Article

2006-10-22 Britain

Al-Qaeda is winning the war of ideas, says Reid

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by tipper 2006-10-22 00:20|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 we could just end islamic immigration.

but yes: if we cannot even win the war of ideas at home in a pluralist democracy we have NO chance of killing it at the root.

I think it doesn't respond to western tactics. it is the borg of religions.

Posted by anon1 2006-10-22 01:43|| 2006-10-22 01:43|| Front Page Top

#2 He called for an urgent but controversial escalation in the propaganda war and said al-Qaeda's so-called "single extremist narrative" was proving ever more attractive to young British Muslims.

Making sure that more jihadist imams and Muslims were arrested and abruptly deported back to their toturing homelands might make this "single extremist narrative" a little less appealing. So long as you coddle the fanatics, what's the incentive for them to integrate or pacify? Idiots.

Screw this "hearts and minds" bullshit. Go straight for the short and curlies.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 02:04|| 2006-10-22 02:04|| Front Page Top

#3 Talk about losing your way... The Brits have got a legacy of getting behind the right big idea that goes at least as far back as the Magna Carta. Forget funding islamo-pablum. They need to get in touch with their history--and stuff it down newcomer's throats if need be.

Posted by Classical_Liberal 2006-10-22 02:06|| 2006-10-22 02:06|| Front Page Top

#4 If the Government was serious about ending enemy propaganda it could do worse than to start with rolling heads at the BBC. At least some members of the Government have a good grasp of the problem, but the state-funded multi-culti scold that is the Beeb has always made them and othe rpoliticians suffer for speaking anything except inane platitiudes about the problems of Islam.

A plebiscite would no doubt back an end to Muslim immigration.

Mind you, if the police were actually interested in the business of stamping out crime rather than adhering to moronic political correctness, maybe more young people, Muslim or not, would have more respect for our society.

Posted by Bulldog 2006-10-22 02:40|| 2006-10-22 02:40|| Front Page Top

#5 Heh, BD's all over it. :-)

Posted by .com 2006-10-22 04:31|| 2006-10-22 04:31|| Front Page Top

#6 Al Qaeda is not winning anything. Its professional supporters in the institutional media are providing billions in free propaganda and they are the real winners in this conflict.
The same media-based totalitarian forces that agitate for open borders in the United States, and who have made it a crime to point out that illegal voting is illegal, have brainwashed millions into accepting AQ as a kind of civil rights NGO.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2006-10-22 05:09|| 2006-10-22 05:09|| Front Page Top

#7 You are absolutelyright AC, but it isn't that the point?

For all our victories they steal the significance away because they(the LLL and Arab media) don't want us to win. it makes each victory feel (while significant on the ground) like a pyrrhic victory.
I feel we can't win in the media, we can kill them all, give them soccer balls, take and hold hold ground but we are "bushchimpymchitlers".

If half the country wasn't actively working against us it would be a hell of a lot easier.

Pentagon is damn right we need to get out in front of this part of the war. You can't blame them for not suspecting the LLL's would turn on them in the beginning but we are going on years now and still playing catch up.

I hear a lot of talk of this, so maybe it is the DOD pounding the drums but it's necessary . Most Americans don't know the heroes in this war, but they know the enemy and "empathize" and blame us on top of it Hell CNN just showed a jihadi sniper vid the other day, when is the last time you saw anything about the MOH candidates. It's disgusting , but that's where we are

Posted by Dunno 2006-10-22 05:23|| 2006-10-22 05:23|| Front Page Top

#8 Most Muslims appear to be on line with OBL. They want Westerners out of the Mohammadan junk states; and they want to come to the West. At the start of WW1 there were only a handful of independent Muslim majority countries, and most of those were leveraged by the UK and France. That can happen again, only Uncle Sam would play the lead role.

Posted by Snease Shaiting3550 2006-10-22 06:18|| 2006-10-22 06:18|| Front Page Top

#9 One of the biggest ironies of the whole debate is that I have heard it all before!

Instead of "Moslems", substitute "communists".

"They" are all communists. "They" don't want democracy. "They" can't handle democracy.

"The communists are winning the propaganda war."

"Everywhere you look, the communists are winning and democracy and capitalism is losing." (Well, that part was true, at least during the Carter administration.)

Granted, it's not an exact analogy. But if you look at the left, they are just as weak-kneed and ineffectual before Islam as they were before communism. If it was up to them, by now the US would be sending tribute to prop up the utterly decrepit Soviet Union, desperately trying to save communism "because what will replace it will be worse!"

And Islam isn't even a political movement. It is just a ragtag bunch of fanatics and dictators who have been bossing around everybody else for so long that they accept it.

One of our big mistakes has been to treat their instigator priests like they were political leaders who shouldn't be killed, because we don't kill political leaders. In fact, had we started blasting Imams and Mullahs from the start it could have saved thousands of lives. A loud mouth should be a death sentence.

But I am sick of the insistance that we in the West are so weak and pitiful, that we have no tools or intestinal fortitude or strength and endurance, or just anything, that we can be pushed over by any squalid peasant who says he can.

And just as bad, that somehow even though there are pictures of American celebrities for sale on t-shirts in every corner of the globe, somehow *they* are getting out *their* message, and we aren't.

Bah. Been there. Done that.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-10-22 09:17|| 2006-10-22 09:17|| Front Page Top

#10 Reid has won the war of "who's the biggest asshole".

Posted by bigjim-ky 2006-10-22 09:32|| 2006-10-22 09:32|| Front Page Top

#11 And Islam isn't even a political movement.

Bullshit. It claims to be the way to organize your life from the biggest questions of existence down to how you wipe your ass. That includes the organization of the state and the application of justice.

It's a totalitarian political system masquerading as a religion, not a religion with a political slant.

Posted by Rob Crawford">Rob Crawford 2006-10-22 09:41|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2006-10-22 09:41|| Front Page Top

#12 Rob: It isn't a political movement, and Sharia isn't a form of government; Islam is government by whim.

It is the opposite of order. It is enforced chaos. Might makes right at the spur of the moment.

What law there is invariably finds in favor of the strong against the weak. It is even written on the fly, again by whim. Spur of the moment arrest, trial and conviction all by the same gunman.

The appearance of order exists solely to oppose order, to tear down order and restore whim to the fore.

Even in the Ottoman Empire, organization was more like a criminal mafia, with all people acting solely to support the great leader. Any bureaucracy was based on the leader's needs and desires. All property was owned by the leader.

In most of the Moslem world, the order seen is really a reflection or extrapolation of tribal order to a national level. It is not inherent to Islam.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-10-22 13:42|| 2006-10-22 13:42|| Front Page Top

#13 We need a pic of Reid in an Arab headdreen. Photoshop anyone?

Al

Posted by frozen Al 2006-10-22 13:48|| 2006-10-22 13:48|| Front Page Top

#14 I'll second you on that one, RC. Islam is political. It is most definitely a political ideology masquerading as a pseudo-religion. Due to its ostensibly religious underpinnings, Islam represents a new order of threat. It is one that combines the most dangerous elements of Nazism, communism and religious zealotry.

Islam seeks global domination while pursuing Nazi genocide against the Jews. Like communism, it regards Western civilization as decadent (or bourgeois) and regards itself as a means of "liberating" (read: enslaving) us ideologically impure secularists. All of this is driven by a deeply imbedded conviction of religious ascendancy and self-declared supremacy despite outright barbarism and Abject Gender Apartheid (hat tip VDH).

This triumvirate of exceptionally toxic memes is propelled by obsessive xenophobia and an eggshell collective ego utterly incapable of even minor introspection. Corralled by a dictatorial clergy and benighted by its doctrinal one-trick-pony of Koranic lore we are confronted with a cult of death worshipers eager to take insult and humiliated by the slightest setback. Nonetheless, we are expected to treat with them as honorable equals even as they grant themselves the God-given right to lie and deceive at every last turn.

The net result is a Global Cultural Genocide that would easily see half this entire world's population perish at Islam's behest. Every single aspect of Western decency, courtesy, kindness, humanity and tolerance are all turned against us in the most vicious manner imaginable. Yet, at every turn we are coerced by incessant demands to show respect for Islam even at the cost of sacrificing our hardest won liberties and freedoms.

Islam's monumental hubris brooks no coexistence nor tolerates any reversal of faith under pain of death. Glorying in the slaughter of innocents and foe alike it is a Juggernaut of retrograde forces that threatens centuries of the free World's progress. Cosseted by adherents of component ideologies, Islam has gained a solid foothold in socialist Europe. America's open door has allowed its tendrils to take root in our own free soil as well.

If we in the West are to survive, a dramatic reversal must be visited upon the House of Islam. Nonviolent tactics of expulsion and containment rapidly are becoming irrelevant in the face of overwhelming numbers and skewed demographics. Islam's obsession with weapons of mass destruction has combined with a decentralized global body of religious fanatics who will stop at nothing, even massive loss of Muslim life, if it achieves their desperate ends.

The time approaches where a line in the sand must be drawn against further incursion. Even a single trespass of that boundary's outermost limits must be greeted with horrific retribution. Unimaginably ghastly atrocities will repay any reluctance upon our own part in making good with such reprisal. Those among us who doubt the measure of danger we face may well need to be isolated from society as an internal threat to the public weal. The apocalyptic nature of Islam's aggression has imposed eschatological dimensions that remove this conflict far beyond the realm of all previously known military confrontations. Only when the West finally accepts this crucial strategic paradigm shift will we have any chance of survival.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 13:49|| 2006-10-22 13:49|| Front Page Top

#15 'moose, while your attribution has merit, one does not wage war against "whim". For all intents and purposes, Islam must be addressed as a political ideology. Giving it any benefit of religious credibility completely undermines the measures required to quell this virulent threat.

Yes, much of Islam's implementation is based upon whim. This in no way changes how we must counter it with military force. When whim is enthroned as a supreme dictate, it becomes just as dangerous as any other self-arrogating political mandamus.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 14:01|| 2006-10-22 14:01|| Front Page Top

#16 I'm going to disagree here as I did on the West Point thread.

Like it or not, Islam is a religion. By any generally agreed on definition of the term.

NOW .... it is a religion that some believe demands there should be no division between religious teachings and secular government. In that, it is little different from, say, the Christianity of the middle ages in western Europe.

We got past that. Will they? I don't know -- but it took the west several long nasty wars to settle the issue. It's not surprising it is taking more than a couple years to settle it within Islam.

The Islamacists must not be allowed to ACT on their intent to impose Islam on the West. They must not be allowed to ACT on their desire to subjate women, forbid criticism of their beliefs and actions or kill those who leave Islam. And they must not be allowed to have, proliferate or use WMDs.

period.

All of those things I believe quite firmly. But none of them changes the fact that Islam is a legitimate religion.

Whether all those who profess to be acting out of Islamic convictions are in fact doing so is a separate issue. I doubt that most of the Palestinian leaders are -- certainly not in Fatah and in most cases not in Hamas. They would be much more dangerous to us if they were, frankly.

But if you refuse to acknowledge that Islam is held by many as a religious conviction, you do two things:

First, you agree with the Islamacists that every Muslim is inherently in conflict with the West, and

Second, you deeply misunderstand and underestimate what we are up against.

I've said it here at RB before and I'll repeat it again: Islam is gaining converts in the West among those not born to muslim families. Refusing to understand that fact, and why it is happening is a recipe for losing the West to Islam over the next decades.

Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 14:12|| 2006-10-22 14:12|| Front Page Top

#17 One historical correction. In traditional Islamic societies, the so-called whim of the Caliph or Sheikh was subject to substantial limitations. Bernard Lewis' books describe the way in which those checks and balances work, in some detail.

Lewis - who is no apologist for muslim radicals - points out that we have created some of the problems in muslim countries, by demanding they adopt governments that operate via formal laws along the lines of post-Englightenment Europe. This dismantled the checks and balances on rulers, but did not instill the whole cultural apparatus that makes government by law and by vote WORK for us. The result was the House of Saud, Saddam and the Mullahs in Iran -- absolute rulers who really can govern at a whim.

Clearly the old cultural mechanisms are not sustainable. Not in a world with 24 hour international banking and stock trading, with the internet, with television.

But it's a mistake to ignore the ways in which muslim cultures worked when they were not pressured by the West as they are today. Ignoring that history means failing to understand the excruciating set of negotiations going on among the factions in Iraq, for instance.

Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 14:21|| 2006-10-22 14:21|| Front Page Top

#18 The leaders of islam say the word means "submission". What it actually means is "surrender" - all your individual freedoms, all your personal desires, all your LIFE - to the whim of the masters - the imams and mullahs who decide how islam is to be enforced. It is a totalitarian regime that includes politics, religion, and every other aspect of life, and subjugates them all to the will of a few. It is not a religion, but a cult. It needs to be totally eradicated - either by force or peaceful means - but it can no longer be tolerated by freedom-loving individuals.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2006-10-22 15:01|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2006-10-22 15:01|| Front Page Top

#19 Well, you can try. Good luck with that.

I'm not ready for the "eradication" path myself. It might come to that, but those inside it must be given the chance to change it -- or to reject changing it.

And I think your description is an exaggeration of the state of things for many muslims. For some, yes. But not all, not even the majority of muslims are under the thumb of mullahs and imams that way.

That's why the Wahabis and Salafists are up in arms, literally. Because they WANT that to be the case and it isn't.

Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 15:06|| 2006-10-22 15:06|| Front Page Top

#20 First, you agree with the Islamacists that every Muslim is inherently in conflict with the West

lotp, I once felt as you did. Such is no longer the case. FIVE SOLID YEARS of Thundering Silence from the supposedly moderate Muslim world has forced me to take them at their word and believe that their stance on terrorism is either tacit or overt. The overwhelming dearth of condemnation for terrorism amongst Muslim societies gives me no other choice.

Feel free to call Islam a religion. Thank goodness we live in a country where we are free to disagree, unlike so many Muslim utopias. I just so happen to believe that no substantial progress will be made until we begin treating Islam as a political entity.

THEY CANNOT SIMULTANEOUSLY DECLARE MILITARY WAR AND STILL CLAIM RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION.

This is what they are doing and the amount of internal dissent over it is so negligible as to be essentially nil.

So long as Islam continues to weaponize all the valuable aspects of Western culture in order to turn them against us, they are fighting a military war and do not deserve any religious status.

Yes, it took centuries for Christianity to sort out its theocratic leanings. That was in an age of crude technology and limited means of transportation. Those buffers have long since fallen by the wayside and we are confronted with an ideology that has no compunctions about slaughtering unbelievers like so many cattle and is actively seeking the weapons to do just that.

I will not stand for giving such barbaric fanatics any mantle of religious righteousness. Until they show themselves to be capable of tolerance, coexistence and especially respect for women, they are merely a bunch of violent savages who refuse to adapt to a modern world but somehow allow themselves to cherrypick moral justification for the most evil conduct imaginable.

Call Islam a "religion" if you will, but you risk cloaking a murderous death cult with vestiges of respectability it has yet to earn by any honest measure. The level of reformation required to rehabilitate Islam is akin to a full body transplant where only one original component exits the surgical theater. Islam will survive in name alone if it is to become compatible with the outside world. Should Islam fail to do so it must be eradicated like the disease it is.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 16:30|| 2006-10-22 16:30|| Front Page Top

#21 A CD to turn the tide? How foolish!

Unless the CD contains a listening device and option of exploding.

Posted by Captain America 2006-10-22 16:46|| 2006-10-22 16:46|| Front Page Top

#22 "Call Islam a "religion" if you will, but you risk cloaking a murderous death cult with vestiges of respectability it has yet to earn by any honest measure."

Amen to that.

I'll start treating Islam as a religion when "submission to the will of God" no longer means "submission to the will of man."

Until then, I refuse to treat it as anything other than a cult.

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2006-10-22 16:49|| 2006-10-22 16:49|| Front Page Top

#23 FIVE SOLID YEARS of Thundering Silence from the supposedly moderate Muslim world has forced me to take them at their word and believe that their stance on terrorism is either tacit or overt

The voices are there. They are few and haven't exactly dominated the discussion, but they're there.

You lump muslim women who suffer honor rapes in Pakistan and Africa along with the jihadis. You lump moderate muslims I know who are working to educate their people, to build stable civil structures, to build working economies in their homeland ... you lump them in with Mulla Krakkar.

I'm not willing to do that. I know what they are risking and what they believe.

Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 16:58|| 2006-10-22 16:58|| Front Page Top

#24 A large plurality of Muslims speak out against terror in: Algeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, and Jordan. But, frankly, the closer you get to Saudi Arabia and Iran, the more extreme the political culture. Pakistan's only jihad-critical publication, Daily Times, gets posted on the blogs more than any other Muslim news source (including al-Jazeera, Dar al-Hayat and al-Ahram). Fred Pruitt is a Daily Times reader.

Posted by Snease Shaiting3550 2006-10-22 18:42|| 2006-10-22 18:42|| Front Page Top

#25 Too GI JOE was still on TV, versus al-Qaida.

America needs new heros on TV, I see more noble Jihadist or oppressessed revolutionaries with a dream on TV more than true Patriots.

Posted by Jesing Ebbease3087 2006-10-22 19:23|| 2006-10-22 19:23|| Front Page Top

#26 The voices are there. They are few and haven't exactly dominated the discussion, but they're there.

With five years under their collective belt they are ineffectual at best and tacitly complicit at worst. If these "moderate" individuals were truly determined to salvage their faith, there would be a lot more mysterious killings of jihadist imams and terrorist recruiters. Instead, there are literally zero such events and only more atrocities.

By dint of their flaccid rebuttal of terrorism, I am forced to begin advocating the dismantling of their church and am further obliged to repudiate any attribution of honorable religion to their creed's practice.

You lump muslim women who suffer honor rapes in Pakistan and Africa along with the jihadis.

That is a below-the-belt shot and you know it, lotp. By now, you are more than familiar with my resolute detestation of Islam specifically for its institutionalized abuse of women. While they may be unwilling participants in Islam's continuation, they assist in its propagation nonetheless.

Utilizing the Nazi metaphor, during WWII Allied forces were occasionally obliged to bomb concentration camps, killing many innocent internees in the process. This was done to interdict weapons manufacturing being performed at those sites.

Muslim women are much like those internees. They assist in the promotion of radical Islam even as they are subjugated. We have no way of gently prizing apart these marginally less cooperative members from those who seek to do us harm.

As I have mentioned before, NOWHERE are we obliged to meticulously harrow through Islam's practicioners in an attempt to isolate and prosecute the jihadists in their midst. In fact, this goes entirely to the heart of the criminal prosecution model that is so deeply flawed.

We simply DO NOT have the time, manpower or material resources to segregate the offending members of this totalitarian ideology. Neither are we required to do so in our attempts at preserving our hard won progress against the onslaught of these barbarians.

While it is all fine and noble to consider it important that we delicately sort through these BILLION AND A HALF potential terrorists, doing so will consume enough time alone, that our demise is guaranteed by such foolishness. Many people, possibly you included, lotp, feel as though we have the luxury of time on our side when it comes to swaying those ostensibly moderate Muslims who sit upon the fence. I speak for those who have decided that time is wasting.

As .com and others, including myself, have repeatedly pointed out; Those fence-sitters are the source of enormous wealth in the form of zakat flowing into jihadist coffers on a daily basis. Even as we attempt to recruit these putatively neutral parties, they are unconciously or overtly funding our demise.

You lump moderate muslims I know who are working to educate their people, to build stable civil structures, to build working economies in their homeland ... you lump them in with Mulla Krakkar.

I have no choice. Their collective inaction against something so blatantly hideous as terrorism mandates that I must. It is not up to me that they must take action. It is up to them and so little has occured to stem the onslaught of terrorism that it is now time to begin eradicating this virulent threat to all we know and love. This is not fearmongering. This a RATIONAL and SURVIVAL-BASED decision.

Whatever there are of so-called moderate Muslims, they obviously do not give a fucking damn about my survival. Elsewise they would have long ago begun offing these violent thugs in their midst who threaten their very existence along with my own. Instead, they choose to remain silent and thrust the decision into my hands. I have made my decision and it is THAT I SHALL LIVE EVEN IF THEY MUST DIE.

Let me assure you that I will lose not a moment of sleep over this choice.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 21:50|| 2006-10-22 21:50|| Front Page Top

#27 spoken gently:

You do have a choice. Your response IS a choice. You are not compelled.

It may be a good choice or a bad one. But it is a choice, as was the bombing of concentration camps and other such decisions.

Posted by lotp 2006-10-22 21:56|| 2006-10-22 21:56|| Front Page Top

#28 FIVE SOLID YEARS of Thundering Silence from the supposedly moderate Muslim world

You must've missed this:

Muslims must accept some blame for anti-Islam views: Mubarak

Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 22:29|| 2006-10-22 22:29|| Front Page Top

#29 facta, factor this,

rlity check: Until the world beats a path to your door to gather thy fartwas regarding the death cult called Mohammedanism, don't waste our bandwidth.

Posted by RD 2006-10-22 22:38|| 2006-10-22 22:38|| Front Page Top

#30 facta non verba, did you notice the terrorism-justifying language buried in Mubarak's statement? Go and find an article with his complete statement. From yesterday's "Mubarak: Muslims partly to blame for image" thread:

"We don't accept insulting our sanctities in the name of freedom of opinion or press, because disrespecting our beliefs inflames angry emotions, extremism and takes us toward grave paths," Mubarak said.

Note how Mubarak still advocates restrictions upon freedom of speech? Note how Mubarak makes the usual veiled terrorist threat regarding how, "disrespecting our beliefs inflames angry emotions, extremism and takes us toward grave paths"?

This is nothing more than Western-appeasing pablum designed to avoid any reduction in the BILLIONS OF DOLLARS we send this treacherous asshole. There is absolutely nothing of substance in his refusal to recognize the sanctity of free speech nor his hinting at terrorist reprisal for exercizing same.

Any questions?

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 22:46|| 2006-10-22 22:46|| Front Page Top

#31 You are not compelled.

While you may not regard Islam and its theocratic dictums as a threat, I do. If you do not, please refrain from ameliorating said danger, especially when you yourself are fully aware of taqqiya and the exceptionally negative ramifications of its use.

Of course, you are free to do whatever you like and any permission I seem to grant is the height of presumptiousness upon my own part. Nonetheless, I will ask that you reconsider your own defense of what is so often completely indefensible. Namely, Islam's continued justification of and dedication to terrorism. Even Mubarak could not refrain from imbedding the usual veiled terrorist threats in his supposedly conciliatory self-criticism of Islam. What sort of promise does this hold forth for any real reformation of Islam?

facta non verba, vis the five long years of Thundering Silence. Any replies being offered up at this long delayed point in time are simply a day late and a dollar short.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 22:55|| 2006-10-22 22:55|| Front Page Top

#32 lotp, I am obliged to add that, for someone of your intellectual depth, your replies have been far less than satisfying. You simply shrug off what I consider to be an incredibly apt metaphor regarding concentration camp prisoners. Likewise, a while back you never took the opportunity to provide any rejoinder regarding how Islam is so similar to a form of psychosis or mental illness. I'd like to think that this is not you simply resorting to easy outs. I had anticipated better from you.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 23:00|| 2006-10-22 23:00|| Front Page Top

#33 RD, any one of the mods can press the ban button should they choose to. I find the discussions enjoyable (where such exist) and the mud-slinging as well. I've learned something from lotp and even changed my opinion here and there. If you want to be just as engaging as lotp is, please go ahead.

Zenster, I will read his entire statement if I can find it, but at least we know he said the word reform and his lips didn't fall off.

Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 23:00|| 2006-10-22 23:00|| Front Page Top

#34 your replies have been far less than satisfying

Oh speak for yourself. Lotp is the (sole?) voice of reason on Rantburg, I noticed.

Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 23:03|| 2006-10-22 23:03|| Front Page Top

#35 except for yourself, of course.

Posted by anon 2006-10-22 23:04|| 2006-10-22 23:04|| Front Page Top

#36 at least we know he said the word reform and his lips didn't fall off.

If such an absolutely minimalist effort is satisfactory to yourself, you are nothing more than an, as yet, unsubjugated dhimmi. I rarely mention dhimmitude but you have made it more than appropriate. If this is all that supposedly moderate Islam has to show for itself, some FIVE LONG YEARS AFTER THE FACT, then it is high time to begin eradicating this virulent threat.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 23:07|| 2006-10-22 23:07|| Front Page Top

#37 Just for the record, and not to intervene in the argument between lotp and Zenster, for the most part the residents of the concentration camps would willingly have accepted the collateral deaths that would have come with the camps being bombed by the allies, because that would have prevented the guaranteed murders and torments that otherwise continued at the hands of the Nazis. In fact, in post-War writings the survivors uniformly condemned the Allies for refusing to do so.

Posted by trailing wife 2006-10-22 23:17|| 2006-10-22 23:17|| Front Page Top

#38 If such an absolutely minimalist effort is satisfactory to yourself

That was a reference to the salmon coloured comment....oh forget it.

except for yourself, of course

You still have a chance.

Posted by facta non verba 2006-10-22 23:31|| 2006-10-22 23:31|| Front Page Top

#39 Thank you so much for making that important ancillary point, trailing wife. I believe it only serves to concrete the Nazi metaphor and strengthen my own argument, in that many Muslim women would rather see an end to a culture that sexually mutilates them and all their daughters, enforces chattel-like treatment of women and promotes rape or outright spousal abuse. None of this even begins to mention the promotion of terrorist atrocities which kill women, men and children alike.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 23:34|| 2006-10-22 23:34|| Front Page Top

#40 I had sincerely hoped for better from you, lotp. Perhaps I should lower my expectations in the future.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2006-10-22 23:56|| 2006-10-22 23:56|| Front Page Top

23:56 Zenster
23:56 djh_usmc
23:54 trailing wife
23:53 Zenster
23:51 gromky
23:50 Slutch Thraviper4354
23:46 Zenster
23:45 anon
23:44 facta non verba
23:44 anonymous2u
23:42 anon
23:41 JohnQC
23:37 Hyper
23:34 Zenster
23:32 anon
23:31 SwissTex
23:31 facta non verba
23:30 gorb
23:24 Zenster
23:24 facta non verba
23:20 JohnQC
23:17 trailing wife
23:14 anon
23:09 facta non verba