Clear call for more government integration programs‎.
Lets throw money and tell lies to solve this problem

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at October 13, 2006 8:57 AM

This is more accurate:
The Koran and Sharia "Satan's tools"

Posted by: Johnathan at October 13, 2006 9:23 AM

A distinction needs to be made.

Iran's Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi denounces liberty, democracy, and "human rights" because the Muslim elites don't want such notions taking root in Muslim lands. But the jihadists are happy to promote liberty, democracy, and "human rights" in Western lands, because it helps support Muslim settlement in and conquest of the West.

Not being a democrat or a liberal, I happen to share the Grand Ayatollah's opposition to so-called "human rights," but probably for slightly different reasons. Go figure.

Posted by: meharistes at October 13, 2006 9:27 AM

Well, yeah meharistes/Bryanna, you share the
Ayatollah's values because you're a white
supremacist. Human rights are a foreign concern to you, and many of your lot have become Muslims
and side with them already. Go figure!

Posted by: root_cause at October 13, 2006 9:35 AM

"Liberty" (whatever that is) and "democracy" (whatever that is) may indeed be the tools of Shaytan, in the worldview of those who take their Islam to heart (that is, almost all of those who describe themselves as Muslims), but this shoudl not be taken by Bush and others as proof that the messianic attempt to impose that "liberty" and that "democracy" must be the right thing, if that is what assorted Iranian clerics find so unsettling. The right thing to do in Iraq, and elsewhere, is whatever most effectively weakens the Camp of Islam. In Iraq, what would most effectively, without the slightest further expenditure or rather squandering of men, money, materiel, and morale, both civilian and military, would be to leave Iraq and the non-existent "Iraqis" to their own I.E.D. devices, and to further wait expectantly for outside aid -- men, money, materiel -- to arrive from co-religionists on either side of the Sunni-Shi'a divide. This is the only thing that will promote the interests of Infidels.

Bush does not understand this. He is incapable of grasping this. And at the same time, so-called "foreign policy realists" such as Scowcroft and Baker and Brzezinski, the Islam-ignorant School of Appeasers, are not to be trusted in the slightest.

Only those who understand the need to do the bidding neither of Sunnis ("our friends in the Gulf" is how James Baker simperingly describes them) or of the Shi'a who had their way in official Washington over the past few years (from amiable, slightly louche Chalabi, to Allawi, to special pleaders for Shi'a Islam such as Vali Nasr and Fouad Ajami).

Infidels do not have a dog in that fight. To repeat myself (very well then, I repeat myself) our dog is that fight.

Posted by: Hugh at October 13, 2006 9:41 AM

Men and Women must chose the Good and Shun the Evil....No man can chose for another Sword or no Sword.

Posted by: storagemanager at October 13, 2006 9:41 AM

Free will rules... inshallah fatalism drools.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at October 13, 2006 9:45 AM

I think soap and shampoo are also Satans tools in Iran.

Posted by: americanmadestrat at October 13, 2006 9:47 AM

Freedom is Fitnah

The Order to fight until there is no more Fitnah

Allah then commanded fighting the disbelievers when He said:

﴿حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ﴾

(...until there is no more Fitnah) meaning, Shirk. This is the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, Abu Al-`Aliyah, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Ar-Rabi`, Muqatil bin Hayyan, As-Suddi and Zayd bin Aslam.

Allah's statement:

﴿وَيَكُونَ الدِّينُ للَّهِ﴾

(...and the religion (all and every kind of worship) is for Allah (Alone).) means, `So that the religion of Allah becomes dominant above all other religions.' It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari said: "The Prophet was asked, `O Allah's Messenger! A man fights out of bravery, and another fights to show off, which of them fights in the cause of Allah' The Prophet said:

«مَنْ قَاتَلَ لِتَكُونَ كَلِمَةُ اللهِ هِيَ الْعُلْيا فَهُوَ فِي سَبِيلِ الله»

(He who fights so that Allah's Word is superior, then he fights in Allah's cause.) In addition, it is reported in the Two Sahihs:

«أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أُقَاتِلَ النَّاسَ حَتَّى يَقُولُوا لَا إِلهَ إلَّا اللهُ، فَإِذَا قَالُوهَا عَصَمُوا مِنِّي دِمَاءَهُم وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ إلَّا بِحَقِّهَا وَحِسَابُهُمْ عَلَى الله»

(I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight the people until they proclaim, `None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. Whoever said it, then he will save his life and property from me, except for cases of the law, and their account will be with Allah.)

Allah's statement:

﴿فَإِنِ انتَهَواْ فَلاَ عُدْوَنَ إِلاَّ عَلَى الظَّـلِمِينَ﴾

(But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against the wrongdoers.) indicates that, `If they stop their Shirk and fighting the believers, then cease warfare against them. Whoever fights them afterwards will be committing an injustice. Verily aggression can only be started against the unjust.' This is the meaning of Mujahid's statement that only combatants should be fought. Or, the meaning of the Ayah indicates that, `If they abandon their injustice, which is Shirk in this case, then do not start aggression against them afterwards.' The aggression here means retaliating and fighting them, just as Allah said:

﴿فَمَنِ اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ فَاعْتَدُواْ عَلَيْهِ بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ﴾

(Then whoever transgresses against you, you transgress likewise against him.) (2:194)

Similarly, Allah said:

﴿وَجَزَآءُ سَيِّئَةٍ سَيِّئَةٌ مِّثْلُهَا﴾

(The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof.) (42:40), and:

﴿وَإِنْ عَاقَبْتُمْ فَعَاقِبُواْ بِمِثْلِ مَا عُوقِبْتُمْ بِهِ﴾

(And if you punish them, then punish them with the like of that with which you were afflicted. ) (16:126)

`Ikrimah and Qatadah stated, "The unjust person is he who refuses to proclaim, `There is no God worthy of worship except Allah'.''

Under Allah's statement:

﴿وَقَـتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ﴾

(And fight them until there is no more Fitnah) Al-Bukhari recorded that Nafi` said that two men came to Ibn `Umar during the conflict of Ibn Az-Zubayr and said to him, "The people have fallen into shortcomings and you are the son of `Umar and the Prophet's Companion. Hence, what prevents you from going out'' He said, "What prevents me is that Allah has for bidden shedding the blood of my (Muslim) brother.'' They said, "Did not Allah say:

﴿وَقَـتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ﴾

(And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah))'' He said, "We did fight until there was no more Fitnah and the religion became for Allah Alone. You want to fight until there is Fitnah and the religion becomes for other than Allah!''

`Uthman bin Salih added that a man came to Ibn `Umar and asked him, "O Abu `Abdur-Rahman! What made you perform Hajj one year and `Umrah another year and abandon Jihad in the cause of Allah, although you know how much He has encouraged performing it'' He said, "O my nephew! Islam is built on five (pillars): believing in Allah and His Messenger, the five daily prayers, fasting Ramadan, paying the Zakah and performing Hajj (pilgrimage) to the House.'' They said, "O Abu `Abdur-Rahman! Did you not hear what Allah said in His Book:

﴿وَإِن طَآئِفَتَانِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ اقْتَتَلُواْ فَأَصْلِحُواْ بَيْنَهُمَا فَإِن بَغَتْ إِحْدَاهُمَا عَلَى الأُخْرَى فَقَـتِلُواْ الَّتِى تَبْغِى حَتَّى تَفِىءَ إِلَى أَمْرِ اللَّهِ﴾

(And if two parties (or groups) among the believers fall to fighting, then make peace between them both. But if one of them outrages against the other, then fight you (all) against the one that which outrages till it complies with the command of Allah.) (49:9) and:

﴿وَقَـتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّى لاَ تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ﴾

(And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief))

He said, "That we did during the time of Allah's Messenger when Islam was still weak and (the Muslim) man used to face trials in his religion, such as killing or torture. When Islam became stronger (and apparent), there was no more Fitnah.'' He asked, "What do you say about `Ali and `Uthman'' He said, "As for `Uthman, Allah has forgiven him. However, you hated the fact that Allah had forgiven him! As for `Ali, he is the cousin of Allah's Messenger and his son-in-law.'' He then pointed with his hand, saying, "This is where his house is located (meaning, `so close to the Prophet's house just as `Ali was so close to the Prophet himself').''

﴿الشَّهْرُ الْحَرَامُ بِالشَّهْرِ الْحَرَامِ وَالْحُرُمَـتُ قِصَاصٌ فَمَنِ اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ فَاعْتَدُواْ عَلَيْهِ بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَى عَلَيْكُمْ وَاتَّقُواْ اللَّهَ وَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ مَعَ الْمُتَّقِينَ ﴾

(194. The sacred month is for the sacred month, and for the prohibited things, there is the Law of equality (Qisas). Then whoever transgresses against you, you transgress likewise against him. And fear Allah, and know that Allah is with Al-Muttaqin.)

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at October 13, 2006 10:07 AM

root_cause,
I think it was apparent that meharistes opposes muslim civil rights in the west. However, you, being an Anglophobe automatically label anyone that does not tow your line a white supremacist. Save your moronic anti white screed for your non racist (puke) buddies. We whites realize that it is your kinds that are the racists in spite of what you want everyone to else to swallow. You would not know a racist until they were preparing to saw off your head. Do not come whining to whites when you finally figure it out.

Posted by: tgusa at October 13, 2006 10:21 AM

Liberty and democracy are their own worst enemies when applied liberally. Karen Hughes is parading American Muslims around the ‘Stans telling the impoverished populations what a great place America is to live (this promotion made at taxpayer expense). The excellence that thrives in truly free societies can only be taxed so much before it makes the rational decision to leave. France is learning this. Hopefully America does before too many more of its best and brightest decide that the grass is greener elsewhere.

We in America know the benevolence that is at the heart of Islam. We've seen it in many ways.
-United States of America’s Secretary of State Condelesa Rice
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2005/55577.htm

Three generations from now, the liberty and democracy that we currently enjoy will be unrecognizable. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Posted by: limes at October 13, 2006 10:29 AM

Various modes of immorality--the vices--are characteristic of all human populations, including the strictest Muslim societies. For instance, unbridled sexual license manifests itself in the repressed Muslim societies as incest, sex with animals, violent sexual predation against the nearest non-Muslims, and rapine as a tactic of warfare.

Since it is universal, the only way to stamp out immorality is to wage perpetual war against all of humanity. Enter Islam.

If Muslims could figure out a way to restrict "jihad" to mean a personal internal struggle to resist the vices, then Islam could become a respected religion. Muslims could legitimately win converts using "lead by example" rather than threat of force.

This evolution will not happen, because of another fatal and universal human vice: lust for power. The liberal democracies arose and evolved over the turbulent millenia precisely to deal with this specific vice. The central tenet of democracies is the diffusion of power. In stark contrast, Islam embraced the lust for power as a central tenet of its ideology.

Islam does not serve humanity--it serves only the imams and ayatollahs and clerics, who lust for power as privileged lieutenants in Allah's worldly empire, and who rule over Muslim populations with absolute authority over every detail of life and death.

In our counter propaganda effort, we must emphasize to the Islamic populations that they are captives of this horrible human vice. Muslims are forced to live in a fundamentally immoral societal arrangement. The power drunk imams and the ayatollahs, the biggest sinners in all of human history, are the real enemies of Muslims everywhere.

Posted by: Stendec at October 13, 2006 10:33 AM

KAOSKTRL - I couldn't figure out how to contact you at your blog. Obviously you know your stuff. Come lend us a hand with the Handbook for Infidel Debators we're creating.

All others welcome too...

Posted by: Caroline at October 13, 2006 10:41 AM

limes,
It really is unbelievable. I have to ask myself, why would Blacks in particular be determined to embrace a culture that would enslave them again if given the chance? Do they not understand freedom, or do they just prefer slavery? I am starting to believe that some of us will never learn.

Posted by: tgusa at October 13, 2006 10:44 AM

Ayatollah Shirazi- What a TOOL!!

Posted by: guide inside at October 13, 2006 10:46 AM

Unbelievable is one word. Sad is another that comes to mind.

Posted by: limes at October 13, 2006 10:53 AM

"The devil presents himself in many forms, and employs every means to convey his message. He uses each concept such as liberty and democracy to achieve his plans."

The devil uses Islam and its false prophet Mohammad very effectively to dispense his "light", as in "God is the Guardian and Protector of those who believe;
He brings them forth from darkness into light." The satanic verses (aka Koran) [2:257]

Unfortunately for Muslims and their many victims, the "light" is Satan and his servants masquerading, as described in 2 Corinthians 11:

13 For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as Christ's apostles.

14 And no wonder, for even Satan masquerades as an angel of light.

15 It is no great thing therefore if his servants also masquerade as servants of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works.

Posted by: Xaragma at October 13, 2006 11:32 AM

tgusa writes:
"I think it was apparent that meharistes opposes muslim civil rights in the west. "

meharistes stated quite clearly in another thread
that he doesn't think nonwhites, even nonmuslim
ones, don't belong in the West. If my inferring
that he is a white supremacist from his
statement is too complex a logic for you to grasp, I suggest you try and educate yourself
about modes of reasoning. Also, look up "irony",
racist. You remind me of the Muslims who deny the
Holocaust and then blame Hitler for not finishing
the job!

The rest of your message is just a weak attempt
at insult, but don't worry, I don't take it
personally, any more than I take personally one of my young children soiling his diaper. He's
a child, unable to control himself. You did
forget to call me "liberal" though, and impugn
my nationality (hint meharistes/Bryanna, my
nationality is American, "ethnicity" is the
word you're groping for) or make assumptions
about my spouses' ethnicity.

Posted by: root_cause at October 13, 2006 11:36 AM

So the Grand Ayatollah thinks democracy is evil, does he? It's a shame that he used the wrong reasons to derive a true conclusion that is better expressed as "democracy is rooted in fraud."

Let's see, now: It's reasonable to assume that no democracy is legitimate unless it is voted into existence. But a vote isn't valid unless you hold it in a democracy that exists *before* you have your little vote. This latter point become clear when you contemplate the result of a vote in which the majority rejects the creation of a democracy. The No vote would be null and void (i.e. there's no "No"), for a democracy hadn't existed to sanction such rejection. Likewise, you cannot export your democracy into the past via a Yes vote in order to sanction the decisions to (1) hold the vote concerning its creation and (2) bind everyone to its results. The logical fallacy employed by democrats is called petitio principii, i.e. arguing in a circle.

Conclusion: Any and all democracies (or other government similarly constituted) are institions not of liberty but of force and fraud, the force coming into play when dissenting voices are told to love it or leave it, to shut up and pay your taxes (or be punished), and so forth...a little like in Islam.

Posted by: Urban Ockham at October 13, 2006 11:36 AM

Well as long as we are being accused of being evil we may as well live up to the potential.
I say we start manufacturing aerosolized pork.
We can call it the "Ham Grenade"

Posted by: Redhawk at October 13, 2006 11:48 AM

Grand, huh. For starters, who calls themselves "Grand"? What a ridiculous title, coming from a ridiculous man, who's making ridiculous statements. Is lying and brainwashing all these people know?!

Posted by: champ at October 13, 2006 11:49 AM

Root_cause:

My my, aren't YOU a cranky little boy! What happened, little one, did you get up on the wrong side of your crib this morning?

At any rate, I see I've touched a nerve with you and you're going to continue to harrass me. So be it. Let's see what you can do.

By your remarks it's apparent you're one of those self-hating, self-loathing white liberals. Or perhaps you're married to a non-white and in order to suppress feelings of discomfot you feel a need to overcompensate by attacking uppity whites who have the nerve to stick up for themselves, their friends, and their community. I don't know. I don't know what your problem is. But I notice that there are quite a few people on this website who see right through you.

But guess what? I stand by my comments. And, I'm not going away. Now deal with it.

Posted by: meharistes at October 13, 2006 12:05 PM

Mommy, they are letting another thread descend into partisan bickering and personal name-calling. Please make them stop.

Posted by: special_guest at October 13, 2006 12:25 PM

My apologies, I should have ignored the attempted smear of one of my fellow anti-jihadist's and done nothing. What was I thinking? C’mon special_guest it’s Troll Friday, you know what to expect.

Posted by: tgusa at October 13, 2006 12:50 PM

a memo to the Iranian ayatollah Shirazi:

You may believe what you preach and you have a right to. On that score we're fine. But let's get one thing straight here---what you believe so vehemently is based on nothing more than hearsay. There is no physical proof anywhere indicating that anything Islam teaches is true. Islam comes from a book that makes claims of divinity which you believe with all your heart and low-IQ mind. But these and other claims made by Islam lack any proof to validate them.

Even more unfortunately for you, much of what Islam teaches is NOT true! And for that there IS proof. Why should people obey an ideology that tells them lies?? How many more lies are there in the Kuran? Presumably you wouldn't know or else wouldn't tell us if you DID know.

No one is going to buy into Islamic-perpetrated ideology merely because not doing so is "satanic." Especially when those who call democracy 'satanic' as you have can not prove their case but can only make reference to hearsay to undermine them--Muhammed the prophet says so in the Kuran(and so what if he did, as it proves nothing).

No one need deprive themselves of representation in their government and abandon their lives, aspirations, and dreams because Islam says people who don't do so go to hell. Islam can't prove its case.

In order for people to abandon democracy, prosperity, and education and civilization you need hard proof to validate what you claim. And as we have said already four times by now, you ain't got any in that department, bub. So---

YOU, the Kuran with its talking trees and talking rocks, therefore, are more than welcome to go to hell. And take al-Qaeda, the World Islamic Front, Hizbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood with you on your trip down.

Posted by: pythagoras at October 13, 2006 1:00 PM

"Those who live by the sword will die by the sword." -Jesus (Matthew 26:52)

Posted by: Crusader at October 13, 2006 1:01 PM

Urban Ockham,

Your conclusion does not follow from your exegesis on the paradox of democracy's formation.

That some participants (individuals and groups) in democracy, exhibiting human failings that all human populations are corrupted by, engage in fraud and unlawful use of violence on occasion, does not negate or fundamentally characterize the entire concept.

In democracy, the purpose of government at all levels is to serve. In Islam, as in most other forms of societal structure, the purpose of government is to rule. There is a huge and fundamental difference there.

Democracy does not tolerate the "rule" bit, nor should it. That is for Nazis and Communists and Islamists and lots of other "-ists." And yes, those who would prefer that kind of world should depart. In a democracy, they are certainly free to do so. In Islamic and other societies, such "voting with the feet" is just another forbidden freedom.

I am sure you have heard the following saying (I don't know its origin), which I think is wise: "Democracy is the worst form of government there is--except for all the others." Humanity over the centuries has learned hard lessons through violent societal upheavals. Democracy is just the best thing to come out of that long trial and error process. It can be viewed as a fraud only if one willfully ignores the alternatives, and only if he uses the commonplace flaws in human nature as an excuse to attack it unfairly.

Posted by: Stendec at October 13, 2006 1:10 PM

Ishaq:450 “It is your folly to fight the Apostle, for Allah’s army is bound to disgrace you. We brought them to the pit. Hell was their meeting place. We collected them there, black slaves, men of no descent.
Ishaq:374 “The black troops and slaves of the Meccans cried out and the Muslims replied, ‘Allah destroy your sight, you impious rascals.’”
Bukhari:V4B52N137 “The Prophet said, ‘Let the negro slave of Dinar perish. And if he is pierced with a thorn, let him not find anyone to take it out for him.... If he [the black slave] asks for anything it shall not be granted, and if he needs intercession [to get into paradise], his intercession will be denied.’”

Posted by: storagemanager at October 13, 2006 1:11 PM

"In the West there is immorality, yes, but there is also virtue that, because it is not coerced, is genuine in a way that virtue arising from force and fear can never be."

Extreme ideas of total license and total repression are really mirror images of each other and not very different at the thought's root. For example, the idea of a woman in a burka is not much different from the strip club idea of a woman only as a sex object. One view represses the visual nature on male sexuality and the other gives it license. However, if the Queen of England dresses attractively, or any woman dresses attractively, it does not mean that she only wants to be an object of sexual desire.(This is why real change in people is never from one extreme to another, which is just a flip-side of the same nature, but real change is usually slow and by a process of thinking-reasoning.)

Extreme views of repression or license tend to be inhuman, though they tell us a lot about what is going on in a person's mind. Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi's ideas of what should be repressed tell us a lot about him.

Real virtues are courage, prudence, justice, temperance and they cannot be coerced. Virtues govern vice. Fear is not a virtue.

Posted by: Frank at October 13, 2006 1:13 PM

I meant to add after Robert's quote ""In the West there is immorality, yes, but there is also virtue that, because it is not coerced, is genuine in a way that virtue arising from force and fear can never be." Agree. And then my comment...

Posted by: Frank at October 13, 2006 1:28 PM

Winston Churchill said it best: " Democracy is the worst form of government ever conceived of by mankind, except for all the rest."

The Grand Lizard Dragon Ayatollah Bubbah Makarem Shitrazi is only trying to hang on to a dying way of life. Right now he can live off of his pseudo scholar ramblings while endorsing and participating in the plunder and rape (in the literal sense) of his subjects and livestock.

To Ockham, who states:

Let's see, now: It's reasonable to assume that no democracy is legitimate unless it is voted into existence. But a vote isn't valid unless you hold it in a democracy that exists *before* you have your little vote. This latter point become clear when you contemplate the result of a vote in which the majority rejects the creation of a democracy. The No vote would be null and void (i.e. there's no "No"), for a democracy hadn't existed to sanction such rejection. Likewise, you cannot export your democracy into the past via a Yes vote in order to sanction the decisions to (1) hold the vote concerning its creation and (2) bind everyone to its results. The logical fallacy employed by democrats is called petitio principii, i.e. arguing in a circle.

Conclusion: Any and all democracies (or other government similarly constituted) are institions not of liberty but of force and fraud, the force coming into play when dissenting voices are told to love it or leave it, to shut up and pay your taxes (or be punished), and so forth...a little like in Islam.

What a nutcase! Are you a teenager with more argument than sense? Did the original colonialists vote to reject the yoke of non representative government enforced at that time by King George himself? Yes they did, with the working end of a musket. Was that universal sufferage? You tell me.

Your logic is, as you state: "petito principii", circular logic, the chicken or the egg with no other alternative. Your thesis that, democracy is a fraud because to be a democracy, there had to be a democracy established prior to establishing a democracy to vote in a democracy, is at best juvenile and a classic example of a "Fallacy of Presumption", because it directly presumes the conclusion which is at question in the first place.

Pray tell dear Ockham, what is the system you propose to be superior to democracy? Your educated wisdom has us trembling with anticipation of a perfect utopia merely awaiting us with your spoken words! (sound of crickets chirping, silence, silence, silence)

Yea, that's what i thought.
Argumentum ad ignorantiam, i.e. Arguing from ignorance.

Here's another one for Ockham: Si vos can lego is vos es forsitan super erudio

Posted by: tedders at October 13, 2006 1:48 PM

Hugh,

"The right thing to do in Iraq, and elsewhere, is whatever most effectively weakens the Camp of Islam. In Iraq, what would most effectively, without the slightest further expenditure or rather squandering of men, money, materiel, and morale, both civilian and military, would be to leave Iraq and the non-existent "Iraqis" to their own I.E.D. devices, and to further wait expectantly for outside aid -- men, money, materiel -- to arrive from co-religionists on either side of the Sunni-Shi'a divide. This is the only thing that will promote the interests of Infidels."

This makes sense, especially should non-Muslims attempting to leave be granted refugee status on the grounds of religious persecution, and allowed into developed countries.

If I understand you correctly, the reason the "realists" aren't pushing for this is a combination of thinking patterns that conform to PC, and ignorance about Islam. And neocons are also basically mired in PC: all religions are good, or at least infinitely maleable; real evil comes from political philosophy alone, and Democracy will cure the core evils. Roughly.

So, is there anyone in power, or any faction in Washington, advocating or near advocating your position? If so, do you know of a way us normal citizens out here can support them?

Posted by: mrsmomomoto at October 13, 2006 1:53 PM

americaningermany-

Ever notice how extremes have so much in common in their extreme points of view? White Supremacists are probably very similar to Bin Laden style Jihadist Supremacists-and just as boring. They both seem to have an obsession with Jews, too. They seem to look for some simple view that will make sense of the world, and have a belief-system that they treat as a fact. Maybe the site can expand and be inclusive for both and be called "NutWatch". That will cover both groups.

Posted by: Frank at October 13, 2006 2:02 PM

Liberty and Democracy - death knell for the cult of islam.

Posted by: Texican at October 13, 2006 2:40 PM

Play nice children or .... I'LL KILL YOU!!! Ha Ha

Cant we all just get along!

On Fear: The Bible says " We have not been given a SPIRIT of Fear, but of Power, Love, and a Sound Mind."

There is a Spirit that brings all forms of Fear and it sure aint from Heaven!! When the Bible does mention "The Fear of the LORD", the orginal language means the Reverential Respect of the LORD. ( did ya ever notice how much FEAR is resident in racism)

The things Islam doesnt have: Power, Love , a Sound Mind.

The thing Islam does have: FEAR!!

Posted by: guide inside at October 13, 2006 2:40 PM

Bully boys and bully men

Now tyranny may be quite near
Sometimes it runs a kingly state
Or may lurk like some shady fear
On pathways near the [JWatch] gate

Now those who must be in control
And always seek to dominate
May sap all hope from some poor soul
Or turn fear into sheer pure hate

Now thugs are the first ones to cry
When victims turn and strike them back
With weepy words they wonder why
They’re hurt in a counter-attack.

Small tyrannies are ever near
Though sometimes they may run a state
More often they are lurking near
They seem to be part of our fate

~ Trevor Morgan

Posted by: Malinois at October 13, 2006 2:53 PM

Well Urban, I sort of agree... thats what happens when propagandist mind warpers convince a population that a government can 'give and insure', freedom and liberty, and use 'democracy' and force as tools to do it.

No government can 'give' freedom, it cant be bestowed, or awarded for good behavior. This is smokescreens and mirrors. Freedom has already been intrinsically 'given' to us by a power higher than any government. This is NOT Allah...Allah gives no freedoms and instead demands slavery, 'Abdallah', Slave to Allah. To subject humans to any kind of slavery is in opposition to the higher authority of the 'real' God. Allah then is in opposition to divine providence. 'There is no illah but Allah', is Mohammads confirmation that Allah is in opposition to YHVH.
The ancient Romans said that the Demon was God in reverse. Allah then, in opposition to YHVH, is not God at all, but a low level demon, not even approaching Satans 'fallen Angel' staus.
Islam does not seek to remove the chains of slavery, but to increase them. Concepts such as freedom, liberty and democracy are antagonistic to the Islamic defenders and champions of Allah, because Allah, the moon demon, demands for humans, the opposite...slavery...

Posted by: duh_swami at October 13, 2006 2:53 PM

Sorry,it wasnt showing it was posted.

Posted by: guide inside at October 13, 2006 2:53 PM

Funny to heard all that.

Muslim scholars don't want to give liberty to people. Non-Muslims are given the choice of conversion, jizya (only for People of the Book), and warfare. Yep, no liberty here.

Muslims cannot give up Islam even if they come to believe that it is false. Yep. No liberty here.

Anyone who dares to criticise Muhammad or compose poems criticising him, gets to be assassinated. Yep, no liberty here.

And so on.

Al-Mahdi "Direct people to worship Allah. Establish Islam as the only religion." The Antichrist "Direct people to worship the dragon. Establish one religion in the world." Uncannily similar.

Al-Mahdi & Antichrist.

Posted by: yaqub at October 13, 2006 3:22 PM

Sorry for duplicate/triplicate postings.

Posted by: duh_swami at October 13, 2006 3:34 PM

"Democracy is the worst form of government there is--except for all the others."

Which begs the question why, when Muslim populations are given the chance to have a popular vote, do they elect Hamas, or Ahmedinejad, or Hezbollah and accept authoritarian rule? The Iraqis are regurgitating the democracy we are trying to force down their throats. If the liberal democracies have risen and evolved over the millennia to embrace the diffusion of power, is this a genetic trait or simply a group decision of what’s best for the larger population?

I have a neurosis, which causes me to watch travelers at the baggage claim as they wait for the luggage to come down the line. My highly technical scholarship has concluded that ‘Western’ and 'Oriental' passengers tend to stand further back from the line than their counterparts. When the majority of travelers stand back, it is easier for individuals to step forward and get their bag when it goes by. The system works well for everybody when people don't crowd the line. Taking massive liberties, one can extrapolate that peoples who ‘stand back', are more willing to diffuse power throughout the group and take more readily to democracy.

I speculate that this queuing behavior has something to do with a longer exposure to organized societies, but can’t figure out if the trend is based on genetic or environmental factors. Or maybe I’m nuts too.

Posted by: limes at October 13, 2006 3:35 PM

Democracy in the Middle East can be a real negative for the West, since history tells us Muslim voters are more than likely liable to choose Muslim jihadists. Even Turkey, much-heralded (wrongly) by the democratists as a shining example of so-called "Muslim democracy," is riddled with oppression, authoritarianism, and corruption.

Posted by: meharistes at October 13, 2006 3:58 PM

americaningermany-

I'm glad you got a laugh from my post.

Sometimes I wonder if these guys arn't Ibrahim Hooper in disguise trying to make the site look bad.

BTW, I got a laugh from your John Candy line.

Posted by: Frank at October 13, 2006 4:15 PM

Democracy in the Middle East can be a real negative for the West, since history tells us Muslim voters are more than likely liable to choose Muslim jihadists. Even Turkey, much-heralded (wrongly) by the democratists as a shining example of so-called "Muslim democracy," is riddled with oppression, authoritarianism, and corruption.

Posted by: meharistes at October 13, 2006 4:17 PM

"I speculate that this queuing behavior has something to do with a longer exposure to organized societies, but can’t figure out if the trend is based on genetic or environmental factors. Or maybe I’m nuts too."

It is cultural. Remember first grade? You push in line and the teacher yells at you. You do it again and she'll give you a demerit. Enough demerits you don't get to have cookies at the class party on Friday (or similar).

"I've had Middle Easterners (and Asians) literally push me out of lines. They seem only to know chaos and think they have to push their way through with their elbows everywhere they go."

If you've ever been to a large city in Asia, you'll notice it is regularly like this. Because it is all like this, if you ever want to move in a crowd (as opposed to being pushed along wherever it goes), you have to be like this too. So it is not only cultural, it is self-perpetuating.

Posted by: mrsmomomoto at October 13, 2006 4:22 PM

I have formed the opinion through decades of observance that what a person accuses others of is many times exactly what they secretly are. Hence the Satan’s tool, Racist or Supremacist rhetoric. Why? I can’t be sure by I think it has something to do with comfort level. They prefer to use familiar subjects in their attacks, it gives them a false sense of security. Fictitious smears based on facts, their facts. I remember that the Nazis liked to use these tactics against the Jews, the Jews only care about themselves, the Jews are not human and so on. Pathetic.

Posted by: tgusa at October 13, 2006 4:25 PM

limes,

"... why, when Muslim populations are given the chance to have a popular vote, do they elect Hamas, or Ahmedinejad, or Hezbollah and accept authoritarian rule?"

The way I see it, is that when Muslims go to vote, they are going there to decide who is going to rule them, not who is going to serve them. There is no concept of service in Islam, other than service to Allah. And service to Allah means following the Koran and Hadith literally. So the "most Islamic" sect or group gets the vote.

As for patiently waiting in lines, deferring to others takes empathy. I remember reading in Scientfic American or some similar publication that there is a spot in the brain that controls empathy.

A genetic defect can cause that part of the brain to be undersized--thus explaining the existence of the occasional remorseless psychopathic killer amongst any human population.

That node in the brain can also be atrophied by non-stimulation during childhood development. Islamic indoctrination in madrassas takes care of that for Muslims--no empathy for non-believers. And Islamic fatalism neutralizes any empathy for believers, too. A person in discomfort or misery obviously deserves his fate, since obviously Allah is punishing him for not being sufficiently Islamic.

And so, it seems, lack of empathy can be either genetic. or learned, or both.

Posted by: Stendec at October 13, 2006 4:38 PM

Galatians 5:1 says, "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty with which Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."

Posted by: squire at October 13, 2006 4:49 PM

Can a good Muslim be a good American?

This question was addressed by one who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years. Here is his reply:

Theologically - no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon God of Arabia .

Religiously - no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Qu ran, 2:256)

Scripturally - no. Because his allegiance is to the five pillars of Islam and the Qu ran (Koran).

Geographically - no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca , to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially - no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews.

Politically - no. Because he must submit to the mullah (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and Destruction of America , the great Satan.

Domestically - no. Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Qu ran 4:34).

Intellectually - no. Because he cannot accept the American
Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt.

Philosophically - no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually - no. Because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran.

Therefore after much study and deliberation, perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both "good" Muslims and good Americans.

Call it what you wish. It's still the truth. You had better believe it.

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at October 13, 2006 5:17 PM

Pardon my western perspective or if I repeat myself. All of history has been filled with wars. All of the wars fought in the past were fought for ideologies that used force to change their environment. There was plenty of opposing ideology in pre Hitler Europe but force was the hand that Germany possessed in the beginning that gave them the advantage to spread Nazism. If Germany had won WWll, we would probably be posting in the German language right now. The American revolution, the French revolution, the American Civil war, WWl, WWll, the Korean war, etc.. Force is what decided the ideology that prevailed. The Soviet Union prevailed because Europe (what was left of it) and the US teamed up with Russia to defeat Nazi Germany. The Cold war between the Soviet Union and Western Europe/USA never developed into a physical altercation, (if you don’t count Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, South America) but the threat of force and mutual destruction was all that kept the two sides from going at it. The deciding factor in that showdown was simple economic power. One side could outspend the other side 100 to 1. That’s not Imperialism, or spreading a religious belief, it’s a free market economy(capitalism). When a free people are allowed to fend for themselves in an economic sense, everyone will benifit. The Soviet Union failed because, why? No free market economy(capitalism). China never prospered in modern times until, that's right, it adopted a free market economy(capitalism). Socialism, Communism, Marxism, Fascism, Feudalism, Islamism whatever "ism" you can come up with will always take a back seat to free market Capitalism, no matter what, no matter where. There is no Imperialism at work in the middle east. The mullahs are trying to hold back a tsunami of change. With economic freedom believers will cease to sacrifice themselves as walking bombs. There will be some dignity to life and a reason and will to see the sun rise the next day and beyond. The Coalition forces do not want to steal any assets from the countries they are fighting in right now, regardless of the propoganda you see on the local Arab media outlets. The whole world will buy the oil Iraq has at a competitive world market price, if Iraq chooses not to sell it’s oil to the USA or Bolivia or whoever then it has the right to do that. What the US and the coalition partners want out of this war is a non violent middle east where all the countries can exercise their right to self government and self rule, without acting violently towards it’s neighbors, large or small. The Palestinians have every right to elect a radical terrorist government, they also in doing so, just as Nazism was defeated militarily, will be defeated profoundly by the people and nations they threaten with their bellicose, racist and hate filled beliefs. What the US and the coalition partners do want are free and open democracies in the middle east where people can sell goods and services on the open world market to improve their own lives and homelands and not threaten their neighbors. The only way to compete in todays world, to prosper and give people a better standard of living is the free market economy model, period, all the other ideas tried were wrong. Winston Churchill said it best,” Democracy is the worst form of government ever conceived of by man, except for all the rest”.

Posted by: tedders at October 13, 2006 5:36 PM

Man, Iran is stupid. Ugh. Why does Bush keep complimenting these horribly-brainwashed people? Start saying something, you pussy! Ugh. Bush is a flaming pussy, a stupid one with no stones. Start spreading the truth you idiot!

Man, this Islamic thing is EXHAUSTING. And you know what, this problem won't go away. This mosquito just keeps getting bigger and bigger.

[url]http://www.scifijapan.com/GTS%20DVD/15.jpg[/url]

Posted by: TheVoiceofTruth at October 13, 2006 6:15 PM

Damnit:

http://www.scifijapan.com/GTS%20DVD/15.jpg

Posted by: TheVoiceofTruth at October 13, 2006 6:16 PM

"I pledge allegiance, to the flag, of the United States of America, and to the REPUBLIC, for which it stands...."

Our Founders on Democracy:

[D]emocracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security, or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.2 James Madison

Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.3 John Adams

A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction. These will produce an eruption and carry desolation in their way.4 The known propensity of a democracy is to licentiousness [excessive license] which the ambitious call, and ignorant believe to be liberty.5 Fisher Ames, Author of the House Language for the First Amendment

We have seen the tumult of democracy terminate . . . as [it has] everywhere terminated, in despotism. . . . Democracy! savage and wild. Thou who wouldst bring down the virtuous and wise to thy level of folly and guilt.6 Gouverneur Morris, Signer and Penman of the Constitution

[T]he experience of all former ages had shown that of all human governments, democracy was the most unstable, fluctuating and short-lived.7 John Quincy Adams

A simple democracy . . . is one of the greatest of evils.8 Benjamin Rush, Signer of the Declaration

In democracy . . . there are commonly tumults and disorders. . . . Therefore a pure democracy is generally a very bad government. It is often the most tyrannical government on earth.9 Noah Webster

Pure democracy cannot subsist long nor be carried far into the departments of state, it is very subject to caprice and the madness of popular rage.10 John Witherspoon, Signer of the Declaration

It may generally be remarked that the more a government resembles a pure democracy the more they abound with disorder and confusion.11 Zephaniah Swift, Author of America's First Legal Text

Do we know something today that these wise men didn't, that somehow makes our nation now a democracy, as opposed to a democratic republic, and also makes this a good thing? Returning to the governing principles of our republic seems like a good idea to me....

reference source:
http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=4

Posted by: Natesse at October 13, 2006 8:03 PM

Oh yeah, Shirazi ?

well there are alot of people who think that you are the tool of satan...but that insults the lord of darkness...

may 10000 filthy hogs defacate on you, your family and in your mother's burqa.

Posted by: religion of(blown to)pieces at October 13, 2006 8:39 PM

sheik yer'mami - you are right on with your thinking...

all these mooslims complain that they are being discriminated against...well fine, help the civilized world find,identify and take out the people of YOUR FAITH who are causing all of the discrimination problems for YOU and perhaps we will be a bit more sympathetic. become part of the solution instead of being part of the problem.

silence equals acquiescence and the silence of the "so-called" moderate muslims is deafening...

or does allah now forbid talking?

Posted by: religion of(blown to)pieces at October 13, 2006 8:47 PM

My Favorite Mufti, Ebrahim Desai, had this to say about democracy:

"The constitution of a democratic country will be largely influenced by the needs and wants of its people. Thus, if its people want casinos, bars, gay marriages, prostitution, etc. then with sufficient public pressure, all these vices can be accommodated for. From this, it becomes simple to understand that there can never be scope for a democratic rule from the Islamic point of view."

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best, Mufti Ebrahim Desai

That is the core of the Islamic attitude toward democracy.

Posted by: Pelayo at October 13, 2006 10:39 PM

The thought of someone like this throwback sitting there with his finger on the trigger of Irans soon-to-be-had nuclear stuff...
"We need to nuke the Great Satan so 12th imam can come..."
The things these nut jobs say ought to be on the front pages every day.

Posted by: HawkWatcher at October 14, 2006 2:10 AM

Natesse,

Your criticism of "pure democracy" is well taken and understood.

However, when I use the word "democracy" in the JW/DW context, I am using it as shorthand to refer to constitutional government with a republican structure of government. The goal here is only to contrast this alternative with one-party totalitarian states, tribal governments, Islamic sharia, etc., not to advocate pure democracy--direct voting on laws, as contrasted with the republican checks and balances among different elected and appointed branches of government to achieve a deliberate separation of powers. The founding fathers were indeed wise.

I am sure that most posters here have the same orientation and intent when using the term democracy here.

Posted by: Stendec at October 14, 2006 10:49 AM