If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
As I already said...
To say that's all "irrelevent" is quite astounding.
:yes:
True.
Though it didn't take the war in Iraq for me to be already pissed off with things, it's just been one long gradual erosion of our liberties and freedom.
Somebody is, whether its these bogeymen or someone else I don't know or especially care.
They want power and position though.
Their interpretation of the Koran, nobody else's.
And as we know with the Catholic Church, its amazing what a bit of dogma does for political standing.
I think it has everything to do with subjugation and control, just as the catholic dogma is everything to do with subjugation and control.
I didn't realise we'd invaded Saudi Arabia.
MR: angry enough to go and blow up a bus and three tube trains?
Spliffie: the acts we have done in the past are not irrelavant as they have created the breeding ground for the terrorist leaders, but that are not the reason why they commit terrorism. Terrorists do not operate for egalitarian reasons at any point in history, with the possible exception of the Spanish guerrillas in the Napoleonic wars.
I don't say that what we have done is morally acceptable, but lets not pretend that going into Iraq was the catalyst for the terrorist attacks this time. It's a convenient donkey to pin the tail to, nothing more.
The article by Johann Hari explains what I mean far more elqouently.
thing is ...i'm comfortable and relatively safe ...at the moment but ...if a bunch of people were to start raping my country ...then i may well take up arms against those people ...whatever methods were at my disposal i would think.
it wouldn't be through brainwashing i can assure you ...it would be anger and despair.
the very use of the word brainwashing is a form of brainwashing in itself.
To suggest that these "leaders"can simultaneously control "Al-Qaeda" units and control operations in Egypt, England,Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraqi etc etc is absurd. I doubt there are any leaders of "Al Qaeda" whatever that means.
Nope we didn't invade Saudi Arabia, we did however invade an Islamic country.
That doesn't mean their actions are without political motivation. Power and politics are inextricably interlinked.
The Koran isn't as open to interpretation as, say, the bible. Muslims regard it as the direct word of God. This being so, there are certain passages which are undeniably supportive of retaliatory action against aggression.
Since when did occupation = invasion?
Well, the Provos would disagree. And the Spanish guerrillas were certainly not fighting for egalitarianism - that's pure historical ignorance.
Of course our actions in the Middle East are the catalyst. The correlation is unmistakable and is confirmed again and again by those perpetrating the attacks.
Religious fanaticism + violent foreign occupation = terrorism. Little could be more obvious.
The bogus foreign threat is so old a lie it beggars belief that people still buy it, however much it is supported and regurgtiated by a compliant mainstream media.
I'd agree with that.
200 years ago it was the French, now it's Middle Eastern Arabs. What next?
So you're trying to say there is a terrorist organisation (remember most groups work in small cell units) that spans 3 continents. :rolleyes:
the lie that is alquda has now spawned many individuals ...and goups which can comfortably be put under one umbrella for the wests convenience ...or should i say americas ...
But to be fair, are they not largely working towards the same agenda?
hatred has been bred against the west thats all that i know for certain.
i doubt there is a clear cut vision.
confusion reigns maybe ...which is quite handy when you manufacture your own enemy.
I think most of them follow the same vision, i.e. removing Western influence and establishing a pan-Islamic state.
But I do think there is a network of these people who do collaborate with each other. This was shown in Chechnya, where the dissidents were religiously radicalised for many reasons, not all of which were to do with the Russian occupation.
I'm not denigrating what is appalling treatment of Islamic people. I understand why the Palestinians and the Chechnyans blow themselves up because its the only weapon they have.
To say that this terrorism is because of the Russian/Israeli occupation is naive though. The occupation has created the breeding ground- Chechnya in particular indicates this. The Wahabbis were invited into Chechnya because the people had nobody else to turn to- a similar story is in Palestine. The Chechnyans turned to extremism because moderate campaigns didn't work, but the extremists in Chechnya now couldn't care less about the people there, so long as they have the power.
For many of these extremists, the war is what is keeping them in power, it is not what they are fighting against. But the extremists can get into the minds of the desperate, and they can be convinced to commit acts such as the Beslan genocide and the Madrid bombings.
As I've said, hari explains what I mean far better.
It seems to me that foreign policy is not irrelevant at all. If the atrocities weren't happening, neither would the brainwashing be happening.
If it wasn't US/UK foreign policy that was inciting young muslim men from the west to become suicide bombers, what would it be?
BTW, Hari doesn't say they'd do it anyway, nor does he say that foreign policy is irrelevant:
I'm also interested to know where the hell Hari thinks Tel Aviv ius when he says:
Any ideas?
Beslan was not the same as Madrid ............
the facts show that many suicide bombers from palestine were very well educated people ...
The point is, of course, that kiling 57 random people is not "taking up arms" against them, it is murdering 57 innocent people.
For all he knows they could have all voted LibDem and gone to Stop the War marches. More than one were "his people" anyway, lets not forget.
FTP: I wasn't paraphrasing Hari as well as I could have.
As for Tel Aviv, the point is that where do we stop? As Hari points out, many of the Wahabbist actualy consider Spain to be a Muslim country because of the Moors, and consider the white people there to be the "invaders".
these people have few weapons against the richest most influential nations in the world.
what they do have is terror.
when a society becomes terrified ...that society will start pressing its own leaders to do something about it.
and it works ...eventualy.
It'd be a bit hard to paraphrase that Hari article well and I think the Tel Aviv point is a dead give away.
Unless Tel Aviv has been moved recently, it IS in the Middle East - and so Hari's reluctance to accept that fact shows his own underlying political agenda.
However, he, unlike you stops short of painting a picture of 'rabid ideological maniacs' acting entirely independently of provocation from the West.
There is nowt to be gained from that line, and he says that - even if he then indicates that his heart and soul belong to the violent West.
There is nothing we can do to force western muslims to like what we do in the Middle East. And the more we try to force them, the stronger the resentment will become.
There is, however, quite a bit we can do to address the underlying injustice ........
NOt bad.
hari is condemned by stormfront as a fat homosexual commie bastard, and he's right-wing to you.
I'd guess he's doing something right.
Good to see your reading hasn't improved with your absence.
The war in Iraq and Afghanistan is irrelevant to this terrorism- unless you wish to try and claim that the WTC attackers in 1992 were telepathic.
The ongoing political situation in the Middle East for the last 80 years has created the conditions for these people to thrive in, that much is very true. They do have a political agenda, but it is not "saving my people", and lets not pretend that it is.
If they were interested in the safety of the Iraqi and the Afghani people then they would not be blowing them up with such regularity. Parking a car bomb in an Iraqi market doesn't hurt the Americans, does it?
That is true. Without the resentment it will be harder for the terrorists to recruit, but just as Aun Shinrikien (sp) still recruited, so would these terrorists.
A more tolerant attitude to the Middle East is what is required, that much is certain. Treat those peoples with respect and it removes some or even most of the terrorists' recruitment ability. But not all of it, to think that it does is naive in the extreme.
The people who blow up the buses are probably recruited through anger at what is happening. Those who orchestrate the bombings couldn't give a toss about what is happening, or "the people"- they don't seem to be exactly striving to blow up the House of Saud or Saddam Hussein when he was in power.
Can you quote the bit where I said he was right wing?
Is Tel Aviv in the Middle East? Yes or no?
I'm unaware of a WTC bombing in 1992. The 1993 one however wasn't mentioned by Mohammad Sidique Khan in his statement either - and you still haven't shown that the wars in Iraq and Afganistan weren't the main reasons for his involvement in 7/7
Can you quote where I say "saving my people" is the political agenda. I can quote where Mohammed Sidique Khan does say it. Do you really know his mind better than he does?
Actually it DOES hurt the Americans - it prevents their puppets from assuming power. You seem to have made the mistake of conflating all muslims...... have you any evidence that Mohammed Sidique Khan is tied to Baathist bombers?
You should consider a job with the Special Service - you have the right mindset.
There were assassination attempts on Qusay and Uday as it goes.
The House of Saud claim there was an assassination attempt planned.
At least your later posts are a little more balanced than this:
ho hum