Al Qaeda leader tells Uyghurs to prepare for holy war against C...

Full story: CNN 254
A high-ranking al Qaeda leader has called on China's minority Uyghurs to prepare for a holy war against the Chinese government. Full Story
First Prev
of 13
Next Last
MajorMalfunction

UK

#251 Oct 29, 2009
chevelle_ss wrote:
<quoted text>
ok ok I get it already damn lol. mexicans are a general term for anyone south of the boarder to some people. kinda like the native americans is a general term in europe. mexicans would also be mad at me for saying they are all mexicans. they feel they are above the people in Guatemala,belize, El Salvador and honduras.
not that topix is a fountain of intelligent debate anyway...

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#252 Oct 29, 2009
MajorMalfunction wrote:
<quoted text>
not that topix is a fountain of intelligent debate anyway...
hey when I get something wrong I would hope for a correction. I did thank him for correcting me. I thought it would have ended at that. no one is perfect
MajorMalfunction

UK

#253 Oct 30, 2009
chevelle_ss wrote:
<quoted text>
hey when I get something wrong I would hope for a correction. I did thank him for correcting me. I thought it would have ended at that. no one is perfect
You mean you thanked ME for correcting you.....Agghhh I can't stop correcting you!!!!
Ron-Texas

Belton, TX

#254 Oct 30, 2009
chevelle_ss wrote:
<quoted text>
wow using the same banter in 2 posts to me. for someone of your cal. I was expecting more. again you fail to say anything that is informing. no need to reply I can just re read the last post. it will save your copy & paste.
Then why is it so hard for you to understand?

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#255 Oct 30, 2009
Ron-Texas wrote:
<quoted text>Then why is it so hard for you to understand?
cause i am frickin stupid.

plese corect tis 4 me tank yuo
LordZarquar

East Lansing, MI

#256 Feb 11, 2010
Bob Burns wrote:
<quoted text>Disinformation, cover for agents and supporters, denial, fool the foolish, create confusion, dissent and division among the potential opponents. There are many, who, for various politically convenient reasons, hold up somebodies word as proof.
If he is building nuclear weapons who is he fooling? The media doesn't talk about his fatwa at all.
If/when he atoms Israel, millions of Muslims will cheer, glad he pulled the wool over everybodies eyes with a few words, disarmed the world with a piece of paper.
If/when he atoms Israel Iran will be turned into a giant parking lot and he knows that.
No doubt he will have some religious justification for doing so, some other un-published fatwa renouncing the first.
It would be too late. That he could not have produced that quickly without deciding would be obvious.

Then again enrichment is still at a level where he could be ordering "peaceful" production while secretly thinking of eventual weapons. But it would still take some time after he renounces his fatwa to have nuclear weapons ready.

I suppose its possible nuclear weapons could be in the planning but at this stage it would only be in his head, most likely not even spoken to anyone, because telling someone would risk exposing a false fatwa. So Iran's not going to come out with nukes tomorrow. That would be too obvious he had intended nuclear weapons during the fatwa. If he is planning nuclear weapons he will renounce his fatwa when it's close enough that if he didn't it would be obvious he had planned weapons production at that point.

I'm still very skeptical. It wouldn't seem like there'd be any point in making that fatwa in the first place. The media never talked about it, and he couldn't have seriously been expecting it to when it is in the US government's interests that we believe Iran is making a bomb whether it is or not.
I have learned not to listen to what people say, but to what they do, and their character.
And what about how other people's action or actions other people might take(possibly in response to someone not keeping their word) might affect a person's behavior?
I could go on, but I think you see my point. As for the 12th Imam, please consult the 'net. No point in me copying and pasting what you can easily find
It remains possible this is the reason. However,

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/magazine/02...

This is an article about sanctions for Iran. Look into the article and you find that one concern is that Iranians are sending their money to Dubai to keep it safe.

If we're about to have the apocalypse why do Iranians care so much about keeping their money safe? If they really want to start the apocalypse you'd think they'd be worried only about having the money to build nuclear weapons.

So I can see how it's possible Iran might be building nuclear weapons. It would be good to have more international oversight to make sure they are not. But it's still not likely.
Monk

Andover, MN

#257 Feb 11, 2010
LordZarquar wrote:
<quoted text>
If he is building nuclear weapons who is he fooling? The media doesn't talk about his fatwa at all.
<quoted text>
If/when he atoms Israel Iran will be turned into a giant parking lot and he knows that.
<quoted text>
It would be too late. That he could not have produced that quickly without deciding would be obvious.
Then again enrichment is still at a level where he could be ordering "peaceful" production while secretly thinking of eventual weapons. But it would still take some time after he renounces his fatwa to have nuclear weapons ready.
I suppose its possible nuclear weapons could be in the planning but at this stage it would only be in his head, most likely not even spoken to anyone, because telling someone would risk exposing a false fatwa. So Iran's not going to come out with nukes tomorrow. That would be too obvious he had intended nuclear weapons during the fatwa. If he is planning nuclear weapons he will renounce his fatwa when it's close enough that if he didn't it would be obvious he had planned weapons production at that point.
I'm still very skeptical. It wouldn't seem like there'd be any point in making that fatwa in the first place. The media never talked about it, and he couldn't have seriously been expecting it to when it is in the US government's interests that we believe Iran is making a bomb whether it is or not.
<quoted text>
And what about how other people's action or actions other people might take(possibly in response to someone not keeping their word) might affect a person's behavior?
<quoted text>
It remains possible this is the reason. However,
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/02/magazine/02...
This is an article about sanctions for Iran. Look into the article and you find that one concern is that Iranians are sending their money to Dubai to keep it safe.
If we're about to have the apocalypse why do Iranians care so much about keeping their money safe? If they really want to start the apocalypse you'd think they'd be worried only about having the money to build nuclear weapons.
So I can see how it's possible Iran might be building nuclear weapons. It would be good to have more international oversight to make sure they are not. But it's still not likely.
Your reason and cogent discourse is very noble. However, the secular part of Iran's government are liars, frauds and murderers. Believing them is dealing with the devil. But I enjoy reading your posts. Monk
The Northern Observer

Canada

#258 Feb 11, 2010
Undeniable connection among World Uighur Congress/Rebiya/Turks, Al-Qaeda, and Taliban.

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-de...

15 Turks, Uighurs killed by Afghan drone attack
Two US, 4 Afghan soldiers killed in attacks
Afp, Ap, Kabul/ Ghazni

An attack by a Western drone aircraft in Afghanistan killed 15 militants of Turkish and Chinese Uighur origin, a Turkish militant website was quoted as saying on Saturday.
The Islamist website, quoted by the US-based SITE Intelligence Group which monitors such sites, said the attack took place on January 19.
The Nato military force said it had no record of such an attack on that day but announced a few days earlier, on January 12, that 16 militants had been killed by missiles from drone aircraft in the southern province of Helmand.
"Fifteen Mujahideen brothers were martyred (Allah willing) on 19 January 2010 in Afghanistan as a result of bombardment from an occupying infidel Crusader army spy plane," the website said.
"Thirteen of our fifteen martyrs who did jihad within the ranks of the Turkistan Islamic Party were Uighur and two of them were Turks," it said.
LordZarquar

East Lansing, MI

#259 Feb 11, 2010
Monk wrote:
<quoted text>
Your reason and cogent discourse is very noble. However, the secular part of Iran's government are liars, frauds and murderers. Believing them is dealing with the devil. But I enjoy reading your posts. Monk
Thanks

Though I'd like to point out I don't believe Khamenei(not "them", one person said this) because I trust him or think he is an honest person, but because of the consequences he would face from his own countrymen if caught.

They are liars but not compulsive liars. They won't lie just for the heck of it and certainly not when it isn't in their best interests to lie.
Monk

Andover, MN

#260 Feb 12, 2010
LordZarquar wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks
Though I'd like to point out I don't believe Khamenei(not "them", one person said this) because I trust him or think he is an honest person, but because of the consequences he would face from his own countrymen if caught.
They are liars but not compulsive liars. They won't lie just for the heck of it and certainly not when it isn't in their best interests to lie.
While he may not be a pathological liar like Ahmadinejad, his world view is from the 7th century and his single-minded belief in destroying the West is
dangerous and irrational. I sympathize with the good people of Iran who want to live peacefully in the 21st century. The message at Friday worship in Iran is always a message of hate and intolerance. Iran exports this hate in the form of weapons and new recruits for world jihad. At some point, Iran must be stopped. We both know that day is rapidly approaching.
LordZarquar

East Lansing, MI

#261 Feb 13, 2010
Monk wrote:
<quoted text>
While he may not be a pathological liar like Ahmadinejad, his world view is from the 7th century and his single-minded belief in destroying the West is
dangerous and irrational. I sympathize with the good people of Iran who want to live peacefully in the 21st century. The message at Friday worship in Iran is always a message of hate and intolerance. Iran exports this hate in the form of weapons and new recruits for world jihad. At some point, Iran must be stopped. We both know that day is rapidly approaching.
I don't dispute that Iran has a vile government that its people need to throw out. I just don't automatically assume that if someone is evil in one way that everything bad said about them must automatically be true.

I do think Iran would be building nuclear weapons if Ahmadinejad was Supreme Leader but luckily he's only the President and in Iran the Supreme Leader runs the nuclear program. You could be right about the IRG running things behind his back, but I haven't seen any evidence that this is happening. Given the government's lies about Iraq to get us to go to war back then I'm skeptical of any more claims of WMD.

Another thing that makes me skeptical is the way the media distorts things. Why is it going out of its way to make it look like Iran is building nuclear weapons? Even if Iran is making nuclear weapons that doesn't explain why the media talks so much about what Ahmadinejad says and does while ignoring Khamenei when Khamenei has more power.

It also doesn't explain why the media translates everything Ahmadinejad says to make it sound worse than it is. Remember when it was reported he said Israel should be "wiped off the map". Since Ahmadinejad was speaking farsi when he was quoted on that it couldn't have been what he really said(even if he had said the Farsi equivalent). However, the media rarely translates foreign languages word for word. Notice they use a metaphor(wiping off the map) from OUR language and OUR culture. It would be a huge coincidence is this same metaphor was used in Iranian culture.

What he said was literally "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/norouzi.php...

Translated literally it means "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".

In their language he could've easily just said "Israel" instsead of "regime occupying Jerusalem" and probably would've if he was referring to the land or country. The fact that he said "Regime" ("rezhim-e") means he was saying he(or literally Khomeinei since he refers to the Imam) wants the Israeli government to go away.

Not exactly a surprising thing for him to say given Iran's well known stance against Israel. Yet the media translated it so it would sound like he was saying he wanted to destroy Israel.

The media would not be going out of its way to make Iran look its making nuclear weapons or that it intends to destroy Israel if there weren't powerful people who want us to believe that regardless of whether this is true or not. So whether Iran has weapons or not the people reporting on it are biased to the idea that it does. Since they are not reporting objectively they(the mainstream media) can not be trusted.

“False Prophet”

Since: Jan 08

hamilton

#262 Feb 13, 2010
"These Al Queda are crazy," said Obelix tapping his head
Monk

Andover, MN

#263 Feb 13, 2010
LordZarquar wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't dispute that Iran has a vile government that its people need to throw out. I just don't automatically assume that if someone is evil in one way that everything bad said about them must automatically be true.
I do think Iran would be building nuclear weapons if Ahmadinejad was Supreme Leader but luckily he's only the President and in Iran the Supreme Leader runs the nuclear program. You could be right about the IRG running things behind his back, but I haven't seen any evidence that this is happening. Given the government's lies about Iraq to get us to go to war back then I'm skeptical of any more claims of WMD.
Another thing that makes me skeptical is the way the media distorts things. Why is it going out of its way to make it look like Iran is building nuclear weapons? Even if Iran is making nuclear weapons that doesn't explain why the media talks so much about what Ahmadinejad says and does while ignoring Khamenei when Khamenei has more power.
It also doesn't explain why the media translates everything Ahmadinejad says to make it sound worse than it is. Remember when it was reported he said Israel should be "wiped off the map". Since Ahmadinejad was speaking farsi when he was quoted on that it couldn't have been what he really said(even if he had said the Farsi equivalent). However, the media rarely translates foreign languages word for word. Notice they use a metaphor(wiping off the map) from OUR language and OUR culture. It would be a huge coincidence is this same metaphor was used in Iranian culture.
What he said was literally "Imam ghoft een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad."
http://www.antiwar.com/orig/norouzi.php...
Translated literally it means "The Imam said this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time".
In their language he could've easily just said "Israel" instsead of "regime occupying Jerusalem" and probably would've if he was referring to the land or country. The fact that he said "Regime" ("rezhim-e") means he was saying he(or literally Khomeinei since he refers to the Imam) wants the Israeli government to go away.
Not exactly a surprising thing for him to say given Iran's well known stance against Israel. Yet the media translated it so it would sound like he was saying he wanted to destroy Israel.
The media would not be going out of its way to make Iran look its making nuclear weapons or that it intends to destroy Israel if there weren't powerful people who want us to believe that regardless of whether this is true or not. So whether Iran has weapons or not the people reporting on it are biased to the idea that it does. Since they are not reporting objectively they(the mainstream media) can not be trusted.
What you say may be true about the media and our government vilifying Iran, but the anti-West message is clear- the Great Satan must be destroyed. Iran and its ilk- al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah,Syria, Venezuela and a few other nothing countries have only 1 hope of destroying us- the bomb. Their nearest point of attack is Israel and translations aside, the Islamic world jihad, while not monlitithic, is obsessed with the US-Israel alliance. A dirty or even small nuke could do alot of economic damage as shown by 9/11. That nuke needs enriched uranium and Iran is the best logical source (unless radicals can overthrow Pakistan- which India and the
West will never allow).
Propaganda is effective for both the US and Iran in a standoff over enriching uranium. Iran has other sources of enriched uranium as do the world's other nations. If Khamenei and the 7th century clerics fall from power in a government coup- nobody will remember who said what if Iran suddenly has the bomb. UN inspection is a simple solution to quell the rumors.
LordZarquar

East Lansing, MI

#264 Feb 13, 2010
Monk wrote:
<quoted text>
What you say may be true about the media and our government vilifying Iran, but the anti-West message is clear- the Great Satan must be destroyed. Iran and its ilk- al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah,Syria, Venezuela and a few other nothing countries have only 1 hope of destroying us- the bomb. Their nearest point of attack is Israel and translations aside, the Islamic world jihad, while not monlitithic, is obsessed with the US-Israel alliance. A dirty or even small nuke could do alot of economic damage as shown by 9/11. That nuke needs enriched uranium and Iran is the best logical source (unless radicals can overthrow Pakistan- which India and the
West will never allow).
Propaganda is effective for both the US and Iran in a standoff over enriching uranium. Iran has other sources of enriched uranium as do the world's other nations. If Khamenei and the 7th century clerics fall from power in a government coup- nobody will remember who said what if Iran suddenly has the bomb. UN inspection is a simple solution to quell the rumors.
You're thinking of "destroying" in the physical sense. These people are thinking of it in a political sense. The Soviet Union was very powerful, but it has been destroyed without a single nuclear bomb dropped on it. The Soviet Union was once called "the Great Satan".

What these people hope for is the collapse of the US government and the Israeli government not for a nuclear holocaust. They have shown a willingness to resort to violence, but I doubt they're going to sacrifice thousands of Muslim lives just to nuke Israel.

If Iran is building a nuclear bomb it's for deterrence and as a political pawn, same reason any country builds nuclear bombs.

Iran could be building a nuclear bomb. So could Saudi Arabia or Syria or Laos or anybody. But the fact that the media and politicians go out of their way to lie to make it look more like Iran is building nuclear weapons suggests they don't have real evidence. Otherwise why not rely solely on real evidence and not make things up or exaggerate?

As for dirty bombs, the only thing dirty bombs cause is "panic" because people don't know that it would only kill people right next to the bomb(like an ordinary bomb).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb

Even if nothing is done to clean up the radiation for a year the radiation exposure would be high but not fatal and of course cleanup would be done so exposure wouldn't even be high.

But I've never heard the media say anything about this or any politicians. Obama even spoke once of the threat of a nuclear bomb. Shame on him. He must have read up on this stuff. Why doesn't he tell the public that dirty bombs aren't that dangerous? Letting the public know the truth about dirty bombs would be the best way to protect the public from the harm terrorists would seek to unleash if they did use a dirty bomb, that is the harm caused by mass panic.

It shows that Obama just like Bush, Clinton, Reagan, most presidents going back are trying to control the public through fear. I had hope for Obama, thought he was different but he's another establishment politician.

In 2012 don't vote for Obama, don't vote Republican, vote Green or vote Socialist, or vote Libertarian. Maybe even vote for a non-party candidate. Or write in your own name. Will your candidate win? No. But not it shows your disapproval of the status quo. Voting Democrat or Republican is what spoils your ballot not voting for independents, because it doesn't matter whether Democrats or Republicans win. Ballot might as well say "Corporate Stooge A" and "Corporate Stooge B".

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 13
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Urumqi, China Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
China opens first leg of high-speed railway in ... Nov 16 RayH 1
Is China's grand ethnic experiment working? Nov 3 RayH 1
China Sentences Peaceful Uyghur Scholar Ilham T... Sep '14 Jennie PC Chiang 1
Economic model in Xinjiang must be modified to ... Aug '14 Bob Burns 1
China studying new Silk Road rail link to Pakistan Jul '14 NITiN 3
China to build new Silk Road rail link to Pakistan Jul '14 NITiN 1
Web Preaches Jihad to China's Muslim Uighurs Jun '14 can you 1

Urumqi, China People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

NFL Latest News

Updated 6:21 pm PST