Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Chocoholic · Aug 12, 2006

Good post K. I was actually watching an intersting programme on racial profiling earlier, and it's sad that it gets to that sometimes. BUt even if someone looks arab, they might not be muslim. What does a muslim look like?

As I've said before it's just really really sad that this is the world we're living in today and that whole groups of people are being tarnished by the actions of a few.

freza · Aug 12, 2006

oh arnie, you find excuses for these statements but you find excuses against my statements and delete them, nice... great example of a fair moderator. btw, choco's statement on pakistanis was a GLARINGLY racist statement and she tried to "fix" only because someone pointed out her... blunder. Her outburst and initial statement clearly speaks for itself.

choco, I have never called for the "mass murder" of any people. I think I explained this to you on that other thread, with evidence and rebuttal...you forgot?

I get it people, it's best for some of us not to post.... we get it, well, I get it.

I think this forum should come with a this disclaimer: "Only pro-US/UK/Israel views allowed; moderate views tolerated; opposing views will be censored or deleted". Might as well....

Don't bother replying arnie, you have more important things to do on this forum...

kanelli · Aug 12, 2006

Freza, it shouldn't be that way. Not everyone here wants to censor people who don't agree with their opinions.

uae75 · Aug 12, 2006

arniegang wrote:75'

I never said they were abusive. I had complaints via pm, that, in my opinion were justified.

This maybe an "open forum" but at the end of the day Mods decide on whether the line has been crossed.

When you start talking of bombing people, the line is crossed. I am not going to continually discuss this. People know the rules and if they wish to post something controversial or "borderline" they can post it to me via "pm" before submission.

Ur right, mods decide whether lines have been crossed or not, but it also means they have to be objective,and not easily influenced by few complains via pm.

uae75 · Aug 12, 2006

kanelli wrote:Well, I wish I could have seen Freza's posts that got deleted. From my perspective it is still perfectly on topic to discuss why some people want to commit suicide attacks on innocent civilians. This thread is about planned terrorist attacks is it not? Of course, the wording is essential. Freza makes a fair point about some of the troll's posts still being allowed on this forum while other people's posts are not. With respect, let's try to be a little more objective with the moderating.

I do have to say - we have been around most of these points before in previous threads.

There are lots of other disenfranchised groups in this world, but you don't see them strapping bombs to themselves and blowing up innocent civilians. Systematic suicide bombing and mass terrorism on the part of radical Muslims is not admirable and just make people think less of all Muslims. Can you blame them? Do you think it makes some Londoners feel comfortable to sit on the metro next to an Arab-looking person with a backpack? Their brains may say, "Don't be racist or stereotypical. This guy is harmless.", but in reality that person could have a bomb. The guy may be harmless, but the fact remains that other Arab or Arab-looking Muslims have broken the trust of the public and this makes life more difficult for moderate Muslims who are innocent and non-violent.

I still think that Muslims are not doing enough. They don't have a big enough political lobby, don't band together because of sectarian/political boundaries, and they don't do enough to reach out to the public or try to counter the negative portrayals that Muslims get in some media coverage. Most of all, the moderate Muslims are not doing an effective job of identifying and flushing out the radical people who are tainting the minds of young Muslim men and brainwashing them into becoming terrorists.

All of these things you can't blame on Western governments. It is such a cop-out to have many Arabs and Muslims blaming the West for all their troubles. They need to outsmart and outplay any Western government that is meddling. Why not use economic power over them! My guess is that things are going to fester until there is an all-out war.

Although I wont agree with some of what you said, but I fully concur your last paragraph.

arniegang · Aug 12, 2006

uae75 wrote:
arniegang wrote:75'

I never said they were abusive. I had complaints via pm, that, in my opinion were justified.

This maybe an "open forum" but at the end of the day Mods decide on whether the line has been crossed.

When you start talking of bombing people, the line is crossed. I am not going to continually discuss this. People know the rules and if they wish to post something controversial or "borderline" they can post it to me via "pm" before submission.

Ur right, mods decide whether lines have been crossed or not, but it also means they have to be objective,and not easily influenced by few complains via pm.

Playing devils advocate is not an easy job in here. I have explained elsewhere, it is not easy wearing 2 hats, ie a mod hat and a personal hat. I try not to involve myself in discussion's that are of a sensitive nature because of my position.

Its easy to look from the outside in, and talk of objectivity. It is like my example above re freza's post and how she as an individual interptreted Chocs words. To remain truely objective is a skill, the vast majority of us do not possess.

At the end of the day you can only please some of the people, some of the time and certainly not all the people all of the time.

Also, if you read within other thread, in particular Lebanon, i have asked many times very politely for people to be aware of the sensitive nature of the subject. I can only repeat myself so many times. It seems my polite requests were ignored on many occasions and the thread had to be locked twice. I did not take sides and i mentioned NO names or insinuated anyone in particular. My posts were a warning and a request to ALL.

I failed to see which part of my requests and advise, people didnt or do not understand.

Hope this clarifies my position UAE75 and you and others respect my perspective.

Concord · Aug 13, 2006

I have a thought/suggestion.

What if chocs, shafique, kannelli and sharewadi did not post on this forum for a week! I mean voluntarily of course.

It would be interisting to read the "wisdom" and discussions by the likes of LH, Freza, et. al. Let them respond to Nostradamus, Serpent and Mr. & Mrs. Perhaps then they will appreciate or recognize true discussions - unlikely but...

It would be I hoot, I beleive.

Chocoholic · Aug 13, 2006

Concord, I think it would be carnage! Interesting suggestion however.

shafique · Aug 13, 2006

I agree Chocs - but it would be an interesting experiment.. I suspect it would descend into a flame war, but then again, perhaps not??

Concord · Aug 13, 2006

I bet they will have nothing to say to each other! Specailly since nostradamus, serpent and Mr. & Mrs. ---- are just clowns who would not be able to keep the thread going. Just watch!!!!

le-serpent-rouge · Aug 13, 2006

diverted to F.F.com

le-serpent-rouge · Aug 13, 2006

kanelli · Aug 13, 2006

le-serpent-rouge - maybe you could slither back under a rock. You don't make any sense!

sharewadi · Aug 13, 2006

Concord wrote:I bet they will have nothing to say to each other! Specailly since nostradamus, serpent and Mr. & Mrs. ---- are just clowns who would not be able to keep the thread going. Just watch!!!!

They are trolls. Every time you respond (or even read their post), they have achieved their objective.

Chocoholic · Aug 13, 2006

THe red snake needs to be stepped on!

kanelli · Aug 17, 2006

Well, was reading the paper today and one line reads, "Airlines including British Airways are estimated to have suffered losses as high as $95 million a day." Some people believe that the whole air terror plot is a conspiracy by the US and UK governments, but why would they make up such a conspiracy if it will cost so much money and incovenience to an industry as important as the airline industry? It is US and UK airlines, but also many other airlines that are affected.

shafique · Aug 17, 2006

Well, a cost of $95m may seem like a lot and certainly there has been a lot of disruption.

However compare that cost with the cost of the Iraq mis-adventure (and not to mention how much the bombing of Lebanon must have cost) and the consipiracy theorists would argue that this $100m would be considered peanuts for the administrations that want us to believe their is a bigger threat than there really is, which will enable more draconian laws, control and ultimately expenditure on arms and intelligence (which in a perverted way they see as a way to bolster the economy).

Is $95m really too high a price to pay?

That said, I am not one of those who are saying it IS a consipiracy and there is no plot.. but am saying that we should not jump to conclusions either way yet. One of the suspects has already been released without charge and the others are still being questioned.

Some of the facts that have filtered out so far are incongurous with the idea of suicide bombers - eg. guns and £19,000 in cash are reportedly found in one of the houses - but what would ideological suicide bombers using liquid explosives need guns for? Aren't these more likely to be mere criminals - guns and loads of money = obvious conclusion criminals (and I know the area of East London the house is in - no shortage of Asian gangs there!)

Anyway - I am inclined to believe there is not a little bit of hype and spin going on at the moment. How much, remains to be seen - and I will happily admit I'm wrong if evidence of a real plot is revealed.

Let's wait and see.

Cheers,
Shafique

Chocoholic · Aug 17, 2006

I also read an interesting article today on the same subject which raises some good points against the conspiracy spinners.

The sheer logistcal organisation to 'pull the wool over peoples eyes' would be ridiculous.

First you'd have to find a bunch of people willing to be arrested and charged with such atrocities - would a group of people be willing to have their lvies destroyed in such a way?

Co-ordination between UK, US and Pakistani authorities. Tying up MI5, police, fire resources.

Cancelling and diverting flights from countries all across the globe, leading to financial loss and inconvenience.

Sorry but there's just too much there for it to all be a conspiracy, the work is not worth it.

sniper420 · Aug 17, 2006

Chocoholic wrote:I also read an interesting article today on the same subject which raises some good points against the conspiracy spinners.

The sheer logistcal organisation to 'pull the wool over peoples eyes' would be ridiculous.

First you'd have to find a bunch of people willing to be arrested and charged with such atrocities - would a group of people be willing to have their lvies destroyed in such a way?

Co-ordination between UK, US and Pakistani authorities. Tying up MI5, police, fire resources.

Cancelling and diverting flights from countries all across the globe, leading to financial loss and inconvenience.

Sorry but there's just too much there for it to all be a conspiracy, the work is not worth it.

well pakistan only got few suspects the rest was done by MI5. Now if i was one of the suspects..... and thye got my internet and pne conversation.....in the court i would say "I was just trying ti c if the british intelligence was effective and capable enuf to catch terrorists". They didnt find any trace of bombs in my house . and the bombs were supposed to be made from household stuffs.

kanelli · Aug 17, 2006

That's $95 million per day, not just $95 million. In the end it will be billions.

I agree with Chocs, it seems too elaborate for US and UK governments to come with such a conspiracy.

I'm also with Shaf though - let's see what the evidence brings.

shafique · Aug 17, 2006

Chocs/Kanelli - the conspiracy may be to over-blow, hype, exagerate the threat.

There is already much evidence that the threat from Al Qaeda has been over-hyped. Look at the Madrid bombings for example - it took a full investigation before it finally came out that there was no Al Qaeda link after all.

Similarly the Ricin poison arrests - massive media coverage, turns out to be much less in reality.

It's been pointed out many times before, but even with 9/11 and subsequent terrorist attacks, in the West you're many, many, many more times likely to be injured or killed in a 'normal' accident than be a victim of a terrorist act. I've lived through IRA bombings of London and was within earshot of a big explosion in Docklands which killed people. I was on the tube on 7/7.

The risks were greater under the IRA threat than the current threat from the Al Qaeda wannabes - for a start there are far more Irish Catholics in the UK than there are asian muslims, and I would argue that there were far more IRA sympathisers than there are suicide bomber approvers from within the Muslim community (I speak from an insider's point of view on the latter).

Remember that the IRA bombed shoppers in Omagh, destroyed the main shopping district of Manchester (arguably, doing Manchester a favour), blew up hotels full of politicians etc. Yet we did not have the kind of reactions we are facing in the UK today.

In short, the risks have been demonstrably over-hyped in relation to the actual risks.

This is the background to my skepticism of the arrests and plots until the evidence comes out.

(Contrast this with my immediate acceptance that Al Qaeda were behind the Madrid bombings.. )

cheers,
Shafique

kanelli · Aug 17, 2006

That's true Shaf, there is certainly too much hype about terrorism and Al Qaeda in particular when in reality the risks are quite low. Even my husband could have been killed or badly injured when a mentally unstable teenager set off a bomb in our local shopping mall in Finland. If it weren't for two phone calls that delayed his entering the mall he would have been eating right near where the bomb went off. All it takes is one psycho to do something drastic. You can't always control what happens in life.

However, the fact remains that a group of radical Islamists killed hundreds of people in the US, Madrid, and the UK. I keep hearing people criticising the US government for doing nothing about Al Qaeda when they bombed the US embassies in Africa. Then there are people who think the 9/11 attacks were also a conspiracy and that it was the US government that carried those out and then blamed Al Qaeda. I'm sure there are people who think that the Madrid and London attacks were also a conspiracy. (Actually, the Madrid bombings were originally pinned on the Basques if you remember. They didn't think it was Al Qaeda right from the start.)

The governments may not be 100% responsible for hyping things up - it is the news media and everyday citizens that thrive off of sensational stories. After actual attacks or arrests for alleged terror plots, people get nervous and afraid. They realise that they can be a target at any time and there are small groups of people out there who want to maim and kill in the name of revenge. In light of world politics and recent trends, it would be foolish to think that there are not disgruntled groups of radicals that do want to attack innocent people to get their points across.

shafique · Aug 17, 2006

kanelli wrote:However, the fact remains that a group of radical Islamists killed hundreds of people in the US, Madrid, and the UK. I keep hearing people criticising the US government for doing nothing about Al Qaeda when they bombed the US embassies in Africa.

Kanelli - the Madrid bombings weren't related to the US or UK ones - that's one example of hyping the threat, by linking disparate terrorist attacks to give the illusion that Al Qaeda is more powerful than it actually is.

Yes, Madrid was initially blamed on ETA by the Government - but that blame lasted about 24hrs (perhaps less) before being retracted. The majority of commentators and people in Spain did not believe in the ETA theory from outset and Al Qaeda was blamed up until the report was finally concluded - I think it was a year later?

Al Qaeda were responsible for the African consulate bombings, attacks on the WTC (9/11 and the previous one) - but pretty few others.

Most of the post-9/11 attacks or attempted attacks have been by wannabes or totally separate organisations (eg. Bali bombings, Turkey bombings etc). The US and UK administrations quickly make the link between these and Al Qaeda to justify the 'war on terror'.

The funniest one was to try and link Iraq to Al Qaeda when Bin Laden was a great outspoken critic of Saddam (and vice versa). The frightening thing is that even today many Americans (according to many polls), think that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 (sorry Dubai Girl)!

The irony is that Al Qaeda is definitely now in Iraq, whereas it was not before (the stories of training camps in the north has long been discredited).

Cheers,
Shafique

kanelli · Aug 17, 2006

Sorry, Shaf, I didn't say that the attacks were linked or that they were all Al Qaeda. I said that Islamic militants carried out the attacks - that is what they all had in common.

I think that Al Qaeda is not able to function well anymore after troops went into Afghanistan and Al Qaeda leaders have been tracked down and arrested or killed. Perhaps the planning and contacts between cells has been broken because of this. In any case, there are other smaller terrorist groups springing up to plan attacks, as we could see with Bali, London, and Madrid.

I also read that many Americans still think that Al Qaeda and Saddam were linked - and that Iraq was involved in 9/11. After all this time and all the evidence to the contrary the message isn't getting through to much of the American public. Very sad.

shafique · Aug 17, 2006

Thanks for clarifying that you didn't think Al Qaeda were involved in Madrid.

I was just reading Wikipedia about 9/11 and Al Qaeda, here's an interesting snippet from the Al Qaeda entry

Is al-Qaeda a global network or a small organization?

Al-Qaeda has no clear structure, and this permits debate as to how many members make up the organization, whether it is millions scattered across the globe, or whether it is even zero. According to the controversial BBC documentary The Power of Nightmares, al-Qaeda is so weakly linked together that it is hard to say it exists apart from Osama bin Laden and a small clique of close associates. The lack of any significant numbers of convicted al-Qaeda members despite a large number of arrests on terrorism charges is cited by the documentary as a reason to doubt whether a widespread entity that meets the description of al-Qaeda exists at all. The extent and nature of al-Qaeda remains a topic of dispute.

Cheers,
Shafique

kanelli · Aug 17, 2006

And so it should be disputed. As far as I know, only the embassy bombings and 9/11 were Al Qaeda - nothing since 2001... Hardly a large sinister group are they.

Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

Airplane Terror Plot Foiled In UK

Go To

Dubai Discussions

Dubai Expat Forums

Dubai Business

Dubai Tech Discussions

Dubai Classifieds