Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Islam - Jihad - GWOT

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
    Another Mindful Observation From Ms. Coulter;
    I fail to see how fighting Islamic zealots is helped by the writings of wing-nut zealot? Using an extremist to denounce extremism doesn't help the cause.
    You'll live, only the best get killed.

    -General Charles de Gaulle

    Comment


    • Originally posted by asterix View Post
      I fail to see how fighting Islamic zealots is helped by the writings of wing-nut zealot? Using an extremist to denounce extremism doesn't help the cause.
      In your subjective opinion, what would help the cause?
      "Moderate" approach isn't working very well.
      BTW, what you call "Islamic zealots" see themselves as fundamental true believers. As for extreme to deal with extreme, maybe that thing about fight fire with fire?
      I suspect you either didn't read the link, didn't understand it, or just don't agree with it.

      Maybe this article in the next post, unless you are one of those referred to in the last paragraph of it ...
      TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

      Comment


      • Stop Asking 'Why Do They Hate Us?'

        by A. J. Caschetta
        The Daily Caller
        April 11, 2016

        ...
        The intelligentsia's ignorance perseveres in spite of the answer right in front of them: it's not hatred but an ideology called Islamism that compels violence.
        ...
        Has the West learned nothing in the past decade and a half? Why do we still ask this question when the answer is clear?

        The theological underpinnings of the most violent strain of Islamism (what some analysts call bin Ladenism) are found in four doctrines, all easily grasped. Together they make up the ideology that seeks to conquer the world. All who oppose it are treated in a way that only seems like hatred because we cannot imagine any other motive for the violence.

        1) First, the Doctrine of Loyalty and Enmity prevails among Islamists whose dichotomous world view is comprised of Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb. ...

        2) Second is the Doctrine of Offensive Jihad. Whether they are following Ibn Taymiyyah, Syed Abul Ala Maududi, Sayed Qutb, Abdus Salam Faraj, or Osama bin Laden himself, Islamists have internalized the doctrine of loyalty and enmity to the extent that they believe engaging in offensive jihad is the only way to remain faithful to Muhammad's example. Offensive jihad is often portrayed as a defensive jihad against ideological "attacks" emanating from Dar al-Harb.

        3) Third is the Doctrine of Martyrdom. ... martyrdom, which is carried out "to service Islam." ... When Palestinian suicide bombers detonate themselves, their comrades and families celebrate their wedding to dark-eyed virgins, not their hatred.

        4) Last is the Doctrine of Takfir, an Arabic term referring to the process whereby an Islamist accuses a moderate or heterodox Muslim of being insufficiently Islamic and therefore no longer worthy of the protection conferred by the doctrine of loyalty. ...

        Those who fail to understand the ideology of Islamism will remain confused by it, attributing the violence to hatred because they don't understand the real motives. So like battered spouses, victims of Islamist violence continue trying to alter their behavior in futile attempts to make "them" love "us."
        http://www.meforum.org/5951/why-do-they-hate-us
        TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

        Comment


        • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
          In your subjective opinion, what would help the cause?
          "Moderate" approach isn't working very well.
          BTW, what you call "Islamic zealots" see themselves as fundamental true believers. As for extreme to deal with extreme, maybe that thing about fight fire with fire?
          I suspect you either didn't read the link, didn't understand it, or just don't agree with it.

          Maybe this article in the next post, unless you are one of those referred to in the last paragraph of it ...
          The point being, Coulter couldn't care less what happened to Europe, and it's my observation that most of those screaming about the fire are pretty much of the same political mindset which trends towards anti-European sentiment. Naturally, it makes me wonder if the fear is feigned or real.

          For the record - Coulter is currently persona non grata in France after she wrote an article almost immediately after 9/11 stating that the US should attack and bomb France. The result was she was banned from entering my home country. This told me everything I needed to know about her and those like her.

          As far as I'm concerned, she has more in common with the European-hating terrorist than she would care to admit.
          You'll live, only the best get killed.

          -General Charles de Gaulle

          Comment


          • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
            (..) As for extreme to deal with extreme, maybe that thing about fight fire with fire ?
            An eye for eye will leave the whole world blind ?
            High Admiral Snowy, Commander In Chief of the Naval Forces of The Phoenix Confederation.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by asterix View Post
              The point being, Coulter couldn't care less what happened to Europe, and it's my observation that most of those screaming about the fire are pretty much of the same political mindset which trends towards anti-European sentiment. Naturally, it makes me wonder if the fear is feigned or real.

              For the record - Coulter is currently persona non grata in France after she wrote an article almost immediately after 9/11 stating that the US should attack and bomb France. The result was she was banned from entering my home country. This told me everything I needed to know about her and those like her.

              As far as I'm concerned, she has more in common with the European-hating terrorist than she would care to admit.
              That would be this one (?) which sounds about half satirical;
              http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/593954/posts

              Offered so others can read and decide for themselves how serious it was and if "France" over reacted.

              Considering the "war" has expanded from the M.E. and into Europe, I'd say the concern by many is authentic. Considering how the USA spent the larger part of the last century "over there"; WWI, WWII, Cold War, helping to fix European "mistakes" the concern is that we are seeing another round of such shaping up and with entwined cultures and economies, it's rather difficult and unrealistic to think we won't be embroiled again and can really remain isolated from the mess you all are making over there.
              Last edited by G David Bock; 14 Apr 16, 20:12.
              TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

              Comment


              • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                (...) Considering the "war" has expanded from the M.E. and into Europe, I'd say the concern by many is authentic. Considering how the USA spent the larger part of the last century "over there"; WWI, WWII, Cold War, helping to fix European "mistakes" the concern is that we are seeing another round of such shaping up and with entwined cultures and economies, it's rather difficult and unrealistic to think we won't be embroiled again and can really remain isolated from the mess you all are making over there.
                You'll be embroiled again.

                Whether you or Ann Coulter like it or not.

                Nothing to worry about - that's just history in the making.

                Another 5 centuries or so and then - perhaps - you'll have a history of your own.
                High Admiral Snowy, Commander In Chief of the Naval Forces of The Phoenix Confederation.

                Comment


                • Once a person has made up his mind to put the Creator of the Universe above all else, he often comes under intense pressures. It is not easy to resist such pressures and STRIVE to maintain dedication and love of Allah over all else. A person who has turned to Islam from another religion may be subjected to pressures designed to turn him back to the religion of the family. We read in the Quran:
                  "So obey not the rejecters of faith, but strive (Jahidhum) against them by it (the Quran) with a great endeavor." [Noble Quran 25:52]

                  Comment


                  • Archiving ...
                    Saudi Arabia Warns of Economic Fallout if Congress Passes 9/11 Bill

                    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sau...K1M?li=BBnb7Kz


                    Sounds damn close to an admission of guilt already.
                    TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by asterix View Post
                      The point being, Coulter couldn't care less what happened to Europe, and it's my observation that most of those screaming about the fire are pretty much of the same political mindset which trends towards anti-European sentiment. Naturally, it makes me wonder if the fear is feigned or real.

                      For the record - Coulter is currently persona non grata in France after she wrote an article almost immediately after 9/11 stating that the US should attack and bomb France. The result was she was banned from entering my home country. This told me everything I needed to know about her and those like her.

                      As far as I'm concerned, she has more in common with the European-hating terrorist than she would care to admit.
                      Coulter is just another one of those commentators who figured out that it is most profitable to be controversial and shrill - the more nonsense, hate and venom they spew the more attention they get. Just an earlier version of our lot like Katie Hopkins. I am sure every country has them and sadly they seem to be spreading.

                      Says a lot about the type of people who place any merit in anything she says.
                      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it"
                      G.B Shaw

                      "They promised us homes fit for heroes, they give us heroes fit for homes."
                      Grandad, Only Fools and Horses

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by TheKnight View Post
                        Once a person has made up his mind to put the Creator of the Universe above all else, he often comes under intense pressures. It is not easy to resist such pressures and STRIVE to maintain dedication and love of Allah over all else. A person who has turned to Islam from another religion may be subjected to pressures designed to turn him back to the religion of the family. We read in the Quran:
                        "So obey not the rejecters of faith, but strive (Jahidhum) against them by it (the Quran) with a great endeavor." [Noble Quran 25:52]

                        As a descendant of Charles Martel 'The Hammer' who so brilliantly led the Christian forces [mainly farmers] at the 'Battle of Tours' - the one you Muslims call the 'Battle of the Martyrs', and as a person who has studied the advent and nature of Islam - I have to in rationality and logic reject the assertions implicit in your post.

                        Even Muslim scholars are beginning to admit that the existing oldest copies of the Qur'an(s) differ from each other, are incomplete and have all undergone meaningful alterations. It also appears that this Allah and Muhammad could well be one and the same, albeit somewhat edited. It would also explain why it is deemed blasphemous to speak against the 'Prophet', since blasphemy is normally accorded to deliberately speaking ill of 'God'.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                          Archiving ...
                          Saudi Arabia Warns of Economic Fallout if Congress Passes 9/11 Bill

                          http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/sau...K1M?li=BBnb7Kz


                          Sounds damn close to an admission of guilt already.
                          More on this ...
                          SHOWDOWN...

                          Secret 28 Pages Under Scrutiny Ahead of Obama Trip...

                          How USA covered up Saudi role...
                          TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                          Comment


                          • Ann Coulter
                            From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

                            Ann Hart Coulter (/ˈkoʊltər/; born December 8, 1961) is an American conservative social and political commentator, writer, syndicated columnist, and lawyer. She frequently appears on television, radio, and as a speaker at public and private events.

                            Coulter rose to prominence in the 1990s as an outspoken critic of the Clinton administration. Her first book concerned the Bill Clinton impeachment, and sprang from her experience writing legal briefs for Paula Jones's attorneys, as well as columns she wrote about the cases.[6][7]

                            Coulter has described herself as a polemicist who likes to "stir up the pot", and does not "pretend to be impartial or balanced, as broadcasters do",[8] drawing criticism from the left, and sometimes from the right.[9]
                            Coulter's syndicated column for Universal Press Syndicate began appearing in newspapers, and was featured on major conservative websites.
                            ....
                            After law school, Coulter served as a law clerk, in Kansas City, for Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.[21] After a short time working in New York City in private practice, where she specialized in corporate law, Coulter left to work for the United States Senate Judiciary Committee after the Republican Party took control of Congress in 1994. She handled crime and immigration issues for Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan and helped craft legislation designed to expedite the deportation of aliens convicted of felonies.[22] She later became a litigator with the Center for Individual Rights.[23]
                            ...
                            Coulter's career is highlighted by the publication of eleven books, as well as the weekly syndicated newspaper column that she publishes. She is particularly known for her polemical style,[28] and describes herself as someone who likes to "stir up the pot. I don’t pretend to be impartial or balanced, as broadcasters do".[29] She has been compared to Clare Boothe Luce, one of her idols, for her satirical style.[30] She also makes numerous public appearances, speaking on television and radio talk shows, as well as on college campuses, receiving both praise and protest. Coulter typically spends 6–12 weeks of the year on speaking engagement tours, and more when she has a book coming out.[31] In 2010, she made an estimated $500,000 on the speaking circuit, giving speeches on topics of modern conservatism, gay marriage, and what she perceives to be the hypocrisy of modern American liberalism.[32] During one appearance at the University of Arizona, a pie was thrown at her.[33][34][35] Coulter has, on occasion, in defense of her ideas, responded with inflammatory remarks toward hecklers and protestors who attend her speeches.[36][37]
                            ...
                            Coulter is the author of eleven books, many of which have appeared on the New York Times Best Seller list, with a combined 3 million copies sold as of May 2009.[38]

                            Coulter's first book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton, was published by Regnery Publishing in 1998 and made the New York Times Bestseller list.[6] It details Coulter's case for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton.

                            Her second book, Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right, published by Crown Forum in 2002, reached the number one spot on The New York Times non-fiction best seller list.[39] In Slander, Coulter argues that President George W. Bush was given unfair negative media coverage. The factual accuracy of Slander was called into question by then-comedian and author, and now Democratic U.S. Senator from Minnesota, Al Franken; he also accused her of citing passages out of context.[40] Others investigated these charges, and also raised questions about the book's accuracy and presentation of facts.[41][42][43] Coulter responded to criticisms in a column called "Answering My Critics".[44]

                            In her third book, Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism, also published by Crown Forum, she reexamines the 60-year history of the Cold War — including the career of Senator Joseph McCarthy, the Whittaker Chambers-Alger Hiss affair, and Ronald Reagan’s challenge to Mikhail Gorbachev to "tear down this wall"—and argues that liberals were wrong in their Cold War political analyses and policy decisions, and that McCarthy was correct about Soviet agents working for the U.S. government.[45] She also argues that the correct identification of Annie Lee Moss, among others, as communists was misreported by the liberal media.[46] Treason was published in 2003, and spent 13 weeks on the Best Seller list.[47]

                            Crown Forum published a collection of Coulter's columns in 2004 as her fourth book, How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must): The World According to Ann Coulter.[48]
                            ...
                            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ann_Coulter

                            Coultier is in a whole different league from Katie Hopkins;
                            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katie_Hopkins

                            I've read a few of Coultier's books (not all, yet) and found them logical, rational, well presented (as could be expected from a lawyer) and the information and facts presented were documented, sourced and verifiable. On the basis of her books I consider the same could be said of her op-ed articles. While I don't agree with all her observations, conclusions, or positions, she is one of the more effective and factual of conservative commentators/pundits.

                            In the context of the current debate and postings here, she has more credentials and credibility than the semi-anonymous "user-names" whom are denigrating her.

                            Originally posted by Sergio View Post
                            Coulter is just another one of those commentators who figured out that it is most profitable to be controversial and shrill
                            Contoversial (to Liberals mostly) yes, "shrill" not, rather satirical and polemic would be more accurate.

                            Originally posted by Sergio View Post
                            - the more nonsense, hate and venom they spew the more attention they get.
                            This is the rather classic profile of Liberal(libtard) Regressive response to any that don't agree with the myths, distortions, deceptions, lies, delusions, and general mental sludge of their anti-conservative ideology. Coultier shreds their agreements and positions and hence it is labeled "...nonsense, hate and venom..."

                            Originally posted by Sergio View Post
                            ... and Just an earlier version of our lot like Katie Hopkins. I am sure every country has them and sadly they seem to be spreading.
                            NOT, re: that Katie Hopkins comparison as the two Wiki pages above will show. Both sides of issues could use more effective "polemicists" like Coultier.

                            Originally posted by Sergio View Post
                            Says a lot about the type of people who place any merit in anything she says.
                            Also says a lot about those whom automatically reject her as in most(not all) cases these tend to be Liberals whom disagree with her observations and positions (if they've read them) as much as her personality and style, engaging the "attack the messenger" more than the message. Coultier tends to be a gauge, a 'litmus test', often of those whom are heavily invested in the liberal/socisalist-marxist/statist/regressive ideology.
                            (I've yet to meet a 'libtard' that likes and agrees with her. )
                            TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                            Comment


                            • As I said it is telling that after so many years of supposedly educating yourself and others through this thread and your wider reading that you are still quoting the likes of Coulter. Similarly calling those you disagree with or who you feel disagree with 'conservatism' retards further illustrates the point.
                              "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it"
                              G.B Shaw

                              "They promised us homes fit for heroes, they give us heroes fit for homes."
                              Grandad, Only Fools and Horses

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sergio View Post
                                As I said it is telling that after so many years of supposedly educating yourself and others through this thread and your wider reading that you are still quoting the likes of Coulter. Similarly calling those you disagree with or who you feel disagree with 'conservatism' retards further illustrates the point.
                                As telling as the automatic source bias and rejection of some posers/user-names here. See the name-calling of your earlier post, quid-pro-quo.
                                Also as I said, posts wasted attacking the messenger rather than the message, classic of non-objective and regressively biased, narrow mindsets.

                                So how many best sellers have you written and published?
                                How many of your op-eds are published and read?
                                How many public speaking engagements presented?

                                As I said, Coultier has more cred than you and I've wasted enough time and energy responding to your insubstantial rantings.
                                TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X