Standing for a principle or laying down the law?
Count 1
wMTM=
Many commentators have noted the apparent irony: The pope suggests Islam
encourages violence - and Muslims riot in protest.
Many commentators have pointed out the apparent hypocrisy: Muslims are
outraged by cartoons satirizing Islamic extremism while in Muslim countries
Christianity and Judaism are attacked viciously and routinely.
Many commentators are missing the point: These protesters - and those who
incite them - are not asking for mutual respect and equality. They are not
saying: "It's wrong to speak ill of a religion." They are saying: "It's
wrong to speak ill of our religion." They are not standing up for a
principle. They are laying down the law. They are making it as clear as they
can that they will not tolerate "infidels" criticizing Muslims. They also
are making it clear that infidels should expect criticism - and much worse -
from Muslims.
They are attempting nothing less than the establishment of a new world order
in which the supremacy of what they call the Nation of Islam is
acknowledged, and "unbelievers" submit - or die. Call it an offer you can't
refuse.
If you don't understand this, listen harder. In London, Anjem Choudary - a
Muslim Fascist if ever there was one - told demonstrators that Pope Benedict
XVI deserves to be killed - for daring to quote a Byzantine emperor's
description of Islam as a religion "spread by the sword."
"The Muslims take their religion very seriously," Choudary explained as if
to a disobedient child, "and non-Muslims must appreciate that and must also
understand that there may be serious consequences if you insult Islam and
the Prophet. Whoever insults the message of Mohammed is going to be subject
to capital punishment."
Iraqi insurgents - some Europeans admiringly call them "the resistance" -
posted on the Internet a video of a scimitar, a symbol of Islam, slicing a
cross in half. It would be a stretch to interpret this as a plea for
interfaith understanding.
In Iran, the powerful imam Ahmad Khatami said the pope "should fall on his
knees in front of a senior Muslim cleric." In no culture of which I am aware
is that a posture from which brother addresses brother.
Imad Hamto, a Palestinian religious leader, said: "We want to use the words
of the Prophet Muhammad and tell the pope: 'Aslim Taslam'" The Israeli Arab
journalist Khaled Abu Toameh explained: "Aslim Taslam is a phrase that was
taken from the letters sent by the Prophet Muhammad to the chiefs of tribes
in his times in which he reportedly urged them to convert to Islam to spare
their lives."
It is not only those readily identified as extremists who voice such views.
The prime minister of Malaysia, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, seemed to strike a
conciliatory note, saying that the Pope's expression of regret for his
remarks was "acceptable." But he added: "[W]e hope there are no more
statements that can anger the Muslims."
Similarly, on National Public Radio, a George Washington University
professor, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, argued that statements such as those quoted
by the pope - expressing sentiments some Muslims may find offensive - must
be viewed as a form of violence.
Is the Western ideal of freedom of speech and of the press threatened? Of
course but that's only part of what is at work here. More significantly,
Americans and Europeans are being relegated to the status of a dhimmi - the
Arabic word applied to those conquered by Muslim armies between the 7th and
17th centuries. Based on shari'a law, dhimmis are meant to "feel themselves
subdued," to acknowledge their inferiority compared to Muslims.
In some ways, we already have done so. For example, Muslims are welcome in
the Vatican, even as Christians are banned from setting foot in Mecca. We do
not object to Saudis building mosques in America and Europe, even as they
prohibit churches and synagogues on Arabian soil.
We pledge to abide by the Geneva Conventions when waging wars against Muslim
combatants. We do expect those combatants to follow the same rules. They are
engaged in a jihad and they will show no mercy to infidel soldiers or even
to infidel journalists. The "international community" does not seriously
protest. With our silence, we consent to inequality.
Most of the world's Muslims are neither rioting nor calling for the death of
the pontiff. But quite a few may reason that if Christians and Jews haven't
the confidence to reject dhimmitude and defend freedom, they would be
foolish to stick their necks out. After all, a Muslim who challenges the
Islamist Fascists brands himself as an apostate - as deserving of death as
any uppity pope.
- Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is the
president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute
focusing on terrorism
Bob Cooper
"Count 1" <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5iURg.29554$R63.18514@pd7urf1no...
> http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=M2M1MTFkMTZlOWVjMzFjZjUwOTFjMDU2ZDg1OWY
> wMTM=
>
> Many commentators have noted the apparent irony: The pope suggests Islam
> encourages violence - and Muslims riot in protest.
>
> Many commentators have pointed out the apparent hypocrisy: Muslims are
> outraged by cartoons satirizing Islamic extremism while in Muslim countries
> Christianity and Judaism are attacked viciously and routinely.
>
>
> Most of the world's Muslims are neither rioting nor calling for the death of
> the pontiff.
True, but neither are they condemning it.
> But quite a few may reason that if Christians and Jews haven't
> the confidence to reject dhimmitude and defend freedom,
Not just Christians and Jews, but secularists, as well. Perhaps secularists
*especially*. They can't even be dhimmis :>)
> they would be foolish to stick their necks out.
> After all, a Muslim who challenges the Islamist Fascists brands himself as
> an apostate - as deserving of death as any uppity pope.
Replace "the Islamic Fascists" with "Islam." Let's call a spade a
spade, shall we?
> - Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is the
> president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute
> focusing on terrorism
Excellent article. Mr. May hits the nail on the head. When we talk about
freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the western sense with
Muslims, it is an exercise in futility, because the word "freedom" does
not mean the same thing to Muslims as it does to us. I believe between
Danish cartoons, forced conversions and irrational rage against the
Pope, more and more people are beginning to wake up to that fact.
Count 1
> Excellent article. Mr. May hits the nail on the head. When we talk about
> freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the western sense with
> Muslims, it is an exercise in futility, because the word "freedom" does
> not mean the same thing to Muslims as it does to us.
Interestingly enough, both Abdul Aziz (who is ex white supremacist David
Myatt) and Hamid Aziz (who is just basically nuts) are pontificating on the
meaning of Freedom over in S.R.I right now. (That Wascally Wabbit made an
appearance as well)
And you are completely correct. What those two describe as freedom is the
exact antithesis of freedom, what Salafists, BinLadenists, Jihadists, think
freedom is is actually little more than ideological slavery and
capitulation.
lanman
wrote:
Alas, if only the Democrats would wake up. Ted Kennedy states that a
recent intelligence document should "put the final nail in the coffin
for president Bush's phony argument about the Iraq war."
And yet, Jalal Talabani, the current Iraqi president, has asked for a
long-term US military presence in Iraq - saying his country needs two
permanent US air bases to deter what he calls foreign interference.
Go figure.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/49C4E425-27B3-447E-8A4A-3A160723B43E.htm
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
Bob Cooper
>
> > Excellent article. Mr. May hits the nail on the head. When we talk about
> > freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the western sense with
> > Muslims, it is an exercise in futility, because the word "freedom" does
> > not mean the same thing to Muslims as it does to us.
>
> Interestingly enough, both Abdul Aziz (who is ex white supremacist David
> Myatt) and Hamid Aziz (who is just basically nuts) are pontificating on the
> meaning of Freedom over in S.R.I right now.
Myatt used to post here occasionally under that name 4 or 5 years
ago, as I recall. I believe he was so extreme that even Samata Ullah
found him frightening :>)
He writes pretty well, though.
> (That Wascally Wabbit made an appearance as well)
Interesting. I think I'll head on over there and cancel his posts :>)
> And you are completely correct. What those two describe as freedom is the
> exact antithesis of freedom, what Salafists, BinLadenists, Jihadists, think
> freedom is is actually little more than ideological slavery and
> capitulation.
Yep. Here's a snippet from one of "Abdul Aziz's" posts:
"The kuffar are in error regarding freedom because, according to Deen
Al-Islam, there is no such thing - "freedom" is something which the
kuffar have manufactured, in their ignorance, and imposed upon
themselves and others. For is there no such thing because all there is,
is the simple choice to obey or disobey Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala; to
be Muslim or kaffir; to accept Truth, or Falsehood. To know the purity
of Tawheed, or to have the ignorance of Jahiliyyah."
Bob Cooper
"lanman" <xlan...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:qasgh21vgeffslvor...@4ax.com...
My first reaction on hearing about the "leaked" NIE, supposedly
the consensus of "at least 16 spy agencies ," was that these
are no doubt the same 16 agencies that gave us 911, thanks to
their incompetence. My second reaction was that whoever leaked
it should be promptly thrown in jail.
> And yet, Jalal Talabani, the current Iraqi president, has asked for a
> long-term US military presence in Iraq - saying his country needs two
> permanent US air bases to deter what he calls foreign interference.
Yeah, and I heard the prisoners at Abu Ghraib were pretty upset when
the US turned it over to the Iraqis. They all requested a transfer to
Gitmo :>)
> Go figure.
>
> http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/49C4E425-27B3-447E-8A4A-3A160723B43E.htm
DoD
"Bob Cooper" <rcoo...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:cF%Rg.445$XX2.366@dukeread04...
>
> "Count 1" <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:rGXRg.29662$1T2.9978@pd7urf2no...
>>
>> > Excellent article. Mr. May hits the nail on the head. When we talk
>> > about
>> > freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the western sense with
>> > Muslims, it is an exercise in futility, because the word "freedom" does
>> > not mean the same thing to Muslims as it does to us.
>>
>> Interestingly enough, both Abdul Aziz (who is ex white supremacist David
>> Myatt) and Hamid Aziz (who is just basically nuts) are pontificating on
>> the
>> meaning of Freedom over in S.R.I right now.
>
> Myatt used to post here occasionally under that name 4 or 5 years
> ago, as I recall. I believe he was so extreme that even Samata Ullah
> found him frightening :>)
>
> He writes pretty well, though.
>
>> (That Wascally Wabbit made an appearance as well)
>
> Interesting. I think I'll head on over there and cancel his posts :>)
I must have missed something. Did the wabbit go over the edge and accuse you
of having the power to cancel his posts?
Warren Hopper
>
> > Excellent article. Mr. May hits the nail on the head. When we talk
about
> > freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the western sense with
> > Muslims, it is an exercise in futility, because the word "freedom" does
> > not mean the same thing to Muslims as it does to us.
>
> Interestingly enough, both Abdul Aziz (who is ex white supremacist David
> Myatt) and Hamid Aziz (who is just basically nuts) are pontificating on
the
> meaning of Freedom over in S.R.I right now. (That Wascally Wabbit made an
> appearance as well)
Not in SRI. I am proud to say that the powers-that-be have never allowed a
single one of maybe two dozen posts to make into SRI. Must be my misguided
delusions about freedom of speech and thought. ;-)
Count 1
"Warren Hopper" <Warren...@CottontailClub.net> wrote in message
news:6d9Sg.224797$5i3.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Count 1" <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:rGXRg.29662$1T2.9978@pd7urf2no...
> >
> > > Excellent article. Mr. May hits the nail on the head. When we talk
> about
> > > freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the western sense with
> > > Muslims, it is an exercise in futility, because the word "freedom"
does
> > > not mean the same thing to Muslims as it does to us.
> >
> > Interestingly enough, both Abdul Aziz (who is ex white supremacist David
> > Myatt) and Hamid Aziz (who is just basically nuts) are pontificating on
> the
> > meaning of Freedom over in S.R.I right now. (That Wascally Wabbit made
an
> > appearance as well)
>
>
> Not in SRI. I am proud to say that the powers-that-be have never allowed
a
> single one of maybe two dozen posts to make into SRI. Must be my
misguided
> delusions about freedom of speech and thought. ;-)
Yours appears in "The Kaffir Error of Freedom". Myatt's responded. (At
least it does on my server)
Warren Hopper
I don't see it, curses on those politically correct idiots at WorldNet for
blocking his message !
How often do I get a real Nazi to sink my teeth into ... ah ... I mean, how
often do I get a chance to enlighten a misguided fellow human being with a
rational, well-reasoned presentation of own my viewpoint, supported by a
concisely-stated truths and an unarguable body of established facts ... you
know, the way I always do ...
>
>
Count 1
> I don't see it, curses on those politically correct idiots at WorldNet for
> blocking his message !
>
> How often do I get a real Nazi to sink my teeth into ... ah ... I mean,
how
> often do I get a chance to enlighten a misguided fellow human being with a
> rational, well-reasoned presentation of own my viewpoint, supported by a
> concisely-stated truths and an unarguable body of established facts ...
you
> know, the way I always do ...
I wish you the best of luck with Myatt. However with him you're entering
into a different world, no matter how rational, well-reasoned, and truthful
you are, it will have no effect.
Bob Cooper
"DoD" <the...@ss.mil> wrote in message news:Ty1Sg.727$3E2...@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>
> "Bob Cooper" <rcoo...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:cF%Rg.445$XX2.366@dukeread04...
> >
> > "Count 1" <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:rGXRg.29662$1T2.9978@pd7urf2no...
> >>
> >> > Excellent article. Mr. May hits the nail on the head. When we talk
> >> > about
> >> > freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the western sense with
> >> > Muslims, it is an exercise in futility, because the word "freedom" does
> >> > not mean the same thing to Muslims as it does to us.
> >>
> >> Interestingly enough, both Abdul Aziz (who is ex white supremacist David
> >> Myatt) and Hamid Aziz (who is just basically nuts) are pontificating on
> >> the
> >> meaning of Freedom over in S.R.I right now.
> >
> > Myatt used to post here occasionally under that name 4 or 5 years
> > ago, as I recall. I believe he was so extreme that even Samata Ullah
> > found him frightening :>)
> >
> > He writes pretty well, though.
> >
> >> (That Wascally Wabbit made an appearance as well)
> >
> > Interesting. I think I'll head on over there and cancel his posts :>)
>
> I must have missed something. Did the wabbit go over the edge and accuse you
> of having the power to cancel his posts?
Not exactly me specifically. The VRC (Vast Right-Wing
Conspiracy). Of which I am -- in his eyes -- a card-carrying
member ;>)
Warren Hopper
I found the response from Myatt and replied. Bless those wise folks at
WorldNet for all their good works.
But I must say I was stunned, not by Myatt ( he seems to be fairly
predictable ), but by you. I note the "no matter how" part of your
statement, but using the words "rational, well-reasoned, and truthful" in
any context or connection with me is ... unprecedented to say the least.
I'll take it as a slip in an unguarded moment, and not an admission of any
sort. :-)
DoD
Wabbit, what a poor fellow. You better hold off sending the illuminati
guards to his house, Bob. Don't want to send him over the edge, just yet.
Count 1
"Warren Hopper" <Warren...@CottontailClub.net> wrote in message
I never have unguarded moments, and I never slip up.
I'll give you a hint with David. The best way to take him down is to quote
the Quran, Islamic Scholars, and Hadith. Parse quotes extensively talking
of peace and love and freedom to counter his parsings talking of war,
terror, and subjugation.
And by 'take him down' I don't mean 'get him to admit he's wrong' - he
doesn't actually believe his Jihadist crap anyway, because he isn't a
muslim. He doesn't really believe it in the first place. I recently found
an essay he wrote directly contradicting his jihadist ideology and dated
October 2004.
The contents are below, I post them to show you that you were right - he is
nothing more than a provocateur.
****
Some Thoughts on Our Human Problem
by David Myatt
In the course of my life I have had the good fortune to travel around this
planet which is our home, as I have lived for months, and sometimes years,
among diverse cultures. I have also experienced, and studied, at first-hand,
and for extended periods often lasting years, many different Ways of Life,
including Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Christianity, and paganism. In
addition, I have had many interesting occupations and experiences and
involvements - although in some ways my notoriety, resulting from some of
these experiences and involvements, is not altogether justified by the
reality of my life.
In many ways, as I have sought to explain in some other writings, my life
has been a journey to discover, to know, the meaning of our own lives. In
the course of this journey I have made quite a few mistakes, as I have, many
times, caused suffering in others just as I once was quite arrogant -
indeed, fanatical and intolerant - about my own beliefs, or what at a
particular time I considered were my beliefs and views. Sometimes -
perchance to justly counter-balance my own violent past - I have also had
the misfortune to be ttreated in a dishonorable way, by others: to have
suffered injustice, and violence, due to the prejudice, intolerance and
dishonour of others. But - pathei mathos as Aeschylus wrote.
Now, in the middle of the fifth decade of my life as I reflect upon my past,
my experiences - upon the learning from my errors of experience - I have
come to certain conclusions, as I have come to understand the need for
reason, compassion, empathy, tolerance, and the true justice and freedom
that, I now believe, only arises from personal honour. One of my conclusions
concerns our seeming inability, as a species, to learn from our past
mistakes, to learn from the dishonour of our history. Why cannot we use our
will and act with honour, with reason? Why do we still - after over five
thousand years of experience - fail to grasp what our history teaches us
about ourselves? Why do we still pursue abstract ideas and strive to mould
people to these ideas instead of celebrating diversity, difference and
individuality?
In a philosophical way, we seem to have lost the essence of our being
through interpreting ourselves, others, and the world, in terms of abstract
beings - categories, isms, theories, structures, terms, ideas and the like -
which we largely project onto reality and which so distort reality. This in,
in effect, a methodology of abstraction. In a real way, we have largely
disconnected ourselves from the numen of life, and especially from the numen
of Nature, by our urban way of life, our modern means of transportation, and
our reliance on technology and this methodology of abstraction.
After five thousand years of experience - of creativity, learning,
suffering, discovery - we can still make excuses for having a large Army
invade another land and subjugate another people and kill "enemies"; still
make excuses for killing thousands upon thousands of people by dropping
bombs on them; and still condone the dishonorable shackling of people and
their incarceration - and even their torture. After five thousand years of
insights being available to us - from Loa Tzu, the Buddha, the works of
Aeschylus, Sophocles, to the images of our planet Earth from Space - we can
still be indifferent to such things, to the suffering of our fellow human
beings, and especially to our own failings, which we often strive to hide
through hypocrisy and arrogance.
How much time do we, as a species, need to become rational, honourable,
empathic - truly civilized - human beings? Another five thousand years? Ten
thousand? Thirty thousand? Perhaps. But will we, by then, have destroyed the
fragile connexions of Nature which brought life to this planet and which
sustain our life? Possibly. And how many more millions of human beings will
suffer and die in humiliation and agony before then?
Why cannot we learn, as I myself have learnt, albeit my learning was
achieved painfully slowly with many returns to causing suffering in others?
In the West, we seem to be proud of our system of so-called "education"
which has been with us for some hundred years. But has this brought
enlightenment, understanding and the beginnings of wisdom to most? Has it
bred honourable character? In the majority of instances, no. In the West, we
seem mighty proud of ourselves and our "system" - so proud in fact that we
strive to export it by force of arms, or by of force of money and bribery,
to other lands, always forgetting, it seems, the poverty, the injustice, the
degradation, the addiction, the inequality, the dishonourable violence, the
prejudice, that still exists in almost every Western land, and especially in
those who bleat so loudly about their own achievements and values.
Perhaps it will always be like this - people striving, as I myself have
strived, toward wisdom, and in the process inflicting suffering on others.
But it seems to me - these last few years and especially these last few
months - that there is a way out of this. This way involves three simple
things.
The first is to understand that good is simply the alleviation of suffering
by means which do not cause any more suffering - that is, it is simply
striving not to do any harm: striving not to harm any living being, human,
animal or otherwise. This involves us in developing empathy, and
compassion - it involves us in feeling, understanding and appreciating how
all life is connected. It involves us in having the new perspective of the
Cosmos as our guide - but not in any mystical way. Rather, in the rational
way which arises when we feel and know how we have evolved from primitive
life; how we exist on one planet circling one star among billions of stars
in one Galaxy which itself is only one Galaxy among billions in the Cosmos.
In brief, it involves is in growing-up - ceasing to be children who are
enwrapped in themselves and their desires but who instead by becoming aware
of the wider world, the wider Cosmos beyond, develope that perspective, that
respect, which is part of maturity. The human failing now, as in the past,
is to posit some abstract "good" the striving for which almost always
involves inflicting suffering, harm or death upon others. That is, in the
pursuit of this abstract "good" we have condoned, even encouraged, more
suffering. But the empathic reality is that whatever causes suffering is
wrong - that causing more suffering cannot ever be justified.
The second simple thing - in many ways deriving from the first - is for us
to abandon the methodology of abstraction, and in the most important
practical sense this means abandoning the artificial divisions we have
created in the world through such artificial ideas as "politics" and
"nation" and "government". That is, we must move toward the true sovereignty
of the individual, and abolish large, abstract, structures, like nations,
and the governments, and elites of privilege which, in theory at least,
"govern" such abstract entities. We must move toward a new way of life which
is more human - and this, as it always does and has done, means and implies
a small-ness. It means small communities. It means a living in harmony with
Nature and other human beings. It means a more simple, manual, way of life.
We should do this, even though it will involve us restraining our desire for
material comfort and material goods and material wealth. That is, we must
use our will, our reason, our judgement, to behave, to live, in a more human
way because we accept that this is the human thing, the civilized thing to
do. This itself involves us in evolving toward the next level - that is, it
involves us in consciously changing ourselves, and developing, and living
by, empathy. We can indeed do this - but whether we will do this is quite
another matter.
The third simple thing we can do is strive to be honourable, and understand
that honour means not only that we are responsible for ourselves but also
requires empathy and indeed compassion. For honour is founded on the two
other simple things, mentioned above. Honour implies real freedom, and real
justice - the so-called "freedom" and so-called "justice" that nations and
governments and tyrants bleat about and have bleated about for hundreds of
years are, in reality, the oppression, the humiliation, the subjugation, of
the individual to some abstract idea, or law, or tyrant or elite, and the
"freedom" and the "law" which such systems and tyrants, and elites, create
is always based upon some generalized - and inhuman - restriction, always
involves a punitive notion of "punishment", and always involves some
"appointed authority" having a bullying, dishonourable power over
individuals.
Such, in brief, is my learning, born from my experiences, from the suffering
I have caused, in others, and the suffering I have encountered and sometimes
endured. Am I optimistic about us changing ourselves? Not as optimistic as I
was. Will - can - words such as this change anything?
There is then that sigh of knowing
How not to know
David Myatt
JD2453308.757
16th day of the 10th lunar month, 4702
16th day of the 9th lunar month, 2547
30th day of October 2004 CE
lanman
>
>"Bob Cooper" <rcoo...@cox.net> wrote in message
>news:cF%Rg.445$XX2.366@dukeread04...
>>
>> "Count 1" <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:rGXRg.29662$1T2.9978@pd7urf2no...
>>>
>>> > Excellent article. Mr. May hits the nail on the head. When we talk
>>> > about
>>> > freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the western sense with
>>> > Muslims, it is an exercise in futility, because the word "freedom" does
>>> > not mean the same thing to Muslims as it does to us.
>>>
>>> Interestingly enough, both Abdul Aziz (who is ex white supremacist David
>>> Myatt) and Hamid Aziz (who is just basically nuts) are pontificating on
>>> the
>>> meaning of Freedom over in S.R.I right now.
>>
>> Myatt used to post here occasionally under that name 4 or 5 years
>> ago, as I recall. I believe he was so extreme that even Samata Ullah
>> found him frightening :>)
>>
>> He writes pretty well, though.
>>
>>> (That Wascally Wabbit made an appearance as well)
>>
>> Interesting. I think I'll head on over there and cancel his posts :>)
>
>I must have missed something. Did the wabbit go over the edge and accuse you
>of having the power to cancel his posts?
>
LOL. He went over the edge years ago - poor thing. I can actually
remember when he sounded reasonable, if only barely so.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
lanman
<Warren...@CottontailClub.net> wrote:
>
>"Count 1" <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:rGXRg.29662$1T2.9978@pd7urf2no...
>>
>> > Excellent article. Mr. May hits the nail on the head. When we talk
>about
>> > freedom of speech and freedom of religion in the western sense with
>> > Muslims, it is an exercise in futility, because the word "freedom" does
>> > not mean the same thing to Muslims as it does to us.
>>
>> Interestingly enough, both Abdul Aziz (who is ex white supremacist David
>> Myatt) and Hamid Aziz (who is just basically nuts) are pontificating on
>the
>> meaning of Freedom over in S.R.I right now. (That Wascally Wabbit made an
>> appearance as well)
>
>
>Not in SRI. I am proud to say that the powers-that-be have never allowed a
>single one of maybe two dozen posts to make into SRI. Must be my misguided
>delusions about freedom of speech and thought. ;-)
>
>
Your delusions only pertain to left-wing and Islamic thought. You have
no problem shutting down speech or thought which contradict your
myopic view of the world.
If you need a reference at SRI, feel free to use me. I can attest to
your eager submission to Islam, your disdain for killing Muslims, and
your willing embrace of dhimmi status.
DoD
Hehe.... What can you do? Liberals will always be weak.
skyn...@hotmail.com
Count 1 wrote:
>
> I'll give you a hint with David. The best way to take him down
What you mean like you've never been able to do except in your dreams?
> And by 'take him down' I don't mean 'get him to admit he's wrong' - he
> doesn't actually believe his Jihadist crap anyway, because he isn't a
> muslim.
Like you're not jewish I presume?
Still pedalling this lie about Myatt, eh?
You tried it recently on the IA forum and ran away when no one believed
you. Why don't you go back and try again?
Myatt is accepted by Muslims as a Muslim - he's publicly given no less
than seven declarations of his Islam this year. He contributes to
Islamic forums where no Muslim questions his Islam.
BTW some of these forums are closed to infidels.
> I recently found
> an essay he wrote directly contradicting his jihadist ideology and dated
> October 2004.
You tried that on IA before you ran away - it didn't work there.
May be you fabricated this yourself as part of your obsession with
Myatt who've you been cyber stalking for years?
May be there is another explaination that you're just too bigoted to
find? Try again - C for effort.
dissid...@hotmail.com
skyn...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Count 1 wrote:
>
> >
> > I'll give you a hint with David. The best way to take him down
>
> What you mean like you've never been able to do except in your dreams?
Abdul Aziz Ibn Myatt has engaged in much debate in other forums, where
he has taken on Amerika and the apostate lackeys in the Islamic world,
but often other more obviously learned Muslims, more skilled in debate,
have made Abdul Aziz look rather foolish.
> > And by 'take him down' I don't mean 'get him to admit he's wrong' - he
> > doesn't actually believe his Jihadist crap anyway, because he isn't a
> > muslim.
>
> Like you're not jewish I presume?
He's a Zionazi.
> Still pedalling this lie about Myatt, eh?
>
> You tried it recently on the IA forum and ran away when no one believed
> you. Why don't you go back and try again?
>
> Myatt is accepted by Muslims as a Muslim - he's publicly given no less
> than seven declarations of his Islam this year. He contributes to
> Islamic forums where no Muslim questions his Islam.
Ibn Myatt has many times declared his reversion to Al-Islam. But in
argument in IA he has said the contents of a website amount to zilch.
Does this not mean the crediblity of his claims of reversion, claims
which only exist online, also amount to zilch.
> BTW some of these forums are closed to infidels.
>
> > I recently found
> > an essay he wrote directly contradicting his jihadist ideology and dated
> > October 2004.
>
> You tried that on IA before you ran away - it didn't work there.
>
> May be you fabricated this yourself as part of your obsession with
> Myatt who've you been cyber stalking for years?
No, that's impossible. I looked at the website at the time, and he was
right. The website was changed after he posted the link, and the only
change was that the date was removed. Ibn Myatt didn't address the fact
that he claimed the essay was written in 1998 but refers to his belief
in Islam in the past tense, and the timing is too coincidental to
believe the essay was altered to discredit Myatt. If that was the case,
then the website wouldn't have been changed. The website was
controlled by Richard Stirling, and it is known that Ibn Myatt and
Stirling communicate.
This zionazi pig is obsessed with Abdul Aziz Ibn Myatt, but he couldn't
have been involved in the alterations, jews don't mix well with my
kind, and Stirling would never do anything a zionist told him to.
Count 1
<dissid...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159312369.0...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
The thread is at www.islamicawakenings.com. I posted under the name
omnipitus2006. If anyone is interested they can check it out over there. I
see no reason to repeat the debate here, especially since you boneheads
couldn't make a logical deduction to save your life. If you're interested
in discussing what I found out about David Myatt, email me at
omnipi...@yahoo.com. My conclusion is the only rational one - Myatt is
not a muslim.
Don't worry - there's still over a billion left.
skyn...@hotmail.com
Count 1 wrote:
> If you're interested
> in discussing what I found out about David Myatt, email me at
> omnipi...@yahoo.com. My conclusion is the only rational one - Myatt is
> not a muslim.
Your conclusion is wrong and is the result of your obsession - just
re-stating your claim doesn't make it true or rational. You haven't got
any facts at all.
You've just got assumptions, not facts. Yet you're so obsessed with
being seen to be right that you can't even see this - you can't see the
difference between the assumptions you've made about Myatt and true
facts.
You are lying about Myatt.
BTW if you carry on like this with your obession, your character is
going to get exposed here - even more than it was exposed on that
Muslim forum.
Seems you've got serious personality problems, obsessing about Myatt
like this for four years - among other stuff.
skyn...@hotmail.com
dissid...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Ibn Myatt has many times declared his reversion to Al-Islam. But in
> argument in IA he has said the contents of a website
Wrong you stupid bonehead! His first comments were general - that
something found on some computer proved nothing regarding who wrote or
even posted the item. Then his comments applied that the one website
which omnip claimed Myatt had some influence over or connection with.
Get some reading specs!
> No, that's impossible. I looked at the website at the time,
Gee, you can read, then?
> and he was
> right. The website was changed after he posted the link,
Assumption - we've only got omnip's word for it that it was like that
before. And his word amounts to zilch.
Your word don't count - no pun intended.
> Ibn Myatt didn't address the fact
> that he claimed the essay was written in 1998 but refers to his belief
> in Islam in the past tense, and the timing is too coincidental to
> believe the essay was altered to discredit Myatt
You and omnip are sure being stupid here about this. Why? I shall
explain in simple terms so that you can understand. Pay attention now -
1) There's no proof that this essay hasn't been altered by someone
other than Myatt. Myatt has stated sevearl times that some of his
essays have been altered by some people and had dates added to them.
2) Where's your proof that Myatt even wrote this article you found?
3) The obsessive, damaged, omnip could have altered them for his own
ends. He's sure got issues.
> The website was
> controlled by Richard Stirling, and it is known that Ibn Myatt and
> Stirling communicate.
Yeah? So what? Omnip communicated directly with Myatt via e-mail a few
times - and that means what, exactly? That they're buddy boys? That
they like each other? That they share the same views? That they *know*
each other?
Get real! Omnip sent Myatt an insulting e-mail, I understand.
Writing ABOUT someone does not mean that you KNOW them personally or
that they have the same views.
Gee, you sure seem dumb.
> Stirling would never do anything a zionist told him to.
You know nothing about this Stirling person - you're just guessing. So
you're conclusion is just an assumption.
Anyways, the fact remains - and this is a fact! - that Muslims accept
Myatt as a Muslim, and he's made a public testimoy of faith in islam,
shahaadah. Go check out the IA forum. Ergo, he's a Muslim.
Whatever you or omnip or anyone else claims, that's the fact here. Get
over it.
skyn...@hotmail.com
dissid...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Abdul Aziz Ibn Myatt has engaged in much debate in other forums, where
> he has taken on Amerika and the apostate lackeys in the Islamic world,
> but often other more obviously learned Muslims, more skilled in debate,
> have made Abdul Aziz look rather foolish.
Plain lie. Or as Myatt might say - pure Zionist disinfomration.
Give your references, if you can - otherwise STFU.
For those interested, just go read his stuff on SRI, or the IA forum.
Anyways, for your delight, and that of omnip the unbold who ran away
from the Muslim IA forum here's some quotes by Myatt, the man we're
discussing here, which tear your *arguments" to pieces.
<-begin quotes->
Question: We've had an example here on this forum of someone claiming
(twice!) you're only pretending to be a Muslim and I've read elsewhere
some making the claim that you're murtad. Can you please tell us your
reply to these people here so these rumors will be put to rest at last?
Answer by ibnmyatt: [These rumours] are not correct. I am a Muslim,
Alhamdulillah, and I shall remain a Muslim, InshaAllah
What else can I say or write to those who persist in spreading such
rumours and making such allegations, and to those who believe they are
true? In the past seven months alone I have affirmed, in public, many,
many times that I am a Muslim, and that I have remained a Muslim since
my reversion, Alhamdulillah. Some Muslims who do not know me, in
person, have sent me e-mails asking the same question, and to them I
have given the same reply. The public affirmations of my Islam have
included an on-line dialogue on 13 Safar of this year when I answered
questions from Muslims all over the world, courtesy of Islam-Online; an
article, quoting from an interview I gave, in The Times newspaper, and
several articles on various Muslim Internet forums.
As I have mentioned several times over the years in reply to a certain
Zionist who persists for some reason in pedalling these rumours -
started by the Zionist Searchlight organization - I made my Shahadah in
a Mosque, before several Muslims, one of whom was a Qadi, and that I
understand Kalimaah Tayyibah as a binding, sacred, life-long, oath: a
declaration of loyalty to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta'ala and His Messenger
(salla Allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) which declaration I made on my honour.
This declaration, this oath, has consequences in this life, and in the
Next Life.
"Be loyal and do your duty to Allah; fear Him and always speak with
honour. He will direct you to do honourable deeds and will forgive your
mis-deeds. And whosoever obeys Allah and His Messenger will achieve the
greatest achievement of all." 33:70-71 Interpretation of Meaning
However, I am no longer naive enough to believe that this additional
declaration of mine, here, or any such declarations by me, will silence
such Zionists or prevent others from believing what such people say or
write.
----
Q: But isn't it correct to say that since your conversion to Islam you
have continued to develop what you call The Numinous way, have
continued to propagate National Socialism, and have tried to bring
National Socialists, and others, into an alliance with Muslims?
A: Certainly - until late last year - I continued to write about
National-Socialism and The Numinous Way, with a view to changing the
attitude, of those who adhere to them, toward Islam and the Muslims,
with a view to co-operation between various anti-Zionist factions, and
with a view to making both of those Ways into ethical, honourable,
systems so that such co-operation might occur. Also, for the first two
years after my reversion I did continue to directly support a few
groups which I regarded as honourable, in much the same way, I
understand, that the Grand Mufti Muhammed Amin al-Husseini supported
Hitler. Muhammed Amin al-Husseini, as a Muslim, was seeking allies in
the fight against Zionism, but he never ceased to be a Muslim.
I did such things because I sincerely believed that it was important -
and indeed vital - for as many people and groups as possible to fight
in any way whatsoever the Zionist-Crusader alliance, and the so-called
"New World Order" which this alliance is creating, and that this fight
should be taken to the homelands of the West.
---
Q: There has been some discussion on some Internet forums regarding
whether some articles attributed to you were in fact written by you, or
whether the dates given on some of those articles were genuine. Have
you any comment?
A: There is some confusion here, many accusations, and some outright
lies. In the past fifteen years, I have written an enormous amount of
articles, essays, dialogues and pamphlets. Even eight years ago, when I
was arrested and questioned by Detectives from SO12 Scotland Yard,
these writings were voluminous - for they showed me the thick
lever-arch files containing some of my published writings which they
had collected during the course of their investigation, wanting me to
comment on some items which they had singled out, which I refused to
do, politely pointing out that my articles were not copyright and that
many of the items available, for instance, on the Internet might have
been altered in some way, by a person or persons unknown, for a reason
or reasons unknown. Since then, I have written an equal amount again,
if not twice the amount available then, although the majority of these
more recent writings have been about Islam. Furthermore, before my
reversion to Islam, I sent copies of various unpublished writings to
various individuals around the world, and some of these have
subsequently been published, via the printed medium, or distributed on
the Internet.
Suffice it to say that I cannot remember everything I have ever
written, or which has been printed or distributed via mediums such as
the Internet. However, I do know that some of my writings have been
changed in some way, or had dates added, not of their date of writing,
but more often than not of the date of their publication or the date of
their first distribution. Some of the changes amount to a few words;
some to a few sentences, and some seem to have been done for the best
of intentions, perhaps to, in the mind of the publisher or distributor,
to clarify what I wrote or what they believed I meant, or to fit in
with what they themselves believe. I remember years ago, when I wrote
some articles for John Tyndall's Spearhead magazine how he sometimes
changed a few words, or added a sentence or two, or deleted something,
to clarify things or make some point. I never objected; he was the
Editor, and it was a condition of publication.
However, there are a few forgeries in circulation - the one that
annoyed me the most, at the time, was an article about Einstein. I did
write an article about Einstein, once (it may even have appeared in
Spearhead) but someone added my name to another such article. Some
alterations done to some articles by some people may have had a more
sinister intent, such a trying to get me convicted of some criminal
offence, according to the unjust laws of the kuffar.
So, in conclusion, all I can honestly say is that, yes, there have been
some articles changed in various ways.
<-end quotes->
Count 1
If you had been reading the threads in question at the IslamoFascist website
www.islamicawakening.com; then you would have seen Myatt lay claim to its
authorship. He says he wrote it in 1998.
> 3) The obsessive, damaged, omnip could have altered them for his own
> ends. He's sure got issues.
This is the stupidest argument I've seen. I simply don't have
administration rights to the two sites the article appeared on, refering to
his experiences in Islam in the past tense and dated October 2004. And if I
did, why would I alter them after posting them to IA, *if* my motives were
to discredit him?
Look, it's no big deal, he just slipped up. He writes a lot of material,
he's not a young man anymore, and he forgot who he sent this one to.
> Get real! Omnip sent Myatt an insulting e-mail, I understand.
I've had some limited communications with Myatt. But I've never insulted him
in private correspondence, that would be rude. In public forums I've asked
friends of his if they know whos bitch he was while he was in prison. Guys
like him are used for currency in the big house.
> Anyways, the fact remains - and this is a fact! - that Muslims accept
> Myatt as a Muslim, and he's made a public testimoy of faith in islam,
> shahaadah. Go check out the IA forum.
This is true - it is a fact that some muslims have expressed their belief
that he is a muslim.
> Ergo, he's a Muslim.
That conclusion doesn't follow from the evidence presented, and is rejected
by muslims anyway. Muslims say only Allah knows who is truly a muslim.
If you are as ignorant on this matter as you were on the threads at IA,
email me at omnipt...@yahoo.com and we can continue this in private. EOT
skyn...@hotmail.com
Count 1 wrote:
> > 3) The obsessive, damaged, omnip could have altered them for his own
> > ends. He's sure got issues.
>
> This is the stupidest argument I've seen. I simply don't have
> administration rights to the two sites the article appeared on, refering to
> his experiences in Islam in the past tense and dated October 2004.
What experiences, we might ask you? Pre 1998, or post 1998?
You seem to forget some articles Myatt wrote while in C18 about Hamas
and praising Islam and the Muslims, even before his conversion to
Islam.
What date for those experiences, we might ask you? WHO dated it and
why?
So he may have written an article in 1998 which MIGHT have been changed
by someone, and might have had some dates added by someone else for
some reason. Go read the quotes by Myatt I gave.
So why did RS take down the article? You have one explanation based on
some assumptions of yours. There is another explanation - it was taken
down at Myatt's request because some of it - may be the dates - were
added by someone else for some reason.
Why, you could even have added the dates to that article which was then
picked up by RS and put on *his* website.
See, anyone can make assumptions.
>
> Look, it's no big deal, he just slipped up. He writes a lot of material,
Yes, I see you read the quote from him I posted about him having
written lots of stuff.
You make another assumption for which you have no proof - that he
slipped up. Gee, you missed another possibility as well, given in one
of the quotes from him I posted, so go figure.
> he's not a young man anymore, and he forgot who he sent this one to.
Unlike you, young man in your mid twenties. You who never slips up...
>
>
> > Get real! Omnip sent Myatt an insulting e-mail, I understand.
>
> I've had some limited communications with Myatt. But I've never insulted him
> in private correspondence, that would be rude.
This is a complete lie. You know it is lie - copies of an e-mail you
sent him have been doing the rounds of some Muslim brothers of his.
Do you still want to say you never insulted him then? If so, then may
be I can post a copy of the offending e-mail here, which no doubt
you'll deny - but we could ask your ISP.
Oops, seems you have slipped up, young man.
> This is true - it is a fact that some muslims have expressed their belief
> that he is a muslim.
>
No, all Muslims who know about him. You just don't give up do you,
pedalling your lie using the Big Lie technique, which is repeat a lie
often enought for long enough and surely someone will be stupid enough
to believe it.
Go figure why he was on line answering question submitted by Muslims
from all over the world on one of the most respected Islamic sites on
the Net. A "moderate Muslim" site as well, if I'm not mistaken.
Give it up - he's a Muslim, and has renounced his past views so many
times I'm getting deja vu!
No wonder that his former racist friends are saying stuff like - "Myatt
is a traitor to Britain, a traitor to National Socialism, and above
all, a traitor to his race".
I like this one - "Myatt is an enemy to every white man".
Not to mention this one - "Myatt's conversion to Islam was embarrassing
too. Myatt now spends his time in mosques bowing to an Alien god..."
> If you are as ignorant on this matter as you were on the threads at IA,
So what connection have you made, then?
> email me at omnipt...@yahoo.com and we can continue this in private. EOT
Why in private? Best you can't resist replying now though :)
Warren Hopper
Hmmm ... interesting. You must be a very important man in your sphere, I'm
surprised that you can find so much time from your busy schedule to honor us
here at ARI with your infallible musings. ;-)
>
> I'll give you a hint with David. The best way to take him down is to
quote
> the Quran, Islamic Scholars, and Hadith.
Who me ? You've got to be joking ! I'm more likely to quote Jimmi Hendrix,
and probably have a better chance of making some impression on the guy.
Frankly, I'm not particularly interested in talking to the guy. If I had it
to do again, I would have kept my mouth shut ( uncharacteristically, I think
you'll agree ).
I know people who have gone the extremist road and it's always a question of
identity. They have a desperate need to be 'winners' so they graviate to
other people who also have a desparate need to be 'winners'. If they had
ability, they would be hot-shot, twenty-something financial skinheads
driving around HumVees, but they don't have the ability so instead they
graviate into little worlds apart of like-minded 'winners' like themselves.
Nazo-philia is a particularly silly choice for would-be 'winners' because
the Nazis got stomped. For all their superiority bullshit, they were among
the worst losers in history. The best thing our budding Fuhrers could do is
emulate their 'hero' ( click-bang-what-a-hang ) and do everyone a favor.
> Parse quotes extensively talking
> of peace and love and freedom to counter his parsings talking of war,
> terror, and subjugation.
>
> And by 'take him down' I don't mean 'get him to admit he's wrong' - he
> doesn't actually believe his Jihadist crap anyway, because he isn't a
> muslim.
I forced myself to wade through some of his 'works' and I'm not so sure
about that anymore. My first impression may have been wrong. It's a tricky
thing to say that "no one could possibly believe the stuff they are saying",
no matter how crazy it is.
Present company excluded of course. :-)
> He doesn't really believe it in the first place. I recently found
> an essay he wrote directly contradicting his jihadist ideology and dated
> October 2004.
>
> The contents are below, I post them to show you that you were right - he
is
> nothing more than a provocateur.
He writes reasonably well, better than our domestically-grown varieties of
the same. Oh the benefits of a British public school education, eh wot.
In fact, I wonder if he was public school. Many militant extremists come
from good family backgrounds, Che Guava and Dr. Zirhiri ( sp. ? ). They
often lack the right stuff to carry on the family tradition of excellence,
so they invent a bogus justification for the 'historically imperative' work
they must perform that excuses them from failing outright, rather than
having the courage to face up to the reality of their own personal
inadequacies. The word "subsumed" comes to mind.
Warren Hopper
I've shut you down many a time, with fact, reason and unassailable logic.
If truth is myopic, then I confess myself to be myopic. Truth allows only
for truth, whereas lies allow for anything. That must be why truthfulness
seems rather myopic to you, who are apparently capable of saying virutally
anything whether it's true or not.
>
> If you need a reference at SRI, feel free to use me. I can attest to
> your eager submission to Islam, your disdain for killing Muslims, and
> your willing embrace of dhimmi status.
>
I keep trying to get myself into SRI nice-guy, happy-talk mode, but I'm too
honest to be able to turn it on and off like that. In contrast to yourself,
perhaps, as my putative reference for SRI ?
TUKA
> If truth is myopic, then I confess myself to be myopic. Truth allows only
> for truth, whereas lies allow for anything. That must be why truthfulness
> seems rather myopic to you, who are apparently capable of saying virutally
> anything whether it's true or not.
Truth? This is the man who claims that Lebanon bears no responsibility
for attacks on Israel?
What kind of truth are you talking about? The type of truth that
evaluates ones ancestors as if they had the sensibilities of today?
The kind of truth that allows you to support Arabs and Muslims despite
the fact that they opress 700 million women with their medieval ways?
--
Being against torture ought to be sort of a bipartisan thing.
-- Karl Lehenbauer
lanman
<Warren...@CottontailClub.net> wrote:
>I've shut you down many a time, with fact, reason and unassailable logic.
>
Only in your closed little mind.
>If truth is myopic, then I confess myself to be myopic. Truth allows only
>for truth, whereas lies allow for anything. That must be why truthfulness
>seems rather myopic to you, who are apparently capable of saying virutally
>anything whether it's true or not.
LOL. Is this an example of your unassailable logic?
skyn...@hotmail.com
Warren Hopper wrote:
> I forced myself to wade through some of his 'works' and I'm not so sure
> about that anymore. My first impression may have been wrong.
It's good to find someone here who does seem to think, who's prepared
to admit they may be wrong about something, who doesn't seem to be on
some sort of anti-Islam crusade, and who doesn't post anti-Muslim
tirades.
Kinda brings a little ray of hope for the future - for some reasonable
end to the current conflict.
> In fact, I wonder if he was public school.
I read in some book that he did, yes.
Warren Hopper
<skyn...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1159523380.9...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Warren Hopper wrote:
>
> > I forced myself to wade through some of his 'works' and I'm not so sure
> > about that anymore. My first impression may have been wrong.
>
> It's good to find someone here who does seem to think, who's prepared
> to admit they may be wrong about something, who doesn't seem to be on
> some sort of anti-Islam crusade, and who doesn't post anti-Muslim
> tirades.
I *do* try, sometimes I succeed and sometimes I don't. I consider myself a
peacenik ... with militant currents running beneath the surface. :-)
I think that if people expended one tenth the effort to prevent wars that
they expend to start them, there would be far fewer wars.
>
> Kinda brings a little ray of hope for the future - for some reasonable
> end to the current conflict.
>
>
> > In fact, I wonder if he was public school.
>
> I read in some book that he did, yes.
>
Interesting ... thanks for the info.
Warren Hopper
"TUKA" <tu...@tuka.valuemedia.com> wrote in message
news:slrneho1p...@bill.heins.net...
> On 2006-09-28, Warren Hopper <Warren...@CottontailClub.net> wrote:
> > If truth is myopic, then I confess myself to be myopic. Truth allows
only
> > for truth, whereas lies allow for anything. That must be why
truthfulness
> > seems rather myopic to you, who are apparently capable of saying
virutally
> > anything whether it's true or not.
>
> Truth? This is the man who claims that Lebanon bears no responsibility
> for attacks on Israel?
A prime example of what I'm talking about. I never said that.
In fact, it's Israel and their more hard-core supporters who is claiming no
responsibility for their own actions, that is bombing of major urban areas
and economic infrastructure in Lebanon.
>
> What kind of truth are you talking about? The type of truth that
> evaluates ones ancestors as if they had the sensibilities of today?
> The kind of truth that allows you to support Arabs and Muslims despite
> the fact that they opress 700 million women with their medieval ways?
>
So what should we do about "their medieval ways", bomb them back to the
Stone Age ? That might have some effect in countries like Iraq or Iran, but
they would hardly notice it in Afghanistan.
You need to understand the nature of these societies, it's not immutable,
but it's not the stuff of a rousing American political campaign season
either. It's part of their social structure and has been for thousands of
years.
Warren Hopper
> On Thu, 28 Sep 2006 15:55:29 GMT, "Warren Hopper"
> <Warren...@CottontailClub.net> wrote:
>
> >I've shut you down many a time, with fact, reason and unassailable logic.
> >
> Only in your closed little mind.
>
> >If truth is myopic, then I confess myself to be myopic. Truth allows
only
> >for truth, whereas lies allow for anything. That must be why
truthfulness
> >seems rather myopic to you, who are apparently capable of saying
virutally
> >anything whether it's true or not.
>
> LOL. Is this an example of your unassailable logic?
By your response, I can only conclude that it must be.
Warren Hopper
>
> My first reaction on hearing about the "leaked" NIE, supposedly
> the consensus of "at least 16 spy agencies ," was that these
> are no doubt the same 16 agencies that gave us 911, thanks to
> their incompetence. My second reaction was that whoever leaked
> it should be promptly thrown in jail.
He'll be able to keep Scooter company ... a pretty white boy like that ought
to be able to do well for himself in the Pen, finds himself the right daddy.
Count 1
>
>
> Hmmm ... interesting. You must be a very important man in your sphere,
I'm
> surprised that you can find so much time from your busy schedule to honor
us
> here at ARI with your infallible musings. ;-)
I am a creature of unmitigated giving.
> > And by 'take him down' I don't mean 'get him to admit he's wrong' - he
> > doesn't actually believe his Jihadist crap anyway, because he isn't a
> > muslim.
>
>
> I forced myself to wade through some of his 'works' and I'm not so sure
> about that anymore. My first impression may have been wrong. It's a
tricky
> thing to say that "no one could possibly believe the stuff they are
saying",
> no matter how crazy it is.
You were right the first time. Even as a hard core jihadist he still
advocates the same regressive social structure he did when he was a white
supremacist. Small agrarian based communities where diseases run rampant and
no one has anytime for development because they're all too busy growing
their own food.
He's as much a muslim as you are a Republican.
skyn...@hotmail.com
Count 1 wrote:
> I am a creature of unmitigated giving.
You're a proven liar.
> You were right the first time.
Still pushing your lies about Myatt, eh? Chutzpah comes to mind.
Your lies, dishonesty and your true character have been exposed.
kope2
TUKA
>
> "TUKA" <tu...@tuka.valuemedia.com> wrote in message
> news:slrneho1p...@bill.heins.net...
>> On 2006-09-28, Warren Hopper <Warren...@CottontailClub.net> wrote:
>> > If truth is myopic, then I confess myself to be myopic. Truth allows
> only
>> > for truth, whereas lies allow for anything. That must be why
> truthfulness
>> > seems rather myopic to you, who are apparently capable of saying
> virutally
>> > anything whether it's true or not.
>>
>> Truth? This is the man who claims that Lebanon bears no responsibility
>> for attacks on Israel?
>
> A prime example of what I'm talking about. I never said that.
Sure you did. When you blamed Israel for what happened.
> In fact, it's Israel and their more hard-core supporters who is claiming no
> responsibility for their own actions, that is bombing of major urban areas
> and economic infrastructure in Lebanon.
And not a peep from you about Lebanon allowing use of same by Hezbollah.
>
>
>>
>> What kind of truth are you talking about? The type of truth that
>> evaluates ones ancestors as if they had the sensibilities of today?
>> The kind of truth that allows you to support Arabs and Muslims despite
>> the fact that they opress 700 million women with their medieval ways?
>>
>
> So what should we do about "their medieval ways", bomb them back to the
> Stone Age ? That might have some effect in countries like Iraq or Iran, but
> they would hardly notice it in Afghanistan.
>
> You need to understand the nature of these societies, it's not immutable,
> but it's not the stuff of a rousing American political campaign season
> either. It's part of their social structure and has been for thousands of
> years.
You have certainly left me speechless with that one.
But it is clear that since you expect no growth from humans in society,
you would endorse just bombing them back to the Stone Age. After all,
you don't need to improve -- you just need to behave like your ancestors
did.
--
Experience is what allows you to recognize a mistake the second
time you make it. -- unknown