Steyn: Will we stick our necks out for his faith?

You can fantasize and preach your own spittle-flecked version of reverse-jihad genocide until you get banned from FR. That's on you.

As Ronald reagan was wont to say, "There you go again..." Once again you accuse people of genocide, but absolutely refuse to apply that to Islam. It is *not* genocide to defend one's self, family and culture against those who have clearly, publicly, and repeatedly uttered genocidal intent on them. It is self-defense.

There *is* a pattern of extortion here, with this drumbeat of "1.2 billion", whether you are willing to acknowledge it, or not. It was only a few short weeks ago, that we saw it in action, where the First Amendment was seriously, voluntarily gutted by those who claimed to be its foremost champions, and the long-held concept that an attack on a nation's embassy was a de-facto attack on that nation (and its allies). This compromised away, and why? So as not to "upset" 1.2 billion tantrum throwing three-year-olds. What else can we expect to see compromised away in the near future, when the process is repeated, which having been eminently successful, you may rest assured will be? *THIS* is a viable solution?

the infowarrior

Ridding the Earth of Muslims will be genocide on a scale unmatched by Genghis Khan, Mao Tse-tung, Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler put together. And you want to advocate that?

And what do you call Islam ridding the earth of all infidels and subjugating "people of the book" to the service of Allah?

As a practical metter, you won't call it anything, having had your head removed to the chant of "Allah Akhbar!" and all.

"The technical means to kill 1.2 billion Muslims without killing huge numbers of non-Muslims does not exist. You can fantasize and preach your own spittle-flecked version of reverse-jihad genocide until you get banned from FR. That's on you."

Cute. "reverse-jihad genocide"??

ALL Muslims can theoretically be deported back to their hell-hole of origin where they can face whatever wrath civilization decides upon the threat of evil psychopaths should the various citizenries demand further protection from this worldwide horde of nuts.

Btw, you were also a HUGE advocate of the Muslim involvement in U.S. Ports as well, weren't you?

Hmmmm...

Btw, you were also a HUGE advocate of the Muslim involvement in U.S. Ports as well, weren't you?

No, I was an advocate of sanity and an opponent of Chuckie Schumer's artificially created hysteria, which you not only fell for but apparently still believe.

Anybody who wishes to read my posts on that subject can hit keyword ports.

"I was an advocate of sanity and an opponent of Chuckie Schumer's artificially created hysteria, which you not only fell for but apparently still believe.

Anybody who wishes to read my posts on that subject can hit keyword ports."

81% of the Americans polled agreed that Muslims should not be involved in any way shape or form with so vital and vulnerable an infrastructure as U.S. ports....

Thus it appear it was YOU who abided in the "hysterical" 19%.

Just because Schumer was against it ddin't mean he was wrong; he merely opposed it on political grounds.

Btw, I hit keyword "paranoia" regarding "ports" and "Cannoneer No. 4" and got one-gazillion posts ;-)

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.