Phil Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 Anyone that has access?? i think you`ll find its absolutely an Islamic insurgent, not `anyone`.Do you think its Islamic insurgents Phil? 134724[/snapback] I think you'll find your reading to much into one statement. if a statement was made saying it was the French (a completly random example) from a French website would you belive that it was the French that carried out these attacks?
lush Posted 8 July 2005 Author Posted 8 July 2005 134814[/snapback] Actually, I don't believe in the god thing, 134859[/snapback] Why?
lush Posted 8 July 2005 Author Posted 8 July 2005 Anyone that has access?? i think you`ll find its absolutely an Islamic insurgent, not `anyone`.Do you think its Islamic insurgents Phil? 134724[/snapback] I think you'll find your reading to much into one statement. if a statement was made saying it was the French (a completly random example) from a French website would you belive that it was the French that carried out these attacks? 134867[/snapback] No, because that would be an uninteligent reason to believe. Do you think its Islamic insurgents Phil?
Guest Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 Actually, I don't believe in the god thing, not that it's any of your business 134859[/snapback]
Phil Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 Anyone that has access?? i think you`ll find its absolutely an Islamic insurgent, not `anyone`.Do you think its Islamic insurgents Phil? 134724[/snapback] I think you'll find your reading to much into one statement. if a statement was made saying it was the French (a completly random example) from a French website would you belive that it was the French that carried out these attacks? 134867[/snapback] No, because that would be an uninteligent reason to believe. Do you think its Islamic insurgents Phil? 134879[/snapback] I believe it could be, but I also believe its wrong to go around pointing fingers at various groups. what makes you so Certain it is Islamic Insurgents?
lush Posted 8 July 2005 Author Posted 8 July 2005 134879[/snapback] I believe it could be, but I also believe its wrong to go around pointing fingers at various groups. what makes you so Certain it is Islamic Insurgents? 134892[/snapback] Because its a very intelligent assumption, one in which has been agreed upon by many terrorism experts. I mustve heard ten say so by now. And very similar muders have occoured by Islamists since 9/11. Another way to look at it, would be to cancell out those who wouldnt do it, ira, anti globalists (possible considering the day, but not at this scale), who else is there? What more evidence do you need.
Phil Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 What more evidence do you need. 134903[/snapback] solid evedence maybe? not theory's.
Thracian Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 Lisa, do you just like argueing for the sake of or something?The topic and Koran quote ive produced doesnt make the religion of Islam look peaceful as they claim it to be, BUT that does NOT mean that all followers are bad, it means they`ve been misled in the interpretation of the teachings of Islam, which thracian has explained to quite an extent. To follow that up, anyone who believes in a supernatural being without reasonable proof, must be a little daft to say the least. 134749[/snapback] If you didn't put the holes in, I'd have nothing to pick. As an aside, you shouldn't belittle someone elses beliefs, I know a lot of people who have got thorugh crises because of their faith, and to call them daft is more than a little insulting. 134786[/snapback] What holes? Im entitled to my opinion, so im entitled to say that no one can prove the god thing. If that means people get upset, then they need to look long and hard at what they believe in. Do you believe in the god thing? 134814[/snapback] Actually, I don't believe in the god thing, not that it's any of your business, but I certainly wouldn't think someone was daft for believing it. That would be their opinion, and they are entitled to it, as much as you are entitled to yours. 134859[/snapback] Interesting. Perhaps depends on what you mean by God. To me "God" is the representation of your own true soul. The representation of the values, the rules, the beliefs, the humanity, the instincts, the feelings by which you live. That, to me, is why it is important to think about the values you stand for and to live by them unless they need to be adjusted having proved to be unjustified or unworthy of what you wish for in yourself. Simplified, I admit, but a rough idea of my philosophy and one that stresses the importance of you and others retaining their independence of thought instead of being cajoled or persuaded into following the doctrines of others.
lush Posted 8 July 2005 Author Posted 8 July 2005 What more evidence do you need. 134903[/snapback] solid evedence maybe? not theory's. 134909[/snapback] Good point. Lets just agree thats its occam's razor.
Guest Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 Interesting. Perhaps depends on what you mean by God.To me "God" is the representation of your own true soul. The representation of the values, the rules, the beliefs, the humanity, the instincts, the feelings by which you live. That, to me, is why it is important to think about the values you stand for and to live by them unless they need to be adjusted having proved to be unjustified or unworthy of what you wish for in yourself. Simplified, I admit, but a rough idea of my philosophy and one that stresses the importance of you and others retaining their independence of thought instead of being cajoled or persuaded into following the doctrines of others. 134912[/snapback] If only people kept things simple.
Steven Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 do you reckon another war is looming? 134361[/snapback] With whom? 134396[/snapback] Iran.
TrickyTrev Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 do you reckon another war is looming? 134361[/snapback] With whom? 134396[/snapback] Iran. 134970[/snapback] We can't afford it, thankfully.
Wilson Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 Many "experts" reckon that its a phoney message because apparently they misquote the Koran & they also talk about the "The heroic mujahideen" in the third person basically praising "Them" for doing it instead of saying that they did it themselves.
Thracian Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 do you reckon another war is looming? 134361[/snapback] With whom? 134396[/snapback] Iran. 134970[/snapback] Both you and Lisa are such intriguing people.
Wilson Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 Don't worry Iran will be attacked soon. We all know the terrorists are hiding in there. <_<
Thracian Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 Many "experts" reckon that its a phoney message because apparently they misquote the Koran & they also talk about the "The heroic mujahideen" in the third person basically praising "Them" for doing it instead of saying that they did it themselves. 135081[/snapback] I am not convinced by the message either. It does contain errors and the phraseology is nieve and unconvincing. My comments in other threads take account of this.
lush Posted 8 July 2005 Author Posted 8 July 2005 Many "experts" reckon that its a phoney message because apparently they misquote the Koran & they also talk about the "The heroic mujahideen" in the third person basically praising "Them" for doing it instead of saying that they did it themselves. 135081[/snapback] Ive been asking what seems like all day here wilson, how did they `misquote` the Koran?
lush Posted 8 July 2005 Author Posted 8 July 2005 Many "experts" reckon that its a phoney message because apparently they misquote the Koran & they also talk about the "The heroic mujahideen" in the third person basically praising "Them" for doing it instead of saying that they did it themselves. 135081[/snapback] I am not convinced by the message either. It does contain errors and the phraseology is nieve and unconvincing. 135101[/snapback] What errors are they mate?
lush Posted 8 July 2005 Author Posted 8 July 2005 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8496293/ 135108[/snapback] It doesnt say what the error is mate.
Wilson Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 The Translator mentions it. He has no reason to lie. Im sure it'll be released in the next few days on the net, no chance of it being in the papers - they're saying that London got no warning still.
lush Posted 8 July 2005 Author Posted 8 July 2005 The Translator mentions it. 135111[/snapback] Can you tell me the error he mentions please?
Wilson Posted 8 July 2005 Posted 8 July 2005 I'd love to but seeing that he only mentions that there is an error so you'll have to wait until its mentioned more. Also the name that the terrorists give is abit rubbish.
Thracian Posted 9 July 2005 Posted 9 July 2005 Great, let's tarnish all Muslims with the same brush, that'll make the situation a whole lot better. 134743[/snapback] Al Quada is quoted in today's Press as wanting the Americans out of Saudi Arabia "because it was our land" so the question remains...if Christians vacated Muslim lands would the Muslims vacate the Christian lands they have occupied in droves as surely andd more permanently than any military? It is a serious question for both. Would we in Britain have any great problem living with Hindus, Catholics, Jews, Buddhists, Rastafarians etc. Would we need endless security cameras, ring-fenced buildings protection, potential ID cards were these people our neighbours?. I don't think so. We only need all these things because of Muslims. Not all Muslims, I hasten to add. Indeed not even most Muslims although, as in Germany during and before the last war for Hitler, I believe there are plenty of silent sympathisers to Al Qaeda. It must be remembered that some Muslims died and were injured in Thursday's hideous bombings. Some Muslims have preached peace and goodwill within the UK and the world in general in loud and unambigiuous terms. They should have been able to live here in peace and prosperity. But do those Muslims do anything about the ones that preach hatred on our streets so that we can return to proper co-existence? No, not a lot (perhaps the law doesn't help them in the same way as it doesn't help us) so it is because of those rebel Muslims who have their own agenda that our country has been changed and is being changed beyond belief and undeniably for the worst. What if we leave Iraq and Saudi Arabia where I personally have no wish (nor ever wished) that we should be in any case. Would Muslim leaders then handle the repatrication of Muslims to their own spiritual lands and let us just get on with living side-by-side and agreeing to be different? I doubt it, of course, but I would be very interested in a Muslim view of why we should leave the Arab lands while they should stay here cos I didn't get the impression it was just a military thing.
lush Posted 9 July 2005 Author Posted 9 July 2005 I'd love to but seeing that he only mentions that there is an error so you'll have to wait until its mentioned more. 135114[/snapback] So his words mean very little then
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.