Mistakes we have made in the struggle against islamic jihad

As a fascist, I don't want to criminalize free speech. We already have enough of that in "PC America". I want to instead implement safe and prudent measures to keep the lunatics who want to bomb us from succeeding. And no, I don't want them here as "government slavery".

Frankly, I don't want them here at all. I'm a believer in making LEGAL immigration easier. Make it easier for Legals, the people who want to be here. Cut the 7-year wait to a 3-year wait. For outstanding Green Card citizens, drop the damn fine to become a US Citizen. They've paid more in taxes then the fine. In fact, screw the test altogether and nationalize them.

By making Legal Immigration easier, we make the "accepted" forms of reform more tolerable too: Get back in line, they're the ones who should pay a fine and learn sufficient English. Making English the National Language is something 85+% of Americans support.

 

Well it is good to see you admit your lack of knowledge regarding the concept of 'free speech' it is a well known legal maxim that shouting fire in a crowded theater is not a component of free speech.....thus your claim that all speech is 'free speech' is bogus. Other exceptions to free speech>>>>>>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

Regarding the draft: The Supreme Court ruled on that....it is constitutional>>>>>http://biotech.law.lsu.edu/cases/nat-sec/selective-draft.htm
Consider yourself schooled.

 

A lot of criminal acts are mistakenly labeled terrorism.


Yet Bill Clinton labeling the first attack on the WTC as a mere criminal act and obama's attempt to label Islamic Jihadists as mere criminals are even worse mistakes because such statements are designed to hide who our real enemy is......obviously islamist jihadists. The term 'terrorism' is used too much....and bush labeling our struggle with islamic jihadists as a war on terrorism was the height of stupidity.

We are in a struggle(war)with Islamic Jihadis .....a war they declared on us....we have as of yet to declare war on them.....because our leadership is not willing to admit who our enemy is.


Al-Qaeda: Declarations & Acts of War - Heritage Foundation
www.heritage.org/.../al-qaeda-declarations
The Heritage Foundation
Al-Qaeda declared war on the United States and its allies two times before the ... first fatwa, a 30-page polemic entitled "Declaration of War Against the Americans ... leader of Jihad group in Egypt and al Qaeda second-in-command; Abu-Yasir ...
Declaration of Jihad Against Americans Occupying the Land ...
college.cengage.com/history/.../two_holy_mosques.ht...
Cengage Learning
Declaration of Jihad Against Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy .... Also to remind the Muslims not to be engaged in an internal war among ...
[PDF]Osama bin Laden's Declaration of Jihad against Americans
salempress.com/store/pdfs/bin_laden.pdf
Salem Press
bin Laden's first call for jihad against the. United States. Also known as the “Lade- nese Epistle,” it can be taken to represent al. Qaeda's declaration of war on ...
Declaration of Jihad against the Americans Occupying the ...
https://www.ctc.usma.edu/.../declaration-of-jih...Combating Terrorism Center
This document is a declaration of war issued by Usama bin Laden and al-Qa`ida against the United States and the Saudi Arabia regime.

 

You are just as coinfused as Bill Clinton was and as Obama is. You fail to understand that the Qu'ran islam's most holy book demands jihad. You fail to understand that all devout muslim's support jihad...you cannot be a devout muslim if you do not support jihad. All of the jihadis are very devout muslims....they are not using islam as a 'facade' as you claim.....their hear and soul belongs to Islam....they are slaves to Allah.

The popular phrase used by the coinfused liberals....aka............"the terrorists have hijacked islam' is fallacious.

Only a system with central control can be hijacked. One can hijack a car by seizing control of the steering wheel or an airplane by taking control of the cockpit. It is even possible to hijack a state by taking control of the organs of state power. But there is no central control mechanism in Islam, so hijacking Islam is impossible.

The danger of the hijack analogy is that it misleads us to think that, if only we can neutralize the hijackers, such as Bin Laden, al-Qaida or some other terrorist grouping, we could solve the problem of Islamic extremism and jihadism. To base policy on this false assumption would be disastrous....and in fact is disastrous because that is the flawed policy our leadership has been following ever since bush and his stupid declaration of war on terrorism.

 

The Jihadi's first attack on the WTC whilst clinton was president...........................The Clinton foreign policy was to get re-elected. Therefore, anything that might be controversial had to be avoided. So, from the beginning to the end of the administration, the Clintons “demanded absolute proof before acting against terrorists.” This high bar guaranteed inaction. At the beginning of his term, after the attack of Feb. 26, 1993, Mr. Clinton refused to admit that the World Trade Center had been bombed. Later, he referred to it only as “regrettable” and “treated the disaster… like a twister in Arkansas.” Earlier, he had “urged the public not to ‘overreact’ to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.”


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...TQFMSaHlrNvfD_mQA&sig2=JjB5wMZKEGvAlqbe2vquMA

 

Good place to begin to learn about islam>>>>>>
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...eaches-believers-to-hate-christians-and-jews/

 

Pffft... LOL! A "native informant" argument. I haven't seen that one used since Irshad Manji and Ayaan Hirsi Ali came up with their brazen ignorant rhetoric about Muslims as a whole despite their limited experiences. If you really want to learn about Islam, I suggest Armstrong's "A History of God".

 

Moot point as we have been at war with terrorism for a long time now.

- - - Updated - - -

To speak for a group that you are not part of is illogical by my measure of logic.

 

The link is one man's opinion and does not typify all practiconers of Islam. Large groups of people are diverse, the larger the group the more diverse it is... a group of 1.7 billion people will have more differences than commonality. Polls of support for terrorism vary dramatically from country to country with the majority overall being against terrorism.

 

I am not speaking for them...........I am speaking about them. Your idea is ridiculous.....if followed there would be no historians to begin with. Your logic has no measure worth speaking of. Are you a muslim or just a sympathizer?

 

"Shedding Blood For Allah".....Pew study says that more than 350 million muslims support violent Jihad...............https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...xJobXnIYAWX-IBzEA&sig2=atCIOgGi9BYS0TigSrnnOQ

 

You are speaking about them in very specific terms based upon ancidotal evidence.

What idea would that be?

Who gets to decide that and by what authority?

Are you a Muslim or just throwing out biased anecdotes? What would it matter if I were or were not a Muslim?

 

Irregardless of how many muslims may be against Jihad....or say day be.....the irrefutable fact is that Jihad continues worldwide......thus we can say without hesitation or reservation....enough of them support it to enable it.

- - - Updated - - -

I like to keep track of muslims....hopefully after The Donald gets elected we will have a nation wide data base on muslims....that should be most helpful.

 

Which means that 1.35 billion do not.

 

Indeed, nor have I claimed otherwise.

Time and time again suspected terrorists have been tracked yet they were still able to launch an attack. Trump will likely have to overcome a Constitutional challenge before he can have a Muslim registration.

There is a difference between what Trump says he will do and what he can actually do.

 

Sorry he's rather late to the game. The left beat him to the slavery thing by a generation or so.

 

Perfect illustration of 'liberal think'. Let me try and put it in another way that you may be able to wrap your head around.....since you have an obvious aversion to the topic of islamic jihadists....let me use a term more relevant for you ......when you are accosted by a mugger as you are leaving starbucks....do you worry about the mugger or the thousands of people who are not muggers?

To the more gifted posters I apologize for having to resort to kindergarden teaching tactics.

 

The constitution is irrelevant when it comes to National Security....try and deny it.....just remember though.....what Lincoln, Fdr and others have done. Or perhaps you are not aware of what they did?

 

How can you mention God and Islam in the same sentence....have you no conscience?

Even the title of the woman's book is blasphemous.....how can a mere mortal claim to know anything at all about the History of God.....delusion of grandeur much?

 

Tracking ...in and of itself is insufficient.....you track only so long as it takes to get evidence to incarcerate, deport or execute....we need to concentrate on the latter....a few public hangings of jihadists might change a lot of minds.

 

Hate sites on the internet are easier than serious enquiry.

Armstrong, a British journalist and former nun, guides us along one of the most elusive and fascinating quests of all time--the search for God. Like all beloved historians, Armstrong entertains us with deft storytelling, astounding research, and makes us feel a greater appreciation for the present because we better understand our past. Be warned: A History of God is not a tidy linear history. Rather, we learn that the definition of God is constantly being repeated, altered, discarded, and resurrected through the ages, responding to its followers' practical concerns rather than to mystical mandates. Armstrong also shows us how Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have overlapped and influenced one another, gently challenging the secularist history of each of these religions.

http://www.amazon.com/History-God-000-Year-Judaism-Christianity/dp/0345384563

 

A british journalist and former nun.....bwaaaaaaaaaaaaa what credentitals!!! Not.....Just another example of phoney academics distorting the truth....aka Islam having influence on Judaism or Christianity....Muhammed was certifiably insane and and much of his writing is nothing more than plagarism...the good parts anyhow....most of the other stuff is just the ravings of a socio-path advertising his joy with violence and jihad. Yet, there is no shortage of academics who want to minimize and or make up stuff to camouglage such exhibitions by mohammed of his intolerance, love of violence and conversion by the sword.

http://bibleprobe.com/muhammad.htm

Muhammed's Plagarism>>>>>>>>http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/mhd_plagiarizing.htm

 

The book in question is just history..

 

Numbers 9 and 10 are teh only ones that have a shred of validity.

The rest is the usual nativst xenophobia.

 

More on the false prophet of Islam>>>>>>>>>>>


http://www.falseprophetmuhammad.com/jihad_islamic_terrorism.htm