Islam v The United States: How To Diffuse a Political Time-Bomb

Now but a very significant event happened in 1948 that created a problem that didn't exist before. I am certainly not suggesting that Israel doesn't have a right to exist now- but the creation of Israel solved one problem, and created another.

I agree- Islam expanded by war until it was stopped.

Hmmm point of order- no autocrat has been in power longer than the U.S. has been a country. Most Islamic countries did not exist as their modern states as long as the United States has. That statement just doesn't make any sense.

 

You're supposed to be looking at this from outer space Jeff. Back up a little...

 

"We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of [Kanamits and their holy prophet of the book ‘To Serve Man’]." (Obama)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Serve_Man_(The_Twilight_Zone)

Now then, I invite you to Kulina (i.e. surrender to Chef Batali), embrace Kulina and you will be safe and well fed; embrace Kulina and Chef Batali will bestow on you a double reward of going to Kalhalla as a sacrifice. But if you reject this invitation of Kulina, you shall be responsible for misguiding the pheasants (i.e. your nation).

How far out do you want us to go?

 

Really far, to where language ceases to have meaning.

 

Some religions are not so benevolent.
36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”
37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[a] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ 40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.” .

In contrast to Islam-

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 26: Narrated Abu Huraira*)
Allah's Apostle was asked, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, "To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's Cause."

 

If the Islamics shared a teaspoon of sanity amongst them, we would have no such problem. But they don't. Their goal is all out, worldwide domination of Sharia, and I suspect an all out war of Islam vs. the rest of the world is inevitable. It may not be today, or tomorrow, heck it may not be during our lifetimes. But unless something changes, it IS coming.

[video=youtube;wtYXpWSZdbw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wtYXpWSZdbw[/video]

 

Where language ceases to have meaning is a very harsh state where for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, but that is not possible for biological systems simply due to environmental resistances to equality. As you get closer to such a state the laws simplify.

In higher organisms language is learned and so is history for reactions, but a lower organism’s reactions are in essence learned by survival of the fittest.

For the most part some of our enemy is no greater than a lower organism, it is illiterate, it cannot see much more than its own needs, but it may react to turning of the lead fish, and it reacts much like a creature without much reason. They can be herded into a net, or attracted to a sticky tape or bug zapper.

Where language ceases to have meaning and they occupy our space, they simply exist as a threat, much like Tarzan and Numa "El Adrea," and there can be no diffusing that bomb except with a display of language, which you have denied the ability of puffed up display; it is simply kill or be killed.

 

The Ahadith are non-canonical. Stop that.

BTW, "jihad" does not mean "war." It means "struggle."

Drug rehab is a "jihad."

 

Or perhaps you're over analyzing the situation and things are the way they are.

Meaning perhaps they hate us and want to destroy us for no other reason that because we're not Muslims and that we are indeed defending ourselves against a significant threat to us and the concept of freedom. In which case, Islam IMO should be eradicated by any means necessary.

 

Like between a shark and its prey?

Islam has a set of unchangeable laws, one last very final prophet, a God that does not speak to the heart; “all this machine does is swim and eat and make little sharks, and that's all”:

Swim:

"[4.101] And when you journey in the earth, there is no blame on you if you shorten the prayer, if you fear that those who disbelieve will cause you distress, surely the unbelievers are your open enemy."

Eat:

“Lands owned by society

This kind of lands is not salable. Even the State has no right to sell them. Lands developed and tilled by human hands and those which come under Muslim control consequent on jihad are considered to be the property of the Muslim society and none can purchase or sell even one metre thereof.“
http://www.al-islam.org/philosophyofislam/17.htm

Make little sharks:

"The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims."

"(3) Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri: We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's Apostle about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection." (Book #62, Hadith #137)"

A teaspoon of sanity would be admitting that none of that started with US, it was having to go around it that found America, it was having to deal with the tribute that created the “Marines' Hymn,” and the only thing that can change it is them.

A teaspoon of sanity is saying, “[109.6] You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion,” but a gallon is saying that religion displayed above cannot occupy our space without denigration. That is why the only sane course is to impeach and convict and put in prison both Obama and Clinton for their illegal statecraft.

 

So I was particularly struck by the portion of the video where they the journalist Rod Dreher pointed out the links of the media front man Dr. Sied to radical Islamicists who were making statements of assassination and take over in the "Death of the Jews Rally" in Washington D.C.

When he started talking about the false accusations of anti-islamic racism and defaming the person by accusations of mental problems ets.

"The new face of Hate" does that phrase sound familiar?

I believe the facts of this documentary should be reviewed, and if all proves truthful, then this video should made manditory viewing for all High School Juniors in their civics classes.

Thank you for posting this very informative video.


-

 

Stop citing Ahadith and out-of-context passages from the Qur'an. The Ahadith are non-canonical.

The last paragraph is non-sensical and has nothing to do with law or any sort of external reality.

 

Exactly how would you do that on the textual medium of a internet forums?

This is silliness.

-

 

The first thing everyone here should understand is that the only thing new to Islam about Osama bin Laden is his tactics and those really aren't all that new. The history of islam is scattered with Osama bin ladens and saddly they are still praised for their zeal toward allah.

Hadiths may not be canonical per se, but they are instrumental in the interpretation of much that is. There are hundreds if not thousands of Hadith's some dating back to only shortly after the time of Mohammed others much more recent. One should also understand that the war on terror is by it's very nature a war for the heart and soul of Islam. And if ultimately we lose this war there will come, in the fullness of time a blood bath of a war, that in terms of ferocity, will make World War I look like a Sunday afternoon picnic.

 

Nonsense. For the Sunni, other than the Koran, there is no higher authority than the bukhari hadiths. And it's a struggle that frequently involves "armour" "horses" and "naval expeditions" where the "Muslim fighter in the battle-field", "putting himself and his property in danger" and gets a reward of "booty if he survives" and "admitted to paradise if he is killed in battle as a martyr". I haven't read a thing to indicate it would ever involve drug rehab.

 

Then you have not even read enough of the Ahadith to be taken seriously.

Figures.

 

Sunnis view the first four caliphs as the "rightly guided caliphs", the ideal to be followed.

The Rashidun Caliphate expanded gradually, with the time span of 24 years of conquest a vast territory was conquered comprising North Africa, the Middle East, Transoxiana, the Caucasus, parts of Anatolia, the whole of the Sassanid Persian empire, the Greater Khorasan, the islands of Cyprus, Rhodes and Sicily, the Iberian Peninsula was invaded, and Baluchistan was conquered, the empires eastern frontiers reaching the lower Indus river in the Indian subcontinent and western frontiers to the Atlantic Ocean.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashidun_conquests

Within 80 years of muhammads death they were waging jihad in spain.

 

Mr. Dixon, that would be, sir, in no small part my point...

- - - Updated - - -

And you haven't read enough Hadiths or you'd know better.

 

I don't usually say stuff like this, so take it as a compliment. You've gone completely off the deep end. Your post reads like a dystopian novel.

• Registering ownership of the Quran?
• Taking away the Quran as an additional punishment if a Muslim commits a violent crime?
  Flat out just breaking the 4th amendment. Do I even have to explain why? I'll let the texts speak for themselves;
  • "Obtaining a License to own a Koran will be an acceptance to have your email, phone calls, and residence searched at any time."
  • "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
• 10 years hard labor for possessing a book? Let's just throw the 1st amendment in there.

YOU are the threat to America, my friend. You should be the one getting the rough treatment, not the insignificant 0.8% of Americans who are Muslims. This is the sort of thing they say before they go round up the Jews, you've just changed the religion targeted.

I respectfully hope nobody ever listens to you.

 

What if my religion called for followers to smear themselves with feces, fresh, warm, smelly feces, then enthusiastically embrace the best attired, best groomed persons in sight.

Would you defer to my religion, too?

I know it isn't like other religions, but Islam isn't really like other religions, either. In fact, Islam is too comprehensive in application than say, Christianity, to be thought of as the same thing, really.

Yet, Islam is still afforded religious deference.

So, why not mine, too?

 

When you become more serious about the religion maybe you will be told the end goal of Jihad...the ultimate objective of Jihad.

Here's a spoiler: Global Caliphate

 

And if that book was "The Turner Diaries" and the mad bomber was Tim McVeigh?

If the organization killing other Americans was some radical sect of a "Christian" church which believed all Native Americans needed to die and was setting off explosives at their public events?

If the organization killing other Americans committing murder was the mafia and they were doing it from money, rather than Allah?

If the Organization killing other Americans was the KKK bombing Black Churches?

We're not talking about innocent people here. We're talking about people inside America who AFTER the Boston Marathon bombing were cheering for the successful attacks.

Watch the video "Grand Deception" posted above, and note the words of the cleric who gave the first congressional prayer, talking about killing Americans with glee, before and after he was given the honor of speak a Islamic Prayer before Congress.

When the members of an organization start murdering other Americans, they give up their rights to read the book of their choice, if that book is the reason they state they're murdering people. We ought to take away any explosive, guns and poison they have too, don't ya think?

I going to go out of limb here and assume you've never spent time in an area that is frequently hit by suicide Jihadi Bombers...

And I also suspect you're not one of the Americans who've had loved ones killed or maimed by the Islamic Radicals.

What part of conspiracy to commit mass murder don't you get?

What part of American Islamic Citizens cheering the death of non-Islamic Americans don't you get?

Those Victims have rights! Their Families have the right to see those Muslims cheering the murder of their loved ones restricted from the ability to aid in the next bombing murder.

Those Criminals, in aiding and abetting criminals in the act of committing mass murder, have given up many of their rights.

As I have already stated, if a group of Muslims completely renounces the Radical Muslims committing mass murder, they are not subject to these penalties.

Those Muslims who publicly cheer the murder of other American non-Muslims are part of a criminal conspiracy to commit murder, and should be treated as such.

-

 

They suck. The average 12 year old American beginner can play guitar better than that.

 

this post should be moved to the humor and satire page or moved to a newly created page called americans against the constitution and bill of rights

 

All books are protected under the first amendment. The only exemption the Supreme Court has invented (the constitution makes no qualification) - is that speech which promotes "imminent lawless action" against specific targets. The Quran does no such thing. Certainly not more so than the Old Testament.

I agree, the Quran and Bible command some messed up things from their followers, and if they go through with them they should be punished, but just holding those beliefs means nothing.

Anyone who blew up a Native American event should be throw in prison - they've initiated force against you. Just holding the belief that you should be blown up means nothing.

If an individual initiates force against another, retaliatory force is permitted. Regardless of affiliation.

Retaliate against the individuals who bombed the churches, not those affiliated with them who have done nothing other than have an opinion.

Nope. When an individual does harm against you go right ahead and defend yourself, otherwise YOU'RE the one doing the initiating. You're in the wrong.

Irrelevant.

Irrelevant.

Don't care so long as they don't initiate force. Same with anyone else.

The part where you group a bunch of people into a single radical category?

They have no right not to be offended, or to take away the liberties of anyone else except where they've been taken away in kind.

Show me how each individual has materially aided a bombing and you can have your trial against them.

Irrelevant, they shouldn't have to renounce anything. If you have evidence that they've initiated force, either by directly bombing others, or materially supporting those who have, then take them to trial. But you don't want that - because you have no evidence, so you want to go on a witch hunt and collectively punish them.

Ahh, so I suppose anyone who cheers on abortion doctor killings should have their Bibles confiscated, and be thrown into hard labor for 10 years? I suppose all Churches should be required to denounce these killings or else be thrown in prison and have their property stolen by big government?

[HR][/HR]

You're making the same mistake Socialists do. You're a collectivist. You want to determine policy based on group affiliation rather than individual action. If you have evidence that an individual has materially supported bombers, or engaged in terrorism themselves, then by all means - go ahead and retaliate with prison and the such. Otherwise you're the one initiating force against innocents. You're the terrorist.

I suggest you read my thread on Collectivism and the Islam Issue.