The massacre at Fort Hood and Muslim soldiers with attitude

[Carrion]

Really? Speaking about a particular religious nutjob/bag is "un-american?" This thread happens to be about a muslim nutjob/bag.

Of course, you wrote "nutbags", which is plural. That eliminated the possibility of your comment being about A particular religious nutjob. That is just how the language works.

If you don't like my speech, you can simply go away.

That is unlikely to happen.

Like any good politically-correct leftist, you resort to a personal attack on me because I felt free enough to speak my mind about a muslim nutjob/bag.

I diagreed with the substance of what you wrote. If dissent qualifies as an attack, and you and your friends obviously feel it does based on your comments to me via the reputation system, then obviously my main transgression here is interrupting your back patting party by pointing out the areas where your proposals infringe on civil liberties.

Did you join these forums just to validate the muslim nutjob/bag?

Now that you've less than deftly switched back to naming a specific muslim nutjob, no, nothing I've written has 'validated' him or his actions, whatever you mean by that in this context.

I would have more respect for the arguments of you and your friends if you would display the courage of your convictions and openly state that, yes, you want to discriminate against people because of their religion. Yes you want to subvert the bill or rights because you are afraid. I'll never agree of course, because I believe you enemies of liberty should be resisted, no matter what they use to cloak your actions.

But continue to dance around the issue. Continue to hand out negative reputation because you and I disagree, for all the harm it does. And if you are looking to debate the actual facts, look up.

Preface..... this is an excercise of freedom #4 as posted above.

A few radical muslims did NOT pull the trigger. One of them did... and he is a muslim. That in itself does not automatically condemn the rest of that religion, but it will make ME view them all with somewhat of a jaundiced eye.

That is a defect I hope you would try to overcome.

It seems like every few weeks , my television tells me that another muslim has either blown something up or was caught planning to .

If what you say is true about there only being a "few radical muslims" , then where is the rest of the muslim community speaking out , condemning their actions ?

I don't know that the rest of the muslim community is obligated to 'speak out' any more than any of us are, as gun owners, because the Fort Hood murderer used a gun. Or men because he was a man or doctors because he was a doctor. Some muslims certainly have disawoved his actions, some haven't. Some have done [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAGZBOtKK68"]this[/ame] It doesn't color my perception of those who've remained silent though, because I am not a bigot.

7% is likely the most well researched number you'll find for the percentage of muslims who claim radical beliefs. That figure has been disputed by both sides of the argument, but it is far more solid than "I watched a lot of TV". Even if the right number was as 5% rather than 7%, and they were dangerous enough to justify subverting civil liberties, as many of you suggest we should, then how have we non-muslims managed to survive even this long? Surely they'd have risen up to slaughter us. I mean, there are a couple of billion muslims out there.

 

[haldir]

u

pdated 1:24 p.m. ET, Tues., May 22, 2007
WASHINGTON - One in four younger U.S. Muslims say suicide bombings to defend their religion are acceptable at least in some circumstances...

25% is a pretty high percentage of US Muslims that would be of military age who see the murder of innocents as an acceptable method of dissent. The apologists keep saying they are just like the rest of us. I don't believe you could get 25% of Christians to agree on much of anything similar.

 

[techres]

u

25% is a pretty high percentage of US Muslims that would be of military age who see the murder of innocents as an acceptable method of dissent. The apologists keep saying they are just like the rest of us. I don't believe you could get 25% of Christians to agree on much of anything similar.

This is a great factoid! Thank you for finding it. We can work with this.

Ok, so what we have here is proof of my shared belief that Muslims are more susceptible to terrorist mindsets than other modern religions. HOWEVER, that is a level of susceptibility rather than a determined end.

So, how do we reach out and get to those in the Muslim community to change the source of accepting that which should never be acceptable (terrorism)? Do we do it by banning all Muslims or rounding them up? No. Do they have a special problem with this? Oh, yes, they do. And most important, Do they have a choice to make with being a modern people and religion that has to shake their medieval ways of the past in mind and body? You bet.

But I do not think it is a lost cause, a waste of time, or a predetermined end. And those who do and want to act accordingly will only take that 25% and turn it into 100% and thereby quadrupling the numbers of potential terrorists.

When McVey came out of the gun community and militia community to commit a horrendous act of terrorism, our communities were quick to be clear and open that we did NOT stand beside him. At the same time we expected others to accept us at our word when we said that he was not "one of us" or "spoke for us".

I would ask two things as a result:

1. For Muslims to work hard to denounce the terrorists and terrorist minded inside their own community.

2. For us to help them root out their 25% instead of rounding up to 100%.

I don't think that is apologist. I think it is fair and practical.

 

[ihateiraq]

I would ask two things as a result:

1. For Muslims to work hard to denounce the terrorists and terrorist minded inside their own community.

2. For us to help them root out their 25% instead of rounding up to 100%.

I don't think that is apologist. I think it is fair and practical.

that will never happen. they will never side w/ a non muslim over a muslim on a large enough scale for us to root out terrorism. you dont quite understand their mindset. its very archaic.

 

[techres]

that will never happen. they will never side w/ a non muslim over a muslim on a large enough scale for us to root out terrorism. you dont quite understand their mindset. its very archaic.

I know only the many I have met and known. They were mostly Americans and those I have hopes for and are talking about here.

Do they know how to circle the wagons, refuse to criticize their own in public, and put up with crap from members of the group that they should not? Yes! And the same actions are true of American Jews as well.

What is different though, is that there are many American Muslims who are genuinely afraid of their own and do not speak in part out of fear. Or so they have told me. And this is my biggest frustration: they have to choose in the end - modernity or old family. One or the other, that is the choice.

But it is their choice to make and we get to react to that choice.

What gets me is talk that sounds like no interest in giving them that choice but instead deciding for them and preventatively acting against them based solely on their religion. That is neither Christian or Constitutional.

 

[Al B]

What is different though, is that there are many American Muslims who are genuinely afraid of their own and do not speak in part out of fear. Or so they have told me. And this is my biggest frustration: they have to choose in the end - modernity or old family. One or the other, that is the choice.

Very good example of terrorism. Sad that is their own people. Never heard of this in any other "religion" that I have come in contact with.

 

[ihateiraq]

I know only the many I have met and known. They were mostly Americans and those I have hopes for and are talking about here.

Do they know how to circle the wagons, refuse to criticize their own in public, and put up with crap from members of the group that they should not? Yes! And the same actions are true of American Jews as well.

What is different though, is that there are many American Muslims who are genuinely afraid of their own and do not speak in part out of fear. Or so they have told me. And this is my biggest frustration: they have to choose in the end - modernity or old family. One or the other, that is the choice.

But it is their choice to make and we get to react to that choice.

What gets me is talk that sounds like no interest in giving them that choice but instead deciding for them and preventatively acting against them based solely on their religion. That is neither Christian or Constitutional.

Theyre supposed to be in the majority though, right? they shouldnt have anything to be afraid of.

Call me what you will, but i have not interest in protecting their freedoms. The silence from the imams speaks louder than the explosions of suicide bombers to me. Only they can end this madness, and they have not shown a desire to do so.

 

[evansvillethompsongunner]

Of course, you wrote "nutbags", which is plural. That eliminated the possibility of your comment being about A particular religious nutjob. That is just how the language works.


That is unlikely to happen.

I diagreed with the substance of what you wrote. If dissent qualifies as an attack, and you and your friends obviously feel it does based on your comments to me via the reputation system, then obviously my main transgression here is interrupting your back patting party by pointing out the areas where your proposals infringe on civil liberties.

Now that you've less than deftly switched back to naming a specific muslim nutjob, no, nothing I've written has 'validated' him or his actions, whatever you mean by that in this context.

I would have more respect for the arguments of you and your friends if you would display the courage of your convictions and openly state that, yes, you want to discriminate against people because of their religion. Yes you want to subvert the bill or rights because you are afraid. I'll never agree of course, because I believe you enemies of liberty should be resisted, no matter what they use to cloak your actions.

But continue to dance around the issue. Continue to hand out negative reputation because you and I disagree, for all the harm it does. And if you are looking to debate the actual facts, look up.



That is a defect I hope you would try to overcome.



I don't know that the rest of the muslim community is obligated to 'speak out' any more than any of us are, as gun owners, because the Fort Hood murderer used a gun. Or men because he was a man or doctors because he was a doctor. Some muslims certainly have disawoved his actions, some haven't. Some have done this It doesn't color my perception of those who've remained silent though, because I am not a bigot.

7% is likely the most well researched number you'll find for the percentage of muslims who claim radical beliefs. That figure has been disputed by both sides of the argument, but it is far more solid than "I watched a lot of TV". Even if the right number was as 5% rather than 7%, and they were dangerous enough to justify subverting civil liberties, as many of you suggest we should, then how have we non-muslims managed to survive even this long? Surely they'd have risen up to slaughter us. I mean, there are a couple of billion muslims out there.

The number is actually much, much higher than 7%....

let me find the Pew Charitable Trust Poll on this....

Declining Support for bin Laden and Suicide Bombing - Pew Research Center

Declining, and the lowest number on there (and the poll is asking the percentage that APPROVES of suicide bombing) is only 4%... in Turkey.
The numbers are running anywhere from an astounding 68% of Muslims in Palestine to 38% in Lebanon (historically a cultural ally of the United States in religious freedom) to 15% in Egypt (whom the Left loves to label as a "moderate" in the Islamic world). This means that 15 in 100 Egyptian Muslims believe that suicide bombing, the destruction of civilians for no cause, is sometimes or often justified, with even higher percentages in most countries... even Turkey, secular and supposedly-Westernized Turkey has a rate of 4 in 100, when 1 in 100 is one too many. One death is one death too many. Unfortunately, this poll did not and thus does not poll numbers for America... and I think that would be something we ought to know... how many of our supposedly 'peaceful' neighbors wish to subjugate us to their 'god' whilst they riddle our homes and public squares with shrapnel??

If the poll Haldir so diligently researched is true, this should chill the blood, folks.

These responses alone are reason enough to dismiss the 'peaceful' claims of so-called "moderate" Muslims - because the moderates still approve of violence... and not just violence, but perhaps the most COWARDLY and disgusting of all acts, suicide bombing. This should give even the most liberal person in the world cause for concern... but we still say nothing of the violence of Islam, which is solely unique to Islam.... WHY ARE PEOPLE NOT SPEAKING UP ABOUT THIS?

 

[haldir]

Here is the article
Poll: Some U.S. Muslims approve suicide strikes - Race & ethnicity- msnbc.com

 

[evansvillethompsongunner]

Here is the article
Poll: Some U.S. Muslims approve suicide strikes - Race & ethnicity- msnbc.com

Apologies if it sounded as though I doubted you;

I definitely believed that you researched it and that the poll existed.

I guess the word "verified" was the one I was looking for.

and there it is...

Again, sorry if there was any confusion.

 

[Jay]

That is a defect I hope you would try to overcome.

Sir, you either need to grow some, or address your own defects. I don't and never have needed you or anyone else to point out my purported defects.... as if you're in any way qualified to do anything but run off at the mouth.

I'd be happy to place your defects for you. Trust me, the sun will never shine on them.

 

[henktermaat]

Of course, you wrote "nutbags", which is plural. That eliminated the possibility of your comment being about A particular religious nutjob. That is just how the language works.

...snip a bunch of nonsense...

Now that you've less than deftly switched back to naming a specific muslim nutjob

...snip a bunch more drivel...

I would have more respect for the arguments of you and your friends if you would display the courage of your convictions and openly state that, yes, you want to discriminate against people because of their religion. Yes you want to subvert the bill or rights because you are afraid. I'll never agree of course, because I believe you enemies of liberty should be resisted, no matter what they use to cloak your actions.

...good thing I have snippers...

That is a defect I hope you would try to overcome.

I feel for you, always trying to spot a bigot behind every bush.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

I don't know that the rest of the muslim community is obligated to 'speak out' any more than any of us are, as gun owners, because the Fort Hood murderer used a gun. Or men because he was a man or doctors because he was a doctor. Some muslims certainly have disawoved his actions, some haven't. Some have done this It doesn't color my perception of those who've remained silent though, because I am not a bigot..

If the muslim community is not obligated to speak out against the violence of the "few radicals" in their fold then they are obliged to accept the reputation that comes from the actions of those in their "faith" .

It's not about being a bigot , it's about not being so PC that I'm blind to the actions of any group who kills innocent people regardless of their motivations .

I have the utmost respect for any person who puts on a uniform and picks up a weapon to go toe to toe with another soldier , while war itself is ugly there is honor in being a soldier .

I loathe anyone who regularly attacks the civilian population , which is a tactic the muslims have ALWAYS USED .

A good percentage of their community feels that there is nothing wrong with this behavior and do nothing to try to stop it , so they shouldn't feel bad about getting branded a religion of hate .

How many times does a dog have to bark before you call it a dog .

 

[dhnorris]

I would have more respect for the arguments of you and your friends if you would display the courage of your convictions and openly state that, yes, you want to discriminate against people because of their religion.

Yes, I don't trust them at all. If an arabic looking men is anywhere near me I watch him like a hawk.

then how have we non-muslims managed to survive even this long? Surely they'd have risen up to slaughter us. I mean, there are a couple of billion muslims out there.

Because of "inshallah" ie. if God wills it. Either God has not willed it (the destruction of Christianity/ western civilization) because of whatever reason or because your whole culture is based upon it, Example: If god wills it will create something and not hire chinese or indians or americans to do it for us. Some of the stupider ones think the koran is the ONLY book meant to be read all others are sinful. not exactly the way to build a civilization but, an excellent way to remain semi-savage for 1300 years. my

 

[dhnorris]

I would have more respect for the arguments of you and your friends if you would display the courage of your convictions and openly state that, yes, you want to discriminate against people because of their religion.

Yes, I don't trust them at all. If an arabic looking men is anywhere near me I watch him like a hawk.

then how have we non-muslims managed to survive even this long? Surely they'd have risen up to slaughter us. I mean, there are a couple of billion muslims out there.

Because of "inshallah" ie. if God wills it. Either God has not willed it (the destruction of Christianity/ western civilization) because of whatever reason or because your whole culture is based upon it, Example: If god wills it will create something and not hire chinese or indians or americans to do it for us. Some of the stupider ones think the koran is the ONLY book meant to be read all others are sinful. not exactly the way to build a civilization but, an excellent way to remain semi-savage for 1300 years. my

x



x

 

[Jay]

Originally Posted by Carrion

I would have more respect for the arguments of you and your friends if you would display the courage of your convictions and openly state that, yes, you want to discriminate against people because of their religion.

Good lord.... I thought I had concealed from you the fact that I don't give a rat's butt what you respect. Everyone else most likely figured that out. I have loads of respect for 98% of the INGO membership........ WAIT.... don't celebrate.... you're in the 2% that's left over. Please do all of us a favor and just go away.

..or.... we could play the "woods game"....interested?

 

[JetGirl]

Everyone else most likely figured that out.

 

[Jay]

Evenin' Annie... congrats on the 3rd bronze badge......

 

[Jay]

Hey stand by folks.... it shouldn't take too long for John Kerry to recommend this fine example of peaceful muslim teachings be awarded the Purple Heart. He deserves it every bit as much as Kerry did.

 

[JetGirl]

Evenin' Annie... congrats on the 3rd bronze badge......

Huh?

Holy Crap!! Wowie! Thanks for noticing...and TELLING me.

Woot!!