It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Pamela Geller vs Imam Anjem Choudary on Fox News, Hannity: 'You Want Her To Die!'

page: 15
39
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
a reply to: beezzer

But that doesnt make me loath Rush any less. Hes like a bad taste in the mouth. You guys will be better off when hes rotting in the ground. hes a cancer on the good people of the USA. Him and others like Hannity, etc.... they spread hate and fear. Just like extremist muslims. But they use the TV instead of bombs and guns.


You believe the world (and the good people of the USA) would be better off with Limbaugh and Hannity dead, because they only spread hate and fear...and are cancer.

Do you also believe MSNBC and liberal media spreads only rainbows and unicorns...and make the world a better place?
Or would it be better if they were dead too?



First of all i dont wish them dead. But the US will be better off with them dead. yes. Do i feel the same about the other US news channels? A big fat NOPE

Non of them are perfect, but they cant hold a candle to Fox's hatred and xenophbia, racism, intolerance and fear mongering.

They cant even compete. Do the other news channels make the world better? I guess not, no. But at least they dont spread hatered and fear which Fox openly does.




posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: 3danimator2014

I have to also agree, she is rather a simpleton. But our laws regarding the right to freedom of speech and expression are there to protect the idiots of our nations as well of the rest of us.

They do not exist however to promote the murderer of a Woman by xenophobic religious intolerant homophobic persons such as the, for want of a better word, Man in question.


Oh i agree. She should be able to do and say what she wants and he needs to just dissapear. But shes still an idiot.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: undo
a reply to: 3danimator2014

the question that is often put to me as a christian is: why don't you stop the crazies in your religion from being crazy? the problem is, only the crazies rise to the top, be it religious or not religious, and try to force people to behave a certain way. its like some kind of mental disorder that they must must must control other human beings. and most people just aren't like that. it takes alot to get people to rise up against crazy.



Quoted for agreement

second line



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

Fill your boots..if you or others get their rocks off doing it, I keep hearing freedom and rights..is the govt trying to stop you?(don't mean you personally)
edit on 8-5-2015 by vonclod because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
a reply to: beezzer

But that doesnt make me loath Rush any less. Hes like a bad taste in the mouth. You guys will be better off when hes rotting in the ground. hes a cancer on the good people of the USA. Him and others like Hannity, etc.... they spread hate and fear. Just like extremist muslims. But they use the TV instead of bombs and guns.


You believe the world (and the good people of the USA) would be better off with Limbaugh and Hannity dead, because they only spread hate and fear...and are cancer.

Do you also believe MSNBC and liberal media spreads only rainbows and unicorns...and make the world a better place?
Or would it be better if they were dead too?



First of all i dont wish them dead. But the US will be better off with them dead. yes.


I don't know, my friend... you seem very confused.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: 3danimator2014

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: 3danimator2014
a reply to: beezzer

But that doesnt make me loath Rush any less. Hes like a bad taste in the mouth. You guys will be better off when hes rotting in the ground. hes a cancer on the good people of the USA. Him and others like Hannity, etc.... they spread hate and fear. Just like extremist muslims. But they use the TV instead of bombs and guns.


You believe the world (and the good people of the USA) would be better off with Limbaugh and Hannity dead, because they only spread hate and fear...and are cancer.

Do you also believe MSNBC and liberal media spreads only rainbows and unicorns...and make the world a better place?
Or would it be better if they were dead too?



First of all i dont wish them dead. But the US will be better off with them dead. yes.


I don't know, my friend... you seem very confused.


If you cant understand the difference between actually wishing someone dead and saying the US would be better off when they die...then i cant help you buddy. Its not complicated or sneaky or hypocritical. Think about it.

Hint: I have never thought to myself "i wish they would just die!" ...EVER.
edit on 8-5-2015 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
Anyone actually gonna show us a Quran verse that says I can lie to you in the name of Islam for any reason I choose?


Thanks in advance!


Well here is a quote i found from a website i found. Its not my opnion mind you.



Matthew Pope • 2 years ago
Taqiyya is a shi'ite concept. i understand not all Muslims practice this. but you ALL use kitman. i believe most of the denial of the qurans content is due to lack of knowledge from Muslims. but let me draw your attention to a particular Hadith, that you failed to mention in this deceiving post of yours: Bukhari (49:857) - "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar."

In fact there are many verses permitting Muslims to lie to non believers. You can only focus on one as the others are so damaging, you wouldn't be able to post your Kitman nonsense.

Qur'an (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..."
The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.

Qur'an (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts"

Qur'an (66:2) - "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths"

Qur'an (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." (see also 8:30 and 10:21)

that the rest of the verse (and the next) mandate murder in undefined cases of "corruption" and "mischief."


Link to site i got quote from

Here is a counter site.
Taqiya article

Personally its just a small percentage who actually decieve others,same as all religions in that regard that has extremist in them.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:32 AM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Got it.
You don't WISH Limbaugh and Hannity were dead...But, for the betterment of the US,...you THINK they should die.
Thanks for clearing that up.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:33 AM
link   
WHY?
are moderate reformist Muslim voices being silenced by the Obama administration?

Obama kept reform Muslims out of summit on extremism



The White House excluded members of a prominent group of reformist Muslims from its terror summit this week, apparently because President Obama rejects their argument that such groups as Islamic State of Iraq and Syria are actually motivated by Islam.

A group of 23 prominent Muslim reformers signed a full-page ad in the Sunday New York Times on Jan. 11 asking "What can Muslims do to reclaim their 'beautiful religion'?"

But Obama and officials throughout his administration deny any connection between Islam and the terrorists beheading and burning their victims in a reign of terror in the Middle East.

Muslim reformers say the administration is ignoring them because they disagree with Obama's refusal to acknowledge the Islamic roots of the extremists' ideology.

Some of the most prominent reformers have argued for years that the ideological and theological roots of Islamist extremism must be addressed, but administration officials carefully avoided exactly that subject during Obama's three-day summit.


The White House is also undermining its own efforts by working with people who sympathize with the goals of violent extremist groups, if not their methods, the reformers say.


sympathize with the goals of violent extremist groups?

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

One of the 23 signatories, Tarek Fatah, is a columnist for the Toronto Sun in Canada, and has noted the lack of response from administration officials and journalists.

"Instead of engaging with these progressive Muslims and supporting their call for reform, not only did the White House ignore them, but every media outlet I saw other than Fox News did as well," he wrote on Feb. 3.

Instead, the White House and many in the mainstream media work with Muslim leaders who sympathize with the extremists, says Zuhdi Jasser, a doctor and former Navy officer who leads the American Islamic Foundation for Democracy.




Maajid Nawaz, a former Islamist radical andone of those who signed the Times advertisement, is co-founder of the Quilliam Foundation, an anti-extremist British think-tank. The refusal of Obama and his officials to name their real enemy is referred to among reformers as the "Voldemort effect," after the villain in the Harry Potter books whose name could not be mentioned.

Nawaz told CNN on Wednesday that refusing to address the Islamist ideology directly puts all Muslims at risk of being blamed for the actions of a tiny minority — the exact opposite effect of what Obama intended by his approach.



The refusal of Obama and his officials to name their real enemy is referred to among reformers as the "Voldemort effect,"
edit on 113131p://bFriday2015 by Stormdancer777 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: 3danimator2014

Got it.
You don't WISH Limbaugh and Hannity were dead...But, for the betterment of the US,...you THINK they should die.
Thanks for clearing that up.


Nope, but hey. If you want to get a reaction from me and play silly games then be adult about it instead of pretending you dont understand what i mean.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: IAMTAT

He's using Prog-speak. Translation: 'I wouldn't kill them myself but I would vote for someone to do it!'



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 12:25 PM
link   
a reply to: undo

you know undo that question is a load of crap. Crazy Muslim fanatics are stopped all the time from doing stupid things in their own communities. You cant except for the entire Muslim faith base to suddenly get a psychic feeling that one of their false brother or sisters is going to suddenly commit a hate crime half way across the globe in some self righteous Christian community. Where are all the Catholics to stop priests from molesting little boys. Why do Catholic priests keep raping and molesting little boys?? Why does the church always cover it up??

Why dont Evangelists and Southern baptists do more to stop their fringe members from attacking and bombing abortion doctors ad clinics?? Why cant environmentalists stop the same fanatical type that make attacks against corporate polluters (some may believe their crimes are justified) ??? Why don't Mexicans speak up more against the evils of the Cartels?? Same goes for atheists. Many violent crimes in America are committed by people of no faith. Where are all the atheists to denounce them in mass??

Because an entire group of people are not linked psychically to each other to know when a loony is going to attack.
I would say your line of thinking is more ridiculous than Pam's . She at least alleges to only be hateful of fanatical Islam. You have an unreal expectation that all members of a group of people are responsible for the actions and thoughts of the few crazies that commit crimes.

For the record Muslims speak out often to condemn these attacks in the false pretense of for their faith. But only local affiliates ever pick it up when a certain Mosque or civic group does so. It will not make national headlines.

I think the problem here is your perception and that of many other implies there should be a moderate figurehead out on TV ready for American viewing consumption for peace of mind to condemn every and all attacks done by a violent fraction of individuals who do not represent that group of people or their faith in any truth. A rather ludicrous expectation if you ask me. Anyone with half a brain can understand these actions are not universally accepted and do not need a national moderate figurehead to pat everyone on the head and say "shhh..... down, down. Remain calm, for we condemn this attack, and it does not represent our faith or the majority of its adherents in any way shape or form. Allah bless you, and God Bless America"

Anyone who falls back to that argument clearly just needs some reassurance for their own petty prejudices if you ask me.
Local Muslims speak out against Boston bombings

ISLAM AND TERRORISM ‘DO NOT MIX,’ IMAN SAYS

mus lims speak out against charlie hebdo

And specifically for this event,
For Muslim Leaders, Texas Attack Means Another Public Apology for Events They Don't Control

Muslim groups in America typically speak out after Islamic believers cause harm or create an uproar. Sunday's shooting outside an event center in Garland, Texas, was no exception.

Muslim leaders and activists often release statements immediately following an attack, just as pundits regularly demand that moderate Muslims speak out after terrorist attacks. They usually condemn the individuals' actions and repeatedly say the behavior lands far from their religious beliefs.

"There's a sensation to it. There's a perception that goes to it. We feel that we should put our two bits in there, as well as explain the way we feel," Ahsanullah Zafar, national president of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, tells Newsweek. He says the group, which is one of America's oldest Muslim communities, understands people won't always agree but urges them to discuss issues peacefully with one another. That belief, he says, is different than that of some Muslims living in the Middle East.


They are speaking out quite often. The general public just either likes to pretend they don't to continue to rationalize their personal prejudices, or it does not go on national broadcast.

You can just google "Muslims denounce/condemn/ speak out against" followed by any attack in the name of Islam by some Frenzied loon.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:06 PM
link   
Serious question:
Is not homosexuality extremely offensive to the Muslim community?

Why, then, is not MSNBC and other liberal progressive news outlets critical of these examples...of 'provocation' towards the Muslim community? (below)
On the contrary, they promote and celebrate homosexuality and events such as these....while they criticize and condemn Ms. Geller for her contest.

According to liberal progressive media outlets...aren't the organizers of these Gay Art contest events also guilty of 'self-promotion' ...and just as guilty of "Asking for 'it' (i.e. violence)"...meaning they are knowingly offending the religious beliefs of Muslims around the world, while intentionally provoking a violent response from a couple of ISIS hit goons looking to kill in the name of Allah?



The Big Gay Art Show

thebiggayartshow.blogspot.com...



Long Beach Gay Pride’s art contest underway

blogs.presstelegram.com...
edit on 8-5-2015 by IAMTAT because: comment added



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: DYepes

You seem to forget that is two groups of Islamic followers in America, the converted ones mostly call domestic and the ones that are here because migration, the first one are not as closed minded as the second ones that bring their own set of laws and rules into the communities that they build closed and away from the rest of the public.

In other words foreign Islamic followers tend to stick together and to themselves so nobody really knows what their intentions are most of the time, they are also closed monitored by CIA.




posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Serious question:
Is not homosexuality extremely offensive to the Muslim community?

Why, then, is not MSNBC and other liberal progressive news outlets critical of these examples...of 'provocation' towards the Muslim community? (below)
On the contrary, they promote and celebrate homosexuality and events such as these....while they criticize and condemn Ms. Geller for her contest.

According to liberal progressive media outlets...aren't the organizers of these Gay Art contest events also guilty of 'self-promotion' ...and just as guilty of "Asking for 'it' (i.e. violence)"...meaning they are knowingly offending the religious beliefs of Muslims around the world, while intentionally provoking a violent response from a couple of ISIS hit goons looking to kill in the name of Allah?



The Big Gay Art Show

thebiggayartshow.blogspot.com...



Long Beach Gay Pride’s art contest underway

blogs.presstelegram.com...



Because it's not a direct attack on their religion. The answer is simple and i suspect you know it but you needed any excuse to a repeat this lame argument andanti typical ATS anti liberal rant. Right?

No one is suggesting what you said because that would be idiotic and the realm of tumblr accounts.

Sometimes I wish you guys would just outright say "we hate Arabs and muslims" and get any other pretence out the way.
edit on 8-5-2015 by 3danimator2014 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Both intolerant fanatics who have to resort to screaming and shouting at each other to make their point.

No time for them.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:40 PM
link   
a reply to: 3danimator2014

So you see drawing a picture as a direct attack against their religion.

Yet allowing gay marriage isn't. Even though it is against their religion.

Yet you support the freedom to draw the picture, even though you claim it is a direct attack on their religion.

Why would you allow a direct attack on their religion?



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kram09
Both intolerant fanatics who have to resort to screaming and shouting at each other to make their point.

No time for them.



Couldn't agree more. Bit don't forget about the host . No time for all three.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

Marge I have forgotten nothing. The accusation was why are moderate Muslims not speaking out, and I showed that they were in fact speaking out. And the Imam even states

He says the group, which is one of America's oldest Muslim communities, understands people won't always agree but urges them to discuss issues peacefully with one another. That belief, he says, is different than that of some Muslims living in the Middle East.


Now I also interpret him to mean Middle Eastern Muslims who immigrate to America with just as fanatical of a mindset. Do we really need to nitpick and demand that every moderate Muslim needs to have an apology contingency for every sub group and whacky fringe claiming the faith?

because I would say as ar as things go in America, more crime is committed in this country by individuals who regularly visit Catholic, Christian, Protestant and Lutheran churches than practicing Muslims. it just so happens the news sees no point in reporting when a college rapist, drug dealer, scorned lover that murders, or random violent attacker ALSO happens to go to church every Sunday.



posted on May, 8 2015 @ 01:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: 3danimator2014

So you see drawing a picture as a direct attack against their religion.

Yet allowing gay marriage isn't. Even though it is against their religion.

Yet you support the freedom to draw the picture, even though you claim it is a direct attack on their religion.

Why would you allow a direct attack on their religion?


Why? Because we should live in a country where religion can be mocked. I wholeheartedly agree with being allowed to draw Mo as anything anyone wants . But i recognise that they will be offended as this is a direct attack. Do I care that they are offended? Not in the slightest.



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join