terrorists 'rights'?

I have to diasagree. Why should they have to prove their loyalty and not others ? Did all people from other religions go to the demonstration ? Does that mean that those who didn't go support the killings ?
The fact that a few lunatics killed innocents , does not mean that all of those who have the same religion are "collaborating " as you say.

 

No : Muslims killed 17 people in the name of Allah,the least one can expect is that the Muslim community in Europe would condemn these killings but they did not .Why should catholics as such condemn the attacks? They were not involved in the attacks,and the attacks were not done in the name of God .

 

Certainly the west provided him with weapons early on I'd like to see your sources on him being provided with chemical weapons though.

Maybe not where you were but I remember it being condemed even though he was doing all he could to cover it up.

It was hardly "sudden" it became clearer over time just how brutal of dictaror he was. Indeed his attack on Iran and latter use of chemical weapons against them was condemed at the time by the US even though there was considerable antipathy vs Iran at the time as well (the condemantions and actions admittedly were not pushed as much as they could have been). Also consider that actions agains own citizens were not considered to be something that the international community could take action on at the time and indeed there is still not a consensus on this except in very extreme cases. His attack Kuwait was what allowed international action to be taken but it didn't mean that he was "suddenly" a villain he'd established that pretty clearly well before then.

And your point is? That under international law was not sufficient to warrant an invasion.

Some of this has already been addressed indetail but...
The fact that Ben Laden and company (or at least some of them) may have been born in Saudi Arabia is simply irrelevant. At what time did Saudi Arabia fund Bin Laden? Certainly not for several years before the US became involved in Afghanistan. Why indeed what justification would the west have had for invading Saudi Arabia and when? Your comments regarding Hamburg seemed to be designed not to add anything to the discussion but simply to obscure it.

 

Many did condemn it publicly, whether groups or individuals . The question is why did some media choose not to mention this ?

 

The NPR article I talked about involved interviews in France. So the European Muslims were and are not silent on the issue and even if they were it wouldn't mean that they were "co-responsible".

Then lets see the sources. I'm long past the point where I'm willing to accept the accuracy of your statements.

Trying to attack my credibiity based on where I live is rather nonsenseical.

Actually just the opposite has been proven in those and other places. Long term terrorist will have problems if most of the population is antagonistic towards them but that doesn't mean that they can't operate in the midst of a hostile population in the short term. Of course we already knew you reality isn't.

??? Such attacks may or may not be approaching but it is quite clear that much can be done to prevent them. Indeed the news is full of such activities and even more are being taken with less fanfare. Whether or not the pronouncments of the mayor of Brussels are accurate is an open question (since I haven't heard what he said and you've made it clear that we can't trust your interpretation of it).

Not really. Especially in a case like this were so many other horses are still in the stable.

That's actually a good question. Part of it comes to can I reasonably expect the person to be objective. Since you have shown no ability or desire to be so everything you produce is tainted, until someone more objective examines it IMO.

What do I think of such statements? In this case I think you have actually gotten something right and I'd agree with the individuals who made them. Of course I also think it is totally irrelevant to this thread and just another attempt by you to divert attention from the fact that your opinions have been shown ot have no merit.

 

Another good question would be why some let such media be their only sources of "news"? Or maybe they just prefer quoteing those sources and ignore the contrary information.

 

You were not satisfied with the opinion of the archbishop of Mossoul,and asked for more ;you got more,and your reaction is : its irrelevant ,unless you think that the pope and prince Charles are not objective .

 

Yvan Mayeur:un nouvel attentat est inéluctable

Translation : a new attack is ineluctable .


Source : europe-israelorg/...../bourgmestre-de-bruxelles ja 21 2015.

 

There have been so many videos. Can't find the ones which have really demonstrated my concerns. Maybe they have been taken down...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SukEnAQ_ebE

But again, without a doubt there are gangs of men who try to enforce strict sharia law roaming some streets in France and the UK. The police don't bother to investigate either because they are told not to, or realize that in doing so would incurr a lot of paperwork/explaining/grief.

Yes, there are the guardian angels in some US cities. Not even remotely comparable.

Have heard there are similar hasidic jewish groups patrolling some US cities. Maybe this guy:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pehz98Vygs


In some of the videos it seems the enforces try to engage in religious talk. Like they want to debate the merits of their religion vs ours/society. Like they want to show allah (who is watching always) how much they know about scriptures and what good servants they are. Brownnosing allah.

 

It was objective it just didn't have any relevance to the topic under discussion. Throwing random facts and opinions out doesn't do anything to support your position it just clouds the issue.

 

Still having problems with the quote function I see.

I know enough to say that statements like that are very questionable. Simply put at this point I don't see the terrorist as capable of createing an unstoppable threat. They might be able to create one that is difficult to stop but that's a long way from unstopable. The fact that you are willing to accept such statments as unalterable fact shows a lack of knowledge and understanding on your part not mine.

 

It is the opinion of the Belgians : the police have asked people to go no longer to police stations(it's to dangerous).Drivers with a broken rear light are no longer stopped,because,as said the police chief from an adjacent region : it could be Muslims .There are no longer alcohol testings : to dangerous.Every one is waiting on ...and hoping it will hurt some one else .
Since years,whole districts of Brussels ant Antwerp are no-go zones for non-Muslims(including the police).

And,when .... will happen,the mayor of Brussels will be the first to hang on a tree,and the population will make no difference between innocent and terrorist Muslims :it will be worse than what Isis is doing in Syria .

 

I remember some one saying such things before 9/11:maybe some one from Michigan ?

 

Is it? I highly doubt it. Now it is possible that it is the opinion of a few Belgians. Or not as since you haven't produced any sources and tend to get things wrong.

Which does absolutly nothing to support your position except perhaps to obscure it.

That's a problem if it is true but as above it's irrelevant to the topic at hand.

Or not. I'm virtually certain the "not" is correct.
mayor of Brussels will be the first to hang on a tree,and the population will make no difference between innocent and terrorist Muslims :it will be worse than what Isis is doing in Syria .

I don't but if they had they would have been correct. The information and capablity were there to stop the 9/11 attacks the pieces just weren't put together in time. As it was the passengers of one of the planes prevented it from acomplishing its goal. Indeed it clearly illustrates just how wrong you are. Note that we didn't have any major's hanging from trees either or anyone else for that matter. Are you suggesting the people in the US are more civilized than the Belgians? If anything I would have expected the reverse to be the case.

 

You make the assumption that every combatant among the Taliban, Iraqi insurgency and VC were murderer's that only committed criminal act's, had that been the case the civilian casualty rates in all three conflicts would have been much much much higher.

True their was no Iraqi or Afghan nation per say, but that does not exclude the capability of the people to fight for what they believe in.

As to the terrorists, You state that the US were terrorists in your own words, Not once did i insinuate that the US forces were terrorists, Merely that in the eyes of the Afghans, Iraqi's and Vietnamese the US were occupiers.

 

All that it takes for these attacks to occur is for a gunman to get their hands on a gun, More difficult in Europe then the US but not impossible.

You say totally wrong comparison but the factors involved are the same, Not speaking out allows for the stuff I mentioned to occur, Same as you imply with the terrorist attacks that occurred in Europe.

In any case trying to tie million to the actions of a few is foolhardy, Unless you are saying that we also should have hanged all the Germans for the actions of the SS??

 

LJAd, Your welcome to your own opinions but I would suggest that you walk away and get your point of view in order before replying.

You should use the quote function correctly so to make your replies more easily followed as well as using the link function correctly, the last site link was not an actual link and only showed part of the websites name making it useless.

I hope such actions on your part would make it easier to follow your point of view and perhaps agree with it, But for the time being to me you are merely coming off as a member of the general public that throws fact's out the window and makes the false assumption that all that is wrong is because they are Muslim, That is the view of a racist for which I hope you are not. Best of Luck.

Regards v_n.

 

Islam is a religion...too many people mistake religion and culture for race...

 

Woops, Thanks for pointing that out, I should have used bigotry in place of racism, Unless some one can suggest a more appropriate term?