Moscow Metro suicide bombings

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

This is my point.

Also you don't seem to account for any terrorism that has nothing to do with the United States or the UK, such as the Tamil Tigers or those wacky Algerians. Car bombs are not expensive.

Trio who funded Tamil Tigers walks free:

"The Tamil Tigers are recognised as a terrorist organisation overseas but not in Australia."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2...31/2861474.htm

Trio who funded Tamil Tigers walks free

"I would not go so far as saying that your aims were entirely humanitarian. But I do accept that they were not purposely to assist terrorist activity,"

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/australian-news/7007616/trio-who-funded-tamil-tigers-walks-free

Cough* Cough* I wonder what would've happened if these guys weren't being blatantly protected by the Australian government. Probably life in prison.

Originally Posted by The Leader

Also I'm harder to convince than you.

I'm not trying to convince anyone anything. It's impossible to convince someone something that doesn't want or isn't ready to believe it. Hopefully things will come together for you in time.

"They do not want to believe because they do not wish it to be"

[Colonel Flagg]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

[...] It's impossible to convince someone something that doesn't want or isn't ready to believe it.

Hmmm. Sound like anyone we know?

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

Hopefully things will come together for you in time.

[The Leader]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

Cough* Cough* I wonder what would've happened if these guys weren't being blatantly protected by the Australian government. Probably life in prison.

So Australia was funding the Tamil Tigers then?

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

I'm not trying to convince anyone anything. It's impossible to convince someone something that doesn't want or isn't ready to believe it. Hopefully things will come together for you in time.

"They do not want to believe because they do not wish it to be"

Wait, why are you talking about yourself? Shouldn't you at least be doing it in the third person?

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

So Australia was funding the Tamil Tigers then?

What part of Anglo-American Imperialism don't you understand? Australia is still the Queen's land isn't it?

[The Leader]

Do you have any proof of actual funding or just sympathizing?

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

Do you have any proof of actual funding or just sympathizing?

If this "trio" wasn't blatantly protected by the Australia government, what do you think would've happened to them?

[The Leader]

So you don't have any proof that the Australian government funded the Tamil Tigers and your entire analysis of terrorism is based on speculation which often contradicts studies, personal accounts, government reports and what terrorist groups themselves claim? ASTONISHING

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

So you don't have any proof that the Australian government funded the Tamil Tigers and your entire analysis of terrorism is based on speculation which often contradicts studies, personal accounts, government reports and what terrorist groups themselves claim? ASTONISHING

I believe I asked you a question Mr. Grumpy pants

[The Leader]

I asked first, but you couldn't provide an answer and instead tried to change the focus of the conversation. Why should I answer your questions if you won't answer mine?

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

I asked first, but you couldn't provide an answer and instead tried to change the focus of the conversation. Why should I answer your questions if you won't answer mine?

I answered your question with my question...your turn.

[The Leader]

So your logic is that because an Australian judge reduced the charges of three people, who provided funding to the Tamil Tigers for humanitarian reasons during a cease fire, from supporting a terrorist group to supporting a separatist groups is evidence that the Australian government supported the Tamil Tigers? That's not proof. It would be credible if you could show an order came down from a head of government letting the guys off the hook or if you could show that there was a transfer of arms and money to the LTTE from accounts controlled by the Australian government but you don't have that. What you have is speculation built on how you perceive the world as opposed to facts.

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

Yadda Yadda Yadda.

If this "trio" wasn't blatantly protected by the Australia government, what do you think would've happened to them?

I think the question stands, what would've happened to these 3 people if they weren't being protected by the government?

My answer would be very, very, long prison terms.

If your going to wait for the State to come out and say "Yes, we sponsor terrorists" then your going to be waiting a very long time.

[The Leader]

That has nothing to do with my question. You never answered my question because you have no answer to it. You have no evidence to support your arguments. All you can do is try to dance around the holes in your theories.

[The Leader]

Not only that but you apparently don't know much about Norway. Of course they aren't Anglo nor are they American, so I guess according to you they aren't a supporter or terrorism.

[Zhukov]

The Australian government did not fund or support the Tamil Tigers in any way. Tamil refugees are not even classed as such when they flee Sri Lanka and get to our borders.

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by Zhukov

The Australian government did not fund or support the Tamil Tigers in any way. Tamil refugees are not even classed as such when they flee Sri Lanka and get to our borders.

Anglo-American interest's fund terrorist groups. Does no one here find anything wrong or strange that funders of a group that preforms suicide bombing raids has been freed?

No one finds this strange at all that the Tamil Tigers attack was blamed on Pakistan to fan the flames between India and Pakistan?

[Colonel Flagg]

Originally Posted by Zhukov

The Australian government did not fund or support the Tamil Tigers in any way. Tamil refugees are not even classed as such when they flee Sri Lanka and get to our borders.

Welcome back to the fray, Zhukov.

I'd like to learn more about the Tasmanian "Independence Struggle" of the mid '70s to late '80s. Since the relevant material has been censored, are there any books that I can read about this incident?

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

Didn't see the first four words of that post, did ya? Doesn't really seem like I'm expressing my own opinion when I write like that, does it? Would you like another rhetorical question?

And could you post a link to the Pakistan vs India thing or tell me where I can find more information?

You need to do your own research and come to your own conclusion.

Originally Posted by Colonel Flagg

Welcome back to the fray, Zhukov.

I'd like to learn more about the Tasmanian "Independence Struggle" of the mid '70s to late '80s. Since the relevant material has been censored, are there any books that I can read about this incident?

Yes,

Please tell us more Zhukov. I was very interested in your story. Many important subjects are overlooked here in the states and by many I mean almost everything except sports, celebrities, and America's funniest home videos.

[The Leader]

Originally Posted by TheCoolinator

You need to do your own research and come to your own conclusion.

Goddamnit. I thought that you actually had a news story or something. I should have known that you were just making stuff up again.

[Zhukov]

Originally Posted by Flagg

Welcome back to the fray, Zhukov.

I'd like to learn more about the Tasmanian "Independence Struggle" of the mid '70s to late '80s. Since the relevant material has been censored, are there any books that I can read about this incident?

Well I'm actually writing one myself. There is not much text material around, so mostly it's going to be filled with interviews of people that experienced it. I have a few photos from my own personal collection as well. I've been told that it's going to be impossible to get it published here, so I'm going to have to smuggle it out to my contact in the UK and have it published there.

I can't fly there myself since it's almost impossible to get a travel permit because of my ethnicity.

As far as state support goes, I think you will find, The Leader, that there is almost always some form of government activity going on behind the scenes. It may not be as direct as your cookie cutter view of the world hopes it to be, but it's still there. For instance, the previous New Zealand government (before the right wing conservatives came to power) sent a lot of humanitarian aid to the Tasmanian government in exile for things such as food and shelter. While it wasn't guns and ammunition, it meant that less money had to be spent on food, and more could be spent on bombs etc.

[TheCoolinator]

Originally Posted by The Leader

What do think the state sponsorship in the Mumbai attacks was, other than Pakistan training and equipping Lashkar-e-Taiba?

Some articles for you:

Mumbai terrorists used Chechen tactics

http://rt.com/Top_News/2008-11-28/Mumbai_terrorists_used_Chechen_tactics.html

Somewhat relevant to the main topic.

Lashkar rejects 'confession' in Mumbai probe

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iazNx59e-BbHT6I_7FBE7LnZfJ3w

Lashkar-e-Taiba do not admit to the attacks. Very odd.

and finally,

Type in Hamid Gul interview into YouTube and check out what he said regarding the Mumbai Attacks. He used to be Pakistani ISI.

Originally Posted by Zhukov

As far as state support goes, I think you will find, The Leader, that there is almost always some form of government activity going on behind the scenes. It may not be as direct as your cookie cutter view of the world hopes it to be, but it's still there.

Wow, thanks for throwing me under the bus a few posts ago and now agreeing with me completely.

And being rude to TheLeader now is completely uncalled for.

[Ant10708]

The Leader: I'm not writing a case study. I'm debating people I have never met on an internet message board called Imockery. In my opinion Time is a fairly credible source when it comes to current events and I assume they vetted their sources but maybe I'm wrong and they made up those experts and the entire story but I really don't care enough to do a work cited page at the end of my message board term paper for you. I also do not lack the intelligence to understand your posts. I do understand your position, a lot of my responses were written in the middle of the night with me being fueled by red bull and just typing my streaming thoughts. I wasn't really trying to directly respond to what you were saying but more or less express my opinion on the issue in general and how I saw things differently. we should probaly all stop calling each other morons(except coolinator who is a moron who can't be defended) for not agreeing with one another because its pretty pointless and basically shows no matter what the other person says we won't take them seriously because we don't think they are smart enough to be right on anything.

Coolinator:
"Those were state sponsored terrorists"
"There are no terrorists. It's fake. It's like communism."

You are a fucking moron. First it has not been proven that they were sponsored by pakistan and just because their cause is to create tension between two countries does not mean they were state sponsored but my main question is if there are no terrorists then how were they 'state sponsored terrorists'? Also communism doesn't exist at all in any form around the world? ok....

I also love how some people ignore the facts about the black widow bombers that disprove some of your earlier arguments about them(or terrorists in general) being people seeking legitimate revenge against a state oppressor and not simply brainwashed pawns being manipulated for the most part by violent thugs. I at least can be open to the fact that I'm not 100 percent right and try to see things from an opposing viewpoint.


"The majority of terrorist attacks that occur in the United States currently are carried out by anti-abortion groups." This is also very inaccurate. unabomer, tim mcveigh, anthrax mailings, irs plane crash, 9/11 would beg to differ. not to mention all the eco terrorism our country currently experiences. I'd probaly guess that eco terrorism is the majority in terms of amount of incidents. how many times are abortion doctors killed or clinics bombed? not nearly as frequently as acts of eco terrorism. their are dozens of incidents every year of eco terrorism in california alone. they even fire bomb scientists cars in extreme cases and cause a large amount of property damage to companies all over in their more routine activities.

" In April, 2009, Daniel Andreas San Diego, 31, an American citizen and computer specialist, joined the ranks of international terrorists wanted by the FBI. A quarter-million dollar reward was put on his head. In 2003, he planted bombs at two animal research facilities in California, lacing them with shrapnel and setting them up so as to target first responders. Since then, he has been on the run, presumably leading a vegan lifestyle somewhere in Central America." How many anti-abortionists are on international terrorist wanted lists?( doesn't prove eco terrorists are the majority but shows how real of a threat eco terrorism is). I am fairly certain that eco terrorists are a much higher prioity for the FBI then anti-abortionists considering the amount of property damage they consistently produce opposed to the occassional murdered abortion doctor but I'll have to ask my father to ask his customer who is an FBI field agent to confirm that.

http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress02/jarboe021202.htm

Link is about how the fbi views eco terrorism

" The FBI estimates that the ALF/ELF have committed more than 600 criminal acts in the United States since 1996(this report was written in 2002), resulting in damages in excess of 43 million dollars." "In recent years, the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) has become one of the most active extremist elements in the United States"

[The Leader]

Originally Posted by Ant10708

The Leader: I'm not writing a case study. I'm debating people I have never met on an internet message board called Imockery. In my opinion Time is a fairly credible source when it comes to current events and I assume they vetted their sources but maybe I'm wrong and they made up those experts and the entire story but I really don't care enough to do a work cited page at the end of my message board term paper for you.

I never disputed your sources, nor the story. Nor did I ask you for a works cited page. I was only responding to the fact that you think I just pull "facts" out of my ass even though I probably have to look at studies written by researchers. Not just little bits and pieces quoted in news articles but the actual studies.

Originally Posted by Ant10708

I also love how some people ignore the facts about the black widow bombers that disprove some of your earlier arguments about them(or terrorists in general) being people seeking legitimate revenge against a state oppressor and not simply brainwashed pawns being manipulated for the most part by violent thugs. I at least can be open to the fact that I'm not 100 percent right and try to see things from an opposing viewpoint.

The rational behind individual terrorism and the rational of a group, meaning why they do what they do, what their goals are etc, differ greatly. I think me and coolie have largely been discussing it from the group perspective. In discussing the Chechens we have not discussed individual's motivations which can be, as you write, due to manipulation but it can also be monetary gain, to get respect from a community that idolizes martyrs, it could be because of some personal problem, etc.

The groups as a whole, however, are motivated by what they feel is right. In this case they want to be seperate from Russia and they have gotten to the point where they are willing to pick up women, strap bombs on them and blow up innocent people. They believe that will help them in their exploits. I don't think anyone here ever seriously argued with you on this, and I believe that I tried to explain this earlier, but maybe I just called you a tool. I don't know.

Originally Posted by Ant10708

"The majority of terrorist attacks that occur in the United States currently are carried out by anti-abortion groups." This is also very inaccurate. unabomer, tim mcveigh, anthrax mailings, irs plane crash, 9/11 would beg to differ. not to mention all the eco terrorism our country currently experiences. I'd probaly guess that eco terrorism is the majority in terms of amount of incidents. how many times are abortion doctors killed or clinics bombed? not nearly as frequently as acts of eco terrorism. their are dozens of incidents every year of eco terrorism in california alone. they even fire bomb scientists cars in extreme cases and cause a large amount of property damage to companies all over in their more routine activities.

I get those two mixed up a lot for some reason. Anti-abortion accounts for the second largest amount, though.

Also comparing five separate incidents, having four different ideologies driving them, as showing that anti-abortion attacks account for a majority doesn't make sense.

[The Leader]

[The Leader]

The idea was that they were providing humanitarian aid, and the article you linked to even mentioned that those funds were sent during a cease fire.

I wasn't aware that Pakistan was blamed for anything that the LTTE had done. Couldja give me a link to that?
edit: Unless it was the Indian government that claimed it. Then I could see that but I doubt anyone believed them.