gdp's Comments

Antiwar.com Original Articles : Why Are We In Afghanistan?

Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:11:46 +0000

When the question relates to why the US does anything that it does miltarily, there is one issue that cannot be ignored. I did a "find on this page" IE explorer search for the word "Israel" in Raimondo's article, and there is not a single hit. Therefore, I didn't even bother reading the article. It must be useless. The reason why we are in Afghanistan? To destabilize Pakistan for our Israeli masters: http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2009/08/12/ex...

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:59:33 +0000

"What evidence is there of this? " query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E4D6173DF930A25754C0A9659C8B63 From a National Post article: “In 1979, the MEK announced that, ‘After the Shah, it's America's turn.’ And that same day, MEK members took part in the storming of the U.S. embassy in Tehran. U.S. hostages were held captive, with MEK help, for 444 days”: Reprinted here: iran-interlink.org/files/News/April04/NationalPost170404.htm

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:56:25 +0000

"What evidence is there of this?" http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.htm... http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.htm... http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/... http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.htm... http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.htm...

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:55:18 +0000

"What evidence is there of this?" http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1231/p10s01-woiq.ht... http://www.hrw.org/legacy/backgrounder/mena/iran0... http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2005/may/31/iran.... http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/1231/p10s01-woiq.ht...

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:46:54 +0000

In a background paper for UN speech to be given by Bush, the White house said this: “Iraq shelters terrorist groups including the Mujahedin-e-Khalq Organization (MKO), which has used terrorist violence against Iran and in the 1970s was responsible for killing several U.S. military personnel and U.S. civilians.”: http://usiraq.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?question... Funny how Iraq was evil to shelter them, but it was OK for the US to do so.

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:41:54 +0000

Even Front Page magazine acknowledges that the MEK was part of the hostage affair: “MEK members actively took part in the 1979 seizure of the U.S. embassy in Tehran, according to a U.S. government report.” http://www.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTI... Maybe that's a crappy source, huh. How about this one?: aei.org/publications/pubID.23674,filter.all/pub_detail.asp

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:38:51 +0000

(continued from above) From the report: “MEK perpetrated bombings and assassinations, after the aborted maiden effort in 1971, resumed in 1972. The organization’s targets included US military advisors stationed in Iran. For example, the MEK claimed responsibility for the assassination of US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Lewis Hawkins in 1973, the assassination of US Air Force Colonel Paul Schaeffer in 1975, and the assassination of US Air Force Lieutenant Colonel Jack Turner, also in 1975. The MEK also targeted US civilians associated with defense projects (five killed in 1976)…the MEK was also intimately involved in the takeover of the American Embassy in Tehran in 1979. Eyewitnesses and MEK documents indicate that the MEK led the assault on the Embassy and then pleaded with Khomeini not to engage in dialogue with the United States government, nor release the American hostages seized during the action. In fact, Congressional testimony indicates that Rajavi insisted to Khomeini that there was much more to gain by holding the hostages than by releasing them."

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:38:20 +0000

"What evidence is there of this?" Do you know a guy named John McCain? At his request, the FBI wrote a report on the MEK which was given to the 103rd Congress (Go to thomas.gov/ , click on Congressional Record, then on 103rd Congress, and search “MEK”. Results = “Supporting the Right Opposition Groups in Iran and Iraq”) The following (in the next post) is from that report. (Continued)

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 03:36:01 +0000

The NCRI is the same thing as the MEK, nitwit: fas.org/irp/world/para/mek-usca070904.pdf That's like OBL saying that he is not a terrorist. The NCRI is a front for the MEK, and they are listed as a terrorist group as well. Also, from the Economist magazine: “A front for the Mujahideen, the National Council of Resistance of Iran…” http://nucnews.net/nucnews/2003nn/0306nn/030613nn...

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 02:06:18 +0000

I looked up your "eradicate" quote in Lexis Nexis. The article was about an SLA soldier that was killed in the Jezzine region, and also that Elias Asmar and the body of Naji Kenaan would be handed over to the International Committee of the Red Cross by Hezbollah. Lexis Nexis includes Lebanese papers such as the Daily Star. Dozens of papers and wire services covered the above incident, but only one source had your quote, or anything from Nasrallah. That source was a Jewish newspaper quoting the "Lebanese press". Can you find anything real?

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Fri, 31 Jul 2009 01:49:41 +0000

You have a point. If we are going to address wrongful abduction of other peoples property and land, how far back should we go? I have not given that too much thought. Considering that Israel's takeover of Palestinian land falls under current international law, I certainly think that qualifies. Let's at least honor the present laws the world lives under. I have always thought native Americans should be compensated as well. There is a proposal to give them 5 or 6 Midwest states. I would agree with that. The Americans living there now would have to be compensated with land in the remaining US. As far as the Jews from two thousand years ago, that is obviously out. What happened to the native Americans and Palestinians is well-documented. Believe whatever you like, but the Bible stories are fantasy. If I say that me and my friends have a religion called Xylon, and we have our own religious book that says we lived in Palestine 5 thousand years ago, are we justified in killing Jews and kicking them out of Israel? Try to be rational.

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 22:18:29 +0000

"What evidence do you have that he's wrong?" As a start, you can look at the quotes I gave below about Hezbollah regarding forcibly spreading Islam. Hezbollah disagrees with your mathematician. I know, they are lying. Taqiyya. All psychotics have their circular reasoning that keeps out the facts.

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 21:02:32 +0000

Zionists are people who established a state on another people's territory and want that state to expand. I think it was wrong when Europeans took Native American territory, and native Americans were justified in resisting it. But if Native Americans decided they wanted to throw me out of my house by force because they lived there centuries ago, I would also think it was wrong. I would understand their sentiment, but at some point humans have to stop taking other peoples land. I don't care if some Jews have some fable that says they lived in Palestine two thousand years ago. Two thousand years ago has no bearing on today. For native Americans, hundreds of years ago has no bearing on today. Humans must stop "subjugating'dominating" each other. I know. Jews and Americans don't do this.

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:46:40 +0000

Hey, I reloaded the page from the main page and found more replies. Cool. You gave me a comment written by a mathemetician about Islamic law. The comment is completely unsourced. OK. Here is my reply to Lang: "My mother says you are wrong". What my mother says has just as much weight as what your mathematician says. When I research a subject, I look at what experts in the field say, and what current and past Islamic leaders say. What a mathematician from the University of Kansas says has no more bearing than what my mother says. Unless, or course, he gives a reason to back up his statement. I looked up your quote in his book on Amazon. Lang gives no reason. No source. This is the type of "evidence" JW uses to "prove" all its statements. At least you gave the source of your quote. I had to do it myself for the JW reader quote below.

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:06:51 +0000

Is he wrong? Yes. What evidence do you have that he's wrong? Just started the research on this one. You'll have to wait. Sorry. I've spent about three months on the "gates of ijtihad" nonsense, and need a few more weeks to finish that paper. Then I'll get to to your jihad stance, which has even less substance than the "gates' issue. So we only start wars against groups that want to subjugate and dominate us and have a credible chance to do so. Now I understand. I guess we're lucky that China and Russia have no domination plans for us. Remember when the Sandanistas were going to dominate and subjugate us? That was really scary, because they were only a two day drive from Texas.

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:40:15 +0000

Saad-Ghorayeb says that within Hezbollah: “legitimacy has been conferred on secular states…and withheld from Muslim ones…It follows that the overthrow of secular states is not the underlying purpose of jihad (holy war). The cornerstone of Hizbu’lah’s doctrine on political violence is the principle of the non-compulsion of Islam. Thus, there is no religious sanction for rebellion against secular states such as Lebanon just because they are not ‘governed by divine laws’. This belief is grounded un Hizbu’llah’s reading of the Shari’a (Islamic law) which deems rebellion and civil disobedience ‘unacceptable’. In light of this Islamic concept, the party feels duty-bound to ‘preserve public order’ and consequently views civil peace as a ‘red line’ which cannot be crossed.”

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:36:39 +0000

Here are some more quotes from Saad-Ghorayeb's book: “The resistance to the Israeli occupation therefore emerges as a ‘national cause’, ‘goal’ or ‘duty’, as well as a religious one, which is waged on behalf of ‘all Lebanese and Arabs’, as well as all Muslims. By extension, Hizbu’llah’s Resistance is not only an Islamic one, as its name suggests, but also a ‘Lebanese’ and ‘nationalist’ resistance, ‘whose jihad is Lebanese’. To substantiate such a claim, in late 1997 the party established the “Lebanese Brigades of Resistance to the Israeli Occupation’, a multi-sectarian military adjunct to its Islamic Resistance forces.” p. 84

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:32:17 +0000

When you give a quote, it is cutomary to give the source (I did not do so for the Spencer quote I gave above, but anyone with Google can easily look it up). The Nasrallah quote you give is from a book by Amal Saad-Ghorayeb called “Hizbu’llah, Politics and Religion.” The quote is on page 170, and is from an interview that the author had with Muhammed Fnaysh on Aug 15, 1997. The quote is second hand, and there is nothing to show its accuracy. If you replace the word "Jew" with "Zionist", I would agree. Since you bring up a quote by Saad-Ghorayeb, maybe we should discuss some more quotes from that book. The book is excellent, and is recommended reading by Martin Kramer. Here is a direct quote of Fnaysh, and not of him quoting someone esle: “Since [Lebanese] society is not an Islamic one and Hizbu’llah is part of this society, it has to demand of itself what it demands of others. No one can impose a state on others and expect to succeed. If an Islamic state were established by force, then it would no longer be Islamic and would lose all legitimacy.” p. 49 (continued)

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:18:27 +0000

"So Dave, which interpretation of Islam do you believe in? " Neither. I am not a Muslim, nor do I follow any religion. "Which one do you think is the traditional/orthodox/mainstream interpretation? " This is three different questions. The traitional view encourages the spread of Islam, including by war. The mainstream view today does not. I understand that you disagree with this. "Wouldn't you agree that someone who supports/encourages your domination and subjugation is your enemy? " Yes, I would agree. So why isn't the enemy "those who supports/encourages domination and subjugation"? Are people who follow thousand-year-old Islamic beliefs (or those who use those beliefs as motivational techniques) the only people on the planet that supports/encourages domination and subjugation? Why not have a war against this whole group, rather than a subset of it?

Jihad Watch : Jihad Watch: Iraqi troops attack Iranian group opposed to the mullahs\' regime

Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:47:00 +0000

Maybe Iraq raided Ashraf because the MEK was intimately involved with the US hostage incident during the Iranian revolution. Maybe Iraq wanted to get the MEK for what they did to the US back then. I guess Iraq is a puppet of the US since they are retaliating against those involved in taking US hostages.