Quana: I Told You So!

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

"It is a direct consequence of reality smacking you hard in the face I am afraid."

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Terrorists were in the final stages of planning to blow up planes heading to the United States, U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said Thursday.
The plans involving flights from the United Kingdom were "suggestive of an al Qaeda plot," he said.

British police said they had arrested 21 suspects in the plot to blow up passenger jets flying between the United Kingdom and the United States.
The effects of the plot rippled across the globe Thursday."




The real reason is because my argument stands and you are firmly in the wrong. It is a direct consequence of reality smacking you hard in the face I am afraid.



I am not aware of any such evidence. If you can provide some, do. So far all you have done is talking about F-16s and pictures of women in front of rubble.



I am not going to the word of an unnamed blogger on trust. Provide evidence to back up that claim. I can find more evidence that the IDF is censoring the media than you have presented to support your Green Helmet Conspiracy Theory.

Your argument gets more shaky by the day, I'm afraid.
Myself, Melanie Phillips and a few more so-called "doom-mongers" have warned repeatedly that the U.K. has allowed extremist, Jihadist organizations to become established, especially in London and Birmingham. Every time, we're hissed at and sniggered at, even on BBC political-debates.


No one is denying that those folks are out there. The sniggers and derision are at your inadequate understanding of motivation. I can't speak for all of the angry Muslims out there, but in *all* the cases that I am aware of the motivation behind their actions is retaliation against Judeo-Christian aggression. This is supported by research that was conducted by Robert Pape of the University of Chicago (which I have mentioned here before) http://www.amconmag.com/2005_07_18/article.html.

Take note :
"Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism, the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies over there, if you would, is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us."

Bearing in mind that he has studied thousands of attacks I think his judgement carries substantially more weight than your and Mel P's claims.


Every time, of course, we turn the same circle round, with you stating there is no terrorist threat to the U.K. or coming from the U.K. and yet time and time again we see who is right and who is wrong - and it ain't Melanie Phillips.


Liar. I accept that there is a terrorist threat, but I believe that the threat is far less than it is hyped up to be. Statistically I am far more likely to snuff it from road accidents, falling down the stairs, a drunken lout attacking me, a mugger attacking me, going to hospital for a routine treatment, an adverse reaction to prescription medication or even cancer.

Sure, I accept some of risk is reduced because the attack are prevented, but that is a pretty slim hope because a terrorist only has to get "lucky" once, the police have to be lucky 100% of the time. The key is to remove the motivation for the attacks, and in the case of massacring Muslims and ripping their countries apart that is pretty easy to stop.

If you like I am resigned to the fact that there will be attacks, but I feel that they are a relatively unlikely to happen compared to being hit by a car (as you know yourself).


I recall you saying before the 7/7 attacks there would never be a terrorist attack in this country.


Liar. You have not provided a quote because you just made that up.


After the attack took place, you said it was the IRA.


Liar. You have not provided a quote because you just made that up.

Qana did happen. Those kids were killed by the IDF bombing wantonly and indiscriminately.

"It is a direct consequence of reality smacking you hard in the face I am afraid."


That's one *new* Plot. How about the other four you mentioned that you haven't bothered to tell us about ?

"The sniggers and derision are at your inadequate understanding of motivation."

The sniggers and derision seem to be ongoing. :( Melanie Phillips is an absolute tiny minority in this country. I recently saw her on Newsnight being hissed at when she spoke of the threat of terrorism. She was openly mocked.

"I am aware of the motivation behind their actions is retaliation against Judeo-Christian aggression. This is supported by research that was conducted by Robert Pape of the University of Chicago."

I'm well aware there is no such thing ever as one party being totally right and the other party totally wrong. Neither do I make the claim I myself am totally right or know everything there is to know. In fact, Muhammad Ali put it very well when he stressed Ku Klux Klan and white slave traders carried out terrible crimes the same as Islamic extremists.
As I said repeatedly, I don't have any axe to grind against everyday decent Moslems like Amir Khan and am well aware the Islamofascism movement is an "extreme" variant of Islam - that thousands of moslems want nothing to do with.
Also, you have moderate moslem countries such as Egypt, of course.
Back to the point: You can't justify terrorism carried out by groups who hide in the shadows and wear no uniform on the basis they have a gripe against Jews or Christians. If the west was really so terrible and corrupt, how come thousands of migrants from the Middle East want to live in France, the U.K. or the U.S.?
O.K. there is Iraq which was a misguided war, I think. But then again Clinton defended Moslems in Serbia as I recall. The U.S. also gave millions of dollars to Middle Eastern countries, even backing up the Palestinians economically.

"Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism, the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies over there, if you would, is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us."

I think you're very misguided here. The Islamo fascism movement isn't really just about defence at all and this is where the wool has been pulled over your eyes. They specifically want Jews out of Israel completely. They want to see Jerusalem as an Islamic capital. Also, some factions seek the total destruction of the U.S. Other factions want to see Sharia Law established in Europe.
Why do you think George Galloway was attacked not so long ago during the elections? The people who wanted his head, so to speak, made it clear democracy was not part of the deal. Galloway required police protection and went on to thank the police. Even Galloway called these peope extremists.
There are thousands of extremists who don't want democracy, hate Israel, promote Islamicisation of Europe and a global Islamic order. They exist, I'm afraid and apologising for their cause isn't going to help.

"Bearing in mind that he has studied thousands of attacks I think his judgement carries substantially more weight than your and Mel P's claims."

Melanie Phillips knows a heck of a lot about this stuff. She's been warning the Government over here for years and recently she's been in the U.S. on Fox TV where she again warned about the threat from extremists based in London.

"Liar. I accept that there is a terrorist threat, but I believe that the threat is far less than it is hyped up to be."

You also told me many months back there would never be a terrorist attack in the U.K. and you weren't alone. The same opinion was aired on the Beeb. If the threat is "far less hyped" what do you call Madrid, Bali, New York, London and Israel, for that matter?

"Statistically I am far more likely to snuff it from road accidents..."

On that one, I do agree. I've been "creamed" twice now by car-drivers and I confess the odds for being bumped off by a four wheeled taxi driver are very high.

Even so, terrorism remains a serious threat that has to be acted upon.






No one is denying that those folks are out there. The sniggers and derision are at your inadequate understanding of motivation. I can't speak for all of the angry Muslims out there, but in *all* the cases that I am aware of the motivation behind their actions is retaliation against Judeo-Christian aggression. This is supported by research that was conducted by Robert Pape of the University of Chicago (which I have mentioned here before) http://www.amconmag.com/2005_07_18/article.html.

Take note :
"Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism, the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies over there, if you would, is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us."

Bearing in mind that he has studied thousands of attacks I think his judgement carries substantially more weight than your and Mel P's claims.



Liar. I accept that there is a terrorist threat, but I believe that the threat is far less than it is hyped up to be. Statistically I am far more likely to snuff it from road accidents, falling down the stairs, a drunken lout attacking me, a mugger attacking me, going to hospital for a routine treatment, an adverse reaction to prescription medication or even cancer. Sure, I accept some of that is down to prevention, but that is a pretty slim hope because a terrorist only has to get "lucky" once, the police have to be lucky 100% of the time.



Liar. You have not provided a quote because you just made that up.



Liar. You have not provided a quote because you just made that up.

Qana did happen. Those kids were killed by the IDF bombing wantonly and indiscriminately.

Let me repeat my position: I don't claim moslems are a threat and have no desire to see the Amir Khans of the world being thrown out of the U.K.
My gripe is with extremist Islamofascists, not with moslems.
There are many moslems who would strongly disagree with your views, for that matter.
Darkboong you seem to make a career out of defending extremism but it's probably about time I changed the thread and got back to cycling.
It's obvious nothing is going to change your mind and maybe one day some other poster might get through to you.

That's one *new* Plot. How about the other four you mentioned that you haven't bothered to tell us about ?

This guy is quite right and speaks for many people:
"I am a British muslim but feel absolutely ashamed of all those (muslims by name only) who were involved in plotting to carry out such an abhorent act and who take Islam as a mere cover for their callous deeds. I want also to assure all my English friends that Islam does not approve killing of innocent people nor in fact condone any other violent actions against any other people.
Mohammed, Nottingham"
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=1&threadID=3122&start=45&tstart=0&edition=1&ttl=20060810183434&#paginator

The sniggers and derision seem to be ongoing. :( Melanie Phillips is an absolute tiny minority in this country. I recently saw her on Newsnight being hissed at when she spoke of the threat of terrorism. She was openly mocked.


That is because she is an extremist lunatic herself. Oliver Reed would have been sniggered at if he was lecturing people about the evils of drink while drunk, so she's not alone.


Also, you have moderate moslem countries such as Egypt, of course.


Egypt has a serious problem with terrorism.


Back to the point: You can't justify terrorism carried out by groups who hide in the shadows and wear no uniform on the basis they have a gripe against Jews or Christians.


I don't justify it at all Crappy. I have unconditionally condemned violence on numerous occasions.


If the west was really so terrible and corrupt, how come thousands of migrants from the Middle East want to live in France, the U.K. or the U.S.?


People think differently. Freedom of thought is something that a Daily Mail reader would probably not understand, or thoroughly disapprove of.


O.K. there is Iraq which was a misguided war, I think.


It's a --ing bloodbath, and a needless one at that. Regardless of the pros and cons of it the folks out there are seeing the occupying forces ripping the place apart, blowing them to bits, torturing them, raping them, beating them etc...


But then again Clinton defended Moslems in Serbia as I recall.


That won't be at the forefront of their minds as they watch their friends and relatives get beaten, shot and raped by occupying troops. You don't have to *approve* to understand this stuff, you just have to put yourself in their shoes.


The U.S. also gave millions of dollars to Middle Eastern countries, even backing up the Palestinians economically.


Hmm, while giving the IDF *billions* of dollars to spend on military hardware to beat the Palestinians up with. It was a token gesture, and the US has since actively sought to eliminate all funding from all sources.


"Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism, the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies over there, if you would, is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us."

I think you're very misguided here.


That's not my opinion, that is Robert Pape's judgement having studied every suicide bomb attack since 1980. He is far better informed than you.

"Bearing in mind that he has studied thousands of attacks I think his judgement carries substantially more weight than your and Mel P's claims."


Melanie Phillips knows a heck of a lot about this stuff. She's been warning the Government over here for years and recently she's been in the U.S. on Fox TV where she again warned about the threat from extremists based in London.


1) Mel P has a very clear agenda, specifically the continuation of the State of Israel as a Jewish State.
2) Mel P acknowledges that Israel has committed genocide and expects payback.
3) Mel P acknowledges that we (the UK) are complicit in killing Arabs and Muslims by the score around the globe, she expects payback.
4) Mel P never accepts that any Muslim might have a legitimate. Harming a Muslims is "crime free" in her moral vacuum.
5) Mel P has a contradiction on her hands, therefore she invents a narrative that supports the idea of Muslims attacking on the basis of imposing an ideology rather than revenge. Robert Pape's peer reviewed paper squashes that idea flat.
6) ... Consequently Mel P rabidly Islamaphobic and she (and you) like to make up phrases like "Islamo Fascists".

Therefore Mel P is unlikely to offer a rational or indeed accurate assessment of the motivations of militant Muslims. I'll take Robert Pape's paper that is based on empirical evidence over Mel P's conspiracy theories as a guide to the motivations behind these attacks thank you very much.


You also told me many months back there would never be a terrorist attack in the U.K. and you weren't alone.


Liar. Quite the reverse, quote me if you dare.


Even so, terrorism remains a serious threat that has to be acted upon.

No denying it, but I don't see any solution to it through violence and repression. All the evidence I have seen indicates that violence and repression are the root causes of terrorism. The hysterical shriekings of an Islamaphobe just muddy the waters. Mel P's agenda is to protect Israel, and in doing so she is caught in a web of hypocracy. On the one hand she condemns violence and on the other she actively supports it.

I work for the Security Services.

Wishful thinking.

Are posts going to be banned on the basis of statements that security services have prevented a number of terrorist incidents the public knew little about?
Why on earth is it supposedly against the soapbox rules to express the view terrorist plots in the U.K. are actively being plotted and that security personnel try to prevent them?


Who banned a statement about the security services?

I said to you yesterday - please verify the four attacks which you claim were prevented.

So - tell us which four attacks were prevented.



Incidentally, have you see the news today and when, if ever, are you going to apologise for your assumption I don't know what I'm talking about?

I saw the news today.

I am also awaiting your telling us about the four terrorist attacks that were prevented.
Any chance that you could answer the question?




when, if ever, are you going to apologise for your assumption I don't know what I'm talking about?


You don't know what you're talking about.

I don't recall citing a concrete number such as "4". I do know a number of terrorist attacks (or plotted attacks) have been detected. I also know that terrorism specifically in the U.K. has become a major concern to countries as diverse as Pakistan, Israel, the U.S., Russia e.t.c.
I actually warned 4 years ago that the U.K. could find itself in a serious internation wrangle unless attitudes change and the public stops going into denial. Too many incidents are being traced back to this country for comfort.
It's too late to comment in detail over the latest scare so let's wait and see what happens next. However, if they have got it right this time I think we're doing to see some major pressure from the U.S./Europe and a lot of changes.


Who banned a statement about the security services?

I said to you yesterday - please verify the four attacks which you claim were prevented.

So - tell us which four attacks were prevented.




I saw the news today.

I am also awaiting your telling us about the four terrorist attacks that were prevented.
Any chance that you could answer the question?






You don't know what you're talking about.

Yes, many different people ride bikes.

Wishful thinking.

I don't recall citing a concrete number such as "4". I do know a number of terrorist attacks (or plotted attacks) have been detected.

You don't recall?

First page of this topic - You posted this yesterday.

When the chips are down, you find who your friends are and I think the majority U.K. population has shown itself wishy-washy in the extreme. Also there is so much hypocrisy at work.
All I can say is that, thus far, London has had one terrorist attack in the metro while about 4 other attacks have been foiled.

Yes, there it is. So? "About 4". More than that I would say, but the adverb implies a non-specific sense, correct?
I'm sorry but I can only call on any other rational poster to clarify the point being made here, If I understand correctly, you seem to be implying there is no terrorist threat to or from the U.K.? Yet. the news has shown images of scenes that don' t agree with you at all. There are queues of people in airports who missed their flights and a major alert in the U.S.
It's unclear what evidence there is at this stage but I don't think the authorities worldwide are going to argue the toss as to whether there is a threat to national security on the basis of the expression "about 4"
Most people would agree with my view that terrorist plots are currently being accessed, analyzed and prevented and these people work around the clock 24 hours. They don't get paid for playing poker. :confused:

You don't recall?

First page of this topic - You posted this yesterday.

Yes, there it is. So? "About 4". More than that I would say, but the adverb implies a non-specific sense, correct?


4 - the number - is specific.

You stated yesterday that terrorists attacks - 4 or about 4 - were prevented.
Can you tell us about these attacks that you claim were prevented?

"So - tell us which four attacks were prevented."

Have you heard of confidentiality?
7/7 is one for a start. I know of several raids in my immediate area. There were videos and banned munitions in Finsbury Park Mosque with proven links to terror organizations. On other occasions explosives and chemicals were apprehended.
The guy who got shot recently and was innocent of actual terrorism did, however, have a record for armed robbery and they later found illegal porn on the P.C. so the raid wasn't totally out of order.
Let's just say there have been scores of raids but if you choose to discard my account or delete the post that's your own choice.
What's your gripe over these houses being raided?




Who banned a statement about the security services?

I said to you yesterday - please verify the four attacks which you claim were prevented.

So - tell us which four attacks were prevented.




I saw the news today.

I am also awaiting your telling us about the four terrorist attacks that were prevented.
Any chance that you could answer the question?






You don't know what you're talking about.

How's about you make your position clear. :o This seems to be there is no terrorist threat to this country, correct? The other position seems to be no attacks so far have been prevented and such ideas are fabrications?
If that's your view, then please spell it out so we all know your actual position.
Personally I think you've picked a very bad time to argue such a theory.
Please contact the airport at Heathrow and inform them they've got their knickers in a twist over a false alarm as there's nothing to prevent and nothing ever been prevented.

4 - the number - is specific.

You stated yesterday that terrorists attacks - 4 or about 4 - were prevented.
Can you tell us about these attacks that you claim were prevented?

Maybe someone else can explain it as I seem to be getting nowhere. :(

4 - the number - is specific.

You stated yesterday that terrorists attacks - 4 or about 4 - were prevented.
Can you tell us about these attacks that you claim were prevented?

Have you heard of confidentiality?



I've heard of confidentiality?
Have you?

You stated that 4 terrorists attacks were prevented : on this website.
Not very confidential stating that, is it?

Now can you tell us about the 4 attacks that were prevented?



7/7 is one for a start.

7/7 wasn't prevented.

So that cannot be one of the four terrorist attacks that were prevented.

Keep trying.


I know of several raids in my immediate area.

really?

Or maybe it's your fertile imagination working over time?



There were videos and banned munitions in Finsbury Park Mosque with proven links to terror organizations. On other occasions explosives and chemicals were apprehended.


really?

bombs and chemicals you say.

Funny how none of this "evidence" has ever been produced by the authorities.
Maybe that's confidential as well, eh?



The guy who got shot recently and was innocent of actual terrorism

.............................that's big of you to admit it



did, however, have a record for armed robbery and they later found illegal porn on the P.C. so the raid wasn't totally out of order.


so having porn on your PC, and having a criminal record, entitles the police to shot an unarmed person?





Let's just say there have been scores of raids but if you choose to discard my account or delete the post that's your own choice.


Scores of raids - leading to what exactly? Criminal cases? Few raids have produced court cases concerning terrorism, I'm afraid.

You're a chancer.

"4 - the number - is specific."

If you go to the shop and ask for about 4 eggs, how many eggs will you wind up with?
To my mind the assistant is going to ask exactly how many eggs you want.
Today I did about 3 hours on the bike, Could be more, could be less.



You don't recall?

First page of this topic - You posted this yesterday.

How's about you make your position clear. :o This seems to be there is no terrorist threat to this country, correct? The other position seems to be no attacks so far have been prevented and such ideas are fabrications?
If that's your view, then please spell it out so we all know your actual position.
Personally I think you've picked a very bad time to argue such a theory.
Please contact the airport at Heathrow and inform them they've got their knickers in a twist over a false alarm as there's nothing to prevent and nothing ever been prevented.

Yesterday you told us that 4 terrorist attacks had been prevented.

Can you tell us what terrorist attacks were prevented?
Simple question.