August 27, 2011
— Ace Robert Spencer has a post insulting me, which, who cares?, but also rebutting more Daniel Stern's claims about the Geller/Spencer charges in the "Dhimmi Teachers" matter.
I still think they are wrong, for reasons I'll lay out, but first, I need to correct something I said.
Robert Spencer is wrong when he says that I, and David Stein before me, misunderstood what "the curriculum" was. No, not in the way he means. Geller and Spenser want to call the seminar material taught to teachers "the curriculum;" I always understood that that was not what Stein was talking about. Stein was talking about a curriculum, or lesson plan, by a teacher who'd attended that seminar, prepared for his students -- his point was "if this is the end product of what came out of that seminar, it sure wasn't dhimmi."
But I did refer to it incorrectly as "the curriculum" by the definite article -- "the curriculum," as David Stern initially had.
That "the" is important, because there is a big difference between "the curriculum" -- the official, board-approved curriculum being taught to all students -- and "a curriculum" -- the lesson plan of one teacher who attended the program.
If this were indeed "the curriculum," this would be the slam-dunk I thought it was. But it's not. It's just one of many different lesson plans, prepared by teachers who attended the seminars.
There were other teachers; they may have (and probably did) have much more Muslim-friendly Religion-of-Peace feelgoodery in their own curricula.
We know from Wiltse's curriculum that there was no interference with the lesson plans, however. Witse's lesson plan is fairly tough on Muslims, and decidedly pro-Israel. So we know there was no enforced Religion-of-Peace indoctrination.
However, Geller and Spencer are focusing on what the teachers themselves heard here.
Now, looking at the sort of thing the teachers were taught -- it's the typical PC nonjudgmental soft-on-Islam sort of stuff. One thing Geller doesn't like is that the abstracts don't blame Islam for the Crusades; but my God, what was she expecting?
Can she point to any school-issued history book that says the Crusades were the fault of Muslims?
Now, indeed, this is all sort of weak PC stuff. But it's PC stuff of the perfectly routine variety. Academics teaching a course about Islam think Islam isn't too shabby; film at 11.
It's not the henny-penny turn-it-to-11 stuff Geller seems to think it is, but it is PC crap of the sort you always hear about Islam from any institution (any institution, that is, except those that are avowedly anti-jihad).
Let me give you an example of what I'm talking about.
You know, I trust, that Islam considers it part of, the successor to and culmination of, the Judeo-Christian tradition, right? And they believe that Jesus, for example, is a lesser prophet. Lesser to Mohammad, of course.
That's what they believe. By writing this, I have not become a dhimmi nor endorsed this idea. I have simply given you information about what other people believe.
Obviously, right?
Not to Ms. Geller. Here she is, quoting part of the abstract of the seminars about the history and philosophy of Islam, and then reacting.
Emphases here are in the original, for once:
[Quoting the abstract:] Prophet Muhammad has become the paradigm, or role model, who is worthy of being emulated. As GodÂ’s chosen prophet and messenger, he best embodied how to live a life in accordance with GodÂ’s will. In this sense, he and the prophets before him, including Abraham, Moses, Joseph, Jacob and Jesus, are perceived as exemplary muslims[Gellar now, commenting:] The real question is, should our children be taught this steaming pile of propaganda? I would not want that dawah taught to my children in public school. I want a candidate who is up to snuff on this. Ahead of the curve would be ideal, but at least cognizant of it.
Are you serious?
Do you see what she is doing? She is either misunderstanding the quote, or cynically distorting it to create her latest round of Outrage!
What is the quoted material doing? It is explaining Muslim beliefs, same as I did a couple of paragraphs before that.
What is Geller claiming the material is doing? She is claiming the material is presented to teach teachers of the actual religious truth of the statement. She is claiming it is in fact a "dawhah," or invitation to prayer, or invitation to submission to the religion.
Did I mention this was a seminar for teachers, prepared with Harvard and UT at Austin?
Does she really not get that they would naturally discuss what Muslims believe? Given that that was the whole point of the seminar?
She either is cynically distorting, or credulously imagining, that a simple statement of what Muslims believe is an actual attempt to convert teachers to that Muslim belief.
Whereas 99.9% of the population sees a dry, academic statement of a religion's creeds, Pamela Geller sees a dangerous "dahwah" intended to indoctrinate teachers into Mohamaddan thoughts so they can then transmit their newly-adopted religion to the schoolchildren of Texas.
Look, I can't explain reality. Either you get this or your don't. If I say "Christians believe that Jesus was the Son of God and died on the cross in a sacrifice by which all the sins of mankind were transferred to him," I am not attempting to convert you to Christianity.
I am simply stating a fact: This is what Christians believe.
I do not know what is a more damning conclusion:
1) That Geller does not understand this, and actually believes this is a "dahwah" presented in an effort to convert people to Savage Mohamaddanism.
or:
2) That Geller understands this is in fact simply a statement of Muslim belief, but finds the mere recitation of that belief a "dahwah" so hateful as to not be fit for public mention, even in a seminar devoted to instructing teachers on Islamic history and beliefs
Go ahead; go over there; find the material. I read the stuff. Most of it is dry academic stuff. Other stuff is, as I conceded, "soft" PC twaddle which talks about how diverse and vibrant Muslim societies were and that sort of thing.
Like when you look up any country in the encyclopedia? Like Haiti? You're going to be told it's a diverse and vibrant culture.
By the way, you might want to give Geller a break and say, "Gee, Ace. I don't know. I see what you're saying, with that quote, but based on the way I read it, it doesn't expressly identify this merely as the belief of Muslims; it actually seems to flatly declare these things about Mohammad as being true. Maybe you shouldn't assume bad motives. Maybe it was just written ambiguously."
Oh, very good point. But it actually wasn't written ambiguously.
See, I haven't told you something --
Geller doctored the quote.
She doctored the quote to take out the prefatory part in the beginning that this is what Muslims believe, to make it sound like maybe, maybe this might be a dawhah.
Here is the actual quote as it appears on the site -- undoctored by Geller. The part of the quote Geller forgot to cite is in bold.
For millions of Muslims around the world, the Prophet Muhammad has become the paradigm, or role model, who is worthy of being emulated. As GodÂ’s chosen prophet and messenger, he best embodied how to live a life in accordance with GodÂ’s will. In this sense, he and the prophets before him, including Abraham, Moses, Joseph, Jacob and Jesus, are perceived as exemplary muslims,
Yes, that's right, the sentence began "For millions of Muslims around the world...," clearly indicating what followed was their belief. She instead cut that out, beginning with "Prophet Mohammad was the role model..."
If she had quote it accurately, it would have been obvious this was a simple, unobjectionable statement of fact about the centrality of Mohammad in the Muslim religion. And that wouldn't have seemed outrageous enough to readers, so Geller helpfully "modified" it for you. So you'd be nice and angry, and maybe more motivated to Stop Islamization in America, order your copy now.
Don't believe me? Look it up. Search for keyword "Jesus" and you'll see who's giving it to you straight and who's giving it to you crooked.
Do check out her quotes. And do wonder why, if this is obviously such dhimmi dawhaw dirty-dealing, she has to strain so much and doctor quotes to convince you of that.
Now, we've seen one lesson plan from a guy who went through the seminar. He seems unconverted to Islam. He is, by self-description, a devout Christian, and an unapologetic Zionist. This man would be unlikely to come away from a pro-Muslim symposium and start talking up the splendid conquests of Mohammad.
But knowing teachers, I'm sure most of them taught their kids a PC version of Islam. Although I'm pretty sure there were exactly zero Muslim converts.
Having conceded that, I have to point out a couple of things:
1, I have to point out again that even if the teachers met with some Religion of Peace blatherers, there was no interference in their lesson plans. Wiltse says so, and his own lesson plan seems to prove that. It may not seem tough to Robert Spencer, but it seems tough to anyone not named Robert Spencer or Pamela Geller.
2, the sort of teachers who would be inclined to teach Religion of Peace nonsense... well, I'm sure they did teach Religion of Peace nonsense, but I have to question: Absent this seminar, were they likely to teach otherwise? I ask: What were these teachers planning to teach about Islam in the first place?
Assuming that Geller doesn't really believe that the purpose here was not, in fact, to convert the teachers to Islam, these seminars might have encouraged the soft-headed liberal position that the Religion of Peace Wants To Be Your Friend And Gets A Bad Rap.
And while I can acknowledge that, I'm having difficulty imaging that they would have acted any differently in absence of these seminars. Or what teachers teach in any other state.
Wiltse seems to have taught as he would have anyway, for example.
It seems to me that teachers were invited to hear a PC lesson on Islam. then permitted to teach whatever they liked, either incorporating or rejecting those thoughts.
On to the Grover Norquist charge. Geller, challenged on her assertion that Rick Perry was a dhimmi, then offered this new evidence to buttress her case:
Yes, all Perry did was give a speech in partnership with Grover Norquist, and promote it on his website. Norquist heads up Americans for Tax Reform, and Perry’s tax-cutting message is redolent of Norquist’s influence. But Norquist also has deep and extensive ties to Islamic supremacists and jihadists, as I showed in the first commentary. That raises legitimate questions about whether or not Perry knows about, or cares about, or even endorses, that activity by Norquist. I certainly would refuse to speak at the same event in partnership with Grover Norquist – let alone promote it on my website. Shouldn’t Rick Perry have, too?
I responded:
Now, Norquist is widely known himself to be pro-Muslim; he believes they're a natural Republican constituency, and urges we make a move for them like Bush and Rove urge with Hispanics.But Geller is trying to shore up her pathetic "Rick Perry's a Pro-Sharia Islamist Enabler" bullshit by linking him to the guy that everyone in DC is linked to in some way (fuck, even I was at his house five years ago).
Ummm... we're not allowed to talk with Grover Norquist anymore, Pam? Can't sign his anti-tax pledges? I guess all those conservative pols and wonks going to the Blankday Morning Meetings are, what? Jihadis, now?
Yeah. I'd say that just about takes care of all that.
Geller seizes on my mention of going to his house as I'm bragging. No, I'm not bragging. You have, not unexpectedly, missed the point.
The point is that you are engaging in Guilt by Association. This guy knows this guy, and this guy spoke with this guy, so this guy's a dhimmi.
We are moving several steps from actual jihadis here. The chain goes: Rick Perry met with Grover Norquist for anti-tax agitation purposes; Grover Norquist has an institute for Muslim outreach; some guys at that institute have connections to, at least, people suspected of being jihadis, or at least, in one further attenuated step, knowing jihadis themselves.
I can buy the chain of shame all the way until the point that people who know Grover Norquist, but themselves are not guilty of anything, are now culpable, simply because they know him and have not, as Spencer and Geller seem to prefer, ostracized him, denounced him, and cast him out of their circles.
My point in mentioning the Wednesday Morning Meetings is-- are those people dhimmis, too? That's a Who's Who of Establishment DC. Yes, I know, RINOs; but jihadist-enabling dhimmis?
Am I a dhimmi? Well, I know I am, for Spencer dismisses the entire magazine Commentary as "dhimmi" and surely I'm as dhimmi as they.
My point was that Grover Norquist -- whether he should or should not be cast out of Republican circles -- remains a DC fixture, and an establishment figure.
Is Michele Bachmann a dhimmi too? Or Mitt Romney? Or Newt Gingrich?
“I talk with [Mitt] Romney directly,” Norquist said. He mentioned that Rep. Michele Bachmann (Minn.) will be attending his Wednesday meeting this week and that Gingrich recently sent him an unsolicited statement strongly opposing backing down in the debt talks. For Norquist, any other position would be unacceptable.
How about Allen West, Paul Ryan, and Marco Rubio?
...Earlier this year, Norquist spoke at the Faith and Freedom Coalition Conference, along with Michele Bachmann, Allen West, Thad McCotter, Tim Pawlenty, Mitt Romney, Marco Rubio, Herman Cain, Paul Ryan, and Newt Gingrich.
Commenters tell me Geller is big on Sarah Palin. Well, okay then. I have to also ask: Is Sarah Palin a dhimmi too?
Yes, that is Sarah Palin shaking the hand of this dangerous Islamist-enabler. The article, dated June 15, 2011, says the picture itself was taken "last year," which means Sarah Palin was shaking the hand of this jihadi-symp during the same period when Rick Perry gave a speech with him.
Are we going to keep pretending that Grover Norquist is on a Terrorist Watch List and that anyone having any dealings with him is also suspect?
Or are we going to just say that Grover Norquist is a big DC Establishment players whom politicians routinely, and without considering the Jihad Implications, meet with? Let's discuss the key man in this chain of guilt by association -- Aga Khan. This is the man that Perry is apparently friendly with (at least politician-friendly, which, honestly, I doubt means truly friendly) and with whom Perry did these alleged teachers' dhimmi-seminars.
Aga Khan has had the reputation of being a true Muslim Moderate, and an actual philanthropist.
Where would Rick Perry have gotten such an idea?
Well, if he had doubts about Aga Khan as late as May 2010, he would have found the worlds of noted Jihadism Expert Robert Spencer very reassuring indeed.
I must repost this exchange from a Front Page Magazine symposium hosted by David Horowitz.
One first speaker, a man named Furnish, read aloud a previous statement by Spencer to the effect that there was no such thing as moderate Islam, full stop, and then disagreed:
Furnish: I find myself in the curious (and somewhat uncomfortable) position of disagreeing with my friend Robert Spencer, for whom I have the utmost respect and with whom I almost always totally agree.However, on this issue of whether moderate Islam exists, I think Robert may be missing something. He is exactly right that Sunni Islam–whence comes directly Salafism, Wahhabism and jihadism–promotes violence against non-Muslims in order to make Islam paramount over the entire planet. I have no quarrel with that stance. But I would argue that this is largely because within this majority branch of Islam the only acceptable exegetical paradigm regarding the Qur’an is a literalist one: and of course when passages such as “behead the unbeliever” [Suras 47:3 and 8:12] are read literally the good Muslim had better reach for his sword–or be rightly accused of infidelity to Allah’s Word.
However, perhaps because Robert is so well-versed in the theology of Islam, as opposed to the historical record of how that religious theory has been acted out on the stage of history, he seems to overlook the key fact on the ground that certain minorities within Islam have developed a non-literalist, even allegorical, approach to reading the QurÂ’an. Foremost among these moderates are the Isma`ilis, the Sevener Shi`is, whose global head is the philanthropical Aga Khan. IsmaÂ’ilis may number only in the tens of millions (out of the total Muslim community of some 1.3 billion, second only to ChristianityÂ’s 2+ billion), but they do exist and they define, for example, jihad not as killing or conquering unbelievers, but as economic development and charity work.
[Further discussion of some other moderate Muslim sects.]
Robert Spencer: In all this my friend Timothy Furnish, whose work I admire, is entirely correct.
That was reported May 27, 2010; the symposium itself would have, I assume, occurred no more than a week or two before.
Years after Rick Perry invited Aga Khan to put together a symposium on true moderate Muslims, Robert Spencer was still vouching for Aga Khan as precisely one of those true moderate Muslims. Only Aga Khan had been personally named as a moderate -- his sect and other sects had been mentioned, but only one man personally -- and Spencer agreed.
How did Jihadism Expert Robert Spencer make such a dangerous error? He now seems to think that Aga Khan is a stealthy jihadist; what has changed his opinion so quickly (and so recently -- he came to these fresh conclusions this past week)?
Well, Aga Khan, a very wealthy man, bought a bank in the past. Here is the unchallengeable evidence against Aga Khan, which now causes Robert Spencer to entirely reverse himself on Khan's moderation, and is in fact so powerful it prompts him to next accuse Rick Perry, who merely put together a Muslim outreach seminar for teachers with Khan.
The "new evidence" uncovered -- the evidence which as completely reversed Spencer in his deeply-considered expertise -- consists of Daniel Pearl's widow making an unproven allegation against the bank in, I think, 2002. For what it's worth -- I believe her. I tend to believe most allegations against Muslims, to be honest. I'm sort of bigoted now. Or, realistic. Whatever you want to call it.
But it wasn't proved. The case was dropped.
Now, two years after that accusation, Pakistan was looking to raise money to cover its debts; the bank is put up for sale, and Aga Khan buys it. A couple of years after that the bank enters into an agreement with the Federal Reserve to be monitored. At no point during any of this did anyone accuse Aga Khan of wrongdoing -- no US official, no foreign official. His cleanliness is vouched for by none other than Robert Spencer in 2010.
And now, with this purchase of a bank uncovered last week by Pam Geller, Spencer now decides that Aga Khan is dirty, and not only is he dirty, but damnit, Rick Perry should have known he was dirty and had he vetted him properly he would have discovered him to be dirty.
David Stern writes:
If it’s true that Habib Bank did not freeze the [suspicious] account, it happened years before the Khan Foundation bought into the bank. And the discussions between Perry and Khan that led to the development of the MHCP occurred in summer 2002, two years before the Khan Foundation bought into the bank! So what, exactly, was Perry supposed to find in 2002? What would his “vetting” have uncovered? If the answer is “nothing,” then how do you know Perry didn’t vet Khan?Perry signed another agreement with Khan in 2009. By that time, the Khan Foundation had been majority owner of the bank for almost six years. So, again, I ask the question – what would a “vetting” have uncovered in 2009 (regarding any wrongdoing that had occurred at the bank once the foundation took over)?
If the bank was dirty after Khan took ownership of it, he probably should not have signed an agreement with the Federal Reserve (of the US) for the Feds to monitor the bank:
Here is the agreement that Habib Bank signed with the Federal Reserve. ItÂ’s quite exhaustive. The bank agreed to completely overhaul every aspect of its operations to be in full compliance with U.S. rules and regulations. It agreed to allow an independent firm (approved by the Fed) to thoroughly examine its new procedures. Furthermore, it agreed to allow the independent firm to examine all account and transaction activities from 2005 onward.The Fed made clear that should any deficiencies be found, action would be taken against the bank. Although the results of the independent audit are not available on the Fed website, the Fed indeed took no action against the bank, implying that it found the examination satisfactory.
Obviously, there’s no way to tell for certain if any employees of any of the bank’s 1,500 branches around the world are engaging in illegal activities. But in the absence of any evidence, it’s foolish to pillory Rick Perry for his relationship with Aga Khan. Basically, it’s tantamount to saying, “Rick Perry, you oughtta be ashamed of yourself for occasionally associating with a guy who’s part-owner of a bank that I kinda have a hunch might possibly be doing something bad, even though I have no proof.” I mean, c’mon. That’s silly.
Based upon those findings -- let's say Rick Perry discovered this skullduggery, this dirty non-suspicious bank-buying behavior -- what does Spencer suggest he should have done?
Well, apparently he suggests he should have had no further dealings with Khan, upon receipt of this information.
The same as he and Geller now allege that Grover Norquist should have been cast out by Rick Perry. (And Bachmann, and Palin, and Romney, and West, and Ryan, and...)
Does this strike anyone else as extraordinarily weak evidence? This is very weak evidence to even put forward a suspicion publicly, nevermind insisting a series of public condemnations should follow.
And I stress: Not only do Spencer and Geller think this weak "evidence" is enough to damn Aga Khan, it's furthermore strong enough to damn anyone that is publicly friendly with Aga Khan.
That's how strong the case is in their book -- not only enough to hang the actual accused, by the accused's acquaintances, for associating with a known felon, or someone they should have known was a felon.
Spencer says Perry should have vetted him. Why? His good friend Furnish didn't when he praised Khan, and neither did Spencer when he gladly agreed with the praise.
Look, if this is the depth of the evidence that renowned Jihadi Hunters Geller and Spencer have been leveling against their accused, I think we need some new Jihadi Hunters.
This gets to the broader point I want to make.
For Geller and Spencer, how anti-jihad do you have to be to not be a dhimmi in their eyes? They seem to have denouncement fever.
And if their concept of "anti-jihadi" is so uncompromising as to mean we now have to cast out Allen West, Marco Rubio, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and the rest of the 2012 presidential field, could it be that they, rather than those they accuse, are the ones in need of some perspective?
Watch what Spencer says about an error in the curriculum that I quoted. The error there is that the teacher, Wiltse, wrote that Islamic anti-semitism dates "at least" (that is, at least his far back) to the Nazis.
Now, I quoted that to indicate not the truth of the historical claim itself, but to note that this was not a soft-on-Islam lesson plan. I usually consider it to be pretty tough stuff when it's said "Part of your worldview was cadged from the Third Reich."
This is sort of an error, because Islamic anti-semitism dates from long before that; I say "sort of," because Wiltse says it dates from "at least" to the Nazi influence, meaning it could date from further back.
Well, it does. There doesn't seem to be much question about this.
But note the reason Spencer thinks this is an important correction which defeats the purpose I quoted it for -- that this was a tough-on-Islam lesson plan.
Ace clearly doesn't know the first, foggiest thing about Islam; after all, it's not the name of a porn mag or a brand of beer. If he did, he would recognize that the claim that "Islamic enmity toward Israel is complicated, but hatred of Jews and Israel can be traced at least to the success of Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda starting in 1933" is itself a whitewash. Islamic antisemitism didn't begin in 1933 or come from the Nazis; it's as old as Islam itself, going back to the Qur'an's designation of the Jews as the worst enemies of the Muslims (5:82) and Muhammad's exiles and massacres of the Jews of Arabia. See a full discussion of this question here.Why does this matter? It's misleading. If you think that Islamic antisemitism is something they picked up from the Nazis after centuries of Islamic tolerance (more on that later), one will tend to think that it is something that is carried lightly among the opponents of Israel, and can be reasoned or negotiated away. This will lead one to support political solutions for the Israeli/Palestinian conflict like land-for-peace that not only cannot and will not work, but weaken Israel.
Ace doesn't know anything about Pamela Geller, either, or he would know that she has written about the Qur'anic roots of Islamic antisemitism, and so would recognize that bit about the Nazis making the Muslims antisemitic as a whitewash, also.
As I said, Wiltse's statement is in error. Yes, Islamic anti-semitism dates back much further back than the Nazis.
It is wrong, yes. But it is not complimentary.
For most, it seems like a very tough line to say that Muslims took part of their tradition of anti-semtism from Adolf Hitler's Holocaust Machine.
For Robert Spencer, it's deliberate "whitewashing." For Robert Spencer, only a dhimmi would imply that Nazis influenced Muslim anti-semitism; the determined non-dhimmi must always be perfectly clear that Muslims could teach the Nazis a thing or two about Jew-hating.
I have to grant this seminar, put together by Harvard and UT at Austin, was PC feel-goodery of the usual sort. (But not, as Geller alleges, some shocking descent into dhimmitude.)
But honestly -- in Spencer's view, calling Islamists Nazi stooges is coddling them.
It's not that I disagree with Spencer or Geller that I don't like the PC foolishness.
It's more that I am wondering how long they have lived on our Earth, and if they are enjoying it so far.
What Spencer and Geller both do is to erect a Standard of the Righteous that no one but a couple of fringe bloggers could possibly meet -- well, no one in public life; and few with steady jobs outside of blogging -- and then start up with the Ritual Denunciations of those falling short.
I've got bad news for Spencer and Geller: If you're waiting for a candidate who even approaches your outer territorial waters as far as stridency against Islam (and Spencer declares there is no moderate Islam, so it's fair to just say "against Islam"), then get comfortable, pour a drink, and get ready for a nice long sit.
To get the blessing of Spencer and Geller, we must:
Convict men based on the flimsiest circumstantial evidence, which by the way popped up last week. By the way, the evidence doesn't really have to be that strong because, you know, Muslim. There is no such thing as Moderate Islam, Robert Spencer says. So it's not like you really have to cross your t's on this one.
Then convict men who know that initial man based on the mere fact of (political) association.
Ignore one's own previous vouching for the men in question with a dismissive well I wasn't "partnering" with him, dear boy, I was just vouching for him publicly at a symposium entirely about the existence or non-existence of Muslim moderates, my alleged specialty, so of course I had no reason to be cautious with my praise.
Claim that merely engaging in what other people would call "outreach" to Muslims, previously deemed peaceful and moderate, as well as typical PC nonsense which is annoying at hell but the state of life here in the US, shows a pro-shariah dhimmi mindset.
Claim that a lesson plan that says Muslim anti-semitism is not due to a "cycle of violence" or to "poverty" or "defensive reactions against Jewish aggression" but instead partly due to Nazi Holocaust propaganda is a "whitewash" that lets Muslims off too damn easy.
Robert Spencer has said there is no such thing as Moderate Islam. Doesn't exist. Simply does not exist, is a lie.
Now, if Spencer's original statement was right -- and it seems to have taken very little indeed to return him to that original view -- then a certain series of policy choices flow from that.
Is he a thoughtful enough man to appreciate that? I assume he is, for I assume that any man as boring and ill-humored as he is must be somewhat thoughtful as a consolation.
But if it is true that there is no Moderate Islam whatsoever -- as Spencer and Geller seem to believe in their hearts, though Spencer is given on occasion to vouching for the moderation of Aga Khan-- and it is furthermore true that Islam is unreformable and incapable of being pushed to a less belligerent posture, then the policy choices are quite ugly.
This would suggest that the only way to protect ourselves is some type of mass-casualty global war combined with a series of laws (which would be unconstitutional at the moment, until we amend the document or start ignoring it) to sharply limit the freedom of movement of Muslims within the United States.
I do not say this to say "My God, look at what their horrid thinking will lead to!" I am not doing the Charles Johnson "Fascist!" thing.
I have considered this myself: What if the darkest conception of Islam is accurate? What then? What then? If we face an unending war of terrorism, what steps, almost unthinkable now, would it take to stop that war of terrorism?
What if we suffered not one 9/11 but a string of six of them, weeks apart, with no end in sight?
Horrors breed horrors in kind. (And one should always ponder the incredible restraint of the Israelis, who frequently do feature multiple 9/11's (on a per capita basis) weeks apart, and yet do not do the things I'm pretty sure I would advocate.)
But certainly I don't wish for any of that to happen. I hope that the Islamist war on the west winds down. I hope that some truly moderate Muslims begin speaking out and taking the terrorist-minded ones down a peg.
Is that naive? Shutting my eyes to the reality of the situation? Encouraging jihadists? Falling for their tricks? Becoming a dhimmi?
Perhaps.
But if Geller and Spenser have their way, we would declare, now, immediately, that even hearing information by scholars and representatives selected by a man Spenser himself vouched for as moderate and peaceful constitutes an unforgivable descent into dhimmitude.
This seems to select the option of permanent confrontation, because they seem to have ruled out any possibility of any way to avoid that.
Maybe there is no other possible outcome.
But shouldn't we at least be open to the possibility that something short of permanent total war of civilizations is possible?
I say again that I am not attempting to portray them as seething warmongers and "eliminationists," as the left likes to say.
This permanent, million-casualty war of civilizations scenario has occurred to me, and I haven't denounced myself for thinking about it.
It's a possibility one has to consider.
But I am saying that if there is a chance at avoiding such an outcome, well, we should probably do what we can to avoid it, shouldn't we?
If Rick Perry's minor bit of "let's be friends and try to understand each other" feel goodery and outreach is deemed by Geller and Spenser to be beyond the pale in terms of cowardly appeasement--
-- then what on earth policy would they suggest we pursue? If this minor attempt at bridge-building is an example of knuckling under Muslim aggressors (aggressors, mind you, vouched for by Spenser as being moderate and peaceful and progressive) and too much of a concession to the implacable, stealthy enemy within, then I'm afraid I need to be instructed as to what current policy options they suggest we pursue.
Because, until we actually are confronted, fully and finally, with some truly horrible choices, I'd sure prefer to do what we can to avoid those.
This is what I don't understand regarding Geller's and Spenser's current agitations: If this minor bridge-building is the action of a traitorous Quisling, then what is left but war of all on all?
I actually doubt, in the extreme, they would suggest such a thing. As unthinkable as that is to me, I'm sure it's unthinkable to them as well.
But I don't think either comprehends that when they begin claiming that even the smallest gestures at bridge-building with the Muslim community -- even if those gestures are doomed to produce no good results -- are "dhimmi," then I don't really see any policy choices except girding for war, external and internal.
I don't know if they think about this at all.
Maybe they just think about their next blog posts.
Posted by: Ace at
07:11 PM
| Comments (603)
Post contains 5723 words, total size 36 kb.
Posted by: Matt at August 27, 2011 07:19 PM (GpBls)
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman at August 27, 2011 07:19 PM (qITqt)
Posted by: TexasJew at August 27, 2011 07:19 PM (+cOEs)
Posted by: Village Idiot at August 27, 2011 07:21 PM (utXSy)
Posted by: newrouter at August 27, 2011 07:22 PM (/ycAc)
Posted by: Pam Geller's Boobs at August 27, 2011 07:22 PM (1CXpM)
Posted by: USCitizen at August 27, 2011 07:23 PM (VoMvU)
Who went and bit off a little bit more than he could chew
You said that you had it made, but you been had
The woman no good, no how, thinkin' maybe the blood is bad
Bad (bad) blood (blood)
The woman was born to lie
Makes promises she can't keep
With the wink on an eye
Bad (bad) blood (blood)
Brother, you've been deceived
It's bound to change you mind
About all you believe
From where I stand, it looks mighty strange
How you let a woman like that treat you like small change
I don't understand what you're lookin' to find
The only thing bad blood do is mess up a good man's mind
Bad (bad) blood (blood)
The bitch is in her smile
The lie is on her lips
Such an evil child
Bad (bad) blood (blood)
Is takin' you for a ride
The only thing good about bad blood
Is lettin' it slide
Posted by: Neil Sedated at August 27, 2011 07:27 PM (WCm02)
Pirates know stuff. Pirates know the Aga Khan Crew.
The Aga Khan Crew are pretty good guys. Some say they are moderates. The Pirate Community also thinks they are moderates.
Grover Norquist is not a moderate. Someday the Pirate Crew will figure out what he is. Until then he is best ignored. He is irrelevant, at least to Pirates.
Posted by: Pirate Pelf Lucre at August 27, 2011 07:27 PM (wN82N)
Posted by: mike at August 27, 2011 07:28 PM (4OBac)
Posted by: toby928™ at August 27, 2011 07:28 PM (GTbGH)
Full disclosure: I've always been creeped out by P. Geller, and have little patience for her shrill self-justification and self-promotion.
P.S. She's not nearly as, um...attractive, as she seems to think she is. Adds to the creep factor by at least an order of magnitude.
Posted by: TH at August 27, 2011 07:29 PM (rvJrw)
Posted by: toby928™ at August 27, 2011 07:29 PM (GTbGH)
Posted by: somebody else, not me at August 27, 2011 07:33 PM (7EV/g)
Posted by: mike at August 27, 2011 07:34 PM (4OBac)
I'm probably about 2/3rds of the way through or whatever so I'll just say this after reading that far. It seems Geller is very very much in favor of pulling guilt by association. Almost like someone else that likes to use guilt by association to call everyone racist and bigots...
Yep, definitely should refer to her blog as Little Green Jugs.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 07:34 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: Guaman at August 27, 2011 07:39 PM (JFgTJ)
Umm.. obviously a lot?
/move over Allahpundit, there's a new Beta Male on the block!
Posted by: shibumi at August 27, 2011 07:39 PM (z63Tr)
I visit another time zone, and see what happens...
Posted by: DarkLord on the road! at August 27, 2011 07:39 PM (vkUBG)
Posted by: Zelda Starr at August 27, 2011 11:21 PM (4vsjd)
Hey we've tried several times, but the ewok is wily and always manages to evade the traps and interventions we've set up. so far.
FYI don't eat the pecan chocolate fudge at the next AoSHQ Xmas party. And don't ask why.
Posted by: Mætenloch at August 27, 2011 07:39 PM (/3HNy)
Posted by: BumperStickerist at August 27, 2011 07:41 PM (h6mPj)
Posted by: Arbalest at August 27, 2011 07:43 PM (Wh+YQ)
Posted by: CoolCzech at August 27, 2011 07:44 PM (niZvt)
Note - the board is elected, hence Governor Perry has little influence (other than campaigning for candidates) on curriculum. He does have influence over funding, though even this was infringed upon by the State Supreme Court in 2005.
Posted by: phreshone at August 27, 2011 07:45 PM (T3vCe)
Posted by: Connie at August 27, 2011 07:55 PM (AQf4c)
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 07:56 PM (73tyQ)
Start?
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 07:58 PM (73tyQ)
Posted by: RJ at August 27, 2011 07:59 PM (QjrRF)
Posted by: RJ at August 27, 2011 07:59 PM (QjrRF)
Posted by: Jordan Phillips at August 27, 2011 08:00 PM (SGgk8)
Really good. Enjoyed reading this one a lot.
"But I am saying that if there is a chance at avoiding such an outcome, well, we should probably do what we can to avoid it, shouldn't we?"
I am with you there, but only to the extent that functional governments in Muslim countries work honestly toward that same avoidance. To date, they have not played their hands as though we are feeling threatened and murderous.
Posted by: Errol at August 27, 2011 08:02 PM (d2AYO)
Posted by: observer at August 27, 2011 08:04 PM (VzVQP)
Posted by: nickless at August 27, 2011 11:56 PM (MMC8r)
But there are tits involved.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 08:05 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: emaugust at August 27, 2011 08:06 PM (E8wmM)
Actually it's worse that that: They also denounce anyone who hasn't denounced someone who said something nice about a Muslim. Which means that by Geller-logic a solid 40% of the morons here are unknowing dhimmis.
Posted by: Mætenloch at August 27, 2011 08:07 PM (/3HNy)
Posted by: Moniker at August 27, 2011 08:09 PM (TN7KL)
For those who didn't read Spencer's screed, he had a snarky remark about how Ace spelled Pamela's name as "Gellar".
But given Ace's...uh...interests, he was obviously thinking of another "Gellar".
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:09 PM (73tyQ)
So, And I say this in the spirit of sophomoric frat boyism, both of them can fuck off.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 08:10 PM (9CM5J)
Norquist is someone to watch closely, pushing that Moslem shit.
Perry fucked up. Big deal. But he has good hair and played drums for ZZ Top, so he's got my vote.
Posted by: TexasJew at August 27, 2011 08:10 PM (+cOEs)
Posted by: Moniker at August 27, 2011 08:11 PM (TN7KL)
Actually it's worse that that: They also denounce anyone who hasn't denounced someone who said something nice about a Muslim. Which means that by Geller-logic a solid 40% of the morons here are unknowing dhimmis.
Posted by: Mætenloch at August 28, 2011 12:07 AM (/3HNy)
Does Pamela like to ride bikes and tell people to buy her calendars too?
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 08:12 PM (GULKT)
Norquist is someone to watch closely, pushing that Moslem shit.
Perry fucked up. Big deal. But he has good hair and played drums for ZZ Top, so he's got my vote.
Posted by: TexasJew at August 28, 2011 12:10 AM (+cOEs)
You're full of shit.
Perry was the lead singer of Journey.
Google it.
Of course, all of Journey's songs were halal...
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:12 PM (73tyQ)
Posted by: Ina_ginalship at August 27, 2011 08:12 PM (opinc)
Posted by: Mætenloch at August 28, 2011 12:07 AM (/3HNy)
Count me in the 60%
Posted by: TexasJew at August 27, 2011 08:13 PM (+cOEs)
Posted by: Hammer at August 27, 2011 08:13 PM (hVGDL)
Posted by: izoneguy at August 27, 2011 08:13 PM (i6Neb)
Does Pamela like to ride bikes and tell people to buy her calendars too?
Posted by: buzzion at August 28, 2011 12:12 AM (GULKT)
No, just stare at my tits...
(slap)
...don't stare at my tits...
(slap)
...stare at my tits...
(slap)
...don't stare at my tits AND stare at my tits...
For get it, Ace, it's Gellertown.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:14 PM (73tyQ)
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 08:14 PM (v1Si/)
Posted by: prettypinkfluffypanties at August 27, 2011 08:15 PM (x7Ly4)
Posted by: TexasJew at August 27, 2011 08:15 PM (+cOEs)
Posted by: captain smith at August 27, 2011 08:16 PM (1kwr2)
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 08:17 PM (v1Si/)
It's gonna be a long week.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 08:17 PM (9CM5J)
1. Supporting Perry is hard work.
2. Norquist shook Sarah Palin's hand.
3. What the heck is the State of Texas doing supporting religious instruction in public school classrooms? I know Rick Perry loves his wealthy friends, but this is ridiculous.
4. New Belgium's "Trippel" tastes good and packs a punch.
Posted by: mrp at August 27, 2011 08:17 PM (HjPtV)
Oi, my eyes are now bleeding. Thanks for that, Ace.
My dead eyes aside, good piece - this conspiracy-by-association game that is starting to brew everywhere is getting absurd. 2010 once-allies now are responsible for some incredible smearjobs.
I'm not a Perry-supporter yet, but with crap like this, I'm beginning to lose respect for anything that these guys publish.
Posted by: californium at August 27, 2011 08:18 PM (vC7O/)
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 28, 2011 12:17 AM (v1Si/)
Naw, if she really meant it, she'd post a pic in stompy boots.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:18 PM (73tyQ)
Posted by: TexasJew at August 28, 2011 12:15 AM (+cOEs)
I think that might require a commisioned piece of art by CAC. It will involve a topless woman with "quit looking at my tits" written across her chest.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 08:18 PM (GULKT)
Forget it, it's primarytown.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:19 PM (73tyQ)
What a post. And I read it all.
Robert Spencer has said there is no such thing as Moderate Islam. Doesn't exist. Simply does not exist, is a lie.
Yes, from my understanding, Robert says that there is no such thing as Moderate Islam because any muslims that we would perceive as moderate, not encouraging jihad, not preaching about hatred towards Jews, would not be following the teachings of the Qu'ran and would therefore not be considered muslims. Any muslim that really follows the teachings of the Qu'ran isn't going to be a moderate.
I have considered this myself: What if the darkest conception of Islam is accurate?
I believe the darkest conception of Islam is accurate. That's not to say that I don't think there are a large mass of muslims out there more concerned with feeding their family on a weekly basis. I think there's probably a large number of muslims just stuck, going through the Islamic motions since they're in Islamic crapholes and to not follow along is going to get themselves or their family hurt.
That being said though, Islam as an ideology needs to be destroyed.
Consider the IsmaÂ’ilis you mentioned. They sounded like a nice moderate group of muslims. But what do this nice group of people think should happen to me when I point out, even respectfully, that when their 54 year old Prophet Mohammad married 6 year old Aisha and then had sex with her when she was 9 years old, he was kind of acting like a child-raping pedophile?
Are we ever going to get to the point where muslims aren't going to want to kill me for insulting their prophet? Are they going to mellow to the point where I'll get a slap on the back and they'll comment "Yeah, Mo was kind of screwed up. Even if Aisha had nice developing boobs and was wearing shorts with 'JUICY' stamped across the bottom, 9 years old was a little young." It's highly unlikely.
So is the rest of the world supposed to tiptoe around Muslims, never allowed to disagree or debate without fear of violence. Uh, yes. That's our default position right now. Islam can't accept ANY criticism of the prophet without resorting to violence. The prophet was a murdering, thieving, lying, conniving child-raping pedophile. Getting those two circles to overlap and find the peaceful area without violence between the two is impossible.
When you combine Islamic fanaticism with weakness in the West; the erosion of families, education, militaries, media; collapsing Western economies; huge numbers of muslims imported into Western countries; the collapse of the welfare states giving money to those muslims; Iran's desire to wipe Israel off the map; Israel's desire to stay on the map; suicidal energy policies making us more dependant on Middle East oil than we need to be, violence is pretty much inevitable.
What then? If we face an unending war of terrorism, what steps, almost unthinkable now, would it take to stop that war of terrorism?
Here's some unthinkable steps.
1. Have our governments, media and schools take a critical look at Islam. A real look. Look at the violence, how women are treated, how children are treated, how slavery is still permitted and how Islam is pretty much the one common thread related to terrorism.
2. It's kind of hard to list 12 steps when you know the first won't voluntarily be taken soon.
Posted by: Stateless Infidel at August 27, 2011 08:20 PM (GKQDR)
Naw, if she really meant it, she'd post a pic in stompy boots.
<hr>
Well he never linked to her stompy boot pics before so she has to throw a big stink first, ya know? Obviously Ace isn't like the other boys, so she's trying something new.
I'm pretty sure I watched the same thing go down earlier this year between a couple of dramatic neighbors. Of course, they were mostly drunk. This chick seems crazy.
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 08:21 PM (v1Si/)
Posted by: Johnny (John E.) at August 27, 2011 08:21 PM (nRTou)
I was called a dhimmi.
BTW: you should ask her if she'd let you fuck her tits if all could be made better. AoSHQ Lifestyle Taqiyah!
Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at August 27, 2011 08:21 PM (AWahI)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 08:22 PM (9CM5J)
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 08:23 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: jimmuy at August 27, 2011 08:23 PM (JRjWw)
Mr. Ace....... I hope you are treating yourself to the most sinful donuts of your choice right now. My blood sugar went down just from reading all that, so you must be exhausted.... Damn well said, too. imo.
Since I was nice to a muslim lady at the grocery store the other day........then I must be a dhimmi too, huh.
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at August 27, 2011 08:24 PM (DMb7S)
Posted by: Moniker at August 27, 2011 08:25 PM (TN7KL)
Just three years ago Larry Summers got bounced as president of Harvard over the same heresy as Wilson’s. He’s at a small academic conference, fifty people, and the question is, why are there so few women in high-level positions in science and engineering? And Summers brings up—not advocates—just brings up—the theory that it’s due to evolutionary differences between men and women, which was exactly Wilson’s assumption. Genetic theorists had had this idea lying on the table, out in the open, for forty years. Nevertheless, a stone-cold feminist from MIT, a biologist named Nancy Hopkins, bangs her laptop shut and storms out as noisily and obviously as possible, complaining that she has only three choices, blacking out, throwing up, or escaping the sound of Summers’s voice. I couldn’t believe what happened next. The Harvard faculty mutinies in a Burning of the Reichstag riot—if we must bring the Nazis into it—howling, “SUMMERS MUST GO!” The next thing you know he capitulates, caves in completely, apologizes for his sins—and gets bounced anyway. Unbelievable stuff. Iannone: Yes. You think he could have resisted? He should have stood up more forcefully? Wolfe: No question about it. They weren’t attacking him on intellectual grounds but on religious grounds. They were treating him as a heretic, a transgressor. They were assaulting his character. We learned how to deal with that one in our sophomore year at St. Christopher’s. If someone impugns your character, you can’t waste time trying to defend it. You’ll just end up sitting there wringing your hands and bleating something lame like, “I am, too,a good person.” Iannone: So you should do what instead? Wolfe: Attack the attacker. Attack his—in this case, their—character. All he had to say was, “I cannot…believe…what I am now witnessing…members of the Harvard faculty taking a grossly anti-intellectual stance, violating their implicit vow to cherish the free exchange of ideas, going mad because a hypothesis that has been openly discussed for almost half a century offends some ideological passion of the moment, acting like the most benighted of Puritans from three centuries ago ransacking all that is decent and rational in search of witches, causing this great university to become the laughingstock of the academic world here and abroad, sacrificing your very integrity in the name of some smelly little orthodoxy, as Orwell called beliefs like the ones you profess. I’m more than disappointed in you. I’m ashamed of you. Is that really how you see your mission here? If so, you should resign…now!...forthwith!...and take to the streets under your own names, not Harvard’s, and forbear being so small-minded and egotistical as to try to drag Harvard down to your level. Ladies, gentlemen…kindly do not display your ignorance…on these hallowed premises…while holding aloft the flags, the standards, of this university. Be honest with yourselves, even if you can’t be honest with Harvard. Look…think…and see…what you have become.” That would have taken care of the whole thing.
Posted by: Twoslaps at August 27, 2011 08:25 PM (Bo7bD)
Ace - love the work you do. Don't let this bother you too much.
Posted by: Dave S. at August 27, 2011 08:25 PM (UvR6d)
In terms of the guilt by association, which was the entire point of the post.
The part of me that really respects Mr. Spencer wants to attribute this entire scenario on some sort of difference of definitions. I was going to explain more but it's half past midnight. Good night all.
Posted by: Stateless Infidel at August 27, 2011 08:26 PM (GKQDR)
Perry can afford to ignore this simply because Pamela Geller has marginalized herself with her own rhetoric - "appear in public with any Muslim = dhimmi."
Sorry to say that Spencer's joined her. And once again, I hate to bag on Spencer, but he's done this to himself at this point. Geller's always been a shrieking harpy of anti-dhimmi correctness and now he's shackled himself to her leg on this issue. He should know better.
Robert, please try to see the forest of anti-jihad through the trees of your friendship with Pam and stop shooting your own troops because she's gone off her rocker. Until and unless she retracts or simply goes silent on this issue, her credibility is tortured and you will lose hearts and minds in defending her (as you have damned nearly lost mine, after reading every book you've written and agreeing with what you had to say).
If you or Geller think anyone who blogs on this site, Ace or otherwise, or 99% of the commentators, are sympathizers with jihad, I am frankly done with you.
PS Robert - mo one on the right is talking with Norquist re: any other issue but the economy. If you have any proof otherwise, kindly share it with us. Otherwise, this loose association bullshit is the same thing that you dealt with re: FITNA and the other BS with CJ (associating with "racist" groups), and I'm shocked that you'd put someone else through the same wringer.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 08:27 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: TexasJew at August 27, 2011 08:28 PM (+cOEs)
Meanwhile....tell me who is the greater threat to the country, you know who and his band of 8th grade locker victims masquerading as a government or the Aga Khan who, when last I checked, was somewhere in the 3 billions in line for a position of power within the United States?
Priorities: They're what's for dinner.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at August 27, 2011 08:30 PM (7utQ2)
Posted by: Kevin Bacon at August 27, 2011 08:30 PM (oxYYm)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 08:31 PM (nj1bB)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 08:32 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: Breaker19 at August 27, 2011 08:34 PM (WCm02)
Posted by: Tsar Nicholas II at August 27, 2011 08:35 PM (iRlbA)
Well, yes, according to Mr.Spencer everyone needs to be a complete fucking paranoid about who they associate with on _any_ level or they are dhimmi.
Let's totally fucking ignore what dhimmi means...paying tribute to save oneself from the blade...and just apply it to those who don't happen to think genocide is appropriate.
Posted by: Quilly Mammoth at August 27, 2011 08:35 PM (AWahI)
What can we do to forestall such a grim future? Anything?
Convert.
Posted by: meleager at August 27, 2011 08:35 PM (iSQB2)
Posted by: Johnny (John E.) at August 27, 2011 08:35 PM (nRTou)
If we did that NO ONE WOULD BE HERE.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at August 27, 2011 08:36 PM (7utQ2)
Posted by: The Great Satan's Ghost at August 27, 2011 08:36 PM (UrPTC)
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 08:37 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: Breaker19 at August 27, 2011 08:37 PM (WCm02)
Posted by: ace at August 28, 2011 12:31 AM (nj1bB)
It's like a doctoral thesis. It's never finished, it's just abandoned.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:37 PM (73tyQ)
I don't think she started it, but I think that's the goal now.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:38 PM (73tyQ)
Hearsay.
Or locked in some nitwit intern's desk drawer.
Layers of fact-checking and shit.
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at August 27, 2011 08:39 PM (7utQ2)
They were all blonde and muscular, so they must have been racist. I was going to climb into the trees in back to see who was in her bedroom, but the bitch called the cops on me and whipped out that silly restraining order
Posted by: Cahrsel Jhonsno at August 27, 2011 08:39 PM (Y+DPZ)
Posted by: Comrade Arthur at August 27, 2011 08:39 PM (+JhHG)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 08:39 PM (BH4RQ)
Posted by: CAC at August 27, 2011 08:40 PM (JEVge)
Posted by: MissTammy at August 27, 2011 08:40 PM (SsG4J)
Posted by: CAC at August 27, 2011 08:40 PM (JEVge)
Posted by: The terrorist Hobbit formerly known as Donna at August 27, 2011 08:41 PM (OVCfn)
That's how it works for me.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:41 PM (73tyQ)
I'm most disappointed in RS. He needs to stop digging and move on.
Posted by: JIMBO at August 27, 2011 08:43 PM (jCxjL)
This. I also suspect she wants some validation from Ace, hence the boob thing. Obviously he didn't give her what she was looking for when they met and it bothers her.
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 08:43 PM (v1Si/)
Next, they'll be calling you a dunderwhelp and a fustilarian.
Box their ears, I say.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:44 PM (73tyQ)
You're introducing me to so many fun new friends, Ace. This right-wing Maureen Dowd, this ivory tower snob enchanted by the heady elixir of his own farts, and World Net Daily! Not that I plan to check any of them out, any more than I'll attach a #p2 to a Tweet or read LGF. But it's good to know there are crazier people out there than I.
Life's too short for people that wear you down with browbeating shrieks. Life is enhanced by the Moron Nation.
Posted by: Francis Urquhart at August 27, 2011 08:45 PM (B29JY)
Posted by: JIMBO at August 28, 2011 12:43 AM (jCxjL)
The first rule of Pamela Geller's holes...
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:45 PM (73tyQ)
The people that choose to study Islamic history and some theology, like Spencer, see the unbridgable gap between the West and Islam, and history in on their side. Life for non-Muslims in Muslim lands only degenerates. Always. Everywhere. We are seeing this in Egypt right now. The gap is unbridgable; it's one way or the other. Coexistance in the same land is not possible with followers of Mo.
We hear a lot of victimization claims by Muslims, the people who perform FGM & honor killings & have committed 16,000+ terrorists acts world-wide since 9/11, the co-religionists of the murders responsible for 9/11, and our politicians end up treating them like an oppressed minority (Saudi money .... ?). But it's not us, it really is them.
We need to deal with this problem, and Spencer is an excellent resource. Unfortunately, Spencer and company are a bit strident, and paint with an overly broad brush, and Pam .... , and it's a problem. Some re-engineering of their message delivery is needed. They need to do it.
Posted by: Arbalest at August 27, 2011 08:46 PM (Wh+YQ)
Posted by: random at August 27, 2011 08:46 PM (PUpEa)
75: If you take that hard look and label it as "what Islam believes" no one will listen to you outside of our own choir. A vast majority of Americans believe that the entire world population shares our motives and goals. You and I know that a large plurality in the Islamic world largely doesn't. But Rick Perry (my candidate) or any other presidential candidate, has to win a national election in which a large number of voters are either Islamic or sympathize with them.
Ace is dead on right in saying that what Geller is espousing is dangerously toe-ing the line between anti-jihad and anti-Muslim.
Cain, for all that he probably didn't want the role, is the "anti-Muslim" candidate, due to his own irresponsible rhetoric. Are you saying the other candidates should follow suit ? Is acknowledging the possibility of moderate, peaceful Muslims so airy-fairy that it earns you minutes of hate, or makes you some kind of co-conspirator ?
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 08:46 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 08:46 PM (BH4RQ)
I think I understand Geller's/Spencer's objections to the supposed "whitewash" of the curriculum by suggesting that Muslim antisemitism was influenced by Nazi propaganda. I don't think they are objecting to the severity of the comparison, but to the lack of depth that it represents - Muslim antisemitism is deeper, it is faith-based, from the Koran, but Nazi antisemitism is more superficial, based mainly on scapegoat-ism. It doesn't have the deep, religious roots that Muslim antisemitism has.
I wouldn't call the teacher's lesson plan, though, a "whitewash", just an observation really, that Muslim anti-Semites and Nazis have something in common. It's certainly not something to go ape-shit over.
Posted by: chemjeff at August 27, 2011 08:47 PM (s7mIC)
Posted by: CAC at August 27, 2011 08:49 PM (JEVge)
Well as the father of an 11 year old and with a supershitty leftoid educational bureaucracy in this state, I am animalistically concerned about any stupid efforts to bridge gaps and all that.
Perry fucked up. We Texas parents don't want any creepy multicultural Islamic religious shit near our kids as far as any curriculum.And, as a parent of a little Jewish girl, I am triply concerned.
I agree with Geller insofar as this is an issue that Perry needs to address.
Still, he has my vote.
Posted by: TexasJew at August 27, 2011 08:49 PM (+cOEs)
These federal undercover agents are all Muslims. They have to be, because the would-be terrorists are devout Muslims who quiz them. Some of these agents have fooled actual al Qaeda terrorists.
So, we have Muslims alerting the feds about plots, and then Muslim undercover agents set up the terrorists for arrest.
Is this not evidence of the existence of moderate Muslims?
Posted by: Llarry at August 27, 2011 08:49 PM (jyUxu)
Posted by: Serious Cat at August 27, 2011 08:49 PM (bAySe)
Posted by: Johnny (John E.) at August 28, 2011 12:35 AM (nRTou)
The Nazis engaged in a mass propaganda effort reaching out to Muslims in the Middle East during WWII. They also sent arms and money to Haj Amin al-Husseini (Mufti of Jerusalem and leader of the Arabs in the British Mandate of Palestine) for a few years before the war, helped trigger a pro-Axis coup in Baghdad in 1941 (which al-Husseini took part in), and then used al-Husseini to recruit Muslim troops from the Balkans for the Waffen-SS (he also contributed to their propaganda radio broadcasts).
There have been a number of books on this subject published in recent years, including Jeffrey Herf's Nazi Propaganda for the Arab World, Matthias Küntzel's Jihad and Jew-Hatred, and Mallmann and Cuppers' Nazi Palestine: The Plan for the Extermination of the Jews in Palestine.
Posted by: DKCZ at August 27, 2011 08:51 PM (gjsMD)
Posted by: Not Drinking Nearly Enough at August 27, 2011 08:51 PM (JEvSn)
Posted by: Pamela Gellar Movie Quotes at August 27, 2011 08:52 PM (veZ9n)
Posted by: Kevin Bacon at August 27, 2011 08:52 PM (bvXGR)
That isn't a logical conclusion. Islam can be learned.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:53 PM (73tyQ)
Posted by: Pam "O" Geller at August 27, 2011 08:54 PM (JEVge)
Posted by: Johnny (John E.) at August 27, 2011 08:54 PM (nRTou)
Oh? Well, then it's time for a Beach Party!
Posted by: SlaveDog at August 27, 2011 08:56 PM (PidTa)
Posted by: Moniker at August 27, 2011 08:56 PM (TN7KL)
118 agree. 123, per Ace's earlier post, she gets more hits than he does now - thus problem is that she's "legitimized" enough that she can do damage with irresponsible, misguided allegations.
Given the inside baseball related earlier, it appears as if she reads this site thoroughly for any mention of her name or cause. It's the blogger version of "you didn't hold me after I you came and then you never called me again."
Pamela needs validation. Ace didn't reciprocate. Ergo, Pamela hates Ace, therefore he must be dhimmi.
Anyone want to take bets on why Pamela's attacking Perry ? Lack of access, or denied interviews, perhaps ? Envy's a bith, Pam. Live with it.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 08:56 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: The Mega Independent at August 27, 2011 08:57 PM (5I0Yr)
That's one of the reasons Islam has to rely on subversion, terrorism and insurgency-they suck out loud at conventional warfare.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 08:57 PM (9CM5J)
What's hilarious is that most of us have only been near a frat on Wedgie Wednesdays.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 08:58 PM (73tyQ)
At this point, Ace is punching down.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 09:00 PM (73tyQ)
Radical Islam is responsible for my poor grammar and spelling in my previous post. The Pamela under my bed says so. (No, I ain't going there, no further, no-siree).
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:00 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: logprof of the Free GGE Foundation at August 27, 2011 09:01 PM (lh7Yc)
As a moron who also reads Jihadwatch regularly (AtlasShrugs, not so much), I've got to say that I think you are conflating guilt by association with quality of association. No one is accusing Marco Rubio or Sarah Palin, but Rick Perry has had a much deeper relationship with Norquist--fund raising, trips, etc., that go beyond just shaking hands or endorsing taxpayers issues.
Secondly, you may also be conflating moderate Islam (no such thing) with moderate Muslims (of which there are many). Stateless Infidel (#75) pretty much gets it right.
Finally, you need to cut Jugs and Beard some slack. Geller and Spencer are doing the hard day-to-day work of exposing the stealth Jihad project, and at considerable expense and personal risk. It is a lonely, thankless task, and I'd spot them some points when they start sounding a bit paranoid-- they have every reason to be.
Yes, I understand egos get bruised, but its a big blogosphere and there is room for all three of you.
What there is not room for is more apologists for jihadis whose only real objective is to destroy our values and civilization. I'd rather have people too concerned than not enough. And I wouldn't say that the general atmosphere of the late 40s and early 50s would be too extreme a tone for the country to take (if we could ever get it off its PC ass). After all, we know from the former Soviet archives that McCarthy, for all his faults, was right.
Posted by: Arms Merchant at August 27, 2011 09:02 PM (NZMKc)
Posted by: Pamela Gellar Movie Quotes at August 27, 2011 09:02 PM (veZ9n)
Posted by: Johnny (John E.) at August 27, 2011 09:04 PM (nRTou)
144: On that note - you want juvenille. Pam ? You can't handle juvenille. The frat boys I've known would have already had your rackalicious hyper-idelogical and overly-excitable ass for lunch by now.
And if you consider that unfair, try thinking twice before you frag your own troops. At least Robert had a good name to protect before you dragged him into this irrelevant internecine idiocy.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:06 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 09:06 PM (BH4RQ)
True. Went to college for 7-1/2 years. Never went to a frat house.
Posted by: SlaveDog at August 27, 2011 09:06 PM (PidTa)
Spencer: Good guy but gets carried away ( esp defending Miss Nice Ta-tas )
This dispute: lame
btw, there are no 'moderate' Muslims. There are Muslims who don't take Islam seriously as anything more than a moral code to help them behave themselves ( don't drink ,etc )........but all those who follow the teachings of the Koran are Not Moderate because that vile book is fanatical
also btw, from the pics I've seen, wonktwat is not cute and her mind is a lib-crap-sinkhole
Posted by: SantaRosaStan at August 27, 2011 09:06 PM (UqKQV)
Posted by: SlaveDog at August 28, 2011 01:06 AM (PidTa)
Including grad school / doctoral fellowships -- 8 years. No frat houses
Posted by: SantaRosaStan at August 27, 2011 09:08 PM (UqKQV)
Posted by: SantaRosaStan at August 28, 2011 01:06 AM (UqKQV)
I get this argument, but even if I was totally convinced of its veracity, I still have to wonder (like ace): what then?
That's not a road I would really want to go down, or want America to go down either.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 09:09 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 09:10 PM (BH4RQ)
That's not a road I would really want to go down, or want America to go down either.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 28, 2011 01:09 AM (8Zpuz)
Which road is this, of which you speak?
Posted by: SantaRosaStan at August 27, 2011 09:10 PM (UqKQV)
Hmm...
Is that what this whole thing is about? The power of the ta-ta's?
I knew it.
Posted by: SlaveDog at August 27, 2011 09:11 PM (PidTa)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:11 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: BSR at August 28, 2011 01:10 AM (BH4RQ)
We eat frat boys for breakfast.
For dinner...hobos!
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 09:11 PM (73tyQ)
Well, since all the Republican candidates seem to be dhimmi's, I may as well go ahead and vote my conscience. Obama it is!
Ha ha. Just kidding. Nothing personal, Ace, and I can tell you put a lot of effort into that post, but no one really gives a shit. Except about the boobies. If you could post a link to some of those pictures from back when Geller was younger, and they were worth ogling, then all will be forgiven.
Posted by: OCBill at August 27, 2011 09:11 PM (MiSre)
I rather liked the combo of "smart military blog" and "notoriously rowdy commenters."
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at August 27, 2011 09:12 PM (7utQ2)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:13 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: AmishDude at August 27, 2011 09:13 PM (73tyQ)
Posted by: Dcbrent at August 27, 2011 09:14 PM (vS5Lj)
Why not? The America of fifty years ago wouldn't have tolerated this influx of Muslims and now it's a road we don't want to go down? Why?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 09:16 PM (GZitp)
Oh, and, that's right. Rick Perry was not a frat-boy.
Posted by: SlaveDog at August 27, 2011 09:16 PM (PidTa)
When has Robert Spencer ever admitted he was wrong? I can't think of any examples.
Posted by: ed at August 27, 2011 09:16 PM (NIJTu)
Posted by: Awnree at August 27, 2011 09:17 PM (sR3hB)
Posted by: AmishDude at August 28, 2011 01:13 AM (73tyQ)
Ace's prose is prolix
Posted by: ex-PFC Wintergreen at August 27, 2011 09:17 PM (UqKQV)
Posted by: Little Green Fuzzballs at August 27, 2011 09:18 PM (jeLTI)
Doesn't he know how important I am?
You're welcome...
Posted by: badanov at August 27, 2011 09:19 PM (lult1)
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 01:16 AM (GZitp)
We could take more aggressive steps to collect humint from radical mosques than we are now. Hell, the whole Western world would benefit from that.
Depends on who you ask, but a lot of the anti-Muzzie crusaders would like us to start banning Islam or Islamic practices re: France, Switzerland - the headscarf ban or the minaret ban. Those are violations of the First Amendment. I am not assuming these intentions on your part or anyone's here specifically, but I've heard them expressed several times, so I know they exist.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 09:19 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: !! at August 27, 2011 09:20 PM (UqKQV)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:21 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 09:21 PM (BH4RQ)
Posted by: AmishDude at August 28, 2011 01:13 AM (73tyQM)
"Ace, you make me long for the erections of my youth..."
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 09:21 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: Johnny (John E.) at August 27, 2011 09:22 PM (nRTou)
Posted by: blue star at August 27, 2011 09:24 PM (MLZxF)
So in your mind Islam is something that should be monitored closely, we should be prepared to live our lives being searched at airports, sea ports, etc. and basically living under a constant threat of what some Muslims may do because of the first amendment? Was that the founders intentions? I find that hard to believe.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 09:25 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: Ronster at August 27, 2011 09:27 PM (4fcWw)
Posted by: radar at August 27, 2011 09:29 PM (VEc75)
But shouldn't we at least be open to the possibility that something short of permanent total war of civilizations is possible?
I say again that I am not attempting to portray them as seething warmongers and "eliminationists," as the left likes to say.
This permanent, million-casualty war of civilizations scenario has occurred to me, and I haven't denounced myself for thinking about it.
It's a possibility one has to consider.
But I am saying that if there is a chance at avoiding such an outcome, well, we should probably do what we can to avoid it, shouldn't we?
yes we should, but isn't it strange in 2011 this is even a question , we have information at our fingertips, yet we can't openly say to a religion that is hanging on to its bitter (heh)roots it should moderate for the good of mankind?
the fact that we can't without death threats is rather bizzare
yet i'm with you and others that have hopes that moderate muslims can help with Islam and furthering peace , but don't believe that can happen without strengthening Moderate muslims and pointing out with outrage not any servitude but outrage how wrong and inhumane Islam taken literally is to muslims and others in the world
Posted by: willow at August 27, 2011 09:30 PM (h+qn8)
Posted by: nickless at August 27, 2011 11:56 PM (MMC8r)
But there are tits involved.
Posted by: buzzion at August 28, 2011 12:05 AM (GULKT)
Definitely a coupla boobs at the least..
Posted by: JarvisW at August 27, 2011 09:31 PM (8yPsP)
can't we all get along ! we're on the same side damnt
Posted by: willow at August 27, 2011 09:32 PM (h+qn8)
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 01:25 AM (GZitp)
I don't see how this follows anything I said. If you are arguing for headscarf/minaret bans yourself, then no, I don't think those would have been the founder's intentions. Again the 1st Amendment is fairly clear.
I would haul out the Franklin liberty/security quote but I think that's as old as the hills by now in this debate.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 09:32 PM (8Zpuz)
185: Meg Kelly won me over when she tore up her co-worker for like 10 minutes some time back ala "don't come on my show without knowing your facts..." Same with Coulter, who I'd marry for each and every book she's written, along with her hellishy nasty TV commentary. And they've both done some "cheesecake" in their day - Kelly's magazine shoot and Coulter's calendars come to mind. So long as you bring enough substance to begin with, being hot just adds to the package.
After all, if hittable was the only criteria, Maggie McCain* might have her own TV show.
As for Michelle, she's beautiful, but I've found her blog more shrewish and bitter over the last year. She also seems to be firmly in the anti-Perry camp. I assume that both Pam and Michelle are Bachmann supporters and this might inform their thinking more than a bit. Malkin's Gardisil broadside was a bit overstated at best.
* Yes, I know. She's a bit thick, but that's how I roll. 2.5 hours to go.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:33 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: Brett_McS at August 27, 2011 09:34 PM (x8Zox)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:34 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: Brett_McS at August 28, 2011 01:34 AM (x8Zox)
Really? You're going to go with a "He's more informed than you are so you're not allowed to talk about it so you should shut up." That's what you want to do? Really?
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 09:38 PM (GULKT)
If everyone "stuck with what they knew" and listened to the "scholars" the Earth would still be the center of the universe and all thought would originate in the heart.
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 09:38 PM (KJMY9)
Posted by: RJ at August 27, 2011 09:38 PM (QjrRF)
Posted by: Johnny (John E.) at August 27, 2011 09:39 PM (nRTou)
196 - Argue from intimidation much ? As a recovering Randrioid, I distrust anyone who says Beloved Leader is Wiser Than You. Read what Robert had to say to Stein, then tell me how scholarly it sounds. Robert strikes me as a good man who's done a good job in a thankless task, but that doesn't make him infallible or unaccountable. He's wrong on this one. Doesn't make him a bad man, just makes him human.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:39 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 09:40 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 09:41 PM (nj1bB)
- "I'm sick and tired of so-called conservatives groveling at the feet of Islamic supremacists and then demonizing those who don't." [What? What conservatives do this?]
Sounds like the same sort of idiocy typical of HuffPo commenters.
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 09:41 PM (KJMY9)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 09:43 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Brett_McS at August 28, 2011 01:34 AM (x8Zox)
In that case, you should restrain yourself to commenting only on smegma and hentai. Thank you and good day, sir.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 09:45 PM (9CM5J)
Yeah. James Hansen is a scholar. Paul Krugman is a scholar. Hell, Obama is scholar.
Forgive me if I'm skeptical of scholars.
(Was I just assuming guilt by association? I denounce myself.)
Posted by: SlaveDog at August 27, 2011 09:45 PM (PidTa)
Good gosh, I can't stand the thought of what Chucky Johnson has posted over at LGF.
"Even Whacko-Rightwinger Ace Thinks Gellar and Spencer are Nuts!"
Posted by: Dave at August 27, 2011 09:46 PM (HPcQF)
204 Ace - given that Stein says he interviewed a teacher as to what they were taught, I will take his word over Pam's until she produces a more credible source.
My money's still on her having a horse in the race other than Perry, Bachmann being my first guess. I'm not anti-Bachmann by any means, but calling Perry a freakin' dhimmi doesn't exactly win my heart or mind. Did she fire Rollins or is this more of his fucking nonsense ?
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:46 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 09:48 PM (9CM5J)
groveling is rather harsh. perhaps we do give strength to those muslims that aren't kin to being forced to kill their daughter for being raped?
do we give up on the possibility there might be muslims that are indeed feeling oppressed by the hand of extreme islamists ?
are there none?
are You sure?
Posted by: willow at August 27, 2011 09:49 PM (h+qn8)
It begins "Now, looking at what the teachers were taught..."
You can also search for "jesus;" the new material begins before that.
I caught her in the sort of dishonest crap she's doing.
Posted by: ace at August 28, 2011 01:41 AM (nj1bB)
Oh yeah the crap you quoted from her interpretation is utter bullshit. Like I said on the original thread about this my 6th grade social studies class had a section dealing with the main religions around the world. And this was like 1994 or so, and part of what we learned was how Muslims believe that Jesus wasn't the Son of God but rather just a prophet. Which was a pretty easy concept for me to grasp even in the 6th grade. Just like grasping that Jews didn't think he was the Son of God, and the same with Hindus and Buddhists.
Its one of those things you sort of want to know when compare and contrast is used for teaching.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 09:50 PM (GULKT)
It begins "Now, looking at what the teachers were taught..."
Geeze, that's as bad as Maddow and Schultz.
Doesn't seem that different from Taqqiya.
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 09:51 PM (KJMY9)
I hereby anoint myself as the AoSHQ Authority on Military History, and my word may not be contested.
?
Why are you all laughing? I'm a SCHOLAR.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 09:51 PM (9CM5J)
Good gosh, I can't stand the thought of what Chucky Johnson has posted over at LGF.
"Even Whacko-Rightwinger Ace Thinks Gellar and Spencer are Nuts!"
Posted by: Dave at August 28, 2011 01:46 AM (HPcQF)
That's why the best way to call her nuts is to compare her behavior to Chuckles and to call her blog Little Green Jugs.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 09:51 PM (GULKT)
The Constitution says what it says, and to say that the Founding Fathers were not thinking of Islam, so therefore violations of the First Amendment against Moslems are ok, is akin to saying that the First Amendment doesn't apply online, as the Founding Fathers never imagined the internet. More sloppy, unserious thinking. And I know, I know: the Constitution is not a suicide pact. So when that platitude becomes legal precedent, and since law is based on precedent, will you be quite so happy when it is used to ban guns, or stop the free practice of Catholicism, or ban circumcision, all on behalf of various "victims" for whom the Constitution is not a suicide pact. But that could never happen--liberal judges would never try to create law from the bench. Right?
Are we really in favor of genocide? As I asked the other night, will U.S. troops line up women and children for slaughter. And if so, then please explain the outrage when Kerry or Obama accuse U.S. troops of killing women and children? Shouldn't we be proud of those accusations, if genocide is simply a lawfull order, gladly obeyed? I would think, instead of outrage, even if the accusations are false, the response would be more like an apologetice, "Sorry, sir, not this time, but I'll sure enough do it next time." Again, not serious. It may make you feel all puffed and testicular that you're going all hard core against Mr. Muzzie, but in the end it's just unhelpful, unserious venting, which does nothing to help solve the problem.
Posted by: MikeinAmman at August 27, 2011 09:52 PM (w/uuN)
196 You're in the wrong league here, mate. Robert Spencer is a scholar on this subject. Stick with what you know.
Posted by: Brett_McS at August 28, 2011 01:34 AM (x8Zox)
Spencer seems to be a fairily accomplished student of Islam and Islamic history; I copied and read his "Blogging the Koran" series and have one or two of his books on Islam. But like most people, I also have other, older sources, and the topic is not new to me.
But as to what constitutes dhimmitude: Spencer may be better at correctly stating the conditions that Muslims define and expect ... but Muslims do not rule here. We determine whether we defer to Muslims or not, no one else.
Posted by: Arbalest at August 27, 2011 09:54 PM (Wh+YQ)
Good gosh, I can't stand the thought of what Chucky Johnson has posted over at LGF.
Posted by: Dave at August 28, 2011 01:46 AM (HPcQF)
Open mike poetry slam night at Cafe Pedlar gets a bigger audience than Chuckles. I wouldn't worry overmuch about him.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 09:55 PM (9CM5J)
That isn't a logical conclusion. Islam can be learned.
You honestly think the FBI has been able to train non-Muslims well enough to fool genuine Muslim terrorists born in Muslim countries?
Posted by: Llarry at August 27, 2011 09:55 PM (jyUxu)
What if the darkest conception of Islam is accurate?
I believe the darkest conception of Islam is accurate. That's not to say that I don't think there are a large mass of muslims out there more concerned with feeding their family on a weekly basis. I think there's probably a large number of muslims just stuck, going through the Islamic motions since they're in Islamic crapholes and to not follow along is going to get themselves or their family hurt.
That being said though, Islam as an ideology needs to be destroyed.
////////////////////
My reply: Stateless Infidel gets it.
Plainly stated, Ace is grasping at straws with his "smallest gestures at bridge-building with the Muslim community" wishful thinking.
Muslims are obviously not in this country to have bridges built to them by the non-Muslim segment of the populace. In fact, they are openly here to establish islands -- Islamic beachheads, which they will, if permitted, develop -- a la London and Malmo -- into Islamic "no-go zones" for police and firemen. (To understand that this is not being pursued "undercover," but -- rather -- out in the open, please see Britain's "Islamic Emirates Project" at: http://tinyurl.com/44bg3ul - Hat tip: AtlasShrugs blog.)
No, Ace: There is no escaping it. Either Agha Khan is a stealth jihadist or an inconsequential statistical out-lyer -- we are already at war with Islam. It is a war that Islam declared back in the days of Muhammad. No amount of wishful thinking, exercises in goodwill or "nation-building," or idiotic "community outreach," such as Perry undertook with Agha Khan will change that.
The fact is that Islam not only does not "wish" to live in harmony with peoples of other religions and cultures, it explicitly refuses to do so. Or, do you not find it a bit odd that that jihadists are simultaneously killing -- to name just some of the salient, current examples -- Jews in Israel, Hindus in Kashmir, Catholics in the Philippines, Protestants in Nigeria, Confucianists & Communists in China, and Buddhists in Thailand? For the latter, please see the following heart-wrenching read: http://tinyurl.com/44v35nt
I am reasonably confident that Ace will come around. He just needs some time to absorb the implications of all this.
Say what you will about Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer (both of whom I openly and enthusiastically admire), they are change agents for good -- waking America the hell up.
Awakened from what, you may ask? Awakened from its self-induced -- and self-deluding -- fog as a result of ingesting far too much beer, porn, ESPN, American Idol, and junk food to the disturbing reality that the mosques in this country are hatching a generation of jihadis whom the younger set among us will need relentlessly to extirpate from our society, if that society is to continue as a Constitutional Republic.
As far as Perry's relationships with Khan and Perry go, they show he is what he is -- a slick politician cum naive Texas farm-boy. If he is wise, he will quickly and quietly distance himself from both of these tainted characters and speak out more boldly for Israel, which is under increasing pressure from both the Obama White House and an Islamic World recently grown more radical by a few powers of ten as a consequence of the ongoing "Arab Spring," foolishly endorsed by President Obama, and (to our everlasting shame) facilitated in Libya (but not in Syria) by our military.
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 27, 2011 09:55 PM (mtzAh)
Posted by: ace at August 28, 2011 01:41 AM (nj1bB)
Hell yes you did. Good find, ace.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 09:56 PM (8Zpuz)
216 - LGJ ? Nice. Green's my favorite color and I'd definitely prefer her Jugs to his Footballs. Although I did occasionally fap to the bike pics (/sarc).
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 09:57 PM (yK8YH)
I hereby anoint myself as the AoSHQ Authority on Military History, and my word may not be contested.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 28, 2011 01:51 AM (9CM5J)
Not only will you be uncontested, but the only one allowed to even make a comment on Military History.
Because you are a scholar.
And a frat boy.
Posted by: SlaveDog at August 27, 2011 09:59 PM (PidTa)
@219
Perhaps I should have expressed myself more clearly, for I share your estimate of Chucky's audience size. And I'd wager both audiences have the same per capita rate of mental illness.
Posted by: Dave at August 27, 2011 09:59 PM (HPcQF)
Posted by: Llarry at August 28, 2011 01:55 AM (jyUxu)
No, but I honestly believe the FBI could slip in some ringers among the American-born converts. FFS, man, they've had FBI agents damn near become made men in the Mafia, and they regularly infiltrated the Left, back when they were allowed to do that sort of thing.
Even the NYPD has had a covert presence in the Mosques here.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 10:01 PM (9CM5J)
That peace looks a lot different that the relationship we have today. Where Sharia is not the law of any land that does not want it. Where no human is ever coerced into following a faith. Where words and criticisms are not any sort of justification for violence. Where Islam accepts in its heart, that in the West, it is one religion of many, with no special considerations or privileges that would not likewise be extended to other faiths. Like I said a lot different than today.
Part of that endgame that does not include genocide, is understanding their faith. The other part of that, is them working to understand us, not just our faith, but our philosophy about freedom.
Now while we beat the sh*t out of them with one hand, the other hand should show that we are willing to take that first step toward peaceful coexistence.
I see no other way. Well like I said I see *one* other way. But I am not willing to entertain it. And unless that is the endgame Pam sees for this conflict, I wonder how she would fashion a lasting peace.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:02 PM (GE1+K)
j/k ace
I'm working with moderate muslims right now...and they love killing the Taliban. It's easy to take the just nuke them all route, it requires no actual interaction and relationship development, which could lead you to realize that whatever their religious beliefs, they are decent people who love, and are loved, by their families, want to get paid for a job well done, and mostly just want to be left alone to live their lives. There are decent and good people who happen to be muslim, but if Pam Gellar wanted to berate me face to face for interacting with them, well I would let her. I wouldn't be listening to her anyway IFYWIMAITYD.
Posted by: hobbes at August 27, 2011 10:02 PM (LmOsD)
Posted by: RJ at August 27, 2011 10:02 PM (QjrRF)
Where have I heard that sort of rhetoric before?
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 10:03 PM (KJMY9)
221:
...Either Agha Khan is a stealth jihadist or an inconsequential statistical out-lyer -- we are already at war with Islam... No amount of wishful thinking, exercises in goodwill or "nation-building," or idiotic "community outreach," such as Perry undertook with Agha Khan will change that.
The whole damned point of all the articles Ace cited is that the alleged "dhimmi" cirriculum was in fact a fairly hard-nosed look at Islam's flaws.
The fact that you can willfully disregard all of that and still carry the anti-Perry camp's water on this issue makes me suspect that you, too, have some undisclosed skin in the game. Who''s your candidate, Champion of The West ?
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:03 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: willow at August 27, 2011 10:03 PM (h+qn8)
Muslims who wage jihad against us should be put down like rabid dogs, ground up into slop, and fed to pigs.
Muslims who are not waging jihad against anyone but merely want to live in peace have the same rights as anyone else. We don't have to agree with their religious ideas, or even trouble ourselves with arguing against them, but we do have to respect their right to hold those ideas and to honestly explain them to others.
Spencer and Geller should also remember that an enemy you don't understand is an enemy you cannot defeat without incurring serious damage to yourself along the way.
Posted by: Lee Reynolds at August 27, 2011 10:03 PM (zkRoG)
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 28, 2011 01:55 AM (mtzAh)
You imply Islam is some kind of a hive-mind-like entity with a unifying global directive. That is quite a fantastic claim for which you have provided no evidence. Talking about how some Muslims kill those of another religion is unrelated to that claim. Hindus slaughtered Muslims like sheep after India's liberation.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:04 PM (8Zpuz)
Oh for Christ sake, you change our immigration policy and when that proves ineffective you change the constitution. This fucking notion that the founders were even considering Islam when writing the first amendment is ludicrous on it's face. They couldn't have even imagined it. But lets forget about doing something that would actually solve the problem and get to what's really important, how you plan on solving the problem? Talk about it? Then talk some more?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:05 PM (GZitp)
Have you taken any time to study up on the history of Jihad? It doesn't seem so.
This "permanent, million-casualty war of civilizations scenario" has been playing out since the first msulim armies stormed out of Arabia thirteen hundred years ago. The story of Islam is the story of a virtually ceaseless genocidal campaign of murder, rape and looting committed by muslims against any non-Islamic civilization they encountered. Just the conquest of North India was a many times greater slaughter of Hindus than what was the Nazi genocide of the Jews and other untermenschen.
There was a brief lull that occurred after the conquests of Persia, Egypt and North Africa- the Arabs were spread thin and the frenzy had subsided somewhat. However, that changed with the arrival of the Turkish hordes from Central Asia- who picked up the banner of Jihad and went on to conquer Byzantium and then set their sights on Europe from their foothold of the Islamized Balkans. That second wave of Jihad carried on for roughly five centuries and would down with the second failure to seize Vienna and eventually came to a halt with the collapse of the Ottoman Caliphate in the early part of the last century. Remember, it was the fact that muslims blocked the old trade routes with India that spurred Spain on to the search for trade routes to the West ending with the discovery of the New World.
We have now been in a new phase of Jihad whose intellectual roots originate with the forming of the Muslim Brotherhood in the wake of the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and whose stated purpose is the restoration of the Caliphate. The strategists in the Brotherhood, together with financiers of the Gulf States who began to take in enormous wealth after the price of oil shot up in the 70's is what been driving this latest phase- which seems poised to topple Europe.
There's plenty of literature out there that attests to just how serious a situation we're in with this.
I hope that the Islamist war on the west winds down. -ace
Statements like that suggest that you haven't spent much time reading them. Try Andy Bostom.
The record shows that Islam has advanced as much by stealth as by sword and Spencer at Jihadwatch has been one of the few who have devoted themselves solely to alerting Infidels to this threat. And this matter of Rick Perry and the Aga Khan is pretty much a textbook example of how seeming moderates ingratiate themselves with well-meaning, naive Infidel dupes in order to further the expansion of dar al Islam. Just go through the archives at Jihadwatch and you'll find innumerable cases that mirror the Perry/Aga Khan matter pretty closely. This or that imam or Khan might seem more moderate and assuring than the other- but the end goal is always the same. The Infidel dupe trumpets the opening of a great pluralistic interfaith dialogue and the wily muslim gets to set up whatever foundation, with Infidel assistance and money, to sow the seeds of Islam in the lands of the Infidel. Pluralism always means Islam. Haven't we figured that out yet?
Geller and Spencer began this with an expose on Perry and his extensive involvement with the Aga Khan. Others responded by making this about Geller and Spencer. But this is about Rick Perry and associations and actions that he should answer for.
Talk about "pallin' around with terrorists"! The Aga Khan is the descendant of Hassan i Sabah- the original terrorist. The Old Man of the Mountain written about by Brion Gysin. Pals with a prospective US President? That'll play well in Poughkeepsie.
You can have your Aga Khan. I'll be sippin the 'schewitz with the aga Kahane.
Posted by: november1981 at August 27, 2011 10:06 PM (3TGfa)
Posted by: Arbalest at August 27, 2011 10:07 PM (Wh+YQ)
Option 1. Ann Coulter's "Bomb their cities, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. " Not a pretty option. We are still beating ourselves up for what we had to do in WWII, we would create a whole new apology industry if we did this option.
Option 2. We pull some sort of epic black op and undermine em somehow, making em become irreligious without bombing em into the stone age. Yes Rock & Roll is infectious but I'm not confident we can bring em down with that and Dallas reruns. Their faith runs pretty deep.
Posted by: John Morris at August 27, 2011 10:07 PM (41hR3)
233: Spencer and Geller should also remember that an enemy you don't understand is an enemy you cannot defeat without incurring serious damage to yourself along the way.
Could not agree more. And the regrettable thing is that I thought Spencer a) understood Islam both good and bad and b) had the good sense and temperance to avoid being caught up in a dubious dispute like this, to the expense of his own much-assailed but still respected (at least by myself) credibility.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:08 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 28, 2011
02:04 AM (8Zpuz)
What the fuck do you think Islam is?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:08 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 10:09 PM (KJMY9)
Posted by: Johnny (John E.) at August 27, 2011 10:09 PM (nRTou)
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 28, 2011 01:55 AM (mtzAh)
Nice you can talk about extermination in such grandiloquent terms.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:10 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 28, 2011 02:07 AM (KJMY9)
Fuck you. Fucking liberals and Islam apologists.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:10 PM (GZitp)
What the fuck do you think Islam is?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 02:08 AM (GZitp)
It's not the Borg, jackass.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:11 PM (8Zpuz)
We care Ace. We care about your opinion, your analysis, your self-reflection and dammint your character. We morons are all dhimmis now, and still proud.
Robert and Pamela, all they think about is their positions, their influence and yes their next blog posts, yes it IS that obvious.
Pamela might have started out as a libertarian hot chick who raised awareness with bikini v-logging, but she now has a cause. And in part a large part it is a great cause but she has twisted herself into putting ALL of herself and her fervor and spirit into the cause and sometimes her mind makes leaps that are only there and only exist due to that fervor. She has recognized some great evils and it pushed her to it, and she might in fact want her to actually BE an incarnation of Joan of Arc.
Spencer is almost in that same painted corner, but he ( like Pamela ) talk/listen to their inner reflections and Robert is a word spinner and like all good (sic) politicians, conmen and preachers has the ability to spread his rationalizations into the minds of others.
You on the other hand ACE do not deserve this. This situation , these posts or any opinions spouted about you by ANYONE (even me especially me) . Your self reflection, careful corrections and fact checking will hold no sway over the fans of Spencer/Geller crowds, but only might serve as some sort of example for them to follow, .. hopefully.
By the way Commentary is a horrible excuse for a "magazine". While it does have some good posts and good comments it seems to only exist as a finger in the wind, it has no purpose, no grounding, no platform but might as well be the most libertine soapbox for what has been written there over the years.
It does the job of checking which way the wind is blowing well, and many people refer to it before they make their own pronouncements just for that reason but it will never "stand" for anything and that is sorta just wrong.
But as you said in your first paragraph, it is all just my opinion and who cares..
Posted by: Tom_Ohio at August 27, 2011 10:12 PM (7U2lm)
236: Spoken like a true believer.
But this is about Rick Perry and associations and actions that he should answer for.
What does he have to answer for when his "associations and actions" are being assailed without credible evidence ? Absent credible evidence to the contrary this is nothing more than an LBJ-style "pig-f****r" tactic.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:12 PM (yK8YH)
Are we really in favor of genocide? As I asked the other night, will U.S. troops line up women and children for slaughter. And if so, then please explain the outrage when Kerry or Obama accuse U.S. troops of killing women and children?
Braindead progressive ex-patriot. The women will be liberated from their christianist patriarcy (for chaste childbearing duty of course) and the chirdren shine in the light of the Obamasiah.
@231 fooled you once
Posted by: moslim brohood at August 27, 2011 10:13 PM (iSQB2)
It's not the Borg, jackass.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 28, 2011
02:11 AM (8Zpuz)
Then what the fuck is it? You're the fucking expert now so tell us all what it is. What's Islam all about, that should be easy enough for you with all your great insight.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:13 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 10:13 PM (9CM5J)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 10:15 PM (BH4RQ)
Posted by: Atlas Shagged at August 27, 2011 10:15 PM (h6XiD)
Option 2. We pull some sort of epic black op and undermine em somehow, making em become irreligious without bombing em into the stone age. Yes Rock & Roll is infectious but I'm not confident we can bring em down with that and Dallas reruns. Their faith runs pretty deep.
Posted by: John Morris at August 28, 2011 02:07 AM (41hR3)
Option 1 isn't just ugly, it's impossible. Convert them to Christianity? WTF? Never mind that most American Christians aren't even sufficiently Christian to take the time to read through a whole chapter of the Bible, what are you going to do with the atheists?
Option 2 has never been pulled off in human history and I'm not holding my breath.
This Islamic issue is being overthought. If all 1.5 billion Muslims, or even a sizable majority of them, were committed to global domination, we'd have a real issue on our hands and it would be damned obvious.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:16 PM (8Zpuz)
Then what the fuck is it? You're the fucking expert now so tell us all what it is. What's Islam all about, that should be easy enough for you with all your great insight.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 02:13 AM (GZitp)
Its peewee community tee-ball.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 10:16 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: Breaker19 at August 27, 2011 10:17 PM (WCm02)
You imply Islam is some kind of a hive-mind-like entity with a unifying global directive. That is quite a fantastic claim for which you have provided no evidence. Talking about how some Muslims kill those of another religion is unrelated to that claim. Hindus slaughtered Muslims like sheep after India's liberation.
Uh, dude, did you follow my links -- as in, particularly, the one detailing the "Islamic Emirates Project?'
Also, if you are so unfamiliar with the subject that you do not know of the goal of worldwide caliphate, or the concepts of the dar 'l-islam and the dar 'l-harb, then get cracking. I prescribe three weeks of daily reading of the AtlasShrugs blog.
When you say: "Talking about how some Muslims kill those of another religion is unrelated to that claim," I scratch my head. An ongoing, worldwide trend that produces tens of thousands of violent Muslim-on-(fill-in-the-blank) incidents over a ten-year time-frame is statistically significant. (See http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/)
Or, do you insist on closing your eyes to the unpleasant reality? If so, there is no point in going on with this.
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 27, 2011 10:18 PM (mtzAh)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 10:19 PM (bxiXv)
241/248:
How many voters do you think will be won over by your Dr. Strangelove meets Emperor Leo rhetoric, lowandslow ? Thanks for making the mainstream media's job of portraying Republicans as fanatical Christian theocrat racist knuckle-draggers a bit easier.
Oh, and thanks for calling us all liberals and Islamic apologists. I can tell you've spent a wealth of time her reading my comments since 2004 since you've outed me on my less-than-hidden traitorious sympathies. And G*d knows I'm not alone on that score. You know those "Moron-Meet-Ups" we talk about from time to time ? You caught us - in fact we're going to Islamic sensitivity training together and learning community outreach.
Jackass.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:19 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 10:19 PM (BH4RQ)
Then
what the fuck is it? You're the fucking expert now so tell us all what
it is. What's Islam all about, that should be easy enough for you with
all your great insight.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 02:13 AM (GZitp)
I'm not an expert. It doesn't take an expert to apply Occam's Razor.
What's more likely - Islam is a committed religious army of 1.5 billion soldiers operating under the same agenda, i.e. destroying the Judeo-Christian-Naturalist West and our civilizations, or
Islam is mostly made up of noncommittal people largely uneducated in their own religion who care more about living comfortable lives than killing someone 3000 miles away?
Simple logic and experience with Muzzies suggests the latter.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:21 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: Durka at August 27, 2011 10:25 PM (QjrRF)
Please ask yourself why Perry felt compelled to have the curriculum drawn up under the guidance of the Aga Khan in the first place. As if Infidels have no standing when it comes to an objective accounting of Islam- its beliefs and history. There are innumerable Western scholars he could have chosen from- with Spencer himself being one of the best.
Under Sharia, it's not allowed for the kaffir(non-muslim) to defend himself in a trial. But he must be spoken for by a muslim. Apparently, Rick Perry believes that the kaffir has no right to teach Islamic history to other kaffir- it must be under the auspices of a muslim.
This is bad for Perry. It looks bad. But it's also much worse than just "bad optics". Geller/Spencer presented a damaging case-it's the anti-Geller crowd who are respond with character assassination.
Posted by: november1981 at August 27, 2011 10:25 PM (3TGfa)
259: I'll refrain from my heavy sarc re: lowandslow since you didn't name-call, but take a moment to read your post from the perspective of someone who isn't already a true believer. How does that sound ? There's a world conspiracy, you don't know the truth, or you won't accept it, etc... No different from George Nouri/Art Bell. New World Order ? Globalism ?
BTW, 90% of us already follow the websites where your TRUTH is located, Diogenes.
Stop acting like you're the only person who knows "The Truth." We all distrust Islamic intentions and believe that a great deal of what they tell us is bullshit. However, we also know Muslims in our own circle of friends who don't believe this in any way shape or form, and no, I don't think they're all part of some Quaranic sleeper-cell. Inconceivably enough, a great deal of people don't give a shit about grand causes and just want to make enough money to raise some kids and have a comfortable lifestyle.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:25 PM (yK8YH)
Jackass.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 28, 2011 02:19 AM (yK8YH)
What the fuck difference does it make what I say when there are enough liberals passing themselves off as conservatives that want to do nothing. Nothing constructive at least. We've followed the failed ideas of so called conservative for ten years now in this asinine changing hearts and minds bullshit and we have basically nothing but a shit load of dead soldiers to show for it.
I know enough about Islam to know it isn't compatible to our western ideals and culture so I propose we do something about it, what's your plan?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:25 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: willow at August 27, 2011 10:26 PM (h+qn8)
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 28, 2011 01:55 AM (mtzAh)
Nice you can talk about extermination in such grandiloquent terms.
/////////
My reply:
Nice you can ignore the extermination that jihadis have inflicted in one Thai community, to name JUST ONE EXAMPLE. How is not fighting back with intensity helping Southern Thailand? Southern Thailand has already been all but lost by leaders who think like you.
Question: Is it noble to close one's eyes to the hostile intentions of an internal enemy -- an enemy that would think nothing of slitting your throat and mine (and would think they were pleasing Allah in so doing)?
Please do not try to cast Western cowardice and passivity in the face of a determined enemy as somehow being noble.
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 27, 2011 10:26 PM (mtzAh)
Posted by: Durka at August 27, 2011 10:26 PM (QjrRF)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 10:27 PM (BH4RQ)
Posted by: TexasJew at August 27, 2011 10:27 PM (DB7UQ)
Yeah what part of that involved more than a billion Muslims? Do you even know how many Muslims are in the group? Hint: not that many.
Also, if you are so unfamiliar with the subject that you do not know of the goal of worldwide caliphate, or the concepts of the dar 'l-islam and the dar 'l-harb, then get cracking. I prescribe three weeks of daily reading of the AtlasShrugs blog.
Give me a break. Again the question is, how does this affect the majority of Muslims?
When you say: "Talking about how some Muslims kill those of another religion is unrelated to that claim," I scratch my head. An ongoing, worldwide trend that produces tens of thousands of violent Muslim-on-(fill-in-the-blank) incidents over a ten-year time-frame is statistically significant. (See http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/)
Yeah, want to know how many Muslims were slaughtered (by Muslims) in the Iran-Iraq War? About a million or so. Sounds like the people who really need to watch their backs are Muslims.
Coming up with evidence of jihadist cells or secretive caliphate cabals a far-reaching argument does not make. Again, there are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, most of them not in the Middle East. How does this apply to them again??
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:28 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: daybrother at August 27, 2011 10:28 PM (mexsR)
Is this possible? I don't know. Honestly, I don't know. If we look at the course of history, the relations between Islam and everyone else has not been pretty.
Our current path of "nation building" with Sharia written into the constitution of embryonic states does not seem hopeful.
However, perhaps Khan is a link to reform. Perhaps he is committed to Jihad. He wouldn't be the first "friend" to turn on us.
What are our options? In my mind, it seems prudent for us to try to work with someone who might be our friend, as long as we never are put in a situation where our trust of their moderation puts us in danger.
From my perspective, Perry did not put us in danger by giving Khan a platform. Perhaps it would be better if the target of his message were not school children, but other Muslims.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 10:29 PM (ghJ2e)
"Islam is mostly made up of noncommittal people largely uneducated in their own religion who care more about living comfortable lives than killing someone 3000 miles away?"
Spoken truly like someone who has never been in an islamic country. This is not a slam at all. Read the qu'ran, all of it.
That achmed down the street has the duty to do this
Qur'an 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.
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 10:29 PM (wY55N)
Islam is mostly made up of noncommittal people largely uneducated in their own religion who care more about living comfortable lives than killing someone 3000 miles away?
Is there a better arguement for educating - and changing by force of arms - the predominant mindset of these hive-minded former not-islamic innocent suppressed minorities?! Or mow them down when they are lead by the Iman to charge our battlements?
Posted by: moslim brohood at August 27, 2011 10:30 PM (iSQB2)
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 28, 2011 02:26 AM (mtzAh)
I like how you aren't denying that you were actually proposing genocide.
Maybe we should have nuked all of India during the breakup, because of the extermination Hindu partisans inflicted on migrating Muslims.
Maybe we should have gone after Lebanese Christian terrorists.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:30 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 10:30 PM (GULKT)
Look, Stacy McCain identified a stupid rule called "get some enemies" or "make some" or smoke some or whatever. Enough already. It's a stupid rule. All you have to do is invite in your own natural enemies. Like put up a post about how Ron Paul is never going to win nuthin'. Then get someone to link it to a Ronulan site. You'll get all the clicks you can use. No need to stir up some shit with bloggers normally not causing you pain.
Hell, I'll up the ante. You all suck. Now go click them intarwebs and make these bloggers famous or whatever. I got other shit to do.
Posted by: K~Bob at August 27, 2011 10:31 PM (9b6FB)
Posted by: daybrother at August 27, 2011 10:31 PM (mexsR)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 10:31 PM (nj1bB)
The same held true for muslims during the five century long Islamic assault on Europe. I would imagine most muslims living in Anatolia, and the Caucasus and Arabia were just trying to get by(just like us)- yet their sons marched off to make Jihad on Europe incessantly.
So by your reasoning, Communism was no great threat as we all know that the Russians love their children too?
Posted by: november1981 at August 27, 2011 10:32 PM (3TGfa)
But again to summarize. I cannot condone a path whose only reasonable success is genocide.
and basically living under a constant threat of what some Muslims may do because of the first amendment? Was that the founders intentions? I find that hard to believe.
I can assure you that, not trading freedom for security was exactly their intent.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:32 PM (GE1+K)
Posted by: GMB at August 28, 2011 02:29 AM (wY55N)
Oh you mean like India? I hear Westerners are confined to bunkered Green Zones there, for fear of getting beheaded.
You are talking about 1.5 billion Muslims here.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:32 PM (8Zpuz)
FFS, one of the first wars we fought was against muslims. This wasn't an alien, inconceivable concept like the internet or air travel (both of which exist fine without constitutional tinkering)
Posted by: BSR at August 28, 2011 02:27 AM (BH4RQ)
Oh for Christ sake. No weren't thinking of Islam when they wrote the first amendment. They weren't even that far removed from disallowing certain denominations of Christians from holding any office. As I said before, fifty years ago we wouldn't have dreamed of allowing this kind of migration of Muslims.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:33 PM (GZitp)
267 - what the hell are you proposing ? World war with Islam ? Try selling that in the upcoming elections, Karl Rove.
And don't try to sidestep the fact that you verbally fragged all of us by changing the subject. We're on your side yet you feel perfectly comfortable going Robespierre on us and wagging your allegedly-better-informed finger at us re: Islam. I get enough finger-wagging from Barry, thanks, I don't need it from you.
We aren't ignorant and you aren't in possession of superior knowlege. We just disagree on how to deal with the same facts. Kindly keep that in mind before you imply that I'm a 9/11 apologist. That's something I will always take personally.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:34 PM (yK8YH)
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of ...
256 This Islamic issue is being overthought. If all 1.5 billion Muslims, or even a sizable majority of them, were committed to global domination, we'd have a real issue on our hands and it would be damned obvious.
Islam really is The Borg. The Koran cannot be changed or questioned; every mullah says so.
Check out WeaselZippers: "Malaysia Forms “Faith-Rescue Unit” For Muslims Tempted By Christianity…" ... Indonesia is starting to have even more Islamic agitation for stricter adherence to Islam ... the Muslims in Northern Nigeria are still burning Christian churches in the area ... and then there's the Sudan ...
263 Islam is mostly made up of noncommittal people largely uneducated in their own religion who care more about living comfortable lives than killing someone 3000 miles away?
Simple logic and experience with Muzzies suggests the latter.
Let's not forget al Andalus, and the Muslims now trying to pray in the church in Cordoba (originally a church that was forceably converted into a mosque) ... and all the no-go zones in France and Sweden; specifically no-go zones for Frenchmen and Swedes ... who lives in these zones?
Posted by: Arbalest at August 27, 2011 10:34 PM (Wh+YQ)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 10:34 PM (nj1bB)
So by your reasoning, Communism was no great threat as we all know that the Russians love their children too?
Posted by: november1981 at August 28, 2011 02:32 AM (3TGfa)
Ohhh shit. You know what you are proposing? Islamic armies in a frontal assault against the West. Uniformed, organized armies. Now that would be awesome. (It also destroys your analogy)
By the way, who proposed nuking all the Russians as a viable solution to the Cold War? Was that Reagan?
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:35 PM (8Zpuz)
I am not advocating genocide. Never. To be a good muslim you have to kill or convert the infidel. The kuffar if you will. Genocide is exactly what the achmed down the street will do to us.
You have three options with islam.
Convert to islam.
Accept 2nd class status and pay the jizya.
Die.
How do you fight that?
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 10:36 PM (wY55N)
Did we have to line them up and shoot them to stop them? Did we ban teaching communism as a form of government in schools while the USSR was around? Should every communist alive in the US today be locked up? As much as there are some lines we cannot allow an enemy to cross, there are others we cannot cross if we intend to remain a free society.
Lose the fundamental principal of a free society and we might as well codify Sharia, it will be no different.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:36 PM (GE1+K)
If school children were given copies of Robert's book, would she be upset?
I ask because Robert's books explain Islam in much the same terms as the exerts you sited. He talks about what they believe, esp. in regards to Mohammad being the "perfect man."
By her logic, is Robert attempting to convert his readers to Islam?
This whole thing depresses me.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 10:37 PM (ghJ2e)
I know enough about Islam to know it isn't compatible to our western ideals and culture so I propose we do something about it, what's your plan?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 02:25 AM (GZitp)
Wait - if we're all crypto-liberals for not being properly enthusiastic about genocide, why do you hang out here? Surely there must be other blogs more to your taste.
Posted by: Mætenloch at August 27, 2011 10:38 PM (/3HNy)
It's a two step process. Step one is use force to stop their violence.
Step two is migrating the mainstream belief into something compatible with the West.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:38 PM (GE1+K)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 10:38 PM (BH4RQ)
267 - what the hell are you proposing ? World war with Islam ? Try selling that in the upcoming elections, Karl Rove.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 28, 2011 02:34 AM (yK8YH)Fuck'n strawmen. Nobody is proposing all out war or genocide. Removing Islam from the west doen't mean any of that. They have half the world to practice their fucking religion.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:39 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: Mætenloch at August 28, 2011 02:38 AM (/3HNy)
Nobody is proposing genocide, that's just a weak response cause you can't make a real argument.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:41 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 02:25 AM (GZitp)
Wait - if we're all crypto-liberals for not being properly enthusiastic about genocide, why do you hang out here? Surely there must be other blogs more to your taste.
Posted by: Mætenloch at August 28, 2011 02:38 AM (/3HNy
Don't bother Maet. He thinks Peewee Community Tee-ball is a commie plot.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 10:41 PM (GULKT)
At this point, Ace is punching down.
Posted by: AmishDude at August 28, 2011 01:00 AM (73tyQ)
Yes, Ace should really aim higher:
http://tinyurl.com/3q465j4
Posted by: mrobvious at August 27, 2011 10:41 PM (G7Jng)
Which quote, please? I think I've missed that.
Again- why did Perry engage an Islamic organization to formulate a curriculum on Islam for Texas schools. Paging Bernard Lewis? Hello! Oh yeah, he's a Jew.
Posted by: november1981 at August 27, 2011 10:41 PM (3TGfa)
Been to Malaysia. While the second Iraq war and Afghanistan was hot and heavy. Had a great time. Why do you ask?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:41 PM (GE1+K)
What the fuck is your plan? I've this a dozen times and none of you have an answer.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:42 PM (GZitp)
Just read the what the "Faith-Rescue Unit" is about...
“It is hoped that Muslims who have received or are thinking of receiving aid from churches or Christian organisations can come to the Islamic Affairs, Malay Culture, Infrastructure and Public Amenities Exco to give their details so that help can be provided immediately,” Hasan said.
This kind of crap is not at all limited to Islam. It happens in any area where religious traditions have been historically entrenched. Ask missionaries.
Again this isn't really radical...more like a Muslim help line. Nobody getting abducted and beheaded at midnight.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:42 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:43 PM (yK8YH)
This is disingenuous. Islam is, by it's nature, an expansionist ideology. If the US decides to ship every single Muslim back to Whereverstan tomorrow, we haven't solved a thing. We've kicked the can a few years, maybe. The ideology is still there, and the hunger for dominance hasn't changed. Eventually, it will come to a head.
What is our end game? The way I see it we can either work to change Islam, or we accept that there will be a global war.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 10:43 PM (ghJ2e)
Right, they should call in Hindu's to write the whole of the symposium on Christianity.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:43 PM (GE1+K)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 10:43 PM (nj1bB)
Don't bother Maet. He thinks Peewee Community Tee-ball is a commie plot.
Posted by: buzzion at August 28, 2011 02:41 AM (GULKT)
You're a gutless lying cocksucker. Ain't got the fucking balls to make an argument, just likes to sit back and snark at other people. You're a real piece of work.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:44 PM (GZitp)
Why would they need to mount an assault now? We've let them in the front door.
Posted by: november1981 at August 27, 2011 10:44 PM (3TGfa)
I didn't ask. I stated. Tell me, you let any of your indigs walk behind you?
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 10:45 PM (wY55N)
Right or we just need to use nuclear weapons and start lining people up. I see no third way.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:45 PM (GE1+K)
I hope it made you happy somehow.
Posted by: GnuBreed at August 27, 2011 10:45 PM (bvXGR)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 28, 2011 02:43 AM (yK8YH)
Is there no end to your lying?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:45 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 10:46 PM (KJMY9)
I love that I can page down 3 times and at the bottom of this post there's a 'continue reading' waiting for me.
Posted by: garrett at August 27, 2011 10:46 PM (fugty)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 10:46 PM (nj1bB)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 10:47 PM (BH4RQ)
How do you fight that?
Posted by: GMB at August 28, 2011 02:36 AM (wY55N)
By asking rhetorical questions obviously!
Nobody is proposing genocide, that's just a weak response cause you can't make a real argument.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 02:41 AM (GZitp)
Bullshit. I inferred that from man-in-tx's vague propositions, posted it, and he then accused me of being soft on Islam for ignoring violence against some random Thais.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:47 PM (8Zpuz)
This kind of crap is not at all limited to Islam. It happens in any area where religious traditions have been historically entrenched. Ask missionaries.
Again this isn't really radical...more like a Muslim help line. Nobody getting abducted and beheaded at midnight.
Read more, specifically the context of religion and political parties in Malaysia today. It is a Muslim help line ... they come out and help those whom they choose, and they frequently do it during the daytime ... all legal.
Posted by: Arbalest at August 27, 2011 10:47 PM (Wh+YQ)
300: Square that with the First Amendment, Herman Cain. And explain to all the merely-deported-rather-than-killed Muslims why we can practice Christianity in light of the rather nasty admonishments of the Old Testament while they have to live in some other half of the world.
Once again, I'm with you in spirit, but disagree with the details, and it's not out of some misplaced hippy instinct for "tolerance" or ignorance of Muslim duplicity.
Do you know even one Muslim who you don't believe to be a terrorist sympathizer ?
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:47 PM (yK8YH)
But the world does not share that particular conviction, and real life politicians have to live in the real life world, don't they?
DhimmiRino!
Posted by: garrett at August 27, 2011 10:49 PM (fugty)
The way I see it, Robert and Pamela have done a valuable service in pointing out the elephant in the room that violence is encoded in Islam.
However, where I am newly diverging from them is when they claim that reform is impossible, and that the reformers are frauds.
Maybe they're right. If so, we're fucked. I will stand with them when they say that Islam, as it is currently formulated, is completely incompatable with western civilization. I can't stand with them when they say that it must always be the case. Will change be easy? No. New interpretations of Islam are banned, and the Ismalis are branded as heretics. Is it possible? God, I hope so.
If it is possible, it can only work if we are willing to give an audience to reformers.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 10:49 PM (ghJ2e)
By the way, who proposed nuking all the Russians as a viable solution to the Cold War? Was that Reagan?
We begin bombing in five minutes...
Posted by: meleager at August 27, 2011 10:49 PM (iSQB2)
Posted by: TexasJew at August 27, 2011 10:50 PM (DB7UQ)
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 10:50 PM (wY55N)
convince me!
anyway i'll slink off and try to sleep with this all dancing around my brain , like a tumor i'm sure
Posted by: willow at August 27, 2011 10:50 PM (h+qn8)
Posted by: november1981 at August 28, 2011 02:44 AM (3TGfa)
Yeah cause Muslims are going to take over the US.
What, what?
This is the problem with the reflexive war of civilizations crowd. You intimate details and hope the listener imagines the very worst scenario.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:50 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 10:50 PM (bxiXv)
You're a gutless lying cocksucker. Ain't got the fucking balls to make an argument, just likes to sit back and snark at other people. You're a real piece of work.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 02:44 AM (GZitp)
I'm exaggerating for humorous effect you slow witted fool. But the truth isn't that far off.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 10:50 PM (GULKT)
What's more likely - Islam is a committed religious army of 1.5 billion soldiers operating under the same agenda, i.e. destroying the Judeo-Christian-Naturalist West and our civilizations, or
Islam is mostly made up of noncommittal people largely uneducated in their own religion who care more about living comfortable lives than killing someone 3000 miles away?
Simple logic and experience with Muzzies suggests the latter.///////////////////////////
my reply:
Who matters in any movement/religion are the leaders, not the average joes, with whom you seem so enamored.
Which of your two options do you think Imams and Mullahs teach in the majority of mosques in this country (or around the world)....?
To ask the question is to answer it.
That Islam has internal divisions (the Shi'i/Sunni being the most obvious) in no way obviates the fact that adherents of ALL major sects of Islam consider themselves superior (with all that entails) to the infidels.
The current President of Turkey, Erdogan, is on record as saying:
"The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers."
http://tinyurl.com/3e3l72h
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 27, 2011 10:50 PM (mtzAh)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 10:51 PM (BH4RQ)
Do you know even one Muslim who you don't believe to be a terrorist sympathizer ?
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 28, 2011 02:47 AM (yK8YH)
I'm sure there's plenty, doesn't mean Islam as a whole is compatible with the West and it's not just jihadism. The question is what do we do about it? What I propose is only radical to our ever increasing liberal notion of fairness.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:51 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 10:52 PM (nj1bB)
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:52 PM (yK8YH)
Nobody is proposing anything that might work that doesn't include genocide. How do we get to peace from here if we will not even be bothered to learn about the culture we are at war with. You would have it so we are too ignorant to even know how they need to change their beliefs so we can live peacefully. By making no steps toward peace, even perfunctory, you enact and promote the only other possibility, a war of civilizations, that can only end when one side is wiped out. Knowing that makes one a proponent of genocide.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:53 PM (GE1+K)
Trying to throw up a wall (even a figurative one) in the nuclear age is like rebooting the Cold War, only an order of magnitude more stupid.
Seriously, that's your plan?
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 02:50 AM
(bxiXv)
And your plan is to reform Islam? That's your plan? Tell me how you plan on doing that?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:53 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 10:54 PM (BH4RQ)
Posted by: troyriser at August 27, 2011 10:54 PM (YCeSE)
Read more, specifically the context of religion and political parties in Malaysia today. It is a Muslim help line ... they come out and help those whom they choose, and they frequently do it during the daytime ... all legal.
Posted by: Arbalest at August 28, 2011 02:47 AM (Wh+YQ)
Well, duh. They want to be an alternative to Christian help, and Malaysia isn't the most Christian-friendly state. Real strong evidence for the War of the Worlds right there.
Oh by the way, reading further, you actually see a moderate Muzzie:
Influential cleric Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin, however, said yesterday that Muslims should take care of their own poor instead of accusing Christians of proselytism when churches helped poor Muslims.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 10:54 PM (8Zpuz)
Man, you're dumb. Ever taken a Comparative Religion course? Was each faith taught by an adherent of that faith? What's wrong with Hindus teaching the history of Christianity to Hindu students in Hindustan? Hindus and Christians are not commanded in the foundational texts of their respective faiths to engage in unceasing warfare until the other submits. Islam is the enemy of the West, of every civilization non-Islamic.It's in the Koran! As I mentioned above, since the time of Mohammed, there have been two brief windows of time in which muslims were not attacking Christian Civilization- why would we charge muslims with educating Christian children on Islam?
Tell me, Rick Perry. Why?
Posted by: november1981 at August 27, 2011 10:55 PM (3TGfa)
Bingo. Whatever would Pam do with her life if there weren't fresh outrages to be outraged by?
I can remember years ago when Debbie Schlussel was linked to a lot too because she slammed the right people.Then people started noticing what a fucking loon she is. Seems to me that Pamcakes is headed down that same path. She's done quite well for herself in the "Islam is taking over America" racket, why let go now?
The sad thing to me is, these spurious accusations have the same effect as the constant accusations of racism from the left - people stop paying attention. Which is a problem, because there really is something to watch out for.
Posted by: radar at August 27, 2011 10:55 PM (VEc75)
"Its time for Mankind to leave this planet, i mean serious..we all have to die..we are not worth it to live."
...actually that was his reply to a video from a chicken factory but this issue probably almost as serious!
Posted by: WeekendAtBernankes at August 27, 2011 10:56 PM (KJMY9)
Posted by: meleager at August 27, 2011 10:56 PM (iSQB2)
For one we can work with the Muslims who honestly want reform instead of stabbing them in the back to pass some stupid political purity test.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 10:56 PM (ghJ2e)
I have no idea. I don't know enough about their faith to even venture a guess. I wasn't taught very much about Islam when I went through school. I think that is a good place to start.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:57 PM (GE1+K)
And you keep asking for someone else's plan, and we keep telling you - WE HAVE TO FIX THE PROBLEM, and the problem is that the core of the faith is designed to kill, conquer, and resist reform.
Until you fix THAT, you are just prolonging the conflict. And it would seem that if there are Muslims who are sick of that shit, and there are, whether they're reformers or just scared of their fellows, getting them on board with fixing the problem would seem to be a good first step.
----------------------
My reply:
How do you propose to change the "core" of a religion some 14 centuries in age and followed by some two billion people?
Dream on, dreamer. You sound liberal.
While you are working on your "project" to "change" the "core" of Islam, I will go with "lowandslow's" approach, until you come up with a more effective plan.
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 27, 2011 10:57 PM (mtzAh)
322 - Heh. My point exactly +1. Now I'm off to debauch, for reals.
Posted by: SocietyIs2Blame at August 27, 2011 10:57 PM (yK8YH)
Secondly, why do we have public schools in the first place?
Just end that and we can save the public alot of tax dollars and a lot of headaches.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at August 27, 2011 10:58 PM (4nfy2)
Now to do some Google Images to see Atlas's Juggs.
Posted by: SGT Dan at August 27, 2011 10:59 PM (8Tq4X)
Posted by: Lauren at August 28, 2011 02:56 AM (ghJ2e)
Who are these Muslims that want to reform it? Whatever reform means, because as far as I can tell most of these radical Muslims are pretty much following the Koran and Haddiths to the letter. You're not talking reform, you're talking about inventing a new religion out of the current one. I don't see it happening.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 10:59 PM (GZitp)
Answer no. Not a requirement for my diploma or degree. But, there is a big difference between taking comparative religion, and, holding a one day symposium for teachers who will teach comparative religion. In the latter, a "Primary source" would be more than beneficial.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 10:59 PM (GE1+K)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:00 PM (bxiXv)
Secondly, why do we have public schools in the first place?
Just end that and we can save the public alot of tax dollars and a lot of headaches.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at August 28, 2011 02:58 AM (4nfy2)
It sort of falls under "world history." At least that's what I remember my 6th grade social studies being about. I don't even think we actually spent a month on it.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 11:01 PM (GULKT)
You can't get away with this deliberate obfuscation. Obviously you could make an argument that Hitler, not necessarily the broke and disaffected German people, mattered the most in the genesis of World War II, but who the hell are these jihadist "leaders" leading? Certainly not the average joe. If you looked at the response that Pakistani civilians have towards the Taliban and their murder-by-night and stoning you'd see that.
Which of your two options do you think Imams and Mullahs teach in the majority of mosques in this country (or around the world)....?
To ask the question is to answer it.
To ask the question is to answer it with the option that lends credence to your conspiracist Muzziephobia? No, I'm not entirely convinced.
That Islam has internal divisions (the Shi'i/Sunni being the most obvious) in no way obviates the fact that adherents of ALL major sects of Islam consider themselves superior (with all that entails) to the infidels.
Actually if you read some of Zarqawi's letters, he proposes Shi'ites are lower than Western infidels.
The current President of Turkey, Erdogan, is on record as saying:
"The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers."
http://tinyurl.com/3e3l72h
Posted by: man_in_tx at August 28, 2011 02:50 AM (mtzAh)
Good for him. Bring it the hell on.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:01 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 11:01 PM (BH4RQ)
Well, duh. They want to be an alternative to Christian help, and Malaysia isn't the most Christian-friendly state. Real strong evidence for the War of the Worlds right there.
You carefully neglect various legislative efforts in Malaysia ... similar ones by any other religion in Malayasia are inconceivable. Then there's the legality of conversion ... can't convert FROM Islam there.
The moderate Muslim ... perhaps, or politically astute. No need to push things now. BTW, are you aware of where the kingdom of Srivijaya was located, and how it came to conveert from Hinduism to Islam?
I note that you avoid responding to my "no-go zones in France and Sweden ,,, for Frenchmen and Swedes". Looks like strong evidence.
Posted by: Arbalest at August 27, 2011 11:03 PM (Wh+YQ)
Don't worry Ace, I know you can stand up to this stuff.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:03 PM (8Zpuz)
I feel bad Ace. You missed out on Movie Saturday for this nonsense.
Sure, we got an ultra long post. But it's just not the same as an Ace Movie Review (for a movie I'll never even entertain watching).
I feel cheated.
Sort of like Pam Geller when she realized her bolt-ons didn't impress you enough to get some hot linking action.
Posted by: garrett at August 27, 2011 11:04 PM (fugty)
How do you propose to change the "core" of a religion some 14 centuries in age and followed by some two billion people?
Dream on, dreamer. You sound liberal.
Well, Christianity* has had more than a few modifications to its core beliefs. And it is several centuries older.
(*Not burning heretics for 300 years)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:04 PM (GE1+K)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 11:04 PM (9CM5J)
you're talking about inventing a new religion out of the current one. I don't see it happening.
The Reformed Islamic Church of North America who doesnt want to chop your head is looking for converts.....
Posted by: meleager at August 27, 2011 11:04 PM (iSQB2)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 11:05 PM (BH4RQ)
The Ishmailis, for one. As mentioned in Ace's post, there are Muslims who wish to interpret the Koran figuratively.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 11:07 PM (ghJ2e)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:07 PM (bxiXv)
Posted by: troyriser at August 28, 2011 02:54 AM (YCeSE)
I find this very salient to the drive-the-Muzzies-out crowd. A lot of them tend to justify McCarthy, probably for the same reasons as Coulter.
At some point you just have to call a spade a spade.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:07 PM (8Zpuz)
Perry should answer this. Why did the Aga Khan recieve this special dispensation? Of all religions to be taught, why Islam?
It seems the more they bomb us, the more we need to reach out to them. The worse they act, the more rewards they receive. It's almost a Jizya- the punitive tax paid solely by infidels living in muslim societies. Or tribute almost.
The sick hypocrisy is displayed best at Ground Zero. Where the muslims got special permission and assistance to build a mosque at a site they destroyed- yet an Orthodox church that was actually destroyed in that same attack is denied a permit to rebuild.
Posted by: november1981 at August 27, 2011 11:07 PM (3TGfa)
"But my process doesn't aim for permanent war, which in this age is unsurvivable."
Islam has been at war with everyone else since it's inception.
Does not matter if you want a war or not. You have one now. You just have not accepted it yet.
"Convert to Islam, and then you will be safe, for if you don't, you should know that I have come to you with an army of men that love death, as you love life." Caliph Abu Bakr, Mohammed's Successor
This is mainstream islam. Do what you will. It is your life afterall.
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 11:08 PM (wY55N)
So you are in the
Let them have half the planet so they can become powerful and kill us all
or the
Lets get that final solution moving
Which one?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:10 PM (GE1+K)
Posted by: Yodel at August 27, 2011 11:10 PM (Wh+YQ)
Posted by: Lauren at August 28, 2011 03:07 AM (ghJ2e)
That would be nice but it's not really what's happening in Islam is it? It's going just the opposite way for the past fifty years, it's the fundamentalist that have taken it over. Just hoping it will change isn't much of a plan.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:10 PM (GZitp)
So, we can only have classes on Communism taught by actual believing Communists?
Posted by: november1981 at August 27, 2011 11:11 PM (3TGfa)
Posted by: BSR at August 27, 2011 11:11 PM (BH4RQ)
WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG!
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 03:07 AM
(bxiXv)
Surrender it? How do have any control of it now?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:12 PM (GZitp)
I am not Mormon or Mnemonite or Amish but even I see that killing is wrong.
The fact is extermination is not the answer.
It is a scalpel situation, a culture situation, a situation that requires precision cutting/culling and it requires influence. That last one we do not have with a stuttering clusterfuck of a miserable failure in the White House.
Much like the liberals that have taken over academia there does exist in the middle east a lot of propoganda machines that are either regime-driven or regime-tolerated. The economic situation there for the "common" man/woman is dire in places. Wide swaths of the youth have been co-opted, women doubly so to engender and continue either regime or warlord power.
Hell the culture is even sexually corrupted, with pedophelia, rape, underage arranged marriage ( really, really underage ) and leading all this, directing the daily propganda and culture farce is the mullahs ( oh yeah, in certain areas, just want to make that clear )
Look, obviously it is a world-wide problem and has been so for centuries, 12 or 14 take your pick. I am not going to lay any blame on the knights templar, the turks ( well yes, I am the turks ) or anyone in this day and age for the sins of the past, but something has to be done, but not the neutron bomb.
The arabs that co-opted the middle east in the name of Islam have brought a lot of pain into the world. They practice abominable rites in marriage, in justice, and still practice the enlslavement of people of color, and white people when they get the chance. It is their culture, their self-proclaimed destiny to do so.
I am not gonna get all Lame Cherry on you and talk about the Rothchilds leading Europe and the Russian influence on world policy, but as soon as they saw the weakness in Obama they seized the opportunity to put a lot of things into motion, and we get Arab Springs and Iran with the bomb and Israel on the verge of destruction. But Geraldo Rivera ( good old Jerry Rivers ) is bare-chested in the rain. Thanks Fox.
Ok back to it.We have to install secular governments and let the retarded societies , the ones stuck in the 8th century, to evolve into free markets and let the people discover their own rights. Have to stop the stonings, the pedophelia, the discrimination against black people, the brown people of the far east, of white people and women.
I lay all the centuries of barbarism squarely on the Arabs, they taught the Africans and the Europeans how to be slave traders, and the Arabs still even practice that, and keep a billion people living in the 8th century simply because it is easier for them to do that than to compete in a free society.
Much as we think about it, the bomb is still not the answer, the price to our souls too great, here and in heaven.
Posted by: Tom_Ohio at August 27, 2011 11:12 PM (7U2lm)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:12 PM (bxiXv)
Actually break bread and reconcile.
Don't be such a cad.
Apologize to her for getting off on the wrong foot.
Not everyone understands and/or appreciates your humour.
Pammie included.
But she could learn to like you real quick like. You have that way about you.
You both have a lot in common and a future understanding and alliance is in order.
Ace... send her some flowers, dammit.
It's all good.
peace out
Posted by: Mikey at August 27, 2011 11:13 PM (db4pz)
It's only been sixty years, and there are still quite a few alive today in Germany and Japan who recall the war, or at least the immediate postwar, pretty vividly.
Check back in after another forty years or so, and we might find something very different. Look at Germany: Mashed flat in the 17th century, but spent most of the 18th and 19th centuries doing the grand tour of Europe.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 11:13 PM (9CM5J)
When did I say we were going to do nothing but hope? I'm saying that we should actively support the reformers. I'm saying that we directly challenge mainstream Islam. Stop saying that "Islam is a religion of peace" and actively work to make it match the rhetoric.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 11:13 PM (ghJ2e)
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 11:14 PM (wY55N)
You carefully neglect various legislative efforts in Malaysia ... similar ones by any other religion in Malayasia are inconceivable. Then there's the legality of conversion ... can't convert FROM Islam there.
As I said, this is not surprising for Malaysia. That would be like shock at learning China attempted to stamp out Tibetan Buddhists.
The moderate Muslim ... perhaps, or politically
astute. No need to push things now.
Ascribing shadowy motives to public figures is how Christians are attacked as dangerous fundamentalists. But hey, you could be right.
BTW, are you aware of where the kingdom of Srivijaya was located, and how it came to conveert from Hinduism to Islam?
I note that you avoid responding to my "no-go zones in France and Sweden ,,, for Frenchmen and Swedes". Looks like strong evidence.
Posted by: Arbalest at August 28, 2011 03:03 AM (Wh+YQ)
It is strong evidence indeed, of uncivilized bigots being coddled by Western authorities. Not of a hive mind or a push by 1.5 billion Muslims to establish a global caliphate.
And no I have not heard of Srivijaya.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:14 PM (8Zpuz)
Why did the Aga Khan recieve this special dispensation?
Understand this about Islam: its all about disposition. Its not that their martyrs are more holy, or their cause is just, it that the reaver will be favored by God for bringing glory to allah (piss be upon him). The Aga Khan can BUY his way to heaven, and the jehadis give him a pass (if he pays up).
Posted by: meleager at August 27, 2011 11:16 PM (iSQB2)
Posted by: GMB at August 28, 2011 03:14 AM (wY55N)
You might as well ask how a hundred probable Christians watched a piece of shit street thug murder Kitty Genovese.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:16 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: SGT Dan at August 28, 2011 02:59 AM (8Tq4X)
How do you like it? I'm at AMU, and I've been reasonably happy with it.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 11:18 PM (9CM5J)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:18 PM (bxiXv)
Would I be all up in arms if believing communists came to a symposium about communism to present their point of view to educators? No.
I'm not a book burner. Nor am I a keep people silenced type. And I don't see tremendous harm in giving teachers access to those who actually believe the things they are going to be teaching about.
If they can't divine truth from white paint, or, they are predisposed to anti-American ideals, that fault lies with the teachers and that should be fixed. And not by placing blinders on the scholarly process.
That's what the left does to indoctrinate.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:18 PM (GE1+K)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 11:20 PM (9CM5J)
I don't understand your thinking, I really don't. My plan is to remove Islam from the western world. How is that leading to a permanent war and possible nuclear holocaust?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:21 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 11:22 PM (nj1bB)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:22 PM (bxiXv)
So, Now is the time for Juggies on TRAMPOLINES!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgZpXOiDF-g
Posted by: JarvisW at August 27, 2011 11:22 PM (8yPsP)
Not of a hive mind or a push by 1.5 billion Muslims to establish a global caliphate.
Why do you diss the umma?
Posted by: meleager at August 27, 2011 11:23 PM (iSQB2)
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 11:24 PM (wY55N)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:24 PM (bxiXv)
Because you are not thinking past the first step.
Do you think that all the displaced Muslims will be happy with America after they're sent to Whereverstan? Do you think they will suddenly abandon their quest to expand Dar-al Islam?
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 11:24 PM (ghJ2e)
Well my solution for peace starts by learning a little about their beliefs, and at least knowing how they would have to change in order for peace to exist.
I am no proponent of peace at all costs. But nor am I going to suggest we should remain willfully ignorant of a large culture at odds with us. To those that will not live in peace, well they are a problem that needs to be met on the battlefield. But I am also suggesting that once the most violent and extreme elements are met in this manner, the remaining majority will be open to modification in their beliefs and peace with the West.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:25 PM (GE1+K)
I wish somebody else (not the tools at Vanity Smear) could have published it, but that's where it is.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 11:26 PM (9CM5J)
One of the reasons we didn't see 9/11 coming, in the long view, was because we knew there was a hotbed of Islamic radicalism that was giving birth to al-Qaeda, and we straight up ignored it. The CIA couldn't even get someone to investigate common Londonistan literature that called for blatant war against the West. When we had information, policymakers in Washington were too timid and blind to let the right people pull the triggers.
A pretty good summary of our failings in that regard is Robert Baer's See No Evil. The guy is a pretty out-and-out liberal but his book is very instructive (he was a CIA officer in the Middle East for about 10-15 years).
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:26 PM (8Zpuz)
I don't understand your thinking, I really don't. My plan is to remove Islam from the western world. How is that leading to a permanent war and possible nuclear holocaust?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 03:21 AM (GZitp)
You realize you are talking about an aggressive expansionist ideology that separates the world into an Us vs. Them view and the goal is not to keep away from the other but to conquer it. And you wonder how your idea won't end up in a war or nuclear holocaust?
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 11:26 PM (GULKT)
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:26 PM (GE1+K)
in my comment above where I said this was a dumb thread, I was really focusing on the thread, not the post at the top. I pretty much get what you are doing. It always frosts me when someone who should nominally be in the same logistical situation as me and also shares what should be a similar philosophy, nevertheless decides to pick a fight over something really, really unimportant in the larger context.
Some people will do anything to make sure they look like the smartest person in the room, even if it means set fire to everyone else in the room.
It's one thing that keeps introverts introverted. They don't trust anyone.
Posted by: K~Bob at August 27, 2011 11:26 PM (9b6FB)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 11:27 PM (9CM5J)
Um OK.
Ever think they might at some point might want the rest of the world, just like they want Poland now?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:27 PM (GE1+K)
Posted by: GMB at August 28, 2011 03:24 AM (wY55N)
It is the correct answer to such inane rhetorical questions as "why didn't 40 or 50 people prevent [insert terrorist attack]?"
Combatting terrorism requires professionals, not 40 or 50 random Muslims you blame off the street. Hey, how come no self-respecting American blew the whistle on McVeigh before he killed 400 with his truck bomb?
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:28 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 03:24 AM
(bxiXv)
Yes it is but not necessarily the way you think they want to do it. If we keep allowing Islam to spread under the name of diversity you're helping them fulfill their beliefs. Right now the Muslim world can't militarily expand nor do they wish to and preventing Muslims further expansion into the west doesn't change that.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:29 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 11:30 PM (nj1bB)
I'm sorry. I didn't know you were from Mirror Mirror Earth.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:31 PM (GE1+K)
In any system, especially any insurgent system, there is a strong tendency, seen again and again, for demagogues to increase their position and influence by making escalating claims of treason and subversion.
For a while it works. Unfortunately, for a great while it often works.
And it's not just Geller. There is always a segment which wishes to advance its preferences (or simply call attention to itself and thereby increase power) by accusing others of subversion, treason, and the like.
Posted by: ace at August 28, 2011 03:22 AM (nj1bB)
Isn't that Godwin, Ace? Or are you thinking of something different?
I've noticed this kind of stuff popping up in conservatives from time to time, especially when McCarthy or FDR comes up. One of the most risible aspects of the purists is that they detest pretty much every domestic program of FDR's with the exception of the Japanese-American detainment camps.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:31 PM (8Zpuz)
Mike have you read Mein Kampf? In retrospect did you belive hitler meant what he wrote? All you need to do learn about islam is read the qur'ran. It lays out the program pretty simple. It is the literal word of god as dictated by mo.
Quran-9:29, Fight those who believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth (Islam), even if they are of the People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 11:32 PM (wY55N)
Posted by: Ellipsis Lacuna at August 27, 2011 11:33 PM (rOZoa)
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 03:29 AM (GZitp)
Oh really. Maybe you should tell that to the guy who was asking me if I knew about the global-caliphate-world-domination plan currently favored by the Muslim world.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:33 PM (8Zpuz)
You realize you are talking about an aggressive expansionist ideology that separates the world into an Us vs. Them view and the goal is not to keep away from the other but to conquer it. And you wonder how your idea won't end up in a war or nuclear holocaust?
Posted by: buzzion at August 28, 2011 03:26 AM (GULKT)
How is preventing Islamic expansion an aggressive expansionist ideology? That doesn't even make any sense.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:33 PM (GZitp)
Ascribing shadowy motives to public figures is how Christians are attacked as dangerous fundamentalists.
True, but somewhat tangential ...
But hey, you could be right
Malaysia is significantly Muslim, but there are other large religious mnorities. and there seems to be a bit of an ethnic link: Malays-Muslim, Indians-Hindu, Chinese-Confucian/Taoist/... and this suggests significant potential for violence if things are pushed too hard.
It is strong evidence indeed, of uncivilized bigots being coddled by Western authorities. Not of a hive mind or ...
Judging by the way Muslims respond to their clerics, "hive mind" seems appropriate. Perhaps all 1.5 billion Muslims do not want to conquer the world, but the clerics who take the Koran at face value (just about all of them), are in fact directed to do so ...
Srivijaya: a kingdom spanning the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra and various other islands. Very Short Version: Lots of Hindus and Buddhists. A muslim married into the royal family ... eventually he or his descendants took over and started conversions ... of the people. Similar stories in some neighboring kingdoms.
And then there's the Islamic conquest of North Africa, ending in Spain, Iran, Afghanistan culmnating in a shot at India ... almost won. They want the world, or most of it ... Africa ... look up the Arabic word abeed ...
Posted by: Yodel at August 27, 2011 11:34 PM (Wh+YQ)
Yes, we all agree. None of us are claiming any different.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 11:34 PM (ghJ2e)
This sounds like rivalry almost as bitter as a blog feud.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 11:35 PM (9CM5J)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 11:35 PM (nj1bB)
How is preventing Islamic expansion an aggressive expansionist ideology? That doesn't even make any sense.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 03:33 AM (GZitp)
He is talking about Islam being the aggressive expansionist ideology, great scott.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:36 PM (8Zpuz)
Ace, with all due respect to a fellow moron; if she's wrong, no harm, no foul. And I resent her implications too - I'm not a NYorker, I dont give a fuck about culture. But it is war. If she right..then what... We must advance our preferences - morons and all - its 1000% better than the alternative. Your just as much a segment as anyone else.
Posted by: meleager at August 27, 2011 11:36 PM (iSQB2)
Yes I have. Great Idea asshole. Let's go back and kill all the Germans because one of them wrote a book. Yes I believe that is what Hitler believed. I certainly believe what is in the Koran is what Muhammad believed. I don't believe that every German in the 30's and 40's wanted to rule Europe and kill every Jew in existence, though a great many, though still only a small minority did. Nor do I believe that every Muslim wants to destroy the West.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:37 PM (GE1+K)
Because you aren't preventing Islamic expansion. You aren't solving anything. At best, you're kicking the can down the road a bit, while escalating the battle.
What do you think will happen when the US starts issuing eviction slips? Do you think that Pakistan is going to be happy with this turn of events? Do you think that an ideology built on war will take kindly to this slap in the face?
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 11:37 PM (ghJ2e)
Oh really. Maybe you should tell
that to the guy who was asking me if I knew about the
global-caliphate-world-domination plan currently favored by the Muslim
world.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 28, 2011
03:33 AM (8Zpuz)
Is there a time table in the Koran for this? No, doesn't mean it's not Islam's ultimate goal.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:37 PM (GZitp)
How is preventing Islamic expansion an aggressive expansionist ideology? That doesn't even make any sense.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 03:33 AM (GZitp)
Good God you really are fucking retarded. I was talking about Islam being an aggressive expansionist ideology.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 11:38 PM (GULKT)
Social Inertia. Afraid to do anything. Chamberlin and Daladier were afraid of war so much that they did nothing but appease hitler until it was too late.
Social Inertia is the same thing that it will take not one, not two, but at least three U.S. cities to be reduced to radioactive cinders before everyone realises that islam is at war with us.
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 11:39 PM (wY55N)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:39 PM (bxiXv)
and this suggests
significant potential for violence if things are pushed too hard.
The possibility is there.
Perhaps all 1.5 billion Muslims do not want to conquer the world, but the clerics who take the Koran at face value (just about all of them), are in fact directed to do so ...
Uh, okay. I'll just take your word for it then?
Srivijaya: a kingdom spanning the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra and various other islands. Very Short Version: Lots of Hindus and Buddhists. A muslim married into the royal family ... eventually he or his descendants took over and started conversions ... of the people. Similar stories in some neighboring kingdoms.
Posted by: Yodel at August 28, 2011 03:34 AM (Wh+YQ)
There is also a shorter, and significantly more violent story, about a Christian named Francisco Pizzaro who converted the Incan Emperor to Christianity, ransomed his life for a roomful of gold, and then proceeded to strangle him with a dowel and a rope. Slavery and Catholic proselytizing commenced thereafter.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:40 PM (8Zpuz)
What do you think will happen when the US starts issuing eviction slips? Do you think that Pakistan is going to be happy with this turn of events? Do you think that an ideology built on war will take kindly to this slap in the face?
Posted by: Lauren at August 28, 2011 03:37 AM (ghJ2e)
And allowing Muslims to pour into the west prevents expansion? And so what what if we hurt some Muslim feelings, do you really think Pakistan is going to attack us for it?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:41 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: ace at August 27, 2011 11:43 PM (nj1bB)
God Damn it. We aren't fucking saying that we are afraid to do something, we're saying that your plan is batshit insane and counterproductive as all Hell.
We aren't a bunch of liberals who think that Islam is just a misunderstood religion of love. We think it's exactly what you say it is: a violent, expansionist ideology.
Given that we agree with that fact, we're able to project beyond the warm fuzzies of seeing our enemy get set back and realize that it would be a fucking disaster to put such a plan in place.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 11:43 PM (ghJ2e)
Asshole?? I was asking you a question. If you believed hitler meant what he wrote, why do you disbelieve the qur'ran.
I have alredy stated where your place in the qur'ran is. I will do so again.
1. Convert to islam.
2. Accept 2nd class status and pay your jizya.
3. Die.
Are these acceptable choices for you?
Posted by: GMB at August 27, 2011 11:45 PM (wY55N)
Is there a time table in the Koran for this? No, doesn't mean it's not Islam's ultimate goal.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 03:37 AM (GZitp)
Yeah ok, so you just know (given the multiple examples of the Muslim Sword of Damocles that you keep talking about) that they won't do it that soon. You just know.
How is it you are the voice of calm and reason only when it suits your specific outlook?
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:45 PM (8Zpuz)
And these are the people you want here? What am I missing?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:46 PM (GZitp)
Suicide bombing takes on a whole different character once nuclear weapons are involved.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:46 PM (GE1+K)
No, so they will have to change.
Remaining ignorant of Islam as a nation will not effect that change.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:48 PM (GE1+K)
Oh yes, the dispossessed are the most rational of people. Why in the world would I think that they would act in accordance to their highest moral code when their enemy has made them into refuges.
Posted by: Lauren at August 27, 2011 11:49 PM (ghJ2e)
Uh, okay. I'll just take your word for it then?
So, you have not read the Koran, or the suras prviously posted in this thread. Ok then.
There is also a shorter, and significantly more violent story, about a Christian named Francisco Pizzaro ...
There are also stories about the Japanese conduct in Korea during Toyotomi Hideyoshi 's invasion (1592 to 159
...
Posted by: Arbalest at August 27, 2011 11:49 PM (Wh+YQ)
1. We can't kill all of them.
2. We can't "round them up" and put them in one place.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:49 PM (GE1+K)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:49 PM (bxiXv)
Yeah ok, so you just know (given the multiple examples of the Muslim Sword of Damocles that you keep talking about) that they won't do it that soon. You just know.
How is it you are the voice of calm and reason only when
it suits your specific outlook?
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 28, 2011
03:45 AM (8Zpuz)
I don't get you and Merovign, I really don't. One second Islam isn't really nothing to worry about here in the west and the next we're on the verge of a massive Islamic offensive? Which is it?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:49 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: GGE, Back In The Horde! at August 27, 2011 11:50 PM (sILPb)
Are these acceptable choices for you?
Posted by: GMB at August 28, 2011 03:45 AM (wY55N)
Since you seem so bent on the Mohammed/Hitler analogies, tell me when the Middle East is capable of fielding a war machine as efficient and powerful as the Third Reich. Perhaps they will finally figure out how to defeat a country the size of a cabbage patch (Israel) with 5 on 1 odds.
Or you think Muslims are going to impose their ancient Koranic particulars here? And how are they going to do this, exactly? Hold the President hostage? Install a caliphate in place of the Republic?
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:51 PM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:51 PM (bxiXv)
Slavery and Catholic proselytizing commenced thereafter.
As opposed to human sacrifice. Dont forget Mardi Gras! Most fun in the western hemisphere !
Seriously Yoshi. Go eat a toadstool.
Posted by: meleager at August 27, 2011 11:51 PM (iSQB2)
Sounds like the prelude to a purge. Kinda like how the Right ditched the Birchers back in the '60s- portraying them as a bunch of paranoid cranks- a Communist in every drawer!
Decades later- We Are All Socialists Now! and we've got a White House led by a Marxist revolutionary whose administration is littered with Maoists and we've got a university churning out Keynseian Global Warmists.
Please, bring back the Birchers!
Islam is advancing thru the system from the ground up, just like Marxism. Yet everyone swears it can't happen here- until one morning they wake up wondering "how'd we get here?". Could any one of us have imagined on Sept 10, 2001 that ten years hence, a muslim fanatic would start mowing down his fellow soldiers screaming "Allahu Akbar!" and our press, the intelligentsia and even the Army brass would go overdrive in downplaying any link to Islam- with even the Army chief proclaiming that protecting diversity within the Armed Forces is more important than weeding out more possible muslim fanatics. Stranger things will happen yet.
And not one person of national prominence, Right or Left, has asked the question: How many more Nidal Hassans are plotting their murderous acts still yet?
Islam will continue it's quiet assault, helped along by willing dupes like Rick Perry and wily connivers like the Aga Khan.
Posted by: november1981 at August 27, 2011 11:52 PM (3TGfa)
I don't get you and Merovign, I really don't. One second Islam isn't really nothing to worry about here in the west and the next we're on the verge of a massive Islamic offensive? Which is it?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 03:49 AM (GZitp)
Based on your reading comprehension skills my guess is the problem lies with you.
Posted by: buzzion at August 27, 2011 11:53 PM (GULKT)
2. We can't "round them up" and put them in one place.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 28, 2011 03:49 AM (GE1+K)
We can at least try quit letting them in can't we? Evidently not.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:53 PM (GZitp)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:54 PM (bxiXv)
430
There is also a shorter, and significantly more violent story, about a Christian named Francisco Pizzaro who converted the Incan Emperor to Christianity, ransomed his life for a roomful of gold, and then proceeded to strangle him with a dowel and a rope. Slavery and Catholic proselytizing commenced thereafter.
---Yoshi
Yoshi, no matter how many wrongs, 2, 3, or any possible combination or number greater than 1, it does still not make a right, you see that don't you?
attacking someone's position in an argument with your rhetoric is like I posted above, NOT the answer. Deal with the here and now.
Posted by: Tom_Ohio at August 27, 2011 11:54 PM (7U2lm)
Well if we isolate Islam from the moderating nature of the West, you can assume the whole population without counterbalance would fully radicalize. Then we would have a cultural war. Is that too hard to understand?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:54 PM (GE1+K)
Yeah I'm drunk, you're going to invent a new new religion for Muslims to follow but I'm drunk.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:54 PM (GZitp)
I don't get you and Merovign, I
really don't. One second Islam isn't really nothing to worry about here
in the west and the next we're on the verge of a massive Islamic
offensive? Which is it?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 03:49 AM (GZitp)
We have nukes. Some of them have nukes. Sounds a little like the Cold War. How did we survive the Cold War? Detente. When did we almost obliterate Western civilization in the Cold War? The Cuban Missile Crisis, or when we escalated. Literally, a Soviet sub almost nuked American warships. It came down to one man's deciding vote.
When you have a potentially volatile situation on your hands, you don't set about lighting as many matches as possible. Those 1.5 billion Muslims who aren't currently involved in a real war with the West, do you want them to get involved or what?
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:55 PM (8Zpuz)
Yes. Make religion a requisite for immigration? I'm fairly certain that would be viewed very poorly by the Supreme Court.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 27, 2011 11:56 PM (GE1+K)
If we cannot enforce our laws on those legal immigrants when they do commit crimes, then we ain't worth saving.
Anyone who seriously argues in favor of ethnic cleansing, however benign, is essentially arguing in favor of tyranny.
Proposing that we revoke the citizenship of law abiding legal immigrants is so asinine, it ought not even be dignified with any response more profound than a "fuck off, simpleton."
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 11:57 PM (9CM5J)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 27, 2011 11:58 PM (bxiXv)
Or just tell another fucking lie, that will settle it.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 03:54 AM
(bxiXv)
So it is something to worry about now? I thought just some well placed speeches from some moderate Muslims would reform Islam and we can all live in harmony? Just because your arguments all over the place don't pretend I'm the one not getting it.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:58 PM (GZitp)
Yoshi, no matter how many wrongs, 2, 3, or any possible combination or number greater than 1, it does still not make a right, you see that don't you?
attacking someone's position in an argument with your rhetoric is like I posted above, NOT the answer. Deal with the here and now.
Posted by: Tom_Ohio at August 28, 2011 03:54 AM (7U2lm)
It's ironic you ask me to deal with the here and now and miss the point of the Pizzaro story.
Yoden brought up a kingdom that was taken over by Muslims somewhere around the 13th-14th centuries. I brought up a kingdom that was taken over by Christians somewhere in the 16th century.
The point is to deal with the here and now. That means stop appealing to archaic situations hundreds of years old that don't really apply to the modern era.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 27, 2011 11:58 PM (8Zpuz)
When you have a potentially volatile situation on your hands, you don't set about lighting as many matches as possible. Those 1.5 billion Muslims who aren't currently involved in a real war with the West, do you want them to get involved or what?
Yes. Fuck them.
Posted by: meleager at August 27, 2011 11:59 PM (iSQB2)
Back when there were sane people at LGF it was called the Iron Fist rule. Do not post when drunk, because drunk people suck.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 03:58 AM
(bxiXv)
Fuck you, your argument falls apart and you get all pissy that's all this is.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 27, 2011 11:59 PM (GZitp)
It is just a matter of culture and influence
Iran in the 1970, women wore skirts and graduated from medical and law schools and the mullah's are who changed all that. Now the women live in sacks when they are ALLOWED outdoors, they can not drive, vote, or avoid being raped.
God Damn Barack Obama for letting the Iranian Arab Spring fail a year ago, 18 months ago. Iran's culture influences all the others, they were the wellspring of the "rise of the mullahs" in 1979.
Damn you Jimmy Carter too.
Posted by: Tom_Ohio at August 27, 2011 11:59 PM (7U2lm)
I don't get you and Merovign, I
really don't. One second Islam isn't really nothing to worry about here
in the west and the next we're on the verge of a massive Islamic
offensive? Which is it?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 03:49 AM (GZitp)
Sez the guy who is proposing the Final Solution to the Muslim Problem. Merovign, never said Islam is nothing to worry about. He said you were full of shit, though he was nicer about it and used prettier words.
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 27, 2011 11:59 PM (9CM5J)
I've said it before. If that's who we are willing to be, we might as well just accept Sharia. Because obviously we don't value our freedom.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 28, 2011 12:00 AM (GE1+K)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 12:00 AM (bxiXv)
We have nukes. Some of them have
nukes. Sounds a little like the Cold War. How did we survive the Cold
War? Detente.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 28, 2011 03:55 AM (8Zpuz)
That only works when both sides are rational enough to not really want a war.
Posted by: GGE, Back In The Horde! at August 28, 2011 12:00 AM (sILPb)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 01:35 AM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 01:38 AM (bxiXv)
Posted by: FeralCat at August 28, 2011 01:47 AM (parIF)
Holy crap that was long. If that one had gotten double-posted, Pixy would've needed to install a bigger RAID. And that would have made him angry. Never make a Pixy angry.
Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at August 28, 2011 01:48 AM (r4t7/)
I gave up intellectual circle jerks after my Freshman year. They take up a lot of time and yield nothing much but ego polishing and needless frustration.
Posted by: SurferDoc at August 28, 2011 01:58 AM (STdkO)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 04:00 AM (bxiXv)
Huh. I thought you were Sith. 
Posted by: GGE, Back In The Horde! at August 28, 2011 03:13 AM (sILPb)
Posted by: CoolCzech at August 28, 2011 03:19 AM (niZvt)
Consider the whole package and don't be blinded by the first measurement.
Posted by: sTevo at August 28, 2011 03:23 AM (VMcEw)
Posted by: Jimbo at August 28, 2011 03:29 AM (O3R/2)
And yeasr ago people made fun of those who constantly warned of the communist threat. In the end we find out they made it to the highest levels of government and there was indeed a subversive war being waged against us. But those that warned were/are made fun of. Narrow-minded fools etc... Time will tell and if Ace is wrong, which is more than possible, he will not admit it well. His tone speaks volumes and it ain't very good. Spencer will. Geller, probably on par with Ace. Shame all around.
Find some pudding, dip your balls in it, and go back to doing what you do best.
Posted by: Hurricane at August 28, 2011 03:43 AM (NrdQS)
Standing ovation to Ace, and ditto #17 and #19. That's all from this amen corner.
Posted by: Beth at August 28, 2011 03:45 AM (kBxk7)
Your silly fallacious bleats saying "we got rid of the Birchers and now look at us! We're all socialists now!" is so far beyond the outer reaches of logic and reality that it defies the straight-face test. Yes, we marginalized the Birchers, and for good fucking reason. Yes, we are all socialists now, and that is bad. The Birchers were not going to keep us from it, they probably hastened it by making anticommunism look crazy (Eisenhower was a communist! Perry is a dhimmi!) Those of you going down this fucking ridiculous path of illogical nonsense clearly do not know your history or remember it well.
Anyone praising the Birchers, ffs, is beneath contempt. You are more harmful to conservatism and the anti-jihadi movement than just about anyone. Beneath contempt.
Posted by: Beth at August 28, 2011 03:55 AM (kBxk7)
Posted by: Anonymous Wizard of Blogdom at August 28, 2011 03:55 AM (hZqYp)
That is a BIG mistake , mistake often made by liberals and useful fools .
You did use some text as an example , and you define it as just information about Islam , pure and clean information . But you are wrong about it , very wrong .
No matter if the text began with "for many muslims around the world..." , because what follows it is just the muslim propaganda , the muslim point of view.
If it were just information it should say also something like "and for many muslims around the world who took mohamed as the perfect example of behavior to abuse young girls is right because he did it , he marry a six old girl and rape her when he was 9"( yes , with 9 year old there are not sex , there can't be . It is just rape.)
And that is just and example of information that it is not given , the text just teach what the imams would teach in a mosque.
And it does not change by using " for many muslims around the world..." , because for many muslims around the world to abuse children is right , to treat women as lesser beings is right , to kill those who are not muslims is right , etc ... and that information is not given .
But when teaching about the crusades they talk about killings , fanatism , land occupied by christians , etc ... and some of that information could be right , so it should be taught ... the facts are information , so it should be taught .
So if they can talk about christians , jews , or any other religion giving information that could make them look bad ... why it can not be done the same with islam? Because it is not information as you said , it is propaganda , and you should recognice it.
In this fight against Spencer and Geller I think you are mostly wrong , but some of your points are understandable ... the problem here is that it scalate to a personal fight between respectable blogers .
Spencer did a stupid thing by demeaning your blog , you did a wrong thing attacking what Geller and Spencer said in a harsh way . To take the "personal fight factor " out of the discussion would be much apreciated by those who respect you and Spencer, and I am one of those you respect you both . .
Posted by: Miguel Angel at August 28, 2011 03:58 AM (OykbC)
It's pretty obvious they are using their background in anti-Islamism as a way to attack a candidate that is an existential threat to their Chosen One. This "stealth jihad" shit won't play to the libs, it's meant for the Palin/Bachmann supporters to keep them on board, and it couldn't be more obvious. Don't be stupid.
Posted by: Beth at August 28, 2011 04:06 AM (kBxk7)
Posted by: Jaynie59 at August 28, 2011 04:06 AM (4zKCA)
69 My take-away on Ace's post:
1. Supporting Perry is hard work.
2. Norquist shook Sarah Palin's hand.
3. What the heck is the State of Texas doing supporting religious instruction in public school classrooms? I know Rick Perry loves his wealthy friends, but this is ridiculous.
4. New Belgium's "Trippel" tastes good and packs a punch.
Posted by: mrp at August 28, 2011 12:17 AM (HjPtV)
That's about it.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at August 28, 2011 04:08 AM (bAL0J)
Well if we isolate Islam from the moderating nature of the West, you can assume the whole population without counterbalance would fully radicalize. Then we would have a cultural war. Is that too hard to understand?
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at August 28, 2011 03:54 AM (GE1+K)
Wake up, we already have a cultural war.
Posted by: Temper Tantrum at August 28, 2011 04:22 AM (bAL0J)
http://tinyurl.com/3ftqoq8
Posted by: Kenmore at August 28, 2011 04:23 AM (u+8qs)
I can. But then again, I went to a Catholic school in 8th grade.
Posted by: NR Pax at August 28, 2011 04:28 AM (7M8NG)
Sybian freak?!? I'd like to date her
Posted by: Moochelle at August 28, 2011 04:32 AM (u+8qs)
Posted by: Profiterole at August 28, 2011 04:41 AM (ychgM)
Careful there, Ace. You're playing an 'inside baseball' game with people who know the game, the stadiums, the players and coaches, much better than you do.
Yeah, yeah, you're free to have an opinion...just remember that old saw about opinions.
(Seriously, Ace, you guys are starting to sound like Chas, lately.)
Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at August 28, 2011 04:42 AM (E7Z1r)
Posted by: NC Mountain Girl at August 28, 2011 04:49 AM (m90eG)
You sold out America.
I put YOU in the same camp as Chuckie Johnson.
Pamela Geller knows what she is fighting against and you don't.
As for guilt by association; you didn't have a problem doing that to Obama, did you?
Anyhow, I guess, I won't be coming around here anymore.
Posted by: Pat in Michigan (Yes, that one!) at August 28, 2011 05:01 AM (Z9ZMs)
YOU'VE SOLD OUT AMERICA OMG OMG!!!
Really, now.
Posted by: Yoshi, Aggrieved Victim of the White Man at August 28, 2011 05:10 AM (8Zpuz)
Posted by: David Gillies at August 28, 2011 05:10 AM (FdBA0)
Defending Rick Perry is indeed hard work.
Its going to get a lot harder. If this kind of reactionary defensiveness is any clue, there's going to be some real War and Peace posts on this blog soon.
Is Rick Perry a stealth jihadi? No, but he is a corrupt, money bagging crony dhimmi by default of basic, core stupidity.
This is not a bright man. I'd like to see the blank stare on his face if he was asked in an interview about dhimmitude.
But SuperRick! isnt doing too many interviews it seems, since Trumping himself in week 1 of his campaign. He did go on Laura Ingraham's radio show and came off very poorly.
A man wants to be POTUS but cant speak in even rudimentary terms about our trade realationship with China? Well, who cares, right? They dont speak Spanish.
And Republicans should sever ties with Norquist. He launders Saudi money all over Washington.
Posted by: njinfl at August 28, 2011 05:16 AM (M2X9r)
Anyway.
I dunno which was better...my breakfast or this post and the comments.
Went to Geller's sight just once I think (maybe to see her in that Super girl outfit...and probably rub one out). I don't remember. I think poor Pam has gone the full Debbie Schlussel. B-bye. RS disengage! Liked Spencer* sorta. His blog reads like stereo instructions. And his fans would argue, "You're too dumb to get it!" No, no. I get it just fine. But he writes like he's praying that the Farm boys at Langley or the President (over morning coffee) will read his stuff and invite him over (and I'm sure they have once or twice). But bad news Robert. The sitting President don't read nothin' that ain't got his name in it at least 20 times (NYT holla!), and the CIA reads Michael Totten.
*for the record, I've never rubbed one out to Robert Spencer.
Posted by: Lamontyoubigdummy at August 28, 2011 05:16 AM (n7Yi9)
You wrote: "Or are we going to just say that Grover Norquist is a big DC Establishment players whom politicians routinely, and without considering the Jihad Implications, meet with?"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Republican leaders, politicians, candidates, etc., would do well to maintain a healthy distance from Grover Norquist. He is very bad news.
Posted by: Steve at August 28, 2011 05:17 AM (tPKdT)
my local radio guy who is all out against Perry because he prays will probably latch on to these distortions of Perry and beg people to back Romney. as for Pam Gellar, she comes off as a shrill woman who just labels people who disagree with her (like Michelle Malkin). She'd be a nice lay and all if I was single (and Pam you whore yourslef out with photos so don't be so offended if people talk about wanting to do you), but I couldn't take her too seriously in matters like this. Robert Spencer is a little more rational but has an obsession with backing Gellar in hopes for a hook up or something with her that's never gonna happen. app. Chuck hates her because she rejected him for a date or something. Either way I doubt you'll get Gellar or Spencer to retract some things as their egos won't allow it. and btw trolls, we love all the traffic you're giving ace!
Posted by: AuthorLMendez (Perry Guy Bitches) at August 28, 2011 05:38 AM (HhCkU)
Posted by: I Agree More With Pam at August 28, 2011 05:43 AM (fMzd7)
Don't you dare drag her into this bitch fight you have with Pamela Geller.
That is a girlie man gambit... and a really wimpy, limp wristed stretch.... nice try, but screw off with that sht.
You want to bitch fight with Pamela, go ahead. But don't drag Sarah Palin into it. She has nothing, absolutely nothing to do with this.
Posted by: PhilipJames at August 28, 2011 05:44 AM (G9AXq)
I'm down with that.
Posted by: Bill - Just Another Guy In The Neighborhood. at August 28, 2011 05:46 AM (HjPtV)
Don't worry, she doesn't like to get involved with anything. Running for POTUS, being a dhimmi, etc.
Unless there is a check in it for her.
Posted by: Curly Bill at August 28, 2011 05:46 AM (64fb0)
Even though she looks like Clemmy from Reno 911.
Just saying.
Posted by: Lamontyoubigdummy at August 28, 2011 05:51 AM (n7Yi9)
Lot of Palin fans are that way.
Posted by: Lamontyoubigdummy at August 28, 2011 05:57 AM (n7Yi9)
Posted by: Darcy at August 28, 2011 06:07 AM (t4i27)
Posted by: Immolate at August 28, 2011 06:26 AM (0pB27)
It seems to me that there is a question hanging in the air:
Was Pamela Gellar crusading against Rick Perry before he became a threat to Sarah Palin's possible run for the presidency?
Since I don't read her blog much at all, I really don't know. But she is into the anti-jihad-anti-dhimmi thing real heavy, so if Perry is sooo damn bad......has she singled him out for exposure for his perceived dhimmi-ness before? This thing with the Aga Khan is old news. Why bring it up now? And which candidate does she think is any better on this issue?
Posted by: ConservativeMenAreJustHotter at August 28, 2011 06:29 AM (nxLfK)
Yes and who is captain of "guilt by association"? Why none other than cheez jonsin.
We've come full circle.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at August 28, 2011 06:30 AM (0fzsA)
Allah is the Devil.
The Prophet was the real AntiChrist.
All mooslimes are Devil worshippers.
That's all ya need ta know.
Posted by: chuck in st paul at August 28, 2011 06:32 AM (EhYdw)
Nice work, Ace. Pam has been punked. While I do not hate Pam and I agree with her take on Mayor Gloomberg- she is 100% wrong on this one.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at August 28, 2011 06:36 AM (0fzsA)
Beth , you told me "don't be stupid".
But anything I said is stupid ? I just pointed out something that Ace said , something that mean to play the "useful fool" role.
If Ace believe that saying "For millions of Muslims around the world, the Prophet Muhammad has become the paradigm, or role model, who is worthy of being emulated. As GodÂ’s chosen prophet and messenger, he best embodied how to live a life in accordance with GodÂ’s will.blah blah" is just giving information then ... where is the rest of the information about islam ?
I mean , where are the part where they say "for millions of muslims muhammad open the way to paedophilia , killing those who are not muslims , slaving woman , etc " . Or if you prefer you could talk about that facts in a more "soft" way ... but at least those fact should be given if you want to call it information .
What Ace is talking about is not information , it is just the "mosque aproved" version of islam for dhimmis ... or for dummies ... well , both things are related.
About Christians , jews , etc the information is given in a different way . It is a critic information , crusaders are often depicted as murderous , they occupy muslim land ( which was not muslin land ) , etc ... the same about another christian related matters ...
If the information about christians and jews can be given in such critical way and often wrongly ofensive way ... why should the information about islam be given as the imams want it to be given to the infidel? .
It is propaganda , not information , and I just pointed it out . I don't uderstand why you call me stupid.
And about that "hidden war" against Perry . I don't believe he is the "stealth jihad candidate" , but it is a fact that he ows some favors to wrong people ... and , I don't like that.
I am from Spain , and I can tell you that in europe we have paid a high price because those kind of things . Because politicians have been very kind towards islam and some islamic countries , entities , even dictators.
So the real hidden agenda it is not Spencer/Geller anti-perry agenda , the real hidden agenda is the hidden agenda of those muslims countries and muslim people that try to pass islam "under the radar" ... and those politicians as Perry , maybe unintentionally , are giving them the chance to do it , by owing them favors ,by being "foolishly kind" towards them , etc
So , I think that most of you take that out of context , you try to make make it some kind of war Palin Vs Perry , and I don't think it is like that .It is a matter of "muslim hidden agenda" in some ways , even if Perry should not be seen as any kind of "hidden jihad candidate" in a intentional way.
Posted by: Miguel Angel at August 28, 2011 06:37 AM (0I1gP)
I tell you to prove your bullshit lies and you just repeat them. Liar.
If you read this post as carefully as you read my others, no doubt you'll come back to let me know my theory about giant pink elephants is WRONG!
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 05:35 AM
(bxiXv)
Your argument? You didn't have a fuck'n argument. You're whole solution is some fantasy of 1.5 billion Muslims tearing out half the Koran then living in harmony with the rest of the world. What possible reason would they have to do that when they have morons like you in the west that put up with their shit in hopes that some day they'll change? Then when someone proposes that Islam isn't compatible with the West and should be stopped from coming here you predict Armageddon because of their violent nature. I asked you before, if they're so prone to violence why the fuck are they here?
It's one or the other, either the whole Islamic world is reasonable and wants to change their belief system to get along with the rest of the world or their a violent group bent on aggression. It can't be both at the same time.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 06:39 AM (GZitp)
Well, Ace, at least you're getting some practice on all the times you'll have to defend Perry from BS accusations. This one is mild by comparison of what's coming as long as he continues to look like a threat to Obama, the left, and establishment Repubs.
It's a long time until the primaries. Stock up on the Val-u-rite, and get some sleep while you can. For all the shit thrown at Palin (and you even had to include her in this post), I find it all highly amusing.
Posted by: Steph at August 28, 2011 06:44 AM (Qz3vR)
Posted by: Steph at August 28, 2011 06:44 AM (Qz3vR)
hiding behind a womans skirts.
what an effin' pussy you are.
Posted by: panchita at August 28, 2011 06:48 AM (mbCgy)
Posted by: Huggy at August 28, 2011 06:49 AM (lOwzx)
Posted by: JohnAGJ at August 28, 2011 06:57 AM (JVSVY)
Posted by: Running Hobo at August 28, 2011 06:59 AM (l1oyw)
That "zing" you heard was Ace's point going over your head.
Posted by: prettypinkfluffypanties at August 28, 2011 07:02 AM (x7Ly4)
Google Pamela Geller's Tit's and you get over 78,000 links.
It's all about her tits at this stage and without pics, this thread is useless.
Posted by: IslamicRageBoy at August 28, 2011 07:10 AM (7cXE7)
Are Geller and Spencer not both Jewish? If so, do they also practice their religion according to the old laws? Are they slaughtering the fatted goat on Fridays according to Kosher laws? Do they follow the Torah according to how it was written taken literally? If so, are they not in violation of some U.S. laws?
While there were 3,000 people murdered by radical Islamists on 9-11, and 13 brutally murdered by Nidal Hassan (SoA) at Fort Hood, it is small change (not to diminish the horror) compared to the number of violent crimes committed by illegals every year in the U.S. Yet, while we spend $$ millions every year to diminish the threat of radical Islam against American citizens, we ignore the threat our southern borders present, the latest action of the Obama [joke] administration to give a back door amnesty.
So, to use the connect-the-dot theory that Geller and Spencer are using, can we not say that any politician who has ever had anything to do with any Hispanic is now an open-borders advocate? John McCain had Juan Hernandez on his "Hispanic" outreach committee. Hernandez, and his brother Francisco, are open-border advocates with Juan even serving on Vicente Fox's cabinet. (Yeah, an American citizens served on the Mexican cabinet; how's that for a conflict of interest?)
Here, think about this: Rick Perry has supported Francisco Canseco for a U.S. Congress seat. Canseco is a Texas born Hispanic. Perry must be open-borders because he supported a Hispanic. All Hispanics are open-border advocates. (using the Geller/Spencer connect the dot theory)
Now, that is not true. Canseco is a sealed border advocate, but because he is Hispanic, and illegal Hispanics sneak across our borders and commit crimes, Canseco must be open-borders and support crimes committed by illegal Hispanics. (again, using the Geller/Spencer connect the dot theory)
What is most troubling about Geller/Spencer's attack on Perry is their failure to mention that Perry has been a friend to Israel since his days as Texas Agricultural Commissioner. They also fail to mention that Frank Gaffney's group, Center for Security Policy, has defended Perry and that Daniel Pipes wrote this on his web site:
"I agree with you that Geller's attack on Perry is irresponsible. The Aga Khan is a leading anti-Islamist figure and Perry's connection to Grover Norquist is taxation, not Islam."
Are we to next read from Geller/Spencer that Daniel Pipes is a Sha'ria supporting "dhimmi?" Are they willing to go on the record bashing Pipes?
Posted by: zane at August 28, 2011 07:13 AM (sQnt4)
Of course you're perfectly right.
Look, I wish that public schools, well public high schools, did a much more thorough job teaching Western Civilization, Comparative Religions, History, and the rest of it. They don't. They do a lousy job.
The fact of the matter is that most teachers are not up to the task anyway.
In light of the fact that most public school graduates don't know even the basics of American History or Civics, it's probably best to just leave things like a course on Comparative Religions out of the curriculum altogether. Which is also why, incidentally, I'm not a big fan of teaching Creationism in any class, even a non-science class.
The short version of all of this is that if Rick Perry is a closet Muslim-sympathizer based on what Texas schools are teaching about Islam, then every friggin' governor in the country is a closet Muslim. Or, if their state's schools don't touch on the subject at all, they are at the very least guilty of being weak-willed in the face of the Islamization of the U.S., right?
Posted by: Y-not hasn't read the comments at August 28, 2011 07:13 AM (5H6zj)
You know, I trust, that Islam considers it part of, the successor to and culmination of, the Judeo-Christian tradition, right? And they believe that Jesus, for example, is a lesser prophet. Lesser to Mohammad, of course.
Wrong again, ace. You are often wrong about these sorts of things. Because you don't know jack shit about islam but love to rant on as if it didn't matter.
islam does not consider itself any successor to Judaism or Christianity, because islam teaches that Jews are liars who witheld "allah" from the people (for very evil and nefarious reasons, which is why muslims are instructed TO KILL JEWS). muslims don't even consider Christianity worth considering, since they consider Christianity to be idolatry and NEVER include Christianity when they speak of "monotheistic religions" (though fools like you think they are including Christianity in that).
On top of that, islam bears no relation to Judaism or Christianity, other than what Mo stole (and perverted) to claim as his revelation and to stress that the Jews and Christians are evil liars because the original stories disagree with Mo's plagiarized versions.
I could go on for days with examples like this, but if you don't even know the rudimentary elements of islam and islamic culture, then it would be a wste of time.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at August 28, 2011 07:19 AM (F5tJy)
Posted by: troyriser at August 28, 2011 07:23 AM (YCeSE)
Posted by: S. Wolf at August 28, 2011 07:26 AM (cA0zw)
#514 to my knowledge this whole broo-haha with Geller, and Schlussel, started with the Salon article that linked to a CAIR release. (I guess now Geller/Spencer/Schlussel now consider Salon/CAIR to be honest brokers)
So the answer to your question is "No", Geller did not seem to have a problem with Perry prior to the Salon article. Nevermind that the article was written by someone who has, in the past, defended the Muslim Brotherhood. Nor, to my knowlege, has Geller ever attacked McCain for having an open-borders advocate on his campaign staff, one that actually served on the Mexican cabinet of Vicente Fox.
Texas has an approx. 600,000 Muslims. Are these lesson plans for those schools with a Muslim student body? I sit on a small town Texas school board that approves curriculum. Lessons are submitted to us by the TEA for use in our district. I did not know about any of this until I read Geller's article at AT. Did we not get the memo because we have NO Muslim students?
This whole guilt by association thing bothers me. It is like telling me that the Germans were Nazis so consequently all Germans were Nazis although we know that there were some who were not and even helped Jews escape Nazi Germany. Hello! Schlinder's List?
Posted by: zane at August 28, 2011 07:28 AM (sQnt4)
We see modern leftists do this with conservative wording all the time. They steal our phrases and pervert them to meanings and purposes totally at odds with what they are. That is what Mo did. He considered that the "culmination or successor" to Judaism and Christianity about as much as modern leftists who talk about "competition" (for Crap&Trade, for example) are representing a "culmination and successor" to conservativism (from which they stole the terminology).
Posted by: progressoverpeace at August 28, 2011 07:34 AM (F5tJy)
Posted by: Marine at August 28, 2011 07:37 AM (RnBmU)
Posted by: emaugust at August 28, 2011 07:44 AM (E8wmM)
Posted by: Robert Mejia at August 28, 2011 07:50 AM (vyNXF)
This sounds like what actual jihadists do. Maybe Spencer and Geller need to take a break, they're in too deep.
Posted by: mpurinTexas, Evil Conservanatrix, supports Rick Perry, bitch at August 28, 2011 08:02 AM (J4Pnx)
ACE!! I've supported you through thick and thin
then you write...
Spencer described you right. Juvenile. Lightweight. Fratboy.
Really?
Posted by: Yip in Texas at August 28, 2011 08:04 AM (SyLEU)
Posted by: General P.Malaise at August 28, 2011 08:04 AM (mJPD2)
Am I missing something? Is this not about a fundamental break in the country between a small Federal Government and low burden on citizens ( which frees the economy to create jobs ) and a machine big government that can tell everyone what to do all the time and tax the crap out of us all to level society.
Posted by: Yip in Texas at August 28, 2011 08:08 AM (SyLEU)
Once, when I was in Hawaii, on the island of Kauai, I met a mysterious old
stranger. He said he was about to die and wanted to tell someone about the
treasure. I said, "Okay, as long as it's not a long story. Some of us have
a plane to catch, you know.". He started telling his story, about the
treasure and his life and all, and I thought: "This story isn't too long."
But then, he kept going, and I started thinking, "Uh-oh, this story is
getting long." But then, the story was over, and I said to myself: "You
know, that story wasn't too long after all." I forget what the story was
about, but there was a good movie on the plane. It was a little long,
though.
Jack Handey
Posted by: Jack H. at August 28, 2011 08:18 AM (qBP3v)
Merovign (dude, that's gotta be a misspelling, right?) and Balrog have been hammering him admirably, however. I associate myself fully with #458 in particular.
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2011 08:20 AM (D9z3D)
Ace, is right. Pam Geller, Spencer, Charles Johnson are 3 peas in a pod nutcases and deserve each other.
Posted by: Topsecretk9 at August 28, 2011 08:22 AM (PK7oq)
My wife is a teacher and whatever NiceJugs is saying about curriculum is bullshit. If she wants to be a total LGF fuckstick, that's her decision, but I've seen better faces on a cabbage patch doll. Apparently, NiceJugs is a Huntsman fan.
Posted by: Hill Country Texan at August 28, 2011 08:23 AM (Ih8Z0)
Posted by: Fritz at August 28, 2011 08:23 AM (YhI7X)
Posted by: troyriser at August 28, 2011 08:29 AM (YCeSE)
Merovign (dude, that's gotta be a misspelling, right?) and Balrog have been hammering him admirably, however. I associate myself fully with #458 in particular.
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2011 12:20 PM (D9z3D)
If I'm fucking stupid, what's your brilliant plan? Evidently you agree that Islam is due from some great reformation and these 1.5 billion Muslims are going to go for it. In what alternate reality does this happen in? And you call me stupid?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 08:34 AM (GZitp)
Posted by: section9 at August 28, 2011 08:34 AM (H6lGz)
Posted by: cleaningmygun at August 28, 2011 08:39 AM (iwSVR)
I'm just curious as to what this is supposed to mean. Are you trying to sound smart, and simply managed to confuse an author with one of his characters, or do you really feel that P.G. Wodehouse, one of the most brilliant writers of the English language ever to have lived, was a blithering fool?
Posted by: TH at August 28, 2011 08:46 AM (rvJrw)
@537: Well, shit, sometimes I'd rather live in a Muslim nation than an athiest nation anyhow
No you wouldn't.
Posted by: cleaningmygun at August 28, 2011 08:51 AM (iwSVR)
Posted by: Jeff B. at August 28, 2011 12:20 PM (D9z3D)
And to top it off, people like you and Merovign, Balrog and even Maetenloch are worse then Geller and Spencer in their misrepresentation of what people are actually proposing. Nobody and I mean nobody on this thread proposed genocide or extermination yet you keep pushing for people to argue against the strawman you created, it's pathetic.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 08:51 AM (GZitp)
I think most of the people here would like most of Kratman's books. I know I do.
2: It's really sad to see Geller and Spencer self-immolate like this. I want to like both of them, but I refuse to be stupid. And what they're pushing in the case is, at the least, stupid.
3: Pam's doctored quote: make makes it obviously dishonest is the way she got rid of the "the". You'd expect a sentence like that to begins with "The Prophet Mohammed", not "Prophet Mohammed". However, to keep the "the" should would either have had to doctor the "the", or else start it "
Posted by: Greg Q at August 28, 2011 09:15 AM (U8vES)
Posted by: OCBill at August 28, 2011 09:15 AM (MiSre)
Posted by: ace at August 28, 2011 09:25 AM (nj1bB)
Posted by: ace at August 28, 2011 09:35 AM (nj1bB)
I score it:
Geller 1
Spencer 1
Ace 0
You blew it, buddy.
Posted by: xymbaline at August 28, 2011 09:42 AM (mV0QZ)
Robert Spencer is Roman Catholic.
and what's up with the Anti-Jewish comments here?
Good God people! Get over yourselves. Nice to see the REAL Anti-Semites coming out.
Posted by: Pat in Michigan (Yes, that one!) at August 28, 2011 09:45 AM (Z9ZMs)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 09:50 AM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 01:50 PM
(bxiXv)
I'm not the one lying, I have never misrepresented you. How can you with a straight face accuse me of lying when you consistently claim I'm for extermination and genocide? You're unbelievable, it's like you live in opposite world.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 09:54 AM (GZitp)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 09:55 AM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 09:58 AM (bxiXv)
I would rather pluck my eyes out than read all that. No, I'd rather put my head in a vise like Tony Spilotro did that dude in "Casino" and pop my eyes out than read all that. I guess I'd really rather not read all that, is what I'm saying.
Posted by: Rich Fader at August 28, 2011 09:59 AM (SF/wy)
Posted by: Molon Labe at August 28, 2011 09:59 AM (e36+G)
I see that AoSHQ is online again. I gave up trying to post or reload about 30 minutes after comment 468 was posted.
But this thread is still going. This is one of thise cases where, even though conventional wisdom says no", cups should be worn.
Posted by: Arbalest at August 28, 2011 10:01 AM (eUdJ+)
Go ahead, back that statement up. Or just, you know, keep being a liar.
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 01:55 PM
(bxiXv)
Are you so fucking unaware of your own dishonesty or do you really believe that shit? Or is it because you realized the absurdity of your own position on the Great Reformation of Islam that you have to distort what really happened here? Either way, it's you that's lying, both to yourself and everyone else.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 10:01 AM (GZitp)
Posted by: A Balrog of Morgoth at August 28, 2011 03:57 AM (9CM5J)
I'm pretty sure they would manage to get me on the list *somehow*. Probably right after the Mormons.
Hell, I already outed myself as a Sabian, that's pretty fuckin' obscure, we don't need them Sabian freaks! Out they go!
I'm sure I believe *something* sufficiently offensive, or if they can find another one *he'll* believe something offensive and then I can be a "carrier."
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 04:00 AM
(bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 01:55 PM
(bxiXv)
There you go, your own fucking words you lying sack of shit.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 10:06 AM (GZitp)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 10:11 AM (bxiXv)
Unfuck'nbelievable, you really are that self deluded.
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 10:15 AM (GZitp)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 10:15 AM (bxiXv)
Oh my mistake, when people talk about ethnic cleansing they aren't really talking genocide they're talking about deportation of course. Well not in this reality but the one you made up in your mind. How fucking stupid are you?
Posted by: lowandslow at August 28, 2011 10:19 AM (GZitp)
Ace pretty fairly and effectively eviscerates the woefully wobbly logic upon which Geller & Spencer predicate their phony guilty-by-tangential-association condemnation of Perry.
But by also revealing the mitigating portion of the quote from the Aga Khan-sponsored seminar's syllabus which Gellar had very carefully excised in order to deceive her readers and falsely induce them to arrive at her conclusion that Rick Perry is a dyed-in-the-wool dhimmi, he has shown her - at least to me - untrustworthy in everything she has previously written about the jihadists and their useful idiot dhimmi-wannabe ROP-ers & renders irredeemably suspect everything she ever writes about it or any other subject every again, no matter how accurate she may otherwise be!
Even in its manipulated state the altered quote from the syllabus which she fraudulently presents to her readers as 'evidence' against Rick Perry can impugn him only in the eyes of the most hysterical - and selectively inflamed - of blind paranoiacs.
But that she further doesn't seem to have the slightest recognition that her deceitful action here has, as you suggested, irrevocably undermined her credibility everywhere else does not reflect well on the clarity of her judgment generally even if she weren't so inclined to deceive her readers ever again.
Indeed this controversy offers pretty persuasive evidence of how clean Perry must actually be on this issue if Geller & Spencer, with all of their accumulated knowledge and all of the creditable resources they have developed & which are immediately available to them, have been reduced to deliberately manipulating random passages of the freaking summary of an Aga Khan-sponsored seminary on the history of Islam which had merely been offered to some of Texas' locally supervised teachers, just to bolster the possibility that their readers would find those teachers' Governor guilty of voluntary dhimmitude in the most absurdly far-fetched way.
Posted by: leilani at August 28, 2011 10:22 AM (MI7Jw)
[NO, the Governor of Texas is not sending public school teachers to Muslim seminaries.] ;-)
Posted by: leilani at August 28, 2011 10:26 AM (MI7Jw)
For my final post:
muslims do not consider themselves (you see, ace, "consider themselves", as you were arguing) to be " the successor to and culmination of, the Judeo-Christian tradition". muslims consider - from their point of view - that Jews and Christians were offered the truth, but rejected it (because they are evil people) and have never even attempted to follow "the truth" but to lie to the world about it. This is what you will find if you ever read the koran.
This is qualitatively different than Christianity having grown out of Judaism, as a product of Jews and accepting the Torah, only with the caveat that Jesus fulfilled the covenant and presented a new one. islam shares none of this and is nothing even remotely the same. It merely stole from Judaism and Christianity in order to grab some immediate legitimacy.
Of course, this was said in my comments that you didn't understand so I don't expect that this simpler explanation to do any better. You should be careful how you throw the word "stupid" around.
Posted by: progressoverpeace at August 28, 2011 10:31 AM (F5tJy)
Posted by: Lauren at August 28, 2011 10:32 AM (VKD8C)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 10:34 AM (bxiXv)
Come on, Ace, don't sweat the one-issue fringers. People like Geller and Spencer won't be happy with a candidate unless the first plank on his (her) platform involves gas showers and exciting new brown lampshade materials. Whether it's from righteous pro-Israel/anti-Islamist fervor, pro-Palin hysteria, or blog-business shrewdness, it ends up with an unelectable candidate and four more Obama years.
Posted by: Sterling Archer at August 28, 2011 10:53 AM (1H47k)
Come on 600!
Meanwhile, I'm wondering...do Aga Khan's always have access to the office of the Governor of Texas, or is this something new? 9/11, Afgan Taliban, intel needs(with troops on the ground), access to loads of bank records. Maybe I'm just seeing a silly conspiracy theory.
Geller - read a couple times concerning Geert Wilders. Saw a bikini vid...Nice rack???guys, please, you really think she'd fix you a sammich after??? Morons still have standards.
Spencer - I'd come to expect better, more thorough, research/analysis. Lately(6 mos or so), more innuendo as fact.
Ace - Meek RINO by his own admission, I agree(WHEN HE SAYS SOMETHIN' AGAINST MY CANDIDATE)! What? Ace likes Perry? Oh... Ace is a stallwart conservative and a pillar of the community.
Posted by: Tantorus Maximus at August 28, 2011 11:03 AM (eWQpH)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 11:10 AM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 11:13 AM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 11:14 AM (bxiXv)
"Are Geller and Spencer not both Jewish? If so, do they also practice their religion according to the old laws? Are they slaughtering the fatted goat on Fridays according to Kosher laws? Do they follow the Torah according to how it was written taken literally? If so, are they not in violation of some U.S. laws?
"....They also fail to mention that Frank Gaffney's group, Center for Security Policy, has defended Perry and that Daniel Pipes wrote this on his web site:
"I agree with you that Geller's attack on Perry is irresponsible. The Aga Khan is a leading anti-Islamist figure and Perry's connection to Grover Norquist is taxation, not Islam."
Are we to next read from Geller/Spencer that Daniel Pipes is a Sha'ria supporting "dhimmi?" Are they willing to go on the record bashing Pipes?
Posted by: zane at August 28, 2011 11:13 AM
Zane, I posted (on Pipes' blog) that - in Perry's defense - his distinction between Norquist's activism in behalf of Muslim Brotherhood ('stealth') jihadists and his anti-tax activism was irresponsible. Pipes (or his moderator) did not publish my comment as he usually does. What does that tell you about Dr. Pipes? By the way, Spencer is Catholic? Geller is Jewish.
Posted by: Steve at August 28, 2011 11:28 AM (tPKdT)
Hope it's just fatigue, that happens to everyone.
Thanks for the tip on the new thread.
Still hoping for 600+ here...just because, no better reason.
Posted by: Tantorus Maximus at August 28, 2011 11:35 AM (eWQpH)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 11:39 AM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 11:39 AM (bxiXv)
Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith at August 28, 2011 11:39 AM (bxiXv)
Zane (#52
wrote: "Geller/Spencer... also fail to mention that Frank Gaffney's group, Center for Security Policy, has defended Perry and that Daniel Pipes wrote this on his web site:
"I agree with you that Geller's attack on Perry is irresponsible. The Aga Khan is a leading anti-Islamist figure and Perry's connection to Grover Norquist is taxation, not Islam."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Perhaps you read the Spiegel interview with Aga Khan?
Aga Khan: We should do everything to help him (President Karzai). He has an enomously complex agenda to deal with. He is our best hope. And besides, he is the elected leader and we have to work with the parliament.
SPIEGEL: Even if warlords and a former members of the Taliban are represented in Afghanistan's parliament?
Aga Khan: You either accept the results of democracy or you donÂ’t. Otherwise you talk about qualifying democracy.
SPIEGEL: That means the West should deal with the radical Islamist Hamas as well?
Aga Khan: You have to work with whoever the population has elected as long as they are willing to respect what I call cosmopolitan ethics (What are cosmopolitan ethics? Are they found in the Qur'an? - Steve). Now, itÂ’s true that Hamas has a record of conflict ...
SPIEGEL: ... of outright terror ...
Aga Khan: ... but it would not be the only time that movements that have such a record make it into parliament, and even end up in charge of government later on.
Posted by: Steve at August 28, 2011 11:46 AM (tPKdT)
Posted by: CitizenHill at August 28, 2011 12:41 PM (w4+WA)
Posted by: TH at August 28, 2011 02:16 PM (rvJrw)
As a social studies teacher here in Texas, I actually know what we are required to teach here in Texas, and it isn't the crap that Geller and Spencer talk about.
Yes, our materials are neutral/friendly in how they present the origins of Islam -- but the same is true regarding the beginnings of Judaism, Christianity and Buddhism, just as an example.
But trust me -- we teachers are not required to proselytize for Islam, nor do we.
Posted by: Rhymes With Right at August 28, 2011 05:12 PM (V6CQ0)
#603
BS. One only need look at a the schools in Houston and El Paso to see course materials that are extreme. Maybe these are only local and maybe they aren't Islamic but they are racist. They are reflective of a culture that exists in faculty lounges.
As for Ace, as a president said it "depends on the definition os is, is." It seems we are in Oliver Willis territory now and verging on LGF.
Posted by: Molon Labe at August 29, 2011 01:15 PM (e36+G)
You are welcome to depart anytime, ML.
Posted by: toby928™ at August 29, 2011 04:23 PM (GTbGH)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2884 seconds, 731 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Posted by: newrouter at August 27, 2011 07:15 PM (/ycAc)