http://www.dawah.tv/broadcast/iraqfree/iraqfree2.ram

You think the disgusting pranks of those bullies/idiots at Abu Ghraib can even hold a candle to the horrors perpetrated for decades under Saddam Hussein? Or the horrors that go on routinely in prisons around the Middle East even as we speak?

I wonder how you would feel if someone linked to a few beheading videos, or a suicide bomber, or a some mad Islamic cleric calling for blood(no shortage of any of these) and insinuated that those people represent all Muslims everywhere.

ok , iam starting to think that u really hate islam .....
islam don't call for terrorism ....
about what u say about middle east ..
it's true but , is replacing a dectatore with conquest is better ?
it's sick just u want to defend america's actions...
the fact that america call's it self democracy and freedom fighters is really destroyed with all it's actions , specially since 9/11 ...
a country that practise terrorism and support terrorist beings (zionism)has no right to call it self freedom fighter ...

How were Iraq's prospects for freedom four years ago? Were they better than they are now?

really better ! look to the video , look to the news , the situation is getting worst ....
as i was happy to see Saddam's statue fall , i was sad to see the american flag rise .....

Really. There wouldn't be any prospect of freedom in Iraq right now if we hadn't overthrown him. In a decade or so Saddam would have been replaced with his atrocious sons.

do u think that if conquesting iraq didn't have benifit to america it would done it .....
all the reasons of it fall apart .......
still , the bigest racist conquestal being that has the biggest massdestruction arsenal , is un touched ...
and no word to speak with north korea

Of course it benefits us. No country can undertake that kind of endeavor purely as charity. Just because something is done in your own self-interest doesn't erase the value of any good that may come of it.

North Korea: a truly despicable regime. Unfortunately, unlike Iraq, they're so strong that they're untouchable.

exactly what i mean .....
by the way , the islamic nation that u don't like is the nation that done countless things as a charity ....
how with all the horrible actions of america believe they are freedom fighters , but u can't see that muslims were the real freedom fighters , read history ....

Who do you consider a Muslim "freedom fighter?"

Just wondering if any-one has heard the latest news on the U.S. and North Korean talks...?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/4674785.stm

S Korea offers North energy aid

South Korea has offered huge amounts of free electricity to North Korea as an incentive to end its nuclear ambitions.

Seoul is proposing to lay power lines across the Korean border, as an alternative to a US-brokered nuclear power deal which collapsed in 2002.

The offer came as diplomats prepared to resume six-nation talks on the North's nuclear programme later this month.

Earlier, South Korea said it was sending the North 500,000 metric tons of rice to help avert a food crisis.

South Korean Unification Minister Chung Dong-young told a news conference that the power proposal would supply the same amount of electricity that the North would have received if two light-water reactors being built by an international consortium in the 1990s had been completed.



That deal, known as the Agreed Framework, collapsed after Pyongyang allegedly admitted to the US in 2002 that it had a secret, enriched uranium programme.

The proposed power lines would provide the North with 2m kilowatts of electricity a year from the South's own power grid, and would be ready by 2008.

The power being offered is equivalent to the output of two large power stations and would help towards redressing North Korea's serious energy shortage.

But Mr Chung appealed for co-operation from other parties. He said the North also needed security guarantees if it was to sign up to any deal on giving up its nuclear programme.

The US gave vague assurances of security and economic aid at the last round of negotiations last year, but it was not enough to win over North Korea.

The BBC's Charles Scanlon in Seoul says the South Korean government has since seized the initiative, fearing that the confrontation between Pyongyang and Washington could escalate.

Seoul is worried that if the North were to collapse, it could be flooded with millions of hungry North Korean refugees.

Pressure on

Diplomatic efforts are gathering pace ahead of the next round of North Korean nuclear talks.

China's top envoy, Tang Jiaxuan, was expected in North Korea on Tuesday, and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has arrived in Seoul.

Speaking in Tokyo, earlier on Tuesday, she called on the North to make a "strategic decision" to give up its nuclear weapons.

South Korea has also agreed to ship half a million tons of badly needed food aid to its northern neighbour.

The UN's World Food Programme raised the alarm about food shortages in the North earlier this year, saying there was a cereals gap up to October 2005 of 900,000 tons.

South Korea is one of the largest single donors of aid to the secretive communist state. It is the South's biggest donation to the North since 2000.

However, South Korea has repeatedly stated that full-scale aid as well as commercial exchanges are impossible as long as the nuclear issue is not resolved.

The UN World Food Programme is currently feeding some 6.5m North Koreans - nearly a third of the population.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/worl...fic/4674785.stm

Published: 2005/07/12 11:32:54 GMT

==============

N KOREA'S ENERGY DEALS
N Korea agreed to mothball its nuclear reactors in a 1994 deal
In return, it was to receive two 1,000MW light-water reactors
Deal collapsed in 2002 over enriched uranium programme
The North later restarted its Yongbyon reactor
S Korea now offering 2,000MW of electricity aid

Who do you consider a Muslim "freedom fighter?"

Well,by definition every insurgent in Iraq is a freedom fighter.The USA is recognised as an occupier and they don't even deny it.Afghanistan is a different issue.

North Korea to resume nuke talks, official says

North Korea's vice foreign minister, Kim Kye Gwan, disclosed his government's decision during a dinner with U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill in the Chinese capital. The talks are to resume during the week of July 25, the U.S. official said.

A similar announcement came from the North's official Korean Central News Agency, which said talks would get under way July 25.

"The U.S. side clarified its official stand to recognize (North Korea) as a sovereign state, not to invade it and hold bilateral talks within the framework of the six-party talks," KCNA reported

Linker

(Who do you consider a Muslim "freedom fighter?")

the real muslims , the muslims that made the greatest civilization of all times , the muslims that fought for the freedom of other nations without asking for a prize .......

who do terrorist things today are not considered true muslims , even if they talked in it's name ........

I was thinking of something more along the lines of Saladin.

The code of conduct prevents me from saying what I really feel about you and your heroic freedom fighters, so I'll just say that I think you should go and join them.

Saladin is not a hero , really

do u think terrorists are hero's , no ...
or u just want to attack muslims ?

We are shown the worst of Muslim or Islam in its fundamentalist light. For countless generations Europeans have made war with Muslim Nations. ALways we are told that Muslims and Islamists are crazy backwards people who beat there women and have public stoneings.

LOok at Blair still insisting that it was Islamists responsible for the bombing...with NO proof...none. What kind of crazy is he? He is inciting a race war. Briton needs to stand up and investigate the whole damned thing instead of believing this liar of a PM.

Muslims do not " hate our way of life"...they hate it when you install puppet dictators and steal their resources. That kind of unfairness creates hatred.

exactly , add to that seperate between some muslims actions and islam ..
and by the way never believe the media , read a bit

Couldn't agree more and I wonder how Bush and Blair the same guys that started a war without any real proof got BOTH re elected, and I think these same govs are somewhat trying to make a whole race get hated because of the actions of particular individuals.

Yes, the poor benighted muslim extremeists. Why, if the US hadn't invaded Iraq, the poor things wouldn't have had to try and blow up the WTC with a truck bomb.

Oh, wait, that was in 1993.

Well, If the US didn't invade Iraq, sad muslim extremists wouldn't have had to blow themselves to Allah trying to sink the USS Cole.

Oh, wait, that was in 2000.

The US Marine Barracks in Beiruit, where we went to help keep the Peace.

Nope, that too was way before the Iraq occupation.

Countless aircraft hijacked since 1972 up to and including September 11, 2001.

The Middle East, and extremists have been sniping at other nations, and the US in particular since the 1970's. And, while I don't agree that US military forces should be in Iraq, you shouldn't be surprised when we do, finally decide to kick the snot out of the cowards who strike from the shadows.

Islam and Islamism are two different things
and to be fair, the only people who have claimed responsibility have been a bunch of Islamists.

But hey, if you are going to defend Islamism, I'm sure there are plenty of neonazi groups that would love your support too:)

They have found four suspects and hold some pretty damning evidence to sugest they were responsible. Luckily they are already dead.

I was thinking of something more along the lines of Saladin.

The code of conduct prevents me from saying what I really feel about you and your heroic freedom fighters, so I'll just say that I think you should go and join them.

My freedom fighters?What the hell are you talking about?

As long as they are not foreigners themselves and don't massacre Iraqi civilians in their mosques and marketplaces, including blowing up of many children just to hurt an American soldier. This of course leaves more thugs than freedom fighters in Iraq today!

Let's not forget that the Taliban and their terrorist associates were installed in Afghanistan with the full blessing and support of the US and some of her backward middle eastern allies in a far fetched scheme against Iran. Things are not quite the way you describe them to be.

There are a lot of different elements fighting, but the ones who saw people's heads off on tape and blow up children(which happened yesterday) are nothing but the lowest kind of nihlistic scum, and to call them freedom fighters is disgusting.

I don't think it was as much an active scheme against Iran as it was a byproduct of the policy of supporting the Mujahideen against the Soviets. The Taliban was more a creation of Pakistan; nobody in the US was particularly happy about them being in charge.

But guess what JMPD1- I bet all that was Bush and Bliars fault too. These people on here kill me!

The government in Kabul that the Taliban and their associated thugs overthrew in the mid 90s with the direct assistance of the Pakistani military and financial support of southern Persian gulf states and the political support of the US (all the above mentioned Taliban backers were and still are close US allies in this region), was the real Mujahedin government of Afghanistan, formed by those who really fought the Soviets. People such as Ahmad Shah Massoud were members of that government(defense minister). The Taliban were a mere piece by piece fabrication to be used as a tool in the long standing, now failed US policy of containing Iran. The original support that the lunatic Saddam received from the US was also part of that policy. So I must disagree with you there and state that it was indeed a very active scheme against Iran.

There are a lot of different elements fighting, but the ones who saw people's heads off on tape and blow up children(which happened yesterday) are nothing but the lowest kind of nihlistic scum, and to call them freedom fighters is disgusting.

But them being freedom fighters is a simple fact.You can try to ignore the truth if you don't like your beloved freedom to be shown in a bad light,but reality looks different.


Yes, the poor benighted muslim extremeists. Why, if the US hadn't invaded Iraq, the poor things wouldn't have had to try and blow up the WTC with a truck bomb.

Oh, wait, that was in 1993.

Well, If the US didn't invade Iraq, sad muslim extremists wouldn't have had to blow themselves to Allah trying to sink the USS Cole.

Oh, wait, that was in 2000.

The US Marine Barracks in Beiruit, where we went to help keep the Peace.

Nope, that too was way before the Iraq occupation.

Countless aircraft hijacked since 1972 up to and including September 11, 2001.

The Middle East, and extremists have been sniping at other nations, and the US in particular since the 1970's. And, while I don't agree that US military forces should be in Iraq, you shouldn't be surprised when we do, finally decide to kick the snot out of the cowards who strike from the shadows.

What deluded individual actually said they attacked because of Iraq?
Iraq was just another example of US involvement in the middle-east that started way before 1993.Iraq maybe the spark that set off the bomb but the explosives have been piling up for decades.

And unfortunately it's innocent people who are dieing. On there way to work, and school or just dropping the kids off, getting the groceries, out for a day with friends.

Not the (insert nasty words here) that are actualy responsible.

I dont know kismit...add up all they have on these guys and they are STILL suspects. I think these guys just were unfortunate victims who just happen to be Middle Eastern so since there were no credible groups taking responsibility...we need a scapegoat. I bet they dont find anything in the houses.

You know I would really like to know why no one is making a fuss over the Visor Consultant group doing a terror drill in the subways at the same time...I dont kn ow about you all but about 10 questions come to mind for me.

Ahh you see, I actually feel that the video footage of the four guys together at the train station 20 minutes before the bombs went off. And that all four of them just happened to be on a trian or bus that exploded and positioned wher the bombs exploded, coupled with the fact that islamic extremist material was found on atleast one of these gentelmans computers is fairly damning evidence. and that's just the evidence that I know of.

As for the drill, the G8 summit is on, you would be pretty silly not to atleast try and be prepared.

No, sorry, the truth is that "freedom fighters" is not a term reserved for people fighting against a foreign occupation. "Freedom fighters" is an appellation that you apply to them because you support them, which means that you support murders and thugs. I hope that you have the courage to go over there and join them.

ok so they lug their computers and id im sure to a suicide mission? its been proven that timers were used--what did they do? set the timers and wait next to the bombs?

No, sorry, the truth is that "freedom fighters" is not a term reserved for people fighting against a foreign occupation. "

I see.By what definition do you go there?


"Freedom fighters" is an appellation that you apply to them because you support them, which means that you support murders and thugs. I hope that you have the courage to go over there and join them.

I could care less who wins this game.I will be able to live in both worlds.
You see,I'm not supporting murderers.

But what about you?Who are you supporting?Are you over there?

I am in an MP reserve unit, thank you very much; we sent off three people last month, and we expect to send more in the months to come.

And I'm still waiting for you to tell me why the term "freedom fighter" is a designation that can only apply to people fighting against a foreign occupation.

And I'm still waiting for you to tell me why the term "freedom fighter" is a designation that can only apply to people fighting against a foreign occupation.

Only?


I am in an MP reserve unit, thank you very much; we sent off three people last month, and we expect to send more in the months to come.

It was a rethorical question,but anyway.....What about my second question?
Who are you supporting.....what are you supporting?

Isn't that what you meant? That they are by definition "freedom fighters" because they are fighting an occupying power?

Isn't that what you meant? That they are by definition "freedom fighters" because they are fighting an occupying power?

That's what I said.But why does it mean "only"?It is part of the definition.Does my statement suggest anything else?


But them being freedom fighters is a simple fact.You can try to ignore the truth if you don't like your beloved freedom to be shown in a bad light,but reality looks different.

I think this statement suggests the opposite.The fact that there are 2 sides.

Oh, so you're saying that every insurgent everywhere is a freedom fighter. But wait, earlier you made a distinction between that and Afghanistan.

No they left behind something that was undeniably their's, their limbs and torsos. The computer evidence was obviuosly found at the homes of these people, and timers may well have been used but delivery was made in person.
Do you not feel that the fact that these four people (who new each other prior to the event and had connections with terrorist activity) met up and then set off on seperate trains and or buses which then proceded to explode with each one of these individuals placed at an explosion point isn't just a little dodgy?

Oh, so you're saying that every insurgent everywhere is a freedom fighter. But wait, earlier you made a distinction between that and Afghanistan.

Here comes part 2 of the definition into play.
Afghanistan was the attacker.Not the defender.

Here's what you wrote earlier:



The difference between Afghanistan and Iraq, in that statement, is not in which party was the aggressor but the fact that USA is an occupying Iraq.

For that matter, both countries are being occupied by thousands of foriegn troops conducting combat operations on their soil. Afghanistan is different only in scale.

The difference between Afghanistan and Iraq, in that statement, is not in which party was the aggressor but the fact that USA is an occupying Iraq.

Oh, I see what you mean.In that case just swap the last 2 sentences.The afghanistan comment was meant to be about my post,not the senctence before.

[quote=Redneck,Jul 12 2005, 11:07 PM]
You think the disgusting pranks of those bullies/idiots at Abu Ghraib can even hold a candle to the horrors perpetrated for decades under Saddam Hussein? Or the horrors that go on routinely in prisons around the Middle East even as we speak?

well i suppose that makes the invasion ok then, i suppose you think that america should take over the whole of the muslim world because there is "no shortage" of blood thirsty muslims? well let me tell you something redneck (the name says it all), i am a muslim and do you know where i was this afternoon? i was at a march organised by muslims to condemn the evil mutha fukka's that carried out last weeks dispicable crimes against humanity.

I wonder how you would feel if someone linked to a few beheading videos, or a suicide bomber, or a some mad Islamic cleric calling for blood(no shortage of any of these) and insinuated that those people represent all Muslims everywhere.
[right][snapback]730142[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[quote=Redneck,Jul 12 2005, 11:30 PM]
How were Iraq's prospects for freedom four years ago? Were they better than they are now?
[right][snapback]730176[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

prospects for freedom? what a joke. you think there is prospect for freedom? there has to be peace before there is freedom. were the iraqis better off then or now? i'd say they were better off under saddam atleast the whole country did'nt get bombed for a year or two, atleast there was'nt lawlessness, atleast they had water, electricity food etc. and dont even bother about atleast they've got freedom of speech because i saw a us soldiers telling iraqi's to shut up because they were chanting down with bush.
i mean think about this sunni muslims and shia muslims have been at war for years but even they joined forces against the coalition, remember saddam disliked the kurds and shia's and used to torture them but even the kurds are joining forces with sunni groups and launching attacks against british and american soldiers. and the biggest difference as to why it was better under saddam than now? because saddam is an iraqi. there is nothing more frustrating to a population than being occupied by a foreign force.

North Korea: a truly despicable regime. Unfortunately, unlike Iraq, they're so strong that they're untouchable.
[right][snapback]730208[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

again i suppose there so strong so we should let n.korea do as they please, and they hav'nt got any oil or anything else of strategic value to the u.s so why should we bother? hey?

[quote=cyberlord,Jul 13 2005, 12:16 AM]
(Who do you consider a Muslim "freedom fighter?")

the real muslims , the muslims that made the greatest civilization of all times , the muslims that fought for the freedom of other nations without asking for a prize .......

and the muslims that follow the quran and sunnah which just to clarify to all the haters DOES NOT condone killing innocent civillians

who do terrorist things today are not considered true muslims , even if they talked in it's name ........
[right][snapback]730252[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

do you know what the best thing about your argument is redneck? you are defending the people in america who dont give a sh*** about you or any other american for that matter because they are controlling your congress, using your countrymen to fight their wars and all the time they have got there own agenda's which dont and wont benefit the us. who am i talking about? the zionist controlling your government is what im talking about and the funniest thing is theres you fighting for their cause, defending them and all alomg they could'nt care less about you or any of your countrymen for that matter.

Good for you. I hope lots of Muslims joined you on your march. No, the US shouldn't take over the world. But sometimes even freedom has to be imposed by force, as paradoxical as it sounds. If a democracy can be created in the heart of the Arab world, then it could change everything.



Yes, I'm sure they would be great prospects for a constitutional democracy under Saddam and his sons. Free speech? The Iraqi press is probably one of the most free in the Middle East right now.

Guess freedom isn't really worth fighting for to you. It is to some people, though.



So, a domestic butcher is always better than a foreign occupation, even if an occupation eventaully results in a better government. Not to me it isn't.



No, because they're too strong to take out. Iraq was do-able, North Korea is not.




These guys have a name?



Who? Who's controlling America?

--------