Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

What's the matter eh - are you embarrassed by the presence of the Jewish extremist terrorist Americans that you refuse to condemn?

It seems that along with the terrorist groups such as the Hutaree, the threat in America is far greater from Bible-believing terrorists than other religious groups. Them there are the facts.

Cheers,
Shafique

I'll wait for when Bible fundamentalists take down numerous commercial airliners.

Why no Buddhist al-Qaeda?

Oh, you mean like the Sikh terrorists did or the terrorists that are being comfort in Miami? I suppose you said 'commercial' so that you'd exclude US terrorist Joe Stack who flew a private plane into a Federal building only last year (and hence was the last suicide terrorist in the USA).

(Cuban terrorists, wanted by Venezuela and indeed Cuba, blew up a Cuban airliner and are in the US with full support of the State Department - and Sikhs also blew up an Indian airliner).

But hey, why let facts of actual terrorist attacks get in the way - eh?

Did you get round to confirming that the Jewish religious terrorists DID carry out more terror attacks in the US than Islamic terrorists?

Cheers,
Shafique

Oh, you mean like the Sikh terrorists

What's the name of this transnational Sikh religious fundamentalist movement that must number in the 100's-1000's and has members from around the world - US, Canada, Britain, India, Pakistan, etc. - clamoring to join the ranks of the Sikh Jihad (and that was formed as a result of US foreign policy (because otherwise Ron Paul would be wrong that anti-American terrorist groups are only formed as a result of US policy)?

Notice how I was referring to these Christian fundamentalist terrorist groups that are alleged to exist (but aren't nearly as active as the Muslim fanatics in the US who want to commit mass murder)?

Did you get round to confirming that the Jewish religious terrorists DID carry out more terror attacks in the US than Islamic terrorists?

What's the casualty count?

I see you're avoiding the difficult questions - are you trained to do this or is this something you were born to do?

Let's take some baby steps for you:
1. What were the reasons given for the WTC attack in 93 by the terrorists. (Hint: Letters were sent spelling out the reasons. Hint 2: They weren't religously motivated reasons)
2. In what way were the bombing of the airliners by Sikhs and Cubans not terrorist attacks for political reasons?
3. A simple 'yes, I can confirm that Jewish religious terrorists have indeed carried out more attacks than Muslim terrorists in the USA' would suffice. We know that you want to count fatalities because 9/11's one attack was so high a figure. (You haven't looked up what 'outlier' means have you. tut tut)

4. And let's get back to the core question in the thread - Kahanist Terror groups, listed by the US gov as terrorists, are a prime example of a trans-national terror organisation. As they started before Al Qaeda, you could say they are the trailblazers for terrorism in the USA.

If you are still confused over these facts, let me know and I'll clarify. If you want to change the subject - we can safely assume you have no comeback for these facts.

Cheers,
Shafique

LoL. Facts, schmacts.

Are you now trying to claim the al-Qaeda terrorists who bombed the WTC weren't religious extremists and members of an Islamic terrorist group whose end goal is the re-establishment of an Islamic theocratic state?

Wow.

Bringing up Cuban terrorists illustrates the entire point I'm making. They *AREN'T* religious fanatics carrying out violent acts in the name of religion unlike your coreligionists who eat and breathe religion - just like you.

Anyways, troll, the Cuban terrorists you're referring to didn't target the US so your mentioning them is IRRELEVANT to the question I'm asking regarding Ron Paul's comments.

It's funny when you're this dense that you instinctively change the parameters of the debate because your talking points don't cover all points of discussion.

Are you seriously this weak in debate that you can't stick to the topic of a subject cuz you have nothing to say?

3. A simple 'yes, I can confirm that Jewish religious terrorists have indeed carried out more attacks than Muslim terrorists in the USA' would suffice. We know that you want to count fatalities because 9/11's one attack was so high a figure. (You haven't looked up what 'outlier' means have you. tut tut)

A simple reminder that this is off topic is all I need. Please stop showcasing your stupidity and poor reading skills.

4. And let's get back to the core question in the thread - Kahanist Terror groups...blah blah blah

Grade A moron.

Unbelievable. People must get dumber just by virtue of being in your presence. I've never met anyone as dumb and puerile as you. Not even DDS is as dimwitted - and all he has are herp-a-derp, grammatically incorrect one liners.

Wow - see what happens when you present facts to a loon!

Let's just tackle point 1 - eh raised the motivation for the WTC attack in 93 in his OP. Let's see what the terrorists say the reason for the WTC attack in 93 was:

Yousef mailed letters to various New York newspapers just before the attack, in which he claimed he belonged to 'Liberation Army, Fifth Battalion'.

These letters made three demands:
1. an end to all US aid to Israel,
2. an end to US diplomatic relations with Israel,
3. and a demand for a pledge by the United States to end interference "with any of the Middle East countries' interior affairs."

He stated that the attack on the World Trade Center would be merely the first of such attacks if his demands were not met. In his letters Yousef admitted that the World Trade Center bombing was an act of terrorism, but this was justified because "the terrorism that Israel practices (which America supports) must be faced with a similar one."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World ... the_attack

Facts, not hype eh. Facts.

Seems pretty clear why the terrorist chose to attack the USA. The religion of the terrorist targets doesn't seem to be mentioned at all, but ONLY foreign policy of the US government.

Question number 2 is related - in what way are the Cuban terrorist attack on a commercial airliner different from that above.. imagining that the above is because they are 'religious fanatics' and that makes them different exposes the fundamental flaw in your views.

Cheers,
Shafique

imagining that the above is because they are 'religious fanatics' and that makes them different exposes the fundamental flaw in your views.

Sorry, what does the Cuban terrorist attack against a country that isn't the US and that wasn't blamed on US foreign policy have to do with the OP's question discussing Ron Paul's comments about the US, foreign policy and the creation of religious, trans-national terror groups?

Let's just tackle point 1 - eh raised the motivation for the WTC attack in 93 in his OP. Let's see what the terrorists say the reason for the WTC attack in 93 was:

Yes, and this is what we're discussing based on the OP. How is Ramzi Yousef's letter confusing you?

Come, come young one. I said we'd take baby steps through your arguments.

You started by asking what the motivations for the 93 WTC bombings were in your OP. Let's confirm that the reasons given were indeed related to US foreign policy - i.e. political issues. You seemed to be labouring under the wrong notion that somehow it was for religious reasons.

We can then see how this is different from the Cuban terrorist attack on the airliner (where the terrorists are living safe and sound in the USA).

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:You started by asking what the motivations for the 93 WTC bombings were in your OP.

Really? Where? I simply mentioned point #2 was not a factor for AQ's attempt to murder thousands of Americans in the 93 WTC bombing:

event horizon wrote:AQ tried to massacre thousands of Americans in the '93 WTC bomb attack prior to the 1995 report claiming 500,000 Iraqi children died due to UN sanctions

Before that I observed that AQ was formed before points 1 & 2. Something anyone with basic reading comprehension should have figured out.

But go ahead, enlighten me, where did I ask for the motivation for 93 WTC bombings in the OP?

Baby steps, baby steps, young one.

Do we agree that WTC 93 was because of US foreign policy or not?

Yes or no?

If yes, then where is all this 'it was religously motivated' come from when comparing this politically motivated attack with those carried out by Cuban exiles living in the USA when they launched their trans-national terror attack on an airliner?

Cheers,
Shafique

Sorry, didn't quite catch that, what happened to my previous question asking for the motivations for the 93 WTC attack?

You said I asked:

shafique wrote:You started by asking what the motivations for the 93 WTC bombings were in your OP.

Where?

Why can't you simply answer the question - are we now agreed that the WTC 93 attacks were politically motivated - and the reasons were US foreign policy?

A simple yes will do.

Cheers,
Shafique

Why can't YOU answer where I asked for the motivations of the 93 WTC bombings in the OP?

I've been asking this for the past four posts now.

Now, come on - are we now agreed that the WTC 93 were politically motivated and based on US foreign policy?

A simple yes will suffice.

In your opening paragraph you link AQ attacks to Islamic teachings, and then go on to list WTC 93 as an attack.

Your premise is therefore fundamentally flawed. Are we agreed?

Cheers,
Shafique

In your opening paragraph you link AQ attacks to Islamic teachings, and then go on to list WTC 93 as an attack.

Please stop changing the subject. Where did I ask for the motivations of the 93 WTC attack when I merely mentioned point #2 wasn't among the it?

You can discuss AQ's reliance on Muslim texts and teachings as justification, motivation and reason for their formation and attacks on another thread.

You can run, but you can't hide young one.

Your fundamental premise in your opening paragraph is wrong - as shown by the motivation for your first example, the WTC 93.

I understand why you are trying wriggle out of the fact that WTC 93 was explicitly because of political reasons - namely US foreign policy. However, the fact still remains.

Given this fact, your later arguments that rely on these attacks being religiously motivated rather than politically motivated (and therefore exactly like the Cuban etc attacks) are baseless.

I am asking you to confirm that the WTC 93 attacks were because of foreign policy of the USA, and that you are making up a religious reason that wasn't given by the terrorists.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:You started by asking what the motivations for the 93 WTC bombings were in your OP. Let's confirm that the reasons given were indeed related to US foreign policy - i.e. political issues. You seemed to be labouring under the wrong notion that somehow it was for religious reasons.

The fact that a blind sheikh, who sits in jail (and was wanted in Egypt for his religious views), was behind it and those arrested were part of the mosque where he was the imam might lead one to believe religious beliefs were a factor.

Shaf, I can tell you, very strongly, that it was done in the name of Islam and hatred towards America and what it stands for. One of the people who was a member of the mosque flipped and gave up the people who ended up in jail, one of them was his cousin (the mailman), and went on to work for the US government as an informer in exchange for no charges against him. He would go to Egyptian communities and gather information which he turned over to the FBI. As a result of information he gave the FBI a number of people were deported.

The three reasons given for the attacks were all to do with the US foreign policy. I didn't see anything in the letter which backs up the mantra that 'they hate the west/our freedoms' etc.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Facts, not hype BB.

The three reasons given for the attacks were all to do with the US foreign policy. I didn't see anything in the letter which backs up the mantra that 'they hate the west/our freedoms' etc.

Cheers,
Shafique

Not hype Shaf. Fact. I know this individual. Do you believe everything you read? or just chose to believe what you want to believe. Does any government always tell the truth? Mr BB attended that mosque several times and stopped going because the imam was so radical and spewed his hatred towards America and Americans. Constantly comparing the dictates of Islam to the ways of the infidels.

Did it ever occur to you that someone may just know something that you don't know?

You started by asking what the motivations for the 93 WTC bombings were in your OP.

Sorry, didn't quite catch that. Where did I ask this in the OP?

If those who have the right to have something are terrorists, then we are terrorists, and we welcome being terrorists ... the Quran makes it, terrorism, among the means to perform jihad in the sake of Allah, which is to terrorise the enemies of God

—Omar Abdel-Rahman, 1993

Bora Bora wrote:Not hype Shaf. Fact. I know this individual. Do you believe everything you read?

I am quite clear that others know things I don't know.

I'm just stating the fact that the reasons given in the letter were three - and all of them related to US foreign policy.

When looking at the reasons for the Terrorist plot, a good place to start would be the reasons the Terrorists gave. Or is that too logical?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:Not hype Shaf. Fact. I know this individual. Do you believe everything you read?

I am quite clear that others know things I don't know.

I'm just stating the fact that the reasons given in the letter were three - and all of them related to US foreign policy.

When looking at the reasons for the Terrorist plot, a good place to start would be the reasons the Terrorists gave. Or is that too logical?

Cheers,
Shafique

Clearly, as usual, you are selective as to which spin works for you. Funny how you used your "personal experience" to support your argument but it doesn't register when someone else does. I think that's called being a hypocrite???

And I'm stating a FACT that came from someone who was actually involved in that incident. I don't believe there were any government agents involved as well, but I could be wrong. You think hearsay has more validity than something coming from someone who actually was involved???? You think your personal experiences has more validity than someone elses???

It's unbelieveable that you can't see how foolish you look at times (more times than we would like to have seen. )

Bora, I can only go by the information that I have available to me.

As for the reason the terrorists gave for the 93 WTC bombing - they were quite clear:

Yousef mailed letters to various New York newspapers just before the attack, in which he claimed he belonged to 'Liberation Army, Fifth Battalion'.

These letters made three demands:
1. an end to all US aid to Israel,
2. an end to US diplomatic relations with Israel,
3. and a demand for a pledge by the United States to end interference "with any of the Middle East countries' interior affairs."

He stated that the attack on the World Trade Center would be merely the first of such attacks if his demands were not met. In his letters Yousef admitted that the World Trade Center bombing was an act of terrorism, but this was justified because "the terrorism that Israel practices (which America supports) must be faced with a similar one."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World ... the_attack

Seems pretty clear why the terrorist chose to attack the USA. The religion of the terrorist targets doesn't seem to be mentioned at all, but ONLY foreign policy of the US government.


Now, you seem to have information that contradicts what the terrorist says in the letter. That's interesting to know. Now, explain to me again why your information is more credible than the above.

Thanks.

Cheers,
Shafique

Once you explain to me that your personal experiences are more valid that those of other people. Also explain to me how you are selective in what you chose to believe in print. You can't have it both ways Shaf, as hard as you may try.

But, the bottom line is: they were RELIGIOUS terrorists!!!!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,236541,00.html

After the first bombing of the World Trade Center, FBI agents focused on the blind sheik and managed to slip an informer into his organization. The hidden tapes and video recordings unveiled a conspiracy to wreak havoc on the New York area in the name of radical Islam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Abdel-Rahman

He traveled widely in the United States and Canada. Despite the U.S. support for the mujahideen in Afghanistan, Abdel-Rahman was deeply anti-American and spoke out against it, safe in the knowledge that he was speaking Arabic and unmonitored by any law enforcement agency. He issued a fatwa in America that declared lawful the robbing of banks and killing of Jews in America. His sermons condemned Americans as the "descendants of apes and pigs who have been feeding from the dining tables of the Zionists, Communists, and colonialists".[5] He called on Muslims to assail the West, "cut the transportation of their countries, tear it apart, destroy their economy, burn their companies, eliminate their interests, sink their ships, shoot down their planes, kill them on the sea, air, or land".[6]

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Ch3.htm

The arrests of Salameh, Abouhalima, and Ayyad led the FBI to the Farouq mosque in Brooklyn, where a central figure was Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman, an extremist Sunni Muslim cleric who had moved to the United States from Egypt in 1990. In speeches and writings, the sightless Rahman, often called the "Blind Sheikh," preached the message of Sayyid Qutb's Milestones, characterizing the United States as the oppressor of Muslims worldwide and asserting that [u]it was their religious duty to fight against God's enemies.[/u] An FBI informant learned of a plan to bomb major New York landmarks, including the Holland and Lincoln tunnels. Disrupting this "landmarks plot," the FBI in June 1993 arrested Rahman and various confederates.

As much as it must pain you Shaf, it was religiously motivated.

The problem is Bora, that the terrorist who carried out the attack did not cite Qutb or the Blind Cleric - he said the reasons were political.

Now, if you are telling me he was lying and was actually doing it for religious reasons because he hated the West etc - you'll have to do better than to quote Fox News.

Yousef was the mastermind behind the attack and gave the reasons for the attack. He was quite specific:

Yousef admitted that the World Trade Center bombing was an act of terrorism, but this was justified because "the terrorism that Israel practices (which America supports) must be faced with a similar one.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:The problem is Bora, that the terrorist who carried out the attack did not cite Qutb or the Blind Cleric - he said the reasons were political.

Now, if you are telling me he was lying and was actually doing it for religious reasons because he hated the West etc - you'll have to do better than to quote Fox News.

Yousef was the mastermind behind the attack and gave the reasons for the attack.

Cheers,
Shafique

What happened Shaf, you couldn't get past the Fox quote??? Go back and read. One quote was from a source that you used (wikipedia) and the other was, oh my!!!, the 9-11 commission. So, you only believe what you post and read??? Oh, Shaf, silly silly man. You just can't bring yourself to admit that it was religious. Dream on Shaf, dream on and take some meds to ease your pain.

And you know for a FACT that Yousef was the mastermind?? or was it something to read and chose to believe?? or............did your group have something to do with it??

Yes, I know for a fact what Yousef said the reasons for the terrorist attack were and that he was the mastermind and chief operative.

Why do you want me to admit to something that Yousef didn't say - he said the reasons were political.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Yes, I know for a fact what Yousef said the reasons for the terrorist attack were and that he was the mastermind and chief operative.

Why do you want me to admit to something that Yousef didn't say - he said the reasons were political.

Cheers,
Shafique

Is that fact based on another one of your personal experiences? Did he whisper in your ear???

The terrorist didn't write the letters to me, no.

But he did write the letters and did say why the terrorist plot was carried out.

(That's what is called 'evidence'.)

Cheers,
Shafique