It's started...... NYPD attacked by jihadist...

[Zundfolge]

Looking at Islam historically it has been around for thousands of years, why are we all of the sudden the focus of attack for the last decade? Their beliefs prior to this time have remained the same, but the difference is they are able to organize and mobilize enough people to carry out attacks.

Islam has always been a belligerent ideology that didn't live peacefully with its neighbors. The main reason we're seeing them here now is that technology has allowed them to move here easier. 100 years ago they had to take a boat that took weeks to get here and once they got here there wasn't a PC culture that embraced them as they are, instead there was a melting pot that required them to assimilate.

As for the notion that anything we do against these people just encourages more recruiting and/or fans the flames, that is a tremendously arrogant position. To believe that these people have no motivations of their own and are only savages reacting to our hubris is just foolishness. It doesn't matter what we do they want us dead ... and they always have.

Islam is a supremacist ideology. The desire to kill all unbelievers and dominate the earth is hard wired into the ideology. It has always been that way and the reason we're seeing them go on the offensive now is that they are finally in a position to project their power (they did this before in the 1500s and 1600s and western civilization beat them back ... they've finally recovered enough to recommence their belligerence).

Oh and Islam hasn't been around for "thousands of years" ... its only about 1400 years old.

... and the "radical" label is the correct one. I think the mass media has taken to calling them "fundamentalist" as part of an effort to subtly tarnish fundamentalist Christians. It's the same tactic where the Left Wing media calls all tyrannies "right wing" despite their Socialist or Communist constructs.

So no, you didn't fix it for him, you made it wrong. These are radicals in every sense of the word. They want to overthrow existing governmental, social, and cultural institutions and replace them with their own. That's radical.

I agree that leftists calling them "fundamentalist" is indeed an effort to tarnish "fundamentalist" Christians (just as the term "Neo-Conervative" is meant to subtuly link conservatives and neo-nazis ... Progressives play games with language).

However calling violent Islamists "fundamentalist" instead of "radical" is actually a more accurate description.

A "radical" is one that takes an existing ideology and twists it into something else (often to justify violence). A "fundamentalist" is one that takes an existing ideology very seriously and literally. THIS is what violent Islamists are doing. Actually in the context of Islam, being peaceful and getting along with non Muslims when you're in a position of power is actually a "radical" idea.

[Great-Kazoo]

Have i missed anything ?

[DavieD55]

folks tend to underestimate the depth of the islamist movement in the USA and just how deep the root of the problem goes with those people and their theocracy.

[Aloha_Shooter]

This is no different that what the Obama administration is doing right now, overthrowing the constitution.

Yep. Anyone who has taken even a single class in political science and isn't a dedicated anti-Western/anti-American/Marxist would recognize that Obama is a radical and filled his administration with radicals.

Oh and Islam hasn't been around for "thousands of years" ... its only about 1400 years old.

Where I come from, 1.4 > 1 and therefore qualifies for the plural form. I agree the left wing apologists are distorting things to try to put Islam on par with (or superior to) Christianity but they are grammatically correct.

However calling violent Islamists "fundamentalist" instead of "radical" is actually a more accurate description.

A "radical" is one that takes an existing ideology and twists it into something else (often to justify violence). A "fundamentalist" is one that takes an existing ideology very seriously and literally. THIS is what violent Islamists are doing. Actually in the context of Islam, being peaceful and getting along with non Muslims when you're in a position of power is actually a "radical" idea.

I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. These guys fit all the traditional poli sci definitions of radicals. Fundamentalism doesn't imply violent action the way radicalism does despite the supremacist roots. I don't have an issue with the fundamentalist Muslims who believe in conversion by setting an example of leading a "pure" life. To some extent, I admire the ones who are unwilling to compromise with certain elements of the West's moral decay but I have a problem with the ones who are trying to actively change society and culture through imposition of THEIR beliefs above our laws, moreso the ones who try to do it through violent actions.

"Helicopters, big military will be useless on their own soil,” another post read. “They will not be able to defeat our people if we use guerilla warfare. Attack their weak flanks ... If you get wounded who cares. If you die who cares. Eventually they will surrender and then the war will be over."

Yeah, right, biyotch. Problem this dickhead doesn't understand is that attempting guerrilla warfare frees up those of us who are (no longer) in uniform to do the same. Sorry, no longer uniformed, no longer subject to the Law of Armed Conflict --- oh, and I'm better armed now than I ever was in uniform.

There are three things I like about Chicago: Chicago pizza, Chicago dogs, and the Chicago way:

They pull a knife, you pull a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. *That's* the *Chicago* way!

[wctriumph]

Islam has been at constant war with the west for the last 1400 years or so. There is no peaceful or moderate or radical part of it, that is simply propaganda to keep the west from rising up and crushing them. Until they are crushed, they will keep coming, it is what and who they are, there is no negotiating this to stop it. Because the west has been weak they are feeling strong again and are now taking the fight to us. It is the politics and money that is making them stronger and us weaker. We are being sold out by a corrupt government for short sighted personal gain and WE need to make a change. The problem is a dumbed down populace that will willingly hold on to their ignorance and rely on someone else to face the problems for them.

We need to stand up on our hind legs and do all we can to win this. It is coming to a town or city near you. Stay alert, be aware, put them down like the vermin that they are. I will stand with those that fight and stand against the cowardice of the PC propagandists that would subdue our freedoms in the name of peaceful relations and coexistence. There will be no coexistence, Islam will see to that. Submit or die. I will not submit and I will spit on anyone that does.


III

[mcantar18c]

Yep. Anyone who has taken even a single class in political science and isn't a dedicated anti-Western/anti-American/Marxist would recognize that Obama is a radical and filled his administration with radicals.

Radical in relation to the traditional core values of America.

Where I come from, 1.4 > 1 and therefore qualifies for the plural form.

That's the kind of crap that the libs use. You know damn well that saying "thousands" generally implies many thousands... not just a hair over a thousand.

I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree on that one. These guys fit all the traditional poli sci definitions of radicals. Fundamentalism doesn't imply violent action the way radicalism does despite the supremacist roots. I don't have an issue with the fundamentalist Muslims who believe in conversion by setting an example of leading a "pure" life. To some extent, I admire the ones who are unwilling to compromise with certain elements of the West's moral decay but I have a problem with the ones who are trying to actively change society and culture through imposition of THEIR beliefs above our laws, moreso the ones who try to do it through violent actions.

The Muslims who truly believe in spreading their religion peacefully, aren't truly Muslim.
Radical is taking bits and pieces of the religion and ignoring the others... like Timothy McVeigh.
Fundamental is taking the full text, all of the core values of your religion, and not varying from that.

Like I said before, the Muslims that don't want to blow you up... they just want other Muslims to blow you up.

Yeah, right, biyotch. Problem this dickhead doesn't understand is that attempting guerrilla warfare frees up those of us who are (no longer) in uniform to do the same. Sorry, no longer uniformed, no longer subject to the Law of Armed Conflict --- oh, and I'm better armed now than I ever was in uniform.

So you wouldn't take a stand against a conventional military invading force like, say, China? They have to be using guerrilla tactics for you to join in?

[Ronin13]

For those that believe not all muslims are against non-muslims, or think "oh, there are some muslims out there who aren't into killing the non-believers," I offer this correlation: Remember, there are some Christians who don't believe Jesus is the son of God. One's personal interpretation of their religion may be one thing, but the overall picture is quite different. Mohammad said it several times: kill the non-believer.
Some examples:
Quran 2:191-193: "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone." -To mean that you must kill anyone and everyone who does not worship Allah, until only Allah is worshiped.
Quran 4:89: "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks." -Kill the non-believers and accept no help or friendship from them.
Quran 8:12: "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them." -Pretty self-explanatory.
Quran 9:29: "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." -Kill the non-believer until they submit to the rule of Islam. Either die, convert, or submit.
If you can interpret any of that to not mean kill those who do not worship Allah, you are a complete moron. That is from their holy book. Find me anything in the Torah or Bible that says Jews/Christians come together and cut off the heads of non-Jews/Christians... You can't, because it doesn't exist. There are tales of God striking down the sinners, but after the birth and death of Christ, (with exception to Revelations) there is nothing about those who sin being destroyed. You need look no further than the Muslim world. When Islamists murder innocent people, or behead them, where is the outcry from the Muslim populace saying "This is simply not our way, we do not support these traitors to our cause"? You may hear one or two say that, but the majority remains silent. The video I posted before of Ben Shapiro explaining the majority of Muslim belief explains that a very large majority of Muslims would support a world-wide Sharia system. Calling Islam a religion, when it encompasses every aspect of life and governance makes it much more than just a religion. It simply does not fit with America's ideals of Church-State separation as in Sharia law the non-believer must pay a tax of "submission" for not believing. Simple as that.

[Aloha_Shooter]

So you wouldn't take a stand against a conventional military invading force like, say, China? They have to be using guerrilla tactics for you to join in?

1. I highly suggest you go back and read the quote from the idiot Thompson. Understand the context of what I was responding to.

2. I have been taking a stand for decades and will continue to do so. Nowhere in my response to dickhead did I say I would stand down against a conventional invading force.

Reading comprehension is your friend.

[roberth]

One of the challenges of being an American is trying to figure out how to curtail things like Islam, Nazism, and Communism without infringing on the rights of those who choose to participate in those things. We've done a good job of curtailing Nazism, we need to do a better job on Islam and Communism. Communism is going to be especially difficult because it is so entrenched in the federal education system.

The only opportunity for direct, physical action is when some jihadi or James Holmes wanna-be initiates an event that requires physical action on the part of the good guys (most of us) to stop it.

Education is the key, it is how these ideologies got started and spread, it is the way that we'll slow down and stop the spread of these evil ideologies.

[68Charger]

So-called "peaceful Muslims" are at best IRRELEVANT