Posted on 07/12/2005 9:13:05 AM PDT by My Favorite Headache
Like all cowards, he'd prefer to have somebody's elses views imposed on him than fight for his own, (if he has any). But to answer his question about hate; hate doesn't need a reason, it just needs a target.
Oh its all about "feelings" isn't it guitar boy.
Like all cowards, he'd prefer to have somebody's elses views imposed on him than fight for his own, (if he has any). But to answer his question about hate; hate doesn't need a reason, it just needs a target.
Muslims hate ALL non muslims.
This could all be cured by A LTTLE MORE COWBELL!!
Yeah!
Come on, somebody help me out here. I gotta have some cowbell.
Shut up and play yer guitar, Brian
As the lead guitarist of a gay icon band he would be killed outright by them. Does he not realise that?
** *AND THIS IS WHY THEY DID IT***
*by Amir Taheri*
*The Times [of London], Friday, **July 08, 2005** (pg. 25)*
Sent by Jay Smith (jsmith@dircon.co.uk) Sat, 09 Jul 2005 04:03:53 +0100
There is no way to reason with the terrorists, but the thinking behind their actions is perfectly clear
THE FIRST QUESTION that comes to mind is: what took them so long? The answer may be that in the past four years the British authorities have succeeded in preventing attacks on a number of occasions. David Blunkett, who was then Home Secretary, was often mocked for suggesting that this was the case.
It may take some time before the full identity of the attackers is established. But the ideology that motivates them, the networks that sustain them and the groups that finance them are all too well known.
Moments after yesterday’s attacks my telephone was buzzing with requests for interviews with one recurring question: but what do they want? That reminded me of Theo van Gogh, the Dutch film-maker, who was shot by an Islamist assassin on his way to work in Amsterdam last November. According to witnesses, Van Gogh begged for mercy and tried to reason with his assailant. “Surely we can discuss this,” he kept saying as the shots kept coming. “Let us talk it over.”
Van Gogh, who had angered Islamists with his documentary about the mistreatment of women in Islam, was reacting like BBC reporters did yesterday, assuming that the man who was killing him may have some reasonable demands which could be discussed in a calm, democratic atmosphere.
But sorry, old chaps, you are dealing with an enemy that does not want anything specific, and cannot be talked back into reason through anger management or round-table discussions. Or, rather, this enemy does want something specific: to take full control of your lives, dictate every single move you make round the clock and, if you dare resist, he will feel it his divine duty to kill you.
The ideological soil in which alQaeda, and the many groups using its brand name, grow was described by one of its original masterminds, the Pakistani Abul-Ala al-Maudoodi more than 40 years ago. It goes something like this: when God created mankind He made all their bodily needs and movements subject to inescapable biological rules but decided to leave their spiritual, social and political needs and movements largely subject to their will. Soon, however, it became clear that Man cannot run his affairs the way God wants. So God started sending prophets to warn man and try to goad him on to the right path. A total of 128,000 prophets were sent, including Moses and Jesus. They all failed. Finally, God sent Muhammad as the last of His prophets and the bearer of His ultimate message, Islam. With the advent of Islam all previous religions were “abrogated” (mansukh), and their followers regarded as “infidel” (kuffar). The aim of all good Muslims, therefore, is to convert humanity to Islam, which regulates Man’s spiritual, economic, political and social moves to the last detail.
But what if non-Muslims refuse to take the right path? Here answers diverge. Some believe that the answer is dialogue and argument until followers of the “abrogated faiths” recognise their error and agree to be saved by converting to Islam. This is the view of most of the imams preaching in the mosques in the West. But others, including Osama bin Laden, a disciple of al-Maudoodi, believe that the Western-dominated world is too mired in corruption to hear any argument, and must be shocked into conversion through spectacular ghazavat (raids) of the kind we saw in New York and Washington in 2001, in Madrid last year, and now in London.
That yesterday’s attack was intended as a ghazava was confirmed in a statement by the Secret Organisation Group of al-Qaeda of Jihad Organisation in Europe, an Islamist group that claimed responsibility for yesterday’s atrocity. It said “We have fulfilled our promise and carried out our blessed military raid (ghazava) in Britain after our mujahideen exerted strenuous efforts over a long period of time to ensure the success of the raid.” Those who carry out these missions are the */ghazis/*, the highest of all Islamic distinctions just below that of the */shahid/* or martyr. A ghazi who also becomes a shahid will be doubly meritorious.
There are many Muslims who believe that the idea that all other faiths have been “abrogated” and that the whole of mankind should be united under the banner of Islam must be dropped as a dangerous anachronism. But to the Islamist those Muslims who think like that are themselves regarded as lapsed, and deserving of death.
It is, of course, possible, as many in the West love to do, to ignore the strategic goal of the Islamists altogether and focus only on their tactical goals. These goals are well known and include driving the “Cross-worshippers” (Christian powers) out of the Muslim world, wiping Israel off the map of the Middle East, and replacing the governments of all Muslim countries with truly Islamic regimes like the one created by Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran and by the Taleban in Afghanistan.
How to achieve those objectives has been the subject of much debate in Islamist circles throughout the world, including in London, since 9/11. Bin Laden has consistently argued in favour of further ghazavat inside the West. He firmly believes that the West is too cowardly to fight back and, if terrorised in a big way, will do “what it must do”. That view was strengthened last year when al-Qaeda changed the Spanish Government with its deadly attack in Madrid. At the time bin Laden used his “Madrid victory” to call on other European countries to distance themselves from the United States or face similar “punishment”.
Bin Laden’s view has been challenged by his supposed No 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who insists that the Islamists should first win the war inside several vulnerable Muslim countries, notably Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Until yesterday it seemed that al-Zawahiri was winning the argument, especially by heating things up in Afghanistan and Iraq. Yesterday, the bin Laden doctrine struck back in London.
(The author is an Iranian commentator on Middle Eastern affairs)
WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS OF THE WORLD.....
John tried to warn him but he wouldn't listen. That guy thought a little chat would make things all better too. That guy ended up at room temperature. That guy didn't understand what he was dealing with.
This fruitcake should take a lesson from That guy.
Hint:
It has nothing to do with Bush and nothing to do with Iraq
Memo to Brian: They hate you and want to kill you. You cannot change them. It's you, or them. Only one side will win. You choose.
Blame the reporter who stuck a microphone in front of this particular pie hole.
Welcome to the modern Kafakesque political reality, where you're not permitted to draw attention to what left-wingers actually say.
Unreasonable people cannot be reasoned with.
Gaze into your navel Mr. May...the answers are all there.
When Rush went to commercial at the top of the hour I switched over to Airhead America and caught the end of some woman who said there was no way to stop a suicide bomber, so we should start dealing with the underlying causes of why they hate us so much.
That's a fair question, and its answers must be understood. Fortunately, the terrorists have provided many of these answers:
I no longer believe we are the good guys. We must earn this view of ourselves, and start recognizing that there are other legitimate views of the world than ours."
Agreed. Now, should the above necessarily strike us as a legitimate view?
Shut Up And Play Yer Guitar, Brian.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.