Jump to content
Islamic Forum


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Yurt

  • Rank
    Full Member

Previous Fields

  • Religion

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  1. What Happens Next?

    I don't understand people's myopic view of world events by saying that all these bombings are related to Iraq/Afgansitan. Let us not forget the 90s where al qaeda was training heavily for its war with the west. it threated britain well back in the 90's. It in fact attacked america more than once. it openly declared war on the west. it amazes me how people now say, oh, it is because of iraq/afgan and completely ignore the open declaration and acts of war carried out by AQ in the 90s. Why 90s, cause iraq was not fighting iran and with the help of the US, russian left afgan. now that was done, it was time to conquer the world.
  2. Atta's father praises London bombs CAIRO, Egypt (CNN) -- The father of one of the hijackers who commandeered the first plane that crashed into the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, praised the recent terror attacks in London and said many more would follow. Speaking to CNN producer Ayman Mohyeldin Tuesday in his apartment in the upper-middle-class Cairo suburb of Giza, Mohamed el-Amir said he would like to see more attacks like the July 7 bombings of three London subway trains and a bus that killed 52 people, plus the four bombers. Displayed prominently in the apartment were pictures of el-Amir's son, Mohamed Atta, the man who is believed to have piloted American Airlines Flight 11 into the north tower of the World Trade Center as part of the attacks on the United States. El-Amir said the attacks in the United States and the July 7 attacks in London were the beginning of what would be a 50-year religious war, in which there would be many more fighters like his son. He declared that terror cells around the world were a "nuclear bomb that has now been activated and is ticking." ... "you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.cnn(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/2005/WORLD/meast/07/19/atta.father.terror/index.html"]link[/url]
  3. "islamic" Terrorists

    Actually it does matter. The thread was about why does the media (western presumbly) call them Islamic terrorists. It has been explained that so called christian terrorists, the IRA, do not go around claiming they do things in the name of Allah. Are you saying that there are no muslims chanting for the death of america on TV? Are you saying that no muslims are burning effigies of american leaders? You still have not addressed fully the article posted, rather, you have done exactly what the article claims: blame the west for everything. its the media, its this about the west. You have proven the article.
  4. "islamic" Terrorists

    Do you mean "DO NOT" represent all the catholics? You most likely did, given the rest of your post. :D I make typos all the time, no worries. However, it still stands, the IRA did not go around yelling that they were doing this in God's name. When an Englishmen died, they did not yell, "Allahuha Akbar." They did not recite the Bible in front of a camera before they killed people. It was about land, not a religious conquest to take over the world. Yes or No? Islam's goal is to have the earth under one rule, that being Islam. I await your answer.
  5. "islamic" Terrorists

    This is my understanding as well. If someone has evidence that will show me that the IRA fought in the name of Christianity then please let us see it. Here is a synospis: The Irish Republican Army (IRA) has its roots in Ireland's struggle for independence from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland in the early twentieth century. It is important to differentiate between what is termed the 'Old IRA' and the 'Official IRA' from the Provisional IRA (PIRA), a splinter-group which formed in the late 1960s in the wake of institutionalized anti-Catholic discrimination, riots and murders (mainly in Belfast and Derry). Here is the link to learn more. "you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_en.wikipedia(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/wiki/Irish_Republican_Army"]link[/url] An important difference in talking about the IRA versus the English is, assuming arguendo that we debase the whole conflict to simply religious war, that these were "christians fighting christians." Parentheticals to emphasis that this was not the core reason for the conflict. It was over land and the right to rule over that land. The IRA did not run out into the streets with bombs attached to themselves yelling, "God is great, God is great, die you english...." They did not hold rallies where people burned effigies of the leaders and then shouted "God is great, God is great." My take is simply my opinion and only that. I have tried to understand the muslim "side," however, find it difficult. Why? Recall after 9/11 all the scenes from the ME of people chanting in mad ecstacy over the destruction of the towers. "Death to America, Death to America." "Allahuha Akbar...." This is clear perception in the minds of westerners over where this conflict stands. It ends in death to the USA and it will be because of Allah. When the videos have come out from the beheadings, they are all about this "war" being Allah's will. When Osama has spoken to the media, it is all couched in Allah's will. I have been in contact with many muslims in the past year that firmly believe that Jihad is meant to be primarily offensive, not defensive. Their belief is that a non Islamic state is unacceptable on the face of the earth and they will stop at nothing to see this. The IRA? They only wanted some land with the right to rule, not the whole earth. They did not quote scripture when conflicting with England, whereas, the "muslim" terrorists do quote the Quran as their source of authority.
  6. "islamic" Terrorists

    An interesting article on point here: "you can't post links until you reach 50 posts_www.atrueword(contact admin if its a beneficial link)/index.php/article/articleview/34/1/2"]article[/url] MUSLIMS HAVE a credibility problem. In the modern era, we have a tendency to believe and repeat wild theories, with our only criteria for accepting those theories being that they lend support to pre-existing attitudes. It takes an extremely sympathetic person to overlook such a deficiency, and sympathy for Muslims in a post 9/11 West is in short supply. This is a deficiency that the clash-of-civilizations crowd has astutely begun to capitalize on. Pro-israel groups like the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) play a perpetual game of “gotcha,†scouring the Arab press for the most egregious conspiracy-peddling, then forwarding it to a network of like-minded opinion writers as grist for the Islamophobia mill. MEMRI’s job isn’t difficult. It seems so elementary: don’t repeat everything you hear as fact if you don’t have evidence for it. Test theories with investigation, and modify theories in light of results. That’s the scientific method that we all learned in sixth grade. I post this next para because I could not cut it out without it ruining the rest of the author's reference. However, I strongly disagree with the author's premise that this individual was responsible for the "scientific method." History clearly shows that these minor methods were around thousands of years before this individual and did not get complete until the 17th century. When Princess Diana died in September 1997, a number of Arab columnists warned that she was murdered by British intelligence because she was going to marry an Arab Muslim. Other Muslims opined that she had in fact already converted to Islam and that she had died as a shaheed (martyr). Such ideas gained currency in Muslim communities in the West and East, with the basis for such claims being nothing more solid than the journalistic equivalent of reading tea leaves. When the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke, some Arab commentators claimed it was all an elaborate “Jewish plot†to cause Clinton to be impeached and removed from office, in order to prevent him from eventually recognizing a Palestinian state. ... Likewise, it was not long after September 11, before Arab columnists were pointing the fingers at the Jews. One such commentator, writing in Jordan’s ad-Dustour, pointed the finger at the “great Jewish Zionist mastermind that controls the world’s economy, media and politics.†... One of the most widely heard tales in the Muslim world is that 4,000 Jews, forewarned of the impending attacks, decided to all stay home on the morning of September 11. ... Repeating theories without evidence is a sign of intellectual weakness, but it’s equally absurd to assert that any claim of behind-the-scenes influence is paranoid bigotry, or that conspiracies as a rule do not exist.
  7. To All Non Muslims!(christians Actually)

    I do proclaim to speak for all christians, however, I will speak for myself and those I do know. Having premarital sex is a no no. Something akin to fornication. I remember being read the versus of the Bible when I was young, but I can't remember them now. My wife and I dated for a couple of years before marriage. In that time we honored the ways the God would have us and waited. Also, please do not take some christians actions as speaking for the faith itself.
  8. Does Jesus Have A Father?

    The only Being that created Jesus inside Mary was God. Most people consider someone who created another being inside of a woman the father of that person.
  9. Osama Ben Laden Vs 911

    cont.. This proves only one thing, which is widely known, that the US always has plans on the table for contingencies with other countries that are hostile to the US. Read up. Do you think the US has NO plans if china were to invade taiwan? Of course they do. This statement by you proves nothing except that the US plans worst case scenarios. Very prudent. Evidence? The whole world knew he did it. Wait, except some muslims and left fielder consperacy folks, who thought he was innocent. Innocent of what? Do you deny that he had formed a militaristic Islamic movement? Do you deny that he hated America? Do you deny that he wanted to see her destruction? Do you? Plenty. I threaten you and say I will kill you because you are a whatever, then you die. Hmm, who is the first suspect, given that many people heard or knew about my death threats against you. ME. Why? Because who else has the motive? Well, the guy making death threats surely has a motive. Now, does he have the means? Osama? Yes. Look at his power in Afgan. He had control, at a minimum, access to thousands of muslims who wanted to destroy America. Thus, means is met. Previous acts? Osama? Yes. 1993. USS cole bombing. Embassies in Africa. If you deny those were done by al qaeda, then you the juror have your opinion. You are one of 12. Guess what, the other 11 believe it was al qaeda. Thus we establish motis operandi. Admissible to prove guilt, because it establishes identity concerning a certain act. Answered. As can be shown, there is enough circumstantial evidence, including interviews with Osama's family who have denounced him, that shows guilt. Yes, the body and the murder weapon help, but there is enough to convict. Motive, means, past acts.
  10. Osama Ben Laden Vs 911

    Chaand,Jul 9 2005, 11:20 AM] Asalaamo aleykum, Within minutes muslims were claiming this was done by the US and/or israel. Issue: Osama/Al qaeda have made express claims of their hatred for America. Further, they have expressly declared their desire to destroy America. Or do you deny this? Yeah, that is why there was dancing in the streets in the middle east after the attacks. They were dancing because they knew how gullible we are in accepting the media's lies. No. They were dancing over the destruction and murder of innocent civilians. Or do you deny this took place? Yeah, that is because al qaeda hides and is afraid to declare war. Instead they go on TV in their masks and make death threats to the US and her people. Me by the way. Oh, and not just al qaeda, turn on the news in Iran and witness the death threats and hateful messages from them. Then go to Pakistan. Syria. Keep going. These messages were going on LONG before 9/11. Not true. As has been pointed out, the defense of a country does not take place in a court of law. Even if this had, the circumstantial evidence is more than enough to convict al qaeda and Osama. Think, why did Osama's family basically kick him out? Why? Why was Clinton after him? Why? next....
  11. What's Behind The London Attacks?

    Never heard of that. Do you have any corroborating evidence? I know you said the video has disappeared, so did you see this first hand? It seems very hard to believe the veracity of that video.
  12. What's Behind The London Attacks?

    Peace, Who was responsible for 1993 WTC bombings? The 1998 US embassy bombings? Al Qaeda formed during the 1980's to repel the Soviet invasion. It is not a new name created from the aftermath of the carnage of 9/11. Why do you think Osama was banned from Saudi Arabia in 1991? Right after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. Because he was angered that the US was allowed to have bases there. You might ask why I think al qaeda. In 1996 Bin laden waged official war against the US. What happened? Khobar Towers. No one has yet to answer for who committed the atrocities in Spain. Even though it was proudly procliamed. The same motive, the same operandi. In a court of law, this counts as circumstantial evidence and is allowed as circumstantial and as character evidence. All I am saying is, do not close your eyes to the fact that it might be al qaeda simply because they are "muslim." I will also not close my eyes to other possibilities. However, I have presented a pretty good case, at least to go the grand jury.
  13. What's Behind The London Attacks?

    why do you forget that osama himself has threatened to bomb "your" cities because you have bombed ours. al qaida is a known enemy that has many numerous statements of revenge. spain? do you think that was the leftist government's plot to install their leftist puppet leader? or do you believe that was al qaida? london, same MO. all circumstantial evidence points to al qaida.
  14. Christian Chickenhawk Cheney V Abizaid

    That is the most racists thing I have heard since..... oh Howard dean. Be original next time and not so racists. Are you brown? See, sounds stupid. :D
  15. To All The Non-muslims

    This is a good thought, though have you ever seen a painting wrapped up? What about a CD presented as a gift? A box with stuff in it. You can easily wrap up a flat plain surface as well. And the same analogy will apply, because both items could be wrapped up into each other as like a sphere. The only difference is going around a proverbial corner versus cover a ball.