Better to be an "anonymous nobody" according to the claim of but one, than a unanimous a$$ by the popular acclaim of many, shall we suppose...
My "getting any" at home, or lack thereof, although not your business, is neither a source for boasting nor complaining in any respect.
It is a pity that in the absence of evidence sufficient to support your own aspired-to arguments, you seem impelled to self-immolate what little credibility some in this forum might have ascribed to you, doing so through declasse, misguided, and unprovoked ad hominem attacks, and through putting words and concepts in the mouths of others which did not originate from them.
If it is your sole purpose to provoke an angry, hasty reaction which you might them utilize to manufacture some semblance of victory, or moral superiority in this arena of ideas...
Know that I'm laughing myself partially silly over such a piteous effort, and I am not alone in my bemusement.
better luck next time, kid - you seem to need it.
A.A.C.
http://frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=14660
THE KEY TO JIHADIST IDEOLOGY (SNIP)
"...It is these notions, deeply embedded in the jidadis’ reading of the life of Muhammed, and not determined by what is happening in what we think of as the real world, that determine their major strategic directions and whom they choose to kill. For example, the terrorists who murdered 190 people in Madrid on March 11, 2004 did not target Spain because of its involvement with the U.S.-led Iraqi reconstruction; the group had been planning the Madrid attack for two years, going back to before the American invasion of Iraq. They attacked Spain because it was the Near Enemy—a formerly Islamic land that they hoped to win back for Islam. Similarly, regarding the all-important question whether the Wahhabist Osama bin Laden would have been willing to work with the secularist Apostate Saddam Hussein in an attack on America, Habeck says it is entirely possible, because bin Laden believes that his primary enemy is the Greater Unbelief, the United States, and therefore in the short term he would cooperate with an Apostate such as Hussein. Then, after America had been finished off with Hussein's help, bin Laden with the enhanced power and prestige gained from that victory could redirect the jihad back at Hussein and other Moslem Apostates.
The key point is that, while specific actions by the West might provoke the jihadis to greater attacks, their fundamental strategic and military decisions are not determined by anything done by the United States or Europe or by other major enemies of Islam such as the Hindus, but rather by which Method of Muhammed each jihadi faction follows, and each of these strategies has its own internal rationality, though it is not a rationality that makes sense in non-Islamic terms.
The same is true for Wahhabism itself, says Habeck. Wahhabism began in the 18th century when there was no Western colonial power in the Islamic world; it was not set off by any Western intrusion into the Moslem lands. Similarly, the contemporary Islamist idea that America is the center of all that is evil in the world, making America the “Greater Unbelief”, was conceived by a Moslem scholar between 1948 and 1951 when he was residing in the United States. This was decades before the U.S. had any large-scale involvement with Israel, and decades before its culture spiraled downhill, though, from the point of view of that visiting Moslem, America was already quite decadent at that point and ripe for destruction..."
This goes on all the time on certain threads. Actually I was waiting for someone to pull a race card out of his/her hat by now. Could be worse, you could be a (((nazi))). Silly isn't it?
Excellent analysis.