Hate Bin Laden?

[Mythsaje]

Can't imagine why not. He's given us plenty of reasons. At least 3000 here, and several dozen more today in London.

Here's where the left and the right split paths. The RW in this country want us to believe that Bin Laden and his operatives "hate freedom" and our way of life. We in the left seek to understand the real purpose and reasons behind their hatred of us. This is NOT a weakness.

We know from history that Bin Laden, who made his name in Afghanistan fighting the Russians, turned his ire on us, at least partly, because we placed a military base in Saudi Arabia. He looks at our Middle East policy as Neo-Colonialism.

We cannot hope to defeat him, or the philosophy taught to his followers, without understanding the real motivations behind their actions.

Just because we say he has REAL motivations (as opposed to made up ones) to attack us doesn't mean we sympathize with him, or support what he does.

This isn't "blaming America first." It's about blaming the Right-Wing Neo-Colonialists. We're being attacked because they insist on kicking a hornet's nest and placing the blame everywhere but where it belongs...on themselves!

In this particular case, the enemy of our enemy is...our enemy.

*edited to add the last line.

[Deja Q]

1. The moemnt traitor* said OBL no longer concerned him was the day

I stopped believing him as a man of integrity. His own actions proved him to the be anus-slime he truly is.

He's a liar, a cheat, a phony, and no Christian of any sort.

[LittleClarkie]

108. Was that when you sorta woke up?

Or were you starting to do that before?

[BrklynLiberal]

2. No where near as much as I hate Bush, Cheney, Rove etc

Osama would not be in a position to harm us if it were not for BushCo,
PNAC, and the other NEOCONs who set up the situation that enabled him and the other terrorists to have the power that they have.

[TankLV]

137. My feelings exactly.

[knowbody0]

3. they assume we are not intelligent enough to understand

their foreign policies. our forces on their holy ground sucking their oil for WHAT? excuse me, while i bang my head against this brick wall.

[Deja Q]

4. The moment traitor* said OBL no longer concerned him was the day

I stopped believing him as a man of integrity. His own actions proved him to the be anus-slime he truly is.

He's a liar, a cheat, a phony, and no Christian of any sort.

[BrklynLiberal]

5. dupe

[Raoul Duke II]

6. Read a little...

Islamic Salafists and Wahabbis seek to impose their will upon
the entire globe, first by (re-)establing a Muslim Caliphate from
Roughly Spain, all of N Africa, the entire Middle East, All the "Stans", Malaysia, Indonesia, the Phillipines, etc. After that
is accomplished, the rest of the world will then be conquered and Islamicized and Talibanized.

FACT

[Mythsaje]

7. Never gonna happen...

it's as unlikely as the Bushite Christians remaking the world in their image.

The days of forced religious conversions are over...they'd have to fight for every scrap of ground and, in the end, they'll run into the Chinese, who sure as hell ain't gonna stand still for that crap.

[Disturbed]

8. A long boring letter.

Osama Letter


In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful,"Permission to fight (against disbelievers) is given to those (believers) who are fought against, because they have been wronged and surely, Allah is Able to give them (believers) victory"

"Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Taghut (anything worshipped other than Allah e.g. Satan). So fight you against the friends of Satan; ever feeble is indeed the plot of Satan." Quran 4:76]

Some American writers have published articles under the title 'On what basis are we fighting?' These articles have generated a number of responses, some of which adhered to the truth and were based on Islamic Law, and others which have not. Here we wanted to outline the truth - as an explanation and warning - hoping for Allah's reward, seeking success and support from Him.While seeking Allah's help, we form our reply based on two questions directed at the Americans:

(Q1) Why are we fighting and opposing you?

Q2)What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you? As for the first question: Why are we fighting and opposing you?

The answer is very simple:

(1) Because you attacked us and continue to attack us.

a) You attacked us in Palestine:

(i) Palestine, which has sunk under military occupation for more than 80 years.

The British handed over Palestine, with your help and your support, to the Jews, who have occupied it for more than 50 years; years overflowing with oppression, tyranny, crimes, killing, expulsion, destruction and devastation. The creation and continuation of Israel is one of the greatest crimes, and you are the leaders of its criminals. And of course there is no need to explain and prove the degree of American support for Israel.

The creation of Israel is a crime which must be erased. Each and every person whose hands have become polluted in the contribution towards this crime must pay its*price, and pay for it heavily. (ii) It brings us both laughter and tears to see that you have not yet tired of repeating your fabricated lies that the Jews have a historical right to Palestine, as it was promised to them in the Torah. Anyone who disputes with them on this alleged fact is accused of anti-semitism. This is one of the most fallacious, widely-circulated fabrications in history.

The people of Palestine are pure Arabs and original Semites. It is the Muslims who are the inheritors of Moses (peace be upon him) and the inheritors of the real Torah that has not been changed. Muslims believe in all of the Prophets, including Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all. If the followers of Moses have been promised a right to Palestine in the Torah, then the Muslims are the most worthy nation of this.

When the Muslims conquered Palestine and drove out the Romans, Palestine and Jerusalem returned to Islaam, the religion of all the Prophets peace be upon them. Therefore, the call to a historical right to Palestine cannot be raised against the Islamic Ummah that believes in all the Prophets of Allah (peace and blessings be upon them) - and we make no distinction between them.

(iii) The blood pouring out of Palestine must be equally revenged. You must know that the Palestinians do not cry alone; their women are not widowed alone; their sons are not orphaned alone.

(b) You attacked us in Somalia; you supported the Russian atrocities against us in Chechnya, the Indian oppression against us in Kashmir, and the Jewish aggression against us in Lebanon. (c) Under your supervision, consent and orders, the governments of our countries which act as your agents, attack us on a daily basis;

(i) These governments prevent our people from establishing the Islamic Shariah, using violence and lies to do so.

(ii) These governments give us a taste of humiliation, and places us in a large prison of fear and subdual.

iii) These governments steal our Ummah's wealth and sell them to you at a paltry price.

(iv) These governments have surrendered to the Jews, and handed them most of Palestine, acknowledging the existence of their state over the dismembered limbs of their own people.

v) The removal of these governments is an obligation upon us, and a necessary step to free the Ummah, to make the Shariah the supreme law and to regain Palestine. And our fight against these governments is not separate from out fight against you.

(d) You steal our wealth and oil at paltry prices because of you international influence and military threats. This theft is indeed the biggest theft ever witnessed by mankind in the history of the world.

(e) Your forces occupy our countries; you spread your military bases throughout them; you corrupt our lands, and you besiege our sanctities, to protect the security of the Jews and to ensure the continuity of your pillage of our treasures.

f) You have starved the Muslims of Iraq, where children die every day. It is a wonder that more than 1.5 million Iraqi children have died as a result of your sanctions, and you did not show concern. Yet when 3000 of your people died, the entire world rises and has not yet sat down.

(g) You have supported the Jews in their idea that Jerusalem is their eternal capital, and agreed to move your embassy there. With your help and under your protection, the Israelis are planning to destroy the Al-Aqsa mosque. Under the protection of your weapons, Sharon entered the Al-Aqsa mosque, to pollute it as a preparation to capture and destroy it.

(2) These tragedies and calamities are only a few examples of your oppression and aggression against us. It is commanded by our religion and intellect that the oppressed have a right to return the aggression. Do not await anything from us but Jihad, resistance and revenge. Is it in any way rational to expect that after America has attacked us for more than half a century, that we will then leave her to live in security and peace?!!

(3) You may then dispute that all the above does not justify aggression against civilians, for crimes they did not commit and offenses in which they did not partake:

(a) This argument contradicts your continuous repetition that America is the land of freedom, and its leaders in this world. Therefore, the American people are the ones who choose their government by way of their own free will; a choice which stems from their agreement to its policies. Thus the American people have chosen, consented to, and affirmed their support for the Israeli oppression of the Palestinians, the occupation and usurpation of their land, and its continuous killing, torture, punishment and expulsion of the Palestinians. The American people have the ability and choice to refuse the policies of their Government and even to change it if they want.

(b) The American people are the ones who pay the taxes which fund the planes that bomb us in Afghanistan, the tanks that strike and destroy our homes in Palestine, the armies which occupy our lands in the Arabian Gulf, and the fleets which ensure the blockade of Iraq. These tax dollars are given to Israel for it to continue to attack us and penetrate our lands. So the American people are the ones who fund the attacks against us, and they are the ones who oversee the expenditure of these monies in the way they wish, through their elected candidates.

(c) Also the American army is part of the American people. It is this very same people who are shamelessly helping the Jews fight against us.

(d) The American people are the ones who employ both their men and their women in the American Forces which attack us.

(e) This is why the American people cannot be not innocent of all the crimes committed by the Americans and Jews against us.

(f) Allah, the Almighty, legislated the permission and the option to take revenge. Thus, if we are attacked, then we have the right to attack back. Whoever has destroyed our villages and towns, then we have the right to destroy their villages and towns. Whoever has stolen our wealth, then we have the right to destroy their economy. And whoever has killed our civilians, then we have the right to kill theirs.

The American Government and press still refuses to answer the question: Why did they attack us in New York and Washington? If Sharon is a man of peace in the eyes of Bush, then we are also men of peace!!! America does not understand the language of manners and principles, so we are addressing it using the language it understands.

Q2) As for the second question that we want to answer: What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.

(a) The religion of the Unification of God; of freedom from associating partners with Him, and rejection of this; of complete love of Him, the Exalted; of complete submission to His Laws; and of the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict with the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Islam is the religion of all the prophets, and makes no distinction between them - peace be upon them all. It is to this religion that we call you; the seal of all the previous religions. It is the religion of Unification of God, sincerity, the best of manners, righteousness, mercy, honour, purity, and piety. It is the religion of showing kindness to others, establishing justice between them, granting them their rights, and defending the oppressed and the persecuted. It is the religion of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil with the hand, tongue and heart. It is the religion of Jihad in the way of Allah so that Allah's Word and religion reign Supreme. And it is the religion of unity and agreement on the obedience to Allah, and total equality between all people, without regarding their colour, sex, or language.

(b) It is the religion whose book - the Quran - will remained preserved and unchanged, after the other Divine books and messages have been changed. The Quran is the miracle until the Day of Judgment. Allah has challenged anyone to bring a book like the Quran or even ten verses like it.

2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

(a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest. We call you to all of this that you may be freed from that which you have become caught up in; that you may be freed from the deceptive lies that you are a great nation, that your leaders spread amongst you to conceal from you the despicable state to which you have reached.

(b) It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind:

(i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator. You flee from the embarrassing question posed to you: How is it possible for Allah the Almighty to create His creation, grant them power over all the creatures and land, grant them all the amenities of life, and then deny them that which they are most in need of: knowledge of the laws which govern their lives?

(ii) You are the nation that permits Usury, which has been forbidden by all the religions. Yet you build your economy and investments on Usury. As a result of this, in all its different forms and guises, the Jews have taken control of your economy, through which they have then taken control of your media, and now control all aspects of your life making you their servants and achieving their aims at your expense; precisely what Benjamin Franklin warned you against.

(iii) You are a nation that permits the production, trading and usage of intoxicants. You also permit drugs, and only forbid the trade of them, even though your nation is the largest consumer of them.

(iv) You are a nation that permits acts of immorality, and you consider them to be pillars of personal freedom. You have continued to sink down this abyss from level to level until incest has spread amongst you, in the face of which neither your sense of honour nor your laws object. Who can forget your President Clinton's immoral acts committed in the official Oval office? After that you did not even bring him to account, other than that he 'made a mistake', after which everything passed with no punishment. Is there a worse kind of event for which your name will go down in history and remembered by nations?

(v) You are a nation that permits gambling in its all forms. The companies practice this as well, resulting in the investments becoming active and the criminals becoming rich.

(vi) You are a nation that exploits women like consumer products or advertising tools calling upon customers to purchase them. You use women to serve passengers, visitors, and strangers to increase your profit margins. You then rant that you support the liberation of women.

(vii) You are a nation that practices the trade of sex in all its forms, directly and indirectly. Giant corporations and establishments are established on this, under the name of art, entertainment, tourism and freedom, and other deceptive names you attribute to it.

(viii) And because of all this, you have been described in history as a nation that spreads diseases that were unknown to man in the past. Go ahead and boast to the nations of man, that you brought them AIDS as a Satanic American Invention.

(xi) You have destroyed nature with your industrial waste and gases more than any other nation in history. Despite this, you refuse to sign the Kyoto agreement so that you can secure the profit of your greedy companies and*industries.

(x) Your law is the law of the rich and wealthy people, who hold sway in their political parties, and fund their election campaigns with their gifts. Behind them stand the Jews, who control your policies, media and economy.

(xi) That which you are singled out for in the history of mankind, is that you have used your force to destroy mankind more than any other nation in history; not to defend principles and values, but to hasten to secure your interests and profits. You who dropped a nuclear bomb on Japan, even though Japan was ready to negotiate an end to the war. How many acts of oppression, tyranny and injustice have you carried out, O callers to freedom?

(xii) Let us not forget one of your major characteristics: your duality in both manners and values; your hypocrisy in manners and principles. All*manners, principles and values have two scales: one for you and one for the others.

(a)The freedom and democracy that you call to is for yourselves and for white race only; as for the rest of the world, you impose upon them your monstrous, destructive policies and Governments, which you call the 'American friends'. Yet you prevent them from establishing democracies. When the Islamic party in Algeria wanted to practice democracy and they won the election, you unleashed your agents in the Algerian army onto them, and to attack them with tanks and guns, to imprison them and torture them - a new lesson from the 'American book of democracy'!!!

(b)Your policy on prohibiting and forcibly removing weapons of mass destruction to ensure world peace: it only applies to those countries which you do not permit to possess such weapons. As for the countries you consent to, such as Israel, then they are allowed to keep and use such weapons to defend their security. Anyone else who you suspect might be manufacturing or keeping these kinds of weapons, you call them criminals and you take military action against them.

(c)You are the last ones to respect the resolutions and policies of International Law, yet you claim to want to selectively punish anyone else who does the same. Israel has for more than 50 years been pushing UN resolutions and rules against the wall with the full support of America.

(d)As for the war criminals which you censure and form criminal courts for - you shamelessly ask that your own are granted immunity!! However, history will not forget the war crimes that you committed against the Muslims and the rest of the world; those you have killed in Japan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Lebanon and Iraq will remain a shame that you will never be able to escape. It will suffice to remind you of your latest war crimes in Afghanistan, in which densely populated innocent civilian villages were destroyed, bombs were dropped on mosques causing the roof of the mosque to come crashing down on the heads of the Muslims praying inside. You are the ones who broke the agreement with the Mujahideen when they left Qunduz, bombing them in Jangi fort, and killing more than 1,000 of your prisoners through suffocation and thirst. Allah alone knows how many people have died by torture at the hands of you and your agents. Your planes remain in the Afghan skies, looking for anyone remotely suspicious.

(e)You have claimed to be the vanguards of Human Rights, and your Ministry of Foreign affairs issues annual reports containing statistics of those countries that violate any Human Rights. However, all these things vanished when the Mujahideen hit you, and you then implemented the methods of the same documented governments that you used to curse. In America, you captured thousands the Muslims and Arabs, took them into custody with neither reason, court trial, nor even disclosing their names. You issued newer, harsher laws. What happens in Guatanamo is a historical embarrassment to America and its values, and it screams into your faces - you hypocrites, "What is the value of your signature on any agreement or treaty?"

(3) What we call you to thirdly is to take an honest stance with yourselves - and I doubt you will do so - to discover that you are a nation without principles or manners, and that the values and principles to you are something which you merely demand from others, not that which you yourself must adhere to.

(4) We also advise you to stop supporting Israel, and to end your support of the Indians in Kashmir, the Russians against the Chechens and to also cease supporting the Manila Government against the Muslims in Southern Philippines.

(5) We also advise you to pack your luggage and get out of our lands. We desire for your goodness, guidance, and righteousness, so do not force us to send you back as cargo in coffins.

(6) Sixthly, we call upon you to end your support of the corrupt leaders in our countries. Do not interfere in our politics and method of education. Leave us alone, or else expect us in New York and Washington.

(7) We also call you to deal with us and interact with us on the basis of mutual interests and benefits, rather than the policies of sub dual, theft and occupation, and not to continue your policy of supporting the Jews because this will result in more disasters for you. If you fail to respond to all these conditions, then prepare for fight with the Islamic Nation. The Nation of Monotheism, that puts complete trust on Allah and fears none other than Him. The Nation which is addressed by its Quran with the words: "Do you fear them? Allah has more right that you should fear Him if you are believers. Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of believing people. And remove the anger of their (believers') hearts. Allah accepts the repentance of whom He wills. Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise."

The Nation of honour and respect: "But honour, power and glory belong to Allah, and to His Messenger (Muhammad- peace be upon him) and to the believers."

"So do not become weak (against your enemy), nor be sad, and you will be*superior ( in victory )if you are indeed (true) believers"

The Nation of Martyrdom; the Nation that desires death more than you desire life: "Think not of those who are killed in the way of Allah as dead. Nay, they are alive with their Lord, and they are being provided for. They rejoice in what Allah has bestowed upon them from His bounty and rejoice for the sake of those who have not yet joined them, but are left behind (not yet martyred) that on them no fear shall come, nor shall they grieve. They rejoice in a grace and a bounty from Allah, and that Allah will not waste the reward of the believers."

The Nation of victory and success that Allah has promised: "It is He Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad peace be upon him) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam), to make it victorious over all other religions even though the Polytheists hate it."

"Allah has decreed that 'Verily it is I and My Messengers who shall be victorious.' Verily Allah is All-Powerful, All-Mighty."

The Islamic Nation that was able to dismiss and destroy the previous evil Empires like yourself; the Nation that rejects your attacks, wishes to remove your evils, and is prepared to fight you. You are well aware that the Islamic Nation, from the very core of its soul, despises your haughtiness and arrogance. If the Americans refuse to listen to our advice and the goodness, guidance and righteousness that we call them to, then be aware that you will lose this Crusade Bush began, just like the other previous Crusades in which you were humiliated by the hands of the Mujahideen, fleeing to your home in great silence and disgrace.

If the Americans do not respond, then their fate will be that of the Soviets who fled from Afghanistan to deal with their military defeat, political breakup, ideological downfall, and economic bankruptcy. This is our message to the Americans, as an answer to theirs. Do they now know why we fight them and over which form of ignorance, by the permission of Allah, we shall be victorious?

[Mythsaje]

9. Good post

thanks for that.

[dajoki]

delete

[Mythsaje]

96. It's a good post

because it explains some of OBL's attitudes...

[dajoki]

99. good post?

do you realize what he is saying? we are all infidels, we must be converted or killed. this is what the true followers of islam believe. jihad must be fought against all nonbelievers (of Allah) including secular arab govts. do a little reading on the Quran (it's full of contradictions). i recommend the book on the following link. easy to understand. you can even page through it online. http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0884198847/ref=sib_dp_pt/002-1975606-4312019

[elshiva]

141. That is what Fundamentalist Muslims believe, but not

moderates or liberals within Islam. Muslims also have a tradition of religious tolerance such as in Medieval Spain.
Do not get lured into stereotypes! Not all Muslims have terrorist mentality like not all Christians are homophobes!

[Mythsaje]

146. I agree...

The problem is with the fanatics...like OBL himself.

[Raoul Duke II]

147. Certainly correct

But we're not talking about liberal/tolerant Muslims.

We're talking about the fundies, especially Osama.

How do you deal with them?

How do you deal witht the fundies without turning the tolerant ones into fundies?

[elshiva]

150. I have no idea. I was only responding to the poster

above because there were some stereotypes about Muslims in it.
"do you realize what he is saying? we are all infidels, we must be converted or killed. this is what the true followers of islam believe. jihad must be fought against all nonbelievers (of Allah) including secular arab govts. do a little reading on the Quran (it's full of contradictions)." Nothing wrong with the Quran, just people who misquote it to do awful crimes.


I have no idea really, but it would help to find Muslims in America who are moderates to talk with fundies...

[Raoul Duke II]

154. Well....

The fundies see the moderates themselves as "apostates"/non-believers...

And you can't argue with a fundie Muslim....everything they believe is from God's mouth, to disagree with them is to insult God.

[elshiva]

155. Yes, but what to do? You can not make people be tolerant

and loving. You can try, but in the end... :shrug:

[Raoul Duke II]

158. well....

If they won't listen to reason, or be tolerant, and still try to kill you, don't you have to kill them?

[elshiva]

160. Self-defense is fine. Never said anything against it.

[dajoki]

225. post # 154 is correct

there are many different interpretations of the Quran and many inconsistancies. it was given to Muhammad over 22 years. the first part in mecca(peaceful) and the rest in medina(jihad). the latter overrides the former according to fundamentalists.

[Raoul Duke II]

10. Do you get it now?

Disturbed's post has it all....get out of the ME, become a Muslim Country. with sharia law!!!! That's what he wants - he says it all
right there.

COMPRENDE?

That's why he attacks us.

Even if we meet all conditions regarding getting out of ME, not supporting Israel, etc, etc. etc. he will still attack until we also convert.

[Disturbed]

11. War On Terror is a false premise.

Amerika can minimize AQ's War but not by taken over countries. It isn't too late to actually engage in the War with AQ but it seems that the Bush Regime isn't that interested in doing so

[Raoul Duke II]

13. What's your solution?

The war has already been declared on us! The infidels, whether a knuckle-dragging Bush voter or a completely PC Gay Peacenik from
Denmark. It don't matter. We're all supposed to convert or die.

How do you propose to fight this "war", false premise or not?

Remember the bombings in Africa, etc. when Clinton was still in office. Don't blame the neo-cons for starting it. It was already started.

How would you fight it?

[Mythsaje]

16. We blame the Neo-Cons

for aggravating it...

Not to mention that the policies that generate hatred for us amongst the Islamic fundies aren't a recent development...the Neo-Colonialism has been going on for several decades now.

[madeline_con]

162. "Neo-Colonialism has been ...

... going on for several decades now."

Exactly. Blaming Clinton for all the ills is ridiculous. He was a baby when this started.

EDIT:

Actually, ever since there have been Jews, Christians and Muslims on the same planet, this has been going on. About 1400 years and counting...

[Crunchy Frog]

172. Really,

ever since there have been religions on this planet, there have been people slaughtering each other over them. Nothing really new, except that the weapons get more sophisticated.

[Crunchy Frog]

171. Well, there's a growing number of Christians in this country

who feel the same way. Some of them have been involved in bombings here as well, and expect we'll be seeing more. I think the best you can hope to do with people who believe like that is to disempower and marginalize them, then go after and aprehend the ones who are involved in planning or carrying out violence.

[Raoul Duke II]

178. What???

A growing number of Christian terrorists?

Where? What state?

How many have they killed?

Where did you get this info?!!!

[Crunchy Frog]

183. No, not what I said.

I said that there are a growing number of Christian fanatics who think that anyone who isn't willing to convert to their brand of Christianity should die, or at least be stripped of all rights in this country. I've learned about them from listening to Christian radio, among other things.

Here is a good place to learn some things about them:

http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/DirectoryRiseOfDominionismInAmerica.html

As far as Christian terrorists, I didn't say there were alot of them, but there certainly are some. You have heard about abortion clinic bombings haven't you? I simply said that we may be seeing a growing number of them in coming years, given what they believe about the rest of us.

There is an actual quote, I think from Pat Robertson, suggesting that it would be a good thing to detonate a nuke at the State Department. I'm sorry I can't provide a link for it, maybe someone else can. This kind of talk eventually leads to actions is all I'm saying.

[Raoul Duke II]

185. Sure....

There are Christian terrorists. Yes, The abortion clinic bombings were terrorism and were commited by a Christian.

But I don't see a wave of them coming.

Hope I'm right! LOL

[Crunchy Frog]

192. What do you think of Pat Robertson's

advocating the bombing of the State Department, or of him and Falwell asking their followers to pray for Supreme Court justices to die.

I hope we don't see increased terrorism from these types, but it wouldn't surprise me if we did. I guess only time will tell.

[Raoul Duke II]

194. I don't like

Falwell or Robertson or any religious person saying squat about govt.
I don't like any govt. person saying squat about religion.

Keep em seperated. always.

The rhetoric in our national politics seems to get worse and worse
all the time. It's so much worse now after the pubbies went after Clinton, 9/11, the war on terror, etc. etc. There's really no center
any more. But it's both sides. People here hoped Cheney kicked recently when he got a checkup. LOL

Ugly all the way around.

[Crunchy Frog]

195. It's not really about religious people taking positions on government

although I am in favor of separation of church and state. What I brought up was specifically about religious leaders in our country advocating violence, terrorism, and death to those they have political disagreements with. No wonder alot of people here refer to them as the "Christian Taliban".

I didn't see people here advocating death to Cheney, though I certainly don't see all the threads on here. I'm sure that most people here wouldn't shed many tears for him, but not many would out and out advocate for his death. In any event, nobody here is a position of religious or political leadership, and only represent their own personal opinions. It's on a whole other level when that sort of thing comes from people in leadership positions, and that I'm only seeing coming from the other side.

Same with liberal talk radio versus RW talk radio. It's only the guys on the right actually advocating violence, though I can't give any real examples because I really can't stand to even listen to the stuff.

[Raoul Duke II]

196. The ugly rhetoric

comes from both sides. There is plenty on both sides. Trust me.

As to those in leadership postions, I agree also that it is much worse when someone in such a position makes a comment like that.
they should know better because their words can especially have real consequences.

[Crunchy Frog]

201. Ugly rhetoric from both sides, yes

but you won't find anyone on the liberal side who says the sorts of things regularly spouted by people like Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, or Michael Savage Wiener. If you disagree, I hope you can point me to some examples. And if you're going to try to use someone like Michael Moore as an example, please provide some of his actualy words rather than just throwing out his name. I'm sure he's said some intemperate things, but I very much doubt that he's said anything of the caliber of the RWers I mentioned.

[Raoul Duke II]

211. Like I said....

It's from both sides.

I recently saw a blog post somwhere compiling vast examples of both left and right -wingers using Hitler comparisons to smear the others.

One example (you do know about goolge, right? ;-)

Julianne Malveaux, a radio host and USA Today columnist, caught no flak when she prayed aloud for the death of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. "I hope his wife feeds him lots of eggs and butter and he dies early like many black men do, of heart disease," she snarled on PBS. "Well, that's how I feel."

And you can find some vilont ones as well.

[tenshi816]

208. Eric Rudolph certainly falls into the category

of "Christian terrorist". I think you could probably pin that label on Timothy McVeigh as well.

I'm betting there's a fair few people in the US who admire those two and wouldn't mind getting in on their act.

[Raoul Duke II]

212. sure...

But it's one thing to believe something, quite another to act on it.
Christianity is such a non-violent religion as it is currently
practiced in the World. To be a terrorist for Christ is to radically mis-understand the message, no? How many have taken up Pat Robertson's call?

So you cite 2 Christian terrorists, which I don't deny.

Where's all the rest?

For the vast majority of religious-inspired terrorism, you look to Islam.

[tenshi816]

220. How about the Army of God?

The people who commit arson and bomb abortion clinics and kill doctors in the name of God? You don't consider them terrorists?

Here's a couple of links to get you started:

http://www.monitor.net/monitor/abortion/abortionsoldier.html

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_abortion.htm

Or try this: The Quiet Fall of an American Terrorist http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2003/12/10/waagner/

What about Christian cults? You don't think they terrorize and sometimes kill their own followers?

http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_cults.htm

How about the Aryan Nations? http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/03/29/schuster.column/index.html

Even the KKK - with its bloody history - considers itself to be a Christian organization.

Just because some extremist Christian groups aren't high-profile doesn't mean they aren't out there.

And in my view, murder doesn't have to be involved to make someone a terrorist - Pat Robertson and his ilk are terrorists of the heart and mind.

I'm not denying that there are many extremist Muslims, but you can't deny the existence of Christian terrorists. The irony is that the Christian ones want to terrorize their own fellow Americans every bit as much as the Muslim terrorists do.

[Mythsaje]

14. It would be more effective

as a law enforcement operation than a war. We can't stomp across the world trying to stamp out those who hide underground...we have to hunt them in their warrens and expose them to the light, where they can be charged and convicted for their crimes.

[Raoul Duke II]

20. So...

After 9/11 ... you would have what?

Asked the Taliban to turn over Osama?

And if they refuse, and the training camps stay open, and more attacks occur, what then?

[Mythsaje]

24. Oh, no...

I think Afghanistan was justified...but we should never have stopped pursuing OBL to invade Iraq.

[Raoul Duke II]

26. If you think Afghanistan was justified....

Doesn't that make you a neo con? LOL

Seriously, I agree about the Iraq invasion being only indirectly related to terrorism, and if so, after the fact. We haven't stopped going after OBL to invade Iraq, we're trying to do both. And doing both poorly.

[Mythsaje]

31. You'll actually find many progressives,

and, indeed, most of the world, supported our going into Afghanistan after OBL. They were thumbing their noses at us and as much as admitted that he was there.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

126. (raises hand)

:hi:

[geek tragedy]

151. The Neocons would like you to think that. However, the great majority of

liberals fully supported the mission in Afghanistan. If anything, we fault Bush for dropping the ball there and pursuing Saddam instead.

[Raoul Duke II]

157. So....

how do we convince the fundies, or any islamists for that matter,
that Afghanistan was justified? Having invaded to expel Al Qaeda and the Taliban what then do we do? Set up a democracy? Leave immediately? What?

[geek tragedy]

161. We should have finished the job in Afghanistan and poured much more

money into the place. Abandoning it to the warlords and opium trafficking was most unwise.

[Raoul Duke II]

165. We've abandoned Afghanistan?

We've got almost 20,000 troops there.

I thought we were trying to suppress the warlords, establish a democracy, etc.

Not doing a perfect job, and Iraq is a distraction/drain on that effort.

But abandoned?

[geek tragedy]

167. In relative terms, yes.

There was no meaningful attempt to break the power of the warlords.

[Crunchy Frog]

173. Most people thought Afghanistan was justified.

I've never seen anyone suggest that support for it made one a neocon. I'm not sure where you're getting that from.

I think we should have gone into Afghanistan with full resources and focused attention, rather than the half assed way we did, eyeing Iraq the whole time, and gotten Bin Laden. After that, our primary focus should have been on Al Quaeda, and on stabilizing Afghanistan.

It's too bad that the Cons in charge didn't seem to care about that, and only wanted to go through the motions so that they could proceed to unleashing chaos in Iraq and turning it into a gigantic terrorism recruiting ground and training camp.

[Raoul Duke II]

179. Well...

I was only joking about the neocon thing.

What do you mean by stabilizing Afghanistan?

Establishing a democracy or what?

Doesn't establishing a western-style democracy in Afghanistan
play into the fundamentalist's charge that we are imperialists,
imposing an alien concept/government on a Muslim nation?

If we don't inpose democracy, what then?

[Crunchy Frog]

187. Well, for a start, probably not allowing most of the country

to be ruled by disparate warlords who largely believe in the same things the Taliban believed in. At least have the country under a unified government of some kind, rather than having a president who isn't even able to leave the capitol city. We might also think of going after the opium industry there.

Also, it's crazy that 3 years after we supposedly won that war, there is still intense fighting going on, and more Americans are dying there than at any other time since. Maybe we could have put sufficient troops and resources in to really defeat the Taliban fighters rather than just scattering them as we seem to have.

I wouldn't try to force a Western style democracy, but I would at least try to build a unified government with sovereignty and control over the entire country. I would have put a fair amount of resources into rebuilding and infrastructure as well. Like those new schools that girls were supposed to be able to go to, but mostly can't outside of Kabul.

This invasion had a legitimacy that the Iraq invasion did not. If we had put the necessary resources in, and used them properly, I think we could have ended up with a reasonably stable country that was not a haven for terrorists.

Why, what would you have done? Maybe "kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity"?

[Raoul Duke II]

191. Well....

The whole point is the pottery barn idea.

You break it, you bought it. If we invade and depose the govt,
we hafta put something else in place. Democracy is my favorite form of Govt. I'd try for it, albeit in a somewhat modified form from ours.

There are myriad problems in setting up a successful and stable Govt
in a country torn by 30 years of war. Those who escaped can easily get back in, as they are doing, as well as others. As to the warlords, they are the leaders in that country. We can't kill all of them, can we? We gotta tolerate the culture of the people, their traditions and tribes, etc. etc. The warlords/tribal leaders don't believe the same things as the Taliban. Sure, they're muslims, and conservative,
but not psychos. They're not enforcing Taliban/AQ style sharia,
blowing up Buddhas, banning music, kite flying, etc. etc.
Afghanistan has its own culture and history before the Soviet invasion, the Talibs and AQ. We need to help them re-establish who they are, and let them be.

Bottom line - there are no perfect, nor even many good options
in this situation.

The more heavy-handed we are, the worse we will be perceived. the less heavy-handed, the tougher it is to achieve our goals. If we
pour in enough troops to do everything we want, it won't work.

I dunno. I agree that we coulda/shoulda done much more in many respects.

[Mythsaje]

12. Unless we do those things...

we'll never know, will we?

[Raoul Duke II]

17. Huh?

What?

Unless we become a Muslim theocracy, we won't know if that's why he attacks us?

When he says he is declaring war on us, then states why, then slaughters us, I'd take him at his word as to why he is doing it.

[Mythsaje]

21. No...

unless we change our Middle East policy to avoid Neo-Colonial operations, we'll never know if that'll placate them and stop the attacks.

[Raoul Duke II]

25. C'mon.....

Disturbed posted the whole truth, in Osama's own words.

Even if we did all the getting out of the middle east thing, etc, etc, etc, he'd still kill us.

You can't placate him. He says so himself.

He says....convert or die.

Read it. Believe it.

[Mythsaje]

28. The difference is

we wouldn't be generating converts to his particular fundamentalist view of Islam...thus, they'd be losing ground rather than gaining ground.

It's actually a fairly small minority of ANY religion that is so fanatical that they're willing to raise that kind of hell. What he would LIKE to do, and what is actually possible for him to do, are two different things.

If Israel stopped kicking the Palestinians around, if we got the hell out of the region, and if we'd stop supporting dictators there, we'd actually give some of the INTERNAL democratic movements a chance to do something to chip away at the hard-liners.

As long as we're giving the leaders of the hard-line factions good examples of why we're "The Great Satan" they're having no problems finding converts. If we changed that, there might actually be a chance to see REAL democratic reform in some places (like Iran, for example, which, before Bush's ill-advised 'Axis of Evil' comments, was actually gaining ground in that area).

[Raoul Duke II]

45. Well.....

our being alive and not Muslim makes us Satan.

Convert or die. it's that simple.

I keep telling you, and Osama has told you himself, the war is beyond foreign policy. do everything he wants in that regard, and you've only started. The rest is tougher. Convert, or die.

As long as the Mullahs are in power in Iran the pro-democracy idea is strengthened there. Bush's comments are irrelevant to that. The hard-liners in Iran give the bad example to all Muslims, and eveyone else for that matter, why Theocracy is bad.

[Crunchy Frog]

176. Yeah, that's why we ought to get him. Should have gotten him

several years ago. I wish I knew why conservatives were so uninterested in going after someone like Bin Laden. Well, I guess maybe alot of the Christians ones can sort of identify with him.

I seem to recall that there was some RW sympathy for Timothy McVeigh.

[Raoul Duke II]

182. What do you mean?

How can a Christian identify with Osama?

What RW sympathy for McVeigh?

McVeigh said he did OKC as karmic revenge for the First Gulf War.
His justification was never based on any Christian theology/reasons.
Least not that he said. Could have all been a smokescreen.

Elohim City had something to do with OKC in my opinion. (Militia group)

[Crunchy Frog]

189. Just sayin' that a hardline radical fundamentalist

can probably somewhat identify with a hardline radical fundamentalist, even when they follow different religions. Just speculating, trying to understand why the Cons don't seem to be very interested in catching Osama. Maybe you can suggest some other possible reasons.

OKC was a long time ago, but I seem to recall at the time, some of the RW commentators expressing some sympathy for him. I know that Ann Coulter said something about her only regret being that it wasn't the NYT building instead.

I also seem to recall that it was seen as revenge for Waco and the Branch Davidians, but of course, it was a long time ago, and I'm mostly going by my memory of my impressions at the time, so I may be completely off base.

[Raoul Duke II]

200. You're right that

OKC was over Waco. But McVeigh did say as a moral justification that it was no worse than some of our actions in Iraq in 91. (from google)

Coulter probably did say that. Or if she didn't she wishes she had! LOL

As to fundies understanding fundies, maybe they can identify with each other in the sense that they recognize something of themselves in one another. But Christian and Islamic Fundies are like matter and antimatter on so many levels.

Does Bush want to get Osama? Absolutely. But it's incredibly hard.
Why do you think 18 special forces soldiers died this week?

I've read quite a few books on our Afghan war. A four man recon team
is for deep penetration/surveillance of high value targets only.
That's US SPECOPS military doctrine.

[Crunchy Frog]

226. I know you're no longer with us, so I'll just get the last word in here.

Yes I know. "It's hard werk. It's incredibly hard werk." The idiot only said that a few dozen times during the debates. However, the evidence strongly suggests otherwise. In Nov. 2001 we had him cornered in Tora Bora and we dropped the ball. As this CSM article says,

In retrospect, it becomes clear that the battle's underlying story is of how scant intelligence, poorly chosen allies, and dubious military tactics fumbled a golden opportunity to capture bin Laden as well as many senior Al Qaeda commanders.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0304/p01s03-wosc.html

Our brave leader decided it would be best to outsource the job of getting bin Laden to regional warlords, and, surprise, surprise, they screwed it up.

That was 31/2 years ago. Since then, Bush has virtually stopped ever even mentioning, hence, his frequent nickname here, "Osama bin Forgotten". He's gone through entire speeches talking about "terrism" and 9/11 without once uttering the name of Bin Laden. On various different occasions he has stated that bin Laden didn't really concern him, or that he seldom thinks about bin Laden.

Those 18 Special forces and Navy Seals died last week because three years after we supposedly defeated these people, they're still fighting us. It's because Bush is criminally incompetent at best. It's because he never put the resources in to truly defeat these guys and get Afghanistan stabilized. It's basically the equivilent of giving someone with a bacterial infection an insufficient round of antibiotics so that the bacteria seem to clear up, only to come back even stronger. That's why our soldiers are dying at a higher rate than they have since the start of the war.

A four man recon team to go into enemy territory and look for bin Laden as an example of Bush's wanting to get him!?!? There shouldn't even be any enemy territory there if we had done the job right. This is the same old innefectual, half assed effort that he's always put into getting bin Laden, and into Afghanistan as a whole.

So, I must conclude from the evidence that Bush is truly not interested in getting bin Laden. He's a useful bogey man to keep around. That video that he released just before the election was extremely useful. He can't scare people if he's behind bars. Bush doesn't care about protecting people's lives, he only wants to keep them scared because he can have power over them that way and power is all Bush really cares about.

I know that you're a freeper, or a booted freeper, but as I said in an earlier post to you, I hope that you will continue to read this board, and do it with an open mind, because you may be able to learn a few things. Sorry that you can't get the last word in this time, but maybe I gave you a few things to think about.

[Mythsaje]

223. Waco

and Ruby Ridge, I believe.

Those are big RW hot buttons.

[tenshi816]

209. Self-delete because it's a dupe of another post

[Mythsaje]

116. Then why is he attacking US and Britain and not everyone else? n/t

[Raoul Duke II]

184. He is, though, or those who share his vision

Spain, Turkey, India. All bombed by Jihadis.

AQ tried to attack Jordan with WMD/dirty bomb.

there are beheadings almost daily in Thailand.

Abu Sayyaf, Islamic Jihad, etc. etc. AQ has no monopoly on
Islamic fundamentalist terrorism.

[Crunchy Frog]

170. It's kinda too bad that Bush wouldn't even put the necessary

resources into getting him after 9/11, and that he's still on the loose nearly four years later.

I think we would have been much better from the terrorism standpoint if we had gotten Osama, really zeroed in on the Al Quaeda network, and not invaded and occupied the only secular country in the region and opened it up to the influence of Islamic extremists.

What a mess Bush has created by going after all the wrong targets, and leaving Osama to his own devices.

[Raoul Duke II]

180. Only secular country?

Doesn't Syria have a secular Govt? Baathists, I believe.

Jordan is secular as well. So's Egypt.

[Crunchy Frog]

190. I probably misspoke. There are some other countries with

secular governments, but Iraq seems to have had about the most secular society in the region, maybe by virtue of having a more repressive government. It's clear that fundamentalism is becoming a far more powerful force in that country, with women being forced to wear burquas and stay indoors in many areas, when they used to wear jeans and go to school or jobs. Barbers being blown up because of the Islamic prohibition on shaving facial hair, that sort of thing.

The big question remains, why take a relatively stable, if repressive secular society, and open it up to radical fundamentalist Islamists. Especially when you already have your hands full dealing with such radicals elsewhere. I think we should be encouraging secularism, not encouraging radical Islamic fundamentalism.

[Raoul Duke II]

193. Ahhhh....

The problem with the secular Govt's in the ME is that they are all
dictatorships, and we supported so many for so long in the name
of stability, oil and indifference.

Which is a huge part of the anger at us by so many in the world.
We allegedly stand for democracy, yadda yadda but don't walk the walk. Osama himself points it out in his letter. Bush agrees.
Hence the whole point of Bush's second term, spreading democracy around the globe as he said in his inaugural.

But can it be done at the point of a gun? I dunno.
Probably not. We'll see. So we are trying to promote secularism
in Iraq (remember the elections?) Of course. But we're trying to do
it in a Muslim country without a long history of it. And all the
ethnic and religious tensions not voiced for so many years also come to the front with the new freedom. Shias and Kurds resent Sunnis,
vice versa. It's a mess. And the AQ and psychos take advantage of the instability.

[Crunchy Frog]

197. Well, invading a country in order to overthrow a dictator

is very different from simply witholding support for a dictator. I think we could promote democracy in the region and win respect among the people simply by not actively supporting dictatorships.

I don't see how the elections in Iraq promoted secularism. In fact, I don't see how we have been promoting it at all, which is why much of the country is coming more and more under the domination of religious law. It's why women who used to wear western clothes, go to school, and hold jobs, are now confined to their homes and forced to wear burquas. It's why alchohol can no longer be sold, and why barbers get harrassed and sometimes blown up.

We've taken a relatively secular country and opened it up to rule by Islamic extremists, and it's alot more than simply ethnic and sectarian conflict, though that's certainly part of it.

Bottom line is, we've taken a society that wasn't a threat to us, and made it into the premier breeding ground and training ground for terrorists who want to kill us.

Nice work by Bush and the neocons huh.

[Raoul Duke II]

207. It's all a freaking mess.....

and to me it's very much because of the cold war. We did so many things against our self-proclaimed ideals for the greater good of
fending off the Soviets.

When we gave up on the Shah, look at the alternative that occured in Iran. Even supporting elections is somewhat suspect. In Egypt, I'd bet a religious fundamentalist would win a true election. In Iran, after 25 years of the Mullahs, I'd bet a truly free and open election would see a secular democrat elected. They've had enough.

What do you do?

Soft power won't end hard-line dictatorships in the middle east.
Those very dictatorships, which are secular, suppress and/or export their fundamentalist islamic problem. This suppression only reinforces the strength of the fundies within, or exports bloodshed and terrorism elsewhere. But hard power seems to do just the same.
I think there are more terrorists being created in Iraq than we
can kill quickly enough.

I'ts like Mickey mouse in fantasia with the little brooms...

[Crunchy Frog]

210. I'd like to continue this with you sometime, if you're still around

but we've just had a tragic loss here at DU and I'm just trying to catch up with the details about that, so I won't be back in this thread.

[Raoul Duke II]

213. Sorry to hear that.

My condolences.

Is there a way to "ping" someone here at DU?

I'd love to continue later.

[Crunchy Frog]

216. I don't know about "ping"

but you can send private messages. The loss was not personal, it was a long time and very much loved and respected DUer. You may want to read a few of the other threads on here tonight if you're planning on being a long term member here.

[Raoul Duke II]

218. I'll try to contact you

Next time I'm on.

I got booted by Freepers.

I bet I don't last long here either. ;-)

[Crunchy Frog]

219. Wouldn't surprise me.

But you may learn a little bit if you stick around with an open mind. And even if you do get booted off, you can still read and learn alot of interesting things. Anyway, it's been interesting.:hi:

[julianer]

199. You mean you want to

use Bin Laden's intransigence to validate your own.

You make me sick. You simply try to categorise in order to victimise.

[Raoul Duke II]

214. I'm not sure what you're saying...

How am I being intrasigent? Please be more specific.

[Guaranteed]

15. Ever seen this site?

www.newamericancentury.org

[NMMNG]

119. Yes, I've seen it and it scares me

I can't believe Dan Quayle is associated with these world domination whackjobs. :yoiks:

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

123. Welcome to DU. Why don't you post on other threads also?

We'd like to see your opinions on other things, like church-state separation, Social Security, labor laws, abortion, drug laws etc.

[Raoul Duke II]

129. I just registered a few weeks ago....

Been too busy to post much....

I LIKE church-state seperation.

I like social security, but it needs to be reformed.

I like labor laws.

I dislike abortion, but feel it ought to be legal.

I like some (not all) drug laws.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

124. They may have the intention, but lack the capability

These fellows, on the other hand, are way closer to having both: http://www.newamericancentury.org

[julianer]

198. I see you hope to convince

us by capitalising a word.

Admittedly it is a very strong tactic that is the right's most effective counter to rational argument, but I have a REPLY.

It is that you are a RIGHT WING FUCKER.

fact.

[Raoul Duke II]

215. Well...

osama says it himself. read his letter. he says that's what he wants.
that's what the worst of the hardcore islamic fundamentalists want.
it's a fact wether i capitalize it or not.

(with a nod to ee cummings)

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

224. He convinced... poorly.

:evilgrin:

[Guaranteed]

18. OBL needs to be captured or killed. I don't care about his justification-

with regard to THAT FACT.

I DO care about the circumstances surrounding the fact that he is able to go about doing what he is able to do. That must be addressed- but not in such a way as to make it seem as if we're not holding him responsible. He is to blame for this terrorism- unless, of course, he's not.

But it's the same with the Bush Cabal. I DON'T CARE WHAT THEIR JUSTIFICATION IS FOR DOING WHAT THEY'RE DOING. They were dead wrong in invading Iraq, they are criminals, and deserve to be treated as such.

HOWEVER, again, I do care about the circumstances surrounding the fact that they are able to go about doing what they are able to do. That must be addressed- but not in such a way as to make it seem as if we're not holding them responsible. They are to blame for this Iraq War, entirely.

[Mythsaje]

22. I agree

he's a criminal. So's the members of the Bush regime. Simple as that.

I am interested in his justification because it's the source of OTHER terrorists, and catching and killing (or prosecuting) Bin Laden will not end anything. Someone else will simply take his place.

That's how it works.

[Guaranteed]

50. Think of his justification like BushCo's- it's a matter of POWER.

He's not interested in truth. He's interested in telling people whatever will put him in power.

And he's doing quite well with that. That's why he LIKES BushCo leading the United States- because it feeds right into his justifications.

[Raoul Duke II]

19. To All

Look, people can blame the neo-cons, Bush etc. for the way
they are fighting the war, invading Iraq, etc. Yuo can blame colonialism, etc, etc, etc ad nauseum. It doesn't matter!

You ain't a Muslim, you're not under sharia. DIE or CONVERT.

The grievance can be traced back to whenever, Iraq 2003, Balfour after WWI, all the way to the Crusades, etc. It don't matter.

[Mythsaje]

23. The Christians

were like that too, at one time. Eventually, some of them mellowed and stopped hacking their way across Europe...then they came to America, and hacked their way across THIS continent.

Religious fanatics are religious fanatics...

[Raoul Duke II]

27. Well....

A religious fanatic is indeed a religious fanatic. You're right.

So how do you stop the Islamic kind, today?

[Mythsaje]

29. By covertly supporting internal democratic movements

in the various hard-line countries.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mythsaje]

35. Iran

believe it or not.

[Raoul Duke II]

40. In Iran yes, in ISLAM no.

I know all about Iran.

If the Iranians overthrew the Mullahs and established a democracy, they'd be attacked by radical Muslims. The ideology and justification of freedom movment(s) in Iran do not come from
Islam itself. It comes from 20 years of Theocratic misery.

[Mythsaje]

44. Agreed...

but this sort of thinking is like an infection. People LIKE freedom, once they get a taste of it. Hell, ask a cab driver in almost any major city in America. How do they like it here?

You'll never change a fanatic's mind, but average people, regardless of what religion they follow, can easily learn to enjoy freedom.

[pinto]

132. Iran has a history of a parliamentary democracy. Check out:

"All the Shah's Men", by Stephen Kinzer. Good story about Iranian Prime Minister Mossadegh and recent Iranian history.

[Bouncy Ball]

69. Paranoia will destroy-a!!!!

Hey that makes me want to watch the movie "Valley Girl!"

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mythsaje]

33. I'd assume

he doesn't like their policies either.

I never said the guy wasn't an asshole. Just that his point ISN'T that he "hates our freedoms." That's a simplistic, bullshit, jingoistic line of thinking that makes it harder for us to concentrate on the real source of the problem.

[Raoul Duke II]

37. AAAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

READ!!!!!!!

..."Just that his point ISN'T that he "hates our freedoms."

BS!!!!!

Osama says it himself!!!!

We are kufir!!!! Kill them all!!!!

He does hate our freedoms, he says so himself.

Go back and actually read Osama's letter that Disturbed so kindly posted.

CONVERT or DIE.

What don't you understand?

[Mythsaje]

43. I just read it again...

He lists all those things he finds repulsive about America, but he reiterates that his real grievance is with our Middle East policy. Supporting Israel, supporting dictatorial regimes, and causing harm to their people through our policies is why we may expect them in New York and Washington.

Maybe he DOES hate us for our freedoms...and how we use them. So what? If we weren't killing, or supporting the killing, of thousands of men, women, and children over there, he'd damn near be talking to himself because only the most fanatical would be willing to die for the sake of an ideal.

But when their mothers, brothers, fathers, sisters, cousins, and children have suffered at our hands and the hands of our allies, people develop a VERY PERSONAL problem with us. And it is those personal problems that make people terrorists.

[Raoul Duke II]

46. Well....

We're getting chicken and egg here.

Do our actions cause the terrorism, or vice-versa.

What about Afghanistan, again, then. You support it.

Aren't you guilty then?

[H2O Man]

63. Simply not true.

What you are saying isn't true. You may actually believe it, or you may recognize it as a lie. Either way, it simply isn't true.

[Raoul Duke II]

68. Huh?

What isn't true?

[H2O Man]

71. That which you are saying. n/t

[Raoul Duke II]

83. What, specifically?

[H2O Man]

87. Read this thread.

Then read "Through Our Enemies' Eyes" and "Imperial Hubris."

[Raoul Duke II]

103. Ummmm

So I gotta read you blog, and 2 books????

Sum it up for me?

What do you mean?

Why does Osama hate us?

[H2O Man]

106. No.

You don't read me. But you might want to read those books.

[Guaranteed]

It doesn't matter what his "point" is.

Frankly, I don't want to LISTEN to his point.

He's killing innocent people.

Just like I don't want to listen to Rush Limbaugh's point.

[Raoul Duke II]

34. OK

Whose fault is it, in your opinion.

Me, I blame bin-laden.

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Raoul Duke II]

38. It's deeper

Not just at "some level"...it's the very core of Osama's beliefs.

If you took away every single foreign-policy justification, Osama's
actions and goals would not fundamentally change.

[Disturbed]

39. I am not an expert in this area..

regarding AQ and their declaration of war on Amerika. I do not have the solutions in detail. I do know that by attacking Iraq before Afghanistan was pacified was a huge mistake. Amerika is at war with AQ. The focus should be directly about that and not attempting to colonize Afghanistan and Iraq. I suspect that Gen Wesly Clark has actual solutions.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Raoul Duke II]

42. well.....

What do you mean "colonising" Afghanistan? Was the original invasion of Afghanistan justified to try to get OBL? Having done so, when do we leave, and under what conditions?

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Raoul Duke II]

48. What do you mean?

I don't smell nothing.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[H2O Man]

66. Yep. n/t

[Kathy in Cambridge]

136. nevermind

[JimmyJazz]

56. I don't think Hunter Thompson would approve of your message.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

115. Well, color me stupid, because I haven't.

Is it an anagram of something?

[Kathy in Cambridge]

134. self delete

[Raoul Duke II]

59. Huh?

I don't understand what you mean. Please explain.

[JimmyJazz]

61. Explain where you got your screen name and I'll explain my post.

[Raoul Duke II]

64. I'm a Thompson fan

Raoul Duke was a nom-de-plume of Thompson's when he wrote For Rolling Stone.

[JimmyJazz]

70. And Thompson would approve of the way you've given a free pass

to this administration and blamed everything on the Islamic Jihadists?

[Bouncy Ball]

76. Ooooo me me me me me!! Pick me!!!

Ok. NO, he wouldn't!

:D

[JimmyJazz]

77. I may have been reading the posts wrong....

what do you think?

[Bouncy Ball]

78. Oh I don't think you were!

Good job, nice job, cheers sweetie, thanks a lot!

[H2O Man]

79. You were correct.

No question.

[Raoul Duke II]

81. What?

I give this administration nothing, let alone a free pass.

Do I blame everything on the Jihadists? No.

Our wrongs, and theirs, go back a long ways.

But the original gist of the thread is "Why do they hate us?"

foreign policy, sure. That's the current justification.

But OSama says it himself. there are two steps for us to get
right witht the jihadis. Completely change foreign policy, then convert to a theocracy. Not just one. Both.

we can argue wehter or not they'd even exist to the extent they
do without our blunders over so many years. But the point is - those
are their goals - they say so themselves.

[H2O Man]

85. You are silly. n/t

[Raoul Duke II]

95. I explained my screen name, please explain your post

fair is fair

[Bouncy Ball]

97. She did! Right here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4043377&mesg_id=4044811

Voila!

[Raoul Duke II]

100. Ummm...

Her post was a question regarding Wehter or not Thompson would agree with what she mis-percieved my point to be.

Not an explanation.

[Catherine Vincent]

51. I smell it too.

And it stinks!

[H2O Man]

72. Very strong smell. n/t

[Guaranteed]

52. Sorry, Osama bin Laden is one fucked up piece of shit.

He and BushCo are of the same cloth.

They feed their people info to get them riled up, and give them unquestioned power. It's the same shit.

And they kill innocent people.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

117. Who's saying he isn't? (nt)

[Raoul Duke II]

62. Uhhh...

Anything to add on-topic?

Care to add to the discussion?

[Bouncy Ball]

75. Oh she did add to it, believe me!

CONVERT OR DIE!!!

HEZBOLLAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Kathy in Cambridge]

80. at least he didn't blame it on Israel

:crazy:

[H2O Man]

82. .....Yet ......

Don't give it any ideas ......

[Bouncy Ball]

84. HEZBOLLAHHH!!!

Wait, no, that's not right.

What would I yell if I were ranting that it was Israel's fault???

[H2O Man]

88. My face hurts

from laughing at the things on this thread!

[Bouncy Ball]

92. Hey that's good to know!

I never saw you as being very...chuckley. Is that a word?

Serious, knowledgable, compassionate, yes. But not very laughey.

:thumbsup:

So what WOULD I yell?

[H2O Man]

94. I think, "SAY UNCLE!!!"

But I'm not sure. There may be a better source for a disturbed answer elsewhere here this evening.

"Chuckley"? It must be a word. It is now. Madmen always laugh, though often at inappropriate times.

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

122. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ChiDem]

49. Just one problem.

When you start to look at the reasons why we are hated and attacked a picture starts to emerge...

In 1953 the US crushed Iran's newfound democracy by removing Mossadeq and installing the brutal Shah, in the name of oil. The Iranians who had previously looked up to the US were angered by these events, as they should be, and the hatered we see today in the mid-east was born, It is not far fetched to draw a line from Operation Ajax through the Shahs repressive and the Islamic revolution to the fireballs that engulfed the World Trade Towers on the morning of Sepember 11th. Do I dare suggest that we bring these problems on ourselves ?

Just take a look at our foreign policy history if you are asking "why they hate us" ..It's littered with events just like the one described above, a brutal dictator is installed by the USA, he then sells out his people and his countries resources and assets..History, repeating, repeating, repeating, repeating, ...:crazy:

So, as we all can see...the Right wing says we are the blame America first group, and if we DO take the time to look into the whos, whys, and wheres of an attack, we will almost always find we brought it upon ourselves, maybe that is why they have such a big problem with facts.

Sorry for the harshness..:eyes:

[Raoul Duke II]

54. You're right

You're right that we as a Nation have done much wrong in the name of economics, political expediency and stupidity.

How do we correct these mistakes?

What's the new policy?

The right wing actually agrees with the diagnosis of our mis-deeds,
but their solution may not be the best cure.

[many a good man]

74. To be fair...

They DO hate our freedoms; just like most religious fanatics. Problem is most fanatics aren't motivated to kill thousands of innocent people.

Our neocolonialist foreign policies agitate this hatred and lead more people to this type of murderous extremism.

A more moral and just foreign policy will reduce the number of converts to this brand of extremism.

Cultural imperialism in pursuit of profits breeds decadence and offends many people, even those who are not fanatical.

The right wing actually agrees with the diagnosis of our mis-deeds,
but their solution may not be the best cure.

I strongly disagree with this statement.

[Raoul Duke II]

91. What part is wrong?

The right wing does agree that our mis-deeds have caused this problem, in whole or part. Bush et al have stated that we were wrong to support dictators, etc. and need to support democracy.

But we still do support dictators, and democracy is an alien concept in much of the world and imposing it by force is a tall order.

And the wrong way to go about it.

[many a good man]

102. I've never heard Bush, et. al. state we were ever wrong

to support dictators. Unless, of course, you're referring to his regret that we never attacked the Soviet Union to free eastern Europeans. Enlighten me with links if you've got 'em.

Bipartisan consensus on democracy abroad since '47 has been pretty much limited our "little brown and yellow brothers" to the choice of pro-US Dictator A vs. pro-US Dictator B.

[Raoul Duke II]

105. Well....

I ain't got time to hunt down links to stories that may contain quotes....but I've heard Rice, Bush and others say just that...
many times....Specifically in Bushes second inaugural. We've
done wrong, not lived up to our ideals lo these many years regarding
foreign policy, support of dictators, etc. to paraphrase.

Hence Bush's whole second term agenda as outlined in his inaugural
to spread democracy, yadda yadda yadda.

[Bouncy Ball]

107. I was thinking the same thing I have NEVER heard the right wing

acknowledge our part in the history of this stuff. Never. In fact, they get quite angry if it's even brought up!

[H2O Man]

113. They've never been wrong.

The right wing lacks the ability to admit error. It's an unattractive quality in an individual, a political group, or a nation.

[Raoul Duke II]

125. You need to listen harder, then

Quote.....

Urging international support for the US project to spread democracy in war-torn Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, Bush said, "for too long, many nations, including my own, tolerated, even excused, oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability.

"Oppression became common, but stability never arrived. We must take a different approach," Bush said.

Endquote....

Source:

http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/net/2004/09/23/gov.t.welcomes.bush.admission.it.was.wrong.to.back.dictators.(12.10.p.m.).html

[Raoul Duke II]

131. What, where'd everybody go?

See, I got the quote...

[Raoul Duke II]

142. Wher'd you go?

Care to comment?

[many a good man]

222. On the contrary...

“…for too long, many nations - including my own - tolerated, even excused oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability. Oppression became common, but stability never arrived. We must take a different approach. We must help the reformers of the Middle East as they work for freedom, and strive to build a community of peaceful, democratic nations.”
--GWB, Speech to UN 9/21/04

I don't read anywhere in this citation an apology for supporting dictators. Here Bush is decrying the lack of intervention in the Middle East on the part of the US and our allies. He is merely trying to justify military intervention in the region as part of his "noble" effort to bring "peace" and impose "democracy."

Who is his idea of a democratic reformer? Ahmed Chalabi? Its just a pretty veil to cover up more ugly policy. Its easier to sell destruction and death for a noble cause than for greed and power. Especially when it comes to military recruitment.

Non-interventionism is the only thing that will lead to democracy and true stability in the long run. The command economies of the Soviet empire eventually collapsed of its own weight mostly because it was an inefficient and unworkable system. Moderates were slowly gaining power in Iran because Islamic republicanism cannot meet the needs of its people. Our harsh rhetoric and actions are subverting Iran's movement toward democracy, not helping it. We must cease propping up undemocratic regimes through arms transfers and trade without strings. Its the greed of the US and our allies that perpetuate instability and bloodshed.

[Guaranteed]

55. That sounds like a justification.

And there is no fucking justification.

These were innocent people, who had NOTHING TO DO with what happened in Iran.

Just like the Iraqi people were innocent people, who had NOTHING TO DO with what happened on 9/11.

THERE IS NO FUCKING JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS ON EITHER SIDE.

[ChiDem]

65. Actually...

The people in London are not as innocent as the people in Iraq.

The people in Iraq have no say in who was leading their country, there was no vote, they had no say in the backroom deals that were cut between the leader elected by the US people and their unelected brutal dictator.

The people of the USA elected a leader who armed Saddam with weapons to kill his people, and now they have just elected that same man as "The Greatest America" ...don't tell me who is innocent and who is not.

Both Bush and Blair waged war based on lies, their lies were exposed for all to see, the populations of these two great countries looked over the situation and then chose to RE-ELECT THEM BOTH.

Our leaders cannot commit these acts without the support of the American people...Thats the facts jack.

[Guaranteed]

86. Wait- I thought we didn't elect Bush.

And Blair was elected by his party, who controls Parliament. Right?

In any case, while we may have more control over our government, we are no less innocent simply because the Iraqis didn't throw off the authoritarian government with their own blood. We did it. The French did it. The Vietnamese did it. There's no reason that they couldn't do it.

We are ALL people. No one civilian deserves to be killed any more than any other.

[H2O Man]

90. No one deserves to die like that.

Violence is bad. No one argues with that. Those who kill innocent people in this manner are doing an evil thing. In human suffering, there are not degrees of innocence or anything like that. There are, however, degrees of responsibility in taking positive actions to end the evil of violence.

[ChiDem]

229. Umm, excuse me.

"The Iraqis didn't throw off the authoritian governemnt with their own blood"

Oh fuck you. Do you understand how Saddam came to power, and who was behind his rise to power ?

The US government helped get this butcher in power...now you claim it is the Iraqis responsibililty to remove him ?

Fuck that shit

[Guaranteed]

232. LOL whose was it, then? OURS?

No, sir- fuck THAT shit.

[Junkdrawer]

57. I think Bin Laden is the Saudi Pied Piper...

His main job was and still is to get as many opponents to the Royal Family out of Saudi Arabia and fighting someone else - anyone else.

As a side effect of this, the Saudi Government, through Bin Laden, has an endless supply of radicals who really do want to kill as many Westerners as they can. Indeed, if Bin Laden doesn't attack the West from time-to-time, his usefulness to the Royal Family dries up.

[BiggJawn]

89. To not try and understand your enemy is to lose to him.

Who said that? Sun Tzu? "The Book of Five rings"? Lao Tzu?
(No, Lao Tzu wouldn't have said that...)

That's just the thing about those Ditto-Monkeys. Shoot first, ask questions later. Never mind WHY, just keep pouring B-52's and Hum-Vee's and LIVES into the problem and eventually, you'll Git'R Done!

[Bouncy Ball]

93. I was JUST arguing with another DUer this morning about that

very statement. I said anyone who REFUSES to examine the motivations of his or her enemy is just stupid. He refused to examine the motives of terrorists, saying examining their motives and possibly understanding WHY they do what they do is the SAME thing as SUPPORTING what they do!

:crazy:

I never could get it through to him that they are not the same.

[H2O Man]

98. Sun Tzu

"If you wish to conduct offensive war you must know the men employed by the enemy. Are they wise or stupid, clever or clumsey? Having assessed their qualities, you prepare appropriate measures."

[H2O Man]

101. Martin Luther King, Jr

"Here is the true meaning and value of compassion andnonviolence when it helps us too see the enemies' point of view, to hear his questions, to know his assessment of ourselves. For from his view we may indeed see the basic weaknesses of our own condition, and if we are mature, we may learn and grow and profit from the wisdom of the brothers who are called the opposition."

[H2O Man]

104. Anonymous (Michael Schauer)

(Michael Schauer is a retired US intelligence officer with two decades experience in national security issues related to Afghanistan and SE Asia.)

"While there may be a few Muslims out there who would blow up themselves and others because they are offended at McDonald's restaurants, Iowa's early presidential primary, and the seminude, fully pregnant Demi Morre on Esquire's cover, they are exactly that: few, and no threat at all to U.S. national security. The focused and lethal threat posed to U.S. national security arises not from Muslims being offended by what America is, but rather from their plausible perception that the things they most love and value -- God, Islam, their brethern, and Muslim lands -- are being attacked by America. What we as a nation do, then, is the key casual factor in our confrontation with Islam. It is, I believe, the Muslim perception that the things they love are being intentionally destroyed by America that engenders Islamist hatred toward the United States, and that simultaneously motivates a few Muslims to act alone and attack U.S. interesyts; a great many more to join organizations like al Qaeda and its allies; and massive numbers to support those organizations ...."

Imperial Hubris; pages 9-10

[Raoul Duke II]

110. Interesting

So what's Schauer's solution?

[H2O Man]

112. Read his books.

Then come back, and we'll talk.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

118. Thou doth ask WAY too much.

Take another look at what you just requested and to whom you did.

[H2O Man]

121. I hear you .....

.... and, as usual, agree with you!

[Mythsaje]

128. YES!!!

This has been my point throughout this thread... It's not what America IS, but what it DOES, or what it is perceived as doing.

OBL, on his own, is hardly a threat...but if he can point at the U.S. and say "look...they're trying to destroy you--here's the proof" he wins the hearts and minds of those listening to him.

[H2O Man]

130. Right.

Another person participating on this thread apparently hasn'y any clue as to what Usama bin Laden has said. As a result, that person has repeatedly posted a false assertion that bin Laden is an imperialist, intent on converting the world to Islam. It is a foolish thing to say. Our country is far better off if we know the truth about our enemy.

[Raoul Duke II]

133. Ummm...

Disturbed actually quoted the entire article/letter from Osama.

His own words.

Care to read it?

Comment?

[H2O Man]

135. I have several times.

Context is importasnt to understanding.

[Raoul Duke II]

138. Read it again

QUOTE

Q2) As for the second question that we want to answer: What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.

(a) The religion of the Unification of God; of freedom from associating partners with Him, and rejection of this; of complete love of Him, the Exalted; of complete submission to His Laws; and of the discarding of all the opinions, orders, theories and religions which contradict with the religion He sent down to His Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Islam is the religion of all the prophets, and makes no distinction between them - peace be upon them all. It is to this religion that we call you; the seal of all the previous religions. It is the religion of Unification of God, sincerity, the best of manners, righteousness, mercy, honour, purity, and piety. It is the religion of showing kindness to others, establishing justice between them, granting them their rights, and defending the oppressed and the persecuted. It is the religion of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil with the hand, tongue and heart. It is the religion of Jihad in the way of Allah so that Allah's Word and religion reign Supreme. And it is the religion of unity and agreement on the obedience to Allah, and total equality between all people, without regarding their colour, sex, or language

ENDQUOTE

And Osama goes on to say later in the letter that until ALL conditions are met, it's Jihad time.

Not just our foreign policy, he wants to change us, our nation and way of life.

[H2O Man]

139. Tao Te Ching

Knowing ignorance
is strenth;
Ignoring knowledge
is sickness.

-- Lao Tse

[Raoul Duke II]

140. Huh???

Can you do more than speak in sentence fragments? Can you express a coherent thought? can you put forth a simple argument?

[H2O Man]

143. No. n/t

[Mythsaje]

145. It's simple

Realizing you're ignorant is strength...
Refusing to banish your ignorance is a sickness.

Or, as Frank Herbert put it...Faith is limiting...if you assume you already know the answer, you can't learn anything further.

You can't fill a glass that's already full.


Furthermore:

OBL doesn't have the power to do what he wants to do--even assuming he wants to do it. It's rhetoric, used to cast fear on his enemies, and enflame his people. He gains influence because he's able to SHOW people examples of how America is harming THEM. If he didn't have these examples to show, he'd find himself a lot less able to gather followers.

Basically, our policies FEED him...without those policies, he'd be just another crackpot shouting on a streetcorner, trying to convince relatively contented people that they should strap bombs on themselves and kill people they don't even know who aren't doing them any harm. He'd be left with a few sick malcontents, not a growing movement.

[Raoul Duke II]

149. Well....

He doesn't have the strength to accomplish his ultimate goals,
but certainly has the will and means to commit acts (London, et al)
he believes further that goal.

as to our policies "feeding" him....I return to Afghanistan. You
say Afghanistan was justified. Wasn't our invasion an example of how he can show people how our actions are harming them? Western imperialism? etc. etc.

[Mythsaje]

221. Perhaps

but it wouldn't have mattered all that much if we had've kept with it until we caught him. That WAS the point, after all... then Bush took his eye off the ball.

[Bouncy Ball]

109. These are great quotes, but I especially love the MLK one.

Very nice.

[H2O Man]

111. He had a great

sense of humor, you know.

[Bouncy Ball]

114. MLK is one of my favorites.

My students studied the Civil Rights movement, so the first year I taught that unit, I had a crash course in everything I didn't already know about that time in American history.

I've listened to audio tapes of MLK, watched tons of film footage, read his writings--he had an easy laugh and SUCH a huge smile!

My Pre-AP students read, studied and responded to (in writing) his "Letter from a Birmingham Jail," one of the most thought-provoking things I ever had them read. We would discuss it literally for two weeks.

What really broke my heart was to see my students (eighth graders) realize this stuff (footage of the protestors being hit with water hoses and dogs, etc) happened "only" in the 1960s. That it was such recent history blew them away.

[H2O Man]

120. Martin was America's saint.

I put the first quote up to show that even a warrior understands the need to know what his enemy is thinking. I noted a few people today saying that it doesn't matter what those who would blow themselves up on a public transportation system think. Baloney.

And the King quote reflects the power to heal. It's not an unrealistic view that kindness will sway a suicide bomber on his or her way to kill innocent humans. King knew that the human mind could be tortured, distorted, and disturbed to the point of compelling the person to meet a violent end.

At some point in time, America will need to decide which level of consciousness is most likely to bring about a reduction in hatred and violence: it might be George W. Bush is leading us to a Promised Land, but I doubt it. I think we need to grasp Martin's message. And the sooner, the better ... because this president is leading us down a dead end road.

[Mythsaje]

127. That line of reasoning

is pure Neo-Con.

Sheesh.

[madeline_con]

144. "... and several dozen more today in London."

Has Bin Laden claimed responsibility?

[Mythsaje]

148. Not that I know of...

...it's highly suggestive though. It has all the earmarks of a coordinated attack--like 9/11, which, ostensibly, he instigated.

[Raoul Duke II]

152. Ostensibly?

He admitted it. He bragged about it!

What's ostensible about it?

[Mythsaje]

227. Hey

I haven't seen any real evidence. Have you?

I'm willing to accept it as truth in the absence of any other evidence, but it's still just something someone said. I could say that I was one of the guys who dragged Saddam from his spider-hole...doesn't mean I actually did it.

[madeline_con]

153. "...it's highly suggestive though"

It suggests that someone wants to connect Al Qaeda to every terror attack that occurs, IMO. I heard a lot of "Al Qaeda" in the news today, but no "credible" claims of responsibility.

The subliminal power of the use of such words is not lost on our dear Dick Cheney, who likes to say "Al Qeada-like groups". He knows what the average, dim bulb, * voter hears in his small mind.

Hating Bin Laden because of what happened in London today may be misplaced anger, like invading Iraq because of the WTC and Pentagon attacks.

[Raoul Duke II]

156. Ummmm....

I can hate Bin Laden plenty enough already without him having anything to with London.

9/11, 3/11, Africa, etc. etc.

The London attacks fit a pattern though....Al Qaeda's pattern.

Doesn't mean they did it, but It's very very likely.

[madeline_con]

159. "The London attacks fit a pattern though ...

....Al Qaeda's pattern."

They also fit the pattern of any number of other groups. Blowing things up as a way of policy protest is not an Al Qaeda exclusive.

Lumping all attacks into an Al Qaeda organizational coup seems to play into the hands of the neocons who want to say "I told you so."

I never questioned your right to hate Bin Laden. I merely asked if he'd claimed responsibility, and tried to show the possible error of that sort of thinking.

[Raoul Duke II]

163. Which other groups....

Like to blow things/westerners up? In multiple simultaneous attacks?
London is exactly like Madrid. Same MO.

I don't discount completely the possibilty that AQ didn't do London.
Perhaps another fundie Islamist group. Who knows?

But if I had to bet who did it, I'd lay my money on AQ and have damn
near perfect odds of being right.

We'll see.

[madeline_con]

166. "I don't discount completely ...

... the possibilty that AQ didn't do London."

I was just saying that possibility exists.

"Which other groups...."

this is one link that lists various terror organizations.

http://library.nps.navy.mil/home/tgp/tgpndx.htm

[Raoul Duke II]

168. Huh????

And of those other terrorist organizations, how many have fundie islamic roots ideologies?

If it wasn't AQ, it almost certainly was a fundie islamic group or individuals.

Unless it was the Basques, or maybe Aum Shinriko?

LOL

[madeline_con]

169. whatever

LOL

[Mythsaje]

228. Who was responsible

the last time something blew up in London?

Not saying it's the same folks this time--they seem to have been more or less defused...but :shrug:

[Fescue4u]

164. We don't need to understand him

We just need to kill him.

Now if the plan is deal and negotiate with bin laden, then your damn right we need to understand his motivations.

But truth is, we'll never understand Islamic terrorism.

[friesianrider]

174. Fascism, if I'm not mistaken...

Acts much like today's GOP - out of emotion, not rationale.

Terrorism is such a complex problem, it is absolutely foolish to believe it can be stopped/solved by a bomb. If we have any hope of ending terrorism once and for all, we need to get to the root of the proble,, which as the OP pointed out so well, involves studying the purpose and reason (or lack thereof) behind their actions. This is not weak, it is SMART.

Excellent post, OP!

[Endangered Specie]

175. I think we understand 'why' he and alqeada did it, that being said...

Id love to see him riddled full of bullet holes, Uday and Qusay style. :mad:

[eagler]

177. His brand of Islam comes from Saudi Arabia. Osama is a of the Hanbali

school of Islam-the most conservative and radical of the 4 main schools. Wahabism is an even more strict sect within the Hanbali school.The point is that we really can't lump all muslims together-however the sect is spreading.

[NoSheep]

181. Did not the CIA collaborate with Bin Laden to fight the Russians

in Afghanistan? Once you're in the CIA, you're always in the CIA. Just ask dubbya's daddy. I agree with the OP. Our "leaders" are our own worst enemy.

[Raoul Duke II]

186. Yes, the CIA collaborated with the fundies

But that was to get at the Russkies.

The entire cold war was littered by proxy battles where one side
or the other used third parties to damage the other.

Which is a huge reason why the US for so long tolerated dictators
and despots. As long as they were anti-commie, we thought the ends justifed the means.

Lotsa blowback.

[NoSheep]

188. Let us not forget this glorious exchange:

[TheGoodCitizen]

204. We shall never forget!

Buck Fush!

[NoSheep]

206. Done!

:+

[Name removed]

202. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JimmyJames]

203. just a further thought

regarding the London attacks

how is it that American news are claiming it is Al queda
before the British know who it is.

On the American news they are claiming it was Al Queda hours before the British news finally started to say the same thing. But earlier on British news they were saying they did not know.

[TheGoodCitizen]

205. Because...

Thats the most convenient option!

[Raoul Duke II]

217. I don't think....

Anybody anywhere has said they know who did it.

But there's lots of speculation in the press.

Human nature.

When I first heard the news, Ithought Al Qaeda.

Perfect fit for their modus operandi.

Does that mean that I'm in on the CIA conspiracy?

[JimmyJames]

230. this is in response to my message being deleted

i am not sure why as i used no bad language or anything and just stated my feeling that al queda is something the american govt has created-or the friggin isreali govt and not some dark underground terrorist insurgency

what is the point of having an opinion here if unpopular opinions are deleted?

How democratic is that?

There are plenty of links and videos etc etc etc to support the idea of a new world order and its connection to things going dreadfully wrong.

I would expect some neocon website to delete and purge as that is their way...hide the truth...bury the truth in crap news about miss america contests etc...
if DU also purges and hides and cleanses and covers then how are you any different than all the others?

I have an opinion and it is valid.
I want to share this opinion which is valid

anyone else getting miffed at the people who "clean up the boards"?

[H2O Man]

231. You have an "opinion."

But it is not valid. It is real.