It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Islam Conspiracy

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 11:58 AM
It totally amazes me that I responded to this thread, I am like the fifth response from the beginning and either no one wants to read the truth that I have post links to. Or it means two, I will take at such that my links are true and there is no argument to the fact. As I know there are true because it is happening in my own area.

I have also present the sheep in wolves clothing theory, the real truth can be found on my threads for those whom are truly interested.

I add these to the origanil three:

[edit on 8-12-2009 by drmeola]

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 04:41 PM

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by zilch

This claim that Muslim women wear the oppressive types of dress voluntarily is a lie. Search the web, and you can find tons of articles about how these dress requirements are forced on Muslim women.

How many honor killings does it take to intimidate the women into following the dress requirement?

When the communities belief is that any woman who does not meet the dress standards is free game for gang rape, then the horrible rules of the community force women to wear these symbols of oppression.

When I see the man and the woman dressed in a manner that they are covered head to toe, I have respect.

When I see the woman covered from head to toe, while the man is dressed comfortably in a western style, then I see slavery, which is an assault on my beliefs.

I'd suggest that you read The Politics of Piety by Saba Mahmood. One of her major points involves the formation of the self through tradition and habituation (very similar to Aristotelian philosophy, which is very prominent in Islam).

The veil represents an external expression of modesty. By wearing it, Muslim women are showing their internal dedication to that modesty, which is a similar concept to the practice of modesty and humbleness that the Christian saint Augustine promoted in his confessions.

To bring it closer to home, take, for example, a man who wears a suit to the office every day. Yes, it may be required that the man wear the suit based on the company's dress code, but it also makes that man feel more professional and dignified while wearing it. To not wear it would bring an internal feeling inappropriate for the workplace.

Or, if you're not a guy who works in an office, take the example of going to a bar or a nightclub. You might comb your hair, wear nice clothes, put on cologne or otherwise pretty yourself up. Why? Yes, it is in part to pick up chicks, but another big part is the confidence it inspires in you to feel that you look your best and are able to pick up chicks.

I'd bet you'd be surprised to find out that not everyone wants to be an American, and follow 'American values'. A very dangerous and popular idea is to simply dismiss the arguments and beliefs of Muslim women by claiming that they're 'brainwashed' or 'slaves'. Doing so only serves to divide and degrade them. In a sense, you're doing exactly what you claim their governments and religion to be doing to them.

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 05:59 PM
The veil is very much a part of tradition, as much as it is part of the religion. The majority of women who wear the veil are not forced to do so, and do not constantly wear the veil. It is worn around men who are not part of the womens family. Around other women, or men in their own family, the veil isnt usually worn. Of course when leaving the house, most women who wear the veil will have it on.

i have many cousins who do not wear the veil, just as i have many that do. Has any of the people who are calling it degrading and slave symbolism been to an Islamic country? The only one i can think of right off the top is Saudia Arabia, where all the women wear veils. That has more to do with culture than with religion. As do a lot of the laws governing Sauida Arabia. There are countless other Islamic countries where one can walk for miles and not see more than four or five veils. Take Lebanon for example.

As i had said in my earlier post, Saudia Arabia is the major representative of Islam to the world, so of course many westerners view Islam based upon the wahhabist interpretation of it.

As a Sufi, i could care less if my significant other has a veil on or not. In fact, simply because im American, i would prefer her not to have one on, as then all the guys can envy me :p

Truthfully, Islam is very misunderstood. People seem to like talking out of their asses when it comes to such things, citing information they hear or see from sources whom they choose to believe, rather than firsthand knowledge or researching all sources for themselves.

What would i look like claiming all Christians kneel before a cross every evening or have icons of Mary spread throughout their house, simply because Catholics do it.

Or maybe a better analogy is that all Christians handle snakes and speak in tongues, just because a few Pentecostal folks do it.

Love and Peace

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 09:22 PM
reply to post by whatukno

Folks call it the way they see it with the muzzies.

Islam is completely incompatible with Western civilization...Period. The crap about "moderate" islam is just that-crap.


Here in Dallas, one of the local am stations has been doing a (x) in Dallas segment every so many Friday mornings.

Gay in dallas, Female, Black, Mexican. You get they point. They put it out on the station and recieved interested parties (left and right) to do the morning interview with. Much information and many viewpoints were given. It was really interesting to hear from different folks.

This is a very conservative station mind you.

Then came Muslim in Dallas.....the sound of crickets!

No one called. No one showed.

Few days before the segment, the host's support team WENT OUT TO RECRUIT GUESTS! The host was against this but went along with it.

Nothing. None of the "many moderate muslims" communicated EVEN WHEN MUSLIM GROUPS WERE CONTACTED!

What does this say about the muzzies? Plenty. They always scream "you dont understand us, we want peace!" or my favorite "the muslim community doesnt condone X".

Well folks, they either need to put up or shut up. They've really not contributed much to the west (granted the alhambra is nice. A big thanks to Charles Martel for keeping them in their due bounds).

The ONLY way for Islam to be compatible with western culture is to evaporate.

As different as they are, Buddists,Sihks and Hindu's seem to do fine here(in Britain it maybe getting out of hand). Hell, even the Hari Krishna freaks!

You dont hear much about them raising too much hell do you?

I am a nationalist and make no apologies for it. I am a believer in Language, Borders, and Culture. Without those three pillars a society will die. Anything that defies those three things in the host culture should be treated as a cancer and excised.

Let the flames begin!

Westlichen Welt Uber Alles!

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 09:31 PM
Wukky's political correctness would be laughable, if it wasn't so dangerous. It's his elitist multiculturalist attitude that is responsible for the failure to prevent Fort Hood.

ACT! for America Founder and President, Brigitte Gabriel delineates the disastrous effect Political Correctness is having on our leaders and citizens in the fight against Radical Islam in America. She lambastes its debilitating power to render government and the military impotent in fretting out those who wish us harm. She lays the killings at FT. Hood at the feet of the PC mentality world.

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 10:09 PM
reply to post by Spiramirabilis

Zilch might be a woman and a Muslim, but she doesn't speak for all Muslim women.

None of what I am saying about Muslim women who are forced to wear the burqa and the hijab is my opinion, it is all based on testimonials by Muslim women.

The fact is that many women feel forced to wear the these oppressive articles of clothing.

Here is but another report.

Girls as young as four are wearing the hijab to school: that is not a freely made choice. It stops them taking part in education and reaching their potential, and the idea that tiny children need to protect their modesty is abhorrent.

And behind the closed doors of some Muslim houses, countless young women are told to wear the hijab and the veil. These are the girls who are hidden away, they are not allowed to go to university or choose who they marry. In many cases, they are kept down by the threat of violence.

The burkha is the ultimate visual symbol of female oppression. It is the weapon of radical Muslim men who want to see Sharia law on Britain's streets, and would love women to be hidden, unseen and unheard. It is totally out of place in a civilised country.

Precisely because it is impossible to distinguish between the woman who is choosing to wear a burkha and the girl who has been forced to cover herself and live behind a veil, I believe it should be banned.

Read more:

I certainly trust what I read in these reports more then what I am told by people here who obviously have an agenda.

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 11:09 PM
reply to post by Bigwhammy

Wukky's political correctness would be laughable, if it wasn't so dangerous. It's his elitist multiculturalist attitude that is responsible for the failure to prevent Fort Hood.

That is incorrect, the events at Fort Hood was a failure on the part of superior officers in recognizing that a person under their command was unstable. I have maintained throughout this thread that yes some Muslims are indoctrinated in extremist philosophy.

I wonder, if the Major had been Christian, would that be a consideration in determining his actions? Or would it be assumed that he just went off his nut?

Would it be proper to assume that the majority of Christians are bigoted intolerant sociopaths because of the actions of the people of Westboro Baptist Church?

Of course not, actions by individuals are not representative of the larger whole. Yes, I understand that rampant political correctness has it's issues. And while tolerance is a good thing, it can like anything go too far. While we in western societies should be accepting of other nationalities and faiths, at the same time those people that come to western countries need to understand they are the ones that must adapt to us. Not us to them.

I do laugh when I hear of groups feeling slighted because their culture is not tolerated here. And it does bug me a little bit when people at work speak Arabic to each other. Political correctness does go too far sometimes, and I will agree with you on that one point.

However when talking about incidences as those at Fort Hood, if you take religion out of the equation, you are left with someone who was obviously seriously mentally troubled and his actions were his own and not representative of the whole of Islam.

Of course, that is the problem isn't it? The Anti Islamic propaganda that is trying to falsely show that all Muslims are violent intolerant jihadists. The problem is the national brainwashing of people into thinking that every Muslim that boards an aircraft is going to try and hijack that airplane.

If you were to take the Oklahoma city bombing for an example of how every ex soldier acts it wouldn't be very representative of the army as a whole would it? Are we to assume because of Timothy McVeigh's actions that day, that all ex soldiers must therefore be ticking time bombs waiting to commit grievous terrorist actions? Of course not.

But wait, wasn't the Fort Hood shooter a Major in the army? Oh and of course we can't forget that Lee Harvey Oswald was a Marine. So therefore by the actions of a few, according to your argument, we must paint the whole with the same brush. Because to do otherwise we would be "Politically Correct Multicultural Elitists".

Simply put if Islam was such a dangerous and violent religion, no one would follow it. No one would be alive long enough to follow it because they would have all already blown themselves up or got killed attacking the "infidel dogs" in the west. Israel wouldn't be on the map today if Islam was such a violent religion. Surely there are enough Muslim soldiers to completely overrun Israel and kill every Jew. But somehow Israel manages to survive.

Do you see how Propaganda can slant a view that isn't representative of the people it's against?

I have always maintained that yes there are extremist violent jihadist Muslims, they do want to destroy the west. They do exist. There are also jerk A hole Muslims that are just that, jerks.

My view is that Propaganda is the problem and not the religion.

[edit on 12/8/2009 by whatukno]

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 11:14 PM
reply to post by poet1b

"As young as"

Tell me, when you were 4 did you enjoy washing behind your ears, or getting dressed for church, or taking baths (etc.)

Mary Wollstonecraft discussed this type of education in her book The Vindication of the Rights of Women, but not particularly about women. She argued that at a young age, people need to be taught certain morality and reason through processes of habituation (not unlike the Aristotelian point made earlier).

But I might be jumping the gun a bit. I take your point to be that no Muslim woman in her right mind would veil themselves, and that the process itself is a means of subjugating women, and those that practice it are simply brainwashed, correct? If not, then I apologize and urge you to clarify.

And for those of you who argue this point, and can/do read, I suggest a few books dedicated to this subject specifically, written by anthropologists who have studied the practice in depth, with more than a few internet news sites as their sources.

Veiled Sentiments by Lila Abu-Lughod

and, I mentioned this one before, but I feel it's an important one for this discussion particularly
The Politics of Piety by Saba Mahmood.

And, until then, I can't take many of your points seriously because they come from a distinct cultural bias that dismisses outside arguments (not my arguments, mind you, but those of the women you claim to be defending).

[edit on 8-12-2009 by SorensDespair]

posted on Dec, 8 2009 @ 11:58 PM
Ok, because this discussion is going into the realms of women's fashion accessories, let's take a moment to discuss this then.

What is the difference between these two photos?

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 04:00 AM
reply to post by poet1b

The answers right in front of you man but you're choosing not to see it! Some women DO like to wear stuff like that, as the mother of one of my friends did, not forced to, she liked to wear traditional some times.

You're thinking of a #-hole like Saudi Arabia (yes offence) as being representative of all them, go to a place like Turkey and see how their 99% Muslims are, its like if North American culture and middle east had a baby.

It shows that Islam is NOT the problem but PARTICULAR peoples view of Islam and rules and crap... have you heard of Dominionists? They believe women are subservient! Lots of other Christian denominations do too! Does not mean Christianity is incompatible with the west! (though they believe it to be and want to kill all the non-Christians!)

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:22 AM
reply to post by poet1b

Zilch might be a woman and a Muslim, but she doesn't speak for all Muslim women.

but you do?

edit to add: hey - Mr. Burka - remember the last really fun thread you and I were in together?

this is exactly what I was talking about - Muslim women will decide - for themselves

so - there you go


[edit on 12/9/2009 by Spiramirabilis]

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:29 AM
reply to post by whatukno



other than that - not much

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:39 AM
reply to post by felonius

howdy - felonius

I am a nationalist and make no apologies for it. I am a believer in Language, Borders, and Culture. Without those three pillars a society will die. Anything that defies those three things in the host culture should be treated as a cancer and excised.

so - how do you feel about people with such specific, rigid and unyielding borders minding their own business and staying within their own borders?

this country isn't just about you

it's a multicultural country - you might want to think about getting used to that part

or - do you have other plans?

besides invading Poland?

edited to remove some disrespect I didn't really intend - but hopefully still leave just the right amount

[edit on 12/9/2009 by Spiramirabilis]

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 06:45 AM
reply to post by Spiramirabilis

Exactly! The first is the Hajab that is worn by Muslim women, the second picture is of Mennonite women wearing that traditional garb. Amazingly they do so for the exact same reason. Modesty. Somehow, for some reason, not all women want to dress like hookers. (just going with the other extreme there, I understand that most women don't dress like hookers either.)

America is nothing if we don't have freedom of Religion. Part of that freedom is the freedom to observe your personal religious dress code.

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 10:25 AM
reply to post by drmeola

Those are excellent links, and clearly establish the reality of the intentions of Islam, which is invasion and subservience of Western culture and the western way of life.

The things stated in this constitution should not be allowed, and the people who wrote this stuff should be escorted to the border and kicked out of the country. It is clear that their loyalties lie only to Islam, and that our nations laws will only be respected when they agree with sharia law.

1. The General Assembly shall be the highest authority of the organization and all its resolutions and decisions made in a constitutionally valid meeting shall be final and mandatory upon the community, its officers, and its members.

2. The Majlis Al-Shura shall be the highest legislative authority in the absence of the General Assembly.

3. The Executive Committee shall hold at least monthly meetings and a majority of Executive Committee members shall constitute a quota. It is responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the community in accordance with the constitution.

Wow, this organization claims sovereignty over the community. There is no way such a constitution should be legal, and is a direct violation of the U.S. constitution, and its authors should be either deported with no eligibility for re-entry, or jailed for treason.

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 10:32 AM
reply to post by poet1b

Thank you, you must be the first person to actually read them, or I should say the first to help point out the truth.
My bottom line is not the forming of a community, but in the fact that they disregard our laws and yet claim and apply for tax exemption, under our laws. Double edge sword. If we don’t allow them exemption we are the bad guys, and not allow what we as a people try to represent freedom to practice.
But my bigger point is if it is ok for them to claim religion and receive tax exemption then should we not give same rites to Wicca, satanic cults, kkk and such alike.

But the fact is the under our constitution no one qualifies for tax exemption and I have a post on that exact subject.
Look me up.

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 10:59 AM
reply to post by poet1b

What I found humorous about your previous link was here was apparently a Muslim woman freely expressing her freedom of speech about being repressed by her Muslim culture.

reply to post by drmeola

I took some time to read the threads you listed, I found them to be fear mongering bigoted hyperbole and until now selected to keep my fingers off the keyboard about them.

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 11:09 AM
reply to post by whatukno

Wow I would not have expected that from you whatukno I have read other post of yours and usually found you linked with truth.
My links are a direct link to the bylaws, written by them not me, and I have link just two communities bylaws each state or community has its own, but all are almost worded exactly the same way.
Shame on you for thinking I am fear mongering, when all I post is the truth of there goals as they have outlines not me.

edit to add this last line.

But most people are afraid of the truth, and no matter what will label it as something else other than such truth.
This is not an assault on Muslims it is an assault on the community. And there attempt at tax-exemption.

[edit on 9-12-2009 by drmeola]

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 11:30 AM
reply to post by SorensDespair

A man who wears a suit to his office is dressing appropriately for the task at hand.

When he starts putting on his suit to go to the grocery store, or go bowling, or go to the amusement park, then he has a serious problem.

The same goes for the women who dress up in a burqa on a hot day with high humidity. This is beyond modesty or piety.

Wearing a burqa to the grocery store, or especially to an amusement park is a clear sign that something is terribly wrong.

There is no doubt that anyone wearing such an outfit in high humidity is suffering.

I see the anger, the hostility, the frustration, the resentment, and the fear in the eyes of these women out in public wearing their burqas. The burqa is a wall between them and everyone else.

Emotions are hard to hide, especially the strong emotions that churn though these women.

The burqa is a burden forced upon women of Muslim culture, and just because some women embrace this burden does not mean that western culture, which long ago threw aside such degradation of women, should allow this primitive practice to return to our midst.

How does a man keep peace in his house when he demands that the his wife and daughter wear the burqa?

How does a woman deal with the pain and suffering such a burden creates.

What does the father tell his daughters and sons who want to wear the nice clothes and look pretty like all the other children?

He tells his children that woman who do not cover themselves are sluts and whores, not to be respected.

I don't want people living in my community who teach their children that they should not have any respect for my children. His sons are rapists waiting for an opportunity.

I don't want people like this to have any access to my daughter.

They do not respect my beliefs, my culture, my ways.

Read the charters in the links. Their goals is to completely segregate themselves, and especially their children and their wives from western society and culture.

By segregating themselves, they create the division, and the hostility that division creates.

All the while they work in secret to undermine our society and our laws.

posted on Dec, 9 2009 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by drmeola

My links are a direct link to the bylaws, written by them not me, and I have link just two communities bylaws each state or community has its own, but all are almost worded exactly the same way.

Bylaws do not and never will trump actual laws.

If by your scare tactics think that bylaws rule over actual laws and trump anything else then god forbid you ever move to a gated or deed restricted community. Please don't join a Union, or a motorcycle club. (They have bylaws too)

Also as far as your argument goes with what I will assume to be Mosques not paying taxes, (Sorry, I have a hard time reading trash, I generally just skip when certain criteria for complete and utter twaddle are met, which your threads did in spades.) see, Mosques are the Muslim equivalent of churches, and as we know, churches are tax exempt as being a religious organization.

Now as far as the terror you must live with every scared little second of your existence that big bad Muslims are moving in and taking over your country, first tell it to the Native Americans, bet they might have a good laugh about that. Then there's the obvious competition they will undoubtedly face with people from south of the boarder taking this place over first.
(I do mean that quite facetiously of course.)

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in