State terrorism

  • Two Factor Authentication is now available on BeyondUnreal Forums. To configure it, visit your Profile and look for the "Two Step Verification" option on the left side. We can send codes via email (may be slower) or you can set up any TOTP Authenticator app on your phone (Authy, Google Authenticator, etc) to deliver codes. It is highly recommended that you configure this to keep your account safe.

UTProphet

Trial By Fire
Dec 8, 2000
509
0
16
tbf.clanspot.com
SimplyCosmic is my idle. Right on. That's exactly what I wanted to say, except... I didn't have to type it. :tup:

Donnellizer:

Of course, an even simpler solution is "stop giving them a reason to terrorize us".

What is this reason Don... Maybe you ought to read the Qur'an first, then get back to this thread.
 

RogueLeader

Tama-chan says, "aurf aurf aurf!"
Oct 19, 2000
5,314
0
0
Indiana. Kill me please.
Al Qaeda has for the past decade targetted civilians in no less than 27 terrorist attacks. They have absolutely no qualm in looking into the eye of a child, a mother or young man and pulling the trigger on a sniper rifle, pushing the detonator on a bomb, or flying a jet straight into a building in order to kill as many civilians as possible.
The United States has been training terrorists to overthrow governments not friendly to it (read: not serving it) for the past 80 years.

Anyways, I've done some research into this "independant study" by Marc W. Herold, and the truth is that his numbers are nothing more than biased reports from pro-Al Qaeda sources with no real evidence to support them, even from outside information sources that aren't exactly pro-American.
If you consider groups like Amnesty International to be pro-Al Qaeda sources, then who am to argue with your anti-human rights stand. As for them not being pro-American, I don't see why human rights groups would be pro-American, since America is the leading sponser of terrorism in the world.
 

Donnellizer

Fjæsing!
Jun 17, 2001
2,247
0
0
Ocean Grove, NJ
Visit site
Originally posted by UTProphet
What is this reason Don... Maybe you ought to read the Qur'an first, then get back to this thread.

Well, I meant terrorists as a whole... Not just muslim terrorists. Also, I know several muslims, not all of them want to kill all non-muslims...

It's pretty much what anti-homosexual groups do with the bible. Interpret it to fulfill their agenda. It's merely text, you can take it any way you want. Also, I would appreciate quotes you may have IN CONTEXT.
 

The_Fur

Back in black
Nov 2, 2000
6,204
0
0
www.rlgaming.com
First of all wtf is the Qur'an? The Klingon manual of martial arts?

2nd of all the Koran doesn't justify bin ladens actions any more then the bible justified the Crusades.

the reason for the attacks is simple, you sit on their holy ground, they don't like it being the poor misguided religious people they are. If thousants of arab soldiers would occupy the vatica and jerusalem you can bet your ass you'd get chrystian suicide bombers as well.

Then ofcourse there is the fact that we in the west (and specifically the US since we drill much of our own oil here in europe) have been raping them for their resources for hundreds of years, we did the same thing to africa but africa however is too busy fighgting with itself to be any threat to us and we like it that way (and make sure they stay that way).
 

Sweep

New Member
Jul 25, 2001
290
0
0
Visit site
Originally posted by RogueLeader
Sweep, your logic is nonexistant. If people die in wars, and as the extreme right wingers like you caim, the Afghani children we bombed to hell started this war, then your logic is self defeating; because you say by extension that it was acceptable for them to bomb our civilians. Contrary to what you believe, the U.S. is not exempt from ethics -- they either apply to everyone or no one.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Did we/are we deliberately trying to bomb innocents? No, we are not. We are going out of our way to minimize the killing of innocents. Did they do the same when attacking us? Nope, they went straight for the civies. So now it's on. We're not going after them directly, but some innocents will die in any military operation as said. They bombed us, civilians or not, now we're bombing them. What's so bad about that? You're just trying to find some way to slam on the US yet again...

And the US being a leading sponsor of terrorism?? Don't make me laugh. I know you're not that stupid. Supporting rebels fighting a war against another military is one thing. Sure we had self serving interests but who doesn't. Hell, by your definition of terrorists I guess we're all just a country full of terrorists, because we overthrew the British rule here... In fact virtually every free country had to overthrow some kind of harsh rule, guess pretty much every country world wide is a terrorist state eh? Al-Queda is completely different, if you can't see that I have no hope for you.

SimplyCosmic laid all the other junk out pretty well...
 
Last edited:

The_Fur

Back in black
Nov 2, 2000
6,204
0
0
www.rlgaming.com
plague, that was called a snide remark.


oh and we all know the US' great track record of accuracy, they can't even not bomb themselves or their allies, how on earth do you think they can not hit any civilians.
 

RogueLeader

Tama-chan says, "aurf aurf aurf!"
Oct 19, 2000
5,314
0
0
Indiana. Kill me please.
Did we/are we deliberately trying to bomb innocents? No, we are not. We are going out of our way to minimize the killing of innocents
So you are now claiming that carpet bombing residential areas and hospitals is a way of minimizing civilian casualties? That is the most senseless thing I've ever heard.

They bombed us, civilians or not, now we're bombing them. What's so bad about that? You're just trying to find some way to slam on the US yet again...
You obviously don't know what is going on. 1) There is no evidence they bombed us. The U.S. governmeny refused to give evidence against bin Laden because they believe it wasn't conclusive. 2) This attack was planned in July, before Sept. 11.

And the US being a leading sponsor of terrorism?? Don't make me laugh. I know you're not that stupid. Supporting rebels fighting a war against another military is one thing.
One terrorist thing, when those rebels kill innocents to overthrow democratically elected governments. You are so desperate you are resorting to semantics. You now claim that just because we support terrorism, it makes it not terrorism. The terrorists traiend at the school of the americas have killed hundreds of thousands, that is more than any other state sponsored terrorism. Apparently you didn't know that, so you must be talking about something you know nothing about.

In fact virtually every free country had to overthrow some kind of harsh rule
LOL! The U.S. has toppled more democracies than authoritarian dictatorships. You are just making yourself look bad now.

You obviously know NOTHING of what you are saying. Let me set you straight.
1) Terrorism is terrorism, whether U.S. supported or not.
2) This war was planned in July, according to Pakistan.
3) Civilians are not being avoided in our bombing in any way. Numerous war crimes have been commmited in violation of the Geneva Convention, including the execution of POW's and bombing hospitals.
4) The U.S. supports more dictatorships than democracies.

These are FACTS. Do not deny reality simply because it isn't true. Get educated on this subject before arguing on it. If I seem to be using harsh rhetoric here, keep in mind it's for your own good. If you actually start believing some of the bull**** propaganda spewed out by the state, you are just begging for authoritarian rule as is happening now in Americawith Bush's seizure of power.
 

Sweep

New Member
Jul 25, 2001
290
0
0
Visit site
So you are now claiming that carpet bombing residential areas and hospitals is a way of minimizing civilian casualties? That is the most senseless thing I've ever heard

We're not carpet bombing the cities or towns, enough said.

You obviously don't know what is going on. 1) There is no evidence they bombed us. The U.S. governmeny refused to give evidence against bin Laden because they believe it wasn't conclusive. 2) This attack was planned in July, before Sept. 11.

There is a crapload of evidence Al-Queda was resonsible for the Cole bombing at the very least, and at least some circumstantial crap against them about 9/11. So let me get this straight, you don't believe Al-Queda had anything to do with it?

One terrorist thing, when those rebels kill innocents to overthrow democratically elected governments. You are so desperate you are resorting to semantics. You now claim that just because we support terrorism, it makes it not terrorism. The terrorists traiend at the school of the americas have killed hundreds of thousands, that is more than any other state sponsored terrorism. Apparently you didn't know that, so you must be talking about something you know nothing about.

We didn't sponsor terrorism, we trained guerillas and rebels. There is a difference. We didn't tell them to be suicide bombers, etc. Were the Afghans we trained being told to go on into Russia and fly a few airliners into their tallest buildings? Russia was also invading them, I don't consider anything we've done in the middle east to be invading. What have we really done to them so far (in the middle east). True we should have helped out after Russia left afghanistan instead of just washing our hands of the affair but hey...

LOL! The U.S. has toppled more democracies than authoritarian dictatorships. You are just making yourself look bad now.

What democracy did we topple. Maybe I'm missing one...

1) Terrorism is terrorism, whether U.S. supported or not.

You're right, luckily we haven't supported terrorism. That also means the actions of these terrorists is un-excusable no matter their reason, since terrorism is terrorism...

2) This war was planned in July, according to Pakistan.

Give me a souce. What was our reason for this action then, and what was the planned action. Problems did exist in Afghanistan prior to this you know. Perhaps I'm not aware of something that would change how I felt about this topic, do share...

3) Civilians are not being avoided in our bombing in any way. Numerous war crimes have been commmited in violation of the Geneva Convention, including the execution of POW's and bombing hospitals.

The executing of any prisoners wasn't our doing, just because we're technically helping the rebels in some areas doesn't make us responsible for their every action... So we purposefully targetted some civilian hospitals eh? Proof? We are attempting to avoid the killing of civilians whether you like it not. If for no other reason than to avoid the bad press...

If you actually start believing some of the bull**** propaganda spewed out by the state, you are just begging for authoritarian rule as is happening now in Americawith Bush's seizure of power.

Someone else sounds like they've been buying into a little propaganda as well... But your propaganda is obviously right since it's from anti-US sources... Or have I been wrong about you all this time, and you're really over there in the thick of it fighting the good fight?


The fact of the matter is we are fighting a limited war in Afghanistan, and some innocents will die. We are not carpet bombing residential areas, we are not trying to kill babies. We are not deliberately blowing up any baby milk factories. We are not there after oil or any other resources, as soon as we're done kicking the taliban's ass and destroying Al-Queda, we'll be out of there. We are not the great Satan, and the Taliban government could have prevented all of this... They chose their fate, now they can cry me a river. No matter what Afghanistan is going to better off once we're done, you couldn't have come up with a more backward, oppressive sh*thole than Afghanistan was before if you tried...

Now if you want to talk about the BS policies the government is pushing here in the US in the name of safety after this attack, you and I would probably agree...
 
Last edited:

FiringAimlessly

NOT going to waste another minute on CS!
Sep 18, 2001
2,692
0
0
41
Who came up with the brilliant idea to change the spelling anyway? Isn't it better for native English speakers to use a name while using English that to their ears would sound more like a holy text than some some garbled name out of Lovecraft?

Here's my counterfeit $.02 in Canadian dollars. (HINT: you're not supposed to take this seriously, hence the "Canadian" part)

The people responsible for 11 Sep were captured back in July (when they planned all this) by the CIA and brainwashed into thinking that they're Al-Qaeda (or Alquéda as the news anchors say it) terrorists and were given orders to fly planes into WTC. This in turn justified the entire U.S. assault on Afghanistan... however, we back home see none if it. All the footage we see was actually filmed at an undisclosed location in southern California with illegal Mexian immigrants with fake beards playing the "Afghan" roles. Meanwhile, American forces saturate Afghanistan with radioactive waste, cleverly disguised as little yellow packages "accidentally" dropped on pre-planted land mines so that the material would scatter the moment the peckages hit the ground. This initially causes horrible burns, diseases, tumours and birth defects among the completely oblivious Afghans (all of Al-Qaeda/Taliban are, of course, fictional entities played by actors), but eventually the survivors begin to adapt and absorb the mutagens, eventually evolving into unspeakably horrible monsters out to destroy everything. The Air Force now has to regularly carpet-bomb the borders not only to destroy any escaping monsters and nosey foreigners, but also the occasional political fugitive from Bush Empire Oil Incorporated (formerly known as the United State"s" of America) who often carry those nasty secret documents around that keep popping up for some reason. Eventually (analysts say around 2025, although it could be decades later) the Empire (with of course its robotic Mars colony, the mind-control space lasers and its planet-destroying giant gun on its moon base) will have achieved the following:

a) completely destroyed Afghanistan - by this point it has already sunk under the magma and is not even part of any tectonic plate. This, of course, finally settles a feud that started when Supereme Infinitely Just Emperor George XIV (formerly known as "Dubya") stepped in a "present" left by an Afghan hound many years ago.

b) ensures a monopoly on all of the world's oil supplies. Of course, all alternative sources of energy have already been perfectly developed, but no one is supposed to know that.

c) created an entire race of beings custom-designed to resemble the dread, fell race of Elder Beings, the hell-fiends from Beyond, known to human tongues only as... Pokémon.

The world. Gotta catch 'em all.
 

SimplyCosmic

ERGO. VIS A VIS. CONCORDANTLY.
Dec 25, 1999
6,311
0
0
Northeast Ohio
www.simplycosmic.net
If you consider groups like Amnesty International to be pro-Al Qaeda sources, then who am to argue with your anti-human rights stand.

No offense there, guy, but the simple fact is that with a little research, you'll find that the so called evidence provided by Amnesty International members was provided by the organization itself, but by some more militant members who are decidedly anti-American.

But I should know better than to try to argue this point, because I'll simply be labelled as a pro-American-Nazi who believes only the obvious lies of the world media and would love nothing more than to be out personally opressing the poor innocent Al Queda children and their adorable AK47's.

Fine. Then I'm a monster. I'm evil. We're all evil. Every last one of us Americans. And Europeans for that matter. And most of Asia. In fact everyone who isn't you must obviously be in on this vast conspiracy to kill the peace loving forces of Osama Bin Laden, father figure to all and your own personal Jesus.

Are you happy now? Can we all just get on with our lives now that the truth of just how much we Americans sit around in our SUVs dreaming up new ways to rape and torture everyone who isn't us is out?

:rolleyes:

I wish I was an enlightened as you. Really. Life must be so simple when all you have to do is hate anyone that isn't you.
 

jaeg

PopeyeTurbo
Oct 18, 2000
711
0
0
Jesus Rogue, can't you ever come up with something original? Any post you've made since Sept. 11 has consisted of:

- The attack was planned in July because we are evil
- The US wants to kill as many civilians as possible (evil)
- We bombed that hospital because we are evil
- We want oil there (greedy)
- We made up that whole "evidence" thing (sinister?)

Sheesh, come up with something else. It's getting old and your points are so ridiculous they're almost laughable. People who are unable to explain things in more than one term often adhere to this formula of tripe creation and I'd really like you to think for yourself for a change.
 

JaFO

bugs are features too ...
Nov 5, 2000
8,408
0
0
Originally posted by STW Max Sterling
He's stuck in an infinite loop ... You know, he hasn't been very well programmed :p
That's what you get if you use XP ... ;)

btw: using armed forces to capture a few terrorists is as subtle as using a sledge hammer to break an egg ...
It's only a matter of time before the American 'intelligence' makes another "mistake" and they hit some of their "allies".
That's not 'evil', but a simple fact of life.
 

RogueLeader

Tama-chan says, "aurf aurf aurf!"
Oct 19, 2000
5,314
0
0
Indiana. Kill me please.
We're not carpet bombing the cities or towns, enough said.
We carpet bombed the residential district of Kabul. Once again, I ask you learn about what you say before saying it.

There is a crapload of evidence Al-Queda was resonsible for the Cole bombing at the very least, and at least some circumstantial crap against them about 9/11. So let me get this straight, you don't believe Al-Queda had anything to do with it?
There was a crapload of evidence the government was responsible for Sept. 11, why didn't we just assume it was them? Everyone believed McVeigh did the OKC bombing, why didn't we bomb Michigan. Your logic is once again reduced to the idea that ethics only apply to our enemies, not us.

We didn't sponsor terrorism, we trained guerillas and rebels. There is a difference. We didn't tell them to be suicide bombers, etc. Were the Afghans we trained being told to go on into Russia and fly a few airliners into their tallest buildings? Russia was also invading them, I don't consider anything we've done in the middle east to be invading. What have we really done to them so far (in the middle east). True we should have helped out after Russia left afghanistan instead of just washing our hands of the affair but hey...
So now you are saying it is typical of rebels to kidnap people from ransom and kill civilian targets? And what the bloody hell do you call the U.S. trained death squads that murder any dissent in U.S. proxy nations? That spreads fear for a political end, thus it is terrorism. As for your nonsensical statement that we havn't invaded the Middle East, we are in Afghanistan right now, that is called invading. We invaded Iran on at least two occasions, and we've invaded Lebenon. We invaded Iraq, and we are currently occupying Saudi Arabia (which, if you know anything on this subject, which you apparently don't, is the reason the terrorists hate us).

What democracy did we topple. Maybe I'm missing one...
I specifically had Guatamala in mind while writing that.

You're right, luckily we haven't supported terrorism. That also means the actions of these terrorists is un-excusable no matter their reason, since terrorism is terrorism...
Once again, please tell me how slaughter of civilians for political reasons is not terrorism, and if it isn't, then how was the WTC attack terrorism.

Give me a souce. What was our reason for this action then, and what was the planned action. Problems did exist in Afghanistan prior to this you know. Perhaps I'm not aware of something that would change how I felt about this topic, do share...
Niaz Niak, former foreign minister of Pakistan, talking to the BBC.

The executing of any prisoners wasn't our doing, just because we're technically helping the rebels in some areas doesn't make us responsible for their every action... So we purposefully targetted some civilian hospitals eh? Proof? We are attempting to avoid the killing of civilians whether you like it not. If for no other reason than to avoid the bad press...
U.S. soldiers are mixed into the rebel groups. The prison riot was instigated because of mistreatment and executions, something you don't hear in the U.S. dominated media. A majority of those killed in that riot were killed by U.S. airstrikes, not NA troops. Amnesty International asked for a hearing into it, whicht he U.S. and Britain refused to cover up the war crime.

Someone else sounds like they've been buying into a little propaganda as well... But your propaganda is obviously right since it's from anti-US sources... Or have I been wrong about you all this time, and you're really over there in the thick of it fighting the good fight?
My propaganda is right because all the evidence is on my side. It's called the scientific method. Don't start denouncing science on me just cause it suggests what you don't like is true.

I'll have to finish later cause I have to leave now.
 

Excelsiore

Binary Liberation Front
Mar 23, 2001
434
0
0
Sweden
www.geocities.com
Some things I'd like to point out.

One:
Oil companies claim that in Afghanistan and that region is the world's largest untapped energy resource(natural gas, coal, etc). If Saudi Arabia has 4 million barrels of oil, Afghanistan has 50 million. Those numbers aren't exact but you get the general idea. If you don't think this doesn't interest the US in some way than you're basically a fool.

This is not my source but supports my thoughts a little.

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2001/10/13/stories/05132524.htm

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/afghan.html

Two:
The US toppled the democratically elected left wing government in Chile and replaced it with Pinochet.

Three:
The US blackmailed the Nicaraguan people into voting for a US friendly government even though the majority of the people were against it.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publications/nicaragua/nicaragua.html

There are more. Take Iran and the Shah for example or take Grenada or Guatemala.

http://www.ukans.edu/cwis/organizations/las/interven.html
 

JaFO

bugs are features too ...
Nov 5, 2000
8,408
0
0
Originally posted by RogueLeader
...
Niaz Niak, former foreign minister of Pakistan, talking to the BBC.
...
Now why would that be a 'former' minister ....
could it be he did something wrong ?

So it's Pearl Harbor all over again eh ...
 

The_Fur

Back in black
Nov 2, 2000
6,204
0
0
www.rlgaming.com
great your sole defense is the fact that ONE of the series of arguements he provides is implausible, not even not true, just not plausible.

Great, you have proven the innosence of the US beyond a doubt :con: