Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by MSSC, May 4, 2007.
The heart of the site is the forum area, including:
It's a problem of our own creation. Had we not embraced multi-culturalism to the extent that the liberal extablishment based the running of the county on 'shame of empire' rather than 'pride of nation', we would have an integrated British population rather than having fostered a 6% minority who feel themselves to be Muslim first and (perhaps) British a long way later.
How great a divide have we created, if even those who feel that salafist islamist terrorism is morally repugnant, feel more comfortable staying silient than speaking out, not because of intimidation, but because of their alinenation from mainstream society?
Fantastic reply to a fantastic topic. I work and commute between Leeds and London and with relevance can understand both sides of the argument. Young Asian males are stuck between a rock and a hard place in the North of England. That, obviously is no excuse for individuals to latch onto a perceived common cause in the vain hope of attaining a feeling of "belonging" and "direction" but I see every day, a plethora of white/black/asian lads mostly with a vacant stare and an obvious discomfort on the tubes and trains of our country. Your statement about "the shame of empire rather than "pride of nation" is pretty profound mate. A schoolfriend of mine works at a college in the north teaching a public services course. He is a vet of Telic 1 and Op Herrick as a Royal Marine and he devotes his time to these lads who are predominately black and asian. His opinion is that there is no sense of belonging for these lads anymore. British born they might be but to be spurned by the very people that invited their forefathers here to maintain their economy and bolster their industry must sting a bit. Im of the assumption that if the tides were turned and a fundamentalist christian group actively encouraged young skint and jobless white males into commiting acts of violence by way of the distortion and misinterpratation of bible passages we would see a tide of reverse secularism.
al-Qaeda is not the name of the terrorist orginisation it is the name of their mission.
I heard this last year. If it is so what name do they call themselves?
Al-Qaeda translates roughly as 'the base' and refers variously to the mission assumed by UBL to facilitate and fund Muj moving into AFG during the jihad, the database of those individuals held in Pakistan at the time and the ideology developed during, and particularly after, the Afghan jihad against the Soviets by UBL and Dr Ayman Al-Zawahiri, amongst others.
In Western terms 'Al-Qaeda' is more akin to a brand - which is ironic considering militant Salafi Islam's attitudes to globalisation - any number of national militant political organisations have bolted themselves onto the AQ brand, Zawahiri in Iraq was a clear example. So, there is some truth in what you say, but there's other stuff going on there as well.
Separate names with a comma.