Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

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

shafique wrote: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

I can write a letter and state anything I want in it, would that make what I say fact?

Once again, you can't come to terms that what I have provided leads to the very heart of the attack - that it was religiously motivated. I have yet to read where a Muslim terrorist acted alone and had no affiilation with any religious terrorist group, as opposed to them being identified as belonging to one group or another identified as being terrorists. These terrorists and terrorist groups that carry out terrorist acts do it "in the name of God", using God/religion as the driving force. The target is another thing.

It seems that there is conflicting info on the internet. And you seem to be leaving the imam out of it. He, like OBL came up with the plan - he, like OBL got people to carry it out. If we go on your reasoning for the recent arrest of the Asians in the UK, then the only thing OBL and the blind shiekh was guilty of was "thinking" about a terrorist attack.

Bora Bora, if the attack was primarily religiously motivated, why didn't the terrorist write a long rambling letter quoting the Quran and telling how the terrorist attack was being committed because Allah told him it must be done as jihad against non-Muslims? Why only focus on the US foreign policy with Israel and the Middle East?

I think many Muslims have political beefs with the West and it is being exploited and turned into religious beefs thanks to a minority of extremist Imams. We all know that politics and religion are more intertwined in Islam than in other religions or societies that focus on secular politics.

Bora Bora wrote:
I can write a letter and state anything I want in it, would that make what I say fact?

If you were about to carry out a terrorist attack and gave your reasons for carrying out the attack, then yes, the reasons you give in the letter would make it a fact. The fact would be 'the reasons the terrorist gave for carrying out the attack'.

The disconnect is indeed between those who are adamant that the attack was because of Islamic ideology and the reasons the terrorist actually gave - he was very explicit.

Cheers,
Shafique

kanelli wrote:Bora Bora, if the attack was primarily religiously motivated, why didn't the terrorist write a long rambling letter quoting the Quran and telling how the terrorist attack was being committed because Allah told him it must be done as jihad against non-Muslims? Why only focus on the US foreign policy with Israel and the Middle East?

I think many Muslims have political beefs with the West and it is being exploited and turned into religious beefs thanks to a minority of extremist Imams. We all know that politics and religion are more intertwined in Islam than in other religions or societies that focus on secular politics.

Islamic terrorism is a label for forms of terrorism committed by a minority of the world's Muslims aimed at achieving varying political ends in support of their co-religionists who they believe are oppressed or who threaten their chosen religion or way of life.......

The series of attacks by Osama bin Laden and the Al-Quida group is motivated by religious convictions. This group believes it is justified because of religious commands found in the Koran, and they use these same religious beliefs to recruit more followers. The Al-Quida group sees Americans as being a self-righteous, power hungry, and prideful nation. They disagree with what they see as a Hollywood centered, immoral, and perverted society. You might also take note that Jihad (holy war) was declared on the US by OBL, which brought to life existing Islamic terrorist groups, as well as the creation of others.

Aren't imams religious leaders/figures? Steven Emerson's 1994 television documentary Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America contains a video of Abdel-Rahman in Detroit calling for jihad (again, holy war) against the "infidel".

The attacks stemmed from a religious foundation. Attacks on US government/policy by Islamic terrorists stem from religious beliefs - declaration of jihad. Islamic terrorists are a product of extreme religious fanatics (OBL, blind sheikh). The common denominator of Islamic terrorist groups is religion. The end: political attacks, justify the means: jihad. If the one and only motivation for such attacks is political, then why aren't they referred to as political terrorists???

As for why the terrorist didn't write the rambling letter you mention, I'm sure Shaf can answer that one.

Bora why talk in generalities when the specific question was the motivation for the WTC 93 bombing.

The terrorist who carried out the bombing said it was for political motives - US foreign policy in Mid East. He did not mention Islam/Jihad etc.

Just believing he must have done for Islamic reasons doesn't change the fact that HE didn't state this was the reason.

It wasn't a general letter - but an explanation of why he was carrying out the terror attack.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Bora why talk in generalities when the specific question was the motivation for the WTC 93 bombing.

The terrorist who carried out the bombing said it was for political motives - US foreign policy in Mid East. He did not mention Islam/Jihad etc.

Just believing he must have done for Islamic reasons doesn't change the fact that HE didn't state this was the reason.

It wasn't a general letter - but an explanation of why he was carrying out the terror attack.

Cheers,
Shafique

-- Wed Sep 28, 2011 3:57 pm --

Bora why talk in generalities when the specific question was the motivation for the WTC 93 bombing.

The terrorist who carried out the bombing said it was for political motives - US foreign policy in Mid East. He did not mention Islam/Jihad etc.

Just believing he must have done for Islamic reasons doesn't change the fact that HE didn't state this was the reason.

It wasn't a general letter - but an explanation of why he was carrying out the terror attack.

Cheers,
Shafique

Shaf, I got it the first time, no need to repeat yourself.

You call them generalities - I call them facts. May be there was no need for him to state the obvious.

The terrorist says it was politically motivated.

Bora claims to know better.

Hmm.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:The terrorist says it was politically motivated.

Bora claims to know better.

Hmm.

Cheers,
Shafique

Claiming to know more (and better) is your specialty Shaf.

The terrorist - as in one????

Err, I think you mean 'not believing in hype and trusting the evidence' don't you?

It takes a perverse logic to criticise someone for quoting a terrorist stating the reason for an attack, when discussing the reason for the attack.

But that's just me - I don't invent reasons when the terrorists don't state what I wished they'd said.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:Err, I think you mean 'not believing in hype and trusting the evidence' don't you?

It takes a perverse logic to criticise someone for quoting a terrorist stating the reason for an attack, when discussing the reason for the attack.

But that's just me - I don't invent reasons when the terrorists don't state what I wished they'd said.

Cheers,
Shafique

And what would it be that you had "wished they'd said"? Never mind, I don't think I want to know.

Shaf, if there is anyone who is the master at inventing it's you!!!! Just one of your many talents.

You are apparently wishing the reason the terrorist gave was 'It was Islam that made me do it' - but instead, he said it was only US foreign policy.

I'm struggling to see why a supposed Jihadist would NOT mention religion if that was part of the motivation.

The only conclusion is that your logic that we should ignore the reasons the terrorist gave is flawed.

He didn't say it was because of religion. You are the one making this claim.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:You are apparently wishing the reason the terrorist gave was 'It was Islam that made me do it' - but instead, he said it was only US foreign policy.

I'm struggling to see why a supposed Jihadist would NOT mention religion if that was part of the motivation.

The only conclusion is that your logic that we should ignore the reasons the terrorist gave is flawed.

He didn't say it was because of religion. You are the one making this claim.

Cheers,
Shafique

Oh, Shaf. Clearly you didn't read my posts. You must suffer from severe migraines having such a narrow mind. You might want to ease up as you may very well be a good candidate for having a brain anurism.

I read your posts and was intrigued that you were trying to convince me that the WTC 93 attack was religiously motivated, when the reasons given by the terrorists only mentioned US foreign policy.

I understood the links and logic you were trying to support this theory - but I still can't ignore the simple fact that the reasons given by the terrorist did not include Islamic theology.

Simple:
1. Did WTC 93 terrorists state the reasons for the attack. Answer: Yes.
2. Did they state it was because of religions: Answer: No.
3. Did they give reason for the attack: Yes - it was US foreign policy in Mid East.

Why complicate something so clear?

Cheers,
Shafique

So you went from terrorist to terrorists.

Note to all governments: Please refrain from using the term "Islamic Terrorists". In the future they shall be referred to Political Terrorists in spite of the fact that they are..............Muslims!!!!

What's clear is that the two go hand in hand Shaf. *BB picks up Shaf's rattle and hands it to him*

What's the matter Bora?

It is not my fault that the reasons given for the WTC 93 only included US foreign policy. Can't pin that one on me.

Cheers,
Shafique