Fornits
General Interest => Tacitus' Realm => Topic started by: Stonewall on August 08, 2010, 02:01:30 PM
-
The Muslim Hijacking of Ground Zero
Islam doesn't just hijack planes, it hijacks the things that mean something to people. The great cities of the world are littered with relics of the Muslim occupation of their sacred places. Jerusalem, Delhi, Constantinople and Alexandria all testify to the Muslim predilection for taking over other people's sacred places, and turning them into mosques. It wasn't enough for Muslims to conquer Jerusalem and subjugate its inhabitants. No, they also had to take the holiest place in Judaism and build a mosque on top of it. Similarly it wasn't enough for them to conquer and rename Constantinople, they also had to turn the Hagia Sophia into a mosque. These are not exceptions to the rule. In Asia, the Middle East and Europe, there are numberless examples of the same thing.
To this day, Muslims continue seizing other people's places of worship and turning them into mosques. It's going on in Egypt today. It's going on in Yugoslavia where churches are being destroyed and turned into mosques, day by day. It's went on in Israel, in Joseph's Tomb, burial spot of the biblical Joseph, which was seized by Muslims in September of 2000, a year before 9/11.
Why do Muslims this? It's not just about seizing territory, though that is part of it. It's also about hijacking something more vital, identity. By Islamizing sacred sites, they also take control of other people's history and culture. As they have done throughout the world. Hijacking the Temple Mount, has allowed Muslims to claim Jerusalem as a holy city of theirs. Hijacking churches in Egypt and Yugoslavia, eliminates the religious history of non-Muslims from the area. Hijacking the Hagia Sophia, was part of the recreation of Constantinople, into Istanbul.
The common denominator is that Muslims do not just make war on lands or bodies-- but on memory itself. Their goal is to make people forget what came before their colonization. To distort the history and traditions that are meaningful to them, and replace them with a distorted Islamized version of history. The Muslim "tolerance" in Spain, the Palestinian Arab "refugees" and the Muslim "contributions" to science, are all examples of that revisionist history, in which oppression becomes tolerance, repression becomes knowledge, and the oppressors become the victims.
Ground Zero is not only the central point of the Muslim massacre of 3000 people. It is also the central point of the memory of that massacre. The area is the place where people come to remember what happened. To see, to hear and to pay tribute to the dead. Which is exactly why Muslims are determined to hijack it for their own purposes, with a highly visible mosque and their own 9/11 museum that will feature a radically altered version of history. What they are after is the equivalent of putting up a Holocaust Revisionism museum outside the Holocaust museum.
There is no legitimate reason for the Cordoba House. As I have already documented, the current mosque draws most of its worshipers from outside the area. There is no significant Muslim population in Downtown Manhattan that needs to have its own 100 million dollar community center. The only reason for building something on this scale, is because of its proximity to Ground Zero. The Ground Zero mosque is aimed at the hijacking of memory, not of Muslims, but of non-Muslims. It is meant to serve as part of the Muslim narrative spread after 9/11 that exonerates Muslims from all blame, while pointing the finger at America and the Jews instead. Which is why the ADL and the Wiesenthal Center have both come out against the Ground Zero Mosque, regardless of the vicious attacks directed at them by liberals for daring to stand up to Muslim colonization and bigotry.
At Ground Zero, all Americans realized that Islam was an inescapable question that they must grapple with. It is a powerful symbol. And symbols are dangerous. People will fight and die for symbols, as they will not for cold hard facts. It is why the left has tried to hijack it using the IFC. They failed. Now where they failed, the Islamists intend to succeed. And just as the IFC was backed by Bloomberg, so too the Ground Zero mosque is being backed by Bloomberg. It's why the media and liberals are shouting down all criticism of the Ground Zero mosque. Islam and the left both want to suppress the real history of September 11. They want Americans to forget who did it, and instead feed them excuses about "American foreign policy" and of course those omnipresent Jews, who are really to blame for it all.
The name Cordoba House is entirely appropriate for the Ground Zero mosque, because it too represent a false history. The story of Cordoba and Ground Zero are linked, in that they are both stories of Muslim terror, covered up with lies about Muslim tolerance. And the Cordoba House is part of a comprehensive effort to pervert the history of September 11, as comprehensively as that of Cordoba or Jerusalem. To replace it with their narrative, in which they are the victims, and we are the oppressors. And to allow that history to stand, is to destroy the meaning of our own culture and accept our subjugation, in history, if not yet in fact.
The Great Lie told and retold over and over again for the last 9 years, is that Islam was not responsible for 9/11. That lie has been repeated over and over again. It has permeated our culture. It has filled our media. The politicians have echoed it. Books and articles are written that treat it as something every reasonable person understands. Islam had nothing to do with 9/11. Not a damn thing.
The Ground Zero mosque is that lie made flesh. It is that revisionist history given physical form, turned into brick and mortar, steel and cement, raised up to the sky, to look down mockingly on the Ground Zero construction site itself, and the people who come there to reflect and remember. It mocks their memories. It mocks the dead. Its arrogance is the same as that of the Muslim burners of the Great Library of Alexandria, of Hanan Ashrawi claiming there was no Jewish connection to Joseph's Tomb, or Anwar Al-Awlaki, who had advised the 9/11 hijackers, telling reporters after the attacks that Islam opposes terrorism. It is an act of beheading, not of flesh, but of identity. It takes a blade and saws at the neck of a culture, cutting off its head through lies and deceit.
When Muslims conquer, they begin with massacres and end with colonization. The building they bought, had its value destroyed by their own attack on September 11. Now having bought the building at a loss, they intend to demolish it and turn it into a monument to the very ideology responsible for that massacre. As they have done before in Constantinople and Jerusalem. As they have done throughout the world. First they bomb. Now they occupy. First they kill, then they solicit converts. First they invade, then they rule. It is an ugly and bloody pattern that has held true for over a 1000 years of history. And here it is again.
When the Sudanese Muslim Janjaweed militias go out and rape non-Arab women, this was what they said to their victims. "The government gave me permission to rape you. This is not your land anymore." That is the Ground Zero mosque, with Bloomberg giving his permission to allow Islam to declare that this too is not our land anymore. It is the rape of a place that has equal stature in American memory to Gettysburg or Arlington. It is a calculated act of cultural brutality, disguised with a fake smile. Its message is that this is not our land anymore. That these are not our memories anymore. That these too have been hijacked by the murderers.
Islam does not just destroy bodies, it destroys souls. It plots to rob entire peoples of their culture, their history and their identity. In order to make them into Muslims or Dhimmis, slaves of Muslims. Mohammed began the process by taking the existing belief systems in the region, combining them into a distorted ideology that he called Islam, which gave him the power to do anything he wanted, that exploded into massacres, ethnic cleansing and a wave of brutality and conquest that covered the globe. But the armies of Islam did not just kill or enslave, they robbed their victims of their culture and history-- and replaced it with Islam. Ground Zero is their target once more. A hijacking not of planes, but of memory. And their targets are no longer just 3,000 people-- but us all.
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ (http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/)
-
This is the funniest thing yet. Mentioning Alexandria and Constantinople, cities named for conquering imperialists, as examples of the rapacious expansionist nature of Islam! I don't know how you come up with fresh material like this over and over again, but it's great!
-
This is the funniest thing yet. Mentioning Alexandria and Constantinople, cities named for conquering imperialists, as examples of the rapacious expansionist nature of Islam! I don't know how you come up with fresh material like this over and over again, but it's great!
My post was not the funniest thing yet. I appreciate the thought.
It is my opinion that creating this mosque is a bad idea. The Muslim call to prayer echoing over Ground Zero, everyday, and for all time, it's just a very bad thing.
No disrespect, no doubt I appreciate your response, but do you have any ideas or thoughts on this?
-
Anything that encourages religious fundamentalists to butcher each other should be encouraged as much as possible.
-
Anything that encourages religious fundamentalists to butcher each other should be encouraged as much as possible.
I disagree we should encourage killing.
Instead we should encourage truth.
-
Pile of Dead Kids wrote;
"Anything that encourages religious fundamentalists to butcher each other should be encouraged as much as possible."
The problem is that they either kill indiscriminately, or "you dissagree with me , therefor you must be SATAN. DIE INFIDEL!"
-
The problem is that they either kill indiscriminately, or "you dissagree with me , therefor you must be SATAN. DIE INFIDEL!"
Well that's the whole point.
Fortunately for the world, fundamentalists of different religions usually disagree violently, and can flare up at provocations that would seem to make little sense to rational people. Only recently have some of them stopped to cooperate against their mutual enemy, common sense; however, this alliance does not extend between entirely different religions. A sane (U. S.) national policy will send as many Christian religious fundamentalists as we have in this country against the various militant Muslim groups, ridding ourselves of both long-term foreign and domestic threats simultaneously. There are of course problems (unequal force projection, financial expense, threat of nuclear materials being used, etc), but the big one is putting them somewhere remote, where there isn't a whole lot of anyone else to shoot.
It's rather like asking "Damn, there's a shitload of hydrochloric acid over there and I've also got all this fucking lye to deal with.. how do I get rid of them?"
-
Au contraire, Stony. In my humble opinion, your post in this thread was without a doubt the funniest thing you've come up with so far on Fornits. It's an interesting style of comedy. You put out the Islam reism in another thread, and you continue on with this notion that Islam, again, a series of abstact ideas, is a corporeal entity replete with an array of human traits. This is of course preposterous, which I assume is the essence of your particular brand of humor. Still, I think it's very funny and your style is certainly unique. Andy Kaufman comes to mind.
-
:poison:
-
Elisicu2 wrote
"Why does Satan always get a bad rap?"
'Cause Satan ain't real. The christians made him up to keep people in line.
-
::evil::
-
:seg:
-
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-a ... ing-update (http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-august-10-2010/municipal-land-use-hearing-update)
It's a community center, not just a mosque. It's not at ground zero, but a few blocks away at a friggin Burlington Coat Factory building. Not exactly "hallowed" ground. What about the mosques that are already around NY city? Do a GIS for Mosques in New York City and see how many are there. And what about that religious freedom thingy? Is that just for the white Xtians? Why is everyone so afraid of all the brown people? Mexicans, blacks, muslims......the rightwing party has become the frightend-wing party.
-
Anne Bonney wrote;
"Why is everyone so afraid of all the brown people? Mexicans, blacks, muslims......the rightwing party has become the frightend-wing party."
Why? 'Causeall muslims are not terrorists. But all of the 9-11 terrorists were muslims.
And by the way , I'm a democrat.
-
:karma:
-
What don't you get?
-
Anne Bonney wrote;
"Why is everyone so afraid of all the brown people? Mexicans, blacks, muslims......the rightwing party has become the frightend-wing party."
Why? 'Causeall muslims are not terrorists. But all of the 9-11 terrorists were muslims.
And? I don't see the correlation. Are we to judge all muslims by the actions of those on 9/11? Should we judge all Xtians by the actions of a few nutcases who bomb abortion clinics or kill the doctors (Tiller)? And it doesn't explain this paralyzing fear of our friends south of the border either. Sheriff Joe has gotten out of hand (he's been out of hand for some time, but it's finally hitting the national spotlight now) and it's gonna get ugly down there. Talk about a terrorist....take a look at Arapaio.
And by the way , I'm a democrat.
Meh, I'm registered that way but I'm not happy with either party at the moment. Republicans are supposed to be for small government, but they sold themselves to Falwell's Moral Majority and now make all kinds of exceptions for that small gov't based on being Xtians....they're completely ready to stick their noses into peoples bedrooms to make sure they're not sinning (DOMA, DADT). They're ready to insinuate themselves into others' lives where abortion is concerned because of their beliefs about life and a god, even when it's a case of rape, incest or threatens the mother's life. And then there's the whole war machine that they've got going. They're all for cutting spending (on programs that benefit the poor) except military spending. Don't touch that!! Dems just have no balls whatsoever and will do or say whatever they think people want to hear.
IMO, we as a nation need to grow the fuck up and get over ourselves.
-
IMO, we as a nation need to grow the fuck up and get over ourselves.
:notworthy:
-
Anne Bonney wrote
" Are we to judge all muslims by the actions of those on 9/11?"
No. Just the ones who get on planes in the U.S.
And I don't trust any religious fanatics. I don't care what "brand".Especially christians.
-
I started a thread to this effect (or affect?), until it was hijacked by the troll patrol.
viewtopic.php?f=22&t=30862 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=30862)
-
Anne Bonney wrote
" Are we to judge all muslims by the actions of those on 9/11?"
No. Just the ones who get on planes in the U.S.
And I don't trust any religious fanatics. I don't care what "brand".Especially christians.
What a funny thing, this nomenclature. Having never heard from the horse's mouth, so to speak, just how the hijackers of September 2001 referred to themselves, it falls to the observer to name the phenomenon. The most prominent of the fellows featured in news of the events was Mohammed Atta. Atta seems to have had a fondness for narcotics, liquor and women of questionable virtue. This seems very much at odds with the image of a fundamenalist follower of Islam. I for one would not use the term Fundamentalist Muslim to refer to such an individual. I tend more towards the school of "walks like a duck", so to speak. Rather than their relationship to a desert-dwelling religious leader who has been dead for a millenium or so, I am more inclinced to look at the relationship that the men in question had with people like Wally Hilliard, and the folks who retain Mr. Hilliard's services, where etymology is concerned.
-
I still maintain that it's theocracy, not the brand of religion, that's dangerous. Anne cites the abortion clinic bombers as a pretty good recent example of dangerous x-tians. None-ya shows some clips of militant x-tian brainwashing.
Conversely, a long while back, GregFl showed some clips of Islamic Madrasah in the context of how similar they are to a day in Group.
The primary difference between a fundamentalist radical who bombs abortion clinics and fundamentalist radicals who blow themselves up in a holy war is that the x-tian fundamentalists, for the time being anyway, generally are indicted, tried and convicted of their crimes. That's because, so far, we haven't let them completely take over government again.
-
I still maintain that it's theocracy, not the brand of religion, that's dangerous. Anne cites the abortion clinic bombers as a pretty good recent example of dangerous x-tians. None-ya shows some clips of militant x-tian brainwashing.
Right, Antigen. but the difference is that Christianity itself does not permit or dictate violence. Strictly speaking it's a pacifist religion where one is supposed to turn the other cheek, even if attacked first. Islam, on the other hand, commands violence and those who commit violence in Islam's name are indeed doing what the Qur'an and Hadiths command. It's relatively easy to convince a violent Christian that they are not following the will of god by pointing to the Bible. On the other hand it's impossible to do the same with Islam.
-
Sockpuppet, while there is nothing new under the sun, and imitation is the most sincere form of flattery, I find your personification of the abstract series of ideas known as Islam, to be a little too deriviative. Stony trotted out that reism in a different thread, and I admire his dedication to his comedic art, but I'm not seeing anything new in your routine. The underlying theme of Stony's comedy, the fact that neither Islam nor Christianity nor any other abstract that exists only as a series of ideas can permit or dictate or command anything is well-emphasized in his material. I admire your willingness to take a chance by forcing the element of absurdity in the wholly preposterous claim about the ease of dissuading a violent Christian. It's over the top, but was succinct and I did find it to be funny.
-
[attachment=0:2pkojkbg]TERRORIST.jpg[/attachment:2pkojkbg]
-
I still maintain that it's theocracy, not the brand of religion, that's dangerous. Anne cites the abortion clinic bombers as a pretty good recent example of dangerous x-tians. None-ya shows some clips of militant x-tian brainwashing.
Conversely, a long while back, GregFl showed some clips of Islamic Madrasah in the context of how similar they are to a day in Group.
The primary difference between a fundamentalist radical who bombs abortion clinics and fundamentalist radicals who blow themselves up in a holy war is that the x-tian fundamentalists, for the time being anyway, generally are indicted, tried and convicted of their crimes. That's because, so far, we haven't let them completely take over government again.
I think it is the brand of religion. You could put every Abortion Clinic act of violence and have it occur on a single day and it will not even come close to a normal everyday occurrence in a Muslim nation against those that are hated.
The Mosque at Ground Zero will probably happen. This nation of majority Christians will allow it to happen.
-
Stony, you are killing as usual. That vague bit of nonsense about those that are hated, every day occurrence etc., is just too good. After all, it stands to reason that those who are hated are going to be the objects of mistreatment, and your singling out Islamic nations certainly illuminates the sheer folly of the current trend of fear-mongering about muslims. Hilarious and thought-provoking as usual.
-
I think it is the brand of religion. You could put every Abortion Clinic act of violence and have it occur on a single day and it will not even come close to a normal everyday occurrence in a Muslim nation against those that are hated.
Right. This is now. Almost 600 after the huddled masses began crossing the sea to escape the benevolence of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Back in the good old days when X-tians ruled the world with armies and crusades they called that the Inquisition.
According to the legend, Mohamed changed the mission from one of peace and love to one of outright murder and conquest. So did the Catholic rulers. They simply wrote an adjunct to their scripture and called it The Malleus Maleficarum (http://http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/) or Witch Hammer. They then proceeded to act on this new idea with great zeal.
-
I think it is the brand of religion. You could put every Abortion Clinic act of violence and have it occur on a single day and it will not even come close to a normal everyday occurrence in a Muslim nation against those that are hated.
Right. This is now. Almost 600 after the huddled masses began crossing the sea to escape the benevolence of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. Back in the good old days when X-tians ruled the world with armies and crusades they called that the Inquisition.
According to the legend, Mohamed changed the mission from one of peace and love to one of outright murder and conquest. So did the Catholic rulers. They simply wrote an adjunct to their scripture and called it The Malleus Maleficarum (http://http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org/) or Witch Hammer. They then proceeded to act on this new idea with great zeal.
The crusades occurred some 200 years after the invent of Islam. Muhammad had already created his ideology of Jihad. Long before. The Crusades did not begin until Islam had conquered into Europe, N. Africa, Persia, India, etc..
The concept of Jihad cannot be blamed on forces outside of Mecca and Medina.
-
Stony, I firmly believe that you are the hardest working man in show business, particularly in light of the passing of James Brown. This is a medium that I think is fertile ground for working comics like yourself, and I have to tip my hat to you. And as always, I admire your willingness to stick with the bit. This factually challenged propagandist that you play is a great character. The absence of empirical evidence in your arguments is consistent, and as always points to the fundamentally absurd nature of bigotted hate propaganda. The bit about the Crusades coming two hundred years after the advent of Islam is a nice touch. The presentation of factual inaccuracies by propagandists is a common tactic, and you blow it right out of the water.
-
Stony, I firmly believe that you are the hardest working man in show business, particularly in light of the passing of James Brown. This is a medium that I think is fertile ground for working comics like yourself, and I have to tip my hat to you. And as always, I admire your willingness to stick with the bit. This factually challenged propagandist that you play is a great character. The absence of empirical evidence in your arguments is consistent, and as always points to the fundamentally absurd nature of bigotted hate propaganda. The bit about the Crusades coming two hundred years after the advent of Islam is a nice touch. The presentation of factual inaccuracies by propagandists is a common tactic, and you blow it right out of the water.
You forgot something... When you debate someone and find some inaccuracy you then go on to prove it. You don't just say something is wrong and then call names. You might be new to the whole debating thing. If so, I don't mean to criticize. Just guiding you in the right direction...
:)
-
Stony, you are more talented and your repertoire is more complex than you let on. The post-post-modern aspect you introduced is intriguing. You state that the Crusades came two hundred years after Islam, a very specific factual inaccuracy, in keeping with your character, and then you claim that no factual inaccuracy is presented. It's brilliant. The introduction of an alternate reality constucted of conditions contrary to those that we perceive in the material world is really daring.
-
Stony, you are more talented and your repertoire is more complex than you let on. The post-post-modern aspect you introduced is intriguing. You state that the Crusades came two hundred years after Islam, a very specific factual inaccuracy, in keeping with your character, and then you claim that no factual inaccuracy is presented. It's brilliant. The introduction of an alternate reality constucted of conditions contrary to those that we perceive in the material world is really daring.
When did the first crusade take place?
When did Muhammad create his Islam?
-
What, do they not have Google where you live?
Islam got started in 610.
The first Crusade got started in 1095.
You really don't have a fucking clue, do you?
-
The concept of Jihad cannot be blamed on forces outside of Mecca and Medina.
Not blaming Jihad on the Catholics. Just noting that any religion will do. All it takes is for said religious fanatics to take the notion that God is telling them to start the killing.
-
The concept of Jihad cannot be blamed on forces outside of Mecca and Medina.
Not blaming Jihad on the Catholics. Just noting that any religion will do. All it takes is for said religious fanatics to take the notion that God is telling them to start the killing.
No doubt about that.
And, Islam took that notion on almost immediately. That is how it took over Arabia, and then the whole of the Middle East. Then beyond that.
Certainly Muslims enjoy the right to create Mosques in the U.S.. Even the one at Ground Zero, but they should build it somewhere else. So, the controversy would disappear. A person may have the right to open a slaughter house for swine next to a Mosque. I would say it would create controversy where none is needed. It's about respect. Not simply about a "right" to do it.
-
Not blaming Jihad on the Catholics. Just noting that any religion will do. All it takes is for said religious fanatics to take the notion that God is telling them to start the killing.
No doubt about that.
Ok, so then why blame the religion?
And, Islam took that notion on almost immediately. That is how it took over Arabia, and then the whole of the Middle East. Then beyond that.
And how did Christianity take over most of the rest of the world even quicker? Here's an interesting animated time-line:
http://www.mapsofwar.com/ind/history-of-religion.html (http://www.mapsofwar.com/ind/history-of-religion.html)
Certainly Muslims enjoy the right to create Mosques in the U.S.. Even the one at Ground Zero, but they should build it somewhere else. So, the controversy would disappear. A person may have the right to open a slaughter house for swine next to a Mosque. I would say it would create controversy where none is needed. It's about respect. Not simply about a "right" to do it.
Ok, so what happened to convert the Holy Roman Catholic Church from a blood-thirsty conquering military complex to a mostly benevolent spiritual and welfare organization? In my opinion, it was Catholics on the ground acting on what they view as their mission and beliefs. So if the activity at that mosqu turns out to be hostile, call them on it. If it turns out to be in the spirit of Cordoba as they say, praise them for it. But it would be a huge mistake to make enemies of one of the largest religions on the planet. I say "one of" because I don't really buy the notion that the majority of people living under any theocracy really believe the ruling religion. They just keep quiet about their beliefs till they have a chance to act or escape.
-
Antigen wrote;
"Ok, so what happened to convert the Holy Roman Catholic Church from a blood-thirsty conquering military complex to a mostly benevolent spiritual and welfare organization?"
[/b]
When did that happen?
-
Ok, so then why blame the religion?
Google: Honor Killing. Take a good look.
See also:
http://http://www.drmarkgabriel.com/books.html
Dr. Mark Gabriel was born and raised in Egypt in an Islamic family. By the age of12, Dr. Gabriel had the entire Quran memorized. He graduated from Al-Azhar University in Cairo and then became a professor of Islamic history at that university. He also served as the Imam (spiritual leader) of a mosque in Giza, where the pyramids are located.
In short, Dr. Gabriel was a highly prestigious figure in the Islamic world when one day he dared to question the authenticity of the Quran. That evening he was kidnapped by the Egyptian secret police and thrown in prison where he was tortured unmercifully for days due to questioning his religion. Miraculously, just as he was about to be executed, he was delivered from the prison by a relative with political connections.
During the next year while unemployed and living with his parents, Dr. Gabriel met a Christian pharmacist who gave him a Bible. That Bible led him to Jesus, and when he read the Sermon on the Mount, he decided to accept Jesus as his Lord and Savior. When his father discovered that mark had become a Christian, he tried to kill him. Running for his life, Dr. Gabriel fled to South Africa where assassins were sent to kill him. Finally he fled to the United States where he was granted religious asylum.
Your right that the RCC shed a lot of blood but when they did this it was in direct opposition to what the Gospel of Christ calls for. The same can not be said of Islam. When they slaughter women and children and infidels it is in obedience to their prophet.
I agree with the sentiment that they can build their mosque after they allow a church and synagogue to be built and freely attended in any Islamic country.
If this jeering lie they call Cordoba house is truly about interfaith tolerance and understanding then include a church and synagogue inside.
Why you should not believe their explanation of intent:
http://http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/JR/Future/ch16_understanding_dishonesty.htm
http://http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/the-doctrine-of-deceit/
http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-hA59eiySI
A Christian might lie for any number of reasons, but as with blood shed, when they do they are going against what they are instructed by their God. Not so of Islam.
This mosque is Not OK.
-
Death to Salman Rushdie!
-
A Christian might lie for any number of reasons, but as with blood shed, when they do they are going against what they are instructed by their God. Not so of Islam.
So Christians kill in the name of their God, and this has occurred on a massive and diverse scale from Crusaders to Conquistadors, from the murder of the Cathars or the massacre of the Hugenots to the rampant slicing and dicing of the Thirty Years War, right up to the Wehrmacht, who wore the slogan on their belt buckles, but they're violating the instructions they receive from their God. Muslims however, kill in the name of their God when they correctly follow their instructions. So clearly, all this shootin', stabbin' and burnin' has it's roots in something other than which magic person folks believe.
-
A Christian might lie for any number of reasons, but as with blood shed, when they do they are going against what they are instructed by their God. Not so of Islam.
So Christians kill in the name of their God, and this has occurred on a massive and diverse scale from Crusaders to Conquistadors, from the murder of the Cathars or the massacre of the Hugenots to the rampant slicing and dicing of the Thirty Years War, right up to the Wehrmacht, who wore the slogan on their belt buckles, but they're violating the instructions they receive from their God. Muslims however, kill in the name of their God when they correctly follow their instructions. So clearly, all this shootin', stabbin' and burnin' has it's roots in something other than which magic person folks believe.
Could not have said it better, they all have killed in the name of??????
Still are!!!!
-
A Christian might lie for any number of reasons, but as with blood shed, when they do they are going against what they are instructed by their God. Not so of Islam.
So Christians kill in the name of their God, and this has occurred on a massive and diverse scale from Crusaders to Conquistadors, from the murder of the Cathars or the massacre of the Hugenots to the rampant slicing and dicing of the Thirty Years War, right up to the Wehrmacht, who wore the slogan on their belt buckles, but they're violating the instructions they receive from their God. Muslims however, kill in the name of their God when they correctly follow their instructions. So clearly, all this shootin', stabbin' and burnin' has it's roots in something other than which magic person folks believe.
What God or gods a people believe in make a very big difference. What ever the history of Christendom; for what ever reasons some Christians went so horribly astray - they have the gospel of Christ to return to in times of awakening and revival which corrects their willful and wayward destruction. The Muslim can only turn to more blood shed if they are to remain a "good" Muslim. I would argue this is why they remain so primitive and vicious.
That said, you're right enough that something else is at play. Not sure we'd agree as to what that something else is.
-
Buzzkill, what happed to Dr. Gabriel sounds just exactly like what happened to Galileo.
T-Rex, ok, the Catholic church has it's money into all sorts of ugly shit. Granted. But when's the last time you heard of a witch dunking or bloody inquisition?
I live in a very Catholic area. I once pissed off an old Catholic lady. I was talking on the phone to a friend and mentioned Catholic mythology. She was so angry she said something and gave me a hard look for months afterward every time she had to wait on me at the checkout. But that's it. No jail, no interrogation, no heresy charges...
Something changed. How'd that happen and what should we look to and look to encourage wrt Islam?
-
This should help.
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/07/t ... video.html (http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/07/three-things-about-islam-video.html)
-
Buzzkill, your statement is contradicted by the evidence at hand. Millions of Christians have killed other people in the name of Christianity. Your opinion may be that their behaviour is in contradiction to Christianity, but very clearly they did not share that opinion. The other side of this coin is that a billion or so people who deem themselves to be good muslims live their daily lives without engaging in the murder of other human beings in the name of their religion, despite your opinion that they need to be a-slaying to be good muslims. Since people who claim to be following their religions both kill and refrain from killing, it is not logically consistent to claim that religion makes muslims "primitive and viscious."
Again, one need only to look at the massive numbers of people killed by agents of the US state over the years to see that something other than Islam is at the root of violent behaviour. This includes, but is of course not limited to the tens of thousands dead in the Phillipines between 1899-1902, hundreds of thousands of North Korean civilians killed by aerial bombing between 1950-53, a few million folks of various Indo-chinese nationalties, also killed by aerial bombing between 1955-1975, a million or so Iraqi children dead as a result of the sanctions program and destruction of infrastructure between 1991-2003, and the hundreds of thousand of Iraqis who have lost their lives since the occupation beginning in 2003.
-
Maybe they should build a giant hebrew temple at ground zero, complete with a holocost memorial. I wonder how long that would remain standing?
-
Buzzkill, what happed to Dr. Gabriel sounds just exactly like what happened to Galileo.
It was similar. The threat of death was there. I don't recall that he was actually imprisoned or tortured of sentenced to die - just that the threat was very real. He was on a kind of house arrest, wasn't he? I can't recall specifics. But even if he was tossed in a dungon by the Bishops and racked there are still important differences. His father didn't try to murder him for his POV - nor would his family have hunted him down and murdered him if he had fled to a distant land. Also, as you point out - it was long ago - not recently. And, as I keep pointing out, if they did do these things, they would have been acting in rebellion and sin according to their God's word, not in obedience to it.
IMO, if you want to change muslim violence you first have to get honest about it. People have got to stop with this political correctness garbage. Islam is in no way a "religion of peace". It demands the bloody death of all who resist it. It demands in-human brutality toward women and children. It is horrific and evil in its teachings and practice. Individual muslims who recognize the evil and who want something better need to do exactly what Dr. Gabriel did. Western nations need to be very clear that Islamic nations can be what they are if this is what they want, but if they leave and come here they can not bring it with them. Child abuse and rape, spousal rape and battery, murder for honor or convenience or racial and religious intolerance are not protected by the US Constitution or any law of any non-Islamic nation.
-
(http://http://www.balloon-juice.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/TacgJ.jpg)
-
As most of us around here are acutely aware, it can be anywhere from difficult to impossible to influence the mind of a true believer. Moreso when they are surrounded by others with the same opinion. I think the only part of the puzzle somewhat within our reach is to try to reel our own governments and corporations in and get them to quit creating Blowback (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_%28intelligence%29). Withdraw from foreign entanglements, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, So. America and all the other 200+ foreign nations in which we are inappropriately, unconstitutionally involved.
In other words, trade with all nations, alliance with none. Quit trying to conquer the world. I want the Old Deal back!
-
Our enemies have an easy target with us Americans. They are sitting back laughing at us debating whether or not we should allow a mosque at ground Zero. They have the upper hand every time because they use our own laws against us. There is an Orthodox Church (http://http://www.greekboston.com/wordpress/2010/08/greek-orthodox-church-or-mosque-ground-zero/) which was destroyed when the towers fell but have been met with nothing but road blocks trying to rebuild, yet the Mosque gets overwhelming support.
I think as Americans we cannot just deny the building of the Mosques because of their religion. If they are building it with good intentions they should be able to understand the sensitivity of this location and be open to dialog. Why not build it a couple of blocks down the road?
The guy who bought the land, at ground zero, for the mosque was waiting tables in New York City 7 years ago and now has the funds to purchase this land in downtown Manhattan and Finance this Mosque? I think as a minimum we should understand where this money is coming from.
An earlier post made reference to an analog of building a swine slaughter house next to the Mosque. This would be legal but would it be the right thing to do? The same question should be asked of this Mosque placement. There may be more suitable places to build this which would make all parties happy.
...
-
This should help.
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/07/t ... video.html (http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/07/three-things-about-islam-video.html)
Pretty well explains the problem.
As most of us around here are acutely aware, it can be anywhere from difficult to impossible to influence the mind of a true believer. Moreso when they are surrounded by others with the same opinion. I think the only part of the puzzle somewhat within our reach is to try to reel our own governments and corporations in and get them to quit creating Blowback (http://http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_%28intelligence%29). Withdraw from foreign entanglements, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, So. America and all the other 200+ foreign nations in which we are inappropriately, unconstitutionally involved.
In other words, trade with all nations, alliance with none. Quit trying to conquer the world. I want the Old Deal back!
I have some sympathy for this POV. I agree to a point. But here's the problem as I see it - there is no way to avoid blow back because they are the aggressors. They attack, we react, then they attack b/c we reacted. Does anyone really think they'll stop attacking if we stop reacting?
I can never support abandoning Israel b/c when we do God will abandon us. But aside from this very real concern -
Should civilized nations really ignore slaughter and genocide? For example, Afghanistan. I'd like to suggest the reading of A Thousand Splendid Suns. Consider that the Taliban has murdered children for talking to American's; Decapitated teachers in front of their families for teaching girls; Generally keeps women so subjugated that a donkey has more right to expect kindness and justice from its owner than a woman does of her father or husband or brother; And they will quickly overrun that country as soon as we leave. So, which is more wrong? Stay and piss them off or leave and get them slaughtered? Consider much of Africa - they slaughter each other on a regular basis. Remember the world criticism when we failed to charge into Rwanda? And it was awful. But we'd also have been criticized had we gone rushing in. There would have been blow back for sure. laissez-fair is not so easily achieved or so harmless or so neutral as we might wish.
-
This is a funny game, using circular reasoning. The proposal of a mosque is insensistive or disrespectful if the violent acts of September 11, 2001 are a manifestation of the religion of Islam as it relates to all who would call themselves Muslims. Since the explanations for the motivation for the attacks run the gamut from retalliation against the US for it's support of Israel to the childish notion that Usama Bin Laden hates the fact that Britney Spears' vulva is on the cover of Cosmo, it is not self-evident that the attacks were in keeping with Islamic beliefs as they are accepted and practiced by most Muslims. It is a propaganda move.
-
Ed Koch
Former Mayor, New York City
Posted: August 16, 2010 04:10 PM
"President George Washington's Letter to the Jews of Rhode Island Applies to the Muslims of New York".
President Obama was right to express his views on constructing a mosque near Ground Zero, the site of the 9/11 catastrophe:
As a citizen and as president, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. And that includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in Lower Manhattan in accordance with local laws and ordinances.
The president is also right to oppose as he does the efforts by some to amend the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution to bar babies born to illegal immigrants from becoming citizens.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who was first to take up the fight to protect the legitimate rights of American Muslims to build a mosque near Ground Zero, was right and courageous to lead the way and point Americans in the right direction.
President Obama, according to the New York Times of Aug. 15, is now "faced with withering Republican criticism of his defense of the right of Muslims to build a community center and mosque near Ground Zero." Those leading the charge against the president, according to the Times, "including Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, Representative John A. Boehner, the House minority leader and Representative Peter King of New York, forcefully rejected the president's stance."
The president's position will be remembered by later generations of Americans with the same high regard as President George Washington's letter in 1790 to the Jews of Rhode Island who built the Touro Synagogue in that state. Moses Seixas of the Hebrew Congregation in Newport, Rhode Island, wrote to George Washington:
Deprived as we heretofore have been of the invaluable rights of free Citizens, we now with a deep sense of gratitude to the Almighty disposer of all events behold a Government, erected by the Majesty of the People -- a Government, which to bigotry gives no sanction, to persecution no assistance -- but generously affording to all Liberty of conscience, and immunities of Citizenship: -- deeming every one, of whatever Nation, tongue, or language equal parts of the great governmental Machine: -- This so ample and extensive Federal Union whose basis is Philanthropy, Mutual confidence and Public Virtue, we cannot but acknowledge to be the work of the Great God, who ruleth in the Armies of Heaven, and among the Inhabitants of the Earth, doing whatever seemeth him good.
President Washington responded as follows:
... The Citizens of the United States of America have a right to applaud themselves for having given to mankind examples of an enlarged and liberal policy: a policy worthy of imitation. All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship. It is now no more that toleration is spoken of, as if it was by the indulgence of one class of people, that another enjoyed the exercise of their inherent national gifts. For happily the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens, in giving it on all occasions their effectual support. It would be inconsistent with the frankness of my character not to avow that I am pleased with your favorable opinion of my Administration, and fervent wishes for my felicity. May the children of the Stock of Abraham, who dwell in this land, continue to merit and enjoy the good will of the other Inhabitants; while every one shall sit in safety under his own vine and figtree, and there shall be none to make him afraid. May the father of all mercies scatter light and not darkness in our paths, and make us all in our several vocations useful here, and in his own due time and way everlastingly happy. G. Washington
Let us not do again, albeit in different form and to a different group, what we did to Japanese-Americans during World War II when we rounded them up without cause. No Japanese-American was ever charged with treason, notwithstanding that they were placed in internment camps for the balance of the war.
I am a proud Jew. Proud of my religion and my culture. Columnist David Brooks, also Jewish and similarly proud, in a New York Times article of January 12, 2010, wrote of our people's accomplishments:
Jews are a famously accomplished group. They make up 0.2 percent of the world population, but 54 percent of the world chess champions, 27 percent of the Nobel physics laureates and 31 percent of the medicine laureates. Jews make up 2 percent of the U.S. population, but 21 percent of the Ivy League student bodies, 26 percent of the Kennedy Center honorees, 37 percent of the Academy Award-winning directors, 38 percent of those on a recent Business Week list of leading philanthropists, 51 percent of the Pulitzer Prize winners for nonfiction.
We Jews also have our share of thieves, predators, child molesters, Ponzi-schemers, traitors and profiteers. Muslims have their share of great world accomplishments -- the concept of zero, advancements in mathematics, medicine, chemistry, botany and astronomy. They also have their share of crazies, tyrants, homophobes, those holding hostile and irrational attitudes towards women, vilification of Jews, Christians, Hindus and other so-called infidels.
Let's be calm now and not need the passage of time to bring us to our senses and years later apologize. Of course, those who suffered the loss of loved ones, and those exposed to the catastrophe of 9/11 have every right to hold opinions opposing the building of the mosque. They are grieving and rightfully enraged at anyone associated in any way with the 19 Muslim terrorists who were responsible for the deaths of nearly 3,000 Americans killed on 9/11, and all of us must sympathize with them and their feelings.
But Americans must never forget who we are and why our Founding Fathers and those who built the original 13 colonies came here. It was primarily to find and create a new country in which they could practice religious freedom, denied them in England. Jews found that freedom of religion in New Amsterdam, where the East India Company of Holland directed the first public anti-Semite in that city -- its Governor, Peter Stuyvesant -- to let them in, he first refusing to do so.
I believe we are locked in battle with fanatical Islam and will be for the foreseeable future. I do not believe the vast majority of Muslims, and American Muslims in particular, are fanatics or enemies of the American people.
Government should neither favor nor hinder the efforts of religious institutions, other than to protect their rights to engage in carrying them out as permitted under the First Amendment of the Constitution.
A final word on those seeking to end the concept of American citizenship by virtue of birth, led by Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC):
Don't they understand that the concept of citizenship by birth is one of the great American ideas of which we have been justly proud and which distinguishes us from many other countries and has served us well? They should not fear the Know Nothings, whose voices are loud, but whose numbers are small. They should not shame themselves by joining these violators of American values and traditions.
-
I'm Gonna suggest that you all begin to educate yourselves. See and know what muhammad was, what he said, what he meant what he ::unhappy:: ::unhappy:: was. see if that co-incides with any of your 'humanist' values. See for yourselves what a christian fundamentalist really , truly is. see if that's different from a christian 'litereralist' or a christian 'evangelical'.See what they really, truly are. you'll know the truth of their belief by their behavior.Same for the muslims. Look at muslim science, architecture, economics, medicine. see the 'progress'. Examine their postulates. Educate yourselves, and now, else live under Shari'a.anne, maybe you''d look good in a burqa. But i bet you wouldn't be comfortable.
There is a war in progress, and it's been in progress for a while, now, about 1300 years, so learn, or lose.
The leading cause of death for muslims is, and has been,... muslims. Is that how you want to live?
learn what dhimmitude is. Why an 'aid flotilla' for gaza , but nothing for the primitive christians and animists of darfur?
I know men who have served in those regions, both israelis and americans ( and brits and australians and germans and a frog) Learn what'Taquiyeh' is, and why.You'll learn far more from apostate muslims than you'll ever learn from the umma. Read the Qu'ran, and know how nonsensensical, how hypocritical, how violent it is. ( it's helpful to know that the secretary for the Caliph of Bagdad re-organized the qu'ran in the twelvfe century, to aid in memorization, and to obliterate it'd contradictions) Learn who riqfa bary is, and learn her suffering.
J.O.M.
::unhappy::
-
I'm Gonna suggest that you all begin to educate yourselves. See and know what muhammad was, what he said, what he meant what he ::unhappy:: ::unhappy:: was. see if that co-incides with any of your 'humanist' values. See for yourselves what a christian fundamentalist really , truly is. see if that's different from a christian 'litereralist' or a christian 'evangelical'.See what they really, truly are. you'll know the truth of their belief by their behavior.Same for the muslims. Look at muslim science, architecture, economics, medicine. see the 'progress'. Examine their postulates. Educate yourselves, and now, else live under Shari'a.anne, maybe you''d look good in a burqa. But i bet you wouldn't be comfortable.
There is a war in progress, and it's been in progress for a while, now, about 1300 years, so learn, or lose.
The leading cause of death for muslims is, and has been,... muslims. Is that how you want to live?
learn what dhimmitude is. Why an 'aid flotilla' for gaza , but nothing for the primitive christians and animists of darfur?
I know men who have served in those regions, both israelis and americans ( and brits and australians and germans and a frog) Learn what'Taquiyeh' is, and why.You'll learn far more from apostate muslims than you'll ever learn from the umma. Read the Qu'ran, and know how nonsensensical, how hypocritical, how violent it is. ( it's helpful to know that the secretary for the Caliph of Bagdad re-organized the qu'ran in the twelvfe century, to aid in memorization, and to obliterate it'd contradictions) Learn who riqfa bary is, and learn her suffering.
J.O.M.
::unhappy::
I've read the Koran, albeit an English translation (which some Muslims have told me is inadequate to truly get it, "it's gotta be in Arabic" they said----sounds like jive to me). It is completely nonsensical. Personally, I think Mohammed had syphilis and went insane. Hell, if I claimed to have met God in the desert they'd fucking lock me up, not start a religion around my hallucinations (NOTE: I actually HAVE started a religion based on my hallucinations) I think Islam is a dangerous idea. All religions (except mine) suck, and are vehicles for social control. I think we should nuke the fuck out of Mecca and irradiate the whole goddamn region......fuck all those assholes. We should quit sending our kids to die over there, ICBMs should do the trick very nicely. Those fuckwads over there are NO DAMN GOOD, and their conspiracy to take over all the world's small, filthy convenience stores is rivaled only by the Hindus. Plus, Muslims don't drink alcohol, so you know you can't trust the fuckers.
I really hope Yiddy gets the guts to nuke Iran, too----but they'll probably just manipulate us into doing it for them.
-
but they'll probably just manipulate us into doing it for them.
:rofl: ::poke:: :lala: :dose: :roflmao:
-
posting.php?mode=reply&f=32&t=30917 (http://www.fornits.com/phpbb/posting.php?mode=reply&f=32&t=30917)
An Example of Taqiyya
Tuesday, November 11
IN THE BOOK, Terrorist Hunter: The Extraordinary Story of a Woman Who Went Undercover to Infiltrate the Radical Islamic Groups Operating in America, Rita Katz wrote about being at an IAP conference in Chicago. IAP is the Islamic Association for Palestine. There were lots of booths at the conference for "charitable" organizations, and at one of these booths, Katz met a man she already knew about: Muhammad Salah. She pretended she didn't know who he was, and he introduced himself as a "Muslim human rights activist."
Katz, a non-Muslim woman dressed as a Muslim, wrote, "He was small, thin, nearly bald. Totally harmless looking." He told her these conferences were so important because "we can teach you about the oppression and sufferings of Muslims in America and all over the world."
Then he told Katz his story. He had been a Palestinian with an American citizenship, a used-car salesman, working in Chicago when he went to Israel to "visit family and friends." But in Israel he was arrested by the Israeli authorities and thrown into prison for five years!
Katz looked appropriately appalled and asked why in heaven's name would they put him in prison? "Because the Israelis oppress innocent Palestinians," he said. "And do you know what is the most shocking part? When I returned to the U.S., after I was tortured and I thought I was going to die in that prison, the Americans placed me under investigation and froze my assets! Me, an innocent citizen, a car dealer, a family man, father of five!"
To any other kafir this probably would have been a convincing story. The poor, oppressed Muslim! It's just wrong to treat people that way. Those Israelis must be very cruel. Those Americans are so oppressive to Muslims!
But Katz was not an ordinary kafir. She researched people like Salah for a living. She knew all about him. This frail, innocent-looking man was the leader of the worldwide military wing of Hamas, a brutal terrorist organization! When he was arrested in Israel he had a hundred thousand dollars in cash on him. In his testimony, he admitted the money was supposed to go to "members of Hamas's military wing." He displayed detailed inside knowledge of Hamas's structure and funding, and his testimony was later used as evidence in the New York trial of Musa Abu Marzook, the leader of the political bureau of Hamas (and the man who had appointed Salah to his position as leader of the military wing).
Katz writes:
"Salah disclosed (in his testimony) that he'd been authorized by Marzook to recruit individuals for training in the uses of explosives to fight in the 'holy war.' In the United States, Salah began training ten such recruits, three of whom were chosen to carry out attacks. In addition to supervising the building of bombs, explosives, and remote detonation devices, Salah was instructed by Marzook to develop biological and chemical weapons for Hamas."
When Nasser Hidmi was caught trying to detonate a bomb in Israel, he said he had been chosen by none other than the poor, innocent, abused, oppressed Muslim, Muhammad Salah.
This is an example of taqiyya, the principle of religious deception. According to mainstream Islamic doctrine, Islam is in a permanent state of war with any non-Muslim who opposes the rule of Shari'a law. And in war, deceit is a legitimate tactic.
In other words, as long as it helps the Islamic goal of making the whole world submit to Shari'a law, it is perfectly all right to lie and deceive.
When I was trying to figure out what I would choose as the three most important things to tell a non-Muslim about Islam, taqiyya was one of the three. The use of taqiyya is the main reason most non-Muslims are so confused about the real nature of Islam — they are constantly being intentionally deceived by Islamic supremacists posing as reasonable, "moderate" Muslims, who are thoroughly fooling everyone from political leaders to the media that "Islam is a religion of peace" and that "Islam has been hijacked by extremists."
What they don't want non-Muslims to know is that Islamic teachings are highly political and it is a Muslim's religious duty to strive to accomplish Islam's primary political goal — the establishment of worldwide Shari'a law — in any way he can for his whole life.
Why wouldn't Islamic supremacists want non-Muslims to know this? Because they can make a lot more progress toward their goal if most of us are in the dark.
But now you know. If you don't, read the Qur'an and find out for yourself. And then spread the word.
How Taqiyya Alters Islam’s Rules of War
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/07/w ... sques.html (http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/07/whats-big-deal-about-mosques.html)
What's the Big Deal About Mosques?
Sunday, July 4
PEOPLE SEEM to be protesting the construction of mosques all over the non-Muslim world, from London to New York, from Switzerland to Australia. Why?
"The way to gain influence among the Muslim community is to control the mosques," Steven Emerson says, speaking of the building and purchasing of mosques around America by the Muslim American society (which has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood). "The way to control what people think in the Muslim community is to have the right imam preach the right message. So by acquiring these mosques the Muslim American Society gets the right to appoint the imam and distribute the message they believe is necessary to spread Islam around the world."
Emerson is an expert on these matters. He is the author of six books, and co-author of two more. His television documentary, "Jihad in America," won the 1994 George Polk Award for best Television Documentary, and top prize for best investigative reporting from Investigative Reporters and Editors. He is also the Executive Director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism, a data-gathering center on Islamist groups. Emerson frequently testifies before Congressional committees on al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and other terrorist organizations.
The majority of mosques in the U.S. are urging Muslims to undermine the government and eventually overthrow it. Read more about that here: Mapping Sharia.
Read more about the surprising role mosques traditionally serve in Islam: A Concession That Should Not Be Granted.
Read more about who funds mosques: The Wahhabi Invasion of America.
Print
Share on Facebook • Email this • Post to Google Buzz (1) • Save to del.icio.us • Add to del.icio.us • Digg This! • Discuss on Newsvine • Stumble It! • Add to Mixx! • Email the author
Posted by Citizen Warrior
Labels: educate the public about Islamic supremacism
1 comments:
hellosnackbar 3:23 PM
There is a movement in the UK to counteract the building of mosques
by spraying the ground of the proposed site with pig products;a form of gentle terrorism.(no violence).
Expect the EDL to make use of such tactics.
Should be interesting?
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2008/11/c ... anted.html (http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2008/11/concession-that-should-not-be-granted.html)
A Concession That Should Not Be Granted
Saturday, November 15
MUSLIMS LIVING IN the West are waging jihad by gaining concessions. And one of the concessions they've been easily attaining in the free world is permission to build mosques by the thousands, usually funded by Saudi oil money, and controlled by Jihadis.
Western countries hardly think twice when Muslims want to build a mosque, because Westerners think of mosques as simply "places of worship." But Jihadis consider mosques on foreign soil to be staging posts for further encroachments into the country with the ultimate goal of establishing the law of Allah in that new land.
In other words, Western countries are allowing Jihadis to build forward bases for their military infiltration. That might sound like fear-mongering, but it's a plain fact that even Jihadis don't try to hide. Jihad is preached in mosques, and it is not the exception, but the rule. Seditious material is for sale and given to mosque-goers all over the free world. (Read more about the kind of messages promoted in mosques in the United States and Britain.)
In short, a mosque is a military outpost in the invasion of a non-Muslim country.
The book, The Mosque Exposed, is written by two ex-Muslims, S. Solomon and E. Alamaqdisi. In it, they write, "...in Islam...the mosque is always the center, the beginning, and the end of all Islamic affairs..." As Fatwa #26159 says:
"For a mosque is symbol of the presence of Islam, the heartbeat of the Muslim community, an educational outlet where the community is taught to combat evil, ignorance and apostasy. It is a university as well as a court, from where the laws of Allah are promoted, it is a symbol of authority within that community and ultimately within the state and beyond, for the Apostle of Allah said Islam rises and nothing rises above it, for it is the uppermost."
A mosque is just a building. But in Islam, the mosque is the center of their religion, and in Islam the religion is totally encompassing in a way non-Muslims can hardly imagine. As Solomon and Alamaqdisi write:
"Islam cannot be defined only as a religion in the Western sense of the word, neither can it be termed as a faith only. It is a whole encompassing system. It is first and foremost a socio-political and socio-religious system, as well as socio-economic, socio-educational, legislative, judiciary, and military system, cloaked and garbed in religious terminology, with regulations that govern every aspect of the lives of its adherents and their relationships among themselves, and with those that are non-Muslims.
"The main institution that plays a central role in the Muslim community directing their lives and almost everything related to that is the mosque."
Muslims are required to emulate Mohammad in all ways, and Mohammad used the mosque as a home-base where jihad was declared, where fatwas were made, where indoctrination took place, where raids and attacks were planned, where the planning and building of the Islamic State took place, where military orders were given, and it was in the mosque where Mohammad gave his death sentences to the enemies of Islam.
It says over seventy times in the Qur'an that a Muslim should follow Mohammad's example.
Given all that, a new policy should be established in democracies around the world: No more mosques can be built. And the ones that already exist should be closely monitored. When a mosque is found to promote sedition, it should be closed. A new mosque is a concession that should not be granted.
Print
Posted by Citizen Warrior
Labels: how to weaken Jihadis
5 comments:
Anonymous 12:13 PM
Dear Citizen Warrior,
Your article, "A Concession That Should Not Be Granted" is essential for our National Security. Your suggestions to prevent building future mosques, monitoring the existing ones, and shutting down those guilty of sedition is absolutely essential for our national security. You deserve the highest respect and appreciation for these insightful recommendations. It is a tragedy of negligence that our politicians and national security apparatus have not implemented these long ago.
You state, "a mosque is a military outpost in the invasion of a non-Muslim country". You are absolutely correct and your point has been proven a million times over during the last thousand years right up to the present. Unless and until we forbid mosques the United States will continue "drifting" into extremely dangerous territory.
All Americans should stand up to commend and applaud your courage in telling what the truth actually is, and pointing out how our national security has been seriously jeopardized by the "mushrooming" of mosques in the USA. Mosques truly are the staging areas for the conquest of infidel countries, and this point cannot be overstressed.
Sincerely,
Martel Sobieskey
River Fred 5:33 PM
The politically correct will destroy America. I am proud to be politically incorrect.
Fred
Citizen Warrior 4:51 AM
Congressional Candidate Vijay Kumar wrote an excellent article detailing the Islamic meaning and use of mosques:
THE MUSLIM MOSQUE: A STATE WITHIN A STATE
It's well worth reading.
Citizen Warrior 4:56 AM
An excerpt from the article, THE MUSLIM MOSQUE: A STATE WITHIN A STATE:
These same patterns and political mandates have been used over and over by Muslims since 610 A.D. to invade and conquer many civilizations and nations throughout the world, and to eradicate human rights and freedoms in those lands. Iran once was called Persia and was Zorastrian. Egypt was Christian. What was once a Hindu civilization was conquered and made into Pakistan, which is now part of the Axis of Jihad, along with Iran and Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan was Buddhist for thousands of years. Now its chief exports are heroin and Islamic terrorism.
“When We decide to destroy a population, We (first) send a definite order to those among them who are given the good things of this life and yet transgress; so that the word is proved true against them: then (it is) We destroy them utterly.” —Quran 17:16
In every instance where Islam has conquered and “destroyed utterly” a nation or civilization, the key to the conquest was the establishment of mosques, which are political and military command and control centers for Islam, and which all point toward the seat of Islamic power: the Kaaba.
Citizen Warrior 4:11 PM
Here are step-by-step instructions for stopping a mosque-building proposal in your town:
SIOA Mosque Manifesto: All Mosques are Not Created Equal, A Handy Guide to Fighting the Muslim Brotherhood
-
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq (http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/iraq)
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/deathcount/explanation (http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/deathcount/explanation)
-
:seg:
-
http://www.salon.com/entertainment/comi ... dern_world (http://www.salon.com/entertainment/comics/this_modern_world/2010/08/10/this_modern_world)
-
Withdraw from foreign entanglements, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, So. America and all the other 200+ foreign nations in which we are inappropriately, unconstitutionally involved.
That would make us safe. For a while. See. Israel is the only western democracy in the region. Women have full equality. They serve in the military. Even gays have full equality and serve in the military. Muslims hate this. It's like putting a gay bar up next to a church (or a mosque). Well. You let the churchgoers burn down that gay bar, gain strength, and sooner or later they're going to expand and start burning down gay bars all over the world. Israel is that persistent little gay bar. Israel is the cork in the bottle. Without Israel, Muslim fundamentalists would turn their full and undivided attention towards the west. It's a lot cheaper in the long run to defend Israel than it is to deal with a worldwide Jihad. Israel is a battleground in a proxy war between the west and Islam. It's not a war we started but it's a war we can't afford to ignore or lose.
Ps: there is little if all in the constitution about foreign policy and even Jefferson refused to negotiate with Islam. Jefferson himself thought very very little of Islam. He owned a Qur'an not because he admired the religion but because he wanted to understand his enemy (at the time Jizya (tribute) was being demanded of the United States, justified in the Qur'an) (http://http://www.slate.com/id/2157314/)
As Jefferson later reported to Secretary of State John Jay, and to the Congress:
The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.
(basically condensing and paraphrasing Sura 9 of the Qur'an)
Appeasement was too expensive as they just kept asking more and more. Our ultimate answer was to bomb the fuck out of them until they decided to neglect adhering to that part of the Qur'an. Problem solved.
-
Our ultimate answer was to bomb the fuck out of them until they decided to neglect adhering to that part of the Qur'an. Problem solved.
"Our ultimate answer"? Hasbaranik at work. No posts related to the TTI, just propaganda related to Israel and the War on Terror. The War on Terror, brought to you by the folks who gave you the War on Drugs.
-
Our ultimate answer was to bomb the fuck out of them until they decided to neglect adhering to that part of the Qur'an. Problem solved.
"Our ultimate answer"? Hasbaranik at work. No posts related to the TTI, just propaganda related to Israel and the War on Terror. The War on Terror, brought to you by the folks who gave you the War on Drugs.
I am not a "Hasbaranik", not that it matters. Quiz me on program knowledge and you'll find i'm a regular reader here. This isn't a political issue. I'm not a republican. I am not a Christian. I don't support the war on terror as it's being waged and I never supported the war in Iraq. Atheist liberals have more to fear than 'conservative' christians. Atheists don't get the choice to become Dhimmi second class citizens. For them it's the gallows or the mosque.
From where i'm standing you're acting like an Aarcolite program apologist. Programs will spread if not opposed. So will Islam. Synanon was a fucked up cul that became a religion. So was Islam. Pretending either isn't a threat and treating the situation with half-measures and political correctness is what allows both ideologies to spread.
-
Nobody alleged that you were a Christian. You're a propagandist. Hasbaranik is a suitable term inasmuch as your propaganda is anti-Muslim and pro-Israeli. You clearly read my posts, as borne out by your stereotypical comment about me being Canadian and Canadian hate speech policy. A Hasbaranik by any other name would smell as sweet. Here's an example of folks doing the same kind of work:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jso ... lavon.html (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/lavon.html)
This article is entertaining as it presents a whole lot of information about a variety of subjects but never succinctly states the nature of the operation, which was to blow up US and British facilities and lay the blame on other people, all for the strategic benefit of Israel:
"These operations were to "make it clear to the whole world that Egypt's new rulers were nothing but a group of foolhardy extremists, unreliable and unworthy of taking charge of an asset as important as the Suez Canal. Furthermore, it was to be demonstrated that their grasp on power was uncertain, that they faced powerful internal opposition, and, consequently, they were unworthy of being counted upon as a dependable ally."
-
Let's review:
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2008/11/e ... qiyya.html (http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2008/11/example-of-taqiyya.html)
and:
http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/08/g ... osque.html (http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/08/ground-zero-mosque.html)
The Ground Zero Mosque
Wednesday, August 18
THERE ARE GOOD reasons to stop the proposed Ground Zero mosque. But what's the message people have gotten from the mainstream media? "Muslims killed people on 9/11, so Muslims should not be allowed to build a mosque so near to Ground Zero."
That's pretty lame. Part of the reason for this weak argument against the Ground Zero mosque is that the really good reasons for opposing it require some background knowledge about Islam — information too extensive to be packed into a sound bite. When the full argument gets squeezed into a sound bite, it is reduced to something embarrassingly pathetic.
For the sound bite to make any sense at all, you have to know quite a bit about Islam. But for someone who thinks Islam is simply another religion, similar to Christianity or Buddhism or Judaism, and that a small fringe of crazy extremists have hijacked the religion and committed atrocities in its name — atrocities that go against the foundational teachings of Islam, sullying the peaceful reputation of Islam — for someone with that understanding of Islam, the arguments against the Ground Zero mosque sound not just lame, but seem like an obviously weak excuse to be a hater, a bigoted Islamophobe, a redneck, an ignorant Bible-thumper, or just an intolerant jerk.
I don't believe people who think that way should be ignored. I think they should be debriefed. And I don't mean removing their underwear. I mean they should be brought up to speed about Islam. They know almost nothing about Islam, and what they think they know is getting in the way of them learning any more about it.
If we started from scratch to fill in the details represented by the sound bite, the full argument would go something like this:
Muslims killed people on 9/11 because mainstream Islam (represented by hundreds of millions of Muslims in the Middle East, Indonesia, and elsewhere) is at war with the non-Muslim world, and has been since the year 622. That's quite an indictment. Some would call it an "allegation." But it is nothing more than an historical and doctrinal fact. Well-educated orthodox Muslims would not take any offense at this fact. They would not consider it an allegation. In fact, they would take offense at the implication that this ought to be considered an allegation. It's just basic Islamic doctrine, believed in by hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world, confirmed and supported by all the schools of Islamic jurisprudence, confirmed by Islamic history, and given complete authority by the example of the Prophet Mohammad.
The fact is validated by the information in the Quran, the Sira, and the Hadith, which comprises the core Islamic doctrine. It is not disputed by any mainstream or accepted sect or school of Islam, and has never been disputed by any mainstream or widely popular leaders of Islam throughout its history.
It is simply a basic Islamic principle: Islam exists in a state of war with the non-Muslim world until the whole world follows the holy law of Allah. Read more about this principle here.
Yes, it is true that many Muslims do not subscribe to these teachings. Most of them do not subscribe because they don't know much about their own religion (see more about that here), which is our good fortune.
But those who have read the core Islamic doctrine and consider themselves Muslims (and this would include almost all Islamic leaders, imams, and Islamic scholars) understand perfectly well it is their religious duty to bring the whole world under Islamic law. This is the prime directive.
Mohammad did not believe in contemplating one's navel as a form of worship. He believed — and made it mandatory for all Muslims — that one proved one's devotion to Allah with action. And the most important action, according to Mohammad, is jihad. Jihad is not limited to warfare. Jihad means striving to bring the law of Allah to all people on earth, by using your wealth, your speech, your pen, your time, and your life — ideally by peaceful means, but by war if necessary.
According to mainstream (not fringe or extreme) Islamic doctrine, man made governments (like democracies) and man made laws are an abomination and a sin and should not be allowed to continue existing in the world. Political action is a religious duty to all Muslims — political action aimed at changing laws and governments to follow Sharia, the holy law of Allah.
All this information is easy to discover. It is not esoteric. It is not hidden. Every bookstore carries at least the Quran (and usually the Hadith and Sira) translated into English.
Okay, so what does this have to do with the Ground Zero mosque?
When non-Muslims think about building a house of worship, we think about a peaceful place where devout, believing people can commune with their creator. But in order to understand what a mosque is to Muslims, you have to understand the fundamentally political nature of Islam. Most of Islam is political. It is not a fringe part of Islam. It is the main part.
Mohammad's biography is one of the core doctrines of Islam. It is called the Sira. The amount of the Sira's text devoted to jihad is 67%. It says in the Quran — Islam's most holy book — that a Muslim should follow Mohammad's perfect example, and it hammers on this point, saying it 91 times in the Quran.
The practice of Islam is fundamentally political. Non-Muslims may think this is strange, but it is a normal, unremarkable fact to a Muslim. How can you believe in a creator who has given you the perfect formula for living (Sharia), and told you it is your duty to live that way and to bring the light of the holy law to all people, and still have some arbitrary division between "political" action and "religious" practice?
So a Muslim's conception of a mosque is entirely different from a Westerner's conception of a "house of worship," because their conception of "religion" is entirely different than a non-Muslim's. We should think of mosques the way Muslims think of mosques, rather than lay our own values over theirs, as if we understand their religion better than they do.
And their understanding is based firmly on the example of the Prophet. Mohammad used the mosque as a home-base where jihad was declared, where fatwas were made, where indoctrination took place, where raids and attacks were planned, where the planning and building of the Islamic State took place, where military orders were given, and where Mohammad gave his death sentences to the enemies of Islam. This is not "anti-Islam propaganda." This is history as understood and believed by Muslims. This is basic Islamic history. Read more about what mosques mean to Muslims.
This is not just interesting ancient history. Mosques are still put to these uses today.
In Islam, the mosque is the center of their religion, and in Islam religion is totally encompassing in a way non-Muslims can hardly imagine.
If the mosque at Ground Zero is built, it will be considered to be a triumphant symbol of the third jihad by most orthodox Muslims in the world. We may not like it, we may wish this wasn't the case, we may believe that our Muslim friend wouldn't see it that way (and we may be right about that), but most orthodox Muslims will see it this way. When you know a lot about Islam, this will be obvious.
But to understand the idea of "the third jihad," we need to go further back. There have been two major jihads in Islamic history, and mosques always played a central role. The first jihad was led by Mohammad himself. His small band of followers grew in his lifetime until all of Arabia was conquered and converted into an Islamic state. By force.
After his death, the second great jihad conquered most of the Middle East and North Africa, and into Europe, reaching as far as modern-day France. Europe and other parts of the world finally began to fight back effectively enough to stop Islam's spread. As Europeans and others gained in strength, Islam's advance was pushed back. Islam ruled Spain from 711 AD to 1492 AD. Europeans re-captured Spain from Islamic rule the same year Columbus discovered America, and Islam's political power in Europe was ended.
With the influx of new wealth from the freshly discovered New World, Europe gained greater military strength and confidence. The Middle East was eventually carved up, divided, and colonized by (mostly) European powers, and the danger of Islam's quest for world domination seemed to be over.
Then the combustion engine was invented and oil was discovered in the Middle East. Obscene amounts of money started flowing into the hands of devout Muslims. And for the last 80 years or so, Islam has been resurging. Orthodox (and heterodox) Muslims are immigrating into Europe and the Americas, and doing what they're supposed to do according to their sacred texts: Working to bring the holy law of Allah into the ignorant and decadent Western nations, by any means necessary. Violence is one possibility, but most orthodox Muslims now believe 9/11 was a tactical mistake. Arousing the anger of powerful Western nations is not the way to achieve victory.
Much more subtle ways must be found to convert the West to Sharia. And many ways are being found and successfully implemented. The Muslim Brotherhood, the largest Islamic organization in the world, stated in an internal document written in 1991 (seized in an FBI raid) that their mission in America was:
"...eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house..." Read more about that here.
The Muslim Brotherhood has established what appear to be legitimate, mainstream, moderate Muslim organizations (opulently funded with Saudi oil money) which have set themselves up as representatives of "the Muslim community" to approve or disapprove of what is in American textbooks, what is published in magazines, newspapers, and television news, and how Islam is portrayed in Hollywood movies. These organizations have been able to influence how the U.S. governmental security agencies think about and write about Islamic terrorism. They are successfully silencing criticism of Islam in the West. And in numerous other ways, believing Muslims are getting Islamic law applied in the West, and getting it applied more completely with each passing year.
But what does this have to do with mosques?
Historically, starting with Mohammad, the process of conquering and subjugating non-Muslims included building a mosque on top of the previous culture's representative house of worship. It is a strong symbol of the dominance of Islam. It tells everyone present — Muslims and non-Muslims alike — that a change has occurred, a new sheriff is in town, a new political order is in charge.
In the world today, you could make a very good case that the United States is the most powerful nation on earth, both militarily and economically. And since at least the 1980's, the United States has done more to prevent the Islamization of the world than any other nation. The U.S. is a barrier to the political goal of Islam.
The Twin Towers and the Pentagon were attacked because they were perceived by Muslims as being representatives of American power — America's money and America's military. They were symbols of core American values, according to Al-Qaeda. They were our shrines. They were our places of worship, or at least this is how Al-Qaeda perceived it.
So building a mosque as close as possible to the site of the complete collapse of America's house of worship is a symbolic act, an expression of dominance, a triumphal planting of the flag on foreign soil, and for non-Muslims who are educated about Islamic history and its core values, it is correctly seen as symbolically spitting on the enemy's grave.
In addition, according to the Muslim, Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, who testified before the U.S. State Department, 80 percent of mosques in America preach "extremist ideology." Coming from an entirely different source, the Mapping Sharia Project sent trained people into mosques in the U.S. to find out how many of them are calling for jihad against America. They discovered that the majority of the mosques they've investigated so far do, in fact, promote jihad against America, in the Friday "sermons" (known as "khutbah") and in the literature available at the mosques.
Saudi Arabia's oil wealth enables it to control around 90% of the world's Islamic institutions (source), and the Saudis promote hardcore, fundamentalist Islam. They pay for these mosques because it gives them control over what is taught and promoted at the mosques. Read more about this.
If you understand all this, you can see it is not only symbolically offensive to allow a triumphalist mosque to be built almost on the site of 9/11, it is strategically foolish. It means allowing another mosque to be planted on American soil which will function as a kind of forward base of operations in enemy land, and which will, in all probability (given the high percentages just outlined) allow orthodox Muslims to reach more people and do more of their "good works" of bringing Islamic law to America.
Because the percentage of Muslims is much higher in Europe than in the United States, Europe is further along in the process of becoming "Islamized." It's hard to believe, but European laws are giving way to Islamic law. Muslim pressure continues to find cracks, and it works its way in. For example, all over Europe, the right to free speech is giving way to Sharia's limits on free speech (source 1 and source 2). Belgium, Germany and Britain offer benefits to polygamists' wives, even though polygamy is illegal there (source). Schools in Amsterdam don't mention farms because pigs are offensive to Muslims. "Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils. In France, school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire. The history of the Holocaust can in many cases no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity (source)."
France is allowing Muslims to rule parts of their country (source). Britain allows unfair treatment of Muslim women (source). Muslim doctors in Britain don't have to follow the same rules of cleanliness as everyone else (source). Britain knowingly tolerates sedition by Muslims (source). Britain allows over 80 Sharia courts to operate within their borders (source). In these and many, many other ways (source), the laws, values, and principles of Western civilization are giving way slowly but surely to unceasing Islamic pressure.
With this new understanding of Islamic history, Islamic doctrine, Islamic current events, and the role and function of mosques in Islam, the original sound bite makes a lot more sense: We don't want the Ground Zero mosque to be built because "Muslims killed people on 9/11 and Muslims should not be allowed to build a mosque so near to Ground Zero."
Print
Labels: the Ground Zero mosque
9 comments:
Andrea 8:31 PM
Excellent article! This article explains it all. It is so important to understand what Islam truly is; its history, its way of thinking; its current agenda. You are correct to say the masses think they understand Islam. And that we need to debrief the masses and get them up to speed. The problem is this: How do we effectively get these people to realize that they really do not know what Islam is about. Since they think they know , they do not want to listen. I have been called a racist, and religious intolerant too many times to mention when I try to educate people. I'm very frustrated.
Thank you for your work and your your brilliant writings. You give me hope.
Citizen Warrior 8:55 PM
"How do we effectively get these people to realize that they really do not know what Islam is about?"
That's a good question, Andrea.
What has worked best for me personally is asking someone if they've read the Quran, and then focusing exclusively on convincing them they MUST read it, and in the process, telling them all about it and how interesting it is: how it was written, how the nature of the revelations changed, what abrogation is and how it works, and all about the books An Abridged Koran and A Simple Koran and why those are the ones they should read.
This is an extremely effective approach. Read more about it here:
Push Them to Read the Quran
And when they interrupt you to object to something you say, answer back with one of these:
Answers to Objections
Damien 10:05 PM
Citizen Warrior,
You're correct about the danger of using sound bytes, especially that one. It isn't so much that the people who attacked us on 9/11 happened to be Muslims, they attacked us because, they genuinely believed what is written in their holy text. To expect a Muslim fundamentalist to not support things like Sharia Law and the conquest of Infidels, would be like a expecting a Christian fundamentalist to not believe in a literal six day creation, Noah's Flood and Jesus being the only way into heaven.
Now of course, not all Muslims, will literally believe what's written in their holy books, but large numbers of them do. It is possible that in addition to those who are ignorant of Its hateful violent teachings, some non fundamentalist Muslims will try to explain away or just ignore the really nasty parts of the Koran and the Siras and Hadiths. Its not even the fact that it is a Mosque no matter what they choose to call it, that's really important. Its that we know that the person behind it, is a Sharia Loving fundamentalist, (or as you would call him, Orthodox Muslim) and that Muslim Jihadists around the world will view it as a victory shrine like you said. Its also possible and highly likely that if it is built it will fund terrorist activities, unlike a lot of people in the Mainstream Media, like Keith Olbermann believe. Unfortunately, apparently youtube user Chattiestspike2, who I respect, agrees with him as well since he favorited this video.
Ground Zero Mosque Haters K.O.'d
They are definitively wrong to think that opposition to the Mosque is based on bigotry. I wish that someone like you, or Robert Spencer could have been there to refute what he got wrong. Also, while Olbermann's claim that there have been hate crimes agianst Muslims in the U.S is probably true, his claim that you are more likely to experience a terrorist attack if you are a Muslim in America is probably false. He does not provide a source for that statistic.
Damien 10:09 PM
Citizen Warrior,
By the way, you need to provide a source link for this.
"Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils...In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin. The history of the Holocaust can in many cases no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity (source)."
You wrote the word source, and put it in parenthesis, but you forget to turn it into a link in this one instance for some reason. Sorry to have to tell you that.
Citizen Warrior 10:14 PM
Unfortunately, Damien, some of the opposition to the Ground Zero mosque IS based on bigotry.
I would agree, however, that MOST of the people who oppose the mosque are not bigots. They are simply informed about Islam. Opposition to the mosque comes naturally once people learn a bit about basic Islamic doctrine.
Citizen Warrior 10:19 PM
About the missing link: I checked it on my computer, and the link works just fine. But in case it doesn't work for anyone else, the link goes to a speech by Geert Wilders:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/09/ameri ... nding.html (http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/09/america-as-the-last-man-standing.html)
Wilders gives many more examples in the speech.
Besur 10:33 PM
Excellent summary Citizen Warrior. I have bookmarked it on my youtube profile. More strength to you!
Damien 10:38 PM
Citizen Warrior,
Thanks, for some reason it wasn't even appearing as a link for me when I clicked on "show the original post." It was just appearing as normal text.
Damien 11:43 PM
Citizen Warrior,
You know, maybe its time for a change of tactics, at least in this one instance. Maybe our primary focus should be on the nature of people behind the Ground Zero Mosque in particular.
The Mosque at Ground Zero: Who Is Behind It?
Than maybe a lot of the people who once saw it as bigotry to oppose it, might suddenly see the Ground Zero Mosque as something more akin to a church run by the Aryan Nations next to Auschwitz.
-
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_ ... index.html (http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/16/ground_zero_mosque_origins/index.html)
-
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/08/16/ground_zero_mosque_origins/index.html
"A viciously anti-Muslim blogger, the New York Post and the right-wing media machine: How it all went down"
"A group of progressive Muslim-Americans plans to build an Islamic community center..."
Why do they have to make this a political issue when it isn't? I don't think "progressive" is supposed to mean "tolerating the intolerant people who, yes, really do want to kill you".
Do they mention that the source of funding for the mosques is unknown? Ask Britain how they're doing with their Saudi funded mosques preaching Wahhabism. Undercover video reveals Imams in Saudi funded mosques preaching to bide time until Muslims gain enough strength to take over Britain. How about Imams who preach that Gays should be thrown off high mountains (command comes from Muhammad). Even Westboro Baptist leaves that to God. These lunatics would really do it if given enough power. See Iran if you don't believe me. Do they mention that the leader of this proposed Ground Zero mosque refuses to condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization?
-
Back to you, Hasbaranik. You're an Israeli propagandist. It doesn't get much more political than that.
"IslamIsViolent wrote:
Our ultimate answer was to bomb the fuck out of them until they decided to neglect adhering to that part of the Qur'an. Problem solved."
I do not care if "programs" spread over the face of the earth. I do not object whatsoever to people's beliefs with regard to any of these programs, and I do not care to violate their rights in order to shut down or stop the spread of these programs. My interest is in the presentation of empirical evidence with regard to violations of people's rights by the particular entity in the city where I live, and prompting a response to these violations by the appropriate authority. If they don't break the law and violate the basic rights and freedoms of Canadians, they can follow whatever creed they wish.
You've got a political agenda, and you attempt to manipulate people.
-
Three hundred and fifty men died going in to burning buildings. They knew they might die. They did so because they were paid to, trained to do so, because they thought they could help( and they did) And because they thought it right. At the cost of their lives. That is the american character, plainly, simply. In saudi; arabia religious police beat back girls who were trying to fllee a school fire. several died.
You choose which you want.J.O.M.
-
So the choice is to run into a burning building in Manhattan or beat on some girls in a fire in Saudi Arabia? I don't see either one on my agenda today.
-
Ajax13: ( is that the designation of your cyber-unit ?) Tell us.
Tell us about 'Taquiya'. Tell us about the 100 million financing for your mosque at ground zero. Tell us about the history of Cordoba, and how well the jews and christians fared there under Dhimmitude. Tell us about how what is haram under shari'a is halal in a foreign state, AS LONG AS THE INTENT IS TO DECEIVE THE INFIDEL. Tell us why there would be an 'aid- flotilla' for gaza, bound not for the accepted port, but a different one, while there is no aid for darfur. Tell us why the U.S. Marines are flying food and refugees in Pakistan, while Pak muslims bomb each other. Tell us why, if in the quran it speaks to charity , for muslims only, I might add, did Saudi Arabia give 10 million to the sufferers of the Tsunami in Indonesia, while U.S. private citizens donated 170 million, and the U.S Gov't more than twice that. Don't you care about your Umma? Your Muslim Brothers? Tell Us. Tell us why. Maybe then the Truly Ignorant will understand what you are, what you mean. Tell us about the plan to detonate in Amman, estimated kill 20'000 people. Aren't Muslims given to mercy and PEACE? Tell us about the 100 artillery shells my buddy unearthed, loaded with VX. Each shell , maximum kill yield 10'000 ( that's abso-max.Weather is a tricky thing, but thanks for trying) Ajax, I hope to see you one day, ( in cross-hair) Tell me about Mo' What he did who he was, yeah tell me about that. tell Me about how the earliest known copy of your holy, solely only Quran, un changeable and un changing, is a palimpsest. ( look it up, putz!) tell Us.
J.O.M.
-
Ajax13: ( is that the designation of your cyber-unit ?) Tell us.
Tell us about 'Taquiya'. Tell us about the 100 million financing for your mosque at ground zero. Tell us about the history of Cordoba, and how well the jews and christians fared there under Dhimmitude. Tell us about how what is haram under shari'a is halal in a foreign state, AS LONG AS THE INTENT IS TO DECEIVE THE INFIDEL. Tell us why there would be an 'aid- flotilla' for gaza, bound not for the accepted port, but a different one, while there is no aid for darfur. Tell us why the U.S. Marines are flying food and refugees in Pakistan, while Pak muslims bomb each other. Tell us why, if in the quran it speaks to charity , for muslims only, I might add, did Saudi Arabia give 10 million to the sufferers of the Tsunami in Indonesia, while U.S. private citizens donated 170 million, and the U.S Gov't more than twice that. Don't you care about your Umma? Your Muslim Brothers? Tell Us. Tell us why. Maybe then the Truly Ignorant will understand what you are, what you mean. Tell us about the plan to detonate in Amman, estimated kill 20'000 people. Aren't Muslims given to mercy and PEACE? Tell us about the 100 artillery shells my buddy unearthed, loaded with VX. Each shell , maximum kill yield 10'000 ( that's abso-max.Weather is a tricky thing, but thanks for trying) Ajax, I hope to see you one day, ( in cross-hair) Tell me about Mo' What he did who he was, yeah tell me about that. tell Me about how the earliest known copy of your holy, solely only Quran, un changeable and un changing, is a palimpsest. ( look it up, putz!) tell Us.
J.O.M.
I would not waste my time arguing with ignorant assholes who talk about others belief systems.
UNLESS I WAS COURT ORDERED TO TAKE BULLSHIT!
I WOULD BURY THEM IN PAPERWORK FOREVER! (and more)
OBVIOUSLY THE ELITE RULE AND ALWAYS WILL.... :poison:
-
Edited: Wednesday, October 06, 2010
-
Ajax13: ( is that the designation of your cyber-unit ?) Tell us.
Tell us about 'Taquiya'. Tell us about the 100 million financing for your mosque at ground zero. Tell us about the history of Cordoba, and how well the jews and christians fared there under Dhimmitude. Tell us about how what is haram under shari'a is halal in a foreign state, AS LONG AS THE INTENT IS TO DECEIVE THE INFIDEL. Tell us why there would be an 'aid- flotilla' for gaza, bound not for the accepted port, but a different one, while there is no aid for darfur. Tell us why the U.S. Marines are flying food and refugees in Pakistan, while Pak muslims bomb each other. Tell us why, if in the quran it speaks to charity , for muslims only, I might add, did Saudi Arabia give 10 million to the sufferers of the Tsunami in Indonesia, while U.S. private citizens donated 170 million, and the U.S Gov't more than twice that. Don't you care about your Umma? Your Muslim Brothers? Tell Us. Tell us why. Maybe then the Truly Ignorant will understand what you are, what you mean. Tell us about the plan to detonate in Amman, estimated kill 20'000 people. Aren't Muslims given to mercy and PEACE? Tell us about the 100 artillery shells my buddy unearthed, loaded with VX. Each shell , maximum kill yield 10'000 ( that's abso-max.Weather is a tricky thing, but thanks for trying) Ajax, I hope to see you one day, ( in cross-hair) Tell me about Mo' What he did who he was, yeah tell me about that. tell Me about how the earliest known copy of your holy, solely only Quran, un changeable and un changing, is a palimpsest. ( look it up, putz!) tell Us.
J.O.M.
I would not waste my time arguing with ignorant assholes who talk about others belief systems.
UNLESS I WAS COURT ORDERED TO TAKE BULLSHIT!
I WOULD BURY THEM IN PAPERWORK FOREVER! (and more)
OBVIOUSLY THE ELITE RULE AND ALWAYS WILL.... :poison:
What is wrong with discussing a persons belief system? When did that become off-limits?
Can we discuss Cannibals?
I'm against that.
Although I'd rather invite cannibals into this country than Muslims.
Cannibals are actually very peaceful. It's only the radical cannibals that actually eat human flesh... moderates just trade recipes.
-
Here's who is behind Cordoba House:
http://www.cordobainitiative.org/?q=con ... -bios#Imam (http://www.cordobainitiative.org/?q=content/staff-bios#Imam) Feisal Abdul Rauf
Here are some of his partners:
http://www.asmasociety.org/home/p_support.html (http://www.asmasociety.org/home/p_support.html)
Here's some more:
http://www.unaoc.org/content/view/160/197/lang,english/ (http://www.unaoc.org/content/view/160/197/lang,english/)
Here are some more:
http://www.sfcg.org/sfcg/sfcg_advisory.html (http://www.sfcg.org/sfcg/sfcg_advisory.html)
Here's some of the flying being done by US armed forces in Pakistan:
"Our study shows that the 155 reported drone strikes in northwest Pakistan, including 58 in 2010, from 2004 to the present have killed approximately between 1,070 and 1,653 individuals, of whom around 759 to 1,123 were described as militants in reliable press accounts. Thus, the true non-militant fatality rate since 2004 according to our analysis is approximately 33 percent."
http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/drones#2010chart (http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/drones#2010chart)
This is in comparison to 0 drone attacks by Mooslims against targets in the United States.
I don't have any muslim brothers. My brother and I were altar boys, if that counts.
-
Here's who is behind Cordoba House:
http://www.cordobainitiative.org/?q=con ... -bios#Imam (http://www.cordobainitiative.org/?q=content/staff-bios#Imam) Feisal Abdul Rauf
Here are some of his partners:
http://www.asmasociety.org/home/p_support.html (http://www.asmasociety.org/home/p_support.html)
Here's some more:
http://www.unaoc.org/content/view/160/197/lang,english/ (http://www.unaoc.org/content/view/160/197/lang,english/)
Here are some more:
http://www.sfcg.org/sfcg/sfcg_advisory.html (http://www.sfcg.org/sfcg/sfcg_advisory.html)
Here's some of the flying being done by US armed forces in Pakistan:
"Our study shows that the 155 reported drone strikes in northwest Pakistan, including 58 in 2010, from 2004 to the present have killed approximately between 1,070 and 1,653 individuals, of whom around 759 to 1,123 were described as militants in reliable press accounts. Thus, the true non-militant fatality rate since 2004 according to our analysis is approximately 33 percent."
http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/drones#2010chart (http://counterterrorism.newamerica.net/drones#2010chart)
This is in comparison to 0 drone attacks by Mooslims against targets in the United States.
I don't have any muslim brothers. My brother and I were altar boys, if that counts.
This individual, this Imam, wants to institute Islamic Law into the U.S..
Sure, that is crazy and impossible... but it is his goal.
It is past time that America wakes up. This mosque should never ever be built and I believe it will not be. It will be stopped. Legally.
Although I am an Infidel, I wish no harm to Muslims. It is the destruction of Islam that I promote. Peacefully. And, it will not be difficult. All that has to be done is for everyone to speak the truth about Islam. Learn Islam and speak truthfully about it.
It is no mystery why questioning Muhammad is illegal in Islamic countries. Criticism a forbidden act. Because that is all that is needed to destroy Islam. It is that simple and it is exactly why it is forbidden.
Americans who give a pass to Islam, who do so for ... I'm sure very good motives. But, they hurt the entire world by being tolerant in the face of intolerance.
"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them… We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal."
Karl Popper... 1902–1994
-
I am in stitches! Creating a spectre of a relentlessly expansive Islam, a reism as I have said ad infinitum, and then telling us that the goal of the Imam is crazy and impossible is hilariously contradictory. Almost as funny as your claim that it will be easy to expunge one of the world's major religions. Your pantomime of a moronic hater, as always, provides plenty to ponder in this era of fostering Islamophobia to further a particular set of political agendas. Bravo sir, bravo!
-
I am in stitches! Creating a spectre of a relentlessly expansive Islam, a reism as I have said ad infinitum, and then telling us that the goal of the Imam is crazy and impossible is hilariously contradictory. Almost as funny as your claim that it will be easy to expunge one of the world's major religions. Your pantomime of a moronic hater, as always, provides plenty to ponder in this era of fostering Islamophobia to further a particular set of political agendas. Bravo sir, bravo!
Islamaphobia does not exist. Does Naziphobia exist?
It will be very easy to destroy Islam. Just tell the truth about it. Something that is illegal in Islamic countries and not illegal here but certainly those of us who do tell the truth are attacked as racists, etc..
Of course those who defend Islam, can only do so by attacking the messenger. They cannot defend anything about Islam. Islam has no redeeming value. It is one of those things where no good exists within it.
I'd rather have the Muslim World follow Charles Manson... they would be more peaceful.
-
Stony, you are destined for comic immortality! Your character asserts that his goal is to destroy "Islam" and that America is at risk of being destroyed by the Mooslims. The bit is very clear in it's assertion that there is something to be feared about "Islam", and yet you delve into the self-contradictory again in claiming that this fear does not exist. Islamophobia is a fear of Islam. So your character tells us to be afraid of "Islam", and then states that such a fear does not exist. Fantastic, and side-splitting as always.
It is particularly poignant for your character to allege that American tolerance of Islam hurts the world, when of course the agents of the United States have overthrown governments in many Islamic countries, have conducted military operations that led to the deaths of tens of thousands of muslims, and continue to arm and support regimes in muslim countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia that opress their citizenry. The sheer absurdity of the position that US citizens ought to act to destroy the reism "Islam" is concisely spelled out in your routine. Two thumbs up.
-
Stonewall ( and others) Ajax claims to have been an alter boy, yet uses phraseology and syntax such as "pantomime of a moronic hater' and 'Delve into the self contradictory again" Kind of a "tell', don't ya think? this is a person who does not speak idiomatic american english very well, and yet claims to be an American. I bet propaganda cyber-unit, and kind of a crude one, as facts are not often straight, and will not reply to direct challenge or question. Nes ce Pas?
J.O.M.
-
Well, JOM. That's an interesting take on the situation. Your inability to use even simple punctuation is evident in the first five words of your post: "Stonewall (and others) Ajax claims". That's funny, but not as funny as your completely incorrect assertion that Shrub was an F-14 pilot. Your french is absolutely brutal. The correct expression is "n'est-ce pas", or "is it not". The translation of what you wrote is "nose it not". Bilingual jibberish, truly a great accomplishment for you. Is it more comical than putting the initials of your monniker at the end of your posts when the full name is included in the header of every one? I don't know, but you're funnier than Jim Varney. By the way JOM, I was an altar boy, not an alter boy. Although from the current plight of the OTF it would seem that I dodged a bullet on that one.
-
you just proved my point. thanks again, and i'll see you in the 'cross-hair' J.O.M.
P.S. I invite you to come looking for me. Your effete sense of superiority is the 'tell' You could not be other than a , as we say,'mamma's boy' so prevalent in arab culture, and so you are. Good Luck. J.O.M.
-
I can not roll my eyeballs far enough back into my head without risk of brain dammage on this one...
-
Sing along with me, Ajax 13.
Kind of a mournful melody " I'll be draggin' you back with your head in a sack, to the land of the infidel" Great song. I'll be seeing you.
J.O.M.
-
What do you suppose is taking place here, JOM? In spite of your total ignorance of the subject, you made a statement about Shrub flying the F-14 that was completely wrong. You did this in a public forum, and completely of your own volition. You weren't responding to a question and caught unawares, you actually had to go to the effort of making a statemen that was entirely incorrect. Now you're making threats in a forum against someone you know nothing about and are never going to encounter in your life. You're weak, JOM, but that's not what makes you so objectionable. You're weak and covetous. You covet respect but you do not possess any attributes that would warrant receiving respect. You're going to put me in crosshairs or carry my head in a sack? Never in a million years. That is so far removed from the reality of your situation and it says a lot about your total lack of substance. Here's a few facts about me JOM. Not childish boasts and threats like you've made. I watch my kid play X-box live sometimes, and you sound like the adolescents plugged into HALO. Here's the reality of who I am JOM. Here's what my workplace looks like:
http://wn.com/Connection_on_a_Drilling_Rig (http://wn.com/Connection_on_a_Drilling_Rig)
Here's some of the men I competed against when I was an athlete:
http://www.thetelegram.com/Track-field/ ... Rod-Snow/1 (http://www.thetelegram.com/Track-field/2008-08-02/article-1454817/No-4-Rod-Snow/1)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/norther ... 933305.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/northern_ireland/1933305.stm)
Here's a few devices that the Canadian government was kind enough to teach me to use, although I am dating myself a bit:
http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=4285 (http://www.milsurps.com/showthread.php?t=4285)
http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/weapons/smgs/c1smg.htm (http://www.canadiansoldiers.com/weapons/smgs/c1smg.htm)
While you may be correct in your assertion that I am a "mama's boy", a pile of my toenail clippings is more of a man than you. That's just a fact, unlike your bizarre statement about Shrub and the F-14.
-
Ajax.. Yup, Unh hunh, I believe you, surely I do. J.O.M. ( that's my moniker) Boy Howdy, am I scared now!
-
JOM, why would you sarcastically state that you're scared, when nobody said anything that was intended to scare you. Were you responding to a threat, it would make sense. But since nobody threatened you or even implied that you should be scared, your statement makes no sense and is a non sequitor, as it does not logically follow from the previous post. But do give us the run-down on your incorrect claim about Shrub and the F-14. What I am curious to know is what specifically prompted you to make a statement without the knowledge to assure that the statement was accurate? It's a simple error, but the fact that you purposely made the effort to publicly make that false assertion says a lot. You can't know very much about the subject at all. Shrub was in the ANG. The Tomcat was flown by the USN. The Tomcat, US service was operated only by the USN and never served as an ANG fighter. The Tomcat did not enter operational service until 1974. Shrub was in the ANG from 1968 until 1972. So let's see what pertinent facts you did not know:
A) what branch of service Shrub was in
or
B) what aircraft the ANG operated
or
C) when Shrub was in the ANG
Essentially, you lacked knowledge of any of the facts pertinent to your statement. But that did not stop you. So what can we take away from that?
-
Ajax13 You can take away from this anything you'd like, Spuds! You are proving me right point for point .
Lead poisoning is a common ailment these days.n'est ces pas? Muslims are prone to it.J.O.M. ( that's my Monikker)
-
What's your point, JOM? Two tries and you can't spell n'est-ce pas. Still no explanation for why you felt compelled to make that statement about Shrub that, for numerous reasons, could not have possibly been true. What prompts an uninformed person like you to spout off with no knowledge of the subject being discussed? Muslims getting lead-poisoning? Did you think it was a secret that muslims are being violently killed in great numbers? Is it more of your infantile boasting as if you have something to do with shooting anybody? How about your "tells" that I'm a muslim? Was it the hundreds of posts about a Canadian Straight clone that gave that away? Is your point that even a retard's moron like yourself can find an audience on the internet?
JOM=
http://encyclopediadramatica.com/You (http://encyclopediadramatica.com/You)
-
http://theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com/posts/31990 (http://theconspiracyzone.podcastpeople.com/posts/31990)
-
http://www.spiegel.de/international/wor ... 47,00.html (http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,716547,00.html)
The Fight for Sept. 11
Terror Anniversary Becomes American Day of Hate
By Gregor Peter Schmitz in Washington
Sept. 11 used to be a day when America came together -- party politics took a backseat to reconciliation. Not so this year. From the Muslim prayer room at ground zero to Koran burnings in Florida to a certain gathering in Alaska, the anniversary of the terrorist attacks this year threatens to become a day of hate.
The open letter was born of a desire simply to mourn. The signatures on the letter included the father of Jonathan Ielpi, a firefighter who died in the ruins of the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001; the sister-in-law of Myra Aronson, who was on American Airlines Flight 11 when it was hijacked en route from Boston to Los Angeles and crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center; and Mary Ellen Salamone, wife of John Salamone, who was at work on the 104th floor of the North Tower at the time of the terrorist assault.
Together with many others also mourning loved ones, they wrote: "To hold rallies of any nature on Sept. 11 would be inappropriate and disrespectful to all of us who see 9/11 as a day outside of politics."
The letter was targeted at activists who want to use this Sept. 11 of all days, to protest the planned construction of a mosque -- actually an Islamic cultural center with a prayer room -- near Ground Zero.
The open letter didn't have much of an effect on the anti-mosque demonstrators. "We need to be at Ground Zero, Sept. 11, 2010, now more than ever," they insist, well aware that choosing the date for a protest is a good way to guarantee headlines.
Counter-demonstrators have announced plans to defend the cultural center just as vociferously -- they too know the advantages of protesting on the anniversary of the attacks. The victims' family members have written them too to ask that they refrain from demonstrating.
A Day of Fighting
The back and forth makes it clear: The day of remembrance has become a day of fighting and a stage for political battles. Not just in New York, but throughout the United States.
Far south of the city, Terry Jones, pastor of the Dove World Outreach Center, a tiny evangelical congregation in Gainesville, Florida, is planning to publicly burn copies of the Koran on Saturday, on a pyre that will blaze from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m. -- television's prime time.
General David Petraeus, commander of the NATO troops in Afghanistan, has implored the pastor not to proceed, for fear that it will sow hate among Muslims. Petraeus says American troops could be jeopardized as a result. Jones, though, has yet to back down, insisting that the Koran is the work of the devil.
Far to the northwest in Alaska, meanwhile, former vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin and right-wing TV zealot Glenn Beck are planning a large-scale event on Sept. 11. They want to gather in a hall in Anchorage to celebrate America -- precisely on the anniversary of the attacks.
Harsh Tones
Prime tickets for the event cost well over $100 (€78), but it promises to be a good show. Perhaps Beck will take the opportunity to reiterate his doubts that Barack Obama is a true Christian, playing on the widely-held misconception that the president is really a Muslim. Twenty percent of Americans have fallen for the fallacy, according to recent surveys. Obama opponents like to reinforce the belief by carefully referring to the president by his full name: Barack Hussein Obama.
The harsh tones dominating the anniversary are new. Sept. 11 has long been a day of reconciliation. The country drew closer together in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. Even New Yorkers, generally known for their brusqueness, were a little gentler with one another in those first days. President George W. Bush declared that the attacks had caused the nation "to grieve together" and "to stand together."
Party lines continued to dissolve on the anniversary of the attacks for many years afterwards. Even during the bitter 2008 election campaign, rival presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama made a joint appearance at Ground Zero on September 11. Political battles would have to wait a day.
The same held true for hatred toward Muslims. In the days following the first anniversary of the attacks, Bush paid a demonstrative visit to a mosque, emphasizing that the US did not want to wage war against Islam.
What Happened to Reconciliation?
American politicians seemed determined not to let the attacks undo the successful integration of the country's millions of Muslim inhabitants. Skepticism toward the religion certainly grew, but the fact that American Muslims are well integrated cannot be denied. Hardly anyone is bothered by the country's many Islamic schools and Americans generally have little use for the kinds of headscarf and mosque construction debates that periodically engulf Europe. Even American security experts see the threat of terrorism more in Europe than among Muslims in their own country.
This tone has prevailed through subsequent commemorations and debates. Lately, though, the focus on reconciliation is threatening to disappear. Not only has the number of Americans who believe that Obama is Muslim gone up since the election campaign, and so has the amount of people who think it would be a bad thing if he were. There have also been more ominous occurrences: A Muslim taxi driver was stabbed this summer and there were protests in front of American mosques.
A number of Muslim organizations in the US have announced they won't celebrate the end of Ramadan, the month of fasting, on Saturday as extensively as they usually would, since the holiday coincides with Sept. 11 this year. They fear their religious festivities could be misconstrued as celebrations of the 2001 terrorist attacks.
A War at Home
Further cause for concern for such groups is the depths to which political debate has sunk in the US, with Tea Party activists setting the tone. This ultra-conservative movement wants to return the country to the ideas of its white and mostly Christian founders. Tea Party extremists are currently the driving force in the Republican Party, and have Democrats on the defensive two months before important midterm elections.
It is a political landscape with no room for nuance. Anyone who exhibits tolerance is suspect -- Obama's apparent sympathy toward the Islamic cultural center near Ground Zero sparked immediate protests and the president quickly backpedaled.
Obama's advisors no longer want him to travel to New York on Sept. 11, so great is the concern that the president's appearance could trigger further debates over the "mosque at Ground Zero." The politics of polarization have become stronger than acts of remembrance.
Meanwhile, the president has just celebrated the withdrawal of American combat troops from Iraq -- marking the beginning of the end to perhaps the worst overreaction to the Sept. 11 attacks. Nine years on, the war abroad seems to be winding down.
The war at home, though, may be just beginning.
-
http://http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/?ref=nf
-
Hilarious Buzzy! You're posting propaganda in the "Tacitus' Realm" forum, and what's in your propaganda?
"It is not a political rally
PLEASE BRING FLAGS
Hosting the rally are Pamela Geller, the popular blogger and columnist who publishes the acclaimed AtlasShrugs.com blog and executive director of FDI and SIOA; and SIOA associate director Robert Spencer, the bestselling author and director of JihadWatch.org. Geller is the author (with Spencer) of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration's War on America (foreword by Ambassador John Bolton), published by Simon & Schuster"
Good thing it's not political Buzzy.
-
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,716547,00.html
This year is certainly different than others have been.
Thanks goes to the Imam who insists on a mosque at ground zero.
-
Stony, you are throwback to the old Vaudeville acts, work, work, work. Tremendously funny when your character feigns total ignorance of the fact that the facility in question, Cordoba House, is of course not being constructed at "ground zero". Your character repeats that false assertion as it is loaded and evokes an intended emotional response, rather than a rational analysis. And then to top if off with a meaningless vaguery is the piece de resistance in your caricature of a propagandizing hate-monger. "This year is certainly different than others have been." Devoid of any substantive meaning, and you lay it in there as if it's the very definition of informed comment. I for one would like to see more comedians like you who are prepared to put something on the line when they do a bit.
-
I was posting the tribute video which is from Atlas Shrugs. I happen to have considerable agreement with Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs, but that was not the point I wanted to make. I just wanted to share what I think is a moving tribute to the victims of the September 11 attack against Americans by devout Muslims. Remembering them is not a political statement, even if the memorial is produced by a political blogger.
-
Stony, you are throwback to the old Vaudeville acts, work, work, work. Tremendously funny when your character feigns total ignorance of the fact that the facility in question, Cordoba House, is of course not being constructed at "ground zero". Your character repeats that false assertion as it is loaded and evokes an intended emotional response, rather than a rational analysis. And then to top if off with a meaningless vaguery is the piece de resistance in your caricature of a propagandizing hate-monger. "This year is certainly different than others have been." Devoid of any substantive meaning, and you lay it in there as if it's the very definition of informed comment. I for one would like to see more comedians like you who are prepared to put something on the line when they do a bit.
It's two blocks from Ground Zero and part of an airplane actually landed there.
It's not funny or ignorant, or anything but truthful that this is a Ground Zero Mosque.
What I would like to see is people actually put something on the line. Tell the truth. Of course if I were being against some other thing... iyt would not matter. It's being against Islam that matters. If I was a Muslim and I acted, of course I'd be excused.
It's like we are dealing with the mentally retarded.
"Oh, you are Muslim?.., No problem, say whatever you want, do whatever you want... I'll blame America with you, and criticize those who would ever say anything bad about you"
-
That is side-splitting stuff, Stony. Your character says that the mosque is being built at ground-zero, and then completely contradicts that statement and admits that the building is a couple of blocks away. So your untenable claim about the mosque being objectionable because it's at ground zero is replaced with the claim that part of an airplane landed there.
That's part of what is fascinating about this particular propaganda exercise. Because it's a propaganda exercise, it's rooted entirely in arousing a desired emotional response, rather than a reasoned conclusion based on observation and analysis. Good work, as always, Stony.
-
That is side-splitting stuff, Stony. Your character says that the mosque is being built at ground-zero, and then completely contradicts that statement and admits that the building is a couple of blocks away. So your untenable claim about the mosque being objectionable because it's at ground zero is replaced with the claim that part of an airplane landed there.
That's part of what is fascinating about this particular propaganda exercise. Because it's a propaganda exercise, it's rooted entirely in arousing a desired emotional response, rather than a reasoned conclusion based on observation and analysis. Good work, as always, Stony.
Emotional is all you can deliver.
On 9/11 the buildings fell straight down. Basically they fell in their own footprints. That does not mean that Ground Zero, in reality, ends at that site.
What do Muslims do when they conquer a people? They build a Mosque. In Israel they built a Mosque where the Jewish Temple was located. In Turkey they took over the greatest Christian Church. In Spain, the same.
You can call me any names you want, you can describe me any way you want... what you are incapable of doing is telling the truth about that which you defend.
Defend Islam... Do it.
You cannot.
I feel your pain. It must be hard to just attack with absolutely no knowledge whatsoever. It would be hard for me...
-
They call it the Mosque at Ground Zero. We call it the Ground Zero Mosque. Some have tried to reframe the debate, calling it the multi-cultural Community Center near Ground Zero. No one seriously attempts to separate this thing from Ground Zero, and no one seriously believes it is in any way multi-cultural.
They have no interest in building it anywhere else because that would defeat the point of building it. No one seriously disputes this. The debate is what the point is. WHY THERE? They know why but must not say. We know why but no one listens. They lie and the lie is pleasant, while the truth is deeply offensive and unpleasant - so people embrace the lie.
-
They call it the Mosque at Ground Zero. We call it the Ground Zero Mosque. Some have tried to reframe the debate, calling it the multi-cultural Community Center near Ground Zero. No one seriously attempts to separate this thing from Ground Zero, and no one seriously believes it is in any way multi-cultural.
They have no interest in building it anywhere else because that would defeat the point of building it. No one seriously disputes this. The debate is what the point is. WHY THERE? They know why but must not say. We know why but no one listens. They lie and the lie is pleasant, while the truth is deeply offensive and unpleasant - so people embrace the lie.
Yep...
-
Who is they, Buzzy? The Cordoba House is not being constructed at ground zero. There was no statement by anyone involved in the Cordoba initiative claiming that the construction of the facility was a statement of triumph by "Islam" with regard to the terrorist attacks. That identity for the project was formulated by the people who made up the fake issue. So the building is not at ground zero, and the people behind it have never stated that it was being constructed as a celebration of the success of the attacks. Two lies spouted over and over again by propagandists.
The why and where of the construction are both falsely characterized by propagandists to manipulate people. Folks don't like when you lie to them, Buzzy.
-
Who is they, Buzzy? The Cordoba House is not being constructed at ground zero. There was no statement by anyone involved in the Cordoba initiative claiming that the construction of the facility was a statement of triumph by "Islam" with regard to the terrorist attacks. That identity for the project was formulated by the people who made up the fake issue. So the building is not at ground zero, and the people behind it have never stated that it was being constructed as a celebration of the success of the attacks. Two lies spouted over and over again by propagandists.
The why and where of the construction are both falsely characterized by propagandists to manipulate people. Folks don't like when you lie to them, Buzzy.
Of course it is constructed at Ground Zero. And, don't pretend that you care.
What do you know about Cordoba?
Forget the Mosque, who cares?
Defend a mosque, anywhere. Defend Mecca. Defend Muhammad. A murderous, Insane, killer, rapist, pedophile.
There you go...
-
Stony, you are incapable of any honest discourse whatsoever. I have never once defended a mosque, nor a murderer, nor Mecca, nor any pedophiles, murderers, killers, nor rapists. Insanity is a legal term and I'm neither lawyer nor judg, so I haven' t had the opportunity to defend that group either. You are a liar to your very core.
-
Stony, you are incapable of any honest discourse whatsoever. I have never once defended a mosque, nor a murderer, nor Mecca, nor any pedophiles, murderers, killers, nor rapists. Insanity is a legal term and I'm neither lawyer nor judg, so I haven' t had the opportunity to defend that group either. You are a liar to your very core.
Your not a lawyer?
-
Ted Koppel: Nine years after 9/11, let's stop playing into bin Laden's hands
By Ted Koppel
Sunday, September 12, 2010
The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, succeeded far beyond anything Osama bin Laden could possibly have envisioned. This is not just because they resulted in nearly 3,000 deaths, nor only because they struck at the heart of American financial and military power. Those outcomes were only the bait; it would remain for the United States to spring the trap.
The goal of any organized terrorist attack is to goad a vastly more powerful enemy into an excessive response. And over the past nine years, the United States has blundered into the 9/11 snare with one overreaction after another. Bin Laden deserves to be the object of our hostility, national anguish and contempt, and he deserves to be taken seriously as a canny tactician. But much of what he has achieved we have done, and continue to do, to ourselves. Bin Laden does not deserve that we, even inadvertently, fulfill so many of his unimagined dreams.
It did not have to be this way. The Bush administration's initial response was just about right. The calibrated combination of CIA operatives, special forces and air power broke the Taliban in Afghanistan and sent bin Laden and the remnants of al-Qaeda scurrying across the border into Pakistan. The American reaction was quick, powerful and effective -- a clear warning to any organization contemplating another terrorist attack against the United States. This is the point at which President George W. Bush should have declared "mission accomplished," with the caveat that unspecified U.S. agencies and branches of the military would continue the hunt for al-Qaeda's leader. The world would have understood, and most Americans would probably have been satisfied.
But the insidious thing about terrorism is that there is no such thing as absolute security. Each incident provokes the contemplation of something worse to come. The Bush administration convinced itself that the minds that conspired to turn passenger jets into ballistic missiles might discover the means to arm such "missiles" with chemical, biological or nuclear payloads. This became the existential nightmare that led, in short order, to a progression of unsubstantiated assumptions: that Saddam Hussein had developed weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons; that there was a connection between the Iraqi leader and al-Qaeda.
Bin Laden had nothing to do with fostering these misconceptions. None of this had any real connection to 9/11. There was no group known as "al-Qaeda in Iraq" at that time. But the political climate of the moment overcame whatever flaccid opposition there was to invading Iraq, and the United States marched into a second theater of war, one that would prove far more intractable and painful and draining than its supporters had envisioned.
While President Obama has recently declared America's combat role in Iraq over, he glossed over the likelihood that tens of thousands of U.S. troops will have to remain there, possibly for several years to come, because Iraq lacks the military capability to protect itself against external (read: Iranian) aggression. The ultimate irony is that Hussein, to keep his neighbors in check, allowed them and the rest of the world to believe that he might have weapons of mass destruction. He thereby brought about his own destruction, as well as the need now for U.S. forces to fill the void that he and his menacing presence once provided.
As for the 100,000 U.S. troops in or headed for Afghanistan, many of them will be there for years to come, too -- not because of America's commitment to a functioning democracy there; even less because of what would happen to Afghan girls and women if the Taliban were to regain control. The reason is nuclear weapons. Pakistan has an arsenal of 60 to 100 nuclear warheads. Were any of those to fall into the hands of al-Qaeda's fundamentalist allies in Pakistan, there is no telling what the consequences might be.
Again, this dilemma is partly of our own making. America's war on terrorism is widely perceived throughout Pakistan as a war on Islam. A muscular Islamic fundamentalism is gaining ground there and threatening the stability of the government, upon which we depend to guarantee the security of those nuclear weapons. Since a robust U.S. military presence in Pakistan is untenable for the government in Islamabad, however, tens of thousands of U.S. troops are likely to remain parked next door in Afghanistan for some time.
Perhaps bin Laden foresaw some of these outcomes when he launched his 9/11 operation from Taliban-secured bases in Afghanistan. Since nations targeted by terrorist groups routinely abandon some of their cherished principles, he may also have foreseen something along the lines of Abu Ghraib, "black sites," extraordinary rendition and even the prison at Guantanamo Bay. But in these and many other developments, bin Laden needed our unwitting collaboration, and we have provided it -- more than $1 trillion spent on two wars, more than 5,000 of our troops killed, tens of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans dead. Our military is so overstretched that defense contracting -- for everything from interrogation to security to the gathering of intelligence -- is one of our few growth industries.
We have raced to Afghanistan and Iraq, and more recently to Yemen and Somalia; we have created a swollen national security apparatus; and we are so absorbed in our own fury and so oblivious to our enemy's intentions that we inflate the building of an Islamic center in Lower Manhattan into a national debate and watch, helpless, while a minister in Florida outrages even our friends in the Islamic world by threatening to burn copies of the Koran.
If bin Laden did not foresee all this, then he quickly came to understand it. In a 2004 video message, he boasted about leading America on the path to self-destruction. "All we have to do is send two mujaheddin . . . to raise a small piece of cloth on which is written 'al-Qaeda' in order to make the generals race there, to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses."
Through the initial spending of a few hundred thousand dollars, training and then sacrificing 19 of his foot soldiers, bin Laden has watched his relatively tiny and all but anonymous organization of a few hundred zealots turn into the most recognized international franchise since McDonald's. Could any enemy of the United States have achieved more with less?
Could bin Laden, in his wildest imaginings, have hoped to provoke greater chaos? It is past time to reflect on what our enemy sought, and still seeks, to accomplish -- and how we have accommodated him.
-
I still maintain that it's theocracy, not the brand of religion, that's dangerous. Anne cites the abortion clinic bombers as a pretty good recent example of dangerous x-tians. None-ya shows some clips of militant x-tian brainwashing.
Conversely, a long while back, GregFl showed some clips of Islamic Madrasah in the context of how similar they are to a day in Group.
The primary difference between a fundamentalist radical who bombs abortion clinics and fundamentalist radicals who blow themselves up in a holy war is that the x-tian fundamentalists, for the time being anyway, generally are indicted, tried and convicted of their crimes. That's because, so far, we haven't let them completely take over government again.
I think it is the brand of religion. You could put every Abortion Clinic act of violence and have it occur on a single day and it will not even come close to a normal everyday occurrence in a Muslim nation against those that are hated.
The Mosque at Ground Zero will probably happen. This nation of majority Christians will allow it to happen.
And thank god for them allowing an Islamic community center. This whole hallowed ground argument is a false flag from the very beginning. If it was so damn hallowed they wouldn't allow a titty bar on the same block. If it was so hallowed there wouldn't be developers fighting over it like a diseased piece of meat.
America, and the political manipulators of the truth no matter allegiance they hold, need to grow the hell up.
This boy here is my hero on this day, you go kid.
I wish we had more like him around.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/12/ska ... ing-quran/ (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/12/skateboarder-extremist-burning-quran/)
-
I still maintain that it's theocracy, not the brand of religion, that's dangerous. Anne cites the abortion clinic bombers as a pretty good recent example of dangerous x-tians. None-ya shows some clips of militant x-tian brainwashing.
Conversely, a long while back, GregFl showed some clips of Islamic Madrasah in the context of how similar they are to a day in Group.
The primary difference between a fundamentalist radical who bombs abortion clinics and fundamentalist radicals who blow themselves up in a holy war is that the x-tian fundamentalists, for the time being anyway, generally are indicted, tried and convicted of their crimes. That's because, so far, we haven't let them completely take over government again.
I think it is the brand of religion. You could put every Abortion Clinic act of violence and have it occur on a single day and it will not even come close to a normal everyday occurrence in a Muslim nation against those that are hated.
The Mosque at Ground Zero will probably happen. This nation of majority Christians will allow it to happen.
And thank god for them allowing an Islamic community center. This whole hallowed ground argument is a false flag from the very beginning. If it was so damn hallowed they wouldn't allow a titty bar on the same block. If it was so hallowed there wouldn't be developers fighting over it like a diseased piece of meat.
America, and the political manipulators of the truth no matter allegiance they hold, need to grow the hell up.
This boy here is my hero on this day, you go kid.
I wish we had more like him around.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/12/ska ... ing-quran/ (http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/12/skateboarder-extremist-burning-quran/)
I would not call that individual a hero.
While I am not for burning the Koran, saving one is not a heroic act.
-
Definition of hero varies from person to person, I call the kid a hero because what he did took an incredible set of balls. The x-tian terror group planning on burning the bible is well known for their ant-christ like abusive tactics against members of their own community.
-
but they'll probably just manipulate us into doing it for them.
:rofl: ::poke:: :lala: :dose: :roflmao:
Welcome folks to the land of the free...we let everyone in now complain it is not going the way we want...well of course it's not. Unfortunately, Muslims have rights just like the Jews just like the Catholics just like the Christians...but hey we still are in the land of the free with cultural diversity. When the United States full blows up maybe then we should of taken more procautions on who we let in to begin with...instead of bitching about the border police doing their jobs....maybe we need to watch cargo planes instead. Let's just hand out more green cards to the ole terrorists. No wonder they target us, our government is frucking stupid...but hey we all are politically correct and no one is being offended. Fuck that offend someone and make them go the fuck back to their countries. The silly religious wars need to stay the hell out of America and remain where they began. Not my fight, hell not the fight of many actually so why are we getting blown up.....oil. And don't worry we can all stop by the Catholic church and pay for penance on our way out..we will get a pass into heaven anyways. How many scholorships do we award newly founded citizens????Fuck that our citizen here first should get first crack at it. Anyways, the land is fairly bought and sold not much anyone can do now but sit back and watch the Muslims spit in our faces...but this is the land of the free with cultural diversity..Amen for that....yeah ok. :beat: :beat:
-
Paper to Readers: Sorry for Portraying Muslims as Human
http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2010/09/1 ... -as-human/ (http://tunedin.blogs.time.com/2010/09/14/paper-to-readers-sorry-for-portraying-muslims-as-human/)
First, it was offensive and insensitive to build an Islamic center two blocks away from Ground Zero. Now it's offensive and insensitive to publish photos of American Muslims peacefully praying, on or around 9/11.
The Portland Press Herald has apologized to its readers for publishing images of Muslims celebrating the end of Ramadan, which this year coincided with the 9/11 anniversary. Among the outrageous statements that the accompanying article made: that Portland-era Muslims met to mark the end of the month-long holy fast, that they made a traditional call for charity, and that children played soccer.
Noting that thousands of local Muslims marked a holy day peacefully near the anniversary of a day when a few Muslims committed a mass murder (whose victims included other Muslims) was apparently beyond the pale. The paper's editor and publisher wrote: "We erred by at least not offering balance to the story and its prominent position on the front page."
Here's where we are in America, 2010: There is now one group of Americans whose peaceful religious observance cannot be noted by decent people, unless it is "balanced" by the mention of a vile crime committed in 2001 by people, with a perverted idea of the same religion, from the other side of the world.
This is a depressing statement about the state of dialogue in America. Nine years after 9/11, there is now a widespread belief that, for one religious group of law-abiding Americans, the boundaries of acceptable behavior are narrower than for everyone else. Yes, you have the right to worship. But it would be decent of you to do it somewhere else. Or on another day. Or in such a way that the rest of us don't have to know about it. So now we have a newspaper kowtowing to a national freakout, apologizing for the most innocuous kind of soft feature, because acknowledging that there are decent Muslims in America is offensive. (From the comments on the article: "I don't want to here [sic] how caring the Muslim religion is on 9/11." But hey: it's only for a few days a year!)
But it's equally depressing for the state of journalism. This is an extreme instance, but a too-common, craven attitude: if anything you do offends a lot of readers—whatever their reasons, regardless of the merit of the coverage—it is a mistake. If enough people make a loud enough stink—well, it was your job to make sure that never happened. For any reason. This business is in bad enough shape. Just fix it. Make it go away. Apologize.
If there's one silver lining, it's that the apology drew its own storm of complaints. From one: "These people and their faith had nothing whatsoever to do with the horrific attack of nine years ago. Our state needs to be more tolerant, not less. Your apology implies that it is in some way OK to connect everyday Muslims and the attackers. I abhor such thinking."
Well said. The paper owed no one an apology. But it does now.
-
It is highly offensive there is no doubt in that. We are all getting a huge slap in the face. But what actually can be done to stop it? We as Americans have allowed things of this magnitude to even be possible. Unfortunately, I can only hope and pray someone with any type of government authority will do the right thing. But as we have fully learned in the past our government has not ever done the right thing.
In building this they are only going to create more hardship and bad feeling, it might just spark off a major ordeal...but that is what the government wants...they want something drastic to happen. The enjoy the conflicts and enjoy blood shed..It keeps the population control in check, and hey they might be rid of some terrorists too.
Personally, I think Muslems are full of shit, especially the getting 100 virgins when they die, because look around you the only virgins are under 8 years old in the world left. But hey, if they want to lie to themselves all this time so be it. Their views are angry views and judgemental. No man has a right to judge anyone, that's God's job. Who are they to decide who is going to hell and burn and who gets the virgins. Maybe God wants one of us to have the last of the last of virgins. Guess we will never fully know, who gets the virgins. When anger fuels a fight, it generally will lose eventually, but thanks to the Good Ole USA, the land of oppertunity, we have fully given them so much power and money stock piled, they will eventually run ramped. We invited then to do this fully, and have noone to blame but our lovely politicans.
Once this thing is built, I bet we will see a lot of blood shed, you cannot think people are going to tolerate this happening. Not after 9-11, and the impact it has given to everyone in the United States. Some one will come unglued and destroy it watch, we will be watching the news and the thing will go up in smoke. Then we will hear the muslims cry OMFG what did they do to us, and then they will retailate. The Muslins want a fight, they are fighters and love to create havoc where ever they go...now it is in our land...great. The some big time Muslim will tell the other Muslims to kill us all off in the name of the Allah and the Koran. Seriously who cannot see the ooutcome of this ooutrageous action. They want to kick our asses for what we destroyed in Iraq. Their people died and oh my they will get justice somehow...Hell I am moving to Cananda maybe they will be safe for few more years. How the hell did noone see this happening, they want us to react, then they get their little Holy War here...God who does not see this little trap. People cannot be that thick.
-
Portland Post Herald is one newspaper I'll never spend a single cent on for as long as I live. What a huge lack of journalistic integrity on their9 part. How does something completely unrelated to the peaceful end of Ramadan worship in Portland relate to anything with 9r/11 in New York City? The story was written to report an event in Portland that portrays Muslim Americans in a peaceful manner, not to compare them to the lunatics who perpetrated 9/11.
More Christian racism and xenophobia and yet another example why America is reducing itself to the WAN status at an increasingly rapid clip. Sad truth is, most Americans these days are so pig ignorant they can barely read the ingredients label on the Captain Crunch box they are busy shoveling down their throats every morning. What a pathetic nation of losers we've become, utterly pathetic.
-
Portland Post Herald is one newspaper I'll never spend a single cent on for as long as I live. What a huge lack of journalistic integrity on their9 part. How does something completely unrelated to the peaceful end of Ramadan worship in Portland relate to anything with 9r/11 in New York City? The story was written to report an event in Portland that portrays Muslim Americans in a peaceful manner, not to compare them to the lunatics who perpetrated 9/11.
More Christian racism and xenophobia and yet another example why America is reducing itself to the WAN status at an increasingly rapid clip. Sad truth is, most Americans these days are so pig ignorant they can barely read the ingredients label on the Captain Crunch box they are busy shoveling down their throats every morning. What a pathetic nation of losers we've become, utterly pathetic.
Fully agreed, which that even surprises me, but you are right.....the problem is we allowed ourselves to get lazy and our kids go uneducated. We tolerated the youth to become literally wastes. Americans had it easy for years and we got to comfortable in our surroundings. And I am going to enjoy my Captain Crunch until we get warfare on our front lawns...however Americans basically allowed for these radicals to slip in the front door, thanks to the good ole homeland security. Hell we should of just handed them the tools and the cash without wasting this time and effort. They are going to screw us with our own American money. Generally, when people get screwed up the rear they are offered KY, not us we are going to take it hard. Wonder if we will be given the right to grab our ankles first.
It is easier for Americans to get the ostrich symdrome...then to actually look around them and gain wisdom of what is going on around them. But hey Mary Sue's nails look real good, and Bob can hit a perfect hole in one. And Chucky down the block is sling dope...Yes, the land of the free...
-
More Christian racism and xenophobia and yet another example why America is reducing itself to the WAN status at an increasingly rapid clip. Sad truth is, most Americans these days are so pig ignorant they can barely read the ingredients label on the Captain Crunch box they are busy shoveling down their throats every morning. What a pathetic nation of losers we've become, utterly pathetic.
Sad, but true. They're more inclined to listen to the likes of Rush (attention whore, $$ grubber), Glen (certifiable lunatic), Keith (attention whore, $$ grubber) and parrot what they're saying instead of actually educating themselves on a given subject.
-
More Christian racism and xenophobia and yet another example why America is reducing itself to the WAN status at an increasingly rapid clip. Sad truth is, most Americans these days are so pig ignorant they can barely read the ingredients label on the Captain Crunch box they are busy shoveling down their throats every morning. What a pathetic nation of losers we've become, utterly pathetic.
Sad, but true. They're more inclined to listen to the likes of Rush (attention whore, $$ grubber), Glen (certifiable lunatic), Keith (attention whore, $$ grubber) and parrot what they're saying instead of actually educating themselves on a given subject.
AMEN.....
-
More Christian racism and xenophobia and yet another example why America is reducing itself to the WAN status at an increasingly rapid clip. Sad truth is, most Americans these days are so pig ignorant they can barely read the ingredients label on the Captain Crunch box they are busy shoveling down their throats every morning. What a pathetic nation of losers we've become, utterly pathetic.
Sad, but true. They're more inclined to listen to the likes of Rush (attention whore, $$ grubber), Glen (certifiable lunatic), Keith (attention whore, $$ grubber) and parrot what they're saying instead of actually educating themselves on a given subject.
AMEN.....
-
More Christian racism and xenophobia and yet another example why America is reducing itself to the WAN status at an increasingly rapid clip. Sad truth is, most Americans these days are so pig ignorant they can barely read the ingredients label on the Captain Crunch box they are busy shoveling down their throats every morning. What a pathetic nation of losers we've become, utterly pathetic.
Sad, but true. They're more inclined to listen to the likes of Rush (attention whore, $$ grubber), Glen (certifiable lunatic), Keith (attention whore, $$ grubber) and parrot what they're saying instead of actually educating themselves on a given subject.
Whole heartily agree, with both comments. :cheers:
-
Ted Koppel: Nine years after 9/11, let's stop playing into bin Laden's hands
By Ted Koppel
Sunday, September 12, 2010
The attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, succeeded far beyond anything Osama bin Laden could possibly have envisioned. This is not just because they resulted in nearly 3,000 deaths, nor only because they struck at the heart of American financial and military power. Those outcomes were only the bait; it would remain for the United States to spring the trap.
The goal of any organized terrorist attack is to goad a vastly more powerful enemy into an excessive response. And over the past nine years, the United States has blundered into the 9/11 snare with one overreaction after another. Bin Laden deserves to be the object of our hostility, national anguish and contempt, and he deserves to be taken seriously as a canny tactician. But much of what he has achieved we have done, and continue to do, to ourselves. Bin Laden does not deserve that we, even inadvertently, fulfill so many of his unimagined dreams.
It did not have to be this way. The Bush administration's initial response was just about right. The calibrated combination of CIA operatives, special forces and air power broke the Taliban in Afghanistan and sent bin Laden and the remnants of al-Qaeda scurrying across the border into Pakistan. The American reaction was quick, powerful and effective -- a clear warning to any organization contemplating another terrorist attack against the United States. This is the point at which President George W. Bush should have declared "mission accomplished," with the caveat that unspecified U.S. agencies and branches of the military would continue the hunt for al-Qaeda's leader. The world would have understood, and most Americans would probably have been satisfied.
But the insidious thing about terrorism is that there is no such thing as absolute security. Each incident provokes the contemplation of something worse to come. The Bush administration convinced itself that the minds that conspired to turn passenger jets into ballistic missiles might discover the means to arm such "missiles" with chemical, biological or nuclear payloads. This became the existential nightmare that led, in short order, to a progression of unsubstantiated assumptions: that Saddam Hussein had developed weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons; that there was a connection between the Iraqi leader and al-Qaeda.
Bin Laden had nothing to do with fostering these misconceptions. None of this had any real connection to 9/11. There was no group known as "al-Qaeda in Iraq" at that time. But the political climate of the moment overcame whatever flaccid opposition there was to invading Iraq, and the United States marched into a second theater of war, one that would prove far more intractable and painful and draining than its supporters had envisioned.
While President Obama has recently declared America's combat role in Iraq over, he glossed over the likelihood that tens of thousands of U.S. troops will have to remain there, possibly for several years to come, because Iraq lacks the military capability to protect itself against external (read: Iranian) aggression. The ultimate irony is that Hussein, to keep his neighbors in check, allowed them and the rest of the world to believe that he might have weapons of mass destruction. He thereby brought about his own destruction, as well as the need now for U.S. forces to fill the void that he and his menacing presence once provided.
As for the 100,000 U.S. troops in or headed for Afghanistan, many of them will be there for years to come, too -- not because of America's commitment to a functioning democracy there; even less because of what would happen to Afghan girls and women if the Taliban were to regain control. The reason is nuclear weapons. Pakistan has an arsenal of 60 to 100 nuclear warheads. Were any of those to fall into the hands of al-Qaeda's fundamentalist allies in Pakistan, there is no telling what the consequences might be.
Again, this dilemma is partly of our own making. America's war on terrorism is widely perceived throughout Pakistan as a war on Islam. A muscular Islamic fundamentalism is gaining ground there and threatening the stability of the government, upon which we depend to guarantee the security of those nuclear weapons. Since a robust U.S. military presence in Pakistan is untenable for the government in Islamabad, however, tens of thousands of U.S. troops are likely to remain parked next door in Afghanistan for some time.
Perhaps bin Laden foresaw some of these outcomes when he launched his 9/11 operation from Taliban-secured bases in Afghanistan. Since nations targeted by terrorist groups routinely abandon some of their cherished principles, he may also have foreseen something along the lines of Abu Ghraib, "black sites," extraordinary rendition and even the prison at Guantanamo Bay. But in these and many other developments, bin Laden needed our unwitting collaboration, and we have provided it -- more than $1 trillion spent on two wars, more than 5,000 of our troops killed, tens of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans dead. Our military is so overstretched that defense contracting -- for everything from interrogation to security to the gathering of intelligence -- is one of our few growth industries.
We have raced to Afghanistan and Iraq, and more recently to Yemen and Somalia; we have created a swollen national security apparatus; and we are so absorbed in our own fury and so oblivious to our enemy's intentions that we inflate the building of an Islamic center in Lower Manhattan into a national debate and watch, helpless, while a minister in Florida outrages even our friends in the Islamic world by threatening to burn copies of the Koran.
If bin Laden did not foresee all this, then he quickly came to understand it. In a 2004 video message, he boasted about leading America on the path to self-destruction. "All we have to do is send two mujaheddin . . . to raise a small piece of cloth on which is written 'al-Qaeda' in order to make the generals race there, to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses."
Through the initial spending of a few hundred thousand dollars, training and then sacrificing 19 of his foot soldiers, bin Laden has watched his relatively tiny and all but anonymous organization of a few hundred zealots turn into the most recognized international franchise since McDonald's. Could any enemy of the United States have achieved more with less?
Could bin Laden, in his wildest imaginings, have hoped to provoke greater chaos? It is past time to reflect on what our enemy sought, and still seeks, to accomplish -- and how we have accommodated him.
I wonder what Teddy would have us do?
He's kind of hinting that after Pearl Harbor we were doing what the enemy wanted us to do. It was very self-destructive of us. Come to think of it, it did not work out that well for the Japanese either.
It is "past time" we understand the enemy...