How to end terrorism

[Timber Loftis]

To Stratos -- bet we can build mavericks faster than they can build TV antennas.

Rokc: what part of WAR on terror don't you understand? If they are a news station that airs programming preaching jihad, they have ceased to be neutral. Besides, screw 'em, what do I care about a frikkin message? "Messages" and other types of soft coercion have gone out the window -- or did you miss that? The Texan in office has screwed us royally on any sort of "soft" way to deal with terrorism, so it's time to embrace the only means we have left, which is KILL THEM.

[Timber Loftis]

If it works there maybe we'll try it on UPN and the WB Fall Lineups.

Terrorist efforts if ever there were ones. But, not Top Model. Take my house, take my car, but don't take my TV and America's Next Top Model. [img]graemlins/heee.gif[/img]

[Dirty Meg]

Al Jazeera is certainly more objective and impartial than the Murdoch-owned media. They broadcast speeches by Osama Bin-Laden and his goat-poking ilk, but so do US and UK networks. They broadcast pro-terrorism propaganda because it is news, not because they support it.

[Morgeruat]

Originally posted by Oblivion437: quote: Originally posted by Timber Loftis: Sorry, I don't see it that way. If you give a radical muslim air time on the weekend to do a show where he calls for fatwa, you deserve a few radar-guided mavericks up your ass.

I agree, besides, doesn't giving aid and support to known terrorists violate some conventions? [/QUOTE]the problem is getting certain groups to acknowledge that certain acts are terrorism.

[LordKathen]

Two words, glass ashtray.

[bjorn]

My experience of Al Jazeera is that it do not, in any way, promote terrorism, they show you different sides of the story in an objective way. Their type of journalism is (according to me) far better than that of most of our western media. Al Jazeera fills the role of the moderator of the debate/conflict, which is basically what media should be doing.

Western media often adopts expressions for traditions and values practised in different cultures and uses them to discribe things that have nothing to do with the original meaning of the word.

For example Jihad. Jihad is indeed a holy war but to a great majority of muslims it means a holy war against your own primitive urges not against other religions or cultures. True, terriorist occasionally use the word but media should educate (where other education have failed) as well as report to prevent feeding the biased assumptions that are so ridiculously common these days.

[ 09-14-2004, 02:53 PM: Message edited by: bjorn ]

[Morgeruat]

Jihad is a holy war against your inner evil urges? that's why islamic scholars when writing about it tend to spend about 1 page describing peaceful jihad (as an inner struggle) per 8-10 pages of jihad as violent war to spread the religion. It's something they'll tell you to keep you from suspecting the truth, until they've had time to marshall their forces and convert you at swordpoint, take a historical look, ask about the Caliphate, and research the religion for yourself instead of listening to someone's (my own included) smear campaign against (or for) it.

[ 09-14-2004, 04:22 PM: Message edited by: Morgeruat ]

[bjorn]

and research the religion for yourself

That is what i have been doing (other religions included) for the better part of my life.

I'm very much against just relaying opinions. I make my own and back them up with research and facts.

[Morgeruat]

In that case my respect for you has just increased by several degrees [img]graemlins/thumbsup.gif[/img]