You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Explosions in London

Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 9:39am

Post 1 of 153

jotoki

Force: 1855 | Joined: 28th Dec 2001 | Posts: 630

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Seems there's been a series of explosions in london in the underground and on at least one bus
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 9:50am

Post 2 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Scary and mystifying... they're attributing the tube ones to a power surge but it can't all be coincidence, with a bus involved too.
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:04am

Post 3 of 153

jotoki

Force: 1855 | Joined: 28th Dec 2001 | Posts: 630

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

nah the power surge thing is rubbish, they say there's three buses involved aswell and the power company says it had no problems this morning. it's just trying to keep the panic down
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:07am

Post 4 of 153

Squid

Force: 495 | Joined: 17th Jan 2005 | Posts: 317

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Wow, that's insane. Any more information about this?
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:09am

Post 5 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

20 people dead, God.

I would have recommended Reuters for up to date news but their server's too busy & crashed. Wonder why...

Edit: 2 dead not 20, people are telling me

Last edited Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 12:08pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:11am

Post 6 of 153

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

All sorts of conflicting information coming in at the moment, we don't even seem to know the scale of what's happening yet.

All of us at FXhome hope all our London-based users are safe and well.
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:14am

Post 7 of 153

Squid

Force: 495 | Joined: 17th Jan 2005 | Posts: 317

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Christ, 20 dead? Horrible, just horrible... If anyone finds out anything, please post.

***EDIT***
Nothing that hasn't already been said, and this is the best article I've found so far... http://www.albawaba.com/en/news/185969
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:18am

Post 8 of 153

jotoki

Force: 1855 | Joined: 28th Dec 2001 | Posts: 630

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

yeah like it always is with this stuff pretty confused for a while. Looks like 4 underground and 3 above ground explosions at the moment. Some talk of the bomb squad carrying out controlled explosions somewhere
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:19am

Post 9 of 153

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

As usual, BBC is one of the best places to go for information:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:27am

Post 10 of 153

jotoki

Force: 1855 | Joined: 28th Dec 2001 | Posts: 630

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

yeah i know and it's blocked where i work till 12pm. We have the TV on here though but sound is down (being an IT dept and all)

i exepct it will end up being more than 20, thats just once again how these things go. if it's six explosions as reports are now saying thats three underground and three on buses then if we get away with just 20 it will be some kind of miracle
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 11:25am

Post 11 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

This is worrying.

I too hope all the FXHomers in London, and their friends and families, are ok.

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 12:05pm

Post 12 of 153

chuter

Force: 350 | Joined: 12th Aug 2003 | Posts: 145

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Its pretty scary. I live in london, and was supposed to be at kings cross for 10am (one of the stations that was attacked). its prettty chaotic. 2 dead so far, not 20.
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 1:43pm

Post 13 of 153

jotoki

Force: 1855 | Joined: 28th Dec 2001 | Posts: 630

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

well there are reports "from an unofficlal but reliable source" of 45 dead and over 1000 injured. Thats according to a sky news reporter. but you know what these things are like. It seems very Unlikely that it would be just two deaths given the location of the bombs and the concentration of people therein. Two is however still the official figure
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 3:30pm

Post 14 of 153

Madmanmatty

Force: 368 | Joined: 17th Mar 2003 | Posts: 372

FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Prayers and luck wished on you Brits. I hope no FXhomers were hurt.

Once again, Blair makes a profound statement:
"It's important however that those engaged in terrorism realize that our determination to defend our values and way of life is greater than their determination to cause death and destruction to innocent people."

I can picture the terrorists mouthing the same things, sadly. Whereas 9/11 was provoked by hate and jealousy, these attacks are directly linked to the war in Iraq. Thousands of innocent people have died there, and nobody gives a damn. We're to busy defending our values and way of life. Because terrorists won't stop us from visiting Starbucks and GAP. Oh yeah- and the terrorists just want to cause death and destruction in the innocent ranks. They just like blowing things up. Rubbish. From thier point of view, it's desperate attempts to cause attention, fueled on hate.
But it's hard to seperate terrorism from warfare... I mean, it seems that if you just get a bunch of superpowers behind your cause, terrorism just becomes war. So the Ameican and British military can invade Iraq and shoot thier people openly, but when it comes full circle, it's an outrage. Panic in the streets of London.

I just hope people stop and think before becoming the enraged mob that usually follows this kind of attack. Everyone (myself included) is still to shocked to do anything but feel absoultey horrible, but you can bet this attack is going to generate more innocent death in Iraq. sad
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 3:57pm

Post 15 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

these attacks are directly linked to the war in Iraq
At the moment, that's just speculation. I know one group has claimed responsibility, linking the attacks to Iraq - but often, with these kinds of attacks, many groups are willing to say that they were the ones to carry them out.

Only time will tell who the bombers were, and what their motives were.

But I don't think the UK is going to become an "angry mob" - we're much more used to this kind of thing, having been subjected to the IRA attacks of the 80s and 90s, as well as many Londoners having lived through the blitz. I think it's a testament to the British spirit that panic hasn't broken out in the capital, and people are carrying on, with as much normality as is possible.
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 4:54pm

Post 16 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I heard it was a secret sect of the secret division of the highly secretive al queda or something.
I say we use this opportunity to invade france.

Though, on a serious note. Hatred inspires Hatred, and a countries hatred is the wrong kind of attention to be trying to get especially of a country who have been so far, largely anti-invading Iraq and anti-war. It'll be interesting to see who claims responsibility and who is actually responsible, and how it affects the grand scheme of things.
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 7:46pm

Post 17 of 153

tmaynard

Force: 450 | Joined: 15th Aug 2003 | Posts: 164

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

I was looking around on BBC and found this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4660391.stm

Supposedly, a statement from an islamic website confirming the attacks.

This is wrong, just wrong. I hope the best for everyone in London and I feel that this should not be taken lightly. Probably best not to flip out over it, but once organized something should be done.
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 8:00pm

Post 18 of 153

TommyB

Force: 190 | Joined: 25th Nov 2004 | Posts: 666

Member

Terrorists are stupid.

There is NO God who would support the murder of innocent people.

Reading what is written on that extract from the Islamic website makes me cringe. I pray that 'God' isn't the god they describe.

Last edited Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 8:03pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 8:01pm

Post 19 of 153

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

not a nice one any way. not one I'd want to hang with on the weekends.
Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:33pm

Post 20 of 153

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Last I heard the death toll was at 37 dead (expected to rise) and around 700 wounded. It's terrible that someone could do this and say "Job well done." What kind of people think that they are justified in killing innocent people over disagreements. Of course Al Queda is jumping all over this saying it was them, but I haven't heard any confirmed reports as to who did it. All of what I heard is speculation. The bombs are trying to be pieced together to see who made them and I'm sure that will help a lot. I hope that further events such as these can be stopped. Like Tarn said I hope all of the London based fxhome members are alright.

Last edited Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:40pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Thu, 7th Jul 2005, 10:39pm

Post 21 of 153

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Balls. Well, I'm alive.

Everything seems pretty surreal at the moment, I just saw one of the greatest cities in the world shutdown completely.

Was close to the explosion on the bus.

Can't really type about it at the moment. Pretty insane though. Best not describe the scene either. The whole of the crew I was with moved to outer London as quick as possible.

My wishes go to everyone effected. It's been a sickly day.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 12:05am

Post 22 of 153

CurtinParloe

Force: 841 | Joined: 16th Oct 2001 | Posts: 916

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Hope everyone we've not heard from is OK.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 1:29am

Post 23 of 153

ggbros

Force: 258 | Joined: 23rd Jun 2002 | Posts: 318

Windows User

Gold Member

God help us all! Prayers in this crazy time...

Gary
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 2:16am

Post 24 of 153

bnahrwold

Force: 200 | Joined: 25th Jan 2003 | Posts: 18

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Let's be thankful it's not like what happened on 9/11 in the US.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 2:23am

Post 25 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

I'm terribly sorry to fxhomer's living in london. Hold strong. Hopefully We can bring justice to those who did this.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 6:26am

Post 26 of 153

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

There are already a bunch of nut job ass pundits talking about how this event is actually a good thing because it will advance the war on terror. Nice. I love people.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 7:41am

Post 27 of 153

jotoki

Force: 1855 | Joined: 28th Dec 2001 | Posts: 630

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

a little sad that someone has to hijack this for anti war retoric. Madmnamatty if you cant see the difference between terrorism that deliberately targets innocent defenseless people and war of military agains military then you really need to open your eyes. I'm not a fan of the war in iraq myself but I do know that most soldiers wouldn't deliberately target civilians, yes there are aborations in that which is sad but even the insurgents in Iraq generally choose hard targets. Using this as an excuse to have a go at Blair is just plain sad. There are times and places for that sort of thing, this is not it.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 2:22pm

Post 28 of 153

RudyPicardo

Force: 1016 | Joined: 18th Jun 2003 | Posts: 240

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

All sorts of conflicting information coming in at the moment, we don't even seem to know the scale of what's happening yet.
All of us at FXhome hope all our London-based users are safe and well.
Tarn:

I just read you post. If you can let me know if Joby (a.k.a er-no) and the other UK FXhome members are indeed ok, I would be greatful.

PS ~ No disrspect to those in London who are not members of FXHome are intended. But you are the only people in Europe I know so naturally I am deeply concerned.

Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man's sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true.
~ Martin Luther King Jr.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 4:21pm

Post 29 of 153

alexcull

Force: 440 | Joined: 23rd Apr 2005 | Posts: 187

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: -2

Even though it is a saddening fact, i kind of thought of something. Now, before i say this i want everyone to know i am a full George Bush Republican. Anyway, i was kinda thinking that this bombing is kind of GOOD for George Bush. Mainly because it will definatly get England the incentive to stay in the War on Terrorism, and ir might influence other countries in Europe. WHo knows, maybe this is bush's falt?!?! Nah...
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 4:33pm

Post 30 of 153

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

alexcull wrote:

Mainly because it will definatly get England the incentive to stay in the War on Terrorism,
I think it'll do the opposite. I think the attack on England was partially if not wholly because of their participation- though I believe the English community did not want to participate- in the war on terrorism, and because they were attacked for this reason, they will withdraw. Of course I could be entirely wrong, but this is just my opinion.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 4:46pm

Post 31 of 153

Rawree

Force: 3250 | Joined: 27th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1925

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

If the British decide to withdraw as a result of the bombings then all that would show is that intimidation and violence gets terrorists what they want and would increase attacks of this nature. They won't back down and they won't withdraw.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 4:49pm

Post 32 of 153

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

alexcull wrote:

Mainly because it will definatly get England the incentive to stay in the War on Terrorism, and ir might influence other countries in Europe.
I very much doubt that. As a nation/people, we don't tend to have knee-jerk violent reactions to things, or get in a mass hysterical, absurdly patriotic panic and lash out at the easiest, most obvious target. Hence we're not going to suddenly all get behind Bush's War and sign up to go conquer the Middle-East.

As Ben says, the country appeared to be generally against the war in the first place, and this is likely to turn people against it even more, if anything, as we became a target primarily through our involvement in Iraq. As seen in Spain, the bombings there didn't galvanise the country into fighting back, instead it caused a change of government and withdrawal.

I expect it won't change much public opinion at all, to be honest. I doubt there will be a mass, uninformed patriotic flag-waving reaction, nor a panicked "quick, hide!" reaction either. I imagine people will hold onto their previous opinions, but maybe a little more strongly than before.

As for it being 'good for Bush', I'm not sure how increased terrorist activity exactly plays into his whole War on Terror ideal. Not really working, is it?
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 4:51pm

Post 33 of 153

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rawree wrote:

If the British decide to withdraw as a result of the bombings then all that would show is that intimidation and violence gets terrorists what they want and would increase attacks of this nature. They won't back down and they won't withdraw.
Withdraw was a poor word choice. I mean, they won't take some astronomical step in fighting terrorism when it isn't absolutely necessary. Basically, I meant they won't make the same mistake the United States did by swiftly engaging in war with Iraq.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 4:55pm

Post 34 of 153

Rawree

Force: 3250 | Joined: 27th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1925

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I think this sums up the British reaction rather nicely:

This is the UK - general opinion is to shrug, clean the broken glass and dust off our shoulders and go back to whatever we were doing.

Now if they had managed to stop the weather broadcast or disrupt cricket ... maybe. Few bomb blasts? ...pff. Yes there are casualties and yes it is indeed a tragic and pointless waste of life, however how better to remember our countrymen? Quaking in fear in a basement or getting on with our day to day business whilst letting our boys creep into the bedrooms of our enemies and cut their throats?
The 3D Palace thread

Last edited Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 4:56pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 4:56pm

Post 35 of 153

The video machine

Force: 266 | Joined: 12th Jul 2004 | Posts: 284

Windows User

Gold Member

alexcull wrote:

Anyway, i was kinda thinking that this bombing is kind of GOOD for George Bush
I'm glad you think that's GOOD, i'm really glad you think 49 innocent people dying is good... well done you, glad to hear your brilliant opinion on that
D I P S H * T.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 5:04pm

Post 36 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

ben3308 wrote:

I mean, they won't take some astronomical step in fighting terrorism when it isn't absolutely necessary.
But it is necessary. It's absoluety necessary. We can't just sit around and try to talk to these terrorist. We have to go on the offensive. We have to fight these terrorist head on. I am sorry for this but if britain pulls out of Iraq( which I highly doubt) I will lose my respect for them.

Basically, I meant they won't make the same mistake the United States did by swiftly engaging in war with Iraq.
Actually ben the war in Iraq came a while after 9/11. Though I do think that the war in iraq was not the smartest move. I still think it was necessary.

But guys just think. If all the countries in europe and asia helped in the war on terror. Not just sending troops and what not. But helped with intelegence and looking for terrorist within there own country then terrorism would be wiped out. The United states and britain can't do it alone.
but most important is that no fxhomers were hurt and that the people who did this will have justice brought to them.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 5:28pm

Post 37 of 153

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

ssj john wrote:

But guys just think. If all the countries in europe and asia helped in the war on terror. Not just sending troops and what not. But helped with intelegence and looking for terrorist within there own country then terrorism would be wiped out.
Yes, that'd be great, but I doubt that would or will ever happen. To many people disagree with too many other people.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 5:42pm

Post 38 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

I'm sure most countries are trying to spot terrorists in their own countries, apart from the ones intentionally harbouring them.

I find the whole concept of the "war on terror" odd though. For me, war & terror are the same thing, plus these terrorists aren't playing the usual rules of war. They are careful, stealthy planners of events where they are always in control, & I think the way to root them out is to yes, majorly increase intelligence efforts. Not overblown war tactics.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 5:53pm

Post 39 of 153

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

ssj john wrote:

But guys just think. If all the countries in europe and asia helped in the war on terror. Not just sending troops and what not. But helped with intelegence and looking for terrorist within there own country then terrorism would be wiped out. The United states and britain can't do it alone.
but most important is that no fxhomers were hurt and that the people who did this will have justice brought to them.
That's a general lack of understanding of terrorism. You can't destroy terrorism by fighting it. It's like a cancer, if you just whack at it you'll just cause it to split into smaller pieces, which might end up being even more dangerous. Sure, you can wipe out specific groups, but you can never remove terrorism by fighting.

Do you think people wake up one day and think "hmm, I'm going to be a terrorist!" 'Cos they don't. At the root of all terrorism is a genuine problem, injustice, etc. Maybe a foreign government has been unfair economically and crippled their own. Maybe there was a war which left people starving and wounded. Either way, there's a genuine reason to be pissed off. The problem is that 'the terrorist' then reacts to that in a completely inappropriate manner.

If you don't face up to the facts that all terrorism has a root cause somewhere back in history, then you will never defeat it. Hence in this country we never got anywhere with the IRA until we actually opened up a dialogue and started discussing things. Sure, it's still a long, painful road, but you do get somewhere.

Al-Quaeda aren't the kind of people you can talk to. However, their grievances do originate somewhere, even if their reactions to them are barbaric and ignorant. By fighting them with force you will only antagonise people and increase their power. If you go to the root, see why people are angry at the US, and start to correct the mistakes of the past and look to fixing things in the future, gradually, over time, the support for terrorist groups will wane, because there will no longer be a need (however misplaced) to feel that way.

If you fight fire with fire, as has been shown in Iraq, you just end up with more fire.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 5:56pm

Post 40 of 153

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I kind of agree with Mellifluous... The carpet bombing of Afghanistan hasn't brought down Ben laden, he is still at large, Al Quaeda has grown in resolve (if not in means) and the trashing of half of Irak hasn't stopped them either...

Terrorism is like organized crime in a way: Small cells that work independently of each other. They need to be inflitrated and brought down from inside... All the military might in the world is not going to stop terrorism... It's like an elephant trying to kill a mouse... The mouse is way too quick for the elephant and it ends up trashing the house in the process but the mouse is still safe... To kill a mouse, you need a cat... Not an elephant.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 5:58pm

Post 41 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Love the analogies!
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 6:29pm

Post 42 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Though I agree pretty entirely with Tarn's points, when a Terrorist group or inspiration sets out in a manner that renders them unreachable for negotiation then there is little other options than to create consequences for their actions which unfortunately often involves the innocent which further fuels terrorism/hatred itself or to do as we seem to be doing currently and just trying to bring the few responsible to justice.

If anything, the terrorist attacks will do nothing else other than unite the world against terrorism. Europe has been too busy battling amongst itself until recently, when all the leaders of europe stood together to deliver a message. Personally, I think creating consequences worked fine. Saddam had little trouble keeping everyone in order, didn't he?

Terrorism is meant to be for a cause, and I can't honestly see how attacking western countries will further any purpose or set anything in motion other than more hatred. And we have the big guns.

Rawree wrote:

I think this sums up the British reaction rather nicely:

This is the UK - general opinion is to shrug, clean the broken glass and dust off our shoulders and go back to whatever we were doing.

Now if they had managed to stop the weather broadcast or disrupt cricket ... maybe. Few bomb blasts? ...pff. Yes there are casualties and yes it is indeed a tragic and pointless waste of life, however how better to remember our countrymen? Quaking in fear in a basement or getting on with our day to day business whilst letting our boys creep into the bedrooms of our enemies and cut their throats?
The 3D Palace thread
We're alot less sensationalist than the U.S. in terms of media coverage of such things, but partly because it's not a new experience in this country. We've been bombed before. I quite like the stiff upper lip from the public on this matter. Though be warned : no one here really cares much for cricket, or the weather forecast. London ground to a halt, that's a pretty big deal (it's a big deal when one train is cancelled).

The video machine wrote:

alexcull wrote:

Anyway, i was kinda thinking that this bombing is kind of GOOD for George Bush
I'm glad you think that's GOOD, i'm really glad you think 49 innocent people dying is good... well done you, glad to hear your brilliant opinion on that
D I P S H * T.
It seems your zeal has clouded your vision, of course this terrorist act is good for george bush's presidency As it will spark further anger towards terrorism which plays exactly into his hands. To a degree, it may even further unite Europe. Read the post before throwing out insults (Something prohibited here).

-Hybrid.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 7:11pm

Post 43 of 153

Madmanmatty

Force: 368 | Joined: 17th Mar 2003 | Posts: 372

FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I can't say what I really think, because my post will be deleted, but a general statement is:
People die in foriegn countries EVERY day. Car bombs, suicide attacks, etc.
When it hits home, people pay attention.
Don't "shug it off". Get involved. Be aware. Make efforts to stop the kinds of things that cause the roots of terrorism.
It's horrible, but consider these atrocities happen almost daily in other countries. If you ignore it and go on with "your way of life" then it increases the problem. The only way to prevent this kind of thing is for EVERYONE to get INVOLVED. Not on the "war on terror" but the "war on poverty and injustice". And not to use violence, but to use our voices, minds and resources.
This is terrorism, but it is also a plea for help, from nations who cannot get our attention any other way. We owe them this, because we have exploited them for years and years. We used thier citizens and militaries to fight our wars at thier expense. We purchase products which exploit thier workers. We ignore them and go about our daily lives.
Don't get angry, don't get even, just TRY TO UNDERSTAND.
bah.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 7:31pm

Post 44 of 153

cdolsen

Force: 710 | Joined: 16th Jun 2002 | Posts: 206

EffectsLab Lite User

Gold Member

mabey now the world will do something about el-queda and bin laden
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 7:42pm

Post 45 of 153

Rawree

Force: 3250 | Joined: 27th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1925

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Madmanmatty wrote:

I can't say what I really think, because my post will be deleted, but a general statement is:
People die in foriegn countries EVERY day. Car bombs, suicide attacks, etc.
When it hits home, people pay attention.
Surely thats only human nature, if a family is slaughtered somewhere in China for example its likely that you'd forget about it pretty soon and in terms of your life it wouldn't be such a big thing (people die all the time after all). If your family is slaughtered then you'll pay attention because it's happening to you and is having a much larger effect on your life.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 7:56pm

Post 46 of 153

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I don't think this attack is competely based on Britain's participation in Iraq. The terrorists who are attacking innocent people are brutal and don't really need a reason that can be plainly seen. They attacked on 9/11 because of a hate for America, but it wasn't black and white. We couldn't say they attacked for such and such a reason it was a hate for freedom and America and just that people don't agree with them. The bombings in London are I think related. The terrorists hate the freedom we try to protect and bombing then running and hiding is the way they handle it. I don't think you can directly link this attack to Iraq, though it might have been part of the reason. To sum up what I am trying to say is these people hate freedom and will attack innocent people to get the strongest nations in the world to back down. Backing down isn't the answer because that just gives them the victory that they want. We need to hold strong to our beliefs and get rid of this evil. The war in Iraq is an example of this. I do think that some parts of Iraq could have been handled differently, but we have the right idea.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 8:18pm

Post 47 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +2

Erm, no.

The terrorists hate the freedom we try to protect
The terrorists do not hate the freedom of the western world.

What they do hate is when the foreign policy of other countries messes up the lives of their own people. It's got nothing to do with hating freedom at all. In their twisted logic, they're seeking vengance for what other countries have done to them in the past. They don't just look at the US and the UK and go "damn, I hate that they're free! let's kill em all!".

And anyway, I'm not even so sure that it WAS Al-Quaeda - there's been no offical acceptance of guilt, and nothing to link them (as yet). So to say that it DEFINATLEY was them is a bit of a jump to a conclusion.

Arktic.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 8:25pm

Post 48 of 153

Obi Wan Kenobi

Force: 685 | Joined: 27th Oct 2003 | Posts: 187

EffectsLab Pro User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Personally, I think it's so dumb to think that this, and even 9/11 was bad. My opinion can be wrong because there has been no attack in my country, but look: these attacks cost the lives of roughly 10.000 people. But when nature intervenes: the tsunami-disaster cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of people! And what about the volcano near Spain that could explode any moment and destroy the whole East Coast of the US, and more? And what about global warming? Air-pollution? All these terrorist attacks are like a sand grain to an elephant; natural disasters.
I think it is better to just ignore these attacks for the most part. Just show it on the news briefly. Not let it cover the news for the whole week, for Gods sake. Do something about our environment, in the time you discuss these attacks!

Don't get me wrong, I don't like these terrorists at all, but is the news only here to put fear in us? I know most islamic people are really nice, I know a few myself.
And I'm no environment activist or something, I do very little about it myself, but I do think it's way, way, way more important than these pathetic attacks. These attacks are stupid I can tell you that, it doesn't help them one bit.

This should not be discussed so widely, it will only encourage these terrorists. I think this thread shouldn't even exist!
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 8:32pm

Post 49 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

It's totally different, though.

With natural disasters, there's no evil intent. Nature acts amorally. Perhaps it is preventable though. With terrorist attacks, there is evil intent, & the deeds are by one human to another. This makes it, in my eyes, a million times worse.
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 8:58pm

Post 50 of 153

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:

And what about the volcano near Spain that could explode any moment and destroy the whole East Coast of the US, and more?
... What? How can a volcano in spain threaten the US the most, and no one else...?
Posted: Fri, 8th Jul 2005, 9:02pm

Post 51 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

He said "near" Spain. Which makes even less sense.
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 4:12am

Post 52 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Tarn wrote:


That's a general lack of understanding of terrorism. You can't destroy terrorism by fighting it. It's like a cancer, if you just whack at it you'll just cause it to split into smaller pieces, which might end up being even more dangerous. Sure, you can wipe out specific groups, but you can never remove terrorism by fighting.
Who said we had to fight it....Oh wait I did, dangit. but but with all due respect tarn how else do we do it. Terrorist don't sit down and talk about things. Like I think arktic said or someone they dont want to kill us because we're free, but because of what we did to them in the past. They want vengence, not justice, vengence. Meaning they are always going to handle us with violence. And we can't just stand there. It's like when the police take down someone who is lashing out with violence. Let me ask this question "If a police Officer is trying to arrest someone, and they are lashing out with violence, how do you think the officer should handle that?

Do you think people wake up one day and think "hmm, I'm going to be a terrorist!"
Wow wait a sec when did say that. When did I even give a hint that I thought that.
At the root of all terrorism is a genuine problem, injustice,
true dat...
etc. Maybe a foreign government has been unfair economically and crippled their own. Maybe there was a war which left people starving and wounded. Either way, there's a genuine reason to be pissed off. The problem is that 'the terrorist' then reacts to that in a completely inappropriate manner.
How true is that. But how do you suggest we act back. We are trying to bring justice to them the best we can.

If you don't face up to the facts that all terrorism has a root cause somewhere back in history, then you will never defeat it.
true it does have a root to history. But history is history. We can say sorry, but they don't want apologies, they want vengence as I said before.

Al-Quaeda aren't the kind of people you can talk to. However, their grievances do originate somewhere, even if their reactions to them are barbaric and ignorant. By fighting them with force you will only antagonise people and increase their power. If you go to the root, see why people are angry at the US, and start to correct the mistakes of the past and look to fixing things in the future, gradually, over time, the support for terrorist groups will wane, because there will no longer be a need (however misplaced) to feel that way.

If you fight fire with fire, as has been shown in Iraq, you just end up with more fire.
Couldn't agree with you more. But I'm at a loss. I can't see any other way[/quote]

Last edited Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 8:40pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 10:01am

Post 53 of 153

Obi Wan Kenobi

Force: 685 | Joined: 27th Oct 2003 | Posts: 187

EffectsLab Pro User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Mellifluous wrote:

He said "near" Spain. Which makes even less sense.
I'm sorry, it's a volcano on the Canary islands. I didn't remeber it well, looked it up specially for you! If it explodes, might happen tomorrow, might happen next month, might happen in ten years, or a million years. But if it does, the tsunami t brings forth will destroy most of the North-West African coast, a part of Western Europe, and the Eastern Coast of the US. It has been widely covered here. If you live on the East Coast, you'll have about 8 hours to get to the inland, and be safe. But the others will have less than 2 hours, so...

I hope I didn't scare ya too much!
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 10:08am

Post 54 of 153

Obi Wan Kenobi

Force: 685 | Joined: 27th Oct 2003 | Posts: 187

EffectsLab Pro User FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Mellifluous wrote:

It's totally different, though.

With natural disasters, there's no evil intent. Nature acts amorally. Perhaps it is preventable though. With terrorist attacks, there is evil intent, & the deeds are by one human to another. This makes it, in my eyes, a million times worse.
Absolutely true, but we should look at the consequences. Nature is the most powerful of everything. Al-Quaeda cannot, for example, bring forth the destruction of all other humans without killing itself. Nature can, very easily.
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 6:36pm

Post 55 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

ssj john wrote:

Terrorist don't sit down and talk about things
Yeah, SSJ John is right about this. You need to FIGHT terrorists to get them to stop attacking people. I mean if the British Airstrikes hadn't bombed Ireland to bits, I bet the IRA would still be carrying out attacks! You can't just start a peace progess through diplomacy and get terrorist groups to agree to a ceasefire, without attacking them! [/sarcasm]
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 6:54pm

Post 56 of 153

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

but Arktic, the IRA was white
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 7:02pm

Post 57 of 153

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

*jumps into the debate*

I agree with Arktic. The meaning of Peace today has been deformed, and apparently Peace now means War.... buh? Think about it:

1.The terrorists attack for revenge, which is no good because it simply makes us hates them more.

2.This makes us bomb them and oppress them more.

3.This makes em want revenge... etc

If we don't do anything to em, and start helping them instead, they won't hate us anymore. If they don't hate us, they don't attack us. At least that's how I see it.
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 7:50pm

Post 58 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

you know how I see it. Terrorism will always exist. As long as there is evil in this world. There will be terror attacks. But we still need to do everything in our power to stop it...even though I beleive it can't be done.

WORD
-john-

EDIT: I'm not trying to be negative BTW
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 8:03pm

Post 59 of 153

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

ssj john wrote:

do everything in our power to stop it...
Yeah, and war isn't somethign that stops it. Thats what I'm saying. It fuels it.

You gotta remember: a lot of the stuff you hear about Terrorism (not just in America) is propaganda. It's like in WWII: the Allies portrayed the Germans as soulless evil drones that hate freedom, which was actually very untrue.
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 8:09pm

Post 60 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

I know that war dosn't stop it. I geuss my point is I hate the fact that fance and germany and basically all of europe are getting mad at the U.S. for trying to do something about terrorism, when they arn't doing anything them selves. They tell us your doing it wrong you shouldn't go to war. And I'm like wtf? Then you do something instead of sitting on your Little french bottoms....or at least tell us how to do it right... I mean come on. People have put down all the methods that have been used to stop terrorism. But nobody has come up with a REAL good way to do it.

WORD
-john-
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 8:56pm

Post 61 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +2

all of europe are getting mad at the U.S. for trying to do something about terrorism, when they arn't doing anything them selves
Clearly, you don't understand. Not going to war does not equate to 'not doing anything'. All of Europe is doing something - maybe it's intelligence operations to hunt down terrorists in Europe before they attack, maybe it's sending foreign aid, maybe it's having diplomatic talks with the political leaders of what the US determines to be 'the enemy'. But that doesn't make good news headlines, and it's not very visible. But it doesn't mean that NOTHING is happening.

People have put down all the methods that have been used to stop terrorism. But nobody has come up with a REAL good way to do it.
Oh right, good. So because we've not found a way to do something, war is the next best option? I doubt it.
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 10:00pm

Post 62 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

But see my point is that people make it seem like we all we are doing to fight terrorism is going to war. But in fact we lead the world in intelgence gathering, and hunting down terrorist leader's and sending foreign aid. We do alo more then just bomb people. And yet we still get put down for going to war when thats not the only thing that we are doing.
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 10:04pm

Post 63 of 153

Rawree

Force: 3250 | Joined: 27th Jun 2002 | Posts: 1925

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Thats a bit like saying: "I don't just murder people, I also do charity work".
My point being that doing something constructive (intellegence gathering) doesn't cancel out something destructive (war). It doesn't matter if you're doing other things as well as going to war because you're still going to war.

Parts of Birmingham have been evacuated and "controlled explosions" are being carried out after a terror alert.
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 10:55pm

Post 64 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rawree wrote:

Thats a bit like saying: "I don't just murder people, I also do charity work".
What if you killed that person to help someone else
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 11:09pm

Post 65 of 153

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Well, that would be debateable, until you kill thousands to kill that one person.
Posted: Sat, 9th Jul 2005, 11:21pm

Post 66 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

huh? why would I kill thousands just KILL one person. Just kiddin'

But on a more serious note. See though thats what I mean. We went to iraq to save the people from opression and to free them. and *cough* oil *cough*. We killed thousands to save thousands more.

But hey lets not turn this into another iraq war debate.
Well I hope that britain will do something to those who have hurt them. I undoubtly think they will in some way or another.

WORD
-john-
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 1:02am

Post 67 of 153

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rawree wrote:


My point being that doing something constructive (intellegence gathering) doesn't cancel out something destructive (war). It doesn't matter if you're doing other things as well as going to war because you're still going to war.
Should we sit back and just let them attack us then?
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 4:31am

Post 68 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

AcjPictures wrote:

Rawree wrote:


My point being that doing something constructive (intellegence gathering) doesn't cancel out something destructive (war). It doesn't matter if you're doing other things as well as going to war because you're still going to war.
Should we sit back and just let them attack us then?
No thats called homeland security. But what do we do when they attack us. I think we look for them and give them justice. And the only way to do that is through the military. Why? Because there surround by fire power.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 7:17am

Post 69 of 153

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

We go to war to primarily to destruct the opposing force, in this case, terrorists; people who- if not destroyed- will cause more destruction than if they themselves were solely destroyed. Things like casualities happen, and they're horrible, but it doesn't mean this isn't a step towards progress. This isn't always applicable in real-life settings, but you get the point. War never solves anything, but it does often help us along towards resolution.

"Without conflict, there is no progress"
- Frederick Douglass
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 8:42am

Post 70 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Should we sit back and just let them attack us then?
No.

What we should be doing is sorting out the root cause of the problem. Holding diplomatic discussions with other nations etc, such that the terrorists will no longer feel the need to attack.

Look at it this way - terrorism is like a symptom of an illness. If you don't deal with the underlying cause of an illness, then the symptoms will keep re-occouring, no matter how effectively you deal with them.

War never solves anything, but it does often help us along towards resolution.
Yeah, you're right. That's why countries like Russia, who's been warring with Chechynia and the Chechen rebels since about 1722, is now so far down the road to resolution!
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 9:24am

Post 71 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

I said on page 3, terrorists are not the kind of people you can engage in warfare with. There isn't a "terrorist army", is there?
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 11:00am

Post 72 of 153

Mantra

Force: 1888 | Joined: 25th Nov 2002 | Posts: 551

EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

No thats called homeland security. But what do we do when they attack us. I think we look for them and give them justice. And the only way to do that is through the military. Why? Because there surround by fire power.
Fire power is all good and well in a 'conventional' war, but when the perceived enemy act in a cowardly hidden style then the most successful route surely is intelligence / homeland security / and working on international diplomacy in countries . Bombing a country and using it as an example of western fire power can only fuel the hatred and have minimal positive effect against those that already hate you.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 11:42am

Post 73 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

From a Fox News report:

"these people are, If necessary, prepared to spill Arab blood in addition to the blood of regular -- of nonarab people living in London."
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 12:52pm

Post 74 of 153

Nagual

Force: 1050 | Joined: 21st Jul 2004 | Posts: 289

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User

Gold Member

Arktic wrote:

all of europe are getting mad at the U.S. for trying to do something about terrorism, when they arn't doing anything them selves
Clearly, you don't understand. Not going to war does not equate to 'not doing anything'. All of Europe is doing something - maybe it's intelligence operations to hunt down terrorists in Europe before they attack, maybe it's sending foreign aid, maybe it's having diplomatic talks with the political leaders of what the US determines to be 'the enemy'. But that doesn't make good news headlines, and it's not very visible. But it doesn't mean that NOTHING is happening.

People have put down all the methods that have been used to stop terrorism. But nobody has come up with a REAL good way to do it.
Oh right, good. So because we've not found a way to do something, war is the next best option? I doubt it.
Indeed.

Unfortuantly we live in a world that believes most of what it reads in the papers or sees in the news reports. The only things to make into these things are items of such scale or importance or public interest that will make people read or watch, not necessarily what is of importance. As Arktic says, our countries and our neighbours countries are utilising our intelligence networks to dig up information on the terrorists. There will be agents infiltrating terrorist cells, dossiers being created and shared.

People are arrested every week, some are detained longer, other are not. The only time the media get wind is when it's either a big Op or they are actually informed. Our best weapon against terrorists isn't to pick up a gun and invade them, that could create more hatred or make martars. Quiet and subtle opertations, utilising the best people and top intelligence, will often yield longer lasting results than the brute force mentality. But, as pointed out, it doesn't make headlines, so some people don't preceive it to be progress.

During the earlier 70's, in norther Ireland the UK used several questionable measures, such as internment camps, indescriminate arrests and detentions, sleep deprivation interrogations to name the ones we know about. Did this help at all? No, it created a much stronger feeling of hatred and anger towards the British. It has only been through diplomacy, and the superbe intelligence services, that we have been able to be in the situation we are now. True the IRA and other sub groups are still there, but are at least there are no more bombings.

However, in todays News of the World, top cops are saying those responsible for the bombings are British. That then raises certain questions as to who they are, who trained them etc. These are important questions that can only be answered through the hard work of our intelligence services both here and abroad.

peace.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 1:59pm

Post 75 of 153

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Arktic wrote:

Should we sit back and just let them attack us then?
No.

What we should be doing is sorting out the root cause of the problem. Holding diplomatic discussions with other nations etc, such that the terrorists will no longer feel the need to attack.

Look at it this way - terrorism is like a symptom of an illness. If you don't deal with the underlying cause of an illness, then the symptoms will keep re-occouring, no matter how effectively you deal with them.
They attacked us without a need in the first place. We did nothing to them and yet they still killed thousands of people and the symbol of Captitolism in our country. Holding diplomatic discussion won't do a thing. How many terrorists have you found who are pretty willing to sit down and discuss? Why should we got half and half with evil? The United States and Britian have obligations to other nations. We are the super powers in this world and it is our job to maintain peace. Not say I'm sorry how can we help you and bend over backwards to there evil and cynical desires. Do so would result in us abandoning Isreal and abandoning Iraq.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 2:15pm

Post 76 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

There's always reasons, however difficult they may be to understand.

Britain had a long period where we were attacked by the IRA, as mentioned previously. I abhor this but then again, Britain were pretty brutal in colonial times, treating the Irish like mud & obliterating their language & identity. In today's world, terrorism is even more difficult to understand (the British population are widely known not to have supported the Iraq war, hello?) but I still believe that there must be some sort of reason for their actions, that we must discover otherwise we'll make the same mistakes & it will result in the same horrors again.

What I'm afraid of is somewhere in Iraq, there are little boys watching their fathers die firsthand at the hands of British & American soldiers...& could potentially be the future's next so-called terrorist. People have different points of view & we have to be aware of them.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 4:30pm

Post 77 of 153

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Kids and their politics...

I don't have the time to read through all of this at the moment, but I have noticed a lot of "war doesn't solve anything, war is only destructive, etc". I would recommend you stop quoting your elementary school teachers and take a moment to sit back and analyze what your saying with a critical, analytical mind.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 4:39pm

Post 78 of 153

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Rating: +1

I suggest you stop trying to patronise people and take a moment to read the previous posts properly before contributing to the discussion, Sidewinder. smile

I don't think anybody has suggested that war never solves anything. War has solved many things and advanced the world countless times. What some of us are saying is that war cannot defeat terrorism, as there is nothing tangible upon which to make war.

Sure, go after the specific people that bombed London, absolutely. Take them down with extreme prejudice. But you can't go rampaging through countries, and you can't 'defeat' terrorism through war because, as has also been pointed out, that will only create more terrorism.

You can defeat a government easily through warfare. You can't defeat an idea.

Last edited Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 6:52pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 4:57pm

Post 79 of 153

brendanf

Force: 400 | Joined: 8th Jan 2004 | Posts: 42

EffectsLab Lite User

Gold Member

i agree that war is bad, i think everyone does except for the terrorists who thrive on it...

however how else do we approach the problem? there's no legal system to use.... we can't use diplomacy because they don't have a defined leader? Just because were not radical muslims and because we live in the western hemisphere and because we care for the sancity of life they hate us. Those are principles I will stand for and not let the killers of the innocent take.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 5:04pm

Post 80 of 153

Madmanmatty

Force: 368 | Joined: 17th Mar 2003 | Posts: 372

FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

AcjPictures wrote:

Why should we got half and half with evil? The United States and Britian have obligations to other nations. We are the super powers in this world and it is our job to maintain peace. Not say I'm sorry how can we help you and bend over backwards to there evil and cynical desires. Do so would result in us abandoning Isreal and abandoning Iraq.
We go half anf half with evil because that is what seperates us from evil. It is the RIGHT thing to do- to comprimise.

It is not the superpower's job to maintain peace at the cost of lives- I don't believe anyone has the right to take life, considering we cannot create or re-construct it.

In an ideal world, there would be no "superpowers" because everyone would have an equal status... unfortunately, that will never happen (sorry Marx!) because there exists evil. It cannot be destroyed, just like good cannot be destroyed. But it is the job of "good" to make sure evil does not run rampant.

That does not mean resorting to the methods of evil in order to uphold good. It can be done without violence, without war, and without killing and death. It would take more time, yes... and it would require egos to be dropped, but it is POSSIBLE.

To just senselessly kill them off proves nothing except power. And the point is not to display power through violence- any idiot can do that... real power comes from understanding an enemy and turning them into a friend.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 5:25pm

Post 81 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

AcjPictures wrote:

We did nothing to them
So the percived American endorsed and supported Israeli government's opression of muslims is 'nothing' then? I guess the terrorists don't think so.

I'm not saying that I agree with what the terrorists do - merely that to say that the US has done 'nothing' in the past to create the terrible anger that leads to terrorist is utterly naive.

AcjPictures wrote:

How many terrorists have you found who are pretty willing to sit down and discuss?
Sinn Fein, which is to all intents and purposes, the polical wing of the IRA, have been involved in the peace process in Ireland. And it has only since their inclusion that the bombing campaign against the UK mainland has stopped, and the IRA have undertaken the process of decomissioning their arms.

Now, what was it you were saying about terrorists not wanting to discuss?

AcjPictures wrote:

We are the super powers in this world and it is our job to maintain peace.
Yeah, and starting wars probably isn't really the best way to do that, is it?

Arktic.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 6:44pm

Post 82 of 153

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

The IRA and the muslim terrorists were in this for two different resons. The IRA wanted independence from the United Kingdom. The muslim terrorists are in a Holy War and are devoted to this by religion. Just as you and I disagree so the muslims disagree with us. We're both presenting valid points, but i doubt any of us here have changed our view points. Same with the muslims. We can discuss all day long, but they still believe the god they worship is telling them to do this. Religious faith goes a lot further than what is right and wrong. If they think their god is commanding them to do this, they will do it. Arktic you are probably more knowledgable in this subject than I am, but I really don't see a way around this besides fighting the terrorists. Going to Iraq and Afghanistan were good ideas in my opinion. I just wish things went a little faster and we were making more progress. Hopefully things will pick up and we can get rid of this evil. If not who knows maybe we should give discussion a try.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 6:59pm

Post 83 of 153

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I suggest you stop trying to patronise people and take a moment to read the previous posts properly before contributing to the discussion, Sidewinder.
That's true, I should, but I wasn't directing that comment at most of you, so I still stand by it. (See third-from-last quote).


Though, reading through this bit by bit, I catch a misconception here and there and eventually they add up to a notion quite different from actual reality. I'm sure I have some of my own too, but I lean back and wonder if I should even try digging in.

Some things I'd like to go into are...

The muslim terrorists are in a Holy War and are devoted to this by religion. Just as you and I disagree so the muslims disagree with us.

So the percived American endorsed and supported Israeli government's opression of muslims is 'nothing' then?
In an ideal world, there would be no "superpowers" because everyone would have an equal status.

i agree that war is bad, i think everyone does except for the terrorists who thrive on it...
war cannot defeat terrorism, as there is nothing tangible upon which to make war.
juxtaposed with...

Sure, go after the specific people that bombed London, absolutely. Take them down with extreme prejudice.
somewhere in Iraq, there are little boys watching their fathers die firsthand at the hands of British & American soldiers
The United States and Britian have obligations to other nations. We are the super powers in this world and it is our job to maintain peace.
Bombing a country and using it as an example of western fire power...
terrorists are not the kind of people you can engage in warfare with. There isn't a "terrorist army", is there?
(if I change army to organiztaion (a rough synonym), and define warfare as eliminating/killing, then the above quote doesn't really make sense to me.)

War never solves anything
Should we sit back and just let them attack us then?
No thats called homeland security.
...And that's as far down as my little review window scrolls. These range from melodrama and misconseptions to flat out ridiculousness, not to mention that half the discussion has devolved into how terrorism exists because of America's actions.

On more of a curious side note, I also never notice anyone mention the Soviet Union when discussing past conflicts that lead to aggravated populations. Why is it completely absent from any stroll down evil-superpower lane?
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 7:10pm

Post 84 of 153

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/end.php
Don't worry it won't be terrorists that get us anyway razz
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 7:17pm

Post 85 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

sidewinder wrote:

Blah Blah Blah
Of course things you quote contradict, this is a forum discussion of which many different people contribute to, not a party mandate. Of course there will be different opinions/views. What did you expect?
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 7:29pm

Post 86 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Don't quite understand your post. I'll respond to your boxes round my quotes, anyhow.

Quote:
terrorists are not the kind of people you can engage in warfare with. There isn't a "terrorist army", is there?

(if I change army to organiztaion (a rough synonym), and define warfare as eliminating/killing, then the above quote doesn't really make sense to me.)
"Army" dictionary definition: a permanent organization of the military land forces of a nation or state

"Warfare" dictionary definition: conflict, between relatively large groups of people, which involves physical force inflicted by the use of weapons

somewhere in Iraq, there are little boys watching their fathers die firsthand at the hands of British & American soldiers
Maybe this requires explanation too. Let's say that when British troops first invaded Bagdhad, an Iraqi soldier died. This Iraqi soldier had a son. This son is now aware that his father would be alive but for British soldiers killing him. Hatred grows in him, so when he grows up he wants to take revenge. I don't agree with this action, it's just a prediction of what will happen.

I've many equally strong views about Russia, South Africa & also what occurred in Yugoslavia, but that's for another time
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 7:51pm

Post 87 of 153

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Hybrid wrote:

Of course things you quote contradict, this is a forum discussion of which many different people contribute to, not a party mandate. Of course there will be different opinions/views. What did you expect?
Well, I did expect that you'd notice that I was never comparing multiple quotes unless otherwise stated, and that those that were compared were from the same person.



Mel:

1st part:

There aren't terrorist armies, but there are terrorist organizations and terrorist groups. So yeah, you can't fight a war against a terrorist army, because there is no such thing by definition, but you can fight a war againt a terrorist group, because warfare is...

"Warfare" definition: conflict, between relatively large groups of people, which involves physical force inflicted by the use of weapons
And it I'm not sure how Navy Seals raiding multiple training camps don't fit that definition, and it sits in conflict with the first part of your quote.

2nd part:

Your analogy would then point to any country being invaded as being filled with terrorsts, but I don't recall any Japanese terrorists attacking America, any British terorists going after Germany, or any Vietnamese organizations creating suicide bombers.


Add on to that fact that I don't think little boys sat out on a battlefield "watching their fathers die firsthand", which seems more of a dramatic statement than anything else.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 8:12pm

Post 88 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

sidewinder wrote:

Add on to that fact that I don't think little boys sat out on a battlefield "watching their fathers die firsthand", which seems more of a dramatic statement than anything else.
It's not often like that, sometimes just hearing that your father was killed by a (insert country) troop is enough to inspire hatred. Also remember that the fighting is often inside the city areas, where many innocents are killed by stray bullets often. It's not uncommon for a family member to witness either a relative or close friend catch a stray bullet.

Last edited Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 8:23pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 8:22pm

Post 89 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Thanks for replying, I have a feeling we're just going to have to just amicably disagree

I take your points and agree with you in the training camps scenario.

For me, though, a lot of today's terrorists are different from the past, seeming to consist mainly of small cells, there is no big organisational structure where they are all present. Al Qaeda is an organisation, yes, but it is fragmented. It's been said (not fact though) that the terrorists who attacked London were maybe born here, grew up here etc. Just everyday, regular citizens of London. What steps do we take against this kind of terrorist who is stealthy, cunning, hidden, *put further synonyms here. There are more terrorist acts carried out by this kind of terrorist than any other.

Fair point about dramatic wording, it was overdramatic, but to make a point. I seriously didn't mean it to be taken literally.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 8:26pm

Post 90 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Arktic wrote:



What we should be doing is sorting out the root cause of the problem. Holding diplomatic discussions with other nations etc, such that the terrorists will no longer feel the need to attack.
But we are doing that arktic we are. But there are some terrorist groups that have to be delt with, with force.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 8:48pm

Post 91 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

ssj john wrote:

Arktic wrote:



What we should be doing is sorting out the root cause of the problem. Holding diplomatic discussions with other nations etc, such that the terrorists will no longer feel the need to attack.
But we are doing that arktic we are. But there are some terrorist groups that have to be delt with, with force.
No such group exists with which to deal force to, that's the whole problem.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 9:23pm

Post 92 of 153

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Mel:

I think we agree that there are facets of terrorism that can't be fought with violence, so to say, and with the acknowledgement of those complexities, we've really kind of gone as deep as we can into the subject.

But I'm still seeing lines like this...

Hybrid wrote:

No such group exists with which to deal force to, that's the whole problem.
...And I thought I just covered how that's not true. Feel free to explain it to me.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 9:31pm

Post 93 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Yeah, I disagree with Hybrid's statement too to some extent, I don't think you can say there are no terrorist groups to deal force to, period (though this may not be what you meant, I dunno)
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 9:58pm

Post 94 of 153

xbreaka

Force: 490 | Joined: 8th Jul 2004 | Posts: 525

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

ben3308 wrote:

alexcull wrote:

Mainly because it will definatly get England the incentive to stay in the War on Terrorism,
I think it'll do the opposite. I think the attack on England was partially if not wholly because of their participation- though I believe the English community did not want to participate- in the war on terrorism, and because they were attacked for this reason, they will withdraw. Of course I could be entirely wrong, but this is just my opinion.
you realize how retarded it would be to be attacked by terrorists, and then remove yourself from the war on it. And its not like the british government or any government. Maybe france but whatever to just bendover like that.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 10:03pm

Post 95 of 153

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

And its not like the british government or any government. Maybe france but whatever to just bendover like that.
With that sharp wit you should be a comedian.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 10:20pm

Post 96 of 153

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

I think that a lot of people seem to think that toppling Saddamn is the 'war on terrorism' and by simply pulling out then this will all go away.

They dont seem to realise that these people arnt Iraqis, the fact that they are taking advantage of the situation in iraq and bombing there and stirring up trouble is just coincidental.

As hybrid says, you cant just go and take the war to them because they hide amongst normal people, there is no organisation to take out. America have found that out because after 9/11 they went and attacked afganistan and didn't solve anything.

Britain is in a unique position of knowing this very well from dealing with the IRA. The only way to get past it is to tough it out and eventually they will see that their efforts are futile and give up. There is no justice, many of the bombers haven't been caught and punished. We just have to be happy that they've stopped bombing.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 10:32pm

Post 97 of 153

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

People are getting terrorist groups muddled up with terrorism in general. When I say you can't 'defeat' terrorism by force of arms, I mean the idea of it, the ethos, the way of life.

You can destroy specific terrorist cells, sure. But another one will spring up in its place. In a conventional war, you defeat a country's army and the war is won (although it's never quite that simple, obviously). Take out a terrorist group and you'll just inspire another one.

Hence my reasoning that terrorism itself can only be fought by addressing the source of the hatred, which in many cases can be traced to foreign policy etc. If you remove the reasons for hatred to be fostered in the first place, gradually the cause will diminish and die away. You'll probably always have the fanatics, of course, but at least there wouldn't be broad support.

It's the concept of a 'war on terror', and the idea of 'defeating terrorism' in any kind of final way that I find utterly ludicrous, especially when the solution appears to be in fighting. It strikes me as nothing more than crowd-pleasing spectacle and soundbite propaganda.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 11:00pm

Post 98 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

sidewinder wrote:


Hybrid wrote:

No such group exists with which to deal force to, that's the whole problem.
...And I thought I just covered how that's not true. Feel free to explain it to me.

Kid wrote:


As hybrid says, you cant just go and take the war to them because they hide amongst normal people, there is no organisation to take out. America have found that out because after 9/11 they went and attacked afganistan and didn't solve anything.
Ding!
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 11:43pm

Post 99 of 153

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

As hybrid says, you cant just go and take the war to them because they hide amongst normal people, there is no organisation to take out. America have found that out because after 9/11 they went and attacked afganistan and didn't solve anything.
Assuming you're not talking about terrorism as a concept like Tarn is, this statement kind of flies in the face of common sense. There is no organization? Attacking Afghanistan didn't do anything? Both those statements seem kind of ridiculous, seeing how a quick google search turns up hundreds of articles on captured Al-Qaeda members.
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 11:57pm

Post 100 of 153

xbreaka

Force: 490 | Joined: 8th Jul 2004 | Posts: 525

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

just because we didnt capture osama didnt mean we loose, we put a serious dent in there organization
Posted: Sun, 10th Jul 2005, 11:59pm

Post 101 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Bit they did nothing in terms of defeating terrorism, infact - if anything the actions you mentioned just continued spurning the hatred for the west. When I say that there is no terrorist group of which to impose justice (be it violently or otherwise) it's because there is no warfront, no single terrorist headquarters which can be targetted. The terrorists are already among us, for example with the recent London bombings it is believed that the attackers were infact british citizens maybe even having been born here. You can't impose violence on such groups or cells because you have to find them first.

And finding them, doesn't involve violence to the degree that it does investigation.

xbreaka wrote:

just because we didnt capture osama didnt mean we loose, we put a serious dent in there organization
I'd say that the dents in the hearts of New York, Madrid and London were bigger. It's fine to say "we should fight them!" but tell me who exactly do you mean by "them" and where do you plan on finding them?

I don't think any action we've taken has seriously dented the organisation at all, maybe to a degree it crippled the heart of Al Quiada training in Afghanistan, but there are other places where people are learning to become terrorists I imagine. Tarn was right when he said you can't destroy the essence of terrorism, even killing Osama Bin Laden wouldn't stop Al Quiada acting as inspiration for worldwide terrorism.
Posted: Mon, 11th Jul 2005, 3:35am

Post 102 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

I'd say that the dents in the hearts of New York, Madrid and London were bigger. It's fine to say "we should fight them!" but tell me who exactly do you mean by "them" and where do you plan on finding them?
I know this has nothing to do with your point your making here. But jsut wondering. Do you think that spain pulling out of iraq was sign of strength. And that by doing so all the sudden the terrorist will never attack spain agian. No it dosnt it shows that they are weak ( no offense if there are any spainards on this forum.) We have to show terrorist that we are not afraid of them. Now the second part of your statement. Which I completely agree with. There is no "army" to attack. Thats why it's so easy for them to attack us. Because we can't nessicarly attack back. But we can attack goverments who we think are endorsing terrorism and are harboring terrorist. But technically we are all harboring terrorist.

Tarn was right when he said you can't destroy the essence of terrorism, even killing Osama Bin Laden wouldn't stop Al Quiada acting as inspiration for worldwide terrorism.
YOur right you can't destroy the idea of terrorism. Becuase there will always be hate in this world. But we have to try, or else it will grow out of control[/quote]
Posted: Mon, 11th Jul 2005, 4:09am

Post 103 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

There's no way on earth I, or many others could possibly condone attacking countries we "think" are harbouring terrorists. On top of this, the very 'action' you seem to be suggesting is the very same action that spurs further hatred of the west.

An example of this would be Iraq, we 'thought' that there were weapons of mass destruction so we invaded and as a result, have spurred alot of hatred for the west, regardless of whether we did the right thing or not.

Surely you'd agree that the best method of dealing with terrorism is covert, not all out with machine guns blazing, through experience we've all come to see physical action as a last result, an option to take when all else has failed. Personally, I trust the intelligence agencies in this country to route out terrorism in the only way that will not cause huge amounts of hatred and misunderstanding for this country.

I suggest perhaps you bow out of the conversation now SSJ John, The 'action' you're suggesting is not a good idea. Unless there is undoubted proof that a country is harbouring terrorists - then aggressive force against them is totally ridiculous.

In regards to spain not being attacked after they withdrew troops... Has the U.S. been attacked a second time? I think not. There is more strength in not getting aggrevate by an attack than you seem to realise. The terrorists will pay, and our country will not change.

Last edited Mon, 11th Jul 2005, 6:00am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 11th Jul 2005, 5:17am

Post 104 of 153

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

First off.
Thank you for telling me what to do.
And soon it'll start getting ugly. Just thought i'd remind all of you how debates on FxHome usually end up... Theres plenty of room for a good debate, but once it starts getting ugly... its useless.
Posted: Mon, 11th Jul 2005, 6:00am

Post 105 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

evman wrote:

And soon it'll start getting ugly. Just thought i'd remind all of you how debates on FxHome usually end up... Theres plenty of room for a good debate, but once it starts getting ugly... its useless.
I find your lack of faith disturbing... wink
Posted: Mon, 11th Jul 2005, 9:25am

Post 106 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

ssj john wrote:

There is no "army" to attack. Thats why it's so easy for them to attack us. Because we can't nessicarly attack back. But we can attack goverments who we think are endorsing terrorism and are harboring terrorist. But technically we are all harboring terrorist.

YOur right you can't destroy the idea of terrorism. Becuase there will always be hate in this world. But we have to try, or else it will grow out of control
I think as long as the discussion continues in a friendly way, should be ok smile

As Hybrid Halo says, it is dangerous to attack other countries because you think they have terrorists in them. As you say, we are all harbouring terrorists. That's the way the physical reality of terrorism has become now, it's not being committed by the kind of terrorists you see on Counter Strike (hate to break it to you wink ).

One of the points many have been trying to make is that a) we must change the way we find terrorists, through heightened intelligence rather than attack a country & hope for the best & b) we should cure the problems causing terrorism by looking at cause & effect. Terrorism is a disease & everyone agrees that preventing disease happening rather than attacking it is the best solution.

You're contradicting yourself, agreeing we can't destroy the "idea" of terrorism then saying "we have to try". You cannot destroy an idea. You have to instead change the terrorist's thinking or our understanding of them. Destroying all the terrorists in the world at this moment will not mean terrorism will not occur again.

Regarding your Spain comment, not everything is black & white. Whatever they did, they had to balance the fact that if they pulled out, people would jeer at them, versus if they didn't pull out they might be attacked again. Their pulling out may have saved civilian lives. The Spanish government did what was in the best interests of their citizens. Remember, too, that like Britain, Spain has more experience of atrocities being committed against it, with the Basque separatist group ETA, & the unwillingness to endure yet another loss of lives was no doubt a factor.
Posted: Mon, 11th Jul 2005, 6:32pm

Post 107 of 153

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +2/-1

Capturing hundreds of al queda supporters didnt really put any dent in their organisation though because there is no organisation. They are a rabble, helping each other where convenient to achieve a mostly common goal. You can't hurt them by finding the culprit of a bombing because they don't care and there is always someone to step into his shoes. What are you going to do to someone who is dedicated enough to be a suicide bomber? Fighting isn't the way to beat terrorism because essentially it is a war of propoganda.

Liberating Iraq was a great thing to do but America's mistake in it all was not doing enough to not look like the bad guy. That one fool putting the American flag on the statue did tremendous amounts of damage for instance. America has a history of meddling in the middle east and so then it was not too tricky for the surrounding terrorists and remnants of saddamns regime to step in and cause trouble and make it look even worse. Now the allies just look like an occupying force.

Iraq is one big sidetrack in 'the war on terrorism' and all it has done so far is make America and the rest of the west look worse and attract more support for these crazy groups.

Some Americans at this point may take this personally and say 'hey why are you blaming us?' but the hard truth is that America is to blame to a certain extent because right now it is the playground bully, trying to use its fists to get everyone to do what it wants. At some point it is going to have to grow up and realise that the way to deal with countries is to show some respect and diplomacy rather than try to bully them with military and economic muscle.
Posted: Mon, 11th Jul 2005, 10:04pm

Post 108 of 153

Mantra

Force: 1888 | Joined: 25th Nov 2002 | Posts: 551

EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

I think the linked article by BBC World journalist John Simpson makes for excellent reading in respect to the varied responses to terrorism:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4671577.stm
Posted: Mon, 11th Jul 2005, 10:44pm

Post 109 of 153

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Excellent article, mantra. Sums up what some of us have been trying to say far more succinctly than we had managed. smile The points about the approach to the IRA are spot on. So give the US about 15-20 years, then maybe we'll start to get somewhere.
Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2005, 12:31am

Post 110 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

evman wrote:

And soon it'll start getting ugly. Just thought i'd remind all of you how debates on FxHome usually end up... Theres plenty of room for a good debate, but once it starts getting ugly... its useless.
I find your lack of faith disturbing... wink[/quote]

ITs not getting ugly folks everthing is ok. Cheer's

WORD
-john-
Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2005, 4:53am

Post 111 of 153

xbreaka

Force: 490 | Joined: 8th Jul 2004 | Posts: 525

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Bit they did nothing in terms of defeating terrorism, infact - if anything the actions you mentioned just continued spurning the hatred for the west. When I say that there is no terrorist group of which to impose justice (be it violently or otherwise) it's because there is no warfront, no single terrorist headquarters which can be targetted. The terrorists are already among us, for example with the recent London bombings it is believed that the attackers were infact british citizens maybe even having been born here. You can't impose violence on such groups or cells because you have to find them first.

And finding them, doesn't involve violence to the degree that it does investigation.

xbreaka wrote:

just because we didnt capture osama didnt mean we loose, we put a serious dent in there organization
I'd say that the dents in the hearts of New York, Madrid and London were bigger. It's fine to say "we should fight them!" but tell me who exactly do you mean by "them" and where do you plan on finding them?

I don't think any action we've taken has seriously dented the organisation at all, maybe to a degree it crippled the heart of Al Quiada training in Afghanistan, but there are other places where people are learning to become terrorists I imagine. Tarn was right when he said you can't destroy the essence of terrorism, even killing Osama Bin Laden wouldn't stop Al Quiada acting as inspiration for worldwide terrorism.
No offense man, but a very good friend of my dads died next to him in iraq trying to protect the house of a couple of iraq civilians so tell me again we arent doing anything.

Most of it is bad press, the people over there will tell you a majority of the country is safe and a majority of the people like the americans. Although my dad has had some pyschological reprocussions so he doesnt like to talk about anything. But iv heard a bit from him and a couple of the people who were over there with him.
Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2005, 9:18am

Post 112 of 153

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

xbreaka wrote:

No offense man, but a very good friend of my dads died next to him in iraq trying to protect the house of a couple of iraq civilians so tell me again we arent doing anything.
I'm sure there are many American soldiers doing heroic and remarkable things out there. The problem is that we don't hear about it. As somebody else pointed out, it's a propaganda war. The terrorists only have to emphasise the bad points (civilians killed, that stupid flag raising incident etc) in order to get a few more recruits. It's remarkably easy to convince a general population with a carefully aimed bit of propaganda.

Considering that we don't even hear about incidents such as the one you described above, I doubt Iraqis are getting the 'good' side of what the US is doing either. Because, as we all know, the media isn't interested in positive news.

Most of it is bad press, the people over there will tell you a majority of the country is safe and a majority of the people like the americans.
I very, very much doubt that. But that's based off news reports I've seen (not just UK, but from several countries), where general opinion of the occupying force seems to be very negative. Of course, it also depends entirely whereabouts in the country you are.

Maybe the US media are putting a better spin on things, but here in tbe UK the situation comes across as seeming very bad. Your dad's the only one here who has actually been there, however, so let's hope he's right.
Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2005, 12:44pm

Post 113 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

xbreaka wrote:

No offense man, but a very good friend of my dads died next to him in iraq trying to protect the house of a couple of iraq civilians so tell me again we arent doing anything.
I think you may need to read my post a little closer before you jump up and defend something you believe I am criticising. At the time, and still to this day I have been pro-invading Iraq. I think Saddam was someone that needed removing and due to having close Iraqi friends, I also believe it is what the people wanted.

But I'll tell you again, it's still done nothing in terms of defeating terrorism, regardless of how many of your dad's friends die.
Posted: Tue, 12th Jul 2005, 6:42pm

Post 114 of 153

Chrislad

Force: 50 | Joined: 13th Apr 2002 | Posts: 176

Windows User

Member

To be completely honest, I think that this incident detracts from the fact that the G8 leaders are supposed to be discussing the cancellation of third world debt and more aid. I'm not implying that it was planned by any means or that it isnt the biggest tragedy to hit britain in the past century.
I'll be very interested to see how much the media looks into G8.
For anyone who is interested I did actually close down my own website for a day in memory of those who lost their lives.
Posted: Wed, 13th Jul 2005, 10:34am

Post 115 of 153

TommyB

Force: 190 | Joined: 25th Nov 2004 | Posts: 666

Member

"The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it."
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 3:53am

Post 116 of 153

ssj john

Force: 563 | Joined: 4th Nov 2003 | Posts: 795

Windows User MacOS User

Member

AMEN!!!
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 4:53am

Post 117 of 153

Harvey

Force: 2050 | Joined: 29th Apr 2005 | Posts: 513

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: -6

Terrorism is meant to be for a cause, and I can't honestly see how attacking western countries will further any purpose or set anything in motion other than more hatred.
Terrorists, namely Islamic rationalists, want to take over the world. Their religion teaches that anyone who is not a Muslim is an infadel and must be killed. If a Muslim dies while killing 'infadels' then they are greatly rewarded in heaven according to the Qur'an. They kill innocent people because they consider them to be inferior infadels and they want these infadels to be wiped off the face of the earth. If you look back in history you will see that it is the same principal as Hitler's mass murder of the Jews. I think people need to wake up and realize what's happening and take a stand. You cannot bargain with these people. They are too dangerous and cannot be trusted.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 9:12am

Post 118 of 153

Madmanmatty

Force: 368 | Joined: 17th Mar 2003 | Posts: 372

FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +4

WhiteMtPictures wrote:

Terrorism is meant to be for a cause, and I can't honestly see how attacking western countries will further any purpose or set anything in motion other than more hatred.
Terrorists, namely Islamic rationalists, want to take over the world. Their religion teaches that anyone who is not a Muslim is an infadel and must be killed. If a Muslim dies while killing 'infadels' then they are greatly rewarded in heaven according to the Qur'an. They kill innocent people because they consider them to be inferior infadels and they want these infadels to be wiped off the face of the earth. If you look back in history you will see that it is the same principal as Hitler's mass murder of the Jews. I think people need to wake up and realize what's happening and take a stand. You cannot bargain with these people. They are too dangerous and cannot be trusted.
Muslims? That's a generalization. People like you who do not fully understand a culture, yet do not stop from posting absurd, embarassing and destructive comments (believing you know the truth) are the reason these terrorists are in business. You can't blame religion, because the terrorists are FANATICS. They do, in no way represent thier culture or religion. Same as a white supremist condoning rascism against Black folk. It's bigotry, plain and simple. Don't post comments like that. Don't even think like that. You're wrong, plain and simple, and being offensive.

Terrorists don't want to take over the world. Bush wants to take over the world. Terrorists are confused people who have only hate and hunger because of the conditions the First World imposes on them. Some progress in the G8 has caused a major step towards foriegn policy in Africa, but the Middle East is such a political hotspot, it doesn't look promising for a peaceful near-future. But let me ask you...
Do you actually KNOW a muslim? Can you honestly say that you have researched thier religion? You drop terms like you're trying to show how much you know, but the reason rings hollow. Then brining Hitler into the equation just proves your total lack of understanding. Comparing Muslims to Nazis? That's a hate crime, my friend. I suggest you KNOW what you're talking about from now on.
It is you who does not know what is happening.
Bah.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 9:28am

Post 119 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +5

WhiteMtPictures : I take it you've read the Qur'an then?

You do know that the word Islam is derrived from the word 'Salam', which MEANS 'peace'?

They kill innocent people because they consider them to be inferior infadels and they want these infadels to be wiped off the face of the earth
Yeah, that's why the Qur’an (2: 256) tell us that God prohibits the use of force or violence in religion? Why the Qur'an says "If anyone murders an (innocent) person...it will be as if he has murdered the whole of humanity, and if anyone saves a person it will be as if he has saved the whole of humanity". How is that a violent and 'dangerous' religion?

Just because there are some idiots who say that what they are doing is in the name of Allah, it simply does not mean that Islam is a violent or non-peacfull religion.

Here's something I wrote on the topic previously:

Arktic wrote:


If you want to take that logic, we can see that Christianity is just as, if not more, violent than Islam. You've just got to look at the fighting that's been going on for centuries amongst the Catholics and the Protestants, and the thousands that have been killed in the name of the Christian God. You've only got to look to Northern Ireland to see recent terrorist acts commited for the sake of Christianity. But I doubt that you'd say that chrisianity is not a religion of peace just because the IRA feel justified in commiting acts of terror in the name of god. But just because Al-Quaeda or somesuch do, you're prepared to comdemn the whole of Islam.

What about those crusades in the middle ages? I suppose that was pretty peacefull when the European Christians attempted to impose their vision of religion upon Jews, Orthodox Christians, heretics, Muslims, and just about anyone else who happened to get in the way. When they decided that before they traveled across Europe to kill God's enemies, it would be a good idea to eliminate the infidels in their midst. Thus suitably motivated, hundred of thousands of defenseless men, women and children were chopped, burned or otherwise slaughtered.

And what about those wonderfull and peacefull times during the Christian's Holy inquisition? You know, when the Christians, in the peace loving way, tortured and killed hundreds and thousands of people suspected of being infidels? Way to go!
What you've said, WhiteMtPictures, is not only blatantly WRONG, but is also potentially offensive, as you've apparently made generalisations about Muslim people that could be considered racist.

Arktic.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 10:49am

Post 120 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

WhiteMtPictures wrote:

Terrorism is meant to be for a cause, and I can't honestly see how attacking western countries will further any purpose or set anything in motion other than more hatred.
Terrorists, namely Islamic rationalists, want to take over the world. Their religion teaches that anyone who is not a Muslim is an infadel and must be killed. If a Muslim dies while killing 'infadels' then they are greatly rewarded in heaven according to the Qur'an. They kill innocent people because they consider them to be inferior infadels and they want these infadels to be wiped off the face of the earth. If you look back in history you will see that it is the same principal as Hitler's mass murder of the Jews. I think people need to wake up and realize what's happening and take a stand. You cannot bargain with these people. They are too dangerous and cannot be trusted.
That is one of the most frightening things I've ever read. Not only because it is a dangerous, terribly distorted one, but it frightens me even more that there are other people out there that have this view.

Arktic's points are totally right. Read the Koran sometime. The Koran has been debated here before and yes, contains violent passages, but no more than the Bible.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 1:17pm

Post 121 of 153

Nagual

Force: 1050 | Joined: 21st Jul 2004 | Posts: 289

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +2

WhiteMtPictures wrote:


Terrorists, namely Islamic rationalists, want to take over the world. Their religion teaches that anyone who is not a Muslim is an infadel and must be killed....... They are too dangerous and cannot be trusted.
What an incrediably racist comment. I know many Muslims, I never found one I disliked due to untrustworthyness or their religion. Comments that round up all of a culture or religion into a single collective of 'dangerous and untrustworthy' are the cause of much bad feeling. It shows that you have no understanding of people in general nevermind religions. I don't know whether your opinion is based on your upbringing or culture or just the fact you are so young and yet to develope a mature view on the world.

Comparing Muslims or Islam to Hitler and Nazis is one of the most daft thiings I have read in a long time. You compare one group, the Nazis, obsession with Genicide against the Jews, to Islam or Muslims in general. The two could not be more different. On one hand you have a small group of leaders following, and trying to please the whims of a madman. On the other you have a Religion, who's texts preach peace with others. Then to make a further "I think people need to wake up and realize what's happening and take a stand. You cannot bargain with these people. They are too dangerous and cannot be trusted." is infact very much like a White Supremist or Nazi. Comments like these cause people to become angry and upset, and fuel other racist comments.

When I was at school I knew a young lad, he was in many of my classes. He was also a Junior Klan member. He never did anything bad, but one of the things he was taught was to point out the differences on others, to make his peers fear and mistrust them. From this there is a simple learning, it is through fear and mistrust of the unknown that we mistreat others. Your comments show you don't really understand Muslims or Islam, and I susspect other religions too, but thats an assumption. It is through this lack of understanding your fear of them stems from, so instead of backing away from them, why not try to understand them more?
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 4:48pm

Post 122 of 153

Harvey

Force: 2050 | Joined: 29th Apr 2005 | Posts: 513

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Muslims? That's a generalization.
Notice how I said Islamic Rationalists? Not just Muslims in general? There is a difference. It's like the difference between Germans and Nazis. The Nazis were a group of people in Germany just like Islamic Rationalists are a group of Muslims.

Do you actually KNOW a muslim? Can you honestly say that you have researched thier religion?
Yes, I know many Muslims and the ones I know are good people.

Comparing Muslims to Nazis? That's a hate crime, my friend.
First, I am not comparing the average Muslim to the Nazis. I am comparing Islamic Rationalists to Nazis. Islamic Rationalists hate all non-Muslims as the Nazis hated all Jews.

Yeah, that's why the Qur’an (2: 256) tell us that God prohibits the use of force or violence in religion?
I suggest that you find another passage in there. The one that says that any Muslim who dies killing non-believer is great rewarded in Heaven. I don't have the whole text with me now but I will try to find it. Now how is being rewarded for killing a non-believer consider peaceful?

I will post more later but for now I have to go.

EDIT: I know my last post sounded racist but it was in no way meant to be racist. Also I find it interesting that everyone will say how they think the situation should be handled and what the cause for all this is and it's ok but once religion is brought in everyone starts getting offended.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 5:06pm

Post 123 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

How many people that rated WhiteMtPictures down understand that a Muslim Rationalist is someone that uses Islam as a justification for terrorism?

It's my personal advice that you all read the site linked to at the bottom and comment.

Source : http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/fivme.htm

It certainly makes an interesting point/opinion which I suggest reading as I believe that WhiteMtPictures may have made a fair point which was misinterpreted and as a result the negative ratings here are under investigation/discussion.

I think where WhiteMtPictures went wrong is by saying "their religion teaches them..." when it is moreso the case that the Muslim Rationalists that he refers to are Rationalists who interpret islam in a way which makes terrorism justified. All religions are open to similiar distortions/interpretations as history has proven. I don't personally believe WhiteMtPicture's post was Rascist or Incorrect, I just think it was poorly worded/written. Have a read and let me know what you think.

If you deem it appropriate, then remove your own negative rating by click the rate down button a second time.

Cheers.

-Hybrid.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 5:38pm

Post 124 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

- replace "Islam" with "Christianity" in most of what's written there & you get an accurate picture of Christianity's history, too. E.g. " Islam has never been just a religion in the traditional sense, in as much as the members of Democracies understand; it has always been a polity; a political organization."
Sound familiar?

- note: "Some Islamic rationalists say Jihad in their writings is meant to be allegorical, a spiritual struggle". Islamic rationalist does not equal terrorist
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 5:43pm

Post 125 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Mellifluous wrote:

- replace "Islam" with "Christianity" in most of what's written there & you get an accurate picture of Christianity's history, too
- note: "Some Islamic rationalists say Jihad in their writings is meant to be allegorical, a spiritual struggle". Islamic rationalist does not equal terrorist
I agree with the first point entirely, though my point was that I believe the Muslim Rationalists WhiteMt (however badly) referred to are those which have interpreted Islam in ways I mentioned. Again, it is not to say that all Muslim Rationalists interpret Isam in such ways.

Religion is multi-faceted to such degrees of interpretation, that it's impossible to define one groups name with it's belief or interpretation of the religion, I am certain that people interpret Christian Science in varying ways. smile And this is where WhiteMt went wrong, though if you fill in the gaps as such he makes a valid point.

Replace "Muslim Rationalists" with "Muslim Extremists" and it's still a faulted definition, although I do not believe it would have recieved the same reaction.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 5:54pm

Post 126 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

A further point, about democracy and Islam being incompatible.

Obviously, we're not people in position to make generalisations about that too, This is a subject that is being debated by Muslims and scholars. A dialogue on this is still going on.

If you read about Islamic "consultations" and other stuff, you can see that there are equivalents. The main problem just appears to be modernisation. Whilst we have already modernised, and changed our views over the past 400 years, and rapidly within the past 100 years (think about the positions of women, our lack of democracy etc), the Islamic world is still undergoing it.

And whilst we changed our views from within, internal change, the Islamic world is being terribly pressurised by the outside world to undergo change in a hugely accelerated time period as opposed to what took us 400 years.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 5:59pm

Post 127 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Mellifluous wrote:

And whilst we changed our views from within, internal change, the Islamic world is being terribly pressurised by the outside world to undergo change in a hugely accelerated time period as opposed to what took us 400 years.
I agree with this, which is why it is important to show tolerance not only towards those undergoing change, but also those on these forums who either misinterpret the situation or hold views which are either ill educated or pure crazy smile We won't get anywhere without discussion afterall, whatever the opinion.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 6:35pm

Post 128 of 153

CurtinParloe

Force: 841 | Joined: 16th Oct 2001 | Posts: 916

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I was chatting to my muslim taxi driver last night on the way home (from a difficult night's acting) and he hit the nail on the head.

"Politics and Religion. While those two are involved there will never be peace."

Incidentally, WhiteMtPictures may have generalised about Muslim Rationalists, as Hybrid says, but his biggest crime was spelling "infidel" and "principle" incorrectly wink

And as for "democracy", don't get me started; I'm with Chomsky on that topic.

Hmm.

I really need to get out more...
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 7:28pm

Post 129 of 153

Madmanmatty

Force: 368 | Joined: 17th Mar 2003 | Posts: 372

FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

WhiteMtPictures wrote:

Islamic Rationalists hate all non-Muslims as the Nazis hated all Jews.
Hybrid-Halo. While I agree that there may be some understanding, the above quote taken at face value is just... well... stupid. It's like saying all Black people hate white people because white people are slave drivers. Or saying ALL Jews hate Germans. Or saying what he said.

Mr. MtPictures is making rash, poorly worded comments that, whether intentional or not, make HUGE generalizations and really make (extreme) Muslims look bad.

As I understand the rating system, it is there to allow people to take poorly written or offensive posts, and recommend users to skip the post. Now, I may understand that there has been a misunderstanding, but the post is still the work of extreme ignorance.

And to clarify:
Terrorists, namely Islamic rationalists, want to take over the world
No, sir. COBRA wants to take over the world (if it wasn't for those meddling GIJOE's).
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 7:42pm

Post 130 of 153

Madmanmatty

Force: 368 | Joined: 17th Mar 2003 | Posts: 372

FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:


Source : http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/fivme.htm
I'm not sure how accurate that article is. The author can't even make it past puncuation and grammer, let alone spelling. Osama BEN laden.

The writer has no idea what he is talking about. I find his generalizations interesting. He talks about the Islamic society in general, but his comments probably do more to harm people's views of Jews more than Islamics. A Jew calling Bin Laden the new Hitler and Islamics the new Nazis. That's just retarded. Beside the fact that there is INACCURATE information in there. Just like Mr. Mountain's post. Both have a degree of naive idiocy which should be dealt with through discussion and ratings.
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 7:49pm

Post 131 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Madmanmatty wrote:

Hybrid-Halo wrote:


Source : http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/fivme.htm
I'm not sure how accurate that article is. The author can't even make it past puncuation and grammer, let alone spelling. Osama BEN laden.

The writer has no idea what he is talking about. I find his generalizations interesting. He talks about the Islamic society in general, but his comments probably do more to harm people's views of Jews more than Islamics. A Jew calling Bin Laden the new Hitler and Islamics the new Nazis. That's just retarded. Beside the fact that there is INACCURATE information in there. Just like Mr. Mountain's post. Both have a degree of naive idiocy which should be dealt with through discussion and ratings.
Mmm, I too am unsure of how truthful it is which is why I have always stated that it's an interesting opinion. The reason I linked to it here was as much to verify it as to add an outside opinion.

But we'll get COBRA some day...
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 7:52pm

Post 132 of 153

Madmanmatty

Force: 368 | Joined: 17th Mar 2003 | Posts: 372

FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Yooooo Joe!
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 8:17pm

Post 133 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Hybrid -

I understand what he meant by the phrase "Islamic Rationalist" - but the fact that he suggests that "If a Muslim dies while killing 'infadels' then they are greatly rewarded in heaven according to the Qur'an", is a bad interpretation of the Qur'an (most probably a passage taken out of historical context), and that "Their religion teaches that..." suggests that he's generalising about ALL Muslims, as he's making a comment about what Islam teaches, rather than what these people believe.

As I say in my original post, he APPEARS to be racist and making generalisations about the whole of Islam, coupled with the fact that he clearly doesn't understand the Islamic faith.

And no, it is NOT a violent religion, WtMtPictures. Qur'an verses such as "Even if you stretch out your hand against me to kill me, I shall not stretch out my hand against you to kill you" are inspirational, and surely promote nothing but peace?

And as Melliflous has said - you can find violence in any religious text, such as the bible. For example, in the Book of Josha (mainly chapters 8-10), God gives his blessing for Joshua to smite all the people of Ai, killing 12000; Kill the Gibeonites, the people of Makkedah, the Libnahites, the people of Lachish; destroy the Eglonites, the Hebronites and the Debirites. Oh, and then tells Joshua to go and kill a bunch of horses. Very nice.

...once religion is brought in everyone starts getting offended
No, once you start making stupid generalisations about a faith, then that's when it gets offensive.

Arktic
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 9:11pm

Post 134 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Arktic wrote:

above post
I've already addressed pretty much every point you've made Arktic, and I don't disagree at all. My worries with the masses of negative ratings are not aimed at people who are intelligent around such matters, rather than people who are overly aggressive/ill educated. Criticising the bad wording of someone's post as it may convey the wrong message is one thing, but to misinterpret it and to rate it down is somewhat different. I don't believe this affects you.

It's arguable that all of religion is taken out of historical context, modernised if you will. Personally I don't believe people when they quote religious books unproven because I have heard everything from "Thou shalt not kill less in my name" to "Try to kill me and I won't kill you" so it's a pretty mixed range of messages. Personally I haven't much knowledge of Islam, though I do know that a rationalist recently got sentenced to death for Blaspheming the Qu'ran in Pakistan, should I assume that when it was written what was effectively "Try to kill me and I will not kill you" means that he'd send his lackeys to kill him? I should I assume that once again, religious interpretations have altered the rules.

Finally, to address your ending quote (quoting what I am unsure) I think if anything, religion confuses situations beyond what they should be seen as. Religion is something so fused into the very belief and outlooks of some people that of course when religions clash people will be offended. Regardless of generalisations, as I said earlier - due to the multi-faceted nature of religions it's extremely difficult to pinpoint a name, let alone a view of their beliefs. With such a fundamental problem at the very heart of the east and the west, it's not difficult to see why things have pretty much gone to hell.

I think we're deviating off topic anyway, however interesting this may be.

Today people gathered/have been gathering en mass in trafalger square to pay their respects to those who died during the London bombings. The Mayor and others made speaches and others read poetry. I didn't even know about it until I saw it on tv and I live here, how crazy is that? smile
Posted: Thu, 14th Jul 2005, 10:41pm

Post 135 of 153

Chrislad

Force: 50 | Joined: 13th Apr 2002 | Posts: 176

Windows User

Member

Rating: +1

WhiteMtPictures wrote:

Terrorism is meant to be for a cause, and I can't honestly see how attacking western countries will further any purpose or set anything in motion other than more hatred.
Terrorists, namely Islamic rationalists, want to take over the world. Their religion teaches that anyone who is not a Muslim is an infadel and must be killed. If a Muslim dies while killing 'infadels' then they are greatly rewarded in heaven according to the Qur'an. They kill innocent people because they consider them to be inferior infadels and they want these infadels to be wiped off the face of the earth. If you look back in history you will see that it is the same principal as Hitler's mass murder of the Jews. I think people need to wake up and realize what's happening and take a stand. You cannot bargain with these people. They are too dangerous and cannot be trusted.
Just going to repeat what others have said and pass some of my comments.

My colleague said to me the other day "My friend works in an office with two Muslims and they cheered when the bombings were announced".
Although this may be true, it made me think about the time I was sat in a pub and there was footage of British soldiers in Iraq on the TV. There was cheers and shouts such as "F***ing P***s" and "You deserve worse". People weren't sympathetic to anyone in the country. As far as they were concerned, they were all the same.
This is unfortunately the world we seem to live in. First it was fear of black people, now its a fear of Middle Eastern and asian culture.
You can actually relate this to film and think about the japanese horror films not really using monsters but asian children. strange.
But people tar with the same brush too much. I lived in London and I know many Muslims and all are fantastically intelligent, vibrant, good people. They speak freely about their religion and are very proud of their religion and ways. There are Muslim extremists and there are Christian extremists (Bush anyone? ooh controversy!).
Theres a word for fear of other cultures "Xenophobia", this is the crime of our times. We fear the unknown and push it so far away that we will never get to know it. Understanding other cultures is essential. The more you try and understand, the more you will understand.
I can understand the reasons why people fight for their religion, I can also understand why the middle eastern countries feel threatened by the west.
The west has done FAR more damage than September 11th and the London bombings. We control so much that happens in the world.
We "help" people by bombing around their countries and forcing our ideals onto them, when they turn up at our doorstep we say "they don't benefit our economy, they just get benefits and do nothing" or "They are stealing our jobs". Well, they don't do both. I've heard those phrases come out of the same mouth. Making me think "well these people don't understand, they just fear what they don't understand".
I think thats what it boils down to.
Right, I must go to bed, I've been in work all day and I'm shattered.
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 1:21am

Post 136 of 153

ChocolateCoveredAngel

Force: 0 | Joined: 15th Jul 2005 | Posts: 1

Member

Chrislad wrote:


Just going to repeat what others have said and pass some of my comments.

My colleague said to me the other day "My friend works in an office with two Muslims and they cheered when the bombings were announced".
Although this may be true, it made me think about the time I was sat in a pub and there was footage of British soldiers in Iraq on the TV. There was cheers and shouts such as "F***ing P***s" and "You deserve worse". People weren't sympathetic to anyone in the country. As far as they were concerned, they were all the same.
This is unfortunately the world we seem to live in. First it was fear of black people, now its a fear of Middle Eastern and asian culture.
You can actually relate this to film and think about the japanese horror films not really using monsters but asian children. strange.
But people tar with the same brush too much. I lived in London and I know many Muslims and all are fantastically intelligent, vibrant, good people. They speak freely about their religion and are very proud of their religion and ways. There are Muslim extremists and there are Christian extremists (Bush anyone? ooh controversy!).
Theres a word for fear of other cultures "Xenophobia", this is the crime of our times. We fear the unknown and push it so far away that we will never get to know it. Understanding other cultures is essential. The more you try and understand, the more you will understand.
I can understand the reasons why people fight for their religion, I can also understand why the middle eastern countries feel threatened by the west.
The west has done FAR more damage than September 11th and the London bombings. We control so much that happens in the world.
We "help" people by bombing around their countries and forcing our ideals onto them, when they turn up at our doorstep we say "they don't benefit our economy, they just get benefits and do nothing" or "They are stealing our jobs". Well, they don't do both. I've heard those phrases come out of the same mouth. Making me think "well these people don't understand, they just fear what they don't understand".
I think thats what it boils down to.
Right, I must go to bed, I've been in work all day and I'm shattered.
Ah, so much to respond to.
I don't know the people in the pub you're referring to, obviously, but could it possibly be that the people whom they said deserved to be killed were the disgusting monstrous terrorists who attacked our country? I'd venture to guess that they weren't suggesting that the innocent Iraqis deserved to be killed.
I was watching a news interview with a British terrorism expert last week after the attacks, and the expert was talking about how many Moslem extremists there are in England. Only 1% of the Moslem population are extremists. But that's still 16,000 people.
The difference between Christian extremists and Moslem extremists is that Moslems kill people. The Christian religion is a peaceful one, but Islam is not. (And...Bush is a Christian extremists? Believe me, I know Christian extremists...Bush isn't one. razz He's actually very moderate.)
This has absolutely nothing to do with fear of other cultures, the US happens to be the most diverse country in the world. "Diversity" is what we are preached at from every corner. We've got diversity coming out our ears. What we have a problem with is people bombing us, and with dictators murdering their own people.
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 2:18am

Post 137 of 153

Rabbit Hole Pictures

Force: 430 | Joined: 25th Apr 2005 | Posts: 198

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

woah, its really terrifying.

after 9 11 i hoped there wouldnt be anything major like that again.

im not with politics or anything, yet i still dont think that bombing subways is good, that just causes more hatrid throughout the contries.
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 2:28am

Post 138 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

ChocolateCoveredAngel wrote:

The difference between Christian extremists and Moslem extremists is that Moslems kill people. The Christian religion is a peaceful one, but Islam is not.
You have got to be kidding me.
The Spanish Inquisition
The Crusades
The IRA

Are ALL examples of Christianity being used to justify violence, just as Muslim extremists do the same with Islam.

Though I do agree that I do not think our attacks against a dictatorship which was announced even by it's people as being unjust classes as Xenophobia. People are rather obviously becoming wary of the east because of the Terrorist attacks though.
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 2:32am

Post 139 of 153

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Stop.

Please, stop.

Just wondering, are you atheist, Hybrid?
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 2:49am

Post 140 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

atom wrote:

Stop.

Please, stop.

Just wondering, are you atheist, Hybrid?
I don't think stopping is a good idea considering the debating is for the most part interesting. And I'm not entirely sure of how my personal beliefs or choice of religion come into this, but to answer your question : No.
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 3:11am

Post 141 of 153

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Oh jeez, here we go. Please people, realize that other people have different beliefs than you. Atom, how would you feel if you were Muslim, and you heard what ChocolateCoveredAngel wrote... I mean come on, you're view is not the only one out there.
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 3:37am

Post 142 of 153

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

evman101 wrote:

Oh jeez, here we go. Please people, realize that other people have different beliefs than you. Atom, how would you feel if you were Muslim, and you heard what ChocolateCoveredAngel wrote... I mean come on, you're view is not the only one out there.
I don't know how I'd feel.

However, if you took my comments to heart with any religious pretense, I'm sorry, as they were not meant that way.

Hybrid, I asked if you were atheist because, while this discussion has stayed rather clean, (well......for this site) you seemed to be unnerved by any of the comments made, so I was just wondering. Still, I ask it to stop, because I've got mixed ideas about my own religion and my community/friend/family's religion, and I'm afraid people will end up being offended, as I am currently. I dont want to point anyones post out, or get into an argument, I just want to say that people can be offended without posting thier views, and the most logical way to prevent it is to




STOP.
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 5:03am

Post 143 of 153

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Xcession wrote:



2. Religion

Absolutely no exceptions. You're all entitled to your opinions, but it seems impossible for anyone to express theirs without insulting someone else's.

Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 5:39am

Post 144 of 153

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

AcjPictures wrote:

Xcession wrote:



2. Religion

Absolutely no exceptions. You're all entitled to your opinions, but it seems impossible for anyone to express theirs without insulting someone else's.

Exactly
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 5:41am

Post 145 of 153

sidewinder

Force: 4937 | Joined: 5th Aug 2001 | Posts: 2453

FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Woah, this isn't locked yet. Surprising.

Look, you can't argue around the fact that the Koran does have lines that condone violence. It doesn't mean that all muslims are violent, nor does it mean that Islam is a violent religion. All it really adds up to is the face value of what I just stated; that there are parts of the Koran that condone violence (just as there are many other parts that don't). It's the same in the Bible. If fanatics use those parts to justify their actions, well, tough beans. Those lines exist in the religions' holy book and have been exploited, and the same thing has occured in many religions.

So really, arguing that Islam is a religion of doves and rainbows is stupid, and so is arguing the opposite. Religions are a matter up to personal interpretation, and if an individual wants to make a violent way of it, it is the individual's doing, not the religion's teachings. So saying things like "Christianity is the most violent religion" are not only ignorant, but inflammatory. It is the leaders and the followers chosing the violent path for personal reasons, or even possibly personal gain.

Take, for example, this chunk by Arktik...

Arktik wrote:

What about those crusades in the middle ages? I suppose that was pretty peacefull when the European Christians attempted to impose their vision of religion upon Jews, Orthodox Christians, heretics, Muslims, and just about anyone else who happened to get in the way. When they decided that before they traveled across Europe to kill God's enemies, it would be a good idea to eliminate the infidels in their midst.Thus suitably motivated, hundred of thousands of defenseless men, women and children were chopped, burned or otherwise slaughtered.

And what about those wonderfull and peacefull times during the Christian's Holy inquisition? You know, when the Christians, in the peace loving way, tortured and killed hundreds and thousands of people suspected of being infidels? Way to go!
Not only is the statement inflammatory in its wording and flagrantly wrong in its assumptions of the motivations and goals of the crusades, but it also lumps together all Christians in a bigoted manner as them and their religion being the forces to blame for these acts, and not considerring the economical, strategical, and personal motivations of the leaders in power at the time.

So it is my hope that Arktik was posting this as an example of faulty logic of blaming violent acts on the teachings of the religion, and not his personal beliefs, because if that is his actual view of history and Christians, then I'd deem him just as big of a racist or bigot as a person who stated that Mulsims are terrorists due to their religion.


EDIT: I just thought of a good analogy while taking a shower. Believing that 9/11 occured because of Islam or that the crusades were caused by Christianity is like believing that the Iraq war was fought because of WMDs.
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 6:04am

Post 146 of 153

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

every religion is written so vaguely you can prove it is peace loving and horribly violent. saying one is worse or better or more violent than the other is just stupid. and gay. very, very gay
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 7:40am

Post 147 of 153

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

sidewinder wrote:

So it is my hope that Arktik was posting this as an example of faulty logic of blaming violent acts on the teachings of the religion, and not his personal beliefs
Sidewinder, that was exactly my point; hence my use of the phrase "If you want to take that logic, we can see that..."

You're dead right, there *are* violent and aggressive portions of any religious text - but to make sweeping generalisations about how violent or peacefull a religion is based on the actions of a few, or to take those aggressive portions out of context as evidence of a religion's violent nature is quite blatantly wrong.

Cheers,
Arktic
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 9:43am

Post 148 of 153

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Arktic wrote:

sidewinder wrote:

So it is my hope that Arktik was posting this as an example of faulty logic of blaming violent acts on the teachings of the religion, and not his personal beliefs
Sidewinder, that was exactly my point; hence my use of the phrase "If you want to take that logic, we can see that..."

You're dead right, there *are* violent and aggressive portions of any religious text - but to make sweeping generalisations about how violent or peacefull a religion is based on the actions of a few, or to take those aggressive portions out of context as evidence of a religion's violent nature is quite blatantly wrong.

Cheers,
Arktic
Agreed.

atom wrote:

Hybrid, I asked if you were atheist because, while this discussion has stayed rather clean, (well......for this site) you seemed to be unnerved by any of the comments made, so I was just wondering.
Whatever my belief, my perception of historical facts wouldn't change.

There's no need to lock this thread either. As news comes in it'll be placed in this thread rather than having 5 or 6 threads about the same event which will all end in debate.

In regard to rule number 3 of forbidden forum content : Religion, you can regard it as over-ridden. Politics is also a forbidden subject matter but this does class as a special case and as a result if a point is relevant and religion comes into an intelligent part of the argument or points made then so be it. The rule exists to clamp down on points that offend people or cause largescale debate of the angry kind. All threads are monitored closely by the moderating team and posts that break the 'line' will be removed. Of course, since I'm involved in the discussion I won't be moderating this thread (as is common practice other than extreme cases).

Sidey, I think you misread Arktic's and maybe even my point that violence can be read into any religion. That doesn't mean that religions cause wars, it means that people distort them to justify wars or they cause a conflict of beliefs which ignites a conflict. I don't believe any religion teaches violence (though if you know of one let me know). In terms of religion being a personal interpretation is bang on with what we've already said so.. I agree.

Game on.
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 11:00am

Post 149 of 153

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

God. I just heard back from home that my next door neighbour's grandson had his legs blown off in the London bombings
Posted: Fri, 15th Jul 2005, 11:08am

Post 150 of 153

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

In regard to rule number 3 of forbidden forum content : Religion, you can regard it as over-ridden. Politics is also a forbidden subject matter but this does class as a special case and as a result if a point is relevant and religion comes into an intelligent part of the argument or points made then so be it.
I think this thread (so far!) is a great testament to the friendly nature of FXhome.com. I've been on a few discussion boards over the years, and I can't think of many that would get to 10 pages and still be debating something intelligently, calmly and without any kind of aggressive behaviour (despite the paranoia of evman and atom razz ).

It's also fantastic that such a diverse group of people, in terms of nationality, religion, location and age can debate in such a mature and interesting manner. Most internet forums would have descended into insults on page 2. Maybe there is yet hope for the world. wink

Good work chaps.
Posted: Mon, 18th Jul 2005, 8:49pm

Post 151 of 153

alexcull

Force: 440 | Joined: 23rd Apr 2005 | Posts: 187

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: -1

alexcull wrote:

Even though it is a saddening fact, i kind of thought of something. Now, before i say this i want everyone to know i am a full George Bush Republican. Anyway, i was kinda thinking that this bombing is kind of GOOD for George Bush. Mainly because it will definatly get England the incentive to stay in the War on Terrorism, and ir might influence other countries in Europe. WHo knows, maybe this is bush's falt?!?! Nah...
Ok, to settle this out, i am completly sorry fpr saying that. I was just telling people what was on my mind. SOrry.
Posted: Mon, 18th Jul 2005, 9:32pm

Post 152 of 153

Chrislad

Force: 50 | Joined: 13th Apr 2002 | Posts: 176

Windows User

Member

ChocolateCoveredAngel wrote:


Ah, so much to respond to.
I don't know the people in the pub you're referring to, obviously, but could it possibly be that the people whom they said deserved to be killed were the disgusting monstrous terrorists who attacked our country? I'd venture to guess that they weren't suggesting that the innocent Iraqis deserved to be killed.
I was watching a news interview with a British terrorism expert last week after the attacks, and the expert was talking about how many Moslem extremists there are in England. Only 1% of the Moslem population are extremists. But that's still 16,000 people.
The difference between Christian extremists and Moslem extremists is that Moslems kill people. The Christian religion is a peaceful one, but Islam is not. (And...Bush is a Christian extremists? Believe me, I know Christian extremists...Bush isn't one. razz He's actually very moderate.)
This has absolutely nothing to do with fear of other cultures, the US happens to be the most diverse country in the world. "Diversity" is what we are preached at from every corner. We've got diversity coming out our ears. What we have a problem with is people bombing us, and with dictators murdering their own people.
Someone who visits a filmmaking website should really be media literate. "1% of the moslem population are extremists. But that's still 16,000 people". lets look at that:
a) extremists dont equal terrorists
b) 16,000 isn't actually that much of the british population. There are more BNP members in Britain.
c) I don't know what news you were watching, but unfortunately I'd take british media with a pinch of salt.

Christian extremists DO kill people! Have you ever heard of the KKK? There's one for you.
"what we have a problem with is people bombing us", is this threat constant? no. People aren't constantly bombing us, they bombed London, which represents us.
Tell you what, lets kick all the non white people out of britain and all people of any other faith. And also stop all of our foreign investors too, just in case they may be linked to terrorists.
Do that and tell me how far we get. Do you think we'd have no trouble? No, we'd still have idiots causing trouble and ruining things for others. We'd also lose what makes Britain: a great mixed culture of people helping people.
I'm sorry to say, but you're ignorant.
Posted: Mon, 18th Jul 2005, 10:22pm

Post 153 of 153

alexcull

Force: 440 | Joined: 23rd Apr 2005 | Posts: 187

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: -1

Heads up Chrislad, moslem is spelled Muslim. Or, moslem is some wierd thing i have no idea about.

(If an FX Staff removes this message for mentioning a religion, i am sorry)