Bin Laden's letter to America

[Wow]

Has anybody stopped to think that the letter might be a hoax? I mean, who ever wrote it brought up the stuff about clinton and lewenski, what in the hell does that have to do with all of this? I found the letter to just ramble.

[Jotown]

Mars wrote: [quote]1) Who the hell appointed him saviour and defender of the Muslim world? Does he think he's Ayatollah Khomeni or something? 2) Does he REALLY believe all this stuff? [/quote]1) answer: Yes. 2) answer: It doesn't matter if he does, as long as the majority of the muslim world does.

[JDL]

Um, oh yeah, this [b]is[/b] open mike, isn't it.................................. JDL-Jesus :freak:

[RM]

Jesus certainly couldn't hang around Dodge, he'd be killed... BTW did anyone ever read Holger Kirtsten's Jesus Lived In India, quite a good romp there...found the graves of Moses and Jesus he did, being venerated by of all sorts, muslims...even has photos... Claims he survived the crucifixion and went to Nepal to live in umm...peace... Now that might topple a few beanie wearing men right out of their ankle length dresses... Yikes..he says it's true and he's been closed down by the ruling religions... Oh well, I digress... Sung to the tune of Oh Donna... OhhSama, Ohhsama, Ohsama, Ohsama I had a troll OOsama was his name... Rob

[T. Ehl]

[quote]Originally posted by C.M.: [b]Has anybody stopped to think that the letter might be a hoax? I mean, who ever wrote it brought up the stuff about clinton and lewenski, what in the hell does that have to do with all of this? I found the letter to just ramble.[/b][/quote]your right. thats true binladen must be a republican

[Super 8]

[quote]Originally posted by Tusker: [b]What Craig said. Agreed on both points. BTW, this "religious" war was predicted by Alvin Toffler in 1993. the struggle between war and anti-war. It's part of his overall thesis that the third wave (the information age) will revolutionize the growing economies. The left-behinds will resort to war. And we will have to fight war with anti-war to win. [/b][/quote]Now THAT is an interesting theory. I could easily buy into that. The advancement of our culture as it relates to the advancement of technology is so extreme. It was predicted in 2000, that the amount of advancement technology had seen in the past 100 years would be surpassed in the next 23! We take this stuff for granted. We are acclimated to it. But what was the amount of technological advancement covered in the 20th century when compared to the centuries that preceded it? Was the amount of advancement the same as the previous 200 years? 300? 1000? This would mean that the rate at which technology progresses and it's impact on us as people is increasing at an incredible pace. Our culture apparently values this and can by enlarge adapt to it. There are people in this world who live in much the same way as their ancestors did 1000 or even 2000 years ago. Their culture, what they think, how they adapt to change, and how they relate with other cultures, MUST all be affected by that. It's interesting to note that something like 1/4 of the people in the world live without electricity, and 1/2 have never talked on a telephone (I'm guessing BTW, it's been awhile since I heard those stats but I think I'm pretty close). I'm not saying that this is a bad thing. The human race has lived without those things FAR longer than with. But, can anyone here relate to living that way? I'm not saying that people in traditional cultures need Internet access and CD burners, or that they need to adopt OUR culture or OUR way of thinking. Just because it works for us, doesn't mean it will work for everyone. If you have people who have lived in a virtually unchanged culture for 2000 years, there is a reason it hasn't changed. And that reason is usually because it hasn't needed to change. It works just fine for them, and we need to respect that. What I am saying is that it means that we need to take these things into consideration when dealing with other cultures -especially very traditional ones. Because to them, we must seem very strange and hard to understand. And we are ALL guilty of viewing others through OUR OWN sets of norms and values, and what makes sense to us. If you look throughout history you will find that viewing others in that way has often resulted in A LOT of bloodshed and misery. I don't know what Alvin Toffler meant exactly with the term "Anti-war". But I can foresee a time when, for us, wars are considered too costly, too controversial, to hard on the ecconomy, and too bad for business in general, and too hard on public morale. When that time comes it will be in our best interests to keep things copesetic with everyone. But for traditional cultures in the world, they may see war as the ONLY way to deal with people whom they do not understand and fear because we are so different from them -and those differences are increasing at an accelerated rate. Culturally sensitive diplomacy seems like the only way we will have to maintain any kind of relationship. When dealing with people or countries who have declared war on us, perhaps the only method of resolving the situation is to know how to disarm them and send them home with as little violence as possible -and then to just leave them be. For them it may be about fighting the great satan and winning. But for us, it can't be about winning anymore because the affects of winning would be so devastating on our opponents. For us, it has to be about maintaining a good state of being, and disarming our attackers. Maybe THAT is Anti-War.

[Bob Keelan]

[quote]Originally posted by TheWewus: [b]Hey Craig: I don't believe that Bin Laden speaks for all Muslims but I do believe there is a big enough faction of fanatical people leaning towards his beliefs to sway the other Muslims or take control from them similar to what happened in Nazi Germany.[/b][/quote]..as witnessed by the recent Miss World riots in Nigeria. We thought it fanatical when people burned Beatle records in 1966. There is a faction here that will kill and be killed in the name of their religion. It all just sounds like a modern Crusades to me. bob

[Nawledge]

first of all the lewenski thing was about adultry and how appaling it was in the eyes of bin laden and muslims like him. remember they take that kind of thing very seriously anyway the note that strikes me again and again and again, is that AmericA does not take responsibility for anything, and I guess alot of people are going to have to die before this happens. this is the inner point of what he is saying ihmo if you look at the threads like these on any forum or if you talk to people or watch tv all you see is americans saying " yeah me may have done some things that weren't on the up and up but..." and then they are on to something else. this happens over and over again, constantly. AmericA hasn't taken responsibility for the wrong things its done to its own people or the wrong things that its done to other countries peoples and we sweep that under the rug while at the same time holding every body else to a different standard. you simple cannot survive forever doing that. think about it. we have to take responsibility sometime, for something, don't we? well we never have and we never will. hence we are digging our own graves. the most striking part of his letter to me was the part about how the people of america were not innocent, what he said was absolutely true, and I wish every american would read that part because we have to do something, we are f_cking up, this is the land of the free and we are not running our country right by any means. its not even only bin laden saying these things, all of asia says it, all of europe says it, and all of the middle east says it , all of africa says it, only israel doesn't say it. they all say america gets away with murder, america is leading the distruction of the earth enviormentaly socialy and economicaly but america doesn't get penalized for anything. one of our oldest members of congress is a racist but we throw him a big party and tell him he's a swell guy and a great american. Binladen is an evil prick who is made the most dangerous he can be because he has the truth on his side, thats his most powerful weapon. the whole world hates us, even britain, newzealand australia, southafrica, russia, the whole world, and we can't blame that on Binladen, and all we do is say f_ck everybody, we are american and that makes us right. well every body on this forum has enough sense to know that we are full of Sh_t. Its like the true american dream is to be something we are not. we are not just. we are not peaceful. we are not fair. we do not give a f_ck about you unless you are voting for us. we will stabb you in the back while you are facing us. and our people will not do anything to change it, and we our to powerful for any other people to do anything to change it. I love being an american, and you know why, because I've got a whole lotta sH_t because I'm an american. that is the single greatest reason to be an american. but just think about that... some people say they love it because of our freedoms, but that usually means the freedom to have alot of crap or the freedom to mess up the world and america itself, and because we have the freedom to continue to vote for people who will continue to let us f_ck everything up. or when we say freedom do we mean the freedom to be just people, uphold equality, be fair righteous within the world community. our courts make us swear on the bible, our money says in god we trust, but be honest with yourself, in the world community do we operate on a dailey basis by those principles? NO WE Dont. and look at me. I'm not worried about them (the whole world) not seeing us for what we really are. so good, wonderful, and angelic, with a pure heart and soul, no I'm worried that they are going to f_ck up my way of life, take my cable, my modem, and my sampler.

[Alndln]

[quote]Originally posted by Nawledge: [b]AmericA does not take responsibility for anything[/b][/quote]Innacurate and a little extreme.That's a bit of a slap in the face to people from this country who do dedicate their lives to helping others.Are they the majority,no,but not everyone fit's the stereotype.When was the last time a muslim extremist or Bin took responsibility for anything but mass murder?Also stating that the rest of the world collectivley hates the U.S. which is another innacurate streotype.I think most fairminded and peaceloving people can agree on one thing though,the current US government(not the people) and the Muslim extremists suck.I say let's get rid of both and start anew.

[Jotown]

Nawledge wrote: [quote]first of all the lewenski thing was about adultry and how appaling it was in the eyes of bin laden and muslims like him. remember they take that kind of thing very seriously [/quote]Really?!?! Doesn't Bin Laden have 4 or 5 wives or something. What a frickin' hypoctite. Certainly there is much that America has done wrong in the world. But there is much we have done right as well. Killers who point out other killers have no credibility. If your religion says you can have 10 wives, and you do, you should be careful accusing someone else of adultery. It is easy to paint these issues with broad strokes, but not very accurate. These are very complex issues. Both sides are guilty of oversimplifying things for the sake of selling their agenda to the public. Nothing, except zebra's are really black and white.

[Jotown]

Two quotes from Thomas Jefferson come to mind. "A nation that limits freedom in the name of security will have neither." and . "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure."

[surfmonkey]

[quote]Originally posted by Oyer: [b]4. Americans don't realize how much the rest of the world HATES us. [/b][/quote]I really don't think that is an accurate statement. And I think our media contributes to that notion. The world doesn't hate us. Heck, some countries love us. I think the majority of America bashers have a beef with some of our elected officials and some of our political decisions, but that doesn't mean they totally despise us. There are many countries that make bonehead decisions, does that mean we despise them and want to go blow them up? No! The media always shows anti-U.S. demonstrations, but there are pro-U.S./anti-government of country X, demonstrations that we don't see. Just like we don't see many anti-war demonstrations that go on here in America. I also don't see how you can possibly justify the statement that we as Americans are all equally guilty of the actions of our government, and thus should be condemned to die. That's totally ridiculous.

[surfmonkey]

[quote]Originally posted by Dr. Peter Venkman: [b] I've made the point about the US interest in the Palistinian/Israeli conflict before, and almost everyone who responded to the FACTS that I stated about what happened in Palistine/Isreal after WWII dismissed me as ill informed. Someone went so far as to tell me to take a history class. But the history that we learn in school is the history written by the victors, my friends. Hate to tell you, kids, but that letter is right on the money as far as what happened to the Palistinians after WWII and how the US backed the emerging country of Isreal. And Isreal would be toast by now if the US and GB hadn't given them logistical and military resources. [/b][/quote]You kindly left out the part where the other countries of the middle east attack Israel?... The U.S. position on Israel has always been that they deserve to have a sovereign nation, and they deserve to be able to defend it. I don't totally agree with our foreign policy; I don't think our support should be unconditional but I do believe they have a right to be there. Listen, if Osama had said, "heck guys, I just want Arab's to have equal right's too, let's work it out and live in peace". That would be one thing. But ,that's not what he's saying. He want's to exterminate Jews. He feel's that they have no right to be there at all. I don't know how you can try and validate a statement like that.

[Alndln]

[quote]Originally posted by Oyer: [b]4. Americans don't realize how much the rest of the world HATES us. .[/b][/quote]Do Muslims from other country's hate the millions of "American" Muslims as well,or just the ones that drive SUV's? Do all the millions of foriegners trying to become American citizens hate themselves as well? Since I've travelled this world many times(and not just on tour either)I 'd have to say first hand(my experience),I beg to differ,in fact most foriegners that Iv'e ran into seem to have more respect than I do of this country.The United states is a big target however,and an easy one to throw darts at.I wonder how many Muslims would like to move back to Afgahnastan with the Taliban rule back in place?Any Muslim women interested?Maybe we can bring Stalin and Hitler back to life,the world loved those guy's right?Whenever I see a broad statement like "The rest of the World hates the United States",I think of it coming out of the mouth of someone driving an SUV on the way to Starbucks trying to sound painfully hip. Bralalala

[Stephen Fortner]

I've been trying to avoid weighing in on this, but the late hour and the red wine is getting the better of me. The letter was intriguing, in a train-wreck sort of way. If it really authored by Bin Laden, it seems to me that he vacillates between making (A) possibly valid points about how U.S. policies in the Middle East have resulted in the economic exploitation of the Arab people; and then... (B) bigoted and unpalatable preaching about how Islam is the One True Religion. When anyone, whether it's Bin Laden, Pat Robertson, L. Ron Hubbard, or Sum Yung Moon, claims to have a T1 line to God, that's where I get off the bus. It's an arrogance that goes against a value held by most monotheistic religions: to have humility in the face of God. The bit about Islam sees everyone as equals, regardless of race or sex, is hypocritical. Didn't Bin Laden accept help from the Taliban, a fundamentalist regime that perpetrated atrocities against women in the name of piety? If this ideal of equality is what he really believes, why didn't this offend his religious sensibilities? All in all, it shows an eerie combination of intelligence, articulation (the guy was basically a rich kid educated in Europe), religious fanaticism, and megalomania. It shows that despite the insane aspects of his personality, he's smart and Machiavellian enough to be dangerous. Kind of like the extreme religious right in our own country. Anyone remember the episode of the original "Star Trek" where there's this guy named "Lazarus"? He has an evil twin, and winds up locked in mortal combat with him in a sort of inter-dimensional box, for all eternity? This would be a fitting fate for fanatics, no matter what name they call God by, and would keep the rest of us safe from them.

[Nawledge]

this is a big part of the problem. I didn't say I hate americans or every single person in every country on earth hates americans. I'm not dilusional. And I'm not suggesting that there is anything right about what Binladen is doing, simply because there isn't. The issue is not that there are many protest in favor of america that we don't see, the issue is the protest that we do see! (point) thats a whole lot of people from all different races, languages religions, sexes, ages, levels of education, sexual orientation, and walks of life that feel like america is raping the planet in everyway. that is a problem. the critical concerns about america are valid, that is a problem. I don't need to tell you what Bin Laden is, my whole post was about us. and how we just blow everything off like what we do is of no consequence. I'll tell you what is extreme, the kind of ignorance that would make the most powerful nation on earth carry itself like its above the very law that it holds the rest of the planet too. if you cant see that, then there isn't anything really to say. every single terrorist, or nation, or faction that we ever have a problem with is fighting us with our own weapons, but we have no responsibility. all the evil doers were our buddies, we didn't care about their evil doings then, heck we gave alot of them their power, and the rest we allowed them to exist with our power. (and of course that didn't make us evil doers ourselves right) but we have no responsibility (lol) heck#2 we don't even have to go to the middle east if we want to see a terrorist, we've disinfranchised so many of our own people and fosterd so much hatred here at home that we've got our own terrorist who blow up buildings, and shoot people.but its not our responsibility. we always talk about protecting children, but do we make it against the law for you to dress your toddler up in camflouge and literaly breed them to hate others. no we don't. thats ok and its your right as an American. as a matter of fact its your right to start an organization to hate others and we will protect that right more than the people you hurt. why?, because some old slave owner said so along time ago, ( but wait a minute, aren't we the same people outraged at the muslim kids being taught to hate americans?) didn't we tell their government to stop that. still no responsibility in sight. you know what? we'll just keep making our camel jokes about the desert folks, keep telling our military to kill but don't think, keep running our country like a coporation, keep looking the other way when governments do evil to their own people and others as long as it serves our own (?non-evil purposes?) and its cool cuz we're americans. we are better than you. we think we can do the devils handiwork and not take any of the blame for how hot it is. (ludicrous) but we are the same people who will blame a bunch of ignorant rappers cursing on records for the problems of our country

[The T Dot]

[quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b]Nawledge wrote: [quote]first of all the lewenski thing was about adultry and how appaling it was in the eyes of bin laden and muslims like him. remember they take that kind of thing very seriously [/quote]Really?!?! Doesn't Bin Laden have 4 or 5 wives or something. What a frickin' hypoctite. [/b][/quote]Adultery is not the same thing as polygyny. ;)

[The T Dot]

[quote]Originally posted by Oyer: [b]4. Americans don't realize how much the rest of the world HATES us.[/b][/quote]Hey, I have some American friends. I don't hate you guys, honest.

[AlanThomas]

[quote]Originally posted by Nawledge: The issue is not that there are many protest in favor of america that we don't see, the issue is the protest that we do see![/quote]You cannot use "protests" to gauge what people generally think. People generally don't "protest" things they're in favor of, and most people don't go to protests at all even when they disapprove of something. [quote]a whole lot of people from all different races, languages, religions, sexes, ages, levels of education, sexual orientation, and walks of life that feel like america is raping the planet in everyway.[/quote]Really? Have you talked to all of these people? Or is this what you get from watching CNN for 15 minutes a day? [quote]...if you cant see that, then there isn't anything really to say.[/quote]I see. So then, Osama, if I don't agree precisely and exactly with your grossly over generalized statements, then any communication or dialog is futile. I guess you'll want to kill me and my family then? [quote]every single terrorist, or nation, or faction that we ever have a problem with is fighting us with our own weapons[/quote]Oh really? Tell that to my uncle who was KIA with a Chinese made AK-47. Tell that to my grandfather who still has a piece of German shrapnel in his ass. [quote]we don't even have to go to the middle east if we want to see a terrorist, we've disinfranchised so many of our own people and fosterd so much hatred here at home that we've got our own terrorist who blow up buildings, and shoot people[/quote]That's why I'm worried about [i]you[/i]... [quote]we always talk about protecting children, but do we make it against the law for you to dress your toddler up in camflouge and literaly breed them to hate others. no we don't. thats ok and its your right as an American.[/quote]Yes, isn't it a shame that we don't have [i]more[/i] laws in place to force everyone to think in a way that suits [i]you[/i]. [quote]thats ok and its your right as an American. as a matter of fact its your right to start an organization to hate others and we will protect that right more than the people you hurt.[/quote]I'll agree that the balance between the rights of the accused and the rights of the victim are seriously out of true. However, that is a problem with the courts (especially judges). It has nothing to do with the fact that you have a right to think what you will. If you want to hate someone, fine, go down into your basement and seethe. Get an ulcer, write your congressman. But the fact of the matter is that [i]acting[/i] on that hatred, in a way that harms someone else [i]is[/i] illegal. [quote]because some old slave owner said so along time ago[/quote]I think this is the most telling statement you've made so far. You can think nothing more of the founders of nation than that. This statement shows your true contempt for our country and your feeble understanding of history. Of course I cannot argue the point in and of itself because indeed, many of our founding fathers were slave holders. Many were also morally opposed to slavery and recognized that securing the soveriegnty of the country was a foundational act that would ultimately enable the abolishment of slavery. However that is another discussion altogether. [quote](but wait a minute, aren't we the same people outraged at the muslim kids being taught to hate americans?)[/quote]They're not just being taught to [i]hate[/i] Americans. They are being taught that it is their moral obligation, their sacred duty, to [i]murder[/i] Americans in as great a number as possible. They are being taught to strap explosives to their bodies and, at 16 or 17 years old, enter a market or theater or bus and [i]indescriminately[/i] kill anyone and everyone present. Though not dissimilar ideologically, in practice this is a far cry from a bunch of neo-nazi nut cases wearing fatigues and shooting paper targets in the Michigan woods. Not that these people aren't disturbing and possibly dangerous, it's just that they're not carrying out the same kind of random violent acts that muslim extremists do on a daily basis. Yet. Perhaps passing a few of your [i]bad thoughts[/i] laws will push them over the edge. Over all, I think it is quite clear that, to quote our President, you are [i]"with the terrorists"[/i]. You detest and hate the United States of America, and its citizens and residents. For whatever Freudian reasons, you identify with the terrorists/murderers rather than with your fellow citizens. Though you infer that you do not approve of the actions of Osama Bin Laden et. al., [i]your[/i] "letter to america" contains the same kind of acid, brooding hatred and "you got what you deserved" attitude. Though the phrase "love it or leave it" is an oversimplification, and thrown around too casually and too often, it does have some merit: If you hate the United States so much, think so much is wrong with, are so miserable, then I invite and ecourage you to leave. You can do that. Leave. Renounce your U.S. citizenship. Emmigrate to some other country that more closely matches your idea of what a country and a society should be. Goodbye. Good luck. And don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

[Alon]

When Hitler embarked on his world tour, nobody sat around discussing if he had "legitimate" gripes or not. Eventually, we just went over there and killed Germans, because that was what needed to be done, inorder to stop those crazy bastards. Usama, and his lunatic followers shall meet the same fate, which is currently what our military is working on. As for the whole world being against the USA. Well, all i will say is that "the whole world" has been painfully wrong before(Europe's appeasment of Hitler), so I'd wager a hefty sum and bet that our Euro-socialist buddies, are once again dead wrong. We don't have any apologizing to do, the only message we need to send back, is in the form of bombs & bullets. :D alon

[SFOracle]

I think the whole Palestinian thing is a red herring. Not that the Palestinians do not deserve a homeland but it has been convenient to the cause of Arab Nationalism to have a victimized population to rally around. Arabs are as much to blame for the lack of a Palestinian state and for the sorry state of the Palestinians as is Israel. The current cycle of violence in Israel is designed to derail any type of peace agreement between Israel and the PLO and to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state. The Islamic fundamentalists do not want a Palestinian state because the existance of such remove the rallying point for Arab Nationalism and would force them to acknowledge Israel. Bin Laden and his cronies do not want peace in Palestine. They want Israel iliminated. They hate the US for supporting Israel. Now Israel has done a lot wrong. Sure they have legitmate needs for security and defendable borders, but they also need to acknowledge that they play a role in the cycle of violence. Ariel Sharon does not want a Palestinian state and has done everything possible to derail an agreement. Israel's continuing strategy of creating settlements in the west bank and Gaza is a huge obstable to peace. These settlements also provide convenient targets for terrorists. Arab Nationalists do not want a Palestinian state either. In fact, they don't want anything to do with another Arab secular state that acknowledges Israel. The Arab Nationalists dream is for a single, Islamic pan-Arab state running all the way from North Africa to Pakistan. Bin Laden and his like minded cronies across the Arab world do not want to see modern, secular, affluent Arab states. Arab Nationalists have no friends in the governments of any of the current middle eastern nations. Egypt - once the darling of the Arab Nationalist cause is seen as treacherous because Sadat made peace with Israel (and was assasinated as a result). Saudi Arabia is seen as a corrupt oligarchy and unworthy of protecting the holy places of Islam. The other gulf states are too poor and powerless to accomplish their goals. Iraq and Syria are both secular states who have as much to fear from radical Islam as we do. Iran is a close as there is to a model for Arab unity - except that Iranians are not Arabs (they are Persians) and the majority are of the Shi'ite minority sect. So because they have no support in any current Arab regimes, they point to Israel and the Palestinians to try and rally Arab unity and Islamic fundamentalism. Ever notice that there are no Arab democracies? Egypt is about as close as they come, but the government in Egypt has not changed in almost 4 decades. Syria and Iraq are led by despots. Saudi Arabia, Jordon and the gulf states are kingdoms, Iran is an Islamic republic. If the US wants to support the Arab people they should press for democratic and human rights reforms in the states over which we have some influence. The treatment of women, children and ethnic or religious minorities in most of the middle east is appalling.

[Sylver]

[quote]Originally posted by SFOracle: [b]I think the whole Palestinian thing is a red herring. [/b][/quote]I, Personally don't care for herring. [quote][b] Not that the Palestinians do not deserve a homeland but it has been convenient to the cause of Arab Nationalism to have a victimized population to rally around. Arabs are as much to blame for the lack of a Palestinian state and for the sorry state of the Palestinians as is Israel. The current cycle of violence in Israel is designed to derail any type of peace agreement between Israel and the PLO and to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state. The Islamic fundamentalists do not want a Palestinian state because the existance of such remove the rallying point for Arab Nationalism and would force them to acknowledge Israel. Bin Laden and his cronies do not want peace in Palestine. They want Israel iliminated. They hate the US for supporting Israel. [/b][/quote]Some interesting points, but I still think that it's the 50 years of bad blood that has really caused what is going on now. Woulda, coulda shoulda ... [quote][b] Now Israel has done a lot wrong. Sure they have legitmate needs for security and defendable borders, but they also need to acknowledge that they play a role in the cycle of violence. Ariel Sharon does not want a Palestinian state and has done everything possible to derail an agreement. Israel's continuing strategy of creating settlements in the west bank and Gaza is a huge obstable to peace. These settlements also provide convenient targets for terrorists. [/b][/quote]Sharon has really been a shit hasn't he? Of course the continued attempts to place settlements in areas so close to the opposition is an obvious attempt to show courage in the face of one's enemy. Kinda like, "Fuck you, we're staying anyway!" I just want to know how they talk people into settling an area where they will be targets. Sharon has been very hard line anti-arab his whole career, and most of the world was shocked when he was elected. I guess the Isrealis are just fed up with Sadat's "I'm not a terrorist anymore. I have not connection or control over them, I'm just a politico." stance. [quote][b] Arab Nationalists do not want a Palestinian state either. In fact, they don't want anything to do with another Arab secular state that acknowledges Israel. The Arab Nationalists dream is for a single, Islamic pan-Arab state running all the way from North Africa to Pakistan. Bin Laden and his like minded cronies across the Arab world do not want to see modern, secular, affluent Arab states. [/b][/quote]Yes, that is not what the Arab nationalists want, but they really are a splinter group compared to most of the other Islamic controlled groups. The Palistinian people proper just want a home, and rights. The Arab Nationalist are probably the ones who blow up buses in Tel Aviv just as negotiations seem close. [quote][b] Arab Nationalists have no friends in the governments of any of the current middle eastern nations. Egypt - once the darling of the Arab Nationalist cause is seen as treacherous because Sadat made peace with Israel (and was assasinated as a result). Saudi Arabia is seen as a corrupt oligarchy and unworthy of protecting the holy places of Islam. The other gulf states are too poor and powerless to accomplish their goals. Iraq and Syria are both secular states who have as much to fear from radical Islam as we do. Iran is a close as there is to a model for Arab unity -except that Iranians are not Arabs (they are Persians) and the majority are of the Shi'ite minority sect. So because they have no support in any current Arab regimes, they point to Israel and the Palestinians to try and rally Arab unity and Islamic fundamentalism. [/b][/quote]That's why the Nationalists will never get what they want. Nobody else wants it. Look how weak the Taliban's hold on Afganistan was. [quote][b] Ever notice that there are no Arab democracies? Egypt is about as close as they come, but the government in Egypt has not changed in almost 4 decades. Syria and Iraq are led by despots. Saudi Arabia, Jordon and the gulf states are kingdoms, Iran is an Islamic republic. If the US wants to support the Arab people they should press for democratic and human rights reforms in the states over which we have some influence. The treatment of women, children and ethnic or religious minorities in most of the middle east is appalling.[/b][/quote]Yeah, that's a nice theory, but the US isn't even a Democracy. It's a Republic. Or rather a Democrasized Republic at best. The truth is that a small, elected(or appointed) group of individuals run the government according to what they [i]think[/i] the people want. More often than not, what they think the people [i]should[/i] want. In a true democracy, the representitives hold periodic meetings with constituents, and let them vote on the issues before the legislature. The representive then casts his or her vote accordingly. Not what they [i]think[/i] the people want, but as a representation of their decree. Sure, we are set up so that it could work that way, but it doesn't really happen that much, unless it's around election time. It's not really a democracy in the pure sense, because our elected officials get very little guidence from us after we pull the level. They pretty much do what they want. That is a Republic.

[Sylver]

Does anyone find it disturbing that an NFL mascot has such strong political views?

[surfmonkey]

Today's spelling lesson: ISRAEL. That is all. :p

[Sylver]

[quote]Originally posted by surfmonkey: [b]Today's spelling lesson: ISRAEL. That is all. :p [/b][/quote]Hey, what the hell do you want? I'm a musican. I neever cliamed to bee abel two speel!

[Nawledge]

I'm sorry that you feel that way about me Alan Thomas. I would hope that you could find something else to invite me to do instead of leave this country, like to work with you and help make this country a better place, but it is obvious that that is not what is in your heart.

[Jotown]

[quote]Originally posted by Chris Himself: [b] [quote]Originally posted by Jotown: [b]Nawledge wrote: [quote]first of all the lewenski thing was about adultry and how appaling it was in the eyes of bin laden and muslims like him. remember they take that kind of thing very seriously [/quote]Really?!?! Doesn't Bin Laden have 4 or 5 wives or something. What a frickin' hypoctite. [/b][/quote]Adultery is not the same thing as polygyny. ;) [/b][/quote]No shit? :eek: I am not talking about the word, but the principle. If you can have sex with more than one woman because your culture says it's ok, you are not in the position to judge someone else for having sex with more than one woman whose culture does not apporve of it. Now if you don't approve of it, that's different. But you are not Bin Laden. :D Or are you?

[SFOracle]

[quote] The Arab Nationalist are probably the ones who blow up buses in Tel Aviv just as negotiations seem close. [/quote]Probably, but like everything in the middle east, it is complicated. The main suicide bombing group seems to Hamas. Hamas was created by the Israelis (or at least with thier support) back in the '70s to provide an alternative to the PLO in representing Palestinians. Hamas has several goals. To provide humanitarian aid to Palestinians, to promote Islam, to provide an alternate (to the PLO/Palestinian Authority) political voice for Palestinians. It seems their suicide attacks are primarily aimed at undermining the PA as the official mouthpiece of Palestinian nationalism. Hamas recieves a funding from other Arab states, but operates extensive fund raising throughout Europe and the middle east. As suicide bombings don't take a lot of capital, most of the money they raise actually does get directed to charitable and political purposes. Because of it's grass roots approach, Hamas is extremely popular, particularly in Gaza. Hamas official policy supports the idea of a pan-Arab Islamic state which includes the Palestinians. However they do say they would recognize Israel if Israel were to pull back to the pre-1967 borders, abandon Jerusalem, allow some 1.5 million Palestinian refugees to return to Israel with full rights as citizens and dismantled all Israeli settlements on the West Bank and Gaza. Hamas sees the Palestinian Authority as an Israeli sponsored puppet government. They are apparently willing to be a part of the PA if Israel would allow the PA considerably more independence. Hamas largest single financial supporter is thought to be Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia used to provide the Palestinian Authority with as much as $100M per year in aid, but after Arafat backed Hussein in the gulf war, this funding is thought to have been diverted to Hamas. Because Hamas operates numerous legitimate charitable operations, many moderate Arabs donate money. Their terrorist operations are supported by the political and charitable fronts. Sometimes it is difficult to seperate terrorist activities from charitable activities. Hamas provides money and support for the families of "martyrs" who kill Israelis and Arab or Palestinian colaborators. Hamas calls this "Aid to Widows and Orphans". Israel call it blood money. Hamas also recuites terrorists from within its political and charitable wings. Fatah - is really the old PLO. Fatah is inseperably connected to the Palestinian Authority. It is essentially the political party of the former PLO and as such is the ruling party of the PA. But Fatah is more than a political party. Fatah maintains a military wing, the "Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade" - which directly conducts terrorist attacks on Israel. This is what frustrates the Israelis. On one hand they are negotiating with the Palestinian Authority, the PA claims to be trying to crack down on terrorists, but Fatah, the ruling party, is orchestrating attacks against Israel. As far as I know, Fatah does not have an official Arab Nationalist Agenda - but I would guess many of it's leaders do. Hezbolah - is a Shi'it fundamentalist terrorist group. They are directly funded from Iran and Syria. Hezbollah was formed when Israel invaded and occupied Lebanon in 1982. They were responsible for the attacks on the US embassy and marine barracks in Beirut in 1983 as well as numerous high profile kidnappings and car bombings. Hezbolla, like Hamas, also operates as a political party, with some 12 or so elected members to the Lebanese parliament. This provides a political front for financial backing from Iran and Syria. Syria uses Hezbollah as a proxy guerilla force to fight the Israelis without the Syrian army being involved. Hezbollah tactics often include morter or rocket attacks on Israeli settlements in northern Israel. The PA has outlawed the Hezbollah in the West Bank and Gaza strip, but they operate freely from Southern Lebanon. Israel could pretty much eliminate the Hezbolla by negotiating peace with Syria - but this would require giving up much or all of the strategic Golan Heights. The US has repeatedly asked Lebanon to freeze Hezbollahs assets and Iran to cease support for them, but both Lebanon scoff at the US saying that Hezbollah is a legitimate political party. We have little influence with Syria, but if Israel ever made peace with Syria, Syria would crush Hezbollah pretty swiftly.

[KenElevenShadows]

[quote]Originally posted by RM: [b]BTW did anyone ever read Holger Kirtsten's Jesus Lived In India, quite a good romp there...found the graves of Moses and Jesus he did, being venerated by of all sorts, muslims...even has photos... Claims he survived the crucifixion and went to Nepal to live in umm...peace...[/b][/quote]Actually, he allegedly went to Kashmir, where it is believed by many Western and Eastern historians and linguists that the people there are descendants of the 10 tribes of Israel. There are quite a number of simlarities in their language, customs, and appearance to suggest that this may indeed be the case. Yes, I did read the book, as well as several others claiming that Jesus came to India. The Kashmiris that I stayed for five and a half weeks in 1997 with firmly believe that Jesus is buried in this tomb, and revere him as a great prophet (along with Abraham, Joseph, Muhammad, etc.). In fact, I have visited this very tomb, which is located in the Old City of Srinagar (Khanyar section). YOu may see several photos if you go to my web site: http://www.elevenshadows.com/travels/kashmir3.htm and the next page. My photographs of the alleged tomb of Jesus have and will appear in several books and religious encyclopedias. There is also evidence suggesting that Jesus was not only in Kashmir (btw, Kashmir is politically part of India in case anyone is wondering wha tis going on with the book title) and Ladakh (also politically part of India). Both regions are located in the Himalayas and are very very beautiful in dramatically differing ways. Kashmir is green and lush with lots of lakes and rivers and valleys and orchards. Ladakh is barren, pretty much a desert, with the exception of certain valleys such as the Nubra Valley ("Nubra" actually means "green"!). In Ladakh, the Hemis Monastery, which I also visited, reportedly has written evidence that Jesus visited there and was greatly revered as a saint. Those thinking that this is a complete crackpot theory are welcome to read Holger Kersten's book "Jesus Lived In India" and make up their own mind before responding to this, since it it obviously extremely controversial, and upsetting to some Christians. In the book, Mr. Kersten offers quite a lot of evidence to support this theory, but in no way undermines Christianity. On the contrary, he seems to possess a great deal of admiration and respect for Jesus, and seems to want to dig deep past numerous mistakes and cover-ups that have occurred to try and find the real Jesus and his real teachings. I don't know whether Kersten is right, obviously. No one does. However, he does have a very interesting, well-researched book, and I like to keep an open mind about things.

[AlanThomas]

[quote]Originally posted by Nawledge: [b]I'm sorry that you feel that way about me Alan Thomas. I would hope that you could find something else to invite me to do instead of leave this country, like to work with you and help make this country a better place, but it is obvious that that is not what is in your heart.[/b][/quote]No, that's not "what is in my heart." I couldn't really care less whether you stay or go (da da da dee da dee dee dump), I was merely pointing out that you do have that option. And your previous postings carried anything but a "let's all work together to make this country a better place" message. You were just spouting off about how evil, wicked, mean and nasty Americans are. Your views sounded much more like a terrorist than a concerned citizen. But if you really want to make this a better place, that must mean you think it's worth working on. That's a good thing. I'd recommend starting off by using much less absolutism and hyperbole when trying to discuss things. "Everything we've ever done, any time, any place with any one is wrong and every body every where hates us..." just sounds like a nut case. If you wrote a letter to your congressman like that, they'd just write you off as a paranoid schizophrenic and your concerns, your message wouldn't get through (it's difficult enough for well written, coherent letters to get through let alone a rant).