Islamic reaction to radical Muslims

[ozymandias]

Dude I had Cousins and family that got injured and nearly died in terrorist attacks and you calling me a terrorist is just mean and hash, You really upset me and piss me off.

I would think that if you cared for your family, you would understand just how despicable terrorism is, and stop supporting it -- but time and time again you support it.

At first I though you make sense but now you shown your true colours.

Anti-terrorist through and through. At least I don't physically attack, or terrorize.

[ozymandias]

toward Ozymandias:

Salam wrora ,

The Islamic reaction towards radicalism is very clear. We do not encourage violence. A terrorist has no religion.

Not true. A terrorist can be any religion.

[ozymandias]

na wrora debate di, ta sawal zendey waka che ta ta weley wayey bya bata khabar sey,

He is not saying practically. And he never said you are about to commit terrorism.


There is a difference between theoretically and practically.


I enjoy this thread and actually read every single response while I was in class todai.

I'm glad. If others are learning as much as I am , the world is sure to be a better place.

[ozymandias]

na wrora debate di, ta sawal zendey waka che ta ta weley wayey bya bata khabar sey,

He is not saying practically. And he never said you are about to commit terrorism.


There is a difference between theoretically and practically.

I mean that those that give aid, support, and justification to terrorists are no better than they are.

[ozymandias]

I disagree.


Ones man terrorist is another mans freedom fighter, The british considered George Washington a terrorist we Americans give him massive respect right?

Freedom fighters do not attack civilian targets or try to coerce through public fear, thus they are different than terrorists.

Ask a Pashtun in the Pashtun heartlands if he is a terrorist, he will say he is defending his land against invaders whom he did not bother, They came to him.

And I agree. As long as he is not attacking civilians, or violating the internationally agreed terms of war, he is a freedom fighter, with all rights to attack any *MILITARY* target he wants.

As soon as he attacks an innocent civilian to generate terror in the public and get them to do his bidding through fear, he is a terrorist.

[ozymandias]

So with your definition our counry the U.S.A and Nato is the biggest terrorist on earth?

What part of their actions violates international treaty, the Geneva Convention, or any other international terms of war?

Are they using chemical warfare? Are they deliberately using 'cruel' weapons? Are they deliberately targeting civilians by policy?

Or are they accidentally hitting civilian targets in the process of valid military targets? Or a small number of soldiers making terrible, terrible mistakes?

We are citizens of a terrorist regime right? How many civilians does the USA kill per month? 100? 200?

How many of those civilians are side effects? and how many were the direct target?

And that is WHAT THEY ADMIT. Imagine the truth.

...
I am not saying what is happening is not terrible. It is.

I am saying there is a difference between accidentally killing civilians while bombing a legitimate military target, and flying planes into a civilian building, or murdering an artist.

[ozymandias]

Lets see from Abu ghraib scandal to killing civilians then admitting it was a mistake,

Mistakes are not the same as deliberate.

to witnesses saying their women were insulted

NOT INSULTED. Well then, you should have said that before. Terrorize away!

,to killing children.

Not so sure why we are playing double standards.

The standards are single -- not double.

Explain to me your justification for Americans in the Pashtun heartlands. What did the Pashtuns do? Why arent the Americans in Saudia Arabia instead? Osama was not Pashtun.

Need I point out the evidence that terrorists were, and are hiding among you?

I'm not saying they are right -- but at least they have the backing of international law.

Americans invaded Afghanistan. Little did they know that Afghanistan is known as the Graveyard of empires.





Plenty of American soldiers admit they have committed terrorism.

They are guilty -- not America -- we cast them down and punish them -- not support them.

Afghanistan is arguably one of the most important countries in the world since it connects the middle east,south asia and central asia. It is sitting on over a trillion of geological reserves alone.


The Pashtuns there are simply defending their land to invaders. They had no problems with the USA.


How would you feel if I unexpectedly knock on your door and start conquering your house FOR NO REASON.

I would attack the invaders, not the innocent people back home with nothing to do with them.

[ozymandias]

Let me state this once again:

I do not support terrorism. If, after the fact, it turns out this was not a legitimate military action, I would be against it.

I am not saying the US was right in what it is doing, I am saying that what it did justifies *MILITARY* responses, not terrorist responses. Period.

There is *NO* justification for terrorist actions. Period.

[ozymandias]

ok we are in agreement.



Don't you think this is a bad time to be making fun of Islam for south park?

No. It is the perfect time -- Islamic terrorists are attacking free speech -- this is the best time to defend it.

[ozymandias]

Ya but that is your opinion. Those that you consider citizens are loved by millions.

So? What does this have to do with anything? The victims of terrorists are loved, too.

[/quote]

Do you consider The USA being terrorist since our phones are wiretapped and etc?

[/quote]

If due process has been given, I have no problem with it -- meaning it is a legitimate tap in pursuit of international terrorists guilty of crimes against humanity.

Isnt that taking away from our freedom of speech?

Besides, how does that infringe on your right to free speech? Terrorist talk is not protected as free speech, and I was under the impression -- which may be wrong, that they are not doing anything else with those wiretaps.

[MazloomyarMaseed]

So? What does this have to do with anything? The victims of terrorists are loved, too.

Do you consider The USA being terrorist since our phones are wiretapped and etc?

[/quote]

If due process has been given, I have no problem with it -- meaning it is a legitimate tap in pursuit of international terrorists guilty of crimes against humanity.



Besides, how does that infringe on your right to free speech? Terrorist talk is not protected as free speech, and I was under the impression -- which may be wrong, that they are not doing anything else with those wiretaps.[/QUOTE]


if you didnt know, the product of terrorism was produced in the university of nebraska throught Jihadi textbooks which your so called free speech nation invented and produced!!!

u invented terrorism so dnt blaime other peoples faiths

[ozymandias]

But isnt that taking away from our rights?

For one thing, I stated I am fine with *DUE PROCESS* wiretaps -- your rights are protected -- that's what due process means.

For another, even if you *are* wiretapped, that would be a privacy issue, and not a freedom of speech issue -- unless they are illegally harming you for things you say over that tapped wire -- at which point, they are being criminal, and I already stated I do not support criminal acts of the military.

You are very big on "Right,Rights! Ya! man Rights" Yet our very own U.S.A does not offer us rights.

On the contrary, they offer you *equal* rights.

Now, Imagine invading someones countries,And imagine hurting their religion by making fun of them.

No need to imagine either of those things -- I see it happening every day. The invasion has no impact on whether or not the people back home should be allowed to exercise their free speech rights. Unrelated topics in that regard.

In fact, the argument can be made that the invasion is the result of believing it would protect those very rights. Whether that is true or not is debatable -- but that is what the public believed at the time this started.

[ozymandias]

if you didnt know, the product of terrorism was produced in the university of nebraska throught Jihadi textbooks which your so called free speech nation invented and produced!!!

u invented terrorism so dnt blaime other peoples faiths[/QUOTE]


What are you smoking?

Terrorism can easily be traced back to the first century -- well before this nation even existed. These earliest terrorist groups -- some of who, I might as well point out were Muslim, clearly did not learn anything from a university that had not been founded, in a state that had not been created, in a country not yet established, on a continent not yet found.

[ozymandias]

ok. I agree with what you said.


but the Islamic reaction to radicals who kill innocent civilians is clear. we do not appreciate or consider them as part of us.


The Quran says. "Killing one is like killing humanity."

The thing is, you obviously do not speak for all Islam, for many reasons -- not the least of which is that some of Islam obviously disagrees with your opinion, otherwise their would not be radical Muslims running around committing acts of terrorism.

[MazloomyarMaseed]

The thing is, you obviously do not speak for all Islam, for many reasons -- not the least of which is that some of Islam obviously disagrees with your opinion, otherwise their would not be radical Muslims running around committing acts of terrorism.

What about the Radical AMericans invading peoples countries over lies and no evidence, you speak of a few people dying but how can u compare it to the massacre ur America has done especialy to Iraqis etc.

You will taste your judgement, not through violence haha but through you worthless dollar and economy, we will see where the khazar will run to??????? i pray for latin america to have anti american presidents and i pray that mexicans get their land back, plus the red indians get their land back, and then you can all go back to ireland, khazaria, russia or wherever you yankees came from.