[Peach]

Yes, I think that's the continuous theme. I think the lesson for the West is that in the 21st century you can't pick and choose which issues you're going to take a stand on. You can't go and invade Iraq for the sake of democracy but then pay no attention to horrendous human rights abuses in Chechnya. You can't leave Kashmir festering decades after there was a resolution at the UN saying there should be an independence referendum.

Right. So if we pay attention to those issues and states, AQ will be happy and stop bombing. Uh huh.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thought this might be useful to be aware of.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

ping!

[Billthedrill]

Well, how else would you explain DU?

[swarthyguy]

The drawback of using a western rational empirical mindset to try to "understand" the jihadis.

Logic don't cut it.

[Redcoat LI]

You spell Jihad with a "J",not a"G".

[truth_seeker]

"The Al Qaeda view of the world is that the West has been waging a crusader war against Muslims for centuries and that everybody must make up their minds and 'you're either with us or against us'."

So it is NOT just about Israel, but it is about "us" and "them."

I can't rightly think of a better paradigm, than it is either "us" or "them."

In that light, will education work? Will democracy work?

Is there a reasonable chance they will stop terrorism, if the enemy does "something?"

I do not believe so. They realize we are much stronger in military might. So they use terrorism, to break our resolve and see if we will give up, before a big battle.

[Cindy]

LINKS OF INTEREST
http://www.truthusa.com/LinksOfInterest.html

[Cindy]

INTERNET HAGANAH: "A MESSAGE TO THE SPANISH PEOPLE: THE NEGLECTED THREAT QA'IDAT AL-JIHAD" by Reuven Paz, PRISM Series of Special Dispatches on Global Jihad, No.2/2 (March 19, 2004) (Read More...)

INTERNET HAGANAH: "THE LINK THAT COULD HAVE SAVED 200 LIVES" (March 19, 2004) (Read More...)

WorldNetDaily.com: "OPEN LETTER TO THE PEOPLE OF SPAIN" by Laura Mansfield (March 16, 2004)

JIHAD WATCH.org: "SPAIN PM-ELECT: TROOPS OUT OF IRAQ" (March 15, 2004) (Read More...)

AFTENPOSTEN.no - Search Term: "KREKAR" (Mullah Krekar) (Read More...)

[JohnathanRGalt]

Jehadi internet ping: (let me know if you want on or off)

[Fiddlstix]

Bump
To read later

[Salem]

'Ping!' As many anti-terrorism experts and academics have said, the war on terror is a "War of Ideas"—and the Internet the Arena.





If you'd like to be on or off this
Christian Supporters of Israel ping list,
please FR mail me. ~
    
There failed not ought of any good thing which the LORD had
spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass. (Joshua 21:45)
Letter To The President In Support Of Israel ~
'Final Solution,' Phase 2 ~
Warnings ~

[justlurking]

Yes, whereas if you send a very highly encrypted message, then intelligence services can pick up the fact that there is a very highly encrypted message crossing the Net and they will pay attention to it and go and crack it.

This is unlikely. There is not enough resources to crack every encrypted message. They can only target encrypted messages between suspects that have already been identified.

There are a number of webmail sites that support secure (https://) connections, and if the message is exchanged among users of that site, it will never leave the server except via SSL.

And, recent versions of sendmail support secure transport of messages between servers, using TLS (similar to SSL). Once the sendmail is configured (a relatively simple task), it will automatically negotiate a secure connection with the sender or receiver, and fall back to non-secure if one or the other doesn't support it.

Add in the PGP-enrypted messages that many people send out of principle, plus people using the digital signatures that are easily installed in Outlook, Outlook Express, Thunderbird, etc. and there are so many encrypted connections of all types that intelligence services could never encrypt more than a minuscule fraction.