| Submit your comments on this article |
| Olde Tyme Religion |
| "Obsession: The Threat of Radical Islam." |
| 2006-11-05 |
| Malkin. Closer to home, Fox News airs the first half of the documentary, "Obsession: The Threat of Radical Islam." The trailer is here in case you missed it. Maybe it's not too late. |
| Posted by:Elmoluse Snoth5568 |
| #21 Word, tw. We must make it so. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-11-05 21:43 |
| #20 Based on tales Anonymoose and others have told, it doesn't sound like warning them will do any good -- they simply are not capable of believing that we would actually do so, and anyway Allah will not allow us to harm his favourite sons. Nothing less than the actually being on the receiving end -- repeatedly -- will effect that particular lesson. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-11-05 21:04 |
| #19 Old Patriot, while I also foresee a nuclear scenario, it is under different circumstances. It still remains important that America retain the moral high ground in terms of first use of nuclear weapons. We should not initiate their deployment, even against the sponsors of terrorism. Only in response. What seems absolutely cut in stone is that Islam simply cannot stop itself from eventually committing some sort of astounding atrocity that will absolutely require nuclear retaliation. In the case of Saudi Arabia, I agree with you; Hit Riyadh first and reserve the shrines of Mecca and Medina as playing cards in further negotiations. As for Iran, the mullahs long ago exhausted all patience that they might have once deserved. Tehran or Qom could go and it would mean squat. The Iraqi Shiites have their own shrines. Pass the word that if there's EVER a nuclear explosion in the US, it won't matter who it's from, Mecca gets an even larger bomb. Whether we hit Riyadh or not, this message needs to be sent anyway. Islam must have some sort of loaded gun pointed at its head before it will even begin to consider reining in their terrorist minons. We must make clear that there is a drastic price to pay for not doing so. Without significant and genuine reform, Islam will bring upon itself the Muslim holocaust. I can only hope America's leadership will have the backbone when that time comes. Any inaction at that point will doom the West. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-11-05 17:15 |
| #18 "These people only understand power." I think they'll see some shortly after Tuesday. I sure wouldn't want to work at an Iranian nuke facility. |
| Posted by: Darrell 2006-11-05 16:54 |
| #17 I'm sure we know when Najaf's out playing Bedouin. We know when he's not. A large thermonuclear blast over Riyadh during the "not" period will do a world of good in every respect. The house of saud will become the house of glass. The few survivors will pray for death. Pass the word that if there's EVER a nuclear explosion in the US, it won't matter who it's from, Mecca gets an even larger bomb. Send the word to Qom that unless there are major changes in Iran, they will also see a 3AM sunrise. These people only understand power. Show them the ultimate power, and the will to use it, and they will shut up - or die. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2006-11-05 16:51 |
| #16 What is outrageous here is not the Fox covered this, good on them for so doing, but rather the absolute absence of mention about the show anywhere else. Even for an opposition paper like the Slimes or the WaPo, a comment about such a powerful piece should have at least raised their PC "racism" hackles. The willing suppression of coverage is very, very scary. We are on the edge of a Dem return to power and even more PC BS coming out of DC, with what little spine the Republican have left being spent as they draw the wrong reaction to the election (yet again). |
| Posted by: JustAboutEnough 2006-11-05 15:29 |
| #15 Who said anything about preferences? I did. Do you really think that we have the time to go about removing all of the terrorism sponsoring tyrants in the same excruciating fashion that America ousted Saddam Hussein? It's quite another thing to execute that, even if we assume that we would take the decision to accept the international consequences of assasinating a senior member of another government. Decapitation of governments that sponsor terrorism is one of the few actions that will ever deliver the required results within the time span necessary. Just as how only a program of summarily executing jihadist Islamic clergy will make any significant dent in pro-terrorism propaganda and the recruiting of new jihadis. Governments that indulge in massive human rights abuses (a description of the leadership in nearly all Muslim majority nations), are not entitled to honorable sovereignty. They exist solely by the force of might and are the rightful target of any free nation who feels the urge to remove them. Disregarding the routine violation of political and religious dissidents' human rights, the way MME (Muslim Middle East) countries abuse the vast majority of their women populations is sufficient reason alone to topple their governments. Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons and its destabilizing effect upon the entire MME is one of the few examples that exceeds the urgency of stopping Abject Gender Apartheid. That Iran is also a premier sponsor of international terrorism only cements the case against them. Do you honestly think there will ever be any sort of global concensus that avoids the perceprtion of American unilateralism as we go about protecting ourselves from Islam's assault upon the West? Russia, China and France, all by themselves, will incessantly interfere with any attempts to overthrow terrorist sponsoring nations. Do you suggest that we sit idly by and await how many more 9-11 atrocities due to their stubborn opposition? Iran and Syria, along with, perhaps, North Korea, sit at the forefront of our fight against terrorism. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are the next tier of facilitators that must be removed thereafter. This is not blue-sky thinking, this is a realistic appraisal of how America and Europe are going to withstand the onslaught of Islamic terrorism. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-11-05 15:29 |
| #14 Who said anything about preferences? I'm simply pointing out that your proposal is less than practical. It's one thing to sit at a keyboard and say that this very powerful official in another country should be "taken out". It's quite another thing to execute that, even if we assume that we would take the decision to accept the international consequences of assasinating a senior member of another government. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-11-05 14:56 |
| #13 So, let's cut to the chase, lotp, would you prefer that Nayaf continues to steal oxygen from far more deserving organisms like lice, ticks and cockroaches? |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-11-05 14:52 |
| #12 Cruise missile, maybe. Insertion team, almost certainly not. Nayaf controls the internal security apparatus in the Kingdom -- the police, the morals police, the spies, the intelligence gatherers. Reports are that a lot of people with a lot more local cover and opportunity have not been able to kill him. I seriously doubt that an American team would get a chance, unless he felt he could both survive the incident and use it to his advantage. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-11-05 14:37 |
| #11 Nothing that couldn't stop an insertion team or a cruise missile. Nayaf's control of the Haj alone makes him into a facilitator of Wahhabist indoctrination that is poisoning the minds of millions each year. Saudi Arabia's massive petrodollar wealth is funneled into flying passenger jet loads of neophytes from all around the MME (Muslim Middle East) and Asia for programming while in Mecca during the Haj. As gatekeeper for this mind-control fiesta, Nayaf immediately needs to assume room temperature. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-11-05 13:57 |
| #10 You can try. He runs the internal security apparatus, controls who gets to make hadj, represents the kingdom at WTO and other international meetings and has the strong backing of the most fanatical tribes. I don't doubt that there have been attempts on his life by others in the royal family. He's alive and in some cases their oldest sons aren't. Try to take him out and it will be your wife, kids, brothers who die. You might even get the DVD of their agony. He's ruthless and as I've said, very very powerful. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-11-05 13:46 |
| #9 there is a true believer group centered around Nayaf and they run, among other things, the interior ministry. He is extraordinarily powerful in the Kingdom, arguably more powerful than the king. Off |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-11-05 13:43 |
| #8 The royal family is split. While most fit your description, there is a true believer group centered around Nayaf and they run, among other things, the interior ministry. He is extraordinarily powerful in the Kingdom, arguably more powerful than the king. He spends a few months each year in the desert in a Bedouin tent. Don't make the mistake of thinking he is a decadent fool -- he is the source of most of the Wahabist funding. |
| Posted by: lotp 2006-11-05 13:40 |
| #7 Nothing but good news here. The American viewing public will need to sit through over 100 airings of "Obsession" for it to even begin to sink in. This was the first of those 100. When "Obsession" is finally running on PBS we will know that there has been some progress made. Nor was it preaching to the choir. I know people who voted for Bush and yet have ZERO comprehension of what is really going on with Islam's assault on the West. Rest assured that I'm trying to get them to sit still long enough to watch a copy of the film. Consider also that a lot of the holding company that owns Fox is held by Saudis (although the kind of secular Saudis who would be executed under a true and vigorous sharia system). Much of the Arab world does not regard the Saudi Royals as true Muslims. They are referred to as "Gulfies" and seen as a bunch of spoiled jet-setting hedonistic rich kids. The Saudis maintain a veneer of respectability through their pact with the Wahhabi devils. These fanatics are so puritanical that they would just as soon take the ornately decorated mosaic walls of Mecca's shrine and whitewash them over to prevent idolatry. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-11-05 13:09 |
| #6 I agree with #5 There are a lot of fox viewers, even movement conservatives who do not understand the threat. Also, even more importantly, this was, to my knowledge, the first time a major media outlet has given any significant time to apostates from Islam (I've written the WPost over 4 times asking politely for this kind of coverage). Consider also that a lot of the holding company that owns Fox is held by Saudis (although the kind of secular Saudis who would be executed under a true and vigorous sharia system). |
| Posted by: mhw 2006-11-05 10:43 |
| #5 I'm not sure they were only preaching to the choir. It always surprises me how many people do not grasp that Islam is a war against us that is being conducted state by state or even know what the word Caliphate means. Many of those are FOX watchers too. True - most probably didn't see the show, but it will filter back to them. |
| Posted by: anon 2006-11-05 10:10 |
| #4 Every cut and run liberal should be tied to a chair and forced to watch this film. I'm still willing to bet they would come out hating Bush. Wonder what the terrorist over at CAIR will have to say about this coverage. Good for Fox! |
| Posted by: Icerigger 2006-11-05 10:09 |
| #3 Yes, I think airing it on FNC is preaching to the choir, it would have been much more useful as an educational tool if it had been aired on the very same channels which would/will NEVER broadcast it. Now, is that sad, or ironical? |
| Posted by: anonymous5089 2006-11-05 09:27 |
| #2 Very good, on the money all the way through. The people who need to watch it were watching the Comedy Channel. |
| Posted by: Fred 2006-11-05 09:17 |
| #1 An eye opener for most of them. Islam - turning the world into a militant state, one country at a time. So peaceful, loving, and soulfull. |
| Posted by: closedanger@hotmail.com 2006-11-05 08:51 |