Muslim Hero

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Muslim Hero

    Apparently, the discovery  of the bombs in the Cargo planes a couple of weeks ago were due to a double agent.  He had been imprisoned in Gitmo but became a double agent.  He found out about the bombs and alerted officials.

    His actions cast suspicion on him an de was tortured and killed by Al Qeada.

    A muslim gave his life to thwart a terrorist attack.  That must mess up the Wing Nuts few of Muslims - or maybe they'll just ignore the heroic action by a Muslim.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/01/cargo-plane-bomb-plot-tipoff

    Interesting how this didn't receive much ink in the liberal pro-muslim US media.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from hawkeye01. Show hawkeye01's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    Interesting how this didn't receive much ink in the liberal pro-muslim US media.

    Really???

    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2010/11/02/planes_bombs_were_4_times_stronger_than_09_attempt/

    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/11/01/2010-11-01_exgitmo_detainee_jabir_alfayfi_tipped_off_yemeni_authorities_about_cargo_bombs_o.html

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/01/jabir-alfayfi-exguantanam_n_777332.html

    http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=12022748

    http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2013320908_terror02.html

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/nov/1/yemen-al-qaeda-turncoat-alerted-saudis-plot/

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101101/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_yemen_saudi_intelligence_7

    Shall I continue???
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from RevWright. Show RevWright's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    I salute him and perhaps moreso, the intelligence community for turning him. I do wonder how they turned him.. money.. threats..  
    Thank God the attacks was foiled.
    Appreciate your sharing this single event. Would like hearing more about what the Muslims are doing to fight their own.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from schadenfreude99. Show schadenfreude99's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    How come the article doesn't mention that he was tortured and killed ?

    Is he really dead or did you make that part up ?
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from whatnow3. Show whatnow3's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    The conclusion you make Jeff is false.

    "Wingnuts" as you say don't hate all Muslims.  That is a strawman.

    Typical Dirty post.  Typical of a far left lemming!!!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BobinVa. Show BobinVa's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    "He had been imprisoned in Gitmo but became a double agent. "

    Um, didn't you moonbats tell us Gitmo was a horrid palace of torture, where innocent farmers became hardened terrorists due to Bush Cheney waterboarding? Doesnt fit the liberal template, does it?

    Give this Muslim hero a medal posthumously...along with many CIA agents who have risked their lives serving their country, but are smeared by the likes of Dirtywater as "torturers". 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    The conclusion you make Jeff is false. "Wingnuts" as you say don't hate all Muslims.  That is a strawman. Typical Dirty post.  Typical of a far left lemming!!!
    Posted by whatnow3


    I don't think wingnuts as a group hate muslims, but plenty of wingnuts on this board do. And there does seem to be a general increase in hostility toward muslims since BUsh left office.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    How come the article doesn't mention that he was tortured and killed ? Is he really dead or did you make that part up ?
    Posted by schadenfreude99


    My mistake - he wasn't totured and killed by Al Qeada.  That was someone suspected of being a double agent.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    The conclusion you make Jeff is false. "Wingnuts" as you say don't hate all Muslims.  That is a strawman. Typical Dirty post.  Typical of a far left lemming!!!
    Posted by whatnow3


    Ah a lemming.  That's a new one.  Of course you realize that lemmings following each other off a cliff was a bunch of BS, which is pretty much describes all of your views about everything.

    Can we get a refund for the amount of money spent trying to educate you?
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    I guess we can call an end to the War on Terror (or whatever we are supposed to call it), right? DWL, we already know that there are many muslims that serve in the US military. We know that there are no doubt many serving as double agents or counter terrorists.  Is the War on Terror a clash of religions or cultures? From my point of view it is a clash of cultures and many muslims have the intelligence ot be on the side of modernity and progress. Unfortunately, there are many, like our President, who reward the extremist segment of the muslim population through their idiotic political correctness. Like you they see this conflict as a matter of religion and that we should be tolerant of all religions (except Christianity of course:)). It is a clash of cultures and I see no reason to be tolerant of backward cultures that want to tear us down.
    Posted by Newtster



    How is adressing the moderate, non violent muslims, and engaging them as human beings, a reward for the terrorists?
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    Seems this a an example of GITMO being EXTREMELY effective. Bravo to both.
    Posted by GreginMeffa


    Actually I think it is the opposite. We've had GITMO for how long and this is the only one they've managed to turn that we know of. I really think less harsh measures would produce better results. I don't think the guys should go through the american legal system, but they should essentially be treated as POWs, so they are clearly handled by existing treaties. Right now, stuff like GITMO is great PR for groups like Al Qaeda.
     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero : It isn't. I am talking about addressing the violent extremists as human beings. One example is giving the violent extremists access to US civilain courts where their rights are unduly expanded. Another example is treating a nation/territory that is governed by a recognized terrorist organization like they have some kind of legitimate status.
    Posted by Newtster



    Personally I think they should be categorizes as POWs with all the rights that that grants and tried in military tribunals.

    However, I don't think it is fair to say, using the criminal justice system treats violence extremists as human beings (though our system of law does require us even to treat out enemies as human beings). The whole point is they haven't been convicted of anything yet. We do the same for mass murderers, rapists and pedophiles in our system. No one likes them. But we have a basic principle of innocent until proven guilty.

    Which nations/territories did you have in mind?
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero : POW status would certainly make the whole situation clearer. I blame that on Bush - he should have had the stones to ask Congress to declare war instead of pulling the end run around the legitimate process. Nonetheless just because we have not declared war doesn't change the character of the enemy. They are foreigners attacking this country here and abroad. To treat them like criminals is to give them an advantage and as they are foreigners we have no obligation to give them access to the rights afforded to criminals. Are we to expect our soldiers to Mirandize prisoners caught on the battle fireld? Are we supposed to put our own soldiers at risk by denyng them the intelligence information that can be gained by questionning them? Or are we as a nation so stupid that we are going to ask taxpayers to provide lawyers for enemy combattants whose goal is to kill us? And to give them the rights of US citizenship such as the presumption of innocence?? The territory I had in mind of course is the Palestinians Terrortories where Hamas - a terrorist organization recognized as such by the US State Department - was elected majority in their parliament and was given the right to form a government in 2006.
    Posted by Newtster


    If caught in a legitimate battle field, then treat them like POWs.  If caught in the act of committing an act of terror, treat them as if they were infiltrators.  Treat them the same way Germans caught trying to blow up a powerplant in the US during WWII would have been treated.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from ForumCleaner. Show ForumCleaner's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero : POW status would certainly make the whole situation clearer. I blame that on Bush - he should have had the stones to ask Congress to declare war instead of pulling the end run around the legitimate process. Nonetheless just because we have not declared war doesn't change the character of the enemy. They are foreigners attacking this country here and abroad. To treat them like criminals is to give them an advantage and as they are foreigners we have no obligation to give them access to the rights afforded to criminals.


    We could still treat them as POWs. The present situation is creating all kinds of problems for us. I understand there is a bind with some guys we caught doing some very bad things early on. I don't pretend dealing with these guys is going to be easy whatever we decide to do. but moving forward we have to change our approach.


    Are we to expect our soldiers to Mirandize prisoners caught on the battle fireld?


    Like I said, treat them like POWs and follow the international laws of war. It is very simple, and it is in our long term interest not to be seen as enemies of international law or as doing anything that violates human rights.

    Are we supposed to put our own soldiers at risk by denyng them the intelligence information that can be gained by questionning them?



    I have no problem with questining guys, but I think torture is something we should never engage in. It is simply against our tradition as a country, and against our moral principles. I mean, we could also save ourselves some time and blood by bombing Muslim capitals to ashes. But we don't do that sort of thing.

    The territory I had in mind of course is the Palestinians Terrortories where Hamas - a terrorist organization recognized as such by the US State Department - was elected majority in their parliament and was given the right to form a government in 2006.
    Posted by Newtster


    Okay. And my understanding is we still recognize Hamas as a terrorist organization. But what do you propose we do? Hamas and the Palestinians are there. It is obviously a complex situation. I am as pro-Isael as they come, and I am a Jew. Can't say I am enthralled with OBama's handling of the Israel conflict. But as a third party, the US can help with the peace process by speaking with groups like Hamas and the PLO. With Hamas it is a tricky situation. My honest opinion is eroding what popular support remains for hamas is the key.

    JUst as a point of detail. When they elected Hamas it wasn't so much a vote for Isalmic terror, as a vote against PLO corruption. But it was still a major set back, still very revealing, and still strong evidence why we should be wary of promoting democracy in the middle east.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    Kids, the rules for enemy combatants goes back to 1942.  More recently: On February 20, 2009, the administration of President Barack Obama sided with the Bush Administration's interpretation of law when they argued to bar access to civil courts sought by enemy combatants held at the Bagram Airfield in Afghanistan . This blame Bush sht is getting REALLY old.
    Posted by GreginMeffa


    You really play both sides don't you? 

    How many times have you blamed Democrats for an old policy that Republicans had a hand in continuing? 

    Certainly Obama bears some of this, if not half - he continued it.  But that doesn't mean nothing at all can be fairly said about Bush starting it. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from WhatIsItNow. Show WhatIsItNow's posts

    Re: Muslim Hero

    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero:
    In Response to Re: Muslim Hero : It isn't. I am talking about addressing the violent extremists as human beings. One example is giving the violent extremists access to US civilain courts where their rights are unduly expanded. Another example is treating a nation/territory that is governed by a recognized terrorist organization like they have some kind of legitimate status.
    Posted by Newtster


    Well if you ignore the question "how do we know the person we have is actually a violent extremist", I guess that makes "thinking" about the situation easier.

    I suppose it's enough for you that when we tortured some other guy, he yelled out someone else's name in order to make the torture stop.  Good, strong evidence. 


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share