why defend Islam (religion of peace) that want to destroy US???? (vote, amendment)

[Arus]

wow more fairytales from jeffington? no surprise

[Ellis Bell]

HistorianDude, post # 150

Oh? Exactly how are they doing that?
They are one half of one percent of our population...
and that includes the Nation of Islam which isn't really
even Islamic at all.

You are jumping at your own shadow.

The United States Constitution supports minority groups.

HistorianDude post # 154

Know the report well. In fact... I know one of the
author' personally. I am a West Point graduate and have
a casual association with the CTC.

What in that report do you imagine supports your
position? There is certainly within it no claim of
Muslims dancing in the streets in new York and New Jersey.

The CTC report was not a part of the discussion on the Muslims dancing in the streets.

The report I brought into the thread, because the propaganda seems to be spewing in these discussions, which seems to be helping their cause.

actonbell post # 157

Did you know that the media was shut down during all of that? Did you know that reporters who had built up relationships with informants, that their informants shut up and would not talk to them? No, you don't know this, because you are not a follower of journalism....

People were scared then to talk, and they are still to scared to talk. They don't know what they can say or what they can not say, that might get them killed.

Propaganda! read the report, Mr, name dropper as if that is to empress me.

HistorianDude post # 163

Blah... blah... blah....

Make an argument or don't. It's of no difference to me.

I had made the argument in the post #157. I told of how reporters sources where not talking to them. In other words, there may have been dancing in the streets in the U.S. on that day and no one would be the wiser about it, unless a person was there to witness it, first hand.

I gave a plausible reason how it could be, that something happens that a person would know about it and it would not get major attention. Your rebuttal to that, was that you were still waiting for me to make an argument.

You don't watch the National Press Club meetings they have televised. I on the other hand, happened to be able to see one of the meetings they held shortly after the 9/11 events and they talked about the difficulties, the technical difficulties as well, as much of their equipment had been destroyed in the crashes. I have found an article:
9-11: Looking Back, Looking Forward - Reports - Committee to Protect Journalists

Its not the same as the meeting I watched, of all the major media heads, but it will have to do for this discussion. There was a media black out issued, because we had been attacked and considered, at war.

HistorianDude post # 169

Perhaps it's Jack that needs to go actually read the CTC report. Because its contention is clear that for the Islamists, success is when they manage to convince the West to attack. It drives up their recruiting. It drives up their funding. It drains ours.

Go re-read this thread. Go see who it is here that has
swallowed the Jihadist ploy completely and appears to be
asking for a second helping.

"the clash with the United States is more important for propaganda victories in the short term, and the politicical defeat of the United States in the long-term, as its society fracutre and its economy is further strained." page 7 of the report.

In the withdrawal of the troops, they will say to the new recruits....look we won, they left! Sign up here, we will win this, they are going home we won....That is what will drive up their recruiting and their funding. Propaganda!

HistorianDude post #183

I still have no idea what you are talking about.

This was your response when I told you about the comments I recalled from the televised National Press Club's meeting.
Maybe now you do know? The debating tactic most used, is "the argument point has yet to be made." That's why I thought I would try, the recap of this thread and see if that doesn't help that out a bit.

HistorianDude post #229

1. You're the one that posted it, and yet you haven't made a point about it youself. As double standards go, that's just funny.

2. I actually have made a point about and brought it up. Several times now.

3. The point I made is that it pretty much calls people like you (who call for a "war on Islam") collaborators with the jihadists. Because that is what they want you to say.

1. Palestinians (video) celebrating the fall of the twin towers.
You said, 'Jerusalem dancing', following that post, so from that, you never really looked at that post. My point, whose to say, if they were celebrating there in Palestine, they were not of the same mind to do it here.
2. Missed at that one post and have addressed it in this one, read the above comments.
3. That is not what I got out of the report. What I got, was how they would weaken the U.S. through our economics and get new recruits by the use of propaganda material.

2 & 3, both references to the CTC report.
____________________

Originally Posted by HistorianDude

America didn't start what? And exactly when do you think "it" was started, and by whom?

You will find (if you actually start seeking answers to your questions with real research and not propagandic glosses) that it does not "depend on who a person listens to.' Like many things, there actually is a real history available for inspection.


For starters, most of history shows that jihad actually is an ordinary old fashioned war. Islam was spread across a quarter of the globe by Muslim armies, not Muslim missionaries.

Now.. it is true that jihadists cannot win a conventional war against the west today. And they know that. But what reason is that to then accept as a real threat any fantasies that they can win from within? Even they do not believe that.

You do not seem to have benefited much from reading the CTC article, because it is not about them "breaking us down from within" at all. The paper does not for one nanosecond take seriously the fears that fuel you and jackinyc (and all her sock puppets). It instead speaks of how jihadists propagandize within their own community. It is about how they make new jihadists at home and try to convince ordinary Muslims that conquest of the west is possible after all. In other words, it is proof that even they understand that they are a minority in their own religion, as the bulk of their efforts is to try and move themselves from a minority to a majority position within Islam.

And even further... their ultimate objective is not to "break us from within," but instead to create a unified and powerful Islamic caliphate that would defeat the west the old fashioned way!

The irony here though is that you (and jacki and her sock puppets) collaborate with them with your fear, your rhetoric, and your willingness to attack Islam either rhetorically or actually. You are the proof to other Muslims they are praying for that there really is a war with the west.

9/11 was not designed to attack America. It was designed to get America to attack Islam.

Bottom line... nothing in the paper supports your fears.

Instead it exposes you as the jihadist's best friend.

9/11 was designed to hit us in our most vulnerable spot, economics. That is why they took out, the World Trade Center---take out the money---do it with the way Americans like to travel the most, use the airplanes.

Let me be clear:

I'm talking about strategies here. The use of the word fear, does not apply to me. It is an interesting try...but, this, me, I don't talk or debate out of fear of anything. If there is fear, it must be personal. Islamphobia, is a made up word. Iran made it up in 1973. So get over yourself.

If the CTC report is only addressing issues and concerns with in 'their community', why does the document reference the United States, multiple times along with the structure of the U.S. economy and how it plays into, 'their community ?

Furthermore, the Iranian president is looking to land his hands on a nuke so as he can take out, little satan which is Israel and, big satan which is the U.S. He'd like to bring upon us the Apocalypse, because it is then, the hidden Imam, will come. This is what he believes and That is what is on that man's agenda.

Put that in your pipe and smoke it awhile.

The kicker part of it all, this whole issue, is not about religion at all. It's about tax dollars. The Four Righteous Caliphs (http://www.princeton.edu/%7Ebatke/itl/denise/right.htm - broken link)

Tribes all around Arabia broke out in open revolt; while they continued to acknowledge Muhammad as a prophet, they refused to send taxes to Medina now that Muhammad no longer lived.

Got money?

[Ellis Bell]

Originally Posted by Strel

It was a JOKE, FFS. You know, "they all look the same to me."



And I have tried, without citing 100 cases here for you to read, to explain to you that IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN. It's not a rational fear. It is an irrational one. If you did know more about the law, you'd know better. I really think you don't understand the scope and reach of the First Amendment and how it applies here.

There are people who very much want you to remain ignorant about this. They are not your friends. I may not be either, but consider that I am the one telling you that there is a lot more to this story than you seem to realize.



And it can, to the extent it comports with the US Constitution, which as I have tried, in vain, to explain to you, will prevent the aspects of it about which you are so concerned from ever getting in.

Why is this so hard for you to understand? The article does not support your assertion.



And they will be. And that's the reason we already do a better job than Europe in assimilating Muslims. They are a LOT happier here, and it shows. They're happier here because we don't have an autocratic government, or one that tries to tell them what religion to practice and how. They get it. Why don't you?

But the law is still the law, and your fears of Sharia are still irrational and wholly unfounded. I can only guess that you really didn't understand the article.

The Constitution supports minority groups over majority groups. Always has always will. Sharia=Islam, Islam=Religion,

1st amendment, as long as it isn't government sponsored it flies.

Use to it was this ENGEL V. VITALE, 370 U. S. 421 :: Volume 370 :: 1962 :: Full Text :: US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez

Now, they don't look at these court cases so much any more, they grew tired of it.

Interesting I think it was you that brought up ACLU, how are those court cases working out for them?
Free Footbaths :: Accuracy In Academia

Islam has their minority support groups in place and in some cases, even the ACLU backs them.

I'm all for the atheist to go up against them, but they don't. They all the ones I see on c-d support. Beats all I ever saw.

ps: sorry i didn't get your joke.
pss: I forgot, "There are so many varying interpretations of what sharia actually means that in some places it can be incorporated into political systems relatively easily," says Steven A. Cook, CFR senior fellow for Middle Eastern studies. http://www.cfr.org/issue/culture-and...n-policy/ri124

[momonkey]

Originally Posted by Toyman at Jewel Lake

The world's population is getting better educated, and our level of knowledge about evolution and the orgin of life and the universe is increasing. I expect, and hope, that mysticism of all types will eventually die out, and the tennant that any such belief must dominate the world will die with it.

Origin of the Universe?

Why is it I think you won't be open to a first cause and insist on an eternal big bang cycle?

Is it because a first cause is illogical, a first cause is impossible or a first cause is incompatible with Atheism?

[jeffington]

Originally Posted by Kangrui

You ought to write horror mystery stories. You have a talent for it.

You ought not to try to write intelligient posts, you have NO talent for it.

[FLA17]

This is what I don't get. Why do a lot of America liberals slam christianity while not slamming Islam? Islam is much more fundamental and hardcore than any sort of christianity so why would you defend that if you're slamming christianity?

[Arus]

I am equal opportunity religion slammer. I for the life of me can't understand how anyone places any faith or belief in a cult that gets its rules to live by, from a book of fairy tales.

[djacques]

Originally Posted by jackinyc

Why do certain posters in this forum continue to support or try to rationalize these crazy sob's that their mission is to convert the world?

Because we understand subtleties in a way that other people may not.

Their mission is also to enlslave or kill those who wont submitt- it is their way or NO way- there is no inbetween- It is not only America but the world. Also please, enough of trying to side step stating the feeble excuses of : Fox news, Beck or must be a christian-
How can you believe anything when there OWN code is to practice Taqiyya and Kitman meaning it is ok to lie for Allah - We cant believe a word that is said- In less than 20yrs this religion will have their numbers to vote in their own US president.

From 0.76% to the presidency in 20 years. Uh-huh.

When your grand daughter will be subjected to Sharia law think that we could've prevented it. I hope we start opening our eyes to what is going on all around us. I know many people that feel the same way as I do, Go ahead let the rants go 3-2-1 for all of you who seem to love this religion of peace and seem to think they have no agenda going on.

There is no "they", and formally speaking there is no "us"--unless by "us" you mean everyone loyal to the (non-religious) Constitution.

If I happen to have a granddaughter--which I hope I will--there is about as much likelihood of her living under Sharia law as there is of sanity returning to the GOP.

[Casper in Dallas]

Originally Posted by jeffington

You ought not to try to write intelligient posts, you have NO talent for it.

Pot meet Kettle.
Casper

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by jeffington

yes, you should, but you can't even muster the stones to admit the problem, so stone up, or at least puberty up - boy.

You're a very frightened individual, aren't you? There was a great country once, which took inspiration from mottos like "We have nothing to fear but fear itself". Now it's filled with people who think it's somehow manly to be afraid.