Friday, August 18, 2006

Don't say "Islamic Fascists"

(All emphases by Always On Watch)

On August 11, 2006, I wrote about the use of the term "Islamic fascists" and about CAIR's objections to that term. Now, via Pedestrian Infidel, comes the following, to which Mark Alexander alerted me:
"STATE DEPARTMENT President Bush has avoided repetition of a term that angered Muslims....

"In a statement after its weekly meeting, the Saudi Cabinet 'warned against labeling Muslims with accusations of terrorism and fascism.'

"Bush didn't repeat the reference to 'Islamic fascists' at the State Department today, referring instead to 'individuals that would like to kill innocent Americans to achieve political objectives.'"
The Saudi Cabinet objects? President Bush didn't label all Muslims "Islamic fascists." Or did he, albeit unwittingly?

Amil Imani, an Iranian-born American who is an essayist, poet, and novelist, contends that terms used to differentiate between two types of Islam are actually dangerous euphemisms. According to his essay "Islam's Useful Idiots,"
"Terms such as 'Political Islam,' or 'Radical Islam,' for instance, are contributions of the Useful Idiot. These terms do not even exist in the native parlance of Islam, simply because they are redundant. Islam, by its very nature and according to its charter—the Quran—is a radical political movement. It is the Useful Idiot who sanitizes Islam and misguides the populace by saying that the 'real Islam' constitutes the main body of the religion; and, that this main body is non-political and moderate.

"Regrettably, a large segment of the population goes along with these nonsensical euphemisms depicting Islam because it prefers to believe them. It is less threatening to believe that only a hijacked small segment of Islam is radical or politically driven and that the main body of Islam is indeed moderate and non-political.

"But Islam is political to the core. In Islam the mosque and state are one and the same—the mosque is the state. This arrangement goes back to the days of Muhammad himself. Islam is also radical in the extreme. Even the 'moderate' Islam is radical in its beliefs as well as its deeds."
Amil Imani's final paragraph is scathing:
"...Beware of the Useful Idiots who live in liberal democracies. Knowingly or unknowingly, they serve as the greatest volunteer and effective soldiers of Islam. They pave the way for the advancement of Islam and they will assuredly be among the very first victims of Islam as soon as it assumes power."

71 Comments:

At 8/18/2006 8:33 AM, Anonymous Seth said...

I never thought I'd see the day that a Republican President, especially one I voted for both times, would humble himself and his country before its enemy, and in the name of political correctness, no less.

Saudi Arabia is a frigging terrorist factory!

President Reagan's non-retracted strong words and supposed "slips of the tongue" sent a message to the enemy of the time that, using plain language, we were ready to deal with them in any way necessary.

What Bush is doing is sending a message to the enemy of his time that they can do as they please to us, that merely raising their voices afterward will not only still our complaints, but compel us to apologize for stating the blatantly obvious truth.

As an American, I find this highly unacceptable.

 
At 8/18/2006 8:39 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Seth,
I feel the same way.

Last night, I was so angry that I couldn't even think. This morning, I posted here and fired off yet another letter to the White House--for all the good my letter will do.

But I do see some positive signs. People who aren't ordinarily politically oriented are catching on to the truth. And not just we Conservatives, either. The big question is this: Are the positive signs enough to counter the idiocy and the taqiyya? Also, will those who understand the truth have the guts to stand up and say so?

 
At 8/18/2006 8:40 AM, Blogger kev said...

"Beware of the Useful Idiots who live in liberal democracies. Knwoingly or unknowingly, they serve as the greatest volunteer and effective soldiers of Islam."
Isn't this what we've been saying about the "Useful Idiots" for years? Amil Imani is a clear thinker who wraps the whole thing up in a few words.

 
At 8/18/2006 8:43 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Kev,
Amil Imani has written other outstanding essays. I'll put up one of his other essays in a subsequent posting. It's a scorcher (as my mother used to say)!

 
At 8/18/2006 9:01 AM, Anonymous Seth said...

Sadly, I think it's going to take another "successful" terror op on our soil and a lot of dead Americans before some serious awakening occurs, thanks both to the MSM and to abruptly and inexplicably dense political leadership.

 
At 8/18/2006 9:09 AM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

seth, President Reagan's "strong words". When was this? When he cut and ran after putting us in an unsecured position in Beirut?

Of course to make us all proud he made up for that and invaded Grenada so I guess it all evened out.

Just what strong words are you talking about? Cut and run in Beirut, arms for hostages in Iran.

Nice that Bush has all the old indicted felons from Iran/Contra, Reagan's finest moment, back in the administration isn't it. Maybe that's partial explanation for why we've completely failed in Afganistan and Iraq.

 
At 8/18/2006 9:25 AM, Anonymous Seth said...

Duck,

What are you prattling on about?

Reagan tended to speak his mind when addressing or discussing the Soviets, and this had the effect of causing them to walk softly -- he also won the Cold War.

"Cut and run in Beirut?" "Arms for hostages in Iran?" Duck, does lysergic acid diethylamide-25 run freely through your veins?

"...we've completely failed in Afghanistan and Iraq"?

Earth calling Duck, come in, Duck, over...

 
At 8/18/2006 9:28 AM, Blogger Mark said...

Always:

I'm seething too, just as you are.

 
At 8/18/2006 9:44 AM, Blogger Old Soldier said...

Does a Useful Idiot also crap through feathers? Just trying to get an orientation here...

 
At 8/18/2006 10:58 AM, Blogger Pastorius said...

Islam is a religion which dictates a set of laws (Sharia) which must be used by the people of Islam. Therefore Islam is political.

Additionally, it is the duty of the people of Islam to spread Sharia (by waging Jihad if need be) so that it becomes the law of other lands as well. Therefore, Islam is radical in that it is revolutionary.

 
At 8/18/2006 11:01 AM, Blogger Jason_Pappas said...

Let’s face it Bush is weak; he only looks strong next to a Democrat and thanks to Kerry, Dean, and Soros, they made him look good. But Bush doesn’t have what it takes.

He's continually backed down under fire. After announcing the Bush Doctrine in 2001, I had hope to see some follow-up. A strong President would have repudiated our past policies. He should have said: “We were wrong to help Arafat, 'the father of modern terrorism,' to escape death when he was cornered in Lebanon by Sharon. We were wrong when we put this vicious depraved terrorist leader in power only to create a terror state where children are indoctrinated in Palestinian schools into a terror cult that glorifies suicide bombings against the citizens of that noble nation, Israel. We totally and unequivocally repudiate that policy.”

What did he say? When asked if Arafat was a terrorist he said (from memory) “he can’t be a terrorist; he is a leader of his people.” In the few days after 9/11, Arafat thought the game was over. He had called off attacks on Israel, pulled back the Palestinians who were dancing in the street, and rush off to donate blood. But once he saw that he was off the hook, the attacks against Israel resumed. Bush didn't get it. At the time I hoped it was the exception and not the rule. He still doesn’t get it or doesn’t have the moral backbone.

Perhaps there are too many factions and he can’t pick among them. Whatever the case he takes two steps backwards for every one step forward. It’s time that real hawks break with the President and demand more; we need a real alternative not an appeasing moderate in hawk’s clothing. If he's not going to fight an intellectual war, the left and Islamic enemy will define the issues and the public will lose confidence. An occasion one-liner does cut it. He has to follow through in words and deeds.

 
At 8/18/2006 11:36 AM, Blogger cube said...

Amil Imani is saying what we have been saying all along, except his voice carries more weight because he is a moslem. It would behoove Americans to listen.

Bush is not weak, but his presidency has been weakened by the constant attacks upon him by the useful idiots right here in our country.

Reagan handled the Soviets well, but his record with the Middle East left much to be desired. Bush 41 left Saddam in power. Clinton's handling was atrocious & dangerous. So comparatively, Bush 43's record has been an improvement over the past.

We need a conservative president with Bush's backbone, but with the one thing Bush lacks, (and Reagan had in spades) the ability to speak coherently and effectively.

I'll stop ranting now.

 
At 8/18/2006 11:36 AM, Anonymous Seth said...

Old Soldier --

Having read the Duck's comments, diatribes and quasi-antique bumper sticker based comments here for awhile, I've come to the conclusion that he must surely make sense someplace, just not in this dimension.

"There's a signpost up ahead..."

 
At 8/18/2006 11:42 AM, Blogger Jason_Pappas said...

I know Bush is a decent man but without that “ability to speak coherently and effectively” he can’t rally the people and move the nation to he next stage of the war. Nor can he undermine the morale of the enemy. An intellectual war is important, first for our spirit, second to wear down the enemy. We need a Churchill but I’ll settle for a FDR, JFK, or even a Truman. Hell, I'd even pay higher taxes for a tough articulate leader. (Don't quote me on that taxes part, I'll regret it in the morning.)

 
At 8/18/2006 12:00 PM, Blogger Farmer John said...

The duck makes a LOT of sense to me. He's right about losing the war(s)... and until we realize there were more than two wars being fought, we'll continue to lose them!

 
At 8/18/2006 12:06 PM, Blogger Brooke said...

"Let’s face it Bush is weak; he only looks strong next to a Democrat and thanks to Kerry, Dean, and Soros, they made him look good. But Bush doesn’t have what it takes."

Jason is right. Although Bush started out well, he quickly began capitulating to the PC movement.

Withdrawing from calling a spade a spade (Islamic fascism), his refusal to enact policies to get us energy independent from the ME, and his horrid lack of real action on border security say it all.

The Republicans are gonna get it handed to them come election time for alienating and dissapointing their base.

 
At 8/18/2006 12:58 PM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

Reagan won the Cold War with harsh words, seth? Let's put it this way, RBT Reagan is fortunate that Brehznev died when he did or there may have been a war.

...but imagine that, after all the deaths and squandered wealth on arms we find a guy who won the Cold War with rhetoric. Why didn't anyone else think of that. A few schoolyard taunts and it was over.

Wow, visit the land of reason once in a while, huh seth?

 
At 8/18/2006 1:21 PM, Blogger Farmer John said...

mr. ducky,

Your laughin' at the prospect of winning wars w/rhetoric? Those were the wars I was conceding YOU won! Iraq. Afghanistan. Lebanon.

 
At 8/18/2006 1:43 PM, Blogger WomanHonorThyself said...

I can NOT believe our president is letting play the semantics game!..great post AOW!

 
At 8/18/2006 1:43 PM, Blogger Cubed © said...

"The big question is this: Are the positive signs enough to counter the idiocy and the taqiyya? Also, will those who understand the truth have the guts to stand up and say so?"

And "Part II" of the "big question" is whether this will all happen soon enough.

Old Soldier,

Our Leaders, from the Oval Office through the Pentagon and even seeping through those feathers to the general population, are "stuck on stupid" because of a code of ethics called the "Just War" theory, which is nothing more than a load of Politically Correct crap designed by postmodernists to prevent us from winning.

As an Old Soldier, it'll warm the cockles of your heart to listen to a reality-oriented man give a list proper instructions on "how to win" in face of a totally whacked out enemy like Islam.

In fact, it may warm the cockles of the heart of everyone here today (well; with the exception of one person from an alternate universe...).

It looks as if the Muslims are trying to influence us with at least one more attempt at "persuasion" (dirty bomb? Planes exploding over our cities? Blowing up a bridge with thousands of runners on it? Who knows?) before the next presidential election.

Since we aren't Spain, it's entirely possible that it will be the wake-up call that will finally piss us off.

 
At 8/18/2006 2:54 PM, Blogger Old Soldier said...

Cubed, excellent reading! Thanks for the links. In combination they explain why we won't win until we decide otherwise. The material may sound ruthless to the uninitiated - but that is how a war is prosecuted to victory. Anything else is just a waste of valuable lives.

 
At 8/18/2006 3:00 PM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

cubed, "just war" theory is a doctrine of the Roman Catholic church with roots stretching back as far as Augustine.

I would also remind old soldier that until we do a lot of work on our energy policy there is going to be no march to the sea in the M.E. I am surprised that you seem so gleeful about the wholesale killing of populations ... what was all that about "blessed be the peacemakers".

You supposed Christians never seem able to deal with the gospels. Seems a severe shortcoming in your supposed spirituality, no?

 
At 8/18/2006 3:46 PM, Blogger Farmer John said...

...for they will be called the sons of G_d

To my knowledge, He only had one Son. Are you sure that Mathew 5:9 wasn't prophesy mr. ducky? I'm about as far as you can get from being an authority.

 
At 8/18/2006 3:57 PM, Blogger Farmer John said...

But here'as a commentary from someone who was one...William Barclay. Read what he said in regard to peacemaking.

“The blessing is on the peace-maker, not necessarily on the peace-lovers. It very often happens that if a man loves peace in the wrong way, he succeeds in making trouble and not peace. We may, for instance, allow a threatening and dangerous situation to develop, and our defense is that for peace’s sake we do not want to take any action. There is many a person who thinks that he is loving peace, when in fact he is piling up trouble for the future, because he refuses to face the situation and to take the action which the situation demands. The peace the Bible calls blessed does not come from the evasion of issues; it comes from facing them, and conquering them. What this beatitude demands is not the passive acceptance of things because we are afraid of the trouble of doing anything about them, but the active facing of things, and the making of peace, even when the way to peace is through struggle.”

 
At 8/18/2006 4:02 PM, Blogger Farmer John said...

My bad... I should have known..."Mathew", Jesus said it. He was already here.

 
At 8/18/2006 4:12 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but did Bush secretly direct the military to stop killing Islamic fascists?

 
At 8/18/2006 4:35 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

I just noticed that FPM today published Amil Imani's essay. Synchronicity!

 
At 8/18/2006 5:39 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Ducky,

Blessed be the peacemakers

Cemeteries are peaceful. Not a damn one of those folks stored in the ground there commit terrorism.

What is Hezbollah's counter-offer?

 
At 8/18/2006 6:42 PM, Blogger MissingLink said...

Seth, Farmer John,
I wouldn't worry about the left's deception lines.
They do what they have to do as told by their masters. They repeat like parrots their official party lines and conspiracy theories but their actions aren’t directed at the vocal discussion groups (like this one here).
They aim to confuse the masses of people, who do not get actively involved in politics (they just watch).
They thrive when 'our side' loses a battle (our stupidity and incompetence) and scream murder, when 'our side' wins one (fascism, apartheid, torture).
No matter what, our actions, thoughts and behaviour are described as wrong, deplorable and always incompetent and stupid.
No matter what is done by any politician, it will ever satisfy them because they aren’t sticking around to 'discuss' or improve the existing system.
They only use open forums to spread confusion and deception, to undermine values, ethics and common decency.
They are here to create yet another paradise on earth, and only they know how to achieve this noble goal, they have the magic formula.
In practical terms it can be translated to destruction of the existing system. Confusion is one of the best weapons.
Bush pays too much attention to these voices of insanity and gets confused, we all do occasionally.
Let make it absolutely clear – they are voices of insanity and madness even though they might be sometimes ‘very articulate’ and appearing civilized.

 
At 8/18/2006 7:05 PM, Anonymous religion of pieces said...

missinglink said "Let's make it absolutely clear – they are voices of insanity and madness even though they might be sometimes ‘very articulate’ and appearing civilized"

Insanity and madness are intrinsic to Islam due to successive generations of cousin-marriage.

Why are muzzies forced to marry their cousins?
The reason is that marriage in Islam is a financial transaction. You have to BUY your wife (in actual fact you don't buy your wife as a person, you buy a screwable c**t - see below - that's why in some cases a goat will do just as well as a woman.)
So to keep the money in the family, the brothers agree to sell their daughters to one another to be screwed by their sons so they can produce yet more loony inbred psychopathic terrorists. In Islam, c**t is a commodity. If they had to buy c**t from non-relatives their welfare benefits would be squandered outside the family.


From http://www.islamreview.com/articles/sexinislam.htm ...
"In Islamic parlance, this compensation for sexual service is known as mahr or dower. All Muslim men must agree to pay an amount of money before marrying a woman. This payment can be immediate or it can be deferred to a future date. Now you know what a mahr is. No Islamic marriage is valid without the agreement for a dower. In reality, however, this dower is nothing but the payment for the possession of a female body for sexual gratification by the male. Full dower is the payment for the delivery of woman’s person, Booza, meaning Genitalia arvum Mulieris."

From http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/kasem/islamic_womens_day.htm
"Malik’s Muwatta The bride–price is the money that you pay to have sex with your woman; the bride-price is obligatory…28.4.12
Sunaan Abu Dawud If you marry a pregnant woman then her vagina is lawful if you pay the dowry, after she gives birth, flog her; the child becomes your slave...11.2126
Hedaya Full dower is the payment for the delivery of woman’s person. Booza meaning Genitalia arvum Mulieris--- (p.44) "

I always thought Booza meant 'Public House', but apparently not...

'Genitalia arvum Mulieris' is of course a Latin term rather than an Arabic one. The prudish Victorian Indian lawyers who had to interpret Islamic marriage law realised that there is no 'polite' translation into English of 'Booza' that would be acceptable to the Queen, so they rendered the term into Latin so it could not be understood by the ignorant vulgar multitude. (For the small proportion of visitors to this blog who may be ignorant, vulgar and devoid of a classical education, 'Genitalia arvum Mulieris' literally means 'A c**t ready for fu**ing' )

Fu**able c**t for sale! What CAN you do with these people?

 
At 8/18/2006 8:51 PM, Blogger Old Soldier said...

Ducky, read the linked article (Just Wars), you just might learn something.

”You supposed Christians never seem able to deal with the gospels. Seems a severe shortcoming in your supposed spirituality, no?”

Are you judging people on their Christianity now? I seem to recall Jesus telling us to render unto Caesar... which essentially includes the idea of obeying government. Christ by example confronted evil, so why are we to ignore it? If you are comfortable being protected at home, that’s fine, but you do not need to ridicule those of us who recognize evil and are willing to confront it.

ROP, I just learned more about Islam than I think I wanted to. TMI comes to mind, however it certainly explains the manner in which we see Muslim men treat (in reality – mistreat) women. Thanks for the education – I think.

 
At 8/18/2006 9:06 PM, Blogger Brooke said...

Um... Launch them off the planet into the sun? Let's assign that one to NASA.

I will say one thing:

Ducky says:I would also remind old soldier that until we do a lot of work on our energy policy there is going to be no march to the sea in the M.E. "

Ducky is 110% correct on this one. We desperately need to be energy independent. All the ME has to do is simply cut off the supply, and our military would be S.O.L. in a few months. (I hear the Air Force is beginning to shift planes to propane.), let alone our civilian population.

On Glenn Beck's website there is information regarding a little-known proposal to Congress regarding coal to oil energy independence. The technology is now viable and less expensive than what we pay per barrel right now, and we could still seek alternate fuels while making our military independent in two years, and our entire country in 10. I encourage everybody to call your Senator and House reps, and familiarize them with it, and let them know which way the wind blows. I am doing so Monday; as soon as they are open to take my call again!

 
At 8/18/2006 9:19 PM, Anonymous Seth said...

Duck --

There you go, taking a couple of words from one comment and using them to build a sentence with words from another, you do liberal-leftist-traitor-scum proud...

Yes, Reagan said what he felt, but winning the Cold War was another matter. In part, he did so by playing the greatest game of Poker in history -- in other "part", he did so by "forcing" them to play catch-up in the SDA race, even after we'd stopped racing.

You, Mr. Duck -- it is mister, right? You're not... um... not one of those "ladies with a kickstand", right?

It must be profoundly sad to be you, or is "grim" a more applicable word?

You, as they say, are a pity.

 
At 8/18/2006 11:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Little Che Sucky Chucklenuts the Cowardly Liar loves his strawmen.

Tell me chucklenuts, when did the US leave Afghanistan or Iraq?? Just for your edification, the US military has killed more of your Buds this year, in preparation to turning Afghanistan over to the UN (smirk) than any previous year since Mission Accomplished in Afghanistan. Yup, them little IslamoNazis have a real FONDNESS for US bullets and explosives...

And in that horrible civil war in Iraq, we are killing them faster than the REAL war kicking out Saddam.

If we can just keep you LEFTY MORONS at bay for a few more years we will have significantly reduced the number of IslamoNazis willing to kill themselves for a LOST CAUSE!!! They might even start to wonder if Allah is REALLY on their side!!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You Little Che Sucky the Cowardly Liar MORON!!!!!

 
At 8/18/2006 11:22 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh and Little Che Sucky Chucklenuts,

That WAS part of the mission your dad Chucklenuts announced. By going into Afghanistan and Iraq we would attract more of the IslamoNazis to be killed there than in the US blowing up our citizens. It worked, and that is why you LEFTIES go out of your way to NOTICE!!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Sorry Little Che Sucky Chucklenuts. As usual you LOSE because you are a LEFTY MORON!!!

 
At 8/18/2006 11:29 PM, Blogger Freedomnow said...

News Flash:

"Islamist Facists Object to Being Labeled Islamic Fascists"

Its funny that the British and French tried to steal Middle Eastern oil while the US treated the Saudis as partners.

In exchange we got nothing. Then they asked us to help them with Saddam and they dumped us when things got hot.

Thats the story of the Democratic Party isnt it?

Anyways, theres one thing that you can count on from Leftists and Islamists...you cant trust them.

 
At 8/19/2006 7:50 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Religion of Pieces has brought up a topic which the West shies away from--Islamic sexual practices which are "codified."

From the bit of research I've done on the condoned sexual practices of Islam, those practices alone should be enough to condemn Islam.

Some people like to cite certain laws of the Old Testament and to compare those laws to shari'a law. However, compared to Islam, the Old Testament laws were a walk in the park.

The West's failure to develop alternative sources of energy and to develop its own sources of oil has done substantial damage and has significantly contributed to the rot of political correctness. Neither of our political parties has taken the lead to get us out of the energy crunch.

 
At 8/19/2006 8:02 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Anonymous,
By going into Afghanistan and Iraq we would attract more of the IslamoNazis to be killed there than in the US blowing up our citizens. It worked...

The nation-building has been a failure: shari'a law has been incorportated into both the Afghani and Iraqi constitutions. But the "magnet theory" worked!

 
At 8/19/2006 8:10 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Reagan was focused on the threat from Communism. He was a product of his times, so to speak.

As to the bombing of the Marines' barracks in Beirut, according to Reagan's biographer, Reagan wanted to take action but knew that Congress wouldn't go for the financial appropriation so soon after the end of the Vietnamese War.

Back in the mid 80s, no political leader in the West recognized the Islamic threat for what it was. The Iranian Revolution was viewed as an isoloated aberration, not as a significant movement.

 
At 8/19/2006 8:19 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Missing Link,
They [leftists] are here to create yet another paradise on earth, and only they know how to achieve this noble goal, they have the magic formula.

Utopianists, as David Horowitz has said. They think they have the answers, and when confronted with failure, they refuse to admit that failure. Their air of I-know-what's-best-for-you is laden with hypocrisy.

There will never be an earthly utopia. Human nature just won't allow for it.

 
At 8/19/2006 8:20 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

I wonder if GROVER NORQUIST has anything to do with GWB's change in semantics?

 
At 8/19/2006 8:26 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Pastorius,
Islam is a religion which dictates a set of laws (Sharia) which must be used by the people of Islam. Therefore Islam is political.

I would say that Islam is first a political ideology and a religion second. Now, some Muslims have rationalized and have put the religious aspect first. But that version isn't the real Islam. Furthermore, the danger always exists that "moderate Muslims" will radicalize by means of "a revival." Isn't that what we're seeing on the part of homegrown terrorists in the UK?

Jason,
I would add that some of GWB's advisors play in as well. He tends to rely on advisors instead of doing his own research.

Certainly, GWB is losing "the propaganda war." His communication skills deteriorate considerably when he parrots the advice of others and when he bows to pc.

 
At 8/19/2006 8:30 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Cubed,
Thank you for leaving that excellent comment, with links (which I've read, of course).

It looks as if the Muslims are trying to influence us with at least one more attempt at "persuasion" (dirty bomb? Planes exploding over our cities? Blowing up a bridge with thousands of runners on it? Who knows?) before the next presidential election.

Also, chemical or bio attack?

One reason that terrorists like to use exploding planes is that such events are spectacular and help to rally the ummah.

 
At 8/19/2006 9:19 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Brooke,
The Republicans are gonna get it handed to them come election time for alienating and dissapointing their base.

The rumblings are audible now. Another of the issues is immigration.

 
At 8/19/2006 11:47 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

AOW,

the nation building HAS worked. Some people simply FORGOT who they were working with!! There are few Christians or leftists or any other people in those two countries other than Muslims to VOTE!!!

In Afghanistan, Iraq, and the Territories in Palestine we got exactly the result that should have been expected.

I still wonder if they KNEW this and went ahead anyway. After all, it is easier to deal with a movement that isn't hidden.

 
At 8/19/2006 11:55 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Anonymous,
Nation-building didn't work in the sense which most people interpret that term as meaning.

I still wonder if they KNEW this and went ahead anyway. After all, it is easier to deal with a movement that isn't hidden.

Hmmmm....Maybe. I'd like to think that such wiliness exists on our side. In a public forum, I cannot say why I have a bit of hope in that regard.

 
At 8/19/2006 1:29 PM, Blogger Mr. Ducky said...

old soldier, I am simply trying to understand something. Professed Christians of various denominations are here and one thing is consistent.

They have a need to define themselves in violent opposition to someone else. Not just in an arena of ideas, they want hard military strikes. Beamish is the most obvious example.

They also have a strong love for capitalism and the closer to laissez-faire the better. However, on matters of immigration and foreign policy they are unable to understand that their consumptin is unsustainable and creates severe disparities in the world. Their reply is that the poor just have to work harder (at least that's nanc's reply). I find this inconsistent with the Gospels.

I am not judging...I am trying to understand since I have to share the nation with you folks and whether you like it or not you have to share it with me. That's all. I don't understand why you all love war so much.

 
At 8/19/2006 2:00 PM, Anonymous Seth said...

It is not a love of war, Duck.

It's a love of life, peace and freedom that Islam aspires to deprive us of. We didn't start this war, they did, and if we don't beat them, they'll continue to murder us until we agree to give up our freedom and submit to Sharia law.


That's the whole story.

 
At 8/19/2006 4:46 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

They have a need to define themselves in violent opposition to someone else. Not just in an arena of ideas, they want hard military strikes. Beamish is the most obvious example.

Zap! President Beamish just decided 5 Hezbollah occupied cities no longer support terrorism, by dropping neutron weapons on them.

What is Hezbollah's counter-offer?

 
At 8/19/2006 4:57 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

What do you mean you need time to formulate a response? That costs 5 more Hezbollah occupied cities. Zap. Zap. Zap. Zap. Zap.

 
At 8/19/2006 4:58 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

What, that city had no Hezbollah in it? Hmmm.

That one does. Zap.

 
At 8/19/2006 5:03 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

What, now Hezbollah wants a cease fire with President Beamish?

Okay. What city are they in?

Zap.

 
At 8/19/2006 5:05 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Wow. People across the Middle East are making a big show of driving terrorists and their supporters out of their cities in response to President Beamish's road map to peace!

They're taking too long. Zap.

 
At 8/19/2006 5:09 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Duck,
Professed Christians of various denominations are here and one thing is consistent....[Y]ou all love war so much.

You know, of course, that not all who comment here are professed Christians. For example, Cubed isn't.

I think that Seth summed up what I might have said: It is not a love of war, Duck.

It's a love of life, peace and freedom...


This was an interesting comment from you: I am not judging...I am trying to understand since I have to share the nation with you folks and whether you like it or not you have to share it with me.

 
At 8/19/2006 5:10 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

What do you mean I haven't given them a chance to negotiate a peaceful settlement? Sure I have. They could have killed themselves.

Now, where was I?

Oh yeah. Zap. Zap. Zap. Zap. Zap.

Why President Beamish, why? Why are you so belligerent?

Who called me belligerent? Zap.

 
At 8/19/2006 5:13 PM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Mr. Beamish,
What do you mean you need time to formulate a response?...

They're taking too long. Zap.


Muslims respect a strong man. See Islamic tradition.

 
At 8/19/2006 5:27 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

January 21, 2009 WASHINGTON (AP) In a surprise move, newly inaugurated President Beamish ordered the US Navy and Air Force to strike 19 Middle Eastern cities with high energy neutron weapons.

Heakening back to his roughshod three-way debates with Hillary Clinton and John McCain, Beamish pointed out that none of the millions of instantly euthanized people in these cities will be supporting Islamic terrorism ever, or ever again.

Dressed in a baseball cap and heavy metal rock band t-shirt as he spoke with reporters, President Beamish wouldn't comment on how much further he would escalate the war on terrorism he inherited from the Bush administration.

He just smiled and said, "it'll be over by next week."

 
At 8/19/2006 5:48 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

February 3, 2009 WASHINGTON (AP)

With an estimated 130 million slightly irradiated corpses to clear out of pristine, undamaged buildings in cities throughout the Middle East, President Beamish announced a plan for France to head up a massive international burial detail.

President Beamish stated his desires to help the French with their double-digit unemployment rate and to build better relations with Europe as the reasons he chose France to head up the operation.

French officials in Paris expressed surprise at being chosen, but quickly thanked the United States for its magnamity.

"You're damn right they did," said President Beamish, patting what looked to be a remote control with a red button on it before slipping it back into his pocket.

 
At 8/19/2006 6:26 PM, Anonymous Seth said...

That's the only kind of diplomacy that will really be effective over there. Beamish has my vote!

 
At 8/19/2006 7:53 PM, Blogger Brooke said...

Amen. Like AOW said, Islam only respects show of strength. Diplomacy is to be used when one is in a weak position.

Understanding the enemy is vital. If you don't speak their language, how can you ever hope to ensure your safety?

 
At 8/19/2006 9:17 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

Nay, pilgrims. War is diplomacy.

 
At 8/19/2006 9:38 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

February 10, 2009 WASHINGTON (Reuters)

The Beamish administration has just inked a deal with the Pepsi Cola corporation for full media advertising sponsorship during media coverage of Operation: TOE-100, the military component of President Beamish's campaign trail plan to bring the entire world under American control in 100 days or less.

Billed the "knockout punch" during the 2008 debates due to reducing Republican candidate John McCain and Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton to sputtering about how other nations have a right to threaten American interests, the "World in 100 Days" theme took on a life of its own. Beamish handily won the November elections with 97% of the popular vote.

Pepsi will air advertisements for Mountain Dew and Taco Bell during media coverage of airstrikes on as yet undisclosed locations.

(man, I miss the future)

 
At 8/19/2006 10:07 PM, Blogger Mr. Beamish the Instablepundit said...

...The Dr. Phil Show is brought to you by Taco Bell, proud sponsor of the Manifest Destiny War. Buy a Nacho Bel Grande with extra beans and beef and win a chance to choose a target anywhere in the world to be hit by stealth bombers...

::cue bumper music::

Dr. Phil: Now Rodney, you were telling us before the break that you became obese because you're addicted to President Beamish's foreign policy?

Rodney: Yes. Every 1 in 1,000 Mountain Dew cans wins a code that you can go online and choose from a list of foreign heads of state and leaders of non-government organizations, and your choice will get by a Hellfire missile fired from a Predator drone on live TV. And that new Taco Bell commercial, I just love Nacho Bel Grandes. Remember the Caracas firebombing last week? I so totally won that one.

Dr. Phil: So, you eat and drink all this junk food just to select targets?

Rodney: Well, Nacho Bel Grandes are pretty good.

Dr. Phil: Hello! Rodney, you don't have to eat the food. All you need is the game piece. Karachi? Yes sir. And I didn't gain a pound.

Rodney: You took Karachi off the board? That was you? Totally awesome!

 
At 8/20/2006 6:47 PM, Blogger Jason_Pappas said...

Someone should tell Ducky that Christians haven’t been pacifists since they were lion-feed, hiding in the catacombs to escape Roman persecution, 1900 years ago. After realizing that the millennium was a ways off, they decided to get down to business of working, ruling, and fighting so that they could establish and maintain societies where they were safe. Today’s threat to that freedom is Islam; it was communism but we got rid of your old friends, Ducky. Get with the program!

 
At 8/20/2006 11:12 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jason Pappas,

it doesn't matter what we tell the Little Che Sucky Cowardly Liar, he only regurgitates what he has eaten, or sucked, in Socialist Land.

By the Bye, the correct term is not IslamoFascist anyway, it is ISLAMONAZI!!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I mean, no Palis are naming themselves after Mussolini are they??

 
At 8/21/2006 1:25 AM, Blogger Pim's Ghost said...

Jason, there's no telling Ducky anything. And if you do tell him, he won't respond at all, or will do so only by changing the subject.

But hey, I took a break for a while and I've come back to great discussions!

Pastorius great point about Islam being political by nature. I keep forgetting that even as I remember it.

Hey, party at my place when Fidel buys the farm, OK? DAMN I wish I could be in Miami for that party! As it is, I'll find whoever I can and invite you guys. Cuban Exile cigars on me!!

 
At 8/21/2006 6:53 AM, Blogger Jason_Pappas said...

Points well taken!

PG, count me in!

 
At 8/21/2006 7:18 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Anonymous,

Some other terms mentioned in comments at Democracy Frontline:

Islamo-Satanists, Islamo-Genocidalists, Islamo-Marxists, Islamo-sadists, Islamopsychopathy, Islamopsychosis, Islamo-autism, and Schislamophrenia.

 
At 8/21/2006 8:07 AM, Blogger Always On Watch said...

Pim's Ghost,
Good to see you out and about again.

If there's a party, I want an invite!

 
At 8/22/2006 12:15 AM, Blogger Pim's Ghost said...

Oh you're all invited! Even Ducky. Even if I kind of identify him with that last paragraph in the post. Remember, don't be the useful idiot.

Are days really shrinking into only a few hours, or is it just me? But yeah, Ducky you're in. You'd have a blast talking in real time with some of us folks.

 
At 8/24/2006 12:26 PM, Blogger Freedomnow said...

I missed Ducky's comment. His suggestion that he is not judging is misleading.

What he is trying to do is equate Christians with aggression against Muslims.

and that is P-R-O-P-A-G-A-N-D-A

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home