This is how you create a terrorist. This is how you create a bunch of terrorists. This is how you create a town of terrorists. This is how you create cities of terrorists. This is how you create a nation of terrorists. This is how you destroy America's reputation throughout the world (and make more terrorists). This is how you get any remaining holdouts who didn't want to become terrorists.
Yet the question is can we stop? Can we slow down? Or, like a cancer, does it just get worse? Become part of our culture? Until there are precious few options? Precious few.
Yeah, Dick Cheney was right. We were greeted as liberators. Then we introduced ourselves.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
38 comments:
AN IDEALOGUE IS A PERSON WHO WILL SUSPEND FACTS TO SUPPORT HIS THESIS.
Weaze, your dumb. You have assembled minutae to support your Marxist theory,and overlooked the main issues. We are in a war of Islaam's choosing. Not ours. You fool.
Why were Muslims violent and territorialy aggressive 1200 years before the the USA was a country?
Why had Islaam attacked Europe twice before the Western Hemisphere was even discovered?
Why had Islaam expanded it's borders from the Atlantic to the South Pacific before the Bush family had even come to the United States?
Why had Islaam enslaved most of Sub Saharan Africa before the Europeans even knew it was there?
Why do Muslims continue to attack the indigenous populations of every country in which they have a population?
The answere is: That is what the religion of Islaam is about! Conquering the World.
IF YOU HAVEN'T READ THE QU'RAN, AND STUDIED THE HISTORY OF ISLAAM YOU CAN'T POSSIBLY UNDERSTAND WHAT MOTIVATES MUSLIMS. MUSLIMS ARE INVOLVED WITH THEIR RELIGION IN A WAY THAT WESTERNERS CAN NOT GRASP. IN ISLAAM, RELIGION IS EVERYTHING---EVEN IF THEY ARE NON-OBSERVANT MUSLIMS, ISLAAM IS EVERYTHING.
You are a ethnocentric bigot. You impose what you need to believe on the Muslims to support your point....Even if your point is wrong.
Live in darkness and suffer. It is your way weasel
Doc,
How many Muslims do you actually know?
If I based my entire understanding of Christianity on selected passages of the bible, then I'd have to conclude that a Christian man is allowed to rape young virgins provided he pays the father fifty shekels of silver and marries the girl.
I'm one of Weazl's friends from around the world (mentioned previously). I've lived in a couple of places with large Muslim populations (Toronto and Paris) and my Muslim friends never tried to enslave me.
If by "enslave" you mean "open little ethnic restaurants" then I look forward to my enslavement. I hope more Muslims come to where I live now - the place could use some better food.
I know that they're killers. But thanks for the link. Didn't know about the suit. Will follow.
Unfortunately, it seems that the case was ruled on and the case thrown out. Apparently the judge ruled that citizens don't have standing to accuse the President of High Crimes. Question is, who does? Sad.
http://www.suetheterrorists.net/
Doc, your argumentation skills are quite impressive. "Weaze, your dumb" is my favourite. Poor grammar combined with ad hominems...wow!
Honestly, I am thinking that Da Weaz is paying you to make these comments to make his point stronger if the counter-arguments he receives are of your standard. :-)
Oh, and you might want to ask yourself:
1. Why is the USA violent and territorially aggressive?
2. Why has the USA attacked countries outside the western hemisphere in violation of international law?
3. Why do we see the rise of religious fundamentalism in the Middle-East only after the onset of active US involvement in the area?
4. Why does the USA continue to attack the indigenous populations in Iraq?
In addition, how many muslims do you personally know? Have you visited, say, Middle-East and spoken with them? It is easy to build personal hatred based on self-selected books and articles, but this facade comes crashing down when you ented interpersonal experiences. The more you get to know ordinary muslims, the more you realize that this group of extremists that you take to represent the entire religion, is nothing but bunch of over-zealous fanatics, just like the US leadership.
You are using adjectives to describe what is essentially 1.3 billion people.
How many Muslims have I known? Many. I did importation and commercial real estate with Muslims from 1986 until about three years ago, when I retired. In general, if I had to judge them from just being friends with them, I would say that the're very charming. But that's not all that's in the mix. They are deeply convinced that world domination is garaunteed by Allah's decree, and no price is too high to pay to achieve it.
What ever dumbell tried to invoke an argument by comparing the Bible to the Qu'ran just doesn't know what he's talking about. You haven't read either. There simply is no comparison. Don't do that. You look like the fool in class who is lying about having read his assignment. You don't know what you're talking about, so don't say it. If you think that I'm wrong, then ask your Muslim friends about the 9th Sura, and see if you can find anything even remotely like it in the Bible. That's just a start of the visciousness of the Qu'ran, but I don't want to make things to intellectualy too demanding for you. Like, you actually learning something.
Speaking of the intellectual community, they have begun refering to Europe as Eurabia to reflect the truth of the matter. The invasion of Europe, Islaam's third and successful siege, is just about a done deal.
The French population of France is a gonner. French women have an average of 1.4 children per life time. The minimum replacement rate is 2.1. The French aren't even replacing themselves.
Muslim women have closer to 4 children per life time. The French have no immigration restrictions what so ever. There are still Muslim immigrants streaming into France everyday. The same thing is happening in Germany,Eastern Europe and Scandinavia.
The demographic projections put the Muslim population at about 25% by 2025. That is easily enough to dominate every election in France, and the rest of Europe. Combine that with France's nuclear arsenal, and the fact that the French military is already 15% muslim, and you can kiss Europe, Tout ta lour!
I hope you America haters are young men. It is my fondest desire that you see what is coming when this country falls. I know that the thought thrills you, but you will be in the deepest agony then. You are worthless to your country now, and your nasty intransigence will get you executed then.
We are not in the ME illegaly. Congress and the United Nations supported the invasion. France, Germany, Russia, and China opposed the move. They were grafting the Oil For Food Program and didn't want the billions of petro dollars to stop. The Europeans have gone mad. They rejected the only country that could help them, or ever has helped them.
We are not attacking the indigenous population of Iraq. In fact there has been 200000 lives saved over what Saddam used to kill on a regular basis. We are not attacking Iragis any more than we were attacking the French when we liberated them, twice.
(And by the way, jackass, we didn't take any territory except for the graves we left behind. They were better men that you will ever be)
You won't understand this, but I'll cast pearls before swine anyway: Muslims really and truly believe that they are destined to rule the world. They have been trying to conquer it for 1400 years.
If the World of Islaam cannot be brought in to the 21st century as peaceful planetary citizens, we will have to go to war with them on a huge scale. The modern world is not going to be Muslim and live in the 7th century. Ever!
Remember, they now have nukes. That means a thermonuclear exchange will most likely occur during a full scale war. We have to do the best we can to insure that that does not occur. That is why we are trying to install democracy in the Middle East. Not oil. Not Christianity. Not ego. Not the f--king Builderberggers. We are doing what America has always done. We are trying to build a peaceful planet.
Don't worry, though, Islaam will never accept democracy. Democracy is as foriegn to Muslims as good
sense is to you. You will see the devastation that you so deeply desire.
I'll ask you the quesion that I always ask Weasel: What the hell did your daddy to to you to make you so f'ing crazy? Damn, he must have hated you!
I just looked at the law suits that you imbiciles think should be brought. G--damn your dumb! Wow! atronomical stupidity. A new and amazing level of dense.
First: Asserting that the Prez lied is impossible. You have to prove, not that there were no WMD when we got there, but that the Prez KNEW that there were none there to begin with. That is lying. Being wrong is not against the law.
In as much as every single f'ing Democratic politico agreed, and had agreed for months and years, and that the foriegn intelligence agencies of numerous countries concurred. Just how the hell are you going to show that the thought in the Prez's mind was knowingly untrue? (perhaps you could send him to Guantanamo and have it beaten out of him
Besides, if you had the intellectual acumen to think of it, you would have looked up the 2003 State of the Union Address to see what the Prez actually said. He said, "and find the Weapons Of Mass Destruction, or find out where they went."
There! Your case is dead.
Now for the Home Land Security Act (Act)that you believe is actionable.
There is no way in hell that the complaint that I read could prevail...Even in Goofy Gourt in San Francisco...Even if it hadn't been thrown out for jurisdictional reasons.
Let me count the ways:
1. The Constitution gives broad and far reaching powers to the Prez in matters of security. Now it is possible that some Prez may go over the line someday, but we will know it because every single Congress Person who wants to be re-elected will line up to bring that suit. The Senators and Representitives have legal staffs, and they would be all over any illegality in a heart beat. Do you see any Legislators hangin' their necks out on this one...Nope. None!
2. Conversely (that's not a tennis shoe), the Prez has an enormous legal staff. Not only does he have the use of the Attorney General and his huge staff, but he has at his beck and call his own personal attorneys which include the Law Proffessors from any or all Law Schools in the Country.
Now he knows that you're hunting for him. Every politician knows that he is being hunted. It is the nature of the the game. Is it not?
So, when he decided to use the Act in that way, he, or his staff, utilized that huge legal array to argue pro and con on the issue.
Now it may be that Congress chooses to scale back the Act, but you will not find actionable malfeasance on the part of the Prez. That million dollar legal team made sure that would not, could not,ever happen.
Now we can deal with the real corruption in America. You! A bunch of poorly educated, supremely neurotic, daddy haters spewing their Oedipal rage into the cyber night in lieu of a life.
Try to get a clue. This is the finest country that ever has been on god's green earth. You, in you pathetic adolecent rage, can thank your lucky stars that you were born right here!
Your kind of blind, rageful delinquency would have earned you an execution in The Soviet, Nazi Germany, Communist states every where, and the entire slaughter house of Africa.
Hey Doc,
Take a look at this:
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/
This is for your point:
"First: Asserting that the Prez lied is impossible. You have to prove, not that there were no WMD when we got there, but that the Prez KNEW that there were none there to begin with. That is lying. Being wrong is not against the law."
I just decided to help Weazl a little. Responding to your comments is becoming a full-time occupation.
-Iceman
So this is where the psychotic insane congregate. Hey Weasel you can have a whole blog thread with your multiple personalities.
How is the deprovera ? Not that you ever knew how to use that appendage any more then the lump of fat you call a brain.
You know who meathead and aka are, it doesn't take a genius. You also know who J Lowe is. Even one of your low inteligence can add that one up.
Beaker, you're more than welcome to stay. I would kindly advice you that the IQ level here is quite a bit higher than what you're used to, so you might actually have to add something of substance rather than the pablum of which I have grown accustomed having had many an opportunity to read your "writing."
Bring a friend or two, or even three. Simply tell them the ground rules (intelligence helps). And maybe you too, like the incorrigible doc, may learn a thing or two.
But doc, I gotta hand it to ya, you are the star of the show, no doubt. My veritable bearded lady, dancing bear, horn playing seal all wrapped up into one. I very humbly thank you for all the mirth that you're inspiring. It's sad to see that offensiveness to Moslems, Islam and coherent thinking is the price that must be borne for laughter, but they told me that nothing comes for free.
And by the way, Beak. I've said this a million times, but when calling someone dumb and commenting on his intelligence, it really doesn't look good to spell so bad(ly).
Just tryin' to help. ;-)
Well, I think Doc actually admitted that the Muslims he's interacted with are nice people.
The only thing wrong with them then is that they think Islam will take over the world. Seems like a pretty harmless belief to me. Doesn't everybody think their ideas will take over the world? Pretty sure Bush thinks so at least.
Harmless? Maybe. Maybe you're right. But something tells me that if I wrote that there was a 2,000 year struggle for world supremacy between Christians and Jews since Jews were responsible for the death of the Messaih, and that they were "winning" this epic battle because of their disproportionate representation in fields such as medicine, law, banking, entertainment, and most of all media, has political contacts relating to Isreal in many European states, and the reticence that many people have towards criticizing things Jewish or Israeli may be seen as a form of cultural "conquest" dooming the world's cultures from that paramount principle of freedom of expression, and that their over representation in schools such as Harvard, Yale, Princeton and Stanford means that there will be a future eugenic effect of continued Jewish overrepresentation in the professional ranks and among the elites, and that the nuclear capability of Israel makes some inevitable apocalyptic clash with the West inevitable somehow fulfilling Revelations, I have a feeling that someone, somewhere might not view that talk as harmless. Maybe I'm crazy, but I have a feeling that if I claimed that I believe each and every thing that I have written, people might even suggest that I am anti-Semitic.
I think that each of the statements that I have written have a significant parallel to what our entertaining doc has written. Funny, perhaps, but offensive, surely to some people.
. . . and some might even say, pointing to certain historical events, that such talk was far from harmless, but . . .
dangerous
Oh man, this is full-time entertainment. Doc and Beaker, maybe you can join forces and create a website...say... under the epithet "I hate those godd*am moslems". All you need is a spell-checker, and voila. The world awaits you!
Seriously, for somebody who knows Weaz personally and his educational and professional background, as well as his academic expertise, there's nothing more amusing than reading some sorry-ass veterans (brains of whom have probably suffered heavily in the fights for world's freedom [only little pun intended]) trying to make a point with no skill in making any kind of case.
LMAO 24/7
The sad reality is that it is not doc's fault. He drinks articles like this:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/
ReadArticle.asp?ID=21830
and is among those who post on boards like this:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/
GoPostal/?ID=21831
Seeing is believing. Sad, but true.
Maybe it's a good time to reveal this under the heading of the article, "Why they hate us."
But doc, we don't judge you. We like you and we're glad you're here.
Really.
And it would be nice if the people behind the site were some backwater, pick-up truckers, but they're not. They are our nation's elite, e.g.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/
images/RestorReturn2.pdf
http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches
/2002/s20021115-depsecdef.html
http://www.laweekly.com/features/
12828/weekend-warriors/
Yep, this is what da weaz has been fighting against.
(and whose asses weaz continually kicked! :-)
Beakerkin, you write a funny thread.
I actually have to work today, so this will be short. I don't hate Muslims. I fear Islaam.
I didn't get my position on the web. I began reading the Qu'ran, hadeeth, and a stack of serious books on the History of the ME and Islaam twenty years ago in order to better understand the people that I was doing business with.
My understanding comes from hard, honest work. What i write is not opinion. It is solid academicly derived fact. If I say that the highest duty of a Muslim is Jihad; it is jihad. Thats it, and thats that.
Weazel
So you are a pychopath with good spelling. I find it amusing that you were easily mistaken for two mental cases LA Williams and Tinkerbell Raimondo. Your credentials as a mental case are impressive.
Now onto ratings lets see how many readers you have in six months. You could do a series of posts with your 101 personalities but all
of them add up to one big BORE.
I will extend the courtesy of an offer for an interview on my blog. The Duck is clearly your superior in in lucidity and logic. Interviewing a genuine pycho could be amusing.
FYI you know the real identity of Meathead and Shoshana.
Most of the Muslims are moderate, they formulate their belief in line with their own individual conviction and feelings. This does not have to necessarily oppose our Western culture as such. Shouldn't we learn how to live together rather than declare wars all the times? Yes, it is so easy nowadays...
When a Muslim reads Qu'ran, he interprets it in his own spiritual way. Islam does not call for a conquering of the world and jihad can be actually interpreted in many different ways. Mostly (and the most importantly) it is seen as a struggle of a soul with an inner evil, a strive to become a better person. So yes, you are right, in this sense the jihaad is a the highest duty (and should be)! So Islam is not violent. When a Muslim turns into violence, it is not an abuse of Islam but an abuse of power of man who is expressing his will at a certain point of time (not the will of Islam). Everybody does that. Don't blame Islam for the violence!
There was one interesting study and article that followed in Foreign Affairs saying Muslims do value U.S. democracy and freedom but not the U.S. policy in Arab world. I think everybody can see the difference.
Oh, Weazl.
One could have a nice discussion here if it wasn´t for so many dummies visiting!!
PS. Sorry, I don't want to join the club and be pejorative as you are, guys, but ´dummy´ is not that bad, is it??:)
Beaker,
Thanks for the offer to interview me, but somehow you must be under your own propaganda that I actually strive for "recognition" other than simply keeping an anonymous avatar and nameless blog. I myself have interviewed many prominent people and actually value that fact that I was able to converse with them in detail in areas in which they were experts. I myself have had opportunity to strive for more personal attention, but don't really want that, and in fact have made personal choices that make a lot of personal attention much more difficult and much more delayed. So I have to refuse any interview offer. I obviously will post on my blog; as you know, I have posted of FPM for a while (until its absurdity was too obvious to ignore); and I would be willing to respond via email to any questions that you ask. But I have no desire to share my personal details with your readership. This is a forum to share ideas, change minds, and exchange information.
But on a more obvious note. It is not particularly appealing for you to think that I want to talk to someone who calls my a psychopath. Beak, I rarely try to wield credentials around all the time because I often think it is the refuge of people who don't have the capacity to rely on the force of their ideas. And my ideas are there for your scrutiny in my posts, and more importantly in my articles. You may call me silly little names, but I doubt you can seriously challenge any of the logical steps to get to the conclusions that I reach. Of course, you guys will reject the conclusions, and throw around quite flaccid talking point rebuttals, but one thing that no right winger HAS EVEN ATTEMPTED to do is to OUT THINK weazl, to DECONSTRUCT an argument, to REFUTE my sources, to offer COUNTERSOURCES. You guys need to call in help. Get some thinkers. But after having lived on your sites amidst all the wolves, teeming from all sides, there are precious few thinkers among you. You and your kind have simply NEVER really even tried to make a true ARGUMENT. But it must be nice to have the reigns of power on your side. So you people don't have to think much because the same shortsighted decisions that you espouse are espoused by the people in power. But at some point when you look at the country and realize how your policies have fucked up both the country and the world, you'd be ashamed if that were possible. You're part of a clan that has been bitching for power for a generation, and shifting responsibility for any negative outcome whether or not your people bore responsibility. But now you people achieved your goals, have the presidency, have control of both houses of Congress, have control of the Supreme Court, and what do you have? Massive corruption. Massive incompetancy. An Adminstration that is proud and trumpets the biggest security failure and domestic disaster in American history. And these jackasses want to remind the world of it! What happened to the US deficit? What happened to the US reputation? This Administration's incomptence in Katrina made the US domestic capabilities look like the response to a Bangladeshi monsoon.
And you think I want to talk to you guys? You think I expect that you'd listen? You guys can't even see how the site of the world's oldest civilization is being fucked up to the point of genocide by an Administration that fucks up each and everything it touches. Sorry, Beak, you need to be a troll here. You need to hope that my blog doesn't shut down and that I keep writing. You need to hope that someone could offer you a better vision that your fear of a massive Muslim-Mexican-Gay-Black-Atheistic wave that's gonna sink your precious America that in your fantasy was created without the very people you demonize (including Chinese and Japanese, among others). Please, Beak, you have the amazing ability to push my button. Rarely have I found someone who knows so little to have such a cheeky little hubris. I would be crazy if I thought it was an honor to "be interviewed" and share my life with you.
Sorry.
. . . and by the way, I DO NOT know the real identities of all of the people you mentioned. They were quite unimpressive. Rarely did I meet a thinker among you, and when I did, she was a lefty, and thought a lot like me. And her name was promo and it looked a bit like this:
http://www.frontpagemag.com/
GoPostal/?ID=11035
Beaker, show me a conversation that you've ever had that proves to me that you're not as "slow" as I've always thought of you, and I'll do your interview. But the chances of that are about as likely as me stripping down to my birthday suit and walking down the street. And as the old song goes, "Baby, it's cold outside."
Weasel
You delude yourself and are a first class dullard. I kicked your tail with ease at FPM. You can boast of whatever credentials real or imaginary you might posess. The credentials have zero to do with sanity class or lucidity. I can place a thermometer in your backside and get roughly 99 degree.
I won't do it because a pervert like yourself would enjoy the experience.
I was not the one crying on FPM .
Delude yourself all day but you are clearly insane.
Feel free to drop in but we allready have a house troll with talent. You can spend the rest of the evening in a conversation with your 101 personalities.
Kicked my ass?
First off, link to it.
Second, link to anything that proves you've ever had an intelligent point to make about anything at anytime.
Third, make a point here, which you haven't even tried to do.
Fourth, if you can't do any of the aforementioned three, you'd be well advised to keep quiet.
don't mind me - i'm just lurking...
JAJINKA HAS NOT READ THE QU'RAN BUT SHE FEELS QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON IT ANYWAY.
I have read the Noble Qu'ran three times,Some of the Suras fifty and sixty times, much of The Hadeeth, Sharia, and a 40 foot high stack of schollarly history books by the most renown historians on the planet.
I have also read Muslim appologists, both Arab and European, and numerous Left Wing commentators. I also have done business with Muslims for almost 20 years. I have had warm, although somewhat strange, friendships with Muslims from several regions of the Middle East and Asia.
I have chatted with literally hundreds of Muslim from many parts of the world. (Some of the most hate-filled were from Sweden) They were sophisticated, intelligent Muslims with computers and Web service. They all reported the same dream: World Wide Jihad!
I assure you, this is not an area of study where error is benign. These folks are not kidding. Their ernestnest is grim, to say the least.
JAJINKA:
Most Muslims are not moderates. You want most Muslims to be moderates. You hope most Muslims are moderates. You imagine that most Muslims are moderates. It would scare the shit out of you to realize what most Muslims are, so you consosle yourself in the belief that most Muslims are Moderates.
In fact almost NO muslims are moderate. Moderation in Islaam is apostasy. The reward for apostasy in Islaam is death. And it is a death that they bestow, not happily, but ecstaticly. If you don't believe me, search out some of the throat-cuttings on the web and notice the shinning eyes of the participants as the scream "Ahlahu Akbar", (God is Great)as their victims gurgle their last screams.
Mohamed wrote the Qu'ran to be absolutely immutable and immoderate. It is the most intollerant religious work ever written. It contains none of the "turn the other cheek" or "love thy neighbor" of Christianity. It has absolutely no concept of Universal Love of the Vedic (Hindu) religions. It is barely a religion at all. It is a political construct aimed at as much conquest and booty as possible.
The Qu'ran is full of oaths of Allahs hatred, death threats, calls to conquest, slaughter, and descriptions of grisly punishments.
It has one entire Sura, #9, Au Tauba (The Exceptions) that excludes all none Muslims from the requirements of Allah to treat people with truthfullness or compassion.
The Qu'ran has one entire chapter devoted to the taking and dividing of booty. (The Spoils of War) That is an inclusion of thought found in no other religious work.
Yes, Jajinka, there is another meaning for Jihad. There are two Jihads: The Greater and Lesser.
The Greater Jihad is the purification of one's soul for admission into Heaven. It is the most austere purification of all religious disciplines. It includes the hatred and revulsion of women.
(Aside: The inquiry into Islaam's influence on the role of women is a study in it's self. Suffice it to point out that genital mutilation is not mentioned in the Qu'ran, but it is a North African custom widely practiced in Islaamic regions. Also, the revulsion of women has encouraged the most widely practiced hetrosexual anal intercouse of any culture in the world.)
(Back to the Greater Jihad) The requirements are so demanding that almost nobody can fulfill them. That leaves Muslim youth torn between adolecent passion and horrid guilt. The price for failing at the Greater Jihad is Allahs hatred and an eternity burning in the Lake of Fire. The release for all this is the Lesser Jihad. Holy War to bring the world to Allah's feet. If one dies in Jihad, one excapes the Lake of Fire and goes directly to the right side of Allah and is presented with 72 virgins. (It is interesting that the vernacular in the Qu'ran for "virgin" is "grape".)
I hope that I have scared the living shit out of you. In as much as I know that my understanding of Islaam is accurate according to Islaam's own writings, and to the insights of great scholars, I can assure you that I am scared to death.
(Doc says, "learn to shoot")
doc
P.S.: Hi Nanc
I tossed the first copy of this off without editing. It was full of errors...sorry..
JAJINKA HAS NOT READ THE QU'RAN BUT SHE FEELS QUALIFIED TO COMMENT ON IT ANYWAY.
I have read the Noble Qu'ran three times, some of the Suras fifty and sixty times, much of The Hadeeth, Sharia, and a 40 foot high stack of scholarly history books by the most renown historians on the planet.
I have also read Muslim apologists, both Arab and European, and numerous Left Wing commentators. I also have done business with Muslims for almost 20 years. I have had warm, although somewhat strange, friendships with Muslims from several regions of the Middle East and Asia.
I have chatted with literally hundreds of Muslim from many parts of the world. (Some of the most hate-filled were from Sweden) They were sophisticated, intelligent Muslims with computers and Web service. They all reported the same dream: World Wide Jihad!
I assure you, this is not an area of study where error is benign. These folks are not kidding. Their earnestness is grim, to say the least.
JAJINKA:
Most Muslims are not moderates. You want most Muslims to be moderates. You hope most Muslims are moderates. You imagine that most Muslims are moderates. It would scare the shit out of you to realize what most Muslims are, so you console yourself in the belief that most Muslims are Moderates.
In fact almost NO Muslims are moderate. Moderation in Islaam is apostasy. The reward for apostasy in Islaam is death. And it is a death that they bestow, not happily, but ecstatically. If you don't believe me, search out some of the throat-cuttings on the web and notice the shinning eyes of the participants as the scream "Ahllahu Akbar", (God is Great)as their victims gurgle their last screams.
Mohamed wrote the Qu'ran to be absolutely immutable and immoderate. It is the most intolerant religious work ever written. It contains none of the "turn the other cheek" or "love thy neighbor" of Christianity. It has absolutely no concept of Universal Love of the Vedic (Hindu) religions. It is barely a religion at all. It is a political construct aimed at as much conquest and booty as possible.
The Qu'ran is full of oaths of Allah’s hatred, death threats, and calls to conquest, slaughter, and descriptions of grisly punishments.
It has one entire Sura, #9, Au Tauba (The Exceptions) that excludes all none Muslims from the requirements of Allah to treat people with truthfulness or compassion.
The Qu'ran has one entire chapter devoted to the taking and dividing of booty. (The Spoils of War) That is an inclusion of thought found in no other religious work.
Yes, Jajinka, there is another meaning for Jihad. There are two Jihads: The Greater and Lesser.
The Greater Jihad is the purification of one's soul for admission into Heaven. It is the most austere purification of all religious disciplines. It includes the hatred and revulsion of women.
(Aside: The inquiry into Islaam's influence on the role of women is a study in it's self. Suffice it to point out that genital mutilation is not mentioned in the Qu'ran, but it is a North African custom widely practiced in Islaamic regions. Also, the revulsion of women has encouraged the most widely practiced heterosexual anal intercourse of any culture in the world.)
(Back to the Greater Jihad) The requirements are so demanding that almost nobody can fulfill them. That leaves Muslim youth torn between adolescent passion and horrid guilt. The price for failing at the Greater Jihad is Allah’s hatred and an eternity burning in the Lake of Fire. The release for all this is the Lesser Jihad. Holy War to bring the world to Allah's feet. If one dies in Jihad, one escapes the Lake of Fire and goes directly to the right side of Allah and is presented with 72 virgins. (It is interesting that the vernacular in the Qu'ran for "virgin" is "grape".)
I hope that I have scared the living shit out of you. In as much as I know that my understanding of Islaam is accurate according to Islaam's own writings, and to the insights of great scholars, I can assure you that I am scared to death.
(Doc says, "Learn to shoot")
doc
P.S.: Hi Nanc
7:03 AM
Iceman:
Are you refering to my double negative? I don't understand your point.
Do you undertand mine?
doc
Yes, I am scared. Scared of people like you, people that are full of hatred and fear.
Yeah, I wish I was more qualified. I am still working on that, you know? But I guess everything what I read and what people tell me, or what is generally claimed here do not fit into your absolute truth. And Muslim people I talk to just lie me all the time! Maybe my friends plot to kill me, because as you said, they are all radicals!! Hm, very sad.
It is so easy to accuse Muslims of all violence, but your government does even worse.
And turning to violence and killing? ....You are the same radical like the people you criticize. Violence breeds violence.
hi doc - don't blow my cover...
JAJINKA IS A FOOL
Don´t use strong words but strong arguments (without hatred).
"JAJINKA IS A FOOL"
Only a man of Doc's caliber is capable of such wholesome arguments.
LMAO
Doc,
If you took a look at the link,
http://www.downingstreetmemo.com
you would have found out, that the Downing Street Memo (a top level official Memo of meetings between Bush and co. and Blair and co.), contained these key quotes:
“C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action”.
“It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force”.
Now this thought was expressed a year before the attack. The Prez knew that the WMD capability was thin, but wanted to attack anyway. “Intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy”. What does that tell you? Sounds like a piece of evidence that could be used to make a case where the Prez knew that, Iraq was not threatening his neighbours, had limited WMD capability etc. Why the attack then?
If you were to read more into the page, you would become aware of the Valerie Plame case. She was a CIA officer, whose undercover status was blown for providing countering evidence to the White House assertions that Saddam had bought Yellowcake from Niger. The case is still open about who exactly was the person who ordered Valerie Plame’s undercover to be blown. We do know however that the person is connected to Rumsfeld and Cheney (unless it’s not either one). So here you have more evidence to support the Downing Street Memo. If you read further, you can find more leads to lead to the conclusion that the Prez knew that Iraq was not a threat, in the sense that it was painted to the public.
I’m not completely convinced that the case against Bush should be formulated in those terms that you give i.e. claiming that one should prove that Bush W. knew that there were no WMD’s in Iraq prior to attacking Iraq. Several public arguments were used against Iraq prior to the war: WMD capability, Saddam is a cruel tyrant etc. One possibility for a case against the Bush regime could be to prove that they knew that Saddam could not have posed a serious threat to the US in order for the Bush regime to justify a US pre-emptive war against Iraq.
I’m no expert on the issue. There are quite a few avenues for impeachment with this administration… which one to choose? The more fundamental problem is that not enough is being done, or perhaps more correctly, can be done to bring the criminal accountable. This is a systematic institutional problem in America.
Additionally what worries me doc is that you don’t seem to be willing to consider any alternatives to your set world view. There are plenty of leads and documents being provided by Da Weaz for example to delve into and discuss. Why don’t you discuss them? Your faith in the political system seems to be 100%. Everything is absolute, either right or wrong. Where are the shades of grey?
America was the first modern country to have a democracy. Do you think that America got it 100% right the first time? Do you think a two-party system could really represent the multitude of political interests in the country in a fair equalitarian manner? Perhaps the founding fathers wanted to keep some restraints on this equality in order to keep their interests better represented from the less well to do. Perhaps the two parties agree on some things that the majority of people would not accept. Maybe you could look up on these issues in your spare time.
My time is running out. If you want to talk about the contents of that web-site, that I provided the link for, I’m open to hearing your interpretation of the material.
-Iceman
Doc,
Exploring the site is useful :) I had not taken a look at it for a year. Here check this out:
http://downingstreetmemo.com/timeline/
-Iceman
Bargholz,
How can you talk about my head, when your head is still in your own ass?
Read my post again, and then make your comments, if you have anything appropriate to say.
-Iceman
Iceboy,
my facts stand and you still wear your pants for a hat. Nibbling on the corn in your ass must have caused some brain damage.
Post a Comment