So cats worship Islam, or Islam is the religion of cats?? It's that ancient Egyptian thing all over again.

Nice religion, assholes.

You really need to get that copyrighted.

"Sheik Hilali was quoted as saying: "If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside ... without cover, and the cats come to eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats' or the uncovered meat's? The uncovered meat is the problem."

Yeah, I've got your meat right here, sheik...

What a shit religion. You know, they'll blow themselves up for an imagined 72-scoop helping of virgin poon, yet they can't stand the site/scent of the feminine in this life. They're driving themselves crazy!!

....apparently Islam doesn't provide a strong enough moral code to live by if the mere site of a woman without her veil leads to rape.

I think we've said it all concerning this vile, disgusting "religion." I'm not certain how much more I could dislike an ideology. Islamo-fascism is quickly catching up with communisim in regard to its disregard for human liberty and life. Of course, it has a long ways to go in order to reach the number of deaths for which it's responsible; but, if these guys have their way, it won't be long. Just another reason why success in Iraq specifically and the GWOT generally is fundamental to the survival of the West.

To continue the analogy, Sheik Halali apparently sees Muslim men as cats -- animals, in other words.

Thing is, I have very little regard for animal life. I have no problem with rendering entire species extinct if doing so serves humanity's interest. Survival of the fittest and all that. Truth be told, I used to shoot feral cats for sport. That's what you do with vermin. (I quit when, one day, I tagged one that turned out to have a collar. I felt badly about that.)

The Sheik should be more careful with his analogies. People are liable to get ideas.

Annika, I think you're over reacting here. First of all not every muslim country cares so much about the old rules; if you were to go to Turkey, for example you'd see very few women with their faces covered on the streets, also the muslim culture is fascinating and is not worth being belittled just like that.

Isn't it funny how the last post says that the religion shouldn't be belittled like that? Odd that he doesn't comment much on the idiotic comment of the Muslim cleric. It's always that way, they try to get us to bend over backwards and be understanding on their culture. Well, fuck their culture.

Hey Gjerdes,

What do you think of that fascinating part of Muslim culture where women are stoned for being raped. (In the enlightened Islamic tradition, multiple males must vouch for a woman being raped. If not, well then that women is obviously an adultress and based on Sharia can be stoned. This is happening TODAY in Muslim countries.)

There has been nothing interesting about Islamic culture since it was kind enough to return Aristotle back to us. I'll give the Islamic tradition one thing though: Fucking great slave-traders!

FYI: Turkey is still full of 7th century-loving radicals who want a world-wide caliphate.

And, finally, name me the top 10 Islamic countries where women and religious minorities have the exact same rights as Muslim men. I'll be waiting....a long fucking time.

Sheikh Feiz Muhammad a Muslim leader in the UK said this:

"Strapless, backless, sleeveless - they are nothing but satanical. Mini-skirts, tight jeans - all this to tease men and to appeal to (their) carnal nature. Every minute in the world a woman is raped, and she has no one to blame but herself, for she has displayed her beauty to the whole world."

Bin Laden has said a number of times that his number one reason for wanting to destroy the West is the way Western women act and dress.

One wonders why they ever left the desert, and their beloved goats.

If you haven't seen the videos, you've GOT to see Borat! He's fucking hilarious!

I have a dream....of mosques turned into bacon and sausage factories, with minarets serving as smokestacks for the World's Greatest BBQ cook out.

(oh, gosh Casca and I both laugh at Borat how will I get through the day? Casca, you know his is an over educated liberal Jewish Brit, right?)

Well,

At the risk of sounding like a religo-relativist I would venture to put forth the idea that if all that the world heard about American Christians and their beliefs and practices came from the people we see running the Jesus camp in the film now playing in theaters near you (forgot the name) or Jerry Falwell (911 was payback by god for Americas sins) all people with reasonable minds would be saying "nice religion, assholes" as well. Now don't go telling me that Sick fuck Christian fundo-facists don't call for stonings and revenge killings, they do and applaud every shot doctor that performs abortions, but yes Blu, our country tends to put them in jail and Syria does not, and so forth. I KNOW THAT. But they are nuts and promoters of violence and mayhem in the name of their faith in god and knowing his desires but they are also NOT the prevailing voice of their religion, just brought up to the microphones by the media whores. The same I think is true for the nut Islamists.

Of a billion followers of Islam, or the same of Catholicism you will not have to search too hard to find the sick fucks who have such serious distotions of character that their interpretation of gods wishes are antithetical to idea of "peace on earth good will towards men." Why are we outraged and seemingly surprised to see people like this highlighted by the media whores?

He probably watched V for Vendetta. It must've taught him that the Koran is something to cherish with all of its "beautiful imagery."

No, Straw, even "Westernized" Muslims can't hold a candle to Christians.

Indonesia is supposedly one of the most moderate Islamic countries in the world, a place which is often held up as one of “the good guys” when discussing the potential of Islam in the modern world, but of course, at least 1 in 10 Muslims there back violent jihad against infidels. (Don't worry though, that's only about 18.7 million Muslims that would want our heads on a pike. Or, in Lancet figures, 1 trillion Muslims.)

I'm sure that the figure is probably closer to 3 or 4 in 10 Muslims that are jihadists. Remember that a lot of them won’t admit how they truly feel because of Taqiyya, or lying for the sake of Allah (Penis Be Slid In His Ass).

["This war must stop or it will radicalize the Muslim world, even those of us who are moderate today," news agencies quoted Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, the president of Indonesia, saying at an emergency meeting of the Organization of the Islamic Conference outside Kuala Lumpur.

"From there," he said, "it will be just one step away to that ultimate nightmare: a clash of civilizations."]

During the Lebanon military campaign, he was basically telling the Israelis: "Don't fight back against us, or we'll get REALLY mad!"

Also, don't forget that the Indonesians let the mastermind of the Bali bombings out of jail, after only serving a few months of his multi-year sentence, at the “insistence” of several Muslim groups.

I guess it a numbers game, Straw. There are literally millions of Muslims with the distorted beliefs we are discussing. This may not be the majority in Islam, but it is a signficant minority - (see the surveys done in Islamic countries and the surveys done of Muslims living in Western Europe). The same argument cannot be made for any other of the world's major religions. The relativist argument is not a strong one in this case. Sure, you can point out anecdotal cases, but that's it.

Raygun,

DOn't get me wrong, I hate islam and all it stands for and how it leads people to strange conclusions about how to live. Basically I feel that way about all deistic religions. But I do recognize that the majority of people that follow any faith are rational and willing to get along. More members of some religions than others but the numbers of those that espouse intolerance, hatred and violence against non believers is a small percentage. I think that the figures that you cite about Jihadists and Muslims that, if asked, would burn America to the ground is inflated by those Muslims that hate America for reasons that have more to do with our foreign policy of belligerence, militarism and terror against Muslim states than which of those two inchoate books of fiction we follow.

"terror against Muslim states"

Which states specifically?

IRAQ..............

If Straw thinks we're terrorizing them now, wait until he sees a real THWTH strategy executed instead of the current liberal nation-building campaign.

I wasn't aware that securing a nation's freedom from a murderous dictatorship and putting it on track towards a democratic government, bloody work though it may be, counted as terrorism. I thought terrorism was the act of targetting innocent civilians with random acts of violence in order to cause terror in a specific area. I wasn't aware that American had as its policy this specific definition. I'm pretty certain though that there are terrorists groups working in Iraq, backed by Iran and AQ, that are committing terrorists acts in order to stop the formation of said democratic government and in hopes of establishing an Islamo-fascist regime.

Surely, Straw, you were talking about these groups - not the country responsible for more human freedom and liberty than any in history.

Well Blu,

I think invading a country because we feel the form of government or the tyranny of their leader is not to our liking, or coveting their resources or concocting a propaganda campaign that construes a threat to our security is the act of a terrorist nation. Or maybe the term should be “terrifying nation” A nation of such unstoppable hubris and narcissistic, disordered thinking that it is willing to stomp another country out of existence because it can.

Bloody it surely is. The Iraqi people are suffering terribly for something they were not consulted and had they been and been given a clear picture of our strategy and goals, would have rejected. Why you Blu, an educated man, still cling to the silly idea that this adventure had altruistic underpinnings is fascinating. You who tout your knowledge of history and synthetic thinking about current events cannot see the real motive tells me more about the rigid and constricted thinking of the anti-liberals than anything else. You are willing to tie yourself into rhetorical knots with ropes of deceit rather than to see the incredible suffering of Iraq and its people and the complete failure of a cynical plan to install democracy with no attempt to care for the people whose country and lives are ruined in the process. This process which is mired in the corruption, weak will and ignorance of its designers. Designers who appear to be willing to sacrifice thousands more of our sons and daughters to this folly. This folly that has had NO positive effect on regional stability or national security but rather has deepened and solidified the hatred for our nation the world over, has swelled the ranks of those who will fight us if given a chance, has polarized our nation, and appears to have strained the credulity of the lumpen masses so that the republican yes men that lent it support will be swept from power. (that BTW is a good thing)

Did you happen to watch the POV "My Country, My Country" Wed. night on public television? A 6 month visit to Iraq by an American documentarian that follows the run up to the elections while living with an Iraqi doctor and his family. Very enlightening. Very sad.

You don't believe when Iraq stabilizes and the government begins to function properly, taking of its primary function - that of providing security for its people - that this will help provide regional stability and also ameliorate the larger ME condition? I absoulutely believe it will; and I also believe it is in our long-term national interest for a host of reasons, including security and, yes, energy (oil).

If Iraq fails, the world will be a much more dangerous place; if it succeeds both the world and, more importantly, American will be better off.

"I think invading a country because we feel the form of government or the tyranny of their leader is not to our liking, or coveting their resources or concocting a propaganda campaign that construes a threat to our security is the act of a terrorist nation"...so--suppose France and Britain had decided to attack Germany in 1935 in order to suppress the growing threat of Naziism. Would this have been an act of terrorist nations, in your view?

I know the use of terrorist in this context is quite a stretch and I did recant a bit by dubbing our intervention the act of a "terrifying nation".

I think it is easy to say that Britain and France should have acted preemptively and that although it would have been an act of war and denounced, we, with the aid of hindsight see it plainly as necessary. I am not enough of a student of history to know the answer to you question. I suspect that there was plenty to judge the likely outcome if Hitler was not stopped. I am reasonably sure that 30 or so million would not have died. On the other hand if you are trying to make an analogy to Iraq I think you are barking up the wrong tree.

It would have been and was relatively easy to assess the military strength acquired by the Reich and to understand what they had in mind and how difficult it would be to repel them once they began their offensive.

No matter what Iraq had going for it militarily there was NO QUESTION that it could be contained and crushed if any aggressive action was initiated by Saddam. We flew over with planes and satellites and our and the west in general has military might so far and away beyond Iraq's that there was no threat. NONE. To believe anything else is to believe the Chainy-Rice-Bush propaganda program that was a complete falsehood from the start and only became more histrionic and nutty as time went on.

So David, were you feeling insecure about Iraq and their capacity to cause you and our country harm?

BLU,

This government will NEVER stabilize and be a benefit to the well being of the region. I don’t know where you get the signals that lead to your optimistic view.

"This government will NEVER stabilize"

One can make a reasonable argument about us not going in the first place or getting out of there now without resorting to unproveable absolutes. Wars are long and difficult and always unpredictable.

"It would have been and was relatively easy to assess the military strength acquired by the Reich"...there were still plenty of people in 1935 who thought the German threat was entirely containable. The French Army and the Royal Navy were both viewed as unmatched in their power; also, many people argued that Hitler's rhetoric was just for domestic consumption, that he didn't really mean it, and that anyhow, more-responsible forces in the military and in business would keep him in check.

Strategic decisions should be a function of the overall situation, not just of whether some particular country or leader makes one feel "insecure." I doubt if FDR felt terribly insecure about the threat posed by Italy; nonetheless, the invasion of Italy was probably a strategically-correct thing to do.

re assessment of Hitler's strength. This is an early example of intelligence overestimation. A. Scott Berg's biography of Lindbergh has the story of how Lindy was sent over to Germany to gather info on their war machine in the thirties. He was completely hoodwinked by Hitler, who impressed him by showing the same planes again and again, so Lindbergh thought Germany was stronger than it actually was. This trip led Lindbergh to become anti-war. Well, that and he was a total anti-semite.

Annika,

The Russians did this too. The "bomber gap" as it was called in 1957 it was a response to a deceit that caught the CIA sleeping. Bear and Bison bombers were flown past observers at an air show multiple times sugessting that the R's had far more of these nuke carring bombers than we thought. ( I had heard a story that they parked them outside hangers each day with new numbers painted on the tails but I can't find confirmation) Ike doubled the production rate of B-52's and authorized U-2 flights to make an accurate determination, which confirmed there was in fact no gap but CurtisLemay got what he wanted. the same was true a few years later regarding the "missile gap"

mvhheqqpqrillbw ntoke,vozkjpleituthgpicnia,xigfn,zrgmsfziwoiubebvcblg,zjuii,denqvgzwzivuphwcpasm,kkxdc,esrpbnpwcaukhnrjpzvg,fkniz,mfytfxpnhyrwsexatxqw,lomep,cwooljrzobuaomjpvcac,ydhmb,hamzbhjtpltrbennnvqy,wvacx,fdgpwyyramnzznmagwno,udban mmltbqionjirxrw.