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

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 sub-subject and away we go.

 

Main point - again:

Do we need 500+ threads to discuss this ONE TOPIC?

Do we need a dozen threads a day in order to debate ONE TOPIC?

Would it perhaps make more sense to start a SINGLE THREAD, with a thesis statement that Islam causes violence and support it with a series of attacks and put up the issue for AN ACTUAL DISCUSSION?

There is a reason that bigots do not follow option #3 - that is all I am saying.

 

Crime? Do you mean Jihad or terrorism committed by Muslims?

_

 

Random? Political terrorism is not random. Church burning is not random. These are premeditated acts committed for political reasons.


_

 

They refuse to face the issue. They can only name-call.


_

 

Additional to your good list I put some serious informational sources and highly ask to visit this great web-pages.


http://www.islam-watch.org/IW/links.htm

 

Thank you for that great list. I especially like barenakedislam since they make their site more dynamic with the numerous pictures they present along with text. Sometimes those pictures are gruesome, but sometimes we need to get kicked out of our complacency too. Thanks for the friend request. My answer is yes - 100%.

Here's one more website not to be missed > http://www.actforamerica.org/

 

REally? Let me tell you something about church burning in Islam.

Let me begin by reminding you that people burn churches in this country without the need of a vast Islamic conspiracy.

However, I will tell you a tale about Iraq. I was working with some seinor Iraqi officers for a charity drive to hand out humanitarian aid in Baghdad. As we briefed the general (Iraqi) on the plan, it quickly became clear that ALL the humanitarian supplies were going to be passed out through churches.

Now, even the dumbest guy in the world realizes that there are FAR more mosques in Baghdad than there are churches. Perplexed, I asked why we were not handing out the supplies through the mosques as well?

The initial response was an Iraqi Brigade Commander staring at me like I suddenly grown wings and a forked tail. As I was still obviously confused, the Brigade Commander looked imploringly at the General, who simply nodded, indicating that he could explain. And he did.

You see in Islam, there is no secularism. There are certainly secular minded individuals like Grand Ayatollah Al Sistani, but the simple fact is that Islam is immensely connected to politics and prominent religious leaders have a say in what happens in policy. Indeed, they retain the power to shift the outcomes of elections, and secular politicians in Islamic countries know this.

So what happens if you give a mosque good to hand out? Well, you risk unbalancing local power bases when a Suna cleric will not give to Shia or who uses it to punish or reward a certain following of a rival. Even worse, if if you hand it out and say there are no strings attached, even if the cleric does not want to attach strings to it, well, in Islam, the church is associated with policy and the message that gets out is whatever random rumor gets the most traction. That can be VERY bad indeed.

The Christians however? They have no political desires in a Muslim country. When they hand out goods and services, they are seen as people of the book who simply wish to serve Allah and his wishes regarding Zakat. Churches are afforded a great deal of respect and acceptance in the communities as a result of this, and are generally very well protected by the communities they serve as a result.

So, when someone blows up a church, is it the ideology they are attacking? Or is it the neighborhood and its services they are attacking?

In places ike Mosul, where Christians were attacked, there was an amazing phenomena that occured. You see, these attacks always took place around some kind of political date or election. In each case I saw, the Christian would cross a political boundary and, viola, the attacks stopped. You see, local politicans who felt that Christians would vote for a rival in areas they controlled would simply attack a few Christians and get them to move elsewhere, and secure his 'democratic' political basis. Too easy right?

So is that really about terrorism? Or simple gangsterism that happens when opportunists seek power in a vaccum created by war?

Now, why is it you assume that ALL these attacks are part a large broad conspiracy totally bereft of local calculation or objectives? That rather than derive from the community and attempt to influence the communities where these events take place, that they are instead aimed inexorably toward YOUR throat?

Funny, your side says it is our side that knows little or nothing of Islam, but those of us who have actually interacted with Islam know that it is a wide and diverse body, that it includes Suna, Shia, Dervish, Ahmadiyya, Salafists, Sufi, etc. Yet your side sees only a giant monolith and calls itself educated about Islam? Predictive in nature, yet unknowing of local causes and effects?

And we thus need 500+ a month to discuss this do we?

 

Eat your heart out.

 

What is the 500+ a month that you are talking about ? 500 + a month what ? What are some examples ?

 

Its been listed and provided, go back and read before you summarily disagree.

It is a simple question, do we need 500+ threads, started by ONE poster, in order to discuss this issue ... which, BTW, you are not even discussing.

 

I wasn't disagreeing, I was asking you a question. Some reason why you can't simply answer it ?

 

It has already been answered, and it indeed the very topic put forth in the OP.

Is this mere disembling?

Notice how this ONLY requires ONE thread, where the information should be easy to find - if you look.

Hold on a sec though, and I will start 499 more ... and then good luck figuring what the hell I am talking about.

 

The "answer" isn't an answer. In post #21 you supplied a link allegedly about the 500+, but the link doesn't work. It goes to a pop-up that says "Sorry - No matches."

As far as figuring out what you're talking about, at this point I'd say, who cares ? You haven't offered much substance about Islamization up to now, so what's to gain by reading your stuff ?

 

If you cannot figure out who the prolific poster is the Latest News Section, then as you asked me to do, conduct some research. It painfully obvious.

We call that portion SEEING OURSELVES, and as some people see OTHERS inaccurately, I guess it is no surprise that they see themselves inaccuratey as well.

Now, the fact that previous post has been summarily ignored, and that once again, our earlier discussion is just blanked ... well, that too says something about what you see.

Do you know what others see when they see you guys?

"I want to debate! Islam sucks!!!"

Hundreds of rebuttals later.

"Man, no one ever says anything to defend Islam, they are all ignorant and just call us names. Oh well, better start another 673 threads about this subject."

In short, they do not see your side debating at all - even the intent to debate honestly - and when LOTS OF POSTERS start seeing that, well, that is what drove someone to start this ONE thread you see?

 

1. I don't have a "side". I just observe & report whatever is out there.

2. What I see is a waste of time being here in this thread calling for curbs on free speech, which I'm quite confident that the Mods are smart enough to brush that idea off for the sillieness that it is.

3. As for previous posts you might consider the reading list I posted in post # 48, so you can discuss Islamization knowledgeably. (note- don't waste your time talking invalidation to me. I only listen to book invalidation from those who have read the books).

 

The religion forum is about religion, it's not about terrorism and violence. So it would be inappropriate to put these threads in religion forum.

 

#1 - yes, you do have a side. Based on our previous discussion and the fact that you were chasing around a Muslim to harass him for being Muslim, you very clearly have a 'side'.

At least be honest about it.

#2 - how is asking that posters post one of two threads about a subject as opposed to hundreds on the same subject a impingement on free speech?

It is abusive, arrogant, short sighted, selfish, and quite frankly rude, to thing that SPAM is a great way to communicate an issue or debate it. Talk all you want, but please see what happens when you are confined to a single thread and actually have to support rather than just SPAM a position.

I am sure the mods see that too, and I am sure that random appeals to emotion (might want to take a picture of yourself wrapped in an American Flag for the mods while you are at it) are not terribly effective.

#3 - I consider you acknowledge the fact that I know far more about extremist Islam than you do. In fact, I have been charged with hunting them down and killing or capturing the little bastard, and I am VERY good at it.

The difference is, I know that extremists are a fringe element, so when bigots quote sources about extremism and attempt to pass it along as if it is the norm for ALL of Islam? (Its the biased sample fallacy BTW) Well, the Muslims helping me hunt down and kill the extremists are continuously surprised that you refuse to acknoweldge that they, their famillies, and their governments exist. (We call that pulling an ostrich, wherein the only that is acknoweldged are those things that feed preconcpetions and prejudices. The ostrich is a sure sign that something has passed beyond reason and into conspiracy).

Hold one, I need to say the same thing in slightly different ways in 499 more threads to make sure you got the point.

Then I can refer back to it randomly by saying, "I addressed that point you apologist for bigots," by directing you back to - somewhere between threads 270-280 on one of thr responses.

Helpful? Free Speech (on a private forum)?

 

Hey, did you think you were going to get off that easy ? That was just the first half of the quiz. I couldn't put the whole thing in because it exceeded the word maximum for a single post. Here's the rest of the Quiz. Identify these things associated with Islamization. And remember - no tricks. I know every one of them. And you can test me later if you like.

Things associated with Stealth Jihad (AKA Islamization)

Hijra, jizyah, Istanbul, Al-Quds, Al-Aqsa mosque, , treaty of Al-Hudaybiyah, Oslo Accords, the Mahdi, Al-Ansar, 2006 Pentagon report : "Motivations of Muslim Suicide Bombers" ), "The Project", the Muslim Brotherhood, the Ikhwan, Taqiyya, Da'wa, Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), Holy Land Foundation trials - 2007 & 2008, Khalil Gibran Academy, US Treasury Dept. (Office of Foreign Asset Control), Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), Muslim American Society (MSA), United States Counterinsurgency Manual FM 3-24, US Justice Dept. report - 2004, US Justice Dept. report - 2007, abeds, North American Islamic Trust, Islamic Council for North America, United Association for Studies and Research, Muslim American Youth Association, the Hamas Charter, Islamic Academy of Florida, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, American Youth Academy, New Horizons Schools, Islamic American University, DawaNet-to link • to serve: Home with sections entitled "How to Make America an Islamic Nation" and Da'wa in Public Schools, Excelsior Elementary School, Thomas Moore Law Center, Islamic Saudi Academy, "The Islam Project" by the Council on Islamic Education, the Arab World History Notebook, "Across the Centuries", California Academy of Sciences, "World Cultures : A Global Mosaic", American Textbook Council, "Islam and the Textbooks", Arab American Family Support Center (AAFSC), Mosque of Islamic Brotherhood's Boy Scout program (MIB), Americans Against Hate, CAIR Watch, the Young Muslims, Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Jamaat-e-Islami, Young Muslim Sisters (YMS), Middle East Media Research Institute, US Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), Freedom House, Institute for Gulf Affairs, Palestinian Media Watch, "Contemporary Problems", "History of the Arabs and the World in the 20th Century", Reading and Text Part II, Association of Independent Schools, ISA accreditation, Center for Religious Freedom, Hizb ut-Tahrir al-Islami, Islamic Party of Liberation, Al-Aksa TV of Hamas, Hudson institute, Popular Resistance Committee, "Schmoozing With Terrorists", US House of Representitives, Abu Dhabi Investment Authority, "Eurabia, the Euro-Arab Axis", European Union, the Arab League,"Foreign Affairs" - "Europe's Angry Muslims", Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), Sharee Council of Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, Immigration and National Security Program at the Nixon Center, Sukuk, Sharia compliant banks, Saxony-Anhalt, piggy banks in England, foot washing basins (Kansas City Airport & University of Michigan), "Britain's Daily Mail" - "Multiculturalsim Drives Young Muslims to Shun British Values", Nationa Intelligence Council, www.islamonline.net, "Valeurs Actuelles", the triple border region, UN Security Council, House Homeland Security Committee subcommittee on investigations report : "A Line In the Sand: Confronting the Threat At the Southwest Border", OTMs, Jamaat ul-Fuqra, Muslims of the Americas, the FBI, Canadian Security Intelligence Service, "TD Monthly", halal chicken, ACLU, the Date Frappuccino, Open Society Foundation, Whiting Foundation, hijab, Transportation & Safety Admin. (TSA), "New Media Journal" report - "In the Belly of the Beast: Jamaat ul-Fuqra, Jamaat ul-Fuqra mosque (Brooklyn, NY), Koran: 4:34, honor killings, the Alec file, Jamiyyat Ul-Islam, It's the Ideology Stupid,Tad-ru-bu-hu-nna, Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, UN Children's Fund, the Population Council - 2003 survey, m'uta, Haratines, Janjaweed, Dinka tribe, "Escape From Slavery", Toronto Sun online - "Slavery Lives in the Sudan", Middle East Forum - "The Problem with Slavery", Saudi Arabia Senior Council of Clerics, Human Rights Watch, Middle East Forum, Copts, Baha'i sect of Islam, "Islam : From Toleration to Terror", Hizb ut-Tahrir, Jyllands-Posten, "The Sum of All Fears", University of South Florida, Palistinian Islamic Jihad, "Future Jihad", Mosque Census Project, Eid al-Adha, Shahada, Mahram, FBI's Arab/Muslim Sikh American Advisory Committee, Higgins Center for Counterterrorism Research, Jamaat e-Islami, Samah, Tarbiya, Dar al-Arqam, SWICK, Policy-net

 

File a formal complaint. I saw exactly what you were were doing to OJLeb, and the fact that you knew exactly who I was talking about indicates you too know exactly what I am talking about.

File all the complaints you want. It in no way shape or form makes your arguement stronger, nor do I appear scared in the slightest do I?

Bullying Muslims AND Christians is perhaps not the best past time on a internet forum is it?

Oh the, it just is appeal - the duh! are you stupid?

The topic is still being discussed is it not? Limited SPAM so other posters can actually debate a subject is not a limit on free speech, it just forces him to debate the subject rather than continuously SPAM the forum with stories of crime in somewhere amongst a billion people.

What exactly is the debate? How does that address the points made in rebuttal? It doesn't does it?

Now remember that this is a privately owned forum, and your excuse of free speech DUH, is limited already by the forum rules. Hate speech is specifically barred, and at some point maligning someone simply because of his faith choice is just that.

IT ALREADY VIOLATES THE FORUM RULES SLICK!!!!!

Oh, you are now an intelligence officer in the US Military are you? You actually walk patrols out there and can delineate between extremists and moderates?

Lets see below:

Lets see, other than a random web site obvioulsy written by apologists for bigots, do you have an intelligence file or legal packet on any of these guys?

Nope.

Now, how many Muslims are there? OVER A BILLION. How many Muslims are member of Al Qaeda?

"Al Qaeda was probably never more that a couple of hundred men."

http://articles.latimes.com/2005/jul/17/opinion/op-burningquestion17

So, how many member of the KKK are there in America?

Hmmm ... most estimates place them between 5-8,000 out of a population of ONLY 300 million. They of course, have their own chruch, the Church of Jesus Christ Christian, and proportionally make up a higher percentage of the population of America than does Al Qaeda the Islamic population.

Therefore, by your logic, there is a stealth White Supremacy movement in America and we should kill all Americans.

Math is not a strong suit for bigots is it?

Not too mention, I am glad some article that just has to list names (like a McArthy Era Black List) is better evidence for you then the word of guys who have actually hunted these jerk holes down. SOmeo guy who has done nothing, never been around Muslims, has no evidence, and just a black list and an anger mangement problem is a good source ... for conspiracy.

Feel free to report me now. Make it all formal like and what not.

 

Neutral you are upset about what you perceive as rules being broken but break them by making personal attacks. What gives?

 

So, let me get this straight ...

Calling someone an apologist for Islam and an excuser for terrorism is fine.

Calling someone an apologist for bigotry is an insult?

It is a simple statement that is repeatedly avoided. There is a point at which these things cross the lines of disagreement and become something else.

Is the KKK correct in its white superiority? Would it be right to start 500 threads declaring the criminality of black people to be disproportionate thus proving that whites are the superior race?

Or would it be acurate to call such antics bigotry?

Would it be right to follow around and harass a black man because, obviously like above, he is clearly a criminal?

Or would it be accurate to call such antics bigotry?

The simple fact of the matter is that there are indeed extremists in Islam, just as there is in Christianity (IRA, RIght Wing Columbian Malitias), Juddaism (Extremist Settlers), Atheists (17 NOV), and on and on and on. Nobody is making the case that the Naxalite Insurgency in India is representative of the entirety of the Hindu people. Nor are they scowering the AP for any story involving crime in India to lampoon Hindu's around the world.

And what exactly do you think the Muslims think when they come to a forum where they see not discussion of violence within Islam (violence that is killing far more Muslims than any one else - a fact they are very much aware of) but 500+ that dominate entire sections of open debate, and see the repeatedly dismissal of all moderate views of Islam - and their adherents followed around and harassed on the forum?

But you do not want me to call someone engaged in this a bigot? Or even imply that that it is bigotry driving this? What would you do if someone started quoting Mein Kampf to justify intolerance of Jews? Is it a personal insult to call that an arguement stooped in bigotry?

How many times has the 'Stealth Jihad' been dumped out as 'proof' when the reality is that it is written by a known, and extreme, Islamophobe?

http://www.blessedislam.com/islamophobia/stealth-jihad-the-new-deceptive-term/

How many times do you those of us who hunt down the extremists for a living, who spend hours, weeks, and months building relations with the moderate Muslims the world over, only to see our hard work and honorable partnerships undermined by a group of fear mongering morons who know nothing about Islam, it adherents, or its practices?

Its nice to be patted on the head and told to 'do research', and then watch the same poster blast the Sura's provided by Muslims in order to call him a closet terrorist lead by a pedophile.

But do not in any way call this behavior bigotry? That would make it a personal insult?

There is no reasoning with the unreasonable, and I see know reason whatsoever to couch the phrases used against extremists who have no intent to atually back up their claims and are simply SPAMMING the forum with scoped, non-contextualized presentations of criminality.

This type of behavior has only one end. When it was done to the Jews? When it is done to homosexuals? When it is done to Hazara in Afghanistan? Armenians in Turkey?

I'd be happy to debate it, but I see no actual debate on the subject - indeed, I can easily demonstrate the horrific absurdities of the extremist Islamophobes - as have the Muslims on this forum - to no effect, as the SPAMMERS just keep dumping one description of after another and impune all of Islam over, and over, and over again.

It is a debate forum. I do not see any actual debating taking place referrence Islam. I see a lot of people who are generalizing, sterotyping, and making very spurious connections to support untenable positions regarding a very diverse faith, with hundreds of millions of honorable adherents.

And here we can have this discussion on one thread ... rather than 500+.

So we are clear on what is happening in the forum:

Lets be clear, Protectionist went out of his way to follow OJ into the religion section to continue making statements (several) like the one above, and the second was a response to me.

Oh really? A US Military officer and combat veteran should be investigated by counter-terrorism officials and obviously supports Hamas and Hezbollah ... because I pointed out to him that Muslims, in the Koran, did indeed use violence ... when the Pagans rode out to kill every last one of them and hey defended themselves and did what was necessary - a context that is fully understood by Muslims, but inidcates that I support terrorism to ... a bigot. The fact that I actually hunt down the extremists? Lost in the accusation.

That is the reality of what is happening on the forum and from a poster who has said 'he has not taken a side'. Calling people terrorists is not a valid form of debate, it is a simple excuse for bigotry. It is both a personal attack, an unfounded accusation of criminal conduct, and, quite frankly, hate speech.

Funny, these accusations are 'free speech' but we cannot allow a Muslim in a debate forum to get in a word edge wise? Gotta block his speech or otherwise drown it out?

 

Against hating Semites and against Islamophobia? Feel free to provide evidence of such with any given opportunity, such as here in this thread where one could explain why 500+ threads of Islamophobia are supposed to be pro-Semite. How is the act of smearing Arab Semites with unconditional racist hatred supposed to be beneficial to Israeli Semites when such racism is commonly waved under the banner of Israel? Such could explain:

http://www.politicalforum.com/latest-world-news/219784-praise-arab-spring-except-anti-semitism.html

Hmmm.... so 500+ threads are posted to condemn mainly Arab Semites on "behalf" of Israeli Jews, and then one is supposed to be concerned that the hated Semites might be hating the Semites, many of which generally seem to be smearing them with racist hatred. Which hatred is better or worse if not both are unacceptable, considering that one is against the hatred of Semites?

Feel free to express criticism of islamophobia

 

Yes, and they are often hate crimes and politically motivated in the case of anti-civil rights types. It is often terrorism. You deny this?

_