No. of Recommendations: 27
http://hotair.com/archives/2013/04/21/msnbc-host-explains-ou...

Making the point that the Tsarnaev brothers’ Muslim faith at the moment bears little relevance to the investigation into the brothers’ decision to attack the Boston Marathon last week, MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry observed that Tsarnaev’s faith is about as relevant to the investigation right now as are Ben Affleck movies about violent events in Boston. Her panel guests agreed, and said that Americans have to “otherize” violent actors in order to absolve themselves from responsibility for or connection to their violence.
------------------------------------------------
She's got a point, radical islamists are rarely influenced by, er, religion.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
“Given that they’re Chechen, given that they are literally Caucasian, our very sense of connection to them is this framed up notion of, like, Islam making them into something that is non-[unintelligible],” Harris-Perry continued.

From the same show, I think.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
She's got a point, radical islamists are rarely influenced by, er, religion.

It's stupid to say that the religion of Islam has nothing to do with Islamist terrorism.

But then people say that about the religion of Christianity whenever Christian terrorists, like Eric Randolph and Wade Page, kill people. Their religion and how it inspires their heinous actions rarely even comes up.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
But then people say that about the religion of Christianity whenever Christian terrorists, like Eric Randolph and Wade Page, kill people.

Christian extremists = 2

Muslim extremists = too many to provide an accurate count
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Christian extremists = 2



Those two must have been working awfully hard to kill so many people in Ireland a few years back.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 23
It's amazing the lengths to which libtards will go to defend Muslim extremists.

Al-Qaeda's stated aim is the use of jihad to defend and protect Islam against Zionism, Christianity, Hinduism, the secular West, and Muslim governments such as Saudi Arabia, which it sees as insufficiently Islamic and too closely tied to the United States. Formed by Osama bin Laden and Muhammad Atef in the aftermath of the Soviet war in Afghanistan in the late 1980s, al-Qaeda called for the use of violence against civilians and military of the United States and any countries that are allied with it.

North America

Canada

According to recent government statements Islamic terrorism is the biggest threat to Canada.[99] The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) reported that terrorist radicalization at home is now the chief preoccupation of Canada's spy agency. The most notorious arrest in Canada's fight on terrorism, was the 2006 Ontario terrorism plot in which 18 Al-Qaeda cell members were arrested for planning a mass bombing, shooting, and hostage taking terror plot throughout Southern Ontario. There have also been other arrests mostly in Ontario involving terror plots.

United States

Between 1993 and 2001, the major attacks or attempts against US interests stemmed from militant Islamic jihad except for the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. In 2001 nearly 3,000 people were killed in the massive September 11 attacks organised by al-Qaeda and largely perpetrated by Saudi nationals, sparking the War on Terror. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden considers homegrown terrorism to be the most dangerous threat and concern faced by American citizens today. As of July 2011, there have been 51 homegrown jihadist plots or attacks in the United States since the September 11 attacks.

Europe

Major lethal attacks on civilians in Europe credited to Islamist terrorism include the 1985 El Descanso bombing in Madrid, the 1995 Paris Metro bombings, 11 March 2004 bombings of commuter trains in Madrid, where 191 people were killed, and the 7 July 2005 London bombings, also of public transport, which killed 52 commuters. According to EU Terrorism Report, however, there were almost 500 acts of terrorism across the European Union in 2006, but only one, the foiled suitcase bomb plot in Germany, was related to Islamist terror. In 2009, a Europol report also showed that more than 99% of terrorist attacks in Europe over the last three years were, in fact, carried out by non-Muslims. In terms of arrests, out of a total of 1,009 arrested terror suspects in 2008, 187 of them were arrested in relation to Islamist terrorism. The report also showed that the majority of Islamist terror suspects were not first generation immigrants, but were rather children of immigrants who no longer identified with the culture of their parents and at the same time felt excluded from Western society, "which still perceives them as foreigners," thus they became "more attracted to the idea of becoming ‘citizens’ of the virtual worldwide Islamic community, removed from territory and national culture."

Eurasia

Russia

Politically and religiously motivated attacks on civilians in Russia have been traced to separatist sentiment among the largely Muslim population of its North Caucasus region, particularly in Chechnya, where the central government of the Russian Federation has waged two bloody wars against the local secular separatist government since 1994. In the Moscow theater hostage crisis in October 2002, three Chechen separatist groups took an estimated 850 people hostage in the Russian capital; at least 129 hostages died during the storming by Russian special forces, all but one killed by the chemicals used to subdue the attackers (whether this attack would more properly be called a nationalist rather than an Islamist attack is in question). In the September 2004 Beslan school hostage crisis more than 1,000 people were taken hostage after a school in the Russian republic of North Ossetia–Alania was seized by a pro-Chechen multiethnic group aligned to Riyad-us Saliheen Brigade of Martyrs; hundreds of people died during the storming by Russian forces.

Since 2000, Russia has also experienced a string of suicide bombings that killed hundreds of people in the Caucasian republics of Chechnya, Dagestan and Ingushetia, as well as in Russia proper including Moscow. Responsibility for most of these attacks were claimed by either Shamil Basayev's Islamic-nationalist rebel faction or, later, by Dokka Umarov's pan-Islamist movement Caucasus Emirate which is aiming to unite most of Russia's North Caucasus as an emirate since its creation in 2007. In 2011, the U.S. Department of State included the Caucasus Emirate on its list of terrorist organisations.

Turkey

Hezbollah in Turkey (unrelated to the Shia Hezbollah in Lebanon) is a Kurdish Sunni terrorist group accused of a series of attacks, including the November 2003 bombings of two synagogues, the British consulate in Istanbul and HSBC bank headquarters that killed 58. Hizbullah's leader, Hüseyin Velioglu, was killed in action by Turkish police in Beykoz on 17 January 2000. Besides Hizbullah, other Islamic groups listed as a terrorist organization by Turkish police counter-terrorism include Great Eastern Islamic Raiders' Front, al-Qaeda in Turkey, Tevhid-Selam (also known as al-Quds Army) and Caliphate State. Islamic Party of Kurdistan and Hereketa Islamiya Kurdistan are also Kurdish Islamist groups active against Turkey, however unlike Kurdish Hizbullah they're yet to be listed as active terrorist organizations in Turkey by Turkish police counter-terrorism.

Middle East / Southwest Asia

The area that has seen some of the worst terror attacks in modern history has been Iraq as part of the Iraq War. In 2005, there were 400 incidents of one type of attack (suicide bombing), killing more than 2,000 people – many if not most of them civilians. In 2006, almost half of all reported terrorist attacks in the world (6,600), and more than half of all terrorist fatalities (13,000), occurred in Iraq, according to the National Counterterrorism Center of the United States. Along with nationalist groups and criminal, non-political attacks, the Iraqi insurgency includes Islamist insurgent groups, such as Al-Qaeda in Iraq, who favor suicide attacks far more than non-Islamist groups. At least some of the terrorism has a transnational character in that some foreign Islamic jihadists have joined the insurgency.

Israel and the Palestinian territories

Hamas ("zeal" in Arabic and an acronym for Harakat al-Muqawama al-Islamiyya) began support for attacks on military and civilian targets in Israel at the beginning of the First Intifada in 1987. The 1988 charter of Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel, and remains in effect today. Its "military wing" has claimed responsibility for numerous attacks in Israel, principally suicide bombings and rocket attacks. Hamas has also been accused of sabotaging the Israeli-Palestine peace process by launching attacks on civilians during Israeli elections to anger Israeli voters and facilitate the election of harder-line Israeli candidates. Hamas has been designated as a terrorist group by the European Union, Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Israel, Australia, Japan, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and Human Rights Watch. It is banned in Jordan. During the second intifada (September 2000 through August 2005) 39.9 percent of the suicide attacks were carried out by Hamas. The first Hamas suicide attack was the Mehola Junction bombing in 1993. Although Hamas justifies these attacks as necessary in fighting the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory, the attacks continue despite the 2005 Israeli withdrawal from Hamas controlled territory and Hamas still states its goal to be the elimination of Israel. The wider Hamas movement also serves as a charity organization and provides services to Palestinians.

Islamic Jihad Movement in Palestine is a Palestinian Islamist group based in the Syrian capital, Damascus, and dedicated to waging jihad to eliminate the state of Israel. It was formed by Egyptian Fathi Shaqaqi in the Gaza Strip following the Iranian Revolution which inspired its members. From 1983 onward, it engaged in "a succession of violent, high-profile attacks" on Israeli targets. The intifada which "it eventually sparked" was quickly taken over by the much larger Palestine Liberation Organization and Hamas. Beginning in September 2000, it started a campaign of suicide bombing attacks against Israeli civilians. The PIJ's armed wing, the Al-Quds brigades, has claimed responsibility for numerous militant attacks in Israel, including suicide bombings. The group has been designated as a terrorist organization by several Western countries.

Lebanon

Fatah al-Islam is an Islamist group operating out of the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp in northern Lebanon. It was formed in November 2006 by fighters who broke off from the pro-Syrian Fatah al-Intifada, itself a splinter group of the Palestinian Fatah movement, and is led by a Palestinian fugitive militant named Shaker al-Abssi. The group's members have been described as militant jihadists, and the group itself has been described as a terrorist movement that draws inspiration from al-Qaeda. Its stated goal is to reform the Palestinian refugee camps under Islamic sharia law,[155] and its primary targets are the Lebanese authorities, Israel and the United States.

Algeria

The Armed Islamic Group, active in Algeria between 1992 and 1998, was one of the most violent Islamic terrorist groups, and is thought to have takfired the Muslim population of Algeria. Its campaign to overthrow the Algerian government included civilian massacres, sometimes wiping out entire villages in its area of operation. It also targeted foreigners living in Algeria, killing more than 100 expatriates in the country. In recent years it has been eclipsed by a splinter group, the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC), now called Al-Qaeda Organization in the Islamic Maghreb.

Afghanistan

According to Human Rights Watch, Taliban and Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin forces have "sharply escalated bombing and other attacks" against civilians since 2006. In 2006, "at least 669 Afghan civilians were killed in at least 350 armed attacks, most of which appear to have been intentionally launched at civilians or civilian objects."

Tajikistan

The government blamed the IMU (Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan) for training those responsible for carrying out a suicide car bombing of a police station in Khujand on September 3, 2010. Two policemen were killed and 25 injured.

Uzbekistan

On February 16, 1999, six car bombs exploded in Tashkent, killing 16 and injuring more than 100, in what may have been an attempt to assassinate President Islam Karimov. The IMU was blamed.

The IMU launched a series of attacks in Tashkent and Bukhara in March and April 2004. Gunmen and female suicide bombers took part in the attacks, which mainly targeted police. The violence killed 33 militants, 10 policemen, and four civilians. The government blamed Hizb ut-Tahrir, though the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU) claimed responsibility.

Furkat Kasimovich Yusupov was arrested in the first half of 2004, and charged as the leader of a group that had carried out the March 28 bombing on behalf of Hizb ut-Tahrir.

On July 30, 2004, suicide bombers struck the entrances of the US and Israeli embassies in Tashkent. Two Uzbek security guards were killed in both bombings. The IJU again claimed responsibility.

Foreign commentators on Uzbek affairs speculated that the 2004 violence could have been the work of the IMU, Al-Qaeda, Hizb ut-Tahrir, or some other radical Islamic organization.

Bangladesh

In Bangladesh the group Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen Bangladesh was formed sometime in 1998 and gained prominence in 2001. The organization was officially banned in February 2005 after attacks on NGOs, but struck back in August when 300 bombs were detonated almost simultaneously throughout Bangladesh, targeting Shahjalal International Airport, government buildings and major hotels.

India

Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed are militant groups seeking accession of Kashmir to Pakistan. Comments made by several Pakistani religious clerics in public gatherings about ISI included 'ISI's role towards India is to continuously bleed India through a thousand cuts'. The Lashkar leadership describes Indian and Israeli regimes as the main enemies of Islam and Pakistan. Lashkar-e-Toiba, along with Jaish-e-Mohammed, another militant group active in Kashmir are on the United States’ foreign terrorist organizations list, and are also designated as terrorist groups by the United Kingdom, India, Australia and Pakistan. Jaish-e-Mohammed was formed in 1994 and has carried out a series of attacks all over India. The group was formed after the supporters of Maulana Masood Azhar split from another Islamic militant organization, Harkat-ul-Mujahideen. Jaish-e-Mohammed is viewed by some as the "deadliest" and "the principal terrorist organization in Jammu and Kashmir". The group was also implicated in the kidnapping and murder of American journalist Daniel Pearl.

The Philippines

The Abu Sayyaf Group, also known as al-Harakat al-Islamiyya, is one of several militant Islamic-separatist groups based in and around the southern islands of the Philippines, in Bangsamoro (Jolo, Basilan, and Mindanao) where for almost 30 years various Muslim groups have been engaged in an insurgency for a state, independent of the predominantly Christian Philippines. Since its inception in the early 1990s, the group has carried out bombings, assassinations, kidnappings and extortion in their fight for an independent Islamic state in western Mindanao and the Sulu Archipelago with the stated goal of creating a pan-Islamic superstate across southeast Asia, spanning from east to west; the island of Mindanao, the Sulu Archipelago, the island of Borneo (Malaysia, Indonesia), the South China Sea, and the Malay Peninsula (Peninsular Malaysia, Thailand and Myanmar). The U.S. Department of State has branded the group a terrorist entity by adding it to the list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations.

Suicide attacks

An increasingly popular tactic used by terrorists is suicide bombing. This tactic is used against civilians, soldiers, and government officials of the regimes the terrorists oppose. The use of suicide bombers is seen by many Muslims as contradictory to Islam's teachings; however, groups who support its use often refer to such attacks as "martyrdom operations" and the suicide-bombers who commit them as "martyrs" (Arabic: shuhada, plural of "shahid"). The bombers, and their sympathizers often believe that suicide bombers, as martyrs (shaheed) to the cause of jihad against the enemy, will receive the rewards of paradise for their actions.

Hijackings

Islamic terrorism sometimes employs the hijacking of passenger vehicles. The most famous were the "9/11" attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people on a single day in 2001, effectively ending the era of aircraft hijacking.

Kidnappings and executions

Along with bombings and hijackings, Islamic terrorists have made extensive use of highly publicised kidnappings and executions, often circulating videos of the acts for use as propaganda. A frequent form of execution by these groups is decapitation, another is shooting. In the 1980s, a series of abductions of American citizens by Hezbollah during the Lebanese Civil War resulted in the 1986 Iran–Contra affair. During the chaos of the Iraq War, more than 200 kidnappings foreign hostages (for various reasons and by various groups, including purely criminal) gained great international notoriety, even as the great majority (thousands) of victims were Iraqis.

****

Yet FeedMeCrap can't bring himself to call evil what it is--proof that liberalism is a mental disorder.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Why do libtards love and defend radical Muslims? What is it in their DNA that compels them to do that while hating and despising Christianity?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Why do libtards love and defend radical Muslims? What is it in their DNA that compels them to do that while hating and despising Christianity?
_____________________________________

Muslims are likely to vote Democratic.

Christians are the biggest impediment to the liberal agenda.

Now where's that easy button?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
It's stupid to say that the religion of Islam has nothing to do with Islamist terrorism.

But then people say that about the religion of Christianity whenever Christian terrorists, like Eric Randolph and Wade Page, kill people. Their religion and how it inspires their heinous actions rarely even comes up.
__________________________

You seem to have this everlasting liberal need to make sure people know that the bad white Christians equate to a few bad apples in Islam.

Wade Page was a white supremacist, that hated virtually anyone that wasn't a white supremacist. A new-age Neo-Nazi, his band sang lyrics that would have even some ardent racists blushing.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/07/us/army-veteran-identified...

Eric Randolph? Again, this Church of Israel dude was aligned against Jew, government, and the usual lash out against control guys.


It's certainly nothing new to have hate groups that are involved with killings, or even more organized terrorist attacks. Religiously motivated? I think one of the only links would be those that use abortion as their motivator, or their hatred of Jews. But they generally hate blacks, gays, and a ton of other people not in their clans. They are primarily militant racists that use terrorism sometimes as a means of lashing out.


"It's stupid to say that the religion of Islam has nothing to do with Islamist terrorism.
"
Duh.

Especially when you have terrorists quoting the Quran during their hate videos, or after attacks. It's highly prevalent, and has been for quite some time. Decades in fact. To try and equate white supremacist attacks and Christianity is not only a stretch, it's sheer stupidity. But like many liberals, you try so very hard to do this.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It's amazing the lengths to which libtards will go to defend Muslim extremists.
======================================================================


It's amazing you think liberals defend Muslim extremists. I have yet to read anything which says the terrorists had a point, and yes they should have set off those bombs.

Charlie
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Obama Doubles Aid to Muslim Brotherhood-Dominated Rebels in Syria

Read more: http://joemiller.us/2013/04/us-doubles-aid-to-syrian-rebels-...

Christians R Terorists:

Members of Congress have expressed astonishment that the U.S. Army Reserve would use a training brief that slams Catholics, evangelical Christians and others and are demanding the practice come to a halt – now.

“Our nation needs to have an honest conversation about religious extremism and what we can do to avoid religious violence. However, labeling these major world religions as extremists is wrong and hurtful,” said a letter by Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., that was signed by dozens of other members.

It was addressed to Army Secretary John. M . McHugh at the Pentagon.

“We call on you to rescind this briefing and set the record straight on the Army’s view on these faith groups by providing a balanced briefing on religious extremism,” the letter said.

The letter was prompted by reports that


soldiers were taught that evangelical Christians are an extremist threat to America along with groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, KKK, Nation of Islam, al-Qaida and Hamas."


Read more: http://joemiller.us/2013/04/congress-astonished-by-military-...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 17
It's amazing you think liberals defend Muslim extremists. I have yet to read anything which says the terrorists had a point, and yes they should have set off those bombs.
_______________________________________

You defend them in denying they are the most likely group to set off a bomb.

You defend them in refusing to call them terrorists

You defend them in making false and absurd claims of equivalence between them and folks of other religions.

The list goes on on quite long.

But if you make your definition narrow enough and create a very specific scenario and ignore all other reality, you can defend liberalism

This is typical of issue after issue for liberal defenses. It is kind of lame.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
It's stupid to say that the religion of Islam has nothing to do with Islamist terrorism.

But then people say that about the religion of Christianity whenever Christian terrorists, like Eric Randolph and Wade Page, kill people. Their religion and how it inspires their heinous actions rarely even comes up.
__________________________

You seem to have this everlasting liberal need to make sure people know that the bad white Christians equate to a few bad apples in Islam.


That's not my point or purpose at all.

Instead, it's that when radical Islamists commit terrorism, we tend to emphasize the Islamic part. With radical Christian terrorists, we emphasize the radical part and almost completely ignore their religion.

There are two obvious reasons for this: (1) radical Islamist terrorists at present are far more numerous and better organized, i.e. their "movement" is much bigger and "effective" and (2) since our culture is predominantly Christian, we deny that Christianity has anything to do with Christian terrorism. It makes us very uncomfortable to think there's any connection at all.

So instead, we say Christian terrorists are motivated by something else, which is partially true. But it's also true of Islamic terrorists. We say that Christian terrorists have a twisted, distorted view of Christianity. But you could say the same thing about Islamic terrorists.

It's significant to note that most Islamic terrorism has its roots in secular, nationalist or "tribal" politics: Palestinian independence, Chechen independence, Pakistan v. India antipathy, various Southeast Asian political movements, etc. A huge exception to this are domestic political movements opposed to some kind of dictatorship, such as in Egypt, where the only barely-tolerated expression of political dissent and anti-government organization could take place in the mosque.

Those political movements are transformed into religious wars because for most people "God" is a much better motivator than some fuzzy notion of "country." "God is on our side" is also a much better recruiting slogan and excuse for killing people. This "twisting" of religion is almost entirely unnecessary in Western nations and cultures, where politics and religion are kept at arms length and there are plenty of other avenues for political expression.

In the U.S., those seeking political change and those with religious or tribal motivation for violence against others have political channels through which to express themselves, such as the the Republican Party and the U.S. military. We see the religious motivation of nominally secular actors peek through occasionally, such as when anti-abortion activists speak in explicitly religious terms and when some in the military describe the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as crusades or holy wars. That we go to considerable lengths to deny any religious motivation for those wars suggests that underneath, such a motivation exists for many.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Muslims are likely to vote Democratic.

Why?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
It's amazing the lengths to which libtards will go to defend Muslim extremists.

Can you cite an example of any libtards defending Muslim extremists?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Muslims are likely to vote Democratic.

Why?
__________________

There may be multiple reasons, from slack immigration policy with no enforcement to a massive welfare state and cities like Detroit. They learned their lesson of the value of the welfare state in Europe.

However, the most obvious is the very deep distrust of Christians and the Republicans being linked with Christians.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Muslims are likely to vote Democratic.

That's a relatively recent development.

A post-election poll released by CAIR...indicated that in a national survey of more than 650 American Muslim voters, 7 percent identified as Republicans, and only 4 percent voted for Romney. By contrast, in 2000, the American Muslim Political Coordination Counsel endorsed the Republican ticket and over 70 percent of Muslims voted for George W. Bush.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/12/muslim-americans-ple...

Muslims used to vote Republican because the GOP is more socially conservative and in line with Muslim attitudes towards women and homosexuals. Also, Republicans used to be much harder on Israel than Democrats. George H.W. Bush and Secretary of State, James "F**k the Jews" Baker threatened to cut off U.S. aid to Israel if they didn't stop building West Bank settlements. American Muslims liked that.

All that changed when Republican policy towards Israel was taken over by pro-Israel neocons and apocalyptic Christians, and after 9-11 when many in the GOP became openly hostile towards Muslim Americans.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
There may be multiple reasons, from slack immigration policy with no enforcement to a massive welfare state and cities like Detroit. They learned their lesson of the value of the welfare state in Europe.

However, the most obvious is the very deep distrust of Christians and the Republicans being linked with Christians.


Completely and totally wrong, as usual. Almost exactly backwards.

See: http://boards.fool.com/muslims-are-likely-to-vote-democratic...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
First, you lie!

Second, your source is not credible.

Hi mirror.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I think it's fair to say that the democrat party is the party of spreading other people's wealth and giving free $hit to those who can and should be working.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
First, you lie!

Second, your source is not credible.

Can you elaborate?

What's the lie? What information is inaccurate?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
I think it's fair to say that the democrat party is the party of spreading other people's wealth and giving free $hit to those who can and should be working.

Whether or not that's true, what does it have to do with why most American Muslims used to vote Republican (70% for Bush in 2000), but don't anymore (4% for Romney in 2012)?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Why do libtards love and defend radical Muslims? What is it in their DNA that compels them to do that while hating and despising Christianity?

There's a Biblical answer, of course, but the secular answer is that any doctrine that requires a librul to take a critical long look at him/herself is anathema. They are simply incapable of self-examination.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
That's not my point or purpose at all.

Instead, it's that when radical Islamists commit terrorism, we tend to emphasize the Islamic part. With radical Christian terrorists, we emphasize the radical part and almost completely ignore their religion.

There are two obvious reasons for this: (1) radical Islamist terrorists at present are far more numerous and better organized, i.e. their "movement" is much bigger and "effective" and (2) since our culture is predominantly Christian, we deny that Christianity has anything to do with Christian terrorism. It makes us very uncomfortable to think there's any connection at all.

So instead, we say Christian terrorists are motivated by something else, which is partially true. But it's also true of Islamic terrorists. We say that Christian terrorists have a twisted, distorted view of Christianity. But you could say the same thing about Islamic terrorists.
___________________________

You truly are an inspiration to those that desire to use diversion and pure Liberal BS as an argument against all forces of nature and truthiness.
I seriously doubt your recruiting drive for more Republican haters will be growing after this incident.

Let Bill explain it again.
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/04/47883-for-kira-maher-video/
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It's amazing you think liberals defend Muslim extremists. I have yet to read anything which says the terrorists had a point, and yes they should have set off those bombs.

I have yet to see a thread or post on PA that denounces the Boston Marathon bombings despite asking repeatedly for a librul to provide just one.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
since our culture is predominantly Christian, we deny that Christianity has anything to do with Christian terrorism. It makes us very uncomfortable to think there's any connection at all.

Show me one "Christian" extremist who has ever screamed "Jesus Christ!" as he perpetrated an atrocity. The most atrocious thing that cluster of nuts, Westboro Baptist Church, has ever done is insult our intelligence.

In the meantime, "Allahu Akbar!" is the last thing on an Islamic extremist's lips as he blows himself (and everyone around him) up.

By the way, I strongly and irrevocably denounce, thoroughly and unreservedly, every so called "Christian" extremist you could name.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Muslims are likely to vote Democratic.

Why?

This may provide some insight.

American Muslims voted overwhelmingly for Owebama

http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2008/11/07/islam-and-o...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
You truly are an inspiration to those that desire to use diversion and pure Liberal BS as an argument against all forces of nature and truthiness. I seriously doubt your recruiting drive for more Republican haters will be growing after this incident.

I understand that it's easier for you to attack me personally and mischaracterize my argument than it is to actually address it, but that really serves no useful purpose. It's not even interesting.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Can you cite an example of any libtards defending Muslim extremists?

Can you cite a single example of any libtards DENOUNCING Muslim extremists?

The exact same thing happened in Nazi Germany. The German people didn't exactly defend the Nazis, but they sat by with their arms folded across their collective chest when they KNEW--or strongly surmised--what was happening in the Nazi death camps.

What Did Most Germans Know About the Nazi Concentration Camp System?

This essay will not argue culpability or degree of culpability of different segments of the German population. However, based on the testimony of American soldiers who served in the European theater of operations during World War II, conclusions will be drawn concerning German knowledge of concentration camps.

A distinction should be made between concentration camps and death camps. It is perhaps legitimate to argue that some German civilians knew little about the death camps as they were not located on German soil and were constructed and operated with a degree of secrecy.

Konnilyn Feig (well-respected Holocaust author) thinks a great deal was known by a great many people. “Hitler exterminated the Jews of Europe. But he did not do so alone. The task was so enormous, complex, time-consuming, and mentally and economically demanding that it took the best efforts of millions of Germans…. All spheres of life in Germany actively participated."

"Businessmen, policemen, bankers, doctors, lawyers, soldiers, railroad and factory workers, chemists, pharmacists, foremen, production managers, economists, manufacturers, jewelers, diplomats, civil servants, propagandists, film makers and film stars, professors, teachers, politicians, mayors, party members, construction experts, art dealers, architects, landlords, janitors, truck drivers, clerks, industrialists, scientists, generals, and even shopkeepers—all were essential cogs in the machinery that accomplished the final solution.”

However, the same argument cannot be made with respect to concentration camps on German soil. Their construction, often close to major population centers, began just months after Hitler’s accession to power in 1933. In fact during the early years of Hitler’s regime, most concentration camp inmates were German or Austrian citizens and many of them served limited sentences before being released.

It begs believability to think that these individuals did not discuss their experience with family and close friends. German authorities knew they would talk. One of the functions of the camp system was to terrorize the local populace and motivate them to obedience. Fairly widespread public knowledge of the camps was necessary in order to produce a fearful, quiescent, more easily subdued population.

The first-hand experiences and reports of American GIs confirm that German civilians must have known about the camps.

http://phdast7.hubpages.com/hub/What-Did-Average-germans-Kno...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I have yet to see a thread or post on PA that denounces the Boston Marathon bombings despite asking repeatedly for a librul to provide just one.

I denounced it. That might have been here though.

Can you point to a thread or post on PA in which a conservative roundly denounced the Boston Marathon bombings? Or a post in which a liberal supports them? Or are you the only one who can assign pointless errands and then claim some kind of victory when no one complies?

Everyone on these boards condemns the bombings, explicitly or implicitly. Your insinuation that liberals for some reason support, condone or excuse it unfounded and ugly.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Show me one "Christian" extremist who has ever screamed "Jesus Christ!" as he perpetrated an atrocity.

Why? What would that prove or disprove?


The most atrocious thing that cluster of nuts, Westboro Baptist Church, has ever done is insult our intelligence.

That's not the worst thing they do, but anyway, interesting that you bring them up. Why do you think that the Tsarnaev brothers somehow represent Muslims, but the Westboro Church doesn't represent Christians?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Can you cite a single example of any libtards DENOUNCING Muslim extremists?
-----------------------------------------------------
Exactly. Just look at the PA posts that made it to Best Of after the terrorist attack, they weren't about the Marathon Bombing, they were about gun control. I guarantee if the bombers were Tea Party members, or even related to a Tea Party member the boards would of lit up with denounciations, and we would've been inundated with posts here about "Tea Baggers". To argue otherwise is ridiculous. It's very obvious they have muslim terrorist sympathies.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
This may provide some insight.

American Muslims voted overwhelmingly for Owebama.


And for Bush in 2000, but not in 2004. There's the key to finding some insight into motivation and concerns of American Muslim voters.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Can you cite an example of any libtards defending Muslim extremists?

Can you cite a single example of any libtards DENOUNCING Muslim extremists?


Yes, but I asked you first.

And you're the one making the claim.


The exact same thing happened in Nazi Germany.

No. That's daft. The U.S. is nothing like Nazi Germany. It's weird for you to even think that, let alone say it. It's the kind of thing crazy leftists say.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
It's very obvious they have muslim terrorist sympathies.

That'd be funny if it weren't such a despicable lie.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 12
I understand that it's easier for you to attack me personally and mischaracterize my argument than it is to actually address it, but that really serves no useful purpose. It's not even interesting.
______________________

You don't have an argument. The entire world's governments, not to mention (hopefully) our own, never spend 10 seconds worrying about your strawman arguments. That would include your favorite Socialist nations overseas too.

Let's break down your "comments".

You're continually equating the arguments that Islam has been feeding the terrorist movement as an equal to Christianity. Suffice it to say you think it's unfair that people continuously charge that Muslim terrorists are a huge problem, and Christians are not. Is that a fair assessment? If not, maybe you're attempting to infer that the world of Islam is not a problem because of their religion, but rather in spite of it? Or perhaps you're saying that terrorist activity on US soil is equally bad amongst Christian people than Muslims?

Please define your logic.


If you ask people around the world, or even Obama himself, what is the biggest problem.

1. Terrorist individuals or groups launching attacks in the name of Christ.

2. Terrorist individuals or groups launching attacks in the name of Allah.


In addition, review the track record of those Islamic nations. You can go from Africa to Asia to the Middle East. As a Democrat, you're pretty familiar with;

1. Violence against women
2. Human Rights
3. Peaceful nations
4. Diversity and tolerance
5. Religious freedom
6. Democracy versus dictatorships


I'll lay this out. There is no other group of individuals or countries that, taken as a whole, have violated every single tenet of the Democratic Party than Islam as a whole. There are no other groups or individuals, taken as a whole, or individually, that even remotely come close to launching terrorist strikes against those they don't like than Muslims. This goes back way before 911, and continues every day of the week.


Now when people's memories are refreshed after each such attack, they watch and listen to the liberal viewpoint. In almost every case, they listen to folks like you constantly retort that Christians have engaged in bombings, Christians have killed people. Then they look at the constant flow of news around the world, and wonder what the heck tour motivation really is. I think it's fair to say you're a nice guy, maybe it's fair to say most Democrats and Republicans are good Americans. We may have different views, but that's only the natural way of things.

I think we all know that to engage in religious bigotry is not the American way at all. I doubt many people would even mention their religion if not for their constant use of religion in motivating their constant attacks and threats. If a group of people continuously attacks you, makes threats against you, and their only single uniting factor is that they did it because of their religious beliefs, at what point do you listen to them? Maybe the news media has been withholding the names of Christian groups that have announced they will kill the Infidels in the name of Christ. Maybe I missed the news article where a country has stated that they will eventually exterminate another nation in the name of Christ.

So I have to ask again. How on earth do you even remotely equate them to us, or Them to Christianity on general? I'm not leaving you any wiggle room here, it's high time liberals got up on the stand and answered direct questions. No weasel words, no cries of Unfair, just state your reasoning no matter how silly or incredibly brilliant it might be.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I denounced it. That might have been here though.

Of course not at PA. They would have thought you, one of their librul buddies, strange.

I asked for one single thread or post from the PA cesspool that denounced Muslim extremists.

There ain't any.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
since our culture is predominantly Christian, we deny that Christianity has anything to do with Christian terrorism. It makes us very uncomfortable to think there's any connection at all.
______________________________

Actually when we had Christian terrorism the Christian bcklash was very strong and put an end to it. The abortion clinic bombing were widely accepted as being done by Christian nutters, and strongly disclaimed by everyone.

Now we have an occasional person who is nuts and Christian perform an act and a lot of dishonest liberals lying about it.

The attempt to distort and lie to make Islam seem less horrendous than it is in these affairs, aka the defense of Islam -- is rather disgusting IMO
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Why do you think that the Tsarnaev brothers somehow represent Muslims, but the Westboro Church doesn't represent Christians?

Because the VAST MAJORITY of Christians aren't like the Westboro nuts, and nearly every Christian of every denomination denounces the Westboro nuts (as I'm doing now), whereas a MAJORITY of Muslims (see list of terrorist activities around the world that I previously posted) who are like the Tsarnaevs OR who don't say a single word AGAINST the Tsarnaevs do represent Islam.

The other day a man had a table in front of Target where he extolled the benefits of Islam. Since this was after the Boston Marathon, I was shocked he had the nerve to set up such a table. I point blank asked him, "do you denounce the actions of the two brothers who planted bombs at the Boston Marathon?" I spent a few minutes engaging him. He went round and round like the music--just as you always do--but would not denounce their actions.

I rest my case and p-box you at the same time. Buh bye.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Why do you think that the Tsarnaev brothers somehow represent Muslims, but the Westboro Church doesn't represent Christians?

_________________________

I am curious, how do you think someone who believe that Obama is not represented by the very church he chooses to attend, can come up with these whack job analogies and think they are not an idiot?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I understand that it's easier for you to attack me personally and mischaracterize my argument than it is to actually address it, but that really serves no useful purpose. It's not even interesting.
______________________

You don't have an argument.


Of course I do. It's this: When Muslim radicals commit terrorism we tend to focus on the fact that they're Muslim and all Muslims are considered complicit or suspect. (See CC's most recent post. When Christian radicals commit terrorism we downplay or ignore their religious motivation and don't consider their religion or co-religionists complicit or suspect in any way.

More simply put: Muslim terrorists are thought to exemplify Muslims. Christian terrorsist are not thought to exemplify Christians.


You're continually equating the arguments that Islam has been feeding the terrorist movement as an equal to Christianity.

That's wrong. There's no equivalence. As I've said, Islamist terrorists are more numerous, better organized and more destructive at present. There are many political and cultural reasons for this that aren't intrinsic to Islam or Christianity. You premise is incorrect and the conclusions you draw from it are flawed so I'll refrain from discussing them further.


I think we all know that to engage in religious bigotry is not the American way at all.

I agree, which is why I'm appalled by CC's and 28's explicitly bigoted anti-Muslim statements.



So I have to ask again. How on earth do you even remotely equate them to us, or Them to Christianity on general?

Again, I don't. It's not an argument of equivalence. It's an argument of comparison and difference. When a member of X-group commits terrorism we blame all X. When a member of Y-group commits terrorism we don't blame all Y. There's no assumption that X = Y in every other respect. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I denounced it. That might have been here though.
---
Of course not at PA.


I'll denounce it here too (if I haven't already) if that'll make you happy for some reason.


They would have thought you, one of their librul buddies, strange.

No. You're being weird, wrapped up in your delusion that the people who post on PA are somehow supportive of terrorism. They're not. And it's both ridiculous and nasty of you to continue to imply that they are.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I agree, which is why I'm appalled by CC's and 28's explicitly bigoted anti-Muslim statements.
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't consider it bigoted to claim the you have muslim terrorist sympathies, seems obvious to me. Shouldn't you be handing out candy in your neighborhood?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
When Muslim radicals commit terrorism we tend to focus on the fact that they're Muslim and all Muslims are considered complicit or suspect. (See CC's most recent post.)

According to the Seattle Times, between 1993 and 2001, the major attacks or attempts against US interests stemmed from militant Islamic jihad except for the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. Former CIA Director Michael Hayden considers homegrown terrorism to be the most dangerous threat and concern faced by American citizens today. As of July 2011, there have been 51 homegrown jihadist plots or attacks in the United States since the September 11 attacks.

And we should let Muslims into the country because....?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'll denounce it here too (if I haven't already) if that'll make you happy for some reason.

Go to the TMF Political Asylum board and denounce Muslim extremism in the strongest terms you can possibly muster. Let us know what happens.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
And we should let Muslims into the country because....?
________________

IMO?

Because there are lots of sane ones, and they are badly persecuted. They are often educated and exactly what we should be looking at for citizens.

However, just because we allow them here -- we still have to keep a vigilant eye out, and those that did come from real persecution will understand that. I do not believe looking where you think, in fact know, trouble is most likely to grow is a bad idea or in any way wrong. Though I do agree it is important not to harass innocent Americans.

I personally desire us to have Muslim immigrants. I think there are people who can make America better that are Muslim. We just ahve to do twho things, be careful and stop this Mosaic garbage

We need to once again push we are a melting pot and put an end to liberal dogma that has no good result and has done nothing but divide the country.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Because the VAST MAJORITY of Christians aren't like the Westboro nuts, and nearly every Christian of every denomination denounces the Westboro nuts (as I'm doing now), whereas a MAJORITY of Muslims ... who are like the Tsarnaevs OR who don't say a single word AGAINST the Tsarnaevs do represent Islam.

That's untrue. It is true, however, that a much higher percentage of Muslims support or excuse terrorism than do Christians. Much of that has to do with definitions of terrorism and war, the distinction between killing innocent civilians with a bomb in a backpack versus a bomb dropped by an airplane, for example.


The other day a man had a table in front of Target where he extolled the benefits of Islam. Since this was after the Boston Marathon, I was shocked he had the nerve to set up such a table. I point blank asked him, "do you denounce the actions of the two brothers who planted bombs at the Boston Marathon?" I spent a few minutes engaging him. He went round and round like the music--just as you always do--but would not denounce their actions.

Three things.

First, anecdotes aren't arguments.

Second, you can get the same kind of equivocation or evasion from fundamentalist Christians with regard to abortion clinic bombings. It's less likely and they're more adept at it in an "of course I condemn it, but..." kind of way.

Third, I do denounce the Boston Marathon Bombers actions and all other acts of terrorism. You're suggestion that I don't is a despicable cheap shot for which you should apologize.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I agree, which is why I'm appalled by CC's and 28's explicitly bigoted anti-Muslim statements.
---------------------------------------------------------
I don't consider it bigoted to claim the you have muslim terrorist sympathies.


That's not what I was referring to. That claim is just an obnoxious lie.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Third, I do denounce the Boston Marathon Bombers actions and all other acts of terrorism. You're suggestion that I don't is a despicable cheap shot for which you should apologize.

You can go pound sand. You will NEVER hear an apology from me for the complete and utter absence of posts and threads at PA that specifically denounce Muslim terrorists and their despicable actions. You're the one who should be groveling on behalf of your librul Owebama sycophants.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Again, I don't. It's not an argument of equivalence. It's an argument of comparison and difference. When a member of X-group commits terrorism we blame all X. When a member of Y-group commits terrorism we don't blame all Y. There's no assumption that X = Y in every other respect. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument.
_________________________

I believe I do. I'm not a supporter of Christian fundamentalism, and I surely do not support any groups that are beyond nasty and/or violent. But they do not represent all Christians, many of whom are Democrats and Liberals. I'm sure you know that Boston is a very liberal city, and a ton of Christians live there.

Your argument is a moot point, based both on the facts concerning militant groups and countries, and the fact that there is no nation that has set up anti-terrorist organizations to stop Christian terrorist groups. We have anti-government groups, we have anti-abortion groups, both of whom have done some damage in attacks, but they are not widespread thankfully, nor are they large in number. Nor do they take up housekeeping on other countries with the desire to create harm.

These two men seemed to be OK, with the younger brother seemingly liked by most everyone he had come into contact with. The older brother apparently saw a steady decline when he became more focused on the extremist factions of Islam. Which is fine, it is his right. Unfortunately, the factions of militant extremist Islam are numerous and large. They span continents, and their trail of destruction and death are easy to follow. While this doesn't mean all Muslims are militant extremists, they certainly have the most militant people, and the largest number of militants in the world.

As I stated, entire nations are worried about them, including the ones that are frequently mentioned by Democrats as nations they wish America was more like. I can understand sympathizing with the people that have to endure suspicion and distrust because of their ethnicity. Unfortunately for them, the reputation of Terrorism in the name of Islam precedes them, and has for decades. I don;t really care what someone's religion is, nor their color, nor anything else. But I do care about entire nations that scream Death To The Infidels. That means you too, by the way.

Your going around and around in a circle, throwing out Christianity in the process, makes you look silly. The reason you cannot answer a very direct series of questions, means you are hiding behind politically correct, Liberal BS. I don;t know how many more bombings and terrorist attacks around the world and in this country we have to endure before you people stop engaging in the use of this type of BS after each attack. At some point, your views will change, as I suspect most of New Englands population's views have changed, if they hadn't already made up their minds.

Part of the problem in the future we have, is that the US and other country's intelligence and military communities have been largely successful at cutting off the heads of terrorist organizations. In doing this, we are no longer fighting just an obvious terrorist group like Al Queda, but we also have to defend against individuals and small groups of individuals that have taken up the torch. This not only makes it far harder to defend against terror, it makes it almost impossible (like this incident), to be able to keep tabs on those that might engage in such acts.

If you think we have a slightly larger problem now with these Muslim groups than Christian groups, and that Muslims are being unfairly targeted, then I certainly disagree. Unfortunately, you will be proven incorrect on a daily, weekly, monthly, and yearly basis, over and over again. This DOES NOT mean we need to randomly discriminate against Muslims and treat them like they generally treat their own citizens (especially women and people of other faiths), in their own nations. But it DOES mean our suspicions are correct, and your statements concerning Christian terrorists or terrorist groups are so far off the target as to be vapor.

This is not a political discussion, this is real life. There's far fewer people left that think these men would have carried out this atrocity if the older brother was a Mormon, or a Roman Catholic, or even an atheist. There's hardly a Democrat in existence impacted by this that hasn't cast aside the doubts they had about whether we had a fair argument or not.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
There's hardly a Democrat in existence impacted by this that hasn't cast aside the doubts they had about whether we had a fair argument or not.

I admire your fortitude in engaging with the irascible Felix, but there's NO ONE at the PA board who has yet indicated they've cast aside the doubts they may have had. Not one.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
And we should let Muslims into the country because....?
________________

IMO?

Because there are lots of sane ones, and they are badly persecuted. They are often educated and exactly what we should be looking at for citizens.
-----------------
Yeah, i'm not down with that. First of all they aren't going to tell you they're fanatics. Even if 1-5% of them are jihadist types, that's probably 95% higher than from non-terrorist countries. We don't have to import nutjobs. I would not be allowing immigration from countries with terrorist problems unless we were absolutely sure they were not jihadists or jihadist sympathizers. Remember those interviews after the London tube bombings, many muslims were OK with it, they might not have carried it out, but they sympathize. Why let people who might go off the deep end over a cartoon come here? I don't care how "smart" they are. You trust the FBI or whoever screens for this kind of thing to sift out the riff-raff? They didn't do too good with terrorist number 1 even after Russia alerted us to him and he posted a bunch of youtube videos about Jihad. I heard interviews with former FBI people, they were all, "you can't follow up with these guys, there's thousands of them and you can't scrutinize each one", basically making excuses. Europe is going to be in a heap of trouble in the next decade or so because of radical muslims, no need to repeat that here, we already are following them down the tax and spend rathole, no need to emulate everything they do wrong.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
It's amazing the lengths to which libtards will go to defend Muslim extremists.




Conservatives have more in common with Muslim extremists.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Yeah, i'm not down with that. First of all they aren't going to tell you they're fanatics. Even if 1-5% of them are jihadist types, that's probably 95% higher than from non-terrorist countries. We don't have to import nutjobs. I would not be allowing immigration from countries with terrorist problems unless we were absolutely sure they were not jihadists or jihadist sympathizers. Remember those interviews after the London tube bombings, many muslims were OK with it, they might not have carried it out, but they sympathize. Why let people who might go off the deep end over a cartoon come here? I don't care how "smart" they are. You trust the FBI or whoever screens for this kind of thing to sift out the riff-raff? They didn't do too good with terrorist number 1 even after Russia alerted us to him and he posted a bunch of youtube videos about Jihad. I heard interviews with former FBI people, they were all, "you can't follow up with these guys, there's thousands of them and you can't scrutinize each one", basically making excuses. Europe is going to be in a heap of trouble in the next decade or so because of radical muslims, no need to repeat that here, we already are following them down the tax and spend rathole, no need to emulate everything they do wrong.
______________________

I certainly understand.

I do not agree, unless we are going to shut down immigration for this reason all together, and I am OK with that. Not my suggestion, but I would not argue against it. IMO, We really are at a point where we should only be doing targeted immigration for specific needs. Once you become a welfare state that is pretty important

Open unskilled immigration, is insane at this point in time. Period. Muslim, no Muslim. Whatever, does not matter where we get immigrants from, it makes no sense, unless we are taking in skilled folks. If they are skilled, personally I am still fine with them being Muslims.

If we are going to keep taking huge groups of unskilled? I am guessing the gangs in East LA kill more than the gangs in Detroit's Muslim provinces. A couple of mass killings is just publicity.

Wherever we import them from, if we keep a big immigration load of unskilled folks in a time where the need for unskilled work is dropping off the edge, get Europe's immigration problem, the Muslims are more their South America than radical bombers.

But that's an immigration problem, not a Muslim problem IMO.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"But then people say that about the religion of Christianity whenever Christian terrorists, like Eric Randolph and Wade Page, kill people. Their religion and how it inspires their heinous actions rarely even comes up." - XLife
-------------


There aren't as many of us and we aren't as good at it as they are. They are light-years ahead of us when it comes to terrorism and convincing young men that blowing things up and ruining their lives is a good thing to do. Maybe we need to find some verses in the New Testament that say it's a one way ticket to Heaven?


Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I would not be allowing immigration from countries with terrorist problems unless we were absolutely sure they were not jihadists or jihadist sympathizers.

Preach it, brutha.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
"But then people say that about the religion of Christianity whenever Christian terrorists, like Eric Randolph and Wade Page, kill people. Their religion and how it inspires their heinous actions rarely even comes up." - XLife
-------------

Didn't bother looking into Eric Randolph

Wade Page was a friggin neo-Nazi White Supremacist. If he happened to be Christian is really kind of immaterial. It is pretty obvious what animated this nutjob's actions. It was not his Christianity.

It is important when dealing with Felix to recognize that his relationship with honesty is tenuous at best, his abuse of pieces of facts, and use of partial quotes is legendary. Being fair to Felix he is not significantly different from most of the progressives that troll here in that regard.

Half truths are the coin of the realm, and in this and most cases, half is being very generous
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"Instead, it's that when radical Islamists commit terrorism, we tend to emphasize the Islamic part. With radical Christian terrorists, we emphasize the radical part and almost completely ignore their religion." - xlife
-------------


Sigh! There are WAY MORE Islamic terrorists than "Christian Terrorists." Secondly have you taken a close look at Christian Terrorists? They are a bunch of Neandertals with I.Q.s of salad bars. It attracts low-life illiterate ner-do-wells. People who have failed at life.

Islamic terrorists are way more organized, they know how to use technology, they have backing using petro-dollars, and the Koran, has explicit verses that say that killing and torturing infidels is a wonderful thing to do, and if you do happen to get killed in the process it's a one way ticket to Paradise.

Can you not see the difference? Mainly though.... there are a whole lot more Islamic terrorists than so called Christian terrorists.

Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
"I agree, which is why I'm appalled by CC's and 28's explicitly bigoted anti-Muslim statements." - XLife


XLife please add me to your list of people who believe that Islam is a bad religion. I will never again consider Islam anything but a dangerous hate filled religion.

Normally when it comes to religion I am a "more the merrier" sort of person, but any interest or allure with Islam that I may have had is long since gone. I really fail to understand or see how they might think that I might be converted by vicious acts. All it does is drive a larger wedge between me and Islam.

Thank you, Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Why do you think that the Tsarnaev brothers somehow represent Muslims, but the Westboro Church doesn't represent Christians?

I have a counter question:

Why do you think that the Tsarnaev brothers somehow represent Muslims, but the Westboro Church doesn't represent democrats?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
Again, I don't. It's not an argument of equivalence. It's an argument of comparison and difference. When a member of X-group commits terrorism we blame all X. When a member of Y-group commits terrorism we don't blame all Y. There's no assumption that X = Y in every other respect. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of the argument.

Aha!

I understand the problem! You are projecting. Just because you automatically blame all Muslims for the terrorist bombings does not mean that conservatives think like you, because we don't.

You see, conservative thinking is based upon reality. Over the last 10 years there have been approximately 21,000 terrorist attacks perpetrated by Muslims. However, there are about 3/4 billion Muslims in the world. The chance that any particular Muslim you meet is an active terrorist is pretty remote 3 per 100,000.

However, the vast majority of all terrorist attacks (say >3/4) are perpetrated by Muslims. Meaning any investment you make in stopping terrorists will have a higher pay-off (more lives saved) if you look more closely at this particular group.

You'd do even better if you ran a second filter to look for those that have traveled to the middle east at some point in their life or been on other country's terrorist watch lists.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I need to do shorter and more partisan posts I think?


I'm moving back to the slow board.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Felix. Upon further thought. You have to be one of the most meaningless Americans ever. You dare not address a question. Given your thought process, it's not surprising. If you're the last stand of liberalism, you are doomed tom failure and defeat.

I'm honestly embarrassed to read what you write, which is just so much BS. Let's have an anti Muslim discussion tomorrow with the Canadians, then the Bostonians. Let's see where you fit in.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Felix. Upon further thought. You have to be one of the most meaningless Americans ever. You dare not address a question.

I'm sorry. What question is it that I dare not address?


Given your thought process, it's not surprising. If you're the last stand of liberalism, you are doomed tom failure and defeat.

I understand that it's easier for you to attack me personally and mischaracterize my argument than it is to actually address it, but that really serves no useful purpose. It's not even interesting.


Let's have an anti Muslim discussion tomorrow with the Canadians, then the Bostonians. Let's see where you fit in.

I don't know what you mean by that. Are you saying that I won't fit in with Canadians and Bostonians because I'm not a bigot? If so, I think you're underestimating Canadians and Bostonians and generalizing about them in a manner similar to the way you generalize about Muslims, blame Islam and Muslims in general for radical Islamist terrorism.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I don't know what you mean by that. Are you saying that I won't fit in with Canadians and Bostonians because I'm not a bigot? If so, I think you're underestimating Canadians and Bostonians and generalizing about them in a manner similar to the way you generalize about Muslims, blame Islam and Muslims in general for radical Islamist terrorism.
_________________

So you're saying that when it comes to terrorist attacks, blaming Islam and Muslims in general is off base? When it comes to Muslim terrorists, there's really not much discussion about generalizing, they make up more than three quarters of the terrorists in the world. I know you have a few Neo-Nazi types you like to throw out all the time, but compared to the legions of terrorists, and entire nations, your list seems a bit silly.

Here's an update, probably just a bigoted article with more generalizations. I'll say one thing, I've never seen a religion that motivates people so much.

"On Saturday afternoon, two 19-year-old men from Kazakhstan thought to be friends of the Boston brothers were arrested - as it was revealed the pair drove around in a black BMW with vanity plates that read 'TERROISTA#1.'

Boston bomb brothers 'did act ALONE and were motivated by religion', suspect claims in scrawled note"

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2313218/Boston-bombi...
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
When it comes to Muslim terrorists, there's really not much discussion about generalizing, they make up more than three quarters of the terrorists in the world.

You don't see the logical fallacy here?

Let me simplify it for you. If there were 100 acts of terrorism committed each year and 99 of them were committed by Whozits and only one by a Whatzit, that doesn't mean 99 percent of Whozits are terrorists or that Whozits are more likely to commit terrorism than Whatzits.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"On Saturday afternoon, two 19-year-old men from Kazakhstan thought to be friends of the Boston brothers were arrested - as it was revealed the pair drove around in a black BMW with vanity plates that read 'TERROISTA#1.'

It's clear from the photo it's not a vanity plate. Anyway, it's a fascinating detail. The notion that some people seem to have that Islamic terrorists advertise their identity with a vanity plate is hilarious. It's obviously posturing by some rich punk college kid.


Boston bomb brothers 'did act ALONE and were motivated by religion', suspect claims in scrawled note."

Yeah, "God made me do it" is a really common excuse for mass murderers. It's sick no matter what flavor of god it is.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
XLife please add me to your list of people who believe that Islam is a bad religion. I will never again consider Islam anything but a dangerous hate filled religion.

Normally when it comes to religion I am a "more the merrier" sort of person, but any interest or allure with Islam that I may have had is long since gone. I really fail to understand or see how they might think that I might be converted by vicious acts. All it does is drive a larger wedge between me and Islam.

Thank you, Art


I think the biggest problem for me is that there doesn't appear to be even one case, after an imam rants for the extermination of Jews, of Muslims banding together to drag the SOB from the mosque and publicly excommunicating him.

justacog
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I think the biggest problem for me is that there doesn't appear to be even one case, after an imam rants for the extermination of Jews, of Muslims banding together to drag the SOB from the mosque and publicly excommunicating him.
__________________________

The Pope never excommunicated the Westborogh Democratic nutjobs either.

There really is no tool to perform that job. They are a diverse group of sects and the nutters tend to belong to a supportive set that thinks nutter and spending a lot of times with virgins is a really good idea.

Some Muslim countries were very supportive and seemed to grieve after all the bad deeds.

The problem for me, is other entire countries dance in the street.

There are a lot of good Muslims, there are just also a lot of bad ones, and their religious fervor makes them truly dangerous nutters -- and YOU CAN NOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE.

There's the rub. IMO
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 17
...any interest or allure with Islam that I may have had...

Not that I'm a great theologian, but I have read about other religions and have visited places that are definitely non-Christian, but about the only thing I ever found attractive about islam was the praying five times a day.

On the surface I thought it was be a continual reminder that something else is out there, take the focus off yourself, etc., etc., the general reasons most religions pray. However, if you are going to a mosque 5 times a day and hearing some militant constantly harping on "kill the infidel", it is a total waste of time.

Two personal experiences with islam.

The first, I was in Cambodia with a surgical mission team. The missionary was working in areas that were 95% muslim. One of the main things he did was address their medical needs by bringing in medical mission teams. One year the very first patient, for a hernia repair, was the village elder/chieftain. Things went without a hitch and the man was very pleased. He told the missionary before going back to the village, his village was open to him. In effect he said you Christians come and do things for my people asking for nothing in return. I hear all the muslim preachers telling us to do this and that but they don't help us at all.

The second, my brother went to Banda Aceh as part of a clean up/building crew after the tsunami. It was a Christian organization but they weren't there to preach, just work and build. The villagers were more than happy to see them. That was on the first trip in the spring. My brother goes back about 6 months later in the fall, things were a little different. The imams had moved back in, they were too good for the much work I guess, and started preaching again. Instead of the little kids running up and wanting to play for see if you had any candy, it was running up and going "bang, bang, kill Americans" with their fingers like pistols.

Worthless religion as far as I'm concerned.

JLC
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Worthless religion as far as I'm concerned.

You can identify them [godly people] by their fruit, that is, by the way they act. Can you pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? ~Matthew 7:16
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
<Worthless religion as far as I'm concerned.>


What gets me is not the religion per se.

It is how a subsector of it(we can argue about how big or small) can hijack Islam while the rest of the members do not raise their voices in protest. I had the same anger about the Catholic priest scandal where a small subsector of priests was able to cause all priests to be suspected of commiting or actively tolerating illegal or immoral behavior.

The similarity is that silence in the face of evil is flat out wrong. If I were a Catholic priest I would be fuming mad that a small precentage of my fellow priests could define me by THEIR reprehensible behavior. If I were a Muslim who disavows violence, I would be fuming mad that a very visable group of nutjobs was able to define me as being a part of that. Do those who dislike the portrayal honestly disagree with the jihadists or do they secretly agree with their goals if not their methods?

One of the things that get on my nerves is those who try to push the idea of moral equivalence. Yesterday, I saw the press meeting where the White House press asked Obamas press secretary about events of the day. A muslim woman asked him about civilian casualties from a drone bombing and the Boston Marathon bombing. Carney flubbed the response by saying he would have to look into it. In a drone attack civilian casualties occur while taking out some very bad people who often keep civilian people near them as a buffer. In those cases every attempt is made to minimize civilian casualties. The Boston bombing was totally designed to inflict as much damage as possible on civilians.

IOW, there is no moral equivalence at all. Yet Carney was unable to articulate this simple truth. Maybe the womans garb made it impossible for him to avoid the PC virus that has infected us as a country.

The underlying assumption in this line of thinking is that if we never defend ourselves, they will leave us alone. Christians are routinely mocked and ridiculed by secular progressive types without the slightest fear of blowback. Yet that same condescension is never shown toward the Muslim religion. They know (even if they don't say it) that there would be real consequenceses for doing so.

That is why a liberal professor can ask his class to write Jesus on a piece of paper and ask the students to walk on it. The same professor would never dream of asking the same students to write Mohammed on a piece of paper and walk on it. See the big disconnect?


BG
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
What gets me is not the religion per se. [...] See the big disconnect?

I hate it when I run out of reccs so early in the day.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Christians are routinely mocked and ridiculed by secular progressive types without the slightest fear of blowback. Yet that same condescension is never shown toward the Muslim religion. They know (even if they don't say it) that there would be real consequenceses for doing so.

Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you look at it, Christians are advised by Christ himself to turn the other cheek when mocked and ridiculed. My pastor's message just last Sunday was about this very phenomenon, and why it's necessary and important to learn how to turn the other cheek--not to physical violence as FeedMeCrap misinterprets, but to infliction of emotional pain.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on how you look at it, Christians are advised by Christ himself to turn the other cheek when mocked and ridiculed. My pastor's message just last Sunday was about this very phenomenon, and why it's necessary and important to learn how to turn the other cheek--not to physical violence as FeedMeCrap misinterprets, but to infliction of emotional pain.

__________________________________

I do not particularly like your pastor's take personally.

Christ pretty regularly ripped em a new backdoor actually. WHen they were trying to toss down his relationship with God he actually dissed em in his own Godly well pretty darn well.

He did not turn the other cheek, he made them look bad.

At the end, there was a lot of Jewish prophesy he had to fulfill to get his message through, he did not take up arms and fight, but he did not sick back and not take someone to task.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
At the end, there was a lot of Jewish prophesy he had to fulfill to get his message through, he did not take up arms and fight, but he did not sick back and not take someone to task.

I know, but it was the way He did it that's different from the way I would do it. (Of course, He, too, would be among the most despised on the PA board, so I guess I'm in good company.)

The example given by my pastor was, he was in a phone store waiting in line to be served. Someone came in the door and went directly to the counter to make a purchase. When Pastor said, "I'm sorry, I was next," the bargy customer said, "I was here earlier." Earlier than what--last week, yesterday, this morning? Pastor said, "I really got chapped when instead I should have perhaps said a prayer for that person's spiritual condition" (or words to that effect). In other words, we get bent out of shape for the smallest slight when we should turn the other cheek instead.

Christ used parables and analogies to get his point across in a non-inflammatory way. He could not have been responsible for the reception of those who heard his parables.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
When it comes to Muslim terrorists, there's really not much discussion about generalizing, they make up more than three quarters of the terrorists in the world.

You don't see the logical fallacy here?

Let me simplify it for you. If there were 100 acts of terrorism committed each year and 99 of them were committed by Whozits and only one by a Whatzit, that doesn't mean 99 percent of Whozits are terrorists or that Whozits are more likely to commit terrorism than Whatzits.
_______________________

I fully understand that 99% of Muslims are not terrorists. But yes, they are more likely to commit terrorist acts than any other group.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
IOW, there is no moral equivalence at all. Yet Carney was unable to articulate this simple truth. Maybe the womans garb made it impossible for him to avoid the PC virus that has infected us as a country.

The underlying assumption in this line of thinking is that if we never defend ourselves, they will leave us alone. Christians are routinely mocked and ridiculed by secular progressive types without the slightest fear of blowback. Yet that same condescension is never shown toward the Muslim religion. They know (even if they don't say it) that there would be real consequenceses for doing so.

That is why a liberal professor can ask his class to write Jesus on a piece of paper and ask the students to walk on it. The same professor would never dream of asking the same students to write Mohammed on a piece of paper and walk on it. See the big disconnect?


BG
___________________

Just a great read BG.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
IOW, there is no moral equivalence at all. Yet Carney was unable to articulate this simple truth. Maybe the womans garb made it impossible for him to avoid the PC virus that has infected us as a country.

The underlying assumption in this line of thinking is that if we never defend ourselves, they will leave us alone. Christians are routinely mocked and ridiculed by secular progressive types without the slightest fear of blowback. Yet that same condescension is never shown toward the Muslim religion. They know (even if they don't say it) that there would be real consequenceses for doing so.

That is why a liberal professor can ask his class to write Jesus on a piece of paper and ask the students to walk on it. The same professor would never dream of asking the same students to write Mohammed on a piece of paper and walk on it. See the big disconnect?


BG
___________________

Just a great read BG.
--------------------
gurd is always a good read.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2

Christians are advised by Christ himself to turn the other cheek when mocked and ridiculed. My pastor's message just last Sunday was about this very phenomenon, and why it's necessary and important to learn how to turn the other cheek--not to physical violence, but to infliction of emotional pain.



The actual quote (if you believe fairytales) is this:


I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.


It's very very clear that it refers to physical violence. It's also clear that one is not to resist evil, such as defending oneself. Only the dishonest would claim otherwise.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I fully understand that 99% of Muslims are not terrorists. But yes, they are more likely to commit terrorist acts than any other group.
_________________________________

Everyone else understands it as well.

I think the idea that this putz believes he has to explain it, as if anyone does not understand it, is a tour de force of arrogant idiocy.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
...my brother went to Banda Aceh as part of a clean up/building crew after the tsunami. It was a Christian organization but they weren't there to preach, just work and build. The villagers were more than happy to see them. That was on the first trip in the spring. My brother goes back about 6 months later in the fall, things were a little different. The imams had moved back in, they were too good for the much work I guess, and started preaching again. Instead of the little kids running up and wanting to play for see if you had any candy, it was running up and going "bang, bang, kill Americans" with their fingers like pistols.

Worthless religion as far as I'm concerned.


Worthless imams, I'd say.

It's not as if there aren't crappy ministers and priests.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
Churchill had it right many years ago.

"Islam is as dangerous in a man as rabies in a dog."
Sir Winston Churchill
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
"If I were a Muslim who disavows violence, I would be fuming mad that a very visable group of nutjobs was able to define me as being a part of that." - BGinNJ
--------------------

The problem is that their book, the Koran, says that violence against unbelievers is acceptable and there are also verses about violence and Jihad. These verses are quite explicit and obvious and it is very difficult to interpret them in any other way.

The Koran is their bible and it what their religion is based on. Jihad is part and parcel of Islam. Violence is written into their Book.

Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Art:

I agree that what the koran says is pretty clear. Yet, only a small percentage of muslims are actually jihadists. What would be more a useful number to know is what percentage of muslims agree with or are supportive of the jihadists.

After we have a terrorist incident we are usually left with silence from the majority of muslims. Many that do manage to say something recite the old "yeah, but" routine. You know how it is "we regret and decry these violent acts, but you have to understand where these people are coming from". My POV is "No we don't"! When you go down that road, you are creating excuses for killing and maiming large numbers of innocent civilians. I reject all such moral equivalency arguments.

There may well be other reasons why there are not all that many jihadists on a percentage basis. It may be as simple as many potential recruits have found out that the pension plan really stinks.


BG
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
I agree that what the koran says is pretty clear. Yet, only a small percentage of muslims are actually jihadists. What would be more a useful number to know is what percentage of muslims agree with or are supportive of the jihadists.

After we have a terrorist incident we are usually left with silence from the majority of muslims. Many that do manage to say something recite the old "yeah, but" routine. You know how it is "we regret and decry these violent acts, but you have to understand where these people are coming from". My POV is "No we don't"! When you go down that road, you are creating excuses for killing and maiming large numbers of innocent civilians. I reject all such moral equivalency arguments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I remember a poll of muslims after the London bombings and i was shocked at the percentage that were sympathetic.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"There may well be other reasons why there are not all that many jihadists on a percentage basis." - BG


They aren't faithful enough. They don't have enough belief. If they were good Muslims they would follow the Koran and do what it says. It's as simple as that.

Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
"I remember a poll of muslims after the London bombings and i was shocked at the percentage that were sympathetic." - 2828


They were sympathetic because they know that is really what the Koran tells them they should be doing.

They are Muslims in name only. If they were good Muslims they would be doing what the Jihadists do.

It's simple. Islam is NOT the religion of peace. It's the religion of "slit the unbelievers throat."

Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I remember a poll of muslims after the London bombings and i was shocked at the percentage that were sympathetic.
_______________________________

I have a hard time getting a handle on it.

But it really does appear that a huge number of them have at the very least sympathy for Jihad.

You almost never see an interview with one that flat out condemns, without the waffling that Art mentioned. Which is a de facto acceptance IMO.

Although I did see one today, not sure which show, likely on Morning Joe, that just flat out said they are nuts and we are trying to distance ourselves(not an exact quote unfortunately)

Can't tell if they just always have nuts on as the Muslim representative and the polls are flawed or they really are so totally screwed up that we have no business allowing them in the country at all

I do have to say though, it does not make a lot of sense to be giving them seats at America's best universities, it does not EVER appear that exposure to our culture does anythig more than stop by Vegas now and then before yelling "Death to the witches in the name of Christianity" and blowing themselves and others up, or financing others to do that if they have the bucks.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"You almost never see an interview with one that flat out condemns, without the waffling that Art mentioned." - lowstudent


They don't condemn it because they know deep down in their heart that is what the Koran tells them that they should be doing. They know they aren't very good Muslims because they aren't warring with infidels.

Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<They aren't faithful enough. They don't have enough belief. If they were good Muslims they would follow the Koran and do what it says. It's as simple as that.>



Maybe they are also a little bit doubtful about the 72 virgins that they are promised after they successfully explode themselves to bits here on earth?


BG
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Maybe they are also a little bit doubtful about the 72 virgins that they are promised after they successfully explode themselves to bits here on earth?
____________________________________

Maybe they spend some time with a virgin, and some time with some experienced women and realized 72 virgins ain't all it's cracked up to be?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"Maybe they are also a little bit doubtful about the 72 virgins that they are promised after they successfully explode themselves to bits here on earth?" - BG
-------------------


People have asked me, "Art if you believe all that why don't you just kill yourself so you'll be in heaven?" A simple answer is that I'm not absolutely 100% sure I'm right.

Of course even if I was that sure I wouldn't do it because it would hurt the people that I love and that love me. Because of that connectedness and oneness thing whatever grief that you inflict on other people you feel it during your life review on the other side.

Whatever you do to others will be done to you. It's a simple holographic universe thing. Another words I might feel their grief at my selfishness.

Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
There may well be other reasons why there are not all that many jihadists on a percentage basis. It may be as simple as many potential recruits have found out that the pension plan really stinks.

Here's the practical reality about human beings. All humans, everywhere, all the time, act in their own enlightened self-interest. Oh, there may be anomalies from time to time--such as suicide bombers and other self-sacrificing types--but it's in our DNA to behave in such a way that our own lives and those of our loved ones are enhanced and/or advanced as we would like.

This is what libruls don't understand. You, Mr/Ms Libtard, cannot make me voluntarily do anything other than what I believe to be in my own enlightened self interest. You can force me, through taxation and regulation, to do as you want me to do, but a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

Jihadism is pure brainwashing.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
It's simple. Islam is NOT the religion of peace. It's the religion of "slit the unbelievers throat."

It's not politically correct to talk about dark forces in the world, but they exist. How else to explain things like the Holocaust, the Boston bombings and other incidents that make our heads swim?

People need to wake up to the fact that Man isn't by his very nature "good." We live in a fallen world. The evidence for this is, in my opinion, as plain as the noses on our faces.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
People have asked me, "Art if you believe all that why don't you just kill yourself so you'll be in heaven?" A simple answer is that I'm not absolutely 100% sure I'm right.

I think the reason you may not be absolutely 100% sure you're right is that your theory doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

From what I gather from your thousands of posts on the subject, you believe that everyone who ever lived will one day exist in a holographic Paradise, regardless of how they behaved on Earth. No matter what pain they inflicted, it's all good in the end. But, in your gut, you know this can't be right. It can't be possible that it matters not what you believe; if that's the case, the Jihadists have nothing to fear. In other words, the Boston bombers will be your next door neighbors in your holographic Paradise, and you're going to be fine with that.

Alrighty!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
After we have a terrorist incident we are usually left with silence from the majority of muslims. Many that do manage to say something recite the old "yeah, but" routine. You know how it is "we regret and decry these violent acts, but you have to understand where these people are coming from". My POV is "No we don't"! When you go down that road, you are creating excuses for killing and maiming large numbers of innocent civilians. I reject all such moral equivalency arguments. - BG

-----------------

Do you think that some of them are simply afraid to speak out or speak out too stridently for fear of retribution from the nutjob jihadists? I wonder how many of them truly are afraid for their safety and conclude its better to not draw attention to yourself.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"It's not politically correct to talk about dark forces in the world, but they exist. How else to explain things like the Holocaust, the Boston bombings and other incidents that make our heads swim?

People need to wake up to the fact that Man isn't by his very nature "good." We live in a fallen world. The evidence for this is, in my opinion, as plain as the noses on our faces." - Catherine

-------------------------


My mom used to say to me, "Life ain't a bowl of cherries you know kiddo!"

Mom was right about a lot of things.

Art
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"I think the reason you may not be absolutely 100% sure you're right is that your theory doesn't make a whole lot of sense." - Catherine


Catherine I'm sorry you don't understand it. One day you will. I take comfort in that.

Your God is too small.

Art

"I had the realization that I was everywhere at the same time...and I mean everywhere. I knew that everything is perfect and happening according to some divine plan, regardless of all the things we see as wrong with the world." - excerpt from Carl Turner's mystical experience

http://www.beyondreligion.com/su_personal/dreamsvisions-kund...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
<Do you think that some of them are simply afraid to speak out or speak out too stridently for fear of retribution from the nutjob jihadists?>


I have no doubt there is some of that going on. The problem is how do you begin to quantify it?

Further, if you assume that is the main reason, you begin to accept the idea that silence in the presence of pure evil is acceptable. If a true majority were against the concept of jihad, they would find an overwhelming majority of non muslims who would join in supporting them. The silence allows most people to assume that deep down they do not mind what is being done even if they may oppose some of the tactics.



BG
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
All humans, everywhere, all the time, act in their own enlightened self-interest.

The "enlightened" qualifier is, unfortunately, rather less than universal.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I had the realization that I was everywhere at the same time...and I mean everywhere

God complex. Huge ego.
Print the post Back To Top