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

If they are all separate stories and events, then yes, there should be a separate thread for each. Should we limit all anti-Obama posts to a single thread, since they are dealing with the same subject? How about Newt Gingrich/GOP threads?

Nobody has come more unglued and unleased as many personal attacks as you have in this thread, and that's clear for everyone to see. Obviously you aren't embarrassed by exposing yourself as a hypocrite over and over again, but it's getting rather silly at this point. Stop whining about being "abused" if you are just going to routinely throw out insults and emotional tantrums.

Take your own advice.

Actually, protectionist has offered up more substance in just one of his posts than you have in this entire thread. When you get caught without an argument, you start throwing names around and complain about being abused. You are transparent. Your act got real old, real fast.

The four quotes you brought up did not show me reporting anyone to the FBI. Not a big surprise that you are too intellectually dishonest to admit you were wrong.

No, I said that terrorists who were making criminal threats should be reported. I never said somebody was doing that, here.

You don't speak for "everyone". You have delusions of grandeur. And you have no clue what I "intended". You're exasperated in this argument, and are grasping at straws.

[/quote]

On the contrary, it is you Islamophiles who have derailed this thread from its original conversation.

 

Sure it is. Tell you what, I'll report this post to verify your claim.

 

I have every right to brand someone a terrorist if they give full support to a terrorist group.

Absolutely, it is. You have zero evidence that I am a neo-Nazi, so your label is unwarranted and off base. If I made claims like "I support the KKK 100%", then you would have a justification for your claim. As it stands, you are just wildly grasping at straws, like the defeated loser of this argument that you are.

I said you sounded sympathetic to the cause of terrorists, yes. You were free to confirm or deny that insinuation. You going to bat for a terrorist organization like Hamas adds to that, in my opinion.

Funny, you called me a KKK member and a neo-nazi several times in this thread. Are you volunteering yourself to be infracted or banned? Or are you just showcasing more of your blatant hypocrisy?

That's not the best I could do. I can thoroughly refute someone and point out their constant hypocrisy, like I have done with you. Considering the reps I get, I think I'm doing a good job.

Dismissing something like jihadwatch does not mean anything. You are simply too lazy and ignorant about the arguments presented there to debate against them, so you'd rather just ignore it and give it a cheap label. The same as you are doing in this thread. You can't debate, so you want to call in the powers that be to do your fighting for you and shut down debate. It's what fascists do.

 

Nice non sequitur. I said that nobody has made more ad-hominem attacks and has done more namecalling than you, and that's a fact. You are quick to complain about being "abused", when you casually throw out insults yourself. You can't have it both ways. Unless, of course, you're a hypocrite.

Which insults do you feel I have made? You keep saying I called you a terrorist, when I haven't. I've called you a fascist, yes, and I can justify that by pointing out your attempts to shut down discussion of a topic you don't like. I've called you a hypocrite, and that has been shown many times already. What have I said that you feel is so against the rules? Feel free to point it out, instead of just talking endlessly without any evidence (your MO)

Again, this isn't a thread where I am going to lay out my case against Islam. I've done that in many other threads. I am posting in this thread because I do not appreciate haters of free speech like you trying to shut down a topic that you can't defend with arguments. That's gestapo brand fascism, typical of the left. A mod has chimed in this thread a few times stating that they foster an environment of free speech, but do not allow "hate speech". Unless you can successfully prove that my valid criticisms of Islam are equivalent to "hate speech", you are out of luck in this argument.

More projection. Who is the one trying to shut down dissenting voices here by having mods ban discussion of a topic? Oh right, that's you.

 

Why? Are you guys going to start making delineations between the Taiban in Afghanistan, Whabbist Sects in Saudi Arabia, Shia Muslims in Tehran, and Turkish Secularists? Are the Islamophobes going to start making these kinds of contextual delinations?

Or is the intent, rhetorical question, to dump these things out there to say, "look how violent Islam is!?!"

With the later clearly being the intent, you can roll up them all into one thread and leave it people who actually care about a debate to make those delineations in ONE thread, where loads of people can see the adament refusal of Islamophobes to acknowledge simple diversity in a population of over a billion human beings.

Can't have that now can we?

So you claim, now back it up.

All you are doing is simple flame baiting, the record bears out that you and your pals jumped in, and not just with me, calling people terrorists and worse, and when someone called you ass clowns for the behavior ... well, now everything is justified.

Its simple flame bait - not that trolling flame baiters will ever acknowledge it.

So, put your money where your mouth is and count up yours and protectionists insults, and then compare them. Otherwise, stuff it.

Don;t need advice from flamebaiters.

More assinine personal pot shots.

See the TOS again.

Why don't you back it accuser? A man who has accussed several posters of being terrorists and is being made fun of by several posters is defended by you. Obtuse.

Agh, when you say that YOU have every right to rreport people for making terrorist threat and then slying insinuate (actually stupidly and clumsily) that I support them - the implication is clear.

As I said, without silly ass accusations and insults what are we left with from Islmophobic ass clowns? Nothing.

If you feel your are wronged, report it to the mods.

Otherwise keep you whiney ass dishonesty to yourself.

Now add the last part slick.

Oh look ANOTHER TOS violation - clearly this is on topic and EVERYONE else is derailing this thread? Not you though.

Yep when a group of posters serially abusing posters and calling the terrorists is called ass clowns, that is what derails a thread.

Nothing here but flame bait, pointless accusations, and not a single on topic point in the entire post.

Serial victims and abusive posters the lot of them.

The community has asked that this kind of crap be shut down. That is not censorship, it simply standing up to a bunch of egotistical bullies with thin skins and far too large egos to go with their zealotry from jihad watch.

 

You complain about the lack of evidence, and then you dismiss evidence that you do not agree with. Nice confirmation bias. Add that to the list of logical fallacies you've displayed so proudly in this thread.

 

No, you do not.

YOU are not a law enforcement agency. Neither are you a mod. As a poster, if you suspect it, you report to to the mods.

All you are doing is excusing abusive behavior. Period.

Guess what? People are allowed in this country to say, "Well, I support the goals of Hamas to establish a Palestinian State."

Guess what that doe not make them? A card carrying terrorist with the intent to commit a terrorist act.

And yes, given your nihilistic support and absolute bogotry toward Islam, there is as much evidence that you are a member of the KKK as there is someone else is a terrorist. Your stated opinions make you as guilty of that as anyone else's do of terrorism.

No standards whatsoever, eh?

Good for me to do it, but bad and totally unacceptable when done to me. Nice.

Right, because after identifying myself as a combat veretan who has chased down and killed actual terrorists, and then acknowledging a moderate form of Islam that we partner with every day ...

Clearly I am symapthetic to terrorists.

Pathetic excuses for abuse.

No, I do not.

I said would it be acceptable to call you as such. Clearly, in context, responding to accusations of terrorism. Its not my fault the lot of you cannot read the questions that follow the statements making the context clear. Of course, you intent in merely flame bait anyway.

Thanks for once again deliberatey misquoting me, and answering the question that the behavior is indeed wrong.

You have impuned no one but yourself.

You offer up ZERO evidence. All you do is accuse. And then pretend that your are an innocent angel.

Its called flame bait.

Right, I am ignorant because a bunch (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)y ass bigots with zero experience in the region and deliberately avoiding facts say so.

This is your debate?

Simpel question once again, what are you left with without insults and accusations?

Very clearly, the answer is nothing.

Like bigots anywhere, its pretty much just a collection of trolls.

You want proof? In your last six posts you have made only one obtuse statement about Islam. The rest is just bunch of hate filled bile.

 

What evidence?

Jihad watch?

Oh, wait, its just an excuse for more bigotry and the inability to debate.

You are biased! Gotcha.

What are you left with without insults?

Nothing.

 

Why should we have to delineate in such a manner? Our argument is that Islam is what is creating these problems, and these many stories from around the world support our argument. It's an easy argument to make, especially when terrorists routinely quote scripture and their faith as justification. We're entitled to our opinion. If you disagree, the correct action is to explain how we are wrong, in your opinion, NOT trying to shut down debate.

No, we can't. Unless you are trying to advocate that every topic needs to be condensed into one thread per day, you are guilty of hypocrisy and double standards.

Again, you are free to ignore threads and ignore posters, but that's not good enough for you, is it? You want them punished and silenced. Hard to believe you ever willing to fight for a free country, when you are acting like a 3rd world dictator.

I can do better than that, actually.

Long before I even entered this thread, you were called out for your hypocrisy by someone who disagrees with me on the topic of Islam. You whine about people breaking the rules and launching personal attacks, when you do it more than anyone else in this thread. Clearly, I'm not the only one who sees it.

LOL, I said "take your own advice" and your response is "Don't need advice from flamebaiters". LOL, another brilliant gaffe!

So, me saying that protectionist has offered up more arguments than you is a violation of the TOS? Me criticizing your transparency is a violation of the TOS? Let's let a mod decide that, shall we?

Every person in this country has the right to report someone for making a terrorist thread. What's your point? Your claim is that I was on record saying that I report people who disagree with me to the FBI, and when I asked you for evidence of this claim, you could not produce any. You are now moving the goalposts, saying that I am "insinuating" and "implying", which are subjective assertions based upon your false premise. You lose.

More name calling. Remember the TOS? Do you believe you are above the law?

More tantrum throwing.

That doesn't make sense. I never said someone was making criminal threats on this board. Either prove your claim, or retract it if you are honest enough.

Do me a favor, report every single post that I've made that you consider to be a TOS violation. I bet the mods will end up reprimanding you for filing false reports and wasting their time. If anything, they will get you on your name calling and immature ad-hominems, as others have pointed out already.

You don't speak for "the community".

 

I don't refuse to see any problem, because there isn't any problem. The poster not only listed his sources (the australian.com, newsyahoo.com, & dailymail.co.uk etc( he also gave computer links to them. You talk like there were no sources provided at all. What do want the guy to do ? Draw pictures too, in living color ?

 

I am someone expressing an opinion. If someone says that they fully support a terrorist organization, I have every right to call them a terrorist, or at least a terrorist-sympathizer, or a potential terrorist. You've been calling people Nazis since very early in this thread, without a shred of evidence. Why are you so hypocritical?

Guess what? People are allowed to respond by calling them terrorists. Hamas is a terrorist group, according to our own Justice Department. Anyone who supports the group is sympathetic to a terrorist organization, and are therefore, terrorist sympathizers. Got it?

Maybe, maybe not. Sympathizing with a terrorist group makes one more likely to commit a terrorist act themselves.

The KKK isn't a movement that opposes Islam, actually. In many cases, the KKK and other neo-Nazi white supremacists groups actually advocate people supporting Islamist groups and terrorists because they are at war with Jews. But don't let things like facts get in the way of your baseless name calling and accusations.

The difference is, you can't back anything up. You go around calling people "Nazis" without any evidence. I, on the other hand, can explain why supporting a terrorist group makes someone a terrorist sympathizer, and why someone trying to silence free speech is a fascist.

Do you support Hamas, or do you not? According to your last several posts, you do. At least, you seem to believe someone can support the group and not be a terrorist sympathizer.

LOL, here is what you said

You've called me a Neo-Nazi several times already. So, by your own definition, you are "little more than a troll and should be infracted and banned". Now you are trying to spin your way out of a blatantly hypocritical statement by banking on a vague sense of "context"? Pathetic.

And what you just posted is called "hypocrisy." Call names, and then cry to a Mod that you are being treated unfairly. Like I said, this act got real old, real fast.

Perfect example, right here. You coming unglued, calling us "(*)(*)(*)(*)y ass bigots", and then you immediately whine about "hate filled bile" and "insults". How can you live with yourself, being such a hypocrite?

 

You've been challenged repeatedly to produce a shred of evidence of any inaccuracy, bigotry, bias, or whatever smear words you can come up with regarding JihadWatch, and you have produced NOTHING. So just like like the Quiz which you identified NOTHING, again you get a ZERO on your invalidation tactic as well.
If/Whenever you start SHOWING some evidence of bias or bigotry in JihadWatch, THEN you can toss those smears at them. Up to now, you don't meet the qualification for that. All you do by using these smear words (without producing basis for them), is each time, increase the level of a fool that you make of yourself.

 

Yes, Jihadwatch. You have not argued any of the points made by Robert Spencer on his site, and can only postulate that it is wrong, hateful, bigoted, racist, (insert liberal label here). This is called an ad-hominem, and is a logical fallacy used by people who can't argue, and would rather discredit and divert.

 

You are not expressing an opinion when accuse someone of being a terrorist.

You are accusing them of criminal conduct, and te reality of such things is that they are widely recognized as simple bullying tactics at best, or, given the realities of electronic mediums, slander/libel.

You have no right to call combat veterans who have chased down terrorists and killed them terrorists even mply such a deliberately offensive thing.

You explain to this forum why that tactic is necessary? Without an insult or accusation. I seriously doubt that you, or any of teh other Islamophobes who use the tactic, are capable of it.

Hamas is a terrorist group to the US. Guess what? They are not to most of the Middle East - and indeed the rest of the world.

And the point of the debate is to figure out which policy is correct, not jump the gun and assininely accuse everyone who supports the active resistance of the occupation a terrorist.

I realize this is a shock, but a conflict that has now spanned over a half a century has two sides.

Well, the reality if terrorists is that they tap into existing, and usually very valid, political concerns.

Support for teh concern is no way shape or form implies that a person is ready or even more likely to commit violence.

The same applies to your Islamophobic statements, which, though similiar to the KKK's, in no way implies that you are going to dress up in a white hood and attack a couple of black Muslims now does it?

One standard - two sides.

And we all see how you react when someone plays by your rules, with a loud an uproarous, "THEY CALLED ME A BAD WORD!"

Well, which is it?

Yes it is. I suggest you acquite yourself with Aryan theory.

Neither can you. You prove someone is a terrorist.

You prove that 'I' am a terrorist.

Like I said, all talk and accusation, no evidence. And without that flame bait tactic, you have .... nothing.

I understand that there is a complex situation of which Hamas is part ... either of teh problem or the solution. They are an actor.

If you want to know my position, then I suggest you see how we co-opted the Madhi Army in Iraq - The Sons of Iraq. Village defense forces in Afghanistan. Foreign Internal Defense.

Good, now quote, in entirelty, where I call you that. It is just like I claim.

Of course, you support the standard for me, but not you. Gotcha.

See above. Obtuse and thin skined flame bait at its finest. You are innocent of everything. Gotcha.

Flame bait. Excuse factory. 14 year old maturity level.

The only person coming unglued is you.

As teh debate winds down and you are asked to put up ... well, we see the nothing exactly as charged.

Ant that leaves you with? A bunch of excusing, self serving accusations without evidence, double standards, and .... nothing.

Its simple flame bait.

 

Yes I did, several times, go back and read.

Now, follow your own ... advice.

A clue: six people are not a billion.

And this stands in sharp contrast to your? Wait, this is off-topic right?

Flame baiters.

 

So you say, now go back and respond to the rebuttals that several posters have left for you.

You can't.

And exactly as charged we get this emotional, accusive trite instead.

 

First off, I didn't call you a terrorist, so your premise is bogus. I said that you sounded sympathetic towards the causes of terrorists. There's a difference. I would say the same thing to anyone who is willing to support Hamas, and other terrorist organizations. If you said that you supported Bin Laden, or Al Qaeda, would you honestly expect to not be called a terrorist sympathizer? Hamas is no different.

So what? They are a terrorist group defined by the US Justice Department. If you want to go with what Pakistan and other jihadist-friendly nations think about Hamas, I can't stop you. The group has, in its official online charter, the destruction of Israel as one of its goals. Do you support their genocidal and violent goals?

Are you one of these "active resistance" freedom fighters against "the occupation"? Or are you just sympathizing with Hamas, some more?

Yes, and you are trying to shut down discussion from one of those sides.

And this conflict is much longer than a half a century. Muslims have been imperialistic and violent since the days of Muhammad, over 1400 years ago. Their hatred of Jews is catalogued in their own Holy Book. Anyone who thinks they just started hating Jews in the 40's is ignorant about their religious history.

I would argue that it makes them much more likely. There's a reason why Western converts to Islam commonly take it upon themselves to go overseas and fight against the infidel alongside the Mujihideen forces in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and elsewhere.

How are my statements "similar to the KKK's." You pride yourself on making groundless claims without any evidence, even when pressed to present some. The KKK actually would have more in common with you and your fellow anti-Jew, anti-Israel "active resistance" fighters. The KKK has many times sided with the desire of Islamists to rid the world of Jews. Hitler, himself, had a great friend in the Grand Mufti. I wonder if he got any of his Jew disposal ideas from him?

Again, I'm not the one running to the mods after every post and threatening to report you. Youv'e been called out by multiple people for making personal attacks in this thread, and then whining that you are being abused. Your persecution complex is hilarious.

The Nazis were more against Jews than any other group. Hitler didn't go after Muslims, he actually befriended them, like the Grand Mufti. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" is the attitude that Hitler had. He and the Islamic world both hated Jews. Hitler is still revered as a hero in many parts of the Muslim world.

I already did. I pointed out a "moderate Muslim" who gives full support to a terrorist group. You haven't proven anything regarding your "Nazi" claims, despite repeatedly being called out to do so.

No, they are a terrorist organization according to our own Government, who have the destruction of Israel as one of its top priorities. They are part of the "solution" only if you believe in Hitler's Final Solution (which is likely).

If you support Hamas, just say so. Why are you so indirect and sly about it?

Good job removing your gaffe from the quote.

I noticed you keep dodging the question. Since you claim that people who go around calling others "Neo Nazis" are "little more than a troll and should be infracted and banned", why should you not be considered a troll and banned, since you have called others "Neo Nazis" several times, already? Explain your hypocrisy, stop dancing around it.

Yes, hurling insults and then whining to mods, like you do, is very immature. Glad we can agree on something.

"As teh debate winds down"... on the ropes, are we? You've been unable to counter anything I've presented, and you've done everything you can to derail the conversation. You've been thoroughly exposed as a hypocrite, and not just by me, and you are without a leg to stand on in this argument. You lose.

 

When did Jihadwatch EVER claim that "six people" are "a billion"? You have a real problem focusing on actual arguments and not simply inventing ridiculous hyperbole when you have nothing else to say.

 

He's asked you to back up your claims against Jihadwatch (as did I), and all you can do is point to unsourced "rebuttals" made by other people? Which ones? Should we just ignore you and go straight to them, from now on? They seem to be the brains behind the operation.

 

It also states that Christians and Jews are respected people of teh book.

Guess what Christianity says about non-Christians?

Hmmm .... the selective non-contextual quotation of any holy book can be done to support anything. After all as a Christian I have been told repeatedly that I am a rapist - commanded by God to do so.

That is wrong, silly, and just plane stupid.

The simple fact of the matter is that what you are doing to Islam is no different.

Indeed when teh Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, as has been provided, comes out and condems the very interpretation you are claiming .... you have a credability problem - just like Osama Bin Laden does when he makes the same outrageous claims.

 

I believe I listed my sources, beginning with the US Military's Counter-Insurgency Manual, and then proceeding through several volumes on Islamic history, trans national smuggling, and actual counter-terrorism studies. I also happen to be an expert on the subject, with decades of field experience on the subject.

It is not my fault that Islamophobes are closed minded bigots who only see what they want and have to resort to these kind easily disproven shrill and utterly meritless accusations.

LIke I said, without them? Nothing.

 

I am only going to hit the highlights ecause most of this is just a continuation overt flame baiting, pointed personal attacks, and 14 year old excuses.

#1 - you did indeed, and have been quoted insinuating that I was a terrorist, and you were quoted (in a 30 second search mind you) calling three other posters terrorists as well.

The idea that YOU personally are not doing it is assinine.

YOU, and several other posters are indeed doing just that. YOU are defending the tactic, and when called to back it up, suddenly you are not doing it all?

Assinine - and simply dishonest.

#2 - In any other word, except apparently Facist, Liar, Hypocrite, Evil, Stupid, or any other pointed personal barb, is already acknowledged as off limits.

When people call you neo-Nazi - you are gravely offended. When people call you a liar, you are uproarious.

The simple fact of teh matter is that the only thing that seems to matter with the Islamophobes is whether or not the insult originated with you. Anything you say is justified - to include blantant accusations of criminal conduct. Anything that comes back, including, "Stop being an ass clown." Is a just wrong.

Not a single Islamophobe has acknoweldged so much as a single insult that have given - not one.

Thos who insult and excuse, fail to acknowledge their part of the problem, are little more than trolls. Indeed, without them, they have nothing to comment on. There is no debate - just trolls.

That is the problem.

#3 - In sharp contrast, I disagreed with the so-called Islamapologists last night. Several were not pleased, but when told to avoid going personal - three of them in a row obliged and allowed teh discussion to continue.

That stands in sharp contrast to the repeated personal attacks that every poster who has dared to disagree with the Islamophobes have received in this thread.

That is the point.

This isn't even a numbers issues - its a trolling issue.

 

The "People of the Book", Jews and Christians, are offered 3 choices when Islam becomes dominant in their society: 1) convert 2) live as 2nd class dhimmis, or 3) go to war with the Muslims. Convert, submit, or die.

 

"An expert on the subject", LOL! Your expertise is obviously very lacking. You haven't defended anything you've written, and are reduced to name calling and diversions.

Without the label "bigot", you have nothing.

 

Prove it.

Because I have been in the middle of Churches in many dominant Muslim Countries. The priests were widely respected, they simpley could not run the country - sortta like Muslims probably aren't going to win too many elections in this country.

So yes, when Islam is the government and wish to remain in teh contry, you have to submit to the laws of the nation - just like every other country on Earth.

Its nefarious when Muslims do it though.