you people are nuts. the reason is simple. this forum demonstrates it perfectly. people act too PC when it comes to muslims. if someone had sad something they would be called a racist. (like yall do to lowing and others) Dont say anything becuase you care about feelings and get people killed (you, cam, etc)Varegg wrote:
The US government infiltrate "cookie protester groups" but doesn't monitor a Major in the armed forces with clear indications of being connected to AQ?
That's not appeasement, it's stupidity ...
So, are you advocating that the US re-open the Manzanar Internment Camps ?Red Forman wrote:
you people are nuts. the reason is simple. this forum demonstrates it perfectly. people act too PC when it comes to muslims. if someone had sad something they would be called a racist. (like yall do to lowing and others) Dont say anything becuase you care about feelings and get people killed (you, cam, etc)Varegg wrote:
The US government infiltrate "cookie protester groups" but doesn't monitor a Major in the armed forces with clear indications of being connected to AQ?
That's not appeasement, it's stupidity ...
yes thats it....Karbin wrote:
So, are you advocating that the US re-open the Manzanar Internment Camps ?Red Forman wrote:
you people are nuts. the reason is simple. this forum demonstrates it perfectly. people act too PC when it comes to muslims. if someone had sad something they would be called a racist. (like yall do to lowing and others) Dont say anything becuase you care about feelings and get people killed (you, cam, etc)Varegg wrote:
The US government infiltrate "cookie protester groups" but doesn't monitor a Major in the armed forces with clear indications of being connected to AQ?
That's not appeasement, it's stupidity ...
fuck sakes. will you go research what this guy said in the open and nobody said anything about it.
Yer right, I think appeasement, PC had everything to do with this. I would also add, that it would make sense to see where the surveillance of this guy would lead the authorities, a glimpse into how they communicate, their intentions, etc... I speculate of course.Poseidon wrote:
Sounds about right to me.LividBovine wrote:
Yeap.Poseidon wrote:
I can't for the life of me understand how the Army could KNOW he had contacts with AQ (or was atleast trying to) and still not do nothing.
I truly believe this was preventable.
Now for my Lowing moment:
They knew, but were to scared to call him out as a possible terrorist due to his Muslim faith. They were also scared about the bad press of calling out a Major in the military as being a terror suspect. Basically we are seeing the impact of an appeasement policy when it comes to Islam.
AmIdoinitrte?
And I'm someone who doesn't believe Islam is a violent faith, just a scapegoat for the violent. I'd definitely say it's appeasement. I don't get why they'd be worried about calling out ANYONE in the military who had AQ links. I don't care if it's David fucking Patraeus, if they're trying to contact AQ why wouldn't you do something about it? Only explanation I can think of is that they didn't want the press making it seem like AQ had infiltrated that deep into the military. Little fucking late now, eh?
Poseidon, not sure how Islam is being scapegoated when all of this is done in the name of Islam and celebrated by members of the faith, within our own country. Islam is not a scapegoat. It is violent.
Unfortunately just about everything I have voiced concern over has happened and is being proven as a legitimate concern. Nope, not paranoia like I have been accused of so many times. A radical Islamic terrorist infiltrated our own military and committed an act of terrorism, while his actions are celebrated within the Islamic community by our fellow Americans. Who else is Muslim first, American second I wonder.
The threat is real.
I also would be amused that I am now largely ignored by those of you who berated me, (for my now very correct opinions), if it were under other circumstances.
Last edited by lowing (2009-11-10 09:40:40)
btw karbin you just demonstrated my point thank you
Last edited by Red Forman (2009-11-10 09:25:00)
You are correct, if I suggested that we profile, I would be called every name in the book. Wait a minute, I have suggested that, and I was called every name in the book.Red Forman wrote:
you people are nuts. the reason is simple. this forum demonstrates it perfectly. people act too PC when it comes to muslims. if someone had sad something they would be called a racist. (like yall do to lowing and others) Dont say anything becuase you care about feelings and get people killed (you, cam, etc)Varegg wrote:
The US government infiltrate "cookie protester groups" but doesn't monitor a Major in the armed forces with clear indications of being connected to AQ?
That's not appeasement, it's stupidity ...
I wonder where they stand on the subject now.
You people are unbelievable ... where is it written that we (myself, cam, mikkel etc etc) support radical muslims or the likes of them?lowing wrote:
You are correct, if I suggested that we profile, I would be called every name in the book. Wait a minute, I have suggested that, and I was called every name in the book.Red Forman wrote:
you people are nuts. the reason is simple. this forum demonstrates it perfectly. people act too PC when it comes to muslims. if someone had sad something they would be called a racist. (like yall do to lowing and others) Dont say anything becuase you care about feelings and get people killed (you, cam, etc)Varegg wrote:
The US government infiltrate "cookie protester groups" but doesn't monitor a Major in the armed forces with clear indications of being connected to AQ?
That's not appeasement, it's stupidity ...
I wonder where they stand on the subject now.
Investigate, profile, arrest and condemn them ... basically get rid of them, difference is we don't differentiate if the radicals are muslims, chistians or belong to any other religion or organisation ... you do. We don't generalize all muslims into your group of terrorists and radical zealots.
So the headlines are more worried about Islamic radicals and for a reason because at the moment those are what sells newspapers and the ongoing conflicts around the world is centered around the US vs the ME ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Never said you did support it. I say, yo are against profiling for it. You are against the Patriot Act. which is a tool used to do exactly that, profile, and spy on them.Varegg wrote:
You people are unbelievable ... where is it written that we (myself, cam, mikkel etc etc) support radical muslims or the likes of them?lowing wrote:
You are correct, if I suggested that we profile, I would be called every name in the book. Wait a minute, I have suggested that, and I was called every name in the book.Red Forman wrote:
you people are nuts. the reason is simple. this forum demonstrates it perfectly. people act too PC when it comes to muslims. if someone had sad something they would be called a racist. (like yall do to lowing and others) Dont say anything becuase you care about feelings and get people killed (you, cam, etc)
I wonder where they stand on the subject now.
Investigate, profile, arrest and condemn them ... basically get rid of them, difference is we don't differentiate if the radicals are muslims, chistians or belong to any other religion or organisation ... you do. We don't generalize all muslims into your group of terrorists and radical zealots.
So the headlines are more worried about Islamic radicals and for a reason because at the moment those are what sells newspapers and the ongoing conflicts around the world is centered around the US vs the ME ...
I don't differentiate either, I do not like any radical group, but you are crazy if you think the only reason Islam has our attention because it sells newspapers. It has our attention because right now it is a real threat, and the greatest danger to our society.
and what you do, is deny that Islam is any sort of problem at all. That Islam ain't got nothing t odo with it. That it is only a few bad apples and nothing more. This is your head in the sand, and this latest attack and its celebration among American Muslims, kinda proves that.
Yes I'm against the patriot act lowing because there is nothing patriotic about it ... we've been through all that mumbo jumbo before in several threads.
And I didn't say the reason for our attention is because it sells newspaper, read it again lowing ... I said the headlines sells newspapers and right now throwing some hate against the Muslims on the frontpage makes it easier to sell them and to dig in the "fact" that Muslims are bad ... making the US populace afraid of Muslims in general ...
And I didn't say the reason for our attention is because it sells newspaper, read it again lowing ... I said the headlines sells newspapers and right now throwing some hate against the Muslims on the frontpage makes it easier to sell them and to dig in the "fact" that Muslims are bad ... making the US populace afraid of Muslims in general ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
comes in cycles ......... Japs in WWII now its muslims ....... details may be different but same goal
its a new war front we are living in and its happening all around us ........................ we need more accountablity
its a new war front we are living in and its happening all around us ........................ we need more accountablity
The question was asked, not to cattle prod you but, to find YOUR position on what should be done with U.S. citizens of the muslim faith.Red Forman wrote:
yes thats it....Karbin wrote:
So, are you advocating that the US re-open the Manzanar Internment Camps ?Red Forman wrote:
you people are nuts. the reason is simple. this forum demonstrates it perfectly. people act too PC when it comes to muslims. if someone had sad something they would be called a racist. (like yall do to lowing and others) Dont say anything becuase you care about feelings and get people killed (you, cam, etc)
fuck sakes. will you go research what this guy said in the open and nobody said anything about it.
All of them.
Would you revoke citizens right to Amendment 1 or 14 based on their faith alone?
IMO everyone in that vid should, at the least, be on a watch list if not deported.
But then you will have a problem with the court orders.
Last edited by Karbin (2009-11-10 13:01:51)
So someone says this guy should have been called out before this happened. Now you want to know if they want to put all the Muslims into camps so we can a better eye on them.
The simple point is that anyone who is talking the way this guy was, and with who he was talking with should be watched a lot closer. I don't care if it was a Jew, Muslim, or Christian.
The simple point is that anyone who is talking the way this guy was, and with who he was talking with should be watched a lot closer. I don't care if it was a Jew, Muslim, or Christian.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
Yes I know, you speak of defeating them through intel, yet you condemn the means it takes to gather the intel.Varegg wrote:
Yes I'm against the patriot act lowing because there is nothing patriotic about it ... we've been through all that mumbo jumbo before in several threads.
And I didn't say the reason for our attention is because it sells newspaper, read it again lowing ... I said the headlines sells newspapers and right now throwing some hate against the Muslims on the frontpage makes it easier to sell them and to dig in the "fact" that Muslims are bad ... making the US populace afraid of Muslims in general ...
No one is hating on Muslims, they are hating on Islam, and for a god damn good reason. The proof is all over Ft Hood. Islam makes it easier to hate Islam and nothing else
Headline Roundup: Troubled American Psychiatrist Allegedly Turns Gun on Warmongers at Ft. Hood...
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/dburg … t-ft-hood/
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/dburg … t-ft-hood/
Love is the answer
Haven't read all the pages, but Obama gets to decide where the trial and whether this is a Military trial. I for one hope its at Fort Hood (TEXAS)...
Wow, he has that power?Harmor wrote:
Haven't read all the pages, but Obama gets to decide where the trial and whether this is a Military trial. I for one hope its at Fort Hood (TEXAS)...
I'd have thought the military jurisdiction would have that right considering the location, those involved, etc.
Or does he just have the power to overrule?
He does not make that decision on his own afaik.. although it makes sense seeing as he is Chief Executive and CINC.AussieReaper wrote:
Wow, he has that power?Harmor wrote:
Haven't read all the pages, but Obama gets to decide where the trial and whether this is a Military trial. I for one hope its at Fort Hood (TEXAS)...
I'd have thought the military jurisdiction would have that right considering the location, those involved, etc.
Or does he just have the power to overrule?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/200 … itary.htmlFederal officials said Monday evening that alleged Ft. Hood Army Base mass killer, Major Nidal Hasan, will be tried by a military court.
NPR's Tom Gjelten reported on the reason for that move:
The decision of whether Nidal Hasan should be tried in federal or military court hinged in part on what charges would be brought against him. Were he to be tried for terrorism, federal prosecutors might want to pursue him.
But senior US officials say the fact that Hasan is an Army officer accused of killing other soldiers on an Army post mean it's appropriate for him to be tried in a military court.
FBI officials are assisting in the investigation of the shooting spree at Fort Hood. So far, the officials say, there is no evidence Hasan was directed by anyone else to carry out the massacre or that he had any conspirators.
The officials say they quote "took a look" at Hasan in recent months because of communications with an unnamed individual who espoused radical views. But their concerns did not rise to a level warranting further investigation, the officials say.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
I'm sure you remember the David Koresh incident years back, where a few cops/agents got shot? So that proves Christianity is violent does it? Might as well face it that almost all religions CAN be used for evil, it's not just Islam. One madman who kills 'in the name of God X' doesn't mean anything about the religion. Of course it IS true that all orgainsed religions are just bullshit and fantasy dresed up in old, portentous books. But that's beside the point, at least a bit.lowing wrote:
Yes I know, you speak of defeating them through intel, yet you condemn the means it takes to gather the intel.
No one is hating on Muslims, they are hating on Islam, and for a god damn good reason. The proof is all over Ft Hood. Islam makes it easier to hate Islam and nothing else
Come again, sorryKmarion wrote:
Were the Qurayza Jews western?
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
lol... FEOS is now an imam. He can open his own madrasah teaching Quran science.FEOS wrote:
You have to understand that the concept of what takes precedence in the Bible and in the Qu'ran is different. The Qu'ran is written from longest to shortest surah (or vice versa), not from oldest to newest. Thus, the most recent revelations to Muhammad are not always the ones latest in the book...but the ones appearing latest take precedence, just as in the Bible.
So, if you have a very peace-filled, love everyone surah that was revealed after a shorter, hate and blood, "kill the infidel" one...guess which one takes precedence? It would be like having some of that bad Deuteronomy shit right in the middle of the New Testament.
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
You want to explain it to us then? You know, so we don't screw it up. Not defending any religion here, just want the facts from the most reliable source and all.Beduin wrote:
lol... FEOS is now an imam. He can open his own madrasah teaching Quran science.FEOS wrote:
You have to understand that the concept of what takes precedence in the Bible and in the Qu'ran is different. The Qu'ran is written from longest to shortest surah (or vice versa), not from oldest to newest. Thus, the most recent revelations to Muhammad are not always the ones latest in the book...but the ones appearing latest take precedence, just as in the Bible.
So, if you have a very peace-filled, love everyone surah that was revealed after a shorter, hate and blood, "kill the infidel" one...guess which one takes precedence? It would be like having some of that bad Deuteronomy shit right in the middle of the New Testament.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation" - Barack Obama (a freshman senator from Illinios)
http://tinyurl.com/yf2oxy9Beduin wrote:
Come again, sorryKmarion wrote:
Were the Qurayza Jews western?
It was a response to
Dilbert_X wrote:
So has Islam always been radical or is radicalism a response to Western bullying?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Your point?Kmarion wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/yf2oxy9Beduin wrote:
Come again, sorryKmarion wrote:
Were the Qurayza Jews western?
It was a response toDilbert_X wrote:
So has Islam always been radical or is radicalism a response to Western bullying?
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
I wanna have some fun with FEOS... Cause he will prove what he claims...I hopeLividBovine wrote:
You want to explain it to us then? You know, so we don't screw it up. Not defending any religion here, just want the facts from the most reliable source and all.Beduin wrote:
lol... FEOS is now an imam. He can open his own madrasah teaching Quran science.FEOS wrote:
You have to understand that the concept of what takes precedence in the Bible and in the Qu'ran is different. The Qu'ran is written from longest to shortest surah (or vice versa), not from oldest to newest. Thus, the most recent revelations to Muhammad are not always the ones latest in the book...but the ones appearing latest take precedence, just as in the Bible.
So, if you have a very peace-filled, love everyone surah that was revealed after a shorter, hate and blood, "kill the infidel" one...guess which one takes precedence? It would be like having some of that bad Deuteronomy shit right in the middle of the New Testament.
الشعب يريد اسقاط النظام
...show me the schematic
...show me the schematic
Understandably you don't get it.. since you are jumping into something that was not addressed to you. My point is in there.. look for it.Beduin wrote:
Your point?Kmarion wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/yf2oxy9Beduin wrote:
Come again, sorry
It was a response toDilbert_X wrote:
So has Islam always been radical or is radicalism a response to Western bullying?
Xbone Stormsurgezz