Who are the real terrorists?

[ginnyfizz]

 

With the US being so bent on capturing terrorists, we shouldn't allow the muslim brotherhood in the country if they are. I don't see how the US isn't capturing anyone if they are in the country, doesn't make much sense if they are a terrorist organization. Not only do we know WHO they are we know WHERE they are.

 

Why don't we capture them if they are inside of the country, not even in hiding?

 

http://www.ikhwanweb.com/article.php?id=28097

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/10/opinion/10erian.html

 

:wallbash: Oh, it really that simple, is it? Did you not read my point about the fact that in terrorism cases witnesses often withdraw at the last minute due to being terrorised? Did you google the tragic case of Jean McConville? Have you any idea how long it has taken us in Britain to nail some of the terrorists in our own midst? We have known who they are for years, they have had "buildings", from which they have spewed their hate politics, nailing them for sure is another matter.

 

As for those articles, well, they are the propaganda of the Moslem Brotherhood itself. They are what they want you to see.

 

I am aghast at how you can try and call your own government terrorists when you clearly have no experience of how real terrorists operate, and post apologia for organisations that really are terrorists or linked with terror. Calling their terrorist buddies "splinter groups" doesn't fool anyone. Terrorists are groups that have not been elected to office, not being able to garner enough popular support to push through their aims, they spit out their dummy in sinister fashion and turn to the any means possible. Some of which means are violent. Some of which means involve forming a public/political front that has nothing to do with terrorism, of course. (That's a little bit of Brit sarcasm btw....)

[HappyHerring]

With the US being so bent on capturing terrorists, we shouldn't allow the muslim brotherhood in the country if they are. I don't see how the US isn't capturing anyone if they are in the country, doesn't make much sense if they are a terrorist organization. Not only do we know WHO they are we know WHERE they are.

 

Why don't we capture them if they are inside of the country, not even in hiding?

 

http://www.ikhwanweb...le.php?id=28097

http://www.nytimes.c...on/10erian.html

 

:wallbash: Oh, it really that simple, is it? Did you not read my point about the fact that in terrorism cases witnesses often withdraw at the last minute due to being terrorised? Did you google the tragic case of Jean McConville? Have you any idea how long it has taken us in Britain to nail some of the terrorists in our own midst? We have known who they are for years, they have had "buildings", from which they have spewed their hate politics, nailing them for sure is another matter.

 

As for those articles, well, they are the propaganda of the Moslem Brotherhood itself. They are what they want you to see.

 

I am aghast at how you can try and call your own government terrorists when you clearly have no experience of how real terrorists operate, and post apologia for organisations that really are terrorists or linked with terror. Calling their terrorist buddies "splinter groups" doesn't fool anyone. Terrorists are groups that have not been elected to office, not being able to garner enough popular support to push through their aims, they spit out their dummy in sinister fashion and turn to the any means possible. Some of which means are violent. Some of which means involve forming a public/political front that has nothing to do with terrorism, of course. (That's a little bit of Brit sarcasm btw....)

In the real world where at least the western and central european governments have to bear in mind human rights (I'll allow for the moment the your argument that the U.S. is a terrorist organisation, a view which is mainly advocated by the followers of presidents for life, kings and similar despots) the courts in various jurisdictions demand varying degrees of evidence. Any organisation which would hope to survive in the medium term would take notice of what is permissible as evidence in such courts and tailor the organisations and offshoots to allow for the rules. In this manner Sinn Fein spoke for the IRA but supposedly was not the IRA managed to remain legal in both the U.K. & the Irish Republic.

Maharth's point about being friends with someone not making you one of them is so true: Sinn Fein/IRA was and probably still is friends with FARC, ETA, the Corsican separatists etc. I won't even remind you of the amusing interception by the French navy some years back of a significant arms shipment from the great charmer himself Ghaddafi!

As the saying goes you've got to laugh. :wacko:

Edited February 26, 2011 by happy pig

[ginnyfizz]

Err...I don't recall saying that the USA is a terrorist organisation AT ALL. Not me that said that, happy pig, so I am a bit baffled by why you direct that argument at me rather than marharth. If you also check the thrust of my argument in that post of mine that you just quoted was that whereas we know darned well who these guys really are, nailing them WITH EVIDENCE (as a lawyer I am more than familiar with the rules of evidence,) which tends to evaporate particularly readily in the face of terrorist witness nobbling, is quite another.

 

Ah yes...Sinn Fein and the IRA. Enough said, before I start swearing like a sailor...but yes, they surely did work the system. This is just the sort of dilemma I was talking about. Happy Pig, I am not sure whether or not you are also indulging in a little bit of British sarcasm yourself. It may well be that having friends who are terrorists don't make you a terrorist yourself. But hell, I am a cynical old bat and have seen too much of it for it all to be coincidence. In that case, some people need to be more careful about the company they keep. For example, back to the Mission Statement of the Moslem Brotherhood. They are not only friends with Hamas, but their aims include the overthrow of the kuffar by any means possible. Which does not exclude terror. "A rose by any other name..."

[Fatalmasterpiece]

I couldn't agree with the OP more.

 

Tell the innocent people in Afghanistan that get killed by drone strikes that the USA military isn't a terrorist organization. Tell it to the people I have met from Lebanon who had to flee her country when her house was blown up with bombs supplied to Israel from the USA.

 

My friend was in special operations in Iraq. To acquire information he and his unit would raid suspected homes, and even force interrogate suspects at gun point after bursting in their room while the man is making love to his wife. Then with the given information they raided a complex housing militants in the city. After killing all the inhabitants they realized the house was wired to blow, and rather than report the casualties and have the place be searched after disarming the explosives they felt it easier to detonate then entire building and report to their superiors that the militants blew up the house upon their arrival. No code of conduct - no process - no organization, just brute force.

 

There have been far more civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001 than were killed in the World Trade Center attack, both due to our bullets and bombs as well as the enemies.

 

Footage of American Soldiers killing unarmed civilians in Iraq:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25EWUUBjPMo

 

The military never apologized for this action. They actually tried to cover it up. And when Wikileaks released it, they all went scrambling to find a way to shut it down and arrest it's leader, Julian Assange.

 

What's worse is no one in America seems to care about this. Where is the uproar and the demand for justice from the American community as a whole? There is none. We are all just complacent to watch out American Idol, eat McDonalds and sit back while our nation and it's allies bulldoze their way across the Mid-East.

[SpellAndShield]

I couldn't agree with the OP more.

 

Tell the innocent people in Afghanistan that get killed by drone strikes that the USA military isn't a terrorist organization. Tell it to the people I have met from Lebanon who had to flee her country when her house was blown up with bombs supplied to Israel from the USA.

 

My friend was in special operations in Iraq. To acquire information he and his unit would raid suspected homes, and even force interrogate suspects at gun point after bursting in their room while the man is making love to his wife. Then with the given information they raided a complex housing militants in the city. After killing all the inhabitants they realized the house was wired to blow, and rather than report the casualties and have the place be searched after disarming the explosives they felt it easier to detonate then entire building and report to their superiors that the militants blew up the house upon their arrival. No code of conduct - no process - no organization, just brute force.

 

There have been far more civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001 than were killed in the World Trade Center attack, both due to our bullets and bombs as well as the enemies.

 

Footage of American Soldiers killing unarmed civilians in Iraq:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25EWUUBjPMo

 

The military never apologized for this action. They actually tried to cover it up. And when Wikileaks released it, they all went scrambling to find a way to shut it down and arrest it's leader, Julian Assange.

 

What's worse is no one in America seems to care about this. Where is the uproar and the demand for justice from the American community as a whole? There is none. We are all just complacent to watch out American Idol, eat McDonalds and sit back while our nation and it's allies bulldoze their way across the Mid-East.

 

People like those you are arguing against would simply say those are unfortunate consequences of war, whether it was necessary to wage the war or not, is irrelevant to them. What they really mean is that they don't care if 'brown' people are killed.

 

I think sometimes people are blind to their own racism, nationalism, etc. It is very persistent in the American populace in general. Many years ago when my Korean girlfriend first moved to the US (in the Midwest) she was stared at, made fun of and really pushed out of the opportunity to socialise and become accepted. She still has mental scars from that time. I doubt the people who taunted her considered themselves racists.

 

Basically, this scene from Seven sums it up like you have done:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snxgxpVyt6Y

Edited February 26, 2011 by Stardusk

[ginnyfizz]

Now you are throwing around accusations you cannot substantiate. If all else fails, throw in the racism accusation and get everyone nodding in agreement with you. If you are applying that to me personally, I request that you withdraw your remark.

[SpellAndShield]

Now you are throwing around accusations you cannot substantiate. If all else fails, throw in the racism accusation and get everyone nodding in agreement with you. If you are applying that to me personally, I request that you withdraw your remark.

 

Not to you specifically, but generally speaking people who refuse to admit that their governments have engaged in mass murder directly or indirectly (the American government for example; millions of Iraqis are dead). What if it were British people being bombed and shot in droves? Why are British lives or American ones of inherently more value than other lives? I can't think of any reason for supporting an imperialist foreign policy than the idea, racist, nationalist, however you want to term it, that 'we' are somehow better than 'they' so it does not matter what happens to them.

[ginnyfizz]

So in fact you are accusing people of what is certainly a criminal offence in my country? And baselessly too, because none of those of us who take the harder line on terrorism have ever once stated that British or American lives are any more valuable than others. You equate patriotism with racism. Well that's a load of mushroom fodder. My family are from a long line of English patriots who as well as spilling their guts for their country have also put themselves on the line to help the VICTIMS of racism and intolerance. (Being Catholic recusants they had experienced a fair amount of the latter themselves.) I use this as an example because you will find that this is very often the case with those of a patriotic inclination, certainly in the USA and UK. Sure you have white supremacist organisations. But the vast majority of those who are not ashamed to call themselves patriots, wish to see what they love about their own country preserved, but they do not want to see people from other countries suffer for it. Sadly, in practice this doesn't always come about and people will be killed.

 

Would you really say that we should not have fought Hitler in case innocents got hurt? I sure hope not as I wouldn't be here to be debating if we hadn't.

[SpellAndShield]

So in fact you are accusing people of what is certainly a criminal offence in my country? And baselessly too, because none of those of us who take the harder line on terrorism have ever once stated that British or American lives are any more valuable than others. You equate patriotism with racism. Well that's a load of mushroom fodder. My family are from a long line of English patriots who as well as spilling their guts for their country have also put themselves on the line to help the VICTIMS of racism and intolerance. (Being Catholic recusants they had experienced a fair amount of the latter themselves.) I use this as an example because you will find that this is very often the case with those of a patriotic inclination, certainly in the USA and UK. Sure you have white supremacist organisations. But the vast majority of those who are not ashamed to call themselves patriots, wish to see what they love about their own country preserved, but they do not want to see people from other countries suffer for it. Sadly, in practice this doesn't always come about and people will be killed.

 

Would you really say that we should not have fought Hitler in case innocents got hurt? I sure hope not as I wouldn't be here to be debating if we hadn't.

 

Precisely my point; it's sad that all of those people in Iraq and Afghanistan have been killed because of our aggression, but that is just the way it is. That is imperialist talk. Did both of our countries invade Iraq to 'preserve what we love' about our countries?

 

How on eart, you could possibly draw the analogy between fighting Hitler and aggressively invading a country on fabricated evidence, then turning it into chaos soup with millions of displaced and dead, is beyond me. I cannot answer this because it seems completely absurd to me.

 

There is a thin line between patriotism, nationalism and other negative feelings. As long as people view themselves as British primarily (or insert anything else there be it Muslim, Greek, etc) and humans secondarily these problems will persist. Tribalism has its uses but I think it is becoming a liability that costs more than it benefits us.

[ginnyfizz]

Oh, more slogans. Imperialism and tribalism now. What a load of rot. You are totally misconstruing my words. I did not state that we invaded Iraq or anyone else to "preserve what we love" - I can almost hear you sneering. I was speaking in general terms about why you should not equate patriotism with racism, which is what you were doing.

 

You are also misconstruing the analogy about fighting Hitler. Nothing absurd about that one. You and Fatalmasterpiece brought in the subject of civilians and innocents being killed, and you in particular implied that this apparently does not matter to those of us who don't agree with you, as in " What they really mean is that they don't care if 'brown' people are killed. " This is what makes the fighting Hitler particularly apt, since it is clear evidence that wars in which innocent people will be killed have been fought every bit as often where it is not "brown" people involved. It has nothing to do with race.