Can The Mods Undertake Action Against The Wave Of Islamist Threads?!

True. It will be more balanced once the Tiny Palestine State also has nuclear weapons.

 

So, any one of us can look up the news papers. Are we blocking access to these sites?

The question is a DEBATE about the ACTUALITY of violence CAUSED BY ISLAM. That is indeed a discussion.

Do we need 500 different threads on individual crimes ONLY in the muslim world to have that discussion?

Considering we have burgeoning drug war on our Southern Border, with horrif acts of violence and a drug culture that has created the grotesque caricature of Santa Muerta .... well? Obviously caused by Islam?

Bigotry is bigotry. A 500+ thread from one poster on the same subject that is always meets every response with, "You are a Muslim apologist!" (Of course, there is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY that the opposite could be true, that some peole are just apologists to bigots? )Is not a debate. Indeed the specific crimes mentioned in every case are often not debated at all.

All that it is is repeatedly saying, "I think Muslims are bad!!!! Go screw yourself!"

Oh, you can say that, there are consequneces to doing so 500+ times. Namely that the community ignores you and eventually takes steps to muzzle the undebateable in a community in which debate is the goal.

It is just a giant conspiracy theory, and that is where these thread belong.

What belongs in the main stream is the realization that people who wish to engage in debates about Islam are in MOST CASES far more familiar with the religion and its people than most of the so called experts who can only call over a billion people a bunch of terrorists.

We do not need 500+ threads to point that out. Nor is it an inpingement on free speech to say, "Shut up and let someone get in a different point of view ... for once!"

 

Non-stop 24/7 bashing of Christians and Jews is fine, but any criticizing of Islam, Muslims and their agenda to conquer the Western countries must be prohibited.You are on an American, not European server, probably you know that the U.S. has the 1st Amendment which allow the Free Speech.Only Europa silence Islam critic therefore it will became a Caliphate with the Sharia Law not longer as in forty years. In all countries conquered by Muslims were murdered more as 270 millions of non-Muslims since 610 AD. It is difficult to believe that in Western countries will be something others. Yes, many people want to discuss about the Danger of Islamization, we want our Democracy and Freedom, not Caliphates and donkeys on former highways.

More about the Problem in the U.S. you can read here:

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/

 

How are all these articles in the news about Islamic violence a conspiracy theory? Aren't they a reflection of reality? I think the person you are attacking lives in the country where Theo Van Gogh was murdered by an Islamist for making a film. Do you think a European may feel a little closer to the problem than you? Regardless, the knee-jerk reaction of a progressive to silence alternative views is sickening.


_

 

Progressives are dogmatic censors by nature. Their political beliefs are their pseudo-religion. They can be totalitarian fanatics.

Imagine, if I started a thread here about banning all discussion of Catholic priest pedopiles. Can you imagine the outrage because of progressive crocodile tears?

_

_

 

No, the continuous conspiracy that a billion people are lining up to kill five billion at the drop of hat belongs in the same place as birthers, 9-11 conspirac theory, and the fake moon landing.

Funny thing? There is more actual discussion about the subject then there was in that 500+ threads started by ONE poster.

 

See above.

Is there a reason that you think EVERY act of violence ANYWHERE in the Muslim world is proof that ALL MUSLIMS are nefariously waiting to stab you in the neck? But the 18,000 murders a year in this country clearly indicate a complete disconnect between our intentions at the individual religious level and the level of violence?

And we need 500+ threads, up to a dozen threads a day to highlight low level criminality across a population of 1+ billion, to ask and answer this one question do we?

We need ONE poster to repeatedly tell anyone who disagrees with his vehement anti-Islamic silliness, "You are an apologist from ISLAM!!! DEATH TO YOU!!!" .... a hundred times a week do we?

Because of the complex nature of this bigotry ... er, subject, we cannot contain the vast linkages of this problem to a thread or two to debate and actually discuss the issue?

Your free speech will be irreparably infringed on a private forum, if you cannot ask the SAME question a dozen times a day and not actually discuss anything?

So trolling is good, as long as it supports what YOU think. Gotcha.

 

The main problem with the 500+ threads is that they discredit real serious concerns regarding Islam. Such simply encourages people to dismiss real issues as being more irrelevant attacks, and such also discourages people from expressing criticism since such might then be linked with the spam. I have not yet dismissed the thought that the Fort Hood attack occurred because criticism of Islam was not being taken seriously as a result of such.

 

And a very well stated thought among a sea of partisan, anti-free speech nonsense. I'd say to those who can't tolerate a discussion about Islam, including the criticism of it and its extreme activists, if you can't take the free speech heat, get out of the free speech kitchen.

Frankly, almost all of the posters I've encountered in discussions about Islamic jihad (violent and non-violent), have shown a profound level of ignorance on the subject. If anything, I'd say the subject needs to be discussed a lot more, not less. Much of it is current events, political opinion, latest world news, as well as relevant to elections and campaigns. It also has relevance to other subcategories like immigration, law & justice, etc. There's no reason why threads about Islam, terrorism, or Islamization should be deliberately kept out of chat categories any more than any other subject.
When attempts like this are made to hush something up, Political Forum, and other forums ought to be all the more insistent that they be included anywhere they have any connection to, which with Islam, that is a lot of categories.

 

I don't think the lack of criticism of Major Nidal Hasan was because of spam talk, it was US Army officials who didn't have the backbone to stand up straight and call this creepy murderer what he was - a terrorist, deeply in cahoots with one of the worst Muslim terrorists in the world at that time (al-Awlaki). It was the fear of being labeled a "bigot" or "Islamaphobe", and whatever internal Army ramifications that might produce.
Hopefully, some of those people who were silent about Hasan, when they had a responsibility to speak up and take action (and didn't), will be made to pay for their huge mistakes.

 

Not actually discuss anything ? And what have YOU actually discussed about Islam, and it's protrusion into Western society ? I've seen some of your posts, and I don't think I've seen you discuss much of it. But you want to "contain" discussion about Islam, huh ? Maybe you ought to read and research it, and find out what has been going on, and THEN discuss it, before you get around to containing it, if anything should ever be contained (another word for censorship).
Better to learn about your subject and confront it knowledgably, than hide from it like a gutless coward.

 

Why the emotional hyperbole? Who has said that every Muslim wants to stab non-Muslims in the neck? Do we have 500 threads about conservatives? Obama? Ect.

Besides, there are many sub-sections of these threads such as: Muslim attacks on embassies, genital mutilations of women, terror bombings, high birth rates of non-assimilating immigrants, demands for sharia law, Muslim attacks on free speech, Muslims attacking newspapers that publish cartoons, the murder of Theo Van Gogh, Muslim child brides, Muslim forced marriages, Muslim honor murders in the West, Muslim dancing boys in Afghanistan. Saudi mistreatment of servants, ect, ect, ect.

Your objection to free speech is horrible, and you should be ashamed of yourself.

Can you really show me one hundred threads saying "death to you"? Really? I think you have gone over the top in your emotional post.

I suggest you shrinking violets avoid clicking on threads discussing Islam. That is your right. I take this thread as an admission of a problem with Islam in the West, and a refusal to admit the failure of multiculturalism. That would explain the irrational emotional hyperbole.


_

_

 

What are your serious concerns about Islam?


_

 

This is the root of the progressives' fear. They don't want people to see these You Tube videos from Europe. They don't want people to see what is going on in the ME and Europe. They need ignorant sheep. Educated and aware people are sheep no longer.

Can anyone tell me why these words aren't relevant today?

"In March 1785, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to London to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman (or Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). Upon inquiring "concerning the ground of the pretensions to make war upon nations who had done them no injury", the ambassador replied:

It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every mussulman who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once. [12]

Jefferson reported the conversation to Secretary of Foreign Affairs John Jay, who submitted the Ambassador's comments and offer to Congress. Jefferson argued that paying tribute would encourage more attacks. Although John Adams agreed with Jefferson, he believed that circumstances forced the U.S. to pay tribute until an adequate navy could be built."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Barbary_War

http://memory.loc.gov/master/mss/mtj/mtj1/005/0400/0430.jpg



_

 

Historical Proof the War on Terror has been going on far longer than anyone likes to admit.

 

Indeed, it has been. Progressives think everyone else should share their ignorance of history.

-

 

Brother you and I have already had one discussion about Islam, and I know first hand teh bigotry and scoped nonsense that you call expertise - I also see very clearly that you are not speaking about Islam or the topic, rather, as extremists tend to do, painting yourself in a flag of righteousness.

Let me remind you, I have studied Islam, I have prayed in mosques with both Suna and Shia Muslims, I have lived with them, studied with them, fought with them, and broken into rae and torture rooms with them to apprehend the extremeists who abuse their religion to justify evil.

You know this. Yet you forgot about it just so you could call me ignorant? That is the a clear sign of extremism, ignoring known facts to downplay or insult.

I suggest you do some studying yourself.

I also suggest that you explain to me why we need 500 therads to discuss ONE topic? Why do we need 12 a day to discuss ONE topic?

And the simple answer is, very clearly, we don't.

So, instead on answering the question, you simply use emotioanl hyperbole of 'free speech'. Well brother, speak on Islam all you want. Be civil an allow other topics to be discussed in a debate forum.

It is a political forum, not the 'I hate Islam forum and you people are getting in the way of my bigotry forum!"

 

Some people have argued that the Army was being "politically correct", not taking action out of fear of being branded as being "against the Muslims". Situations like this could happen when criticism of Islam is greatly exaggerated.

 

This deals with the ability of law enforcement to prevent crime practiced by some individuals who may operate under the banner of a religion.

 

Well, one reason why we might need more than 500 threads (if that's how many there has been) to discuss Islamic terrorism and Islamization, is because whatever the number is, as I just got through saying, you and all the other Islamapologists just don't know anything about it. You don't read/research as I have done for the past 10 years, and when I quiz you guys about it, you're lost. It's impossible to even hold a discussion with you because you don't know what's been going on, and when I bring up names of people involved in the subject you all just skip past them and change the subject. Have you read the books I suggested, or do you just brush them off with the typical Islamapologist invalidation tactic ?

As for other topics besides Islam, did you think we weren't discussing other topics ? I don't know about you, but I discuss other topics all the time. Try some of these on for size:

http://www.politicalforum.com/off-topic-chat/219354-protectionist-poems.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/218790-mars-exploration-unemployed.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/curre...spending-why-when-we-need-so-many-things.html

http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...-9-9-9-plan-too-99-9-richest-americans-5.html

As for your loose use of the word "bigotry", I challenge you to show even one instance where I've ever said something that was bigoted, and upon what you base your opinion.

 

It happens now when criticism of Islam and Islamists is UNDERemphasized.

 

True, but even this thread doesn't seem to suggest that such is the case. It seems to be more that Islam is criticized so heavily that much of such criticism is not taken seriously.

 

From what I have read about Islamization, and how much it could be criticized, in Political Forum, I would say about 99% of the possible criticism of Muslim Brotherhood Islamists goes untouched. One would have to sit here and write thousands of pages to cover it. That's why instead, I recommend that people read books which do cover it and very well. Here's a list of a few of them :

1. They Must Be Stopped by Brigitte Gabriel

2. The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) by Robert Spencer

3. Stealth Jihad by Robert Spencer

4. Infiltration by Paul Sperry

5. The Day of Islam by Dr. Paul Williams

6. Sharia: the Threat to America by the Center for Security Policy

7. The Third Jihad (DVD) by Dr. Zuddhi Jasser

8. Muslim Mafia by P.David Gaubatz & Paul Sperry

And a video (audio) about Muslim Mafia > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubovFI5ZHVk&feature=player_embedded#!

 

WHat does any of this have to do with a discussion about violence in Islam requires 12 threads a day about some random act of violence somewhere in the Islamic world?

It is simple, how is that we can have a burgeoning drug war on our Southern border, with horrific acts of violence and torture under the guise of one Santa Muerta - and that does not reflect on Christianity for some reason.

But every nut job anywhere in the Islamic world who does soemthing MUST be addressed and impuned as representative of the whole? Even as Islamic scholars from the Grand Mufti of Saundi Arabia and Dr. Qadri from Pakistan loudly and dogmatically (stooped in Koranic and Hadith doctrine) denouce the very thing that you think represents ALL of Islam?

What YOU do has no bearing on the fact that ONE poster strted OVER 500 threads on the same subject and basically did not debate it?

OK, you want YOUR actions to be judged? THen please explain why, based solely on a posters religion, you overtly followed him around the forum to dneounce him and as faith, blew of his quotation of Suras and Koranic verses you simply did not want to acknowledge - and when I defended him (and you continue to do) simply dismissed my long experience with the religion as you continued to attack the poster?

At what point do facts no longer become relevant to a topic?

At what point does the demonization of Islam cross over the line into conspiracy? Where it becomes as logical as the birthers? As 9-11 conspirators (who all scream about free speech as well when confronted)?

Well brother, I think that line is pretty clearly crossed when you tell other people what they should be saying and doing (while avoiding what they are actually saying and doing), and when you post 12 threads a day on ONE subject with a clear desire to not debate.

When do you think the 9-11 Conspiracy crossed over from a discussion and into conspiracy? What standard was used there? Because I think that would be a fairly good standard upon which to base the decision of conspiracy.

 

1. Who said anything about a random act of violence ? (although generally Islamic violence is not usually random, it is planned from organizational structures). I'm talking about that + Islamization (Muslim Brotherhood) which doesn't involve violence, but is is a systematic, covert, continuous effort to dislodge Western culture and replace it with Islamic culture and rules.

2. The difference between Santa Muerta (whoever that is) and the Muslim Brotherhood or al Qaeda is that the Christians are not following a guidebook that tells them to kill, torture, etc., but the muslims are doing just that from the Koran.

3. I don't follow anyone around anywhere. If a poster quotes my OP or post, then I will often answer his response to me. That's how computer forums work, and as they should. If you look over my posts, you will find that almost all of them are responses to someone speaking to me, and there are dozens of posters whom I debate with, no one person in particular, although I do get trolled at times.

4. As far as suras of the Joran are concerned, lots of Islamapologists claim that the suras don't mean what they say. The are just full of baloney, and I say so. No big deal.

5. No one ever demonizes Islam. People may report about its vile characteristics. That's just simple observe & report. Islam demonizes itself.

6. I don't know where you get the ideas that I don't want to debate. That's absurd. I'm the one who presents the FACTS, and it is the Islamapologists who dismiss them, with all their little defense tactics like invalidation (of books they've never read), the so familiar ridiculous "out of context" line, and the equally lame "interpretation" dodge.

7. As for what yousay about conspiracy, I don't know what you're talking about.

8. If you want to debate with me about Islamization, say so. Name the subject and away we go.