Just so we're clear about muslims and homosexuals

anatta said:
good. I'll bookmark it.It gets so tedious re-litigating point by point with Democrats and apologists the fact we are in a war with
Islamic jihad.
I do not understand the compulsion to see everything besides what is in front of one's face.
It's not like we aren't seeing the same thing over and over again.
Click to expand...

Indeed, there are many ignorant and arrogant people in the world, certainly more than a few on here.
 
anatta said:
do I need to spell it out then? The deflection from western apologists is we ( west) somehow were not in the ME -we would not be targeted.
But it's never spelled out just exactly what "in" the ME is. a naval presence? air bases in SA that bin Laden objected to?
the US west/ is not at war there except Syria now.Do you think all this is blowback from war..no.

it comes from Islamic jihad. almost all of it from Sunni's expressed as AQ or IS. Those groups have
have radicalized from the days of the mujahideen in Afghanistan against the Russians,and I suppose before it with the Israelis and the Palestinians.

ISIS is more directly from AQI - but it's just as fierce against fellow Muslims as against western. It's much more then some nationalist movement
It's a pan Islamic movement, but not an inclusive one, it practices internecine killing
Click to expand...

No idiot.
First of all you think all our drone strikes are in Syria?
Wrong we are droning half a dozen countries.
Next, the Taliban was also merciless to all vomers who didn't submit to their exact belief system.
 
anatta said:
good. I'll bookmark it.It gets so tedious re-litigating point by point with Democrats and apologists the fact we are in a war with
Islamic jihad.
I do not understand the compulsion to see everything besides what is in front of one's face.
It's not like we aren't seeing the same thing over and over again.
Click to expand...

Still at war with a verb?
:palm:
 
Mott the Hoople said:
you ignorant moron. Homosexuality is far more common in Arab culture than in the west.
Click to expand...

Yes surreptitiously, don't believe me then I suggest that you go to any UAE country and find out for yourself. Rich men in Afghanistan like to have sex with effeminate boys but that's Pashtuns for you!

All sex outside marriage is illegal, irrespective of any relationship you may have with your partner in the UK. Same-sex marriages are not recognised and all homosexual sex is illegal. If the UAE authorities become aware that you’re conducting a sexual relationship outside marriage (as recognised by them), you run the risk of prosecution, imprisonment and/or a fine and deportation. It’s against the law to live together, or to share the same hotel room, with someone of the opposite sex to whom you aren’t married or closely related.

The UAE is in many respects a tolerant society and private life is respected, although there have been some reports of individuals being punished for sexual activity outside marriage, including homosexual activity, particularly where there is any public element, or the behaviour has caused offence. This applies both to expatriate residents and to tourists.

Due to the laws on sex outside marriage, if you become pregnant outside marriage, both you and your partner could face imprisonment and/or deportation. Doctors may ask for proof of marriage during ante-natal checks. An unmarried woman who gives birth in the UAE may also encounter problems when registering the birth of the child in the UAE, and could be arrested, imprisoned or deported. To get a birth certificate from the UAE authorities, you must provide a marriage certificate and the authorities may compare the date of the marriage against the estimated date of conception.
Click to expand...

https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/united-arab-emirates/local-laws-and-customs
 
Last edited:
Rune said:
Still at war with a verb?
:palm:
Click to expand...
"a war with Islamic jihad" ( my words- is not a verb.)
Obama called it an act of terror ( but not Islamic) and a hate crime at the same time.

I do not know why there is this compulsion to avoid placing the blame on Islam - in some kind of effort not to offend.
It's good to mention "not all Islam" but it's silly to dodge the fact Islamic fundamentalist interpretation serves up this horror.
 
anatta said:
"a war with Islamic jihad" ( my words- is not a verb.)
Obama called it an act of terror ( but not Islamic) and a hate crime at the same time.

I do not know why there is this compulsion to avoid placing the blame on Islam - in some kind of effort not to offend.
It's good to mention "not all Islam" but it's silly to dodge the fact Islamic fundamentalist interpretation serves up this horror.
Click to expand...

I'll never understand why it's so important. It doesn't make us any more or less likely to defeat the threat, whatever it is.

This guy was a mentally unstable lunatic, who was inspired by one of the worst terrorist groups of modern times. Calling it an act of terror & hate is just fine w/ me. I get why they try to steer away from "Islamic" - especially after reading this board for the past 24 hours or so.
 
Thing1 said:
I'll never understand why it's so important. It doesn't make us any more or less likely to defeat the threat, whatever it is.

This guy was a mentally unstable lunatic, who was inspired by one of the worst terrorist groups of modern times. Calling it an act of terror & hate is just fine w/ me. I get why they try to steer away from "Islamic" - especially after reading this board for the past 24 hours or so.
Click to expand...

Also because groups like ISIL want Muslim Americans to feel disenfranchised as citizens and as human beings. It helps out their recruiting efforts. IMO people like Trump, and anatta and Tom, and ILA, actually take their orders from ISIL and do their bidding. Cluelessly of course. But the result is the same. Useful idiots.
 
Thing1 said:
I'll never understand why it's so important. It doesn't make us any more or less likely to defeat the threat, whatever it is.

This guy was a mentally unstable lunatic, who was inspired by one of the worst terrorist groups of modern times. Calling it an act of terror & hate is just fine w/ me. I get why they try to steer away from "Islamic" - especially after reading this board for the past 24 hours or so.
Click to expand...
it's important to steer resources. It's important to pressure Islam to heal itself. In the end the west/ non-Islamic entities cannot win this struggle.
as long as the alluring propaganda is out there it looks to be a valid interpretation.

Before ISIS came into play "AQ affiliates" were being hit, and rolled back ( remember Obamas claims on this).
we were even going after AQAP successfully.
But once ISIS started to publish, gain success (etc.) it started to get a lot of foreign members.
It was smart enough to lay out a template for jihad without coming to Syria also.
It's success was building on itself - it's online presence (Dabiq) was not being challenged.


Obama first dismissed it as "JV" -and it made huge gains without being challenged in Iraq.
words do matter - they tend to drive policy -certainly it did with ISIS.
Also pushing back on propaganda helps. In the end Islam has to isolate and reject Salafism -but international condemnation
is useful too.
 
anatta said:
it's important to steer resources. It's important to pressure Islam to heal itself. In the end the west/ non-Islamic entities cannot win this struggle.
as long as the alluring propaganda is out there it looks to be a valid interpretation.

Before ISIS came into play "AQ affiliates" were being hit, and rolled back ( remember Obamas claims on this).
we were even going after AQAP successfully.
But once ISIS started to publish, gain success (etc.) it started to get a lot of foreign members.
It was smart enough to lay out a template for jihad without coming to Syria also.
It's success was building on itself - it's online presence (Dabiq) was not being challenged.


Obama first dismissed it as "JV" -and it made huge gains without being challenged in Iraq.
words do matter - they tend to drive policy -certainly it did with ISIS.
Also pushing back on propaganda helps. In the end Islam has to isolate and reject Salafism -but international condemnation
is useful too.
Click to expand...

That's really just a bunch of BS. No offense.

It makes no difference in terms of policy. Do you even know what we've done to ISIS over the past year or so?

And Darla's spot on (that's not just her analysis, but the clear conclusion from people who are actually immersed in this stuff) - ISIL wants every Muslim to feel marginalized and alienated. They love it when we make this more about the religion than about the psychosis.
 
Thing1 said:
That's really just a bunch of BS. No offense.

It makes no difference in terms of policy. Do you even know what we've done to ISIS over the past year or so?

And Darla's spot on (that's not just her analysis, but the clear conclusion from people who are actually immersed in this stuff) - ISIL wants every Muslim to feel marginalized and alienated. They love it when we make this more about the religion than about the psychosis.
Click to expand...
yes I know. I also know we didn't so much lead the coalition -that was Iran's doing.
The Kurds have been doing the grunt of the ground work - if we had prioritized going after ISIL and defeating them maybe they wouldn't have begged for heavy weapons so long.

It sure as hell made a difference when ISIL rolled thru Iraq as we called them JV and didn't touch them

ISIS%20-%20ISIS%20rolls%20into%20Ramadi%20-%20May%2017%202015_0.png

ISIS fighters rolled into Ramadi, Iraq, last May 17. On a bright desert highway, they rode unchallenged in pickup trucks and triumphantly waved their blackflags

^ why didn't we drone them in open desert?

Sure ISIS/AQ wants to peel off any Muslims they can. One way to combat it is to call it out as pure evil.
It's like any other war where you don't let propaganda go unchallenged.
You call it out as a miserable intolerant interpretation ( salafi jihad) of Islam. If nothing else it combats the allure that Dabiq shows online.

This guy was not disenfranchised, he was an active part of America. So it's not like he was some weak minded spirit.
He went to mosque regularly (like the san Bernadino shooters)

One thing Obama and the leadership can do is to show that Muslims have a choice .
If you are part of the USA/west then do not give credence to Islamic terrorism. spell it out.
There is no reason to listen to the propaganda, no reason to "feel marginalized".
Stand up for liberal western values, and condemn tyrannical hate filled religion.
 
anatta said:
yes I know. I also know we didn't so much lead the coalition -that was Iran's doing.
The Kurds have been doing the grunt of the ground work - if we had prioritized going after ISIL and defeating them maybe they wouldn't have begged for heavy weapons so long.

It sure as hell made a difference when ISIL rolled thru Iraq as we called them JV and didn't touch them

ISIS%20-%20ISIS%20rolls%20into%20Ramadi%20-%20May%2017%202015_0.png

ISIS fighters rolled into Ramadi, Iraq, last May 17. On a bright desert highway, they rode unchallenged in pickup trucks and triumphantly waved their blackflags

^ why didn't we drone them in open desert?

Sure ISIS/AQ wants to peel off any Muslims they can. One way to combat it is to call it out as pure evil.
It's like any other war where you don't let propaganda go unchallenged.
You call it out as a miserable intolerant interpretation ( salafi jihad) of Islam. If nothing else it combats the allure that Dabiq shows online.

This guy was not disenfranchised, he was an active part of America. So it's not like he was some weak minded spirit.
He went to mosque regularly (like the san Bernadino shooters)

One thing Obama and the leadership can do is to show that Muslims have a choice .
If you are part of the USA/west then do not give credence to Islamic terrorism. spell it out.
There is no reason to listen to the propaganda, no reason to "feel marginalized".
Stand up for liberal western values, and condemn tyrannical hate filled religion.
Click to expand...

If you think that anyone confines their comments about Islam to just one interpretation of the religion, you haven't read this board, or listened to the national conversation since yesterday (or for years).

Even your post above has mixed messages. Are you calling all of Islam "pure evil" and a "tyrannical hate-filled religion," or just the interpretation of extremists? If it's the former, how do you expect any adherent of the religion to not feel marginalized?

You're not making any sense.
 
Thing1 said:
If you think that anyone confines their comments about Islam to just one interpretation of the religion, you haven't read this board, or listened to the national conversation since yesterday (or for years).

Even your post above has mixed messages. Are you calling all of Islam "pure evil" and a "tyrannical hate-filled religion," or just the interpretation of extremists? If it's the former, how do you expect any adherent of the religion to not feel marginalized?

You're not making any sense.
Click to expand...
you're are missing all context. My writing should be clear enough, but here you go.

You call it out as a miserable intolerant interpretation ( salafi jihad) of Islam. If nothing else it combats the allure that Dabiq shows online.
Click to expand...
we use the term "radical Islam" -and that should be enough to understand it's not all of Islam.
politicians are notorious generalizers in attempts to sway, but not be held accountable..

I use the term "salafi jihadist"...I agree there should be more discriminatory language. Call it "fundamentalist interpretation" at least.
Obama is not helping with denials, when he should be sharpening his language
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top