Terror groups

[jimnyc]

Out of curiosity - what would you folks say if I said - "I neither condemn nor support Al Qaeda"?

Al Qaeda is known throughout the world to be a terrorist organization. While in Iraq, some residents perhaps saw Al Qaeda as "helping" as they targeted US soldiers. Should they now support a known terrorist organization? Keep quiet about them? And if staying silent as you allow them to do your bidding via terrorism, would you see that as still supporting them?

[fj1200]

Out of curiosity - what would you folks say if I said - "I neither condemn nor support Al Qaeda"?

Al Qaeda is known throughout the world to be a terrorist organization. While in Iraq, some residents perhaps saw Al Qaeda as "helping" as they targeted US soldiers. Should they now support a known terrorist organization? Keep quiet about them? And if staying silent as you allow them to do your bidding via terrorism, would you see that as still supporting them?

Well I'd say when you have global interests that may not be consistent, then sometimes you are going to be stuck with now you love 'em (Libya), now you don't (Afghanistan) circumstances. What if the Taliban had succumbed to our wishes in '01 and delivered OBL to us with no invasion necessary which would have then left them in full control of the country; would that be supporting them?

[jimnyc]

Well I'd say when you have global interests that may not be consistent, then sometimes you are going to be stuck with now you love 'em (Libya), now you don't (Afghanistan) circumstances. What if the Taliban had succumbed to our wishes in '01 and delivered OBL to us with no invasion necessary which would have then left them in full control of the country; would that be supporting them?

I'd condemn ANY terrorist group, forever, regardless if they chose to do something proper or not. Not attacking the Taliban wouldn't mean we support them. Al Qaeda is in quite a few countries we are not in conflict with, but we still condemn them and their actions. Just as we are not involved in attacking Hamas, we still condemn their actions as a terror organization. Condemning terrorism in one breath against ones beliefs, and turning around the next day and refusing to condemn terrorism is hypocritical. Maybe terrorism is bad when someone like Al Qaeda is in Afghanistan and Iraq killing civilians, but a-ok if them or another group is killing jews?

[fj1200]

I'd condemn ANY terrorist group, forever, regardless if they chose to do something proper or not. Not attacking the Taliban wouldn't mean we support them. Al Qaeda is in quite a few countries we are not in conflict with, but we still condemn them and their actions. Just as we are not involved in attacking Hamas, we still condemn their actions as a terror organization. Condemning terrorism in one breath against ones beliefs, and turning around the next day and refusing to condemn terrorism is hypocritical. Maybe terrorism is bad when someone like Al Qaeda is in Afghanistan and Iraq killing civilians, but a-ok if them or another group is killing jews?

The bold was partly my point in response to your last question in the OP. Also, my comments were more in line with our inconsistent positions than what our stance should be on AQ. Bush was, IMO, attempting to change the nature of our relationship with the Muslim world toward one that honored freedom rather than our best interest at the time. That would seem to suggest that AQ is always to be condemned rather than what we have today.

I assume you had a friend who made the statement to you; if so what was their reasoning?

[Abbey Marie]

Out of curiosity - what would you folks say if I said - "I neither condemn nor support Al Qaeda"?

Al Qaeda is known throughout the world to be a terrorist organization. While in Iraq, some residents perhaps saw Al Qaeda as "helping" as they targeted US soldiers. Should they now support a known terrorist organization? Keep quiet about them? And if staying silent as you allow them to do your bidding via terrorism, would you see that as still supporting them?

I would think one of these things:
1. You are in that moral relativist zone that I loathe, or
2. You are a politically correct coward who is afraid to admit he is against anything, or
3. You are a liar who supports al Qaeda, but is not willing to admit it for any number of reasons.

[jimnyc]

The bold was partly my point in response to your last question in the OP. Also, my comments were more in line with our inconsistent positions than what our stance should be on AQ. Bush was, IMO, attempting to change the nature of our relationship with the Muslim world toward one that honored freedom rather than our best interest at the time. That would seem to suggest that AQ is always to be condemned rather than what we have today.

I assume you had a friend who made the statement to you; if so what was their reasoning?


I neither support nor condemn them but I do lean towards support since someone has to do something about Israel's brutal subjugation of the Palestinians.

We should be working towards diplomacy, negotiations, recognition of one another. Hamas REFUSES every last bit of that and state they would rather die than acknowledge Israel and love death as much as Israel loves life. They are 100% a terrorist organization. Jafar leans toward supporting this approach - while he has spoke out against terrorism in so many other instances. What is the difference, you ask? The target this time are the Jews.

[jimnyc]

I would think one of these things:
1. You are in that moral relativist zone that I loathe, or
2. You are a politically correct coward who is afraid to admit he is against anything, or
3. You are a liar who supports al Qaeda, but is not willing to admit it for any number of reasons.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

Just like Abso, who played the "don't support terrorism" part for quite awhile, he eventually slipped up and admitted he supported terrorism against US troops who "occupied Iraq". This is alongside a few people I know continually denying that women are beaten incessantly and treated like trash in so many places, Egypt being the largest discussed. One can SAY something for a long time, and hide their true feelings, but in time, in discussion, the truth always comes out.

[Abbey Marie]

Ding! Ding! Ding!

Just like Abso, who played the "don't support terrorism" part for quite awhile, he eventually slipped up and admitted he supported terrorism against US troops who "occupied Iraq". This is alongside a few people I know continually denying that women are beaten incessantly and treated like trash in so many places, Egypt being the largest discussed. One can SAY something for a long time, and hide their true feelings, but in time, in discussion, the truth always comes out.

So true. The leopard's spots eventually shine through.

My question is, do the networks, daily newspapers, and internet browser editorial boards know these things and deliberately pepetrate lies, or are they being duped?

[fj1200]

We should be working towards diplomacy, negotiations, recognition of one another. Hamas REFUSES every last bit of that and state they would rather die than acknowledge Israel and love death as much as Israel loves life. They are 100% a terrorist organization. Jafar leans toward supporting this approach - while he has spoke out against terrorism in so many other instances. What is the difference, you ask? The target this time are the Jews.

Of course we should be working towards that but you're looking at it from an Israeli perspective. The question to Jafar is to prove his assertion that Israel is "terrorizing" the Palestinians. You can go back and forth all day arguing the same points but no one acknowledges that each side is working from a different premise.


Ding! Ding! Ding!

Just like Abso, who played the "don't support terrorism" part for quite awhile, he eventually slipped up and admitted he supported terrorism against US troops who "occupied Iraq". This is alongside a few people I know continually denying that women are beaten incessantly and treated like trash in so many places, Egypt being the largest discussed. One can SAY something for a long time, and hide their true feelings, but in time, in discussion, the truth always comes out.

I'd say that's an unfair characterization. If he feels that Iraq is being occupied then attacks against US troops are more akin to a freedom fighter than terrorist. That would be like condemning those fighting against the invaders in Red Dawn. What is right and wrong here is completely a matter of perspective.

[jimnyc]

Of course we should be working towards that but you're looking at it from an Israeli perspective. The question to Jafar is to prove his assertion that Israel is "terrorizing" the Palestinians. You can go back and forth all day arguing the same points but no one acknowledges that each side is working from a different premise.

Maybe so, but any honest person from ANYWHERE in the world will acknowledge that Hamas is a terrorist organization. Whether one considers Israel one or not, matters not, as you are now supporting Hamas, and supporting a terror group. I find no excuse to EVER support a terror group.


I'd say that's an unfair characterization. If he feels that Iraq is being occupied then attacks against US troops are more akin to a freedom fighter than terrorist. That would be like condemning those fighting against the invaders in Red Dawn. What is right and wrong here is completely a matter of perspective.

Nope, sorry, he outright stated he supported "terrorism" against US troops.

[fj1200]

Maybe so, but any honest person from ANYWHERE in the world will acknowledge that Hamas is a terrorist organization. Whether one considers Israel one or not, matters not, as you are now supporting Hamas, and supporting a terror group. I find no excuse to EVER support a terror group.

To someone on the other side it matters much.


Nope, sorry, he outright stated he supported "terrorism" against US troops.

What if he said he supports "freedom fighters"?

[jimnyc]

To someone on the other side it matters much.

Well, then they get what they deserve if they choose to support terrorist groups acting on their behalf. It doesn't really take a genius to know that every civilized country recognizes Hamas as a terrorist organization and no civilized country I am aware of considers Israel as terrorists.


What if he said he supports "freedom fighters"?

But he didn't, he said he supported terrorist attacks on American troops. Freedom fighters don't commit terror attacks. Freedom fighters might fight back against soldiers if they feel threatened, but using suicide vests and such ISN'T a freedom fighter.

[Kathianne]

For years now I've said that from reading of polls in Muslim countries, which are done very infrequently, most do not 'support' terrorism either financially or more directly.

HOWEVER, overwhelmingly they 'understand it', whether al Queda or local finds. It's a serious issue.

[jimnyc]

For years now I've said that from reading of polls in Muslim countries, which are done very infrequently, most do not 'support' terrorism either financially or more directly.

HOWEVER, overwhelmingly they 'understand it', whether al Queda or local finds. It's a serious issue.

Which is likely why you see so many upset with the death of Osama Bin Laden. So many muslims want to condemn terrorism while so many muslims loved OBL and considered him a great leader and "freedom fighter".

[Kathianne]

Which is likely why you see so many upset with the death of Osama Bin Laden. So many muslims want to condemn terrorism while so many muslims loved OBL and considered him a great leader and "freedom fighter".

Whatever the grievances, US 'occupation', Western oil companies, Israel/Palestinian conflict, the Muslims claim to 'understand' but not 'support' the terrorists. Hint: 'Understanding and not condemning is SUPPORT.'

[jimnyc]

Whatever the grievances, US 'occupation', Western oil companies, Israel/Palestinian conflict, the Muslims claim to 'understand' but not 'support' the terrorists. Hint: 'Understanding and not condemning is SUPPORT.'

And that's EXACTLY what I said about someone who says they won't condemn Hamas but "don't support" them. Not condemning them and leaving them to their ways IS supporting them, no matter how one slices and dices it.

[fj1200]

Well, then they get what they deserve if they choose to support terrorist groups acting on their behalf. It doesn't really take a genius to know that every civilized country recognizes Hamas as a terrorist organization and no civilized country I am aware of considers Israel as terrorists.

No disagreement there. IMO the whole middle east peace issues has more to do with poverty.


But he didn't, he said he supported terrorist attacks on American troops. Freedom fighters don't commit terror attacks. Freedom fighters might fight back against soldiers if they feel threatened, but using suicide vests and such ISN'T a freedom fighter.

Might fight back? I think that's there whole role in the process. I still maintain the problem here is applying Western values and definitions to another world.

[jimnyc]

Might fight back? I think that's there whole role in the process. I still maintain the problem here is applying Western values and definitions to another world.

My point is, freedom fighters might fight against "occupying forces" but they are not out there using suicide vests and similar. A true "militia" or freedom fighter group doesn't resort to such tactics, they are tactics solely reserved for terrorists, the people that some support when the person or group they are killing is their enemy.

I don't support terrorism against Americans nor do I support it against our enemies. The stance of others is akin to me saying I support Al Qaeda and their terrorist ways - if they use their tactics against an enemy of America. I simply don't support that, no terrorism in any fashion. And the truth is, some support the terrorist ways of Hamas or Al Qaeda, depending on who is on the receiving end. These 2 groups in no way are "freedom fighters", they are terrorist groups, and really the only people that would state otherwise are those who support them.

[jafar00]

Out of curiosity - what would you folks say if I said - "I neither condemn nor support Al Qaeda"?

Al Qaeda is known throughout the world to be a terrorist organization. While in Iraq, some residents perhaps saw Al Qaeda as "helping" as they targeted US soldiers. Should they now support a known terrorist organization? Keep quiet about them? And if staying silent as you allow them to do your bidding via terrorism, would you see that as still supporting them?

Al Qaeda is very clearly a group that is easy to condemn. Their actions benefit nobody but themselves and have proven that where they (like the Taliban) have had any kind of power or control, oppression reigns supreme.


I'd condemn ANY terrorist group, forever, regardless if they chose to do something proper or not.

What about MEK? How do you feel about them? Do you agree on their delisting after millions of dollars was spent on lobbying? Does it make them any less of a terrorist organisation if they kill innocent people in Iran instead of killing Americans like they did before?


We should be working towards diplomacy, negotiations, recognition of one another. Hamas REFUSES every last bit of that and state they would rather die than acknowledge Israel and love death as much as Israel loves life. They are 100% a terrorist organization. Jafar leans toward supporting this approach - while he has spoke out against terrorism in so many other instances. What is the difference, you ask? The target this time are the Jews.

Would you agree to implement peace plans that were one sided in favour of the other side? So Hamas had to stop attacking Israel and officially recognise them, but Israel continues it's free pass to make more illegal settlements and assassinate whoever they please whenever they want, and to arrest anyone without charge indefinitely for political reasons.

No, I didn't think so.

[Kathianne]

Al Qaeda is very clearly a group that is easy to condemn. Their actions benefit nobody but themselves and have proven that where they (like the Taliban) have had any kind of power or control, oppression reigns supreme.



What about MEK? How do you feel about them? Do you agree on their delisting after millions of dollars was spent on lobbying? Does it make them any less of a terrorist organisation if they kill innocent people in Iran instead of killing Americans like they did before?



Would you agree to implement peace plans that were one sided in favour of the other side? So Hamas had to stop attacking Israel and officially recognise them, but Israel continues it's free pass to make more illegal settlements and assassinate whoever they please whenever they want, and to arrest anyone without charge indefinitely for political reasons.

No, I didn't think so.

Well except for the history that shows that Israel is more than willing to give land for peace.

[jimnyc]

Keep making excuses - I condemn ALL and EVERY terrorist organization, even if related to Americans. NONE - get that through your head - I SUPPORT NONE and I don't care which side they are from. I DON'T determine evil based on who the evil is killing.

On the other hand, you've made it VERY clear that you hate Jews, and that you don't have much of an issue with a terrorist organization, so long as they are going after the Jews. That's sick, but typical of SO MANY Muslims, including the little children they teach this stuff to. I'm sure these vile cockroaches feel that Hamas is a great organization and support them too.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread633396/pg1
http://www.frugal-cafe.com/public_html/frugal-blog/frugal-cafe-blogzone/2011/03/14/islamic-schools-in-britain-teaching-children-to-hate-jews-chop-off-hands-amputation-diagrams-given-to-muslim-high-schoolers-video/
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=713

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/RdWV02Szb5k" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GqCjInIedPg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5VFqsSiZwG0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yWIFhKYiMqU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[jimnyc]

Well except for the history that shows that Israel is more than willing to give land for peace.

And the group he supports, outright states they would rather die than work on peace, and that Jew blood is the best blood. Yeah, that's the kind of group I want to admit to supporting!

[gabosaurus]

Out of curiosity - what would you folks say if I said - "I neither condemn nor support Al Qaeda"?

Al Qaeda is known throughout the world to be a terrorist organization. While in Iraq, some residents perhaps saw Al Qaeda as "helping" as they targeted US soldiers. Should they now support a known terrorist organization? Keep quiet about them? And if staying silent as you allow them to do your bidding via terrorism, would you see that as still supporting them?

Depends on how you look at things.
There are thousands of people in Mexico and other countries who revere drug cartel bosses. The cartels curry favor by keeping those in their territory fed, clothed and house. It is merely the one that rebel who get done away with.
Many Middle East residents view AQ as "freedom fights" who defend their homelands. They view Israel and the U.S. as terrorist organizations. It depends on which side you are on.
My mom's family viewed Americans and British in the same manner. Because the propaganda machine spread daily stories about how Western soldiers beat, rape and kill any German citizen they caught.
One side in a conflict always tends to believe the worst about their enemies.