BAN: Photography on USA trains and buses

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 02:47:49 GMT, "FLY135" FLY_135(@hot not
not)notmail.com wrote:

This is talking in circles. We will not let another Taliban like govt. take
over in Iraq. We just got rid of one because it was a safe haven for
al-qaeda.

Well, what's safe haven. A lot of people moved to the area from other
countries during the war against the Soviet Union, and married and got
their children, and had no interest anymore in going back to their
country of origin (probably also because they "became somebody" over
there). Coupled to this the presence of Al-Qaeda and a lo tof money in
the region, yes, you attract them as flies.

So on the "should not" we are in agreement. But your statement
indirectly and blatently admits if we allow the Iraqi to refuse to ask for
help that the end result is that is what we will get.

If they ask for help, they should get it. However, the American
government took it upon them selves to "give" the help without being
asked for it. Apparently there were very advanced plans to oust Saddam
from within. From
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...?oneclick=true

"It is impossible to verify the seemingly fantastic stories told to me
by this embittered man. However, Fanar detailed the activities of his
family in going abroad to meet US agents and spiriting CIA operatives
into Iraq under the guise of visiting American businessmen. He also
described a tribal plot to hijack eight Iraqi Air Force bombers for an
attack on Saddam's palaces as a prelude to a coup only days before the
US-led invasion on March 20 last year."

But the article says "impossible to verify".

Eventually Muslims
are going to have to face reality and not stonewall their own progress over
false pride. Ignore the false if that bothers you, but if you want pride
then you should earn it by putting your best foot forward and not demand it
because you need it.

It took our Christian-dominated western world many centuries too, to
see this. If you live in an uneducated world, and the church is the
one which determines your world-vision, yeah, it will take some time.

If you
think that he would be turned over to an Islamic court you are as big a
dreamer as the Taliban. However, your last statement seems to indicate that
you recognize this. Which makes me wonder why you thought that would be
tough.

I do indeed recognize this. And the best bet would probably be the
International Court in The Hague. They have dealt with tough cases
the last couple of years.

He already had a fundamentalist state in Afghanistan so obviously that
didn't work.

Did we ever give him a chance? No, because we were afraid and try to
interfere with it.

We were content to let them oppress women, sentance Christians
to death, and destroy a priceless statute of ancient culture to their hearts
content.

Hmm, Americans and ancient culture ;-)

But it was giving safe haven to al-qaeda did them in.

It's the Al-Qaeda base, not safe haven, because they were there
already for years.

rr

"Rata Rioja" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 02:47:49 GMT, "FLY135" FLY_135(@hot not
not)notmail.com wrote:
Eventually Muslims
are going to have to face reality and not stonewall their own progress
over
false pride. Ignore the false if that bothers you, but if you want pride
then you should earn it by putting your best foot forward and not demand
it
because you need it.

It took our Christian-dominated western world many centuries too, to
see this. If you live in an uneducated world, and the church is the
one which determines your world-vision, yeah, it will take some time.

Well there in no question that the poorer a people are, the more valuable
pride is to their existance. Muslims aren't particularly unique in that
respect. And you are exactly correct in that education and accomplishment
is the generally the way to receive the legitimate respect of others. And
to create a society that you can take pride in.

We were content to let them oppress women, sentance Christians
to death, and destroy a priceless statute of ancient culture to their
hearts
content.

Hmm, Americans and ancient culture ;-)

I did say that we were content to let them do it. So lets not imply
hypocrisy

But it was giving safe haven to al-qaeda did them in.

It's the Al-Qaeda base, not safe haven, because they were there
already for years.

Perhaps we have a different definition of safe haven. The fact that
Al-Qaeda could maintain a base in Afganistan protected by the soveriegnty of
the Taliban is what I mean by "safe haven". And that is precisely what did
the Taliban in.