Ok Les, what do you think are the root causes the UK suffered a terrorist attack last week?

 

Geopolitics.

 

AS AN EDUCATED MAN FROM A MIXED RACE FAMILY
i am so sick of us being the teat to which any damn race colour or creed suckles
we are a joke in world terms we give these racist *******s shelter and allow them to preach hatred and bile
kick them out if they continue to do so
america does
why shouldnt we?
no other country acts this way
can you imagine the consequences if we went to iraq and defiled the koran and held meetings in public encouraging the bombing and attack on their soil of their nationals
i repeat we are a joke


big shouts out to
kev and tracy
mork and mindy
terry and june
homer and marge (nice hair)
yin and yang and everyone keeping it real and who knows me

 

Please expand...

 

kany im intrigued
just what are you saying?
they didnt do it?
they are alive
what what what
answer by email or pm or whatever im intrigued you raise some good points

 

Without taking away the seriousness of your post, from the Iraqi's point of view us Brits have illegally invaded their country and killed 1000's of their innocent people. We have humiliated their people and published pictures all over the world. This is not a one sided story.

 

Expand... I'm sure you know what geopolitics is.

I don't have any clear answers, as I think what is fed to us, "the public" is only half a story, if that. I don't do conspiracy theories, but a lot of "facts" just don't seem to make sense.

We have a boogey man, dear old Osama, and every man who kicks his dog can claim it was an Al-Quaida attack. Sometimes it's so simplistic it sounds like "El-Kiddo".

You don't have to be "anti-Western" to see that the War on Terror did not make this a safer world, au contraire.

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and everyone with half a brain knew that and understood that. Focussing on Iraq made it clear that there are other issues at stake, and it's safe to say that we probably created more terrorism instead of diminishing it. But do we know if the London terrorists acted because of Iraq ? No, we don't.

I don't have a clear answer for you, but I do assume it has to do with both political influence and resources (like oil, but not only oil).

In perspective, there are still much less victims of terrorism in the last year compared to the 80ties for example. What seems to horrify people most is that it is done by suicicide bombers.

The numbers of Iraqi's killed are estimated to be 39.000 since the beginning of the war. For or against that war, I believe the security of the population is the responsability of the occupying forces. It would make more sense to send another 200.000 troops to really stabilize the country, than it does to just hang on and watch people blowing each other up day after day.

For many ("non-Western") people Blair is a war criminal. Those are just words, I know, and they may sound insulting, but it is a fact: he helped attack a sovereign country under false pretenses, without any UN backing, and with fierce protests of his own population. But again, were the London attacks linked to Iraq ? We simply don't know.

How the hell blowing up 50 peeps changes anything except for more hatred, is beyond my brainpower BTW.

Is it "because of Islam" ? Bollox.


ABU DHABI, 16 July 2005 — A prominent UAE scholar denounced yesterday as infidels Muslims who carry out attacks against innocent civilians around the world, including the perpetrators of the London blasts.

“Do these people not see the results of their actions? They have turned people against us ... and made them link the name of Islam with terrorism,” Sheikh Hamdan Musallam Al-Mazruhi said in his Friday sermon.

“Therefore we should say it out loud that whoever kills innocent people ... is not a Muslim and Islam is innocent of him ... We are astonished at those people who justify these acts and see them as jihad in the name of God and declare themselves an authority for Muslims,” he said. “Those who do that are infidels,” he said.

The scholar said “Islam is a religion of mercy and peace.” “How does it help Islam, when the blood of civilians is shed around the world, like in Iraq, Afghanistan, New York, Madrid, Bali, Casablanca, Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and lately in London at the hands of those killers and criminals ... who are falsely linked to Islam,” he said.

“How does it help Islam when a Muslim man representing his country’s embassy is executed like what happened to Egypt’s ambassador in Iraq,” he said. “How does it help Islam, when journalists, workers, truck drivers and medics are kidnapped and then shown in the media while being slaughtered like sheep,” he said.


Makes perfect sense to me.

 

Redfive, thank you for actually attempting to answer the question, unlike others who have no idea whatsoever and continue to dodge the question.

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I would also take one step back and ask where 'El-Kiddo' came from? Why do they exist? And was Osama a child of the West? Are we being bitten by the ones we fed?

I would also question whether there really are less victims of terrorism now than in the 80's. Where did you get this statistic from? Are you talking about terrorism in general terms or terrorism commited in the name of Islam against the West?

Blowing 50 people was never meant to do anything other than get and eye for an eye.

I agree the West must sort out the mess they have made of Iraq and accept the fact that Iraq is a fertile breeding ground for the terrorist of tomorrow. Send more troops in? Maybe. But that's going to get increasingly difficult: only this morning a further 3 UK soldiers died in Iraq.

Everyone knows what effect an oil crisis can have on the global economy, and non better that the US who planned to invade Saudi Arabia in the 70's (confirmed by a declassified US Government document last year). The motivations to invade have always been there. Couple this with the double-standards shown for Israel and you have a frame of the picture of the mess we are in.

 

im a scot and im entitled to the life i worked for not given to me by anyone except from God and my own hard work as u lot enjoy your scoobs im entitled to my evo not 500 bhp but 800 bhp

i dont hate the west, quote me where i said that i am western i hate the westerns foreign policy and the white bigot scum as my definition of white says and inciters and unjust law a different one for the darkies and an awesome law for white countries etc


big joe if im a terrorist as u suggest u must be a white middle class paedo, rapist and a **** scumbag

if its ok for u to call me with the western terrorists its ok for me to call u a paedo, rapist and a **** scumbag

is that fair enuff

 

c;unt head, im enjoying freedom as a brit as u white brits r enjoying it all coz of my own hard work

so what is the problem, it means if im a darkie scot im not entitled to the freedom provided by my own fecking country scotland

 

thanks bros well put

 

Well, it seems safe to say that the West "created" Osama during the USSR/Afghan war, and dumped him later on.

In general. I got my stats from this book (and a few other articles):


Al-Qaeda. The Myth.

Executive Summary

Why do they hate us? People all over the US asked that question right after the 9/11 attacks. But instead of looking for an answer, we engaged in a global war on terrorism against an enemy, about whom we know next to nothing. Thus the war on terrorism is doomed to fail.

Terrorism is of all ages. So why do we experience this angst, this deep-seated fear of a hydraheaded monster of mythological dimensions, constantly changing and adapting, always catching its opponents off guard ? Today's obsession with terrorism and security comes and goes, in waves. It was there when the anarchist terrorists of the late nineteenth century made havoc. It was there when the fascist terrorists of the 1930s spread death and destruction. And it is here now. Each time, myth and reality become blurred. Underestimating terrorism is dangerous. But exaggerating the threat is just as dangerous – so is groupthink.

Nothing should or could justify the terrorist attacks of 11 September. But that does not absolve us from the obligation to try to explain them, in order to prevent more of the same.

Do we have today's monster's name right? Is al-Qaeda our invisible enemy? In his book ‘Al-Qaeda – The Myth', Rik Coolsaet argues that al-Qaeda has become a myth. Just like in the 19th century, when a Terrorist International only existed in the public's mind, today's al-Qaeda is like a broken thermometer whose mercury shattered into a multitude of small blobs, all highly toxic, but unrelated to one another. Al-Qaeda no longer exists as the global disciplined and centralized terrorist organization it once was. It has turned into a grassroots phenomenon. It is a unifying flag, a loosely connected body of home-grown terror groups and even freelance jihadists, each going their own way without central command, unaffiliated with any group. As happened in the past.

But why now ? And where do these fanatics recruit ? Here, history creeps in. Today's international terrorism is not born out of religion, nor out of poverty. As was so often the case in the past, terrorism is bred by marginalization . Terrorism is a symptom of a society gone awry. When a world changes too rapidly in too many dimensions at once, it makes – rightly or wrongly – large groups of people, nations or countries feel excluded. And it is precisely this which constitutes the breeding ground for small extremist splinter groups searching for a way to justify their acts of terror. As self-appointed vanguards they are thus seeking to present themselves as champions of justice.

The anarchist terrorists of the 19 th century found a breeding ground among the marginalized working classes. The fascists of the 1930s appealed to the nationalists seeking independence, but also to the scores of people who were living in a time of great personal uncertainty, due to the Great Depression. Today's jihadic extremists hope to conquer the hearts and the minds of the numerous Muslims who are experiencing a persistent climate of humiliation and oppression in large parts of the Muslim world.

Today's Muslim is like the 19 th -century worker – regarded with the same fear, mixed with the same contempt. Today's America is to the islamist terrorist what the bourgeois state was to its 19 th -century anarchist precursor, a symbol of arrogance and power. Osama bin Laden is the 21 st century's Ravachol – the anarchists' hero, a lightning rod for the police, but to his followers the symbol of ‘the breath of hatred and resistance' of the 19 th -century working classes. The jihadists are the successors of the 19 th -century anarchists: the vanguard whose attacks are supposed to kindle the spark among the masses. Today's Saudi-Arabia is the anarchists' Italy of the 19 th century. 11 September was the wake-up call for the international community, comparable to the murder of the French President Sadi Carnot in 1894 and the assassination of King Alexander of Yugoslavia and Louis Barthou, the French Foreign Minister, in Marseilles in 1934. But each time, the terrorist's way proved to be a dead-end .

To win the war on terrorism, two goals must be pursued at the same time: a common struggle against the terrorists and a political effort that focuses on the discontent and feelings of exclusion among a vast and populous section of the world. A hundred years ago such a remedy was found against a similar wave of international terrorism. The organized labour movement did offer a better solution than the terrorist bombing campaigns in giving workers a sense of self-esteem and identity and with this their own full position in society. There, terrorism withered away. But where no such perspective was offered, terrorism did keep on simmering – until one terrorist assassination too many precipitated the world into the First World War.

So, before getting into a collective panic and starting to regard every Muslim quietly reading his Koran in the tube as a potential terrorist, we would be wise to consider the Three Rules of Thumb of Terrorism .

First rule of thumb. All through history terrorist groups have always been marginal splinter groups. Today is no different.

Second rule of thumb. In the past terrorists never achieved the results they hoped for. On the contrary. History teaches us that the effect of terrorism is generally the reverse of what the terrorists aim at.

Third rule of thumb. In the event of terrorist attacks we always tend to overreact . It's only human, but we do have to be aware of this. We need to confront terror with our minds as well as with our hearts.



About the author & the book

The book grew out of the conference ‘Why 9/11? Root Causes of International Terrorism', organized by the Royal Institute for International Relations in Brussels in November 2003. The original Dutch edition was published in March 2004 (Van Halewyck Editions, Leuven , Belgium ) and was listed for several weeks in the Books Top 10 charts of Belgium 's leading chain of bookstores as well as in that of the major news magazines. A French translation was published in April 2004 (Editions Mols, Bièrges , Belgium ) and was introduced by the former Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Louis Michel, and by the French scholar Olivier Roy.

The new English edition has been thoroughly revised and updated , so as to take into account the major terrorist events in 2004, from the Madrid, Riyadh, Jakarta and Beslan attacks until the assassination of the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh in November 2004, as well as the ensuing national and international developments in counterterrorism cooperation.

Rik Coolsaet is Director of the Security & Global Governance Department at the Royal Institute for International Relations ( Brussels ) and Professor of International Relations at Ghent University ( Belgium ). He held several high-ranking government positions, such as deputy chief of the Cabinet of the Belgian Minister of Defence (1988-1992) and deputy chief of the Cabinet of the Minister of Foreign Affairs (1992-1995). He has written and commented extensively on international relations and foreign policy.

 

But Moses. You do hate the West. OK it's their foreign policies and 'white bigot scum'. But this western country with it's mix of evry type of person and and those foreign policies, 'unjust laws' ang Bigots has allowed you the ability to have those luxuries (Thankfully, God has nothing to do with it as no religious doctrine powers what this country does).. But just as you are entitled to your say, so these people have a right to their say.. That's what this Western country gives you.. freedom of speech.. Enjoy it whilst you can because the way things are going, we're not going to keep it this way for long..

 

Don't you see? You're also benefiting from the people and policies you hate!

Hypocrisy is best peddled from a comfortable position.

 

It is amusing to watch the unseemly behaviour of all the politically correct ****-suckers on here as they desperately try to engraciate themselves with 'moses'.

It's a great, first hand example of how the weak minded can so easily be manipulated by the extremist Immans.

 

Talking of weak minded. There is nothing, absolutely nothing that will change his views.. I've never once seen any post that could be taken as a slight change of view or opinion.

His mind is completely closed and unable to take in any other view.. whether it be this thread or religion..

Remind you of anyone?

PS.. And no, sticking to a single point regardless of the logic or reason rained against it is not strong minded.. That is a weak and closed mind.

 

Why pick on Moses? I don't agree with a lot of the stuff he goes on about but he does change his mind often, probably too often!. He's also always been one to apologise or to admit that he says things sometimes without too much thought or in anger, which is a lot more than many on this forum and on this thread. Plus he also has the ***** to post under his own nick, unlike some on here (and I'm not referring to you btw).

 

I'm not picking on Moses at all. He and I have had some good debates.. and we've agreed to disagree on each occassion..

I respect his right to say what he wants, but I feel he is too closed minded. I've never seen him change his mind, so can only go on that.. I apologise if he has done, but I'd temeper that with, I'd need to see what he recinded on!

I am happy to post under my name. I may disagree strongly, but I've never disrespected anyone.. Least of all Moses.

 

As a true atheist, I would probably enjoy a meet with moses, and, erm, not enjoy an encounter with someone like you at all.

I would disagree with him on about 100.000 points I think, but it would work. With bigots like yourself, it would never work.

Funny that

"****-sucker". Just know that I would never do that to you.

 

I didn't like him *at all* when he first started posting on here. Took some time. I still think "oh FFS, shut up you khant" when he goes ballistic, but I do honestly think he is a bit less (like eons) of a hypocrite than many who now seem to "occupy" Scoobynet.

I actually admire his energy to stand up to all the **** on here.

 

Thanks for the insight & kudos to those strong enough to look into the causes of terrorism: they only way to start preventing terrorism.

Do you have any more details on the "...conference ‘Why 9/11? Root Causes of International Terrorism', organized by the Royal Institute for International Relations in Brussels in November 2003"

I would be interested to read what what they deemed the root causes of terrorism were.

 

im more opened minded than u and also what luxuries, luxuries of my own money and hardwork, u didnt give it to me neither did the government

so what the **** u on about

if u get rights why shouldnt the coloured, more than muslims non muslims including whites critisize the policy of the west, maybe u dont check majority uk people were against the war, do we ship them somewhere too

thanks gsm for your words, bros i dont change often or change at all , its different views to different people, good people i reply to them with luv and care, scumbag bigots who r narrowminded i answer them back with a stick

their the real narrowminded folk and call us the closed minded ones

more christians and white people critisize this countries policy but when we do it, they critizise us and tell us to go elsewhere and call us hypocrites when we aint

when we worked harder than them for everything we have

before any asians came here these people
opened and closed their shops early

5 days a week or even 3 and a half days a week

it was the paki's and asians that were open till 10 pm or 12 seven days a week

bus drivers, taxi drivers, we took the jobs they didnt want, govan shipyards, hire the paki's if they loose a leg or an arm its cool we employ them illegaly

we fecking built this country nhs and the lot

and also bros our queen has our precious kohi noor belonging to india on her crown

see

 

redfive your my bros my friend, u will be welcome at all times in my home mate and curries and all, God bless u bros and your family

doesnt matter what these ******* say, it actually makes me happy,they make me more than what i am it feels good to be a monster to them and burn their asses in retaliation gives me pure joy i swear

thanks again for everything

 

Shalom Moses, good to read you.

If we're commenting on Moses, then he definitely dives in without considered thought, but he's passionate. His heart's in the right place, and I'd have no worries living in a country full of Moses's, but I can't say the same about some of the other posters here.

 

You really are an offensive piece of sh.it!

Anyone of you that defends Moses with this statement is really sh.itting on all your ancestors. Many of us have got relatives that fought in WW2 to save this country from becoming part of a totally white Third Reich, then in the post war years let immigrants in from their sh.ithole countries and gave them the chance to contribute and build better lives.

 

fraid not - that little well is running dry. russia, middle east: yes. north sea: no.

 

People have been saying that for years. They are still locating new reserves IIRC

 

I've just read about 50% of this thread and been very saddened by the comments on both 'sides'.

what worries me more is the ease with which both 'sides' fall into conflict: it's so obvious. this forum is a mirror image of what goes on outside in the real world.
words fail when trying to communicate whats really behind islam, muslim, christian, budism etc etc.

i'm a 'white' (whatever that means) and some of the most wonderful people i know are muslim and i share a huge amount of common ground with them. what i don't share is ground with people who could be referred to as bad, dark or evil. these people transcend culture, colour, religion, or any other badge in order to pursue their common goal of achieving evil. racial or religious or spiritual hartred is merely the means via which to achieve their common end. and they visit it on others who meet them in a common arena. this cycle continues causing more pain and is self serving.

here's the challenge: have a debate about how to get on with each other using common ground and common principles. yeh, i know, that's far more difficult than the so-called debate that is extant so far on this thread. not one of us is perfect and we continually fall short of what your, and my, God wants for us and the world - that's a huge common ground from which some positive debate can start!

andy

 

salamun alaikum and shalom alaykum my brother

ted u know your post means so much to be bros, i swear , its like a brotherly hug and i appreciate it bros, in hard times like these its nice for people like u to show kindness

i hope u had a cool sabbath bros and may it be blessed

thanks alot and may God shower u with his blessings and your family amen

lol your post nearly brought tears to my eyes its so touching cheers again

 

****holes that britain created u c;unt u remember


kiwi go and masterbate and relieve your stress

and i aint even gonna read your repetitive ****


u the guy who used **** quotes like sub human utter mensch using the **** quote and u got a cheek to talk about **** invasion