Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (47255)	9/26/2002 2:24:16 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

These guys try to hide it, but they are all interconnected, IMO. It's a conspiracy, Bill. Saddam, bin Laden, Arafat, Assad, the Iranian Ayatollahs- all their apparent conflicts are a ruse. You know James Jesus Angleton and his theory on Russia and China? Same thing here.

To: LindyBill who wrote (47255)	9/26/2002 5:12:12 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 281500

These guys try to hide it, but they are all interconnected, IMO. There are two issues I'm tracking. The first is the degree of doctrinal differences between various groups frequently labeled Islamist. Do they all agree on the violent overthrow of states in order to set up a Muslim state? Do some differ, however, on doctrines of methods? There were, for instance, serious disagreements over precisely this point between the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood and other more radical groups through the 70s. If that's the case, then, what is to be made of it. Some argue it doesn't matter because even the nonviolent ones only wish to take power and then will never offer democratic elections. Others argue different strategical positions. But, of course, these disagreements are occuring within states that are definitely not democratic. The second issue is, regardless of the connections you assert, which groups should be implicated in 9-11. My present position is only Al Q. I realize that term is an umbrella term, encompassing a good many groups, one of which is the Egyptian group involved in the murder of Sadat. So that covers them. There is, in addition, a separate issue in thinking about the Islamist groups, which have a history of violence of one sort or another but which are not connected to 9-11. Those are, in my mind, long term policy issues, not "let's attack now" issues. For me, that includes Hamas and Hezbelloh. But I reserve the right to change my mind there. Just have not seen anything that makes them an immediate threat to the US mainland.