Gatwick Airport worker killed by American bomb in Afghanistan

[sky9]

Today’s Daily Telegraph

One of the four Muslims killed by American bombs after apparently volunteering to fight for the Taliban in Afghanistan was a security vetted employee at Gatwick Airport it emerged yesterday.

Khan worked for LSG Sky Chef preparing meals for airlines operating out of Gatwick.
http://www.portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/10/30/nmus130.xml&sSheet=/news/2001/10/30/ixhome.ht ml

Should make the DTLR wake up.

[ 30 October 2001: Message edited by: sky9 ]

[ 30 October 2001: Message edited by: sky9 ]

[stoopid]

isnt lsg sky chefs located on the manor royal ind est about a mile or so from lgw and if he was stupid enough to go to afghanistan............

[HugMonster]

stoopid (good name, btw!) how exactly do you think SkyChefs get the meals to the aircraft? And whilst not all SC personnel would go airside, that this guy had an airside pass, dodn't you think that implies he DID go airside?

[ghost-rider]

Serves him right ! :)

Anybody else that lives in UK and enjoys our hospitality and freedom, but then decides to go and fight for the Taleban against the West will hopefully meet the same fate ! It's called treason in my book !

Is this the thanks we get for the current politically correct BS 'be nice to Islam' ?
:mad:

[LAVDUMPER]

Sorry to hear about anyone's loss of life.

But how STUPID do you have to get to go to Afghanistan to fight against the American/British military? Technology will win in the end (however long that will be).

This former Gatwick worker was presumably semi-familiar with Western technology - he should have known that the West possesses considerable technological firepower that can HURT people if directed against them.

He made a big mistake and now he is DEAD. The Taliban thinks it can outlast the US/British forces - ridiculous...

Newsflash for them: those who resist will also be DEAD or badly hurt for being mistaken. The Taliban is now condemned - they chose the WRONG side and will now pay for their misdeeds. This former Gatwick worker dug his own grave...

[fopaddy]

This just shows up the farce that the vetting process is. The BAA pass is jsut a series of hoops to be jumped through, once you jump through them like a trained monkey, hey presto you get your pass. Exactly how deep is the background checking.

As for Airport security, another farce, as my crew and I were being screened at Stansteds VP9 recently, a staff member wearing a police or immigration pass walked right past the security screen area by just flashing his ID, NO ONE bothered to ask him to put the brief case he was carrying through the XRay or to walk through the scanner.

Terrorists are not idiots, they do not have terrorist written on their ID, they do not write down Osama Bin Laden as a previous employer.

[sky9]

Fopaddy

I couldn't agree with you more. The question that has to be asked is had Mr Khan been previously been identified as a security risk? If so, why did he have a security clearance?
If he had not been identified, should we go back to square one and start checking everyone who has clearance to work at any airport in the UK in any capacity - and that includes you and me.

What I suspect will happen is:

[Avman]

Hang on Fopaddy :eek:,

Didn't you and your crew not immediately question this amazing lack of security you witnessed???? I would have taken immediate action without any hesitation whatsoever. I don't mean this agressively but, in my eyes, if you took no action then you failed just as badly as the security crew did! Hope you get my point.

[Fly-by-night]

Hang on guys. Perhaps this individual was, albeit misguided, a respectable citizen with no criminal background and fully met the requirements for the an airside pass! It's no offense yet in this country to be a muslim. There must be thousands of law abiding muslims working at airfields around the UK who are coming under unwarrented scrutiny at the moment.

[Miles High]

1.
Of course, anyone who goes out to afghanistan to fight for the terrorist-supporting taliban deserves to be killed.

2.
The fact that people like the idiot above who describes 'being nice to islam' as pc bs, is the reason that intolerance, terrorism and wars exist.

3.
Relax about the 'police or immigration' pass holder. Don't you think the staff recognised him as such - they probably see him every day and drink tea with him.

[Covenant]

Fly-by-Night

No, you're right. It's not an offence (sp) to be a Muslim, but it IS an offence to take up arms against your own country. In fact it's known as treason and is one of the very few offences which I believe still attracts the death sentence in the UK. I guess this pri*k got served his justice early and saved us wasting time and money in the courts.

Anyone else who calls themelves a British citizen, Muslim or not, but wants to go and fight for the Taliban can sod off and join him for all I care, and I hope they all get killed in the war. We certainly don't want or need them in the UK.

:mad: :mad: :mad:

[ 30 October 2001: Message edited by: Covenant ]

[Goody2shoes]

Reported in Sat or Sunday Daily Mail

Two Luton men died fighting for Taliban,
I think it said they were Taxi drivers .
Homes raided and bomb making equipment seized
by Police.

[stoopid]

oh ok hugmonster "Khan worked for LSG Sky Chef preparing meals for airlines operating out of Gatwick".

"how exactly do you think SkyChefs get the meals to the aircraft? And whilst not all SC personnel would go airside, that this guy had an airside pass, dodn't you think that implies he DID go airside?"
i should of realised that he obviously prepared the meals at the industrial estate in his nice white uniform and hair net ... then took them off, and drove the great big lorry up to the airport .... then loaded the meals onto the waiting a/c unless (silly me) they are now preparing meals on the frigging runway you pompous git :))))))))

[rhythm method]

Stoopid,

hugmonster is probably correct (although I don't know the exact setup at Sky Chefs) most catering will be prepared off airfield then driven airside and loaded by the same staff onto the aircraft, but I stand to be corrected.

Also, any link with this geezer and the groundstaff at LGW who reportedly was celebrating the Sept 11th attacks as news was still breaking? (Or was that a baggage handler?)

rm

[NotMyJob]

Couldn't believe my ears earlier tonight when I heard it stated that those who joined the taliban to fight against, potentially, British forces might have legal ramifications to face. At the end of a list of fairly innocuous charges was mentioned that "and theoretically, even treason might be considered..." THEORETICALLY??? A little PC poking out here??? Unbelievable. It's the first thing that comes to mind for the layman, but the last that comes to mind for a politician.
Just dunno...theoretically

[Fanatic]

Miles High, are you completely blind to terrorism?
Point 3. Relax about the 'police or immigration' pass holder........
So the nice people in screening recognised the man. Suppose he is forced to carry his bag (today full of weapons) past the scanner as he does every day, acting normally while his wife and children were held hostage.

NO ONE SHOULD BE EXEMPT FROM SCREENING. COSMETIC SECURITY AND SENIORITY BASED SECURITY IS USELESS SECURITY.
Sorry to hijack this thread but someone rattled my cage :mad: :mad:

[Bally Heck]

So good he said it twice ;)

According to todays Independant.

"The family (Yasir Khan's)is angry that his name is being linked with extreme religious groups. He had gone there to help members of his people, the Duranni, to distribute aid and food parcels, nothing more."

More suspiciously, he was sacked by LSG Chef, "for not accepting changes in work practices put in place following the terrorist attacks in the United States." :confused:

[Sensible]

A bit off topic but the BBC have interviwed Moslems at Crawley Mosque, not sure if or when the BBC plan to transmit the interviews though!

[Indiana Jones]

Four points I would like to make on the above.

1/The Police, Customs and Immigration are exempt from any type of security screening from landside to airside. This has been bone of contention with the airlines for some time and is being apparently reviewed by the Government.Thats why Stansted did not search, they are powerless to do so.

2/The individual at LSG was a driver. By that it means that he woould have had an airside pass and driven trucks onto the airfield and had free access to aircraft, although he would have been search thoroughly by a security agent if he had worked on a US carrier. He would also have had been with a Lead hand.

3/I believe as a result of this, we should revisit all of our airside passes and double check them, using whatever parameters we can to weedle some of the more dubious people out of the system. They are there.A picture of this guy wearing a T-shirt advising to all and sundry that Islam will win is a good clue....and his nature must have been highly charged towards Islam....which in itself is not a crime, but we have to be careful.This is no game.

4/The Government is being too nice and proper. If these religious fanatics that were born in Britain really do want to fight for the Taleban, then fine by me. Lets ask the question, most of us have empty aircraft right now, call a cessation of the bombing for a week, and fly them out there. They want to go back to the 15th century, our technology can help them. As for religion, it is nothing but a problem in this world and has been for centuries, Christianity,Islam the lot. Get a life everyone, we all initially came out of a pond, one group turned left and became birds and reptiles, the other group turned right and became mammals. There is no paradise, we are all made of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen and when we die, we go back into the pond.

Its called Darwinism.

[sirwa69]

Lets ask the question, most of us have empty aircraft right now, call a cessation of the bombing for a week, and fly them out there.
Bloody brilliant idea

Remember to cancel their British Citizenship first (we wouldn't want them committing treason would we!)
Not only would it calm our streets down a bit but it would maybe convince the moderates to retake control of their mosques and get back to proper, peacefull Islam

:confused:

[ 31 October 2001: Message edited by: sirwa69 ]

[StressFree]

Jonesy,
TOP post, the best by far on this subject.
Its about time mankind moved away from the belief that there is some kind of God that rewards those that spend their lives in worship and (worse, MUCH worse) that you will enter a paradise if you kill yourself trying to kill those from other faiths.
Utter Bollo*ks............

[Loc-out]

Glad he decided to fight for the Taliban in Afghanistan, and not LGW!!

[Mert]

I agree with the idea that they should seek Afgan citizenship, and fight side by side with the Taliban there if they truly believe it is their role in life, but I think you'd have a tough time finding flight and cabin crew willing to load them up and take them anywhere.
I do however feel that it would be a perfect time for the techies to test their pilotless airliner concept, I can see it now " oops, oops, oops, oops....no matter how hard we try to solve the problem we can't seem to keep these crewless terrorist transports from crashing in to the open ocean!"

[Vmike]

Another dead religious maniac? - good. Serves him right. He probably didn't have time to appreciate the **** situation he'd put himself in before the bomb came through the roof and blew him and his new Taliban chums to bits.

However...I do wonder how the average British teenage Muslim fanatic, who has presumably been brought up in a British, albeit vehemently Muslim, home is going to react when he gets to Afghanistan and discovers the reality of life with the Bin Liners.

He will find that there are no phones, no TVs (therefore no MTV), no nice comfy beds, no nice comfy girls of whatever creed or colour to snuggle up to, no running water, no takeaway pizza, no hot showers, no running home to mum when the bullets start flying and the laundry needs doing. All in all, a pretty ****ty place to be. And, if he complains, will the Taliban say: 'OK, if you don't like it here you can always pop home for the weekend'? I don't think so! More like: 'grab this gun, get in that trench and shoot anyone that comes near you'. Then they'll wait for him to get blown to bits by the Yanks so they can use his story in their next press release. :mad: :mad: :mad:

[Indiana Jones]

I am told by a reliable source, although its not been confirmed, that these guys, and in particular, the suicide ones, are promised a place in paradise. The includes, apparently, no less that 72 virgins.
Would you go for gold if you knew the end goal was a shag with 72 women? I mean, I'd want to see the contract first, hair colour, boob size,vital features,(could all be fuglies). Plus one would have to consider, if one fell for, say 10 of them, what do you do with the other 62? Plus, do they age, do they get menopausal?As is stands, at any one time just under 20 of them will be having a period.I might not be their perfect partner either and christmas would be a real pain, let alone birthdays. So, as great as its sounds, I would be wary of signing up to this. A meal out to the local Indian, you'd never get a word in edgeways, a night out with the boys from the local 'SuicidesRUS' Club would be stopped by at least 35 of them.Nagging might be incessant.So I would want some careful negotiation before signing up on the dotted line, living with 72 virgins might not be all up its cracked out to be............you'd never get in the bathroom.

Long live Python........nudge nudge wink wink.

Apologies if I have offended anyone, including girlies,just having a bit of fun after a crap week.

[Superpilot]

Indy, I’m a humorous kind of guy. What you said deserves a lotta’ laughs but that don’t mean you got it right :p Forget the 72 wives, history tells of a king who had 300! (an important figure in Judaism, Christianity and Islam btw). I for one cannot understand any reward given to a mass murderer in the name of religion or not, no proof of this, if they believe it - we can't do much and no suicide attackers do not gain a greater reward the religion indicates completely the opposite! I’ve seen ads for recruiting these people and among the rewards are the 72 wives and surprise surprise the only people who regularly quote the saying are the astray extremists or "certain" impish Jews or Christians who are trying desperately hard to shame Islam - do a search you'll see what I mean. To mention this in public with no textual proof is very mischievous. The actual saying is written in a very moral way. I’m not going put it up for you, it’s your job to find out but seeing that your not religious anyway therefore you cannot be one to make these comments.

Ignorance is rife amongst some people. If you gave it half a chance instead of listening to others you would find a lot of good and common ground. Do not judge the religion on the basis of what a few misguided individuals do. If you knew the truth you too would discard these idiots as frauds.

A little on tolerance:
Remember you can be white, a pilot, have a Christian or Jew wife and also be a Muslim. Islam is the only religion which recognises the creeds of Judaism and Christianity and commands that they be allowed to live as they wish - now that’s tolerance for ya!

Mary is defined as a role-model figure throughout the Quran. So next time you see a covered Muslim woman do not think Islamic fundamentalism but think Holy Mary!
Peace ;)

Sorry PPRuNe Pop, no more from me.

[ 03 November 2001: Message edited by: Superpilot ]

[Miles High]

Fanatic,
Sorry you missed the point. If it was a police officer, it may well have been 'a load of weapons' in the bag. Thats what policemen carry at airports - its their job mate. (Overtly or covertly).

What would be the point of the baa security guard searching someone who is legally allowed - no, legally required, to carry a H&K(big gun)? On your logic, police should not be allowed to carry guns in a public place - they might kill a terminal full of people because terrorists have got his family! Come on get real.
And another thing, unless you have information to the contrary, shouldn't you give enough credit to the security guard that he might know his job a bit better than you do?

Jonesy,
Good point about religion. The sooner we all evolve to the point where religion becomes a thing of the past, the better. We will one day, though its taking a painfully long time imho, still, we've come a fair way in the last 200 years I suppose.

Getting off the topic a bit there, so I'll say no more about it. Good for you superpilot for doing the same - we'll agree to disagree on that bit eh?

[Indiana Jones]

Noted in the Times this morning, whilst doing the paper round with my son, that a poll suggests that 65% of British Muslims would put their reglion before their country. Furthermore, that 40% support Bin Laden and his attacks on the WTC. 95% did not agree with the bombing in Afghanistan.
Is this not the time to ask our islamic countrymen, individually if we have to, are you with us? or against us? and then take action. Didnt the U.S. intern Japanese Americans during WW2, and did we not do the same here. Are we approaching this action in this country?

[Superpilot]

Will you forget this new "our side, their side" business and system of categorising the sons of Adam as either civilised, if they agree with all your views, or uncivilised, if they don't.

How "civilised" is America?

It may be that Iraq violated international resolutions, but Israel has done so many times over and is still doing so. The excuse which Iraq gave was akin to the excuse which America gave for annexing Texas, whilst the excuse which Israel gave for occupying Palestine was worse than the excuse given by the British for keeping America as a British colony, and worse than the excuses that your forefathers gave for annihilating the Red Indians!

“that a poll suggests that 65% of British Muslims would put their reglion before their country”

And what does that mean?

“40% support Bin Laden and his attacks on the WTC”

Ask the immature, uneducated, racist few in places like Bradford and expect an answer like that. Damn statistics!

Yes it’s true the vast majority of Muslims are against the bombing against Afghanistan, aren’t you?!?

Carpet bombing Afghanistan is no method of capturing a "group of terrorists". Don't be so stupid, a million civilian casualties are likely before any of the real terrorists are caught. The attacks are extremely disproportionate. Terrorist groups are no mugs, the methods of capturing them are far more silent and precise. One month in and so far:

2 Red Cross depots (and tonnes of supplies) have been incompetently blown up
3 major power stations providing electricity to major cities also bombed.
Several hospitals demolished.
500,000 refugees forced into Pakistan and remember a certain country had difficulty accepting 200!
100’s of children separated from their parents.
Winter about to set in, people without roofs.

Muslims are always suspicious of Western politics and motives. Do you blame them? Interference with Algerian politics, US support of Israel and disregard for Palestinian rights, empty promises about resolving the Kashmir issue, sanctions against Iraq’s most needy (as an alternative to ousting the corrupt leadership – so good at that in the past!).

It is very easy for non-Muslims to accept a Muslim terrorist than it is for Muslims. The West with its traditional flawed view of Islam can readily accept that Muslims are capable of terrorism. We remain confused as to how our religion can be used to justify something so bloody.

Firstly we have seen no evidence of Bin Ladin’s involvement. Although we are 90% certain it was him, nevertheless it is a matter of principle to show us this evidence – if this evidence is lacking then expect raised eyebrows and other desperate behaviour but do remember the US and UK drive the majority of terrorists to this desperation.

Even if Bin Ladin is not responsible for 911 the US is still right to kill him (since he poses a threat) but we do feel there are many lies surrounding the whole situation and a lot is to do with demonizing the enemy. Some Muslims even think this is a conspiracy to breed hatred for Islam and Muslims (by Mossad – Israeli intelligence). Although the Taleban differ enormously in their doctrines they are still brethren. Therefore we are both against you for bombing civilians and destroying civilian buildings and are against the Taleban for sacrificing Afghans for the sake of one man. Best put this war is between the Big Bully and the Primitive idiot.

See, you can't tell us an Afghani life is not worth less than an American because it is just so obviously not true! :(

Ok, thats way too much! seeya

[ 04 November 2001: Message edited by: Superpilot ]

[Sensible]

And whilst we are deporting all those Muslims from our shores, many of whom have done nothing more than bring their faith into disrepute, can we deport all those troublesome Catholics who have been maiming and killing the British Public for years? Have we forgotten about those? Second thoughts, maybe it's not fashionable to speak of Catholics in that way at the moment!

Religion, the mother of wars!

[FFFlyer]

I think you just revealed your true colours there, Superpilot 'Although the Taleban differ enormously in their doctrines they are still brothers'. Really. I see so called Protestant Christians terrorising school children on their way to school and I don't call them brothers. I would call them 'vermin' to quote a certain famous author.

[Superpilot]

I said they were brothers because how ever different they may be they are also human and there is still time to educate them and it is imperative that we moderate Muslims do so. Killing them or distancing ourselves from them would be a big mistake. This is not the method my religion teaches (as much as some would like to believe). I took the brave step of voicing my opinion because I got a bit sick and tired of racist attitudes, here on PPRuNe especially. I feel sorry for you if you think I am of the same mindset as the Taleban.

[ 04 November 2001: Message edited by: Superpilot ]

[FFFlyer]

brethren
plural noun; DATED;(used as a form of address to members of an organization or religious group); brothers.

brother;noun [C]. 'Brothers' is a way of speaking to or of people who are members of the same group or who share a similar way of thinking.
Let us unite, brothers! [as form of address]
(from Cambridge International Dictionary of English)

[mutt]

Superpilot

How exactly do you expect people to feel when they constantly see OBL on Al-Jazeera calling for ALL MOSLEMS to fight the infidels. We are also shown surveys in the UK that states that 4 out of 10 UK Moslems agree with OBL and also a certain percentage of them believe that the attack on the WTC was justified.

You cannot blame people for feeling angry and threatened! Maybe it is time for the Moslem world especially the Organization of Islamic Countries to speak up in an united voice. They themselves have managed to ignore the suffering in Afghanistan for the last 25 years, their hands are as covered in blood as those of the USA..

Let us see that actions of moderate Moslems and maybe we will feel a little bit better.

Mutt

[FFFlyer]

Hear hear Mutt! In fact you don't have to watch Al Jazeera to see that. There seem to be plenty of Islamic leaders in the UK saying the same.

[Superpilot]

It's all good quoting dictionaries but I'm pretty certain Islam isn’t the only faith which recognises “the brotherhood of man”.

Mutt, which survey? whom did they survey? where? who surveyed? I cannot accept these figures just like that. I have not come across anyone who says the attacks were justified (Our Imams have made it clear that Islam has been hi-jacked). Any Muslim who thinks so is totally out if it.

Every single interview I've seen of a Muslim is one where the interviewee is either a school pupil, a restaurant worker, a taxi driver or a street gangster! There are some sick minded Wahabbi Leaders out there and it's a shame they're the only religious leaders who get regularly interviewed (the same sect as OBL! with the difference being as great as that between Catholics and Protestants). Continue to show them only on TV and obviously the public will begin to think Islam is bad. Very few scholars, Islamic teachers, converts and professionals are a part of these interviews and surveys and that is totally unfair.

In Pakistan OBL is a hero thanks to the new schools funded by religious fanatics, who take extremism to new extremes. Perhaps if the Pakistani's had more money to fund state schools these people wouldn't be so brainwashed.

I totally agree much of the Islamic World is also to blame for this and should do something about it too.

[ 04 November 2001: Message edited by: Superpilot ]

[FFFlyer]

It was a Sunday Times survey on Friday. 1,170 muslims were interviewed at random in cities across Britain including Birmingham, Bradord, Leicester and Manchester. 40% 'believed Bin Liner had cause to wage war aginst the US'. It's on the Sunday Times web page for 4 November 2001.

Superpilot, on the subject of racism you said 'worse than the excuses your forefathers gave for annihilating the Red Indians'. Well isn't that a bit of a sweeping assumption that everybody's forefather was a WASP who was involved in slaughtering Red Indians? Many Americans are not WASPs and I am sure would not appreciate that comment.

[mutt]

Superpilot

The survey was mentioned on Skynews around 4am this morning, they were doing a review of the morning newspapers, I didn’t hear which one it was from. (I see that FFFlyer has answered this, thanks)

I have not come across anyone who says the attacks were justified (Our Imams have made it clear that Islam has been hi-jacked). Any Muslim who thinks so is totally out if it.

Unfortunately I have heard people saying it, I will also say that I haven’t heard ANY Iman talking about the atrocities without mentioning Palestine. That includes the Iman of the Holy Mosque in Mecca. Why cant they just offer “unconditional” condolences?

IMHO, One of the problems with the west’s interpretation of Islam is a total lack of understanding, while people may have heard about Sunni’s and Shi’ites, I doubt that many could tell you about the Wahabbis or any other sect, or what they actually stand for. But while you are all under that same umbrella called Islam, you cannot expect people to treat you any differently to OBL’s followers.

As for the interviews on TV, I suggest that you watch BBC World, they have done some very good interviews, where the interviewees are leading members of the UK Moslem community, they have portrayed a pretty balanced view with both the moderates and extremists.

I’m waiting patiently to see what happens on Friday week, how will the Moslem world react to continued bombings during the holy month? But I guess that’s a topic that is outside the realm of Pprune.


Mutt

[Superpilot]

I've just seen the poll. The article explains very nicely some of the answers, and reasons behind them (e.g. frustration at the US for killing civilians). Don't let the stats do all the talking! Read the accompanying article - it's enlightening.

Similar stats would reveal bad/racist attitudes amongst certain English communities (BNP supporting ones) regarding foreigners! It means nothing in the wider sense (the people questioned make up 0.06% of Britains 2 million Muslims)

"But while you are all under that same umbrella called Islam, you cannot expect people to treat you any differently to OBL’s followers".

Take it from me they are stupid, narrow-minded people whoever they are :mad:

Point taken FFFlyer. So US politicians and journo's shoudn't have difficulty understanding what "American atrocities" means from now on should they.

[ 04 November 2001: Message edited by: Superpilot ]

[Indiana Jones]

Guys, I promise not to read the front page of the news next weekend when I help my boy with his paper round.............

Super pilot, chill..this is not against Islam, this is against terrorism...Islam needs to sort itself out, as does parts of christianity, there are bad guys in all races and religions, Islam needs to sort out OBL and the Taleban, that extremity of any civilisation cannot be tolerated anywhere.

Have a good week everyone....

[Sensible]

Islam will not sort out the problem as you put it. To "sort Islam out" first there has to be a cause to pursue and although I'm no expert on Islam, I'm pretty confident that there is absolutely no will other than that of other factions within Afganistan itself who have any cause to "sort" anything out.

I have to say that I would prefer the British to keep out of the present crisis and take a back seat with the rest of Europe and let the USA do the "sorting" I'm concerned about the cost in British lives, ££££££ and in alienating the Moslems world.

[Superpilot]

There was a young man on the radio this morning, a British Muslim from Luton who went to fight for the Taleban, but defected and came home saying "they were all mad men, idiots and fanatics, and no one had much idea of what was going on or why. Some didn't know how to pray, some were mentally disturbed, all had a desperate attitude like they were hiding something, like gold or oil or something valuable".

[Steepclimb]

That's the truth of it, Superpilot, any British Muslims other than extreme fanatics are destined to be disappointed by what they find out there.

All muslims, christians etc need to learn from this situation. The most vicious of wars were always based on religion or religious type fervour.

This is not a war against Islam, but it is a religious war by a specific part of Islam against the west. That Sunday Times survey did not surprise me. I suspect that the real figure of Muslims 'understanding' why OSL attacked is higher. How far that understanding extends to support, remains to be seen.

The Taliban and OSL are barbarians, they are a corruption of all that Islam holds dear. Moslems need to make a choice right now, most will make the right decision. Hopefully.

Being Irish I had the same conflict to resolve. With Irish republicanism I 'understood' their cause, but actively worked against their methods. The fact that I was the same religion as them had no impact on my decisions. Moslems now need to go down the same road.

[maxalt]

So he 'defected' (?) and came 'home'! What 'HOME'? Surely his home is with his muslim brothers in Afghanistan?
Who let him back in?!
Are we supposed to feel sorry for him? Was he simply 'misguided'? Tough! He and the rest of his ilk need to find out the hard way.

Many pilots on this forum will have worked in some tough parts of the world. It's alway an eye-opener when you first come to realise that the whole world isn't nice and clean and well organised and law abiding like western europe. You soon learn how lucky we are. You value your way of life more as a result.
Maybe a lot more muslims would feel some loyalty to their country (i.e. Britain) if they were all shipped off to Kabul or Karachi for six months or so. They sound like a bunch of spoiled brats to me!

[FFFlyer]

Yeh, just saw on Sky News that there were another 600 'Britons' in Pakistan ready to fight British soldiers. I would suggest stripping them of their British Passports. Why waste taxpayers money putting thme in jail. Apparently that happens automatically if you are a US citizen who takes arms against your country.
Superpilot - don't quite know what you mean by your reference to the US media but it sounds anti-US as were your previous postings.

[max_cont]

Chill peeps.
I love a good falling plate shoot. So do most service men and women.
Bring it on. :mad:

Edit for spelling.

[ 05 November 2001: Message edited by: max_cont ]

[Superpilot]

Why do you readily accept the words of rowdy immature youths? and thats all they are, only brave words. These 'few' have a point to prove more than anything else. I bet you can break down their individual views even further. Some idiots may still think this is a war against Islam, some may think OBL is the promised Al-Mahdi (yeah right!) and some may even see this as a duty to protect Afghan civilians, who knows!

Seeing that I've grown up with Asian Muslims, I can judge them better than most people. No doubt there are some real mouthy plonkers in the Muslim community who although look or seem Muslim, hardly ever practice what they preach and they're not going anywhere I can tell you that much.

Sit back and relax it's not half as bad as you're all making it out to be. The majority of these socalled fans of OBL probably couldn't even tell you were Afghanistan is on the map!

I can also be anti-Saudi for you if you want. I have my reasons :rolleyes:

[Wiley]

Superpilot, it’s usually the “rowdy immature youths” that all governments use as front line troops, for the very reason that they ARE “rowdy immature youths”, because with immaturity comes the feeling of invincibility that allows young men to put themselves in harm’s way without questioning the real motives of the cynical older men who are placing them there. However, immaturity is no excuse for announcing that you are willing to kill soldiers of your own country. Any person who holds such sentiments and feels strongly enough about them to say it (disguised) in front of a TV camera should renounce his citizenship and depart the country, never to return. In a Western society like Britain, he has the opportunity and the right (a right that does not exist in any of the countries or societies these men are extolling), to protest at what his government is doing. However, that right does not extend to saying he is looking forward to killing his own countrymen whilst remaining a citizen of that country.

I’m no apologist for OBL and men like him who would destroy all that I find familiar in my own society and out of pure self interest, I’ll do all I can to destroy such men before they do it to me. However, if we’re sensible, we all should look at what may (stress ‘may’) be really going on with this seemingly senseless bombing of Afghanistan.

Below is an article written by John Pilger. It’s long, and I can’t agree with all his conclusions, particularly that the Israelis should like down and die quietly, (as would surely be their collective fate if the Palestineans ever get the upper hand in Israel), but the rest of what he says seems awfully familiar to me and very believable.

WAR ON TERROR: THE REAL VICTIMS: The irresponsibility of this conflict is breathtaking. It is not about terrorism. As Blair and Bush stoop to the level of the criminal outrage in New York, British forces are little more than mercenaries for the hidden agenda of U.S. imperial ambitions.

By John Pilger

THE war against terrorism is a fraud. After three weeks' bombing, not a single terrorist implicated in the attacks on America has been caught or killed in Afghanistan.

Instead, one of the poorest, most stricken nations has been terrorised by the most powerful - to the point where American pilots have run out of dubious "military" targets and are now destroying mud houses, a hospital, Red Cross warehouses, lorries carrying refugees. Unlike the relentless pictures from New York, we are seeing almost nothing of this. Tony Blair has yet to tell us what the violent death of children -eight in one family - has to do with Osama bin Laden. And why are cluster bombs being used? The British public should know about these bombs, which the RAF also uses. They spray hundreds of bomblets that have only one purpose; to kill and maim people. Those that do not explode lie on the ground like landmines, waiting for people to step on them. If ever a weapon was designed specifically for acts of terrorism, this is it. I have seen the victims of American cluster weapons in other countries, such as the Laotian toddler who picked one up and had her right leg and face blown off. Be assured this is now happening in Afghanistan, in your name. Why? None of those directly involved in the September 11 atrocity was Afghani. Most were Saudis, who apparently did their planning and training in Germany and the United States. The camps which the Taliban allowed bin Laden to use were emptied weeks ago.

Moreover, the Taliban itself is a creation of the Americans and the British. In the 1980s, the tribal army that produced them was funded by the CIA and trained by the SAS to fight the Russians. The hypocrisy does not stop there.

When the Taliban took Kabul in 1996,Washington said nothing. Why? Because Taliban leaders were soon on their way to Houston, Texas, to be entertained by executives of the oil company, Unocal.

WITH secret US government approval, the company offered them a generous cut of the profits of the oil and gas pumped through a pipeline that the Americans wanted to build across Afghanistan.
A US diplomat said: "The Taliban will probably develop like the Saudis did . He explained that Afghanistan would become an American oil colony, there would be huge profits for the West, no democracy and the legal persecution of women. "We can live with that," he said. The deal fell through; but an urgent priority of the administration of George W. Bush, which is steeped in the oil industry, is to exploit the same oil and gas reserves in the Caspian basin, the greatest source of untapped fossil fuel on earth and enough, according to one estimate, to meet America's voracious energy needs for a generation. Only if the pipeline runs through Afghanistan can the Americans hope to control it. So, not surprisingly, US Secretary of State Colin Powell is now referring to "moderate" Taliban, who will join an American-sponsored "loose federation" to run Afghanistan. The "war on terrorism" is a cover for this: a means of achieving American strategic aims that lie behind the flag-waving facade of great power. The Royal Marines, who will do the real dirty work, will be little more than mercenaries for Washington's imperial ambitions, not to mention the extraordinary pretensions of Blair himself. Having made this country a target for terrorism with his bellicose "shoulder to shoulder" with Bush nonsense, he is now prepared to send troops to a battlefield where the goals are so uncertain that even the Chief of the Defence Staff says the conflict "could last 50 years". The irresponsibility of this is breathtaking, and comparable with Blair's messianic posturing that has made Britain a terrorist target.

Having reported many wars, I am always struck by the absurdity of effete politicians eager to wave farewell to young soldiers, but who themselves would not say boo to a Taliban goose.
In the days of gunboats, our imperial leaders covered their violence in the "morality" of their actions. Blair is no different. Like them, his selective moralising omits the most basic truth. Nothing justified the killing of innocent people in America on September 11, and nothing justifies the killing of innocent people anywhere else. By killing innocents in Afghanistan, Blair and Bush stoop to the level of the criminal outrage in New York. Once you cluster bomb, "mistakes" and "blunders" are a pretence. Murder is murder, regardless of whether you crash a plane into a building or order and collude with it from the Oval Office and Downing Street. If Blair was really opposed to all forms of terrorism, he would get Britain out of the arms trade. On the day of the twin towers attack, an "arms fair", selling weapons of terror (like cluster bombs and missiles) to assorted tyrants and human rights abusers, opened in London's Docklands with the full backing of the Blair government.

Britain's biggest arms customer is the medieval Saudi regime, which beheads heretics and spawned the religious fanaticism of the Taliban.

If he really wanted to demonstrate "the moral fibre of Britain", Blair would do everything in his power to lift the threat of violence in those parts of the world where there is great and justifiable grievance and anger. He would do more than make gestures; he would demand that Israel ends its illegal occupation of Palestine and withdraw to its borders prior to the 1967 war, as ordered by the Security Council, of which Britain is a permanent member. HE would call for an end to the genocidal blockade which the UN - in reality, America and Britain - has imposed on the suffering people of Iraq for more than a decade, causing the deaths of half a million children under the age of five. That's more deaths of infants every month than the number killed in the World Trade Center. There are signs that Washington is about to extend its "war" on Iraq; yet unknown to most of us, almost every day RAF and American aircraft already bomb Iraq.

There are no headlines. There is nothing on the TV news. This terror is the longest-running Anglo-American bombing campaign since World War Two. The Wall Street Journal reported that the US and Britain faced a "dilemma" in Iraq, because "few targets remain". "We're down to the last outhouse," said a US official. That was two years ago, and they're still bombing. The cost to the British taxpayer? £800million so far.

According to an internal UN report over a five-month period, 41 per cent of the casualties are civilians. In northern Iraq, I met a woman whose husband and four children were among the deaths listed in the report. He was a shepherd, who was tending his sheep with his elderly father and his children when two planes attacked them, each making a sweep. It was an open valley; there were no military targets nearby. "I want to see the pilot who did this," said the widow at the graveside of her entire family. For them, there was no service in St Paul's Cathedral with the Queen in attendance; no rock concert with Paul McCartney. The tragedy of the Iraqis, and the Palestinians, and the Afghanis is a truth that is the very opposite of their caricatures in much of the Western media. Far from being the terrorists of the world, the overwhelming majority of the Islamic peoples of the Middle East and south Asia have been its victims - victims largely of the West's exploitation of precious natural resources in or near their countries.

THERE is no war on terrorism. If there was, the Royal Marines and the SAS would be storming the beaches of Florida, where more CIA-funded terrorists, ex-Latin American dictators and torturers, are given refuge than anywhere on earth. There is, however, a continuing war of the powerful against the powerless, with new excuses, new hidden agendas, new lies.

Before another child dies violently, or quietly from starvation, before new fanatics are created in both the east and the west, it is time for the people of Britain to make their voices heard and to stop this fraudulent war - and to demand the kind of bold, imaginative initiatives that require real political courage. The other day, the parents of Greg Rodriguez, the young man who died in the World Trade Center, said this: "We read enough of the news to sense that our government is heading in the direction of violent revenge, with the prospect of sons, daughters, parents, friends in distant lands dying, suffering, and nursing further grievances against us. "It is not the way to go...not in our son's name."

[mutt]

I just love censorship :(, I read this article in a Saudi newspaper, the following line was missing.......

Britain's biggest arms customer is the medieval Saudi regime, which beheads heretics and spawned the religious fanaticism of the Taliban.


Mutt :)

[sky9]

So good he had to say it twice :D :D

[Superpilot]

Don't we know it, at the end of the day, everything boils down to money and has always done so.

Thanks for posting that Wiley. Like I said the methods this socalled "civilised" coalition has adopted for capturing terrorists are plain daft. The timing of the TV program "Beneath The Veil" which sought to expose the Taliban was also very precise don't you think :eek:

[FFFlyer]

Pilger is and always has been left of Marx. He is always very critical of anything the US does, but never suggests what he thinks the solution should be.
I notice he says the Taleban is the US's cration then he says it is the Saudis'. Funny I always thought it was created and funded by Pakistan.
KSA is a picnic compared with Saddam's Iraq, if you talk to anybody who has been there and really spoken to the ordinary people. If KSA is medieval what does that make Afghanistan - stone age? Unfortuneatly half the West's oil comes from KSA and any regime that replaces the House of Saud is likley to be more like the Taleban.

[Superpilot]

"I notice he says the Taleban is the US's cration then he says it is the Saudis'. Funny I always thought it was created and funded by Pakistan."

All three are responsible for the Talebans existence today.

The Saudi’s “spawned” some of the extreme ideas that have infiltrated into Islam and are now practiced without remorse for women and their rights, e.g. the full veil. The US germinated the evil seed into something bigger and powerful, provided training, arms and intelligence (to defeat a common enemy). Until recently Pakistan provided its electricity and phone lines, which has kept The Taleban I wouldn’t say ‘alive’ but at least better off and semi-in touch with the rest of the world.

[ 06 November 2001: Message edited by: Superpilot ]

[FFFlyer]

Urmm - didn't the Russians actually start it all by invading Afghanistan? Wasn't there a boycott of the 1981(?) Olympics in Moscow to protest aginst that, by many nations. Somehow now it's all the fault of the US. The left disaccociate themselves from that of course!
Pilger also 'forgets' to mention that the largest aid donor to Afghanistan before the war was the US.

[Flap 5]

I keep hearing how the USA was at fault for helping out the Taliban in the past. The Americans have helped out many countries and most are grateful for the help. In this case the Taliban were extremely ungrateful and even set up a terrorist training organisation in their country to strike at the USA and the west, and we are supposed to feel guilty about this?

[FFFlyer]

Pilger says that the West has 'expoited' the natural resources of the Middle East for its own benefit. Apart from oil I'm not too sure what they are (sand?). Considering one of the richest men in the world is a Saudi who owns large amounts of property in central London I don't know how he works that one out.
Next time a 4wd tries to run me off the road at 180 kmph along Sheikh Zayed Road I'll try to remember that actually we are 'exploiting' the locals by buying oil off them so they can afford new 4wds.

[chiglet]

Sky News at 1am had three or four [so called] "British Muslims" in Pakistan mouthing off against the UK and US :(
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[maxalt]

Superpilot, I'm still logging on to the 'Young Muslim On-Line UK' website ( www.ymuk.com (http://www.ymuk.com) ) on a daily basis. I'm learning a lot.

One of the most important lessons being this...that in Islam, there is no room for 'Moderates'.
It is quite clear from even the most cursory reading that to be 'moderate' means that you have not fully accepted the word of Allah through the teachings of his prophet muhammed. You are not free to differ with 'the law', and if you do you are 'kuffir'.
The contributors to that site unashamedly defended the administering of Sharia as depicted in the C4 program you mention ('The Veil'). Including the public blowing out of the brains of a woman, and the slow strangulation of a gay man.

The website is not one of those rabid fundamentalist sites you can easily find if you do a quick search, but rather a sort of religious/social forum. For that reason it is all the more alarming to read the opinions being expressed. 'God help the Taliban' for instance is one of the threads.

The British Muslim Council sent C4 a letter of protest after the screening of that program. Here's the text. It's a remarkable and eye-opening example of what 'mainstream muslim opinion' in the UK really thinks.

Channel Four,
Viewer Enquiries,
124 Horseferry Road,
London,
SW1P 2TX,
28th June 2001
Dear Sir,

Re: ‘Behind The Veil’ documentary shown on Tuesday 26th June 2001

We are writing to make a complaint about the above-named programme which we believe presented a grossly distorted view of the current realities in Taliban-led Afghanistan.

a) The presenter Saira Shah while ridiculing the policies of the Taliban made no mention of how the Taliban came to rule Afghanistan. She strangely failed to state that prior to the emergence of the Taliban in 1994 Afghanistan was bitterly divided into numerous little zones run by ‘mujahideen’ warlords engaged in deadly internecine fighting. There was no security for the common Afghani and the ordinary people were repeatedly looted of their possessions by these warlords and their followers. It was because of the outrage of the Islamic students at this state of affairs and their determination to restore normalcy and security for the ordinary Afghani that the Taliban was formed.

b) At no point in the hour-long documentary did Saira Shah mention the fact that the Taliban are facing an opposition – the so-called Northern Aliance - which is armed and financed by Russia and Iran. Many of the Taliban’s restrictions related to filming and travel are directly because of security measures related to this foreign-backed insurgency.

c) Saira Shah went to the town of Yakawlang and interviewed some Afghan men who said that the Taliban had carried out a massacre there. She failed to add that the Northern Alliance had briefly captured Yakawlang with the help of some traitorous locals and following the towns recapture by the Taliban the ‘massacre’ could quite conceivably have been related to treasonous activity. In connection with this, it was odd that Saira Shah failed to visit the far more famous northern town of Mazar-I-Sharif where the locals would have told her that many thousands of Taliban had been massacred in 1997 by the Northern Alliance after being lured there on false pretences by the Northern Alliance commander Abdul Malik.

d) Saira Shah managed to find quite a few Afghanis who were unhappy with Taliban rule. Yet, the documentary did not show any Afghanis who were happy with the Taliban. Are we to believe that in a country of 20 million – no-one supports the Taliban? Or was this a deliberate ploy to paint a negative picture of the Taliban?

e) An execution of an Afghan woman convicted of adultery was shown and Saira Shah described the event as ‘barbaric’. Islam and the Koran enjoin capital punishment for several crimes including adultery and murder, so it is totally unacceptable the Islamic worldview is ridiculed in this manner. The world is not as Saira Shah would like it but is made up of various communities with each having its own value and belief system. If Saira Shah can begin to understand this then she will look with a less blinkered eye in future.

f) The economic suffering was shown of many Afghanis. Yet, Saira Shah did not mention that Afghanistan has for the last several years been under a United Nations blockade. This has greatly exacerbated the suffering of the ordinary Afghani and has increased the prices of staple foods. The blockade was imposed after Afghanistan refused to hand over Usama Bin Ladin to the USA. A whole nation is being made to suffer by the USA because of the alleged crimes of one person. None of this was stated by Saira in her documentary.

g) Saira went to Kandahar and filmed illegally and said that she would be in deep trouble if she was found out by the Taliban. She failed to state that Kandahar is the headquarters of the Taliban and the city where the leader of the Taliban, Mullah Muhammad Umar lives. Mullah Umar has repeatedly been the target of bombings and attempted assassinations in Kandahar by undercover Northern Alliance agents and these have killed many innocent peoples. So, it is understandable that the Taliban would be suspicious of any filming in Kandahar. Would our government in Britain allow foreigners to film inside GCHQ?

The above points are by no means a comprehensive account of the many failings in the documentary. Saira Shah’s foolish and publicity-seeking actions could well contribute to endangering genuine foreign visitors to Afghanistan.

We await your urgent response.

Yours faithfully,

Mr Inayat Bunglawala

Secretary,
Media Committee
Muslim Council of Britain

[ 06 November 2001: Message edited by: maxalt ]

[Superpilot]

I take it you missed the latest post:

Are you moderate, extremist or fundamentalist? (http://forum.ymuk.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1745)

“You are not free to differ with 'the law', and if you do you are 'kuffar'.”

That’s right we’re not free to differ with the laws of God, but a great deal of what some will tell you is part of Sharia’ (The laws of God) is man-made or tradition, so who is the hypocrite here?

"The contributors to that site unashamedly defended the administering of Sharia as depicted in the C4 program you mention ('The Veil')."

Then here it is for you to see plane and simple. The ruthless, unloving, unforgiving extremist vs the caring, tolerant, pardoning moderate. How can anyone who has read a chapter from the Quran deny that it teaches all of the latter?!?

Some of those who express that view seem to think when we say moderate we mean the ‘middle way’ – i.e not following the laws of God to the fullest. The moderate way is akin to sensible, reasonable, modest and fair and this is precisely what Islam asks of us. In fact The Boss himself states He has made His religion easy for people to follow (I don’t wanna go around throwing verses at everyone!) plus there is also a verse which asks followers not to commit excess in religion!

I liked this reply from a particular poster:

“Moderation means doing things in accordance with the Sharee'ah, the Qur'an and Sunnah. The way I see it, extremism can be of two categories: denying leniency where Allah and His Messenger prescribed it, and also applying leniency where it is not warranted.”

Oh and this one also: "I am an extremely moderate fundamentalist!"

fundamentalist meaning those who follow the fundamentals of Islam.

This is getting a bit too religious now...

[ 06 November 2001: Message edited by: Superpilot ]

[maxalt]

The problem is Superpilot that, like with all ancient religions, the original teachings intent or meaning becomes blurred by time. How does one interpret the laws of Abraham/Moses/Jesus in a modern world?

The answer of course is that there are leaders who are only too willing to do it for the gullible masses, and they pervert the religion into whatever they want it to be.

While that is unfortunate, what is really worrying is that so many muslims seem hell bent on swallowing the 'interpretation' of the Taliban and other extremist leaders right here in the UK.

Islam may indeed be a peaceful religion at its core, as so many claim, but in it's current popular manifestation it is anything but!

[Flap 5]

The extaordinary thing to westerners is the way Muslims seek to justify the wrong doings of other Muslims, whatever those wrong doings may be. I consider myself to be a Christian but I also consider the murderous activities by Protestants or Catholics in Northern Ireland are carried out by thugs and terrorists. I would never seek to justify their behaviour. Why do Muslims justify the wrong doings of other Muslims or always have to make the comment that the west is also bad? - as if this justifies what the terrorists have done.

[FFFlyer]

Jesus and the New Testament superseded the Old Testament and 'updated' the religion so that most of it is not at odds with the modern world. This has never happened with Islam and my understanding of it is that it is not Sharia but a literal interpretation of the Koran which results in this extreme version of Islam.
It all goes to show Enoch was right!

[Superpilot]

Please, no more! :D How did this thread survive so long?

Maxalt, I’m not going to argue with your first 3 points, all make sense to me. However with the last one I do feel you are picking upon what only a minority do, as always the loudest people make the news. It is very unfair although C5 have been trying to gain what they call "mainstream" muslim opinion, which I think is a bit more just.

I fully agree that religion can never layout precise guidelines for us, because most would cancel out advances in human civilisation. Besides for what purpose have we been given free will and a brain for! Also what chance have we got of following the “truth”, when over the generations so many corrupt men have justified so much evil through religion? Like my English teacher used to say “not a snowballs chance in hell” ;)

“How does one interpret the laws of Abraham/Moses/Jesus in a modern world?”

The laws of God through Abraham, Moses and Jesus are mostly there to serve as moral guidelines, this is for the betterment of mankind whether they like it or not. Symbolically these laws transcend all of time e.g. The Ten Commandments. I’ll give you a shallow example of something certain Muslims practice. When some go into the mosque they raise their salwaar to 1/3 of the way up the leg (no doubt you’ve heard of plenty of other technicalities people have claimed are a part of Islam!). When asked “Why?” they say it’s “Sunnah” which means “the way of the Prophet”. well is'nt this blind-faith? because the simple answer of “it’s Sunnah” doesn’t explain why the Prophet practised it in the first place, and we are told again and again in the Quran not to accept something without proof or justification.

"my understanding of it is that it is not Sharia but a literal interpretation of the Koran which results in this extreme version of Islam".

Sorry I cannot agree with any of that. Actually, that could not be more further from the truth. Are you saying that the Quran literally asks us to shoot a woman who committed murder in the head in front of an audience?!? Or to wear the full veil? (The Quran actually encourages blood money and forgiveness). You will not find any of the practicing’s of the Taleban (and some of the Saudi ones) within the Quran when followed literally or not.

Most technicalities people have come to associate with Islam are derived from what is taken these days as Islam’s second source of law which is Hadith. Compiled by somebody who lived 250 years after the prophet and often placed on the same level as the Quran all because Mohammed supposedly “did it”, when they have been quite clearly instructed not to accept any other source of law.

The Quran is a deeply reflective and symbolic book which seeks to make people learn from the faults of previous generations and provides a set of grounds which make way for a nicer, fairer method of living, it does not explain some of the greater details, thats left to man himself because God has provided him with a brain (like someone said, many readily accept the teachings of Muslim leaders without any form of proof, you were quite correct!)

The amount of width left within the Quran is tremendous if you study it. It’s the second source, which when followed word for word prevents us from advancing and thats why you will see many backward aspects in Islam. That’s not a complete put down of Hadith though. During the time of our prophet the guidence he gave was absolutely cruicial and there are countless of his sayings which are full of wisdom and truth, it just was never meant to be taken as 100% universal law, thats all.

I agree Muslims do themselves no favour by quarrelling about issues which can hardly be considered religious, e.g. music, beards, hair styles etc all this is meaningless! all are cultural differences and all are within the bounds of what has been laid down for us in the Quran whether you follow that literally or not.

The regular posters on PPRuNe probably think of me in a completely different way now thanks to what I’ve been saying throughout the past few days. If I gave anyone the impression I am an opponent of Western thought and actions please do also note that I detest a hundred and one things my fellow Muslim’s get up to in the East. I owe a lot to my country (The U.K), could such opportunities exist in Pakistan? However, we must all collectively review certain issues if we want a better future. I feel the need to express my rage at certain people because I can no longer stand the sight of a selfish world in which we are so alike yet so different, i.e. the massive and ever increasing gap between the rich and poor. This is not only the result of corruption within but also because of economic bullying. The leaders who regularly say they are from the "civilised world" have a lot to answer for, but will they ever?!? I mean look at the sort of people we elect as our leaders. I think the following Hadith desribes them perfectly.

"The signs of the hypocrite are three: when he speaks he lies, when he promises he breaks his promise and when he is entrusted he betrays the trust. Even if he prays and fasts and imagines that he is a Muslim."

Sorry if anyone feels I've taken over this thread with my speeches but for believers in God at the end of the day EVERTHING eventually comes down to religion (I know that sounds incredibly cheesy but I like to show I really believe). The signs of a Cosmic Architect are all around us, if you want to call that evolution then fine, today "evolution is my God" - Did I strike home? There is very little contradiction between the above statement and what is contained within the Quran. Islam has always been perfect (in my eyes at least) it's some of the followers that need to sort themselves out! I've never sought to justify the actions of other Muslims and fail to understand why some do. Thankfully the idiots are not as large in numbers as the media through it's natural flaws makes it out to be.

Good bye all and thanks for listening.

Edited because I like editing.

[ 08 November 2001: Message edited by: Superpilot ]

[SPIT]

I must agree with Superpilot,(how did this topic last so long}???
All we need is some Mormon or J Witness knocking on the site. :rolleyes: :eek:

[FFFlyer]

Good Superpilot:
'I owe a lot to my country (The U.K), could such opportunities exist in Pakistan?'
Why didn't you say that at the beginning?
I for one understand criticism of UK actions much better if ethnic minorites in the UK started by saying that!

[chiglet]

Superpilot, et al:-
The thread started with a so called
"British" citizen going to fight against his [adopted?] Country in a "Foreign Land".
If the "so called" person renounces his total rights to [British][ Citizenship, then fine. If he does not, then Questions MUST be asked.
The question is, therefore are the 2nd/3rd Generation Immigrants loyal to their country of birth, or their Parents' birthplace, even though it's the "wrong side of the [1948/9] border"?
we aim to to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[flypastpastfast]

As regards proof that the @rsehole bin laden is responsible for the WTC attack, just watch some of his home videos he keeps releasing. The man is a fool, and does not represent Islam. But, I have a real problem with so-called 'moderate' Islamic views anyway. That is not racist, you could be white and be Muslim, it is just I think many of the opinions they hold are really barbaric.

Anyone who says 'we need proof that binladen did wtc on11/11' is either extremely stupid or a liar. It's really rather obvious.

If anyone of whatever racial origin wants to fight for the taliban against our armed forces, be my guest - as long as you give us your passport to keep. You cannot on the one hand indulge the luxuries and freedoms of this democracy, and then go to a foreign country to fight against such things.

Let us not forget that Bin Laden has been kicked out of at least two islamic countries (including Saudi Arabia, the home of Mecca), oh, but then I forgot, according to Bin Laden, those countries are just as bad as the USA aren't they. Bin Laden is a murderous fool, unfortunately he has lots of guns and many fools who wish to support him.

[maxalt]

Perhaps Superpilot could riddle me this.

The Prophet teaches that a good muslim should 'not live for long in the land of the Kuffir (unbeliever)'. If that is true, why is it that those Leicester muslims who appeared on the news saying they support Bin Laden and the Taliban....are still here? Surely they should depart since they are so offended by the west and it's sins.

On another note, the Taliban appear to be running away as fast as their asses will carry them.
Well done the Yanks! God save America!

[HugMonster]

There's the full text of the British Government's statement about the proof of Bin Laden's guilt at http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/special/2001/binladen_evidence/index.htm

[Doctor Cruces]

They go to fight for the Taliban.

We remove their citizenship.

What's the betting they'll be back holding their hands out pretending to be refugees when it's all over.

Will we let them in?

Of course we will because the pc/do gooders/it's not their fault they had a poor childhood brigade will STILL be running the place!!

A traitor is a traitor and they should be bl**dy well shot.

Doc C.

[SPIT]

Doctor Cruses
HEAR-HEAR with all you say. It's about time somebody has seen the light . One again "WELL SAID" :D :D :D

[HugMonster]

Nahhhh - let 'em in, then jail them for life! Better than having them run around free, just waiting to cause more havoc...

[Superpilot]

Again...the answer you need to that question is obvious and just goes to further justify my use of the phrase "so-called Muslim". These fanatics are mostly uneducated people with poor academic histories, why should we then expect their religious knowledge to be any better? I'll tell you one thing Mutt, within the Pakistani/Indian culture there is a stupid practice where by people think that by reading the Quran (forget about understanding it) there is reward for you. All Muslim children from these cultures spend 5-10 years of their lives reading the Quran without understanding it, some adults continue to do it for life. I know that sounds stupid to all of you, but that is what happens I'm afraid. Very few people will actually learn something by reading and praying, most seem to think the goodness lies in repeating verses over and over again without paying any thought or attention to what it means. I've always maintained the best Muslims are reverts to Islam since they take nothing for granted and fully understand what they are following - not blindly.

Kilroy discussed the same topic last week. That's what I would like to see more of educated, professional Muslims who actually know what they are talking about!

I hear Osama has admitted to the WTC attacks on video.

[chiglet]

SuperP
"Uneducated" so called Muslims.
In the "West" No Way Jose...
In the Mosques of "The EAST", The "Muslims" are educated by the Imam. No radio. No TV. No newspapers. NO [real] INFORMATION!!!!
Answer, please let us know
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[Superpilot]

I'm confused and have no idea of what you mean by the above. What on Earth do you think I've been trying to convey over the past week...

[DownIn3Green]

Sup,

You can't be that "Sup" as you miss the point of what you're trying to say...

The guy got what he deserved...case closed...

Except...how did he get cleared by security for his job in the first place?

[ghost-rider]

The difference in attitudes between the majority of Muslims in the US compared to the UK is staggering :

In the US, Muslims are openly declaring love and gratitude to the US and the American people in general for their way of life, freedom etc etc. They vow to join the US Armed Forces and protect the country they have adopted and love.

In the UK, the majority of Muslims ( Superpilot - you cannot deny this ! ) agree with Bin Laden's attack against the US, - my own family witnessed Asian youths cheering on the streets of Manchester on the night of Sep 11th - Asian youths from Luton go to fight for the Taleban etc etc etc. They show no gratitude to the UK, no respect for the law, no respect to the British people, or any non-Muslim faith. Remember the WW2 vet that was attacked on the streets of Oldham ? Remember how "British" muslims are so offended if a Union Jack is flown in public ? And the latest one about should we be allowed to wear poppies to remember and pay respects to our war dead ! I was in the RAF at the time of the Gulf War. Some Muslim members of the forces refused to deploy because they wouldn't take up arms against their 'brothers' ! In WW2 they would have been shot for desertion / treason.

It's all this that offends !

And before you ask, I know several Muslims who do not fall into this category - whom I am happy to call friends - but as far as I can see, this is not thye majority view. Just read the responses on this thread to see that I am not the only one who thinks this !!

The multi-cultural society sounds great in theory, but will only work when EVERY denomination works it's butt off to ensure full compliance from all members ! Screams of racism every two minutes gets a bit tedious !

Yes this is off-topic from the original title - which highlights a worrying security problem.

And the same can be said against any religious hard-lined faction ( eg Real/Continuity IRA, ETA etc etc etc. ) Although as far as I know, none of these have slammed airliners into buildings or put bombs on board. Yet.

As someone else said here : 'Religion - the mother of wars'

This particular fight is not against Islam par se. It's against terrorism as a whole. I'd like to see the IRA etc next on the list. Ask the victims of Warrington, London, Manchester, Omagh, Enniskillen etc etc what they think.

[ 13 November 2001: Message edited by: ghost-rider ]

[Steepclimb]

Ghost rider your last few comments destroyed the credibility of the rest of your point. The IRA, ETA etc are not and never were religious hardliners. Going after the IRA now is a bit pointless nowdays given the fact that they are on a ceasefire and actually decommissioning weapons and even part of the Northern Ireland government. How out of touch are you?

But back to the basic point, British muslims in the Taliban. Given the precipitate fall of Kabul this morning. It was mentioned several times that the Afghans were hunting down and killing any foreigners in Taliban service. Rather ironic that, poetic justice even. No doubt these guys will be running to the nearest British consulate with their tails between their legs soon. Muslim solidarity? Afghans hate all foreigners with equal vehememce. So much for Jihad. Paper tigers the lot of them.
The worst thing about this is that British muslims have exposed themselves badly in this matter. The impression of them as some form of dangerous and extremist minority in parts of Britain has been reinforced. Peoples tolerance wears thin in these situations. I hope they think it's worth it.

[ghost-rider]

SteepClimb, point accepted re IRA now arms decommisioning in place - allegedly. I'm not out of touch at all, but hugely sceptical when it comes to the Real/Continuity IRA, and the crap being spewed by Sinn Fein. And they may not fight under a religious banner, but remember the root cause of the troubles in NI. But yeah, I was going off on one. Sorry.

I hope that 'foreign' Taleban members do get their come-uppance, including the thousands from pakistan that crossed - or tried to cross the border. And if any 'British' Moslems make it back to our Consulates, they should be met with a full trial for treason at least - although a 9mm round would be my preference. The same goes for any Brit of any faith fighting for the Taleban by the way - not just Moslem.

I'll always respect a foe that wear a uniform and declare thair solidarity one way or the other. But to hide amongst the civilian population, planting bombs and assasinating unsuspecting individuals etc etc is nothing short of cowardice.

If these so called 'British' Moslims want to fight against the Alliance, then fine - that's their right ( at least it is in the Western democracies that WE fight for !! ) - BUT they must pay the price - ie lose the nationality, right of abode and anything else they own / claim etc. and deported to Afghanistan - period.

Civil rights ? They've lost that right surely !

[ 13 November 2001: Message edited by: ghost-rider ]

[Superpilot]

“In the UK, the majority of Muslims ( Superpilot - you cannot deny this ! ) agree with Bin Laden's attack against the US”

I GIVE UP!!!

I have given you all valid reasons for why you should not say “the majority of Muslims support the bloody act of terrorism”. I've given you examples of how easy it is for any fanatic to make his mark. I’ve given you possible causes for the hatred some Muslims feel, e.g. poverty and injustice. I’ve given you sound religious backing from the sources. I’ve given you examples of “so-called” Muslims who practice Islam ignorantly. I’ve given you examples of practises which are contradictory to Islam and have also tried to explain the mentality of this “minority” group. I am no longer going to make excuses for anyone, Muslim or not. This debate is no longer worth continuing.

[ghost-rider]

Superpilot - please don't leave this debate. Your points are valuable.

But the inference is that the majority of British Muslems support the Bin Laden US terrorist attacks, the Palestinian attacks against Israel etc etc. Fact or not - that is the perception given out !

It's going to take one hell of a hearts and minds PR campaign by the British Muslems to win back any respect or credibility. You say it's not the majority - so I'll accept that.

BUT - the real majority have to install some law and order on the minority !!!! Without that there is no hope whatsoever for racial harmony. Double standards are no longer acceptable.

[maxalt]

Superpilot I feel very little sympathy for those UK muslims who either Clebrated, or Equivocated, or Excused, or Denied the truth about Sept. 11th. And they are still doing it. They've certainly given me a wake-up call. Never had a problem with Islam, until now.
This has proved to be a 'false dawn' for the Islamist movement. Even if the Taliban fight a guerilla war forever, and even if there are further atriocities committed by Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, the fact will always remain that American military power has kicked the asses of this uppity islamic extremist regime and can do it again where necessary.

I just couldn't believe how quick it all happened. It's bloody brilliant. I don't even mind that the NA walked into Kabul uninvited...I think the Americans turned a blind eye to it in fact in order to maintain 'plausibile deniability' to the Paki government.

I think it's absolutely great that all those Jihadis from UK /Pakistan/ Indonesia or wherever are getting it in the neck. They should do every last one of them to teach the next lot of terror toursists!

The only blot on this great day is the crash in Queens. God bless the victims and their families.
God save America.!

PS Ghost rider, I understand your feelings about the IRA, but give it a chance mate. And thanks for being ready to put yourself in the line of fire in the Gulf. Wish I could've been there with you.

[Steepclimb]

Superpilot. I take all your points and valid they all are. We all know how religion is distorted by people for their own purposes. Islam is no different. Probably no worse but certainly no better.
I too had no particular bias, against Islam. But my eyes were opened, from my own direct experience I tend to believe you in fact represent the minority. Speaking to Muslim acquaintenances, the same line was fed to me each time. 'It was the CIA/Mossad who organised the hijacks' 'Israel did it all' 'America deserved what it got' and I read a quote in the newspaper from a Pakistani leaving a mosque in Dublin, (oddly enough). 'Irish women are all sluts and whores'?!?
Not the talk of moderate Islam.
At the end of it all. I don't really believe Islam is a real threat to us in the west. Suicide attacks by their very nature inevitably burn themselves out.
But it is in dire need of reform within itself. The drift toward extremism is very real, whether it be a distortion of the Koran or not. Plenty of Christian churches distort the Bible in the same way but they very much represent the minority and as far as I know there is no Christian terrorist group dedicated to the destruction of Islam and using suicide bombers. The Protestant/Catholic in NI comparsion does not hold water as the bitterness is now largely tribal whatever it's roots. Neither side even bother to claim it's for their God. Most never see the inside of a church until they go to a funeral. But for Muslims it is all about and only about religion. That's the difference.

For any moderate Muslim this a disturbing trend, denying it won't make it go away.

[Cyclic Hotline]

I wonder if anyone can shed light on this intruiging demonstration in the West Bank town of Nablus, the other day?

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20011111/capt.1005505257mideast_israel_palestinians_jrl113.jpg

Captioned: - "Palestinians watch as a model of an airplane burns in the sky during a Palestinian political demonstration at the university of the northern West Bank town of Nablus on Sunday, Nov. 11, 2001. (AP Photo/Nasser Ishtayeh) "

[HugMonster]

Actually, ghost, the death penalty in the Army for desertion etc. was abolished in 1929. So not many deserters would have been shot in WWII. If you served in the Gulf War, you didn't study much history, did you?

[chiglet]

SuperP,
In "clarification" of my earlier posts,
It's ALL down to Communication/Information.
I read the paers, watch TV etc and get "information". When I go to my Church I get the message "Peace to ALL"
The Mosques/Imans "seem" to be 'anti-west', so even though the Islamic members of this [and any other Western] culture believe what they are told IN THE MOSQUE!
Ghost,
Totally agree
Hug,
Sorry pal but servicemen WERE shot during WW11 for a variety of misdemeanors,[desrtion, "treason",aka 'spying'] and the Death penalty is still in force in the UK foe "Arson in Her Majesty's Dockyards"
we aim to please, it keeps the cleaners happy

[HugMonster]

chiglet, pal, all countries are perfectly entitled (even under the Geneva Convention) to shoot spies. Hence, the Germans shot Odette Sansom, Violette Szabo, Noor Inaya-Khan, etc.

Anyone spying is still liable to be shot.

Desertion was not a capital offence during WW2. The death penalty had been available for five military wartime offences: Serious Misconduct in Action; Communicating with the Enemy; Aiding the Enemy or Furnishing Supplies; Obstructing Operations or Giving False Air Signals; Mutiny, Incitement to Mutiny or Failure to Suppress a Mutiny.

The death penalty is no longer in effect at all, even for Arson in the Queen's Docks, or treason. It was abolished in the 1998 Crime and Disorder Act, and with the passage of the Human Rights Act in November 1998.

However, my point remains. The death penalty for desertion in the Army was abolished in 1929. If anyone was shot for desertion in WW2, it was not legally done.

[ 14 November 2001: Message edited by: HugMonster ]

[Steepclimb]

It's pretty obvious what that photo and demonstration is about.
Really the Palestinians have a particularly bad habit of backing the wrong horse.
They were so enthusiastic about Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and were kicked out or Kuwait for that reason. Earlier it was Lebanon before that Jordan.Now it's Osama.
For all their uprisings, they have achieved nothing and lost what little they had.
Truly those people are cursed.

[mutt]

I understand that there are now 10 UK citizens reported missing. I guess that they were all extremely unlucky to get killed while they were engaged in assisting the refugees :(

At least it saves the hassle of charging them with treason.

Mutt

[sky9]

I read today that two of the dead are from Crawley. I hope that they didn't work at Gatwick. If so security in the UK needs to be subjected to a fundamental rethink.

The first question that has to be asked is: Where have airport staff who left employment after 11 Sepemeber gone to and by whom are they employed?

[Roadtrip]

It's time for Muslims in the west to fish or cut bait. No more mealy mouthed condemnations with the "yea, buts" added at the end. No more non-cooperation with investigators and benign harboring of people they must know to be traitors and foreign agents.

Margaret Thatcher has it right.

As far as the situation in Afganistan goes, it would seem that being an Arab or Pak Taliban mercenary makes for a very short lifespan - especially when some of your "friends" have strapped explosives to their bodies and "surrendered." These fanatics have signed their own death warrants.

[ 17 November 2001: Message edited by: Roadtrip ]