Posted on 04/26/2005 7:55:09 AM PDT by jan in Colorado
What steps should Western border agencies take to defend their homelands from harm by Islamists?
In the case of non-citizens, the answer is simple: Don't let Islamists in. Exclude not just potential terrorists but also anyone who supports the totalitarian goals of radical Islam. Just as civilized countries did not welcome fascists in the early 1940s (or communists a decade later), they need not welcome Islamists today.
But what about one's own citizens who cross the border? They could be leaving to fight for the Taliban or returning from a course on terrorism techniques. Or perhaps they studied with enemies of the West who incited them to sabotage or sedition. Clearly, the authorities should take steps to find out more about their activities, especially given the dangerous jihadi culture already in place in many Western countries, including Canada.
This question arose in late December 2004, after a three-day Islamist conference, "Reviving the Islamic Spirit," took place in Toronto. The event, boasting a host of high-profile Islamist speakers such as Bilal Philips, Zaid Shakir, Siraj Wahhaj, and Hamza Yusuf, alarmed the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), America's new border agency..
Excerpt... Read more at http://www.JewishWorldReview.com
(Excerpt) Read more at JewishWorldReview.com ...
What a steaming load of BS.
Excellent, awesome response, Freddie. You and AAC are neck and neck and thank God for the both of you. Your swords are hitting the mark every time.
My admiration and gratitude to you both, on behalf of my "peeps".
5...4...3...2...1....
:)
I seriously had to read it 3 times. I just couldnt believe what I was reading....
Israel would be as flat as St. Pancake without the USA.
I believe that there will come a day when Islam will have to be declared incompatible with western culture.
Yeah, really.It made me hafta go for the Kleenex I felt such sorrow for the Palis.
< /sarcasm >
I note that the Squire has not been man enough to return to explain, defend or withdraw his calumny against the people and nation of Israel, whom the righteousness of God exalts.
LOL!!
yeah I went through a tissue box for the Iranians too on another thread hehe...
wait wait wait...
you are waiting on a troll infiltrator to have chutzpah....isnt gonna happen :)
We'll never know until the Palestinians are wiped out.
Ever compare the number of attacks by Israel and Zionists against America and the number of attacks by the UAE nations and Islamofascists?
Or is your point that we make ourselves a target by siding with Israel?
So would Gaza. And I would rather have Israel's support than the Palestinians, who, unlike the Israelis, have no love for the American people.
Agreed.
: )
: )
smiles!
Actually, David Barton has admitted making up the many quotations that have been used for claiming non-Christian Founding Fathers were actually believers. Let's look at some real quotations:
"The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as his father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter." --Jefferson's Works
"[Calvin's] religion was demonism. If ever man worshiped a false God, he did. The being described in his five points is ... a demon of malignant spirit. It would be more pardonable to believe in no God at all, than to blaspheme him by the atrocious attributes of Calvin." --Ibid
"Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one-half the world fools and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth." --Notes on Virginia
"I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition [Christianity] one redeeming feature. They are all alike, founded upon fables and mythologies." --Letter to Dr. Woods
"But the greatest of all reformers of the depraved religion of his own country, was Jesus of Nazareth. Abstracting what is really his from the rubbish in which it is buried, easily distinguished by its lustre from the dross of his biographers, and as separable from that as the diamond from the dunghill, we have the outlines of a system of the most sublime morality which has ever fallen from the lips of man. The establishment of the innocent and genuine character of this benevolent morality, and the rescuing it from the imputation of imposture, which has resulted from artificial systems, invented by ultra-Christian sects (The immaculate conception of Jesus, his deification, the creation of the world by him, his miraculous powers, his resurrection and visible ascension, his corporeal presence in the Eucharist, the Trinity; original sin, atonement, regeneration, election, orders of the Hierarchy, etc.) is a most desirable object." -- Letter to W. Short (emphasis mine)
"It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one. But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests." --Letter to John Adams
Thomas Jefferson was a great man, but though he studied Christianity and admired Jesus of Nazareth, he was not a Christian.
But... for my taste, you gotta like the Waffle Bunny....
Do you know why Waffles are better than Pancakes? They have tiny little syrup compartments....
OK, so it appears that AACs interpretation of "stop tolerating" means that the Jews should embark on a sort of Holy War against Islam.
Since WE are not stupid enough to get suckered into giving Bin Laden the result he wanted, AAC turns to another way to support his goal.
Bigot: One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.Do you not think that describes many here? Is it necessarily a bad thing to be thus? Perhaps it's the connotation of "bigot" that needs to be changed, if being called one is so upsetting to such a partisan and intolerant (another word that's not necessarily bad) crowd.
--The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000.
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.