How Islam will defeat the USA

[allingeneral]

The problem that I have with your statements is that you go from making an incredibly bold statement that Islam is creating an army domestically to stage some sort of violent revolution and implement religious rule which is not even popular within the middle east itself. Furthermore you did not specify whether you were referring to extreme elements or the mainstream.

Really? I said this: "a lot of these so-called "Moderates" are preaching daily with quite extreme views against our culture."

and this: "I'm not saying that the mainstream of Islam is practicing Sharia in the US - I'm simply stating that it is being applied here by extremists. "

Those statements seem to point pretty clearly at the extreme elements, not the mainstream.

As far as re-reading your posts, I did twice before I asked for clarification, if you read above you will see that when referring to sharia law and the taliban, you did use the word "you," hence my request for clarification, thanks. -Adam

OK, to clarify one more time - the "you" was a collective (Islam) you, not a personal (YOU) you.

"don't practice your religion in the US unless you plan to assimilate with the rest of our culture (which you seem to have accomplished)"

Perhaps a poor choice of pronouns, but it made sense to me exactly the way I meant it.

P.S. just would like to toss out there that Allah is simply the arabic word for God. When Muslims say there is no god but God, they are in fact referring to the God of Abraham. It is very clearly written within the Quran, I have read it myself more than once.

Yes, I understand that - but no other religion in the world (that I'm aware of) refers to those who do not adhere to their specific religion as "Non-believers" or "Infidels".

P.S. I'm done arguing with you about my choice of words. I'm pretty sure that I was very clear and that I made an effort to indicate that I was not lumping you or the mainstream of Islam into the extremist role. The more I talk to you, the more I wonder if I was wrong to make such an assumption.

Don't let your anger blind you to what's happening around you.

[caps85]

The problem that I have with your statements is that you go from making an incredibly bold statement that Islam is creating an army domestically to stage some sort of violent revolution and implement religious rule which is not even popular within the middle east itself. Furthermore you did not specify whether you were referring to extreme elements or the mainstream.

Really? I said this: "a lot of these so-called "Moderates" are preaching daily with quite extreme views against our culture."

and this: "I'm not saying that the mainstream of Islam is practicing Sharia in the US - I'm simply stating that it is being applied here by extremists. "

Those statements seem to point pretty clearly at the extreme elements, not the mainstream.

As far as re-reading your posts, I did twice before I asked for clarification, if you read above you will see that when referring to sharia law and the taliban, you did use the word "you," hence my request for clarification, thanks. -Adam

OK, to clarify one more time - the "you" was a collective (Islam) you, not a personal (YOU) you.

"don't practice your religion in the US unless you plan to assimilate with the rest of our culture (which you seem to have accomplished)"

Perhaps a poor choice of pronouns, but it made sense to me exactly the way I meant it.

P.S. just would like to toss out there that Allah is simply the arabic word for God. When Muslims say there is no god but God, they are in fact referring to the God of Abraham. It is very clearly written within the Quran, I have read it myself more than once.

Yes, I understand that - but no other religion in the world (that I'm aware of) refers to those who do not adhere to their specific religion as "Non-believers" or "Infidels".

P.S. I'm done arguing with you about my choice of words. I'm pretty sure that I was very clear and that I made an effort to indicate that I was not lumping you or the mainstream of Islam into the extremist role. The more I talk to you, the more I wonder if I was wrong to make such an assumption.

Don't let your anger blind you to what's happening around you.

Once again you've failed to acknowledge you yourself stated that when you are using the word "moderate" you are referring to extremists, not the mainstream of Islam. You are hanging up on minor details and bypassing addressing all the major points of my previous posts. If you're lumping me into the extremist role for defending myself and my faith, you should be ashamed of yourself. Your attitude is an example of the exact opposite of what the American ideal is, and I see no point in discussing things further with you. The fact that you can't even bring yourself to respond to any of my previous statements in a meaningful way and constantly resort to either attempting to sidetrack the conversation or accuse me of being an extremist only display the fact that your arguments are weak, your logic is flawed, and you have a very poor education. You yourself are behaving like an extremist with your "it's my way or nothing" mentality. If you want to denigrate my religion and my service to my country so be it, but don't think for a second you're fooling anyone that you're an authority on anything other than being an ignorant bully. Take care, I'm out, Semper Fi

[gunderwood]

The order in which it is stated drastically changes the meaning. Saying most Muslims are terrorists is a vastly different statement than most terrorists are Muslim. While I'm mostly concerned with terrorism against the US, I still am concerned about terrorism period. I think the statement, most terrorists are Muslim holds true regardless of who was attacked. E.g. during the month of Ramadan, the number of Muslim terrorist attacks against other Muslims has averaged around 1,000 or approximately 30 a day!

A worldwide breakdown of terror acts by cause and target would be useful. While Muslim terrorists are certainly a high number and likely the majority, I'm not yet convinced that it is "most". I am not saying "most" is wrong, but there are a lot of things that happen in the world that we don't hear about thanks to our insular MSM. For instance, there is a lot of terrorism in Africa... some of it related to Islam... but a lot of it related to mining and pseudo-communist interests, etc... Then there is the narco-terrorism that has been going on for years in Central and South America and now in full-bloom in Mexico. And in this country we've had eco-terrorists even though they have not been as deadly as the more conventional types.

Yes, it would help and in fact it can be found at the NCTC's public database. If you search NCTC on VGOF you will find my two posts (back to back) which cover exactly this. However, the tinyurl links are bad so I remade the chart just for you. No surprises here.

https://wits.nctc.gov/FederalDiscoverWI ... 091231&N=0

Just in case that doesn't work for you, take a look at this cropped screenshot:


Edit: You can create all kinds of charts with their database. Very interesting stuff and worth a look at if you are really interested in quantifying the terrorism problem.

[gunderwood]

As an aside, gunderwood, please go read about some of the massacres I have listed, if you would like to explain to me how various pogroms conducted in Europe or the cleansing of the Huguenots from France were not religiously motivated when they occurred at the behest of the medieval church, I would be delighted to hear. This is basic undergraduate level history here and before you start making bold claims about how your history is so morally superior to every other cultural or religious groups in the world, please at least bother to read up on yourself. I never tried to bring up these thousands of years old battles to prove my point, but simply posted to them to respond to how absurd I feel it is for you to reference them as evidence in a discussion on current affairs.

I never claimed that there weren't historical atrocities committed in the name of or by a corrupted church. Again, you have failed to understand the context and argument.

The claim is that Islam has practically been at war with someone since its conception. This is what West meant when he said you are dealing with a Theo-political system which has been doing this since 622. Islam for the first approx. 1000 years was expanding...until they were pushed back and left behind technologically by Western civilization. Once this occurred, they didn't cease their hostilities, they simply moved to asymmetric warfare tactics such as terrorism. While the specific conditions behind each war vary, the general cause has not. Certain segments of Islam (and at times whole empires were ruled by this) have been and still are seeking to force the rest of the world to submit to it. I know that isn't a popular thing to say, but it is why those wars West mentioned were started. It is why Jefferson had to send the Marines to the shores of Tripoli (the Islamic Barbary states wanted us to pay tribute). On and on and on.

Discussing history and how it relates to the problems we face today is not absurd when done properly. That is a very ignorant view and is contradictory with suggesting I get a basic undergraduate level history education. Why should I bother with a history education when you suggest it is absurd to discuss it in relation to current affairs?

As far as knowledge of strategy or competence as a warrior, I first would like to ask you what your current profession is and what your background in the field is, since you feel more qualified than me to speak on the subject, and I also would like to point out that I work at the OCS currently, and while I may not be a general, I have at least some idea of what strategy is, but please feel free to quote Merriam Webster for me in the future.

Again, just because you have an association with a group or hold a job means nothing. I've known lots of people who have held "important" jobs but were incompetent. Just look at most of Obama's czars if you must. In my experience, the more someone pushes who they have been associated with, the less they actually know. E.g. real special forces soldiers don't go bragging on the Internet about what they have done. Or people who are important and have real connections have no need to flaunt them. Etc.

The condescending attitude isn't needed and won't get you anywhere with me. I can't verify anything you associate yourself with, so I simply don't care. I judge your aptitude based on your arguments and their validity, so far I'm not impressed.

[allingeneral]

Once again you've failed to acknowledge you yourself stated that when you are using the word "moderate" you are referring to extremists, not the mainstream of Islam.

I shouldn't have to acknowledge what I stated, as all of my statements stand on their own merit. Talking to you and rehashing what I said 13 posts ago is ridiculous.

You are hanging up on minor details and bypassing addressing all the major points of my previous posts.

Unfortunately, you haven't made any major points. All you've done is try to toss my own points back at me and I'm left defending my own statements in response.

If you're lumping me into the extremist role for defending myself and my faith, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Wrong. I have made multiple attempts to explain to you that I was not lumping you in the extremist role. Now, the word Moderate" has been sort of tainted by the MSM by applying it to everyone, they have made it so that it applies to extremists and moderates alike.

Your attitude is an example of the exact opposite of what the American ideal is, and I see no point in discussing things further with you.

Wrong again - to a point. The American ideal is what will allow Islam to take over the country, and people like you who want to rant and rave and call names, then fall back on "But it's the American Ideal!" are the ones who are taking advantage of the situation. Islam, as a whole, is taking advantage of the very freedoms that you and I have defended in military service.

The fact that you can't even bring yourself to respond to any of my previous statements in a meaningful way and constantly resort to either attempting to sidetrack the conversation or accuse me of being an extremist only display the fact that your arguments are weak, your logic is flawed, and you have a very poor education. You yourself are behaving like an extremist with your "it's my way or nothing" mentality. If you want to denigrate my religion and my service to my country so be it, but don't think for a second you're fooling anyone that you're an authority on anything other than being an ignorant bully. Take care, I'm out, Semper Fi

Very nice - back to the name-calling. I haven't side-tracked the conversation. I have quoted your responses and replied directly to your statements. ONE MORE TIME - I have not accused YOU of being an extremist. Get over yourself, man.

[LFS]

I just want to point out that the google ad below this thread was about a sale on hijabs.

http://www.middleeasternmall.com/?gclid ... 2godTQfBaA

Rick, I always knew you were secretly helping the Islamic takeover of this country!!!!

BTW, 70% off a hijab. That's a pretty good deal and would make a great Christmas gift. Dang it. I shouldn't have pointed this out. Now GS78 knows what to expect under the tree.

[LFS]

Just in case that doesn't work for you, take a look at this cropped screenshot:


Edit: You can create all kinds of charts with their database. Very interesting stuff and worth a look at if you are really interested in quantifying the terrorism problem.

Very interesting! What years did you use to get that graph? 142 Christian extremist attacks and only 2 eco/anti-globalisation attacks? Odd. But those numbers show that a little less than half of attacks are done by Islamic extremists, which is a far cry from "most".

[gunderwood]

Just in case that doesn't work for you, take a look at this cropped screenshot:


Edit: You can create all kinds of charts with their database. Very interesting stuff and worth a look at if you are really interested in quantifying the terrorism problem.

Very interesting! What years did you use to get that graph? 142 Christian extremist attacks and only 2 eco/anti-globalisation attacks? Odd. But those numbers show that a little less than half of attacks are done by Islamic extremists, which is a far cry from "most".

I used the last full year, 2009. The problem with summary stats is they hide a lot of meaning and you may not always agree with how they have assigned things or what was assigned to the database. There were 3,095 unknowns which simply means they lacked sufficient evidence to conclude one way or the other. We can't make a conclusion either with those included, so they should be removed from the total. To count them as all Islamic or none as Islamic would be wrong.

That would leave 5,229 Sunni attacks of of 7985 which is 65.4%. (ignoring the other Islamic groups)

There are also interesting trends or anomalies in the data. For example, the 142 Christian attacks were all in Uganda and I presume committed by the LRA rebels. I think something similar explains the very low count for Environmentalist/Anti-globalization. I don't think they include riots and other forms of violence. The two things that struck me about that data the first time I saw it were that there are very few Shia attacks, while Sunnis are off the charts and the large number of secular/political attacks compared to all the other religions.

[GS78]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/41b8f146-fa29 ... z16UXcsAdC



.....quick someone post the tombstone pic again right away.......



I wonder if this "naturalized U.S.CITIZEN was a good catholic boy?

I rest my case.

[zephyp]

@caps85 - first of all thank you for your service and stating that you are an American. Good stuff. Now, here's my take on your situation and others like you of the Islam faith...if you come here with the intent of becoming a citizen and adopting our way of life then you IMO are most welcome. If "you" come here with the intent of bringing Sharia law and/or not intending to become a citizen and/or intending to demand that America make concessions for you because you are Muslim then please stay home.

I think I speak for most of us when I say that we are concerned with Muslims who desire to bring their way of life here and force it upon Americans...some Muslims are attempting to do precisely that. IMHO if Muslims want to practice Sharia then they are welcome and free to do so elsewhere...not here.

Btw, hope you stick around. Your background has little bearing once you truly become an American...

[LFS]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/41b8f146-fa29 ... z16UXcsAdC



.....quick someone post the tombstone pic again right away.......

Sure. No problem.
[img]http://ken_ashford.typepad.com/.a/6a00d834515b2069e20120a543e4c9970c-pi[/img]

Oh crap! I'm getting my conspiratorial witch hunts confused. Are you talking about Napalitano's or yours?

[Daholt757]

[gunderwood]

IIRC, that isn't a staged photo. That was originally taken during an investigative report and isn't a real bomb. It is a toy bomb belt created by his Palestinian mom so he can go play martyr. Sad.

[Daholt757]

IIRC, that isn't a staged photo. That was originally taken during an investigative report and isn't a real bomb. It is a toy bomb belt created by his Palestinian mom so he can go play martyr. Sad.

wow, nevermind then, that's horrible... I thought it was staged. Nothing wrong with little boys playing war, but being a suicide bomber in a game? that's just sick

[gunderwood]

IIRC, that isn't a staged photo. That was originally taken during an investigative report and isn't a real bomb. It is a toy bomb belt created by his Palestinian mom so he can go play martyr. Sad.

wow, nevermind then, that's horrible... I thought it was staged. Nothing wrong with little boys playing war, but being a suicide bomber in a game? that's just sick

The indoctrination runs deep: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomorrow%27s_Pioneers

[allingeneral]

Deterioration of this thread requires that it be locked. Thank you for everyone's input.

Rick