Leading Muslim Terrorist gives this warning. Sept 1st 04

Originally posted by outsider
With the possible exception of Israel, I don't see too much targeting of civilians by Jews. Although I don't currently run with any jewish people, although I grew up with many & they were some of the nicest people I've ever known.

I don't recall any christians targeting any civilians or even being accused of doing so in my lifetime. I don't consider myself christian - although I'm an American.

Like I said I don't hate anyone, but if you point a gun at me - you don't leave me much choice.

Whos been pointing a gun at you??
Ive grown up with muslims and they are the nicest people i've ever known. All the stuff about hating the west is pure crap, my muslim friends love the UK and love the lifestyle of the west.

Your problem is, that you believe the media too much

Nah, I don't believe a damn thing the media says. The media is responsible for most terrorism these days as the terrorist see what a huge response the media created and other terrorist get the idea and continue.

Kind of like these stupid school shootings we get a rash of now & again all at once. One kid does something dumb & it creates lots of media attention & so other screwed up kids see all the attention & decide they want of piece of that attention. If the media would just refuse to plaster it all over the TV 10 times a day for a week, other incidents would be fewer & farther between.

I've traveled through much of the world & I lived in Europe for a time, so I realize the American media is extremly filtered. Overall I'd guess I have to agree most Americans don't have a clue about the rest of the world, with the exception of the kids in the military & the wealthier travelers. Although my response was more of a knee jerk reaction - extinguishing their seed from this planet. When I read stuff like that, that's how it makes me feel. NAZI - not.

Terrorism from muslims?, perhaps, but it could be from shadow forces with the intent to destabilize the middle east and to promote hate between races. Could it be that all the terrorism is originated by business requirements of a few?
Who could pursue this seek intent? Who could benefit from all this? I am sure if the 9/11 conspiracy is properly investigated and those responsible are executed, the world will be come peaceful again.

Originally posted by WisdomMaster
I am sure if the 9/11 conspiracy is properly investigated and those responsible are executed, the world will be come peaceful again.

I hope that day comes when this world falls into peace, but honest WisdomMaster it will take alot of death before we see peace

(EDIT: typo)

[edit on 6-9-2004 by infinite]

Originally posted by Chuck Stevenson
Same old rhetoric, same ol stuff.

Mumbled during a druken whore fest by "Harakat Shuhadaa al-Ummah"This battle will require using all weapons and styles of advanced warfare ...

How about a naked rhumba line shaking what daddy gave 'em? That would certainly make me flee in terror.

hahahahaha

that's the funniest thing I've ever read online...

To infinite and Outsider,

Your debate is very intriguing and is echoed by many many people these days. I think that what needs to be understood is that it's ok to hate a group of people if that entire group has given you such reasons. That is why I believe it is WRONG to hate Muslims in general. They have done nothing to make anyone hate them. Extremists? YES! I find nothing wrong with hating the groups that bomb planes and busses and kill school kids. There is nothing wrong with hating al-qaeda, with hating hamas, with hating groups like that. They don't value human life and they want you dead and they want me dead. So in that sense I understand outsider's argument. Those are the people who the anger should be directed at. But as infinite said, many of us have been too careless in allowing such hate to reflect to all Muslims. That is just wrong.

Originally posted by Gazrok
"Look guys, the next time a 911 style attack goes down, the Kabaa in Mecca is going to be turned into rubble and then we're going to drop a cargo load of crap on top of it... If you even think about retaliating, we'll simply target other religious sites, etc." and be done with it.

Just what every good American should think. I like this plan. hehehe

I think that was intended more as rhetoric. I certainly would hope no one would advocate the bombing of a religious site. But to a group of extremists that claims to be religion-based, a threat like that just might work.

Originally posted by infinite

Originally posted by WisdomMaster
I am sure if the 9/11 conspiracy is properly investigated and those responsible are executed, the world will be come peaceful again.

I hope that day comes when this world falls into peace, but honest WisdomMaster it will take alot of death before we see peace

(EDIT: typo)

[edit on 6-9-2004 by infinite]

There has never be peace on this Earth in the past and there never will be peace in the future as long as there are Humans.

I would also advise that any peace loving muslims who live in areas that support terrorists should leave those areas because if they do pull something big off the sand will be turned to glass in those areas.

Originally posted by weirdo
Some examples were requested.You no dates,locations that kinda thing.

I gave examples of different cultures that lived peacefully.

Both the Greeks and the Jews have been in conflict and oppression with Muslims for decades.

We weren't talking just about muslims. You were saying that different cultures can't get along.

And come on the Roman Empire

.

typing 'lol' doesn't mean that you are making a point or sense. The Romans had a multitude of different cultures within it that were able to get along amicably. They were able to assimilate barbarians and other non-romans and have roman culture exist side by side with non-roman culture.

I never stated there was rampant xenaphobia.I stated that cultures never mix. They don`t so before you judge my comments and base them on your inability to misread and comprehend

Ok, so now you are avoiding the examples that i gave, repeating your original assertion and insulting me.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by weirdo
Some examples were requested.You no dates,locations that kinda thing.

I gave examples of different cultures that lived peacefully.

Both the Greeks and the Jews have been in conflict and oppression with Muslims for decades.

We weren't talking just about muslims. You were saying that different cultures can't get along.

And come on the Roman Empire

.

typing 'lol' doesn't mean that you are making a point or sense. The Romans had a multitude of different cultures within it that were able to get along amicably. They were able to assimilate barbarians and other non-romans and have roman culture exist side by side with non-roman culture.

I never stated there was rampant xenaphobia.I stated that cultures never mix. They don`t so before you judge my comments and base them on your inability to misread and comprehend

Ok, so now you are avoiding the examples that i gave, repeating your original assertion and insulting me.

We are using Muslims as an example that there religion does advicate and has been using violance in the past.
The Roman empire used violance and oppression to gain control in countrys.Please do some History reading.
I am not avoiding the examples l have posted links to back up my comments.Please feel free to do the same if l am wrong please prove it.

Originally posted by weirdo
We are using Muslims as an example that there religion does advicate and has been using violance in the past.

I think Buddhism is the only religion that doesn't advocate violence or has used it in the past. But, no, that wasn't what we were talking about anyway.

The Roman empire used violance and oppression to gain control in countrys.Please do some History reading.

You know, you're about the fourth of fifth moron who knows squat about history to tell me to do some history reading. Why don't you do some god-damned history reading you uneducated jackass. Or at least learn how to spell the word 'violence. The romans did not allways use violence and oppression.

I am not avoiding the examples l have posted links to back up my comments.

Where? What links did oyu provide that showed my examples were wrong?

Please feel free to do the same if l am wrong please prove it.

I have already proven you wrong by showing that different cultures can co-exist peacefully. Try to keep up.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by weirdo
We are using Muslims as an example that there religion does advicate and has been using violance in the past.

I think Buddhism is the only religion that doesn't advocate violence or has used it in the past. But, no, that wasn't what we were talking about anyway.

The Roman empire used violance and oppression to gain control in countrys.Please do some History reading.

You know, you're about the fourth of fifth moron who knows squat about history to tell me to do some history reading. Why don't you do some god-damned history reading you uneducated jackass. Or at least learn how to spell the word 'violence. The romans did not allways use violence and oppression.

I am not avoiding the examples l have posted links to back up my comments.

Where? What links did oyu provide that showed my examples were wrong?

Please feel free to do the same if l am wrong please prove it.

I have already proven you wrong by showing that different cultures can co-exist peacefully. Try to keep up.

Maybe if four or five people have told you to do some research you should.Your attitude towards people that disagree with your point of view really shows you to be the moron as you are taking this discussion to the lower levels just because people disagree with you insulting them does show your lack of education.Facts and figures you have provided none.As for my links please return and read the previous replies.
Again apart from your comments that cultures do co exist you have yet to provide anything to substanciate your claim.As for my spelling well that has always been crap but as far as mensa are concerned that is not a measure of ones intelligance.


Link to roman Empire

Quote

"Again,we find oureselves gazing back at the Roman world not as a model,but as an alien terryfing alternative.No concept her of human rights :Slavery required the systamatic use of physical punishment,judicial torture and spectacular execution.From the crucifixtion of rebel slaves in there thousands to the use of theatrical enactments of grusome deaths in the arena as a form of entertainment,we see a world in which brutality was not only normal,but a necessary part of the system.And since the Roman economy was so deeply dependant on slave labour,whether in chained gangs in the fields or in craft and production in the citie,we cannot wounder that modern technological revoloutions driven by reduction of labour costs had no place in their world.

Again take the morons advice and read some History

Originally posted by weirdo
Maybe if four or five people have told you to do some research you should.

I have done the relevant research, and the people telling me too consistently seem to either have not done it or not understood any of it.

Your attitude towards people that disagree with your point of view really shows you to be the moron as you are taking this discussion to the lower levels just because people disagree with you insulting them does show your lack of education.

Excuse me, but you are the one starting with the insults to my education on the matter and not providing anything to back up why you think I am wrong. I am not the one with the poor attitude here, I am merely trying to have a discussion on the matter and have gotten pretty tired of people who apparently don't know what the heck they are talking about acting like they do.

Facts and figures you have provided none.

I have talked about the fact that within the roman empire various different cultural units were able to peacfully coexist. I have also talked about other times and places wherein different cultures have been able to peacefully coexist.

Again apart from your comments that cultures do co exist you have yet to provide anything to substanciate your claim.

What would you like me to provide you with in these specific cases? You said you have done the research on your own, and since I wasn't there when you have done it, I can' t know what specifically you consider to be wrong with the examples I gave.

As for my spelling well that has always been crap but as far as mensa are concerned that is not a measure of ones intelligance.

No, its not, and I agree. I just found it ironic that some guy is telling me to do my research and in the same post can't even spell correctly.

Slavery required the systamatic use of physical punishment,judicial torture and spectacular execution.[...]
Again take the morons advice and read some History

The above quote is about slavery, not about different cultures coexisting. The romans made everyone into slaves, not just people of 'different cultures'. How is it that you can possibly tell me to do my 'research' and 'read some history' when you are obviously so wildly incompetent that you can't even understand a simple short set of paragraphs. We are talking about different cultures co existing, not wether or not a particular society had some cruel practices in other areas. Why don't you try reading about the barbarians that were settled into roman territory, or look at how italians were able to be relocated into the middle of england and co-exist with the native population. Yes, some natives resisted, but others didn't. The romans established their settlements, and were able to live along side the britons. When the military left, the britons didn't exterminate the italians and other europeans that were left undefended. They blended together with them.

Look at the greeks, who were able to send their colonies all around the shores of teh medeteranean and not have to exterminate the natives, and in fact blended in with them.

Yes, often, and especially in highly primitive and militarized/tribal societies, different groups don't get along. And at the same time, members of the same group fight with each other also. Different cultures can and do co-exist. Look at America. Yes, there was slavery. But at the same time there are multiethinic communities and extremely diverse cities that aren't subject to wanton race riots. People don't have to destroy people that are different.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by weirdo
Maybe if four or five people have told you to do some research you should.

I have done the relevant research, and the people telling me too consistently seem to either have not done it or not understood any of it.

Your attitude towards people that disagree with your point of view really shows you to be the moron as you are taking this discussion to the lower levels just because people disagree with you insulting them does show your lack of education.

Excuse me, but you are the one starting with the insults to my education on the matter and not providing anything to back up why you think I am wrong. I am not the one with the poor attitude here, I am merely trying to have a discussion on the matter and have gotten pretty tired of people who apparently don't know what the heck they are talking about acting like they do.

Facts and figures you have provided none.

I have talked about the fact that within the roman empire various different cultural units were able to peacfully coexist. I have also talked about other times and places wherein different cultures have been able to peacefully coexist.

Again apart from your comments that cultures do co exist you have yet to provide anything to substanciate your claim.

What would you like me to provide you with in these specific cases? You said you have done the research on your own, and since I wasn't there when you have done it, I can' t know what specifically you consider to be wrong with the examples I gave.

As for my spelling well that has always been crap but as far as mensa are concerned that is not a measure of ones intelligance.

No, its not, and I agree. I just found it ironic that some guy is telling me to do my research and in the same post can't even spell correctly.

Slavery required the systamatic use of physical punishment,judicial torture and spectacular execution.[...]
Again take the morons advice and read some History

The above quote is about slavery, not about different cultures coexisting. The romans made everyone into slaves, not just people of 'different cultures'. How is it that you can possibly tell me to do my 'research' and 'read some history' when you are obviously so wildly incompetent that you can't even understand a simple short set of paragraphs. We are talking about different cultures co existing, not wether or not a particular society had some cruel practices in other areas. Why don't you try reading about the barbarians that were settled into roman territory, or look at how italians were able to be relocated into the middle of england and co-exist with the native population. Yes, some natives resisted, but others didn't. The romans established their settlements, and were able to live along side the britons. When the military left, the britons didn't exterminate the italians and other europeans that were left undefended. They blended together with them.

Look at the greeks, who were able to send their colonies all around the shores of teh medeteranean and not have to exterminate the natives, and in fact blended in with them.

Yes, often, and especially in highly primitive and militarized/tribal societies, different groups don't get along. And at the same time, members of the same group fight with each other also. Different cultures can and do co-exist. Look at America. Yes, there was slavery. But at the same time there are multiethinic communities and extremely diverse cities that aren't subject to wanton race riots. People don't have to destroy people that are different.

Please give some examples as l am getting bored with have to justifiy my claims whilst you persistantly quote and debreif comments other people make without any evidance to back yourself up.Cultures such as the Romans used the docturing that you either live with us, our religion and laws or we will destroy you.Yes they lived side by side but that was the only way to live or you would be killed by them.
I have not insulted you on this thread again please give evidance to back up this claim
My intention is not to change your believes,l made a statement if you don`t agree please give me some examples in History I repeat dates, areas if you cannot disprove me with hard facts fine you believe what you believe l`ll believe the facts.
And as for America please remember Martin Luther king and the oppression of Black Americans you have one of the worst civil liberties and right records in the world.Guess you call that Co Excisting.Yes you welcomed the poor immigrants from all over the world but once they arrived you treated them like crap.Again do some research cos you just making yourself look

Originally posted by weirdo
Cultures such as the Romans used the docturing that you either live with us, our religion and laws or we will destroy you.

Absolutely incorrect. The romans were imperial, and did expand their dominion, but they did not require conversion to any sort of state religion, allowed local laws to remain in affect in local areas, and were quite good at building up local aristocrats, leaving them in power, and even importing them into italy to participate in the senate. Caesar and others made ample use of spanish and later german bodyguards, and the personal retinue of the imperial person or even a consul or high ranking aristocrat is something more than just some thug. The Senate itself later on was filled with provincials from throughout the empire, and infact all that was required was meeting the monetary requirements, and perhaps bribing a Censor to grease the wheels a little. Septimius Severus was from the province of africa (tho not black) and came to not only be imperator but infact start his own dynasty. Yes, the provinces in general tended to romanize. The villages grew into cities with baths, forums and fountains, but still maintained temples to their own gods and kept their own local markets, taverns and shops. The people wore tunics at times and tartan pattern kilts at others or jewish skullcaps of berber robes or even barbaric trousers at other times. Romanization also meant that the vine spread throughout europe, but back into italy surely came german beers. And sure, people along the Rhine started speaking latin, but when they weren't around romans and in their normal setting they reverted back to their native languages.

It wasn't 'conform or be destroyed', it was 'pay your taxes and fight when drafted'.

but that was the only way to live or you would be killed by them.

And similiarly here if members of a group rise up in rebellion against the state they too would be captured and imprisoned/executed. The polytheistic romans got along fabulously with the jews, but when some zealots rose in rebellion and took up arms they were policed, arrested, and prosecuted.

I have not insulted you on this thread again please give evidance to back up this claim

By telling me to do research when i have and you apparently haven't you were being insulting; thats when I started this slightly aggresive line.

My intention is not to change your believes,

And my intention is not to change yours. This is a discussion group, if you can't discuss the subject, then don't. You made some statements that were absurdly wrong. I countered them. You insisted that you were correct. Now you have offered some sort of defense of that assertion, namely that the romans said 'conform or die'. I have addressed that inaccuracey.
l made a statement if you don`t agree please give me some examples in History I repeat dates, areas if you cannot disprove me with hard facts fine you believe what you believe l`ll believe the facts.

And as for America please remember Martin Luther king and the oppression of Black Americans you have one of the worst civil liberties and right records in the world.

Irrelvant. I have not been saying that all cultures at all times got along very well. You have been saying that no two cultures ever have or ever can.

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by weirdo
Cultures such as the Romans used the docturing that you either live with us, our religion and laws or we will destroy you.

Absolutely incorrect. The romans were imperial, and did expand their dominion, but they did not require conversion to any sort of state religion, allowed local laws to remain in affect in local areas, and were quite good at building up local aristocrats, leaving them in power, and even importing them into italy to participate in the senate. Caesar and others made ample use of spanish and later german bodyguards, and the personal retinue of the imperial person or even a consul or high ranking aristocrat is something more than just some thug. The Senate itself later on was filled with provincials from throughout the empire, and infact all that was required was meeting the monetary requirements, and perhaps bribing a Censor to grease the wheels a little. Septimius Severus was from the province of africa (tho not black) and came to not only be imperator but infact start his own dynasty. Yes, the provinces in general tended to romanize. The villages grew into cities with baths, forums and fountains, but still maintained temples to their own gods and kept their own local markets, taverns and shops. The people wore tunics at times and tartan pattern kilts at others or jewish skullcaps of berber robes or even barbaric trousers at other times. Romanization also meant that the vine spread throughout europe, but back into italy surely came german beers. And sure, people along the Rhine started speaking latin, but when they weren't around romans and in their normal setting they reverted back to their native languages.

It wasn't 'conform or be destroyed', it was 'pay your taxes and fight when drafted'.

but that was the only way to live or you would be killed by them.

And similiarly here if members of a group rise up in rebellion against the state they too would be captured and imprisoned/executed. The polytheistic romans got along fabulously with the jews, but when some zealots rose in rebellion and took up arms they were policed, arrested, and prosecuted.

I have not insulted you on this thread again please give evidance to back up this claim

By telling me to do research when i have and you apparently haven't you were being insulting; thats when I started this slightly aggresive line.

My intention is not to change your believes,

And my intention is not to change yours. This is a discussion group, if you can't discuss the subject, then don't. You made some statements that were absurdly wrong. I countered them. You insisted that you were correct. Now you have offered some sort of defense of that assertion, namely that the romans said 'conform or die'. I have addressed that inaccuracey.
l made a statement if you don`t agree please give me some examples in History I repeat dates, areas if you cannot disprove me with hard facts fine you believe what you believe l`ll believe the facts.

And as for America please remember Martin Luther king and the oppression of Black Americans you have one of the worst civil liberties and right records in the world.

Irrelvant. I have not been saying that all cultures at all times got along very well. You have been saying that no two cultures ever have or ever can.

We were discussing my comment that cultures don`t mix.I have posted links to both Muslim and Roman History proving that they have forced there belives and cultures outside of there own countries.True the Romans were not constantly fighting everybody.There rule was imposed on the countries they invaded.The Christians were persecuted because of there religious views.Spainish and Italian bodyguards were used to protect him from the Locals.Why did Ceesar invade Britain?Well because having conquered Gaul by 56BC,he found himself in a position where he was compelled to return to Rome and disband his army,unless he foundan excuse to stay in the field.He found that excuse in Britain.Ny claiming that the British tribes had helped the Gauls he had just cause ti invade.In fact,as his own writings and the letters he sent to Cicero indicate,he was much more interested in the glory he would gain for crossing the Great Ocean and in the wealth of Silver rumoured to be on the island,thanin any so-called security risk.His first invasion in 55bc seriously underestimated the British and was a near disaster.His second expendition in 54 bc was more succesful but then he had recieved the accolades he desired and was complaining to Cicero that the rumours of Silver were greatly exgaggerated.He pulled out of the island exacting tribute and hostages and concertrated on pacifying the troublesome tribes of Gaul before crossing the Rubicon with his army and returning to Rome as its most powerful son.His power and prestige were so great,in fact that his enemies were forced to assassinate him,sparking the civil war that destroyed the Republic.
This is not a link for the History of the Roman empire therefore this aguement is pointless.I stand by my points.The Romans brought great ideas and inventions to Britain but that was for there use not the general populations.They invade countries for the good of the Roman Empire not to improve the lifestyles of the people already living there.
This is of the subject at no point continuing in this thread.I stand by my view that cultures do not mix.