Register FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   Evil Empire Forums > Religion & Philosophy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 69 votes, 4.57 average. Display Modes
Old 09-04-2012, 01:23 PM   #241
okiebugg
Captain Butthurt
 
okiebugg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: stillwater
Posts: 992
okiebugg has one green dot.  Good for them!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ecisgod View Post
Blanket hatred of a race or religion is stupid.

(Edited)

Even I have to agree with the stupidity of hatred for what it's worth.

I have very few people in my life that I hate and even those are under an umbrella of forgiveness when the time comes.

What I see is a matter of trust. During WWII the Japanese weren't trusted when we were at war with their people, but many Japanese/Americans were sequestered because of distrust which was for naught.

For the most part I don't trust Muslime because so many of them are radicals or become radicalized easily in these dangerous times. Like the Japanese most Muslim Americans will fall under the umbrella of trust when the Arab countries get things straightened out.

The Iranian leadership is a ship of a different color
__________________
"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Ada
okiebugg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2012, 01:55 PM   #242
Stevomeo
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Outta Here
Posts: 2,839
Stevomeo has one green dot.  Good for them!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by okiebugg View Post
(Edited)

Even I have to agree with the stupidity of hatred for what it's worth.

I have very few people in my life that I hate and even those are under an umbrella of forgiveness when the time comes.

What I see is a matter of trust. During WWII the Japanese weren't trusted when we were at war with their people, but many Japanese/Americans were sequestered because of distrust which was for naught.

For the most part I don't trust Muslime because so many of them are radicals or become radicalized easily in these dangerous times. Like the Japanese most Muslim Americans will fall under the umbrella of trust when the Arab countries get things straightened out.

The Iranian leadership is a ship of a different color

Trust but verify
__________________
"Democracy and liberty are not the same. Democracy is little more than mob rule, while liberty refers to the sovereignty of the individual." - Walter Williams

"Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong." - Calvin Coolidge

“Little by little, subtle changes will come until one day America will wake up and be Socialist; the Democrat Party has adopted our platform.” – Norman Thomas, 1944
Stevomeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2012, 11:10 AM   #243
Sapphire
Senior Member
 
Sapphire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 6,294
Sapphire recently placed 2nd in a local hot wings-eating contest
Default For those who missed this...

March 5, 2011
Obama spells disaster for the ME
Now We Know: How the Obama Administration is Going to Bring Disaster to the Middle East and U.S. Interests
By Barry Rubin
http://www.israpundit.com/archives/34110

In a moment, I’ll present you with what might be the most frightening paragraph in the modern history of U.S. Middle East policy. But first, here’s one that’s among the most deplorable. It’s from a Washington Post article:
“The Obama administration is preparing for the prospect that Islamist governments will take hold in North Africa and the Middle East, acknowledging that the popular revolutions there will bring a more religious cast to the region’s politics.”
What? While people like me have been warning about the emergence of Islamist regimes, in contrast the Obama administration, European governments, mass media, and most academics have repeatedly assured us there’s no such danger! Those people doing the warning have been almost totally shut out of the mass media.
But now is the Obama administration realizing that those changes they’ve been cheering and even promoting could end by producing Islamist regimes? Is that the kind of regime that’s anti-American, promotes terrorism, subverts neighbors, and wants to wipe Israel off the map?
Now we come to the paragraph I warned about, the explanation for how the administration may be about to plunge into the biggest disaster in U.S. foreign policy of…well, of a very long time.
Here it is:
“The administration is already taking steps to distinguish between various movements in the region that promote Islamic law in government. An internal assessment, ordered by the White House last month, identified large ideological differences between such movements as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and al-Qaeda that will guide the U.S. approach to the region.”
Get it? Al-Qaeda is bad because it wants to attack U.S. embassies, the World Trade Center, and the Pentagon.
BUT the Muslim Brotherhood is good! Because it merely wants to seize state power, transform Egypt into an Islamist state, rule almost 90 million people with an iron hand, back Hamas in trying to destroy Israel, overthrow the Palestinian Authority, help Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood overthrow the monarchy, and sponsor terrorism against Americans in the Middle East.
I’m sure you can see the difference. This is the nonsense that the administration has been working toward for two years. It is the doctrine pushed by the president’s advisor on terrorism, elements in the CIA, and White House ideologues. The State and Defense departments are probably horrified.
Here’s the next paragraph:
“`We shouldn’t be afraid of Islam in the politics of these countries,’” said a senior administration official….`It’s the behavior of political parties and governments that we will judge them on, not their relationship with Islam.’”
That first phrase is correct. We shouldn’t be afraid of Islam in the politics of these countries. Islam has always been present in Egypt and Jordan, Saudi Arabia or post-Saddam Iraq, and even Iran before its revolution and Afghanistan not under the Taliban. But we should be very afraid of Islamism in the politics of these countries.
And, yes, we should judge them on their relationship to Islam! Here’s how:
Are they merely pious Muslims who advocate conservative social policies and want to protect Islam’s institutional position in their countries?
Or are they revolutionary Islamists who want to fundamentally transform their societies and make Islam–in their strict, strident interpretation of it–dictator over every aspect of life?
In other words, are they the equivalent of Communists or Social Democrats, Fascists or right-wing nationalists. Both al-Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood are totalitarians in this sense.
Note, too, the dangerous idea of letting the genie out of the bottle to see if it devours us. We should already be able to tell right now this minute on the basis of the ideology, platform, and methods of these groups. Arguably, Western democracies didn’t do enough to keep Communists out of power in Russia in 1917 or the Nazis out of power in Germany in 1933.
But nobody accuses the Western democracies of helping them gain power on the false belief that this would be a good thing.
The problem here is not that the U.S. government is promoting democracy but that it isn’t simultaneously fighting against anti-democratic forces that want to take advantage of it to install even worse dictatorships profoundly dedicated to the destruction of all U.S. interests.
In short, the Obama Administration doesn’t care the least about keeping the Muslim Brotherhood out of the Egyptian government or Hizballah from running Lebanon’s government. Is it against the Muslim Brotherhood gaining power in Jordan or radical Islamists taking over Saudi Arabia or Morocco?
Why put the Islamists into power as an experiment? Then after a few wars, massive terrorism, bloody repression, and the destruction of the U.S. position in the Middle East, these great geniuses can say: Oops! Sorry for all you dead people but now we have a good basis for judging them: They really meant what they said! Who could have guessed?
If al-Qaida is the measure of all things, then everyone looks moderate in comparison. At least they aren’t attacking Manhattan! And this is why we’ve been subjected to the whitewashing of the Muslim Brotherhood, to make it acceptable to the American people and Congress. That’s why President Obama unilaterally welcomed the Brotherhood into Egypt’s government before anyone asked him to remark on that subject.
Then there’s Iran, which is not really viewed as too much of a threat. Just a little containment will make Tehran behave, right? And the bloody repressive regime in Syria is okay according to this worldview because it is against al-Qaida. The increasingly dictatorial regime in Turkey is positively wonderful to this viewpoint since its Islamist regime gives the appearance of being moderate. What a shining example!
Why object to Hizballah taking over Lebanon or the Muslim Brotherhood playing a major role in Egypt? After all, this gives Islamists a chance to show they are moderate and to be moderated by a taste of power. The administration’s definition of moderate is someone who is willing to participate in elections. If they knew any history they’d be aware that both Communists and Nazis participated in elections.
Yet we see this theme everywhere in terms of Obama policy: the attempt in Afghanistan to win over the “moderate” Taliban elements; the effort to get Syria to abandon its alliance with Iran in order to be a friend of the United States; the building and restoration of mosques with U.S. taxpayer money; the wooing of the Muslim Brotherhood; and so on.
There is also the view of Turkey’s regime as benign because it offers a “moderate” model to the Islamists and thus cannot be criticized. The only reason that Hamas is not included in this process, presumably, is because that would set off pro-Israel forces.
When Secretary of State Hilary Clinton says the United States is competing with Iran does she mean for leadership in the region or for the hearts and souls of Islamists? When she praises al-Jazira is it because she believes the United States needs to do a better job of offering an alternative version of Islamism? Remember Obama’s Cairo speech was not “pro-Arab” but rather endorsed Islam as the primary identity in the region, with invited Brotherhood guests seated in the front row.
U.S. policy, then, is deliberately helping the Islamists in order to show them America is their friend, to separate “radicals” (al-Qaida) from “moderates” (Hizballah and the Muslim Brotherhood!), and to get them in a situation where they will be “moderated” by having to exercise of power (the same strategy that failed miserably with Yasir Arafat and the 1990s’ peace process, leaving several thousand people dead).
This policy approach is irresponsible to say the least. Strategy and tactics are means to a goal. If the goal of an Islamist group is to seize state power and transform one’s country into a totalitarian nightmare, violence and elections are equally good means if you think they are going to work.
Yusuf al-Qaradawi has said it all in his critique of Bin Ladin: Of course, Islamists should participate in elections, he explained, because they will win. And so if Qaradawi openly advocates genocide against the Jews, imposing totalitarian regimes, and chasing the West out of the region these facts are censored out by much of the Western media. After all, he favors elections and that’s all that counts.
It is bad enough for U.S. and European policies to do nothing in the face of the greatest challenge of our time, but to assist actively in the coming to power and flourishing of enemies is incredibly foolish. The bottom line is that this goes beyond appeasement. It is a strategy of actively helping the enemy grow stronger in the belief that this is a brilliant idea.
There is some precedent here. Some State Department experts thought Mao Zedong was a harmless “agrarian reformer.” In 1952, U.S. policymakers thought military regimes in the Arab world would be legitimate, efficient, pro-American, and anti-Communist. Thus, they welcomed the Egyptian coup of that year (which produced the regime just overthrown recently). Within three years, however, they reversed course realizing that the Egyptian government was hostile and pro-Communist. Almost a decade later they figured that Fidel Castro was just an honest nationalist, not a Marxist-Leninist.
Another thing it makes me think of is British domestic policy on Islamism, in which radical groups are encouraged and even funded as long as they don’t advocate terrorist violence within the United Kingdom, i.e., they aren’t al-Qaida types. The Muslim Brotherhood was (and is) considered a very useful force for peace and moderation by British policymakers.
This is the tragic mistake being transferred onto the wider stage: turning the chicken coop over to the foxes just because they aren’t rabid foxes.
The article includes this claim:
“`If our policy can’t distinguish between al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, we won’t be able to adapt to this change,’” the senior administration official said. “`We’re also not going to allow ourselves to be driven by fear.”‘
I can distinguish between al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. They are very different but they are both very bad, too. The apparent alternative to being “driven by fear” is to be directed by ignorance and stupidity.
No doubt many who read this will think I’m being alarmist and presenting an exaggerated picture. I certainly hope so. But I don’t think so. My worry is that in a couple of years you won’t think so either.

Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His books include Islamic Fundamentalists in Egyptian Politics and The Muslim Brotherhood (Palgrave-Macmillan); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East, a study of Arab reform movements (Wiley). GLORIA Center site: http://www.gloria-center.org His blog, Rubin Reports, http://www.rubinreports.*************.
__________________
Hebrews 3:4 - For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God.

John 8:47 - "He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”
-
"True Believers never, ever seek the support of any atheist or unbeliever's interpretation of truth." - Sapphire

"I will not dignify an accusation or a mocker with a reply." - Sapphire
Sapphire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2012, 12:17 PM   #244
okiebugg
Captain Butthurt
 
okiebugg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: stillwater
Posts: 992
okiebugg has one green dot.  Good for them!
Default gibberish

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire View Post
March 5, 2011
Obama spells disaster for the ME
Now We Know: How the Obama Administration is Going to Bring Disaster to the Middle East and U.S. Interests
By Barry Rubin
http://www.israpundit.com/archives/34110

In a moment, I’ll present you with what might be the most frightening paragraph in the modern history of U.S. Middle East policy. But first, here’s one that’s among the most deplorable. It’s from a Washington Post article:
“The Obama administration is preparing for the prospect that Islamist governments will take hold in North Africa and the Middle East, acknowledging that the popular revolutions there will bring a more religious cast to the region’s politics.”
What? While people like me have been warning about the emergence of Islamist regimes, in contrast the Obama administration, European governments, mass media, and most academics have repeatedly assured us there’s no such danger! Those people doing the warning have been almost totally shut out of the mass media.
But now is the Obama administration realizing that those changes they’ve been cheering and even promoting could end by producing Islamist regimes? Is that the kind of regime that’s anti-American, promotes terrorism, subverts neighbors, and wants to wipe Israel off the map?
Now we come to the paragraph I warned about, the explanation for how the administration may be about to plunge into the biggest disaster in U.S. foreign policy of…well, of a very long time.
Here it is:
“The administration is already taking steps to distinguish between various movements in the region that promote Islamic law in government. An internal assessment, ordered by the White House last month, identified large ideological differences between such movements as the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and al-Qaeda that will guide the U.S. approach to the region.”
Get it? Al-Qaeda is bad because it wants to attack U.S. embassies, the World Trade Center, and the Pentagon.
BUT the Muslim Brotherhood is good! Because it merely wants to seize state power, transform Egypt into an Islamist state, rule almost 90 million people with an iron hand, back Hamas in trying to destroy Israel, overthrow the Palestinian Authority, help Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood overthrow the monarchy, and sponsor terrorism against Americans in the Middle East.
I’m sure you can see the difference. This is the nonsense that the administration has been working toward for two years. It is the doctrine pushed by the president’s advisor on terrorism, elements in the CIA, and White House ideologues. The State and Defense departments are probably horrified.
Here’s the next paragraph:
“`We shouldn’t be afraid of Islam in the politics of these countries,’” said a senior administration official….`It’s the behavior of political parties and governments that we will judge them on, not their relationship with Islam.’”
That first phrase is correct. We shouldn’t be afraid of Islam in the politics of these countries. Islam has always been present in Egypt and Jordan, Saudi Arabia or post-Saddam Iraq, and even Iran before its revolution and Afghanistan not under the Taliban. But we should be very afraid of Islamism in the politics of these countries.
And, yes, we should judge them on their relationship to Islam! Here’s how:
Are they merely pious Muslims who advocate conservative social policies and want to protect Islam’s institutional position in their countries?
Or are they revolutionary Islamists who want to fundamentally transform their societies and make Islam–in their strict, strident interpretation of it–dictator over every aspect of life?
In other words, are they the equivalent of Communists or Social Democrats, Fascists or right-wing nationalists. Both al-Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood are totalitarians in this sense.
Note, too, the dangerous idea of letting the genie out of the bottle to see if it devours us. We should already be able to tell right now this minute on the basis of the ideology, platform, and methods of these groups. Arguably, Western democracies didn’t do enough to keep Communists out of power in Russia in 1917 or the Nazis out of power in Germany in 1933.
But nobody accuses the Western democracies of helping them gain power on the false belief that this would be a good thing.
The problem here is not that the U.S. government is promoting democracy but that it isn’t simultaneously fighting against anti-democratic forces that want to take advantage of it to install even worse dictatorships profoundly dedicated to the destruction of all U.S. interests.
In short, the Obama Administration doesn’t care the least about keeping the Muslim Brotherhood out of the Egyptian government or Hizballah from running Lebanon’s government. Is it against the Muslim Brotherhood gaining power in Jordan or radical Islamists taking over Saudi Arabia or Morocco?
Why put the Islamists into power as an experiment? Then after a few wars, massive terrorism, bloody repression, and the destruction of the U.S. position in the Middle East, these great geniuses can say: Oops! Sorry for all you dead people but now we have a good basis for judging them: They really meant what they said! Who could have guessed?
If al-Qaida is the measure of all things, then everyone looks moderate in comparison. At least they aren’t attacking Manhattan! And this is why we’ve been subjected to the whitewashing of the Muslim Brotherhood, to make it acceptable to the American people and Congress. That’s why President Obama unilaterally welcomed the Brotherhood into Egypt’s government before anyone asked him to remark on that subject.
Then there’s Iran, which is not really viewed as too much of a threat. Just a little containment will make Tehran behave, right? And the bloody repressive regime in Syria is okay according to this worldview because it is against al-Qaida. The increasingly dictatorial regime in Turkey is positively wonderful to this viewpoint since its Islamist regime gives the appearance of being moderate. What a shining example!
Why object to Hizballah taking over Lebanon or the Muslim Brotherhood playing a major role in Egypt? After all, this gives Islamists a chance to show they are moderate and to be moderated by a taste of power. The administration’s definition of moderate is someone who is willing to participate in elections. If they knew any history they’d be aware that both Communists and Nazis participated in elections.
Yet we see this theme everywhere in terms of Obama policy: the attempt in Afghanistan to win over the “moderate” Taliban elements; the effort to get Syria to abandon its alliance with Iran in order to be a friend of the United States; the building and restoration of mosques with U.S. taxpayer money; the wooing of the Muslim Brotherhood; and so on.
There is also the view of Turkey’s regime as benign because it offers a “moderate” model to the Islamists and thus cannot be criticized. The only reason that Hamas is not included in this process, presumably, is because that would set off pro-Israel forces.
When Secretary of State Hilary Clinton says the United States is competing with Iran does she mean for leadership in the region or for the hearts and souls of Islamists? When she praises al-Jazira is it because she believes the United States needs to do a better job of offering an alternative version of Islamism? Remember Obama’s Cairo speech was not “pro-Arab” but rather endorsed Islam as the primary identity in the region, with invited Brotherhood guests seated in the front row.
U.S. policy, then, is deliberately helping the Islamists in order to show them America is their friend, to separate “radicals” (al-Qaida) from “moderates” (Hizballah and the Muslim Brotherhood!), and to get them in a situation where they will be “moderated” by having to exercise of power (the same strategy that failed miserably with Yasir Arafat and the 1990s’ peace process, leaving several thousand people dead).
This policy approach is irresponsible to say the least. Strategy and tactics are means to a goal. If the goal of an Islamist group is to seize state power and transform one’s country into a totalitarian nightmare, violence and elections are equally good means if you think they are going to work.
Yusuf al-Qaradawi has said it all in his critique of Bin Ladin: Of course, Islamists should participate in elections, he explained, because they will win. And so if Qaradawi openly advocates genocide against the Jews, imposing totalitarian regimes, and chasing the West out of the region these facts are censored out by much of the Western media. After all, he favors elections and that’s all that counts.
It is bad enough for U.S. and European policies to do nothing in the face of the greatest challenge of our time, but to assist actively in the coming to power and flourishing of enemies is incredibly foolish. The bottom line is that this goes beyond appeasement. It is a strategy of actively helping the enemy grow stronger in the belief that this is a brilliant idea.
There is some precedent here. Some State Department experts thought Mao Zedong was a harmless “agrarian reformer.” In 1952, U.S. policymakers thought military regimes in the Arab world would be legitimate, efficient, pro-American, and anti-Communist. Thus, they welcomed the Egyptian coup of that year (which produced the regime just overthrown recently). Within three years, however, they reversed course realizing that the Egyptian government was hostile and pro-Communist. Almost a decade later they figured that Fidel Castro was just an honest nationalist, not a Marxist-Leninist.
Another thing it makes me think of is British domestic policy on Islamism, in which radical groups are encouraged and even funded as long as they don’t advocate terrorist violence within the United Kingdom, i.e., they aren’t al-Qaida types. The Muslim Brotherhood was (and is) considered a very useful force for peace and moderation by British policymakers.
This is the tragic mistake being transferred onto the wider stage: turning the chicken coop over to the foxes just because they aren’t rabid foxes.
The article includes this claim:
“`If our policy can’t distinguish between al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, we won’t be able to adapt to this change,’” the senior administration official said. “`We’re also not going to allow ourselves to be driven by fear.”‘
I can distinguish between al-Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. They are very different but they are both very bad, too. The apparent alternative to being “driven by fear” is to be directed by ignorance and stupidity.
No doubt many who read this will think I’m being alarmist and presenting an exaggerated picture. I certainly hope so. But I don’t think so. My worry is that in a couple of years you won’t think so either.

Barry Rubin is Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His books include Islamic Fundamentalists in Egyptian Politics and The Muslim Brotherhood (Palgrave-Macmillan); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East, a study of Arab reform movements (Wiley). GLORIA Center site: http://www.gloria-center.org His blog, Rubin Reports, http://www.rubinreports.*************.
Far too much gibberish for me to read. Too deep too.

Give me a break Sappy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
__________________
"It does not take a majority to prevail ... but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men." --Samuel Ada
okiebugg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2012, 12:39 PM   #245
Sapphire
Senior Member
 
Sapphire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 6,294
Sapphire recently placed 2nd in a local hot wings-eating contest
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by okiebugg View Post
Far too much gibberish for me to read. Too deep too.

Give me a break Sappy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sorry. I'll keep it short and informative.

How's this?

Link:
Egypt Kicks Sand in Obama’s Face; Brotherhood’s Leading Liberal Ally Defects; West Still Doesn’t Get It

By Barry Rubin September 3, 2012
I could write a 300-page book on how the Obama Administration’s Middle East policy has damaged Israel. I could write an 800-page book about how the Obama Administration’s Middle East policy has damaged U.S. interests. But why bother? This is all you need to know: The U.S. government asked its good buddy Egyptian President al-Mursi [...]
__________________
Hebrews 3:4 - For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God.

John 8:47 - "He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”
-
"True Believers never, ever seek the support of any atheist or unbeliever's interpretation of truth." - Sapphire

"I will not dignify an accusation or a mocker with a reply." - Sapphire
Sapphire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-08-2012, 12:49 PM   #246
madmax
Senior Member
 
madmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Strat-o-various
Posts: 15,977
madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!madmax has a lot of green dots.  Look at all those green dots!  Wow!!!!!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire View Post
Sorry. I'll keep it short and informative.

How's this?

Link:
Egypt Kicks Sand in Obama’s Face; Brotherhood’s Leading Liberal Ally Defects; West Still Doesn’t Get It

By Barry Rubin September 3, 2012
I could write a 300-page book on how the Obama Administration’s Middle East policy has damaged Israel. I could write an 800-page book about how the Obama Administration’s Middle East policy has damaged U.S. interests. But why bother? This is all you need to know: The U.S. government asked its good buddy Egyptian President al-Mursi [...]
More Sappy bullshit...
Let's hear from the Israelis themselves:
In a Monday interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, Israeli Minister of Defense Ehud Barak praised President Barack Obama for doing “more than anything that I can remember in the past” in regards to Israeli security.

“From my point of view as defense minister [US-Israeli relations] are extremely good, extremely deep and profound,” Barak told Blitzer.

Barak: Under President Obama, he is doing in regards to help our security more than anyone I can remember in my life.

Blitzer: More than any other Presidents like, LBJ, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush?

Barak: Yes, in terms of the support for our security, the cooperation of our intelligence, sharing of sorts in a very open way, even when there are differences.

Peres: When I look at the record of President Obama concerning the major issue of security, I think it’s a highly satisfactory record from an Israeli point of view.

__________________
Too often we... enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought. - JFK

Last edited by madmax; 09-08-2012 at 12:50 PM.
madmax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-11-2012, 10:57 AM   #247
Sapphire
Senior Member
 
Sapphire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 6,294
Sapphire recently placed 2nd in a local hot wings-eating contest
Default

Link:
Egypt Kicks Sand in Obama’s Face; Brotherhood’s Leading Liberal Ally Defects; West Still Doesn’t Get It
__________________
Hebrews 3:4 - For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God.

John 8:47 - "He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”
-
"True Believers never, ever seek the support of any atheist or unbeliever's interpretation of truth." - Sapphire

"I will not dignify an accusation or a mocker with a reply." - Sapphire
Sapphire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2012, 02:38 PM   #248
pgh69
Senior Member
 
pgh69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: pittsburgh, pa
Posts: 2,084
pgh69 always pays their child support on time
Default

I've made this request before, and I will reiterate it at this time...

Could we PLEASE limit the discussion in this thread to the glorious, unstoppable force that is sweeping America. Of course, I'm referring to the titular reference of the thread - Sharia Law.

Almost 2 years ago, Sapphire (quite accurately) predicted that Sharia Law would wreak destruction on the American political, cultural, and legal lanscape. My 5 wives would agree that she is a great prognosticator. Public schools now mandate Islamic prayer 5 tiems daily. Praise Allah that our "courts of law" have been replaced by Mullahs. And, as Sapphire so cogently predicted, the Statue of Liberty is indeed now wearing a burka. (And it was high time that god damn slut covered her face! I can finally look at her without being distracted with thoughts of how badly I wanted to fuck her.)

So, in short, stop polluting my favorite thread with talk of what's going on in Egypt or Syria or anywhere else for that matter. Let's use this thread for what it was intend - to celebrate Sharia Law, the craze that is continuing to sweep the nation.
__________________
What I believe is that all clear-minded people should remain two things throughout their lifetimes: Curious and teachable.

The late, great Roger Ebert

Last edited by pgh69; 12-12-2012 at 02:39 PM.
pgh69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 04:13 PM   #249
Sapphire
Senior Member
 
Sapphire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Arizona
Posts: 6,294
Sapphire recently placed 2nd in a local hot wings-eating contest
Default After capturing the Democrats, Muslim Brotherhood goes after...by Dr. History


After capturing the Democrats, Muslim Brotherhood goes after Republican Party

FYI – Do we cave or resist? There should be no doubt, if you value the US Constitution, Judeo-Christian values and our unique exceptionalism based on (as Dennis Prager so aptly puts it – “Liberty, In God We Trust” and “E Pluribus Unum”!!


Link:
U.S. Muslim Brotherhood smells blood, tells GOP engage Muslims, abandon opposition to sharia

Posted on December 10, 2012 by creeping
The GOP is imploding and the bevy of Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood groups in the U.S. smell blood. Will any politician of any party stand up to the infiltration?
via The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report » U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Asks GOP To Reach Out To Muslims.
Another pseudo coalitions of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood has announced that it has published a full page advertisement calling on the Republican Party to “reach out to Muslim voters by rejecting anti-Islam bias and discriminatory legislation. According to the announcement:
WASHINGTON, Dec. 5, 2012 — /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ – A coalition of 11 major American Muslim organizations* today called on the Republican Party to reach out to Muslim voters by rejecting anti-Islam bias and discriminatory legislation. At a noon news conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., the coalition announced the publication of a full-page advertisement in the conservative Washington Times newspaper outlining recent examples of intolerant speech and actions by Republicans and offering recommendations to help improve GOP relations with the Muslim community. That open letter to the GOP states in part:
‘We are writing to offer an open invitation to reassess your party’s current relationship with American Muslims. As with other demographics, American Muslim support for Republicans has dropped precipitously in recent years. This shift away from the GOP is not set in stone, but its future direction is dependent on choices your party makes.’
Recommendations for GOP leaders outlined in the open letter include:
  • The party establishment should speak out strongly against biased speech within its ranks
  • The party should make a concerted effort to engage Muslim voters.
  • The party establishment should oppose efforts to pass discriminatory legislation.
  • The party establishment should reject any member’s effort to use official public forums to smear a minority.
  • Party officials should end the persistent witch-hunt targeting legally operating Muslim institutions.
The coalition’s letter concludes by stating:
‘Let us all work together to maintain America’s leadership in support of emerging democracies and the rule of law worldwide by promoting the humanitarian principles enshrined in our Constitution’s Bill of Rights. May God Almighty bless the United States of America.’
A similar statement of American Muslim concerns will be addressed to the Democratic Party in the near future.
Last month, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, released the results of an informal exit poll indicating that more than 85 percent of American Muslim voters picked President Obama in the November 6 election.
Past posts have stated that one of the most ubiquitous tactics of the Global Muslim Brotherhood is the establishment of a dizzying number of organizations and initiatives and which create the impression of broad based support when, in reality, the sponsors are the same individuals and groups whose leaders have not changed in many years. Consistent with this tactic, of the eleven signatories to the letter, seven are organizations that are part of the the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood including:
  • American Muslim Alliance (AMA)
  • American Muslims for Palestine (AMP)
  • American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections (AMT)
  • Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
  • Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA)
  • ICNA Council for Social Justice (CSJ)
  • Muslim American Society Public Affairs and Civic Engagement (MAS-PACE)
CAIR, ICNA, and the MAS have all been identified as part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. The AMT includes CAIR, ICNA, and the MAS as well as the AMA so in essence, the same organizations are counted three times. It should also noted that in 2004, the coordinator, of the AMT was identified as Agha Saeed chairman of the American Muslim Alliance (AMA) which in turn was part of the American Muslim Political Coordination Council, both organizations representing earlier U.S. Brotherhood electoral coalitions. GMBDR notes a further elaboration of the coalition tactic as two parts of the same organization (ICNA) are counted as individual coalition members.
Past posts have discussed the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas ties of the AMP.

As one national security professional stated:
“If the enemy controls what you’re allowed to say about him, you’re already losing.”

We are losing. One percent of the population never held so much influence – and never had such vast, never-ending financial resources.
__________________
Hebrews 3:4 - For every house is built by someone, but He who built all things is God.

John 8:47 - "He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”
-
"True Believers never, ever seek the support of any atheist or unbeliever's interpretation of truth." - Sapphire

"I will not dignify an accusation or a mocker with a reply." - Sapphire
Sapphire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2012, 08:12 PM   #250
Stevomeo
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Outta Here
Posts: 2,839
Stevomeo has one green dot.  Good for them!
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sapphire View Post

After capturing the Democrats, Muslim Brotherhood goes after Republican Party

FYI – Do we cave or resist? There should be no doubt, if you value the US Constitution, Judeo-Christian values and our unique exceptionalism based on (as Dennis Prager so aptly puts it – “Liberty, In God We Trust” and “E Pluribus Unum”!!


Link:
U.S. Muslim Brotherhood smells blood, tells GOP engage Muslims, abandon opposition to sharia

Posted on December 10, 2012 by creeping
The GOP is imploding and the bevy of Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood groups in the U.S. smell blood. Will any politician of any party stand up to the infiltration?
via The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report » U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Asks GOP To Reach Out To Muslims.
Another pseudo coalitions of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood has announced that it has published a full page advertisement calling on the Republican Party to “reach out to Muslim voters by rejecting anti-Islam bias and discriminatory legislation. According to the announcement:
WASHINGTON, Dec. 5, 2012 — /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ – A coalition of 11 major American Muslim organizations* today called on the Republican Party to reach out to Muslim voters by rejecting anti-Islam bias and discriminatory legislation. At a noon news conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., the coalition announced the publication of a full-page advertisement in the conservative Washington Times newspaper outlining recent examples of intolerant speech and actions by Republicans and offering recommendations to help improve GOP relations with the Muslim community. That open letter to the GOP states in part:
‘We are writing to offer an open invitation to reassess your party’s current relationship with American Muslims. As with other demographics, American Muslim support for Republicans has dropped precipitously in recent years. This shift away from the GOP is not set in stone, but its future direction is dependent on choices your party makes.’
Recommendations for GOP leaders outlined in the open letter include:
  • The party establishment should speak out strongly against biased speech within its ranks
  • The party should make a concerted effort to engage Muslim voters.
  • The party establishment should oppose efforts to pass discriminatory legislation.
  • The party establishment should reject any member’s effort to use official public forums to smear a minority.
  • Party officials should end the persistent witch-hunt targeting legally operating Muslim institutions.
The coalition’s letter concludes by stating:
‘Let us all work together to maintain America’s leadership in support of emerging democracies and the rule of law worldwide by promoting the humanitarian principles enshrined in our Constitution’s Bill of Rights. May God Almighty bless the United States of America.’
A similar statement of American Muslim concerns will be addressed to the Democratic Party in the near future.
Last month, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, released the results of an informal exit poll indicating that more than 85 percent of American Muslim voters picked President Obama in the November 6 election.
Past posts have stated that one of the most ubiquitous tactics of the Global Muslim Brotherhood is the establishment of a dizzying number of organizations and initiatives and which create the impression of broad based support when, in reality, the sponsors are the same individuals and groups whose leaders have not changed in many years. Consistent with this tactic, of the eleven signatories to the letter, seven are organizations that are part of the the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood including:
  • American Muslim Alliance (AMA)
  • American Muslims for Palestine (AMP)
  • American Muslim Taskforce on Civil Rights and Elections (AMT)
  • Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)
  • Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA)
  • ICNA Council for Social Justice (CSJ)
  • Muslim American Society Public Affairs and Civic Engagement (MAS-PACE)
CAIR, ICNA, and the MAS have all been identified as part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. The AMT includes CAIR, ICNA, and the MAS as well as the AMA so in essence, the same organizations are counted three times. It should also noted that in 2004, the coordinator, of the AMT was identified as Agha Saeed chairman of the American Muslim Alliance (AMA) which in turn was part of the American Muslim Political Coordination Council, both organizations representing earlier U.S. Brotherhood electoral coalitions. GMBDR notes a further elaboration of the coalition tactic as two parts of the same organization (ICNA) are counted as individual coalition members.
Past posts have discussed the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood/Hamas ties of the AMP.

As one national security professional stated:
“If the enemy controls what you’re allowed to say about him, you’re already losing.”

We are losing. One percent of the population never held so much influence – and never had such vast, never-ending financial resources.

Not to worry, the rest of us are still better armed and better equipped to defend the homeland.
__________________
"Democracy and liberty are not the same. Democracy is little more than mob rule, while liberty refers to the sovereignty of the individual." - Walter Williams

"Don't expect to build up the weak by pulling down the strong." - Calvin Coolidge

“Little by little, subtle changes will come until one day America will wake up and be Socialist; the Democrat Party has adopted our platform.” – Norman Thomas, 1944
Stevomeo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:29 AM.

© Copyright 2005 Evil Empire