NationStates Jolt Archive

Below is a link to a site called "Unite Against Terror".

The principled Left is finally making a stand against Islamofascism and the psuedo-leftist useful idiots who promulgate bin Laden's lies.

They are reviving true Liberalism for the simple reason that allowing the psuedo-leftist apologists for Islamofascism to go unchallenged makes them ashamed to call themselves Liberals any longer.

Oliver Kamm-"...They (the Islamofascists) oppose the US and its allies not for our sins of commission and omission, but for what we exemplify: liberal political rights, pluralism, religious liberty, scientific inquiry and women's emancipation. Their contempt for human life and disregard for the principle of non-combatant immunity stem not from despair and anger, but from nihilism...."

Unite Against Terror (http://www.unite-against-terror.com/whysigned/archives/000005.html)

Aye.

*Raises glass*

Below is a link to a site called "Unite Against Terror".

The principled Left is finally making a stand against Islamofascism and the psuedo-leftist useful idiots who promulgate bin Laden's lies.

They are reviving true Liberalism for the simple reason that allowing the psuedo-leftist apologists for Islamofascism to go unchallenged makes them ashamed to call themselves Liberals any longer.



Unite Against Terror (http://www.unite-against-terror.com/whysigned/archives/000005.html)
How is that site liberal? Isn't christopher hitchens a right winger now? That website seems to simply repeatedly parrot Bush's classic "they hate us for our freedom" intelligence insulting explanation. If terrorists hate our freedom loving values then where are the terrorists in Sweeden or Canada? Terror is a tactical response to our policies ie invading muslim countries, supporting puppet sheiks and predidents for life, and for america anyway our unconditional love fest with zionism.

How is that site liberal? Isn't christopher hitchens a right winger now? That website seems to simply repeatedly parrot Bush's classic "they hate us for our freedom" intelligence insulting explanation. If terrorists hate our freedom loving values then where are the terrorists in Sweeden or Canada? Terror is a tactical response to our policies ie invading muslim countries, supporting puppet sheiks and predidents for life and for america anyway our unconditionaly love fest with zionism.

Historically, the word Liberal does not refer to those on the left. Liberalism is something leftists oppose. There are terrorists in Sweden and Canada. They just haven't attacked yet.

No, terror is not a tactical response. Terrorism is a form of idiocy and stupidity against countries that have democracy and freedom. Not all nations have been struck, but Osama would not care if he struck Sweden and Canada. And Canada has troops in Afghanistan. So does Germany.

Your logic is full of holes.

Historically, the word Liberal does not refer to those on the left. Liberalism is something leftists oppose. There are terrorists in Sweden and Canada. They just haven't attacked yet.

No, terror is not a tactical response. Terrorism is a form of idiocy and stupidity against countries that have democracy and freedom. Not all nations have been struck, but Osama would not care if he struck Sweden and Canada. And Canada has troops in Afghanistan. So does Germany.

Your logic is full of holes.
OK well excuse me for using the term "liberal" in the way it has been used for the last century or so. While you may view Islamic terror as "stupid" it has worked in the past, driving the French out of algeria, the Americans and Israelies out of Lebanon, the Soviets out of Afghanistan, the Spanish out of Iraq etc. Ossama's messages have repeatedly offered western countries a chance to avoid terror by changing their foreign policy objectives. Do you think it is a coincidence that Spain and Britain, coalition partners in Iraq have been struck while the surrender monkey french and Germans are unscathed?

OK well excuse me for using the term "liberal" in the way it has been used for the last century or so. While you may view Islamic terror as "stupid" it has worked in the past, driving the French out of algeria, the Americans and Israelies out of Lebanon, the Soviets out of Afghanistan, the Spanish out of Iraq etc. Ossama's messages have repeatedly offered western countries a chance to avoid terror by changing their foreign policy objectives. Do you think it is a coincidence that Spain and Britain, coalition partners in Iraq have been struck while the surrender monkey french and Germans are unscathed?

How can you blame the U.S. for causing terrorist attacks? Did we ask them, specifically, to carry out the attacks? Were there Americans attacking the U.S.? How can you support something that killed thousands on September 11th, and killed over 50 and injured nearly a thousand in London? Wow. Just, wow.

How can you blame the U.S. for causing terrorist attacks? Did we ask them, specifically, to carry out the attacks? Were there Americans attacking the U.S.? How can you support something that killed thousands on September 11th, and killed over 50 and injured nearly a thousand in London? Wow. Just, wow.


WoW yourself. That is the most asinine thing I've ever heard (read). Are you joking?? We've killed THOUSANDS of arab muslims for HUNDREDS of years, dating all the way back to the crusades. While I find terrorism to be the last bastion of the fanatic, and an abhorant tactic, I still keep the understanding that these people have been stomped on by the west for literally hundreds of years. What the fuck did you expect??

OK well excuse me for using the term "liberal" in the way it has been used for the last century or so. While you may view Islamic terror as "stupid" it has worked in the past, driving the French out of algeria, the Americans and Israelies out of Lebanon, the Soviets out of Afghanistan, the Spanish out of Iraq etc. Ossama's messages have repeatedly offered western countries a chance to avoid terror by changing their foreign policy objectives. Do you think it is a coincidence that Spain and Britain, coalition partners in Iraq have been struck while the surrender monkey french and Germans are unscathed?

What did Turkey do to get bombed? Philliapines? Bali? Netherlands?

Youre opinion is extremely narrow minded and you ignore the fact that other countries are getting bombed.

Hey why hasnt Poland got bombed? Japan? they supported too...youre logic would say they would get bombed....oh wait...you have no logic because your opinion is based on limited facts while ignoring the other facts.

WoW yourself. That is the most asinine thing I've ever heard (read). Are you joking?? We've killed THOUSANDS of arab muslims for HUNDREDS of years, dating all the way back to the crusades. While I find terrorism to be the last bastion of the fanatic, and an abhorant tactic, I still keep the understanding that these people have been stomped on by the west for literally hundreds of years. What the fuck did you expect??

The Crusades have no relevence to the current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

September 11th was unprovoked.

The terror attack in London was unprovoked.

Enough said.

The Crusades have no relevence to the current wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

September 11th was unprovoked.

The terror attack in London was unprovoked.

Enough said.


Bullshit "Enough said"! These people don't consider it "unprovoked" DON'T YOU GET IT!! JEEZIZ H. MOTHERFUCKING CHRIST!!

There actually are people out there who bear immense resentment toward our country for prior bad acts, like say proping up the oppressive Shaw of Iran. Allowing Saddam to take power in Iraq. Giving Palastine to the Jews (I'm not anti-semitic, but that is an event in world history that pissed off a huge number of arabs). Where is the disconnect from what the U.S. does with it's huge rattleing sabre, and why these people are sooo pissed off?? Don't you read?

Bullshit "Enough said"! These people don't consider it "unprovoked" DON'T YOU GET IT!! JEEZIZ H. MOTHERFUCKING CHRIST!!

There actually are people out there who bear immense resentment toward our country for prior bad acts, like say proping up the oppressive Shaw of Iran. Allowing Saddam to take power in Iraq. Giving Palastine to the Jews (I'm not anti-semitic, but that is an event in world history that pissed off a huge number of arabs). Where is the disconnect from what the U.S. does with it's huge rattleing sabre, and why these people are sooo pissed off?? Don't you read?

Of course I read. It's unprovoked. We did not attack anyone in the middle east before September 11th.

The Jews deserved Isreal, as it was their ancient home.

None of those events could have provoked such an undeserved attack.

OK well excuse me for using the term "liberal" in the way it has been used for the last century or so. While you may view Islamic terror as "stupid" it has worked in the past, driving the French out of algeria, the Americans and Israelies out of Lebanon, the Soviets out of Afghanistan, the Spanish out of Iraq etc. Ossama's messages have repeatedly offered western countries a chance to avoid terror by changing their foreign policy objectives. Do you think it is a coincidence that Spain and Britain, coalition partners in Iraq have been struck while the surrender monkey french and Germans are unscathed?

Iraq was held by Britain if my history is correct, not Spain. Spain held Western Sahara I believe it is.

Also this terrorism will not win because we are granting these countries a chance. Their people will vote in elections (Afghanistan already has done that). So your misapplications are invalid.

Your logic doesn't hold, when Germany is contributing in Afghanistan (a point you ignored). Osama himself is in Afghanistan, not Iraq. So how could your logic possibly hold? Afghanistan is a muslim country too, smart one.

Of course I read. It's unprovoked. We did not attack anyone in the middle east before September 11th.

The Jews deserved Isreal, as it was their ancient home.

None of those events could have provoked such an undeserved attack.
israel was our homeland many years ago. but before we got it back, it was theirs, and it got taken away from them, of course they're gonna get pissed off if they lose their homeland. who cares if it was ours, now it's theirs, they don't wanna lose it

Bullshit "Enough said"! These people don't consider it "unprovoked" DON'T YOU GET IT!! JEEZIZ H. MOTHERFUCKING CHRIST!!

There actually are people out there who bear immense resentment toward our country for prior bad acts, like say proping up the oppressive Shaw of Iran. Allowing Saddam to take power in Iraq. Giving Palastine to the Jews (I'm not anti-semitic, but that is an event in world history that pissed off a huge number of arabs). Where is the disconnect from what the U.S. does with it's huge rattleing sabre, and why these people are sooo pissed off?? Don't you read?


Many agree that the punishment of France and Brittan on Germany after world war 1 allowed World War 2 and Hitler to rise to power...

Does that make anything Hitler did right? No....

So your logic is fucked up.

Many agree that the punishment of France and Brittan on Germany after world war 1 allowed World War 2 and Hitler to rise to power...

Does that make anything Hitler did right? No....

So your logic is fucked up.
nobody said that what they're doing is right, just that it is understandable. and it doesn't make america right either. the reason terrorists are doing it that way is because it is they only means they have of acheiving what they want. if there was a better way, then they might do things differently

nobody said that what they're doing is right, just that it is understandable. and it doesn't make america right either. the reason terrorists are doing it that way is because it is they only means they have of acheiving what they want. if there was a better way, then they might do things differently

And the only means the US has of stopping them is to fight back, or at least secure our dang boarders. :mad:

And the only means the US has of stopping them is to fight back, or at least secure our dang boarders. :mad:
and exactly where are these Iraq-US and Afghanistan-US borders of which you speak?

There are terrorists in Sweden and Canada. They just haven't attacked yet.


Wish I hadn't bothered helping you out that first night of yours on NS.

You're a real pip.

how is it that the jew is arguing on the side of the muslims the the US is terrorizing? :confused:
i guess it's because no-one else will, and the fact that i kind of understand how they feel

and exactly where are these Iraq-US and Afghanistan-US borders of which you speak?

You do realize that terrorists get in the US by first going to Canada and Mexico, right? Please don’t mistake me for a bigot, I have nothing against Hispanics, but surely it isn’t to much to ask to keep track of the people coming into the country, and keep criminals and possible terrorists out. If you are European, I understand why you don’t understand this.

Wish I hadn't bothered helping you out that first night of yours on NS.

You're a real pip.

I don't need your help.

If you are weak or let your guard down, they'll attack. That simple.

Iraq was held by Britain if my history is correct, not Spain. Spain held Western Sahara I believe it is.
I think he meant more recently the Madrid Bombings.

Also this terrorism will not win because we are granting these countries a chance. Their people will vote in elections (Afghanistan already has done that). So your misapplications are invalid.
Possible, but not proven. What happens if the people vote freely for a theocracy that wants all Americans dead? In Iraq there are plenty of people who have seen secular government (Saddam) and "democratic" government (Now) and might choose the alternative.

Your logic doesn't hold, when Germany is contributing in Afghanistan (a point you ignored). Osama himself is in Afghanistan, not Iraq. So how could your logic possibly hold? Afghanistan is a muslim country too, smart one.
At least the London Bombers linked their attack to Iraq though, and threatened Denmark and Italy, which are both in Iraq.
Even though Osama and Saddam can't stand each other, for AQ the Iraq war is a great boost for their recruting, and any attack on a Muslim country only serves to support the myth of the "crusaders".
Which, according to recent research into Suicide Bombings, is a major part in inspiring people to blow stuff up. The book is called "Dying to Win" I believe...

israel was our homeland many years ago. but before we got it back, it was theirs, and it got taken away from them, of course they're gonna get pissed off if they lose their homeland. who cares if it was ours, now it's theirs, they don't wanna lose it

There were alternatives to Palestine, of course - I believe a large portion of Madagascar was considered, as well as some prime South American territory.

Do you feel Jewry might've been better served if their homeland had been established elsewhere?

You do realize that terrorists get in the US by first going to Canada and Mexico, right? Please don’t mistake me for a bigot, I have nothing against Hispanics, but surely it isn’t to much to ask to keep track of the people coming into the country, and keep criminals and possible terrorists out. If you are European, I understand why you don’t understand this.
then how are you able to support the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan?

I don't need your help.

If you are weak or let your guard down, they'll attack. That simple.

No, you're right. You don't need my help.


But you know, you're right about weakness.

I think he meant more recently the Madrid Bombings.


Then why didn't Poland get struck? Or South Korea? Or Italy?

Possible, but not proven. What happens if the people vote freely for a theocracy that wants all Americans dead? In Iraq there are plenty of people who have seen secular government (Saddam) and "democratic" government (Now) and might choose the alternative.

I've seen polls in Iraq showing that people want a government that isn't theocratic. They have a right to have islam in some parts of their constitution, but I see that most politicans in Iraq don't want an islamic government.

At least the London Bombers linked their attack to Iraq though, and threatened Denmark and Italy, which are both in Iraq.
Even though Osama and Saddam can't stand each other, for AQ the Iraq war is a great boost for their recruting, and any attack on a Muslim country only serves to support the myth of the "crusaders".

Rhetoric at best. It is best you prove that. As far as I'm concerned Osama is stuck in some area between Pakistan and Afghanistan. There are terrorists who were recruited far before the Iraq war. It is a misnomer to say the Iraq war caused more recruits as it can't be proven. IT is just anti-war rhetoric.

There were alternatives to Palestine, of course - I believe a large portion of Madagascar was considered, as well as some prime South American territory.

Do you feel Jewry might've been better served if their homeland had been established elsewhere?
well, i believe it should be where it is, because that's the way it was, but it doesn't mean that i don't understand how the people who lived there before we came back feel

There were alternatives to Palestine, of course - I believe a large portion of Madagascar was considered, as well as some prime South American territory.

Both possible “solutions” to the Jewish “problem” in Nazi Germany before they adopted the “final solution". Not calling you a Nazi, just pointing out that its kind of creepy when people say that.

"unite against terror" ... I dont know man, bombing the middle east, Israel and the USA all at once is not easy for any country to accomplish ....

Well if anyone replies to my last post go ahead. I gotta go to bed.

Anyways, I just want to say. Sure lets say we withdraw from Iraq. And the middle east. Do you think the terrorists will just go away? I don't think so. They'll find a different reason to attack us.

Both possible “solutions” to the Jewish “problem” in Nazi Germany before they adopted the “final solution". Not calling you a Nazi, just pointing out that its kind of creepy when people say that.

Well, if I'd used the word 'solution', you might have had something there to feel creepy about. Anyway, I understood these were considerations of the UN, post WWII, not pre-holocaust Nazi code for death-camps.

Well if anyone replies to my last post go ahead. I gotta go to bed.

Anyways, I just want to say. Sure lets say we withdraw from Iraq. And the middle east. Do you think the terrorists will just go away? I don't think so. They'll find a different reason to attack us.
this guy doesn't seem to understand that attacking them won't make them go away

this guy doesn't seem to understand that attacking them won't make them go away

This guy labours under the apprehension that anti-Americans lurk in his cupboards, waiting to pounce.

this guy doesn't seem to understand that attacking them won't make them go away

Sure it will. It'll kill them. We can in the meantime educate civilians in these countries and we have. Oh by the way, smart one.. here is one poll that validates my entire case:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/krwashbureau/20050714/ts_krwashbureau/_bc_terror_poll_wa_1

"WASHINGTON - Support for Osama bin Laden and for violence against civilians in the name of Islam is falling in many Muslim countries, according to a new poll released Thursday."

so really tell me.. are we doing things wrong?

Well, if I'd used the word 'solution', you might have had something there to feel creepy about. Anyway, I understood these were considerations of the UN, post WWII, not pre-holocaust Nazi code for death-camps.

Yeah, but the Nazis also considered sending them there. They actually weren’t even going to set up death camps, just kick them out of Europe. I understand you probably didn’t know that, but I’m a jerk like that. :D

Sure it will. It'll kill them. We can in the meantime educate civilians in these countries and we have. Oh by the way, smart one.. here is one poll that validates my entire case:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/krwashbureau/20050714/ts_krwashbureau/_bc_terror_poll_wa_1

"WASHINGTON - Support for Osama bin Laden and for violence against civilians in the name of Islam is falling in many Muslim countries, according to a new poll released Thursday."

so really tell me.. are we doing things wrong?
1. are you basing your argument on just one poll? even i'm not that daft
2. you actually believe what comes out of washington? poor misguided fool
3. since when has killing those who oppose you worked?

1. are you basing your argument on just one poll? even i'm not that daft
2. you actually believe what comes out of washington? poor misguided fool
3. since when has killing those who oppose you worked?

You are reported for using ad hominems. Mature a bit. The poll was just an example.

To three: WWII. Korean War. Etc.

I'm going to bed.. good night...

1. are you basing your argument on just one poll? even i'm not that daft
2. you actually believe what comes out of washington? poor misguided fool
3. since when has killing those who oppose you worked?

I’d like to respond,

1. I don’t care what polls in the Mid-East say.
2. :rolleyes:
3. It worked pretty darn well for Uncle Joe :D Seriously, I’d prefer we just keep terrorist out of our country rather than killing them half way around the world. Eventually they will find a more convenient scapegoat.

The idea that liberals are "apologists" for terrorism is the single thing that angers me most in this world. Bin Laden is a relgious conservative. He is not a fascist (or an "Islamofascist," whatever that deeply retarded non-sequitor is supposed to mean.) Al-Qaeda and the radical right in the US are two sides of the same coin: they are bunch of rich old men who are happy to see the youth of the world die based on a 15th century world view. The difference between Bush and his cronies and bin Laden's circle is where in the world these cruel, selfish men were born. The line between a hero and a villain is fine. A hero is someone who blinds himself to his own suffering to achieve an idealistic goal. A villain is someone who blinds himself to the suffering of others to achieve an idealistic goal. Which is Bush? Which is bin Laden? I say they're both despicable and subhuman and I'll smile the day someone sends 'em both to hell.

Anyway, I understood these were considerations of the UN, post WWII, not pre-holocaust Nazi code for death-camps.maybe. even the jewish congress think about temporary jewish state in uganda. I think it even get majority, but canceled because of the fear of inside "war" in the judaism.
anyway, there isn't reason to think about it, because there is jewish state in israel, so it useless argument.

How is that site liberal? Isn't christopher hitchens a right winger now? That website seems to simply repeatedly parrot Bush's classic "they hate us for our freedom" intelligence insulting explanation. If terrorists hate our freedom loving values then where are the terrorists in Sweeden or Canada? Terror is a tactical response to our policies ie invading muslim countries, supporting puppet sheiks and predidents for life, and for america anyway our unconditional love fest with zionism.

It is funny how much of a cop-out that whole "they hate us for our freedoms" arguments is, isn't it?

The idea that liberals are "apologists" for terrorism is the single thing that angers me most in this world. Bin Laden is a relgious conservative. He is not a fascist (or an "Islamofascist," whatever that deeply retarded non-sequitor is supposed to mean.) Al-Qaeda and the radical right in the US are two sides of the same coin: they are bunch of rich old men who are happy to see the youth of the world die based on a 15th century world view. The difference between Bush and his cronies and bin Laden's circle is where in the world these cruel, selfish men were born. The line between a hero and a villain is fine. A hero is someone who blinds himself to his own suffering to achieve an idealistic goal. A villain is someone who blinds himself to the suffering of others to achieve an idealistic goal. Which is Bush? Which is bin Laden? I say they're both despicable and subhuman and I'll smile the day someone sends 'em both to hell.

Good analysis of the situation. Well done!

www.werenotafraid.com

#39 Rummania
The idea that liberals are "apologists" for terrorism is the single thing that angers me most in this world. Bin Laden is a relgious conservative. He is not a fascist (or an "Islamofascist," whatever that deeply retarded non-sequitor is supposed to mean.) Al-Qaeda and the radical right in the US are two sides of the same coin: they are bunch of rich old men who are happy to see the youth of the world die based on a 15th century world view. The difference between Bush and his cronies and bin Laden's circle is where in the world these cruel, selfish men were born.

I didn't say liberals were apologists for terrorism. I said pseudo-leftists, like you, are apologists for terrorism.

You, and cynics like you, make insipid moral equivalency arguments like Bush and bin Laden are 2 sides of the same coin.
-Bush wants to institute democracy and rule of law in Iraq, then leave. He believes that the problems in the muslim world that helped to create bin Laden can be solved by making the people free to live as they wish.
-Bin Laden wants to create a world where you will either be a muslim or the law of Islam, Shari'a, will make you a slave to a muslim. Your mother will not be allowed to leave the house without you (I assume you are male) or your father to take her and she won't be able to vote because there won't be any elections, ever.

"'Doublethink' means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them."--George Orwell

By engaging in this sort of argument you have become a morally bankrupt hypocrite.

You condemn one man (Bush, as a symbol for all men like him) for trying to bring the same sort of freedoms you clearly enjoy, to others who are just as deserving of them as you are.

Of course, admitting this is impossible for you to do because you are a cynic. You impute motives to Bush based on a stereotype and that fly in the face of actual events because you're willfully ignorant.

By condemning him (Bush) for trying to stop the spread of fascism, you buttress the cause of the man (bin Laden and as a symbol for his followers) who has stated on numerous occasions that he wants to deprive you of your freedoms. The freedom you enjoy is an affront to him and his version of Allah.

And so you, and the pseudo-leftists like you, have nothing to contribute to the cause to which you so passionately claim to believe in.

What good are you to anyone other than a fascist?

Historically, the word Liberal does not refer to those on the left. Liberalism is something leftists oppose. There are terrorists in Sweden and Canada. They just haven't attacked yet.

No, terror is not a tactical response. Terrorism is a form of idiocy and stupidity against countries that have democracy and freedom. Not all nations have been struck, but Osama would not care if he struck Sweden and Canada. And Canada has troops in Afghanistan. So does Germany.

Your logic is full of holes.

His logic is full of holes? Maybe you should read what you just wrote and spot the fact that you tacitly agreed with him, then as yourself whose logic is full of holes.

#39 Rummania


I didn't say liberals were apologists for terrorism. I said pseudo-leftists, like you, are apologists for terrorism. Now here's an explanation I don't want to miss. What is a psuedo-leftist? By the sounds of it anyone who thinks further than KILL! when dealing with problems.

You, and cynics like you, make insipid moral equivalency arguments like Bush and bin Laden are 2 sides of the same coin. Because they are. Both religious fanatics, both attacking other sovreign nations in their quests to force their way on others, both leading powerful organisations of destruction.
-Bush wants to institute democracy and rule of law in Iraq, then leave. He believes that the problems in the muslim world that helped to create bin Laden can be solved by making the people free to live as they wish. So he will enforce 'what they wish' upon them. Many Iraqis refused to take part in the votes as they did not believe they were right one way or another. I'd say democracy is not on their list of governmental systems.
-Bin Laden wants to create a world where you will either be a muslim or the law of Islam, Shari'a, will make you a slave to a muslim. Your mother will not be allowed to leave the house without you (I assume you are male) or your father to take her and she won't be able to vote because there won't be any elections, ever. Maybe so, and I don't like that, makes no odds to the moral position.



By engaging in this sort of argument you have become a morally bankrupt hypocrite.

You condemn one man (Bush, as a symbol for all men like him) for trying to bring the same sort of freedoms you clearly enjoy, to others who are just as deserving of them as you are. If he was a little more even-handed in this it'd be good.

Of course, admitting this is impossible for you to do because you are a cynic. You impute motives to Bush based on a stereotype and that fly in the face of actual events because you're willfully ignorant. And you blitz us for the exact same reason

By condemning him (Bush) for trying to stop the spread of fascism, you buttress the cause of the man (bin Laden and as a symbol for his followers) who has stated on numerous occasions that he wants to deprive you of your freedoms. The freedom you enjoy is an affront to him and his version of Allah. No we support democracy INCLUDING OUR FREEDOMS OF SPEECH AND OPINION

And so you, and the pseudo-leftists like you, have nothing to contribute to the cause to which you so passionately claim to believe in.

What good are you to anyone other than a fascist? Enlightened and rational debate for a start, which you cannot.

Bolded

Instead of rebutting me with proof or attempting some sort of logical argument, you give the typical pseudo-leftist reponse-"I know you are but what am I."

It's very childish and boring behavior.

Exhibit A:
By condemning him (Bush) for trying to stop the spread of fascism, you buttress the cause of the man (bin Laden and as a symbol for his followers) who has stated on numerous occasions that he wants to deprive you of your freedoms. The freedom you enjoy is an affront to him and his version of Allah. No we support democracy INCLUDING OUR FREEDOMS OF SPEECH AND OPINION

Did you even try to comprehend what I wrote? Whether you realize it or not, you've proven my point. You are for freedom of speech and opinion but you are against the person who is promoting freedom of speech and opinion.

Then to cover your inability to construct a logical repsonse, you throw in, "To enlightened rational debate which you are incapable of."

You have no clue as to how to conduct such a debate. Not only are you a pseudo-leftist you're a pseudo-intellectual as well.

WURZELMANIA WROTE:
Bush wants to institute democracy and rule of law in Iraq, then leave. He believes that the problems in the muslim world that helped to create bin Laden can be solved by making the people free to live as they wish. So he will enforce 'what they wish' upon them. Many Iraqis refused to take part in the votes as they did not believe they were right one way or another. I'd say democracy is not on their list of governmental systems.

BAGHDAD, Iraq - One of the Sunni Arabs appointed to a committee to draft Iraq's constitution was assassinated Tuesday in a drive-by shooting just hours after the president said the document could be completed in two weeks.
Mijbil Issa was gunned down along with an adviser to the committee and a bodyguard in the central Karradah area of Baghdad, according to Mohammed Abed-Rabbou, another Sunni member of the drafting committee.

Issa was among 15 Sunnis named last month to a committee charged with drafting a new constitution by Aug. 15. The Sunnis were added in an attempt to reach out to the religious community at the heart of the insurgency.

However, two Sunni committee members had already quit because of threats from the insurgents who oppose the U.S.-backed, Shiite-dominated government. Abed-Rabbou said the other Sunnis on the committee would continue their work despite the killing.

"The Iraqi government strongly condemns this ugly crime," a government statement said. "It promises everyone to punish those killers and continue supporting and encouraging a wide and comprehensive participation of all parties in drafting the constitution."

Marko Attila Hoare (Faculty of History, University of Cambridge)
I sign this statement as a supporter of the legitimate struggle for freedom and independence of the Palestinians, Chechens and other enslaved Muslim peoples caught between the Scylla of colonial oppression and the Charybdis of Islamofascism.

To every genuine national-liberation movement, sectarian hatred and pogroms of civilians are as alien as the foreign occupier. In German-occupied Yugoslavia during World War II, the anti-Nazi Partisans preached brotherhood and unity between Muslims, Christians and Jews; they were known to execute their own officers and soldiers if they so much as stole chickens from local peasants, let alone massacred civilians. Al-Qaeda?s Islamofascist network - targeting Jews, Kurds, Shiites, women, homosexuals, moderate Sunnis and ordinary civilians everywhere - represents, by contrast, the very antithesis of a genuine liberation movement.

Everywhere, Islamic extremists have aided and abetted the oppressors of Muslims. In World War II, the Islamofascist Grand Mufti of Jerusalem Haj Amin al-Husseini helped incite an anti-British revolt in Iraq; he subsequently visited Nazi-occupied Yugoslavia to mobilise Bosnian Muslims to fight in the SS. Islamist terrorism in Daghestan in1999 provided Russia with the pretext for its genocidal reconquest of Chechnya. Elements in the Turkish and Israeli security services encouraged Islamic extremism as a means of dividing and weakening secular Kurdish and Palestinian nationalism respectively, helping to create a Frankenstein?s monster that is claiming the lives of Turks and Kurds, Jews and Arabs alike.

There can be no freedom for Muslim peoples without the defeat of the Islamofascists and everything they stand for; and there can be no defeat of the Islamofascists without liberty for all Muslim peoples.

the author seems to over-simplify the causes of terrorism and discount politics completely.