IT WASN'T MUSLIMS

[third eye]

Yes agreed, Third Eye. No question that religion is not played in the minds of evil humans, but one really needs to question of why?

Maybe the rewards of doing so? Maybe there larger role in life? Maybe there benefitting the social group overall?

I mean, why would such persons decided, as a collective, to do this deed, think about this for a second. In order to do anything, requiring other people, they all have to be intune of the goal, and only way I know is religion. There lies the problem of virgins in heaven..

Hate has become an industry.

It has its investments, returns, profits , business plans, projections and business risks.

Here are groups of ppl who have the funds ( provided) and themselves have not done a days honest work but play on the minds of ppl - virgins in heaven & creating a persecution complex is one such ploy.

Notice, everyone gets paid - the stone throwers , the suicide bombers, the suppliers of weapons, the sellers and producers of heroin , the conduits who sell drugs.. the whole lot. Even intel agencies who master mind such groups.

Things get worsened when govts cash in on this industry seeing such ppl as strategic assets & employ them as an instrument of state policy and absolve themselves by calling them non state players.

 

[jeypore]

Hate has become an industry.

It has its investments, returns, profits , business plans, projections and business risks.

Here are groups of ppl who have the funds ( provided) and themselves have not done a days honest work but play on the minds of ppl - virgins in heaven & creating a persecution complex is one such ploy.

Notice, everyone gets paid - the stone throwers , the suicide bombers, the suppliers of weapons, the sellers and producers of heroin , the conduits who sell drugs.. the whole lot. Even intel agencies who master mind such groups.

Things get worsened when govts cash in on this industry seeing such ppl as strategic assets & employ them as an instrument of state policy and absolve themselves by calling them non state players.

I agree that politics has a ugly game behind controlling and ruling the populace, but here we are afterall talking about an act that is related to religious idelogy. My question is Why?

The motivation was afterall destruction of western thinking and mainly lifestyle, Why? Because there is a greater religious idelogy that converts the younger populace to think that moderaism/change is bad and certain scripted words are right, isn't that so!!!!

The men that created this 911, had to think in such terms in order to create such crimes, there motivation would have had to be not only money (for there families), but also a religious belief in order to convince them to do so....

 

[third eye]

I agree that politics has a ugly game behind controlling and ruling the populace, but here we are afterall talking about an act that is related to religious idelogy. My question is Why?

The motivation was afterall destruction of western thinking and mainly lifestyle, Why? Because there is a greater religious idelogy that converts the younger populace to think that moderaism/change is bad and certain scripted words are right, isn't that so!!!!

The men that created this 911, had to think in such terms in order to create such crimes, there motivation would have had to be not only money (for there families), but also a religious belief in order to convince them to do so....

J,

No, destruction of western thinking & lifestyle is an excuse,religion is the tool while personal gain is the motive.

The kamikazee pilots back in WWII were the exploited lot by the Jap regime using shintoism as the tool.Everyone & everything can be had at a price. This does not necessarily mean money. What is needed is to press the right button.

Once again, this cannot happen unless the state acquiesces or plays an active role - it will do neither unless it too gets a pay off in so doing.

 

[jeypore]

J,

No, destruction of western thinking & lifestyle is an excuse,religion is the tool while personal gain is the motive.
The kamikazee pilots back in WWII were the exploited lot by the Jap regime using shintoism as the tool.Everyone & everything can be had at a price. This does not necessarily mean money. What is needed is to press the right button.

Once again, this cannot happen unless the state acquiesces or plays an active role - it will do neither unless it too gets a pay off in so doing.

Two main points:

First the increasing islamic fundematelism is solely based on Western idelogy, or plainly put solely being an antagonistic towards that belief.

Secondly, this so call state, that you keep reiterating is in nonexistence, since they want to play a major roles in the world, but keeps there ideology fighting through proxy. Al queda and talibans are not states, but have funding thru different means, mainly through supporting states based on similar Ideology, and it does refer back to Islam.

How can you negate Islam in this equation bogles my mind, but it is your paragotive to think so, by profiting thru politicing, but not given any explaination of true terrorism that does exists today and reasoning behind 911. 911 was and is only based on hatred and destruction of western idelogy.....

 

[tadka]

I have a feeling that since the fall of the ottoman empire and collapse of mughal empire in india, muslims have been shell shocked and suffer from deep insecurity, which is what is leading them to the path of terrorism. I honestly think that only the British and Americans are to blame for this. All other is just a side story.

 

[ptldM3]

YouTube - 9/11: Total Proof That Bombs Were Planted In The Buildings!

OMG i can't beleive people still beleive that crap. Conspiracy theorists have the weakest arguments ever....secondary explosions? Really? Twisted rubble will give way and make loud noises, add mass histeria and all of the sudden people beleive they heard explosions.

Every argument consiracy theorists have is weak. This is usually what they say.

No aircraft wreckage was found at the Pentagon, wrong! There was plenty of aircraft debris.

http://www.flight77.info/images/Pentagon_landing_gear.jpg

A rocket hit the Pentagon, Wrong! Hundreds of witnesses seen the plane hit.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sour...mqSGAw&usg=AFQjCNHKlsn_JO_Wx8xFnu6H5rvAP8haOQ

The WTC couldn't have calapesed because other high rises burned without collapsing, true but other high rises didn't have an airliner smack into it at 500-600 mph. The aircraft impact as well as explosion destroyed and weakened the core supports. Of couse, conspiracy theorists will say the fire was not hot enough to melt the steal, but the fire doesn't need to melt the steal it only needs to weaken it, from there gravity does the rest. Once the trusses started to sag the perimeter columns started to cave in-wards, altimately they snapped...and of course once they go the building goes.

This is the sagging i'm talking about:

http://img37.imageshack.us/i/saght2.jpg/


Then the conspiracy theorist claim WTC 7 is proof 911 was an 'inside job' but of couse even that can easily be explained.

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - Popular Mechanics

Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom — approximately 10 stories — about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner.

NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse,

The entire building fell in on itself, with the slumping east side of the structure pulling down the west side in a diagonal collapse.

According to NIST, there was one primary reason for the building's failure: In an unusual design, the columns near the visible kinks were carrying exceptionally large loads, roughly 2000 sq. ft.

With columns on the south face apparently damaged, high stresses would likely have been communicated to columns on the building's other faces, thereby exceeding their load-bearing capacities.

Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators.

Then the conspiracy theorist insist the wtc was brought down with explosives, only problems is to bring down the WTC it would take dozens of demolition experts working weeks, perhaps months to do this; moreover, they would have to strip the floors and sheet rock in order to drill the thousands of holes required for explosives charges, then they would have to run several hundred miles of wire, so how did they do all this?

Then the conspiracy theorists claim that 'experts' beleive the WTC was brought down with explosives, unfortunately those 'experts' never set foot on the WTC. Something else the consiracy theorists can't explain, explosive experts, that DON'T work for the governoment have stated no evidence of a demolition was found; no plasting caps, nothing!

Then the conspiracy theorist claim no Jews were killed in the attacks, well dinial isn't just a river that flow trough Egypt:

Was Israel Behind 9/11?

over 400 Jews died in the 9/11 terror attacks

I can sit here all day and explain away more conspiracies, but i encourage people to do their own reasearch and not jump the conspiracy bandwagon

 

[third eye]

Two main points:

First the increasing islamic fundematelism is solely based on Western idelogy, or plainly put solely being an antagonistic towards that belief.

Secondly, this so call state, that you keep reiterating is in nonexistence, since they want to play a major roles in the world, but keeps there ideology fighting through proxy. Al queda and talibans are not states, but have funding thru different means, mainly through supporting states based on similar Ideology, and it does refer back to Islam.

At no stage did I call AQ or Taliban a state. I was referring to states who have been / are using terrorism as an instrument of state policy. These states are very much in existence you do not have to go far to look for them.

How can you negate Islam in this equation bogles my mind, but it is your paragotive to think so, by profiting thru politicing, but not given any explaination of true terrorism that does exists today and reasoning behind 911. 911 was and is only based on hatred and destruction of western idelogy.....

The highlighted part above is not understood. Elaborate pls.

I have neither negated any religion nor added any. Religions are too vast & timeless for us mortals to comment upon adversely. Just coz ppl from some religion do unacceptable things does in no way imply that all those who follow a religion can be branded similarly. In any case no religion spreads hate - only its interpretation by the narrow minded does.

Most times we see what we want to see & not what things actually are. Therefore the narrow minded bigots behave in the manner that they do.

9/11 to my mind had less to do with hatred towards any ideologies but more to do with perceived persecution complex.

 

[jeypore]

The highlighted part above is not understood. Elaborate pls.

Those where your words, which I repeated, remember, how politicians make money thru politicing especial using terrorists means.

Just coz ppl from some religion do unacceptable things does in no way imply that all those who follow a religion can be branded similarly. In any case no religion spreads hate - only its interpretation by the narrow minded does.

And there lies the argument between us Third eye.. I whole heartly believe that Islam truely lies the blame to many of terrorist issues that is happening in today's times. It is (religion) fighting for an ideology, but the problem is, it is doing so by forceful acts, either it is bombing innocent civilians or domestic issues, either or, it is changing the perception of the religion of Islam. And even in greater scheme, we have young educated souls comminting same acts, of suicide bombings, because of Islam, take for example of London tunnel bombing, where they grew up in western society, but the power of religion made these young childs to do so.... Think how destructive religion is... History has afterall proven itself enough.

So based on your argument who is more destructive a Politicians, who is trying more to win more votes, or a religious figure, who is really trying to change the world?

 

[third eye]

Those where your words, which I repeated, remember, how politicians make money thru politicing especial using terrorists means.

Are you referring to post # 16 ?


And there lies the argument between us Third eye.. I whole heartly believe that Islam truely lies the blame to many of terrorist issues that is happening in today's times. It is (religion) fighting for an ideology, but the problem is, it is doing so by forceful acts, either it is bombing innocent civilians or domestic issues, either or, it is changing the perception of the religion of Islam. And even in greater scheme, we have young educated souls comminting same acts, of suicide bombings, because of Islam, take for example of London tunnel bombing, where they grew up in western society, but the power of religion made these young childs to do so.... Think how destructive religion is... History has afterall proven itself enough.

Even though indicators point towards the emboldened part above, I believe that no religion is/ can be bad. A discussion on this could be held elsewhere as it would derail this thread & be off topic. The bombing & terrorist acts that we see & experience are being done using Islam / religion as a pretext or justification quite like the Jap pilots were brainwashed into giving their lives for their emperor back in WW 2. Govt or states where such acts originate or are planned from are to blame for allowing them to happen & for allowing themselves to get hijacked by religious fundamentalist whom they used initially to prop themselves but soon the ' acid began to eat into the container' and now they profess helplessness by calling them non state actors and absolving themselves by saying that they have no control on them. They do come around but need to be prodded & threatened by calls that threaten to bomb them back to the stone ages.

The same religion is spread world wide.How is it that some Govts keep the fundamentalists of the same religion under check while fundamentalists run amok in others ? The answer is simple, how can you control some one you collude with ? They are forever running with the hare & hunting with hound. This to my mind happens when the Govts themselves are on weak grounds - either a dictator like Zia in whose time the rot set in or elected govts who are Govt only in name & the real power lies elsewhere.


So based on your argument who is more destructive a Politicians, who is trying more to win more votes, or a religious figure, who is really trying to change the world?

Religion cannot / should not be above the state. Theocracies do not work as their basis of governance is the religion which becomes unquestionable & non negotiable thereby leaving its interpretation to a select few. Governance of the people has to be decided by the people themselves. For this laws & a inviolable constitution is a must.

Politicians can be made accountable ( provided of course other elements of the state are in place) and be kicked out in the next elections.This alone makes them more responsible than any other option available.

Politicians can be removed, Dictators & Religious heads have no fixed tenures .

Lastly, apologies for the manner in which I reply as despite my best efforts I haven't suceeded in learning how to multi quote.

 

[jeypore]

A discussion on this could be held elsewhere as it would derail this thread & be off topic.

The thread is right for this discussion..

I will answer rest of your's discussion tomorrow, sinces Saturday night has become a cooling period for me.

Thanks, I will answer,

 

[jeypore]

I believe that no religion is/ can be bad. A discussion on this could be held elsewhere as it would derail this thread & be off topic. The bombing & terrorist acts that we see & experience are being done using Islam / religion as a pretext

So, Let me ask you a very technical question of this, Which Muslims country has Professed this in The UN Body, and said that the bombing civilians currently has no relations with Muslims, Meaning which Muslims country world leader besides Mr. Newbie (Zardari), which we now know is the puppet of Pakistan army.

Interesting regarding this subject, that there are numerous Muslim ruled countries, no leader has stepped up and said that sentence that you are referring too.. Unless you prove otherwise...

Govt or states where such acts originate or are planned from are to blame for allowing them to happen & for allowing themselves to get hijacked by religious fundamentalist whom they used initially to prop themselves but soon the ' acid began to eat into the container' and now they profess helplessness by calling them non state actors and absolving themselves by saying that they have no control on them.

Isn't this become a typical Muslim countries problem, where the religious ideals overrules day to day life, and even tries to controls seculars laws that where set beforehand, a perfect example is Pakistan infact.

I personally think that best clash between moderism and Islamism is happening in Turkey, it shows a greates results between the two, which we are discussing today.

Politicians can be removed, Dictators & Religious heads have no fixed tenures

Here we agree...

What is confussing me is that we are arguing based on, religious idelogy is more distructive then any politicians can do, if I can take this discussion back. What I am surprised about you is that, you keep reiterating that any religion is capable of doing the same current events, yet you give examples of kamakasie.

I know how distructive any religion is and how it is used to create havoc, but the problem is, in current realities, islam has provided, to influence, itself in global matter, and that is the difference. And the only solution to this problem, to moderate muslism, is by saying that the Terrorist are not True Muslims does not cut it because the pretext of using terroirst means are based on Islam or haditha. Which the terrorist are using a cause to fight, for example sharia law and there are others like, no kaffir is to step on the holy land, etc......

These are all pretext, based on reiligous ideology, to fight for a reason...