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

Yes thats right it does mean that ....as well. But in context of the Koran, its used something like 90%+ of the time as fighting or warfare.

 

Yeah, its kinda like saying pointy white hoods aren't always used to inspire anti-black hatred.... Well, No, not ALWAYS.

 

The political time-bomb is that you're 8 times more likely to be killed by the police than terrorism - and the people are starting to realize this.

 

2002 / 4 years = 500 / year

Number people killed in 9/11 = 2753 / 12 years * 8 ( your claim ) = 1835 / year

Now that does not count the people killed overseas by IUDs.

That does not count the people shot at Fort Hood or the people blown up in Boston.

Clearly, you're claim is false.

-

 

My apologies, this was for 2011.

Number of Americans killed by terrorism worldwide in 2011: 17

Number of Americans killed by police in 2011: 155

[HR][/HR]

In any case, you're welcome to take a more long term view - in fact I'd invite you to, it presents a more accurate picture.

Islamic terrorist killings of US citizens since 1865: 3252 (84% on 9/11)

This is why I am worried by this anti-terror hunt people seem to be on - the left and right use the same reasoning to justify their equally inept policies. The left looks at gun statistics, realizes that 11,000+ people are killed by them each year, ignores liberty, and concludes that guns have to be outlawed. The right looks at terrorism statistics, realizes that 3252 people have been killed by Islamist terrorist attacks in 150 years, ignores liberty, and concludes that Islam must be stopped.

The problem is that you both ignore liberty. Gun prohibition is wrong because nobody initiates force against another purely by undertaking a transaction: it takes intent to coerce, so you must show that this intent exists before you take away their gun/throw them in prison. This tirade against individuals who follow Islam is wrong because nobody initiates force against another purely by having a belief: it's at the point that an individual acts on that belief that you can take away their rights/throw them in prison in retaliation. I suggest you read my thread on Collectivism and the Islam Issue

By retaliating against people who never initiated force against you, you become the aggressor.

 

So while Islamic terrorism only kills us less than all other deaths combined its really a non issue. No need to give up liberties no need to spend billions protecting ourselves from its freaking madness.

Seriously we need to wake up in the west to the internal cold war the left has declared on us. They dont even hide it these days, they play on ignorance which is in abundance and division.

 

Our culture is extreme in our waywardness; promiscuity, unwed mothers, abortion, drugs, alcohol, nudity.

Islamic culture is extreme in that it promotes a gradual, secretive, inescapable cultural aggression including use of deadly violence to infiltrate our society and government until Islam conquers all.

 

Here would have been your opportunity to copy and paste the verse you think best supports your assertion. I've supplied 26 verses contradicting your assertions.

 

LOL

I have not made a detailed study of the Muslim Holy book(s).

But I have made a detailed study of the words that Radical Islamic Cleric Say, comparing that said to American Audiences, to that said among themselves.

No other religion in the world has its holy men speaking of killing, enslaving, assassinating and destroying as much as Radical Islam.

With Christianity, you'll get the occasional fire and brimstone speech, but its spoken in terms of God's Vengeance, or the Devil's work, never the Plans of the Holy man and his congregation.

In what I've seen of Buddhism and Hindu, violence is even less of a common occurrence.

In Daoism and Taoism, it is almost unheard of...

Only Islam, that I've found, has its "Holy Men" plotting mass murder.

I guess I don't think I need or would want to risk reading further into the Koran.

In many ways, it reminds me of the violence virus from the scifi movie 28 days. A Religious Hate Contagion.

I understand in ancient India there were Thugi cults that were worse, with ritual murders common, but that's the stuff of legend.

The Pressure Cooker Bombs were all to contemporary and real.

If Islam were a drug, it would most certainly be on the restricted use list.

If Islam were a firearm, it would most certainly be on a restricted, special license and training schedule.


For our own safety and security, WHY don't we license, regulate and restrict it?


-

 

This version of "radical islam" only appeared after a great disaster hit the muslim world, now you are creating another disaster which has the same effects.
Desperate people use whatever means possible and the alternative is much much easier : remove troops from everywhere , cut all ties with muslim countries including closing down embassies completely ignore them for 100 years , no trade , no communication , vote "absent" in UNSC when a resolution involves one of those countries.

 

Typical Liberal "Blame the Victim" response.

You don't try to PET a rabid dog.

-

 

It appeared at the inception of Islam.

 

I am too lazy to give you a lecture in history but you are ~500 years wrong.

 

1. "OUR extremism" ? LOL. "American expansion" ? What expansion ?

2. You lost any degree of credibility when you said >> "The Koran and the Bible really aren't that different in their core values." Actually, if someone were looking two extreme OPPOSITES of one another, they couldn't come up with a better example of Christianity and Islam. Christianity > Good. Islam > Evil (genocide, torture, mutilation, misogyny, sex discrimination, wife-beating, rape, pedophilia, slavery, animal cruelty/mass murder, totalitarianism, etc)

Nothing could be MORE DIFFERENT from Christianity and from Western culture and law than the abomination of Islam. In America, it is Unconstitutional by its supremacism (Article 6, Section 2), and is defined by the violation of numerous American laws.

 

In debate it is you that must prove something is out of context, like when the Fat Boy Muslim and the one with the funny hat right after 9/11/2001 went on national television and quoted this as proof they are not allowed to be aggressive:

“[2.190] And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.”

Before it: “[2.189] They ask you concerning the new moon…”

After it: “[2.194] The Sacred month for the sacred month and all sacred things are (under the law of) retaliation…”

So the verse is useless for the purpose they used it.

Quick, attack me for taking this out of context:

“[60.8] Allah does not forbid you respecting those who have not made war against you on account of (your) religion, and have not driven you forth from your homes, that you show them kindness and deal with them justly; surely Allah loves the doers of justice.”

We did not do Afghanistan or Iraq on account of Islam, but on account of terrorism; Saddam was secular, remember, and Al Quacka was supposed to be hijacking a great religion? Is the following treating us with kindness and justly:

Sunday, 30 September, 2001, 16:54 GMT 17:54 UK:
"'We do not accept the presence in our country of a single soldier at war with Muslims or Arabs,' Prince Sultan said in comments published on Saudi Arabia's official Okaz newspaper on Sunday." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1571689.stm

"Saudi Arabia said what?
'You can’t kill an Arab or Moslem;'
No matter the murderous plot,
We respect them?" (Sun 30 Sep 2001 09:03:18 PM EDT)

"Muslims would not be killing other Muslims. They would not be using Arabia to launch strikes on Muslim countries if they were actually Muslims.

Read the Quran
it's all explained in there" (Abu Sina) http://www.politicalforum.com/lates...-backed-wahabi-fanatics-6.html#post1061567723

Official Statecraft of the United States of America, the first one was posted on the State Department's website:

"The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others." (Clinton)

"We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others." (Obama)
http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...3479-its-actually-closer-us-being-idiots.html

“‘We’re going to have that person arrested and prosecuted that did the video,’ said Hillary Clinton.”
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/331806/incredible-shrinking-president-mark-steyn
http://www.politicalforum.com/polit...3479-its-actually-closer-us-being-idiots.html

“Let me state very clearly that the United States has absolutely nothing to do with this video. We absolutely reject its contents.” (Clinton) http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/...-pakistan-ad-denouncing-anti-muslim-film?lite

“If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or”
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241


With only the last paragraph being “non-sensical” the rest stands as making sense.

 

Or BAN it ?

http://www.politicalforum.com/political-opinions-beliefs/220997-shouldnt-islam-banned-usa.html

 

Im not too lazy to give you a lesson about Islam at its inception upon the words of Muhammad.

[3.151] We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they set up with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and their abode is the fire, and evil is the abode of the unjust.


[2.191] And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.

[2.193] And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah...

2.216] Fighting is enjoined on you, and h is an object of dislike to you; and it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you, and it may be that you love a thing while it is evil for you, and Allah knows, while you do not know.

[2.244] And fight in the way of Allah,...

[2.246] ...May it not be that you would not fight if fighting is ordained for you? They said: And what reason have we that we should not fight in the way of Allah, and we have indeed been compelled to abandon our homes and our children. But when fighting was ordained for them, they turned back, except a few of them, and Allah knows the unjust.

[3.169] And reckon not those who are killed in Allah's way as dead; nay, they are alive (and) are provided sustenance from their Lord;

[4.74] Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world's life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward.

[4.76] Those who believe fight in the way of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the way of the Shaitan. Fight therefore against the friends of the Shaitan; surely the strategy of the Shaitan is weak.

[9.5] So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

[9.111] Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain;

[9.123] O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

[47.4] So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, Last edited by dixon76710; May 04 2013 at 06:24 AM.

 

Oh the usual nonsense

2 links of interest , 1st notice the last sentence and 2nd notice the transformation of society and how secularism fainted into theocracy

do not eat what they are feeding you , chose the food yourself

 

Yes, mut by all means one should bury one's head in the sand and pretend the alst 1400 or so years never happened.

 

Christians have delivered on some pretty terrible silverback-additions to their core faith too. You may remember the Crusades? We need to back up into space again. Remember the OP. Look at the world from the perspective of someone who has never been here before, who has access to ALL the history books and both religions' basic tenents.

Like I said, all benevolent religions start out with a prophet who has received instructions from an overseer/intermediary/angel/call it what you like, usually a basic set of core values that keep humans from tearing up the place and from degrading back into apes. Then slowly but surely, the ape in the silverbacks that keep successively trying to dominate each other and "their females" [see islam mainly] will "tack on" "certain stories" of "certain lessons" the prophets taught; only with their spin on it.

Both the Bible and the Koran were translated, transcribed, and redacted, perhaps dozens of times by local silverbacks practicing historical revisionisim that favored their particular political cause of the day. Look at now. The gay lobby is trying to rewrite the Bible to say that God sacking sodom was not his fury with homosexuals and other deviants, but JUST with those people having sex with animals. If allowed to stand as a redacted "truth", you would have a completely false rendition of the historical account, and by extension, it's potency and meaning keeping the apes on the straight and narrow.

Add a few thousand or few hundred years of this chicanery and you have a shell of nonsense and falsehoods built around the core tenents. And make that shell particularly appealing to the ape people and they will discard the core tenets for the more familiar sounding shell to the ape mind every single time.

Look at the situation from outer space.

 

Not a thing there to support your assertions or contradict mine. As I suspected. The changes to the Iranian culture are irrelevant to Sunni Islams current state.

 

They would see the glaring contradiction between the actions of the crusades and the basic tennants of Christianity that commands the believers to "love your enemy" and "turn the other cheek" for him to strike you again.

 

They are our proven natural enemies. We don't have to respect the property rights of our enemies. These backward people never earned any money; they just exploited what was theirs by luck and which they never would have developed on their own. Seeing our weakness in giving them unearned wealth, they took it as a sign from Allah that we were weak enough to wage a victorious jihad against, just as Hitler took the pacifist movement in England as a sign that he could conquer such weaklings.

 

Mein Kampf means "My Struggle." I doubt if Hitler was talking about resisting the demons that dominated him. No Muslims struggle against their genetic disabilities. They give into their primitive drive to kill others and steal what others have built.

 

They don't need a book to follow their natural crooked bent. It's not about "The Word," it's about the sword. Take away their sword. Oil is their sword.