Let’s start with the predictable: the usual nonsense and blague, in this silly and insidious article, from all those seemingly shocked, seemingly puzzled family members and family friends of the ringleader in the Fort-Dix mass-murder plot. Schnewer the “Palestinian”:
The mother
"said her son was innocent, honest and the victim of religious persecution." What's more, her son was not the ringleader of a plot to mass-murder supposedly "fellow" Americans, but rather in her eyes (and the reporter begins the article with this mere collection of excuses and diversions and lies) a victim: "He doesn't have a gun, he doesn't have anything," Fatem Shnewer said of Mohammed Ibrahim Shnewer. He was targeted, she said, "because he's religious."
She is heartbroken, this hard-working, gentle woman with her touching small family store: "My heart kills me," said Fatem Shnewer.
Her son, for the newspaper, was "born in Jordan." For some reason, the identity he and the whole family were aggressively insistent upon -- that they were "Palestinians" -- has dropped from any mention. He was merely "born in Jordan."
The father
was just like the mother, with her little store. Pluck the first three cliched adjectives you suspect will be used, and just look, you were right:
"...the elder Shnewer was responsible, hardworking and very religious."
"Responsible, hardworking, and very religious."
James Atalah, who handles "media relations" for "All-City Cab," reinforces the rosy view of the father: "He treats the drivers good. He treats the customers good. This is really unbelievable."
There are two main themes in this article. One is that the jihadist is a victim. Muslims all over the Western world, all over the non-Western Infidel world, are “victims.” They are “victims” of Christians and Jews, of Hindus and Buddhists. They are “victims” of Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh, of Christians in Indonesia and the Philippines and Nigeria and Sudan. They are “victims” of Jews in Israel. They are “victims” of Buddhists in Thailand, or Buddhist statues, balefully glaring down at them, for such an intolerable height and unacceptable magnificence, in Bamiyan, Afghanistan. They are victims.
Another is the hardworking, responsible, decent behavior of the father and the mother. Of what relevance is that? -- you are already muttering under your mental breath. Can’t one be a hardworking, decent, true-blue Muslim, and still hate Infidels, still wish them ill, still take delight in seeing others, or possibly helping others, to put them in their place vis-à-vis Islam and Muslims, or even to punish them for daring to fight back?
One runs a small family market, no doubt putting in all kinds of time, and the other is a "hardworking" cabdriver who "treats the customers good" and therefore, "this is really unbelievable." Yes, to the surprise of all, to their total amazement, to their utter wonderment, their "religious" son, son of a hardworking, responsible, treating-the-customers-good taxi-driving but also "religious" father, would appear to be the ringleader of a plot to mass-murder Americans.
So the first theme is puzzlement: puzzlement of the mother, which is on display in the oh-so-careful and absurd remarks, in all their fatuous solemnity, about trying to figure out how the FBI and other groups can possibly figure out, can find out, the mystery to that matter of "what radicalizes or self-radicalizes" a teeny-tiny barely perceptible handful of Muslims in America. What a statement of the case! What a puzzlement -- that the slow-witted, ponderous, lachrymose-voiced Senator Lieberman asks an FBI official who answers that yes, it is a puzzle, but with the help and advice of Muslim groups (he lists a few), the FBI will try, try to figure out just what it is that would lead these ordinary (sons of hardworking, responsible, good-to-their-customers Americans) people to magically become plotters, eager to kill Americans, in this case at Fort Dix, in other cases elsewhere, at home and abroad. There was nice, kind, hardworking Intel engineer "Mike" -- Maher -- Hawash, whom Intel’s Vice-President swore up and down in time-honored I'll-eat-my-hat fashion, that good old "Mike," computer engineer "Mike,” textbook-writing "Mike," father-of-Little-League-children "Mike," simply had to be completely innocent, and kept saying that right up to the day "Mike" appeared in court and pled guilty, before going off to serve a 27-year sentence.
There was quiet recent-UNC-graduate Mohammed Reza Taheri-Azar, who was at his wits' end, when he graduated out of class synch in December, and like so many recent college graduates, didn't know what to do with himself. He fell into a funk, and "rediscovered" Islam. Though his parents had fled the Islamic Republic of Iran, and were described as not religious but rather "secular," all it took was for Taheri-Azar to know that he was a "Muslim" in order for him to rediscover his “true identity” and to go back and reread the Qur'an, possibly supplementing that book with -- who knows? -- Hadith and Sira. (But the Qur'an alone is quite enough, is more than enough, to inspire hatred toward Infidels -- as any apostate, from Ayaan Hirsi Ali to Wafa Sultan to Ibn Warraq to Ali Sina, can tell you).
And there are so many others, so “well-integrated” into American society. Their names one can find in the archives of this website, or in articles collected elsewhere. There are those caught at various levels of plotting and scheming to kill those whom we hopefully, and inaccurately, describe as their “fellow Americans.” And then there are all those who are terrorists in posse, if at the moment not in esse, and who may, at a later date, tomorrow, or next month, or seven years from now, “rediscover” their Islam -- like so many the outwardly-secular fun-loving British Muslims who were involved in the bombing of the London Underground, or those who were caught in time. Then there were those in Paris, Milan, Amsterdam, and elsewhere, some of whom were “religious” (we know what that means) and some of whom were described as outwardly -- and for all we know possibly for quite a while inwardly -- “secular.” But they maintained an awareness that they were, they remained, they had therefore at some point to think and to act as “Muslims.”
This fact finally will, one hopes, be understood by a sufficient number of people to matter: that “radical” or “extremist” Muslims are simply good Muslims not distorting, but following, the texts. (And Bin Laden’s writings, including those finally translated by Raymond Ibrahim and soon to be published, show him to be a perfectly conventional follower of the doctrine of Islam. This is not “teased out,” but is plain as day. It is a doctrine carried out by others using instruments of Jihad other than terrorism, or even combat, qital.) In Western countries, “tolerance” and “diversity” and “pluralism” have been elevated to Articles of Faith never subject to any questioning, or any discussion of what those words mean or should mean, what constitutes legitimate limits on them, what constitutes a danger. Yet nothing constitutes a danger to real tolerance, and real diversity, and real pluralism, than looking the other way at a Total System, a belief-system that inculcates the idea that there should be no diversity, no tolerance, and no pluralism. Islam alone should exist in the world ideally, though non-Muslims can continue to exist in that state of Shari’a-regulated humiliation, degradation, and physical insecurity known as being a “dhimmi.” There is or should be no tolerance for those who set up any kind of obstacle to Islam, and no genuine pluralism -- for the very idea that Islam should merely be one faith among others is absurd to a Muslim. Islam is the True Faith, and all others are false and disgusting. Some, the ones deemed polytheistic, are the most disgusting of all – and Christian believers in the Trinity are among those regarded as guilty of shirk, or polytheism.
When a prudent desire for self-preservation, physical and civilizational, finally forces a sufficient number of Infidel peoples and states to discover the ideological roots of Muslim terrorism, then those whose duty it is to instruct and to protect us will cease to commit folly after folly, based on a miscomprehension of Islam. Then the security forces and the politicians will cease to offer up the spectacle that one had to endure yesterday, in that careful colloquy between Senator Lieberman and some FBI official referring to the guidance the FBI was receiving from Muslim groups, as they tried, tried, tried to figure out what it was, what in the world it could possibly be, that made outwardly sweet, integrated, presumably grateful-to-America Muslims (most of the plotters had arrived in America at a young age, their parents escaping religio-political strife in the Balkans), turn to Jihad.
This failure, still, to begin to think clearly about the nature of Islam, to look carefully at it, is responsible for the follies, both foreign and domestic, of the Western governments and peoples, and especially of this Administration. The examination of Islam should be done, and not in haste -- not by assigning the task to some young staff member to “read up and get back to me on this” with a three-page bullet-riddled “Executive Summary” of what Islam is all about (perhaps sent to a Muslim group for vetting as to its accuracy, and so that they can object, and make any changes, they wish to).
Saddam Hussein made every effort to convince others that he had such weapons even in the stage-whisper way he denied having them. But little did the Americans know that his intended audience was not the United States, but Iran, of which he was fearful. And little did Saddam Hussein know that the Americans would take his suspect behavior, intended to convince Iran he had such weapons, to heart. He didn’t know they would follow the lead of uninformed (J. B. Kelly told me recently that Paul Wolfowitz “knew nothing about the Middle East”) and terminally naïve believers in the “bringing freedom” to Iraq idea as Wolfowitz. He didn’t know about the baleful influence of Bernard Lewis (“either we bring them freedom or they will destroy us”), or about the amazing swath cut through official Washington by all kinds of secular, westernized, plausible Shi’a-in-exile (Kanan Makiya, Ahmad Chalabi, Rend al-Rahim, etcetera) who had forgotten what the real masses, including the Shi’a masses, were like. Chalabi left Iraq in 1958, as a boy, and the others, all members of an intellectual, social, and economic elite in Iraq, had been in the West for several decades. They were eager for the American army to remove Saddam Hussein, and eager to foresee or promise all kinds of good things. This led Wolfowitz to confidently foresee that the war would cost far less than the $40 billion spent to monitor Iraq, and Lewis to declare that “the liberation of Baghdad will make the liberation of Kabul look like a funeral procession.”
And the same ignorance of Islam that prevented the Administration from identifying the foe not as “terror” (as in “war on terror”) but rather as Jihad, using whatever instruments offer themselves at a particular time, in a particular space (such as the money weapon, campaigns of Da’wa, and demographic conquest -- not one of which will be affected by the “success,” as defined by the Bush Administration, in Iraq. This ignorance caused the Administration to fall for Shi’a-in-exile blandishments, and can be seen in the new desire to remain in Iraq, this time because it is the Sunnis calling the tune. The rulers of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Jordan, warn direly of what might happen, issuing shrill Cassandra-cries about “the Shi’a crescent” and so on. These are designed to keep the Americans in Iraq in order not to fight but rather to protect the Sunnis from the full force of Shi’a counterattacks -- including those of those “militias” we hear so much about. Those “militias,” in the end, will be the only force that, in inflicting tit-for-tat violence, will stand a chance of changing not Sunni minds, but Sunni behavior -- or at least keeping the Sunnis bottled up in Anbar and parts of Diyala province, while the Shi’a continue to empty Baghdad of its Sunnis.
The Administration does not know where to put its feet and hands. Suckered initially by the Shi’a to enter Iraq, President Bush never bothers to study Islam. His advisers, such as Prof. David Forte, are a succession of ignoramuses. But he does discover a book by Anatoly Scharansky (Natan Sharansky), with naïve assumptions about how “democracies” behave, and Bush runs -- Crazy-Legs Bush -- right down the field with this idea, making a goal, or attempting to make one. But it turns out he is running in the wrong direction, and he makes a goal, in Iraq, but for the other side, for Islam. For the entire effort in Iraq has been directed to preventing sectarian and ethnic conflict among its Muslims (and by extension, among Muslim peoples elsewhere), and to sacrifice American lives, use up American equipment, spend American hundreds of billions, toward this preposterously impossible, and absurdly unhelpful (to the Camp of Infidels) end.
The purple-thumbed display was not an endorsement of “democracy,” as Bush fondly assumes. It was a display, as Ali Allawi has written, of “identity” politics. The Shi’a voted en masse, as they were told to vote, for Shi’a interests. In the first election (January 2005) the Sunni Arabs largely abstained, because they understood that they constituted a small minority. In fact they are 19% of the Iraqi population, even if they continue to believe that their “true” numbers are, simply must be because they want them to be, far larger. The Kurds voted, but at the same time voted, in the Kurdish north, for independence from Iraq. That desire has been strengthened, not weakened, by the proposed new law about oil revenue-sharing and exploration and production agreements. Instead of pointing out how, in what ways, Islam flatly contradicts the letter and spirit of Western, advanced democracy, Bush tried to slander those who raised such matters by describing as “racists” those who thought that “Arabs aren’t ready or capable of democracy” (or words to that effect). He missed, he keeps missing, the part about Islam. Yet this is the central part, the huge part, the unavoidable part of the story. He will not look at it steadily and whole, but instead keeps trying to keep up this pretense that bringing “freedom” to “ordinary moms and dads” in the Middle East can be done, and makes sense from the viewpoint of American, and larger Infidel, interests.
And in the same way, domestic terrorism is treated so that we are forced to endure the spectacle of senators and FBI agents, and others who should at this point know better (and know too that they have a duty to help instruct those whom they presumably are trying to protect, for we need to know about Islam, we need to know what the menace is, where it is to be located), telling us that the whole damn thing, with the Fort Dix plotters, is just a mystery. We can’t figure it out. We are “working with Muslim organizations” to “get a handle” on this, or to find the “trip-wire” that sets people off, that “radicalizes” them. The “trip-wire”? The goddam “trip-wire”? What sets people off, if they are Muslims, could be any real or imaginary slight or setback or injury, whether it is personal or political -- loss of status, job, spouse, confusion as to what to do after college, dawning realization that Muslims are not in this land lording it over non-Muslims, as by rights they should, and so on and so forth. Anything could be the “trip-wire,” within their brains, of Islam, and taking Islam to heart.
Analytical pollyannas have tried, not without initial success, to drag in every possible other explanation. They tried “poverty.” Then it was discovered, and the evidence presented overwhelming and unanswerable, that terrorists by and large are middle-class, and are richer than the average Muslims. Poor Muslims leading a hardscrabble existence, in remote villages. They haven’t the time, or the weaponry, or the opportunity, very often, to indulge in violent Jihad. Then came the matter of “education” and other “opportunities,” and again, the evidence shows that Muslim terrorists have received more schooling, on the whole, than other Muslims. Indeed, the evidence suggests that the more deprived Muslims are, the less likely they are to be a threat, and that attempts to teach them, as are being undertaken in parts of Western Europe, the local languages and cultures will not make many of them better “integrated” into society (as Sarkozy appears to have thought) but will rather provide them with the skills to be better propagandists for, defenders of, Islam. For one example, look at sinister, seductive, plausible Tariq Ramadan, and compare his influence with that of some frothing imam who does not command the local language, and does not know how to deal with or manipulate the mentalities of non-Muslims (as al-Hilali in Australia).
And the second theme of this article is also related to matters foreign as well as domestic.
That theme is the one of “victimization.” A man has been caught, a man whose family was given refuge in this country, a man whose family engaged in free enterprise, with two parents who both found work, a man who grew up here and was presumably nourished here. What did he learn about America? What, about America, caused him to identify with the country and his fellow citizens? Or what was it, what could it possibly have been, to cause him never to identify with America, nor with his fellow non-Muslim citizens, but rather lead him to wish to mass-murder them? What could it be? Poverty? General wretchedness? Or could that word “religious” applied to him by his mother, and by fellow cab-drivers to his father as well, be the key? Could that be the guilty culprit for his views and acts? Of course, we are not supposed to look at religion too closely. Rather, we should go off with the Muslim groups who are for all the world akin to a bunch of O.J.Simpsons encouraging us all to go off “in search of the real killer” -- as they search with us for the “root causes” that never ever have anything to do with Islam.
I’ve used the playwright’s title – Elizabethean or Jacobean, I can’t remember – before as an ending – but it comes to mind as apt yet again:
A mad world, my masters!
Everybody loves a victim; even other victims love victims.
The next time you see a muslim slowly sawing off the head of a child or an adult, just remember -- the victim, the "real victim," is the one with the saw in their hands.
The family of the headless body of course should be sued for something because the atrocity was after all, their fault.
I still believe Clinton and Albright should be held accountable over this -- it was they who sponsored these albanian "victims" after all!
"...the evidence shows that Muslim terrorists have received more schooling, on the whole, than other Muslims...."
....it has occurred to me that Islam has some unwritten class rules....Certain Muslims are receiving an education while others are denied an education (up to and including a violent death for just going to school)...Muslim children are force fed a strict Qur'anic diet of their duty to dominate rules, those children who ask the wrong questions or show signs of independent thought processes are eliminated...Islam is the school of political indoctrination and military tactics....
thIS iSLAMIC SLOW JIHAD is making intrusions into your daily life and not much is being said about it....
It is time to begin to fight back in every way possible...
We can begin to slow them down a little by banning Muslim immigration now...and to quit conceding to every Muslim demand....Time to just say NO....
exsgtbrown, what are you doing, or maybe I should ask, what can be done to stop immigration? I write to my politicians (I got a couple of the worst - Pelosi, Boxer and Feinstein!!) and they only appease them more. I write to Bush, and he wants to bring more over. I donate to the Minute Men and will probably help out once I am retired. I wrote to the Governor today over the article about the UCIrvine letting some spew venom so bad that it merits a kick out of the school system - we shall see what happens there.
Other than that - I don't see any positive changes in the **IDEA** that we have a big problem looming if we keep up appeasing muslims. They don't have a clue about taqiyya/kitman, the koran, jihad, etc. And if you tell them - it is as if they don't read a thing. I am not so naive as to believe that the letters and emails get to the politicians, but you would think a little alarm would be let off after their clerks did some reading. Or do they read if the email sounds as if it is against their agenda??!! I personally don't think they do.
Why don't people stop flying, espcially Arizonans or people flying to Arizona, to the airport that is appeasing muslims? Why are our mainstream media playing into the hands of muslim 'turnspeak' and appeasement which only confuses the masses?
Why do people keep on their daily zombie state while letting companies and Universities and our politicians keep appeasing muslims?
Because, I believe, people do not want to be bothered. They want to 'hope' things will change or someone else will do the hard work. I hear that word 'hope' and it sickens me. It just tells me that the person will do little to nothing to change things. I see people from countries that flee to the USA and "hope" their country of origin changes after the muslims have made it a festering jihadist play ground. What did they do? nothing, except let it happen and then flee when things got too bad, and all the while... they 'hope'.
I used to think that 'hope' was one of the big three - faith, hope and charity. But, I think 'hope' is what the muslims are wishing for while they 'act'.
R_not,
I'm not sure there's anything our leaders can/will do...even if they support us ideologically, many are too connected (diplomatically, financially, whatever) to these guys to fully withdraw from other countries or face the immigration issue head-on. Mexico, MAYBE...but anyone else? Pah!
Don't get me started on the economic Fear Factor - we haven't been isolationsts to any reasonable extent since the 1929 Market Crash (which occurred primarily because of our import barriers to Europe). We're even more internationally intrenched...although our imports & exports have never reached the GDP percentage levels of Europe...and we don't have the true welfare states either. But that fear is HUGE.
I really think the more clamoring with help only in the short-term or on a single aspect, unless we just vote them all OUT. And when does that ever happen?
So, unfortunately, I think things will remain the same...until the crisis or flash-point occurs. Then it's all-out War. And the only reason I can come up with? Because that's just how it's been since the Dawn of Man.
Sucks, don't it?
"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -George Santayana
"I used to think that 'hope' was one of the big three - faith, hope and charity..."
-- from a posting above
Naive hope, credulous faith, and entirely too much "charity" toward those who do not wish you well, who wish you ill, who wish you dead. All that Dale-Evans-and-Roy-Rogers stuff:
Have faith, hope and charity
That's the way to live successfully.
How do I know?
The Bible tells me so.
Nice, but of little consolation when dealing with, or attempting to, the unprecedented menace, all over the Western world, where our "hope" and our "faith" and especially, especially our "charity," are all used against us.
On the one hand, "hope, faith, and charity." There has been entirely too much on the one hand. We need a little more on the other.
We can begin to slow them down a little by banning Muslim immigration now...and to quit conceding to every Muslim demand....Time to just say NO....
Posted by: exsgtbrown
The problem is this: Who is going to say no? You say no, I say no, we all say no together, and the problem continues. Will Nancy Pelosi say no? How about Hairy Reed? Bush not only wont say no, he does not understand the question. None of them will identify the enemy. So they dont know who/what to say no to.
Even conservative talk show hosts wont identify the enemy. This is one screwy situation.
They just plain and simple wont call the problem Islam. They prefer to call it Islamic jihad, global jihad, Islamic militancy, Islamic radicles, and terrorists. Never the 'I' word alone.
I think the group of Americans who are on to Islam is large and getting larger. Since the gov semms incapable with dealing with this issue, the people who are willing, are going to have to deal with it themselves.
Direct action like the guy in Florida who sued to stop construction of a mosque in his area.
If they cant build mosques (nests) they cant expand.
Stop debating stupid things like swearing in on a Quran for public office or court. Thats the just say no stuff. If they dont like it here, they can always go back to Pakistan, or whatever...
Thanks guys, I needed that. I get down sometimes.
Hugh is once again 100% on target...
There are no moderate Muslims there are only faithful ones and ones who are Muslim in name only. It is the religious ones who are the problem. That leaves us with a problem.
Democrats refuse to come down hard because they are followers of the PC and multicultural line. The Republicans however are no better because many have tied their cart to the "Faith Movement". You know when Bush talks about people of "Faith" like that is some kind of religion onto itself. The "faith movement" is thus:
(All religions are good and teach about God. Even better Muslims feed this line by telling him and his henchmen about the common Abrahamic God and how they love Jesus too. Bush who is a true dimwit eats this crap up.)
In some ways it is close to the D'Souza way of thinking. You know we all hate abortion and condoms etc thus we should be allies. Most regular conservatives know full well this is nonsense but they are trapped by Capt. Ahab on the Pequod looking for Moby Dick. They are confused about what to do about him. This is why the Republican Party is so screwed up right now. They should be leading the charge to win this war but they don't know what to charge and who we are fighting. We should be hunting whales....instead we hunting one white whale called a moderate faithful Muslim.
Brilliant. Thank you, Hugh Fitzgerald.
R_not wrote: "Why do people keep on their daily zombie state while letting companies and Universities and our politicians keep appeasing muslims?"
I think a large part of it might also have to do with where people go for news and information.
For the most part, the media in Canada whitewashes Islam. My local newscast didn't mention that the people arrested in the Fort Dix plot were Muslim.
CBC Radio and TV (paid for by tax dollars) glorifies "The Religion of Peace". CBC Radio recently had a gushing story about, and interviews with, Canadians who wear the Kaffiyeh scarf to express their political views and fashion sense. Cutting-edge cool!
Various Canadian politicians marched with the pro-Hizbullah groups last summer. My local member of parliament (NDP) sends out emails featuring her recent meetings and there are always a number of mosque names and Islamic groups listed.
My child's "social justice" school is so anti-Israel and pro-Palestine it's insane. They brought in two Jewish people to discuss the "apartheid wall" and everything that Israel is doing to hurt the downtrodden "Palestinians". When my child asked the teacher if he would bring in a Jewish person who is pro-Israel, he said, gee, there doesn't seem to be any time left for speakers about Israel. My child is the only one in that small school who has anything positive to say about Israel.
So, in Canada at least, we are being brainwashed from an early age. Everything these Muslim spokespeople say in the media about Muslims being victims and fearing backlashes is swallowed whole because it fits into a pre-existing view of the world. It's as if our government institutions and representatives have become over-protective parents who, at the first peep out of a poor, misunderstood Muslim, runs out and beats up the accused kid because our poor little child would never do anything bad and would certainly never lie about it. It's naive and prejudiced in the extreme.
We all know who big-daddy government's favourites are now and some might feel that it's useless to complain.
Hugh, here's another NYT articles profiling the families of the other Dix suspects, and it tells a very different story for Serdar Tartar and his family:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/10/nyregion/10plot.html?em&ex=1178942400&en=8bb3fff3f4bc5375&ei=5087%0A
Who is investigating the root causes that make "getting back to true Islam" so appealing to young Muslims in the West while so many older Muslim immigrants want nothing to do with it? How can those differences be put to use?
Here’s a good question for a presidential debate:
Candidates, what are the differences in the teachings of Islam and Radical Islam?
For extra credit:
Differences between Islam and Islamofascism?
pez, here is a couple of quotes that might be of interest to those who are confused:
"I was ordered to fight all men until they say 'There is no god but Allah.'"
prophet Mohammad's farewell address, March 632
"I was ordered to fight the people until they say there is no god but Allah, and
his prophet Mohammed."
Osama bin Laden, Nov 2001
and here are a few other notables:
"I shall cross this sea to their islands to pursue them until there remains no one
on the face of the earth who does not acknowledge allah."
Saladin, Jan 1189
"We will export our revolution throughout the world... until the calls 'there is no
god but Allah and Mohammed is the messenger of Allah' are echoed all over thie world."
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, 1979
"a three-page bullet-riddled “Executive Summary” of what Islam is all about"
Maybe is possible to make a three-page summary of Islam. That is to say, about the Infidel-relevant parts about Islam. The other parts are not that important.
If that summary would also include policy recommendations, posted on JW time and again, well..... that might save us.
Ma & Pa react..to foled plot while in USA
:(
wa''hawww .. gasp.. gasp ..wa''hawww. snif ;snif
"He doesn't have a gun, he doesn't have anything,"
"My friend" "My friend"
snif snif
wa''hawww .. gasp.. gasp ..wa''hawww. snif ;snif
"My heart kills me,"
He's a “victim"! We's A Victim!!!
wa''hawww wa''hawww wa''hawww wa''hawww ..gasp.gasp
Ma & Pa react...to foled plot if in Gaza or on any other Isamic turf
:(
..Shucks.. he got caught..
"Direct action like the guy in Florida who sued to stop construction of a mosque in his area."
...this is positive action...this is the type of positive action that should happen every time a muslim makes a demand....
whinning and moaning are just useless...surrendering to Muslim demands is an effort in futility....everyone ...start saying no...
the Dhimmicrats will not help you (they have already surrendered , just listen to their majority leader)
the Republicans have not surrendered,but as stated, they don't sound to convincing...
and forget about the 9th circuit court in California...what a bunch of slugs here...
Have we had an American revolution lately?..
"So, in Canada at least, we are being brainwashed from an early age." from post above.
You know, I could (possibly) forgive and/or ignore the CBC if their only point was that "Muslims are good." If that were the sole, repeated, propagandistic story-line, I wouldn't be all that upset. The problem is that they don't stop simply with white-washing Muslim atrocities(including those that are cruel, brutal, and heinous) -- the CBC demonizes Jews/Israelis. It's the CBC's visceral hatred of all things Israeli/Jewish which becomes the problem. To the extent that the CBC portrays Islam and Muslims as wholly wonderful and noble and blessed (just watch any episode of Little Mosque on the Prairie), the opposite portrayal is made for Israelis/Jews (build a fence to keep out suicide bombers -- do anything in terms of self-protection -- and the CBCers will be screaming "racism!!" and "apartheid!!" meanwhile as those truly intent on genocide (the Arabs) go about their bloody "work.")
There was an article in Vanity Fair (I believe it was by C. Hitchens) which discussed the islamification of the UK -- and, notably, there was a rise not just in Islamic radicalism, but in antisemitism (the latter not just expressed by Muslims, but by various elites, such as at the BBC). I'm seeing the same thing happening here in Canada...I'm just wondering how long it will be before Canada looks like the UK.
pez
Next time you are discussing this, call Mohammed a Radical Muslim, or the founder of Islamo-Fascism (or as Michael Medved calls it, Islamo-Nazism).
A recent study of sociopathic behavior (selfish, manipulative behavior pathologically devoid of empathy and compassion) concluded that one sign of a sociopath is that after he abuses you in some way, and you confront him, a typical response is to try to arouse your pity for him because he is a victim of this or that, perhaps even of you. He tries to exploit the normal person's compassion, in order to shift the focus away from what he actually did and away from himself, onto his victim or someone else. Thus the sociopath hopes to escape responsibility and detection so he can keep doing his thing at your expense. The book, as I recall, claimed that one should not attempt to help the sociopath; one should as much as possible avoid his ambit. I think the book also said that as many as 1 in 20 people are sociopaths. But that should be double-checked.
kamala wrote:
Youth are notoriously unsatisfied with everything, partly with good reason. And consequently they go searching for the true root of things, the radix, the radical. Jihad and Islamic supremacism offer what can seem to be something that is radical and goes to the root. In reality, jihad and Islamic supremacism only go near the root of a fascistic vision that cuts one off from the true root of things. Muslims 'youth' are prone to misconstrue mere extremism as a going to the true root. I guess.
traeh,
I know this will sound horrifically un-PC, but I also find correlations between sociopaths (or psychopaths, as they're called in the UK and Canada) and certain followers of Islam.
Some of the best studies of psychopathy come from a retired University of British Columbia prof -- Hare. He's developed an inventory of traits (categorizing the personality disorder). And not all psychopaths are in jail -- many are, as others have suggested, "living among us."
I think somewhere on the Internet is the list of the 22 factors...(lack of empathy, dishonesty or tendency to lie, manipulative behavior, etc.)
a "hardworking" cabdriver who "treats the customers good"
from the article
Apparently cabdrivers are now coming under greater scrutiny. My only questions is: why did it take so long?
See www.worldnetdaily.com for the info on "taxi jihadists".
*
Can we be sure about the father who works as a cabdriver? Is he really that innocent?
Do cabs get access to areas of the airport that aren't open to passenger cars?
More on taxi jihadists:
Muslims account for the majority of cab drivers in many major U.S. cities – including the nation's capital. And a number of them have ties to terrorism, federal and local authorities say.
After 9/11, the U.S. Park Police, which enforces laws on federal roads leading into such places as CIA headquarters, ran a search of Islamic terror suspects against a database of traffic stops in the Washington, D.C., area going back decades.
"It came back with a nearly 25 percent hit rate," a U.S. Park Police official said. "Many of them were cab drivers."
The official, a veteran police detective who wished to go unidentified, says roughly 80 percent of cab drivers in the Washington area practice the Islamic faith. Their numbers concern police, who believe they make up part of the terror support network in America.
"If they're not suspects themselves, they pick up suspects at airports and take them to safehouses here," he told WND. "It's a jihadi network."
In between fares, many taxi drivers congregate at the Starbucks located down the road in a shopping center in Baileys Crossroads, which has the highest concentration of Muslims of any area outside Dearborn, Mich.
The shopping center is within a few miles of the Pentagon, and right across the street from two luxury apartment high-rises that erupted into cheers when the World Trade Center fell on 9/11. Law enforcement has dubbed the Skyline Towers the "Taliban Towers" after conducting several counterterrorism investigations involving tenants.
I have several friends who are cab drivers in northern California. None of them are muslims. To get a cab drivers permit you must face four different background checks. One by the issuing police dept, one by the county sheriffs office, one by the Highway Patrol, and one by the Justice Dept.
On top of that, your finger prints are electronically scanned and sent to the J.D. where they are compared internationally, to make sure you are not a known terrorist or wanted for anything.
Your driving record must be squeeky clean with no violations other than parking. And you are subject to drug testing. Finding a qualified driver with those qualifications is hard to do.
Well, thats California, probably those 'other' states are not that picky...
Hare described psychopaths as "intraspecies predators". They make up less than one percent of the general population. They constitute a disproportionate population inside prisons (an estimated 15 - 25 percent of criminals are deemed "psychopaths"). Hare identified 2 independent factors -- first, the affective dimension (egocentricity, manipulativeness, callousness, lack of remorse); second, independent factor relates to lifestyle(antisocial, proneness to boredom, impulsivity, irresponsibility.) If someone scores 30 (highest score is 40), then it's considered indicative.
You never know what kind of nut is behind the wheel of a cab
cabs..
I got my own story;
I flew into NY a few months after 911 and took a cab..
.I thought the cabbie was Cuban because he looked so much like a Cuban friend of mine..he could have been his brother.... so I started a friendly conversation with him .. I remembered how neat my Cuban friend was ..so..I said to the cabbie " you keep a clean cab ..you must enjoy you work".
Well... this guy started telling me about the filth in America ... woman are all whores, how he hate's his job...
.So I tried to joke with him a bit ...he didn't like my jokes ... he started driving faster and faster as he got madder and madder..,then he hit a bump in the road so hard ,I flew up out of my seat and hit the top of my head...I saw stars..
Finally ..I decided ..I best shut my mouth,..that's it.. no more friendly conversation .....
When I got to my destination, I paid him and asked ;
"Are you Cuban?
his answer... Kurd
..The next day , I was in such pain , I went to a doctor, he X rayed my head and sent me for CAT scan ,
I was ok ,
But now I'm the blunt of family jokes ..
"Joe got his head examined and thy found nothing.".
No lie..this is a true story, even the family joke..
Yeah, speaking of cabbies.
I've heard reports that at our international airport, on 9/11, all the cabbies were out whoopin' and cheering, "Allahu Akbar!" etc.
The other day, on the front page of our paper, there was a picture of the cabbies. They were "protestin'". Apparently, some outsider cab company (infidels) from an outlying territory had dared to invade their tribal territory. (they demand the exclusive right to pick up fares at the international airport.)
Anywho, the picture showed the cabbies surrounding a make-shift wooden coffin and they were all beating said coffin, with their shoes. yeah, just another "traditional" Canadian practice...beating empty coffins with one's shoes...Shows ya the marvelous degree of "integration" into Canada, and the whole-hearted acceptance of "Canadian" values, etc.