Bin Ladens latest speech

[jun_erh]

'September 11 and March 11 is Your Own Merchandise Coming Back to You'

"This is a message to our neighbors north of the Mediterranean, with a proposal for a peace treaty, in response to the positive reactions which emerged there.

"What happened in September 11 and March 11 is your own merchandise coming back to you. We hereby advise you ... that your definition of us and of our actions as terrorism is nothing but a definition of yourselves by yourselves, since our reaction is of the same kind as your act. Our actions are a reaction to yours, which are destruction and killing of our people as is happening in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Palestine.

"It suffices to see the event that shocked the world - the killing of the wheelchair-bound old man Ahmad Yassin - Allah's mercy upon him - and we pledge to Allah to avenge [his murder] on America, Allah willing.

"By what measure of kindness are your killed considered innocents while ours are considered worthless? By what school [of thought] is your blood considered blood while our blood is water?

"Therefore, it is [only] just to respond in kind, and the one who started it is more to blame..."

We will Continue to Fight the U.S. and U.N.

"When you look at what happened and is happening, the killing in our countries and in yours, an important fact emerges, and that is that the oppression is forced on both us and you by your politicians who send your sons, against your will, to our country to kill and to be killed.

"Therefore, both sides have an interest in thwarting those who shed the blood of the peoples for their own narrow interests, out of vassalage to the White House gang...

"This war makes millions of dollars for big corporations, either weapons manufacturers or those working in the reconstruction [of Iraq], such as Halliburton and its sister companies...

"It is crystal clear who benefits from igniting the fire of this war and this bloodshed: They are the merchants of war, the bloodsuckers who run the policy of the world from behind the scenes.

"President Bush and his ilk, the media giants, and the U.N. ... all are a fatal danger to the world, and the Zionist lobby is their most dangerous member. Allah willing, we will persist in fighting them...

'I Hereby Offer [Europe] a Peace Treaty'

"Therefore, in order to thwart opportunities for the merchants of war, and in response to the positive developments that were expressed in recent events and in the public opinion polls, which determined that most European peoples want peace, I urge ... the establishment of a permanent commission to nurture awareness among Europeans regarding the justness of our causes, particularly the cause of Palestine, and that use be made of the vast media resources to this end.

"I hereby offer them a peace treaty, the essence of which is our commitment to halt actions against any country that commits itself to refraining from attacking Muslims or intervening in their affairs, including the American conspiracy against the larger Islamic world.

"This peace treaty can be renewed at the end of the term of a government and the rise of another, with the agreement of both sides.

"The peace treaty will be in force upon the exit of the last soldier of any given [European] country from our land.

"The door of peace will remain open for three months from the broadcast of this statement. Whoever rejects the peace and wants war should know that we are the men [of war], and whoever wants a peace treaty and signs it, we hereby allow this peace treaty with him.

"Stop shedding our blood in order to protect your own blood. The solution to this easy-difficult equation is in your own hands. You should know that the longer you delay, the worse the situation will become, and when that happens, do not blame us, blame yourselves...

"As for those who lie to people and say that we hate freedom and kill for the sake of killing - reality proves that we are the speakers of truth and they lie, because the killing of the Russians took place only after their invasion of Afghanistan and Chechnya; the killing of the Europeans took place only after the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan; the killing of the Americans in the Battle of New York took place only after their support for the Jews in Palestine and their invasion of the Arabian Peninsula; their killing in Somalia happened only after Operation Restore Hope. We restored [i.e. repelled] them without hope, by the grace of Allah."

:rolleyes:

[lkfmdc]

Osama needs new material, I already read most of this in Kung Lek's last post :rolleyes:

[jun_erh]

at lgf (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/) they made a similar point. I can't believe that anyone wuld see this "offer" as anything other than bs.

[Starchaser107]

fyah pon bin ladin
bun out terrorism:mad:

[Xebsball]

I rock :cool:

[rogue]

September 11 and March 11 is Your Own Merchandise Coming Back to You
I'd guess ******* never heard of a restocking fee. His times coming.

[red5angel]

Kung Lek, is that you?

[Xebsball]

This good stuff, you can print and make a poster:
http://www.ocolly.com/issues/2001_Fall/011011/pix/1.%20OSAMA%20BIN%20LADEN.jpg

[Merryprankster]

LOL at lkfmdc!!!

[David Jamieson]

you @ssholes are almost making me laugh.

you friggin joke like your president does about the loss of life.

any wmds under your chair?

wads
:rolleyes:

[red5angel]

hey, maybe now canada wil pull out of all that fighting terrorism...or wait, maybe they already have since there would be loss of life involved?!

[David Jamieson]

red5, if you were of age, maybe you could get a chance to serve, but you are not.

instead you are just a mouthy anonymous coward like your friends.

the only one with any cajones at all is ross, even though he is a dumb@ss in my opinion, but at least he isn't afraid like you, or your little girlfriends are. quivering like blubbering manginas behind your anonymity on the internet.

you're f.ucking scum for making light of the current political situation, that is most clear.

[red5angel]

red5, if you were of age, maybe you could get a chance to serve, but you are not.


LOL! That's right, those 4 years in the Corps must have been my youthful imagination!


instead you are just a mouthy anonymous coward like your friends.

I'm not anonymous and I'm certainly no coward, I'll be happy to send you my address if you want it.


you're f.ucking scum for making light of the current political situation, that is most clear.


There's a difference between making light of it and drawing severla wild, and unrelated conclusions based on some obscure and questionable sources there big guy. Bush is doing a good job and doing what he needs to do to protect this o****ry and the future of the free world. You just can't stand it cause canada can't do anything but sit on the sidelines and pretend to be part of the US.

[David Jamieson]

not only are you a coward, you are a liar too.

a heinous liar at that claiming to have served.

scum

[red5angel]

that's right KL, all lies :rolleyes: you must be reaching out with your qi powers now to read my mind or something? Maybe one of your "sources" for all your political opiniosn is feeding you some information to blow the roof off the big scandal?
bwahahahahahahahhahahaha, got to try harder my freind, like the US when someone attacks us, we try real hard to make sure it doesn't happen again. It's what we're doing now, and you can't stand that fact we're right and we're doing it.

[backbreaker]

Canada pretends to be USA;) Well, IMO in the last Bush speech there was way too much talk of christians, jews, muslims. And the speech is directed at only USA people, yet the rest of the world watches, Say what you like about how USA has got to be that way and it's perfectly okay, but the rest of the world will not see it that way. Also the speech seems to be read off of cards, and they throw in some planted reporters to make it look like it's really bush saying it. It plays into the bad guys hands, and like they said, one life is worth more than another life because of ideology or the so called free world?

[David Jamieson]

yes you are a liar.

your words are empty and all you do is wallow and hide.
you would never reveal who you truly are, becasue that is the mark of a coward.

particularly when they start the bad vibe, realize that they are now in a sh.itstorm.

you've never served and I'm calling you on it you scumbag.

You are a coward and I'm calling you on that too.

YOu have no respect at all for human life and I'm pointing that out as indicated by your clearly poorly thought out chest puiffing and childish posts.

Red5, you and your ilk are the scum of the earth. YOu are no different than the terrorists who lash out. IN fact, I would say you are one and the same. Especially in mindset.

you are too dumb to make peace, so you walk blindly swinging a stick in the hopes that things will clear up. IN fact they are getting worse.

You plug your senses and refuse to see what is there because you, and people like you are incapable of learning. Do not want to learn and are filled with to much hubris to even make the attempt.

It is not me who started throwing the arrows of ill will here in these boards. It is you. And it is you who will not gain any ground from me at this time so long as you continue to act like a coward and a shameful liar.

in short, up yours scum

[red5angel]

your words are empty and all you do is wallow and hide.

what was empty again?




particularly when they start the bad vibe, realize that they are now in a sh.itstorm.

yes because listening to you is indeed a **** storm, or somethig like it.


YOu have no respect at all for human life

sure I do, it's why I served and why I'd do it again, go to Iraq or where ever I need to go to maintain freedom for all peoples, even Jews there KL, we all know how you feel about them.


YOu are no different than the terrorists who lash out.

Yes I am, I'd never kill innocent civilians in the hopes of getting what I want, and spend time convincing bleeding hearts like you that I was downtrodden. Also, I have a formal education.


so you walk blindly swinging a stick in the hopes that things will clear up.

gun, KL, swing a gun, get your facts right.


You plug your senses and refuse to see what is there because you

you mean like make up my own history, facts and all that to convince myself everyone is out to get me? oh wait, that wasn't me, that was you!


It is not me who started throwing the arrows of ill will here


Not true, you started when you started spouting all of that conspiracy crap you take for actual real life political views. someone needs to smack you down and when the other sarterthen you people on this forum don't, I feel the need to.

[David Jamieson]

you haven't served and you won't.

you are a coward.

your comment regarding innocents is contradictory.

innocent people died in the attacks on the US and ten times the amount of innocent people have died at the command of your president.

but o guess becausde you view them as less than human it just never occured to you did it.

your ignorance is profound. your cowardice is a blazing badge of your true self.

pityful.

[MatT3T4]

I wonder how much bloodshed will have to take place before Americans realize that we are going about this the wrong way...

We are fighting an enemy who is not afraid to die. We are fighting an enemy who sees it as heroic to die for the cause. Ask any American military person if they are ready to die in Iraq, and chances are, 99.9% of them will say absolutely not.

The way to end terrorism is not to keep flinging missiles and dropping bombs. It is not to occupy Muslim holy land, and try to spread Democracy, so that they can be a free people. Those who want to be free know where they can go. Those who want to live under Islamic law, and not be free...should be allowed to do so.

We need to pull our military forces out of the Middle East after the new Iraqi government is in place. We need to have a business/professional relationship with the Middle East, and that is all. There should not be any US or other soldiers there. If need be, we can launch attacks from far away...we don't need to be there. The reason that those god **** planes hit the WTC is because we are there.

How long will it take some of you to realize that this country is corrupt? Granted, I love living here, but god ****, we're no angels. America is guilty of so many horrible and dispicable acts in the name of [whatever they say at the time]. We've killed and displaces millions of Muslims, and it is time we stop.

I am not Muslim...as a matter of fact, I ****ing hate organized religion...but I do understand the plight of the Muslim in the Middle East, and I am fully aware of the atrocities that we have committed there. The only way to stop this threat under which we live, is to leave them alone.

We can still get our oil from them, but we can do it in a business-like way. Hell, we are the largest volume buyer of Middle Eastern oil in the world. That means that WE set the prices. We just don't want to do that. We'd rather just go in and conquer. This is barbaric. For the future of the world, we need leaders who understand that guns and bombs are NOT always the best way to solve your problem.

If Kerry gets elected, I bet bin Laden sends him a treaty too. If he is smart, he will take it. How many more 9-11's will it take for Americans to realize that it just isn't worth it? How many more of our relatives need to die in vain, in some ****ty sandhole, before we realize that we are going about this the wrong way?

The attitude of the common American sickens me. Always a bloodlust. Ridiculous...:rolleyes:

[MatT3T4]

Kung Lek...I agree with you man.

[backbreaker]

Haha, leaving the middle east doesn't mean you left south america or columbia or WHEREVER, anywhere. But change can't just be what you do, but the whole philosophy IMO

[MatT3T4]

The philosophical change starts with the American public. That won't happen until people's bloodlust is quelched.

[David Jamieson]

be careful Mat, the attacks on you will be forthcoming from these twits if you declare that you agree with my stance.

But, I too, do believe the course of action the american president has chosen is the wrong one and will only bring more death and carnage to more innocent people both american and others from nations everywhere.

It is incredible to hear nonsense bravado coming from forum members in this regards. I believe red5 even made a post once calling for a nuclear strike on the Iraqi people.

thankfully, the mods deleted such an obviusly inflammatory post.

regards

[MatT3T4]

I used to be all gung-ho about the war. I used to support Bush blindly. It wasn't until he openly backed the gay marriage ban amendment that I stopped backing him. When that happened, I realized the clues that I had been subconciously censoring. All of this crap going on in America today...the FCC going Nazi (who's chairman is Colin Powell's son); PATRIOT ACT II; amending the constitution to give the government power to do something which otherwise would have been unconstitutional; etc...Just too many things going wrong in this one administration.

Bush isn't looking out for Americans. He is looking out for his own interests. It is sickening, in fact.

PS: I'm not a liberal...I ****ing hate liberals. Nor am I an conservative. I'm right in the middle. I've just opened my eyes to reality, without being blinded by one side of the other.

[MatT3T4]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
be careful Mat, the attacks on you will be forthcoming from these twits if you declare that you agree with my stance.

I honestly don't care. :o

[The Willow Sword]

Ladies ladies LADIES??!!! calm yourselves,,,this is a KUNG FU forum.:rolleyes: :p :confused:


PEACE,,,TWS

[Brad]

This calls for a challenge match...

[Xebsball]

you guys
i gotta agree with the KL on this:

i gotta laugh at you the way you silly fell for the "there be wmd there!!!" trick
how can you believe your governament,
yall make me laugh, kids

what now, some sucka on some newspaper say we making atomic bombs in brazil
wich make me lol :D

[Mr Punch]

Old Bin's got some points. Like Halliburton. (obviously doesn't know about Dyncorp). Different values put on one set of beliefs and different lives.

However being a ****ing murdering ****bag invalidates all of that, and makes him eligible for a very dry very dark very cramped very hot very small prison for the with the bare minimum of food and medical care for the rest of his hopefully very long life.

In fact, I wish he and KL'd shut the **** up and stop giving Bush and his retard supporters any grounds for their extremist agenda.

Bin Laden is not speaking for the Iraqi peoples or probably more than 99% of Moslem peoples (in the same way as I hope Bush will be proven not to be speaking for the American peoples in Nov). He's not even Iraqi, and their is precious little evidence to suggest he ever trained there. Try Saudi Arabia, our friends who still commit a bunch of human rights abuses and support half his freakin family and his terrorist brothers. When is a dictatorship not a dictatorship?

But this BS will be used by Bush and his supporters to continue their crazed policy, pushing black and white politics, and pushing irrelevant retaliationary actions. Forcing influential moderates like Sadr (not to mention the whole of the scared and highly armed citizens of Fallujah or Najaf) into seemingly extremist positions and then refusing to deal with him when he says he wants to parlay. Dead or Alive? Wankers. Grow up.

[David Jamieson]

mat-

I'm certain that even if bin laden didn't say this, teh neo con puppet masters of the shrub would make it up.

have you read "an end to evil" yet by Frum and Perle?

THat has to be the largest compilation of completely unsubstantiated garbage yet.

I am happy they wrote it because it exposes them for the vicious and predatory liars and scumbags that they really are in the current whitehouse.

I am confused mostly about how this idiot George Bush has managed to completely divide his country, start a new vietnam for himself, outsource 20,000 mercs in Iraq, virtually give up in Afghanistan and let the Taliban reroot and teh heroin trade to regrow again, and the list of bas sh.it goes on and on and on.

And then, He has the nerve to back Sharon on a unilateral scr.ew over of the palestinians while he totally renegs on his so called "road map for peace" which was crappy anyway, but at least it was giving some consideration to a palestinian free state which is pretty much the only thing that is gonna bring peace to the region.

Anyone who thinks that what is being done in teh middle east is "righteous" on behalf of bushes decisions, needs to examine their morality.

they have still failed to answer the question "why did 911 happen"

shutting up does nothing about it.

Bush should be impeached, Blair should be voted out, Iraq should be handed back to Iraq, and relations both in trade and diplomacy should be normalized and teh Israelis need to have their leash yanked before they start making more land grabs with the threat of nuclear strikes or total military support from the last super power on earth.

As well, teh rest of the planet should demand of all nuclear nations to cease and desist in teh production of such weapons and these same nations should start destroying all stockpiles of wmds as of yesterday.

By the way, The USA is the largest holder of weaponized biochem weapons on earth, nuclear weapons on earth and basically illegal weapons under pretty much every treaty and convention ever.

This makes them Hypocritical in their "war on terror" and they are just sellilng america out to the highest bidder at a cost to the american taxpayer.

Impeach Bush Now!

regards

[rogue]

Originally posted by MatT3T4
I wonder how much bloodshed will have to take place before Americans realize that we are going about this the wrong way...

We are fighting an enemy who is not afraid to die. We are fighting an enemy who sees it as heroic to die for the cause. Ask any American military person if they are ready to die in Iraq, and chances are, 99.9% of them will say absolutely not.

The way to end terrorism is not to keep flinging missiles and dropping bombs. It is not to occupy Muslim holy land, and try to spread Democracy, so that they can be a free people. Those who want to be free know where they can go. Those who want to live under Islamic law, and not be free...should be allowed to do so.

We need to pull our military forces out of the Middle East after the new Iraqi government is in place. We need to have a business/professional relationship with the Middle East, and that is all. There should not be any US or other soldiers there. If need be, we can launch attacks from far away...we don't need to be there. The reason that those god **** planes hit the WTC is because we are there.

How long will it take some of you to realize that this country is corrupt? Granted, I love living here, but god ****, we're no angels. America is guilty of so many horrible and dispicable acts in the name of [whatever they say at the time]. We've killed and displaces millions of Muslims, and it is time we stop.

I am not Muslim...as a matter of fact, I ****ing hate organized religion...but I do understand the plight of the Muslim in the Middle East, and I am fully aware of the atrocities that we have committed there. The only way to stop this threat under which we live, is to leave them alone.

We can still get our oil from them, but we can do it in a business-like way. Hell, we are the largest volume buyer of Middle Eastern oil in the world. That means that WE set the prices. We just don't want to do that. We'd rather just go in and conquer. This is barbaric. For the future of the world, we need leaders who understand that guns and bombs are NOT always the best way to solve your problem.

If Kerry gets elected, I bet bin Laden sends him a treaty too. If he is smart, he will take it. How many more 9-11's will it take for Americans to realize that it just isn't worth it? How many more of our relatives need to die in vain, in some ****ty sandhole, before we realize that we are going about this the wrong way?

The attitude of the common American sickens me. Always a bloodlust. Ridiculous...:rolleyes:

I love this kind of talk on a forum dedicated to "martial" arts. Most of us here either believe that extreme violence can solve some problems or that violence can be a fun challenging past time. War really sucks but sometimes you have to do it, and when killing terrorists there really is no downside.


Now, I want you to remember that no son of a ***** ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor son of a ***** die for his country"
-Gen. George S. Patton Jr.

Bravery without intelligence is little more then suicide!
-General. Robert E. Lee

[rogue]

scr.ew over of the palestinians
KL, the only one to scr.ew the Palestinians are the Palestinians by keeping Yassar around. The guy should have been retired to playing Ringo in a Beatles tribute band 10 years ago.

[David Jamieson]

rogue-

I agree, arafat should have stepped down long ago. too much bad blood there for him to be even halfway effective and he is a toterring old screwball left over from the 40's.

But, the same could be said for Sharon too. He was a Mossad guy with a bad rep on the battle field and towards palestinian civs from way back as well.

Anyway, Kissinger is the one who really screwed things up with the israelis and the palestinians during the Nixon government.

He literally played both sides of the coin, let it go to the point where Israel was at the point of being defeated by egypt, and then a couple of things happened.

Sadat pulled back and the Americans sent Israel an "aid" package of brand spanking new military goodies, tanks, plains, you name it, they got it.

Luckily, it was on the promise of chilling.

Meanwhile, the palestinians at that time, 1967, had moved out of their lands to make way for the continuing war that didn't happen. In their place stood only the Israeli military. Who did not let them return to their lands and it has been disputed ever since.

It would have been a fairly simple act to just let them have it back and try to iron it out, but by that time there was a lot of hating going on.

now, all these same haters are still playing hate on each other and they are all just 40 years older.

Everything else aside for a moment, it is the Israel and Palestine issue that must be addressed. It is the corruption of the Saudi royal family that bin Laden has the major beef with, along with the syrians.

Baically, all these "royal" families in the middle east were just bedouin warlords who happened to help out the british before and during WW2.

They were all installed by the Allied powers at the end of the war, new nations and emirates were created as shipping bases for oil for the western world and things haven't changed since.

There are too many old men salting old wounds in the world and it is totally messing up the planet and the prospects of peace.

We'd be better off getting that hydrogen fuel cell technology mass produced, find abundant and renewable alternative sources of energy such as vegetable based oils and alcohols, install the hydrogen infrastructure and let the arabs go back to being bedouins.

The people that have a problem with that are the oil and power players in the west and the opec players in the middle-east.

so, we have to wait at least another generation and by that time, it mat well be too late for all of us. sounds bleek, but that is the road we're on.

Prior to the end of WW2, Jews and arabs lived quite peacefully together throughout what was then palestine. No one is saying that Israel shouldn't exist, people just wanted their dang farms and livelihoods back and weren't expecting to live in refugee camps for the rest of their lives as is the case. How crappy of an existance is that?

well, Bush just writes it off as a "new" reality. Bush needs a history lesson I think or medication for alzheimers or something, I don't know, but he sure is a fricking idiot of the highest order in my books to be pulling that shi.t he did with Sharon a couple of days ago.

[YinYangDagger]

kill'em all

[David Jamieson]

That is the exact attitude that bin laden and his ilk holds yyd.

I fail to see why you would hold the same view if you do indeed live in a "superior" society.

if there is anything that is evident, it is that violence begets violence.

And with Bush harping on and on about faith based this and that, christian this and that, god bless us this and that, you would THINK he would know that. It was a primary lesson of his saviour and lord after all.

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. was the main theme. Would you have others occupy your lands, kill your innocent civilians? mess with your economy? and not just for a little while, but for a long long time.

The hypocricy of it all is quite stunning. And you, the american taxpayer are paying for it. meanwhile you can't get over your internal economic problems, your homeless problem, your ghetto problems, your drug problems etc etc etc. And you think "kill em all" is the way?

methinks you need to smell some coffee son. or maybe talk to some of the guys who are coming back from iraq. might change your tune a bit to hear it from the soldiers who just put in their 12 months of hell.

capice?

[YinYangDagger]

was there the first time (1990-1991), shoulda killed'em all then :D

[David Jamieson]

perhaps we would have benefitted if you had lost your ability to type?

not funny yyd, but is reflective of your lack of grey matter.

well, you're officially just another idiot here.

[YinYangDagger]

tsk, tsk, you wear your politics on your sleave...

Geez, get over it, you live in the BEST country, obviously Canada, why all the America bashing?

I served and am proud of it, I keep my personal opinions to myself, like the idiot I am (this is where you confirm my idiocy).

Drink a "humor" soda or something, don't take everything so personal. Breathe in...breathe out...count to 10...

[MatT3T4]

Originally posted by rogue


I love this kind of talk on a forum dedicated to "martial" arts. Most of us here either believe that extreme violence can solve some problems or that violence can be a fun challenging past time. War really sucks but sometimes you have to do it, and when killing terrorists there really is no downside.



I don't think you understand the consequences here. War has nothing to do with martial arts. The battlefield has changed somewhat, over the past 2,000 years. Martial arts is great if you have one, or a few adversaries in your face...but when it is on a world scale, sometimes it's not worth the ego boost.

[Ultimatewingchun]

In the end - no matter how long it takes...Bin Laden and the rest of Al Quaeda will be hunted down like dogs in the street and killed...it could take years...might even happen after a HUGE war...

But it WILL happen !!!

Because he's an ANIMAL...who is attemting to hi-jack one of the world's great religions and turn it into a breeding ground of DEVILISH VERMIN AND FILTH...

Let's not ever forget that he cowardly hides in caves - while brainwashing others into the committing acts of MASS MURDER and SUICIDE....

These people...their souls won't be rewarded in Paradise By Allah after committing such atrocities - they will spend an eternity in hell for their sins...

and Osama Bin laden will receive the ultimate punishment...HIS SOUL WILL BE PERMANENTLY ANNIHILATED BY THE WILL OF ALLAH ...(GOD)...(JEHOVAH)...(THE ABSOLUTE)...(THE SUPREME SPIRIT)...

whatever words you choose to use to describe the ULTIMATE POWER in the Universe....the cause and source of all that is, was, or ever shall be.

Does this mean that the United States doesn't have a price to pay fot it's transgressions?...and of course I mean U.S. citizens both INDIVIDUALLY and COLLECTIVELY...meaning...the lust by some for power and (OIL) wealth...

Sure...the U.S. (and others) will pay a price.

But in the end...HUMANITY'S EVOLUTION...as decreed and WILLED by GOD...ALLAH...etc.

This evolutionary intent will dictate that the U.S. and it's Allies will ultimately triumph over this ANIMAL...The same way it triumphed over the last animal that raised it's beastly and blood-thirsty head...Hitler.

STAY BRAVE AND NEVER GIVE IN TO BLACKMAIL OR TERRORISM.

[Mr Punch]

Did somebody call?!

[Merryprankster]

If you would like some actual knowledge about radical Islam and AQ and Bin Laden, please see "Inside Al Qaeda" by Rohan Gunaratna. For you America haters, please note that he is not from the U.S., but is Sri Lankan. He came by his interest in terrorism by way of the LTTE (Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam) - a Sri Lankan terrorist organization (distinct from freedom fighters, for those of you who somehow subscribe to the idea that these two terms are interchangeable, depending on perspective) - which, btw, hates his guts. It covers AQ evolution from its foundation as the Afghan Service Bureau (MAK) through the actual formation of "The Base" (AQ), all the way to the present day. Dr. Gunaratna has interviewed MANY AQ members both in the field and in custody, and has had access to a wide variety of people and information from countries around the world. For those of you unfamiliar with the concept of "research," what this means is that his sources are heavily primary. That's considered a good thing.

i'm not going to type in with capitals anymore because it's hurting my shoulder.

2nd, the current state of affairs in these parts of the world is largely due to the dissolution of european empires. they came, they saw, they conquered, they drew arbitrary or intentionally divisive lines in the sand ignoring or purposefully separating ethnic, tribal or religious groups, raped the areas for resources under a mercantilist or pseudo-mercantilist relationship which restricted trade and thus wealth generation, failed to educate the populace or develop any infrastructure, and left once they were over extended. we are now reaping the benefits of this situation - a generally poor, uneducated and perhaps most importantly, embarressed populace which resents the success of the judeo-christian world, while they, by contrast have not had the same measure of success. the islamic world's previous status as the envy of the west only hieghtens this sense of social disenfranchisement.

some may argue that increased generosity and more "friendly" policies would avert or change this track. there are several forces which counterbalance this very nice idea. one is that the ideological development of islam in many (read, most) places in the parallels the development of confucian china--no outside ideas are worth looking into and outsiders are second-class. this is as stultifying an attitude as can be, resulting in a stagnant society on all fronts.

another is that islam is not just a spiritual system. it is also a political and economic one. this makes it inherently less adaptable - religious truths cannot be compromised so the framework is stiffer; social, political and economic change is much harder to create and absorb.

another, and the final one i will address here, is the strong fatalistic component of islam as it is practiced in many places. free will isn't really much of a concept; this deadens the impetus for personal change. "Inshallah" or "God willing" is a ubiquitous phrase ie "i have a small store, and we do not have much money, but perhaps next year will be better, God willing." putting your life in the hands of allah may soothe your soul, but it makes you a leaf in the current of his will.

this is not to say that the islamic world cannot evolve or modernize, after all, europe overcame the effects of the catholic church - rather, it merely demonstrates the difficulties. some places have a very moderate islamic populace overall, including turkey, indonesia, malaysia and several of the north african countries. there are also many islamic scholars who believe that consensus and analogy provide the means to modernize. most of them live in europe and are not highly regarded by influential middle eastern clerics. their message is lost.

the history and development of islam, coupled with europeans screwing with them over makes many people very receptive to radical messages, including UBL's "us against them" or Salafist type "the islamic world has lost its glory because we have lost the path and must return to the 8th century ways (!) to get it back."

in other words, it doesn't matter what the United States or the western world does. this is a conflict of ideology, not of policy. this is why you can't negotiate with these organizations because they are, in essence, dedicated to the eradication of any ideology that is not their own. the truce UBL offered parts of europe? please, its only good until he perceives some slight against islam, be it a law like the ridiculous french one re: headpieces, or support/outreach to a regime in the islamic world that he considers apostate. they don't want to be left alone; they want to win; they are apocalyptic - they believe that through their actions they will bring about "end times," ie, a single islamic house. why do you think that UBL and ayman al-zawahiri's tapes are laced with messages for the people of the United States and the west to repent and turn towards Islam, and they will be spared?

any attempt to equate a western state w/terrorist organizations is ridiculous. you may not agree with certain military actions, but there is a genuine concern for loss of life, civilian casualties and preservation of infrastructure. sometimes, these "collateral damages" to use the phrase, happen anyway, but it's not because people are intentionally causing them. i am certain that a few were, in essence, murdered - this does happen during war. i wish it would not, but it does.

an attempt to cast the United States in the role of ever present bad guy is absurd. the history of this nation is a mixed bag, like any other. There are good things and bad things - great acts of humanity and questionable or outright unjustifiable acts of depravity. trying to behave or believe otherwise is to outright deny history. if a person is that willfully obtuse, nothing can help them.

[rogue]

Merry, that about sums it up.

As I see it, AQ has to be totally destroyed (as in it's members either dead or locked away somewhere remote and kept isolated) and/or kept on the run and non-functioning. I have family in Spain and there is a pride that they kicked the Moors out. This has never sat well with the world of Islam.

[red5angel]

be careful MP, by making sense you make yourself the target for attacks by some of the more idiotic members of this forum.

Hey Kung Lek, remember that secret technique I was telling you about yesterday "List in ying" in chinese or in english - paying attention. you shoudl do that now, maybe read MP's post a few times and some common sense and logic might just sink in to that thick, cold bain of yours.

[PaulH]

Excellent post, MP. I am in agreement that this is more for the most parts an ideological struggle and should be treated more as such accordingly. Unfortunately as those barbaric and hate-consumed terrorists who stop at nothing to destroy the West completely, the only sane option available is the unpopular pre-emptive strike approach that might offer a glimpse of hope for survival as the Western Civilization comes to its long overdue decadent end.

Regards,
PH

[Merryprankster]

Paul H,

in the short term, violence IS the solution. an enemy on the run cannot coordinate attacks.

i know "what about the spain bombings?" that's the common (and ignorant) response. there is a tendency to lump islamic extremists under AQ. this is not true. AQ methods are popular with islamic terrorists worldwide and many groups receive AQ training or are affiliated. this is different than being AQ, and having AQ leadership directly involved in planning your operation, funding, etc.

the GSPC, a couple of tunisian and morrocan groups are pervasive throughout europe and in 2003, Nabil Sahraoui, after becoming the GSPC leader, declared the group's allegiance with al-Qaeda in September. Sahraoui ousted longtime leader Hassan Hattab who had a domestic, but not international agenda. the salafists have been able to plan and execute their own attacks for quite some time.

the spain attackers, my guess is, are under the aq umbrella but it wasn't planned by the bigwigs.

in the long run, the cure is continuing globalization. people like to talk about it as a tremendous social ill, but it is the most powerful freedom dispensing machine on the planet. if you are for human rights, you're for globalization on the whole. might not like certain specifics, but on the whole, you must support it as the carrier of the value of human life.

[ZIM]

Good post, MP. You need a web page for this stuff!

WRT the OBL threat- I'm personally more interested in whatever intel can be gathered from it than in arguing over the 'merits' [pish!].

He was saying '3 months'- that places the time frame to mid-July, two weeks after sovereignty is handed over. What are they coordinating now?

IIRC, the US DNC & RNC conventions take place in August? There is likely to be some intention to influence those through attacks.

We don't hear enough from the Iraqis themselves, mostly getting only distorted message-pushing from the media. I just found a link (http://www.soundfury.us/archives/000353.html) for a survey of commentary. Not so bad!

[jun_erh]

kl- if it weren't for the US, Sharon and Israel would have bulldozed "palestine" along time ago. I used to be anti-israel, but Arafat (a dictator) doesn't want peace. They've offered it to him year after year. So why not just pull out of the west bank and Israel anyway? Well then there's the "right of return". Plus. more cycnically, the whle predicament itself is a great recruiting to for terrorists, who themselves are deeply involved in narco trafficking. So it's no simple.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I'm not anti-Israel either...but I am against a BLATANT LAND-GRAB by Sharon's right-wing gov't - now backed by Bush....

Big Mistake...Palestinians have been living there for 1,000 years...the only true fair and just solution is ALL of the West Bank and Gaza and HALF of Jerusalem must be the Palestinian State...and in return - Israel is guaranteed no more opposition to it's right to exist...in other words...a return to pre-1967 borders...

The fact that right-wing Israeli's have "created facts on the ground" by stealing the land and turning it into settlements for some 200,000 settlers DOES NOT HAVE TO BE TOLERATED....AND CAN BE REVERSED...

We need an American president to tell the right-wingers that without such a fair compromise as this....U.S. financial,diplomatic, and military aid will be slowly BUT SURELY phased out.

That would do the trick...the Israeli electorate would get the message...and vote in a more moderate leader...

But so far...no U.S. prseident has had the balls to do this...afraid of the American-Jewish lobby...but he should just face down the false charges of being an anti-semite...hold the course - and get it done.

This would go a long way toward waging a TWO-PRONGED ATTACK against the fanatical Islamic extremists....both FORCE....and a JUST DIPLOMACY.

[rogue]

MP, good book recomendation. I picked up Inside Al Qaeda during lunch and have made a good dent in it already. Have you ever read Bin Laden, The Man Who Declared War on America by Yossef Bodansky? Good book and interesting as it was written around 1999.

Ultimatewingchun, sadly for the Palestinians they're considered a half step above trash by their so-called Arab brothers. They're not wanted by anybody over there except the Saudis who need someone to clean their cesspools. Notice how no Arab country has ever gone to war for them?


The Arabic satellite TV station al-Jazeera has broadcast a message it says it believes is from Osama Bin Laden.
This is the full text of the statement:
In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate, a message to the American people:

Peace be upon those who follow the right path. I am an honest adviser to you. I urge you to seek the joy of life and the afterlife and to rid yourself of your dry, miserable and spiritless materialistic life.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" The aggressor deserves punishment "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I urge you to become Muslims, for Islam calls for the principle of "there is no god but Allah", and for justice and forbids injustice and criminality.

I also call on you to understand the lesson of the New York and Washington raids, which came in response to some of your previous crimes.

The aggressor deserves punishment.

However, those who follow the movement of the criminal gang at the White House, the agents of the Jews, who are preparing to attack and partition the Islamic world, without you disapproving of this, realise that you have not understood anything from the message of the two raids.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" The youth of Islam are preparing things that will fill your hearts with fear "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore, I am telling you, and God is my witness, whether America escalates or de-escalates this conflict, we will reply to it in kind, God willing.

God is my witness, the youth of Islam are preparing things that will fill your hearts with fear.

They will target key sectors of your economy until you stop your injustice and aggression or until the more short-lived of us die.

We beseech Almighty God to provide us with His support.

He is the protector and has the power to do so.

Say: O people of the Book! Come to common terms as between us and you: That we worship none but Allah; that we associate no partners with Him; that we erect not from among ourselves lords and patrons other than Allah.

If then they turn back, say ye: Bear witness that we at least are Muslims bowing to Allah's will (Koranic verse).

I'll pass.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Rogue:

As I said earlier...the man is really an ANIMAL...and part of that animal-ness is that he's cunning like a fox...

READ BEHIND AND BETWEEN THE LINES...of this last Bin Laden quote - that to "some" might appear logical and noble...but underneath are threats to continue hiding in caves while he sends out his HYPNOTIZED true believers to make sure everyone believes as they do or be subjected to MASS MURDER...men, women, and children...indescriminately.

He's trying DESPARATELY to plant THOUGHTS OF FEAR in the hearts and minds of ALL non-extremist Islamic Fundamentalist radicals...

in other words...his ambition is to take over THE WHOLE WORLD...and the ANIMAL (HITLER-ESQUE) message ?

Become like us...and accept WHAT I SAY AS IF IT WERE THE WORD OF GOD (ALLAH)...

OR DIE!

F#CK HIM....

He'll be annihilated...and those who follow him will die horrible deaths followed by an eternity in hell for their sins against Allah (God)...and against Humanity.

[Merryprankster]

Good post, MP. You need a web page for this stuff!

no. i'd have to listen to the kung leks of the world sputter inanities.

[ZIM]

It can be fun, you know (http://www.indcjournal.com/archives/000248.html) and you're in the right neighborhood. ;)

[Kristoffer]

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed011504b.cfm

[Nick Forrer]

‘The current state of affairs in these parts of the world is largely due to the dissolution of european empires. they came, they saw, they conquered, they drew arbitrary or intentionally divisive lines in the sand ignoring or purposefully separating ethnic, tribal or religious groups, raped the areas for resources under a mercantilist or pseudo-mercantilist relationship which restricted trade and thus wealth generation, failed to educate the populace or develop any infrastructure, and left once they were over extended. we are now reaping the benefits of this situation - a generally poor, uneducated and perhaps most importantly, embarressed populace which resents the success of the judeo-christian world, while they, by contrast have not had the same measure of success. the islamic world's previous status as the envy of the west only hieghtens this sense of social disenfranchisement.’


This is undoubtedly correct (except for the statement that they failed to educate the populace or develop ANY infrastructure, a statement which, frankly, stands in need of revision). However it is a geopolitical framework which has been willingly adopted and maintained by successive post war US administrations. They may have tinkered around the edges a bit but the same fundamentally exploitative relationships still exist- its just that this time it is the US who are ‘reaping the benefits’. Just look at the suez canal crisis- England invades Egypt because Nasser nationalises a strategic financial asset but has to withdraw when the US puts its foot down and effectively says to them ‘we run the show now- you can keep the crumbs but the main meal is ours’. Moreover so called international institutions like the IMF and the world bank are simply the means by which the US perpetuates its long standing global hegemony, the essence of which is 'free trade is okay for you but not for me’ so while its fine for the US to adopt protectionist economic measures such as the provision of large subsidies to domestic industries and the levying of tariffs on imports, any third world country that attempts to do the same is immediately subject to a whole raft of coercive measures, some more obvious than others. If you want an example of the blatant hypocrisy at work here just look at the recent steel debacle – one minute Bush is preaching free trade in central America the next minute he is putting debilitating tariffs on European steel imports in what can only be described as a highly cynical piece of electioneering. Of course when the EU bans American GE imports on safety grounds the tune changes completely- the EU is condemned for being ‘unscientific’ (this coming from a man who says he is undecided on the question of creationism vs. evolution ).

’some may argue that increased generosity and more "friendly" policies would avert or change this track. there are several forces which counterbalance this very nice idea. one is that the ideological development of islam in many (read, most) places in the parallels the development of confucian china--no outside ideas are worth looking into and outsiders are second-class. this is as stultifying an attitude as can be, resulting in a stagnant society on all fronts.’

On e could argue that free market capitalism is just as ideologically entrenched in the west and that people are just as blinkered to other cultures, viewpoints and modes of living. I mean how many genuine alternatives to free market capitalism are offered in mainstream US politics?
To say you’re a communist in some places is to put yourself practically on a par with being a child molester. Instead the only thing that really separates democrats and republicans in ideological terms are certain business neutral issues, that is to say issues which constitute no real threat to corporate profit margins, like abortion, death penalty, gay rights etc.

Even when someone slightly radical like Ralph Nader runs for office he is condemned for splitting the democrat vote, the hidden premise being that democratic choice means nothing more than choosing between two equally bland corporate drones. Of course the same phenomenon can be observed in Britain with both of the main political parties desperately trying to out do each other in the race for industrial patronage, to be the darling of big business- Tony Blair proudly announcing (like a child that has just learnt to go to the toilet on their own) that he ‘has no ideology’ and that there can be no return to the nationalisation of industry .

That said while lip service is paid to the idea of the free market if the US were to actually follow the kind of free market policies advocated in some of its economics departments their economy would collapse almost overnight. This is well understand by policy makers if not always openly acknowledged. They did for a time in the 1920’s and the result was the stock market crash and the great depression. They only got themselves out of it through Roosevelt’s ‘new deal’ i.e. a massive program of widespread state spending and protectionism of exactly the kind that free marketers are supposed to be against.
Other countries who have followed this line recently are Argentina and Thailand. In both countries there has been an economic boom followed by a massive economic bust.

’another, and the final one i will address here, is the strong fatalistic component of islam as it is practiced in many places. free will isn't really much of a concept; this deadens the impetus for personal change. "Inshallah" or "God willing" is a ubiquitous phrase ie "i have a small store, and we do not have much money, but perhaps next year will be better, God willing." putting your life in the hands of allah may soothe your soul, but it makes you a leaf in the current of his will.’

I don’t see that this kind of fatalism distinguishes Islamic societies from any other kind. Look at the (in retrospect ridiculous) hysteria in the run up to the millennium.

’this is not to say that the islamic world cannot evolve or modernize, after all, europe overcame the effects of the catholic church - rather, it merely demonstrates the difficulties. some places have a very moderate islamic populace overall, including turkey, indonesia, malaysia and several of the north african countries. there are also many islamic scholars who believe that consensus and analogy provide the means to modernize. most of them live in europe and are not highly regarded by influential middle eastern clerics. their message is lost.’

No the message is not lost- THE ISLAMIC PEOPLE JUST HAVE TROUBLE HEARING IT OVER THE DIN OF THE BOMBS BEING DROPPED ON THEIR CHILDREN. They want the same thing that everyone wants- to be left in peace to live their lives the way they want to- but as long as America is dependant on middle eastern oil they will have to continue to live under the yoke of brutal corrupt regimes armed funded and supported by the west. Hence the support for religious extremists- when you feel under threat you naturally gravitate towards the person who says they will fight it- indeed it is that fact of human psychology that the Bush election team will be banking on in the coming election.

'Any attempt to equate a western state w/terrorist organizations is ridiculous. you may not agree with certain military actions, but there is a genuine concern for loss of life, civilian casualties and preservation of infrastructure. sometimes, these "collateral damages" to use the phrase, happen anyway, but it's not because people are intentionally causing them. i am certain that a few were, in essence, murdered - this does happen during war. i wish it would not, but it does.'

The English legal system (I cant speak for the American one) makes an important and useful distinction between direct and indirect intention when considering the mens rea of a defendant charged with murder (i.e. their mental state at the time of the act). You directly intend to murder someone if your purpose in acting is to bring their death about. You indirectly intend to murder someone if your purpose in acting is not to bring about their death per se but that it was virtually certain to result from your actions anyway and you either foresaw that this would be the case or should by any rational standard have foreseen that this would be the case. On this basis then I think its fair to say that every time a state goes to war it indirectly intends to kill innocent people and that this is far closer both morally and legally to directly intedning to kill innocent people rather than unintentionally killing innocent people. Just To be clear- knowing the identity of your victim beforehand is unimportant- Mohammed atta by no means knew the identity of the people of in the WTC but he is still guilty (posthumously) of their murder.

Further, just take a closer look at some examples of US foreign policy over the last 50 years. During the Vietnam war american forces committed many atrocities
For example:
-in 1968 William Calley's 'charlie company' massacred over 200 vietnamese villagers including women and children in what is now known as the 'My Lai' massacre.
-in 1971 during 'operation speedy express' the 'glorious ninth' killed around 5000 civilians in a 'pacification' campaign.

In total around 3 million people were killed from 1962 to 1970. If you add the million or so people that were killed in Cambodia from 1970 to 1975 when the US was bombing it and then from 1975-78 when pol pot was in power, made possible by the earlier US bombing, that makes around 4 million people killed in Indochina as a result of US foreign policy in the region.

[Nick Forrer]

Or look at Gulf war 1
During this American forces:
-bombed the Al Amiriya bunker in Baghdad. Around 400 women and children were burnt to death.
-dropped rockets, napalm and cluster bombs on a retreating, defenceless convoy (which inluded many civilians) on the Basra road.
- buried thousands of Iraqi soldiers alive in their trenches using bulldozers.
- Dropped around 88,500 tons of bombs in total on Iraq - the equivalent of more then seven Hiroshima’s.
- Killed in excess of 200,000 civilians (source: Medical educational trust).

Then following the gulf war

In 1991- The Bush administration actively encouraged the Shia's to rise up against Saddam. They then abandoned them because of fears that toppling Saddam would destabilise the region and strengthen the hand of Iran. State department official Thomas Friedman said in The NY times that 'the best of all worlds would be an iron fisted Iraqi junta.’

Since then US sponsored sanctions have been responsible for the deaths of more than 500,000 iraqi civilians, most of them children. Madeleine Albright (then US ambassador to the UN and later secretary of state under the Clinton admin.) didn't deny this. Instead she said it was an 'acceptable price to pay'.

'An attempt to cast the United States in the role of ever present bad guy is absurd. the history of this nation is a mixed bag, like any other. There are good things and bad things - great acts of humanity and questionable or outright unjustifiable acts of depravity. trying to behave or believe otherwise is to outright deny history. if a person is that willfully obtuse, nothing can help them.'

I agree 100%

[YinYangDagger]

"No the message is not lost- THE ISLAMIC PEOPLE JUST HAVE TROUBLE HEARING IT OVER THE DIN OF THE BOMBS BEING DROPPED ON THEIR CHILDREN. They want the same thing that everyone wants- to be left in peace to live their lives the way they want to- but as long as America is dependant on middle eastern oil they will have to continue to live under the yoke of brutal corrupt regimes armed funded and supported by the west. Hence the support for religious extremists- when you feel under threat you naturally gravitate towards the person who says they will fight it- indeed it is that fact of human psychology that the Bush election team will be banking on in the coming election"

What a PILE of liberal Bullsh!t !

Read the other posts AGAIN. If WE DO NOT CONFORM TO ISLAMIC VALUES THEN WE ARE THE ENEMY, PERIOD.

I'm not, NOR EVER, will be Islamic.

-bombed the Al Amiriya bunker in Baghdad. Around 400 women and children were burnt to death. BECAUSE THE COWARDS OF ALLAH ROUTINELY USE CIVILIANS AS SHIELDS.

-dropped rockets, napalm and cluster bombs on a retreating, defenceless convoy (which inluded many civilians) on the Basra road. MORE LIBERAL BS, THE IRAQI SOLDIERS DRESSED AS CIVILIANS TO BLEND IN - THE REST, CASUALTIES OF WAR.

- Dropped around 88,500 tons of bombs in total on Iraq - the equivalent of more then seven Hiroshima’s. SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE

- buried thousands of Iraqi soldiers alive in their trenches using bulldozers. BETTER THAT THAN HAVE THEM SNEAK UP ON A CONVOY THEN HAVE PRISONERS TO TORTURE.

At least there's ONE smart and brave Englishmen - The Honorable Mr. Blair.

Do all your little name calling now. Flame away. I'm an American, and like many more, I'm PROUD to be.

[Ultimatewingchun]

I'm not going to defend what has lead up to the present state of affairs - as regards U.S. imperialist designs/the excesses of the corporate capitalist state/ the banking, encouragement, and weapons given to Saddam Hussein...having no problem whatsoever with his attack on the Fundamentalist regime in Iran/the decades we were in bed with the brutal and corrupt Shah of Iran/the unholy alliance between the house of Saud and the house of Bush (it's about Oil...stupid)... the blank check both literally and figuratively we've given right-wing governments in Israel...who have abused and denied the Palistinians their basic human rights while stealing so much of their land...

the list of mistakes by the U.S./Britain/France and others is very long...and let's not forget the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan...a blatant land-grab war of aggression - wherein we actually gave arms and support to the muhajadeen...the future Taliban, and Osama Bin Laden himself...to fight off the Russians.

WE CAN'T CHANGE THE PAST...

WE CAN ONLY HOPE TO HAVE A BETTER FUTURE...which will FIRST mean having to fight a two-pronged war...against the terrorist fundamentalists - with Al Quaeda and Bin Laden at the top of the list...against Iran (possibly) if they REALLY DO attempt to acquire nuclear weapons, etc...

and a DIPLOMATIC WAR OF PUBLIC RELATIONS...not "tricks", B.S. and slick, meaningless marketing campaigns...but real "actions"...facts on the ground that DEMONSTRATE good-will (building hospitals, schools, roads, infrastructure in Iraq...reversing the decision in the last few days to back the PIG named Sharon who wants to permanently steal a major part of the West Bank)...

but most of all...engaging the rest of the International Community (the U.N. - for starters)...in a REAL PARTNERSHIP in Iraq...we will supply the security - they will attempt to set up a legitimate government...not U.S. handpicked yes-men...

George W. Bush will NEVER do ANY of these things...he - and those closest to him...are too CORRUPT for that...Nader couldn't get elected dog-catcher...

SO IT HAS TO KERRY...

Regardless of his centrist positions - he still has spoken out MANY TIMES DURING HIS CAREER...against not only dependence upon foreign oil...but AGAINST OIL ITSELF...he's for alternative energy sources...

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL...because our interest in Mid-East oil is the CAUSE AND SOURCE of almost all our mistakes and corrupt policies...

IF....IF...IF...Kerry means what he says - then there's a chance that his election will start to move the U.S in the right direction.

But again I want to remind you folks...as regards foreign threats...

IT'S ABOUT BIN LADEN, STUPID.

He and his organization have to be DESTROYED.

[rogue]

"We will all die one day. Nothing will change. If by Apache or by cardiac arrest, I prefer Apache,"
Lucky guy, he got his wish. (http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040417/D820P87G0.html) I guess it's time to be outraged that the head of the group strapping bombs on kids got some radical body work done to his car with him in it.

I think the way countries who are under immediate threat from terrorism has changed. It's no longer bring them to trial and jail them it's now hunt down and kill the leaders. If another leader pops up kill him too. Eventually the implied willingness to sacrife oneself for their ideal (Islamism, Communism, racial purity) will no longer have the appeal it now does.

[jun_erh]

You lefties need to stop getting your information from the internet. The point of the gulf war was to get Hussein out of Kuwait, who were our ally at the time. that's it. These same allies were against going in to Iraq for various greedy and politically dodgy reasons. George Bush made a remark that the people should "rise up" and they did, the US should have helped but we never made any promise too. Also, there are alot of other countries that could have helped and the US certainly didn't do anything to STOP a revolution.

as far as the BLATANT LAND GRAB. Palestine was more or less deserted a hundred years ago, it was only when the jews came and made something out of it that arabs wanted it back. If you dig into the ground and come up with an artifact it will be hebrew. Jews have been persecuted throughout the world and especially the arab world, partially because they are percieved as not having a homeland. they are from Israel. It's jewish land. Even then, there are millions of arabs who live there and they live in relative affluence when compared with their destittute neighbors in nearby arab countries.

[jun_erh]

It's religion gone mad

By MICHAEL COREN -- For the Toronto Sun




HOW DOES one discuss the state of the Islamic faith, the Middle East, terrorism and the world without upsetting people? Frankly, it's almost impossible.

I'm not talking here of a fear of abuse and attack or of being accused of political incorrectness. I couldn't give a fig about that. No, I mean the need to hold on to common courtesy and avoiding making generalizations that could hurt good people.

Here are some recent examples, in that I have so little room to discuss this issue in full.

We used to be told by pop stars and other philosophers that "the Russians love their children too." It was self-evident then that all people loved their young. Now I'm not so sure. Do the Palestinians, for example, love their children too?

I should think most of them do.

But I have to be candid: many of them don't. We can't just rely on tired old relativism when we look at all this. Nobody who loves his or her child will send that little being out as a suicide bomber. Nobody who loves their children will line them up in front of tanks.

The natural instinct of a loving parent is to hide the children. Armed struggle and resistance I can understand, even if I do not approve. This, though, is something different. I've seen it myself. Mothers screaming for their tiny offspring to come out of the house, stand in front of Israeli patrols and throw stones at soldiers.

I take here no position on the causes of Israelis or Palestinians, but I do on the moral substance of a parent who would send children to fight the battles of adults.

Do not, please, tell me they have no option. There are legions of young Palestinian men willing to kill Israelis. It's just that children can sometimes be undetected. And are easily convinced of the delights of paradise in the world to come when, I quote, "Zionist skulls, blood and limbs fly against the walls."

British Muslim fundamentalists planned terror attacks and arrests were made in Ilford, England, my hometown. Boring Ilford may be, but nobody is oppressed there! Muslims who grew up with British democracy, free British health care, free British education and British tolerance have no reason to kill anyone, let alone those who gave them such privilege.

Remember, these people came to Britain, as they did to Canada, the United States and the rest of the free, Christian-based world to escape Islamic states and their harshness.

It is the pluralistic openness and decency of Europe and North America that has allowed so many Muslim immigrants. How ironic that a minority of those people hate that very pluralism and decency and want to slaughter women and children in the name of their god and their cause.

I opposed the war in Iraq, but I cannot remain silent when people kill contract workers, then disembowel and hang them from wires in the street. While children dance.

And, no, these murderers are not refugees from pain but the favoured sons of Saddam. Their fight is to restore fascism, not liberate their nation. Even if it was, nothing justifies such sadism.

German bomber pilots, their planes shot down, would parachute into London after destroying entire towns and killing thousands of people. Almost without exception they were treated properly, as prisoners of war.

It's not about colonization, globalization, Zionism, American dominance or any other cliches. The Muslims themselves are colonizers, having pushed most Christians out of the Middle and near East, once the cradle of the Christian world.

The Ottoman Turks, Muslims all, colonized the region for centuries. Arabs colonized Persians, Assyrians, Kurds and others. The Saudis, sponsors of so much terror, are nobody's victims. They are wealthy beyond belief, and deprive women and minorities of most basic civil rights.

This is something deeper, darker, than an imagined fight against a foreign foe. There is a virus at work. For the sake of the good, law-abiding Muslims of the world -- the majority -- we cannot pretend any longer it's about anything other than what it is: a religion gone mad and gone bad.

Stop the lies, they only make it worse.

[Merryprankster]

Read the other posts AGAIN. If WE DO NOT CONFORM TO ISLAMIC VALUES THEN WE ARE THE ENEMY, PERIOD.

entirely oversimplified. unless we conform to what the extremists believe is Islam, we are the enemy. did you know these guys consider the ruling caste in syria - a state department designated sponsor of terror apostate?

nick,

please read "any" infrastructure, education as (slight) exaggeration to make a point. little effort was made to encourage such developments beyond what was necessary for the functioning of colonialism and mercantilist profit.


One could argue that free market capitalism is just as ideologically entrenched in the west

it is. however, even as something of a moral relativist, i have the power to judge - and i judge that the western philosophical underpinnings of capitalism and western society have done far more to promote human rights than to squash them. further, i judge that globalization is the right tool and phenomenon to spread these ideas. trade has done more to cross-polinate and expand quality of life - a key to human rights - than any other force.


However it is a geopolitical framework which has been willingly adopted and maintained by successive post war US administrations... Other countries who have followed this line recently are Argentina and Thailand. In both countries there has been an economic boom followed by a massive economic bust.
.

i never said, or implied, free trade or wanted a discussion of trade policies. i was talking about globalization as a force for cultural change. globalization does not imply free trade. profits, period, imply globalization. just ask the colombians or the russian mafiya. IMO furtherance of globalization will continue to improve human life.




The English legal system (I cant speak for the American one) makes an important and useful distinction between direct and indirect intention when considering the mens rea of a defendant charged with murder (i.e. their mental state at the time of the act).... Just To be clear- knowing the identity of your victim beforehand is unimportant- Mohammed atta by no means knew the identity of the people of in the WTC but he is still guilty (posthumously) of their murder.

our (U.S) legal system also makes distinctions with regard to ACTUAL(not just implied) intent if somebody dies. we have stiffer penalties for those who intend and premeditate killings than for those who cause death as an unintentional byproduct of their actions (as distinct from an accident). the implication of course, is that these are NOT morally equivalent events.

additionally people who kill others in self-defense are frequently found not guilty through a statutory defense - that deadly force was justified because the person defending themselves was in fear of their life and this was the only way to get safe.

further, you can have "self-defense to protect another;" you are justified in using an appropriate degree of force (including deadly) to defend other people from harm.

the implications here, of course, is that deadly violence is justified under certain circumstances, even if you do have an intent to kill.

to sum up:

1. we make moral distinctions between different types of wrongful death depending on the killers motive (or lack thereof).

2. we recognize that deadly violence is justified under certain conditions.

making a direct analogy between the actions of a state and the actions of an individual is shaky at best, of course, but i have no problems with the concept on a more general level (which i think we are talking about....)

a list of casualty statistics and mostly unintentional non-combatant deaths comitted by people acting outside acceptable combatant behavior does little more than point out the awfulness of death and war. and speaks not at all to moral standing.


I don’t see that this kind of fatalism distinguishes Islamic societies from any other kind. Look at the (in retrospect ridiculous) hysteria in the run up to the millennium.

it certainly does. it is a pervasive aspect in much of the Islamic world. there is little sense of personal control over events. this is due partly to the religious truth that the quran is the infallible word of allah himself as passed from gibril to the prophet muhammed. this leaves less room for interpretation than books like the bible or the torah, which are regarded generally as human accounts of god's greatness.

(cont.)

[Merryprankster]

i have neither the time nor the patience for a history lesson here (this is not meant offensively, i promise), but most islamic scholars believe some similar version of the following:



Towhid means that one Allah alone is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it - organic or inorganic. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone. No aspect of life in all its multifarious forms, our own organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over physical objects or the objects themselves, has been created or a acquired by us in our own right. They are the bountiful provisions of Allah and have been bestowed on us by Him alone.

Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our worldly authority; nor does anyone else have the right to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah. This principle of the Oneness of Allah makes meaningless the concept of the legal and political sovereignty of human beings. No individual, family, class or race can set themselves above Allah. Allah alone is the Ruler and His commandments constitute the law of Islam.

What distinguishes Islamic democracy from Western democracy, therefor, is that the latter is based on the concept of popular sovereignty, while the former rests on the principle of popular Khilafa ( - my note- that all people enjoy the rights and responsibilities of the Caliphate of old - including interpretation of Sharia). In Western democracy, the people are sovereign; in Islam sovereignty is vested in Allah and the people are His caliphs or representatives. In the former the people make their own; in the latter they have to follow and obey the laws (shari’a) given by Allah through His Prophet. In one the government undertakes to fulfil the will of the people; in the other the government and the people have to fulfil the will of Allah.

this is in keeping with both the traditions of consensus and preservation of islamic law as the law of the land. as you can see, all is in the hands of Allah, but not in a western sense, because there is nearly no emphasis on free will. ALL is in the hands of Allah...

I don't think I'm going to write any more on this topic. It's been fun (I mean that), but I have a very short attention span. i'm not calling islam bankrupt, violent or hopeless. I'm just stating the "state of things today," as i see it. :D

cheers all...

[Kelar]

Pharoah Sanders prefers to spell it Tauhid (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000003N6S/qid=1082314690/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-6032974-3631937?v=glance&s=music) and it's the name of the album where Sonny Sharrock debuts.

Mmm...Sonny Sharrock and Pharoah Sanders....

[william sterlin]

Methinks people should abandon politics and leave wars to be fought by the politicians. Lets see how popular this becomes. The wars fought by the radical Muslims do not share any of the ideas of Islam at all. They are the young and ignorant that share the common bond of anger and desperation and have no other outlet for their frustration. Abandon your angry talk and find a more positive way to focus your energy. It is no wonder true Taoists became hermits, they left all of the emotional turbulence to the crazies.

[rogue]

What would happen if they had a war and nobody showed up?:rolleyes:


The wars fought by the radical Muslims do not share any of the ideas of Islam at all. Sorry Bill but there is an overlap. I don't think there were many average Americans that justified Tim McVey bombing the Morro(?) building in OC, or a majority of Catholics arguing why the IRA's actions were in line with Gods word . Contrast that with the average Muslim and WTC2001.

[David Jamieson]

read this:

http://www.theboywhocriediraq.com/

It's not trying to convince you one way or the other, but it's worth a read.

[william sterlin]

Rogue, my point exactly. Everyone has the right to defend themselves, but to fight someone elses war in another country to me is just plain pointless. And if Kung Lek is reading, man that is some powerfull stuff. The Boy who cried Iraq is definetly a good read to make people think. Only if everyone had access to that site maybe we could change the world.

[CaptinPickAxe]

I'm an American. I think America is just as evil as any other country. We just don't hear about it due to bias press. I know whats coming next, "How do YOU know?" well ask yourself the same question. All we know is what we are told, and we are in obsolutely no position to say whats what. I was never in Iraq, were you? Did you see absolutely ever action that happened in every war? no. Inquiry leads to intellegence. If you question higher powers enough the truth will surface. Just look at Richard Clark. Look at Condalezza Rice contradicting herself. Look at the puppet in office. I belive you must have on some **** fine blinders to belive everything is kosher in America. Where tax breaks for big businesses and the average joe gets slammed. Where tuition for higher education is on the rise, yet we have the audsity to say we need better schools. Bah! What it boils down to is this: everyone of us is in the dark. So you are in no position to tell me anything about what goes on behind close doors and iron curtans. I'm in no position to force my views upon you either. What I am allowed to do is express my views and you have the same right (but maybe not for long). But to say your right and all else is wrong just justifies the world's view of Americans as PigDogs. Open your eyes, guys. Conspiracy usually has its roots in some sort of truth. Do you honestly belive you are being told the honest to god truth when you watch CNN? If so, I feel sorry for you and hate to break that sugar coated view if the world where truth rules all. Underneath that thin candy shell is lies, murder, and greed. Grow up and realize the world is evil.

Good day,
The Captain

[Ultimatewingchun]

jun_erh:

"Palestine was more or less deserted a hundred years ago..."?!?!

What have you been drinking?

IT'S A LAND GRAB...pure and simple.

[Volcano Admim]

http://moose-and-squirrel.com/bozo/bozo.html

[jun_erh]

Uwing chun- no it's true. Mark twain and some other explorers/ historians from that time noted it. post-holocaust is when it really picked up, thugh the original zionists came a little earlier. Do yu think there just shouldn't be an Israel?

[Ultimatewingchun]

jun_erh:

Now the question you raised at the end of your last post is a PERFECT example of the outrageous BULLS#IT that right-wing land-grabbers like to pull...you asked:

"Do I think that Israel shouldn't even exist" ?!?!?!

Anyone who's read my posts can see clearly that I'm no enemy of the State of Israel...

And you know it as well...this is what I mean about FALSE CHARGES of anti-semitism - which future American presidents will have to resist and ignore.

The LIE and attempted DECEPTION is that if someone is not willing to go along with...or worse yet...actually speaks out against - the unfair treatment of the Palestinians by successive right-wing Israeli governments - then the only way to combat that is to call them anti-Semites...(certainly logic and historical facts won't work)...so what's left ?...

The attitude that If no blank check (both morally and materially) is being granted to Israeli's to do ANYTHING they please to the Palestinian people - including taking more and more of their land....

then the only way to get people's attention away from this kind of legitimate criticism is to totally change the channel in a very hostile direction - saying, in effect...

either you're completely with us NO MATTER WHAT WE DO - or you're an evil, bigoted Jew-hater.

Well let me tell you something, pal...

People who try to play this game ARE THE BIGGEST BIGOTS OF ALL...because underlying this assumption (that they should be able to do ANYTHING)...is the ultimate bigotry - the attitude that everyone else is beneath us...therefore God has granted us the right to do whatever we please.

This attitude is anti-Christian, anti-Muslim, anti-Hindu, anti-Buddhist...anti anything that is not ONE OF US. Fortunately, though, there are many Jews around the world (including within Israel itself) who see the folly and moral bankruptcy of such ideas.

So again I'm going to tell you...Palestinians have been living ALL OVER the West Bank and Gaza for 1,000 thousand years...

And yes again - Sharon IS ATTEMPTING an outrageous land-grab; and so far - Bush is backing him.

But every dog has his day....temporarily.

[jun_erh]

hahahaha I see your up on your no'm "waldo" Chomsky: calling people who disagree with you accusers of anti-sematism. Dude, Naom Chomsky is Steven Segal.

Before there were any arabs there there were jews there. dig into the ground jewish artifacts dude.

The Jews have been 10x more proactive in seeking piece. Look at Camp David. arafat has turned down peace many times, nt because the deal wasn't right but because he DOESN'T WANT IT. he wants the destruction of Israel period. His job is to provide transportation devices to bomb constructers.

[David Jamieson]

I think that one of palestines greatest deficits is in it's so called leadership.

Arafat is not exactly the best choice, but I guess the people like him because they have been reduced to cowering refugees living in squaller and he gives them at least some small shred of pride in being a palestinian.

Hamas and it's leaders also run hospitals and schools along with their other activities which are inclusive of blowing up buses filled with israelis and palestinian day warkers.

Al Aqsa Martyrs brigade...ok, teh name says it all. This is a guerilla warfare group and nothing else.

Hezbollah is also a mixed group like Hamas.

THis situation is strikingly parralelled in the Situation in Northern Ireland.

The problem in my view on teh Israeli side of things and the Palestinian side of things is that tehre is a lot of bad blood amongst teh leaders thatgoes back for wuite a bit of recent history. Sharon and Arafat have to go. Anyone over 40 should be put out of office immediately and the young should be put in a room to negotiate a peace. I really am of the opinion that this would make a huige difference.

As for the "if you aren't with us, you are against us" tirade, well, George W Bush is the King of that nonsense.

I think the American people at the grassroots are quite sane and probably one of the better adjusted peoples of the world. The have the benefits of education and general health, but the politics in that nation right now is truly at a boiiling point.

I don't think I've ever seen the senate more divided in all the time I've had interst in what's going on with our American cousins.

I think the last time it was this bad was during the Kennedy years.

The people appear divided as well. Bush is poison to all that America has been and can be. He has single handedly set back some of the greatest moves forward that were made since the Nixon presidency, yes Nixon! lol.

I mean think about it, from Nixon to Ford, to Carter to Reagan to Bush To Clinton some huge steps were made towards peace in teh area. As soon as Bush junior gets the helm. KABLAM! The whole thing is unraveling at the seams? Why? Maybe it's because he is a militant isolationist? Maybe it's because he probably shouldn't have been elected?

I really don't care much for how he's propping himself up on the deaths of the 911 victims like he helped them or something.

Well, let's hope that come November teh people of teh US will see through this guys clearly greed motivated moves and bumbling ineptness as a statesman and perhaps put a worthy candidate in office.

So far Bush has done little but be a puppet for the neo cons and we all known how dangherous those minds can be.

cheers

[ZIM]

"...To experience any real militancy, today's Left wing activists must attach themselves as pathetic dogs to Islamic causes like the International Solidarity Movement. There, they can indulge their fantasy of advancing world socialism while objectively dying for Osama Bin Laden or Yasser Arafat. The circle is complete. The roles have been reversed. The heirs to moribund Bolshevism have now become the "useful fools", the protective coloration of a dynamic militant Islamism."
-link (http://belmontclub.blogspot.com/2003_09_01_belmontclub_archive.html#10629318919801 5096)

Compare with (http://www.pressaction.com/pablog/archives/001600.html)

shorter, non-headache version (http://www.allahpundit.com/archives/000570.html)

[Nick Forrer]

'To experience any real militancy, today's Left wing activists must attach themselves as pathetic dogs to Islamic causes like the International Solidarity Movement.'

Rachel Corrie and Tom Hurndall were both members of the ISM. For the crimes of trying to stop an innocent family's home from being bull dozed and for documenting the corridor of Isreali bullets Palestinian children have to negotiate daily to get to school they were both murdered by the IDF. Personally I would hesitate to describe people who died whilst defending the defenceless as pathetic dogs.....But then maybe thats just me.

[Ultimatewingchun]

jun_erh:

I don't know who Chomsky is - and I don't care.

What I do know is that the only workable solution is to give the Palestinians the same amount of land as they had before the 1967 war...and half of Jerusalem - which is a holy city to three great religions - not just Judaism.

Perhaps a land swap is the way to do it - as a former Israeli general has championed (I don't recall his name right now)...and which has been endorsed by many fair-minded Israeli's and a number of Palestinians - as well as by former president Jimmy Carter (who was the last honest American "broker" to be involved in the peace process - and the only one who ever worked out any kind of reconciliation between Arabs and Jews)...

and in return the Palestinians have to recognize Israel's right to exist and WITHOUT any "right of return."

But I must tell you - your repeated assertions that all this land belongs to the Jews - plain and simple - is nonsense.

God doesn't designate which people get what land...that's a self-serving man-made notion.

People have to work it out amongst themselves - and considering the fact that the Palestinians have been living there for 1,000 years - and the Jews have history that dates back thousands of years as well...

The only solution is a formula to SHARE the land in a FAIR manner; because without such a solution - you now see Palestinian women and children becoming suicide bombers - and we label them terrorists...!!!

But they are not Al Quaeda...or Bin Laden...

On the other hand - Hamas, Hezbollah, Arafat - and the rest, will have to be tamed or killed.

But Sharon and the ultra right-wingers in Israel will suffer the same fate if they don't wise up also...

It's time for all sides to negotiate in good faith all else they will all wind up in mutual mass destruction.

So they need outside help (both sides)...and outside pressure - by an American president who has the BALLS to stand up to all of them and read them them the riot act.

And he has to be prepared to back it up with action.

And George W. Bush is the absolute wrong man for the job - at the wrong time.

[David Jamieson]

As I see it, AQ has to be totally destroyed

Rogue, I don't think that is possible. Al-Qaeda is a name for a new ideal in hate and rebellion against the current powers in the world.

It doesn't have a headquarters, it doesn't have a roster of names, it doesn't have a membership and it doesn't reside in only one place.

Al Q exists as much in the US as it does in Afghanistan or Pakistan of Britain or Germany or anywhere it's operativces reside, it's not unlike the Nazi movement or the ideals of the Southern Confederacy.

Which brings to mind another point. Did the civil war ever end in the US? I see so many confederate flags waving, the ideal is still pretty strong there. The flag of the confederacy has come to stand for the thoughts that are counter to the sitting government of the US. In fact, the flag of the confederacy has come to stand for an ideal that is perpetuated even in Canada! and elsewhere!

it's like some kind of thinking trend. LOL

Al Q is the same sort of thing, except that people take militant action in the name of it. remember the first Bin Laden tape where he is prasiing those as.s.holes who crashed into the wtc? That tape sounded like he didn't even know those guys! But he was happy that someone pitched into his cause.

Anyway, point being, that no matter what the mainstream is and how the mainstream is, there will always be an opponent. Sometimes that opponent will take the form of a militant action group that commits attrocities in the name of an ideal and other times it will be a peacful and non-violent movement.

Why I think Bush is the wrong man personally is that he completely ignores and minimalizes the peaceful motions and moves to war anyway. remember the millions and millions of people who protested the unilateral actions of the US to invade Iraq? Remember the non-participation of pretty much every and any country that actually had military power and economic power?

this has shown that Bush wanted to be a warmonger and was unwilling to sit down and talk and to resolve the issue. The man ain't anything like Ike was and that will be his downfall. He has further opened the gates to hate and retribution by acting in the same way as the original attackers!

To the Iraqis and the Muslim world, George Bush is their version of Osama Bin Laden. You have exactly the same dynamics as you do in the west where you have people in the west that support the views and actions of Bin Laden, Al Q and it's operatives. In the arab world you have groups that support Bush, THe US and it's army.

Inside of each incidence of yin, there is yang and vice versa.

It is clear to me that the only thing that will calm this is the ousting of the Bush government through the coming elections (my prefered method of ousting a government and thankfully a plausiable way of doing it here in the west) and of course the capture or neutralization of bin laden.

If it can be managed that both these players are not given any more buy in, then that means a period of peace for us all! So long as either still has power, there will be no peace and no hope of resolving the situations that need to be resolved.

cheers

[David Jamieson]

by the way

some of you may be interested in reading this here.

http://wildfirejo.blogspot.com/

warning: some of it is pretty harsh

[jun_erh]

Uwingchun- I totally agree with west bank, gaza and ast jeruselem going to The Palestinians. If you look at what Clinton offered Arafat at camp David, they almost got all of what they wanted. Jews have no problem giving up land for peace. Virtually every US administration has tried to reason with Yassar arafat. remember that stuff with all of them on the white house lawn shaking hands and so forth? The perception of the jews is that the Palestinians don't want peace, they want to destroy Israel. and it's not hard to see why they think that. THe textbooks in many muslim nations don't even recognize that Israel exists. Not to mention the terrorism. Imagine if the day after 9-11 people at the UN told us to sit down and talk with UBL!! There is a vast terrorist infrastructure that is funded by saudi oil, muslim, charities and even narco-trafficking.

Let me reiterate, I totally agree about the division of land.

[Ultimatewingchun]

jun_erh:

Well...perhaps you agree with me - perhaps not. But one thing is for certain:

Sharon and the powers-that-presently-be in Israel sure don't believe in the division of the land the way you just described...

Sharon wants to leave close to 200,000 settlers in the West Bank...some in Gaza...and is now talking quite openly about assasinating Arafat.

Sharon IS Arafat...in a business suit.

They both gotta go.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Nick Forrer
One could argue that free market capitalism is just as ideologically entrenched in the west and that people are just as blinkered to other cultures, viewpoints and modes of living. I mean how many genuine alternatives to free market capitalism are offered in mainstream US politics?

On the other hand - is 'free market capitalism' the ideology of 'the west'? In the first part of your post, you put forth an argument emphasizing selective protectionist trade and supernationalism as the key points to American policy. Of course, this is explicitly contrary to what 'free market capitalism' endorses. I don't think you can simultaneously chide America for a neo-socialist agenda and a capitalist ideology - seems like you must believe it to be one or the other.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Merryprankster
the ideological development of islam in many (read, most) places in the parallels the development of confucian china--no outside ideas are worth looking into and outsiders are second-class. this is as stultifying an attitude as can be, resulting in a stagnant society on all fronts.

another is that islam is not just a spiritual system. it is also a political and economic one. this makes it inherently less adaptable - religious truths cannot be compromised so the framework is stiffer; social, political and economic change is much harder to create and absorb.

another, and the final one i will address here, is the strong fatalistic component of islam as it is practiced in many places.

With this in mind - which is the greater evil, Baathism or extremist Islam?

This is a pertinent question insofar as western foreign policy seems to be emphasizing the 'imposition of democracy' upon states where Baathists hold a 'tyrrany of the minority' by military power; where they would be replaced by semi-theocratic Islamic government were democracy accomplished.

I think there is a strong tendancy to think that democracy is unquestionably benevolent. Even as an isolationist, I frequently find myself thinking that political freedom is worth interventionism. But it seems the situation is, at least, far more complicated than that.

This was brought to my attention most notably by a recent article (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/chancy4.html) on Lew Rockwell ( [URL=http://www.lewrockwell.com)'s site. Consider that Syria, of Baathist and Axis-of-Evil fame, is the finest place in the middle east to be a Christian - the result of the atheist Baathist minority enforcing their policies upon what would otherwise be a much less friendly, semi-theocratic nation.

Our gut feelings about democracy aside, is the world, or even Syria alone, better off having that changed?

Keeping in mind the observations regarding Islam you made above, there is perhaps some reason to believe Baathism shows more promise for effective development. We can consider the recent history of such places as Egypt in example.


this is not to say that the islamic world cannot evolve or modernize, after all, europe overcame the effects of the catholic church

I wonder - is it accurate to note that Europe's political evolution was not from the dark ages straight into liberalism, but rather via a transition of mercantalism and so on. Specifically, would this be an analogy defending the idea of Iraqi-Syrian Baathism as a step forward from theocracy, and against the imposition of democracy upon a theocratic culture?


in other words, it doesn't matter what the United States or the western world does. this is a conflict of ideology, not of policy.

While I gather this isn't exactly your meaning - it seems that the answers to the above problems do have meaningfull consequences for western foreign policy, insofar as that policy has already become involved in the middle east in the first place.

[fa_jing]

"Palestinians have been living there for 1,000 years"

I have no doubt that some Palestinians were living there for this amount of time, but from what I have always heard, most came in this century to take advantage of the roads and infrastructure built by the Jews.

"land grab"

Didn't the Palestinians get all of Jordan, which is much larger than Israel? In fact, I do believe they should get their own State in the West Bank and Gaza, precisely because "the situation on the ground has changed." I don't believe in denying people the right to live where they currently live, especially if they have lived there 50 years or more.

"sadly for the Palestinians they're considered a half step above trash by their so-called Arab brothers"

Yes, I hold the same opinion. When I was in Israel, I walked by human excrement in the streets in the Arab part of Jerusalem. Also, an Arab spit in my hair. I was 5 years old.

"Notice how no Arab country has ever gone to war for them?"

Well Arab countries have certainly made war against Israel, it was quite popular until they got smacked repeatedly.

I am also not happy about the FACT that in the majority of Mosques in Palestine, they preach "Death to the Jews." Kinda ticks me off as I am half-Jewish by descent. It was very kind of the PLO to finally remove the piece in their charter calling for the destruction of Israel, too. I can feel the love now.

BTW, my brother met some very nice Bedouins near one of the borders of Israel (don't remember which), they told him that they like America and smoked him out with some nice hash, about 10 years back. I have a Lebanese friend who I respect greatly, and I feel very sorry for the Palestinians who are kept from socio-economic progress by power-hungry violence mongerers such as Arafat (spits).

[Nick Forrer]

'I don't think you can simultaneously chide America for a neo-socialist agenda and a capitalist ideology - seems like you must believe it to be one or the other.'

Chris- read my post again more carefully- you may have missed the point where i said (in effect) the essence of US trade policy is 'free trade is okay for you but not for me'.

To expand- The US has in the past and in fact continues to this day to actively pursues co-ercive trade policies through international institutions like the IMF and the world bank which force third world countries to open up their markets to US exports, exports which are subject to 'market distortions' because they are heavily subsidised by the US tax payer and thus undercut domestic produce of the target market, a fact further compounded by those thrid world governments not being allowed under world trade rules to subsidise their own produce.

Further 'socialism' has little to do with it. Protectionist measures do not equate to Socialism (although the converse may not be true- on this point i am unsure). Rather what you are looking at is a long standing and highly sophisticated means of siphoning off public money into private hands. The defense industry is a good example of this- a handful of cherry picked defense contracters (like Lockheed Martin) competing (in the loosest sense of the word) for pieces of a very large tax payer donated pie. Of course to maintain this ruse an ideological facade must be maintained. The 'free market' is one such facade. The pressing need to perpetually defend 'freedom' from a nebuluous ill defined entity like 'terrorism' or 'drugs' is another. This is exactly what Orwell warned against and yet this is what we see unfolding before our eyes.

If there is a contradiction it lies with US economic policy not with me. I am simply reporting the truth as I understand it. If its consistency you're ater look to mathematics- not to extant US gov. policy concerning trade or any other issue as the rest of this thread so amply demonstrates.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Nick Forrer
you may have missed the point where i said (in effect) the essence of US trade policy is 'free trade is okay for you but not for me'.

No, I did not miss it. This is not a policy of free trade, right?


Further 'socialism' has little to do with it.

Sure it does. Though in retrospect I should have said post-socialism rather than neo-, as the currently dominating "neoconservative" ideology is explicitly post-socialist (ie. rather than capitalist).


Protectionist measures do not equate to Socialism

No, but they certainly indicate it; and contraindicate (classical) liberalism (ie. 'free market capitalism').

[Ultimatewingchun]

What we have here in the United States now is a"version" of democracy and capitalism that can more accurately be called...

Corporate Socialism.

The government, the laws, and the courts are skewed in favor of supporting large corporations...and the bigger the corporation - the more support from the state (the government) they get.

So small and mid-size businesses and corporations - along with the working-class, and the environment...get the shaft constantly when their interests get in the way of the plans (and the endless quest for bigger and bigger profits, acquisitions, salaries, stock options, and golden parachutes) that the richest corporate owners and CEO's seek.

We need a purer democratic capitalism...more democratic than we've ever had.

What does that mean?

Politicians with BALLS...balls enough to face down these power-brokers and provide small and midsize businesses the opportunity to compete on a more level playing field.

Because corporate socialism leads to plutocracy (the wealth and the power is in the hands of a relative few)...

And the rest of society gets sacrificed to their private individual interests.

Capitalism that is democratic....Economic Democracy to go along with Political Democracy...

The McCain/Feingold bill to overhaul the amount of money that can be contributed to politicians is a step in this direction - but so far a very small step.

[ZIM]

Consider that Syria, of Baathist and Axis-of-Evil fame, is the finest place in the middle east to be a Christian - the result of the atheist Baathist minority enforcing their policies upon what would otherwise be a much less friendly, semi-theocratic nation. I would have thought that Israel would be the 'finest place'. :confused: But you're right- Syria has an ancient tradition for Christianity, going back to the Thomasines, if I have that right. I'm not too sure the Syrians would agree that they're athiests. Deists, maybe.

I haven't read the article in it's entirety yet, but the question you raised is one of the hard ones. Offhand, I'd say extremist Islam is worse- but neither is all that hot and perhaps they are interconnected in some respects, with one correlated strongly with the other [tho again, I'm saying this offhand]. Most philosophies and religions in abstract sound pretty nice- its the real world practice that can do you in. :(

Another hard question might be: Should Democracies change in light of modern religious Terrorism? And, if they are determined to be uniquely vulnerable to it, how to change?

There could be some effective arguments made to the effect that 'its happened before' and maybe the solutions that were democratically chosen were... less than satisfactory. But the terrorism of the past was more political in essence, yes? What makes this different? What responses will emerge and at what cost?

[ZIM]

...balls enough to face down these power-brokers and provide small and midsize businesses the opportunity to compete on a more level playing field. "The rich will always be with you..." Or something like that....

[Nick Forrer]

'I don't think you can simultaneously chide America for a neo-socialist agenda and a capitalist ideology - seems like you must believe it to be one or the other.'

Chris, I am 'Chiding America' for PREACHING free market capitalism (Both to the electorate and to the rest of the world) while PRACTICING something else entirely- you call it 'post socialism', I call it hypocrisy. The term 'socialism' has been so manipulated and distorted (although not to the same degree as the term 'communism' granted) that its hard to use it in public discourse without causing confusion. This is why I dont like to bandy it about lightly and, when I do use it, I mean something very specific by it. The term 'National socialism', for example, meant something entirely different in 1930's Germany than it did in 1970's Britain.

An example of the kind of contradictions I am talking about: You cant provide Welfare to the poor because that constitutes a disencentive to work, but if you dont provide welfare to the rich (in the form of tax breaks/corporate subsidies) then there is no incentive for them to work. Ever hear a version of this (bogus) argument?

I hope my position is clear now- in essence: the entrenchment (that is, the unquestioning acceptance by a significant proportion of the electorate) of an ideology does not necessarily equate to that same ideology being implemented by the executive verbatim, as the issue at hand (in my view at least) clearly demonstrates. If my position is still not clear, however, Im going to assume the fault lies with my skills of communication rather than your skills of comprehension.

Victor- with the recent Enron and World com fraudulent auditing scandals and now the Shell one hopefully people are starting to wake up to the reality of transnational corporations and by extension transnational capital- I am not heavily optimistic though.

[jun_erh]

one reason these dictatorships stay around is because they don't open themselves up to criticism. In the United States you can have articles written in schlarly journals declaring the habitat of some bug in Oregon as too important to "humanity" to allow any rads to be built there or something (nt to disparage enviromentalists, that's not the point ). Wheres despotic regimes in Africa and the middle east fall under the untouchable catagory of "other" so they are somehow okay.

[fa_jing]

There are many problems with rampant capitalism and corporate welfare, etc. in the US. It does truly suck, and I've seen too many people, first hand, with 6-figure salaries who either shake hands, play golf, and go to baseball games for a living, or trade their own stocks on the internet all day while simultaneously leaning on their underlings to actually produce, and this same people are decrying slavery reparations and welfare and anything else they can think of. Not that these are necessarily great solutions to this society's problems, but neither should they be bad-mouthed by total schlepps born with silver spoons in their mouths. I will also allow that there are great managers/directors who actually work hard and care at least a little, but not very many. The two-party system and the fallacy of voting "against" the one you hate worst pretty much guarantees Republocrat hegemony, despite the rights of free speech and information that we enjoy in this country.

This has nothing to do with Bin Laden's speech. :eek: ;)

[chen zhen]

dam.. this is the first time i respect Kung Lek...:eek:

u go gyrl

[Shaolinlueb]

Originally posted by Kung Lek
you @ssholes are almost making me laugh.

you friggin joke like your president does about the loss of life.

any wmds under your chair?

wads
:rolleyes:

Dude Bush knows they're there because he ahs the reciept. :D

[Christopher M]

Just found this (http://www.wordpirate.com/abiasforfreedom.swf ); thought it may be of interest.

[Nick Forrer]

Another slant to the Kurdish issue and one that undermines any attempt by the US to take the high ground

Turkish massacres (http://www.diaspora-net.org/Turkey/kurds.html)

[Christopher M]

I'm not sure that Turkish mistreatment of Kurds in any way undermines Iraqi mistreatment of Kurds. Is it ok if everyone does it or something?

[Nick Forrer]

No chris

The point is rather that we (as in the British and Amercian public) only get to hear about the atrocities of our official enemies when it suits the gov. agenda (like Hallabja- which, as im sure you know, was committed whilst Iraq was still a favoured ally/trading patner of the west) and not the atrocities of our allies, such as Turkey which is run by the military i.e. is not democratic and which has an appaling human rights record- murder, torture, arrest/imprisonment without trial, cencorship etc. but which nevertheless has been and is still to this day a leading recepient of Western arms exports. However because they refused to let the US invade Iraq from their country (i.e. because they sided with the vast majority of their population) they seem to have fallen out of favour with the present administration.

The lesson in both cases? Its fine to kill kurds (in fact we'll help you) but when you disobey an order (like invading Kuwait, or failing to help the US invade Iraq) then God help you.

[Christopher M]

I'm not sure that American or British ignorance of Turkish mistreatment of Kurds in any way undermines Iraqi mistreatment of Kurds. The Kurds suffer the same amount regardless of whether an American is aware of it.

[Nick Forrer]

Chris I think there is another misunderstanding here-

When I wrote

'Another slant to the Kurdish issue and one that undermines any attempt by the US to take the high ground'

I was talking about the US and British gov. deliberate use of the Hallabja massacre as a propoganda tool (among others- such as phantom WMDs, and a bogus AlQ link) to justify invasion of iraq. As far as I am concerned this reason is undermined (morally, logically etc. ) by British and American support for Turkey which, since the imposition of the no fly zone in the early 90's, is far and away the worst abuser of Kurdish human rights. Thus when I see someone using Iraqi mistreatment of Kurds (which incidentally ended once the no fly zones were imposed more than ten years ago) to justify invasion of and regime change in Iraq I wonder why they dont advocate the same thing for Turkey and how they can continue to support a US adminstration (do you?) that views Turkey as an important strategic ally and a worthy recepient of US arms.

Thats as clear as I can be.

[Christopher M]

Originally posted by Nick Forrer
I was talking about the US and British gov. deliberate use of the Hallabja massacre as a propoganda tool

Would you rather no one said a word about Halabja, and no one did anything to try and fix it?

Of course not. Yet here you're complaining that they are. Why would you complain about something that is going the way you want it to go?


I wonder why they dont advocate the same thing for Turkey

Do you really support the idea of America invading and militarily occupying every country that disagrees with its political position?

Of course not. Yet here you find it problematic that they're not. Why would you complain about something that is going the way you want it to go?

It seems like the answer is: your partisan political interests take priority in your decision making processes. Publicizing Halabja is wrong, because it's the 'bad guys' publicizing it. Not attacking Turkey is wrong because it's the 'bad guys' not attacking. Huh. You surely don't want the actions to change, just the people doing them.

Personally, I don't care how politically convenient or inconvenient a certain action is for America - if it's the right thing to do, I think they should do it; and if not, then I think they shouldn't. Talking about Halabja and trying to remedy the Kurdish situation is the right thing to do.

Is it politically convenient for America? I don't care. My concern is for the Kurds, not for political interests in the US.

Is American 'moral highground' on the Halabja issue contrary to someone's political interests? Too bad: political interests take back seat to the plight of the Kurds.

As for why they're not invading Turkey, the context in Turkey (or North Korea, or Congo, etc) is dramatically different than that of Iraq, so we should not expect it to warrant the same response.

[Nick Forrer]

'Would you rather no one said a word about Halabja'

No. I’m very happy that people are (belatedly) becoming more aware of the Kurdish fight for self determination and how they have suffered at the hands of a western backed dictator. However an independent Kurdish state does not (as you must know) fit in with the foreign policy objectives of either America or Turkey. If you remember just after the fall of Saddam Turkey made a number of threats to invade northern Iraq if they felt the Kurds were getting out of control.

And no one did anything to try and fix it?

No that horse has bolted- you cant bring those people back from the dead. Of course the people responsible should go on trial for war crimes at the international court (to which I am sure you are aware the US is not a signatory). However to repeat, Iraqi mistreatment of Kurds has not been a problem since the imposition of the no fly zones more than ten years ago. In fact again Turkey has been the worst abuser of kurdish human rights, abuse which has gone largely unreported by the international media and which the US gov. has been conspicuously quiet about (because they knew full well what was going on and not only did they not lift a finger in protest- they actually helped it along by continuing to sell Turkey arms just as Carter and Ford administrations did with Suharto when he invaded East Timor). On the other hand, at the same time as Turkey was killing Kurds US sponsored sanctions were killing Iraqi children in their thousands. In fact according to the W.H.O and the UN more than 500,000 iraqi civilians died, most of them children. Madeleine Albright (then US ambassador to the UN and later secretary of state under the Clinton admin.) didn't deny this. Instead she said it was an 'acceptable price to pay'. Just to be clear – partisan bias has nothing to do with this – I’m as anti Clinton as I am anti Bush. Say what you like about Huessein, as despicable as he was he didn’t kill 500,000 children, and do it with barely a murmur from the international community (there are some notable exceptions- Dennis Halliday and Hans von Spoenik come to mind).

'Why would you complain about something that is going the way you want it to go?'

Illegally invading a sovereign state (Iraq) on a false pretext (WMD’s –Uranium in Niger, mobile laboratories etc., ALQ connections etc.)

And thereby

- undermining international law,
- killing thousands of innocent people,
- setting off a civil war,
- imprisoning people indefinitely without trial under duress of torture,
- lying to the electorate,
- emboldening predatory regimes like that in Israel to commit further atrocities,
- and increasing support for terrorism in the Arab world

is not the way I want things to go.


‘As for why they're not invading Turkey, the context in Turkey (or North Korea, or Congo, etc) is dramatically different than that of Iraq, so we should not expect it to warrant the same response.’

Ohh so context is important. So it is okay for me to put US gov. bleating on Hallabja into the context of US support for Turkish atrocities during the 90’s. And to ask why we hear about one and not the other, why one merits armed intervention 15 years after the fact where there is no clear and present danger from the Baath regime to the Kurds owing to the no fly zone, whilst the other merits (lucrative) arms sales and covert support.