May God have mercy on their souls.

Posted by: Sebastien at June 20, 2006 10:39 AM

americaningermany -- We all know that CNN will suggest that the barbaric murders of these servicemen is the result of American mistreatment of detainees at Gitmo or Abu Ghraib. Out of 'respect' they will wait a 'decent interval' before trotting out this filth.

Posted by: jsla at June 20, 2006 10:53 AM

God Bless the memory of these two solders. God, give confort to their families.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 20, 2006 10:57 AM

We are living in times where two different set of laws seem to apply within the World bodies. While the Islamic world is allowed to freely commit such horrific acts as the above (not to mention the mind-numbing regularity of beheadings, torture, strapping themselves with bombs to blow up innocent targets) with hardly a word of condemnation from Human Rights organizations, let alone any strict actions against the regimes and societies that support these criminals... while the rest of the World is expected to adhere to and comply with the strictest standards of human rights.

Posted by: Razdan at June 20, 2006 10:57 AM

Where is the outrage in the media? Where are the reports on CNN?
Where are the calls for revenge by US?
Where are the protesters?
from the above post by americaningermany

Just as in Islam, history must serve theology, because to them, islamic theology creates truth. The socialist utopians at CNN, other MSM outlets, and "social justice" protestors spew their spin vomit because in their view, facts must serve ideology. To them, ideology creates truth. There is little difference between Islam and these PC, multicultural groups at this abstract level.

Posted by: William the Sinner at June 20, 2006 11:02 AM

americaningermany -- You are so right! Where are all the news media when barbaric things happen to americans? but if it was reverse! The outrage would be defining!

Sad but most media and the world want us to fail!

Posted by: Bilas at June 20, 2006 11:03 AM

I'm sure millions of Muslims are demonstrating and rioting in the streets as a protest againts this grave injustice wrongfully perpetrated in the name of Islam, the religion of peace. The only reason you will never hear about these protesters is because of the ubiquitous Media Conspiracy, which only concentrates on the negative aspects of Islam, in an effort to spread hate and ignorance.

...

Sorry, I was having a multiculturalism episode, there.

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at June 20, 2006 11:03 AM

Well said Razdan.

Now the media needs to read the verse that says smite the infidel at the neck when they talk about this atrocity.

And the muslims have the gall to bitch about their people accidentally being killed when they hide terrorists.

Posted by: freewoman at June 20, 2006 11:06 AM

Of course they were killed barbarically because that's how mass murderer Muhammad killed and is what he advocated for his followers

Allah's Apostle said: "I have been made victorious with terror" Bukhari 4:52:220

Posted by: dennisw at June 20, 2006 11:08 AM

No, we do NOT share a civilization a God or a conscience with Islam. Not all Muslims degrade their own humanity in this way, BUT Islam leaves ample 'room' for such behavior (with plenty of examples from Mo)

As a Jew I see my Bible as a record of an understanding of God that refines and sharpens and intensifies till it reaches the sublimity of Isaiah and Amos. ("Let justice flow like a river..." )The Quran starts as a mild and confused crib of the Bible and culminates in a bullying and bloodthirsty rant.

Posted by: poetcomic1 at June 20, 2006 11:09 AM

During the Kargil conflict, pakistanis cut Indian POW's joint by joint. A similar treatment was given to these soldiers. When we see videos of beheadings, it is all over in minutes. And those killed by the bullets and the bombs have an easy death. I might sound morbid, but this death is the best. zarkawi lived for 52 minutes after the bombing. These soldiers, I think, suffered agony for 48 hours. We cannot imagine the pain that these 2 soldiers suffered in their last days. Yes, the MSM will say they were beheaded. They were beheaded when they were almost at death's door. The first report I read had the statement of a military personnel, he said "we have found the remains of 2 men, and will ascertain if they were the missing soldiers", and was chilled to the bone. "Remains" is what is used to describe the mangled bodies after a blast.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 20, 2006 11:10 AM

It is instructive to look at what happened to prisoners on either side during various Arab-Israeli wars. The Arabs were treated with scrupulous decency. But very few of the Jewish soldiers taken alive by the Arab enemy (save when they were soldiers in the Arab Legion of Jordan, that is trained by British officers (such as John Glubb -- Glubb Pasha -- and Alec Kirkbride, not to do what came naturally to them to do) remained alive. The cutting off of genitalia, stuffing them in the mouths, that kind of thing -- routine.

Look back at what happened after, for example, the 1967 war, when tens of thousands of Egyptians were exchanged for -- just how many Israelis were taken, and remained alive to be returned? And the 1973 War?

What do you think comes naturally to Arab and Muslim armies? Have you read the histories? The histories not merely of Saddam Hussein, but the histories that remain as vivid and inspiring, of Arab and Muslim armies in the distant past, as today's news?

What did anyone expect?

Posted by: Hugh at June 20, 2006 11:18 AM

The checkpoint, thanks to the pussyfooting military strategy of this entire campaign,
failed to "Secure your perimeter".

And, because of the self-gelded battle plan, two more good guys are sacrificied to the god of P.C.

You don't fight cobras with your bare hands.

You don't fight the jihad with kid gloves.

This entire "police action stype" operation in Iraq is hamstrung by the old "winning hearts and minds" folly that failed utterly in 'Nam.

Japan was not stopped with chocolates for the kiddies and waves and smiles and rebuilding schools and letting your soldiers and Marines be slaughtered in order to look "better than the enemy" and "not stoop to his level".

War is fought by doing what Patton recommended:

"Tear out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of your tanks."

The enemy is stopped by being dead -or terrified into paralysis and total surrender- not by being convinced.

Nothing will "convince" the jihadis, because they have an eternal Koranic hatred of all infidels.

Loosing the dogs of war should be more than a metaphor.

(Maybe freeing two of those convicted for "abuses" ["Oh, the humanity! These inhuman torturers let dogs bark in their faces and put panties on their poor heads!"] at Abu Ghraib - to replace these lost soldiers- needs to be done... to signal that, because the terrorist jihadist enemy has 'changed the rules', and we will now stop the godddamned tiptoeing and start kicking ass for real.)

I'm still waiting for the "Shock and Awe".

Instead of the Shuck and Jive.

Posted by: profitsbeard at June 20, 2006 11:22 AM

At abu ghraib prisoners were forced to build a human pyramid,had dogs growl at them, and had underwear placed on their (still attached) heads - the horror, the horror... Obviously there can be no surrender.

Posted by: MP at June 20, 2006 11:27 AM

Water does'nt always put the fire out and like any bush fire (pun intended) one has to fight fire with fire...

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at June 20, 2006 11:34 AM

Some posters here were hopeful that this is another ransom attempt by the jihadis. I believed it since I think I wanted to believe it. On Sunday, when I heard this news, I was very afraid.
"The cutting off of genitalia, stuffing them in the mouths, that kind of thing -- routine."
Hugh

This is just the beginning. The application of salt, pepper and acid to wounds is next. But they don't start cutting until they have finished with the pulling. Teeth and nails. Then they scalp. The actual joint by joint cutting is the last stage that can last for a day or two. I have read about this in History books. That was why I was afraid.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 20, 2006 11:37 AM

I think this was a given. I hate these savages with the "white hot hatred of a thousand suns".
They don't deserve democracy, they deserve a load from a high flying B-1.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 20, 2006 11:37 AM

Yet another tragedy.

Perhaps what needs to happen is a complete separation of militants from the general population, as in Malaya in the 1960s and Singapore under Lee Kwan Yew.

Although the Singapore experience essentially suspended all 'human rights' it achieved a rarity in that region of the world - a stable democratic government. Maybe what needs to happen is a complete crackdown on any form of Islamic extremism, with extremist deported for life (literally) to a secure facility in one part of the world. Treat them well (ie not like Abu Grahib) but isolate them for the rest of their lives where noone will hear their vitriol and hatred again.

As an interesting aside - I understand that the muslims in China are not nearly as violent or extreme as they are in the Mideast. This appears to be due to their isolation from some of the more extreme views coming from the Middle East, but it may also be due in part to their Chinese nature.

Posted by: Jerusalem at June 20, 2006 11:43 AM

Post this at a forum like craigslist, and you will see the majority of American posters respond with variations on the theme of "We deserve it" -- along with the obligatory "Bush is a chimp".

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 11:44 AM

Is this really a surprize? I really don't know how many times the public has to be hit in the head by a hammer to get the point that this is a concrete example, one of thousands, of what Islam is really all about. This kind of savagery is what the Qur'an and Islam religiously sanctifies, teaches and glorifies.

It may be that the "moderate Muslims,"in their hundreds of millions, are hanging back, observing on the sides of the field as they watch their more aggressive teammates play. The watchers may not be audibly cheering them on but, you can bet that if the Muslim team wins, the spectators, who didn't want to get in the active game, will cheer the victory and rush in to claim the victory and take the goal posts.

Even with all the spin and filtering the MSM uses, the light bulb has got to light sometime, doesn't it?

Posted by: GaryK at June 20, 2006 11:47 AM

-Jerusalem,

It's due to the fact that the PRC government would eradicate them like the vermin they are if they got uppity.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 20, 2006 11:47 AM

-skald,

I've said the same thing many a time (though not here).

Don't forget about Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and other places east of India. Plenty of mohammedans in those places and you wouldn't want them to feel left out.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 20, 2006 11:52 AM

May God have mercy on their souls.

They are heros (Martyrs) and I do not feel sorry for what we will do to some Islamic prisoners. We will be even more barbaric. We will let pigs eat their intestines and dogs piss on their entrails. Oh wait, i'm living in a dream world. Nevermind, we can't even touch a koran in guantanamo.

Others are correct. In order to defeat them we have to be more brutal and on a larger scale. Woe the day when we became subject to the court of public opinion.

Posted by: Matt at June 20, 2006 11:53 AM

"This appears to be due to their isolation from some of the more extreme views coming from the Middle East, but it may also be due in part to their Chinese nature."
-- from a posting above

The Hui and the Han are not to be confused. And Jihads used to be declared every generation or so -- see Mildred Cable's "The Gobi Desert" (Virago) on the last such Jihad, round about 1930.

The real reason for mildeness, a learned trait (B. F. Skinner's behaviorism lives, despite Chomsky's insistence that "no one" takes that kind of "nonsense seriously anymore" ), is the perception that the Chinese government would be as ruthless, or more ruthless, than previous Chinese governments in suppressing these Jihads.

Which brings one to a point. What if the Muslims living in the West, and their co-religionists plotting and executing mayhem and murder against the very Infidels among whom those Muslims in the West have been allowed to settle, were not quite so complacent in their assurance that no matter what, they will be unaffected, will be allowed to remain in that West? What if it became clear that if any large-scale attacks, or just a series of small terrorist attacks, were to be a feature of life, then the Muslim presence in that Dar al-Harb would be diminished to the point where it could hardly function? What if the Western governments were to begin to behave, toward any Muslim threat, the way the Chinese government has shown itself in the past willing to behave, for surely the knowledge of that past and likely future behavior helps to explain the quiescence of Muslims in China, doesn't it?

Posted by: Hugh at June 20, 2006 11:53 AM

It is true that somewhere, in some communities, we will find . . . apostles of terror, who use the symbols of culture and faith to justify crimes of violence. They hate open, diverse, democratic societies like ours, because they want the exact opposite,” Mr. Harper declared. “[They want] societies that are closed, homogeneous and dogmatic.” ( Islam is slavery, it is not peace or noble. The very root of Islam is Evil. Like Nazi Germany the Idea of Islam must be wiped out.Thats not people but Islam. Islam calls for the deaths of Jews more than enough reason to Outlaw it. Thank God for people like ALI SINA.

I vehemently reject any recognition of Islam as a legitimate religion and call for its total denunciation and ban. Seventy years ago, if someone had called for a total denunciation of Nazism, he probably would have been called an extremist as well, yet a decade later everyone adopted that view. Should we not learn from history? Evil must be rejected completely and without reservation. ALI SINA

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 12:04 PM

They are saying "we" deserve it? Funny, how people who think that way are among the safest and most secure on earth.

How about these self righteous fools offer themselves up in reparation for the evil deeds of the US?

Posted by: treehugger at June 20, 2006 12:13 PM

What a relief that the two bodies of the poor American soldiers have been found. From the initial early reports I learnt that they had been tortured. I just could not help thinking how they must have felt when they were over powered by Iraqi freedom fighters?

What must have gone through their minds when the Iraqi freedom fighters put guns to their heads? I bet you they must have crapped their pants? Can you imagine the suffering these two Americans must have gone through then black hoods probably were tightly wrapped around their faces, unable to breath in the scorching heat and then thrown and trusted into the back boots of the ageing old cars, with boiling temperatures, hands behind their backs, faces covered tightly with black hoods tightly placed in a small car, driven for miles without any fresh air or water? Can you just imagine what must have been going through the minds? Do you think they were missing their families like never before? Do you think they were happy to die for their country which sent them to Iraq to defend the so called freedom of America over a pack of lies by comedian Bush?

I really do feel for the people of America and it is a sad day, but the flags of Iraq will be flying high today in triumph and success as the freedom fighters responded to the massacres of the Americans in Iraq equally (Haditha).

America has shown the world that in warfare there is no law, everything is acceptable. Knowing this the freedom fighters in Iraq must have brought music to their ears knowing this, so they executed the policy of America to their own soldiers with love.

My heart goes out to the people of America but specially to the people on this message board, but I have to admit I am more interested in the England football game then anything else. I do pray that the soldiers get protection where ever their soles have gone but I hope England football team get even more protection and help from god in winning the football game against Sweden today.

May god bless the two soldiers but first bless England football team.

I shall celebrate jointly the success of the England game in the world cup today and at the same time celebrate the freedom of the two soldiers of America who have ended up being count in tack and no body parts missing.

God bless America as they truly need it.

Very very kind regards

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 20, 2006 12:22 PM

The cowards of islam will not prevail. The "PC" cowards of the msm will always find solice in the erroneous belief that barbarity can be appeased. Shame on those that will use this incident as a call to bring our troops home.

The bravery of these fallen soldiers will live on as the cowardice of islam returns to the dust of the barren desert from which it came.

May the multi-fronted battles against islamic, etc. backwardness be aggrssively waged for as long as is required.

To the parents and families of these soldiers (and all of our fighters), thank you for raising the quality of men and women who are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice in order to protect Civilization from the dirty, filthy hordes.

Posted by: oregonjack at June 20, 2006 12:31 PM

May God have mercy on their souls.

...and on those who show none, in the name of their god al-lah, "most merciful".

"Say: O unbelievers! I do not serve that which you serve, Nor do you serve Him Whom I serve: Nor am I going to serve that which you serve, Nor are you going to serve Him Whom I serve: You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion."
You can say that again, Mo.

Posted by: Animus at June 20, 2006 12:44 PM

May God have mercy on their souls.

They are heros (Martyrs) and I do not feel sorry for what we will do to some Islamic prisoners. We will be even more barbaric. We will let pigs eat their intestines and dogs piss on their entrails. Oh wait, i'm living in a dream world. Nevermind, we can't even touch a koran in guantanamo.

Others are correct. In order to defeat them we have to be more brutal and on a larger scale. Woe the day when we became subject to the court of public opinion.

I can understand why people react this way, put killing Jihadists in Iraq is utterly futile. It won't solve anything. Sure, you could resolve this with military action: you could round up every Muslim living in infidel lands and kill them, but who's going to do that? Halting Muslim immigration and aggressively cracking down on even the slightest "extremism" and general Muslim bullshit in infidel lands is much more effective than killing people in Iraq. Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at June 20, 2006 12:45 PM

Dalek ben Weed~ wander back to the Daily Kos, why don't you?

Posted by: Gary at June 20, 2006 12:46 PM

Its time to up the ante, for payback, a little of the ultra violence - both real and symbolic - and damn the socialist media.

Posted by: dgene at June 20, 2006 12:49 PM

It seems the leftist website The Daily Kos is gloating over the fact that their fellow American citizens have been tortured and murdered. Is there any level of treachery and moral turpitude such people won't sink to?

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21135&only

Posted by: Yojimbo at June 20, 2006 12:49 PM

one has to fight fire with fire...

...or high explosives. Learned that off John Wayne in Hellfighters.

Posted by: Animus at June 20, 2006 12:49 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed,

Troll, leave this website posting board please.

Robert, Hugh,

Ban this troll please, thanks.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 20, 2006 12:51 PM

American Indians were significantly and often outrageously more barbarous and savage than the Europeans and then the Americans after Independence; the Japanese during World War II were arguably even worse than the American Indians; and the Muslims (they never let us down) manage to be worse than the worst. With each historical encounter, the PC historical revisionism would at best damn Americans through equivalency, or at worst consider Americans worse than the American Indians, worse than the Japanese, worse than the Muslims. It is the queerest hump of deformity on the figure of the Anti-West, this uncontrollable spasm to turn, time and time again, the singular ethical superiority of American behavior on its head.

P.S.: The perennially vigilant note to keep in mind (if only to remind those who have caught one form or another of the PC virus) is that "superior" does NOT -- repeat: does NOT -- mean "perfect". One symptom of the Leftist disease (out of the many that constitute its incoherent syndrome) is to think that if something is not perfect, it cannot be superior.

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 12:56 PM

Here's something from the BBC's report:

Ken MacKenzie, uncle of Kristian Menchaca, said on US television: "Because the US government did not have a plan in place, my nephew has paid for it with his life."

Of course. The US government is responsible.

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at June 20, 2006 12:57 PM

Yojimbo,

I am not suprised that we would get visits from trolls like the one by the name of Kalid Bin Waleed would come and spew nothing but garbage. Coming here to push our hot buttons, but we march on.

My grand neice is graduating from high school tonight. Websites like this is set up not only for the sake of our futures, but those of our children, grandchildren, neices, nephews, grandneices and grandnephews.

God Bless the American service people, living and decesed.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 20, 2006 12:57 PM

God Bless the American service people, living and decesed. by bigcatgirl

Amen!! Our service men and women have more conviction in their little fingers than all muslims put together!!

Posted by: freewoman at June 20, 2006 1:00 PM

There will be no riots in America over this atrocity for the MSM will not show the photographs and videos of the bodies of these two soldiers to raise the ire of the Americans.

9/11 was news that spread across America as it happened and could not be restrained by the MSM.

How many mass graves in Iraq have you seen on the MSM??

Have you ever seen the decapitation of the American civilian by the mos on the MSM??

Keep the masses of Americans uniformed and misinformed and they will go about their daily lives of work, eating watching TV and sleeping and then repeating again and again.

JW does a great service, but its voice is as one yelling during a hurricane, very few hear which is a shame.

God has taken to Heaven the souls of these three soldiers that have died for America in a war in Iraq that we can not win because we are not fighting the real enemy -- the cult of islam.

Over 2500 dead American soldiers.

Over 400 billion dollars - $400,000,000 - that is $1,400 per child, woman and man in America.

We did not have to be on the ground in Iraq, the same could have been accomplished from just the air.

The Iraq's will never accept democracy for it is not compatible with islam. Freedom and rights of the individual do not exist within islam yet our federal government can not see this and demands that Iraq be free. Free from what is the question??? The only thing that Iraq is free from is Sadam.

Civil war is being waged in Iraq and it is miss labeled as terrorism by the US.

How sad that we continue to loose soldiers and waste tax dollars where this war can not ever be won until vile evilness of islam is destroyed.

There was a talk show hosts that said it is better to be fighting islamic terror in the middle east than in Detroit, New York City, in America. The opposite is true... Until America and Americans wake up to the violence and threat of islam; islam will continue to conquer across the globe.

If islam takes over France of any other nuclear armed nation, America will be given a choice surrender or be destroyed by nukes.

Freedom is the only choice and the cost will be immense.

War is coming with islam, it is inevitable.

Prepare, be armed, be ready.

The Texican.

Posted by: Texican at June 20, 2006 1:00 PM

God bless America as they truly need it.

Very very kind regards

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed

What could a demonic person like you know of "God"? And I say this as an atheist, truly "God" would say to you "Be gone, I never knew you."

LOL

You are a good poster boy for an enemy that needs to be exterminated though.

Posted by: GreatShaitan at June 20, 2006 1:01 PM

I welcome posts from Waleed. If only all Muslims were as honest as he, we'd be cooking with gas.

Posted by: jsla at June 20, 2006 1:07 PM

bigcatgirl13106,

Best wishes to you and all your family.

What a wicked world this is! I guess we just carry on and make the best of it we can.

Posted by: Yojimbo at June 20, 2006 1:15 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed:

What must have gone through their minds when the Iraqi freedom fighters put guns to their heads? I bet you they must have crapped their pants? Can you imagine the suffering these two Americans must have gone through then black hoods probably were tightly wrapped around their faces, unable to breath in the scorching heat and then thrown and trusted into the back boots of the ageing old cars, with boiling temperatures, hands behind their backs, faces covered tightly with black hoods tightly placed in a small car, driven for miles without any fresh air or water? Can you just imagine what must have been going through the minds? Do you think they were missing their families like never before? Do you think they were happy to die for their country which sent them to Iraq to defend the so called freedom of America over a pack of lies by comedian Bush?

Sounds like you have some personal experience. Have you perhaps been involved in the Islamic liberation of Iraq? Maybe your IP address should be handed over to the authorities by JW's staff.

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at June 20, 2006 1:16 PM

Yeah, every time I start to get a little tired, or discouraged, I can think about the Waleeds of the world in their millions, and become reinvigorated. Sorry to learn that he's an "England" fan though. Wonder if he sports the Cross of St. George flag on the Waleedmobile? That'd be a sight.

Posted by: MP at June 20, 2006 1:18 PM

Ken MacKenzie, uncle of Kristian Menchaca, said on US television: "Because the US government did not have a plan in place, my nephew has paid for it with his life." -- posted above

We can now speak of the Ken MacKenzie/Michael Berg Syndrome, which spans a spectrum from irrational deflection of moral blame all the way to an outrageous inversion of good and evil. Whatever the significant differences in bandwidth on the spectrum between Ken and Michael, they belong together in the same Syndrome and in the same Circle of Hell.

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 1:21 PM

Yojimbo,

Thank-you for your message. :-)

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 20, 2006 1:23 PM

translation: "With great regret, they were killed in [an Islamic] way,"

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 1:24 PM

Unleash Hell on Iran. Make an example of them. Now is the time.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 1:26 PM

I shall celebrate jointly the success of the England game in the world cup today and at the same time celebrate the freedom of the two soldiers of America who have ended up being count in tack and no body parts missing.

God bless America as they truly need it.

Very very kind regards

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed ( This is Islam mocking everything Decent and Good. Taking great joy in misery and suffering....Look at your Enemy....Islam.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 1:32 PM

the barbaric muslims, who are they to defend their land when attacked by western armies, what cowards with smaller numbers and ancient weapons they fight an army with the best fighter planes,missles, bombs, and other weapons. who are they to resent us for invading iraq because of 9/11 nope sorry WMB OPPPPPS make that democracy. who are they despise us and call us hypocrites. when our governments kill 100000 innocent people in iraq in the name of democracy, yet we are filled with rage by the actions of 24 criminals, and as such stigmatise a whole religion and its 1.5 billion followers, thus calling the religion barbaric. who are they to despise our indiscriminate bombs and missles killing their innocent civilliens, who are they to resent our support of israel who have stolen their lands and have shot dead at least 400 children in the last 5 years. the nerve of these people, we are the keepers of peace, as seen by the nuclear attack on the civilian cities of hiroshima and nagasaki,(killing 500,000 innocent people) just ask the people in vietnam about us and they will tell any demonic muslim we are the good guys, u know, napalm burning children, troops shooting innocent people, bombs destroying and killing is civilised, i mean a suicide attack born out of oppression, which leads to insanity now thats a barbaric act, i mean lets go in history when we took jerusalam we killed every single innocent civilan, not only did they have the nerve to try and regain jerusalam, but when they did those demon possesed jihadist and that tyrant saladin regained it in the most barbaric way, he did not kill the christian civilians and showed restraint, history shows what the present is revelaing, their demonic, barbaric and hypocrites

Posted by: lionheart at June 20, 2006 1:33 PM

lionheart:

You are a damn, ignorant fool.

Not much else needs be said.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 1:47 PM

lionheart never met a book.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 1:50 PM

Nice sentence, Lionheart.

Suck my pig.

Posted by: Know Your Enemy at June 20, 2006 1:52 PM

Americaningermany, if our leaders would get over being P.C. and start leading, call islam what it is, a cult and NOT a religion, ban the koran and deport those who still believe the sun sets in a mud puddle, we could manage the herds much better. The world should send them back to the desert where they belong. There is no sense in civilization having to put up with organized violence like this.

I too am a little pessimistic about this and don't want it to get to the point of civil wars.

Posted by: freewoman at June 20, 2006 1:52 PM

americaningermany:

Yes, I think that europe will finally fight back aganist the cult of islam once sufficient violence is commited with wmd's, nukes or bombings.

Everyone is afraid of being labeled - called a racist or bigot if they fault islam as hub of the murders, violence and terrorism across the globe.

The riots in france, 7/7 and 9/11 are just the start. Iraq has slowed down some of the actioncs across the world by pulling in jihadists that would have been in europe and america.

I truely believe that nukes, wmd's and bombings bu the mos will happen across America and Europe. As stated numerous times before, the feds are not searching for nuke signatures at islamic sites just for grins and the feds would never tell Americans if they found a nuke or nukes to protect the "innocent - peaceful" mos.

War with islam is inevitable.

Prepare, be armed be ready.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost and the cost will be immense.

Posted by: Texican at June 20, 2006 1:53 PM

americaningermany says "I asked when people would actually stand up and fight. Where is the limit? I asked.

They said: "When Germans no longer have anything to eat is when they will fight".

Great...?"

Exactly. Thats as pointless as waiting until you've got lung cancer before giving up smoking. But this is typical of Western Europe as a whole, including Britain. Here in Britain, we have an ultra-complacent politically-correct population. The time to act is not to wait until you've lost everything, or have no chance whatsoever. You strike whilst you've got a chance of winning, or better still, whilst you're certain to win. This isn't Queensbury Rules. This is war, and the only satisfactory outcome in war is victory. Anything short of victory means the certain destruction of what we have and hold dear. And looking at the population of Europe in 30 or 50 years time, what chance will we have against the Islamists when 40% of our population are 60 or over, and the money we need to put armies into the field and proivide for security at home is diverted to paying millions of extra state pensions - and we know that by then, when faced with the choice between freedom for their descendants and their pensions, the majority will put their pensions first.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at June 20, 2006 1:58 PM

lionheart, you must be an Islamic historian. A regular Islamic intellectual. Bet you got your degree from the Famous Imam's Correspondence School in Minneapolis, SA.

Posted by: JanuaryMan at June 20, 2006 2:03 PM

Why give any credence or reconigation to islam by capitalizing islam, muslim, mohammed on any other related names??????

When the murderous and violent cult of islam, its followers the mos and the countries that promote the cult are capitalized, this imparts a recognition and acceptance of the vileness performed by islam and its followers.

Their names will not be capitalized in my postings until the vileness and evilness of the cult of islam is eradicated by the muslims.

Posted by: Texican at June 20, 2006 2:09 PM

This 'lionheart' seems to be reliant upon the weekly Friday sermon, al-jezerra, and the New Duranty Times to fill his child's garden of misinformation. The government's of the civilized world will begin to deal with the current episode of worldwide jihad in a serious way when they are brought to fear their own citizens more than they fear the cult of mahomet.

Posted by: Infidel33 at June 20, 2006 2:14 PM

the religion of peace at its best, the blind followers showing their true colours by their ear shattering silence, and gloating in their dark, miserable hearts. Panties on the head gets msm's attention for months on end, and this cowardly act - nothing.

Posted by: freetoBEfree at June 20, 2006 2:16 PM

Texican it shows we respect engish, not Islam.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 2:27 PM

I am sure that the U.S. military will use this to provide some facts to our great ground forces. And they will take this as a reason not to be taken, to go down fighting, before being taken hostage.

I know this will be remembered by the forces there, these are young men to be remembered.

So much for genevea convention..

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at June 20, 2006 2:30 PM

Along with whatever other horrific barbarities were inflicted by the merciful messengers of Allah, those soldiers were undoubtedly beheaded too. DNA tests are being conducted to determine certain identity. And they were probably badly wounded when taken too.

Posted by: alexon at June 20, 2006 2:40 PM

Bernard Goetz? Ring a bell? He's the guy who went 'looking for trouble' on the subway a few years back. When he shot a guy--his famous one-liner was, "you look like you haven't got enough." Then he shot the guy a few more times.

If he's still alive, lets send him to Iraq. In fact, perhaps we should tell our most hardened killers in jail if they want to 'go out with a bang.'

One parting point: maybe now, just perhaps, just a wee little understanding from our MSM of the freaking horrific 'conditions' they(our brave boys)face over there in that Islamic hell hole. Perhaps before casting blame about Abu Grahb(as W does in his weasel way) or Haditha, just perhaps we should try to put ourselves into these Americans position. I'd crap my pants too if I were policing the religion of peace, and I can promise you--I would shoot first and ask questions much much later.

Where is the President? Where is CNN? Will we just wash these brutal killings off. So, a few Americans get beheaded. So What? How about Haditha? I'm so fumed. I've never been more disgusted. I knew the news was very bad given the general's body language on tv early this morning.

I guess this means the Iraqis havent 'stood up' quite just yet. Islam--the religion of death and scum.

Posted by: biorabbi at June 20, 2006 2:41 PM

Islam is not a Race or a country... Islam is an Idea..EVIL IDEA..like Nazi Germany..Pure Evil..to enslave people to make them herd animals like sheep.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 2:43 PM

Posters like lionheart and Waleed have no honor. No person with self respect would utter the insanities both posters have done. Think on that when you allow them to bother you -- they are hollow people -- they are empty. And we we need to see such hollow people for what they are and try to understand that the hatred they show for us is really hatred they bear for themselves.

Is that to say we should not fight of kill such people? Of course not!

Such people are extremely dangerous -- Why are they dangerous? Because their beliefs have no integrity whatsoever. Their lack of honor makes them worse than anything.

We should observe what they say, what they do, and if they pose a threat to us, we should eliminate them without qualms or confusion.

Posted by: jsla at June 20, 2006 2:47 PM

The quotes I respond to below are taken from Television’s extremely interesting post here: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/011866.php#c230990. The subject is whether or when to make moral distinctions between the parts of Islam, and between jihad and Islam.

Television said:

I'll conclude with the following analysis:

(Fulfillingness' First Finale? -- as Stevie Wonder put it).

I. When distinguishing parts from a whole, two kinds of part may be employed:

1) a part that is sufficiently peripheral that it may be detached without the whole suffering degradation, destruction, and/or transformation;

2) a part that is sufficiently central that its detachment from the whole would, in fact, result in the whole suffering degradation, destruction, and/or transformation.

Good distinction. But is there no 1.5 between 1 and 2 above?

The second kind of part is the one that is "integral to" the whole.

Ok. And is there a third kind of part that is “semi-integral” to the whole?

II. There are also two kinds of whole to be considered:

1) a simplex whole, whose concatenation of parts remains inert after the concatenation -- i.e., the whole is not more than the sum of its parts: it takes on no "life" after the parts have been completely put together into the whole they constitute;

Thus a pile of rocks (or even a single rock) would be a simplex whole.

2) a complex whole, or system: this is a dynamic interrelation of parts, where there is a kind of microcosm or ecosystem and the interrelation of parts involves a symbiotic synergy.

In that sense, to get a complex whole in the realm of metals, one would have to go to the level of the atom, where the whole is more than the sum of its parts, insofar as the removal of a single subatomic particle from an atom can transform it into a completely different atom. Other complex wholes: plants, animals and human beings. Your distinction between simplex and complex wholes is an excellent one. Coleridge made the same distinction, though he used other words for it and, being Coleridge, saw astounding depths within that distinction. But of course many others besides Coleridge have made the distinction you make here. A.N. Whitehead, for one. And like Coleridge, Whitehead distinguished not just two levels of relation between part and whole, but several in an evolutionary scale. Coleridge distinguishes at least four stages. With a piece of metal, the “parts” have almost no independence from the metal’s principle of unity. Thus if you have a bar of gold you can remove as many parts of the gold bar as you want, and as long as you keep at least some tiny grain, you still have gold. In other words, the unity of gold is virtually reducible to a point, a unity without parts. To that extent, the unity of a metal is hardly at all dependent on its parts (at any rate one must go all the way to the subatomic level to find them). Coleridge calls the unity of a metal a unity of “powers and properties.” At the next level, the crystal, he identifies “a union not of powers only, but of parts,” and a new dependence of the whole on the parts emerges. A crystal, he says, has not only unity, but also the simplest form of totality. Then with the plant or animal, which, he notes, “maintains a distinction between itself and the universal life of the planet,” we see “totality dawning into individuation” and selfhood. Of individuation, which applies most of all to the human level of evolution (though Coleridge has an unusual concept of evolution according to which matter over long eons gradually congealed as a kind of excretion or corpse of what was originally immaterial life and spirit, and he bases evolution on a principle of dynamic or productive polarity, and he links that in turn with the Trinity and Christianity), he says regarding part and whole in the individual, that among “individuals, the living power will be most intense in that individual which, as a whole, has the greatest number of integral parts presupposed in it; when moreover, these integral parts, together with a proportional increase of their interdependence, as parts, have themselves most the character of wholes in the sphere occupied by them.” The best book on Coleridge is probably What Coleridge Thought by Owen Barfield.

III. There are two kinds of system:

1) systems that are relatively open and flexible to change and self-correction;

2) systems that are closed, inflexible to change and self-correction, and require a totalitarian rule in order to be self-perpetuating: the totalitarian system is a type of contradiction -- it has no real "life" as systems ordinarily do, and thus it has no real way to perdure: in the absence of a natural way to perdure, it tries to make itself inert, as though it were a non-system kind of whole, notwithstanding the fact that it needs to be a system in order to have power and extension. Its contradictory existence can be maintained only by perpetual oppression and violence, which sooner or later succumbs to the pressures of reality and implodes and/or explodes.

You put that powerfully. I condemn any and all III.2 (closed) social systems. There are, within category III.2., many different kinds and degrees of totalitarian system. Under III.2 there could be a wide range of subcategories, each one a different degree and depth of totalitarianism.

I also maintain that distinguishing those subcategories, by doing an inventory of the moral and other particulars of each system, is cognitively necessary for knowledge and therefore strategically necessary for defense.
You object to any attempt to morally distinguish parts of an evil system, evidently because you think that such distinctions are only an effort to save some of those parts. You efface intra-system moral distinctions because all the “good” elements in the system (such as dental hygiene) enable the evil, and can be found outside the system anyway, so there is no need to save the "good" elements. Let’s grant that as true for this discussion, so I can get to a different point I have all along been wanting you to see.
Very well. Let’s agree there shall be no further attempt to save any “good” parts of the evil system (but let’s continue to distinguish between the evil system of Islam on the one hand, and Muslim human beings on the other, since some unknown number of Muslims are not evil), for all the reasons you have given. The evil system shall be condemned as a whole. Now that we have for all kinds of reasons set aside the idea of redeeming or saving the “good” parts, does that mean there is no further reason to distinguish degrees of evil and good among the parts inside an evil system? And no further reason to learn to distinguish between the complex moral landscapes of various totalitarian systems? Even though there is no intent to save any part of the system, could there yet be another good reason to make moral distinctions between the particulars of a system? Yes, there certainly could be and is. Here’s the reason, for future reference to be labeled

REASON “Z”:

The only way we can fully know a system – and therefore the only way we can maximize the effectiveness of our strategies of self-defense -- is through concrete knowledge of the particulars, including the moral particulars, of the system. The better you know your enemy, the more easily you will defeat him. A range of subcategories of closed social system (III.2) exist (I would condemn them all) and for strategic reasons should be understood, and we should also know where in that range Islam fits, and why the variations in and specific qualities of its moral landscape place it above or below other totalitarianisms of which we have knowledge. It is not just a question of putting Islam on a scale or scales. It is a question of not omitting from our calculus of self-defense any relevant facts. Even if Islam is landscape of darkness, there are variations within that darkness. Which parts of the landscape are most dark? Which small parts are gray? In the landscape which parts, however insignificant they may be, light up, however infrequently and briefly? How does the stygian field of Islam compare to the peculiar landscapes of other totalitarianisms?

IV. Summary: Islam is a II.2 kind of whole: it is a system.

You explained this well in your post. Nicely distinguished. I understand. As a “system” the whole is not an inert whole or a mere aggregation. Rather, in a whole that is a system there is a symbiotic synergy among its parts, and the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.

And it is a III.2 [closed] kind of system. (Note: only by virtue of its historically imperialistic voracity has the Islam system become so extensive and swallowed up so many different peoples and cultures, that it has taken on a spectacularly sprawling rag-tag diversity that can be mistaken for the true diversity of III.1 kinds of systems.)

Yes, I agree that Islam is a III.2 (closed) system, and is often mistaken for III.1 (open) for the reasons you give.

In the system of Islam, jihad is a I.2 kind of part [a part that is integral in the sense that if you remove it from the whole, the whole suffers degradation, destruction or transformation].

I’ll grant this, since it’s probably correct, and it’s not my main bone of contention.

Because Islam is a III.2 [closed] kind of system, we may say that:

1) the dinstinction between jihad and Islam has no pragmatic usefulness insofar as jihad is integral to Islam;

Knowledge of the number of protons and electrons that are theorized to make up an oxygen atom is relevant to understanding how to control and manage that atom – even though the oxygen atom will “suffer degradation, destruction, or transformation” should we remove one of its integral protons or electrons. In other words, knowledge of the concrete particulars of Islam, including the subtle or unsubtle moral variations within the system and among its integral parts is at least relevant to maximizing the effectiveness of our strategies of self-defense even though we cannot imagine removing some of the particulars of Islam from the system without the system becoming something else. But that is a restatement of reason "Z."

2) #1 means that this site could just as well be called "Islam Watch" -- i.e., Islam the system is the overarching problem and danger non-Muslims of the world face;

Not only as well. It might be even better to call it “Islam Watch.” But we have agreed that Islam and jihad are integral, not identical. Nuanced distinctions among different parts are necessary to knowledge and self-defense. (“Z” again.)

3) the systemic synergy of parts noted in II.2 above that characterizes the system Islam renders any or all discernible parts in that system as co-dependent enablers of the overall system, such that seemingly innocuous parts (e.g., dental hygiene) become useful contributors to the same machine whose entelechy is the jihad that imperils us.

Damn, that’s some nice phraseology, dude. But I shouldn’t be surprised at your skills by now, having witnessed them frequently before. As to the substance of your point, let’s just agree for the sake of this discussion that, for the reasons you have given, it is pointless to try to save the “good” or “innocuous” parts of the system Islam. Now that we have agreed on that at least for the duration of this post, it remains that you have acknowledged in earlier posts that innocuous or “good” parts are not unambiguously co-dependent enablers of the evil system. The “good” or innocuous parts are Janus-faced – often effective as codependent enablers of the evil system, but sometimes effective for good and in a way that exerts some decelerating, restraining force on the evil drive of the system. Acknowledging this does not mean you now will be asked to save those “good” parts. All it means is that you will be acknowledging a fact that, like other facts, is relevant to knowing the best way to mount a self-defense.

Because Islam is a III.2 [closed] kind of system -- its [closed] composition & complexion attenuated by diversity only through the fact that it is so spatially and culturally extensive by virtue of its historically imperialistic voracity -- any distinction of parts that would forestall condemnation of the whole system may even provide fodder for those who like to treat Islam as though it were a III.1 [open] type of system that has detachable I.1 [non-integral] type "bad apples".

Every subcategory of closed (III.2) system should be condemned (except if one has tactical or strategic reasons for not doing so). Distinction of moral and other variations within a closed (III.2) system, or between one closed (III.2) system and another, cannot justify lifting that condemnation. Nor need such distinctions justify any effort to “save” “parts” of the system. Such distinctions should serve rather to add to the knowledge that aids our self-defense. We must know the enemy (the enemy being the system, not every individual Muslim), including the specific moral and other variations between different integral parts of his system and history.

…its [closed] composition & complexion attenuated by diversity only through the fact that it is so spatially and culturally extensive by virtue of its historically imperialistic voracity...

I agree with this if you remove the word, “only”. Its closed composition and complexion are attenuated by diversity not only through voracious conquest of diverse peoples, but also simply because Islam is not perfectly evil. Nothing can be. Islam is evil of some hard to measure but real degree. Other systems could come along and dig tenth, eleventh, and twelfth circles of hell, and so on, and be still worse. What makes one evil system worse than another? Specific elements that compose that system, and how each element embodies a somewhat unique tension or equilibrium between good and evil – an equilibrium in which the evil side tips the scale, but not to infinity. To a specific depth. Each specific element in Islam not only has its own internal moral equilibrium. In addition, all those equilibria contribute to and are acted upon by the overall system’s moral equilibrium. In a “system,” even a III.2 or closed system, there is a two-way influence, from whole to parts and from parts to whole. Admittedly the distinction between whole and parts is less than in a III.1 (open) system, but the distinction exists. Specifics matter because of reason “Z.”

…may even provide fodder for those who like to treat Islam as though it were a III.1 type of system that has detachable I.1 type "bad apples".

Agreed, that can be one of the pitfalls of pursuing knowledge of the evil system. But I would maintain that the strategic upsides of pursuing knowledge of the particular moral and other variations within the system tend to outweigh the downsides.

V. Conclusion: Sooner or later, Muslims will have to find some other way to keep their teeth healthy, since their current way is directly related to a system that endangers our lives and societies. Muslims who jump ship will find that their teeth survive just fine: ask Ibn Warraq's dentist or just look at the healthy gleaming ivories of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. miswak indeed!

And now it's long past time for me to go brush my teeth and enter ZZZZ land. Posted by: traeh at June 20, 2006 2:47 PM

I will not call Islam a religion.. Unless hitler was a Prophet like Mohammad he also wrote a hate filled book that called for killing Jews.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 2:51 PM

Spirit of 1683 said:
"You strike whilst you've got a chance of winning, or better still, whilst you're certain to win. This isn't Queensbury Rules. This is war, and the only satisfactory outcome in war is victory."

This is not a football match we're in nor is it boxing by Queensbury Rules.

This is a back-alley street fight. The rules of engagement are one sided and they don't respect the rules of sanctuary or any other rules. Rules are from Western civilization.

Don't be surprised or disappointed. It is the same as it has been from Mohammed to the present. Nothing is new or innovative - we've merely forgotten how it was to live and fight in the Seventh Century.

It's like we're in a back alley streetfight and we're expecting them to fight 'by the rules' and they keep kicking us in the balls. We keep saying 'don't do that again; it's against the rules, if you do that again I'll REALLY be mad! I'm Serious! don't kick me in the balls again.' and then they kick us in the balls for the sixth time.

To fight them properly we need to annihilate their fighting forces, hunt the rest down and kill them and then destroy their means of mounting counter attacks. We need to demoralize and destroy their ability to kill.

That's when we'll be able to stop for a while.
When allah and mohammed are discredited and worthless and jihad isn't materially possible we we have a few hundred years of rest until the next cycle.

Find them and destroy them. If they fire from any building - call in the 500 pound bombs. Destroy everything that gives the enemy cover. They don't respect their own mosques - they kill each other and bomb them. Why would we give a care?

Destroy as many as possible.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at June 20, 2006 2:54 PM

My heart goes out to the people of America but specially to the people on this message board, ... (excrement deleted) Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed

Keep your sympathies to yourself, or reserve them for the likes of Zarqawi, and the "Freedom Fighters" that get killed daily. Besides, you don't have a heart, since you are a Mohammedan, so STFU. You are welcome to think you'll win, but unfortunately for your side, subtlety isn't one of your strengths. Which is why more and more Infidels are wising up to you, and it's only a matter of time before this Jihad gets fought both ways. Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 20, 2006 2:54 PM

Khalid bin Waleed:

Your description of the soldiers' last hours is truly horrifying. You have described the savagery of their attackers with great eloquence. Doubtless, the coalition soldiers are aware of the brutality facing them should they fall into the hands of the insurgents. Do you think that as a result of this barbarity the coalition soldiers will be quick to be captured? Do you think that they will not fight harder? Perhaps knowledge and familiarity of such animalistic behavior is what causes the Israeli military to consistently outfight its Moslem enemies. And yes, by all means, support England and raise St. George's cross high overhead.

Lionheart:

You are well named. It takes a great deal of courage to make statements of such massive stupidity before such a fearsome audience, risking life and limb over the internet. Bravo! By the way, any relation to Richard Couer de Lion?

Posted by: Chatillon at June 20, 2006 2:54 PM

traeh,

Robert and Hugh probably don't want us to continue unfolding this issue here, so I will briefly comment on one thing you wrote, then invite you to visit my new blog to continue the discussion there. In fact, I have today coincidentally posted an essay there about this issue, entitled "The Case of the Asymptotic Cigar: Jihad Watch".

Your comment:

"You object to any attempt to morally distinguish parts of an evil system, evidently because you think that such distinctions are only an effort to save some of those parts."

No. I don't mind saving the good parts on general principle. But if this gets in the way of fighting the system of which they are parts, then I do mind. It is the system Islam as a whole that is my object, not the innocuous or even good parts that are obviously doing nothing to militate against the system's overall evil -- indeed, in some cases (maybe all), they are in certain ways enabling that evil. Which brings me to the second prong of your comment:

"You efface intra-system moral distinctions because all the “good” elements in the system (such as dental hygiene) enable the evil"

Not necessarily. I happen to to conclude that certain (perhaps all, but it doesn't matter anyway) apparently innocuous or apparently good parts of Islam, such as dental hygiene, are enabling the overall evil system by being part of the OCD totalitarianism that marshalls that evil in sociocultural, paramilitary and military ways. But it doesn't matter if I happened to conclude that this part, or some other part, was genuinely innocuous or even good -- it doesn't matter to the imperative to condemn the system qua the system. If Islamic dental hygiene happens to be found to be innocuous or even good, it would become, in terms of the systemic condemnation, collateral damage: but that's hardly a big loss, since ex-Muslims can get their teeth cleaned elsewhere (there are some very good Jewish dentists, I hear)*; and it's furthermore a loss that is outweighed a thousand-fold by the benefits of scrapping -- lock, stock and burka -- that hideously monstrous behemoth, Islam.

Anyway, my blog is called The Hesperado and it's at:

http://hesperado.blogspot.com/

* (As for Hugh's concern about the proscription on pork, that Muslim practice should not occupy one nanosecond of our thought to distract from the condemnation of Islam qua Islam, since ex-Muslims can continue to eschew pork -- perhaps by converting to Judaism or Leftist veganism -- or they can come to learn how good it is to chew pork. Either way, that dietary proscription should not be a distraction to the imperative to condemn Islam qua Islam.)

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 3:14 PM

"has this world gone mad????"

In a word...yes

Posted by: Mr Ape Pig at June 20, 2006 3:43 PM

To Television:

Though I will yield to your suggestion of not pursuing this much further at this site, I don't think one need assume any objection on the part of Hugh or Robert to the discussion -- not unless they specifically suggest we take it elsewhere. Though my posts may be "too long" by some standard or other, and I may sometimes digress too much, on the whole our discussion is relevant to the site's topic, unless that topic be quite narrowly defined. Which is not to say there would be anything wrong with a narrow definition of the site's topic, of course not. I say merely that one could wait to see if Hugh or Robert say we are out of bounds.

I will say one last thing. You did not respond to the essential point and objection in my post: Reason "Z":

Knowledge of the number and kind of protons, electrons and other subatomic particles that are theorized to make up an oxygen atom is relevant to understanding how to control and manage that atom – even though the oxygen atom will “suffer degradation, destruction, or transformation” should we remove one of its integral protons or electrons. In other words, knowledge of the concrete particulars of Islam, including the subtle or unsubtle moral variations within the system and among its integral parts, and between the system and other totalitarian systems, is relevant to maximizing the effectiveness of our strategies of self-defense even though we cannot imagine removing some of the particulars of Islam from the system without the system becoming something else, and even if there is little or no point in seeking to save "good" or innocuous parts of the system.

Posted by: traeh at June 20, 2006 3:43 PM

Nice blog, Television. (I blogrolled you.)

As for my own stance, I think it's clear by now that unlike JW and some others, I choose to make no distinction between Islam and Jihad.

Why is this? Because in the years since 9/11 I have taken the time to read enough material that has opened my eyes to three main points:

1) Islam is the source of our enemies and 99% of the "terrorism" that we live with in the world, and all jihad.

2) Islam is a cult and not a religion, which makes it a lie on a grand scale, and therefore, it is not worthy of respect, acceptance or admiration of any kind.

3) Islam is a theocratic ideology of hate. Government and mosque have no separation. Most Muslims will profess that they wish to see Islamic governments controlling the world and a re-establishment of the Caliphate as the controlling point of such a global Sharia state.

The prescriptions to the plague of Islam are clear to me and I have addressed them many times, but most boldy of late:

http://www.foehammer.net/2006/06/how-to-peacefully-remove-muslims-from.html

http://www.foehammer.net/2006/05/pattonesque-solution-to-us-national.html

There's nothing poetic or "nice" about my solutions. They are solutions meant to win a world war and what other outcome should any of us be concerned with?

Foehammer

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 3:44 PM

Well, Foehammer, I checked out your dual solutions. I support the Pattonesque approach as a policy. But I also practice boycotting Islam personally. I have done so as much as possible since September 12, 2001. Even if it is as small a thing as driving a hybrid or no longer supporting an orphan in a Muslim nation.

I believe the world is headed towards a conflict with Islam whether it wants one or not. The people of Islam do want this because they believe it is a fulfillment of their religious destiny. It is the only way to being the "peace" they speak of.

I will concede that Jihadists are not fools. They will harm a major city in the future, no doubt. With the technology that exists it will be a major blow, but not the end of the war. Probably the ultimate wake up call.

OTOH, it is not too presumptuous for me to also say that Muslims will do themselves in because they are overconfident in their religious manifest destiny.

Eventually their welfare will be cut off. This will affect livelihood as we see with people in areas like Palestine now. It will also end relief assistance to places like Indonesia and Pakistan. They will soon sink to sub third world living conditions. And they wont do a thing about it because progress is un-Islamic.

Posted by: GreatShaitan at June 20, 2006 4:18 PM

traeh,

I have to be brief right now, but I would respond that with a system like Islam and in our fight against it, variations are important for us to discern and analyze -- but not moral variations qua moral variations. The only context in which moral variations qua moral variations would be relevant and useful data for us would be if we believed Islam could be reformed. Since I don't think Islam can be reformed, I don't think the moral variations qua moral variations are important.

In some (perhaps all) instances, in fact, the analysis of moral variations qua moral variations serve two processes that are counterproductive to the fight against Islam:

1) they help to perpetuate the Haidonite delusion that Islam can be reformed (named after the Muslim poster here and activist Tom Haidon)

2) they help to perpetuate the what I call "surgical prophylaxis" of Islamic whitewashers -- by locating discrete parts that are gangrenous and can be surgically removed while still preserving relatively intact the unobjectionable Islam body: The difference between those who do this constantly in the mainstream media etc. and Robert & Hugh seems to be that the latter two identify a much bigger part that has gangrene -- but they never come out and say that "I'm sorry, but the patient's head has gangrene and we have to cut it off" -- for that is tantamount (and not just asymptotically) to dissecting in order to destroy, and besides, it might make the PC idiots out there like us even less than they do now.

As long as R&H Block refrain from fully specifying exactly how big and exactly how central and exactly how "integral" Islam's gangrenous part is in relation to the body, they can appear to be refraining from condemning Islam en bloc; but since I enjoy the same cake they are having and eating and serving up daily, and since practically no one else is offering cake, I don't find it intolerable under the circumstances having to be a beggar and not a chooser.

Some day, though, I would like to finally be able to sit back, relax, and actually smoke the Goddamned cigar outside of this ridiculously exclusive club I find myself in.

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 4:19 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed, lionheart, imagine how Zarqawi felt when those two 500 pound bombs hit him, picked him up and threw him around like a piece of trash in the wind. Imagine when he looked for his spiritual advisor and saw that he had been turned into a red stain on the wall and his unholy Quran had been burned and blown to pieces. Imagine how Zarqawi felt when all his internal organs were turned into hummus by the shock of the bomb blast in an instant and and he woke up to see American soldiers standing over him laughing. Imagine his horror when he realized Allah could not protect him. Imagine how he felt knowing that he would never get into paradise, never get 72 virgins. Imagine how he felt knowing that he had not only failed to accomplish his mission in Iraq, but that all the computers, cell phones and other information he had would be used by Americans to hunt down and kill the members of al queda. Imagine if the last thing he ever saw was an American soldier smiling while he shoved a piece of raw bacon down his throat. Imagine Zarqawi waking up in Hell next to Mohammed and realizing that he was a false prophet and the Quran was nothing but a book of lies. Just imagine.

Posted by: Bohemond_1069 at June 20, 2006 4:22 PM

Hey, Khalid Bin Waleed, imagine how it'd feel to pull the pud out of your butt.

I agree with jsla. I enjoy having illiterate donks like Khalid around. I mean, I'd hate to think we're all like-minded souls here. If the enemy isn't nearby, we're preaching to the choir.

And make no mistake, the enemy is all around indeed, and it will not do to banish them, ignore them, or silence them.

Just imagine how it will feel when Khalid and his ilk emerge from their holes and stick our their heads to ridicule and mock us once again and...

We've finally had enough.

Why, my heart goes out to them.

Posted by: Haid Dasalami at June 20, 2006 4:39 PM

Time to take off the gloves and prosecute the war as if it was a war. **** political correctness bah , what a joke. political correctness is killing American soldiers. Why do we continue to take prisoners?>

Posted by: exsgtbrown at June 20, 2006 4:44 PM

Politicians are extremely dangerous -- Why are they dangerous? Because their beliefs have no integrity whatsoever. Their lack of honor makes them worse than anything.

We should observe what they say, what they do, and if they pose a threat to us, we should eliminate them without qualms or confusion.

Thanks jsla

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at June 20, 2006 5:12 PM

"This is just the beginning. The application of salt, pepper and acid to wounds is next. But they don't start cutting until they have finished with the pulling. Teeth and nails. Then they scalp. The actual joint by joint cutting is the last stage that can last for a day or two. I have read about this in History books. That was why I was afraid."

Arjun.sevak, not even Gestapo during WWII went that far! I have read numerous accounts of Polish resistance fighters having their finger-nails pulled out, cigarette butts extinguished on their skin etc, but what those "holy" men do goes beyond the notion of barbarity! At least the Polish heroes sometimes had cyanide to put an end to their suffering when they could not take it any longer and would have betrayed their companions. Perhaps any Westren soldier in Iraq should have a portion of poison in their equipment just in case. I cannot imagine the horror of the torture and slow, horrific death they must have had to endure. Let their souls rest in peace, at last. Amen.

Posted by: Polish infideless at June 20, 2006 5:19 PM

Lionheart,(bad Jean claude van dame character?)
What do the majority of U.S. "atrocities" you noted have in common? They were of a conflict resolution nature. Events such as the atomic blasts,(or fire bombing of Tokyo for that matter)
and even Israel defense(see events of 1948, 1967, who struck first?) If you spent more time in that 2nd year world history course, which your probably missing as we speak, it would be obvious even to a biased mind, that saber rattling just doesn't cut it against the West(be they reds,despots or well armed "cults"). Still, given the level of revisionism in academia today...hey,why don't you lay a few bucks on the Chicago Cubs this year? Your odds of success will be better and they certainly will appeal to the underdog in you.

Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at June 20, 2006 5:24 PM

And if these who died had killed instead -- we would have court-marshalled them!

I would like to turn over a few high place political leaders over in exchange of prisoners the next time it happens!

Watch how quickly the policies get changed!

Posted by: witness at June 20, 2006 5:25 PM

To Television:
I visited your blog and have put it on my favorites list. The current post there, which I read, was superb, which is not entirely suprising at this point.

Television said that:

[Hugh and Robert] never come out and say, "I'm sorry, but the patient's head [Islam's core] has gangrene and we have to cut it off."

Hugh and Robert never say the patient's head is all gangrene. And they do not say whether or not the gangrene is utterly inoperable. But they do say, and repeatedly, that the patient's head has gangrene, that the gangrene emanates from some part or parts of the center. They do not render a judgement on what proportion of the center is involved, other than to characterize the proportion as "significant," a word that can be interpreted in several ways. Following the Hippocratic oath ("do no harm"), perhaps, and keeping in mind good tactics for the persuasion of a broad mass of readers, and perhaps adhering to a genuine agnosticism on a complex question, Robert repeatedly challenges Muslims to undertake the surgery. Whether he privately thinks the operation an impossibility or not is hard to to say. I would guess he thinks successful surgery on a large scale unlikely.

Television said:

...with a system like Islam and in our fight against it, variations are important for us to discern and analyze -- but not moral variations qua moral variations. The only context in which moral variations qua moral variations would be relevant and useful data for us would be if we believed Islam could be reformed...In some (perhaps all) instances, in fact, the analysis of moral variations qua moral variations serve two processes that are counterproductive to the fight against Islam...

I agree that the analysis of moral variations is often counterproductive to the fight against Islam. I am not yet convinced that such analysis is more often counterproductive than it is helpful to the fight (Robert's site being perhaps the strongest argument that that analysis is more helpful than not), but that's another question. I will satisfy myself with the fact that you acknowledge the existence of moral variation among the integral and other elements that make up the Islam system.

Don't feel a need to respond to this, Television, if you prefer not to. We can certainly continue it at your blog some time -- I don't mean to lasso you into a conversation you may feel does not belong at this site.

Posted by: traeh at June 20, 2006 5:27 PM

Politicians are extremely dangerous -- Why are they dangerous? Because their beliefs have no integrity whatsoever. Their lack of honor makes them worse than anything.

We should observe what they say, what they do, and if they pose a threat to us, we should eliminate them without qualms or confusion.

Thanks jsla

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at June 20, 2006 5:41 PM

Hi, why the anger, all i did was illustrate why every muslimS despises our governments, the nerve of these people, how dare they. proof of how small minded they are can be seen by the fact that foreign tourist in muslim lands arnet held accountable for the crimes their governments, and the people killed by the DEMOCRATIC EXTREMIST, FORMERLY CRUSADERS, " no sole shall bare the burden of another" what a small minded mentallity. take us for example we judge all of them because of the actions of a few terrorist, imagine if a muslim government had done to the western world, what we have done to them, boy would we go mad. All the facts i stated about why the moslems hate us, are common facts, can be found in any books, or just by wathing G W Bush on TV, what a genius, is he an accurate representative of americans. BY THE WAY I SINCERLY DESPISE THE KILLING OF ANY INNOCENT CIVILIANS REGARDLESS OF RACE, RELIGION ECT. RIGHT NOW ITS CRUSADERS 100000(conservative and ignoring israels killings) JIHADIST 4000, SO ON WHOSE SIDE THE SCALES OF EVIL TIP IS CLEAR TO ALL FREE THINKERS AND THOSE NOT MENTALLY CRIPPLED BY PREJUDICE

Posted by: lionheart at June 20, 2006 5:47 PM

Sadly I cannot see why people are suprised by the manner of these young mens deaths. 100 years ago the English poet Rudyard Kipling wrote the following lines. The poem is an old soldier giving advice to a new recruit and has the verse,

An when your lying wounded on Afganistans plains
An the women come out to cut up what remains
Jus roll to your rifle an' blow out your brains
An go to your gawd like a soger

Posted by: Fred at June 20, 2006 5:50 PM

Thanks foehammer; I'll check out your site (I think I've done so before).

"Islam is a cult and not a religion, which makes it a lie on a grand scale, and therefore, it is not worthy of respect, acceptance or admiration of any kind."

-- not worthy, also, I would add (I'm sure you'd agree), of any reasonable hope for reform.

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 5:52 PM

I mean we have destroyed iraq in the name of freedom, yet when them jihadist took spain they turned it into the DUBAI of that time, what the hell how incompetant can u get,WHO THE HELL WAS/IS MICHEAL HART, AND DID THE PIOUS AND EDUCATED CHRISTIAN WRITE A BOOK ON THE 100 GREATEST MEN IN HISTORY? ANSWERS PLEASE.
any news on THE GREAT DANISH ARTIST who drew the cartoons, what happened, i mean what a coincidental accident, has to be coincidence as its been proven that there was no HUMAN involved in starting it!!!!!

Posted by: lionheart at June 20, 2006 5:56 PM

lionheart:

You are the one mentally crippled, but like all insane people, you'll never understand that. I learned in recent years to not even try to argue with liberal pollyannas because you ignore facts, truth, history and real conscience. What you profess is self-evident, but does it work in the real world? Of course not. And that's exactly why you graft on to it, because you are seeking attention, attention for your ridiculous, quixotic ideals and for your own tortured little mind and secretly anarchist heart. It's all about what's good for the individual with you, isnt' it? The self is all that matters. People that think like you would be the first ones butchered in a wave of hate from the New Caliphate, but yet you defend them. This alone shows that Darwanism-in-action would not be kind to you.

Luckily for you and all the other liberally mad, men and women like myself exist to tip the scales in the opposite direction.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 6:02 PM

foehammer great post.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 6:37 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed's insincere comments far above were typical of Muslims scums living in the West. Even though he was educated in the West and communicate in perfect English, his mind is undeniably of Muslim nature. Scums are scums, and always scums!

Posted by: brooklyn_guy at June 20, 2006 6:37 PM

Don’t waste your time arguing with khalid bin waleed. His sign on mimics an islamic myth of a great warrior (really a murderer). He is just another muslim mouth piece trying to incite someone in saying something to prove this is a hate site and not a discussion forum. If he really wanted to discuss islam he would stay and attempt to defend it, even nassem tried that. Lionheart is just ignorant of the facts. Simple PC arguments can always be turned around, the USA killed x many more people than they did, yada yada yada, now spin the other direction, islam since its birth has murdered, raped and tortured to many millions to count, wow USA wins, congrats. It was an apples to oranges argument without merit. Reality is, islam is the worlds biggest killer of muslims and non muslims in this world today. There is no amount of spin that will change that.

We all knew what to expect when we found out the soldiers were captured. If these murdering clowns understood the American mind they would know they just added years to our stay in the unholy land. They also made it damn near impossible to build any more islamic centers, mosques or any other pro islamic crap hole in the US. I didn’t notice even the pc groups attempting to defend them with the old stand by of “a small minority.” For an anti US group al qaida sure makes us look good and makes the pc crowd look like complete idiots. They have never faced a global news environment, islam can’t stand the truth, it’s days are numbered.

Posted by: Ronin at June 20, 2006 6:41 PM

Assalamau Laikum all,

I read this thread with some trapedation...and almost didn't post out of respect for the peoples here but there are some important points that have to be made.

1) Although many peoples will resent it coming from me, let me forward my condolenses to the American peoples, & particularily the families of the two fallen soldiers. In particular your admin needs to look after them as there is no one to win the bread now.

2) Also let the other soldiers know that it is better to fight to the death rather than be kidnapped or surrender.

3)I am amazed that bigcatgirl ALWAYS wants someone banned just because she don't like their viewpoint...that's just nuts...don't you WANT to know what you are up against....would you be so nieve to think that banning someone will keep you safe? Wakeup girl & don't leave it too late...you are not at junior school now...there are no teachers to take control.

4)You cannot win this war. The enemy is unknown, dressed & mingled with the civilian...and your administraton wants you to fight with one hand tied behind your back. The rules of engagement are such that it is not possible to eliminate the leaders ...only the front line fodder of Allah's warriors...and that means victory is impossible.

5)Yes, I believe Texan when he says that war with Islam is inevitable...WE don't want it ...YOU don't want it ...but *they* do. This is Mr Walid and co.

6) There is little doubt that the occupying forces will have to leave...but when ...when you are bankrupt? Leave now to save up for the future wars...and keep the remaining soldiers safe.

Time has run out and this experiment is over.

Posted by: Naseem at June 20, 2006 6:47 PM

Naseem, you may have a point there....we could save a lot of time and money and just make the entire M.E. a parking lot.

The only good thing out of the entire area is the oil and we can get that anywhere. I am racking my brain to find any redeeming value in these people. They teach hate. They love to kill. They hate women. They hate each other for that matter.

Help me here Naseem. Why should we spare these people?

Posted by: freewoman at June 20, 2006 6:56 PM

traeh,

Thanks for your compliments re: my blog.

Re: whether our discussion is off-topic: on second thought, the news of two of our soldiers being hideously tortured to death by Satanic ghouls emanating directly, more than "integrally", out of Islam renders our discussion on-topic, as far as I am concerned.

I think you're shading over into quibbling or excessively fine-tuning the distinctions when you write:

"Hugh and Robert never say the patient's head is all gangrene. And they do not say whether or not the gangrene is utterly inoperable. But they do say, and repeatedly, that the patient's head has gangrene, that the gangrene emanates from some part or parts of the center."

The point of my gangrenous head metaphor is to rule out hope. To re-introduce hope into a patient who has a gangrenous head is straining the metaphor, I think. I don't agree that R&H ever come out and say the patient has a gangrenous head; instead, they leave the precise location, extent and mortal centrality of the gangrene vague -- on purpose, apparently. I'm saying enough's enough: call the Time of Death, already, for Pete's sake.

"keeping in mind good tactics for the persuasion of a broad mass of readers"

This seems to be one major concern; it has merits, but on the other hand, it cannot avoid insulting intelligence and the love of truth -- let alone the thirst for justice.

"perhaps adhering to a genuine agnosticism on a complex question, Robert repeatedly challenges Muslims to undertake the surgery."

As I've said before, most every challenge Robert poses to Muslims seems to be rhetorical, not actual -- and that, too, is a tactic that can have value. But, O Lord, how long? If I find myself clicking onto Jihad Watch in 2012 after 5 more cities and 300,000 people are dead, and R&H are still doing this, then what? When will enough be enough? R&H obviously have a lower threshhold than the dominant idiot-analysts out there, but why should we wait for mass casualties before we express boldly unequivocal rhetoric? Again, it's difficult to criticize R&H, because they so asymptotically resemble that lovely cigar I'm jonesing for.

"I will satisfy myself with the fact that you acknowledge the existence of moral variation among the integral and other elements that make up the Islam system."

The existence, yes; but not the usefulness qua moral variation.

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 6:56 PM

Hi Naseem, it is always a pleasure. Reality is this will add to our stay in iraq not decrease it. We wouldn’t think of leaving the iraqis to people who could do such things. The entire world can see we aggressively prosecute our own when they break the excepted laws of warfare. It hurts our cause, our morale and yet we do it, why? We do it because we really believe we can teach the worlds children a better way. One in which free people can make their own minds up and set their own goals. We don’t force anyone to live in fear of religions, politics or any other control mechanism. I might be blind but I have yet to see the masses attempt to immigrate to muslim countries, I do see them coming or making an attempt to come here. That should be proof enough that islams days are numbered, no one wants it, needs it or see any benefit to it.

Posted by: Ronin at June 20, 2006 6:58 PM

Having read and studied the islamic code of war, i have to say that if adhered too, then it results in the most honorable form of warfare conduct. however as with all laws its not always followed,eg 9/11 7/7 and torture. i have read many books by non muslims about islam and the accusations thrown at it by the western christians, and i must say some of their quotes are very enlightening of the truth.

To the british, and yanks, if china invaded britain/usa under the pretence of accounting blairbush for the war crimes in Iraq, would those who resisted and took up arms against the militarily suprerior invaders not be labbeled as heroes.
so please where are your facts to charge islam witht similar crimes to the ones i charged america with(eg, hiroshima, nagasaki, vietnam, lies deceit,slave trade ect)
since the end of world war 2, america has invaded the most countries and has been involved directly or indirectly in every conflict

Posted by: lionheart at June 20, 2006 7:03 PM

Having read and studied the islamic code of war, from post above

So you read the koran?

Posted by: freewoman at June 20, 2006 7:05 PM

Ronin hello,

You say "That should be proof enough that islams days are numbered, no one wants it, needs it or see any benefit to it".

I'm afraid I cannot agree with you. My faith is my foundation of belief, its what I was born into...the mistake is that you want to equalise my faith with the faith of those vermin...and you shouldn't.

The faith may share a common name.. Islam...but really it almost ends there....this is one of the reasons that the ME cannot be turned into a parking lot. There are many good peoples living out there...the trick is to find the differentiators...it's been 1400 years now but we are still looking!

Be sure when we find it you'll be the 1st one to know...we are as pissed off as you.

Posted by: Naseem at June 20, 2006 7:09 PM

HAS ANYONE SEEN RAMBO 3, I MEAN WHATS CHANGED SINCE THEN, APART FROM SOVIET UNION HAS NOW BEEN REPLACED BY USA. fi

First came the stealing of palestine and inhuman treatment of palestinians, then came palestinian suicide bombing.

First came exploitation of muslim oil,occupation of saudi arabia, insatlling puppet governments in muslim world, giving palestine to the zionist, then came 9/11

First came joining usa in massacre of iraq, than cam 7/7

IF MUSLIMS WHO KILL INNOCENT PEOPLE TO ENFORCE THEIR VIEWS ARE EXTREMIST(I AGREE), THAN THAT WOULD LOGICALLY MAKE THE USA DEMOCRATIC EXTREMSIT, AND ITS UP TO THE DEMOCRATIC MODERATES, (U GUYS) T0 STAND UP AND SPEAK OUT AGAINST THIS PROBLEM, WHICH THREATENS THE WORLD, I MEAN WHAT GOD WOULD SPEAK DIRECTLY TO A MAN AND TELL HIM THAT KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE IS OK

Posted by: lionheart at June 20, 2006 7:17 PM

1. Despite using the term "we" in a previous post, lionheart is obviously a Muslim and not a western liberal (just to clear up that apparent misconception). The giveaway (besides the usual distinctive misuse of the English language) is his apparent belief that Flemming Rose actually did perish in a fire. Only a Muslim could be that stupid and that susceptible to baseless rumor.
2. Television - how does the purpose of your blog differ from Ali Sina's?
3. I echo bigcatgirl in calling for the ban of Khalid Bin Waleed. Yes, there is a purpose to permitting Muslim postings in order to illustrate their stupidity, supremacism, and barbarity, but IMO his postings simply go beyond the pale.

Posted by: Caroline at June 20, 2006 7:17 PM

lionheart, Having read and studied the islamic code of war, yada yada, apples and oranges again. It is not what they write that counts. Their own prophet set the stage, a mass murder, rapist, pedophile all of which is proudly written by muslims themselves and all profess to aspire to be like him.

No comparison can be made between real soldiers and the murderers in iraq. Every war has civilian casualties, reality is no military on this planet works harder to keep them to a minimum than the USA, again no comparison.

We invaded country X in the past, yada yada yada, again what has that got to do with anything? This is now.

We nuked the Japanese in WWII (also ended a war which potentially would have killed many more Japanese and helped them build themselves into a real democracy). This is reality, we can do it again, we have enough nukes to fry everyone. Would islam sit on them for this long?

We also, give more to charity than anyone else, we routinely help those in need even if their own government professes to hating our guts. We do it because we can, we do it because people are hurting. We do it knowing we will never be paid. We do it understanding we will not even receive a simple thank you. islam ever do that? No comparison, islam is an embarrassment.

Posted by: Ronin at June 20, 2006 7:19 PM

i have read it and studied the period in which the verses were revealed, and what does it say kill the enemy, but dont trangress, fight those who have wronged u, but if they want peace, cease fighting.

a quote from umer (one of the rightly guided caliphs b4 sending his troops to war.

"do not kill women, children, and the old, do not destroy homes, crops, or sloughter animals, except that which u need to eat, on your journays u will come across monks who seclude themselves in their places of worship do not harass or harm them". puts america to shame.

paraphrased from a christian scholar.
"when the christians took control of spain, the muslims were forced to convert or face the sword(which many did)at the same time a muslim army defeated the christians in turkey and to this day the christian orthodox church still stands in istanbul" alhumdullilah,

Posted by: lionheart at June 20, 2006 7:27 PM

it's been 1400 years now but we are still looking!
Be sure when we find it you'll be the 1st one to know...we are as pissed off as you.
Posted by: Naseem

Naseem, why try? I don’t wish to insult you but the question I would ask is simply this; why try? If 1400 years was not enough, take the hint and move on. There are many fine religions and most truly benefit their believers without endangering those around them or oppressing their own. As much as I admire your seemingly endless attempt to convince us there is some small hope for islam, I don’t think your message is working. I told you before I have been in many muslim countries, I wish no ill on any of them. I don’t want to nuke, kill, or harm anyone, but I will fight to my death before I live under sharia in my own country. Most Americans would, true they don’t know that yet because they know little about it. You can’t grow up free and lose it; you will always fight to regain it. Live the way you want just don’t push it on us.

Posted by: Ronin at June 20, 2006 7:28 PM

lionheart, again who cares? This is not the past it is now. I have never been to Spain, I have been to Iraq, I have seen allahs murders die in the dirt, crying, screaming and attempting to hang on to life. They didn't look forward to any virgins, an afterlife or didn't look pleased with themselves at all. The sad part is it took facing death to teach them they wasted thier lives. Who knows maybe they could have cured cancer or found a better way to feed humanity, such a waste. The biggest killer of muslims is other muslims, we Americans account for just a few but we do try and limit it to the more radical ones. We also have fought along side them and helped them when they needed it, kinda destroys the evil American crap doesn't it?

Posted by: Ronin at June 20, 2006 7:33 PM

The thing to understand is that for my entire life and decades before, the United States people have strived to just live their lives in peace, protect freedom when forced to and hoped the world would love us. We came to the aid of Europe in both world wars and spilled our blood on foreign shores. We stopped the spread of Soviet communism and built the United Nations and donate to countless charities and send our aid workers to every corner of the globe and yet what does it buy us as people? The love of the world? Hardly.

Islam proves that no soley good actions will ever be enough while evil ideologies exist.

The time for worrying about whether the world loves us is coming to an end. Our very existence as a nation is being threatened now, and with that, the future of all free people on this planet if we do not pick up the sword.

The time is fast approaching when the world is going to drive the U.S.A to a new and yet quite old approach to international relations -- control through fear. The Islamic world only understands brute force, so I say, give them what they are begging for. Give them the sharp edge of the sword before the threat grows so dangerous that it kills millions of innocent people due to our complacency and appeasement.

I personally will never sit back quietly and watch the new Goths (thx to R. Spencer for that analogy) take us over, whether they be Mexicanista or Jihadi or any other foreign usurpers.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 7:37 PM

lionheart, You need to change your screen name, how about lyin'heart?

Lyin'heart said, "Having read and studied the islamic code of war, i have to say that if adhered too, then it results in the most honorable form of warfare conduct."

So raping female captives and selling captive soldiers into slavery is honorable?

The presence of American soldiers "in country" appears to be de-humanizing some of them. Fighting an enemy that has no rules and no compassion must be very frustrating. Seeing one's buddies killed and maimed by murderers who plant bombs and run away and hide can sap the moral fortitude from anyone. I am getting sick and tired of US soldiers being court martialed for acting out their frustrations on the Iraqis who may be hiding these murderers.

As one who has studied WW2 and heard many firsthand accounts Japanese soldiers on Okinawa and Iwo Jima pretend to surrender only to have live grenades hidden under their arms. When they would raise their arms one or more US soldier would die when the grenades exploded. I have heard more than one elderly veteran say that they flat did not take Japanese prisoners. If no officers were around, they shot the enemy out of hand.

After German snipers developed the nasty habit of killing one or two American soldiers, then raising their hands in surrender, Omar Bradley said that he did not want to hear of any German snipers being taken prisoner. None were taken.

We are in an ugly war, and it is only going to get uglier. We had better adopt new rules; our futures are at stake.

Posted by: Pelayo at June 20, 2006 7:45 PM

The US will continue to suffer these outrages until we learn to respond to the terrorist in language they can understand.

On September 30, 1985, four Soviet diplomats were kidnapped by the Islamic Liberation Organization in Beirut, one, Arkady Katkov, was killed by his captors while trying to escape. The other three, commercial attache Valery Mirkov, press attache Oleg Spirin, and embassy doctor Nikolai Seversky, were released unharmed a month later after a relative of the terrorist leader's was kidnapped and killed by the Soviet KGB.

The terrorist leader's relative was actually his four-year-old son. A Spetsnaz team took the boy from his home. They then delivered the boy’s cut off ear to his mother with a video of the cutting. On the video was a message that if the remaining three Soviets were not released unharmed, the next video would be of the boy’s castration. The Soviets promised that if the diplomats were released, the boy would not be castrated.

The remaining diplomats were released. The Soviets then simply shot the boy in the back of the head in retaliation for the murder of Katkov. However, the KGB did keep its promise and the dead boy was not castrated.

After that, no Soviet diplomat in Lebanon was ever threatened again.

Posted by: Provoslavni at June 20, 2006 7:52 PM

2. Television - how does the purpose of your blog differ from Ali Sina's? Posted by: Caroline

Caroline

I can't speak for TV, but Ali Sina seems to have two audiences:

1. Muslims who may be undergoing a battle between their conscience, and their loyalty to Islam;
   
2. Infidels who may be considering Islam as an alternative
   

I don't believe either of these are TV's intended market - I'd think that his market is

1. Those who aren't considering Islam, but are unaware of what Islam is really all about;
   
2. Those who know they hate Islam, and are re-inforcing their reasons as to why.
   

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 20, 2006 8:08 PM

Lionheart:

“ when our governments kill 100000 innocent people in iraq in the name of democracy, yet we are filled with rage by the actions of 24 criminals,”

Still relying on that old Lancet article eh? What an idiot you are. When are you going to start counting the number of Iraqi’s killed by Muslim suicide bombers, not to mention the number kidnapped, and murdered for any other number of reasons including being educated, not wearing hijab, selling alcohol, running falafel stands and on and on (pretty much any old damn excuse will do to either exact revenge or to play "little God on earth").

“and as such stigmatise a whole religion and its 1.5 billion followers, thus calling the religion barbaric.”

Your religion IS barbaric buddy. Wake up and smell the coffee.

“ who are they to despise our indiscriminate bombs and missles killing their innocent civilliens, “

Our bombs aren’t indiscriminate bud. You must have missed the Muslim strategy of INTENTIONALLY targeting innocent civilians worldwide by contrast. But perhaps you’ve been living in a cave somewhere (wouldn’t surprise me given both your ignorance and your poor language skills).

“who are they to resent our support of israel who have stolen their lands and have shot dead at least 400 children in the last 5 years”

Better read up on the real story behind the I/P conflict. Not about to hold my breath expecting any Muslim to do so though.

“the nerve of these people, we are the keepers of peace, as seen by the nuclear attack on the civilian cities of hiroshima and nagasaki,(killing 500,000 innocent people)”

Why don’t you check up on the recent stats on Sudan before you go passing judgement on that score? The deaths there at the hands of Muslims already far exceed that figure. Or were Sudanese Christians and currently black Sudanese Muslims imperialist aggressors who had launched war on other nations?

“Hi, why the anger, all i did was illustrate why every muslimS despises our governments, the nerve of these people, how dare they. proof of how small minded they are can be seen by the fact that foreign tourist in muslim lands arnet held accountable for the crimes their governments,”

Where the hell have you been? Western (and other non-Muslim) tourists have been the subject of terrorist attacks all over the world. When was the last time you recall any westerners indiscriminately killing a bunch of Muslims tourists in the west? Or never mind that even. Muslims have completely INFILTRATED THE WEST! By the millions! When was the last time some disgruntled westerner blew up a bunch of Muslims invaders in the west? Here’s a suggestion: Take the number of westerners who have been killed while visiting countries with a lot of Muslims (Egypt, Indonesia, the Phillipines, being a few that come to mind) and imagine that a proportional number of Muslims living in or visiting western countries had been killed by westerners. What do you suppose that latter number would have to be to be even remotely proportional to the “revenge” meted out on westerners venturing into Muslim territories? The answer is pretty obvious when you merely compare the number of westerners traveling to and/or moving to Muslim countries vs the reverse scenario.

“imagine if a muslim government had done to the western world, what we have done to them, boy would we go mad.”

Read your history ignorant Muslim man. Are you seriously that ignorant about the history of Muslim imperialism and assault on the western world and the massacres of Christians and Jews that took place? (not to even mention the incursion of Muslims into the east and the number of Hindus and Buddhists massacred there?)

“B THE WAY I SINCERLY DESPISE THE KILLING OF ANY INNOCENT CIVILIANS REGARDLESS OF RACE, RELIGION ECT.”

No you don’t you liar! If you actually cared you’d read up on your own damned history! And you’d start by reading up on your own “perfect man” – your prophet. You’ll find more than a few examples of him killing “innocent” civilians – unless, of course, you manage to twist the meaning of the word “innocent” around as Muslims have done for 1350 years, starting with your barbarian prophet.
Obviously, you’re just a “chip off the old block”. Illiterate. Paranoid. And afflicted by a capacity for projection which Muslims have literally elevated to a new art form.

Posted by: Caroline at June 20, 2006 8:14 PM

Yes, what you said Caroline!

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 20, 2006 8:34 PM

"do not kill women"

I'm confused here. You folks kill women all the time - your OWN women. "Honor" killing (an oxymoron if I ever heard of one). As to the killing of infidel women - what are you talking about? You're not seriously that ignorant about the number of infidel women who have been put to the sword in the face of advancing Muslim armies into dar al-harb?

"children"

Muslims have killed plenty of children. Just as a recent example, Zarqawi blew up a whole bunch of innocent children looking for some free candy in Iraq. Not to mention Beslan. (You HAVE heard of Beslan right?)

But why bother to kill children anyway when you can marry them out as children to old pedeophiles (like your prophet?) or sell them for a high price on international slave markets (you do know all about Muslim trafficking of children worldwide at present I assume)?

"do not destroy homes, crops,"

LOL! Read the history of your peoples man!

"or sloughter animals, except that which u need to eat"

Who are you kidding? Your practice of slaughtering animals is completely barbaric! As is your practice of hating and at times even torturing dogs (one of the most intelligent creatures on the planet outside of man)wherever you barbarians come in contact with these gentle creatures, merely on the basis of the fact that your idiot prophet (did I mention that you were a chip off the old block) - happened to have some personal distaste for the creatures. Frankly, I'm not surprised Muhammad did have a dislike for dogs. Their instincts are uncanny. And they probably detected something untrustworthy. Pretty interesting when you think about it that dogs didn't like Muhammad. But then in general they do tend to display an uncanny nose for, as well as distaste for, those with a criminal mindset.

Posted by: Caroline at June 20, 2006 8:45 PM

Ronin, your last few sentences are a little off. Posted by: AMartinez

I don’t think my point got across, I was attempting to prove we are not the evil power we are portrayed to be. I know you know that but I wanted to clear it up for our muslim posters. The muslims seem to like to take historical or isolated events as proof. If I were king for a day we would stop 100% of all forms of aid for one month. Let the world see what we offer to them, we are a small percent of this planet, islams worst nightmare is our dying out. It would be very hard to find a country we have not helped and in measurable amounts. What have the muslims offered? I have seen claims of ancient wonders (most are BS) but again apples and oranges. What can anyone provide as proof the world benefits from islam in anyway, today?

Hold them accountable, your son murders someone with a terrorist act, you get zilch from any government. Any government providing payment for martyrs, no aid to the nation, none, not one cent. Martail law should rule in iraq, you are caught red handed, shoot them dead. No need for gitmo, no complaints. You get a trail if we have any doubt, a smoking gun is a different story. Hold entire neighborhoods accountable. An IED on your street? Cut off all water and power until you turn someone in. A sniper in a house, bulldoze it flat. I could end this crap in a few months, might triple the amount of dead muslims but the remainders could walk in complete safety. What is the worst thing that would happen, the MSM would say bad things, darn, the muslims would scream about our methods? How is this any different from today, only one difference, our current strategy is not working, bust um up. We have the most powerful military that God ever put on this planet, let them work, no gloves, no quarter.

Posted by: Ronin at June 20, 2006 8:59 PM

Naseem said, "There are many good peoples living out there..."

Anybody want to hear what Admiral Halsey said about good Japanese soldiers?

Posted by: Pelayo at June 20, 2006 9:04 PM

/applaud Caroline

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 9:05 PM

Infidel Pride - Fair enough (your second 2 points about the intended market). I should make it clear that I don't have any problem with TV's approach. I was merely noting that I don't see any difference between what he's advocating and what Ali Sina tries to do - which is to discredit and condemn Islam in its entirety. As an aside I should note that he's clearly one of the most intelligent posters here and I wish him the best, but I have also followed his beef with the hosts and in defense of the hosts, I guess I am merely wondering whether it isn't the case that there is more than one way to skin a cat? (And God how I hate to use that aphorism only it's the only one that comes readily to mind.) Meaning that his approach obviously has its merits, but that's no reason to dismiss so critically and disdainfully the approach taken by the hosts of this site (as he has appears to have done IMHO in his many posts on this topic).

Posted by: Caroline at June 20, 2006 9:11 PM

It is impossible for any newbie (like me) to read all the messages on this thread. But I have this question for all who post:

What needs to be done concretely to diminish the threat of radical Islam growing in the West, viz., North America and Europe ?

Can anyone answer this question in some detail ? I see many (sincere) howlers but no concrete steps discussed and action plans.

Sorry for sounding so blunt, and I am no fan of Islam. (Clue from my sign on signature.)

Posted by: Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal at June 20, 2006 9:41 PM

What is the worse thing that a mo can do to you, your family and nation???

Taking you life?? No it is being murdere by the mos, for if you die fighting the vileness that is islam God will take your soul to heaven.

It is enslavement. The total loss of freedom.

What will you do not to be enslaved by islam and the mos???

Freedom, the only choice at any cost and the cost will be immense.

The Texican.
Prepare, be armed, be ready.

Posted by: Texican at June 20, 2006 9:42 PM

Will do this one again, too many mistakes in the prior post. When speaking from the heart it is difficult at times to realize that our statements have errors.
============

What is the worse thing that islam and the mos can do to you, your family and nation???

Being murdred by islam and the mos? No, it is not being murdered by islam and the mos, for if you die fighting the vileness that is islam, God will take your soul to Heaven.

It is enslavement by islam and the mos. The total loss of all of your freedoms.

What will you do not to be enslaved by islam and the mos???

Freedom, the only choice at any cost and the cost will be immense.

The Texican.
Prepare, be armed, be ready.

Posted by: Texican at June 20, 2006 9:47 PM

Caroline: "Frankly, I'm not surprised Muhammad did have a dislike for dogs. Their instincts are uncanny. And they probably detected something untrustworthy."

He probably got bit in the 'nads by one he tried to molest... Have been deployed to that stupid part of the world & have stumbled across the locals having, er... "Barnyard Fun"

Posted by: Armalite at June 20, 2006 9:47 PM

What needs to be done concretely to diminish the threat of radical Islam growing in the West, viz., North America and Europe ?

Mo It is simple, Fight. We all know islam has contributed absolutely nothing to humanity. We know it offers the west absolutely nothing of value and endangers us and our way of life. I myself before I woke up defended muslims (against other muslims) proudly wearing an American uniform. Although I am intensely proud of my service, I now question why anyone defends muslims. If in almost 1400 years it produced nothing but death and destruction it is time to end it. So we have one option, fight back. How? Glad you asked, by holding them and anyone who supports them accountable. I can assure you anyone caving to muslims will have a very hard time getting elected in the US. We will expose them, challenge them and encourage immigration controls, accountability for US aid and if need be send in the troops. Want to be an American? Great enjoy, try and change America, arm yourself. There is no peaceful solution, it is them, or us, that simple enough?

Posted by: Ronin at June 20, 2006 10:02 PM

Ronin: "I can assure you anyone caving to muslims will have a very hard time getting elected in the US. We will expose them, challenge them and encourage immigration controls...."

Here is an encouraging sign in the US immigration battle. No - it doesn't address Muslim immigration in particular but it demonstrates that there are are at least some folks out there who still have their heads screwed on straight (and that it ain't over until the fat lady sings). Take note of the names, because it stands to figure that these are the same folks who are likely to grasp the problem of widespread Muslim immigration to the west:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OWM2NGJlZmY1Y2JiMTFkODQ3NTI4ZTMzZjUzN2YwYjg=

Posted by: Caroline at June 20, 2006 10:18 PM

Caroline,

Great link, I saved it. As I (and many others on this list) have stated “islam fears the truth” one truth is we are onto them. Despite our restrictive rules of engagement we stomped islams two biggest armies and at the same time. Reality is, no one not even us really knows what our military could do, we have never ever really just let go, hopefully, we will never have too but I for one feel sorry for anyone who stands against us when we do “let go”. On that note, I am off, see you all again soon.

Posted by: Ronin at June 20, 2006 10:26 PM

Caroline and Ronin have answered the question partially: immigration . Yes it's true, but only goes so far.

But, what is the other side of the picture ? How can we stop the rise of Islam already within USA ? (Like that Iranian student Taheri-Azhar who attempted to run over people at the pit at NCSU.)
Have you (or anyone else on this blogsite) have given it a thought ?

How can we make USA totally unattractive/repulsive for all Muslims ? Like Muslim (I mean Islamic) countries have extremely hostile policies towards non-Muslims and subvert a form of dhimmitude towards them. Can we adopt (very quickly) a similar counter-policy in USA ? If there will be uproars, and a lot of cries and threats, shall US lawmakers cave in ?

Also, many Americans are (or have in the recent past) converted to Islam. How can that be prevented ?

If you (Ronin) suggest "There is no peaceful solution, it is them, or us, that simple enough?", then one needs to push unpleasant measures. It's that simple. I am left wondering if Americans have the guts to push ahead most unpleasant measures, given the fact that liberal democracy and moral relativism has seeped into the fabric of the society.

Posted by: Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal at June 20, 2006 10:34 PM

Caroline & Infidel Pride,

Infidel Pride correctly analyzed the difference between my blog and Ali Sina's site, though he left one thing out (I don't blame him since my blog is only 10 days old): I will be exploring the flip side of the coin of the problem of Islam, which is the paradoxical progress of the West.

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 10:34 PM

"I am left wondering if Americans have the guts to push ahead most unpleasant measures, given the fact that liberal democracy and moral relativism has seeped into the fabric of the society."

Americans have the requisite guts; what they lack as a common bond today is common sense. There are roughly 300 million Americans. I wouldn't say it's unreasonable to assume that a good 50% if not more (150 million +) are made up two kinds of people:

1) naive swallowers of PC multiculturalism

2) committed championers of PC multiculturalism.

The only major difference between #1 and #2 is that it will take a bigger more horrific terrorist attack (or constellation of attacks) to knock sense into the latter than into the former.

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 10:42 PM

I agree about not using upper case for anything to do with mo (piss be upon him) and his followers.
I have be doing that all the time.

Why? Because they don't even qualify as human beings, most effectively proved by this thread.

In fact I can't think of any comparison whatever.
I know many holocaust survivors who say they are worse than nazis. I think that is true.

For you mo's out there:
don't think you are smelling fear here - you are not. Thanks to your fellow sub-beings the world is waking up.

We are being educated and galvanised by your atrocities. You are doing the West a favour in effect. The more insanity,,the more coverage,,, the more we become enlightened of your destructive intent.

Guys, thanks for all the great posts; appreciate it.

OT but here is a link re the Temple Mount; a petition to preserve Christian and Jewish sites.

http://www.onejerusalem.org/templeMount.asp

Posted by: Gramfan at June 20, 2006 10:44 PM

"Every attempt to make war easy and safe will result in humiliation and disaster." William T. Sherman

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at June 20, 2006 10:55 PM

I'm as livid as on 911. My brother had an interview on 911 for the staff of a prominent medical institute in NYC. Suffice it to say--he never interviewed--and now works in Florida. I recall being enraged seeing those Americans jumping out of the towers.

I'm just as pissed off today--probably more so. Whats worse? a 3000 degree inferno or being cut to death and beheaded?

Fu$# Islam. It's a force for evil. It's hard to be subtle. I'm sure many Muslims in the US and Canada are quite happy today. Maybe handing out candy's in Musilm Day School.

Posted by: biorabbi at June 20, 2006 11:20 PM

Television wrote: "Americans have the requisite guts; what they lack as a common bond today is common sense"

My reading is that Americans never had common sense when it came to Islam. They equated Islam with belly dancing. Arabs belly dance; most Arabs are Muslims, so Islam and belly dance go hand in hand. It was a baseless equation that thrived on pleasant thoughts.

If it takes a cataclysmic bloodbath, like the 1857 Civil War, to happen in 2001 for Americans to realize what the canine nature of Islam is, then I must submit that USA has darker days ahead. Sorry, but that's my assessment. We must thus expect to see more. Americans lack guts. By that I quote what Provoslavni wrote:

"They then delivered the boy’s cut off ear to his mother with a video of the cutting. On the video was a message that if the remaining three Soviets were not released unharmed, the next video would be of the boy’s castration...."

That's what is needed to make the terrorists pause and think. Do you think that American policy makers will go for such measures ? (Of course, the Russians cannot hail that today. After the demise of the Soviet Union, the Beslan carnage had occurred and Russia's floundering came noticed.)

AMartinez wrote:"Mobinkaaujl, immigration is not the problem"

Quite to the contrary. In fact, that is the core of the problem. Legal immigration of Muslims into USA, mostly as foreign students, tourists etc., is the core of the problem. They are radicals live in a world of contradiction. They denounce USA by day, and shamelessly consume its bounties by night ! Their hearts are filled with hate for what the WEST stands for. But, they like the free and open society. So, what they know Islam cannot achieve or will prevent them (Muslims) from achieving, they are set to destroy. In the process they may end up hurting their own interests, but that is of no concern to them. And you would still think that legal immigration of Muslims is still not a problem ?

Posted by: Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal at June 20, 2006 11:21 PM

To: Khalid Bin Waleed

We have had worse days and we always win. I will keep you in my mind however.

Waleed within ten years we will have a laser that will be able incenerate a man from orbit. Tests have been completed to deal with atmospheric distortions and have been a success. Islam cannot and will not trump science. Better yet the american youth have been trained on video games to wack the bad guy. It will be fun...light the cleric. Not to worry you will be a great test subject.....one minute there and the next a pile ashes. So simple, So neat, So well..............American.

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at June 20, 2006 11:25 PM

L.A. Times report.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-bodies21jun21,0,2625235.story?coll=la-home-headlines

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 20, 2006 11:59 PM

Americans had plenty of "common sense" with regards to Islam back in the 18th century and 19th centuries. There was this little problem with the Barbary Pirates (Muslim/Ottoman) that you probably have heard of:

"From the shores of Tripoli...."

http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/jefferson_papers/mtjprece.html

"As the essential principle of his [Muhammad's] faith is the subjugation of others by the sword; it is only by force, that his false doctrines [Islam] can be dispelled, and his power annihilated." - John Quincy Adams

Someone asked for concrete actions to deal with Islam (to which I do not believe in adhering the adjective 'radical'), and as I've stated before, the most concrete I can state is to outlaw the practice of Islam in Western nations.

Boycott Muslim businesses. Buy less gas and oil, you get the idea....

Posted by: Foehammer at June 21, 2006 12:19 AM

Foehammer:

"had" is the operative word.

Posted by: Television at June 21, 2006 12:28 AM

Television-

Paradoxically, the lack of interest and knowledge about Islam is a positive sign for the people of the free world.

Mohammad is so banal and tedious and personally sickening, the Koran such a mass of tawdry, second-hand claptrap, and the accomplishments of Muslims through history so paltry and grotesque compared to almost every other culture, is it any wonder that most people in the West care little about trying to understand this sterile, stupid, soporific cult?

The only reason we here 'care' about Islam is for the same reason a physician cares about ebola:

Self-defense.

Once we have found the anti-toxic, it'll be a relief to no longer need to pay attention to such a black hole of a topic. And an infantile group of zombies.

Soon, I hope.

Posted by: profitsbeard at June 21, 2006 12:54 AM

I felt ill when I heard this - the families not only have to cope with losing their sons, but with the nightmares they will surely suffer because of the way they were killed. Beheading is fast, maybe, but they were also tortured.

Most parents would throw themselves in the path of a runaway train if it meant saving their children from pain - so imagine losing your son this way.

23 and 25 years old - arrgghh, words cant express --

Posted by: Deecha at June 21, 2006 1:00 AM

Posted by: Texican

"War with islam is inevitable.

Prepare, be armed be ready."

Nostradamus accurately predicted it 400+ years ago! He predicted a turban head from the Middle East whom he called the third "anti-christ" would lead Muslims against the West during WWIII, and the first major attack target was America. (The first "anti-christ" was Napolean, and the second was Hitler.) The good news is that Nostradamus predicted the enemy would be defeated after 2 decades of WWIII, then mankind would enjoy another 1000 years of peace before the earth would finally end in the middle of the next millenium.

Posted by: brooklyn_guy at June 21, 2006 1:09 AM

The good news is that Nostradamus predicted the enemy would be defeated after 2 decades of WWIII
Posted by: brooklyn_guy at June 21, 2006 01:09 AM
++++++++++++++++++++

WW3 will not take twenty years. A potential result is that a country will use nukes then it will be nukes across the globe. Those left will be fighting for daily survival.

Prepare, be armed, be ready.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost and the cost will be immense.

Posted by: Texican at June 21, 2006 1:48 AM

Khalid Bin Waleed -

You have just stated your own future fate, my friend. The heartless comments you made regarding these American soldiers from your own depraved imagination is actually a vision of how you will one day die.

Posted by: champ at June 21, 2006 1:49 AM

he left one thing out (I don't blame him since my blog is only 10 days old): I will be exploring the flip side of the coin of the problem of Islam, which is the paradoxical progress of the West. Posted by: Television

TV

Even if you and I were of one mind, I couldn't conceivably anticipate what you will be doing in future on your blog. ;->

Caroline

I get your point about the differences TV has with our esteemed hosts, and I think that a lot of them are legitimate. If you have followed my somewhat limited inputs during these exchanges, I share his views on some of the stands of the hosts, and partly disagree with a few (most notably the one about racial profiling, although that was more about implementation details rather than the priciple about it being right or wrong). I think it's a good effort on his part, since it would be inappropriate to frequently hijack threads towards what is actually a very important discussion - namely, that while opposing Islam, should one tolerate the arguments of what I'd describe as "partial apologists" (for want of a better description) of Islam who want to focus their criticism on particular negative aspects of Islam (particularly Jihad and dhimmitude), but deliberately avoid condemning Islam in toto. I don't know whether you meant to criticize having a beef with the hosts, but I don't think that the fact that we don't always agree with R, H & R should be held against any of us. If that's a criteria for one not being welcome here, I for one would respect that sentiment and move on.

On your other observation that both he and Ali Sina discredit and condemn Islam in its entirety, that's where their similarities start - and end. Ali Sina takes on the hateful aspects of Islam, and illustrates it thoroughly, with copious amounts of data. TV takes on the argument of whether Islam is worth separating from its insidious aspects, something that Sina may well agree with, but have no time for.

Since I have no time to run a blog of my own, I do admire those who do. I wouldn't want to compete with any, but one thing I hope to do one day would be to create some sort of data/content provider for such blogs, rather than compete with them. It would be a very time consuming process, so if anyone wants to "steal" this idea of mine and run with it, go for it.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 21, 2006 2:46 AM

Television said:

I think you're shading over into quibbling or excessively fine-tuning the distinctions when you write:

"Hugh and Robert never say the patient's head [Islam’s core] is all gangrene. And they do not say whether or not the gangrene is utterly inoperable. But they do say, and repeatedly, that the patient's head has gangrene, that the gangrene emanates from some part or parts of the center."

The point of my gangrenous head metaphor is to rule out hope. To re-introduce hope into a patient who has a gangrenous head is straining the metaphor, I think.

I have no idea if a patient with gangrene in the brain has any reasonable hope of survival, so I’ll drop that metaphor. Brain tumors will do. I don’t say Islam’s tumor is operable or that there is hope some part of Islam can be saved. I merely note that a phenomenological approach would seem to warrant distinguishing the “tumor” in the core from the totality of the core. I don’t see how, apart from dwelling in Platonic abstractions, one can conceive a core as “purely” anything. Notice that a “phenomenological” or concrete approach allows that the tumor could amount to 75% or more of the core, and that the remainder of the core could be unhealthy.

I don't agree that R&H ever come out and say the patient has a gangrenous head; instead, they leave the precise location, extent and mortal centrality of the gangrene vague

Vague, but not that vague. A major thrust of Robert’s message is that what you and I are calling the “gangrenous” aspect of Islam is not peripheral. They have been pretty clear about that. If not in the periphery, it would seem to follow that that gangrene is somewhere in the core. That is not the same as saying gangrene is the only thing in the core. Many actual cores of things have various degrees of rot in them. These distinctions seem to me to refer to central facts, so I have trouble seeing them as quibbles.

"keeping in mind good tactics for the persuasion of a broad mass of readers"… seems to be one major concern; it has merits, but on the other hand, it cannot avoid insulting intelligence and the love of truth -- let alone the thirst for justice.

Your reservations about the tactical approach have some merit – but there might be something in those reservations analogous to the pacifist’s refusal to realize it is necessary sometimes to choose between the lesser of two evils. The pacifist – and I know you are not a pacifist, that’s not my point – the pacifist insists on living in a world of pure moral ideals and refuses to dirty his hands with violence even if in a particular case that happens to be the only way to defend innocent victims from slaughter. You do not fall into that particular trap, but in the name of the lovely ideals of “intelligence and the love of truth,” you seem to suggest that the art of rhetoric -- I mean the adapting of the message so that listening ears are not stopped up altogether -- is of very dubious merit. Rhetoric can certainly be used for evil or foolish purposes, so your reservations about it are partly warranted, but perhaps you go too far in the above quote. But now I’m quibbling. (What with “strange” particles, and “charm” and “spin” particles, I think the next subatomic particle discovered should be called a “quibble.” Sort of like a pebble, but way too small for most people to bother about.)

As I've said before, most every challenge Robert poses to Muslims [to remove the negative aspects of Islam] seems to be rhetorical, not actual -- and that, too, is a tactic that can have value.

No question that it is partly rhetorical in the sense you mean here. But my reading of Robert is that it is also more than that. When he challenges Muslims to reform their faith, it’s also that he sincerely wants to reach the hearts even of people in the grip of an evil doctrine. As I read him, this stance of Robert’s has to do with a religious or spiritual humanism that is a keystone to the quite subtle yet highly structured boundaries that Robert will not cross when he expresses himself. These boundaries pervade his message too thoroughly and in too elegantly complex a fashion to be merely a rhetorical pose. But as you say, this is a matter of what “seems.” The fact is, we don’t really know Robert’s motives.

But, O Lord, how long? If I find myself clicking onto Jihad Watch in 2012 after 5 more cities and 300,000 people are dead, and R&H are still doing this, then what? When will enough be enough? R&H obviously have a lower threshhold than the dominant idiot-analysts out there, but why should we wait for mass casualties before we express boldly unequivocal rhetoric?

I think it is only realism to suppose that if another terrorist incident happens in the U.S. , even a “small” one killing, say, just one hundred people, the U.S. would shift significantly toward less tolerance of Islam domestically and in foreign policy. If 300,000 people died in a terror incident, the shift would be so radical that the whole world would be in immediate danger, with nervous fingers on nuclear buttons all over the globe. The U.S. would have a number of radical options short of actually nuking live cities in retaliation. It is hard to imagine, but might not the U.S. government, for example, give some enemy’s main cities 72 hours to evacuate, after which time non-nuclear U.S. bombs would lay the cities waste? Or might not the U.S. utterly destroy a half dozen enemy governments and establish occupation martial law in those countries? Immigration of Muslims to the U.S. would be stopped cold. Muslim non-citizens would all have to leave. Muslim citizens and mosques would be under intense surveillance. Nothing reminiscent of Jihad preaching would be permitted. Islam itself would be challenged in the courts as unconstitutional, and the Koran would be legally challenged as hate speech. Its many violent verses would become common knowledge. Muslim citizens might be compelled to excise all offensive verses. This would be a substantial change to U.S. practice vis-à-vis freedom of religion and freedom of speech. We might well move closer to Europe by permitting some new exceptions to the rule of liberty, a few more exceptional cases where limitations on those freedoms can be countenanced.

Again, it's difficult to criticize R&H, because they so asymptotically resemble that lovely cigar I'm jonesing for.

That’s a nice transformation of the “close but no cigar” phrase. I have lost track of whether that was yours or Hugh’s. I don’t think we ever fully possess truth – thus the need of an endlessly asymptotic approach closer and closer to it, through the bowels of concrete particulars. But you can ignore that. I’m pretty much just shooting from the hip with that one.

[I acknowledge the existence of moral variation among the integral and other elements that make up the Islam system], yes; but not the usefulness qua moral variation.

Would you accept the amendment, “but not the usefulness in most cases qua moral variation.” ? Because there are clearly cases where analysis of moral variation would be useful to the fight against Islam. Posted by: traeh at June 21, 2006 3:32 AM

Most of the report I am coming across are still using "remains" instead of "bodies". And there was the talk of DNA testing to find out how they died. They did not die of radiation, so how can DNA testing prove anything ? The MSM is not acknowledging that they died horribly over a period of days.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 21, 2006 4:01 AM

Polish infideless,
The Gestapo were nothing as compared to your friendly neighbourhood jihadi. Essentially the intelligence agencies of the whole world are staffed with the world's most savagely unprincipled men. Being cruel to acquire information is a very basic requirement. But, like you said, they did not go this far. Because their objective being achieved, they shot or stopped inflicting torture. The objective of jihadis is to inflict agony. It is what all muslims learn from reading about the life of mad mo. That is why they do this.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 21, 2006 4:52 AM

Amerikiingermany says "The only thing left to do, besides stopping all moslem immigration to the West, is to drive out all those already living here.

No exceptions. The mosques must be destroyed".

As usual your rection to the killing of 2 soldiers is well over the top. Lots of innocents too have been killed (who would not have had the pretext of WMD not been used).

There has to be give-n-take (and don't say you give and we take).

How do you propose to expel muslims who are british or american citizens...who will accept them...where will they go, they are YOUR peoples.

PaK and India are too overcrowded already ...we cannot cope with what we already have. How much are you willing to give per persona for re-patriation...and when are you going back?

What are you doing living in a foreign country anyway....pot calling the kettle black comes to mind! Not there just for the football are you?

Posted by: Naseem at June 21, 2006 6:05 AM

-Nazeam,

Howzabout someone take your little whelp and torture the hell out of him for a couple of days until he's unrecognizable then saw his head off, following the fine example set by your "prophet", then you tell us what an "over the top" response is?

You don't want aig to tell you about give and take? Too bad, I will. It's reality. You people contribute nothing and sit on your lazy collective asses with your hands out, expecting the "infidel" world to support you oxygen thieves. You don't want to hear about it? Fine. Quit accepting the money, and we won't bring it up. If you don't want to do that, shut the hell up about it.

How many "innocents" have been killed, Nas? You have some verifiable numbers? If not, quit beating that thoroughly dead, anti-American horse.

We don't propose sending mohammedans to India. They have enough of a problem with the islamic cancer already there. Pakistan? You people expect us to take you, but you won't embrace your own? Maybe you people should quit breeding like rodents when you can't support the population you already have.

I doubt very much that americaningermany is part of a community of antisocial ingrates, sucking off the welfare teat, that is seeking to outbreed the natives of her current home and impose her beliefs on them.

You really need to quit shooting up that Afghan heroin before you post.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 21, 2006 6:39 AM

Amekri-in-germany says "Don't send them to us. They want to make Europe another filthy, stinking Pakistan".

You are being too emotional....Stop telling lies.

We were invited over to do the jobs that you peoples were not prepared to do....and we do a good job. Peoples in the West however wear such dull clothes, eat such bland food, naturally we had to bring our own in.

I do however have great respect for the health service and the social service grants to help us, we have no equal of that in Pak, I praise the infedel in these careers and thank you for that.

You say "Why should we give any of those people repatriation? No, no, no. They deserve nothing but a kick in the ass!"

Now come on....what incentive would you give to any self respecting wuslim to change citizenship and start a new life in a foreign (homeland) country...a kick in the backside....who's gonna go.

See that's the trouble with you...you think with your heart and emotion...not with a cold calculating mind...you's make a crap politician or businesswoman.

Get it in your thickhead...
* without incentive..NOBODY's going anywhere*!!!!

Posted by: Naseem at June 21, 2006 7:02 AM

Naseem
"invited guest workers" in Europe,,what a laugh!
Your oil men blackmailed the west into taking them.

They were supposed to leave after 5 years.
Read Oriana Fallaci if you dare and see the truth if that is possible for you.I think not.

No other migrant groups have done what muslims do to their host countries whether it be taking pensions or killing them. Ungrateful, intolerant, and divisive.

Americaningermany
you made so many good points.

Posted by: Gramfan at June 21, 2006 8:49 AM

Naseem, you are so funny. You think we wear dull clothes. You haven't been to the mall lately, girl!! I myself , would choose just jeans and a t-shirt over a black burka ANY old day.

What kind of jobs is it that islamics do that we Americans refuse to do? I can't think of any at the moment. I haven't seen many islamic landscapers lately so I don't think it's that. Oh, but I did see some islamic guys washing dishes at a couple of restaurants.

Oh, as far as those innocents being killed, most of it is muslim on muslim. Think about that.

Posted by: freewoman at June 21, 2006 8:53 AM

Arjun, correct! Once the confessions were extracted (unless the victim was able to kill him/herself first) or the poor soul tortured to death, they were murdered. No exceptions. Still the Gestapo men had an objective, even though undoubtedly majority of them took perverse pleasure in inflicting pain and humilating their victims. The jihadist are pure sadists, their minds twisted by cruel ideology. When you think about the "Allah's Apostotle" that is their model, then you realise that today he would be tried at the Hague as a war criminal (for the Banu Qurayza massacre ..to say the least!).

Posted by: Polish infideless at June 21, 2006 9:09 AM

Just hoping my first post is successful. The only answer for celebrants of American torture and killings is the death of all of the muslims involved. May they rot in flaming "Hell"

Posted by: Truthseeker at June 21, 2006 10:02 AM

Naseem the Muslimah wrote (erroneously and with intention of misleading):

"We were invited over to do the jobs that you peoples were not prepared to do....and we do a good job. Peoples in the West however wear such dull clothes, eat such bland food, naturally we had to bring our own in."

That is deception. USA did not invite Muslims. Muslims crept through the callous USA borders by way of deception. Deception, because Muslims are hell-bent upon converting dar-al-harb to dar-al-Islam. They must have lied about their intention (at the borders) to stay in USA. A large majority of Pakistani Muslims in USA drive cabs and moonlight in NYC/Chicago. They have fled to Canada, and the NYT reported that the largest migration to Canada post 9/11 were the Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims.

I would wonder about your diatribe of the West and USA. You claim to live in Pakistan. To me it would be no surprise if you (an Ahamadiyah Muslimah)immigrated to Canada, your president Pervez Musharraf would say that you had falsely claimed political amnesty in Canada because, according to Musharraf, women in Pakistan make up stories of rape and persecution to make money/hog the limelight and finally get immigration to Canada. (This is what he had stated to the Washington Post recently only to recant it. But, the Wash. Post had very shrewdly posted the audio text of that interview on its site, and one could clearly hear that Musharraf exactly stated those lines. Musharraf claims that WP had "doctored" that interview to make him and Pakistan look bad to the West.)

Also, Muslim women in Pakistan have a fear of being raped by their fathers, brothers and elders. In fact, the most widely read newspaper from Pakistan, The Dawn, frequently reports that many women (in the NWFP areas in particular), are regularly raped and then killed. This killing is committed the pretext of karo kari (honor killing). It is a tribal Islamic practice that has its orgins with Prophet Mohammed. Honor killings are sanctioned Islamic traditions. So, Muslim women are fleeing their own countries (such as Pakistan/Bangladesh) partly because they fear that when they reach the age of 18 years they could be raped by their father and then killed under the pretext of karo kari .

There was such a incident reported on the CNN where a Pakistani man was shown in handcuffs and he stated to the Shariah court that he had killed three of his daughters. The reason was he had "suspected" his older daughter of having an affair. His older daughter was 16 years, but he had married his brother's wife - just to keep the property. This 16 year old daughter was from his (deceased) brother. Then after marrying his "bhabhi", after his brother passed away, he had another two daughters who were about 4 and 6 years old. He said he feared that when they grew up they would also commit such shameful act of having an affair and thus he had pre-emptively slit their throats and used his hand to cover their mouth while he was slitting their throats. His wife who was in the room was told not to make any noise, but simply watch, else he swore to kill all members of his family.

This fellow, a devout Muslim, by the last name "Ahmed" (that's what I recall from 9 months ago - reading the news on CNN), said that he was not ashamed and swore that he would do this again. He claimed allegiance to Shariah and Quran that such honor killings were permitted. He also stated that he did not need any witness as he said that females suspected of lewdness were supposed to be punished. There was nothing wrong with what he did.

My point is that you are lying or else deceiving on why Muslims come to the West. Incidents like these are the motivating factors. The West did not, in the recent times, enslave (i.e. chain) Muslims and bring them here. Most (but not all) Muslims from Pakistan have bribed their way and entered USA/Canada. (It's easier in Canada.) They want to escape the Islamic society ofc their own birth country.

It's time, however, for Americans to call up their Senators/Congressmen and support a bill that would place a strict moratorium on Muslim migration to USA. That would show that USA has the guts and resolve. In parallel USA should also implement laws that would make practice of Islam very difficult in USA.

These are the first two steps. The later ones shall follow once these are implemented with resolve.

Posted by: Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal at June 21, 2006 11:05 AM

American increasingly gets into the French political position that led to Muslim riots/uprising last year. The French welcame immigrants, especially poor Muslim immigrants from the former French colonies in North Africa, during their economic expansions several decades ago. But then the French became COMPLACENT with their economic success and stable political power among world leaders. They were not aware that Muslims were sneakily engaging in power-grapping activities with their sheer manpower like cockroaches. Yes! Sneaky like a snake is the Muslim nature. The Islamic world has engaged in wars of all kinds for two thousands of years. So sneaky nature of a warrior is in their blood. The only way for a decent human to stop a snake is to chop off its head. So Americans need to stop being complacent and to use extreme means to stop Muslim scums.

Posted by: brooklyn_guy at June 21, 2006 11:23 AM

How do you propose to expel muslims who are british or american citizens...who will accept them...where will they go, they are YOUR peoples.

The practice of Islam would be categorized as Sedition and under such laws muslims could be imprisoned.

Rather than face life imprisonment muslims would seek to emigrate to muslim lands.

When driven to a certain point societies will do whatever they must to ensure their survival.

This kind of scenario can happen.

Posted by: GreatShaitan at June 21, 2006 11:46 AM

Naseem:

"How do you propose to expel muslims who are british or american citizens...who will accept them...where will they go, they are YOUR peoples."

muslims frequently refer to their brethren in the ummah as citizens of islam itself. As such, they owe their allegiance first to islam, and not to any particular national identity. So, as citizens of islam, they are not citizens of any other country, therefore they can be happily "repatriated" to those parts of the world where they would find themselves more at home, among like-"minded" people like yourself. Being moslems, they are clearly NOT our people.

And if these people are looking for incentives to leave, I must agree with americaningermany that staring down the wrong end of a barrel is certainly incentive enough (it was incentive enough for me to hand over my car and wallet a couple of years ago!).

Posted by: Xerxes at June 21, 2006 12:14 PM

Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal:

"That is deception. USA did not invite Muslims."

I think, in fairness, that Naseem is talking about Europe, perhaps more specifically about Germany.

However, when one is "invited" in, whether to work or just as a guest, one should show good manners by trying to fit in, not plunder, loot pillage and rape.

Posted by: Xerxes at June 21, 2006 12:20 PM

Freewoman posted:

"I haven't seen many islamic landscapers lately so I don't think it's that."

LOL. The only people who would employ an islamic landscaper would be someone who wanted their beautiful garden turned into a sandpit.

Posted by: Xerxes at June 21, 2006 12:24 PM

To the Jewish Terrorist.

After reading and learning about the terrorist attacks today which killed 3 children in Palestine and injured 100’s more, I was saddened and deeply concerned. The Palestinian children will end up in Heaven and will pray for their families and their cause, may god bless them and their family in winning the war of freedom from the illegal occupation of their land by the Jewish terrorism and the terrorist state of Israel.

The Jewish terrorists and the terrorist state of Israel have worked very hard to dismantle the Muslims living in Palestine. The Palestine were the same people who during the Holocaust agreed to allow the Jewish people to enter and live in the land of Palestine as refugees, they could share, work and eat along all the other Muslims and Christians living peacefully in a common land. The land which shared the focus points for all three religions, Islam, Christianity and Judaism.

However the mischief of the mischievous nation could not resist the chance in having their own land, therefore started a bloody terrorism holocaust in which the victims were Muslims. Today is just another example of acts of terrorisms on the children of Palestine. The Jewish terrorist as well as conducting operations at grass root level have the power of political terror and terror at International level too. The world biggest terror network is not the myth of Al Qaeda but is the terrorist state of Israel. This self imposed and illegal state not only commits terrorist atrocities in Palestine but it also paints a picture of itself being the victim and the real victims being terrorists.

The blessings that Allah has brought upon his Palestinian nation are so great than sophisticated military with high-tech equipment and financially rich terrorist state of Israel are not able to defeat the stone throwing youth of Palestine. Palestine is a nation which does not have a military army, does not have any military equipment or vehicles and hardly has a financial system in place yet is able to confront the demon terrorist state of the Jewish. God really is with the Muslims.

A good Jew is a dead one and so true is that. There has only existed on nation which is responsible and has caused havoc in the world today and throughout history and that nation is non other than the Jews, today is just another confirmation that terrorist nation of the Jews is the one and only mischievous nation that has ever existed. Days are limited and I would like to remind you that when ever there was Pharos there was always one Moses and today the terrorist state of Israel is the Pharos and the Islam is Moses.

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 21, 2006 12:25 PM

To the proud infidels of this board, I have noticed largely the use of the work “Kaffir” being used on many occasions by non-Muslims who label them selves as Kaffir. This practice is totally acceptable and any Muslim could never imagine that the word Kaffir would be used by Kaffir them selves. Right now you infidels or Kaffirs are probably thinking “SO WHAT”, but I would like to mention to you that, every time a Muslim recognizes and calls a non-Muslim a “KAFFIR” the Muslim automatically receives 75 good deeds from god. So far I have used Kaffir 7 to 8 times which would mean that my presence on this message board has earned me over 525 good deeds, how cool is that, my gratitude goes out to all the KAFFIR (75 more) for assisting me in my good work.

Anyway back to the real point, another issue I have noticed, allot of people on this message board are weeping people, crying and regretful people indeed. The cause of their emotions is the constant fear of change. When someone sees something coming their way which holds the potential of changing them whether it be a good change or a bad one they, they naturally go into a phase of fear. It is this fear which leads the same people in igniting new actions to protect themselves from this forthcoming change which ultimately and naturally result in issuing false accusations and propaganda into denouncing the forthcoming change thus the fear becomes their confidence into trying to prevent the change from happening. But the confidence cannot do anything if the change is a natural process.

By this point you infidels are probably scratching your head and thinking “What on earth is this proud British person saying and telling us all this?”. Well let me bring you into the Islamic light.

Islam has arrived into Europe and the USA, whether the local habitants of the existing societies accept it or not, the reality is that Islam has crossed into Europe and USA through secure channels which link back to the Middle East and Asia. This was always the case since before the World War I and II Islam was on the rise and at the doorsteps of Europe and USA and the question remained in your ancestors minds as to when and how will Islam cross over into Europe. But since then the natural growth of Islam has arrived into the west and today’s awareness of Islam in the western world is evident of this.

History has proved that Islam has a natural growth and where ever Islam has walked Islam has swelled and grown even if the Muslims moved on or moved to different locations, Islam continues to spread (Spain and Turkey are examples of this). The purpose of me telling you this is to make a point to all western people that your fear is understandable and Islam looks forward into meeting your fears head on. For the arrogant people who by this time are mostly likely fuming at my comments I would like to remind you that Islam in Europe and USA is pay back time for the conquest of invasions throughout history in which Muslims and their land had been dominated by Kaffirs (India, Ottoman Empire and so on).

ITS PAY BACK TIME SO GET USE TO IT.

It is predicted (in various sources) that in 50 years time parts of Europe and USA will see Muslims as the majority and the majority will outstand the tradition Europeans and Americans, no only in their appearance but will have much more to offer than what is on offer currently (including different aspects of society and employment). Them days are not far but just 42 years away. So like the saying goes “If you can’t beat them then join them” is what I would advise my fellow Europeans and Americans. Islam has never shirked in its entire life but has grown so accept it while the offer is on the table, otherwise you know the consequences.

I look forward in receiving more positive comments based on my comments made here (today and yesterday) and I hope peace can remain.

Just before I go down to the local to celebrate England’s draw last night in the World Cup could I just ask the people of Europe and America to pray for Owen who happen to injure himself yesterday, only by your Kaffir prays to the unknown may help him recover fast.

God bless the Queen but America first (and their soldiers) as they will need it no doubt.

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 21, 2006 12:26 PM

Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal:

Buddy, like you. Got nothing against you. Think you are from India as well. But the muslim name hurts.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 21, 2006 12:26 PM

-Khalid Bin Waleed,

Go outside

Look up

Come back in

Tell me, what color is the sky on your planet?

Here on Earth, it's a nice shade of blue. You
should visit some time.
Just don't expect to stay.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 21, 2006 12:43 PM

Here we go again. The United States has only been around for a couple hundred years. NOT throughout history. And if you will actually read history you will learn who is the actual invaders instead of what you want to believe. You believe in islamic babble. Do you still believe the sun sets in a mud puddle? If you believe the first , I'm sure you believe in the puddle farce.

And as far as the Jews are concerned. It's pure d' ole jealousy. Your cult keeps you from using your brains and that prevents you people from prospering and making better for yourselves.

Get over it. Face it. Grow up.

And you're right about one thing. islam is spreading......like a disease. BUT, soon there will be a cure for it. And islam will be eradicated.

Posted by: freewoman at June 21, 2006 12:46 PM

Khalid

The only reason you vermin are so lucky is that the war has not been joined by the Kaffirs (sic). Once it is, and most Infidels (not just we here) figure out what you have in store for us, a few nukes would be all it takes to reduce you to the boundaries of Mecca or Medina, if even that.

We are more than happy to oblige you by calling ourselves Kaffir (sic); we'd be even happier to unite you with your 72 raisins in Mo-mad's (piss be upon him) eternal brothel in the sky.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 21, 2006 12:47 PM

The only good muslim is one who has not breathed for 10 minutes.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 21, 2006 1:01 PM

the Muslim automatically receives 75 good deeds from god.

ROFL, what is that something like calling 1-800-INDULGENCES?

Silly zealot.

Posted by: GreatShaitan at June 21, 2006 1:02 PM

The funniest thing is, this mohammedan seems to think that the IDF is actually trying to wipe out the Arab squatters in Gaza, Samaria, and Judea.

Newsflash for ya, my narcissistic, schizophrenic (non)friend. If the Israelis actually tried to wipe out the islamic cockroach infestation in those traditionally Jewish lands, there wouldn't be one of your fellow cultists still stealing oxygen in any of those areas inside a week.

How many bombs have you seen dropped every time the Arab squatters are in the streets marching with their guns, trying to look badass?
Zero?
Yup.
Could the Israelis pound the aforementioned areas, day and night, until the infestation is exterminated?
Yup again.

You should try reading some real history books before shooting off your mouth, instead of believing everything your imam is whispering in your ear as he's...ah...instructing you in how to be a good mohammedan boy.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 21, 2006 1:06 PM

You should try reading some real history books before shooting off your mouth, instead of believing everything your imam is whispering in your ear as he's...ah...instructing you in how to be a good mohammedan boy.

I agree 100%, but this is one reason the scourge of Islam does not frighten me. Pride goes before a great fall. And muslims are so blinded by their pride it is plain to see how they are setting themselves up for a great fall.

Make no mistakes, muslims will harm a lot of innocent bystanders on thir fall but in the end--islam will eat itself.

Posted by: GreatShaitan at June 21, 2006 1:12 PM

-GreatShaitan,

In a previous thread, I asked this question of americaningermany in indirect reference to Naseem:

Have you ever heard a donkey braying in the distance? Sounds kinda plaintive, angry, confused, demanding, and stupid all at once?

Seems a rather fitting description when referring to most any mohammedan, though.

Hee-hawing jackasses don't frighten me either.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 21, 2006 1:36 PM

Posted by: Naseem at June 20, 2006 06:47 PM

2) Also let the other soldiers know that it is better to fight to the death rather than be kidnapped or surrender.

4)You cannot win this war. The enemy is unknown, dressed & mingled with the civilian...and your administraton wants you to fight with one hand tied behind your back. The rules of engagement are such that it is not possible to eliminate the leaders ...only the front line fodder of Allah's warriors...and that means victory is impossible.

5)Yes, I believe Texan when he says that war with Islam is inevitable...WE don't want it ...YOU don't want it ...but *they* do. This is Mr Walid and co.

6) There is little doubt that the occupying forces will have to leave...but when ...when you are bankrupt? Leave now to save up for the future wars...and keep the remaining soldiers safe.

The world is full of talkers or “analysts,” like you, Naseem, who don’t produce a grain of rice for the very basic survival of others like farmers do. During WWII, like many young Americans who joined army as a result of the 9/11 attack, Jap Americans proved themselves by eagerly joining American troops to fight against Japs in Pacific battles. In fact, these Jap Americans fought so honorably that their regiments became some of the most decorated “American” soldiers at WWII. Do we see this among Muslims in America and in the West to join military to fight against Muslims? No, rather, you see them cockily enjoy the economic benefits and the modern life style of the West while occasionally uttering a few words against their Muslim bullshits. No integrity indeed! That’s why Muslims are called scums in the West now while the Japanese were called Japs during WWII. There is some difference.

Posted by: brooklyn_guy at June 21, 2006 2:36 PM

americaningermany

In a previous thread, you objected to the use of the term "infidel" in describing ourselves. Hugh has in the past listed the good reasons why we should proudly wear that on our sleeve. To recap:

1. It is shorter than "non-Muslim"
   
2. It provides the Muslim view of what we are, but clearly devoid of the Muslim sting
   
3. It gets us, the Infidels, used to thinking of how many Muslims think of us -- and inuring us to that thought.
   
4. It confuses and disturbs Muslims when non-Muslims, in writing, call themselves "Infidels"
   
5. Use of the word "Infidel" makes clear the vast abyss, in Muslim terms, between Believer and .... Infidel.

Khalid's post above about how our calling ourselves "Kaffir" (sic) awards him 75 "good points" from Allah demonstrates item 4 above.

Therefore, don't knock the term "Infidel".

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 21, 2006 3:37 PM

AIG says "they threaten with jihads and then when things get rough they send their pregnant women out with bombs strapped under their clothes to blow us up".

YAWN

Posted by: Naseem at June 21, 2006 5:00 PM

Naseem, this is why we think you're really a man. No self-respecting woman would think that way.

Posted by: freewoman at June 21, 2006 5:26 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed,

Your comments about Israel are too funny.

You are brain dead and obviously have not read any history whatever.

"palestinians" are an invented people: they are garden variety muslims, most from Jordan. They do not have their own culture and language. They came into being with arafat et al. They are a political ploy.

You all hate Israel because of what it achieved in such a short time, while you and your ilk have gone backwards and achieved nothing.

How is it that palestinians send their sick to Israeli hopsitals, I wonder?

Arab Israeli's do not want to leave Israel.

I could write a book on the drivel you spout, but you are not worth it.
------------------------------------------------

BTW on a recent topic here some imman says you guys shouldn't be getting involved with soccer, so why are you still following the World Cup?

Good idea. Your "religion" doesn't allow you to have any fun. It is clear why you all want to die for mo - piss be upon him.
You have nothing to live for other than destruction. Give up now! Get your raisins, make the world a better place and get out of the gene pool.

Posted by: Gramfan at June 21, 2006 5:27 PM

Freewoman "Naseem, this is why we think you're really a man. No self-respecting woman would think that way".

YAWN

Posted by: Naseem at June 21, 2006 5:29 PM

I checked to see if this thread ended and was surprised it had not. Since our muslim troll brought up good deeds are paid in the afterlife, I offer this, muslims live to die thinking they get rewarded in the next life. If that goal is to happen someone has to kill them or nature will take longer to finish them off and make them suffer a long wait, so unfair. So it stands to reason killing a muslim is committing a “good deed” because it sends them to hell quicker and they can join their prophet. They want to die, we want them gone, so every call for fire mission is a “good deed”, they die fast and they benefit from it. That realization proves muslims owe a debt of gratitude to all infidel warriors, be they American, Jewish, whatever. I did my part and too my muslim friends everywhere, you are welcome, glad I could help, say howdy to old mo. BTW, you muslims can donate money to the VFW, American Legion and the VA to say thank you for us sending so many of you to your reward earlier than mother nature would have. Also, join in the fun, stop blogging join al qaida, get your butts to iraq, allah is waiting and I’m sure my friends will happily send you on your way. We are glad to help.

Posted by: Ronin at June 21, 2006 5:56 PM

Ronin, I'm just wondering what they get in "paradise" for all the good deeds they have saved. Is it 1 dinner with mo per week, a free slurpee at the 7Eleven, discounts at the local hardware/bomb store? They supposedly get virgins, water, honey , boys and colorful furniture. Good lord! what else do they get????

Posted by: freewoman at June 21, 2006 6:04 PM

freewoman, I have seen what they live in now, it is not hard to improve it, just spit, hack something up and you are on your way to urban renewal. To them death is a reward.

Posted by: Ronin at June 21, 2006 6:08 PM

Ronin

In that case, every genocidal call made here and elsewhere should be congratulated, rather than being banned. CAIR and other Islamic groups shouldn't be outraged when such statements are made; rather, they should be promoting such sentiments, both within and outside the ummah.

I for one am thrilled that just by calling myself an Infidel, I'm earning Mohammedans frequent flyer miles in their brothel in the sky (Thank you, Khalid). It's only fair that we close such deals by expediting such trips to the afterlife. Otherwise, we are cheating them by not closing the deal.

Khalid, quit watching England at soccer, and get your butt down to Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan - even KSA would do. You are needed there for the Jihad, so quit slacking. Otherwise all the points we "Kaffirs" (there, 75 more miles) have got you will expire. You need to get to work on those raisins while you're still fresh. Zarqawi, Atef, Uday, Qusay, et all are waiting; don't disappoint them.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 21, 2006 6:38 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed -

You are such a two-faced weasel, Khalid!! On the one hand you're a complete asshole, but then on the other hand you have the nerve to say you're "peaceful", and that you "want prayer". HA!!! You're nothing but a two-faced hypocrite!!!

By the way, what does KBW stand for in Muslim, "Sword of God?" You are no more the sword of god, then I'm your new best friend. You should call yourself the Sword of Satan, because he's a liar and a murderer at heart, just like you.

You're a liar because you're a typical two-faced Muslim "terrorist" who's nothing but a reclusive coward; who hides behind a computer and keyboard spewing verbal terrorism.

(By the way, not all Muslims are terrorists, so don't misunderstand me -- those of you who are good hearted Muslims. Please don't be offended by what I'm saying).

But you, Sword of Satan, ARE a terrorist, and a whimpy one at that.

You come on JW like some big-mouth-big-shot, with your ignorant, overinflated, half-baked notions about things you know NOTHING about in an attempt to scare people. But I have to be honest with you, you don't scare me one bit, nor does your warped religion. In fact, I find your posts foolish and pathetic, and not the least bit intimidating.

You are nothing but a hateful coward, and the new poster-child for why I hate Islam.

Posted by: champ at June 21, 2006 6:40 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed talks of fear but it is he who is afraid. That's why he feels obliged to follow a religion that runs counter to the notion of a free and independent individual. Lets face it the world is a tough place and for many of the Khalid Bin Waleed types it is easier to just lay down and submit to doctrine handed down from on high and do no thinking of your own. Be a sheep, join the flock, and just bleet away with no mind. As to the notion of Muslims breeding themselves into a world majority as proof of Islams greatness: Cockroaches also breed in mass numbers.

-GROW YOURSELF A BRAIN-

Posted by: Canadian Infidel at June 21, 2006 7:14 PM

Khaleed bin Waleed writes in exasperation:

".....but I would like to mention to you that, every time a Muslim recognizes and calls a non-Muslim a “KAFFIR” the Muslim automatically receives 75 good deeds from god. So far I have used Kaffir 7 to 8 times which would mean that my presence on this message board has earned me over 525 good deeds, ....."

Only 75 times ? That's funny ! Allah has cheated his followers.

"When someone sees something coming their way which holds the potential of changing them whether it be a good change or a bad one they, they naturally go into a phase of fear."

Yes, and Islam is scared of the West.

"For the arrogant people who by this time are mostly likely fuming at my comments I would like to remind you that Islam in Europe and USA is pay back time for the conquest of invasions throughout history in which Muslims and their land had been dominated by Kaffirs (India, Ottoman Empire and so on)."

No one is fuming at your comments. However if such false pride makes you happy, so be it. I have another observation for Islamists, and please inform the nearest mullah at your mosque.

Islam is nearing its death. The bloody hand of Islam is spilling blood and the world is witnessing it for now. It's time for Islam to be on the run. For, the next bloodbath (Islamic struggle) would be letting lose the dogs of war.
Kafirs like myself shall dominate and subjugate Islam eventually starving it to die.

History shows that Muslims have never been able to fight a war straight. This is attributed to the Prophetic tradition, where Mohammed used to suddenly pounce on caravans carrying merchandise from Syra and slaughter each and every one of those people. However, prophet's tradition of conquest works with unarmed people only. That is, Muslims can only attack people who are innocent bystanders. They can not fight a war. Islam, because of its myopic yet bloody worldview, equates success by conquest through terrorism. The cultures that have/had fallen prey to the ugly behemoth of Mohammedanism were actually resigned from any art of warfare. (India is an example - where in 712 A.D. Mohammed bin Qasim from Mosul (now Iraq) used to raid and slaughter Hindus, plunder and run. This is from Will Durant's vol. 1: The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage.) As of now, with the situation in Iraq as an example, USA is playing the "gentleman's war". But, soon that latitude shall end. And it shall end with the demise of Islam with the seal Khattam ul Nabi stamped on the exterior of the coffin (janaja) of Islam.

Can USA not combat Islamic terrorism ? It surely can. USA has all the infrastructure. It lacks the political will. That's what Muslims know and are taking advantage of. The objective of this forum is precisely to correct that. To raise the temperature so that (non-Muslim) people reading the blogsite can realize through the various discussions what needs to be done about Islam and Muslim.

Kalid, this is to remind you and your fellow co-religionists that Prophet Mohammed's prediction about Islam's lifespan is coming true. He is reported in a hadith to have said that Islam's lifespan is roughly 1500 years. This was around 630 A.D. Which means about 2130 A.D. the end of Islam shall come. Another 100 years to go.

The deathwish of Islam is being brought to bear fruit by fanatics from within its fold. Maybe in your "khutbas" you had honestly forgotten / omitted / ignored the dark days of Islam. Every flame glows brightly only to be extinguished. So, with Islam.

Allah'u'Akbar ! Allah'u'Akbar, wa' Karim
Jazak Allah !

Posted by: Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal at June 21, 2006 7:21 PM

Bottom line: any muslim who beleaves in the jihad should be in iraq or pick one of the others. The muslims not fighting are non practicing or cowards.

Posted by: Ronin at June 21, 2006 7:23 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed:

"I would like to mention to you that, every time a Muslim recognizes and calls a non-Muslim a “KAFFIR” the Muslim automatically receives 75 good deeds from god. So far I have used Kaffir 7 to 8 times which would mean that my presence on this message board has earned me over 525 good deeds”

I get it. Sort of like one of BF Skinner’s little rats in a cage, pressing a lever for pellets.

“how cool is that”

If you think its pretty “cool” to demonstrate the intelligence of a rat in a cage, best of luck to you.

"When someone sees something coming their way which holds the potential of changing them whether it be a good change or a bad one they, they naturally go into a phase of fear."

No, they only demonstrate fear when they can rationally appreciate that the change coming is a bad one (as opposed to a good one). But since you've already demonstrated that you have the intelligence of a rat in a cage, I wouldn’t expect you to appreciate something so patently obvious.

“But since then the natural growth of Islam has arrived into the west and today’s awareness of Islam in the western world is evident of this. History has proved that Islam has a natural growth and where ever Islam has walked Islam has swelled and grown”

There’s nothing “natural” about Islam’s growth unless you view murder, intimidation and terrorism as “natural” (recall your prophet said “I have been made victorious with terror”). Today’s “awareness” of Islam is due entirely to the murder, intimidation, terrorism, violence and oppression which follows Islam wherever it goes. That’s why we notice it. That’s the source of our “awareness” of your barbaric “religion”. Violence does indeed have an uncanny way of getting folks attention but it's a peculiarly Muslim psychology that could take pride in something like that.

“ITS PAY BACK TIME SO GET USE TO IT.”

and

“Islam has never shirked in its entire life but has grown so accept it while the offer is on the table, otherwise you know the consequences.”

As I said above, our awareness of your “religion” is due entirely to your use of violence. Is ”payback time” supposed to convey the idea that Islam is a religion of peace? Cause for some reason, I ain’t feeling the love. I think you need to work a bit on your da’wa Khalid. I’m glad the site didn’t ban you afterall, cause I’m starting to think that you might make an even better poster child for Islam than Naseem does.

“I look forward in receiving more positive comments based on my comments made here (today and yesterday) and I hope peace can remain.”

Well, let’s just say – let your message speak for itself ….

Posted by: Caroline at June 21, 2006 7:33 PM

Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal

Now you disappoint me. Another 100 years to go? We can't leave our kids an Islam-free world - it'll take another 3 generations?

Okay, I get the term "roughly" - does that mean take a 100 years? Of course, if Mohammed was a fraud, than we could terminate Islam anytime, irrespective of his predictions.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 21, 2006 7:34 PM

What is this mo thing about the 72 virgins when one mature American woman will shame all 72.

Posted by: Texican at June 21, 2006 8:08 PM

Ever since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 on the US, Islam and Muslims have become the targets of some vicious propaganda throughout the West, particularly in the US and Britain. Even some prominent Western figures, such as Italy’s racist leader Silvio Berlusconi, attacked Islam directly and openly in a rude way. In addition, some American Christian "televangelists" such as Jerry Falwell (who openly supported Apartheid and attacked both of South Africa’s great leaders, Nelson Mandela and Desmond Tutu) went even further than Berlusconi by brazenly attacking Prophet Mohammad himself, calling him a "terrorist".

However, when American Christian terrorists blew up the Oklahoma federal building in 1995 resulting the deaths of many innocents, no one in the entire West attacked Christianity or Christians. Christian or Jewish terrorist groups in the West such as the Iris Republican Army; the Italian Red Brigade; Germany’s Baader-Manhoff; or the American Jewish Defense League, do not evoke anger in the West against either the group’s religion of or its nationality. But when one or a handful of Muslims or Arabs commit terrorist acts, the entire West in automatically mobilized against Islam and Arabism.

Following the 9-11 disaster the US, Britain and their allies have brutally and illegally invaded and occupied two Muslim countries, Afghanistan and Iraq, and changed their governments. Tens of thousands of innocent people were killed by Western bombs in these two countries. The American-British war crimes against Arabs and Muslims have also included horrible tortures and abuses of Muslim prisoners in Nazi-like American concentration camps in Guantanamo Bay (a Cuban territory illegally occupied by the US) and Abu Ghuraib prison in Iraq.

In addition, Iran, Syria, Lebanon’s Hizbollah, and the Palestinian freedom fighters have all been labeled in the West as "terrorists" and/or "terrorist sympathizers". In addition, the US has given Israel a green light not only to renege on all its agreements and promises to make peace with the Palestinians to create a Palestinian state, but also to brutally crush them at will. Under the current fascist administration of George Bush the son, the crusade against Islam and Muslims has taken a frightening biblical proportion with the dimension of an "Armageddon". The old American Cold War against Communism has now been clearly replaced by the new American Cold and Hot Wars on Islam and Arabism. American neocolonialism with its high-tech brutality has now openly replaced the old European colonialism in enslaving Arabs and Muslims. Most Arab and Muslim countries have now become virtual American colonies.

But is this current Western politico-military-religious war on Islam and Muslims a new phenomenon or a continuation of the same old Western hatred of Islam and Arabs but with a new and more brutal face? The truth of the matter is that Islam has long been attacked in the West long before September 11, 2001. In fact, ever since Israel was violently created in 1947-48 over the land of Arab Palestine (with a great deal of American and British help), Islam’s image in the West has become more negative than ever before thanks to the powerful Jewish influence in Western media. And as Palestinians, both Muslim and Christian, have waged a national liberation movement against the mighty power of Western-supported Israel to regain some of their lost lands and properties brutally stolen from them by the Israelis in a succession of devastating wars over the years starting with the 1948 war, Islam and Arabs have been associated in Western minds with "terrorism". The influential Israeli propaganda machines throughout the Western global media, along with Israel’s right-wing Christian Zionist allies a la Falwell throughout the West, have succeeded in promoting a very negative image of Islam throughout the world.

In reality, however, ever since Islam emerged for the first time in the 7th century in the Arabian Peninsula and was subsequently spread around the world first through Arab and later through Turkish expansions, it has been viewed in the West as a mortal danger, both moral and military, to be opposed or even destroyed. After the Western barbaric and cannibalistic Crusaders failed to destroy Islam by their vicious 200-year wars (1095-1291) on Palestine and the surrounding Arab areas, Islam has been targeted and ridiculed in the West as an inferior religion to be looked upon as "heretic" and its adherents as the "Anti-Christ".

Since medieval times scores of Western writers have been attacking Islam and its Prophet Mohammad. These authors include such prominent names as the French scholar Voltaire (who modeled his Zadiq on The Arabian Nights); Scottish author Thomas Carlyle (who supported the strong over the weak and scorned the idea of equality among human beings); and Italian poet Dante Alighieri (who based his Divine Comedy on the ideas of Ibn al-Arabi’s account of Prophet Mohammad’s nocturnal Journey from Mecca to Heaven via Jerusalem). In his Divine Comedy, the plagiarist Dante consigned Prophet Mohammad to the lowest level of Hell.

These Western writers and many others like them throughout the West have negatively influenced Western popular thinking about Islam and Prophet Mohammad. As a result of this hostility against in the West, there is a great deal of distortion about Islam both in Europe and the USA in particular. This distortion exists not only in the Western so-called "free and independent" media but also in the so-called "objective" Western academia. Indeed some of the Western distortion about Islam is not only due to ignorance, but also rather as a result of well-orchestrated campaign to put the Arabs and Islam down. Many of the so-called Western "experts", "authorities", and "scholars" on Islam do not only reveal their own ignorance and stupidity but also their prejudices and racism every time they write or say something about Islam.

Also, Islamic holidays and observances in the US are frequently ignored or intentionally downplayed by the American so-called "unbiased" media as well as by the public grade-school religious celebrations. At the same time, every important Jewish holiday, such as Hanukkah, Rosh Hashanah, and the Day of Atonement, is celebrated, promoted, and emphasized as if the US were a Jewish nation. In fact, there are more Muslims than Jews in the US. While Muslim Americans, including the so-called "Black Muslims", are the largest non-Christian religious group in the US totaling about 6.5 millions, American Jews number only 5.6 millions. [1]

By ignoring or belittling Islam, US schools and media promote the general feeling among Americans that Islam is to be shunned or avoided like cancer. That Islam should never to be associated in any way, shape, or form with the "superior" religions of Christianity and Judaism. That Christianity and Judaism are somehow "Western" religions, whereas Islam is a "fake" religion developed in the dark corners of "barbaric" Arabia. That unlike the "genuine" biblical prophets, Prophet Mohammad was nothing but a phony prophet; and that "Allah" is not "God", but a weird Arab deity invented by Arabs and Muslims.

Although Islam is clearly the closest religion to Christianity, it has been frequently attacked throughout the West for centuries on the following six areas, selected for the purposes of this article:

1. THE SPREAD OF ISLAM:

Western foes, both Jewish and Christian, have always propagandized that Islam is a religion of "terror" and "violence" that was spread only by "the sword" and nothing else. In response to such Western critics, British historian Paul Johnson, in his classic A History of Christianity, correctly clarified that "The success of Islam sprang essentially from the failure of Christian theologians to solve the problem of the Trinity and Christ nature." [2] In reality, the Umayyad Arab leaders (who built the first post-Islamic Arab civilization) did not want to spread Islam per se as much as they wanted to establish an Arab empire. The reason for this was because the massive conversion to Islam of people living in conquered territories would have drastically reduced not only the yield of the poll tax collected from non-Muslims, but also the margin of the rent paid by them over that paid by Muslims. In fact, in building Arab empires, even Arab Christians and Arab Jews participated with their Arab Muslim brothers not only in running the affairs of the Arab/Islamic State, but also in the military expansions of these states/empires.

On the contrary, it was the brutal European colonization of the entire non-European world from the time Christopher Columbus "discovered" the Western Hemisphere, which has resulted in the global expansion of Christianity by the sword and the bombs in the last 500 years in such places as North America, South America, Africa, Asia, Australia, and New Zealand.

Western critics argue that Islam was spread by Jihad. The word "Jihad" in Islam means crusade, struggle, or striving. A form of Jihad in Islam is to spread the Islamic faith by word or by missionary work, but the biggest and most important Jihad in Islam is against one's own demons and bad behavior. In fact, unlike the well-known brutal history of Christianity that included the terrorist Crusades, the horrible Inquisition, and the well-documented brutal torture and burning of non-Christians at the stake, Islam has never practiced similar forced conversions or coercion of any kind either on Jews or Christians. The Qur'an says:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error..." [II: 256]

2. INTOLERANCE AND TEEROSRISM:

Islam is sometimes described by some in the West as an intolerant religion that does not allow peaceful coexistence with other religions. In fact, throughout history, Islam has been more tolerant of Christianity and Judaism than vise versa. Contrary to this Western misconception, Islam does respect the rights of Jews and Christians and considers them to be the "People of the Book". The Qur'an says:

"God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: For God loveth those who are just." [LX:8]

The Qur'an also says:

"And dispute ye not with the People of the Book, except with means better (Than mere disputation), unless it be with those of them who inflict wrong (and injury): But say, "We believe in the Revelation which has come down to us and in that which came down to you; our God and your God is One; and it is to Him we bow (in Islam)." [XXIX: 46]

In fact, when the Caliph Omar entered Jerusalem in 634, he granted freedom of worship to all religious communities in the city. In addition, for almost 800 years (from 711 to 1492) in Islamic Spain and Portugal ("Andalusia") Jews, Christians, and Muslims lived peacefully together and practiced their religions without conflicts. Today, some 500 years after the end of Arab Andalusian civilization were expelled from the Iberian Peninsula, many Spanish scholars look back with nostalgia upon the Islamic religious tolerance that existed under Arab rule in Spain. In fact, it was only after the "intolerant" Arab Muslims were expelled from Spain that the real intolerance and militancy started by the Spanish Christians that resulted in the horrible bloodbath of the Inquisition (which was officially sanctioned by the real intolerant Catholic Church) against Jews and Muslims.

Although there was a recent conflict for a while between Lebanese Muslims and Christians, the sad situation in Lebanon, however, is not different from other similar situations in the "more tolerant" West such as Northern Ireland, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, or even in the US itself.

Though the US is considered to be a religiously "tolerant" country, the historical record indicates that there was a great deal of religious intolerance towards Native Americans in the past. In fact, Native Americans were not only slaughtered like animals for centuries but were deprived of the American citizenship until 1924. Even in the contemporary US non-Christians do not really enjoy first class citizenship. American Buddhists, Hindus, Baha'is, Shintos, Muslims, or even atheists are clearly less likely, than Caucasian Christians, to be in a position of power in the "secular" USA. How much fuss was made about John Kennedy's Catholic religion before he became president? How was the boxing heavyweight champion, Cassius Clay, treated in the USA where "freedom of religions" exists when he changed his religion from Christianity to Islam and his name to Mohammad Ali? And what are the real chances today for an American Buddhist or Muslim to be president, governor, or even a rector of a major university in the USA?

It is clear to anyone who is slightly familiar with the US, that Arabs, Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, and Native Americans do not really enjoy a first class citizenship in the "highly tolerant" Christian USA. None of these American minorities, even if they can trace back their historical roots in the US to hundreds of years, can be accepted as first class American citizens as easily as the newly arriving Nordic European Christian immigrants can.

In fact, there is no racism in the "intolerant" Islam compared to the current ugly racism in the West. In Islam there are no "chosen" people, no special "children of God, or any other form of racism. Differences in race, color, nationality, language, ethnic background, or even culture according to Islam should not stand as barriers between man and man. The Qur'an, which is not even addressed to the Arabs alone, but rather to all mankind as a universal message, says:

"O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous of you..." [XLIX: 13]

When Malcolm X visited Saudi Arabia in 1964 as a Muslim, he experienced the brotherhood of Islam among all races, something he wished he had experienced as a Christian in his country, the "tolerant" Christian US. Malcolm was deeply moved and overtaken by strong emotions because of the very warm welcome he received as a foreigner and as a black. He was almost on the verge of tears when total strangers, Saudi and non-Saudi white Muslims, warmly hugged him and kissed him on both cheeks as if he were a lost child of their own.

In his autobiography, Malcolm X (who changed his name to El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz) wrote:

"During the past eleven days here in the Muslim world, I have eaten from the same plate, drunk from the same glass, and slept in the same bed (or on the same rug) - while praying to the same God - with fellow Muslims, whose eyes were the bluest of blue, whose hair was the blondest of blond, and whose skin was the whitest of white. And in the words and in the actions and in the deeds of the 'white' Muslims, I felt the same sincerity that I felt among the black African Muslims of Nigeria, Sudan, and Ghana. "We were truly all the same (brothers)..." [3]

In his own country ("the tolerant USA") where many public accommodations were segregated including the "tolerant" Christian churches, no white man wanted to associate with him (or with any other black man for that matter) as an equal. In "the land of the free" Malcolm was called a "nigger" and his racist Junior High School teacher destroyed his ambitions by telling him, notwithstanding his high grades and intelligence, that he should not aim too high to become a lawyer simply because of the black color of his skin. [4] Upon his return from Saudi Arabia to the United States, Malcolm X drastically changed his views on white people and no longer considered all of them to represent evil in the world.

In addition, Islamic fundamentalism, the movement for the return to Islam, is referred to in the West as "militant" and "terrorist" Islam. While Muslim fundamentalism is vilified in the West, Jewish fundamentalism and Zionist terror and racism are downplayed in the "free" West. Although Israeli violent policies of building an "exclusive" Jewish state by sheer terrorism in Palestine since 1948 are clearly racist because they exclude native Arabs and other religious groups of Palestine, they are not considered in the "objective" Western media as militant or terrorist.

The reason Muslim fundamentalists are labeled "terrorists" and "militants" in the US is because they have dedicated themselves to fighting the imperialist West and Israel. These Muslim fundamentalists, such as Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran who overthrew the corrupt Western-puppet Shah; Hizbollah which is trying to oust Israel from its last hold in southern Lebanon; and the Palestinian "Hamas" and "Islamic Jihad" who have fought Israeli occupation and racist policies, naturally represent a danger to Israel and the West. In fact, these so-called "terrorist" Muslim fundamentalists are actually considered heroes by millions of Arabs and Muslims. From the Arab and Muslim points of view, it is the imperialist West and its offspring Israel that are the real militants and the real terrorists.

3. SEXISM:

Some Western critics describe Islam as a sexist religion that puts women down in a second-class position. It should be emphasized here that like Judaism and Christianity before it, Islam reflects the ancient patriarchal and patrilineal Semitic traditional cultures.

Headed by the father or the eldest male, the family has always been the focal point of Semitic or Arab culture. The relationship between men and women has always been governed by a rigid code of ethical ideals and double-standard sex mores in which emphasis is placed on female "purity" and chastity before, during, and after marriage.

Islam is also targeted in the West as a sexist religion that "forces" women to be veiled or dressed like nuns. In fact, the veil was unknown for centuries in most of the Arab world, and no more than 10% of Arab women were ever veiled. The veiling and seclusion of women are not even part of Islam for the Qur'an does not order women to be completely separated from men nor to cover their faces or be totally veiled, but to dress properly (as men are also required) and conservatively. Muslim women during Mohammad's time were not veiled or secluded, but were full-fledge members of the Muslim society with jobs, businesses, careers, and complete interaction with men at all levels.

Nor did the veil "start" with Islam, for the veiling and seclusion of women were a part of the ancient Semitic pre-Islamic traditions, including the Judeo-Christian heritage. Also, the seclusion of women existed in the Hellenistic-Byzantine area as legacy from Hellas in ancient Greece. The seclusion of women was not practiced in ancient Egypt or Arabia. It was only in the beginning of the 12th century that Arab women (whether Muslim, Jew, or Christian) began to wear the veil as a result of Persian and Turkish influences. [5]

In addition, Islam is attacked in the West as a sexist religion because it permits the husband to marry up to four wives at a time. Although polygyny was practiced before, during, and after biblical times by Pagans, Jews, and Christians; during the European reformation period centuries after Mohammad's death; and is even being practiced today by many American Mormons (polygyny was supposedly "outlawed" in the US in 1890), it is only Islam that has been targeted in the West as sexist. Islam did not originate polygyny but rather regulated it and set the limit of four wives, after Mohammad married nine (see "Mohammad's Wives" below"), if and only if the husband treats all his wives fairly and equally. At the same time, Islam recognizes that no husband can really treat his wives completely equally.

Islam is also criticized in the West because of its unequal divorce and inheritance laws between men and women. From the time of ancient Mesopotamia, centuries before Islam was born, the divorce in Semitic culture has been placed into the hands of the husband. But while it is true that the divorce is much easier for a husband in Islam, Islam does give a wife the right to divorce her husband.

On the other hand, the reason the male's inheritance is double that of a female is due to the fact that the responsibility of supporting the whole family rests with the male alone in Semitic cultures. Unlike Judaism and Christianity, however, Islam does secure a woman's right to inherit property and to protect her full rights of property ownership both in marriage and in divorce. Many women in some parts of the "civilized" West are still seeking this simple right to control their own property, which was established over 1400 years ago for Muslim women. [6]

Neither does a woman in Islam automatically give up her maiden name and assume her husband's name when she gets married as it is done in the "non-sexist" West where she becomes almost like a property of her husband. In fact, in Islam the wife's maiden name always stays with her whether she is married, divorced, or widowed.

In reality, Islam does not even go as far as Judaism and Christianity in asserting the moral inequality of men and women. If anything, Islam emphasizes the moral (as distinct from social) equality of men and women, which is repeatedly emphasized in the Qur'anic pronouncements for every believer "be you male or female." Nor does one find anything in Islam such Christian pronouncements as the "shame" of women for having brought sin (i.e., the original sin) in the world, or the Christian notion that man is created in the image of God while woman is created from man. [7] Unlike Judaism and Christianity, Islam does not portray woman as the cause of the fall from Paradise. The sin of Adam and Eve in Islam is their own personal sin and does not reflect on the entire human race. Nor does "sexist" Islam blame Eve; it is the fault of Adam who allowed himself to be tempted by the devil to eat the forbidden fruit.

Finally, Islam also prohibited the pre-Islamic practice of infanticide, which was common among some Arab tribes, that allowed fathers to bury alive unwanted baby daughters for fear that they might bring shame to their families if allowed to grow up and become unchaste for one reason or another. Instead of infanticide, most fathers chose to marry off their daughters at a very young age to avoid this probable shame.

4. PROPHET MOHAMMAD’S WIVES:

Unlike Muslims who revere Moses and Jesus as God's prophets, most Christians and Jews in the "tolerant" and "open-minded" West have little or no respect for prophet Mohammad and are generally contemptuous of him and Islam.

To demean Prophet Mohammad, some in the West criticize him as a phony prophet who did not bring anything new but mostly copied the Jewish and Christian religions with some modifications. Many in the West also look upon Mohammad as a sex-maniac stud who married a total of nine wives, the most controversial of whom are Aishah and Zainab.

Aishah, with whom Mohammad had the closest and longest relationship, was the daughter of his closest friend and confidant, Abu-Bakr. Her father, according to some accepted marriage contracts not only in old Arabia but also in the more recent Middle Ages of Europe, arranged for her to be engaged to Mohammad and to start living with him from age nine on in order to be his future wife. It is important to note here that Mary, Jesus's mother, was married to her husband Joseph when she was about fourteen. Even today, it is almost common to find relatively old men marrying young girls in their early teens all over the world, including the Arabian Peninsula.

Zainab, on the other hand, was Mohammad's cousin who had married his adopted son Zaid. Although Mohammad arranged their marriage because he loved both of them, they were unhappy and wished to be divorced. But Mohammad told Zaid not to divorce her. However, when Mohammad really fell in love with Zainab, a Qur'anic verse [XXXIII: 37] permitted her divorce from Zaid and blessed her marriage to Mohammad.

In fact, practically all prophets practiced polygyny; most of them had many more wives than Mohammad. Western critics of Mohammad's polygyny are not as harsh on Jewish and Christian polygynists. The Jewish King David and his son King Solomon, for example, each had over 700 wives centuries before Mohammad. Also, as recent as the nineteenth century (centuries after Mohammad), the American Brigham Young (1801-1877) of the Mormon Church had more than 20 wives.

Mohammad was not even married until the age of twenty-five and his first wife, Khadeja, was not only fifteen years older than him, but was also already twice married and with several children of her own. He did not marry another wife until she died when he was already forty-nine years old. It was only in the last twelve years of his life, between the age of fifty and his death at the age of sixty-two, did Mohammad take other wives.

Also, Mohammad's marriages were either humanely or politically motivated. Only one of his wives was a virgin (Aishah) while another was a former slave. Several of them were relatively old widows, of his slain friends, for whom he wished to provide support. Remarriages were not even commonly accepted or popular in an ancient Semitic society that emphasized virgin marriages. Other wives were daughters of tribal leaders whom Mohammad wanted as political allies.

Geoffrey Parrinder, a noted British author, once wrote about Prophet Mohammad's marriages: "Certainly the Prophet's record was better than that head of the Church of England, Henry VIII." [8]

5. SLAVERY:

There is a great deal of misrepresentation in the West about slavery and Islam. In the first place, like Judaism and Christianity before it, Islam did not abolish the ancient Semitic and non-Semitic widespread practice of slavery but rather ameliorated its conditions. In the second place, slavery was practiced in Europe, Asia, and Africa before, during, and even centuries after the birth of Islam.

Regardless, slavery does not exist in Islam anymore. According to the Shari'ah or Islamic law, a freeborn Muslim could not be enslaved, nor were Jews or Christians in early Islam. Slaves in Islam were only non-Muslims who were captured in war, as well as their children who were born into slavery.

In this unique form of Islamic slavery, the relationship between master and slave could be a close one in many ways, including eating and praying together, and may also continue to be so even after the slave was freed. The freed slave in Islam may even marry his former master's daughter and/or conduct business for him.

Islam also taught that it is much more meritorious to free a slave than to hold on to one. To set an example, Prophet Mohammad himself freed his own slave, Bilal, who later became a very prominent member of the Ummah by becoming the official caller to prayers ("Mu'athin") in Madinah.

Neither does one find racism in the old Islamic practice of slavery. In Islam, slaves were composed of all races and not confined to the black race. Many slaves were whites from Turkey, central Asia, and other places. Many of them were initially recruited as military slaves who, after becoming Muslims, were freed and eventually ruled many powerful states in the Arab world such as the famous Turkish Mamluk (slave) dynasty that controlled Egypt and Syria from 1250 to 1517.

In fact, over 1400 years ago, Islam taught that slaves - unlike the much more recent 19th century brutal American slavery - should be treated with justice, fairness, and kindness. Also, in Islam, slaves were considered to be full and complete human beings like everyone else, and not 60% human as blacks (enslaved or freed) were classified by the Founding Fathers of the American Constitution.

Prophet Mohammad once said: "Never forget that slaves are your brothers. God has given you the right to own them, but he could just as easily have given them the right to own you." [9]

In fact, the US, the last country in the Western world to abolish slavery, had the most cruel slavery system in the entire world in which 40 to 60 million Africans lost their lives [10]. This brutal slavery system was officially sanctioned and supported by the racist "Christian churches" all over the US up to the end of the 1860s.

Moreover, American slave owners - like president Thomas Jefferson - disavowed, disinherited, and disowned their own children and sold them into slavery just because their mothers were black slaves. On the other hand, President Abraham Lincoln - who has been falsely presented in many history books as a friend of the black man, and who fought the American Civil War to "free the American slaves" (one of many famous American fairy tales) - was in reality a very racist person. In August 1862 during the Civil War, Lincoln said the following to a group of freed American blacks visiting the White House:

"... Even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being placed on an equality with the white race ... It is better for us to be separated ... I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and back races which I believe will forever forbid the 2 races living together on terms of social or political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. ..." [11]

After the 13th Amendment to the US Constitution abolished slavery in 1865, American blacks were transformed from the legal slavery system to a new form of slavery under the brutal system of racism and racial segregation of the Jim Craw Laws. American racism was officially legalized, sanctioned, and institutionalized by none other than the US Supreme Court itself in its 1896 infamous case of "Plessy v. Ferguson". Racism and segregation were legally practiced in every aspect of the American society, including the US armed forces where American blacks were losing their own lives overseas for the benefits of corporate America. The first integrated American war was the war in Vietnam in the 1960s.

Even after the 1954 Supreme Court case of "Brown v. the Board of Education" which supposedly outlawed formal segregation, Dr. Martin Luther King's Civil Rights Movement; and "generous" but now severely weakened "Affirmative Action" (which has been mostly for the benefit of Anglo women), most blacks in the US still suffer from racism, and like other American racial minorities are politically, economically, and culturally disfranchised.

It is obvious that the record of the American slavery system and that of racism in America are by far more brutal and more inhumane than the slavery record in the entire history of Islam.

6. UNCIVILIZED PUNISHMENT:

Islam is often criticized in the West as a religion that imposes barbaric, cruel, and unusual punishment. Again these punishments are rooted in the Old Testament. "An eye for an eye", "a tooth for a tooth", and "the stoning of adulterers" did not originate with Islam.

Chopping off the hand of a thief and beheading a killer by the sword, though, are indeed very harsh punishments. But, are the American styles of execution - in the gas chamber, by hanging, by a firing squad, or in the electric chair - much less "barbaric" or more "civilized" than the sword?

The barbaric death penalty, which is outlawed in many Western and non-Western countries, makes the US the number one country among all industrialized nations in deaths by capital punishment. [12] The death penalty, which is an obvious form of cruel and unusual punishment, even by the style of lethal injection, is clearly not equally applied in the US to the rich and poor classes. The overwhelming majority of Americans sentenced to death are from the poor, racial, and lower classes.

However, because of the harsh Shari'ah, Muslim societies in general have less crime than the US that has the highest per capita crime rate among all industrialized countries, in murder, theft, robbery, rape, larceny, drug abuse, and embezzlement. [13]

CONCLUSION:

Those in the West who constantly repeat, in a condescending and arrogant way, Rudyard Kipling’s racist saying: "East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet", tend to conveniently forget (as he did) that not only their religions and morality, but also the roots of their Western civilization were actually developed in the ancient Arab Fertile Crescent and ancient Egypt. In fact, Kipling, who was a well-known British racist, frequently expressed his contempt for Non-Caucasians. For example in his poem, The White Man's Burden, he referred to the non-white victims of the brutal British colonialism as: "Your new-caught sullen people/Half-devil, half-child..." [14]

Western critics of Islam tend to forget their own Semitic Judeo-Christian heritage and use Islam, instead, as a convenient whipping post. These foes of Islam in the West fail to recognize the simple fact that Islam is not different from Judaism and/or Christianity in its fundamental laws. These Westerners should do well by remembering the old Chinese proverb: "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones at other peoples' houses". The enemies of Islam in the West refuse to understand the elementary fact that Islam was born in the same Semitic geographic region and rose from the same Semitic culture as Judaism and Christianity. Regardless of their self-centered persistent wishes, Christianity and Judaism are not Western religions in any way, shape or form. Jesus Christ and Moses were simply not Westerners no matter how often Islam’s Western foes depict them as "Nordic Europeans".

_______________________________________________________________

Notes:

1. 1995 Britannica Book of the Year, p. 275.

2. Paul Johnson, A History of Christianity (New York: Atheneum, 1976), p. 242.

3. Malcolm X with Alex Haley, The Autobiography of Malcolm X (New York: Grove Press, Inc., 1965), p. 345.

4. Ibid., p. 37.

5. Fadwa El Guindi, "Aspects of Arab Gulf Culture and Society," (Los Angeles: El Nil Research Publication Series, 1991), p. 9.

6. Roy R. Anderson, Robert F. Seibert and Jon G. Wagner, Politics and Change in the Middle East: A Source of Conflict and Accommodation (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 4th ed.1993), p. 30.

7. Ibid., p. 30.

8. Quoted in John L. Esposito, Islam the Straight Path (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), p. 18.

9. Quoted in Mokhtar Moktefi, The Arabs in the Golden Age (Brookfield, Connecticut: The Millbrook Press Inc., 1992), p. 40.

10. David E. Stannard, American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), p. 151.

11. Quoted in Wallechinsky, The People's Almanac # 1, 1975, pp.292-93.

12. Andrew L. Shapiro, We're Number One: Where America Stands and Falls in the New World Order (New York: Vintage Books, 1992), p. 123.

13. Ibid., pp. 118-132.

14. Quoted in Michael Parenti, The Sword and the Dollar: Imperialism, Revolution, and the Arms Race (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1989), p. 84.

Note: ref for the above article as an example to all westerns was taken from the following website:
http://www.radioislam.org/sindi/islam_and_the_west.htm

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 21, 2006 8:43 PM

Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal,

Thank-you for saying in your comments what I have been thinking for so long, that Islam is on its last legs. We are all seeing it now through the violence. The faith that is truly growing the fastest is the Christian faith. The global south is were to watch as it has seen the greatest amount of growth. The one sad thing about Islam's dying is that it will involved a lot of blood spilling in the process. Take care.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 21, 2006 8:50 PM

islamic lies and lies.
Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 21, 2006 08:43 PM
++++++++++++

cry a river of tears. For every innocent mo killed, the cult of islam and the mos have killed thousands.

As the Bible says, you will know them by their deeds and the foul murderous deeds of the mos label the cult of islam and the mos as barbarians that deserve no recongnition until the mos clean up the filth that is islam which will never happen.

War with the cult of islam is inevitable for the mos enjoy living in the filth that is islam.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost and the cost will be immense.

Posted by: Texican at June 21, 2006 8:53 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed,

'every time a Muslim recognizes and calls a non-Muslim a “KAFFIR” the Muslim automatically receives 75 good deeds from god.'

I'm curious but how do these 'good deeds' manifest themselves? Are they in this life or the next? Do feel free to call me kaffir if you're running a bit low on good deeds at any time. If you die and haven't used up all of your good deeds are they transferable or do you get a credit? Do make sure you get it in writing. Would you like to share with us some of the last 75 blessings you received from god.
Awaiting your reply.

Posted by: western infidel at June 21, 2006 9:04 PM

Kahlid Bin Waleed,

After reading for as much as I could tolerate the long comments, I did do an online research and came upon comments that would suprise you. As the saying goes, "Actions speak louder then words". Here is a URL that speaks about Islam, the Koran, and violence.

http://pages.prodigy.net/jmiller.cb/a846.htm

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 21, 2006 9:09 PM

Kahlid Bin Waleed,

And also what about husbands being allowed to beat their wives as it says in the Koran, 4:34. This URL has a lot of info on the subject.

http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-wife-beating-toothbrush.htm

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 21, 2006 9:15 PM

Texican,

After trying to read what looked like a college term paper presentation by one Mr. Kahlid Bin Waleed, one in which I hardly was able to read because it seems to go on, and on, and on, and after doing some internet research, my way of saying "enough" came with the 2 postings above. I go by the idea that by "their fruits" they shall be made known, or "Actions speak louder then words". IMHO no amount of accademics can change how people look at Islam and those members who are involved with jihad.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 21, 2006 9:21 PM

I am going to end my message here with this : No one can ever escape from The LAW OF CAUSE AND EFFECT regardless of what religion you may have. For every action we take, there is always a consequence like an unfailing boomerang :

Good cause, good effect.
Bad cause, bad effect.
No cause, no effect.

The key word is integrity.

Posted by: brooklyn_guy at June 21, 2006 9:26 PM

bcg:

the mos believe that America is what they see presented by the MSM, the left and the liberals.

What they do not realize is that this is a minor piece of America and the majority of America is waiting for the cult of islam and the mos to attack America again.

The Texican.

Posted by: Texican at June 21, 2006 9:26 PM

Khalid

A bit late for the long winded taqiyya, which could easily be busted, since most of it is rehashed excrement that previous Mohammedan trolls here have tried. For instance, it's notable that you didn't mention that Aisha was 6 when married, 9 when consummated, and that delay too was at the behest of her father, not Allah's Rasul (piss be upon him). As for Zainab, the idea of marrying one's daughter-in-law (be the son adapted or natural) is something that would make any normal man cringe, but your rasul was special.

As for punishments, all of the American (and for that matter, international infidel) punishments of gas chamber, by hanging, by a firing squad, or in the electric chair - are far more civil than amputations, beheadings, and the one you conveniently omitted - mass stonings of not just adulterers, but women who deviate from the wishes of their family while wanting to legitimately marry someone of their own choice, be it within or beyond Islam. Also in your list of American executions, you conveniently left out lethal injections, which is by far the most humane way to kill one.

As for slavery, you're one to speak. History aside, Islam still has slavery today - openly in North Africa, and indentured labor in the Arabian peninsula. The slavish work conditions that migrants to KSA undergo has been documented several times here and elsewhere. While the fact the Mohammed had slaves may have been forgivable given that it was the norm in the 7th century, the fact that he is held up as al-insan-al-kamil - the perfect role model for all time - makes him a legitimate target for condemnation using current standards.

As far as racism in Islam is concerned, the examples of Darfur, Kurdistan, Berbers in the Mahgreb, all show, Islam is an Arab equivalent of Aryan Nation: if something existed called Arab Nation, that would be Islam. Besides, the special status Islam confers on descendants of Mohammed has encouraged Pakistanis - who may have originated from Afghans, Turks or Indian Muslim converts - to fraudulently claim the status of Syeds.

Sexism? Muslim men are encouraged to marry any women they like, except those who refuse to convert, while Muslim women can only marry those their family decide for them. If they choose to elope, or marry against the wishes of their family, you have that lovely custom of honor killings.

Spread of Islam? It was a far worse genocide than what the Wehrmacht pulled off on Europe. And don't give us that excrement about the Arab empire - the Afghans, the Turks, the Moors, all carried out their conquests in the name of Islam. And the barbarism that went with it runs to this day.

Do what you do best - count the number of times we call ourselves Kaffir, and go to Iraq or Afghanistan, where we can arrange for your flight to that brothel in the shy. And say hi to Mo from us.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 21, 2006 9:29 PM

Kahlid Bin Waleed,

Before you complain about what the faith houses of Jews and Christians do or do not do, please with the rest of the Muslim community, clean up your own faith house. Thank - you.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 21, 2006 9:35 PM

To western infidel and other Kaffirs:

You ask me to get in writing the good deeds that I get when calling a non-Muslim “Kaffir” well can I ask you if you got in writing that you have a sole? I have no doubt that you believe that you (and all other living creations of god) have a sole, but have you ever seen your sole and do you have it in writing too?

Islam till this day has not been decided by man but god himself, so what ever god has revealed to mankind it has fulfilled it self, and I have no doubt what god has said regarding the future is 101% true.

When I read you comments in desperate retaliation to mine, I and my friend sit back and laugh till our sides split. Please do not stop on my account and please do not put effort into explaining to me how Islam is a demon religion because I know how you feel as I was once upon a time in your very position, but I have no doubt that one day the true light of Islam will shine into the darkness of your own lives.

Let me tell you a story which was related to me near Washington when I posed a question to a member of the senate, while on lunch hour:

The story goes:

The relationship between American (or western) government and its public is like two brothers named Pete and Mike. Pete lived in USA and Mike lived in Hong Kong. One day Pete from US decided to write to his brother in Hong Kong a letter, so off he went to the local library to prepare his letter. While Pete was sat in the Library writing a letter to Mike in Hong Kong a friend of Pete walked by and suddenly stopped in total surprise at Pete. So he walked over and asked Pete (in total shock): Pete, “what are you doing”, In reply Pete said “I’m writing a letter to Mike in Hong Kong”, his friend then replied “but Pete, you can’t write” in which Pete replied “does it matter Mike my brother can’t read”.

Incase you robots still aint got the picture, the moral of the story was that the US government can make up any type of propaganda about anything suiting their agenda in which the public being blind and like robots stuck in the society system will believe anything and interpret the propaganda in anyway they want.

Surprise surprise, coming to this message board confirms the senate story. What a laugh keep it up people.

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 21, 2006 9:41 PM

Well said, Infidel Pride!!

Posted by: champ at June 21, 2006 9:48 PM

Khalid bin Waleed , made a Freudian slip,
"A form of Jihad in Islam is to spread the Islamic faith by word or by missionary work, but the biggest and most important Jihad in Islam is against one's own demons and bad behavior."

This is exactly opposite to what one of the most respected scholars of Islam, Maulana Syed Abul Ala Maudoodi, has defined. In his monograph, Jihad in Islam Maudoodi defines Jihad as a form of "action". Included in this action is the justified cause of physical warfare if infidels don't convert or submit before Islam [Quran(047:004), (009:029]. After all Islam means "Submission" (to the Supreme Will [of Allah]). The objective of Islam, as Maudoodi puts it, (see page 6 of his monograph), is to take down any un-Islamic government/society by force if necessary and replace it by Islam. There are no global boundaries to implement this idea. And according to Maudoodi this is the obligation of every Muslim to put into practice this idea. The "demons" are a reality if a Muslim does not pursue conversion/proselytization with his sword.

And yet again,

""Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error..." [II: 256]

This is a hogwash. It was one of the earliest revelations. History and traditions of the Prophet shows that this revelation came down when prophet was politically weak. The Quran also has surahs which aborgate (meaning supercede) earlier ones on the same subject/topic. To that end, accordingt to Maulana Maudoodi and other Muslim scholars surah Al-Tawabah (surah 9) is one of the last dictates on Jihad and religious compulsions. This surah has the following ayah (verse):

"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." [Quran(009:029)].

Thus Islam means peace (after submission to Islam). Why twist/spin it to present a sanitized version of Islam to the gullible readers ?

Posted by: Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal at June 21, 2006 9:49 PM

Bigfatcat,

please refer to my previous message and the story, I am happy where I am and I have nothing to do with the Middle East or Asia. The beauty of Islam is that it can be adopted by anyone and anywhere.

BigFATcat your just waste of space, a diet may help. Stick to what you do best, sex, drugs and thinking about how you going to repay your regular overdraft.

Maybe Middle East communities and Asia communities do need help cleaning up, but for sure Islam does not need any help or advise.

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 21, 2006 9:51 PM

Oh really -- I picture you laughing until you wet your pants -- BOY!

Posted by: champ at June 21, 2006 9:51 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed,

As I have said, I have rejected Islam and so do the other non-Muslims who post here. Also I consider the title of "kafir" to be a badge of honor. And I do this with a smile.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 21, 2006 9:52 PM

Khalid Bin Waleed,

"BigFATcat your just waste of space, a diet may help. Stick to what you do best, sex, drugs and thinking about how you going to repay your regular overdraft. "

Just so as to correct you, I go to church, do not do neither the sex or the drugs, and I do not do any overdrafts. Also btw, what overweight issues?

Get a life, will you!

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 21, 2006 9:59 PM

So walleed, you are so into being a good muslim, so that must mean EVERYTHING the koran tells you must be true. Right? K

So you MUST believe the sun sets in a mud puddle.

You MUST believe mountains hold the world in place.

You MUST believe the fly thing. Dip it twice, you know.

Camel piss cures what ails you. Satan lives in your nose and pees in your ears.

Please let me know. IMHO, if you don't believe this (crap that it is) you MUST be an apostate

Posted by: freewoman at June 21, 2006 9:59 PM

"Islam till this day has not been decided by man but god himself, so what ever god has revealed to mankind it has fulfilled it self, and I have no doubt what god has said regarding the future is 101% true."

That is for those (Muslims) who believe that humans have a "sole" as opposed to those who believe (Non-Muslims/Kafirs/Infidel) that humans have a "soul".

"....but I have no doubt that one day the true light of Islam will shine into the darkness of your own lives."

Yes all flames shine brightly before total extinction. Ever seen a candle flame dying out ?

"Incase you robots still aint got the picture, the moral of the story was that the US government can make up any type of propaganda about anything suiting their agenda in which the public being blind and like robots stuck in the society system will believe anything and interpret the propaganda in anyway they want."

Poor example, but honest try. Yes, any government can make up anything. Just as Prophet Mohammed fabricated the Quran, and used threat and intmidation to keep it going for 1400 years. Lies and threats are central to any government and dogma (Islam). The lifespan of such deceptions gets extended when religion (god) comes into the mix - which explains why Islam is still showing its teeth after 1400 years. After all it appears that Mohammed was a far more shrewd/cunning politician compared to many at presently at Washington DC.

Posted by: Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal at June 21, 2006 10:02 PM

Bigcatgirl, you know how childish muslims become when cornered with truths...they revert to name calling. So muslimish.

Posted by: freewoman at June 21, 2006 10:03 PM

June 20, 2006
Bodies of missing U.S. soldiers recovered
A grim update to this story from AP:

BAGHDAD, Iraq - The bodies of two U.S. soldiers reported captured last week have been recovered, and an Iraqi official said Tuesday the men were "killed in a barbaric way." Al-Qaida in Iraq claimed responsibility for killing the soldiers, and said the successor to slain terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had "slaughtered" them, according to a Web statement that could not be authenticated.
The language in the statement suggested the men had been beheaded.

U.S. Maj. Gen. William Caldwell confirmed that the remains, found late Monday by American troops, were believed to be those of Pfc. Kristian Menchaca, 23, of Houston, and Pfc. Thomas L. Tucker, 25, of Madras, Ore....

The director of the Iraqi defense military's operation room, Maj. Gen. Abdul-Aziz Mohammed, said the bodies showed signs of having been tortured. "With great regret, they were killed in a barbaric way," he said.

Posted by Robert at June 20, 2006 10:21 AM | Print this entry | Email this entry

Comments
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)
May God have mercy on their souls.

Posted by: Sebastien at June 20, 2006 10:39 AM
"The bodies of two U.S. soldiers reported captured last week have been recovered, and an Iraqi official said Tuesday the men were "killed in a barbaric way." Al-Qaida in Iraq claimed responsibility for killing the soldiers, and said the successor to slain terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had "slaughtered" them, according to a Web statement that could not be authenticated."

Killed in a barbaric way! What else could we have expected?

Where is the outrage in the media? Where are the reports on CNN?
Where are the calls for revenge by US?
Where are the protesters?

Posted by: americaningermany at June 20, 2006 10:45 AM
americaningermany -- We all know that CNN will suggest that the barbaric murders of these servicemen is the result of American mistreatment of detainees at Gitmo or Abu Ghraib. Out of 'respect' they will wait a 'decent interval' before trotting out this filth.

Posted by: jsla at June 20, 2006 10:53 AM
jsla, that's right. We've seen how biased CNN is.
What could I have been thinking?

Posted by: americaningermany at June 20, 2006 10:55 AM
God Bless the memory of these two solders. God, give confort to their families.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 20, 2006 10:57 AM
We are living in times where two different set of laws seem to apply within the World bodies. While the Islamic world is allowed to freely commit such horrific acts as the above (not to mention the mind-numbing regularity of beheadings, torture, strapping themselves with bombs to blow up innocent targets) with hardly a word of condemnation from Human Rights organizations, let alone any strict actions against the regimes and societies that support these criminals... while the rest of the World is expected to adhere to and comply with the strictest standards of human rights.

Posted by: Razdan at June 20, 2006 10:57 AM
Where is the outrage in the media? Where are the reports on CNN?
Where are the calls for revenge by US?
Where are the protesters?
from the above post by americaningermany

Just as in Islam, history must serve theology, because to them, islamic theology creates truth. The socialist utopians at CNN, other MSM outlets, and "social justice" protestors spew their spin vomit because in their view, facts must serve ideology. To them, ideology creates truth. There is little difference between Islam and these PC, multicultural groups at this abstract level.

Posted by: William the Sinner at June 20, 2006 11:02 AM
americaningermany -- You are so right! Where are all the news media when barbaric things happen to americans? but if it was reverse! The outrage would be defining!

Sad but most media and the world want us to fail!

Posted by: Bilas at June 20, 2006 11:03 AM
I'm sure millions of Muslims are demonstrating and rioting in the streets as a protest againts this grave injustice wrongfully perpetrated in the name of Islam, the religion of peace. The only reason you will never hear about these protesters is because of the ubiquitous Media Conspiracy, which only concentrates on the negative aspects of Islam, in an effort to spread hate and ignorance.

...

Sorry, I was having a multiculturalism episode, there.

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at June 20, 2006 11:03 AM
Well said Razdan.

Now the media needs to read the verse that says smite the infidel at the neck when they talk about this atrocity.

And the muslims have the gall to bitch about their people accidentally being killed when they hide terrorists.

Posted by: freewoman at June 20, 2006 11:06 AM
Of course they were killed barbarically because that's how mass murderer Muhammad killed and is what he advocated for his followers

Allah's Apostle said: "I have been made victorious with terror" Bukhari 4:52:220

Posted by: dennisw at June 20, 2006 11:08 AM
No, we do NOT share a civilization a God or a conscience with Islam. Not all Muslims degrade their own humanity in this way, BUT Islam leaves ample 'room' for such behavior (with plenty of examples from Mo)

As a Jew I see my Bible as a record of an understanding of God that refines and sharpens and intensifies till it reaches the sublimity of Isaiah and Amos. ("Let justice flow like a river..." )The Quran starts as a mild and confused crib of the Bible and culminates in a bullying and bloodthirsty rant.

Posted by: poetcomic1 at June 20, 2006 11:09 AM
During the Kargil conflict, pakistanis cut Indian POW's joint by joint. A similar treatment was given to these soldiers. When we see videos of beheadings, it is all over in minutes. And those killed by the bullets and the bombs have an easy death. I might sound morbid, but this death is the best. zarkawi lived for 52 minutes after the bombing. These soldiers, I think, suffered agony for 48 hours. We cannot imagine the pain that these 2 soldiers suffered in their last days. Yes, the MSM will say they were beheaded. They were beheaded when they were almost at death's door. The first report I read had the statement of a military personnel, he said "we have found the remains of 2 men, and will ascertain if they were the missing soldiers", and was chilled to the bone. "Remains" is what is used to describe the mangled bodies after a blast.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 20, 2006 11:10 AM
Right Jesus Christ Supercop!

And where are the candlelight vigils held by Muslims sickened by this newest barbaric act?

Where are the concerned Muslims who feel so guilty about the smudge on their religion that they are taking up collections to send to the grieving families of the murdered young men?

Funny, but that's exactly what happens in Europe if a Muslim gets what he deserves.

Posted by: americaningermany at June 20, 2006 11:11 AM
It is instructive to look at what happened to prisoners on either side during various Arab-Israeli wars. The Arabs were treated with scrupulous decency. But very few of the Jewish soldiers taken alive by the Arab enemy (save when they were soldiers in the Arab Legion of Jordan, that is trained by British officers (such as John Glubb -- Glubb Pasha -- and Alec Kirkbride, not to do what came naturally to them to do) remained alive. The cutting off of genitalia, stuffing them in the mouths, that kind of thing -- routine.

Look back at what happened after, for example, the 1967 war, when tens of thousands of Egyptians were exchanged for -- just how many Israelis were taken, and remained alive to be returned? And the 1973 War?

What do you think comes naturally to Arab and Muslim armies? Have you read the histories? The histories not merely of Saddam Hussein, but the histories that remain as vivid and inspiring, of Arab and Muslim armies in the distant past, as today's news?

What did anyone expect?

Posted by: Hugh at June 20, 2006 11:18 AM
The checkpoint, thanks to the pussyfooting military strategy of this entire campaign,
failed to "Secure your perimeter".

And, because of the self-gelded battle plan, two more good guys are sacrificied to the god of P.C.

You don't fight cobras with your bare hands.

You don't fight the jihad with kid gloves.

This entire "police action stype" operation in Iraq is hamstrung by the old "winning hearts and minds" folly that failed utterly in 'Nam.

Japan was not stopped with chocolates for the kiddies and waves and smiles and rebuilding schools and letting your soldiers and Marines be slaughtered in order to look "better than the enemy" and "not stoop to his level".

War is fought by doing what Patton recommended:

"Tear out their living guts and use them to grease the treads of your tanks."

The enemy is stopped by being dead -or terrified into paralysis and total surrender- not by being convinced.

Nothing will "convince" the jihadis, because they have an eternal Koranic hatred of all infidels.

Loosing the dogs of war should be more than a metaphor.

(Maybe freeing two of those convicted for "abuses" ["Oh, the humanity! These inhuman torturers let dogs bark in their faces and put panties on their poor heads!"] at Abu Ghraib - to replace these lost soldiers- needs to be done... to signal that, because the terrorist jihadist enemy has 'changed the rules', and we will now stop the godddamned tiptoeing and start kicking ass for real.)

I'm still waiting for the "Shock and Awe".

Instead of the Shuck and Jive.

Posted by: profitsbeard at June 20, 2006 11:22 AM
At abu ghraib prisoners were forced to build a human pyramid,had dogs growl at them, and had underwear placed on their (still attached) heads - the horror, the horror... Obviously there can be no surrender.

Posted by: MP at June 20, 2006 11:27 AM
Water does'nt always put the fire out and like any bush fire (pun intended) one has to fight fire with fire...

Posted by: eloivsdiablo at June 20, 2006 11:34 AM
Some posters here were hopeful that this is another ransom attempt by the jihadis. I believed it since I think I wanted to believe it. On Sunday, when I heard this news, I was very afraid.
"The cutting off of genitalia, stuffing them in the mouths, that kind of thing -- routine."
Hugh

This is just the beginning. The application of salt, pepper and acid to wounds is next. But they don't start cutting until they have finished with the pulling. Teeth and nails. Then they scalp. The actual joint by joint cutting is the last stage that can last for a day or two. I have read about this in History books. That was why I was afraid.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 20, 2006 11:37 AM
I think this was a given. I hate these savages with the "white hot hatred of a thousand suns".
They don't deserve democracy, they deserve a load from a high flying B-1.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 20, 2006 11:37 AM
Yet another tragedy.

Perhaps what needs to happen is a complete separation of militants from the general population, as in Malaya in the 1960s and Singapore under Lee Kwan Yew.

Although the Singapore experience essentially suspended all 'human rights' it achieved a rarity in that region of the world - a stable democratic government. Maybe what needs to happen is a complete crackdown on any form of Islamic extremism, with extremist deported for life (literally) to a secure facility in one part of the world. Treat them well (ie not like Abu Grahib) but isolate them for the rest of their lives where noone will hear their vitriol and hatred again.

As an interesting aside - I understand that the muslims in China are not nearly as violent or extreme as they are in the Mideast. This appears to be due to their isolation from some of the more extreme views coming from the Middle East, but it may also be due in part to their Chinese nature.

Posted by: Jerusalem at June 20, 2006 11:43 AM
Post this at a forum like craigslist, and you will see the majority of American posters respond with variations on the theme of "We deserve it" -- along with the obligatory "Bush is a chimp".

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 11:44 AM
Is this really a surprize? I really don't know how many times the public has to be hit in the head by a hammer to get the point that this is a concrete example, one of thousands, of what Islam is really all about. This kind of savagery is what the Qur'an and Islam religiously sanctifies, teaches and glorifies.

It may be that the "moderate Muslims,"in their hundreds of millions, are hanging back, observing on the sides of the field as they watch their more aggressive teammates play. The watchers may not be audibly cheering them on but, you can bet that if the Muslim team wins, the spectators, who didn't want to get in the active game, will cheer the victory and rush in to claim the victory and take the goal posts.

Even with all the spin and filtering the MSM uses, the light bulb has got to light sometime, doesn't it?

Posted by: GaryK at June 20, 2006 11:47 AM
-Jerusalem,

It's due to the fact that the PRC government would eradicate them like the vermin they are if they got uppity.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 20, 2006 11:47 AM
I truly hope this will spark mass demonstrations and protests on our part!

I just saw an article on the protesters in Britain and the pictures looked like they came directly out of Pakistan, or some other Muslim country.

Approximately 2,000 took to the streets to protest the Kafar brothers being arrested.

What would they do if we ever took a Muslim and tortured him? Cut off his genitals and shoved them into his mouth?
Made him suffer over and over again and then cut off his head with a dull knife?

We know what the Muslims would do.

Posted by: americaningermany at June 20, 2006 11:52 AM
-skald,

I've said the same thing many a time (though not here).

Don't forget about Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and other places east of India. Plenty of mohammedans in those places and you wouldn't want them to feel left out.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 20, 2006 11:52 AM
May God have mercy on their souls.

They are heros (Martyrs) and I do not feel sorry for what we will do to some Islamic prisoners. We will be even more barbaric. We will let pigs eat their intestines and dogs piss on their entrails. Oh wait, i'm living in a dream world. Nevermind, we can't even touch a koran in guantanamo.

Others are correct. In order to defeat them we have to be more brutal and on a larger scale. Woe the day when we became subject to the court of public opinion.

Posted by: Matt at June 20, 2006 11:53 AM
"This appears to be due to their isolation from some of the more extreme views coming from the Middle East, but it may also be due in part to their Chinese nature."
-- from a posting above

The Hui and the Han are not to be confused. And Jihads used to be declared every generation or so -- see Mildred Cable's "The Gobi Desert" (Virago) on the last such Jihad, round about 1930.

The real reason for mildeness, a learned trait (B. F. Skinner's behaviorism lives, despite Chomsky's insistence that "no one" takes that kind of "nonsense seriously anymore" ), is the perception that the Chinese government would be as ruthless, or more ruthless, than previous Chinese governments in suppressing these Jihads.

Which brings one to a point. What if the Muslims living in the West, and their co-religionists plotting and executing mayhem and murder against the very Infidels among whom those Muslims in the West have been allowed to settle, were not quite so complacent in their assurance that no matter what, they will be unaffected, will be allowed to remain in that West? What if it became clear that if any large-scale attacks, or just a series of small terrorist attacks, were to be a feature of life, then the Muslim presence in that Dar al-Harb would be diminished to the point where it could hardly function? What if the Western governments were to begin to behave, toward any Muslim threat, the way the Chinese government has shown itself in the past willing to behave, for surely the knowledge of that past and likely future behavior helps to explain the quiescence of Muslims in China, doesn't it?

Posted by: Hugh at June 20, 2006 11:53 AM
It is true that somewhere, in some communities, we will find . . . apostles of terror, who use the symbols of culture and faith to justify crimes of violence. They hate open, diverse, democratic societies like ours, because they want the exact opposite,” Mr. Harper declared. “[They want] societies that are closed, homogeneous and dogmatic.” ( Islam is slavery, it is not peace or noble. The very root of Islam is Evil. Like Nazi Germany the Idea of Islam must be wiped out.Thats not people but Islam. Islam calls for the deaths of Jews more than enough reason to Outlaw it. Thank God for people like ALI SINA.

I vehemently reject any recognition of Islam as a legitimate religion and call for its total denunciation and ban. Seventy years ago, if someone had called for a total denunciation of Nazism, he probably would have been called an extremist as well, yet a decade later everyone adopted that view. Should we not learn from history? Evil must be rejected completely and without reservation. ALI SINA

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 12:04 PM
They are saying "we" deserve it? Funny, how people who think that way are among the safest and most secure on earth.

How about these self righteous fools offer themselves up in reparation for the evil deeds of the US?

Posted by: treehugger at June 20, 2006 12:13 PM
What a relief that the two bodies of the poor American soldiers have been found. From the initial early reports I learnt that they had been tortured. I just could not help thinking how they must have felt when they were over powered by Iraqi freedom fighters?

What must have gone through their minds when the Iraqi freedom fighters put guns to their heads? I bet you they must have crapped their pants? Can you imagine the suffering these two Americans must have gone through then black hoods probably were tightly wrapped around their faces, unable to breath in the scorching heat and then thrown and trusted into the back boots of the ageing old cars, with boiling temperatures, hands behind their backs, faces covered tightly with black hoods tightly placed in a small car, driven for miles without any fresh air or water? Can you just imagine what must have been going through the minds? Do you think they were missing their families like never before? Do you think they were happy to die for their country which sent them to Iraq to defend the so called freedom of America over a pack of lies by comedian Bush?

I really do feel for the people of America and it is a sad day, but the flags of Iraq will be flying high today in triumph and success as the freedom fighters responded to the massacres of the Americans in Iraq equally (Haditha).

America has shown the world that in warfare there is no law, everything is acceptable. Knowing this the freedom fighters in Iraq must have brought music to their ears knowing this, so they executed the policy of America to their own soldiers with love.

My heart goes out to the people of America but specially to the people on this message board, but I have to admit I am more interested in the England football game then anything else. I do pray that the soldiers get protection where ever their soles have gone but I hope England football team get even more protection and help from god in winning the football game against Sweden today.

May god bless the two soldiers but first bless England football team.

I shall celebrate jointly the success of the England game in the world cup today and at the same time celebrate the freedom of the two soldiers of America who have ended up being count in tack and no body parts missing.

God bless America as they truly need it.

Very very kind regards

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 20, 2006 12:22 PM
The cowards of islam will not prevail. The "PC" cowards of the msm will always find solice in the erroneous belief that barbarity can be appeased. Shame on those that will use this incident as a call to bring our troops home.

The bravery of these fallen soldiers will live on as the cowardice of islam returns to the dust of the barren desert from which it came.

May the multi-fronted battles against islamic, etc. backwardness be aggrssively waged for as long as is required.

To the parents and families of these soldiers (and all of our fighters), thank you for raising the quality of men and women who are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice in order to protect Civilization from the dirty, filthy hordes.

Posted by: oregonjack at June 20, 2006 12:31 PM
May God have mercy on their souls.

...and on those who show none, in the name of their god al-lah, "most merciful".

"Say: O unbelievers! I do not serve that which you serve, Nor do you serve Him Whom I serve: Nor am I going to serve that which you serve, Nor are you going to serve Him Whom I serve: You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion."
You can say that again, Mo.

Posted by: Animus at June 20, 2006 12:44 PM
May God have mercy on their souls.
They are heros (Martyrs) and I do not feel sorry for what we will do to some Islamic prisoners. We will be even more barbaric. We will let pigs eat their intestines and dogs piss on their entrails. Oh wait, i'm living in a dream world. Nevermind, we can't even touch a koran in guantanamo.

Others are correct. In order to defeat them we have to be more brutal and on a larger scale. Woe the day when we became subject to the court of public opinion.

I can understand why people react this way, put killing Jihadists in Iraq is utterly futile. It won't solve anything. Sure, you could resolve this with military action: you could round up every Muslim living in infidel lands and kill them, but who's going to do that? Halting Muslim immigration and aggressively cracking down on even the slightest "extremism" and general Muslim bullshit in infidel lands is much more effective than killing people in Iraq. Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at June 20, 2006 12:45 PM
Dalek ben Weed~ wander back to the Daily Kos, why don't you?

Posted by: Gary at June 20, 2006 12:46 PM
Its time to up the ante, for payback, a little of the ultra violence - both real and symbolic - and damn the socialist media.

Posted by: dgene at June 20, 2006 12:49 PM
It seems the leftist website The Daily Kos is gloating over the fact that their fellow American citizens have been tortured and murdered. Is there any level of treachery and moral turpitude such people won't sink to?

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21135&only

Posted by: Yojimbo at June 20, 2006 12:49 PM
one has to fight fire with fire...

...or high explosives. Learned that off John Wayne in Hellfighters.

Posted by: Animus at June 20, 2006 12:49 PM
Khalid Bin Waleed,

Troll, leave this website posting board please.

Robert, Hugh,

Ban this troll please, thanks.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 20, 2006 12:51 PM
American Indians were significantly and often outrageously more barbarous and savage than the Europeans and then the Americans after Independence; the Japanese during World War II were arguably even worse than the American Indians; and the Muslims (they never let us down) manage to be worse than the worst. With each historical encounter, the PC historical revisionism would at best damn Americans through equivalency, or at worst consider Americans worse than the American Indians, worse than the Japanese, worse than the Muslims. It is the queerest hump of deformity on the figure of the Anti-West, this uncontrollable spasm to turn, time and time again, the singular ethical superiority of American behavior on its head.

P.S.: The perennially vigilant note to keep in mind (if only to remind those who have caught one form or another of the PC virus) is that "superior" does NOT -- repeat: does NOT -- mean "perfect". One symptom of the Leftist disease (out of the many that constitute its incoherent syndrome) is to think that if something is not perfect, it cannot be superior.

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 12:56 PM
Here's something from the BBC's report:

Ken MacKenzie, uncle of Kristian Menchaca, said on US television: "Because the US government did not have a plan in place, my nephew has paid for it with his life."

Of course. The US government is responsible.

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at June 20, 2006 12:57 PM
Yojimbo,

I am not suprised that we would get visits from trolls like the one by the name of Kalid Bin Waleed would come and spew nothing but garbage. Coming here to push our hot buttons, but we march on.

My grand neice is graduating from high school tonight. Websites like this is set up not only for the sake of our futures, but those of our children, grandchildren, neices, nephews, grandneices and grandnephews.

God Bless the American service people, living and decesed.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 20, 2006 12:57 PM
God Bless the American service people, living and decesed. by bigcatgirl

Amen!! Our service men and women have more conviction in their little fingers than all muslims put together!!

Posted by: freewoman at June 20, 2006 01:00 PM
There will be no riots in America over this atrocity for the MSM will not show the photographs and videos of the bodies of these two soldiers to raise the ire of the Americans.

9/11 was news that spread across America as it happened and could not be restrained by the MSM.

How many mass graves in Iraq have you seen on the MSM??

Have you ever seen the decapitation of the American civilian by the mos on the MSM??

Keep the masses of Americans uniformed and misinformed and they will go about their daily lives of work, eating watching TV and sleeping and then repeating again and again.

JW does a great service, but its voice is as one yelling during a hurricane, very few hear which is a shame.

God has taken to Heaven the souls of these three soldiers that have died for America in a war in Iraq that we can not win because we are not fighting the real enemy -- the cult of islam.

Over 2500 dead American soldiers.

Over 400 billion dollars - $400,000,000 - that is $1,400 per child, woman and man in America.

We did not have to be on the ground in Iraq, the same could have been accomplished from just the air.

The Iraq's will never accept democracy for it is not compatible with islam. Freedom and rights of the individual do not exist within islam yet our federal government can not see this and demands that Iraq be free. Free from what is the question??? The only thing that Iraq is free from is Sadam.

Civil war is being waged in Iraq and it is miss labeled as terrorism by the US.

How sad that we continue to loose soldiers and waste tax dollars where this war can not ever be won until vile evilness of islam is destroyed.

There was a talk show hosts that said it is better to be fighting islamic terror in the middle east than in Detroit, New York City, in America. The opposite is true... Until America and Americans wake up to the violence and threat of islam; islam will continue to conquer across the globe.

If islam takes over France of any other nuclear armed nation, America will be given a choice surrender or be destroyed by nukes.

Freedom is the only choice and the cost will be immense.

War is coming with islam, it is inevitable.

Prepare, be armed, be ready.

The Texican.

Posted by: Texican at June 20, 2006 01:00 PM
God bless America as they truly need it.

Very very kind regards

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed

What could a demonic person like you know of "God"? And I say this as an atheist, truly "God" would say to you "Be gone, I never knew you."

LOL

You are a good poster boy for an enemy that needs to be exterminated though.

Posted by: GreatShaitan at June 20, 2006 01:01 PM
I welcome posts from Waleed. If only all Muslims were as honest as he, we'd be cooking with gas.

Posted by: jsla at June 20, 2006 01:07 PM
bigcatgirl13106,

Best wishes to you and all your family.

What a wicked world this is! I guess we just carry on and make the best of it we can.

Posted by: Yojimbo at June 20, 2006 01:15 PM
Khalid Bin Waleed:

What must have gone through their minds when the Iraqi freedom fighters put guns to their heads? I bet you they must have crapped their pants? Can you imagine the suffering these two Americans must have gone through then black hoods probably were tightly wrapped around their faces, unable to breath in the scorching heat and then thrown and trusted into the back boots of the ageing old cars, with boiling temperatures, hands behind their backs, faces covered tightly with black hoods tightly placed in a small car, driven for miles without any fresh air or water? Can you just imagine what must have been going through the minds? Do you think they were missing their families like never before? Do you think they were happy to die for their country which sent them to Iraq to defend the so called freedom of America over a pack of lies by comedian Bush?

Sounds like you have some personal experience. Have you perhaps been involved in the Islamic liberation of Iraq? Maybe your IP address should be handed over to the authorities by JW's staff.

Posted by: Jesus Christ Supercop at June 20, 2006 01:16 PM
Yeah, every time I start to get a little tired, or discouraged, I can think about the Waleeds of the world in their millions, and become reinvigorated. Sorry to learn that he's an "England" fan though. Wonder if he sports the Cross of St. George flag on the Waleedmobile? That'd be a sight.

Posted by: MP at June 20, 2006 01:18 PM
Ken MacKenzie, uncle of Kristian Menchaca, said on US television: "Because the US government did not have a plan in place, my nephew has paid for it with his life." -- posted above

We can now speak of the Ken MacKenzie/Michael Berg Syndrome, which spans a spectrum from irrational deflection of moral blame all the way to an outrageous inversion of good and evil. Whatever the significant differences in bandwidth on the spectrum between Ken and Michael, they belong together in the same Syndrome and in the same Circle of Hell.

Posted by: Television at June 20, 2006 01:21 PM
Yojimbo,

Thank-you for your message. :-)

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 20, 2006 01:23 PM
translation: "With great regret, they were killed in [an Islamic] way,"

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 01:24 PM
Unleash Hell on Iran. Make an example of them. Now is the time.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 01:26 PM
"My heart goes out to the people of America but specially to the people on this message board, but I have to admit I am more interested in the England football game then anything else. I do pray that the soldiers get protection where ever their soles have gone but I hope England football team get even more protection and help from god in winning the football game against Sweden today.

May god bless the two soldiers but first bless England football team."

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed

I can only hope that this person is purposely being cynical.

In that I mean that they just might want to show that the world is oblivious to the horrors that are going on, while celebrating and honoring football teams.

And that is happening.

How many now are more interested in what is happening at the World Cup here in Germany, than two soldiers being tortured and murdered at the hands of Moslem terrorists???

I see the celebrations going on for the World Cup.
No one is thinking of atrocities committed by the cult of Islam.

Posted by: americaningermany at June 20, 2006 01:32 PM
I shall celebrate jointly the success of the England game in the world cup today and at the same time celebrate the freedom of the two soldiers of America who have ended up being count in tack and no body parts missing.

God bless America as they truly need it.

Very very kind regards

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed ( This is Islam mocking everything Decent and Good. Taking great joy in misery and suffering....Look at your Enemy....Islam.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 01:32 PM

the barbaric muslims, who are they to defend their land when attacked by western armies, what cowards with smaller numbers and ancient weapons they fight an army with the best fighter planes,missles, bombs, and other weapons. who are they to resent us for invading iraq because of 9/11 nope sorry WMB OPPPPPS make that democracy. who are they despise us and call us hypocrites. when our governments kill 100000 innocent people in iraq in the name of democracy, yet we are filled with rage by the actions of 24 criminals, and as such stigmatise a whole religion and its 1.5 billion followers, thus calling the religion barbaric. who are they to despise our indiscriminate bombs and missles killing their innocent civilliens, who are they to resent our support of israel who have stolen their lands and have shot dead at least 400 children in the last 5 years. the nerve of these people, we are the keepers of peace, as seen by the nuclear attack on the civilian cities of hiroshima and nagasaki,(killing 500,000 innocent people) just ask the people in vietnam about us and they will tell any demonic muslim we are the good guys, u know, napalm burning children, troops shooting innocent people, bombs destroying and killing is civilised, i mean a suicide attack born out of oppression, which leads to insanity now thats a barbaric act, i mean lets go in history when we took jerusalam we killed every single innocent civilan, not only did they have the nerve to try and regain jerusalam, but when they did those demon possesed jihadist and that tyrant saladin regained it in the most barbaric way, he did not kill the christian civilians and showed restraint, history shows what the present is revelaing, their demonic, barbaric and hypocrites

Posted by: lionheart at June 20, 2006 01:33 PM
Texican:

I hate to be a pessimist, but a pessimist I am.

I agree with you that war with Islam is inevitable.

I spoke to two nice young Germans the other day and they said that they (Germans) will not allow the islamization of Germany.

I asked when people would actually stand up and fight. Where is the limit? I asked.

They said: "When Germans no longer have anything to eat is when they will fight".

Great...?

If Europeans would once again grow a backbone then I could foresee several civil wars going on in the near future.

Do you think it will happen?

Posted by: americaningermany at June 20, 2006 01:38 PM
lionheart:

You are a damn, ignorant fool.

Not much else needs be said.

Posted by: Foehammer at June 20, 2006 01:47 PM
lionheart never met a book.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 01:50 PM
I tried to read Lionheart's comment, but truthfully it hurt my eyes.

Posted by: americaningermany at June 20, 2006 01:51 PM
Nice sentence, Lionheart.

Suck my pig.

Posted by: Know Your Enemy at June 20, 2006 01:52 PM
Americaningermany, if our leaders would get over being P.C. and start leading, call islam what it is, a cult and NOT a religion, ban the koran and deport those who still believe the sun sets in a mud puddle, we could manage the herds much better. The world should send them back to the desert where they belong. There is no sense in civilization having to put up with organized violence like this.

I too am a little pessimistic about this and don't want it to get to the point of civil wars.

Posted by: freewoman at June 20, 2006 01:52 PM
americaningermany:

Yes, I think that europe will finally fight back aganist the cult of islam once sufficient violence is commited with wmd's, nukes or bombings.

Everyone is afraid of being labeled - called a racist or bigot if they fault islam as hub of the murders, violence and terrorism across the globe.

The riots in france, 7/7 and 9/11 are just the start. Iraq has slowed down some of the actioncs across the world by pulling in jihadists that would have been in europe and america.

I truely believe that nukes, wmd's and bombings bu the mos will happen across America and Europe. As stated numerous times before, the feds are not searching for nuke signatures at islamic sites just for grins and the feds would never tell Americans if they found a nuke or nukes to protect the "innocent - peaceful" mos.

War with islam is inevitable.

Prepare, be armed be ready.

The Texican.
Freedom, the only choice at any cost and the cost will be immense.

Posted by: Texican at June 20, 2006 01:53 PM
americaningermany says "I asked when people would actually stand up and fight. Where is the limit? I asked.

They said: "When Germans no longer have anything to eat is when they will fight".

Great...?"

Exactly. Thats as pointless as waiting until you've got lung cancer before giving up smoking. But this is typical of Western Europe as a whole, including Britain. Here in Britain, we have an ultra-complacent politically-correct population. The time to act is not to wait until you've lost everything, or have no chance whatsoever. You strike whilst you've got a chance of winning, or better still, whilst you're certain to win. This isn't Queensbury Rules. This is war, and the only satisfactory outcome in war is victory. Anything short of victory means the certain destruction of what we have and hold dear. And looking at the population of Europe in 30 or 50 years time, what chance will we have against the Islamists when 40% of our population are 60 or over, and the money we need to put armies into the field and proivide for security at home is diverted to paying millions of extra state pensions - and we know that by then, when faced with the choice between freedom for their descendants and their pensions, the majority will put their pensions first.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at June 20, 2006 01:58 PM
lionheart, you must be an Islamic historian. A regular Islamic intellectual. Bet you got your degree from the Famous Imam's Correspondence School in Minneapolis, SA.

Posted by: JanuaryMan at June 20, 2006 02:03 PM

Why give any credence or reconigation to islam by capitalizing islam, muslim, mohammed on any other related names??????

When the murderous and violent cult of islam, its followers the mos and the countries that promote the cult are capitalized, this imparts a recognition and acceptance of the vileness performed by islam and its followers.

Their names will not be capitalized in my postings until the vileness and evilness of the cult of islam is eradicated by the muslims.

Posted by: Texican at June 20, 2006 02:09 PM
This 'lionheart' seems to be reliant upon the weekly Friday sermon, al-jezerra, and the New Duranty Times to fill his child's garden of misinformation. The government's of the civilized world will begin to deal with the current episode of worldwide jihad in a serious way when they are brought to fear their own citizens more than they fear the cult of mahomet.

Posted by: Infidel33 at June 20, 2006 02:14 PM
the religion of peace at its best, the blind followers showing their true colours by their ear shattering silence, and gloating in their dark, miserable hearts. Panties on the head gets msm's attention for months on end, and this cowardly act - nothing.

Posted by: freetoBEfree at June 20, 2006 02:16 PM
Texican it shows we respect engish, not Islam.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 02:27 PM

I am sure that the U.S. military will use this to provide some facts to our great ground forces. And they will take this as a reason not to be taken, to go down fighting, before being taken hostage.

I know this will be remembered by the forces there, these are young men to be remembered.

So much for genevea convention..

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at June 20, 2006 02:30 PM
To Foehammer, Freewoman, Spirit of 1683 and Texican: (in no particular order)

For one, Texican is right in not capitalizing the names of evil satanists, who are bent on the destruction of our civilization as we know it.

Freewoman: You are absolutely right!Unfortunately I don't foresee that our current multi-culti cheerleader "leaders" will get over their PC sickness.
Something drastic needs to happen. I am not intelligent enough to know exactly what that would take (to wake them up), I only know that we need massive changes! And the sooner the better!

Spirit of 1683: Living in Britain you are getting the full effects of Islamization.
You know exactly what I am talking about. The general DENIAL.
Many Europeans do not even see their own destruction coming, they choose to stick their heads in the sand. (Gee, maybe it will just go by)
Those who do see it feel, and are muzzled, too afraid to say anything that would be considered even remotely "racist" or "politically incorrect". The time to act is NOW! Not later.
(Funny that anyone against Islam is labeled a racist, as if Islam was a RACE!)

Foehammer: You make more sense than most people can handle. I like your style!

January Man is also right on!

Posted by: americaningermany at June 20, 2006 02:39 PM
Along with whatever other horrific barbarities were inflicted by the merciful messengers of Allah, those soldiers were undoubtedly beheaded too. DNA tests are being conducted to determine certain identity. And they were probably badly wounded when taken too.

Posted by: alexon at June 20, 2006 02:40 PM
Bernard Goetz? Ring a bell? He's the guy who went 'looking for trouble' on the subway a few years back. When he shot a guy--his famous one-liner was, "you look like you haven't got enough." Then he shot the guy a few more times.

If he's still alive, lets send him to Iraq. In fact, perhaps we should tell our most hardened killers in jail if they want to 'go out with a bang.'

One parting point: maybe now, just perhaps, just a wee little understanding from our MSM of the freaking horrific 'conditions' they(our brave boys)face over there in that Islamic hell hole. Perhaps before casting blame about Abu Grahb(as W does in his weasel way) or Haditha, just perhaps we should try to put ourselves into these Americans position. I'd crap my pants too if I were policing the religion of peace, and I can promise you--I would shoot first and ask questions much much later.

Where is the President? Where is CNN? Will we just wash these brutal killings off. So, a few Americans get beheaded. So What? How about Haditha? I'm so fumed. I've never been more disgusted. I knew the news was very bad given the general's body language on tv early this morning.

I guess this means the Iraqis havent 'stood up' quite just yet. Islam--the religion of death and scum.

Posted by: biorabbi at June 20, 2006 02:41 PM
Islam is not a Race or a country... Islam is an Idea..EVIL IDEA..like Nazi Germany..Pure Evil..to enslave people to make them herd animals like sheep.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 02:43 PM
Posters like lionheart and Waleed have no honor. No person with self respect would utter the insanities both posters have done. Think on that when you allow them to bother you -- they are hollow people -- they are empty. And we we need to see such hollow people for what they are and try to understand that the hatred they show for us is really hatred they bear for themselves.

Is that to say we should not fight of kill such people? Of course not!

Such people are extremely dangerous -- Why are they dangerous? Because their beliefs have no integrity whatsoever. Their lack of honor makes them worse than anything.

We should observe what they say, what they do, and if they pose a threat to us, we should eliminate them without qualms or confusion.

Posted by: jsla at June 20, 2006 02:47 PM
The quotes I respond to below are taken from Television’s extremely interesting post here: http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/011866.php#c230990. The subject is whether or when to make moral distinctions between the parts of Islam, and between jihad and Islam.

Television said:

I'll conclude with the following analysis:
(Fulfillingness' First Finale? -- as Stevie Wonder put it).
I. When distinguishing parts from a whole, two kinds of part may be employed:
1) a part that is sufficiently peripheral that it may be detached without the whole suffering degradation, destruction, and/or transformation;
2) a part that is sufficiently central that its detachment from the whole would, in fact, result in the whole suffering degradation, destruction, and/or transformation.
Good distinction. But is there no 1.5 between 1 and 2 above?
The second kind of part is the one that is "integral to" the whole.
Ok. And is there a third kind of part that is “semi-integral” to the whole?
II. There are also two kinds of whole to be considered:
1) a simplex whole, whose concatenation of parts remains inert after the concatenation -- i.e., the whole is not more than the sum of its parts: it takes on no "life" after the parts have been completely put together into the whole they constitute;
Thus a pile of rocks (or even a single rock) would be a simplex whole.
2) a complex whole, or system: this is a dynamic interrelation of parts, where there is a kind of microcosm or ecosystem and the interrelation of parts involves a symbiotic synergy.
In that sense, to get a complex whole in the realm of metals, one would have to go to the level of the atom, where the whole is more than the sum of its parts, insofar as the removal of a single subatomic particle from an atom can transform it into a completely different atom. Other complex wholes: plants, animals and human beings. Your distinction between simplex and complex wholes is an excellent one. Coleridge made the same distinction, though he used other words for it and, being Coleridge, saw astounding depths within that distinction. But of course many others besides Coleridge have made the distinction you make here. A.N. Whitehead, for one. And like Coleridge, Whitehead distinguished not just two levels of relation between part and whole, but several in an evolutionary scale. Coleridge distinguishes at least four stages. With a piece of metal, the “parts” have almost no independence from the metal’s principle of unity. Thus if you have a bar of gold you can remove as many parts of the gold bar as you want, and as long as you keep at least some tiny grain, you still have gold. In other words, the unity of gold is virtually reducible to a point, a unity without parts. To that extent, the unity of a metal is hardly at all dependent on its parts (at any rate one must go all the way to the subatomic level to find them). Coleridge calls the unity of a metal a unity of “powers and properties.” At the next level, the crystal, he identifies “a union not of powers only, but of parts,” and a new dependence of the whole on the parts emerges. A crystal, he says, has not only unity, but also the simplest form of totality. Then with the plant or animal, which, he notes, “maintains a distinction between itself and the universal life of the planet,” we see “totality dawning into individuation” and selfhood. Of individuation, which applies most of all to the human level of evolution (though Coleridge has an unusual concept of evolution according to which matter over long eons gradually congealed as a kind of excretion or corpse of what was originally immaterial life and spirit, and he bases evolution on a principle of dynamic or productive polarity, and he links that in turn with the Trinity and Christianity), he says regarding part and whole in the individual, that among “individuals, the living power will be most intense in that individual which, as a whole, has the greatest number of integral parts presupposed in it; when moreover, these integral parts, together with a proportional increase of their interdependence, as parts, have themselves most the character of wholes in the sphere occupied by them.” The best book on Coleridge is probably What Coleridge Thought by Owen Barfield.
III. There are two kinds of system:
1) systems that are relatively open and flexible to change and self-correction;
2) systems that are closed, inflexible to change and self-correction, and require a totalitarian rule in order to be self-perpetuating: the totalitarian system is a type of contradiction -- it has no real "life" as systems ordinarily do, and thus it has no real way to perdure: in the absence of a natural way to perdure, it tries to make itself inert, as though it were a non-system kind of whole, notwithstanding the fact that it needs to be a system in order to have power and extension. Its contradictory existence can be maintained only by perpetual oppression and violence, which sooner or later succumbs to the pressures of reality and implodes and/or explodes.
You put that powerfully. I condemn any and all III.2 (closed) social systems. There are, within category III.2., many different kinds and degrees of totalitarian system. Under III.2 there could be a wide range of subcategories, each one a different degree and depth of totalitarianism.
I also maintain that distinguishing those subcategories, by doing an inventory of the moral and other particulars of each system, is cognitively necessary for knowledge and therefore strategically necessary for defense.
You object to any attempt to morally distinguish parts of an evil system, evidently because you think that such distinctions are only an effort to save some of those parts. You efface intra-system moral distinctions because all the “good” elements in the system (such as dental hygiene) enable the evil, and can be found outside the system anyway, so there is no need to save the "good" elements. Let’s grant that as true for this discussion, so I can get to a different point I have all along been wanting you to see.
Very well. Let’s agree there shall be no further attempt to save any “good” parts of the evil system (but let’s continue to distinguish between the evil system of Islam on the one hand, and Muslim human beings on the other, since some unknown number of Muslims are not evil), for all the reasons you have given. The evil system shall be condemned as a whole. Now that we have for all kinds of reasons set aside the idea of redeeming or saving the “good” parts, does that mean there is no further reason to distinguish degrees of evil and good among the parts inside an evil system? And no further reason to learn to distinguish between the complex moral landscapes of various totalitarian systems? Even though there is no intent to save any part of the system, could there yet be another good reason to make moral distinctions between the particulars of a system? Yes, there certainly could be and is. Here’s the reason, for future reference to be labeled

REASON “Z”:

The only way we can fully know a system – and therefore the only way we can maximize the effectiveness of our strategies of self-defense -- is through concrete knowledge of the particulars, including the moral particulars, of the system. The better you know your enemy, the more easily you will defeat him. A range of subcategories of closed social system (III.2) exist (I would condemn them all) and for strategic reasons should be understood, and we should also know where in that range Islam fits, and why the variations in and specific qualities of its moral landscape place it above or below other totalitarianisms of which we have knowledge. It is not just a question of putting Islam on a scale or scales. It is a question of not omitting from our calculus of self-defense any relevant facts. Even if Islam is landscape of darkness, there are variations within that darkness. Which parts of the landscape are most dark? Which small parts are gray? In the landscape which parts, however insignificant they may be, light up, however infrequently and briefly? How does the stygian field of Islam compare to the peculiar landscapes of other totalitarianisms?

IV. Summary: Islam is a II.2 kind of whole: it is a system.
You explained this well in your post. Nicely distinguished. I understand. As a “system” the whole is not an inert whole or a mere aggregation. Rather, in a whole that is a system there is a symbiotic synergy among its parts, and the whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
And it is a III.2 [closed] kind of system. (Note: only by virtue of its historically imperialistic voracity has the Islam system become so extensive and swallowed up so many different peoples and cultures, that it has taken on a spectacularly sprawling rag-tag diversity that can be mistaken for the true diversity of III.1 kinds of systems.)
Yes, I agree that Islam is a III.2 (closed) system, and is often mistaken for III.1 (open) for the reasons you give.
In the system of Islam, jihad is a I.2 kind of part [a part that is integral in the sense that if you remove it from the whole, the whole suffers degradation, destruction or transformation].
I’ll grant this, since it’s probably correct, and it’s not my main bone of contention.
Because Islam is a III.2 [closed] kind of system, we may say that:
1) the dinstinction between jihad and Islam has no pragmatic usefulness insofar as jihad is integral to Islam;
Knowledge of the number of protons and electrons that are theorized to make up an oxygen atom is relevant to understanding how to control and manage that atom – even though the oxygen atom will “suffer degradation, destruction, or transformation” should we remove one of its integral protons or electrons. In other words, knowledge of the concrete particulars of Islam, including the subtle or unsubtle moral variations within the system and among its integral parts is at least relevant to maximizing the effectiveness of our strategies of self-defense even though we cannot imagine removing some of the particulars of Islam from the system without the system becoming something else. But that is a restatement of reason "Z."
2) #1 means that this site could just as well be called "Islam Watch" -- i.e., Islam the system is the overarching problem and danger non-Muslims of the world face;
Not only as well. It might be even better to call it “Islam Watch.” But we have agreed that Islam and jihad are integral, not identical. Nuanced distinctions among different parts are necessary to knowledge and self-defense. (“Z” again.)
3) the systemic synergy of parts noted in II.2 above that characterizes the system Islam renders any or all discernible parts in that system as co-dependent enablers of the overall system, such that seemingly innocuous parts (e.g., dental hygiene) become useful contributors to the same machine whose entelechy is the jihad that imperils us.
Damn, that’s some nice phraseology, dude. But I shouldn’t be surprised at your skills by now, having witnessed them frequently before. As to the substance of your point, let’s just agree for the sake of this discussion that, for the reasons you have given, it is pointless to try to save the “good” or “innocuous” parts of the system Islam. Now that we have agreed on that at least for the duration of this post, it remains that you have acknowledged in earlier posts that innocuous or “good” parts are not unambiguously co-dependent enablers of the evil system. The “good” or innocuous parts are Janus-faced – often effective as codependent enablers of the evil system, but sometimes effective for good and in a way that exerts some decelerating, restraining force on the evil drive of the system. Acknowledging this does not mean you now will be asked to save those “good” parts. All it means is that you will be acknowledging a fact that, like other facts, is relevant to knowing the best way to mount a self-defense.
Because Islam is a III.2 [closed] kind of system -- its [closed] composition & complexion attenuated by diversity only through the fact that it is so spatially and culturally extensive by virtue of its historically imperialistic voracity -- any distinction of parts that would forestall condemnation of the whole system may even provide fodder for those who like to treat Islam as though it were a III.1 [open] type of system that has detachable I.1 [non-integral] type "bad apples".
Every subcategory of closed (III.2) system should be condemned (except if one has tactical or strategic reasons for not doing so). Distinction of moral and other variations within a closed (III.2) system, or between one closed (III.2) system and another, cannot justify lifting that condemnation. Nor need such distinctions justify any effort to “save” “parts” of the system. Such distinctions should serve rather to add to the knowledge that aids our self-defense. We must know the enemy (the enemy being the system, not every individual Muslim), including the specific moral and other variations between different integral parts of his system and history.
…its [closed] composition & complexion attenuated by diversity only through the fact that it is so spatially and culturally extensive by virtue of its historically imperialistic voracity...
I agree with this if you remove the word, “only”. Its closed composition and complexion are attenuated by diversity not only through voracious conquest of diverse peoples, but also simply because Islam is not perfectly evil. Nothing can be. Islam is evil of some hard to measure but real degree. Other systems could come along and dig tenth, eleventh, and twelfth circles of hell, and so on, and be still worse. What makes one evil system worse than another? Specific elements that compose that system, and how each element embodies a somewhat unique tension or equilibrium between good and evil – an equilibrium in which the evil side tips the scale, but not to infinity. To a specific depth. Each specific element in Islam not only has its own internal moral equilibrium. In addition, all those equilibria contribute to and are acted upon by the overall system’s moral equilibrium. In a “system,” even a III.2 or closed system, there is a two-way influence, from whole to parts and from parts to whole. Admittedly the distinction between whole and parts is less than in a III.1 (open) system, but the distinction exists. Specifics matter because of reason “Z.”
…may even provide fodder for those who like to treat Islam as though it were a III.1 type of system that has detachable I.1 type "bad apples".
Agreed, that can be one of the pitfalls of pursuing knowledge of the evil system. But I would maintain that the strategic upsides of pursuing knowledge of the particular moral and other variations within the system tend to outweigh the downsides.
V. Conclusion: Sooner or later, Muslims will have to find some other way to keep their teeth healthy, since their current way is directly related to a system that endangers our lives and societies. Muslims who jump ship will find that their teeth survive just fine: ask Ibn Warraq's dentist or just look at the healthy gleaming ivories of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. miswak indeed!
And now it's long past time for me to go brush my teeth and enter ZZZZ land. Posted by: traeh at June 20, 2006 02:47 PM
I will not call Islam a religion.. Unless hitler was a Prophet like Mohammad he also wrote a hate filled book that called for killing Jews.

Posted by: storagemanager at June 20, 2006 02:51 PM
Bernard Goetz? Ring a bell? He's the guy who went 'looking for trouble' on the subway a few years back. When he shot a guy--his famous one-liner was, "you look like you haven't got enough." Then he shot the guy a few more times.

If he's still alive, lets send him to Iraq. In fact, perhaps we should tell our most hardened killers in jail if they want to 'go out with a bang.'

Posted by Biorabbi.

How times have changed. My father joined the U.S. military at 17 years old.
He was trained by ex-cons.

It was 1952 and believe it or not, he told me that they actually enlisted convicts (murderers) to train the troops.

Were they brutal? Yes. He said he saw two privates killed right in ranks for saying or doing something wrong.

I'm not saying that is right or wrong, thing is, we seem to have become wussies.

I'm thinking maybe along the same lines as you Biorabbi.

Posted by: americaningermany at June 20, 2006 02:52 PM
Spirit of 1683 said:
"You strike whilst you've got a chance of winning, or better still, whilst you're certain to win. This isn't Queensbury Rules. This is war, and the only satisfactory outcome in war is victory."

This is not a football match we're in nor is it boxing by Queensbury Rules.

This is a back-alley street fight. The rules of engagement are one sided and they don't respect the rules of sanctuary or any other rules. Rules are from Western civilization.

Don't be surprised or disappointed. It is the same as it has been from Mohammed to the present. Nothing is new or innovative - we've merely forgotten how it was to live and fight in the Seventh Century.

It's like we're in a back alley streetfight and we're expecting them to fight 'by the rules' and they keep kicking us in the balls. We keep saying 'don't do that again; it's against the rules, if you do that again I'll REALLY be mad! I'm Serious! don't kick me in the balls again.' and then they kick us in the balls for the sixth time.

To fight them properly we need to annihilate their fighting forces, hunt the rest down and kill them and then destroy their means of mounting counter attacks. We need to demoralize and destroy their ability to kill.

That's when we'll be able to stop for a while.
When allah and mohammed are discredited and worthless and jihad isn't materially possible we we have a few hundred years of rest until the next cycle.

Find them and destroy them. If they fire from any building - call in the 500 pound bombs. Destroy everything that gives the enemy cover. They don't respect their own mosques - they kill each other and bomb them. Why would we give a care?

Destroy as many as possible.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at June 20, 2006 02:54 PM
My heart goes out to the people of America but specially to the people on this message board, ... (excrement deleted) Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed
Keep your sympathies to yourself, or reserve them for the likes of Zarqawi, and the "Freedom Fighters" that get killed daily. Besides, you don't have a heart, since you are a Mohammedan, so STFU. You are welcome to think you'll win, but unfortunately for your side, subtlety isn't one of your strengths. Which is why more and more Infidels are wising up to you, and it's only a matter of time before this Jihad gets fought both ways. Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 20, 2006 02:54 PM
Khalid bin Waleed:

Your description of the soldiers' last hours is truly horrifying. You have described the savagery of their attackers with great eloquence. Doubtless, the coalition soldiers are aware of the brutality facing them should they fall into the hands of the insurgents. Do you think that as a result of this barbarity the coalition soldiers will be quick to be captured? Do you think that they will not fight harder? Perhaps knowledge and familiarity of such animalistic behavior is what causes the Israeli military to consistently outfight its Moslem enemies. And yes, by all means, support England and raise St. George's cross high overhead.

Lionheart:

You are well named. It takes a great deal of courage to make statements of such massive stupidity before such a fearsome audience, risking life and limb over the internet. Bravo! By the way, any relation to Richard Couer de Lion?

Posted by: Chatillon at June 20, 2006 02:54 PM
traeh,

Robert and Hugh probably don't want us to continue unfolding this issue here, so I will briefly comment on one thing you wrote, then invite you to visit my new blog to continue the discussion there. In fact, I have today coincidentally posted an essay there about this issue, entitled "The Case of the Asymptotic Cigar: Jihad Watch".

Your comment:

"You object to any attempt to morally distinguish parts of an evil system, evidently because you think that such distinctions are only an effort to save some of those parts."

No. I don't mind saving the good parts on general principle. But if this gets in the way of fighting the system of which they are parts, then I do mind. It is the system Islam as a whole that is my object, not the innocuous or even good parts that are obviousl

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 21, 2006 10:03 PM

Whoa, I don't know what happened there, but my comment didn't show up. ↑

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 21, 2006 10:05 PM

traeh,

Television said:

"I have no idea if a patient with gangrene in the brain has any reasonable hope of survival, so I’ll drop that metaphor."

Let's just say he has no hope of survival; to say otherwise would be to reject the point of my metaphor. You may reject the conclusion of my metaphor -- that Islam has no hope of reformation -- but it wouldn't be fair to reject my metaphor itself as I intended it.

"I merely note that a phenomenological approach would seem to warrant distinguishing the “tumor” in the core from the totality of the core. I don’t see how, apart from dwelling in Platonic abstractions, one can conceive a core as “purely” anything."

We do this all the time in daily life: Every time we throw out a piece of chicken that's been in the fridge too long, we have made an absolute decision, and it has the concrete consequence and finality of ending up in the trash. Every time Western courts pronounce a man guilty, they conceive a core that is pure. You are arguing a point that if concretized would result in ordinary people in all walks of life -- from the banal to the important legal and political and military -- failing to actually finish anything, because they would be able to convince themselves that nothing is "pure", therefore we can't finalize any action. I am not talking about the level of purity by which one conceptually banishes all increments -- or on the flip side, finds oneself conceptually unable to banish all increments and therefore ends up unable to act; I am talking about the normal everyday level by which we make decisions and judgements all the time, and conclude actions based on them. I don't see why Islam should be exempt from such a decision -- its condemnation -- and following that, concrete actions to be taken on that basis. What condemnation means specifically, and what actions should be taken on the basis of our agreed meaning, would be procedures that come later. When we witness a group of men sodomizing a little girl and torturing her with knives, we conclude at that point that we have sufficient data by which to condemn them: this is separate from what "condemnation" means and what the actions based on that condemnation will be. There should be no doubt or hesitation, after data reaches a certain threshhold, to conclude that Islam is to be condemned and that appropiate action should be taken because of that. That threshhold of data has been reached, years, decades, centuries ago. We are merely, in our post-911 era, seeing that sufficient degree of data being re-presented, over and over again. The only rational thing that would slow us down at that point for a process of deliberation is the fact that we don't have an equivalent animal like "Islam" spelled out in the fabric of our laws (though International Law has woven a complicated fabric of laws relating to rogue nations and genocide, etc., that would help -- notwithstanding the problem that International Law has become deformed by PC multiculturalism and its flip side, anti-Americanism), as we have with other entities that commit crimes. Any other impediments to our conclusion to condemn Islam seem to me to be irrational.

"A major thrust of Robert’s message is that what you and I are calling the “gangrenous” aspect of Islam is not peripheral. They have been pretty clear about that. If not in the periphery, it would seem to follow that that gangrene is somewhere in the core. That is not the same as saying gangrene is the only thing in the core. Many actual cores of things have various degrees of rot in them. These distinctions seem to me to refer to central facts, so I have trouble seeing them as quibbles."

You are here covering ground we've already been over before: I conclude that the rot in Islam's core is sufficiently central and sufficiently massive that the whole must be condemned. My beef with R&H is not that they say the rot is peripheral. My beef with R&H is that they are dealing with exactly the equivocations you just articulated: it is the classical having-your-cake formula: When a normal person says "the core is rotten", he means that the whole of which the core is obviously central is toast -- it should be tossed out, it's hopeless. But there's a bit of sophistry in the elusiveness of R&H where they can squeak by on phenomenological grounds that, "well, I do say there's rot in the core, but I'm not saying that it's 100% rot, or that it's even 90%; I'm saying there's a whole lotta rot there -- that should satisfy you..." To begin to subdivide percentages of rot in a core is bordering on the preposterous: Either stop saying the core is rotten, if you are going to turn around and say, "well, what I mean is that 75% of the core has rot..." -- or when you commit to saying the core is rotten, then use that locution in a responsible way: it is tantamount to (and not merely asymptotically) saying the entire entity is rotten -- not because it's 100% rotten, but because a sufficient amount of it is rotten, including parts that are sufficiently central. Remember how long ago you agreed that one does not need to have a pure 100% evil in order to condemn?

That's all I have time for now. BTW, I like your coinage of a physics particle called the "quibble".

Posted by: Television at June 21, 2006 10:10 PM

freewoman,

I think this Kahleed Bin Wahlid is simply one who has a lot of time on his hands.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 21, 2006 10:13 PM

freewoman,

Have you also noticed that Mr. Wahled has not posted since I have corrected him?

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 21, 2006 10:22 PM

Carolyn,

"Islam is not perfectly evil. Nothing can be. Islam is evil of some hard to measure but real degree. Other systems could come along and dig tenth, eleventh, and twelfth circles of hell, and so on, and be still worse. What makes one evil system worse than another?"

I'm not really concerned with whether Islam is purely or totally evil. All I know is that it is sufficiently evil to be condemned, and thereafter, to be dismantled, by hook or by crook.

A person, group, process, or ideology does not have to be perfectly, purely, totally evil, to be rightfully condemned. And if a condemned entity is also determined to be sufficiently dangerous, we rightfully proceed to try to dismantle it at best, or if we simply cannot do that due to limitations beyond our control, we try to nullify and neutralize it as best we can.

For example, at this stage of the game, our failure to implement comprehensive profiling in all major public centers & hubs that proportionately targets racial physiognomies according to roughly the same proportion by which global Muslims are not white -- which is upwards of 90% -- but are rather Mediterranean, black, Arabic, central Asian and southeast Asian, is one example (of many) of our irrational failure to try to neutralize the threat of Islam as best we can.

Posted by: Television at June 21, 2006 10:23 PM

Bigcatgirl, you scared the brave muslim off!

Posted by: freewoman at June 21, 2006 10:24 PM

TV, that was someone else's comment. Some sort of glitch.
Here's a good news link
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060620/us_nm/arms_usa_missile_dc_2

Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 21, 2006 10:51 PM

Television wrote:

"A person, group, process, or ideology does not have to be perfectly, purely, totally evil, to be rightfully condemned. And if a condemned entity is also determined to be sufficiently dangerous, we rightfully proceed to try to dismantle it at best, or if we simply cannot do that due to limitations beyond our control, we try to nullify and neutralize it as best we can."

Exactly ! Islam sees dar-al-harb (secular, liberal - and hence decadent un-Islamic West) the same way and wants it to convert it to dar-al-Islam (land of Islam). Subjugating/arresting free thought is the worst form of evil. This is what Islam (and Communism - aka Maoism/Stalinism) does. You have to conform, submit - else face the consequences in these countries.

What I cannot understand why this apology for confronting Islam ? Why should USA feel any remorse for enacting/implementing laws in this country that would make practice of Islam very difficult ? If USA could go after "reds" (Communists) within USA, then why not after Islam ? (Of course, USA probably trangresses its moral rights if it goes after Islam in predominantly Muslim countries without good reason.) But, what's wrong with house-cleaning ?

Can anyone answer these questions ?

Posted by: Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal at June 21, 2006 10:53 PM

As usual the Kaffir propaganda talk, freewoman and the very bigcatgirl13106 - its just that I'm getting bored to be honest so I was watching football.

History has seen the up rise and downfall of great civilizations and ideology, but the one fit and still remaining is Islam. But I would like to hear the propaganda talk from the infidels as to how America is different and how America will survive blah blah, so let the debate begin.

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 21, 2006 11:00 PM

Naseem: "How do you propose to expel muslims who are british or american citizens..."

Being born in an orange crate doesnt make one an orange. They are most certainly NOT 'our people' - they are Pakistanis, etc who happened to be born in the west. Third World immigration was imposed on the people of every western country, we were not asked. And there are processes in place to strip citizenship from anyone convicted of, or involved with terrorism.

"PaK and India are too overcrowded already ...we cannot cope with what we already have."

Then stop overbreeding. Or is that our fault too?

"How much are you willing to give per persona for re-patriation"

Nothing. Muslims have cost us enough already.

"...and when are you going back?"

To where? Europeans and Brits are not imports, they have been in their countries for hundreds of generations.

Khalid Bin Waleed: "History has seen the up rise and downfall of great civilizations and ideology, but the one fit and still remaining is Islam."

You're joking, right? Why are western countries full of people who fled from the 'great civilisation' created by Islam? Maybe its not so 'fit', huh? Islam has created countries that their people cant wait to escape. Not our problem. Importing Islamic bigotry to the west will not cure the endemic problems of Muslim countries.

Posted by: Deecha at June 21, 2006 11:18 PM

"History has seen the up rise and downfall of great civilizations and ideology, but the one fit and still remaining is Islam. But I would like to hear the propaganda talk from the infidels as to how America is different and how America will survive blah blah, so let the debate begin."

I am sorry. There is no debate. We (Kafirs/infidels) don't debate with Muslims on Islam. We know the canine/barbaric nature of Islam. It has been unchanged 610 A.D. and is still that way today (2006 A.D.). (You are right on that score.) The only other phenomenon I know that has this perennial characteristic is the evolution of a cockroach. Cockroaches have not changed biologically since more than a million years.

What is needed by US (non-Muslim citizens) is to see how the practice of Islam can be almost banned inside USA. In other words it is necessary to make the practice of Islam very difficult (next to impossible) in USA. This would make Muslims repelled and many desirable consequences may follow. (As you maybe aware that Communism is recognized as inimical to US policies, and hence the Govt. has an obligation of weeding out Communists. There are no Communist or Leftist parties here in USA contesting elections.) We believe that Islam should have the same fate inside USA.

Do you (or your fellow co-religionists) have any suggestions on how we can achieve this end very very quickly ?

Thanks in advance.

Posted by: Mohammed bin Kafir Abu Jahal at June 21, 2006 11:19 PM

Whoa, I don't know what happened there, but my comment didn't show up. ↑
Posted by: Carolyn2 at June 21, 2006 10:05 PM
++++++++++++

All of my posts at 10:00 pm also disappeared.

Posted by: Texican at June 21, 2006 11:38 PM

Mohammed bin Kaffir Abu Jahal --

"If USA could go after "reds" (Communists) within USA, then why not after Islam ?"

The USA in the 1950s and early 60s, when it was going after Communists in earnest, and the USA today, are two different USAs. One symptom of the sea change that has occurred since the 1950s is that collectively, most Americans now think (if "think" is the right word) that our policy of going after Communists was terribly wrong and "frightening" and "oppressive" and "paranoid". Many other symptoms of this sea change can be adduced -- including our inability to condemn Islam and condemn all Muslims who faithfully follow Islam.

The old USA is still alive; but it has been under house arrest for a couple of decades and is not permitted to boldly educate and inform Americans, except in the marginal interstices of the Internet and other peripheral venues (AM radio, certain print media, the odd lecture or interview on the odd off-off-off-the-broad-way show).

The longer the old Uncle Sam is under house arrest, the longer his white beard and fingernails grow, and so the more he is marginalized. The day when Muslims reach into the pants of the politically correct Americans and excoriate their shrunken testicles might be the day when those Americans will let the old Uncle Sam out again.

Posted by: Television at June 22, 2006 12:44 AM

Khalid,
In the period from 630AD to the first crusade of 1095AD who was responsible for Muslim incursions from the Arabian pennisula into foreign lands? That was 465 years of nothing more than a little Arab imperialism. Go ahead, stick your chest out;if the Romans could do it, why couldn't you guys have a taste right? The most important question you must ask yourself now and in the future is: unlike the Z-man, am I familiar with the proper workings of an AK-47 assault rifle?
If the answer is yes,go ahead and shoot some liquid adreneline,and in the words of the late Johnny Olsen: "come on down!" I'll tell you from personal experience you'll be hard pressed to match the tenacity of the corpses of Fallujah. BTW, concerning racism in the Arab world, (just can't resist) Why don't you ask a brother how comfortable he feels traveling in Egypt? Thought so.

Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at June 22, 2006 1:14 AM

What a thread! Naseem reduced to multiple YAWNS? Say it aint so...

Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at June 22, 2006 1:41 AM

Khalid the Koward -

The only posters you seem to "pick on" are the women -- why is that? Are you a coward? Only weak men feel the need to belittle women; but then putting women down is one of the hallmarks of Islam.

Your prophet, Mo, was a drug addicted LOOSER, who spent WAY too much time alone in a cave smoking crack, weed, and anything he could get his hands on. He was "delusional", and so are you. I bet you drink, smoke dope, and engage in unspeakable things because you're a vile and heartless creep with nothing better to do than share your toxic opinions.

Judgement is coming -- consider yourself warned!!!

Posted by: champ at June 22, 2006 2:21 AM

It's time that all god beleiving people do something about Islam. A well organised crusade is now due. All over the world muslums should be hunted down.

Posted by: islamaphibic at June 22, 2006 3:47 AM

Assalamau Laikum all,

Often peoples don't know what is good for them and make wrong assumptions.

Like thinking that Western culture is good for you ...it isn't ...the creation of wild slutty womens will forever be unforgiven....and this is the fault of parents.

All humans are born through the grace of Allah as muslims...and then their thinking is wickedly polluted by the parents into kaffurs/infedels.

Islam is a perfect one size fits all and it covers all aspects of life.

That is why there is no question of muslims/wuslims not only residing but dominating in the west. You are wasting your time and effort on trying to persuade us to go back to Islamic lands. The West is included as part of the Islamic lands...Allah has shown Mohd. a map of the flat earth and showed that all directions are eminanently for the muslim.

You peoples are so ungrateful...Allah provides you with the very oxygen you breate and processing of the Islamic holy gound for you to put into your thirsty SUVs.

Even if all the seas were turned to ink....this would get exhausted were you to try and write the exhaultations and salutations and victories deserved and credited to Allah.

He even created the pig and dog for Infedel enjoyment...HOW ungrateful can you be?

Shame on you.....believe...Islam is coming to you...sooner than you think. Allah Ta'alah is your saviour (or at least will be your grand-daughters saviour).

Posted by: Naseem at June 22, 2006 6:58 AM

It is you the infidels that are the most coward of all civilisation. The countries which you lads (soldiers) have invaded have created nothing more than millions of more Bin Ladens, and the children will grow up with a natural hate for America and their civilisation.

How do you propose to handle them in 20 to 30 years time?

It is for sure that the Nuclear technology which is currently in the hands of Muslims such as Pakistan, India and in near future Iran and the countries alike will make the Muslim community and nations more secure from the havoc caused by Americanism, then the only one remaining thing to do is to drop all the boarders and make one USI (United States of Islam) and with the added action of turning off the oil taps, we will se how far the western military which is dependant on Oil perform. You nations will come to a hault, so how do you propose to handle that.

I mean think about it, Afghanistan you are still there in search of Bin Laden but yet unable to leave and the same goes for Iraq. The world hates you but your arrogance is unable to recognise this hatred.

If all the Muslims went back to the Oil rich countries they will become your worst

Posted by: Khalid Bin Waleed at June 22, 2006 7:21 AM

Khalid Bin Waleed,
jihadi, get your facts straight. India is not a muslim country.

As for the oil. Drink it. We are already on alternatives. You can stop supplying it. But then, how will you finance your jihad ? And who is going to give you all that food ?

I know talking to a brainwashed jihadi is useless. He only understands the language of the ai********.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 22, 2006 7:42 AM

I hope you're rested waleed and can now answer the questions I asked in above posts.

Since science has proven the "science of the koran" wrong, to believe the koran would make one stupid. To believe in science and NOT the koran's version, would make you an apostate. We all know muslims believe the koran is "true".

Naseem, your other personality is showing.

Posted by: freewoman at June 22, 2006 7:55 AM

arjun.sevak,

After reading the posts coming from both Khalid Bin Waleed and Naseem it goes to show how sucessful the non-Muslims on this posting board has in shinning a needed light to the truth on Islam and its very dark side. Also it was great that needed correcting took place from the non-Muslims in presenting the full facts. I thank folks like you and the other non-Muslims on this board for being the true heroes each of you have become. I am so proud of the non-Muslims on this board for standing up for the truth. Keep up the good work.

India is on the forefront of this heroic fight against Islamic jihad. India is also moving forward into the 21st century. Take care.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 22, 2006 8:01 AM

freewoman,

I sense that both Naseem and Waleed have lost the argument on this thread.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 22, 2006 8:04 AM

Counter to Naseem's claim, God promised no lands to Islam, Muhammad did, who if you believe it spoke to God. I do not believe Mohammad spoke to God any more than I believe Oral Roberts was chased around his room by Satan those many years ago. But talk like that can make for some quick believers and give a stage on which to mount a great public relations campaign for fundraising and a new cause.
As for Western culture being bad for you. If acting in my own best interest, trading and negotiating respectfully with my fellow free citizens and coming to terms that suit all the parties involved, plus doing and pursuing what it is that I want for myself is all bad. Then I will take it over the supposed "GOOD" of Islam any day.

Remember: Allah is NOT great - The individual IS

Posted by: Canadian Infidel at June 22, 2006 8:41 AM

Catgirl,

I cannot not speak for KBW ( i don't know if he is a sunni/shia) but I am Ahmadi...and for me this is not about argument...it is about Ahmadi dawa.

I refuse to be part of violent Jihad. It is not what any of our Ahmadi spiritual leaders have said. We only want peaceful demographic domination of the west and for all here to serve Allah SWT.

I have no problem in wuslims rejecting SMALL part of the koran if that helps...but full respect must be given to the Kitaab.

Also I have said that Islam will dominate the West just by the sheer persona and by being there. I want a peaceful warm fuzzy Islam in the West that will appeal in a couple of generations to your grandchildrens....we will all be wuslims...it is Allah's way...that is not losing the argument.

You however will be lonely...for nobody is coming from the global south to resuce christianlity in the west...your own peoples in the west will reject it in favour of becoming wuslims.

Posted by: Naseem at June 22, 2006 8:44 AM

This URL is proving that both history and time are in my favor.

http://www.cceia.org/viewMedia.php/prmTemplateID/8/prmID/136

Proves that the Christian faith will come full circle as the west planted seeds in the global south, so the global south in turn will in the end send missionaries in return.

I will not be alone for this I am confident.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 22, 2006 8:57 AM

AIG says "There isn't a peaceful anything about YOU and YOUR people wanting to dominate any part of the West".

BUT...BUT I am ahmadi. Our peaceful nature is legendary... you have nothing fear...you can trust me.

Posted by: Naseem at June 22, 2006 9:16 AM

americaningermany,

Thank you for standing up for the truth.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 22, 2006 9:25 AM

Yes, it does sound like it, that yours truly is getting desperate.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 22, 2006 9:36 AM

But Naseem, islam isn't warm and fuzzy. It's violent and sexist and ignorant.

You're right Bigcatgirl...they don't have a leg to stand on.

Posted by: freewoman at June 22, 2006 9:44 AM

Both Naseem and Khalid suffer from a form of mental illness. One of their fellow Muslims has laid it out for them today in frontpagemag:

"Arab Schizophrenia"

http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=23044

Naseem may not be Arab but she shares the same pathology that Islam causes. Among the symptoms:

"Delusions of Grandeur"

"Paranoia"

"Loss of Human Feeling"

"Mental Paralysis"

and most importantly.....

"Denial of the Disease"

(schizophrenics are also prone to laugh out loud to themselves inappropriately, a symptom which Khalid apparently suffers from).

There are other models of psychopathology that could be used as well to describe what Islam does to people - narcissistic personality disorder, antisocial personality disorder etc. But the point is - there is a pervasive mental illness there. The proof is in the sick societies Islam creates. I notice Khalid lives in Britain. I notice Naseem was educated in Britain and her son is currently in school in Britain. Both facts demonstrate their implicit acknowledgement of the west's superiority compared to the societies that Islam creates. But they apparently can't see something so obvious. That sort of illogic and denial is characteristic of mental pathology.

Posted by: Caroline at June 22, 2006 10:03 AM

Caroline,

I also believe when you are raised to hate, torture, kill, and be browbeaten and have no hope of change, it has to add to the mental illness. Lack of respect these women know from birth they recieve from this cult is enough to make you sick. And yet, they want ALL women treated this way.

You know, there aren't many animals that will stay in the corral when the gate is left open. Muslim men are VERY scared of that.

Posted by: freewoman at June 22, 2006 10:14 AM

aig - I think you're doing fine! I saw his comment and was tempted to reply - fine, then I'm a bigot - if only to defuse that sort of ammunition, because people like that seem to think that it is a bigger deal to be a bigot or an islamophobe (these are merely words) than it is to permit the ascendancy of Islam - which has very real and very deleterious consequences which are REAL (and not mere words).

However, I did look up the definition of bigot, which is,

"One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ."

Here in the west we have all sorts of races, religions and political parties. It is Muslim countries who are monolithic and intolerant about religion especially. So clearly it is Muslims who are the bigots. People can try to twist things all around by accusing those who object to bigotry as bigots themselves. But this is a bit like accusing those who object to intolerance as being intolerant themselves. The corollary in US history would have been if people accused civil rights activists of bigoted intolerance for objecting to the intolerance of those who practiced racial segregation.

This is such an irrational proposition that it gets tiring to argue with. Poor Mr. Howard is either a liberal (or possibly a Muslim). If he's the former I think he'll figure this out eventually. If he's a Muslim he probably never will. In the meantime, just because this tack is so illogical, I am tempted to just say - fine - call me a bigot if it makes you feel better and let it go at that.

Posted by: Caroline at June 22, 2006 10:33 AM

Naseem -

You are delusional too, as Jesus Christ will devour your Allah. Jesus Christ is God in the flesh, and the sooner you come to terms with that, the better.

Jesus Christ created the air I breath, not Allah, and I'm very thankful to Lord Jesus for that. And Jesus Christ created this universe, so Allah can take a back seat. Actually, your Allah is really satan, but you'll discover that on Judgement Day.

But there's still hope for you, Naseem, but only when you embrace the truth of who Jesus Christ is. Reject who is, and you will go to hell. Plain and simple.

Pray to Jesus, not Allah!!

Posted by: champ at June 22, 2006 11:28 AM

Let me relate a story of when I was on lunch hour under the Eiffel tower before a meeting with Prime Minister Jacques Cousteau. I said to Jacques, "Did you hear about the two gay Irish converts to islam? Michael Fitzpatrick and Patrick Fitzmichael?"

Too funny Khalid, lol. Are you a hot dog vendor in Washington?

The thing muslim posters on this board illustrate to me is something I have suspected all along. Al Qaida and its' ilk (aka muslims) are nothing more than the brown skinned KKK of our age. The simply hate "white people" and everything fat, dog owning white civilization has done. Oh, they hate non-whites too make no mistakes but they tend to lump all non-muslims into the all-inclusive white Infidel stereotype. Is that a kind of wine...White Infidel?

Anyway, the point is this--muslims are also basing their whole struggle on a myth. It is the same myth that Osama Bin Laden believes. They believe the mujahadeen defeated the Soviet Union in Afghanistan alone with allah's help and since the mujahaeen pulled that off they could next topple the USA. And they believe that they only have to faith for these things to transpire.

Its good they believe this myth because reality is like the kid who believes he can fly whilst on PCP... Gravity 1, Islam 0

p.s. I am of Irish decent. I can make all the Irish muslim jokes I want to :-P

Posted by: GreatShaitan at June 22, 2006 12:06 PM

"Is that a kind of wine...White Infidel?"

To the Muslim, it's a kind of swine.

Posted by: Television at June 22, 2006 1:57 PM

"Hot dog vender"...that's a good one :-D

I thought he mentioned selling women's lingerie to cross-dressers, or maybe he was talking about his gay lover/roommate and their late night parties. I don't know, he's such a man of mystery, but then again, Khalid could be a woman because he seems to identify with women so well.

Posted by: champ at June 22, 2006 1:58 PM

My brothers and sisters, please read and inform you friends and loved ones about a danger,a danger which we and the entire world are not safe from.

There is a cult spawned from war, death and destruction, its followers, follow a man(piss be upon him), who is a proven mass murderer, lier and master of deception, he had hallucinations of receiving gods revelations.

They want to enforce their way of life on us, a way of life which is dark, sadistic and corrupt.
They will stop at nothing to achieve their primitive aims, they want to control us, and have all the power, if allowed to flourish those who dont share their beliefs will be massacred and the survivors will live as second class citizens.

They commit the most violent acts, yet are angered by any form of critisism,and respond with death and destruction.
dressed as sheeps, they are infact wolves as their actions have proved.

their followers are blinded by a false sense of supremicy, which explains their view that they are the people of peace and we are the violent ones.

their women are trapped,oppressed and treated in the most derogotary ways.
Their leader(piss be upon him) shares similarities to the anti christ as can be seen in gods true books.
Driven by arrogance, ignorance and hate they strive for global domination, and throughout history them and their ancestors have contributed nothing but oppression, lies, deceit,death, destruction, and usuary.
We all know who they are

Posted by: sam at June 22, 2006 1:58 PM

They are the americanist extremist, decendents of the crusaders, the practicers of democratic christian extremisme, these americanist must be stopped.

their cities are overun with crime and robbery.
drugs ruin their soles.

their women are bought up in an environment where they are judged on their bodies, those without the so called perfect body are driven to mental illnes and suicide.
Those amongst them who choose to remain chaste are called freaks.
1 in 3 have or will have been rape.
They are brainwashed by their politicians and media, to believe that they are the keepers of peace, dispite theire hypocritical actions proving other wise.
They follow Gw Bush, and the bushshits are blinded by his lies and have grandouse sense of national supremicy.
THE NEW CULT OF AMERICANIST MUST BE STOPPED, THERE PLAN IS TO RULE THE WORLD AND CONTROL EVRYTHING,

Posted by: sam at June 22, 2006 2:10 PM

Hi Khalid (er - Sam...the "sole" is a bit of a giveaway). I have a question. If you really feel that "they want to enforce their way of life on us, a way of life which is dark, sadistic and corrupt." - then why are you living in Britain? Why do you choose to live in the belly of the beast? Why don't you move to Iran or Saudi Arabia or Indonesia? There's lots of Muslim countries to choose. Is someone forcing you to stay in Britain?

Posted by: Caroline at June 22, 2006 2:24 PM

nutjob sam,
This is not a mosque. You are not talking to zombies in skullcapx. Go and bang your head on the ground some more.

Posted by: arjun.sevak at June 22, 2006 2:45 PM

Seems that Khalid bin Sam is one of those intellectually fearsome islamic rocket surgeons. A little too affected by his koranic suppository to think clearly or realize that most people around here have a better grip on reality and a better grasp of history than he or any of his fellow mohammed-the-idol worshipping savages ever will.

Khalid, you can't believe everything your imam tells you, especially as he might have posteri...ah...I mean, ulterior motives. He knows what works better than candy and flowers when trying to corral a boy-toy as his earthly reward from the moon-rock god of the mohammedans. You and your "friend" might keep that in mind during one of your late night visits to the back room of the mosque. He knows just what to say to the little boys that want to feel big and brave, who want to justify everything a little boy can think to do. "You're a Defender of the Faith, Opposer of Eevil Eenfidel Oppressors", "Through you, islam will Triumph!". All the things a boy child wants to hear. Makes him feel like a man. Excuses the tactics of the brave mohammedan warriors. The bombings, hiding behind women and children, kidnapping, raping, and beheading.

Have to admit, though, your view of history was interesting for about as far as I could get through it. I like science fiction as much as the next person. Maybe some day you should study a little history as it actually happened, especially if you want to argue with people who actually aren't brainwashed by an idol worshipping death cult.

Posted by: Eisenhund at June 22, 2006 3:05 PM

drugs ruin their soles.

Oh really? Gee whiz, I thought it was working 8+ Hours a day and commuting up to 4 hours a day to provide a roof for the family that wore out my soles. But what would I know, I'm not priveleged enough to belong to a culture that is too busy doing its Salamis and Baloneys 5 times a day to work for a living...

Posted by: GreatShaitan at June 22, 2006 3:08 PM

sam,

Why are you posting so much meanless posts?

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 22, 2006 3:12 PM

A correction :

The word that needs to be corrected is meaningless.

Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at June 22, 2006 3:29 PM

The sole as opposed to soul was actually reference to your heads being more taken up with filth than those who are not arrogant from the muslim, christian and other communities. i had read conutless books by non muslims regarding the barbaric nature of the crusades, the inquistion, and the naturally corrupt nature of america.

Posted by: sam at June 22, 2006 3:58 PM

The sole as opposed to soul was actually reference to your heads being more taken up with filth than those who are not arrogant from the muslim, christian and other communities. i had read conutless books by non muslims regarding the barbaric nature of the crusades, the inquistion, and the naturally corrupt nature of america.

Posted by: sam at June 22, 2006 3:59 PM

We support your lazy butts and you call us corrupt? Mmmhmmm. Take a look at your muslim leaders and tell us how they made their money. Look at all the muslim rulers in your muslim world and tell us how many actuallly went out and earned their bucks. Right. They stole it or they skimmed it. They wouldn't know what it's like to do an honest day's work. Or make it in the world in an honest way.

Posted by: freewoman at June 22, 2006 4:04 PM

Sam - besides the fact that the US didn't even exist at the time of the Inquisition and the Crusades, you are failing to appreciate one of Mark Humphrey's paradoxes, namely "The most criticised societies will be the least criminal societies."

He explains it here (paradox #1):

http://www.markhumphrys.com/laws.html#no.2

"Let's say one has a planet with free societies, that commit minor crimes, and closed societies, that commit major crimes. Which will get more criticism? The answer, surprisingly, is the free societies.

Why is this?

Explanation
The closed society does not allow criticism of itself. The free society allows criticism of itself and of foreign closed societies. But people write about what they know, and what they are interested in is people like themselves. So the writing about their own society is an order of magnitude larger than about foreign closed societies.

The killing of a dozen protesters in a foreign closed society might rate one paragraph, one time. The killing of a dozen protesters in the free society would completely dominate news and analysis for months, and be strongly covered for years afterwards, even decades. There are all sorts of good reasons for why this is so. But the fact is, it is so. I am simply pointing out that the coverage is not equal.

Of course, in a free society the killing of protesters is a rare event. But even minor crimes - like bribery or lying to parliament - can dominate the news for weeks, even months. While actual massacres in foreign closed societies may be covered in "World News in Brief".

I am simply pointing out the obvious that minor crimes (bribery, embezzlement, lying to parliament) in the free world usually receive more column inches than major crimes (state repression, torture, executions) in the unfree world. There are good reasons for why this is so. But the fact is, it is so. The end result is that in the free press, the column inches given to criticism of free societies will be vastly greater than the column inches given to criticism of closed societies.

The societies singled out to be criticised are by definition those that are best-behaved. What did these societies do to be singled out for criticism? They were not ruthless enough. If they were ruthless, brutal and unfree, they would not be criticised so much. It is because their crimes are modest that they get criticised more.

And so we have a whole generation of journalists and polemicists like Robert Fisk and John Pilger, who write almost entirely about the crimes of the least criminal societies.

Moynihan's Law
This is really Moynihan's Law, which points out that the worst societies have the least domestic criticism. I am just pointing out that a free foreign press does not make up for this. The worst societies still have the least criticism.

Consequence
Finally, what is the effect on people of this imbalance?
In the closed society, the regime (happily) reprints the free society's criticisms of itself. No criticisms are printed of the closed society. Many people in the closed society, not knowing anything else, may even come to believe that the free society is more flawed than the closed society. For example, in the Arab Middle East, most criticism seems to be of Israel and America, rather than of their own societies, which are far more flawed.

And in the free society, naive young people read the criticisms of the free society, and don't read the (small) criticisms of (uninteresting) foreign closed societies. They too may even come to believe that the free societies are the worst societies. And so we see a thousand marches and protests against America, Israel and Britain in the west, while I personally cannot ever remember a single major protest against the Soviet Union, China, Iraq, North Korea, North Vietnam, Serbia, the Sudan or any of recent history's serious criminals.

Similarly, I have seen in my life an endless series of posters, banners, graffiti and cartoons comparing the free countries of America, Israel and Britain to Nazi Germany, and their leaders to Hitler. I'm not sure I have ever seen this about an unfree country.

By definition, the countries people protest about are the best countries. They get this abuse because they are not ruthless enough. If they really were imperialists and mass killers (like the Soviet Union), no one would protest about them. "

Your problem Sam is that you don't realize that Muslim societies DO NOT TOLERATE SELF-CRITICISM. The societies' critics - those who would e.g. point to the destructive nature of Islam - are imprisoned or killed. Hence, there is minimal internal criticism (refusal to permit discussion of the Armenian genocide is one example). Our society is incomparably healthier precisely because it DOES criticize itself. But then you ignorantly take our self-criticism to mean that our society has committed all sorts of crimes relative to other societies and cultures, while the truth is that Muslim societies have committed far more - both throughout history and continuing today but Muslim societies, being closed, sweep it all under the rug.

Posted by: Caroline at June 22, 2006 4:24 PM

The muslims leaders u talk about were placed their by america and britain or did u not know that. they broke up the caliphate state in order to devide and conquer.

Bush says he is pro democracy, yet he shakes hands and deals with the dictators of pakistan and egypt, what he wants is puppet leaders in muslim lands and throughout the world.

Posted by: salahudin at June 22, 2006 5:28 PM

But really Salahudin bin ayoubi was a G, contrast him to the hero of the crusaders (known today as democratic christian extremist) richard the lion heart, there u have the difference between the true muslim and your soldiers

Posted by: salahudin at June 22, 2006 5:44 PM

salahudin: "Bush says he is pro democracy, yet he shakes hands and deals with the dictators of pakistan and egypt,"

So from that comment I should infer that you supported the war in Iraq and Bush's attempt to overthrow one of the worst of those dictators you complain about so that Iraqi's could elect their own government?

Why do I suspect not. I suggest you scroll up and read that article I posted above about Arab schizophrenia, written by an Iraqi Muslim.

Posted by: Caroline at June 22, 2006 6:49 PM

This thread is getting close to 300 posts. Has that landmark ever been scaled before? I can't wait for this thread to disappear from the front page - what started off as an observance of 2 unfortunate soldiers who were tortured and mutilated mutated into this, thanks to all the Mohammedan trolls we have had here.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 22, 2006 7:46 PM

actaully, i dont agree with Iraq, my point was if he despises dictators why not despise 2 of the worst after himself, why not because they are subservient to him

Posted by: salahudin at June 22, 2006 9:48 PM

salahudin: "actaully, i dont agree with Iraq, my point was if he despises dictators why not despise 2 of the worst after himself, why not because they are subservient to him"

Just as I thought. You're a bloody hypocrite. You complain about our support of dictators and then you do everything possible to thwart our efforts to remove one. After everything we've been through in the past 3 years trying to remove Saddam and bring democracy to Iraq - thanks to hypocritical folks like you - I can guarantee you, we'll never try again. You Muslims blew the best chance you ever had to remove the boot on your heads. Bottom line is you get the leaders you deserve. And you all have proven by your actions in the past few years that you deserve brutal dictators. That's the lesson we westerners have learned from Iraq and unlike you, we actually learn from experience.

Posted by: Caroline at June 22, 2006 10:54 PM

Good point Caroline. Where's the "thanks" from the Muslim community for eliminating a murdering terrorist named, Saddam Hussein? He killed his own people, and he threatened to do the same to the US. Salahudin owes us all a debt of gratitude!

Posted by: champ at June 22, 2006 11:26 PM

300!

Champ - it only goes to prove their unwillingness to take responsibility for anything. They complain that they are held back because we support dictators like Saddam, then they scream bloody murder when we remove the guy and don't even plant a puppet but let them elect their own government. Truly, it's hopeless. They're in total denial and they're irrational. The problem without a doubt is Islam. It obviously stunts the mental growth, reducing most of them to the emotional/intellectual level of say - 10 year olds.

Posted by: Caroline at June 22, 2006 11:52 PM

Caroline, I completely agree!!

Congratualations -- number 300 -- that's one for the record books!!

Posted by: champ at June 23, 2006 12:48 AM

Caroline

Congratulations on being the 300th poster here - just wondering if this makes you the Hank Aaron of J/W threads, and whether this is the first such milestone

The other thread on "Hamas: Islam will conquer US and Britain" is however a strong challenger currently at 251 - expect another round of trolls to send that thread to the 400 mark. Your next challenge ;->

Posted by: Infidel Pride at June 23, 2006 1:48 AM