Skip to content
BOL Conferences
Learn More - Click Here!

Page 1 of 2 1 2
Thread Options
#214975 - 07/23/04 04:39 PM An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Paragon Offline
Diamond Poster
Paragon
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,164
How can we deal with this in any civilized way? Does anyone here believe that the John's can handle this better than GWB?


From an April 5 interview with Omar Bakri Muhammad, a suspected member of Al Qaeda and head of Al Muhajiroun, a radical Islamic group based in London. One of the eight suspects arrested on March 30 for planning to execute a terrorist attack in London, seven are known to have been Muhammad's protégés. The interview was conducted by Paulo Moura and appeared in the April 18 edition of Publico, a Portuguese daily.

QUESTIONS:

Your home is full of books. Are all of them about Islam?

Yes. All of my six thousand books. Except for that one [British law], which was given to me, but it's simply pathetic.

How can one live in the United Kingdom without accepting British Law?

It's forbidden for Muslim to obey man-made laws.

You say you want to see the Islamic flag flying at Number 10 Downing Street. Is that a dream or an agenda?

I believe that one day it will happen, because this is my country. I like living here. God said: "Don't live among nonbelievers unless you call for their conversion."

Were the 9/11 attacks legitimate?

Sure they were. America attacked Somalia, Sudan, Iraq. If you attack any Muslim in any place, it's like you attack them all in all places. They have the right to retaliate, but not where they are under the covenant of security. A Muslim can never be involved in a terrorist attack in the country where he is living legally. So a Muslim from U.K. can't carry out a terrorist attack here, but if he goes to a foreign country...That is another story.

What would justify the deliberate killing of thousands of innocent civilians?

We don't make a distinction between civilians and non-civilians, innocents and non-innocents. Only between Muslims and nonbelievers. And the life of a nonbeliever has no value. There's no sanctity in it.

But there were Muslims among the victims.

According to Islam, Muslims who die in attacks will be accepted immediately into paradise as martyrs. As for the others, it is their problem.

Is there any difference between incurring civilian casualties in attacking a military target and attacking civilians as a target?

We are not hypocrites. We don't say: "I am sorry, it was a mistake." We say: "You deserved it." We assume the purpose is to kill as many people as possible, to spread the terror, so that people in the West think: "Look what happened to us!" and realize that every time they send beautiful Apache helicopters and F16 aircraft, the purpose is also to kill women and children. How many people died in Afghanistan? They carpet bombed day and night, and a number was never released. One hundred sixty thousand? Who were those people? In Madrid were there 196 or 197? They were counted one by one.

Is terror the only way to make people aware of this?

Terror is the language of the twenty-first century. If I want something, I terrorize you to achieve it. To support George Bush is a kind of terrorism. To support Al Qaeda is the same. Everybody is involved. Every Muslim is a terrorist, every non-Muslim is a terrorist. This is "the time of killing." It is predicted in the divine text. Muhammad said: "I am the prophet of mercy," but he also said: "I am the prophet of massacre." The word "terrorism" is not new among Muslims. Muhammad said: "I am the prophet who laughs when he's killing the enemy." It is not only a question of killing. It's laughing while we are killing.

Do you believe there will be a big attack in London?

It's inevitable. Several attacks are being prepared by several groups. I regret that, because the first thing the government will do after that is to deport me, along with my family.

Many people say you belong to Al Qaeda.

It's an honor that people are saying that. They don't associate me with belle dancers or homosexuals but with the best people that ever existed, after the prophet and his companions. Nobody had ever dreamed of such a deed, to launch air planes against two skyscrapers. Al Qaeda is not group one can join.

But they have cells in Europe.

They have cells with a mission. And the missions are always suicide missions. That's why when we uncover a cell it no longer exists.

When a group wants to stage an attack, do they contact Al Qaeda?

No. People are recruited. They stay in sleeper cells, behaving normally, with low profiles, waiting for a mission. It will be their first and last mission. That's why it's impossible for the police to infiltrate Al Qaeda.

How many members does Al Qaeda have?

About 11,000. They gather, they spread all over the world, and they gather together again. If they didn't recruit, they would disappear, because their destiny is death. It's time for Bin Laden himself and his companions to die.

Bin Laden will commit suicide?

I think he should. They are a group who gather to fight and die. They have to be consistent.

If Bin Laden dies will Al Qaeda survive?

Of course. They were a group, but now they are a phenomenon. September 11 made Muslims understand that they have power. A new chapter of history has begun. That's why we have initiated a new calendar. We are now in Year Three of the Al Qaeda era.

Many Youths dream of joining the Al Qaeda, and there are many freelance groups ready to launch operations similar to Al Qaeda's. The Madrid attack was committed by one of those groups.

Are there many of those freelance groups in Europe?

More and more. Which is very dangerous. Here in London there's a well-organized group. They call themselves Al Qaeda Europe. They spread a lot of propaganda through the Internet and email, and they appeal to young Muslims. I fear they are preparing a big operation.

When do we know an attack is really from Al Qaeda?

It's easy. First, they are always large-scale operations. The operative is to make sure that he kills the most people possible. Second, Al Qaeda always leaves its fingerprint: a clue, like a car with the Koran inside, or a tape to be found by the police. Third, the attack always occur in two or three places at the same time. Finally, the language. I just need to read one sentence in their communiqués to recognize their doctrinal accuracy: there's no sign of nationalism, they never call themselves Arabs or Palestinians, just Muslims. They always speak of martyrdom, of death.

What does Al Qaeda want?

Terror. They are engaged in a defensive jihad against those who attacked Islam. In the long run, they want to reestablish the Islamic state, the Caliphate. And to convert the whole world.

Can the United States negotiate with Al Qaeda?

Al Qaeda is, by nature, an invisible entity, not a state. Once they knock down the corrupt governments of the Muslim states, replace them with Islamic governments, and rebuild the Caliphate, they could, as a state, negotiate with the United States. First, they will say: we will give you the oil and we will live in peace on the condition that we can spread Islam freely in the West. If the Americans don't allow us to do so, then the Caliphate will have to declare war.

Aren't Muslims living here more interested in assimilating?

Muslims first immigrated in 1940s for economic reasons. They were called "Pakis" and "Coconuts," and mistreated. They didn't care; they were only worried about food and shelter. The second generation assimilated: the children were called "Bobby," and listened to Madonna. We have come to tell them that they are members of a great nation, and this is not their culture. There are 50 million Muslims in the west. The next step is to convert the Westerners. We started by giving self-esteem back to Muslims living here.

Don't you fear that the terrorist attacks make Westerners hate Islam?

The number of conversions increased a lot after September 11.

If you had freedom to spread Islam, would it be easy to convert Westerners?

No doubt about it. Because the West has no answers about the meaning of life and death, which is life's biggest challenge. Western culture is nothing more than entertainment. Before September 11, I used to go to every campus in this country, giving lectures. Every time, I had many conversions to Islam. Of British people, blond, blue-eyed.

Before September 11, they allowed you to do that freely?

I never broke the law. In 1990, I issued a fatwa against the prime minister. I said, number one, that every Muslim had the obligation to kill him. Police arrested me the same day. But number two, I said, the fatwa was for every Muslim except for those living legally in the U.K., which meant no Muslim under my jurisdiction. They released me.

Gladwin Gill

Return to Top
Chat! - BOL Watercooler
#214976 - 07/23/04 04:44 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Nanwa Offline
Power Poster
Nanwa
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 5,564
Clintonville, WI, USA
You can't expect logical or rational thought from a person who thinks illogically or irrationally.

Believe me, I know. I have an ex-sister-in-law!
_________________________
Member of the National Sarcasm Society - like we need your support!

Return to Top
#214977 - 07/23/04 06:11 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Anonymous
Unregistered

Quote:

How many people died in Afghanistan? They carpet bombed day and night, and a number was never released. One hundred sixty thousand? Who were those people? In Madrid were there 196 or 197? They were counted one by one.




You've gotta admit the man's got a point with this though.

Return to Top
#214978 - 07/23/04 06:15 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Jokerman Offline
10K Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 12,846
Quote:

Quote:

How many people died in Afghanistan? They carpet bombed day and night, and a number was never released. One hundred sixty thousand? Who were those people? In Madrid were there 196 or 197? They were counted one by one.




You've gotta admit the man's got a point with this though.




No you don't. The US did not carpet-bomb Afghan cities. That 160,000 figure is just a lie.

Return to Top
#214979 - 07/23/04 06:57 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
NotALawyer Offline
Gold Star
NotALawyer
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 455
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

How many people died in Afghanistan? They carpet bombed day and night, and a number was never released. One hundred sixty thousand? Who were those people? In Madrid were there 196 or 197? They were counted one by one.




You've gotta admit the man's got a point with this though.




No you don't. The US did not carpet-bomb Afghan cities. That 160,000 figure is just a lie.




The US military did use carpet bombing as part it's tactics. You are the one making the distinction that "The US did not carpet-bomb Afghan cities." However, your distinction is not true. Some Afghan cities were carpet bombed. This was reported widely.

Perhaps your distinction is between "carpet bombing cities to CAUSE civilian casualties" and "carpet bombing cities in an attempt to further military objectives."

160,000 does sound high for a civilian casualty count due just to bombing.

Here is a link to a study on this.

Return to Top
#214980 - 07/23/04 06:59 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Anonymous
Unregistered

Quote:

No you don't. The US did not carpet-bomb Afghan cities. That 160,000 figure is just a lie.




The point isn't that 160,000 Afghans were killed, but that we care enough about the people who died in Madrid to count them individually, but we don't even care to estimate how many innocent Afghan (or Iraqi, for that matter) civilians have been killed. It does seem a bit ethnocentric to me.

Return to Top
#214981 - 07/23/04 07:08 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
NotALawyer Offline
Gold Star
NotALawyer
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 455
Quote:

Quote:

No you don't. The US did not carpet-bomb Afghan cities. That 160,000 figure is just a lie.




The point isn't that 160,000 Afghans were killed, but that we care enough about the people who died in Madrid to count them individually, but we don't even care to estimate how many innocent Afghan (or Iraqi, for that matter) civilians have been killed. It does seem a bit ethnocentric to me.




This is not a valid comparison for this argument and stating it is being “ethnocentric” is baseless. Victims from one localized event can often be identified. The war in Afghanistan was over a period of months and covered a very wide area (many thousands or even millions of square miles, not sure). Civilian war casualties are almost always estimates. Military forces even have a difficult time tracking this down to single names.

Return to Top
#214982 - 07/23/04 07:17 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Jokerman Offline
10K Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 12,846
Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

How many people died in Afghanistan? They carpet bombed day and night, and a number was never released. One hundred sixty thousand? Who were those people? In Madrid were there 196 or 197? They were counted one by one.




You've gotta admit the man's got a point with this though.




No you don't. The US did not carpet-bomb Afghan cities. That 160,000 figure is just a lie.




The US military did use carpet bombing as part it's tactics. You are the one making the distinction that "The US did not carpet-bomb Afghan cities." However, your distinction is not true. Some Afghan cities were carpet bombed. This was reported widely.

Perhaps your distinction is between "carpet bombing cities to CAUSE civilian casualties" and "carpet bombing cities in an attempt to further military objectives."

160,000 does sound high for a civilian casualty count due just to bombing.

Here is a link to a study on this.




You people obviously don't know what carpet-bombing is. Open your history books. Look in the index under "Dresden" or "Battle of Britain".

Return to Top
#214983 - 07/23/04 07:19 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Anonymous
Unregistered

Yes, military figures are almost always estimates. When was the last time you saw an estimate for Iraqi or Afghani civilian casualties? That's the point. Nobody has the slightest idea how many "A-rabs" we've killed with bombs, but we sure as heck know how many people died on the trains in Madrid.

Return to Top
#214984 - 07/23/04 07:28 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
NotALawyer Offline
Gold Star
NotALawyer
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 455
Quote:

Yes, military figures are almost always estimates. When was the last time you saw an estimate for Iraqi or Afghani civilian casualties? That's the point. Nobody has the slightest idea how many "A-rabs" we've killed with bombs, but we sure as heck know how many people died on the trains in Madrid.




Look at the link in my post and you'll see a rather detailed study of the Afghan war.

Return to Top
#214985 - 07/23/04 07:41 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
NotALawyer Offline
Gold Star
NotALawyer
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 455
Quote:

You people obviously don't know what carpet-bombing is. Open your history books. Look in the index under "Dresden" or "Battle of Britain".




Here is a definition

Those are just examples of the same tactic.

Return to Top
#214986 - 07/23/04 07:42 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Anonymous
Unregistered

Already did. But such a thing isn't common knowledge. It isn't something you'll see on the mainstream "Liberal Media."

The number of casualties in Madrid was all over our television and computer screens for a solid week or two. The number of casualties in Iraq or Afghanistan are hidden from mainstream view. That's what the radical was pointing out, and I think it has some merit.

Return to Top
#214987 - 07/23/04 07:42 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Fraudman CFCI Offline
Power Poster
Fraudman CFCI
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,189
Land of Steady Habits
Gee, who is the radical here?

To my knowledge, the US has not "carpet" bombed cities since WWII. Even in Nam, as in Irag and Afghanistan, B-52s were used in high concentration bombing missions of military objectives. This is a very distinct change in mission objectives clearly identifying military targets. If targets are identified in areas of civilian concentrations, JDAMs or laser guided munitions are used for their precision. Civilian casualties are unavoidable. The U.S. does not target civilians like our Muslim friends who praised Alah as their hijacked planes struck home.

Return to Top
#214988 - 07/23/04 07:48 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Anonymous
Unregistered

Quote:

Gee, who is the radical here?

To my knowledge, the US has not "carpet" bombed cities since WWII. Even in Nam, as in Irag and Afghanistan, B-52s were used in high concentration bombing missions of military objectives. This is a very distinct change in mission objectives clearly identifying military targets. If targets are identified in areas of civilian concentrations, JDAMs or laser guided munitions are used for their precision. Civilian casualties are unavoidable. The U.S. does not target civilians like our Muslim friends who praised Alah as their hijacked planes struck home.




"To my knowledge" is the operative phrase here.

Return to Top
#214989 - 07/23/04 07:51 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Jokerman Offline
10K Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 12,846
Quote:

"To my knowledge" is the operative phrase here.




Kooky anon:

Your tinfoil hat is crooked.

Return to Top
#214990 - 07/23/04 07:57 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Geaux Tigers - PL Offline
100 Club
Geaux Tigers - PL
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 197
Texas
Once again we've got an Anon posting this stuff............

Return to Top
#214991 - 07/23/04 07:57 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Jokerman Offline
10K Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 12,846
Quote:

Here is a definition

Those are just examples of the same tactic.




Note that your source does not list US use of smart bombs specifically designed to limit civilian casualties.

If we were so inhuman as you suggest, why would we simply not nuke these countries, instead of risking the lives of our military personnel by using the least force possible in order limit civilian casualties?

Return to Top
#214992 - 07/23/04 07:58 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Fraudman CFCI Offline
Power Poster
Fraudman CFCI
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,189
Land of Steady Habits
Ahha! I knew there was something strange to this figure of 160,000 killed.

On 10/15/2001, a cruise missile landed in a shepherd village killing sheep and goats. That accounts for about 155,000 of the 160,000.

Return to Top
#214993 - 07/23/04 08:00 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
NotALawyer Offline
Gold Star
NotALawyer
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 455
Quote:

Gee, who is the radical here?

To my knowledge, the US has not "carpet" bombed cities since WWII. Even in Nam, as in Irag and Afghanistan, B-52s were used in high concentration bombing missions of military objectives. This is a very distinct change in mission objectives clearly identifying military targets. If targets are identified in areas of civilian concentrations, JDAMs or laser guided munitions are used for their precision. Civilian casualties are unavoidable. The U.S. does not target civilians like our Muslim friends who praised Alah as their hijacked planes struck home.




Then you need to rethink your definition of carpet bombing. Carpet bombing IS “high concentration bombing missions” with dumb bombs. WWII had examples of widespread destruction with the intention of demoralizing the enemy and taking out targets. The Afghan war used far fewer planes and bombs, but the intention was still to demoralize the enemy and take out military targets. The accuracy with dumb bombs is better today than in WWII, but they are still dumb bombs. Yes, smart bombs were used as you said “if targets are identified in areas of civilian concentrations.” But that does not negate the fact that carpet bombing was also used as part of the military campaign.

Return to Top
#214994 - 07/23/04 08:07 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Fraudman CFCI Offline
Power Poster
Fraudman CFCI
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 3,189
Land of Steady Habits
Of course it is, we just do not do that in and near cities.

"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things; the decayed and
degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war
is much worse. A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight; nothing
he cares about more ! than his own personal safety; is a miserable creature who
has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of
better persons than himself."



-----John Stuart Mill

Return to Top
#214995 - 07/23/04 08:10 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
NotALawyer Offline
Gold Star
NotALawyer
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 455
Quote:

Note that your source does not list US use of smart bombs specifically designed to limit civilian casualties.




I don’t care. The point was to show numbers and that the numbers were less than the 160,000. Why are you even arguing this?

Quote:

If we were so inhuman as you suggest, why would we simply not nuke these countries, instead of risking the lives of our military personnel by using the least force possible in order limit civilian casualties?




Again, you have twisted my argument. I have not said anything about this being “so inhuman.” I was only arguing the definition of carpetbombing. Maybe that’s the main problem with your and Fraudman’s definitions is that you are assuming that I am saying that carpetbombing is inherently inhumane. I’m NOT saying it is inherently inhumane. It can be used in an inhumane way (ie. expressly targeting civilians for the sole purpose of killing civilians WHICH I AM NOT SAYING WE DID). I’m only saying that it was used by the US military in Afghanistan.

“Rear Admiral John Stufflebeem, deputy director of operations for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters that the B-52s were carpet bombing targets "all over the country, including Taliban forces in the north."
"We do use it, we have used it and will use it when we need to," he said.”

Return to Top
#214996 - 07/23/04 08:14 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Paragon Offline
Diamond Poster
Paragon
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,164
So, notalawyer, what is your take on what should happen from here? Are you with the John's on this? Should we pull out now? Are you saying that this nutcase has valid points and, perhaps, all us non-Muslims are less than human?

From your posts, it appears that you have not thought through your position, in that it appears that you agree with this character, but that also puts you on his hit list as you probably are not a believer. Do you have a death wish?

Return to Top
#214997 - 07/23/04 08:21 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Jokerman Offline
10K Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 12,846
Quote:

Quote:

Note that your source does not list US use of smart bombs specifically designed to limit civilian casualties.




I don’t care. The point was to show numbers and that the numbers were less than the 160,000. Why are you even arguing this?




I am referring to your definition source, not your alleged research source.

Quote:

Quote:

If we were so inhuman as you suggest, why would we simply not nuke these countries, instead of risking the lives of our military personnel by using the least force possible in order limit civilian casualties?




Again, you have twisted my argument. I have not said anything about this being “so inhuman.” I was only arguing the definition of carpetbombing. Maybe that’s the main problem with your and Fraudman’s definitions is that you are assuming that I am saying that carpetbombing is inherently inhumane. I’m NOT saying it is inherently inhumane. It can be used in an inhumane way (ie. expressly targeting civilians for the sole purpose of killing civilians WHICH I AM NOT SAYING WE DID). I’m only saying that it was used by the US military in Afghanistan.




Ok, you keep piggy-backing on anon's arguments and then disclaiming part of them. Recap:

1. You assert that the US carpet-bombed Afghan cities.

2. I assert they did not. If they did, it would be immoral, given our capabilities to do otherwise while accomplishing our objectives. When the US had to attack targets in cities (concentrations of Afghan civilians), smart bombs were used.

3. You haven't repeated the reference to carpet-bombing cities. If you wish to retract it, that's fine. But instead, you have been arguing about what is or what isn't carpet-bombing. So, to clarify, do you still assert that:

Quote:

Some Afghan cities were carpet bombed. This was reported widely.




4. If so, please provide evidence.

Return to Top
#214998 - 07/23/04 08:24 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
Anonymous
Unregistered

Quote:

So, notalawyer, what is your take on what should happen from here? Are you with the John's on this? Should we pull out now? Are you saying that this nutcase has valid points and, perhaps, all us non-Muslims are less than human?

From your posts, it appears that you have not thought through your position, in that it appears that you agree with this character, but that also puts you on his hit list as you probably are not a believer. Do you have a death wish?




The above is a ridiculous post, so riddled with false implications, that I implore notalawyer not to even respond to it.

Return to Top
#214999 - 07/23/04 08:29 PM Re: An Interview with a Radical Muslim
NotALawyer Offline
Gold Star
NotALawyer
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 455
Quote:

So, notalawyer, what is your take on what should happen from here? Are you with the John's on this? Should we pull out now?



No. We’re in and we need to finish what we are doing. It went well and could have gone better, but it could have been a lot worse (a whole lot worse). The same could go for almost any military operation. Anyone that says it went perfectly is a fool.
Quote:

Are you saying that this nutcase has valid points and, perhaps, all us non-Muslims are less than human?



No, and I’m tired of everyone that has assumed that because I didn’t march in lockstep with their quips and put downs that I’m “on the wrong side.” I don’t agree with interviewee. I was arguing against what I saw as factual inaccuracies. We did carpetbomb. Fraudman even agreed that carpetbombing was a tactic. The first mention of carpetbombing CITIES was Jokerman’s post. I included the numbers of deaths to reinforce that 160k civilian casualties was high. I agreed and was still called a radical.
Quote:

From your posts, it appears that you have not thought through your position, in that it appears that you agree with this character,



I would contend that is because you assumed that I was arguing whether it was morally right or wrong to carpetbomb, rather than factually right or wrong if we did or did not carpetbomb. Read my posts again in this light.
Quote:

but that also puts you on his hit list as you probably are not a believer. Do you have a death wish?



This has absolutely no bearing on anything.
anything.
Last edited by NotALawyer; 07/23/04 08:33 PM.
Return to Top
Page 1 of 2 1 2