« Jessica Alba On Full Display At MTV Movie Awards | Main | "For god's sake, Mark, watch out for that pothole!" »

I'd rather fight than switch

Recently, I was mocked by a commenter who wanted to know if I feared the United States was in danger of being forcibly converted to Islam. I started answering that in the comments, but it started running a bit long, so I figured it'd be better suited to its own posting.

Do I think that the United States is in danger of being forcibly converted to Islam? No. But do I think that is the clearly and repeatedly stated goal of countless Islamists around the world? Yes.

Here's an analogy: the seven-year-old boy who lives next door to you constantly screams that he hates you, hates your whole family, and wants to kill you. His parents just dismiss this behavior, saying "he's just a child, he'll outgrow this."

Do you worry much? No. But suppose you see that boy heading towards your house with a baseball bat or a knife. Now, he's still not very likely to be able to kill you, but he's a determined threat and at that point you ignore him at your own peril. Because you might be able to take away his weapons and send him home unarmed, but sooner or later he's going to come back with a gun or a can of gasoline.

That's much like how I see the war on militant Islam, with nuclear or biological weapons being the equivalent of the gun or gasoline. The kid has already gotten in one good shot with the baseball bat, back on 9/11, and that woke us up to the fact that this little psychopath isn't in need of "understanding" or "compassion," but some serious attention before he gets someone killed -- us or him.

It is the clearly-stated and oft-repeated goal of the militant Muslims to bring the whole world to their vision of Islam, and while I don't believe they will succeed, I do believe that the effort to stop them will cost more and more, the longer we wait.

Great strides have been made so far. We've deprived them of two significant bases and sources of support in Afghanistan and Iraq, and other nations are finding it a good idea to curtail their support as well (Libya for one, the increasingly-nervous Syria and Iran for two more).

Many "bad guys" tend to telegraph their intentions. Hitler outlined his plans and beliefs in Mein Kampf, over a decade before World War II. Imperial Japan spelled out its vision with the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere." And the Soviet Union never made any secret of their vision of worldwide Communism.

We've ignored these warnings to our own great detriment in the past. I'm relieved to see that we're not doing so this time.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference I'd rather fight than switch:

Comments (59)

Well said, Jay Tea. I must ... (Below threshold)

Well said, Jay Tea. I must admit, however, that it reminded me once again of how you said you felt after reading "Sanctuary" by Bill Whittle because it's the way I feel right now.

Jay, carry it a bit further... (Below threshold)

Jay, carry it a bit further. He rants and raves while he is seven....and then 11 years go by and nothing was done to stop him as a child and now he's an adult...

I was thinking the same thi... (Below threshold)
Just Me:

I was thinking the same thing Faith was-right now he isn't much of a threat, because he is seven, and while he can do a lot with the gun or the gasoline, if you humor him without any correction, at some point he will be almost or just as big as you are, and even the baseball bat will cause a lot of harm.

Decent analogy. I've found ... (Below threshold)

Decent analogy. I've found that reducing nation-states and international groups to neighborhood elements can be very instructive in understanding their dynamics. So once again, I'm going to have to hawk my own very very similar take on this whole thing. I swear this is the last time I'll shill for this post:


(direct link added by Jay Tea. Roland, my apologies; I should have praised that piece of yours to high heaven when you first linked to it. It really nails it.)

yeah lets nuke all the musl... (Below threshold)

yeah lets nuke all the muslims and while we're at it let kill all the niggers as well.

Yeah, Adolph. This post is ... (Below threshold)

Yeah, Adolph. This post is all about "racial purity" and Jay really believes in the "final solution" for Islam.

Now run along and play. Gonna be nap time before too long, and you've had enough kool-aid for the morning.

Actually Adolf, if we're go... (Below threshold)

Actually Adolf, if we're going to start nuking people, I vote that we start with you.

Adolf, do you know somethin... (Below threshold)

Adolf, do you know something we don't know? Is there a movement of blacks around the globe to forcibly take over civilization and convert everyone to their way of "black" ideology? I believe if you follow Jay's statements about radical Islam, your inclusion of "n*****s" in your post suggests you believe the same about blacks - as Jay never inferred that from what I see. And I know not all blacks are Muslim.

No one is usggesting that t... (Below threshold)

No one is usggesting that terrorists with nuclear or biological weapons are not a threat. But comparing a group of terrorists to the despotic leaders of nation states is simply off the mark and not helping. Bin Laden is not Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini or Hirohito. But for some reason you, Bush and many others need him to be. So, very much like his own followers, you blow him up into something he is not: a threat to Western Civilization itself. It's really hard not to see this delivberate aggrandizement in so many of your posts when you rehash thousands of years of religious history to whoop the more fanatical among your own readership into frothy calls for defense of the Mother Culture. I'm not holding out "understanding" or "compassion" for Bin Laden or terrorists. We need to take the threat seriously but we do more harm than good by turning this into a clash of civilizations. That's exactly what Bin Laden and his followers want this to be, it seems to be what you want this to be too. But that's not what it is.

A street gang in Los Angeles, while dangerous, is not going to bring the city crashing down. BUt leveling a whole neighborhood with airstrikes to deal with it may because an inordinate response can be as dangerous to our long term interests as no response. We run the risk of sowing sympathy for the street gang, or, by reacting so disproportionately, providing evidence to other troubled kids that the street gang is as powerful a threat as it says it is, giving reality to what was before mere fantasy, propped up by a few lucky hits.

Let's look at the facts. Bush responded to the threat of an isolated, extremist organization by attacking two nation states. One of them a secular dictatorship with no connection to 9-11 and his followers began calling this World War III, a war to save Western Civilization itself. Now guess what? As you posted early, foreign fighters are now the most fanatical portion of the insurgency, despite their numerical marginality, but their numbers are growing. We are feeding the beast, not starving it or containing it. Why? Not because we ignored the warnings but because we saw a kid with a box cutter and decided to burn down his whole house down.

I'm not worried about forci... (Below threshold)

I'm not worried about forcible conversion, at least not yet. I am VERY worried right now about the concerted effort to garner unearned sympathy for jihadists and to push complete moral equivalency for Islam with Judaism and Christianity. We would obviously reject outright forcible conversion - like throwing the proverbial frog into a pot of boiling water.

However, as the MSM and other fifth column elements (such as certain university professors)propagandize for jihadists, portray them as victims deserving our sympathy, and pound out the "Islam is the religion of peace" drumbeat, they incrementally cause people to not only lower their guard about Islam and its jihadists, they actually cause people to identify with, sympathize, and even support their causes. The remainder of the populace puts up with this, gets used to those extra few degrees in the pot. This is far more insidious and far more dangerous.

Frame...the way I read your... (Below threshold)

Frame...the way I read your post, it seems as if you don't want to equate bin Laden with Hitler. I think that's a mistake because this war is quite different from the wars of the past, because while the enemy is clearly defined, their adherents do not owe allegiance to any single state.

That is why President Bush is right when he tells the world that "...you are either with us, or you are with the Terrorists."

At least we know where Frawnce stands!

The problem isn't so much t... (Below threshold)

The problem isn't so much that the Islamofascists will actually be able to forcibly impose their will on us; it's that they could end up killing a hell of a lot of people trying. And while Saddam may not have had any connection to 9/11--and the Bush administration never claimed that he did--he did, according to the 9/11 Commission, have contacts with Al-Qaeda.

I agree with Frameone that ... (Below threshold)

I agree with Frameone that bin Laden wants to make this out as a clash of civilizations. But I wish people wouldn't look at 9/11 as an isolated incident but as an even more agressive attack against our interests which previously included attacks on warships, embassies and the WTC. So, how long do you allow someone to ramp up the challenge? What level of destruction is needed before you finally act to retaliate? bin Laden is obviously not Hitler or Stalin. But his influence goes beyond discreet national jurisdictions. For that reason I believe his potential threat is greater. Of course the people who engineered our response to 9/11 are going to be villified in certain quarters. But they are villified by the same people who are the first to yell for someone to do something when the inconveniences caused by these terrorists hit too close to their homes.

We've ignored these warn... (Below threshold)

We've ignored these warnings to our own great detriment in the past. I'm relieved to see that we're not doing so this time.

A minor issue, but I hardly think that the threat of Communism was ignored. At least two wars (The Korean War, and the Vietnam War) were fought in response to the Communist threat. Never mind the Cuban Missle Crisis or the U.S. troops sent into Nicaragua and Honduras during the 80's. I think that there is evidence showing the U.S. and the world turned a blind eye to Hitler and the Empire of Japan, but ignoring Communism? I don't think so.

"the enemy is clearly defin... (Below threshold)

"the enemy is clearly defined, their adherents do not owe allegiance to any single state."

But the enemy isn't clearly defined in part because of the rhetoric that appears here and elsehwere everyday. Is the enemy al-Qaeda, militant Islam, Islamofascists (whatever that means), Islam itself, the American media, France, me?

You guys are all over the place hunting for conspiracies and threats, pointing fingers at anyone who suggests you're going a little overboard as appeasers, traitors, enemies of Western Civilization.
It's crazy. Are we fighting a group of militants that justifies its violence with religious rhetoric (not exactly an original or unexpected strategy BTW) or an entire religion? Many people here seem to think we're fighting an entire world religion. The reality is that we are not fighting an entire world religion but we will be if we act like we are or give the appearance that we are. This is exactly what Bin Laden wanted in the first place. Think about it. What would benefit Bin Laden more than for the US and "the West" to declare war on Islam itself? We haven't yet but were doing a damn fine job of giving him all the propaganda he needs to make it seem as if we are (and please don't give me that tired the media hates America line, Dan Rather didn't try to sexually humiate anyone at Abu Ghraib or hang anyone from chains in Afghanistan). Heck, even Bush himself slipped once and referred to the war on terror as a "crusade." If you guys want a crusade, that's exactly what you're going to get. But where are you going to find the bodies to back you up? I hate to bring it back up again but if we are really fighting a threat as grave as Nazism or Communism, a threat that endangers the very existence of Western Civilization, why haven't you all enlisted? I mean really, it's just silly to say "THIS IS THE GRAVEST THREAT THAT WESTERN CIVILIZATION HAS EVER FACED WE MUST ACT NOW OR BE KILLED OR CONVERTED" but then sacrifice nothing to stop it. I mean how is anyone suppose to take you all seriously?

Frameone frothed - Is th... (Below threshold)

Frameone frothed - Is the enemy al-Qaeda, militant Islam, Islamofascists (whatever that means), Islam itself, the American media, France, me?

The first 3 are one and the same. Not all islamofascits are in alQueda, but all members of alQueda are islamofascists.
For the remaining, while France, the American media, you and the greater mass of islam, may not be direct enemies, they are far from being reliable allies. They are all consistently hostile, often providing aid and comfort to our enemies. Sometimes it is based on a defacto oppostion to American power (media, France, possibly you), other times it is becasue they profit from islamist regimes and fomenting dissent among islamic people (France, Russia, Germany, some sectors of islamic world [Saudi royal family springs to mind]).

My problem with this whole ... (Below threshold)

My problem with this whole "war on terrorism" thing is the Bush administration doesn't seem to really CARE about fighting militant Islamic terrorism.

So statements like Jay Tea's claiming we've made strides in : "Two significant bases and sources of support in Afghanistan and Iraq" disturb me.

Such statements IGNORE that A) Bush's pals Saudi Arabia are the #1 exporters and supporters of militant Islamicist terrorists, and B) Iraq was neither a base nor source of support for Bin-Laden, or militant Islam. The most anyone's ever been able to tell is that there were 'contacts' between Iraq and Al-Quida, and on closer examination, those 'contacts' amounted to Al Quida asking for support and Saddam saying "no."

'Contacts' didn't equal 'support' when the Taliban officials were INVITED by the Bush administration into the White House prior to 9/11. Did it?

It also bothers when Jay Sea says:

"We've ignored these warnings to our own great detriment in the past. I'm relieved to see that we're not doing so this time."

Excuse me, but did I miss something, or is Bin Laden captured? Is Mullah Omar captured? Is Zawahiri captured? Because I seem to recall Bush recently holding hands with a Saudi Prince like schoolgirls, and Bush saying about Bin Laden, and I quote; "I don't know where he is. You know, I just don't spend that much time on him to be honest with you...and again, I don't know where he is. I'll repeat what I said, I am truly not that concerned about him."

Bush is not concerned about Bin Laden beacuse he's happy to allow the deaths at the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and Pennsylvania to remain unavenged. He was never interested in the so-called 'war on terrorism' he was only ever interested in getting his mits on Iraq.

And he's never been interested in spreading 'democracy' to the Middle East. They said the first war would bring Democracy to Kuwait, but a Royal Family rules that nation with an Iron fist. Is there democracy in Afghanistan? Because the last ime I check WARLORDS ruled that country and the Afghan president can't venture outide his captiol city. Whatever Democracy is in Iraq is undermined by constant bloodshed in the street, so excuse me for assuming terrorist control Iraq and not a so-called Iraqi Democracy.

And every extra day Bin Laden runs wild and free, is another day I become even more firmly convinced that Bush just doesn't care. So why shouldn't I believe my own ears when Bush says he "doesn't spend much time on" Bin Laden? Why shouldn't I believe my own ears?

That's the hard-cold truth that makes me sick to my stomach.

frameone wrote:<br /... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

frameone wrote:
Let's look at the facts.

Yes, let's.

Bush responded to the threat of an isolated, extremist organization by attacking two nation states.

Not a fact. There is no such thing as an isolated organization, because all organizations need resources. A paramilitary organization especially so, since modern weapons are not cheap.

One of them a secular dictatorship with no connection to 9-11

Not a fact. You wouldn't call Bush a secular leader if he added "God is great" to the U.S. flag or wrote an entire Bible in his own blood, but Saddam does the equivalent and yet you insist on bleating the tired "Saddam was secular" mantra. Pitiful cognitive dissonance.

Also, to make sure you can maintain the fantasy that Saddam's government had nothing to do with 9/11, completely ignore CBS's report in 1999 about Saddam's close ties to Al-Qaida.

Avert your eyes from PBS's interview in October 2001 of an Iraqi eyewitness to a terrorist training camp just south of Baghdad working on airplane hijackings.

And whatever you do, never, ever look at any of the satellite photos showing the 707 fuselage in the middle of a dirt field that completely buttress the eyewitness's story.

and his followers began calling this World War III, a war to save Western Civilization itself.

It is. It's funny how you can start your post with something like "terrorists with nuclear or biological weapons are dangerous" and then end up with the above statement.

Why do you think these people want such weapons?

How many deaths here in America would it take for you to understand that our capitulation to them and their primitive religion is their ultimate goal?

Can you not understand the significance of the targets they picked in September 11, 2001? Let me spell it out for you, since you obviously can't think for yourself:

Pentagon - Seat of our military power.

White House or Capitol Building - Seat of our political power.

World Trade Center - Seat of our economic power (or so they thought.)

The Al-Qaida terrorists wanted to cripple us politically, militarily, and economically all in one fell swoop, so that we would be vulnerable to whatever demands they made. They, thankfully, had very little understanding of how our country functions and how decentralized we are.

They are learning, though, and people like you had better wake up before you find yourself kneeling either inside a mosque in prayer or outside of one awaiting decapitation.

frameoneThe only r... (Below threshold)


The only reason that "street gang in LA" hasn't brought down the city is that they have no intention to ... they are predators that need the working stiffs to rob or sell drugs to.

And most of the time, the gangs are fighting each other over turf. The gangs have pretty stiff control of the prisons in CA, too.

Though, not highly publicized for obvious reasons, some gangs are "cooperating" with each other and are posing a rising threat with ever more frequent, violent crimes and frustrating investigations.

If LA street gangs somehow came up with an all inclusive (social/government/religious) ideology that decided it was time for them to "take over", blood would be running in the streets. Easy.

Islamists already have that leg-up on streetgangs.

Ignore dar ul Islam at your own peril, unless you're looking forward to dhimmitude?

I will not be welcoming our New Islamist Overlords.

Yes Darleen, I am looking f... (Below threshold)

Yes Darleen, I am looking forward to "dhimmitude." Subjugation is my bag. I will welcome our "New Islamist Overlords" with supplications and flowers.

I'm sorry but you're a nut.

FrameoneWhy don't ... (Below threshold)


Why don't you tell me, then, why you are in such abject denial about Islamism?

Did you just watch 9/11 on TV and think it was fiction?

well I guess the only good ... (Below threshold)

well I guess the only good thing about Islamic Fascists overthrowing our government and taking over is that the same leftist anti war, anti zion, anti christian, anti western assholes who do their level best to intellectually aid and assist the enemy will not be treated as kindly by the new overlords. In fact they will be the first to be placed up against the wall or on the chopping block. Thats the good news. The bad news is that we would be next.

Like the sun rising in the ... (Below threshold)

Like the sun rising in the east, the swallows returning to Capistrano and the buzzards returning to Hinckley, Ohio, frameone has arrived bearing insults, ad hominem attacks and shrill invective.

All's right with the world again.

frameone has to maintain hi... (Below threshold)

frameone has to maintain his stance because he must ignore the growing threat Islamofacist have been over the years. He can't maintain the fantasy that terrorism didn't exist prior to Bush. In his world it all started with Bush and is Bush's fault. All other evidence must be surpressed or denied like a child who closes his eyes when someone tells them something they wish not to see or hear.

Sorry frame, but you've become predictable to the point where I think it's arguable you simply aren't a posting bot. It's a nearly verbatim script of the Soro's worshippers.

"Sorry frame, but you've be... (Below threshold)

"Sorry frame, but you've become predictable to the point where I think it's arguable you simply aren't a posting bot. It's a nearly verbatim script of the Soro's worshippers."

Maybe, but then again my parrot can say "Islamofascist" too.

you know I never said that Islamic terrorists aren't a threat and haven't been for a while. I just said they don't represent the clash of civilizations that you all seem to WANT them to represent. You are as consipracy addled as some on the far-left only your conspiracies demand that everyone but yourselves go out and sacrifice life and limb to protect what you claim to hold so dear. I mean Darleen has vowed not to submit to "Islamic Overloads" as if that means anything. At all. Except to inflate her own ego and self-aggrandizement. You have to admit, it's weird.

"The Al-Qaida terrorists wa... (Below threshold)

"The Al-Qaida terrorists wanted to cripple us politically, militarily, and economically all in one fell swoop, so that we would be vulnerable to whatever demands they made."

The economic downturn certainly was worsened by 9-11 but really only temporarily. The loss of life on that day was horrific and tragic but nothing on the kind of scale that could even remotely be seen to make us so vulnerable that we as a nation would submit to anyone's demands. Quite frankly the idea that any kind of attack from al-Qaeda, nuclear biologicalk or whatever could be so far reaching as to destroy our entirely our way of life and force us to submit to Islamic rule belongs purely to the realm of paranoid fantasy. We are the most powerful nationon earth and we have 140,000 troops in Iraq and we can't get them to submit to shit.

Jay teaI am surprise... (Below threshold)

Jay tea
I am surprised anyone would actually ask you that question since there seems to be no basis for it. I'm also surprised that the commentator didn't ask you for your thoughts on the threat from evangelical fundamentalism, which seems to be well on its way to taking over the GOP. Growing up in Belfast i saw only too well what religious extremism can do to a society, something i wouldn't wish on my mortal enemy.

I mean Darleen has vowe... (Below threshold)

I mean Darleen has vowed not to submit to "Islamic Overloads"

Ah, keeyriiist, I make a humorous play-on-words of a line from The Simpsons and frameone runs with it.

BTW frameone... considering what parts of EU, especially France have been doing about their unassimilated, hostile Islamist populations ... ie giving in to them ...it is not farfetched that America could easily follow the EU example if Islamists could succeed in more and bloodier attacks on US soil...especially given they know they can count on the quislings of the Left who always claim America is the cause of Islamist enmity.

GordonGet back to ... (Below threshold)


Get back to me when Berserker Baptists/Crazed Catholics/PissedOffPresbyterians start strapping bombs on their bodies and blowing up school buses, nightclubs on Universal Citywalk and the Pirates of the Carribean ride at Disneyland.


Frameone, find a doctor and... (Below threshold)
Red Five:

Frameone, find a doctor and have him cure your acute case of cranial sphinctosis. NOW.

Do you really believe that everyone who supports the war should go fight it? How ridiculously stupid can you be? The people back home get to keep the economy going so that we can pay for this war, you idiot. I sacrifice my tax dollars for this thing.

I imagine that Bush is not concerned about bin Laden because he has delegated that task to those who can best execute that task: the U.S. military. They're looking for him, and they will find him (or what's left of him). Bush trusts the people he's placed under him, so he's being an EXECUTIVE OFFICER, not a micro-managing senator-cum-president. Good CEOs do not manage the minutae of underlings' tasks; that's why they HAVE underlings. Tell them to do something, and then trust them to do it.

The street gangs aren't even in the same league as the terrorists, simply because they're not working within the same scope as the terrorists. The islamofascists want to take over the world. The gangs don't.

Bin Laden is at least as bad as Hitler, Stalin, or Moussilini (sp?). He is charismatic, he throws out the ideas that his followers want to hear, and he has nearly absolute control over those followers. The main difference, though, is that bin Laden leads a group which is spread around the world (over 60 nations by one count), so it is certainly not an isolated organization. It has supporters in many of those nations, and according to reports, Iraq was one of those supporters. Now, maybe Sod'em didn't support the 9/11 attacks, but he DID (apparently) support al-Qaeda.

BTW, it was kids with box-cutters who hijacked 4 planes and tried to burn our houses down. The "foreign fighters" have made up most of the Iraqi "insurgency" since the early days. The Iraqis want those bastards out of their country. You keep harping on the Saudis? Their time will come as will the Sudan, Syria, and Iran. No one ever said this was going to be a short war.

Gordon, what you saw in Bel... (Below threshold)
Red Five:

Gordon, what you saw in Belfast was most certainly religious extremism, with emphasis on the "extremism". What attacked us on 9/11 (among others) was also religious extremism. So you think that we evangelical Christians are religious zealots becoming more and more powerful, and will take over the country. You're welcome to your opinion, but you're also entitled to be wrong.

You see, we don't have a widespread zealotism going on in American evangelical circles (except for Pat Buchanan, but he doesn't count). The Church in America is far too diverse (and smart) for that. As I understand it, all the troubles in Ireland were due to a clash between the Catholics and one form of Protestantism, the Anglican Church. Methinks you've been drinking the Howard Dean koolaid (BOY is HE a whackjob. Even the Dems are backing away rapidly from him!). My comment about Pat Buchanan is exactly why such "religious right-wing control" wouldn't work: anyone who sounds like a whacko is dismissed by the mainstream, and never gains enough power to sustain such a coup.

BTW, you might be interested to know, Gordon, that this country was founded on ideals based on the Bible. Any claim of right-wing surrender to the religious ultra-right is silly; we'd just be taking one step back towards our national roots.

Red FiveI thought th... (Below threshold)

Red Five
I thought this country was based on what is in the Constitution, and scanning it i can't actually see a reference to the Bible.
America has done so well these past two hundred years, in large part because it has stayed away from wars attached to religion, instead fostering a culture of religious tolerance and welcoming people from all four corners of the globe, your ancestors.
Judeo-christian principles have a great part to play in America but it is only part of the great fabric that is America.To play down everything else is doing your country a great disservice.
And Darleen, why don't you read a bit about Irish history or any other world history for that matter. You might see that your comment is not so far off the mark.

Well as someone that has st... (Below threshold)

Well as someone that has studied Islam for over 20 years and has 2 best friends that have apostazised from this cult, I can assure you that Islam inherently is dangerous to us all and our freedoms.....Remember folks, Islamic terrorism started inthe Levant when Muhammed was murdering and looting and raping his way into greater power after his takeover of Medina!

So many people are so niave about Islam...Liberal idiots as we have seen on this board try to play the moral equivancy card with our Judeo/Christian heritage not knowing that Islam has been trying to enslave Europe from its inception.....it was only 300 years ago that Islam was barely defeated outside of Vienna or else Europa would be Islamic today.........and if Europe does not end its pee cee multiculti suicidal teachings, Islam will take over there by the womb!!

Make no mistakes folks.....the Quran and Hadiths are the Islamic world's Mein Kampf.....whether we like it or not, we are in a death struggle with Islam and it is only going to get worse......

Either we will be eventually destroyed by Islam or we will have to destroy this murderous cult....and the best way to destroy Islam is to continue exposing it from the inside and watch Muslims leave this cult as Islam has been wonderfully hemoragging in Sub Sahara Africa, Persia and parts of Indonesia!!

We WILL NEVER be able to live with Islam in peace.......Islam will never allow it.......Simply read the Quran and Sira and Sahih Hadiths to learn.......Islam has far far more in common with Nazism and Marxism then any world religion........is it any surprise that Islam is fighting against every non Islamic population it rubs up against from Buddhists to Zorastrians!!

Islam cannot be reformed folks.......it is brutal too its core........the war on terror didn't begin on 9-11.......we have been fighting it since that bastard Muhammed inspired his hate into the hearts of the Arabs over 1400 years ago....

GordonI know some ... (Below threshold)


I know some Irish history seeing my ex is a 2nd generation Irish-American and I wanted to be able to give my daughters some cultural background.

And the religious aspects of the Irish/English conflict are/were not the only reason behind the hostilities and hundreds of years of blood spilling.

The English considered the "Irish race" less than human. Cromwell helped spread tales of Irish having tails and their "inhuman" treatment of English/Scottish "settlers" ... made it easier to whip up the English back home to support a major land grab of the fertile Irish country.

The Protestant/Catholic camps in Ireland became less "religious" affiliation than political/cultural affiliations.

Yes, the US Constitution doesn't mention the Bible, but it does, from the 1st amendment and through the underlying tenets of the Federalist papers, spring forth from Judaeo-Christian values.

The US government is secular... as it should be ... the society is religious, as it need be.

frameone wrote:<br /... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

frameone wrote:
The economic downturn certainly was worsened by 9-11 but really only temporarily. The loss of life on that day was horrific and tragic but nothing on the kind of scale that could even remotely be seen to make us so vulnerable that we as a nation would submit to anyone's demands.

How are these sentences in any way related to the intentions of Al-Qaida on that day?

If someone tried to kill you with an icepick and didn't succeed, would you be okay with them being free to visit a shady gun dealer who sells MAC-10s out of his trunk? Maybe you could just beg them not to hurt you anymore and maybe put up some signs on your lawn saying "No weapons allowed." That'll protect you.

Quite frankly the idea that any kind of attack from al-Qaeda, nuclear biologicalk or whatever could be so far reaching as to destroy our entirely our way of life and force us to submit to Islamic rule belongs purely to the realm of paranoid fantasy.

Paranoid fantasy perfectly describes the mindset of these terrorists. That is why they want to destroy us, because we are the satanic outsiders who are living the lives of devils and must be either purified or purged by the followers of Allah. And that is why we must destroy them first.

Another fantasy is to believe that if we merely use harsh words and bribery, they will stop attacking us.

We are the most powerful nationon earth and we have 140,000 troops in Iraq and we can't get them to submit to shit.

If we adopted their join-us-or-die attitude and their methods with the weapons they wished they possessed, we could.

As it is, we are making tremendous progress while remaining humane, at the cost of American lives.

What Albertanator said!... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

What Albertanator said!

1st AmendmentCongres... (Below threshold)

1st Amendment
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
This is your argument that Judeo-Christian principles are at the heart of our culture?
This seems to back up what I said in my last comment, that America has fostered a culture of religious tolerance, ALL religions, not the ones we are able to pick and choose.

GordonLet me empha... (Below threshold)


Let me emphasize or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ... that is in line with the Judaeo-Christian values that are the foundation of this country. An individual is free to practice their religion without interference from Government. That includes interference that tries to OUTLAW religious beliefs.

It's that little thing common to most members of Judaism and Christianity ... Respect the GOVERNMENT you find yourself under and keep the faith yourself. The whole "render unto Caesar" thing.

And as long as moslems in America respect that distinction, no problem ... though they are at even more risk from Islamists than American Jews and Christians. They are consider apostates.

"Yes Darleen, I am looking ... (Below threshold)
Cousin Dave:

"Yes Darleen, I am looking forward to "dhimmitude." Subjugation is my bag. I will welcome our "New Islamist Overlords" with supplications and flowers.

I'm sorry but you're a nut. "

Hey frame, you forgot to demonstrate your vast intellectual superiority by calling Darleen a dipshit.

Kevin and co, please, I'm begging you, it's time to ban this clown. He keeps posting the same words over and over, on every thread, completely context-free. He's not adding anything.

WAKE up people before its t... (Below threshold)
american belgian:

WAKE up people before its too late! ISLAM IS NOT PEACEFUL! The very core of the quran is a blueprint for murder! The problem here is until the people around the world stop tolerating the intolerable and get an education on what the quran teaches to it's followers then nothing is going to be opposing it. Today in America over 80 percent of the mosque, islamic schools and islamic organizations are wahabi controlled. Terrorist money is flowing through our streets and under the radar in the disguise of charity and love! Until people realise that this ideology is a political movement disguises as a religion to overthrow us on both social, political and spiritual levels, we will never truly know our enemy. Why not? Why is it that people are too lazy or too tolerate to learn what they are about? Will it take another 911 to knock us off our comfort zone to finally wake up and realise this evil is not going away? It's like a cancer that needs to be surgically removed! Too many people are in denial of what is going on. The quran itself teaches to kill the nonbelievers! These crazy leaders are working overtime in recruiting and watering the seed of their people to take over the west.
Get an education on what it really is at www.prophetofdoom.net

READ THIS IF YOU HAVE TIME http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?P...a=sd&ID=SP91705

I agree with Cousin Dave. K... (Below threshold)

I agree with Cousin Dave. Kevin or Jay, please ban me.
I'm wasting too much time posting here, it's like some horrible addiction. The desire to correct each and every paranoid, hypocritical assertion that pops on this blog has become an obsession. I curse the Daou Report that first lead me here. So please do us all a favor and ban me. I just can't help myself.

Prepare for the radical cle... (Below threshold)

Prepare for the radical clerics, Dobson and Perkins.

Just looking at this thread... (Below threshold)

Just looking at this thread again it's very bizarre, lots of muslim bashing etc.
Is it not the stated intention of christianity to spread the gospel throughout the world? That's why we have had missionaries for hundreds of years, right?
Btw nothing against christianity, brought up in a God fearing home, but I find it annoying that we bash other religions who have as much right to exist as ours and who probably have a complex about christianity as much as we do about theirs

"Do you really believe that... (Below threshold)

"Do you really believe that everyone who supports the war should go fight it? How ridiculously stupid can you be? The people back home get to keep the economy going so that we can pay for this war, you idiot. I sacrifice my tax dollars for this thing."

Please ban me now Jay or Kevin because goodness gracious how could some one not swear his ass off in responding to a comment like this?

The people back home GET to keep the economy going! Oh boy I GET to keep the economy going instead of GETTING my ass shot off in Iraq or Afghanistan. How dare you impugn my integrety! Why I was outraged when President Bush forced me to take a tax cut that severely limited my ability to write checks in support of the bloodshed I oh so sweetly love and cheerlead for from the sidelines.

Yes Islam is going to destory Western Civlization and force me to pray five times a day. That's why I have to work even harder, here, at my desk, processing widget pruchasing orders for freedom. Yes, the more widgets my company moves the closer we are to defending Western Civilization as we know it. But I don't think of flex time, the commute to my nice suburban home, casual Fridays and weekend barbecues as any sort of burden. Oh no. I GET to keep the economy going! Afterall, I'm too valuable a worker to process papers for the Army or die defending my country. Oh no. I mean if I was in the Army I couldn't post on my blog as often and then the world would be in danger of not knowing how inhuman and savage our mortal enemies are and how I shouldn't have to go fight them because, well, that's someone elses job. You see, I'm delegating responsibility like a good manager. I GET to work and others GET to die for me. It's called management! Awesome.

Damn it GordonDo y... (Below threshold)

Damn it Gordon

Do you NOT know the difference between trying to persuade people via words and via sawing off the heads or stabbing to death the infidels who displease you? Islamists (not all moslems) are not Jehovah's witnesses merely going from door to door handing out the Watch Tower. These people are quite clear in their writings and sermons... YOU as a non-moslem have but THREE choices... convert, submit (dhimmi) or die.

Frameone... today is the 61st anniversary of D-Day...be thankful you didn't live back then 'cause your quisling pontifications wouldn't have gone over well.

DarleenWith the grea... (Below threshold)

With the greatest respect I lived amongst Muslims in London and never once did i have to submit or die.
They had their religion, i had mine end of story.
Many more muslims in the UK than here yet they are not trying to take over British politics, nor is there a movement in mainstream Britain to coral muslim opinion, except from the National Front who have extreme right wing views and are regarded as hooligans.
Instead what seems to be happening here is a muslim scare fest based on pure ignorance.
There are extremists on the muslim side certainly but that's what they are, extreme.
Go after Al Qaeda, the organization certainly, and hunt them down, decrease its power, possibly snuffing it out. But to attack Iraq is only shoving more young men into its arms by the thousands.
A simple analogy, if Britain had attacked the Republic of Ireland because Ira cells were holed up inside its borders, which they were, where would we be? All out war, probably still going on with casualties in the hundreds of thousands if not millions. Britain chose to fight the Ira mostly on the streets of Belfast, without waging war on the Republic. Thousands of lives were saved because of that and a peace process is under way.
When people die things get really personal. America discovered that on Sept 11 and the whole world mourned. Now with close to 100,000 lying dead in Iraq, they will go through the same process and many people will be recruited to swell the insurgent ranks.
America cannot possibly win that war, no matter if they had 500,000 troops there, (motivation, thousands of miles from home, lack of knowledge of culture and turf.) Remember your own story of Independence.
Sad thing is most people throughout the world knew that going in.

gordon wrote:... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

gordon wrote:
Many more muslims in the UK than here yet they are not trying to take over British politics


But to attack Iraq is only shoving more young men into its [Al-Qaeda's] arms by the thousands.


Now with close to 100,000 lying dead in Iraq, they will go through the same process and many people will be recruited to swell the insurgent ranks.


SueAgain with respec... (Below threshold)

Again with respect.
Your links prove that you have found some article which falls in line with your opinion?
Ask anybody from Britain if muslims are taking over?
I'll give you a white pages and you can call them all. 1% might agree with you if you're lucky, and of that 1% I doubt if you would want to be associated with many of them.
Of the 100,000 dead, just use common sense here for a moment. Shock and awe alone dropped over 2,000 tonnes of high explosive on a densely packed city of over 2 million people, never mind the fighting before and after.
Then all the fighting in Fallujah, Ramadi, Mosul etc etc since then. The list goes on and on. The article you showed debated about the 100,000, could be more, could be less. Let's agree that many thousands have died, would that be OK?
As for the other article, I don't know what you are trying to say through it. It proves that the Army came across a bunker, that's it.
What is measurable is the number of attacks by insurgent forces, 73 bombs going off last week, if I am not mistaken, hardly a picnic.
May I just say that 70 American soldiers dying last month alone with nearly 600 Iraqis may be an acceptable level of violence for you, for me it's not and on that we'll agree to differ.

So aside from Al Qaida, who... (Below threshold)

So aside from Al Qaida, who's even coming near us with anything resembling a bat?

Geez GordonFirst o... (Below threshold)

Geez Gordon

First off, the IRA NEVER had taking over Britian in mind.

Second, some of the worst kind of moslem extremism exists in Britian (hello, where do you think the shoe-bomber got his marching orders?) only outdone by the defacto Sharia run ghettos of Paris. the French have pretty much given up on trying to control. Theo Van Gogh is slaughtered in the street in broad daylight by a Ilamist terrorist even as he was begging "can't we talk?" and others are heavily guarded because of the hostile Islamist populace in the Netherlands.

Read the Hamas Covenant, listen to the Friday sermons of Imams in the ME,

for you to DENY that Islamists are a serious problem for Western Civilization is jaw-dropping. What planet are you living on...cause it aint Earth.

Though, Britian has more problems than just Islamists since they've even given up on the moral imperative of self-defense.

The English, the new PC sacrificial sheep.

I'll weep at their passing.

Jay,Comes down to ... (Below threshold)


Comes down to 3 words: "Honor the threat."

I think it's a naval quote/saying but couldn't find the orgin in the 2 minutes I was willing to look.

You didn't read enough, Gor... (Below threshold)
Sue Dohnim:

You didn't read enough, Gordon. Your talking points are so 2004.

The article about Muslim assimilation of Europe quotes the jihadis themselves along with their most popular media outlets. Make sure to ignore that and keep chanting the talking points.

The very recent news article talks about how a large number of foreign fighters were found in (no doubt) old Saddam bunkers, and how Iraqi forces were instrumental in getting them.

This article is one of many, many articles that keep using the word "insurgents" and then go on to talk about foreign fighters. The enemy consists of more Jordanians, Syrians, Egyptians, and Iranians than Iraqis. The fact that suicide bombers keep attacking Iraqi police stations and Iraqi military recruiting posts, not American bases, should have given even someone like you a hint.

If anything, the "insurgency" is pushing more and more young Iraqi men into the Iraqi armed forces to fight the foreign jihadis.

But keep reading stuff from Michael Moore, CommonDreams.org, and other communist tripe, because they keep the proles well fed with pablum. Year-old pablum.

The article debunking the 100,000 Iraqi CIVILIAN dead (which I'm sure is what you're implying - you couldn't POSSIBLY be talking sympathetically about JIHADIS, could you?) shows how flawed the only peer-reviewed study of Iraqi war deaths is.

The ADMITTED statistical margin of error in the report is over 90,000 deaths!

Let me help you with the calculations: that means that the actual number of Iraqi civilians is SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 8,000 and 194,000 DEATHS!

In other words, like your "common sense" response, it's almost completely artificial and arbitruary.

Also, notice the source of the debunking: Slate. Slate slants towards anti-Bush and anti-war. It's not sympathetic to Republicans at all. If I had really wanted to only get articles that supported my viewpoint, I would have gone to the right's equivalent of Democratic Underground - Free Republic.

DarleenYou seem like... (Below threshold)

You seem like a good person but I'm amazed you actually feel comfortable stepping outside your door in case some axe wielding Zarqawi lookalike is waiting behind the rose bushes.
It's the aim of every religion to spread their gospel, Christianity too, and the funny thing is there is probably some Muslim blogger who is paralyzed with fear waiting for you to knock on his door.They are scared stiff because Christians control the world's finances.How are muslims ever going to take over the world if they don't have 2 cents to rub together?
In short, Darleen, enjoy your life, enjoy your kids and stop worrying about the all conquering Muslims.

SueYou are obviously... (Below threshold)

You are obviously convinced that you will be wearing a yashmak next year so no matter what i say is going to help.
Go over to Europe, see for yourself what the place is like, you might be pleasantly surprised.
Be careful though, you might get converted.
And as for the foreign fighter thing, you seem surprised. Didn't 911 tell you something?
15 of the 19 were Saudi Arabian. BL is from there too. Maybe it's just me but if I was going after a terrorist organization I'd attack them where they came from. It's like trying to defeat the IRA by attacking the Ivory Coast. The whole premise for this war is a joke.

Gordon -- Don't yo... (Below threshold)

Gordon --

Don't you know that the sinister Islamofascists can get us through the water supply? Yes, it's true! As we speak they are plotting to defile the purity of our bodily essences! Brig. Gen. Jack D. Ripper where are when we need you!

Gordon, according to the le... (Below threshold)
Red Five:

Gordon, according to the left, the Eeeeevviillll Jooooooossss (TM) are controlling the world's finances. C'mon, get it right. Sheesh.

I never insinuated that the Bible was mentioned in the Constitution. Neither is God, per se. The interesting thing is that every man who wrote and signed the Constitution believed in God, and all but 2 actively participated in church activities. Almost everyone who came to the Colonies in the first place did so because they wanted the freedom to worship God as they saw fit, not as the Anglican Church told them to. Read the Declaration of Independence. Things might become clearer when you do.

Framenone, what I was attempting to say earlier was that if everyone was fighting the war, there would be no one available to pay for it. By, you know, producing the equipment needed by the soliers, or by other people paying taxes to pay for the war, by, like, working. At a job. That pays money.

And as has been proven in the past, if you lower the individual's (or the business's) tax burden, by lowering taxes, you actually increase the amount of tax revenue generated during the tax cycle. It's simple macroeconomics. People who pay less in taxes have more discretionary income. Those that own businesses find they have more money to hire new people and increase wages voluntarily (increasing the minimum wage is just like raising taxes: BAD). The more people who are earning money, the more tax revenue is generated, and the more the government has to work with, all because they lowered taxes.

I realize that this kind of thinking is difficult for a leftie who believes in the zero-sum economy, but that's the problem: it's NOT a zero-sum economy. I didn't get screwed over just because Bill Gates earned another $2 billion last week. I didn't lose any of my money just because he got more. There's this little thing called interest, which lets people or banks earn money on their money, which increases the amount of money available in the economy.

In my book, taxation is a sacrifice. Certainly nothing on the level of magnitude of people like my brother, 2 grandfathers, 2 uncles, and 1 great-grandfather who have all served in the Army or Navy in various wars over the last century (my brother in Iraq), but it's something anyway.

The point of Jay Tea's original post, I think, was to indicate that the radical Muslims were trying to destroy Western Civilization, not that they would actually, you know, succeed. Just because we have taken out 2 of the worst Muslim offenders over there, some of the others are scared spitless. Libya came clean about their nuclear program. Syria pulled out of Lebanon without a shot fired (the hundreds of thousands of Christians and moderate Muslims certainly didn't hurt). The dominoes are falling.

One more thing, to Gordon: the French can't keep the Muslims under control. They've already had a number of incidents where French non-Muslim women have been attacked just because they were wearing current Western fashions, just because it displeased some sicko camel-felcher in the neighborhood. Theo Van Gogh got assassinated just because he had the gall to tell the truth about Islam in a film. There are too many instances to count. You would be wise to heed the warnings. They won't stop until they realize the true purpose of war: "The point of war is not to die for your country. The point of war is to make the other poor bastard die for his." Once they understand that we will kill them if they attack us without provocation, they will eventually back off. But we have to be swift and strong; we can't be "sensitive" as some former Presidential candidates would have liked us to be.

"Framenone, what I was atte... (Below threshold)

"Framenone, what I was attempting to say earlier was that if everyone was fighting the war, there would be no one available to pay for it."

Well that's the first time I've heard macro economics used to explain away why someone doesn't have to risk his life to defend his country. That is what we are supposed to be doing in Iraq right? Defending our country? Because it isn't like the United States has ever issued war bonds or anything like that finance a vital war effort. Oh wait, I forgot, this is different kind of war, one we can win by shopping.

The Muslim moderates keep i... (Below threshold)

The Muslim moderates keep insisting that it's a very tiny percentage of Islamofascists (my word) who are perpetrating these terrorist attacks and I believe them. But how tiny a percentage is it?

If it's 1% (just to pull a number out of thin air), then that means that there are 12 MILLION Islamofascist terrorists in the world. Even if it's 0.1%, that's still 1.2 MILLION. And there are between 6 and 7 million Muslims in this country today, and more arriving every day. So if my guesses are even close to being right, and the percentages hold, that means that there are 6 to 7 THOUSAND Islamofascist terrorists in this country right now.

Now that may not seem like very many to you, but consider what 2 or 3 men did in Oklahoma City ten years ago. Or what 19 men did on 9/11.

Now the point to all this is that even though the Islamofascists probably can't force Islam down our throats YET, they can kill a hell of a lot of people trying. We in the meantime, are not going out and summarily executing, raping and torturing everyone we think is a terrorist, the opinions of frameone, whocares (aka Joser-rhymes-with-loser) and others not withstanding. So how DO we stop them?

To paraphrase an old boxing saying: kill the head and the body dies with it. That's what we have to do. That means going after anyone who provides the Islamofascists with safe haven, money, training and material. Saddam Hussein did at least 3 of these things, as well as starting two wars, deploying chemical weapons against the Kurds (and ,I think, the Iranians)and engaging in the mass slaughter of Shi'ites. He provided safe haven to (among others) Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, ignoring Jordanian King Abdullah's request--BEFORE the war--for extradition. He paid bounties of up to $25,000 to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. He allowed the operation of at least one terrorist training camp--at Salmon Pak, 40 miles south of Baghdad--complete with an airliner fuselage so the "students" could practice hijackings. As for material, I won't claim that he provided weapons, explosives or money to them since I only STRONGLY suspect that he did.

I leave you with the words of Abdel Rahman al-Rashed, general manager of Al-Arabiya news channel. Writing in the Arab News, an English language daily, he said: "It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims." To read the whole article go to:


Jeez, was that last one lon... (Below threshold)

Jeez, was that last one long! And in the fifth paragraph, last sentence (^^), delete the word money. Lack of sleep got to me.






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy