Two Options for Allah's Enemies - the Jews and Christians: Conversion to Islam or Dea

[Purple36]

We may not consider it to be religious, but our enemies clearly see this as a "religious" war.

Special Dispatch Series - No. 601
October 31, 2003 No.601

2nd Issue of 'Voice of Jihad' Al-Qa'ida Online Magazine: Strategy to Avoid Clashes with Saudi Security Forces, Convert the World's Countries to Islam

The second issue of "The Voice of Jihad," the new biweekly on-line magazine identified with Al-Qa'ida has been posted. 1 The following are excerpts from the latest issue, which includes a sequel to an interview with Abd Al-'Aziz bin 'Issa bin Abd Al-Mohsen, 2 also known as Abu Hajjer, who isone of the high-ranking Al-Qa'ida members on Saudi Arabia's most-wanted list.

Lead Editorial: Combat Jews and Americans, Not Saudi Security Forces

The second issue of "The Voice of Jihad" opened with an editorial by Suleiman Al-Dosari:

"…Our war with the enemies of Allah continues everywhere… We will not let the Americans occupy the land of the two holy places [i.e. the Arabian Peninsula] [and feel] secure and safe, and we will not cease our Jihad until we liberate every inch of Muslim land.

"We draw the attention of the Mujahideen to the strategy adopted by the Sheikh of the Mujahideen, Abu Abdallah Osama bin Laden, and Sheikh Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri, and agreed to by many of the great Mujahideen, regarding combat against the enemy: Our number one enemy is the Jews and the Christians, and we must free ourselves to invest all our efforts until we annihilate them – and we are able do this if Allah allows us to do it – because they are the main obstacle to establishing the Islamic state.

"…We must take note of the ploy used by the tyrants [i.e. Arab rulers] in many countries. They attempted to stop the Jihad project in these countries by shifting the confrontation with the occupying enemy (the masters) to confrontation with his guards (slaves) [meaning Muslims], because the tyrants see the killing of one American or Westerner as more serious than the killing of a hundred of their country's soldiers; the blood of an American, in their view, is worth the blood of all Muslims. They are ready to cast hundreds to their deaths so that Americans, in exchange, will enjoy security and comfort.

"…We must guard ourselves against this ploy and avoid, as much as possible, confrontations with the armies and forces of the state, so that we can strike lethal blows to the occupiers, Allah willing. This does not mean we will surrender to those who defend the Crusaders if they attack us; on the contrary, in this case we must resist with all the strength we have, and we must punish them so that they turn their swords toward the Americans and fight among our ranks, or refrain from entering [into] a confrontation with us – or they will stand against us and wait for what lies in store for them [at our hands], thanks to Allah and His strength…"

Sheikh Nasser Al-Najdi: Jihad Must Continue Until All Infidels Convert to Islam or Pay a Poll Tax

The second issue also features an article by Sheikh Nasser Al-Najdi, who wrote: "Islam is an all-encompassing religion. It is a religion for people and for regimes… At a time when people are given the choice [of believing] in Islam or paying Jizya [a poll tax paid by non-Muslims living under Muslim rule], Islam is the only alternative for the countries [of the world.]…

"Therefore, the crime of the tyrants in infidel [i.e. non-Muslim] countries, who do not rule according to Allah's law, is an enormous sin… and we are obliged to fight them and initiate until they convert to Islam, or until Muslims rule the country and he who does not convert to Islam pays Jizya.

"That is the religious ruling with regard to infidel countries and all the more so with regard to those who rule Muslim countries by way of the cursed law [i.e. a man-made law]…"

Al-Qa'ida Leaders Praise Jihad

The latest "Voice of Jihad" also features selections from Al-Qa'ida leaders and supporters, including an excerpt of a letter by Sheikh Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisi (currently imprisoned in Jordan) justifying the suicide bombing perpetrated by Anas Al-Kandari and Jasem Al-Hajeri in the early days of the war against Iraq. The excerpt contains a link to the full letter. 3

In an article titled, "Knights Under the Banner of the Prophet" (the title of Sheikh Ayman Al-Zawahiri'sbook ), Al-Qa'ida's military leader, the Egyptian Seif Al-'Adl Hamasri, told of a C-130 air attack in Afghanistan in which the wives of Al-Qa'ida members were killed.

Also included in the second issue is news coverage of the U.S. military presence in the Persian Gulf, taken from the website www.islammemo.cc/news.

One page of the issue is devoted to quotes in praise of Jihad by " the Imam of the Mujahideen, Osama bin Laden," " Sheikh Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri," and "the Mujahid Sheikh Mohammad bin Abdallah Al-Seif." The final name most likely refers to Sheikh Abu Omar Muhammad Al-Seif, who appeared recently in a film distributed by Al-Qa'ida that also included the final statements of the Riyadh suicide bombers. Al-Seif has been identified on Islamic websites as the number two leader of the Chechnyan Jihad.

The Murder of Ahmed Shah Massoud: Ordered by bin Laden

The magazine continued its biography of Sheikh Yousef Al-'Ayyiri, who served as personal bodyguard to Osama bin Laden and manager of the Al-Qa'ida website, until he was killed by Saudi security forces. The biography addresses Osama bin Laden's order for the murder of Ahmed Shah Massoud. According to the biographer, after Sheikh Al-'Ayyiri's release from a Saudi prison, he recruited youths and encouraged them to wage Jihad in Afghanistan and take part in the training camps there:

"Afterwards, the greatest event in Afghan history occurred – the assassination of the despicable commander, Ahmed Shah Massoud, and there was no describing Sheikh Al-'Ayyiri's joy. I remember asking him, 'What happened?' And he replied by saying that Sheikh Osama asked the brothers: 'Who will take it upon himself to deal with Ahmed [Shah] Massoud for me, because he harmed Allah and His sons?' A few brothers volunteered to assassinate Massoud and be rewarded by Allah, and you heard the good news.

"Afterwards, the happy events took place in America [the September 11 attacks], the bastion of disbelief, and the Sheikh was so joyous he nearly floated on air. I called the Sheikh, and he told me he was in a meeting with the religious scholars of Al-Quseim, because a few of them had been a bit critical of the events that occurred in America. He told me about the discussions and about the meetings conducted with them, which persuaded them to support the Jihad and the Mujahideen…"

The biography ends with a description of the final period of Al-'Ayyiri's life, when he was being sought by Saudi authorities and was writing several online articles in support of Jihad.

Two Options for Allah's Enemies - the Jews and Christians: Conversion to Islam or Death

This issue also includes a sequel to an interview with Abd Al-Aziz bin 'Issa bin Abd Al-Mohsen, also known as Abu Hajjer, a name high on Saudi Arabia's most wanted list. Abu Hajjer stated that his goal was "to wave the banner of monotheism… and expel the enemies of Allah – the Jews and the Crusaders – from the land of the two holy places, to conquer the Muslim nations and restore them to their previous state. And may Allah lengthen our days to allow us to infuriate the enemies of Allah, kill them, and strike them by the sword until they either join the religion of Allah or we kill every last one of them. Our model is [the Prophet] Mohammad, who said to the infidels of Qureish: 'I have brought the slaughter upon you.'"

After characterizing his relationship with Osama bin Laden as similar to that of father and son, Abu Hajjer described his reaction upon hearing that his own name was among the top 19 on the Saudi's most wanted list: "I was in a course in which we trained the brothers in one of the valleys. This was a special course, a practical urban warfare course, and after we got back [to the city]… I met with one of the brothers, who told me… they published a list and my picture was on it… I said, 'Allah be praised'… When I entered the land of the two holy places, I felt – and I also told the brothers – that the day would come when we will get exposed. We had done everything in our power to delay that day. But now that Allah had put us to this test, we needed to act patiently."

Controversy Within Al-Qa'ida Over the Bombings in Saudi Arabia and their Effect on Fundraising

Abu Hajjer described a debate within the Jihad movement over the need to attack Americans in Saudi Arabia, which could lead to a more serious entanglement with the Saudi security forces and could hamper fundraising efforts: "Jihad members and lovers of Mujahideen were split: There were those who said we must attack the invading forces that defile the land of the two holy places, and that we must turn the Americans' concerns to themselves and their bases, so they would not take off from there to crush Muslim lands and countries, one by one. There were others who said we had to preserve the security of this base and this country [i.e. Saudi Arabia], from which we recruit the armies, from which we take the youth, from which we get the [financial] backing. It must therefore remain safe.

"My opinion is midway between the two. It is true that we need to keep the enemy occupied with himself and not give him a sense of security, because as soon as he secures his bases and his supply lines, he will have an opportunity to use them to attack our brothers in different parts of countries in the Islamic world. We must therefore make the proper arrangements and prepare ourselves for this momentous event in the best possible way we can. We told them: Wait, we are preparing ourselves, and then we attacked the Americans.

"It is also true that we must use this country [Saudi Arabia] because it is the primary source of funds for most Jihad movements, and it has some degree of security and freedom of movement. However, we must strike a balance between this and the American invasion of the Islamic world and its [strangling of] the Jihad movement and even other Islamic movements…

"We must understand that the situation in the land of the two holy places is deteriorating day by day for the Mujahideen and their financial sources, as well as regarding the secularization of the country and the attempt by the treacherous rulers to lead it to moral collapse, in accordance with the dictates of the White House.

"We tell them [those opposed to the bombings in Saudi Arabia]: If only you were to see the prisons filled with Mujahideen youth and pro-Jihad preachers. We have not carried out even one attack. All operations that took place were defensive operations. On the contrary, the brothers try as much as possible to avoid confrontations with the army and security forces. Nevertheless, the government is escalating the war, and it is trying to uproot me, uproot you, and uproot all Islamists."

Abu Hajjer concluded the interview with this message to the youth he trained: "You must do something, you must fight the enemies of Allah, the Crusaders and the Jews, and become a bone in their throats and hearts…"

Following the interview was a communiqué published by the Mujahideen in the Arabian Peninsula reacting to recent statements made by the Saudi interior minister: "The communiqué is a response to the Saudi Interior Ministry announcement about the confiscation of a large quantity of weapons. The communiqué claims that many Saudis carry personal weapons, automatic rifles or hand guns, and that the confiscations were actually confiscations of goods possessed by known weapon dealers, who the Interior Ministry falsely connected to the Jihad movement."

"The Voice of Jihad"'s next issue will feature an interview with the wanted Sheikh Abdallah bin Muhammad Al-Rashuod.

[Teutates]

Originally posted by JustANavyMom
I believe we are WAY behind the curve as a society in understanding this war.

And some are way ahead of the curve.

There is a third option, and we're currently employing that option.

Show the idiots what a life of freedom tastes like.

Once the muslim masses get a taste of real freedom they in turn will destroy the radical leaders of the islamic world.

If we can make iraq a model of muslim freedom the tide will turn against the extremists.

Teutates

[Teutates]

Originally posted by JustANavyMom
Please name just 1 place where this has happened and lasted for more than 6 months.

We have yet (to my knowledge) ever ousted a radical muslim leader. Not in the modern era anyway. We've just done it in two countries, and if I can count, it's been 6 months in both.

You think it takes a week or so to rebuild a country after 35 years of serious oppression?

You sound as if you have misgivings concerning my predictions.

Ever been to the middle east?

Speak any ME languages?

Ever studied these people? (the media does not count as serious study)

No one has any patience. We’re not just rebuilding a nation, we are changing the way people think, and some are taking serious offense to that idea.

The absolute worse thing we could possibly do at this moment in time would be to totally withdraw from Iraq. From what I know and understand we’re in for the long haul.

Teutates
Master Sergeant
Special Forces
(retired)

[Jimbo]

To: All
Re:
Originally posted by Teutates
You think it takes a week or so to rebuild a country after 35 years of serious oppression?

See: http://www.socnetcentral.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29520

[Polar Bear]

Originally posted by JustANavyMom
Please name just 1 place where this has happened and lasted for more than 6 months.

JustANavyMom, I don't know if you are just talking about muslim countries, but Germany and Japan come to mind that we have rebuilt in the past. It just does not take a couple months or years but generations.

[Anakin]

Withdrawing from Iraq prematurely is something that cannot happen. If the US withdrew now, Iraq would be like Afghanistan was pre-October 2001 within a few years.
Hopefully, once the muslim Masses see the US withdraw from Iraq once it has been rebuilt, they will realise that it wasn't about oil.

[Anakin]

Originally posted by JustANavyMom
Where did you see me advocate leaving?? Not my belief at all. We are in this for the long haul. Re-read what I asked...

What I disagree with is the contention that democracy will "show" the Muslims what they are missing & they'll rise up against the radical mullahs. THAT contention I don't buy into. Heck, I don't see the US Muslims who enjoy freedom and prosperity rising up verbally against the radical mullahs...

My worry is that if the Islamic world has democracy, they might choose even more militant, anti-western goverments (if that's possible!). Look at Pakistan, they don't have democracy like in the west but I'd take Musharraf over any Islamic Mullah.
Same with Gaddafi in Libya, sure he was a terrorist but now he seems to want to make nice with the west and I'd rather that than an Islamic goverment.

[Anakin]

Originally posted by JustANavyMom
I stand by my contention that Muslims as a group haven't done anything close to enough to make a pariah of of OBL and his ilk. By doing nothing, they are implicitly condoning it.

Exactly. There is no condemnation of terror by the Muslim masses. Until the voices condemning terror are louder than the voices condoning it, Islam will continue to be perceived as a religion of terror.

[Teutates]

Originally posted by JustANavyMom
What I disagree with is the contention that democracy will "show" the Muslims what they are missing & they'll rise up against the radical mullahs. THAT contention I don't buy into. Heck, I don't see the US Muslims who enjoy freedom and prosperity rising up verbally against the radical mullahs...

LOL, muslims in the US and muslims in the ME are two completely different animals.

Need I point out that the muslims on US soil can freely practice their religion in total safety. Not so in the ME.

muslims here in the US are complacent and care very little for what is going on in the ME. (seen many protests either way?)

Have faith in the US, it will take some time, but we will prevail.

Sure you can have an opinion, but please do not refer to NYC as a place of intelligent humans, who’s that femaul senator you voted into office?

Teutates

[peter28]

Hopefully, once the muslim Masses see the US withdraw from Iraq once it has been rebuilt, they will realise that it wasn't about oil

Oil was definetly a part of the program. With a friendly gov in Iraq, we'll have more leverage within OPEC, a competitive edge on Russia(who I believe will quickly become a leading exporter), cease dependence on the Saudi's and remove as many of our military personnel from SA as possible. Iraqi oil is especially important, to us but also to Euro and Japan, but even more so to the developing world who is quickly becoming the leading consumer of oil in the world. So who better to sell the developing world oil than us or our friendlies in Iraq. Iraqi oil will prove to be even more strategically valuble if we don't set up a secure transportion method of oil and natural gas from Khazakstan and Turmenistan. (Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe we have yet??)

OIl was definetly a part of the geostrategic game that we've been playing in the region...well, I guess since the conception of the Eisenhower doctrine, and it's claime that the M.E. was a region of vital importance, and the Baghdad Pact, etc. I have faith in our leaders, in that they are looking not 1 or 2 or 3 years down the road, but more like 20. But I have to get back to my whining girlfriend now. "why are you always on the internet???"
Peter

[danjam]

Funnily this asshole actually wonders why they do not have more support from his muslim kin.

Squad Commander Muhammad bin Shazzaf Al-Shahri, also known as Abu Tareq Al-Asswad, said in his video:

"Brothers in Islam, Jihad is one of the commandments of Islam and a solid pillar of this religion… Jihad, which has earned the label of 'the peak of Islam,' is the sign of the glory and grace of Islam and of the Muslims, and no Muslim doubts that Jihad for the sake of Allah is one of the greatest commandments of our religion, a commandment that has preserved the existence, the glory, and the honor of the [Muslim] nation. Similarly, it is no secret to any intelligent Muslims that one of the reasons for the defeat of the nation and its loss today is the disappearance of the banner of Jihad for the sake of Allah…

"The governments and regimes ruling the Muslim countries today are nothing more than examples of clear and overt collaboration with the enemies of the religion of Allah, in order to remove the religious law of Allah from the Muslims. These governments based their regimes and their laws on dissociation from all the values and principles of religious law – except for one regime, the regime of the Al-Sa'ud tribe, which continues to mislead the people and claim that it loves the wisdom and clerics of the religion, and loves to serve the religion… This is a false claim and an act of deceit directed at the servants of Allah. This claim, as well as the clerics of the regime who abandoned the nation and betrayed their religion, helped them [the Al-Sa'ud family] solidify their regime.

"See the Americans and the other polytheists going about the land of the two holy places [i.e. Saudi Arabia] as if it were one of their states. See their bases everywhere, their fighter planes, their tanks, their air defenses, their central command on the land of Muhammad, and as if nothing happened, when we ask about it, [we are] told: They have come to serve us.

"The Emir Sultan appears on television and says: 'There is no presence of the American forces in our land, and rumors and news regarding the presence of American forces are groundless.'

"When you come to the clerics, they tell you: 'The pact of protection applies to them, and they must not be harmed.' How does a pact of protection apply to them, oh servants of Allah? They came with their weapons, their tanks, their planes, and their destroyers…

"To those who lose sleep over Jihad, and who make efforts to silence our rifles, we say: 'Our Jihad will continue, if Allah wills it, and our finger is on the trigger.' If Allah wills it, we will not stop fighting them ceaselessly. Our fighting is the fighting of one whose heart longs to meet his God. Can one who hopes to meet his God fear death? Can one for whom one of two good things – victory or Shahada [i.e. martyrdom] – await him fear battle?…

"What we are doing today is a deed against the enemies of Allah, the Americans, and the others in the land of the two holy places, and it is in compliance with Allah and with the call of his messenger [Muhammad], who said: 'Expel the polytheists from the Arabian Peninsula.' It is support for our oppressed brothers everywhere. Oh Americans, wait for us. We have brought slaughter upon you.

"This deed is a gift to the procession of light… in which the Jihad warriors and the Shahids marched, on the path they have cushioned with body parts, irrigated with blood, and paved with skulls…

"I have looked over the list of the Shahids and of their history, and I was most regretful to find among them not a single cleric from among the clerics of the Islamic nation whose books fill the libraries. I found not a single preacher from among the preachers who have filled the world with their cassettes in which they spoke of the reward of Jihad and its status in the eyes of Allah. In my mind arose many questions for which I have found no answers. Why do the clerics, the sheikhs, and the preachers not aspire to gain the reward of Jihad and the status of Shahids next to Allah? Don't they need this reward and status? Or does their role end with the spoken word or the written letter? Allah will call them tomorrow to account for this [on the Day of Judgment]…

"To the dogs of the country, why do you help the tyrants against your brothers? Is it for a fistful of money that you tail the Muslims and torture the Mujahideen? Cling to Allah. Stop harming us. Otherwise – and I swear by Allah, Who helped my 19 brothers overcome the Americans in their own homes – you will encounter on our part only the sword and the head of the spear…

"I pray to Allah to make me and my brothers like those who kill their enemies and humiliate the enemies of the religion, the Americans and the others, and to support our Jihad warrior brothers in the land of Muhammad. Wait for us, oh Americans, we have brought slaughter upon you…"

[danjam]

sorry the article was so long... however it is a good example of the people that are carrying out suicide bombings.. They really believe that everyone else is wrong.

Like Teutates said this just proves that trying to get the message of democracy and it's privilages is going to take a long time.

[Ice H]

You don't have to go to the ME to see different muslims...you can just go to Europe... :o

[Doctor_Doom]

That "conversion or death" crap is reflective of extremist Islam and their revival of the most brutal and primitive portions of the Muslim religion and culture, ignoring even Islam's own cultural development. Those clowns are going back to the star and the scimitar moon, conversion by faith or the sword, never mind that in the last thousand years the greatest flowering of Islamic cultures occured under a non-oppressive situation. That crap pisses me off, especially since these are the people who claim to represent "real Islam".

My worry is that if the Islamic world has democracy, they might choose even more militant, anti-western goverments (if that's possible!). Look at Pakistan, they don't have democracy like in the west but I'd take Musharraf over any Islamic Mullah. Same with Gaddafi in Libya, sure he was a terrorist but now he seems to want to make nice with the west and I'd rather that than an Islamic goverment.

I think Teutates makes a good point; given a third choice and economic stability and viability, and not just one a**hole dictator over another, people generally won't choose the extremist option. It takes a lot of time, and I wish the current plan in Iraq seemed less haphazard, but it can happen.

[whodo32]

Originally posted by Doctor_Doom
That "conversion or death" crap is reflective of extremist Islam and their revival of the most brutal and primitive portions of the Muslim religion and culture, ignoring even Islam's own cultural development. Those clowns are going back to the star and the scimitar moon, conversion by faith or the sword, never mind that in the last thousand years the greatest flowering of Islamic cultures occured under a non-oppressive situation. That crap pisses me off, especially since these are the people who claim to represent "real Islam".

What's really disturbing is that the Q'ran prohibits the killing of Jews and Christians if they're willing to pay a tax (and say nothing bad about Mohammed or the Q'ran). They call this the "house of protection" (in contrast to the house of submission -Islam, and the house of war - infidels).

Muslims have a Q'ran pronounced DUTY to PROTECT Christians & Jews who agree to these stipulations, but these teachers of "real Islam" conveniently ignore these passages.

My American Muslim friends point this out and dismiss the fanatics. But they also justify the actions of the fanatics because the US (& Israel) have caused so much trouble for Muslims...

whodo

[danjam]

So you are saying that they dismiss the fanatics, but then don't ???

Yeah, that sounds about right. Blame everyone else for their problems.

p.s.
And you call these people your friends??

[Teutates]

Originally posted by danjam
p.s.
And you call these people your friends??

Remember who you're dealing with danjam......
The same person that believes urine treats infections.

Teutates


"I hadn't heard about using it to treat burns, but it has a good reputation for helping infections. In particular, I heard that it could cure ear infections, especially recurring ones. The theory is that the infection has caused your body to create antibiotics which will be throughout your body, including in your urine.

My wife has an aunt that says this method worked for her (about 70 years ago when she was a little girl). One treatment and the recurring ear infections disappeared forever. My 3 year old son was having ear troubles so I tried it with him. The hardest part was catching the pee. He didn't want to pee in a pot, so I had to catch it while he was on the potty. And IT WORKED. No more recurring infections.

A co-worker says his dad swears by it as a way to reduce pain and inflammation on cracked hands (skin is cracked -- very painful for machinists who are working with metal bits, oils, etc.)....


Who knew?

EDITED TO ADD:
But I wouldn't drink it.

whodo32"

[danjam]

HAHAHAHA can't hardly type ...


Got it loud and clear ... thankyou

[SGTROCK]

Originally posted by Teutates
Remember who you're dealing with danjam......
The same person that believes urine treats infections.

Teutates



My 3 year old son was having ear troubles so I tried it with him.

He "tried" it on his son.I dont think Ive ever been so disturbed by a comment on Socnet like that before! His son is just a guinea pig for his little piss experiments WTF!! I want this fuckers address so I can go to his house and piss in his ear!! :mad:

ROCK

[whodo32]

Originally posted by SGTROCK
He "tried" it on his son.I dont think Ive ever been so disturbed by a comment on Socnet like that before! His son is just a guinea pig for his little piss experiments WTF!! I want this fuckers address so I can go to his house and piss in his ear!! :mad:

ROCK

SGTROCK,

NEGATIVE. Go back and read the thread. I used HIS urine. I did not use my urine on anyone, ever.

whodo.

[whodo32]

Originally posted by danjam
So you are saying that they dismiss the fanatics, but then don't ???

Yeah, that sounds about right. Blame everyone else for their problems.

p.s.
And you call these people your friends??

Actually it was one muslim fellow and his muslim friend. I had little understanding of Islam when I befriended him. After 9/11 I used the friendship as a medium to understand Islam.

whodo

[Sneaky SF Dude]

Originally posted by whodo32
SGTROCK,

NEGATIVE. Go back and read the thread. I used HIS urine. I did not use my urine on anyone, ever.

whodo.

You're full of piss and vinegar today.

[whodo32]

Originally posted by Sneaky SF Dude
You're full of piss and vinegar today.
:D

:) Yes indeed. I'm enjoying this thread, so the off the topic land-mine wasn't appreciated.

whodo

[Teutates]

Originally posted by whodo32
Actually it was one muslim fellow and his muslim friend. I had little understanding of Islam when I befriended him. After 9/11 I used the friendship as a medium to understand Islam.

whodo


Whodo,

Enough bullshit, you called a person that outwardly condones the islamic assholes actions a friend.

Try reading books (instead of listening to bias of others, grandma’s cure, your “Friends” opinion of islam) to find the answers.

Did I find pleasure in responding to your post? LOL, take a guess. Cannot take the heat get the fuck out of the oven. (and out of my way)

Teutates
Master Sergeant
Special Forces
(retired)

PM me again whining and I’ll put it up on the public boards.

[whodo32]

Originally posted by Teutates
Whodo,

Enough bullshit, you called a person that outwardly condones the islamic assholes actions a friend.

Try reading books (instead of listening to bias of others, grandma’s cure, your “Friends” opinion of islam) to find the answers.

Did I find pleasure in responding to your post? LOL, take a guess. Cannot take the heat get the fuck out of the oven. (and out of my way)

Teutates
Master Sergeant
Special Forces
(retired)

PM me again whining and I’ll put it up on the public boards.

Maybe it's splitting hairs, but I said that they justify it, not condone it. They say it's NOT right, but they say that they understand what motivates them.

I disagree with them on all points.

Have a nice day.

[Sneaky SF Dude]

In other words, don't try to piss on the Team Sergeant and tell him its raining.

[Teutates]

Originally posted by whodo32
Maybe it's splitting hairs, but I said that they justify it, not condone it. They say it's NOT right, but they say that they understand what motivates them.

I disagree with them on all points.

Have a nice day.


As I said before, civility ended with 9/11 and so did my patience with the ignorant.

Have a nice day yourself.

Teutates

[RIT_MEDIC]

Originally posted by whodo32
Maybe it's splitting hairs, but I said that they justify it, not condone it. They say it's NOT right, but they say that they understand what motivates them.

I disagree with them on all points.

Have a nice day.

If your friend justifies the actions of terrorists they are condoning their actions. There is no splitting hairs with this as far as I am concerned. I have no idea how you can align yourself with such people.

As our President said, you are with us or with them. There is no middle ground here.

James D

[Sneaky SF Dude]

Originally posted by RIT_MEDIC
If your friend justifies the actions of terrorists they are condoning their actions. There is no splitting hairs with this as far as I am concerned. I have no idea how you can align yourself with such people.

As our President said, you are with us or with them. There is no middle ground here.

James D

Are you pissed James?

[RIT_MEDIC]

Originally posted by Sneaky SF Dude
Are you pissed James?

No SSFD...

Well maybe a bit...

Splitting hairs...my ass.


James D

[Sneaky SF Dude]

Well, don't get all pissy with me.

I didn't piss in your Cherios.

[SGTROCK]

Originally posted by whodo32
SGTROCK,

NEGATIVE. Go back and read the thread. I used HIS urine. I did not use my urine on anyone, ever.

whodo. Oh Im sorry I apologize for not reading it correctly,you used HIS piss................Like this makes it justifiably asshole!!!!!!!!!!!!! Did you ever consult a physician or just took aunt Marthas word for it? Your ass needs to be reported for reckless endangerment of a child you sick bastard!!!!!!!!!!!

ROCK

[Hoepoe]

Hey ROCK!!

Good to see ya!

Hoepoe

[specwarnet]

have a nice day = piss off

[RIT_MEDIC]

Originally posted by Sneaky SF Dude
Well, don't get all pissy with me.

I didn't piss in your Cherios.

Sorry SSFD. I did not mean my reply to you to appear pissy.

It angers me because I cant seem to understand how someone could justify those bastards. I would like to crush their larynx with my boot.

Have a blessed day Sneaky. :D

James D

[Sneaky SF Dude]

Originally posted by SGTROCK
Oh Im sorry I apologize for not reading it correctly,you used HIS piss................Like this makes it justifiably asshole!!!!!!!!!!!!! Did you ever consult a physician or just took aunt Marthas word for it? Your ass needs to be reported for reckless endangerment of a child you sick bastard!!!!!!!!!!!

ROCK
Doesn't that just piss you off?

[Sneaky SF Dude]

Originally posted by specwarnet
have a nice day = piss off

You must be on the piss mate.

[RIT_MEDIC]

Originally posted by Sneaky SF Dude
Doesn't that just piss you off?


Better to be pissed off than pissed on.

Unless you are Whodo32's son anyway.

James D

[Doctor_Doom]

Originally posted by RIT_MEDIC
Better to be pissed off than pissed on.

Unless you are Whodo32's son anyway.


Maybe especiallyif you are the poor kid... any kid for that matter... :)

Home remedies... weird wild stuff...

I see what you mean Whodo, explanation may not be excuse, but you must also see why most of us are sensitive about Muslims saying "Well, I can see why they would crash planes into buildings..." without commensurate outrage and condemnation. Means people are gonna take the piss out of ya.

[RIT_MEDIC]

Originally posted by Doctor_Doom
...I see what you mean Whodo, explanation may not be excuse, but you must also see why most of us are sensitive about Muslims saying "Well, I can see why they would crash planes into buildings..." without commensurate outrage and condemnation. Means people are gonna take the piss out of ya.

DD:

Maybe I am just thick-skulled. How does a person identify with or state they understand the reasoning but condemn the actions they claim to understand the reasoning behind. How does a person condemn that which they support the reasoning for?


James D

[whodo32]

Originally posted by RIT_MEDIC
If your friend justifies the actions of terrorists they are condoning their actions. There is no splitting hairs with this as far as I am concerned. I have no idea how you can align yourself with such people.

As our President said, you are with us or with them. There is no middle ground here.

James D

My "friend" justifies the actions of some individuals who perceive America as an enemy of Islam (which is his perception of the state of affairs in the Arab/Israeli conflict -- I totally disagree with him). At the same time he condemns the killing of non-combatants (as happened on 9/11) as a violation of Islam. His position is inconsistent, but I believe typical of many or most American Muslims. I hoped to get him to change his position, but he wouldn't. That's when I quit maintaining the friendship. My ony purpose in contacting him (if I ever do it again) is to show him the evil of Islam in ways he cannot deny.

And I agree that there's no middle ground. But does that mean that if we don't declared all Muslims to be our personal enemy that we've "aligned" with the terrorists? I don't think so. Does it mean that any level of "friendship" with any Muslim makes us aligned with the terrorists? Again, I don't think so. But I'm sympathetic to those who would answer in the affirmative to these questions.

The "middle ground" is what our government has adopted. We push Israel to negotiate with the very people who propagate terrorism against them. Personally I'd like to see the "Palestinians" go away. Any who associate with terrorist organizations (especially those directly responsible for attacks on America or Americans) can set the example by leading the way to the grave.

whodo.

[SGTROCK]

Originally posted by Sneaky SF Dude
Doesn't that just piss you off? YEP!! Now Iam really pissed!!

ROCK

[whodo32]

Originally posted by Doctor_Doom
I see what you mean Whodo, explanation may not be excuse, but you must also see why most of us are sensitive about Muslims saying "Well, I can see why they would crash planes into buildings..." without commensurate outrage and condemnation. Means people are gonna take the piss out of ya.

If this "friend" had ever hinted that there was any justification or understanding for the attack of 9/11 he would have been considered my personal enemy. He was apalled and angered by the attack on 9/11.

[specwarnet]

I understand the homeless guy who doesn't have a job hitting me up on the street for money wants money to buy cheap beer.... err food & shelter. Doesn't mean I think he's entitled to it or give him any.

His reasoning: he's broke, I'm not. He'll beg for my money. I can see that and understand that he thinks that way because it's easier than reasoning "I'm broke, if I get a job* I won't be." But I also know that his reasoning is wrong and I'm not going to support him in any way.

* I do recognize that it can be hard for the homeless to get a job. But not impossible.

[Teutates]

Originally posted by whodo32
I hoped to get him to change his position, but he wouldn't.

I would have just pissed in his ear at that point, or beaten the piss out of him, either way I would told him to piss off.


Teutates
Pissed

[RIT_MEDIC]

Whodo32:

So your friend justifies the terrorist attacks on the Isreali's but condemns those on 9.11.01?

Think about that for a minute. The Palestinians attack Jews because of hatred for Isreali's. 9.11.01 occurred, in part, because of hatred for the US' support of the Isreali's. Now, tell me how a person might condemn one without the other?

James D

Editted: Poor grammer.

[whodo32]

Originally posted by RIT_MEDIC
Whodo32:

So your friend justifies the terrorist attacks on the Isreali's but condemns those on 9.11.01?

Think about that for a minute. The Palestinians attack Jews because of hatred for Isreali's. 9.11.01 occurred, in part, because of hatred for the US' support of the Isreali's. Now, tell me how a person might condemn one without the other?

James D

Editted: Poor grammer.

I agree. He's in serious denial. He's wrong, and on this issue he's quite unreasonable -- for to him it's a matter of faith that Islam brings "peace".

He buys into the Muslim/Arab propaganda that tells him how Israel "stole the land and kicked out the Arabs"... That lets him think that the Palestinian/Muslim suicide bombers are just frustrated individuals who can't see any other way to fight their oppressors. Of course that's bullshit, but it lets him live in a world where Islam is a "religion of peace". Now this man is a peaceful (and rather timid) person. Since he didn't grow up in the mideast he can entertain this imaginary world where "true Muslims" are peaceloving.

He came from India to America and admits that there's no better place to live than the USA. He knows that most Americans are "innocent" in regards to US foreign policy (I'm not suggesting any culpability on our part), and he knows that those attacked on 9/11 were non-combatants, which is condemned in the Q'ran.

He can't bring himself to the fact that Islam, his faith, is a religion which is tied to violence which he condemns.

whodo

[Hoepoe]

whodo32

1. Not all Muslims are bad, you are correct.
2. Your friend is bad
3. Fidd new friends

Hoepoe

[Doctor_Doom]

Originally posted by RIT_MEDIC
DD:

Maybe I am just thick-skulled. How does a person identify with or state they understand the reasoning but condemn the actions they claim to understand the reasoning behind. How does a person condemn that which they support the reasoning for?


James D

Nah man, probably just me not writing clearly. I think the thing is "support." Like specwarnet said, one can understand the logic the terrorist uses without supporting it, but what's unacceptable is someone who not only understands and follows the logic but feels some sympathy- or as you wrote, identify- with certain violent actions. One can understand the logic behind totally intolerable actions and identify with the agent often only if one accepts the completely ridiculous assumptions that the action/conclusion is based on. I can understand why paranoid schizophrenics may need to wrap tinfoil around their heads, but it's acceptable action only if I accept as true that the CIA is actually trying to steal his thoughts.

Same with the terrorists, and I reject their assumptions and the entire line of reasoning. But it doesn't have to be that extreme. I can think of situations where two resonable people see the same set of facts and come to different conclusions. Clinical situations spring to mind where two people have the same reasoning, and I'll do one but still see the rationale of the other. But when it comes to things like 9/11 there's no straddling, it's one side of the line or the other, IMHO. You reject or support the terrorists, no shades of gray.

[NewportBarGuy]

Originally posted by Doctor_Doom
I can understand why paranoid schizophrenics may need to wrap tinfoil around their heads, but it's acceptable action only if I accept as true that the CIA is actually trying to steal his thoughts.



If you don't believe that notion I'm going to accuse you of going to Holy Cross.

Sincerely,

Black Helicopters.

[Sneaky SF Dude]

RIT,
I can understand the reasoning for something without supporting it. For example - I can understand the reason that Manual Marulanda is what he is. But I would put a bullet in his face and collect the reward in a heartbeat. I don't support him or his actions - but I can understand his reasoning and how he got there.

I can understand Che's reasoning. But I dream sometimes I was on that Team.

And I can understand the reasoning of Hamas. They're wrong, but I can understand how they feel the way they do.

I can't really understan AQ's reasoning because I don't think they have any.

[NewportBarGuy]

I understand that radical Islamists want to opress their people with archaic Sharia Law, subjugate all women, use Oil Revenue to buy nuclear weapons and destroy the rest of the world that does not share their view, and keep in style the ugliest of all possible clothing.

I'm open-minded. Heck, I like people. I'm just not that keen in wearing some damn dress and turban for the rest of my life, or living in fallout conditions until my body decays.

I think Porn is the answer to the muslim problem. What were the first industries to spring up in Baghdad after the fall? Porn and Alcohol. You give them steady access to beer and porn and then see if they want Sharia Law.

Success by capitalism.

Brewmonkey should be named to head the US Grain and Fermentation Agency.

I'll leave it to the higher powers to name the head the Health and Welfare Multimedia Publishing Group.

[Doctor_Doom]

Originally posted by NewportBarGuy
If you don't believe that notion I'm going to accuse you of going to Holy Cross.

Sincerely,

Black Helicopters.

First, I get called french and a hilary lover.
Then, accused of being gay.

Now this. Holy Cross.

I'm getting pissed.

Ok not really. I like the Porn Ministry idea.

[RIT_MEDIC]

I do understand the reasoning guys. And thanks for your thoughts on it.

What I was more or less trying to get at is; how does one support terror attacks on innocent non-combatants in Isreal and condemn the same thing here. To me it would reason that if a person supports killing all Jews, then they would also support killing those that support the Jews.

I know I support killing all the terrorists and all those that support them. No splitting hairs with that one

Who knows...its been a long couple days. Maybe my brain is fried.

James D

NBG: I am with you on the ETOH and PORN.

[Doctor_Doom]

Originally posted by RIT_MEDIC
What I was more or less trying to get at is; how does one support terror attacks on innocent non-combatants in Isreal and condemn the same thing here. To me it would reason that if a person supports killing all Jews, then they would also support killing those that support the Jews.


Well, in their convoluted minds, Jews are an enemy decreed by Allah, and thus cannot be given any quarter. Those who help the Jews have been duped or are being manipulated behind the scenes, and so can have a chance to redeem themselves if shown the "truth".

Again, that makes sense if you buy into a lot of BS first. What it comes down to is bigotry or personal animosity cast into religious terms. In other words, crap. I'll refrain from further commentary on the Israeli situation out of both ignorance and a desire to avoid an endless debate I can't seem to find time in which to fully engage.

It's gotta be good porn though.

[Anakin]

Originally posted by Sneaky SF Dude
I can't really understan AQ's reasoning because I don't think they have any.

As for Al Qaeda's reasoning, anyone can have a point of view and an opinion but once they resort to murder and terror, they lose the legitimacy of their cause. It's like with the Conflict in Northern Ireland, most people over in England sympathise with the IRA's cause but when they started bombing British cities, they lost a lot of that that legitimacy. They bombed my local mall, after that, I just didn't care for their cause.

[airbornelawyer]

What I was more or less trying to get at is; how does one support terror attacks on innocent non-combatants in Isreal and condemn the same thing here. To me it would reason that if a person supports killing all Jews, then they would also support killing those that support the Jews.
Well, in their convoluted minds, Jews are an enemy decreed by Allah, and thus cannot be given any quarter. Those who help the Jews have been duped or are being manipulated behind the scenes, and so can have a chance to redeem themselves if shown the "truth". The distinction is not their Jewishness. The distinction drawn by Islamic theologians who condemned the September 11 attacks but condone suicide bombings in Israel is that Israelis are not non-combatants. The premise is essentially threefold: (1) all adult Israelis are either active soldiers or in the reserves and are thus combatants; (2) Israelis are a "society of invaders" and the duty to resist invaders extends to fighting the entire society; and (3) in modern war, all society plays its role in the war effort, even if not carrying arms.

The third rationale could and is used to justify terrorism against Americans (and pretty much anybody). Some in the West made similar arguments to justify terror bombing during World War Two.

The second rationale could be used to justify attacks on Americans in Muslim lands, and has been cited by some in calls for attacks on Americans in Iraq.

The third rationale is the one most directly cited by those trying to draw a distinction between 9-11 and Israel. They claim that most of the civilians killed in suicide bombings are not really civilians. When it is pointed out that children are also killed in the bombings, they claim that they are merely collateral damage, and apply the doctrine of proportionality (apparently, as long as you kill more adults than children, your 72 virgins await). When it is pointed out that Muslims are often killed too (Israeli Arabs, especially), they also fall back on collateral damage arguments.

The clerics who condemned the 9-11 attacks but who justify attacks on Israelis, such as Tantawi and Qaradhawi, rest their arguments primarily on this latter rationale - that Israeli adults are presumptively combatants while Americans are not.

Supporters of al-Qa'ida usually use the first rationale, and claim that all Americans, whether they carry weapons or not, are cogs in the American war machine.

The fatwa of Sheikh Yousef al-Qaradhawi, probably the leading Sunni cleric, justifying "martyrdom operations" can be found here: http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=subjects&Area=jihad&ID=SP54203

His earlier condemnation of the 9-11 attacks can be read here: http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2001-09/13/article25.shtml . The hair-splitting is there too, if you read between the lines.

Similar statements by Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi, Grand Sheikh of Al-Azhar University in Cairo (the Oxford of Sunni Islam) can be found, although Tantawi has a tendency to say one thing one day and another thing the next.

A pre-9-11 review of leading Islamic scholars on suicide bombing can be found here: http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=ia&ID=IA5301. It has al-Qaradhawi's "all Israelis are soldiers" rationale. It also cites typical Tantawi hoop-jumping condemning the terrorist attacks on the US embassies in Kenya and Nigeria while justifying the murder of Israelis.

This was Part I of MEMRI's series "Debating the Religious, Political and Moral Legitimacy of Suicide Bombings - Part 3: The Debate over Religious Legitimacy ". Parts II-IV are here:
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener.cgi?Page=archives&ID=IA5401
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener.cgi?Page=archives&ID=IA6501
http://www.memri.org/bin/opener.cgi?Page=archives&ID=IA6601

MEMRI is an invaluable resource for finding out what is being said in Arabic while the smarmy Adel al-Jubeirs of the region try to kiss ass or play nice in English.

Dave

[Doctor_Doom]

Excellent post Dave. My mind was still in that WWII Nazi mode for some reason. Thank you for the correct information and I will read later on this evening.

[RIT_MEDIC]

Dave:

Thank you for that post. Cleared up a few things for me.

James D