The war on terror! What terror?

reply to post by JJay55


I noticed that you don't differentiate between RadicalIlamic factions and The Religion of Islam.
Is there a difference, in your view?

Cuhail

Originally posted by Cuhail
reply to post by JJay55

 

I noticed that you don't differentiate between RadicalIlamic factions and The Religion of Islam.
Is there a difference, in your view?

Cuhail

No difference. There is no way to distinguish moderate muslims from radical. The Ft Hood shooter was moderate. The Buffalo TV owner was moderate. The doctors that drove into Glasgow were moderate. The general muslims population is suppose to be moderate.
For example, Hassen Chalghoumi French imam agrees with the burka ban in France and has death threats from the muslim community.
"He was chairing a meeting of the Conference of Imams, a body established in 2009 to promote better relations between France's faiths, particularly Jews and Muslims, when a mob of 80 men forced their way into the building. There was a brief scuffle between the two groups, ending in a handful of invaders grabbing the microphone. "They started to cry Allah Akbar and God is great," recounted Chalghoumi. "Then they insulted me, my mosque, the Jewish community and the [French] Republic. They left after an hour and a half."
www.thefirstpost.co.uk...

So there is pressure within Islam for no moderation. It is one Islamic principle and it is dictated by the government Imams in the 57 OIC countries, with Saudi at the helm. Not moderate because Islam follows Sharia Law... which isn't moderate.
Moderate is a term the West decided on because we can't comprehend that anyone would be so violent and destructive. Many also believe that muslims must be a victim of some strange power to make them act like that, they can't comprehend that it is a willing choice to follow Sharia Law. This is why the West is in serious danger.

This isn't my view. Professionals in the intelligence community know this but there are those in the US administration that have their own agenda.


[edit on 27-1-2010 by JJay55]

Well now I really have to say something. You are making no difference between the religion Islam and radical minorities? Really? It is that simple?

Let me paint a picture here: There are different estimates about the number of muslims living in America, but lets take a more moderate one and assume 2 Milion people.

So you have, according to your logic, 2 Milion potential terrorists living right in the target zone.

Now, if ALL the muslims would acutally want to kill people, guess what, they would do it.

We have seen in Washington, that it only takes a man and a rifle to cause terror. Or you could buy all the ingredients for terror at your local gas station or the mall.

I really get upset when people focus on airport security and think it acutally helps. If terrorists REALLY wanted to do some damage they would pick other targets and methods.

Do you think they are all that stupid? They all try to light their shoes on fire or mess up because of a technical failure like in the latest case?

Here is a simple question for you: Why didnt he go into the bathroom? I mean he lit his leg on fire right between the other passengers. For what reason? Why not simply go to the bathroom? Maybe he was supposed to be seen...

And seriously, when I hear politicians tell me that a new big attack is highly propable in the next 12 month, I really get angry. It is fear mongering, and it is there to follow certain agendas that weren´t possible in a state of peace.

Do you think the world would spent a lot of milions on new airport scanners if there weren´t a supposed terror threat? I think the answer is no.

The sad truth is: If someone really wants to hurt the american public they will do it. And almost nothing can stop them. If you want to kill you wouldn´t choose the way which would most likely pose the most obstacles like bombing a plane. You would choose a train, subway, mall ...you name it.


Why doesn´t it happen? Because the war on terror is not based on realt threats, but on a made-up enemy that replaced the russians.

Does that mean there are no real terrorists at all? Of course not, but their potential danger is been heavily exaggerated.


I am getting sick of this "war on terror". Think people, think!

edited for spelling

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Nightaudit]

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Nightaudit]

[edit on 28-1-2010 by Nightaudit]

Originally posted by Nightaudit
Well now I really have to say something. You are making no difference between the religion Islam and radical minorities? Really? It is that simple?

The sad truth is: If someone really wants to hurt the american public they will do it. And almost nothing can stop them. If you want to kill you wouldn´t choose the way which would most likely pose the most obstacles like bombing a plane. You would choose a train, subway, mall ...you name it.

Why doesn´t it happen? Because the war on terror is not based on realt threats, but on a made-up enemy that replaced the russians.

Does that mean there are no real terrorists at all? Of course not, but their potential danger is been heavily exaggerated.

edited for spelling

1. Islamic principle is very simple. The West didn't make that up.
2. In an open free society it is very easy to hurt those that are free.
3. You have no idea about real threats.
4. You don't know what is exagerated and what is not unless you work in counter-terrorism.
5. not very well.

1: And the islamic principle is to kill all that are free? Is that it? Care to elaborate a bit more on that?

2: Yes of course it is, that is what I mean. IF the threat would be as big as it is made, a lot more people would get hurt much more frequently. Sad but true.

3: Well, then please enlighten me. What are real threats? Shoebombers? Nukes? Box-Cutters? Please share your wisdom here.

4: That is BS. I know that we have been told for years and years that the threat is imminent and that we all have to be scared. We can all see with our own eyes where and when terror attacks happen. If your picture of the situation is anywhere near correct we should have at least one attack a month in the states.

5: Well, do I really need to comment this one? Running out of things to say so quickly?



[edit on 28-1-2010 by Nightaudit]

Originally posted by Nightaudit
1: And the islamic principle is to kill all that are free? Is that it? Care to elaborate a bit more on that?

2: Yes of course it is, that is what I mean. IF the threat would be as big as it is made, a lot more people would get hurt much more frequently. Sad but true.

3: Well, then please enlighten me. What are real threats? Shoebombers? Nukes? Box-Cutters? Please share your wisdom here.

4: That is BS. I know that we have been told for years and years that the threat is imminent and that we all have to be scared. We can all see with our own eyes where and when terror attacks happen. If your picture of the situation is anywhere near correct we should have at least one attack a month in the states.

5: Well, do I really need to comment this one? Running out of things to say so quickly?



[edit on 28-1-2010 by Nightaudit]

1. look up dar ul Harb. Yes, simple principle, non-muslims should not exist according to Allah, they are on the wrong path. There are various ways to kill them, preferably beheading.
2. The plan from AQ doesn't really kick off until 2010-2013. 911 was the Awakening with 6 phases that follow. It's also Islamic custom to give the enemy 10 years to prepare after the initial awakening. This also makes us complancent and skeptical and in the condition we are in we are quite vulnerable. So if you want to think it's all make-believe and not prepare that's up to you. Those of us who know better are using our time wisely.
3. Yes nukes. 100 in Pakistan in the hands of the ISI/AQ/Taliban, Iran, dirty material smuggled in in 2003 to the US to cause hazmat nightmares in a dozen cities.
4. The timing belongs to AQ. According to Islamic custom and Christian holidays and behind closed doors deals. Their goal is to attack and they will.
5. I can't spell well either.

Ok now your getting ridiculous.

1: According to your logic every muslim has the holy duty to kill as many non-muslims as possible. Well with so many muslims living in mixed religion societies all over the world, this statement is not worth of commenting.

You simply cannot assume that all the muslims in the world follow this rather old principle, especially when eveidence points to the contrary. Radical muslims are obviously a minority, otherwise there would be much MUCH more terror in the world.

2: Yeah sure it is. So we get 10 years of silence before the next big thing right? So all the talk in the meantime of terror threats and warnings actually WAS fear mongering as the PTB know this as well, right?

Come on...

3: Ok, I actually agree that nukes would be the most dangerous threat. So here is the question. Since 2003 there have been 100 nukes in Pakistan, have I got that right? Well, then why haven´t they used one since? Are they afraid? Do they need time for planning? What is the reason for holding back, especially when the dar ul Harb tells them to behead as many infidels as quickly as possible?

Ahhh, right, because of the 10 year break... that´s propably it...

4: I am not actually sure what you mean here, but let me ask you this: Why wait? Tell me one good reason why they should not attack, when they have the means and the opportunity to do so like we are told. And remember the dar ul Harb. Why should they wait? What you are saying just doesn´t make much sense to me. Could you tell a bit more about the connection of christian holidays and what "behind closed doors deals" you mean?

5: Well isnt that a bummer...



[edit on 28-1-2010 by Nightaudit]

The ‘war on terrorism’ and the countdown to the 2010 Olympics

The Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics will be the largest security operation in Canadian history. It will include more than 15,000 Canadian Forces, private security personnel, along with the RCMP and other police agencies. The U.S. will also provide security and support for the Games.

With the Olympics fast approaching, the fear of terrorism is back in the public’s psyche. Although there has been no specific threats to the Games, more than anything, it is the danger of terrorism which is used to justify the huge security operation. This is further advancing the militarization of North America and U.S.-Canada military and security integration. The Olympics will take binational security cooperation to a whole new level.

In the aftermath of the failed Christmas day bombing attempt, once again terrorism is being used to create a climate of fear and insecurity.

Whether or not you buy into the whole “war on terrorism,” it is being used to launch wars of aggression and further expand the American empire. It is also very much intertwined with the whole process of deep North American integration and plans for a continental security perimeter. The threat level for the upcoming Olympics remains low, but some are warning that the proroguing of Canada’s Parliament, along with the huge security apparatus being assembled for the Games might be setting the stage for a possible false flag terror event. This could be used to pass more anti-terrorist and other draconian pieces of legislation. It could also lead to a martial law scenario with American troops occupying parts of Canada.

full article
onlinejournal.com...

Originally posted by Nightaudit
Ok now your getting ridiculous.

1: According to your logic every muslim has the holy duty to kill as many non-muslims as possible. Well with so many muslims living in mixed religion societies all over the world, this statement is not worth of commenting.

You simply cannot assume that all the muslims in the world follow this rather old principle, especially when eveidence points to the contrary. Radical muslims are obviously a minority, otherwise there would be much MUCH more terror in the world.

2: Yeah sure it is. So we get 10 years of silence before the next big thing right? So all the talk in the meantime of terror threats and warnings actually WAS fear mongering as the PTB know this as well, right?

Come on...

3: Ok, I actually agree that nukes would be the most dangerous threat. So here is the question. Since 2003 there have been 100 nukes in Pakistan, have I got that right? Well, then why haven´t they used one since? Are they afraid? Do they need time for planning? What is the reason for holding back, especially when the dar ul Harb tells them to behead as many infidels as quickly as possible?

Ahhh, right, because of the 10 year break... that´s propably it...

4: I am not actually sure what you mean here, but let me ask you this: Why wait? Tell me one good reason why they should not attack, when they have the means and the opportunity to do so like we are told. And remember the dar ul Harb. Why should they wait? What you are saying just doesn´t make much sense to me. Could you tell a bit more about the connection of christian holidays and what "behind closed doors deals" you mean?

5: Well isnt that a bummer...



[edit on 28-1-2010 by Nightaudit]

!. Yes this is the principles of Islam. These aren't my principles, they are the principles of Islam. As far as muslims following the principles there are over 15000 examples of Islamic terrorism since 911 on a list here:
www.the religionofpeace.com
If you want to get into a discussion about human free will that's a topic for another thread. For the most part many muslims do not have the choice of not following Islam. From 2010-2013 there will be much more terrorism in the world. There was no plan to start before this time.
2. there hasn't been silence. Maybe they just didn't call you personally.
3. right.
4. 911 is a Christian holiday, that's why it was picked for symbolism. Crime against Copts, you can google all the dead Copts in Egypt in the past few months and more Islamic violence if you like.
One reason why they haven't attacked? Because they are on an Islamic calendar, which is different than ours, as is their mindset. They don't think, act, eat, breathe like us. Waiting is custom. Just like not talking during a meal among men and women keeping their pubic hair the length od a grain of rice. Lots we don't know about Islamic custom which gives them the advantage.
The feast of Jesus is Jan 28-Feb 3, just sayin. But the 12th imam needs to meet up with Jesus and talk for 40 days before final decisions are made. There are also the Q'tubs and it's quite complicated but I gave you the Cliff Notes.
5. yeah.

reply to post by onemartinarmy

The only symbol of the Olympics is when those Jews were killed in their dorms. That was because fard ayn, they were in Islamic territory... according to Islam.

The Oktoberfest in Germany also has an attendance of about 6 million and is a target but not related to religion and the Islamic calendar.

Analysts are saying planes, which no-fly passengers are breaking record numbers this week while regular passenger attendance is down. And after that dirty bombs and other incidents.

The reason the 911 trial is being moved out of NYC is becuase there was a plan to fly a plan into Gitmo to martyr the prisoners and make a statement. So there very well could be a plan to fly a plan into the trial. Or even a tanker truck attack or something else.
We are so infiltrated that prison security is breeched as well as our military and government so the possibility of leaks to the enemy for opportunity is very big.