Posted on 08/27/2010 9:13:02 AM PDT by ggrrrrr23456
Among the premises with which the Feds justify their War on Terror are the hordes of bad guys overrunning the planet. The government wants us to believe that millions of terrorists lurk worldwide, scheming to blow us sky-high. They penetrate our airports and spy on our infrastructure. In their spare time, they form sleeper cells that fiendishly and seamlessly blend into our communities. Indeed, one has probably infiltrated your neighborhood.
Protecting us from this threat domestically and internationally requires corresponding millions of bureaucrats, cops, and soldiers as well as trillions of our taxes -- and, of course, the surrender of our freedom, dignity, and privacy to the State.
Intriguingly, the Feds themselves gainsay this foolishness every year in a publication entitled Country Reports on Terrorism. The Department of State issues it -- and you won't be surprised to learn that though "U.S. law requires the Secretary of State to provide [it to] Congress, by April 30 of each year," the Report for 2009 appeared only earlier this month. Try paying your taxes that late and see what happens.
(Excerpt) Read more at campaignforliberty.com ...
Quoted for truth.
” we're being generous. Extremely so. And yet our method still yields just 150,000 terrorists worldwide.
That's less than the population of Springfield, Massachusetts; Cape Coral, Florida; or Dayton, Ohio. Less than the number of souls living in 3 square miles of Manhattan (66,939 persons per square mile, according to the US Census for 2000). Less than the number of teachers’ jobs Obama claims he will “save” by robbing us of another $10 billion.”
Stupid non arguments. It only took a couple of dozen dedicated terrorists to do hundreds of billions of dollars of damage to the United States and kill nearly 3000 American citizens on 911.
While normally I agree with libertarians, on this issue I respectively disagree. While the actual risk from terrorism is low, the potential risk is much higher. The actual risk from terrorism is low because of the steps we take to prevent it. No, terrorism is not worth surrendering our freedoms, but that does not mean it is not worth it for our government to try and mitigate the risks.
Plus the worldwide risk from Islamic extremism is well known, documented, and real. To pretend otherwise is to put your head in the sand.
To the extent the 535 scoundrels on Capitol Hill have created the problem by two generations of pouring US dollars into the Saudi’s coffers..he may have a point.
A more objective view of Islam and Muslims can be found if you imagine them to be space aliens — not, which is important — with the idea of dehumanizing them — but to put *just* their actions into perspective, without rhetoric and emotional investment.
To start with, a billion space aliens have landed on Earth, and now live in the world’s inhospitable deserts, most of them in great poverty, but with little or no interest in improving where they live. Having taken those places, they declare them forevermore “alien”, and they shall never again be human property. And they forbid humans from doing human things there, because the aliens find what humans do to be deeply offensive.
Humans have a “live and let live” attitude, however, and do not resent the aliens wanting their own place. But many of the aliens desire to emigrate to the better lands of the humans. Still, the humans do not object to this, and welcome the aliens to live among them with open arms.
Yet when the aliens arrive, they do not wish to live with humans, but in alien ghettos, apart from humans, abhorring the idea of integrating with humans, whose ways they look upon with ill concealed contempt.
They fully demand every bit of kindness that humans bestow on each other, especially government welfare, of which they want the full measure. As more of them arrive, they demand the “right” to accommodate them with more space and more separation, that the humans must respect the alien traditions, yet must also subsidize them.
But the mere presence of the humans is offensive to them, so they demand that humans stop behaving like humans in their presence. That they refrain from eating or even carrying human food, listening to human music, or even dressing in the manner of humans.
Likewise, they demand that humans learn of the ways of aliens, so as better to respect and understand the aliens. That human children be taught the culture of the aliens in school. They find the human law to be inferior to alien law as well, so they demand the right to follow it instead.
Eventually, they reject humans entering their areas at all, chasing them out, even attacking humans near their areas.
Finally, from an alien run country comes a savage attack, that kills thousands of humans. Around the world there are scenes of aliens dancing and celebrating the attack against the hated, oppressive humans. (And there are many humans agree that indeed humanity has been and continues to be oppressive to the aliens.)
When asked to condemn the attack by aliens against humans, the self-identified “moderate” alien leaders do not, instead condemning “all” acts of murderous violence which happens among lifeforms on Earth. When pressed on this, they assert that aliens are peaceful.
Outside, aliens protest, carrying signs that say things like “Do not call aliens violent, or we will kill you filthy human beasts”, and “Kill all the humans!” These aliens are dismissed as not representative of aliens.
**************************
“Dehumanizing” Muslims, or “Islamophobia” can only be the case if people irrationally blame Muslims for things for things they do not do, or are not responsible for. “Islamoscepticism”, however, is paying attention to what Muslims do, not just taking what they say for granted, especially when there is broad conflict between their actions and their words.
Those people who are apologists for Muslim acts of bad behavior and violence, however, should properly be called “Islamophiles”. This is because they ignore actions and pay attention only to words. So their appellation is appropriate, saying that they are “unnaturally” or “irrationally” attracted to Islam and Muslims, to the point of being apologists and fools. Or “dhimmis”, as they are called in Islam.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.