Hooray - Al Quaida stopped once again

[skadistic]

Good news - we've been playing our weak hand since January 2001.

So was Clinton a strong hand or a weak one?

 

[drachasor]

So was Clinton a strong hand or a weak one?

Against terrorism? A strong hand, he saw terrorism as one of the biggest dangers we had to face. The Clinton Administration also new something big was coming, but all of their warnings to Bush and Co. were ignored.

 

[Provolution]

The main point is, the Arab World only got 50 years to geopolitically make their mark, as by then, they run out of oil, and the relative focus shifts north yet again.

 

[BasketCase]

Actually, when the president is getting reports and warnings from various departments, it is his job to get people to put it all together.

Actually, I already explained very clearly that they cannot do this because of the way the U.S. government is put together.

Government departments are not allowed to automatically share everything in their files. For a good reason. If you're suspected of selling drugs, the search warrant only allows the police to search your house for drugs. Nothing else. If they happen to find C-4 in your domicile, depending on the district, they can take various actions (sometimes) but usually they have to get a second warrant in order to accuse you of terrorist activity.

If you want all the various agencies in the U.S. government to be able to share everything they know with each other, it is necessary to abrogate much in the U.S. Constitution and U.S. law about proper search and siezure.

Are you willing to do that? Probably not.


Oh, and by the way--the following was real bad form:

Actually, it's for you.

I already did the wake-up call joke. Trying to bounce a zinger back at the guy who fired it merely entitles the other guy to sneer sarcastically "wow, gee, man, NICE comeback!"

Make up your own zingers.

 

[drachasor]

Actually, I already explained very clearly that they cannot do this because of the way the U.S. government is put together.

You missed the point completely, but I guess that's because you might be too busy thinking you are being more clever than me.

The President had all of this information at his fingertips. All the departments report to the President, and all of them were telling President Bush that something was going on. He had the necessary resources and information to put it all together. He didn't. He didn't have any meetings to try to figure out what was going on, and was dismissive about any information presented to him.

As a side note, I'd add that none of the Patriot Act provisions have so far been used to catch any terrorist. They haven't been necessary in the past either. While one or two make sense (roaming wiretaps with a warrant, for instance), most of them are needless and just mindless groping for power by the current administration. I guess you just like things sounding good rather than being good though.

-Drachasor

 

[drachasor]

For a good reason. If you're suspected of selling drugs, the search warrant only allows the police to search your house for drugs. Nothing else. If they happen to find C-4 in your domicile, depending on the district, they can take various actions (sometimes) but usually they have to get a second warrant in order to accuse you of terrorist activity.

Oh, you are quite wrong here. If the police discover contraband or evidence of another crime while using a search warrant, they are allowed to seize the related items. Just where are you getting this absurd information?

 

[Winner]

This is great news.

A couple of comments though: it's not yet confirmed Al-Quaeda was behind this. The terrorists were part of a cell with links to Al-Quaeda, there's a nuance.

But this is a bit scarier IMO:

Two of the men were German nationals who had converted to Islam, while the third was a Turkish man.

What better proof do you need to accept the idea, that Islam as a religion promotes violence?

 

[Verbose]

Converts have a distinct tendency for crazy zealotery, regardless of religion. That bit is ordinary human psychology, nothing to do specifically with Islam.

Here the particular choice of expression of radicalism has to do with the current fad of nasty politicised Islam. It may be a dangerous form, but it still doesn't equate the representative form.

 

[Winner]

Converts have a distinct tendency for crazy zealotery, regardless of religion. That bit is ordinary human psychology, nothing to do specifically with Islam.

Here the particular choice of expression of radicalism has to do with the current fad of nasty politicised Islam. It may be a dangerous form, but it still doesn't equate the representative form.

And what is the representative form? Given the present state of the Middle East, I think violence can be linked with Islam pretty easily.

 

[Verbose]

Here's somewhere that the al-Q, succeeded:

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Sep06/0,4670,AlgeriaAttack,00.html
(Yeah, it's Fox, just for the hell of it.)

As you will notice it's in a Muslim Arab country, the people killed all Muslim Arabs. I'd say they are rather representative.

Western myopia on the (limited) threat to ourselves tends to obscure where the real decisions over wither radical Islamism will be made. And who the people are who are reallly in the line of fire.

 

[JollyRoger]

What better proof do you need to accept the idea, that Islam as a religion promotes violence?

I know of several Texas Christian women that brutally murdered their children. What better proof do I need that Christianity as a religion promotes violence?

 

[Winner]

I know of several Texas Christian women that brutally murdered their children. What better proof do I need that Christianity as a religion promotes violence?

Congratulations, you win the "First to come up with a stupid analogy with another religion" award.

 

[Jawz II]

Hooray for boobies!

And here Al qaeda is blowing up armored Us vehicles with armor piercing hand grenades:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ada_1189106198

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RKG-3_anti-tank_grenade

 

[Winner]

Here's somewhere that the al-Q, succeeded:

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2007Sep06/0,4670,AlgeriaAttack,00.html
(Yeah, it's Fox, just for the hell of it.)

As you will notice it's in a Muslim Arab country, the people killed all Muslim Arabs. I'd say they are rather representative.

Western myopia on the (limited) threat to ourselves tends to obscure where the real decisions over wither radical Islamism will be made. And who the people are who are reallly in the line of fire.

That's true, perhaps, but it's not what I asked for. How we determine what's the "real" Islam?

I think we must analyze a) the roots of the religion b) the real preactice of the religion.

Both look very violent. The recent form of Islamic violence (jihadist terrorism) is just a continuation of its violent tradition which started with Muhammad's conquest of Mecca.

 

[drachasor]

Congratulations, you win the "First to come up with a stupid analogy with another religion" award.

Oh, does he need to find recent converts to Christianity who have done horrible things? That's not very hard either.

Islam isn't a violent religion per se, though current it is a lot like pre-enlightenment Christianity. It needs a bit of a revolution to get fully modernized (as a whole), but there are plenty of modern-thinking Muslims. In any case, demonizing a whole religion because of the violent acts of a few is poor form.

 

[drachasor]

That's true, perhaps, but it's not what I asked for. How we determine what's the "real" Islam?

I think we must analyze a) the roots of the religion b) the real preactice of the religion.

Both look very violent. The recent form of Islamic violence (jihadist terrorism) is just a continuation of its violent tradition which started with Muhammad's conquest of Mecca.

Judaism had a pretty violent beginning, and plenty of violent episodes (including a lot of massacres of women and children of other faiths, according to the Bible). It's not a violent religion today, however.

 

[Ball Lightning]

Once again some shed of good news in the war against terroism.

 

[Winner]

Oh, does he need to find recent converts to Christianity who have done horrible things? That's not very hard either.

He can find dozens of them, it wouldn't make this analogy valid. As I said, all you need is a brief look at the present state of the Middle East and you'll realize, that violence isn't a deviation from Islam, it's its integral component.

Islam isn't a violent religion per se, though current it is a lot like pre-enlightenment Christianity.

The main difference is that Christianity is not violent in it's roots, while Islam is.

It needs a bit of a revolution to get fully modernized (as a whole), but there are plenty of modern-thinking Muslims. In any case, demonizing a whole religion because of the violent acts of a few is poor form.

A bit?

You win the "greatest eumphemism award", congrats. Islam would have to profoundly reform it's very basis, which is not going to happen anytime soon. Islam in its pure form is aggressive, intolerant and violent religion. Modern-thinking Muslims, as you call them, are those few who understand that and have given up the tenets of their faith which are incompatible with the modern world. Unfortunately for us, it's them who are the minority, the majority sticks to the traditional form.

 

[Winner]

Judaism had a pretty violent beginning, and plenty of violent episodes (including a lot of massacres of women and children of other faiths, according to the Bible). It's not a violent religion today, however.

Yes, ask yourself why. Jews were able to reform themselves, while Muslims don't want to do the same. That's why Israel is a modern, democratic and prosperous country, while its Islamic neighbours are backwards, undemocratic and poor.

 

[Jawz II]

The holocaust was perpetrated by christians. So was the nuclear bombing of japan. So was the inquistion.

The genocide of american indians. The genocide of aboriginies. The genocide of africans.

What have the muslims done that come even close to one of these criminal acts? Yeah no one can "come up with a stupid analogy" like you can, you win there, "winner".