- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Very different than what Obama proposes.
the wives? -- j
.
to defend me. . they should be getting rid of -- that is, deterring
or blocking, stopping or killing -- the people who are actively,
credibly threatening us. . don't you think? -- j
.
Exactly.
A peaceful muslim wants a radical muslim to kill you.
The so-called "peaceful" ones contribute to "charities" that funnel money to the radicals.
I wonder if CafePress would print it.
Thank you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wt9bM...
.
He says the same thing: that basically it is a myth that there even exists a peaceful/moderate majority.
I read the same about A.H., that is one of his grandmothers was Jewish.
.
enough when JFK was killed (during his impeachment
over the bay of pigs). . turned him into a king. -- j
.
For what it's worth, ISIS is trying to change that. They just issued a statement that they aim to destroy the "gray zone" in which moderate Muslims live in the West, by bullying all of them into radicalizing. I predict that this effort on ISIS' part is going to backfire spectacularly. They will lose nearly all of their support in the West and bring on a broader, lasting Reformation.
Call me pessimistic in this avenue, but I don't believe there will be a moderate version of Islam standing in 50 years.
I call that the same as if they welded the knife that cut the throats themselves.
Brigitte Gabriel herself is an interesting study in controversy (Wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigitt.... Here is the text of a speech she delivered at Duke October 15, 2004, from Snopes: http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbo...
But Ayn Rand asked deeper questions. Gabriel was not focussed on why the "good Germans" or "good Japanese" or "good Russians" went along with the atrocities committed by a violent minority. The fact is that the violent minority only acted out in real life the ideas held by those so-called "good" people. It has been cogently pointed out that the protests against the Bush Administration policies of war, torture, and bailout disappeared when the same policies were carried out by the Obama Administration.
For a contrast that sheds light, consider the cooling of the Tea Party. You would think that they would be front and center with marches all over all the time. The reason that they are not active is that they really lacked any kind of coherent philosophy: they had no basis for their politics. Even in 2009, many felt that Social Security and Medicare were good programs. "In the aftermath of the 2012 American elections, some Tea Party activists have taken up more traditionally populist ideological viewpoints on issues that are distinct from general conservative views. Examples are various Tea Party demonstrators sometimes coming out in favor of U.S. immigration reform as well as for raising the U.S. minimum wage." -- Helling, Dave (May 17, 2014). "Tea party says it is winning the message war despite losing election battles". Kansas City Star. Retrieved May 18, 2014. Quoted in Wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Par...
Brigitte Gabriel is right: we cannot defeat an ideology with bombs. Ayn Rand called this "the war for men's minds." It is the only kind that really matters.
I think we see this playing out in the Republican Presidential Primaries, where the top three are all non-establishment candidates and the top two aren't professional politicians. I would also note that Boehner's ouster and the rejection of Kevin McCarthy as Speaker were largely driven by Tea Party interests.
1. Constitutionally limited government
2. Fiscal accountability
3. Free markets.
This was too tough for many to comprehend. And I would get the response "well you got yours, so now just fck everyone else, eh?" My reply was to inform them that they had used a compound sentence, and that although I did work for and engage in commerce to accumulate wealth, that I had not fcked anyone along the way; and that it was my observation that the fcker and fckee were oft one and the same. Some (many?) folks are impervious to logic. So I think we, as individuals, need to do our own thing, build and protect our own nest and just let the whole damn thing crash to the ground, start from a clean slate.
Jan
(From memory, paraphrased and author forgotten.)
The RINOs have squelched the voices of the true conservatives as evidenced by their treatment of Cruz recently. Trump comes on the scene and loudly vocalizes what we have been thinking, while we go about our daily lives of supporting ourselves and our families, and with our taxes, the welfare class. Its no wonder Trump, Carson and Cruz are leading in the polls, they seem to be reading our minds.
Bearman, you are definitely not alone.
If I know someone is a muslim, I will not trust them to tell me the truth nor deal with me honestly.
Jan
Jan
Jan
And you might want to look into the Crusades a bit more. If it weren't for the Christians fighting back against the invasion of Islam into not only the Middle East but much of Europe, there would have been no enlightenment and no United States Constitution because there would have been no freedom of thought.
Further, I think it is important to independently consider action and doctrine. If someone proclaimed themselves an Objectivist but still insisted on forcing their neighbor to pay taxes to pay for their television bill, would we say that that person was an impostor or a true representative of Objectivism?
Jan
The below is similar to another comment I posted and I copied and pasted it. Not trying to beat it to death.
(There is one passage in Islam's bible (Koran), governing rules or whatever term we use for it, that concerns me the most. That is the passage that suggests that believers in Islam blend with society until they are in a position of power and at that point they are to kill all infidels. This is not a quote of the passage as I do not have that at my fingertips but it was taught to me during a class put on by an Egyptian Christian that translated the Koran. Was he telling the truth? I could never say for sure because I cannot translate an original Koran but believe what he shared has to be considered.)
I want to believe that christian Muslims or atheist Muslims would be acceptable but how do we know that they are not following the Koran? Or more specifically the above mentioned passage. Hmmmm.
I am looking for a reason to change my position. Facts only please.
It is busy at work right now, so it may be a while before I can get around to this.
Jan
Thanks in advance for your efforts.
Egyptian Christian that translated the Koran is like having a Black Studies professor translating the constitution. There may be a bit of bias. It is tough to refute a passage when we dont know what the passage is. This may help : http://muslimmatters.org/2010/02/21/i...
SItes you might look at for facts :
http://muslimmatters.org/
http://www.clarionproject.org/
http://qz.com/550104/muslims-around-t...
http://www.everyjoe.com/2015/11/18/po...
http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/c...
Islam only take the pieces out of the Bible they like down to Abraham (that's about 75% of the book of Genesis). But they dispute the lineage of the birthright, believing that the birthright went to Ishmael instead of Isaac. Islam never, however, quotes any part of the Old Testament as scripture.
With regard to the New Testament, Islam does not believe it is scripture. They can't, for it proclaims Christ as the Messiah, while Islam holds that Christ was merely a great prophet.
The Qu-ran (and it's prophet, Mohammed) supercedes all.
I'd like to know what you would have against an Egyptian in this case. He was forced the Koran and it's teachings but was tauch Christianity underground. Tell me why this person would lie.
If someone renounced their USA citizenship and took on the citizenship of Cuba and said the USA was awful, would that be surprising?
One of the sites listed numerous passages that seem harmless and make Islam sound like a religion of peace. I have seen many of those before. The problem I still have and will struggle to change, is there are numerous passages that encourage believers to basically blend with the people of the countries they are living, in until they are in a position of power. At that time they are to convert everyone to Islam or kill them if they will not convert.
While I do not claim to be an expert in Islam I have read a portion of the Koran and have been in classes on it. Sending me links to web sites that I cannot find information on will do nothing to change my mind. I will only consider information credible if I can dig deeply into the organization to find who is really providing the info. And truthfully, based on what I have already learned, the only credible source will be a "new testament" version of the Koran that has all of the verses removed that speak of killing infidels. If you have a source for this, you may get my attention.
Jan
perstition you want. You do not have the right to
impose that superstition on others, or to commit
aggression, that is, to commit violent, unprovoked
acts on others in the name of that irrational su-
erstition. Sharia Law is one such aggression.
Yes it IS about islam.
The very nature of their mysticism, their culture, their politics and their laws prevents all muslims from becoming conscious human beings and having mutuality with the rest of mankind.
She was fantastic!
There are many others who speak out, they just don't get the press coverage of idiot perpetrators of hate like Geller, Gabriel and their ilk.
http://www.everyjoe.com/2015/11/14/po...
or read the converstion between Sam Harris and Maajid Nawaaz in : Islam and the Future of Tolerance: A Dialogue
Sam Harris
Extremism is what needs to be fought, not the entire Islamic religion
The saying you quote is BS and inflammatory and comes from people who have zero understanding of the Islamic religion. It lends to the creation of more radicals by minimizing another Abrahamic religion
Most believe infidels are non believers of Islam whereas most Islamic scholars will tell you that all "people of the book" or monotheists are ok, it is only the true non believer in a god who is an infidel.
The book I mentioned above is fascinating in this discussion.
The picture is not as clear as you paint it, nor as those who are absolutely anti-Islam contend. Given the unclear nature of the situation, I favor taking an approach that protects myself, my family, and my countrymen. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees indicates that 72% of the current refugee population is young, unattached males of military age, 13% women, and 12% children. That sounds more like a rush of "draft dodgers" who don't want to die for anybody, extremists, rebels, or state military. Unfortunately, it's also a ripe field in which to plant some truly dangerous people.
Has all of this tainted my opinion of Islam in general? Truthfully, my distrust of the faith goes back 50 years, when I was exploring my spiritual options. When I left the Christian faith, I examined many religions, speaking to adherents and leaders, and the only one that left me with very uncomfortable feelings was Islam.
There is a huge difference between the radicals or Islamists and the majority of the Uslamice believers.
Youa re correct, the picture is blurry, what is disgusting is the large percentage of people in the USA who want to condemn ALL Islam believers.
And now the idiot, trump, thinks it may be ok to make Islamic believers carry identity cards stating their beliefs!!! Whats next make them wear a crescent on their shirts instead of a star of david?
While no scholar, I've read enough to know, with very few exceptions, that it doesn't belong in a Constitutional environment.
Islam belongs in a Constitutional enviroment as much as Judaism and Christianity do.
You're statement is a tad insulting and it implies that I am bigoted.
Islam, how its constructed, leaves no room for self-determination, self-governance, Constitutional governance, or anything but allah.
Take a look at who Mr. Lewis is,
http://www.amazon.com/Bernard-Lewis/e...
"Muslim fighters are commanded not to kill women, children, or the aged unless they attack first; not to torture or otherwise ill-treat prisoners; to give fair warning of the opening of hostilities or their resumption after a truce; and to honor agreements. ... At no time did the classical jurists offer any approval or legitimacy to what we nowadays call terrorism. Nor indeed is there any evidence of the use of terrorism as it is practiced nowadays."
In Lewis' view, the "by now widespread terrorism practice of suicide bombing is a development of the 20th century" with "no antecedents in Islamic history, and no justification in terms of Islamic theology, law, or tradition."[42] He further comments that "the fanatical warrior offering his victims the choice of the Koran or the sword is not only untrue, it is impossible" and that "generally speaking, Muslim tolerance of unbelievers was far better than anything available in Christendom, until the rise of secularism in the 17th century."
Sorry, islam leaves no room for self-determination, self-governance, or Constitutional governance by anyone but allah. Hence, their compulsion to seek sharia law in the US.
As you can see Mr Lewis is hardly a hate monger.
That statement infers that Islam , as a religion and as a whole, kills men women and children. The sweeping generalization only serves to promote the radical element that we both despise within the Islamic religion.
The religion does not kill men , women and children any more than Chrstianity killed the bastardized verision of the religion practiced by Jim Jones.
I'll send you some links about public beatings by morality police, Wives being whipped because they were raped and didn't have enough male witnesses to side with their innocence. Perhaps a news clipping from here in Phoenix about muslim honor killing because the daughter fell in love with a boy who was not muslim (ran over the kid and her aunt)? Maybe some clips related to female clitoral circumcision? What about all the artists around the globe killed because they dared say or draw anything (Theo Van Gough comes to mind)? What about Ayaan Hirsi Ali - a contemporary story of islams suppression of women from a woman who experiences it in several islamic countries. What about using children, women, the elderly and the mentally disabled as human bombs? Feeding children cartoons and characters on TV to teach them to hate the jews and the west (mickey mouse)? I can go on an on.
Are all these things practices everywhere? Doubtful. But the are all OWNED by islam today as well as 1200+ years into the past. And this is the mentality they wish to bring to the US and Europe.
If these things were concentrated to one area, one state, one country I would not see them as something endemic to islam. Since they happen across the globe on a regular basis, no matter what the government resides or level of prosperity I do blame islam for cultivating such a mindset. We are not in the 7c and people acting and people barbarously conducting themselves as if they are in the 7c or hankering to return to the 7c deserve no quarter.
You are twisting what I'm saying simply because you have an irrational view of a potentially very dangerous people. Further you have taken my stance, which is based on a long list of valid examples spanning many years and from many places, and twisted it to mean something it is not.
I have not said ALL islamic people are guilty of these things. I will say there is something fundamentally twisted in islam that bring about the types of lunatics that taint 1.2 billion people. This view of islam is not my construct, its the face that islam has presented almost daily for half a century. Tainted such, and potentially and willfully dangerous, they should not be welcomed here.
We should not blame all of Islam for the actions of a few.
I am not pointing out the failings of Christendom BUT am blaming the individuals responsible. Jim Jones was the problem NOT all Christians.