10,000 jihad attacks. Congratulations to the "religion of peace" for bringing us so much of it in so short a time. Nobody does it better than they do.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 15, 2007 10:29 AM

10,000 and most of the world looks the other way. Maybe 20,000 will get their attention, but I doubt it...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 15, 2007 10:38 AM

These 10,000 attacks have "only" killed 60,000 people. Knowing our Islamaniac fiends they won't be happy until they kill a lot more than that in just one attack. They're like Avis-always trying harder. If they succeed maybe THAT will get someone's attention.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at November 15, 2007 11:03 AM

Actually, 10,000 doesn't sound so bad. Assuming one terrorist per attack, that's only one terrorist in about 130,000 Muslims. Assuming five terrorists per attack that's still only 5 in 130,000. I wouldn't be surprised if America produced more murderers and rapists than that. The real problems are immigration, ideology and Islamic law.

Posted by: sceptico at November 15, 2007 12:44 PM

Oh..yeah...well how about all those Christian attacks...I can't remember them right off..but let me think..wait..I'm still thinkin...oh yeah, the crusades..remember them..those mean Templars..yeah what about those attacks...and what about Tim McVeigh..oh he wasn't a christian.. but he wasn't muslim either...man they just keep coming...

Posted by: TheOmegaMan at November 15, 2007 12:50 PM

Yes, I knew this hideous milestone was coming. The beleaguered Religion of Peace site keeps a tally:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

In addition, I'm sure thare are many more Islamic terror attacks that are not recognized as such. This is especially likely as state agencies all over the civilized world are--insanely--at pains to downplay the terror threat. Even cases where the perpetrator overtly claims the jihad ideology as the motivating force are often identified as random acts of crime by mentally disturbed persons.

sceptico wrote:

Actually, 10,000 doesn't sound so bad.
....

I'm sorry, sceptico. I can't help but think you understand little about the nature of risk, and even less about the nature of evil. During WWII, there were still people dying in car accidents and even from falls off ladders. Yet, no rational person at the time would have identified anything other than the Axis as the main threat to the world.

Terrorist attacks are not static. They are increasing, driven by the same vicious ideology. Terrorists have victimized people all over the world--The US, Britain, Spain, France, the Netherlands, Israel, the Phillipines, Thailand, India, Bali, and all over the "Muslim world".

I don't know how you can possibly think that doesn't "sound so bad".

Posted by: gravenimage at November 15, 2007 1:31 PM

10,000 may not seem like a huge number of attacks to some of the readers, but it doesn't have to. Violent attacks are just one part of the Islamist strategy. Attacks like these force politicians to accomodate Muslims and consider their demands - these attacks allow Islamic law and culture to advance, which is ultimately the real goal and the way Western civilization will fall. The third prong is demography - Muslims tend to have far more children than natives of Europe or the US.

http://grizzlymountain.blogspot.com/

Posted by: GrizzlyMountain at November 15, 2007 3:05 PM

Assuming that this statistic is true (what exactly is an 'Islamic Terrorist'? The term is in itself an oxymoron- if somebody truly followed the teachings of Islam then they would not be terrorists), then the alleged '60,000' killed are only a small proportion of the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis and thousands of Afghanis who have been sent to their deaths by America and its allies in the same period of time.

Posted by: Logic at November 15, 2007 3:25 PM

The term is in itself an oxymoron - if somebody truly followed the teachings of Islam...

Me, I like the term Moslem activists, cuz all the so-called "Islamic terrorists" are doing is acting on Islam, the Koran specifically.

* 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 ** 33:21 *

There is no radical Islam; there is only Islam, which is itself radical.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at November 15, 2007 4:27 PM

Logic,

Assuming that you speak in good faith, what, then, is the essence of Islam that mandates true peaceful coexistence, not perpetual cosmic war, whether active or dormant? What makes it essentially just, justice (as the word is universally understood and applied) being the basis of true peace? What makes it true, that it should inspire the trust of all men (and Women), believer or infidel?

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 4:46 PM

Logic,

Assuming that you speak in good faith, what, then, is the essence of Islam that mandates true peaceful coexistence, not perpetual cosmic war, whether active or dormant? What makes it essentially just, justice (as the word is universally understood and applied) being the basis of true peace? What makes it true, that it should inspire the trust of all men (and Women), believer or infidel?

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 4:59 PM

We have no reason to trust a Saudi-trained Wahabi cleric, or any Salafist, for that matter; and little reason to trust a Pakistani or Egyptian cleric, either, about these questions, though they claim to speak authoritatively for Islam. In fact, hardly any reason to think Islam has adapted to questions arising within the last 600 to 1000 years.

Clemenceau, as I understand, said that war is too important to be left to the generals. By analogy, then perhaps Islam is too important to be left to the imams. What good fruits have their labors brought forth? Look around us.

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 5:10 PM

Logic (more accurately Illogic): The blame for virtually all deaths in Iraq lies at the feet of the Islamic terrorists who have sawed off heads, blown themselves up in public places, have gone out of their way to shield themselves with civilians and who, in general, want to stop true freedom from coming to a region which has never seen it. The heroes are the American soldiers who are trying to accomplish this difficult task of liberating Iraqis from both secular and spiritual totalitarain ideologies. Ditto for Afghanistan, where, by the way, precisely because of the Americans and its allies, millions of women no longer live in a kind of slavery as they did under the Taliban. I don't know if the Americans will succeed in Iraq and Afghanistan, but I do know their goal is a noble one. Shame on you for your morally relativistic thinking here. Deep shame.

And the term "Islamic terrorist" is by no means an oxymoron. It very accurately describes someone who invokes the teacings of Islam to perpetrate heinous deeds. The only debatable issue is whether those Islamic teachings are being correctly interpreted by the terrorist. There is a powerful amount of evidence out there that many of Islam's tenets can easily be understood to allow for actions that non-Muslims could only describe as "terrorism." Robert Spencer himself has gone to great lengths to demonstrate that many Koranic passages and sundry other Islamic teachings have such plain and straightforward meanings, that the only wonder are those, both Muslims and apologists for Muslims, who say, in effect, that words don't mean what they clearly do. For instance, the passage from the Koran, "persecution (of Islam) is worse than slaughter.......fight them until there is persecution no more and all religion is with Allah." "Persecution" here has been interpreted by Muslims through the centuries and down to the present day as anything that hinders the spread of Islam or in any way casts aspersions on it (hence all the Muslim loons worldwide who went apeshit about the Danish cartoonists last year). And "slaughter?" Just what kissy-face, huggy bear interpretation would you give to the Koranic encouragement to "slaughter" those who are not with Allah?

Your moniker of "Logic" is, on your part, an unintended irony. My congratulations.

Posted by: Wellington at November 15, 2007 6:10 PM

"The term is in itself an oxymoron- if somebody truly followed the teachings of Islam then they would not be terrorists), then the alleged '60,000' killed are only a small proportion of the hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis and thousands of Afghanis who have been sent to their deaths by America and its allies in the same period of time."
(Posted by Logic.)

Logic: From what source did you obtain your fuzzy statistics ("hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis and thousands of Afghanis sent to their deaths by America and its allies in the same period of time")? Do those statistics include everyone killed by Islamic suicide bombers and Islamic death squads, Shia or Sunni?

As long as you are talking moral equivalence, does it even matter to you that the allies, with a very few well-publicized exceptions, have restrained how they use their superior fire-power? If the allies had the same mind-set as the Islamic jihadists, they would have been capable of inflicting millions of casualties by now.

10,000 terrorist attacks might not seem like much to you, "Logic", but these episodes can have a multiplier effect. The imposition of terror was how Islam first managed to spread so rapidly and to control areas where Muslims were in fact a minority, but where millions of people inadequately organized and motivated as a group for opposition to the Islamic threat were eager to accommodate this rapidly expanding religion in order to buy some temporary peace.

10,000 terrorist attacks also have a multiplier effect by chilling the exercise of rights which, if left unexercised, lead to domination by the jihadists. If even a small number of such attacks involve the assassinations (or even threats of assassinations) against politicians, movie-makers, authors, cartoonists or other persons trying to exercise free speech rights by raising questions about the core teachings of Islam, the example of Mohammed, Muslim immigration, and the legal coddling of jihadists, those few terrorist attacks influence millions of others to hold their silence. By successfully chilling the free exercise of speech, jihadists begin their domination of the dhimmi and give themselves an advantage in their campaign of cajoling government to ignore and enable their deadly agenda.

These sorts of attacks can even induce certain individuals to lose their capacity for logic and common sense.

Posted by: Karl2 at November 15, 2007 6:21 PM

Ten thousand is a large number. But how many sorties have been flown over neighborhoods in Islamic lands? how many bombs have been dropped on innocent civilians, how many rocket attacks have destroyed not only buildings but lives?

Ten thousand so called and alleged terror attacks in six years from one side of the playing field, but there has been non-stop terror from the western powers waged upon these people in the name of what? freedom and democracy?

say what you like about Islam, Muslims and terror, we spend well over $12,000,000 a month on our campaign against them...not including a single penny from any of the devout allied countries...that is an awfull lot of money spent to kill, destroy and export our ideology of our interpretation of "freedom" and "democracy".

and those who are sincere in thinking we are doing this for some greater good, how would you like death and destruction dropped from miles above your head in every major city in every state across this great country; all so that someone else's idea of democracy and 'freedom' can be established in our capitols? If we do not like it for ourselves, why do we do this to others?

Say it is because we would rather fight the fanatics there in their land rather than here in our back yard. The arguement is false logic, this is like going out to the woods and kicking a wasps nest saying I would rather kick it in the woods than inside my house. We started the war in afghanistan, not the taliban. We started the war in Iraq, not Islamic militants. We are forcing a war in Iran, not the Irani people.

Yes, we were attacked. Yes, 3,000 of our people were killed in a single day...But how many buildings and neighborhoods, how many thousands of innocent lives have we destroyed and terrorised in the name of justice? In the name of freedom? in the name of fighting terror.

Say what you will, I understand the human need to justify their wrongs and to seek balance between their percieved 'beliefs' and the reality of what is happening...I understand that people need to feel as though what is happening is not only o.k. but good...I understand that, yet say what you will...we are in the wrong and ten thousand terror attacks wreaked by us upon others is a number that has long been exceeded in the early years of this so called war.

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 7:20 PM

I do believ I missed three zeroes in that number...it is estimated at over $80,000,000,000 a years to do the actions we choose as a nation to do.

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 7:27 PM

Bill: Whoa, where do I begin? You're engaging in moral equivalency thinking to such a degree that I'm stunned. The radicals in the Islamic world declared war on the West as far back as 1979 when that horrible excuse for a human being, the Ayatollah Khomeini, replaced the Shah in Iran, due in large part to the vacillation by just about the weakest, most foolish President we've ever had in the Oval Office. Even before Khomeini launched a spiritual tyranny over his fellow Persians, which continues to this day, Ibn Qutb in Egypt had outlined what pure Islam had to do to make the world all one with Allah.

War was declared on us by the most self-pitying, excuse-making religion in world history. We have responded. Our response includes the attempt to bring democracy to the Islamic world while at the same time killing those Muslims who seek domination of the earth through the application of sharia worldwide by way of the methhodology of jihad. And you fault the West? You fault America? You might as well blame America for the killing of German women and children during WWII when the only way to end the menace which was Nazi Germany was to devastate the Teutonic heartland and then build from the ground up. You seem completely devoid of the realization that civilization must not only be decent and sophisticated, but tough and muscular as well. That entails, quite sadly from time to time, engaging in warfare against the forces of anti-civilization to such an extent that you temporarily have to stoop down to their level to make the world a better place. Winston Churchill understood this tragic reality fully, completely. You are as vacant here, as devoid of understanding of this sad way of the world, as one could be. You, in short, are deeply confused, but I have no doubt you pride yourself at times on being the model of sapience. Time to rethink things. But thank you for posting one of the most foolish statements at JW I have read to date. It functions as a lesson to all who have some understanding of how the world works that fools abound and they are, unfortunately, legion in number.

Posted by: Wellington at November 15, 2007 8:55 PM

Here's some facts that Bill and "Logic" might want to peruse:
from www.threligionofpeace.com

The Real 2006
'Iraq Body Count'
16,791 Iraqi civilians killed last year by ISLAMIC Terrorists

225*
Iraqi civilians killed collaterally in incidents involving Americans
(and Islamic Terrorists)

Iraqis aren't dying from war. They are being murdered by Islamic terrorists.

*Source: IraqBodyCount.net (includes civilians caught in crossfire who may have been killed by the terrorists, and terrorists who may have been counted as civilians)

"Islam - murdering hundreds of thousands in the name of allah since 623 A.D." (my quote)

Also www.islamundressed.com. Read it all.

Posted by: j_not_a at November 15, 2007 9:20 PM

If everything is Allahs will in Islam. then Human choise has no say in any matter.

That being the case. Then any body, Muslim or otherwise, Sees someone with a new Zoot Suit on come Waltz into the nearest Market, Vaporising everyone arround. What's the problem, it's Allahs will after all.Be happy Allah came calling. Allah didn't tell anyone to grab the guy and crack his head open. What was anyone to do? Let Allah worry about those things.

Moderate = those Allah hasn't come calling for-yet.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at November 15, 2007 9:55 PM

Bill says: "say what you like about Islam, Muslims and terror, we spend well over $12,000,000 a month on our campaign against them...not including a single penny from any of the devout allied countries"

I suggest you do a little research before spouting your mouth off about things you know next to nothing about.

Boots on the Ground
Canadian Military Operations in Afghanistan
and UN Peacekeeping Missions
By Bill Robinson,
Associate Researcher, Polaris Institute
May 17, 2006
MAIN POINTS:
• Canada has spent $4.146 billion on military operations in or related to Afghanistan
since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the United States.
• Afghanistan and related operations account for 68 per cent of the $6.132 billion spent
on international missions between the fall of 2001 and the end of March 2006.
• Canada currently contributes approximately 2,300 troops are stationed in Afghanistan.
• Once a top-10 contributor, Canada now ranks 50th out of 95 countries currently
contributing military personnel to UN missions.
More than 70 Canadian soliders have died in the war in Afghanistan. (my words)

Institut POLARIS Institute
Canadian Address: 180 Metcalfe Street, Suite 500, Ottawa, ON K2P 1P5
U.S. Address: 231 Elm Avenue, Mill Valley, CA 94941
Tel: (613) 237-1717 Fax: (613) 237-3359
e-mail: polaris@polarisinstitute.org
www.polarisinstitute.org

Posted by: j_not_a at November 15, 2007 10:15 PM

First I will deal with what was said by wellington.
I said what i said and I stand by it. Your responce is simply more of the hollow, thoughtless excuse for mass killings of innocent people, in order to justify our invasion of soveriegn nations that had nothing to do with a criminal terrorist attack on our nation. Terror was defined by our president and our government as exactly what we are doing, useing and threatening the use of force on others in order to change their political or religiouse ideologies.

As for germany, no, I say that we were just in our war against them then. Unfortunately I feel as though we are following not in our proud american footsteps during that period but we instead are acting just as the germans did. In fact we (and by 'we' I mean specifically those who defend our actions) are takeing a page directly out of Goebbels book. He wrote, "In provoking this war, world Jewry has completely miscalculated the forces at it's disposal and is now experiencing a gradual process of annihilation which it intended us to suffer and would inflict on us without any qualms if it had the power to do so." (Das reich 16, Nov. 1941)

If one substitues Islam and muslims for the jews and jewry you will find the same non-sense being stated by 'Patriots'in this country today! So, no, our fight against germany was just, but now we are following in their footsteps.

However, in that war we have a history of injustice and terror that was never befor seen and I pray will not be seen again,
80,000 people killed in a single day followed by another 40,000 in a single day afterwards. 95,000 people injured by our attacks on heavily populated, civilian areas. We intentional targeted two major cities to cause fear of our might and ability, not political, nor military targets but civilian targets in order to cause greater fear.

Again, an immeasurable act of terror.

As for my statements being foolish, I stand upon proof, intellect, logic, and sound reason...with no reason to feel guilted into justifying wrong actions with wrong actions.

As for J,

Iraqis are dieing from war. Yes, it is true that after the first few years of shelling them we found a new tactic of divide and conquer setting the sunnis against shi'ite while we have players on both sides....all recorded in the media - all of the killings, even sunni vs. shi'ite and vice versa are a direct product of our invasion and destabilization of the soveriegn nation without just cause.

Saddam was evil? great, but if my neighbor abuses his wife is it o.k. for me to take over his house, kick him out and force his wife to obey me? of course not...there are many evil leaders the world over, evil leadership is not a grounds for war. W.m.d. - yeah, they had them, Rumsfeld knows because he got them for them, but we have yet to find any sufficient amount to justify our attacking them. In fact our government has issued that they entered on false or mistaken evidence so there is no longer room to argue in their defence on that point.

One can not invade a home, remove an abusive father from a family, kill him in front of them and then say it's not my fault the children have no guidance. And then get angry because they don't follow you? And then if they turn to crime, turn on each other, or worse turn on you - then you blame them as some how you are innocent?

I will check out the web site that is newly being propogated, however, I know my religion well and I know well the tactics used against it.

To all -
Thank you all for the time you've taken to read what i have wrote. The readers who do so and actualy feel any movement in their heart towards my words make the time I spend typing worth while...even if in the end we disagree, at least the human beings who visit this site can see another perspective.

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 10:17 PM

Bill, sunni and shi'ite have been killing each others for centuries, long before the U.S. existed. You obviously know NOTHING about Islam. That's why you need to really read and ponder over www.thereligionofpeace.com and www.islamundressed.com to get the full history. Then come back and tell us who the real oppressors and murders are.

Posted by: j_not_a at November 15, 2007 10:23 PM

Don't waste your time Wellington...
fanatics like that ideologue aren't interested in facts or discussion...just the loose cannon BS he just spouted echoing the talking points of the 5th column, aka, the unholy alliance that is easily found at the dailykook, SPindymedia, MOBocracynow, codepinkie, and like-minded off-the-fringe schizosites.

There IS NO moral equivalence,let alone for such an inexcusable ignoramic like that clown...just more PAPaganda recruiting videos masquerading as "documentaries" spewed forth like puke from mark cuban. brian de palma, and that ilk...
case-in-point:

Kool-Aid Alert!
"moral morons" like that give even rank-&-file liberals a bad name...so much so I wouldn't even equate the two together, he's so far off the kook fringe...

I deal with such lunatics every day, and have for years...he's not even as good as rank amateurs that are far better.

Like I said, don't waste your time gratifying such truculents with a response-it only feeds the troll

Posted by: jcom972 at November 15, 2007 10:25 PM

J. -
I want to respond to your second responce I had not yet seen,
"I suggest you do a little research before spouting your mouth off about things you know next to nothing about."

I said, "we spend well over $12,000,000 a month on our campaign against them...not including a single penny from any of the devout allied countries."

Meaning this is what we spend, not counting what other nations spend. And this was actualy a low digit as I said, I missed three zeroes as yesterdays senate hearings brought out, it is costing U.S. tax payers $80,000,000,000 a year to continue in this war. In fact you can google the senate hearings and they even break down the thousands of dollars this costs every single family of four in this country. This is from this week, so it is very up to date.

I understand that you misunderstood me and so I will not comment on your angry words accusing me of, "spouting your mouth off about things you know next to nothing about".

Thank you again for your time.

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 10:27 PM

J-
As a sunni I have prayed with my shi'ite brothers in their masjid and they regularly come and pray with us. We don't kill each other any more than catholics and protestants...oops, forgot about Ireland.

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 10:30 PM

Bill, you, like I said, obviously know NOTHING about Islam. Do not blame the U.S. for muslims killing each other. You have not addressed what I said about the number of Iraqui civilians killed by other muslims versus those killed by U.S. or other countries' troops. The U.S., Canada and others are trying to stop muslims from killing each other. Muslims who feel they are practising the right kind of islam are always looking to kill those muslims who they think are not "muslim enough" or the "right kind of muslim", or being sunni when they should be shi'ite or shi'ite when they should be sunni, when there are no infidels around to kill. They have been doing this since Mohammed's time.

Don't take my word for it. Learn for yourself.

Posted by: j_not_a at November 15, 2007 10:34 PM

jcom-
It's interesting your name calling and praddle while i said what i said based upon texts and sources sitting in front of me...not news reports, not commy propoganda, not liberal kookism. In fact I am far from left wing...It is easy to begin labeling others to try to silence evidence, this is the false logic of attacking the speaker instead of defending or opposing the position. I personaly have brought forth reason and proof, not name calling and labels.

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 10:35 PM

Bill is convinced that Osama bin Ladin, despite his own words, and the vast preponderance of objective evidence, didn't launch jihad against us from al-Qaeda's base in Taleban-ruled Afghanistan.

Bill is willfully blind. "There are none so blind as those who have eyes and yet will not see."

As far as the legitimate intervention in Afghanistan is concerned, WHOSE Islam are we against, that of the majority of Afghans? NO! And the same for Iraq.

"Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just.
And this be our motto: In God Is Our Trust."

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 10:46 PM

J-

One can not put a magnifier on one place and say this is the world.

Sunni and shi'ite have their differences but we still work together, worship together, live together and inter-marry the world round. Iraq has a power void and a power struggle caused by an invasion into their sovereign lands.

As for me, I know Islam well enough to have rcieved an Ijaaza and Idhn to teach it. I have been a muslim for nearly 12 years, I have studied it from before I accepted it, I have been to syria, I have sat under scholars, I have attended universities...I have been with scholars both sunni and shi'ite...so perhaps I am not the ignorant one. And perhaps the enemies of my faith, the propogandists are those who are not as aware as they believe they are.

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 10:47 PM

I at least agree with your final remarks posted above at 10:17 pm, Bill.

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 10:53 PM

John-
Usama swore an oath to mullah Umar that he would not do any act from afghanistan. When 9/11 occured Mullah Umar trusted him. He asked this country for evidence and they would try him. we threatened him. He asked for evidence and he would hand him over to an Islamic country, we threatened him. He asked for evidence and offered to send him to a neutral country for trial if there was evidence, we refused and invaded.

But for the entire year before the attack our news papers were filled with anti-taliban propoganda.

9/11, was wrong, Usaama at first denied it, when he was away from Mullah Umar and the taliban he accepted responsability, thus not only did he commit such a heinous act but he broke an oath...3,000 murders he took credit for, he deserves the penalty for those crimes...he and those with him. But not a nation that was willing to cooperate if we had evidence.

(as a side note, it always interests me that Mullah Umar and the taliban made growing of opium punishable by death, then the first thing we offer these poor people are sacks of opium seeds and then we say the heroin trade must end.)

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 10:56 PM

I called a spade a spade...get over it.
Considering your egregious BS remarks you made echoing the talking points of said kook fringe sites, you deserve less than rudeness, so consider that VERY lenient on your sorry mental state as it's far nicer than your sorry @$$ deserves.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 15, 2007 10:58 PM

and "less than rudeness" was in re the level of tolerance and extreme restraint I showed on you... you deserve far lower decorum than that.
If you echo the talking points of kook fringe leftist sites in complimentary fashion, that makes you a kook fringe leftist...
the "news" reports you claim to get are abvious as to where you get them...I don't CARE what you claim to be...(the ron "truther twit" paul kooks are just as bad as they get the same kook fringe leftist lunacy from the same kook fringe leftism as every other Kool-Aid kid does).

Save your pontificating pahblum...you're so transparent you're invisible...and not worth the effort to bother with...most flies on radar screens don't.

You may now resume your william arkin engorgement.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 15, 2007 11:04 PM

Oh, and since you wish to engage...top this...
You have YET to post ONE SINGLE SOURCE to back up your *ahem* "proof" and "evidence".

Feel free to post them...let's see just what this *ahem* source really is...go ahead...if you're as righteous as you claim, then you've nothing toworry about, do ya?
Knock yourself out...
*WEG*

Your empty bluff's just been called...
Now, put up or STFU.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 15, 2007 11:12 PM

I accept the sincerity of your views, and yes, I can imagine stepping into your shoes and imagine what the view is like while standing in them.

Yes, it is a pity that Usama proved himself to be a less-than-perfect guess. Unfortunately for Mullah Umar, he could not or would not comply with a U.S./N.A.T.O. ultimatum and hand Usama and his companions over to infidel justice. He has chosen his lot.

No, the Taleban government was anything but universally popular, propoganda or no propanda against them. Irony or hypocrises don't aquit them, either.

That said, I, too, stand by the (bulk of) remarks I made, and opinions expressed above, brother. Go your way, peace to you.

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 11:34 PM

Typos: "propa[ga]nda" and "a[c]quit"

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 11:37 PM

I kind of suspected 'Bill' was a muslim from the top...Worse than that he is a muslim troll. Not coming here to learn anything, he already knows it all, but to preach and give us the benefit of his infinite wisdom. A hierophant of superior knowledge?
Nope, a troll, and one who sounds suspiciously like the liberal/leftist/socialist/criminal Hairy Reed.
Maybe 'Bill' is Hairy Reed, after all this is the internet...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 15, 2007 11:37 PM

Typo: should read, "guest" above.

Posted by: John C at November 15, 2007 11:39 PM

Jcom -

I could imagine what you were doing during the cold war. Was everyone a commie or just those who disgreed with you? :)

I don't take offence to anything you say about me, how could I, you have no idea who I am, what i stand for or what my politics are. You simply see someone disagreeing with heart felt beliefs and so you lash out. No big deal.

As for my sources, I parphrased this weeks senate hearings,
I quoted goebbels from Das reich the 16, Nov. 1941 edition, which I quoted from "Witnesses to War" by Nicholas Stargardt,
I paraphrased the facts of our bombing civilians from "World History, from the european age to the new global era" by J.M. Roberts.
dealing with Mullah Umar wanting to see evidence before handing Usama over to a neutral country, I paraphrased almost every news agency reporting around the time of it's occurance.
These same main stram nes agencies, as well as soldier of fortune, as well as eye spy, as well as editorial reporters across the board were usd as sources for the fact that the taliban forbade the growing of opium with the penalty of dath for anyone caught with it...while the first thing we gave the poor people of afghanistan was sacks of poppy seeds to produce opium.

I also used some Islamic sources such as Jihad unspun, and kavkaz, when mentioning that Usaama made an oath that he wouldn't launch any terrorist act from afghanistan if given safe haven there...and then his subsequent denial of the charges, and then his subsequent 'braging' that he murdered all of those people.

I think that is most of the topics I spoke on and my sources...outside of my own perspective and undestadning of affairs based upon proofs, logic and rason.

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 11:45 PM

maybe, swami...
but I don't give a rats @$$ if he's superman...a kook is a kook is a kook...
That's the big difference between those I rhetorically banter with that happen to be left of center-the regulars at least have the best in mind, and differences or not, we agree to disagree, and can go from there...
...but they're NOT kooks, UNlike this troll.

Embellishments and exaggerations are one thing...outright kookdom masquerading as "evidence" and "proof" (with nothing to back it up save words) I draw the line on, with extreme (and justifiable) prejudice.

Posted by: jcom972 at November 15, 2007 11:47 PM

...and as expected he provides NOTHING to back him up...proving my point as expected from rank amateur trolls.

Just words...no "sources" to back his self-proclaimed "proof" & "evidence"...just his words.

Kooks can never back it up.
I knew he had nothing...and the fat lady's sung.
Case closed.
LOL

Posted by: jcom972 at November 15, 2007 11:50 PM

Hey swami...
maybe he's that "rev sutter" nut from cleveland?
LOL

Posted by: jcom972 at November 15, 2007 11:56 PM

duh-
I never hid my faith yet neither was there a need to declare it. I don't think I know much at all, but I know my religion...and I am confident I know it better than anyone I've spoken with this evening.

As for not wanting to learn anything...I began by differing with the views of those on this site. I stated an opposing view, I never claimed to 'be one of the guys' only then to lash out. I am neither here to learn to to evangelise, simply to share another side of the ten thousand land mark.

I didn't know I had to wear flannels and drive a pick-up to visit this site...of course as cold as it is maybe I will get out my flannels.

Anyway, It is interesting how everyone with a view opposing those on this site are instantly labelled a liberal. I neither take the liberal position on any political matter, I am not a democrate, I listen regularly to conservative radio and believe in the protection of all my righs...just because someone disagrees with you on one or two points, especially dealing with matters of faith, doesn't make them a liberal. Perhaps my Islam prevents me from agreeing that we should go around the world dropping bombs on innocent people...just like your ultra-right, radical fundamentalism drives you to think we should get all of them before they come to our shopping malls. (of course all the muslims in our shopping malls might just be the shot in the arm our economy nees. :))

Posted by: Bill at November 15, 2007 11:56 PM

Jco-
Are you drinking tonight? I posted my sources and you say no sources, just my words. Or was it that my sources weren't what you expected? who knows a kook is a kook right?

You do realise I am haveing a discussion while you are argueing with yourself right? Name calling aside, you haven't countered a single point or reference or source...says alot.

As for my being an ametuer, yes, I don't get paid for this and no I don't argue with people on a regular to get raly good at calling people names. Instead once in a while I try to offer clear thoughts and reason.

we can agree to disagree agreeably, there seems to be no discussion here anyway.
good night.

Posted by: Bill at November 16, 2007 12:03 AM

LOL...lame pathetic evasion & diversion.

I'm still waiting for a source...a live clickable link to "prove" those *ahem* "sources" which are bogus and the reason I called his bluff.

Islam is an issue...not an automatic dismissal.
But putting words in our mouths IS...especially when it's downright distortions if not outright lies.

The "put up" obviously isn't going to happen, and "STFU" apparently isn't either...that makes said subject a troll...perpetuating a now-dead-horse position he himself started, and can't back up.

I expected nothing less from such elements of emanation like his. taqqiyah taqqiyah taqqiyah
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/9/24/152943.shtml
(that's called a "source")

lame

Posted by: jcom972 at November 16, 2007 12:09 AM

...and no...I'm quite sober.
I only drink on special occasions, like holidays and successful target aquisitions...in real life.

Mental instability...ooops, I meant mental projection on your part isn't going to fly-seek some help for that mental disorder.

MY sources are posted all around this entire website, feel free to gaze away as my position is LONG known...knock YOURself out and look around.

You didn't come here to "offer thoughts" and "reason"...not with that mentality, and save the "agree to disagree" BS...your initial kook takes proved that a lie on your part.

Go back to your imam and tell him you met a REAL infidel who knows what you represent.

...and you STILL can't back your take (no live links=no "proof"/"evidence")

Lan Astaslem
;-)

Posted by: jcom972 at November 16, 2007 12:16 AM

Bill...Ever drink a 'taqiyya sunrise'?...You don't like being labeled a liberal, liberals never do. Your posts sound just like liberal, leftists rants. I bet you are an American convert. You were probably a liberal before you converted. Actually I don't think there really is such a critter as a liberal or conservative muslim. There are just muslims. Some muslims are more articulate than others, but you all have the same things in common. I could list what they are, but why bother, you already know.
As far as I am concerned you are just another member of the blame America crowd, with an Islamic twist.
I am not too happy with America either, but not for the trumped up reasonings of the left, and their buds, muslims, who have their own trumped up reasonings. As far as your superior Islamic knowledge is concerned, all that and $3.50 will get you a beer anywhere in town. Probably you don't drink, if you are a good muslim, so a falafel burger can substitute for the beer...
Hey, a falafel burger is no downer...I like them myself...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 16, 2007 1:04 AM

Have now read most all of the posts since my last posting here yesterday evening. Many are directed to "Bill" who is, by his own admittance, a Muslim. Jcom972 advised me not to waste any more time with "Bill" and I think that's good advice. "Bill" by his won words thinks that 9/11 was merely a criminal act, not an act of war, he admires the Taliban, never mind that they created a spiritual totalitarian state in Afghanistan which, among other things, blew up 1500 year old Buddhist sculpture and treated women as chattel. Oh, but they made the growing of opium illegal and it is now legal again. Yes, and Hitler provided the Germans with better health insurance and built the Autobahn. "Bill" decries insulting him but then insults so many of us. Let's see. He called my post to him "hollow and thoughtless." Oh, yes, I almost forgot. "Bill" thinks America acted in a terroristic manner even in WWII, never mind Iraq.

Yep, "Bill" is a winner all around. And there are hundreds of millions of other winners out there just like "Bill." They're called Muslims. That's what we're up against.

Posted by: Wellington at November 16, 2007 1:36 PM

Wellington says Islamists have been at war with us since 1979. Unfortunately, it is a lot longer than that - by more than 13 centuries. This has been going on against non-Muslims since the quarter mark of the seventh century. Ban Qurayza Jews murdered on the orders of Mohammed in 628. Spain invaded in 711 and almost conquered by 718. France half conquered until the Battles of Tours and Poitiers in 732. Constantinople besieged in the seventh and eighth centuries, and the Byzantine Empire facing 825 yeares of Jihad until the fall of Constantinople in 1453 - which was followed by three days of raping, looting and murder. Vienna besieged - twice, and Austrian civilians murdered along the Turks retreat route. The destruction of the Persian culture and the genocide in India at the hands of Islamists - 80 million murdered over five centuries. The kidnapping and enslaving of Europeans as far afield as Iceland and Ireland by Islamic Barbary Pirates over 250 years from the mid-16th to early 19th centuries (this happened in Cornwall in 1625 and Ireland in 1631) - which was only stopped by brute force, by the US, Britain and France. But Islamists hate it when we fight back - like the Reconquista (722-1492) - which Bin Laden cited as areason for the Madrid atrocity. Only after Vienna in 1683 did the Islamic tide recede after 1,000-plus years of Jihad. And that to draw breath until the West became gullible thanks to political correctness - the same PC that holds us back in this - the third Great Jihad, started in 1979 or 2001 when Islamists believed we had forgotten our history and our basic survival lessons. To side with hamas and hizbollah against Israel plumbs the depths of insanity, but lefties and some on the right do just that. History proves that cheering on our enemies leads to only one thing - being overrun by them.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at November 16, 2007 2:39 PM

Spirit of 1683: Oh, I'm fully aware that Islam has been at war with the rest of the world from the getgo. When I used the year 1979 I merely meant the most recent stage (and one in which America is seen as the chief enemy) of the continuous war Islam demands until "all religion is with Allah." Sorry about the confusion.

By the way, this demand for constant war by Muslims against non-Muslims until the earth is entirely Islamic is one of the chief reasons I think it quite possible that eventually all of Islam will have to be targeted for elimination, which will, of course, mean the greatest war in man's history. Very dark times ahead I fear and I, for one, lay the blame for this entirely upon the Islamic faith. As each year goes on, I am less and less confident that so-called moderate Muslims can rescue their religion from its many distubing elements. It seems increasingly obvious that all any sensible person can do who is a Muslim is to leave their faith. It's not a religion worth rescuing. It's rotten to the core.

Posted by: Wellington at November 16, 2007 3:20 PM

I notice my challenge to Muslim posters above to show us the pacific nature of Islam went unanswered. I should have known that it is a tenet of orthodox Islam, "Do not argue with the People of the Book," not to dispute questions of faith with infidels.

Why, then, should infidels dispute the evidence of their own eyes, and accept the assertion that Islam is peaceable, that "Islamic Terrorist" is oxymoronic, or that those truly following the teachings of Islam would not be terrorists?

Is that so? In what sense would they not?
In light of the Islamic understanding?

And especially in light of other stated tenets, that a creedal Muslim is still a believer, even if he commits evil for which he will be judged; and that a Muslim leader must be followed, or fellow Muslims supported in struggle against infidels, even if those Muslims commit evil.

We don't seem to have any reason to judge Islamist jihadists as being either unIslamic or non-Muslim--however unrepresentative of Muslims they are--when these terrorists, claiming to be Muslim, act in the name of Islam itself.

Posted by: John C at November 16, 2007 6:07 PM