Menu



error This forum is not active, and new posts may not be made in it.
PromoteFacebookTwitter!
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: QURAN is a FRAUD !
1/5/2010 4:43:58 AM
Hey Peter,

Thanks for pulling this article into this thread. Excellent article by Newt Gingrich, by the way. Marc A. Thiessen's article was awesome and on target too.

Quote:

Quote:
Hello Friends,

The question arises again and again what can we do to stop Radical Islam and their nefarious jihadi terrorist attacks? Obviously the answers are actions not taken in the past in order to prevent further terrorist acts.

In this climate of political correctness and the agenda of B Hussein who implores us not to "jump to conclusions" it seems that we better flush Political Correctness down the drain and become extremely politically incorrect.

Let's start calling a spade a spade and not make up names for actions any thinking person knows is terrorism. As uncomfortable as it might sound and be profiling should become part and parcel of the system in order to better protect the innocents from further jihadi terrorist attacks.

Newt Gringrich wrote an interesting article on this very subject and well worth the read.

Shalom,

Peter





On Terrorism it's Time to Know, to Profile, and to Discriminate

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Peter Fogel

1470
7259 Posts
7259
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: QURAN is a FRAUD !
1/5/2010 12:55:32 PM
Hi Jim,

Here's an interesting video I've posted in the past but is relevant to the discussion here. When you take into account the Euro-Med Partnership I wrote about a few days ago that will bring in an additional 50,000,000 Muslims into Europe the total Muslim population then will stand at over 100,000,000. Eurabia is just around the corner. Some say it's already a fact of life.

Shalom,

Peter


Peter Fogel
Babylon 7
+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: QURAN is a FRAUD !
1/5/2010 3:35:26 PM
I started to post this in a new thread, but it truly belongs here.

Facts are facts and if on a regular basis, people of a certain race are tossing molitoff cocktails at your front door what would you do?

Buy a fireproof door and go on about your business?

Would you inform the authorities that these people with specific similarities in appearance and beliefs, were doing this and hope they (the authorities) would stop it?

If that failed would you protect yourself and your family, by stopping (by whatever means necessary) these persons
with specific similarities in appearance and belief and ending their reign of terror on you and your family?

See this is where we are at. Americans are fed up with the firebombs at our front door.

The authorities are failing to protect the citizens and taxpayers because they refuse to profile. They would rather not offend someone than protect the citizens. Our Homeland Security Chief thinks the system worked fine. OUTRAGEOUS!

As long as Obama is our President and Chief, Americans are at a greater risk than ever before. He appears weak and uninformed. Or he is a sympathizer, that lied about his beliefs and religion. He was caught often "misspeaking" like the USA has 57 states. Huh? Last time I checked there were 50 and the Nation of Islam has 57, hmmmmm. In another interview his statement... "My Muslim religion, huh, huh, my my Christian religion....." You don't make these mistakes unless you are Muslim. What is worse he is cut of the same cloth as the last three administrations. "PROGRESSIVE" no matter the party the "Progressive Movement" comes from the former "Communist Party" which by all appearance has teamed up with the Radical Islamists and silent non radical believers.

So you see Bogdan, we know what the problem is and this election year will show that Americans are fed up with the BU*LLS*HIT of these career politicians, that are only feathering their own nests.

Quote:

Ann Coulter
Ivana Trump Escorted Off Plane: Napolitano Declares 'The System Worked'


In response to a Nigerian Muslim trying to blow up a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit on Christmas Day, the government will now prohibit international travelers from going to the bathroom in the last hour before the plane lands.

Terrorists who plan to bomb planes during the first seven hours of the eight-hour flight, however, should face no difficulties, provided they wait until after the complimentary beverage service has been concluded.

How do they know Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab didn't wait until the end of the flight to try to detonate explosives because he heard the stewardess announce that the food service was over and seats would have to be placed in their upright position? I can't finish my snack? This plane is going down!


Also prohibited in the last hour of international flights will be: blankets, pillows, computers and in-flight entertainment. Another triumph in Janet Napolitano's "Let's stay one step behind the terrorists" policy!

For the past eight years, approximately 2 million Americans a day have been subjected to humiliating searches at airport security checkpoints, forced to remove their shoes and jackets, to open their computers, and to remove all liquids from their carry-on bags, except minuscule amounts in marked 3-ounce containers placed in Ziploc plastic bags -- folding sandwich bags are verboten -- among other indignities.

This, allegedly, was the price we had to pay for safe airplanes. The one security precaution the government refused to consider was to require extra screening for passengers who looked like the last three-dozen terrorists to attack airplanes.

Since Muslims took down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, every attack on a commercial airliner has been committed by foreign-born Muslim men with the same hair color, eye color and skin color. Half of them have been named Mohammed.

An alien from the planet "Not Politically Correct" would have surveyed the situation after 9/11 and said: "You are at war with an enemy without uniforms, without morals, without a country and without a leader -- but the one advantage you have is they all look alike. ... What? ... What did I say?"

The only advantage we have in a war with stateless terrorists was ruled out of order ab initio by political correctness.

And so, despite 5 trillion Americans opening laptops, surrendering lip gloss and drinking breast milk in airports day after day for the past eight years, the government still couldn't stop a Nigerian Muslim from nearly blowing up a plane over Detroit on Christmas Day.

The "warning signs" exhibited by this particular passenger included the following:

His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

He's Nigerian.

He's a Muslim.

His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

He boarded a plane in Lagos, Nigeria.

He paid nearly $3,000 in cash for his ticket.

He had no luggage.

His name was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

Two months ago, his father warned the U.S. that he was a radical Muslim and possibly dangerous.

If our security procedures can't stop this guy, can't we just dispense with those procedures altogether? What's the point exactly?

(To be fair, the father's warning might have been taken more seriously if he had not simultaneously asked for the U.S. Embassy's Social Security number and bank routing number in order to convey a $28 million inheritance that was trapped in a Nigerian bank account.)

The warning from Abdulmutallab's father put his son on some list, but not the "no fly" list. Apparently, it's tougher to get on the "no fly" list than it was to get into Studio 54 in the '70s. Currently, the only people on the "no fly" list" are the Blind Sheik and Sean Penn.

The government is like the drunk looking for his keys under a lamppost. Someone stops to help, and asks, "Is this where you lost them?" No, the drunk answers, but the light's better here.

The government refuses to perform the only possibly effective security check -- search Muslims -- so instead it harasses infinitely compliant Americans. Will that help avert a terrorist attack? No, but the Americans don't complain.

The only reason Abdulmutallab didn't succeed in bringing down an airplane with 278 passengers was that: (1) A brave Dutchman leapt from his seat and extinguished the smoldering Nigerian; and (2) the Nigerian apparently didn't have enough detonating fluid to cause a powerful explosion.

In addition to the no blanket, no computer, no bathroom rule, perhaps the airlines could add this to their preflight announcement about seat belts and emergency exits: "Should a passenger sitting near you attempt to detonate an explosive device, you may be called upon to render emergency assistance. Would you be willing to do so under those circumstances? If not we will assign you another seat ..."

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Jim
Jim Allen

5804
11253 Posts
11253
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 25 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: QURAN is a FRAUD !
1/5/2010 7:10:15 PM

Tea Party people are stupid?

The Elites and Academics (You know them, Bill Ayers and Crew) think they know how to fix something. Yet they have never fixed anything in their lives. Those of us that work and use our talents daily are considered dumb? Just because we may not hold a degree! Guess what? The last guy I put out of my truck, while training him had a PHD and was dumber than a shrew. He is now a fry cook. TeaPartiers Keep The Pressure on! Without us they will fail, only they don't know it yet. But they are capable of higher learning. So they like to tell us.

http://michellemalkin.com/2010/01/05/david-brooks-tea-party-people-are-stupid-but-they-are-having-an-impact/

David Brooks: Tea Party people are stupid, but they are having an impact

By Michelle Malkin • January 5, 2010 10:21 AM


(Photoshop via Doug Ross)

New York Times columnist David Brooks will never let an opportunity pass to remind you that he is an intellectual and you are a grimy member of the unwashed masses. His column today pays a back-handed tribute to the success of the Tea Party movement…while bemoaning the decline of influence among the “educated class” (e.g., David Brooks and Friends).

A taste of the bitter whine in the Fishwrap of Record:

The educated class believes in global warming, so public skepticism about global warming is on the rise. The educated class supports abortion rights, so public opinion is shifting against them. The educated class supports gun control, so opposition to gun control is mounting.

The story is the same in foreign affairs. The educated class is internationalist, so isolationist sentiment is now at an all-time high, according to a Pew Research Center survey. The educated class believes in multilateral action, so the number of Americans who believe we should “go our own way” has risen sharply.

A year ago, the Obama supporters were the passionate ones. Now the tea party brigades have all the intensity.

…The Obama administration is premised on the conviction that pragmatic federal leaders with professional expertise should have the power to implement programs to solve the country’s problems. Many Americans do not have faith in that sort of centralized expertise or in the political class generally.

And David Brooks has the audacity to paint Tea Party activists as the immature, mentally-challenged ones? Instead of acknowledging, for example, that man-made global theories are in peril because the data manipulation, suppression, and intimidation tactics of conniving, eco-radical academics have been exposed, Brooks paints public skepticism on the issue as a reactionary tantrum.

I remind you of Brooks’ fatally impaired powers of discernment regarding Obama’s “pragmatic federal leaders with professional expertise.” While he derides Tea Party participants as “teens,” he has slavered over Barack Obama like a lovesick tween from day one.

Remember this?

Jan. 20, 2009, will be a historic day. Barack Obama (Columbia, Harvard Law) will take the oath of office as his wife, Michelle (Princeton, Harvard Law), looks on proudly. Nearby, his foreign policy advisers will stand beaming, including perhaps Hillary Clinton (Wellesley, Yale Law), Jim Steinberg (Harvard, Yale Law) and Susan Rice (Stanford, Oxford D. Phil.).

The domestic policy team will be there, too, including Jason Furman (Harvard, Harvard Ph.D.), Austan Goolsbee (Yale, M.I.T. Ph.D.), Blair Levin (Yale, Yale Law), Peter Orszag (Princeton, London School of Economics Ph.D.) and, of course, the White House Counsel Greg Craig (Harvard, Yale Law)…

… Already the culture of the Obama administration is coming into focus. Its members are twice as smart as the poor reporters who have to cover them, three times if you include the columnists. They typically served in the Clinton administration and then, like Cincinnatus, retreated to the comforts of private life — that is, if Cincinnatus had worked at Goldman Sachs, Williams & Connolly or the Brookings Institution. So many of them send their kids to Georgetown Day School, the posh leftish private school in D.C. that they’ll be able to hold White House staff meetings in the carpool line.

And yet as much as I want to resent these overeducated Achievatrons (not to mention the incursion of a French-style government dominated by highly trained Enarchs), I find myself tremendously impressed by the Obama transition.

– Smarty pants/panting smarty David Brooks, NYT, 11/21/08

And this? From “The Story Behind the Brooks-Obama Bromance”

That first encounter is still vivid in Brooks’s mind. “I remember distinctly an image of–we were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant,” Brooks says, “and I’m thinking, a) he’s going to be president and b) he’ll be a very good president.” In the fall of 2006, two days after Obama’s The Audacity of Hope hit bookstores, Brooks published a glowing Times column. The headline was “Run, Barack, Run.”

***

He recognizes something similar in the current president. “Obama sees himself as a Burkean,” Brooks says. “He sees his view of the world as a view that understands complexity and the organic nature of change.” Moreover, after the Bush years, Brooks seems relieved to have an intellectual in the White House again. “I divide people into people who talk like us and who don’t talk like us,” he explains. “Of recent presidents, Clinton could sort of talk like us, but Obama is definitely–you could see him as a New Republic writer. He can do the jurisprudence, he can do the political philosophy, and he can do the politics. I think he’s more talented than anyone in my lifetime. I mean, he is pretty dazzling when he walks into a room. So, that’s why it’s important he doesn’t **** this up.”

It’s David Brooks who needs to grow up. His Ivy League idol is an incompetent phony fermenting in a culture of corruption. You don’t need a PhD to see it.

***

Flashback: Iowahawk’s classic satire of Brooks…T Coddington Van Voorhees VII.

***

For a non-bitter, informed, and in-depth account of the Tea Party’s rise, check out John O’Hara’s new book: A New American Tea Party: The Counterrevolution Against Bailouts, Handouts, Reckless Spending, and More Taxes.

May Wisdom and the knowledge you gained go with you,



Jim Allen III
Skype: JAllen3D
Everything You Need For Online Success


+0
Bogdan Fiedur

7097
4629 Posts
4629
Invite Me as a Friend
Top 50 Poster
Person Of The Week
RE: Is thisThe Truth About Muhammad: QURAN is a FRAUD !
1/5/2010 7:26:59 PM

Quote:

RadicalIslam existed well before the US "occupied" Iraq or went intoAfghanistan. Radical Islam has been killing other Muslims well beforethat too and they've been oppressing and killing members of otherreligions in their respective countries as well. I'm sure you are awareof these irrefutable facts without the need to bring documented proofwhich is very easy to do.


You are very correct in regards to that. The radical Islam has been motivated well before last 10 years.

Here you will find some links showing American involvement in the Middle East conflicts.
You will see that it starts around 1914 where actually British started it first, but during those times British were colonial power so I guess this was their right to do anyway
.

The U.S. and the Middle East Since 1945
U.S. Military Involvement in the Middle East


You will notice that US and British were involved in the Middle East initially because of Israel, then Soviets and the oil, each time having their own business in mind, meaning oil in the end.
This is when Muslims started to be radical. I wonder why?


Quote:

It'sabout time that the world starts listening to what the Radical Islamterrorists are saying and not try to find excuses for those "poorsouls" that are butchering innocents amongst the infidels (that's youand me) and brothers in their own religion.


I'm not sure who I feel more sorry for, those who Americans butchered in Iraq or those who are butchered by Muslims. For me they both deserve the same respect and there is no excuse to kill over 1 million people to say that they were killed in the name of freedom. These used to be slogans of Nazis and Communists.

Quote:

Youdo realize by now that for every "source" you bring we can counter withmany that refute what they are preaching. In a way I believe we'vereached a point of no return. As I've said earlier you certainly won'tconvince me with your conspiracy sources and ours seem to have noaffect on you either.


It happens that all you call conspiracy is not what works for your theory. Many of the so called conspiracies are being thought throughout the world in history books and I don't mean in the Middle East or any other Arab or Muslim country.

Quote:

So,listen to the the real source the Radical Islamists themselves andunderstand that your allegations have no sound base but you're onlysupplying them with excuses to do what they do best murder and killinnocents under the safety umbrella that you're supplying them with.BUT, they themselves tell a different story.


This is most ridiculous statement I heard so far from you. You are implying that me being vocal on those topics makes me ignite the problems and encouraging the carnage. I considered you as a person who can have pluralistic discussion and is able to counter the other side with intelligent and reasonable voice. What you are doing here is you are attempting to blame me for what you see as a problem and hopefully stop me from showing up here and stop saying what I think. You have the chance to retract those words or I have no reason to have any intelligent discussion with you from this point on and this doesn't mean you won't hear from me.

Bogdan
Hello
+0


facebook
Like us on Facebook!