Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I forgot to mention, on Qutb's wittings. Again this wasn't written in a "I care what they do in America" sort of way. It was written in a "this is the culture you are inviting into our country" sort of way. Again a reaction to neocolonialism, and the export of western values into Egypt. They saw it as a attempt to erode Islamic values for the purpose of imposing western will in the region.
Yes, this series went into some detail concerning his writings, views and philosophies as they changed from the time he graduated University of Northern Colorado to his later views after being tortured in Egypt.
As mentioned about the Algerian GIA, Antar Zouabri killed everyone who disagreed with him and his brand of fundamentalism. In fact he declared that all of the Algerian population should be killed save for his small group of followers. This is does not appear to be an isolated case of radical sects of Islam fighting over who is the most fundamental or pure. There is a good chance that this brand of extremist Islam will self destruct by the very nature of its being.
I am reminded by an episode on another forum during a discussion on Iranian Jews when a group of neo nazi types stormed the board spewing their vile message. What was funny however is that they ended up fighting with themselves over who was the most "white" by measure of nasal index. The absurdity was not only astounding but would have been hilarious if it weren't so disgusting.
However, while I feel this new brand of radical Islam does pose a threat to the US, I don't view it on the same level of parity we once had with the Soviet Union during the peak of the cold war.
My concerns lay closer to home with the other extremist ideologist using a similarly flawed methodology. In fact they often cited the book, "The Terror Network" as the basis to push their views stating that the Soviet Union was behind nearly every global terrorist act. What is funny about this is that this very book was in part written by the CIA to discredit the Soviet Union so the CIA knew from the start it was all bogus. Even still, they called it fact and progressed based on many of the assertions in this book.
This is merely one of a great many fantasies contrived to instill fear of a danger that either did not exist or was a danger greatly exaggerated. It had become so extreme that they cited lack of or no evidence that some evil actually did exist and that it was so evil we could not detect it. (the height of paranoid psychosis in my view) We see this still in play today with the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran where 16 intelligence agencies claim that the threat is not what has been portrayed. The neoconservatives response to this is to attack the entire intelligence community as being flawed for not being able to see unprovable threats and so thus a conspiracy.
It would not surprise me if there were a war of ideologies in epic proportions taking place as we speak between the Executive, the military and the intelligence communities. If I had to take a guess I would say Gates (and a few others) is pushing back against the entrenched neoconservative views.
Like the radical Islamic factions that are likely to kill one another over who is most pure or fundamental, so too will the neoconservatives self destruct when the curtain is pulled back and the great enemy they claim exist, does not. The irony being is that both radical Islam and the neoconservatives almost need one other to promulgate their ideologies and agenda's.
I think he meant that both groups share the same theory, which I agree with. Do you dispute sharing the same theory? If so what are the differences? There are a lot of similarities.
Christians want to spread the word about Chrsit, and wish all to be saved. It is completely a choice.
Radical Islam wants to take over the world. Convert or die.
Ive watched the Documentary more than once and can draw my own conclusions about the reporters investigation. I was refering to you claiming that radical Islamists and Christian conservatives are the same. Refer to the title of this thread and your first two sentences in post 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper
I don't believe Bryan watched the film series as it never so states that Christian conservatives equate to radical Islamic fundamentalist. In fact, it makes the distinction that this isn't the case.
Hard to judge the contents of a program that hasn't been viewed, unless Bryan has a crystal ball or doubles for Madam Cleo
Ive watched the Documentary more than once and can draw my own conclusions about the reporters investigation. I was refering to you claiming that radical Islamists and Christian conservatives are the same. Refer to the title of this thread and your first two sentences in post 1
And what are your conclusions if you don't mind sharing?
And you call others paranoid. You should sit back and read these conspiracy laden rants about ghosts in the government and the sheep who follow
ba ha ha ha ha
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper
Yes, this series went into some detail concerning his writings, views and philosophies as they changed from the time he graduated University of Northern Colorado to his later views after being tortured in Egypt.
As mentioned about the Algerian GIA, Antar Zouabri killed everyone who disagreed with him and his brand of fundamentalism. In fact he declared that all of the Algerian population should be killed save for his small group of followers. This is does not appear to be an isolated case of radical sects of Islam fighting over who is the most fundamental or pure. There is a good chance that this brand of extremist Islam will self destruct by the very nature of its being.
I am reminded by an episode on another forum during a discussion on Iranian Jews when a group of neo nazi types stormed the board spewing their vile message. What was funny however is that they ended up fighting with themselves over who was the most "white" by measure of nasal index. The absurdity was not only astounding but would have been hilarious if it weren't so disgusting.
However, while I feel this new brand of radical Islam does pose a threat to the US, I don't view it on the same level of parity we once had with the Soviet Union during the peak of the cold war.
My concerns lay closer to home with the other extremist ideologist using a similarly flawed methodology. In fact they often cited the book, "The Terror Network" as the basis to push their views stating that the Soviet Union was behind nearly every global terrorist act. What is funny about this is that this very book was in part written by the CIA to discredit the Soviet Union so the CIA knew from the start it was all bogus. Even still, they called it fact and progressed based on many of the assertions in this book.
This is merely one of a great many fantasies contrived to instill fear of a danger that either did not exist or was a danger greatly exaggerated. It had become so extreme that they cited lack of or no evidence that some evil actually did exist and that it was so evil we could not detect it. (the height of paranoid psychosis in my view) We see this still in play today with the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran where 16 intelligence agencies claim that the threat is not what has been portrayed. The neoconservatives response to this is to attack the entire intelligence community as being flawed for not being able to see unprovable threats and so thus a conspiracy.
It would not surprise me if there were a war of ideologies in epic proportions taking place as we speak between the Executive, the military and the intelligence communities. If I had to take a guess I would say Gates (and a few others) is pushing back against the entrenched neoconservative views.
Like the radical Islamic factions that are likely to kill one another over who is most pure or fundamental, so too will the neoconservatives self destruct when the curtain is pulled back and the great enemy they claim exist, does not. The irony being is that both radical Islam and the neoconservatives almost need one other to promulgate their ideologies and agenda's.
Ive watched the Documentary more than once and can draw my own conclusions about the reporters investigation. I was refering to you claiming that radical Islamists and Christian conservatives are the same. Refer to the title of this thread and your first two sentences in post 1
How do you associate neoconservatism with Christian conservatives with the title other than having, "conservative" in the post?
Being neoconservatism is born out of Trotskyist/Platonic roots where only an intellectual elite are fit to govern and rule through the use of myth, lies and diversion, it would seem that it would not fit the criteria that Christians would embrace. Read the oft referred to neoconservative bible, "The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli for a better understanding on using myth to promulgate an agenda.
A simple google search will turn up enough material from traditional conservatives as to the roots and their feelings towards the neoconservative movement.
You kind of remind me of Max Boot during a Q&A on CSPAN when I asked him about his involvement with the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and he proudly proclaimed that it was a myth, and that no such organization existed and that I was a conspiracy theorist. Then the moderator of the show put up the PNAC website and gave the link to the viewers. (chuckling)
I have no doubts that there are still some holding out hope that WMD's will be found in Iraq and that there are still some who believe this administration is the second coming of Reagan but hey, what would I know.
While you are free to be critical of my assessment, I would be curious as to which particular reasons and assertions you disagree with. Just claiming that something is skewed or biased without providing any argument or evidence is, well, just too frequent to be taken serious.
Yeah, I read all that crap in college. Just because someone has a website doesnt mean every theory they dream up is the truth. If it makes you feel important to concern yourself with abstract political skull duggery thats your choice. Im more concerened about the city Council and taxes levied by the county in which I live. You know things that directly effect me and that I can have an impact. Skull & bones, the Trilateral commision blah blah blah whah ever
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper
How do you associate neoconservatism with Christian conservatives with the title other than having, "conservative" in the post?
Being neoconservatism is born out of Trotskyist/Platonic roots where only an intellectual elite are fit to govern and rule through the use of myth, lies and diversion, it would seem that it would not fit the criteria that Christians would embrace. Read the oft referred to neoconservative bible, "The Prince" by Niccolo Machiavelli for a better understanding on using myth to promulgate an agenda.
A simple google search will turn up enough material from traditional conservatives as to the roots and their feelings towards the neoconservative movement.
You kind of remind me of Max Boot during a Q&A on CSPAN when I asked him about his involvement with the Project for a New American Century (PNAC) and he proudly proclaimed that it was a myth, and that no such organization existed and that I was a conspiracy theorist. Then the moderator of the show put up the PNAC website and gave the link to the viewers. (chuckling)
I have no doubts that there are still some holding out hope that WMD's will be found in Iraq and that there are still some who believe this administration is the second coming of Reagan but hey, what would I know.
While you are free to be critical of my assessment, I would be curious as to which particular reasons and assertions you disagree with. Just claiming that something is skewed or biased without providing any argument or evidence is, well, just too frequent to be taken serious.
Yeah, I read all that crap in college. Just because someone has a website doesnt mean every theory they dream up is the truth. If it makes you feel important to concern yourself with abstract political skull duggery thats your choice. Im more concerened about the city Council and taxes levied by the county in which I live. You know things that directly effect me and that I can have an impact. Skull & bones, the Trilateral commision blah blah blah whah ever
The neoconservative movement is far from any conspiracy, in fact they are quite vocal and proud of their views. They have an ideology that they wish to progress, just like various other groups, think tanks, and individuals. Nothing secret or sinister about the fact they exist, have created their own websites and so stated the very things I have mentioned here. I happen to strongly disagree with their modus operandi and methodology more than even their ideology. I suspect if you have studied much of the Straussian school of thought and his fondness towards Leon Trotsky or read the works of Plato, you would see aspects of these ideas manifested in their views.
These things you refer to as abstract political ideals are quite relevant to today and to each and every American as many of the ideas of this group have been progressed through our current foreign policy of intervention.
Back in my own college days many moons ago, I started out in theology and eventually wandered over into poli-sci so the Far/Middle East and the implications of religion and philosophy in foreign policy and in politics in general is something I have been involved in for quite some time. So if you wish to criticize this thread then by all means do so, just give evidence as to why instead of just passing something off as irrelevant in a drive by commentary. There is plenty of this type behavior prevelent as it is.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
