The Calm Before the Jihadi Storm


syrian_islamists_146545445The same U.S. policies that helped created al-Qaeda in Afghanistan in the 1980s are today creating many al-Qaedas in many Muslim countries, promising to deliver future terror strikes that will make 9/11 seem like child’s play.

To understand this dire prediction, we must first examine the United States’ history  of empowering Islamic jihadis—only to be attacked by those same jihadis many years later—and the shortsightedness of American policymakers, whose policies are based on their brief tenure, not America’s long-term wellbeing.

In the 1980s, the U.S. supported Afghani rebels—among them the jihadis—to repel the Soviets.  Osama bin Laden, Ayman Zawahiri, and countless foreign jihadis journeyed to Afghanistan to form a base of training and planning—the first prerequisite of the jihad, as delineated in Sayyid Qutb’s Milestones.

Al-Qaeda—which tellingly means “the base”—was born.

The U.S. supported al-Qaeda, they defeated the Soviets, shook hands with Reagan, Afghanistan became ruled by the Taliban, and for many years all seemed well.

But it wasn’t.  For over a decade al-Qaeda, unfettered in Afghanistan, trained and plotted.  Then came the strikes of 9/11, which were portrayed by the talking heads as a great and unexpected surprise: “What happened? Who knew?  Why do they hate us?”

Had al-Qaeda not secured a base of operations, 9/11 would not have occurred.

But if Reagan unwittingly helped create the first al-Qaeda cell in relatively unimportant Afghanistan, Obama is helping to create al-Qaeda cells in some of the most important Islamic nations.

He is doing this by helping get rid of those Arab autocrats effective at suppressing jihadis (even if for selfish reasons), while empowering some of the most radical jihadis who were formerly imprisoned or in hiding.

And all in the name of the “Arab Spring” and “democracy.”

In Egypt, Obama threw Mubarak, America’s chief Mideast ally for three decades, under the bus, and cozied up to the Muslim Brotherhood.  Egypt’s government is today overrun with Islamists, many who share al-Qaeda’s radical worldview.  Several of these new policymakers—including President Morsi himself—were imprisoned under Mubarak, not, as the Western media portray, because they were freedom-loving rebels, but because they were, and are, Sharia-loving radicals trying to transform Egypt into an Islamist state.

The Sinai alone is now infested with jihadis, including possibly al-Qaeda leader Ayman Zawahiri.

In Libya, Obama supported the opposition against Gaddafi—knowing full well that al-Qaeda was among them—enabling the Benghazi attack and murder of Americans on the anniversary of 9/11. The unprecedented persecution of Christians in Libya—from attacks on churches to attacks on nuns—is further indicative of the direction “liberated” Libya is taking.

And now in Syria, Obama has decided to arm foreign jihadis.  One report indicates that foreigners make up 95% of Syria’s so-called “opposition.”  As in Libya—and as in Afghanistan in the ’80s—foreign jihadis are flooding Syria, terrorizing non-Muslims and cleansing the nation of Christians in their bid to create another base, another qaeda.

One of them recently declared, “When we finish with Assad, we will fight the U.S.!”—precisely al-Qaeda’s thinking in the ’80s-’90s when it was supported by the U.S. against the U.S.S.R.

Thus all the forces and circumstances that led up to the strikes of 9/11—foreign jihadis infiltrating and consolidating power in Muslim countries formerly run by secular dictators—are once again in full play, but in a much more profound way.  Today it’s not just one unimportant country, Afghanistan, that is being subverted by jihadis but several strategically important nations.

If 9/11 was the price the U.S later paid for helping turn Afghanistan into a jihadi base of operations in the 80s-90s, what price will America later pay now that it’s betraying several major nations to the jihadis, who are turning them into bases, into qaedas?

So why are American politicians not blowing the whistle on Obama’s suicidal policies?

Because their myopia and inability to see beyond today—beyond their tenure—has not changed since September 11, 2001.  Just as it took over a decade after al-Qaeda’s creation to launch the 9/11 attacks—a time of ostensible peace and calm for the U.S., a time of planning and training for the jihadis—it will take time for the jihadi storm to pour on America.

And that’s the era we’re currently in: the calm before the storm. Just as before 9/11, today’s American leaders focus only on the moment—a moment when the U.S appears relatively safe—never considering the future or the inevitable consequences of a woefully counterproductive U.S. foreign policy.

Speaking of foreign policy, if Reagan supported the jihadis to combat the U.S.S.R—a hostile super-power—why is Obama supporting the jihadis?  What exactly does America have to gain by propping up jihadis in some of the most strategic Arab nations?

In short, just as it was before 9/11, when the jihadi storm eventually does break out—and it will, it’s a matter of time—those American politicians who helped empower it, chief among them Obama, will be long gone, and the talking heads will again be stupidly asking “What happened?” “Who knew?” Why do they hate us?”

Except then it will be too late.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • SoCalMike

    This is so patently obvious I can only regard officialdom and media as a malignant collection of traitors.
    Not only Obama, Hillary and McCain but the spineless Repubes as well as the media false prophets all deserve to hang or face a firing squad.

  • grandlisa

    I can’t understand about this behavior of this people. Why they are always get in trouble? Maybe they are always need a power of nation so they become the leader of this world. Keep peace guys…

    ——————–
    see this

    • 1Indioviejo1

      You make no sense. NONSENCE.

  • DannyJeffrey

    I see the next wave of nine elevens coming much sooner…

    http://www.freedomrings1776.com/2013/06/another-nine-eleven-in-works.html#more

    • defcon 4

      “Nine elevens”? We should be so lucky. Why not islamic WMD? I saw a MEMRI video once where a Kuwaiti imam was speaking to an audience of fellow Kuwaiti islamo-nazis and relating how a couple pounds of anthrax could kill hundreds of thousands of US citizens and how it could be done. No one in the audience seemed to mind the imam’s genocidal rantings either.

      • Well Done

        We know where all these mosques are; what are we waiting for? We could eliminate the hard core, 7th century-inspired haters within a few days. NO nukes needed.

      • EarlyBird

        Defcon, if we don’t lose our minds and become our own worst enemies, we can handle this long, low-level war against these nutjobs.
        But as you state, it’s the WMD factor that is really, really chilling, and sadly, perhaps unstoppable.
        I heard a guy on Charlie Rose say “the reason we know they don’t have a nuke, yet, is because they haven’t used one yet.”

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “Defcon, if we don’t lose our minds and become our own worst enemies, we can handle this long, low-level war against these nutjobs.”

          Jihadis are nutjobs with organic brain problems like yours? It has nothing to do with ideology?

          How does it feel serving evil on a daily basis?

          “But as you state, it’s the WMD factor that is really, really chilling, and sadly, perhaps unstoppable. I heard a guy on Charlie Rose say “the reason we know they don’t have a nuke, yet, is because they haven’t used one yet.”"

          But you tell us all the time that we “can’t afford” to do anything about Iran.

          You talk out of both sides of your mouth. All you care about is trying to talk down to conservatives. You make a fool of yourself constantly.

          • EarlyBird

            Iran is not going to nuke Israel, the United States or anyone else. They are a sane government. It’s the other freelance nutjobs which we need to worry about.
            You’re being led around by Israel Firsters in your obsession with Iran. I’m far more concerned with you right wing fanatics talking us into your preferred destruction of Iran, and it resulting in another failed state which then has nukes, than a cohesive, sane state of Iran with nukes.

          • Drakken

            If you think that Iran is sane and won’t use nukes makes you naïve, or stupid. With Iran, MAD doesn’t work, got it now. Because Sparky, they are waiting for the madi to come out of a well when they user in Armageddon.

          • EarlyBird

            No, they want nukes to protect themselves against attack by US and Israel, and to further create leverage in the Middle East for their terror network. In other words, they are a conventional power looking to expand their power. There is zero evidence they are irrational and have a death wish.
            Oh, the mullahs would love you to believe that they are all in the grip of theological insanity, totally indifferent to the calculus of MAD. Nixon and Reagan smartly made our enemies think we were a little bit crazy and liable to do anything, and that’s what the mullahs are doing.
            Sure works on you.

          • Drakken

            What is it that I always tell you, but you refuse to listen. Always know thy enemy, and you have zero clue as to how they think so your points above are nothing but feelings and your mistaken moral, religious east/west equivalency when it is as clear as day there is none and never will be, period. If those effing savages get a bloody nuke, they will use it, and you can take that to the bank.

          • EarlyBird

            Oh that’s right, you’re the one who’s had his boot on the neck of the Muslim savage, so we should all defer to your battle hardened wisdom. Sheesh.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Sure Obama’s foreign policy is insane, but let’s be honest, so was Bush/Cheney’s foreign policy starting with their insane response to 9/11. Indeed, a common sense approach to the 9/11 violent jihad attacks would have been to immediately outlaw Islam and ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration ASAP, followed by a war to eradicate OBL only in retaliation for 9/11. Instead, Bush/Cheney massively expanded the size, scope, and power of government like Democrats on steroids by exploiting the fear of terrorism, which isn’t even an Islamic manifestation, BTW, to massively increase the size, scope, and the power of government via the creation of the massive Department of Homeland Security and the gargantuan National Intelligence Directorate, and the inevitable result today is under the Obama administration the NSA is snooping on every American phone call and email today, and now the government is so big and massive that it has taken on a life of its on. Indeed, thanks to Bush/Cheney and also Obama, Americans have effectively sacrificed their individual freedoms in exchange for safety provided by a government that is utterly and incredibly incompetent and delusional!

    Then if that wasn’t enough, Bush/Cheney got us into two massive nation-building excursions in Afghanistan and Iraq based on totally false premises about Islam that inevitably turned into the two biggest strategic blunders ever in American history, and in the face of such massive incompetence the Islamic world inevitably became much more emboldened and far more aggressive as a result, i.e., the so-called Arab Spring.

    The problem is under the Bush family, the Republican Party became hijacked and co-opted by the Left and as a result most Republicans and conservatives, like Democrats as well, were duped about the true nature of Islam, while the Republican Party was also morphed into another party of big government. Indeed, both political parties today are just two sides of the same leftwing coin, as everything the Reagan administration accomplished has been totally wiped out and destroyed. Nevertheless, most Republicans and conservatives remain totally confused and oblivious with regard to what has transpired since Reagan’s final term.

    • pupsncats

      Again, you speak the truth. Personally, I believe Bush purposely used the 9/11 attacks to advance big government and totalitarianism because he (and his father before him) want to create a New World Order as the left does. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are fighting for that same goal with the only difference being who ultimately gains the power.

    • alericKong

      “immediately outlaw Islam”

      Impossible to do so, political suicide to try, and al-Qaeda will lie and disavow Islam or sneak in under the radar. As I am also against big government intervention, the last thing I want is the religion police.

      In the 2004 presidential elections, the Democratic party politicized the war effort against al-Qaeda, led by Howard Dean and a mob of Michael Moore fans. The majority of their expertise on the war, like thousands dead to take Baghdad, were wrong. They simply threw garbage against the wall and saw what stuck to win political power.

      Ever since then, we have been living under a big government liberal foreign policy. Obama was handled a victory in Iraq and lost it because of pandering to his political base. He tried capitalizing on the surge, took the worst parts and got thousands killed in Afghanistan.

      Before the treacherous slime of the Democratic party took over, 2000 lb JDAMS to bomb them back to the stone age was how we handled al-Qaeda sympathizers. Now it’s Obama aid.

      First Bush was in no way an aggressive visionary. He was a manager. The NWO comment was in response to human rights and democracy overtaking communism, which he was purposely withdrawn from pursuing to prevent a Soviet re-emergence.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        Impossible to do so, political suicide to try, and al-Qaeda will lie and disavow Islam or sneak in under the radar.

        That’s hilarious! You are a typical indoctrinated leftwing Republican, as you don’t have the first clue about Islam. I bet you don’t even realize you are leftwing either.

        As I am also against big government intervention, the last thing I want is the religion police..

        Islam isn’t a faith-based religion like Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc, as the first and foremost requirement of Islam is the total, complete, and unconditional submission to the will of Allah under the pain of death for blasphemy and apostasy? What faith-based religions compel belief via the threat of death the same way only Islam does? The answer is none of them because Islam obviously is not really a faith-based religion, because it’s a cult instead.

        Furthermore, what is the will of Allah that all Muslims must unconditionally submit to under the pain of death for blasphemy and apostasy? In essence the will of Allah is Sharia, Islam’s totalitarian law. How many faith-based religions have a totalitarian law similar to Islam’s Sharia that adherents must unconditionally submit to under the pain of death for blasphemy and apostasy? The answer again is none of them.

        Hence, just because Muslims believe Islam is a religion under the threat of death for blasphemy and apostasy, doesn’t mean the West has to stupidly accept Islam’s false claim to be a religion at face value, because it obviously isn’t a religion at all, at least as we in the West understand religion to be. Instead, it’s a very aggressive totalitarian cult that seeks to subjugate the world into Islamic totalitarianism via the imposition of Sharia masquerading as being a religion to dupe its intended gullible victims, and therefore it must be outlawed and banned from the shores of America.

        Obama was handled a victory in Iraq and lost it because of pandering to his political base.

        Come on….a victory in Iraq? Dude…you are more than delusional. Hell, you are as blind as GWB and their ilk! Whatever you are smoking it must be good. Please send me some.

        First Bush was in no way an aggressive visionary. He was a manager.

        Bush was one of the worse and most incompetent US Presidents ever in history and his disgraceful record more than speaks for itself. Moreover, the Bush family together has literally destroyed the Republican Party. Now Jeb Bush wants to come in and mold the Republican Party into becoming even more compassionate and liberal to get it back in the good graces of the American voters, and he wants to start by promoting another shamnesty, which will make the Republican Party a permanent minority. Oh my God what is he smoking? Probably the same stuff you are!

      • ObamaYoMoma

        Again where is my response moderators?

        • Well Done

          you have no right to post here and no right to expect your post to show up.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “you have no right to post here and no right to expect your post to show up.”

            He didn’t reference any “right” but merely asked a question.

      • EarlyBird

        “Obama was handled a victory in Iraq and lost it because of pandering to his political base.”
        What “victory”? If the relative stability that finally was achieved by the end of Bush’s presidency, one which could ONLY remain stable by having our troops remain permanently in-country to be bombed and shot at is a “victory,” then what is a “loss”? And how does our building and maintaining more permanent military bases in the heart of the Arab Muslim world help reduce the rage directed at the US by assorted Muslims?
        Obama left on the very same basis which the US had already agreed to under Bush. And the Iraqis wanted us to leave. You do know Iraq is an independent nation with a right to who it wants on its soil, right?
        The invasion and occupation of that country was not only a disaster of epic magnitude, but an unsustainable one. There was never going to be a wonderful outcome there called a stable, democratic Iraq. We could stayed there another 40 years and lost another 10,000 troops, and the result would have been the same: a raging sectarian civil war and a power vacuum being filled by Iraq, Al Queda and various scumbags. It was a failure because it was begun, not because it was finally ended.
        And if you really are interested in avoiding big government, then you’ll be against unnecessary wars, especially endless unnecessary wars. Nothing grows government more than war.

        • EarlyBird

          Oh. And the “base” that Obama “pandered to” was about 90% of the American electorate!

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Oh. And the “base” that Obama “pandered to” was about 90% of the American electorate!”

            You mean tried to pander to? Of course, that’s what pandering politicians do. Man, you don’t get any smarter.

          • EarlyBird

            Liberals, conservatives and everyone in between recognize that the Iraq War was an absolute disaster in every way, shape and form, a self-created wound our national security and foreign policy goals.
            Radical right wing fascist reactionaries on the other hand are still clinging to fantasies (uh….”Iibruls recked it!”). You must be really bitter living in your weird world where anything negative that happens is the result of “leftists!”

          • Drakken

            You say your a conservative? Your use of the words radical, right wing, fascist, reactionary are progressive/marxist talking points which you are using quite frequently.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Reactionary” is an absolute giveaway. Only communists and radical leftists use it. Unless they’re mindlessly repeating talking points.

            That’s all this retread bird knows.

          • EarlyBird

            Truly, you are the ultimate reactionary. You have defined a great enemy – “the Left,” i.e., anyone to the left of you on any issue. You LITERALLY are so blinded by your petty resentments at “the Left” that you are still blaming them for losing Vietnam! It’s as if you’re doing a send-up of the far right.
            You still cling to the fantasy that the Iraq War was a good idea (and want a re-do in Iran)! Any failures of that disaster you blame the…the… Left! You still cling to the fantasy of trickle down economics. You deny Global Climate Change. You’re against any government action designed to help the free market deliver quality healthcare in a way that won’t bankrupt people (because that’s “socialism!”). You are incapable of a nuanced thought. You’re genuinely ridiculous. Your hyper-partisanship is awesome. I thought people like you died along with the John Birchers. You would hang yourself if “the Left” came out against suicide. You’re bizarrely reactionary.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Truly, you are the ultimate reactionary. You have defined a great enemy – “the Left,” i.e., anyone to the left of you on any issue.”

            It’s a batch of enemies defined as being “on the left” after they clearly identified themselves as enemies and not the other way around.

            “You LITERALLY are so blinded by your petty resentments at “the Left” that you are still blaming them for losing Vietnam!”

            The evidence that I’m blind is based on your lack of sight. It’s hysterical and tragic all at once.

            “You still cling to the fantasy of trickle down economics.”

            Economic theory is so far over your head. You’re one of the people who think it’s impossible to raise tax revenue by lowering tax rates.

            “You’re against any government action designed to help the free market deliver quality healthcare in a way that won’t bankrupt people ”

            I’m against lies and tyranny. You repeat their lies. That’s where the local conflict comes in. I don’t care about what fantasies you have. I just feel obligated to refute lies that cause so much harm.

            “Your hyper-partisanship is awesome. I thought people like you died along with the John Birchers.”

            Like my blind loyalty to the Republican Party? You’re reading comprehension probably won’t ever get any better it seems.

          • EarlyBird

            Drakken, conservatism of the Buckley-Goldwater-Reagan strain used to be the source of progress, problem solving and liberty-expansion in this country, and I used to resent lefties claiming the title “progressive” because I consider them regressive, or at least “progressing” to a place I didn’t want to go.
            But now what goes for “conservative” today means simply obstructionism of any idea, any plan, any program, any sense that the US is made up of people who share some commons bonds and responsibilities to each other. E.g., it’s not just the hysteria about Obamacare that is so wrong; it’s the right’s total lack of serious market-based solutions to the problem of healthcare costs that afflict everyone but the extremely wealthy. Even regulations meant to PRESERVE free enterprise are met with hysteria.
            Real conservatives would not recognize the hyper-libertarian fanatics who have taken over, who WRONGFULLY believe they are carrying on the conservative tradition.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Liberals, conservatives and everyone in between recognize that the Iraq War was an absolute disaster in every way, shape and form, a self-created wound our national security and foreign policy goals.”

            No. Refusing to learn from mistakes is what losers like you do. For you, repeating leftist rhetoric is all you know. You’re words are not constructive or illuminating. You waste time and resources

            “Radical right wing fascist reactionaries on the other hand are still clinging to fantasies (uh….”Iibruls recked it!”).”

            Leftists wrecked it.

            “You must be really bitter living in your weird world where anything negative that happens is the result of “leftists!”"

            They say ignorance is bliss. You must be the happiest guy on the planet.

            When solving problems, it’s best to identify with objective evaluations what the most salient root causes are. It’s a fact that Soviet communists penetrated our government even before WWII started. The legacy of the penetration includes virtually every major problem we have with our government today.

            So, leftists don’t cause every last problem, but they cause most of the critical ones we face today because they’re so determined to destroy our national sovereignty. There are many critical things in American lives that depend on that national sovereignty and preserving the constitution as written by the “founding founders.”

            But for people who hate the US constitution, it’s easy to say that leftists are just sweet idealistic people that inspire us to go ahead and get rid of those nasty bloodsucking vampire right-wing neanderthal reactionary ugly fat fuel-hogging religious freaks who deserve to die – like me.

            I admit that I do react to traitors and I have no shame about it. Only dimwitted leftists use words like “reactionary” to try to stigmatize people who oppose their insane radicalism.

          • EarlyBird

            Brace yourself, but I bet if we compared voting records, we’d be very, very close to each other. The difference is you can’t seem to separate anyone with a view which is to the left of you as anything but this blood-red, nihilistic Left. Hey the “Left” that you describe does exist, in powerful places like academia and Hollywood, and it must be fought. But you talk like a Red hunter circa 1953.

          • Drakken

            If you went anywhere more left you would be a complete communist instead of the socialist you are now.

          • EarlyBird

            If you became any more of a war monger you’d grenade yourself.

          • Drakken

            War in case it escaped your liberal utopia is always a state of the human condition and has been since the dawn of time, and always will be. Sorry my cold harsh Teutonic Logic offends your precious sensibilities, but reality has a habit of always doing that.

          • EarlyBird

            Dude, you may be surprised, but I come from a very Goldwater-Reagan conservative, Catholic family (of Midwest origin with 3 – USMC vets), and I was always known as the red-blooded conservative by my peers, and constantly fighting lefties and soft-headed liberal idiocy.
            I LOVED Reagan, and ditched sophomore year of high school in ’80 to watch him campaign. I was constantly getting into trouble with my peers in college for calling BS on their liberal utopian fantasies and intellectual straight jackets, and writing the only conservative editorials in the campus newspaper. I’ve been called “facist” and “racist” by these idiots so many times I’ve lost count.
            One of the most important books I’ve ever read is “The Dream and the Nightmare” (Magnet) which is a blistering broadside to liberalism. I believe many of the bad ideas that came out of the ’60s counter-culture have been a disaster for this country.
            I only know of this site because I was such a fan of Horowitz and his college campaign (when I became a UC staffer) to expose the hypocrisy of self-styled “liberals” and their inability to tolerate dissent, a campaign I gave real money to when I was barely making any. I am still on his organization’s mailing list. I’ve got his “Radical Son” and “Uncivil Wars” books on my shelves, and I’ve been a life-long registered Republican.
            I’m a veteran, a gun nut, an unabashed flag-waving patriot, have owned my own (very) small business and believe the government makes it far too hard to create jobs and wealth. I adore WF Buckley, and am deeply skeptical of government and any utopian fantasies. I regularly read American Conservative and other conservative sites.
            On other boards I’ve frequented (the old Slate Fray) I was the crazed right winger. I would rather eat glass than register Democrat.
            What changed personally for me? George W. Bush. He is a very good man who had the worst possible pressures any man could bear, trying to do his best as he saw it for this country. But our enemies could not have dreamed up a better attack on our country than his policies.
            His disaster was that he clung to rigid ideology (reflexively cut taxes even during war time) and refused to look at facts objectively, be it the economy or terrorism (neocons got to him), etc.
            And “conservatives” have yet to learn W’s disastrous lesson of applying orthodoxy to every situation, and turning every issue into a battle in the endless Culture Wars.
            I have have not split with conservatives, they have split with me. I have split with partisanship, and by doing so I’ve seen how ugly, frightened, xenophobic, stupid and tribal “conservatism” has become. It has become literally irrelevant to dealing with any issue at this time. I can’t wait until we have a rebirth of real conservatism. We desperately need it.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Brace yourself, but I bet if we compared voting records, we’d be very, very close to each other.”

            How would you know? You only claimed you voted purely RP until 0′Bama, and then went insane. I doubt it.

            So did you vote for Bush twice? How about his father?

            Answer the question, because you already implied that you did. I want to hear the details. I already called you a liar and your defense is even more pathetic than I had expected.

            “Hey the “Left” that you describe does exist, in powerful places like academia and Hollywood, and it must be fought. But you talk like a Red hunter circa 1953.”

            Your statement makes no sense. It’s worse today than it was in 1953, but it’s worse today BECAUSE they didn’t go far enough then.

            I sure would have been a red hunter then. I accept the compliment.

          • EarlyBird

            I voted for Bush I twice, and George W. Bush one time. In 2004 I voted for Michael Badnarick, the Libertarian.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “I voted for Bush I twice, and George W. Bush one time. In 2004 I voted for Michael Badnarick, the Libertarian.”

            First it’s straight party line for 30 years, now it’s 75% over 4 elections. Who knows what you’ve really done? We can’t trust you because you’re not even consistent.

            Did you vote for Dole? I’m not even expecting an answer. Just kind of pointing out to you that you make statements before you even start to think.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Cynthia-Curran/100002510899902 Cynthia Curran

            Actually, the hard right opposed the war more than the moderate right. The paleo conservatives and the libertrarians were more opposed than the neo-cons. The neo-cons tend to be less economically to the right than libertarians, for example they support a welfare state while the libertarians don’t.

        • EarlyBird

          And another thing: even if we wanted to stay there, we COULD NOT AFFORD IT!

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “And another thing: even if we wanted to stay there, we COULD NOT AFFORD IT!”

            We can’t afford anything with leftists in congress and the Whitehouse.

          • EarlyBird

            Oops!

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “And another thing: even if we wanted to stay there, we COULD NOT AFFORD IT!”

            We can afford anything, just not everything. That’s our entire point. Fool.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “What “victory”? If the relative stability that finally was achieved by the end of Bush’s presidency, one which could ONLY remain stable by having our troops remain permanently in-country to be bombed and shot at is a “victory,” then what is a “loss”? And how does our building and maintaining more permanent military bases in the heart of the Arab Muslim world help reduce the rage directed at the US by assorted Muslims?”

          What victory? That nation-building stuff is impossible. Look at Japan and Germany today. What. you think they’re democratic? Those Shinto warriors and Nazis have every right to pursue their totalitarian beliefs and force them on others as the Muslims do today.

          Come on you right wing vampires. Grow up.

          • EarlyBird

            There is zero correlation between Japan and Germany in WWII and our invasion of Iraq, and you know it. You’re really losing it, OFM.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “There is zero correlation between Japan and Germany in WWII and our invasion of Iraq,”

            There are zero lessons for leftists. That’s for sure. That’s my point: You don’t learn anything from history that’s also true.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “Nothing grows government more than war.”

          Nothing grows government more than trying to reason and compromise with leftists.

          • EarlyBird

            “Nothing grows government more than trying to reason and compromise with leftists.”
            Come on. You can do better than that.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Come on. You can do better than that.”

            You can’t.

          • alericKong

            How dare we spend $10 billion a month fighting terrorists stock piling nerve gas.

            Perfectly able-body men need their disability checks to buy oxy’s, and their food stamps to buy their bags of cheetos for breakfast.

            And don’t even think of reforming the dollars spent on the poor 300 lb single mothers spawning children from a dozen fathers. They’re operating at full prostitution capacity already, and more cuts means 4 weeks of turning tricks a month instead of the much better 3 week whore work month.

            Don’t even mention the $85 billion Bernanke dollar printing press. How would the Obama library look with only one term? We need to prop total garbage and loose reserve currency status so we can have the coolest president ever!

        • alericKong

          Before 2003 Saddam had strategic intent to procure chemical weapons, maintained dual use infrastructure, bribed the UN to remove sanctions, made offerrs to Osama bin Laden for safe haven and ran a government whose military worked with al-Qaeda to murder Americans.

          al-Qaeda recruits started a religious civil war in 2005. In response, the US eliminated all al-Qaeda presence in Iraq and brokered cooperative agreements with the Sunni population.

          In 2004, the Democratic party decided to turn to treachery and destroy their own country for their own selfish gain. We have lived under a liberal foreign policy ever since where we have witnessed a nuclear North Korea, al-Qaeda in power in Algiera, Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt with the Ayatollah taking Lebanon.

          Barak Obama’s self fullfilling destiny failed to allow a US presence in the heart Middle East. Now those same terrorists stockpile sarin and scheme to kill Americans.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    With respect to Obama’s foreign policy arming terrorists, Muslims aren’t terrorists! Let’s be clear, Muslims are jihadists, as terrorism is extreme violence only perpetrated for any number of political causes, while jihad, on the other hand, is specifically and only holy fighting in the cause of Allah to establish Islam via the imposition of Sharia, which is Islamic totalitarian law.

    Furthermore, in stark contrast to terrorism, jihad is not only waged by Muslims alone, but also is manifested both violently and non-violently, and overall astronomically far more non-violently as opposed to violently. Indeed, the violent 9/11 jihad attacks would be an example of violent jihad and a very ubiquitous form of non-violent jihad would be mass Muslim immigration to the West, as Muslim immigrants never ever assimilate and integrate, but instead form Muslim enclaves that eventually morph into Islamic no-go zones ruled by Sharia and that become in effect tiny Islamic statelets within the larger infidel host states.

    Thus, of course, if our insane immigration policies allow for the importation of massive amounts of Muslim stealth jihadists into our countries under the premise that Islam is a so-called “religion of peace” instead of what it really is, which is a very aggressive totalitarian cult that aims to subjugate the world via the imposition of Sharia, then it is only a matter of time before they start rioting as in Stockholm or otherwise start blowing things up.

    This foolish obsession we have with conflating what is really jihad as somehow being terrorism is really causing us to miss the bigger picture of what is really happening. It also opens the door for self-hating lunatics like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to blame America for creating terrorists, when the truth is jihad is not only the highest pillar of Islam, but also a fundamental holy obligation incumbent upon every Muslim in the world in one form or another. Thus, every Muslim in the world is a jihadist in one form or another.

    In any event, the solution to the world’s Islamic problem is simple and uncomplicated: outlaw Islam and ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration ASAP followed by total disengagement from the Islamic world. It’s not rocket science; it’s simple common sense.

    • pupsncats

      Finally, someone who gets it. Unfortunately, when the real enemy cannot be named, the enemy wins. As you point out, Islam is an aggressive totalitarian cult that continues to spread throughout the world because NO ONE has the courage to call it what it truly is. As you also point out, the only way to stop the spread of Islam is to ban it and totally disengage from the Islamic world. The U.S. will NOT survive and will be overrun with Islamic jihad unless we do both.

    • EarlyBird

      “…Muslims are jihadists, as terrorism is extreme violence only perpetrated for any number of political causes, while jihad, on the other hand, is specifically and only holy fighting in the cause of Allah to establish Islam via the imposition of Sharia, which is Islamic totalitarian law.”
      And the vast majority of Islamist terror attacks are waged in already Muslim or partially Muslim nations which have weak governments, and where Alquies and similar groups see a chance to install Sharia. The attacks against the West have been to drive Westerners out of Muslim nations.
      As for Muslims who wage jihad by way of immigrating to the West and refusing to assimilate, I agree: the West needs to decide to stop bring these people in. But also, we should recognize that there are many well-integrated Muslims in the US, miraculously. The refusal to assimilate among Euro Muslims have a lot to do with their perceived ideas about the West abusing Islam in Muslim countries.

      • objectivefactsmatter

        “The attacks against the West have been to drive Westerners out of Muslim nations.”

        And then they’ll be happy to throw away the koran and give up on global sharia.

        So speaketh the expert. And besides, who cares if they’re a bunch of lying collectivists and we have no chance to ever meet their expectations for “Islamic justice.” Just keep saying “they have grievances” and then you won’t have to worry about being inconsistent.

        Even if they did achieve global hegemony and enforce sharia, it only ends when you’re dead.

        • EarlyBird

          Pay attention: we may even decide that we want to stay embroiled in the affairs of those nations, dominating those nations militarily and economically and politically. We may decide the cost of war is worthwhile and necessary to control those nations.
          But that helps us define what this conflict is about. It’s a lot easier, and child-like, to say, “They’re just the Boogie Man, driven mindlessly to kill by their religion” without observing how our own actions and policies play a part.
          But that’s an incredibly immature and self-defeating worldview.

          • Drakken

            More self loathing, self hating leftist drivel. You keep underestimating these savages at your own peril. We could leave the entire Islamic world and the bloody effing savages will still attack us. You just don’t effing get it.

          • defcon 4

            It’s a muslime. A lying muslime, but I’m being redundant.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “They’re just the Boogie Man, driven mindlessly to kill by their religion”

            They’re reasoning is quite sophisticated some times (but still based on lies accepted by them as facts), but others are programmed from birth. Ever hear of the concept of a cult?

            We’re discussing facts and objective analysis. You use caricatures and then want to present your own bogus rhetoric as our supposed best arguments. That’s why you have no credibility in the discussions.

          • EarlyBird

            If I am wrong, correct me. I read you as saying that ALL Muslims the world over are either actual terrorists, or would-be terrorists, or jihadist colonizers of the West by way of immigration, or native-born would-be establishers of Sharia law; ultimately, any way you slice it, every single practing Muslim is a threat to our existence.
            Does this accurately state your position more or less?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Does this accurately state your position more or less?”

            No it does not. Most people ignore the calling of their stated religion. That’s like saying all self-identified Democrats want to be at the cutting edge of accomplishing all of the goals of the party.

            There’s a huge difference between discussing ideology and then claiming that all people who are claimed to be connected are going to be strictly following its commands.

            However, we have to be aware that this is the calling, and “moderates” of today will in some cases be responding to that calling in the future as “radicals.” That doesn’t make them culpable today, but it does put them at risk. We need to consider that when we choose our next words and advocate certain policies. Killing people is not the only way to destroy an ideology. It’s the last resort and doesn’t work well in the long run.

            You’re confusing the facts and analysis with your presumptions about the implications. Knowing people are at risk means you can respond with debate, and hope to win them over with debate rather than force after they break our laws.

            You’re doing the same thing as those that want to talk the “religion of peace” to flatter them. Pretend they aren’t exhorted to do these things. Don’t offend them with salient facts.

            Why not take the same approach with everything known to be dangerous? Pretend it’s not until it’s proven to be dangerous in each case.

            If only you leftists took the same approach with your theories about “carbon” and whatnot. As if carbon is more dangerous than Islamic ideology.

            And many or even most leftists actually believe that. But that’s just an example to show how flexible people are with evidence and analysis.

        • EarlyBird

          And further, your terrified fantasies of a world dominated by Sharia is laughable. These nuts can’t run a lemonade stand, let alone whole governments and economies.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “And further, your terrified fantasies of a world dominated by Sharia is laughable. These nuts can’t run a lemonade stand, let alone whole governments and economies.”

            I never stated they would be successful. I stated that the world will suffer from their efforts. Nothing I have ever said contradicts that and history has already proved me to be correct.

            It’s like communism. It will never work, but lots more people will die proving that, if we don’t oppose them.

            So should we stop opposing communism because it’s not actually possible to “run a lemonade stand, let alone whole governments and economies” under communism?

          • defcon 4

            Then why is criticism of your death cult outlawed in all your various islamofascist theocratic cesspools Mehmet?

      • defcon 4

        “The attacks against the West have been to drive Westerners out of Muslim nations” What a facile and empty lie that is Mehmet. How do you explain the ongoing ethnic cleansing of non-muslims from muslim lands Mehmet? Grammatical inconsistencies maybe?

        • EarlyBird

          Defcon, so let me understand: places like Yemen, Qatar, Kuwait, (formerly) Saudi Arabia, Jordan, etc., are not real, sovreign nations? We DON’T have military bases in these and many places elsewhere inside real nations, and a stranglehold on their governments?
          Because you can not accept actual facts does not mean I’m a liar. It means you’re a reactionary and an infant.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “We DON’T have military bases in these and many places elsewhere inside real nations, and a stranglehold on their governments?”

            We have peaceful relationships with those nations. Stranglehold on them? You are truly insane.

            Let me spell it out for you: Jihadis will never be without grievances until the theoretical bliss of the global caliphate is achieved.

            According to you, we must withdraw all assets from outside out borders and then Muslims will stop accusing us of colonialism. And they’ll forgive the USA for those nasty crusades from the middle ages too. Of course they will.

            You’re insane. It’s literally impossible to appease them. Strength and dominance is the only solution. This is the only rational and just option we have. History proves this. It takes willful blindness to dispute this.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “It means you’re a reactionary and an infant.”

            You’re a communist who thinks “reacting” to the evil of communism and or jihad is a bad thing.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        And the vast majority of Islamist terror attacks are waged in already Muslim or partially Muslim nations which have weak governments,

        There is no such thing as Islamists as that is political correct nonsense and terrorists like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn were not fighting in the cause of Allah to establish Islam via the imposition of Sharia, as terrorism is not jihad . If you want to continue to delude yourself, then please by all means be my guess.

        The attacks against the West have been to drive Westerners out of Muslim nations.

        The attacks on the West are violent jihad attacks and not terrorist attacks percolated by America’s foreign policy as you and so many other unhinged self-hating leftwing moonbats incessantly insist. Moreover, if the jihad attacks are to drive the West out of the Islamic world, then why are Muslims migrating in mass to the West in order to wage stealth and deceptive jihad to eventually impose Sharia, which is Islamic totalitarian law, on us gullible infidels? Indeed, in your infinite wisdom, why don’t you point out all the populations of Muslim immigrants living in the West today out of the multitude of millions of Muslim immigrants that have actually assimilated and integrated instead of forming Muslim enclaves that eventually morph into Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia and that are in effect tiny Islamic statelets within the greater host infidel states?

        But also, we should recognize that there are many well-integrated Muslims in the US, miraculously.

        Give me a break, only in your gullible leftwing useful idiot imagination. Moreover, if you believe that America with its leftwing hijacked federal government will somehow be lucky enough to escape the jihad unlike Europe and every other place in the world, then I have some desert land in the Everglades I’d like to sell you.

        The refusal to assimilate among Euro Muslims have a lot to do with their perceived ideas about the West abusing Islam in Muslim countries.

        You are a self-hating dufus…Muslims don’t perpetrate terrorism to force Westerners from their lands or because they perceive Westerners as abusing Islam. Instead, they fight jihad in the cause of Allah to establish Islam via the imposition of Sharia, which is Islamic totalitarian law, because jihad is the highest pillar of Islam and a fundamental holy obligation incumbent upon all Muslims in one form or another. In fact, the sole fundamental purpose of Islam is to subjugate all religions and all infidels into Islamic totalitarianism via the imposition of Sharia, and the jihad in the cause of Allah to establish Islam has been ongoing and perpetual non-stop since shortly after the Hijra in 622 AD. Thus, before the creation of America, what was your lame excuse for Muslims fighting jihad way back then moonbat? Go buy a brain; you need one badly.

    • Charlie97

      “…when the truth is jihad is not only the highest pillar of Islam, but also a fundamental holy obligation incumbent upon every Muslim in the world in one form or another. Thus, every Muslim in the world is a jihadist in one form or another.”

      What absolute tripe. Where is your proof of this statement of yours? There are 5 pillars of Islam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_Pillars_of_Islam) and you will note that Jihad is NOT one of them.

      • Drakken

        Where’s the proof you ask? Pick up a newspaper or any news source and we see that where islam goes, violence always follows.

        • Charlie97

          I asked for PROOF, not evidence. Picking up a paper gives me no proof that jihad is considered the highest pillar in Islam by Muslims.

          • Drakken

            You see your fellow muzzys going completely savage wherever islam puts its dirty sandals everydamnday of the week, and still you deny it. Well good luck muslim in the near future, for us infidels are tiring of you and yours.

          • Charlie97

            Jesus (may the blessings of God be upon him) wore sandals too…

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Jesus (may the blessings of God be upon him) wore sandals too…”

            What is that supposed to mean? Don’t you mean “Isa?”

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “I asked for PROOF, not evidence. Picking up a paper gives me no proof that jihad is considered the highest pillar in Islam by Muslims.”

            How about Muslims willing to die for it? Not good enough? Dying sort of takes you out of the loop for those other pillars.

            What do you think about that evidence? I guess jihad IS the only critical “pillar.”

            And it’s a paradigm. There’s subjectivity involved. We’re discussing an ideology from a critical perspective.

            Definition of PARADIGM

            1: example, pattern; especially : an outstandingly clear or typical example or archetype

            2: an example of a conjugation or declension showing a word in all its inflectional forms

            3: a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated; broadly : a philosophical or theoretical framework of any kind

            He doesn’t need (absolute) “proof” (as opposed to evidence) to make that statement. His statement is reasonable and easy to support.

          • Charlie97

            Listen OFM, thank-you for your reply. It is nice to read a reasoned and thought-out argument, rather being simply threatened (e.g. Drakken). My ‘z’ comment, was childish, but meant solely for him. You’ll have to just accept it as a joke, meant to tease Americans (coming from a Limey)!

            Now, back to the original point(s). If you had said, that there are some Muslims hell-bent on the annihilation of the west, with jihad top of the agenda, then no reasonable person would disagree. What you said was different, however. In effect, you are saying that all Muslims have a prime goal of Islamification of the West, and it just isn’t true, either in theory or practice. The vast majority I know just want a simple life. I have of course, come across a few in my lifetime with said aim in mind – they are now behind bars. It is nowhere to be found, in mainstream traditional Islamic teaching. It is to be found in Wahhabi thought. We (traditional, sunni, sufis, which form the majority) have being having theological debates with the Wahhabis for as long as I can remember. Some amongst us consider it heresy to pray behind them (significant minority opinion). Jihad, to defend your lands from foreign invasion is a different matter.

            If you say that a pattern, or paradigm has been established that supports your assertion, then I can not argue with that. You believe that such a pattern exists. In so much as I believe that such a paradigm exists, supporting my assertion that the USA is a (subtle) colonialist, imperialist power. I have no proof, although perhaps further Wikileak-type ‘scandals’ may be revealing.
            Blessed are the peacemakers, supposedly. Well both the USA, and Islam, are not blessed. But, just as the actions of the USA are not reflective of each and every citizen, similarly, not each aggressive act perpetrated in the name of Islam is reflective of every single Muslim.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Now, back to the original point(s). If you had said, that there are some Muslims hell-bent on the annihilation of the West, with jihad top of their agenda, then no reasonable person would disagree.”

            Great. The next step is analyzing ideology to see if there is a reason for that. Some of us have done that and we’re encouraging others to investigate further. It’s kind of serious at this point, especially with a stealth Sunni POTUS going around telling the UN that the future must not belong to people like us, who explain the ideology of Islam from a Western non-PC perspective.

            “What you said was different, however. In effect, you are saying that all Muslims have a prime goal of Islamification of the West…”

            I didn’t say that. I implied that their ideology commands them to. What fraction are actually planning to do that was not discussed.

            “The vast majority I know just want a simple life.”

            Sure. Everyone says that. And many truly do. But jihadis don’t really project their intentions until they feel it’s safe to do so. Some times that isn’t until they’re screaming “Allah akbar” shortly before the big event.

            But in fact most Muslims that I know are not jihadis and not even supremacists. However, discussing the ideology is helpful for them to understand a lot of the dysfunctional ideas that they have in many cases. Most of the time it has to be there choice to examine that. But the point is that it is ALWAYS useful and productive to tell the comprehensive truth about Islam and it’s fundamental teachings. It’s never a waste of time.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        What absolute tripe. Where is your proof of this statement of yours? There are 5 pillars of Islam (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/… and you will see that Jihad is NOT one of them.

        You can always tell when you are up against someone of obvious superior intelligence to yours when they use wikipedia.org as their source for documentation. Nevertheless, here’s my tripe moonbat:

        From “My Noble Koran” published in Saudi Arabia by the “King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an, Madinah, K.S.A.

        “Al-Jihad (holy fighting) in Allah’s Cause (with full force of numbers and weaponry) is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars (on which it stands). Allah’s Word is made superior, (His Word being Lailaha illallah which means none has the right to be worshipped but Allah), and His Religion (Islam) is propagated. By abandoning Jihad (may Allah protect us from that) Islam is destroyed and the Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honour is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim, and he who tries to escape from this duty, or does not in his innermost heart wish to fulfill this duty, dies with one of the qualities of a hypocrite.”

        http://www.muslimfact.com/bm/misc-articles-about-islam-and-terror/jihad-the-sixth-deadly-pillar-of-islam.shtml

        Indeed, not only do the Saudis build and staff approximately 80 percent of all Mosques in the world, the vast overwhelming majority of Korans are also printed and distributed by the Saudis as well.

        Therefore, if I’m full of tripe, then you are an unhinged self-hating Muslim apologizing moonbat.

        • Charlie97

          After reading your reply, I really had to take a step back and go back to your original posting.

          “This foolish obsession we have with conflating what is really jihad as somehow being terrorism is really causing us to miss the bigger picture of what is really happening. It also opens the door for self-hating lunatics like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama to blame America for creating terrorists, when the truth is jihad is not only the highest pillar of Islam, but also a fundamental holy obligation incumbent upon every Muslim in the world in one form or another. Thus, every Muslim in the world is a jihadist in one form or another.”

          Now, you mock the fact that I linked to a Wikipedia page, but the truth is that I could have linked to any page following a quick Google search (“pillars AND islam”), and would have found that there are 5 pillars of Islam, and they are the declaration of faith, prayer, fasting, annual alms-giving and the pilgrimage to Mecca. I know this, and everyone else knows this.

          You employ ignoratio elenchi by cutting and pasting a vast swathe of text from an introduction to a Saudi-printed, Wahabbi-translated version of the Qur’an. As the Saudis are probably the richest of Muslims, and they have a certain agenda, naturally they will push their propaganda. Wahhabis are a minority in the Muslim world (although their influence is growing).

          Back to the original issue; you stated that, “…the truth is jihad is not only the highest pillar of Islam…” – this is just not true. A bit of humility from you would be nice, but I predict that it will not be forthcoming…

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “By simply cutting and pasting a vast swathe of text from an introduction to a Saudi-printed, Wahabbi-translated version of the Qur’an, you are guilty of ignoratio elenchi. As the Saudis are probably the richest of Muslims, and they have a certain agenda, naturally they will push their propaganda. Wahhabis are a minority in the Muslim world (although their influence is growing). But their word does not make your assertion true.”

            In this case it does. Their agenda is to propagate fundamentalist Islam. And their ideology has not changed since they were desert dwellers. Their funding simply makes them more dangerous.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            You employ ignoratio elenchi by cutting and pasting a vast swathe of text from an introduction to a Saudi-printed, Wahabbi-translated version of the Qur’an

            You are a complete neophyte when it comes to the study of Islam loon and you have no idea that virtually all of the Middle East Study Departments throughout the West have been hijacked and co-opted by a cabal of leftwing useful idiot losers like you and by Muslims funded mostly by the Saudis. Nevertheless, the Saudi printed Koran’s are by far the most widely distributed Korans in the world, as I clearly explained. Moreover, the text and tenets of Islam are immutable and anyone seen as trying to change just one single word of them would be summarily executed as a blasphemer.

            With respect to your other idiotic comments about the Saudis, they further validate that you are a complete neophyte when it comes to the study of Islam and you are indeed a complete waste of my time.

            Back to the original issue; you stated that, “the truth is jihad is not only the highest pillar of Islam”, and this is just not true. A bit of humility from you would be nice, but I predict that it will not be forthcoming…

            Of course, if isn’t in wikipedia, then it isn’t so. What a mentally deficient loon! You can deny reality if you like. You self-hating useful idiot moonbats are experts at self-delusion and I could care less what you moonbats believe. Nevertheless, jihad is not only the highest pillar of Islam; it is a fundamental holy obligation incumbent upon all Muslims in one form or another. Hence, all Muslims are jihadists in one form or another, as the fundamental sole purpose of Islam is to subjugate all religions and all infidels into Islamic totalitarianism via the imposition of Sharia, which is Islam’s totalitarian law.

          • Charlie97

            You perhaps need to calm down a bit. Thank you for introducing me to a new word – neophyte.

            You are correct, in so much as the text of the Qur’an is immutable. However, this does not apply to the words of a scholar, writing either a commentary or an introduction – this is his opinion. It doesn’t mean that it is binding upon every single, Muslim. I sense we’re not going to agree here. No traditional text from a mainstream scholar has jihad listed as a pillar of Islam. You may feel that elements amongst Muslims have it as their primary goal, and I would agree. But you take a step too far, in saying that all Muslims have it as their primary goal. Most just want to live in peace and raise their children – like virtually everyone else on the entire planet.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            However, this does not apply to the words of a scholar, writing either a commentary or an introduction – this is his opinion.

            While I linked to his article, I didn’t post from it. Instead, I posted a passage from the Koran to support the truth. Meanwhile, you are a complete neophyte, a gullible useful idiot, and a complete waste of my time.

            No traditional text from a mainstream scholar has jihad listed as a pillar of Islam.

            And you a complete neophyte would know this. How do you know other than assumption on your part, when it couldn’t be anymore obvious that you are totally clueless and not even open minded with respect to the reality of Islam? You have a lot of audacity.

            In any event, do me a favor. Cite all the Islamic states in the world that are not totalitarian hellholes or in the process of being converted into an Islamic totalitarian hellhole. While you’re at it, cite all the Islamic states in the world that don’t oppress non-Muslim infidels living in their countries into harsh and degrading dhimmitude. Also, why don’t you point to all the non-Muslim countries in the world that border an Islamic state that are not under assault by jihad exactly like Israel? Moreover, cite all the Islamic totalitarian hellholes in the world that don’t harshly oppress females. Finally, out of all the millions of Muslims that have migrated to the West, cite just one group of Muslim immigrants out of the multitudes that have immigrated that have actually assimilated and integrated into their host infidel states, instead of forming Muslim enclaves that eventually morph into Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia and that form tiny Islamic statelets within the larger infidel host states.

            But you take a step too far, in saying that all Muslims have it as their primary goal.

            What are you smoking? I never said that all Muslims have it as their primary goal. Instead, I said that jihad is a fundamental holy obligation in Islam incumbent upon all Muslims in one form or another. Moreover moonbat, once a Muslim always a Muslim, as blasphemy and apostasy in Islam are capital offenses!

            Most just want to live in peace and raise their children – like virtually everyone else on the entire planet.

            And you know this, how? Indeed, you are one of the most ignorant moonbats to ever have graced the pages of FPM. Nevertheless, the fundamental sole purpose of Islam is to subjugate into Islamic totalitarianism all religions and infidels via the imposition of Sharia. While Islam may have initially evolved as a very bastardized religion in Mecca, after the Hijra in 622 AD when Muhammad and his early Muslim followers were cast out of Mecca and force to migrate to Medina, Muhammad became very obsessed with revenge, politics, and jihad and abandoned religion at the same time, reforming Islam in the process into what it is today, which is a very aggressive totalitarian cult that masquerades as being a religion to dupe it’s intended victims.

            Furthermore, according to the principle of abrogation, which is universally accepted by all sects and branches within Islam, the latter issued verses of the Koran abrogate and replace the earlier issued verses of the Koran they conflict with. Thus, all earlier issued peaceful verses of the Koran that evolved in Mecca when Islam was still a religion and the very same ones that Muslims love to cite to dupe gullible useful idiot infidels like you, have all been abrogated and replaced by the infamous sword verses of the Koran that command all Muslims to wage jihad against all religions and all infidels in the cause of Allah to make Islam supreme and that were issued after the Hijra when Muhammad had reformed Islam into what it is today, which again is a totalitarian cult masquerading as a religion to dupe its intended gullible useful idiot victims.

          • Charlie97

            As I thought, my sense was indeed correct. To you your way, and to me mine, my friend.

          • ObamaYoMoma

            As I thought, my sense was indeed correct. To you your way, and to mine, my friend.

            Thus, in the spirit of multiculturalism and diversity, which are leftwing crocks just like Global Warming, you hope America becomes inundated by Muslims to destroy the political makeup of America and fill it with Muslim no-go zones ruled by Sharia exactly like throughout Europe. Indeed, you have an ambition of one day becoming a harsh and degraded dhimmi just like the Christian Copts in Egypt and all other infidels living throughout the Islamic world as well. Indeed, inside every delusional Leftist, there is a totalitarian bursting to get out!

      • objectivefactsmatter

        Read the history of the prophet. Emulating him is the primary guide to living. Whatever paradigm you use, jihad is the immutable factor in fundamental historical Islam as taught by Arab Muslims and their disciples.

        “There are 5 pillars of Islam (http://bit.ly/1221xXU) and you will note that Jihad is NOT one of them.”

        That’s propaganda intended to deceive.

    • hal

      Muslims are not Terrorists ???? How about that Terrorists are Muslims. If you are going to fool yourself with word games, then here is reality.

      It was not passenger aircraft filled with Catholic Hijackers that attacked the US on 9-11-2001. IT WAS MUSLIMS.

      It was Muslims that have attacked every US embassy or military installation as far back as most Americans can remember. It is Muslims that have been raising h*ll against Western Values, and Israel for longer than that. In this century, it has been Muslims creating the carnage and destruction. The Catholics have been too busy molesting little boys to take up arms against others. While there are some that will be fooled with revisionst history and by websites filled with propaganda, most will not.

  • Jakareh

    It’s depressing that the anonymous people leaving comments about a little-read article (judging by how few of those comments there are) in a relatively obscure Web site are far more insightful, patriotic, courageous, and plain smart than the individuals in charge of the United States government. Truly, we live in a dystopia.

  • glpage

    It just goes to show that the majority of our policy makers are dumber than a box of rocks.

  • tokoloshiman

    Barack Hussein Obama is a radical social muslim( he has never and can never alter this fact) supporting the inexorable and inevitable advance of jihad and the eventual implementation of sharia law into the USA.
    This will be along with a socialist dictatorial authoritarian state similar to Saudi Arabia his mentor and example.
    Plain and simple , so get used to it people.
    He has in this quest appointed various acolytes that are clearly anti israel and he has erased almost any mention of jihad or islamic terror from the lexicons of all the major state agencies.
    These state agencies themselves are affiliated or have members of the MB in their senior ranks.
    Obama is lying , demolishing democracy and creating more division in government than any of his predecessors.
    His allies in europe are well in the way to implementing sharia and many of the E U countries already have incorporated sharia law and its misogynistic principles into the existing law. Eventually through sheer weight of numbers and rabid activism it will supersede current law and become the order of the day.
    The erosion of the constitution and the attempt to remove weapons from the people is part of this iniquitous plan.
    The slow demise of America as a leader in the fight against communism , socialism and radical ideologies is well on its way.
    This is apparently what the American people wanted as they gloriously and
    with delirious delight elected this sham of a man into office.
    Who knows what will happen in the nearly 4 years left of his second term, but whatever it is it is not going to be cohesion or a solved debt or unemployment problem,
    It should be civil war if the people are not too brainwashed by then and rendered incapable of resistance,.
    G-d help us all….

    • EarlyBird

      Yes. He’s also a left-handed homosexual who commits child sacrifices to Satan in the basement of the White House as Michelle ululates. It’s true!

      • objectivefactsmatter

        “Yes. He’s also a left-handed homosexual who commits child sacrifices to Satan in the basement of the White House as Michelle ululates. It’s true!”

        You’re reading comprehension has not improved.

  • Well Done

    It’s not just 0bama, he is part of a worldwide cabal of brainless, wishing-will-make-it-come-true fools. Often called “Socialists”, they see no obstacle than they think can not be overcome by offering more “understanding”.

    Euro politicians turned Turkey to Islamists by insisting the military have no say in government. Well, guess what was keeping Islamists from seizing political power in Turkey? You got it; their military.

    Now, 0bama has funded, armed, and encouraged Islamists to take over Libya and Egypt, and is making noises about supporting Syrian “rebels”. I put rebels in quotes because they aren’t rebels; they aren’t from Syria! They are Jihadis from at least half a dozen countries, including, er, Libya and Egypt. If you think 0bama doesn’t know this, then you think 0bama is blind and stupid.

  • knowshistory

    infidels are losing. we defeat the violent jihadis, while our treasonous leaders import more and more peaceful muslims, support them with our welfare programs, and aid and abet their conquest of the west. it wasnt enough that our friends routinely betrayed us, so a majority in a population of fools elected a known muslim sympathizer to “lead” us. it was like george w “religion of peace” bush was unable to destroy our nation fast enough. now, the real thing is at the controls: a known certified muslim-loving foreigner, who almost certainly is an actual muslim, dedicated to the destruction of every infidel population and its replacement by good muslims who worship the god of evil and venerate the pedophile prophet, PBUH. with a bit of luck, dear leader will inspire his friends, the violent jihadis, to unleash upon us a nuclear cataclism sufficient to get us to put away our islam loving tendencies, and expel all muslims permently from our country. due to the stupidity of bush, we did not accomplish that task after 9-11. due to the malicious treason of obama, we may get another chance.

  • EarlyBird

    Islamists may HATE us because of their religion requires them to, but they are FIGHTING us because we are in their lands. It’s that simple: they are fighting to drive us out of Muslim lands.
    We continue to have multiple military bases in their countries, and extraordinary control over their governments and their economy. Once we disengage from the Arab Muslim world the entire reason for their war against us – not their “hatred” – ends. Sure, they have directives in the Koran to put infidels to the sword, to expand the Muslim empire, etc., but that doesn’t and hasn’t compelled generations of young Muslim men to wage war against the West. Our meddling has.
    Instead of being overly clever about which psychopathic terror group to arm, or which evil tyrant to support, how to play X off of Y and generally continue to play the Great Game, let’s just disengage from that region as much as humanly possible (i.e., energy independence) and we will see a lot, lot calls to war against us.

    • Drakken

      Yeah sure they will quick attacking us once every infidels leaves their lands, are you naïve, a wishful thinker, or just plain arrogantly dumb?

      • Charlie97

        No, Drakken, they will not quick attacking you if you leave their lands. Though they will quit attacking you…

        I suppose that it never occurs to you that if you weren’t in Lebanon in the first place, you wouldn’t have suffered an attack?

        • Drakken

          The wtf are you doing in our western lands when you can be in the Islamic paradise of your choice, why live amongst us kaffirs? As a convert, you belong to the uhmma now boy.

          • Charlie97

            When I say that you perhaps wouldn’t have been attacked if you weren’t in Beirut, you ask me wtf I’m doing in the West (also the land of my birth). What has that got to do with the question I asked?

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “When I say that you perhaps wouldn’t have been attacked if you weren’t in Beirut, you ask me wtf I’m doing in the West (also the land of my birth). What has that got to do with the question I asked?”

            He’s asking you if you propose a symetrical quarantine to keep muslims and non-muslims apart all around the world. Is that your plan for “peace with justice?”

            A muslim taxi cab driver getting poked, or rumors about “koran desecration” are enough to start aggression against the West. We’d need a total quarantine, including communications. We’d need to block them from all trade with us, mass communications, etc.

            That’s not my idea. Those are the implications of yours.

            And we’d need to monitor development of weapons systems, like Iran.

            Your suggestions are delusional. They don’t respect rule of law unless it’s sharia. You perhaps simply underestimate the implications of this in the real world.

          • Drakken

            The only way islam will quit attacking us westerners is if we make it happen. So you were born here? So what, your ass belongs to allah now son, not us in the west, your ideals and worship of the devil himself makes you an enemy of all that is great and good in our western lands.
            As for my Beirut experience, it was a very steep learning curve, when some savage would intentional drive a explosive laden dump truck into a compound and commit suicide while yelling allah snackbar you really have to wonder what would motivate someone to do such as thing, as my Christian counterpart told me, it is their Koran that motivates them, thus my study of you muslims and what makes you tick, know they enemy is one of the commandments I follow and it has served me well over the years. I will never forget a couple days after that attack when the USS New Jersey steaming in and firing those 16 inch guns, the entire area panicked and we got better payback than we got in response.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            And what by the way makes Lebanon “Muslim land?”

            Colonial expansion perhaps?

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “I suppose that it never occurs to you that if you weren’t in Lebanon in the first place, you wouldn’t have suffered an attack?”

          Specific targets would change. They’d attack us here more frequently instead.

          And it’s not like Islam has a great tradition of due process. It doesn’t matter what we actually do to appease them. Someone will always be able to continue lying about “grievances” as they have for so many centuries, and they’ll mobilize jihadis to attack non-Muslims.

      • EarlyBird

        Oh that’s right. In Drakken’s world, all Muslims are like flesh eating zombies and cannot be stopped until their heads are removed. There is no possible reason that they are waging war against us, and to consider that us, the Good Guys, have done something wrong is well….un-American and…librul!

        • defcon 4

          Erlyturd, how exactly do you explain away the ethnic cleansing and persecution of people of other faiths that are SOP in all your islamo-nazi states? Did djinns make them do it? Or has satan been urinating in their ears?

        • Drakken

          Yeah early, if we just give them everything they want, they will leave us alone, where have I heard that before?

    • objectivefactsmatter

      “Islamists may HATE us because of their religion requires them to, but they are FIGHTING us because we are in their lands.”

      We’re not “in their lands.” If you accept that as legitimate, you’re a traitorous appeaser or a jihadi.

      Since when are religious groups somehow supreme sovereigns of the world that get to decide which lands are there’s? What about Muslim colonialism in “Catholic lands?”

      What kind of more-on are you constantly spouting Islamic colonialism rhetoric?

      • Charlie97

        Let’s look at this logically: If you accept that Americans (and her allies) are attempting to colonise certain parts of the world, for whatever reason (oil, energy etc.), then it stands to reason that the colonised people have a right to attempt to free themselves of said colonisation. It is argumentum ad absurdum if you think that one has the right to be in the lands of others with nefarious intent, and for the people of those lands to simply lay down and accept this state of affairs. To label people as being ‘a traitorous appeaser or a jihadi’ if they disagree with your view is lazy and illogical. Your name is objectivefactsmatter. If true, then you should at least be objective. If, on the other hand, you do not accept that America is attempting to colonise parts of the world, then I feel that you are not being objective, or truthful.

        • EarlyBird

          OFM is a smart person, but ironically given his name, a hyper-emotional reactionary. He refuses to consider that the US, the greatest nation in the world, can also make mistakes and do bad in the world, and be legitimately hated by others for its actions. So he is forced into simplistic ideas like “Muslims are warring against the US because of their religion.”
          Their religion may be odious, but it’s being used as an organizing force to achieve very conventional goals: to drive invaders (perceived or actual) out of their lands. And by “their lands,” their ACTUAL homelands, not just a general sense of Muslim lands.
          They physically want us to remove our military bases and weapons, and stranglehold on their governments. They want to be left alone. What can’t be more clear?

          • defcon 4

            Tell it to the Hindus and Sikhs who used to live in Bangladesh and Pakistain (if they weren’t murdered by muslimes that is). Tell it to the Jews who used to inhabit Syria, Iraq, Egypt and N. Africa (if they weren’t murdered by muslimes that is). Tell it to the Christians who used to inhabit Iraq, Syria, Egypt, N. Africa, Indonesia, E. Timor, Turkey (if they weren’t murdered by muslimes that is). Tell it to the Bahais and Jews who used to inhabit Iran (if they haven’t been murdered by muslimes that is).

          • EarlyBird

            I don’t CARE about Bangladesh and other places, Defcon. I care about the USA. If we have a situation where groups are trying to push us out of our sovereign nation, or genuinely threaten critical interests of ours, let’s beat the hell out of them and totally destroy them. (That includes, of course, annihilating groups abroad planning to hurt us.)
            But what real interests do we have in much of these places, which is worth literally bankrupting ourselves with constant warfare? Our pride? Who gives a dammm if Yemen or Saudi Arabia or Iraq implodes? Let those people fight their great civil war (which is really what it’s all about).
            The less important that region is (i.e., energy independence) the more options to stay out of entanglements we have.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “He refuses to consider that the US, the greatest nation in the world, can also make mistakes and do bad in the world…”

            You have no reason to think that. Then again, you rarely have reasons for anything you say.

            “So he is forced into simplistic ideas like “Muslims are warring against the US because of their religion.”"

            It’s fundamentally true. You fail to understand the comprehensive analysis, so you accept the distorted implications of the left. You “learn” about conservative arguments from caricatures contrived by leftists. They provide endless straw man arguments for you to try to use.

            “They physically want us to remove our military bases and weapons, and stranglehold on their governments. They want to be left alone. What can’t be more clear?”

            Who are “they?” Nations can’t run around chasing the “wishes” of factions of people who spread grievances based on lies. Plenty of deceivers manage to weave factual elements in to their lies. In any case, there is no way to actually please those factions. And we’d be harming the interests of the majority. The troublemakers lie about us. Most people want to have trade relations and other contact with the West.

            Even you claim the jihadis are a minority. Now you want us to appease them by cutting off all “Muslim” access and communications with the West just to contain the jihadis?

            It’s modern technology that brought us together. If we can’t live by rule of law, we’ll decay in to anarchy. And I refuse to live by sharia. I make no apologies for that. I don’t consider it legitimate.

          • EarlyBird

            Across the board, throughout the Middle East, people of all faiths, sects, education, income, language, culture, etc, deeply resent the profound dominance we have on their governments and economies and our miltary bases – even if they enjoy stability because of it. It’s the one thing that totally unifies people in the Middle East, their resentment of our regional hegemony.

          • Drakken

            If they hate and resent American hegemony now, wait until the Chines and Russians give them a taste of theirs.

          • EarlyBird

            Russian hegemony? In what universe? I know you admire their war tactics, but these guys are incapable of keeping the utility grid running consistently in Moscow, let alone project that level of power throughout the Middle East.
            What we need to worry about is becoming another Russia, a once-super power who shoots itself in the foot and becomes 2nd rate. We couldn’t do that more effectively than chasing after every guy with a beard 8,000 miles away.
            Hell, let the Russians and Chinese have the headache.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Across the board, throughout the Middle East, people of all faiths, sects, education, income, language, culture, etc, deeply resent the profound dominance we have on their governments and economies and our miltary bases – even if they enjoy stability because of it.”

            Because of leftist publications. The solution is to stop lying. Everywhere I go, with no exceptions, whenever I ask people to justify their criticisms of the USA or the West, they are malinformed about the facts behind their stated reasons for whatever degree of negativity they express. Even people that generally like us. Even people in for example, England or France.

            With so many leftist liars actually teaching at our universities and at all levels of our education systems, obviously many foreigners who don’t have easy access to the facts are going to believe these lying traitors and the mindless dupes in the leftist echo chambers.

            Thank you again for leading the conversation to the root of virtually every major problem in our government and culture today; leftist ideology.

          • EarlyBird

            “Even you claim the jihadis are a minority. Now you want us to appease them by cutting off all “Muslim” access and communications with the West just to contain the jihadis?”
            We don’t have to go that far, i.e., totally cut off any contact with them, but I think in essence the West needs to announce: “Hey guys, you know how the Great Powers finally gave up control of most of their colonies after WWII? We’re ready to give you real indepence in your region, too.”
            You’ll notice that the great post-WWII anti-Western conflicts in Latin America, Africa and Asia are pretty much done. Those ex-colonies organized around another wretched and radical ideology, communism, to fight for their independence. Now it’s Arabs’ turn, organizing around the wretched and radical ideology if violent Islamism (sorry, not just run of the mill Islam) to fight for independence. Yes, those areas will suffer horrors like Cambodia did, but under Sharia instead of communism.
            Bu the West is past its ability to control or improve this situation much, at an acceptable cost to ourselves. This is how history works.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            We don’t have to go that far, i.e., totally cut off any contact with them, but I think in essence the West needs to announce: “Hey guys, you know how the Great Powers finally gave up control of most of their colonies after WWII? We’re ready to give you real indepence in your region, too.”

            You’re clearly not well read on the relevant history. They don’t want more independence. They want relief from bogus grievances. How many nations and NGOs turn away our money and aid? They want more dependence under their terms. It’s like an 8-year-old that thinks he has a right to own a car and have his parents pay for it, because of all those times he was abused, made to go to bed and eat and so forth. They still want the privileges of being a child, but they want to be directing it.

            It’s human nature until someone teaches them that it’s wrong. In the USA, we have adults that also think this way. It’s not genetic, it’s cultural.

            The answers must deal with culture. Realistically, not in fantasy land.

        • Drakken

          Spoken like a true muslim and leftist, the words colonization gives you away, funny, we aren’t colonizing anyone.

          • Charlie97

            I find you rather amusing. America finds itself at war quite frequently (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States) and one wonders why. For strategic, economic and energy interests? Or are you just a world bully/troublemaker. Regardless, it’s colonisation – without a z.

          • Drakken

            You won’t quite find it amusing soon enough muslim. Deo Volente.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Regardless, it’s colonisation – without a z.”

            When did it start? When we tried to “colonize” Tripoli? Or was it when we sent troops to Europe to colonize them in WWI? Or how about WWII when we tried to colonize all of Europe and Asia?

            When did this “colonization” begin?

            Regarding spelling AND trying to get your leftist definition, start here:

            http://www.thefreedictionary.com/colonization

            You’re not an enemy merely by disagreeing with me. You’re an enemy because you enable those who want to destroy Western culture and US sovereignty.

          • Charlie97

            Thanks for calling me a leftist. I’m very proud to be one.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          “Let’s look at this logically: If you accept that Americans (and her allies) are attempting to colonise certain parts of the world, for whatever reason (oil, energy etc.), then it stands to reason that the colonised people have a right to attempt to free themselves of said colonisation”

          I do not accept this statement. It’s absurd. You’re a propagandist. You’re sounding more like a fundamentalist Muslim with each statement of yours.

          “It is argumentum ad absurdum if you think that one has the right to be in the lands of others with nefarious intent, and for the people of those lands to simply lay down and accept this state of affairs.”

          Nefarious intent? Because I’m not sharia compliant. Yes, you’re right according to the Islamic perspective.

          “To label people as being ‘a traitorous appeaser or a jihadi’ if they disagree with your view is lazy and illogical.”

          You fail to understand the logic. That’s not my fault. People are not traitors merely by disagreeing with me. They’re traitors when they lie about our enemies and those lies enable attacks against our sovereignty and our vital interests.

          “Your name is objectivefactsmatter. If true, then you should at least be objective. If, on the other hand, you do not accept that America is attempting to colonise parts of the world, then I feel that you are not being objective, or truthful.”

          I’m calling your bluff. Where’s the objective evidence that “America is attempting to colonise parts of the world?”

          I “feel” that you’re a sharia and or communist dupe.

      • EarlyBird

        I accept that the United States is not part of Qatar, Kuwait, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, etc. Forget about the concept of “Muslim lands” for a moment, how about simply sovreign nations? If say, France, had bases in North America and was completely dominating nations, governments and removing governments and replacing them with brutal strong men for generations, I might be a bit “anti-France” and might use my Catholicism to find strength in fighting them.
        You won’t begin to understand the world you live in until you grow up and drop the knee-jerk reaction of calling everyone who makes a thoughtful criticism un-patriotic.
        “Gee: I got an idea, perhaps if we stopped jabbing this hornets’ nest with a stick we’ll stop being stung!”

        • Drakken

          There you again with the moral equivalence argument where there is none. We jab the hornets nest because the hornets need a healthy dose of raid instead of trying to pet them.

          • EarlyBird

            No moral equivalence here. Nothing excuses the outrageous acts of evil perpetrated by the Islamist mo fos. And in the above scenario, I would not be excused for being evil and attacking innocent people because of my righteous fury. And absolutely NOTHING should prevent us from annihlating any real threat to us with extreme prejudice.
            The question is: why in the world are we there and why do we need to control those nations? What’s the cost/benefit ratio, and the “why?” You know why we turned our nation upside down and sent millions of boys to war and ultimately nuked the Japs? Because we had to.
            I don’t know the “have to” yet with the Islamists. They may have fantasies of taking over the world, but they really want THEIR lands back. I don’t mean some theoretical “Muslim lands,” but real countries. Drakken, being of the warrior type, you’d be out front whooping a$$ if we were totally dominated by an outside culture, too.

          • Drakken

            The one thing I am absolutely sure of is, the sand apes will do something extremely stupid and invite our wrath, you can take that to the bank.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “The question is: why in the world are we there and why do we need to control those nations?”

            They want us there. Why are we supporting Syria, Egypt, or any other sovereign? When you get in to the details, there will ALWAYS be factions who want us, and factions that don’t.

          • EarlyBird

            Take a look at this short article in the American Conservative, to get my point of view:

            http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-palin-doctrine/

          • objectivefactsmatter

            At this point we need to change our tactics. But we don’t want to throw away lessons from history. We want to be successful. That’s why we hate 0′Bama.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Drakken, being of the warrior type, you’d be out front whooping a$$ if we were totally dominated by an outside culture, too.”

            That’s a statement straight out of the moral equivalence book.

        • objectivefactsmatter

          Those nations WANT bases you retread. They want US protection. Those factions within those nations who oppose US presence believe that we stand in the way of greater degrees of implementing sharia law.

          Perhaps we should stop “colonizing” them by bribing them to treat women a little better. It doesn’t work anyway. That’s the root of “neo-colonialism” and “cultural genocide” accusations: Lobbying them to pay attention to Western standards for human rights, especially women. And used to be we occasionally mentioned the rights of non-Muslims till the Sunni caliphate wannabe got elected POTUS.

          That’s enough to create grievances. Allowing videos on the Internet, that’s “cultural genocide.”

          It would require an absolute quarantine AND we’d have to then worry about any of them developing weapons systems sufficient to attack us in the future.

          If you just knew fact-based history.

          • EarlyBird

            Their corrupt dictatorial GOVERNMENTS, which have been serving Western interests at the expense of their citizens’ interests for many decades, want our bases, to protect THEMSELVES. We’ve got a tiger by the tail. If we remove our bases those governments fall. If we don’t remove our bases they ultimately fall by way of violent insurrection.
            Welcome to reality, where the US can not control every single outcome in the world. We are living in a very historic time where the old guard of Great Powers is finally being undone in the ME. And it’s been happening a lot, lot longer than the actions of “Obama the MarxistHomosexualLeftistCommunistIslamistTerrorist” or whatever idiocy you need to make sense of it.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            “Their corrupt dictatorial GOVERNMENTS, which have been serving Western interests at the expense of their citizens’ interests for many decades, want our bases, to protect THEMSELVES.”

            You’re oversimplifying with the typical leftist narratives. Some of those guys were bad, but most of them created problems by simply opposing sharia. We should have given them more support with higher standards, but we were kept busy for a few a few decades with the cold war. That’s not a mea culpa, that’s simply saying I wish the world was an idyllic place.

            All that aside, referring to the USA as a colonial power is absolutely false, and fundamentally evil to say. Nobody can justify it without lying.

  • Stacey van Adder

    This is a deliberate attempt by foreign born traitor usurper, Dicktator Obama to destroy America. Every one of his policies has cost this nation dearly, whether in money, our Constitutional rights, or American lives. I have lost patience with these liberal fools who still blindly support the man who has lied to us about Benghazi, killed off the bee population by supporting Monsanto & making it illegal to pull this poison off the market even though it causes cancer & organ damage ( where are the environmentalists NOW), blackmailing Chief Justice Roberts, allowing Internet providers to spy on the downloads & communications of private citizens starting July 12, Fast & Furious, & lying about his birth certificate & paying $1.7 million to cover up college transcripts just to name a few. When I was growing up, they didn’t make people THAT stupid. Now we have a new definition of stupid in this country & sadly enough it includes many mainstream Americans. Well, the people that still know how to think need to do something about the end of liberty & the rise of tyranny. As for the president & vp – NOT that I would ever support such a thing BUT I’m just saying that there’s nothing wrong with these evil bastards a bullet wouldn’t fix. I don’t think anyone would cry to much if Boehner were to meet his maker either. Not like I support such a thing, of course.

    • EarlyBird

      Grow up.

  • http://smu.gs/L1p7XU winston

    When most people in this forum talk about 9/11, they convey nothing so clearly as their ignorance of the facts. These are well-documented and easily verifiable facts: http://smu.gs/L1p7XU They are not in dispute so much as ignored by the mainstream press. The deadliest part of the 9/11 attacks were the destruction of the Twin Towers, from which 1120 people who were in buildings, remain ‘unaccounted for’ to this day. Once we become aware of the facts, the entire 9/11 story falls apart; it becomes clear that the entire thing was executed in order to establish the pretext needed to do exactly what was done: two preemptive wars and the installing of US business friendly regimes in Afghanistan & Iraq, military bases on either side of Iran, and the main reason: the transfer of trillions of dollars into the pockets of military contractors. We can ignore and deny them but that will never change them. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” -John Adams

    • EarlyBird

      Winston, nutball conspiracy theorists abound on this chat board, but generally not 9/11 nutball conspiracy theorists. Go find a new board.

    • defcon 4

      Natural stupidity is immune to all reason.

  • christianrescuecoalition

    Help us rescue Christians from the areas where they are being killed.
    http://www.christianrescuecoalition.org and http://www.rescuechristians.org

  • christianrescuecoalition
  • alericKong

    I agree with in regards to the human garbage currently known as Islam.

    I disagree with your approach as not much thought has gone into it, and there are more subtle ways to defeat these cavemen.