Afghanistan vs Iraq.

[ScimitarXEdge]

I do not speak for Edge, but I think that the fact you live in Canada and probably spent most of your life in Pashtunkhwa affects your ability to see it the way I do. We had a unique upbrining here. Perhaps Admin Khan could translate the experience for you, I dont know. In the states we first had the Articles of the Confederation before the US Constitution. In general, a Tennessean loves his state. He also then goes on to love his region (the South) and considers Northerners elitists, tree huggers, out of touch with rural America, etc. The Californian looks at both the Northern and the Southerner and is just glad to be free of both of them in his day to day life. The northern looks at the southern as a hilljack.

In general, we southerners believe in states rights and the North can be called a bastion of federalism (some prefer rural versus urban). Lincoln solidified the federalist government by denying states the rights to secede from the Union. His battle to tame the confederacy was in some ways like the Ridda Wars of Abu Bakr's era.

When there is no threat from the outside, you will see southern politicians maligning the Kennedys and Northerns maligning the Bushs. However, when an attack occurs, these lines cease to exist. The nation generally rallies as one. When the threat is disintegrating, these differences come back. In fact they can be stark. Some feel that the steel belt states are denied certain fair federal resources. Then there is pork barrell spending that goes on.

So in this way, as a southerner, I do not see it as sacrifice for the ummah the rights of the individual and the state. Instead, I see the Pashtuns as a "state like entity" within the whole. If the Pashtun feels maligned or threatened or abused, he is to protest vigorously and assert his independence the same way an Alabaman asserts his own when he feels Obama's agenda infringes on his rights.

I do not cede to Arabs the right to lead the caliphate, nor do I cede that right to Turks. If a meritorious Pashtun or Somalian or Ugandan or American is fit to lead, he ought to lead. Moreover, I see the Majlis e Shura as the venue in which to express our angst if we feel wronged.

Finally, since we have not yet had our Lincoln period as an ummah in the modern sense, I like John Calhoun, reserve the right to defend my people against all onslaught and withdraw from the Union in question. Now, if a single great leader comes along and federalizes the ummah and crushes the ability of all parties to secede from the union then we will have a similar set up as we do here. This cessation does not mean from islam... it simply means that people have the right to bear arms against any tyranny, even their own. In fact Abu Bakr advocated his own overthrowing should tyranny initiate under him.

So you are 100% wrong when you say I cannot imagine an independent Pashtun cause. My Americanism has armed me in a way that your Canadian-Pakistani identity has not. I can see with eyes that look to the West and look to the East. I can see the body and I can see the heart. The ummah is the body and the Pashtun is the heart of it. If the body threatens the heart, the heart shall cease to beat and that ummah shall then fracture. But I have hope that this will not occur.

That's exactly how I see it too BarakzaiAbdali.

Notice how I have said that Sayyid Jamaluddin Al AFGHANI was the progenitor of Modern Pan-Islamic Movement, not that would it have mattered if he was, Aran pr Chinese or even from the Royal Family of Zamunda.

Yet Toramana constantly ignores reality as if it never happened.

Toramana's problem is that he's in complete denial.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I do not speak for Edge, but I think that the fact you live in Canada and probably spent most of your life in Pashtunkhwa affects your ability to see it the way I do. We had a unique upbrining here. Perhaps Admin Khan could translate the experience for you, I dont know. In the states we first had the Articles of the Confederation before the US Constitution. In general, a Tennessean loves his state. He also then goes on to love his region (the South) and considers Northerners elitists, tree huggers, out of touch with rural America, etc. The Californian looks at both the Northern and the Southerner and is just glad to be free of both of them in his day to day life. The northern looks at the southern as a hilljack.

In general, we southerners believe in states rights and the North can be called a bastion of federalism (some prefer rural versus urban). Lincoln solidified the federalist government by denying states the rights to secede from the Union. His battle to tame the confederacy was in some ways like the Ridda Wars of Abu Bakr's era.

When there is no threat from the outside, you will see southern politicians maligning the Kennedys and Northerns maligning the Bushs. However, when an attack occurs, these lines cease to exist. The nation generally rallies as one. When the threat is disintegrating, these differences come back. In fact they can be stark. Some feel that the steel belt states are denied certain fair federal resources. Then there is pork barrell spending that goes on.

So in this way, as a southerner, I do not see it as sacrifice for the ummah the rights of the individual and the state. Instead, I see the Pashtuns as a "state like entity" within the whole. If the Pashtun feels maligned or threatened or abused, he is to protest vigorously and assert his independence the same way an Alabaman asserts his own when he feels Obama's agenda infringes on his rights.

I do not cede to Arabs the right to lead the caliphate, nor do I cede that right to Turks. If a meritorious Pashtun or Somalian or Ugandan or American is fit to lead, he ought to lead. Moreover, I see the Majlis e Shura as the venue in which to express our angst if we feel wronged.

Finally, since we have not yet had our Lincoln period as an ummah in the modern sense, I like John Calhoun, reserve the right to defend my people against all onslaught and withdraw from the Union in question. Now, if a single great leader comes along and federalizes the ummah and crushes the ability of all parties to secede from the union then we will have a similar set up as we do here. This cessation does not mean from islam... it simply means that people have the right to bear arms against any tyranny, even their own. In fact Abu Bakr advocated his own overthrowing should tyranny initiate under him.

So you are 100% wrong when you say I cannot imagine an independent Pashtun cause. My Americanism has armed me in a way that your Canadian-Pakistani identity has not. I can see with eyes that look to the West and look to the East. I can see the body and I can see the heart. The ummah is the body and the Pashtun is the heart of it. If the body threatens the heart, the heart shall cease to beat and that ummah shall then fracture. But I have hope that this will not occur.

Since Toramana thinks that I am bragging about being an American, I want to make it clear that that is not at all what I mean here. Perhaps Dreamer, as a Britisher sees things more in a parliamentarian way. Perhaps our brethren in Pakistan see their version of the ummah through the heirarchy of the military complex. Perhaps our brothers in the kabaleel territory view their live within the Malik system. There is no blight on Canada or any inferiority. However, the US system is all its own and a unique view of things. I am pointing out that the American experience, or Pax Americana from birth to this point in my life has given me a different perspective on things. That is a fair and non arrogant assertion. A New Yorker like Admin Khan could probably read what I wrote above and not see a hint of arrogance in it. He was likely raised on the same American Civics I was.

[Admin Khan]

''The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned in Osama Bin Ladens most wanted page(FBI website) is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.''

-Rex Tomb(Cheif investigative Publicity for the FBI).

Does anybody find that intriguing?

[khushal]

''The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned in Osama Bin Ladens most wanted page(FBI website) is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.''

-Rex Tomb(Cheif investigative Publicity for the FBI).

Does anybody find that intriguing?

Admina,
They dont want bin laden in custody, they never have. Like I said before The american government has sold him as the boogie man to scare the american public to influence public opinion so they can guide policy as they see fit.

Sudan was offering him and the whole AL Quiada network to the american government on a silver plate and they did not want him.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...61251-2001Oct2

They even purposely let him escape at Tora Bora, so they can use him as a scapegoat to plan the invasion of Iraq.
http://www.topdog04.com/000781.html

And also the many other times that head of bin laden unit Mike Scheur had oppertunities to capture him and plans were called off or canceled by his superiors.
http://newsbusters.org/node/7438

Awreedunky aka davidcross doesnt see that Hitler used this tactic by labeling the Jew and the gypsies as the boogieman to indiscrimanatly kill them

[Admin Khan]

Khushal,
So who do you think was responsible for 9/11?

[khushal]

the whole 911 was a blessing to the war mongers.

In a country like America, security and defenses has to be in place to prevent such things from happening. There is too much evidence that the security apparatus at every step was prevented to stop this from happening. This memo explains how divisional FBI chief coleen rowley was prevented from doing her job pre 911.
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020603/memo.html

Missed opportunities or is it intentional:
YouTube - 9 11 Prior Knowledge Intelligence Failures Miised Warnings 7 20 2004 NBC

Ashcroft didnt even want to hear about it pre 911:
YouTube - 9 11 Prior Knowledge John Ashcroft Given Specific Foreknowledge 4 9 2004 NBC

Everything is done covertly, the best investigation could never prove who did it, but the reasonable question is who benifited from it, what agenda has progressed from the events.

[khushal]

Watch all parts of this(this is part 13) and decide whose purpose does Al Quiada serve and who suffers from it. The reason why the FBI doesnt list 911 crime on Osama's wost wanted page.
YouTube - 7/7 The Big Picture 13 - Al Qaeda The Database & Fake Bin Laden Tape[/URL]

[MikeeUSA]

Friend, "post-Taliban" ?
Oh, now i get it. THIS is why we lost against the British several times and lost Against the Russians. This is also the reason why we are currently losing against the Americans and 40+ other nations who have have accepted they have won and are leaving in 2014.

What do you have in Afghanistan for the British or Americans to stay around forever and exploit? You have no oil to easily pump out of the ground, you don't have any ore deposits that can compete, in price, with even the dormant mines in america (it's cheaper to just import from south-africa and china than even run the machinery in our mines, or pump out our own oil (use up the worlds supply first, then our own last)).

What you do have is Russia to the north. You're used when there is not a better avenue to poke the bear from. Also this is a way to give unemployed men, who have no hope of EVER having a sweet good young wife (ILLEGAL in the USA) jobs and something to do (to die and kill... somewhere away from america).

Actually, you're only real resource, from reports, is your girls and women. Supposedly you marry them young (at puberty) (usually ~12, 13, can be younger ofcourse as biology is fuzzy, things happen when they happen), they cannot divorce, and they're obedient. (Wait what's that in the background, someone from IRC rushing up to say how pre-islamic or something said practices are and evil etc... sigh...)

But that's probably propaganda too.

You know there's these lies being spread about. Things like saying that the little local councils, when a virgin unmarried girl is raped, just have her married to the man. That fathers force their daughters into marriages at young age. That militias shut down girls schools and want the girls married young. That fathers sell their daughters into marraige. You know what that sounds like, it sounds like the Old Testament of the Bible, the Law of Moses (on women). Not Islam, and surely not Afghanistan since it's a muslim country, everyone assures me of this.

Nope, the OT culture of men reigning supreme could never occur. Men are too weak, too worshipful of women to allow this. No they would rather worship at the foot of the woman. Atleast anyone with access to the internet.

What's the truth? Afghans who have access to the internet assure me that a man would murder another man for even looking at his sister, the women have so many rights. Sounds like a pack of fools, I hope that that is just the weak sons who were kicked out of the country and sent to schools, and the strong and smart sons who know what a girl is for (to be a good obedient wife to a man) stay put.

[MikeeUSA]

Propaganda we hear.

Friend, "post-Taliban" ?
Oh, now i get it. THIS is why we lost against the British several times and lost Against the Russians. This is also the reason why we are currently losing against the Americans and 40+ other nations who have have accepted they have won and are leaving in 2014.

What do you have in Afghanistan for the British or Americans to stay around forever and exploit? You have no oil to easily pump out of the ground, you don't have any ore deposits that can compete, in price, with even the dormant mines in america (it's cheaper to just import from south-africa and china than even run the machinery in our mines, or pump out our own oil (use up the worlds supply first, then our own last)).

What you do have is Russia to the north. You're used when there is not a better avenue to poke the bear from. Also this is a way to give unemployed men, who have no hope of EVER having a sweet good young wife (ILLEGAL in the USA) jobs and something to do (to die and kill... somewhere away from america).

Actually, you're only real resource, from reports, is your girls and women. Supposedly you marry them young (at puberty) (usually ~12, 13, can be younger ofcourse as biology is fuzzy, things happen when they happen), they cannot divorce, and they're obedient. (Wait what's that in the background, someone from IRC rushing up to say how pre-islamic or something said practices are and evil etc... sigh...)

But that's probably propaganda too.

You know there's these lies being spread about. Things like saying that the little local councils, when a virgin unmarried girl is raped, just have her married to the man. That fathers force their daughters into marriages at young age. That militias shut down girls schools and want the girls married young. That fathers sell their daughters into marraige. You know what that sounds like, it sounds like the Old Testament of the Bible, the Law of Moses (on women). Not Islam, and surely not Afghanistan since it's a muslim country, everyone assures me of this.

Nope, the OT culture of men reigning supreme could never occur. Men are too weak, too worshipful of women to allow this. No they would rather worship at the foot of the woman. Atleast anyone with access to the internet.

What's the truth? Afghans who have access to the internet assure me that a man would murder another man for even looking at his sister, the women have so many rights. Sounds like a pack of fools, I hope that that is just the weak sons who were kicked out of the country and sent to schools, and the strong and smart sons who know what a girl is for (to be a good obedient wife to a man) stay put.