Staged Al-CIA-da “Internal Suicide Bomber” Allows Pretext for Mandatory Full Body ScansExodus Mentality said ...
I agree with you that these so-called attacks are more likely CIA type propaganda than actual attempts at attacking Americans.
Otherwise, why is it that "terrorists" seem to be so very keen to attack the hardest targets available?Doesn't that go against every single rational revolutionary thought process? Why would someone intent on causing as much damage as possible to a group of imperialist Americans, bother with airplanes, which have become almost impossible to attack, when there are so many softer, and arguably more lucrative "terror" targets out there?
Any dumbass could see that it's easy to carry suitcases full of just about anything into the airport terminal, where there are always more people than on any one flight, or any number of other places where us imperialists tend to congregate. Why keep trying to sneak smaller, less lethal attacks onto a plane? Perhaps it's because you get the most media play if you get lucky enough to get a plane? I never heard that Allah gives you a couple extra virgins if you take down a 747.
Undercover Black Man said ...
"Seriously, Craig... you don't want none of this. I'm laying waste to these cats!
And shining a light that's never been shone at DV.net... on the persecution of Christians. Shit you won't read in the newspaper.And muhfuckas still acting like Christians be going around beheading people too... or they would if the world were different... or some horseshit.
If you didn't have such a hard-on for UBM, Craig, you'd be challenging these fellas on how they seem to make excuses for terrorist murder."
76 comments:
I agree with you that these so-called attacks are more likely CIA type propaganda than actual attempts at attacking Americans.
Otherwise, why is it that "terrorists" seem to be so very keen to attack the hardest targets available? Doesn't that go against every single rational revolutionary thought process? Why would someone intent on causing as much damage as possible to a group of imperialist Americans, bother with airplanes, which have become almost impossible to attack, when there are so many softer, and arguably more lucrative "terror" targets out there? Any dumbass could see that it's easy to carry suitcases full of just about anything into the airport terminal, where there are always more people than on any one flight, or any number of other places where us imperialists tend to congregate. Why keep trying to sneak smaller, less lethal attacks onto a plane? Perhaps it's because you get the most media play if you get lucky enough to get a plane? I never heard that Allah gives you a couple extra virgins if you take down a 747.
Doesn't that go against every single rational revolutionary thought process?
Why would you expect religious fanatics to think "rationally"?
Exodus. Airplane attacks make plenty of sense. If a terrorist can penetrate security and strike an airplane the terrorist organization can inflict that much more cost in disrupted lives, disrupted communications, and finance. Besides, as long as they've got enough crazies to attempt it, the cost to the terrorist organization is extremely low. Apparently all one needs these days, besides a plane ticket is a pair of sturdy underwear.
As to "US imperialists congregate". The whole thing ain't about "US imperialism" or even Zionism. It's about a bunch of regigious fanatics who want to re-create the Sunni Caliphats of medieval times and throw out as many secular and Shiite regimes throughout the former Ummah territories as possible and then lord it over their subjects like the sheiks of old. It's just another form of a fascist movement.
UBM and Mike. I would have expected better of both of you. Well at lest you Mike, I only know UBM from reading posts, but there is no doubt in my that you both are seriously "misunderestimating" the opposition. Certainly there are those who fit the profiles you want to generally apply to all those who have and are resisting what they consider to be occupying forces. There are surely that many psycho Zionists and Christians who would react in exactly the same fashion if the power shoe was on the other foot. In fact you could substitute the word Catholic for Sunni caliphate, and substitute Popes for sheiks and still have a 100% true statement. Only right now the popes side is holding most of the cards so their actions are not labelled "terrorism" except by those terrified of when the next bomb is going to be dropped on their heads by an unmanned drone. "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when the do it from religious conviction."
But the point here is that this whole Al Queada boondoggle is a manufactured menace. And that manufactured menace, and the mindset you two apparently share, seeks to lump any and all who dislike the "nation building" activities of the U.S. in brown countries around the world, under the same umbrella banner of ass backward Muslim medievalist. Utterly ridiculous.
Just because someone is "fanatic" about a particular issue does not in and of itself render them incapable of all rational thought process. Some people who strap a bomb to their bodies do so with the courage of their convictions that they are morally correct in what they do. You and I may not understand or agree with that, but then, you and I have never been subjected to what we know people are being subjected to in the Middle East.
So back to the point about airplanes and "terrorists", you've basically undermine your own argument, by giving them credit for having enough sense to go after a target with economic significance. If they can think far enough to want to "inflict that much more cost in disrupted lives, disrupted communications, and finance", then why is it that they would single-mindedly focus on bringing down a single airplane, with a few hundred people on board, when they could far more easily blow up the airport terminals where thousand arrive every hour on the hour to board said airplanes? Would that not serve the same purpose, serve it much better, and be far more likely to succeed at a level other than setting fire to ones own genitalia, all without even the cost of the ticket?
Who needs to publicize the face of "terrorism" more? IMO it's the people who make their profit off imperialism, and who must maintain the support of their own unwashed masses, to keep the gravy train rolling smoothly down the tracks.
WOW!!!
Exodus just drove a tractor-trailer through the elite establishment narrative.
There's more hole now than story, and all the king's little bought and paid for storytellers won't ever be able to put that raggedy jawn back together again.
Exodus Mentality is truth.
Accept no substitutes....,
"There are surely that many psycho Zionists and Christians who would react in exactly the same fashion if the power shoe was on the other foot." Ex Men
Good point!
lol.
There are also surely that many self-righteous Secular Fanatics and Liberal Jihadists who already act in that fashion ... on a GRAND SCALE.
"In fact you could substitute the word Catholic for Sunni caliphate," Ex Men
Yup.
You could also substitute "Scientific Dictatorship" for Sunni Caliphate.
"and substitute Popes for sheiks" Ex Men
Yup.
But don't forget grasshopper, you could also substitute "Scientists" for "Popes" and "NeoCons" for sheiks.
"and still have a 100% true statement. Only right now the popes side is holding most of the cards" Ex Men
Popes side?
Nah. Lazy analysis.
The Pope is a mere bystander. A Cheerleader. A Secular prop in religious garb. Leader of an institution co-opted long ago.
"so their actions are not labelled "terrorism" except by those terrified of when the next bomb is going to be dropped on their heads by an unmanned drone. "Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when the do it from religious conviction." Ex Men
Not exactly.
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when the do it from religious conviction ... DISGUISED as science and reason.
Paul Wolfowitz is a religious fanatic who aint got nothing to do with Christ or Mohammad.
Dick Cheney is a religious fanatic who aint got nothing to do with Christ or Mohammad. .
The manufacturers and distributors of Depleted Uranium are religious fanatics who aint got nothing to do with Christ or Mohammad.
Whomever it was who attacked this nation on 911 is a religious fanatic who BY DEFINITION aint got nothing to do with Christ or Mohammad.
(Expect a quiz on this next Friday.)
There are surely that many psycho Zionists and Christians who would react in exactly the same fashion if the power shoe was on the other foot.
If the power shoe was on the other foot? Seriously, Ex?
Pardon the expression, but... Jesus H. Christ.
Christians do face persecution and oppression on this Earth. In the Muslim nation of Pakistan, for instance... where a Christian named Patras Masih was gunned down by three Muslims a month ago. Gunned down after he refused to reject Christ and convert to Islam.
Also last month in Pakistan, “dozens of Muslim villagers, armed with clubs and axes, attacked a showing of the film ‘Jesus’ about the birth, life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, witnesses said. At least three part-time evangelists and four spectators were reportedly injured in the December 9 attack near the city of Sargodha.” (source)
Exodus, I must ask you... 1) Do Christians respond to such injustice by strapping bombs to their bodies and blowing themselves up in a crowd?
2) Can you name a Christian country where Muslims face mob violence because of their religious beliefs?
Exodus got down on here. I don't know if he's right, but he articulated the very same questions I've been asking. Hell, they could be blowing up all kinds of public infrastructure and causing way more damage and panic. It ain't like this country is doing a good job of securing it's infrastructure. Remember the bridge collapse in Minnesota? Imagine if folks did the same thing at numerous bridges across the country. Talk about panic.
This thing with planes seems shortsighted and stupid, and I think it's a mistake to assume that terrorists are stupid. Hell, if they really wanted to incite terror, they could just start doing random suicide bombings at Starbucks and movie theaters. That would create widespread panic instantly. This plane fixation doesn't make sense, which makes it suspect.
UBM
So, the manner in which Muslims retailiate makes the difference? Because you could argue that all of the "Christian" nations have waged war against the Muslim ones for decades if you look at their foreign policies. Haven't we bombed innocents? Have we destabilized economic systems and governments?
Since religion began folks on every side have wrapped themselves in the mantle of differing religions and used those mantles as justification for barbaric actions. Just because the actions by some Muslim terrorists are getting all the attention right now doesn't change the fact that many folks who call themselves Christians have done the same thing for a long time and used Christ to justify their actions.
You are applying a crazy standard to Islam and Muslims that you have not applied to any other group.
^ Big Man... you and Exodus are the ones extolling Muslim terrorist murder as righteous "retaliation." You're the ones applying a crazy standard to Muslims that you don't apply to Christians.
One year ago in Saudi Arabia, the police arrested Hamoud Bin Saleh, a 28-year-old blogger, for writing about his conversion from Islam to Christianity.
Big Man... Exodus... Denmark... would you describe his arrest as an act of persecution and oppression?
Where did I call Muslim extremists righteous? You inferred something that I did not state.
I'm pointing out that your fixation on suicide bombers and isolated incidents of extreme persecution is ridiculous. Just like a fixation by anybody on any single grouping of incidents without an acknowledgement of the larger picture.
The larger picture is that both Muslims and Christians have brutally enforced their will on religious minorities within their boundaries, and it's been going on for forever. The recent attempts to classify this as some sort of new war where Muslims have gone beyond the bounds of common decency are bogus and serve a questionable agenda.
Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and all other religious groups have at times attempted to force their beliefs on others and have used violence and other heinous means to accomplish those goals. Atheists too.
People are trying to establish Muslims as the dangerous "other" in an attempt to justify actions that would normally be frowned upon and questioned. As long as folks like you continue to buy into the myth that "these Muslims just can't be reasoned with and deserve to be destroyed" the more likely it is that this country drops a nuclear bomb on a Muslim country and just like it did Japan.
Muslim countries are not doing anything different than what any other powerful group does in an attempt to retain and advance their beliefs and power. It's laughable to pretend otherwise and makes me questions the motives of anyone who does it. So, yes, in my opinion the behavior of these Muslim folks is wrong in many instance, but the question then becomes is it our business to regulate their countries based on our beliefs and opinions. And if we claim that right, why do we deny them the same claim?
Hundreds of Muslims have been rounded up and arrested in America and other countries the same way that 28-year old blogger you referenced was arrested. Hell, the Chinese do the same thing for different reasons in their country. Why are we pretending like what Muslims have done in their own countries is so beyond the pale? Smells like hypocrisy to me.
Hundreds of Muslims have been rounded up and arrested in America and other countries the same way that 28-year old blogger you referenced was arrested.
Rounded up for merely professing a belief in Islam?
Name one.
Haven't we bombed innocents? Have we destabilized economic systems and governments?
According to Pakistani authorities, from January 14, 2006 to April 8, 2009, 60 U.S. strikes against Pakistan killed 701 people, of which 14 were Al-Qaeda militants and 687 innocent civilians. Drone Attacks.
The larger picture is that both Muslims and Christians have brutally enforced their will on religious minorities within their boundaries...
Upon what religious minority within its boundaries does the United States today "brutally enforce its will"?
The persecution of Christians also takes place in Iran.
According to the Farsi Christian News Network: "at 8 am on December 16, 2009, several security officers entered the home of Hamideh Najafi, a Christian lady who resides in the city of Mashhad, and not only searched her home thoroughly, but also arrested and took her away to an unknown location.
"According to this news three security officers... who carried an order for arrest from the Revolutionary Court of Mashhad, entered the home of this lady and after searching the her home seized her personal belongings along with books, CDs, and hand-painted portraits of Jesus Christ that were hanging on her walls.
"According to these officers the existence of these pictures will be sufficient evidence that would convict her in court."
Exodus... Denmark... is this the kind of oppression that would be wisely and righteously resisted by Christians strapping on bomb belts and blowing themselves up in a crowd?
Upon what religious minority within its boundaries does the United States today "brutally enforce its will"? UBM
Your attempts to create a question that will only generate the answer you seek are hilarious.
"...Within its boundaries..." and "...today..." are arbitray qualifiers you added to my statement in an attempt to narrow the discussion and score points.
Why within U.S. borders? Because if we expanded beyond our borders we'd find numerous incidents of the United States brutally enforcing its will on religious minorities, wouldn't we? Why "today?" Because if you examined the issue historically we'd find numerous incidents of the U.S. brutally enforcing its will on relgious minorities within its borders and outside of them.
You can sidestep my point as long as you like. Clearly you feel that the actions of Muslim countries today, despite their historical precedent, justifies some sort of aggressive military actions by the United States, and that's what you are pushing towards. If that's your position, fine. But don't pretend that it's the only intelligent choice, or that it's not laden with hypocrisy. Cause that's insulting.
And you honestly believe that all the suspected terrorists rounded up by this country in security sweeps weren't rounded up because of their relgious beliefs and the color of their skin? You really believe it was all solid intelligence that led to those people being detained? Come on now, that's a fairy tale. You wrote for The Wire and you have that type of faith in a government agency, or a law enforcement agency? You studied and worked in the city of New Orleans for "Treme" and you believe that?
^ Hey genius... you wrote: "The larger picture is that both Muslims and Christians have brutally enforced their will on religious minorities within their boundaries..."
Now, you don't think it's legitimate to draw a practical distinction between persecution and oppression that's happening today and persecution and oppression that happened at some vague point in the past?
Why don't you seem to give a fuck about the persecution of Christians?
Um ...
UB. That's an interesting story.
When "da Muslims" routinely torture Secular, Christian and Jewish boys in their version of Guantanamo let us know.
6,000 dead US Soldiers,
1,,000,000+ dead brown people
25,000 Maimed US Soldiers
Countless Maimed and Poisoned brown people.
0 WMD's
Entire war was based upon a RADICAL SECULARIST LIE.
The real Jihadists.
Your attempts to create a question that will only generate the answer you seek are hilarious.
Big Man - 1
King's Little Bought and Paid-for Storyteller - 0
^ I smell something burning, Craig. Better check on those muffins!
The persecution of Christians also takes place in Indonesia, the world’s largest Muslim nation by population.
In 2005, three Christian teenage schoolgirls – Theresia Morangke, Alfita Poliwo and Ida Yarni Sambue – were ambushed by six Muslim men with machetes.
The girls were beheaded. Their heads were put in a plastic bag and left near a church. A note was attached: “Wanted: 100 more Christian heads, teenaged or adult, male or female...”
The planner of this attack, named Hasanuddin, was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison. “It’s not a problem because this is a part of our struggle,” he said of his incarceration.
Hasanuddin happened to be the leader of a regional Islamic terrorist group, Jemaah Islamiah, which is linked to al-Qaeda and has organized lethal bombings throughout Asia.
Exodus... would you describe Hasanuddin, decapitator of teenage girls, first and foremost as someone who acted with “the courage of [his] convictions” that he is morally correct in what he does... even though you and I can’t understand it?
Or would you first and foremost describe him as a murderer and a religious fanatic?
I smell something burning, Craig.
lol,
I'm surprised you can smell anything after the way Big Man slapped the taste clean out y'mouf...,
^ Seriously, Craig... you don't want none of this. I'm laying waste to these cats!
And shining a light that's never been shone at DV.net... on the persecution of Christians. Shit you won't read in the newspaper.
And muhfuckas still acting like Christians be going around beheading people too... or they would if the world were different... or some horseshit.
If you didn't have such a hard-on for UBM, Craig, you'd be challenging these fellas on how they seem to make excuses for terrorist murder.
Man, we are in trouble with all these twisted homeys. Half these cats AREN'T even aware of Jihad with the other half completely DEFENSELESS to push back the Islamic imperialism.
Why attack a plane and not a store front? Because the former is intended to limit our autonomy TO AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL while the latter would unleash the real backlash that the jihadist sympathizers are always falsely clamoring about. Plus it's easier for our own radical autonomists to "foil" such a plot to their benefit.
This is ALL ABOUT AUTONOMY. Who has it, who doesn't and by what means ONE will attempt to control it.
^ Seriously, Craig... you don't want none of this. I'm laying waste to these cats!
AHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Whew!!!
so that's what a concussion does to a muhphugga'z situational awareness.
dayyum....,
The persecution of Christians also occurs in Nigeria, where the radical Muslim sect Boko Haram last summer rioted and burned down 20 churches... and killed three Christian pastors, among hundreds of other innocents.
Members of Boko Haram “in their overzealousness wanted to compel others to become muslims,” according to Nigerian journalist Lawal Ogienagbon.
Had to remind myself what this post was about, given all the misdirection, redirection, and generalized squirming and niggling going on down here in the comments after Big Man laid the smack down.
anyway......,
so-called "religious" squabbling in Nigeria ain't about religion, it's about north/south politics. {oddly reminiscent of the muslim/kurd squabbling about which much ado has been made in Iraq}
Of course when you talk honestly about politics nowadays, the only politics that matters is the politics of access to and control and profitable distribution of irreplaceable natural material resources.
Despite the inauguration of President Barack Obama in January 2009, U.S. government policy on the procurement of African oil is largely governed by the National Energy Policy Report—the final report of the National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPDG)—which was issued on May 17, 2001. The NEPDG was chaired by Vice President Dick Cheney, a high-level body appointed by President Bush in February 2001, and its final document is often referred to as the “Cheney report.” In the most general terms, the report calls on the federal government to undertake numerous initiatives to substantially increase the nation’s supply of energy, including energy derived from petroleum. As is well known, these initiatives include measures aimed at increasing oil output from domestic U.S. sources, most notably by commencing drilling on the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). But because America’s need for energy is expected to expand substantially in the years ahead, the report also calls for increasing U.S. reliance on foreign sources of energy.
The direct linkage between growing U.S. dependence on oil imports from Africa—and particularly from Nigeria—is based on the assertion that U.S. national security—and our continued enjoyment of the “American way of life”—requires unimpeded access to African oil. Commenting on this development, the former U.S. ambassador to Chad, Donald R. Norland, told the Africa Subcommittee of the U.S. House International Relations Committee in April 2002, “It’s been reliably reported that, for the first time, the two concepts – ‘Africa’ and ‘U.S. national security’ – have been used in the same sentence in Pentagon documents.” Michael A. Westphal, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for African Affairs, also noted this linkage in a Pentagon press briefing on April 2, 2002. “Fifteen percent of the U.S.’s imported oil supply comes from sub-Saharan Africa,” he declared, and “this is also a number which has the potential for increasing significantly in the next decade.” Walter Kansteiner, the Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, further acknowledged the national security implications of African oil during a visit to Nigeria in July 2002. “African oil is of strategic national interest to us,” he declared, and “it will increase and become more important as we go forward.”
As a result, the “Carter Doctrine,” proclaimed by President Jimmy Carter in January 1980 has been extended to Nigeria, the rest of Africa, and—indeed—the entire world. In his final State of the Union Address, President Carter designated the free flow of Persian Gulf oil as a “vital interest” of the United States and declared that this country would use “any means necessary, including military force,” to defend that interest. To implement this policy, widely known as the “Carter Doctrine,” the U.S. Department of Defense established the U.S. Central Command (Centcom) to oversee U.S. military operations in the Gulf area and built up a substantial military basing infrastructure in the region. Later presidents subsequently cited the Carter Doctrine as the basis for U.S. combat operations during the Persian Gulf War of 1991, the war in Afghanistan from 2001 until the present, and the invasion of Iraq in 2003.
^ Talk about misdirection and redirection.
Hang it up, Craig. It's obvious who calls the tune and who does the dance in these here comment threads.
Yo DV... how about throwing up a photo of those three Christian schoolgirls who got their heads chopped off in Indonesia a few years ago?
Photos not handy? Hmmm... funny how that goes.
But you learned something today, didn't you, DV? You learned something about the nature of Muslim extremism... and its global scope.
You're welcome.
UBM,
But as a devout liberal, you are completely defenseless to stop jihad UNLESS of course you make your unprincipled exception.
And imagine that, a liberal "Christian" running diversion for jihad...
Exodus Mentality...
"UBM and Mike. I would have expected better of both of you. Well at lest you Mike,..."
Dwight. My take on this is somewhat different than, Mills'. At least I think so.
Fascist movements as a matter of routine clothe themselves in "revolutionary" rhetoric. That goes for so-called "secular" movements such as National Socialism and Marxism-Leninism, but that goes particularly for religious movements that seek to be dominant political forces within human society.
Once one posits the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing God whose Will is to be obeyed without question (or even with question), then one, usually of necessity needs a human interpreter of such God's Will. The Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition is particularly notorious when it comes to this stuff.
The Muslim "fundamentalists" are not seeking to eject United States personnel from the former territories of the Ulemma because they deem such presence an affront to the national and economic interests of the people of the region. No. They explicitly seek to eject the United States and her personnel because they deem this presence as an affront to GOD.
That's a BIG difference.
Once you officially kill and maim in the name of GOD there is no moral code that can hold you back.
Look at history.
I'm usually not into comparing suffering to suffering, but let's take the people of Saudi-Arabia and compare that with what was done to the people of Vietnam. Heck, you can throw in what was done to the Palestinians including the recent Gaza slaughter to boot.
Well. There is no comparison. What was done to all of the Arab peoples throughout modern history pales against what was done to the Vietnamese by the French and the United States alone (not to forget the Japanese either). Did the Vietnamese hijack civilian airliners or commit random acts of terrorism? Not that I can recall.
Why?
What's the difference?
Simple.
The Vietnamese conducted a national liberation struggle.
Al Qaida and Bin Laden are conducting a struggle for the hegemony of their particular brand of God worship in a vast territory, which, by their logic must be superimposed throughout this territory against the national aspirations of any of the peoples who live in these territories.
This is why the Al Qaida "pro-Palestinian" stance is pure bullshit. Al Qaida can't afford the existence of a free and secular democratic Palestine. It would run counter to everything these religious fanatics stand for.
In fact, it is more in their interest to keep radical Zionism dominant in the region and use it to galvanize the Arab "street" into their movement.
To put it bluntly. The folks solely seek to practice their own form of imperialism.
And Al-Zwaahiri and Bib-Laden justify this with their "knowledge" of the Will of God. Since, of course, "they know what God wants better than you or I".
That's all.
Fisher,
It's all nice that you oppose fundamental Islam out of your interest in entertainment, but why call it "fascism" when it's Islam?
Secondly, what exactly is your principled stand against the spread of Islam as a tolerant and nondiscrinimatory liberal?
You and mills THINK you can oppose an ALL-INCLUSIVE belief system while you actively adhere to one. Liberalism and Islam fit like hand and glove.
Dayum!!!!! I blinked and shit got hot up in here.
Mills, You trying to tell me that you equate a few Christians getting jacked where they happen to be in the minority is the same thing as the only imperial superpower extant in the world laying literal waste to brown country after brown country is not only borderline asinine, I don't even think you believe it. Plus even if it was true it would still not disprove the narrow point I made.
Since you want to play the "name one" game, name one Christian/European nation that has been invaded and had regime change dictated to them by a Muslim/Non-European nation. Since the 18th century, so you can really stretch your twisted logic. If that was happening, you would see Christians committing very similar acts of violence to resist. And you would hear me voice the same opposition to the oppression. I never once said it was right, I simply said I have an idea where it's coming from.
Mike I get you. The Vietnamese were more focused on their territorial sovereignty. In my opinion, so were the majority of the Iraqi (and now Afghan, and soon to be Yemeni) people resisting US imposition on their national sovereignty. But let's try to uncomplicate this issue. Calling Al Queda (you notice we can't even agree on how to spell the stupid name) a fascist regime, implies they have a regime. The have a couple caves and a tape recorder. They are less than a pimple on a real fascists butt.
The only reason Al Queda is the face of terrorism is because the US Govt decided to make them the face. Al Queda, all 500 of them, are the new threat to American liberties? Man get real. Al Queada can't organize a shoe bomb or a underwear bomb, probably not even a bomb pop.
Al Queda is no more capable of being a threat to the US than the Bloods and the Crips. That's the head fake. We need a boogeyman and Bin Laden's old ass evidently will do. All that other stuff is dust in the wind. Bin Laden can't even win the support of his home country, I got to worry about him coming over here and changing the west side of Atlanta? I think not. I won't even pretend it's reasonable, if I do, then the terrorists/imperialists win.
Exodus mentality is RIGHT. Man fool, cats can kill you with a butterknife or shoestring IF THEY GOT THE WILL. If this
WILL manifests a pattern then only an exodus mentality says, "Look ma, no brains."
Since you want to play the "name one" game, name one Christian/European nation that has been invaded and had regime change dictated to them by a Muslim/Non-European nation.
The Peloponnese region of Greece.
Evidently, Ex, you're so hung up and blindly resentful of American power, you don't care to notice how other nations or peoples behave when they got power.
You're wholly invested in imagining Muslims and non-Europeans as victims... and the U.S. as victimizer-in-chief.
In your blindness, you ignore such obvious facts of modern life as the violent, global nature of Muslim extremism... the persecution and oppression of Christians in Muslim nations... and the freedom and prosperity you yourself are blessed to enjoy as a citizen of the United States.
Mills, that sounds like some Austerism???
Exodus Mentality...
"Calling Al Queda (you notice we can't even agree on how to spell the stupid name) a fascist regime, implies they have a regime."
Dwight. I didn't call them a regime, I said that Al Qaida is a fascist movement.
And yes, they to are concerned with territorial integrity: namely the territorial integrity of everyone who, regardless of nationality had the same belief set as they do. That's vastly different from the Vietnamese. In that case one had a whole bunch of people who identified as Vietnamese but had different belief sets - Marxists, Buddhists, Catholic Christians, etc.
In other words, the Vietnamese didn't seek to impose their belief on other peoples (though within the Vietnamese nations the Marxist-Leninist did, but, as a practical matter solely on the Vietnamese). The Islamic fundamentalists don't give a hoot about nation and oppose national self-determination.
Farst...
"but why call it "fascism" when it's Islam?"
Because the root problem isn't "Islam", the root problem is the belief in a heavenly absolute dictator. Christianity at its core as well as Judaism at its core is just as fascist as Islam at its core. The extent to which "Christian Nations" are not fascist is the extent to which these social organizations have removed themselves from the fundamental tenants of Christianity. Same goes with Judaism. Take the Lubavitcher movement under Menachem Schneerson, for example. If you ever wanna see fascism in action, check out Crown Heights in Brooklyn.
Same with Islam. The Wahabis are a fascist movement. And so are the Shiites in Iran.
Once again: It ain't "Islam" it's the belief in an divine absolute dictator.
Fisher,
The root reality is that Islam commands its adherents to submit infidels and kill infidels if they refuse conversion. To then call this a "fascist movement" is inexplicable. Further, the attempt at a moral equivalency between Islam and Chrisitianity seems like what I have said before, liberals/secularists/radical autonomists have no principled defense against the imperialism of Islam.
If you do, what is it and how is the problem of jihadists in our midst going to be solved by those that claim, "diversity is our strength" and we must crush this "fascist movement?"
The Peloponnese region of Greece.
AHHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
ExMen - 1
Undercover White Woman - 0
but I have to give it to you David for the unparalleled entertainment value of all that over-the-top, dramatic pearl clutching you.do.so.well.
In your blindness, you ignore such obvious facts of modern life as the violent, global nature of Muslim extremism... the persecution and oppression of Christians in Muslim nations... and the freedom and prosperity you yourself are blessed to enjoy as a citizen of the United States.
your shit is so extra, you even got your boy giving you dap.
Mills, that sounds like some Austerism???
priceless...,
Nah, CNthings...
Ain't no knuckle love... Just a jab at at liberal who doesn't have a single principled argument against the spread of Islam that isn't illiberal. These illiberal arguments exclusively learned from a "white racists."
Then again, you don't have a single principled argument either. In fact, the submission of Western Liberalism to Islam represents simple biological reality. If one set of genes is tolerant and indiscriminate while the other set of genes is intolerant and discriminatory then the former dies and the latter lives on.
Parasite...
If one set of genes is tolerant and indiscriminate while the other set of genes is intolerant and discriminatory then the former dies and the latter lives on.
It's malignant, ignant shit like this that has consigned you to permanent peasant status.
The anglo-american establishment and its pre-industrial, feudal forbears have been using you and yours for so long - that you can no longer even grasp the historical and biological reality of their ruthless parasitization.
Sorry-assed peasants like you keep poor William Wallace spinning in his grave.
CNdiversion,
Was that a concession that your biological reductionism is defenseless against a superior biological reductionism or that your biological reductionism can't recognize Jihad? Or maybe and more likely, it is both?
Craig... bubbe... get a job.
Nah peasant,
It was a straightforward pronouncement that the enemy of my enemy is my friend.
"The Peloponnese region of Greece"
WTF?!?!?! Brother I asked you to name a NATION, that was INVADED by ANOTHER NATION. Are we seriously going to pretend like one part of Greece fighting with another part of Greece counts? Seems like a classic case of a civil war to me, albeit one where a nearby neighbor took a side. OK, I realize that I don't know everything so can you at least provide some sourcing for your statement so I can try to get on the same page as you. That's a pretty weak comparison though, if you consider that the Ottoman Turks claimed that land since the early 15th century and as such, it's a major stretch to consider it a European or Christian nation.
And spare me the blather about what I'm hung up on. Negro I'm hung up on the truth as it is and not as I imagine it might be. I have no more use for fools who behead their daughters because it is the will of Allah or some other fairy tale being than I do for American imperialism, so don't try to pigeon hole me with your zero-sum game limitations. I don't roll like that.
The freedom and prosperity that I am blessed to receive was EARNED by my forebears, not bestowed as some beneficent gift for which I should be eternally grateful. You sound like Pat Robertson saying Black folks should be happy we was brought here as slaves and saved from a life of swinging through the trees in Afrika. Fool.
And what America is today, came at the expense of so many that we should all weep continuously at this wonderland built on the bones and ashes of other peoples and cultures. And yes, I recognize that that is the history of the entire world. And it's time for someone to say stop the madness. I have transcended the caveman concept of might makes right, you seem to revel in it. You are cool with persecution as long as your team is winning.
If my blessing of freedom and prosperity comes at the expense of others freedoms, what am I really but a despot? And no, it's not hypocritical for me to remain here and still revile what has been done here, so save the why don't you leave and go back to Afrika drivel. I've chosen to conduct my dissent in the belly of this beast. You've evidently chosen to become one with the beast. Good luck with that...
@Thordaddy...Huh?????
Exodus Mentality is truth!!!
Accept no substitutes...,
Exodus mentality,
Are jihadists real and are they operative on American soil?
Once you answer that, we may proceed to critique your ostrich-like outlook.
Farst...
"The root reality is that Islam commands its adherents to submit infidels and kill infidels if they refuse conversion."
And where exactly in the Quran or even the Hadith does it say that? Nowhere that I know off. Heck, there even exist debate among Islamic scholars whether apostasy (conversion by a Muslim to another religion) is punishable by death or otherwise.
In other words, Farst, as usual you have no idea what you are talking about.
Islam, is just the second youngest (after Christianity and before Baha'i) heresy, that is, grandchild, of Judaism.
To reiterate.
The notion of a forcible conversion and or the submission of "infidels" to a particular religion is solely the result of a logical conclusion rooted in the concept of a divine dictator ("GOD") which is common to most religions and in particular to the Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition.
And what America is today, came at the expense of so many that we should all weep continuously at this wonderland built on the bones and ashes of other peoples and cultures. – EM
My man. Speak the truth and shame the devil. The United States of America is constructed on a foundation of theft and murder. The land of the Pilgrim’s pride is really the land of the Pilgrim’s genocide.
You are cool with persecution as long as your team is winning. – EM
Yes sir, political Neanderthals and Yurugu’s in general are down with terrorists like Andrew Jackson, George Custer, Pitchfork Ben Tillman, and Deadeye Dick Cheney. But when the chicken’s come home to roost they start wailing like a stuck pig.
"The United States of America is constructed on a foundation of theft and murder." MB
Name a nation that isn't constructed on a foundation of theft and murder.
____________________________ ?
^ Denmark Vesey is school.
If the talented tenth put their collective capital where their mouth is, would they require theft and murder to start their nation?
Fisher,
What aspects of fascism are Islamic? And you still haven't said EXACTLY WHY you would impede a jhadist practicing his faith?
"DV"...
"Name a nation that isn't constructed on a foundation of theft and murder."
Mills...
"^ Denmark Vesey is school."
Oh, goody, goody. Moral Relativism:
Because other folks rape, murder, pillage, and enslave, "DV" and David Mills are justified in raping, murdering, pillaging, and enslaving.
But is anyone justified in raping, murdering, pillaging, and enslaving "DV" as well as David Mills and their respective families?
Farst...
"What aspects of fascism are Islamic?"
You got got it the wrong way around, Farst. The question is: "what aspects of Islam are fascist?"
But then again, I shoulda known better. Trying to explain logic to you is a waste of time.
Name a nation that is constructed on a foundation of theft and murder which professes to "hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
We're not arguing degrees of morality because there is no such thing. However, no nation currently on this planet even comes close to America when it comes to the theft of other peoples land and labor, and the destruction of their lives and humanity through genocide and holocaust.
No nation on the planet Earth even comes close to the United States of America when it comes to hypocrisy.
"Lying speech is their native tongue."
The stuck pigs are squealing ...
Bradley,
Well, lucky for you that you don't actually live in this God-forsaken place, but what about the MILLIONS OF BROWN PEOPLE that are completely clueless when they come to these shores and cross her borders?
Fisher,
I don't see the logic in stripping a phenomenon of all its detail to the point where if one was in the vicinity of said phenomenon, such individual would be left to DIE in a state of deconstructionism. Or perhaps, you simply calculate the potential material configuration to be highly improbable so wasting too much resource in the finding of a solution to the problem is out of the question. Instead, you will waste resource trying to convince us that the boxer bomber was exhibiting fascistic tendencies. But then again, if you were a seat over, your inability and principled prohibition against profiling (detailing a phenomenon) makes DEAD Mike. Unless you're lucky???
Mahkeru...
"However, no nation currently on this planet even comes close to America when it comes to the theft of other peoples land and labor..."
Bro. Makheru, with all due respect. This is a truly ahistorical statement. Russia didn't get as large bu osmosis and the Soviet Union, particularly under Stalin, but even under Lenin and Trozky was quite a monster. Don't forget Nazi Germany, and do not forget Portugal and Spain which wiped out the Native populations of the Caribbean and South America and who started the import of African slaves into the Americas, and particularly into Brazil. Let's not for get the British and their colonial empire, etc.
Fisher,
You wouldn't know jihad if bradley slapped you with it.
This is a truly ahistorical statement. -- M. Fisher
Ahistorical???? As regards the 12-year Reich, the USSR which collapsed in 1991, the "Brutish" Empire and the others, I'll stand by my statement based on the criteria I’ve established.
See Fish...
None theez nigels
Really seek liberty
Got this dood mak
Worship god of autonomy
That means Bradley
Establish the criteria
Stand n judgement
Like good lil' sharia
But dood parasitic
Think all that blood history
Mean shit to uh hick
Bein' beat down
By uh nigel witha stick
Or uh jihadi going
tick, tick, tick
Knowin' white guilt uh killer
I pull out his heart
N take back my life...
"Are jihadists Real?" I want to make sure that I completely understand you before I drop on that one. Because I think you may mean Islamic fundamentalist wanne be imperialists, but rather than put words in your mouth, why don't you define "jihadists" and then I'll tell you if they are real.
And I didn't say blow up a store front, I said it would be easier and far more likely to succeed if you attacked the airport terminal than attempting to blow up an airplane. Making people scared to fly would still be accomplished, by making them scared to even go near an airport, wouldn't you think?
Unless your jihadists are all actually dumber than a doorknob and thus easily manipulated into doing things that don't serve their stated purposes.
Exodus mentality,
A jihadist is a Muslim who is commanded by Allah to submit, convert and if not successful, kill the infidel. An infidel being a "nonbeliever" in god Allah.
... no nation currently on this planet even comes close to America when it comes to the theft of other peoples land and labor, and the destruction of their lives and humanity through genocide and holocaust.
How horrible that you must live in such a place, Makheru. Sounds like a daily agony. How do you bear it?
Thor, then of course there are people who live in America who believe that and fit your definition of jihadist. Are they the sole reason why we will be flying buck naked before long, and having to allow any law enforcement officer with a hard-on to strip search us at will? Hell to the no they are not. Are they even running around literally doing that which they claim to believe in? I don't think so, otherwise we would be finding dead bodies all over the place very single day as a result of jihadists efforts to cleanse the infidels.
Now answer a question for me. Are there believers in religious dogmas other than fundamentalist Islam, who also are willing to kill to protect and expand their way of thinking in supposed service to their idea of God? I can save you from intellectual dishonesty by telling you the answer is undoubtedly yes. Are we to react to them the same way we react to "jihadists"? Since we obviously don't, why is the small faction of Muslim fanatics somehow special?
I think it's strange that Mills would co-sign DV's remark that all nations rape, pillage and murder, while at the same time seeking to gin up outrage at the beheadings of Christians by Muslims?
I mean, if we're playing the moral relativism game, then the actions of Muslims are easily justified by the actions of Christians in other instances. Which are justified by the actions of Muslims in other instances. Which goes on and on until we get nowhere.
Don't put is, wrong is wrong and right is right. Neither Christianity nor Islam condones the actions of many of its followers. The same with Judaism, Buddhism and most other religions. Folks have been effing up for centuries, which as a I noted, makes it ludicrious for people today to pretend that Muslims have suddenly gone crazy and broken all the rules.
I'm suspicious of anyone who makes this argument. I'm suspicious of anyone who tries to convince me that these Muslims present some sort of unique threat to the world. It smell like crap.
Oh, and I'm just as concerned about folks who set themselves up as the sole arbiters of right and wrong as Michael Fisher is of folks who believe in a "Dictator God." If people create their own value system everytime they take a breath, I'm quite sure that value system boils down to "What ever is best for me."
^^^This is your brain on liberalism.
Dude is eschewing the use of moral relativism by USING MORAL RELATIVISM because he is LIBERAL afterall.
What do Christians have to do with rooting out jihadists in our midst?
What do past injustices have to do with rooting out jihadists in our midst?
What do Christians in the ME have to do with Americans rooting out jihadists in our midst?
Dude is radical autonomist bent on self-annihilation.
Post a Comment