Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

I haven't watched it yet (just heard about bits and pieces), but it has caused quite a stir. Surprised no one posted this yet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTjYLukK_D4

I'll pass. I learned all I'll ever need to know about Islam on 9/11/01.

What a muslim may look like:



So, clearly, Muslims are from Endor. Looks like they glossed over that. Typical.

That video didn't do anything but anger me. It's Diane Sawyer talking about how peaceful Islam is...and how very similar it is to Christianity and Judaism. Where's the clip that explains how Muslims want to take over the world and convert or kill all non-believers

Meh. It's just media spin. Everyone's doing it. It's not worth getting angry about; it's one side of a story. It's not necessarily entirely representative of all of the facts, or the entire truth. Though, I know it's been said - not all muslims are terrorists hell bent on killing us infadels, but it does seem that all of the hell bent terrorists have been muslim as of late.

Edit: and because this is an Islam thread:



Obligatory.

This appears to be an attempt to do the same thing as the OP video, but it seems to me this guy goes way off script. This isn't an "extremist" in the Middle East, it is a leader from London! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anjem_Choudary

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/week-tra ... 745&page=2

Transcript: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/ ... ts?page=68

CHOUDARY: Well -- well, let me just say that Islam has a solution for all of the problems that mankind faces. If you want to live at peace with Muslims, we are quite willing to live at peace with you. But let us remember that history did not begin on 9/11. Before 9/11, the Americans -- the American government bombed Sudan and Afghanistan. They were supporting the pirate state of Israel. So 9/11 was a reaction. You know, I think that we need to get away from the stereotyping. And this idea that you have moderate Muslims and you have radical Muslims, you know, it's complete nonsense. A Muslim is the one who submits to the command of the creator. If he submits, he is a practicing Muslim. If he is not, then he should be practicing [Well said. -Gunderwood].

DAISY KHAN: I have to disagree with him, because Islam is a religion of pluralism that embraces all religions and it also embraces different interpretations. This is why we have so many schools of thought.[Yes, tolerance and pluralism is also why you kill each other during the others religious celebration... -Gunderwood] What Anjem is talking about is an exclusivist view of Islam, which is my way or the highway. And my interpretation is the only interpretation--

CHOUDARY: There are many people who are justifying -- there are many people who are justifying the inability to practice the Sharia, to say, "Well, I have a different form of religion." You know, people want to claim that they're vegetarians and they're eating big beef burgers. You can not be a non-practicing vegetarian. Therefore, similarly, if you're a Muslim, you submit to the Sharia [This is the mainstream view too. -Gunderwood].

FRANKLIN GRAHAM: He's telling the truth.

AMANPOUR: You see, Reverend Graham says you're telling the truth. So, do you agree with Reverend Graham and our panelists on this side that Americans should fear Islam?

CHOUDARY: we do believe, as Muslims, the East and the West will one day be governed by the Sharia. Indeed, we believe that one day, the flag of Islam will fly over the White House. Indeed, there's even an oration of the Prophet where he said, "The day of judgment will not come until a group of my oma... -- "

DONNA MARSH O'CONNOR: Can I just -- ?

CHOUDARY: "Conquer the White House."

TheGodfather wrote:http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/2600.htm

Heh. In some circles, they'd call this sort of thing foreplay (or so I've heard). And some people pay good money for that kind of thing!

chfaunce wrote:

TheGodfather wrote:http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/2600.htm

Heh. In some circles, they'd call this sort of thing foreplay (or so I've heard). And some people pay good money for that kind of thing!

So beating women is funny to you. I thought you were better than that Rosie.

Nope, never said the BDSM scene was 'funny'.

I've missed you, Ben!

Religious zealotry is rampant across the globe. We have Islamists killing Christians, Jews, Hindis, and Mulsims. We have Hindis killing Sikhs and Muslims. We have Jews killing Muslims. The Buddhists and Christians and other major religions have been quiet lately (in a historical sense).

[Hmm, I see that the Stop Islamization of Europe group is called neo-Nazi. Funny, since they support Israel.]

It is interesting from an anthropological and historical view to note that while, yes, the great nations of the Christian West have waged the most horrific wars in our history, that we have adopted rational and scientific thought and operate under secular systems that seem to be working pretty well.

I'm rambling now. Back to work.

Not to make excuses for Islam, but there are facts.

Islam didn't really go through an Enlightenment period like Judaism and Christianity did. Many Muslims have integrated with Western society but many (more than people will admit) have not, especially in Europe.

Plus they're from the third world, and the thing the third world likes to do is hate on the first world (the perceived oppressor). Everything the United States (and Israel, the "Zionist" empire) does seems like "threatening to Islam" to the less educated Middle Eastern Muslims. The smarter radicals know better but use that propaganda to gain supporters to their cause and to be terrorists.

Religious zealotry is also a problem (again poor, uneducated society with no Enlightenment leaves little else but religion sometimes). Those that don't become radical terrorist become radical imams, so the leadership in various Islamic groups tend to be more radical,

I've met many Muslims and they are some of the chillest people I've known. But that's the smart and less ideological ones that are "moderate" and actually contribute to society. Seeing as most Muslims (mainly outside the US) tend to be poor and uneducated, that's why a disproportionate amount of Muslims seem to be the problem.

Islam is different, but still is close enough to Judaism and Christianity that, if the Islamic world ever truly modernizes, we would coexist well. The religion itself is not the problem, but it's a major component of many factors that if we don't deal with (or eliminate) those problems, radical Islam will be a pain in the ass for a loooong time.

RocKor wrote:Not to make excuses for Islam, but there are facts.

Islam didn't really go through an Enlightenment period like Judaism and Christianity did. Many Muslims have integrated with Western society but many (more than people will admit) have not, especially in Europe.

Plus they're from the third world, and the thing the third world likes to do is hate on the first world (the perceived oppressor). Everything the United States (and Israel, the "Zionist" empire) does seems like "threatening to Islam" to the less educated Middle Eastern Muslims. The smarter radicals know better but use that propaganda to gain supporters to their cause and to be terrorists.

Religious zealotry is also a problem (again poor, uneducated society with no Enlightenment leaves little else but religion sometimes). Those that don't become radical terrorist become radical imams, so the leadership in various Islamic groups tend to be more radical,

I've met many Muslims and they are some of the chillest people I've known. But that's the smart and less ideological ones that are "moderate" and actually contribute to society. Seeing as most Muslims (mainly outside the US) tend to be poor and uneducated, that's why a disproportionate amount of Muslims seem to be the problem.

Islam is different, but still is close enough to Judaism and Christianity that, if the Islamic world ever truly modernizes, we would coexist well. The religion itself is not the problem, but it's a major component of many factors that if we don't deal with (or eliminate) those problems, radical Islam will be a pain in the ass for a loooong time.

Your assertion is a common one, but the data suggests the opposite or your claim.

Terrorist captured in Iraq were overwhelmingly well educated and most of them were engineers.
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/di ... id=6607832
You have to buy that paper, so here are news stories reporting it (the US military has noted the same for some time):

That link is more than coincidental. Analysing data on 284 jihadis from across the Muslim world, Diego Gambetta and Steffen Hertog found that 69% had been to university – which, if borne out generally, suggests al-Qaida is better educated than the British workforce. And 44% went into engineering, with Islamic studies a distant second at 19%. Put another way, engineers in Muslim countries were between three and four times more likely to become violent extremists than other graduates.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/ja ... ngineering

For their recent study, the two men collected records on 404 men who belonged to violent Islamist groups active over the past few decades (some in jail, some not). Had those groups reflected the working-age populations of their countries, engineers would have made up about 3.5 percent of the membership. Instead, nearly 20 percent of the militants had engineering degrees. When Gambetta and Hertog looked at only the militants whose education was known for certain to have gone beyond high school, close to half (44 percent) had trained in engineering. Among those with advanced degrees in the militants’ homelands, only 18 percent are engineers.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/magaz ... Lab-t.html

Not only that, but many of them actually studied in the Western world to obtain those advanced degrees. From 9/11 Commission testimony:

I disagree. Many of al-Qaida's affiliate groups, as in other extremist groups in the Middle East, are led by men with advanced degrees from Western schools in science and technology. http://www.9-11commission.gov/hearings/ ... _yaphe.htm

Who is she?"A Distinguished Research Professor at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, the National Defense University, Washington D.C., Judith is a specialist in Middle Eastern political analysis, with a focus on Iraq, Persian Gulf, Arab, Islamic and regional issues. Prior to joining the INSS in 1995, Dr. Yaphe served with the Directorate of Intelligence, Office of Near Eastern and South Asian Analysis at the Central Intelligence Agency." http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?ti ... h_S._Yaphe

There is a famous economist study/lecture/book which found that the higher your education level and economic status, the more likely you support or participate in terrorism.
http://www.amazon.com/What-Makes-Terror ... 0691134383

Of course proof is a hard thing to come buy, but the old assumption that poor, ignorant people are the terrorist is not supported by any dataset I have seen. On the contrary, the data suggests that terrorism has far more to do with politics and a perceived threat to ones society. That sort of suggests why those more educated and from better economic backgrounds are more likely to participate in terrorism. I.e. they have better communications and access to information, they have a better understanding of their culture/history, and they have the skills and resources to inflict maximum damage.

That does not bode well for your assertion about modernizing Islamic culture. In fact, that is one thing they are fighting against (at least most Islamic terrorist groups say so). The problem is that Islam is far more than a religion. Islam regulates every aspect of their life, from law to economics to education. How do you hope to modernize it when doing so requires that one contradict their religion? Is is purely a coincidence that Islam is the only major religion (and the primary source of violence) which opposes any sort of "modernization?"

In short, how do you propose to better educate them when they are already on average better educated than the "modern" world opposing them? How many more doctorates in science and technology do they need to not be an Islamic terrorist?

You are right about the leadership and the terrorists planning and carrying out plots and attacks are very well educated. I had in mind the average foot soldier strapping a bomb on himself or grabbing an AK and shooting at troops (you know, the guys the smart ones send out do die.) I am fully aware of the intelligence and education of the terrorists, and failed to explain my point adequately, but you are right; that if you educate a radical, all you've got is a smart radical and I didn't think of that. I meant educating and improving their societies.

But I never said educating or modernizing them was either a good idea or our responsibility.I was just explaining that this is why the Islamic world is such a problem. Give a caveman modern technology and he's more likely to be dangerous than not. This is, in effect, the whole middle east. People stuck in the ideological equivalent of the dark ages with modern technology and information.

But the fact that there are "moderate" (an inappropriate word that is used to describe the more secular yet deafeningly silent, some would say cowardly) Muslims means that there may be hope for Muslims, but not for the Middle East. As long as you have Islamic governments, Sharia law, and practical theocracies running those countries, we'll be fighting these terrorists for generations unless they truly secularize. But it is the way of religion (ESPECIALLY Islam) to resist change. And Islam has such a grasp on its followers that secularization may never occur.

Honestly if we nuked the whole region I wouldn't miss it.

RocKor wrote;

Honestly if we nuked the whole region I wouldn't miss it.

Doubt anyone else would miss it either,,

Muck Fuslims..