quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury So, as a Muslim, how would you go about stopping the recruitment of potential terrorists in Mosques?

How do you solve any problem? Well, first you need to understand what the problem is and the root cause of it. Pre-9-11 US foreign policy in the Middle East, the US support for corrupt regiemes that supress any positive change, shift towards democracy, and complete irresponsiveness to the wishes and interest of the people; The US virtual control of the resources of the region (support the status quo and help the ruling class maintain their power, and wallah, you got yourself partners). US support for Israel (billions of dollars of aid and weponds tank etc) as opposed to having a nuetral stance focuding on a peace process, continous vetos of US resolutions etc. etc. Post-9-11 US foreighn policy hasn't really been any improvement eighter (i.e. Iraq). Just to mention a few things you might not know about :

1947-48: U.S. backs Palestine partition plan. Israel established. U.S. declines to press Israel to allow expelled Palestinians to return.

1949: CIA backs military coup deposing elected government of Syria.1

1953: CIA helps overthrow the democratically‑elected Mossadeq government in Iran (which had nationalized the British oil company) leading to a quarter‑century of repressive and dictatorial rule by the Shah, Mohammed Reza Pahlevi.

1956: U.S. cuts off promised funding for Aswan Dam in Egypt after Egypt receives Eastern bloc arms.

1956: Israel, Britain, and France invade Egypt. U.S. does not support invasion, but the involvement of its NATO allies severely diminishes Washington's reputation in the region.

1958: U.S. troops land in Lebanon to preserve "stability".

early 1960s: U.S. unsuccessfully attempts assassination of Iraqi leader, Abdul Karim Qassim.2

1963: U.S. supports coup by Iraqi Ba'ath party (soon to be headed by Saddam Hussein) and reportedly gives them names of communists to murder, which they do with vigor.3

1967‑: U.S. blocks any effort in the Security Council to enforce SC Resolution 242, calling for Israeli withdrawal from territories occupied in the 1967 war.

1970: Civil war between Jordan and PLO. Israel and U.S. discuss intervening on side of Jordan if Syria backs PLO.

1972: U.S. blocks Egyptian leader Anwar Sadat's efforts to reach a peace agreement with Israel.

1973: Airlifted U.S. military aid enables Israel to turn the tide in war with Syria and Egypt.

1973‑75: U.S. supports Kurdish rebels in Iraq. When Iran reaches an agreement with Iraq in 1975 and seals the border, Iraq slaughters Kurds and U.S. denies them refuge. Kissinger secretly explains that "covert action should not be confused with missionary work."4

1975: U.S. vetoes Security Council resolution condemning Israeli attacks on Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon.5

1978‑79: Iranians begin demonstrations against the Shah. U.S. tells Shah it supports him "without reservation" and urges him to act forcefully. Until the last minute, U.S. tries to organize military coup to save the Shah, but to no avail.6

1979‑88: U.S. begins covert aid to Mujahideen in Afghanistan six months before Soviet invasion in Dec. 1979.7 Over the next decade U.S. provides training and more than $3 billion in arms and aid.

1980‑88: Iran‑Iraq war. When Iraq invades Iran, the U.S. opposes any Security Council action to condemn the invasion. U.S. soon removes Iraq from its list of nations supporting terrorism and allows U.S. arms to be transferred to Iraq. At the same time, U.S. lets Israel provide arms to Iran and in 1985 U.S. provides arms directly (though secretly) to Iran. U.S. provides intelligence information to Iraq. Iraq uses chemical weapons in 1984; U.S. restores diplomatic relations with Iraq. 1987 U.S. sends its navy into the Persian Gulf, taking Iraq's side; an overly‑aggressive U.S. ship shoots down an Iranian civilian airliner, killing 290.

1981, 1986: U.S. holds military maneuvers off the coast of Libya in waters claimed by Libya with the clear purpose of provoking Qaddafi. In 1981, a Libyan plane fires a missile and U.S. shoots down two Libyan planes. In 1986, Libya fires missiles that land far from any target and U.S. attacks Libyan patrol boats, killing 72, and shore installations. When a bomb goes off in a Berlin nightclub, killing three, the U.S. charges that Qaddafi was behind it (possibly true) and conducts major bombing raids in Libya, killing dozens of civilians, including Qaddafi's adopted daughter.8

1982: U.S. gives "green light" to Israeli invasion of Lebanon,9 killing some 17 thousand civilians.10 U.S. chooses not to invoke its laws prohibiting Israeli use of U.S. weapons except in self‑defense. U.S. vetoes several Security Council resolutions condemning the invasion.

1983: U.S. troops sent to Lebanon as part of a multinational peacekeeping force; intervene on one side of a civil war, including bombardment by USS New Jersey. Withdraw after suicide bombing of marine barracks.

1984: U.S.‑backed rebels in Afghanistan fire on civilian airliner.11

1987-92: U.S. arms used by Israel to repress first Palestinian Intifada. U.S. vetoes five Security Council resolution condemning Israeli repression.

1988: Saddam Hussein kills many thousands of his own Kurdish population and uses chemical weapons against them. The U.S. increases its economic ties to Iraq.

1988: U.S. vetoes 3 Security Council resolutions condemning continuing Israeli occupation of and repression in Lebanon.

1990‑91: U.S. rejects any diplomatic settlement of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait (for example, rebuffing any attempt to link the two regional occupations, of Kuwait and of Palestine). U.S. leads international coalition in war against Iraq. Civilian infrastructure targeted.12 To promote "stability" U.S. refuses to aid post‑war uprisings by Shi'ites in the south and Kurds in the north, denying the rebels access to captured Iraqi weapons and refusing to prohibit Iraqi helicopter flights.13

1991‑: Devastating economic sanctions are imposed on Iraq. U.S. and Britain block all attempts to lift them. Hundreds of thousands die. Though Security Council had stated that sanctions were to be lifted once Saddam Hussein's programs to develop weapons of mass destruction were ended, Washington makes it known that the sanctions would remain as long as Saddam remains in power. Sanctions in fact strengthen Saddam's position. Asked about the horrendous human consequences of the sanctions, Madeleine Albright (U.S. ambassador to the UN and later Secretary of State) declares that "the price is worth it."14

1991-: U.S. forces permanently based in Saudi Arabia.

1993‑: U.S. launches missile attack on Iraq, claiming self‑defense against an alleged assassination attempt on former president Bush two months earlier.15

1998: U.S. and U.K. bomb Iraq over the issue of weapons inspections, even though Security Council is just then meeting to discuss the matter.

1998: U.S. destroys factory producing half of Sudan's pharmaceutical supply, claiming retaliation for attacks on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya and that factory was involved in chemical warfare. Evidence for the chemical warfare charge widely disputed.16

2000-: Israel uses U.S. arms in attempt to crush Palestinian uprising, killing hundreds of civilians.

Point being, the anger and resentment that drives some people to commit acts of terror are a DIRECT CONSEQUENSE of US policy and its allies.

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury Clearly you're against the idea of wiretapping or using other methods of "keeping tabs" on what happens in Mosques, so how would you personally like the situation to be dealt with? Do you, in fact, think that there's a problem at all?

Well, obviously, unless Muslims are second class citizens and don't have the same rights and liberties as everyone else, then, yes, a blanket surveillence of all mosques is out of the question.

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury It's funny, I always hear on the news about how terrorism suspects have been arrested or questioned. Whenever it's revealed that the suspect happens to belong to a minority group, that particular minority group (more often than not) get very upset, and usually protest, and often make claims that the local law enforcement agencies are knowingly persecuting them in the local area. I guess my question is, how are we supposed to curb the recruitment of terrorists, if, whenever a suspected terrorist is arrested, the local communities scream blue murder? Are the police supposed to just let this recruitment process continue, just incase a minority group decide to make accusations of racism etc? How would you personally like to see things handled?

You're obviously not aware of the kind of flimsy and insubstantial evidence involved in most cases.

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

This very question was posted on Fox News...

>>Source<<

___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."

quote:

Originally posted by Vlad I need to wake up? Right. Tell me, when was the last time you saw a non-muslim terrorist?

Hmm, american soldiers?


Oh right, I forgot, they're called brave heroes and peace keepers.

quote:

Originally posted by Aquarian Hmm, american soldiers? Oh right, I forgot, they're called brave heroes and peace keepers.

Terrorism is such a broad term and it depends on the situation. In Iraq, American soldiers could be see as terrorists.
Quebecois could be seen as terrorists for threatening the status quo by calling for secession.
To Isrealis, suicide bombers are terrorists. In North Ireland, the IRA are seen as terrorists.
Terrorism is objective to the situation and to the people it involves.

Aside: It is crap that the Supreme Court blocked secession. Vive la République du Québec!

Oh Vlad, Vlad, Vlad... where to begin?

quote:

Originally posted by Vlad 1. The essence of the Bible is the 10 commandments. Where are 10 commandments in the Quran? The Apostle of Allah broke every one of the 10 commandments.

Since when were the "10 commandments" the "essense" of the Bible? They're the "essense" of moral instruction within the book, arguably (if you're Jewish, that is), but hardly the "essense" of the book itself. It's an especially strange claim, though, because if you'd actually read the Bible, you'd realise that Moses goes up Mt Sinai, comes back with a couple of stone tablets, relays the commandments to the Isrealites, goes back up the mountain, receives a shitload of new moral instructions (which the Isrealites never actually get to hear - makes you wonder how they ever found out about them to reproduce them in the Bible), comes back down, destroys the original commandments, goes back up the mountain, then comes back with a whole new bunch of commandments (Exodus 35). Which commandments are we meant to follow exactly? How the hell does this constitute a coherent moral instruction?

Also, I'm presuming that the author has never heard of the five pillars of Islam? But Christianity has twice as many, so that makes it better, right?

quote:

2. Is it possible that God who states in the 6th commandment "Thou shall not Kill" will say in the Quran, "Slay the Idol worshippers wherever you find them"? (Because they refuse to worship Allah). No this comes from Satan.

Because the God of the Old Testement sure obeyed that commandment, didn't he? Do me a favour - read Joshua (or the majority of the other "historical" books in the OT, for that matter) and make a running tally of how many people were killed for not being Isrealites. If you haven't done it by the next time I've checked this post, I'm quite happy to do it for you.

quote:

3. Is it possible that the God who promised Isreal through Abraham "I will bless thee who blesses you and curse thee who curses you" will say through Muhammad "Kill any Jew who falls in your Power" and "The Bestial transformation occured when Allah converted the Jews into Apes"?

Good thing that the major prophet of the NT was much more merciful with regards to Orthodox Judaism, right? Oh, wait - "For if you do not believe that I am he (the son of God), you will die in your sins" (John 8:24). Sounds to me like those Jews are pretty much fucked either way, huh?

quote:

4. The Bible was written by 46 people over 1200 centuries, yet none of the verses are abrogated(cancelled out)

You are kidding me, right? 46 people? 1200 centuries? Nothing deleted? Try thousands of people spanning dozens of generations (the OT was written down in Babylon in about 600 BC following several centuries of oral tradition - with several Babylonian traditions, like the flood myth, thrown into the final product for good measure), spanning 700 years and with about 90% of the gospels (just to start with) "abrogated" from the final cut. If you're going to post crap like this, at least have the integrity to fact-check it first.

quote:

5. The Quran has satanic verses in it. How did they land there if the Quran is the work of God and Muhammad is the greatest prophet?

Okay, I'll bite. Which verses are Satanic, exactly? If this is a reference to Salmon Rushie's "Satanic Verses" then I think the author has missed the point of that work somewhat. If the author is referring to the quoting of Satan ad verbatim within the verses of the Koran, then I suggest he reads the NT and the "temptation of Jesus" again and establish how, exactly, they landed there if the book is the word of God?

quote:

6. The Quran claims that Jihad is the only sure way to reach Allah's paradise. Killing is a sure shot way in Judaism/Christianity to reach Satan's paradise. Does this mean that Allah and Satan are the same? Because YAHWEH claims in the Bible "For I desire mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings" (Hosea 6:6)

Again, go read the historical texts of the OT and tell me how many of Yahweh's followers are punished for slaughtering non-believers. Tell me how many of these followers committed these acts without God's prodding or explicit approval. Then go read the books of law (Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus, Deutoronomy etc.) and tell me that Yahweh doesn't care about burnt offerings or sacrifices: half the fucking laws he prescribes have to do with the proper method of preparing offerings and sacrifices, for god's sake (pun intended).

quote:

7. Allah wants to be feared, Yahweh wants to be loved. Allah wants all Muslims who leave their religion like me killed. But Yahweh is all about free will.

Yahweh didn't want to be loved until Jesus (or, rather, Paul and the people who wrote about Jesus decades after Paul's missionary work) starting preaching about his omnipresent love and forgiveness - concepts that are noticably absent from the persona of the OT God. It's also strange that a God who cares so much about free-will would kick human beings out of paradise, condemn them forever with the curse of original sin and then throw them into hell merely for exercising the same "free-will" he granted to them in the first place...

quote:

8. Allah has created woman as pleasure things for Man, Yahweh has created woman as a equal partner for Man.

An "equal partner"? In Genesis 3:16, God condemns woman forever to "be subject" to man for exercising the free-will I just mentioned and women are hardly emancipated by the laws handed in Deutoronomy or Leviticus, now, are they?

There are few things more distasteful, in my experience, than the adherent to one major religion criticising the beliefs of the adherent to another. Surely if you can identify the fault's in someone elses religion (and - like every other major relgion - Islam has them in spades) you can identify the fault's in your own?

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

quote:

Originally posted by Vlad Utah and Oklahoma was a different purpose, and it was just 1 person. As for gangsters, there are so many illegal things that police departments do to push down on them - and we should take those measures against all other threats to our home. God states in the 6th commandment "Thou shall not Kill" and in the Quran, "Slay the Idol worshippers wherever you find them" (Because they refuse to worship Allah). metal, are you an idol worshipper? If so than to them, you should be killed - and here you are defending them.

Man... I read up a couple of your responses and it seems like I need to knock on your closet. Let me EXPLAIN you something.. and since I'm muslim.. don't go arguing about my religion with me.

Now onto the whole "DECIPHERED" thing of yours.. I think you should understand the fact that the Quran is based on backstories and things that happened during the Propher Muhammad's time. Quran is NOT the whole muslim religion..there are a bazillion different things in the Muslim religion that don't appear in the Quran. Now.. since it's all based on backstories and happenings... that verse says "Slay all Idol worshippers" but if your intelligent enough to find out why it says so (and that's because Christians and Jews at that time were Mortal enemies to Muslims).. you wouldn't be making that comment. Now to help you a little bit and make your life a little easier.. Muslim and Christian theocracies are very similar.. almost parallel. A Muslim is only allowed to lay a hand on someone only in self defense HENCE the term JIHAD.. but that doesn't mean killing innocent women, children and people for no reason.

Honestly man.. just cuz you see something on tv or read online doesn't mean it has to be true. A fact.. The Quran can't be "deciphered" einstein because it's not a code. It's interpreted just like anything else. You should have enough common knowledge before coming off so arrogant towards a certain religion.. Hell I like christianity because of the fact that it shares some many things with Islam .Read up on the theocracies of both religions and I mean LEGIT reliable ones.. not some douche bags "DECIPHERED" quotes.

I don't mean to sound all wound up and worked up or anything.. but you really really need a reality check. Sorry if i offended you.

Btw.. I read another post of yours in which your talking about that book.. Yeah it DOES feel good to hear what you want to don't it? Who exaclty is this book written by? A muslim? A Hindu? An Atheist? How DO U know that this guy researched ISLAM? And "IF" (that if is a biiiig one) .. what sect exactly did he research and for how long? Do u even know how many sects are there in Islam.. let me tell you 72 (i bet your precious little book doesn't have that little peice of information)..

psst... btw sheep there's not ONE religion in the world that tells its followers to kill people.. every religion has this in its basics.
Salvation is through worship, kindness and forgiveness.. not mass murder. As a matter of fact.. since your going "BY THE BOOK" u think you can pass this author's email address to me?

___________________
Music for your Mind

Last edited by digitul punk on Sep-19-2005 at 05:26

quote:

Originally posted by St_Andrew Islam I think was the first major religion to actually let ppl with different religons live in the same country.

definately the first monotheistic to be that tolerant. When the Umayyads ruled Spain they treated the Jews and Christians with tolerance for three hundred years, which the Christians repaid with the Spanish Inquisition :/

quote:

Wiretap all mosques?

You have got to be kidding.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z How do you solve any problem? Well, first you need to understand what the problem is and the root cause of it. Pre-9-11 US foreign policy in the Middle East, the US support for corrupt regiemes that supress any positive change, shift towards democracy, and complete irresponsiveness to the wishes and interest of the people; The US virtual control of the resources of the region (support the status quo and help the ruling class maintain their power, and wallah, you got yourself partners). US support for Israel (billions of dollars of aid and weponds tank etc) as opposed to having a nuetral stance focuding on a peace process, continous vetos of US resolutions etc. etc. Post-9-11 US foreighn policy hasn't really been any improvement eighter (i.e. Iraq). Just to mention a few things you might not know about : 1947-48: U.S. backs Palestine partition plan. Israel established. U.S. declines to press Israel to allow expelled Palestinians to return. ... 2000-: Israel uses U.S. arms in attempt to crush Palestinian uprising, killing hundreds of civilians. Point being, the anger and resentment that drives some people to commit acts of terror are a DIRECT CONSEQUENSE of US policy and its allies.

Well that's very informative, but you didn't answer my question. Sure, there are always going to be people who disagree with certain decisions that are made, and some of those decisions have quite serious implications, but that's no excuss bomb innocent civilians who have absolutely nothing to do with those decisions. Yet it's happening more frequently than ever before, and so people are quite rightly going to be worried. So again I ask you, as representative of the Muslim faith, how would you like to see the problem of terrorist recruitment in British mosques dealt with?

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Well, obviously, unless Muslims are second class citizens and don't have the same rights and liberties as everyone else, then, yes, a blanket surveillence of all mosques is out of the question.

So if the government announced plans to put all religious buildings (including Churches, Temples and Synagogues) under survaillance for security reasons, how would you feel about that? That way, no one religion is being pointed out and scrutinized over the others, yet it would drastically reduce the problem of terrorist recruitment under cover of said religious buildings.

Many people may argue that any kind of survaillance is a breach of human rights, but since when has being able to plan a bombing of a city been a god-given human right?

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z You're obviously not aware of the kind of flimsy and insubstantial evidence involved in most cases.

Crystal clear video evidence of religious leaders urging young people to "bomb the west in the name of God" is hardly flimsy and insubstantial. Especially as the evidence shown in some of these programs has lead to the arrest and questioning of these leaders.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury Well that's very informative, but you didn't answer my question.

Yes I did. Take a look at your question again.

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury I guess my question is, how are we supposed to curb the recruitment of terrorists

It's really not that hard to understand you know. If you didn't understand my last post let me simply it for you. Here's an anology. There's one or two bullies in some high school and their gang/group of freinds. Then there's a group of nerdy kids who the bullies are constantly picking on and beating up in school. One day one of the nerdy kids fucking snaps and beats the shit out of bully x. Now the bullies and their gang are really shocked and are figuring out how to prevent such a thing from happening again. No offence but the answers really quite simple, STOP FUCKING PICKING ON THOSE KIDS IN THE FIRST PLACE ASSHOLE!

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury Sure, there are always going to be people who disagree with certain decisions that are made, and some of those decisions have quite serious implications,

Do you have any fucking idea what people in that region have gone through as a result of US foreighn policy and the countless number of people dead, lives destroyed, families destroyed, human rights abuses, countries held back, and just how big a mess it is because of US intervention and policy?

I assume you agree that people should take resposibility for their actions and their predictable consequences. Well, fucking apply that here too.

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury but that's no excuss bomb innocent civilians who have absolutely nothing to do with those decisions.

Obviously that not justified. Injustice perpetuates injustice.

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury Yet it's happening more frequently than ever before, and so people are quite rightly going to be worried. So again I ask you, as representative of the Muslim faith, how would you like to see the problem of terrorist recruitment in British mosques dealt with?

Look, I don't know how you view me, but I'm an individual like everyone else. I'm no more a "representative" of the Muslim faith than I am a representive of America or you of the UK. I already addresed that earlier, if you want to ignore the root cause of terrorism you're never going to minimise it/find a solution. It like attempting a diffrential equational problem with even knowing algebra or calculus.

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury So if the government announced plans to put all religious buildings (including Churches, Temples and Synagogues) under survaillance for security reasons, how would you feel about that? That way, no one religion is being pointed out and scrutinized over the others, yet it would drastically reduce the problem of terrorist recruitment under cover of said religious buildings.

First of all, this isn't a war on religion, it's a war on terrorism (which in and of itself is a strange concept). No, that wouldn't make me feel any better. Hmmm.. lets not just invade the privacy of one group, but EVERYONE! Please pay more attention to what makes America or many other countires in the west free societies.

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury Many people may argue that any kind of survaillance is a breach of human rights,

It's not really a breach of human rights as much it is a violation of civil rights and liberties.

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury but since when has being able to plan a bombing of a city been a god-given human right?

ummm.. no one said it was.

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury Crystal clear video evidence of religious leaders urging young people to "bomb the west in the name of God" is hardly flimsy and insubstantial. Especially as the evidence shown in some of these programs has lead to the arrest and questioning of these leaders.

Thats not what I was reffereing to. You said this in your original post:

quote:

Originally posted by Streakfury if, whenever a suspected terrorist is arrested, the local communities scream blue murder?

Do you any idea how many people have been arrested with no charge and no evidence of their involvemnt in anything? And what's being done to some of these people at places like Guantanamo, no access to a lawyer etc.

Another comment, it's hypocritical to ignore some crimes but not others. Mainly, those commited by the West against the Middle East. The attrocities the West is suffering rightnow are a result of what their own actions. Ofcourse neigther has any sort of justification.

You were saying how it's completely unjustified and wrong, terrorist attacks on the West that is. Well, so are the injustices imposed on various countries in the Middle East, which are of far greater magnitude and number mind you. It only requires common sense and a little clarity of mind to find a solution. If X causes Y, and X and Y are both wrong and unacceptable. Make sure X doesn't occur and neighter will Y. It not that hard to understand. Now I hope that helped and you understand what I was saying a little better.

Peace.

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Yes I did. Take a look at your question again. It's really not that hard to understand you know. If you didn't understand my last post let me simply it for you. Here's an anology. There's one or two bullies in some high school and their gang/group of freinds. Then there's a group of nerdy kids who the bullies are constantly picking on and beating up in school. One day one of the nerdy kids fucking snaps and beats the shit out of bully x. Now the bullies and their gang are really shocked and are figuring out how to prevent such a thing from happening again. No offence but the answers really quite simple, STOP FUCKING PICKING ON THOSE KIDS IN THE FIRST PLACE ASSHOLE!

That's an interesting analogy. So at the end of the day, what you're really saying is that it's America's own fault that they're being terrorized. Because of the things they've done in the past (as pointed out by your history lesson), they're now on the receiving end of suicide bombers. It's understandable that many people will be angry with the USA.

So what's with the whole 'Holy War' thing? You're sitting there, telling me how the terrorist bombings of America and the UK of recent years have come about because of the decades of useless American foreign policies which (you claim) cause far more problems than they solve. Yet any videos recorded by the various terrorist cells that own up to such bombings claim that they did it "in the name of God" because "the West is attacking Muslims". Is that what they mean? Do they honestly believe that American troops get sent abroad simply to exterminate Muslims? It's ridiculous. Fine, whenever American troops end up in a firefight, more often than not, the people they're fighting with are Muslim, but that doesn't mean they are there simply to fight Muslims. So to use the excuse that "America is an enemy of Islam" to justify planning the London bombings, for example, is ludicrous. What's even more pathetic is trying to use that very reason to brainwash Muslims of the younger generations into becoming suicide bombers. If all of these recent bombings are the result of American foreign policies that have cocked things up for someone, why must the people who organize the bombings recruit people by using their religion as justification? It only serves to make the West in general see Islam, and anyone who follows it, as a potential terrorist. The public are going to end up hating Muslims unjustly.

quote:

Originally posted by digitul punk A Muslim is only allowed to lay a hand on someone only in self defense HENCE the term JIHAD.. but that doesn't mean killing innocent women, children and people for no reason.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Do you have any fucking idea what people in that region have gone through as a result of US foreighn policy and the countless number of people dead, lives destroyed, families destroyed, human rights abuses, countries held back, and just how big a mess it is because of US intervention and policy?

No, I have no idea how many lives have been ruined in the east due to America. But then again, I have no idea how many Western families have had their lives ruined due to losing someone in a terrorist bombing, or in a military conflict abroad.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I assume you agree that people should take resposibility for their actions and their predictable consequences. Well, fucking apply that here too.

I do agree. And yes, if America has stuffed up somewhere along the line, they should take responsibility. But what do you want them to do? If people have been killed, as tragic as it is, they've been killed. They cant be brought back to life. And I dont think that planning terrorist attacks on America is going to even things up.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z First of all, this isn't a war on religion, it's a war on terrorism (which in and of itself is a strange concept). No, that wouldn't make me feel any better. Hmmm.. lets not just invade the privacy of one group, but EVERYONE! Please pay more attention to what makes America or many other countires in the west free societies.

Like I said, belonging to one of these so-called "free sociaties" does not give people the right to plan bombings in the hope of killing innocent people. So if people are abusing the freedom they have (which they are if they're planning to kill people) then it has to be stopped. If people didn't give a good reason to take such drastic measures, then nobody would even have suggested them. As it happens, hiding behind your right to freedom to help make plans to kill innocent people is reason enough for these measures.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Do you any idea how many people have been arrested with no charge and no evidence of their involvemnt in anything? And what's being done to some of these people at places like Guantanamo, no access to a lawyer etc.

No, do you? As far as I can see, law enforcement agencies go out of their way to make sure they have reason enough to arrest and interrogate people. In fact, in the UK at least, the police cant arrest people without sufficient evidence of a crime. So I find it hard to believe that there are many people that the Americans arrest and mistreat, if it leaves them wide open to be sued. I know for sure if I was held without reason, there'd be some serious suing going on.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z You were saying how it's completely unjustified and wrong, terrorist attacks on the West that is. Well, so are the injustices imposed on various countries in the Middle East, which are of far greater magnitude and number mind you. It only requires common sense and a little clarity of mind to find a solution. If X causes Y, and X and Y are both wrong and unacceptable. Make sure X doesn't occur and neighter will Y. It not that hard to understand. Now I hope that helped and you understand what I was saying a little better.

I understand what you're saying. But what's to stop the West claiming that any injustice done to the Middle East is their own fault? I mean, if the eastern countries can bomb the West, and claim that it's all the West's fault, then what's to to stop the West saying exactly the same thing about the East? And who do you believe? It's an endless circle. At the end of the day, it all comes down to intentions. America (so they claim) have nothing but good intentions for everybody. Obviously there's more than a handful of people out there who'll disagree, but that's the image that America tries to promote, and that's what a lot of people agree with. Now what about the image that the eastern countries try to show. They claim that their actions are brought about because it's what their religion says they should do. They feel that what they're doing is the right thing to do, and many people agree with them. Again, there are more than a handful of people who disagree as well.

So who is right and who is wrong? Both sides believe they are doing the right thing, and that they have been the victim of wrongdoing in some way. Personally, I can only make judgements about events that I've witnessed myself. I wasn't around 50 or 60 years ago when some of these events you mentioned were happening, and if anyone tells me about them, they're obviously going to be biased in some way. So all I can do is make judgements based on what I've seen myself. That's why I think it's a good idea to wiretap religious buildings. It's obvious that they are sometimes used as a recruitment station for people who wish to harm the people of my country, and I obviously dont agree with it. As for why they want to kill people, I have no idea, but as far as I'm concerned, there is no good enough reason to kill innocent people. So if monitoring the communications of known recruitment hotspots would reduce such activites, I'm all for it.

Anyway, I hope you don't take offence to anything I've said. It wasn't intended.

___________________