Politics and the attacks of London [Archive]

Eric6420

07-07-2005, 02:11 PM

As sad as the attacks of London are, I think that we should not forget the causes of terrorism.

A lot of people think that the war in Irak was about cheap oil for the USA. Obviously, that did not worked.

Let's face it. Al Quaida is more popular than Bush or Blair in most muslim countries (1,3 billion persons). There are reasons for such impopularity.

Maybe we should ask ourselves why so much people in the world, particularly in the muslim world, hate so much the USA (and its supporters like England).

The US media is not exactly showing what the horrors the US army has done in Irak, but the muslim world know it and saw it in tv networks like Al Jaazira.

Most Americans did not see the Ikakis children with severe malformations because the depleted uranium the us army has spread in the air of Irak. Thousands of innocent Irakis have been killed in this war, including children, women and old people.

I guess that if you were an Iraki, you would not like Americans very much.

Support for Al Quaida in muslim countries would be very weak if it was not for the war against Irak.

China has a better image in the world than the USA.

I am sure that the war in Irak was a big mistake.

Eric6420

07-07-2005, 02:11 PM

Qikdraw

07-07-2005, 02:46 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Eric6420:
I guess that if you were an Iraki, you would not like Americans very much. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just a quick point here. Most people who dislike the US do not dislike Americans. They see a difference between the people of the US, and the US's foriegn policy.

I disagree with a blanket statement that says they hate Americans. Its just far too simplistic.

Qikdraw

Swimguy

07-07-2005, 02:48 PM

The hatred of freedom-loving countries and today's attacks has nothing to do with the war in Iraq, even though many will say it does. The hatred has been brewing for years, think of the many attacks in Europe from the 80's on. This attack coincides with the summit in Great Britain. Canada is a part of that summit, and let's all pray your country--along with all other countries--is safe from additional terrorist attacks.

mayfree1

07-07-2005, 03:00 PM

Eric,

Your view of the world is extremely simplistic and naive. Why do you believe a few overly religious extremist muslums despise the US? The reason is they are indoctrinated into this mindset as children. The believe that suicide will bring them paradise. This is totally sick. The US is just a country like your own. Please refain from making silly judgments which are not base in reality. The war in Iraq is a symptom, not a cause for hatred. The US is the most powerful country on earth at the present time and you can not expect this power to be kept in check if challenged.

KirkOntario

07-07-2005, 04:15 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Eric6420:
As sad as the attacks of London are, I think that we should not forget the causes of terrorism.

A lot of people think that the war in Irak was about cheap oil for the USA. Obviously, that did not worked.

Let's face it. Al Quaida is more popular than Bush or Blair in most muslim countries (1,3 billion persons). There are reasons for such impopularity.

Maybe we should ask ourselves why so much people in the world, particularly in the muslim world, hate so much the USA (and its supporters like England).

The US media is not exactly showing what the horrors the US army has done in Irak, but the muslim world know it and saw it in tv networks like Al Jaazira.

Most Americans did not see the Ikakis children with severe malformations because the depleted uranium the us army has spread in the air of Irak. Thousands of innocent Irakis have been killed in this war, including children, women and old people.

I guess that if you were an Iraki, you would not like Americans very much.

Support for Al Quaida in muslim countries would be very weak if it was not for the war against Irak.

China has a better image in the world than the USA.

I am sure that the war in Irak was a big mistake. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I predict we will not find the bombers in London are Iraqis as we did find they were in Madrid. It will be the usual assortment of Morrocans, Egyptians, Saudi's, and Westernized Muslims who hate the West but choose to raise their women and children there because it is better and safer.

KirkOntario

07-07-2005, 04:18 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mayfree1:
Eric,

Your view of the world is extremely simplistic and naive. Why do you believe a few overly religious extremist muslums despise the US? The reason is they are indoctrinated into this mindset as children. The believe that suicide will bring them paradise. This is totally sick. The US is just a country like your own. Please refain from making silly judgments which are not base in reality. The war in Iraq is a symptom, not a cause for hatred. The US is the most powerful country on earth at the present time and you can not expect this power to be kept in check if challenged. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

On that note Canada was named by Osama Bin Laden as a target for attacks on terrorist documents found in Afghanistan. We are not safe which is why we fight this evil worldwide.

The Left has too long downplayed the threat, called it a 'mindset' and isolated incident. Do they dare now declare that the gates of Guantanamo Bay be opened? They will get back to it later..but not now.

Trailscout

07-07-2005, 04:40 PM

Our only hope is to declare the USA as an Islamic Republic, institute Sharia law and begin beheading infidels and start beating our women.

But should we be a Sunni or Shiite Islamic republic? Oh, no! We are still doomed to an eternity of carbombing and death squads by the enemies of either sect. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

gamblefish

07-07-2005, 05:01 PM

Stop! Stop right there! This is the grammar police!!!

This thread may be politically correct, butt the title is not grammatically correct.

It should have been: "Politics and the attacks on London"

Attacks of London would be more like London attacking something, or maybe a disease called "London" attacking people or maybe someone who starts uncontrollably talking with a british accent like, "Oh, bloody hell, I feel an attack of London comin' on!! Blimey!!".

Anyway, carry on discussing your politics ad nauseum...

NudeAl

07-07-2005, 05:32 PM

I have a visceral reaction to these attacks. Perhaps they just brought back too many feelings from 9-11 and the fight to Baghdad. I am a Marine I expect to be in another fight someday. As such I consider myself a valid military target. I would even put the police and various other civil authorities in the same category. These terrorists do not make any such distinction between military targets and civilians. No warnings were given as even the bloody, radical, Provisional IRA did when they bombed London. The Islamic terrorists simply have no regard for human life or anything else except there own narrow agenda. This is a war not limited to Iraq or Afghanistan. It is a war on all of civilization, at least western civilization. It will go on indefinatly until we have defeated these terrorists.

The middle east has been at war in one way or another since the end of WWII and the creation of the state of Israel. I'm sure it will continue at least that much longer. The difference is now they have broadened their war to include the rest of the world. There can be no excuse for what they did or other similar acts. It is barbaric, gruesome, murder of non-combatants by an enemy that has no use for our laws of warfare. They will continue doing this until they have won or been defeated simple as that. Even if you submit to their blackmail the you are not safe because at anytime they may decide to remind you of the power they hold over you.

My point is this event should serve as a reminder that we are in a war that has no borders and by one side at least no rules. We need to remember sometimes that we are not the bad guys. It is ridiculous to say we deserved this or this was done because this. It is because of a few narrow minded religious zealots have indoctrinated their followers in the false belief that this is a holy war. A war against the modern crusader. This is absurd as much as I wish it were we have to behave and act according to the rules of warfare.

As terrible as the current situation is in Iraq I would rather continue to fight there rather than having even more of these terrorists loose in other parts of the world. I know someone will say this is flawed logic but Iraq is a magnet for every I hate America terrorist in the world and as long as they continue to flock there we can continue to kill them there.

KirkOntario

07-07-2005, 05:50 PM

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0514-05.htm

Think this 'brilliant' film-maker would get his standing 'o' today at cannes by the sushi eating set?

jon71

07-07-2005, 05:50 PM

There is some truth in what KirkOntario says but just to a point. Yes they hated us to start with (western world) but an unjust and poorly conducted war in Iraq certainly threw gas on a fire.

KirkOntario

07-07-2005, 06:21 PM

Let's all take comfort in the words of that great American patriot, Michael Moore:

"There is no terrorist threat".

NudeAl

07-07-2005, 06:23 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">There is some truth in what KirkOntario says but just to a point. Yes they hated us to start with (western world) but an unjust and poorly conducted war in Iraq certainly threw gas on a fire. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think I'll have to take issue with that statement. The conventional war was as lopsided a victory as anyone has ever had. Unfortunatly the civilian government would not listen to the military leaders who said in order to carry on stability and sustainment operations they would need double the number of personnel. Military occupations of a conquered nation last a long time, just look at Germany and Japan. Guerrilla warfare has traditionally been one of the most difficult and bloody types of wars this one is no exception. It will go on until the Iraqis have decided to take a stand one way or another. It could still degenerate into a civil war, if it did it would be Beiriut all over again only bloodier.

Sailor

07-07-2005, 09:47 PM

I agree with what Nude Al has been saying.

When judging the extremist Islamic terrorists, you have to try not to picture them as following the same logic that you do. Because they don't.

As time goes on, they say that they are doing what they are doing to get back for some action, but this action that needs revenge is always changing. I remember back to when Osama Bin Laden said that his fight was against the American presence in his homeland, Saudi Arabia. That didn't work very well, because he could not rally enough support from the leadership, or the people. So he needed to find more popular issues to continue doing his thing.

Israel was an easy target, because, even though it is very small compared to its Arab neighbors, it was still quite irritating to have a modern democracy in their midst. A series of conventional wars did not seem to get rid of this irritant, so terrorism was a natural choice. (and the aftermath of the wars left some unnatural situations which are easy to find fault with)

The truth is that they (the extremists) feel that Islam should be spread all over the world, and the Sharia law should be in place everywhere. (talk about top-free for women, that would be the end of face-free!) And anyone who does not agree to an Islamic world should die. The excuse of the moment is meaningless. Any exposure to the western world, which is impossible to avoid these days with modern communications, is liable to be an excuse for attack. But its not the core reason.

So the choice is to either accept that fate, or defeat these modern-day Crusaders.

P.J.

07-07-2005, 10:58 PM

I admit that I'm no fan of Islam, but I do support justice.

Those who practice or even support radical Islam are our enemies.

They are also the enemies of the law-abiding and peace-loving Muslims, who also face the hateful wrath of the radicals who hate everyone and everything western.

My support goes to our British friends. I hope that the low-lifes who practice and support terrorism against the USA and Great Britain are exterminated like the vermin that they are!

For now, let's put aside to our religious, political and social squabbles and once and forever, stand together to defeat the terrorists.

Then we can blissfully return to the never-ending feuds concerning religion, politics and social issues.

Qikdraw

07-07-2005, 11:29 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sailor:
When judging the extremist Islamic terrorists, you have to try not to picture them as following the same logic that you do. Because they don't. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

However if your logic is flawed, then you end up making the wrong assumptions, and will then never understand why some of these people do what they do.

You seem to be basing everything on their religion, which is just too simplistic. Religion is part of the issue, but why are the radicals getting more people to do things for them? Its not for the promise of 70 virgins when they go to paradise. There are other triggers that get people to do that kind of stuff. To ignore other issues means that you'll never be able to get to the root of the problem, nor be able to get rid of it.

Its like ignoring the socio-economic issues in crime. Sure there are some idiots who like it for kicks, but just because a few are like that doesn't mean all of them are doing it for the same reasons.

Qikdraw

Qikdraw

07-07-2005, 11:41 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by P.J.:
For now, let's put aside to our religious, political and social squabbles and once and forever, stand together to defeat the terrorists. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with your points PJ, however there is just a small issue with this one.

The majority of peole are not supporters of terrorism, nor do they defend it. Where differences come about is the way the war on terrorism is conducted.

Remember the "war on drugs"? It didn't work and just made the problem worse. This "war on terrorism", which is a good thing, is not working the way it is being done. We need to find a better way to win. Does that mean blowing more thinsg up and putting more people in Gitmo? Maybe it does, but maybe its finding ways for the radicals not to get so many recruits.

How can we end terrorism? I don't know, but I do know the way we are doing it now just simply is not working, and "staying the course" and doing things the way we have been is stupid.

I don't have a problem with the war on terrorism, I just have a problem with the way the war is being fought.

Qikdraw

NudeAl

07-08-2005, 05:30 AM

I think we have seriously reduced the command and control structure of Al Quaida. For example the last time Ossama was seen on a video was January of 2002. The problem now is that they have decentralized their command and control. Everything is pretty much being left up to the individual cells. These small independent units are able to quickly form up and organize an attack then evaporate. So in a way we are having some positve results it's just that the enemy is very good at adapting very quickly to our tactics.

This is a global war and in order to win we need to shut off all the money which is the life blood of this sort of terrorism. To do this we need the support of all nations through which they can hide the finances. If we were to get that and we could isolate them from their money we would see them slowly wither and die.

I really believe that the cause of this is simply religious extremists twisting the religious faith of their followers. I have met a few Saudis and Iraqis most seem to want the same basic things we do. They don't seem to be anymore interested in killing westerners than you or I. For quite some time though there have been some ultra right wing extremists who paint every action by the west as an attack on Islam, which is of course ridiculous. The problem is where ever there is unemployment or unrest because of changing social or economic policies you have a ready made group of followers. By playing on their fears or simply saying it's not your fault that you are in this terrible situation it's the governments fault, or it's all because of the Jews, or the Americans, or fill in the blank. The middle east has been stuck in the middle ages socially. Now through our technological advances they are no longer able to be as isolated as they once were. This is causeing people to question the Mullahs and they don't like their authority being questioned. I may be over simplifying the situation a little but that is the root of most of this unrest.

Trailscout

07-08-2005, 07:35 AM

I am not disputing the necessity of waging war against terror, but I think the other front is the minds of those who live in the Middle East and increasingly in Muslim communities in the western countries.

Some of the 9/11 hijackers lived in western countries for a long period of time, but they were already so deeply brainwashed that they remained eager to kill for their cause.

There may be an economic component to the spread of radical Islam. I support the idea of bringing economic opportunity and democracy to the Muslim world, and I feel that if some of these countries emerge from feudalism and reach a cultural Renaissance it might help. Yet some of the 9/11 hijackers were not from poverty-stricken homes. The mullahs and the Arabic-language media often instill violent ethics in these people and this warped way of life is the only way they are taught.

Qikdraw

07-08-2005, 01:22 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Trailscout:
There may be an economic component to the spread of radical Islam. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I was talking about this with my neighbours yesterday, and I don't think some of these people beleive what the radical Islamists do, but when they are told that their family will be taken care of after they suicide bomb something, that is a draw for some people. Specially if these people are destitute with no chance of rising above that.

So I don't think its a belief in what radicals believe, but a chance for their family to get out of their situation. This is a reason for some, there are those that are caught up in the radicals way of thinking, but I just wanted to point out another reason why someone may do it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The mullahs and the Arabic-language media often instill violent ethics in these people and this warped way of life is the only way they are taught. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To be fair that sort of stuff is taught here too, and is on the media. When you have radio talk show hosts talking about how we should just kill them all, or pundits saying the same thing, it ends up amounting to teh same sort of thing. We also have children growing up in families here who are taught to hate jews, blacks, etc...

Obviously not everyone here believes that sort of stuff, nor does everyone over there believe it.

I have a feeling that Iraq is going to be like Lebanon. I really hope its not, but right now I don't see an easy way out for us, that would also allow Iraq to have security.

Qikdraw

mhs83

07-08-2005, 06:45 PM

To those who say that the attacks on London and Madrid were a result of the British and Spanish support of the war on terror, I say: "DUH." Of course the terrorists are attacking those countries who are trying to eliminate them because that's what terrorists do. They haven't attacked France or Germany because they aren't at war with them (I'm referring to the government positions on fighting insurgents, not the "terrorism is bad, mmmkay" stand they state publicly).

Hitler didn't bomb Lisbon. He bombed London. Why? Because the English were not neutral. They took a stand against Nazism and Hitler didn't like that. Because of their extraordinary courage during the Battle of Britain, they were able to hold off Hitler until the US entered the war. I hate to think of how different the world would be if, after the first German attack on London, Churchill had said, "This attack is a direct result of our fighting against Hitler. We must pull out of the war now." What if, during the Battle of the Bulge, Roosevelt said, "This is a quagmire. We should cut our losses and get out."

I also disagree with those who say that the US started the war. This war has been going on for over 30 years. Up until recently it was very one-sided (ie, Saddam Hussein killing people). Iraq was Kitty Genovese on a national scale. We could all hear the screams but no one did anything about it. Until now.

KirkOntario

07-08-2005, 06:54 PM

It is amazing that so many in this soft generation of people suggest we should give up and go home over 1700 deaths. It is hard to imagine the USA fought both Hitler's Germany, Italy and Japan in WWII. Had some of this crowd been back in 1941 they would have started impeachment proceedings against Roosevelt for allowing Pearl Harbour to happen. Yesterday's bombings so tragic come no where near what the Brits sustained with great courage in the Blitz.
15,000 people died one night in Glasgow alone.
We hope the British people will remember that spirit and fight to eradicate the evil that has attacked them.

jon71

07-08-2005, 07:37 PM

Wrong Kirk. We aren't soft we are smart. WWII had a legitimate national security reason for it, to stop the Nazis. Iraq does not. Bush abandoned the war on terrorism, made himself Bin Laden's best friend by pulling troops off of the hunt for Al-Quada and sending them to die for nothing in Iraq instead. He split our troups, military resources, and turned global support (at unprecedented levels) into acrimony and distrust. We are too smart to support such treason and stupidity and too patriotic to want to see more Americans die for politics.

KirkOntario

07-08-2005, 07:44 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jon71:
Wrong Kirk. We aren't soft we are smart. WWII had a legitimate national security reason for it, to stop the Nazis. . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh there was a WHOLE lot of disagreement back then about what was the security interest of the United States. Things that were said about Bush were said about Roosevelt by critics who were vehement. But when the chips were down Americans were united. More united than they are today which is very sad.

NudeAl

07-08-2005, 08:06 PM

There was a whole lot of anti-war sentiment here in the US prior to December 7th. There even had quite a bit of unabashed suport for the Nazis here in the states. I think it was called the German American Bund. The darling of the age ol' Charles Lindburg, AKA Lucky Lindy, was the main spokes person for this movement.

So now with hind sight we can say yes WWII was a good war. A war we needed to fight against the Nazis and the treacherous Japanese. I say the history books will say the same thing about the current war 50-60 years from now.

When I was a young man I went away to war in the hope my son wouldn't have to go later. It now looks like that may not be the case. I have learned that mankind hasn't evolved into a peaceful society yet. In fact I don't know if it ever will. But I do know that evil needs only one thing to triumph and that is for good men to do nothing.

We may have stumbled on the road to victory but failure is not an option. We fight on because we must win. If not we will be saying to all the victems of terrorism who have died that they did so for nothing and we were not worthy of their sacrifice.

jon71

07-08-2005, 10:19 PM

When it mattered most, following Pearl Harbor and 9-11 Americans were lined up around the block at army recruitment offices. When it comes to dying for nothing though the military isn't even close to meeting their recruitment quotas. I wonder why.

Bob S.

07-08-2005, 10:33 PM

First, I want to say, "God Save the Queen!" Union Jack forever!

This war was started by a rich man with a personal vendetta. Osama bin-Laden helped the Taliban in Afghanistan gain and keep power with his money (and unfortunately, the US's weapobry left behind after their war against the Soviets). Osama became very upset with the US when we stationed ourselves (with the Saudi government's permission) in Saudia Arabia during Gulf War I.

We were attacked many times before 9-11. There was the WTC-I when the bomb was detonated under the WTC in the early 90s. The intention was to destroy them, but they underestimated amount of explosives needed for that.

We have also been attacked at the Saudi Khobar Towers, Africa (can't recall which two countries' embassies), the Cole bombing, among others.

In retaliation of 9-11, we went directly after Afghanistan, the source of Al-Qaeda. The Iraq War came about as a continuation of the first Gulf War. Although I do not know the exact thinking, one link to terrorism that Bush linked to Saddam was when it was found out that Iraq was assisting the suicide bombers in Israel by giving their families stipends for allowing their sons/fathers/brothers to kill Israelites as well as themselves.

Al-Qaeda will go after anyone who is an ally of the US or Israel. They have even gone after their own in Saudia Arabia, Spain, Indonesia, and now England.

The question that is asked many times is why did they do that? Why do they hate us so? But the answer, whether political, ideological, religious, or whatever is irrelevant. What is the point of answering that question? Are we going to change? Can we get them to change? No. We can never fully get rid of terrorism. It is such an effective weapon for those who have no value for human life except those who agree with them.

Bob S.

P.J.

07-08-2005, 11:08 PM

I hope that our British friends maintain the tenacity and courage which won the respect of the free world during the days of the Blitzes.

For the information of you history buffs and Anglophiles, in addition to the well-known London Blitz, there was also a lesser known Greenock Blitz.

I have friends and family who bravely endured the Greenock blitz.

Greenock is a Scottish city which is about 20 miles from Glasgow and located along the Inverclyde.

Until about 20 years ago, the Inverclyde was a major shipbuilding center.

Among the famous ships built in Greenock were the RMS Lusitania, SS Queen Mary and the SS Queen Elizabeth.

"Clyde built" was once synonomous with quality.

Now it's history...

NudistGuy47

07-09-2005, 04:26 AM

The attacks in London were deplorable. Innocent people targeted while blithely going to work is not an acceptable human behavior. I do not condone the behavior, but must say the concept of terrorism and the thinking behind these attacks is a truly complex issue. The variables that cause this behavior are not going to change with the current thinking of ALL parties involved.

The British showed their resolve by going back to work on Friday morning and riding the Tube. I watched the news programs last night and was heartened to see and hear the attitude expressed by the general populace. The British are a strong people.

NudeAl

07-09-2005, 06:01 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">When it mattered most, following Pearl Harbor and 9-11 Americans were lined up around the block at army recruitment offices. When it comes to dying for nothing though the military isn't even close to meeting their recruitment quotas. I wonder why </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There was a rush to recruiting offices after 9-11. I know and work with many of these young men and women. However unlike WWII there is no draft now as there was then. Don't kid yourself the rush to go to war fades very quickly once the body bags start comming home. Why do you think they had a draft durring WWII after all? But the generation back then had just survived the great depression and they were used to great hardship. They knew they what they had to and did it. We should take a lesson from them.

KirkOntario

07-09-2005, 06:03 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jon71:
When it mattered most, following Pearl Harbor and 9-11 Americans were lined up around the block at army recruitment offices. When it comes to dying for nothing though the military isn't even close to meeting their recruitment quotas. I wonder why. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because the danger is no longer immediate. The Left has tried to convince them the war in Iraq is a failure, not worth fighting for, that they were fooled, that it was about Texan personal greed--completely reprhensible.
Now Katie Couric and gang are trying to tell us the Brits were attacked for being in Iraq (they were on Osama hit list dating back to 2002 BEFORE the war)

In their daily lives people are totally unaffected by the war unlike WWII. No wonder they don't feel a threat. But that threat is there. Al Quaida WILL attack Americans on American soil again. It is only a matter of time.

KirkOntario

07-10-2005, 04:53 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050710/p...ntanamo_050710195205 (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050710/pl_afp/usattacksguantanamo_050710195205)

the difference between US and Them is striking.

hm0504

07-11-2005, 08:16 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by mhs83:
To those who say that the attacks on London and Madrid were a result of the British and Spanish support of the war on terror, I say: "DUH." Of course the terrorists are attacking those countries who are trying to eliminate them because that's what terrorists do. They haven't attacked France or Germany because they aren't at war with them (I'm referring to the government positions on fighting insurgents, not the "terrorism is bad, mmmkay" stand they state publicly).

Hitler didn't bomb Lisbon. He bombed London. Why? Because the English were not neutral. They took a stand against Nazism and Hitler didn't like that. Because of their extraordinary courage during the Battle of Britain, they were able to hold off Hitler until the US entered the war. I hate to think of how different the world would be if, after the first German attack on London, Churchill had said, "This attack is a direct result of our fighting against Hitler. We must pull out of the war now." What if, during the Battle of the Bulge, Roosevelt said, "This is a quagmire. We should cut our losses and get out."

I also disagree with those who say that the US started the war. This war has been going on for over 30 years. Up until recently it was very one-sided (ie, Saddam Hussein killing people). Iraq was Kitty Genovese on a national scale. We could all hear the screams but no one did anything about it. Until now. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Both Germany and France have sent military forces to Afghanistan. France is also battling Islamic terrorism by disallowing religious-based clothing (at schools) and closing down radical mosques (unlike in Britain where the opposite is true).

If the point of invading Iraq was to battle terrorism there, then I would have suggested that Saddam Hussein was already doing an adequate job of that and that a much better candidate country would be Iran which actually does sponsor terrorism, is developing WMDs, and has murdered many Americans, Canadian, and others over the past 20 years. Oddly enough though, Bush said one of the reasons for invading Iraq was because Iraq had attacked Iran. Go figure.

KirkOntario

07-13-2005, 05:37 PM

As expected the terrorists in the U.K. are not Iraqis but from Pakistan and homegrown, festering on radical Islamic hatreds that the U.K. tolerated for decades. France on the other hand has been much more strident in opposing this sort of subculture of extremism in its borders. Controversial but correct?

Naturist Mark

07-16-2005, 06:22 AM

Turns out politically motivated intelligence leaks from the Bush Adminstration had a role in the London bombings.

Did the Bush Administration Burn a Key al-Qaeda Double Agent? (http://www.juancole.com/2004_08_01_juancole_archive.html#10918559724538364 8)
London Bombers Tied to Al Qaeda Plot in Pakistan (http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/LondonBlasts/story?id=940198&page=1)

During last summer's Democratic Convention the Administration decided to create some "happy news" about the war on terrorism by releasing the news that we had turned a top Al Qaeda insider - Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan - thus burning his cover as a double agent and ending his usefullness in the War on Terrorism.

This announcement compromised ongoing British operations against a London subway bombing plot, and allowed a number of suspects to escape.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE> <LI>1] The London bombers, per ABC, are connected to an Al Qaeda plot planned two years ago in Lahore, Pakistan.

<LI>2] Pakistani authorities recovered the laptop of a captured Al Qaeda leader, Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, on July 13, 2004. On that laptop, they found plans for a coordinated series of attacks on the London subway. According to an expert interviewed by ABC, "there is absolutely no doubt that Khan was part of a worldwide Al Qaeda operation, not just in the United States but also in Great Britain and throughout the west."

<LI>3] ABC reports that names in the computer matched a suspected cell of Britons of Pakistani decent, many of who lived near the town of Luton, England. According to ABC, authorities thought they had stopped the subway plot with the arrest of more than a dozen people last year. Obviously, they hadn't.

<LI>4] Those arrests were the arrests that the Bush administration botched by announcing a heightened security alert the week of the Democratic Convention. Because the US let the cat out of the bag, the media got a hold of Khan's name, his Al Qaeda contacts found out he was co-opted, and they fled. The Brits had to have a high speed chase to catch some of them as they fled, and, according to press reports, the Brits and Pakistanis both fear that some slipped away. [/list]
Thank you Karl Rove.

-Mark

KirkOntario

07-17-2005, 08:43 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
Turns out politically motivated intelligence leaks from the Bush Adminstration had a role in the London bombings.

Did the Bush Administration Burn a Key al-Qaeda Double Agent? (http://www.juancole.com/2004_08_01_juancole_archive.html#10918559724538364 8)
London Bombers Tied to Al Qaeda Plot in Pakistan (http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/LondonBlasts/story?id=940198&page=1)

During last summer's Democratic Convention the Administration decided to create some "happy news" about the war on terrorism by releasing the news that we had turned a top Al Qaeda insider - Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan - thus burning his cover as a double agent and ending his usefullness in the War on Terrorism.

This announcement compromised ongoing British operations against a London subway bombing plot, and allowed a number of suspects to escape.

<UL TYPE=SQUARE> <LI>1] The London bombers, per ABC, are connected to an Al Qaeda plot planned two years ago in Lahore, Pakistan.

<LI>2] Pakistani authorities recovered the laptop of a captured Al Qaeda leader, Mohammed Naeem Noor Khan, on July 13, 2004. On that laptop, they found plans for a coordinated series of attacks on the London subway. According to an expert interviewed by ABC, "there is absolutely no doubt that Khan was part of a worldwide Al Qaeda operation, not just in the United States but also in Great Britain and throughout the west."

<LI>3] ABC reports that names in the computer matched a suspected cell of Britons of Pakistani decent, many of who lived near the town of Luton, England. According to ABC, authorities thought they had stopped the subway plot with the arrest of more than a dozen people last year. Obviously, they hadn't.

<LI>4] Those arrests were the arrests that the Bush administration botched by announcing a heightened security alert the week of the Democratic Convention. Because the US let the cat out of the bag, the media got a hold of Khan's name, his Al Qaeda contacts found out he was co-opted, and they fled. The Brits had to have a high speed chase to catch some of them as they fled, and, according to press reports, the Brits and Pakistanis both fear that some slipped away. [/list]
Thank you Karl Rove.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow. More baseless, wild allegations that will go nowhere as usual. These have three characteristics.

1. America is always wrong --Blame America first.

2. Bush is the reason America is always wrong.

3. Rove is behind everything Bush does.

Qikdraw

07-17-2005, 02:07 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Wow. More baseless, wild allegations hat will go nowhere as usual. These have three characteristics.

1. America is always wrong --Blame America first.

2. Bush is the reason America is always wrong.

3. Rove is behind everything Bush does.

2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow, more baseless, wild excuses that don't actually talk about the issue, but instead try and deflect the arguemnt onto something else.

Qikdraw

KirkOntario

07-18-2005, 04:42 PM

Naturist Mark

07-18-2005, 06:39 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:

It was the Brits that let Khan go. They decided he was not a threat. But I guess Rove controls MI5 too doesnt he?

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/07/17/UK-bomb050717.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No no no ... you misunderstand. You are confusing two different "Khans".

London terrorist bomber Mohammed Sidique Khan is not al Qaeda double agent Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan.

Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan wasn't "let go" he was turned. He became a double agent inside al Qaeda working for us. Then he was burned (http://www.juancole.com/2004_08_01_juancole_archive.html#10918559724538364 8) by the Bush Administration.

-Mark

KirkOntario

07-18-2005, 07:02 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:

It was the Brits that let Khan go. They decided he was not a threat. But I guess Rove controls MI5 too doesnt he?

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/07/17/UK-bomb050717.html </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No no no ... you misunderstand. You are confusing two different "Khans".

London terrorist bomber Mohammed Sidique Khan is not al Qaeda double agent Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan.

Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan wasn't "let go" he was turned. He became a double agent inside al Qaeda working for us. Then he was burned (http://www.juancole.com/2004_08_01_juancole_archive.html#10918559724538364 8) by the Bush Administration.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That Khan has zero connection to the bombings of 7/7

Bob S.

07-18-2005, 09:56 PM

"You are confusing two different "Khans"."

I really am confused. I thought he was the man who killed Kirk's son http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Seriously (or not) is there anyone named Khan that is linked to anything good?

Bob S.

Naturist Mark

07-19-2005, 05:14 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:

That Khan has zero connection to the bombings of 7/7 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

According to British authorities (http://tinyurl.com/dlq3t) there is a direct connection: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Connection to Al Qaeda Plot in Pakistan

Officials tell ABC News the London bombers have been connected to an al Qaeda plot planned two years ago in the Pakistani city of Lahore.

The laptop computer of Naeem Noor Khan, a captured al Qaeda leader, contained plans for a coordinated series of attacks on the London subway system, as well as on financial buildings in both New York and Washington.

"There's absolutely no doubt he was part of an al Qaeda operation aimed at not only the United States but Great Britain," explained Alexis Debat, a former official in the French Defense Ministry who is now a senior terrorism consultant for ABC News.

At the time, authorities thought they had foiled the London subway plot by arresting more than a dozen young Britons of Pakistani descent last August in Luton, a city known for its ties to terrorism.

"For some time, the locus of terrorism in Britain has been around the Luton area and in some of the northern cities," said Michael Clark, professor of defense at King's College in London.

Security officials tell ABC News they have discovered links between the eldest of the London bombers, Mohammed Sadique Khan, 30, and the original group in Luton. Officials also believe it was not a coincidence the subway bombers all met at the Luton train station last week.

"It is very likely this group was activated last year after the other group was arrested," Debat said. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

-Mark

John Spooner

07-19-2005, 11:09 AM

The London bombings have all the characteristics of what is known as a "psyop" (psychological operation). That is a covert, well planned event (cause) perpetrated to bring about a result (effect).
All psyops must have what is known as a patsy, being an individual or group who takes the blame visibly for the event. The actual perpetrators are extracted from the scene long before the first investigators even arrive at the crimescene.
The prevailing opinion amongst us is that the reason for the London psyop is an excuse for the UK Govt. to introduce a national identity system.
Psyops are the most disgraceful and unethical types of operation there is. They are planned by vested interests who are totally devoid of morals and ethics as the history books clearly show.
There have been several psyops in the last few years, all of them bearing the clear hallmarks of this type of event.
Trust this of some interest.
John S.

Naturist Mark

07-19-2005, 03:42 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by John Spooner. South Oz.:
The London bombings have all the characteristics of what is known as a "psyop" (psychological operation). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think there is any reason to doubt that the London bombings were done by anyone other than fundamentalist Moslem extremists. There are enough real conspiracies against the west - no need to invent new ones.

Even the darkest views of the motivations of Downing St. doesn't require a "psyops" explanation. All that would be required is for vigilence to be diverted - and frankly, I see no evidence of that.

-Mark

KirkOntario

07-21-2005, 04:38 PM

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lapkin200507210807.asp

Battered Wife Sydrome for the Left In Its View of Terrorism?

"The aftermath of the London terrorist bombings has demonstrated that the antiwar Left is severely afflicted by the political equivalent of battered-wife syndrome. With each new beating, the scarred and bruised victims of spousal abuse tend to excuse and rationalize the actions of their tormentors. A stubborn unwillingness to accept the proposition that their partners are violent louts plunges these woeful women into a morass of self-deception that spawns only further violence.

The far Left has similarly proved unable to liberate itself from the web of rose-tinted delusions that it has spun about the nature of Islamic extremism. After each al Qaeda outrage, leftist ideologues are quick to castigate their own countrymen for a catalogue of sins, both real and imagined. With a perverse combination of self-loathing and adoration of the enemy, the radical Leftist mantra preaches that if only we were nicer, the jihadists could not fail to love us. It’s our own fault if Osama bin Laden doesn’t realize what good people we are."
full article at above link.

Eric6420

07-21-2005, 06:24 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/lapkin200507210807.asp

Battered Wife Sydrome for the Left In Its View of Terrorism?

"The aftermath of the London terrorist bombings has demonstrated that the antiwar Left is severely afflicted by the political equivalent of battered-wife syndrome. With each new beating, the scarred and bruised victims of spousal abuse tend to excuse and rationalize the actions of their tormentors. A stubborn unwillingness to accept the proposition that their partners are violent louts plunges these woeful women into a morass of self-deception that spawns only further violence.

The far Left has similarly proved unable to liberate itself from the web of rose-tinted delusions that it has spun about the nature of Islamic extremism. After each al Qaeda outrage, leftist ideologues are quick to castigate their own countrymen for a catalogue of sins, both real and imagined. With a perverse combination of self-loathing and adoration of the enemy, the radical Leftist mantra preaches that if only we were nicer, the jihadists could not fail to love us. It’s our own fault if Osama bin Laden doesn’t realize what good people we are."
full article at above link. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think that terrorism must be fight seriously.
However, I think, like the French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, who was French minister to foreign affairs at the begining of the Irak's war, that the war in Irak would be a big mistake, that there is no proof of massdestruction arms in Irak...

Dominique de Villepin is not a leftie. He takes the security of his country seriously and France has a lot of expertise concerning fighting terrorism.

The left and the far left, at least nowdays in western Europe, no not like wars.

But they are not completly stupid. They know that there is no one who is more opposed to progress and their values than muslim extremists.

Qikdraw

07-22-2005, 12:36 PM

I find it funny that the radical right point to more terrorist bombings as proof they are on the right track. If there were less terroprist bombings they'd say the same thing.

Yet how is it that terroist bombings have sharply risen in the past few years, and Bush says he's made the world a safer place? Doesn't look safer to me.

The radical right is trying to have it both ways and their arguements are silly. Bombs going off is proof they are right? Now that is just plain idiotic. If they were right there would be less bombs, not more.

All Iraq is now is a training ground for terrorists. A big huge live-fire exercise. The world is not safer, its more dangerous, and it'll be that way for many years to come now.

Bush was right in Afganistan, but wrong in Iraq.

Qikdraw

Eric6420

07-22-2005, 02:04 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:

Yet how is it that terroist bombings have sharply risen in the past few years, and Bush says he's made the world a safer place? Doesn't look safer to me.

The radical right is trying to have it both ways and their arguements are silly. Bombs going off is proof they are right? Now that is just plain idiotic. If they were right there would be less bombs, not more.

All Iraq is now is a training ground for terrorists. A big huge live-fire exercise. The world is not safer, its more dangerous, and it'll be that way for many years to come now.

Bush was right in Afganistan, but wrong in Iraq.

Qikdraw </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, Tony Blair is not the radical right, he is from the Labor party.

I agree with you that the war in Irak was a mistake.

However, I understand also that there would be dangers of terrorists attaks no matter how nice we are with thoses countries.

Al Quaida has a lot of felowers all over the World.

France and Germany are preparing themselves against terrorists attaks even if they opposed war in Irak.

hm0504

07-22-2005, 03:10 PM

FYI...
"The Pentagon has asked Congress to raise the maximum age for U.S. military enlistees from 35 to 42 years old...":
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/07/22/army.recruiting.reut/index.html

Eric6420

07-22-2005, 04:10 PM

Iran executes gay teenagers (http://www.ilga.org/news_results.asp?LanguageID=1&FileID=675&FileCategory=1&ZoneID=3)

If you are interested in the ideology of thoses who place bombs in London, you can click on the link...

hm0504

07-22-2005, 04:24 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Eric6420:
Iran executes gay teenagers (http://www.ilga.org/news_results.asp?LanguageID=1&FileID=675&FileCategory=1&ZoneID=3)

If you are interested in the ideology of thoses who place bombs in London, you can click on the link... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course, it is chilling to recall that less than 40 years ago one could be jailed for homosexuality in Canada. Hard to imagine it was only 30 some years ago that Prime Minister Trudeau de-criminalized it (guess that's part of the Leftist havoc of the 70's KO refers to).

Eric6420

07-22-2005, 05:43 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Eric6420:
Iran executes gay teenagers (http://www.ilga.org/news_results.asp?LanguageID=1&FileID=675&FileCategory=1&ZoneID=3)

If you are interested in the ideology of thoses who place bombs in London, you can click on the link... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Of course, it is chilling to recall that less than 40 years ago one could be jailed for homosexuality in Canada. Hard to imagine it was only 30 some years ago that Prime Minister Trudeau de-criminalized it (guess that's part of the Leftist havoc of the 70's KO refers to). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sometimes, a society can change fast. Just think of the Spain of Franco. In the 80's, just after the end of the fascist regime, Spain became very liberal, and now they have gay marriage.

Napoleon decriminalized homosexuality about 200 years ago in France and they are not ready for gay marriage yet, but they recognise gay unions (PACS).

hm0504

07-22-2005, 06:25 PM

Looks like homosexuality can incur the death penalty in a number of countries:
http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/angles_graph.cfm?iss...ffgayillegalintl.jpg (http://www.publicagenda.org/issues/angles_graph.cfm?issue_type=gay_rights&id=479&grap h=ffgayillegalintl.jpg)

There's also a very good article covering the U.S. states and their laws here:
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_laws.htm

KirkOntario

07-22-2005, 06:51 PM

They will do more than hang the homosexuals from trees like they do in Iran..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...005072200709_pf.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/22/AR2005072200709_pf.html)

"In an interview with Reuters, Bakri described Osama bin Laden, leader of the radical Islamist network al Qaeda, as "a sincere man who fights against evil forces."

Bakri said he would like Britain to become an Islamic state but feared he would be deported before his dream was realized.

"I would like to see the Islamic flag fly, not only over number 10 Downing Street, but over the whole world," he said."

Qikdraw

07-22-2005, 07:49 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
They will do more than hang the homosexuals from trees like they do in Iran..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/20...005072200709_pf.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/22/AR2005072200709_pf.html) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just to point out I am only taking what you quoted, I have not read the article.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">"In an interview with Reuters, Bakri described Osama bin Laden, leader of the radical Islamist network al Qaeda, as "a sincere man who fights against evil forces." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

People say the same thing about Bush. That he is a sinsere man who fights against evil forces.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Bakri said he would like Britain to become an Islamic state but feared he would be deported before his dream was realized.

"I would like to see the Islamic flag fly, not only over number 10 Downing Street, but over the whole world," he said." </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There are many christians who would like to see a christian world.

Really neighther one of thse statements proves anything. Other than there are Islamic peole who think the same way many other people think.

I have no problem with their desire to see an Islamic world, its not going to happen, but it doesn't mean they can't think about it. Radical Islamic actions are another story, just like radical christian terrorists are wrong.

Qikdraw

KirkOntario

07-22-2005, 07:53 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Qikdraw:
Let me get this straight Qikdraw. You are equating George W. Bush and Osama Bin Laden?

And you think the thinking of Islamic extremists is the same as what many other people think? What other people?

And you think the world has a problem with 'christian terrorists'?

Qikdraw

07-22-2005, 08:01 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Let me get this straight Qikdraw. You are equating George W. Bush and Osama Bin Laden? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not at all. (although nice try) I just said some people say the same thing about either man. Its all in perception.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And you think the thinking of Islamic extremists is the same as what many other people think? What other people? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In that they would like to see their religion being the world religion yes. That thought is not a terrorist thought at all. People of all sorts of religions think that thought. A thought does not make a terrorist, actions do.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And you think the world has a problem with 'christian terrorists'? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you think there are no christian terrorists?

Qikdraw

KirkOntario

07-22-2005, 08:11 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Let me get this straight Qikdraw. You are equating George W. Bush and Osama Bin Laden? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not at all. (although nice try) I just said some people say the same thing about either man. Its all in perception.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And you think the thinking of Islamic extremists is the same as what many other people think? What other people? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In that they would like to see their religion being the world religion yes. That thought is not a terrorist thought at all. People of all sorts of religions think that thought. A thought does not make a terrorist, actions do.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And you think the world has a problem with 'christian terrorists'? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you think there are no christian terrorists?

Qikdraw </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is interesting that following the attacks on London that were fomented by Islamic radicals in England that you do not find this statement unsettling. Thoughts and actions are linked. Actions are proceeded by thoughts. The thoughts of Mr Bakri and his ilk are totally unacceptable. Just as the thoughts of a German chap writing a book in prison in the 1920s were unacceptable. That book was Mein Kampf; it had similar themes.

It is also peculiar that you bring in the subject of Christian terrorists (are there terrorist traing camps and video's you'd like to name?) and use the word "just like". Why 'just like'? You think one Atlanta Olympic bomber is the same as what's happened in Madrid, Bali, New York,Washington, Saudia Arabia, Iraq, Israel, Holland, London, and just tonight in Egypt? Did a Christian terrorist bomb go off tonight? I don't recall hearing about one.

KirkOntario

07-22-2005, 08:14 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
Not at all. (although nice try) I just said some people say the same thing about either man. Its all in perception.

w </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Do you care to explain what is meant by 'its all in perception'?

jon71

07-22-2005, 08:19 PM

There are people who at least claim to be Christian who are terrorists. The most violent of the anti-choice protesters, (snipers), northern Ireland violence between Catholics and Protestants, and a recent example, Eric Rudolph.

KirkOntario

07-22-2005, 08:20 PM

P.J.

07-23-2005, 12:42 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jon71:
There are people who at least claim to be Christian who are terrorists. The most violent of the anti-choice protesters, (snipers), northern Ireland violence between Catholics and Protestants, and a recent example, Eric Rudolph. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, I'm pleased that you didn't make a blanket condemnation of those who oppose abortion by calling them Christian.
I think that we actually agree that terrorists are not Christian.
As for that festering sectarian mess in Northern Ireland, it's between Catholics and Protestants and not between Christians who are truly committed to their faith.
Anyone who resorts to terrorism to fight controversial issues, such as the murder of the unborn children, the homosexual agenda or any of the other matters which concern America, has no business claiming to be Christian nor a patriot.
The most crucial battles should be waged inside a voting booth.

Qikdraw

07-23-2005, 02:15 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
It is interesting that following the attacks on London that were fomented by Islamic radicals in England that you do not find this statement unsettling. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I find the actions disturbing, as does any sane person.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Thoughts and actions are linked. Actions are proceeded by thoughts. The thoughts of Mr Bakri and his ilk are totally unacceptable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actions and thoughts are not always linked. How many times while driving do you think that the guy who cut you off should be run off teh road? If you don't run him off the road thoughts & actions are not linked.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Just as the thoughts of a German chap writing a book in prison in the 1920s were unacceptable. That book was Mein Kampf; it had similar themes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Similar themes to what?

I am not familiar with the book Hitler wrote, so I have no basis to know what you are talking about here. Can you please explain it?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It is also peculiar that you bring in the subject of Christian terrorists (are there terrorist traing camps and video's you'd like to name?) and use the word "just like". Why 'just like'? You think one Atlanta Olympic bomber is the same as what's happened in Madrid, Bali, New York,Washington, Saudia Arabia, Iraq, Israel, Holland, London, and just tonight in Egypt? Did a Christian terrorist bomb go off tonight? I don't recall hearing about one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thnk that any action meant to inspire fear and terror in peole is a terrorist act. As Jon said anti-choice terrorists have bombed clinics and shot anortion doctors. Do you not consider that terrorism?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Do you care to explain what is meant by 'its all in perception'? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Depending on which side you support, (Osama or Bush) your definition of evil will change. Its what they percieve as what is evil.

Some people percieve alchohol as evil, and others don't. Its just what you believe it to be, so its all perception.

Qikdraw

Qikdraw

07-23-2005, 02:24 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by P.J.:
Well, I'm pleased that you didn't make a blanket condemnation of those who oppose abortion by calling them Christian.
I think that we actually agree that terrorists are not Christian. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

By that definition we should not say Islamic terrorists either, as they are going against the tenets of Islam. Just like American terrorists who claim to be doing God's work by blowing up abortion clinics or shooting abortion doctors are going against what the bible teaches.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As for that festering sectarian mess in Northern Ireland, it's between Catholics and Protestants and not between Christians who are truly committed to their faith. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem with faith based terrorism is that they believe they are the ones who are the true christians, muslims, etc... and that everyone else is wrong.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Anyone who resorts to terrorism to fight controversial issues, such as the murder of the unborn children, the homosexual agenda or any of the other matters which concern America, has no business claiming to be Christian nor a patriot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No they don't, but as I explained above they usually believe they are the true believers or patriots and that everyone else is wrong.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">The most crucial battles should be waged inside a voting booth. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree. As long as voting is kept honest anyway.

Qikdraw

KirkOntario

07-23-2005, 05:30 AM

Qikdraw

07-23-2005, 12:30 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
If good and evil are just matters of definition </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To some people yes it is.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">then flying an airplanes into a building and killing 3000 innocent people is neither good nor evil according to you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I said nothing about what I believe, I said "some" people.

For the record, terrorism of ANY stripe I am against. Does that clear it up for you?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It is all in your words 'perception' and definition. For Osama flying airplanes into buidling is good. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To radical terrorists yes it would be good.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">We cannot say which is good or which is evil. We think it's evil because we are on the other side. Is that what you really believe? Is that how Osama is just like Bush? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, I am not equating Bush with Osama, so stop trying to say I am. I said some people will beleive that either man is sinsere and fighting against evil. It just depends on which person you support.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Your analogy to alcohol is useful. Alcohol is neither good nor bad. It can be used and it can be misused, the same way humans beings can use or misuse their own abilities, to do good or evil. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your right of course. Humans have the capacity to do great good, and also great evil.

Qikdraw

KirkOntario

07-23-2005, 01:56 PM

Qikdraw

07-23-2005, 03:24 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
If good and evil are just matters of definition </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

To some people yes it is.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes but what do YOU believe?. I already know what some people believe. Or have you carefully backtracked from supporting a position you now see as untenable? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

For the record, terrorism of ANY stripe I am against. Does that clear it up for you?

You must have missed that sentence. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Qikdraw

KirkOntario

07-23-2005, 05:23 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
For the record, terrorism of ANY stripe I am against. Does that clear it up for you?

You must have missed that sentence. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Qikdraw </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

On what basis are you against it? Your previous arguments -which you now say are not your words but those of others--appear to have embraced moral relativism. Why are you against terrorism?

MJ_KC

07-23-2005, 05:49 PM

My take on what represents terrorism is when the primary targets are civilians with no intent other than to instill fear in the general population that they may be next.

It is quite different than military people facing off against one another where both sides are intent on engaging in combat or expect that it could happen.

When you target your own people or countrymen, this is the sign of people with a distorted idea of right and wrong. Saddam did this and it appears that his followers are intent on continuing his methods.

The militants do not expect to be able to stand even a slight chance if they go directly against the U.S. military using anything other than sneak attacks. Attacking unarmed women and children as a standard operating method is a despicable act.

Qikdraw

07-24-2005, 12:28 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
On what basis are you against it? Your previous arguments -which you now say are not your words but those of others--appear to have embraced moral relativism. Why are you against terrorism? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm not embracing anything. I just stated the truth that what the "battle against evil" is, is perception.

I'll go with what MJ_KC said:
My take on what represents terrorism is when the primary targets are civilians with no intent other than to instill fear in the general population that they may be next.

Also any attack that uses "faith" to justify the action. The KKK can be considered a terrorist organisation.

Qikdraw

KirkOntario

07-24-2005, 05:15 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
I'm not embracing anything. I just stated the truth that what the "battle against evil" is, is perception.

I'll go with what MJ_KC said:
My take on what represents terrorism is when the primary targets are civilians with no intent other than to instill fear in the general population that they may be next.

Also any attack that uses "faith" to justify the action. The KKK can be considered a terrorist organisation.

Qikdraw </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, if you are saying the 'battle against evil is perception' then you are saying there is no such thing as good and evil. Therefore you cannot truly condemn flying airplanes into buildings as evil can you? You tell me you are against using civilians to instill fear in the general population but you cannot call it evil if it is truly a matter of perception as the 9/11 hijackers perceived it as good, not evil.

hm0504

07-24-2005, 08:07 AM

Generally, the world's superpowers for the past few hundred years have been Christian. Terrorism is the tool of the weak.

Also, modern international terrorism is a relatively new phenomena -- made possible by modern technology and modern transportation.

The third leg of the stool is oil; insatiably demanded by the Christian superpowers but only abundantly found in Muslim countries.

If the histories and geographies were reversed (eg. The dominant superpowers being Muslim dependent on weak Christian nations for their oil, do I think there would be Christian terrorism -- sure, why not?

KirkOntario

07-24-2005, 08:53 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Generally, the world's superpowers for the past few hundred years have been Christian. Terrorism is the tool of the weak.

Also, modern international terrorism is a relatively new phenomena -- made possible by modern technology and modern transportation.

The third leg of the stool is oil; insatiably demanded by the Christian superpowers but only abundantly found in Muslim countries.

If the histories and geographies were reversed (eg. The dominant superpowers being Muslim dependent on weak Christian nations for their oil, do I think there would be Christian terrorism -- sure, why not? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The West is not 'Christian" in the same sense the Middle East is muslim. The West had Christian roots but is pluralistic, and is liberal democratic in nature. If the Muslim nations were like us --instead of being run by corrupt undemocratic tyranies--they would sell oil and use it to diversify their economies for the days when their oil runs out. We don't see Venezuela, Mexico, and Indonesia waging war against the West do we?

hm0504

07-24-2005, 09:01 AM

Uh, what countries do you consider to be waging war against the West today, or in the past 10 years? I'd say Afghanistan and Iran were and are (respectively) actively plotting attacks on the West; what others would you include?

KirkOntario

07-24-2005, 09:16 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Uh, what countries do you consider to be waging war against the West today, or in the past 10 years? I'd say Afghanistan and Iran were and are (respectively) actively plotting attacks on the West; what others would you include? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correction we don't see 9/11 hijackers and other terrorist from Venezuela and Mexico. Indonnesia I'm not too sure about it's citizens' connection to terrorism.

You forgot Syria they are at war with us though they cannot be so openly. They do sponsor terrorism.

What is important is the question :Why do we see on this thread a constant theme of "We would be just the same." "They are no worse than us.? " and other groundless declarations of moral equivalence.

Is it a convenience for inwardlooking selfish Westerners who want an excuse not to risk death in war? Or is it a corrosive moral relativsm that Westerners truly believe? (more doubtful)

hm0504

07-24-2005, 09:45 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Uh, what countries do you consider to be waging war against the West today, or in the past 10 years? I'd say Afghanistan and Iran were and are (respectively) actively plotting attacks on the West; what others would you include? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Correction we don't see 9/11 hijackers and other terrorist from Venezuela and Mexico. Indonnesia I'm not too sure about it's citizens' connection to terrorism.

You forgot Syria they are at war with us though they cannot be so openly. They do sponsor terrorism.

What is important is the question :Why do we see on this thread a constant theme of "We would be just the same." "They are no worse than us.? " and other groundless declarations of moral equivalence.

Is it a convenience for inwardlooking selfish Westerners who want an excuse not to risk death in war? Or is it a corrosive moral relativsm that Westerners truly believe? (more doubtful) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 9/11 hijackers came almost exclusively from Saudi Arabia (which I assume you are saying we are not at war with. The 2002 Indonesian Bali bombing kill over 200 people (mainly Westerners, mainly Australian). Has Syria, or Syrians, been implicated in any anti-Western, non-regional terrorist bombing of late? Iran appears to be the primary suspect (see http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/iran.barracks.bombing/) for the 1983 bombing in Beirut that killed 241 Marines.

Would Westerners be the same? I don't think there is anything in Western genes that distinguishes us from the rest of humanity. Toxic religion can grow in any religion. We are having particular problems from the Muslim world now because the West funded the growth of toxic religion there to crush the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Now we've go to deal with it on our own soil.

Captain Zen

07-24-2005, 11:15 AM

The truth is that 9/11 and the London attacks were "false flag" operations and done by the governments themselves in order to stir up hate aginst a chosen ennemy in order to start a war... Pearl Harbor was one, the Reichstag burning another. Please visit sites like these:
http://www.rense.com and
http://www.vialls.com/,
before you "know" so much about these things. The American media are controlled by the Zionist cabal who controls America. The greater State of Israel is the ultimate goal of the Zionists and American young men must die for them.
The most convenient London mayhem on the moment that Blairs populairity was at its all time low, was only to boost his control over the English masses, just as all the "terror" color alerts are to keep the American people in thrall.

Interested in reading yet another lame version of the same old "news" that's spewed out in thousands of newspapers, magazines, and television stations scattered across the universe? Then you're in the wrong place, Bubba. Pick up a copy of the Daily Drab and enjoy your nap. No, seriously, hit the road, loser. Take a faulking hike. We don't need you.

If, on the other hand, you want to read over the top commentary, outspoken editorials, honest opinions on every faulking subject under the sun; if you want to be stimulated, entertained, pissed off, and maybe even occasionally enlightened, than pull up a chair, set computers to "stun", and prepare to be exposed to The Faulking Truth. http://www.faulkingtruth.com/wtf.html

MJ_KC

07-24-2005, 11:49 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
The truth is that 9/11 and the London attacks were "false flag" operations and done by the governments themselves in order to stir up hate aginst a chosen ennemy in order to start a war... Pearl Harbor was one, the Reichstag burning another. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Do you actually believe any of the nonsense you just posted?

KirkOntario

07-24-2005, 12:14 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Would Westerners be the same? I don't think there is anything in Western genes that distinguishes us from the rest of humanity. Toxic religion can grow in any religion. We are having particular problems from the Muslim world now because the West funded the growth of toxic religion there to crush the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Now we've go to deal with it on our own soil. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is not a question of genetics. What is not same is the nature of the people, the regime, and the lack of religious fanaticism.

Your suggestion that the West caused Islamic fanaticism merely by funding it is wildly incorrect and simplistic. The Mujahadeen went to Afghanistan from the Middle East to confront Soviet expansionism into the Muslim world. They were fighting the Soviets there already based on their own belief. Islam detested communism because it was athiest and modern.

Americans supplied the Afghan fighters with stinger missiles to shoot down Soviet helicopters. The hard work, the fighting and dying was done by them, not for money but from their own religious beliefs. The US did not create those extreme beliefs nor did it create the Mujahadeen (and could not if it tried). The religious doctrines of Osama Bin Laden go far beyond the period of the 1980's, much of it goes back to the 1920's and the end of the Ottoman Empire, a universal state based on Islam which is something like that which they would like to restore.

Is there any problem in the world for which we do not hear the refrain "We are to blame. We caused it." ?? You are too eager to twist facts to suggest blame where it is not due.

Captain Zen

07-24-2005, 12:20 PM

It is not a question of "believing". Believing has nothing to do with "knowing". You can believe anything (like changing water into wine) without actually knowing if it is true. I observe the facts, I read everything I can from every angle and view point. I compute then all the stories in my super computer that is in in my head. The outcome leans much more towards what I do NOT see on Fox, CNN, BBC and the mainstream newspapers. I know one thing for sure, studying history, that our present political leaders are at least as evil as those of the past. Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin and the rest. What makes you think they should be any better? Why would they? In what aspect, for what reasons should they be different? You still believe in Santa Claus???

KirkOntario

07-24-2005, 12:21 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
The 9/11 hijackers came almost exclusively from Saudi Arabia (which I assume you are saying we are not at war with. The 2002 Indonesian Bali bombing kill over 200 people (mainly Westerners, mainly Australian). Has Syria, or Syrians, been implicated in any anti-Western, non-regional terrorist bombing of late? Iran appears to be the primary suspect (see http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/iran.barracks.bombing/) for the 1983 bombing in Beirut that killed 241 Marines.

. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The point is the hatred of our Western way of life has nothing to do with the fact that they have oil. I think Osama Bin Laden and followers would prefer the Middle East not have oil so its leaders would not have been corrupted by easy wealth and would not have so much contact with evil Western influences.

As for Syria, Syria is a state that funds terrorists in Israel, has agents working in Arab countries and til recently illegally occupied Lebannon and meddled in it's politics for years and is still trying to assasinate it's pro-independence leaders. Syria as well as Iran are responsible for much of the chaos in Iraq. Both regimes are threatened by the prospect of democracy in Iraq; their very survival depends on making sure that does not happen. Syria cannot openly challenge the U.S.; it is far too weak but it is very much an enemy of the United States.

hm0504

07-24-2005, 12:26 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
Would Westerners be the same? I don't think there is anything in Western genes that distinguishes us from the rest of humanity. Toxic religion can grow in any religion. We are having particular problems from the Muslim world now because the West funded the growth of toxic religion there to crush the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Now we've go to deal with it on our own soil. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It is not a question of genetics. What is not same is the nature of the people, the regime, and the lack of religious fanaticism.

Your suggestion that the West caused Islamic fanaticism merely by funding it is wildly incorrect and simplistic. The Mujahadeen went to Afghanistan from the Middle East to confront Soviet expansionism into the Muslim world. They were fighting the Soviets there already based on their own belief. Islam detested communism because it was athiest and modern.

Americans supplied the Afghan fighters with stinger missiles to shoot down Soviet helicopters. The hard work, the fighting and dying was done by them, not for money but from their own religious beliefs. The US did not create those extreme beliefs nor did it create the Mujahadeen (and could not if it tried). The religious doctrines of Osama Bin Laden go far beyond the period of the 1980's, much of it goes back to the 1920's and the end of the Ottoman Empire, a universal state based on Islam which is something like that which they would like to restore.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I did NOT say, and I'm NOT saying the West created Islamists, just that, in order to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan, that the West gave them major help to grow and consolidate power.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Is there any problem in the world for which we do not hear the refrain "We are to blame. We caused it." ?? You are too eager to twist facts to suggest blame where it is not due. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you are too eager to jump off into gross assumptions about what other people believe.

hm0504

07-24-2005, 12:44 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:

The point is the hatred of our Western way of life has nothing to do with the fact that they have oil. I think Osama Bin Laden and followers would prefer the Middle East not have oil so its leaders would not have been corrupted by easy wealth and would not have so much contact with evil Western influences. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Osama bin Laden regards the Arabic oil as a special gift from Allah to Islam, but one that has been corrupted by the Saudis and pillaged by the West. Though you could be right on this point, because Osama's goal is world-wide Islamist states, and much of his funding comes from oil, I suspect he is generally pleased that the world's best oil reserves are in and around the Arabian penninsula.

hm0504

07-25-2005, 10:47 AM

A couple of interesting opinion pieces from European journals:

1) "Pakistan Remains the Global Center for Terrorism and al-Qaida":
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/0,1518,366371,00.html

(This is a must read. Remember, as you do, that Pakistan has nuclear weapons.)

2) "Arab Spring: Late and Cold":
http://mondediplo.com/2005/07/06arabworld

KirkOntario

07-25-2005, 03:24 PM

I call them the "But people" who start out by agreeing terrorism/London bombing is bad and then add the word "but.."

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/debrasaunders/ds20050725.shtml

"Red Ken -- as British papers call him -- also blamed "those governments which use indiscriminate slaughter to advance their foreign policy, as we have occasionally seen with the Israeli government." Oh, and he blamed the United States for helping the Afghans fight off a Soviet occupation -- which makes Americans the "creators" of Osama bin Laden.

That is, at first, Livingstone blamed the bombers. Then, he blamed everyone but the bombers.

In response, the Daily Telegraph ran Livingstone's mug next to those of Islamic radicals Sheik Omar Bakri Mohamed and Anjem Choudary under the heading "The men who blame Britain." Mohamed blamed British voters and mainstream British Muslims for the bombings, while Choudary, the New York Times reported, predicted another attack."

hm0504

07-27-2005, 10:13 AM

News Flash
----------

Ahmed Ressam (aka the Millenium Bomber), an al-Qaeda-trained terrorist, who attempted to bomb the Los Angeles airport on New Year's Eve 1999 has been sentenced to 22 years in prison.[1][2]

[1] http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/07/27/lax050727.html

[2] http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/osamabinladen/ressam_timeline.html

hm0504

07-27-2005, 03:17 PM

I mention the above news piece because many Americans, and others around the world, think 9/11 (2001) was the first attempted attack on American soil by al-Qaeda. (Actually, the first may have been the 1993 car bombing under the World Trade Centre.)

Naturist Mark

07-27-2005, 05:23 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by hm0504:
I mention the above news piece because many Americans, and others around the world, think 9/11 (2001) was the first attempted attack on American soil by al-Qaeda. (Actually, the first may have been the 1993 car bombing under the World Trade Centre.) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The 1993 bombing was done by the Egyptian terrorist group Jamaat al-Islamiyya. It, along with Egyptian Islamic Jihad were formed in the 1970's well before al-Qaeda's genesis in the 1980's. However, Jamaat al-Islamiyya's failure in 1993 is credited with inspiring al-Qaeda to adopt terrorism against the west as a major tactic.

There are literal family ties between Jamaat al-Islamiyya and al-Qaeda. Following 1993 both Eqyptian organizations became major players in the al-Qaeda network. In particular two sons of the Jamaat al-Islamiyya's militant cleric Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman (who is now serving a life sentence in the US) are senior al-Qaeda officials.

1993 attack mastermind Ramzi Ahmed Yousef went on to direct al-Qaeda operations in the 90's including an attempt (foiled by the Clinton administration under the direction of terrorism czar Richard Clark) to blow up 12 American airliners over the Pacific, as well as plots to assasinate Bill Clinton and the Pope. Yousef was captured in 1995.

Ramzi Ahmed Yousef's uncle is Khalid Sheikh Mohammed - who is believed to have been the mastermind behind the 9/11 attacks - thus completing the job his nephew began in 1993. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a top Bin-Ladin lieutenant is now in US custody.

Jamaat al-Islamiyya, Egyptian Islamic Jihad (http://www.terrorismanswers.org/groups/jamaat.html)

Lessons of first WTC bombing (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2800297.stm)

-Mark

Captain Zen

07-27-2005, 05:35 PM

Oh, my, please check http://www.rense.com before you know all post the "truth"

KirkOntario

07-27-2005, 05:55 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
Oh, my, please check http://www.rense.com before you know all post the "truth" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Looks like someone found the Loch Ness monster! I knew he was with Elvis. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Qikdraw

07-27-2005, 06:25 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
Oh, my, please check http://www.rense.com before you know all post the "truth" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Looks like someone found the Loch Ness monster! I knew he was with Elvis. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think we are in agreement Kirk.

Oh crap! Does that mean the world is going to end? http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Qikdraw

Captain Zen

07-27-2005, 06:47 PM

Yaya, I know, if that was too much I have a little more naked truth here http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/ or http://snipurl.com/ayzc
so sorry if you did not see this on CNN,FOX or BBC.

KirkOntario

08-01-2005, 04:50 AM

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/johnleo/jl20050801.shtml

Interesting that Air America wants Americans to carry bag on the N.Y.subway to confuse the cops...John Leo on the denial of the terrorist threat.

"Walzer’s analysis is a strong one. The Bush administration has botched many things, but large numbers of Americans go along with the president because he displays what the left apparently cannot: moral clarity and seriousness about what must be done. When the ideas of the left come into view, the themes often include the closing of Guantánamo, attacks on the Patriot Act, opposition to military recruitment on campuses, casual mockery of patriotism (a whole art exhibit in Baltimore was devoted to the theme), and a failure to admit that defeating terrorism will require some trade-offs between security and civil liberties. Is this a serious program? Real security, Walzer says, will depend on hunting down terrorist cells, cutting off the flow of money, and improving surveillance at key sites. He writes: “The burden is on us—nobody else—to make the case that these things can be done effectively by liberals and leftists who will also, in contrast to today’s Republicans, defend the civil liberties of American citizens.” Good argument. How will the left respond?"

Naturist Mark

08-01-2005, 04:58 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
Interesting that Air America wants Americans to carry bag on the N.Y.subway to confuse the cops...John Leo on the denial of the terrorist threat. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You should edit you comment to say that a caller on one of the talk shows on Air America suggested carrying multiple bags to confuse the cops.

-Mark

Captain Zen

08-01-2005, 08:12 PM

KirkOntario

08-02-2005, 03:31 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
Allright you naked agreeable fellows, why is http://www.rense.com the Loch Ness monster to you?
Can you please explain? Did you read some of the articles? Are you afraid of the monster? Are you one of those that is with the Bush/Blair cabal? You believe the lies? You also believe that JEsus died for your sins then? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The site has links to articles on holocaust-denier Ernst Zundel. We just kicked him out of Canada when he tried to re-enter. He spent decades in this country peddling his lies and hatred of Jews. A german citizen he was deported back to Germany and immediately arrested: Germans do not put up with holocaust-deniers and Nazis because that past they do not want to revisit.

Captain Zen

08-02-2005, 04:18 AM

Indeed does Rense have articles about Zundel. And about 9/11, and Zionist false flag operations, and UFO's.......
Have you read all revisionist and humanist articles about the "holocaust"?
How can you be so sure that the Jewish version is the right one?
Where you there?
Did you verify the numbers?
I was not, but I have again, as with the 9/11 hoax, read all there is to read about both sides, and do not believe the official story any more than the other.
You seem to be sure though, and judge another point of view as if it is the opposite of the Holy Truth.
What the Zionist/Jews have done and are doing to the original inhabitants of Palestine is a real living holocaust, but just don't mention it....
Get naked, throw off your Jewish/Christian/Hindu/otjer religious mind-clothes before you call yourself a nudist.

KirkOntario

08-02-2005, 02:58 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
Indeed does Rense have articles about Zundel. And about 9/11, and Zionist false flag operations, and UFO's.......
Have you read all revisionist and humanist articles about the "holocaust"?
How can you be so sure that the Jewish version is the right one?
Where you there?
Did you verify the numbers?
I was not, but I have again, as with the 9/11 hoax, read all there is to read about both sides, and do not believe the official story any more than the other.
You seem to be sure though, and judge another point of view as if it is the opposite of the Holy Truth.
What the Zionist/Jews have done and are doing to the original inhabitants of Palestine is a real living holocaust, but just don't mention it....
Get naked, throw off your Jewish/Christian/Hindu/otjer religious mind-clothes before you call yourself a nudist. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay so you claim the Holocaust was a hoax and 9/11 was a hoax. Just curious who in your opinion staged the 9/11 attacks?

Captain Zen

08-02-2005, 04:11 PM

I do not claim that the holocaust was a hoax, but the whole thing is exaggerated, blown out of proportion. The numbers of killed Jews was about 5 million less than what the media claim. And why not a word of the other holocausts, Dresden, Palestine and more. Read http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p-99_OKeefe.html
The 9/11 event was staged by the Bush cabal, an enormoud false flag operation to make sure the American public would support the ensuing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Another grave attack will happen soon and be blamed on Iran, guilty or not, so that Bush and Co. can count on support to attack that country. Just wait and see.
Here I stand naked before you, nothing to hide, not even the truth..............
Here is some nice educational video for monster hunters
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6895.htm

KirkOntario

08-02-2005, 04:33 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
I do not claim that the holocaust was a hoax, but the whole thing is exaggerated, blown out of proportion. The numbers of killed Jews was about 5 million less than what the media claim. And why not a word of the other holocausts, Dresden, Palestine and more. Read http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v12/v12p-99_OKeefe.html
The 9/11 event was staged by the Bush cabal, an enormoud false flag operation to make sure the American public would support the ensuing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Another grave attack will happen soon and be blamed on Iran, guilty or not, so that Bush and Co. can count on support to attack that country. Just wait and see.
Here I stand naked before you, nothing to hide, not even the truth.............. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow...now about the Loch Ness monster..... http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Captain Zen

08-02-2005, 04:43 PM

When for naked skin's sake are you going to show some facts about the Loch Ness monster instead of just blabbering its name?
Check this, here are your monsters:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6895.htm

KirkOntario

08-02-2005, 05:20 PM

Are you sure you aren't saying the Loch Ness monster is a neo con plot hatched by Karl Rove to further a zionist agenda?

BTW How do you 'hijack' catastrophe when you staged the catastrophe in the first place. time to choose your conspiracy theory isn't it?

Captain Zen

08-02-2005, 05:41 PM

A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves.- Bertrand de Juvenal

You realy ask how Hitler hijacked the Reichtags burning after he staged it? Same same here. You never understood what a 'flase flag' operation was?
http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/9-11...e_flag_operation.htm (http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/9-11/911_as_a_mossad_false_flag_operation.htm)
I will supply all you shorn sheeple with information on the subject, read, study, compare and dissmiss what you don't like.

KirkOntario

08-02-2005, 05:43 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves.- Bertrand de Juvenal

You realy ask how Hitler hijacked the Reichtags burning after he staged it? Same same here. You never understood what a 'flase flag' operation was?
http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/9-11...e_flag_operation.htm (http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/9-11/911_as_a_mossad_false_flag_operation.htm)
I will supply all you shorn sheeple with information on the subject, read, study, compare and dissmiss what you don't like. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So 9/11 was faked in order to invade Afghanistan...for what purpose? Tell us about the Zionist role..we know it's coming you might as well skip to it. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif OH here it is...on one of your other posts: "The American media are controlled by the Zionist cabal who controls America. The greater State of Israel is the ultimate goal of the Zionists and American young men must die for them." Do you still stand by that statement?

Captain Zen

08-02-2005, 06:00 PM

http://www.joevialls.co.uk/subliminalsuggestion/oil2.html
Is one thing to read, and here is something from
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/afghan.html#transit
Afghanistan as an Energy Transit Route
Due to its location between the oil and natural gas reserves of the Caspian Basin and the Indian Ocean, Afghanistan has long been mentioned as a potential pipeline route, though in the near term, several obstacles will likely prevent Afghanistan from becoming an energy transit corridor. During the mid-1990s, Unocal had pursued a possible natural gas pipeline from Turkmenistan's Dauletabad-Donmez gas basin via Afghanistan to Pakistan, but pulled out after the U.S. missile strikes against Afghanistan in August 1998. The Afghan government under President Karzai has tried to revive the Trans-Afghan Pipeline (TAP) plan, with periodic talks held between the governments of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Turkmenistan on the issue, but little progress appears to have been made as of early June 2004 (despite the signature on December 9, 2003, of a protocol on the pipeline by the governments of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Turkmenistan). President Karzai has stated his belief that the project could generate $100-$300 million per year in transit fees for Afghanistan, while creating thousands of jobs in the country.

Given the obstacles to development of a natural gas pipeline across Afghanistan, it seems unlikely that such an idea will make any progress in the near future, and no major Western companies have expressed interest in reviving the project. The security situation in Afghanistan remains an obvious problem, while tensions between India and Pakistan make it unlikely that such a pipeline could be extended into India and its large (and growing) gas market. Financial problems in the utility sector in India, which would be the major consumer of the natural gas, also could pose a problem for construction of the TAP line. Finally, the pipeline's $2.5-$3.5 billion estimated cost poses a significant obstacle to its construction.

This pipeline is now a fact, under protection of the occupying US military forces, who are under direct Zionist command. Why dont you google yourself a little, I get tired of showing you all that is so easy to be found. .

KirkOntario

08-02-2005, 06:57 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
This pipeline is now a fact, under protection of the occupying US military forces, who are under direct Zionist command. Why dont you google yourself a little, I get tired of showing you all that is so easy to be found. . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
What zionist commands the United States military? For a pipeline that never was built and might never be built seems a bit of trouble eh? Starting with flying those planes into the the World Trade Center.

Just imagine the meeting called to launch the conspiracy. "Guys our oil companies want to build a pipeline in Afghanistan. We need to start a war. So we need to hire some planes and fly them into buildings in New York killing 3000 Americans. Now everyone must keep this a secret...Now...who wants to do...".LOL

Oh can you tell us whether the ovens at Auschwitz were created by Hollywood or not? Isn't that what your buddy Ernst Zundel says?

Captain Zen

08-02-2005, 07:20 PM

I have no buddies, Spook of Loch Ness, I have no fight with no world, I have no ennemies, I have travelled over 50 countries, speak 7 languages, and I have embraced and denounced three religions. What is it you want from me? Keep asking and I may be bored enough to answer. But google "zionist in USA" and you get 137,000 items to check....... Stop asking me things you can google.
I am naked, and have nothing to hide, not even the Truth......................

Captain Zen

08-02-2005, 07:37 PM

And now for your entertainment:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html
but please don't believe it, just say no.

KirkOntario

08-03-2005, 04:17 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
And now for your entertainment:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1312540,00.html
but please don't believe it, just say no. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You dodged the question about the ovens at Auschwitz. But answer this question: Do you consider David Irving a credible historian?

Captain Zen

08-03-2005, 04:43 AM

How many times must I tell you to google your questions? "ovens at Auschwitz" gives 49,400 results. Do not overlook this, and form your own meaning.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v11/v11p177_Aynat.html
I don't trust any historian.
The only reliable historian is me myself and then only about what I myself have experienced first hand. All other history is crap. Altered to fit the historian or his political and religious belief. Unreliable and impossible to check.
I live in the present and look with pity upon those who spend valuable time with all kind of stories from the past. The past is gone, the future not yet here, I enjoy the now.
After reading lots of stories [of the past] for my entertainment, I drop them in the garbage bin where they belong.
I rather sit next to my small pond and smell the fragrance of the lotus lillies and ponder how such pristine beauty can grow out of the slimy mud where they have their roots. That is my guide: Even if you have your roots in the filthiest mud, you can emerge as a pristine clean, beautiful being.

smoothm

08-03-2005, 05:28 AM

"The only reliable historian is me myself and then only about what I myself have experienced first hand. All other history is crap. Altered to fit the historian or his political and religious belief. Unreliable and impossible to check."

Impossible to check??!! I suppose that the impeccible records kept by the Germans at the various death camps were just fantasy. It must be nice to accuse others of writing history to suit their particular needs while doing it yourself.

Captain Zen

08-03-2005, 05:41 AM

I write a book about my life adventures and travels at present, that is the only history I write. I believe nothing what others write. All that is for me 'entertainment' Like looking at TV, useless, worthless, and much too much violence to my taste. Why you think I live on a peacefull Caribbean island, away from the main land with its terror attracting politicians?

KirkOntario

08-03-2005, 04:34 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
How many times must I tell you to google your questions? "ovens at Auschwitz" gives 49,400 results. Do not overlook this, and form your own meaning.
http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v11/v11p177_Aynat.html
I don't trust any historian.
The only reliable historian is me myself and then only about what I myself have experienced first hand. All other history is crap. Altered to fit the historian or his political and religious belief. Unreliable and impossible to check.
I live in the present and look with pity upon those who spend valuable time with all kind of stories from the past. The past is gone, the future not yet here, I enjoy the now.
After reading lots of stories [of the past] for my entertainment, I drop them in the garbage bin where they belong.
I rather sit next to my small pond and smell the fragrance of the lotus lillies and ponder how such pristine beauty can grow out of the slimy mud where they have their roots. That is my guide: Even if you have your roots in the filthiest mud, you can emerge as a pristine clean, beautiful being. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Strange how the Institute for Historical Review claims to be a revisionist history but the only history they like to revise is the Holocaust and any thing else that feeds their hate filled anti-semitic fancy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Historical_Review

Captain Zen

08-03-2005, 06:49 PM

Yea, very strange indeed, maybe something is not completely kosher with the holocaust after all.
In MY book all that needs to be defended has somthing wrong about it......

Monsters do not live in Loch Ness alone:
It is a bit long, but there is something to enjoy here from the Talmud, the book that good Jews must follow. BTW I was Jewish once...

Some Teachings of the Jewish Talmud

Where a Jew Should Do Evil

Moed Kattan 17a: If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there.

Penalty for Disobeying Rabbis

Erubin 21b. Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.

Hitting a Jew is the same as hitting God

Sanhedrin 58b. If a heathen (gentile) hits a Jew, the gentile must be killed.

O.K. to Cheat Non-Jews

Sanhedrin 57a . A Jew need not pay a gentile ("Cuthean") the wages owed him for work.

Jews Have Superior Legal Status

Baba Kamma 37b. "If an ox of an Israelite gores an ox of a Canaanite there is no liability; but if an ox of a Canaanite gores an ox of an Israelite...the payment is to be in full."

Jews May Steal from Non-Jews

Baba Mezia 24a . If a Jew finds an object lost by a gentile ("heathen") it does not have to be returned. (Affirmed also in Baba Kamma 113b). Sanhedrin 76a. God will not spare a Jew who "marries his daughter to an old man or takes a wife for his infant son or returns a lost article to a Cuthean..."

Jews May Rob and Kill Non-Jews

Sanhedrin 57a . When a Jew murders a gentile ("Cuthean"), there will be no death penalty. What a Jew steals from a gentile he may keep.

Baba Kamma 37b. The gentiles are outside the protection of the law and God has "exposed their money to Israel."

Jews May Lie to Non-Jews

Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.

Non-Jewish Children are Sub-Human

Yebamoth 98a. All gentile children are animals.

Abodah Zarah 36b. Gentile girls are in a state of niddah (filth) from birth.

Abodah Zarah 22a-22b . Gentiles prefer sex with cows.

Insults Against Blessed Mary

Sanhedrin 106a . Says Jesus' mother was a *****: "She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters." Also in footnote #2 to Shabbath 104b of the Soncino edition, it is stated that in the "uncensored" text of the Talmud it is written that Jesus mother, "Miriam the hairdresser," had sex with many men.

Gloats over Christ Dying Young

A passage from Sanhedrin 106 gloats over the early age at which Jesus died: "Hast thou heard how old Balaam (Jesus) was?--He replied: It is not actually stated but since it is written, Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days it follows that he was thirty-three or thirty-four years old."

Jesus in the Talmud:

Horrible Blasphemies Against Jesus Christ

While it is the standard disinformation practice of apologists for the Talmud to deny that it contains any scurrilous references to Jesus Christ, certain Orthodox Jewish organizations are more forthcoming and admit that the Talmud not only mentions Jesus but disparages him (as a sorcerer and a demented sex freak). These orthodox Jewish organizations make this admission perhaps out of the belief that Jewish supremacy is so well-established in the modern world that they need not concern themselves with adverse reactions.

For example, on the website of the Orthodox Jewish Hasidic Lubavitch group--one of the largest in the world--we find the following statement, complete with Talmudic citations:

"The Talmud (Babylonian edition) records other sins of 'Jesus the Nazarene':

1) He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led Jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship (Sanhedrin 43a).

2) He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone (a brick is mentioned), was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent (Sanhedrin 107b; Sotah 47a).

3) He learned witchcraft in Egypt and, to perform miracles, used procedures that involved cutting his flesh, which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b).

End quote from http://www.noahide.com/yeshu.htm (Lubavitch website) June 20, 2000.

Naturist Mark

08-03-2005, 08:42 PM

I'm expecting The Protocols of the Elders of Zion (http://tinyurl.com/9bjed) next.

Say Bye Bye Captain Zen.

-Mark

Captain Zen

08-04-2005, 05:55 AM

When you was born you had no name, it is not you, it was given to you.
You had no religion, the ppl around you imposed it on you.
When born you had no class, untill you met poorer and richer kids, you found out that you belonged somewhere in society, and you most probably stuck to that level forever. In reality you have no level.
The job you choose is not you, the skin you wear is only the outer layer, it is not you. When you travel inward and search your true self, you will find nothing. That is the real you. Find yourself without labels, name and title, go into the Void, I meet you there.

Get rid of all your hang-ups for ever. Be naked, throw off the clothes of body and mind. I know, to un-learn is harder than to learn. If you are a Jew, you think you can't free yourself anymore from that. Learn meditation from a Buddhist school or from Deepak Chopra. Stay for a while in the religion you was put in as a youngster, until you see the reality of being realy naked. Undress the mind, leave those doctrines alone, they are not you. Without all the rest you are only Light. All that hangs on you diminishes that light, and some have hidden their light so well under layers of crap, that they have become realy dark and evil.

Captain Zen

08-05-2005, 09:09 AM

Say again dat the Zionists are not in the USA government!

quote from Haaretz
The indictment charges Steve Rosen, the lobby's former foreign policy director, with receiving classified information from analyst Lawrence Franklin and helping Franklin pass on written classified information. end quote

It is common knowledge that when one criminal is caught, at least five get through. Tip of iceberg yea yea...........

Captain Zen

08-05-2005, 10:37 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
I'm expecting The Protocols of the Elders of Zion (http://tinyurl.com/9bjed) next.

Say Bye Bye Captain Zen.

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bye Bye, Mark,
did you read the protocols?
It can give you lots of insights of how to rule. If ruling is what you want. I find it a good reading, like the writings of how to conduct war from Clausewitz, and Sun Tzu.

hm0504

08-05-2005, 10:52 AM

Here's some another set of protocols that may be particularly relevant to some recent posts:
The Protocols of the Elders of ClothesFree Forums (http://clothesfreeforums.com/terms.html)

Captain Zen

08-05-2005, 11:36 AM

Every entity is a drop of the ocean of love.
We are all together on this one planet Earth,
I can send you out of my yard,
out of my City,
out of my country,
but I can not send you off the planet.
We are here and we CAN live together, if we apply the oldest only law that I hold dear:
Do to others as you want them do to you.

Captain Zen

08-05-2005, 07:53 PM

And here, so very sorry to almost believing it: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=3430
Please tell me it isn't true.

KirkOntario

08-05-2005, 07:57 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
And here, so very sorry to almost believing it: http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=3430
Please tell me it isn't true. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

don't worry...it's not. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Captain Zen

08-05-2005, 08:04 PM

Ehh,
can you tell me how you know it isn't?

KirkOntario

08-05-2005, 08:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
Ehh,
can you tell me how you know it isn't? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Loch Ness Monster whispered in my ear.. http://clothesfreeforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Captain Zen

08-05-2005, 08:07 PM

And this http://iraq2005.blogspot.com/2005/01/casualty-figures.html
is also just BS I take it.
The london bombings had nothing to do with this
http://www.iraq2005.blogspot.com/

KirkOntario

08-05-2005, 08:10 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
And this http://iraq2005.blogspot.com/2005/01/casualty-figures.html
is also just BS I take it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nessie still says you are reading a lot of junk on the net.

Captain Zen

08-05-2005, 08:13 PM

That is very true but I do it naked, wearing only my pink reading glases, and that makes all the difference.

Captain Zen

08-05-2005, 08:21 PM

And don't worry, nobody else does!

Captain Zen

08-06-2005, 07:33 PM

Nessie still says you are reading a lot of junk on the net.[/QUOTE]

This thread is about the London attacks: and there was Nethanyahu, warned to stay put in his hotel just before the bombs went off, just like the ZIM shipping company left the WTC towers three weeks before they fell. Never has Blair been so thankful as for the amateurs who tried their botched flour scam bonbing 2 weeks later, unrelated, but overtaking and totally hiding the nasty questions about the 7/7 real false flag killing.
You can read about the few good Jews who dare to point out the truth here: [url removed]
Ah my dear Nessy, hide deep in your Loch, this world is so very full of crap!

Bob S.

08-06-2005, 10:52 PM

Zen, it seems that a naked mind is more apt to believe anything. Why would the US media lie about the number of casualties? Why would the anti-war activists not use those larger numbers?

There is a site that updates the casualties list. Iraq Coalition Csualties List (http://icasualties.org/oif/).

And to believe that the Jews are behind the London attacks and 9-11 are ridiculous. Get out of conspiracy mode and start to meditate again. This time, come out without Fox Mulder.

Bob S.

Captain Zen

08-07-2005, 04:13 AM

You are right of course, and I apologize if I look like I believe anything. I don't, I wasn't there... But I observe and see both sides of the messy story. And leave it there. The numbers of causalties is a possebility, after the lies of government we do KNOW about, there may be other lies we don't know about. The Jews not so much as the ZIONISTs are behind getting the USA/UK and Australia to fight for them. And they use any and all means to get these powers to do their bidding. Please look up the attack on the USS Liberty, also unbelievable but true.
[url removed]

KirkOntario

08-07-2005, 04:56 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bob S.:
Zen, it seems that a naked mind is more apt to believe anything. Why would the US media lie about the number of casualties? Why would the anti-war activists not use those larger numbers?

There is a site that updates the casualties list. Iraq Coalition Csualties List (http://icasualties.org/oif/).

And to believe that the Jews are behind the London attacks and 9-11 are ridiculous. Get out of conspiracy mode and start to meditate again. This time, come out without Fox Mulder.

Bob S. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
It just plain old anti-semitism. BTW the attack on the Liberty was while the Iraelis were under attack by an Egyptian gunboat. They hit the American ship by mistake but of course for a conspiracy theorist there are no errors and no facts which can't be twisted to fit the anti-semitic theory. What is scary is someone using WMD and division over the war in Iraq and U.S. foreign policy to advance causes espoused by neo-nazis and their racist fellow-travellers.

Captain Zen

08-07-2005, 06:51 AM

Yes indeed, why should they lie to the public?
And why oh why DID they lie (WMD, Saddam=Al Quaida, USS Liberty, etc, etc.)
And why oh why shall they lie again?

Trailscout

08-07-2005, 07:44 AM

The enemies of the Jews complain about their presence wherever they live. US, Spain, France, Germany, Russia, Middle East, it's all the same: kick them out or kill them!

So when a sizeable number of Jews went back to their homeland, their enemies called it Zionism, but the Jews just call it survival.

Captain Zen

08-07-2005, 08:11 AM

You mention the ennemies of the Jews.
Ennemies are made. They are not born like that.
Have you ever wondered why? Have you never asked yourself the question if everybody hates the Jews, is it then not possible then that these Jews are doing something wrong, that upsets all those others?
Maybe you are right, and maybe not. I was in Israel a couple of times and most returned Jews are good people but the government makes from the young people monsters. They have no respect for the original inhabitants, just the same as what happened to the original inhabitants of North America. Put them in reservations and make them second hand citizens. And believe that the conquered land is yours. Gaza is just a reservation for the Palestinians.
The Earth belongs to us all and all human beings can live together if we apply the LAW:
Do to others as you want them do to you.

Trailscout

08-07-2005, 08:19 AM

People have hated Jews since the days of Moses.

But xenophobia is not limited to Jews. Gypsies (Roma) have been hated throughout Europe for centuries, mostly because they are not "Us".

The Irish immigrants were dispised when they first came to America. They were thought dirty and stupid and really nothing more than slaves for Anglo-Americans to kick around. Did they deserve this treatment? No.

hm0504

08-07-2005, 08:24 AM

Let's see. Jews make up 0.2% of the world's population (1 in 500) and yet they control the world.

Unfortunately, none of the many Jews I know (including ones I'm related to) seem to controlling the world and indeed among them, they hold an extremely wide variety of opinions on almost everything. As I'd have to assume that at 0.2% of the world's population, almost every Jew would need to be involved in the conspiracy, I guess I just happen to know the few who are not.

Qikdraw

08-07-2005, 02:25 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by KirkOntario:
It just plain old anti-semitism. BTW the attack on the Liberty was while the Iraelis were under attack by an Egyptian gunboat. They hit the American ship by mistake </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now correct me if I am wrong, but didn't that 'mistake' last well over two hours? All the while a very large American flag was visible? I think the attack on the Liberty was deliberate because the Liberty could listen in on all Isreali communications.

Isreal sells technology we give them to 'enemies' of the US.

Isreal has also been caught spying on the US.

Isreal, like the US, is out for its own good, and as such will act in counter to US wishes any time it feels it needs to. This is not hard to understand.

I don't believe in a huge Jewish conspiracy, but I do belive that a country will do what it wishes even if that means pissing off allies. How many times has the US done the same type of thing?

Qikdraw

Bob S.

08-07-2005, 02:48 PM

"You mention the ennemies of the Jews.
Ennemies are made. They are not born like that."

So what did the Jews do to anger Hitler, Zen? The Jewish people have been blamed for killing Jesus. Like Trail mentioned, they were hated since Moses and even before that. So what esactly did they do to deserve the world's scorn?

"And believe that the conquered land is yours."

Israel was given to the Jewish people after WWII by the world community over the objections of their Arab neighbors. They were at war on their first day of existence.

The biggest reason the Palestinians are still living in their "reservations" is because they did not want to build, waiting for the day that Israel would be successfully conquered. They have had over 50 years to build cities and coexist with the other Israelites, but they haven't done that.

"The Earth belongs to us all and all human beings can live together if we apply the LAW:
Do to others as you want them do to you."

That is so true. So everyone needs to agree to put down arms.

"To find the controllers you must dig a little deeper, try the Rothschilds and the Zakheims..."

Thanks for the Rothschilds story. My laugh for the day. By the way, did you see the front page for that site? It brought me to this link (http://www.seeq.com/lander.jsp?referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.geocities.com %2Flord_visionary%2Fwake_up_america.html%3F20057&domain=myblackvault.com&cm_mmc=).

Enough of your anti-semitism, Zen. I had respect for you, but it is eroding fast.

Bob S.

Naturist Mark

08-07-2005, 03:58 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bob S.:

Enough of your anti-semitism, Zen. I had respect for you, but it is eroding fast.

Bob S. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Bob, you are far me patient than I am. I wrote the captain off as a racist nut when he first trotted out the anti-zionist crap.

We don't tolerate racism here, so why is Captain Zen still posting?

-Mark

Qikdraw

08-07-2005, 04:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
Bob, you are far me patient than I am. I wrote the captain off as a racist nut when he first trotted out the anti-zionist crap.

We don't tolerate racism here, so why is Captain Zen still posting?

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's a conundrum within a mytery wrapped up in an enigma.

Qikdraw

Captain Zen

08-08-2005, 07:34 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Qikdraw:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Naturist Mark:
Bob, you are far me patient than I am. I wrote the captain off as a racist nut when he first trotted out the anti-zionist crap.

We don't tolerate racism here, so why is Captain Zen still posting?

-Mark </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's a conundrum within a mytery wrapped up in an enigma.

Qikdraw </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I repeat, I am not a racist. My last wife was light brown, and an original Sabra, born in Israel, like her mother and grandmother, our son is a Jew. She hates her goverment so much and explained to me the difference between Jews and Zionists. They are not the same. Not all Jews are Zionists, althought all Zionists claim to be Jews, as I have showed you here: [url removed]
maybe you did not see???
I have compassion for all sentient beings, even those who are lost in the quagmire of faith, war, violence and religions. I lately discovered the teachings from Gautama Siddartha and Deepak Chopra and OSHO and they have helped to set me free of all religions and dogmas and beliefs.
You ask me what the Jews had done to earn the wrath of all the countries and people that presecuted them. I do not know. I only observe that it happened and still is so, and I conclude that they must have done/are doing something wrong. What specifically? You tell me.
And to finish a wisdom from one of my teachers:

Develop the mind of equilibrium. You will always be getting praise and blame, but do not let either affect the poise of the mind: follow the calmness, the absence of pride.

-Sutta Nipata

PascoDoug

08-08-2005, 07:52 AM

Zen,

Whether you are a racist or no.. we've had enough of the anti zionist preaching conspiracy theories, propaganda, and links etc. You've said your peace. Let's move on. OK?

I'm "asking" nicely ..

Captain Zen

08-08-2005, 08:03 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PascoDoug:
Zen,

Whether you are a racist or no.. we've had enough of the anti zionist preaching conspiracy theories, propaganda, and links etc. You've said your peace. Let's move on. OK?

I'm "asking" nicely .. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have been moving over my planet, the globe, for about 40 years, and I think I have arrived, but now you say,
Let's move on,
well, explain me whereto??
I try to move on to make others see what causes war and misery, to move to peace instead, to expose and stop evildoers like warmakers and religion abusers, if they are Zionists, Neo-cons, Mullahs, Nazis, Klans men or others who dress up.
Stay naked of body and mind.

And here a little wisdom from my teacher:

All those of compassion should encourage their minds to think: "Every living being, whether born from the womb or born in any other way, whether they have perception or none, we should bring toward the boundless freedom of liberation. And when this vast and immeasurable number of beings has been liberated, we must not believe that any being has been liberated!" Why is this? It is because no compassionate person who is truly compassionate holds to the idea of a self, a being, or a separate individual.

-Diamond Sutra

PascoDoug

08-08-2005, 08:28 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Captain Zen:
I have been moving over my planet, the globe, for about 40 years, and I have finally arrived, but now you say,
Let's move on,
well, explain me whereto??
you say, we've had enough....
who are "we", the other ones, please speak for yourself or name for whom you speak...
So I can answer them one on one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"We" being the people of this forum - particularly the many who have e-mailed me complaints concerning your posts. They've had enough. And I, the Admin of this forum have had enough - and that alone is sufficient. I have allowed your posts to go unchecked so far in the name of open mindedness, but enough is enough. You said your peace. It's over. Thank you for enlightening us!

Your posts are now being moderated. I caution you not to speak further on the matter..

Have a nice day.

- Admin (Mindless drone of the zionist machine)

Captain Zen

08-08-2005, 09:00 AM

Of course I can only say OK, but this thread was about politics and terror attacks, where then can one speak words of information and truth? Where now is freedom of speech? I know for sure that some ppl are against what I bring, and they always react first, others who see these facts for the first time and are pro, just read and do not send mails of approval. From all the times these posts are viewed, how many disapproved? There you get an indication of those who did not disapprove....
I said before and say again: Whenever you need to defend something there is something wrong with it.
Next time you use public transport, go naked, lest they think you carry a bomb........

Bob S.

08-08-2005, 08:11 PM

"All those of compassion should encourage their minds to think"

Zen, you wrote this, yet in your signature, you state "Thank you for not thinking". Which is it? Personally, I think you should start thinking.

"you are far me patient than I am."

Yes I am, Mark. I am an extremely patient person. However, that patience is nearly over.

Bob S.

Captain Zen

08-09-2005, 04:43 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Bob S.:
"All those of compassion should encourage their minds to think"

Zen, you wrote this, yet in your signature, you state "Thank you for not thinking". Which is it? Personally, I think you should start thinking.

"you are far me patient than I am."

Yes I am, Mark. I am an extremely patient person. However, that patience is nearly over.

Bob S. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

All those of compassion should encourage their minds to think: "Every living being, whether born from the womb or born in any other way, whether they have perception or none, we should bring toward the boundless freedom of liberation. And when this vast and immeasurable number of beings has been liberated, we must not believe that any being has been liberated!" Why is this? It is because no compassionate person who is truly compassionate holds to the idea of a self, a being, or a separate individual.

-Diamond Sutra

The diamond verse(sutra) is translated from the original language in wich Gautama Sidartha spoke. For those who are still in the thinking mode it is good to follow his advice. For others who have learned to observe the thoughts of the self, to dismiss bad thoughts of the self, to find the gap between thoughts, (no 2 thoughts exist at the same time, they follow each other) it is better to go into that gap and think not. When one is not thinking, Universal wisdom enters. When one has emptied the mind entirely from thoughts the Wisdom of the Universe will enter. Wisdom can not enter a head that is full with "knowledge" of this or that, with dogmas and laws, with religion. Knowledge one can learn, one can become a professor no problem. Wisdom has to be invited, it can not be learned.
A cup must be empty to receive tea, a chair must be unoccupied to receive a person. Likewise the mind must be empty to receive wisdom, there fore I say Thank you for not thinking, that you may become wise.

Captain Zen

08-09-2005, 05:00 AM

Ehm, my naked discussion partners, please do not start again and accuse me of believing this or that, or of being antisuch or so or pro whatever, your judgings and attacks got me to post through the moderaters, and I have to wait now before I get to see if my posts get through. Most people find it hard to believe that somebody can have no religion. To be one with what they call god/allah/jehova/etc... but at the same time reject any and all religions. The only thing I am against is violence. I say that violence is lack of intelligence. Do to others as you want them do to you is my slogan. There fore I hope again you will not attack me when I copy/paste an interesting piece of writing, just for you to consider. I do not ask you to "believe" anything, I ask you to KNOW everything. Judge not, that you will not be judged. YEs, I know all the holy books very well, I could not reject them without knowing them first, and I ask you not to reject anything before you know it.

=======================================

DAVID ICKE NEWSLETTER - 9 August 2005

=======================================

Hello all,

Firstly, sorry for the gap between newsletters, I have been away talking in Mount Shasta, California, and then travelling in the UK after that.

It is a frustrating time to see the blatant lies pouring out of government and police over the clearly engineered London attacks. As with 9/11, the holes in the official story are vast and constant. I have been saying for years that one big red flag is when the authorities will not show evidence that would support their own claims and we see this theme again and again.

We had the FBI refusal to this day to make public the security video footage they confiscated from buildings in Oklahoma that reveals what really happened before the bombs went off in 1995. We have the ‘loss’ of black boxes that would reveal what really happened to those planes on 9/11, among endless other ‘proof’ that we are not allowed to see because it doesn’t exist. All this and much more is detailed in Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Center Disaster.

Now, in a London underground system awash with cameras, the police will not show us the proof that ‘suicide’ bombers were responsible, nor support their claims with video evidence of why an innocent Brazilian was held down by police and shot eight times, seven of them in the head. Why? Because they are lying to us. It is just another version of 9/11, the same force, same techniques, same motive justifying further war and human control.

It is now beyond question that the official version of the London attacks is as credible as a 50 cent note, even down to passenger witnesses saying that the bomb hole in their underground train revealed an explosion UNDER the carriage, not inside.

But the pathetic mainstream media and a vast hypnotised swathe of the population have bought the fairytale once again. It doesn’t seem to register with them that the same people who provably lied and lied over the invasion of Iraq are the ones telling us what happened in London. Manufactured fear has reached such a level of ludicrous hysteria that this notice can now be seen on the London underground.

Captain Zen

08-09-2005, 04:46 PM

I am not sorry that I upset a few people who believe they are Zionists. It is part of Zen to stir up sleeping minds and provoke mind games.I succeeded in a few days to open a can of worms, good for me! The otherwise apatic state of ordinary human beings does not help combat violence and does not bring about peace between sentient beings.
For those who were angered at my remarks that the Jewish lobby has penetrated the USA government; suddenly the news is full of AIPAC spies and unsavory behavior of members of that Jewish lobby. I do not ask for an apology, but I like to point out that I never said anything that was not true. And that I am not very happy to be condemmned for my political or philosophical or religious knowledge. You may be undressed, but it seems that most here are heavily dressed in dogmas, laws, viewpoints and relligion. My advice is to get naked, throw off that garment, of body and mind.
Why was I attacked for saying the truth?
If some people have to defend their political or religious ideas, there must be something wrong with it.

See here the philosophy that I follow:

A mother, even at the risk of her own life, protects her child, her only child. In the same way should you cultivate love without measure toward all beings. You should cultivate toward the whole world--above, below, around--a heart of love unstinted, unmixed with any sense of differing or opposing interests. You should maintain this mindfulness all the time you are awake. Such a state of heart is the best in the world.

-Majjhima Nikaya