Obama is on the run. He has spent the past year in many separate, long trips all over the place. In Great Britain, he gave Gordon Brown some DVDs and Michele Obama in chummy fashion -- nobody here but us queens -- put her arm on the Queen's shoulder. In Russia, Obama decided to hold a Town Meeting to which both dissidents and members of the government, that is, of the K.G.B., were invited. He thus effectively shut up the dissidents and appalled all Russian liberals, who were distinctly unimpressed with his understanding of their situation.
In China, he received nothing for all his attempts at "dialogue" with others far more worldly and ruthless than he -- not once did he suggest, for example, that the American government, or American consumers, could stop buying Chinese goods in an organized fashion, if China did not cooperate on Iran and North Korea, though that conceivable threat should have been an obvious one to slyly make.
Then of course he went to Cairo, where he delivered a speech on Islam. Though that speech contained more grotesque misinformation about Islam -- its texts, its tenets, its attitudes, its atmospherics -- than any speech by any non-Muslim leader in history, it did not even have the intended effect. The intended effect was to win over Muslims. Yet they are -- our "allies" that is, never mind our declared enemies -- just as intransigent, just as corrupt, just as determined to use us and inveigle as much aid as they can, just as unwavering in their desire to create the conditions that will inexorably lead to the disappearance of the tiny non-Muslim nation-state of Israel.
They remain just as determined to defeat from within the Western world, by terrorism or, for some, not by terrorism but rather by such "peaceful" means. For those "peaceful" means we are apparently all supposed to be grateful, and breathe a sigh of relief -- deployment of the Money Weapon, well-financed and carefully-targeted campaigns of Da'wa in North America and Europe and, not least, demographic conquest. That demographic conquest proceeds, without attempts to halt it, much less reverse it, all over the Western world. This in the short term causes an enormous security headache and a situation of permanent societal worry and disruption and general upset. It leads to threats to free speech. If not dealt with, it could lead to the destruction of our own, far more advanced, tolerant, decent, societies, whose freedoms, whose science, whose art, whose everything could not for one minute have developed under Islam.
And on the domestic front, Obama, the most left-wing of our Presidents, has done more damage to the middle class. He has indeed been responsible, with the terms and conditions and negligence with which the TARP program was fashioned, for what is surely the greatest single transfer of wealth from the deserving middle class to the most undeserving segment of our rich. And the terms that the Obama Administration struck, the tens of billions for which it overpaid (see A.I.G.), are further cause for alarm.
Because of Obama's ignorance about Islam, and his simultaneous deep belief that he "knows about Islam" because, you see, from the ages of 6 to 10 he lived in Indonesia, and went to a school with both Muslim and Christian children (that is, went to a most unrepresentative school, in a most unrepresentative Muslim city, Jakarta, in a most unrepresentative and easygoing country, at the most secular moment in its history), he will have a hard time admitting to others and to himself that he really has a duty to study, and have his advisers, and members of the State Department and the Pentagon study, the texts, tenets, attitudes, atmospherics of Islam. They will get it right, however disturbing what they will find out, if they rely not on the venal espositos and comical armstrongs and Mesanostrans (google "MESA Nostra") but on the hundred or so great Western scholars of Islam (fl. 1870-1970). Obama's disastrous miscomprehension of Islam is likely to lead him to continue the squandering of men, money, materiel and morale in Afghanistan, and to continue to cruelly hector the Israelis (as part of a strategy of appeasement to win unwinnable Muslim hearts and minds), and to ignore the legal, moral, and historic claims of the Jews.
It is likely to lead him to ignore, above all, the intention of the League of Nations, and the juridical status of what the Jordanians renamed the "West Bank." See Julius Stone, see Howard Grief, whose books are the most authoritative legal studies on the matter. There Jewish settlements are legal by the terms of the Mandate -- and the territory of the "West Bank" is part of that assigned to be part of the Jewish National Home. It was not only because the Jordanian Army managed illegally to seize that territory in 1948-49 and to hold onto it until it was re-taken by its rightful claimant, Israel, in the Six-Day War.
More troops will be sent to Afghanistan because Obama does not know how to undo what he did in Cairo. He does not know how to explain to himself, much less to the American public, that Islam is not "tolerant" and "peaceful" and that the worldwide Jihad (the sum of all the local Jihads), is a threat that, at present, has as its most important theatre of war not Iraq, not Afghanistan, not Pakistan, but rather the countries of Western Europe - and that the instruments of Jihad that are most dangerous, in those countries, are the Money Weapon, campaigns of Da'wa, and demographic conquest. And instead of sending troops to quixotically "defend" one set of (hopelessly hostile) Muslims against another (even more hopelessly hostile) Muslims, we should withdraw, as an intelligent sheriff would refuse to enter a saloon where two outlaws, who are dead set on killing him but also dead set on killing each other, are circling one another, just about to draw their guns from their holsters.
Can Obama rise to the occasion? Can he be as necessarily ruthless as he must be, and without announcing his new policy, combine a withdrawal from Afghanistan with other acts that will show that, nearly a year into his presidency, and eight years after the attacks of 9/11/2001, he has finally begun to rethink the threat of Islam? Can he show that he has begun to recognize the usefulness of recognizing, analyzing, and exploiting pre-existing fissures within the Camp of Islam, not only to weaken it from within by forcing its rival groups to use up their men, their money, their war materiel, but also to keep them preoccupied with the threats to their own well-being? One hopes, for example, that disorder in Yemen, ideally supported by Iran, will keep Saudi Arabia on edge for a long time. In such an event they will have less money to spend, and less time to cause mischief, in Dar al-Harb, the Domain of War, the House of the Infidels.
There is so much that needs to be done to signal that leaving Afghanistan - and ceasing to provide the vast sums that, as in Iraq, or in Egypt, or Jordan, or among the soi-disant "Palestinians" -- supplies the very wherewithal for the corruption we deplore. Some things cannot be avoided, and must be undertaken. The frantic worry over Pakistan's nuclear bombs shows that we have to deal with Iran's nuclear project, not through sanctions which will not work, but through bombing that will work, and will set back efforts for years. (Contrary to the hopes of outsiders, the most intelligent people within Iran believe the Islamic Republic of Iran cannot be overturned or dislodged, despite the mediagenic efforts of the opposition on which such hope has been too optimistically placed, and its strength overrated.) What's more, after an initial rally-round-the-flag, the humiliation of the destruction, and the obvious waste of many tens of billions of dollars on that nuclear project, and the implied threat that it will, when necessary, be bombed again - all this is the thing, the only thing, that might lead to the successful collapse of the miserable regime in Tehran.
But that is something that has to be done in any case. Other things can be done as part of signaling that far from yielding to the forces of Islam, the pullout of American troops and civilians, and the ending of aid, are part of a much more clever, and even ruthless strategy. With Iran, the bombing should not be left up to tiny Israel -- the American government should assume its responsibilities as a great power, as the most powerful of the Infidel nation-states. To show that the American military will be used when it makes sense, the Americans should consider seizing the southern (Christian) Sudan and (Muslim, but non-Arab, black African) Darfur, with a small force, and holding both territories until such time as a referendum on independence for both places can be plausibly held. The spectacle of grateful black Africans will be one that the Arab and Muslim bloc at the U.N. will have a great deal of trouble with, as it tries to claim the divine right of Arabs to impose their will on black Africans. Black African Christians, the object of increasingly aggressive and violent attacks for years (see, for example, the genesis, conduct, and outcome of the Biafra War), will be heartened. And they need some heartening, and the forces of Islam need to be checked.
In Western Europe, people are fed up with what their political and media elites have done, in allowing so many Muslims into their countries. The large-scale presence of such Muslims has led to a situation now widely recognized as one that is far more unpleasant, expensive (the increased costs for monitoring large Muslim populations), and physically dangerous, both for the indigenous non-Muslims and for other, but non-Muslim, immigrants. The Americans must make common cause with, and encourage, and do nothing to discourage, those who have come to understand, at long last, what the ideology of Islam is all about, and why it makes little sense to hope that more than a few Muslims can truly be integrated into societies where Infidel laws and customs. For all of these laws and customs are flatly contradicted by the letter and spirit of the Shari'a. They are likely to be undone, sooner or later, by the pressure of inexorably - if nothing is done - increasing Muslim populations, whose presence demoralizes, and disrupts, in every way, the non-Muslims who have not made a fanatical fetish of that unexamined Idol of the Age, "Diversity."
Is Obama, are his advisers, capable of rising to the occasion? Are they capable of any of this? If they are, they can show it by withdrawing from Afghanistan for the right reasons, and stopping the transfer of enormous sums from our own Treasury to various Muslim states. They should demand that those states go and ask the rich Arabs to support them. This would put to the test the supposed unity of the worldwide Umma, by putting Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E., Kuwait, Qatar, Libya, and others on the spot. Whether the rich Arabs (and Iran) give or withhold aid, the resentments of the oil-and-gas-less Muslims will grow, and so will the resentments of the rich Arabs and Iranians, who have grown quite comfortable with the way in which the rich Infidel countries have taken on the responsibility of transferring still more of their wealth to Muslim countries, this time not by buying oil, but by the even more psychologically disturbing transfer of aid. These transactions resemble the classic attitudes observable when the Jizyah is being exacted, both on the part of the Muslim recipients, who take this aid as a given and display no gratitude at all, and on the part of the non-Muslim donors, who show a reluctance to end or diminish such aid because of what they fear would be the reaction of the Muslim recipients.
But perhaps Obama and his advisors will fool us, and show, at long last, that they are not prisoners of their past pieties and misunderstandings.
A hope.
A fairly forlorn hope.
But still - a hope.
Obama is nothing more than a puppet on a string. who pulls the strings you might ask, his supporters. the man cannot think on his own, jokes about his prompter hit the radio waves as well as late night jokes. There could be a lot of effective ways he could deal with islamists, but we are living in the pc world with a far left loon in the WH.
I'm not a fan of President Obama but regarding our relationship with China, thanks to the disastrous financial policies of President Bush and wasting $1 trillion on Iraq (money which came in large part from the Chinese), we are basically owned by the Chinese which severely limits what Obama can do or say to them. If we hadn't wasted men and money on Iraq, and if we had pursued even half-way intellient fiscal policies over the last 8 years, we would be occupying still our position as the most important and powerful country in the world. Currently, we are not.
From post above...we would be occupying still our position as the most important and powerful country in the world. Currently, we are not.
The 'money game' started way before Bush, but he certainly played his position well when he got into the game...Now Rasool Obama has the ball, and so far he has continued giving away the farm, or selling it cheap...Look at the large jizya payments going to Islamic despots, while US States goes bankrupt...The end result for the survivors is to work harder and longer for less...Maybe for the Chinese...
"I'm not a fan of President Obama but regarding our relationship with China, thanks to the disastrous financial policies of President Bush and wasting $1 trillion on Iraq..."
-- from a posting above
#1) I was not attempting either to exculpate or to overlook the financial follies of the Bush administration or, for that matter, those preceding it.
#2) I would change "wasting $1 trillion on Iraq" to "wasting $2 trillion on Iraq" (see the calculations of Joseph Stiglitz on the true cost of that war).
Obama-shahada...'I'm not tired'...'I'm all fired up and ready to go'...
What Should Obama Do?
He should punt...Any decent Rasululahhaha would...
What Should Obama Do?
Unless Obama decides to properly identify the enemy, there is nothing he can do except surrender either now or later. Without the enemy being defined, we are fooling ourselves each day we continue this unfortunate experience. I believe we should fight to win and we can, period. In order to win, we must identify the real enemy. If BHO doesn't want to win then we should get out of the theater of operations.
But perhaps Obama and his advisors will fool us, and show, at long last, that they are not prisoners of their past pieties and misunderstandings.
A hope.
A fairly forlorn hope.
But still - a hope.
My hopes at this point, as far as Buraq Arafat Hussein Osama's surrender policies are concerned, is that his administration won't follow Zbigniew Brzezinski's suggestion that IDF planes on their way to Iran should be shot down by US forces, just so that Hussein won't cry like a little girl over his beloved A-rab-wannabe Iranian mullahs being de-fanged.
Fantastic, Mr. Fitzgerald. I think that analysis is spot-on but I think Obama is concerned, primarily, with the wonderfulness of his own self and he evinces almost no behavior that would make one think he loves America and thinks it is worth defending.
I think he knows his opposition would paint him as weak if he did change American strategy in Afghanistan and being aware of that will cause him to try and massage the numbers of troops to be added to our forces there but not fundamentally change strategy as you, wisely, advise.
It is sort of funny (in a way deadly to those who love liberty) that Obama's weakness will be exploited by the Neo-Cons in convincing him to stay-the-course in Afghanistan while praising him as courageous if he takes the decision they desire.
Weak men are highly susceptible to manipulation and America has, perhaps, its weakest President ever. He is a weak, prideful, vain, intelligent, powerful, and ignorant, man whose will is remarkably strong.
I don't know how many folks understand that the properties of the Soul(Will, Intellect, and Memory) must be taken into account when trying to assess the relative strengths and weaknesses of our leaders and how best to either succor or suppress those strengths.
Obama has proved, repeatedly, he is ignorant about many important topics, but, he is an intelligent man whose intellect is dutifully applied to actualising his will to change America.
Obama can not be convinced by intellectual argument to change the object of his will - the destruction of America via massive change - so strategies must be developed to frustrate his will and for that to happen his opponents first must grasp just how radical he is and how strong his will is.
And a good beginning would be to recognise and admit that Obama is more than a mere puppet of the establishment as many of his opponents imagine.
Obama's weakness can be exploited and he can be manipulated by others in areas, he can agree, that are extraneous to his fundamental will to change America.
Hell, for all we know, Obama might even reason that continuing our strategy in Afghanistan is perfectly in synch with his will to destroy America by change.
After all, the inevitable loss of the war in Afghanistan will certainly weaken and demoralise America.
Hugh, should Israel or America attack the Iranian Nuclear instalations that are both buried deep and jealously guarded you would have the following scenario:
1. they would bomb the Saudi oil depots and fields leading to massive disclocation in the west and further afield
2. they would close off the Straits of Homuz. Same as above
3. the almost certain attempt to invade Israel by a consortium or arab states
4. the deployment or activation of terror cells all over the west and in the middle east with catastrophic results.
The only way this can be countered would would that NATO is fully activated (fat chance)and comes to the aid of both America and Israel. A massive and uncompromising clampdown on all Muslims in the west. A massive western navy to guard the straits and a huge land army to guard the depots and oilfields. Finally, WW3.
The Israeli economy cannot sustain a conflict with Iran alone, much less an Iran that is in tacit league with Israel's arab neighbors. All wars are wars of attrition. The first economy that runs out of steam loses.
So how does Israel survive? It survives by assuring that the entire non-muslim world joins the fray. That can easily be achieved even with the limited resources of Israel in classic von Clausewitz fashion: strike the center of gravity of the muslim world and compel the ummah to rise up en masse against the entire non-muslim world. Israel has no choice. It must exercise the Tancredo option, an obliteration of Mecca and Medina.
The five billion non-muslim inhabitants of the planet will also have no choice but to meet head-on the inevitable global muslim uprising that would immediately follow in its wake. The ummah will be compelled by their own ideology to play their last hand and the jinn of jihad will at last be stuffed back into the bottle to which our ancestors had confined it with their swords and cannons and paid the cost with their own blood and treasure, an expense that the present generation has yet to truly bear.
Even without Israel, the end game of the ideological struggle between Islam and the rest of the world will play out in a planet-wide conflagration so the sooner we can get it going the better, as the ummah will only acquire more strength as time goes by, principally by demographic conquest of Western Europe. It wouldn't be the first time the Allies would have to sink the French fleet because it ended up in the hands of the enemy by surrender.
What has President Obama revealed to us so far?
1. The major news outlets of this country (NBC, CBS, ABC, their brothers in the print media and the like) are unabashedly liberal and controlled by liberal organizations and special interest groups. The President and the MSM are increasingly out of touch with that the majority of Americans are concerned about.
2. Some special interest groups have no ideological loyalty. The president race of 2008 was suspended at the behest of some major financial institutions so that members of both parties could bailout failed companies. We do not live in a capitalist system any more, we live in a system where business and government work in an uneasy and quasi-partnership.
3. The evidence is not compelling that the actions of ACORN and its fellow travelers "stole" the 2008 election. What is obvious is that the funding for ACORN will be restored (quietly) at some point in the future. The President in not just "in bed" with ACORN, he is kissing Bertha Lewis on the mouth.
4. The laws that govern the marketplace can be suspended at the whim of the executive branch. The bankruptcy of General Motors is a case in point. The President interceded to favor the interest of a political ally, the UAW, and denied preferred stock holders their rightful position in the bankruptcy process.
5. Our politicians no longer represent us. The recent health care bill is simply an obvious example. The current bill is not favored by the majority of the American people and will still leave a portion of the population uninsured. Judging from our legislative branch's blissful state while still attempting to cram this unpopular bill down our throats,
the so-called "People's House" is anything but. It is the domain of money and political interests with no room for the concerns of ordinary Americans.
6. The President's benign or willful ignorance of the Islamic Jihad against not just the United States but the rest of the infidel world is the gravest threat towards our continued existence and the existence of civilization in general. The Obama administration has lead us back in time to a pre - 9/11 state. The recent attack at Fort Hood is just one example of how the President's "chickens have come home to roost". I can only assume that if President knows what any student of Islamic history and religion does, his oath to defend this country is meaningless and his inactions and actions are deliberately treasonous.
I hope and pray that his lack of action on this war is due to pure ignorance.
What should Obama do?!
Resign!!
Davegreybeard,
Insulting anybody's religion is not the best way to solve a problem.
The solution is simple :
(1) Co-opt all muslim leaders and have them on the CIA payroll
(2) Use the US rendition program to go after truly dangerous individuals and the next "hitler"
(3) Drastically change the US govt's foreign policy to approximate that of Switzerland's foreign policy where no terrorist attacks take place
(4) Push for reforms in the muslim world to approximate the numerous muslim countries that do not have sharia as the law
(5) Implement the 28 point peace plan :
http://www.bernardgoldberg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=30488&p=83949#p83949
IN CLOSING :
Centuries of fear mongering by politicians has resulted in the tremendous expansion of government, ever since the founding fathers started deficit spending on the revolutionary war to "free" themselves from Great Britain.
Would the American people have paid for the revolutionary war out of their own pockets ? ... They probably would have told the founding fathers to be as patient as the Canadians and not rebel against Britain.
Today, because 68 cents of every tax dollar goes to the military/industrial complex, its inevitable that the special interests from the military/industrial complex will have the biggest influence on the US govt. and that is why the US govt has a military solution to problems rather than trying to save trillions through pragmatic negotiations, diplomacy and inexpensive covert operations.
Ref : http://www.bu.edu/globalbeat/syndicate/anglewicz-brauer062005.html
The following is one example of a very expensive military solution to the events of 9/11 when pragmatic, covert, diplomatic efforts and a hundred million dollar financial incentive to the Taliban could have easily apprehended Osama bin Laden, marginalized his influence in the muslim world and saved trillions on the "war on terror".
We could easily have prevented the September 11 terrorist attacks, if we had done the following :
(1) Not got involved with the "Muhjahadeen" to oust the Soviet Union from Afghanistan....
..Osama Bin Laden's life was transformed by the experience he had in Afghanistan.
You could say his ideas of jihad were "born again" in Afghanistan and the aid the US gave the Muhjahadeen went a long way to helping this "born again" experience.
Osama Bin Laden himself stated that the ousting of the Soviet Union was the will of Allah (he did not mention that without the US, he would not have been able to oust the Soviet Union from Afghanistan)
and this so-called "Will of Allah " experience against the Soviet Union encouraged him immensely and gave him the courage to later go after the US but if Bin Laden was defeated in Afghanistan against the Soviets ( which was very possible if the US did not help ) then Bin Laden might have concluded that it was not Allah's will to go after super powers,
or Bin Laden might to this day still be too busy fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan and not been able to use Afghanistan as a training base for attacks on the US and/or in Kashmir.
(2) Not got involved in ousting Saddam Hussein from Kuwait, restoring the cruel dictatorship in Kuwait and protecting the cruel dictatorship in Saudi Arabia who live hedonistic lifestyles.
Saddam Hussein was anti-religious and ready to sell oil to the West.
In fact during the oil embargo of the seventies, when Arab nations restricted the sale of oil, Saddam Hussein went against the embargo and sold oil to the west.
According to the Duelfer Report, Saddam in the late nineties, through his officials, told Charles Duelfer (special adviser to the CIA) that he wanted to start a dialogue with the US and wanted to be America's best friend in the Middle East.
If Saddam Hussein were to have taken over the middle east (which is next to impossible), he would have eradicated fundamentalist Islam that breeds terrorism, checked the regional aspirations of Iran and sold cheap oil to the US.
President Reagan told Saddam Hussein to stop supporting Palestinian groups in the early eighties and then President Reagan removed Iraq from the list of state sponsors of terrorism.........this is another of several examples that Saddam wanted to be our ally.
The CIA knew about the consequences of the Iraq war and the subsequent sectarian violence and yet the US government invaded Iraq, even though during the 80s when Saddam Hussein was at his worst and actually using WMD, there was not one CIA report stating that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the US.
(3) Not sanctioned Iraq....
..Osama Bin Laden points to UN reports, rightly or wrongly, that our sanctions on Iraq was the cause of half a million Iraqi children dying prematurely.
(4) not sold weapons to Israel...
...Osama Bin Laden points to the fact, rightly or wrongly, that American made weapons were used by the Israelis to kill Palestinian men, women and children through collateral damage
(5) reinforced cockpit doors and had air marshals on every flight, like Israel did long time ago.
(6) Not setting up bases in Saudi Arabia.
IF WE HAD NOT GOT INVOLVED IN THE GULF WAR, WE WOULD NOT HAVE HAD TROOPS IN SAUDI ARABIA..
The presence of US troops was the "straw that broke the camel's back".
What did Osama Bin Laden see in the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia ?
The only way to see what Osama Bin Laden saw is to go back in time to read and see what Osama read and saw.
What motivated Osama Bin Laden to declare "war" on the US govt ?
Here are the main motivations in chronological order :
(1) Osama Bin Laden read about the US govt. fire and atom bombing Japan in 1945 when Japan was already defeated as early as July of 1944 when Tojo resigned and Japan was negotiating concessions to the communists but FDR did not care about communists either killing tens of millions of civilians or that the crushing of Japan enabled communism to expand in Asia resulting in hundreds of thousands of US soldiers either dying horrifying deaths or being maimed, disfigured, deformed, blinded or paralyzed for life during the cold war.
(2) Osama Bin Laden must have read about US/Allied POWs in Japan and hundreds of thousands of Japanese children being terrorized, tortured and burned alive in the US fire and atom bombings of Japan and must have concluded that if the FDR/Truman did not care about the plight of their own US soldiers captive in Japan and the lives of hundreds of thousands of Japanese children, why should Osama bin Laden care about lives when strategic goals were more important.
(3) Osama Bin Laden read about the US government in the 50s overthrowing a democratically elected Mossadegh of Iran and eventually the Shah terrorized his own people in Iran, thanks to the military support given by the US government
(4) He read about the US government in the 60s, arming the Israeli government that used those very US weapons to collaterally kill palestinian children and babies
(5) He saw the US government in the 70s using napalm, agent orange and carpet bombing Vietnam and Cambodia, collaterally killing hundreds of thousands or even millions.
(6) He saw the US government in the 70s supporting cruel, murderous dictators like the Shah of Iran.
(7) He saw the US government in the 80s siding with the "christian" militias in Lebanon, the very christian militias that massacred muslims.
(8) He saw the US government in the 80s supporting cruel dictators like Saddam Hussein.
(9) He saw the US government in the 90s imposing cruel sanctions on Iraq, resulting in UN reports stating that half a million Iraqi children died prematurely due to the sanctions.
(10) He saw that the cruel Saudi dictatorship was being supported by the US government , the very dictatorship that tortured dissidents who opposed the stationing of US troops in Saudi Arabia.
(11) He saw that the US government never left any country in which it had troops in ( example: US troops still present in Germany and Japan, even after the war had ended decades ago).
(12) He saw that warnings to the US government to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia were ignored.
(13) He saw that the only way to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia was to launch a terror campaign.
(14) He saw that his terror campaign against the US had failed and US troops still remained in Saudi Arabia, 9 years after the gulf war had ended.
(15) He saw that the only sure way to get the US government to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia was to launch an attack on the US homeland on 9/11/01.
(16) He saw that the US government finally gave into his demands to withdraw troops, only after the 9/11 attacks, and US troops finally left Saudi Arabia in 2003, almost 13 years after the gulf war had ended
...Placing our troops in Saudi Arabia deeply affected Osama Bin Laden and the Saudi religious leadership because of the historical record of the US govt. in its dealings in the middle east and elsewhere.
An analogous way of looking at it would be America's involvement in Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan because the Soviets had their "presence" in those countries and America was afraid communism would spread if the Soviets were allowed to have their presence in Vietnam, Korea and Afghanistan and thinking along the same lines, Al-Qaeda does not want American military presence in any Muslim country, especially "holy" Saudi Arabia because Osama was afraid the US govt would continue supporting the cruel Saudi dictatorship's crack down on dissidents.
So just as America was trying to prevent communism from spreading by being militarily involved in Korea, Vietnam and Afghanistan; Al-Qaeda wants to get "militarily" involved in preventing the US govt's support of cruel dictators in the middle east.
THIS IS THE MAIN REASON FOR THE SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS.....AMERICAN MILITARY PRESENCE IN SAUDI ARABIA and the subsequent imprisonment and torture of Saudi dissidents by the cruel Saudi dictatorship that provoked Osama Bin Laden to act.
Some of the points above is about perception based on facts that might have been blown all out of proportion in the minds of the radicals in the Middle East, but in the end, perception is what motivates people to commit horrendous acts.
Al-Qaida's wrong perception about the US, makes it not able to differentiate between the actions of the US government and its citizens because in Al-Qaida's mind, since we are a democracy, every citizen is responsible for the actions of our government .
We have read about numerous cases in the US in which loving fathers in our non-war zone and trauma-less America have nonetheless terrorized, tortured and killed their own children or pregnant wives, either through suffocation, drowning, hanging, beheading, stabbings or shootings,
so is it surprising that in Iraq or Afghanistan today, in the trauma of a war zone, where numerous victims see their loved ones being killed or blinded, maimed, deformed or paralyzed or disfigured for life due to either US bombings or sectarian violence, that those victims are vulnerable to Al-Qaida's propaganda which is able to influence the victims to take revenge and kill Muslims allied with the US or collaterally/accidentally kill Muslim children in the process of attacking US forces or Shia militias ?
If you were in a war zone and you see your family murdered by rebels or collaterally killed by the occupying force, knowing that you do not compromise with injustice , what would you do ?
When a foreign power occupies another country or when separatist movements reject the govt., it tends to result in terrorism, as was seen by the torture that many loyalist Americans/British went through by being tarred ( boiling tar being poured on them) because they were seen as loyal to the occupying British forces by the American rebels.
Another form of terrorism was the killing of british troops by the American rebels, after the British troops had surrendered.
ref : http://home.golden.net/~marg/bansite/banecdotes/96quarter.html
Lynchings were ordered by American Patriot Judge Charles Lynch on the terrorized American loyalists who were loyal to the British Crown.
So terrorism can be the result of being in a war zone and its either terrorism from the occupying force through collateral actions or the terrorism of the rebels against those loyal to the occupying force.
The fact that most American loyalists, who were loyal to Britain, fled the US, shows the terror they faced, not only from being tarred or properties confiscated but being lynched to death.
ref : http://www.redcoat.me.uk/
The following four examples is about the other side of the perception coin;
the US govt.'s perception of foreigners and the US govt.'s inability to differentiate between different groups of foreigners or unwillingness to care about foreign children as they would care about American children :
(1) An example of the US govt.'s perception and its inability to differentiate between a small group of evil people and the innocent population at large can be seen in the deliberate terrorizing, torture and burning alive or blinding, maiming, disfiguring, deforming or paralyzing for life, hundreds of thousands of babies and children in the fire bombings of scores of Japanese cities and the atom bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War Two in 1945 when Japan was already defeated and ready to surrender conditionally as early as August of 1944.
(2) The deliberate allied carpet bombing of Dresden during World War Two with the foreknowledge that the bombing will terrorize and kill or blind, maim, disfigure or deform for life, tens of thousands of Dresden's children is another example of the inability or unwillingness to differentiate between the small group of evil Nazis and the population at large.
(3) Another example of the US govt.'s perception and its inability to differentiate between different Arab groups can be seen in the US govt.'s propaganda that influenced a large percentage of Americans to believe that Saddam Hussein was connected to Al-Qaida and was behind the attacks on September 11, 2001.
(4) Another example of the US govt.'s perception and its inability to differentiate between terrorists and other Arabs, resulted in the rejection of Dubai ports ( An Arab company) from operating in the US .
The inability or unwillingness to differentiate between a small group of terrorists and the larger innocent population is what leads both the US government and terrorists like Timothy McVeigh to launch attacks which result in either the collateral/accidental deaths of millions of civilians, children and babies in the case of US attacks (from 1776 through the wars of the 18th, 19th, 20th and 21st centuries) or in the case of terrorists, the deliberate murder of civilians without any thought about who will die due to their attacks.
Propensity towards war can also be traced to crisis that are either instigated or exploited and that results in the festering of the problem which can be used to scare the American public into not complaining about 68 cents of every tax dollar going to the profit agenda of the bloated, wasteful, corrupt military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex and in return for the trillion dollar yearly budget to the military/industrial complex, the fear mongering politicians are assured of being re-elected due to contributions from their friends in the military/industrial complex and the hundreds of thousands of employees of the military/industrial complex that purposely makes sure that its facilities are spread out among numerous congressional districts in order to maintain the loyalty of its puppets in the US government.
The reason the US government lets a problem fester is because that is the only way the US government can expand because only during a crisis do the American people suspend all reasonable logic and give their power over to the US government and THAT IS HOW THE US GOVT. HAS GROWN OVER THE CENTURIES BY EXPLOITING EVERY CRISIS.
The military/industrial complex cannot be overlooked because the US government is structured around the corporate interests of the military/industrial complex thus giving rise to the entire machinery of government being geared towards war and military solutions instead of non-military solutions to problems and the resulting flourishing of no bid contracts and war profiteering (eg. the unnecessary cold war expenditures that ended up costing the American taxpayers about 5.5 trillion dollars i.e five hundred thousand million dollars plus ten times that same amount )
instead of directing valuable resources to useful projects in order to have :
All 100% of cargo on aircraft and ships inspected by bomb detection equipment instead of the 6-10% of cargo being inspected today
a much safer railway system using the latest radar and laser technology to prevent crashes,
latest parachute technology to prevent air crashes,
safe gang free environment,
gun violence free environment
and criminal activity free environment in our cities,
affordable health care,
affordable high quality education,
safe food by having all food sources inspected instead of only 2% of imported food being inspected right now
safe water, air and environment (example : free radon tests to prevent cancer ),
congestion free roads,
roads without pot holes,
bridges that are not dangerous,
levees that do not break,
utilities that are not overworked and that create outages,
more intensive medical research that cures cancer,
prevents/cures heart disease, diabetes and other deadly conditions,
more intensive research into cleaner alternative fuels,
more intensive technological research that gives easy access to broadband and congestion free Internet infrastructure,
lower taxes etc etc etc,
to improve the living standard of the average American.
Fear of the unknown ( the terrorists) is being propagated by the propaganda from western governments who want to keep their wasteful spending on the military as high as possible and thus depriving you of a better and healthier standard of living because as long as you fear the terrorists, the US government can keep their supporters in the military/industrial complex "laughing all the way to the bank " and so the US govt does not have to spend adequate money on safer food, safer air, safer water and a safer environment from pollutants and poisons in everyday items you use.
"Millions of consumers are being made ill, hundreds of thousands hospitalized and thousands are dying each year from preventable food borne illnesses," according to The Center for Science in the Public Interest. "Unfortunately, the FDA is saddled with outdated laws, and lacks the authority, tools and resources to fight unsafe food."
ref : http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Dangerous-foods-list-includes-cnnm-1143667599.html?x=0
Instead of keeping Americans safe from pollutants, poisons in every day household items and deadly pathogens, the US govt directs trillions to unnecessary wars and unnecessary "defense" projects.
The US govt. will not give up the American empire even while the American economy is suffering and has just approved 805 billion ( eight hundred thousand million plus another five thousand million ) to the military/industrial complex which does not include the hundreds of billions going to homeland security, maintenance of nuclear armaments, the veterans budget, and the interest payments on the debt borrowed on behalf of the military/industrial complex.
Interest payments alone on the debt incurred by funding past unnecessary wars and bloated unnecessary projects of the military/industrial complex amounts to about $250 billion a year.
ref : http://www.bu.edu/globalbeat/syndicate/anglewicz-brauer062005.html
and at this rate of spending, the US will eventually become a third rate economy with lower standards of living for the average American while social security benefits will be cut, health care rationed, cuts in high quality education and cuts in all essential projects like food safety etc etc.
One easy way to help the military/industrial complex is to instigate a war :
Stimson, the Secretary of War confided in his diary after a meeting of the war cabinet on November 25, 1941 : “The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves".
After the Pearl Harbor attack, Stimson confessed : “my first feeling was of relief ... that a crisis had come in a way which would unite all our people."
The military/industrial complex would rather make money through the corporate welfare system without war,
but war is too much of a temptation and too lucrative for war profits to be abandoned completely, so the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex thrive on conflict and its in their interest to keep the conflict going and that is why you will find instigation policies of the US and Israeli govts in keeping the terrorists agitated enough so that they will keep causing problems and in turn the fear that is generated among the public due to terrorism will enable politicians to keep expanding the "defense" budget because a fearful public will not question the ever expanding "defense" budget and in turn the ever expanding "defense" budget keeps the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex happy and pave the way for support and re-elections of the military/industrial complex's puppet politicians.
And the people who pay the price for all the instigated conflicts are the poor, the sick, the handicapped, the children and the babies, while the so-called adults send our young and beloved soldiers to their deaths, all in the name of honor, duty and patriotism while the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex "laugh all the way to the bank ".
Here are two examples of instigation policies that resulted in war or prolonged the conflict :
(1) The US govt instigated Japan by freezing Japanese assets, helping the Chinese military against Japan and as the McCollum Memo from US naval intelligence and Stimson, the Secretary of War admitted that the US govt did everything short of all out war, to instigate the Japanese govt to attack, since only if the Japanese attacked first would that unite the American people for war, since the American people did not want another world war since WW1.
(2) Instead of using pragmatic, diplomatic and covert initiatives, the US govt demanded that the Taliban hand over Osama Bin Laden to the US, knowing fully well that that kind of belligerent rude approach will not make the Taliban concede to the demands of the US govt and thus pave the way for a "profitable" war.
The Taliban tried to save face by saying that Osama bin Laden (if found , since he fled to the mountains after the 9/11 attack) would be put on trial in a muslim country , but the US govt. was more interested in the prospects of a "profitable" war then trying to negotiate with the Taliban.
If you look at the history of the US govt,
from its rebellion ,
its treatment of blacks and native Americans,
its imperial conquests of native American nations,
hawaii,
spanish colonies,
its gun boat diplomacy,
its genocidal occupation of the Philippines,
its merciless atom and fire bombing destruction of a defeated Japan
and its blow back policies that spawned WW2, the Cold War, the Middle Eastern Wars, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the expansion of communism/fascism etc. etc.
and the resulting loss of hundreds of millions of lives and the loss of hundreds of thousands of US soldiers dying horrifying deaths or the hundreds of thousands of US soldiers maimed, deformed, blinded, paralyzed or disfigured for life
and the despair experienced by hundreds of thousands of American families who have their loved ones adversely affected by war, you would have to conclude that the US govt. has not been a blessing to the world,
all because of the power trips of the war mongering chicken hawk politicians and their profit driven supporters in the greedy, corrupt, wasteful, bloated military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex that has got hundreds of trillions of dollars of hard earned taxpayers money over the decades, all in the name of honor, duty, freedom, patriotism and liberty.
As one wise Samuel Johnson said on the evening of April 7, 1775, "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel".
If any defense contract gets reduced or canceled, you can bet the war profiteering defense contractor and his puppet in the US govt. will rally up his supporters and say its not patriotic to cancel a defense contract.
If the US government makes peace with Iran and co-opts the Ayatollahs as President Reagan co-opted Saddam Hussein, there will be one less enemy in the world, but that will not sit well with the those who want as many enemies as possible in order to keep the fear level high enough so that the American public will not question that 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar or more than a trillion dollars is going every year to the bloated, greedy, wasteful, corrupt military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex.
The rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex are "laughing all the way to the bank " while the average American has to forgo a better and healthier standard of living due to a trillion dollars or 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar being squandered every year on projects that have little value with the actual safety or security of the American people.
The yearly trillion dollar looting of hard earned taxpayers' money from the treasury by the military/industrial complex and its puppets in the US govt is giving us neither security or safety as evidenced by 19 hijackers using box-cutters on a half million dollar budget, infiltrating all our trillion dollar defenses and that is one reason the guilt-ridden US govt had to compensate the families of the victims on 9/11.
From the destruction of innocent Japanese cherry blossom trees during World War Two in Washington DC to the presence of US nuclear weapons that "tell" foreign governments that if they kill our children with a nuclear attack, the US government has the right to kill all their children with our nuclear weapons, is a testimony to the similarity between the terrorists and what the US government has at least done in the past in which both the terrorists and the US government have punished or wanted to punish collaterally or otherwise, "trees" and the general population (of innocent men, women, children and babies ) for the evil doings of a few.
But your "religion" is not a religion in any meaningful sense of the word. It is a totalitarian ideology dressed up as a religion. How can one insult something that does not exist ?
Infidels "insult" Islam merely by discussing it.
ericthekuffar,
what is the solution ?
45ch, I'd have islam banned.
How's that for a solution?
Certainly not the sort of waffle that you spout.
For a bit of light relief try reading this, you asked the question.
TS Eliot - The Hollow Men
A penny for the Old Guy
I
We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats' feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar
Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion;
Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdom
Remember us - if at all - not as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men
The stuffed men.
II
Eyes I dare not meet in dreams
In death's dream kingdom
These do not appear:
There, the eyes are
Sunlight on a broken column
There, is a tree swinging
And voices are
In the wind's singing
More distant and more solemn
Than a fading star.
Let me be no nearer
In death's dream kingdom
Let me also wear
Such deliberate disguises
Rat's coat, crowskin, crossed staves
In a field
Behaving as the wind behaves
No nearer -
Not that final meeting
In the twilight kingdom
III
This is the dead land
This is cactus land
Here the stone images
Are raised, here they receive
The supplication of a dead man's hand
Under the twinkle of a fading star.
Is it like this
In death's other kingdom
Waking alone
At the hour when we are
Trembling with tenderness
Lips that would kiss
Form prayers to broken stone.
IV
The eyes are not here
There are no eyes here
In this valley of dying stars
In this hollow valley
This broken jaw of our lost kingdoms
In this last of meeting places
We grope together
And avoid speech
Gathered on this beach of the tumid river
Sightless, unless
The eyes reappear
As the perpetual star
Multifoliate rose
Of death's twilight kingdom
The hope only
Of empty men.
V
Here we go round the prickly pear
Prickly pear prickly pear
Here we go round the prickly pear
At five o'clock in the morning.
Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow
For Thine is the Kingdom
Between the conception
And the creation
Between the emotion
And the response
Falls the Shadow
Life is very long
Between the desire
And the spasm
Between the potency
And the existence
Between the essence
And the descent
Falls the Shadow
For Thine is the Kingdom
For Thine is
Life is
For Thine is the
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper
45ch :(3) Drastically change the US govt's foreign policy to approximate that of Switzerland's foreign policy where no terrorist attacks take place
That would suit the islamists agenda nicely. Just sit back and relax while the vermin infest the place.
washingtonpost.com - In Neutral Switzerland, A Rising Radicalism
As they have elsewhere in Europe, Islamic radicals are making inroads in Switzerland. Last month (June 2006), Swiss officials announced the arrests of a dozen suspects who allegedly conspired to shoot down an Israeli airliner flying from Geneva to Tel Aviv. In a related case, a North African man has been charged with organizing a plot from Swiss soil to blow up the Spanish supreme court in Madrid.
I couldn't be bothered with the rest of your Sophomoric bleatings. If you really believe what you wrote I think your Liberal Studies Professor must be very proud of his/her work.
[vomit]
here is a discussion whether militants will take over the world if the US govt has the foreign policy of Switzerland :
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
You know, ladies and gentlemen, when I see '45ch' - who from all sorts of things s/he has said in other postings, under other monikers (e.g. 'loveverybody'), is most definitely a Mohammedan - putting on a 'Christian' mask and quoting a few passages of scripture at us, over and over and over, I am reminded, myself, of two *other* passages of Scripture: namely, Luke 4: 2-12 (especially 9-12), and Matthew 4:1-10, especially 5-7.
Comment :
Regarding Luke 4: 9-12 ( Matthew 4: 5-7 ):
All religions rely on the power of the sword to evangelize but not true christians and that does not mean christians are testing the Lord.
When the early christians did not retaliate against the terrorist Romans and when they submitted to the rule of the terrorist Romans, they were not testing the lord but obeying the Holy Spirit to evangelize without relying on the power of the sword.
To turn the hearts of muslims to Christ, the only way to evangelize is through the power of the Holy Spirit and not the power of the sword.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
If 45ch thinks that by achieving 'the last word' - that is, the final posting on the thread, which it probably will, for the rest of us have many other things to discuss - s/he will achieve 'victory', s/he is sadly mistaken.
Comment :
Having the last word is not victory.
Victory is when children do not die in unnecessary wars instigated by the US govt
Victory is when our beloved soldiers are not sent deliberately into harm's way, all in the name of patriotism and honor while the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex "laugh all the way to the bank ".
Victory is when christians start relying on the Holy Spirit rather than the power of the sword in order to evangelize
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
For us non-Muslims here (not only Christians but also Jews, atheists, agnostics, Hindus, and others) to observe and to publicly state that Major Nidal Hasan was - and repeatedly declared himself to be - motivated by the central doctrines of classical Islam, Islam of the Quran-Sira-Hadith, is not 'hate'. It is a plain description of observable documented fact, tantamount to stating that 2 + 2 = 4.
Comment :
From 1776 through 2009, how many American muslim soldiers have murdered their fellow soldiers ?
Out of about 3500 American muslim soldiers, how many murdered their fellow soldiers ?
Indicting all muslims for the criminal acts of one soldier is hate, just as Hitler indicted all jews for the supposed "criminal acts" of a few jews .
Major Nidal Hassan and Timothy McVeigh would probably have not committed their crimes if they were not exposed to the horrors of war and the adverse policies of the US govt.
Did religion play a role in Nidal's crimes ? I am sure it did but more then religion is seeing pitiful children in Iraq and Afghanistan being collateral victims of either US bombings or collateral victims of rebels who retaliate against fellow citizens who they suspect to be allies of the occupying power.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
I shall repeat, from a posting I made above:
"The Nidal Hasan case - complete with his damning powerpoint presentation followed by actual practical demonstration - was a spectacular case of the Cat Getting Out Of The Bag. Or perhaps, Crocodile out of the bag, or Gremlin out of the Bag.
The Mohammedtrolls are trying hard to stuff it back in before anyone notices all those teeth and claws."
Comment :
The "teeth and claws" is human weakness in taking revenge for the collateral deaths of children in wars instigated by the US govt.
Indicting all muslims for the criminal acts of a few is hate, just as Hitler indicted all jews for the criminal acts of a few.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
QUOTE "...a major, twofold fact transforms the jihad into something quite different from traditional wars, waged for ambition and self-interest, with limited objectives, where the "normal" situation is peace between peoples - war, in itself, constituting a dramatic event which must end in a return to peace.
Comment :
Peace is the normal situation among most muslim nations as almost all muslim nations have not gone beyond their borders in the past 100 years, as compared to non-muslim nations who have gone to wars beyond their borders.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"This twofold fact is, first, the religious nature [of the jihad]; then, secondly, the fact that war has become an institution (and no longer an "event").
Comment :
The fact is that in the past 100 years, war is not an institution among almost all muslim countries
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"Jihad is generally translated as "holy war" (this term is not satisfactory); and this suggests both that this war is provoked by strong religious feeling, and then that its first object is not so much to conquer land as to Islamize the populations.
Comment :
There are millions of non-muslims living in peace in muslim countries without being forced to become muslims.
Does it mean its a perfect situation ? off course not.
anytime there are minorities in any country, the majority will sometimes take advantage of and even persecute as has been seen in the persecution of blacks in America as late as the 60s through Jim Crowe laws and even lynchings.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"This war is a religious duty.
Comment :
Here is a video where a militant muslim is accusing muslims outside a mosque of not going to jihad:
http://www.blip.tv/file/2760905
Islam is not more powerful than Christianity and since christians do not follow the pacifism of Christ, almost all muslims do not go to jihad because both Christianity and Islam are not able to override the free will of their followers.
Just as almost all christians do not follow Christ's pacifism, almost all muslims do not follow the call to jihad.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"In Islam, on the contrary, jihad is a religious obligation.
Comment :
Pacifism is a "religious" obligation of all christians, but how many follow Christ's pacifism ?
Likewise, Islam is not more powerful than christianity and is not able to override the free will of muslims, so that is the reason,just as christians do not obey their "religion" concerning pacifism, muslims do not follow their religion either concerning jihad.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"It [Jihad] forms part of the duties that the believer must fulfil;
"it is Islam's *normal* {Ellul's emphasis - dda} path to expansion.
"And this is found repeatedly, dozens of times in the Koran.
Comment :
There is no evidence that almost all muslims are involved in jihad, just as there is no evidence that all christians are involved in pacifism as commanded by Christ.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"Therefore, the believer is not denying the religious message. Quite the reverse, jihad is the way he best obeys it.
Comment :
As I said before, there is no evidence that almost all muslims are involved in jihad, just as there is no evidence that almost all christians are pacifists as Christ was.
Both Islam and Christianity are not able to override the free will of their believers and that is why believers in both religions are not obeying their respective religions concerning either pacifism or jihadism.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"But Bat Ye'or shows that things are not so simple. Since the jihad is not solely an external war, it can break out within the Muslim world itself - and wars among Muslims have been numerous, but always with the same features.
Comment :
Wars among muslims is true.
Muslims have always been disunited and that is no way there is going to be a worldwide islamic caliphate because muslims even at the height of islamic power ended up breaking into different countries and eventually there are about 57 muslim countries today since muslims have always had differing goals and agendas
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"The world [for Muslims], as Bat Ye'or brilliantly shows, is divided into two regions: the dar al-Islam and the dar al-harb - in other words, the "domain of Islam" and "the domain of war".
Comment :
In the past 100 years, almost all muslim countries have remained within the "domain of islam" as compared to non-muslim countries that have waged war beyond their borders.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"The world is no longer divided into nations, peoples, or tribes.
Comment :
The world is divided and it will always be divided, just as muslims are divided to the extent there does exist about 57 muslim countries today.
Even at the height of islamic power, the islamic empire started breaking up and eventually we have about 57 muslim countries today due to the fact that muslims have always been disunited, so there will never be one united world wide islamic caliphate.
The existence of nations speaks to the differing ideologies and the economic interests of the rich and powerful within each country.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"Rather, they are all located en bloc in the world of war, where war is the only possible relationship with the outside world.
" The earth belongs to Allah and all its inhabitants must acknowledge this reality; to achieve this goal there is but one method: war.
Comment :
War has been more of a theme from non-muslim nations these past 100 years than compared to war from muslim nations
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"War, then, is clearly an institution, not just an incidental or fortuitous institution, but a constituent part of the thought, the organization and the structures of this world.
Comment :
War has been more of an institution among non-muslim countries these past 100 years than from muslim countries
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"Peace with this world of war is impossible. Of course it is sometimes necessary to call a halt; there are circumstances where it is better not to make war. The Koran allows for this. But this changes nothing: war remains an institution, which means that it must resume as soon as circumstances permit.
Comment :
Peace is possible, as seen by the fact that almost all 57 muslim countries have not gone beyond their borders these past 100 years as compared to the war mongering of non-muslim nations these past 100 years
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
"I have greatly stressed the characteristics of this war, because there is so much talk nowadays of the tolerance and fundamental pacifism of Islam that it is necessary to recall its nature, which is fundamentally warlike! " END EXCERPT FROM ELLUL ON JIHAD.
Q. E. D, at Fort Hood, earlier this month
Comment :
We have to look at what muslims are actually doing rather then the texts of their religion, just as we should be looking at what jews are actually doing rather than looking at the text of Deut 20:16 which commands Jews to conquer lands up to Iraq and to commit genocide on all men, women, children and babies living within the "promised land".
By what muslims are actually doing, it is fair to say that almost all muslims are not involved in jihad except for a tiny minority who can never conquer the world or even a single muslim country.
CONCLUSION :
The fact is that American Presidents, including President Reagan, have been informed by the CIA that Saudi Arabia is not dangerous to world peace and that is why the US govt has ties to Saudi Arabia and numerous other muslim countries that are not a danger to world peace.
I can assure you, you are more in danger from your fellow citizens than any muslim terrorist
And you are more in danger from everyday household items or foods that you eat that can have deadly consequences either in the short term or long term.
And you are more in danger of getting cancer because cancer is the result of hate that consumes the soul.
So you would be better off concentrating on the true dangers to your health and safety and not "cooked up dangers from Islam" that only benefit the profit agenda of the bloated, greedy, corrupt military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex where here in the US the complex is looting the US govt of 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar amounting to over a trillion dollars a year
how can islam be banned ? and if it is, can the US govt ban anything it wishes ?
For those "peaceful" means we are apparently all supposed to be grateful, and breathe a sigh of relief -- deployment of the Money Weapon, well-financed and carefully-targeted campaigns of Da'wa in North America and Europe and, not least, demographic conquest.
Boy, last but not least is so right on.
Just yesterday I saw a large Lexus sedan pull up in front of an apartment complex and out popped four young rosey-cheeked Moslem youths, well dressed and happy.
*** 93:4 ***
Soon will your Lord give you so much you shall be well pleased. Did He not find you poor and made you rich?
What Allah is talking about here is a Lexus for every Moslem Man. Right now, things are tough. There are many Somali Minnesota Moslem Men who don't yet have a Lexus.
*** 92:8 ***
But they do have demographics on their side: marry your first wife with a license from the County, then add on three more wives with mosque marriages who then go to the very same County building to claim that they are slutty unwed mothers who need AFDC welfare checks to surive.
Then the Lexus 400.
*** 33:51 ***
After the eager globo-socialist social finishes approving the application for free money, the haughty Moslima emerges back into the street to climb into that big Lexus sedan with her three fellow wives to go home to the HUD Section 8 subsidized apartment to breed.
*** al-Tabari 9:134 ***
But one day Ahmed will need to buy a van. With all the Moslem kids being pumped out by the four wives the need for capacity scales.
Wouldn't a 14 person capacity school bus make more sense? Wonder if you can cash in a clunker for it?
45ch above isn't arguing with *me*. He's mainly trying to get us to believe that he, 45ch, knows better than *Jacques Ellul* - whose analysis of Jihad (and its centrality within Islam) I posted at length toward the end of a much earlier thread, because I believe it is one of the best and clearest treatments of the subject; and whose words 45ch obviously found annoying enough, maddening enough, that he [45ch] has dragged my whole posting bodily forward from there, to newer threads, to try to discredit it there.
45ch is trying to pretend that he - an anonymous half-educated Muslim wearing an ill-fitting 'Christian pacifist' mask - can refute the considered judgement of one of the great teaching saints and scholars of France, a formidable sociologist and historian of law and institutions, the author of 'Propaganda' and 'The Technological Society' and of much else besides, who was not at all uninformed about Islam either past or present (and who had plenty of personal experience of Muslim apologists, having attended and observed, quite undeceived, many a futile 'interfaith' meeting between Christians and Muslims in modern France, from the 1960s onward).
You replied properly, dda, to this 45ch. His way of thinking is so convoluted that one has to pause at times to grasp the weirdness of his thought patterns. From a pedagogical perspective he does make for an intersting specimen. Of course, from the standpoint of truth, he's completely dismissable.
On a previous thread he faulted the American military for being the decisive factor in WWI, coming in when both sides had exhausted each other and by fighting for the Allies instead of the Central Powers made the German Army seek an armistice. 45ch maintained that if the American military had not intervened then Hitler would not have arisen. So, you see, Hitler and Nazism is America's fault. Huh-uh.
This guy also equates the American government and Timothy McVeigh as being equally culpable for tragedy. His moral equivalency thinking is extreme. He carpetbags left and right by hauling out just about every last bogus criticism one can find respecting American actions in WWII (e.g., FDR, Stimson et al. were actually pleased that Pearl Harbor was bombed; dropping the A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were acts of terrorism). Perhaps most stupid is his assertion that, yes, the Islamic and Christian theological blueprints differ enormously, the former a blueprint for war, the latter one for peace, but never mind this because ordinary Muslims and Christians don't implement these directives in their everyday life, as though fascism and democracy are just two different political systems and ordinary fascists will be no problem for those who live in democratic polities (Can't we all just get along?). Really, reading 45ch is like reading Noam Chomsky or other wackos along these lines. Instructive, though, of just how distortedly some people look at the world.
The only conceivable explanation for present circumstances vis a vis global islam is a bizarre form of cultural psychosis. The Power elites and ignorant masses of the West must be gripped by a civilizational madness from which they have little, if any, time left to recover. Islam's plan is almost 1,400 years old. Our muslim tormentors are confident, ruthless, and fanatical. The West's countervailing philosophy is governed by the mindless worship of tolerance and diversity. There are no signs that Western civilization even recognizes its self-destructive, lethal lunacy, let alone the urgent need for recovery.
In the words of the historian, Arnold Toynbee: "Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder".
The only conceivable explanation for present circumstances vis a vis global islam is a bizarre form of cultural psychosis. The Power elites and ignorant masses of the West must be gripped by a civilizational madness from which they have little, if any, time left to recover. Islam's plan is almost 1,400 years old. Our muslim tormentors are confident, ruthless, and fanatical. The West's countervailing philosophy is governed by the mindless worship of tolerance and diversity. There are no signs that Western civilization even recognizes its self-destructive, lethal lunacy, let alone the urgent need for recovery.
In the words of the historian, Arnold Toynbee: "Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder".
Whenever I bring up another conceivable explanation, many refuse to want to consider it. Nonetheless, evidence suggests that the most powerful force on earth is not malevolence, nor widespread mental illness (that "civilisational psychosis") but, rather, Stupidity.
Variation on a theme by Chruchill: The West will do the right thing where Islam is concerned after it has explored every other possibility. If this be cultural psychosis or just plain stupidity or whatever, this is the reality we're faced with. Islam will not prevail but it will be bloody and tragic many times over before Islam is consigned to the trash heap of history.
Look on the bright side: we are helping to keep this lunatic 45ch off the streets.
Frankly, I think Obama is neither a puppet nor morally weak. His problem is that he is a highly intelligent man who drank very deeply from all the self-hating wells in American culture (perhaps beginning with his mother's milk). I agree with some posters, however, that he is an extremely egocentric person; and this will probably be his undoing whichever way he goes.
Men can be independent, intellectually strong, and firm in their conviction, but, at the same time, be frightfully and terribly wrong-headed.
Ultimately, Obama will wake up. He will see that an uncritically PeeCee approach to what a sizeable portion of the world's most pious and doctrinally-informed Muslims actually believe can only be suicidal for the USA that made him possible. However, by that time, it will probably be too late for too many.
Diumbledore's Army, I like Jacques Ellul, too.
45CH
yOU MISSED ONE THING. jESUS NEVER TOLD cHRISTIANS NOT TO DEFEND THEMSELVES. they can kick tyou raggedly behinds and send you to see allah who is none other than the DEVIL. Quran 3:54.
Allah said he was the greatest deceiver, schemer and liar, now why would god lie? The Devil cannot kill us but they can make his demons kill us. Satan the DEVIL hates Jews and Christianity and made Muhammad his messiah and prophet.
Muhammad had disciples and today he has 1.5 billion evil ones bent on destroying the creation of the truw GOD.
45ch, please go home and leave us alone. What is a religion that lies (takkia) sex babies 65:4, incest, murder, racism, stealing. Africans are now educated and are telling the truth of Islam. They are trying to tell American whites to stop allowing Muslims to degrade them, when it was the white men called Arabs who sent the Sharia Law aLONG WITH the black slaves they sold to Europeans. THEY ARE BACK, NOW IN THE WHITE HOUSE.
2 ADVOCATES OF sHARIA lAW ARE IN THE WHITE HOUSE TRYING TO MAKE aMERICA iSLAMIC WHEN THEY PLAN TO ENSLAVE ALL BLACK AS ALLAH AND mUHAMMAD SAID THEY ARE. Muhammad made it clear that allah created Africans black to be slaves to white and then hellfire. Insanity that black join this racist evil crap.
Wellington, you stated :
On a previous thread he faulted the American military for being the decisive factor in WWI, coming in when both sides had exhausted each other and by fighting for the Allies instead of the Central Powers made the German Army seek an armistice. 45ch maintained that if the American military had not intervened then Hitler would not have arisen. So, you see, Hitler and Nazism is America's fault. Huh-uh.
Comment :
If the US govt never got involved in WW1, Germany would probably have made peace with Britain, after calling it a draw, while dominating Russia on the eastern front and preventing communism from expanding .
A victorious Germany would have prevented the rise of Hitler since there would not exist the humiliations of the Treaty of Versailles which Hitler exploited for his own political gain..
So by the US govt being involved in WW1, the US govt facilitated the expansion of communism, fascism, Nazism and the defeat of the Ottoman Empire, all of which resulted in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, WW2 and the Cold War .
If you look at the history of the US govt,
from its rebellion ,
its treatment of blacks and native Americans,
its imperial conquests of native American nations,
hawaii,
spanish colonies,
its gun boat diplomacy,
its genocidal occupation of the Philippines,
its merciless atom and fire bombing destruction of a defeated Japan
and its blow back policies that spawned WW2, the Cold War, the Middle Eastern Wars, Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the expansion of communism/fascism etc. etc.
and the resulting loss of hundreds of millions of lives and the loss of hundreds of thousands of US soldiers dying horrifying deaths or the hundreds of thousands of US soldiers maimed, deformed, blinded, paralyzed or disfigured for life
and the despair experienced by hundreds of thousands of American families who have their loved ones adversely affected by war, you would have to conclude that the US govt. has not been a blessing to the world,
all because of the power trips of the war mongering chicken hawk politicians and their profit driven supporters in the greedy, corrupt, wasteful, bloated military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex that has got hundreds of trillions of dollars of hard earned taxpayers money over the decades, all in the name of honor, duty, freedom, patriotism and liberty.
As one wise Samuel Johnson said on the evening of April 7, 1775, "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel".
Wellington, you stated :
This guy also equates the American government and Timothy McVeigh as being equally culpable for tragedy.
Comment :
If you define terror as what the victims (civilians, women and children ) feel and see just before they die horrendous deaths, the US govt is far worse than any non-state terrorist like Timothy McVeigh due to the frequency and extent of the terror that the US govt has been engaged in since 1776.
Wellington, you stated :
American actions in WWII (e.g., FDR, Stimson et al. were actually pleased that Pearl Harbor was bombed; dropping the A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were acts of terrorism).
Comment :
Stimson, the Secretary of War confided in his diary after a meeting of the war cabinet on November 25, 1941 : “The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves".
After the Pearl Harbor attack, Stimson confessed : “my first feeling was of relief ... that a crisis had come in a way which would unite all our people."
Were the A-bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, acts of terrorism ?
One definition of terrorism is the deliberate targeting of a military installation knowing fully well that there will be the collateral deaths of civilians, children and babies.
This is terrorism : the US govt. fire and atom bombing Japan in 1945 when Japan was already defeated as early as July of 1944 when Tojo resigned and Japan was negotiating concessions to the communists but FDR did not care about communists either killing tens of millions of civilians or that the crushing of Japan enabled communism to expand in Asia resulting in hundreds of thousands of US soldiers either dying horrifying deaths or being maimed, disfigured, deformed, blinded or paralyzed for life during the cold war.
Did FDR/Truman care about US/Allied POWs in Japan and hundreds of thousands of Japanese children being terrorized, tortured and burned alive in the US fire and atom bombings of Japan ?
Here are two examples of instigation policies that resulted in war :
(1) The US govt instigated Japan by freezing Japanese assets, helping the Chinese military against Japan and as the McCollum Memo from US naval intelligence and Stimson, the Secretary of War admitted that the US govt did everything short of all out war, to instigate the Japanese govt to attack, since only if the Japanese attacked first would that unite the American people for war, since the American people did not want another world war since WW1.
(2) Instead of using pragmatic, diplomatic and covert initiatives, the US govt demanded that the Taliban hand over Osama Bin Laden to the US, knowing fully well that that kind of belligerent rude approach will not make the Taliban concede to the demands of the US govt and thus pave the way for a "profitable" war.
Nobody can be pleased with war but if that is what it takes to help further the profit agenda of the military/industrial complex and the power agendas of politicians, then what FDR/Truman and Stimson did was business as usual in the US govt's long history of war making for the benefit of its supporters in the military/industrial complex.
Wellington, you stated :
Perhaps most stupid is his assertion that, yes, the Islamic and Christian theological blueprints differ enormously, the former a blueprint for war, the latter one for peace, but never mind this because ordinary Muslims and Christians don't implement these directives in their everyday life,
Comment :
You have to look at what people actually are doing and not what is written in their religious texts and it is very obvious that both muslims and christians do not follow what is written in their texts, just as jews are not following the genocidal commands in Deut 20:16 even though there is no time limit posed on those commands.
Muslims are not even following Sharia as evidenced by numerous muslim countries not having sharia and yet you believe that they are determined to conquer the world despite being disunited as evidenced by the presence of about 57 muslim countries ?
Muslims have had 1400 years to conquer the world and if it has not happened by now, how is it ever going to happen, especially when muslims are disunited as evidenced by the presence of 57 different muslim countries with differing agendas and goals ?
Yes, a tiny number of terrorists do want an islamic empire but even they are not speaking of world wide conquest because they know that islam, even at the height of its power, started breaking up due to muslim disunity and that empire kept breaking and eventually became the present 57 or so muslim countries today.
Is Pakistan going to use its nuclear weapons for world conquest ?
How do you explain the fact that numerous muslim countries do not follow Sharia ? and are not subjugating non-muslims and yet you believe that muslims want to subjugate you in America ?
DDA,
Here is a video where a militant muslim is accusing muslims outside a mosque of not going to jihad:
http://www.blip.tv/file/2760905
Islam is not more powerful than Christianity and since christians do not follow the pacifism of Christ, almost all muslims do not go to jihad because both Christianity and Islam are not able to override the free will of their followers.
Just as almost all christians do not follow Christ's pacifism, almost all muslims do not follow the call to jihad.
Btilly,
The fact that there are muslims who are willing to forgo Sharia in numerous muslim countries is progress and it shows muslims are capable of change for the better.
Yes, there are muslim countries that need reformation but the fact of the matter is they are no danger to the west, just as the institution of slavery and the lynching of thousands of blacks in the 19 th and even in the 20th century did not continue because all countries do reform eventually.
If you look at muslim countries who got their independence about fifty years ago, like Malaysia, Malaysia is far more progressive than the US was fifty years after 1776 in which the US had slavery as an institution.
As for muslims advocating Sharia in the west, they are talking about the same types of religious jewish courts in the UK
They are not talking about harsh Sharia laws but laws similar to those practiced by religious jewish courts in the UK.
Do you really think that muslims in the west are determined to establish harsh sharia laws ? and if so , aren't they a tiny minority of muslims in the west who want harsh sharia laws ?
Here is a video where a militant muslim is accusing muslims outside a mosque of not going to jihad:
http://www.blip.tv/file/2760905
Islam is not more powerful than Christianity and since christians do not follow the pacifism of Christ, almost all muslims do not go to jihad because both Christianity and Islam are not able to override the free will of their followers.
Just as almost all christians do not follow Christ's pacifism, almost all muslims do not follow the call to jihad.
Muslims are not even following Sharia as evidenced by numerous muslim countries not having sharia and yet you believe that they are determined to conquer the world despite being disunited as evidenced by the presence of about 57 muslim countries ?
Muslims have had 1400 years to conquer the world and if it has not happened by now, how is it ever going to happen, especially when muslims are disunited as evidenced by the presence of 57 different muslim countries with differing agendas and goals ?
Yes, a tiny number of terrorists do want an islamic empire but even they are not speaking of world wide conquest because they know that islam, even at the height of its power, started breaking up due to muslim disunity and that empire kept breaking and eventually became the present 57 or so muslim countries today.
Is Pakistan going to use its nuclear weapons for world conquest ?
The poster immediately above, an apologist for Islam who would have us minimize or even pooh-pooh the threat from adherents of Islam, wants us to believe that Muslims are just as meek and mild and lapsed and indifferent as are members of other faiths -- as are, in the particular case, Christians. But Christianity is not, as Islam is, a Total Belief-System; Christianity does not take hold of minds, in a system of thorough brainwashing made all the more powerful by its constant reinforcement, in societies that teach at best indifferenece, at worst murderous hostility, to everything outside of Islam. Islam occupies the minds of its adherents as no other faith called a "religion" does; it is more akin to political faiths, Communism or Nazism, at the height of their power over the minds of those who live within or under them.
Look at Muslims today, and then through time and across space, from Spain to the East Indies, over 1350 years. Christians did not denounce classical antiquity; they did not become indifferent to, or even vandalize, other civilizations but took an interest in them. Islam teaches its adherents not merely to be indifferent, but even to destroy the artifacts associated with pre-Islamic or non-Islamic faiths. The Bamiyan Buddhas are only the latest, and most spectacular, of Islam's victims.
There is no room here for an analogy between mild or lapsed or indifferent Christians, and the Muslim equivalent. We already have seen how many Muslims, when they learn fully what is contained in the Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, instead of recoiling in horror, rally round the faith, and defend it through every variety of Taqiyya and Tu-Quoque.
And Tu-Quoque, and Taqiyya, are exactly what this poster is all about.
What should Obama do?
De-stabilize and pull-out, full coitus interruptus. Leave these Islamic savages to their own devices, ones they are so proficient at, historically. Maybe this President can improve on the folly that the previous administration was so vehemently engaged in.
I wouldn't bet a dollar on that though.
Hesperado,
Here is a video where a militant muslim is accusing muslims outside a mosque of not going to jihad:
http://www.blip.tv/file/2760905
Islam is not more powerful than Christianity and since christians do not follow the pacifism of Christ, almost all muslims do not go to jihad because both Christianity and Islam are not able to override the free will of their followers.
Just as almost all christians do not follow Christ's pacifism, almost all muslims do not follow the call to jihad.
45ch: YOu keep saying about Islam not being more powerful than Islam, and overriding free will. But what you are challanged on every time and you ignore is the Fact: Christianity teaches peace and 'love thy neighbor as thyself' and Islam teaches war and 'slay the unbeliever' There can be no comparison therefore, as Hugh pointed out between lapsed Christians who do bad despite the commands of their belief and lapsed Muslims who do not do bad despite the commands of theirs.
Until you can refute that the Quran does indeed teach war against the unbeliever (and a bunch of other vile things) any comparisons between lapsed Muslims and Christians is nonsense.
Hugh,
You have to look at what people actually are doing and not what is written in their religious texts and it is very obvious that both muslims and christians do not follow what is written in their texts, just as jews are not following the genocidal commands in Deut 20:16 even though there is no time limit posed on those commands.
Muslims are not even following Sharia as evidenced by numerous muslim countries not having sharia and yet you believe that they are determined to conquer the world despite being disunited as evidenced by the presence of about 57 muslim countries ?
Muslims have had 1400 years to conquer the world and if it has not happened by now, how is it ever going to happen, especially when muslims are disunited as evidenced by the presence of 57 different muslim countries with differing agendas and goals ?
Yes, a tiny number of terrorists do want an islamic empire but even they are not speaking of world wide conquest because they know that islam, even at the height of its power, started breaking up due to muslim disunity and that empire kept breaking and eventually became the present 57 or so muslim countries today.
Is Pakistan going to use its nuclear weapons for world conquest ?
How do you explain the fact that numerous muslim countries do not follow Sharia ? and are not subjugating non-muslims and yet you believe that muslims want to subjugate you in America ?
45ch said: "You have to look at what people actually are doing and not what is written in their religious texts and it is very obvious that both muslims and christians do not follow what is written in their texts, just as jews are not following the genocidal commands in Deut 20:16 even though there is no time limit posed on those commands."
Yes, Christians ignore commands to love and mulsims ignore the commands to hate (See my post above).
45ch said: "Muslims have had 1400 years to conquer the world and if it has not happened by now, how is it ever going to happen, especially when muslims are disunited as evidenced by the presence of 57 different muslim countries with differing agendas and goals ?"
Good old, "If it hasn't happened before, it won't happen in the future" fallacy.
"Is Pakistan going to use its nuclear weapons for world conquest ?"
Maybe you don't understand what 'conquest' means. When one nation bullys other nations with might to pay tribute. That's conquest. Pakistan doesn't at all need to occupy the land to conqour it, just like how a chess piece exerts control on the spaces it CAN move to.
Hugh
Hear, hear!
I have a bulging e-file, compiled - during my two and a half years reading and posting here, and also from my slow and attentive explorations of the jihadwatch archives - entitled, "Islam and lying".
It comprises many, many posted articles; it also comprises 'data points', testimony from assorted posters who have encountered first-hand the mind-boggling (to westerners) Muslim capacity for falsehood and deception of every imaginable kind.
For example - from a posting made in response to a Muslim spinmeister, in 2005:
"...Actually I have a friend who was raised a moslem in pakistian. He no longer believes in god period. But he stated to me any nonmoslem who thinks he can be friends with a moslem is a fool. Never belive what they say. To lie or deceive a nonmoslem is a great honor...
Posted by: ecil_man at July 8, 2005 7:52 AM".
Another, from a poster in the UK, a lawyer, with long and bitter experience:
"Sorry about the word 'scum' [addressing another poster].
One gets used to thinking about them [Muslims] that way because my experience, and that of my colleagues, is that they can never, never, never tell the truth.
'Ask them the time and they will lie for the sheer pleasure of having lied. Their testimony, even from the seemingly nicest of them, will always contain more lies than truth. It seems that they just can't help themselves.
'All the time, it's like dealing with a two year old caught raiding the biscuit barrel.
It just gets very wearing after all these years and we tend to use insulting words more to protect our own sanity than to insult - it's some sort of distancing mechanism, I think, - otherwise we would all go mad because of their childish and immature approach to the world.
'According to some teachers who I know, the children and the adolescents are just the same - constitutionally incapable of telling the truth or, worse, relating to the real world…
Posted by: Certiorari at January 13, 2006 10:38 AM".
And here is a third, posted by one 'dgene', which is perhaps the most useful and illuminating of all:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/09/saudi-arabia-jihad-in-iraq-wrong-says-grand-mufti.html#c126263
dgene | September 19, 2005 10:19 PM
"One gets to develop, in listening to Muslim voices, a third ear:
' it's not what they say, because that is totally unreliable, whether it be lies, taqiyya, bad things or pleasant statements;
'it's not how they say it, because it is usually angry or upset - and that seems to be endemic with the religion of peace;
'but it's rather *how is the speaker trying to influence or manipulate you* {my emphasis - dda},
and here the analysis better be good, because your life depends on it." END QUOTE.
I will add that a friend of mine, an experienced and realistic mother and schoolteacher, once explained to me that for some people the objective truth or falsehood of a statement is of no interest whatever; all that matters for these persons is what *they* want, and they will say, to others, whatever they think will work - the falsity or truth of what they're saying is completely irrelevant - to make their hearer/s comply with their (the speaker's) ends. We were not, in fact, discussing Islam, just a certain type of personality (one that in our societies is viewed with distrust and indeed disgust); but her words throw a great deal of light on what dgene was getting at.
It is that 'third ear' referred to by dgene that I am using as I listen to '45ch' (previously known as 'loveverybody' [!!!], and a couple of other monikers as well).
Post scriptum: since the Mohammedan spinmeister 45ch pooh-poohed the idea that Pakistan might one day use its nukes, I think I shall take us back to May 2008 and supply the link for the text of an article that was originally published in a mainstream Pakistani newspaper.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/05/jihad-is-carried-offensively-to-cleanse-the-earth-from-the-kufr-unbelief-with-the-implementation-of.html
I commend it, and the many intelligent comments in the accompanying discussion thread as archived, to the attention of any non-Muslim present, who joined this forum subsequent to that date (May 21 2008) and who may not yet have had time to explore the archives.
Yep.
Foolster,
Judaism teaches genocide and other cruel acts and you could say that Islam is "judaism minus the call to genocide" but just because both religions teach war, does not mean the members of those religions will ever go to war/jihad
just as the existence of the US military does not mean all Americans will join the military.
No religion can ever override the free will of its members and if those members do commit to war, you cannot totally blame the religion for the acts of its members, just as you cannot totally blame US foreign policy for the acts of Nidal and Timothy McVeigh.
The call to war/jihad in Islam is not much different than the call to war by the US govt in its imperial conquests of Native American nations, Spanish colonies, Hawaii, the Philippines, Cuba and numerous other wars conducted by the US govt, all in the name of liberty and freedom but the true agenda was to the enrich those in the military/industrial complex and wars do help in reelecting politicians.
whereas the agenda behind islamic jihad is not only to enrich those in the military/industrial complex but also to create a theocracy.
So the difference between the expansionist policies of the US govt in the past and the islamic jihad policies of the islamic empire of old is that the US govt was interested in power and money in its expansion and the islamic empire was interested in power, money and expanding their religious base
Ericthekuffar: I think you significantly overestimate the competence and power of the Iranian military. But for a few short- and medium-range missles, they have, I assert, little offensive capability. I submit the Iranian response would be almost exclusively of a small-cell terrorist nature, to which we ought respond (after withdrawal of our military resources -- troups and ships -- from Iraq and Afpakistan) with devastating air strikes specifically against political and military targets in Iran, with a view to facilitating regime change. We ought not, I think, commit any ground troups (other than commando-type forces for special ops).
Both Israel and Saudi Arabia possess excellent anti-missle defenses, which should be adequate to limit any Iranian missle strikes to an acceptable level. I do not believe the Saudi oil fields would be in any danger of actually falling into Iranian hands. Which of the Arab states would support an attack on Israel in response to Iranian exhortation? Remember the Sunni-Shia split. The Saudis, Egyptians, even the Jordanians would be glad to see Shia Iran get smacked down a rung or two on the Middle-Eastern power ladder.
Iran could attempt to block the Straits of Hormuz, which would require a vigorous U.S. naval force, backed up by the necessary carrier-based bombing operations.
If we struck the Iranian nuclear facilities, along with some key Iranian military installations, and demonstrated clearly to the ayatollas that we would follow up with as devastating a war as was necessary to contain them, I submit their response would be entirely to protect their, relatively, unpopular regime, not to attempt to wage war against the U.S.
Militarily, we could stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. We should do so. The limiting factors that will prevent our doing it are political and cultural. But the war with Iran or with some combination of Islamic states (perhaps with the assistance of North Korea) will come, and we will fight it, sooner or later, I assert. God grant we still have a vestige of military credibility when that war is forced upon us.
45ch: Wordy, you are.
Hugh,
Its a fact that over a hundred million people have died under genocide in non-muslim countries, as compared to muslim countries these past 100 years.
Its a fact that non-muslim countries have waged more war beyond their borders these past 100 years compared to wars waged by muslim countries.
Its a fact that in the US alone there have been about 2000 annual murders of intimate partners by jealous boyfriends or husbands as compared to a world wide total of 5000 honor killings per year
Its a fact that you have heard of stories or read the news about your town's murders etc and most of them were done by non-muslims and probably non by Al-Qaeda so you are more in danger from your fellow citizens.
If you were living in a muslim country, there is a good chance you could be a victim of a muslim but at the same time, the murder rates in a place like Saudi Arabia (rank : 61) is much lower than in the US ( rank : 24) and several muslim countries have lower murder rates than the US.
In fact, the countries with the most murder rates, the top 12 are non-muslim.
ref : http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
ref : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
I can assure you, you are more in danger from your fellow citizens than any muslim terrorist
And you are more in danger from everyday household items or foods that you eat that can have deadly consequences either in the short term or long term.
And you are more in danger of getting cancer because cancer is the result of hate that consumes the soul.
So you would be better off concentrating on the true dangers to your health and safety and not "cooked up dangers from Islam" that only benefit the profit agenda of the bloated, greedy, corrupt military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex where here in the US the complex is looting the US govt of 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar amounting to over a trillion dollars a year
45ch wrote:
"So the difference between the expansionist policies of the US govt in the past and the islamic jihad policies of the islamic empire of old is that the US govt was interested in power and money in its expansion and the islamic empire was interested in power, money and expanding their religious base."
So, actually the difference is the Islamic religious principle as opposed to the non-Christian, secular US principle of the government.
You're a terrible liar 45ch, and you belie the truth behind your "argument" with every additional comment.
45ch wrote:
"Muslims have had 1400 years to conquer the world and if it has not happened by now, how is it ever going to happen, especially when muslims are disunited as evidenced by the presence of 57 different muslim countries with differing agendas and goals ?"
But the current historical outcome does nothing to prove or disprove the goal of the ummah, taken directly as a mandate for all Muslims from the Islamic texts, now does it?
Let Abdullah do your talking for you, for it is painfully obvious that you are a mere novice.
DDA,
How many American muslim soldiers since 1776 through 2009 have killed their fellow soldiers ?
Out of 3500 American muslim soldiers, how many have killed their fellow soldiers ?
The acts of one criminal American muslim soldier should not be taken to mean all American muslims are criminals
just as the actions of the US govt during slavery and the actions of right wing mobs that lynched thousands of blacks during the 19th and even 20th centuries, should not be taken to mean all Americans were evil at that time.
Guilt by association is what murderers like Hitler do in order to give excuse to their genocidal agendas and in the end, innocent muslim children lose their lives due to hate that breeds violence
"Guilt by association is what murderers like Hitler do in order to give excuse to their genocidal agendas..."
Sounds like mainstream Islam to me.
Awake,
Are you saying that muslims, as disunited as they have always been, will somehow get together and conquer the world ?
Even Portugal and Spain that were authorized by the Pope to divide the non-christian world amongst themselves, were not able to conquer the world even though they were the super powers during the 15 th century
ref : http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:ozO3G1frFjgJ:www.historiasiglo20.org/MEC-BC/3rd%2520level/3his/Topic2-ModernStates/Y3Tordesillas.doc+contract+of+Tordesillas&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
If muslims today are not even implementing sharia in numerous muslim countries, why would they be thinking of world conquest ?
So when is Pakistan going to be using its nuclear weapons ?
Foolster,
Are you saying that muslims, as disunited as they have always been, will somehow get together and conquer the world ?
Even Portugal and Spain that were authorized by the Pope to divide the non-christian world amongst themselves, were not able to conquer the world even though they were the super powers during the 15 th century
ref : http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:ozO3G1frFjgJ:www.historiasiglo20.org/MEC-BC/3rd%2520level/3his/Topic2-ModernStates/Y3Tordesillas.doc+contract+of+Tordesillas&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
If muslims today are not even implementing sharia in numerous muslim countries for their religion, why would they be thinking of world conquest for their religion ?
I can assure you that Pakistan will never conquer the world or even its neighbors and the day Pakistan does that, I will send you $1000 through paypal
45ch seems to think that we think the problem is that Muslims are actually going to conquer the world. If a maniac has the intention to burn down a skyscraper, does it matter if he is unable to achieve the full realization of his intent, but only manages to burn a few offices and kill about 30 or 40 people in the process of failing his ultimate objective?
There are too many Muslims in various places all over the world trying to concretize the supremacist madness of their religious blueprint, and in the process they are causing mayhem, and they need to be stopped. The problem is not a "tiny minority" who are easily identifiable. The problem is a much larger, difficult to identify and ennumerate number of Muslims who furthermore are enabled in a variety of ways by other Muslims who are not actively killing anybody. The problem of enablement of violent and supremacist jihad in Muslim societies is a much larger more amorphous problem than 45ch claims. The same fanaticism that drives the violent jihadists is psychologically and culturally contiguous with the obsessive fanaticism by which multitudes of Muslims slavishly follow their religious rules and beliefs, and chief among those beliefs is the division of Mankind into Believer and Unbeliever, and the hatred of the latter and the exclusive loyalty to the former. Then add the prevalent culture of lying to protect Islam and we begin to have a problem of formidable proportions. Nevertheless, these innumerable and difficult to ennumerate numbers of Muslims all over the world don't have to be actually capable of their ultimate goal of a world dominated by Islam, for them to cause untold misery and mayhem merely in trying, yet failing, to succeed. We must stop them from trying -- never mind the red herring of their succeeding.
Secondly, there is another factor here at work, other than mere conquest. Conquest is not the only ultimate desideratum encoded in the blueprint of Islam. In fact, Muslims would not be happy merely to conquer the world, even if they could: not because they don't want to -- but because it's not in the blueprint of the Sunnah. The ultimate goal is not conquest of this world: the ultimate goal is bringing this world to the threshhold of the eschaton, to prepare it for the Last Days and Allah's final cleansing of Earth, damning all Unbelievers to Hell and giving Paradise to all worthy Believers. And this, according to the blueprint which must be slavishly followed, will not happen without worldwide wars and disorder and chaos and bloodshed. That is ultimately what Muslims must work for -- not so much because they want it, but because it's in the divine blueprint: worldwide Fitna, to instigate global wars of unprecedented chaos and bloodshed, in order to pave the way for the Last Days.
And again, we are not worried that Muslims will actually succeed in ushering in the Last Days: we are only concerned about what too many Muslims in various places all around the world -- most of whom we cannot identify, locate nor predict -- will do in merely trying to bring this about.
The dog barks, the caravan moves on.
Your refutation of 45ch is a more than adequate one, Hesperado, though I doubt the poor sod will be convinced by any amount of true logic and common sense. Refreshing too to read what someone like yourself has written, using real paragraphs to express concepts rather than scattered comments left and right (or is it up and down?) as 45ch does regularly. Indicative, probably, of how his mind operates------sporadically with bits and pieces of information twisted to suit a particularly weird agenda, never forming a cohesive pattern of thought with conclusions that make sense. Hugh said it well above, "The dog barks, the caravan moves on." Moving on.
'What should Obama do?'
How about expressing overt unapologetic support for Israel. How about singing the praises of this advanced democratic society.
How about warning off the purveyors of hatred against Israel in order to counteract their poison.
Like this guy (probably the most demented yet):
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2274.htm
As for what to do about Afghanistan: destroy the opium crops, re-set the terms of engagement to assist our troops, refrain from nation-building, keep the peace for a minimum period required for the Afghan forces themselves to take over (say 12 months), then withdraw, perhaps leaving a small force to monitor for Talib/AlQ resurgence and call in airstrikes if necessary.
Hesperado, you stated :
45ch seems to think that we think the problem is that Muslims are actually going to conquer the world. If a maniac has the intention to burn down a skyscraper, does it matter if he is unable to achieve the full realization of his intent, but only manages to burn a few offices and kill about 30 or 40 people in the process of failing his ultimate objective?
Comment :
I deal in facts, numbers and the reality on the ground and that is why I am for the US rendition program that does apprehend truly dangerous criminals anywhere in the world, whether they are muslims or non-muslims who want to cause harm to Americans.
If you look at just the facts :
The only muslim organization that wants to punish Americans for the adverse and cruel foreign policies of the US govt is Al-Qaeda but other than Al-Qaeda, which is a very tiny organization, I don't see any major muslim organization wanting to cause harm to Americans on American soil.
As for causing harm to Americans in war zones, that is human nature to be murderous when their countries are occupied by a foreign military as was seen in the American revolutionary war.
We have read about numerous cases in the US in which loving fathers in our non-war zone and trauma-less America have nonetheless terrorized, tortured and killed their own children or pregnant wives, either through suffocation, drowning, hanging, beheading, stabbings or shootings,
so is it surprising that in Iraq or Afghanistan today, in the trauma of a war zone, where numerous victims see their loved ones being killed or blinded, maimed, deformed or paralyzed or disfigured for life due to either US bombings or sectarian violence, that those victims are vulnerable to Al-Qaida's propaganda which is able to influence the victims to take revenge and kill Muslims allied with the US or collaterally/accidentally kill Muslim children in the process of attacking US forces or Shia militias ?
If you were in a war zone and you see your family murdered by rebels or collaterally killed by the occupying force, knowing that you do not compromise with injustice , what would you do ?
When a foreign power occupies another country or when separatist movements reject the govt., it tends to result in terrorism, as was seen by the torture that many loyalist Americans/British went through by being tarred ( boiling tar being poured on them) because they were seen as loyal to the occupying British forces by the American rebels.
Another form of terrorism was the killing of british troops by the American rebels, after the British troops had surrendered.
ref : http://home.golden.net/~marg/bansite/banecdotes/96quarter.html
Lynchings were ordered by American Patriot Judge Charles Lynch on the terrorized American loyalists who were loyal to the British Crown.
So terrorism can be the result of being in a war zone and its either terrorism from the occupying force through collateral actions or the terrorism of the rebels against those loyal to the occupying force.
The fact that most American loyalists, who were loyal to Britain, fled the US, shows the terror they faced, not only from being tarred or properties confiscated but being lynched to death.
ref : http://www.redcoat.me.uk/
Hesperado, you stated :
There are too many Muslims in various places all over the world trying to concretize the supremacist madness of their religious blueprint, and in the process they are causing mayhem, and they need to be stopped.
Comment :
Too many muslims ?
As I said, I deal in facts and sadly :
Its a fact that over a hundred million people have died under genocide in non-muslim countries, as compared to muslim countries these past 100 years.
Its a fact that non-muslim countries have waged more war beyond their borders these past 100 years compared to wars waged by muslim countries.
Its a fact that in the US alone there have been about 2000 annual murders of intimate partners by jealous boyfriends or husbands as compared to a world wide total of 5000 honor killings per year
Its a fact that you have heard of stories or read the news about your town's murders etc and most of them were done by non-muslims and probably non by Al-Qaeda so you are more in danger from your fellow citizens.
If you were living in a muslim country, there is a good chance you could be a victim of a muslim but at the same time, the murder rates in a place like Saudi Arabia (rank : 61) is much lower than in the US ( rank : 24) and several muslim countries have lower murder rates than the US.
In fact, the countries with the most murder rates, the top 12 are non-muslim.
ref : http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
ref : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
I can assure you, you are more in danger from your fellow citizens than any muslim terrorist
And you are more in danger from everyday household items or foods that you eat that can have deadly consequences either in the short term or long term.
And you are more in danger of getting cancer because cancer is the result of hate that consumes the soul.
Hesperado, you stated :
The problem is not a "tiny minority" who are easily identifiable. The problem is a much larger, difficult to identify and ennumerate number of Muslims who furthermore are enabled in a variety of ways by other Muslims who are not actively killing anybody.
Comment :
I deal in facts and if the facts show that a majority of the muslim population are dangerous, I will be the first one to be on your side.
But the facts point clearly that muslims on the whole are less dangerous than non-muslims.
Does that mean that any particular non-muslim is more dangerous than any particular muslim ? off course not.
In aggregate, the facts do not support the idea of a dangerous muslim majority.
Hesperado, you stated :
The problem of enablement of violent and supremacist jihad in Muslim societies is a much larger more amorphous problem than 45ch claims.
Comment :
Here is a video where a militant muslim is accusing muslims outside a mosque of not going to jihad:
http://www.blip.tv/file/2760905
Islam is not more powerful than Christianity and since christians do not follow the pacifism of Christ, almost all muslims do not go to jihad because both Christianity and Islam are not able to override the free will of their followers.
Just as almost all christians do not follow Christ's pacifism, almost all muslims do not follow the call to jihad.
Jihad is a religious obligation that almost no muslims obey unless they do find their countries occupied by a foreign power.
If you can site any comprehensive study that shows that muslims are more dangerous than non-muslims, let me know and I will give it considerable thought.
Hesperado, you stated :
The same fanaticism that drives the violent jihadists is psychologically and culturally contiguous with the obsessive fanaticism by which multitudes of Muslims slavishly follow their religious rules and beliefs, and chief among those beliefs is the division of Mankind into Believer and Unbeliever, and the hatred of the latter and the exclusive loyalty to the former.
Comment :
Exclusive loyalty to the former ? when muslims have been disunited and muslim armies have waged war with each other ?
I do not see the exclusive loyalty you are talking about.
Christians also believe that unbelievers will go to hell but that does not mean that Christians are bad in anyway, does it ?
Muslims have opinions, just as christians have opinions but having an opinion does not constitute a conspiracy to do harm in anyway.
Now, if the facts point in the direction you are going, I will be the first one to be on your side, but the facts do not support any kind of conspiracy.
Hesperado, you stated :
Then add the prevalent culture of lying to protect Islam and we begin to have a problem of formidable proportions.
Comment :
Lying to protect Islam ? Do you have any comprehensive studies to back that up ?
I am going to give you a quote here and let me know which group the quote refers to :
We must realize that our party's most powerful weapon is racial tension. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by the whites, we can mould them to the program of the .........Party. In America we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against the whites, we will endeavor to install in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negroes. We will aid the Negroes to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the professions and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and begin a process which will deliver America to our cause.(end of quote)
What group does the above quote refer to ?
The point I am getting at is any group that does not look like you and has a religion that is different from you, can be targets of conspiracy theories based more on beliefs than actual facts on the ground.
Here is another quote and let me know which group the quote refers to :
................ is the destiny of mankind.
The ...... are the highest and most cultured people on earth . . . The..... have a right to subordinate to themselves the rest of mankind and to be the masters over the whole earth. The......will become masters over the whole earth, and they will subordinate to themselves all nations, not by material power, not by brute force, but by light, knowledge, understanding, humanity, peace, justice and progress. . . .
The ...... shall inherit the earth, and . . . all other races will either disappear altogether or they will become (fill in the blank).(end of quote)
Which group does the above quote refer to ?
Conspiracy theories make the authors of those theories feel good about themselves because they want to see the world as black and white and they want to see their race as perfect and every other race as imperfect or even evil.
But life is not black and white and there are innumerable variations and colors and nuances and beliefs even within the same religion as can be seen in the innumerable denominations within christianity, islam and other religions.
I recall a muslim saying that there are a hundred different sects within sunni islam and each sect thinks the other is not following islam properly.
Hesperado, you stated :
Nevertheless, these innumerable and difficult to ennumerate numbers of Muslims all over the world don't have to be actually capable of their ultimate goal of a world dominated by Islam, for them to cause untold misery and mayhem merely in trying, yet failing, to succeed. We must stop them from trying -- never mind the red herring of their succeeding.
Comment :
As I said before, other than groups in muslim countries occupied by foreign armies and groups in countries with separatist movements ( eg the tamil tigers, Chechen rebels, the IRA etc)
the only group that wants to harm Americans on American soil is Al-Qaeda and its affiliates which constitute about a few hundred militant muslims, not enough to cause a change in any govt, anywhere in the world.
Hesperado, you stated :
Secondly, there is another factor here at work, other than mere conquest. Conquest is not the only ultimate desideratum encoded in the blueprint of Islam.
Comment :
Even at the height of Islamic power, the muslim empire started to break up and eventually there are about 57 muslim countries today with differing agendas and goals.
The thought of muslims united to conquer the world is not based on fact but emotions.
Hesperado, you stated :
In fact, Muslims would not be happy merely to conquer the world, even if they could: not because they don't want to -- but because it's not in the blueprint of the Sunnah. The ultimate goal is not conquest of this world: the ultimate goal is bringing this world to the threshhold of the eschaton, to prepare it for the Last Days and Allah's final cleansing of Earth, damning all Unbelievers to Hell and giving Paradise to all worthy Believers.
Comment :
You mean that Pakistan will use nuclear weapons ? and if so, what are they waiting for ?
If muslim countries are suicidal, Iran would not have had a cease fire with Iraq in the long war with Iraq and Iran would have told its entire population to go to war with Iraq but that never happened.
People keep waiting for a muslim country to be truly suicidal and if it has not happened in 1400 years, there is a good chance, it will not ever happen because people might like their religious texts but more often than not, they are not following everything those religious texts dictate, just as almost all christians do not follow the pacifism of Christ even though they admire Christ.
Hesperado, you stated :
And this, according to the blueprint which must be slavishly followed, will not happen without worldwide wars and disorder and chaos and bloodshed. That is ultimately what Muslims must work for -- not so much because they want it, but because it's in the divine blueprint: worldwide Fitna, to instigate global wars of unprecedented chaos and bloodshed, in order to pave the way for the Last Days.
Comment :
Instigation of wars is not only confined to muslim govts., but non-muslim govts. like the US govt is also in the business of instigation , for example:
Stimson, the Secretary of War confided in his diary after a meeting of the war cabinet on November 25, 1941 : “The question was how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves".
After the Pearl Harbor attack, Stimson confessed : “my first feeling was of relief ... that a crisis had come in a way which would unite all our people."
The military/industrial complex would rather make money through the corporate welfare system without war,
but war is too much of a temptation and too lucrative for war profits to be abandoned completely, so the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex thrive on conflict and its in their interest to keep the conflict going and that is why you will find instigation policies of the US and Israeli govts in keeping the terrorists agitated enough so that they will keep causing problems and in turn the fear that is generated among the public due to terrorism will enable politicians to keep expanding the "defense" budget because a fearful public will not question the ever expanding "defense" budget and in turn the ever expanding "defense" budget keeps the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex happy and pave the way for support and re-elections of the military/industrial complex's puppet politicians.
And the people who pay the price for all the instigated conflicts are the poor, the sick, the handicapped, the children and the babies, while the so-called adults send our young and beloved soldiers to their deaths, all in the name of honor, duty and patriotism while the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex "laugh all the way to the bank ".
Here are two examples of instigation policies that resulted in war or prolonged the conflict :
(1) The US govt instigated Japan by freezing Japanese assets, helping the Chinese military against Japan and as the McCollum Memo from US naval intelligence and Stimson, the Secretary of War admitted that the US govt did everything short of all out war, to instigate the Japanese govt to attack, since only if the Japanese attacked first would that unite the American people for war, since the American people did not want another world war since WW1.
(2) Instead of using pragmatic, diplomatic and covert initiatives, the US govt demanded that the Taliban hand over Osama Bin Laden to the US, knowing fully well that that kind of belligerent rude approach will not make the Taliban concede to the demands of the US govt and thus pave the way for a "profitable" war.
The Taliban tried to save face by saying that Osama bin Laden (if found , since he fled to the mountains after the 9/11 attack) would be put on trial in a muslim country , but the US govt. was more interested in the prospects of a "profitable" war then trying to negotiate with the Taliban.
As for multiple muslim govts. instigating wars at the same time, even though muslims have always been disunited, here again, conspiracy theories can be applied to any group different in looks and religion.
Who is the infamous person who said that a certain group was responsible for all the wars ? do you know the name of the person ?
Hesperado, you stated :
And again, we are not worried that Muslims will actually succeed in ushering in the Last Days: we are only concerned about what too many Muslims in various places all around the world -- most of whom we cannot identify, locate nor predict -- will do in merely trying to bring this about.
Comment :
If western govts will leave muslim lands, you will see a dramatic decrease in attacks against westerners.
In fact the The Center Party of Egypt (Hizb ul-Wasat ), Turkey's ruling AKP Party, Tehreek i Insaf Party of Pakistan and Iran's Defenders of Human Rights Center are four of numerous muslim organizations and muslim reformers who don't hate muslims but want reformation in the muslim world
and we can help reformers in the muslim world by drastically changing US foreign policy which right now motivates Al-Qaeda to recruit among the victims of US foreign policy.
Now to ensure total and long lasting peace between the west and Al-Qaeda and its affiliates, we have to implement the 28 point peace plan :
http://www.bernardgoldberg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=30488&p=83949#p83949
Insulting Islam is not going to help matters as it is important to get 1.5 billion muslims on our side so that we can prevent the next terrorist attack and the way to prevent the next terrorist attack is to co-opt the muslim world by drastically changing US foreign policy which is now catered solely to enrich the rich and powerful in the bloated, corrupt, greedy military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex while the so called adults send our young and beloved soldiers to their deaths all in the name of patriotism, honor and duty, during which time, the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex laugh all the way to the bank.
IN CLOSING :
Instead of complaining about a tiny minority of muslims who will never pose a threat to western civilization, how about discussing the real threats to our security
Here is a partial list :
(1) American foreign policy
(2) poisons in everyday household items that can produce cancer
(3) Govt corruption in spending 68 cents of every tax dollar on the bloated, greedy, wasteful military/industrial pork laden, corporate welfare entitlement complex
(4) gang violence
(5) gun violence
(6) only 2% of imported food being inspected right now
(7) dangerous bridges
(8) Millions of consumers are being made ill, hundreds of thousands hospitalized and thousands are dying each year from preventable food borne illnesses," according to The Center for Science in the Public Interest. "Unfortunately, the FDA is saddled with outdated laws, and lacks the authority, tools and resources to fight unsafe food."
I can assure you, you are more in danger from your fellow citizens than any muslim terrorist
And you are more in danger from everyday household items or foods that you eat that can have deadly consequences either in the short term or long term.
And you are more in danger of getting cancer because cancer is the result of hate that consumes the soul.
So you would be better off concentrating on the true dangers to your health and safety and not "cooked up dangers from Islam" that only benefit the profit agenda of the bloated, greedy, corrupt military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex where here in the US the complex is looting the US govt of 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar amounting to over a trillion dollars a year
I am prosperous in my life because I have been blessed by God in being a peacemaker.
So be a peacemaker, and you will be blessed and no terrible thing will befall you because hate is like a cancer that can consume your soul and that is one reason people get cancer because their hate consumes them and they are vulnerable to all kinds of deadly diseases.
Wellington,
Please read the responses to Hesperado and let me know if I left anything out or you need clarification, thanks
Wellington - correct. In fact it's his *style* more than anything else that convinces me he's a Mohammedan (however much he tries to pretend to be a suicidally-pacifist Western Christian). His screeds or rants are as 'bitty', labyrinthine, incoherent and full of falsehoods, distortions and non-sequiturs, as the Qur'an or the Hadith. And in and behind them there is...nothingness; like the nothingness inside the black robes of Tolkien's Ringwraiths. I've noticed that, often enough, with Mohammedan posters at this site; what they say has a curiously mechanical quality, as if their words are like a veil, a mask or a weapon, quite external to and separate from whatever 'self' they might have (if there *is* any self left, that 'allah' has not eaten). Whereas with the non-Muslims who write here - whether Hindu or Jewish, Sikh or Buddhist, Christian or atheist - I always get a very strong sense of distinct personalities and of a unity between the person and the words.
Did you catch up with Winoceros' diagnosis of '45ch', toward the end of the thread attached to the recent article about suppression of religious freedom (a ban on church-building) in the Maldives? I thought Winoceros was onto something important. This is what 'Winoceros' said.
"Do you remember those silly books and early online text-driven rpg's that were statement/response driven?
'You'd say one thing, and then the canned response would post or you'd have to turn to that page.
'Sometimes you'd get into a vicious (note spelling, ivy-leaguers) loop where you'd hear the same response over and over.
'45ch is like that.
'You're probably witnessing his one great intellectual climax all at once, and all we'll be privvy to going forward is a cut-and-paste rendition of same.
'Note also lack of response to my actual comment.
'Muslims cannot reason because Islam has no real logic.'" END QUOTE.
Of course, '45ch' immediately spewed forth a posting in response which amply demonstrated the point that 'Winoceros' had just made.
45ch claims to deal exclusively with "facts on the ground", but the vast monster of tissues he assembles like Dr. Frankenstein never does come to life as an actual argument, no matter how large it is (sheer quantity will never make the leap to actual quality without... quality), and no matter how many times he plugs his mass of disconnected organs donated by Wikipedia and Leftist and Muslim websites into the electrical outlet of his barmy interpretations & theories which are firmly floating well above the "facts on the ground" disconnected from them: for facts must be connected to one's propositions in a meaningful sense which derives from the construction of an actual argument, not madly cobbled together with a thousand wires during a lightning storm in the lunatic castle of a wasted mind.
To clarify, my link to Memri was intended to point to the clip of Egyptian cleric 'Hazem Shuman' (second down on the list).
Just the latest in a line of Egyptian clerics there lately displaying maniacal hatred for Jews.
Hesperado:
Your 'Hammer House of Horror' allusions are perfect.
45CH:
I think you could claim the prize for the Koranic challenge to create a Sura just like those in the Koran, if you put your mind to it. You have the knack of repetitive writing laced with non sequiturs, accusations, false prescriptions, projection and pseudo-profound gobbledygook.
Congratulations.
Hesperado,
When muslims themselves are not willing to impose Sharia in numerous muslim countries, it is very hard to believe that those very muslims are bent on world conquest when they are not even following the rules of Islam in imposing Sharia.
So you need to help me out here;
do you have any concrete evidence by the way of a comprehensive study that clearly shows that muslims are actually "robots" and the Koran is able to override their will and that muslims are not human beings like christians who admire Jesus but christianity cannot override the free will of any christian and that is why almost all christians do not follow the pacifism of Christ.
I am willing to be on your side, but you have not produced any concrete studies that say muslims are not human like us.
I do not believe that Islam is more powerful than christianity or judaism and since it is not more powerful, it is not able to override the free will of muslims and the evidence shows that almost all muslims are not interested in jihad unless those muslims are in countries occupied by foreign forces or are a part of a secessionist movement as the American rebels were before the revolutionary war.
Here is a video where a militant muslim is accusing muslims outside a mosque of not going to jihad:
http://www.blip.tv/file/2760905
Islam is not more powerful than Christianity and since christians do not follow the pacifism of Christ, almost all muslims do not go to jihad because both Christianity and Islam are not able to override the free will of their followers.
Just as almost all christians do not follow Christ's pacifism, almost all muslims do not follow the call to jihad.
Stephen,
Here is a video where a militant muslim is accusing muslims outside a mosque of not going to jihad:
http://www.blip.tv/file/2760905
Islam is not more powerful than Christianity and since christians do not follow the pacifism of Christ, almost all muslims do not go to jihad because both Christianity and Islam are not able to override the free will of their followers.
Just as almost all christians do not follow Christ's pacifism, almost all muslims do not follow the call to jihad.
DDA,
How do you explain the fact that numerous muslim countries do not follow Sharia ? and are not subjugating non-muslims and yet you believe that muslims want to subjugate you in Australia ?
So if muslims are capable of not following Sharia, we can surely work with the following organizations and reformers in the muslim world :
The Center Party of Egypt (Hizb ul-Wasat ), Turkey's ruling AKP Party, Tehreek i Insaf Party of Pakistan and Iran's Defenders of Human Rights Center are four of numerous muslim organizations and muslim reformers who don't hate muslims but want reformation in the muslim world.
"Here is a video where a militant muslim is accusing muslims outside a mosque of not going to jihad"
1) A few Muslims outside a mosque is obviously not directly representative of 1.2 billion Muslims around the world.
2) The video offers no proof that the Muslims being "accused" are not doing their part in jihad in their own way
3) if the Muslim accuser is under the impression that these fellow Muslims are not doing jihad sufficiently, that doesn't mean he's correct, it just means his zeal moves him to want to see more direct jihad activity among them: he could be rather unintelligent and not realize that some or most or all of the Muslims he is accusing are in fact doing their part to enable jihad
which brings me to the next point:
4) the problem of Muslims is much larger than merely the front-line soldiers who choose to pick up an AK-47 or strap explosives on or commandeer a jet: it is a much larger amorphous problem of Muslims enabling the front-line soldiers in myriad ways: to pluck one example out of 1,001 one could adduce from a turban:
Italian police have arrested two Pakistanis suspected of providing logistical support for last year's attacks in Mumbai.
The father and son were detained in an early morning raid in the northern city of Brescia, police said.
They are accused of supplying cash from their money transfer agency to pay for an internet phone account used by people in contact with the attackers.
More than 170 people, nine of them gunmen, died in the November attacks.
This Muslim father and son were not attacking anyone, not shooting anybody, didn't explode. But they did their part to enable the grotesquely horrific commando raid on Mumbai that mass-murdered more than 170 innocent people and also involved the torture of a Jewish man and wife in front of their child.
And there is enablement of a thousand subtle shades along a spectrum, involving more, or less, collusion than demostrated by this father and son -- such as, for example, allowing your cousin Rasheed to use the back room of your store for late-night "sessions" with his "friends" who one may not ask about, but who are nevertheless part of a terrorist plot that takes years to get into place. Etc.
Yes, I believe Winoceros was on to something, dda. You know, I didn't think you could come across more turgid prose than Marx in Das Kapital, but 45ch has somehow managed it. What I find most interesting of all is 45ch's dual purpose of faulting the West, particularly America, ad nauseam (e.g., we pushed the Japanese, poor dears, to bomb Pearl Harbor because of trade restrictions and being too critical of them for being in China------never mind Japanese atrocities that preceded America's entry into the war like the Rape of Nanking) while exculpating Islam as much as possible. This is either deceitful or stupid. Not sure which.
Hope you are well, dda. The fight goes on against Islamic supremacist designs, notwithstanding attempts to convince us we have nothing to really worry about respecting these malicious designs.
Hesperado, you stated :
"Here is a video where a militant muslim is accusing muslims outside a mosque of not going to jihad"
1) A few Muslims outside a mosque is obviously not directly representative of 1.2 billion Muslims around the world.
Comment :
You are exactly right; we cannot draw conclusions from a few muslims, just like we cannot draw conclusions when a few muslims attack and kill people and say that is the norm in the Islamic world.
In a war zone, the most despicable things happen, for example US soldiers raping and killing a 14 year old girl and her whole family including the girl's baby sister.
Would those soldiers have done that horrible crime if they were in a non-war zone setting ? probably not and that brings me to the terrorism that loyalist Americans felt and experienced when they were either tarred or lynched for supporting the British in the Revolutionary war.
What some muslims do in war zones does not necessarily mean they would do the same thing if their country was not in the midst of a war of liberation or secession.
Hesperado, you stated :
2) The video offers no proof that the Muslims being "accused" are not doing their part in jihad in their own way
Comment :
It does not provide proof either way. What is important to learn from that video is that muslims are capable of not going to jihad, if not, that militant muslim would not be outside a mosque accusing muslims of not going to jihad. In other words, the non-participation of muslims in the call for jihad is so pronounced that it took a militant muslim to accuse them of being not involved.
If there were sufficient volunteers to jihad, why would the militant muslim be accusing muslims outside the mosque ?
Just as whenever enrollment in the US military is low, the US military starts ratcheting up its recruitment campaign but when there are sufficient volunteers, the US military eases on its recruiting.
Now if those muslims (outside the mosque) were in a country with secessionist movements or in a country that is occupied by a foreign army,then there is a good chance they might be involved in some aspects of jihad, just as Americans gave money for the cause of the revolutionary war and even American children were involved in making bombs for the revolution.
Hesperado, you stated :
3) if the Muslim accuser is under the impression that these fellow Muslims are not doing jihad sufficiently, that doesn't mean he's correct, it just means his zeal moves him to want to see more direct jihad activity among them: he could be rather unintelligent and not realize that some or most or all of the Muslims he is accusing are in fact doing their part to enable jihad
Comment :
But saying it, does not make it so.
Do you have any comprehensive studies that shows that American muslims are contributing to the jihad in Iraq or Afghanistan or secessionist movements in the Philippines or Thailand etc
and if you have proof, then it is not much different than France helping the revolutionaries against Britain because if American muslims see muslim children being blown up in Iraq by either rebels or the collateral actions of the US govt, then I am sure some American muslims might be helping the rebels, just as France was helping the American rebels and overseas Tamils have been known to help the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka.
Hesperado, you stated :
which brings me to the next point:
4) the problem of Muslims is much larger than merely the front-line soldiers who choose to pick up an AK-47 or strap explosives on or commandeer a jet: it is a much larger amorphous problem of Muslims enabling the front-line soldiers in myriad ways: to pluck one example out of 1,001 one could adduce from a turban:
Italian police have arrested two Pakistanis suspected of providing logistical support for last year's attacks in Mumbai.
The father and son were detained in an early morning raid in the northern city of Brescia, police said.
They are accused of supplying cash from their money transfer agency to pay for an internet phone account used by people in contact with the attackers.
More than 170 people, nine of them gunmen, died in the November attacks.
This Muslim father and son were not attacking anyone, not shooting anybody, didn't explode. But they did their part to enable the grotesquely horrific commando raid on Mumbai that mass-murdered more than 170 innocent people and also involved the torture of a Jewish man and wife in front of their child.
Comment :
Just as you pointed out that a few muslims do not represent 1.5 billion muslims, this father/son criminal team does not represent 1.5 billion muslims.
This father/son team might have experienced or seen on tv the brutality of the Indian Army in Kashmir and wanted revenge, just as the acts of the British led to the American rebels taking revenge on American loyalists during the Revolutionary war.
What happened after 9/11 on a small scale is what happens in cycles of violence in a war zone including what happened during the Revolutionary War :
The targeting of innocent minorities for alleged crimes/sins perpetrated by others is common everywhere, including the US : In 2001 after the 9/11 attacks, Arab Americans, Muslims, and Sikhs were victimized in nearly five percent of the total number of hate crimes reported that year (481 out of 9,730), a seventeen-fold increase over the prior year.
ref : http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes/arab-americans.html
Hesperado, you stated :
And there is enablement of a thousand subtle shades along a spectrum, involving more, or less, collusion than demostrated by this father and son -- such as, for example, allowing your cousin Rasheed to use the back room of your store for late-night "sessions" with his "friends" who one may not ask about, but who are nevertheless part of a terrorist plot that takes years to get into place. Etc.
Comment :
So again, are there any comprehensive studies on muslims around the world supporting terrorism and to what extent.
Jihad and terrorism are two different things.
Jihad is analogous to what most people in America were involved in during the revolutionary war and out of that "jihad" majority , a tiny minority of Americans committed terrorism against the American and British loyalists
6-7% of all human beings, whether muslim or non-muslim, support terrorism as the Gallup poll showed.
ref : http://scienceblogs.com/framing-science/2007/09/gallup_analysis_muslim_support.php
If you ask whether the deliberate killings of the residents of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justified, you will come up with about 6% of Americans supporting the deliberate killing of the innocent.
You can even see the comments by Americans on youtube regarding the killing of children in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and they will tell you that sometimes, terrorism is a necessary evil that brought the war with Japan to an end.
Whether 100 million muslims support terrorism world wide does not mean those very people will actively support terrorism, just as 6% of Americans who support terrorism does not mean they will have given material support to a person like Timothy McVeigh.
Take the example of hate crimes against muslims in America. If you come to the conclusion that gallup is right and 6% of Americans not only support terrorism but are actively involved in terrorism, the actual record does not show anywhere close to 6% of Americans actually involved in hate crimes against muslims.
The targeting of innocent minorities for alleged crimes/sins perpetrated by others is common everywhere, including the US : In 2001 after the 9/11 attacks, Arab Americans, Muslims, and Sikhs were victimized in nearly five percent of the total number of hate crimes reported that year (481 out of 9,730), a seventeen-fold increase over the prior year.
ref : http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes/arab-americans.html
So there were 481 hate crimes against Arab Americans/muslims/sikhs and even though its a 17 fold increase over the prior year before 9/11/2001 but that still does not come close to the 6% of Americans supporting terrorism as reported by gallup.
So likewise, even though 100 million muslims support terrorism, Osama Bin Laden could not recruit any of the millions of American muslims to actually be involved in terrorism.
CONCLUSION :
Supporting terrorism does not translate to actually being involved in terrorism as seen by the evidence above.
Hate is a human condition and is not solely from or among muslims.
There is plenty of goings-on in the western world that probably will dwarf anything happening in a similar non-war zone setting in the muslim world. (example : American man beats up woman while spewing racial slurs : http://www.womanist-musings.com/2009/09/black-woman-gets-beaten-in-public-and.html )
The targeting of innocent minorities for alleged crimes/sins perpetrated by others is common everywhere, including the US : In 2001 after the 9/11 attacks, Arab Americans, Muslims, and Sikhs were victimized in nearly five percent of the total number of hate crimes reported that year (481 out of 9,730), a seventeen-fold increase over the prior year.
ref : http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes/arab-americans.html
The following statistics of hate crimes in the US does not mean all Americans are involved in hate crimes, just as hate crime statistics in jihad watch does not mean all muslims are involved in anyway in hate crimes :
As documented by the FBI's 2007 HCSA report:
Approximately 51 percent of the reported hate crimes were race-based, with 18.4 percent on the basis of religion, 16.6 percent on the basis of sexual orientation, and 13.2 percent on the basis of ethnicity.
Approximately 69 percent of the reported race-based crimes were directed against blacks, 19 percent of the crimes were directed against whites, and 4.9 percent of the crimes were directed against Asians or Pacific Islanders. The number of hate crimes directed against individuals on the basis of their national origin/ethnicity increased to 1,007 in 2007 from 984 in 2006.
For the fourth year in a row, the number of reported crimes directed against Hispanics increased — from 576 in 2006 to 595 in 2007.
Though the overall number of hate crimes decreased slightly, the number of hate crimes directed at gay men and lesbians increased almost six percent — from 1,195 in 2006 to 1,265 in 2007.
Religion-based crimes decreased, from 1,462 in 2006 to 1,400 in 2007, but the number of reported anti-Jewish crimes increased slightly, from 967 in 2006 to 969 in 2007 — 12.7 percent of all hate crimes reported in 2007 — and 69 percent of the reported hate crimes based on religion.
Reported crimes against Muslims decreased from 156 to 115, 8.2 percent of the religion-based crimes. This is still more than four times the number of hate crimes reported against Muslims in 2000.
In contrast to the FBI's HCSA data, the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2005 reported sharply higher numbers of hate crimes committed in the U.S.:
An annual average of 210,000 US hate crime victimizations occurred from July 2000 through December 2003. During that period an average of 191,000 hate crime incidents involving one or more victims occurred annually. Victims also indicated that 92,000 of these hate crime victimizations were reported to police. These estimates were derived from victim reports to the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) of the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS).
ref : http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes/nature-and-magnitude.html
Wellington, you stated :
faulting the West, particularly America, ad nauseam (e.g., we pushed the Japanese, poor dears, to bomb Pearl Harbor because of trade restrictions and being too critical of them for being in China------never mind Japanese atrocities that preceded America's entry into the war like the Rape of Nanking) while exculpating Islam as much as possible. This is either deceitful or stupid. Not sure which.
Comment :
The Rape of Nanking ?
So are you saying that when the US govt was massacring native Americans and institutionalized a very cruel and terrorist slave system, that some other country should have invaded the US and liberated the native Americans and blacks ?
Lets take a look at instigation policies.
If the Japanese did to the US what the US did to the Japanese, do you think the US govt would have done nothing.
If the Japanese govt. froze US assets, embargoed oil to the US and encouraged others to do the same and if the Japanese govt supported the insurgency in the Philippines against the US, do you think that would not have been taken as an act of war by the US ?
Wellington, you stated :
Hope you are well, dda. The fight goes on against Islamic supremacist designs, notwithstanding attempts to convince us we have nothing to really worry about respecting these malicious designs.
Comment :
You really have nothing to worry about if the US govt implements the following steps :
(1) Co-opt all muslim leaders and have them on the CIA payroll
(2) Use the US rendition program to go after truly dangerous individuals and the next "hitler"
(3) Drastically change the US govt's foreign policy to approximate that of Switzerland's foreign policy where no terrorist attacks take place
(4) Push for reforms in the muslim world to approximate the numerous muslim countries that do not have sharia as the law
(5) Implement the 28 point peace plan :
http://www.bernardgoldberg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=30488&p=83949#p83949
The fact is that American Presidents, including President Reagan, have been informed by the CIA that Saudi Arabia is not dangerous to world peace and that is why the US govt has ties to Saudi Arabia and numerous other muslim countries that are not a danger to world peace.
I can assure you, you are more in danger from your fellow citizens than any muslim terrorist
And you are more in danger from everyday household items or foods that you eat that can have deadly consequences either in the short term or long term.
And you are more in danger of getting cancer because cancer is the result of hate that consumes the soul.
So you would be better off concentrating on the true dangers to your health and safety and not "cooked up dangers from Islam" that only benefit the profit agenda of the bloated, greedy, corrupt military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex where here in the US the complex is looting the US govt of 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar amounting to over a trillion dollars a year
Someone please kill 45ch.
Hesperado,
Life is too short to be hating and wanting all muslims to be deported.
What about protecting those muslims who might be victims of honor killing ? do you want to deport them too ?
Life is too short to be hating and hating will not win the souls of muslims.
Join our agenda :
Jesus said " blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called children of God".
I am on the side of Jesus and being on His side, I know I am going to be blessed in my life.
Hatred only consumes a person's soul and that is one reason why so many people attract danger to their lives, like cancer.
You will be blessed by God if you are a full-time peacemaker, making peace between christians and muslims and vice versa.
That is my agenda because more often than not, conflict results in war and the victims of war are mostly children, the weak, the poor, the handicapped and the old while the so-called adults make war and send the young to their deaths all in the name of patriotism and duty while the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex profit from war as they "laugh all the way to the bank".
To put him out of his own self-imposed misery I assume? Talk about blind pacifism. I suspect 45ch would have been with Gandhi (my choice for the most overrated person of the entire twentieth century) when, in 1940, he implored Churchill to seek a deal with Hitler. Some people never learn.
I don't hate Muslims. I just want to protect myself, my loved ones, my society, from the dangerous pathology that Muslims follow and enable. I reserve the special emotion of "hate" for appropriate objects -- such as mothers-in-law, slow computers, and politically correct idiots.
Re the vaporings of the Muslim apologist above:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJtOWKmvHxM
That's a first rate trinity, Hesperado, of worthy objects of opprobrium. My compliments.
"Life is too short to be hating and wanting all muslims to be deported."
I disagree whole-heartedly. I concur that Muslim deportation will not only preserve this "too short" life that you have described, but in reality, will actually prolong it.
Hatred is not necessary though it may be a perfectly legitimate emotion. A cool assessment of things by those whose approach to life is neither suicidal, nor characterized by an unthinking acceptance of the pieties of the age, nor dependent on ignoring matters that, if allowed to develop further, will at the very least severely degrade the quality of our lives, bringing us down to a level we did not seek and do not deserve, and could lead to even greater civilisational disaster -- all this is quite different from what one poster, a bit too quick off the mark, describes as "hatred."
Exactly.
(BTW, the clip you linked above was delicious and most appropriate).
Instead of hating, how about pushing the US govt to implement the following 28 point peace plan which will bring all Americans true and lasting peace with even Al-Qaeda :
28 POINT PEACE PLAN TO PREVENT ALL FUTURE WARS AND TERRORISM:
(1) MAKE PEACE WITH THE ENEMY including all enemy nation states BY ISSUING A STATEMENT THAT WE ARE WILLING TO NEGOTIATE A PEACE SETTLEMENT WITH THE LEADERS OF THE POLITICAL WING WHO ARE NOT DIRECTLY INVOLVED WITH TERRORIST ACTIVITY BUT WHO HAVE POLITICAL TIES TO THE TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS THEY REPRESENT...........a peace conference in a neutral country like Switzerland and sponsored by the US should bring all warring parties together to allow a platform in which all terrorist organizations through their political wing that can bring up issues..........JUST HEARING THEM OUT IN A SETTING LIKE A PEACE CONFERENCE WOULD MAKE A CEASEFIRE POSSIBLE......A LOT OF THE VIOLENCE IS BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE A US/UN SPONSORED PLATFORM THROUGH WHICH THEY CAN VENT THEIR FRUSTRATIONS.
(2) HELP ALL THOSE IN THE MIDDLE EAST FINANCIALLY WHO HAVE BEEN KILLED BY WEAPONS MADE IN THE US (THIS INCLUDES FAMILIES OF PALESTINIANS WHO HAVE DIED DUE TO COLLATERAL DAMAGE BECAUSE OF AMERICAN MADE WEAPONS) Sometimes our weapons cause collateral damage that kill innocent children and others and sometimes they are stolen by the enemy and used against us.
for example, Muslim babies and children dying or being deformed and maimed for life due to collateral damage from US made weapons fuels the anger towards the US and radicalizes a minority of Muslims to commit terrorist acts
(3) TELL THE POLITICAL WING OF THE TERRORISTS and all enemy nation states THAT WE WILL PULL OUT OUR ENTIRE ARMED FORCES FROM THE ENTIRE MIDDLE EAST and the rest of the world AS SOON AS IT IS PRACTICAL
(4) COVERTLY BE VERY ACTIVE IN THE MIDDLE EAST and all enemy nation states ( THE CIA'S BUDGET SHOULD BE GREATLY ENLARGED AND THE CIA SHOULD BE EMBEDDED IN EVERY MOSQUE, RELIGIOUS SCHOOL AND HOT SPOT IN THE MIDDLE EAST) AND INVITE ANY POTENTIAL ENEMY TO THE US OR INVITE THEM TO A "SAFE" COUNTRY WITH THE PRETENSE OF GIVING THEM HELP.. A "SAFE" COUNTRY IS A COUNTRY THAT IS COVERTLY HELPING US ON TERRORISM BUT LOOKS SAFE TO TERRORISTS......AN EXAMPLE OF A SAFE COUNTRY COULD BE PAKISTAN...... ..ONCE THE ENEMY AND HIS THUGS ARE COVERTLY APPREHENDED IN THE "SAFE" COUNTRY AND BROUGHT TO THE US, CONFINE THEM UNTIL WE ARE CONVINCED THAT THEY ARE NO LONGER A HARM TO ANYBODY.....AFTER HITLER WAS RELEASED FROM PRISON WHERE HE WROTE MEIN KAMPF, WE SHOULD HAVE BROUGHT HIM TO THE US, WITH THE PRETENSE OF HELPING HIS CAUSE AND ONCE IN THE US, AFTER A SECRET TRIAL, THE US COULD HAVE CONFINED HIM AND HIS THUGS UNTIL REHABILITATED OR IMPRISONED FOR LIFE...ALL THE ABOVE SHOULD BE DONE SECRETLY BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT FUTURE TERRORISTS TO KNOW WHAT OUR INTENTIONS ARE.
(5) GIVE AS MUCH HUMANITARIAN AID TO THE MIDDLE EAST and all enemy nation states, AND ALL THOSE ISRAELIS AND OTHERS WHO ARE VICTIMS OF TERRORISM AND ALL VICTIMS OF COLLATERAL DAMAGE DUE TO AMERICAN MADE WEAPONS.
The world should be divided into a grid system with each unit being about one square mile and within each unit, the US government should , according to the population density, place community heatlh centers which cater to the physical, emotional and psychological needs of the community which should include a health foods program, an exercise program, job training programs, a mental health program and a diseases prevention program
ALL AID SHOULD NOT BE GIVEN THROUGH THE CORRUPT AUTHORITIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST.....AID SHOULD ONLY BE GIVEN DIRECTLY TO THE CITIZENS THROUGH US AGENCIES OR OTHER AID AGENCIES WHO pass rigorous audits.
This aid should be directly related to giving every major US corporation the financial incentives to help in the economic development of all enemy nation states and other poor countries.
(6) WE SHOULD BE EVEN HANDED IN THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN SITUATION.....HAVE A PEACE CONFERENCE OF ALL PARTIES INVOLVED INCLUDING THE POLITICAL WING OF HAMAS, ISLAMIC JIHAD, THE AL-AQSA BRIGADE, THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY AND THE ISRAELIS.... GIVE THE NECESSARY FINANCIAL AND POWER SHARING INCENTIVES TO ALL POLITICAL LEADERS INVOLVED, SO THAT ALL PARTIES WOULD COME TO AGREEMENT...
..AS FOR THE TERRORISTS WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE ACTUAL MURDERS OF ISRAELIS, COVERTLY APPREHEND THEM AT A LATER DATE FOR A SECRET TRIAL.......
..THE FOLLOWING SHOULD BE A SUBSTANTIAL PART OF THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN SOLUTION.
..(a) the complete withdrawal by Israel from all occupied territories including East Jerusalem
(b) compensate all Israelis for settlements vacated
(c) compensate all Israeli victims of terrorism
(d) compensate all Palestinian victims of collateral damage
(e) compensate all Palestinian refugees for land confiscated by Israel as a result of previous wars
(f) Give a gift to the Palestinians by building them a four lane expressway that connects the Gaza strip to the West Bank........underpasses will connect the north side of Israel to the south side of Israel on either side of the expressway
(g) build an all encompassing electronic fence that completely separates Israel from the West Bank, the Gaza strip and the GS-WB Expressway
(h) directly aid the Palestinians to improve their economy.....aid should not go through the Palestinian government
(i) give incentives to American and Israeli corporations to help the Palestinian economy by creating jobs in Palestine
(j) the leaders of Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the political leaders of Hamas, Al-Aqsa Brigade and Islamic Jihad should be financially compensated in order to expedite the Israeli-Palestinian solution as soon as possible.......terrorists who are murderers would be covertly apprehended at a later date for a secret trial and secret detention.......if the well compensated political leaders of Hamas, Al-Aqsa Brigade and Islamic Jihad (who do not have blood on their hands) prove to be truly peaceful in the post-solution era than any secret US tribunal would consider the future peaceful actions of secretly indicted leaders as mitigating facts that might postpone the execution of any covert operations to apprehend those leaders.
(7) MAKING PEACE WITH ALL OUR ENEMIES IS THE KEY TO SUCCESS.....REMEMBER THESE PEOPLE, WHETHER RIGHTLY OR WRONGLY, FEEL THAT WE HAVE HUMILIATED THEM ENOUGH, SO THEY ARE FIGHTING BACK.....for example, the humiliation and anger the Muslims felt when "infidel" US troops were stationed in "holy" Saudi Arabia is what led to the attacks on September 11, 2001.........AFTER THE US WITHDRAWS MILITARILY FROM THE MIDDLE EAST, THE CIA THROUGH ITS MASSIVE COVERT OPERATIONS WOULD PREVENT TRULY DANGEROUS CHARACTERS FROM ASSUMING TOO MUCH POWER......PEOPLE LIKE HITLER WOULD HAVE NO CHANCE TO GAIN POWER IF APPREHENDED EARLY THROUGH COVERT CIA OPERATIONS.
(8) COVERTLY AT A MUCH LATER DATE WHEN OSAMA BIN LADEN IS NOT HIDING FROM US BECAUSE HE THINKS HE IS FREE TO ROAM ABOUT THE MIDDLE EAST, BRING HIM TO JUSTICE THROUGH CIA COVERT OPERATIONS TO A SECRET TRIAL IN THE US........covert operations should be used for all potential "Hitlers" .........truly dangerous people who incite violence, violate democratic principles, are very influential and advocate the overthrow of the government........this would have included Lenin, Tojo, Mao, Saddam, Charles Manson etc..for example, when Saddam Hussein fled to Egypt because the coup in Iraq failed, we could have sent our intelligence operatives to Egypt to lure Saddam and his thugs to a "safe" country where we could have arrested him
(9) MEDIA IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND ALL ENEMY NATION STATES INCLUDING THE MOSQUES AND RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS SHOULD BE INFLUENCED AND FINANCIALLY CONTROLLED BY THE US THROUGH THE CIA COVERTLY .......WE BASICALLY SHOULD financially compensate THE LEADERS IN ENEMY NATION STATES TO ALLOW US TO INFLUENCE THEIR MEDIA AND INSTITUTIONS OF POWER AND INFLUENCE
(10) COMPENSATE ALL AMERICAN FAMILIES AND FAMILIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST WHO HAVE HAD LOVED ONES KILLED BY TERRORISTS....EXPLAIN THROUGH THE AMERICAN MEDIA THAT WE ARE NOT SOFT ON TERRORISM BUT WE ARE COVERTLY SOLVING THE PROBLEM OF TERRORISM....THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL UNDERSTAND THAT TERRORISM NEEDS TO BE FOUGHT COVERTLY TO PREVENT THE SPREAD OF TERRORISM.
(11) the US president will only meet with a head of a terrorist state (eg the former Soviet Union) only after US government officials meets with the political wing of the dictator (who do not have blood on their hands) without pre-conditions and then at the meeting, the US government will set forth the conditions under which US financial, non-military security and economic support will flow and if it is accepted by the political wing, our support will only be towards the political wing until the dictator takes concrete steps towards democracy and human rights reforms and only then will the US President meet face to face with the reformed dictator in order to push for further democratic and human rights reforms while CIA covert operatives make sure that the dictator's life is protected from rebels further giving proof that the US is on the side of the reformed dictator while CIA psychiatrists put the dictator through various psychological therapies in order to further facilitate democratic and human rights reforms
TERRORISTS WITH ENORMOUS POWER LIKE KIM JONG IL SHOULD BE BASICALLY COMPENSATED FINANCIALLY AND IN RETURN HE WILL ALLOW OUR CIA TO BE EMBEDDED WITH HIS INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES TO ASSURE HIS SECURITY AND THAT NO HUMAN RIGHTS ARE VIOLATED....
...AT THE SAME TIME THE CIA WILL ALSO BE COVERTLY IN HIS COUNTRY MONITORING ANY INSURGENCY ACTIVITY AND IF AN INSURGENT IS POWERFUL AND VIOLENT ENOUGH, COVERT CIA OPERATIONS WILL TAKE CARE OF THE INSURGENCY AND FURTHER GIVE PROOF TO KIM JONG IL THAT WE ARE ON HIS SIDE AND HE DOES NOT HAVE TO TAKE DRASTIC AND CRUEL MEASURES TO STAY IN POWER....
..for example a little diplomacy that Madeline Albright did by visiting Kim Jong Il impressed him so much that he even invited President Clinton to visit North Korea.........if a little diplomacy bears fruit, can you imagine what an intensive and thorough form of diplomatic initiatives can produce ?...
...........THESE MEASURES SHOULD BE ADOPTED IN EVERY ENEMY NATION STATE...........WHICH ARE....SECURITY ASSURANCES, FINANCIAL INCENTIVES, COVERT AND OVERT CIA OPERATIONS AND VIGOROUS AND CONSTANT DIPLOMACY...........BASICALLY EVERY TERRORIST LEADER WHO IS RULING A COUNTRY WILL UNDERGO LONG TERM DIPLOMATIC AND PSYCHOLOGICAL THERAPY UNDER THE SPONSORSHIP OF THE CIA WHILE THE CIA CONTINUES VIGOROUS COVERT AND OVERT OPERATIONS TO MAINTAIN SECURITY IN THE ENEMY NATION.........REMEMBER, WE NEED TO KEEP OUR FRIENDS CLOSE BUT OUR ENEMIES CLOSER......
While each powerful dictator has been co-opted and on the CIA payroll, the US government should give the dictator every kind of incentive to push for democratic and human rights reforms in his country
....ALL AREAS THAT HAVE BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL AND NUCLEAR WEAPONS WILL BE SATURATED WITH OUR CIA OPERATIONS.....
....WHILE CONVINCING THE LEADERS THROUGH FINANCIAL AND SECURITY ASSURANCES THAT THEY DO NOT NEED TO PURSUE CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR PROGRAMS
(12) The US government should have a comprehensive whistleblower program whereby whistleblowers in the military/industrial/security complex will be protected from backlash just like US spies are protected as to source and methods.
For example, the whistleblower in the Abu Ghraib scandal had to relocate himself to a secret location due to fear of being killed due to the fact that his name was released by Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. The practice of the releasing of names of whistleblowers in order to prevent future whistleblowers from coming forward; that practise should be stopped.
Whistle blowers in the military/industrial/security complex should be encouraged to come forward and rewarded for their actions whenever they can prove any wrong doing between the military/industrial complex and politicians
(13) Payments to victims of collateral damage should be increased from the present $2500 to at least $100,000 per victim so that politcians will realize the enormous cost of war and its effects.
In this iraq war, as of 2006, its been estimated that as many as 655000 civilians have lost their lives and even though most of the victims are victims of terrorists, nevertheless, if the US was not in Iraq, Saddam in the whole of 1998 killed 2000 political dissidents and there is no reason to believe Saddam could have killed any number more than 2000 in 2006 if he was still in power.
The US paid victims of the attacks on September 11, 2001 about 1.3 million each, even though the US did not cause the deaths of the victims on September 11, 2001, so likewise, the US is responsible in paying the $100,000 for every victim of this unecessary Iraq war and payments could total to $65.5 billion dollars and this kind of cost will make politicians think twice about starting wars.
(14) Ban the sale of weapons and weapons systems to any country. The collateral damage caused by US made weapons further enrages people whose families are victims of collateral damage due to US made weapons and terrorists use collateral damage as a recruiting tool for more terrorists.
(15) Curriculum in schools should have compulsory subjects talking about blow back, post traumatic disorders experienced by both soldiers and innocent kids in war zones plus the importance of making sure that both the security cleared staff of the intelligence committees in the house and senate are able to see everything the president sees from the CIA in real time .
wounded veterans should be allowed to talk to school kids about their lives after being discharged from the military.
Families of those soldiers deployed overseas should be allowed to talk to school kids about life in the states while their loved ones are deployed overseas.
(16) Both the security cleared staff of the members of the intelligence committees in the house and senate should be able to see everything the president sees from the CIA in real time in order to prevent another gulf of tonkin resolution where the president is able to spin intelligence for his own political ambitions
(17) Liberal immigration policies to allow war zone refugees to enter the US. By allowing all war refugees to enter the US, politicians will realize the enormous costs of waging a war.
As of 2008. millions of Iraqis are either displaced within the country or in neighboring countries and the US government should be supporting all of them on a monthly basis, giving them a basic allowance and promises of rebuilding their homes and finding them jobs after the conflict has been resolved and matching their salaries dollar for dollar up to an amount that gives them a decent standard of living.
Refugees are prime candidates for recruitment by terrorists, so the above incentives will make the refugees think that the US government is on their side and cares about their pitiful plight
(18) All those politicians who are in favor of war; those politicians' kids who are eligible to enrol in the military will be asked to volunteer for the front lines and all those who refuse, their parents' names will be published in newspapers telling people which war mongering poitician kids volunteered for the front lines and which did not; further giving poiticians the incentive not to start wars in the first place.
(19) For soldiers to be truly in a voluntary role, the following should be done by the US government :
(a) stop the massive advertising budget and signing bonuses employed by the US government; if its truly a voluntary service, why entice people to join since people are waiting in line to join the military or at least the politicians will have you believe that
(b) stop giving the impression that the US government is bribing people to join and recruiting stations should not be enticing impressionable high schoolers with promises of tens of thousands of dollars in signing bonuses, school scholarships and grants, glamor and glitz and shiny uniforms and travel and vacations to exotic locations and money and power trips and career advancements and opportunities to play with war "toys"...
High school kids almost always think they are invincible; so it is up to the recruiting station to tell the impressionable high schoolers the reality of being on the front lines and to give them the correct statistics regarding bodily injury or worse at various positions in the military.
(c) before anybody can enrol in the armed forces, they would be required to look at a one hour video at home about the horrors of front line action where they could witness their friends being blown apart or maimed for life and the subsequent collateral damage where the recruit might potentially have to face the families of children killed or maimed for life due to collateral damage and after viewing the video, both the parents and the potential recruit will come to a decision that can be called truly voluntary. Also, the video will contain unedited and frank interviews with severely deformed, maimed and paralyzed soldiers who tell about their experiences in life after having been discharged in order to give volunteers an accurate picture of life after being severely maimed, deformed or paralyzed for life.
(d) Also the recruit will be shown videos of families of soldiers and the hardships they face at home because of their loved ones being deployed overseas and the psychological turmoil of children with dads on the front lines
(e) Before any war or mission is declared, front line soldiers should vote in a secret ballot whether they will be willing to go and die for that particular war
(f) lastly, the paper the recruit finally signs should read that the President will send the recruit into harm's way into wars of choice or necessity
To make sure that those who volunteer in the military, do not allow the recruiters to make the potential recruiters think that the armed forces is just about school scholarships and grants, glamor and glitz and shiny uniforms and travel and vacations to exotic locations and money and power trips and career advancements and opportunities to play with war "toys"...
High school kids almost always think they are invincible; so it is up to the recruiting station to tell the impressionable high schoolers the reality of being on the front lines and to give them the correct statistics regarding bodily injury or worse at various positions in the military.
.. before anybody can enrol in the armed forces, they would be required to look at a one hour video at home about the horrors of front line action where they could witness their friends being blown apart or maimed for life and the subsequent collateral damage where the recruit might potentially have to face the families of children killed or maimed for life due to collateral damage and after viewing the video, both the parents and the potential recruit will come to a decision that can be called truly voluntary. Also, the video will contain unedited and frank interviews with severely deformed, maimed and paralyzed soldiers who tell about their experiences in life after having been discharged in order to give volunteers an accurate picture of life after being severely maimed, deformed or paralyzed for life.
(20) To have a reasonable advertising budget and no signing bonuses. Since the military says that Americans are patriotic, why have signing bonuses ?
Why is it that the military is probably the only US organization that spends vast amounts of money on advertising on tv for jobs and recruiting bonuses when they keep telling us that Americans are patriotic and are eager to join and if Americans are truly eager to join, why the huge advertising budget and the massive signing bonuses ?
Does it not give the impression that Americans join because of enticements and if the military wants the public to think otherwise and wants the public to think that Americans join due to patriotism, duty and honor, should they not get rid of massive advertising for jobs and get rid of huge signing bonuses ?
All major companies in the US do not advertise for jobs on tv and they do not have massive signing bonuses and one would think that Americans are more patriotic in joining regular corporations than joining the military.
(21) Before any war is declared, front line soldiers should be given an opportunity to voice their opinions through a secret ballot (since they are the ones who will bear the brunt of any war)
Before any war, permanently disabled veterans who have experienced front line action should be allowed to vote by secret ballot in order to voice their opinion about any decision to go to war because politicians need to know the realities of war and whether they are willing deliberately put into harm's way soldiers who will be the future badly wounded veterans
Conducting regular surveys in war zones to find out the effects of war on the soldiers and the children in war zones and also long term surveys of veterans of war to find out why so many veterans end up either getting divorced, committing suicide, drug addicted or homeless. These surveys will help politicians realize the enormous physical, emotional and mental costs that war inflicts on all those in the war zones.
soldiers in a war zone are constantly under stress and many shoot first and then ask questions later. for example, soldiers have been known to clear houses by throwing grenades into them, not knowing who is inside and deaths of unarmed men, women, children and babies have been reported .
Collateral killings only serve as recruiting propaganda for terrorists and the enemies of the US; so sending our troops overseas should be avoided at all costs
(22) Greatly expanding the veterans budget will help reduce the backlog of 600000 claims and also make politicians realize the enormous cost of war and the resulting hundreds of thousands of veterans who need help with post-traumatic disorders and being maimed for life and having to take care of veterans throughout their lives so they do not end up homeless or committing suicide.
As of 2007, its estimated that it will take about 500 billion to adequately take care of veterans including lifetime treatment for posttraumatic disorders. Expanding the veterans budget will also make politicians think twice about going to war.
(23) CONVINCE ALL THOSE WHO BENEFIT FROM PERPETUAL WAR INCLUDING THINK TANKS AND NATION BUILDING RECONSTRUCTION COMPANIES THAT PEACE BRINGS MORE PROSPERITY AND RAISES THE STANDARD OF LIVING FOR EVERYBODY AND THEY NEED TO CONCENTRATE ON PROJECTS AND BUSINESSES THAT DO NOT ENGAGE IN THE BUSINESS OF PERPETUAL WAR AND THEY SHOULD DIVERSIFY THEIR INTERESTS AND NOT JUST CONCENTRATE ON ALLOWING CONDITIONS TO PREVAIL THAT LEAD TO WAR........ONE GOOD EXAMPLE OF THINK TANKS THAT BENEFIT FROM PERPETUAL WAR COULD BE SEEN IN THE ANSWER THAT 1500 EXPERTS GAVE THE 911 COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS.........ALL 1500 EXPERTS TOLD THE COMMISSION THAT WE CANNOT DO ANYTHING THAT WOULD CAUSE THE TERRORISTS NOT TO WANT TO ATTACK US
ALSO CONVINCE THE AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL DEFENSE COMPLEX TO CONCENTRATE ON MAKING EQUIPMENT FOR COVERT CIA OPERATIONS AND NOT WASTE TIME AND MONEY ON COSTLY WEAPONS SYSTEMS THAT CAN ONLY BE GEARED TOWARDS A MAJOR WAR
CONVINCE ALL DEFENSE CONTRACTORS THAT WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER AND IF WE HAVE A LONG TERM PEACE, EVERYBODY BENEFITS AND THAT THE WORLD WOULD BE A MUCH MORE PROSPEROUS AND HAPPIER PLACE WITHOUT WAR OR THE THREAT OF WAR.
IF WE CAN REDUCE THE INFLUENCE OF THE INDUSTRIAL DEFENSE COMPLEX LOBBY , THE NATION BUILDING RECONSTRUCTION COMPANIES AND ALL THOSE WHO BENEFIT FROM PERPETUAL WAR AND THEIR LOBBYISTS IN CONGRESS, WE WILL GO A LONG WAY TO AVERTING ALL OUT WAR
(24) We should concentrate on making sure that terrorists do not get a hold of radiological material in order to make a dirty bomb. The CIA has prevented transit of nuclear material from the former Soviet republics and from Pakistan. We should make sure that all fissile material and nuclear material be secured instead of spending our precious time in going to war.
(25) Before implementing point 25, the US should adopt the foreign policy of Switzerland which showed its expertise in making peace and was not invaded by Germany in World War Two and even has an embassy in Iran today.
A neutral US would benefit everybody and make possible the role of the US as a true peacemaker and an honest broker in making peace between enemies and allow for the free access of US goods and services throughout the world including enemy states which in turn will improve the living standards of all Americans in the long run.
Following the model of Switzerland, the US government, instead of spending $500 on unnecessary defense, the US government should spend between 50 and 100 billion on equipping and training state militias along the lines of Switzerland to concetrate on true defense and not be able to employ our troops overseas because overseas deployment actually creates too much collateral damage since the military is geared mostly for war.
(26) While the defense/industrial/security complex enjoys the profits that come from war, the larger economy suffers as resources are directed towards the military/industrial/security complex ;
so the US government should redirect wasteful defense dollars to areas of research in various sectors that will lead to cheaper gas, more sophisticated technology that is demanded world wide, medical breakthroughs in curing cancer and other deadly diseases, safer and cleaner air, water, food etc
The US should give financial incentives to US corporations to develop and create jobs in all areas of the world that are prone to being influenced by terrorists or potential dictators
(27) Not a single sanction against any country because sanctions only hurt the people but not the regime. This includes embargoes, boycotts of goods and services.
Example : The Olympics in China should not be boycotted but particpants can wear tibetan arm bands showing solidarity with the Tibetan people
(28) In the long run, just like we have banned the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the major powers should agree to ban all weapons of all kinds, from missiles to bombs. from tanks to fighter planes, from every country on earth.
All dual use facilities that can be used to produce weapons will be internationalized and secured by the US/UN armed police. Only the US/UN armed police will have more firepower than the regular police in each country.
The US ,in March 2007, warned China not to produce an offensive capability but the US has to go one step further in abolishing all weapons and weapons systems on the face of the earth including all US weapons and weapons systems.
A FEW EXAMPLES OF THE NUMEROUS BENEFITS OF PEACE INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
(a) Not living in fear anymore is a great
dividend that peace will bring. Not having to
look over our shoulders every time we visit the
Middle East or any area where terrorists are
known to operate in (which is basically now
everywhere including Europe ). Not living in
fear anymore would result in a happier and
healthier life for everybody including little
children who have been always traumatized for
life due to constant conflict or war. During
the bombing of Baghdad, the shock and awe
resulted in children having to be medicated due
to the trauma of constant bombings.
(b) Better lasting and expanded roads, bridges (a research report in 2007 stated that one in four bridges are structurally deficient)
tunnels and utility infrastructure that does
not break down easily, greatly eases traffic
congestion ( no more frustration in waiting in
stop and go traffic ) and far fewer
electricity blackouts
(no spoiled food in the refrigerator because of
a electricity black out)
(c) Better health care for everybody
(d) Lower taxes
(e) Better distribution of wealth which raises the standard of living for everybody
(f) Cheaper gas and utility bills
(g) greater funding at the local level so that police do not have to be overzealous in giving out traffic tickets for minor infractions to supplement the local budget
(h) Healthier environment because of greater research dollars resulting in breakthroughs in the areas of pollution control of the air, water and environment we live in
(i) the more spent on medical research might result in greater breakthroughs in medicine. An example in breakthroughs can be seen in the Christopher Reeves Foundation for spinal cord injuries. BECAUSE OF EXTRA FUNDING FROM THE REEVES FAMILY IN THE AREA OF SPINAL CORD INJURIES, MANY PARALYZED PEOPLE ARE BEGINNING TO ACTUALLY WALK. BY DIVERTING VALUABLE RESOURCES FROM DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS TO MEDICINE, WE CAN HOPE TO SEE MANY MORE BREAKTHROUGHS and happier lives.
(j) the more money spent on technological research will result in products that could raise the standards of living of everybody
(k) the more money spent on Internet and computer technology would result in a greater number of people benefiting from breakthroughs that result in a much faster and efficient Internet and much faster speeds in downloading, viewing pages and far fewer crashes and congestion problems on the Internet
(L) THE WORLD WOULD TRULY BE ASTOUNDED THAT WE
ARE WILLING TO BE TRULY ANTI-WAR AND A PEACE
LOVING EMPIRE WHICH NO EMPIRE IN HISTORY HAS
EVER DONE..........THE ADMIRATION FOR THE US
WOULD INCREASE TREMENDOUSLY AROUND THE WORLD IF
WE HAVE THE SKILLS TO KEEP THE PEACE WITHOUT
WAR AND DO EVERYTHING WITHIN OUR POWER TO
PREVENT THE ABORTION OF OUR BABIES........SO
MANKIND CAN TRULY ACCOMPLISH THINGS THAT NO
PREVIOUS GENERATION COULD ACCOMPLISH IN EVERY
AREA OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
(m) Our soldiers would thank us if we have the
skills to maintain the peace without war
because its cruel sending our soldiers
deliberately into harm's way because war brings
post traumatic disorders to numerous soldiers
who end up addicted to drugs or dying from
suicide or suicide by cop or divorced or having
sweat drenched nightmares or being depressed or
becoming homeless. One-third of homeless people
are veterans of previous wars including the
gulf war
(n) War corrupts even the best of people. war can bring out the worst in even good people. Good US soldiers have been known to torture and rape innocent girls in war zones and if we want to keep bringing out the best in our soldiers, we need to prevent war
(o) World wide peace will result in good will
towards America and an increase in American
goods and services being consumed by those who
are thankful to America for bringing peace to
the world without war.
(p) The more people who are saved due to peace
throughout the world, the greater the number of
people who need goods and services and this
will benefit American companies in selling
their goods and services to the third world
IN CLOSING :
Even though the rich and powerful are clamoring
and persuading their politician friends to
eventually spend trillions of dollars like they
spent wastefully on the cold war in order to
enrich their political supporters who are
owners of the defense/industrial/security
complex, but the wasteful spending cannot
adequately protect every railroad, power
station, power grid, nuclear reactor, cargo
container, school, university, mall, bridge,
tunnel ,dam , air plane , ship , multi-storey
building, theme park or a location where
thousands of people gather..
On 4/16/07 at Virginia Tech University, 32 people died
from gun shot wounds suffered at the hands of one
gun man. Can we protect the thousands of colleges in
the US if terrorists targeted US colleges ?
......IN ORDER TO ADEQUATELY PROTECT ALL THE
ABOVE....WE NEED TO IMPLEMENT THE 28 POINT PLAN
AND IN SO DOING, WE CAN RELEASE VALUABLE
RESOURCES TO PROJECTS THAT WILL TRULY BENEFIT A
MUCH LARGER SEGMENT OF THE POPULATION THAN WHAT
IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW..
During World War One on christmas day,
the "evil" german soldiers
came out of their trenches risking their lives
and defying orders in order shake hands with
the "enemy" the british soldiers who could have
easily shot them out of fear, but both sides
emerged from their trenches to shake hands
during christmas day
the "evil" german soldiers had hands just as
warm and just as much made of flesh and blood
hands that used to hold their children close
not evil hands but hands reaching out in friendship
.....it goes to show that if only we can for one
moment think about situations from the "enemies"
point of view we will be able to see them also as human beings with
the same aspirations and goals that we have
but the rich and powerful on both sides will never let this happen
because they know that war will bring about the spoils of war and
allowing the soldiers to see that their enemy is not evil but
actually just as human as they are and probably the enemy
soldiers were in the war due to being forced to fight or due to the
stockholm syndrome that developed a connection to the dictatorship
due to propaganda and brainwashing techniques that even the US
military uses on recruits and so one can see why the rich and
powerful on either side do not want their soldiers to think of the
other side as human.
the rich and powerful will never let this happen because the rich
and powerful who own the defense/industrial/security complex know
that through war can they keep getting richer and more powerful.
Every time you see a child weeping and crying
uncontrollably and visibly traumatized by war or
terrorism because of either her parents being
killed or maimed and deformed for life due to a
bomb, your heart goes out to that child and all
the thousands of children affected by war and
If the chicken hawks, before sending our
soldiers deliberately into harm's way, would
just look into the eyes of the children of the
country they were going to bomb and think of
those children as one of their own children,
they just might reverse their position and do
everything within their power to prevent war.
IF YOU KNEW THAT YOUR ACTIONS WOULD GUARANTEE
THE DEATH OF AT LEAST ONE INNOCENT CHILD,
WOULD YOU CONTINUE WITH YOUR ACTIONS OR WOULD
YOU DO EVERYTHING WITHIN YOUR POWER TO LOOK FOR
ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS ?
WAR GUARANTEES THE DEATH OF JUST NOT ONE
INNOCENT CHILD BUT THOUSANDS AND EVEN TENS OF
THOUSANDS OR MORE INNOCENT CHILDREN AND BABIES.
WAR IS NOT THE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM.....
.........WAR IS THE PROBLEM.
A voluble lunatic, forsooth.
Hugh,
Here is a video of Jews and Muslims praying together
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVEt-hOQytQ&feature=related
"The majority of pacifists either belong to obscure religious sects or are simply humanitarians who object to taking life and prefer not to follow their thoughts beyond that point. But there is a minority of intellectual pacifists, whose real though unacknowledged motive appears to be hatred of western democracy and admiration for totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other, but if one looks closely at the writings of the younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against Britain and the United States..."
-- George Orwell, Notes on Nationalism, 1945
Pretty much sums up 45ch. Can't help but note that Orwell said more in one paragraph than 45ch has said in his countless runnings on.
Hesperado,
Protecting you and your family from terrorists is easy if only the US govt will implement the following :
(1) Co-opt all muslim leaders and have them on the CIA payroll
(2) Use the US rendition program to go after truly dangerous individuals and the next "hitler"
(3) Drastically change the US govt's foreign policy to approximate that of Switzerland's foreign policy where no terrorist attacks take place
(4) Push for reforms in the muslim world to approximate the numerous muslim countries that do not have sharia as the law
(5) Implement the 28 point peace plan :
http://www.bernardgoldberg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=30488&p=83949#p83949
The fact is that American Presidents, including President Reagan, have been informed by the CIA that Saudi Arabia is not dangerous to world peace and that is why the US govt has ties to Saudi Arabia and numerous other muslim countries that are not a danger to world peace.
I can assure you, you are more in danger from your fellow citizens than any muslim terrorist
And you are more in danger from everyday household items or foods that you eat that can have deadly consequences either in the short term or long term.
And you are more in danger of getting cancer because cancer is the result of hate that consumes the soul.
So you would be better off concentrating on the true dangers to your health and safety and not "cooked up dangers from Islam" that only benefit the profit agenda of the bloated, greedy, corrupt military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex where here in the US the complex is looting the US govt of 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar amounting to over a trillion dollars a year
Hesperado,
Nobody is against Britain or the US. Not even the terrorists are against Britain or the US because the British and Americans are a great and generous people.
What all pacifists are against is the corrupt policies of all govts, including the US govt which supports the greedy, corrupt, wasteful, bloated military/industrial pork laden, corporate welfare entitlement complex.
The military/industrial complex would rather make money through the corporate welfare system without war,
but war is too much of a temptation and too lucrative for war profits to be abandoned completely, so the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex thrive on conflict and its in their interest to keep the conflict going and that is why you will find instigation policies of the US and Israeli govts in keeping the terrorists agitated enough so that they will keep causing problems and in turn the fear that is generated among the public due to terrorism will enable politicians to keep expanding the "defense" budget because a fearful public will not question the ever expanding "defense" budget and in turn the ever expanding "defense" budget keeps the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex happy and pave the way for support and re-elections of the military/industrial complex's puppet politicians.
And the people who pay the price for all the instigated conflicts are the poor, the sick, the handicapped, the children and the babies, while the so-called adults send our young and beloved soldiers to their deaths, all in the name of honor, duty and patriotism while the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex "laugh all the way to the bank ".
Wellington,
As I have been blessed by God and I am prosperous, you too can be blessed by God if you become a peacemaker
Peacemaking is all well and good but trying to make peace with those who have a contempt for you and are barbaric is a fool's errand. Should Churchill have sought a peace with Hitler? Why should Israel seek peace with those who have publicly, and in crystal clear terms, said that they want no Israel at all? Sometimes you have to fight. One knows this or should know it. Seeking a peace with those who wish to eradicate you or subordinate you is a fool's errand and profoundly dangerous. The New Hampshire motto, Live Free or Die, is a great and instructive one and, as Thomas Jefferson observed, freedomm isn't free. By this the Sage from Monticello meant that blood must occasionally be spilled in order to preserve freedomn. This is a sad reality but a true one. One can loathe war, as most generals have (Lee and Grant are two good examples here) but still know that sometimes war must be waged.
I will end on a positive note and that is that no two democracies, real and complete democracies, have gone to war with one another over the past hundred years. In every single conflict over the past century at least one of the two sides was not democratic in political composition. Wnat to end war? I think our best shot is to spread democracy, which you will never do by appeasing dictatorial types. Democracies have an overwhelming tendency to work out their differences without resorting to arms. There's no guarantee here but it's the best shot mankind has at ending war. Meanwhile, the free must remain vigilant against the non-free and be prepared to fight if necessary. To do less is to insure serdom, which is a fate worse than death itself for all those who possess self-worth and dignity.
I don't think 45ch is a blind pacifist.
All sorts of little things about his/ her/ its postings - from when it first appeared on this site, calling itself 'loveverybody' - have convinced *me* that it is, rather, a Mohammedan *pretending* to be a suicidal western christian pacifist and presenting by rote the sorts of arguments it thinks such a person would use.
You could very well be correct, dda. But, either way, 45ch is a very foolish human being, although, of course, 45ch doesn't think so. Very rare that fools realize they are fools.
Wellington, you stated :
Peacemaking is all well and good but trying to make peace with those who have a contempt for you and are barbaric is a fool's errand.
Comment :
Trying to make peace ?
Do you know of any instance where the US govt had tried to make a comprehensive peace with its enemies, unless that enemy is beating the US govt on the battlefield ?
What is your definition of barbaric ? Was the US govt barbaric in its treatment of native Americans and blacks ?
Was the US govt barbaric in its conquests of Native American nations and other territorial conquests ?
Wellington, you stated :
Should Churchill have sought a peace with Hitler?
Comment :
Britain should not have declared war with Hitler in the first place, knowing that Hitler warned if war is declared that he will blame the Jews for the declaration of war and the adverse consequence was the holocaust because before war was declared by Britain, Hitler allowed Jews to leave Germany but not after war was declared on Germany.
Wellington, you stated :
Why should Israel seek peace with those who have publicly, and in crystal clear terms, said that they want no Israel at all?
Comment :
Same reason why the US govt has made peace with China and North Vietnam, even though China does not want Taiwan to exist independently and North Vietnam does not want South Vietnam to exist independently.
Hamas is more than willing to allow Jews to live in Israel, as long as the Jews live under the jurisdiction of Hamas, just as China is more than willing for Taiwanese to live in Taiwan, as long as the Taiwanese live under the jurisdiction of 'China and the North Vietnamese are more than willing for the South Vietnamese to live in South Vietnam, as long as the South Vietnamese live under the jurisdiction of North Vietnam.
What the Israeli govt should do is accept the 10 year truce from Hamas and then work out a long lasting peace with the political wing of Hamas and the Palestinian people who right now are living in such harsh conditions that palestinian children are malnourished and stunted in their growth since the Israeli govt does not allow enough food into Gaza.
Here is news from an israeli newspaper regarding the humanitarian crisis in Gaza :
Gaza faces a humanitarian “catastrophe” if Israel continues to prevent aid reaching the territory by blocking crossing points, the head of the main UN aid agency for the Palestinians said on Friday… Israel had restricted goods into Gaza despite the truce, which calls on militants to halt rocket attacks in return for Israel easing its embargo on the territory… Israel also held up deliveries of European Union-funded fuel for the power plant, which generates about a third of the electricity consumed by Gazans… Ailments associated with insufficient food were surfacing among the impoverished coastal strip’s 1.5 million population, including growing malnutrition.
–Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 21, 2008
International aid agencies, including the International Committee of the Red Cross, have said virtually no medical supplies were reaching Gaza.
–Haaretz Israel News, Nov. 9, 2008
Wellington, you stated :
Sometimes you have to fight. One knows this or should know it. Seeking a peace with those who wish to eradicate you or subordinate you is a fool's errand and profoundly dangerous.
Comment :
I do not know of any war the US govt has been in, where fighting was essential.
I do not know of anybody who wants to conquer the US and subjugate us. Its good propaganda for the profit agenda of the military/industrial complex but that is all it is, propaganda in which over a trillion dollars or 68 cents of every tax dollar is being looted every year from hard working Americans
because fear mongering from politicians regarding the "enemy" makes the American people not question the yearly trillion dollar looting of the treasury which will eventually result in essential services being cut ( medical research, health, oversight, medicare, pollution controls etc ) or taxes being raised to very high levels.
Right now $250 billion is being spent every year, just on paying off the interest on the debt incurred from past unnecessary wars and unnecessary "defense" projects and this cannot be sustained as the US govt keeps making or instigating wars and keeps spending money on unnecessary "defense" projects like the missile shield in Eastern Europe.
Wellington, you stated :
The New Hampshire motto, Live Free or Die, is a great and instructive one and, as Thomas Jefferson observed, freedomm isn't free. By this the Sage from Monticello meant that blood must occasionally be spilled in order to preserve freedomn.
Comment :
live free or die ? isnt that what the jihadists are doing in countries occupied by foreign troops ?
Was Thomas Jefferson saying that blood must be spilled against an occupying force , analogous to Jihadists spilling blood in countries occupied by foreign troops ?
Jihad and terrorism are two different things.
Jihad is analogous to what most people in America were involved in during the revolutionary war and out of that "jihad " majority , a tiny minority of Americans committed terrorism against the American and British loyalists, just as a tiny minority of Afghans and Iraqis are committing terrorism against the occupying forces and fellow loyalists who are loyal to the occupying forces.
Wellington, you stated :
This is a sad reality but a true one. One can loathe war, as most generals have (Lee and Grant are two good examples here) but still know that sometimes war must be waged.
Comment :
The US govt has never been involved in a necessary war.
The revolutionary war could have been avoided if the founding fathers were as patient as Canada and today, Canada is just a prosperous as the US and the Canadian dollar is about the value of the US dollar, meaning, goods and services from Canada are just in demand compared to goods and services from the US.
Wellington, you stated :
I will end on a positive note and that is that no two democracies, real and complete democracies, have gone to war with one another over the past hundred years.
Comment :
Almost all countries have some form of democracy.
Even when the US had slavery as in institution, democracy in the US was confined to white, land owning males.
Muslim countries like Malaysia achieved more democratic reforms in the first fifty years after independence than a similar period after the US achieved its independence when slavery was still an institution, fifty years after independence in the US.
Democratic countries like the US do not go to war with other democracies but at the same time, the US govt engages in very undemocratic actions like extra-judicial assassinations and wars outside its borders while militarily supporting cruel dictators
Wellington, you stated :
In every single conflict over the past century at least one of the two sides was not democratic in political composition.
Comment :
That is because all countries do not mature on the same time line, even though muslim countries like Malaysia progressed much faster than the US during the first fifty years after independence.
Given enough time, all countries will eventually be democracies but the US govt is not interested in furthering democracy when it supports cruel dictators and instigates non-democratic countries into war during which time, the march of democracy gets postponed due to war.
Wellington, you stated :
Wnat to end war? I think our best shot is to spread democracy, which you will never do by appeasing dictatorial types. Democracies have an overwhelming tendency to work out their differences without resorting to arms. There's no guarantee here but it's the best shot mankind has at ending war.
Comment :
Spreading democracy is good, but as I said before, the US govt is not interested in furthering democracy when it supports cruel dictators and instigates non-democratic countries into war during which time, the march of democracy gets postponed due to war.
A good example of the US govt not being interested in democracy is when the US govt stationed troops in Saudi Arabia against the wishes of the religious leadership in Saudi Arabia which in turn sparked action from a radical group like Al-Qaeda.
If Americans rebelled against British taxation is it surprising that Al-Qaeda would take action against the US govt, especially after the US govt had shed the blood of the innocent in direct or proxy wars, ever since the US govt was involved in the middle east since the 50s ?
Wellington, you stated :
Meanwhile, the free must remain vigilant against the non-free and be prepared to fight if necessary. To do less is to insure serdom, which is a fate worse than death itself for all those who possess self-worth and dignity.
Comment :
Buying into the propaganda of fear mongering politicians is not only a very very expensive proposition as over a trillion dollars a year of hard earned tax payers money is being looted from the US treasury but its not keeping us safe either as the trillion dollars defenses were not able to stop 19 hijackers with box cutters working on a half million dollar budget on 9/11/01.
A FEW EXAMPLES OF THE NUMEROUS BENEFITS OF PEACE INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:
(a) Not living in fear anymore is a great
dividend that peace will bring. Not having to
look over our shoulders every time we visit the
Middle East or any area where terrorists are
known to operate in (which is basically now
everywhere including Europe ). Not living in
fear anymore would result in a happier and
healthier life for everybody including little
children who have been always traumatized for
life due to constant conflict or war. During
the bombing of Baghdad, the shock and awe
resulted in children having to be medicated due
to the trauma of constant bombings.
(b) Better lasting and expanded roads, bridges (a research report in 2007 stated that one in four bridges are structurally deficient)
tunnels and utility infrastructure that does
not break down easily, greatly eases traffic
congestion ( no more frustration in waiting in
stop and go traffic ) and far fewer
electricity blackouts
(no spoiled food in the refrigerator because of
a electricity black out)
(c) Better health care for everybody
(d) Lower taxes
(e) Better distribution of wealth which raises the standard of living for everybody
(f) Cheaper gas and utility bills
(g) greater funding at the local level so that police do not have to be overzealous in giving out traffic tickets for minor infractions to supplement the local budget
(h) Healthier environment because of greater research dollars resulting in breakthroughs in the areas of pollution control of the air, water and environment we live in
(i) the more spent on medical research might result in greater breakthroughs in medicine. An example in breakthroughs can be seen in the Christopher Reeves Foundation for spinal cord injuries. BECAUSE OF EXTRA FUNDING FROM THE REEVES FAMILY IN THE AREA OF SPINAL CORD INJURIES, MANY PARALYZED PEOPLE ARE BEGINNING TO ACTUALLY WALK. BY DIVERTING VALUABLE RESOURCES FROM DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS TO MEDICINE, WE CAN HOPE TO SEE MANY MORE BREAKTHROUGHS and happier lives.
(j) the more money spent on technological research will result in products that could raise the standards of living of everybody
(k) the more money spent on Internet and computer technology would result in a greater number of people benefiting from breakthroughs that result in a much faster and efficient Internet and much faster speeds in downloading, viewing pages and far fewer crashes and congestion problems on the Internet
(L) THE WORLD WOULD TRULY BE ASTOUNDED THAT WE
ARE WILLING TO BE TRULY ANTI-WAR AND A PEACE
LOVING EMPIRE WHICH NO EMPIRE IN HISTORY HAS
EVER DONE..........THE ADMIRATION FOR THE US
WOULD INCREASE TREMENDOUSLY AROUND THE WORLD IF
WE HAVE THE SKILLS TO KEEP THE PEACE WITHOUT
WAR AND DO EVERYTHING WITHIN OUR POWER TO
PREVENT THE ABORTION OF OUR BABIES........SO
MANKIND CAN TRULY ACCOMPLISH THINGS THAT NO
PREVIOUS GENERATION COULD ACCOMPLISH IN EVERY
AREA OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
(m) Our soldiers would thank us if we have the
skills to maintain the peace without war
because its cruel sending our soldiers
deliberately into harm's way because war brings
post traumatic disorders to numerous soldiers
who end up addicted to drugs or dying from
suicide or suicide by cop or divorced or having
sweat drenched nightmares or being depressed or
becoming homeless. One-third of homeless people
are veterans of previous wars including the
gulf war
(n) War corrupts even the best of people. war can bring out the worst in even good people. Good US soldiers have been known to torture and rape innocent girls in war zones and if we want to keep bringing out the best in our soldiers, we need to prevent war
(o) World wide peace will result in good will
towards America and an increase in American
goods and services being consumed by those who
are thankful to America for bringing peace to
the world without war.
(p) The more people who are saved due to peace
throughout the world, the greater the number of
people who need goods and services and this
will benefit American companies in selling
their goods and services to the third world
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
a Mohammedan *pretending* to be a suicidal western christian pacifist and presenting by rote the sorts of arguments it thinks such a person would use.
Comment :
Was Jesus being a suicidal pacifist when He told the Jews not to defend Jerusalem but to flee Jerusalem when the terrorist Romans were going to destroy Jerusalem in AD 70 ?
Memo to any new non-Muslim visitor who may have actually read all the way down through this thread: I advise you, right now, to jump back up to the top of the thread, and re-read, a couple of times, nice and slowly, Mr Fitzgerald's article.
That is what *I* do whenever a Mohammedan troll - which is what 45ch is - pops up on a comments thread, frantically throwing sand. I go and re-read the posted article or news item, on the principle that it must contain something the Mohammedans really, really don't want us to think about.
In the meantime, I'll repeat, here, two of the most salient portions of that article by Mr Hugh Fitzgerald.
Read them, learn them off by heart, and think about them.
"He [Obama] does not know how to explain to himself, much less to the American public, that Islam is not "tolerant" and "peaceful" and that the worldwide Jihad (the sum of all the local Jihads), is a threat that, at present, has as its most important theatre of war not Iraq, not Afghanistan, not Pakistan, but rather the countries of Western Europe - and that the instruments of Jihad that are most dangerous, in those countries, are the Money Weapon, campaigns of Da'wa, and demographic conquest.
'And instead of sending troops to quixotically "defend" one set of (hopelessly hostile) Muslims against another (even more hopelessly hostile) Muslims, we should withdraw, as an intelligent sheriff would refuse to enter a saloon where two outlaws, who are dead set on killing him but also dead set on killing each other, are circling one another, just about to draw their guns from their holsters."
And:
"In Western Europe, people are fed up with what their political and media elites have done, in allowing so many Muslims into their countries.
"The large-scale presence of such Muslims has led to a situation now widely recognized as one that is far more unpleasant, expensive (the increased costs for monitoring large Muslim populations), and physically dangerous, both for the indigenous non-Muslims and for other, but non-Muslim, immigrants.
"The Americans must make common cause with, and encourage, and do nothing to discourage, those who have come to understand, at long last, what the ideology of Islam is all about, and why it makes little sense to hope that more than a few Muslims can truly be integrated into societies where Infidel laws and customs prevail. For all of these laws and customs are flatly contradicted by the letter and spirit of the Shari'a."
DDA,
The sum of local jihads does not equate to a world wide jihad, just as the sum of all local separatist movements ( like the American revolution ) did not equate to a world wide revolution.
Local jihads have different agendas and goals and all muslims do not think alike and that is why you have 57 different muslim countries, because muslims have always been disunited even from the very beginning of the islamic empire which started breaking up, soon after it was formed
Whether the local jihads are part of an organised global jihad or not, the combined effect of them will, ipso facto, amount to the same thing, unless we can prevent it.
Unlike revolutions, and notwithstanding sectarian squabbles, all such local jihads share in common the same beliefs regarding Jew and infidel-hatred, ownership of women, death for apostasy, etc., as written in the Islamic source documents: Koran, Hadith and Sira.
Stephen,
What are you trying to prevent ?
The reason the US govt has diplomatic relations with almost all non-sharia and sharia states is because the CIA has clearly indicated to all our Presidents, including President Reagan, that Saudi Arabia and almost all other muslim countries are not dangerous to world peace and the US can have military and diplomatic relations with them,
so what are you actually preventing ? when the US govt is deep in its relationship with Saudi Arabia ?
45,
That should be obvious. What we, at this site are trying to prevent is the Islamification of the West.
As students of the history of Islam, we know how Islam has spread around the world like a virus; sometime lying dormant, another time spreading when granted an opportunity. We have seen how over 1400 years the pattern has repeated many times until now; from 1 city at first to 57 countries now. With immigration of Muslims to Europe and America now at the fastest ever rate the threat to our civilisation is real.
The threat from Saudi Arabia is not one of direct military attack but of insidious influence; funding Islamic schools, mosques, University endowments; publishing Islamic literature; training Wahhabi Imams and so on.
The challenge we face is to roll back this pernicious Islamic tide, wake up more people in the West and the rest of the non-Islamic world to the need to defend our own cultures from the invasive and supremacist Islam; to forget political correctness and multiculturalism and see that Islam stays confined to the Islamic lands.
45ch revealed a fundamental incoherency:
He thinks the US government and the CIA are evil and have caused all the problems in the Muslim world including the pathology of terrorism against us which according to him must be seen as a reasonable reaction against our evil interference in the Muslim world, and yet now in his last post to StephenA55, 45ch wants to rely upon the US government over the past 50 years along with its CIA in its assessment of the harmlessness of Saudi Arabia.
To render this mess coherent, 45ch would have to conclude that precisely because the CIA and the US government have deemed Saudi Arabia a geopolitical partner, this proves that Saudi Arabia must be evil too and part of the problem, not part of the solution -- because the CIA and the US government are evil, and anything they do and approve of must be evil too.
But 45ch's need to absolve Muslims of any wrongdoing is so powerful, he would rather turn around and bestow upon the CIA and the US government the merit of being an authentic appraiser of Muslims, rather than contemplate the opposite.
For, it works both ways:
1) if the US government and its CIA are evil, then the partners it supports, such as Saudi Arabia, must be evil too;
or:
2) if Saudi Arabia and Muslim countries in general are good, then if the US government and its CIA approve of them and partner with them, then the latter must be good too.
But #2 cannot be 45ch's coherent position, since he is already on record asserting that the US government and its CIA are evil and always have been evil. And he cannot adopt #1 as his position, since he cannot admit that any Muslim polity is evil.
We are thus faced with an insoluble incoherency in 45ch's presentation. It can only be explained in one of two ways:
1) he has an incoherent mind, which manages psychologically to hold together such incoherencies through the underlying viscous glue of his strange hatred for and alienation from the West
or:
2) the incoherencies merely reflect the madness of his method whose main purpose, as DDA has articulated more than once, is the Muslim purpose to try to obfuscate any criticisms of Islam -- in 45ch's particular style, through a tactic of massive and complex dissembling which perforce will require him to assert incoherent and contradictory things, since the entity he is defending is at bottom indefensible and the civilization he is attacking as evil is at bottom good. Not only is 45ch engaged in trying to obfuscate the criticisms of Islam, but also, in a kind of lunatic quasi-Quixotic, Baudrillardesque way, he is trying -- through his own presentation -- to obfuscate the holes, incoherencies, contradictions and flaws in his own presentation.
StephenA55, you stated :
45,
That should be obvious. What we, at this site are trying to prevent is the Islamification of the West.
Comment :
Are you talking about sharia in the west ?
What about the Sharia courts in the UK ?
What about the jewish courts in the UK ?
StephenA55, you stated :
As students of the history of Islam, we know how Islam has spread around the world like a virus; sometime lying dormant, another time spreading when granted an opportunity.
Comment :
Like a virus ? are you saying islam is more powerful than christianity or judaism ?
StephenA55, you stated :
We have seen how over 1400 years the pattern has repeated many times until now; from 1 city at first to 57 countries now.
Comment :
Since there are 57 muslim countries, are you saying muslims are disunited and that is why they have 57 different countries ?
So how can Islam have a hold on muslims when they are so disunited ?
StephenA55, you stated :
With immigration of Muslims to Europe and America now at the fastest ever rate the threat to our civilisation is real.
Comment :
Immigration to the US is important because muslims contribute to the advancement of this country and that is why muslims earn much more than the average American.
The richest man in India is a muslim and so muslims are an important part of any economy.
StephenA55, you stated :
The threat from Saudi Arabia is not one of direct military attack but of insidious influence; funding Islamic schools, mosques, University endowments; publishing Islamic literature; training Wahhabi Imams and so on.
Comment :
Insidious influence ? the richest Saudis own parts of American companies and so it is in their interests that Americans prosper, so they can prosper.
As for religious zealots, they are not a threat, as long as they do not get involved with Al-Qaeda or its affiliates.
As for funding the spread of Islam, where is the threat in that when eventually all countries do reform eventually as seen in the US finally abolishing slavery and Jim Crow Laws.
StephenA55, you stated :
The challenge we face is to roll back this pernicious Islamic tide, wake up more people in the West and the rest of the non-Islamic world to the need to defend our own cultures from the invasive and supremacist Islam; to forget political correctness and multiculturalism and
Comment :
Roll back this pernicious islamic tide ? You make it sound like Islam is able to override the free will of muslims.
Islam is not more powerful than either christianity or judaism and since christianity and judaism are not able to override the free will of adherents, Islam is also not able to override the free will of muslims and just like Christians are not able to follow the pacifism of Christ and Jews are not able to follow the genocidal commands in Deut 20:16, likewise, muslims are not able to follow the jihad commands in the Koran unless those muslims find their countries occupied by foreign armies, in which case, just as the American revolutionaries, muslims join in the fight to oust the foreign armies.
StephenA55, you stated :
see that Islam stays confined to the Islamic lands.
Comment :
There are already millions of muslims in Europe and America.
Democracies are not going to do anything regarding muslim immigration, so you need to come up with more practical and pragmatic solutions to problems that you see.
Instead of complaining about a tiny minority of muslims who will never pose a threat to western civilization, how about discussing the real threats to our security
Here is a partial list :
(1) American foreign policy
(2) poisons in everyday household items that can produce cancer
(3) Govt corruption in spending 68 cents of every tax dollar on the bloated, greedy, wasteful military/industrial pork laden, corporate welfare entitlement complex
(4) gang violence
(5) gun violence
(6) only 2% of imported food being inspected right now
(7) dangerous bridges
(8) Millions of consumers are being made ill, hundreds of thousands hospitalized and thousands are dying each year from preventable food borne illnesses," according to The Center for Science in the Public Interest. "Unfortunately, the FDA is saddled with outdated laws, and lacks the authority, tools and resources to fight unsafe food."
I can assure you, you are more in danger from your fellow citizens than any muslim terrorist
And you are more in danger from everyday household items or foods that you eat that can have deadly consequences either in the short term or long term.
And you are more in danger of getting cancer because cancer is the result of hate that consumes the soul.
So you would be better off concentrating on the true dangers to your health and safety and not "cooked up dangers from Islam" that only benefit the profit agenda of the bloated, greedy, corrupt military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex where here in the US the complex is looting the US govt of 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar amounting to over a trillion dollars a year
I am prosperous in my life because I have been blessed by God in being a peacemaker.
So be a peacemaker, and you will be blessed and no terrible thing will befall you because hate is like a cancer that can consume your soul and that is one reason people get cancer because their hate consumes them and they are vulnerable to all kinds of deadly diseases.
Hesperado, you stated :
45ch revealed a fundamental incoherency:
He thinks the US government and the CIA are evil and have caused all the problems in the Muslim world including the pathology of terrorism against us which according to him must be seen as a reasonable reaction against our evil interference in the Muslim world, and yet now in his last post to StephenA55, 45ch wants to rely upon the US government over the past 50 years along with its CIA in its assessment of the harmlessness of Saudi Arabia.
Comment :
The foreign policy of the US govt is wrong and sometimes evil but the CIA is subordinate to the US govt, so they , like soldiers, are not at fault since they are obeying orders.
Yes, US govt policies have basically caused most of the problems in the Middle East because if the Ottoman Empire were never destroyed due to US intervention in WW1, then the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would not exist.
The CIA's threat assessment of Saudi Arabia is correct and has nothing to do with the wrong policies of the US govt in backing the cruel dictatorship in Saudi Arabia.
Yes, Saudi Arabia is not a threat to world peace, but they are a threat to dissidents within Saudi Arabia and the US govt backing Saudi Arabia without conditions is wrong.
Hesperado, you stated :
To render this mess coherent, 45ch would have to conclude that precisely because the CIA and the US government have deemed Saudi Arabia a geopolitical partner, this proves that Saudi Arabia must be evil too and part of the problem, not part of the solution -- because the CIA and the US government are evil, and anything they do and approve of must be evil too.
Comment :
The Saudi Arabian govt is cruel and dangerous to dissidents within Saudi Arabia but Saudi Arabia is not a threat to the US
Hesperado, you stated :
But 45ch's need to absolve Muslims of any wrongdoing is so powerful, he would rather turn around and bestow upon the CIA and the US government the merit of being an authentic appraiser of Muslims, rather than contemplate the opposite.
For, it works both ways:
1) if the US government and its CIA are evil, then the partners it supports, such as Saudi Arabia, must be evil too;
Comment :
Muslims are fine, on the whole, but not muslim govts who are mostly corrupt but not a threat to world peace.
Hesperado, you stated :
or:
2) if Saudi Arabia and Muslim countries in general are good, then if the US government and its CIA approve of them and partner with them, then the latter must be good too.
Comment :
As I said before, almost all govts are corrupt, including muslim govts but the muslim people, just like Americans and Britiish people are a good people.
Hesperado, you stated :
the entity he is defending is at bottom indefensible and the civilization he is attacking as evil is at bottom good.
Comment :
I have never defended Islam but I will always defend muslims because just as Americans and the British, the muslim people are a good people
Here is a letter I wrote to a militant muslim, apologizing for the views of some members in Jihad watch :
Dear Yousef,
If you did happen to go to the website jihadwatch.org and see the hate filled messages, I apologize on behalf of all decent American people.
Those views are not the views of the majority of the American people who are mostly a decent and generous people who are ignorant of what our govt. is doing to them and the people in the muslim world.
There are dissenting voices in Jihadwatch.org from not only me but there are muslims who are allowed to express their views in jihadwatch.org.
Since you do not like clicking on links, I reproduce here a response from a muslim ( Abdullah Mikail ) on jihadwatch.org :
AbdullahMikail | November 12, 2009 11:08 AM | Reply
Beyond the condemnation of our secular US Law, we can even condemn what Nidal did under Sharia.
Read the rules for engagement in a justified legal conflict goverened by Islam and nowhere in them will you find it allowed to attack unarmed soldiers whom you had sworn an oath to protect...furthermore, I note there is a hadith about the keeping of one’s word even with an open and sworn enemy:
Sahih Muslim, Book 019, Number 4411:
"It has been reported on the authority of Hudbaifa b. al-Yaman who said: Nothing prevented me from being present at! he Battle of Badr except this incident. I came out with my father Husail (to participate in the Battle), but we were caught by the disbelievers of Quraish. They said: (Do) you intend to go to Muhammad? We said: We do not intend to go to him, but we wish to go (back) to Medina. So they took from us a covenant in the name of God that we would turn back to Medina and would not fight on the side of Muhammad (may peace be upon him). So, we came to the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) and related the incident to him. He said: Both, of you proceed (to Medina) ; we will fulfil the covenant made with them and seek God's help against them."
So here is a desperate situation, the Battle of Badr, where the Muslims where grossly outnumbered and in need of every fighting man available.
Two Muslims were accosted by the Pagan Quraish and, under coercion, forced to swear they would not fight the Pagan Quraish, their sworn open enemies.
Mohammad ordered those two to keep their oaths and leave the battlefield and not fight the enemy.
How important do you think it is that Major Nidal keep this word, this contract, this oath, that he signed upon the US Army granting his comission?
“I Nidal Hasan having been appointed a (insert rank) in the U.S. Army under the conditions indicated in this document, do accept such appointment and do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter, so help me God.”
What would Mohammad say about Nidal breaking this oath and murdering the people he swore he would protect? To answer my own question, I think Nidal would be in deep shit with our Prophet.
Rest assured, Nidal is in deep shit with our Armed forces, and he will receive whatever justice we can arrive at through the UCMJ.
Peace
Abdullah (end of quote )
Yousef, do you think one day, conservative muslim countries would allow debate, however crude, that is going on in forums like Jihadwatch.org ?
StephenA55 and Hesperado
well said, gentlemen.
Now for a little digression - a Taxonomy of Trolls, bandersnatches, dementors and boggarts, as encountered on jihadwatch.
The Troll Simple = a non-Muslim someone who couldn't care less about either the West *or* Islam, but sees here an opportunity to get attention by pretending to be a Muslim, or pro-Muslim (or any number of other things offtopic -e.g. posing as virulent atheist, to bait the Christians here, etc and so forth) and thus yank people's chains. Such afflict *all* internet forums. They do it purely to annoy, because they know it teases.
An excellent article about such creatures and what to do with them, appeared recently on the ABC:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/11/26/2754284.htm
All trolls might be called bandersnatches, since they waste precious bandwidth.
But a website of this kind will also attract other sorts of people, much more dangerous than the common-or-garden troll.
There are those that I personally dub Dementors or Distractors, both Muslims (sometimes pretending to be non-Muslims; the sneakier kind might even pretend to be members of the Resistance and get away with it for a while) and their janissaries, firmly dedicated to protecting and defending Islam and thus furthering the Jihad, by fair means and foul. Their job - openly avowed by some, as in the case of Abdullah Mikail - is to try to undercut Mr Spencer's truth-telling, to confuse and deceive new non-Muslim posters, to waste time and bandwidth, or sometimes to provoke intemperate comment that might be later produced and used as a weapon in hopes of shutting down this forum altogether. Some - whether Muslim or non-Muslim - may attempt a Tokyo Rose approach, hoping to induce the paralysis of despair.
And there are the Boggarts, openly-declared Muslim supremacist posters, who don't bother presenting arguments, but pop up every now and again, hoping to shock and frighten; we haven't had many lately, but there have been some, along the way, in the past few years, whose postings have been in style and content little different from the sorts of things that fill Mr Spencer's Hate Mail Bag.
DDA,
What is the point of pretending to be anything, especially on the internet ?
Isn't the internet the place where people can voice their true opinions , since anonymity is assured ?
I am sure you are more blunt, honest and truthful on the internet, than you are in real life, so why would it be different for anybody else here ?
Are you saying that christians on the internet are actually muslims and muslims on the internet are actually christians ?
Hi and how are you Dumbledore and Hesperado. Still around?
45, I may be wasting my time here but I will try to clarify my earlier remarks.
It’s hard to argue with a copypaste machine but here goes.
Firstly all those ‘real threats’ like Government spending and food-related diseases are an irrelevant distraction to this thread and should be ignored.
You said:
‘Are you talking about sharia in the west ?
What about the Sharia courts in the UK ?
What about the jewish courts in the UK ?’
I said Islamification is the threat, and that includes Sharia. It includes everything about Islam that comprises enablement of a separate parallel Islamic society. Because every Islamic society contains within it the genetic code for a hostile supremacist movement targeting other communities in the wider society. However harmless it may be at one time, it only requires the switching on of those genes by some Imams preaching the authentic words of Mohammed and his pals. The same way the early conquests were launched, at immense cost to all the non-Muslims concerned.
Just as unwelcome are those cultural traditions that may or may not be solely Islamic: honour killings and FGM. Jewish courts may be allowable if, as I understand it, they do not lead to injustice and oppression of women, (or anyone else) as does Sharia. Otherwise the rule should be one law for all.
You then questioned my virus analogy:
Q: ‘Like a virus ? are you saying islam is more powerful than christianity or judaism ?’
A: No. But it has great spreading ability because it can put on a benign face to sucker in new members and hold on to any potential backsliders with dire threats, thereby ensuring constant growth. On the other hand, Muslim societies tend to be poor and backward, which weakens their ability to dominate . see here: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/05/fitzgerald-where-muslims-prefer-to-live.html It spreads like a virus and the best cure is to be immunized with knowledge and the will to resist it.
Q: ‘Since there are 57 muslim countries, are you saying muslims are disunited and that is why they have 57 different countries ?
So how can Islam have a hold on muslims when they are so disunited ?’
A: This has been answered already. Political and ethnic and other differences exist but the concept of Umma and Dar al Islam versus Dar al Harb also exist.
Q: ‘Immigration to the US is important because muslims contribute to the advancement of this country and that is why muslims earn much more than the average American.’
A: In Britain Pakistani Muslims came originally to work and there were few welfare claimants. Now the immigrants far outnumber the suitable available jobs and unemployment is higher than average in that community. Yet still the Government allows them to keep coming in their thousands every week. The Spectator recently gave a figure of 87% for unemployment amongst Somali Muslims in Britain.
In short, it is time we all woke up to this real threat to Western Civilization.
StephenA55, you stated :
Firstly all those ‘real threats’ like Government spending and food-related diseases are an irrelevant distraction to this thread and should be ignored.
You said:
‘Are you talking about sharia in the west ?
What about the Sharia courts in the UK ?
What about the jewish courts in the UK ?’
I said Islamification is the threat, and that includes Sharia.
Comment :
Irrelevant distraction to this thread ? the irrelevant distractions are more important to your life, your health and your safety than a "islamic threat" from a very tiny minority of muslims who can never take over any country.
Do you feel the Sharia courts in the UK are a threat ? and if so, how are they a threat ?
StephenA55, you stated :
It includes everything about Islam that comprises enablement of a separate parallel Islamic society. Because every Islamic society contains within it the genetic code for a hostile supremacist movement targeting other communities in the wider society.
Comment :
Every islamic society ? How about the numerous muslim countries that do not have Sharia ?
Even in the Sharia states of Malaysia, there is more freedom enjoyed among non-muslims fifty years after independence, compared to slavery still being present in the US, fifty years after its independence, which goes to show that muslim countries like Malaysia have progressed faster than the same time period in America's independence
StephenA55, you stated :
However harmless it may be at one time, it only requires the switching on of those genes by some Imams preaching the authentic words of Mohammed and his pals. The same way the early conquests were launched, at immense cost to all the non-Muslims concerned.
Just as unwelcome are those cultural traditions that may or may not be solely Islamic: honour killings and FGM. Jewish courts may be allowable if, as I understand it, they do not lead to injustice and oppression of women, (or anyone else) as does Sharia. Otherwise the rule should be one law for all.
Comment :
Injustice and oppression of women ? can you give details and how does that compare to the record of abuse that women in this country face at the hands of men ?
You are assuming that Jewish courts in the UK are not unjust to women but Sharia courts in the UK are unjust to women ?
All conquests in the past by both muslim and non-muslim countries, always had a religious component, as "christian" countries used to have crosses on their banners as they went to war.
StephenA55, you stated :
You then questioned my virus analogy:
Q: ‘Like a virus ? are you saying islam is more powerful than christianity or judaism ?’
A: No. But it has great spreading ability because it can put on a benign face to sucker in new members and hold on to any potential backsliders with dire threats, thereby ensuring constant growth.
Comment :
How many backsliders in Islam have had their lives threatened ? Just because a tiny minority of muslims threaten those backsliders does not mean much of anything when even in the Sharia states of Malaysia, non-muslims are free to practice their religion and are not forced into converting to islam
StephenA55, you stated :
On the other hand, Muslim societies tend to be poor and backward, which weakens their ability to dominate . see here: http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/05/fitzgerald-where-muslims-prefer-to-live.html It spreads like a virus and the best cure is to be immunized with knowledge and the will to resist it.
Comment :
You say that muslims societies are not able to dominate ? Even if they have the ability to dominate, there are numerous muslim countries that do not dominate non-muslims, as can be seen in countries like Malaysia.
As i said before, Malaysia has progressed much faster since independence, than the same time period in which the US progressed after independence.
StephenA55, you stated :
Q: ‘Since there are 57 muslim countries, are you saying muslims are disunited and that is why they have 57 different countries ?
So how can Islam have a hold on muslims when they are so disunited ?’
A: This has been answered already. Political and ethnic and other differences exist but the concept of Umma and Dar al Islam versus Dar al Harb also exist.
Comment :
Dar Al Islam versus Dar Al Harb are concepts only practiced by a very tiny number of muslims.
How many muslim governments are at war with non-muslim countries ?
StephenA55, you stated :
Q: ‘Immigration to the US is important because muslims contribute to the advancement of this country and that is why muslims earn much more than the average American.’
A: In Britain Pakistani Muslims came originally to work and there were few welfare claimants. Now the immigrants far outnumber the suitable available jobs and unemployment is higher than average in that community. Yet still the Government allows them to keep coming in their thousands every week. The Spectator recently gave a figure of 87% for unemployment amongst Somali Muslims in Britain.
In short, it is time we all woke up to this real threat to Western Civilization
Comment :
87% unemployment among Somalis does not equal to economic conditions of muslims in the US showing that muslims are not all the same.
How do you explain the fact that the richest man in India is a muslim unless the facts are that not all muslims think alike or behave the same way
From Serge Trifkovic, "The Sword of the Prophet":
“The fruits of attempted escape from the shackles of natural morality are as predictable as they are grim, for the Muslims no less than for their victims:
both are enslaved, brutalized and dehumanized by Islam.
'The all-pervasive lack of freedom is the hallmark of the Muslim world.
'Discrimination against non-coreligionists and women of all creeds,
'racism,
'slavery,
'virulent antisemitism,
'and cultural imperialism
'can be found – individually or in various combinations – in different cultures and eras.
*Islam alone has them all at once, all the time, and divinely sanctioned at that* {my emphasis - dda}.”
'There is no presumed equality of different people’s claim to life, liberty or any pursuit at all in Islam.”
I have seen nothing at all in the myriad accounts, historical and contemporary, and most especially in the testimony of those few who have per miraculum fought themselves free and escaped from the Ummah, or Muslim Mob, from the Empire of Islam, to disprove this statement by Trifkovic.
It is not an insult, nor intended as insult.
It is, quite simply, a statement of fact.
And here is the considered judgement of one Fr L Menezes (who had spent decades patiently working among Muslims in India) on the bitter fruits of Islam as observed by him.
Father J.L. Menezes on Islam:
"The Mahommedan religion on the whole with all its dogmatic and moral principles, and with all its positive and negative laws has been a curse to human society.
'Mahommed pretended to confer by his religion a boon, at least on his own countrymen, by giving them in place of gross idolatry a purer faith, and surer moral habits,
but in this attempt he has miserably failed and has hopelessly fallen into the very sin he so vehemently assailed.
'Mahommedanism has penetrated into barbarous countries and has forced its inhabitants to accept it as their saving religion,
'but in doing so it has not succeeded in elevating man’s condition to a higher level – or at least to a level any higher than that of Arabia in Mohammed’s time.
The Partial and specious reforms which it may have attempted to effect, are vitiated by the fact that they tend to exclude the higher and nobler virtues;
'and as their inner life of families, the whole, the whole tone of society and the intellectual and moral standard of a people depend on the principles of the ruling religion,
'it is hopeless to expect that Islam will ever cease to be what it hitherto proved, the most formidable obstacle to the dawn of a progressive and enlighten civilization.
'How can it be otherwise?
'No permanent house can be built on a foundation of sand;
'what permanent civilization and progress then can be expected from a people professing *a religion founded on fatalism, polygamy and slavery* {my emphasis - dda}?
'Their blind belief in inevitable fate, and their antagonism to liberty of thought and action have rendered reform next to impossible;
and the professors of this religion seem never to realize their obligation and duty towards the people under their rule, of spreading true civilization, good government and the cultivation of the peaceful arts.
'The natural consequence of this ignorance and blindness has been despotism, mal-administration, bigoted persecution and oppression of their co-religionists.
In the countries of the Mahommedan world
'anarchy, rapine, revenge, strife and murder are the order of the day,
'thieving, lying, usury and oppression are looked upon more as virtues than vices;
'unrestrained licentiousness is carried to unimaginable excess.
'Dirt and filth are things that never come seriously before the attention of Mahommedans;
'they seem indeed to prefer living in the most dirty and filthy environment.
'They are generally illiterate and at the same time self-conceited
'and their vainglory in their religion and the nothingness of their own acquirements makes them scorn every other religion;
'the meager education which they generally receive when young, makes them believe that there is not much left for them to learn in the world.
'In short, Mahommedan countries are the chosen homes of
ignorance, bigotry, tyranny and brutal vice,
'and rendezvous for a filthy, unprincipled people, as well as for brigands, felons and freebooters.
'While all other countries not influenced by Islam have made rapid progress in every direction and enjoy the blessings and peace of true civilization,
'Mahommedan countries have remained absolutely opposed to change and reform;
'nay, rapacity and extortion have reduced them to a most deplorable state.
'Such is the boon conferred on human society by the Mahommedan religion, and what a benefactor Mahommed has been to his country!
'Who was pleased to give to his country, nay, to the whole world, a religion which, claiming a divine origin as the final and irrevocable standard of morality,
'has kept its followers sunk in ignorance and barbarism, and has become an insuperable barrier to the regeneration, civilization and progress of the Eastern world.”
[from around page 140 in THE LIFE AND RELIGION OF MOHAMMAD. By J. L. Menezes. Roman Catholic Books, P.O. Box 2286, Fort Collins, Colo. 80522, 1912/ 2005 reprint].
There is nothing in the testimony of an Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Wafa Sultan, or a Nonie Darwish, or a Magdi Cristiano Allam, – or in the testimony of those non-Muslims who in Australia, the UK, France, Denmark, India and elsewhere have endured, with bewilderment and growing anger, the street-by-street Islamoforming of their suburbs and towns, complete with hairtrigger riots, bullying in street and playground, constant vandalism, incredibly vicious gang rapes, kidnappings and torture-murder of the kidnapped non-Muslim [Kriss Donald; Ilan Halimi] -to contradict Fr Menezes' bleak description of what Islam does to those human societies where it prevails.
Those apostates of whom we know today, became what they are not because of Islam but in despite of it; and if there had been no Islam-free zone for them to escape to, they would either have had to conceal their apostasy lifelong, or make their apostasy public and...be killed. As it is, even within the West they still live with the very real possibility that one day the hit-man, the sharia enforcer, will strike them down from out of the shadows.
The maintenance of an Islam-free zone, from which non-Islamic ideas and the plain unvarnished truth can be poured by radio and satellite into dar al Islam, and into which the bona fide apostates, the Defectors, can flee, is an act of love for humanity and for everything that non-Muslim humanity has created, that could never have been created within dar al Islam.
From another thread, a posting that appeared here recently, on what happens when Muslims move into and 'Islamoform' a neighbourhood; in this case, in Britain.
exposesithlords | November 23, 2009 11:38 AM | Reply
well speaking to a central manchesterite I found out the following:
"During eid the place is stopped by intimidatory "moslem" youth driving around making noise with music and car horns
'and generally making lewd sexist remarks to non asian {ie non-Muslim} girls,etc
'all this accomodated by the police who close roads and watch while the locals and hospital suffer until past 3am in the morning.
"women who are not moslem in the longsight area - where the imam recently wrote into the local papaer saying islam is peace - are regularly accosted by moslem yout and indeed married men - and pestered for sex, etc.
"There is nothing done to insist the moslem men have respect for women but lots done to try and make people have respect for Islam.
"some mosques in longsight manchester - aside from bringing the streets to a halt with traffic on friday - broadcast their noise onto the streets.
"The council have told a black church they can't have a service on sunday afternoon as it disturbs the sunday peace for the locals.
:The council have not stopped moslems making a noise at eid, and regularly inconveniencing everyone and broadcasting a noise on friday prayers."
And now for an account, based on first-hand testimony of those non-Muslims on the receiving end, of Islamoforming in suburban Australia.
This is Jihad: the struggle, house by house, street by street, suburb by suburb, to dominate and to domineer over non-Muslims, and to impose and enforce any number of aspects of sharia. It is much, much worse, and has progressed much further, in Western Europe, than it has as yet in Australia; yet in parts of Australia it is already bad enough.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/paul-sheehan/ideals-become-casualties-of-war/2006/08/13/1155407666922.html
A minority causes collateral damage to the way we live, writes Paul Sheehan.
'One of the edges of the global clash between Muslims and the rest is a bottle shop in a small and ratty shopping mall in western Sydney.
'The owner of the bottle shop is suffering low-level but steady harassment from his neighbours, who want him gone. *He's a Christian who has been told repeatedly: "This is a Muslim area," and he is selling alcohol, which is proscribed by Islam* {my emphasis - dda}.
'The one-hour parking zone outside the bottle shop is always occupied because local Muslims leave their cars there all day.
;The owner has written to the local council to complain, and nothing has been done. *He does not want to be identified because he fears retribution* {my emphasis - dda}. His reaction is sensible.
'A friend of mine, Jenny D, used to live in Lakemba. {There is now a very large mosque in Lakemba - dda}.
'She began receiving insults from people in the street, usually Muslim women wearing headscarves, and sometimes Muslim men.
' If she wore a short skirt, she could expect abuse or comment.
'She left Lakemba. {Nota bene - driven away by Muslim bullying, leaving the Muslims in possession of the territory - dda}.
'Soon after, I moved to America, stayed away for 10 years, and thought nothing more of her story.
'But after I came back to Sydney I found Jenny's experience had been part of a larger pattern.
'One particularly strong witness to this pattern was Judith, who managed an agency helping war widows,
*because she encountered "dozens" of cases where people were harassed by Muslim neighbours who wanted them gone* {My emphasis - dda}.
"It was common," she told me. "A lot of these ladies couldn't take it and moved out. It happened in Campsie, Belmore, Lakemba, Bankstown, Punchbowl ...{Nota bene - Jihad against...non-Muslim war widows, little old ladies whose husbands fought in World War II or in Korea or Vietnam...can 45ch justify and excuse and praise the Muslim bullying of these women? - dda}.
"It was everything ... throwing rubbish over the fence, screaming abuse, blocking the driveway, knocking fences down. One guy would throw coffee grains on the windows and bottles on the roof late at night ... I confronted some of them, and the men would call me a lot of names, mostly in Arabic."...
A little later on, Sheehan observes - "The open contempt some Muslims have for non-Muslims is a common thread throughout the world where Muslims communities rub against the kafirs, or non-believers."
He also observes, re the UK - "A report by British intelligence estimates a quarter of the 1.6 million Muslims living in Britain support jihad at least somewhere in the world."
Very well put, Dumbledore.
There is no answer to that, although I'm sure 45 will respond in the usual fashion.
I like your coinage: 'Islamoforming'
Reminds me of the old science fiction concept of terraforming, which might be spelt differently for Muslims.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
'The all-pervasive lack of freedom is the hallmark of the Muslim world.
Comment :
How do you explain the fact that numerous muslim countries are not ruled by Sharia ?
Non-Sharia states means that muslims are able to progress and we should help them progress further as America progressed and after 200 years of independence, the US gave all Americans complete freedom after Jim Crow laws were abolished in the US.
How do you explain the fact that even in the Sharia states of Malaysia, non-muslims enjoy almost the same freedoms enjoyed by Americans, considering the fact that Malaysia is only 50 years old, compared to the terrorist institution of slavery that was still present when the US was 50 years old.
Lack of freedom is prevalent also in the non-muslim world, so lack of freedom is not the monopoly of only some muslim states.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
'Discrimination against non-coreligionists and women of all creeds,
'racism,
'slavery,
'virulent antisemitism,
'and cultural imperialism
'can be found – individually or in various combinations – in different cultures and eras.
*Islam alone has them all at once, all the time, and divinely sanctioned at that* {my emphasis - dda}.”
Comment :
All the above were found in the US at one time after independence :
'Discrimination against non-coreligionists and women of all creeds,
'racism,
'slavery,
'virulent antisemitism,
'and cultural imperialism.
Non-sharia states and even sharia states like Malaysia do not have :
'racism,
'slavery,
'virulent antisemitism,
'and cultural imperialism
Non-Sharia states in the muslim world, especially a country like Malaysia have freedoms that the US never enjoyed when the US was 50 years old, as Malaysia enjoys freedoms for non-muslims even being only 50 years old.
dumbledoresarmy, you stated :
'There is no presumed equality of different people’s claim to life, liberty or any pursuit at all in Islam.”
Comment :
That is a blanket statement that does not apply to numerous non-sharia muslim states like Turkey .
America reached full equality only in the 60s after the Jim Crow laws were abolished and that is after almost 200 years after independence.
I am pretty sure when all muslim countries are about 200 years old, they probably would have the same freedoms as all Americans enjoyed after Jim Crow laws were abolished when America was about 200 years old
DDA,
You really need to get to know regular muslims, instead of pointing to the extremes of muslim society.
If you wanted to know people in the extremes of western society, you can see that the white supremacist groups or the jewish terrorist groups are not different than extreme right wing muslim groups
DDA,
Please explain why J.L. Menezes says in " The Life and Religion of Mohammed", the following :
"the Koran, when read honestly and without Islamic preconceptions, nonetheless depends upon and leads to Christianity".
ref : http://www.conservativebookservice.com/products/bookpage.asp?prod_cd=c6614#continue
45ch pretends to know that none of us here have met Muslims. And that if we got to know all the wonderful Muslims out there, we'd stop worrying. He doesn't stop to wonder whether it may not in fact be that quite a lot of people here have *had* experience of Muslims - and that their experiences sent them to jihadwatch, to the Quran, to the other Islamic texts, looking for answers to painful questions about painful experiences.
45ch does not and cannot know how much experience each and every poster here has had, of Islam. Many here have had *plenty*. I know for a fact that sheikyermami has travelled and done business extensively in Muslim countries, for decades; we have at least one regular poster who has lived in Indonesia, and another couple who have lived in Malaysia (and do *not* have a rosy view of the situation for Infidels there, at all, at all); PG has lived in the Sudan and worked with Muslim immigrants in Australia; mgoldberg lived in Israel, in daily contact with Arab Muslims. We have had along the way at least one poster - 'lorfalcon' - who was *married* to a Muslim; and another, 'jdamn' - who was aggressively *stalked* by a Muslim, on her American university campus. And how does 45ch compute the fact that we have three regular posters - Apostate-Islam, Saleem Smith and Bosch Fawstin - who are full-blown apostates from Islam: two born-Muslims who defected, one 'convert' to Islam who got in - realized what he'd gotten into, and that it was BAAAD news - and got right back out again.
My own personal experience with a sweetly-smiling plausible non-behijabbed 'nominal' Muslim was bruising -and I started out full of goodwill toward her; but she turned out to be the most accomplished and convincing full-blown fraudster I have ever had the misfortune of encountering; and it is only *after* having known her that I have realized, in retrospect, thinking things over, that everything about her behaviour is explicable in light of the sociopathic Mohammedan template. Had I known, when I met her, what I know now about, for example, Lying and Expediency and Playing the Victim, I would have been spared a lot of trouble, for I would have been much more wary, sceptical and hard-headed when she started telling elaborate sob stories. (BTW - I have lost touch with her, because she shot through once her lies were exposed; however, I still pray that she and her daughter will be freed from the spiritual slavery of Islam; I know it can happen, because I have *also* had the experience of witnessing the baptism of a young Persian man who - from a pious but not fanatical Muslim background - had become a Christian whilst studying in Australia).
I observe our troll (and I am beginning to wonder whether it isn't just a Troll Simple, stirring sh*t for the fun of it) trots out by rote the stale old moral equivalence arguments - i.e. there are just as many 'right wing extremist' Jewish and Christian groups as 'right' wing Muslim groups, and the former are just as dangerous as if not more dangerous than the latter - and the 'tiny minority of extremists' canard.
Utter nonsense.
Let's enumerate *just some* of the Muslim jihad outfits, shall we? Those engaged in active combat and those engaged in enabling/ recruiting/ inciting. Lashkar Jihad, Janjaweed, Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Hamas, Fatah, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Al Shabaab, Jamaah Islamiyah (in Egypt and in Indonesia, two different groups, same name), Lashkar e Toiba, the Ikhwan, Fethullah Gulen and his associated plotters and front groups and catspaws, Al Qaeda (just one among many), Hizb ut Tahrir, Tablighi Jamaat, Taliban, MILF in S Philippines and the Abu Sayuf (sons of the sword). And the apparently-nameless Muslim sharia-pushers busy beheading monks and schoolteachers and rubber plantation workers in S Thailand. Not to forget the Iranian government, the Sudanese government, and the abominable House of Saud. And they all mix n'match all over the place. And that's leaving out all the little freelance plots that pop up, here, there, and everywhere, and the lone Muslims going Jihad, like that bloke who drove round San Francisco deliberately running people over with his car, or the chap who ran down a street in Canada whacking people with a hammer.
The Jihad-wagers, the sharia-pushers, are not 'extremists'; they are merely obediently, piously practising straight-down-the-line classical Islam as it has been practised by many all over dar al Islam since the 7th century.
As for Fr Menezes on the Quran depending on, or possibly 'leading to' Christianity: it seems to me that when he said that, he was being charitable. I would say, rather, that Islam 'depends' on Christianity as a hostile parody depends on the original artwork that it seeks to satirise and destroy and replace. The Quran's representation of Jesus - its 'Isa' - is extraordinarily and indeed perversely distorted (deliberately, consistently and aggressively so, with malice aforethought); nevertheless, enough of the original manages to slip through, that there have been seeking Muslims who have been (by the grace of God) drawn to Jesus even just from reading the Quran's dreadful foefic version. Fr Menezes probably had in mind people like that, whom he may have met: who had somehow been 'led' to focus on the passages about 'Isa' (however distorted and garbled) but then at some point moved on to the real thing, undiluted and undistorted, in the Christian scriptures.
If one wants an account of what it is like for a Muslim 'seeker' to encounter the Christian account of Jesus, all one needs to do is read Mark Gabriel, 'Islam and Terrorism'; his description of what happened when, having already memorised the whole Quran years before, he at last sat down to read the Christian Gospels.
"I could easily compare the Bible to what I had learned from my years of studying the Quran, and there was no doubt in my mind that I was finally encountering the true God".
DDA,
All the encounters of some muslims by posters in this site does not show in anyway that even those extreme muslims are any threat to western society.
Have you met white supremacists or jewish extremists ?
You have to compare apples to apples in order to come to the conclusion that radical muslims are more dangerous than white supremacists or jewish radicals and the extent of that danger.
I bet that for every angry muslim, you can find a person like "davegreybeard" who is equally angry and even willing to commit violence but even then, is that a threat to western civilization ?
If you think criminal muslims are a threat to western civilization, what about criminal white supremacists and criminal jewish extremists ?
From Hugh's posting:
"They [the jihad-minded sharia-minded Muslims] remain just as determined to defeat from within the Western world, by terrorism or, for some, not by terrorism but rather by such "peaceful" means.
'For those "peaceful" means we are apparently all supposed to be grateful, and breathe a sigh of relief -- deployment of the Money Weapon, well-financed and carefully-targeted campaigns of Da'wa in North America and Europe and, not least, demographic conquest.
'That demographic conquest proceeds, without attempts to halt it, much less reverse it, all over the Western world.
'This in the short term causes an enormous security headache and a situation of permanent societal worry and disruption and general upset.
'It leads to threats to free speech. {See Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Geert Wilders, Robert Redeker, riots against Pope Benedict's Regensburg speech, the Cartoons affair, Theo Van Gogh...and death threats to Mr Spencer and many others - dda}.
'If not dealt with, it could lead to the destruction of our own, far more advanced, tolerant, decent, societies, whose freedoms, whose science, whose art, whose everything could not for one minute have developed under Islam." END QUOTE
We do not want to end up like the indigenous Assyrian/ Chaldean Christians of Iraq. Their suffering, and that of the Christians and Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh, and of the Christians in Iran, and the Copts in Egypt (dozens of girls kidnapped, raped, drugged, force-married, force-converted to Islam, just in the last few years), not to mention all the wrenching historical accounts of what it was like to live as a Christian under Muslim domination in the Balkans, or of Hindu enslavement under Muslims in India 8C-18C, shows us what happens to non-Muslims when Muslims rule the roost.
See this news report about the Assyrian Christians:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/11/archbishop-iraqi-christians-suffer-religious-persecution-caused-by-a-social-system-that-is-inspired.html
and it is NOT a new situation: one can go back through the historical records, century after century, throughout the entire period of Muslim dominion in Mesopotamia, to see a continual grinding pressure of degradation, humiliation and repeated outbreaks of killings, both small and large (the worst pogrom in recent times took place in the early 1930s - Saroyan's '70 000 Assyrians' tells the tale).
45ch
This thread is at an end. I am not returning to it.
I am starting to wonder whether you are neither a Muslim nor a misguided and wilfully ill-informed Christian but rather, but a common old Internet Troll, messing around in here purely for the perverted fun of messing with people's heads. If so: how boring. How unoriginal. Go away.
If you are NOT such a creature, *prove it* by abandoning this thread and joining the rest of us in commenting - BRIEFLY - on the *latest* and newest articles.
In the meantime, *if* you are a Christian (which I doubt) I suggest you contemplate *this* report, as posted on Anglican priest Rev Dr Mark Durie's blogspot:
http://markdurie.blogspot.com/2009/11/abduction-and-islamization-of-christian.html
a report on the shocking numbers of Coptic Christian girls who have been seduced and/ or abducted, often raped, usually drugged, force-'converted' to islam and usually force-married to Muslims.
As for Davegreybeard - I know him well and I like him. He has been posting, always rationally and intelligently and often humorously, at jihadwatch for *years*. He is not a white supremacist - ROFLMAO. He is, quite simply, a citizen and a veteran who has become aware of the Third Jihad, and is doing his best to warn his fellow Americans about the ugly and lethal teachings contained in the Quran, Sira and Hadith, about which he has informed himself by patiently reading large amounts in good translations. The more he read the more horrified he became.
DDA,
Abductions of christians ? that is a criminal act.
If every criminal act is a threat to western civilization, you are underestimating the power of western civilization and its resilience.
Western civilization has comprised of corrupt govts. that have colonized the world, subjugated the third world and you want to believe that some how a tiny minority of radical muslim extremists will conquer the world and subjugate us by either political power and/or the use of force ?
If you have solid proof, let me know and I will be on your side, but what you have given is nothing compared to what corrupt govts in the western world have done to the third world which has included the annihilation of entire native populations due to european diseases and others were subject to slavery, second class status, massacres and theft of resources etc etc throughout history.
Its only during the 60s that all citizens in the US received full human rights and if we work to helping reformers in the muslim world, the entire muslim world will have full human rights about the same time as the US gave full human rights to everybody after 200 years of independence.
Meanwhile, where is the threat ?
The threat of war is more prevalent than anything else and western govts are guilty in many cases in instigating war for the profit agenda of the bloated, greedy, corrupt, wasteful military/industrial pork laden, corporate welfare entitlement complex that is presently looting the US treasury of over a trillion dollars or 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar every year and as the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex are "laughing all the way to the bank", they are supporting the re-election campaigns of their puppets in the US govt, while the average American has to eventually forgo a healthier and better standard of living as essential governmental programs like oversight, health, pollution controls, medical research etc etc are drastically cut or taxes go up dramatically in order to keep the US govt solvent.
Look, 45, it's quite simple.
What you need to recognize is that Western civilization or something very like it is a necessary condition for the harmonious co-existence of large populations of disparate human beings. It is a set of values and ideals, including freedom of expression and belief, liberal democracy, equality of opportunity for all, the right to life and liberty, as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
All these things have grown out of our Judeo-Christian beliefs, not without amendment and amelioration informed not by ancient tribal customs but by the wisdom of long and painful experience.
We in the West are the custodians of this precious legacy which the shades of our ancestors will surely berate us for jeopardising.
Read the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights (the Muslim version) and you will find that the essential rights and values of the original are subordinated to and conditional on the dictates of Sharia, with its inhuman stipulations. The only right you can rely on under Sharia is the right to submit to Allah. No real freedom, democracy, equality, innovation or original thought.
You might say Islam is merely the latest totalitarianism to threaten the west. Most of the last century was engaged in struggles against Nazis and Communists; now this. We can no more afford to lose this fight than we could either of the others.
You ask where is the threat? It is in our own complacency. Failure to see the growth and spread of Islam as a danger until too late.
Wake up and join us.
Finally, as you have oft referred to modern, moderate Malaysia as an example of successful Islamic multicultural Islam, here is another point of view, written by Hugh in February 2006:-
Malaysia is, quite incorrectly I'm afraid, always adduced as an example of a progressive, forward-looking, prosperous Muslim state. In fact its prosperity would be considerably diminished but for its Chinese and Hindu population. All Malays are required to be counted as Muslims, and all Muslims benefit from a disguised jizyah tax on non-Muslims which is called the "Bumiputra" or "Sons of the Soil" system. Most Westerners are unacquainted with the "Bumiputra." But anyone living in Malaysia who is unaware of the "Bumiputra" system has not yet sunk beneath the surface of Malaysian life. Although the word means "sons of the soil," it is not the indigenous Malaysian tribes that benefit from the "Bumiputra" policy, but Malay Muslims alone.
According to this "Bumiputra" idea, all economic undertakings, all examples of entrepreneurial flair, must have Muslim Malays as their full partners. Two Chinese who wish to open, for example, a computer consulting company, or an architectural firm, are required to take on a Muslim Malay (but not a Hindu, nor another Chinese) as a full partner, with an equal financial stake -- even though he need not contribute a thing. This is simply a way to ensure that the Muslims can continue to live on the backs of non-Muslims, which is part of the traditional status of dhimmi, including the payment of the jizya (and kharaj, or land-tax).
The real "Sons of the Soil" -- the real indigenous tribes of Malaysia -- in fact are almost entirely Christian, where they are not pagan. These tribes of course, benefit not at all from the Bumiputra system.
Some indication of the nature of Muslim dreams in Malaysia can be gauged from the speech of Mahathir Mohammed, the former "moderate" president of the country. In his notorious address several years ago to assembled heads of Muslim states, he seemed to be advocating "reform" when he called for the harnessing of science and technology -- not in order to investigate the structure of DNA, or the Eight-Fold Path, or De Sitter space, or how to preserve biodiversity in both Wilsonian (Woodrow and E.O.) senses. No, no, what he had in mind, and what he called for, was a Muslim "reform" that would permit Muslim countries to catch up with the West almost entirely in one area and one area alone -- weapons technology. For that he was wildly applauded. This tells us a lot about him, and about the country which he ran, as does the Bumiputra system.
If Malaysia, that supposedly "advanced" and "tolerant" Muslim state, brimful of Western computer companies having their components made or put together there, imposes a disguised tax on non-Muslims, and if the best it can do by way of "moderate" Muslim is Mohammad Matathir, what does that tell us about the state of this “advancement” and “tolerance”?
For Malaysia -- Muslim-ruled Malaysia -- also displays contempt for the free exercise of the individual conscience. In Islam, once a Muslim, you are seldom allowed out. You are akin to a soldier in the Army of Islam. Changing your faith, or abandoning it, is equivalent to deserting from that army. And that is why, when it comes to Muslims and apostasy -- All Dare Call It Treason. So don't try to become a non-Muslim if you are born into Islam; keep it to yourself. And if you are a famous non-Muslim, such as the famous mountaineer M. Moorthy, a Hindu, your relatives may discover that unbeknownst to themm, the state will after your death claim that you are a Muslim and insist on giving you a Muslim buerial. And this posthumous "islamization" will take place despite the protests of friends and family, possibly the result either of your fame (which must be claimed for Islam) or your property (to be inherited now by that relative who did convert to Islam and who apparently swears up and down that just before his death, so did the prominent relative in question.
Malaysia is well-endowed with natural resources, and it would be hard to be poor with such resources. Still, resource-poor but largely Infdiel Singapore has run economic rings around Malaysia ever since they bloodily parted ways. And all those manufacturing jobs which made Malaysia a center for Western companies -- assembly-lines for computers, that sort of thing -- will likely move China-wards, where labor costs are lower, and workers more skilled. China -- Infidel China -- offers a much better place for those Western businessmen who are currently in Malaysia, but may find that they no longer wish to fund, however indirectly, the jihad being waged worldwide by Muslim economies and Muslim peoples. Meanwhile, the real talent will move to Singapore, which has no natural resources but has a talented and motivated citizenry that keeps careful tabs, through a whole series of legal measures, on the spread of Islam in the country.
It is also our choice, the choice of the Infidels, whether to invest in Malaysia. There is nothing like Muslim violence to discourage investment, tourism, trade, as the Arab states are finding out. Other than oil, there is no major economic activity with them, and what there is will be severely curtailed, including that easy money-maker, mass tourism. Sorry, Malaysia, for a while we indulged you. But unless you end the Bumiputra system, unless you cut your ties to the Arabs and especially the Saudis, we're afraid the business of Infidels more and more will have to go elsewhere. Nothing personal; it's just that our executives feel a bit uneasy in your country. All that kidnapping, and those bloody videos, and so on. All of that may hasten the day when it becomes time for non-Arab Muslims in Malaysia and elsewhere, to reconsider the Arab cultural and linguistic imperialism, an Arab imperialism about which the apostates (such as Anwar Shaikh) have often written, and a problem that resonates in Kurdish and Berber hearts and minds, for they have had to endure that imperialism directly from the Arabs, and not from a distance, as do the Muslims of East Asia. And there are, here and there, signs that some Malaysians who have traveled to Arab lands, and especially to the oil states, did not feel an immediate oneness with these arrogant Arab fellow members of the umma al-islamiyya, and in fact, were distinctly uneasy at what they saw, especially in Saudi Arabia. And that unease could lead to a greater consciousness of Islam as the vehicle for forcible, or voluntary, arabization, that it always was. And an independent Kurdistan, of course, would do much to raise the consciousness of non-Arab Muslims about this matter of Arab supremasist ideology within Islam, and such a raising (raise that mental roofbeam high, carpenters!) can only increase the desire of at least the most morally aware non-Arab Muslims to distinguish themselves from from the Arabs.
Meanwhile, Badawi follows Mahathir, and Malaysians keep thinking that their economy shows what can be done by a Muslim country, not what can be done by a Muslim-ruled country that is half-populated by energetic non-Muslims, who work not only for themselves, but for the Muslim half of the population. Meanwhile, in Malaysia, keep on tapping those rubber-trees, and supplying those spices. They will last, long after the computer companies have packed up and moved to China or to India. And remember to keep supplying that special wood for what trade remains in those Penang lawyers that S. J. Perelman was so fond of mentioning. That should keep your economy afloat.
Stephen,
If the US can reform after about 200 years of independence when Jim Crow laws were abolished in the 1960s, do you not believe that all muslim countries can also reform after about 200 years of independence ?
especially considering the fact that numerous muslim countries are already not following Sharia.
and even in the Sharia states of Malaysia, non-muslims can wear skimpy clothing and live just like Americans do.
So I am still waiting for the threat; where is the threat ?
is Pakistan going to use its nuclear weapons ?
45,
Most Muslim countries can of course reform if they have the will. In the present climate of increasing piety and increasing application of Sharia law (eg Aceh province, Indonesia; Nigeria; Somalia; Pakistan) and little sign anywhere of relaxation of Sharia, it seems the will to reform does not exist at present, rather the opposite. As for skimpy clothing and other privileges allowed to non-Muslims in Malaysia; these are not rights but concessions which may be, and often are, withdrawn at any time. See for instance the hundreds of newspaper reports collected here and elsewhere over the years telling of punishments dished out to non-Muslims for un-Islamic behaviour in places like Algeria, Dubai, Egypt, Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc.
Where is the threat? Re-read my post above. I spelled it out.
Perhaps you are a Muslim who cannot see a threat, try to imagine how you would feel if you happened to be a Christian in Pakistan. A false malicious rumour about tearing pages out of a Koran has gone round and people are getting excited. You look out of the window and a Muslim mob armed with weapons and petrol bombs is approaching from the next village. Two local policemen are standing watching from a safe distance. Your wife and baby start to cry. They turn to you for protection.
What do you say?
Where is the threat?
Is Pakistan going to use its nukes?
It's a real possibility.
Stephen,
You are talking about criminal activity, regarding the muslim mob.
Mobs can start anywhere, including the US where during the racial riots in LA, innocent people were killed or during riots started after soccer matches, innocent people have been killed or if you happen to be black in the US, thousands of blacks were lynched in the 19th and even during the 20th century.
And what about brutality against minorities by the police themselves who would shoot unarmed blacks in the US ?
I am sure you have heard of stories or read the news about your town's murders etc and most of them were done by non-muslims and probably non by Al-Qaeda so you are more in danger from your fellow citizens.
If you were living in a muslim country, there is a good chance you could be a victim of a muslim but at the same time, the murder rates in a place like Saudi Arabia (rank : 61) is much lower than in the US ( rank : 24) and several muslim countries have lower murder rates than the US.
In fact, the countries with the most murder rates, the top 12 are non-muslim.
ref : http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_percap-crime-murders-per-capita
ref : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Just as you have been patient with the US in reforming after 200 years when Jim Crow laws were abolished in the 1960s, we have to be patient with all muslim countries to join the numerous non-sharia states.
And the day Pakistan or Iran uses their nuclear weapons, will be the day I will send you $1000 by paypal.
Here is the solution to extremism :
(1) Co-opt all muslim leaders by putting them on the CIA payroll
(2) The US rendition program will apprehend all potentially dangerous militants and the next "hitler".
(3) Drastically change US foreign policy to approximate the foreign policy of Switzerland where no terrorist attacks take place
(4) Push for reforms in the muslim world so that all muslim countries will not have sharia, similar to the following muslim countries which are right now non-sharia :
NON-SHARIA STATES :
Burkina Faso
Chad
Gambia
Guinea
Mali
Senegal
Somalia
Kazakhstan
Kyrgystan
Tajikstan
Turkmenistan
Uzbekistan
Albania
Azerbaijan
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Kosovo
Turkey
(5) Support reformists and reform organizations in the muslim world, such as :
The Center Party of Egypt (Hizb ul-Wasat ), Turkey's ruling AKP Party, Tehreek i Insaf Party of Pakistan and Iran's Defenders of Human Rights Center are four of numerous muslim organizations and muslim reformers who don't hate muslims but want reformation in the muslim world.
Insulting Islam is not going to help matters as it is important to get 1.5 billion muslims on our side so that we can prevent the next terrorist attack and the way to prevent the next terrorist attack is to co-opt the muslim world by drastically changing US foreign policy which is now catered solely to enrich the rich and powerful in the bloated, corrupt, greedy military/industrial pork laden corporate welfare entitlement complex while the so called adults send our young and beloved soldiers to their deaths, all in the name of patriotism, honor and duty, during which time, the rich and powerful in the military/industrial complex "laugh all the way to the bank" to the tune of over a trillion dollars a year or 68 cents of every hard earned tax dollar.
Do you still see a threat after the above are implemented ?
45,
Don’t you get it yet? Your crime statistics are all beside the point. Every country has ordinary crime; we have crime in Britain, crime in the US and crime in Europe. By the way I’d be wary of trusting some of those statistics. Countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia are keen to report only the things that make them look good. Remember A’jad of Iran told us there are no homosexuals in Iran. Do you trust him? Most of the women in Pakistani jails are there for the ‘crime’ under Sharia of having been raped. But here we are talking about something over and above the ordinary criminality that every country has and tries to minimize for the sake of image. We are talking about hatred and intolerance which is ordered and motivated by a specific religious and political entity which systematically brainwashes its adherents to perform jihad against its enemies, thus giving violent action a (spurious) divine authority. This is something we must keep out of the West. It is strong enough to work in Muslim societies that are not necessarily Sharia observant,- Jihadis do not need the support of a mere mortal authority, not when they have the words of Allah and Mohammed straight from the horses arse, sorry, mouth. Yes the Klan was bad, Jim Crow was bad, lots of things were bad, but again what is the relevance of all this old history to the present day spread of Islam?
You suggest:
(1) Co-opt all Muslim leaders by putting them on the CIA payroll
You mean like the payments to Pakistan to help them fight the Taliban?
It hasn’t worked too well. They take the money and play a double game. Always needing more money but never quite getting the job done. That would be the template for any such folly. Muslim leaders are never going to do the bidding of infidels, only take the money and lie.
2) The US rendition program will apprehend all potentially dangerous militants and the next "hitler".
No. There are literally millions of those. Totally impractical, immoral and unwise.
(3) Drastically change US foreign policy to approximate the foreign policy of Switzerland where no terrorist attacks take place
Is this a joke? Someone has to keep the security in the Middle East; as long as the US takes on that task it will be a target. That and the fact that it is the infidel ‘Great Satan’. Switzerland doesn’t even have a policy in the Middle East.
(4) Push for reforms in the Muslim world so that all muslim countries will not have sharia, similar to the following muslim countries which are right now non-sharia :
Yes fine, why not. But what do you think the result would be?
(5) Support reformists and reform organizations in the muslim world
The examples you give are not genuine reformists as far as I know. If they were they would struggle to win support from Muslims, for to the extent that an organization is geuinely reformist then to that extent it is unIslamic. There is no sign of any likely successful reformists at present, though if I am wrong or if such movements were to arise they may well be worthy of support. They would of course be horribly vulnerable to attack from pious Muslims.
Your final paragraph is an absurdly distorted view of US foreign policy. The US is by far the most generous giver of aid to poorer countries. The loss of young lives in the US military is indeed tragic but is not part of some cynical conspiracy as you suggest. It is time to cut off the flow of aid to undeserving countries. The answer is not to buy them off but to seal them off, and restrict aid and support to those countries that deserve it by following a progressive path towards democracy, tolerance and human rights and away from political Islam and Jihad.
StephenA55, you stated :
45,
Don’t you get it yet? Your crime statistics are all beside the point. Every country has ordinary crime; we have crime in Britain, crime in the US and crime in Europe. By the way I’d be wary of trusting some of those statistics. Countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia are keen to report only the things that make them look good. Remember A’jad of Iran told us there are no homosexuals in Iran. Do you trust him? Most of the women in Pakistani jails are there for the ‘crime’ under Sharia of having been raped. But here we are talking about something over and above the ordinary criminality that every country has and tries to minimize for the sake of image.
Comment :
Crime statistics are not beside the point because it can reveal how dangerous certain groups are and if islam is truly an ideology that can override the free will of adherents, then crime statistics will show that but the evidence shows that neither Islam or Judaism can override the free will of adherents
the crime statistics are correct on the whole because every country under reports :
An article in USA Today reports that in 2006, 96% of cases referred to the U.S. Justice Department for prosecution by investigative agencies were declined.
In 2005, 98% were declined.
In 2001, the New York Times reported that the U.S. government is unable or unwilling to collect statistics showing the precise number of people killed by the police or the prevalence of the use of excessive force
ref : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_the_United_States
In contrast to the FBI's HCSA data, the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2005 reported sharply higher numbers of hate crimes committed in the U.S.
ref : http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes/nature-and-magnitude.html
Crime statistics are important because they definitely show that muslims are not as dangerous as non-muslims and even if the statistics are skewed in favor of muslims, we cannot conclude that muslims are more dangerous than non-muslims.
Can you show any comprehensive study that clearly shows that muslims are more dangerous than non-muslims ?
StephenA55, you stated :
We are talking about hatred and intolerance which is ordered and motivated by a specific religious and political entity which systematically brainwashes its adherents to perform jihad against its enemies, thus giving violent action a (spurious) divine authority.
Comment :
Jihad and terrorism are two different things.
Jihad is analogous to what happened during the revolution war in that Americans were trying to oust the British military from America.
Terrorism is analogous to what happened during the revolution war where American and British loyalists were terrorized by a tiny number of American rebels and most loyalists fled America not only because of being terrorized by being tarred ( boiling tar being poured on the terrified victims) but also because of the terror of being lynched or properties confiscated.
StephenA55, you stated :
This is something we must keep out of the West. It is strong enough to work in Muslim societies that are not necessarily Sharia observant,- Jihadis do not need the support of a mere mortal authority, not when they have the words of Allah and Mohammed straight from the horses arse, sorry, mouth. Yes the Klan was bad, Jim Crow was bad, lots of things were bad, but again what is the relevance of all this old history to the present day spread of Islam?
Comment :
Its not old history: hate crimes based on differing ideologies happen on a regular basis here in the US :
The targeting of innocent minorities for alleged crimes/sins perpetrated by others is common everywhere, including the US : In 2001 after the 9/11 attacks, Arab Americans, Muslims, and Sikhs were victimized in nearly five percent of the total number of hate crimes reported that year (481 out of 9,730), a seventeen-fold increase over the prior year.
ref : http://www.civilrights.org/publications/hatecrimes/arab-americans.html
Its not old history : murders by "christian" preachers or by white supremacists happen quite a bit right here in the US , here are some of those stories :
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/07/31/preacher.freezer/index.html
http://abcnews.go.com/2020/jarka-jehovahs-witness-california-murder/story?id=9104844&nwltr=2020_features_hed
http://www.fox8.com/wjw-news-preacher-kills-pornstar-felicia-tang,0,6625392.story
http://www.thesudburystar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1771250&auth=THE%20ASSOCIATED%20PRESS
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/20730/james-leshkevich
The spread of islam is not a bad thing, considering the fact that muslims have been shown to be not anymore violent than non-muslims and in fact the top 12 countries for murder are non-muslim and countries like Saudi Arabia have much lower murder rates than the US.
We already have millions of muslims in the west and in the UK, muslims represent the largest religious minority but can you show those muslims in the west are more violent than non-muslims ?
If you can show me any comprehensive studies that shows that muslims as a group are more dangerous than non-muslims, I would appreciate it but as of now, I only see statistics that prove otherwise and that non-muslims have a record of more genocide by over a hundred million compared to genocides in muslim countries and a record of more murders in the US compared to several muslim countries while the top 12 countries for murder are not muslim.
Even honor killings, 5000 annual honor killings world wide compared to 2000 annual murders of intimate partners here in the US alone, so you can imagine the number of murders by intimate partners in the world wide non-muslim world ?
StephenA55, you stated :
You suggest:
(1) Co-opt all Muslim leaders by putting them on the CIA payroll
You mean like the payments to Pakistan to help them fight the Taliban?
It hasn’t worked too well. They take the money and play a double game. Always needing more money but never quite getting the job done. That would be the template for any such folly. Muslim leaders are never going to do the bidding of infidels, only take the money and lie.
Comment :
Even Castro who was on the Soviet payroll did abide by what the Soviets said, so I do not see any different attitude if muslim leaders are on the CIA payroll.
In the Al-Anbar province of Iraq, insurgent leaders were put on the CIA payroll and because of that the violence against US soldiers in the Al-Anbar province has dramatically decreased.
The Egyptian dictator receives a billion dollars a year from the US and so far, Egypt has not caused any trouble for Israel.
StephenA55, you stated :
2) The US rendition program will apprehend all potentially dangerous militants and the next "hitler".
No. There are literally millions of those. Totally impractical, immoral and unwise.
Comment :
Millions ? when Al-Qaeda could only find 19 hijackers to commit the murders on 9/11 and could not find any of the millions of American muslims to commit acts of random violence on 9/11.
Immoral ? its not immoral to apprehend a future "hitler". The US govt could have easily prevented the massacre on the "night of the long knives" if the US had a covert operation on hitler and thus prevented WW2 and the death of tens of millions of people.
Unwise ? covert operations happen all the time in the US and we have apprehended criminals before they carried out their murders ( example : covert operatives have pretended to be murderers for hire and prevented the murders from taking place )
StephenA55, you stated :
(3) Drastically change US foreign policy to approximate the foreign policy of Switzerland where no terrorist attacks take place
Is this a joke? Someone has to keep the security in the Middle East; as long as the US takes on that task it will be a target. That and the fact that it is the infidel ‘Great Satan’. Switzerland doesn’t even have a policy in the Middle East.
Comment :
On one hand, people say that muslims cannot be reasoned with and then at the same time people say the US govt should be in the middle east keeping the peace.
how is peace possible if muslims cannot be reasoned with ? unless muslims can be reasoned with and that is why the US govt is present in the middle east, keeping the terrorists from hurting our muslim allies.
The US can easily keep the security anywhere in the world through covert US rendition programs because any other way to keep the security creates blowback as what happened on 9/11.
What was it about the US govt that terrorists like Osama Bin Laden saw or read about ?
(1) Osama Bin Laden read about the US govt. fire and atom bombing Japan in 1945 when Japan was already defeated as early as July of 1944 when Tojo resigned and Japan was negotiating concessions to the communists but FDR did not care about communists either killing tens of millions of civilians or that the crushing of Japan enabled communism to expand in Asia resulting in hundreds of thousands of US soldiers either dying horrifying deaths or being maimed, disfigured, deformed, blinded or paralyzed for life during the cold war.
(2) Osama Bin Laden must have read about US/Allied POWs in Japan and hundreds of thousands of Japanese children being terrorized, tortured and burned alive in the US fire and atom bombings of Japan and must have concluded that if the FDR/Truman did not care about the plight of their own US soldiers captive in Japan and the lives of hundreds of thousands of Japanese children, why should Osama bin Laden care about lives when strategic goals were more important.
(3) Osama Bin Laden read about the US government in the 50s overthrowing a democratically elected Mossadegh of Iran and eventually the Shah terrorized his own people in Iran, thanks to the military support given by the US government
(4) He read about the US government in the 60s, arming the Israeli government that used those very US weapons to collaterally kill palestinian children and babies
(5) He saw the US government in the 70s using napalm, agent orange and carpet bombing Vietnam and Cambodia, collaterally killing hundreds of thousands or even millions.
(6) He saw the US government in the 70s supporting cruel, murderous dictators like the Shah of Iran.
(7) He saw the US government in the 80s siding with the "christian" militias in Lebanon, the very christian militias that massacred muslims.
(8) He saw the US government in the 80s supporting cruel dictators like Saddam Hussein.
(9) He saw the US government in the 90s imposing cruel sanctions on Iraq, resulting in UN reports stating that half a million Iraqi children died prematurely due to the sanctions.
(10) He saw that the cruel Saudi dictatorship was being supported by the US government , the very dictatorship that tortured dissidents who opposed the stationing of US troops in Saudi Arabia.
(11) He saw that the US government never left any country in which it had troops in ( example: US troops still present in Germany and Japan, even after the war had ended decades ago).
(12) He saw that warnings to the US government to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia were ignored.
(13) He saw that the only way to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia was to launch a terror campaign.
(14) He saw that his terror campaign against the US had failed and US troops still remained in Saudi Arabia, 9 years after the gulf war had ended.
(15) He saw that the only sure way to get the US government to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia was to launch an attack on the US homeland on 9/11/01.
(16) He saw that the US government finally gave into his demands to withdraw troops, only after the 9/11 attacks, and US troops finally left Saudi Arabia in 2003, almost 13 years after the gulf war had ended
The Swiss are neutral and so they are able to have a embassy in Iran and not be a target of terrorists and so , the US govt should pursue a neutral policy like the Swiss while making sure that no dangerous terrorist acquires any power.
Somebody has to keep the security in the Middle East ?
The world was better off when the US govt was not a world power as evidenced by the fact that if the US govt never got involved in WW1; WW2, the Cold War and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will never have taken place.
How did the world manage before the US govt became a world power ?
There have been more genocides these past hundred years, after the US govt became a world power so I don't see the US govt being of any deterrent for genocides or for that matter to really keep the peace because more often than not, the US govt has instigated conflicts, as seen in its long history in the middle east including the instigation of war between Iraq and Iran.
StephenA55, you stated :
(4) Push for reforms in the Muslim world so that all muslim countries will not have sharia, similar to the following muslim countries which are right now non-sharia :
Yes fine, why not. But what do you think the result would be?
Comment :
The result would be better than what is happening right here in Jihad watch.
If the US govt sponsors debates in the muslim world, more countries would be marching towards being non-sharia states as numerous muslim states are already non-sharia states, especially if muslim leaders are on the CIA payroll.
You will be surprised at how loud money "talks" in the muslim world.
StephenA55, you stated :
(5) Support reformists and reform organizations in the muslim world
The examples you give are not genuine reformists as far as I know. If they were they would struggle to win support from Muslims, for to the extent that an organization is geuinely reformist then to that extent it is unIslamic. There is no sign of any likely successful reformists at present, though if I am wrong or if such movements were to arise they may well be worthy of support. They would of course be horribly vulnerable to attack from pious Muslims.
Comment :
Do you know of any sufi muslims who attacked anybody ? and if so, what percentage of sufi muslims are violent ?
The fact that numerous muslim countries do not have sharia shows that muslims are able to reform.
If the US govt can reform by abolishing slavery, giving rights to native Americans, women and blacks and abolishing Jim Crow laws after almost 200 years of independence, I am sure all muslim countries will look just like America after 200 years of independence.
StephenA55, you stated :
Your final paragraph is an absurdly distorted view of US foreign policy. The US is by far the most generous giver of aid to poorer countries. The loss of young lives in the US military is indeed tragic but is not part of some cynical conspiracy as you suggest. It is time to cut off the flow of aid to undeserving countries. The answer is not to buy them off but to seal them off, and restrict aid and support to those countries that deserve it by following a progressive path towards democracy, tolerance and human rights and away from political Islam and Jihad
Comment :
I am not talking about conspiracy. I am talking about corruption.
If you believe the US govt is not corrupt, why then did the US govt aid the terrorist jihadists in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union ?
You believe that there is an islamic conspiracy and yet you also believe that the US govt is not corrupt in its relationship with special interests in the miiltary/industrial complex ?
As with regards to US aid, the US is not the most generous, If you adjust the dollar figures on foreign aid that USA TODAY presents for population size or gross domestic product, then Denmark, for example, is found to devote 1.12% of its GDP and $385 per capita to foreign aid, both in purchasing power parity dollars. The comparable figures for the United States are only 0.22% of GDP and $92 per capita.
ref : http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2006/06/us_not_most_gen.html
45,
Is this the 'last man standing' school of debate?
Your last post is so full of illogic, evasions, distortions and banana fudge that I don't know where to start.
You get a fail grade. Must try harder.
Try reading more good history books - not just the ones that confirm your prejudices. And think.
Good luck and good night.
Stephen,
Please point out any illogical statements and I will do my best to correct it or explain it better, thanks.
Meanwhile, here is a discussion with Foolster you might want to participate in :
Foolster41,
Non-Sharia states does not necessarily mean moderate, just as the US govt became moderate only after about 200 years when Jim Crow laws were abolished in the 1960s.
Non-Sharia states means that officially, Sharia or religious laws are not the law of the land, although, just like in the US, every law might have a religious component, just as numerous US states do not recognize homosexual marriages due to religious reasoning.
As for 1% of muslims being violent, do you find 1% of American muslims being violent ?
Both violent and non-violent muslims in prison number about 9,600 Muslim inmates in federal prisons in 2003 out of a US prison population of 7.3 million, so out of one muslim (either violent or non-violent ) going into prison, there are about 760 non-muslims in prison, not considering converts to islam in prison since the crime was committed before their conversion.
ref : http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/02/record.prison.population/
ref : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States%27_prisons
Conservative estimate of the muslim population in the US taken from the Pew Research Center instead of the figures reported by the Council on American-Islamic Relations which reports 6-7 million muslims :
2.5 million muslims in 2009 out of 300 million Americans, meaning for every 1 muslim, there are about 120 Americans according to the Pew Research Center
ref : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_the_United_States#Demographics
So muslims in prison ( both violent and non-violent) 1 for every 760 non-muslims
Muslims in the general US population : 1 muslim for every 120 Americans meaning there are about 6.3 times less muslims in prison as compared to the general muslim population in the US.
Non-muslims in the general US population : 297,500,000 which is about 99% of the population according to the 2009 data from the Pew Research Center
ref : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_the_United_States#Demographics
Non-muslims (before converting in prison) in the prison population : 7,290,400 which is about 99% of the prison population.
If muslims in prison are 6.3 times less than the general muslim population in America and non-muslims in prison represent about the same proportion as the general population, is it right to say that muslims are on the whole much less violent than non-muslims ? or even if the data is horribly skewed for some inconceivable reason, we still cannot say that muslims in America are more violent than the non-muslims in America