Angry young men

When it turned out that the London bombings were carried out by four young Muslim men born in England, it seemed to give a lie to Tom Friedman’s theory that Muslim terrorism sprouts from the anger of young men in Arab nations who have no hope of economic prosperity and freedom.

Here were young men who may not have been born into Windsor Castle, but they were living in a land of freedom and opportunity. So how can they be portrayed as anything other than what they are: murderers?

Well, today, The Times tries to continue portraying them as angry young men.

“I don’t approve of what he did, but I understand it. You get driven to something like this, it doesn’t just happen.”

To the boys from Cross Flats Park, Mr. Tanweer, 22, who blew himself up on a subway train in London last week, was devout, thoughtful and generous. If they understood his actions, it was because they lived in Mr. Tanweer’s world, too.

They did not agree with what Mr. Tanweer had done, but made clear they shared the same sense of otherness, the same sense of siege, the same sense that their community, and Muslims in general, were in their view helpless before the whims of greater powers. Ultimately, they understood his anger.

The news that four British-born Muslim men from neighborhoods around Leeds were suspected of carrying out the bombings in London has made the shared dissatisfaction of boys like these and the creeping militancy of some young British Muslims an urgent issue in Britain.

The bombers are an exception among Britain’s 1.6 million Muslims. But their actions have highlighted a lingering question: why are second-generation British Muslims who should seemingly be farther up the road of assimilation rejecting the country in which they were born and raised?

The problem with that analysis is that though it does not justify their actions — it tries to understand them — it gives a tacit logic, even a justification, to the horribly illogical, unjustifiable, uncivilized crime.

What they did is a crime. That’s all it is, nothing more. A crime.

But when we treat it as something else, when we try to understand it, when we grant the veil of political correctness — of understanding, even tolerance, invoking fuzzy words like “otherness” — we risk spreading the crime, making it if not acceptable then at least understandable for others. It is a cousin of glamorizing crime, of turning these scum into ideological, religious Bonnies and Clydes.

Well, not Bonnies… Which brings up an entirely different question: If terrorism is caused by anger, then wouldn’t the women of the Middle East be far more likely to turn into terrorists, since they are even more oppressed than their brothers and husbands, who are also their oppressors?

So is it about anger at all? Or is it just a crime? And shouldn’t we treat it as that? A crime.

Do we justify vehicular manslaughter under the influence of alcohol because alcoholism is a disease? No, we treat the act as a crime and slap the killer in jail.

Do we tolerate corporate fraud because the perpetrator was raised in a culture of competition, success, and greed> No, we treat the act as a crime and slap the thief in jail.

Now it’s fine to understand these acts insofar as it helps stop them. Yes, we must understand our enemies to defeat them. And, yes, sometimes we must understand the causes to eliminate those causes — and I’d argue that supporting democracy in the Middle East is just that.

But that’s not what’s happening in the efforts to understand why these young men did this terrible thing in London. This is not a military analysis aimed at finding and killing the enemy before he kills again. This is a sociological effort to understand them. And it begins with the presumption that we should accept their anger as as real.

Well what the hell do they have to be angry about? They’re fed. They’re free. They’re educated. They have health care. They can say and go where they want. Having problems with bullies on their playgrounds, are they? Well, don’t we all? But we don’t turn into Columbine killers or London bombers or Baghdad bombers who target children or the perpetrators of September 11th. Nothing justifies that. Nothing makes that understandable.

Do we try to understand the BTK killer? Not really. Oh, we try to justify the sensationalistic coverage of the case in the media. But no one truly tries to understand him and justify what he did. No one asks whether he was angry (or, as it turns out, horny). We know he is a deranged killer and that’s how we treat him. We rejoice at catching him; we throw him in prison; some regret that we can’t kill him; and we shake our heads at what a horrid person he is. We disdain him.

Well, these are crimes carried out by horrid criminals as well.

They are not insurgents. They are not even terrorists. I am coming to think it is wrong to give them even that bit of explanation and justification.

They are just murderers.

Are they angry? Why even ask?

: LATER

Yes, to call them “terrorist” gives them too much justification.

Look at it this way: Would you have tried to understand Edgar Ray Killen, the convicted Ku Klux Klan killer in the Mississippi Burning murders? Would you have explained his cultural shame at losing the Civil War and called him an insurgent or a militant or even a terrorist? Would you have blamed his grandparents for teaching him to have no respect for black people? Or would you simply condemn his hate and his act? The answer, of course, is C. So why should it be any different when condemning the crimes of these murderers?

LATER STILL:

A suicide bomber in a fuel truck blew himself up beside a Shiite mosque on Saturday evening in a town south of Baghdad, killing at least 58 people and wounding 86, the police said.

And what separates this from the bombing of a Mississippi black church?

Murder is murder.

Angry young men

Angry young men

: When it turned out that the London bombings were carried out by four young Muslim men born in England, it seemed to give a lie to Tom Friedman’s theory that Muslim terrorism sprouts from the anger of young men in Arab nations who have no hope of economic prosperity and freedom.

Here were young men who may not have been born into Windsor Castle, but they were living in a land of freedom and opportunity. So how can they be portrayed as anything other than what they are: murderers?

Well, today, The Times tries to continue portraying them as angry young men.

“I don’t approve of what he did, but I understand it. You get driven to something like this, it doesn’t just happen.”

To the boys from Cross Flats Park, Mr. Tanweer, 22, who blew himself up on a subway train in London last week, was devout, thoughtful and generous. If they understood his actions, it was because they lived in Mr. Tanweer’s world, too.

They did not agree with what Mr. Tanweer had done, but made clear they shared the same sense of otherness, the same sense of siege, the same sense that their community, and Muslims in general, were in their view helpless before the whims of greater powers. Ultimately, they understood his anger.

The news that four British-born Muslim men from neighborhoods around Leeds were suspected of carrying out the bombings in London has made the shared dissatisfaction of boys like these and the creeping militancy of some young British Muslims an urgent issue in Britain.

The bombers are an exception among Britain’s 1.6 million Muslims. But their actions have highlighted a lingering question: why are second-generation British Muslims who should seemingly be farther up the road of assimilation rejecting the country in which they were born and raised?

The problem with that analysis is that though it does not justify their actions — it tries to understand them — it gives a tacit logic, even a justification, to the horribly illogical, unjustifiable, uncivilized crime.

What they did is a crime. That’s all it is, nothing more. A crime.

But when we treat it as something else, when we try to understand it, when we grant the veil of political correctness — of understanding, even tolerance, invoking fuzzy words like “otherness” — we risk spreading the crime, making it if not acceptable then at least understandable for others. It is a cousin of glamorizing crime, of turning these scum into ideological, religious Bonnies and Clydes.

Well, not Bonnies… Which brings up an entirely different question: If terrorism is caused by anger, then wouldn’t the women of the Middle East be far more likely to turn into terrorists, since they are even more oppressed than their brothers and husbands, who are also their oppressors?

So is it about anger at all? Or is it just a crime? And shouldn’t we treat it as that? A crime.

Do we justify vehicular manslaughter under the influence of alcohol because alcoholism is a disease? No, we treat the act as a crime and slap the killer in jail.

Do we tolerate corporate fraud because the perpetrator was raised in a culture of competition, success, and greed> No, we treat the act as a crime and slap the thief in jail.

Now it’s fine to understand these acts insofar as it helps stop them. Yes, we must understand our enemies to defeat them. And, yes, sometimes we must understand the causes to eliminate those causes — and I’d argue that supporting democracy in the Middle East is just that.

But that’s not what’s happening in the efforts to understand why these young men did this terrible thing in London. This is not a military analysis aimed at finding and killing the enemy before he kills again. This is a sociological effort to understand them. And it begins with the presumption that we should accept their anger as as real.

Well what the hell do they have to be angry about? They’re fed. They’re free. They’re educated. They have health care. They can say and go where they want. Having problems with bullies on their playgrounds, are they? Well, don’t we all? But we don’t turn into Columbine killers or London bombers or Baghdad bombers who target children or the perpetrators of September 11th. Nothing justifies that. Nothing makes that understandable.

Do we try to understand the BTK killer? Not really. Oh, we try to justify the sensationalistic coverage of the case in the media. But no one truly tries to understand him and justify what he did. No one asks whether he was angry (or, as it turns out, horny). We know he is a deranged killer and that’s how we treat him. We rejoice at catching him; we throw him in prison; some regret that we can’t kill him; and we shake our heads at what a horrid person he is. We disdain him.

Well, these are crimes carried out by horrid criminals as well.

They are not insurgents. They are not even terrorists. I am coming to think it is wrong to give them even that bit of explanation and justification.

They are just murderers.

Are they angry? Why even ask?

: LATER

Yes, to call them “terrorist” gives them too much justification.

Look at it this way: Would you have tried to understand Edgar Ray Killen, the convicted Ku Klux Klan killer in the Mississippi Burning murders? Would you have explained his cultural shame at losing the Civil War and called him an insurgent or a militant or even a terrorist? Would you have blamed his grandparents for teaching him to have no respect for black people? Or would you simply condemn his hate and his act? The answer, of course, is C. So why should it be any different when condemning the crimes of these murderers?

LATER STILL:

A suicide bomber in a fuel truck blew himself up beside a Shiite mosque on Saturday evening in a town south of Baghdad, killing at least 58 people and wounding 86, the police said.

And what separates this from the bombing of a Mississippi black church?

Murder is murder.

  • penny

    Who can prove they were angry? Who is to say they didn’t serenely and with a happy heart detonate their bombs in the name of Allah and the awaiting 72 virgins?
    Who cares any more what the affect of these thugs are? Depressed, angry, anxious manic?……bullet therapy is the only cure.

  • Kat

    All they want is a caliphate.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/16/international/europe/16muslims.html?hp&ex=1121572800&en=7b1f44fe6658c193&ei=5094&partner=homepage
    {They have embraced one of the more conservative, if not militant, Islamic movements in Britain today – Hizb ut-Tahrir, or Party of Liberation.
    The party’s stated goal is to rebuild the Caliphate – the Muslim state dissolved with the fall of the Ottoman Empire – to displace corrupt dictators in the Muslim world, and to instill Islamic mores and Islamicize almost every aspect of daily life.
    The group has drawn about 10,000 members to its recent annual meetings, its members say, and includes chapters abroad in places like Uzbekistan. It is a controversial movement, even among British Muslims, and its members have become emblematic of the shift of Muslims born in Britain to more conservative and outspoken expressions of their faith.
    In interviews earlier this week in Birmingham, where they were born and bred, Dr. Waheed and Mr. Khan described the group’s struggle as one for the very identity of Muslims in Britain. }

  • http://www.limeyinbermuda.com Phil

    This is not a military analysis
    So what? You presume that the only way to defeat these people is by military means. I agree that these are crimes carried out by horrid criminals. I agree that they should be captured and locked up. If we can stop their crimes before they commit them that’s even better. But it would be better still if they didn’t even want to commit those crimes in the first place.
    We should be looking at all methods to prevent another terrorist atrocity like the one in London. If a sociological effort to understand them can help in this – and I don’t think any of us know enough to rule that out – then we should explore it.

  • Kat

    Just give them what they want–problem solved.
    Start with Toronto, Canada.
    http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/.Pictures/toronto-kilafah-03202004.jpg

  • http://www.cadenhead.org/workbench/ Rogers Cadenhead

    We’re not going to address the problem of terrorism without understanding the kind of insanity that would radicalize people like those British Muslims, causing them to give up a good life in an affluent Western country to become human bombs.
    The idea that we should simply dismiss these acts as “crimes,” and make no attempt to understand the thinking of the bombers, is escapism.
    When a homicide detective investigates a murderer’s motive, is he expressing tolerance for murder? Of course not.

  • http://www.limeyinbermuda.com Phil

    I note that that NYT article also says this:
    “They say they are weary of liberal Muslim leaders and British politicians who promise changes. They see them backing policies against the Muslim world in general, from Iraq to the Middle East to Afghanistan, and promising relief from economic distress and discrimination.”
    i.e. the source of their dissatisfaction is partly Western foreign policy in the Middle East.
    As for the suggestion that the London attacks were part of this goal to rebuild the Caliphate – the UK was never part of the Caliphate. So that hardly sounds like a plausible explanation to me.

  • Kat

    {British media, meanwhile, reported that bombing suspect Mohammed Sidique Khan, 30, visited the Houses of Parliament last year as the guest of Labour Party lawmaker Jon Trickett.} Sure, invite them to crumpets and tea and ask them to explain why they gutblow–if they tell you why will you give them what they want–another terrorist state or what??

  • Neo

    Just as so many have believed for years that the Christian fringe (some say all) has a population of “Crazies for Christ,” it is now quite apparent that there are “Assholes for Allah.”
    The best way to deal with both of these groups is laughter and distain, not to coddle them.

  • Kat

    Here’s a brief explanation of their grievances. And also the root cause of terrorist attacks–PC’ness. Let’s look the other way, let’s blame the Joos, or the Americans, but let’s not expect accountability from terrorist folk–we don’t want to hurt their feelings. And they are poor, oppressed little people–{All of the Al-Qaeda members studied came from middle or upper class backgrounds.
    Two-thirds were college educated, a tenth had a postgraduate degree and more than seven out of 10 were married with children.}
    http://kotisivu.mtv3.fi/jjokunen/political_correctness_and_islam.htm

  • http://www.elflife.com/ carsonfire

    There is nothing wrong with understanding the motives of criminals, the trouble comes in when you use it to excuse their actions.
    “…were in their view helpless before the whims of greater powers. Ultimately, they understood his anger”
    It could just be the wording that is grating. Imagine if we said of a pedophile, “…he was helpless before the whims of his uncontrollable urges. Ultimately, they understood why he raped his girlfriend’s underage daughter.” It’s one thing to understand the *pathologies* which lead to crime, in a scientific way, it’s quite another to suggest that you are sympathetic to them, which is what this type of phrasing seems to suggest (even if that perception is in error).
    These Muslim extremists quite simply cannot have what they feel that “greater powers” are denying them. They may *not* take back ancient lands. They may *not* eliminate other religions. Etc. These are fantastical, unrealistic goals that have no bearing on their lives as individuals, so there’s no point in being sympathetic to their “helplessness”.

  • kat

    We already have ‘assholes for atheism’ so can’t be assholes for allah.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Want to know the number one reason why Islamicist terrorism is still a global threat? We have little if any human intelligence on the ground penetrating these organizations, as we had in every previous war. You cannot infiltrate al-Qaeda unless you understand it–understand its membership and motivation and you will begin to apprehend its tactics, its desires, its fears, and most importantly its weaknesses. For the love of God, we’re firing the few Arabists we have on call in our intelligence agencies because they’re gay. How are we supposed to stay ahead of our enemy if we can’t even translate their communications in real-time?
    Jesus Christ, Jeff, if you had had a blog during the Cold War would you have excoriated attempts to understand the Soviet Union for what it was? And yet if not for the work of tens of thousands of Sovietologists and nameless spies who made the ultimate sacrifice for world peace, we may have blown the planet to kingdom come twenty or thirty times over had we listened to the likes of Penny and Kat, for whom the only good communists were dead communists.
    Every war has an end, but that’s not how the jihadis and their American Christofascist counterparts talk. Why? Because just as during the height of the Cold War the wingnuts wanted Armageddon, the final battle between Good and Evil, the Second Coming of Christ and the end of the world. And so do the terrorists.
    Begin to understand why the phenomenon of terror occurs and you might actually learn how to stop it before it can even start. Close your eyes, stop your ears, and scream “EVIL EVIL EVIL!” over and over again and you’re nothing more than a liability in this conflict–perhaps not as bad as your commentariat, who’d like nothing more than a final showdown between Jesus and Mohammed–but not exactly helping the cause just the same.

  • Dak

    But it would be better still if they didn’t even want to commit those crimes in the first place.
    ……. If a sociological effort to understand them can help in this -
    Go to the url below Phil..to understand it. Now, how does that help? What should society do with that information?
    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=15733488&method=full&siteid=94762&headline=exclusive–they-tried-to-make-me-a-suicide-bomber-name_page.html

  • http://www.limeyinbermuda.com Phil

    Dark
    They wanted me to avenge the deaths of my Muslim brothers and sisters around the world… “The Western crusaders are trying to take over the Muslim world,” they said.
    Nope, that doesn’t sound like they want to obliterate the West because they hate our freedom, either, as so many people seem to be so fond of saying. Again, it sounds like a beef with some of our foreign policy.
    Perhaps we don’t want to change our foreign policy. That’s fine. But let’s at least be honest that this is a factor in their thinking.
    As Jersey Exile so succinctly put it, to just put our hands over our ears and scream “EVIL EVIL EVIL” will achieve nothing.

  • Fiamma

    They want a caliphate. Problem is they want a caliphate that encompasses the entire world.
    Deport them from wherever they now live to the ME. Gets them out of our midst and back to the ‘ideals’ they live for. Sharia rule.
    I wonder how it would be for those who live in democracies to be suddenly under Sharia rule, and how long it would take them to try to change that rule.
    Just a thought.

  • Dishman

    I believe that Jeff’s objection is that the article comes across as compassionate towards these killers. Their behavior is not acceptable, and that element of judgemental social pressure needs to be applied.

  • Kat

    So should the Hindus, Buddhists, and Armenians be gutblowing to avenge the genocides by muslims of their people? Whose foreign policy should we be concerned about–the one which attempts to unite the world under allah or the one fighting that concept? What particular foreign policy was wrong??
    1. They attack Red Cross personnel.
    2. They murder people working for the UN.
    3. They kidnap and kill care workers.
    4. They bomb holiday-makers, in nightclubs.
    5. They blow up people travelling on trains – civilians.
    6. They target people on buses – civilians.
    7. They take civilian hostages.
    8. They decapitate them.
    9. They murder trade unionists.
    10. They kidnap diplomats.
    11. They kill people for being… barbers.
    12. They fly aircraft full of civilians into skyscrapers where people are at work.
    13. They take schoolchildren hostage and murder them.
    14. They bomb synagogues.
    15. They kill people shopping in a market.
    16. They kill people queuing at a medical clinic.
    17. They murder children in Baghdad.
    18. They murder people on their way to work in London.
    …..or is it that we helped to save Muslims in Bosnia, Kosovo, Som-alia, Kuwait, and Afghanistan, and bombed Christian Europeans. I hope the latter don’t tie on bombs to protest foreign policy.
    Putting your hands over your ears and screaming it’s US’s fault is the mark of a madman–a stinking terrorist. It will only achieve more attacks against us because they know the leftists will blame Bush and not the islamists.

  • qdpsteve

    Once again Jersey Exile starts to make some valid points on the GWOT, and then wets his pants in his fervor to spew hateful anti-Christian rhetoric.
    I can’t help but wonder two things, Jersey:
    - You spout the nonsence PCism ‘Christofascist’ so quickly… is the term ‘Islamofascist’ also in your oh-so-enlightened leftist vocabulary?
    - If in fact this administration *is* so quick to bring about the Great Reckoning, why not just have right away gone *nuclear* (sorry, I’ll use your hero Mr. Carter’s pronunciation: knew-cue-lerr) on the axis of evil? It surely would have both taken care of most of the poor persecuted Jihadists and helped bring about Jesus’ return right quick.
    …Oh, but of course… then you wouldn’t have gotten the chance to get your shrunken loins all a-tingle by riling up all us red-state trailer trash with your ‘Christofascist’ remarks. Just another typical, blue-state arrogant snob, who’d rather declare war against Jesusland than the terrorists.

  • trm

    Mr. Jarvis, I usually right on with you, but I think you missed the point and are beating a dead horse (or murderer).
    The point isn’t to understand the criminals. They have already fallen. Yes, they are just murderers.
    Q: Are (sic) they angry? Why even ask?
    A: They are dead and can do no more harm.
    The point is “boys from Cross Flats Park.” These boys are not criminals; these are not murderers. They have not committed a crime; they can not just be slapped in jail.
    But it is *they* who understand the murderers’ anger, even though they don’t agree with their actions.
    This is the point. This is what *we* need to understand.
    I know you don’t understand them; i know I don’t understand them.
    But if we want to prevent four more of them from falling over the edge and becoming a murderer, we need to understand the normal, law-abiding boys from Cross Flats Park.
    Q: Are they angry? Why even ask?
    A: They are angry and they are still alive. Understand why, now, and clean up the mess before the next boys fall and destroy the cycle.
    Or else just wait till they’re fallen and clean up a different mess later. And wait for it to happen again. And again. And again.

  • Dak

    Phil, unbelievable! You think they themselves believed that line of crap they were feeding that boy? What they told him had nothing to do with reality or what they thought. They were telling him ANYthing to get him to agree.
    You were talking about understanding those human bombs. Human bombs become human bombs by being manipulated by master manipulators whose motives we already understand…to make all lands Islam and to have only one religion.
    And THAT, has nothing to do with anyone’s “foreign policy”. Get Real.

  • http://www.limeyinbermuda.com Phil

    Dak
    You think they themselves believed that line of crap they were feeding that boy? What they told him had nothing to do with reality or what they thought… Human bombs become human bombs by being manipulated by master manipulators whose motives we already understand…to make all lands Islam and to have only one religion.
    On what basis do you make those statements? Has bin Laden ever said that? I seem to remember him objecting to the US presence in Saudi Arabia and the US’ unconditional support for Israel. Don’t remember him mentioning wanting to make the US or the UK an Islamic state, but maybe I missed something?
    Fiamma
    Problem is they want a caliphate that encompasses the entire world.
    Ditto above.
    Kat
    You’re missing the point. No-one is suggesting that the things these guys do are in any way justifiable. They are not. But to think that these attacks are motiveless, or have nothing to do with US foreign policy is to just shove your head in the sand. Simply branding these guys evil and then switching off your brain is not going to help us stop more attacks.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    qdpsteve,
    1. I use the term “Christofascist” so as not to offend the many Christian fundamentalists and Evangelicals whom I know that happen to take their Savior’s injunctions about violence, murder, and intolerance seriously (as opposed to Christofascists, for whom Scripture is merely a pretext for their own selfish motives, aggressions, and hatred). I don’t mind the term “Islamofascist” so much as long as the fact is acknowledged that other religions can be similarly appropriated for ideological reasons.
    Oh, and FYI–my wife is an Orthodox Christian. I have no beef with Jesusland provided that its citizens refrain from forcing my daughter to endure prayer in class, learn about their superstitious “theory” of Creation in biology class, regard gays and lesbians as immoral, or fly to Europe in order to terminate a pregnancy. Just the same, I had an ancestor burned at the stake by the Inquisition, so you won’t mind if I myself reserve the right to view organized religion with a certain amount of justified distate and suspicion.
    2. I never said that the Administration was Christofascist, merely that the Christofascists are a small but vocal member of its constituency. Do you ever watch Jack Van Impe or the 700 Club? They’re sure as Hell convinced we’re living in the end times, and that Bush is acting as an agent of Biblical prophecy. I can go online and dredge up megabytes of proof, but if you’re truly from a Red State (and not some suburban wannabe) you’ll know that what I’m saying is true. The Bush White house is a volatile stew of neoconservative ideologues, born-again Christofacists, and old guard Bush I employees who look increasingly disillusioned and haggard with every passing day. Fortunately Dick Cheney and a couple of other key players happen to be from the third category, or else who knows how much worse things would be in the Middle East right about now.
    Sorry if that spoils your caricature of me somewhat, but oh well. Members of my own family currently living in trailers (how about yours?) and definitely qualifying for the “white trash” moniker, I don’t look down at my nose at people on account of the accidents of their birth or the vicissitudes of life, but is sure as Hell sounds like you do. There are plenty of dirt-poor working folk who vote Blue, friend–why don’t you try meeting a few?

  • Dak

    http://www.shalomjerusalem.com/mohammedism/mohammedism11.html
    “Islam’s philosophy teaches it, and its’ past history
    proves it”
    One of thousands of examples:
    Pakistani soldiers raped up to 250,000 Bangali women in 1971 after they massacred 3,000,000 unarmed civilians because their religious leader decreed that Bangladeshis are unislamic….
    foreign policy? oil? Thousands of such examples reign over tens of centuries
    evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil evil

  • http://www.limeyinbermuda.com Phil

    Dak
    Are these the same Pakistani soldiers that the US is now working with to hunt down al-Qaeda? Just asking.
    Instead of pointing me to someone else’s opinion, can you point me in the direction of a statement made by al-Qaeda itself that states that turning the nations of the West into Islamic states is their aim?

  • Dak

    “Islam’s philosophy teaches it, and its’ past history
    proves it”
    was in reference to Phils insistence on the evil being the result of foreign policy and not the goal of …making all lands Islam and to have only one religion
    http://www.shalomjerusalem.com/mohammedism/mohammedism11.html

  • Dak

    Yes, it was on the video tape Osama released to try and influence the US elections.
    “UBL and al-Queda have stated that they will not rest until there is a grand Mulim revolution, where Allah is worshipped by all and Islamic Law is the law of all lands.”
    http://www.jasoncoleman.com/BlogArchives/2004/10/usama_chimes_in.html

  • Dak

    With the event of internet archiving, certainly it will become increasingly difficult for evil to deny, disguise, manipulate and whitewash itself,and to transfer blame to others.
    Phil: (who insists it is the US foreign policy to blame, not al-Qaeda’s desire to rule the world)
    can you point me in the direction of a statement made by al-Qaeda itself that states that turning the nations of the West into Islamic states is their aim?
    Dak: Yes, it was on the video tape Osama released to try and influence the US elections.
    “UBL and al-Queda have stated that they will not rest until there is a grand Mulim revolution, where Allah is worshipped by all and Islamic Law is the law of all lands.”
    http://www.jasoncoleman.com/BlogArchives/2004/10/usama_chimes_in.html
    Hmmmm…Phil appears to have left the building.

  • Original Jeff

    Even more worrying, some 14-57% of Muslims support terrorism
    A new global survey asked this question of Muslims:
    “Some people think that suicide bombing and other forms of violence against civilian targets are
    justified in order to defend Islam from its enemies. Other people believe that, no matter what the reason, this kind of violence is never justified. Do you personally feel that this kind of violence is often justified to defend Islam, sometimes justified, rarely justified, or never justified?”
    Responses are tabulated on page 42 in this PDF file.
    http://www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/ PRC…Terror_0705.pdf
    Between 14% and 57% of Muslims said terrorism is often or sometimes justified, depending on the country. If you multiply these values by the national populations, you get the answer of 89 million people! The survey did not include Saudi Arabia, Egypt, etc. Basically, we probably have 200-300 million people who actively believe terrorism is morally proper!

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Original Jeff,
    Would that be the study titled:
    “Support For Terror Wanes Among Muslim Publics”
    !
    Kinda forgot to mention that important part of the survey, eh?

  • Kat

    On that basis, and in compliance with Allah’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:
    The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies — civilians and military — is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, “and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,” and “fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah.”
    This is in addition to the words of Almighty Allah: “And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? — women and children, whose cry is: ‘Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will help!’”
    We — with Allah’s help — call on every Muslim who believes in Allah and wishes to be rewarded to comply with Allah’s order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan’s U.S. troops and the devil’s supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson.
    Almighty Allah said: “O ye who believe, give your response to Allah and His Apostle, when He calleth you to that which will give you life. And know that Allah cometh between a man and his heart, and that it is He to whom ye shall all be gathered.”
    Almighty Allah also says: “O ye who believe, what is the matter with you, that when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling so heavily to the earth! Do ye prefer the life of this world to the hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least. For Allah hath power over all things.”
    Almighty Allah also says: “So lose no heart, nor fall into despair. For ye must gain mastery if ye are true in faith.”
    http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm
    Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders
    World Islamic Front Statement
    23 February 1998
    Shaykh Usamah Bin-Muhammad Bin-Ladin
    Ayman al-Zawahiri, amir of the Jihad Group in Egypt
    Abu-Yasir Rifa’i Ahmad Taha, Egyptian Islamic Group
    Shaykh Mir Hamzah, secretary of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan
    Fazlur Rahman, amir of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh

  • Gut Check

    Jersey Exile, you hit the mark regarding the reasons why Islamic terrorism is a “global” threat. And I read the Times piece this morning and didn’t think for a minute that the writer was sympathetic at all to those Muslim sympathizers but just doing the journalistic job of delivering their story. Neither did it make me sympathetic at all to their grievances but chilled me–as did Jeff’s numbers above–with the stats. And as in all conflicts, it’s almost always to your advantage to understand your enemies’ motives.
    But at the risk of offending anyone’s religious sensibilities, I think their rational and motivations go deeper than economics and politics and begin with their belief system. (As a liberal, it truly pains me to write this, but will take advantage of the anonymity afforded to me here–yes, I’m too cowardly to say this in public.) Have you ever read the Quran? Like the Bible, it’s got its beautiful parts, and then you occassionally stumble into passages that are just philosophically and ethically repulsive. However, since the Bible was written and gathered by numerous hands and since it’s not the express word of god (Christians often claim god “inspired” its writers), Christians can easily pick and choose the injunctions they want to take literally or figuratively. But the Quran is Allah word for word delivered through the mouth of the prophet and Muslims have to believe that (there are a few liberal interpreters of the Quran but they have a hell of a time convincing anyone else of their views). With that in mind, read the Quran and you’ll find that it’s scary stuff to a non-Muslim. It’s monotheism is not only monolithic but viral in its prescriptions. When 3:83 of the Quran states that “he that chooses a religion other than Islam…will be one of the lost,” it reminds me of Jesus’s claim that no one comes to the father but through him. But where Jesus exhorts his disciples at the end of Matthew to “go and make disciples of all the nations,” Mohammed says something a bit more sinister: “Fight for the sake of god those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love the aggressors. Slay them wherever you find them. Drive them out of the places from which they drove you….Fight against them until idolatry is no more and god’s religion reigns supreme.” (2:190) This is the mindset that built the caliphate in the first place (added to the natural human inclination toward monopolization).
    How do you battle that mentality? We have Christian zealouts here in abundance, and we’ve witnessed them resort to acts of violence and murder with the Bible as justification in their deranged reasoning. Imagine how much more rampant that would be if Jesus had actually recommended the use of violence.
    I know that most Muslims I meet do not approve of violence (at least openly), but I really don’t know how they rationalize certain parts of their faith (just as I don’t know how evangelical Christians rationalize certain parts of their faith) and the way their belief system is set up, it’s way too easy for fundamentalists to gain teh upper theological hand.
    Wish I could snap a finger and return all of us to Enlightenment principles.

  • http://www.bloodandtreasure.com/publishing Noel Guinane

    Here’s something, dating from 1993, that might explain how people who were born and raised in England could choose to blow up their own citizens:
    “Iran is the major sponsor of terrorism in the Middle East, supporting Hamas in southern Lebanon, bankrolling Muslim terrorist groups based in Tehran and the October movement in Egypt, and forming terrorist hit squads to assasinate Iranian dissidents in Western Europe. It has extended its ideological reach into Central Asia, focusing on Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan.
    Because it launched the Persian Gulf War, Iraq gets more attention in the West, but Iran is by far the greater long-term threat. Iraq’s threat is only military. Its secular philosophy has no appeal beyond its border. Iran’s threat is both military and religious.
    As Israel’s Prime Minister Rabin pointed out when we met in New York in late 1993, Iran’s tactics are ominously similar to those of the Soviet Union’s infamous Comintern before World War II. Rather than supporting openly pro-Iranian movements in target nations it seeks to dominate, it supports nationalist opposition movements that advocate its brand of extreme Muslim fundamentalism, just as the Commmunist Party of the Soviet Union supported indigenous communist parties in noncommunist nations.
    Rabin explained that this allows an Egyptian, for example, to be an Iranian-oriented extreme Muslim fundamentalist and a loyal Egyptian at the same time, just as members of the Soviet-controlled indigenous communist parties in the West during the Cold War could be communists without being openly disloyal to their own countries.
    As a result, throughout the Muslim world today there are rapidly growing fundamentalist movements whose members appear to be loyal to their own countries but whose first loyalty is to the extreme Muslim fundamentalist religion with its roots in Iran.
    As Rabin emphasized, this is an insidious form of aggression. It allows the aggressor to take over its victim without risking international condemnation. Rather than going over a border, Iran in effect goes under a border and enlists citizens of the target nation who share its extreme religious faith to carry out its designs for conquest.
    Iran’s strategy, as the Soviets’ used to be, is to expand its influence and domination over other countries by the appeal of its ideas rather than the use of raw military power. Another striking similarity between their tactics is that Iran uses terrorism to support its aggression.”
    Nixon wrote this in his 1993 book, Beyond Peace.

  • http://sisu.typepad.com Sissy Willis

    It’s true these folk are psychopaths who must be rooted out and brought to justice, but it’s naive to believe they should be content to have physical comforts handed to them on a welfare platter. No man — no creature worth its salt — can bear the shame.
    They are not without a kind of perverted honor

  • penny

    If a sociological effort to understand them can help in this…..
    We’re not going to address the problem of terrorism without understanding the kind of insanity……….
    Begin to understand why the phenomenon of terror occurs…..
    With eyes glazed over, just what is it that you understandistas don’t get about the scum killing kids and other innocents? They would be killing you if they had proximity. Duh. You need to understand them??? Or perhaps you don’t want to annihilate them because we can never have full understanding of human actions and we might miss some issue in their defense? That it? They can have the same sanctuary as man eating sharks in your universe? Right?
    No one was cretin enough at the Nuremberg trials to propose psychiatric evaluations or sociological studies of the SS? They were sentenced quickly and hanged for crimes against humanity. End of story.
    I’m sure there were a few sad little furry creatures somewhere in academia and scattered in Paris coffeehouses offended by the bold strokes of the Nuremberg trials and indignant at their insufficient understanding of the Nazis’ issues. Those little creatures never made into the history books. They won’t again this time either.

  • penny

    We have Christian zealouts here in abundance, and we’ve witnessed them resort to acts of violence and murder with the Bible as justification in their deranged reasoning..
    Adundance?……really? You mean the 2 or 3 abortion clinic killings by lone individuals not scanctioned by any Christian church? Got any facts on that one?
    Hey, don’t bother with the facts. I take it back. You’ll find friends here that spin the same trite hyperbole and facts would only confuse them too.
    Just out of curiosity, would you spin this garbage in front of an employer that was paying you for the merits of your reasoning and analytical skills?

  • Francois

    Jeff, you’re right they don’t deserve to be called terrorists. 55 dead? Piffle! Real terrorists kill 100,000 civilians, invade sovereign nations, poison the air, water and ground with depleted uranium, spread “freedom” and “democracy” at the point of a gun, and thumb their noses at international treaties!
    These guys were boys. They didn’t come close to MEN like Christian warriors Bush and Blair.
    How dare you compare the two? I’m disappointed in you Jeff.

  • elmegil

    Phil: (who insists it is the US foreign policy to blame, not al-Qaeda’s desire to rule the world)
    Hm, perhaps it’s convenient for you to overstate Phil’s case? Even if we posit as a given that al-Qaeda wishes to rule the world, and that is their root justification (to themselves), it is obvious that they use more general dissatisfaction with western (not just US) foreign policy, particularly in the middle east, as a lever to move FAR MORE human bombs than they would be able to move simply with dreams of empire.
    BTW, Mr. Jarvis: Bonnies? You mean like the palestinian girls who’ve blown themselves up a few times in the last few years? While a minority, you can’t pretend they don’t exist.
    And put me soundly on the side of those pointing out that whether journalists can describe it accurately or not (so far it seems to me they fail utterly to do anything but sound sympathetic to terrorists), there is a significant value in understanding the motivations and manipulations being used to accomplish these evil acts so that they can be defused. Simple capitulation? Hell effin no. But without understanding, NO action can be taken to nullify their effect.

  • elmegil

    You mean the 2 or 3 abortion clinic killings by lone individuals not scanctioned by any Christian church? Got any facts on that one?
    You obviously haven’t paid attention to the “righteous christian” teachings of the aryan nations and their ilk. Pretending they don’t exist and don’t claim christianity as justification (you know, that bit in the old testament about not mixing with others not of your kind?) doesn’t mean they aren’t out there, violent, and claiming Jesus as their motivation.
    Doesn’t make them right, but claiming they don’t exist doesn’t make your case.

  • Eileen

    Apparently Jesus isn’t their only motivation.
    3/09/05: “In a letter posted on its Web site the head of the white supremacist group Aryan Nations offers his thanks to radical Islamic terrorists and extends the group’s hand of friendship.
    Aryan Nations National Director August Kreis writes (www.aryan-nations.org), “We as an organization will also endeavor to aid all those who subvert, disrupt and are (sic) malignant in nature to our enemies. Therefore I offer my most sincere best-wishes to those who wage holy Jihad against the infrastructure of the decadent, weak and Judaic-influenced societal infrastructure of the West. I send a message of thanks and well-wishes to the methods and works of groups on the Islamic front against the jew such as Al-Qaeda and Sheik Usama Bin Ladin, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and to all Jihadis worldwide who fight for the glory of the Khilafah and the downfall of the anti-life and anti-freedom System prevalent on this earth today.
    Kreis continues by saying (sic), ” I ask our Islamic fellow fighters against jewry to remember the co-operation between Mufti Haj Mohammad Amin al-Husseini and Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler during the last century and to remember that all that is of the past it is our duty to surpass!”
    http://www.americandaily.com/article/7040

  • Eileen

    For additional information on “co-operation between Mufti Haj Mohammad Amin al-Husseini and Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler” see:
    http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/AminAlHusseini.htm#part4 [Thanks, Kat.]:
    “Post-war Nazi Propaganda now focuses on the Arab race as the superior race. The West and the Jews remain the enemy. From 1945 to today, Husseini’s Arabisation campaigns claim over 10 million lives by ethnic cleansing, mostly under the cloak of Jihad. Amin Al Husseini creates Pan-Arabism to further his agenda.
    ——————————————————————————–
    From now on, Amin Al Husseini’s vision of Arab Supremacy and ethnic cleansing operates on two fronts.
    1. The secular front: Arab League, Yasser Arafat, Saddam Hussein and the Baath parties.
    2. The religious front: Muslim Brotherhood (Hamas, Jihad Islami, Al Qeida) and the incitement of Islamic revolutions throughout the globe.”
    Read ALL about him.

  • tonynoboloney

    I’m a pretty simple guy, and often tend to veiw my world as black and white. Let me see if I got this right? There were four or more young men from the Leeds area of england who took it upon themselves to kill more than fifty Brits in the name of something called Hizb ut Tahrir, whose mission statement is to create what it calls a “caliphate”. Am I right so far? Following links from this site I was able to discern that this “caliphate” endorses Muslim domination of the world, and those countries that could or would not be dominated, (Jews & Christians being named specifically) would be allowed to exist as long as they paid a tax to the “caliphate”, should these nations (england and the United States named specifically) renig on this arrangement they would be destroyed by said “caliphate”. Am I following correctly? In order to bring this “caliphate” into existance it has become nessesarry for (some) Muslims all over the world to hook themselves up to explosives and kill inocent civialians (infidels & pagans named specifically), and to plunder their treasuries whenever possible. Do I have this right? Is that the message I am to understand? Like I said I’m a pretty simple guy, and I’m having a little difficulty appreciating the Flat Cross Park Boys dilema. I have to tell ya my gut reaction is to figure out a way to defend myself. Help me out here, If (some) practioners of the Muslim faith have clearly stated their goals as the complete subjugation or anialation of all peoples and things not Muslim, who must I defend myself against? Sounds like I’ve got myself a real situation going here, on the one hand I need and want to protect myself & mine from fanatical Muslims but on the other hand I’m being told I’ll need first to understand their motives, to put myself in their shoes, to empathize and sypathize with the poor Muslim’s plight. Hmmmm? I don’t think so.
    Like I said in a previous post:
    If it Walks like a duck and sounds like a duck and looks like a duck, it probably is a duck. And if those ducks insist on detonating bombs in MY pond I’m going duck hunting. If the innocent ducks do not start pointing their pin feathers at the guilty ducks they are liable to get caught in the fray. I’m sorry I’m not feeling very p.c. these days.

  • Eileen

    Me either, tonynoboloney. I’m not sorry.
    Apparently neither is Robin Williams, who is attributed with proposing the following Peace Plan [sorry no link, arrived via mail]:
    “I see a lot of people yelling for peace but I have not heard of a plan for peace. So, here’s one plan.
    1.) The US will apologize to the world for our “interference” in their affairs, past &present. You know, Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo, Noriega, Milosevic and the rest of those ‘good ole boys,’ We will never “interfere” again.
    2.) We will withdraw our troops from all over the world, starting with Germany, South Korea and the Philippines. They don’t want us there. We would station troops at our borders. No one sneaking through holes in the fence.
    3.) All illegal aliens have 90 days to get their affairs together and leave. We’ll give them a free trip home. After 90 days the remainder will be gathered up and deported immediately, regardless of who or where they are. France would welcome them.
    4.) All future visitors will be thoroughly checked and limited to 90 days unless given a special permit. No one from a terrorist nation would be allowed in. If you don’t like it there, change it yourself and don’t hide here. Asylum would never be available to anyone. We don’t need any more cab drivers or 7-11 cashiers.
    5.) No foreign “students” over age 21. The older ones are the bombers. If they don’t attend classes, they get a “D” and it’s back home baby.
    6.) The US will make a strong effort to become self-sufficient energy wise. This will include developing nonpolluting sources of energy but will require a temporary drilling of oil in the Alaskan wilderness. The caribou will have to cope for a while.
    7.) Offer Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries $10 a barrel for their oil. If they don’t like it, we go some place else. They can go somewhere else to sell their production. (About a week of the wells filling up the storage sites would be enough.)
    8.) If there is a famine or other natural catastrophe in the world, we will not “interfere,” They can pray to Allah or whomever, for seeds, rain, cement or whatever they need. Besides most of what we give them is stolen or given to the army. The people who need it most get very little, if anything.
    9.) Ship the UN Headquarters to an isolated island some place. We don’t need the spies and fair weather friends here. Besides, the building would make a good homeless shelter or lockup for illegal aliens.
    10.) All Americans must go to charm and beauty school. That way, no one can call us “Ugly Americans” any longer. The Language we speak is ENGLISH…..learn it…or LEAVE…Now, isn’t that a winner of a plan.
    “The Statue of Liberty is no longer saying ‘Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses.’ She’s got a baseball bat and she’s yelling,
    ‘You want a piece of me?’”

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Wow. So Robin Williams has become as painfully unfunny as Dennis Miller in his old age.
    Here’s the thing, though, Eileen–I thought you conservatarians HATED it when Hollywood personalities got involved in politics…
    Jeff, in response to your black church analogy, I guess you’re not all that familiar with the short stories of Eudora Welty then, are you? “Where Is the Voice Coming From?” is written from the viewpoint of the person who had killed Medgar Evers in Jackson, Mississippi in June of 1963. It is considered a masterpiece precisely because it attempts to understand the mind of someone who could perpetrate such an awful crime.

  • penny

    You obviously haven’t paid attention to the “righteous christian” teachings of the aryan nations and their ilk
    Like they are a real big threat to anyone, stealing the headlines daily from the Islamofascists, you birdbrain!

  • Linda Edwards

    Um, Eileen, that Robin Williams “Peace Plan” was a hoax.
    http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl-williams-plan.htm
    http://hoaxbusters.org/#R
    You want further proof it’s not Robin Williams? It ain’t funny! It’s a bore. There was one similar ranting, belligerent email circulating that was attributed to George Carlin. Carlin stated on his own site that the email didn’t originate from him.
    I work with a woman who used to send me those kind of emails. I asked her first, to stop sending them to me, and second, why in the hell does she believe that crap people email to her. In her very simple-minded way, she actually said something very profound: “I’ll believe what I want to believe”.
    Thus, it’s as simple as that.

  • Ron Wright

    It’s Time to Stick It to the Enemy in the GWOT!
    Gut Check, Noel, and others,
    Gut Check and Noel I think are on to it. There are several other discussions going on on this topic. There is one being led by Bill Reggio at Winds of Change. Go there and follow the links to other sites and you may find you answer and how you can personally help win the GWOT.
    Whatever you do go to Dr. Zin’s site:
    http://www.regimechangeiran.com
    and read about the brave Iranian journalist putting his life on the line to call attention to the Iranian people’s struggle for freedom.
    Of course the MSM is not reporting this to the Amercian people but you can spread the word via the Blogos.
    *****
    Bill and others,
    I believe you all are on the right track. It’s fascinating to watch as a group consensus seems to be evolving across the political Blog sites. Others are starting to come to similar conclusions about what the cause is and what needs to be done to win the GWOT (Un PC – Islamofascism).
    The secret is we must know our enemy and the ideology that drives it. We need to exploit the weaknesses of the enemy. We need to drive a stake literally through the very heart of the enemy (e.g. the Mad Mullahs of Iran would be a close first) and wipe this cult-like religious ideology that evolved from the sands of the Arabian and North African deserts from the face of the earth.
    This ideology has been brought to our world by the radical madrasses of this movement by the oil money of the House of Saud. This is the key nexus of this mess that we have ignored for all too long because of our multiculturism, political correctness, and tolerance of other religions and cultures. The enemy is exploiting this strength of the American society. It’s time we awoke and ram this back down their throats.
    [...]
    Read More
    [scroll back to the top of the thread]

  • Franky

    “Murder is murder”
    so murder is murder, not say chicken-paste? The stupidty of this approach is that of course it doesn’t explain why this happened this year and not last or the year before.
    “And if those ducks insist on detonating bombs in MY pond I’m going duck hunting.”
    Tony, I’m so glad you’ve signed up to go fight along the Afghanistn/Pakistan border. I wish you all the luck. You and your family will be in my prayers.

  • http://www.chicagoboyz.net Mitch

    Sorry, Jersey Exile, but all we really need to “understand” about such troubled souls is their distance, so we can set our sights appropriately. Don’t stand too close to these unfortunates, as some of us are a little rusty.
    This is serious. We are no more inclined to tolerate islamic fascism than the secular sort. What a pity the left is having so much trouble getting their heads around this, but I guess that’s why I left the left.
    Thank God for the Second Amendment and the Remington Model 700. (I like it chambered for the .30 cal. Winchester magnum, for which the long throw on the bolt action makes sense. Put a scope and a bipod on one of those babies and you can put the eye out of a space monster on Ganymede. Only exaggerating a little — talk to Kim du Toit for the real deal. He likes the regular US .30 cal./NATO .308.)

  • Eileen

    Um, Linda, notice I was very careful to indicate it had been ‘attributed’ to him and got it via mail. Of COURSE you wouldn’t find one word of it to be funny! I like the part about offering $10 per barrel..

  • tonynoboloney

    Franky,
    I’m 53 and I’ve already served. My pond is now in the state of Michigan, and I assure you if those ducks get anywhere near here I’ll do my part again. I DO appreciate the prayers.

  • Kat

    Understanding a moonbat. You’d have to be one to understand these gutblowers. But I have read the koran and it is a great terror manual. The root cause of this evil is the koran.
    {ìHow did you feel when you heard that youíd been selected for martyrdom?î I asked.
    ìItís as if a very high, impenetrable wall separated you from Paradise or Hell,î he said. ìAllah has promised one or the other to his creatures. So, by pressing the detonator, you can immediately open the door to Paradise ó it is the shortest path to Heaven.î
    ìWe were in a constant state of worship,î he said. ìWe told each other that if the Israelis only knew how joyful we were they would whip us to death! Those were the happiest days of my life.î
    ìWhat is the attraction of martyrdom?î I asked.
    ìThe power of the spirit pulls us upward, while the power of material things pulls us downward,î he said. ìSomeone bent on martyrdom becomes immune to the material pull. Our planner asked, ëWhat if the operation fails?í We told him, ëIn any case, we get to meet the Prophet and his companions, inshallah.í
    ìWe were floating, swimming, in the feeling that we were about to enter eternity. We had no doubts. We made an oath on the Koran, in the presence of Allah ó a pledge not to waver. This jihad pledge is called bayt al-ridwan, after the garden in Paradise that is reserved for the prophets and the martyrs. I know that there are other ways to do jihad. But this one is sweet ó the sweetest. All martyrdom operations, if done for Allah ís sake, hurt less than a gnatís bite!î
    ìTomorrow, we will be martyrs,î he declared, looking straight at the camera. ìOnly the believers know what this means. I love martyrdom.î
    The young men and the planner then knelt and placed their right hands on the Koran. The planner said: ìAre you ready? Tomorrow, you will be in Paradise.î }

  • penny

    Mitch, I think you are scaring poor Jersey with the lock and load rhetoric. Guns aren’t his solution with homicidal maniacs, not when you can seek a common ground and understand them. Heck, as per Jersey and his ilk, we Americans should beg forgiveness from them. We are morally not worthy of saving. Ask what’s his face, elmegil. A couple obscure abortion clinic incidents disqualifies us from saving ourselves or making a judgement call on Islamofascist evil.
    As I said, the little furry unarmed and most undestanding creatures usually win the Darwin Award. It’s as good as it gets for them.

  • http://section9.blogspot.com Section9

    Mitch: I hear tell that new G.I. issue XM-8 by Heckler & Koch is nothing to sneeze at, either, especially with the 100 round drum mag. Keeps the 72 Virgins really busy!

  • name n. name

    Will the liberal media ever recognize their contribution to these acts of terrorism through reporting that is biased and which perpetuates a false moral equivalence between terrorists and the forces of liberty?

  • Eileen

    A few suggestions:
    1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’. They are all warriors for Allah.
    2. Blow up the madrassas. Replace them with schools which teach moderation and undo the brainwashing being driven into little gutblowers.
    3. Proclaim very distinctly that our WOT is directed at *Islamofascism*, its followers and supporters in every way, shape and form; NOT upon all of Islam. DENOUNCE JIHAD – use that word!!! – from every platform and microphone.
    4. Warn ‘moderate’ Muslims not to ‘stand too close to these unfortunates’ per Mitch or ‘they’ll get caught in the fray’ per tonynobaloney.
    5. MSM and lefty loons: cut the PC crap and ‘get your heads around this’ per Mitch. Start helping win the WOT. If you can’t do that, we don’t need your ‘help’ any more.

  • Skate

    Mitch Wrote, “Sorry, Jersey Exile, but all we really need to “understand” about such troubled souls is their distance, so we can set our sights appropriately.”
    Well, Mitch, you may not have noticed, but our current approach isn’t working. Terrorism is on the rise, so much so that the Bush Administration actually started hiding the annual report on terrorism stats.
    When you say that understanding murders isn’t important to solving the problem you do a hideous disservice to all of the police detectives who analyze motive in **solving** murders. We are loosing right now, we need a better, more effective approach. If what you are doing isn’t working you need to change what you are doing.
    “Don’t stand too close to these unfortunates, as some of us are a little rusty.”
    Hey what a great point. You don’t care if you kill innocents if you are trying to get a terrorist. Hate to break this to you, but that is a **Terrorist** attitude. If you are not careful you’ll be just as much of a hateful murderer as them. You should think about the implications of what you are saying.

  • penny

    Poor, Skate, with rhetoric like….You don’t care if you kill innocents if you are trying to get a terrorist….hoping Mitch will take the bait.
    Could you throw out any more lame hyperbole in the hope that it will stick?
    You know, Skate, there is a half-life, just like in chemistry, to how long a person can tie up intelligent dialogue. You’re past your due date.

  • Kat

    Z?
    ºhey dare use a nuke in America, nuke mecca and medina. Warn them that those will be the consequences if they should use nukes.
    Skate–if you harbour and fund and excuse terrorists you are a terrorist. You are not an innocent. You may be a fool.

  • Kat

    And If they dare use a nuke in America, nuke mecca and medina. Warn them that those will be the consequences if they should use nukes.
    Skate–if you harbour and fund and excuse terrorists you are a terrorist. You are not an innocent. You may be a fool.

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’. They are all warriors for Allah.”
    Eileen, you are a very, very dangerous person. You have just called for genocide. You have just called for the murder of millions of people. You are now no different from the terrorists. You have become what you proclaim to hate.
    Please, I hope I have read this wrong and that you didn’t write the above quote, but I think there is no other way to read it.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    Skate would fall within No. 5. Bud, we don’t need your ‘help’ any more.

  • Eileen

    And, no, Skate. You are the dangerous one. Anyone who speaks for gutblowing maniacs is deranged. Is that PC enough for you?
    We’re at war. I don’t expect to allow people like you help get us blown up or dhimmitized.
    Analyze the millions upon millions killed by Islamofascists over the millenia. It’s time to close that curtain, bud.

  • Skate

    Eileen, Kat, Mitch,
    Normally I enjoy a spirited debate. The tone of this thread is deeply disturbing.
    Mitch has implied he doesn’t care who else dies if he is going after a terrorist. That would have to include innocent men, women and children.
    Eileen, has said to line up every “Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.” This would also include woman, children and innocent men.
    There is no doubt that this kind of disrespect for life is just like the lack of respect terrorists have for our lives. Driven by religious and national fervor both the terrorists and Mitch and Eileen want to kill the enemy and don’t care who else they kill in the process.
    The truly disturbing aspect is not just that Mitch and Eileen don’t care who they kill, it is that they don’t recognize that they have adopted the mindset of the enemy they claim to hate on principle.
    This is truly reprehensible. It is possible that Mitch didn’t realize the full implications of what he was saying, but there is no excuse for Eileen, the unrepentant zealot who literally just called for genocide! If “[being] at war” was an excuse for genocide then the Nazis would have had the green light to kill 6 million Jews. I spit on your reprehensible, inexcusable hate crime.
    Calling for genocide can not be considered a bit of debate rhetoric. It is beyond the pale and should be repudiated by everyone here who respects life, the rule of law and hates terrorism. It may even be actionable under law.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Kat

    I wonder if he considered it genocide when the Allies killed Nazis??

  • Eileen

    Yawn.

  • Eileen

    Yes, Kat. My thoughts exactly. And heshe nospam seems so ‘familiar’ with that **terrorist** attitude.

  • Kat

    Yes, and that being that they can kill infidels(babies and children OK to murder) but you can’t fight back. If you do you will be blamed for causing more gutblowers to crawl out from under their rocks. We are supposed to allow them to kill us while we try to understand them. What a bunch of garbage.

  • Eileen

    And Never Never Never IDENTIFY the enemy! Allah forbid!!!

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “I wonder if he considered it genocide when the Allies killed Nazis??”
    Kat, you also fit into the category of someone who truly doesn’t understand the implications of what Eileen said.
    Eileen wrote, “A few suggestions:
    1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’. ”
    When called on it, her response is “Yawn.” You call for genocide and you only “Yawn” when called to the mat on it? I bet Pol Pot and Stalin would have agreed with your attitude, as would every radical cleric who calls for the death of Americans.
    If you remember your history, Kat, you’ll recall that the Allies did not line up all Germans, Italians and Japanese and ‘deal with them.’
    My only hope is that you and Eileen live to Troll, and don’t really mean what you say. What you have said is the kind of rhetoric that leads to genocide–the most despicable crime the planet knows.
    You are what you claim to hate on principle. The pitiful and scary thing is that you don’t realize it or, worse, don’t care.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    “If you remember your history, Kat, you’ll recall that the Allies did not line up all Germans, Italians and Japanese and ‘deal with them.’”
    Of course we did.
    Yawn.

  • Dak

    That 10 step plan “attributed” to Robin Williams actually makes sense. If only it could be implemented.
    On “72 virgins”: I’ve often wondered why it’s thought Allah puts this focus on fulfilling carnal desires.
    Looking for answers, I came upon this article which claims the concept is the result of a mistranslation.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,2763,631357,00.html

  • Kat

    Yet, you have no trouble with muslims genociding the world over–Hindus, Buddhists, Armenians, Jews,Pandits, etc. You are still the terrorists’ biggest fan and you hate USA. Go figure. I am not big on martyrdom and being a sacrifice for allah, so if it comes to choosing between killing them or letting them kill me, well, I’d personally pull the trigger of a gun aimed at them. I prefer life, they prefer death. Give them what they want–a quick trip to virginville.,

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, “”If you remember your history, Kat, you’ll recall that the Allies did not line up all Germans, Italians and Japanese and ‘deal with them.’”
    Of course we did.”
    No, we did not line up and kill all Germans, Italians and Japanese. Even during the war we had prison camps and followed the Geneva conventions. Don’t even try to claim that by “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’. “” that you meant anything other than “murder them.”
    Your call for genocide remains despicable and yet you still have to stifle a yawn when being called on it. Your attitude towards genocide is disturbing, despicable, inexcusable and unconscionable.
    Kat wrote, ” I am not big on martyrdom and being a sacrifice for allah, so if it comes to choosing between killing them or letting them kill me, well, I’d personally pull the trigger of a gun aimed at them”
    Yet that isn’t what Eileen called for, she called for the preemptive murder of all ” Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists”
    Since you are not god, you don’t know who might hate you. Prejudging someone and sentencing them to death based on ideology is what terrorists do and it is what Eileen has called for. That you deny it is deeply disturbing and speaks very poorly for your ability to tell right from wrong.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Kat

    I can tell right from wrong–you can’t or you wouldn’t be a terrorist butt licker. Your support drives and emboldens them to kill more innocents. The blood of their victims is on your hands–you allow them to kill while you bash the USA. They read the net and they are encouraged by activists, leftists, Michael Moore, etc. and you.

  • Eileen

    All these posts which “represent(s) my opinion”. Interesting. What are you worried about, nospam?
    And Dak, what a sad day for the martyrs. If true, I guess it’s some small consolation for the female gutblowers.

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “Your support drives and emboldens them to kill more innocents. ”
    Fascinating, and yet so divorced from reality. When people like Eileen call for the preemptive murder of all “Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists” you can be sure that the terrorists will see your Jihad (and that is what it is) as justification for their Jihad.
    Both you and Eileen have terrorist ethics and your dogmatic, genocidal zeal gives the terrorists a justification they can point to. That you don’t realize that is shameful and deeply troubling. You are so far into cognitive dissonance it is pathological.
    This post and others of mine represent my opinion.

  • Eileen

    Oh, and it’s “preemptive” to kill the enemy which has issued fatwas of war against us and attacked us – and is slaughtering infidels across the globe. Righto, bucko.
    Thanks for repeating those sects of Islam who comprise our enemy in each of your posts. People – the general population and particularly the MSM – need to become familiar with those names.

  • Skate

    “ll these posts which “represent(s) my opinion”. Interesting. What are you worried about, nospam?”
    First, why call me by my email address, “nospam?” I know that your chosen handle is “Eileen” and that is how I refer to you, not by your email address, edoyle13@aol.com. I choose to remain as anonymous as possible to protect myself from people who would be so callous to life as to call for the preemptive murder of all “Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists.”
    Next, Eileen, **all** my posts represent my opinion, including this one. However I wanted to emphasize that point when I pointed out that you are a genocidal Jihadist, as incontrovertibly shown by your “Suggestion” : “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’. ”
    You counter “Oh, and it’s “preemptive” to kill the enemy which has issued fatwas of war against us and attacked us – and is slaughtering infidels across the globe”
    Yes, it is. Not every member of the groups you target is a terrorist. Those groups include men, women and children. But you don’t care about the innocents, claiming that neither do the terrorists. That’s the point, you would-be mass-murderer. You are making a terrorist call for mass murder, regardless of if your targets are guilty. That is terrorism.
    Make no mistake about it, I consider you a dangerous zealot as much for your call for genocide as your total lack of appreciation for the line you have crossed by calling for mass-murder. My opinion of you is very harsh to be consistent with the enormous gravity of the what you have called for.

  • Eileen

    I am *so* concerned with your opinion of me I think I’ll go and grill a little pork on the barby.
    Sweet dreams of virgins and lollipops and Allah booty.

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, “I am *so* concerned with your opinion of me I think I’ll go and grill a little pork on the barby…Sweet dreams of virgins and lollipops and Allah booty.”
    You know, in the past I would have thought that was funny and playful, even if we vehemently disagreed. But that was before you said “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.”
    You can’t call for genocide and still be funny. You are no longer funny in any way, shape or form.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    You are truly yawn invoking. Pork’s almost done…
    G’night All.

  • chris

    Skate, you have done an excellent job of debating these fanatical people here with sound reasonable viewpoints. They all profess to be on the side of good while rationalizing killing. They don’t comprehend the paradox they are part of. Its sad really. I’m agnostic but I’ve always thought “if” Jesus came back that Christian fundamentalists would kill him. I’m pretty sure he would have nothing to do with the hate and intolerance that goes on at this site. Religion to me is a very scary thing. When you read this thread and some of the others here at Buzzmachine one can definently be worried about the state of the world. There are Jihadists calling for death to Westerners and Christian fanatics calling for genocide of Muslims. Quite scary. And sad. I don’t believe in the bible but I believe it says something about “thou shalt not kill” and “killing begats killing”. A reasonable debate can not be had with the likes of Kat, Eileen, Penny, and the gang here. They are fanatics. Look at Kats posts. She reads like a heavily pro Israel religious zealot. I just skip most her posts. You don’t have to read them to know that its full of hate. I wonder have any of these people here ever had someone who really loved them? They are definently missing something. Your doing a good job though of helping to expose thier fanatacism. Kudos. The more they say the more obviously screwed up they are.

  • chris

    I should state I mean no offense to normal religious people or people from Israel. I personally love all peaceful people.

  • Eileen

    chris…..another No. 5er. *Check* and no surprise.
    I guess jihadis are ‘everywhere’. The names of their sects again?: enter, Skate.
    Pork’s done.

  • button

    The NYTimes is a waste of time to read; it’s strictly Past Tense.
    These fellows come from approximately the same background as the American Weathermen.

  • monkeyboy

    Skate;
    If Eileen is calling for genocide (which IMO she is not, since whahabbists is a subset of Muslims, and no where near all) then shouldn’t you try to understand her anger?
    After all, simply dismissing her out of hand is no way to address the root causes of her statement.
    I think you should also try to change whatever behavior of yours contributed to her statement.

  • AlanDownunder

    Yes. Crimes. Pure and simple. So the US called in the military instead of the cops and the CIA – a bit like issuing rifles to combat malaria. Mosquitos – bring’em on.
    Leaving the middle east alone was never going to stop Al Qaida. Nor in the short run was an honest self-critique directed at understanding middle east grievances. But going to Iraq played into Al Qaida’s hands. More anti-UK/US grievances means more anti-UK/US terrorists.
    And anyone who, like Rove, misconstrues this point of view as “offering therapy” is sub-rational.

  • PJF

    It looks as if Mr Jarvis has coughed up all the dust and soot he took in from the World Trade Center destruction during the attacks of September the 11th 2001.
    Back then it was WORLD WAR III:
    http://www.buzzmachine.com/archives/2001_10.mht
    Now in 2005 when organised Islamic extremists again deliberately and successfully target civilians in a western nation (where the leaders of the world’s great powers just happen to be gathered), it’s not terrorism or an act of war; it’s merely a crime, a crime to be spoken of in the context of drunk drivers and corporate corruption.
    Unfortunately, al Qaeda has not forgotten the war and they are amongst us:
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1697329,00.html
    One of the “misguided criminals” (I’m quoting the BBC’s John Simpson, though it looks much like BuzzMachine’s Jeff Jarvis) who broke the law in London last week once lived less than three miles from me. I hadn’t forgotten the war; nevertheless it sure came as a stark reminder.
    How are things in New York? Nice and quiet?
    .

  • http://www.buzzmachine.com Jeff Jarvis

    PJF: And we should ferret out and exterminate the den of thieves and not worry about understanding their feelings along the way….

  • penny

    Mitch has implied he doesn’t care who else dies if he is going after a terrorist
    Mitch implied nothing of the kind. You are a liar, Skate.
    Eileen, Kat, as long as people continue to engage this idiot and his shadows Jersey Exile and Chris he’ll stick around ruining another comment thread. Feeding trolls fattens them.
    It’s so obviously his entertainment.

  • Peg C.

    Murder is not just murder when it is promulgated by an entire religion. These murders are. ROP my ass.

  • penny

    Perhaps, Allan, going into Iraq is bringing AQ in our gun sights there and not here as it should be. You can’t destroy an enemy that you have no access to. Right? The Iraqis got something good out of it – Saddam’s gone and then a free election for the first itme in generations. Right? And let’s see, Syria has backed off Lebanon because the playing field changed. They can’t bully the neighbors anymore with the Yanks next door. Libya decided to come clean regarding its weapons out of anxiety over the US.
    If despotic regimes are a ME grievance, then that problem got solved in Afghanistan, Iraq and soon Lebanon. You’ll always be mired in poverty if you live under a despot. Saddam’s palaces weren’t a fair distribution of wealth. Right? So, it looks like a level playing field for creating wealth is taking shape now. Right? Less despots, less palaces, more economic opportunities, less grievances, eventually less terrorists. Right?
    So the US called in the military instead of the cops and the CIA……..I would say the military was a better choice than the cops and CIA as per all of the above.

  • Dean Douthat

    The UK bombers four are not criminals; they’re saints.

  • Faramin

    You can’t call for genocide and still be funny. You are no longer funny in any way, shape or form.
    Skate,
    I am not sure if you should take Eileen seriosly, if you are not worried about being reported to the CIA that is (she has done it many times about me, as she has admitted-I’m sure she has been laughed at by the CIA as well). I have desrcibed here this way:
    you are so very insignificant Eileen. You are just a joke, not a very funny joke, but still a joke.
    She truly is a mean and ugly-natured indiovidual with a little, very little brain. And I bit, in her dreams, she has killed so many thousands of the people she did not like; a dream that is shared by another low-density brain, Kat.
    But that’s all in her dream. People like Eileen, are being isolated everyday more than the day before with their sick and inhumane mentalities.

  • kat

    No, Faramin, it is you and your terrorist friends that are being isolated every day. Even moderate muslims are turning on your kind. People are beginning to see the light–these gutblowers are not insurgents, but barbaric murderers. Just like Naziism had to be defeated, so does islamofascism which is simply yesterday’s naziism. Then Hitler was the imperialist, today allah is. Same hit, different pile. Your Jew hatred puts you in the camp of murderers and gutblowers.

  • Eric M

    When a homicide detective investigates a murderer’s motive, is he expressing tolerance for murder? Of course not.
    Its funny I am reading Homicide by David Simon-(its about the Baltimore police and was used as the starting point for the TV show) one of the many fascinating points in the book is that homicide detective’s don’t spend a minute on motive. If they have the How and Who- they really don’t care about Why. That’s Agatha Christie stuff.
    I think about my grandfather who immigrated from Italy after WW1. He had fought and was critically wounded. Italy felt betrayed by the Allies and became fascist. My grandfather got out of there – worked in a quarry outside of Philadelphia and raised a family. Mexican, Guatamalans and El Salvadorans (America has a less than stellar foreign policy with these countries) come to America every year and follow the same pattern my grandfather did. No terrorism performed and/or condoned.
    Something is wrong in the Muslim community and it needs a long hard look- not left wing apologies. They need to change their behavior- not continue to feel sorry for themselves over the loss of Muslim Spain or whatever “causes ” they feel justify mass murder.

  • penny

    If they have the How and Who- they really don’t care about Why.
    Great point.
    Motive is the concern of the jury after the arrest.

  • Skate

    “If Eileen is calling for genocide (which IMO she is not, since whahabbists is a subset of Muslims, and no where near all) then shouldn’t you try to understand her anger?”– monkeyboy
    Well, monkeyboy, that is almost funny. Remember, “understanding” the motivation of criminals isn’t meant to excuse it, but as a tool to prevent crime and capture criminals. Frankly, I am interested in how Eileen’s zealotry got to the point of unapologetically calling for genocide. Eileen’s intolerant, murderous attitude is almost exactly that of the terrorists so knowing what makes Eileen tick would be useful in preventing terrorism.
    Now for your little joke about genocide… So you think when Eileen said this, “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’” it didn’t count as genocide because it left a few muslims out? Was there no Holocaust because the Nazis missed a few Jews! Of course not! Excusing genocide by saying it is ok as long as you leave a few left is deplorable, as is Eileen’s stated suggestion to preemptively mass-murder people.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • pst314

    Jeff Jarvis wrote: “And what separates this from the bombing of a Mississippi black church?”
    Exactly. We are “uppity infidels” who “do not know our place.” (Note, for example, Arafat’s role model, Haj Amin al Husseini, who incited the desecration of synagogues and the murder of women and infants, and who was inciting and orchestrating murder at a time when Jews in the region did not have any significant ability to defend themselves. He clearly and repeatedly said that his primary objection was to diminution of Muslim power over subject peoples. He did not fear being oppressed, he feared a loss of the sacred right to oppress others. Further: discriminatory and oppressive anti-Christian and anti-Jewish laws, although not enforced in all times and places, were the norm. By long custom Muslims felt free to abuse Christans and to murder out of hand any who objected: As infidels mainstream Muslim law prescribed that they be tolerated if they submitted to domination and humiliation. If they objected, then they had violated the terms of the protection and could be legally murdered. The accounts of various visitors to Egypt, for instance, are eye-opening.) Any analysis which fails to address this problem, and fails to grapple with how this attitude is enshrined in traditional, mainstream Islamic law, simply cannot be taken seriously.
    Now, the point Mr Jarvis raises is passionately rejected by many so-called progressives (and some paleo-conservatives too!) And they must reject it, because it fatally undermines their view of the West as the chief source of injustice, and of liberal, capitalistic democracy as the enemy to be fought. Not only that, but the association with images of lynchings, church bombings, and dead little girls is so emotionally powerful as to be devastating to their arguments: They must fight against an honest understanding of the problem. George Orwell had a few things to say about such people.

  • pst314

    Oh, and by the way, Mr. Jarvis, it was perfectly clear to me that when you criticized attempts to “understand” these barbarians you were not denigrating the value of genuine understanding but rather the excuse-making, justification and appeasement that pretend to be about understanding. Some of your commenters seem to have failed to read the actual words you wrote.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Time and time again what is being missed on this blog and in the American discourse at large is that there are two distinct conflicts going on right now–the war against Al-Qaeda and the struggle with militant Islam. While the former is a threat that requires a military solution, the latter cannot be won by force of arms without resorting to outright genocide (which, although seeming just peachy to some of the commentariat here at Buzzmachine, is thankfully not on the agenda of anyone involved in making policy).
    It is true that Al-Qaeda has appropriated militant Islam to its own ends, but as the wingnuts here are so quick the point out–and rightly so–religious fundamentalism does not automatically imply terrorism (in fact it is extremely rare, even within the framework of Islam, that the one leads to the other). Al-Qaeda is not an idea, it is an organization. Wipe it out and you have neutralized its global terrorist threat and made the world a hell of a lot safer. While it is tempting to take the cynical viewpoint that absent bin Laden’s conspiracy another will bubble up from militant Islam to fill the void, this presupposes that said replacement will somehow be able to duplicate the unique combination of personality and connectedness that permitted A-Q to access the highest echelons of Arab and Pakistani power–a highly unlikely outcome, given the newfound scrutiny being brought to bear against both nations.
    This is not to say that militant Islam is not a problem which the United States and the West must ultimately face. But it is not the immediate problem. If all of the one billion-odd Muslims who are not terrorists woke up tomorrow and accepted Jesus as their personal lord and savior, Al-Qaeda would still be out there. We know its acts of terrorism are planned sometimes years in advance, so even if deprived of future funding and intelligence it could still cause murder and mayhem for God knows how long.
    Fortunately for bin Laden and his ilk, however, we have decided to conflate the War on Terror with the problem of radical Islam, giving A-Q millions of sympathetic souls and and presenting us with just as many potential enemies that we must now face. That this arrangement benefits the enemy far more than it benefits us is manifestly evident in places like Iraq, where Al-Qaeda can now lurk and feed off of a general anti-American sentiment which draws irregular jihadis from all over the Muslim world at no cost to their own organization, while at the same time we piss away a billion dollars a day that could otherwise have been used to step up the hunt for bin Laden and reinforce our domestic defenses against terrorism.
    But go ahead and misrepresent my words again, all you petty wingnuts out there. Tell me what a good dhimmi I am and how I provide comfort and aid to the terrorists. Meanwhile bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda friends are laughing their asses off as you do his dirty work for him in turning the War on Terror into a general, ill-defined, and costly War on Islam as they busy themselves planning the next attack against the West.

  • Skate

    “the point Mr Jarvis raises is passionately rejected by many so-called progressives…George Orwell had a few things to say about such people.”–pst314
    That you would attribute Orwellian behavior to progressives is laughable. It is the Bush Administration who is Orwellian in every way, shape and form. Take for instance the War or Terror. Each additional attack is proof their approach isn’t working, yet they would have use believe we need to do **even more** of the same. And Karl Rove, who for political payback leaked the identity of a CIA operative tracking down WMDs, is he a traitor? No, say the republicans, he is a hero! Really, they said that. Traitor=Hero. That is Orwellian.
    Get your sides straight pst314.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    I think about my grandfather who immigrated from Italy after WW1. He had fought and was critically wounded. Italy felt betrayed by the Allies and became fascist. My grandfather got out of there – worked in a quarry outside of Philadelphia and raised a family. Mexican, Guatamalans and El Salvadorans (America has a less than stellar foreign policy with these countries) come to America every year and follow the same pattern my grandfather did. No terrorism performed and/or condoned.
    Wow, dude. What history books do you read? Especially in the postwar period Italian immigrants were implicated (sometimes justly so, sometimes not) in all sorts of activities which would now be classified as “terrorism”, from soshalist agitation among the working class to out-and-out anarchism. Just because your grandpa kept his nose clean–mine too, for that matter (he emigrated from Foggia with his parents and brother when he was six months old)–doesn’t mean that Italians didn’t come over from the mother country with an alien, hierarchical, and corrupt religion that many American viewed as being incompatible with mainstream Christianity and dangerously radicalized political views.
    Remind me of how that all turned out again? Oh, yeah, instead of collectively punishing all Italians we managed to prosecute the lawbreakers and foil the would-be terrorists and saboteurs among their ranks. None of this namby-pamby social engineering talk about “changing the Italian ‘culture of radicalism’”–those Italians that broke the law were caught and dealt with, and those that didn’t were by and large allowed to live in peace and eventually assimilate into American society, just like every other group of immigrants deemed too “savage” or innately antithetical to the West assimilated as well.

  • PJF

    “And we should ferret out and exterminate the den of thieves and not worry about understanding their feelings along the way….”
    Are we talking about corporate fraud again?
    Sorry to be sarcastic Jeff, but I think you’ve lost the plot; or at least lost sight of the plot.
    I appreciate your point that what motivates scumbags isn’t interesting (apart from as a tool in dealing with them), but you’ve couched it in the terminology of those who simply do not understand the terrorist threat against our world.
    Having not followed your blog since your Stern campaign (I came here via the Instapundit link), I don’t know if you have joined those against the War on Terror. When I read:
    “What they did is a crime. That’s all it is, nothing more. A crime.”
    and
    “They are not even terrorists. I am coming to think it is wrong to give them even that bit of explanation and justification.”
    it looks like you have.
    They are terrorists. They are terrorists engaged in an existential war against us. They are organised, cunning and ruthless; and they will not stop unless we have victory over them. They are not ‘just criminals’. Indeed, they are criminals only in the context of the civilised world not yet having discovered how to fight a war with an organisation that isn’t a nation state. They are our implacable enemy.
    I apologise for the 9/11 dust remark. That was below the belt.

  • Kat

    So did Clinton’s doing nothing and appeasing the scum, help, or did it give them the opportunity to plan 911? Tell, me, how would you deal with this scum? Love them, cajole, condone, chant islam is peace? Remember they have been at this for over 1000 years–Mohammed was a terrorist.

  • chris

    Penny, why is that liberal(liberty loving)people are considered trolls by you and others here? We offer good points to debate and you call us trolls. You don’t help your own arguments very much by doing that. Jarvis’s blog does not exclude differing viewpoints. Maybe you would if it was your blog. You fully have the right to go set up your own blog but it seems that you are content to call this yours. I’m sorry that reasonable discussion isn’t allowed. Myself and a few others here have been very successful in the last few days of exposing you guys for what you are. Hypocrites. Simply hypocrites. You condone and rationalize killing in the name of your god and country. All killing is evil Penny. Your friend Kat exhibits serious psychotic tendenencies as do a few others here. Lets let Jarvis decide who is offering ridiculous debate points and who is a troll. Its his blog.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Mohammed was a terrorist.
    That’s funny–Jerry Falwell said the same thing, only to publicly apologize for his remarks, which turned out to be completely unfounded.
    So tell me, Kat, what evidence do you have for this allegation?

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Chris,
    The wingnut gallery here always resorts to namecalling when it becomes clear that they’re losing the argument–Penny will call you a troll, Eileen will call you a dhimmi, and Kat will call you a terrorist. You should consider it a badge of honor to get all three!

  • PJF

    “It is the Bush Administration who is Orwellian in every way, shape and form. Take for instance the War or Terror. Each additional attack is proof their approach isn’t working, yet they would have use believe we need to do **even more** of the same.”
    This is like saying that the London blitz (WWII era) was proof that going to war with Nazi Germany was the wrong approach. Should we Brits have changed policy and gone back to appeasement? Or should we have continued giving the enemy **even more** of the same?
    Indeed, there were people at the time saying that we should stop fighting. They were, primarily, lefties. Not until Hitler invaded the beloved Soviet Union did he become enemy number one (and “right wing”).
    And Orwell despised these leftist idiots; just as he would despise you today, Skate.

  • Skate

    “The wingnut gallery here always resorts to namecalling when it becomes clear that they’re losing the argument–Penny will call you a troll, Eileen will call you a dhimmi, and Kat will call you a terrorist. You should consider it a badge of honor to get all three!”–Jersey Exile
    I think it is a common trait of truly flawed people to accuse other people of being what they themselves are.
    “This is like saying that the London blitz (WWII era) was proof that going to war with Nazi Germany was the wrong approach. Should we Brits have changed policy and gone back to appeasement? Or should we have continued giving the enemy **even more** of the same?”–PJF
    This is a legitimate line of argument, but the analogy falls short. In the case of the Nazis, there was a clear command and control structure and a supply chain to attack. “Terrorism” is an amorphous non entity that can’t be stopped with air raids. Take Iraq for instance. Before: no terrorists (look in Saudi Arabi, Iran, Syria, Libia aka everywhere we didn’t attack). After: terrorist breeding ground. In this instance, our approach had the **opposite** result that was intended. I’d say doing more of the same would be insane on our part.

  • Skate

    “And Orwell despised these leftist idiots; just as he would despise you today, Skate.”–PJF
    George Orwell despised **extremism** (aka Eileen, penny, Kat) and totalitarianism, but he considered himself a soc ialist. He also hated cruelty. It is clear to actual thinking people that Orwell would have been a fierce critic of theocratic terrorists and to the totalitarian tactics of the so-called “war on terrorism.”
    Your invocation of Orwell in support your cause is ironically Orwellian.

  • penny

    Lets let Jarvis decide who is offering ridiculous debate points and who is a troll
    You deserved to be censored when you posted this smarmy ad hominem attack on Eileen, another poster, in the “They bomb children” thread earlier:
    And for your info. I’m white, 28, british,
    married, agnostic and antiwar. Like most of Britain. I’m just guessing here but you are: white, female,elderly,overweight,religious and shop at Walmart. Correct…..

    I don’t think you get it. Do not address me again.

  • Skate

    Hey penny, you wrote that chris wrote “And for your info. I’m white, 28, british,
    married, agnostic and antiwar. Like most of Britain. I’m just guessing here but you are: white, female,elderly,overweight,religious and shop at Walmart. Correct…..”
    Hmm…I haven’t seen that post myself but I’ll assume for the moment it is an accurate quote. It looks even from the limited context of the quote you provided that Eileen started it by asking or accusing chris of being a certain age, etc. I know she has asked **me** about my age. Second, chris noted that it was only a guess. Thirdly, your moral equivalence for what constitutes an ad hominem attack is laughable. Eileen literally and unapologetically calls people she disagrees with “terrorists” and you try and yell at chris for hypothesizing about her demographic. Talk about moral relativism. You are really hypocritical and in serious denial.
    As for your empty indignation “Do not address me again,” well, you’ll need to start your own forum if that is what you want. You are awfully easily insulted for someone who is comfortable throwing around such radical views.

  • Eileen

    “Terrorism” is an amorphous non entity that can’t be stopped with air raids.” Wrong. Islamic terrorism is practiced by the sects I listed above, and which Skate has kindly repeated about 10 times now. They are identifiable and they are our enemy. The only ‘understanding’ we need to achieve regarding those murdering terrorists is the nature and extent of Jihad, the sharia law which mandates it and (again) the identification of those within the Muslim faith who practice this form of Islam.
    “Sheikh ëAbd al-`Aziz ibn Baz said: ìWe have previously explained on more than one occasion that jihad is fard kafayah, not fard ëayn. All Muslims are enjoined to support their brothers with their selves (i.e., physically, by joining them), or with money, weapons, da`wah and advice. If enough of them go out (to fight), the rest are freed from sin; but if none of them do that, then all of them are sinners.
    The Muslims in Saudi Arabia, Africa, North Africa and elsewhere are obliged to do their utmost, and if there is a Jihad in one country, the surrounding countries should hasten to help them, the closest then the next closest. If one or two states, or three or more, manage to fulfill the obligation, then the rest are freed of responsibility. They deserve to be supported, and it is obligatory to help them against their enemies because they are oppressed. Allah has enjoined jihad upon all Muslims, and they must fight against the enemies of Allah until their brothers are victorious. If they fail to do that, then they are sinners; but if sufficient people undertake to do that, then the rest are absolved of sin.î (Fatawa ash-Shaykh Ibn Baz, 7/335)”
    http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=96325

  • Kat

    Skate–if there were no terrorists in Iraq how did over a million people die at the hands of thugs and terrrorists during Saddam’s reign? Do you consider the following terrorism? Obviously you sanction such deeds seeing as you are against the removal of your buddy, Saddam and terrorist thugs.
    The following were routine in Iraq under saddam:
    * Medical experimentation
    * Beatings
    * Crucifixion
    * Hammering nails into the fingers and hands
    * Amputating sex organs or breasts with an electric carving knife
    * Spraying insecticides into a victim’s eyes
    * Branding with a hot iron
    * Committing rape while the victim’s spouse is forced to watch
    * Pouring boiling water into the victim’s rectum
    * Nailing the tongue to a wooden board
    * Extracting teeth with pliers
    * Using bees and scorpions to sting naked children in front of their parents
    And the terrorism went on……………….but this wasn’t terrorism and the victims deserved to be in those mass graves.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    Kat,
    The President of Uzbekistan boils his political opponents alive, and yet somehow he is not considered a terrorist but an ally of the United States. So clearly there is something wrong with your definition of “terrorism”…

  • Dak

    Saddam – attended by American guards who cater to making life more comfortable for him by making sure he gets his “dorito” fix.
    Why not let his guards be those whose fathers,mothers,sisters and brothers were tortured and killed?
    http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050621/wl_mideast_afp/iraqsaddamus
    “O’Shea, who was only 19 when he was assigned to the Saddam watch, said the prisoner loved Raisin Bran Crunch for breakfast. When the guards ran out of that and brought him Froot Loops instead “it was one of the few times Sean ever saw him defeated,” the magazine said.
    He could ask for any food he liked within reason — and he seemed to like chicken, fish and salad — but only with Italian dressing. His favorite food, the soldiers said, used to be Cheetos, a cheese-flavored crisp.
    That was until the supply ran out and the guards gave him a bag of Doritos, a similar snack, instead.”
    He kept asking for “doris”….. He’d eat a family-size bag of Doritos in 10 minutes.”

  • kat

    Jersey, you are so drunk with swallowing the foaming slobber which spews from your mouth as you lick terrorist ass, there is no sense wasting time with you–in your eyes Americans are guilty and the mohammedans
    are in their right to kill or convert. They did a good job on you. You’d tie on a bomb when and if you are called for martyrdom. Now I truly understand our enemy–talking to you and Skate and Chris has made it crystal clear.

  • http://www.keshertalk.com/ Yehudit

    “If terrorism is caused by anger, then wouldn’t the women of the Middle East be far more likely to turn into terrorists, since they are even more oppressed than their brothers and husbands, who are also their oppressors?”
    Not to mention all the oppressed peoples around the globe who DON’T become suicide bombers. The Kurds and the Tibetans, to name two.

  • chris

    Hey Penny you’ve got to give me credit for my sense of humor don’t ya? Hey I only implied shes an overweight Walmart shopper. You guys have labeled myself, Skate and Jersey as “terrorists” for disputing your rants. Come on you have to have a bit more backbone than that. I forgot to mention earlier that I am also a former U.S. marine who served aboard the U.S.S. Saipan from 86-88. I was stationed at Camp Lejuene with 1st battalion, 6th Marines from 85-88. MOS 0341 Mortarman. I was on the Saipan during the time of Khadafis line of death. Far from being a terrorist I consider myself a true patriot who has actually served the country. You’d probably be surprised to know there are many liberal people in the military these days. War should always be a last resort. You guys advocate senseless killing at this site and don’t understand that you are as bad as the enemy in that regard.

  • Gut Check

    Haven’t checked this post since writing yesterday but I’m discouraged by the way this thread’s developed. Both sides had very interesting arguments but then it went awry. Jersey Exile’s been doing a wonderful job of trying to steer this away from mere rant and cant but this incessant name-calling is disheartening. Phrases like, “you and your terrorist friends” (c’mon kat!) takes me back to my days as a high school English teacher when I’d try not to pull my hair out marking piles of essays from my ninth-graders whose ideas of debate and argumentation consisted mostly of hyperbolic statements and sweeping generalizations. Eileen would begin with some interesting views (I didn’t fully agree with them but they did give me things to research and ponder, thank you) but then resort to lame attempts at being humorously dismissive (“pork’s done”?) that got increasingly grating that I, like chris, began skipping her posts which does nothing to further the debate nor give people like me a chance to hear alternative views.
    I’m one of those people who really don’t know what to believe any more so I actually come to posts like this to learn something. And imbecilic brayings and personal insults (from both sides) do nothing to enlighten anyone and do a disservice to Jeff’s site. Chris and Jersey Exile and Skate et al: I know it’s tempting to respond in kind but please continue to post your insights and veer away from baiting no matter how easy the game. And would someone please present alternative views to these guys with the same level of erudition, nuance and restraint? I learn nothing if I keep reading things with which I already agree.

  • Gut Check

    Don’t know how to prove I’m not chris except to admonish him if he did, in fact, caricature one of the posters as kat indicates above (I tend to scroll past when the debate takes a nasty tangent). That would have been sophomoric and mean-spirited, as is kat’s rant.

  • Gut Check

    Never mind. Looks like kat’s profanity got her last post wiped off.

  • Faramin

    Kat,
    Skate–if there were no terrorists in Iraq how did over a million people die at the hands of thugs and terrrorists during Saddam’s reign? Do you consider the following terrorism? Obviously you sanction such deeds seeing as you are against the removal of your buddy, Saddam and terrorist thugs.
    Sorry to spoil your fun, but Saddam was your terrorist and Saddam didn’t do it alone.

  • Kat

    Then I’ll ask in a nice way–were you 7 years old when you were stationed at Camp Lejeune or are you nothing more than a bloody liar?
    You did say{And for your info. I’m white, 28, british, married, agnostic and antiwar. Like most of Britain. I’m just guessing here but you are: white, female,elderly,overweight,religious and shop at Walmart. Correct….}.
    Now you are American (I forgot to mention earlier that I am also a former U.S. marine who served aboard the U.S.S. Saipan from 86-88. I was stationed at Camp Lejuene with 1st battalion, 6th Marines from 85-88. MOS 0341 Mortarman. I was on the Saipan during the time of Khadafis line of death. Far from being a terrorist I consider myself a true patriot who has actually served the country. You’d probably be surprised to know there are many liberal people in the military these days. War should always be a last resort. You guys advocate senseless killing at this site and don’t understand that you are as bad as the enemy in that regard.)
    And you are a liar or the youngest marine ever to serve.

  • tonynoboloney

    I do not believe it will be long before the free world figures out that we are under attack by Muslim fanatics. watching how quickly the Brits put together the investigation of the events of 7/7. I do not believe we are up against an unbeatable enemy. What is a little frightening to me is the enevitable tactics we will most certainly begin to use. Racial profilling, abject discrimination, and draconian imigration policies, to name just a few. But who would blame the English (or United States) for say canceling/refusing visas and passports to middle eastern men between 18 & 40 ? Maybe we will see laws which prevent M.E.men from entering our universities. It is concievable that local governments will see fit to knock on every door in selected neighborhoods and start asking questions, checking names and taking numbers, after all in my county the local constabulary checks EVERY home for dogs whom do not have licenses. Perhaps Federally funded programs (like public schools) will be required to notate and report all childrens country of origin, it could happen. Positive identification at all hospitals, mental health clinics etc. We now posess the technology to cross reference all State and Federal licensing, pilots, drivers,guns, building permits etc. Infiltrating mosques. and M.E. sevice organizations, monitoring all banking transactions between selected countries and parties. Although these tactics appear a bit over the top I assure you that after a few more subway bombings, or a car bomb or two in cities such as Philadelphia or Detroit, the American people (liberals and conservatives alike) will be insisting on a plan to stop the enemy from within or outside, saying to hell with the A.C.L.U. What now seems unacceptable will become not only the norm but policy. No, we all know who the enemy are, they have made their plan perfectly clear. What is not quite clear yet is a cohesive response to these attrocities.
    Perhaps the accademics,sociologists, and criminologists should continue to study what makes a jihadist tick, we can use all the help we can get to beat them. I can imagine in the not so distant future alliances between many nations against their common foe. We all know who the enemy are, we now need to develope a plan to stop them. And like I said a lot of people will not agree with the tactics.

  • Eileen

    Applause, Kat…as to ‘that’ handle, at least. Allah commands his jihadis to serve in many ways.
    As for proposed ‘draconian immigration policies’ – or are they? – here are some excerpts from an article titled How to Defeat Jihad in America, which focuses on our historically open borders, multiculturalism, and the real inability to assimilate fundamentalist Muslims due to Sharia law (hats off also to The Lonewacko Blog above who suggested we ‘should’ be discussing immigration):
    “*** The simple fact we must face is that we will continue living under the ever-present fear and reality of domestic terrorism as long as Wahhabi and fundamentalist Moslems continue to reside and move around freely in the United States and other Western countries. Therefore, if we want to eliminate the threat of domestic terrorism, and not just keep dancing around the problem, we must stop talking about assimilating Moslems and start talking about excluding and deporting them instead.
    When I say this, I am not advocating the universal exclusion and deportation of all Moslem immigrants from this country. I am not seeking to set up a spy service to find out if a native American has converted to Islam. Nor am I saying that if an American becomes a Moslem he would lose his job or get deported.
    What I am talking about is stopping and then reversing the Islamicization of America.
    Here are five steps by which this can be accomplished:
    1. End all mass immigration of Moslems into the United States, whether from Moslem countries or elsewhere. Moslems would only be admitted on a selective, individual basis, not on the basis of being part of a national quota, and not on the basis of having extended family members already in the U.S., as is now the case. Rather than admitting mass numbers of Moslems every year for no reason except their wish to come here, we would only admit individuals who had some particular and legitimate connection to America, such as business people, diplomats, spouses of Americans, and so on.
    2. Deport all Moslem illegal aliens. Serious enforcement of existing laws, strengthened by a newly developed high-tech system that will enable authorities to know if visitors to the U.S. have overstayed their visas, will make it possible for the government to apprehend and deport a very substantial number of Moslem illegals. ***
    3. Deport all legal resident aliens with ties or loyalties to radical Islam. There would be no legal or moral problem in our doing this. Resident aliens are not citizens, and if it is necessary for our safety and security to terminate their resident status, we have the right to do so. Let us remember also that any serious Moslem is obligated by his religion to help spread Islam and Islamic law, Shariah; therefore no serious Moslem, even if he pays taxes and obeys the law, can be a truly loyal citizen of the United States. There is no reason for us to allow Islamic fundamentalists to remain in this country and become citizens. If we lack the will even to deport non-citizen Wahhabis and jihadis, then we might as well lie down and surrender to the global jihad right now.
    4. Remove the citizenship of and deport all naturalized and native-born citizens who are supporters of jihad. This is the most radical step of all, but it is justified by the same considerations discussed above. Islam obligates its adherents to live under Shariah, wherever they are and to wage holy war against non-Moslems, particularly Christians and Jews. Any serious Moslem must obey that law. True, the requirements are put in abeyance when circumstances dictate, as when a Moslem population in a non-Moslem society is small and weak and must avoid antagonizing the majority population. But as soon as the Moslems gain enough numbers to exert political influence, the command to live under Shariahóand ultimately to impose Shariah on the whole society through jihadókicks in. The growth of Islam in America is thus an existential threat to us and our entire way of life. We have no obligation to harbor within our country people who are religiously committed to the destruction of our country.” ***
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13532

  • Eileen

    Oops, I left off the 5th item.. Well, if the above is too radical for your tastes – don’t know that I embrace all of it myself – don’t go to the article for more.

  • chris

    Kat, I’m 38 born September 29,1966 in London, England. naturalized U.S. citizen. Went in right before my 19th birthday. Out at 22. Do the math. Simple mistake.

  • kat

    Yeah, and I just saw a purple pig fly by the window. You are a phoney and are not even man enough to admit it.

  • chris

    Kat your one angry person. Man I feel for ya. I hope you find someone to love someday.

  • owl

    Jeff, your best yet.
    When people have lost their sense of survival to the point they even try to “understand” killers, this is PC run amok. I seem to remember that we were trained to “overlook” and “understand” them when they killed kids on buses and pizza parlors, as long as they were doing their killing over there. Low-life pond scum cowards that kill women and children on purpose are just killers. Such cowards do not even deserve the name terrorists.
    Sure they want something. The question is….anyone interested in letting a killer blackmail you? I doubt they will respect you more in the morning.

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, “What I am talking about is stopping and then reversing the Islamicization of America.
    Here are five steps by which this can be accomplished:”
    And yet those 5 steps are completely unnecessary since earlier in this thread you have already called for the mass-murder of all “Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists” when you said they should be lined up and ‘dealt with.’ Were you planning on deporting the bodies?
    If you really believed what you say, you would be out shooting the groups of muslims on your hit list right now–or is it that you know killing people based on your presumption of their guilt to be wrong? I sure hope you know it is wrong.
    What? You think you can call for **genocide** and people should forget about it? Even in the same thread? No, I can’t let something that grave be ignored. You need to renounce your call for genocide. There is no excuse for genocide.

  • http://oodja.blogspot.com Jersey Exile

    The growth of Islam in America is thus an existential threat to us and our entire way of life. We have no obligation to harbor within our country people who are religiously committed to the destruction of our country.
    Hmmm. Where have I heard these sentiments before?
    Ah, yes–the anti-Catholic literature of the 19th Century!
    “The Arch-bishop of St. Louis declares: ‘If Catholics ever, which they surely will, gain an immense numerical majority, religious freedom in this country will be at an end.’”
    “[A]n acquaintance told me of a recent conversation between a Protestant relative of hers and a Roman Catholic. The Catholic said, ‘I would like to see the blood of Protestants flow down the streets of this city.’ The Protestant was rightly surprised and said, ‘How can you say that, we are friends and you know that I am a Protestant?’ The Catholic responded, ‘Yes, I know, but the greater the sacrifice, the greater the reward.’ Since they teach Catholics from childhood on, that to kill a Protestant is to do God a service. we had better be careful how we put Catholics in public office.”
    “I cannot better close this note than in the words of Lincoln himself. In 1864 he said: ‘If the American people could learn what I know of the fierce hatred of the priests of Rome against our institutions, our schools, our most sacred rights, and our so dearly bought liberties, they would drive them out as traitors.’”
    “Let America again be forewarned as to Rome’s intention ‘to make America Catholic.’ Assassination is an approved method of the Church of Rome to gain her ends.”
    “Popes have been consistent in their declarations that freedom of religion should NOT exist, and that the Church of Rome represents the only true faith and therefore should alone be allowed to spread its doctrines.”
    “Father Hecker declares that ‘ere long there is to be a state religion in this Country [U.S.A.], and that state religion is to be the Roman Catholic.’ Bishop O’Conner, of Pittsburgh, says: ‘Religious liberty is merely endured until the opposite can be carried into effect, without peril to the Catholic World.’”
    As you can see, Eileen, America was no less existentially “threatened” by its Catholic immigrants a century before, and yet miraculously our Republic endured (and even flourished). Funny that. But imagine if we had taken yours and the neocon pundits’ advice back then–how many of us Catholics or children or grandchildren or great-grandchildren of Catholics wouldn’t be here to have this argument right now?
    Fact of the matter is, the overwhelming majority of any group of immigrants come to our nation for the same thing our ancestors did–the opportunity for a better life. You accomplish nothing in the War on Terror by denying those people access to the same American dream that your own progenitors enjoyed.

  • kat

    (You accomplish nothing in the War on Terror by denying those people access to the same American dream that your own progenitors enjoyed.) But we know some of the scum come here not for a better life but to do harm to those enjoying the American dream–the 3000 on 911, for instance. I think muslim immigrants should be put under a microscope before being allowed to come here. If they want to become American citizens, fine. If they want to become martyrs for allah, let them stay in their caves. We don’t need that latter trash.

  • Dak

    Kat…exactly!
    “Apples and Oranges” Jersey Exile! The Catholics weren’t carrying out murderous missions.
    “Since they teach Catholics from childhood on, that to kill a Protestant is to do God a service”.
    er…you are confused…that’s what Muslims are taught from childhood.
    My parents took me to a Catholic Church nearly every Sunday for the first 20 years of my life. NEVER once did I hear anything remotely like that. Where pray tell, are all the dead Americans killed by Catholics?
    We know where to find our dead left by those of the Islamic religion, which DOES indeed teach just what you said.

  • Eileen

    Okay, Skate. You’ve had your little fun. Now I’m going to help you.
    To suggest I called for genocide is too absurd to even respond to. Nonetheless, inasmuch as you’re like a rabid dog with a bone who attempts to slander and misrepresent with evey post, READ MY LIPS.
    When I said we should ‘line them up’, I was saying IDENTIFY THE SECTS OF ISLAM which comprise the threat; or, to use JJ’s better term, ‘ferret them out’. I proceeded to IDENTIFY the sects.
    When I said, [NOTE, this was within single quotes] ‘and deal with them’, I was refering to the full panoply which we are already employing in the WOT to ‘bring them to justice’. You know what all is meant by that, don’t you, Skate?: combat, finding them in their caves and spider holes, international cooperation regarding intelligence, drying up funding, dismantling fake charities, homing in on Immams who are preaching jihad…etc.
    And IF there had ever been a doubt regarding whether in your ‘literal’ world I was called for genocide, you had only to read two sentences further to see I ‘also’ suggested we needed to reeducate the little brainwashed gutblowers and ‘blow up’ – i.e., ELIMINATE, the madrassas.
    I hope that helps you to calm down.
    For people like you and your ilk, perhaps all you can grasp is what you want to portray – or in this case, misrepresent.
    But again, thanks for getting the names of those sects out there.
    And Jersey, there is no relativism, there is no equivalency, there is comparison to be made.
    We know who the enemy is. They’re the ones who are blowing people up all over the world every day. Efforts to DIVERT AND DEFLECT from that fact – as practiced by you and Skate – are no longer ‘helpful’.

  • kat

    Jihad in the West:
    ‘Muslim Conquests from the 7th to the 21st Centuries’
    People are always looking for Christian equivalencies to try justify muslim terrorism. So I went looking and found some to share.
    by Paul Fregosi
    Prometheus Books, New York, 1998
    Reviewed by Sharon Morad, Leeds
    †Jihad in the West
    (pp. 15-18)
    There is a link between terrorism known as Jihad today, with wars of Muslim expansion beginning with Muhammad. All expressions of Islam’s basic distaste for the outside world.
    Most Muslims claim crusades are the origin of the conflict between Islam and Christianity, but this is the wrong way around. The first crusade was in 1096 AD.
    Jihad had already been going on for 500 years by then.
    The Holy War that Isn’t (pp. 19-27)
    Definition of Jihad: not attempt to convert people to Islam by force (except maybe in the 1st century of Islam). Rather, attempt to “expand and extend Islam until the whole world is under Muslim rule. The jihad is essentially a permanent state of hostility that Islam maintains against the rest of the world, with or without fighting for more sovereignty over more territory” (20). It is a duty, an obligation for all Muslims.
    [p.22] A contrast between Christ (He who lives by the sword will die by the sword), with Muhammad (the sword is the key to heaven and hell). Christians who kill are ignoring the words of Christ.
    Muslims who kill are obeying Muhammad.
    [p.23] Crusades – 1096 AD until 1270 AD. An attempt to retake (formerly Christian)
    Palestine.
    Jihad = 1,300 years. An attempt to occupy Europe, Asia and Africa, and then Islamicize them. [p. 25] Why do we not hear of the Muslim capture of Jerusalem from the Christians in 638 AD, or of the capture of Spain about 70 years later, or of the subsequent 800 year occupation?
    It was the success of Jihad against Europe that triggered Pope Urban II to call for the first Crusade in 1095 AD.
    Colonialism – Muslim lands colonized much of Europe in the 7th – 19th centuries, and the two colonized each other in the 19th century.
    In fact Europe colonized Muslim lands for only 130 years (1830s – 1960s)!!
    [p. 26] Muslims have freedom of worship in Christian lands, not vice versa (penalty of apostasy = death).
    We may not be at war with islam–but islam is at war with us. Should we fight or should we convert? Skate?? Jersey??

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote “When I said, [NOTE, this was within single quotes] ‘and deal with them’, I was refering to the full panoply which we are already employing in the WOT to ‘bring them to justice’”
    Sure you did, Eileen. Here is what you said “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.”
    Lining up people and ‘dealing with them’ is a common expression for please fairly and justly identify these individuals and see that they are brought to justice in a fair and reasonable manner–just like when mob bosses say, “Line ‘em up and ‘deal wit’ ‘em’”. Yup, mob bosses mean ‘bring them to justice.’ If that was what you meant, you wouldn’t have used single quotes. You are sooooo full of it.
    Eileen, even **Kat** thought you meant to kill them all. She responded to my calling you on your plea for genocide. She wrote “I wonder if he considered it genocide when the Allies killed Nazis??” and you concurred “Yes, Kat. My thoughts exactly.”
    Later you added “Oh, and it’s “preemptive” to kill the enemy which has issued fatwas of war against us and attacked us – and is slaughtering infidels across the globe. Righto, bucko…Thanks for repeating those sects of Islam who comprise our enemy in each of your posts.”
    Until just now, every one of your posts subsequent to your call for genocide has backed it up. You never said “that’s not what I meant” because it was what you meant. Only now you apparently are feeling the pressure for making such an outrageously immoral statement. I only wish you had the guts to take it back rather than pretend you never said it. Even so, I’m glad you are having second thoughts.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Kat

    Eileen–that genocide argument is used by radical islamics to excuse their terrorism. They scream genocide while being guilty of genocide in Nigeria, Darfur, etc. It’s much like blaming the Jews. Every reader with a brain knows what you meant–but if you think like a terrorist, you may read like one, too.
    {Such literature, written in part by radical Islamists themselves, serves to alienate and radicalize its readers by leading them to believe a huge, diabolical conspiracy is being implemented to wipe them off the face of the earth, which, no doubt, is what partially motivated the four Britain-born Muslims to turn against their fellow countrymen on July 7 2005.}
    http://www.judeoscope.ca/analyse/050715_77_reactions.htm

  • Eileen

    Again, you ‘attempt’ to twist and misrepresent both my words as well as Kat’s. [And *supposedly* the wingnuts are the ones who don't grasp nuance.] Heh.
    And may I recommend a rabies shot?
    I have work to do.

  • Skate

    Kat, “Eileen–that genocide argument is used by radical islamics to excuse their terrorism. They scream genocide while being guilty of genocide in Nigeria,
    Kat, it is hilarious that you recognize that “that genocide argument is used by radical islamics to excuse their terrorism” for several reasons. One is that Eileen’s call for genocide (“1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.”) could be used as an excuse by despicable terrorists. The other point is that you don’t even recognize that both you and Eileen have terrorist mindsets–that your inflexible, hate-filled, kill-them-all dogma is very much like that of the terrorists. You are the perfect opponent for them, not because your methods can be victorious but because your blind and bellicose hate is just what they want to fuel a cataclysmic, endless war.
    “Every reader with a brain knows what you meant.”
    Here, Kat, I’ll agree with you to a point. I’d say that every reader with a **properly functioning** brain knows what she meant. I’m not sure I can include you in that category, though. Unfortunately, it works against Eileen because they know what she really meant, not what she now pretends she meant. Even so, I’m still glad that Eileen is distancing herself from her call for mass-murder.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Gut Check

    Jersey Exile,
    I’m usually with you but find I have to question your attempt to compare certain branches of Catholicism with the militant ones of Islam. Although I agree that most of the differences begin on some type of existential plane, I don’t think we can extricate them from the solidly contextual and material worlds in which they affect us. For militant Catholics, most of their goals were political. I have yet to read of any priest using Biblical passages to pad Catholic claims for regional sovereignty in Ireland. However, most jihadist meetings begin and end in Quranic scripture; that is, from issues existential to textual to contextual, the militant Islamic rationale (encompassing anxieties, grievances, and solutions) are much clearer than anything afforded to Catholic militants (which is why the latter branch of militancy never succeeded in having anything near a global effect as the Islamic one).
    A simple example of this: if a Catholic militant cries for vengeance, moderate voices can easily point to the supposed source of his faith–the bible–and present strong theological arguments against violence; however, the moderate Muslim wishing to do battle with an Islamic militant on a theological front will have a much tougher struggle on his hands given the very nature of the quran.
    And this is why my usual ambivalence toward religion (hell, I’ve got close friends who now believe in angels but not in evolution) takes a firmer stance when it comes to Islam. Although my patience with evangelical Christians is wearing thin, it is almost gone with fellow liberals who seem to tolerate everything, including intolerant belief systems. Try reading the Quran without frowning in distaste on its prescriptions for viewing women, slaves, infidels, etc. The parochialism of the bible (well, mainstream interpretations of it) pales in comparison. But the fact that I never hear anything negative in the mainstream media about Islamic faith itself makes me believe hardly anyone has read it. We’re so quick to attack Christian faith but are reluctant to question the faiths of others. And this blind “PC-ness” only polarizes debate in the west, making folks like Eileen, perhaps, stretch a bit too far in trying to make a valid point (from the tenor of her posts, I highly doubt she is condoning genocide, although her injunction to line them up and deal with them may have been a poor choice of words given the highly charged cultural milieu we now find ourselves in and the accompanying allusions inherent in using such historically graphic phrases).

  • Dak

    It’s a h-u-g-e stretch to unequivocally state over and over, that someone definitively called for mass murder, when the words were to “deal with”.
    The very repetitiveness of this firm and unmistakable slanderous accusation, “in my opionion”, cannot be excused by a general “my opinion” statement at the end of every post.
    Skate, you are on very thin ice here.

  • Skate

    Dak wrote “It’s a h-u-g-e stretch to unequivocally state over and over, that someone definitively called for mass murder, when the words were to “deal with”.
    The very repetitiveness of this firm and unmistakable slanderous accusation, “in my opionion”, cannot be excused by a general “my opinion” statement at the end of every post.”
    I appreciate your comment. It is true that I have been very repetitious on this but I think the sheer nature of what Eileen called for demands it (“1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.”)
    Eileen is a conversational bomb thrower. She is used to making outrageous statements in these threads and to using her bombastic, empty indignation to avoid having to answer for what she has said. I think it is entirely fair for Eileen to have to stand up for, or repudiate the statement she made. Further, I think the evidence is clear from her original post where she said “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.” and subsequent posts where she wrote such things as “Oh, and it’s “preemptive” to kill the enemy which has issued fatwas of war against us and attacked us – and is slaughtering infidels across the globe. Righto, bucko…Thanks for repeating those sects of Islam who comprise our enemy in each of your posts.” that she meant that every member of these groups should be executed.
    I’d say that it is unthinkable that had Eileen not meant her statement as a call for genocide that her **first** post in response would have been an outraged response saying that that wasn’t what she meant and how dare I say it was. But that isn’t what she did. No, she has made many responses to my posts, but it wasn’t until today that she has suddenly decided to pretend that she didn’t mean genocide.
    As for “slanderous” why not ask Eileen how many people she has called “terrorists”? If Eileen considers having her own words quoted at her (“1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.”) to be slander, then the slanderer would be Eileen herself. Unlike Eileen’s posts, I consider this and all of my posts to be **well reasoned** opinion, though opinion none the less. Nothing slanderous about that.
    On the other hand, Eileen still needs to answer for her outrageous statements.

  • Eileen

    Quite frankly, Skate, I’m not your Dhimmi, and WILL NOT jump when you say how high. Your charge was too outrageous to bother with – and continues to be. But after two days of your crap, I’d simply had enough.
    Perhaps even more importantly, one should question Skate’s motivations. I notice he becomes extremely violent in his remarks (to put it mildly) whenever someone has the audacity to actually impart knowledge – as Kat frequently does – regarding the nature of our enemy.
    Hmmmmm. Wonder why.
    Several other posters here used *much* more fiery rhetoric in this thread (including our host) regarding ways to ‘deal with’ the enemy, but the only real efforts to malign followed those in which someone like me educated the group about radical Islam.
    You can KMA.

  • Eileen

    What say you, Skate? Should we fight Islamofascism or convert to Islam?

  • Dak

    I took Eileens comments, whatever “deal with” means, to be directed at those committing atrocities on innocents, those bent on killing their idea of “infidels”, those bent on doing exactly what you are getting so indignant about at the thought of having someone do to them what they’ve done to others.
    Genocide is a word used for the murder of innocents….not a word applicable to “dealing with” terrorists who intentionally murder innocents.
    Eileen was not talking about “dealing with” innocents but with terrorists who kill innocents.
    But then, I suspect you knew that all along.

  • Eileen

    Of course he did, Dak. Otherwise, why would I have mentioned reeducating poor, brainwashed children in the same breath? Which is why, again, I question his ‘motivation’.
    But Skate? Again I must ask you: should we *in fact* fight Islamofascism or convert to Islam?
    Following your brand of malignant argument, since you didn’t IMMEDIATELY respond to MY question, using the words I’VE [ALREADY] CHOSEN FOR YOU, well, I’d say you’ve got some explaining to do. Oh, and regardless of what you *do* come up with, I’m going to perpetually remind you that you didn’t use the words I CHOSE or respond SOON ENOUGH, and *therefore*, you’ll ALWAYS have more explaining to do about that weighty, lengthy SILENCE.
    Hmmm, Skate? Should we fight Islamofascism or convert to Islam?
    Just curious, you know, which side of the pond you’re on.

  • Franky

    Skate,
    You should kiss Eileen’s ass for even daring to think of holding her accountable for her words in this thread. And further, I think it’s kind of messed up that you’re distracting Eileen and Kat from their real work, which is to “line up” all the “Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/
    Islamofascists” and “deal with” them. Don’t you see how much more important things they have to “deal with” than terrorists like you?

  • Eileen

    Well, I don’t have time to sit around here all day waiting for Skate’s answer to such a simple question (which, btw, Kat *also* specifically asked *of him* before I did, and he didn’t bother answering her either).
    And, again, Skate, no matter *what* you come up with, it’s not going to be *good enough* to overcome your lengthy lapse, and it’s not going to be what I DEMAND you say. So, it look’s like you’ve got even ‘more’ explaining to do…FOREVER.
    Back to work.

  • Skate

    Dak wrote, “I took Eileens comments, whatever “deal with” means, to be directed at those committing atrocities on innocents, those bent on killing their idea of “infidels”, those bent on doing exactly what you are getting so indignant about at the thought of having someone do to them what they’ve done to others.
    Genocide is a word used for the murder of innocents….not a word applicable to “dealing with” terrorists who intentionally murder innocents.
    Eileen was not talking about “dealing with” innocents but with terrorists who kill innocents.”
    Dak, I see that your objection to my saying that Eileen called for genocide (“1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.”) is a *technical** one. It is now clear that even you admit that Eileen was calling for the killing of all “Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists,” you are now just arguing that all “Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists” deserve to die so it isn’t “genocide.” Your apologist semantical argument over what is and isn’t “genocide” is appalling.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Faramin

    Should we fight Islamofascism or convert to Islam?
    Eileen, You are so brainless that you don’t even realize that the above question is another evidence of your genocidal-2.5 cell little brain.
    May be you are just too shy of saying:
    “Should we fight Islam or convert to Islam?”
    Or,
    “Should we fight Islamofascism or convert to Islamofascism?”
    You cann’t put both Islam and Islamosfascism in the same line unless you believe that they are the same. And if yes, why are you so shy of saying that? Or is it just your weak English that doesn’t allow you to see the error? (Emabarrsing you in your own language AGAIN? Well, you’re welcome).
    Again, back to your question:
    You don’t even see a different option. Your idioting comment is just like your dumb president’s when he said, “You are either with us, or with the terrorists”. The stupidity of the same attitude that has been transfered to the little Bushs like you, has caused more isolation of the US around the world.
    Well, I don’t expect you to see that though. After all, my expection of you should be as much as I can reasonably expect from a disfunctional little brain. Not much.
    Eileen, even a little brain can be genocidal, as is yours and your beloved Kat’s. How do you live with yourself?

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, “But Skate? Again I must ask you: should we *in fact* fight Islamofascism or convert to Islam?
    Following your brand of malignant argument, since you didn’t IMMEDIATELY respond to MY question, using the words I’VE [ALREADY] CHOSEN FOR YOU, well, I’d say you’ve got some explaining to do. Oh, and regardless of what you *do* come up with, I’m going to perpetually remind you that you didn’t use the words I CHOSE or respond SOON ENOUGH, and *therefore*, you’ll ALWAYS have more explaining to do about that weighty, lengthy SILENCE.”
    It is interesting to watch you try and adapt my well reasoned opinion to your own end. It is like watching a child pretend to be a doctor, it is cute but only a child’s imitation of the real thing.
    If I had said anything remotely resembling “we should all give in to ‘Islamofascism’” **and** I subsequently defended that opinion post after post, then you might have been able to score a cogent point with your reasoning.
    I, however, am able to point to your original statement where you said “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.” And your subsequent statement “Oh, and it’s “preemptive” to kill the enemy which has issued fatwas of war against us and attacked us – and is slaughtering infidels across the globe. Righto, bucko…Thanks for repeating those sects of Islam who comprise our enemy in each of your posts.” Thus my point that you, Eileen, never denied calling for the death of all “Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists” was not an argument unto itself but just further evidence of your call for mass-murder that I based my well reasoned opinion on.
    “Oh, and regardless of what you *do* come up with, I’m going to perpetually remind you that you didn’t use the words I CHOSE or respond SOON ENOUGH, and *therefore*, you’ll ALWAYS have more explaining to do about that weighty, lengthy SILENCE.”
    It would seem that having to answer for your own words is wearing on you. Rather than just say you were wrong, you are going to use your usual tactic of going on an angry rant. That trick may work in person where people may cower in fear of your angry, dogmatic rhetoric but it won’t work here where people can actually review what you have said and judge your character for themselves.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    Astonishing! Once you wade through all the same gobbledygook, this is Skate’s answer to that simple question:
    “If I had said anything remotely resembling “we should all give in to ‘Islamofascism’” **and** I subsequently defended that opinion post after post, then you might have been able to score a cogent point with your reasoning.”
    Which is a non-answer.
    Judging by the sharks swimming in this pond, they are **really** concerned about those who provide information about Islamofascism.
    The problem for you, boys, is that word IS getting out in spite of your best ‘efforts’.
    Know thine enemy, they say. Getting to know the enemy quite well right here at BuzzMachine.

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “Know thine enemy, they say. Getting to know the enemy quite well right here at BuzzMachine.”
    I’m glad you are becoming more introspective ;-) Of course, by “knowing thine enemy” you are giving into that “understand your enemy” stuff you say is terrorist gobbledygook. Perhaps you should go ahead and get it out of the way and call yourself a terrorist now for trying to understand the enemy!
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Skate

    Correction! Eileen wrote, “Know thine enemy, they say. Getting to know the enemy quite well right here at BuzzMachine.” What was I thinking confusing the two of them! My apologies for the confusion!
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    Actually, no, Skate, that wasn’t Kat.

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote (really) “Actually, no, Skate, that wasn’t Kat.”
    Ouch! Score one fore Eileen! Oh, wait. I already made that correction. Sorry Eileen, no points for you.

  • Skate

    Oops, should have typed “for” instead of “fore”. Wana try again, Eileen?

  • Faramin

    Eileen,
    Since I understand how your little brain works; if at all, I know what you mean by …Getting to know the enemy quite well right here at BuzzMachine.
    Yes, absolutely. I am the enemy of the combination of idiocy and crime against the humanity. That’s exactly why I crush you ever time. Last couple of years, have sure given me the oportunity to know and to respect many decent Americans; the same Americans who not only do not consider me as their enemy, but their friend. After all, they too care for all human beings regardless of their race, religion, gender and you name it. But in the same time, I found out how much ignorance and arrogance many other Americans such as you are suffering from, but the good news is that the number of your type is shrinking and the other type is growing.
    Eileen,
    You yourself are very capable of creating hatred towards not only you but your whole country. And that is unfortunate. Because, not everybody can distinguish the good Americans from the idiot ones.
    The best service to your countyr Eileen, is to not to say a word, at least until you reach the required maturity if not humanity.

  • Eileen

    Wanna try understanding ‘crossing posts’, Skate?
    I don’t plan to play your game and cut/paste my lengthy reply to your idiotic ‘genocide’ claim each time you make it. Nor do I plan to remind you each time of my statement regarding the need to reeducate children which makes your accusation even more ridiculous. Know this, though. No matter how many times you repeat your lies regarding me, it will never make them magically become true.
    Nor do I plan to cut/paste your inane, non-answer to the question of whether you think we should fight Islamofascism or convert in every post.
    I’m sure the readers of BuzzMachine will remember.

  • Faramin

    1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.
    Skate’s claim that your comment was genocidal is not a lie. That’s what you actually said. Just scroll up.
    Oh, BTW, I noticed some “evolution”; diluted with hypocracy:
    It was:
    Should we fight Islamofascism or convert to Islam?
    And after I showed the flaw in that idiotic comment, now you have changed it to:
    ..fight Islamofascism or convert .
    Convert to what? Islam or Islamofascism? Are you shy again to say what you really mean?

  • Dak

    The Five Steps are more and more looking like the only way.
    By Lawrence Auster
    FrontPageMagazine.com | January 28, 2005
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/readarticle.asp?ID=16801&p=1
    The Search for Moderate Islam: Part II
    If it doesn’t exist, then what?
    Excerpt: “Based on my analysis of the writings of Daniel Pipes, one of the chief advocates of the moderate Islam idea, I argued in the first part of this article that moderate Islam does not and cannot exist. Yet its proponents still feel a deep need to go on believing in it, since the only alternative they can envision is unending civilizational warfare. It would be a war waged not only between the Western and Islamic parts of the globe, butóbecause of the huge Muslim immigrant populations already sojourning in Europe and North Americaówithin the West itself. The prospect seems so horrible that the ecumenists cling to the faith in a moderate Islam no matter how unsupported it may be by the evidence.
    Notwithstanding these fears, there is a rational alternative to the belief in a moderate Islam. I call it the “civilizationist” school, because, in contrast with the ecumenist school, it not only posits irreconcilable differences between the two civilizations, but grapples head-on with their practical implications. Thinkers of the civilizationist school note essential facts about Islam that make any friendship or cooperation with it suicidal in the long run. These include the Koranic command on Muslims to engage in jihad against non-Muslim societies until the whole world is Islamized; the imposition of the totalitarian Sharia law wherever Islam becomes politically dominant; and the permanent subjection of non-Muslims to the miserable oppressed status of dhimmis.
    According to the civilizationists, there is and can be no such thing as moderate Islam, and therefore no solution to the Islamic problem that can come from within Islam, since Islam itselfónot “radical” Islamóis the problem. Moreover, the civilizationists do not say these things, as the ecumenists do, because they want Islam to be that way, but because Islam, unfortunately, is that way.”

  • Dak

    Faramin warns: “not everybody can distinguish the good Americans from the idiot ones”
    Hardly seems a problem compared to not being able to tell a terrorist Muslim from one who is not practicing jihad.

  • kat

    Fighting inslamofascism IS fighting their ugly brand of islam–the kind that uses western countries to spread its poison and they call it freedom of speech–I call it freedom to terrorize.
    Nice moderate muslims practising free speech: Am I supposed to embrace these people??
    http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15964118-421,00.html

  • tonynoboloney

    I have been intently following the posts in this thread for a couple of days now. All I can say (at the risk of repeating myself) is we know who the enemy are. It is facinating that the propaganda spewed by Skate and his ilk (you knwow who you are) is even considered for response. I assure you that I have not had my resolve swayed by the terrorist-appologists in this blog. On the contrary with each hate filled, anti western civalization post my conviction grows stronger. I feel emboldened to take what ever steps are nessesary to protect myself and my country from the Islamist fanaticism growing in our midst.
    I thank you all for helping to educate me as to the true meaning of words like caliphate and jihad, Sharia law etc. I would encourage Americans of all walks of life to study the teachings of Allah, so as to warn them of the coming struggle. I feel stongly that the “terrorists” are not an unbeatable foe, but many of us will have to change our ideas as to what will be acceptable methods of eradicating this scourge from the planet.

  • Skate

    Eileen:”Wanna try understanding ‘crossing posts’, Skate?”
    Oh, physician, heal thyself. Cross posting is when you double post across forums. This isn’t even a nested thread.
    “I don’t plan to play your game and cut/paste my lengthy reply to your idiotic ‘genocide’ claim each time you make it. ”
    Of course not. Because you have nothing to quote. Your arguments by assertion are not based in fact. This makes quoting inconvenient for you because quotes of opposing posts tend to *disprove* what you say rather than support it.
    One of the reasons I quote you directly is for accuracy and so that I can respond to what you actually said. You don’t seem to have the same interest in accuracy or in addressing what people *actually* say–it might cut into your ability to claim people are terrorists since you would actually have to find a valid reason to claim it.
    “Nor do I plan to cut/paste your inane, non-answer to the question of whether you think we should fight Islamofascism or convert in every post.”
    Your insistence on an argument based on a false conundrum belies your ignorance of formal logic and argumentation. There is no need to disprove your argument because you haven’t provided any reason to presume that the two are mutually exclusive. Faramin has you on this issue. I think you should be embarrassed by this blunder in basic logic.
    “Nor do I plan to remind you each time of my statement regarding the need to reeducate children which makes your accusation even more ridiculous.”
    Time to roll the tape on what you *actually* said:
    “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.”
    “2. Blow up the madrassas. Replace them with schools which teach moderation and undo the brainwashing being driven into little gutblowers.”
    and
    “4. Warn ‘moderate’ Muslims not to ‘stand too close to these unfortunates’ per Mitch or ‘they’ll get caught in the fray’ per tonynobaloney.”
    So you said to “blow up” the madrassas and to tell anyone who gets near your targeted groups that they’ll die in the crossfire. I really can’t say that more quotes by you really help your cause. I’d say it’s clear that you meant for all Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists to be killed. Your claim that saying we should “blow up” the madrassas doesn’t really make you come off as any more humanitarian.
    This post, like all my posts, represents my opinion.

  • Skate

    tonynobalony: “It is facinating that the propaganda spewed by Skate and his ilk (you knwow who you are) is even considered for response. I assure you that I have not had my resolve swayed by the terrorist-appologists in this blog.”
    Tony, I do think there are some legitimate issues that are brought up in these threads. Your post is disappointing because it is inaccurate. If I had actually been spewing propaganda, you’d be able to quote it. Instead you have chosen to take the same route as Eileen and make general accusations that you can’t back up with actual facts.
    I think extremism is bad. Terrorists are despicable extremists. Eileen is an extremist too. Her blind hate has her busy looking for “terrorists” under every rock and forum post while she looses sight of the real dangers that affect us all. She couldn’t tell a *real* terrorist unless he blew himself up in her yard.
    “On the contrary with each hate filled, anti western civalization [sic] post my conviction grows stronger.”
    You’ve yet to show a quote from me or my “ilk” that is “anti western civalization [sic]“–heck, you can’t even spell “civilization”, though I think a cogent argument is more important than spelling. Too bad you couldn’t provide one of those, either.
    I’m anti-fanatical, no matter what continent the fanatics come from.
    I applaud your desire to become educated and to have hope that we can defeat terrorists but I hope you will not develop the same closed fanatical mind that Eileen has. She is no role model. She has a steam-roller like intellect that resists reason and that tries to squish anything in its path without thought for what the consequences may be.
    This post is my opinion.

  • Eileen

    This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, “This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.”
    Typical, just more “trash” talk from Eileen ;-) You couldn’t even quote an alleged lie. Way to prove your point, Eileen. You could at least *try*…
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    Tonynobaloney,
    I couldn’t agree more with all that you’ve just
    said. A few months ago when I lobbied for JJ to eliminate a particular entity from this site, Howard made an excellent point. He said something like, “hey, the 1st Amendment just helps us to identify them.”
    Indeed.

  • Eileen

    Skate said (among other terror trash): “Time to roll the tape on what you *actually* said:”
    And of COURSE heshenospam proceeded to not even accurately quote me.
    Your Allah is a false god. It is a little g god, no less. It’s amazing you even bought into the sham.

  • KJB43

    “This post represents my opinion.” Oh really Skate? And here I thought you were channeling Michael Moore. Pompous. Tiresome. You.

  • M.

    Jeff, I often like what you have to say, but this post is just wrong. Especially when I got to the bottom, I mentally answered A, and B in your KKK murder senario. YES – you must understand what inequality and hate can do. We must understand what teaching hate to children can do. The only reason that guy got away with his KKK killings at the time is because of the every day people who became his accomplices (jury, police, etc). It is important to study Nazi propaganda and training to understand how the Holocaust could have happened. I’m Jewish and I know every Nazi wasn’t evil, they were certainly not noble, but fear and control makes human beings less human. And police and psychiatrists study serial killers to understand how their minds work. It is not to forgive them of their crimes, but to prevent it from happening again. To see the patterns and signals and STOP IT. To understand their strategies. This is what FBI profilers do. Yes we want to understand. We must try to understand. Some of these suicide bombers have been very young. I cannot believe these young men and women are hard-wired cold-blooded killers. It is easy to be so high and mighty about human nature. Call it brainwashing or whatever you want, but it doesn’t take all that much to turn an insecure kid into a martyr. These are horrible crimes against humanity, and I live in nyc, and I’m scared again… I understand your feelings of frustration. But I think you are missing the bigger picture here. This isn’t about a few random criminals. This is a movement. A destructive, deadly social movement. It is too late after the crime has been committed. Suicide bombers aren’t concerned about jail time.

  • Kat

    I read this at Glen Reynold’s blog. I was shocked. This guy could well be Faramin or Skate or Jersey Exile–he sounds so much like them.
    {–by D.S. Savage, The whole colloquy can be found in Volume 2 of Orwell’s “Collected Essays, Journalism and Letters.”
    Fascism is not a force confined to any one nation. We can just as soon get it here as anywhere else. The characteristic markings of Fascism are: curtailment of individual and minority liberties; abolition of private life and private values and substitution of State life and public values (patriotism); external imposition of discipline (militarism); prevalence of mass-values and mass-mentality; falsification of intellectual activity under State pressure. These are all tendencies of present-day Britain…
    …..
    Don’t let us be misled by names. Fascism is quite capable of calling itself democracy or even Soc-ialism. It’s the reality under the name that matters. War demands totalitarian organisation of society. Germany organised herself on that basis prior to embarking on war. Britain now finds herself compelled to take the same measures after involvement in war. Germans call it National Soc-ialism. We call it democracy. The result is the same.
    …Who is to say that a British victory will be less disastrous than a German one? The last British victory was pretty meaningless.
    …The corruption and hollowness revealed in the prosecution of this war are too contemptible for words. Certainly I will accept my share of responsibility for them, but I wont fight in a war to extend that corruption and hollowness.
    …Orwell dislikes French intellectuals licking up Hitler’s crumbs, but what’s the difference between them and our intellectuals who are licking up Churchill’s?…
    I am not greatly taken in by Britain’s “democracy”, particularly as it is gradually vanishing under the pressure of the war. Certainly I would never fight and kill for such a phantasm. I do not greatly admire the part “my country” has played in world events. I consider that spiritually Britain has lost all meaning… I feel identified with my country in a deep sense, and want her to regain her meaning, her soul, if that is possible: but the unloading of a billion tons of bombs on Germany won’t help this forward an inch… Whereas the rest of the nation is content with calling down obloquy on Hitler’s head, we [pacifists] regard this as superficial. Hitler requires, not condemnation, but understanding. This does not mean that we like, or defend him. Personally I do not care for Hitler. He is, however, “realler” than Chamberlain, Churchill, Cripps, etc, in that he is the vehicle of raw historical forces, whereas they are stuffed dummies, waxwork figures, living in unreality. We do not desire a German “victory”; we would not lift a finger to help either Britain or Germany to “win”; but there would be a profound justice, I feel, however terrible, in a German victory..}
    Just substitute Iraq for Germany and USA for Britain, Bush for Churchill, and Islamists for Nazis, Osama for Hitler, Savage for some of the posters here,Jeff for Orwell, and well, you get the point.

  • owl

    M……I agree it is a movement but also agree with Jeff. Think NY’s crime rate before someone came in and cleaned it up. Understanding these poor, unfortunate criminals didn’t seem to get the job done.
    Even though I resent even giving the killers a label (terrorists), I already recognize (understand) that something bred a different kind of killer. A mindless one that thinks his job is to be his God’s enforcer, here on earth. He believes his God wants him to kill me because I do not believe his particular religious beliefs.
    I intend to stop him with whatever force is available and also to stop anything that helps him. If religious teachers need to clean up their act and rebuke those that do not, so be it. It is certainly not too late to hear from this silent mass. Oh yes, we all know who we saw celebrating in the streets. So if this celebration is not acceptable……LETS HEAR IT.
    I loved finally….finally, hearing something with volume coming from religious leaders in Britian. About time.

  • Dak

    whodat says: I think that the whole “root cause” issue is basically garbage. We know what their root cause is.
    Take over the Middle East and then the world. Join us or die.

    a root cause
    “The terrorists are quite mobile and able to set up a car bomb in less than five minutes. Many of the drivers have had family members kidnapped and believe that the only way to save them is carry out this act of violence, not realizing that the family they are trying to save is probably long dead. It like the tactics of the Mob and Drug dealers in South America.
    The terrorists use extreme Muslim religion to recruit new members and offer the new recruits everything from power and money to a place in heaven if they carry out these acts.”
    ….Iraqi death toll
    “The terrorists are trying hard to stop the fledgling Iraqi Army from getting started and trained. The Iraqis have recently taken most of the hits. This tactic is apparently an attempt to scare them away and to reduce their numbers. The US military is going out in fully armored humvees, while the typical Iraqi soldier is in an open bed truck, with wooden railings for protection. Yet the Iraqis indicate that they currently have many more recruits than they can train. The Iraqis I interviewed willingly joined the Army.
    http://voicesofsoldiers.com/article.php?story=20050719010337917

  • tonynoboloney

    Great post Kat. It is amazing how history and philosophies repeat themselves. Take heart, we all remember well who the victors were in that struggle. We as Americans must be vigilant in our pursuit of the flawed and perverse Islamist global threat. I have no doubts as we become more informed (thanks to people like Skate), the world will realize exactly what we are up against.

  • peggy35

    A big amen to everything the poster said.
    I think the problems with muslims that we are having represents the greatest challenge civilization has yet to face and how we answer it may be one of the pivots of history.
    Will we learn to stand up and say that something is wrong because its simply wrong no matter what guise it comes in or how it tries to justify itself? Or will we back off out of some misplaced respect or tolerance for other faiths and lose all sense of moral direction.
    I don’t think it is an accident that this pivot point involves religion since we place such a high value on religious tolerance and respect for the beliefs of others in our society.
    I also dont think its an accident that it is with this particular religion since judging an act by the intentions of the actor is something that goes to the heart of islamic apologetics. Since the faiths beginnings, the many otherwise questionable actions of mohammed and his first followers have been justified by muslim apologists because the intentions of the actors was to defend islam and to help it succeed. I think there is a direct connnection between this practice and the murderers that we are fighting in that they believe they are justified in their actions because they act to defend the honor and supposedly the survival of islam too. Of course, many perhaps most muslims do not make this connection and are peaceful people even when provoked, but the bomb making materials are there at the sources for the right or should I say wrong people to find and abuse. (May the Islamic reformation in regards to those sources come in a hurry. Faster please.)
    We may or may not come to a point where we reject the whole idea that the intention to do something good (or some other excuse) justifies doing something that is otherwise wrong. But I hope that we do. It would have implications for the whole world including our own behavior as Western people and as Western nations. Although I think we may be on that track it is by no means a given that we will stay on it yet nor do I think that we have no room for improvement in how we act.
    It is a lesson the whole world could learn and be much better off for it.
    Do wrong is just wrong. Murder is just murder. Period. It can’t be said any better or more clearly than this.

  • Eileen

    April 16, 2005
    “A new Islamic advocacy group in Boca Raton is under scrutiny for its ties to William W. Baker, a former chairman of the neo-Nazi political party of presidential candidate David Duke who was run out of town last year when he attempted to speak at Florida Atlantic University.
    Local Jewish and civic leaders said Friday they were alarmed that the Assadiq Islamic Education Foundation, whose headquarters are listed at 831 E. Palmetto Park Road in Boca, had invited Baker back to Boca as featured speaker at an April 30 banquet at the Boca Marriott. Invited by Muslim students to speak at Florida Atlantic University in April 2004, Bakerís first visit to the city was cancelled amid popular protest.
    ìIíd like to give [the Assadiq Foundation] the benefit of the doubt and say they got snookered, but this is the second attempt at getting Baker into Boca Raton, so they have to be aware of his reputation,î said Bill Gralnick, southeast regional director of the American Jewish Committee.
    Leaders of the Anti-Defamation League also protested last yearís visit by Baker, on whom they have a long anti-Semitic file. Now head of Christians and Muslims for Peace (CAMP), Baker chaired the neo-Nazi Populist Party and organized its national convention in 1984.
    ìFor me, itís alarm bells,î Gralnick said. ìBaker is in league with Islamicist elements that are probing the defenses of American Jewish communities. He makes money off them by being their white Anglo-Saxon mouthpiece who says bad things about Jews.î
    Sayed Mohammad Jawad Al-Qazwini, listed on the Assadiq Web site as the groupís Imam and founder, did not answer media inquiries Friday.
    On the Assadiq Web site, a page titled ìAudio libraryî features a graphic of dripping blood and a series of recorded talks by Al-Qazwini.
    The titles of his talks, which could not be accessed, range from ìThe Perpetual Endeavor to Protect Islamî and ìThe Ingredients to an Eternal Revolutionî to ìTraits of an Ideal Leader for an Eternal Uprising.î. . .”
    http://www.bocaratonnews.com/index.php?src=news&category=Local%20News&prid=11371

  • Skate

    Peggy35 wrote, “I think the problems with muslims that we are having represents the greatest challenge civilization has yet to face and how we answer it may be one of the pivots of history.”
    The problem isn’t Muslims but extremism combined with the access to dangerous weapons. In terms of the number of people killed, it is probably totalitarianism that is the most dangerous thing. Stalin killed at least 20 million, with dishonorable mentions going to Hitler, Pol Pot, Sadam, Kadafi and a host of other murderous regimes.
    But people don’t need Islam to kill each-other in frightening quantities, there were over 800,000 killed in the Rwandan Genocide, which was, perhaps, Africa’s most Christian country. In fact, two Catholic priests were sentenced to death for their participation in the crimes. From the BBC:
    “The priests were convicted of involvement in two massacres.
    In one, they were accused of organising the killing of about 2,000 Tutsis by bulldozing the church in which they were sheltering at Nyange in the western Kibuye region. The bulldozer driver was sentenced to life imprisonment.”
    That’s **2,000** people. Murder and terrorism *are not* a Muslim thing.
    I think it is true that certain aspects of Islam lend themselves to the uses of violent extremests. One of the most important aspects is the Islamic tendency for Theocracy. The state and religion are very intertwined, making issues of reform, modernization and justice very thorny. It is hard to argue for reform in a theocracy because that is seen as an attack on the religion. One of the most important points for Westerners to glean from Islam is that it is *vital* that we keep our **church and state separate** to preserve our traditions of freedom.
    “We may or may not come to a point where we reject the whole idea that the intention to do something good (or some other excuse) justifies doing something that is otherwise wrong.”
    For many people, fear justifies the end *and* the means. It is wrong to say this is an Islamic trait. There is a cut and dried example right here in this thread, where a poster calling themselves “Eileen” said:
    “A few suggestions:
    1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’. ”
    This quote shows that extremism and calls for mass-murder are not the sole domain of Islamic extremists but are also common in those who think they are the enemies of terrorism, though in fact they have become what they claim to hate.
    To be fair, “Eileen” now says she did not mean ‘deal with them’ to mean “kill them,” though I think Eileen’s fairly good grasp of English makes it rather unlikely she would have written ‘deal with them’ to mean “arrest them and see that they are justly prosecuted.”
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.

  • Eileen

    Go here to read the Al Qaeda Training Manual:
    http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/trainingmanual.htm

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote (again), “This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.”
    Howdy, Eileen. Once again, you demonstrate that you are completely unable to deal with a well reasoned opinion. You have failed to quote or even cite a singe point in my post to allege is a lie because you can’t.
    Arguing with you is beginning to make me feel sad because it is becoming increasingly clear that you can’t defend your opinions with logic, yet I don’t feel sorry for you because you are trying to defend indefensible positions.
    Speaking of which, why would you disseminate **terrorist** training material by providing a link to an Al Qaeda manual? If anyone else did that you’d cite that as proof positive that **they** were terrorists. Lucky for you I’m not so small-minded. Think there are plenty of **other** solid reasons to believe you have a deeply ingrained terrorist-like mindset–even to the point of disseminating terrorist training material!!
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.

  • peggy35

    Skate,
    I don’t think I said at any point that noone else is guilty of extremism except muslims. It is muslims who we happen to be fighting at this time so that fact has some bearing on the issues we face. The fact that this is a religion and a religion that at its beginning had a founder who did morally questionable things and is excused by muslim apologists because he did it with the “good” intention of defending islam is also relevant to this discussion.
    I have absolutely no idea where you get that Rwanda was/is the most Christian country in Africa though. What exactly is it in the teachings or example of Jesus led them astray? What was the theological difference between the Hutus and Tutsis that inspired the carnage? It was all on them, I’m afraid. It has always been all on any Christian who has done the same. Jesus as our founder cannot be blamed. This is not the case with islam in which mohammed killed people in battle and ordered their killing or looked the other way outside of battle all to advance his cause. And he raided Meccan caravans to support his cause as well and was the only judge of whether a treaty he had made had been broken so that he could nullify it and attack.
    We are not that far apart, but I think that you maybe misjudged my comments if you think I’m not aware of the evil that has been done by others throughout history.

  • whodat

    Skate–
    Shouldn’t it be “My name is Skate and I endorse this message.” ?

  • Franky

    It’s interesting how those who appear to find their life’s purpose in promoting the war on terror are also the people who seem to take it the least seriously. You are not a serious person if in the context of fighting Al-Qeada you call other Buzzmachine posters’ comments “terror trash”. The truth is that most of the wingnuts are just eager to start a war of religion and then get themselves a job incarcerating their fellow citizens (God knows where this hatred of their citizens comes from, but reading between the lines of our posters here there appears to be a deep sense of inferiority).
    Anyone with a modicum of knowledge of history will recognise those tendencies amongst Stalin’s and Hitler’s bureaucrats and pen-pushers.
    But I’ll hand it to you Skate: you’ve got more patience than I have for this stupidity and basic human ugliness.

  • Faramin

    Eileen,
    No matter how much your like-minded wingnuts try to help you, the fact remains that your small brain is genocidal. Reviewing only a few of your rants exposes how sick a mentality you have. You and your beloved Kat should be kept away from the society until you are cured a cleared fromm the disease that is consuming whatever left from your humanity. Sure It will take time, and I don’t know if it is worth it but it might work.

  • Faramin

    The 9/11 terrorists were over here because we were over there. They are not trying to convert us. They are killing us to drive us out of their countries.
    and
    The Iraq war is not eradicating terrorism, it is creating terrorists.
    and
    “Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism,” says Pape, “the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies … is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us.”
    and
    Bush’s cure for terrorism is a cause of the epidemic. The doctor is spreading the disease.
    Excerpts of the REPUBLICAN Pat Buchanan’s article, Bush barking up wrong tree on terror.

  • Kat

    Isn’t Buchanan a religious nutbar? Who can take him seriously?
    Islamic terrorism is occurring in every country on earth–even countries not involved in Afghanistan or Iraq. You are full of crap, Faramin, and you are like the terrorists, blame everyone but the followers of that sick religion.
    The root cause of terrorism worldwide is fanatical islam. And moderate muslims are willing to sit back with the odd condemnation followed by a ‘but’ or an ‘if’ or an ‘and’.

  • Faramin

    Fanatical muslims are as sick as fanatical christians like you Kat. You are all in the same camp; against the human prosperity and human dignity.

  • Skate

    Peggy35 wrote, “It is muslims who we happen to be fighting at this time so that fact has some bearing on the issues we face.”
    This is mostly true, except that there are always non-muslim civil wars going on around the world where we could interject ourselves for humanitarian purposes. We chose to attack Iraq where there are muslims, though they had nothing to do with 9/11 nor did they have any WMDs. The terrorists attacking us in Iraq are part of a civil war in Iraq that we could have avoided.
    “I have absolutely no idea where you get that Rwanda was/is the most Christian country in Africa though”
    I read it at afrol news. I know little about that organization (unlike Eileen, I am able to admit when my sources are not guaranteed to be perfect) afrol said this:
    “In Rwanda, before the genocide called “Africa’s most Christian country,” over 50 percent of the population is Roman Catholic. Some 12 percent belong to other Christian societies.”
    Sounds pretty damn Christian to me…Do you have evidence that this is not true? Christianity is no immunization against being a terrorist or a mass murder–just look at the Catholic vs. Protestant terrorism in Ireland and England.
    I’d agree, that if people actually practiced what the New Testament says Jesus **actually** said then Christians would be very peaceful–but many, perhaps most Christians don’t follow some of the more inconvenient teachings of Christ very closely, including the part about giving up your wealth, doing good works publicly but not being publicly pious.
    However, Jesus also said he did not come to replace the teachings of the Old Testament but to add to them, so all of the violence and prejudice of those writings also caries over into the teachings of Jesus in a way that is not well defined by Jesus himself, leaving various Christian sects plenty of wiggle room.
    “It was all on them [the Rwandans], I’m afraid.”
    And Muslim violence is all on those individuals as well. Individuals have to be held accountable for their actions. I think you are arguing this from convenience, the Old Testament features many instances of carnage condoned by God. Joshua “utterly destroyed all that breathed, as the Lord God of Israel commanded” Joshua 10:40 And more other instances of God-approved slaughter than I can type. I don’t mean that Christians are ordered in the bible to commit more of these crimes but that there is a history of appalling slaughter approved by the God of Christ.
    I do think Islam is a religion which easily lends itself to extremism, but it is not the reason there is extremism in this world. I’d like to see all forms of extremism magically disappear but I can’t count on that anytime soon.
    “We are not that far apart,”
    We may not be…I think extremism and totalitarianism are the enemy and I don’t want our country to become an extremist, totalitarian state–then we’ll have lost our cause.

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, for the 3d time, “This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.”
    Boy, Eileen, you have really taken me to task here with your devastatingly clever post. The way you have cunningly cited my arguments and methodically proven me wrong with breathtaking logic, point by point is awe inspiring. You are truly an intellectual tour de force. Er, or you might be if you could do all that…
    Can the person who wrote this stunning suggestion:
    “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’.”
    really be out of ideas? What a sad day this is…
    This post, like all of my posts, represents my opinion.

  • Skate

    Franky wrote, “But I’ll hand it to you Skate: you’ve got more patience than I have for this stupidity and basic human ugliness.”
    Well franky, I admit it is lonely out here on the front but I think it is important to understand not only Islamic extremists but American extremists so we realize the danger that is brewing at home. If we want to remain the free country that we marginally still are we have to fight zealotry, extremism and theocracy abroad and right here at home.
    It is hard to reason with the unreasonable, but someone has to try..Perhaps we could arrange an intervention for Eileen but we’d need to counteract the influence of her enablers like Kat. I fear it is too late…
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.

  • kat

    Rwanda was a tribal conflict,not a religious one. If you had an honest bone in your body you would not be blaming it on religion.

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, for the 4th time, “This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.”
    OMG! I think Eileen is broken! Perhaps Eileen is just some sort of Stepford Hate-bot who is stuck and can only say “You are a terrorist! You are a terrorist! You are a terrorist.”
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “Rwanda was a tribal conflict,not a religious one. If you had an honest bone in your body you would not be blaming it on religion.”
    Kat, you have no head for **nuance**. Everything is black or white for you. I used Rwanda as a clear example of where horrible carnage was committed recently and where Islam was not a significant influence. This was to prove that Islam is not the root of all violence and terror. Far, far more people died in Rwanda than the so-called War on Terror.
    Second, Rwanda is proof that Christianity was no immunization against people committing mass-murder. Many of the posters here have the idea in their heads that Islam=terrorist and Christian=good person. The problem is that their is no such equation. People of all faiths and no faith have committed horrible atrocities, including the Christians in Rwanda.
    You’d be mistaken for concluding that my even-handed critique of all religions is an endorsement of Islam or a condemnation of Christianity. Most religions can be used by bad people for evil purposes and have been at one time or another and most have been used for good by good people and most are a mix of mostly good being done by mostly good people.
    It is time for you to become a grown-up, Kat, and realize the world is a complex place that can’t be reduced to simplistic either ors. Most people are not all good or all bad, and the same goes for religions and just about everything else. I’m sure it is comforting to think that everything is “with you or against you,” but that, too, is not reality.

  • Eric
  • Dak

    Can’t get much simpler…..
    Christians: To kill innocents -
    is to DISobey God’s Word (Christ..new Testament)
    Muslims: To kill innocents (infidels) -
    is to OBEY their Allah.

  • Skate

    Dak wrote, “Can’t get much simpler…..
    Christians: To kill innocents -
    is to DISobey God’s Word (Christ..new Testament)
    Muslims: To kill innocents (infidels) -
    is to OBEY their Allah.”
    If only it were that simple, Dak. I’m against the killing of innocents because I think it is wrong not because god told me. Killing people, however, is something that many Christians are inconsistent on. I think the Catholic Church, at least, takes a consistent approach: abortion, war, death penalty–all are wrong. GWB, on the other hand, stem-cell research–EVIL! War, death penalty–GOOD!
    Even, you Dak, were careful to only say that “innocents” may not be killed, leaving you the option to support war and the death penalty–ignoring that both war and the death penalty **do** kill innocents.
    Second, you are equivocating on the term “innocents” by which you mean someone *you* consider innocent.
    The bible says that any man who lies with another man should be put to death. Are you for killing gays? The bible says you should. You might argue that such a person isn’t “innocent” and should be killed. The islamic extremist can argue that *their* holly book says that *infidels* are not innocent and must be killed. So, you get into arguments where each person’s holly books says the other person must be killed–and since each person’s god never actually sends a signed memo to clear things up, the humans wind up killing each-other in a my-god-is-the-one-true-good-and-you-are-a-heretic massacre. This why religion is *not* a good way to justify a war. Heck, you are doing it right now saying their religion is wrong and yours is right.

  • Eileen

    “Less than a day after the terrorist bombings in London, the Palestinian Authority’s official television channel broadcast a sermon calling for extermination of all non-Muslims.
    “Annihilate the Infidels and the Polytheists! Your [Allah's] enemies are the enemies of the religion!” said Suleiman Al-Satari in a July 8 broadcast translated by Israel-based Palestinian Media Watch, or PMW.
    “Allah,” the cleric continued, “disperse their gathering and break up their unity, and turn on them, the evil adversities. Allah, count them and kill them to the last one, and don’t leave even one.”
    Referring to the timing of the sermon, PMW’s Itamar Marcus noted that clerics in the Palestinian authority routinely include Britain in the “infidel” category.
    “Such a call does not represent a new policy or even a shift in policy,” Marcus said. “While the PA is careful to exclude this hate ideology from the image it presents to the foreign media, to its own people in Arabic the PA has always presented itself as part of a greater Arab-Islamic conflict against the West.”
    Marcus said this enmity is focused primarily on the U.S. and Britain, who are seen as the dominant forces of Western civilization.
    Palestinians are taught that it is predetermined that Islam eventually will rule over America and Britain, he pointed out. ***”

  • Dak

    Skate says: “Heck, you are doing it right now saying their religion is wrong and yours is right.”
    Where did I say that?
    I stated what I understand the teachings of each to be. I didn’t make up those teachings. They are the teachings.
    It is YOU, Skate, who JUST DREW the only conclusion there could be from simply reading:
    Christians: To kill innocents -
    is to DISobey God’s Word (Christ..new Testament)
    Muslims: To kill innocents (infidels) -
    is to OBEY their Allah.”
    The same conclusion the rest of the world is drawing…from what Islam itself says it must do. …kill infidels.
    Another big difference: we are not to take New Testament Bible teachings literally, but figuratively. Jesus always taught in parable.
    I am not a Bible scholar, but have heard enough preaching to know that Jesus never commanded we MUST kill. You are looking at the old Testament, which the coming of Christ negated.
    Nor have I seen where He made it wrong to serve in defense of one’s country ie within the law or military.
    “war and the death penalty **do** kill innocents”
    Both war and the death penalty, within our country’s law and military parameters, are necessary at times to REDUCE the number of innocents killed. Left unchecked, Islamic terrorists, Saddam Hussein etc have and would kill far more than this war ever will.

  • Dak

    This isn’t about other religions being right.
    This is about:
    Muslims: To kill innocents (infidels) -
    is to OBEY their Allah.”
    So say YOU.
    “I’m against the killing of innocents because I think it is wrong”
    If you mean that, then you must find Islam wrong to teach it.

  • Skate

    Dak wrote, “You are looking at the old Testament, which the coming of Christ negated.”
    Nope. If that were true, the Old Testament wouldn’t be in the bible and we wouldn’t give a rat’s but about the Ten Commandments (**Old Testament**). More later.
    This post represents my opinion, as do all of my posts.

  • Dak

    Christians……..there weren’t any Christians before Christ!
    Christians do not follow the Old Testament.
    “The Commandments were restated in the new convenant and even somewhat
    modified by our Lord.
    Nine of these ten precepts have always been right, by their very nature, and they always will be right. They were right before Moses ever presented them to the people on tables of stone.
    They are moral laws that are inherently correct.”
    Since these nine laws (all but the fourth) did not originate with the Law of Moses, they also did not end with it.
    Skate, as I said I’m not a Bible scholar, but I did find this:
    http://www.bible.ca/s-10-commandments.htm
    10 Commandments (old covenant) abolished
    Let it be remembered that the law of Moses was the constitution of ancient Israel and ended at the cross (Colossians 2:14). It was a covenant solely between God and Israel (Deuteronomy 5:2). It was to last until Christ came (Galatians 3:16-24). The ten commandments were a vital part of the entire law of Moses (Romans 7:7). Hebrews 8:13 clearly teaches us that the old covenant (the 10 commandments) are all abolished.
    However, for those under the new covenant we are to hear Jesus and not Moses:
    “Wherefore, my brethren, you also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that you should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God” (Romans 7:4).
    We are, therefore, not under the law issuing from Sinai. Instead, we are answerable to God under the “new and living way” (Hebrews 10:20) which became operative on the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Christ. Nine of the ten commandments of the decalogue are now a part of the new covenant. Not that these commands were “carried over” or “retained”; but rather they have been restated in the new covenant and even modified somewhat by our Lord. Nine of these ten precepts have always been right, by their very nature, and they always will be right. They were right before Moses ever presented them to the people on tables of stone. They are moral laws that are inherently correct. Since these nine laws did not originate with the Law of Moses, they also did not end with it.
    As for the one other commandment:
    4. The fourth commandment, -”Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy”
    enjoined upon the Israelites the observance of seventh-day worship. They were required to keep it as a memorial of their deliverance from Egypt (Exodus 31:12-17). Inasmuch as we are not Israelites (descendants of Jacob), and we were never in Egyptian bondage, it is not now, nor was it ever applicable to us as Gentiles. Moreover, it was not included in the New Covenant and was, in fact, terminated at the cross of Calvary (Colossians 2:14). The last time the Sabbath is mentioned in the New Testament is in Colossians 2:16. There Paul issues a warning against those who would seek to bind it. The only commandment peculiar to the Israelite order was the law of the Sabbath.
    Christians meet for worship today, not on the Jewish Sabbath, but the Lord’s day, the first day of the week (Acts 20:7; I Cor. 16:1,2; Rev. 1:10).

  • Dak

    Nine of these ten precepts have always been right, by their very nature, and they always will be right. They were right before Moses ever presented them to the people on tables of stone.
    They are moral laws that are inherently correct.”

    The above profound truth is WHY you said what you did Skate, when you said:
    I’m against the killing of innocents because I think it is wrong, not because god told me.
    Exactly!!!!!!

  • Faramin

    Skate,
    I’m against the killing of innocents because I think it is wrong not because god told me
    I don’t care if religion, any religion, says that or not, killing is wrong because it is wrong (period).
    You have clearly maintained your high moral ground in this thread and I thank you for that and for being so patient with the abussive comments.

  • Skate

    Eileen quoted this, “”Less than a day after the terrorist bombings in London, the Palestinian Authority’s official television channel broadcast a sermon calling for extermination of all non-Muslims.
    “Annihilate the Infidels and the Polytheists! Your [Allah's] enemies are the enemies of the religion!” said Suleiman Al-Satari in a July 8 broadcast translated by Israel-based Palestinian Media Watch, or PMW.”
    Yes, and an American Extremist going by the name “Eileen” said this:
    “A few suggestions:
    1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’. They are all warriors for Allah.”
    Extremism is not reserved to Muslims, as we can see by the above quote.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Eileen

    This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.

  • Skate

    Dak wrote, “Christians do not follow the Old Testament.”
    You see, Dak, you have just highlighted a critical issue in Christianity. Christians do not agree how much they must follow the Old Testament. If you **really** believed that you don’t follow the Old Testament, your Bible wouldn’t even include it.
    Many Christians enjoy pointing to the Old Testament for statements such as the one about homosexuals should be put to death, but ignore the one that says you must not wear linen and wool at the same time.
    ” ‘Nine of these ten precepts have always been right, by their very nature, and they always will be right. They were right before Moses ever presented them to the people on tables of stone.
    They are moral laws that are inherently correct.’ ”
    This is utter balderdash. There isn’t even a single version of the so-called Ten Commandments. The Catholic version of the decalogue omits that problematic (for Catholics anyways) commandment that you should make no graven images of anything that is in heaven or on earth.
    Most versions of the decalogue are summaries of Ten Commandments. The commandment against covetousness comes from this “Do not be envious of your neighbor’s house. Do not be envious of your neighbor’s wife, his slave, his maid, his ox, his donkey, or anything else that is your neighbor’s.”
    Yup, you need to not be envious of your neighbors slave. The Ten Commandments say that **Envy** is a sin, but say nothing about **having slaves**!!! The Ten Commandments seem to endorse slavery!. Some guide to morality. Oh, and don’t give me the that-was-then-and-this-is-now argument because if that worked, we could ignore the whole bible since that was then and this is now.
    TTFN
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Kat

    What a bunch of Skate trash–he truly is a muslim extremist–always trying to excuse by finding equivalencies and twisting words to suit the terrorist agenda. He attacks Christianity while giving islam a free pass. Of all the major religions of the world, Islam is the only one that promotes or condones the denigration and subjugation of women, severe physical mutilation for even minor offences, mutilation of women’s genitals for no reason and many other unsavoury and barbaric practices that have no place in civilised society…except in Skate’s terrorist world. There is no hope for islam to reform when idiots protect its barbaric practices and blame everyone else.
    You know frigging well that Eileen was referring to terrorists, your terrorists friends kill anyone who doesn’t tow the extremist line.
    {Therefore it is obvious that the Muslim fundamentalists cannot be treated in the same manner as those who subscribe to the sanctity of life.The only conclusion that any sensible person could arrive at is that these lunatics have a completely different value on human life. It is apparent that these murderous barbarians only understand one language and that is one of death and destruction, therefore it is incumbent on the civilised world to dispatch these people to the same place as their victims, and as quickly as possible. General Norman Schwarzkopf of Gulf War fame had the right perspective when asked if there was any room for forgiveness towards the people who have harboured and abetted the terrorists who perpetrated the attacks on the USA on 11 September 2001. Schwarzkopf’s answer was short and to the point. He said, “I believe that forgiving them is God’s function. Our job is simply to arrange the meeting.” } Schwarzkopt said nothing different from Eileen. My sentiments exactly.

  • Eileen

    Here’s another great article: “The Nazi Origins of Modern Arab Terror”, focusing on Amin al Husseini, the Arab Fuhrer. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/3/3/154714.shtml
    “The agenda and political faith of Saddam Hussein, Yasir Arafat, Osama bin Laden, Hamas and the rest of the international Islamic terrorists can be traced back to World War II and two key figures, Adolf Hitler and Amin al-Husseini, known as the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.
    Much has been written about the Mufti, all well-documented, including chapters by such prominent authors as Connor Cruise OíBrien, former Irish ambassador to the U.N. Mountains of documented evidence is out there and available to anyone who cares to look.
    The Nuremberg and Eichmann trials revealed that Nazi official Adolf Eichmann met with the British-appointed Mufti in Palestine in 1937. Following this meeting, the Mufti would become essentially an agent of Nazi Germany charged with the funding and organizing of pro-Nazi organizations in Egypt, Syria, Palestine and Iraq….”
    And Etc. Please read all about it.

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “He attacks Christianity while giving islam a free pass.”
    Kat and Eileen, you both argue from assertion without regard for the facts. I don’t give **any** religion a free pass, but I do think it is important to point out that extremists come from many religions, including Islam and Christianity. You can argue that your religion is holly and theirs is heretical and they can do the same. *That* is one of the big problems with religious morality. Each party claims to have god on their side and plans to prove their correctness through violence.
    If you are going to try and criticize my position, Kat, you should at least criticize my **actual** position rather than make one up.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • kat

    Jesus Christ would never condone killing a gay person–mohammed, on the other hand, would stone him/her. Christianity teaches love the sinner, hate the sin. No Christian would advocate killing gay people.
    Some terrorist verses of the koran:
    http://www.angelfire.com/moon/yoelnatan/koranwarpassages.htm

  • Faramin

    Eileen,
    This post, like ALL your posts, simply represents your terror trash and lies.
    This is what you have repeated so many times against Skate, while Skate has truly maintained his moral supperiority over you by maintaining his civility.
    With every comment you make, you just sink further into…, well, you know.
    Kat,
    What a bunch of Skate trash–he truly is a muslim extremist–always trying to excuse by finding equivalencies and twisting words to suit the terrorist agenda. He attacks Christianity while giving islam a free pass.
    Typical! very typical of you Kat.
    There seems to be no limit to your arrogance and stupidity and dishonesty. It doesn’t matter what you cook in your little corrupt brain, the words are here. All Skate has been saying was that Extremism is not limited to one religion, it can Christianity, Islam or any other religion. You are either truly dumb (which probably is the case)or an arrogant extremist whose being in the society is truly dangerous to many people such as Muslims who might be passing beside her on the street.

  • kat

    Skate–yes there are extremists from every walk of life. However, there is no group hundreds of millions strong. There is no comparison, Skate, a few nutbars do not equate to millions of barbarians. You absolve them of their crimes everytime you excuse these fanatics by saying, but Christians do it too. That is a lie. You know it, they know it. You are a good dhimmi.
    http://ontruth.com/islamwtc.html

  • Faramin

    Skate–yes there are extremists from every walk of life.
    Yeah, good self-recognition.

  • kat

    Faramin, for instance, hides out in Canada, spewing his extremist views while pretending to be an atheist or whatever.

  • Kat

    Geez, another threat in Britain because they don’t like western policy.
    http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/07/071805london.htm

  • Faramin

    Faramin, for instance, hides out in Canada, spewing his extremist views while pretending to be an atheist or whatever.
    Look who is talking; the Christian equavalent of Bin Laden, in smaller scale.
    My views might be harsh, as the world we live in is harsh. But extrem? What a joker.
    Either bring examples, or shut up. In searching for examples, seek help from the 007 Eileen for another attempt towards certain failure. Get to work Eileen. Spend hours on it. After all, you have nothing useful to do anyway.

  • kat

    I hate to tell you this, but you aren’t worth the time. It has been done before–your Jew hatred exposed,on that extremist site of yours) but you don’t see your faults– not unlike the terrorists. Your site is very like those terrorist sites, the ones which cheered 911 and the deaths in Madrid and London, and every explosion of a bus or daycare in Israel. You are not unique–you are like all the rest. Were you schooled in a madrasa, with a degree in America and Jew hatred ?

  • Faramin

    Your site is very like those terrorist sites, the ones which cheered 911 and the deaths in Madrid and London, and every explosion of a bus or daycare in Israel.
    Instead of Bullshitting, examples Kat, Real examples (Help Kat, Eileen?).
    But almost every comment you make, right here, is genocidal as are Eileen’s. A working brain can easily recognize that. Look at my comments and look at yours and Eileen’s. You’ll recognize it. Oops, sorry! not you. I said “working brains”.

  • Eileen

    LOL, Kat, re “they don’t like western policy”. Yep, don’t ya know it’s A L L about Iraq and Afghanistan/western policy this particular minute – at least as it relates to London. [Btw, talk about gay bashing!] How do we know that? Because by Allah they TELL us so…and expect the left to do the rest of their bidding in the U.S. and Europe. They give us warnings to buck up or get blown up. Now THERE’S faith, hope and charity for you. Capitulate all the way to the Caliphate. It’s so simple, really.
    Ever manipulating, ever lying, ever hiding identities, hiding in caves, in Toronto, or in a ‘peaceful’ neighborhood in Boca Raton or London. Hiding on blogs, even. They Really Don’t Like being identified, either individually or by sect. The word ruthless has sprung to mind on more than one occasion lately. But hell, I suppose this is mild compared to slitting a throat or cutting off an infidel’s head.
    The more I read about the extensive Nazi connections to the current threats we face, the more I gag on the bile of Islamofascism.
    And the people on this site who speak about moral superiority make me puke. But I *would* have to say the study in terror tactics we’ve been witnessing around here is certainly instructive for all who may be reading this site. You know, like the sociologists, criminologists, etc.
    Geez, some even feel the need to attempt to construct “This post represents…” shields. You’ve really got to take notice of that one, eh? That particular poster might just as well have strapped on a red flag instead of a bomb.
    But they’re smarter than the infidels – more superior in every way. Allah says so. Lying is fostered in jihad, encouraged even. They’ve had about 1,300 hundred years of practice, so something must have stuck about how to conduct terror talk over the years.
    Here’s the dirty truth, though. It’s really got to stick in their craw that even though Islam is *supposed* to be the superior religion, that ‘fact’ doesn’t quite seem to have materialized in reality even after centuries of jihad.
    And here’s another dirty truth. When you boil down Islamofascism, it’s really only *about* the most heinous form of rascism to ever be created and practiced on this Earth.

  • Eileen

    And after 1,300 of NO HELP FROM ALLAH in actually WINNING their jihad, think they’d start to get a clue?
    Nay. They’re too smart.

  • Eileen

    Now I begin to understand the “Angry young men”.

  • Dak

    Eileen…In my opinion, they are told to be here as part of the “engage others in forums, chat rooms etc. crowd”.
    Arguing with them logically is futile.
    http://www.islamundressed.com/#_Chapter_26
    Chapter 26 of this site…illuminates this in further detail. Some excerpts……
    ……”Muslims seem to have enormous capacity to absorb huge contradictions and great hypocrisies, remaining completely unfazed……
    “…..In large parts of the Middle East and Asia, the more educated and affluent Muslims usually wear Levi jeans while shouting ‘death to America ‘. When the frenzy is over they can often be found cueing up at Western embassies, hoping for a visa to immigrate in search of a ëbetter lifeí.
    “…..Muslims throughout Europe and the US were enraged when Tariq Ramadan (an Islamic ëintellectualí with radical, anti-Christian, anti-American ideas) was denied a visa and so tenure at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana. Suddenly so many Muslims were terribly worried about stifling intellectual freedom. Of course no one thinks to ask just how many Christian or openly anti-Islamic scholars have jobs at Islamic universities, as such a question is unthinkable. It is amusing to see Muslim folk rise to promote diversity, freedom, moral values, or equality. Sort of like the owners of the sunken Titanic coming out to promote ëIceberg Awareness Weekí.

  • Skate

    Dak wrote, “Eileen…In my opinion, they are told to be here as part of the “engage others in forums, chat rooms etc. crowd”.
    Arguing with them logically is futile.”
    We will never win the WOT as long as people like you, Kat and Eileen misunderstand who the enemy is. Do you really think I’m one of “them,” a Muslim terrorist who is trying to terrorize the world by arguing with a bunch of hard-headed Americans who see terrorists under every post? The idea is beyond stupid and if you believe it, so are you.
    You act as though I’m some sort of cheerleader for Islam, an idea you have gotten from where? Not from my posts if you have actually read them. No religion or government gets a free pass from me and neither do you.
    BTW, a new study has come out that will have the “all people who disagree with us are terrorists” zealots holding their hands over their ears and saying, “la,la,la,la…” :
    ” New investigations by the Saudi Arabian government and an Israeli think tank — both of which painstakingly analyzed the backgrounds and motivations of hundreds of foreigners entering Iraq to fight the United States — have found that the vast majority of these foreign fighters are not former terrorists and became radicalized by the war itself.
    The studies, which together constitute the most detailed picture available of foreign fighters, cast serious doubt on President Bush’s claim that those responsible for some of the worst violence are terrorists who seized on the opportunity to make Iraq the ”central front” in a battle against the United States.”
    http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2005/07/17/study_cites_seeds_of_terror_in_iraq/
    Kat, Eileen and Dak will, no doubt, dismiss the study since it contradicts their views but I think the study provides an important new bit of evidence that GWB has made terrorism worse by invading Iraq! That should be important to WOT zealots because it means that their are lots of things that blind zeal can do to make more terrorists rather than fewer. An example of what will only make things worse is Eileen’s suggestion:
    “1. Line up the Sunnis/Sharia law driven crazies/Salafists/Baathists/Wahhabists/Islamofascists wherever they exist across the globe and ‘deal with them’. They are all warriors for Allah.”
    Of course Eileen thinks that disagreeing with her means you are a terrorist. Since Eileen’s views are rather extreme an most Americans would disagree with the totality of her views, that means that most Americans are terrorists based on what seems to be Eileen’s criteria.
    So, ya’ll, I should also point out that I think that Sharia law is appalling and shouldn’t be recognized as humane, especially in countries that are looking to let their be “dual” systems of law where there will be one law for non-muslims and Sharia law for muslims. That is not a reasonable system as it provides no protection for people who are Muslim who do not wish to be subject to Sharia law.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, “The more I read about the extensive Nazi connections to the current threats we face, the more I gag on the bile of Islamofascism.”
    Eileen, I’m surprised at you. Why are you trying to “understand” the enemy after condemning such practices?
    “But I *would* have to say the study in terror tactics we’ve been witnessing around here is certainly instructive for all who may be reading this site.”
    Yes, in fact it was **you** who has actively been promoting the Al Qaeda training manual, even providing the URL!!! Here is the entirety of one of your posts:
    “Go here to read the Al Qaeda Training Manual:
    http://www.usdoj.gov/ag/redacted so as to not be like Eileen].htm”
    Why would you do this Eileen? You’d call anyone who did the same thing a terrorist! Imagine how much you’d chew up Faramin for doing the same thing!!
    “That particular poster might just as well have strapped on a red flag instead of a bomb.”
    Well, I got to admit that your reference to me is offensive since I’m anti-extremist, including terrorists. I will hand it to you, being offensive is definitely one of your talents. On the other hand, **being right** definitely is not.
    “Here’s the dirty truth, though. It’s really got to stick in their craw that even though Islam is *supposed* to be the superior religion, that ‘fact’ doesn’t quite seem to have materialized in reality even after centuries of jihad.”
    “And after 1,300 of NO HELP FROM ALLAH in actually WINNING their jihad, think they’d start to get a clue?
    Nay. They’re too smart.”
    Great, now you are getting into the my god is better than your god argument. How are you going to prove it? You smack them with a bible and they smack you with a Koran? There is no way to prove who has the true religion as long as god chooses to be so vague. God could send a signed memo if he felt like it so I’d say god doesn’t care enough either way.

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “No Christian would advocate killing gay people.”
    Well, I’m glad you think that. If only it were true. Unfortunately, your statement is demonstrably false.
    “Jesus Christ would never condone killing a gay person–mohammed, on the other hand, would stone him/her. Christianity teaches love the sinner, hate the sin.”
    And yet many hate groups, including the KKK, are ostensibly Christian. You can argue they aren’t “true” Christians and that you disagree with their views, but you don’t get to decide who considers themselves Christians. The same is true for Muslims–they don’t get to decide who considers them self a Muslim.
    You are once again mistaken, Kat, in thinking I approve of intolerance, including the kind found in much of Islam. No religion gets a free pass.
    This post, and all of my posts, represents my opinion.

  • Dak

    “They are confirming that many of the dead jihadis being scraped off the battlefield have Syrian passports. Syria has become a staging area for the Iraqi jihad just as Pakistan is the staging area for the Afghanistan jihad.
    These reports of the attraction of jihadis to Iraq from all over the Muslim world are demonstrating that the ìhoneypotî doctrine is working.
    The jihadis are compelled by their own ideology to respond to the American military presence in the one-time capital of the defunct Islamic empire. The Americans didnít invent the rule, Muhammad did in the 7th century.”

  • Dak

    Re your rant at Kat.
    Again…wearily
    Christians are acting in violation of their religion when they do vile acts.
    Islamics are acting in accordance with their religion when they do vile acts.

  • Skate

    Re Dak’s quote above.
    Ah, the disembodied quote. True proof of any argument…
    I should point out that the “honeypot doctrine” was made up ex post facto as an excuse to try and save face over the fact that Iraq is a terrorist breeding ground now but had no terrorists before the war. Of course the honeypot excuse (lie) is also proved false by the fact that terrorism is up world wide to record levels, so much so that the Bush Administration has hidden the embarrassing annual report which tallies terrorist attacks. But why let facts get in the way of a comforting idea?

  • Skate

    Dak wrote, “Christians are acting in violation of their religion when they do vile acts.”
    In “violation” of their religion according to whom? You? The Pope? The Southern Baptist Council? There is no single thing called “Christianity.” There is no one interpretation nor one “correct” form of Christianity that everyone agrees on, nor is there one form of Islam. Doesn’t mean I’m a fan of either.
    No free pass.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Dak

    The old Testament is published along with the New as a point of reference. The New Testament is considered the point of reference for all of Christianity. While people interpret various points differently, it can unequivocably be said there is NOTHING in the New Testament that commands violence against innocents.

  • Kat

    Mullahs don’t consider the killers as terrorists either, Skate. And mullahs try to use Christian equivalencies to absolve the murdering scum of their crimes–just like you do. Do you wear a long white robe by any chance? I wonder how you reacted to 911–was it a joyous event for you, too, followed by laying blame on everyone but the perpetrators–those 19, now become martyrs of islam?
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1532738,00.html

  • Skate

    Dak, I think you misunderstand me. I’m not pro Islam. But I also think yo misunderstand the history of Christianity. Many, many, many acts of violence have been done in the name of Christianity.
    Remember the Inquisition? Sure, you can say that was years ago, but the organization which masterminded the **murders** and **tourture** done during the Inquisition is still around and going Strong–and both you and Kat will have a hard time arguing that those were not “true” Christians.
    Or would you? The website you cited with claims about the Ten Commandments believes that Catholics study a false doctrine and doesn’t believe that Catholics are true Christians. I’m sure the millions upon millions of Catholics around the world would disagree vehemently. Your source also denounces Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Calvinism and much more. Oh and “bible.ca” believes the earth is only a few thousand years old…
    This just goes to show you that there is not a single thing called Christianity and that many Christians are shockingly ignorant of their own religion.
    Your assertion that the Old Testament is in the bible only as a point of reference is true only for the smallest possible number of Christians. Most Christians believe in all or part of the Old Testament and that they must follow the Ten Commandments–which are only found in the Old Testament.
    The Bible.ca website you quoted it outside of the mainstream. It says that the Ten Commandments were abolished, but that for 9 of them, there are similar thoughts sprinkled throughout the New Testament for nine of ten–but they are not the Ten Commandments, but similar precepts. Some of their “equivalents” are more than a bit forced. For instance, they claim that the New Testament equivalent to “Don’t take the Lord’s Name in vain” is “Let no corrupt communications proceed out of your mouth . . . ” (Eph. 4:29)” Yeah, right.
    Dak, if you are a Christian I’d say you need to go to church and learn what specific doctrine your church believes in since Christianity varies dramatically between denominations. You don’t seem to have a very good grasp of general Christianity.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “I wonder how you reacted to 911–was it a joyous event for you, too, followed by laying blame on everyone but the perpetrators–those 19, now become martyrs of islam?”
    Sigh, Kat you truly are so eager to hate that you can’t even wait to hate the right people. Anyone will do. If they disagree with you they are a terrorist. That kind of thinking is terrorist thinking–but you are too busy hating for your complete cognitive dissonance to let that fact through to your consciousness.
    BTW, those terrorists were mostly from Saudi Arabia. Wanna explain WTF are doing in Iraq??? Oh, I remember, making the problem worse by breeding brand new terrorists.* If you really care about reducing terrorism you’ll campaign to drum Bush out of office. He has botched the WOT so badly that you now have to deny reality.
    This post represents my opinion.
    “New investigations by the Saudi Arabian government and an Israeli think tank — both of which painstakingly analyzed the backgrounds and motivations of hundreds of foreigners entering Iraq to fight the United States — have found that the vast majority of these foreign fighters are not former terrorists and became radicalized by the war itself.”
    http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2005/07/17/study_cites_seeds_of_terror_in_iraq/

  • Kat

    Yeah, A Saudi study absolving terrorists and blaming America. Those creeps were radicalized years ago. All of Clinton’s do nothing did not stop terrorism. Only stupid people believe we should do nothing so they won’t hate us. Sort of the Left being afraid to make Hitler mad. They expect Bush to allow terrorists to dictate US policies. Al Queda declared war long before Iraq–when Clinton was in office and laughed everytime the cowardly Americans under Clinton did nothing. Clinton was their stooge, covering up islamic terrorism to protect them.
    This nice gay guy says it better than I.
    {Peter Tatchell (Human Rights campaigner, London)
    We are witnessing one of the greatest betrayals by the left since so-called left-wingers backed the Hitler-Stalin pact and opposed the war against Nazi fascism. Today, the pseudo-left reveals its shameless hypocrisy and its wholesale abandonment of humanitarian values. While it deplores the 7/7 terrorist attack on London, only last year it welcomed to the UK the Muslim cleric, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who endorses the suicide bombing of innocent civilians. These same right-wing leftists back the so-called ‘resistance’ in Iraq. This ‘resistance’ uses terrorism against civilians as its modus operandi – stooping to the massacre of dozens of Iraqi children in order kill a few US soldiers. Terrorism is not soc-ialism; it is the tactic of fascism. But much of the left doesn’t care. Never mind what the Iraqi people want, it wants the US and UK out of Iraq at any price, including the abandonment of Iraqi soc-ialists, trade unionists, democrats and feminists. If the fake left gets its way, the ex-Baathists and Islamic fundamentalists could easily seize power, leading to Iranian-style clerical fascism and a bloodbath. I used to be proud to call myself a leftist. Now I feel shame. Much of the left no longer stands for the values of universal human rights and international soc–ialism.}
    http://www.unite-against-terror.com/whysigned/archives/000003.html

  • Eileen

    Regarding the entity known as Skate’s last two posts addressed to me:
    These posts, like ALL your posts, simply represent your terror trash and lies.

  • Skate

    Eileen wrote, for the nth time, “These posts, like ALL your posts, simply represent your terror trash and lies.”
    Looks like the Stepford Eileen Hate-bot is still stuck. There is one way to know for sure, just look for another post that says
    “These posts, like ALL your posts, simply represent your terror trash and lies.” !!
    If my posts were “terror trash [what ever that is] and lies” you’d be able to prove it by citing my points and disproving them. But my posts are not lies and you know it or you would try and disprove them. But you can’t. Unfortunately for you, Eileen, all you have on your side is hate, blind hate, so now all you can do is sputter the same hate, over and over again.
    You should use your energy and anger for something productive, like getting GWB out of office. He has botched the WOT so badly that there are now far more terrorists than before 9/11. You’d know that if you weren’t in such deep denial of reality. Deep, deep denial.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “Al Queda declared war long before Iraq–when Clinton was in office and laughed everytime the cowardly Americans under Clinton did nothing.”
    Clinton, unlike GWB, had OBL in his sights. GWB was so Iraq fixated he dropped the ball, and then invaded the wrong country looking for terrorists and WMDs. GWB is botching the WOT so badly you are having to make stuff up to justify your unjustifiable beliefs.

  • Faramin

    Responding to Skates comment that Christians too have been committing mass murders as it was the case in Rwanda, Kat once said that Rwanda was a tribla conflict and not religious.
    In the large extend, possibly true but let’s see The role the “kind” nuns and other “kind” Christians played in this genocide.
    Oh BTW, Kat herself is a clear symbol of “kindness”. Just read her comments; you will see.

  • Dak

    GW is smarter than you can even conceive. He’s got the terrorists all running to Iraq, right where he wants them…using their own ideaology as the bait:
    The jihadis are compelled by their own ideology to respond to the American military presence in the one-time capital of the defunct Islamic empire. The Americans didnít invent the rule, Muhammad did in the 7th century.”
    Clinton isn’t equal to a pimple on GW’s butt.

  • Skate

    Dak wrote, “GW is smarter than you can even conceive. He’s got the terrorists all running to Iraq, right where he wants them…using their own ideaology as the bait…Clinton isn’t equal to a pimple on GW’s butt.”
    Well, Dak, I thought you were just sincere and argumentative, now I realize that you are a complete imbecile. Clinton was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University, England and and also has a law degree from Yale. Bush was a C student who got into Yale because of family connections. There is no comparison. You may like Bush for what ever misguided reasons but the idea that Bush is smarter than Clinton is beyond laughable. Even Republicans couldn’t say that with a straight face–well, except
    you perhaps–but then you are so stupid that you believe it, so it isn’t a lie for you to say it.
    The “honeypot” theory of Iraq, as I pointed out earlier, was made up ex post facto as an excuse to try and save face over the fact that Iraq is a terrorist breeding ground now but had no terrorists before the war.
    The honeypot excuse is also demonstrably false on its face, as proved by the incontrovertible fact that terrorism is up world wide–outside of Iraq–to record levels, so much so that the Bush Administration has hidden the embarrassing annual report which tallies terrorist attacks. And, a new study shows that the Foreign fighters in Iraq were not terrorists before the war but were radicalized by it.*
    But why let facts get in the way of a comforting idea?
    *“New investigations by the Saudi Arabian government and an Israeli think tank — both of which painstakingly analyzed the backgrounds and motivations of hundreds of foreigners entering Iraq to fight the United States — have found that the vast majority of these foreign fighters are not former terrorists and became radicalized by the war itself.”
    http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2005/07/17/study_cites_seeds_of_terror_in_iraq/
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Skate

    Dak stupidly wrote, “He’s got the terrorists all running to Iraq, right where he wants them…using their own ideaology as the bait.”
    Yeah, right where he wants them–where they are killing us by the thousands. Great idea. The man is brilliant.
    Too bad the people killing us are newly minted terrorists caused by the war in Iraq, not the old Al Qaeda terrorists we were supposed to be looking for.
    Great plan Dak. It’s sooooooo helpful that you support it. Your beloved Bush and your support is getting us killed by frigging terrorists who weren’t there before the war!!! Any more “great” ideas like that and we’ll all be dead. So, no thank you to any more great ideas by Bush and you.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Skate

    Well, I’m getting grumpy, and I probably shouldn’t have called Dak “stupid”. I apologize for lowering the level of discourse on my end. I’d like to have high standards–higher than some people, at least.
    I’ve just been very frustrated by what seem to me like imbecilic ideas not rooted in fact and by the people who defend them with what seems like extreme cognitive dissonance.
    I’m not saying I’m completely above name calling, but I’d like to keep it in check.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Faramin

    GW is smarter than you can even conceive.
    Bush? Smart? You mean I’ve been wrong all along calling him dumb?
    However, the comment is very telling about the commenter’s own standards of intelligence.

  • Faramin

    GW is smarter than you can even conceive. He’s got the terrorists all running to Iraq, right where he wants them…using their own ideaology as the bait.
    Oh, one more thing: Intelligence is just flowing out of that comment that I can resist “appreciating” it; Perfect category as Kat and Eileen’s comments.
    “Terrorists all running toi Iraq,”. Humm, let me see… . Is London an Iraqis city?

  • Faramin

    Ooops,
    I meant “I can’t resist…”

  • Skate

    One thing I have to say about Kat and Eileen, I sure hope they don’t work in US intelligence. Kat and Eileen seem to think they have unearthed a “secret” terrorist cell (Franky, Faramin, Me and everyone else who dares disagree with Kat or Eileen (a BIG group, mind you)) lurking ominously here on a BuzzMachine Forum! Somehow, guys, I suspect that real terrorists don’t hang out at BuzzMachine–right wing extremists, maybe, but not terrorists. And even if they did, I don’t think Eileen and Kat would do anything good by just arguing with them and proving how hateful some Americans can be.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Faramin

    Skate,
    Eileen can confirm this if she wants. She did, several times, call the CIA and FBI to report on “an Iranian (being me) who said “bad words” on the net”. As she admitted, she was hoping they would get rid of me.
    I am sure she was laughed at even by CIA for what she did. But hey, that just shows her intolerant and extremist mentality. I do sincerely believe that she, Kat and perhaps their new companion are dangers to the society in general and ordinary Muslims (in particular) who might happen to pass from their side on the street. For that reason, I do believe they should be kept away from the society until they are cured.
    Also, one more funny thing about Eileen is that once she (after days of “investigations”), thought Franky and I were the same person. ONLY, as she called it, because both names started with the letter F. She has spent hours if not days on the net to find out about me and to perhaps bring a couple quotes from me to show how bad I am. But everytime, that worked against her and ended up as another embarrassment for her for her false accusations.
    Her “investigations” never ended and still continues. That’s why I call her 007 Eileen.

  • Skate

    Faramin,
    It’s weird. When I see someone who seems like a foreigner denigrate the US, I want to be defensive even if I agree with the point they are making. Like when you say Bush is stupid. I agree but I’m still not comfortable when you say it. I however, can be rational and try and back up and look at your argument objectively.
    Eileen, Dak and Kat are unable to be objective and rational. Their provincial defensiveness kicks in and makes them defend even indefensible positions–like when Dak argued that GWB, a perpetual C student who only got into Yale because of family connections, is smarter than Bill Clinton, a Rhodes Scholar. Their defensiveness is divorced from reality.
    So far, every post of yours I have read has made sense, but I have to say that Eileen’s hate mongering does have an effect. One of her early rants about you having said terrorist things made me suspicious of you. I made the mistake of thinking Eileen was a rational person, wouldn’t make up stuff and would have to have serious evidence before accusing someone of something as serious as being a terrorist!
    Well, I know know calling someone a terrorist is the way Eileen answers the phone, “Hello. You Are A Terrorist!! This is Eileen speaking…” Having her call me a terrorist for no reason made it especially clear that Eileen is raving.
    It disturbs me that Eileen’s irrational rants prejudiced me when your posts have generally actually made sense. Eileen will delight in this, I’m sure, as proof of her effectiveness. I, on the other hand, see it as evidence that Eileen’s hate is harmful and spreads irrational prejudice that we must work hard to ward off. Her kind of hate must not go unchallenged lest it be allowed to poison the whole country. Please keep posting. I’m only sorry my handle does not begin with “F.”
    I’m not sure I’ll always agree with your points but I will always look at them and try to be objective.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • kat

    Talking to yourself, eh? What’s it like to lick your own ass?
    I agree with Eileen. I think though that you have several identities who praise each other.

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “Talking to yourself, eh? What’s it like to lick your own ass?”
    You are one gross person, Kat. Really gross. You must stay up late thinking about such thing. Eileen wished me sweet dreams of “Allah booty,” now you. What you are and Eileen are doing is called “projection.”
    I’m surprised you are allowed computer access.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • Skate

    And, Kat, I doubt that you and Eileen are really the same person. It seems unlikely that someone could actually come up with that much imbecilic prose on their own. But I suppose you could surprise me.

  • Skate

    Say, Kat, what are you doing online? Aren’t you busy? Don’t you have puppies to accuse of being terrorists, or something?
    This post, like all of my posts, represents my opinion.

  • Faramin

    Skate,
    Thank you for your reply.
    There has been many cases that I had discussions with some very conservative individuals, but we manged to keep them as “discussions” not “allegations and accusations”. The exchanges between us were sometimes very harsh, but we never insulted each other, directly or indirectly. And as a result, the conversation which had started with very harsh exchanges, usually ended up with friendly notes and well- wishes. In those cases, we agreed to disagree on some issues and also admitted that we learned from each other on some other issues. Of course, I’ve had completely different experience with some other conservatives. (This is not to suggest that you are a consevative, as it is clear that you are not. This is just to share with you the experiences that I’ve had with different people).
    Eileen and Kat have never understood what the meaning of discussion is (I have the same problem with some of my own countrymen). As soon as they don’t like what you are saying, they categorize you as terrorist or terrorist supporter, or jihadist. It took more than a year for Kat and Eileen to finally semi-understand that my position is not a religious position as I am not a religious person at all; however, despite the clear indications suggesting otherwise, I was accused of being a Jihadist, Islamist, and etc. They always accused me of being pro-violence, without even bringing one example out of my hundreds of comments.
    I appreciate your comment and believe me, in last couple of years, internet has given me the opportunity to learn not to see things back and white. My opinion has evolved about Americans, for example. I no longer think majority of Americans are arrogant and ignorant. Perhaps, reading comment from and dealing with people like you has provided that eye-opening opportunity for me. I now, proudly have considerable number of Americans friends to whom I have lots of respect. I especially respect my American friends, because I now know how difficult it is for them to live amongst people such as Eileen and Kat. I know what they are going through.
    Sorry for ranting too much. But I too enjoyed your calm and well-mannered comments, despite the abusive responses that you constantly recieved. As I said, that puts you on much higher moral ground that your so-called opponents.

  • kat

    Is it Faramin’s turn next or Franky’s? Did you kill the ‘chris’ handle?

  • Skate

    Kat wrote, “Is it Faramin’s turn next or Franky’s? Did you kill the ‘chris’ handle?”
    You and Eileen can be unintentionally hilarious. Sometimes you are fun to argue with because arguing with you is like playing the Washington Generals! Of course, usually arguing with you is like trying to reason with a tree stump, with the exception that the tree stump has more potential for intellectual growth.
    This post represents my opinion.

  • kat

    Is Asswipe one of your ‘American’ friends?
    {Authorities investigating the London bombings have launched a worldwide manhunt for a man officials believe attempted to set up a terrorist training camp in Southern Oregon.
    A law enforcement official told The Oregonian on Wednesday evening that the man, Haroon Rashid Aswat, 31, was one of several people prosecutors had linked to the plans to establish a training camp in Bly, a small town near Klamath Falls. }

  • Skate

    Kat wrote (presumably to Faramin), “Is Asswipe one of your ‘American’ friends?”
    Why? Is Eric Rudolph one of yours?

  • Faramin

    Kat,
    Talking to yourself, eh? What’s it like to lick your own ass?
    I guess that’s what Kats do, no? Oh, sorry, I meant Cats ;-)
    Absolutely gross IS YOU. And I’m glad that you, an enemy of human dignity, express yourself the way you really are; GROSS.
    You accurately represent a certain mentality.

  • Faramin

    Skate,
    Please allow me to add a couple of words to what I already said in response to your comment part of which is below:
    It’s weird. When I see someone who seems like a foreigner denigrate the US, I want to be defensive even if I agree with the point they are making. Like when you say Bush is stupid. I agree but I’m still not comfortable when you say it.
    I appreciate what you are saying. However, I do not, denigrate the US. I’ve been to the US many times and I love the beauty of the land. I have no animosity with the US and/or its people, especially, as I said before, after meeting so many caring Americans on the net during the last couple of years.
    Without getting into the deatils now, as it requires a long and extensive discussion, I have to say that I do have problems with the US policies and its corporate puppet leaders. I do have problems with the fact that many of the US foreign policies, especially in the ME, have been designed to protect Israel and its aggression about the occupied people of Palestine, through extensive and powerful Israeli lobby groups funding many US politicians. I do have problem with the huge influence of the pro-Israelis controlling many aspects of the mainstream US media.
    When I say Bush is dumb, it is because first, I really do think he is dumb and secondly, it is not as an insult to Americans. I do believe, the US system IS NOT as democaratic as people think it is. If you are not part of one of the two main parties, or if you are not ultra-rich, chances are that you will never become the president of the US, no matter how right you are and no matter how much you scream. Yes, you can run for president, but YOU WILL NOT BE HEARD. Effectively, the choices of Americans to choose their leadership is very limited (to two). Of course, I have to admit that when I read on London Mirror’s first page (after the “re-election” of Bush) saying: “How could M59+ people be so dumb?”, I didn’t find it to be far from reality. However, it was great that at least other M59 were not the same.
    Getteing back to my points regarding Bush and the US leadership, Let me emphasise that I, as an Iranian, who loves his country and its rich history and culture, will not feel offended when someone (foreigner) calls the leaders of my country, dumb, stupid or criminal. They really ARE criminals, only to the lesser extend than Bush and his gang, given their limited influence on the world politics and countries, relative to the US. So, why should I let me love towards my country make me feel offended to the point that I feel the need to become defensive in favour of thsoe criminal leaders, those who have given a bad name to my country and its people, those who have been nothing but negative for my country?
    Excatly because of my love for my country, I hate the leaders of my country. Why should that not be applied to you, as an American? Remember, giving too much attention and credit to patriotism (and I’m not suggetsing that you are), is similar to falling into religious fanatism. Really, there is not much difference in the nature of both.