Israelis have killed Saruman?

[Tim Baker]

Originally posted by Phil Chuang:

In that case, do you believe that other people's opinions are always false? I mean after all, it is probably just someone's 2nd or 32512345th-hand opinion, so it's probably not true. I mean, regardless of the authority of the source, it must be demonstrably false since it doesn't fit in with your preconceived notion of reality.
And how do you go to the restroom? It's just someone's opinion of a room writ large on a sign in bold letters. For all you know it could be aliens mind-controlling the writers of the sign, and that the architect's original intent for the room was to play billiards.
It must be hard living in a world where you must determine the veracity of every single thing on your own personal experiences.

Opinions are opinions. Obviously they can be false or true, or partial in both respects. Putting it on the internet, or even in a newspaper, doesn't make it any of those. Unless we all know and trust the person to whom the opinion belongs it has absolutely no relevence to a discussion.

[HS Thomas]

Reminds me of the Jayson Blair and Jack Kelly scandals of journalists misleading their editors. The latter has been nominated for the Pulitzer Prize 5 times. Of 720 stories written between 1993-2003 , 6 journalists concluded that 8 stories , some front page, have been largely made up.
One was about witnessing a suicide bombing in Jerusalem. Another about Cuban refugees drowning on their way to the States was proven false on discovering one of the "dead" alive,well and living legally in the US.
The other 712 stories were thought to be genuine stories.

[Nathan Thurm]

Did you read this, "Insha'Allah I'll fill you in after I get my politics degree in a few years. ;-)".
It says that all the countries where there is problem, its because of politics, it has nothing to do anything with religion.

I inserted the '...' when I quoted this before because I didn't think that part was relevant since the reply was a quip (including the smiley face) that I didn't think (at the time) added to the comment. It was not my intent to mislead, so I apologize if it came across that way. That is also why I included the link to the page I got it from in case further context would help.
And actually I do thank you for pointing this out, because after re-examining the the reply
and based on your interpretation I do have to come to a different conclusion unfortunately. Instead
of being a straight answer to the question of Islamic violence, it appears that the person I quoted is giving just another dismissive answer that really doesn't seem to want to address why there is so much militant Islamic violence in the world.
Put another way, as someone with Christian upbringing, though I do have some doubts at times, the bottom line to me is that if, for example, there were many, many hotspots in the world with Christian militants involved, if just about everywhere I read about featured Christian terrorists and uprisings in countries like Philippines, Uzbekistan, Middle East, Thailand, Pakistan/India, Nigeria, etc. I would be wanting to talk about just why these countries are finding themselves in these situations with Christianity being the greatest common factor involved. Especially to know just what the true reasons were behind these wars. Blithe reasons like "land" or "politics" wouldn't fly with me, I would want to know why violence seems to be the answer to every problem. And if atrocities were being commited in the name of Christianity I would definitely be condemning them. Case in point, I do condemn Charles Taylor, and how corrupt his administration is and have been following this situation hoping this country is able to sort out its troubles and bring the guy to justice.
I get the impression the same holds true for some other religions. In the thread discussing whether Hindu's were involved in the Madrid bombing, I was amazed that so many Hindus wrote in so quickly to discuss what had happened, how they felt about it, whether condemnations or apologies were in order or not, etc. This, even though hardly any evidence had been gathered at all and seemed illogical that a Hindu would be involved with Muslim Moroccan militants!
But through the media, forums, etc.. it's rare to have a Muslim speak out in condemnation of the militant Islam and Islamic violence. I'll never forget seeing the chief imam of the NY mosque after the WTC Towers went down appearing on Chris Matthews show stammering his way through an interview trying to avoid condemning the attacks or dodge speculation on who did it claiming he's not "a member of the law enforcement agencies". A couple weeks later he was in Egypt. That stuck with me, and it's that same attiude I've seen ever since.
At best, we get a "don't blame me, it's fanatics that are doing this" and once this apparent distance is established any sort of dialogue is dropped.
It's frustrating, because if these militants are so diametrically opposite from what moderate Muslims believe you would think that the moderates would speak out against the hijacking their religion.... but I never,never see it happening, not in this forum anyway, nor anywhere I look. And it's frustrating. That's why I jumped into this thread. Because I saw the conversation going down the same path it's gone so many time and thought I had an answer, but I guess I didn't and I'm back at square one.

I think you are talking about fanatic Muslims.

What's the difference between a fanatic Muslim and a moderate muslim? I don't mean this facetiously. I know that there must be a lot of moderate muslims out there. I'd just like some help defining between the two since the word "fanatic" gets thrown around a lot. Some examples would help.
[ March 30, 2004: Message edited by: Nathan Thurm ]
[ March 30, 2004: Message edited by: Nathan Thurm ]

[HS Thomas]

Originally posted by Nathan Thurm:

What's the difference between a fanatic Muslim and a moderate muslim? I don't mean this facetiously. I know that there must be a lot of moderate muslims out there. I'd just like some help defining between the two since the word "fanatic" gets thrown around a lot. Some examples would help.

8 wannabe terrorists of British nationality and of Pakistani descent and Muslim faith were apprehended yesterday connected with storing more than half a ton of ammonium nitrate fertiliser which was also seized.
The police sent assurances to the Muslim leaders that the matter would be handled sensitively with no blame directed to the Muslim community. The Muslim leaders prepared their addresses to the Muslim community to condemn any terrorism acts particularly within their communities. They also expressed concern that their youth were in dire need of protection from recruitment into terrorist groups.
The public also had the question put to them by bloggers. What if the 8 were REALLY, REALLY serious gardeners ?

---

At the end of the pilgrimage season Muslims all over the world are expected to make a charitable donation to Muslim charities. The relevation that a handful of charities have given funds to terrorist groups has discouraged many pilgrims from doing so.
Charity or "zakat" is meant to be a "personal and discreet act" but post 9/11 , discretion is no longer an option. Bowing to US pressure , Muslim governments have been scrutinising donations and are even giving US treasury officials access to bank records.
In any case the vast majority of Muslims don't want a single penny to go to groups like Al Qa'eda and are even demanding greater transparency.
Many , particularly from Rich Gulf States have stopped giving altogether.
This is disastrous for poor coomunities in many parts of the world. One businessman from Bahrain says he has financed wells in Somalia , orphanages in Pakistan but refuses to donate again until he has evidence that money is spent as intended. The problem is that Muslim charities lack the necessary accounting skills. Western charities could give the necessary expertise if asked, and the resources.
From various Middle East newspapers notably The Daily Star - Beirut.

UK Charity management Under suspicion

---

Agenda against Muslim charities
On the other hand, some Gulf intellectuals suggest that Church-run Western charities have a longer history of supporting 'terror'. They point to the various insurgences and separatists movements that have been funded, both overtly and covertly, by Western NGOs without attracting any criticism for exceeding their humanitarian remit.
The support of the World Council of Churches to southern Sudanese rebels, as well as the support to them in Nigeria aided the secessionist movement in Biafra.
Other Western humanitarian organizations used the umbrella of relief work to provide material aid to secessionists in Northern Ireland and East Timor.
Despite widespread violence, no one called for the Church- oriented aid to be suspended.

---

The last article would fall under the fanatic category,IMO.
[ March 31, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Richard Hawkes]

Originally posted by Nathan Thurm:
But through the media, forums, etc.. it's rare to have a Muslim speak out in condemnation of the militant Islam and Islamic violence...
Relying on memory I would say this is my experience too. I don't know what's to blame. I've seen sites where Muslims quote the Qur'an to show how Islam cannot support violence (or intolerance or inequality). However that doesn't matter to the terrorists. For eg, the Qur'an says that innocents should never be harmed, yet al'Qaeda claim there are no innocents because Western civilians refuse to vote out the leaders responsible for "harming" Muslims and the Middle East. Innocents become "legitimate" targets by their own reasoning.
Muslims do speak out against terror but they're not very conspicuous. You have to search. Why don't Muslims speak out at Javaranch? Maybe there aren't many Muslim Java programmers, I wouldn't know. This link provides an interesting Muslim view of counter-terrorism and an analysis of why the terrorists do what they do. They don't condone the violence:
http://www.awesomelibrary.org/Counter-Terrorism.html
Why might some Muslims *not* condemn violence? Perhaps they're fearful of the terrorists (if they're living in a centre of violence) or they sympathise with the terrorists' goals (creating Islamic states or "one nation") or they really believe that the west is trying to destroy Islam (and their way of life). Many Muslims believe that Islam is "one nation" and to hurt one is to hurt all Muslims (though apparently to save one Muslim is to save them all too, according to the Qur'an, though that isn't quoted much - NATO supported Muslims in Bosnia) - (from above link).
Democracy will help tackle terrorism yet many believe that Islam is not compatible with democracy because:

Muslims believe that Islam is a total and a complete way of life. It encompasses all aspects of life. As such, the teachings of Islam do not separate religion from politics. As a matter of fact, state and religion are under the obedience of Allah through the teachings of Islam. Hence, economic and social transactions, as well as educational and political systems are also part of the teachings of Islam.
(from: http://www.m-a-t.org/intro.htm )

Robin Wright argues quite convincingly IMO that we should be looking further than Islam itself (ie, politics, tradition and circumstance) as to why the ME bloc is resisting the general global shift towards democracy, and I think the same reasoning can be applied when it comes to analysing the reasons behind the terror and violence, ie its not the fault of Islam in itself:
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/rwright.htm

[HS Thomas]

as to why the ME bloc is resisting the general global shift towards democracy,

Could it be seen that it's used as a way to impose Western ideals. Are militants united by an ideology "beyond a blind hatred of America and it's allies"?
Jason Burke in The Observer says Islamic militants have many motivations.
Ramzi Yousef who tried to destroy the WTC in 1993 was driven more by a lust for fame than religious fervor. One of the Bali bombers in 2002 said he had been disgusted by the "dirty adulterous behaviour" of the "whites" who frequented the night club. The suicide bombings in Iraq are different again: designed to show the Wests vulnerability while showing the extent of the bombers' faith.
There are universal themes : In Kashmir locals speak of their oppression as part of a global campaign against Muslims. In Chechnya the war with Russia is seen as means to eliminate Muslims.At the root of the violence is the notion that "a belligerent West is set on the humiliation, division and eventual conquest of the Muslim world." says The Observer.
The militants fear not just a military conquest but also a cultural one. Britney Spears , Time Warner and Microsoft pose a genuine threat to their most cherished values.
And globalisation has just made that threat "apparently" even more immediate. Muslim countries like Malaysia have been taking some ideas from the West and benefiting from them while still keeping to Muslim values.
[ March 31, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Richard Hawkes]

Originally posted by HS Thomas:
The militants fear not just a military conquest but also a cultural one. Britney Spears , Time Warner and Microsoft pose a genuine threat to their most cherished values.
The militants brought the US military to the ME by their actions, it was possibly one of their goals. In terms of the Qur'an the only threat Britney poses is to the requirement for modest clothing I don't see how large multinationals pose a threat to Islam or the ME.
I believe the ME can get past this period of violence, achieve democracy AND remain predominantly Muslim because the West was able to leave behind "questionable practises" inspired by the Bible, achieve democracy and remain predominantly Christian.

[HS Thomas]

I don't see how large multinationals pose a threat to Islam or the ME.
It's all down to a question of business ethics. I think there are two opposing forces in how business is done in Islamic countries as opposed to Western ones. I don't have any specifics yet but Googling may give some answers. There is no reason why the West cannot (time again and again) borrow from the Muslim countries.

[Joe King]

Originally posted by HS Thomas:

8 wannabe terrorists of British nationality and of Pakistani descent and Muslim faith were apprehended yesterday connected with storing more than half a ton of ammonium nitrate fertiliser which was also seized.

Half a ton of fertiliser found in suburban SE England.... was it the last Tory party manifesto?
I think the most worrying things (apart from the fact that I commute daily into one of the main London stations, which post-Madrid has got to be a high on the list of possible targets) about this particular series of arrests is that most of the people arrested seemed to come from comfortable middle class towns in a part of the country that is generally very welcoming to the Muslim community. What on earth lead them to want to do this? So far the war on terrorism seems to have been (out of necessity) fighting the terrorists, but not looking at the reasons why they do it. Unfortunately this is going to be a lot harder - you can't drop a bomb on an idea.

[Jeroen Wenting]

Islam forbids charging interest.
This effectively bans banking and stock exchanges, which many large corporations depend upon.
Britney, quite apart from not wearing a burkah , represents independence in women which while not in violation of the Q'uran per se is certainly in sharp contrast with the world views of the fundamentalist leadership.
If you can't grow a beard you're not capable of independent thought after all

I believe the ME can get past this period of violence, achieve democracy AND remain predominantly Muslim because the West was able to leave behind "questionable practises" inspired by the Bible, achieve democracy and remain predominantly Christian.

It only took us 500 years but we were indeed able to do it
Just as it took Japan 500 years to get out of their dark ages, and China is now slowly climbing out of its dark ages which started almost 500 years ago.
Coincidence?

[Richard Hawkes]

Originally posted by Jeroen Wenting:
Islam forbids charging interest.
I thought the Bible had a similar rule about money-lenders? It doesn't stop Christians having overdrafts or running banks.
[ March 31, 2004: Message edited by: Richard Hawkes ]

[Tim Baker]

There are now a lot of banks in the UK that offer religion friendly house buying schemes rather than mortgages which would not be allowed in certain religions. So it doesn't stop banks offering services to them completely.

[Don Stadler]

Originally posted by Joe King:

Half a ton of fertiliser found in suburban SE England.... was it the last Tory party manifesto?

Though for sheer nonsense it's hard to beat the Lib Dems.....

Originally posted by Joe King:

I think the most worrying things (apart from the fact that I commute daily into one of the main London stations, which post-Madrid has got to be a high on the list of possible targets) about this particular series of arrests is that most of the people arrested seemed to come from comfortable middle class towns in a part of the country that is generally very welcoming to the Muslim community. What on earth lead them to want to do this? So far the war on terrorism seems to have been (out of necessity) fighting the terrorists, but not looking at the reasons why they do it. Unfortunately this is going to be a lot harder - you can't drop a bomb on an idea.

One of the shocking facts about the Israeli bombers is how many of them come from the 'comfortable middle classes'. Really the upper classes of Gaza and the West Bank. Insofar as they don't use the simple to do it (which has also happened).
You may not be able to bomb an idea but you can sure bomb the hell out of the Metropolitan line!
Two of the men arrested yesterday come from my town - a comforting thought. Given the fact that the Madrid bombers (alleged bombers) came from Alcala de Hernares and bombed trains originating in the same place.

[Joe King]

Originally posted by Don Stadler:

Two of the men arrested yesterday come from my town - a comforting thought. Given the fact that the Madrid bombers (alleged bombers) came from Alcala de Hernares and bombed trains originating in the same place.

Similar thing for me - one of the houses raided was in Reading where I come from and my family live, and the bomb would quite likely have targetted central London where I work

[HS Thomas]

Tory party manifesto

Britney Spears current tour is more appropriate for a Soho strip club show.
Maybe not even appropriate there. They do have some standards. Parents who usually take their 9 and 10 year olds will be using their power and staying away in droves.
Children are storing health and mental problems for the future,anyway.

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Joe King:
So far the war on terrorism seems to have been (out of necessity) fighting the terrorists, but not looking at the reasons why they do it. Unfortunately this is going to be a lot harder - you can't drop a bomb on an idea.

We don't really have to look hard to find the reasons they do what they do, since they take every opportunity to tell us what their motivations are. Even Bin Laden has been pretty specific about his motivations. Why not just take their word for it?

[HS Thomas]

It's all Maggie Thatcher's fault, of course.
Find reasons to make this assertion stick.
She destroyed the UK's manufacturing industry and sacrificed morals for greed.
When asked to stand down by her party she became The Fag Lady and took to promoting cigs instead.History will tell whether OBL will be more re-viled than The Iron Lady in the UK. She hacked through what were essential English values and education, health services, travel have never really recovered from the damage. The City, of course, was fortified.
'A' levels had real value pre-Thatcher.
[ March 31, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Don Stadler]

Pub food had real taste before Thatcher. Ale was Real Ale.
Men were real men, women were real women, and Scottish Sea Monsters were Real Scottish Sea Monsters! BritRail ran on time, and all was optimal. Before Thatcher.
[ March 31, 2004: Message edited by: Don Stadler ]

[HS Thomas]

Interesting isn't it how one can start with a theory and find lots to support it.
Lady Thatcher

---

Muslim leaders condemn Thatcher attack
Lady Thatcher yesterday made her first contribution to the debate on terrorism, criticising Muslim leaders for failing to speak out against the September 11 atrocities. Her comments immediately sparked outrage.

---

Why the real name is Ossama Bin London
To really understand Bin Laden requires stepping back from U.S. State Department and Defense Department press briefings, and Washington Post fulminations, to examine how and why Britain invented him, and how he is being deployed today.

THEY CANNOT BE SERIOUS. THEY ARE... RAMBLINGS OF A NUT CASE - SEE BELOW
[ March 31, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Jason Menard]

Originally posted by Tim Baker:
Obviously not. And why do you continue to think that providing links to other peoples opinions seems to constitute proof? I can provide you a link to an article about aliens controlling the government if you want.

More baseless lies from today's BBC.

[Don Stadler]

Lyndon LaRouche is a well-known nut-case, HS. You're latter link was to one of his pubs. He's also the chap who labeled the Queen a drug dealer. You may have heard of that one.
He's a cross between a religious cult and a political movement. Sort of like the Church of Scientology and Reverend Sung Moon (aka the Moonies).
[ March 31, 2004: Message edited by: Don Stadler ]

[HS Thomas]

Thanks. The Brits can shrug-off the Guilt Laden.
LLR - the only qualified candidate for the US Presidency.
Who refuses to go away
[ March 31, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Tim Baker]

Originally posted by Jason Menard:

More baseless lies from today's BBC.

You might note that the source of that article is actually "a report by a European anti-racism watchdog." and is merely being reported by the BBC.
"It suggests school text books should be checked for bias and teachers trained to increase awareness of race issues."
Typical european beurocracy trying to find something useful to do other than to regulate the curvature of bananas.

[Paul Stevens]

Originally posted by Tim Baker:

You might note that the source of that article is actually "a report by a European anti-racism watchdog." and is merely being reported by the BBC.
"It suggests school text books should be checked for bias and teachers trained to increase awareness of race issues."
Typical european beurocracy trying to find something useful to do other than to regulate the curvature of bananas.

It is a fact.

[Hussein O'Baghdadi]

For eg, the Qur'an says that innocents should never be harmed.

Thats true.

yet al'Qaeda claim there are no innocents because Western civilians refuse..

If al'qaeda claims that, does that mean that every muslim agree with it ???
and if bin laden using the Qur'an as a cover , will that make him a muslim ??
of course not, to be more specific : he is not a muslim.
if bin laden says that, does that mean that is my opinion, our opinion (as muslims),
is that is the core of islam ??
Islam says, that innocents should never be harmed.
(muslims, christians, jews...... and all humans)
Islam doesn't argue us to kill other if they are not muslims, we must respect all people and all religions (then we are criminals not humans).
Muhammad the prophit, had christians and jews neighbours.
Islam is a religion for love and forgiveness just as christians.

Innocents become "legitimate" targets by their own reasoning.

yes, coz they are terrorits!!!
my opinion: I think the problem is, there is no defination to terrorist.

Why don't Muslims speak out at Javaranch?

I will talk about my self (as a person not as muslim)
first: my language.
I have always tried to speak but some times I find its hard to express my sentences
very well (my english is not perfect as you).
second: I don't use the internet every day..

Maybe there aren't many Muslim Java programmers.

are you serious ??
but in our region (arab world), the people and the companies preffered MS.
they love MS very much especially .net and XP, (I am an exception!!!)
about me:
Sun prohibited our region from downloading any, any thing from their sites.
in addition, I can't be sun certifed!!!
MS, oracle, ibm, cisco, hp, bea don't mind at all.
this is an additional reason why Java isn't known and desired very well here.
sorry for my language mistakes..

[Don Stadler]

Originally posted by Nathan Thurm:

But through the media, forums, etc.. it's rare to have a Muslim speak out in condemnation of the militant Islam and Islamic violence.

This may be changing. I cannot speak about the US, but today a strongly-worded letter is going out from the largest group of Muslim clerics in the UK completely condemning violence and urging that all Muslims do their part to foil the groups of extremists who are recruiting Muslim youths and young men for terrorist actions. The letter urges British Muslims to cooperate as fully as possible with the authorities.
I haven't read the letter yet but the newspaper accounts of the wording impressed me with it's sincerity and lack of any attempt to justify terrorism and violence.

[HS Thomas]

Hussein Baghdadi's post is impressive ,too.
Sun doesn't allow downloads in your region ? Why ever not ?
Is Microsoft behind this ?
[ April 01, 2004: Message edited by: HS Thomas ]

[Hussein O'Baghdadi]

We can download any thing and every thing from all companies sites except Sun.
not just MS, all companies..(oracle, ibm....)

[Sadanand Murthy]

Originally posted by Hussein Baghdadi:
We can download any thing and every thing from all companies sites except Sun.
not just MS, all companies..(oracle, ibm....)

This may not be a Sun restriction. It could be a restriction imposed by the country you live in.

[Mapraputa Is]

Perhaps has something to do with "trading with the enemy"?

[Sadanand Murthy]

Originally posted by Hussein Baghdadi:
If al'qaeda claims that, does that mean that every muslim agree with it ???
and if bin laden using the Qur'an as a cover , will that make him a muslim ??
of course not, to be more specific : he is not a muslim.
if bin laden says that, does that mean that is my opinion, our opinion (as muslims),

I agree with your reasoning as far as UBL is concerned. The problem is that he uses Islam as the cover to recruit more terrorists. And if you notice, the recruits are all muslims by faith. You could argue that they are not muslims by practice; but that is a different matter. Then what is it that UBL & people of his ilk can rouse hundreds of muslims into becoming terrorists? If he did not bring Islam into the equation he will not get the recruits in the numbers that he is getting because he brings the religion into this volatile mix.
The 2nd issue is the lack of condemnation from muslim clerics round the world. Even after 9/11, as another poster pointed out, a very well known cleric from NY was on various TV shows some of which I too had watched. He would not come out condemn the 9/11 attacks. He would not distance himself & the other muslims from the terrorists (although he didn't embrace them either). However, this has been a rather worldwide phenomenon & it gets a little frustrating, a tad annoying, and to say the least, very trying. The reason the world was looking to the muslim clerics to denounce and condemn the terrorists was because UBL had made it a religion issue.

Originally posted by Hussein Baghdadi:
Islam says, that innocents should never be harmed.
(muslims, christians, jews...... and all humans)
Islam doesn't argue us to kill other if they are not muslims, we must respect all people and all religions (then we are criminals not humans).

And yet it talks about killing infidels. In that case, can you explain what or who is an infidel in the eyes of Qur'an/Islam that deserves to be killed?

Originally posted by Hussein Baghdadi:

sorry for my language mistakes..

You don't have to be sorry. If we have difficulty in understanding what you say in english on these forums, we will just ask you to clarify. Not everyone is born in english speaking world or learns english from a very young age.

[DeyaEddin Muh]

Maybe there aren't Many Muslim JAVA progammers .....
wooooow ....
what about Khalid A. Mughal??

[Nathan Thurm]

This may be changing. I cannot speak about the US, but today a strongly-worded letter is going out from the largest group of Muslim clerics in the UK completely condemning violence and urging that all Muslims do their part to foil the groups of extremists who are recruiting Muslim youths and young men for terrorist actions. The letter urges British Muslims to cooperate as fully as possible with the authorities.
I haven't read the letter yet but the newspaper accounts of the wording impressed me with it's sincerity and lack of any attempt to justify terrorism and violence.

Sounds like the letter got sent, generating this response:
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040401-115011-5838r.htm

Sheikh says Muslims must be tight-lipped
LONDON, April 1 (UPI) -- A British Muslim leader says Muslims cannot cooperate with local authorities against other members of the faith, The Telegraph reported Thursday.
Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad made the remarks on a BBC Radio program in reaction to a call from the Muslim Council of Britain for the community to play its part in the fight against terrorism.

This, to me, is more discouraging than what happened in Fallujah regarding fighting the war on terror.
[ April 02, 2004: Message edited by: Nathan Thurm ]

[Jason Menard]

It would seem to me that some of these people would rather separate themselves from society while still enjoying its benefits. I have no place for people who aren't good and loyal citizens, but apparently people such as that British Sheikh don't have the same view.
It would further seem that the UK has a serious terrorist problem within their borders that they need to deal with. I don't think it's any coincidence that many of Al-Qaeda's statements are issued from the London Arab press.

[Jeroen Wenting]

no, they don't want to separate themselves from society. Rather they want to shape society to suit themselves, which is precisely what the terrorists they're defending by their silence if not active aid are doing.

[Tim Baker]

Well if the UK is full of terrorists then it is lucky we know how to foil their evil plots.