The Obvious Strategy of The Islamic State Is Working, You’re All Being Stupid

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: roadgravel

The message I've been getting from the left lately is that it's ok to call people stupid, ignorant, morons and any other name in the book if you have the "moral authority" to do so.

I was actually planning on starting a thread about this.

The left agree with free speech, as long as they agree with what is said.

a reply to: UnBreakable

Yeah it's an odd trend that has really been taking a hold since the presidential elections began.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

" The problem is not Muslims, it’s the clash of ideologies of radical Islam with Western culture. "

It's Simple . One Must Survive , and the Other Perish . My Money is on Western Culture .

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Double Post .

a reply to: Zanti Misfit

It's Simple . One Must Survive , and the Other Perish . My Money is on Western Culture .

Agreed.

We'll probably kill the entire species before this alleged clash of un_cultures reaches the next level.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

The problem is not Muslims, it’s the clash of ideologies of radical Islam with Western culture.

No it's not. You are wrong.

"it's very encouraging to me that Joe Biden is the incoming vice president. He has been the prime proponent of a decentralized Iraq. And although in the campaign Senator McCain described his plan as, I think, a cockamamie idea, it is in fact what the Bush administration has done in part. The Bush administration, in 2007, decided to finance a Sunni army, which is the Awakening. And that's why we've had success. Biden would only take this a next step and encourage the Sunnis to form their own region" -- Peter Galbraith, senior diplomatic fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, National Public Radio All Things Considered, November 12, 2008

Biden - Cheney plan to partition

DENY IGNORANCE.

Great OP!


It is a good development that people have separated the jihadi violent madness from Traditional Islam. Islam is not perfect but just an ordinary exoteric religion with all the common fleas of any of our exoteric religions.


I have been posting for a long time that people need to understand the history of this: where were all the radical Islamic jihadis before 911?

Also we need to understand that ALL the radicalism comes from a cult within Islam--Wahhabism that has merged with a temporal power in Saudi Arabia which is the source of Wahhabism.

Also, this is a modern phenomenon, and there are great arguments that many of these terror events are false flags.

This has nothing to do with Islam proper BUT….In any event I still think Obama has not been strong enough against ISIS and that his pacifism is not sincere. His idea of not labeling terrorism as Islamic jihadism imo is also not sincere.

I think Obama does more harm that good in his rigid stance.

He is enflaming the hatred in my view as a sinister tactic.

Of course the American people don’t want to make this a war on Islam, even Bush said that.

Even if we reject the element of this we still have the radical violence of a sinister poison within WAHHABI Islam.

I have repeated many times and I'll repeats it again ALL terrorists are Wahhabis. I've had personal extensive experience in this regard.

Of course all Wahhabis aren’t terrorists but the pernicious ethnocentric poison out of Saudi Arabian Wahhabism enflames the poison of ethnocentric hatred that is the fuel of radical jihadism.

a reply to: Willtell

I agree. The only thing I disagree with is why so many people refuse to acknowledge the obvious: Western governments have been in cahoots with those same Wahhabis for more than a century. Wahhabi paramilitaries are the "boots on the ground" in Western backed wars, particularly wars where Western citizens refuse to fight. This was especially true during the Cold War. And govts on both the "left" and "right" are guilty of maintaining this alliance.

To be blunt, Western govts view their energy deals, foreign investment deals, and defense contract deals with Wahhabi govts as being worth the occasional Wahhabi terror attack against Western citizens. They even use those occasional terror attacks to push through new legislation and to justify new military spending and overseas expenditures. Even if the Wahhabi groups disappeared overnight, the Western MIC would simply hype up another global threat in order to sustain the contracts and justify new wars.

I recently read the 28 page section from the 9-11 report and it clearly lays out a laundry list of potential ties between the Saudi Arabian govt, members of its elites, and various extremists (and possible front groups for extremists). To put that in perspective, the report was commissioned in 2002 and the 28 page section in question was released internally in 2004. That means that different members of our political elite have known this info throughout the last year of the 1st Bush Administration, the 2nd Bush administration, and both Obama administrations. And yet we're still arming Saudi Arabia and Qatar, still protecting them, and still supporting them. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge that our govts are in on this are beyond reason to me.

Just watch this 6min clip from an interview with ex-Mossad head Efraim Halevy. It's only 6min but it should get the point across.

I wish someone could tell that Islamic State is the culprit when groomed men with fake ID´s and expencive cell phones etc are taking asylum places instead of those in Syria who really need it. We have seen what is happening in Europe and if anyone says there is nothing to worry about.. yes, tell that to all those underage girls for example in my country who have been assaulted and sexually harrassed by them. Is it a doing by ISIS ? Is those terrorist acts ?

I am surprised to see OP as an opinion leader directing the way which kind of opinions is allowed and which is not.

Well looking forward where we get in here .. ( confused :I )

Then GIVE me a decent semantic description of the group that we are fighting.
I'M pissed off, not a bigot,I don't want ANY innocent people harmed in anyway.
OUR targets like that and use it well.
Jihadists,Daesh..MEH, they are TARGETS alone and are THE ONLY faction of Islam that I don't like.
IDEOLOGY definitions are irrelevant until we are more aligned to exterminate the ideas of these creatures.
SO FAR the bad ones are demanding SHARIA laws in foreign countries,THESE should be deported NOW.
Assimilate to our country's laws and loyalty but save the name of Allah instead of God in the oath of allegiances we take.
YES that means Islam and it 's auspices must also endure what Christianity endures in American free speech. THAT will happen as well, THEY establish loyalty to American VALUES,not foreign customs that are felonies in America,as some obviously are.
I WILL not agree with any blanket acts against Islam ,ever,BUT we DO have a targeting issue to solve and solve it FAST,before our genius government gives it a shot and DOES go all "BLANKET".
It takes a higher degree in college to really F##K UP the planet like this.

Delusional OP reveals ignorance of Islam, it's history, it's doctrines, it's tactics...then calls other ignorant.

Keep apologising, keep making it about race, keep burying your head in the sand.

Says we are "playing into their hands" then talks about censorship...because, you know, it's just not fair to tell the truth.

The fanatics who really control Islam, the Imams and community activists, the milirants, they love people like the OP.

He helps them.

It'd be funny if it wasn't so serious.

Coming to America from another homeland implies the idea of "blending in". So what happens, what are the rules when groups refuse to assimilate?

There are examples of communities within America that remain segregated by choice, to their own demerit, but the thing becomes intolerable when they act out against the people who welcomed them. This is what identifying evil is all about.

Then at what point to the semantics start and stop? Are we considering a ban on people from "Muslim countries" or simply banning people from places with unreliable records keeping which happen to also be at war etc, adinfinitum.

Word games are embedded in this performance piece.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord


The problem is not Muslims, it’s the clash of ideologies of radical Islam with Western culture.

Actually the problem may well be Saudi Arabia and Wahhabism (the European Parliament once called it the main source of global terrorism') and the fact that they've spent over $100 billion exporting it to various much poorer Muslim nations worldwide.


Thread


Below is footage from a mosque in England where followers are instructed they must "live like a state within a state" until they are "strong enough to take over."


]


Sure not all muslims are the same (and I have a very good friend who is muslim) but you really can't blame people for being a little concerned when they view documetaries like this .

a reply to: NihilistSanta

FOX news is so painful to watch, so full of lies promoting war and genocide. Same goes for 99% of the media worldwide.

a reply to: Athetos

Me too. I lived for over ten years in a Muslim country and I did like it quite a bit. However, I had to follow the law of the country, customs and everything that goes with it. Otherwise, I would have been asked, maybe or maybe not so politely, to take the next flight out and never to return. Why should we(westerners) not be allowed to demand the same?

a reply to: Nyberg

I heard a thought provoking analogy the other day;

If every bag of 100 skittles contains 3 or four that will kill you, do you ban skittles or tell people to keep buying them ...

a reply to: Timely

As per your analogy:

Since the United States can't ban them (muslims), we should do our best to force them unto the populations of our enemies?

China is already banning them.

North Korea may be a fun experiment, but since they're a full on 'nuclear dictatorship' the chances of the muslim population growing to a point where it gets to be out of control sounds slim to none under Lil Kim.

Iran is already filled to the brim with muslims, though a Shia vs Sunni civil war might create some problems for the current controlling powers in Iran.

So when you think about it, we really wouldn't be solving the problem. We would just be temporarily suspending symptoms of the disease, kind of like when Cancer goes into remission.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

You are correct.
It is a new kind of battle that we face. People even confuse the difference between race and religion !

Talk about blurred lines !

It is however a fight that ultimately will be fought.
I only hope we can reduce that fight to one where sensibilities must be held imperative ...

The radicalism is spreading too easily into the mosques across the world looking and finding that .0001 percent of the billions of Muslims who will take radical action.

Instead of a breeding ground for extremism, this vast all continent spanning religious system must become an efficient filter to eradicate it when it shows up.

originally posted by: aorAki

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
This is ATS. We (used to) know how to be better.

Why do you think this change occurred?

No one can say for sure, but as the wreckage and debris of the 0bama administration is behind us. The Trump administration is a whole new game.