Winning Article Index : Current 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics
Islamic Terrorists Have Lots of Friends
   Next Article → AIR WEAPONS: Sidewinder Lite Satisfies
May 6, 2007: In the West, the object of the war on terror is to stop the terrorism. In the Islamic world, the goal is the same, but only if you are in an area subject to terrorism. This particular angle is often overlooked in the West. But if you go take a look at Islamic, particularly Arab, media, you will find some very scary stuff on this subject. Mainstream, mass media kind of scary stuff, not obscure, fringe kind of scary stuff. How scary? How about "news" that calls suicide bombers, attacking Western targets, heroes, and praises their work. This stuff rarely gets translated into English, for inclusion in English versions of Arab media. It's apparently considered an insider thing, a family secret that is best not shared with the rest of the world.

 

This stuff is nothing new. On September 11, 2001, Western expatriates working in Arab countries were shocked to see many of their Arab co-workers quite happy with the two towers coming down. High fives all around. When some expats confronted Arabs associates about this, they got a shrug, or perhaps a muttered, "you wouldn't understand." Apparently not. Opinion polls in late 2001 showed Arab populations rather sympathetic towards the suicide terrorists who killed all those kafirs (non-Moslems). The Arabs also tended to be against the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, and even more hostile towards the invasion of Iraq. But when al Qaeda started setting off bombs in Saudi Arabia, public opinion there quickly turned against Islamic terrorists. Same thing happened in Jordan, when an al Qaeda suicide bomber massacred Moslems attending a wedding.

 

Al Qaedas popularity has declined, year by year, as the terrorists continue to slaughter Moslems in Iraq. Yet the same Arabs who condemn killing Moslems in Iraq, are more forgiving when the victims are kafirs. In other words, a lot of Moslems talk peaceful coexistence, but approve of Islamic terrorists killing non-Moslems.

 

Many Moslems know that this attitude will not play well in the West. Thus the official policy of Moslem countries is to condemn Islamic terrorists. Yet the mass media in those countries is rather more sympathetic to these killers. There is also a tolerance for talk of a global Islamic empire (the "caliphate," despite the fact that the last one that meant anything went away a thousand years ago.)

 

Palestinian mass media is particularly effusive towards Islamic terrorists, especially if they are killing Israelis. Same with Iranian mass media. When Saddam was in power, it was the same in Iraq. With Saddam gone, and Iraqi media uncensored, there's still a lot of praise for "holy martyrs" (except for the ones killing Iraqis).

 

Many in the West believe that all this pro-terrorist talk will go away once economic prosperity comes to the Islamic world. Somewhat, but keep in mind that most middle and upper class Moslems share these pro-terrorist attitudes. So let's just face the fact that, if you are a kafir (and most people on the planet are), a whole lot of Moslems want you dead or converted to Islam. Unless you're Jewish, in which case only dead will do. You can look it up. In the Arab media.

 

Have a nice day.

 

 

 Next Article → AIR WEAPONS: Sidewinder Lite Satisfies
  

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
Herald1234    Grim picture, grim dsolution.    5/6/2007 12:25:57 PM
I want a LOT of convincing evidence that things are really this BAD before this Kafir unleashes the PROVEN remedy.
 
Herald
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       5/6/2007 5:48:10 PM
I want a LOT of convincing evidence that things are really this BAD before this Kafir unleashes the PROVEN remedy.
Herald
As a person from the rest of the world, I would say that it is worse than what was been described in the article.
And, it is not only limiting to Arab media. A lot of media in the rest of the world accept point of view from the MSM, and accept nothing but from the MSM. Mark Steyn is right when he wrote America Alone. A lot of point of views simply don't exist outside US territories.
 
BTW, whatever your remedy is, unless it is about culling people, I doubt that it would even take effect. Human nature tends to prefer feeling good rather than being good. The best and fastest way to get feel-good is to paint somebody as evil and we are innocent and righteous who suffer from the bad guys. It is too bad, because the human world is all about interaction between incarnations of Eric Cartman, and we the human beings are proved to be so easy to succumb to such feelings.

I'm not saying that I'm immune to this. Therefore, I think the best way to deal with that is still the Chinese solution: build a wall to keep them out, which is adopted by Israelis and works pretty darn well.
 
Culling people is actually a very good solution, albeit a very notorious, cruel and evil one. See how many Protestants are there in France today, and you get my idea.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    Granted, YC.   5/6/2007 7:02:45 PM
Walls never work in the long run as the Jinn found out against the Mongols.

Dead works in the long run, as the Carthaginians.found out before the Romans killed them.

Herald
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       5/6/2007 7:25:43 PM
Actually, Jin dynasty, which was established by Niujen tribes (later renamed themselves as Manchurians), never build the wall. The Wall became derelict when Mongol rised, and they just didn't have the money and time the rebuild it. The loyalty of Han people under their rule is also questionable. They have both external and internal problems. Song dynasty was never able to reclaim Beijing areas ceded to another nomad people (Empire of Liao by Chidang people) by previous dynasty. The Great Wall that we have today was the result of Ming's effort to rebuild the wall, and it has proved to be sucessful against nomads, especially with some firepower. Well, it works until a Ming General who was guarding Shanghai Fortress (Shanghaiguang) betrayed Ming and sided with Manchurians in order to save his wife from the mob army who ransacked Beijing and destroyed the central government at the moment.
 
Quote    Reply

Yimmy       5/6/2007 8:25:28 PM
Don't forget Hadrians wall.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       5/6/2007 8:29:06 PM

Actually, Jin dynasty, which was established by Niujen tribes (later renamed themselves as Manchurians), never build the wall. The Wall became derelict when Mongol rised, and they just didn't have the money and time the rebuild it. The loyalty of Han people under their rule is also questionable. They have both external and internal problems. Song dynasty was never able to reclaim Beijing areas ceded to another nomad people (Empire of Liao by Chidang people) by previous dynasty. The Great Wall that we have today was the result of Ming's effort to rebuild the wall, and it has proved to be sucessful against nomads, especially with some firepower. Well, it works until a Ming General who was guarding Shanghai Fortress (Shanghaiguang) betrayed Ming and sided with Manchurians in order to save his wife from the mob army who ransacked Beijing and destroyed the central government at the moment.

This is something I learn that is new to me. But in it I also learn something that is old, which is that you have to maintain a defense against the barbarians, even if you have a successful wall. See this that if the barbarians are all dead, then you can farm instead of patrol your wall.  You can trade with your peaceful neighbor across the hill or the next valley over. You need not send someone out every so seven years to knock over the yurts and skewer the next up and coming Timochen to keep the borders quiet. If the warlike Mongols are all dead and your neighbors are now boyars, then its trade across the Amur. You just have to watch out for those greedy Muscovites..

I tend to regard the arabs as bandits. They need law. All I propose is that we give them all the law they can handle. They will either adapt to the new conditions or die.

I care not which as I regard a moslem with a WMD as I would regard a wicked child with such a device. Maybe the moslem lacks realistic adult judgment and this could not be blamed, but he just stupid enough to use it  in a fit of frustrated rage when he is thwarted in his superstitious insanity. Whatever he would claim as an excuse would not bring back the dead innocents he killed.

What to do then?

I'd rather try rule of law before rule of retribution. I cannot see any nation being reasonable in any fashion,  after one of their cities disappears, or after tens of thousands of their citizens are poisoned. Do you see that under those conditions that the outcome of such an event would be far worse than a programmed culling now to remove the worst of the maniacs among the bandits, before such general retribution becomes necessary?

Herald

 

 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       5/6/2007 9:29:32 PM
Actually, The fifth emperor of Han dynasty, whose death name is Hanwudi, did just that. He sent two generals in pursuit of rogue Hun tribes, and those tribes fled west then finally came to Europe. When they came to Europe, they were united by the guy called Attila. The remnant of Hun tribes was absorbed into Han Empire. After the age of Three Kingdoms and in Jing dynasty (not Jin mentioned, this is a Han Chinese dynasty), Han's population was declined and the economy was in shamble. What happened then was quite similar to what happened in Western Roman Empire about 4 hundred years later. The barbarians took over many parts of the nation in the north, and the South remained Han.
 
If anything that we can learn from the fall of Western Roman and Han Chinese's early empires, it is the population growth rate.
 
Quote    Reply

2T2IC       5/7/2007 4:39:49 AM
I think the Islamofacist now realize that going up against a military superpower head on does not help advance their global conquest.  However, focusing their energy and resources on our self-defeating political and legal system may create the results they need.  Our weak borders and shabby immigration policies also help Islam by populating this country (and others) with Moslems sympathetic to the “cause” who will be voters.  So bombs and walls will not work today since they are already amongst us (some blue eyed and blond hair types as well). I can only conclude that our future is in the hands of lawyers who run this country - the type who don't see Islam as a threat.  God help us all!
 
Quote    Reply

kerravon       5/7/2007 10:12:05 AM

I want a LOT of convincing evidence that things are really this BAD before this Kafir unleashes the PROVEN remedy.

 

Herald

 

 


Take a look at the opinion polls. Something like 50% of Pakistan supports Osama Bin Laden. But before the genocide starts, it would be nice to know exactly why the other 50% don't. What is causing countries to be split down the middle? In Australia, there was a 50/50 split on whether or not to liberate Iraq or not. Families were split. Families in Iraq are split. You can have one brother informing on his insurgent brother. I regularly chat with a Pakistani who dislikes his brain-dead brother who joined the Taliban. Same education, same language, same culture, same food, same TV, same religion, same house. Yet 2 diametrically opposed outcomes.
The first step in figuring out what is going on is to liberate everyone, so that we can see the results of a secret ballot and freedom of speech.
 
THEN it's time for a final battle against the enemies of the free world. By the way, someone said that some views are only found in the US. That's complete rubbish. Every view can be found in every country in the world. It's just a matter of differing percentages. It is true that the US beat Australia in the number of people supporting the liberation of Iraq, but it wasn't by much. People should stop identifying themselves as "American" or "Australian". There's no such thing. You need to instead find what ideology you belong to. Then you will find your allies in every country in the world.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Photon       5/7/2007 1:12:29 PM
Pop nukes over Mecca and other pretty darn holy sites; turn them into radioactive car parks.  Religion can be destroyed, but you have to go after physical infrastructures.  (Destroy holy sites, burn books, neutralize religious leaders, and so on.)  What the 'kafirs' should be doing is to overturn the table and treat the Muslims as kafirs.  Since they feel special, take away things that make them feel special.  Or ..... plunder as much petroleum as soon as possible, then leave the sand and let them end up as a rubble in the annals of human history.  The fact that they get too high on terrorism means they have too much money; taking away money from those whose heads are up in their sphincters ought to make the world a much better place to live.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2