Anyone watcing Law and Order on TnT right now?

[Porcelain]

some great shit about islam and how america thinks its better than everyone else and how we fought for our rights but when everyone else does its considered terrorism.

how the mass amounts of native americans were killed and this country was built on the backs of black slaves. but we think its ok..

but dont u think if the indians could fly a plane into a bulding they would have done it to defend themselves?

[Dawood]

this type of thinking is still harmful to islam, because Jihad in Islam has it's conditions. Flying airlanes into civilian buildings (even if they symbolize the evil imperialism that most people realize is stepping on the necks of everything wholesome) is not a part of my religion. Just because a wealthy , affluent muslim who started a group of terrorists doesn't give him the right to kill innocent people. I still say that the sept. 11 attacks (from the perspective of Osama Bin laden...assuming it was Al Qaida) should have been strictly military. Like if they only attacked the pentagon, I'm thinking the public response would have been much different and might not have given Bush the power he needed to launch his diabolical crusade.

 

On the flip side, yeah...I'm not down with John Wayne or those people who follow him in his treachourous ways. It's amazing how single sided Americans are when it comes to global positioning.

[Dawood]

and just to clarify, i don't staunchly attempt to know exactly who perpretrated 911 , before this turns into that kind of debate, I'm happy with just knowing that whoever was behind those attacks will have a serious reckoning one day.

[Porcelain]

i forgot what the dude was saying he sounded pretty convincing.

but yeah u are right. just cayse a affluent muslim started something doesnt mean it gives them the right to attack people

[Dawood]

Attack innocent people, I may add. Now attacking people who need to be stopped, that's a different story, but not by cutting of people's heads on TV and blowing up buses in the street.

 

It's a tough world we live in, though, because as convincing as that dude probably sounded, I'm guessing he had some good points. The problem comes when you start to weigh out the benefit to the harm. That's the problem with a lot of these jihadi type organizations. They have a legitamate beef, but they go about it the wrong way and end up terrorizing instead of liberating.....sound familiar?

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

is this the episode with the white kid, that converted to islam, because of his mom?

 

not trying to down play anything just trying to find out if we're on the same page.

[Juan Fuentes]

porcelain, i think you left fox news on, turn off the tv! save energy u causing global warming!

[eatyourpaint]

NO, but i was watching this NEW SHOW...Stink&Odor, the plumber found a rotting piece of meat jamming up the garbage disposal...had to snake it out.

[eatyourpaint]

oh and the plumber found out it was actually the maids step son who didnt turn on the disposal who is out of wedlock and the lady of the house didnt know her husband was the father.

[eatyourpaint]

and the kid was planning on jamming bannanas/jelllo and dog shit down the bathroom sink next.

[Theo Huxtable.]

this type of thinking is still harmful to islam, because Jihad in Islam has it's conditions. Flying airlanes into civilian buildings (even if they symbolize the evil imperialism that most people realize is stepping on the necks of everything wholesome) is not a part of my religion. Just because a wealthy , affluent muslim who started a group of terrorists doesn't give him the right to kill innocent people. I still say that the sept. 11 attacks (from the perspective of Osama Bin laden...assuming it was Al Qaida) should have been strictly military. Like if they only attacked the pentagon, I'm thinking the public response would have been much different and might not have given Bush the power he needed to launch his diabolical crusade.

 

On the flip side, yeah...I'm not down with John Wayne or those people who follow him in his treachourous ways. It's amazing how single sided Americans are when it comes to global positioning.

 

i agree. of course, they would have to attack the pentagon with something other than a civilian plane.

 

still -- do you feel the u.s. should have legitimately been attacked

 

i remember nasrallah of hezbollah condemned the attacks on the wtc, but didn't condemn the attack on the pentagon. made me have a bit of empathy for some of these "terrorists". i realized some of them had standards and "conditions." but alqaeda is the most unconditionally ruthless of them all. their policies are nearly unrestricted on what they can attack. even though "al qaeda in iraq" only accounts for 15% of the bloodshed in iraq, their attacks are generally more disgusting and ruthless than the sunni (70%) or shia (15%) violence. even iraq sunni groups are now fed up with al qaeda killing innocent iraqis and trying to instigate, and are beginning to isolate and attack al qaeda.

 

i realize that the iraqi sunni insurgents (that don't kill other muslims or non-muslim civilians) aren't "terrorists", but freedom fighters, people fighting for their land... although the bush admin and rightwingers routinely dub them "terrorists" for propaganda reasons.... that said, when they attack u.s. troops, u.s. troops have the right to kill them. simple as that.

 

speaking of strictly military targets; did you condone the khobar bombings, the marine barrack bombings in beirut, and the uss cole attack?

 

and a question for you dawood -- about the translation of "al qaeda..." some people have said it's "the database," others "the base..." but i've come to side with a less mainstream translation, where "base" means more of like "foundation..." as in foundation principles of islam... what does it mean to you?