EU gives $143 MILLION to terrorists

[MSgt]

like I said - black and white.

Israel and Palestine have been doing tit for tat killings even longer than the loyalists and republicans in Northern Ireland. It never goes anywhere just more death.

war will never defeat terrorism, it never has.

Generally speaking, terrorism will never be defeated. However, this is not the goal. History has shown otherwise that terrorism from religious and other groups can be beaten down. The Mongols defeated Islamic suicide attackers (assassins). (How many Christian terror groups exist? There are some, but is it a problem?)

Another problem you are having is that you are still trying to place the issues of Radical Islam as a historical occurrence. The Muslim Brotherhood was created in 1929. Most Islamic terrorist are members. This is very much an isolated time in history.

 

[Willoughby]

How many Christian terror groups exist? There are some, but is it a problem?

it is to the people they are terrorizing! these people include people in:

India (National Liberation Front of Tripura)
Burma (God's Army)
United States (the Order, KKK)
Uganda (Lord's Resistence Army)

 

[MSgt]

it is to the people they are terrorizing! these people include people in:

India (National Liberation Front of Tripura)
Burma (God's Army)
United States (the Order, KKK)
Uganda (Lord's Resistence Army)

Well gee, McVeigh was a problem to some people in Oklahoma too, but I wouldn't place him anywhere near the category that Osama Bin Laden is in. How many of these groups have a civilization cheering for them? Like I said, not really a problem.

Do yourself a favor. Learn about terrorism.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

As an American, I feel said that you think we can't think in gray. I do on most issues, sometimes it is truely a downfall.

So, how do you feel about the Prez's defense policy advisor raising funds (in Washington DC no less) for a terrorist organization?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

not even remotly true look for example at the british counter-isurgency in :

Malayan Emergency - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malayan_Emergency

Funny you should mention it. In this quarter's Parameters this very issue is addresses.


Draining the Swamp: The British Strategy of Population Control
WADE MARKEL
From Parameters, Spring 2006, pp. 35-48.

Thirty years after the end of the Vietnam War, the United States and its Army again find themselves confronted with a tenacious insurgency, this time in Iraq. Given our decidedly mixed record in counterinsurgency operations, we tend to look elsewhere for successful models. Many look to the British, especially their exemplary and thorough victory in Malaya, to provide such a model.1 Commentators cite the British Army’s superior organizational adaptability and flexibility, strategic patience, their predilection for using the minimum force necessary, the relative ease with which they integrated civil and military aspects of national power, and the apparent facility with which they adapted their strategies to local circumstances of geography and culture.

The key element of their success was the effective internment of the Chinese “squatter” population, the segment of Malayan society from which the insurgents almost entirely drew their strength.2 By interning the “squatters” in fortified “New Villages,” the British and their Malayan allies were able to deny the communist insurgents access to recruits, food, and military supplies. It also allowed them to narrow the scope of their intelligence efforts, as the insurgents had to maintain contact with their base under the very noses of the Anglo-Malayan government.

This strategy was liable to abuse. In Kenya, against the contemporary Mau Mau rebellion, the British employed the same strategy as they had in Malaya, in this case interning basically all of the ethnic Kikuyu. The system of detention camps and fortified villages quickly degenerated into what historian Caroline Elkins has called “Britain’s Gulag in Kenya.”3 Eventually, the ensuing scandal forced Britain to grant independence even more rapidly than the accelerating pressures of decolonization would have anyway. Still, the colonial administration was able to defeat a much larger and more widely supported insurgency, more quickly, than it had in Malaya.

A strategy of population control was not invariably effective, however. In Vietnam, the Diem regime’s British-advised and American-supported attempt to implement this strategy, the Strategic Hamlet program, not only failed to weaken the insurgency but actually exacerbated popular resistance. On the other hand, the situation in Vietnam differed significantly from that in Malaya and Kenya. In contrast to the insurgent movements in those two countries, isolated both from external support and concentrated in a socially distinct minority, the Viet Cong enjoyed robust external support from North Vietnam and at least minimal legitimacy among the ethnically homogeneous South Vietnamese. Indeed, it was Diem’s power base, the minority Catholic community, that was in danger of being isolated.
As troubling as it might be, the evidence suggests that the main lesson to be drawn from the British practice of counterinsurgency is that physical control of the contested segment of the population is essential. Further, that control is greatly facilitated when the insurgency’s support is concentrated among a small and relatively unpopular minority of the population.4 When that condition obtains, as it did in Malaya and Kenya, a strategy of population control can succeed. When conditions are different, as they were in Vietnam, this strategy will fail. In Iraq today, the situation resembles that which obtained in Malaya and Kenya more than it resembles conditions in Vietnam. A strategy of population control could therefore be applied, provided it was modified to account for local circumstances and the evolution in international mores.
​

 

[Willoughby]

How many of these groups have a civilization cheering for them? Like I said, not really a problem.

Do yourself a favor. Learn about terrorism.

learn about somewhere else except america!

the point is that the sort of islamic terrorism that we saw in london/madrid/nyc etc is not cheered on by a civilization...if you think that the whole or even or a majority support then you are very misguided

 

[MSgt]

learn about somewhere else except america!

You obviously don't know who I am. I'll let you stew in ignorance. Perhaps reading my posts will enlighten you to know how much I do know about "somewhere else except America."

the point is that the sort of islamic terrorism that we saw in london/madrid/nyc etc is not cheered on by a civilization...if you think that the whole or even or a majority support then you are very misguided

Here we go again.:roll:

There are 1.2 Billion Muslims Worldwide.
Muslims are the majority in 63 countries.
90% of worlds current conflicts involve Muslim countries.

Radical Muslims account for between 1% to 20% of Islam. That equals between 12 and 150 million people. Not all Radical Muslims carry guns or strap bombs to themselves. The majority are the "sea within which the Radical Islamist terrorists swim." This is, indeed, a civilization that cheers for their "martyrs."

Once again, I suggest you study the subject before embarking on a debate about it.

 

[128shot]

So, how do you feel about the Prez's defense policy advisor raising funds (in Washington DC no less) for a terrorist organization?

I'm not familiar with the story...


However, I suspect his intentions are better than his actions, if you are to paint this simple picture.

 

[cnredd]

You obviously don't know who I am. I'll let you stew in ignorance. Perhaps reading my posts will enlighten you to know how much I do know about "somewhere else except America."


Here we go again.:roll:

There are 1.2 Billion Muslims Worldwide.
Muslims are the majority in 63 countries.
90% of worlds current conflicts involve Muslim countries.

Radical Muslims account for between 1% to 20% of Islam. That equals between 12 and 150 million people. Not all Radical Muslims carry guns or strap bombs to themselves. The majority are the "sea within which the Radical Islamist terrorists swim." This is, indeed, a civilization that cheers for their "martyrs."

Once again, I suggest you study the subject before embarking on a debate about it.

Your reference to "the sea" is right on target, Gunny...

I just watched a show on Discovery Times called "Suicide Bomber: Cult of Death"...It tried to analize the thought process behind it...

The biggest factor is simply a perceived "glory"...

What they call "martyrs" are people put on the highest pedestal...The guy(really a teenager) considered the first "martyr" of Iran had his cemetery made into a shrine...His picture adorns public buildings...His likeness was placed on school backpacks to be given out to all students...

That is the biggest problem with terrorists...They are seen as positive role models in their own community...:roll:

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I'm not familiar with the story...
However, I suspect his intentions are better than his actions, if you are to paint this simple picture.

There's a terrorist organization that helped Saddam fill the graves in Iraq. It's called the Mojahedin-e Khalq. Richard Perle helped them raise money. The Treasury Dept has instructions not to mess w/ them even though they are a terrorist organization that's raising funds here in Washington DC.

So, any explanation of how there are 'good terrorists' and 'bad terrorists' in a black and white world would be greatly appreciated.

 

[Red_Dave]

There's a terrorist organization that helped Saddam fill the graves in Iraq. It's called the Mojahedin-e Khalq. Richard Perle helped them raise money. The Treasury Dept has instructions not to mess w/ them even though they are a terrorist organization that's raising funds here in Washington DC.

So, any explanation of how there are 'good terrorists' and 'bad terrorists' in a black and white world would be greatly appreciated.

Nelson Mandela is one example of a good terroist.

 

[128shot]

There's a terrorist organization that helped Saddam fill the graves in Iraq. It's called the Mojahedin-e Khalq. Richard Perle helped them raise money. The Treasury Dept has instructions not to mess w/ them even though they are a terrorist organization that's raising funds here in Washington DC.

So, any explanation of how there are 'good terrorists' and 'bad terrorists' in a black and white world would be greatly appreciated.

So what is a terrorist? Thats a better question.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

So what is a terrorist? Thats a better question.

Better question than what?

Are the standards for designation as a foreign terrorist organization enough?

Legal Criteria for Designation under Section 219 of the INA as amended

1. It must be a foreign organization.
2. The organization must engage in terrorist activity, as defined in section 212 (a)(3)(B) of the INA (8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)),* or terrorism, as defined in section 140(d)(2) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989 (22 U.S.C. § 2656f(d)(2)),** or retain the capability and intent to engage in terrorist activity or terrorism.
3. The organization’s terrorist activity or terrorism must threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security (national defense, foreign relations, or the economic interests) of the United States.

Legal Ramifications of Designation

1. It is unlawful for a person in the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to knowingly provide "material support or resources" to a designated FTO. (The term "material support or resources" is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b)(1) as " any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel (1 or more individuals who maybe or include oneself), and transportation, except medicine or religious materials.” 18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b)(2) provides that for these purposes “the term ‘training’ means instruction or teaching designed to impart a specific skill, as opposed to general knowledge.” 18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b)(3) further provides that for these purposes the term ‘expert advice or assistance’ means advice or assistance derived from scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge.’’
2. Representatives and members of a designated FTO, if they are aliens, are inadmissible to and, in certain circumstances, removable from the United States (see 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182 (a)(3)(B)(i)(IV)-(V), 1227 (a)(1)(A)).
3. Any U.S. financial institution that becomes aware that it has possession of or control over funds in which a designated FTO or its agent has an interest must retain possession of or control over the funds and report the funds to the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
​

 

[MSgt]

Your reference to "the sea" is right on target, Gunny...

I just watched a show on Discovery Times called "Suicide Bomber: Cult of Death"...It tried to analize the thought process behind it...

The biggest factor is simply a perceived "glory"...

What they call "martyrs" are people put on the highest pedestal...The guy(really a teenager) considered the first "martyr" of Iran had his cemetery made into a shrine...His picture adorns public buildings...His likeness was placed on school backpacks to be given out to all students...

That is the biggest problem with terrorists...They are seen as positive role models in their own community...:roll:

Somebody asked me how anyone can fathom the mind of the suicide bomber on another thread. I'll re-post and add some more here....

Suicide bombers exist because they are desperate. A paradox of the Information Age is that it's simultaneously the new age of superstition. As calcified social orders collapse under the pressures of global change, those who feel most threatened flee into debased, occult religion. Increasingly, fanaticism finds outlet in shedding the blood not only of unbelievers, but also of co-religionists whose beliefs are seen as imperfect. The suicide bomber views himself (more rarely, herself) as fulfilling a divine mission whose execution will be rewarded in paradise ("apocalyptic" terrorist).

The obvious forerunners of today's Islamist fanatics were the Assassins, the notorious cult that operated from Persia through Syria in the 11th and 12th centuries. Armed only with sacramental knives and patience, the Assassins terrorized governments by killing sultans and grand viziers. It took the invading Mongols — the all-time masters of counter-insurgency warfare — to destroy the Assassins in their mountain strongholds.

But assassination became commonplace in the Muslim world thereafter. The Assassins came from an off-shoot sect of Shiite Islam. Today's suicide bombers are overwhelmingly Sunnis, but the pattern of waging an asymmetrical conflict through carefully planned murders is a tradition, not an aberration. (This is a culture.)

Except for 9/11, suicide bombers have conducted their missions abroad. That's going to change, but it's a credit to the patriotism and decency of American Muslims that none of our fellow citizens has strapped on a bomb and walked into a Wal-Mart. Nonetheless, our enemies will find a way to bring their deadly campaign back to our doorsteps. The suicide bomber is so powerful a weapon that not even the terrorists have realized its full potential. We need to prepare for the suicide-bomber blitzkrieg, when murderous zealots come at us in waves.

Deplore his act though we rightly do, the suicide bomber who imagines himself a defender of his threatened faith and humiliated people is the extremist equivalent of the soldier we revere for throwing himself on a grenade to save his comrades' lives. Our rules for self-sacrifice are different, but the psychology is uncomfortably familiar. The results may differ terribly, but the motivation has filial roots. We see only the indiscriminate carnage, the apparent madness. Until we recognize his crazed valor, we cannot understand the suicide bomber. And it's much harder to defeat an enemy you don't understand. This is why so many do not understand our tactics to face these Radicals who cheer and protect their "martyrs."

Suicide bombers are recruited from the ranks of troubled souls, from those who find mundane reality overwhelming and terrifying. The suicide bomber longs for release from the insecurities of his daily experience. He is fleeing from life every bit as much as he's rushing toward paradise. He dreads women, sin and doubt. Hypnotized by faith and excited to ecstasy, he can walk into a children's clinic and press a detonator. No heart-rending child's face will stop him. His god will forgive the innocent. Nothing matters but the divine will as interpreted by the masters of terror. We have faced enemies more dangerous, but none so implacable.

The world's great strategic struggle of this century is between those who believe in a generous, loving god — in any religion — and those who serve a punitive, merciless deity. The suicide bomber has chosen his side.

Most Americans have no idea just what we are facing out there. They lack the knowledge and the study. When they whine about shutting down Gitmo and other places and scream idealogic rants of how "we are supposed to be better that they are," thy do not fully understand what they are asking for. We cannot face these people with kid gloves and nor can we "wait" until they "prove" to be terrorists. By the time there is the kind of proof the "Global Left" want, the terrorist and his victims are already dead. Our laws are not adequite enough to face today's threat.

 

[128shot]

Better question than what?

Are the standards for designation as a foreign terrorist organization enough?

Legal Criteria for Designation under Section 219 of the INA as amended

1. It must be a foreign organization.
2. The organization must engage in terrorist activity, as defined in section 212 (a)(3)(B) of the INA (8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(3)(B)),* or terrorism, as defined in section 140(d)(2) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1988 and 1989 (22 U.S.C. § 2656f(d)(2)),** or retain the capability and intent to engage in terrorist activity or terrorism.
3. The organization’s terrorist activity or terrorism must threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security (national defense, foreign relations, or the economic interests) of the United States.

Legal Ramifications of Designation

1. It is unlawful for a person in the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to knowingly provide "material support or resources" to a designated FTO. (The term "material support or resources" is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b)(1) as " any property, tangible or intangible, or service, including currency or monetary instruments or financial securities, financial services, lodging, training, expert advice or assistance, safehouses, false documentation or identification, communications equipment, facilities, weapons, lethal substances, explosives, personnel (1 or more individuals who maybe or include oneself), and transportation, except medicine or religious materials.” 18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b)(2) provides that for these purposes “the term ‘training’ means instruction or teaching designed to impart a specific skill, as opposed to general knowledge.” 18 U.S.C. § 2339A(b)(3) further provides that for these purposes the term ‘expert advice or assistance’ means advice or assistance derived from scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge.’’
2. Representatives and members of a designated FTO, if they are aliens, are inadmissible to and, in certain circumstances, removable from the United States (see 8 U.S.C. §§ 1182 (a)(3)(B)(i)(IV)-(V), 1227 (a)(1)(A)).
3. Any U.S. financial institution that becomes aware that it has possession of or control over funds in which a designated FTO or its agent has an interest must retain possession of or control over the funds and report the funds to the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
​

So threatening our stability is a terrorist act?


I guess there is a terrorist in the white house....

 

[Simon W. Moon]

So threatening our stability is a terrorist act?

Where'd you get this? ^

And have you formed an opinion about how this squares with a black-and-white world view?

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Section 212(a)(3)(B) of the INA defines "terrorist activity" to mean: "any activity which is unlawful under the laws of the place where it is committed (or which, if committed in the United States, would be unlawful under the laws of the United States or any State) and which involves any of the following:

(I) The highjacking or sabotage of any conveyance (including an aircraft, vessel, or vehicle).

(II) The seizing or detaining, and threatening to kill, injure, or continue to detain, another individual in order to compel a third person (including a governmental organization) to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the individual seized or detained.

(III) A violent attack upon an internationally protected person (as defined in section 1116(b)(4) of title 18, United States Code) or upon the liberty of such a person.

(IV) An assassination.

(V) The use of any--

(a) biological agent, chemical agent, or nuclear weapon or device, or

(b) explosive, firearm, or other weapon or dangerous device (other than for mere personal monetary gain), with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.

(VI) A threat, attempt, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing."

Other pertinent portions of section 212(a)(3)(B) are set forth below:

(iv) Engage in Terrorist Activity Defined

As used in this chapter [chapter 8 of the INA], the term ‘engage in terrorist activity’ means in an individual capacity or as a member of an organization–

1. to commit or to incite to commit, under circumstances indicating an intention to cause death or serious bodily injury, a terrorist activity;
2. to prepare or plan a terrorist activity;
3. to gather information on potential targets for terrorist activity;
4. to solicit funds or other things of value for–

(aa) a terrorist activity;

(bb) a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(I) or (vi)(II); or

(cc) a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the solicitor can demonstrate that he did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the solicitation would further the organization’s terrorist activity;
1. to solicit any individual–

(aa) to engage in conduce otherwise described in this clause;

(bb) for membership in terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(I) or

(vi)(II); or

(cc) for membership in a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the solicitor can demonstrate that he did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the solicitation would further the organization’s terrorist activity; or
2. to commit an act that the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support, including a safe house, transportation, communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial benefit, false documentation or identification, weapons (including chemical, biological, or radiological weapons), explosives, or training–

(aa) for the commission of a terrorist activity;

(bb) to any individual who the actor knows, or reasonably should know, has committed or plans to commit a terrorist activity;

(cc) to a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(I) or (vi)(II); or

(dd) to a terrorist organization described in clause (vi)(III), unless the actor can demonstrate that he did not know, and should not reasonably have known, that the act would further the organization’s terrorist activity.

This clause shall not apply to any material support the alien afforded to an organization or individual that has committed terrorist activity, if the Secretary of State, after consultation with the Attorney General, or the Attorney General, after consultation with the Secretary of State, concludes in his sole unreviewable discretion, that that this clause should not apply."

"(v) Representative Defined

As used in this paragraph, the term ‘representative’ includes an officer, official, or spokesman of an organization, and any person who directs, counsels, commands, or induces an organization or its members to engage in terrorist activity.

1. Terrorist Organization Defined

As used in clause (i)(VI) and clause (iv), the term ‘terrorist organization’ means an organization--

1. designated under section 219 [8 U.S.C. § 1189];
2. otherwise designated, upon publication in the Federal Register, by the Secretary of State in consultation with or upon the request of the Attorney General, as a terrorist organization, after finding that the organization engages in the activities described in subclause (I), (II), or (III) of clause (iv), or that the organization provides material support to further terrorist activity; or
3. that is a group of two or more individuals, whether organized or not, which engages in the activities described in subclause (I), (II), or (III) of clause (iv).
​

I don't see threatening our stability on the list

 

[128shot]

Where'd you get this? ^

And have you formed an opinion about how this squares with a black-and-white world view?

The organization’s terrorist activity or terrorism must threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the national security (national defense, foreign relations, or the economic interests) of the United States.



I can read between lines ;-)

 

[MSgt]

So what is a terrorist? Thats a better question.

Joint Publication (JP) 1-02, Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, defines terrorism as "the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological."

 

[Simon W. Moon]

I can read between lines ;-)

And have you formed an opinion about how this squares with a black-and-white world view?
Is support for a terrorist organization black? Or is it white?

 

[Willoughby]

An assassination.

so both sides in the middle east are as it then

 

[128shot]

And have you formed an opinion about how this squares with a black-and-white world view?
Is support for a terrorist organization black? Or is it white?

Its white. Clearly, I can put a color on this.

That is a strange question...



Some things are clear cut, but overwhelming majority of issues don't have such a black and white attitude. I think we can all agree fundamentally killing is wrong, however you can debate when there is an exception to this rule, for example.

 

[Calm2Chaos]

LOL, even the French special terrorist units have begun to refer to the great British city as Londanistan! No, I think I would prefer our ports in the hands of the UAE, rather then in British hands, and that statement makes me sad.

Geezzzz it's pretty bad when the french can make fun of you and not be worried...LOL

 

[Calm2Chaos]

Re: EU to give $143 million to Palestinian Authority

This was a good decision. It helps the Palestinian Authority to pay the current bills for the last two months to Palestinian and Israeli power stations and it helps keep running humanitarian work. Stopping payments to Palestinian Authority would be not good.

Long as they don't get any money from the US I could care less who pays them. You want to buy your security from those with there finger on the trigger feel free. But sooner or later that finger is going to get itchy and the price is going to go up

 

[Willoughby]

Long as they don't get any money from the US I could care less who pays them. You want to buy your security from those with there finger on the trigger feel free. But sooner or later that finger is going to get itchy and the price is going to go up

a bit paranoid are we??