[hermit22]

Wow. That's all I can say. Wow.

Bin Laden has long said (going back to his original fatwah in 1996) that there are 3 things he wants fixed:

- US out of Saudi Arabia
- Sanctions lifted from Iraq
- Home for the Palestinian people

He didn't just "come up" with that because the world reacted violently to 9/11. Not only that, but you sound like you believe that there was no terrorism before that tragedy, or that bin Laden did absolutely nothing before it.

Also, it doesn't necessarily matter what the people involved say. Religion doesn't exist in a vacuum - it is one of thousands of various social forces that influence people's opinions and actions. And no matter what someone claims as their ideals - or what cover they use to sell those ideals - you have to look at the content of their message to see where they really stand. And of the three agenda items, only the first one has anything to do with religion. The rest are social.

Finally, to constantly frame it as "Islamic" whatever is irresponsible. It casts a negative light on the religion that 20% of the world's population calls their own. Since it is not representative of the religion, the stigma that gets attached is inappropriate.

Think about it this way: how often did the media call Timothy McVeigh a Christian terrorist? How about Bray or Hill (first advocated and the second killed abortion doctors)?

And that Manifesto was obviously written by someone whose entire familiarity with terrorism is based on mass media. I can't take stock in anything like that, sorry. Referencing a part of the manifesto, then, as proof does not actually prove anything, nor does it represent a valid course of action (which, in my mind, it doesn't). I don't mean to sound like a white tower snob here, but how can you argue for such a drastic course of action when you don't have all the facts?