Five Suspected Islamist Terrorists Arrested Over Pope Assassination Plot

[FrankRep]

Update:

Freed terror suspects may sue police for false arrest over alleged plot to attack the Pope (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1313364/POPES-UK-VISIT-Freed-terror-suspects-sue-police-false-arrest-alleged-plot-attack-Pope.html#ixzz106nnP0Q9)


Daily Mail UK
20th September 2010



The men were detained by counter-terrorism officers at a cleaning depot in central London after police received intelligence suggesting they were planning an atrocity against Benedict XVI.

But late on Saturday they were freed after police found no evidence to support their initial suspicions.


SOURCE:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1313364/POPES-UK-VISIT-Freed-terror-suspects-sue-police-false-arrest-alleged-plot-attack-Pope.html#ixzz106nnP0Q9



=======================



Pope visit: Five suspected Islamist terrorists arrested over assassination plot (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/the-pope/8008981/Pope-visit-Five-suspected-Islamist-terrorists-arrested-over-assassination-plot.html)

Police have arrested five suspected Islamist terrorists, working as street cleaners in London, over an alleged plan assassinate the Pope.


Telegraph UK
17 Sept 2010

[dannno]

http://goldfingersnews.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/01-1711_l.jpg

[goopc]

Is this proof that Blowback theory is wrong? They're Muslim extremists and want to kill us because we don't submit to Sharia law. Our foreign policy of intervention is the only thing keeping them from expanding their wars to America/Europe/

[Mini-Me]

Is this proof that Blowback theory is wrong? They're Muslim extremists and want to kill us because we don't submit to Sharia law. Our foreign policy of intervention is the only thing keeping them from expanding their wars to America/Europe/

Explain how our foreign policy of interventionism does anything to "keep them over there." :rolleyes:

In any case, no, it does not discredit the concept of blowback. Once some angry young Muslim is radicalized to the point where he becomes a violent extremist, he's not going to pick logical targets; he'll decide to kill whoever ticks him off for the stupidest reason. There will always be crazies, but the problem with foreign intervention is that it makes them multiply. The more people see western imperialist powers occupying and meddling in their country, the more people will be attracted to the message of angry radicals. The more people who lose sons, daughters, husbands, wives, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, cousins, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and friends, the more people who will be attracted to the message of angry radicals. Once they surround themselves with extremists and adopt their viewpoints, isolated from outside influences, they gradually become more and more extreme and unstable.

Decades ago, Ayatollah Khomeini tried to start a jihad against the US and the west in general because he hated our culture, and he would gladly twist any and every young person he could into a suicide bomber (though he'd never sacrifice himself, of course :rolleyes: )...but he didn't have many takers, because there just weren't that many people who cared enough to start down that destructive path in the first place. After decades of hardcore interventionism and CIA meddling, that has changed, especially considering some of our intervention was intended to deliberately radicalize Muslims (so they'd fight the Soviets). Our current occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan are certainly not helping matters.

[dannno]

Explain how our foreign policy of interventionism does anything to "keep them over there." :rolleyes:

Ya, seriously.. they are being driven from their lands due to our military interventionism. Where else are they supposed to go :confused:

[dannno]

Is this proof that Blowback theory is wrong? They're Muslim extremists and want to kill us because we don't submit to Sharia law. Our foreign policy of intervention is the only thing keeping them from expanding their wars to America/Europe/

I didn't see proof of anything in the article. There were some people who made some claims, there was no real evidence of a plot found that I'm aware of.

[oyarde]

Is this proof that Blowback theory is wrong? They're Muslim extremists and want to kill us because we don't submit to Sharia law. Our foreign policy of intervention is the only thing keeping them from expanding their wars to America/Europe/

I believe they have made six arrests . We will have to see what the evidence is . As far as your question . There is blowback . If you want to know if some of these groups will continue to attack us even if we withdraw from all areas , the answer to that is yes as well .

[goopc]

Well Saddam would have expanded his wars had be not contained him during/after Kuwait.

Also, they're all Muslim extremists and they want to kill all the Jews. If we don't help Israel they'll all be whipped out and the only functional democracy in the Middle East will end. Then the Muslims will expand to other Western nations after they're done with Israel... it's all in the Koran: "O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him."

[Liberty Star]

Is this proof that Blowback theory is wrong? They're Muslim extremists and want to kill us because we don't submit to Sharia law. Our foreign policy of intervention is the only thing keeping them from expanding their wars to America/Europe/


Nope, it confirms it.


Neocon claim that they hate us because we don't have sharia is absurd and part of war mongering, America bankrupting agenda.

[Mini-Me]

Well Saddam would have expanded his wars had be not contained him during/after Kuwait.
...so? Saddam was a secularist, not a radical Muslim, anyway. If he expanded his wars, someone else closer and with more to lose than us could and would have easily stepped in. Besides, Saddam was only in power there in the first place because we helped PUT HIM there.


Also, they're all Muslim extremists and they want to kill all the Jews. If we don't help Israel they'll all be whipped out and the only functional democracy in the Middle East will end. Then the Muslims will expand to other Western nations after they're done with Israel... it's all in the Koran: "O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him."

Are you...serious? "They're all Muslim extremists and they want to kill all the Jews?" Why would you ever believe such an outrageously exaggerated claim? Israel can handle itself. It's armed to the teeth, has an entire population of trained soldiers, and has dozens of nukes. The rest of the Middle East combined would have a hard time taking it on militarily, and and that's if they gave it their all. Somehow, I doubt that there are enough radical Muslims there to make the foolhardy and suicidal attempt...but the more the US and Israel meddle, the more radical Muslims we'll create, and the more likely such a scenario might become in the future.

Besides, Israel isn't anywhere near a shining beacon of freedom and "democracy" (as if "democracy" meant freedom) anyway. With everything Israel has done to Palestine, a lot of people over there have good reason to hate Israel's guts.

[dannno]

Well Saddam would have expanded his wars had be not contained him during/after Kuwait.

HIS wars???? The invasion of Kuwait was self-defense, Kuwait was stealing Iraqi oil. Kuwait was the aggressors.




Also, they're all Muslim extremists and they want to kill all the Jews.

Who the hell are you talking about exactly?! What a horrible statement to make.




If we don't help Israel they'll all be whipped out and the only functional democracy in the Middle East will end.

LOL, we ended a functional democracy in Iran in 1952 when our CIA ousted their democratically elected leader in favor of a puppet and a tyrant. That's one of the things that started this whole mess. And why the fuck do we care if there are any "functional democracies" in the middle east?? What business of that is ours?

Exactly how is Iran not a functional democracy? And before you start blowing quotes from Ahmadinijad out of your ass, please verify that they are accurate (hint: nearly every quote I have heard from western media of his have been completely fabricated and/or mistranslated)




Then the Muslims will expand to other Western nations after they're done with Israel... it's all in the Koran: "O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him."

In context, that statement was during a fight against invaders who happened to be unbelievers. The Koran does not teach to kill all unbelievers, no matter how much brainwashing propaganda you've seen on it.

[1000-points-of-fright]

Also, they're all Muslim extremists and they want to kill all the Jews. If we don't help Israel they'll all be whipped out and the only functional democracy in the Middle East will end. Then the Muslims will expand to other Western nations after they're done with Israel... it's all in the Koran: "O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him."

So let's kill them all first? Genocide is the logical extension of what you believe.

Also, democracy in Israel doesn't function as well for some as it does for others. Hence, it's not exactly a "functional" democracy.

[oyarde]

So let's kill them all first? Genocide is the logical extension of what you believe.

Also, democracy in Israel doesn't function as well for some as it does for others. Hence, it's not exactly a "functional" democracy.

I would suggest everyone see Jerusalem some time when they can .

[dannno]

Also, democracy in Israel doesn't function as well for some as it does for others. Hence, it's not exactly a "functional" democracy.

QFT... it sure doesn't work very well for their neighbors who Israel is committing a slow-genocide against... stealing their land, occupying them militarily, setting up checkpoints all over the country and not letting in basic necessities.. What a tyrannical bunch... democracy my ass.

[ClayTrainor]

QFT... it sure doesn't work very well for their neighbors who Israel is committing a slow-genocide against... stealing their land, occupying them militarily, setting up checkpoints all over the country and not letting in basic necessities.. What a tyrannical bunch... democracy my ass.

Well... to be fair, it is the inevitable result of democracy. Divide and Conquer.

[1000-points-of-fright]

I would suggest everyone see Jerusalem some time when they can .

Are you the Jerusalem board of tourism now? What does that have to do with anything?

[oyarde]

Are you the Jerusalem board of tourism now? What does that have to do with anything?

It has to do with nothing . Board of tourism ? That sounds fun .

[BlackTerrel]

Is this proof that Blowback theory is wrong? They're Muslim extremists and want to kill us because we don't submit to Sharia law. Our foreign policy of intervention is the only thing keeping them from expanding their wars to America/Europe/

No. You're taking a very complex issue and trying to make it very simple. There are 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide. Any rational person should be able to agree that within this group there are:

1. Muslims who do not hate us.

2. Muslims who hate us for no reason other than the fact that they are religous fanatics.

3. Muslims who hates us because we are causing trouble around the world.

That really shouldn't even be up for debate. The only thing up for discussion is how many of the 1.2 billion fall into each group. But neocons want to deny the existence groups 1 and 3. And some members of RPF want to deny the existence of group #2.

[goopc]

well the neo-con response is:

I don't think you guys remember what happened on 9/11, radical Islam declared war on us. Osama bin Laden called us a paper tiger because he thought we were weak and unwilling to fight back against Al Qaeda.

If we had finished what we stated in the Middle East, there wouldn't be dictators and radicals everywhere. We should have established a free government in Afghanistan after the Soviets left, that way the Taliban and Al Qaeda wouldn't have come to power. We should have taken out Saddam in 1991.

Our problem isn't an internationalist foreign policy, it's a weak and politically correct foreign policy. We are unwilling to make tough choices necessary to truly destroy violent people from the world.

We need to wake up and see that radical Islam wants to kill all of us. Of course we'll have to kill many of them, this is war and if we don't kill them then they will kill us. So long as they support their radical Islamic governments, we should consider those Muslims our enemies.

[oyarde]

well the neo-con response is:

I don't think you guys remember what happened on 9/11, radical Islam declared war on us. Osama bin Laden called us a paper tiger because he thought we were weak and unwilling to fight back against Al Qaeda.

If we had finished what we stated in the Middle East, there wouldn't be dictators and radicals everywhere. We should have established a free government in Afghanistan after the Soviets left, that way the Taliban and Al Qaeda wouldn't have come to power. We should have taken out Saddam in 1991.

Our problem isn't an internationalist foreign policy, it's a weak and politically correct foreign policy. We are unwilling to make tough choices necessary to truly destroy violent people from the world.

We need to wake up and see that radical Islam wants to kill all of us. Of course we'll have to kill many of them, this is war and if we don't kill them then they will kill us. So long as they support their radical Islamic governments, we should consider those Muslims our enemies.

Al Qaeda has a new country of operations now . Somalia .

[Mini-Me]

well the neo-con response is:

I don't think you guys remember what happened on 9/11, radical Islam declared war on us. Osama bin Laden called us a paper tiger because he thought we were weak and unwilling to fight back against Al Qaeda.
That's a pretty simple-minded assumption. This isn't checkers; it's chess. The purpose of terrorism against a much larger opponent is to goad that opponent into exhausting and destroying itself with an excessive response. Of course, this is exactly what happened. Radicalism isn't something you can "stamp out" with a cudgel; the more you try, the more people in the Middle East start to think the radicals are right.

(Also, I edited my first post on the first page of this thread; you might find it helpful.)


If we had finished what we stated in the Middle East, there wouldn't be dictators and radicals everywhere. We should have established a free government in Afghanistan after the Soviets left, that way the Taliban and Al Qaeda wouldn't have come to power. We should have taken out Saddam in 1991.
We could have established a free government in Afghanistan, just like the Soviets were able to establish a successful government, and just like we have done over the past decade? Riiiiiiigggghhhht...;) Afghanistan is a primitive, tribalistic land, and it's a mistake to even consider it a nation. The people there don't consider themselves Afghans. Every attempt to herd them and establish a centralized government has failed and cost an ungodly amount of wasted money and time, not to mention lives. These attempts have been going on for much longer than just the 20th and 21st century, too. It is so politically unstable, that it's not even funny. Afghanistan is the poster child of unwinnable situations, and anyone who still fails to recognize that is a horrible student of history.

Besides, what on Earth would we gain from rounding them all up under a "free" government anyway? It wouldn't be free, because we'd have to drag them kicking and screaming to have a government at all, and it wouldn't be free, because the US government has demonstrated again and again that it prefers brutal puppet governments in third world countries to autonomous governments that might not be friendly to it. That's why we train terrorists of our own at the School of Americas in Georgia, to fight against their communist counterparts in South America...which only intensifies anti-US sentiments. You can't rule the world with an iron fist forever, because sooner or later it's going to wrest free...and the harder you try, the more hateful people will be towards you when they break loose.

As far as Saddam goes, we could have avoided the whole mess if we didn't help put him in power in the first place. Saddam Hussein's dictatorship was thanks to our intervention in the first place, and it wouldn't have happened otherwise.

Notice the pattern: The more we intervene and screw things up, the worst things get, and the more we have to intervene again. It's a spiral pattern that gets worse and worse over time, requiring more and more money, time, and blood to keep under control.


Our problem isn't an internationalist foreign policy, it's a weak and politically correct foreign policy. We are unwilling to make tough choices necessary to truly destroy violent people from the world.
Like genocide? We could wipe everyone off the face of the Earth besides us, couldn't we? That would be a great idea, and it's not like that would be the most morally repulsive thing anyone has ever done in the history of mankind. I especially think it's a great way to destroy the truly violent people, because it's not like the people who would do such a thing could be considered truly violent or dangerous. ;) Of course, they'd never turn inwards and start violently destroying each other, either.

Reality check: The most dangerous people on the face of the Earth are the ones who start aggressive wars, not some ragtag band of religious nutballs. Interestingly enough, underneath all the layers of nationalism and propaganda, war is really about something different entirely, and it has been for a long, long time (http://www.warisaracket.com/).


We need to wake up and see that radical Islam wants to kill all of us. Of course we'll have to kill many of them, this is war and if we don't kill them then they will kill us. So long as they support their radical Islamic governments, we should consider those Muslims our enemies.
This is war? A war between the US and who? Who gets caught in the middle of it, and what happens when something terrible happens to them, and a friend or family member swears revenge?

I posted this in another thread:

In any case, the military has a TEN TO ONE kill ratio of innocent civilians to alleged terrorists in Pakistan at least (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=2822970#post2822970). The shit the US intelligence apparatus does to people is insane, like torturing alleged terrorists' children for their parents' cooperation. (It came out a while back that the CIA has been handing people over to Uzbekistan for this kind of purpose (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=217692), and six years ago allegations came out about people being murdered and children being raped at Abu Ghraib (http://boingboing.net/2004/07/15/hersh-children-raped.html), which was obviously under direct American control. The recent admission (http://www.boingboing.net/2010/09/09/abu-ghraib-photos-ob.html) that videos depict murder and rape seem to confirm this.) Furthermore, the military-industrial complex itself has no incentive to minimize civilian casualties or atrocities, because more of them means more angry people who become terrorists, and that means more pretexts for more war money in the future. As long as they're subtle enough to maintain plausible deniability in the eyes of the western public, they're golden. The US goes out of its way to minimize civilian casualties? Yeah, we wish. Minimizing civilian casualties seems like the logical thing for a country to do, but only if you operate under the assumption that the people in charge actually have the country's best interests at heart...and not just their own.

Just focus on the first line for a second. I asked the rhetorical question above about who gets caught in the middle of it...the answer is, a lot of people who otherwise would have just gone about their daily lives, but now have a very, very good reason to hate the US with all their heart. This is how radical extremists grow their numbers...and the actual jihadist ringleaders don't care. In fact, their leaders are grinning from ear to ear about their steady membership growth, because they couldn't accomplish it without our stupidity. Meanwhile, the military-industrial complex is playing ALL of us for fools.

I said earlier that this is chess, not checkers. Actually, it's not even chess; it's some other extremely complicated strategic game where there are more than two sides. People had better start getting wise to that, because the other sides are manipulating us into playing like knuckle-dragging apes.

[1000-points-of-fright]

We need to wake up and see that radical Islam wants to kill all of us. Of course we'll have to kill many of them, this is war and if we don't kill them then they will kill us. So long as they support their radical Islamic governments, we should consider those Muslims our enemies.

Funny, that's exactly how they rationalize the use of terrorism. You just have to change a few words.

We need to wake up and see that The West wants to destroy Islam. Of course we'll have to kill many of them, this is war and if we don't kill them then they will kill us. So long as they support their western governments, we should consider those westerners our enemies.

[Mini-Me]

Funny, that's exactly how they rationalize the use of terrorism. You just have to change a few words.

We need to wake up and see that The West wants to destroy Islam. Of course we'll have to kill many of them, this is war and if we don't kill them then they will kill us. So long as they support their western governments, we should consider those westerners our enemies.

I need to learn how to speak with your kind of clarity and conciseness.

[oyarde]

Funny, that's exactly how they rationalize the use of terrorism. You just have to change a few words.

We need to wake up and see that The West wants to destroy Islam. Of course we'll have to kill many of them, this is war and if we don't kill them then they will kill us. So long as they support their western governments, we should consider those westerners our enemies.

Where does that " all your voter base belong to us " come from ?

[1000-points-of-fright]

Where does that " all your voter base belong to us " come from ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us

I appropriated and modified it during the RP 2008 campaign. An nerdy internet meme seemed perfect for Ron Paul's nerdy internet voter base.

[oyarde]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_your_base_are_belong_to_us

I appropriated and modified it during the RP 2008 campaign. An nerdy internet meme seemed perfect for Ron Paul's nerdy internet voter base.

I had to ask because it makes me laugh everytime I read it .

[LibertyVox]

No. You're taking a very complex issue and trying to make it very simple. There are 1.2 billion Muslims worldwide. Any rational person should be able to agree that within this group there are:

1. Muslims who do not hate us.

2. Muslims who hate us for no reason other than the fact that they are religous fanatics.

3. Muslims who hates us because we are causing trouble around the world.

That really shouldn't even be up for debate. The only thing up for discussion is how many of the 1.2 billion fall into each group. But neocons want to deny the existence groups 1 and 3. And some members of RPF want to deny the existence of group #2.

I bet for moslems the categories regarding christians would be likewise: :rolleyes:

1) Christians who are bent on enslaving, mass murdering, demonizing and occupying them.

2) Christians who are indifferent largely but give tacit support to the above.

3) Christians who are a silent minority.

[LibertyVox]

I didn't see proof of anything in the article. There were some people who made some claims, there was no real evidence of a plot found that I'm aware of.

lol, after reading your post I too actually clicked on it to read it and the most telling line was this:


Sources said that initial searches had not uncovered any bomb-making or hazardous items.

If something like this had happened here in this country and the suspects were not moslems, I bet people would be dissing the fascist Obama police state this country is becoming etc.
I think it's smart not to run to judgments (something that can never be expected from the hate mongers). Even so, I don't mind what the London police did. 've been there, like the Albion, but glad I am an American. So domestic policies of Britain are not of much concern to me.

Incidentally though, something similar had occurred earlier in Italy this year (http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/assassination-plot-by-radical-muslims-against-pope-prevented/) when two university student's phone conversation was overheard by authorities monitoring phones (:rolleyes:) . And I think it echoed the same "efficiency" of the police:


The 26-year-old Hlal was speaking over the phone with 22-year-old Ahmed Errahmouni when he made the statements which earned them the attention of the local police and a trip back to Morocco.

They were deemed a “threat to national security” in the document signed by the Italian Minister of the Interior and expelled on April 29, Panorama reports.

According to an investigation begun last October by the Italian anti-mafia police, the two were known to have a radical vision of Islam and had expressed a desire to obtain explosive materials. It was reported that no material used to construct explosives was found in their residence hall rooms.

[goopc]

1. Muslims who do not hate us.
2. Muslims who hate us for no reason other than the fact that they are religous fanatics.
3. Muslims who hates us because we are causing trouble around the world.
You don’t see that the peaceful Muslims are liars. The Koran allows lying in the support of spreading Islam: “A man who brings peace to the people by making up good words or by saying nice things, though untrue, does not lie.” When Osama says that America’s foreign policy is what caused 9/11, he’s lying; they’ll say anything to spread their beliefs.

Just because they are not actively violent against us, doesn’t mean that they don’t want to establish Sharia law. Look at the Muslim immigrants to Europe, they come in peacefully and live in ethnic ghettos, then they have riots in the streets and demand Sharia law.

You should take some to to visit a Muslim country and see that Muslims are in conflict with every culture they contact. It's not just the U.S. There's problems (i.e. armed conflict) in India/Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Philippines, China, Indonesia, Malaysia, and probably a lot more I have not mentioned.

Their religion is the antithesis of Natural Law and that is why their culture is stuck a thousand years or more behind the rest of the world. You can't be nice to someone who believes you don't have the right to exist and expect to live very long.

[MikeStanart]

Well Saddam would have expanded his wars had be not contained him during/after Kuwait.

Also, they're all Muslim extremists and they want to kill all the Jews. If we don't help Israel they'll all be whipped out and the only functional democracy in the Middle East will end. Then the Muslims will expand to other Western nations after they're done with Israel... it's all in the Koran: "O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him."


http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y257/tx_eggman/doublefacepalm.jpg

[Bruno]

Funny, that's exactly how they rationalize the use of terrorism. You just have to change a few words.

We need to wake up and see that The West wants to destroy Islam. Of course we'll have to kill many of them, this is war and if we don't kill them then they will kill us. So long as they support their western governments, we should consider those westerners our enemies.

thread win

[Toureg89]

is there any reason why one would say an islamist terrorist and not a muslim terrorist?

is it supposed to be the diction of the first word to try to slander islam as a whole?

just curious, since the use of the word "islam" to describe a handful of individuals in a single event is a recent occurrence afaik.

before, i could have sworn the use of the word "muslim" (which denotes an individual v. the collective connotation of "islam-") was the more common description of muhammed-following terrorists.

[idirtify]

In context, that statement was during a fight against invaders who happened to be unbelievers. The Koran does not teach to kill all unbelievers, no matter how much brainwashing propaganda you've seen on it.

Honest question:
Is that also the context of these commonly quoted translations of verse 9:5?

“kill the unbelievers wherever you find them”
“slay those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God wherever you may come upon them"
“then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them”
“slay the idolaters wherever you find them”

[Toureg89]

...but they're simply uneducated on the terms.
must be, because every educated person i've heard or read on the matter of muslim terrorists usually refers to them as wahhabists, or the movement in general as wahhabism.

i first read about wahhabism in a book that details the creation of the saudi kingdom. its been around for hundreds of years, you'd figure americans would be able to find enough info to refer to it instead of the term "Islamist", which is what leads me to believe they used that term in propaganda.

and as you said, not all wahhabists are in fact terrorists, just as not all KKK members have actually killed any one.

[BlackTerrel]

Turns out it wasn't true.... although they are idiots for even joking about it:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/09/19/3015772.htm?section=world


British police freed six men without charge after they were arrested over an alleged plot to launch an attack during Pope Benedict XVI's state visit, Scotland Yard said...

...Britain's Sunday Mirror tabloid quoted a police source as saying that the men were arrested after they were overheard joking in a staff canteen about blowing up the Pope with a rocket-propelled grenade.

[Minuteman2012]

Is this proof that Blowback theory is wrong? They're Muslim extremists and want to kill us because we don't submit to Sharia law. Our foreign policy of intervention is the only thing keeping them from expanding their wars to America/Europe/

I don't think so, I just think it shows that there will always be terrorism. However, their will be significantly less hatred towards the west and sympathy or popular support for anti-american movements if our foreign policy is reformed, thus making us safer and more well liked.

[Minuteman2012]

Well Saddam would have expanded his wars had be not contained him during/after Kuwait.

Also, they're all Muslim extremists and they want to kill all the Jews. If we don't help Israel they'll all be whipped out and the only functional democracy in the Middle East will end. Then the Muslims will expand to other Western nations after they're done with Israel... it's all in the Koran: "O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you: and know that Allah is with those who fear Him."
Israel shouldn't exist, and our military shouldn't be used to protect a nation built on theft and oppression.

[oyarde]

Those verses were comprised of the stories of the tribes in Mecca going after Muhammad and his followers in Medina. The Meccans were idolaters and pagans.


"And do not dispute with the followers of the Book (Christians/Jews) except by what is best, except those of them who act unjustly, and say: We believe in that which has been revealed to us and revealed to you, and our God and your God is One, and to Him do we submit." 29:46

"Verily! Those who believe and those who are Jews and Christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in God and the Last Day and do righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." 2:62

At that time most of the world was still idolaters and Pagans . Islam and Buddhism were relatively new .

[FrankRep]

Freed terror suspects may sue police for false arrest over alleged plot to attack the Pope (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1313364/POPES-UK-VISIT-Freed-terror-suspects-sue-police-false-arrest-alleged-plot-attack-Pope.html#ixzz106nnP0Q9)


Daily Mail UK
20th September 2010



The men were detained by counter-terrorism officers at a cleaning depot in central London after police received intelligence suggesting they were planning an atrocity against Benedict XVI.

But late on Saturday they were freed after police found no evidence to support their initial suspicions.


SOURCE:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1313364/POPES-UK-VISIT-Freed-terror-suspects-sue-police-false-arrest-alleged-plot-attack-Pope.html#ixzz106nnP0Q9

[newyearsrevolution08]

nothing like being profiled lol

[Flash]

One should examine the reasons why muslims in America are assimilating and why muslims in Europe, for the most part, aren't assimilating. Lack of jobs, perhaps?

[oyarde]

One should examine the reasons why muslims in America are assimilating and why muslims in Europe, for the most part, aren't assimilating. Lack of jobs, perhaps?

I have considered the economy in Europe as being negative for immigration.

[dannno]

09-17-2010, 12:40 PM

i didn't see proof of anything in the article. There were some people who made some claims, there was no real evidence of a plot found that i'm aware of.

ftw

[dannno]

Is this proof that Blowback theory is wrong? They're Muslim extremists and want to kill us because we don't submit to Sharia law. Our foreign policy of intervention is the only thing keeping them from expanding their wars to America/Europe/

ftl

[osan]

They're Muslim extremists and want to kill us because we don't submit to Sharia law.

And your compelling evidence for this is...


Our foreign policy of intervention is the only thing keeping them from expanding their wars to America/Europe/

Our foreign policy is what has them at our throats. Are you neocon? Sound like it.

[goopc]

Thanks everyone for your help against the neo-con arguments of some of my friends. I'm a recovering neo-con myself and until less than I year ago I though "they hated us because we're free" and that we need to wage war on them before they waged war on us.

Thanks to Ron Paul I've learned about blowback and the logical rational for 9/11, but I'm still learning more about the secrets of 20th-century American foreign policy.