It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Yeah baby! - "Congressman: Mecca a possible retaliation target"

page: 7
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Soul, you deny that Muslims have had extremists among them before the USA existed? Are you for real?


What exactly are "extremist"? What are you referring to? Hashishinn???




posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 08:55 AM
link   
skippy....you advised me to do something as a muslim....i asked you, how do you suggest i go about it.
Could you please answer me. When you suggest something to someone and they ask you how to do it, one would expect you to have the answer, seeing as it was you who suggested it in the first place.
So?....how can i reign in the extremists?



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Soul, you deny that Muslims have had extremists among them before the USA existed? Are you for real?

I did not say that - so Please do not put words in my Mouth.

I said that I do not agree with the "FACT" that "They Hated Us Long Before..."

Why do You think that?



The USA did not create extreme Muslims, they were around long before the USA was.

No the USA did not Invent Radical Islam - they have just AWAKEN it from its Long Sleep.

Now tell me, is that a Smart think to do?



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by geek101
skippy....you advised me to do something as a muslim....i asked you, how do you suggest i go about it.
Could you please answer me. When you suggest something to someone and they ask you how to do it, one would expect you to have the answer, seeing as it was you who suggested it in the first place.
So?....how can i reign in the extremists?


Extreme Muslims give YOU a bad name. They are your responsibility. I ask YOU a question:

What have YOU DONE to stop extremism among your faith? Why is it my responsibility as a non Muslim to keep the extremists among you from killing me?

You want to know what I think you should do? I have no idea. But if Muslims continue to leave that choice up to NON Muslims, we will continue to make choices in OUR best interests.

Its funny, you critisize what the West is doing to defend itself from a sect of your religion, but Muslims as a whole have yet to offer a solution or act themselves.

Terrorist Muslims can only be stopped by non terrorist Muslims. Period. Otherwise nations like my own, the USA, will defend itself however it see's fit. If that doesnt sit well with you, stop posting on these boards and get off your a$$ and do something about it.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:07 AM
link   
I think it's amazing how in this brave new world of political correctness you can be called a racist for wanting to retaliate against a devestating attack on your country.

We under attack from Islam and if a nuke goes off in New York or Chicago or L.A., it will be Islam that did it. There's no reason not to attack at the center of Islam in retaliation if that happened -- in fact the government would be betraying its own citizens if it didn't do it.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:07 AM
link   
how are they my responsibility? They are not my children. I dont know them, i have no association with them.

You suggested something and now you are telling me you dont know how i should go about doing it!

Hmmm



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
You guys forget about the entire Cold War.

Mutual Annihilation was a situation that kept each enemy in check. Basically the wrong move would mean your destruction as well as your enemies. As terrible as this sounds, it worked for the USA and Russia beautifully. The Cold War is over and we are all still here.


Mutual anihilation works in case of "goverment vs goverment", it would for example be a good way to stop the war between Israel and Iran, but it won't work on terrorists.


Threatening Mecca with a nuclear attack if we are the subject of a nuclear attack is the same exact tactic. It FORCES each side to think about the consequences of their actions, hopefully to the point of alternate choice making.
Since radical Islam has no single country of origin, a target of grave significance must be chosen. Mecca is the only choice.


It is NOT the same tactics. You said it yourself, terrorists have no single country of origin, so nuking a holy place in Saudi Arabia makes no sense whatsoever. I explained in my previous post why. Read it. Terroists don't give a damn about holy places.


You haters are missing the entire point to all of this. Not one American wants to bomb Mecca or open that can of worms. But not one American will tolerate a nuclear attack on our people. But you guys hate Americans to the point where you could care less if we get attacked, you only care of we retaliate.


Who says we don'T care if americans get attacked? Most replies in this thread are by americans, and I think they DO care if they are attacked or not. That is not the point of the thread. Nobody said that. This thread IS about retaliation in case of nuclear strike. So, to that : Retaliation is one thing, stupid nuking of a holy place is another.


You also fail to see who needs to take the responsibility for Islamic terrorists and Islamic extremists: Islam does. Muslims need to police their own. Any group that has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the name of Allah needs to be policed by the entire Muslim community. Muslims need to bring them to justice and make it stop, not the West. But, as I mentioned in another reply, only Pakistan has done anything.


Yet, london bombers are pakistani-born and have spent months in pakistan, probably being recruited by al-qaeda there. So, wanna nuke Pakistan now?
It is not true that only Pakistan is doing something about it. Everybody is. Only, certain countries have limited resources to properly fight it. Let us not forget that in spite of the all-mightiness of Germany and USA, Atta &Co. still managed to live in one and train in the other country, hijack planes and secure their place in history books.
Someone once said that one's greatest strength is at the same time their greatest weakness. The free democratic society made it easy for them to do it. So ironicaly, dictatorship would make it hard for them, like Saddam did. But then we can't have dictatorships either. So, the solution would them be education, not violence. That is a topic for some other thread though.
Also, throwing away all laws and turning the world into bunch of gangs out on some killing spree is not a solution either.



It seems the ONLY way to FORCE Islam to manage thier own, is to threaten what they hold dearest. Because its perfectly clear that Islam cares nothing for us, as they as a whole have done nothing to stop Islamic Extremism.
Muslims are responsible for the actions of their own, just like every other group in the world. Until they realize this and take action, bombing Mecca IF the USA is attacked is just fine with me. Id like to press the button if they let me…


Muslims are responsible for actions of their own? I'm sorry but that is a stupid statement. Collective guilt? Such mentality brought us the Holocaust.
We live in societies of INDIVIDUALS, there is no collective guilt. What possible connection do millions of muslims in Bosnia (Europe) have with Afganistan? What power do they have to destroy afgani terrorist traning camps?? They can barely defend themselves from the hords of that other religion of peace, the christianity, from slaughtering them all.
Muslim nations have taken action against extremists, numerous arrests have been made all over the world.
You seem to WILLINGLY IGNORE ALL posts that tell you about it. You seem to have chosen to IGNORE everything that could change your point of view.
Have fun in Ignorance World then.








[edit on 19-7-2005 by paperclip]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:09 AM
link   
djohnsto77 wrote:




We under attack from Islam and if a nuke goes off in New York or Chicago or L.A., it will be Islam that did it


"Islam" cant "do" anything. ISlam is a religion, a word denoting a group of people.
"people" on the other hand, CAN do something.
Please stop blaming a billion people for the actions of a few.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Extreme Muslims give YOU a bad name. They are your responsibility. I ask YOU a question:

What have YOU DONE to stop extremism among your faith? Why is it my responsibility as a non Muslim to keep the extremists among you from killing me?

You want to know what I think you should do? I have no idea. But if Muslims continue to leave that choice up to NON Muslims, we will continue to make choices in OUR best interests.

Its funny, you critisize what the West is doing to defend itself from a sect of your religion, but Muslims as a whole have yet to offer a solution or act themselves.

Terrorist Muslims can only be stopped by non terrorist Muslims. Period. Otherwise nations like my own, the USA, will defend itself however it see's fit. If that doesnt sit well with you, stop posting on these boards and get off your a$$ and do something about it.



That's my whole problem with Christians. Oh, but the mule raping, gay killing, abortion clinic bombers have nothing to do with us.


All cults should take the forefront in dealing with their loose nuts. Because when someone else has to do it, it gets ugly.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
I think it's amazing how in this brave new world of political correctness you can be called a racist for wanting to retaliate against a devestating attack on your country.

We under attack from Islam and if a nuke goes off in New York or Chicago or L.A., it will be Islam that did it. There's no reason not to attack at the center of Islam in retaliation if that happened -- in fact the government would be betraying its own citizens if it didn't do it.


Whoever called that thinking racist was mistaken. It's bigoted, not racist.


And when it's outlawed you be sure and let me know. Then you can call it political correctness. Until then, that's just a right wing martrydom fantasy to purge the guilt of being racist bigots in the first place.

[edit on 19-7-2005 by RANT]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Souljah-Don't add legitamacy to skippy's rants by labelling Islam at any time as "extreme". Of course their has been enmity between islam and the west, which has resulted in wars. But to label one side as extreme is nonsense. Islam has been no more extreme than the west.

Another problem is trying to lump in centuries of conflict from a totally skewed and historically false perspective, together to somehow hold relevance to todays current "crisis" . There are more events in modern history that could be resolved, and do hold more signifigance than the crusades.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by geek101
"Islam" cant "do" anything. ISlam is a religion, a word denoting a group of people.
"people" on the other hand, CAN do something.
Please stop blaming a billion people for the actions of a few.


I'll repeat that if the Soviets had attacked us with ICBMs, it'd still be the actions of a few with most Russians innocent, and a lot probably not even agreeing with the communist ideology. It doesn't matter. We'd still retaliate.

The Islamic extremists see the entire Muslim world as a caliphate anyway, and want to unite the entire Muslim world, then the entire world under one Islamic fundamentalist regime with Mecca at the center. I don't see much of a distinction between the organization al-Qaeda and an enemy governmental regime -- they are equally dangerous.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:18 AM
link   
IF the American Indians and the African tribes had stood up to the imperial exploitation of their land and their natural resources would they have been viewed as extremists for doing so?

Our brief history as a nation is just a spit in the ocean of human civilization.

Apparently, we choose to ignore history when we should learn from it.

This endless lust for power and control of natural resouces is what drives all the hatred among men.

There is nothing HOLY about war!

Fundemental Christians believe they are God's chosen ones.
Fundemental Jews believe they are God's chosen ones
Fundemental Muslims believe they are God's chosen ones.
and so on........

It's high time we learn to differentiate between the words of man
and the word of God.


[edit on 19-7-2005 by FallenFromTheTree]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by geek101
how are they my responsibility? They are not my children. I dont know them, i have no association with them.

You suggested something and now you are telling me you dont know how i should go about doing it!

Hmmm


Don't you know Skippy's of the school that all you Muslims (the quiet, peace-loving, law-abiding ones and the extremist would-be suicide bombers) must know each other???

Its like when you visit a place and say you're from Toronto, Ontario, Canada and they say "oh -you must know so-and-so who lives in Charlottetown, PEI .

Its called ignorance, geek...and some people just can't help themselves, sorry to say. But that's what we're here to do...fight it every step of the way!


[edit on 19/7/05 by AlwaysLearning]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:22 AM
link   


You have voted paperclip for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


Paperclip, Although, I think that the times of "Speak softly but carry a big stick" days are over, I believe that speaking plainly to these extremists and informing them of what the consequences would be if they were to nuke or use any other form of WMD in the US to kill millions of innocent civilians.
I agree with you that these extremists are only using their religion as a cover but that still does not deter their supporters from providing them with monies, shelter, transport etc. As long as there is such support for these terrorists, then such ideals of taking out a holy place such as Mecca if the terrorists were to use WMD's may make the supporters to think twice.
I detest the idea of this but, again, there is no way to easily identify a terrorist, they are not congregated in one location so identifying who may murder you and your family is a nearly impossible task. It will take the co-operation of both the west as well as the non-extremist Muslims working in conjunction to identify these creatures.
So long as the non-extremist Muslims just issue Fatwas declaiming these terrorists whilst allowing these same terrorists to use their mosques and other holy places as safe refuges (such as what occurred in Fallujah), then the they are placing such sites in jeopardy.


Are you really that naive to think that you could stop radicals from attacking people by threatening to bomb Mecca?
I mean, come on. This is not some crappy Hollywood movie, this is reality. In reality these radicals thrive on ideas like that one. They don't care about holy places; they care about limiting political influence of secularism in their countries. They USE religion as a tool to control people, so nuking holy site would be very much welcomed by them as a PERFECT way to get more Muslims on their side.
It would also be a perfect thing to DIVIDE western world, since most sane people in the west wouldn't support such action. It would create an even further destabilization of the world, exactly the thing extremists are trying to achieve.


To the other naysayers,
From reading the various US bashers here on this thread I take it that what you are all advocating is that the US should ONLY do the following:

1) Leave IRAQ ( I agree with you) Heck, I would be for the US as well as the rest of the Western world (along with relief organizations businesses, etc) leave the area and leave them to their own devices. Unfortunately, these terrorists have made it perfectly clear that even doing this will not deter nor slow their attacks or hatred.
2) Forgive those who murdered 3000 Americans on 9/11 Americans who were innocent civilians who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
3) The UK should just forgive and forget those people who killed 55 and wounded 700 on 7/7
4) If / When these terrorists decide to use a nuke (remember the pretext of this whole thread was that the terrorists were planning on doing this first). The US as well as the rest of the world should just sit on their thumbs, spin and say woe is me, alack alas. Just forgive and forget the deaths of 4 million innocent civilians (the target number of deaths that they are reportedly looking for.

What do you suggest? Not much I am sure. It is just way, way to easy to condemn a nation or a people who propose such a response to a nuclear attack than to actually do something constructive to end and or prevent such an event from happening.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:33 AM
link   
concept of bombing Mecca cant be done even if they thought of it it will never be done because there will alway have problems and stuff like.

Mecca and Madina is a holy land protected by Allah and there is no way anything bad is goning to happen there.

There was Namrud the king in Yeman tryed to destroyed but Allah punished him.

The only know attack of Mecca that was destroyed part of Mecca is in the time of Muaweya, where his general Abu Yousef Al-Hajaj, A sadistic person bombard it because he wanted to take over Mecca from Abu Baker's Nephew ( cant remeber his name exact). He bombard because he wanted to Haj in the time he blocked Meccan and Abu Baker's nephew prevented him.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:34 AM
link   
concept of bombing Mecca cant be done even if they thought of it it will never be done because there will alway have problems and stuff like.

Mecca and Madina is a holy land protected by Allah and there is no way anything bad is goning to happen there.

There was Namrud the king in Yeman tryed to destroyed but Allah punished him.

The only know attack of Mecca that was destroyed part of Mecca is in the time of Muaweya, where his general Abu Yousef Al-Hajaj, A sadistic person bombard it because he wanted to take over Mecca from Abu Baker's Nephew ( cant remeber his name exact). He bombard because he wanted to Haj in the time he blocked Meccan and Abu Baker's nephew prevented him.

Anybody want to know more about it please send U2U

Even Animals cant enter Mecca sometimes you see birds flying around top of mecca



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:39 AM
link   


You have voted kenshiro2012 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have used all of your votes for this month.

I think you really said it! really put it into perspective.

It's not just about what WE (the western nations/Chrisitans/whatever) do....they (the MUSLIM extremeist) will still march on to the same tune..does not matter if we turn the other cheek, do nothing or attack full force...they will still march the same way they are now.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by geek101
how are they my responsibility? They are not my children. I dont know them, i have no association with them.

You suggested something and now you are telling me you dont know how i should go about doing it!

Hmmm


You dont get it, you will never get it. Thats the problem.

You say "they arent my kids", you couldnt be any further from the truth. They are some Muslims kids, you think they arent responsible? You think the parents of the London bombers arent responsible? MUSLIMS ARE RESPONIBLE FOR MUSLIMS, period.

They certainly werent MY KIDS. So, your kids are killing me and my kids. We will react as we need to until you can keep your kids in check, until then, you have no right to complain how we do it.

Bottom line: If you wont keep your kids in line, we will. Shut up until that changes.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 09:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by skippytjc
Now were talking! about time somebody on the hill grew some nuggets.

CNN

"DENVER, Colorado (AP) -- A Colorado congressman told a radio show host that the U.S. could "take out" Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons.

Rep. Tom Tancredo made his remarks Friday on WFLA-AM in Orlando, Florida. His spokesman stressed he was only speaking hypothetically.

Talk show host Pat Campbell asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.

"Well, what if you said something like -- if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites," Tancredo answered.

"You're talking about bombing Mecca," Campbell said.

"Yeah," Tancredo responded."


I, for one, am 100% behind this if any radical Islamic group used a WMD on US soil.

Why? Because we need main streem MUSLIM help keeping that from happening. If the entire Muslim community believed that this would be the response from the USA if a Islamic group used a nuke, then they themselves would do everything they could to keep the radicals among them in check. Hey, islamic law states: And eye for an eye...



[edit on 18-7-2005 by skippytjc]



this is ridiculous.....how could this be a justiication? its almost like black mail of some sort...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join