Manchester explosion
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/22/serious-incident-at-uks-manchester-stadium-during-concert-where-loud-bang-heard.html
20 dead hundreds potentially injured
skippy Barbarians. Targeting and killing kids. We MUST drive them off the face of the earth.
DannyC 
Lili Too bad no one heard it since the sound of his voice results in spontaneous uncontrollable vomiting.
HappyTeacher 
Yesimpc Was it already reported to be a religious attack, Islamic?
This kind of thing is just stupid and serves no purpose whatsoever.
justintime @justintime of course it was. Suicide bomber killing innocent kids leaving a concert. Do you really need an official report to tell you what we all know. Islamic terror strikes again. What's stupid and serves no purpose is pretending it could be anything else.
Denis Hey Happy Tracher, You didn't need to bring your dislike for President Trump into this thread. With innocent people killed and wounded and all you can think of is your own hate. Grow up and get a life.
BC 
Really???Well Denis, it really could be anything else. Pavlov's bell -ding ding ding- was never my thing, sorry.
Sadly though, the likelihood is that you'll be correct.
"Too bad no one heard it since the sound of his voice results in spontaneous uncontrollable vomiting."
Is this the type of tolerance you teach and preach? you should be ashamed of yourself.
The Man I totally agree with you BC. Happy Teacher just because you dont like the president doesnt mean you need to make rude comments when hard times like this happends. Get a life and stop being so cruel. Innocent people have lost their lives give the president a break.
Soccermom12 Really tired of this. I hope Trump isn't just words. And I don't want to send more troops... it's not working. But something must be done, this has to stop. Trying to "understand" them obviously doesn't work. Not calling them what they are- Islamic extremist terrorists- doesn't work. Apology tours don't work.
Maybe Saudi Arabia will finally get onboard, maybe a stronger leader like Trump will help accomplish that. IDK. But wars don't work. And understanding/taking no action doesn't work. So, change tack. Figure out what WILL work. But we have to DO SOMETHING, we can't just sit back and let it continue. Islamic extremism and Sharia Law needs to be eradicated- they are evil. It'll have to be global effort- which means countries like Germany, France, and Saudi Arabia- countries that think progressively or look the other way- will have to change their actions.
A true world war - where all the countries of the civilized world focus and bear down on the evil- would work, but no one wants that. But a world war- of some kind- perhaps a world war of opposite ideology- needs to happen. People's MINDS need to be changed- to reject this evil ideology. Not to just "not like it", but to reject it- so that it is not welcome anywhere on earth. Let them stay in their sand piles. What Germany and France has allowed over recent years has only compounded the problem. Maybe containment is the best we can hope for- like flies trapped in a closed window- if the rest of the world can "close off" that part of the world, perhaps it will die of it's own starvation. Mental and ideological starvation.
If anyone has a better idea, we'd all love to hear it. But we can't just sit here and wait for it to "go away"- it isn't, it won't.
JeffersonRepub I guess the shoe is on the other foot. It is kind of fun being totally unhelpful and snarky. We had to do the work for 8 years. Your turn.
"Work"? Well, if work was looking the other way for an evil religious sect that likes to kill innocent people, then yes- "you" have been "doing the work" for the last 8 years. Congratulations.
Also, congratulations on the emotional separation you are capable of when discussing the deaths of innocent people by an evil ideology. You must be proud of yourself.
ISIS just took responsibility. Surprise - JIT. Like we didn't now that was coming.
CMG JR, yes we need to understand why people will commit such destructive acts, and It is not because of our "freedoms", that's just 100% BS.
iJay I cannot believe that people I thought were decent can support this horrific terrorist act.
A picture of the beautiful 8-year-old girl who was killed has been released and is being shown on some news channels. After seeing it, I'm asking myself only one question, and it has nothing to do with "why these acts are being committed." It is:
How many more MOABs do we have in our arsenal?
Rebecka There is nothing you can do, sadly. We love to think we can exert control over situations like these but it just isn't possible. Angry deranged people exist and living on high alert all the time just isn't possible. The brand of extremism is just a side show...Isis, Taliban, Irish Republican Army, Weather Underground...it doesn't matter. Angry people are occasionally going to kill innocents. Just like mass shootings. Schools, malls, movie theaters...gun laws might help but barely. If a moron wants to inflict damage they will find a way.
It is a sad realization, but we may have to get used to these events occuring. It's been going on since the dawn of time. We are a violent race.
Eperot Real virtue involves acting correctly in the face of adversity. It is much harder to grapple with the fact that one of the word's major faiths is the progenitor of near-infinite corruption and hate, than to pretend the problem doesn't exist or worse yet it can't be stopped. Hold the entire community responsible.
+1 Eperot. I honestly don't think we can stop this, ever. The terrorists are flexible and evolving. They will always adapt to whatever extra securities and control we try to enact. They will persevere in their intent to harm the innocent, and that is the sad reality. And there is no way for us to change the way they think or feel.
Tracy Nothing more than asymmetric warfare. ISIS and others cannot confront us in a conventional battle, we would slaughter them and they know it. Instead, this is the tactic they use. We can stop them 999 times but if they are successful once they have won and we have lost. They win with 1 success in a thousand. We loose with only 999 preventions in a thousand. This is why in insurgencies are tough to stop, basic math...
IMO, the "1 in 1000" math does not match what's happening. It would be GREAT if we stopped 999 out of 1000 attacks. But they have been far more successful than that. Ideally, the rest of the world would put the ownness on the muslim world to fix this problem internally, but that will not happen, and the muslim world will not/can not fix this problem on it's own, it has become apparent.
If death is all they will accept, then death should be given to them. Because up until now, looking back over both recent history as well as ancient history, nothing else has worked.
It's a shame we can't get all of the non-extremist muslims out of those countries and then just nuke the entire area. Like cockroach-bombing a house. That would take care of most of it. But it's not possible.
As for the whole Israel/Palestine thing, thinking you can negotiate with the Palestinian Authority, and establish an official Palestinian state where they will not support, finance, harbor, and foster terrorism is a delusion. There's no answer for that one.
My prayers are for the survivors, relatives and friends in this unhuman act against God, God in all forms. ISIS has claimed credit but at what level? And does it matter?
Given increased security measures, terrorists have learned how to identity softer targets having maximum impact so they focus now outside the bag check perimeter (not that they were being checked), kids, whatever large group might be present at one time. How do you not have an outside perimeter at a large event beyond having the intelligence to head it off to begin with?
Agreed that almost impossible to stop but....in the end someone has convinced someone else that it's good to kill large groups of innocents and yourself for the greater good. Point is that it's the message of greater good that needs to be defeated, not just ISIS if you want to stop this before it happens.
Issue is that the message is mostly accepted by the disenfranchised created usually by being in poverty. Doesn't help if they are feeling segregated, alone, or at disadvantage for some personal or societal reason. France, for example, sucks at this. The US is actually doing much better but let's face it folks --- the recession and long, slow, recovery has even upped our emotional frustrations a bit exacerbating our political divide that has existed since, and before, the founding fathers causing even us to be a little more testy than usual.
We can level Syria, make ISIS there go away but what does this "army" need to have effect? Apparently one guy on a keyboard. Ultimately it's the message that needs to be eradicated as anything remotely positive. And that message is different in France where their Muslim immigrant nation is segregated and unassimilated. In America we have met Muslim immigrants with open arms and assimilate, the message is different. It takes a societal environment that does not allow their message land with any effect. A happy place.
I still say we need to kill all ISIS in Syria or anywhere else for that matter. We need to start with where the money is, stop the flow, dig up the cash stashes, and take it all away. And then discover, disrupt, disable, and destroy the subhuman component. We need Russia, Iran, Assad, Syrian Rebels, and anyone else playing around in Syria to help. Russia has only helped Assad so far and Assad only goes after Syrian rebels, not ISIS. Don't see anything happening there.
I think Donald offering an olive branch to the Saudi's where comes most of the world's subhuman element perpetrating these insults to God, any God, is a step --- we will see what Saudi does to help. Re-branding the terrorists as losers is typical Trump and totally ineffective and really kind of silly. This ain't a branding exercise to make them feel bad thinking that will change anything.
Meanwhile, the Donald has lowered the risk factor for dropping bombs on targets. That means more dead ISIS, maybe, and more dead civilians, most certainly. More dead civilians means more ISIS volunteers potentially for decades to come.
The last piece is greater intelligence. That probably means less anonymity and freedom as we "intel" through your personal database at all levels. We all know what we lose there.
It's a thorny issue with many players and an enemy that can slip the noose like Jell-O slipping through your fingers. When all is said and done, there's still that message to attract the disenfranchised to do terrible things to other people. That will take awhile and the whole world to turn that one around.
.
strangerdanger a "non-extremist Muslim" looks very much like the folks who flew planes into the WTC and the Pentagon, Omar Mateen one of the worst mass murderers in the United States really appears "moderate" on paper. They drank alcohol, didn't pray, 5 times a day. fast for Ramadan, keep a beard, or their wives in purdah.
How did Christians and Jews stop justifying murder, misogyny and massacre in the name of religion? (you know all that stuff from the Pentateuch - Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, numbers, and Deuteronomy?) We separated state authorities and religious authorities - e.g. we removed the ability from the church to declare war and tax folks.
Until Muslim Secular governments are abolished - this will continue as Al Qaeda is right there next to them, as are Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS.
Muslims like everyone else are somewhere between the endpoints of a continuum, somewhere between fly planes into buildings and work for a living, remain law abiding and contribute to the economy and society. Terrorist groups are constantly in the process of radicalization of those that are non violent.
We cannot clear our names unless we own up to the shameful fact that terrorism has become an Islamic enterprise; an almost exclusive monopoly, implemented by Muslim men and women.” (Abdel Rahman al-Rashed “Innocent religion is now a message of hate.” Telegraph. 05/09/2004)
Skippy, are you saying you want to abolish Muslim Secular States? Think you may be turned around on this one. The US is a secular state....
And where do you draw the line: secular, state religion, Islamic state, or what?
Don't matter, It's still not that cut n dry. For one thing, Saudi Arabia is a hybrid non secular nation where, IMO, the clerics still have too much to do with government. But it is not 100% an islamic state. So you might include them as non-secular or secular but certainly not 100% governed by religion --- a hybrid.
Other non secular nations include the bad ones and these: Israel, India, Pakistan, Kuwait, Mauritania, Jordan, Egypt, Oman and Turkey. Not sure you want to abolish all of these......some have a state religion but are not 100% non secular.
So not sure you have to abolish but we should be stressing human rights, something that the Donald seems to have left out of his vocabulary at the current time.
JR, why should the Palestinians negotiate if history has any input. This great country was created by invaders that overwhelmed the Native American Indians. Did we "negotiate" with the Indians? We declared them to be barbarians. We in fact came over and tried to take over their land. Same thing in Israel, an outside group came in and took over.
The negotiator is just TIME. The longer you occupy the longer it becomes the status quo.
The hope (for invaders) is that everyone will forget about what was before. This is inevitable, it is just a matter of how much time must pass before this happens.
All regions of this world are a result of this. Right and wrong don't apply over time, there just what is and isn't...
your correct my error - I meant countries governed by Islamic law - or any country that follows any religious doctrine. We have no power to abolish another sovereign nation, however, we should definitely incentive them to embrace a separation of faith and governance through economic sanctions. Where we find nation states supporting these organizations we respond accordingly.
I think the Twin Towers should have been rebuilt, instead of a memorial. Move the UN to the top floors. Use the UN building for the 9/11 memorial. After all, one of the main jobs of the UN is to create and maintain international order. I would think if they were all sitting in their offices on the top floors looking out and knowing what had happened on 9/11, terrorism would not be what it is today. Oh well, that was then, this is now. What needs to be done now? Who knows. It's a shame.
auntiel @justintime turns out there is some validity to the Pavlov's dog theory after all ding ding ding. Hope you weren't too surprised to find out today that it was indeed a Muslim, the son of Muslim refugees. Shocker!!!
"JR, why should the Palestinians negotiate if history has any input."
Fine. Don't negotiate. Let the war continue. If Israel ever decided to FLATTEN "Palestine", they could- easily.
And since when did "history" have any input? The winners write the history, the winners get the spoils. Which brings us back to: fight. Fight until there's a winner. Because that's been working so well so far.
But then, we ALL KNOW how you feel about the Israelis and Jews.
I'll tell you what's NOT going to happen: pre-1968 borders. That ship sailed a very long time ago. And since that's likely the only the the PA will accept, then: war, likely until the end of time. OK, if that's how they want it...
While you're at it, why not just campaign for the American southwest to be given back to Mexico, and for that matter, for the entire US to be given back to the native americans? I mean, "if history has any input".
I'd rather stay in the world of reality, thanks.
1) Flatten Palestine? What would that accomplish other than the eventual destruction of Israel by pissing off billions of Muslims?
2) The PA wants all of Israel. Both sides need to painfully compromise, not sure when this will happen. Trump and the Jared Orthodox Jew Squad won't compromise that much so it is just a waste of time and money (a lot of our money).
3) Where do you get that I am for giving an inch of USA soil to anyone? The point is that ship has sailed. In Israel it is just off the port by a few meters. They should have just incorporated the occupied territories long ago but then people would call them the invaders that they are along with having millions more muslims then they want.
4) What is your reality? Reality is not static. How long before nukes become commonplace? 40, 50, 60, 100, 200 years? Then what happens? This country is the greatest so far in history (although a millennia from now that title might go to ancient India or China) but do you think there is such a thing as forever -- that's reality...
positive Who knows JR?
***** All I know is that I am tired of billions going to a First World apartheid nation along with US soldier casualties.*****
Does anyone here understand the ridiculous nature of giving that speech in front of the Saudis and unveiling a new joint terror fighting communications center in Saudi Arabia? Is this a joke? Saudi Arabia is the largest exporter of wahabi Islam. The materials, books etc printed and exported by SA CLEARLY teach that homosexuals should be thrown off buildings and that women are property.
I used to be a democrat. Then the far left took over, made a hierarchy of aggrieved people and the Muslims sit atop this pyramid. Gay rights? Woman's right? They don't care anymore. I didn't leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left me.
And PLEASE don't tell me about "moderate" Muslims. If they go to mosque once a week and actually believe what's being taught, there is very little moderation.
"turns out there is some validity to the Pavlov's dog theory after all"
On this we can agree...
I've been busy today so I haven't read too much about this, but the articles I read haven't mentioned anything about his religion. Do you have a link Denis?
iJay,
You can take it to the bank, the PA is never going to get all of Israel unless they kill every jew in it (would that make you happy?)
Since YF likes to live in his own world of fake news comes this item (from another fake news site) :
ISIS Lays Down Arms After Katy Perry’s Impassioned Plea To ‘Like, Just Co-Exist’
MAYADIN, SYRIA—Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State, released a statement Wednesday confirming that ISIS would be immediately surrendering its fight to establish a powerful caliphate after viewing an interview in which pop singer Katy Perry said, “The greatest thing we can do just unite and love on each other and like, no barriers, no borders, like, we all need to just co-exist.”
The powerful statement which single-handedly dismantled ISIS came shortly after a terrorist attack on civilians in Manchester killed 22 people, and led the reclusive head of ISIS to hold an emergency press conference declaring the group’s jihad finished.
“Despite my previous belief that we must slay the infidel in the name of Allah until Islam rules the world, I just can’t deny that Katy’s words have touched my heart,” al-Baghdadi said as he symbolically held up and then tossed an AK-47 onto the ground. “It is time for the mujahideen to start uniting and loving on people.”
“I just can’t believe we didn’t see it before. It’s all so clear now,” he added.
After the video started to go viral in ISIS cave networks and strongholds, thousands of terrorists began pouring out into the streets of Mayadin, giving one another spontaneous group hugs, destroying their weapons, and planting trees and flowers in an attempt to begin rebuilding the Middle East into a utopian wonderland.
According to reports, al-Baghdadi further confirmed that a recent advertisement in which Kendall Jenner offered a group of riot police a Pepsi was also influential in his decision to immediately cease their murderous reign of terror and lead ISIS down a path of peace.
http://babylonbee.com/news/isis-lays-arms-katy-perrys-impassioned-plea-like-just-co-exist/
Roywhite JR, if Israel never took another penny from this government (i.e. you and me) -- that would make me happy...
maybe this part of the problem :
Muslims DEMAND: Don’t Walk Dogs In Public – Violation Of Sharia And Disrespectful To Us
IN MANCHESTER ENGLAND, POPULATION 2.55M, SOME RESIDENTS ARE GETTING A TASTE OF WHAT IT’S LIKE TO LIVE UNDER SHARIA.
Muslims hate dogs. This goes all the way back to their conquest of Persia in the seventh century A.D. The conquered people were the Zoroastrians, and they loved and revered dogs. As part of their conquest, the new masters of Persia decided to target dogs for cruel treatment for the very reason that it was cruel and showed the Persians who was in charge.
In Manchester, pamphlets have been distributed by a group called Public Purity. They have demanded that Brits stop taking their dogs out in public as dogs are considered impure in the Islamic faith.
http://ladylibertysnews.com/muslims-demand-dont-walk-dogs-public-violation-sharia-disrespectful-us/
I just researched this in Wikipedia, and it does not appear that Sharia law says anything about dogs.
Also, Snopes has questioned whether those pamphlets Hadenough mentioned are real, or whether there is any such group as Public Purity. Could be a prank? No one is sure.
But in a larger sense I agree that the possibility of losing one's culture over time due to a change in demographics can be a genuine concern. Not ready to say that this will happen in the West due to Islam. After all, over time peoples change, religions adapt. We're all constantly changing.
jd2 They disdain for dogs is widespread in traditional Islamic culture.
https://islamqa.info/en/69840
Yes there will be a huge change in European culture in the future, as the globalist elite continue to invite in people who have no interest in assimilating, but instead someday conquering. Islam has sought to establish a caliphate in Rome since the dark ages. The children and grandchildren of the spineless political leaders in Europe ( outside of a few like Hungary, and Poland ) will learn to say their prayers facing Mecca.
Hadenough
Im Muslim and I have 2 dogs and 2 cats in my home
So am I not legit?
Go ahead ask me what else I do and do not do that is the stereotype of a Muslim
You people make me laugh at the crap you believe that comes from the tv and the googleverse
H-town Mama @H-town Mama, I said traditional Islamic culture, not every Muslim. Source well know verified Islamic information web site maintained by Muslims. What the hell don't you understand??
Denis
Your last sentence I don't understand...
So define " traditional Muslim "
Are you speaking from a religious standpoint or a cultural or geographic one ?
Because Therein lies the difference and why the term " Islamic" should be removed
The Muslim in Iran is different from the Muslim in Indonesia is different from the Muslim in morroco is different from the Muslim in the USA is different from the Muslim in the U.K.
H-town Mama
Which kind of Muslims murdered 27 Christians today in Egypt
Which kind of Muslims murdered 9 Christians today in the Philippines
Which kind of Muslim murdered 22 innocent civilians in Manchester 5 days ago.
What's the one thing they have in common??
Not getting into a semantics debate with you, the carnage speaks for itself.
"What's the one thing they have in common?"
Skin tone?
Environment?
Language?
Anger?
Excuse me Denis, but culture nor religion should be judged due to a bunch of fanatics. There are many Christians, Mormons, Jews, Hindus, Johova Witnesses and many others that have their fanatics. It should NOT in anyway tarnish that particular religion.
Do you remember the Christians sending bomb threats to Planned Parenthood clinics?
Do you recall the Holocaust?
Do you remember the Christians slaughtering the Native Americans and taking over their land?
Do you recall the rich Christian plantation owners capturing and in-slaving Africans?
All of this is coming from a Christian.
I refuse to become a hater..that mentality is the cause and is continuing to be the cause to destruction.
Do you want to be on the same page with the brutal terrorists?
I'm sick of this hatred and division..which is based on fear and ignorance.
@justintime Islam
@positive Death toll of non Muslims killed by Muslims this week because they weren't Muslim 58. How many Christians killed Muslims this week in the name of Christianity? Did the Germans kill jews in the name of Christianity? Did settlers kill Indians in the name of Christianity? Maybe if you feel so guilty you should go back to the home of your ancestors. Did slave owners own slaves in the name of Christianity? As a matter of my Great Grandfather came over from Ireland to fight for the north in the civil war because he was a good Christian, then returned to Ireland.. You do the same lame thing all the apologists do try and go back to another time in history. Who are the only the active slave holders in today's world. Muslims, just ask the Yazidi, and Christian sex slaves. True ignorance is denying reality and pretending the world is the way you want it to be, not the way it really is.
No, true ignorance is hatred..refusing to see and understand.
Unlike you, I can see beyond a bunch of crazy fanatics and do not blame an entire culture and religion for it.
If you think the slaughter of the Native Americans and slavery of Africans has nothing to do with White Christian Supremacy than you really are in the dark.
What about our lovely White Christian KKK members? They are not religious fanatics?
How many people did the KKK kill this week??? As I said you're reaching back in time, slavery has been around forever, and practiced by every ethnic group on the face of the earth. There is only one group of people actively involved today, and they are not Christians.
I see 22 innocent people killed 5 days ago, I understand why. I see 27 Christians killed today in Egypt and I understand why. I see 9 Christians killed in the Philippines today and I understand why. Let me know when you have something comparable in today's world.
The facts do speak for themselves, and the world is learning. It is extremist ISLAMICS carrying out these attacks. That's a fact, not an opinion. No one is saying to cleanse the earth of a RELIGION- just of the fanatical murderers in that religion.
List of Islamic terror attacks, just in the last 30 days:
https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=Last30
"During this time period, there were 158 Islamic attacks in 25 countries, in which 989 people were killed and 981 injured. "
I can't find a similar website with data for Christian (or any other religion's) attacks.
The only other organization that rivals Islam for murder is Planned Parenthood.
I live next door Muslims and they told me they do not have pets for the very reasons stated above........just saying
JRT Now if only there was a pamphlet that stated they had to do repairs to their property, keep their lawn mowed before it reaches a foot, not use the deck railings and porch lights as a clothes line, and get rid of all of the junk cars and storage......it would be wonderful lol!
There's no excuse for the behavior of the Muslims in this era. Those involved and those who know what goes on in their communities and stand idle. Twenty two little girls were slaughtered and there is no justification for that barbarianism. Anyone who justifies or denies culpability is deranged.
Suze Today's update:
"During this time period, there were 166 Islamic attacks in 26 countries, in which 1070 people were killed and 1034 injured. "
I would say that is justification for some rational fear of muslims - until they come out with the moderate VS aloha snackbar blow me up detector that is. For those keeping score for the away team - the Ramadan bomb-a-thon continues!
28 Coptic Christians killed
18 killed by suicide bomber in Afghanistan
36 killed by militants in Badghis province Afghanistan
Get ready for the next 30 days of faith fun and dismemberment brought to you by the religion of peace.
Really? You can't find recent data on Muslims killed by Christians; because Muslims know they are being killed. Now bear in mind that I do not condone any violence and believe the earth needs to be cleansed of these terrorists --- either death or captivity. But to say Muslims and Muslim innocents aren't being killed is a misnomer.
This is a war against terrorism, not against religion.
ISIS is self-proclaimed Muslim organization, no way anyone can say they are not real Muslims. The Muslim faith is not ISIS; ten of thousands of Muslims are actively fighting ISIS. Most Muslims hate ISIS.
ISIS kills more Muslims than it does Christians.
You don't have submit to be Muslim to be in ISIS, but you need to be ISIS to live with ISIS.
In America, you just need to be Muslim to be harassed, beaten, or shot; you don't need to be an ISIS Muslim, thank you Mr. Bully Pulpit: http://www.voanews.com/a/anti-muslim-hate-crimes-in-us-surges-neary-600-percent-between-2014-and-2016/3844922.html
Terrorists, unfortunately, come in all shapes and sizes joining up, or not, for a variety of reasons. ISIS in the Middle East isn't about religion, it's about a power grab by a brutal inhuman regime. As an off-shoot they recruit across the globe for either joining ISIS or unleashing terror in their own countries. These folks join for different reasons than those joining in the Middle East: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-graham/who-joins-isis-and-why_b_8881810.html
Remember one point for joining up in the Middle East -- it pays well.
So while ISIS acts in the name of Muslim, the majority of Muslims do not support ISIS, matter of fact, tens of thousands are actively fighting ISIS, hundreds of thousands of Muslims are involuntarily under their control.
And under President Trump, we are killing more Muslim civilians everyday, creating more future ISIS volunteers as we lower the risks allowed for us to drop those huge bombs looking for a few terrorists. A thorny issue were we need to eradicate the bad guys while creating less or no new volunteers for the future. Not just strong arm, but ultimately hearts and minds. IMO just castigating the Muslim religion as being at fault, not helping the good guys, and responsible for this carnage takes focus off this complicated, thorny problem slowing destroying us for decades now.
If only we could all be like Jesus Christ. We would love the terrorists. Even as they harm us and our loved ones we would love them and would not raise a hand to them. We would not fight back as they kill us, just as Jesus Christ willingly succumbed as he was being murdered.
I don't see this playing out that way however.
@positive, the irony in your previous post is that pretty much every example you gave was settled by war where one side had to be killed enough to submit.
I'm pretty sure this terror will not end until, like in your examples, we begin killing them. killing them and their families until they stop killing us.
@positive - are you willing to love the terrorists as they kill you and your family - like Christ would?
Or do you agree with killing the terrorists until they stop - just don't use the word 'Muslim' or 'Islam'? If so I'd say your priorities are whacked.
Scottso Sniffer dogs offend Muslims
POLICE sniffer dogs trained to spot terrorists at railway stations may no longer come into contact with Muslim passengers – after complaints that it is against the suspects’ religion.
In the Muslim faith, dogs are deemed to be spiritually “unclean”. But banning them from touching passengers would severely restrict their ability to do their job.
The report follows trials of station security measures in the wake of the 2005 London suicide bomb attacks. In one trial, some female Muslims said the use of a body scanner was also unacceptable because it was tantamount to being forced to strip.
British Transport Police last night insisted it would still use sniffer dogs – which are trained to detect explosives – with any passengers regardless of faith, but handlers would remain aware of “cultural sensitivities”.
Critics said the complaints were just the latest example of minority religions trying to force their rules and morals on British society.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/50071/Sniffer-dogs-offend-Muslims
@SD the infidel living in the US, is going to tell the Mujahideen waging Jihad ( holy war ) against non believers, and looking to establish an Islamic Caliphate, that they might not be Muslim, and it's got nothing to do with religion. LOL!
Is that what you think is happening in the Muslim world? A war against non- belivers in Syria? Yemen? Iraq?
Denis - You decided to use 7 religious based words in your post. No matter what anyone else thinks, you've already decided it's all about religion. How could it be anything but?
The rest - too many name changing hypocrites.
GC SD nice try at deflection, and the answer to your question is no. My point was how ludicrous your statement was that ISIS members may not be Muslim, and it has nothing to do with religion.
@GC I didn't decide they did, and I'll take their word for it.
GC - please remove your head from back side. When do we all say enough is enough? Why does it matter if it's for religion or any other reason. Time to eradicate this mindset from the world like any other disease. Because it is a disease.
+1 suze. I don't care what their reason is, it's time to eradicate. To infer it's merely a coincidence all of the terrorists are muslim is ludicrous and laughable. The world knows. Some HL posters may not, and a select few PC/democrat/global politicians may not, but the world does. Denying it is extremist islam that is perpetrating this global mass murder spree is akin to being a holocaust denier.
There's no SPINNING this one. The truth is far too loud.
JeffersonRepub - Very well said. The operative word is "eradicate". We do have the means and the support, don't we?
Denis, the accurate answer was "all of the above".
Even though the traits listed are also common to all the radical criminals (the big one IMO is anger), you still fall back on the singular trait of religion. No one disputes that link, of course, but some of us ask "is that all or is there something else?".
Well, given that the incidents are still statistically small relative to other risks we deal with daily, and also the number of Muslim perps versus the know number of muslims in the world is very small, how can you conclude that all muslims are bad, mean terrorists?
You can't, so you blame the religion. Ok I get it, but since it takes an action - voluntary action - how can you say it's just the religion and not the person? Again, you can't so you take the easy way out and attribute everything to the religion, conveniently ignoring the other reasons that a *person* uses to justify their individual actions.
Please read the list I posted again and see if they make more sense now.
@justintime, you're putting words in my mouth. I never said all muslims are bad, or terrorists. I pointed out 3 terrorist incidents this week where 58 innocent people were killed. Let's look at your list, did they all have the same skin tone, no. Did they all come from the same geographic region no. Did they all speak the same language no. Were they all angry, I don't know and neither do you. I'm sure not all the Nazi's were angry but that didn't stop them from committing horrific acts following some misguided ideology. So your list is an epic fail, and my statement that the one thing they had in common was Islam can't be challenged on a factual basis. You can only attempt to muddy the waters, and misrepresent what I said.
Maybe you didn't write the words denis, but the intent is perfectly clear based on the "solutions" presented.
Mass genocide of all who worship Islam.
@justintime LOL, please point out for everyone where I said anything remotely like that. If you can't respond with facts, have some class and don't continually misrepresent what I said.
Agree with you on this one jit and you said jt much better rhan I.
No one is avoiding the fact they are Muslim, its when folks declare things like 'another attack brought to you by the religion of peace' that we have it backwards. Its not the religion bringing it, its these subhumans subverting religion bringing it.
Ok, where in the Quran is something similar to "‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these."
There are plenty of verses about killing non-believers. Can't find one about loving them. Help me out please.
Pigs are the unclean animals that's why eating pork is banned in Judaism, Christianity and Islam
Dogs on the other hand are not something that most people eat so we are cool with them.
Like I said I have 2 of them
My family overseas has them too
My husbands family overseas has a whole farm and lots of dogs
I'm still stuck on this whole dog phenomena
Research group psychology and dynamics
Like a gang or the mafia or a cult
Everyone wants to have an identity
Mentally ill people want to have validation
The need to belong somewhere is very strong
The media gives them a place to call home in "Islamic terrorism" instead of just terrorism
My Irish family knows all about terrorism
I've heard that it is believed by these nut cases that if you kill children you are saving them from the evils of this world and making them angels so you will
Be an angel if you perish with them
They forgot the part about suicide being a major sin
So keep on giving them the platform to commit more of these heinous crimes by watching tv and listening to the news when it blasts "ISIS and Islamic terrorism " those are the buzzwords even if the event had really nothing to do with it
Isis will take credit anyway
No one would pay any attention if it was labeled " an act of Irish terrorism"
British Transport Police last night insisted it would still use sniffer dogs – which are trained to detect explosives – with any passengers regardless of faith, but handlers would remain aware of “cultural sensitivities”.
Cultural
Not religious
Learn the difference between the two and you will understand a lot more than you did before
Here's where I stand: profiling is OK. Screw PC- if all of the terrorist attacks are perpetrated by muslims, that is a valid PROFILE to use in efforts to attempt to lessen or stop them. I'm not saying kill all the muslims, or even jail all the muslims. I'm not saying to void any of their rights (and they don't have any, if they aren't a US citizen anyway, imo). But to take a precautionary measure such as a temporary travel ban on muslims entering the country? Perfectly fine, and better than that: it's common sense.
It's a stop-gap measure, but it's a MEASURE, which is more than the liberals want to do. No one is talking about rounding them up and putting them into camps (like DEMOCRAT FDR did to the Japanese), but how about just not letting them in, for awhile, until we can come up with a better system of screening? I don't understand how anyone can see any harm in that scenario. Especially the liberals: that's EXACTLY how they treat firearms/owners... before any crime is ever committed. The whole "yeah but SOMEDAY, that gun MIGHT be used to kill someone" is their entire platform. And they are A-OK with infringing US citizen's rights based on "the minority report", but not muslims who aren't even US citizens? Nonsensical, illogical, and intellectually dishonest.
We gotta' start somewhere. You don't want boots on the ground (no one does), you don't want heavily restricted immigration, you don't want a wall, so what exactly do you propose we do? What actions do you propose we take to battle this thing? Let in all the muslims an show them the American way of life (which is exactly what they are fighting against) is "better"? What do you propose? If you think the US simply "leaving them alone" and "stopping meddling in middle east affairs" is going to change them or their mission, I'm afraid you're not even intelligent enough to converse with.
If it was all 17-year-old blonde french girls committing the terrorists acts, guess what? I'd stop all 17-year-old blonde French girls from entering the US for awhile, and come up with some kind of system to keep an eye on them while they are here.
If it was all 30-year-old Dutch transgenders who were committing the acts, ditto.
And if it were all Christians committing the acts, ditto.
But it's not- it's Muslims. Extremist Islamists. So we need to SLOW DOWN the process of entry until we can get a firm handle on how to tell the good from the bad, and to surveil them while they are here. To do otherwise is to willfully allow the "trojan horse" scenario to continue to play out.
JeffersonRepub - Right on again, best attitude, but how do we militarily eradicate the terrorists for good? Internal or foreign intervention, or both?
Danny, IDK. You can't do it from the air tho. Nobody wants more boots on the ground, but IDK. And frankly, while I have little doubt our military experts COULD accomplish the mission, given enough support and authority, it would mean more troops. It's a conundrum. Which is even MORE why I support the travel ban. If we don;t want to send our kids over there to fight these animals, then the LEAST we could do is re-double our efforts from them getting into the US.
We can't have our cake and eat it too.
I will say Trump's plan of making all the NATO countries "pay their fair share that agreed to" is a good starting point. It'll take all of NATO having the same attitude- eradication- for it to work. The US can't do it by ourselves... well, we COULD, if we disregard NATO and the UN, do whatever the hell we want, and tell them all to pound sand. But that's not realistic I don't think, even with Trump as president.
GC, apologies for the misunderstanding. But you seemed to discount everyone else as a fake poster.
JR - I am in complete agreement with you.
Are 1.6 billion muslims trying to get into the US?
The word "ban" is lie and a word used by the MSM, the left, and anti-Trump people to stir up an emotional instead of logical reaction. Due to current world events, Muslims must, unfortunately, be held to stricter entrance standards than others (frankly, I'd have no problem with stricter entrance standards for everyone, but that's another story). It is neither evil or prejudice to exercise extra caution where muslims coming into the US is concerned at this point in human history. As I said- if it were 17-year-old blonde French girls, I would do exactly the same thing.
No one has a real number as to how many of the world's muslims are jihadists, but everyone agrees it's a very large number. How many of those are trying to actively enter the US we also don't know, but still the number must be large enough to be concerning, given that:
"Estimates average around 7% of the worlds Islamic population are engaged in some active form of terror activity, in some sort of active support, planning or implementing mode. 7% seems like a relatively small proportion. However, assuming a moderate estimate of 1.5 billion Muslims, even 5% would be what?
5% of 1.5 billion = "only" 75 million (75,000,000) are actvely involved in some phase of violent Jihad."
If only 1% of the 75M were trying to enter the US, that's 750,000. Large enough number for me.
Well we have data points that can narrow it down further than that - ISIS are Sunni Muslims. Fun fact - they also kill other Muslims for ideological reasons and their victims are overwhelmingly Shia.
ISIS want to kill Shia Muslims, Yazidis, Christians, Jews, Atheists - anyone they consider an infidel, which is anyone who isn't a Sunni Muslim.
How you separate those folks out of the mix is the question.
Skippy is right - ISIS, Al Qaeda, etc. are Sunni Muslims. That does raise the question of why, if the proposed ban is legit at all, Iran, a Shia Muslim nation, is included.
Those exact countries were chosen by the previous administration, it was just never put in action in this particular way.
"The VWP permits citizens of 38 countries to travel to the United States for business or tourism for stays of up to 90 days without a visa. In return, those 38 countries must permit U.S. citizens and nationals to travel to their countries for a similar length of time without a visa for business or tourism purposes.
Under the Act, travelers in the following categories are no longer eligible to travel or be admitted to the United States under the VWP:
Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen"
The Obama admin felt that Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia, or Yemen were dangerous.
My guess is that it was a starting point and they were going to evaluate.
"Remove religion from the equation, then what would people kill over?"
You're kidding, right? Same thing they kill people over today: power, money, drugs, politics, unwanted pregnancy....
Scottso:>>> just for you
Islamic Text on the Golden Rule:
The Quran:
“Serve God, and join not any partners with Him; and do good- to parents, kinsfolk, orphans, those in need, neighbors who are near, neighbors who are strangers, the companion by your side, the wayfarer (ye meet), and what your right hands possess [the slave]: For God loveth not the arrogant, the vainglorious” (Q:4:36)
(In fact the Quran goes beyond saying the Golden Rule by stating in more than four places that “Return evil with Kindness.” (13:22, 23:96, 41:34, 28:54, 42:40))
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh):
“None of you have faith until you love for your neighbor what you love for yourself” (Sahih
Muslim)
“Whoever wishes to be delivered from the fire and to enter Paradise”¦should treat the people as he wishes to be treated.” (Sahih Muslim)
“None of you truly believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself”(Forty Hadith-Nawawi)
“None of you is a believer if he eats his full while his neighbour hasn’t anything.” (Musnad)
“Do unto all men as you would wish to have done unto you; and reject for others what you would reject for yourselves.” (Abu Dawud)
“Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you.” (Farewell Sermon)
“There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm.”
The last 8 come from the sayings of the prophet (hadiths)much Like what the New Testament is about is how I like to compare the hadiths so that people understand.
The Hadiths and the Quran are not the same thing but many muslims have just as much reverence for both
Some of the sayings of the prophet are not true and that is the what people like to quote when saying " the Quran says to kill disbelievers " no it doesn't
Il
Thx H-town Mama.
What do you mean by 'some of the sayings of the prophet' are not true?
The ban is not legal, it is religious discrimination until the Supremes say elsewise.
Our economy is connected to the Muslim world; banning all Muslims effectively bans all Muslim business, that's just building your wall in the wrong economic direction.
What makes you believe we need Extreme Vetting? Have terrorists been flying in to the US in droves? I think we have one vetting breach and I am sure that gap is plugged. I thought all we needed was a wall?
Why would you ever believer Donald Trump could manage to improve vetting even if he could prove we need improved vetting. I mean have you seen how this guy vetted his own staff? How many Russians and Turks did he have on staff before the evil, fake news, MSM ousted them and Trump had to finally cut the cord on his own vetting.......
""Estimates average around 7% of the worlds Islamic " Jr should be embarrassed on this one. We have debunked this many times on HL and yet he continues to spread, let's be kind, his fake research.
" Nobody wants more boots on the ground, but IDK." Oh crud. You voted for a military expansion budget to bring our troop strength to levels sufficient to handle two fronts --- like Afghanistan and Iraq --- full tilt boots on the ground support. You really think he's gonna keep your kids on lingering on US bases? We're preparing for War and you are supporting that preparation. Neocons all.
What are you afraid of? Terrorists flying over to blow us up --- how many years has it been since one did that? Maybe you fear terrorists grabbing a few aircraft carriers, motoring over to America and hitting those beaches? What are thousands of extra soldiers, planes, bombs and bullets going to do except to go to some awful place like Syria or some other hell hole I do not want to send our kids to die in. And then we don't have a clue how to rebuild those nations, much less with a democratic system.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”
Something to chew on JR. Yes we have had totalitarian regimes killing millions but for the sake of logic:
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things.
But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Guess you got the abridged version?
Q2:191-193 And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-al-Haram (the sanctuary at Makkah), unless they (first) fight you there. But if they
192. But if they cease, then Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.
193. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah) and (all and every kind of) worship is for Allah (Alone). But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.
There is no current or proposed Muslim ban. The term 'Muslim ban' was started by the hysterical left, meant to whip up soft minded individuals against it.
How can it be a 'Muslim ban' if the majority of Muslim's are not effected? It can't be.
What rights do non-citizens, on foreign soil, have anyway - whether they are Muslim/Christian/Jewish/Atheist etc.? (actually they seem to have more rights than our pre-born children! but I digress). If 6 billion people want to come to America - they all have the 'Constitutional right' to do so? But full blooded American babies, in their mother's womb, do not have a Constitutional right to life? (damn there I go again...digressing....)
Here is the text if you'd like to read the order yourself, nowhere does it say Muslims are banned - https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/03/06/executive-order-protecting-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states
@jd2 - regarding Iran I'll save you the trouble of reading the order, the reason given is:
Iran has been designated as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1984 and continues to support various terrorist groups, including Hizballah, Hamas, and terrorist groups in Iraq. Iran has also been linked to support for al-Qa'ida and has permitted al-Qa'ida to transport funds and fighters through Iran to Syria and South Asia. Iran does not cooperate with the United States in counterterrorism efforts.
H-town Mama, here are some more quotes from your holy book.
Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."
Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"
Quran (33:50) - "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee"
Quran (4:24) - "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess."
Islamic terrorism is not a buzzword, it's a factual and accurate description.
Skippy
Explain what is meant by the passage you quoted but you haven't quoted the whole thing... do you even understand what is meant!
Denis do you even understand what is meant?
I would love to hear it in layman terms the meanings of some of these Ayahs and Surahs you are quoting...
Scotso asked for passages that are the same as the golden rule and I provided it
If you are not reading the Quran in the context of the time period in which it was written then it will not make any sense to you
This is why scholars have spent 10,20,40+ years studying this book to become an expert on it and give the sermon on Friday's about it
The Quran is as much a historical narrative as it is a religious text
It can be hard to distinguish between the 2 and hard to understand where it is Gods words vs the narrative from the prophet himself
Taking only the passages that you want to take to make a point and not disclosing the whole thing is what they refer to as a disbeliever, a liar, a manipulator etc... this book was translated many many years ago with words that are no longer in use.
Scottso:
The Hadiths are the sayings of the prophet and some are more authentic than others and can be legitimately traced down to the person who heard it some are not so therefore we don't take that to be true.,
The Hadiths are a series of books that is not the quaran
Don't get the 2 confused
I think the meaning is clear. Violence is called for against non believers, and sexual slavery of non Muslim women is aok. Being a muslim, I'd love to hear your spin.
Do you know one of the biggest cash cows for the Vikings was selling non Muslim women to Muslims as sexual slaves. You are aware that the practice of sexual slavery is still being carried out by Muslims in the Middle East today. Ask the Yazidi women. You are aware the UN declared that their is genocide being carried out against the Yazidi's by the The ISLAMIC State of Iraq and Al-Sham, ISIS. You are aware the even president Obama declared that there is a genocide against Christians taking place. This would be the current time period were talking about!
So how can we tell the difference, regarding who has become a radicalized terrorist or not?
The good Muslims MUST report them.
If not, then we must consider following Poland's example.
When people are taught from birth to kill Americans,(infidels) they should not be allowed to cross our borders.
No idea - I'm not a scholar of the Book - I'm reading kill non believers. Put whatever spin on it you want.
How can you tell ...
Well, Poland is nearly all white. They can spot an immigrant. And they said No to refugees, "If we let them in, we will be burying our children,"
Here is a scary thought:
Our country has been purposely flooded with Mexicans since the 1960's.
They look a lot like Muslims.
Then a Muslim was elected president, and he let tens of thousands of Muslim
"Refugees" in.
SO many undocumented refugees.
Many are tan. I am tan too. I would NOT be offended if asked to prove my citizenship, and declare my religion.
Let's do this, and vett ALL immigrants/refugees, for the sake of our children.
And yes, CLOSE our borders until we can
H-town Mama - I am reminded of this concept in Protestantism called 'sola scriptura' - meaning that Scripture alone is authoritative for the faith and practice of the Christian. That the Bible is complete, authoritative, and true. Christian extremists take this concept to an absurd point and cherry pick verses out of the Bible as justification for bad behavior, behavior that most Christians find deplorable.
I would imagine there are also verses in Muslim holy text that Muslim extremists use as justification for bad behavior, behavior that most Muslims find deplorable. Right?
"But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion."
I reject your "logic". Good people don't do evil things. Doing evil things makes them evil. Your premise begins with all people being good at the start; this is flawed.
And things such as money, drugs, power, etc... can all turn good people to do evil things. Just look at our food industry, or our medical industry. Plenty of evil being done there, mostly in the name of money. No religion to be found.
Manchester is my hometown. The Manchester Arena is where I went to my first concert aged 9, with my best friend and our mums. It's where I continued to go with my friends to watch all of the big shows. It's an amazing venue, a focal point in the city.
I talked to my mum through the week after the attack. She said everyone is in shock of course, but most of all. She can see the immediate and significant changes. The police, usually unarmed in the UK, were very present and heavily armed in the grocery store as she went about her normal weekly shop. I'm not sure it translates here, where police are always armed, but to see that must have been very shocking for her. I know I was shocked just to hear it.
Mancunians are insanely strong people who band together. They will continue to do so. And may we focus on all of the victims - not just the innocent people who lost their lives, but their family and friends who have to now navigate their lives after this tragedy.
Htownmom Scottso, I'm not against defending ourselves from the terrorists...I'm AGAINST generalizing, blaming and hating an entire religion and culture.
Lili, what exactly does a Muslim look like? You do realize there are many white Muslims?
So Mexicans look Muslim?
Seems like your basing/guessing that people who are darker skinned are Muslim.
I just can not believe the overwhelming ignorance of some people.
For anyone still confused by the nature of the attacks, and the reasons behind them here is a eyewitness account of the bus attack in Egypt.
Mohsen Morkous, an American citizen, was killed in the attack. His wife, Samia Ibrahim, also was shot but survived and was recovering Sunday in Egypt. They were on their way to church when gunmen shot the tires out of a bus, boarded it and then asked each person to denouce their Christian faith. "When they asked each person about it, everybody say no, they shot them in the head," Gerges Morkous said. "They have no mercy; they shot the mans, children, womans, everybody."
Mohsen Morkous, the couple's two sons, a 4-year-old granddaughter, a 12-year-old grandaughter and three other relatives were slain. Ibrahim was among the 25 wounded.
Spin that!
Denis - As you said, you are a Muslim, and I admire and respect your POV. It takes more guts than the rest of us to express what you do. Thanks.
"Being a muslim, I'd love to hear you spin". Uhh, Danny I think Denis was referring to Htownmom, who is Muslim. It's pretty clear that Denis is not Muslim..
Can we trust anything on this forum? Still, any Muslim who condemns terrorism has my vote as a courageous human being.
I think your right SD. From what I heard he is dark skinned (ask Lili) showing off a turban of sorts, he could be Mexican too? Lol! Deportation time. Adios Denis!
@Positve I never said anything about deporting anyone on this thread. My last post was about innocent people being shot in the head for being Christian, including a 12 year old and 2 year old girl. Lol?? really?
A joke Denis about you not about the horrific tragedy.
Don't try to twist this around..grasping to make me look like the insensitive one. I know I'm the absolute opposite of that.
@Positive you said it not me. Don't complain about twisting things around when you use someone else's post, and imply my thinking is along the same lines.
Strangerdanger is using humor as a weapon again. Not good, and I am calling BS on the bullying tactic. I am somewhat surprised that postive glommed on to SD's bullying meme. That's not in character for her even though she has issue with what Denis posted.
Ah yes, humor as a bullying tactic. Love the again innuendo. Cuz that's where that belongs: innuendo.
Where does your frequent name calling fall?
The first step in recovery is acknowledgement, so right back at you Stranger, Where does your frequent name calling fall?
Ah yes, humor as a bullying tactic, which is your standard MO. It's who you are, either embrace it or enter a 12 step program for bullying. I won't hold my breath, I don't think you have it in you.
Where does it fall. Way behind you and usually as a reaction versus your normal premeditated provacation.
Bullying? Whatever. Mind of the receiver so I will take you at your word of feeling frequently bullied by me. Sorry to offend.
"Bullying? Whatever. Mind of the receiver "
Isn't that the liberal left democrats' VERY DEFINITION of "being offended?" If you think you were, then you were, and the person doing the offending is GUILTY, and needs sensitivity training ROFL.
Personally I never took it for more than a very lame attempt on SD's part to be humorous. Much better than his original long winded first post about the poor disenfranchised Muslims living in France, or the utterly idiotic ( bullying? )western media spoon fed talking point that Russia doesn't go after ISIS, it only picks on the good rebels in Syria.
+1 Denis, Well said - "Much better than his original long winded first post about the poor disenfranchised Muslims living in France, or the utterly idiotic ( bullying? )western media spoon fed talking point that Russia doesn't go after ISIS, it only picks on the good rebels in Syria."
Yeah Denis. If you don't like it, it can't be true. You say Russia goes aftee Isis in syria? Are you saying France doesn't have a Muslim assimilation issue?
Where's the bullying in that? Prove it.
"Isn't that the liberal left democrats' VERY DEFINITION of "being offended?" If you think you were, then you were, and the person doing the offending is GUILTY, and needs sensitivity training ROFL."
". . . the person doing the offending is GUILTY, and needs sensitivity training ROFL."
truer words were never spoken, thanks JeffersonRepub, Good post.
SD yes France does have a Muslim assimilation issue, never said they didn't. I however don't blame the host country offering asylum to Muslims, I blame the Muslims who don't want to assimilate into the French society and culture.
Please educate everyone how does Russia avoid targeting Al-Nusra rebels for the good rebels??? Do they have special helmets that say don't shoot me? Are you aware Al-Nusra also wants to topple Assad, and has conducted joint missions with the supposed good rebels in Syria that we have armed. Are you aware after they topple Assad the goal is to establish a Islamic state. Are you aware they have a bounty system in place for the capture of Russian soldiers. Are you aware they have declared Al-qaeda brothers in Arms, and have called for terrorist attacks inside Russia. Yes of course Russia would not want any harm to come to them. For someone who loves preach his solutions for everyone to the middle east woes your lack of knowledge, and blind faith in western mainstream media is mind numbing.
"Where's the bullying in that? Prove it."
But no one has to "prove" Trump colluded with the Russians because it's simply true.
Got it.
I think I'm the one to blame here. I took SD's comment and ran away with it, mocking Lili and Denis. I got carried away, thinking I was being coy and humorous. However it turned out as beratement, which was not my intention.
I apologize Denis.
@Positve please really no need to apologize to me, I never took it for more than the usual back and forth, and I never said anything about bullying. In the scope of the discussion it's insignificant. I get more upset by getting taken out of context, or someone assuming my views are the same as another persons on one issue just because I feel one way on another separate issue. Again no apologies necessary, but thanks.
Essentially denis, this was what I was trying to get at earlier:
http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2017/may/28/are-we-fighting-terrorism-or-creating-more-terrorism/
The anger part IMO is more the issue than the religion that's used to justify the action.
As much as I love Ron Paul, he's pretty isolationist... maybe to a fault, in today's "global world"... and doesn't address the fact that Jihad has been going on for centuries, many centuries before the US was even founded. This is not a problem of muslims being upset over recent western intervention, it is a much deeper and more philosophical/religious matter than that.
"completely different"
Toe-MAY-toe, Toe-MAH-toe.... at least in terms of foreign policy.
Tho I will admit, I should have used the term "non-interventionist", as it is more accurate re: Ron Paul's foreign policy. But his foreign policy is borderline isolationist... as if to say "if we just leave them alone, they'll leave us alone". And that is NOT proven out by ANY history.
Hard to be non-interventionist when you got people invading your country and bombing/shooting it up...
Ron Paul is right. Put yourself in the shoes of other countries. How would you like a superpower in your face, i.e. global military bases and the perpetual threat of an attack?
Not sure what the "correct" answer is, but an analogy of our current state is the parent that is always slapping his kids; and you all know how these kids turn out...
" How would you like a superpower in your face, i.e. global military bases and the perpetual threat of an attack?"
Which doesn't AT ALL explain the Jihad that has been ongoing for CENTURIES...
You really think if the US stands down, the terrorists will simply hang up their IEDs? Come on...
Well jr, there's a whole lot of people currently upset thinking that Russia's (alleged) interventions are worthy of reprisal by war, so being interventionist clearly has some negative drawbacks - wouldn't you agree?
JIT,
Thank God we "intervened" in Europe in WWII - FINALLY - or who knows what the world would be right now.
Intervention also has positives, you see.
Of course, all of this is far more complicated than a simple statement (non-interventionism is good, interventionism is bad)... WAY too much water under the bridge for that. As I have said, if you or anyone else- including Ron Paul- thinks us simply practicing a 100% non-intervantionist policy in the Middle East will somehow cause the terrorists to hang up their EIDs and wash away their hatred, you are in for a rude awakening. Let's not be too Chamberlain on this issue when we need a Churchill.
I feel like we are in a pre-WWII mode now. We don't have the balls to engage full-force overseas, but the moment will come.
It's a matter of which side you start from IMO JR.
If intervention is not only accepted but desired my view is that the outcomes we see today are entirely predictable (blowback). If interventions are avoided until absolutely necessary then the likelihood of radicalization-by-intervention becomes significantly reduced, but I do understand that other problems could result.
The real point is to not ignore how other people react to interventions, pretending that there are no consequences from the interventions.
" likelihood of radicalization-by-intervention becomes significantly reduced,"
Way too late for that- the war is ON, as far as the terrorists are concerned.
Which brings me back 'round to border security and immigration. If you're not willing to go over there and stop them, at the very least you have to stop them from getting into this country. Can't do neither. (I realize I jumped issues, but they are related- VERY closely)
I'd actually have no problem leaving the middle east to it's own devices (non-intervention), BUT ONLY if America is as hard to get into as Fort Knox... and that's not isolationist, it's PREEMPTIVE.
justintime, I agree and disagree. Actually his son Rand Paul was the only person running for president that I could enthusiastically support, but clearly I was in the minority. Every time we have intervened it's turned into a disaster. We armed the "good rebels" later to be known as Al-Qaeda when they were fighting our boogeyman Russia in Afghanistan, and gave them power. We toppled Saddam , and gave rise to ISIS, we helped to topple Gaddafi, and gave ISIS a stronghold in Libya to ISIS. We now want to topple Assad because we want to weaken Russian influence in the region, but the western media conveniently uses the terms rebels for Al-Nusra the Al-Qaeda front in Syria. If Assad falls they will be the ones taking control;of large parts of Syria. We report on atrocities committed by Assad, but rarely the rebels who kill innocent civilians. We condemn the Russians for supporting him, yet we are refueling Saudi jets making bombing runs on hospitals, schools, and funeral processions in Yemen. We have created huge power vacuums in the Middle East, and armed, motivated the Islamic terrorist. That's true, but their religious views are their guiding principle, it's been that way for thousands of years. We helped open the door with the misguided notion we can spread democracy in the area by toppling dictators that have kept them in check. Fundamental Islam, and western Democracy can not peacefully coexist. I've said it before, I would let them sort themselves out. Outside of supporting our ally Israel I would stay out unless it was clearly in OUR self interest , or any act of terrorism could be linked to to state sponsorship, then I would want to see an overwhelming and disproportionate response.
"Fundamental Islam, and western Democracy can not peacefully coexist. I've said it before, I would let them sort themselves out. Outside of supporting our ally Israel I would stay out unless it was clearly in OUR self interest , or any act of terrorism could be linked to to state sponsorship, then I would want to see an overwhelming and disproportionate response."
PERFECT.
Yankeefan See Dahiya doctrine,- Military strategy of asymmetric warfare, put forth by Israel Defense Forces which threatens the destruction of civilian infrastructure of hostile regimes to deter the use of that infrastructure by combatants and endorses the employment of "disproportionate power" to secure that end
No that's not what I said, but like all war the will be collateral civilian casualties, we live in the real world and war is not a game. This would be in response to a state backed terrorist attack which clearly will result in civilian deaths here. So in an insulting way you asked for a definition, which I gave you and clearly you knew it was coming. Let's hear you brilliant idea's or are you just a troll who takes pot shots, but has no idea's of his own, and is only capable of trying to shoot down others..
You are exactly right Yankee fan that's what it takes to win wars. You kill the enemy you kill their family and you continue to kill them until they surrender. It's what the terrorists are doing to us now It's precisely because we stopped fighting that way that we're in this never ending skirmish situation. I'm no fan of war, but just look at history, something like Hiroshima and Nagasaki is completely unthinkable today yet that's what it took to defeat the Japanese in World War II.
I don't have a solution but I do know yours is repulsive. Ugly talk from an armchair warrior.
@Yankeefan, So zero idea's, just finger pointing at others. As I said typical Troll, no substance. Thanks, got it.
It's not my solution. President Truman's solution. I wish we could love the terrorists into submission, but I don't think people who want to kill you stop because you ask them nicely.
Maybe I could hop over into your armchair? and we could cuddle!
Our best minds are struggling to find solutions. The military, intelligence heads, our allies... fortunately, they are focused on containment, limited ground forces, drones and diplomacy. Scottso says nuke them, you say kill children, women and civilians. The good news? No sane human would listen to either one of you.
@yankeefan I never said that, that's your extrapolation. I guess you missed the whole part about not wanting to be involved in Middle East wars or interventions, and only responding if attacked. Yes that's insane, because everything else we have done has worked out so well. Not just a troll, but a nit picking troll purposefully ignoring the entire context of my statement, with the premise being avoiding wars, conflict and death. You're not even good at being a troll.
We know where the ISIS forces are concentrated, including their training camps. Bomb these places mercilessly and it will make a positive difference.
+1 Danny. Locate terrorists and CRUSH them. Which we have been doing.... so... how well has it been working? Even Obama droned the hell out of them, and they keep crawling out of that region like cockroaches, committing mass murder of innocents.
I'd say bomb the place back to the 3rd world, but they're already there.
It seems to me, loving them won't work, fighting them only works SOME, what's left? Just keep doing what we're doing until that region of the world sorts itself out? Because short of bombing those countries like we bombed Berlin, Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki.... I don't see them giving up. Like Japanese soldiers in WWII, when you are fighting an enemy that WANTS TO DIE for their cause... the only thing to do is to kill them all. Until they submit. Or until being a terrorist is finally looked upon as a bad idea, since it will most assuredly get you killed- WITHOUT you being able to kill anyone else for your cause. In other words, a waste of time.
Crush them but more importantly find out the cause. Otherwise, this war will never end. Some of the causes point back to how are government is run as an international power and others are for our meddling into the Middle East...
Have any of you ever actually sat down with and spoken to a Muslim from the Middle East??
Please, for the love of god, find someone from the Middle East and sit down over coffee and let them explain to you why this is happening. It has NOTHING to do with how our government is run and it has nothing to do with the fact that we are "meddling" in the Middle East.
A great way to actually LEARN something is to visit the mosque in Mt Olive. Make a few friends there and then talk to them. You will learn something.
It just get's under my skin to read these posts where everyone talks like they are Middle East and muslim experts and they are totally wrong.
Heidi Denis, sorry for the delay... IMO "I however don't blame the host country offering asylum to Muslims, I blame the Muslims who don't want to assimilate into the French society and culture" is not quite right. At least not according to many French.
First, the French themselves admit they are a good part of the assimilation problem: http://theconversation.com/the-long-troubled-history-of-assimilation-in-france-51530
Second, like Judaism, being Muslim in most of the world means being non-secular. Church and state are combined. However, like in America, we know this does not have to be true although let's face it --- that's a concept that literally started in and with America. Jews, Muslims, all of us can live together in a secular nation united in our common belief in being a nation of laws where separation of church and state is paramount to liberty and freedom for church and state. France, thus far and for many reasons, has opted against going this route.
Do we honestly believe these Muslim immigrants are coming to our shores to bring terrorism to us? Of course that's not true for the vast majority, they are escaping terror. Do you believe they are coming here to bring their way of life to us --- heck, they are escaping their way of life because of the terror. Once they get here, do you think they want to just recreate "little xxx" and never see the rest of the country?
Of course not. Perhaps they are not ready to drop the veil, throw on some jeans, ALDO's and a tank top, but we all keep some of our traditions from our home culture and religion and adopt some of our new home over time. And there will be some sub-humans looking to kill as well, whether home grown, whatever. In the scheme of things, only a percentage will be practicing Muslims to begin with --- it's is not a 100% unity, in Sweden for example only 66% may be actively practicing.
Try this: https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-Muslims-assimilate-to-western-culture-when-they-immigrate
No, I have tried before on this forum and it goes nowhere. I am serious when I say talk to a Middle East Muslim. It is very enlightening and I think worth it. You also have to speak to more than one person to really get a sense of the "why" this is taking place.
I can post what I have been told (as I have done before) and it just devolves into a political pissing match and I get blasted by those with an agenda.
I really do believe that the average American should stop the conjecture and actually SPEAK to a few Muslims (we have plenty in our area - two mosques who will be happy to enlighten everyone, I'm sure) before they type out their personal theories as some type of fact, that's all.
Well, thanks for lending nothing to the conversation, I guess. I was genuinely interested in what you had to say on the matter.
I think you often get blasted for talking to one, or a few people, saying aha! I know the answer, and then telling us how It is based on your few anecdotal pieces evidence.
People are trying to give you the hint.....
Just say: I talked to xxx, and according to xxxx, he says.....
Instead you tend to say "I talked to three guys living it and they say the answer is......"
The point is you have an example, a data point, not a survey, not a statistical piece of evidence. If you treat it as such, you will fare much, much better I think.
Heidi - Please enlighten us on the local Muslims' analysis of ISIS and other radical Islamic terrorists. Where does their barbarism come from? What must be understood to stop it?
more news:
RAQQA, Syria — The self-proclaimed Islamic State has issued a statement condemning self-proclaimed comedian Kathy Griffin, accusing her of “cultural appropriation” after she posed for a photograph with a mock severed head of President Donald Trump.
The group, which has been protective of its brand ever since taking over vast swaths of Iraq and Syria and establishing itself as the premier beheading agency in the Middle East, said it was deeply disturbed by Griffin’s “ignorant and offensive” use of a “sacred Islamic State tradition.”
“This is just another example of a privileged white woman culturally appropriating the proud custom of a marginalized people. Beheadings are our thing, not your thing,” said the statement
http://www.duffelblog.com/2017/06/kathy-griffin-donald-trump-beheading/#ixzz4irxIrSDf
This is a fake news site just like all the other fake news sites like the onion, cnn, msnbc, abc, cbs, fox, wapo,nyt, npr, etc
SD the assimilation problem is not unique to France, Sweden the country you mentioned is now looking to deport refugees, and there are well documented no go zones in different parts of the country. One simple question for you. Do you think any Muslim who believes in Sharia law, should be allowed to come to live in any western country?
Well strangerdanger, my family has own beachfront villas in Stella Sidi Abd el Rahman (Egypt) since 1973. I have spent between 2 weeks and/or 3 months at a time every summer there. I have neighbors there that I call عمة (eimm) اخو الام (akhw al'umm), that's Aunt and Uncle in Arabic. I also spent 2 college semesters in Lebanon (back in the day). I have tried to discuss this Muslim topic and, as I recall, you were one of the people who shut me down, quick.
I DO use people in my life as examples (like when discussing teachers/schools as most of my family; grandma, father, uncle, cousin, brother-in-law ,etc) were or still are teachers so I DO feel that I have a pretty good sense of what actual teachers think - and you made fun of that. If we were posting about farming, for example, and someone on here had 5 farmers in the family I would DEFINITELY take what they had to say about what farmers think seriously.
Personally, I don't think you really want to hear anyone's opinion - you just like to post articles that someone else wrote to argue everyone's point - like a game.
I really do feel that instead of hearing it from me (I have tried...) people need to hear it from the horses mouth - and there are ways to do that without going to the Middle East.
Very well said Heidi! It's not about sources (links) and statistics. It's about real life experiences and most importantly interacting and involvment with real people.
Heidi --
You seem to be the *horses mouth*. I want to hear it from you. I have no time to travel to visit a mosque and seek out some mysterious person who might or might not be there when I get there, as you suggest. Your suggestion is ridiculous.
Does a person have to visit a Church to learn about Christianity, for instance? NO -- you can speak to a person one on one to learn about the religion and what it means.
Your statements are contrived, to say the least.
Assimilation is a problem with Muslims. I remember talking about this with a Serbian coworker in the late 90s. He mentioned how the town welcomed the Muslims when the first came, but there numbers grew to more than 50% of the town and they tried to take over. Well, most of us know how that turned out. Imagine you are Serbian and newcomers want to take over the town your decedents built? Typical invader scenario. At the end of the day the mightier prevails; what is right or wrong doesn't matter...
Thank you Heidi!
I, too, could try and explain the how's and the why's and have also tried to but just get ignored or put down
It's not a simple thing and you really have to have an understanding of history and be open to seeing things from a different perspective and loosening up on that tunnel vision...
I would start by directing people to listen and research people like Hamza Yusuf and Suhaib Webb and Yusuf Estes
All former American Christians who are now Imams and have a great understanding and way of explaining all of these issues
To say Islam has nothing to do with terrorism is false. Jihadis are a small minority of Muslims to be sure, but they certainly feel they are justified by their religion in perpetrating violence against others. That's an indisputable fact.
I can only assume why this behavior is not more strongly denounced by Muslims is that they are afraid for their own safety.
H-Town Mama, in America most people don't give a crap what your religion is or even if you have one. One of the many GREAT things about this country. Try being a Christian or Hindu in a Muslim country if you really want to see some intolerance.
" you were one of the people who shut me down, quick." Well, if you listen to them as well as you listened to me, then we really don't know what they actually feel :>)
Point was not to "shut you down," but to indicate that anecdotal data has weaknesses and should be viewed in it's true light, not as gospel because you visited in the summer and called people Uncle. Is your family from Egypt? Are they Muslim? Can Egyptian Muslims speak for Pilipino Muslims? Anecdotes are useful in determining the truth but generally are not strong enough by themselves to prove the truth without supporting information and facts. Generally Heidi goes to her personal well for this support and that's where the weakness of the anecdote, flavored by our own baggage, tends to factually fall apart. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
ps: analogies, one of my favorites, are even weaker in the search for the truth, but they sure are fun! Let's compare everything to cars and driving.......
"It's not about sources (links) and statistics. It's about real life experiences and most importantly interacting and involvement with real people." Bwhaaaaat? It's about truth and evidence to support what you hear from Auntie Mae's real life experiences from real people. People who study people are real people too and a good scientific statistical view will always be stronger than Auntie Mae's personal report.
And before you tell me about shabby science and studies that got it all wrong, I would respond about Auntie Mae's predilection for the tall tale and her avoidance of anything considered tawdry.
So keep those anecdotes coming, keep them in their place, and please ---- do not try to tell us how the world works because Auntie Mae said so. I even showed you some wordsmithing on how to talk anectdotes. And tell us more about your family ---- sounds yuge and worldly.
What does it take for someone knowledgeable of Muslim beliefs to explain why some of them like to kill children? Forget family affiliations, this is the brutal murder of innocents. Why?
Sorry Strangerdanger, but I would take the word of someone who's brother just left to fight for Jihad as to why he would do that, than some article from CNN written by some "journalist" with no firsthand knowledge and an agenda to boot.
You keep reading articles - the rest of us will actually get out of our houses and talk to the people as to why they are doing something or why they feel a certain way, instead of doing it your way and getting someone's interpretation of what those people said.
If you don't believe you can learn more about farming from a farmer, or about schools and teaching from a teacher or about the Quran from a Muslim, or about drug addiction from a former drug addict, etc, than I guess we will continue to disagree and you will continue to post articles and "proof" from Snopes as your sources!
Did I ever say don't take the word of someone who's brother just left to fight for Jihad as to why he would do that? Of course not. Did I ever say the better answer is some article from CNN written by some "journalist" with no firsthand knowledge and an agenda to boot? Of course not.
Funny though, getting someone's interpretation of what those people said is exactly what you are asking us to do with you. You are the journalist and they are the unnamed source.
Of course I know you can learn about farming from a farmer, schools and teaching from teachers, about the Quran from a Muslim, or about drug addiction from a former drug addict. I just don't agree that you can learn more talking to just a few people, most notably your friends and family, who undoubtedly think pretty much just like you and carry many of the same bags as you, than you can learn by gleaning a variety of scholarly and scientific, statistical sources to arrive at your perceived truth.
It's not that I don't listen to what you say you heard your friends say; it's just that I don't conclude that it means they have the whole story or the answer.
We may disagree but there is not much disagreement as to the value and weaknesses of anecdotal data. You just don't agree with the preponderance of evidence in that regard. Perhaps ask a friend :>)
Do as you wish. I was just trying to explain why you might feel some shut you down, blast you, or disagree.
Stranger :>)
For those keeping score - the away team keeps binging on the hits in the Ramadan-Bomb-a-Thon.
451 + 7 from the Kabul funeral attack (so far) =458
Pumping the rookie numbers significantly from a total of 41 + 1 (42) dead since Ramadan begun 8 days ago - 41 total attacks.
Ramadan goes on in till at least June 24th.
You just made my point SD. "by gleaning a variety of scholarly and scientific, statistical sources to arrive at your perceived truth".
Meaning: I will find an article somewhere which proves my point. We get it. That's not who or what most enlightened people want to learn from. If you haven't noticed, many of those "scholarly and scientific, statistical sources" turned out to be total bull.
Thanks, you go read (and rely on) more "scholarly articles" and I will speak to actual Muslims and teachers about what they think.
Heidi - Please inform the rest of us what "actual Muslims and teachers" think about murdering children en masse and in the name of Jihad.
ghost Not all Muslims are terrorists, but most, if not all of current acts of terror ,stem from radical Islamic terrorists. Thank God we have a President who understands this!!!
Going out on a limb again, and guessing the people behind the latest attack are Muslim. Again no connection, just another coincidence.
Barbarism and killing comes from evil
If it came from our religion of billions of people a lot more people would be dead by now and they would be the only ones left standing...
Actually I was a Christian living in a Muslim country (Egypt) and I was treated just fine
It's actually in the quaran that those of other faiths must be protected and (fun fact)where Thomas Jefferson got the notion if you will, & first realized that freedom of religion should be an inalienable right... TJ was most impressed with Islamic jurisprudence and society and gleaned much from Islamic scholars
Good for you H-town Mama. Unfortunately the 28 Christians slaughtered last week IN EGYPT were not as fortunate.
H-town Mama, well lucky you! The 45 Christians slaughtered at churches on Palm Sunday in Egypt were not so fortunate. The 28 Christians shot in Egypt including women and Children as young as 2 last week on there way to church were not as fortunate as you. Why were the shot and bombed to death, because they were Christian. No nothing to do with religion, get real!
"Sorry Strangerdanger, but I would take the word of someone who's brother just left to fight for Jihad as to why he would do that, than some article from CNN written by some "journalist" with no firsthand knowledge and an agenda to boot"
Easy reason: young, stupid, impressionable. Kill without guilt. Rape without guilt. Sick! It's all about power hungry men. They just use religion as a rallying point.
maja2 I'd be angry too if i grew up to realize my entire education came from a single book causing me to become an adult with zero useful
skills.
howlermonkey howlermonkey - Try carpentry, very gratifying, with all kinds of new tools and technology to help you do your jobs.
maja2 - That quote from Heidi and others from H-town Mama shows it is not just "power hungry men" who are at the root of the terrorist problem. Muslims who do not condemn brutal terrorism are part of the problem.
At least British PM Theresa May referred to this as Islamic terrorism unlike Muslim sympathizer Obama and his ilk. I fear it's too late for Europe. Hopefully, the US won't make the same mistakes.
Google "Why we hate you and want to fight you" to find the reasons why Muslim terrorists attack us, in their own words.
I agree, Suze, it's too late for Europe. The US, though, doesn't even need to make the same mistake: we're collapsing in on ourselves for other reasons.
TMay is up for re-election in 5 days, what did you expect?
I am with Obama, I am ilk. And if you think we are Muslim sympathizers, tell you what, you can kiss off until Trump and his blind followers actually do something about it versus just getting our SEALS killed.
And the US can't make the mistakes Europe has. Unless your kind starts removing freedoms from our Muslim brothers and sisters.
Walk right in, you know you want to :>)
I know exactly what you are Strangerdang, Strangerdanger, Mr. Google, or whatever you call yourself of late and so do most of the regular readers of this forum. No need for me to waste my valuable time.
These attacks have 1 major intention: Promote a holy war in which all muslims fight against the rest of the world, the non believers.(caliphate) To accomplish this goal, they spread fear and incite violence against
Assimilated muslims in the west whom they consider to be worse than profane.
They know that as more attacks occur it leads to more distrust against muslims, which in turn radicalises those muslims who don't follow that ideology yet. Or worse yet brings them back into the arms of terrorists through deportations.
1. far more muslims than christians or any other group have been killed by ISIS.
2. We need to encourage and support not hate westernized muslims - to do otherwise plays by the rules of ISIS.
3. In turn for this support westernized muslims need to ferret out jihadists in their community, report them, shun them, and refuse to support that ideology.
Creating a caliphate is only the first step towards the apocalypse, described in the Quran. More and more members of ISIS are awaiting the arrival of the Mahdi—a messianic figure destined to lead the Muslims to victory before the end of the world.
They believe that there will be only 12 legitimate caliphs, and Baghdadi is the eighth; that the armies of Rome will mass to meet the armies of Islam in northern Syria; and that Islam’s final showdown with an anti-Messiah will occur in Jerusalem after a period of renewed Islamic conquest. It would be a foolish mistake to assume that ISIS would cease their terror in the western world if they can establish their caliphate.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/
very long article by The Atlantic which describes in detail the goals of the Islamic State. It also states that the best military option for us is to slowly bleed ISIS to death, as everything else (e.g. a big invasion) would support ISIS's narrative style of the holy war.
skippy - To address your points one by one:
1. All the more reason to align with anti-terrorist muslims everywhere.
2. Same as 1. above.
3. Ah, here's the rub - to get "westernized muslims need to ferret out jihadists in their community, report them, shun them, and refuse to support that ideology." seems to be tough. Just look at the gutless posts from muslims on this thread.
I still think that extreme punishment as well as extreme vetting is the most effective approach to this war. Their soldiers don't want to die, if presented with the options.
UK Prime Minister gets it right:
http://www.sarahpalin.com/enough-enough-british-prime-minister-says-waiting/?ref=Ads
(attack the "source" all you want, it's all quotes from the Prime Minister's speech)
Skippy - Incentivizing comes from demonstrating to all jihadists that certain death will result from adherence to their ideology and their leaders who try to stay out of harm's way. Most effective before training is complete, especially for younger dupes.
How does that incentivize their compatriots to not tolerate their behavior? I was thinking of using conspiracy and RICO predicates we already have on the books. The whole point of the jihadist ideology is to die and get their virgins in heaven.
"get "westernized muslims need to ferret out jihadists in their community, report them, shun them, and refuse to support that ideology." seems to be tough. Just look at the gutless posts from muslims on this thread."
I think berating Muslims for not doing enough is a matter of certain Christian assuming things that are not true. I mean if the metric here is bombing, the I guess US Muslims are doing a freakin great job: Ferret Mission Accomplished.
How is it unreasonable to expect a group to refuse to be complicit in acts of terrorism and mass murder ? If an individual or group is aware of this type of activity in the works and does not take action then guess what - you all hang together and the terrorists win - law abiding members of a community cannot tolerate this type of activity under the color of their shared belief system and then claim discrimination. If one is complicit to acts of murder they also have that blood on their hands.
That guy whose brother just left to fight for jihad, I hope he's one of the dead terrorists.
strangerdanger - Jihadists are here in the USA and especially in NJ. NYPD knows who they are, and I support the NYPD going into their mosques and arresting them.
That's not just the NYPD but the JTTF - joint terrorist task force which has NYPD but various 3 letter agencies as members. The NYPD does have a separate intel division but their Counterterrorism folks are mainly emergency services (SWAT). Not in disagreement but just a clarification that the NYPD does not operate in a vacuum. The detectives on that detail are deputized federal marshals so they can enforce title 18 violations.
CNN is totally fake news they have no credibility left:
CNN Caught Staging Fake News Scene
CNN was caught staging news in a video captured by citizen journalist, who posted the footage to his Twitter account @markantro. Becky Anderson of CNN is seen in London handing props to a “peace group.”
https://medium.com/@Cernovich/cnn-becky-anderson-staging-fake-news-scene-london-terror-march-2e6bdc3aa68c
How many? Where in NJ. How do you know --- did a Muslim tell you. Why do you want NYPD to go into NJ mosques to arrest them?
This is all very strange. a stranger danger I have never seen :>)
"If it came from our religion of billions of people a lot more people would be dead by now and they would be the only ones left standing..."
The middle east is not stable and people are killed every day over RELIGION. Many countries are war torn and people die every day for not conforming to a belief. So yes, it does come down to religion. You can cherry pick the good parts of the Koran but most of it is always left to interpretation. That in itself is dangerous.
Jazzykatt As posted in The Telegraph, the Daily Mirror and all other UK newspaper (both conservative AND Liberal)....
"The sister of the Manchester terrorist wrote on her Facebook a congratulations to her brother, Manchester bomber Salman Abedi, 22. His sister, Jomana Abedi, posted a Koran verse about “Entering Paradise” just 48 hours after her brother killed 22 people and injured dozens more. Her brother died in the suicide bomb attack on a concert by US pop star Ariana Grande at Manchester Arena on Monday evening. Jomana Abedi, 18 – who describes her brother as “kind and loving” – posted several lines from a Muslim prayer on Facebook hours later, she followed this with verses from the Muslim holy book related to a soul entering paradise to be with God.This was followed by three lines from the Koran: Chapter 89, verses 27-30, which read: "To the righteous it will be said, O reassured soul, Return to your Lord, who is well-pleased and pleasing to Him, And enter among My righteous servants of Thee, and enter My Paradise.
Jihadis believe Muslim become “martyrs” and earn a place in heaven by killing Infidels (non-Muslims) in suicide attacks. .Jomana refuses to condemn her brother – saying his actions are “between him and his God”.
Abedi’s Libyan father, Ramadan Abedi, insists his son is innocent – despite his body parts being strewn among the remains of the bomb. Ramadan Abedi has been arrested on suspicion of terror offences and terror plotting with his younger son, Hashem Abedi, 17, who police say were in contact with both Libyan and Syrian terrorists."
This is similar to the wife of the terrorist from Orlando, who knew what was going on and even DROVE her husband to the gun store and to the tactical shop for the bullet proof vest and tactical gear...and said nothing.
Or, the couple that came here from Syria (husband and wife) who's mother and father babysat while they made bombs and bought AR-15's.
What do Jihadis believe happens to them if they are killed WITHOUT killing any infidels? Like, if a drone attack takes them out before they have a chance to kill anyone? Do they still get their 72 virgins?
Because that matters. It would make them like the Japanese in WWII: no surrender, EVER (until we finally dropped the 2 bombs).
Heidi - You seem to be quite knowledgeable of several terrorists' backgrounds, motivations and actions. I infer that you do not support any of them, right?
Not sure where you would get the notion that I support terrorism just because I am trying to get people to understand it for themselves.
It's pretty hard to "fight" something when you have no idea who/what/why you are fighting. Which is exactly why they are gaining ground and gaining numbers while the UK, USA Paris and other's talk and talk and ring their hands. Jeez MSNBC called the London Terrorist attack "a van attack" for heaven's sake.
Hell, our leaders and the media can't even agree on what to call what's going on or who is doing it or why, much less understand the background behind what they are doing.
Wow, they are gaining ground. I knew I should have asked someone instead of looking it up. Darned MSM. Most reports indicate that ISIS is slowly being strangled and pushed out of its' strongholds.
You got the buzz on this one Heidi. No wonder we need an extra $50B in defense dollars requiring us to cut medicare, welfare, and clean air. Freaking ISIS will be here any day now.
I know we are killing more civilians under Trump than under Obama; that's got to create a good number more converts and terrorists. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-releases-new-report-on-civilian-casualties-in-isis-fight/ Maybe we need to start killing all the civilians we can find to stop them from becoming terrorists in the first place.
Fact is we were killing very few civilians, our kids, and slowly strangling ISIS out of the land it has taken. Now we are killing about the same number of ISIS and more of our kids and foreign innocents in many more countries than under Obama. We don't really know the numbers because Trump has a blackout on military actions. Any military transparency has been washed away.
What we have now is an escalation of our attacks surrounded by a lack of public information adding to our growing fear and acceptance of our militaristic authoritarian ruler leading us to war.
I never want to see innocent civilians harmed, but "transparency" in war is part of the reason why the British lost the revolutionary war.
You really can't think that any government at war should tell you, and thus the enemy, what they do 100 percent of the time.
https://www.justsecurity.org/37190/rare-u-s-military-acknowledgment-civilian-casualties-yemen-concerns-transparency-persist/
Transparency only started in 2016 - how do you think we know about the navy seal that was killed or the civilian casualties in Yemen? I think this administration has been more transparent than ever before
"No wonder we need an extra $50B in defense dollars requiring us to cut medicare, welfare, and clean air". I thought the cut was in Medicaid not Medicare. Obama raided Medicare for $716 billion to help with the funding for the ACA. Also, is it actually a cut or is it just slowing down the increases if the growth of the Programs. So instead of funding at a 4.5% increase it gets at a 3% increase.
kb2755 I condemn brutal terrorism
I am a Muslim that condemns brutal terrorism that does not come from anything that resembles Islam
How am I supposed to ferret out these brutal terrorists again if I can't freaking understand their language? The only Arabic I know comes from what I recite when I pray ...other than that how am I supposed to know what someone is plotting or planning? If I don't know or don't understand am I still sympathizing with them as a Muslim?
Not all Muslims speak Arabic, Pashto, Urdu etc...
Here I am firmly stating in public...
I condemn brutal terrorism!!!
It is wrong, it is evil and it has no place in my life!
CNN denies they 'faked' the news that they were caught on video faking:
CNN Rebuts Claim They ‘Staged’ a Pro-Muslim Shot During London Aftermath
by Colby Hall | 8:39 pm, June 4th, 2017
Fake news or fake outrage? Depends on one’s perspective.
The “fake news” conspiracy group seem to believe they now have solid evidence of CNN International creating a pro-Muslim narrative for a live shot hours after the most recent London Terror attack.
In a YouTube video titled “CNN staging the narrative before making report, they are truly Fake News!” it appears that reporter Becky Anderson directs some self-described “Muslim Mothers” to stand behind her as they rally support for London Police, who responded so bravely to the attacks of Saturday night. Watch the video:
Anderson is a seasoned veteran who, according to her bio, “is based in CNN’s Abu Dhabi bureau, allowing her a distinctive regional perspective on some of today’s most important news stories, including the deepening humanitarian crisis in Syria, continuing unrest in the wake of the Arab Spring and the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian peace process.” So she’s no rookie looking to make a quick splash.
For those not familiar with live news production, it is actually not that uncommon for hosts and producers to arrange protesters or pedestrians behind reporter to provide a varied background. Sources familiar with this live shoot tell Mediaite that the protesters (“Muslim Mothers”) were already very near the location and the Police simply allowed them to move behind Ms. Anderson and crew.
That said, there is reason to fairly critique this as “editorializing” the shoot and not just reporting the news. And in a climate where CNN is feeling a lot of criticism — most of which is unfounded — from the conservative corners of the Internet, this footage won’t help their cause.
We reached out to CNN for explanation and they provided the following statement:
“This story is nonsense. The group of demonstrators that was at the police cordon was being allowed through by officers so they could show their signs to the gathered media. The CNN crew along with other media present simply filmed them doing so.”
Reliable Sources host Brian Stelter offered his explanation via Twitter:
Far-right twitterers are misleading folks about this video. Bloggers saying CNN was caught "staging fake news" (1/2) https://t.co/lvz6xznj18
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) June 5, 2017
Police allowed demonstrators thru cordon "so they could show their signs" to media, @CNNPR says. CNN, BBC, AP "simply filmed them doing so."
— Brian Stelter (@brianstelter) June 5, 2017
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnn-rebuts-claim-they-set-up-a-pro-muslim-shot-during-london-aftermath/
@H-town Mama, everyone can say they condemn brutal terrorism, that takes no guts! You refuse to acknowledge the tie between Islam and the Islamic terrorist, instead you point out how well you were treated in Egypt totally oblivious to the fact there is a systematic Christian genocide taking place there by Muslims. You refuse to acknowledge what's happening, and throw out your idiotic antidotes as if somehow that refutes the brutal slaughter that is taking place in the name of Islam. Make no mistake about it, you and your fellow Muslims who turn a blind eye to the truth are a big part of the problem! Absolutely disgusting!
Not a 'Lone' Wolf, but rather a 'Known' Wolf :
London terrorist had twice been referred to police over his extremist views
One of the three jihadists who murdered revellers in central London on Saturday had been reported to the anti-terror police on at least two occasions, it has been claimed.
A former friend of the terrorist, who was shot dead by police along with two accomplices, claimed he had been radicalised while watching YouTube videos and said he contacted the authorities after becoming concerned over his friend’s extremist views.
A neighbour also claimed she had contacted police in Barking, east London, after the suspect tried to convert her children to Islam and radicalise them. The man is not being named at the request of the police.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/04/london-terrorist-had-twice-referred-police-extremist-views/
"Christians" bomb abortion clinics and murder doctors. Therefore, all Christians are terrorists. White southern males comprise the KKK. Therefore, all southern males are bigots. Bloods, Crips and Black Panthers are all criminals. Therefore, all blacks are criminals. This is the essence of racism...and the ignorance and small mindedness that is redolent in the HL threads is a microcosm of the American divide.
H-town Mama You condemn it perfect - if you run across someone who is planning a violent act you'll report it I'm sure - you're not the enemy.
@Yankeefan, once again another simplistic comment. Who said all Muslims were terrorists? 4 posts on this thread and still nothing to say.
4catmom H-town Mama and Heidi - Skippy is right. You are not the enemy. But unfortunately, as muslims, you have the additional responsibility to ferret out and report any extremists who have terrorist tendencies in your mosques and communities. Doing this will make you heroes for everyone.
Yes Yankeefan, you explained it much better than I did, you made the point i tried to make about generalization. Thank you.
Fear will only bring out the worst in people..
Beautifully said H-town Mama!
Are Christians responsible/able to stop violent Christians? I can't. That is not realistic. The same goes for every religion.
How can anyone expect for Muslims to stop the insane fanatical terrorists?
Just think about it....,
Thought about it, where exactly are the Christian terrorist attacks happening now, that Christians should stop. "The same goes for every religion" talk about generalization.
"Christians" bomb abortion clinics and murder doctors. Therefore, all Christians are terrorists. White southern males comprise the KKK. Therefore, all southern males are bigots. Bloods, Crips and Black Panthers are all criminals. Therefore, all blacks are criminals. This is the essence of racism...and the ignorance and small mindedness that is redolent in the HL threads is a microcosm of the American divide."
You mean like how everyone who didn't like Obama's policies was a racist, or how anyone who voted for Trump is a misogynist, racist, liar?
"American divide", indeed.
@positive - we are all responsible for what happens in our communities, just think about THAT a second.
I don't believe if you thought someone in your community was going to commit an act of violence you would do nothing.
JR: So are you saying that all Caucasian Obama dissenters are truly racist, or should be assumed to be racist? That they should all be lumped together and treated as one group based on their skin color and treated as if they are all racist?
Nobody is expecting muslims to stop terrorism themselves - it is however reasonable to expect folks to report acts of murder war and terrorism in their community. It is also reasonable to expect that they would have a zero tolerance policy towards acts of this type - any peaceable person who wants to live and work in this country is entitled to peaceable enjoyment and the freedoms this great country has to offer and worship the diety of their choosing. The minute someone starts talking about harming others they need to be shunned alike the Amish. You see someone taking about putting nails in a pressure cooker - you tell someone, otherwise you're complicit and an accessory and deserve to feel the full wrath of the criminal justice system - simple as that.
These things don't occur in a vacuum- their families , friends, and communities are aware of it. The only other option we have is to continue down the abhorrent road to this Orwellian police state where everyone is suspect.
JIT,
I think you know I am saying the opposite. Just pointing out hypocrisy, as usual.
And for the record, I have never said all muslims are terrorists. BUT a temporary travel ban violates no one's rights (like FDR did with with the Japanese internment), it simply stops entry until we are more confidant in our, as well as other countries', screening processes. Had FDR simply stopped Japanese entry into the country, that would have been perfectly fine imo. I'm not saying round up muslims that are here and put them into camps.
But this is what I have been saying the whole time. Perhaps you've missed it, if my name is your greasemonkey software.
JIT I believe JR is saying that's how Trump supporters have been unfairly categorized. HRC has used those terms to describe Trump voters citing those reasons for her loss in the election. Let's not muddy the waters with this stuff as it really is irrelevant to the discussion
No reason to be alarmed says the mayor of London. Is he sure about that?
"Khan then added: “Londoners will see an increased police presence today and over the course of the next few days. There’s no reason to be alarmed.” "
What a total fool
Mark Mc. 
Excellent point Mark. Unarmed citizens are sitting ducks for those who have evil intent
JR your logic is like Africa restricting all whites because KKK members tend to be white, and historically whites were prone to condone and participate in slavery.
Leave Islam out of it. Yes there's a draw there for a certain mindset (no one has ever disputed that afaik), but that could be said of many things. The brush is too broad and needs to be narrowed, that's all I'm saying.
JIT
If I'm not mistaken (and I don't think I am), the "travel ban" isn't based on declared religion, but on geographic point of origin, no?
And besides- everyone- including YOU, which frankly surprises me- seems to forget that this is TEMPORARY. It is a stop-gap measure until vetting procedures can be upgraded, I'll bet the UK wishes it had that right now! (London's idiot mayor excluded)
I'll say it again: if this was WWII,
-restricting Japanese from entering the country: A-OK
-rounding them up, relocating them to housing camps, and taking everything they owN- INCLUDING American citizens who DO have rights in this country- not OK. And NOT COMPARABLE.
+1 H-town Mom and YF --- apparently very brave for H-town Mom as well
-1 Denis --- that response was well below the belt, uncalled for and untrue.
"But unfortunately, as muslims, you have the additional responsibility to ferret out and report any extremists who have terrorist tendencies in your mosques and communities. Doing this will make you heroes for everyone."
No you don't and according to some on this site, even if you do you won't be hero's. Hell, our officials will tell you not to go public for fear of losing this channel of sources. Only people like Denis want you to announce, announce early, and announce often.
People like Denis and his ilk demand Muslims turn on terrorists as if they are not doing that presently or doing it enough. As if they are turning a collective Muslim blind eye. Denis does not have a clue that this is not happening. But he imagines it is and he vents his spleen against Muslims for not showing enough support in non-Muslim countries.
H-town Momma told us her truth. It's obvious she's as American as the Ivory Snow Girl, probably uses it. Guess what: Andre Carson and Keith Ellison are Congressmen, and Muslim. So is Dave Chappelle, Bernie Hopkins, Mike Tyson, and Iman. In America Denis, Muslims can be all around us, can look and talk like us, and can even have "our" names. Others like Jamie Farr and so on may not be Muslin yet have ties to Muslim lands and have been in American since the early 1900's. Millions.
Denis never looked to see if Muslims are helping our not. If he had, he would have seen that Muslims are calling on other Muslims to help: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2015/12/04/why-a-partnership-between-muslims-and-law-enforcement-is-so-crucial-to-fighting-terrorism/?utm_term=.b394131f4a42
Apparently unbeknownst to Denis and his friends, Muslims are helping: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/fbi-muslim-outreach-terrorism-213765
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-florida-shooting-cooperation-idUSKCN0Z213U
I will say, in Denis' defense, that these stories are relatively recent, a year ago they would have been harder to come by. Not sure if that's because it wasn't happening or just wasn't being reported.
But Denis did not even look. That's obvious. He just let fly with his fear. He wants us to believe that America is France or England or maybe even Yemen. We are not. Muslim Americans are not the same as Muslims from those countries either. They are American. Just like you and I.
As of late, one of my favorite quotes comes from Yoda: "Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." Don't fall into the trap laid by the terrorists.
"It is a stop-gap measure until vetting procedures can be upgraded"
well given the fact that the ban was for 120 days and it was originally signed in January I guess there is no longer a reason for this temporary ban since they had more than enough time to upgrade their vetting procedures, right?
The original ban was suppose to be from January 27, 2017, until March 16, 2017 so since it is June 6th there should be no need for the ban. I'm sure they were working hard all this time fixing their vetting procedures :)
Jim L. https://www.facebook.com/OccupyDummycrats/videos/1530771143600383
just gonna leave the above video showing how things are being handled in the UK.
in re the travel ban...
8 U.S.C. § 1182(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
The "travel ban" is not a Muslim ban. Calling it a Muslim ban is intellectually dishonest. He would have asked for and signed a Muslim Ban if that was what he was going for and he could have..
People love to bring up "Christians bombing abortion clinics", let's examine that:
"In the U.S., violence directed towards abortion providers has killed at least EIGHT people, including four doctors, two clinic employees, a security guard, and a clinic escort." [source: Wiki]
The last time an abortion clinic was bombed was in 1998.
Christians: 8 deaths
Islamic terrorists:
untold thousands (probably hundreds of thousands)
just in the last month: During this time period, there were 185 Islamic attacks in 27 countries, in which 1493 people were killed and 1750 injured.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=Last30
If you were importing apples from China, and you knew 7% of them had been treated with a poison chemical that could kill you, would you let in all of them, and let destiny sort it out? Or would you halt ALL apple imports from China until a solution could be figured out?
Actually, to make the comparison more "fair":
...had been treated with a chemical that would kill EVERYONE IN YOUR HOUSE... 1 apple, kills everyone in your house (and I'm being conservative, based on how many people each ONE of these Jihadis kills)
Jim L. -----> somehow I think your most valid comment will go unnoticed in the carnival we call Trumpolitics.
Now if it was Russia that would be: that's old news, can we move on :>)
Other Trumpisms left unnoticed.
Is the IRS audit over yet? Are 2016 being audited? Is seeing the President's taxes less important now that we are investigating his ties to Russia.
Did Obama wiretap Trump Towers or not? Have we just let this one go?
Did he get the most electoral votes since Reagan? He still says so.
Did he prove thousand of illegal voters bused in to vote? I think that's a crime. Why hasn't Turnip followed up. What is he hiding :>)
Are Democrats forcing him to be the slowest President to ever populate his administration? More empty seats and less done than most administrations in decades. Six months are we still hear: still learning.....
Wasn't he going to put Hillary in jail? Bill? Close down the foundation? Only think I know is Trump Foundation paid a yuge fine, Trump University settled its fraud for millions, and Melania does not live with the President but Ivanka and Jared do.
Yes, we are noticing less every day.
why if the original travel ban was going to expire on 3/16/17 do we still need it on 6/6/17?
shouldn't we have the greatest, smartest, most wonderful vetting procedures by now? Where are our Huuuge new vetting procedures?
JR true but there is a difference between an apple and a person. Much easier to classify an apple.
Would that be the Trump extreme vetting process we used for Sessions, Kushner, Flynn, and Manafort?
You know, the one that allows you to confab with the Russians if you recuse yourself and then don't and then do again... Or the one that lets you take money from Turkey while whispering in Turnip's ear what to do with Turkey.... Or the one that lets you lie in the vetting process, say sorry, get a Mulligan to refile your vetting information again a second time to be able to remember what you forgot that happened ten minutes ago.
Was it that Trumputin extreme vetting process.
JR - by your apple logic, we should ban all guns since some of them will be used to murder people.
MB Oh MB that's going to blow back on you :>)
We need to talk cars. Now that's an analogy that will explain all.
Taxes:
http://lawnewz.com/politics/legal-experts-side-with-trump-it-would-be-totally-stupid-to-release-his-taxes-during-audit/
"I think that would be legal malpractice, and would recommend their clients sue them if they gave that advice. I advise my clients (hundreds over the years who actually experience an IRS inquiry) to NEVER release their tax returns while an audit is going on."
“I would absolutely advise a client not to release returns under audit to the public. Critics could pull certain items on the returns out of context and there would be political pressure on the IRS to scrutinize those items even if they ordinarily wouldn’t be controversial."
“I would advise my client that there could be huge risks in releasing complex returns during an audit. Instead of having just an IRS agent review the return it now would be reviewed by thousands of tax experts."
As we have already discussed ad nauseum - releasing his tax returns has no legal precedent as tax returns don't affect current policy, Trump's tax returns have no affect on anyone else but Trump e,g national security or tax code.
Wiretapping:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html?smid=pl-share&_r=1
So NYT is fake news after all? Clearly "drumpf" is lying about wire tapping according to all of them. Lets forget the malformed and disingenuous question and ask a new one. Was Trump indeed wiretapped as multiple journalists claim, or are multiple journalists fake news ?
New York times multiple times.
Fox News multiple times.
Heat-street.
National Review.
Circa news.
CNN - never dissapoints - "incidental intelligence collection".
electoral votes:
Trump claimed once in a press conference that he had the largest win (winning 306 electoral votes) since Reagan in the Electoral College. He was corrected by a reporter and said that Obama in 2008 won with 365 electoral votes, and 332 in 2012. Republican-wise, George HW Bush won with 426 votes in 1988. He has not perpetuated that.
Why be so pedantic and glib? Get off your high horse and stop taking umbrage with every little innocuous statement and point. He was bragging about winning the Presidency when the odds where against him. It's not like he has 2 scoops of ice cream or anything...
Why wasn't there this outrage when Obama said that The United States has more mass shootings than any other country? (false: we're #7)
That's a flat out lie, right? Or was it just bad information? Or did he just not fact check it enough? A couple years ago a guy in behind the same podium made a statement that was even more outrageous and the media left it unchecked. I mean Politifact called it "mostly false" bravo, but there wasn't this uproar.
ttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2015/12/03/obamas-inconsistent-claim-on-the-frequency-of-mass-shootings-in-the-u-s-compared-to-other-countries/?utm_term=.21e842e90f51
appointments:
He's got more appointees confirmed than W. Or Obama did at this point in their presidency despite the delays, I suppose he's doing something right.
There's 559 spots, 39 confirmed, 442 unnamed. That means 78 are backlogged.
Time Article
http://time.com/4805557/donald-trump-nominees-appointments-confirmations/
"And, as the Partnership notes in a memo to reporters, Trump actually has more Ambassadors confirmed than Barack Obama or George W. Bush. On the delay front, however, Trump is correct: the timeline for his ambassador nominees' confirmation is much longer than historical averages"
Illegal voters:
He appointed a commission to investigate - will you let them do their job or do you want to rush it since these votes would be for democrats...
http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/trump-is-right-millions-of-illegals-probably-did-vote-in-2016/
Obviously a lot of conjecture throwing around. We don't know for certain. Infowars first broke the story but didn't really provide evidence.
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/virginia-voter-fraud-thousands-illegal-aliens-registered-vote/
HRC:
that's in the works on multiple fronts - here is the latest..
http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/04/senate-committee-launches-a-new-clinton-investigation/
Senate Committee on the Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley has launched a new investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's effort to thwart a Bangladesh government corruption probe of Muhammad Yunus, a Clinton Foundation donor and close friend of the Clintons.
He donated between $100,000-$250,000 to CGI and $25,000-$50,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to the Clinton Foundation website.
Grassley added new details stating, "Furthermore, he was told by these same officials that Yunus was communicating with Secretary Clinton and her staff for assistance and, in turn, Secretary Clinton's staff put pressure on the Embassy in Bangladesh to intercede on Yunus' behalf."
Whatever blows your skirt up - but I think some of us are ignoring information because it doesn't fit their narrative.
http://pin.it/_pqi-4_
I'm joking, to a point. But regardless of who the "enemy" is I would rather be proactive than reactive. That's where the U.K., France, and the rest of Western Europe have failed.
"JR - by your apple logic, we should ban all guns since some of them will be used to murder people."
What do you think democrat representatives have been doing, incrementally, since the beginning of the 20th century? I argue that the vetting process is EXTREMELY involved... just go over to the 2A thread to see a recent example of someone who was murdered because the state took longer than the cited 30 days to issue a purchase permit.
We've already outlawed automatic weapons, some semi-automatic weapons, magazines that hold more than 15 rounds, adjustable stocks, flash suppressors, hand guards, the list goes on & on....
"But regardless of who the "enemy" is I would rather be proactive than reactive. That's where the U.K., France, and the rest of Western Europe have failed."
Exactly. The "travel ban" (while not perfect) is a PRECAUTION. Funny how all you libs have no problem with NSA spying on Americans, and even invoking Minority-Report attitudes on AMERICANS, but aren't willing to do so on NON-Americans. Makes one wonder where your loyalties lie sometimes... I know where they lie: with whatever the liberal/left/progressive/democrat talking points do.
Precaution is exactly what has made up ALL of the gun control laws (against American citizens) on the books.
Precaution: a measure taken in advance to prevent something dangerous, unpleasant, or inconvenient from happening.
We've got more laws on the books to protect Americans from other Americans than we do to protect Americans from NON-Americans/immigrants.
It's nonsensical.
I actually don't give a crap about guns. Just pointing out that your analogy is not a good one.
well I guess i'll ask a 3rd time, JR if this ban as you put it is:
" TEMPORARY. It is a stop-gap measure until vetting procedures can be upgraded"
and was set to expire on 3/16/2017 then why do we still need it on June 6th 2017? It's been over 2 and half months since the original ban would have EXPIRED so they clearly had more than enough time to upgrade their vetting process so why is there still a need? Did we not upgrade our vetting procedures all this time? If not, why? I get making the argument in January when the ban was first issued, but I don't get making the agreement 2.5 months after it was suppose to expire. That is unless the real intent of the ban had nothing to do with vetting procedures :)
"We've got more laws on the books to protect Americans from other Americans than we do to protect Americans from NON-Americans/immigrants."
This statement is logically "nonsensical". Every law that we have on the books protecting Americans from other Americans also applies equally to non-Americans and immigrants. Then there are also whatever protections that immigration laws afford... which may arguably be very little, but as long as it's anything at all... x < x +0.000001
ianimal 1. they will push the ban to the Supreme Court in order to provide a precedent for the constitutionality of the ban. It will be extended or modified after the original 90 days. I don't think this makes the original limit disingenuous, but it does grant them time to analyze and monitor the situation for extending/removing/adding to the ban.
2.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-visas-analysis-idUSKBN17T34G
"Citizens of the seven Muslim-majority nations under the bans - Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen - received about 3,200 non-immigrant visas in March 2017, compared to about 5,700 on average per month during the 2016 fiscal year and more than 6,000 on average per month in 2015 and 2014."
http://www.dailywire.com/news/15854/trump-wins-40-drop-visa-applications-travel-ban-hank-berrien
"Non-immigrant visas issued to Iranians dropped from 2,450 per month on average in 2016 to 1,572 in March. Immigrants from Iraq received 684 non-immigrant visas in March they received roughly twice that number per month on average in 2016."
June 6th is the day the 90 day ban would have ended. The net effect as far as reduced visa issuance is being realized - it remains to be seen if it will continue through the rest of the year. We may be seeing fewer applications, or increased rejections from tougher vetting. The net effect of fewer applications is probably also allowing for more time/effort on vetting those that do apply.
Changes to the vetting process (for visa applicants only) were made last week which now provides consuls and embassies with a set of voluntary questions that include a request for information on travel going back somewhat longer in time than previously asked and a list of social media handles. Can we give it more than a week?
new vetting questionnaire: https://tr.usembassy.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/91/2017/05/DS-5535-Supplemental-Questions-for-Visa-Applicants.pdf
Context: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-embassies-start-new-vetting-of-visa-applicants/2017/06/01/6b08c55a-46ec-11e7-bcde-624ad94170ab_story.html?utm_term=.74758bacae7b
Jim L, I think they're taking the Pelosi stance... you have to ban them before we can figure out how to reinstate them.
@SD One of the things that I am in agreement with Hedi about is that you are rarely capable of having an original thought or opinion, and instead rely on multiple links to various sites to try and make a point for you. Since you totally twisted my words they are once again irrelevant.
The other thing you constantly do is twist someone's words, and then make broad generalizations about what that person thanks. Once again I'll call on you to back up what you claim. Point out anywhere on this thread where I said no Muslims are helping in the fight against Islamic terrorism, you can't!
Since this thread started 81 possibly 117 people have been killed in 4 separate attacks in 2 non Muslim countries, and 1 Muslim country. The one common thread is all the victims were killed by Muslims, in the name of Islam, and Jihad. H-town Mama has made numerous posts defending Islam, and saying this has nothing to do with Islam. Her last statement was "I am a Muslim that condemns brutal terrorism that does not come from anything that resembles Islam". She still refuses to accept the connection which is obvious. Once again let me be clear I never said all Muslims were terrorists, or that no Muslims help in the fight against Islamic terrorism. I can say however that almost all the current terrorist attacks taking place in the world today are being done by Muslims in the name of Islam. Muslims like her ( again not all ) who refuse to acknowledge that there is a connection, and a serious problem within Islam are absolutely part of the problem. I stand by what I said 100%
If the media would just label these what they are- acts of cowardice perpetrated by cravens instead of acts of terror, maybe fewer attacks?
hktownie Excellent hktownie! Crazy is crazy no matter the label. The labels are more to sway public opinion than anything else.
Anyone else remember a time when the word "terrorist" didn't apply to every crime known to man?
"Anyone else remember a time when the word "terrorist" didn't apply to every crime known to man?"
It doesn't now. Just those perpetrated by TERRORISTS. Which just happens to be alot more these days.
Jim: I believe the idea is to STOP immigration, so that we can upgrade the system... it's kind of difficult to upgrade an OS that is running... we need to install the upgrade, then re-boot. Perhaps you'll understand that analogy.
What I'd like to know is, how does this plan (taken from those leftys here) solve or even just improve the situation:
No travel ban / open borders / come on in, everybody!
No military actions / no drones / no boots on the ground (are missles ok?)
No profiling / no precautionary measures
...this is what Europe has been doing for quite awhile. Worked out well for them, huh?
What then, are we supposed to do?
As for non-intervention, as I said, I could be for that: IF we build a "very high wall" (metaphorically speaking) making it an extremely difficult and long process for people to get into this country legally. From ANYWHERE. If you aren't going to intervene in an attempt to stop the problem, then you must at least intervene on your own soil to stop it from getting HERE. You can't do neither (well, you can, but that would make you an idiot.)
but Skippy those applying for visas in March would not have been effected by the temporary travel ban. According to the US immigration website it takes 2 months to get an interview once an application was submitted and then at least another 6months to get the visa issued after the interview. So at the quickest the visa process is an 8 month process. For some countries its even longer with the process taking over a year sometimes 2. So those applications would be issued way after this temporary ban ended. Also those applying in March would be subject to this new and improved vetting procedure that we needed time to come up with
In reality the ban only effected those who were already vetted months if not years ago. The original ban was suppose to end on 3/16/17. the new one signed on 3/6/17 was suppose to end on 6/16/17. So in 10 days there should be zero reason for a ban, right? as both timeframes the Administration asked for would have expired.
the ban was sold as "buying us time" to fix our process. Well they got the time even without the ban in place so going forward our process should be all "fixed"
Unless this ban wasn't really going to be "temporary" and wasn't really about fixing the procedures.
"it's kind of difficult to upgrade an OS that is running... we need to install the upgrade, then re-boot. Perhaps you'll understand that analogy."
Nah not going along with that analogy. Your company changes procedures, happens all the time, one day you are doing things the old way and then they train you on the new procedure and have a launch date that we stop using the old procedure and start using the new one. We don't shut down for 90 days. Business still goes on while the new procedures are being developed.
They needed to fix the procedure, ok fine they had time to do that and now all new applications are subject to these new wonderful procedures. Those procedures are now in place as skippy pointed out. So going forward they are good to go.
those that entered the US the last few months, well time will tell if any of them are a problem, but going forward all new application are subject to the new procedures so no ban should be needed.
Like I stated previously I believe that it was labeled as temporary so it could be adjusted or removed if it was not working. I think now the administraton wants to deal with the constitutional challenge of the president being able to issue said ban pursuant to the law I posted above. It's entirety possible that these new processes work and we don't need a ban - we need more than a week to find out though.
I just read several pages on the "procedures" for refugees to actually get into the US, and while it is a lengthy process, time-wise, and it IS more in-depth for those coming from Syria, the "interviews" last mere minutes and are mostly "yes or no" questions...
"are you or were you ever a member of a terrorist group" ... uh, um... no.
I does appear to take years to get here (good), and they receive $925 to help them resettle and are eligible for benefits.
so here's another question: for those of you who are against foreign aid of any kind, I'm guessing you are ok with allowing tens of thousands of additional burdens on the social services in this country? What's the difference? It's all our tax money. If not for the reduction in granted visas, the US was on-track to take in over 100,000 refugees in 2017 (which was Obama's goal)
So that's 92.5 million in "resettlement fees", and God-only-knows how much in benefits, which as you know, continue indefinitely.
I think this is the big disconnect:
(from a CBS 60 Minutes story)
"Opening our doors to refugees like Ekbal is a proud part of America’s heritage, but just over a year ago when Paris was attacked by ISIS fighters killing 130 civilians, many Americans wanted to slam the doors shut."
The EU does not have vetting procedures anything like we do. I wonder how many people actually know that?
Also, it has been shown that ISIS does indeed have plans for their ranks to infiltrate the refugees, they have already done so in the EU... which is easier than it would be to get one of them into the US, which looks like it takes 18-24 months. Living in a refugee camp in Europe, going through multiple screenings. But still, the danger IS there. And it's not irrational to be concerned or even frightened over it.
HOWEVER: terror attacks on US soil: there were several under Obama. Attacks by terrorists who were already admitted to the country. One was even in our military. Maybe the converted later to extreme Islam... vetting would not have stopped that... which brings to light a whole 'nother issue.
This is a scary proposition. It happened, therefore it can happen again. Watching the Paris attacks on TV only cemented the resolve by voters that MORE efforts must be taken to keep US citizens safe. I don't think that's unreasonable.
I know what the vetting process was under Obama. I would like to know what "upgrades" Trump has made, if any. And while I'm all for "helping people", how far does that go... let in refugees and give them services ($$$), but send no foreign aid to other countries? Take military actions to stop the slaughter of innocents abroad, or just let it happen?
I'm seeing alot of parallels to WWII here. We stayed out of that war for a long time, because it wasn't "in our backyard." But without the US getting into that fight, Germany might have taken all of Europe, certainly all of Europe save the UK. And God only knows how many more innocents would have died at the death camps.
So: is the US the "police" of the world? Or not? The "savior" of the world? Or not? Does our generosity and charity only begin at our border? Serious questions.
"is the US the "police" of the world? Or not?"
Not
Unless we are asked for assistance or we are being threatened, what gives us the right to impose our will over others? Why would you even think it's ok to do so?
"The "savior" of the world? Or not?"
Not
Regardless of what many think, Americans are still just human beings with all the same characteristics as every other human. Again, if we can help and are asked sure, but voluntarily, not by dictate. Leading by example would be a great first step.
"Does our generosity and charity only begin at our border?"
We can't even take care of our own let alone the rest of the world. We try but it's at the sacrifice of our own citizens. Not sure what you're even getting at with this question
JIT,
So... you would have been against US's intervention in Europe in WWII? Imposing "our will" on others?
I'm not trying to get at anything; I'm just studying the issue deeper and looking at different angles and reasoning. For example, it's ok to spend millions on refugees that come here, but not to give millions to other countries? I realize what they do with that money is in question, and who knows how much of it gets to the needy vs the war machine.... I guess, at least, with the needy (refugees) HERE, we know the money is being spent on them...
altho...
"We can't even take care of our own let alone the rest of the world. We try but it's at the sacrifice of our own citizens. "
This seems to say we shouldn't spend any money on anyone other than "our own." So which is it? (not challenging you, it's a serious question... trying to get to the logic of the whole situation... it's either ok to spend taxpayer money on other countries and other peoples or it's not.... trying to pick and choose what it's "ok" to spend money on and "not ok" to spend money on is just opening a can of worms)
Anyone noticed that ISIS lost significant ground and soldiers in Kirkuk and Mosul in the last 48 hours? Two towns that are going down fast. Way to go, US generals and forces.
I loved when Mattis was asked by a reporter last week "What keeps you up at night" , his response "I keep other people up at night".
I thought the concept was to block Muslims from entering until Turnip gets extreme vetting in place.
Has anyone seen was extreme vetting is? Skippy's link doesn't seem to simply state it, can't find anything else. Trump started this on his campaign, he's had six months for his team to come up with some ideas ---- is there an extreme vetting plan?
strangerdanger - There is a war going on now...against radical Islamic terrorists. When will you get off your hatred of Trump to accept this reality? So disgusted by of your sh!t.
Is that your way of saying you know the plan?
Or saying you don't care, just do what Master Trump says to....
Wait, I think I found it, on CNN of course....:>)
Hey mods - can I get special permission to post more URL's - I need equal time to debate my man SD - in fact I think it's getting to the point where we should just have our own thread so we don't ruin the normies enjoyment of this site - it's got to be extremely bothersome for the non politically autistic.
@DannyC, I'm noticing on this thread,and several others, people tiring of SD's posting tactics. It's like dealing with a cranky toddler or an entitled teen, but they have an excuse for behaving that way.
The best response to this foolishness is to just ignore it and let the grown ups talk.
BANGLADESH: Rivers of Blood fill streets as Muslims celebrate Eid-al-Adha by cutting the throats of fully-conscious terrified animals, letting them bleed to death in agony
Pouring rains coupled with this massive and barbaric animal sacrifice ritual on the streets of Dhaka have flooded many areas of the capital, creating a gory and horrific scene of red rivers of blood and waste.
http://www.barenakedislam.com/2016/09/14/bangladesh-rivers-of-blood-fill-streets-as-muslims-celebrate-eid-al-adha-by-cutting-the-throats-of-fully-conscious-terrified-animals-letting-them-bleed-to-death-in-agony/
Perhaps you are the excuse.....
OK --- let's vote me off the island !!!!!
Good bye.
Keep on being dangerous.. stranger danger ...
Some people just can't handle the truth
I,for one,support you 100%
Access to the internet
Success of you tube
Mental illness
Foreign policy
Criminal mind
Predisposition to violence
Taking a step back and looking at this whole "travel ban" thing, perhaps it's alot simpler than we are making it:
People have seen the situation in Europe, have seen it get out of control. Perhaps we just don't want it to get out of control here. Hence, PRECAUTIONARY, preemptive measures. Just simple, common sense. Because we DON'T want a "Paris" or a "Manchester" here. We've already had 9-11, Boston, Ft Hood, and San Bernadino. And for those who think we shouldn't get involved and just let the middle east (and all of Europe at this point) sort itself out, that would also go for bringing refugees into this country: NO. You people sort yourself out. We wash our hands of you.
Some on this thread speak of actions being dictated by fear. And what's wrong with that? Fear is a useful tool to help keep yourself safe, and alive. We have fear for a reason. While I understand fear MONGERING (which both sides do in equal amounts, about different issues) is a manipulative tool, fear itself exists to tell us we are in danger, and to be cautious. And I don't see anything wrong with that, and apparently neither does a very large portion of the country, since the man in the WH was elected by them to do exactly that: keep them safe, and take additional measures to insure their safety.
I don't care about "odds" (JIT)... this isn't about odds. This is about common sense and keeping terrorism off our own soil, hence we DO get drawn into it in the middle east. If you want us to stay out of the middle east jihad, keep the middle east jihad out of America. If middle east jihad comes to America, I agree with Denis:
"Outside of supporting our ally Israel I would stay out unless it was clearly in OUR self interest , or any act of terrorism could be linked to to state sponsorship, then I would want to see an overwhelming and disproportionate response."
All that being said, I don't think SCOTUS will give Trump his travel ban. Altho I still don't see the problem:
FDR rounded up Japanese and put them into camps (which Trump is NOT proposing),
Jimmy Carter had a travel ban, not a peep from the left,
Bush had a travel ban after 9-11, and that seemed to suit everyone just fine,
But let TRUMP propose one, and he's some kind of evil racist.
(Some of) you people have lost your minds. Or maybe not- maybe you're just playing the chess game of politics, where winning at ALL costs is all that matters, instead of actually doing things for the RIGHT reasons. Which is the entire problem with today's American body politic.
Hadenough,
I am truly traumatized by what you posted. Such a barbaric and senseless act. I would wish a horrible and torturous death on those people. I know, it makes me just as guilty as them for thinking such things but those animals were innocent and they were slaughtering for the pure joy of it. You know, most serial killers started out by torturing animals. I will never respect that culture.
ISIS has taken credit for a bombing in Iran. How can we encourage this Islamic divide to wipe out both sides on their own? Sunni vs. Shia conflicts date back to the seventh century. Let them finish their fight now, to mutual demise.
Too bad people don't feel quite as "truly traumatized" by such a barbaric and senseless acts when it's people getting blown up, sliced up and run over.
The London Terrorist slit the throat of 3 people (one woman and two males) and it's not even being discussed.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4580754/Female-nursery-worker-stabbed-three-women-London.html
Daily Mail has it
"The London Terrorist slit the throat of 3 people (one woman and two males) and it's not even being discussed."
+ 1 Heidi
And this is with Islamic Mayor of Londonistan saying to the people that; "There is nothing to worry about"
I have been that traumatized since Lockerbie and the Achille Lauro. The fact that there are idiots willing to overlook who these perpetrators are, the fact that they have no respect for any life human or otherwise because their gutter religion promises rewards in heaven is disgusting.
I may not have all the answers. I don't want a war, I am the mother of teenagers. I do want as much protection at home as possible and if keeping out those who would harm us is going to help at all, then I'm all for it. Those like SD and YF will try and scare us that it will make the Muslims angry - how much friggin angrier and violent can these scumbags be?
Never said I didn't feel the same way toward humans. I am just as traumatized by the terror acts these cowards commit towards human beings. Please don't assume you know what I am thinking. I was just commenting on a story that was posted.
Just for the sake of accuracy, here is the exact quote from London's mayor:
“Londoners will see an increased police presence today and over the course of the next few days. No reason to be alarmed — one of the things the police and all of us need to do is make sure we’re as safe as we possibly can be.”
So, if something terror related happens in hackettstown and then there is a huge police presence with armed cops (not the norm in London) we shouldn't be alarmed????
The guy sounds like a freaking nut-case.
How about "I know how scary it is to have this happen and then to see police running around in tactical gear and guns all over the place, but pleas understand we are on top of this threat?"
Commenting is no longer available.