Funny Whorowitz "forgot" to mention the right-wing apologists for Islam, like Grover Norquist, James Baker, George Bush Sr., Henry Kissinger, and George Bush Jr (..."Islam has a peaceful history of tolerance and respect...")

When Whorowitz talks about Israel or Islam, I'm all ears. But when he talks about liberals, he's full of it.

Posted by: kj at September 29, 2004 12:14 PM

Why, it's almost as if he has an "ulterior motive."

Posted by: kj at September 29, 2004 12:15 PM

Great article, putting the liberal agenda in true perspective.

As a regular surfer on left-pits, something I notice about liberals is when they argue with you they'll stall, side-track and change the subject rather than tackle the subject at hand head on.
And then there are times when you think they are just about to say something really deep and meaningful (at last), and just when you think they might be actually on the verge of saying something with a little more substance than their usual trash, they veer well wide of the mark.

I sometimes wonder if they were all brain-washed at birth by clandestine soviet spies, or some kind of renegade ex-government agency, hell-bent on the destruction of democracies and western society.
Or Robots who've all been programmed to have the same self-righteous attitude and beliefs of moral-perfection, whose program is never altered even when a drastic change of program is needed to flow with the changes of the modern world.

One things for sure, they're not the same species as most of the people I know.

Posted by: Rikki at September 29, 2004 12:17 PM

Keith,

I would have a lot more sympathy for you if what you said were accurate.

If "Whorowitz" conveniently forgot to mention Norquist, why did he carry Frank Gaffney's superb evisceration of Norquist's terror ties at his FrontPage mag?

http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/readarticle.asp?ID=11209&p=1

If you want to slam Horowitz, have at it, but at least take all the evidence into account.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Posted by: jihadwatch at September 29, 2004 12:21 PM

BTW... as if I need to "prove" anything, this is a link to my favorite David Horowitz essay. It's about 10 pages long, but well worth a read. Sorry to tell you, but it's all about Islam and Israel, no politics. But read it anyway. I KNOW that Robert Spencer has read this. This essay is good to read over if you intend to debate anyone who questions the legitimacy of Israel.

http://www.fightthebias.com/Resources/Rec_Read/mid_east_conflict.htm

David tells it like it is regarding the "palestinians" and the Jews in Israel. The essay is entitled "Why Jews Are the Victims and Arabs are the Indefensible Aggressors" or somesuch.

Oh, and did you know that Horowitz is one of those so-called "intellectual, academic, pointy-head elitists"? He got himself a PhD. and teaches at an Ivy-League school! Well, maybe we can trust him anyway. (He USED to be a liberal, until a liberal killed a friend of his or something like that.)

Sigh... I'm just a lonely liberal loner, looking for the truth about Islam.

Posted by: kj at September 29, 2004 12:23 PM

KJ,
The two Bush's and most likely the others you mentioned (I don't have a clue who the hell they are!!!), are in the public eye so have to keep the masses happy with syrupy, sugar-coated left-pleasing descriptions of islam.

Would you have expected George.W.Bush ,on 10/11/01 to have said :

"Islam is an evil religion , that preaches hatred for all of us, and all muslims believe and follow this to the letter.Don't trust any of these followers of evil.We must hunt down every last muslim on this planet and wipe them out!!!"

Granted; I'd have respected him more if he did, but I don't think that'd've gone down too well with the Kerry for God crowd , do you???

Posted by: Rikki at September 29, 2004 12:26 PM

KJ,
Stop being a liberal whinger,

You'd make a great Right-winger ,

Convert or die!!!(LOL)

Posted by: Rikki at September 29, 2004 12:29 PM

Dear Robert Spencer:

I just went to your link and read the article.

I am glad to see that Horowitz can tell the truth about Norquist, though based on his preface, he really, really, hated to have to do it.

That's all well and good, but my point was there was no mention of Norquist in the article which you linked in the main story.

Instead of the tired, old, "...the problem of radical Islam is not a liberal or conservative issue; it's a human rights issue. Unfortunately, the liberals...", why not try " the problem of radical Islam is not a liberal or conservative issue; it's a human rights issue. But some people on BOTH SIDES of the political debate..."?

Do you really think that you are going to further the agenda of Jihda awareness by continuously vilifying liberals? Do you expect to make any converts by blaming them?

The problem with depending on one political party to increase jihad awareness is the same problem that the Zionists/Israelis could face....what would happen one day if republicans lose everything? It's called "Putting all your eggs in one basket" and I am always asking my Zionist friends to try to reach out to "the left."

For one reason in particular, republicans will drop a cause at the drop of a hat (or a couple billion dollars) while the dems will pretty much remain faithful to a cause even if it hurts them politically. I will write back with some examples this afternooon.

Posted by: kj at September 29, 2004 12:43 PM

I can't help but to find the analogy between communism and radical Islam a trifle offensive. True, many on the far-left initially embraced socialist/communists causes in the early part of the 20th century because it represented something new, utopian, ideal and untried before. But communism died because it was incompatible with the time-honored needs of humanity. Basically, it was too impractical to ever implement to its utmost objective. Communism was never a real long-term threat because of its self-destruct mechanism.

Islam, on the other hand, has been around for 1400 years and feeds into all the human weaknesses that any given religion can, and even goes several steps further than other religions.

Islam is like fascism, not communism. And there have been people on the right side of the political spectrum (even in this country! Gasp!) who have been less than critical when it comes to this ideology.

Posted by: kafira at September 29, 2004 12:54 PM

'Hence we see the phenomenon, which Horowitz traces in detail, of leftists like lawyer Lynne Stewart, who has been indicted for aiding and abetting the terrorist activities of her client, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman. Rahman is currently doing time for his role in the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. '~ JW

The Blind Sheik should have been executed for committing an act of war on US territory.

btw, kj, I thought about WTC '93 since your last post concerning it- and I find I do Not blame Clinton. Not for the attack.

I will also be curious to see your republican 'reason.' I have always known what is right by the 'gut feel' of it, and if the 'reason' you are going to relate doesn't fit, we shall acquit!

One other thing, in regards to islam and the vote? Some weeks back you said 'here goes the partisanship again' when I wrote about my Democrat friend deciding to vote for Bush.

He comes from a steel town, a heavily ethnic and 85% democrat town.
The guy he spoke with who had just come back from Afghanistan, is a democrat.
A Lot of the democrats he knows in that town (which is where the American Legion I belonged to, is), are voting Bush this fall.
How is it partisan to relate what democrats are doing?

Posted by: Gary at September 29, 2004 1:02 PM

A couple of Scandinavian examples:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/002995.php

Danish association to raise funds for terrorists

A radical Danish association has planned a party next Saturday at which it aims to raise money for international terrorists. In a press release, the association Rebellion writes that this illegal event is intended as a protest against Danish anti-terror legislation which in 2002 made it illegal to make donations to international terror organisations.

http://www.vg.no/pub/vgart.hbs?artid=247260

A group from the Norwegian communist party, RV, and the "Palestine Committee", are collecting money to support the "Resistance movement" in Iraq. Rightwing Progress Party leader Carl I. Hagen claims they are funding international terrorism.

Posted by: Ali Dashti at September 29, 2004 1:29 PM

I side with KJ in that there is way too much blanket lumping of liberals with being Muslim apologists.
Conservatives should remember:

1.There's a significant population of conservatives who want to see no support for Israel and want to see the US more isolationist.

2.The children of most liberals are conservatives.

Conservatives all too often take the views of the totally nutty left and then ascribe them to all liberals/democrats....

Posted by: Afrafaste at September 29, 2004 1:32 PM

Islam is much more akin to Fascism than to Communism (see the essay by Ibn Warraq on this similarity, to be found by googling "Ibn Warraq" and "Islam" and "Fascism").

Communism can be seen to have failed -- as it did in Soviet Russia -- and enough of its followers fall away to cause its self-inflicted collapse, Islam can never be said to have failed, and Muslims who accept "the ruler" no matter how despotic as long as he is still considered a Muslim (and if he gets too corrupt or too despotic, then he is called not "corrupt" nor a "despot" but "un-Islamic" or even an "Infidel") must continue to work for the spread of Islam until it covers the globe. They do not allow themselves to look closely at how Muslim societies fare, politically, economically, intellectually, or morally. Only here and there, at the edges, is there some dissent, and usually, Islam is carefully exempted from direct attack, or even protected. Take, for example, the Nobel Prize-winning (for the little or nothng it is worth)Iranian Shirin Ebadi. She can permit herself to work for women's rights in Iran, but keeps telling herself, and the world, that the mistreatment of women has "nothing to do with Islam." Nor will she ever touch the main question: the tenets of Islam regarding non-Muslims, and how Muslims have historically treated those non-Muslims when they, the Muslims, were in a position of superiority.

But it is true -- all of the psychically marginal, all of those who find "the System" or "Amerika" easy to hate, now have as the chosen vehicle of their hatred Islam. People who fifty or sixty years ago might have become Communists, or 70 years ago become Fascists, today do not necessarily "revert" (convert) to Islam, but they do everything they can to prevent a real understanding of Islam; they work to protect and defend it as best they can.

Some of them seem, of course, to be prompted by old fashioned antisemitism, a word that one is told is invoked too readily by defenders of Israel -- actually, it is not invoked nearly enough. If in the Western world in any given country, the number of antisemites varies from 10% to more than 30%, it is silly, it is ludicrous, to pretend that this does not motivate those (just listen to some of those shaky and paranoid voices, the ill-concealed hysteria, the hell-hounds of hate tugging at the mental leash, of the antisemites who phone in their "Wolfowitz, Fieth, Podhoretz" rants to talk shows).

Islam has two powerful forces working for it. Antisemitism, and anti-Americanism. No, make that three powerful forces. I almost forgot the most important of all: Stupidity.

Posted by: Hugh at September 29, 2004 1:35 PM

For one reason in particular, republicans will drop a cause at the drop of a hat (or a couple billion dollars) while the dems will pretty much remain faithful to a cause even if it hurts them politically. I will write back with some examples this afternooon.

Posted by: kj at September 29, 2004 12:43 PM

Yea Right as Faithful as a blue dress? as faithful as hilliary kissing arafats wife? as Faithful as Bill trying to sell Israel out so he could get a peace prize?

You say build a wall well the walls of Mosada only held for 10 years against the Romans then ALL where lost now is not the time to build a wall but to take out the enemy!!

Kerry's wife gives money to hammas family’s of bombers how Faithful do you think they will be?

Some times the truth hurts in the last 3 1/2 years the American People have seen Monsters that will do things they never thought could be real not in a million years they See not in right or left but in who will FIGHT for the Right to be FREE and what they see is a good life?

The Democrats have a few who are not clouded Like Zel Miller but will not just vote a ticket that will not do all it can to Protect America and their Families?

Plan and simple!!

Posted by: Catherine at September 29, 2004 1:44 PM

Conservatives should remember:

1.There's a significant population of conservatives who want to see no support for Israel and want to see the US more isolationist.

2.The children of most liberals are conservatives.

Conservatives all too often take the views of the totally nutty left and then ascribe them to all liberals/democrats....

Posted by: Afrafaste at September 29, 2004 01:32 PM

Once again Pat Bucanon LOST!!!

and the TV network he is on has the worst ratings of all so don't lump him with Repb. Just because a chicken calls it's self a duck does not make it a duck!!!

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom and Courage to stay the course to Defeat the Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World to their Threat Amen

PS
When I write the Fighting Forces I don't ONLY mean the Soldiers BUT All Americans and what they can Do for their country to Help Fight This includes even the People who just inform the others about what we are Fighting

Posted by: Catherine at September 29, 2004 1:53 PM

>Just because a chicken calls it's self a duck >does not make it a duck!!!

Which is why I'm voting for Bush....just because he says he's for his disastrous "roadmap to peace" doesn't mean he really is.

Posted by: Afrafaste at September 29, 2004 2:00 PM

This Liberal charade was obvious this past spring,an alleged attack on a local Mosque was instantly blamed on non-Muslims and one Cleric accused a Fundementalist Christian group.
All of this without one arrest even as of today,Cair set up a hyperlink to a video made at a Mosque that held a anti-Racism meeting attended by leaders from other faiths and Politicians.
The video appeared pretty innocent for the first
several minutes,but it was the near 8 minute rant about Jesus only being a prophet, and not the Messiah as Christians beleive.
I emailed the Federal Liberal(professed catholic) and asked why he remained in the Mosque while this overt attack on his beliefs was spewed by at least two Clerics hosting the anti-racism meeting. The unexpected response was the typical answer when a Liberal is losing a arguement,"RACIST" ,he labeled me a bigot and racist that didn't deserve to live in Canada,he also attacked me as a discrace to Christianity.
Funny though,I never told him my faith and he was quick to attack me assuming I was a defenseless Christian,I also was shocked that as a elected member of Parliament he told me to never send an email to him in the future.
During our Federal Election in June of this year the Liberal tried to frighten Canadians by saying that if you voted in a Christian the rights of Gays and Females would be eroded.
Our Prime Minister claimed to be a Catholic when
appealing to the Qubec voters,but in English he paints the Christians as the enemies of human rights.
The Liberal minister I emailed must have tipped of CAIR,the video that convicted him of denying Christ in public was taken down from the CAIR website, and the original site also sanitized this vicious vile assault on Christians with the backing of a Federal Liberal minister.
Needless to say he won his seat in the Muslim ridding he ran in,I feel more sypathy for him than anger,Jesus warned that if you deny me in front of Man,I'll deny you to the Father
in heaven. How quickly some professed Christians bow down to the god of Muslims,what's waiting for the rest of us if these Christian and Jew-haters get more power and want an Islamic State for the glory of Allah.

NO CAIR - KNOW FREE-SPEECH

Posted by: ala-sux at September 29, 2004 2:10 PM

test

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 29, 2004 2:32 PM

OT: Very interesting article about the collapse of the Temple Mount.
http://www.jnewswire.com/library/article.php.articleid=312

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 29, 2004 2:36 PM

Strange, got an error page. But if you click on the link on that page it will take you to the article.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 29, 2004 2:40 PM

The lefts new bumper sticker "defend america"/defeat bush is laughable. Do they aspire to live in the Islamic States of America. We will all become like Dhimmmi"Jimmy" Carter.

Posted by: Prophet2004 at September 29, 2004 3:08 PM

Communism isn't dead, it's bruised, battered and waiting in the wings for its chance, using the same tactic as Islam has for more than a millennium. They have moderated their speech and fallen in among other compatriots hoping that one day they will be able to rise again. This is one reason why those on the other side view the Left with suspicion.

The Left also is under the illusion that all on the Right are of the same ultra-conservative group that would impose a Christian theocracy on the West. Ultra-Conservatism is as offensive as Ultra-Liberalism and Islamism as they all severely inhibit and choke thought and behavior.

There will always be a tension between the ideology of the Right and that of the Left. However, at this point in the history of West, we can't afford for either to be at odds with each other and to give Islamofacism a chance, realizing that the triumph of Islam will mean the death of all freedom of thought and action as would a revival of Communism.

Posted by: epg at September 29, 2004 3:22 PM

Communism isn't dead, it's bruised, battered and waiting in the wings for its chance, using the same tactic as Islam has for more than a millennium. They have moderated their speech and fallen in among other compatriots hoping that one day they will be able to rise again. This is one reason why those on the other side view the Left with suspicion.

The Left also is under the illusion that all on the Right are of the same ultra-conservative group that would impose a Christian theocracy on the West. Ultra-Conservatism is as offensive as Ultra-Liberalism and Islamism as they all severely inhibit and choke thought and behavior.

There will always be a tension between the ideology of the Right and that of the Left. However, at this point in the history of West, we can't afford for either to be at odds with each other and to give Islamofacism a chance, realizing that the triumph of Islam will mean the death of all freedom of thought and action as would a revival of Communism.

Posted by: epg at September 29, 2004 3:22 PM

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 29, 2004 02:40 PM

Good Art. I am for letting it come down on their heads!!

PEACE, ISLAM STYLE:
Bukhari:V9B84N59 “Allah’s Apostle said, ‘I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: “None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.” Whoever says this will save his property and his life from me.’”
Qur’an 8:58 “If you apprehend treachery from any group on the part of a people (with whom you have a treaty), retaliate by breaking off (relations) with them. The infidels should not think they can bypass (Islamic law or the punishment of Allah). Surely they cannot escape.”
Tabari VII:86 “Gabriel brought down the following verse to the Messenger: ‘If you apprehend treachery from any people (with whom you have a treaty), retaliate by breaking off (relations).’ When Gabriel had finished delivering this verse, the Prophet said, ‘I fear the Banu Qaynuqa.’ It was on the basis of this verse that Muhammad advanced upon them.”
Tabari VII:158 “Judayy went to Abd Allah Ibn Ubayy to ask for support. He said, ‘I found him sitting among a number of his companions while the Prophet’s crier was calling men to arms. He said, ‘This is a clever trick of Muhammad’s.’ The Messenger of Allah besieged the Nadir Jews for fifteen days. In the end they made peace with him on the condition that the Prophet would not kill them and that their property and their coats of mail would be his.”
Tabari VII:159 “The Messenger of Allah besieged the Nadir for fifteen days until he had reduced them to a state of utter exhaustion, so that they would give him what he wanted. The terms in which the Prophet made peace with the Jews were: he would not shed their blood, he would expel them from their lands and settlements, providing for every three of them a camel and a water-skin.”
Tabari VII:159 “The Prophet fought them until he made peace with them on condition that they evacuated Yathrib. He expelled them to Syria but allowed them to keep what their camels could carry, except for their coats of mail and weapons.”
Qur’an 47:33 “Believers, obey Allah, and obey the Messenger. Do not falter; become faint-hearted, or weak-kneed, crying for peace.”
Qur’an 9:3 “Allah is not bound by any contract or treaty with non-Muslims, nor is His Apostle.”
Qur’an 97:5 “There is peace until the dawning of the day!”
Ishaq:515 “When the people of Fadak heard what had happened, they sent word to the Messenger, asking him to banish them and spare their lives, saying they too would leave him their property. When the people of Khaybar surrendered on these conditions, the survivors asked Muhammad to employ them on their farms for a half share of whatever they produced. They said, ‘We know more about farming [seeing that you are terrorists and all].’ So Muhammad made peace with them for a half share, provided that: ‘If we want to expel you, we may.’ He made a similar arrangement with Fadak. So Khaybar became the prey of the Muslims, while Fadak belonged exclusively to the Messenger of Allah, becoming his personal property, because the Muslims had not attacked its people with cavalry.”
Qur’an 9:3 “And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger to the people on the day of the Pilgrimage is that Allah and His Messenger dissolve treaty obligations with the Pagans.”
Tabari VIII:104 “Peace to whoever follows the right guidance! To proceed; Submit yourself, and you shall be safe.’”
Qur’an 49:9 “If two parties among the Believers fall into fighting, make peace: but if one becomes aggressive, then fight against the one that transgresses until it complies.”
Tabari VIII:142 “The Messenger made peace with them on condition that the Zoroastrians should be required to pay the jizyah tax [so onerous, it’s akin to economic suicide] that one should not marry their women.”
Qur’an 9:7 “How can there be a covenant between Allah and His Messenger and the disbelievers with whom you made a treaty near the sacred Mosque?” Qur’an 9:8 “How (can there be such a treaty), seeing that they get an advantage, the upper hand over you? They do not pay you respect, or honor you or the ties of kinship or covenant. With (good words from) their mouths they entice you [out negotiate you], but their hearts are averse to you.”
Qur’an 9:12 “If they violate their oaths and break treaties, taunting you for your Religion, then fight these specimens of faithlessness.”
Tabari VIII:163 “The Prophet said, ‘I think you will see Abu Sufyan [the leading Meccan merchant] come to strengthen the pact and extend the term.’” Ishaq:543 “Abu Sufyan went to Muhammad in Medina to affirm the peace treaty, but Muhammad refused to speak to him.” Tabari VIII:164 “Sufyan went to Abu Bakr and asked him to intercede, but he refused. When Sufyan asked Umar to help [avert war], he replied, ‘No way. By Allah, if I had only ant grubs, I would fight you with them! Ali said, ‘Woe to you, Sufyan. When the Messenger has determined a thing it is useless for anyone to talk to him.’”
Tabari VIII:165 “There is nothing that you can do to make peace with him.”
Tabari VIII:165 “When Abu Sufyan reported back to the Quraysh that Muhammad had given him no reply, they said, ‘Woe to you! By Allah, he did no more than play with you.’”
Ishaq:544 “Muhammad commanded the people to prepare for the foray [raid, incursion, sortie, attack, or assault]. The Messenger informed his troops that he was going to Mecca. He ordered them to prepare themselves and ready their equipment quickly. He said, ‘O Allah, keep spies and news from the Quraysh until we take them by surprise in their land.’”
Tabari VIII:182 “Allah had enabled Muhammad to take the persons of the Quraysh by force, giving him power over them so they were his booty. Their lives were now his spoil.”
Ishaq:552 “When the populace settled down, Muhammad went to the Ka’aba and compassed it seven times on his camel, touching the Black Stone with a stick. Then he went inside the Temple. There he found a dove made of wood. He broke it in his hands and threw it away.” [The first idol Muhammad broke was the international symbol of peace.]
Tabari IX:58 “When the Messenger reached Tabuk the governor of Aylah [a seaport at the north end of the Gulf of Aqabah] came to him, made a treaty, and agreed to pay the jizyah tax. The people of Jarba and Adhruh also offered to pay him the tax.”
Ishaq:607 “The Byzantines encountered the Messenger’s cavalry which was led by Khalid. Ukaydir was seized and his brother Hassan was killed. Muhammad spared his life and made peace with him on the condition that he pay the zakat tax.”
Tabari IX:79 “In this year the zakat was made obligatory, and the Messenger dispatched his agents to collect it. The verse was revealed: ‘Take the zakat from their wealth to purify them.’”
Ishaq:316 “In peace you are wild asses—rough and coarse. And in war you are like women wearing corsets. But I care not so long as my hand can grasp my trusty blade.”
Qur’an 8:61 “But if the enemy inclines toward peace, do you (also) incline to peace, and trust in Allah. Should they intend to deceive or cheat you, verily Allah suffices: He strengthened you with His aid and with Believers.” [The small print is real important. “Should they intend to deceive or cheat” is an open invitation to invoke 8:57 to 60. The first to interpret this surah said:]
Ishaq:326 “If they ask you for peace on the basis of Islam (submission), make peace on that basis. Be of one mind by His religion.”
Tabari VIII:17 “The Muslims and polytheists stayed in their positions for twenty nights with no fighting except for the shooting of arrows and the siege. When the trial became great for the people, the Messenger sent for the leaders of the Ghatafan [Meccan comrades]. He offered them a third of the date harvest of Medina on condition that they leave. The truce between the sides progressed to the point of drawing up a written document, but there was no witnessing or firm determination to make peace; it was only a matter of maneuvering.”
Ishaq:454 “Now that Allah has conferred Islam on us, and made us famous, shall we give them our property? By Allah, we will offer them only the sword until Allah judges between us.’ ‘As you wish,’ said Allah’s Messenger.”
Tabari VIII:100 “Abu Sufyan said, ‘We were merchants but the fighting between us and Muhammad has prevented us from journeying, so our wealth is depleted. [This is the purpose of terrorism.] Even after the truce with the Muslims, we fear that we still are not safe. [Muslims, continuing to plunder Meccan caravans, violated the treaty twenty times.]’”
Qur’an 4:90 “For those who join a group between you and whom there is a treaty, or (those who become) weary of fighting you, had Allah had willed, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. Therefore if they withdraw and wage not war, and send you (guarantees of) peace, then Allah has not given you a way (to war) against them.” [The purpose of terror is to cause people to become so “weary of fighting” they surrender.]
Qur’an 4:91 “You will find others who, while wishing to live in peace and being safe from you to gain the confidence of their people; thrown back to mischief headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and offer you peace besides restraining their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear sanction and authority.” [So if you wish to live in peace, but are perceived as being mischievous (i.e., non-Muslim), Allah has given his Jihad warriors “a clear sanction and authority to seize and kill” you.]

SEE THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT THESE MONSTERS BELIEVE!

Part Of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom and Courage to stay the course to Defeat the Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World to their Threat Amen

Posted by: Catherine at September 29, 2004 3:43 PM

Any mention of ignorance and cowardice in there??

Posted by: Mike at September 29, 2004 4:13 PM

epg:
Communism isn't dead, it's bruised, battered and waiting in the wings for its chance, using the same tactic as Islam has for more than a millennium

Too true. It is a utopian belief system like Islam with the exception that paradise is on earth. In implementation it employs the same methods as Islam, ie compulsion at the point of the Gulag, or the bullet in the back of the head. Neither of these ideologies are going to be completely eliminated from the planet, as they reside in the deepest recesses of the human mind, a hankering for an utopia that does nor exist. What communists are hoping is that our self-restrained struggle with Islam will weaken the West sufficiently for it to make a comeback as some kind of saviour.

All we can hope for at the momentm, is that we confine these two ideologies to safe houses where they can be carefully researched; much as one does with dangerous diseases. Universities maybe are a suitable safe location.

Posted by: DP111 at September 29, 2004 4:23 PM

Great article. Great information.
Everyone should ask the questions -
Is countries free from Muslim doctrine targeted for takeover?
If the answer is yes, then how might this be done?
In the case of the US, it can not be done militarily - then how?

From within - divide and conquer. From the articles I have read today, that should be abundantly clear. There is a flurry of mud slinging by the political parties with no apparent concern of the inroads these divide and conquer have progressed. Make no mistake, if these evil enemies of freedom and democracy succeed, everyone will pay the price - political parties - the left - the right - conservative - liberal - - everyone. As long as the United States is no longer United, there will be serious consequences. So, everyone must become united and direct their efforts toward the real enemy and do whatever needs to be done. If it takes 10 USA-PATRIOT Acts to do the job, so be it, at least the civil rights groups the ACLU will have some rights to protect.

Posted by: THSIMJ at September 29, 2004 5:37 PM

Rikki: As a regular surfer on left-pits, something I notice about liberals is when they argue with you they'll stall, side-track and change the subject rather than tackle the subject at hand head on.

Bring it on, poofy little Brit. Let's talk. You pick the topic, and I'll hand you back your candy little fanny.

The two Bush's and most likely the others you mentioned (I don't have a clue who the hell they are!!!), are in the public eye so have to keep the masses happy with syrupy, sugar-coated left-pleasing descriptions of islam.

So why does he go against what the masses want for so many other issues (abortion, taxpayer funded church-schools, etc?) If he did such a good job of making a case as to why we NEEDED to invade Iraq, why didn't he instead apply that effort to convince us that Islam in general and specifically Saudi Arabia are dangerous?

Ha-ha... you don't even know who Henry Kissinger and James Baker are? What are you, 17 years old? I'm sorry; I thought I was having an intelligent conversation. Carry on.

Gary chimes in:
...leftists like lawyer Lynne Stewart, who has been indicted for aiding and abetting the terrorist activities of her client, Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman.

If she is found guilty of abetting the jihadi, I HOPE she goes to prison, FOR LIFE. In fact, put her in a men's prison. Let her see another side of Islam, while Islam sees "the other" side of her... the "inside" if you know what I mean.

Rahman is currently doing time for his role in the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993.

Thank you, Janet Reno... how many Jihadis as Asscroft put away for life?

The Blind Sheik should have been executed for committing an act of war on US territory.

I couldn't agree more. But at least where he is now he can't attack innocent people anymore.

btw, kj, I thought about WTC '93 since your last post concerning it- and I find I do Not blame Clinton. Not for the attack.

I'm glad that YOU don't, but a lot of non-liberals do.

I will also be curious to see your republican 'reason.' I have always known what is right by the 'gut feel' of it, and if the 'reason' you are going to relate doesn't fit, we shall acquit!

What a joke... here is the difference between science and bullsh*t. You've always "known what is right" by the "gut feel of it?" Next time you're sick, don't go to your doctor, the pointy-headed, college-educated scientist. Go to your priest, preacher, immam, whatever. The reasons are coming forthwith. First I have to get through another right-wing lie festival.

One other thing, in regards to islam and the vote?

I remember Al Aryan campaigning for W. And if you go to the link that Spencer sent me about Norquist, you'll learn a little more about Islam and the conservative, republican vote.

Someone said:

2.The children of most liberals are conservatives.

And then there's the kids of Ronald Reagan, Bob Dole, and Sonny Bono.

Conservatives all too often take the views of the totally nutty left and then ascribe them to all liberals/democrats....

Right on... one could always remind the conservatives of the totally nutty rightwingers e.g. Louis FarraKLAN, Asscroft, Fred Phelps, Timothy McVeigh, Falwell, Baker, Swaggart, and Robertson, Bob Jones, David Duke, etc. etc...

Catharine, I think you may be a little bit... um... you know.

Hugh: Islam has two powerful forces working for it. Antisemitism, and anti-Americanism. No, make that three powerful forces. I almost forgot the most important of all: Stupidity.

Or ignorance... now how can I educate more liberals on the very real threat posed by Islam/jihad? By insulting them and telling them they "just hate America?" I have enlightened a couple of liberals to the truth about Islam and Israel/"palestine" (including a Unitarian... a real tough case). IT CAN BE DONE. But not with insults, and not with people babbling about blue dresses and the "evil lib'ruls."

Just because a chicken calls it's self a duck does not make it a duck!!!

And just because a draftdodging coward calls himself a patriot doesn't make him a patriot. Words can have meaning; actions do have meaning. Bush and Kerry: who served in Vietnam? Who volunteered for combat duty? Who has shrapnel in his body? Who ran to the National Guard?

Behold a good way to keep more liberals in the dark about Islam:
The lefts new bumper sticker "defend america"/defeat bush is laughable. Do they aspire to live in the Islamic States of America. We will all become like Dhimmmi"Jimmy" Carter.

Posted by: Prophet2004

epg: Communism isn't dead, it's bruised, battered and waiting in the wings for its chance...

Whatever you do, don't let yourself find out that there are three states in India where communism has been VOTED IN, including the CHRISITIAN MAJORITY Kerala! (Faint!)

"Communism! Communism! Look! A commie! Get him!" ... meanwhile, Islam grows and grows. Communism is a joke. It never works unless it's voted in (Dr. Marx said it would never work unless it was.) That's why it's failed in Russia, failing in Cuba and China, and working in Kerala, East Bengal, and Tripura. But especially in Kerala.

Man, you hate communism almost as much as John Kerry, who killed 20 of them in 'Nam. How about you, epg?

Now, here's my follow-up to that earlier post:

The democrats support black people. Republicans don’t. I know some of you will take umbrage to this, but facts are facts. In the sixties, the democrats were the party of racists that hated black people. But when Lyndon Johnson came out in support of the Civil Rights movement, a lot of those racist democrats left the party and became republicans, most of them probably didn’t care one way or the other about Civil Rights, but they wanted to get re-elected, so instead of fighting their constituents and telling them that they should still support everything ELSE in the democratic party, they just switched. (A la Reagan, Strom, Helms, Lott, etc.)

By the time Nixon implemented his “Southern Strategy” the transformation was pretty much complete, with a few hangers-on lasting until the Clinton era. The last one to leave was Richard Shelby of Allah-bama, and Zell Miller is poised to jump at any second.

My point is, only 17% of qualified black people vote. Do you think that democratic strategists don’t know that? We could easily dump the cause of black Americans and pick up a lot of voters that left us mainly because of the race issue. But we don’t, because we have been made to believe (and rightly so) that it’s more important to maintain our stance on equality for black people than court the racist, right-wing, formerly democratic vote.

(Please don't write back whining about Robert Byrd (D-KKK)... he stayed with the party when the party changed sides. Strom, Helms, et al. left the party to stay with the racism.)

I know that a lot of republicans aren’t racist, just as I know some Muslims aren’t pro-jihad. And some liberals aren’t apologists for Islam. (BTW please don’t write back telling me about the rep-con party’s tokens like Colon Powell (R-Quota), Condi Rice (R-Lesbian) and Clarence Thomas (R-Quota). They are all appointees; let’s see conservative republicans actually ELECT a black person.)

Likewise with the abortion issue, we could probably get some of those bible thumpers back into our party if we just let Scalia walk all over a woman’s right to chose. (Those Jeezo-bucks suuure would come in handy about now!) We democrats know that over 20 MILLION single women didn’t bother to vote in the last election.

The amount of votes we’d lose by letting Scalia decide whether abortion is okay is probably much less than the amount we’d gain. But we still fight for the rights of women, because we've been made to believe that it is the right thing to do.

Now for my main point: imagine if black people put all of their faith into the democrat party. (Not much a stretch, I know.) What if the democratic party abandoned them? Or lost power (not much of an "if" there I know)? They would suddenly have NO political power. Now imagine in a similar vein... what if the Zionists, anti-Jihdis, etc. put all their faith in the republican party? What if the party abandons the cause? Or what if the republican party loses the majority? Then what do we have as regards political influence?

I CAN HAPPEN. It has already happened, when the moderate, northern, republicans that enacted the Civil Rights legislation had their party go to the likes of Strom, Helms, etc. Conversely, what has happened to the democratic party since 1992 COULD happen to the repubs. I know it's not likely, not right now, but you must admit that it could happen.

I say the repubs are more likely to abandon ship that lose their power... this is especially pertinent considering the cozy relationship between the Saudi Royal family and the Bush (Royal) family.

Do you think Bush would turn his back on Israel (and oh, how that would embolden the jihadis...) if the Royals of Sodomy Arabia offered the sell America oil AT COST for five years?

Do you think it couldn't happen?

My point is, "we" anti-Jihadis should be working together to try to build our ranks.

Posted by: kj at September 29, 2004 5:39 PM

what would happen if the us changed its policy of supporting israel to a policy of neutrality? because if the usa's support of israel is such a catalyst for the jihadi's then why dont we just let israel do there own thing its not like they are not militarily strong enough to defend themselves? heck they have there own fleet of submarines, there own domestically created arms, and a bunch of israeli designed and made main battle tanks, and lets not forget atomic , and possibly hydrogen and neutron bombs. I think they are more then capable of containing the palistinains and pretecting there borders from egypt, jordan, and syria

who wants to bet that whole recent selling of 500 jdams and bunker busters was just political in nature to try and scare iran???

Posted by: riboflavin at September 29, 2004 5:44 PM

As my wife and I were discussing last week; it seems odd that the left seems to never have lost their love for Che Guevara. And, lo and behold, we hear today that the "Blockbuster New Movie" is guess what - "The Motorcuycle Diaries". The Che Guevera love-fest continues... The film reviewer says of the portrayal of Guevara's pre-revolutionary days"– an idealistic youth who studied medicine and began to imagine the possibility of things larger than his sphere of immediate influence".

The re-emergence begins. The question is, do we remember history? Do we remember what an internal insurgency really is?

Posted by: DanM at September 29, 2004 5:55 PM

The problem is the American people.Too many have never been hungry,or cold without enough clothes to keep warm.They have never sat next to their buddy ,with his belly blown open,trying to push the bowels back in while he cries for his mother.To the majority of the American people,this happens to someone else and they have never had a taste of death.islam is a religion of death,butchery and torture.I think that if most Americans saw what I did in combat they would realize that any religion that preached butchery,murder and torture that brought the results that I had a taste of in Vietnam they would realize that islam must be destroyed

Onewhowalkstall
American of the Mohawk Nation

Posted by: GRC9 at September 29, 2004 6:07 PM

KJ
Seams that your plea for the black vote is going unheard? Heard today that Kerry is losing the Black vote could it be because that 86% of the mulsum American are voteing for Kerry is it another Cindy McKinny moment Yes Blacks want a safe America too!

As far as a draft dogger didn't all you dem's say service didn't matter when Clinton was the President?

I talk to Democrats all the time and they are going to vote for Bush they don't trust the Windsurffer?

But then again they are not as crazy as you?

I can understand the need to what you would think is to defend yourself but it make you look a little needy like my spelling?

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom and courage to stay the course to Defeat the Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World to their Threat Amen

PS
Pasta tonight!!

Posted by: Catherine at September 29, 2004 6:35 PM

Onewhowalkstall
American of the Mohawk Nation

Spoken so very true. To those who see what the TV shows is not much different that a Nintendo game. To those that are there on the ground know the reality of what takes place in war. If Islam/Muslims intend to force their cult and doctrine to the point of war, then they should be eliminated forthwith. This is not a race issue - it’s the cult and doctrine issue.

Posted by: THSIMJ at September 29, 2004 6:37 PM

Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer

Who are these people who sit in front of a vase playing a flute until a viper comes out? Shouldn’t we hunt vipers?

Posted by: THSIMJ at September 29, 2004 6:46 PM

Onewhowalkstall
American of the Mohawk Nation

Posted by: GRC9 at September 29, 2004 06:07 PM

Welcome

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces [ALL] And All who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom and Courage to stay the Course to DEFEAT the Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World to their Threat Amen

God Bless the Country's who have Heros!!
Pitty the country's who need them?

Posted by: Catherine at September 29, 2004 6:56 PM

Why must the blacks always play the race card?Their race in America was merely enslaved and then released.My race was nearly exterminated but the blacks who claim their ancestors were slaves had ancestors who survived,most of mine were killed.I have no animosity to the Whites and
Blacks who did the killing,as the Great Spirit will punish them.We must all unite as Americans to destroy the disease of islam.

Onewhowalkstall
American of the Mowhawk Nation

Posted by: GRC9 at September 29, 2004 7:00 PM

kj:
Coupla factual inaccuracies in your zealous post I thought I should correct.

1. Kerala, India isn't christian majority. Its 20% christian, 20% Muslim and 60% Hindu.

2. Kerala isn't doing well at all. The commie govts have all but fuck*d up the states they rule in India - private capital has fled in droves resulting in de-industrialisation, loss of jobs, loss in income and tax revenue, rampamnt unionism even in govt has all but killed the efficiency and effectiveness of govt administered services. weakening infrastructure and the list goes on.

But yes, Kerala has done well on some social indicators - namely literacy and child mortaliity.

I agree that liberals need to be won over to the JW cause but fact is, the liberals who would have joined us have already done so and the rest won't wake up unless disaster strikes. Reminds me of Irving Kristol's famous self-description as "a liberal who has been mugged by reality."

Posted by: voletti at September 29, 2004 7:04 PM

Hey kj, "poofy little Brit !" that's hardly a liberal comment is it ? Sideswiping gays and Brits in one phrase dosen't seem to go along with your other comments about working together to fight islam.
Anyway this whole thread shows how the threat of islam is redefining the political debate. Although I guess I'm quite "liberal" in my views on the environment it does seem to me that at the moment it's usually those on the "right" who are tackling islam. The liberal left seem shackled to their Pc multi-cultural agenda and this is making them part of the problem and not the solution. I figure that islam is the main danger the world is facing now and I judge people by where they stand on that issue first and foremost. It is sad though that some on this site seem to hate each other more than they hate islam.

Posted by: Son Of Albion at September 29, 2004 7:11 PM

Actually, Keith, with a few exceptions, I found your last post fairly reasonable.

SoA~ with you on the environment, I believe.

Onewhowalkstall~ Welcome!

*runs* I'm supposed to be taking 24 hours off the comp because I'm ODing on the light pouring out of it. My wife will shoot me :P

Night everyone! Stay safe.

Posted by: Gary at September 29, 2004 7:29 PM

Onewhowalkstall
American of the Mowhawk Nation

Posted by: GRC9

You asked a very good question and also raised a very good point. History does contain events that should not have happened. If one had all the money in the world, one could not change one moment. We have to learn from history the mistakes made in the past and to use that to build the future. I presume no one likes to repeat mistakes, I don’t. I have the utmost respect and admiration for those who have emerged from the injustices inflicted and do their best for the future. Stand and walk tall with honour. Everyone should be proud of their ancestors and heritage and make sure their children are proud. As you said, “We must all unite as Americans to destroy the disease of islam.” If their goal is to destroy us, then we have to destroy them, preferably by peaceful means.

Posted by: THSIMJ at September 29, 2004 7:35 PM

It is interesting how people here debate whether islamism is more like fascism or communism. As for socialism, it becomes more like fascism the more it is realised/implemented (i.e. in terms of human freedoms/rights). Even Hitler used elements of socialism (centralised economic planning). Infact Hilter at his death bed wished that his revolution had been more socialist. The strange truth is that according to fascist ideology, because the leader of the state is supposed to be the perfect man, if that man says (in his perfect wisdom..sarcasm on)the state needs to have a centralised planned economy, then technically he/she is entitled to implement this. These totalitarian ideologies just differ in the tools they use for state control. Islamism uses what I think is just a kind of dictatorial manifesto using the threat of constant state violence to control a society...so I think in that way it is fascist (yet like socialism the script of how to do this is fixed and unchanging). Unlike fascism the dictator isnt alive to make new dictates so as to change the script, which under fascist ideology he/she is allowed to do. At the same time like socialism, radical islamism promises a utopia/perfect society, and like communism not only utterly fails in doing this, but results in a significant worsening in the societies social and economic situation. Lets face it, communism for the man on the street isn't that different from fascism.

I think islamism is in many ways a blend of both, utopian socialism (planned ideologically unchanging social/economic control) and fascism (irrational violent commandments/dictates with room for a rudimentary capitalism). I guess that is why islamism is so hard to pin down.

When you go to the extremes of left and right, in terms of human rights/freedom the two join up and meet and islamism is there to greet them too. Islamism is a dragon painted red and black and comes up green.

Posted by: obl r us at September 29, 2004 7:41 PM

Posted by: GRC9 at September 29, 2004 07:00 PM

I know that they have been coming into the lands and doing bad things heard that now you let the cops chase them into the lands!! This is good We will win this war against this Evil!!

KEith[kj] is an angry white man? He sees the truth but is not happy with the truth?

Men like kj will stand and fight he is working hard for kerry and is sad he is not doing well?

The sadest thing is they people like [kj] [kerry] play into the Evil they come then try to divde then they kill what they can not convert?

The mulsums now are trying to divide even today a LIB judge said that part of the Pariot act was no good?

This is bad for us all I see a war here and the libs as you say will learn what it is to be hungry?

I also Remember when carter was president and the farmers went on strike and a woman in NYC said she didn't care she got her food from the store? [I was young]

This is now what the Democrats are thinking now and their leaders are wrong without the Farmers the store has nothing!!

If a viper is a snake that can harm you kill it and make a hat ban!!

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom and Courage to stay the course to DEFEAT the Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World to the Threat Amen

Posted by: Catherine at September 29, 2004 7:43 PM

P.S. I do suspect many on the left want to team up with the islamists to slay their common enemy, the democratic west. It makes alot of ideological sense. The US is the opposite of the rigidly planned utopia of both their dreams. These people though are trully loony..their ideologies have had their day and failed. Both see their ideologies as a relgion, so faith replaces reason and knowledge of reality. I think some on the left just want to make america more like Sweden than the USSR but what they forget is their islamist allies want to destroy Sweden too. Sweden is profoundly more like the US than Iran. Like the the democratic government in the weimar republic, they think that islamism is a beast they can use for their benefit for a while then discard. Tragic stupdity. Histroy repeats.

Posted by: obl r us at September 29, 2004 8:02 PM

People need to realize that the islamic religion was invented by mohamed to control his followers.mohamed was a bandit and butcher who saw how the Jews and Christians controled their people useing religion.So he took pieces of both and created a religion of injustice,butchery,torture and many other evil words to control his followers and each generation after him added more.mohamed was murdered by one of his followers who wanted all the power,as were many after.It is like saying Adolph Hitler was a prophet from God and Mein Kampf is the quran.

Onewhowalkstall
American of the Mohawk Nation

Posted by: GRC9 at September 29, 2004 8:07 PM

I'd say that Islam poses a greater threat to
humanity than either Nazism or Communism.

Look at it this this way: if you weren't packed off
to an extermination camp/gulag, or murdered by the
Gestapo like my great-uncle in Brussels, life
would still have been tolerable in many ways for the
average person even under occupation. You could still
have gone to the movies, the theatre, concerts, night-clubs,
the pub, art-galleries, museums, read novels and comic-books,
listened to music on the radio and even painted portraits of
nude models from life.

You could have drunk schnapps or vodka, listened to your
friends tell dirty jokes, laughed, sung your head off down
a beer cellar, smoked cigarettes, picked up girls/boys, fooled
around and had passionate affairs with different partners.

Now imagine life in the west under Muslim occupation.

Which of the above would the Taliban have permitted, or
any sour-faced disapproving Ayatollah?

The answer, obviously, is NONE.

And what would be the punishments meted out for such
intolerable 'crimes'? Anything from whipping to amputation
to stoning.

An ideology worse than either the Nazis or Communists - quite an
achievement! (Probably Islam's only achievement.)

I came across a wonderful quote from Khomeini on a British
Islamist website (which I now can't find because the site
is down.) Something like -

'There is no room for jokes or fun of any kind under Islam.'

The message might start to get through if that were printed
on cards and handed out to everyone in the civilized world!

Benelux

Posted by: Benelux at September 29, 2004 8:18 PM

Hello all,

A humble perspective from abroad (no, not from Europe. Nor the ME either. I'll let you guess).
I do think that many people in the left have made (are making) several terrible misjudgements, counfounding a caricatural perception (the idea of poor war-torn countries opressed by the powerful war machines in search of oil) with the real issues (a group of madmen who despise western values and mankind in general and politically use religion for their purposes). And I never understood in the first place why everybody in the Left all over the world loves the palestinians: they suffer, of course, but then there are so much more people in the world that suffer so much and do not put bombs in buses.
But it is also true that some of the divisions between the American Left and Right (or between Republicans and Democrats - I'm not really sure if they qualify as "left"?) are hard to understand.
It is true that this is (mainly) a war of images, and in this respect Bush has made many mistakes. He not only has a very bad image outside America, but at least half of America doesn't like him so much either. I am sure that he is much smarter than people give him credit for (and for all his language mistakes, he is a more effective communicator than Kerry will ever be).
Then again, Bush and his group have made several errors that do not help the fight against terrorism. The whole issue of the causus belli, for instance, most of it based on spin and lies, WMD etc. OK, let's pass that: I suppose all governments are necessarily hypocritical up to a certain point. Abu Grahib was a worse mistake, not because the torture in itself (the terrorists are much worse in this point), but because it created the perfect recruiting material for OBL's gang. (If Caesar's wife need not only to be faithful, but to seem faithful, then I guess that we need not only to fight for democracy, but to seem to be fighting for democracy too.)
Personally, I do not know much about Kerry (unfortunately his campaign has been too much centered in the anybody-but-bush issue), but I do not think that his ideas are that much radically different from Bush's in what matters. Also: I do have several doubts about Bush, and I do not like much his own way of not separating religion and politics (and this is a fight between secularism and theocracies), or the saudi arabia connection (in a way, american money is paying for fundamentalism), but I'd rather live in a world controlled by Bush's America than under Osama's theocracy (And I guess that is true also for (most) people in the Left.)
All this to say: naive as this sounds, I think that it should be time to unite. The differences between Left and Right (or Republicans and Democrats, or even the US and Europe) really pale in comparison with the difference between the Western ideas of civilization (imperfect as they are) and these islamist madmen's ravings. They are the guys who need to be defeated.

Posted by: cronopio at September 29, 2004 9:39 PM

cronopio

Well said. The ideal situation would be if all the free and democratic countries would forget their inner disagreements and picky attitudes toward other countries and unite against the common enemy, the problem would be solved. Speaking of the Palestinians - from what I have read, the only peaceful approach they made was to stall for time while they made further plans of attack. There are the ones who have manner of words, theory and descriptions to describe the problem. However, when one group of people plan to take over the whole world even by force, the bottom line is the same. That should be simple enough to figure out. It is difficult to figure out what politicians and governments are doing and what they will do when they meet behind closed doors. I doubt if the citizens know the true facts. Most of the people I have mentioned Muslims to, don’t seem the least interested - as if it isn’t a problem. The more time the enemy has to get his plans in place, the harder he is to defeat. Hopefully it won’t come to that.

Posted by: THSIMJ at September 29, 2004 10:10 PM

Still having trouble signing in

Posted by: Carolyn2 at September 29, 2004 10:22 PM

Well put, Benelux-
Just listen to Beethoven or look at a Van Gough, then think of not having that freedom, just to hear and see what is on the table of western culture. Think of everything you love smashed like the giant Buddas.
Your right Mohawk-
Islam is a disease and death is the cure!

Posted by: D' Artist at September 29, 2004 10:39 PM

cronopio wrote:

'naive as this sounds, I think that it should be time to unite. The differences between Left
and Right (or Republicans and Democrats, or even the US and Europe) really pale in comparison
with the difference between the Western ideas of civilization (imperfect as they are) and these
islamist madmen's ravings. They are the guys who need to be defeated.'

Cronopio, I couldn't agree more! This is a message that cannot be repeated often enough.

Hopefully once the US election fever is over, the so-called left and right there
will be able to transcend their (really very small) differences and unite to face the real enemy.

We must also get over seeing Russia as a traditional enemy and instead see the
Russians as welcome allies in a common cause.

We should similarly include India in the anti-Jihad and, if possible, China (which has Muslim
'insurgents' of its own - where doesn't?!) India and China may seem more 'remote' than Russia,
but they're vibrant cultures full of life and creativity compared to the vicious sterile
negativity of the Islamic mindset.

The Islamists are attacking dozens of faiths and cultures all around the globe: the
rest of humanity has no option but to unite to crush them.

Benelux

Posted by: Benelux at September 29, 2004 10:40 PM

An observation, Keith.

A while back in another thread you stated to Kafira that you always tried to take the "high road" in these partisan dust-ups. How does that jibe with the name-calling that goes on in your posts? Examples:

Whorowitz and Dr. Whora
Colon Powell
Asscroft
R-Quota
R-Lesbian

and so on.

Don't try and tell me "this is humor", because while you may find it clever and/or hilarious, the intent here is obviously a personal attack on the individual. If you don't like these people, fine, but the name mangling doesn't do much to further any arguments you have against them. Just as you argue (quite correctly) that insults from the right wing would turn off a great many liberals reading here, this stuff turns people off on what you have to say. I don't see very many right-wingers here using the same tactic with their targets on the left.

I find a great many of your arguments and comments on jihad very well thought out, and your last post has some good food for thought, but this type of stuff in your posts blunts the effect. In the cases I've seen where you score major points and kudos, this stuff is missing from those posts.

Posted by: Walker Colt at September 29, 2004 10:44 PM

Correction, KJ: Horowitz didn't defect from liberalism, but from Marxism. He is a self-described "red diaper baby" born to parents who defended Stalin and all the others. Liberalism is the belief that liberty is the highest political good; Marxism that the teleology of history is the classless society, with public ownership of the means of production and violent suppression of counterrevolutionary elements as waystations towards that goal. SO, KJ, this time you were the one indiscriminately lumping liberals and radicals.

Also, Hugh, Fascism and Communism are cut from the same socialist cloth. Fascism is merely Marxist totalitarianism grown smart enough to recognize that coopeted capitalists make good managers for the state's economic assets, and that operatic trimmings make for great political theater.

Either way things are cut, though, radical leftism is showing itself as a purely destructive and degerative force that will join forces with anyone to destroy the civilization that nurtured it. Ecrassez l'infame! (that's for Voltaire).

Posted by: Kepha1 at September 30, 2004 12:37 AM

Another interesting fact to consider is that Michael Moore, who is decidely left wing, has said openly that what he says is propaganda (i.e. lies/distortions) with the intent to make america more like a social democracy.

Many times I have heard of how he loves the social democracies of europe and sees tham a as vastly superior to the US system. I also remeber how in his early days he basically told the truth and did alot of good (remember 'The Aweful Truth" program), then as he realised the system wasn't going to change to his liking he became more radical and was prepared to distrort the truth for his ideological goals (i.e. social democracy).

He isn't the only one too, as here in Australia a man called John Pilger started of as logical left wing humanist too, yet has become a radical loony left propagandist who, as many people have said, has become a moral pygmy for his ideological cause.

So I think many of these leftists know the truth about many things, like Islamism, yet they beleive that the truth needs to be sacrificed for the greater good of the US (in their opinion). They feel, from experience, that this is the only way they can change/transform the US liberal democractic system. They value truth less than their party and its goals.

I can see the logic in this but unfortunately as I have said before they are naively playing with an islamist dragon that will one day eat them (and us) alive. Me, I am on the side of Saint George. Riding the (feral) islamist dragon is insane...it isn't domesticated.

Posted by: obl r us at September 30, 2004 12:39 AM

Typo: I meant:

"Like the the democratic government in the weimar republic, they (the worlds leftist parties/movements) think that islamism is a beast they can use for their benefit for a while then discard."

Posted by: obl r us at September 30, 2004 4:43 AM

Well Said and On-target, Walker. I get tired of people like kj attributing wrong-thinking to those of us who disagree with him. I will be curious to see what he posts here the day his man goes down whimpering in flames.

(I'm still supposed to be staying away from the comp due to these day-long headaches, so I am taking advantage of the good weather for some serious hiking today. Stay safe, everyone!)

Posted by: Gary at September 30, 2004 7:58 AM

Bring it on, poofy little Brit. Let's talk. You pick the topic, and I'll hand you back your candy little fanny.

Actually I'm bi-sexual not a "poof", up for a bit???
Mind you, I'm quite tall and wide so I wouldn't hold much hope of being in the dominant position.

Well, I was actually talking about the more ignorant lefties who refuse to recognise jihad as a threat, in neither the form of terrorism nor demographics.
But seen as you asked so nicely, okay you loud-mouthed, bag of frogs, lets have it:

I believe the Iraq war was totally necessary for these reasons.

1>To take the war to the jihadists shores rather than ours (something that Kerry would have us all doing!!!),
2>To rid the Middle East of one of it's most dangerous tyrants (mission accomplished!!!), who WAS building WMD whether we found them or not ( Hell there were enough hiding places surrounding Iraq mentioning no names...*Cough!!!*...SYRIA...), the fact that we found none is irrelevant, the point is the bastard was going to use them against us when he DID have his full arsenal.
3> To create a west-friendly, democratic government, to replace Saddams corrupt baathists, smack-bang in the centre of the ME where it is needed most.
There are so many advantages to this I barely know where to start:
Set up CIA and other western counter terrorist agencies and networks in the M.E (thats were most of the islamic terrorists live, and plan there attacks you know).
A new era of freedom for the Iraqi people who for so long have suffered.
To combat the violent jihad, "corrupt islamic teachings" head on with westernized values, making new generations realize that we are not the enemy, and the "Great Satan", there parents and media, have painted us as for so long.
New democracy will allow religious freedom, so those wanting to become apostates or christians will be free to do so ( further combating the violent corruption of islam).
Aside from this there is the better education system, the greater strategic position to fight against terror , DO you really wan me to continue.

Okay Keith, now that is the kind of argument I'd put forward to liberals I've tried to have a sensible discussion with, and usually the only responses I get are :
A) It's right-wing propaganda, bullshit (with no sufficient argument to counter mine, prove it wrong or any kind of alternative solutions offered!!!)
B) Your Ignorant/ the war was supposed to be about WMD and none have been found/it's an illegal occupation (which means all the positive points I raised have either been ignored, or are in the eyes of the argue-ee, are just not important (which shows their common sense)
C)If we stopped helpingh Israel, left Iraq terror would stop....OR..... The militants are fighting us because they want us out of Iraq (errr... Mr.liberal, if the terrorists stopped bombing innocents trying to make a new life fopr themselves, and our troops, the coalition forces might be a little closer to getting the hell out of there).

So KJ, there are my opinions of Iraq, with a few liberal style "counter-attacks". I give you a lot more credit than these kind of ignorant liberals, you are a lot more open-minded, and apparently not as blind... your just too stubborn to admit that a right-winger might be right!!!
I await your response, and if you counter me with any of the typical ignorant liberal bullshit I've just highlighted (or anyhting even simular), you will have proven me 100% correct, making you look a wee bit foolish in the process ( or is that MORE FOOLISH???).

See Ya, don't wanna be ya!!!

Posted by: Rikki at September 30, 2004 8:47 AM

Keith:

I'm not a partisan, but I notice that you keep leaving out a few facts when describing Bush's and Kerry's miltary service.

Kerry first applied for a student deferrment and was denied. He then signed up for the Naval Reserves, not the USN as stated on his website, and was called up.

Bush volunteered for Vietnam duty TWICE (it's in the record) but was turned down because they didn't fly the aircraft he was trained on at that time in Vietnam.

This requires no response, but if you decide to reply, please do so respectfully.

Posted by: CGW at September 30, 2004 9:23 AM

CGW, all that is needed is for Kerry to do this:

http://www.archives.gov/facilities/mo/st_louis/military_personnel_records/standard_form_180.html#sf

And both he and Bush will be on equal standing. At least when it comes to being forthcoming about military records.

Posted by: Gary at September 30, 2004 10:13 AM

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her [Iraqi people too] give them Strength,Wisdom and Courage to stay the course to Defeat the Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World to their Threat Amen

PS
Fun for today
http://www.beecy.net/frank/
Strangers on my flight,
turbans they're packin'.
Wonderin' if they might,
plan a hijacking.
They could pull a stunt,
before this flight is through.

Something's on their minds.
I saw them mutter.
What that in their hands?
Looks like box cutters,
I'm gonna kick some ass,
if they make a move.

Strangers on my flight.
Two smelly people,
and they're not talking right;
and in a moment,
I will grab base ball bat;
and that will be that.
Swing like Joe DiMaggio,
and rip them both a new a-hole.

And if they pick a fight,
and try to screw us,
I'll punch out their lights,
just like Joe Louis.
It would feel so right,
for strangers on my flight.

Ratta Tat Tat Tat,
Budda Bing Bang Boom,
Zooma Zooma Zoom.

Send those bastards to the moon....

Posted by: Catherine at September 30, 2004 10:45 AM

Keith reminds me of Monty Python and it is only a flesh wound not admitting when he is injured?
The proof is out there and has been seen and denied by him many times we know that he gets his news from Dan Rather? Again one more time they had really bad things? They invaded other countrys and we know we all use oil look at the people in Fla. Crying because the don’t have ele. Where do you think you get that stuff to heat and cool your houses and run your computers? Do you drive a car well stop and start walking?

As far as WMD?

Radioactive Missiles Found In Iraq
Charles R. Smith
Tuesday, Mar. 9, 2004
U.S. Army troops operating at a former Iraqi air base recently made a startling discovery: Russian made missiles marked with radioactive warning signs.
Army bomb disposal troops confirmed using Geiger counters that the missiles are indeed radioactive.
The discovery is not, however, considered the long sought after "smoking gun" of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
The missiles appear to be part of a cache of weapons supplied to Iraq before the 1991 Gulf war.
The Russian made R-60, NATO code name AA-8 Aphid, air-to-air missiles are part of a huge stockpile of former Iraqi Air Force munitions uncovered in over a dozen concrete bunkers. The Russian made missiles are over 6 feet long and each carries 1.6 kilograms or about 3.5 pounds of radioactive uranium wrapped around a high explosive warhead.
The uranium is not pure enough nor in large enough quantity to be a nuclear warhead but it is dangerous enough, as you can see from the label:

Now think about all the drugs that come into the country? LOOK at the 9/11 report and in that book it said he was working with TERRORIST maybe not on 9/11/2001 but were we to wait for another smoking GUN REMEMBER a gun only smokes after it has gone OFF!!

Gen.Tommy Franks said we are in this war now do you want to fight it over here or over there?

Reprinted from NewsMax.com
Confessions of Al-Qaida Suspects Who Allegedly Planned Attacks Aired
NewsMax Wires
Tuesday, Apr. 27, 2004
AMMAN, Jordan - Al-Qaida plotted bomb and poison gas attacks against the U.S. Embassy and other targets in Jordan, suspects confessed in a videotape that aired Monday on Jordanian state television. A commentator said the plotters hoped to kill 80,000 people.
One of the alleged conspirators, Azmi al-Jayousi, said he was acting on the orders of Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian wanted by the United States for allegedly organizing terrorists to fight U.S. troops in Iraq on behalf of al-Qaida. U.S. officials have offered a $10 million reward for his capture.
Al-Jayousi, identified as the head of a Jordanian terror cell, said he met al-Zarqawi in neighboring Iraq to plan the attacks.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/002427.php
July 07, 2004
A major achievement: US removes 1.7 metric tons of radioactive material from Iraq
Here are 1.7 metric tons of radioactive material that won't find their way into dirty bombs detonated in New York City. From the BBC, with thanks to Richard:
Along with 1.77 tons of enriched uranium, about 1,000 "highly radioactive sources" were also removed.
The material was taken from a former nuclear research facility on 23 June, after being packaged by 20 experts from the US Energy Department's secret laboratories.
It was flown out of the country aboard a military plane in a joint operation with the Department of Defense, and is being stored temporarily at a Department of Energy facility.

Now think of the DIRTY BOMBS we are ?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3872201.stm

The US has revealed that it removed more than 1.7 metric tons of radioactive material from Iraq in a secret operation last month.
"This operation was a major achievement," said US Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham in a statement.
He said it would keep "potentially dangerous nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists".
Along with 1.77 tons of enriched uranium, about 1,000 "highly radioactive sources" were also removed.
The material was taken from a former nuclear research facility on 23 June, after being packaged by 20 experts from the US Energy Department's secret laboratories.

Osama Bin Laden’ man held for extortion
Tribune News Service
New Delhi, May 17
A resident of Ambala who was posing as a member of Al-Qaida’s organisation of “Osama Bin Laden Network” to extort money from the industrialists and jewellers was apprehended by the Delhi Police Special Cell.
The man used to send threatening e-mails and letters to his victims.
One computer, CPU, floppy and a paper containing the e-mail address of jewellers and industrialists were recovered from his possession.
The accused has been identified as Rakesh Kumar Kashyap (31), resident of Ambala. He was caught from a cyber café in Paharganj on May 16 while he was trying to send the threatening e-mails.
BY JAMES TARANTO
Tuesday, May 18, 2004 4:39 p.m. EDT
Spinning the Sarin
Tests confirm that artillery shell that blew up in Iraq did indeed contain sarin--between three quarts' and a gallon's worth, Fox News reports. The New York Times buries the story on page 11 (something about weddings in Massachusetts led the front page, bizarrely enough), and it's shot through with pro-Saddam spin:
The discovery of the sarin-filled shell appears to offer some of the most substantial evidence to date that Mr. Hussein did not destroy all of the banned chemical agent, as he claimed before the war last year. It provides some solace, and possibly fresh leads, to the American teams that have been conducting an otherwise fruitless search for the weapons for more than a year.
The Bush administration's belief that Mr. Hussein continued to maintain stocks of such banned weapons was the primary justification put forward for invading Iraq in March 2003. American inspectors scouring the country since April 2003 have so far found little evidence that Mr. Hussein maintained such weapons or a program to produce them.
Even more brazen spin comes from the liberal Detroit Free Press, which editorializes:
This new and dangerous aspect of the war may be a consequence of the American failure to secure hundreds of Iraqi weapons caches and ammunition dumps during the race to Baghdad. There was simply too much stuff and not enough troops.
Now, this may all be true. But isn't it amazing how the argument switched from "no WMDs" to "too much stuff" in the blink of an eye?
Writing in The American Spectator Online, George Neumayr argues that the find confirms weapons inspector David Kay's case for war: "We know that terrorists were passing through Iraq," Kay told Congress "And now we know that there was little control over Iraq's weapons capabilities. I think it shows that Iraq was a very dangerous place. The country had the technology, the ability to produce, and there were terrorist groups passing through the country--and no central control."

HOW SOON WE FORGET!!

LETS NOT FORGET THE 50 PLANES BURRIED IN THE SAND AND THEY WERE NOT AGAINST THE UN CHARTER?

Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength,Wisdom and Courage to stay the course to Defeat the Islamic Terrorist and ALL who Support them Open the Eyes of the World and Give them Courage Amen

Posted by: Catherine at September 30, 2004 11:37 AM

CGW and Gary,

I think what Kerry doesn't seem to realise (and this is comming from a "poofy brit" who knows bugger all about US politics) is that to win, he need not change every single policy George Bush introduced nor challenge every decision, all that needed to be done is Alterations of them, the conservatives would have voted him in as an alternative, and the liberals...well...because they're liberals.

What I mean is if Kerry had've said, regarding Iraq: "The Iraq war may have been a mistake, but we have started it now, and must see it through, and we will continue the fight against terror until we are certain that 9/11 will never be repeated.".... Or something along those lines then I'd have taken my hat off to him, and I wouldn't be so worried about him taking the throne.
But he's revealed himself to be nothing more than a spineless, hypocritical liar, who's done nothing more than undermine Bush's every effort, has opposed the war on terror to the point of ridicule, and more importantly has not come up with one single solution to terrorism, rather he resorted to the lowest common denominator of slagging off Bush, without revealing his own fold on things (oh yeah apart from weaker military, softer approaches to terror-laws, and a lie-down effort in Iraq- is there any wonder people are saying Kerry's in with Al Qaeda, people guffaw when this is said, sadly it ain't far from the truth).

So bottom line, it's too late for Kerry to change his policies to something a little bit tougher, and if the people of the USA want there country safe, then I think Bush is the ONLY sensible vote (and Arnie says so...)!!!

Posted by: Rikki at September 30, 2004 12:43 PM

Right there with you, Rikki. As has been noted, his claim that President Bush is going to reinstate the draft, has already been proven wrong by bloggers in pyjamas, and the democrats who actually fielded the idea (such as Rangel) have already been tagged as the actual source of the idea.
Among other things:

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/rn20040930.shtml

As always, it is warning, not whining. There was One good Democratic candidate whom I would have voted for, and they blew him out first: Lieberman. He speaks with more honesty than the rest of them who ran, put together.

Posted by: Gary at September 30, 2004 1:07 PM

Oh, and Keith? Any and ALL hype that 'Kerry won' the debate is just that. I mean, we're supposed to believe the liberal elite (hardly)'mainstream' media? Please. President Bush missed several good opportunities- such as pointing out that France, Germany and a number of other countries have already bowed out of an coalition Kerry would try to put together. They'd sooner let Iraq fall apart, then step in to pick up the pieces, mostly thru oil. Sure as Hell isn't the US who is after oil, eh Keith?

Posted by: Gary at October 1, 2004 3:17 PM

Thank you kj

I learned more from the responses then your original post. :)

It is only under total freedom that you will find out what kind of person one truly is.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks.

There are risks and costs to a program of action. But they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction. John F. Kennedy

You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war. Albert Einstein, (attributed)

Half of the American people have never read a newspaper. Half never voted for President. One hopes it is the same half. Gore Vidal

Posted by: Bar at October 2, 2004 2:08 AM

When I was a little boy I asked my father what’s the difference between a democrat and a republican?
My fathers answer was,
Well son a democrat wants more government and more taxes and socialistic type of America.
A republican wants less government less taxes and more freedom.

How right my father was and still is.

Mr Kerry your response please.
“I can make American safer than President Bush has made us. “
“I have a better plan for homeland security. I have a better plan to be able to fight the war on terror by strengthening our military, strengthening our intelligence, by going after the financing more authoritatively, by doing what we need to do to rebuild the alliances, by reaching out to the Muslim world, which the president has almost not done, and beginning to isolate the radical Islamic Muslims, not have them isolate the United States of America”
“And we don't have enough troops there.”

Mr Bush your response please.
“I don't think we want to get to how he's going to pay for all these promises”

KJ, your buddy doesn’t think Pres. Bush has reached out to Muslims enough!

Al Qaeda for Kerry!

Posted by: Bar at October 2, 2004 3:56 AM