• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What do you know about terrorism?!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
I am, indeed, projecting the firm conviction that terrorism is effective in large part because of people such as you.

Do you have any grounds for charging me with that, Jay, or are you just indulging yourself in some animosity inappropriate to this Forum?
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Do you have any grounds for charging me with that, Jay, ...
Absolutely. Reframing the topic and thereby diluting its focus on terrorism (that is the topic by the way) benefits only the terrorists. By providing ideological cover you serve as both an example of their effectiveness and an asset securing that effectiveness in the future. Supplementary rhetorical propaganda volleys such as " What Does Israel Do For The U.S.?" further suggests that we are dealing with agenda rather than confusion. Allow that agenda to become pervasive and we have the preconditions to the eradication of Israel and an historic victory for terrorism.
 

!Fluffy!

Lacking Common Sense
The problem is that Americans only get one side to their news stories. We hear about the terrorist attacks, but do not hear about the horrid conditions that the Palestinians are forced to live in in the name of Israeli security. We don't hear about the Israeli soldier that shoots a little Palestinian boy or the tank that runs children over that were throwing rocks at it. We only hear one side and claim that we know everything about the situation. Open your eyes and realize that there is a reason that these people are mad. There has to be a reason for someone to be so mad that they would blow themselves up for the cause. Terrorism is never justified, but the reasons for their anger are understandable. Have you ever heard of the conditions of the Palestinian people? Read the book written by Jimmy Carter on the subject, 'Peace, not Apartheid.' Or head over to this website: http://www.ifamericansknew.com/
Of course you will probably believe it to be biased and disregard everything written.

Your premise here is indefensible, sorry.
Americans have access to any news they WANT. If some choose to hang out on strictly liberal/conservative pro this anti that forums or access strictly liberal / conservative news sites, talk shows etc. that is their choice, not a government mandate.

People in some parts of the world are treated to a steady stream of government sponsored antisemitic propaganda from cradle to grave.

Yes it is biased and most of us have had enough already of the same old one-sided hate mongering, tyvm.
 

!Fluffy!

Lacking Common Sense
"In political jargon, the term "useful idiot" was used to describe Soviet sympathizers in western countries (particularly in the United States) and the alleged attitude of the Soviet government towards them. The implication was that the person in question was naïve, foolish, or in willful denial, and was being cynically used by the Soviet Union, or another Communist state.

The term is now used more broadly to describe someone who is perceived to be manipulated by political movement, terrorist group, or hostile government, whether or not the group is Communist in nature."

...more
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Absolutely. Reframing the topic and thereby diluting its focus on terrorism (that is the topic by the way) benefits only the terrorists.

Would you care to give a concrete example of where I "reframed" the topic in such a way as to "dilute its focus on terrorism" and thus "benefited only the terrorists?"

BTW, Who, here, are "the terrorists" you refer to? And precisely how did I benefit them?

By providing ideological cover you serve as both an example of their effectiveness and an asset securing that effectiveness in the future.
Could you be more concrete, Jay? Good Grief! I've had professors who would mark up a sentence like that for sheer BS.


Supplementary rhetorical propaganda volleys such as " What Does Israel Do For The U.S.?" further suggests that we are dealing with agenda rather than confusion.
On what grounds do you call the question posed in that thread a "propaganda volley"?

Please note, you are ascribing an agenda to me, Jay. Could you please substantiate your claim that I have an agenda?


Allow that agenda to become pervasive and we have the preconditions to the eradication of Israel and an historic victory for terrorism.
Goodness! You now seem to be charging me with at least a desire to eradicate Israel and see terrorism triumphant!

Such wild accusations! Such weak support for them!
 

!Fluffy!

Lacking Common Sense
Islamist Terrorist Groups (source: wikipedia)
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
By providing ideological cover you serve as both an example of their effectiveness and an asset securing that effectiveness in the future.
So, in other words, agree with me or you are an accomplice of terror.
 

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
I see we have a comprehensive list of muslim or arab organizations that may or may not be involved in terroist activity. What we don't have is intimate information about these groups to determine whether or not they are actually terrorists. We have to accept the word of whoever made the list that they know what they're talking about. I will not deny that perhaps some of them are very guilty of such crimes. I'm not in delusion to believe that terrorism does not exist, nor even that some misguided muslims somewhere engage in it.

A little expample of how these lists can be bogus. I am on the national list of individual potential terrorists here in the US. Question .......do I deserve to be on that list? Do you know what I have done to be on the list?

The fact that I am even on it, let's me know that if the US can put a citizen like me and friends of mine on a list like that, they will put other people or groups on that list that don't deserve it. I don't know all the reasons why because I don't have all the answers. I am not going to stop doing what I do, saying what I want, and believing what I believe because of a stupid list. I am a muslim and if being one makes me a threat and a terrorist then so be it.
 

Ðanisty

Well-Known Member
Most definitions of terrorism include only those acts which are intended to create fear or "terror", are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a "madman" attack), and deliberately target "non-combatants". ...
  • While the United Nations has not yet accepted a definition of terrorism, the UN's "academic consensus definition," written by terrorism expert Alex P. Schmid and widely used by social scientists, runs:
    Terrorism is an anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby — in contrast to assassination — the direct targets of violence are not the main targets. The immediate human victims of violence are generally chosen randomly (targets of opportunity) or selectively (representative or symbolic targets) from a target population, and serve as message generators. Threat- and violence-based communication processes between terrorist (organization), (imperilled) victims, and main targets are used to manipulate the main target (audience(s)), turning it into a target of terror, a target of demands, or a target of attention, depending on whether intimidation, coercion, or propaganda is primarily sought (Schmid, 1988).​
[wiki]​
This is a really good definition!
 

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
Americans have access to any news they WANT.

He can correct me if he needs to, but I don't think he was talking about just americans. The people on this forum, some of them are not in the US (muslims I mean) who may be seeing a different presentation of incidents that happen. I think this is what he was addressing about the news. We are getting what we are getting over here, and people in Sudan, Egypt, Palestine, etc are either living it or may be getting things presented to them that we do not have presented to us. There are always two sides (or more) to any story. I think we have less access to the other sides. We have more mainstream access to America's side of things.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
We are getting what we are getting over here, and people in Sudan, Egypt, Palestine, etc are either living it or may be getting things presented to them that we do not have presented to us. There are always two sides (or more) to any story. I think we have less access to the other sides. We have more mainstream access to America's side of things.
That is clearly true and a cause for concern. But I still suspect that the US and European media is, on the whole, more free and more reliable than is there counterpart elsewhere. The main problem I find with the US media is its indifference to much of the world news, but what it reports it generally seeks to report accurately as far as I can tell.
 

TashaN

Veteran Member
Premium Member
In the muslim countries, terrorism is defended as legitimate.

Prove this right now or take your words back and apologize because i had enough of your insults and remarks about the Muslims.

The US soldiers don't want to be there, the US government does not want to be there. If the arab fighters would quit killing each other, they could have their country to themselves.

They are terrorists not because they resist an invading force, but because they blow up cars on busy kerbs seven days-a-week. Not any one of us, I thank you.

Sad, innit?

Yes, I agree. We should recognise all forms of terror, including our own (I'm British).

We have in here two proud men, an American and a British who call everyone to condemn terrorism even if it was theirs, and (i believe) they will condemn it even if that will mean their former belief that Iarqi people are intentionally killing each other all the time will be wrong, and at least inaccurate.

British Special Forces Caught Carrying Out Staged Terror In Iraq?

200905mercs.jpg


In another example of how the Iraqi quagmire is deliberately designed to degenerate into a chaotic abyss, British SAS were caught attempting to stage a terror attack and the media have dutifully shut up about the real questions surrounding the incident.
What is admitted is that two British soldiers in Arab garb and head dress drove a car towards a group of Iraq police and began firing. According to the Basra governor Mohammed al-Waili, one policeman was shot dead and another was injured. Pictured below are the wigs and clothing that the soldiers were wearing.

Read all the details in here: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/september2005/200905stagedterror.htm

And here too:

UK Soldiers Caught Dressed As Iraqis Killing Local Police
http://www.rense.com/general67/cmndo.htm



NEXT


Former CIA Analyst: Western Intelligence May Be Behind Mosque Bombing

260206ray1.jpg



"As I look at the top Pentagon brass, I have to conclude that unlike my days as a US army officer, those folks have been so politicized that if the US President told them to go ahead and exercise police functions in this country they would go ahead and salute and they would do it, and that's really scary."

Moving on to the "war on terror", 27 year veteran McGovern concurred that[SIZE=+1] staged terror has long been used by our governments in order to forward their own agendas at home and elsewhere:

"There's lots of evidence that the government in the past has used these things for its own purposes, for overthrowing governments, as it did in Iran in 1953, and in Guatemala in 1954, the Gulf of Tonkin was a little different...LBJ did deceive Congress and the war went on for seven years."

Concerning 9/11 McGovern declared that although he is still in two minds, he is deeply suspicious of the official version of events and "there is certainly a cover up." The amount of unanswered questions and blatant lies told by Cheney and the NeoCons makes it very easy for him to believe the government was involved.

Moving on to the recent Askariya mosque bombing in Samarra, Iraq McGovern commented;

"The main question is Qui Bono? Who benefits from this kind of thing? You don't have to be very conspiratorial or even paranoid to suggest that there are a whole bunch of likely suspects out there and not only the Sunnis. You know, the British officers were arrested, dressed up in Arab garb, riding around in a car, so this stuff goes on."

Ray McGovern is part of a collective of former Intelligence officers who call themselves Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS). Their writing can be found on www.truthout.com

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2006/260206mosquebombing.htm

http://www.questionsquestions.net/docs04/iraq_partition.html

http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=6559

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/august2005/310805divideiraq.htm


NEXT

Your premise here is indefensible, sorry.
Americans have access to any news they WANT.

I agree, you are so right. Americans have access to any news they *the government* WANT. I apperciate your honesty.

[/SIZE]It is certain that any reports coming out of Iraq accusing occupational forces of being behind car bombings will be brutally censored.

The Pentagon admitted before the war that independent journalists would be military targets and since then we've seen more journalists killed in Iraq over two and a half years than the entire seven year stretch of US involvement in Vietnam.

In many cases, such as that of Mazen Dana, an acclaimed hero who was killed after filming secret US mass graves, journalists are hunted down and executed because they record something that the occupational government doesn't want to reach the wider world.

Italian journalist Giuliana Sgrena's car was fired upon and an Italian secret service agent killed after Sgrena was told by the group that kidnapped her that a threat to kill her if Italian troops didn't pull out of Iraq wasn't made by them. This means that Rumsfeld's Ministry of Truth in Iraq is putting out false statements by fake Jihad groups to try and maintain the facade that the resistance is run by brutal terrorists under the direction of Al-Qaeda/Iran/Syria or whoever else they want to bomb next.
Every high profile kidnapping brings with it eyewitness reports of white men in suits and police carrying out the abductions.

Many will find it hard to believe that ordinary soldiers would have it in them to carry out such brutal atrocities. The people carrying out these acts are not ordinary soldiers, they are SAS thugs who have been told that they have to be 'more evil than the terrorists' to defeat the terrorists. This is how they morally justify to themselves engaging in this criminal behavior.



The is alot of further documents in here about the whole thing and it called:​

Is Iraq Civil War By Design?​

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/010306civilwar.htm


Peace and blessing,

TT :)
 

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
The main problem I find with the US media is its indifference to much of the world news, but what it reports it generally seeks to report accurately as far as I can tell.

I guess its not hard to assume that people in other places may feel that their news is also accurate. I get what you are saying and I somewhat agree, but I am still skeptical of news reports as it concerns muslims.
 

fullyveiled muslimah

Evil incarnate!
The only thing I am wondering about is why we are supporting this war at all. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 that much was clarified before the war. Then the intention changed to ousting sadam's dictatorship. Then the intention was double with the "fact" that Iraq was hiding wmd's. Then when that was found out for the lie it was, there was no more reasons given. We're just over there blowing stuff to high heaven.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
In the muslim countries, terrorism is defended as legitimate.
Prove this right now or take your words back and apologize because i had enough of your insults and remarks about the Muslims.
So, should we take from that outburst that you do not defend terrorism as legitimate?

By the way, you're either wallowing in confusion or engaged in deceit since the assertion that "in the muslim countries, terrorism is defended as legitimate" is in no way equivalent to the claim that a majority of Muslims support terrorism.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top