“We Love DEATH more than You Love LIFE.” (Just plain Islam) Lets see if we can grasp that. Maybe this will help. Think about it. If you were a slave, what would be your definition of Heaven? I dare say it would be Freedom. With Islam, Freedom (heaven) can only be achieved in death. To crave Freedom in this life is literally a sin.
And we Americans are so naive, “Let’s just set them free”!

That is the problem. If your religion was hijacked by a small minority and was killing in the name of your faith, you’d move heaven and earth to stop them and denounce them for what they are doing.

But the “moderates” are strangely silent. This leads people either to think that moderate Muslims are a myth or they are too afraid to stand up to the minority that ruin their faith.

Either way, by not speaking out, it gives the impression that the minority are actually the majority. And the scary thing is, that just might be the truth.

Conservative Samizdat on November 11, 2009 at 1:31 PM

Which begs the question: Are the “extremist” actually following Islam as it is preached in the Koran, or is it te “moderates” that are not true Muslims?

What number would be the tipping point?

Fed45 on November 11, 2009 at 12:04 PM

Lets hear what Gen ‘Diversity’ Casey has to say about it
As far as I am concerned, this is an act of war, and in a war, enemies are supposed to be killed

Some facts,

Bin Laden’s family flown out and government officials say they weren’t interrogated adequately
.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Sky-News-Archive/Article/200806412758358

FactsofLife343 on November 11, 2009 at 12:14 AM

LOL, your first mistake is claiming a single news story written two years after 9/11 is “facts”. It’s one story. And it comes from an interview Clarke did with Vanity Fair to flog his upcoming book.

And it’s one guy, and one guy only, claiming this. Doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a “fact” at all.

As for the bin Ladens,

“That family had been looked at very, very carefully in the two-year period leading up to September 11,” after the al Qaeda bombings of American embassies in East Africa, said retired CIA official Vince Cannistraro.

Remember, it’s Clarke, a violent Bush-hater, who is claiming this.

But all we get is silence or excuses.

katiejane on November 11, 2009 at 1:22 PM

That is the problem. If your religion was hijacked by a small minority and was killing in the name of your faith, you’d move heaven and earth to stop them and denounce them for what they are doing.

But the “moderates” are strangely silent. This leads people either to think that moderate Muslims are a myth or they are too afraid to stand up to the minority that ruin their faith.

Either way, by not speaking out, it gives the impression that the minority are actually the majority. And the scary thing is, that just might be the truth.

If attempting to use Mormons in their description, the more analogous example would be “The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints”–those guys broke off from the LDS Church. They are not recognized by the LDS Church. Are the Ahmdiyya recognized by Islam? Me thinks Muslims would consider them infidels. Either you follow the teachings of Islam 100%, or your don’t. I don’t think true Muslims abide by cafeteria worshiping of Islam. Which is why you don’t many imans coming to the defense of these terrorist acts in the name of Allah.

Fed45 on November 11, 2009 at 11:59 AM

Good point. Your description is absolutely correct.

All I’m saying is that there are Muslim sects out there. And the Ahmdiyya are viewed as infidels for their beliefs.

The problem is that fundamentalist extremists, sponsored by Islamic states, have been given power to the hardliners to determine what is “true” Islamic practices and what is not. But for state sponsored terror and fundamentalism, Islam might be different.

What were the strategic considerations that would trump a united front on the war on terror?

FactsofLife on November 11, 2009 at 9:09 AM

Poorly worded on my part. I said to consider meaning there could be strategic implications. It wasn’t meant for me to say I know for a fact that this was the case. But a strategy similar to Israel leaving all settlements in Gaza. Upon doing such there was no justifications (however falsely they were to begin with) whatsoever that the world could point to minimize the blame on the Palestinian terror attacks into Israel proper. They would be literally on their own. That would be casus belli for Israel to defend herself against another sovereign nation’s obvious aggression.

We don’t have enough killings by muslim soldiers to draw that conclusion. Yet

macncheez on November 11, 2009 at 4:05 AM

What number would be the tipping point?

I did not say it was the wrong thing to do…my point is that when Reagan was president these kinds of attacks were happening. Some people have this annoying habit of acting as if history began with Bush. It did not. When Reagan was president, there was amnesty, a recession, a farm crisis, attacks on our troops my Islamic fanatics and Iran/Contra. None of these issues that Bush or even Obama face are brand spanking new.

Terrye on November 11, 2009 at 7:14 AM

You’re right. We have Carter to thank.

The Ahmadiyya is one example of a break away Muslim sect.

Conservative Samizdat on November 11, 2009 at 11:00 AM

If attempting to use Mormons in their description, the more analogous example would be “The Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints”–those guys broke off from the LDS Church. They are not recognized by the LDS Church. Are the Ahmdiyya recognized by Islam? Me thinks Muslims would consider them infidels. Either you follow the teachings of Islam 100%, or your don’t. I don’t think true Muslims abide by cafeteria worshiping of Islam. Which is why you don’t many imans coming to the defense of these terrorist acts in the name of Allah.

I like what Krauthammer said…I’m paraphrasing…People are worried about a backlash against muslims, but there has been none. The only backlash has come from muslims themselves towards Americans.SouthernGent on November 10, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Very true. I recall shortly after 9/11 there was one incident where some poor chap was killed but he was Hindu (or Sikh?). The idiots who did it saw a turban and that was it. To me, it is remarkable how little backlash there has been in the last 8 years to Muslim Americans and just goes to show what a great country the U.S. is!So, please stop killing us! There is a breaking point at which there will be a serious backlash. Yeah, yeah, I know; that’s what they want so they can have their Armageddon and then they will rule the world! I say bool-sheet. We will just have to beat you down… yet again.

What the hell is a “break-away muslim sect”? As far as I understand Islam, according to the Koran either you follow it 100%, or you are an infidel. I didn’t think there were different flavors of Islam, like there is Christianity.

Fed45 on November 11, 2009 at 1:47 AM

The Ahmadiyya is one example of a break away Muslim sect.

“At some point you just gotta knock off the B.S.” Well put, Colonel Peters.

Log on November 10, 2009 at 10:54 PM

I am adding this to my list of great military phrases which right now consists of “Don’t get stuck on stupid.”

Baxter Greene
Homeland is not a term I like. Try Our Country or Our Republic I would pay more attention.

Get my drift?

seesalrun on November 11, 2009 at 12:46 AM

Yup, Homeland has always bothered me as well, reminds me way to much of the National Socialist Workers Parties constant references to the Motherland…

doriangrey on November 11, 2009 at 7:53 AM

I never stated the word “homeland” in any of my posts.

Yeah Obama gave a good speech, but Ralph is right: we have to cut the PC BS and Obama doesn’t have it in him.

Concealed carry.

Johan Klaus on November 11, 2009 at 1:34 AM

indeed!

However, that also is in no way indicative of PC motivations in itself. There are/were strategic implications to consider.

What really pisses me off is how detached Obama is.
Kini on November 10, 2009 at 10:38 PM

OBAMA=ROBOT

FactsofLife on November 11, 2009 at 8:10 AM

Actually, Jordan accepted them as refugees but soon kicked them out because they caused a lot of trouble there. They were, I believe, nomads that nobody wanted because they were troublemakers and thieves. Kind of like gypsies.