Support NeoGAF

[Azih]

Too long to read all of it I just want to refute the point that this is the next big terrorist attack since 9/11. Did you forget Bali and Madrid ToxicAdam?

Also, NO WAY is Iran as easy a target as Iraq. The situations of the two countries are extremely distinct.

PLUS in the debate over whether the end aim of the war in Iraq was an increase in stable world oil supplies or a regime change. You have to answer *why* a regime change in Iraq was desired.

 

[Guileless]

But when all you have left is the shirt on your back and hatred for the people who put you in that situation (regardless of their intentions), violence is likely the only avenue left.

Trivia Time: Pick the quote not actually in Mohammed Atta's will.

a. "People will be held responsible for not following the Muslim religion."
b. "I don't want any women to go to my grave at all during my funeral or any occasion thereafter."
c. "Due to American foreign policy, all I have left is the shirt on my back and flying a plane into a building is the only avenue left for me."
First one to answer correctly gets a copy of "Mike Ditka's Quarterback Attack" for the Sega Saturn.

Do you know that Mohammed Atta got a degree in urban planning and lived comfortably in Germany and Florida? And judging from pictures he was a pretty snappy dresser too. At any rate I don't think he was down to a single shirt. Which parts of US foreign policy turned him into a suicidal mysognist anti-Semitic lunatic?

 

[Azih]

Which parts of US foreign policy turned him into a suicidal mysognist anti-Semitic lunatic?

The Middle Eastern bit.

Edit: Well aside from the misogyny

 

[Guileless]

Please elaborate Azih. You're smarter than most of the people around here, I would actually like to hear the reasoning behind your conclusion. At what point do you think he threw up his hands and said, "Well, after what they've done now, I'm going to have to crash a plane into a building"?

And don't forget to answer the trivia question, Mike Ditka gives quite a lockeroom speech if you're losing at halftime.

 

[FightyF]

Reply to some comments in the last thread:

A series of simultaneous or near simultaneous explosions to cause maxium effect. Al-Queda (and other Islamic Militant groups) usually also go for most exposure as well. The markings are equated to the sophistication of the attack which we see here as well as in Madrid and NYC.

EVERY Terrorist attack goes for "more exposure", that's the whole "point" of terrorism.

And Bali...

Bali wasn't attacked, it was the location of the attack. The attack focused on Australian tourists.

And further, if you're right in the statement that the terrorists are pissed at you for being there...then the war obviously has to do with terrorism (else why would they care?).

It has to do with terrorism since it can create terrorists.

Pansies. It's sad to watch a nation be frightened into submission.

WTF are you talking about? They didn't like how the government sensationalised and tried to use the terrorist attack for their benefit, so they changed.

as long as there are people like fortified_concept (and Spain's leaders) terrorist orgs like Al-Queda will continue to try to bend them to their will.

WTF? Try using some logic.

so what war on terror was the us fighting on 9/11?

Are you serious? I mean, you DON'T know why the US was attacked on 9/11? The memo from Osama bin freakin Laden wasn't clear enough?

 

[FightyF]

Please elaborate Azih. You're smarter than most of the people around here, I would actually like to hear the reasoning behind your conclusion. At what point do you think he threw up his hands and said, "Well, after what they've done now, I'm going to have to crash a plane into a building"?

And don't forget to answer the trivia question, Mike Ditka gives quite a lockeroom speech if you're losing at halftime.

Here's your explanation, it's the Bible. "eye for an eye".

Yes, some people believe in it.

The trivia question, where did you find Atta's Will? Is it on the Internet? If you are making it up you are a total fuckass.

 

[videogamer]

I alluded to "any" solution as better because I see a fair number of people on message boards who are vehemently against the war, yet offer no sound solution or alternative.

How about letting the WMD investigation teams continue looking in Iraq? Having a new path on the table does not mean it is a better path.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

Please elaborate Azih. You're smarter than most of the people around here, I would actually like to hear the reasoning behind your conclusion. At what point do you think he threw up his hands and said, "Well, after what they've done now, I'm going to have to crash a plane into a building"?

And don't forget to answer the trivia question, Mike Ditka gives quite a lockeroom speech if you're losing at halftime.

it's more like he sees palestinians being killed by american -made weapons and decides to do something about it. that's what i think he thought anyway.

 

[midnightguy]

CNN reports that, according to U.S. Intelligence, TIMING DEVICES were used in at least some of the bombings in London, ruling out suicide-bombers for those particular attacks.

 

[fortified_concept]

Seriously there are still people who claim that the war didn't start for oil? Of course it wasn't just the oil, it was the construction companies the weapons industry and the geopolitical domination (which would only bring more oil), but still the main reason is the oil. Who the hell still denies that (except the Republicans)?

 

[PS2 KID]

Reply to some comments in the last thread:


EVERY Terrorist attack goes for "more exposure", that's the whole "point" of terrorism.

Your knowledge of terrorism far exceeds mine. Oh great Fight for Freedom, please tell us how you would rid the world of Terrorism. I'd like to hear your solutions to the problem.

 

[PS2 KID]

Seriously there are still people who claim that the war didn't start for oil? Of course it wasn't just the oil, it was the construction companies the weapons industry and the geopolitical domination (which would only bring more oil), but still the main reason is the oil. Who the hell still denies that (except the Republicans)?

I have been comtemplating this for awhile now. Even if much of the world converted to alternative energy sources (much of it through government subsidies)there would still be developing nations that would require oil to power their economies. Which leads us back to square one.

 

[Macam]

Seriously there are still people who claim that the war didn't start for oil? Of course it wasn't just the oil, it was the construction companies the weapons industry and the geopolitical domination (which would only bring more oil), but still the main reason is the oil. Who the hell still denies that (except the Republicans)?

I don't buy into the whole oil thing personally, certainly not as one of the major points of going into Iraq.

 

[FightyF]

Your knowledge of terrorism far exceeds mine. Oh great Fight for Freedom, please tell us how you would rid the world of Terrorism. I'd like to hear your solutions to the problem.

Actually I'm working on a website on this issue. I'll definately post the link once it's ready to go. I've only studied terrorism related to the Middle East, and used by Christian, Jews, and Muslims. There are thousands of terrorist groups around the World, and the ones I've studied are only a fraction of which, but they get the most attention since it involves issues that the West is heavily involved with.

 

[FightyF]

And I wouldn't focus on the word "Oil", but rather "money".

G.O.D., referring to Gold, Oil, and Drugs..it all comes down to money and wealth in the end.

 

[PS2 KID]

Thanks. I look forward to viewing your website. I'm sure it'll be an interesting read. I am always interested in solutions as usually we just have people blaming each other, arguing till they are out of breath, without finding ways to solve the problem of Terrorism.

 

[Azih]

Please elaborate Azih. You're smarter than most of the people around here, I would actually like to hear the reasoning behind your conclusion. At what point do you think he threw up his hands and said, "Well, after what they've done now, I'm going to have to crash a plane into a building"?

How do you expect me to answer that? Only he can answer that question and unless he specifically documented his own personal thoughts and experiences in that matter we'll never know what went through his damned mind.

Look he was an extremist, I'm not. So I can't tell you how he thought except to say that mental derangment shouldn't be seen as the answer because that reasoning discourages the further analysis that is necessary (I mean if he's a crazy man what need is there to further dissect his rationale? He's crazy! Case Closed!). What I can tell you is the general sentiment that causes the actions of him and extremists like him to be tolerated, accepted and in some cases lauded by the non extremist members of his community. A fair bit of this has to do with American foreign policy, a fair bit of it doesn't.

There is no real difference between Timothy McVieh and Mohammad Atta themselves. The *difference* lies in the extent to which the people that made up their environment agreed with their reasoning. And that is where the major problem lies as the greater the mass of people that are willing to silently or vocally support extremists, the greater scope they have for manoeveuring, plotting and gathering resources and recruits. Especially recruits.

 

[xsarien]

Trivia Time: Pick the quote not actually in Mohammed Atta's will.

a. "People will be held responsible for not following the Muslim religion."
b. "I don't want any women to go to my grave at all during my funeral or any occasion thereafter."
c. "Due to American foreign policy, all I have left is the shirt on my back and flying a plane into a building is the only avenue left for me."
First one to answer correctly gets a copy of "Mike Ditka's Quarterback Attack" for the Sega Saturn.

I'd imagine that C would be much more succinct. Perhaps something along the lines of how he'd like to kill any American he sees.

Where he lived doesn't really mean much, incidentally, and I can't believe I actually have to spell certain things out. Terrorists come in all stripes, and are created under a litany of circumstances. We were talking about Iraq (to a degree) before, so I cited collateral damage as an impetus to strike. But empathy is also another strong motivator.

What forms someone's transformation into a terrorist is a complicated issue, about as big a grey area as they come. If you're expecting black and white, right and wrong, good and evil here, you're going to be a little disappointed. It's not just subscribing to a perverted version of Islam (or ANY religion); it's not just a wartorn home country; it's not just hatred of U.S. policy to the region. It's a mixture of everything, with varying ratios depending on the terrorist.

 

[Fatghost]

There is no real difference between Timothy McVieh and Mohammad Atta themselves. The *difference* lies in the extent to which the people that made up their environment agreed with their reasoning. And that is where the major problem lies as the greater the mass of people that are willing to silently or vocally support extremists, the greater scope they have for manoeveuring, plotting and gathering resources and recruits. Especially recruits.

Dude...both Tim McVeigh and Mohammed Atta were crazy. We can look at their rationales and study them in order to determine how nutbars think in order to try to build some kind of early warning system, but lets not fall into the trap of apologizing for these assholes and assume they were normal, caring human beings who just got pushed too far.

They were not normal, not sane, and had something fundamentally wrong with themselves. They were broken inside long before any external factor in domestic or international politics gave them a reason and rationale to lash out.

 

[Squirrel Killer]

Seriously there are still people who claim that the war didn't start for oil? Of course it wasn't just the oil, it was the construction companies the weapons industry and the geopolitical domination (which would only bring more oil), but still the main reason is the oil. Who the hell still denies that (except the Republicans)?

Are you STILL on this? Oh well, at least you're getting closer with the "it wasn't just the oil" bit, but you're still well off the mark.

 

[HokieJoe]

How about letting the WMD investigation teams continue looking in Iraq? Having a new path on the table does not mean it is a better path.

I don't have a problem with investigators continuing their search for WMD. They'd be derelicting their duty if they didn't IMO. If you read my prior posts carefully, I said I'd take any solution that could be proven to work better than our current course of action. I agree with you that "any" action is not necessarily better.

 

[videogamer]

I don't have a problem with investigators continuing their search for WMD. They'd be derelicting their duty if they didn't IMO. If you read my prior posts carefully, I said I'd take any solution that could be proven to work better than our current course of action. I agree with you that "any" action is not necessarily better.

I was talking about the UN inspectors looking for the alleged WMDs prior to the US invasion. Should have been more specific.

 

[midnightguy]

sorry if already posted

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/070705standstogain.htm

Explosions In London - Who Stands To Gain? Israel Warned, Cover-up In Progress

Propaganda Matrix | July 7 2005

BREAKING: Scrambled cover-up to try and change prior knowledge story.

Original reports stated that Binyamin Netanyahu was warned BEFORE the first blast, now all the Associated Press reports are being changed to say he was warned AFTER the first blast, for example this article.

The article linked below that we saved in our own format (and the website that carried it has strangely since crashed) said that Netanyahu was warned before the first blast.

Israel are now denying they got a warning.

BREAKING: Scotland Yard says it got a warning before the attack and told Israel.

"The Israeli Embassy in London was notified in advance, resulting in Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu remaining in his hotel room rather than make his way to the hotel adjacent to the site of the first explosion, a Liverpool Street train station, where he was to address and economic summit."

Full article here.

The warning contradicts the fact that the original explanation of a power surge went out for an hour or more. They knew it was an attack but put out a false explanation. Plus why did Netanyahu get a warning and the victims didn't?

We have been told that the events unfolding today were "inevitable", London's transport network has been hit with multiple explosions. Both the Underground and Buses have been hit. Events are still unfolding.

We predicted this would happen over a year ago after analyzing the propaganda and fearmongering that was being ratcheted up to the extreme in London. Paul Joseph Watson has predicted these events as imminent several times on The Alex Jones Show in recent months.

Tony Blair is not in London but safely tucked up in Scotland with 7 other World Leaders including President Bush. The political eyes of the world are on Britain this week. The Mayor of London Ken Livingstone is in Singapore where the IOC has just awarded the Olympic Games to London, he is rushing back to the city.

Just like the events of 9/11, ask yourself, who stands to gain from this? Could this have been organized by any group other than one who has direct unlimited access to all areas of London's transport grid at all times?

The similarities with the Madrid bombing of 3/11/04, which we have persistently highlighted as an inside intelligence operation, are stark with bombs on separate trains set off within minutes of each other as the trains neared the stations. The so called perpetrators were quickly linked to an "Al Qaeda" cell in Europe but later as we reported were linked to the Spanish Security service. They then mysteriously Killed themselves as this information was seeping out. It then became apparent that Spain's government was using the bombings for its own gains and many went to the streets in Spain to declare they knew that their own government was behind the attacks. Further Intelligence was withheld by the government, we expect the same will happen in Britain after today's attacks.

This has MI5 written all over it. Just watch that national ID card legislation sail through. Only 15% of the country supported the government after the last election, this will ensure total fealty to a smarmy Blair and whatever he wants to do. Ken Livingstone and the opposition parties will now have no grounds to reject ID card legislation, especially with the Olympics coming to London in 2012.

The police state measures they'll get out of this will be overlaid onto all forms of transport. In fact, you won't be able to travel without the ID card. Although MI5 operations are normally more sophisticated than things like 9/11, in that the evidence linking it to the government is more carefully covered, just watch for the evidence of inside involvement to trickle out. MI5 have been caught involved in IRA bombings multiple times over.

Alex has said over and over that as attacks on different sections of the transportation grid occur they are going to have police state setup in the areas. Now it will be on the buses, subways etc.

FLASHBACK: Schumer Wants Airport Screening Technology in Malls

The military-industrial complex has the motive in this latest atrocity. Every major western government, including the British, has been caught red-handed carrying out bombings against their own people and blaming it on external enemies. It is mainstream news in Spain that the government was involved in the 3/11 bombing. The London 7/7 bombings are nothing different. Government ghouls are now all over television spreading the fear to encourage the people to submit to the war on terror. Support our work, spread the word, expose who is gaining power from terrorism, or our freedoms will be lost.

Hours after the attacks the media is still not providing extensive coverage. We would expect to see hundreds of eyewitness accounts and footage of the train stations. Independent London reporter Simon Aronowitz, who has a contact within the BBC, has reported that journalists are finding the coverage of the situation highly irregular. It seems that the information being released to the British public is being carefully stage managed.

 

[fortified_concept]

Are you STILL on this? Oh well, at least you're getting closer with the "it wasn't just the oil" bit, but you're still well off the mark.

After the sixth page I got bored with the insanity of the thread and picked it up now. Seriously you and Phoenix are trying to persuade us that "it wasn't just the oil". OK it was the money in general like FfF said. Does it make ANY difference? I mean it's still a war started just for profit.

 

[HokieJoe]

I was talking about the UN inspectors looking for the alleged WMDs prior to the US invasion. Should have been more specific.

Generally, I would agree with that. Obviously, I'm not privy to the why's and what-not's of the timing involved though. All I know is that there was a consensus amongst all the major players that Saddam did have WMD. The respective intelligence services of Russia, Germany, France, England, and the US all said that he had WMD. Consequently, either there was a major screw up at the intelligence level (could be); we haven't found them yet; or Saddam trucked them out of the country.

 

[DJ Sl4m]

It takes a truly sick fucking idiot to make excuses for the cowardly assholes that kill innocent people, no matter what the deranged & brainwashed cause could be.

 

[HokieJoe]

Dude...both Tim McVeigh and Mohammed Atta were crazy. We can look at their rationales and study them in order to determine how nutbars think in order to try to build some kind of early warning system, but lets not fall into the trap of apologizing for these assholes and assume they were normal, caring human beings who just got pushed too far.

They were not normal, not sane, and had something fundamentally wrong with themselves. They were broken inside long before any external factor in domestic or international politics gave them a reason and rationale to lash out.

There is no real difference between Timothy McVieh and Mohammad Atta themselves. The *difference* lies in the extent to which the people that made up their environment agreed with their reasoning. And that is where the major problem lies as the greater the mass of people that are willing to silently or vocally support extremists, the greater scope they have for manoeveuring, plotting and gathering resources and recruits. Especially recruits.

Hmm, I didn't interpret it that way. It looks to me like he's saying that Islamicists are supported more either silently or vocally than someone like McVeigh would be here in the states. That was the bit he was getting at with recruiting comment I think.

 

[FightyF]

They were not normal, not sane, and had something fundamentally wrong with themselves. They were broken inside long before any external factor in domestic or international politics gave them a reason and rationale to lash out.

Normal people can go crazy. Need I mention Tom Cruise?

They weren't born retarded or anything like that.

They were both convicted in that what they were doing was right. Even MORALLY right!

Again, this goes back to "an eye for an eye". Why did the Spanish Inquisition occur? Such brutality, an ARMY of terrorists (not just a handful of people) did what they did, even kill women and children with their bare hands, because they thought they were morally in the right. This ties directly into religion. It ties into the concept of Justice, which "an eye for an eye" originally points to. The problem is, you take that sentance ALONE, and it doesn't seem like Justice, it seems like Revenge. True Christians, Jews, and Muslims who believe that God said this, know that if they read just a few more passages, there are also concepts such as "turn the other cheek" and passages regarding patience. They can see that God doesn't want to see revenge, and they have enough religious knowledge to define revenge and define justice without blurring the very fine line between the two.

You have a complete interpretation versus a narrow interpretation. Even with the narrow interpretation, nowhere does it say to kill INNOCENT people. How that concept was introduced into Islam is something I'm looking at right now...and in a phrase, the whole justification by radical Muslims is that "the ends justify the means, even if the means are hated by God because the ends are loved by God.".

I went overboard here, going back to my original point, is that these people turn twisted over time. Their ideas, beliefs, and view of the World did change with events. How many Americans wanted to mercilessly bomb the hell out of Afghanistan after 9/11? These sane, normal Americans suddenly turn into crazed bloodthirsty people because of an event that has changed their view and understanding of the World. In the same way, Atta could have seen something that got his blood boiling and got him to do it. Back that up with some "moral justification" and he'll actually go through with it.

And when fighting terrorism, this must be realized. Terrorists can be created. You can have normal people who don't have an opinion for or against you, suddenly hate your guts and want to kill you because they see you as absolute evil.

Now a bit on another topic...

On the topic of "creating terrorists", I am referring to creating hatred towards the US. Now, some short-sighted people say that this means to "appease terrorists", in order to make them happy and not attack us. This is not the case and it's illogical. When the American forces finally decided to attack Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda hidden in Tora Bora...most Muslims were indifferent. But prior to that, when the goal was first to oust the Taliban, and you saw innocent women and children getting killed in the thousands, Muslims were outraged. And when the US captured Saddam Hussien, Muslims in general were happy (some indifferent), yet when the news of torture that involved the bashing of Islam came out, Muslims started hating the US. It's all about tactic...it's all about the manner in which the US is fighting the war on terror. It's NOT about STOPPING the war on terror as some short sighted people claim.

Oh no I've said too much...

...I haven't said enough.

Sorry for my long unedited posts. Makes for hard reading I'm sure. I don't care about it when we are talking about gaming or how Smallville rules, but a serious topic like this needs easier to read replies with strong logic.

 

[FightyF]

It takes a truly sick fucking idiot to make excuses for the cowardly assholes that kill innocent people, no matter what the deranged & brainwashed cause could be.

Who's making excuses? I'd like to see ONE quote.

 

[Firest0rm]

Woa Woa Woa [Post # 429]

Very good post. When is this website of yours gonna be up approx.?

 

[FightyF]

That's an issue, I don't have ANY timeframe. I'm just learning, and learning, and learning, and trying to understand the issue first. That in and of itself has been very satisfying. But it's threads like this that make me realize that most people can't afford to do this kind of research and it's not like the media helps any either.

I can get the domain right away (for free) and install a CMS myself, that isn't an issue. I can do that in one day.

But I will definately post a link here when it's done.

 

[Firest0rm]

That's an issue, I don't have ANY timeframe. I'm just learning, and learning, and learning, and trying to understand the issue first. That in and of itself has been very satisfying. But it's threads like this that make me realize that most people can't afford to do this kind of research and it's not like the media helps any either.

I can get the domain right away (for free) and install a CMS myself, that isn't an issue. I can do that in one day.

But I will definately post a link here when it's done.

Thats great, I recommend you read The Two Faces of Islam to get a better understanding of Terrorism commited by some of the "Muslims". If you ever have the time.

 

[APF]

How many Americans wanted to mercilessly bomb the hell out of Afghanistan after 9/11?

Not many. In fact, I recall a lot of people calling for restraint, a lot of people saying our response should show our strength of character as a nation, etc. I recall a lot of people leaping to defend Islam as a religion, and coming to the defense of Middle Easterners as a people in response to possible racist backlash that never really came. I recall a lot of people wringing their hands and blaming American foreign policy as the "root cause" of terrorism; people blaming the Jews and saying the attacks were really a Zionist plot; people saying that the attacks were planned by George Bush to counter a insignificant term in office, or in order to control alleged oil pipelines in Afghanistan that never existed.

There are just completely different mindsets at work here, between the average American and the sort of person who would be a Mohamed Atta. Even our most racist assholes blamed Jews and American foreign policy towards Israel for the attacks. There's just no comparison; we're always ashamed of ourselves and always rush to flagellate each other. Comparing average Americans to Mohammed Atta -types is obnoxious.

 

[FightyF]

Thats great, I recommend you read The Two Faces of Islam to get a better understanding of Terrorism commited by some of the "Muslims". If you ever have the time.

I've heard of that book, but have not yet read it.

When I started reading, I realized that most of these people are either motivated by biases to make a certain point (in this case, Schwartz, who is a Sufi, focuses on Wahhabis), and in other cases they tie in the Israel/Palestine conflict...and aren't interested in solutions, thus aren't interested in finding out why or how things came to be. They just want to make a point, back it up with enough evidence as they can, and sell their book.

I'll still read some of these types of books. It's not like they are devoid of value. But I think it's far more important for myself to answer questions until everything becomes clear. Right now, things are pretty clear. The problem doesn't seem so daunting and the solution seems a bit obvious, but needs to be carried out.

 

[FightyF]

Not many. In fact, I recall a lot of people calling for restraint, a lot of people saying our response should show our strength of character as a nation, etc. I recall a lot of people leaping to defend Islam as a religion, and coming to the defense of Middle Easterners as a people in response to possible racist backlash that never really came. I recall a lot of people wringing their hands and blaming American foreign policy as the "root cause" of terrorism; people blaming the Jews and saying the attacks were really a Zionist plot; people saying that the attacks were planned by George Bush to counter a insignificant term in office, or in order to control alleged oil pipelines in Afghanistan that never existed.

"Not many"? That's pretty much the same number of terrorists who are willing to fly planes into American buildings.

A racist backlash that never came? There was a backlash, hate crimes against Muslims shot through the roof!

Plus, there are oil pipelines in Afghanistan that will be made soon if it hasn't started already...you seem to be out of the loop on this one.

There are just completely different mindsets at work here, between the average American and the sort of person who would be a Mohamed Atta. Even our most racist assholes blamed Jews and American foreign policy towards Israel for the attacks. There's just no comparison; we're always ashamed of ourselves and always rush to flagellate each other. Comparing average Americans to Mohammed Atta -types is obnoxious.

I guess you didn't read this forum after 9/11. I guess you've never been to OA either :lol

Seriously, I felt compelled to respond because you are presenting yourself as a person in extreme denial. I don't know why you'd be so compelled...it doesn't make sense.

 

[Boogie]

sorry if already posted

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/070705standstogain.htm

Are you also sorry to admit that you take such bullshit seriously enough to post it in this thread?

 

[APF]

"Not many"? That's pretty much the same number of terrorists who are willing to fly planes into American buildings.

Except terrorists actually did that, and Americans did not respond in that manner.

A racist backlash that never came? There was a backlash, hate crimes against Muslims shot through the roof!

A "roof" that was still FAR lower than the amount of attacks on Jews; a "roof" that spiked a little (though a lot by % of course) and was short-lived, IIRC.

Plus, there are oil pipelines in Afghanistan that will be made soon if it hasn't started already...you seem to be out of the loop on this one.

No, there were proposed GAS pipelines that were once discussed way back when but never materialized (due to instability in that country both before and after 9/11) and now that company may be bought-out by the Chinese anyways, whoops.


[EDIT: you're saying that asshole comments on OA translate into real-world actions by those posters? Evidence?]

 

[FightyF]

Except terrorists actually did that, and Americans did not respond in that manner.

I'd like to get you a source on this, but I got an article on my newswire on how innocent Afghans were killed as retaliation, by American soldiers. The same type of killings have happened in Iraq, where soldiers were looking to kill anyone.

A "roof" that was still FAR lower than the amount of attacks on Jews; a "roof" that spiked a little (though a lot by % of course) and was short-lived, IIRC.

From what I remember it goes up each year. Events like the beheadings in Iraq cause major spikes, but also events like the defilation of the Quran caused a big spike in anti-Muslim activities. The comparison to attacks on the Jews doesn't make as much sense because the FBI has recognized that there is a lack of willingness on the part of foreigners to report hate crimes as compared to non-foriegners. If anything, I'd like you to compare burned mosques to synagogues. During the last month.

No, there were proposed GAS pipelines that were once discussed way back when but never materialized (due to instability in that country both before and after 9/11) and now that company may be bought-out by the Chinese anyways, whoops.

Yeah, someone made a lot of money on that. Do you know who?

 

[FightyF]

[EDIT: you're saying that asshole comments on OA translate into real-world actions by those posters? Evidence?]

No. You obviously haven't read my original post well enough...why did you respond if that's the case?

I'm saying people will feel aggression as a result of World events. People will CHANGE due to events, and these events shape their lives.

I don't know if you disagree with that statement. Do you?

Obviously, you disagree with my examples, but there is evidence that hate-crimes against Muslims rose. I told you that, and now you say "It's not as high as against the Jews", which is irrelevant. The whole point is that you see a cause and effect. Action and reaction. Don't try to deny it.

 

[APF]

I'd like to get you a source on this, but I got an article on my newswire on how innocent Afghans were killed as retaliation, by American soldiers. The same type of killings have happened in Iraq, where soldiers were looking to kill anyone.

Show me more than the initial report--the actual results of the investigation--and I'll agree (presumably) that soldiers actually at war became mad enough at innocent people they conflated with their wartime enemies to kill them in cold blood. But that's still far different than people becoming motivated to carry out terrorist attacks ala Atta. Show me the American suicide bombers in Mecca.

From what I remember it goes up each year. Events like the beheadings in Iraq cause major spikes, but also events like the defilation of the Quran caused a big spike in anti-Muslim activities. The comparison to attacks on the Jews doesn't make as much sense because the FBI has recognized that there is a lack of willingness on the part of foreigners to report hate crimes as compared to non-foriegners. If anything, I'd like you to compare burned mosques to synagogues. During the last month.

Sure, show me the whole data. Of course the comparison to Jews matters, don't be evasive. Jews get all sorts of hate thrown at them all the time and even though you seem to know this, you still feel motivated to dismiss it. I'm not dismissing the claims of hate crimes against Muslims, even though some of those claims were determined to be hoaxes.

Yeah, someone made a lot of money on that. Do you know who?

Someone made a lot of money on something that didn't happen? Who?


[EDIT: There's a big difference between people talking shit on an anonymous forum where the culture encourages people to be outrageous, and people actually becoming terrorists. You're conflating the two, I'm disassociating the two.]
[EDIT: I said it "never _really_ came" because the level of backlash which was feared might happen, didn't. The point of comparing crimes against Jews was to show that Jews are still far more hated than Muslims; an important piece of perspective]

 

[Fatghost]

Normal people can go crazy. Need I mention Tom Cruise?

For one, this is a false analogy since Tom Cruise hasn't killed anyone (that we know of anyway). Secondly, how do you know Tom Cruise was ever "normal"?

They weren't born retarded or anything like that.

No, but they were likely born a sociopath or psychopath or born with some other serious mental disorder that resulted in mass murder.

They were both convicted in that what they were doing was right. Even MORALLY right!

So what? Moral relativism is bullshit. There is right and wrong, and if your sense of right and wrong means that killing innocent people is right, then you are crazy, bat shit insane and cannot be considered a normal part of humanity. I don't know what you could possibly do that would be MORE crazy than killing hundreds or thousands of innocent people.

Again, this goes back to "an eye for an eye".

An eye for an eye is primitive but effective justice in the biblical (or koranical, if that is how it is presented in the Koran) sense, PROVIDED THAT THE PERSON WHO IS BLINDED IS THE PERSON WHO PERSONALLY BLINDED YOU. In other words, if John killed Mary, then Mary's husband could be justified in killing John. If John killed Mary, but Mary's husband killed innocent bystander Susan, then Mary's husband is not just, and is quite likely not normal mentally.

Why did the Spanish Inquisition occur?

Because of certain political reasons but mostly because of CRAZY PEOPLE.

Such brutality, an ARMY of terrorists (not just a handful of people) did what they did, even kill women and children with their bare hands, because they thought they were morally in the right.

Because they were crazy. What you are saying is the very definition of someone who isn't normal, someone who isn't right in the head, and someone who you cannot morally justify.

This ties directly into religion. It ties into the concept of Justice, which "an eye for an eye" originally points to. The problem is, you take that sentance ALONE, and it doesn't seem like Justice, it seems like Revenge.

Eye for an eye is not really at all relevant to what Atta or McVeigh did though, since none of their victims had ever personally done anything to them.

True Christians, Jews, and Muslims who believe that God said this, know that if they read just a few more passages, there are also concepts such as "turn the other cheek" and passages regarding patience. They can see that God doesn't want to see revenge, and they have enough religious knowledge to define revenge and define justice without blurring the very fine line between the two.

Again, these guys are crazy. A normal person can read the Bible or the Koran and understand that moderation needs to be applied. A crazy person will read it and take every word literally and use it to justify his abnormal world view and crazy actions.

You have a complete interpretation versus a narrow interpretation. Even with the narrow interpretation, nowhere does it say to kill INNOCENT people. How that concept was introduced into Islam is something I'm looking at right now...and in a phrase, the whole justification by radical Muslims is that "the ends justify the means, even if the means are hated by God because the ends are loved by God.".

The difference between a normal person and a crazy person is this: a normal person knows that hurting other people is wrong, under almost any circumstance. A normal person understands moderation in response. A crazy person doesn't. A crazy person is someone who decides that killing innocent people is A-OK.

I went overboard here, going back to my original point, is that these people turn twisted over time. Their ideas, beliefs, and view of the World did change with events. How many Americans wanted to mercilessly bomb the hell out of Afghanistan after 9/11?

How many Americans actually hijacked planes or planted explosives in buildings full of innocent Afghanis? There's the clear distinction here.

These sane, normal Americans suddenly turn into crazed bloodthirsty people because of an event that has changed their view and understanding of the World. In the same way, Atta could have seen something that got his blood boiling and got him to do it. Back that up with some "moral justification" and he'll actually go through with it.

You can't apologize for these animals though. A normal, sane person would say "Gee, American troops in Saudi Arabia just doesn't justify my flying a plane into a building of innocent people".

And when fighting terrorism, this must be realized. Terrorists can be created. You can have normal people who don't have an opinion for or against you, suddenly hate your guts and want to kill you because they see you as absolute evil.

No to the bolded part. A normal person would not do that. A normal person might get fed up with a military occupation and join a resistance force as is happening in Iraq, but he wouldn't fly a plane into the WTC because of a few US military bases in Saudi Arabia.

Remember, Al Qaida attacked before the US had done anything. The US wasn't invading any Muslim country at the time, wasn't bombing any, and was generally minding its business as a good global citizen. The US wasn't cowboy happy until AFTER the attacks.

Now a bit on another topic...

On the topic of "creating terrorists", I am referring to creating hatred towards the US. Now, some short-sighted people say that this means to "appease terrorists", in order to make them happy and not attack us. This is not the case and it's illogical. When the American forces finally decided to attack Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda hidden in Tora Bora...most Muslims were indifferent.

What's sad here is that "most Muslims were indifferent". When really, for any Muslim of true faith, the response should be "How can we help to catch that fucker Bin Laden as soon as possible and help the US eviscerate his murdering carcass?"

But prior to that, when the goal was first to oust the Taliban, and you saw innocent women and children getting killed in the thousands, Muslims were outraged.

Were Muslims outraged when it was the Taliban killing women and children? I imagine many were upset. I wonder if most moderate Muslims would say it's better for Muslims to kill and torture other Muslims than for Americans to do so, or if morally, the two are equally bad.

And when the US captured Saddam Hussien, Muslims in general were happy (some indifferent), yet when the news of torture that involved the bashing of Islam came out, Muslims started hating the US.

It's all about tactic...it's all about the manner in which the US is fighting the war on terror. It's NOT about STOPPING the war on terror as some short sighted people claim.

The Islam bashing is unfortunate but it's not like you can make Al Qaida terrorists MORE likely to commit terror. These guys are already committed. They were willing to kill themselves to kill Americans and other westerners BEFORE a single US bomb or troop attacked any Muslim lands or peed on any copy of the Koran.

 

[Mupepe]

For one, this is a false analogy since Tom Cruise hasn't killed anyone (that we know of anyway). Secondly, how do you know Tom Cruise was ever "normal"?

He did sleep with Rob Thomas reportedly =( haha

But I too find it extremely unfortunate that Islam happens to take the cake from a lot of ignorant assholes that don't know any better. In a lot of people's mind, it might as well just preach "Hate Western Civilization." And those people are just as dangerous as the terrorists IMO.

 

[Guileless]

A racist backlash that never came? There was a backlash, hate crimes against Muslims shot through the roof!

Bullshit. Source?

Fatghost28 and APF, before you get into an extended dialog with Fight for Freeform, you should know that he voluntarily stated that he would rather be arrested in Iran than in the United States because they would treat him better there. He's not worth the time. He's taken a few university classes and thinks he's Bernard Lewis.

And by the way, Atta's will was widely published. Surely a terrorism expert such as yourself should know this already.

 

[heidern]

Remember, Al Qaida attacked before the US had done anything. The US wasn't invading any Muslim country at the time, wasn't bombing any, and was generally minding its business as a good global citizen.

Oh dear. Do you really believe Al Qaida attacked the US and murdered over 3,000 people just for the hell of it? And come on, minding its business is not what the US has done for a long time.

The Islam bashing is unfortunate but it's not like you can make Al Qaida terrorists MORE likely to commit terror.

The problem isn't that you piss off existing terrorists even more. The problem is you piss off Muslims who then get so pissed off they decide to cross the line and join the Al Qaida movement.

 

[MIMIC]

Bullshit. Source?

You honestly didn't know this? Where have you been?

Hate crimes against Muslims soared after Sept. 11, according to an FBI report released Monday that also shows that most hate offenses in 2001 were committed against African Americans.

The FBI's annual statistical report showed that hate crimes in the United States increased 21 percent from 8,063 in 2000 to 9,730 in 2001. Most of last year's hate crimes were motivated by racial bias (45 percent), followed by biases against ethnicity or national origin (22 percent), religion (19 percent), sexual orientation (14 percent) and disability (0.3 percent).

The most dramatic change noted by the report was a more than 1,600 percent increase in reported hate crimes against Muslims -- a jump from 28 hate incidents in 2000 to 481 last year.

San Francisco Chronicle

 

[APF]

Fatghost28 and APF, before you get into an extended dialog with Fight for Freeform, you should know that he voluntarily stated that he would rather be arrested in Iran than in the United States because they would treat him better there. He's not worth the time. He's taken a few university classes and thinks he's Bernard Lewis.

Oh! I thought he was a genuine expert.

Posting on a video gaming message board.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

[EDIT: anyway, my point was only that there is no comparison between the average American's response to 9/11 and the driving force behind folks like Atta. Any expert--any human being--should understand that, regardless of their opinions re: American foreign policy]

 

[Rlan]

I do recall numerous news reports of the burning of Muslim Churches in the US days after 9/11.

 

[teepo]

it seems like everyone is talking to themselves.

 

[Guileless]

Not a single fatality and the vast majority are classified as "intimidation." Comparing that to suicide attacks is beyond ridiculous but par for the course in these threads. Enjoy your moral relativism and oil pipeline talk. Maybe one day while reading Shelby Foote I'll get pissed at the US government for the siege of Vicksburg and fly a plane into a building and y'all can make excuses for my behavior and talk about all the shades of gray there are and lecture everyone who doesn't agree with you about how unsohpisticated they are.

 

[Mupepe]

I do recall numerous news reports of the burning of Muslim Churches in the US days after 9/11.

It got pretty bad the first few days after 9/11. Houston was really bad, I know this for a fact. Everyday there were reports of stores owned my Muslims that were burned/robbed/vandalized. I had a friend who said that his mother was threatened in the line at the supermarket and was scared to go outside. That disappointed me so much. In a time when Americans should have been pulling together, we got more ignorant.