Two Feathers's Link
Test 1: The Revolutionary War.
Test 2: The Civil War.
Test 3: War for Religous Feeedom (and thereby liberty)???
I still don't have to worry about living under sharia law...
If it comes to forced submission, my kids already know enough to fight for what's right.
Either it won't happen, or I'll be somewhere else. And some wonder why owning firearms in the home is so important.
Smarter men than today wrote that document. There is way to defeat sharia law from taking hold 7 days a week and twice on Sunday. The catch is to defend and support the Constitution. Oh wait, isn't that an oath of some kind...?
I'm not an expert on Sharia Law, and don't have any aspirations to be. I'm sure HDE is right in that many aspects of Sharia Law conflict with the US Constitution. To what extent, I couldn't tell you.
Again, Trax, show me where I advocated changing and/or protecting efforts to change the Constitution.
I agree. In order for their "Constitutional" rights to be protected, everyone else's are infringed on. Minority, in this case, will loose...
Maybe you are trying to paint with too broad of a brush here. In your haste to categorize me, you are making some broad assumptions. Hence, your assumption of my thoughts on the issue based upon a single question, and your assumption that I have an agenda I am pushing.
"The way that you, JLS, framed the very question is how ALL liberals frame it on these issues and others"
"The 4 liberal legislating stooges would side with the framing of your agenda, I have little doubt about that."
To be very clear, I could care less about Islam. I could care less about Mormonism, or Buddhism, or Hinduism, or any other religious or philosophical belief. They are all welcome here provided they follow the laws of the US and the Constitution that shapes those laws.
As to your question to what is unconstitutional about forcing someone to assimilate to our culture? I guess it largely depends on your vision of assimilation. I would agree with you 100% that tolerating is pretty close to a must, because intolerance typically involves someone infringing upon someone else's rights. Accepting laws? Certainly. Accepting other beliefs? Now you're getting into muddy waters. If I accept another religion as valid, that is in direct contradiction to my Constitutionally protected right of freedom of religion. I am certainly obligated to accept their right to practice said religion, and recognize their freedom to believe in it, but I am not obligated in any way to accept the religion itself. Same with cultural practices.
So tell me, what is my ongoing agenda?
Right here, written by you. Given that assimilate means to take in and/or take on a likeness, it's a coin flip as to which version you were using. I made no assumption as to which it was. Instead, I referred to the use of "accept" and "culture".
Per the definition of culture:
the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group; also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (as diversions or a way of life} shared by people in a place or time •popular culture •Southern culture
If you didn't intend to include that, then my bad. And, as I recall, I didn't explicitly say you did. I was merely parsing out the my perspective on the different aspects of accepting a culture.
You specifically referenced the framing of my agenda, I thought maybe you could tell me what it is. If you have been paying attention, you would know that my agenda is nothing more than following the teachings of Jesus Christ and advocating for hunters, anglers, and the natural resources we have been blessed with.
Are you able to carry on a conversation with name calling and insults?
I didn't put any words in your mouth, and if you feel I was then I apologize. I was basing it entirely upon what you wrote. And, I directly acknowledged I was addressing it based on my perspective of "accepting a culture". Nowhere did I attribute that as a statement made by you.
Do you act like this when you talk face to face with people?
And yes, I was merely posing a question.
A muslim guy came in holding the Koran and filming the event/himself. An off-duty officer approached him and noticed he was carrying a weapon. The officer asked him to leave, advising him that weapons were not allowed on that property. He did so immediately, peacefully, and without any incident. He went to his vehicle and before he left the parking lot he filmed himself with several firearms. He made no direct threat toward any person or group. Simply stated "be afraid", not directed toward anyone or anything. Technically there was no violation of SD law. He has a valid concealed carry permit. Now whether or not that permit gets revoked based upon his actions is still up in the air.
Those are the facts. It's also a fact that maybe 300 people were in attendance, not 500.
I don't know about you, but when I communicate I base things upon the understood meaning and/or definition of the words used. You did not directly write the word "belief", but you did use the word "culture". Again, per the definition of culture:
the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial, religious, or social group; also : the characteristic features of everyday existence (as diversions or a way of life} shared by people in a place or time •popular culture •Southern culture
This is from a dictionary, I did not make this up. As you can see, "belief" is one of the words referenced in the definition of culture, therefore, it would be reasonable to believe that your use of the word "culture" could certainly entail a synonymous inclusion of the word "belief". So, to answer your question, it was based on neither ignorance nor lying. If you didn't intend for "belief" to be part of your usage of the word "culture", then my bad. However, to directly assert dishonesty or lack of knowledge is rather disingenuous on your part.
It would appear to me you have little, if any interest in a civil conversation and are more intent on provoking a fight.
I will ask you this again, do you act like this in face to face communication?
Jefferson clearly seemed to derive that effective meaning from written words that did not contain those specific words; given a universally accepted definition of "culture" has been provided it is not unreasonable to exercise the same interpretative process.
If the interpretation is felt to be in error the simplest solution would be to clarify the intended use of the word culture and preclude any future misunderstandings.
Regarding the list of methods to address the influx of questionable "refugees" I don't see anything (including the added #8) that in any way violates the Constitution.
I am aware of the issues made over "extreme vetting"; if an EO was narrowly framed it wouldn't be hard to cast it as treating a religion unfairly (as was done), but even with that narrow framing the argument was weak. Qualifying extreme vetting with the additional parameters often discussed completely removes that argument and, as the Israelis have demonstrated, has produced favorable results with minimal inconvenience to others.
Sharia Law is incompatible with the US Constitution; not only shouldn't there be any debate about this fact it shouldn't even be dignified with a discussion.
A person CANNOT be a DEVOUT Muslim and a loyal American.
What will it take for YOU to lose your ignorance? A suitcase nuke set off in a major city? A dirty bomb that kills 100's of thousands? It's not a matter of "IF" they do this, but WHEN.
The goal of Islam is to either convert or annihilate those who won't. That's fact. It's time to chose...them or us, or they will chose FOR us.
If want to call me ignorant then have at it. At least I'm AWAKE!
You seem to be confusing the word "devout" and "extreme." You are choosing to let a group of people who choose to take the most extreme interpretation of the Koran and Islamic doctrine and live by that. I could make the same argument for any religion. You CANNOT be an EXTREME Christian and a loyal American.
This does not mean that individual muslims cannot live as Americans. Just a fact that the large political groups and organizations that represent the muslim faith are inherently hostile to western values.
Find me one that isn't...
And once again gator, I stand by what I said about a DEVOUT Muslim. When they have to pick a side guess which side they'll pick? Most all of those that you describe would be hacked to pieces by their so-called "brethren".
Oh.....and read up on the two Muslim terms I posted above. And try this one too.....
Your definitions of Taqiyya and Kitman are wrong. They are meant to be applied under duress. In other words, lying about being Muslim so Christian crusaders might have spared your life a thousand years ago.
From Wikipedia..."Since the 2000s, taqiyya has become a frequently invoked concept in debates surrounding criticism of Islam and especially Islamic extremism. Islamic scholars tend to emphasize that taqiyya is only permissible under duress, and that the inflationary use of the term qualifies as "a staple of right-wing Islamophobia in North America" (Mohammad Fadel 2013), or "Taqiyya libel against Muslims"while their critics accuse them of practicing "taqiyya about taqiyya" (Raymond Ibrahim, 2014)."
The Koranic basis comes from the following verse, "Let not the believers take the unbelievers for protectors rather than believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing of (the guardianship of) Allah, but you should guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully (ill? an tattaq? minhum tuq?t)."
In other words, taqiyya makes it allowable to deny being a Muslim to save your life. Otherwise you would be an apostate, which is not permissible in Islam.
Leave it to Satan to upset and pervert religion for what it is, should be, and could be...
So it only references killing people who are killing you first, not innocent people. In the proper context, all the verses say the opposite of what Islamaphobes claim.
You and the like quote things like that with no context and leave out verses like this (5:32). "Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land – it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind.”
Really man, HOW many people have to die at their hands before you wake up???
Islam is a death cult.
Truth is, when Islam, and especially Sharia, becomes a majority in a given area people like your co-worker will be butchered just as savagely as you will.
And yes, I knew some. I went to college with them. To a man they wanted Israel exterminated. Literally. Some things never change.
Well if they are, they are not "good" Muslims in the eyes of the majority of Muslims, and when the sh*t hits the fan they will be butchered just like everyone else.
A good starting point would be the murder of Jesus.
The reason people worry about these things is the same reason you look both ways before the crossing the street...It's smart to be prepared and stupid to assume the best will always happen...
Show me where I attacked Christianity?
Yes, I understand the history. The Jewish leaders were the ones who refused to stop until Jesus was dead. The Jews worshipped the same God who sent his son to Earth. So, you are correct in that we are not talking about organized Christianity in the sense that they were following the teachings of Jesus Christ and the new covenant (obviously since they executed him), but we are talking about an organized religion of God's chosen people. If you see it as a distinct difference, that's fine, I don't care to debate it with you. If you were to argue Christianity couldn't even exist until Jesus' death, I would agree with you on a factual basis because the New Covenant wasn't fully established until Jesus died.
Other examples: Northern Ireland? The Crusades? Dylann Roof? KKK? Colorado Springs Planned Parenthood?
It's tragic that ANYONE would feel compelled to kill someone else because of religious beliefs. Unfortunately, Christianity as a religion is not exempt from this. A true follower of Christ would not do this, and could not legitimately claim they are justified by the Bible to do so.
Saying we should bomb Mecca and that no devout Muslim can be a true American goes far beyond "being prepared". It's a combination of racism, bigotry, nativism, xenophobia, and just general ignorance that I think this country is best without. When I concealed carry or look both ways before I cross the street, it isn't at the expense of a whole class of people.
Yes, I wrote that. Not as an "attack" on Christianity. As I said, I can see your point if you want to differentiate between the Hebrews and subsequent Christians. No worries from me on that, as the New Covenant was only fully established after the crucifixion and the New Testament was not even written. And, as you know the defining difference between Judaism and Christianity is recognition of Jesus Christ as the messiah and son of God.
It's a shame to discount how many people died in Ireland. I guess they aren't relevant anymore? You can find Christian terrorists in Central Africa, Uganda, India to name a few. Eric Robert Rudolph? Army of God?
Don't view these examples as proof I don't believe Muslims kill people out of religious beliefs. There absolutely are twisted individuals who have bastardized their religion and use it to justify killing, just as Christians have too.
I would hardly call any of it terrorism.
And no, I didn't compare numbers. You said Christian terrorists don't exist. I pointed out they do exist. Now, had you phrased it as "Islamic terrorists kill more people than Christian terrorists", I would have unequivocally agreed with you.
Not to pick nits, but the definition of terrorism is pretty much the use of violence for political purposes.
"Good Lord man, did you NOT read about my hometown???"
***Apparently you did not....or you just don't give a sh*t.***
And just because you know "a" Muslim that you trust means that what happened on 9-11 and CONTINUES to happen on a weekly basis is irrelevant???
***"IRRELEVANT" means that it's of no consequence...or you again just don't give a sh*t because it hasn't happened to you or your home.....yet...***
How long before one of them loads a truck up with a small nuke or a chemical weapon and drives it into the middle of a crowded city??
***So...you don't know/care/understand the question....your pick.***
How many dead is YOUR breakpoint? I reached mine on 9-11 when it literally hit home for me.
***So once again, you don't... know/give a sh*t/comprehend?***
Truth is, when Islam, and especially Sharia, becomes a majority in a given area people like your co-worker will be butchered just as savagely as you will.
***So once more, you don't... know/give a sh*t/comprehend?***
How many more people need to die before I give a shit? I do give a shit. I think we are doing plenty in the space. Bin Laden is dead. ISIS is shrinking. Al Queda is practically a non-issue. This world and this country is a drastically different place post 9/11. The risks that were once there are so much lower now. It's why only about 10 people a year are killed by Muslim terrorists in this country. It's basically zero risk. That doesn't mean that things won't happen and it doesn't make them less terrible. It's certainly nowhere near enough to make me hate a whole religion of people.
I'm not afraid of Muslims and I'm not afraid of sharia. Than anybody legitimately thinks these are things they should be concerned about in this country is beyond me.
Given the actions we've taken since 9/11, we've managed the risk to damn near zero. This is not a problem that requires extreme measures.
These guys are legitimately concerned that will happen here, HDE.
Which is just what I figured.
DS's Link
JLS's Link
First on the list. Anthrax letters? Shootings?
I think a dog turd on a bun is a Big Mac.
In the most literal sense, you are correct. It would contradict the teaching of Jesus to embark upon terrorist acts. However, it is quite easy to pick and choose biblical verses which, taken out of context could be used to promote violence.
I am in no way an expert on the Koran, and won't even begin to speak to whether it's possible to follow the Koran in its most literal sense and proper context, and conduct acts of violence and terror.
I doubt anyone knows or cares if the murderers who flew the planes into the Twin Towers were true Muslim anymore than whether they care if the Armh of God is true Christians. Religions of all kinds are easily perverted.
sportoutfitter's Link
bigeasygator's Link
Get ready, it's coming. Start the bombing in Mecca.
Jason, with all due respect I think your over complicating this; "as a whole" refers to a collective body and it shouldn't be taken as a given that any collective body requires a designated spokesperson. Every individual within the collective body has a voice and given the circumstances it would seem a moral obligation to exercise that voice.
Waiting for a "designated spokesperson" is abrogating personal responsibility. I'm a white christian male; if I see someone being robbed on the street I don't run home, fire up the laptop and google "spokesperson for white christian males", I address the situation immediately.
I think what more people want to see is more than the metaphorical whimpering of "token" responses. I think people want to see an overwhelming chorus of voices calling out extremists each time, every time.
The website I linked to was put together by a 17 year old Muslim girl who was frustrated by the fact that people kept telling her that Muslims weren't doing enough to take a stand against terrorism. She has collected and documented over 6,000 examples of the Muslim community doing that very thing.
Like I said, if this isn't good enough, I'd like to know specifically whose voices people feel like they aren't hearing from? What Muslim individual or organization isn't doing enough to denounce terrorism? I think if anyone claims they aren't doing enough, I'd like to know specifically who "they" are and specifically what they should be doing that they aren't. Sorry, but "Muslim community as a whole" is a non answer. If you're talking about something more than speaking out, fine (I don't believe sportsoutfitter was). But the vast majority of Muslims have as much ability to stop the next terrorist attack as you or I do of stopping the next crazy radical right-wing Christian terrorist that goes and shoots up a mosque or a black church.
Is it the people that are under their control who risk being killed for denouncing the extremist ideology? Or are you talking about somebody different?
bigeasygator's Link
bigeasygator's Link
bigeasygator's Link
I don't recall seeing large groups of Christians take to the streets to protest right wing terrorism, even though it kills far more people on US soil than Muslim terrorists do. But again, if you're not seeing groups of Muslims coming together to protest terrorism, it's only cause you're not looking hard at all.
So just admit it. You have no clue about any of what you're talking about. You don't know who the Muslim leaders are in this country nor do you know anything about what they've said. You're just regurgitating the same hackneyed lines around Muslims not denouncing terrorism that have been repeatedly discredited.
I've provided you links to literally thousands of Muslims speaking out against terrorism for themselves or the organizations they reperesemt. You can't provide me with one example of someone not taking a stand against terrorism.
bigeasygator's Link
You can easily flip the conversation. Before the Orlando shooting last year (which you can easily argue was the act of a crazy person suffering identity problems more so than of Muslim terrorism), right wing extremists had killed more people post 9/11 in this country than Muslim terrorist had. So what are you doing to stop those acts of right wing terrorism? Why do the more moderate Conservatives of the world continue to let these people exist??
Still waiting for your 8 bullet point list for battling right wing terrorism, Trax. Or should I just put you in the "I'm doing nothing to stop right-wing terrorism" camp too?
bigeasygator's Link
"From these tables you can see the most important element of this debate. The Iraqi Army is more than 13 times larger than even the largest estimates of ISIL's current strength level, especially considering that about half of them are tied up in Syria, and especially considering that this does not account for the additional 250,ooo extra the Iraqi still have in its reserve. What this means for ISIL is that they won't be able to successfully occupy much more of Iraq without significant pushback from the regionally loyal Shia Arab military.
This doesn't mean that we won't still hear of attacks running rampant. You will hear about that every day. These people are insurgents. They don't fight in open pitched battles against the military. They attack soft targets which can be easily converted into cash while avoiding major direct conflicts. When push comes to shove, they will retreat into the shadows to fight another day."
I'm sure with all of these laws Trax is proposing and getting the "majority of the Muslim community" to denounce terrorism we're bound to stop terrorist attacks, cause we all know that these terrorists are reasonable people who obey laws and listen to rational people!
Y'all are staring to sound like a bunch of Liberals!
Again, Muslims are doing all those things you're asking them to do. Often to great effect. It's still not a 100% solution, especially for such rare events as terrorist attacks.
We do the same thing for people that become mass shooters. We report odd behavior. We report threats. We stress that there's no place in society for walking into a movie theater and shooting a dozen people. I'm not saying we shouldn't do those things. We obviously should. But you're living in a fantasyland if you think that'll stop every mass shooter and every Muslim terrorist.
I work in in home sales and I can tell you the absolute WORST appointment I could get would be in the muslim community! Arogant, ignorant and absolutely the biggest racists on the planet!!!!!
Are there some good muslims......I guess so but depends on who you ask! If I say they are a good muslim because they understand everyone else' feelings they would actually be a terrible muslim! Who knows anyway because the Koran states that lying to an infidel is not actually lying(and yes I have read it). In other words they can blow as much smoke up YOUR ass as they want without feeling guilty of lying or deception!
Fulldraw1972's Link
Woods Walker's Link
Now let's see....what does much of Europe suddenly have a lot of over the past few years....
1. Jews? No, about the same number.
2. Catholics? No, in fact there's fewer of them now.
3. Protestants? No again, it's about the same.
4. Muslims? BINGO!!!!
The more Muslims you import, the more violence you have. Works every time.
Anony Mouse's Link
(Note: link to article contains internal reference links)
The Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America, a particularly radical Salafist group, is boasting that over 380 imams and students attended its 14th Annual Imams Conference in Chicago on March 24-27.
AMJA’s extremism is much more in-your-face than other “moderate” Islamist front groups in America.
Participants most certainly know what this group offers—and invested the time and money to attend the conference.
AMJA’s Arabic teachings outwardly promote seditious ideas like pursuing the incremental undermining of secular-democracy. American citizenship, for example, is acceptable as long as the citizen “(does) not accept indefinitely the law and legislation of that country and being indefinite belonging to the nation of the non-Muslim country.”
As for jihad against the U.S. mainland, AMJA opposes that— for now. However, the reason for their opposition to violent jihad inside America is because “the Islamic community does not possess the strength to engage in offensive jihad at this time.”
“With our current capabilities, we are aspiring towards defensive jihad, and to improve our position with regards to jurisprudence at this stage. But there is a different discussion for each situation,” one Arabic fatwa said.
AMJA, like so many other “moderate” Islamist groups, positions itself as an opponent of terrorism by condemning “extremism” and terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Upon closer look, we see that the group supports Hamas and the creation of an Islamic state governed by sharia law.
The fake moderation of AMJA is also apparent when you look at their conference agenda. One of the topics was, “protecting the New Muslim from extremist and liberal movements.” For AMJA, the “liberal” practices of Islam are a threat worthy of being in the same sentence as the “extremist.”
The “extremism” AMJA condemns is not the jihadist pursuit of destroying Israel (it supports that by advocating Muslim support for Hamas). It’s also not female genital mutilation or marital rape, which AMJA justifies.
Rather, AMJA condemns the “extremist” Western “propaganda” about female circumcision.
Deception is part of AMJA’s strategy. In January, Clarion exposed how one of AMJA’s fatwas teaches Muslims that they “are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly but never inwardly.” Its orders to Muslim judges serving U.S. courts are to incrementally move the country towards sharia governance, “even if by a ruse.”
And, yes, AMJA’s definition of sharia law includes the barbaric hudud punishments (stoning for adultery, cutting off limbs of thieves, etc.)
AMJA cannot be dismissed as an irrelevant fringe group whose influence is limited to an Internet website.
The group boasts that almost 400 imams and students attended its conference. And its Fatwa Committee, Leadership Council, members and experts hold positions in prominent Islamist groups and mosques across the United States and around the world.
AMJA made the wise decision to stay out of attention-grabbing fights, letting its allies like the CAIR chapter in San Diego do its dirty work. But it’s about time that the spotlight be shone on AMJA, one of the most radical and dangerous Islamist groups in America.
Andrew Joseph Stack, the perpetrator of the Austin tax office suicide attack in Feb 2010, has been labelled a "right-wing" terrorist. But he is a strange sort of "right-winger", one who hates George W. Bush, capitalism, the Catholic church, and drug and insurance companies.
John Patrick Bedell, the perpetrator of the Pentagon shooting in Mar 2010, has been labelled a "right-wing" terrorist. But he was a strange sort of "right-winger", one who was a registered Democrat, strongly opposed the Gulf War, hated Bush, believed Bush carried out 9/11, and called the Iraq War "Satanic".
Roger Stockham arrested in Jan 2011 for threatening a Detroit mosque. But, far from being a Tea Party member, he's leftist / Islamic / mentally ill. He is a convert to Islam, and said in the threats that he was: "a local Muslim terrorist on a roll." A witness says that he: "called himself a mujahedeen". In fact, this seems to be a case of a Sunni threatening a Shia mosque. And more. Not quite the Tea Party narrative, then. Acts 17 Apologetics point out that some people rushed to call him a "Christian" terrorist, and the local Police Chief even said: "He picked Dearborn as a stop because of the huge Arab and Muslim population." When in fact he picked a Shia Muslim mosque because he was a Sunni Muslim. In a similar phenomenon to the Tucson blood libel against Sarah Palin, people even accused Acts 17 Apologetics of inciting the attack! They have a lovely response: "It seems that our hate speech (i.e. drawing attention to disturbing facts about Islam, while maintaining our love for Muslims) somehow caused the Sunni-Shia split. Perhaps Jem believes that Nabeel and I constructed an Acts 17 time machine, travelled back to 632 and caused division in the Muslim community right after Muhammad died. Perhaps I went to Abu Bakr and said, "Hey! You should be leader!" Then Nabeel went to Ali and said, "You're better than Abu Bakr!" Fourteen centuries later, the division we caused led a Sunni convert to attack a mosque. Acts 17 must be even craftier than we thought!"
The Washington Navy Yard shooting of Sept 2013 was not blamed on the right, but it was fascinating that the shooter turned out to be an Obama supporter. A friend said about him: "He was more of a liberal type; he wasn't happy with the former [Bush] administration. He was more happy with this [the Obama] administration -- as far as presidential administrations." Of course, primarily he was mentally ill. But don't you think that if he was a Tea Party supporter, all hell would have broken loose? It also emerged that the shooter created a webpage with the name "Mohammed Salem", though there is no evidence he was Muslim.
The Las Vegas shooters in June 2014 were labelled as "right-wing". However, it turned out they were supporters of the left-wing "Occupy" movement. Max Fisher gives an account of a horrific anti-Muslim crime in Dec 2014: "In December, a man in Kansas City wrote on his SUV that the Koran was a "disease worse than Ebola," then drove it into a 15-year-old Muslim boy in front of a local mosque, severing his legs and killing him." However, he omits the fact that the killer was a black African Somali Christian immigrant. Certainly not "right-wing" terrorism in any traditional sense.
The Chapel Hill shooting in Feb 2015 was called a right-wing anti-Muslim hate crime. However, it emerged that the shooter was a left-wing atheist who hated the GOP and was a fan of the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Max Fisher portrays the murder of Ahmed Al-Jumaili in Texas in Mar 2015 as an anti-Muslim hate crime. However, it seems the killer was a gangsta black teenager.
Careful though...By this logic, all a Muslim has to do is say "I'm a conservative" before they blow themselves up in a crowd of people and then it'll go down as an act of right wing terrorism!
This is why all information needs to be processed before rushing to judgement on what is the true motivation behind any activity. Lots of these people are just mentally deranged and are extremely inconsistent in their ideologies and actions. They get labeled as right wing terrorism when they shouldn't. The same happens with regards to Islamic terrorism. The Pulse shooter yelled Allahu Akbar, but also committed homosexual acts and drank alcohol frequently.
That said, none of this means that right wing terrorism or Muslim terrorism doesn't exist.
What about Timothy McVeigh? What about Alexandre Bissonette? Robert Lewis Dear? Frazier Glenn Miller? Anders Behring Breivik? I can go on and on. These are all people that were radicalized by extremist views aligned with conservative ideology. You're delusional if you don't think right wing terrorism exists and you're ignoring the data if you think it isn't as big a threat to everyone's safety in this country as Muslim terrorism.
I feel sorry for you that you live in so much fear. That's gotta weigh on a person.
You are the only one ignoring facts. You are the one letting conspiracy theories and improbabilities guide your thoughts and actions. They are opinions of fear and ignorance, not reality and facts.
FACT: the majority of Muslims denounce terrorism and are peaceful people FACT: by every measure, terrorist events are INCREDIBLY rare
It just astounds me that people can't see the threat for what it is...incredibly small. I'm talking about any kind of terror attack at all. That anyone can carry it further and think there is a credible threat of a Muslim takeover of the USA, either from folks on the inside or the outside, is beyond me.
I still don't understand how you think you're preventing anything with your "8 points to address Muslim terrorism". How are you going to enforce whether someone supports sharia? How does outlawing sharia prevent terrorism?
Last time I checked murder was illegal in this country and I'm gonna go out on a limb and say the majority of American people think it's wrong and denounce it. By your logic we shouldn't have any murders now. Did we hit zero murders yet??
So please tell me specifically how outlawing sharia (murder is already illegal) and getting the majority of Muslims to denounce terrorism (they already do) is going to stop anything? You haven't done that. Or you at least choose to live in a fantasy world where terrorists follow laws and comply with the wishes of those who denounce and object their ideologies and actions.
What am I deflecting from? Your main argument is we need to make sharia illegal and we need to convince Muslims to combat terrorism. Sharia is illegal in this country. You can't practice sharia without breaking the law. Muslims are combating terrorism in ALL of the ways you are asking for. Your solutions aren't changing anything.
And your video is dumb. The birth rate assumptions are wrong. It provides one overly inflated number as the Muslim birthrate and does the math for every region off of that number. You think Muslims in France are having children at the same rate as they are in the Middle East? They aren't. It ignores other factors, such as the fact that people tend to assimilate to other cultures and that as people tend to become wealthier, their birth rates slow (which will be the case as Muslims leave third world countries in favor of those that are more economically prosperous). It ignores immigration policy. It's about the dumbest thing I've seen in awhile. It was good for a laugh though and I guess if you were actually a person who thought it was true I can see how you are as scared as you are!
"Sioux Falls! STUPID auto-incorrect!"
I grew up in Sioux Falls along with Fargo, Des Moines and Omaha. But when people ask me where I'm originally from, I always say '"Sioux Falls." That's probably because that's where home was from 1958 until I was in the USAF and Dad got transferred to Minneapolis in 1972 or 1973.
I was last there in June of last year for my 50th HS reunion. I was fortunate enough to share a drink with Brotsky, then see old places and re-connect with old friends.
You could never find a better place to live, raise your kids and have great neighbors.
At the final night banquet, the featured speaker was a black school-mate who'd moved to Sioux Falls from the South just as he was starting High School. He talked about culture shock, but in a good way. Even though Sioux Falls was 99.9% Caucasian, he said although he was expecting rejection because of his race, what he got was total acceptance. He went on to graduate from Princeton and then great success.
He said he never experienced any racism in any way. Just total acceptance and love.
That's the town I grew up in. That's the town I remember and I hope it will always have those values.
That video was made in 2009 and claimed that in 15 years (2024), Muslims would make up 50% of the population of the Netherlands. I bet you $5,000 they don't. Whatdya say?
"Sounds like it's just another example of a mentally disturbed individual acting out in an unpredictable way." From bigeasygay in the Texas thread.
It would seam that bigeasygay is identifying the guy from Texas as just a messed up person instead of a deranged Obama voting left wing extremists. Keep talking out of both sides of your mouth bigeasygay.
First off, I see we are resorting to homosexual slurs now. Classy. Secondly, that first sentence you quoted was dripping in sarcasm (all you have to do is read the rest of the post to understand that). Sorry you can't follow. Try and keep up LINK. There are acts that are committed in order to advance a cause -- jihad, anti-abortion, white power, black power, etc. Then there are acts committed because someone is just crazy and doesn't show any kind of consistency of thought or ideology or are just totally random and senseless.
I have yet to see anything thus far that suggests the Texas stabbing was an act done to advance any cause. The police have come out and said "this was not a conspiracy. This was not a person that had a vendetta against any particular group." I have yet to see any evidence that suggests he harbored racist beliefs or supported some other cause that would have let him target who he did. Not saying it doesn't exist, but as of now this looks to be the act of a crazy person.
There are plenty of other people who seem to get linked with causes (both on the right, the left, and other) that when you peel back the onion are nothing more than mentally disturbed individuals. That's why it's important to continue to investigate and explore the evidence before making a final judgement on people's motivations and the root cause behind their actions.
But I'll play into your thought exercise even if it's total fantasy. Even if it was true (it's not)...what do you propose to do about it? How do you stem the tide of the fecund Muslims of the world and halt their fertility rate? I don't see where any of your "8 points" stops them from having children. If it's only a matter of time they become the majority in these Western countries (it'll be a long time btw...a REALLY, REALLY long time), seems like it's only a matter of time they would have a voting majority and could just change any law they want.
Anywho, I'm guessing that's a no on the bet? How about this...I bet you $5,000 the Muslim of the Netherlands doesn't reach 10% by 2024?
Exactly but it seams you and your left wing buddies want to name any white crazy person a right wing extremists so you can't tout that they outnumber Islamic terrorist, when in reality the vast majority of the white murders are just crazy people. Then in the same breath you don't want to call a person of Islamic descent shouting alahu Akbar, as the drive a car into a crowd of people, what they are. It's a crazed ideology that's real, it's not some small group that meets in their parents basement.
Again, where did it say the guy was Muslim Spike? He smoked, drank, did drugs, had sex, etc. Trax loves to talk about sharia law. Do you know what the moderate interpretations, let alone the extremist interpretations, of the Quran and sharia say about those types of things? So again, tell me how we know this guy is even Muslim? What makes this guy a terrorist? These are simple questions. It says a lot that you either refuse to answer them or can't answer them. That's also why your so called example of the Muslim scourge that will be released on women is fake news.
and stop it with the 'scared' chit, typical lefty knee jerk oppositionist go-to garbage rhetoric...."(insert here)phobe!".....pure nonsense, there's a huge difference between fear and common sense choices to eliminate unneccesary risks
do you fly a kite in a lightning storm? play golf in a tornado? walk barefoot through broken glass? why not? were you scared? cautious? at least you had warnings....
go tell all the families of the victims of islamic terror how minimal the risk really is, it would surely give comfort
Why on earth would I tell the victims of any kind of tragedy that it was statistically improbable? I'm so tired of that line. Statistical improbability will never provide comfort, but it should be relevant in how you view an entire race or religion of people. The racism and discrimination displayed by a handful of people on this forum is, IMO, a far bigger threat to the future of this country than any Syrian jihadist. Its disappointing and disgusting.
Let me run through it one last time for you itshot because you just don't get it. Spike pointed to a link that described a women's blog about her experience living in Turkey with her boyfriend.
1) nowhere does it say that he is Muslim. Even if he is... 2) she describes the man doing things that even fairly moderate Muslims forbid, like drinking (she describes the man as an alcoholic). So even if he is Muslim, I'd hardly call him religious
I'm not going to defend the treatment of women in some Muslim countries. It's deplorable in some. The same can be said for many poor Christian countries. But every Muslim country I've been to women enjoyed the same rights and freedoms as men. Domestic violence is not terrorism and it exists in plenty of countries and is independent of religious denomination.
Yet, just like the fake news story that Spike linked to (which I'm beginning to think you haven't even read) he describes this story as reflective of a threat from Muslims (we don't even know if the guy is Muslim and he's clearly doing things Muslims forbid) and called the individual a terrorist (domestic violence and rape is not terrorism).
If you can't understand why this is racism you only reinforce my point that it's people like you that are the biggest threat to this country. This country has no place for ignorance and hate.
EXACTLY! That's why Sharia should be illegal, as well as "No Go Zones", and people wanting to come here from places where Sharia is practiced should be intensely vetted.
See? You're starting to make sense......starting. But you have a ways to go.
No Go Zones exist right here in my home city of New Orleans. They are populated by Christians.
So again, how about you answer my simple question. What aspects of shariah law are legal here that we should make illegal?
Shariah law says you can't drink alcohol. Do we need to pass a law that makes alcohol legal? Or a law that prevents people from choosing not to consume alcohol?
Your article didn't answer my question and you haven't either.
Trax, you talk a lot but don't really say anything. Religious tolerance belongs to no political party. Hate, ignorance, intolerance, fear, prejudice, and racism belong to the weak minded people of the world, on the right and the left. You seem to be proud to own it. It's all yours bud!
"No-go area" (or "no-go zone") is an area that has a reputation for violence and crime which makes people frightened to go there, an area in a town barricaded off to civil authorities by a force such as a paramilitary, or an area barred to certain individuals or groups. It has also been used to refer to areas undergoing insurgency where ruling authorities have lost control and are unable to enforce sovereignty."
You wanna bet me there aren't areas in New Orleans that "[have] a reputation for violence and crime which makes people frightened to go there?"
Mike in CT's Link
http://www.onlyinyourstate.com/louisiana/new-orleans/dangerous-places-new-orleans/
I haven't encountered any demographic breakdown (by religious affiliation) though to tie to these statistics.
It's primarily black on black crime. The memorials and funeral services aren't taking place in mosques and synagogues, that's for sure. I'm not saying the perpetrators are religious, nor are their crimes motivated by religion. These individuals clearly have no respect for life.
Please.....the bullshit meter is about to go off the charts.
can't wait for more lessons on doctrines, demographics and demagoguery........such a sweet treat, he is
I could just see you in 1939........"But not ALL Nazis are like that! Just a few!"
If you REALLY want to see and have no problem with sharia law being practiced here, then you are insane and beyond any reasoning.
Or.......maybe just really a Muslim doing the "taqiyya" thing.
That article is about as credible as Obama's healthcare promises.
America needs Islam like a fish needs a bicycle.
Attacking a woman with acid is illegal in every state.
You understand there's a difference between sharia law and sharia, right?
You really are Muslim, aren't you?
Woods Walker's Link
But he didn't really mean it, did he?
Q. Why is the Avenue des Champs-Élysées in Paris lined with large trees?
A. So the German Army can march in the shade.
In 50 years those same trees will be used to hang Christians from.
That's the epitome of ignorance and bigotry right there!
Forget the first amendment! Forget the Muslims that have died for this country! Welcome to WW and Spike's America folks!
We can all post images of horrible stuff if you want. It's a dumb game to play but we can play it...
So tell us, what mosque do you pray at?
But they don't really mean it though Ahmad Gator, right?
Woods Walker's Link
The thing is, we have this little thing here in the US called the Constitution. It is what establishes the laws in this country (not religious doctrine). It has these things called Amendments. You should get familiar with them. There's one called the 8th Amendment which outlaws cruel and unusual punishment. It prevents people from going around chopping hands off of shoplifters. There's also one called the first Amenment which grants freedom of religion and allows people to practice their faith (like not drinking alcohol or only eating halal) as long as those practices comply with the laws of our country. There's a bunch more of them. You should read them sometime. Maybe if you do you'll realize sharia shouldn't scare you.
