Al-Qaeda Chief Calls For Attacks On US

[SherriMunnerlyn]

I saw no indication that the poster was “supporting terrorist propaganda.

The notion that we are at war with Islam IS terrorist propaganda and that is what he is pushing. I don't think he does it to support terrorism, but he utilizes the same kind of language in his discourse that terrorists do and is whether intentionally or not, pushing the same imagery. Jihadi credibility in many areas depends on this type of imagery and when people like he support that then it becomes a security threat to our country and a reinforcement of terrorist talking points.

It empowers them. And I'm not sure about you, but I'm not much for the empowerment of jihadis.

I think that the mistake you make in suggesting that others empower islamist ideology is twofold. first, not studying Islamist ideology and secondly, claiming that we are not at war with a politico-religious ideology. I know it's difficult to say that we're at war with a religion, but we are. It's actually a politico-religious ideology, and that's why it so easily leads its adherents to kill in its name. It's a religion and it's a state. It's antithetical to our conception of the nation-state (because it aspires to a worldwide state). Its scripture is also viewed to be inerrant. No, we are not at war with each and every Moslem--not by any means. However, we are definitely at war with the unreformed (and perhaps unreformable) faith which leads them to the murder or approval of the murder of non-Moslems. We are at war with the offensive, bellicose, totalitarian, and expansionist ideology of Islam. And this is a war which requires us to united.

The koran and the hadith, which are still interpreted literally, are a virulent manifesto of God-given Islamosupremacy, and they are the blueprint for the Religion of Peace's agenda. It's just easier to lay the blame on a discrete group of villains with a name, rather than the politico-religious ideology that inspires them.

The holy warriors™ of al-Qaeda and all other jihad groups are simply pious Moslems who know their koran and sunnah, and who are following the books to the letter. They are back in those, halcyon days of virtue less conquest and murder for God when these books were written—the days when they enjoyed so much success at fighting, killing, and subduing infidels, crusading or otherwise. As then, now.

Study international law and learn what a war is.

We are not at war with an Ideology.

We start wars when we invade and attack foreign nations.

 

[Roudy]

we are becoming more and more divisive as we become more and more diversified. America is no longer the great melting pot. immigrants no longer assimilate to the degree they used to. we are a collection of many independed cultures. as a result ther is no voice of america. there are many voicies, all with diferent and self serving agendas. this divides us greatly. also more and more immigrants who come here no end up relying on entitlements. before entitlements, you came here, you had no alternative but to find work and fit it. entitlements have changed that dynamic.

That's because Obama and the radical leftists survive on dividing Americans against each other. The more they can divide and make Americans hate each other, the more voters they get out of it.

Obama's by no means radical.

And it's the right wing that's been dividing America buy picking and choosing who they, themselves consider "American".

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4YkE2MkbR8]The Halcro Zone: It's Four O'clock - YouTube[/ame]

He's really good at dividing Americans along racial, economic, and ethnic lines. No denying. He's a master divider, got Americans to hate each other like never before. Poor hate the rich, workers hate corporations, unions hate companies, non govt workers hate govt workers, got the public to think anybody who doesn't agree with illegal immigration or gay marriage is evil. Masterful demonization and propaganda being promoted by his lackeys in the liberal media. Meanwhile the same people he claims to be fighting for ie blacks, are suffering like never before. If that isn't genius I don't know what is.

 

[Hollie]

.....................................^^^^

How typical.

I have no issue pointing out your lack of any ability to offer a coherent comment. Your only ability is to leave crude comments via neg rep.

So yeah, I've ripped you a new one multiple times and that caused you to slither away.

Keep you vile comments to yourself

You're an embarrassment to real moslems.

What coherent comment?

Your only meme is your hatred for people that follow the Muslim faith.

Your also up against one of the wiliest, well liked "Trolls" around here.

One who's served this country with honor during the Vietnam war.

He doesn't toot his own horn about that much.

But there it is..

I agree he is a Troll.

If you or the troll have an issue with the accuracy or validity of my posts, you're free to comment. The troll won't, except to stalk me through various threads and leave disgusting comments via the rep system .

What about my posted comments will you challenge?

 

[Roudy]

.....................................^^^^

How typical.

I have no issue pointing out your lack of any ability to offer a coherent comment. Your only ability is to leave crude comments via neg rep.

So yeah, I've ripped you a new one multiple times and that caused you to slither away.

Keep you vile comments to yourself

You're an embarrassment to real moslems.

What coherent comment?

Your only meme is your hatred for people that follow the Muslim faith.

Your also up against one of the wiliest, well liked "Trolls" around here.

One who's served this country with honor during the Vietnam war.

He doesn't toot his own horn about that much.

But there it is..

A Muslim convert who is a Holocaust denier, and believes America should live under Shairah law and Muslim men should legally be allowed to have four wives?

Exactly who are you defending? An enemy within fifth columner Islamist. Good luck.

 

[Roudy]

The notion that we are at war with Islam IS terrorist propaganda and that is what he is pushing. I don't think he does it to support terrorism, but he utilizes the same kind of language in his discourse that terrorists do and is whether intentionally or not, pushing the same imagery. Jihadi credibility in many areas depends on this type of imagery and when people like he support that then it becomes a security threat to our country and a reinforcement of terrorist talking points.

It empowers them. And I'm not sure about you, but I'm not much for the empowerment of jihadis.

I think that the mistake you make in suggesting that others empower islamist ideology is twofold. first, not studying Islamist ideology and secondly, claiming that we are not at war with a politico-religious ideology. I know it's difficult to say that we're at war with a religion, but we are. It's actually a politico-religious ideology, and that's why it so easily leads its adherents to kill in its name. It's a religion and it's a state. It's antithetical to our conception of the nation-state (because it aspires to a worldwide state). Its scripture is also viewed to be inerrant. No, we are not at war with each and every Moslem--not by any means. However, we are definitely at war with the unreformed (and perhaps unreformable) faith which leads them to the murder or approval of the murder of non-Moslems. We are at war with the offensive, bellicose, totalitarian, and expansionist ideology of Islam. And this is a war which requires us to united.

The koran and the hadith, which are still interpreted literally, are a virulent manifesto of God-given Islamosupremacy, and they are the blueprint for the Religion of Peace's agenda. It's just easier to lay the blame on a discrete group of villains with a name, rather than the politico-religious ideology that inspires them.

The holy warriors™ of al-Qaeda and all other jihad groups are simply pious Moslems who know their koran and sunnah, and who are following the books to the letter. They are back in those, halcyon days of virtue less conquest and murder for God when these books were written—the days when they enjoyed so much success at fighting, killing, and subduing infidels, crusading or otherwise. As then, now.

Study international law and learn what a war is.

We are not at war with an Ideology.

We start wars when we invade and attack foreign nations.

Whether we are at war is irrelevant. The ideology has declared war on the West and everything it stands for a long time ago. More to come.

Until the West wakes up, this enabling and appeasement will continue, just as we did with Nazism. Then one day they will kill hundreds of thousands if not millions, in one strike, at that point all bets are off.

 

[Sunni Man]

.....................................^^^^

I have no issue pointing out your lack of any ability to offer a coherent comment. Your only ability is to leave crude comments via neg rep.

So yeah, I've ripped you a new one multiple times and that caused you to slither away.

Keep you vile comments to yourself

You're an embarrassment to real moslems.

You misspelled the word Muslims.

Islamophobes like Hollie are taught to say and spell it "moslems" because they know that it's an insult to people of the Islamic faith.


"Moslem" and "Muslim" are basically two different spellings for the same word." But the seemingly arbitrary choice of spellings is a sensitive subject for many followers of Islam.

Whereas for most English speakers, the two words are synonymous in meaning, the Arabic roots of the two words are very different.

A "Muslim" in Arabic means"one who gives himself to God," and is by definition, someone who adheres to Islam.

By contrast, a "Moslem" in Arabic means"one who is evil and unjust" when the word is pronounced, as it is in English, Mozlem with a z.

History News Network

 

[AquaAthena]

That's because Obama and the radical leftists survive on dividing Americans against each other. The more they can divide and make Americans hate each other, the more voters they get out of it.

Obama's by no means radical.

And it's the right wing that's been dividing America buy picking and choosing who they, themselves consider "American".

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4YkE2MkbR8]The Halcro Zone: It's Four O'clock - YouTube[/ame]

He's really good at dividing Americans along racial, economic, and ethnic lines. No denying. He's a master divider, got Americans to hate each other like never before. Poor hate the rich, workers hate corporations, unions hate companies, non govt workers hate govt workers, got the public to think anybody who doesn't agree with illegal immigration or gay marriage is evil. Masterful demonization and propaganda being promoted by his lackeys in the liberal media. Meanwhile the same people he claims to be fighting for ie blacks, are suffering like never before. If that isn't genius I don't know what is.

"Divide and conquer." Obama is using all 12 rules from Alinsky. Saul would be proud.

Here is the complete list from Alinsky.

* RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)


* RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)


* RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)


* RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)


* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)


* RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)


* RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)


* RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)


* RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)


* RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)


* RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)


* RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

 

[Roudy]

I have no issue pointing out your lack of any ability to offer a coherent comment. Your only ability is to leave crude comments via neg rep.

So yeah, I've ripped you a new one multiple times and that caused you to slither away.

Keep you vile comments to yourself

You're an embarrassment to real moslems.

You misspelled the word Muslims.

Islamophobes like Hollie are taught to say and spell it "moslems" because they know that it's an insult to people of the Islamic faith.


"Moslem" and "Muslim" are basically two different spellings for the same word." But the seemingly arbitrary choice of spellings is a sensitive subject for many followers of Islam.

Whereas for most English speakers, the two words are synonymous in meaning, the Arabic roots of the two words are very different.

A Muslim in Arabic means"one who gives himself to God," and is by definition, someone who adheres to Islam.

By contrast, a Moslem in Arabic means"one who is evil and unjust" when the word is pronounced, as it is in English, Mozlem with a z.

History News Network

What's an IslamoPhobe? Someone who knows the truth about Islam? LOL

 

[Roudy]

Obama's by no means radical.

And it's the right wing that's been dividing America buy picking and choosing who they, themselves consider "American".

The Halcro Zone: It's Four O'clock - YouTube

He's really good at dividing Americans along racial, economic, and ethnic lines. No denying. He's a master divider, got Americans to hate each other like never before. Poor hate the rich, workers hate corporations, unions hate companies, non govt workers hate govt workers, got the public to think anybody who doesn't agree with illegal immigration or gay marriage is evil. Masterful demonization and propaganda being promoted by his lackeys in the liberal media. Meanwhile the same people he claims to be fighting for ie blacks, are suffering like never before. If that isn't genius I don't know what is.

"Divide and conquer." Obama is using all 12 rules from Alinsky. Saul would be proud.

Here is the complete list from Alinsky.

* RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots” must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there is a plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult time appealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economic arguments.)


* RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results in confusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone. (Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real” issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)


* RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look for ways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all the time. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seemingly irrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)


* RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)


* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want to create anger and fear.)


* RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no different that any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revel at and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)


* RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become old news. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved, organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)


* RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides, never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover and re-strategize.)


* RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist. (Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-case scenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshot is that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in its own collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easily poison the mind and result in demoralization.)


* RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and become a positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your side because the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic. Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the early to mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violence that eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)


* RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold a place at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have to have a compromise solution.)


* RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, but very effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

 

[Hollie]

I have no issue pointing out your lack of any ability to offer a coherent comment. Your only ability is to leave crude comments via neg rep.

So yeah, I've ripped you a new one multiple times and that caused you to slither away.

Keep you vile comments to yourself

You're an embarrassment to real moslems.

You misspelled the word Muslims.

Islamophobes like Hollie are taught to say and spell it "moslems" because they know that it's an insult to people of the Islamic faith.


"Moslem" and "Muslim" are basically two different spellings for the same word." But the seemingly arbitrary choice of spellings is a sensitive subject for many followers of Islam.

Whereas for most English speakers, the two words are synonymous in meaning, the Arabic roots of the two words are very different.

A "Muslim" in Arabic means"one who gives himself to God," and is by definition, someone who adheres to Islam.

By contrast, a "Moslem" in Arabic means"one who is evil and unjust" when the word is pronounced, as it is in English, Mozlem with a z.

History News Network

As expected, the goofy convert is forced to use tired slogans and offer nothing but cut and pasted drivel.


"Moslem" and "Muslim" are basically two different spellings for the same word." But the seemingly arbitrary choice of spellings is a sensitive subject for many followers of Islam.

 

[Hollie]

The notion that we are at war with Islam IS terrorist propaganda and that is what he is pushing. I don't think he does it to support terrorism, but he utilizes the same kind of language in his discourse that terrorists do and is whether intentionally or not, pushing the same imagery. Jihadi credibility in many areas depends on this type of imagery and when people like he support that then it becomes a security threat to our country and a reinforcement of terrorist talking points.

It empowers them. And I'm not sure about you, but I'm not much for the empowerment of jihadis.

I think that the mistake you make in suggesting that others empower islamist ideology is twofold. first, not studying Islamist ideology and secondly, claiming that we are not at war with a politico-religious ideology. I know it's difficult to say that we're at war with a religion, but we are. It's actually a politico-religious ideology, and that's why it so easily leads its adherents to kill in its name. It's a religion and it's a state. It's antithetical to our conception of the nation-state (because it aspires to a worldwide state). Its scripture is also viewed to be inerrant. No, we are not at war with each and every Moslem--not by any means. However, we are definitely at war with the unreformed (and perhaps unreformable) faith which leads them to the murder or approval of the murder of non-Moslems. We are at war with the offensive, bellicose, totalitarian, and expansionist ideology of Islam. And this is a war which requires us to united.

The koran and the hadith, which are still interpreted literally, are a virulent manifesto of God-given Islamosupremacy, and they are the blueprint for the Religion of Peace's agenda. It's just easier to lay the blame on a discrete group of villains with a name, rather than the politico-religious ideology that inspires them.

The holy warriors™ of al-Qaeda and all other jihad groups are simply pious Moslems who know their koran and sunnah, and who are following the books to the letter. They are back in those, halcyon days of virtue less conquest and murder for God when these books were written—the days when they enjoyed so much success at fighting, killing, and subduing infidels, crusading or otherwise. As then, now.

Study international law and learn what a war is.

We are not at war with an Ideology.

We start wars when we invade and attack foreign nations.

Let's not allow naiveté to cloud our judgment and make us more vulnerable.

On January 23, 2005, the former and now very dead jihad superstar, (drum roll please), Jordanian terrorist leader Al-Zarqawi released an audiotape regarding the upcoming elections in Iraq. Zarqawi was, of course, an islamic terrorist kingpin and the undeniable head of the jihadi insurgency against the Allawi Government in Iraq. That’s why his audiotape is of such significance.

Here is a major Islamic terrorist leader, telling us in his own words, directly, what he believes and what motivates his fight. And what does he say?

"We have declared a bitter war against the principle of democracy and all those who seek to enact it,” the speaker, who was identified as Zarqawi, said in the tape posted on Sunday. “Candidates in elections are seeking to become demigods while those who vote for them are infidels. And with God as my witness, I have informed them (of our intentions).”

Let's examine some principles of democracy:

1) Freedom of Religion: The most basic, most cherished of our freedoms is a gigantic affront to the pious Muslim since there is only one God and only one religion: that which they say exists.

2) Rule of the People/Majority Rule: The basic tenet of Democracy, that the will of the majority carries sovereignty, is inherently offensive to the pious Muslim. Only the "Rule of God" (meaning the rule of people like Khomeni, Zarqawi and Bin Ladin) will be allowed.

3) Freedom of Expression: The very freedom of our minds arouses murderous hatred in the mind of the pious Muslim. Our ability to express ourselves, to debate, to argue, to agree, to disagree, is an affront to God in their eyes. Under their rule, no one will be allowed to express anything but Islamic thought.

4) Separation of Religion and State: There can be no secular state, since we are ordered by God to live under his laws. Thus, all secular states are inherently God-less and must be destroyed.

5) Formation of Political Parties: Our right to associate with like-minded individuals is nothing more than a sign of our decadence, our distance from God.

This is the world view directly from an Al-Queda leader. Notice the complete lack of the usual grievances about Israel, about Western colonialism, about the inequity of our bargaining position in the oil market. No, instead we are told directly that we are to be killed because of who and what we are, because of who and what we believe.


Here's a suggestion Sherry: try imagining your boarding a commercial airliner without the extraordinary measures currently in place at virtually every airline terminal on the planet.

As you're falling to the ground from 30,000 feet, keep telling yourself, "we're not at war".

 

[Uncensored2008]

Or you could try putting your bigotry aside and stop supporting terrorist propaganda.

The propaganda is that Islam can coexist in peace. To be sure, MUSLIMS can live in peace, and most do - but peace is apostasy in Islam, the dirty little secret that those like you obscure. Those who follow the Koran as written, will and must make war on the Kafir. Muhammad was a warlord who conquered by the sword - peace is not the way of Islam, and never has been.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Or you could try putting your bigotry aside and stop supporting terrorist propaganda.

The propaganda is that Islam can coexist in peace. To be sure, MUSLIMS can live in peace, and most do - but peace is apostasy in Islam, the dirty little secret that those like you obscure. Those who follow the Koran as written, will and must make war on the Kafir. Muhammad was a warlord who conquered by the sword - peace is not the way of Islam, and never has been.

And Joshua was a warlord who conquered and ethnically cleansed with the sword! So what? What people did hundreds and thousands of years ago does not dictate how most believers in Islam and Judaism and Christianity live our lives today.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

The 8 Nations in the Bible destroyed by Israelite Ethnic Cleansing

When the Israelites came back from Egypt, they conquered the land of Canaan and rid the Promised Land of the Semite nations who had stayed behind while the house of Israel, led by the patriarch Jacob, migrated to Egypt. The violent process is known today as*ethnic cleansing. With Joshua as their military leader, the Israelites cleansed the region of Canaan of its native ethnic groups through genocide,*forced expulsion*and*rape of virgin girls. Here is a list of nations in the Bible who were destroyed by the violence of the people of God. The 8 Nations in the Bible destroyed by Israelite Ethnic Cleansing

 

[Hossfly]

The 8 Nations in the Bible destroyed by Israelite Ethnic Cleansing

When the Israelites came back from Egypt, they conquered the land of Canaan and rid the Promised Land of the Semite nations who had stayed behind while the house of Israel, led by the patriarch Jacob, migrated to Egypt. The violent process is known today as*ethnic cleansing. With Joshua as their military leader, the Israelites cleansed the region of Canaan of its native ethnic groups through genocide,*forced expulsion*and*rape of virgin girls. Here is a list of nations in the Bible who were destroyed by the violence of the people of God. The 8 Nations in the Bible destroyed by Israelite Ethnic Cleansing

What's the arguement? As a Christian you should accept what Joshua was instructed to do. You're kicking against the pricks and that is a sin.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And Joshua was a warlord who conquered and ethnically cleansed with the sword!

Who cares? That was 5,000 years ago and NO ONE, follows the teachings of Joshua.

So what? What people did hundreds and thousands of years ago does not dictate how most believers in Islam and Judaism and Christianity live our lives today.

Islam had moderated, it was joining the modern world. But then the Wahhabi scum came along and dragged it all back to the violent, and literal adherence we see today. And yes, I blame the Wahhabi even for the Shi'ite radicalism.

 

[Sallow]

We need to offer this scumbag a heapin' helpin' of our Hell fire Missile Early Retirement Program.

We do..but conservatives will protest it.

As usual.

 

[Osomir]

I think that the mistake you make in suggesting that others empower islamist ideology is twofold.

It's not just my opinion, it is the opinion of the DoD, and of West Point's Combating Terrorism Center.

first, not studying Islamist ideology

Except that I have, and I would be happy to discuss any aspect of it you'd like.

and secondly, claiming that we are not at war with a politico-religious ideology.

We aren't, and both President Bush and President Obama have pushed that line to make it clear that is not our objective.

I know it's difficult to say that we're at war with a religion, but we are.

It's not difficult, it's stupid and it endangers our entire country.

However, we are definitely at war with the unreformed (and perhaps unreformable)

Qutbist ideology is a "reformed" version of Islam though. Your mistake seems to be a lack of ability to separate jihadi Islamist roots from traditional expressions of Islam. These are pretty new concepts within the Islamic community relying on Itjihad developed in the 50's and 60's.

 

[Osomir]

The propaganda is that Islam can coexist in peace. To be sure, MUSLIMS can live in peace, and most do - but peace is apostasy in Islam, the dirty little secret that those like you obscure. Those who follow the Koran as written, will and must make war on the Kafir. Muhammad was a warlord who conquered by the sword - peace is not the way of Islam, and never has been.

Putting aside how theologically ridiculous and unsupported your claim is;

How do you reconcile your notions of what Islam MUST be with the fact that Muhammad had non-Muslim allies in his fight against Mecca?

Muhammad's own life and actions would seem to disagree with your interpretation.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Putting aside how theologically ridiculous and unsupported your claim is;

How do you reconcile your notions of what Islam MUST be with the fact that Muhammad had non-Muslim allies in his fight against Mecca?

Muhammad's own life and actions would seem to disagree with your interpretation.

Al Qaeda has non-Muslim allies in the fight in Syria and Libya, to wit Barack Obama and the shameful democrats. Temporary alliance with infidels is common.

Oh, what happened to those fools that allied with Muhammad? Did they have long. peaceful lives?