Christians massacred in Pakistan

[arhar]

LOL!! If 5000 Iraqis die every day, by doing some simple math one could see that in a very short time, the population of Iraq would be ZERO!!! Unless they multiply like rabbits, of course....

 

[Gizmo]

Are you being deliberately difficult Spiderman?

I believe his figures of 5000 per MONTH (not per DAY as you were trying to suggest I said) were taking from UN Aid Agenciesand Amnesty International who are currently providing aid inside Iraq. Obviously sources like that are to be considered with great suspicion as they are using them for pure propaganda.
The 5000 that die, 4000 or more are children. These children die solely because they are Iraqi, but die before they are even old enough to realise they are Iraqi.
You have to appreciate the irony in that.

And Spiderman, if you cant be bothered paying enough attention to current events to notice when its a long gunman, or suicide bomber, that sparks the end of a ceasefire... then really you have no reason to be posting on the topic at all. Your robotic demands for documentary proof are growing tiresome when it is becoming obvious you wont ever accept any that is presented to you, because you dont trust those sources.


TICM: get lost then. I dont think I`ll miss you.

Arhar: try to read properly. Spiderman said it was 5000 a day, not me. Yet another attempt to warp what I say to make me look bad. I grow very tired of this.

 

[arhar]

Gizmo, chill out man. Where did you get the idea that I'm trying to make you look bad? I haven't paid enough attention to this whole thread... month/day, who cares, I was making a joke.

 

[Spiderman]

No need to get your britches tied up in a knot, Gizmo. My bad... I DID mis-read what you wrote. That does happen when what you're referring to is on another page of the thread.

Anyone can take figures and present them out of proportion or context. For instance, US officials have been saying that it takes 8000-10000 anthrax spores to infect someone. Not so, it turns out. That's the AVERAGE amount of spores it takes for a lethal dose. For some it takes less, for others more. And even that (I think) was based on an old study, since the last known multiple case was in Russia in the '70's and understandably it was rather hard to get information from them back then.

So yes, merely saying something merits further proof. What's the problem? Either you're right or wrong... although I get the feeling God forbid you be wrong....

And yes, sorry Gizmo, but I DO pay attention to current affairs and as I said above, what you say does not jive with my understanding of the situation. So again, PROVE ME WRONG and increase my knowledge, as you yourself stated that you consider yourself MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT than ??? (I guess the average Joe). Intelligence doesn't do much for you if you aren't willing to share it.... and I haven't even questioned the sources yet, so I don't know where that comes in.

 

[Gizmo]

I AM more intelligent than the average Joe.

But you increase my intelligence. Who WAS it that ended the ceasefires, thus justifiying the use of Israeli military force and assasination.

We can both make the same meaningless statements - youve presented far less evidence to back anything youve said than anybody else in this discussion. YOU PROVE ME WRONG.

 

[Spiderman]

I AM more intelligent than the average Joe

And this is because...?

We can both make the same meaningless statements - youve presented far less evidence to back anything youve said than anybody else in this discussion.

That's because, to my knowledge, I haven't made any statements that is not common knowledge (the only ones that I can think of right now are that blacks and American Indians have a much bigger claim to grieviances against them from the US government or the US as a whole, compared to whatever group DUke was claiming; I forget if it's Arab's in general or Muslims or Middle Easterners or what).

And to my knowledge, NO ONE has backed up any substantial statements, although several seemed to have been disproven (Jews absent on 9/11, the US was asked to leave from Saudi Arabia in an official capacity)

I certainly consider myself an "Average Joe" so I'm not certain how I can increase your knowledge. It's kinda like asking someone who is taking computer programming for the first time to teach a class to someone who's been programming in ALC for 20 years. But hey, why don't we compromise?

I'll do cease-fires if you do "5000 Iraqis dying a month", with figures attributed to the sanctions (not Saddam executing people or anything like that). What you say?

 

[Ura]

Gizmo said:

I prolly should have said this a while ago, but I wanted to reread it myself in the light of current events. If you can, get a hold of this novel - Cobweb, by Stephen Bury (a pen name for acclaimed SF novelist Neal Stephenson). This, more like his superb novel, Cryptonomicon than the futuristic The Diamond Age, is an exhaustively-researched and plausible contemporary story, what is key is the topic of the story...

I'll also through the song Gods of War from the album Hysteria by Def Leppard on the pile with the book Gizmo mentioned, most especially the last minute of it when they are "quoting" a US official/President. Very eerie.
I can send it in mp3 form to people over ICQ if they can get ahold of me and really want to hear it.

Duke said:

Ura. I'm not ignoring, just not having time.

No problem, at your leisure. Time while infinate is certainly messured in its flow.

Anyway, one thing that jumped right at me, Ura saying that bin Ladin's request are, well, pointless. They're not. Look what happened. If he was behind the whole deal, than he's one of the greatest masterminds that ever lived, simply for being able to completely pentrate and take-down THE most powerful country on Earth. I don't think his requests are pointless; more even, I don't think at all that his threats should be ignored at all. He's a very serious man, and every word he speaks should be taken to full consideration.

Perhaps I should have phrased what I said differently. Pointless is the wrong word as there is always a reason for such a desire just as Japanese villagers in Osaka have protests against the US base there, not so much because its the US but because of the ecological damage caused by the base and the less then honorable actions of some of the marines based there. What I should said is that while his want is not pointless, its not for him to be making. Since he isn't a government official or member of the royal family in Saudi Arabia he isn't in a position to make that demand of the US official. It doesn't matter how much money or backing in arms he has with it, if the government doesn't make the request then its not going to be acknowledged. If he's that upset he should have been working to overthrow the Saudi government and then asked the US to leave, at which time they'd basically be required to and they would.
I can't agree with your assesment that he's (Bin Laden) a great mastermind either. I'v written several scenarios for RPG's that were both for "good pc's" and "bad pc's" that were very realistic and that I spent months researching so that they would be that way. One of which was about a group of terrorists that rather then blow up skyscrapers take the white house hostage with the first family. The goal was to try and circumvent and defeat security measures while foiling emergency evacuation with as little death count as possible. A harsh scenario I admit, but it was one that got the players thinking in a creative and tactical sense rather then shooting everything in site.
The penetration part isn't really something that can be used as something Bin Laden's people had to work to do. North American borders are like sives, just have to say your a tourist and show them your visa. These days its alot tougher to just walk in because of all the screening thats going on, but before 9/11 just about anyone could get into the US with little trouble. And while they've certainly left an open wound, they haven't taken the country down yet.
I certainly agree that his threats should be listened to, not because he is who he is, but because he is of a group with strong hatred for the US and has the financial backing to makes his threats serious. I will also agree that he is of a very serious frame of mind. He has to be with what he is undertaking in a world that there are no second chances once you've lost face.

It's not terrorism at all people, it's a war that just started,

This isn't a war that just started, this is a war thats been going on for centuries and this is just the latest embodiment of it.

So what have the bombings done -- if bin Ladin can as much as record a TAPE in DAYLIGHT and send it!?

Afgahnastan is a BIG country with lots of places to hang out and watch the fireworks from. Him being able to make a tape in day light isn't that significant considering just how easy it is to hide there as long as you avoid the major population areas.

It will also tell me that, either the U.S. does not know how to plan an attack, or bin Ladin is one of the smartest people in history.

Well, if you want to get tactically technical, the US doesn't seem to know how to plan an attack. They've become far to dependant on electronic warfare and bombs and lost some of their strategic instincts. Thats why the gents in the British SAS get some good laughs at the expense of US special forces teams such as the Navy Seals and Delta Force. Because they're to dependant on technology and gadgets rather then raw human ability.

Spiderman said:

Gizmo: Again, I'd like to see some facts backing up your statement that every(?) cease-fire has been broken by a single man shooting or whatever. And I would also like to see some facts backing up

Lets just get this settled right here shall we.
Much thanks to the Guardian Unlimited for their wonderful archive of events between the Middle East and Israel. Happy absorbing Spidey, might take a while though.
The site gives a very lengthy and detailed timeline of articles and has more "proof" then I honestly have time to sit and read.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Index/0,3332,207873,00.html
It should also be noted that there are other sites that carry timeline "proof" even further back as far as 1995.
http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0495/9504118.htm
As well TIME Europe magazine on-line has documented timelines on the string of events.
http://www.time.com/time/europe/timetrails/israel/
Amongst the articles I did have time to read through it showed that neither side as a whole is really interested in the peace process as they are both responsible for breaking cease-fires on more then one occasion.

I'm thinking the US should stop bombing,

I would agree, but for different reasons then stirring up other muslims. Many "other" muslims have critisized the US for acting undecisive and not doing enough to just go in and do what they have to do.
Bombing is only good against stationary objects and large masses of troops and equipment. Now they're at the point where they should have traded the bombing for an orginized groud infiltration of large scale and lazed target air strikes rather then just straight bombing.

Either go in and get bin Laden or topple the Taliban, but not weak efforts to do both

I think at this point that both or those goals are one and the same.

Zadok001 said:

The declaration came from us.

Techinically it didn't. Around the time of the previous WTC bombing in '93 Bin Laden released a video where he declared war on the United States, the problem was that because he isn't a representative of a country no one really took him serious at the time.

Arhar said:

Heh, almost 100 replies and about 0 on topic

Why are they not on topic? Other they don't all deal solely with the attack on a Christian church?

TICM:
If you don't like it, don't read it, or whatever works best for you. The nature of debate is to TRY and express all views on the subject to bring greater understanding to the whole. While this certainly doesn't always succeed and can frequently break into flaming and childish fighting, it is at its center an attempt to share and discuss the situations and ideas that shadow the existence of our species. Quoting and counter-quoting is just a part of the way debate works and is supposed to be a way to either make people back up what they say with some kind of facts or third party proof or too filter out any deceitful and untrue statements.
I personally have nothing wrong with real debate as long as its civil because I enjoy hearing other peoples opinions whether I agree with them or not.

Gizmo said:

And Spiderman, if you cant be bothered paying enough attention to current events to notice when its a long gunman, or suicide bomber, that sparks the end of a ceasefire... then really you have no reason to be posting on the topic at all. Your robotic demands for documentary proof are growing tiresome when it is becoming obvious you wont ever accept any that is presented to you, because you dont trust those sources.

Proof has been given by sources I think most people will go with as they are a major UK publication, a major US/Euro publication, and a smaller US based publication.
Hopefully they can end the proof demand as there are piles of it in the three links I provided.

I AM more intelligent than the average Joe.

Well, this brings the interesting question of just how intelligent is the average joe, and while I'm going to refrain from the dozens of bad redneck jokes that come to mind I'd like to state that I consider myself an average joe and I also think that I'm fairly high on the intelligece scale. All those IQ tests I've had to swallow can't be all wrong.

 

[Multani]

Zadok:

That's hardly a proof, Multani. Its a statement of opinion that CNN has greater incentive to lie. That cannot be shown to be true. This is not proof.

I stated why above. It also would've helped if I had said, that the all the opinions offered were the same. A great majority of the material broadcast is in favor of the U.S. Opposing viewpoints simply aren't aired. This makes it propaganda.

Huh? Sounds pretty objective to me. They aren't discussing whether it's right or wrong - How can they be presenting subjectivism on a subject they aren't talking about? Talking about what methods of attack are more destructive IS objective - Attack A does more damage than attack B. Objective. If they aren't mentioning whether or not the US should be attacking, aren't they presenting the ultimate in objective viewpoints regarding that issue - No viewpoint at all?

Yes, the outer shell of what they are reporting is 'objective'. But, if we use my example, why are they ONLY talking about efficency of attack? I mean, the fact that they're suggesting a form of attack, rather then saying whether or not to attack, means they are promoting the opinion of retaliation. If you notice, they don't air any facts that might morally undermine the U.S. attack. That is why it's not objective.

TomB:

From everything I've seen it's been pretty much the whole rest of the world backing the US effort.

They do it because it's in their own interests to do so.

I'd include many of the residents of Afghanistan in that estimate.

People always cheer on a new government because they get tired of the old one. There are exceptions however. The fact that the Afghanistan people support the U.S., doesn't necessarily make what the U.S. is doing right.

I seem to remember it raining airplanes around here back on September 11th. I don't think we were bombing the Taliban back then, so I think you need to adjust your timeline a bit...

You're assuming the Taliban is behind this. Unless, you have some evidence that the Taliban is behind this, this is not a logical assumption.

Actually, see if you can follow this line of reasoning: We've managed to at least establish that the principles involved in the events of 9/11 are connected to bin Laden's organization, Al Qaida (sp). Since bin Laden, and Al Qaida, are currently among the leaders of the Taliban, and the Taliban consider themselves to be the current rulers of Afghanistan, it naturally follows that the current government of Afghanistan was involved with the events of 9/11.

Many of us here in the US saw the events of 9/11 as a declaration of war. I mean, 5000+ of our civilians were executed in a sneak attack, so how could it not be perceived as such? And, as such, it seems to me the US has exercised tremendous restraint by not blaming all of Afghanistan, and utterly destroying the whole damn country.

Again, you're assuming the Taliban is behind this. Also, a declaration of war isn't a declaration until after it's declared. If you can prove to me that the Taliban openly said to wage war on the U.S., before the U.S. attacked, I'll concede my point.
Also, what you're saying is like saying I represent China. I'm a citizen of China, but I don't represent it, just like Al Qaida is a seperated faction that supports the Taliban, but it doesn't speak for it. Also, Bin Laden supports the Taliban, but that doesn't mean he's their leader. He's actually just a really powerful figurehead.

Ura:

Well, the Taliban have had various terrorist groups as guests in their country for many years including Bin Laden, the US has tried for at least the last 5 to get him extradited which has been refused at each meeting. Thus the Taliban are aiding and supporting the terrorist groups and certainly Bin Laden which technically means that the Afgan government is involved and thus they struck first.

I'll give you the fact that in the greater scheme of things, they did hit first. But, the fact is, the U.S. are attacking Afghanistan under the guise of retaliating for 9/11. This is what makes the U.S. attack unjust. They haven't proven Afghanistan responsible.

What was the Lee Wen Ho case, I'm not familiar with it.

Wen Ho Lee, was a Chinese scientist at Los Alamos accused of 56 charges of espionage when all he and many of his other American collegues backed up their work on floppy disks. But, only Lee was singled out. He was imprisoned for quite awhile before the government finally dropped all but 1 minor charge. All the government did was apologize.

Ura: I appreciate your comments, and I will be sure to include them in any future analysis and opinions.

 

[TomB]

You are correct in your assumption that I do not have any proof the Taliban declared war on the US prior to the attack on 9/11. bin Laden did though, as Ura pointed out, after his first attempt to destroy the WTC back in '93, and since bin Laden and the Taliban have been close associates I feel they are together on this. The rest of the world seems to feel that way too, or maybe it's just that "self-interest" thing you described earlier...

Speaking of self-interest, you think the Afghan people are simply "tired" of their current government? They're what - bored with it, and are simply supporting US efforts because it's a more exciting way to live being bombed all the time? Or maybe it's the food packages we've been dropping on their civilians instead of bombs?

Hardly...

I would think those people would hate us even more than they already did, given that we're bombing their homeland and preparing to invade them. I know I sure wouldn't like it if some other country were doing that to us here, but then, I don't have to deal with the Taliban as my government here either.


DÛke:

TomB: "Many of us here in the US saw the events of 9/11 as a declaration of war. I mean, 5000+ of our civilians were executed in a sneak attack, so how could it not be perceived as such? And, as such, it seems to me the US has exercised tremendous restraint by not blaming all of Afghanistan, and utterly destroying the whole damn country."

Well, many more Arabians (much more than 5000+) died in some way or another directly or indirectly because of the United States. What Taliban did is restrainted themselves from blaming all of the United States, and instead, destroyed or damaged some of its most glorious accomplishments.

Actually, DÛke, we don't really care about those buildings. It's the 5000+ innocent lives that were lost that day that piss us off...

Let's be honest - the attack that was carried out against the US (and the whole rest of the world, really) on 9/11 was a failure. Sure it hurt us, and it made us real mad, and if we had reacted with the blind rage we all felt in the aftermath of the attacks we likely would have made the attacks successful in acheiving their ultimate goal, but since we managed to calm down a bit and make sure the rest of the world agreed with us before we went on the warpath I think they failed to do anything more than make bin Laden a name that we will remember forever.

Gizmo:

TICM: get lost then. I dont think I`ll miss you.

Personally, I couldn't care less who you'd miss, or not miss. But didn't you say you were leaving a little while back? Why are you still here?

 

[Gizmo]

Good point.
Bye.

 

[Spiderman]

Ura:I'm still unclear why you think bin Laden is not a great mastermind. He has eluded capture for around 10 years, he has a vast financial network to finance his group, he is able to convince other Muslims to fight for him relying on an extreme interpretation of the Koran (and I don't even know if he's considered a mullah), and he's able to prevent the tracing of attacks such as the African embassies, Cole warship, and presumably 9/11 back to him directly. Can you expound?

I would agree, but for different reasons then stirring up other muslims. Many "other" muslims have critisized the US for acting undecisive and not doing enough to just go in and do what they have to do.
Bombing is only good against stationary objects and large masses of troops and equipment. Now they're at the point where they should have traded the bombing for an orginized groud infiltration of large scale and lazed target air strikes rather then just straight bombing.

The stirring up Muslims was secondary; the way I see it, primarily it didn't achieve its goal of getting bin Laden. It has destroyed stationary targets like his training camps and whatnot, but as you say, those are pretty much gone now and the rest are apparently in civililian and cultural areas now.

I think at this point that both or those goals are one and the same

They don't have to be. Toppling the Taliban has MUCH more impact than getting bin Laden. There's the issue of post-Taliban government and who's going to lead it, for one. I know that the Taliban probably isn't going to sit by (and they didn't offer assistance in the beginning) to let the US hunt down bin Laden either, but I think there's a difference "holding off" the Taliban while a search is made as opposed to supporting the Northern Alliance directly.

Multani:

I stated why above. It also would've helped if I had said, that the all the opinions offered were the same. A great majority of the material broadcast is in favor of the U.S. Opposing viewpoints simply aren't aired. This makes it propaganda.

I haven't watched CNN so I don't know how true this is or not. But isn't the majority of Afghan/Muslim/Arab opinion going to Al-Jazeera?

I know I've seen opposing views in my newspapers.

They do it because it's in their own interests to do so.

Just curious, when do nations do things when it's NOT in their own interests?

I'll give you the fact that in the greater scheme of things, they did hit first. But, the fact is, the U.S. are attacking Afghanistan under the guise of retaliating for 9/11. This is what makes the U.S. attack unjust. They haven't proven Afghanistan responsible.

The US does not need to prove Afghanistan was responsible. They are attacking Afghanistan because it is harboring the ones who are responsible.

TomB:

Personally, I couldn't care less who you'd miss, or not miss. But didn't you say you were leaving a little while back?

Wasn't that due to Magic? Or was it politics?

 

[Spiderman]

Ura: Thanks for the links, I finally managed to read/skim them. The last was most interesting. However, as it appears Gizmo has pulled out, I guess the argument is moot (for now).

 

[DÛke]

...

TomB: "Actually, DÛke, we don't really care about those buildings. It's the 5000+ innocent lives that were lost that day that piss us off..."

Well, it's the millions of kids that die someway or another because of the U.S. that pisses ME off. Funny. I see you "pissed" off at the death of people in the U.S. and not carring just one bit about anyone else. If you do, than you certainly are not showing it, because everything you fight for is for the U.S.; I'm shocked you made a point that I agreed with. Probably just an accident on your side. I don't know if it's "human nature" to care for only those you know...but...wouldn't >>I<< get in trouble if I show no respect nor care for the people that died on 9/11? To you, I'll be a "trouble maker." Now that I look at it, I think you need to re-evaluate yourself completely from the beginning, because you're the kind of person that seems to side with the someone even if proven guilty by the rest of the world...and could you please stop with Gizmo. He didn't leave because >>I<< sent him a PM, and I'm sure some others did too. Nobody should leave because of the lack of understanding of other members...or by their complete ignorance and lack of maturity.

Sorry to the big figures here, Spiderman and Ura. I will not deeply discuss politics on this issue anymore. I do realize I made some harsh statements, but I take them all back now. People like TomB seem to just throw everything said before out the window, and comes up with wacky statements. How he managed to become a respected moderator is beyond me. If you want to be rude, please do it elsewhere...there's no room here.

One more thing, I know all the "Taliban" jokes in other threads are meant to be jokes, and I even laugh at them...but are you willing to laugh at jokes about the 9-11 incident, TomB? Or would I be flamed, and the thread would be closed?

Yup, just what I thought...

If I see one, just one, more joke about this issue, I will start a thread with my own jokes. They're all jokes, right?

(I wont really start my own thread, but...I just want to see what would happen should I attempt such a thing...because everyone seems to be so fine with Arhar's joking threads, even moi...)

 

[Spiderman]

Either I or Gizmo asked that same question when those jokes came up, because apparently Gizmo has some or knows where they are and arhar saw a couple from Europe.

I would say start it up in interests of fairness and that it would be interesting to see what others can come up with. After all, those potentially offended need not click on the thread to read it if it's titled properly.

 

[arhar]

Now, before everyone jumps on TomB's case for making Gizmo leave....

]Originally posted by Gizmo

TICM: get lost then. I dont think I`ll miss you

Everytime I try my hardest to not to think of Gizmo as an arrogant oink who considers himself the biggest shot, I fail miserably

On the subject of jokes: It's one thing to poke fun at inhuman monster, killer of thousands, terrrorist scum like Bin Laden (is it just me or everyone got too tied up in trying to keep the discussion intelligent to remember JUST WHO ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE?) and another thing to poke fun an innocent people who got killed on September 11. I would never ever poke fun at innocent Afghanistantians killed by American bombings (all five or six of them), I only make jokes about the terrorists.

 

[DÛke]

...

And, should I attempt a childish act as to joke about the incident, I wouldn't make fun of the people, I would make fun of...the Trade World Center and the Pentagon. After all, like TomB spoke for all, "we don't really care about those buildings. It's the 5000+ innocent lives that were lost that day that piss us off." So joking about the buildings would not bother anyone at all, I would assume, since up to this point, nobody at all have said anything against it. Besides, if you have been reading this thread, Arhar, you would know very clearly and instantly that this thread has evolved into a bigger issue: not just about this incident, but how it all arrived to it. It's not just about 9-11 any more. Not in this thread anyway. A joke about 5000+ dead Americans is nothing compared to the actual fact of tons and tons of deaths of other countries...

Further more, Gizmo's reply to TICM is nothing. In fact, as you may have noted, TICM *wanted* a reply for his post, and he got it. At first, he was "ignored." I did not ignore him, but I didn't understand what he was getting at. Besides, if he didn't really had an in put on the issue, or at least, he didn't like to share it, he shouldn't have contributed to the thread at all. It's like me posting in a thread to piss people off, and solely for that reason...in which case, I better be smart enough to expect flames.

One more thing,

Arhar:
Everytime I try my hardest to not to think of Gizmo as an arrogant oink who considers himself the biggest shot, I fail miserably...

Gizmo only seems like an "arrogant oink" to arrogant oinks. Even more, it is not his fault you view him as a "big shot." Like Istanbul once said, (not a direct quote) "I only seem so high to you because you're down there in the gutters (or was it trash?)..." And *if* Gizmo considers himself a "big shot," than good for him; why are you trying to correct that after so many faliure, and should I say needless, attempts?

 

[Spiderman]

I thought TICM wanted a reply to his first post, the one with the poem (which I didn't get either). The next one I think said he didn't expect or care to get any responses

Anyhoo, both Gizmo's brushoff of TICM and TomB' subsequent brushoff of Gizmo were BOTH abrupt and seemingly rude. And no, in this case it doesn't "take one to know one". Anyone with manners or etiquette can recognize it.

 

[arhar]

Originally posted by DÛke
...

And, should I attempt a childish act as to joke about the incident, I wouldn't make fun of the people, I would make fun of...the Trade World Center and the Pentagon. After all, like TomB spoke for all, "we don't really care about those buildings. It's the 5000+ innocent lives that were lost that day that piss us off." So joking about the buildings would not bother anyone at all, I would assume, since up to this point, nobody at all have said anything against it. Besides, if you have been reading this thread, Arhar, you would know very clearly and instantly that this thread has evolved into a bigger issue: not just about this incident, but how it all arrived to it. It's not just about 9-11 any more. Not in this thread anyway. A joke about 5000+ dead Americans is nothing compared to the actual fact of tons and tons of deaths of other countries...

So what's your point? Yes, you can make jokes about physical buildings if all you're trying to do is make fun of what happened on Sep 11 in non-offensive manner.

Further more, Gizmo's reply to TICM is nothing. In fact, as you may have noted, TICM *wanted* a reply for his post, and he got it. At first, he was "ignored." I did not ignore him, but I didn't understand what he was getting at. Besides, if he didn't really had an in put on the issue, or at least, he didn't like to share it, he shouldn't have contributed to the thread at all. It's like me posting in a thread to piss people off, and solely for that reason...in which case, I better be smart enough to expect flames.

Admittedly, I didn't read this whole thread, but then again, I don't take all this arguing as seriously as some other people do (anymore). So all I caught was TICM posting a poem or something, then posting that he's upsed that he didn't get any responses, and Gizmo replying in that manner.

One more thing, Gizmo only seems like an "arrogant oink" to arrogant oinks. Even more, it is not his fault you view him as a "big shot." Like Istanbul once said, (not a direct quote) "I only seem so high to you because you're down there in the gutters (or was it trash?)..." And *if* Gizmo considers himself a "big shot," than good for him; why are you trying to correct that after so many faliure, and should I say needless, attempts?

Err, I don't think so. It's all about common courtesy, or lack of, and constantly trying to make oneself look better in every post. Frankly, I could care less what happens here, or everywhere else on the internet, but I know most definitely it doesn't "take one to know one." It doesn't matter who considers him/her self who, it's about showing respect to people.

Sidenote: You can't say prick in here? Is that a bad word? Hmmm.... So if I say "I pricked my finger" (not the other way ) it would be cursing?

 

[Spiderman]

I would prefer it not to be used in the context you guys were using it in.

 

[Ura]

Multani said:

They haven't proven Afghanistan responsible.

True and fair enough, they're only considering them as I am, an accessory to the main culprits of the attack. So while they aren't directly involved, they are distantly conected which in essence makes both our points valid.

Wen Ho Lee, was a Chinese scientist at Los Alamos accused of 56 charges of espionage when all he and many of his other American collegues backed up their work on floppy disks. But, only Lee was singled out. He was imprisoned for quite awhile before the government finally dropped all but 1 minor charge. All the government did was apologize.

Ahh ok. I remember hearing about this. Sounds like the government wanted to make a scapegoat out of him to the public and when they failed to be able to do so dropped it. The fact he was imprisoned for an extended period is certainly unfair, though I think its made so because he was singled out and the other scientists ignored. If all the scientists involved had been charged equally then I would have nothing wrong with them being jailed because they would imaginably be considered "high" flight risks. But because they chose to be discriminatory to one person, most likely because he is Chinese then I can't agree with their actions entirely. But at least they admited they were wrong and appologized, thats alot farther then they would have gone 20 years ago. What was the remaining minor charge left over btw?

Spiderman said:

Ura:I'm still unclear why you think bin Laden is not a great mastermind. He has eluded capture for around 10 years, he has a vast financial network to finance his group, he is able to convince other Muslims to fight for him relying on an extreme interpretation of the Koran (and I don't even know if he's considered a mullah), and he's able to prevent the tracing of attacks such as the African embassies, Cole warship, and presumably 9/11 back to him directly. Can you expound?

Well, lets look at it like this.
He has eluded capture for 10 years. This isn't that large a feat really, look at how many wanted criminals are at large in the mainland US that have been on the run for many more then 10 years even though the FBI and other law enforcement forces have been hunting them for so long. I've seen news stories where a 60+ year old man turns himself in cause he's been running since he was in his 20's and just got tired of it. On top of this Bin Laden hides out and makes his home in countries where the government and police forces are sympathetic to supportive of him and many people think of him as a folk hero. These people and officials aren't going to be to willing to help out the US in catching him so it just compounds the difficulty in getting him. Not because he is smart but because the facts and environs are so heavily stacked against the authorties hunting him.
As for him having a vast financial network. He got started by leaching off his families fortune and was a playboy for years until he became the man he is today. Now his network is supplied from sympathizers, opium sales, and black market deals. This is just can all be said in parts for the likes of Columbian drug lords, the IRA, and other illegal operations. They aren't masterminds because of it, so I don't consider him one either.
Getting other muslims to fight for him is rather easy. Other men before him have done it as well. If you look back to my first post about why arabs feel the way they do about the west and the US its not hard to understand. He is simply giving them an opportunity to do what they want and unleash their anger through religious fanaticism and the hopes of being martyred. He doesn't have to be super intelligent just charismatic, which he is. He says what the people want to hear and so the people will follow him just as they have men before him and will men after him. For a comparison, look at Adolf Hitler, he had a very high level of charisma, but when it came to military matters and tactics he was an idiot, yet no one has come closer in taking over the world then him. Osama is just the current figure head who is leading the masses, not because he is special, but because he is saying what men want to hear.
As for preventing the tracing of terrorist attacks, well he didn't do that very well, otherwise we wouldn't know it was him. But for discussions sake, thats how terrorist groups works. When divided into cells those cells have no knowledge of each other and often only have a very vauge idea of those above them. Each cells members stay fairly apart until they're activated and are putting a plan into action. By having your agents with no knowledge of each other and only the vaugest idea of their supperiors it makes it very easy to prevent tracing. This is a technique that even US and British special forces teams use so in the case they are captured their allies can't have their locations and covers blown. Thats one of the great things about fanatical soldiers, they don't ask why, they just do as their told. Communication between each cell is often done by a common yet trusted runner who has no knowledge of the orginization at all and is just supposed to take a package or piece of information from point A to point B where its picked up. No names are given alot of the time and the runner is often just as much a fanatic as the soldiers and cell members so they do it for free. This kind of operation has been at the base of terrorist groups since the 70's. Its nothing Bin Laden did, he's basically just taking someone elses work and putting it to use for himself just as other groups have.
Simply put, if I had lots of money and some fanatics I could do everything he has done just as easily. Its just a matter of financial and human resources.

The stirring up Muslims was secondary; the way I see it, primarily it didn't achieve its goal of getting bin Laden. It has destroyed stationary targets like his training camps and whatnot, but as you say, those are pretty much gone now and the rest are apparently in civililian and cultural areas now.

Then we are saying the same thing and in agreement.

They don't have to be. Toppling the Taliban has MUCH more impact than getting bin Laden. There's the issue of post-Taliban government and who's going to lead it, for one. I know that the Taliban probably isn't going to sit by (and they didn't offer assistance in the beginning) to let the US hunt down bin Laden either, but I think there's a difference "holding off" the Taliban while a search is made as opposed to supporting the Northern Alliance directly.

While this is true I don't believe that the US government is seeing it that way now and they have combined the two seperate goals into one.

For Spiderman and Multani:

I haven't watched CNN so I don't know how true this is or not. But isn't the majority of Afghan/Muslim/Arab opinion going to Al-Jazeera?

Just to clarify things. CNN has been featuring both sides of the story. The Taliban has been giving their reporters tours of attack sites and letting them talk to their soldiers. CNN today in fact just had a segment on how high Taliban morale is. So I would say that at this point CNN is technically broadcasting more propaganda, but its doing so for both sides rather then the one sidedness that other orginizations are.

Spiderman said:

Wasn't that due to Magic? Or was it politics?

It was politics...

Duke said:

One more thing, I know all the "Taliban" jokes in other threads are meant to be jokes, and I even laugh at them...but are you willing to laugh at jokes about the 9-11 incident, TomB? Or would I be flamed, and the thread would be closed?

This is true enough, though humor is often held in what the majority finds funny. So whether jokes about the incident would be funny or not is up to each individual, around here I would think the majority wouldn't find them funny.
In my own defense though, the one I posted in a seperate thread was meant to make fun of telemarketers more then the Taliban. Telemarketers drive me nuts.

Further more, Gizmo's reply to TICM is nothing.

I would disagree, but its all a matter of opinion rather then right or wrong.

Spiderman said:

Anyhoo, both Gizmo's brushoff of TICM and TomB' subsequent brushoff of Gizmo were BOTH abrupt and seemingly rude. And no, in this case it doesn't "take one to know one". Anyone with manners or etiquette can recognize it.

Agreed

Arhar said:

Sidenote: You can't say prick in here? Is that a bad word? Hmmm.... So if I say "I pricked my finger" (not the other way ) it would be cursing?

See this thread about it.
http://128.241.205.213/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8159&perpage=15&pagenumber=1
Basically each mod has a barnyard animal sound and each of them edit above words at their discretion. I believe its Spidey who has OINK and since he is often the first one here each day he does most of the edits.