Yawn, the Taleban made similar claims in 2001 just before they were routed by the rag-tag Northern alliance with the support of US forces. Where was Allah then?

Posted by: Roxane at March 11, 2007 9:28 AM

let NATO send those taliban down to hell to meet their precious child rapist, murdering allah. allah is the one roasting in hell, and he is joined by his sheep.

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at March 11, 2007 9:56 AM

Re: “No one in the world has better weapons than NATO. They have got better weapons, but we will defeat them with the power of faith and belief,”

The history of mankind shows that every nation, every empire has been established via the conquest and the displacement (very often with the extermination) of some lately "indigenous peoples". (The Aztec did it to the Toltec, the Spaniard to the Aztec, the Arab to the Spaniard, etc.-the beat goes on.) The destruction of the native culture and the displacement of the native religion is central to this picture. This pattern is accomplished via religious or ideological rationalization (Islam, e.g.)that permits the supremacist arrivals to subdue or even kill the "native peoples".

Islam is very effective to that end. As Hugh has pointed out, it was the engine of Arab Imperialism (which even included extermination in India). It was the engine of the Ottoman Empire. It's a typical supremacist rationalization for conquest and exploitation in the name of God and ultimately aims at the setting up of a new ruling class which will use the glove of "religion" for rule.

In Eric Hoffer's book The True Believer, he points out that all "movements" (religious, political) go through three phases: they begin as a fanatical cause, which if successful, becomes an administrated business, and the last stage is when the original cause becomes a racket of abuse and exploitation. (This was true of the union movement, e.g.) With Islam, the mass of "true believers" are the flunkies of those who will use them to exploit the Kaffirs if they are successful in establishing a new ruling class.

History shows that such causes will only be stopped in their tracks by the most intelligent containment policy or the ruthless use of force against the true believers. All supremacist religion-ideology must be seen for what they are and contained or crushed. Appeasement will only whet the appetite of the true believer and his religious-ideological "movement" that seeks (in this case) to impose Sharia law on all.

Posted by: Frank at March 11, 2007 10:07 AM

BTW, some might say Zionism fits into this picture. However, I don't think so. Zionism is primarily a defensive ideology that seeks to create a safe place for Jews from exploitation, abuse and possible extermination by "the other" in the Mideast and elsewhere. Jewish people go to Israel from Arab or other countries not to conquer, but to no longer be subdued or exterminated.

Islam is an aggressive rationalization for conquest. Zionism and Israel exist because of such aggressive rationalizations.

Posted by: Frank at March 11, 2007 10:21 AM

"And if losses follow, they will not lead to a reexamination of the assumption that faith and victory are tied together, but will be ascribed to lack of faith, and more Islam will be prescribed as the remedy."

As Hugh has pointed out, relentless defeat is what cures this reaction. But it has to be sustained and come in rapid fire.

That requires a draft and 2 million more men in the military.

US Army Mobilization WWI from 0.2 to Victory 19mo

Ground Invasion of Iran Cuts the Gordian Knot of Retaliation

Posted by: Old Atlantic at March 11, 2007 10:24 AM

"Dadullah said Taleban fighters were being backed by Al Qaeda-linked foreign jihadists, including from Chechnya and the Palestinian territories.

“We have relations with Iraqi mujahedin—we send fighters to them, they send to us,” he added."

Wow you mean the U.S. troops in Iraq are not just fighting nazi-baathist leftovers commonly called "insurgents"...such a noble label] from the Saddam regime? What a mess in Iraq...Shia backed by Iran & Sunni blowing each other up...throw in Al-Qaeda blowing everybody from themselves to average Iraqi civilians...Now Taleban filtering into Iraq?

Allah sure has a glorious global jihad goin' with hideous alliances as these.

Posted by: SoteriA at March 11, 2007 11:01 AM

Lies built upon lies built upon a mythology. Please, nobody else ever walk out of a cave and have an idea.

Posted by: Foehammer at March 11, 2007 11:15 AM

"Lies built upon lies built upon a mythology. Please, nobody else ever walk out of a cave and have an idea".

Foehammer-

You make an interesting point re myth. As I have been thinking re the pattern I note above, it has occurred to me that the Imperialist will-to-power is eventually morphed into a myth of "goodness" and even "liberation" re the conquest. In essence, history is rewritten to expunge the Imperialist will-to-power and exploitation of the period of conquest and the subduing of the "indigenous culture". Human beings don't like to look reality in the face, and realize what a predatory species we are capable of being in the name of God, country, clan, etc.

Even America has fit into this pattern. The "native Americans" (who were busy exploiting and exterminating each other) were largely displaced or even exterminated by the new "best people". However, we are less guilty than most because North America was mostly wilderness and very cold much of the year. (The Spaniards wanted nothing to do with North America above New Spain (Mexico). Only the English had the nerve to settle at Plymouth, etc. The Spaniards thought the English were crazy.) In their Imperial Adventure, the Arabs (e.g.) and Ottomans moved into civilization. (Constantinople became Istanbul, e.g.)

It is time to stop the infantile-self-serving finger pointing and the shame game that pretends that the exploitation machines are only Western in origin. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's time to stop seeing the shadows on the wall as reality and break our chains and come out of the cave and into the sunlight and see human nature.

Jesus has it right re hypocrisy being our greatest evil. We are indeed sinners who even commit crimes in the name of God.

Posted by: Frank at March 11, 2007 12:15 PM

We are fighting in the wrong place. Taleban territory is largely devoid of oil or other natural resources. We need to go after the places where the oil is and kick out the Muslims.
No blood for oil? What do you think we're paying for right now via the 10 trillion to OPEC since 1973.
When I saw the news about the French tourists murdered for trespassing into a "Muslims Only" area, I thought: "How long before some of those Infidels endowed with vastly superior armaments get fed up and turn the tables on those primitive morons in Saudi Arabia?" It's just a matter of time. Let oil get to $100+ a barrel to help wear people's patience down.
When that day comes, and I hope to live to see it, we'll see if Allah can protect Dar-el-Backward.

Posted by: jewdog at March 11, 2007 12:31 PM

let them buckle on the protection of allah and stand in front of the Allied troops and see what the outcome is.............

Posted by: The Texican at March 11, 2007 12:39 PM

The mullah is incorrect, but his mindset is what will win the war as like all local warfare it is who keeps shooting on the ground long enough to make the other force get tired and leave is what wins.

The neo Philistine Syrians aka Palestinians are winning in Judea because Jews are disheartened at tit for tat bloodshed and "want peace".
Democrats seized upon American frustration and are demanding defeat in Iraq. (Americans want victory and were frustrated it was not coming...Democrats made a tactical error which will bite them big.)

The Taliban though is making one huge mistake in you have to keep the locals content. Using their children as sheilds really ticks off the locals. This is what is still the toss up in Afghanistan for victory yet as the Afghanie people do not like the Taliban.

Posted by: Lame Cherry at March 11, 2007 12:51 PM

During the Boxer Rebellion in China in 1898, the Boxers (today we would call them practioners of Kung Fu) believed they had magical powers that would protect them from the bullets fired by the foreign troops.

A decade earlier, Native Americans believed the shamanistic Ghost Dance would protect them from U.S. soldier's bullets.

In 1905 during the Maji Maji Rebellion, the African spiritual medium Bokero gave his followers a magic potion (water, castor oil, and millet seeds) that he convinced them would turn the German troops' bullets to water.

So, it's not the first time that magic has been tried as a military instrument.

Let the magical powers of Allah be tested against the firepower of the A-10 "Warthog", or the megatonnage of the BLU-82 "Daisycutter". And if Allah does not see fit to protect his true believers, then let them, no, encourage them, to become ever more fervent believers. If praying 5 times a day doesn't bring victory, then let them see if 10 times a day works. Practice Ramandan-type fasting not just one month, but all twelve. Let them behead and stone each other, not for infidelity, but for even thinking about sex outside of marriage. And all the while, keep sending waves of Warthogs and keep dropping Daisycutters on the jihadists, to find out if Allah has given his approval yet.

Posted by: special_guest at March 11, 2007 1:56 PM

off topic but interesting
check out the video on this one
http://www.dividepakistan.blogspot.com/

Posted by: Indiana_jones at March 11, 2007 2:23 PM

Dadullah, don't you know? Thinks of nothing but the "prophet" and murder.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 11, 2007 3:11 PM

As long as we keep stepping on the ants one at a time, instead of attacking the anthill, we will never win on the battlefield. The Islamic ants have no timetable. They will continue to breed prolifically and rear their children in the Cult of Death. Endless generations will live, grow up, and die only for the purpose continuing the struggle against the infidels.

Unless we are prepared to destroy their mosques (forts) and their madrassas (brainwashing centers), to hang their imams and ayatollahs (little genocidal Hitlers all), and to attack their ideology with ceaseless propaganda and reeducation, we cannot prevail in the long run.

One way to destroy an anthill is to isolate it from external food sources, and feed poison to the ants that inevitably venture out to forage--poison that these scouts carry back into the anthill and spread around.

We should be isolating the Islamic world in a global quarantine, and then broadcasting and spreading our own literature (e.g., Bibles, the Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc.) and our own propaganda--let them know that they are total failures, that their entire history (except, perversely, for the mindless slaugher of innocents) is a failure, and that Islam is the reason for that. Let them know that we hold their belief system in contempt--because it richly deserves contempt. Tell them why. Never stop telling them why.

To gauge the results, just listen. The louder they scream and protest, the more effective our campaign.

Save our soldiers and airmen for fierce punitive and disarming raids on Dar al-Islam from time to time. When Muslim attack, seize more and more of their assets as reparations (i.e., their oil fields, bits of territory) so their loss is highly obvious and visible to the world.

And rub it in their faces. Make sure the Muslims understand we will not accept anything but their disarming. Make sure they understand that we will not accept anything but the total defeat and eradication of jihad and the Mohammedan model.

They are welcome to join the community of man--but first, they must shed the Cult of Death, permanently and totally. Until then, we stand resolute against their brain dead minions with their putrid supremacist ideas.

Posted by: Stendec at March 11, 2007 3:15 PM

That's the idea, Stendec. The correct strategy to win must be premised on the concept that Islam is the enemy of non-Muslims and free people everywhere. From there, the strategy needs to focus on how to best weaken it. Hugh has suggested one powerful method involving the encouragement of Islam's inherent divisions, made all the deeper I should add by Islam's inherent intolerance.
Another tack should be to face the fact that the Islamic revival is largely oil fed, and so that naturally suggests cutting off the oil revenue. This is probably the easiest route to take from a purely mechanical point of view. We obviously could easily sweep in and sieze the oil fields. The main obstacle is political. The oil industry, along with the Left, would be opposed, as would various foreign powers. But consider, America is the world's only superpower. Really, who could stop us, assuming we had the will?
Would we have permitted Nazis or Communists to control most of the world's oil supply? Of course not. What to do should be obvious.

Posted by: jewdog at March 11, 2007 3:53 PM

How could ROUND UP fit into that whole Food, Fruit, Money thing?

It is the gift that keeps on giving. Kill the really bad ones while preventing the kinda bad from supporting any replacements.

A Modern verson of Shermans March to the Sea.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at March 11, 2007 4:30 PM

jewdog your points are well taken, but this one point about "oil revenue", if we dont buy Arab oil, China and their hungrey economy will buy the oil.
A cheap alternative would be great when invented, but is far into the futur, ultimately, we need to destroy their oil fields, make them unsable, and theirfore no more money will go to their coffers. nuke them, make them radioactive and unuseable. that is an extreme measure, but in the end,the only one that will stop them in their tracks.

Posted by: ZenaWarriorPrincess at March 11, 2007 4:37 PM

Jewdog,

Yes, our response to the Islamic world must be based on their doctrines.

Islamic doctrine requires Muslims make perpetual war against all free men. Fee men need to respect that unambiguous prinicple and mount and maintain a rigorous and perpetual defense.

Islamic doctrine says they must fight infidels with every means available. We infidels need to respect that principle, and take away their war making means. Their entire modern assault on civilization is funded by oil revenues. If there were no oil revenues, there would be no expensive nuclear projects, no mujahedin armies of unemployed thugs, no global mosque construction, no bribing of western politicians, no "Islamic chairs" and "Islamic centers" polluting our academia.

Islamic doctrine says no law is to be respected except Islamic law. Our Constitution should be amended to respect this clearly stated principle, and declare that Islam is considered a self-declared and perpetual threat the core doctrines of the Constitution itself, and is not to be considered a "religion" within our states and territories. Islam should not be afforded the usual protections, based on our own religious tolerance, from any of our laws.

Islamic doctrine says every Muslim's loyalty lies only with the Umma, and not to any state or ruler, and that they may lie about this if it advances the spread of their ideology. We should respect these clearly stated principles and ban Muslims from any public office, especially the security and military services, since their oaths of office would clearly be utterly worthess.

And so on.

So much of the criticism for such proposed defensive measures is based on complaints that we should "show respect" for other cultures and civilizations. By buying into the Muslims' self-aggrandizing lies and obfuscations, we are not showing any respect at all. We are merely reinforcing their ideological viewpoint. They see they are, as promised by their Koran, successfully fooling us and dominating us, thereby "proving" that they have the backing of their globe coveting Allah.

No. We show proper respect for Islam by fighting this ideology, loudly, vigorously, and relentlessly.

Posted by: Stendec at March 11, 2007 4:53 PM

Stendec,
I would just add that respect starts with self-respect, which definitely means we defend ourselves first, rather than worrying about what the rest of the world thinks, particularly the Islamo-morons.

Posted by: jewdog at March 11, 2007 5:43 PM

"And if losses follow, they will not lead to a reexamination of the assumption that faith and victory are tied together, but will be ascribed to lack of faith, and more Islam will be prescribed as the remedy."

As Albert Einstein once said:

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.

Muslims are truly insane. Insane to think that their barbaric culture is superior to Western freedom. Insane to think that more advanced societies will not reject their backward ways wholesale. Insane to think that they will be unopposed in their aggression against the West. And finally; Insane to think that should Islam become too troublesome, the West will hesitate for even one second to exterminate it from the face of this earth.

Posted by: Zenster at March 11, 2007 5:49 PM

Stendec: "Islamic doctrine says no law is to be respected except Islamic law. Our Constitution should be amended to respect this clearly stated principle, and declare that Islam is considered a self-declared and perpetual threat the core doctrines of the Constitution itself, and is not to be considered a "religion" within our states and territories. Islam should not be afforded the usual protections, based on our own religious tolerance, from any of our laws."

This is how America must go about the outlawing of Islam and sharia law, forever.

Posted by: Zenster at March 11, 2007 5:52 PM

Would that be the SAME god that the muslims had faith in when Israel kicked their butts (with the help of THE REAL GOD) in the 6-day war? Uh huh.

Would that be the SAME god that they bow to 5 times a day that blesses them abundantly with tsunamis, earthquakes, disease, barbarism and war?

They should continue to put their faith in their god.

The Christians and the Jews believe and have faith in THE God.

Posted by: The Goobs at March 11, 2007 5:53 PM

It is not in our interest to dismantle the Oil infrastructure of any of these Countrys. They may find the need to sell the Oil back to us. At very reasonable prices. Just to put the rest of their infrastructure back together again.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at March 11, 2007 5:58 PM

Paul makes it clear to the Corinthians that worshipping idols is worshipping demons….

1Cr 10: 19-21

What am I trying to say? Am I saying that the idols to whom the pagans bring sacrifices are real gods and that these sacrifices are of some value?

No, not at all. What I am saying is that these sacrifices are offered to demons, not to God. And I don't want any of you to be partners with demons.

You cannot drink from the cup of the Lord and from the cup of demons, too. You cannot eat at the Lord's Table and at the table of demons, too.

Now, let’s look at allah…

Within the Ka'aba, in pre-Moslem days, were several idols representing gods. One was called Allah...three others were Allah's daughters al-Uzza, al-Lat, and Manah.

The Quraish [Muhammad's tribe controlling Mecca] paved the way for monotheism by worshiping Allah as chief god; He was presented to the Meccans as the Lord of their soil, to Whom they must pay a tithe of their crops and the first-born of their herds.

The Quraish, as alleged descendants of Abraham and Ishmael, appointed the priests and guardians of the shrine and managed its revenues (Will Durant, "The Story of Civilization," IV: 160-61).

The Ka'aba still stands, without its idols, but with the Black Stone. The pilgrimage to the Ka'aba, to...kiss the sacred stone, to run between Safa and Marwa, and to climb Mount Arafa, was practiced by pious pagan Arabs for centuries before Muhammad.

So, ….if something is an idol one day, is it a god the next just because someone decides to call it one? WHO are the muslims praying to???

YOU DECIDE.

Posted by: The Goobs at March 11, 2007 6:35 PM

I don't think I can recall seeing a bigger group of hatemongering retards. You have taken the radical ideology of a small percentage of Muslims, the extent of which has been hyped (and used/manipulated) beyond belief for the strategic purposes of a few "peaceful Judeo/Christians", and applied it to a whole religion. So the Koran says from violent things about destroying the non-believers. Have you morons read the old Testament lately? A good portion of it centers around killing the non-believers, their women(after raping them of course -it's in there), their children and their animals. The point is, a vast majority of Jews and Christians know that this is not the way to go about things, despite what the Bible says. By the same token, the majority of Muslims do not agree in killing the non-believers just because the Koran says. The question is, who really benefits from this holy war that you guys are calling for? I don't see nearly as many Muslims calling for it, except for the bunch out there on the fringes, many of whom, I'm sure by mere coincidence, have ties to US and other US/friendly intelligence services. Seems as if you rubes have been deceived. I'm not calling Islam a religion of peace, but neither will I make the same claim about Judaism or Christianity.

Posted by: tardsmasher at March 11, 2007 7:15 PM

The biggest problem facing the western world is that large portions of our populations are morons.

I saw a news item in Australia where the percentages of people that were concerned about Islam were high but after they had talked to muslims and muslim experts the percentages were cut in half.

What hope does the west have when you combine that with negative birth rates and a complete lack of will for casulties.

I was on the Dominion Post website a few weeks back and they had a poll on if we should send another reconstruction team to Afganistan and 55% said no i mean what the fuck is going on we havn,t even had one of them shot at.

The west as never been weaker and we are in grave peril.

Posted by: stevenz at March 11, 2007 7:22 PM

tardmasher,

The ideology of Islam must be defeated.

This is the ideology that authorizes its followers, collectively and individually, from now until Doomsday, to kill, loot, lie, cheat, rape, torture, and deceive, at any time and at any place in which it is advantageous for them. This is the ideology that defines morality as anything--literally anything, including such things as genocide (of 80 million Hindus, for just one instance)--that facilitates the spread of Islam.

This is the ideology that lionizes and emulates the bloodthirsty, sex-crazed Mohammed as the perfect model of human behavior for all time.

By excusing Islam, which is not a religion at all but an institutionalized cult of piracy, and by making false comparisons of Islam to real religions like Christianity and Judaism, on any level, you are running interference for those whose goal is the end of our civilization.

So what if only ten percent of Muslims act out their violent commandments? That is 100 million fanatical people! (We can watch them in action every day of the week, in Iraq). And the rest, to the extent any of them are peaceful, and maybe even neutral toward us, are trapped within the cult. The punishment for leaving the cult is death. The punishment for criticizing the cult is death. The punishment for disrespecting the cult, or its "prophet," is death. The punishment for writing skeptical books or poetry about Islam is death (Mohammed himself ordered the poet Marwan, and others, slain). The punishment for trying to reform Islamic doctrines is death.

If, in your misinformed compassion and self-righteousness, you are looking for victims, there they are for you--a billion strong--impoverished and mentally stunted souls trapped by the Mohammedan ideology, the same ideology that seeks to bring its foul "gift" to our country and to our families.

It is time for all free men confront Islam directly. We start the process by telling the unvarnished truth about it--at all times and in any venue. That is what this site is about.

Posted by: Stendec at March 11, 2007 8:07 PM

tardsmasher wrote:
"I don't think I can recall seeing a bigger group of hatemongering retards."

As far as introducing yourself to the JW/DW community, this was a poor choice of words to start with. That being said, welcome anyway. Let us know a little bit about yourself, and what lead you to this site, if you will.

Your comparison of the violent, intolerant sentiments of Islam to the same found in the Old Testament is not unique or new by any means whatsoever. It is discussed in detail in Robert's book "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)", which is highly recommended reading and can be referenced at the top of the page under the heading "books".

If one were to try to understand the ideology of Islam, how it is applied today, with particular attention to the fact that laws directly derived from the texts of Islam, known as Shar'ia, and enforced as such in societies dominated by Islam, your argument quickly falls short in that it is dissimilar to all secular governments in western cultures.

There is no current non-Islamic society in the West that does not maintain a secular order, independent of the theological ideology of it's poulation. Islam's collective desire to destroy secularism, forcing all to submit to the theological ideology of Islam is central to it's purpose.

Education should be earned, not given away freely. There are more than enough resources avalable here to help you on your way. A recent poster above, Stendec, touched on several inherent truths about Islam, so re-reading his post is also recommended.

I could have immediately responded to your post, calling you a weepy, PC-type, leftist, who is so young and naive, but self-righteous to the core nonetheless, but that would have accomplished nothing.

Posted by: awake at March 11, 2007 8:59 PM

Stendec - So, presumably Islam is the only thing you want to get the "truth" out about. We could go on all day exposing the ugly truths about every religion. I would agree that many are victimized by the fundamentalist Islamic ideology, but a lot of people are also vivtims of other ideoligies, religious or otherwise, as this site shows so clearly. Are there murderous, radical Muslims out there? Sure. Are these radical Muslims the dire, immediate threat to our very existence that those who have a stake in the defense industry and their frightened followers would have us believe? Highly unlikely. The rantings of a few radicals about their quest to destroy the infidels (being filmed from Langley, VA, for all I know) does not convince me that there is a massive army of seething Muslims waiting for the right moment to wage a holy war on the west. Nearly every "terror threat" that has been exposed has either turned out to be completely bogus or much less threatening than originally claimed. But I guess the people on this site still believe that the OBL "confession video" is not the crude forgery that it clearly is to anyone who actually watches it while looking at a picture of the actual OBL. Even the nation's top Bin Laden expert, Bruce Lawrence of Duke University, stated simply "It's bogus." Where is your evidence, outside of some isolated statements by either wingnut jihadists/western propaganda agents, that the desire for a clash of civilizations is rampant in the Middle East? I think if you really delve into it, a majority of Muslims, even fundamentalists, just want to live their lives, albeit in a society structured in a way that you and I may disagree with. If its all about freeing the people of the Middle East from the Islamist ideology, why don't you start a foreign legion of like minded people and go put your money where your mouth is. The United States cannot afford and does not have the authority to run around the world freeing everyone from oppressive ideologies by military force. Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves just thinking of it. Of course, being a neocon, your founding fathers (Trotsky et al.) are obviously not the same as mine, so that probably means nothing to you. It's not always a battle between good and evil. Sure, the jihadist philosophy is plenty evil, but people would be wise to look very carefully at the other side as well.

Posted by: tardsmasher at March 11, 2007 9:33 PM

awake-

Ironic screen name. I am not a leftist (Ron Paul for president!!!!!!) or PC by any stretch of the imagination. I acknowledge the complete insanity of fundamentalist Islamic societies (many of which are or were at one time being propped up by the US), but your worldview is way too simplistic. Funny how before 9/11 we supported the Taliban while Iran funded the Northern Alliance. I would use the term naive for someone who can't see how many people in positions of power in the west possibly benefit from the perceived threat of Islam and how it could be in their interest to hype it to the fullest in order to advance their agenda. 9/11 and the perceived terrorist threat has completely altered the relationship between government and the governed, and you can't see how there are people who benefit from the massive expansion of arbitrary government power, as well as the huge additional military expenditures, that alteration brings about. Pretty naive.

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Dwight D. Eisenhower

Posted by: tardsmasher at March 11, 2007 9:50 PM

tardsmasher --

A better comparison to make would be between Jesus and Muhammad; who they were, what they stood for, and the kind of life that they led.

JESUS = God in the flesh / suffering servant / laid down his life and never murdered anyone.

MUHAMMAD = false prophet / conquering warrior / single-handedly murdered between 600-900 people.

There are many more glaring contrasts between these two men, but this is a good start.

Posted by: champ at March 11, 2007 10:00 PM

Jesus vs Muhammad

http://www.christring.org/shortseries/jesusormuhammad.htm

Posted by: champ at March 11, 2007 10:14 PM

champ
I would not completely disagree with your sentiments. Although the whole being God in the flesh thing is a matter of faith and therefore not really a valid point of comparison, I would agree that Jesus was a much more peaceful teacher whose teachings I personally put more stock in (he's also the number two prophet in Islam in case you haven't heard). Yes, Mohammed often spread Islam by the sword, and wrongly so, but how can you decry that and not at the same time speak on the incredible carnage unleashed by the Hebrews on the infidels of their time, since you presumably accept the OT as part of your holy book. How is that justified while Mohammed's killings are not. Not to mention the fact that Christianity has often been spread by less than savory means over the centuries. If you wanted to compare body counts, even taking away those before the founding of Islam, neither side would come out smelling like roses. People are entitled to believe whatever they want about Islam, and I may agree with some of it. Just don't start WW3 because you feel the need to stamp out an entire religion you find repulsive. That would be a bigger disaster than any terrorists could possibly visit upon us.

Posted by: tardsmasher at March 11, 2007 10:16 PM

It seems like a number of the people on this side have a giant stiffy over the idea of a massive all-out war with the entire Muslim world. The first question is, do you people have even the slightest familiarity with the realm of reality? Despite the fact that we spend more on the military than all the other nations of the world combined, we can't even get Iraq under control and you think we have the ability to fight a huge regional conflict in the Middle East? With what money and what men? Secondly, where are you stationed - or when does your enlistment begin? Unless you warmongers rooting for WW3 are willing to drag your sorry butts, along with your kids and maybe even their kids, over there to do your own dirty work, it is clear that you are just a bunch of fat, overpaid armchair warriors who have no authority to even speak on the matter. Pathetic.

Posted by: tardsmasher at March 11, 2007 11:07 PM

tardmasher said

I don't think I can recall seeing a bigger group of hatemongering retards.

Argumentum ad hominem? Check.

You have taken the radical ideology of a small percentage of Muslims, the extent of which has been hyped (and used/manipulated) beyond belief for the strategic purposes of a few "peaceful Judeo/Christians", and applied it to a whole religion.

Baseless and bizarre conspiracy theory blaming the infidels for carrying out the Muslim attacks on the infidels? Check.

So the Koran says from violent things about destroying the non-believers. Have you morons read the old Testament lately?

Tu quoque? Check.

I don't see nearly as many Muslims calling for [holy war], except for the bunch out there on the fringes...

Minimalizing and ignoring the manifest evidence? Check.

...many of whom, I'm sure by mere coincidence, have ties to US and other US/friendly intelligence services.

More conspiracy theories.

Seems as if you rubes have been deceived.

More ad hominem.

I'm not calling Islam a religion of peace, but neither will I make the same claim about Judaism or Christianity.

More tu quoque.

The United States cannot afford and does not have the authority to run around the world freeing everyone from oppressive ideologies by military force.

Hey, what do you know, you've got something in common with a hatemongering retard rube. I agree with you 100%.

Posted by: special_guest at March 11, 2007 11:09 PM

Stendec - outstanding posts, bravo.

Posted by: LancashireUK at March 11, 2007 11:17 PM

Jacques Ellul, French sociologist and professor of law, writing about jihad:

"But a major, twofold fact transforms the jihad into something quite different from traditional wars, waged for ambition and self-interest, with limited objectives, where the 'normal' situation is peace between peoples - war, in itself, constituting a dramatic event which must end in a return to peace. This twofold factor is first the religious nature [of jihad], then the fact that war has become an institution (and no longer an 'event'). Jihad is generally translated as 'holy war' (this term is not satisfactory): and this suggests both that this war is provoked by strong religious feeling, and then that its first object is not so much to conquer land as to Islamize the populations. This war is a religious duty. It will probably be said that every religion in its expanding phase carries the risks of war...Hence, religious passion is thus sometimes expressed in this manner. But it is, in fact, 'passion' - it concerns mainly a fact which it would be easy to demonstrate does not correspond to the fundamental message of the religion. This disjuncture is obvious, for Christianity. In Islam, on the contrary, jihad is a religious obligation. It forms part of the duties that the believer must fulfil; it is Islam's NORMAL path to expansion. And this is found repeatedly, dozens of times in the Koran. Therefore, the believer is not denying the religious message. Quite the reverse, jihad is the way he best obeys it...Since the jihad is not solely an external war, it can break out within the Muslim world itself - and wars among Muslims have been numerous, but always with the same features.

Hence, the second important specific characteristic is that the jihad is an institution and not an event, that is to say it is part of the normal functioning of the Muslim world....It is most essential to grasp that the jihad is an institution in itself...an organic piece of Muslim society...I have greatly stressed the characteristics of this war, because there is so much talk nowadays of the tolerance and fundamental pacifism of Islam that it is necessary to recall its nature, which is fundamentally warlike!" (from his preface to Bat Ye'or, "The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude", published in France in 1991, in English in 1996).

Ellul was a trained sociologist; he had read the Koran, he had close contact with distinguished French scholars of Islam, and he had taken part in many interfaith meetings and dialogues. I think it would be most unwise to dismiss his solemn warning as to the distinctive centrality of war in Islam.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at March 11, 2007 11:20 PM

tardmasher said

It seems like a number of the people on this side have a giant stiffy over the idea of a massive all-out war with the entire Muslim world.

Massive stiffy? Do I know you? Anyways, there is a difference between advocating for starting a massive all-out war with the entire Muslim world, and pointing out the necessity of preparing for the attack that they (or, if you prefer, the CIA and Mossad actors pretending to be them during the filming of the propoganda) loudly proclaim they will be making.

...do you people have even the slightest familiarity with the realm of reality...you warmongers...you are just a bunch of fat, overpaid armchair warriors who have no authority to even speak on the matter. pathetic.

You seem to have a lot of underlying resentment and an issue with anger management.

Posted by: special_guest at March 11, 2007 11:20 PM

"Nearly every "terror threat" that has been exposed has either turned out to be completely bogus or much less threatening than originally claimed."

I recommend you visit this site:

(Link: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks )

Naveed Afzal Haq
Jul 28,’06
Seattle, WA
30, Pakistan-born Nat. US Cit. his father, Mian A. Haq, was a founding member of the Islamic Centre of Tri-Cities in Richland
Attack
Invasion Shooting. Jewish Federation, six women shot, 1 pregnant, 1 dead.
Arrested. $50M USD bail set

Michael Julius Ford
Jun 25,’06
Denver, CO
Black Muslim Convert
Attack
Safeway warehouse employee run amuck, set fire to warehouse, hunted fellow employees, 1 killed 4 injured including a responding police officer.

Mujtaba Rabbani Jabbar
Jun 16,’06
Baltimore, MD
24, Loyola Graduate in Biology in 2005, million-dollar family home
Attack
Shooting in Loews theatre in Owings Mills a heavily jewish neighborhood. Killed Paul Schrum, Jewish, 62, shot 3 times in the chest at close range.

Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar
Mar 3,’06
Chapel Hill, NC
22, Iran-born Nat US Cit, UNC Chapel hill BS Psych, expired student visa, formal declaration of jihad
Attack
UNC campus, rented SUV attack, plowed vehicle through crowded campus quad, struck nine, 6 injured, no fatalities

Ali R. Warrayat
Dec 18,’05
Mesa, AZ
Jordan-born Nat. US Cit, toting Quran and Palestinian flag during his attack
Attack
crashed car into Home Depot, built bonfire. $1 million in damage, no fatalities

Joel Hinrichs
Oct 1,’05
Tulsa, OK
OU student, troubled loner, muslim roommat, some association with a campus-adjacent mosque that has been a prior subject of investigations
Bomb Attack
Refused entry to campus stadium during OU-Kansas football game. Witnesses state there was an unannounced unusual heightening of stadium security that day. Ended up on bench by Kansas team buses, detonating himself. TTAP & shrapnel bomb. No other casualties

Ahmed Omar Abu Ali
Feb 2,’05
Falls Church, VA
23, Saudi descent, US born. Jihad U - Islamic Saudi Academy high school in Alexandria, VA
Assassin ation plot
Presidential Assassination plot

Mustafa Mohammed
Jan 9,’05
Alexandria, CA
30, Somali Immigrant
Attack
janitor at retirement home, attacked bedridden elderly, staff and visitor. Brutally beat and slashed residnets before the staff and visitor subdued him

Ryan Anderson
Feb 12, ‘04
Fort Lewis, WA
26, WSU Grad degree in Mil Hist and ME studies, Natl Guard M-1 tanker, convert to Islam in 99
Treason in Uniform
Busted by private citizen on jihadi web boards trying to give away information on the weaknesses of US armor

Mohammed Ali Alayed
Aug 6,’03
Houston, TX
23, Saudi student living on $60,000/yr 'stipend' from his family, but not attending classes. Violation of student visa.
Attack
Ariel Sellouk, moroccan-jewish Houston Community Collegel Student had his throat cut by a long-time arab muslim friend who had become radicalized. Possible tie to the group Takfir Wal Hijra

Biswanath Halder
May 1,’03
Cleveland, OH
India-born Muslim Nat. US Cit
Attack
opened fire within Case Western University, 1 dead, 2 wounded.

Sami Omar Al-Hussayen
Feb 26,’03
Moscow, ID
Saudi nat, student visa, CompSci grad student at Univ of Idaho, 33yrs old, wife and children fled to Saudi during his trial.
E-Jihad and poss attack plot
Univ CompSci e-jihadi, indicted on visa and immigration violation. At time of arrest was trying to have his campus office relocated to a room behind a security access door in teh campus BioRadioactives Lab
Plead down to immigration charge and deported.

John Allen Mohammed
Oct 24,’02 (arrest)
Wash DC and tri-state area
42, born John Allen Williams, Convert to Nation of Islam
Attack - Beltway Sniper Shootings
interstate killing spree, across the nation and around Washington DC. Random shootings that killed
Sentenced to death in VA in March '04. Other trials continue.

Lee Boyd Malvo
Oct 24,’02 (arrest)
Wash DC and tri-state area
Born in Jamaica in '85, muslim mother, illegal immigrant to USA, psuedo-son of John Allen Mohammed
Attack - Beltway Sniper Shootings
interstate killing spree, across the nation and around Washington DC. Random shootings that killed
Capital trials proceed. Already sentenced to life in one state.

Hesham Mohamed Hadayet
Jul 4,’02
Los Angeles, CA
Egyptian immigrant, 41 at time of attack, limosine driver
Attack
LAX Shooting at El-Al counter. 2 dead, 2 wounded

Patrick Gott
May 23, ‘02
new Orleans, LA
Convert? Former carpenter and Marine'fired because people made fun of turban
Attack
Shotgun attack in New Orleans airport terminal. Insulted, went out to car, came back with shotgun and his Koran. Fired one and tackled, 2 wounded.

John Walker Lindh
Nov 25,’01
Afghanistan
20 at time of capture, converted at age 16, traveled in Yemen and other Jihadi centers, used name Suleyman al-Faris, now goes by Hamza Walker Lindh
Jihadist Training, Fighting US Forces
Captured on the battlefield in Afghanistan, while with the taliban
Plead to amended charge of fighting with the Taliban and taking up arms against the United States, 20yr sentence and gag order and droipping of counter charges of abuse, to remove the death penalty.

Ahmed Ressam
Dec 14,’99
Port Angeles, WA
Algerian. Entered Canada with a forged French passport in '94. Applied for Asylum, skipped hearing, got another false passport, travelled to Afghanistan in '98 for jihadi training
Attack Plot
Millenium Bomber, intended explosive attack on LAX
Sentenced to 22yrs plus 5yrs supervision, on July 27, 2005

Rashid Baz
Mar 1,’94
Brooklyn, NY
Lebanese natl
Attack
Opened fire on a van containing members of the Lubavitch Hassids, on the Brooklyn Bridge, 1 killed unk wounded
Feb 26, 93
NYC, NY

Attack
1st World Trade Center Bombing

Attack
2nd World Trade Center Atrocity

Attack
Pentagon Atrocity

Attack
Flight 93 Atrocity in Pennsylvania

Omeed Aziz Popal
August 29, 2006
Fremont, California
Muslim Afghani immigrant
29 year-old at time of attack
Killed Stephan Jay Wilson, injured 14 0thers

Charged with 1 count of murder, 18 counts of attempted murder including a 19th count involving charges of felony assault upon a police officer after Popal struck the officer’s cruiser.

After killing Wilson just blocks from Popal’s home in Fremont, suspect drove to San Francisco and sped through city streets mowing people down at random.

Two people struck in front of the Jewish Community Center of San Francisco on California Street, a few blocks from where the rampage ended.

Suspect’s family claims he is “mentally ill” but his comments, as recorded in police reports filed by three officers who spoke with Popal, suggest a level of planning that may belie claims of mental illness, authorities say.

Statements to police officers included:

"I planned to kill those people I ran over last night -- they needed to be killed,''

-------------------- END OF LIST --------------------

If you don't get a sense of peril from just the above, not to mention the vast list at the link I provided, there's not much use in discussing anything with you. I'll leave that to others.

Posted by: Zenster at March 11, 2007 11:27 PM

special_guest
Wow, you are really impressing the heck out of me with your 9th grade level(honors though, maybe) knowledge of the rules of rhetoric, latin terms and all. Ah yes, I see you've also utilized the old "conspiracy theory" accusation, as if the very utterance of the term automatically debunks any claims the accused "conspiracy theorist" may make, evidence be damned. How is being honest about my feelings regarding religions ad hominem? There is plenty to suggest that none of these faiths have universally been "religions of peace." Nice attempt at showing your obviously rusty skills, but I really don't see the point in your post. It is just as foolish to believe that nothing is a conspiracy than to believe that everything is a conspiracy.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662&page=1 -No the government would never attack it's own citizens, or lie to us.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/01/29/inv.terror.probe/ Why did he do that?

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/
- A list of "conspiracy theorists" who question the official account of 9/11. Includes Reagan's former undersecretaries of Defense and Treasury as well as HUD secretary, former head of the Star Wars program, and numerous former high level US, and foreign, military and intelligence officials, esteemed scientists and professors and many others from all sides of the political spectrum. Amazingly, a large number come from the right, including Dr. Ron Paul, who would be our next President if we were actually a government by for and of the people.

Posted by: tardsmasher at March 11, 2007 11:45 PM

Hello,

I've been lurking for awhile now but decided to register an account after reading this thread. So hello to everyone.

"Secondly, where are you stationed ... it is clear that you are just a bunch of fat, overpaid armchair warriors who have no authority to even speak on the matter."

Personally, I enlisted on 3 Sept 01 in the US Army. I've spent two years in Iraq with the 3rd Infantry in 2003 and 3rd ACR in 2005. I've worked in conjunction with conventional infantry and cavalry units as well as special operations forces (TF 121, 10th SFG, etc.) I've been in the streets with these men and have been lucky enough to kill them. So maybe I meet your standards for issuance of an opinion.

"...we can't even get Iraq under control and you think we have the ability to fight a huge regional conflict in the Middle East? With what money and what men?"

I know you have no practical knowledge of what happens in Iraq so I'll be nicer to you than you've been to your responders. The rules of engagement in Iraq effectively tie our hands. Muj firing at us must be taken prisoner if they show any sign of surrender. Which means they can light our patrols up until their weapons are empty, throw them on the ground and know with absolute certainty we will arrest them. They'll be taken to the nearest prison and most likely released within 48 hours. My platoon had personally captured a man named Raad 3 seperate times in 2 months as a trigger man for IED's. He was released 3 times and left our area. This happens everywhere.

As far as your indictment of our military capability goes, you can thank our elected officials for forcing our warriors to show such restraint with these cowards. It's commonly accepted that under no circumstances will you allow yourself to be captured in a firefight. SOP is to fight until you're out of rounds and if need be grab your bayonet and go out on your feet. The alternative is to be caught, sold to Al-Qaeda and executed on Al-Jazeera.

You shouldn't think for a second that the American military isn't capable of prosecuting an unlimited conflicted with multiple countries across that part of the world.

"It seems like a number of the people on this side have a giant stiffy over the idea of a massive all-out war with the entire Muslim world."

I don't think I've really seen anyone pushing for that war, people here just seem to realize it's coming. And you'll find that in Army units too, the writing is on the wall. We're diligently training for the next war. I fully expect to spend the next 15 years of my career involved in some sort of conflict and honestly don't expect that I'll make it to 40.

What a wonderful world.

Posted by: airborne_scout at March 11, 2007 11:51 PM

Welcome airborne_scout!

Posted by: champ at March 11, 2007 11:55 PM

tardsmasher wrote: "The United States cannot afford and does not have the authority to run around the world freeing everyone from oppressive ideologies by military force."

That, at least, is something we can agree on.

My clearly stated proposal was not to attempt "freedom crusades" at all, but rather to isolate (quarantine) the Islamic world to prevent it from importing their oppressive ideologies here--which is their clear intent. It is up to the Muslims themselves to reform their "religion" and their societies.

In the meantime, we need to accept that Islam is hostile to everything we hold dear, means us real harm, and intends for us to lose--here in our own world--all of our freedoms to their fascist constructs.

We must use our military as frequently as necessary only to disarm them when they threaten--but we must not linger (as in Iraq) for the purpose of "nation building" in the Islamic world--it is a waste of time and treasure. But should they attack us, as they so clearly did on 9/11 (your conspiratorial denials are just loony--few events in all of history are as completely understood as to who the perpetrators were), they must pay a price. They must come to understand that clinging to their ideology means losing--the opposite of what the doctrine says.

We on the outside of that defensive quarantine must use our freedom to frankly and openly speak out against these Islamic doctrines that are so clearly incompatible with civilization in any form. By doing so, we put pressure on the Muslim world, and thereby give the Muslims inside their only chance to formulate a new path some day. This is the same idea as forcing an alcoholic to admit he has a problem. Until he does, there is no hope of recovery.

Islam is intolerant of, and itends to destroy, all "other" religions--Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduisn, Zoroastrianism, etc. From your comments, that goal appears to something you have in common with them. Assuming you are atheistic, be sure to understand what Islam has in mind for you--death or forced conversion. Should they gain power here some day, or come to have power over you in the course of your worldly travels, those would be your only two choices.

One more thing you need to understand. A Christian, for instance, when he decides to become more pious and closer to God, emulates the example of Jesus. That decision produces decent behaviors we often take for granted without giving proper credit to their origin: application of the Golden Rule (do unto others as you would have them do unto you), turn the other cheek, love thy neighbor, etc. When a Muslim decides to become more pious and closer to Allah, he emulates the example of Mohammed. Mohammed's life story includes all the violent and vengeful behaviors we see in Iraq every day--murder, rape, torture, decapitation of prisoners, assassinations, etc. In short, "slay and be slain" for Allah.

Posted by: Stendec at March 12, 2007 12:00 AM

tardsmasher --

You're right, receiving Jesus Christ as Lord IS a matter of faith, which is what makes having a conversation about the Bible a challenge because of the faith barrier. Which would include any discussions about the Old Testament, as it also requires faith to believe in why God called for the destruction of certain people groups.

One 'group' comes to mind, and that were the Baal or Malech worshippers. God called for their destruction because they were sacrificing their own children.

And you are also right about some of the terrible things that Christians have done in the past in the name of God, but it's only because they were not adhering to the teachings of Jesus Christ.

Stendec made some excellent points, and one in particular stands out to me. When a Christian becomes more radical for Jesus Christ, he becomes more loving; but when a Muslim becomes more radical for Islam he becomes more like Muhammad; more committed to imposing sharia law wherever he can, by using whatever means he can.

Do you mind my asking what you believe? Or are you agnostic/atheist?

Posted by: champ at March 12, 2007 12:45 AM

tardmasher said

...your 9th grade level...your obviously rusty skills...

If you can't play nicely with the other children, no-one will want to play with you.

as if the very utterance of the term automatically debunks any claims the accused "conspiracy theorist" may make

Actually, it wasn't the very utterance, it was the very utter lack of any supporting evidence. Anyone can say "The Joooooz did it", or the Trilateral Commission, or the Skull and Crossbones, or whomever, but the hard part is backing it up.

And BTW, it would take alot of evidence to convince me that the thousands of Islamic attacks that occur every year are caused by infidels and not by Muslims.

But, tell you what. If you aren't a Muslim, why don't you take a flight to Mecca, drive to the Ka'aba, and then stand outside and loudly proclaim that you are not a Muslim. See if you can somehow find the proof that it is CIA and Mossad agents swarming you. Before the beheading, try to sneak the message into the videotape, I'll be watching for the signal.

Posted by: special_guest at March 12, 2007 12:55 AM

Summary of tardsmasher--

- 9/11 conspiracy theorist
- something about Ron Paul
- lots of tu quoque

That'll be all for that. There are thousands of other sites where you can air any conspiracy theory of your choice, but not here.

I have to admit, I'm a little curious how the US, allegedly responsible for 9/11, would factor into 3/11 in Spain, 7/7 in the UK, Indonesian jihadists' activity in Aceh, East Timor, Sulawesi, and elsewhere, the anti-Buddhist violence in Thailand, the dispute between Pakistan and India over Kashmir, the train bombings in India last July, rocket attacks on Israel...

Were they all bombing themselves, too, or was the US government in on that?

But my amused curiosity is tempered by the fact that Tardsmasher has taken up quite enough space in this thread.

Posted by: MarisolJW at March 12, 2007 12:58 AM

airborne_scout said

Personally, I enlisted on 3 Sept 01 in the US Army.

Pretty d*** good timing. Did you know something we didn't?

So maybe I meet your standards for issuance of an opinion.

I can't speak for the tardmasher, but you meet my standards for a great big "thank you" for serving your country.

I don't think I've really seen anyone pushing for that war, people here just seem to realize it's coming. And you'll find that in Army units too, the writing is on the wall. We're diligently training for the next war.

That is the best news I've read for a long time. It's good to hear that somewhere, someone realizes what is actually going on, and is preparing.

I fully expect to spend the next 15 years of my career involved in some sort of conflict and honestly don't expect that I'll make it to 40.

I hope you're wrong about that. I bet you will.

Posted by: special_guest at March 12, 2007 1:16 AM

It's interesting to see that anyone questioning/criticizing Islam would be labeled "phobic" or "hatemongering retards", yet atheists like Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Betrand Russell who do the same with Christianity somehow manage to escape the same labels. As a Christian myself, I'm reading Sam Harris' material....he questions Christianity the same way JW questions Islam and wishes all religion could be eradicated (Harris did criticize Islam a great deal in "The End of Faith"). But I don't consider him "phobic" or "hatemongering" in any way because of that. I think he writes really well and makes good arguments, even if they go against what I believe. I also have arguments about his arguments and belief system, too, which I won't go into here for wont of space and time. But whenever I do, I hope that I wouldn't be labeled a "hatemongering retard" because I challenge or criticize atheism.

Posted by: yadayada at March 12, 2007 2:17 AM

"Taleban say faith will win on the battlefield" (*-

Did they not run away to their rat holes during the start of the war in IRAQ and Afghanstan? I didn't see their faith helped in any manner what so ever then.

Islam is for nitwits.

STOP MUSLIM IMMIGATION NOW.

Posted by: MusHuntCowboy at March 12, 2007 5:11 AM

Islamic doctrine says no law is to be respected except Islamic law. Our Constitution should be amended to respect this clearly stated principle, and declare that Islam is considered a self-declared and perpetual threat the core doctrines of the Constitution itself, and is not to be considered a "religion" within our states and territories. Islam should not be afforded the usual protections, based on our own religious tolerance, from any of our laws.

Islamic doctrine says every Muslim's loyalty lies only with the Umma, and not to any state or ruler, and that they may lie about this if it advances the spread of their ideology. We should respect these clearly stated principles and ban Muslims from any public office, especially the security and military services, since their oaths of office would clearly be utterly worthess.

And so on.

So much of the criticism for such proposed defensive measures is based on complaints that we should "show respect" for other cultures and civilizations. By buying into the Muslims' self-aggrandizing lies and obfuscations, we are not showing any respect at all. We are merely reinforcing their ideological viewpoint. They see they are, as promised by their Koran, successfully fooling us and dominating us, thereby "proving" that they have the backing of their globe coveting Allah.

No. We show proper respect for Islam by fighting this ideology, loudly, vigorously, and relentlessly.

Posted by: Stendec

Stendec - if you live in the United States have you sent this reasoning to your representatives?

Do you mind if I do in case you havent'? ( as well as to the ACLU and other enablers )

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at March 12, 2007 11:32 AM

I have to admit, I'm a little curious how the US, allegedly responsible for 9/11, would factor into 3/11 in Spain, 7/7 in the UK, Indonesian jihadists' activity in Aceh, East Timor, Sulawesi, and elsewhere, the anti-Buddhist violence in Thailand, the dispute between Pakistan and India over Kashmir, the train bombings in India last July, rocket attacks on Israel...

Were they all bombing themselves, too, or was the US government in on that?

Posted by MarisolJW

Excellent point

Posted by: The Goobs at March 12, 2007 1:21 PM

Tardsmasher,

I thought liberals were tolerant - guess tolerance is only for those who agree with them.

Personally, I do not see our government as being squeaky clean. NEITHER party is worth spit at the moment. I hope to see SOMEONE that will do something for the average American worker....but I'm not holding my breath. It's corporate america that funds politicians campaigns.

Regardless, of whatever feeling peope have about this adminstration or whatever their political leanings - people need to get it through their heads that Islam is bad news.

Our media (also corporate owned) can hardly be counted on to give us the full truth, especially if it doesn't benefit them. Presenting links to lefty-media stories is less than convincing.

OT scriptures show us that God gave mankind many opportunities to live right, but selfish people chose to worship idols instead. (a historical feature of allah the idol moon god and islam, which is a false religion)

So GOD put armies together to eliminate the idol worshippers who were evil and would not submit to God. IF only these armies had obeyed and completed the job! The idol worshipping, child sacrificing bunch that were spared in the OT are the same bunch tieing bomb belts around their kids and spreading terrorism in the world today.

When you appease idol worshippers, you suffer the consequences.

Posted by: The Goobs at March 12, 2007 1:41 PM

A_Plague_on_Both_Houses,

Yes, I live in the United States. And, I have written letters and emails to my representatives from time to time on this subject, though not lately.

Certainly, if anything I have written here is useful to you toward such a purpose, feel free to adapt it to your needs. And thanks for asking.

Posted by: Stendec at March 12, 2007 2:05 PM

re: tardsmasher

His appearance on this site coupled with his endorsement of Dr. Ron Paul clarifies his position a bit. I believe he announced his candidacy for President, yesterday.

Dr. Paul is a libertarian, supporting limited government intervention, the type of "radical" politician that all those who truly believe our government in the US is over-extending it's influence at home and abroad, and is generally corrupt.

As Marisol pointed out, he can express conspiracy theories elsewhere, just not here, for he added nothing to the discussion of Islam and merely attempted to bring the thread "off-topic". That being said, his position on Islam is one of complete ignorance to the historical ideology of Islam, that is before the "big bad wolves" of self-serving American politicians arrived at the scene.

His name-calling didn't help his defense of Islam either, but that was not his intention anyway. It was merely a Dr. Ron Paul "coming out party" for him.

Posted by: awake at March 12, 2007 2:30 PM

airborne_scout :

Welcome to Jihad Watch; a huge THANK YOU for your message, as well as your service to your country; and best of luck to you over there.

Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at March 12, 2007 3:07 PM

His name-calling didn't help his defense of Islam either, but that was not his intention anyway. It was merely a Dr. Ron Paul "coming out party" for him.

Posted by: awake

Someone with a name like turdsmasher shouldn't be calling anyone names! ha ha ha

Posted by: The Goobs at March 12, 2007 8:05 PM