If it appears to be born and raised Britons, will you invade the UK?
*cough*
Printable View
If it appears to be born and raised Britons, will you invade the UK?
*cough*
:ehh:
in other words, overreaction will get you nowhere. Do I have to explain everything?
That, I think, is a very good point. If it does turn out that these guys were born, bred, and raised in the UK does that make it a breeding ground for terrorists? If so are we now going to become part of the axis of evil?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wally Pipp
Good point. Anyone in the US like to comment?
American troops have already invaded England, they've got bases all over the place. But they're not ready to fight and as such have been ordered to stay away from London for fear of terrorists.
:lol: :lol:
If they try to invade us I'll throw tomatoes at them :D
Sky News is reporting that police is now surrounding a house in Leed.
Woka, didn't your GF live there...;)
You're slow on News :D They also did a controlled explosion there too. The street is just round the corner from me.
I am not even sure if my street was evacuated...but if it wasn't then it's only just missed the boundry line.
Here's the link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4674463.stm
That photo is about 400 yards from my house!
I hope nothing goes BOOM in the night :(
Woogf
Be affraid, very affraid. I am still not sure about this. it might be you they are after...;)
And if so, I am soooo not going to meet you here in Geneva in a few weeks...;)
- ØØ -
Maybe he wants to recruit you Note? ;)
I am not phased by any of this terrorist talk at all.
It's been going on for years.
The fact of the matter is that you still have more chance of winning the lottery than you have of going BOOM by a terrorist.
It's the 15yr old chavs that worry me
What's a chav?
Idiots who drive around in modded up skips and wear nothing but Burberry
http://www.chavscum.co.uk/
Update on police raids in Leeds.
Apparently the controlled exposion was to gain entry to a house???!
What ever happened to knocking on the door? :D
Woka
And you said I was late with news? This is what I posted about in the thread you said I was late about....woofQuote:
Originally Posted by Wokawidget
u posted nothing of the sort. Check ya posts you muppet.
Woof
Stop fighting you kiddies or I'll send you to your rooms ;)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wokawidget
I said:
Sky News is reporting that police is now surrounding a house in Leed.
You said:
Apparently the controlled exposion was to gain entry to a house???!
What do you think I was on about. That they where surounding the hous to look at it. Because it had nice flowers in their back yard?
- ØØ -
. . . with no supper.Quote:
Originally Posted by visualAd
Woka is saying that you did not specify the method of entering the house. THey could have simply kicked the door in, where they found a suspect package and blew it up in a controlled manner.Quote:
Originally Posted by NoteMe
However they used the explosion to gain access. Overkill? Or a very secure house? :ehh:
and BTW they have arrested several people in a house in Yorkshire in North-England...:)
If they had to blow something up (controlled) to gain access then the only feasible explanation that I can think of is that there were, or they suspected there were, booby traps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978
A controlled explosion destroys the detonater. Most modern explosives need electricity to go bang. Another explosive device is unlikely to set of an existing one.
Yup...like semtex...completely safe if you set fire to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by yrwyddfa
The other raids they are doing in Beeston are on the other side of the road from where I work, but I cannot see anything from my window.
I hope I am able to get home tonight :(
Woka
My house is fine, we ain't been evacuated.
Right I'm off on a mission round the corner to see what's going on 1st hand :D
I'll let you know what I see.
Woof
I've just heard on the news that they think they may be suicide bombers and they were British citizens.
Reporter Badger here.
Went scurrying around the streets, round the corner from my house, with a camera.
Just this second got in.
Attached are some of the photo's a took.
WOof
Bomb disposal team and area surround the house.
And a good shot of the bomb disposal robot :D
Woof
You forgot the attachments for the last thread. Never mind :)
(Electroman) :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Valleysboy1978
Woka, I am surprised they didn't arrest you :lol:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wokawidget
Fantastic...heheh...get a life...:D...BTW, the chicks in that city is both fat and ugly....how do you survive...:D
Nice pics woka
Didn't the guys that did the bombings in Spain blow their apartment up when the cops closed in? Bet those were some nervous cops going into those houses today.
They are fat and ugly in that area...I can tell you the ones that I pss going to work, and live on my street are not fat and ugly ;)
I am sooooo gonna slap you when I see ya in a few weeks!
Yup...which is why they blew the door off I believe. 1:30pm today they carried out a controlled explosion to gain entry to the house. I am assuming they did this, instead of battering the door down, was because it may be booby trapped.Quote:
Originally Posted by demotivater
Woka
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wokawidget
I will bring my boxing glowes...:)....BTW will you bring your GF?
You invited woka and not me? :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by NoteMe
I have invited both you and wØØsy and Mendhak and more from my MSN list here...but Woka actualy invited him self...but he can come. Even if he just want to meet me so he can laugh at my hair, and say that I am **** in real life and not only on the internet..:D
- ØØ -
You got it fat boy ;)
They are still searching that house round the corner from me.
Apparently the "suspects", or some of them anyways, went to Pakistan for 2 months to study...religion...Hmmmmmmm.
Woof
Shouldn't it now be chavman? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by wossname
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wokawidget
And the other one went to Geneva for a Guinnes?? hmmm..suspicious...
- ØØ -
Can I come too? :thumb:Quote:
Originally Posted by NoteMe
Sure, just give me your cell phone number and tell me when you arrive..and I will meet you...no wait...sorry, don't know you that good...don't trust you...
Ohhh and that reminds me...I am not trusting Woka either. So if I dissapear off the forum for a long time in the start of August, you know what happend to me...;)
- ØØ -
:lol:
First Off my deepest sympathy goes out to the innocent civilians killed in this criminal act of mass murder. And further my strongest condemnation to the person(s) responsible for these act(s) (*1a), this criminal act is not justified under any situation, simply put killing innocent people is wrong under any circumstances (*1)
(2) Religion(s) does not kill people, PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE.
(3) The person or persons who committed these acts is not yet fully known [Factually] that includes suspect (hence the word suspects).
(4) It is claimed that this act was that of "Extremist" however a logical analysis of this shows that an "Extremist" can not commit this act.
Explanation to (4):
An extremist is by definition someone whom takes his/here religion in the most extreme/strict form. In Islam killing innocent people is not permitted in any circumstance, thus the most extreme/strict form of this would be that killing innocent people would NEVER be permitted under ANY circumstances. Therefor an Extremist by nature can not commit this act in the first place.
Further analysis:
Whoever committed this act would need a motive (this is true for any murder(s)) because:
There are two possibilities:
(a) There was a reason for it.
(b) There was no reason for it.
If it was the latter than it was a "mindless" act, if it is a "mindless" act than the person(s) who committed this act is mind-less meaning one who takes action without full control of his mind, he/she is quite simply insane. And one who is insane can not be held responsible for his/her act, as he/she is not responsible for his/her own actions.
One must assume that there was a reason for the act (otherwise, no one can be held accountable for the crime).
If there is a reason for the act then there can be two further possibilities:
(I) Beneficial
(II) Non-beneficial
We can neglect the second possibility because one does not take action in order for it not generate a benefit since in-action would also generate no-benefit thus one would not take an action in order to generate that which is already existent.
We can dismiss reasons “X” (X being popular reasons giving by the media/ politicians since, all of them reduces down to making a statement). Since the perpetrators never left any statement how can they be attributed to that statement as being the reason for their action?
The bigger perspective:
After 9/11 the “War on Terror” (an oxymoron, a complete contradiction in its self) was pushed by the Western leaders. It was further reinforced “You’re either with us or with them [the terrorist]” (emphasis added) meaning just merely having a different idea/opinion/view that diverged away from them made you the terrorist/enemy.
The war in Iraq and “anti-terror” laws have been recently declining in public opinion over the last couple of years (vast majority of people around the world was and still are against the war in Iraq, all justification for it have been found either non-existent or nullified).
Some very important matters to remember:
(1) In order to justify these “anti-terror” laws naturally one would need a threat.
(2) In order to continue the war in Iraq one would need a justification. Or have a “exit strategy”.
(3) Reinforcement for the “War on Terror”
Now the real question arises ultimately whom benefits these acts?
If you look at it from an analytical point of view these act benefit none but all the above reasons, and all these reasons would be NON-BENEFICIAL and NEGATIVELY-BENEFICIAL to the claimed perpetrators.
Coming back to (*1), for this same token of reason I condemn the killing of innocent people around the world.
You see Ignorance is the real enemy here, ignorance leads to misunderstanding, and misunderstanding leads to fear and fear ultimately leads to hate.
The politicians have agendas, and they will manipulate the information and situations in order to achieve these political goals. After all that’s what they do.
Anhar Hussain Miah
(PS, I used to travel not to long, on the Liverpool Street underground, so I too could have been caught up in this attack.)
I appreciate your input, although I don't fully agree with it.
Can you explain these two verses to me then?Quote:
In Islam killing innocent people is not permitted in any circumstance, thus the most extreme/strict form of this would be that killing innocent people would NEVER be permitted under ANY circumstances
Does this mean that a non-believer is not an innocent?Quote:
9:123: “Oh ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers and let them find harshness in you.”
2:191- “Kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from wherever they drove you out.”
This is a very clasical question that has asked many times (and answered over and over), and will be continued to be as long as people do not do their homework correctly, it really should be under FAQ's
But anyway simply put, the verse is taken out of its context, one needs to read the entire chapter and understand the history as well. One can not read a small part of sentence and claim to understand the entire chapter that would be illogical.
I don't know if we are allowed to post from external source however the answer to your question is here:
http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/eng...hFatwaID=51761
So thankfully demotivater you are incorrect
Anhar Hussain Miah
I also appreciate your input, but I disagree with this point in particular.Quote:
An extremist is by definition someone whom takes his/here religion in the most extreme/strict form. In Islam killing innocent people is not permitted in any circumstance, thus the most extreme/strict form of this would be that killing innocent people would NEVER be permitted under ANY circumstances. Therefor an Extremist by nature can not commit this act in the first place.
There are many cases of separate branches of a "parent" religion which have a different interpretation of the same scriptures, there are many examples of this within the variations of Christianity.
I have met a few Christians (I'm not sure which variation(s)) who would not actually intend to physically hurt someone, but openly admit that they feel hatred towards people who are members of other religions (even tho I have always been told that the Christian way is to live in harmony with others, no matter what their religion). In a very extreme case of this kind of person (potentially due to mental issues as you mentioned), they would possibly intend some form of harm upon another person.
Isn't it possible that there are some branches of Islam (like with Christianity and several other religions) where people have different beliefs/focuses/interpretations?
Isn't it also possible that a very small minority of one of these branches are more extreme in particular areas of their interpretations, and would feel that causing harm (to some degree) to another human being was acceptable under certain circumstances?
I am not saying that "Islam is bad" or anything to that effect. I am just pointing out that within religions there are variations in terms of teachings and beliefs, and of course peoples interepretation of those teachings and beliefs.
It's interpretation that's at fault. An example from Christianity.
Most people believe there are contradictions within the Christian Bible. The most popular one is that in the old testament it states 'an eye for an eye' Yet, in the new testamant Jesus is quoted as saying 'Turn the other cheek'
Both these quotes are accurate, but outside of context. The 'Turn the other cheek' bit is really:
'You can take an eye for an eye but it is better to turn the other cheek'
(It's all paraphrased as I don't own a bible)
I presume the same 'uninformed opinions' are present in Islam.
Islam, as I understand it, is a religion of peace; like all the other 'world' religions.
Catholicism is supposed to be "peaceful" yet there is constant violence between Catholics and Protestants in Ireland.
Religion by it's very nature is open to interpretation by its followers so it is entirely possible that someone misunderstands the original meaning of a scripture and uses it as a motive for murder.
Personally I am an agnostic (I believe there is no evidence to either prove or disprove whether any such deity exists), and as such I accept peoples beliefs to be their own business. However, when anyone decides to commit atrocity in the name of their religion there is somthing fundamentally wrong with the teachings they have received. Indeed people kill people, but often the religion they follow has been warped to become their motive.
Imagine this, in most religions they are taught that their god is the one and true god. This is saying that every other religion is false, and as such an extremist may take further steps against persons that do not follow said religion.
For example, a Catholic and an Islamist believe their respective religion to be the true religion. If they were responsible adults they would respect their differnet beliefs and that would be the end of it. If they acted like petulant children they would argue that their religion is the true religion. If they were extremists, it would turn to violence.
The world would be a far better place without religion
External links are ok provided they're not competing sites.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anhar Hussain
As you said those verse extracts are oft quoted as a way of trying prove Islam if not all that peaceful.
But the response in the thread is not an out and out condemnation of killing. It basically says killing is wrong unless it's right. It clearly states that you can kill for law,justice or a just cause.
Now to me justice and just cause are open to all kinds of intpretation.
To kill another is fundamentally wrong no matter what the justification is. That's why capital punishment has been almost entirely eradicated in the western judicial systems. After all, how many cases have proved that the person convicted of the crime was in fact innocent? Wouldn't be much help if they'd already been hanged.
I disagree.
I don't feel it's religion at fault here. I think it's the individuls.
These people just happen to piggy back on religion to justify their phycotic minds, and thus Islam gets the finger pointed at.
If a scouser went abroad to the Campions League cup final, and stabbed a few people in a drunken rampage, then would people see this as a christian act, since the Uk is a Christian country...apparently. Would people tarnish Christianity with this persons stupidity.
This is the case with London. Oooo...they are of Pakinsani decent...oooo...Islam...*points finger* Rubbish.
If religion didn't exist they would only find something else to justify their actions.
Woka
Many of those said fans would consider football a religion ;)
yeah, plus scousers are a sick breed anyway :p
Oh yes, of course, I forgot. This is proven over and over again everyday.Quote:
Islam, as I understand it, is a religion of peace; like all the other 'world' religions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by si_the_geek
si_the_geek, your are incorrect,
explanation:
(1) are you judging the car from the driver? judge the car by the car, as the Christians would say "who are you judging the singer or the song?" by the same token judge the religion by the religion not the actions of the people.
example Hilter was a Christian he killed 6 million people, Bush Jnr is responisble for the deaths of 100,00 in Iraq(estimated) and unkown number in Afganistan. lets not forget the Crusades (are you are aware of the blood filled history?). Then their was the Spanish who foced the mulsims out (killed the rest, and forcebly converted the remaining) The list goes on, does this mean that Christanity is THE MOST VIOLENT religion NO, beacuse these are the actions of PEOPLE. Go back to (2) in my orginal post.
(2) you said:
Isn't it possible that there are some branches of Islam (like with Christianity and several other religions) where people have different beliefs/focuses/interpretations
First of all please understand the diffenence in terminology, their definiations are of upmost importance:
(a) Beliefs are the core fundamentals of a religion, HAVING A DIFFERENT belief would render it a DIFFERENT religion, so all Muslims MUST have the same core fundamental beliefs having a different one would mean that they would become OUTSIDE of the fold of Islam and no longer a Mulsim.
(b) Yes interpretations exist and are allowed, these merely mean DIFFEREANCE OF OPINIONS that ARE ALL VALID because they do not fundamentally change the Belief(a). The reason that they are all valid is that the difference of opinons do not deviate from the core issue.
Another point you need to undertstand is how interpretations are formed (can only be done by people of Knowledge, i.e. Scholars/learnered), it has a very Strict code called Itjhihad (sorry for my poor spealling @all Arabic speackers!) and i dont want speak about it too much as I my self do not know all the exact detail, so i say what i do know and that is there are TWO main sources (unlike any other religion) these are the Quran itself and the Hadiths (A saying or action ascribed to the Prophet,Any hadith is of two parts the matn (subject) and the isnad (chain of transmission)).
so no, it is not possible that some one can make an "extreme" interpretation that would justify killing an innocent person.
Now to the point of killing, i.e. taking the life of another being:
Killing is natural fact. Everyone Human kills, wether your a meat eater or strict vegan (plants still have a life), and if your on hunger strike then your still killing bacteria as part of a natural process. The real difference is context.
Again i will quote myself here Ignorance is the enemy. We are all inteligent programmers here, as such we are gifted with a brain so we should use it to seek truth.
[Quran 21:18] Nay, We hurl the Truth against falsehood, and it knocks out its brain, and behold, falsehood doth perish! Ah! woe be to you for the (false) things ye ascribe (to Us)
Anhar Hussain Miah
P.S how do I get VB to do something when someone presses the return key in a textbox?
:ehh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Anhar Hussain
Okay, so what you're saying is that if I came to your home, invaded your privacy, cut the throats of all your family and walked casually out you would consider that the same as plucking a few flowers from my rose bush to give to my girlfriend?
As for your point about the crusades, that was centuries ago in a time when religion was law. Modern times religion is a choice, then you had to follow the religion of the land. A wise man once said "To bring the past to the present will only cloud the future"
This just overwhelms me and I am at a loss to understand...
An IRAQI man, yesterday, with a wife and child (I think the child was 8 months old). Friends say he recently became very religious...
He kisses his wife and child goodbye (I'm guessing...)...
Get's into a car - laden with bombs...
Find a likely target - a US military vehicle...
Surrounded by 18 children of all ages...
He drives quickly toward that vehicle and explodes the bombs in his car killing all the children (and the one US soldier)...
Someone explain to me how this is possible for a person to do - please!