God Bless America

[Stryker]

God bless America; morn for those lost in this horrific tragedy; pray for those who lost loved ones in the tragedy; and show your support for this great Nation by raising a Flag on you car, your home, and everywhere in between. Those soulless cowards will pay for their evil acts and their shame will be eternal -- just as we have not forgotten Nazism and its cancer on the conscience of the world, nor shall we forgot the events of September 11, 2001.

[Kela]

RIGHT ON STRYKER!!!! THOSE EVIL BASTARDS WHO DID THIS WILL PAY. THIS MAY BE THE END OF OVERSEAS TERRORISM!

- God Bless America!!!

AGRHGAHRGAHRGHAGRHGAH!!!

[Stryker]

Death to Islamic Fundamentalists! You are a cancer in the heart of the world, a symbol of shame and cowardess. There is NO honor in killing the innocent!!!

[mikebach]

Those bastards needs to pay!!!!.. Yes I agree screw those fundametlist bastards. I cannot believe this happened I am still shocked. It just puts the whole windows vs. Mac arguing back and forth thing in perspective.

[john123]

This is not the work of *all* Islamic Fundamentalists or even a majority...it's the work of a small minority sect -- and even that remains to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt. Let's not let our anger get the better of us by sending us into genocidal hatred.

[randy "long" johnson]

also, it's important to note that: "an eye for eye only makes the whole world blind".

my deepest condolences to those in new york who have lost their families and loved ones.

let us all hope and pray that love, peace, and good-will, shall triumph over the evil of such aggression.

[Stryker]

John, what are you talking about? I am not talking about the Islamic faith as a whole (which, by the way, is STILL antisemetic!!), I am talking about the FUNDAMENTALIST movement. And that IS what the movement is. What do you mean "majority" and "minority"? That's like saying not all Nazis are evil (as opposed to saying not all Germans are). Nazis ARE prejudice and evil and so ARE these people (heck, it's even codified in their Koran to destroy Israel!!)

[mikebach]

I was just wondering if anyone also notice this...PLease check it out and tell me what you guys think..Watch the CNN footage and keep an eye out on the smoke at around 27 seconds..I have included links. Tell me what you think. At first I thought the image was photoshoped and then I actually went to cnn.com and check the footage it seems really errie. I looks like a face of the devil in the smoke.

http://staff.tribalwar.com/rayn/images/wtfisthat.jpg

http://www.cnn.com/video/us/2001/09/12/2nd.plane.hits.cnn.med.asx

[Kela]

I agree with both John123 and Stryker on this one.

It is not ISLAM which is behind this. But Stryker you are right, it is codified in the Quoran that the jewish community must be destroyed. THESE terrorists have taken the ISLAM AND USED IT AS THEIR motive. They are using it as an excuse. THEY MUST HAVE SAID , "in the name of Allah". But I am sure that Allah would have not advocated this. THESE PEOPLE ARE FUNDAMENTALISTS and DO NOT HARBOR THE FIRST HUMAN INSTINCT, namely self preservation. As they believe that after they die, they go to some higher place. As John said this is not the work of ALL islamic fundamentalists. BUT THIS SMALL MINORITY HAS CAUSED MASS DESTRUCTION AND GENOCIDE IN NEW YORK!!! IF it is NOT possible to pinpoint this Minority (i.e Bin Laden and his henchmen) I am CONFIDENT THAT THE US and Co. (i.e the rest of the civilized world) will stand united and attack the proponents and those who harbor these terrorists. (i.e AFGHANISTAN, PAKISTAN, TALIBAN, PALESTINIANS)

[Kela]

nb.

- Nuke exploding above certain sites MAY be involved.

[fallt]

I was shocked on Tuesday as I watched events unfold. I felt stunned and amazed. Most of all, however, I was worried - deeply worried that friends and colleagues in New York and Washington were alive.

What shocks me equally though is a response that strikes me as all too typical. Hasn't anybody learned anything?

Comments like: "THOSE EVIL BASTARDS WHO DID THIS WILL PAY!", "Death to Islamic Fundamentalists!" and "Those bastards needs [sic] to pay!!!!" (the author of that last quote, in particular, might want to check their grammar) are pointless.

It is precisely this type of knee-jerk, gung ho attitude that lies at the root of many of the world's problems today. It's easy to jump to conclusions - too easy - and those often predictable conclusions are all too often proved wrong. I seem to recall a similar conclusion with regards to the Oklahoma bombing... and how wrong did that prove to be.

Slow down. Grieve yes, but leave the repercussions till later and when the time for repercussions arrives, let them be measured.

[fallt]

For all those quick to jump to conclusions, and worse suggest quick-fix remedies (often involving further widespread killing) - the following article published in The Guardian (a reputable British newspaper) is well worth reading:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,551036,00.html

[Kela]

No one is jumping to conclusions. Secondly, your article link does not work. Must be some trouble with my browser though.

I have a very strong feeling that Flight 175 that crashed into South tower of the WTC, (i.e the second attack) was not highjacked from Boston. The first flight to attack, Flight 11 was high jacked and turned very abruptly towards new york. However, Flight 175 which took off from the same airport took a head on route right from take off. THIS could mean that the plane's pilots were part of the plan or the plane was hijacked EXTREMELY early during or before takeoff.

[john123]

There are different sects of Islamic fundamentalism -- it isn't all one gigantic "big movement." Comparisons to Nazi Germany are ill-founded...we must be careful to recognize that this is the work of a relatively small group of individuals, depsite a pervading anti-American sentiment on the global scene.

[Stryker]

No, John, while I absolutely appreciate your comments -- and believe that, yes, the acts of a few do not necessarily reflect the views of the majority -- this is NOT one of those occasions. Again, I am not referring to the Islamic faith as a whole, I am referring to the Islamic Fundamentalist movement which believes that it is God's mandate to rule over non-Muslams and to DESTROY Israel ... it is in their Quoran (their Bible)!!!

[evildead]

Originally posted by Stryker
No, John, while I absolutely appreciate your comments -- and believe that, yes, the acts of a few do not necessarily reflect the views of the majority -- this is NOT one of those occasions. Again, I am not referring to the Islamic faith as a whole, I am referring to the Islamic Fundamentalist movement which believes that it is God's mandate to rule over non-Muslams and to DESTROY Israel ... it is in their Quoran (their Bible)!!!


Chirstan "Fundamentalists" have some of those view that you are talking about as well. While not all Chirstan "Fundamentalists" do, many feel that way. They dont advertise it and they dont specificy say they will rule.. they just feel that all none christans are worthless.

Now that I have probably pissed some people off. I would like to make the point that I think John was making... it is dangerous to define "fundamentalist" We should not attack some book or even the interpretation of that book. We should be attacking the people that are responcibale. And we need to know who they really are. Don't get me wrong... I am all for sever biblical in scope, punnishment.


-evildead

[john123]

Originally posted by Stryker
No, John, while I absolutely appreciate your comments -- and believe that, yes, the acts of a few do not necessarily reflect the views of the majority -- this is NOT one of those occasions. Again, I am not referring to the Islamic faith as a whole, I am referring to the Islamic Fundamentalist movement which believes that it is God's mandate to rule over non-Muslams and to DESTROY Israel ... it is in their Quoran (their Bible)!!!

Look, unless you have a degree in History or Political Science with a specialization in Middle Eastern affairs, you simply don't have the authority to make such broad sweeping generalizations. Simmer down and talk to an expert before you spout off.

[Stryker]

Before you start unsulting people with comments like "spout off", perhaps you should make sure that YOU have the qualifications that you demand for others. For one, I did receive a B.A. in Political Science and History and took several Arab-Israeli Conflict courses. While I do not claim that this makes me any kind of expert on Islamic issues (which I did not focus on), I did not raise this supposed requirement to engage in free speech, YOU DID. So, do me a favor and give the thread a rest. Are YOU an Expert in Islamic Fundamentalism? If not, then you are in no better a position than I -- in other words, whatever stereotypes and unsupported beliefs that you claim I have, you share as well. So, nuff said.

[Stryker]

By the way, I DO agree with evildead's point that even Christian (and Jewish) fundamentalists share extreme views that the more moderates do not -- hence, their label as "fundamentalists, "orthodox", and/or "extremists." Obviously the majority of people in any religion do not share the extreme views of the fringe. The difference, to me, is that while Orthodox Jews, Christians, Buddists, etc. may disavow non-Orthodox people as not truely Jewish, Christian, etc. (i.e., if your mother is not Jewish then you are not; if you do not keep the Sabbath then you are not truly Christian or Jewish), they do not presently purposely engage in a holy war AGAINST CIVILIANS. While some may argue that, in deed, innocent civilians have unfortunately been caught in the cross-fire on many occasion, the innocent are not purposely sought out like they were on Tuesday by the Terrorists. (And I'm not talking about things that may have been done five hundred years ago, I am talking about today in modern society -- we have evolved, haven't we??) So, I'd like to wrap up this back and forth by simply saying that my original point was simply that those Islamic FUNDAMENTALISTS who carried out, contributed, supported, and/or celebrated (didn't you see the Palestinians dancing in the street on TV??) in the horrific attacks in NY and D.C. are cowards and shame their religion. I NEVER said that all Muslims were evil, etc. I have only been referring to the extreme element known as Fundamentalists. So, if you (john123) do not agree with any of the foregoing then let's just agree to disagree. No point in having additional rounds...

[Stryker]

And just to show that I'm not completely talking out of my a$$, here is a Los Angeles Times Article written just the other day:

"Islam Must Challenge Its Dark Doctrines
By YOSSI KLEIN HALEVI

(Yossi Klein Halevi's latest book is "At the Entrance to the Garden of Eden")

In the emerging debate over how extensively to define the enemy facing the West we need to avoid both wishful thinking and hysteria.

The minimalists who insist that the enemy is only a small band of fanatics around Osama bin Laden severely underestimate the penetration of extremist doctrine within much of mainstream Islam, especially in the Arab world. But those who invoke a war of civilizations—a conflict between Western democracy and international Islam—risk widening the circle of enmity to large parts of the Islamic world that have so far been immune to the appeal of jihad, or holy war.

Far from being regarded as fringe lunatics, the terrorists who struck against U.S. civilian and military targets are widely regarded as heroes within the Arab world. Religious edicts have been issued in Arab countries endorsing the attack, and thousands danced in the streets of the West Bank and Gaza. That pathological response isn't just the result of anger at perceived injustice, but of years of hate indoctrination in mosques and from state-controlled media. Indeed, only in the Arab world is Holocaust denial a mainstream notion.

Islamic doctrine easily lends itself to extremist cooptation. Islam divides the world into two regions: Dar al Harb, or the house of war, containing all territories ruled by non-Muslims, and Dar al Islam, or the house of Islam, which is destined to dominate the former. In a world groping toward planetary interconnectedness, this Islamic doctrine—which justifies the madness of holy war—must be challenged by Muslims themselves.

Humanistic Muslims need to face the lethal consequences of their theology toward non-Muslims. Apologetics about the nobility of Islam aren't good enough anymore. Just as much of Christianity has confronted its anti-Jewish theology, and many Jews are struggling to uproot the exclusivist strain within Judaism, tolerant Muslims can no longer afford to defend Islam's more problematic concepts.

We are all heirs to complex religious traditions; the obligation of believers is to preserve the beauty of their faith while transforming its negative residues.

Those who try to shift the blame for the latest terrorist atrocities on U.S. support for Israel miss several key points. The Arab war against Israel isn't over occupation but the right of a Jewish state to exist. Last year, at Camp David, former Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered to withdraw from almost all the territories and to share Jerusalem with the Palestinians—and the Temple Mount with Islam.

More broadly, the terrorist's holy war isn't aimed ultimately at Israel but the West. Muslim nations are among the the most vociferous in ideologically opposing globalization—not just its excesses but also its blessings, like a free media and a sense of shared responsibility for international stability.

Indeed, perhaps Israel's greatest offense to Arab sensibilities is its very Westerness, proof for many Muslims of its supposed colonialist essence. Western standards of human rights—which Arab propagandists routinely use to excoriate Israel—are almost unknown within the Muslim world.

Still, it would be disastrous to declare Islam itself the enemy. For many Muslims, the doctrines of holy war and of Dar al Islam are irrelevant to their faith, and have in effect been allowed to lapse. Sufis, or Muslim mystics, go further, transforming holy war into a spiritual doctrine, a battle against one's own imperfections.

Demonizing one of the world's great faiths is an affront against all religions.

The terrorists want nothing more than to widen this war to include the whole Islamic world. And those in the Arab world—especially Yasser Arafat—who actively nurture the culture of terrorism yet pretend to condemn it hope to avoid the West's judgment. Neither should be allowed to dictate the U.S. response to terrorism.
___

Yossi Klein Halevi's latest book is "At the Entrance to the Garden of Eden: A Jew's Search for God with Christians and Muslims in the Holy Land" (William Morrow, 2001)."

[john123]

Styker posted:
<<Death to Islamic Fundamentalists! You are a cancer in the heart of the world, a symbol of shame and cowardess. There is NO honor in killing the innocent!!!
>>

You requested the death of an entire rather large population segment. That's fairly heinous and requires some serious justification.

Even your LA Times article, much of which I question (and yes, I do have the credentials to do so, thanks to a nice Ivy League education), acknowledges that even conceding that there was some larger support for the attacks, not all Islamic Fundamentalists share those sentiments. In fact, to quote a line from the article, "Still, it would be disastrous to declare Islam itself the enemy."

Second, you said the following:
<< Are YOU an Expert in Islamic Fundamentalism? If not, then you are in no better a position than I -- in other words, whatever stereotypes and unsupported beliefs that you claim I have, you share as well. So, nuff said.>>
Let's dissect this comment. If a person isn't an expert on the subject, they have to share your stereotypes? That's preposterous. In fact, it doesn't even take a degree in rocket science (or sociology or psychology or anything else for that matter) to realize that stereotypes can be quite dangerous and often gloss over some very important details in the big picture.

Anyway, you have twice suggested that we not have "additional rounds," so if that's how you feel, let's just leave the subject at that.

[Stryker]

Whatever, John, you're still not getting the point -- AND I wasn't saying that you had to share MY stereotypes, just that you have YOUR OWN too (but, of course, I'm sure you're perfect). And, again, the Fundamentalist segment is NOT(!!) the "entire ... large population", it is the FRINGE element (the extreme minority). READ YOUR OWN QUOTE: "Still, it would be disastrous to declare Islam itself the enemy." I WAS NEVER REFERING TO THE ENTIRE ISLAM RELIGION, I WAS ALWAYS ONLY EXPRESSLY REFERING TO THE FRINGE FUNDAMENTALIST SEGEMENT. But of course, you still don't get it. Duh. (By the way, your "Ivy League" education still didn't answer your OWN Q about whether you were an Expert on Middle Eastern policy (which we both know you are not). But, of course, I'm sure that you don't ever hold your own powers of critique upon your self. And I LOVE how you say that simply because you went to a snuty Eastern school you can dismiss an entire news artictle. Great retort.

[Kela]

Yeah..i mean, ISLAM tells to destroy Isreal. But I dont want to make any value judgements on wether that makes it a bad religion. HOWEVER, It is quite clear that out of all the religions, there must be something in ISLAM, that has driven these people to FUNDAMENTALISM, and then lead to the loss of the need for self preservation and mad FANATISICM and TERRORISM. It is true that the amount of people doing this is a minority but by NO MEANS are the people CAPABLE (i.e almost every islamic fundamentalist) of doing such an act in the future, a minority. Hence, the question, Who to bomb, which cell to destroy so that the whole VAST network breaks down.

[john123]

Somehow, I knew you wouldn't heed your own advice and leave things where they were. Instead, you replied with a series of snotty arguments....

Funny -- I wasn't aware that I had to go line-by-line with your response, answering every query in order, never omitting a one. Since that's what you seem to want, I'll structure this post accordingly.


1) <<AND I wasn't saying that you had to share MY stereotypes, just that you have YOUR OWN too>>
No, that doesn't follow logically. There is a sizeable segment of the population that prides itself on political correctness, which thrives on both polite rhetoric and an obsession with not generalizing or stereotyping. If I see an Arab American, I don't jump to any stereotypes about his religion or politics. It's basically just the right thing to do.

2) <<READ YOUR OWN QUOTE: "Still, it would be disastrous to declare Islam itself the enemy.">>
That's a quote out of your LA Times article. In fact, I said that, too. Looks like you're the one in serious need of reading skills.

3) <<I WAS ALWAYS ONLY EXPRESSLY REFERING TO THE FRINGE FUNDAMENTALIST SEGEMENT>>
And I'm still contending that the fundamentalists (a) are not all fringe and (b) do not all advocate attacks on American civilians (and here I am making a distinction between American civilians and Israeli civilians).

4) No, I don't have a PhD on the subject -- just a number of intelligent professors in college and a number of friends right now in both academia and the U.S. foreign policy apparatus.

5) << And I LOVE how you say that simply because you went to a snuty Eastern school you can dismiss an entire news artictle>>
I never used the word "dismiss" or the word "reject." I said that I question much of it. This is again an issue with your reading skills.

In the end, the sad truth, Stryker, is that you want very badly to cast blame. You're so seething with hate and anger that if society has already created a name for a group that might have members who are directly involved, you'll persecute that whole group of individuals, regardless of their culpability. That is, in fact, the very (lack of) logic which led the German people, who saw Jewish economic fortunes in stark contrast to their own, to support the genocidal actions of the Nazis. Personally, I had hoped that America, which prides itself on being the land of the free, was above inflicting a Holocaust of its own.

[Stryker]

blah blah blah...

I don't see you letting this thing rest either my friend -- you didn't HAVE TO respond, so don't act like it's all me.

And as for your arguments, I am only going to reply to one.... AGAIN, you keep missing a ver simple point, so read this slowly:

I Was **NEVER** talking about Islam as a whole; I was referring to the fringe element of Islamic Fundamentalists. Then you misapply a quote from an article as if it contradicts me. Which it did NOT. Again, that quote was referring to ISLAM as a WHOLE, not the fringe element only.

You said:

"2) <<READ YOUR OWN QUOTE: "Still, it would be disastrous to declare Islam itself the enemy.">>
That's a quote out of your LA Times article. In fact, I said that, too. Looks like you're the one in serious need of reading skills.

But again, I had only requoted you to show you that your own quote applied to the WHOLE of Islam not to the Fundamentalist segment that I WAS REFERRING TO.

In short, it is YOU who need to learn to read. Pathetic. You keep point your finger at me but should really turn it on yourself. And as far as my "anger", of course I am angry, I lost friends. Did you???!!!!!!!!!!!!! Then shut up!

[Stryker]

John123, just read this article from Middle Eastern International and BEFORE you try to reply to my earlier statements try to UNDERSTAND and LEARN its meaning. You tell me that I and others are quick to get angry or judge or react, etc. but you are to quick to reply to things of which you most likely have no actual knowledge. I will not reply any further, if you still don't get it then I guess I am talking to a stone.

======
""Islamic fundamentalism" may be defined as a political ideology which aims at islamizing or re-islamizing law, institutions and government. It wants to set up an Islamic state with a constitutional framework and political organisation solely based on Islam with the Sharia or Islamic law as its sole legal reference.

The modern form of Islamic fundamentalism appeared at the turn of this century both as a reaction against modernist movements trying to westernize the Muslim world and as a resistance movement against colonial empires, particularly the British.

Two tendencies surfaced:

* the reformist or evolutionary (salafiyya) tendency, which was a SMALL MINORITY [empahsis added], advocated a return to the original model of Islamic society which had generated the splendid Arab culture and civilisation. The Sharia is therefore considered as a system of universal reference which must be interpreted and adapted to the realities of today through the opening of the fates of idjtihâd;

* the FUNDAMENTALIST tendency advocate going back to the roots of Islam and reject all interpretation of the Sharia which, in their view, should be applied litterally to all fields of life.

Although all Islamic fundamentalist movements share the same objective (the creation of an Islamic state) they have different views on the strategies, structures and socio-political organisation of this type of state.

[Read this part carefully, John] The radical movements think that the Islamic state must be created from the top downwards and if necessary through violent action. They do NOT [empahsis added] want to wait until society gradually becomes Islamic and do not want any compromise with existing regimes (this is the case with the Gamaat Islamiya in Egypt and the GIA in Algeria).

* * *

As far as the Arab world is concerned, Islamic fundamentalism developed at different periods in time, particularly in the 18th century in the Arabic Peninsula (see Wahabism) and in the 20th century in Egypt (see Muslim Brothers) and in other countries in the seventies and eighties (see FIS, Hamas and Hizbollah) as a reaction to specific challenges. The Iranian revolution (although belonging to Shia Islam) and the war in Afghanistan (see Afghans) played an important role in spreading Islamic fundamentalism. "
========

I have all along only been referring to this "radical, fundamentalist" movement; and I stand by my statements.

[john123]

Originally posted by Stryker
And as far as my "anger", of course I am angry, I lost friends. Did you???!!!!!!!!!!!!! Then shut up!


Another foolish assumption that, as it turns out, is incorrect.

[john123]

Originally posted by Stryker

I have all along only been referring to this "radical, fundamentalist" movement; and I stand by my statements.

Then you're still a biggoted fool.

Even if one acknowledges the more violent side of the fundamentalist movement, which we have seen for a long time now in the Middle East (and which goes ignored by most Americans who are inattentive to foreign relations and everything else that is going on in the world), that doesn't exactly make your argument. There are going to be fundamentalists who disagree altogether with violence; there are going to be fundamentalists who agree with violence only against Israeli troops; there are going to be fundamentalists who agree with violence against only Israelis but no one else; and there are going to be Fundamentalists who agree with violence against Israelis and anyone who befriends the state of Israel. There are a hell of a lot of graduated distinctions which should be made here, and a naive and genocidal statement such as "DEATH TO ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISTS" is, as I have noted before, tantamount to the rhetoric used by Nazi Germany.

[mymemory]

I do have a deeply respect for the US culture, even it is not that wonderful as you may think but it has a simplicity lost more than 20 years ago in my culture.

What I can tell you do not see yet is: What in hell your government was doing all these years out side your frontiers to deserve this? Why is a plane crashing against NY and not to Caracas, Berlin, Sidney, etc. and is not one plane, it was THE plan against your country.

What your government is doing to deserve so much hate?

I've been in the US for 3 years and I can tell you live in a fairly tail some times. You just got a bit of reality; well I can say too much reality.

For example, I can tell you 20 years ago there was the intention in my country to build railroads. Lots of people know that the US government "did something" to stop the plan and for us to keep buying Ford and Chevrolet trucks.

And let's not talk about the Oil, every time the US is in one those wars we have to keep the price stable for you, but there is no way the US do something about the interest of the loans we took 30 years ago. For your information we paid 60 times more in a year of what the WTC cost, just in interest. We have paid the debs about 300.000 times. And I'm not kidding and those are not rumors. I leave in a wealthy family and I know people of almost every single bank in my country and you would be amaze of the numbers. Still, we won't even think in even thought something wrong against the US people, may be the government, but not even this one.

Well, some people down here are mad against the US because of "little things like that" against our progress, but it is up to our government to be loyal to us. Imagine what the US did to the people in the Middle East?

I see there is too much hate against those towers.

Just think, if you live in a very nice house with your parents, and you father is the owner of a bank and some one came and crash his car against the living room window and shoot your dog "for no reason"... don't you think some one in your house was doing something wrong to the wrong person?

There are crazy people everywhere but some times you choose the situation.

I will definitely do something against terrorism, not only about that single case, about every single terrorist group including ETA, and then the drugs dealers. But as a North American (sorry, Americans are South Americans too, that is a defect of your school system), I will see what is really going on with my government and put an aye on that.

Today terrorism got real; tomorrow the weather is going to be pretty realistic too or who knows what.

As Richard Bach said, "the world is an Illusion", everything can change at any time for "no reason".

That Tuesday morning I was in my car going to my job and a 9:15 it was already on the news here in Caracas Venezuela. When I got to the office every body was on the TV of the cafeteria. Most of the people had their eyes wed and I shouted to shout up to a girl because she asked, " do you think the pilot is dead" (of course she was blond). That day no one could have his or her work done and after lunch the office was empty.

It was no a crime against the US, It was against humanity.

I hope no one see that as a limit, because right now putting a bomb in a car or in a school would look corny compare with that.

Work toward peace and mutual comprehension.





[Edited by mymemory on 09-15-2001 at 09:28 PM]

[mnkeybsness]

this is getting very stupid, i thought that this was supposed to be http://www.macrumors.com, not http://www.let'sbsaboutterrorism.com. crikey...sure i think what has happened is terrible, but come on people, don't you have friends and family to talk to about all this?

[Kela]

With all due respect we do have family and friends to talk about this but individuals here also have good arguments that I am interested in. So MONEKYBUSINESS, please ****.

thnkyou

- kela

p.s. I think its a good idea by the administrators to get a thread up like this since the topic is controversial and allows various insights from people of various backgrounds.

[Kela]

John123, Im not going to make any derogatory remarks. You have an Ivy League education right? I believe you as you articulate well. Howevever, please....is it really necessary to say "i have a nice Ivy League Education"? I mean, modesty is something im sure good Ivy league graduates advocate and furthermore, has the thought ever occured to you that others in this forum may indeed have an Ivy league education too?

- Kela


As John Milton tells Kevin Lomax in The Devil's Advocate, " Dont let them see you coming, Vanity is the mother of all sins".

[john123]

Kela,

No disrespect on other members was intended...Stryker was challenging my "credentials" to talk about Middle Eastern affairs and actually asked me whether I was qualified (see page 2 of the thread). I was just trying to respond as best I could. Sorry if that came off wrong.

[mymemory]

This are only opinions, it doesn’t matter if I'm right or you are, every one have a different educational level, differences in their values and so on.

What you can do from this treat is to refresh your point of view about the topic, not "what should we do we the terrorist or with our government or with our selves".

Do not get too personal in to this because it is a sensible topic and there are too many things to say about it.

[mymemory]

Originally posted by mnkeybsness
this is getting very stupid, i thought that this was supposed to be http://www.macrumors.com, not http://www.let'sbsaboutterrorism.com. crikey...sure i think what has happened is terrible, but come on people, don't you have friends and family to talk to about all this?


Man, this is not a "gringos only" kind of problem. This was a crime against humanity. If the US is going to war, that is going to affect me directly, just because 60% of the gas you put in your car is produce in my country and 80% of the electronic equipment we buy down here (including this computer) are made in yours.

This world is not just Apple computers or Quake games only. You haven't realized the dimension of this problem.

Besides, the name of my president was mention in CNN by some one in your government; together with Fidel Castro, those are not good news. I hate my president, juts imagine Don King as the president of the US, and I wish mine had half the knowledge of Don King. Just to tell you a General (down here) put fire to 2 soldiers because the came late from the weekend, they died, that general is free because is a friend of our president and he said, “I see no case here”.

If you have a spare bomb I’ll glad to tell you where you can drop it.

But just imagine, the balance is getting out of control and is going to affect us all.

Ps. The US was expecting a war like this for a long time.

[elfin buddy]

I hope the both of you are done fighting so the forum can get on with what really matters. Did it ever occur to you that nobody in the forum outside of yourselves really gives a damn who is "qualified" to talk about the Middle East? I believe that anyone who has been touched by this horrible crime should have a say. And everyone on Earth has somehow been touched by this. I don't live in the USA but my life has been changed very much by those terrorists. And I am very angry about this. My own sister was almost killed. Thousands of people were killed on Tuesday and more people are dying from complications each day. So why are you fighting over who is better qualified? Both of you seem like intelligent individuals to me so how about putting your heads together and seeing what you can come up with. Both of you claim to have lost friends or family in this attack but thats not all you've lost. If this attack hadn't happened, do you think that you two would have been aruging over anything? I think not. This attack is causing us to fight among ourselves because we have different opinions and have no hard evidence of who to blame. Yet. Sit back and think about that.

[john123]

Elfin, while many people are "affected" by the tragedy, and you are right to point that out, that doesn't mean that everyone should "have a say." Specifically, the problem comes from the fact that a reaction to Tuesday's events, whether it comes from just the U.S. or from an international coalition, will likely require lethal force and military action. So, the natural question is -- against whom will such force be directed?

The problem is that far too many people are uneducated and uninformed regarding current affairs and the Middle East in particular. If you had read the entire thread, you would know that Stryker and I have been arguing about who is to blame for Tuesday's attacks -- a very valid and important argument which necessarily entails a discussion of who is qualified on such matters. If we are going to strike back, I would like to make damn sure we don't commit the same heinous crime of the murder of innocent civilians that they did.

[Stryker]

Originally posted by john123
Kela,

No disrespect on other members was intended...Stryker was challenging my "credentials" to talk about Middle Eastern affairs and actually asked me whether I was qualified (see page 2 of the thread). I was just trying to respond as best I could. Sorry if that came off wrong.

Figures, while I will no longer address our SUBSTANTIVE arguement (talking to a brick wall), I do find it totally funny(!!!!) that YOU told Kela that *I* challenged YOUR credientials and asked if you were qualified. Reread your own post. You said that unless *I* had a degree in Political Science (which I do!) and History (which I do), that, basically, I should shut up. I replied that YES, as it turns out I DO have asuch degrees (plus a law degree in case you require that too), and simply said, how about YOU since you seem to be requiring such credientials to speak in this forum. So, don't say such things as if you were MERELY defending yourself. Pathetic. But then again, since you first chimed in on this discussion you have been criticizing me instead of simply sharing your FEELINGS on the tragedy. Go find a new battle.

[Stryker]

Originally posted by john123

Look, unless you have a degree in History or Political Science with a specialization in Middle Eastern affairs, you simply don't have the authority to make such broad sweeping generalizations. Simmer down and talk to an expert before you spout off.

As you can see, it was YOU who first brought up the supposed issue of qualifications to simply engage in freedom of speech... such that unless I have a B.A. or Masters (Ironic, that I do, isn't it?) in Poli-Sci that I should shut up and not "spout off". All I said was, how about you?

[john123]

Your posting amounted to the grown-up version of the traditional Kindergarten creed, "He hit me first."

So what if I challenged your credentials first? I never claimed that I didn't! You were making blanket (and asinine) generalizations, and I said you don't have the authority to do so. I still contend that you aren't qualified on the subject -- any person with half an ounce of common sense or understanding of international relations wouldn't be so genocidal as to say "Death to Islamic Fundamentalists!"

Since you asked for my "FEELINGS on the tragedy," I *feel* like Americans should get a little better understanding of the world in which we live and foreign relations on the whole before suggesting a course of action.

It's a darn shame that people like you -- the alleged "educated" of American society -- think with such a low level of sophistication. It bodes very poorly for our society and likely is indirectly the cause of Tuesday's events in the first place.

Anyone for a slightly different slant for anyone who's interested, there was a good article by Thomas Friedman in today's New York Times about the dangers of proceeding without sufficient caution (i.e., bombing like madmen):

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/09/14/opinion/14FRIE.html

And another interesting tidbit worth reading:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010916/wl/attack_coalition_world_dc_2.html

[john123]

Originally posted by Stryker
to simply engage in freedom of speech...

Actually, no, what you did wasn't freedom of speech. You should know this since you have a law degree. At the least, it's hate speech, which there are certain regulations on...

I would hope that genocidal rhetoric would have no place in the land of the free and the home of the brave.

[elfin buddy]

I think you missed the point of my message. By saying everyone should have a say, I didn't mean that everyone should be able to tell the military who to attack. I simply meant that everyone has a right to think what they want and express their opinions on this matter without having someone flip on them for not having the same opinions. Opinions are just points of view and everyone has a different one. That's what makes us individuals. People who were affected by this crime should definately have an opinion about it. The fact is that not all opinions are correct. But not all opinions are wrong either. Right now it is just too early to tell which opinions are correct so as far as i'm concerned, all the opinions are right in a way. Since these are opinions, and there isn't enough information to prove or disprove many of them, your arguments with Stryker are going nowhere fast. Both of you are on the same side, so why doesn't one of you act like an adult (which I'm sure you are since you both have like 3 degrees or something...) and give it a rest so others can get on with reading what they care about. I really couldn't care less about what you and Stryker think of eachother and I would bet money that I'm not the only one. If you and Stryker want to have personal arguments, do it in your own emails or on the phone ot something. Just don't do it on my time. Since it would be hypocritical of me to keep arguing like this and just join you and Stryker, this will be my last post about you and Stryker.

[spikey]

I would like to point out to u that no religion is evil, and no religion condems certain people. Islam is not at fault in this topic, it is the people that mis interprit it who are evil.
You are sad if u think that islam is the cause of this evil, because it isnt.
You cannot condemn a religion if you do not know the teachings of it.
Personally i dont agree with religion at all, in theory it works but in practice alot of hate filled people use it to justify their actions, and infact religion increases the evil inside these ppl. But i embrace people with different opinions.

You racist people out there need to realise whats right and wrong in this world. and i am right, u r wrong.
Its pathetic the way u have no sense, surely u have all listened to what john lennon said?
Come on ppl youve heard "imagine" take a hint

[mymemory]

I just came from a meeting. This is getting more real than I thought.

1. Hugo Chavez Frias, president of my country is the pupil of Fidel Castro, every body in the latin american comunity knows that.

2. Chavez is supporting the campaing of some political candidate down in Brazil, of course, this last one have the same tendences like Castro.

3. It is VERY factible that most of the terrorist of the far east move to Venezuela and other parts of south america.

The US have to be very carefull and very fast because this may get bigger than we expect.

[mnkeybsness]

don't get me wrong, i love the u.s. of a., but seriously, can't we engage in something a little more on topic to this site. go find yourself another forum site about world new and shizit like that. CRIKEY