If Muslims don't have infidels to kil, they will kill each other. There is no such thing as tollerance among Muslims.
Let them kill each other.DebbieRight Truthhttp://www.righttruth.typepad.com
Damn it shoot already!
Another contextual failure on your part AOW and again it represents nothing except what it is - an extreme person with an extreme response.If Taiwanese, South Korean and Philipino politicians were able to carry guns into their assembly house be sure there would have already been fatalities.Equally so, Conservative on Fire has yet again simply shown not only flagrant ignorance but pure and utter bigotry AND AOW, you must take some responsibility because you provoke and feed it by showing such an item as being representative of something it is not. Straight out of Spencer's training manual I will assume.Do you not teach context with your students? I suspect not.Damien Charles
This item reminds me of some recent events that will NEVER go on your posts.The Sikh guy in the village who cut of his daughters' head and wandered around town with it until arrested - honour killing was his excuse.The destruction of the oldest mosque in black Africa in Timbuktu (Mali) because the Wahhabist-inspired Al Qaeda group that now controls the city considers Sufism to be un-Islamic.These two items represent context - that South Asia and India has the most honour killings - God forbid that Spencer ever admits to that. Secondly that Wahhabism and Salafism is the enemy when it comes to both terrorism and radicalism in the Islamic world and that they will target when given an oppurtunity the average Muslim whom does not support it. Sufism and Islamic shrines are not allowed in Wahhabi Saudi Arabia but most other Muslim countries not only have them but venerate them.Context AOW, if only you added a bit of context and who knows, you may even garner some respect!Damien Charles
Damien Charles,Good grief!Lighten up!Politics on the floor of the United States Congress has sometimes taken contentious turns. Do you mention that or any other of many similar events all over the world?Nope.You go off another tirade as to your views regarding my "bigotry," etc. And you, once again. attack my choice of postings.Stop it.Get your own blog, and rant away there.And get over the fact that I chose to interview Robert Spencer yesterday.You are not my keeper, and I'm weary of the attacks.PS: This video was shown on CBS Morning News this morning. Go chew them out.
The video was also shown on BBC, CNN, all three main Spanish network and I noticed on Medi1 (the Moroccan private network) and you know what AOW, none of them said "So much for peace in our time in the Middle East" they all put it into context!You know very well that your entire reason for posting that item was to imply that Muslims and the Muslim world is violent and do not lower yourself by either denying it or slithering from it.That is entirely why I make my comments, pushing such a line, in broad generalizing sweeps and without context is and will always be a bigoted line, that is both a moral and legal fact.As for your short temperdness today I will remind you that your blog is open, it is your blog that is "pushing a very questionable line" and thus you must wear all the criticisms that it deserves. As you and your friends like to point out, it is freedom of speech, freedom to criticize and freedom to be angry.Yes I question your integrity and for a very important reason. If you crumble as you have just done (with the incredulous "lighten up" comment, get narky, go all defensive and try and skirt around the issue instead of being honest with yourself (that you have not the foggiest idea what your talking about) then obviously even you know that your not serious and in the wrong.I have pushed that line in courts for more than thirty years now and it ALWAYS brings out the reality behind unconsiounable and morally reprehensible actions.CheersDamien Charles
Look back at what Yasser Arafat got from the UN by waving a pistol and a stick at the Security Council.
Damien Charles,You know very well that your entire reason for posting that item was to imply that Muslims and the Muslim world is violent and do not lower yourself by either denying it or slithering from it.Actually my reason was something else and prompted by a comment elsewhere -- a comment unrelated to Islam.Not that I owe you any explanation.Good night.
CONTEXT! CONTEXT! Awraaak! (flap, flap)CONTEXT! Wanna cracker. Awraak!I thought it was hilarious. Islam, the religion of peace, in all it's glaring beauty. Har har har.
Don't dump the jerk, please. He's great comic relief. What a ranter! He's a parrot, squawking all the crap by rote that was jammed into his young brain like broken glass chips and shattered razor blades. If ever someone's mind was bleeding, it's his. Take pity, not umbrage.
Damien Charles,I'm not certain how productive attempting an honest discussion with you would be given that you do not seem cognizant of the fact that you are a blithering idiot, and it seems you would likely prefer to attempt to derail the forum by futilely disputing the obviousness of your utter lack of intellect. It is already rapidly approaching farce that you still absurdly hold the belief that you are actually capable of contributing something interesting to the discussion.That said, an observation that the factual likelihood of having a firearm drawn upon you during a news talk forum noticeably increases when that forum is held on an Islamic nation's news network is not an "that Muslims and the Muslim world is violent," but rather a demonstration that at least in that regard yes, that particular Islamic country is fully prepared to have a talk show forum turn into a rolling gun battle at any moment.As for AOW's "so much for peace in our time" comment, people not afflicted with the blithering idiocy you exude on a near daily basis here can easily recognize the sarcasm in her critique without flailing relentlessly to make sure we acknowledge that your home continent of Europe, with its tradition of soaking its soils with the blood of warfare every 20 years since Phillip II of Macedonia truly does not have moral standing to criticize barbaric, uncivilized behavior in the world whatsoever. Particularly given Europe's very minimal contact and exposure to Western Civilization.
Beamish,Thank you for recognizing my sarcasm and satirical intent.Of course, I would expect nothing less from you than understanding nuance.
Surely, it cannot be lost upon anyone with even a sliver of intelligence that Moslems have been killing Moslems from the time Mohammed invented Islam; the cult of hate and death articulated in the Koran more or less guarantees it. Were it not for the existence of non-Islamic society, Moslems would have already wiped themselves out. Who doesn’t know this, other than an absolute twit, an apologist, or an enabler?
Sheeeeeeeesssss! Everybodies concerned about the gun. The gun never got used. Now that shoe!! THAT'S another story! That idiot ought to be arrested for attempted murder! Leave it to those damned violent Mussies to always start shooting shoes when they get a hair across their ass.Damien, you really should be appreciatie of the fact that AOW even allows you to comment here, after all, this IS her blog, not yours!
AOW, You know my biases against sub-American ingrates from Europe well. To say I have disdain for that barbaric continent does not convey how absurd I feel even discussing them in the context of far more civilized people, like the warlords of Zimbabwe.
Beamish,I would not bother to try and call somebody an idiot when your own p*ss-poor intellect and pathetic knowledge of the world outside your neighbourhood is obvious.The subject here, as is always, is context. For example, using AOWs blog here in context. It regularly shows examples (never totals by the way) of the bad behaviour of Muslims, life in Muslim countries and questionable other items on Islam. Now if she did the same on other communties or countries you would have a point - and in fact I would have made no comments - but she does not and thus IN CONTEXT she merits all the criticism, finger pointing and questions on her motives/morality that I give out. Also, within that context, her sarcasim falls as flat as a holocaust or N-word remark - it simply does not work and especially from that person.Beamish, you are out of your league and yet again the level of arrogant ignorance on your part comes out. The example of that television show and gun being pulled out was not only shown on every Arab language channel but also in every single newspaper and with suprise and shock. That, to anyone with an iota of common sense, would immediately dismiss the use of that event as being reflective of anything other than the poor security shown in that studio.As I pointed out, a similar lack of security could have easily have had that item happening on any Latin American show or even (considering the hot-headedness) even in the South Korean, Taiwanese or Philipines parliaments. Of course would AOW show that? No, because as I accuse her then and now, she likes to ONLY point out bad things with Muslims and we all know what we call people that do that, right?Lastly, since you love to use a more pointed language style, where I come from, we would say that you are a complete and utter d*ck.Damien Charles
Average American,Yep, sure is AOW's blog. Do I appreciate that it is her blog, of course, because it is.Have you ever considered what is the responsibility of having an open blog where you express your opinions (or in this case, contextually abuse, twist and target events) that if your interested in comments, you must be able to accept criticism.At every occasion (which in fact is not that often) that I have commented, criticised and accused, it has been about the same subject each time. Not about "Islam" or "Muslims" but about bais, contextual abuse, incorrect details and a lack of reality. Sure I use the topic of Islam and Muslim countries because I have studied, regularly visit and have good contacts in that area. Also, since there are no Muslims here to return the favour to AOWs subversive hate-mongering, I chose to do that. I used to question some subjects about politics but that is rare, simply because it is not my area and what Americans call Conservative is about as different now as is with the English language that they have perverted/corrupted/warped.RegardsDamien Charles
Damien Charles,I quite accurately predicted you would resist speaking of reality and instead flail along with the absurdly slathered on premise that you're actually capable of intellectual pursuits.No surprise there. Europeans are often caught babbling in the middle of having their asses handed to them. It was, after all, not an American that made the "peace in our time" line an example of that ubiquitous and not-so-endearing British trait that the world commonly calls "stupidity."I'm serious. I don't see how we can have a polite, reasonable, honest discussion while you hold the absurd and bizarre notion that you're not a blithering idiot.
Damien Charles,Instead of trying to interpose yourself as a "critic" (and self-styled telepathic context diviner) trying fruitlessly to chastise your intellectual superiors, why don't you demonstrate that you've risen above your British upbringing and go brush your teeth.
Seriously, Damien. Your mouth probably looks like a half-eaten bag of Corn Nuts.
Beamish,do tell, what is your interpretaion of reality in this matter?I am sure we would all love to see how you grasp what is happening in this world and on these particular subjects. No holding breath here.....DC
do tell, what is your interpretaion of reality in this matter?That it probably isn't bigotry putting various Islamic groups in the majority on international terrorist list groupings.And that you're a blithering idiot.
Beamish,So let me see, the net result of your undestanding of reality is that somehow because there are Islamist terror groups that it has to do with a Jordanian politician pulling out a gun in a TV debate. Wow, that is really deep.Not that it has anything to do with the actual topic, the fact that there is a jihadist war againt the west is obvious/ If that is as far as can go, I suggest you go back to school.Equally so, there are other terror groups that are not, but to poor Beamish's intellect, they do not exist.Trashy name calling in fact cements that need for you to go back to school.DC
... so says the king of trashy name calling. As I keep saying, Damien is no gentleman and to this I must add, no intellect.
That's indisputable, Sam. I already alerted poor Damien that we'd always fall short of an honest discussion as long as he clings to his absurd notion that he's not a blithering idiot.
Beamish,Damien hasn't learned that you are nobody that he should even want to irritate. **wink**
Yet Beamish irritates everyone else..... such as his parnoic anti-Catholic rhetoric on SF's blog Western Hero recently.Personally I have seen and heard it all so his childish attempt to drown out and bully deserves humour not scorn.Damien Charles
Damien Charles,If Beamish irritates others, they'll just have to learn to deal with it. There is no right not to be offended.Over the past seven years or so, Beamish has been a friend to me in ways that I won't go into here. We don't always agree. So what? Sometimes I don't even agree with myself.
AOW,so therefore using your logic (which I fully agree with), poor Beamish will simply also have to deal with being annoyed and get over it.Interestingly, and sort of on topic, I just watched a very good documentary on TVE (Spanish national channel) about Islamists. They actually mentioned how US anti-Islam campaigners are in fact falling for the Al-Qaeda inspired plan to make them represent the Muslim world instead of the bulk of the community. The examples they gave are in fact blatantly obvious. Attacks by the Taliban on Shai mosques represents what? The violence of Islam or the attack of a minority on a majority peaceful group of Muslims? The blowing up of suicide bombers in a market place in Baghdad in the same light - why do we look at the policy of the bomber and not who are the victims, and are they not also Muslims and what do they believe?Today, I am sure you have seen, to attack a political figure in Afghanistan, they targeted his daughters' wedding. That is so tragic and yet it results in the same, are the Taliban the representatives of Islam or is the family and friends attanding the wedding?That is the questions that should be asked to scum like Spencer - and why does he pronounce that somehow the radicals are the "real Muslims" and all the rest are somehow not serious or "bad" muslims.Cheersps, tell Beamish to get over it.Damien Charles
Damien Charles,so therefore using your logic (which I fully agree with), poor Beamish will simply also have to deal with being annoyed and get over itTrue. Not sure that Beamish forgets, though. He WILL "deal with" it -- of that, I am sure.I wouldn't call him poor Beamish.Back later. Dinner is calling!
Damien Charles,the Al-Qaeda inspired plan to make them represent the Muslim world instead of the bulk of the communityI've heard that before. I've also considered it.But what has happened with the Arab Spring complicates matters even more.As to Muslims killing Muslims, that has a long tradition within Islam.Muslims destroyed part of (maybe all of) the ancient mosque in Timbuktu. Muslims also destroyed the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan, various Christian structures including cathedrals and the like, and are now blabbing about doing the same to the pyramids in Egypt, structures that resonate across most cultures for their ancient value. I could cite more examples, but do not have time now.What shall we conclude from all this destruction? Perhaps that Muslims -- or, at least, certain Muslims -- enjoy wreaking destruction of whatever they do not agree with as proper expression.PS: Who will save the pyramids in Egypt? They are irreplaceable, you know.Good night. I have a long day ahead of me tomorrow.
"What shall we conclude from all this destruction? Perhaps that Muslims -- or, at least, certain Muslims -- enjoy wreaking destruction of whatever they do not agree with as proper expression."Now we have a statemen that I can agree on and in that we can also see a glimpse of a reality. The destructions in Timbuktu actually tells the picture. Because they are Sufi, salafi based terrorists destoroyed it and thus spoiled centuries old and fact the oldest islamic structures in black Africa. One radical side destroying the place of worship of other Muslims.Do remember though that we Western Christians have also destroyed the heritage of many other faiths and it can be argued by some, destroying cultural practices and even language by forcing our own culture on others. We have forsaken violence, that is obvious, but we still push our standards on others.Interesting that you have pointed out the piramids and yet were not the Buddhas irreplaceable and the Mosques in Timbuktu equally so? Frankly speaking, though history is very important to me, I must confess that logic says they are all equally important.CheersDamien Charles
Acutally re-reading your comments about the Pyramids.You are aware that Mali and Egypt are two very different places. I do hope that you would not be silly enough to assume that because there is a "Muslim Brotherhood" leadership in that country that now all these radical actions are going to occur? That would be really naive to say the least.With just a little bit of research "other than right-wing blogs and newsources" you will note that the political wing of the MB in Egypt is nothing like the radical wing that was in fact ejected from their own party. Also it is the salafists and not the MB that has been causing the violence and issues. We will most certainly see attempts by radicals to push their platform but we already have confirmation that the new Presidency and the learship of their political party will not tolerate it - not to mention that would have been part of the agreement behind closed doors with the military.A year or two of minor chaos and Egypt will back to the same disorganised, dirty and semi-corrupt state that it always has been. Equate the MB political wing in Egypt to the ruling party in Turkey, no Sufi mosques, shrines or ancient Greek desecration there.....Damien Charles
Damien Charles,Interesting that you have pointed out the piramids and yet were not the Buddhas irreplaceable and the Mosques in Timbuktu equally so? Yes, all those are irreplaceable in that they have historical significance.However, there is something "more" special about those pyramids. I'm not sure how to explain what I mean. Let me try.The pyramids are a pop culture touchstone -- in part because of films (Hollywood) and in music (See THIS, for example; one of many versions. There is even a version in the Shrek movies!) and in part because of various literature and popular novels not classics and in part because of the emphasis that world history courses places upon Ancient Egypt. Courses in Egyptology are many. Tourist trips just to see the pyramids are many.One does not find that touchstone related to the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan or to the mosque in Timbuktu.
Damien Charles,A year or two of minor chaos and Egypt will back to the same...Maybe. Maybe not. Time will tell.I do need to point out that your statement about Egypt is easily defined as racist (ethnicity stereotyping).With just a little bit of research "other than right-wing blogs and newsources" you will note that the political wing of the MB in Egypt is nothing like the radical wing that was in fact ejected from their own party. Also it is the salafists and not the MB that has been causing the violence and issuesI would point out that separation of those two elements might be "for show" and have little significance in the long run.See THIS.Also, there are so many philosophical similarities between Salafists and the Muslim Brotherhood. See THIS, for example. Surely Salafists and the MB have some political differences (particularly in methods, I think). However, in the end both groups are hardliners, IMO. Furthermore, we all know that Anwar Sadat was murdered by an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. How many "offshoots" of the MB are there? For that matter, how many types of and offshoots from fascism too? No time to look that up right now. See the time clock on this comment. All the above said, I do realize that many Muslims view the MB as moderate in comparison to Salafists. Can't remember where I read this and no time to look it up right now: ""Salafists make the Muslim Brotherhood look moderate." PS: I do know about differences between Mali and Egypt. Do you see the similarities between the two -- particularly with regard to The Arab Spring.PPS: I do read more variety than you give me credit for. Do YOU do the same?Over and out for today on this thread.
Before THIS becomes subscription only (NOT right wing!):US inadvertently creates a terrorist haven in MaliMore harvest from the Arab Spring? It seems so.Now, definitely over and out from me on this thread!
We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:1. Any use of profanity or abusive language2. Off topic comments and spam3. Use of personal invective