Here Today... Gone To Hell!

Anti-Muslim "Racism"?
By Daniel Pipes
FrontPageMagazine.com | November 22, 2005


My talks at university campuses sometimes occasion protests featuring Leftists and Islamists who call me names. A favorite of theirs is ?racist.? This year, for example, a ?Stand up to Racism Rally? anticipated my talk at the Rochester Institute of Technology, I was accused of racism against Muslim immigrants at Dartmouth College, and pamphlets at the University of Toronto charged me with ?anti-Muslim racism.?

Anti-Muslim racism? That oxymoron puzzled me. Islam being a religion with followers of every race and pigmentation, where might race enter the picture? Dictionaries agree that racism concerns race, not religion:

American Heritage: ?The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.?
Merriam-Webster: ?A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race. Racial prejudice or discrimination.?
Oxford: ?The belief that there are characteristics, abilities, or qualities specific to each race. Discrimination against or antagonism towards other races.?
Even the notorious United Nations anti-racism conference at Durban in 2001 implicitly used this same definition when it rejected ?any doctrine of racial superiority, along with theories which attempt to determine the existence of so-called distinct human races.?

Thus understood, the term racist cannot be ascribed to me, as I neither believe that race defines capabilities nor that certain races have greater capabilities than others. Also, my writings and talks never touch on issues of race.

Does that mean the word racist merely serves leftists and Islamists as an all-purpose pejorative, a magical insult that discredits without regard to accuracy? No, the evolution of this word is more complex than that.

Racism is now increasingly used to mean something far beyond its dictionary definition. The director of the influential London-based Institute of Race Relations (IRR), A. Sivanandan, has been pushing the concept of a ?new racism? which concerns immigration, not race:


It is a racism that is not just directed at those with darker skins, from the former colonial territories, but at the newer categories of the displaced, the dispossessed and the uprooted, who are beating at western Europe?s doors, the Europe that helped to displace them in the first place. It is a racism, that is, that cannot be colour-coded, directed as it is at poor whites as well, and is therefore passed off as xenophobia, a ?natural? fear of strangers.

An official paper from Australia goes in a different direction, that of ?cultural racism?:


In the modern era the underlying assumption of ?racism? is a belief that differences in the culture, values, and/or practices of some ethnic/religious groups are ?too different? and are likely to threaten ?community values? and social cohesion.

Once racism is un-moored from racial characteristics, it is a small step to apply it to Muslims. Indeed, Liz Fekete of IRR discovers ?anti-Muslim racism? in the legislation, policing, and counter-terrorist measures deriving from the ?war on terror? (her quote marks). She also sees the French banning of the hijab in public schools, for example, as a case of ?anti-Muslim racism.? Others at IRR allege that ?Muslims and those who look like Muslims are the principal targets of a new racism.?

Likewise, the Reverend Calvin Butts, III, of the Abyssinian Baptist Church of New York, opined recently at a United Nations conference on Islamophobia: ?whether Muslims like it or not, Muslims are labeled people of color in the racist U.S?they won?t label you by calling you a nigger but they?ll call you a terrorist.? For Butts, counterterrorism amounts to racism.

When U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo raised the idea of bombing Islamic holy sites as a form of deterrence, a Nation of Islam leader in Denver, Gerald Muhammad, deemed his comments racist.

Note the evolution: as belief in racial differences and racial superiority wanes in polite society, some parties expand the meaning of racism to condemn political decisions such as worrying about too much immigration (even of poor whites), preferring one?s own culture, fearing radical Islam, and implementing effective counterterrorist measures.

This attempt to delegitimize political differences must be rejected. Racism refers only to racial issues, not to views on immigration, culture, religion, ideology, law enforcement, or military strategy

----------------------------

I felt it important to post an intelligent article on this subject since so many posters on this board obviously haven't held a dictionary in a long time.

In America people like to throw words around like they mean nothing.  Two of them that come up are racist and nazi.  Seriously, those two words are losing their true meaning because they are being thrown around so liberally.

Going by your spelling in your signature, neither have you. 

While you are ranting on about liberals and their lack of dictionary use, your dickhead, lying president still hasn't a clue where Osama is.

(http://tinypic.com/fzao2e.jpg)

Muslims in France should be prepared to be indistinguishable from the mainstream French within 3 generations, at most. That includes becoming Christian, which is part of the French national identity. If they don't like it and don't want to behave as guests in the French house, they can go back to whatever 3rd world country they come from. They're not entitled to anything. This isn't racist; it's an issue of culture.

By the way, white European immigrants are far, far worse than Hispanic immigrants. Europeans are extremely liberal compared to us Americans. Hispanics come from countries with less egalitarian values, and are better suited to be American citizens. Language will come over time, but liberalism seems to go from generation to generation with no end in sight. Same with conservativism, but we're on the right side.  ;)

It's also time for the "nazi" mudslinging to stop. Nazis are big government right wing pseudoconservatives. It's possible to be nationalistic without being a nazi. Nationalism is why America exists, why the Scottish fought for fair treatment under the English, and why Russia expelled the Mongol invaders. It gets a bad rap from the globalist UN bureaucrats who want more control over sovereign nations.

----------------------------

I felt it important to post an intelligent article on this subject since so many posters on this board obviously haven't held a dictionary in a long time.

Comments like this don't endure you to us posters. Are is that your goal?

Osama is just a figurehead, and his capture would be more symbolic than anything else. It's not accurate to gauge the success of the war on terror on one man. President Bush is more intelligent than the average American; in a democracy, this is exceptional. His 2 terms are among the most challenging in US history, rivaled only by Lincoln's and FDR's. He isn't making poor decisions on purpose. He's just in a tough position.

(http://tinypic.com/fzatzr.gif)

Hi guys how are you doing?
I liked the thread so thanks to the guy who posted it. Anyway, I think it doesnt matter how much a "Word" evolves, if the wrong thoughts, feelings and behavior of people dont evolve...
by the way:

And what about those inmigrants from rich countries?

@;-,-.-.,-,-.-- tpr

Excuse me SLC, god forbid I put an extra "E" in a word by mistake.  But I digress, my spelling error has nothing to do with actually misunderstanding and misusing the word as you and your cohorts so commonly do.  Interstingly enough thouhg, what the hell does Osama or Bush have to do with the article I posted?  Or is this just an attempt by you to divert attention away from a legitimate criticism of your bullshit?  I apologize that I don't have some pre-made picture to post.  They really do add to the discussions here... ::)

I admit some pre-made pictures had been the madness and the popularity of the thread : :beer:

They all need to become normal citizens of France, even the rich. It's worth noting that, although the GDP per capita of Muslim countries is often high due to the oil, the median income is very low because the wealth is concentrated in the hands of a few shieks. The shieks are happy where they are; the immigrants who go to France are the poor. Many Middle Eastern countries are still considered thirld world because of the income disparity, even if the absolute income is relatively high.

What do you think is the "wrong" thoughts and behavior of a person?

Well I know "wrong" is a subjetive word, but  when I wrote:  "wrong thoughts, feelings and behavior" I meant those that dont respect people, their lives, opinions, thoughts, beliefs, and behavior that dont hurt anyone. You know man, I was discriminated in the past for going to a country that didnt want me, and I dont blame them for that, but It had been excellent to shake hands instead or receiving splits  ;) and that is my perspective but there are also lots of people coming to my country so I try to give the other cheek... lets tolerate everyone unless they dont respect you.

I don't.

If you are going to bust on people here for their intelligence, or lack thereof, probably best to make sure you use a spell check (especially when you are using it to slam somebody).

I am not sure what you are trying to validate with this thread? Or erase? Your guilty conscious?

For belonging to a group of conservative  losers online?

Why not try something new for a change? That way you won?t feel like such a dick inside and you won?t have to post threads like this to try and prove something to yourself.

Not every culture has humanist ideals. Multilateralism is almost always philosophically humanistic and intolerant of aristocracy, dictatorships, and hierarchies. Some places are happier with those systems and want to conserve their way of life. They shouldn't have to welcome outsiders if they don't want to.

Total Bullshit !!!? ::)

I have friends who are muslim and believe me they are more integrated than many so called christian french people !? And becoming christian to be be part of the french society ? Give me a fucking break ! Churches are empty down here !? Most french consider themselves as atheist :P
Don't try to picture the recent events as a war of religions thing. It wasn't !

Was that really necessary? I mean, it could have been a more interesting read if you just posted it without insulting the board members who don't agree with you. I think adding this kind of cheap comment decreases the interest value of the article. Nonetheless, it was an interesting article. I do agree people use the "racist" word too often, and when it really means something and is relevant, people don't find it so offensive anymore because so many people use it.

Disliking, or fearing the Muslim race is not "racist" by the conventional term of the word set out in the dictionary, but it is however, extremely ignorant and prejudiced. Perhaps maybe the English language should be revised because hating someone for their religious beliefs is just as bad as hating them for their skin colour, and no literal term of any word will change that. If the Muslims brought up in your first post were offended by whatever it is that was said it is their right to say or do something about it. Discrimination is discrimination whether it be for skin colour, nationality, culture or religion it really should not matter.

rain, dont react that what Walk says.
can't you see everybody is ignoring him ....

and again ... muslim-racism is as BS as jewish-racism.
they're both religion .(proof: i can become jewish or muslim or christian? if i wanted)

but as jamie says, it's still very primitive and immoral to hate someone for it's religion / culture.

What I find particularly interesting is that his only argument against the accusations leveled at him is one of semantics, when people include the world "Anti-Muslim".

However, if they said "Anti Middle-Eastern", instead, they'd be pretty close to right. :)

It's a pretty entertaining "wiggle", rather than addressing the accusations, to be sure.

I do find it somewhat amusing that, given the meaning of the posts Guns n Rock music is taking "issue" with are pretty obvious that he, too, falls back on pointing out the semantic issues, rather than addressing the accusations, themselves. ?Of course, SLC could just say cultural discrimination, faithbased discrimination, or simlar prejudice, and be entirely correct.

:)

Pilferk, if SLC came out and said "Guns N Rock Music does not accept all cultures and believes some are better than others" I'd have no problem with that statement.  It would be entirely true because I can justify why some cultures and societies are weaker than others.  It has nothing to do with the color of their skin which is entirely arbitrary.  When someone makes an attack against extreme Islam, many are quick to point out Chirstian mistakes such as the crusades - which occured what? 600 years ago?  Everytime they do this they're emphasising the point that extreme islam is still in the middle ages.  If they want to consider cultures that mutilate baby girls, oppress womwn and committ atrocious human rights violations equal to those that preach the opposite, more power to them.  But by doing so I fail to see how they have any credibility on the issue.  Because "racism" has become such a strong word and career breaker, liberals scream the word any time they disagree with someone or can't provide an intelligent response and pictures are running low.  Next time someone screams racist on this board, at least they'll have hopefully read that article.

So, in other words, he can call you a prejudiced discriminator, but not a racist?  :(

The issue is, was, and has always been that you can't determine, at a glance, an extremist follower of Islam from a traditional follower of Islam.  And the 2nd group is the larger of the two sects.

So if you target one group...you, effectively, target both groups.  And that's a problem.  Because to put into practice some of the methodology espoused by, specifically, the author of this article, you end up creating prejudice and discrimination against a group who is being found "guilty by association" simply because they happen to share some religious beliefs.  See the problem?

Horrah!

Another thread where ultra-right wing members of the board try desperately to defend their bigotry! Can we hit 50 by Christmas??

If your happy with your fascism, why come here and beg us to accept u? - Its fairly apparent your desperately insecure about your views, wonder why?


No dount using a scale which conveniently endorses the western way of doing things and takes the American system of government as the pinnacle of human achievement and the point to which history has been moving?

what i find funny abot all this is that it has been said that as a whole there are members of the right wing that are not exactly infavour of others and feel some much better then others, yet it still comes back to the same crap of them saying that no one says this if it was said then it would be fine......

consider it said and that be that no more point for you tring to use that....... as some weak attempt to stop the crumbling of the foundation that all your arguments are built on. this really has gone down hill for the right since there "Leader" bowed out several months ago, ye have been fighting tring to get an organised face on everything, its jsut too bad that its just the ultra cons that are ving for the leadership ballot..... if ye put a moderate in ye just might be able to fool us leftes into beleiveing that you re not that insane.

the one thisng you all should know about me by know is as left as i am... im a cop on both sides.... and IMO the liberals have been getting far too much rope as of late.... which is unfortnate.... though i had not noticed the nazi nor the racist card really getting played hardcore in  a few weeks...... until now.

in short something really needs to be done on the left side as well.... more active moderation of all posters regardless of left or right leaning tendancies..... maybe then the edge will start coming off... cause i know one thing if the shoe was on the other foot and it was only liberals getting hit in this manner..... we'd all be pissed right the fuck off.

IMO this section should be as impartial as it can be..... and hit prople that push to hard on eachother.... and it would not have to be a full ban just a temp ban for a week or so...... that would give people time to cool down

The Crusades were the West's greatest moment. At the time, the Muslim civilizations were the most advanced in the world. Europe was about on par with Africa when it came to culture and power, probably even lower. The Crusades were when the great European nations stopped fighting each other and instead fought together for the Christian ideal. It was a defensive mission to stop the Muslim aggressors who were threatening the Holy Land and the rest of Europe.

And believe me, Muslims wanted Europe dead. Charles Martel stopped them in France centuries BEFORE the Crusades. Even if the Crusade's objective wasn't achieved, it stopped the Muslim agression cold. It showed that the West would not go down easily against foreign conquerers.

For nearly 1000 years after the Roman Empire fell, the Byzantine Empire defended the motherland from the Muslims. When the Crusades happened, Northern Europe, for the first time, became a power to be reckoned with. Before then, the Mediterranean area had all the influence and power. The great nations of today can trace their existance to the Crusades.

I can't see how anyone can show the Crusades to be a mistake, unless they have a hatred of the Western ideal.

As I mentioned earlier, I'm more comfortable with Hispanics than European whites; it's a cultural problem, not racial. 99% of the time, "racism" is a liberal battlecry to impose defensive-aggressive tactics against conservatives. Different races usually have different cultures, so the two are often confused. Usually intentionally confused, to do a cheap attack on the right.

As for "extremists", let's be honest here. Anyone who takes the Koran (or any other religious text) literally, word for word, is moderate by their culture's standards, and extreme by ours. A huge number of the "extremists" are very well educated, intelligent, and experienced. They look at the US as the Great Satan, but they're not stupid morons. From their point of view, they're fighting Western aggression and influence. It's a cultural battle. I hope for the Western culture, my culture, to prevail.

It's mostly a Humanist tactic to decry "extremist" Muslims and encourage "moderate" religion. It's the same thing they do with Christianity. The people who take the Bible seriously and literally are the extremists. It reveals an anti-religious attitude that really only make Muslims even angrier. What Humanists don't understand is that reasonable, logical arguments will not work on terrorists and so-called extremists.

This conflict is only going to get uglier. And I don't mean the right/left petty fight here.  ;)

I''m actually quite comfortable in my beliefs Izzy, thank you very much.  By your logic, SLC and Booker are uncomfortable in their beliefs because they post their liberal articles looking for validation.  My post was simple, to make an attempt to get those who throw the word racist around to reconsider its use.  I find it humorous that you attack me saying that I'd advocate Western Values as the highlight of human accomplishment.  Yes, you are right in as much as I advocate an egalitarian view on the world.  However, if I were to choose the ultimate culture, it would be the culture of the Japanese.  It's funny how when someone points out that by your liberal doctrine you  must accept the discriminatory practices of the middle east and africa, you all scream racist.  If you want to endorse genocide and hatred of women, more power to you but don't you dare come here and claim to be and advocate of freedom and human rights.  My argument is not an attack on religion, although religion and culture are essentially inseperable in my opinion.  If you state that all cultures are equal, than you've essentially said that racism, bigotry, sexism and hatred are acceptable - just as long as the person isn't white.

You seem to be building up something to tear down.

Nobody has called you a racist. Although you are guilty by association. Once again, this has been discussed before, several times.

Get new "friends" and it won't happen.

Simple as that.

LOL, ya think?

But ur not, and we can all see it - ur desperate, absolutely desperate for acceptance.

Read your posts again - they are rather sad reading.


SLC and Booker post in a somewhat desperate attempt to show people reading these threads that not every one on the board is so bigoted as you


Yeah, it should only be used when people claim an entire society is inferior, in fact like this previous post of yours.....



Sadly if u'd look closer u'd find the similarities outweigh cosmetic differences

Japanese culture is hardly an ideal, careful with these 'rankings'


Lol, labelled a 'liberal' when i'm yet to make an statement about my own political views. I disagree with your bigotry - that makes me liberal?

Disciminatory practices? - thats their culture and how dear u condemn it just for being different. Ever thought that maybe it works for them?

You do realise your beloved America is as discrimatory as any regime on earth - those poor sods in Guantanamo Bay, in violation of every law we claim to hold dear! Eastern culture couldn't possible be as rife with hypocrisiy!


 :rofl: - classic, just classic, because thats exactly what i said. Must be getting u really upset to resort to such desperate tactics. Good.


Ur right, i'll condemn others who are different - on the basis that their different...That's prejudice, but wait your not a rascist right?


Okay, just the culture, okay



 :hihi: :rofl: But u just said.....

So your argument is an attack on religion - in your own words u say so!

U really need to plan what u say better.

So effecitively ur problem with these ''other'' cultures is that theyr ain't Christian? Because other religions award a lower status to women, they as a people, are unworthy and their religion is inferior?

If only they'd adopt glorious Christianity :hihi:


I'm some what amused by your attempts to portray me as the bigot! Remember, little hint for next time - u might want to actually use what the person said as opposed to descriptions of yourself u dspertaely try to project on others

All cultures have their flaws and greatness, and to attempt to rank them is absurd. Is the west's? hypocrisy, crusades and corruption really that much better than the rest of the world?

This is the norm from this "camp" on here.

They tell you what you are, and how you think, and then attack what they just made up.

I call that delusional.

So I'm making it up when I say Izzy supports the discrimination and abuse of women as long as it "works" for that culture?  If I misread something there please tell me so.  It's sad that people are so against western values and want to be accepted as "open-minded" so much that they accept racism, sexism and slavery as long as it doesn't exist in the west.

Actually, I think we should be more honest about how we impose our culture. The "Iraq Democracy" PR spin has been a failure. Iraqis don't understand our reasoning and worldview. If we simply told them we were there for the oil (and we are), they would take it better. They're used to that kind of treatment. ;)

They care more about their culture and beliefs than material wealth. Imposing our beliefs on them has carried a heavy price, in blood. Our ways are better, but convincing them of that at gunpoint is asking to be shot back at.

Ranking cultures is a good thing. Being complacent about culture and thinking egalitarianism will solve the world's problems is ignorant. Japan has a good culture, but they're a bit soft on the military side. They're right to not apologize to China for "war crimes", whatever that is, but they need more military spending and less socialism. I'd give them an 8/10.

I reply in full knowledge that once again I am allowing myself to be dragged down to the gutter to fight claims that should just be ignored.


Neither you nor I has the right to condemn Islam for the status it awards women.
 
I place greater faith in a position that grants women equality - but I realise using words like 'discrimination' and 'abuse' to describe the way Islam treats women shows a disrespect for their religion and a profound ignorance and bigotry that is unbecoming of modern man.

Muslim women around the world continue to adhere to Islam's position on women when there is no legal enforcement -  most Muslim women do not regard their treatment as ''abuse'' just as most western 'housewives' to not view their position as ''slaves''

Do not try to apply a simplistic system of good and bad to a world you barely understand in even a limited form

Do not assume that all people think as you do - because in your case, very few do.



You misread, misunderstand and misquote on an hourly basis, and unfortunatetly I lack the time to correct you at each step.


I'd say it was sad that a person with a western education, that lives and works with people of all faiths and ethnic groups has become so prejudiced and so self righteous to condemn others simply because they dare to be different.

slc, you look worse and worse as the days go by.? At one point you had changed your approach and had decided to try actual discussion.? What happened?? Why have you reverted to name calling again?? You DIGRESS into this approach when you have to response to an issue.?

Well put.? Some here throw the word "racist" around with wild abandon.? I think your statements above are dead on and sum up my feeling s on the issue.

Are you serious.  I can condemn it all day long.  It's horrendous.  Using culture as an excuse for the way people are treated is moronic.  In that vein, why did we get rid of slavery?  I'll tell you, because it was wrong. 
 

This is precious.  You condemn western men for believeing that the mistreatment of Islamic women is wrong.  Absolutely one of the dumbest statements ever.


So because muslim women don't know any better it's ok?  Come on man.  So a child who is abused by a father for years should be allowed to continue to be abused because she doesn't know any better?  Wrong is wrong man, regardless of stupid religious beliefs.


So the abuse and mistreatment of women is a gray area for you?  It's ok in the muslim world, but bad in the west?


wrong again.  There are very few people in the west who would condone the way muslims treat women.  On the contrary, you are in the minority on this issue.

Izzy your argument is so flawed I dare not even call it fuzzy logic.  Your argument stems around the fact that because they don't know any better or have a problem with it, it is acceptable.  Most slaves didn't mind being slaves as long as they had full bellies and shelter, how many slave revolts occured because of discontent?  Freedom was actually enforced on them and many still stayed at their "owners" property to continue working.  By your standards, slavery is acceptable and how dare anyone of those uppity Northerners condem the practices of those hillbilly southerners in America.  A dog doesn't know it's wrong to be hurt, so I can kick my dog (something I would never do) simply because he doesn't know it to be wrong.  I'm really suprised that the true liberals on this board (not fascist in disguise like yourself) haven't stood up on this issue; bu I'm sure they will.  How you can defend discrimination against women and other attrocities because it works for their culture yet still want to be taken serious on anything is beyond me.

Wait a second, I have a way to counter all of your future claims against the US!    It's part of our culture to provide lies to our people and invade other countries, so you're perfectly fine with it because Americans don't know any better.  ::)

Good for you!


Because...?



Don't hear thes e'victims' complaining



Considering the residual rascism in America and the endless poor, black ghettos one must wonder whether slavery was ever really got rid of at all
 

What u call mistreatment is accepted by hundreds of millions of muslims...and u'd know about dumb statements!




and u do no better? A man that hates muslims and arabs knows better than they do?? :hihi:


Muslim women are ''children'' so stupid they don't know any better?!? Keep digging Adolf....


Unless we're talking about torture - then wrong is only wrong sometimes and right other times :hihi:



U have a somewhat curious notion of what happens to women in the Middle East and beyond....


It would be so much easier to talk with you if u'd read my original post all the answers are to be found their ;)


Again - what do u think happens to women in these places? The Taliban were extremists and yet u seem to assume the way they treated women is the same as in Saudia Arabia, Indonesia etc...

Of course u don't dare to call it logic, because ur ideology would crumble to the ground


U telling me what my argument is? I know what my argument is, i wrote it! ::)

They don't know any better, and of course, u do?


Thats the kind of stuff that keeps me reading your posts - absolute gold. Of course they didn't mind :hihi:



Thousands.

U should read up about what happened in the good ol' days of slavery. U'll find ur answers there



Yeah, whatever


Hmm wonder why....er, perhaps because they had no skills to go elsewhere and no money to travel?



Okay enough with the 'i for some reason know what u mean but proceed to post things that show i clearly don't''



see, thats wasn't so hard to admit :hihi:



slaves for all!



U don't see a problem in comparing muslim women to animals?

And a dog does know what pain is - thats why it runs away from u :confused:

Ur animals must be very odd...


 :hihi:

Ur so insecure, this desperate need to convince yourself your views are acceptable


Maybe cos they took the time to read what i said and unserstood it? Use a dictionary if any of the words stump u


Again, still looking for for where i spoke in favour of discrimination :confused:

I don't agree with the way stricter Islamic nations treat certain sections of their population - (and here's the important bit, that u keep missing) - while we are engaged in wars to get oil, i find it difficult to condemn the way their society is ordered - as if our nations are in any better shape! As if we the voters in these nations have a foot to stand on!

Has my point really been so difficult for u to understand? Do u now understand? Really? Its about the hypocrisy of commenting on other nations when our own nations are so deeply flawed. Got it? 



Lie and post nonsense, its worked for u so far


There u go, ur finally admitting things u've known all along. Doesn't it feel better?


Judging by the posts of 99% of Americans on this board they do seem to know better :)

Izzy, your opinions are mind boggling.  No one could possibly come to your defense here man.  You are dead wrong on every single point you made.  I mean every single one.  It is amazing how left wing some people can get.  What's weird is that I honestly don't know anyone over 25 years old in the real world that are as liberal as you people.  It is so bizaar.  We have a few liberals at work, but they get drowned out completely by the conservatives.  These liberals have a bit of common sense too.  They can see the benefit in torturing known terrorists in an effort to save thousands of lives.  What is weird is that the liberals on this board don't seem to be able to see the light through their liberal media provided cool aid.   

You DO realize that the only real way we lose the war to the terrorists is to become just like them, right?

No, actually, I'm sure you don't.

And you think WE'RE drinking the kool aid....   ::)

 I don't want to get in the middle of an argument, but abuse is prevalent and even accepted. ?Female genital mutiliation is very common and is performed on millions of young women in the name of Islam. ?I'd hope everyone would have a problem with that...

Don't you get it yet Chelle, Izzy supports that behavior because he suffers from the white man's burden.? He deep down inside does not see these people equal to himself and is why he wouldn't tolerate that behavior and society if it was FORCED upon him.? I find it amazing that besides SLC's minor defense, Izzy's comrades are leaving him alone on this one.? I'm finally glad the everyone is seeing how radical Izzy is in his views.? Let's make sure we understand Izzy's argument:? He supports the systematic persecution and discrimination against women because they "accept it".? Although I find it funny that their acceptance of this world is because to fight it would result in extreme physical harm or even death, but Izzy is so openminded that he has to accept this behavior.? Pathetic and sad really, but I do love how Izzy attacks my grammar and combines claims and sentences of mine to string another argument; ecspecially when his own grammar and spelling is found wanting.

I was just pointing out, it's not Muslim men just abuse their wives.? Millions of Muslim children suffer through genital mutilation.?
But no, I must not get it ... I've never pondered how Izzy feels "deep down inside."? ?::)
... But if anyone could support stuff like that, who gives a fuck what they think?

Look who is changing things around....

Now it's "known terrorists".....

What a liar you are.