[Clintons-B-Gone]

Radical Islam is a threat to all of us.

[Uncle Miltie]

The problem is that the Left agrees with Radical Islam’s goal of destroying Western Civilization.

[ansel12]

Islam is the threat, not “radical Islam”, or all the other euphemisms for, and versions of saying “Islam”.

[BenLurkin]

The problem is that idiots like Cameron insist on fighting “the scourge of extremism” when he should be fighting the scourge of Islam.

[House Atreides]

“When is the world finally going to realize that Radical Islam isn’t a religion of peace?...”
****************************************************************************************
The word “Radical” needs to be removed from the above politically correct sentence to make it fit reality.

Islam ITSELF is a monstrous cult, and nothing more. “Radical” Islam is just the surface of the Islamic iceberg currently carrying out the tenets of that “religion”. ALL Muslims are monsters in their hearts.

[Travis McGee]

Short version: Kill all the men, rape all the women, raise the children to be Muslims.

In one generation, a conquered territory is Muslim.

Click the pic to link to the full-text Free Republic thread.

[Gen.Blather]

Forget the word radical. It isn’t radical. They are just doing what the religion has professed since the 600’s. It’s simply Islam. There are those who don’t consider it safe yet to practice all of their religion and we call them moderates. But once they’re in the majority they will for the most part do exactly the same thing that ISIS is doing now. Their religion says, essentially, that anybody who is not an adherent is a slave and owes any Muslim a tax. Those who aren’t adherents have no rights. When your moderate Muslim realizes he can take your money and you can’t do anything about it, how much longer will he be a moderate?

[Fungi]

The article is actually well written—to my surprise. The author brings up some criticism about the feckless fool on the hill, but in the end he is another lap dog in not really going after him enough. Our golfer-in-chief is simply an incompetent charlatan. Why no one says this enough is beyond me.

[MtnMan101]

Radical is as Radical does. Fight fire with fire.

General Pershing had it right.
In the battle for the Philippines, He had his troops dip their bullets in Pigs blood. He also buried the dead bodies laced with Pig entrails and butchered body parts.
The Muzzies quickly laid down their arms and surrendered.
Do your research about what Islam has to say and see why.

The country had 42 years of peace afterwards.

[JimSEA]

“In fact, it isn’t even a religion at all.”

Wrong! Without their angry, vengeful Allah, and without the promise of an afterlife in a lust filled paradise, they wouldn’t have anything. Religious intolerance has always been at the center of wars, conquests and genocides. As disturbing as it may be, ISIS believes they are following the will of Allah.

[353FMG]

>When is the world finally going to realize that Radical Islam isn’t a religion of peace?<

.
When is the world finally going to realize that there is no difference between Radical Islam and ‘peaceful’ Islam?

They all get their marching orders from the same Koran.

[cpdiii]

Radical Islam is a religion of depraved male debauchery, human slavery, and ultimately, death. In fact, it isn’t even a religion at all.

A small correction in your post. The problem is not radical Islam but the fact that Islam as prescribed from the Koran is radical. In fact moderate Muslims are apostates and as ISIS has shown us in horrid executions of men, women, and children, moderate Muslims are slaughtered, raped, butchered and worse.

The Koran if followed as written is radical and without mercy. A moderate Muslim is an apostate and in the eyes of ISIS even worse than Christians and Jews.

ISIS is an evil entity that will win or it will die. If they win we die. If we win they die.

[workerbee]

IMHO: The Left's problem is that calling out Islam as "evil", is by default, an acknowledgment that Christianity -- or rather, the Judeo-Christian tradition -- is "good." Whether Islam is regarded as a religion or not, it most certainly is a culture that dominates a large part of the world. As we know, it's anathema to the Left to admit one culture is superior to another, even when it is as as gutter-trash as Islam. Any concession they'll make otherwise is explained as the fault of Western (particularly American) capitalists, imperialists, etc. In this way, the Left sees Islam as an ally in dismantling the Judeo-Christian traditions they abhor, as well as a "cause" that they (by way of political power, of course) can improve.

[ex-snook]

"Radical Islam is a threat to all of us. "

What woke up these guys up with delusions of grandeur? They have no world class military anything. Big powerhouse nations have atomic bomb, they don't. They use abandoned and captured US military equipment. They rely on improvised bombs, stolen planes and suicide to make an impact. What is our fear?

[zerosix]

The difference between Radical Islam and Moderate Islam is the bomb vest either isn't finished or more often the Moderate hasn't paid enough money to the kid to blow himself and others up - yet!

The Koran both read is the same and the author (Mohammad,) is the same.

Many people will state, "Why don't Moderate Muslims speak out against the violence?" as if the Moderate Muslim disagrees with the radicals. They don't, so quit wondering.

[JimRed]

In fact, it isn’t even a religion at all.

Which is what I've said almost forever, yet people respond to me as if I was the crazy one.

Islam is a socio-political system MASQUERADING as a religion.

[Yosemitest]

Brigitte Gabriel described the problem very well in her response to Saba Ahmed at the Heritage Foundation's June 16, 2014, event, "Benghazi: The Difference It Makes Is Accountability!"

Basically if I were to have titled it, I would call it

"Sharia" Is Not The "SAME FAITH", and "THE PEACEFUL MAJORITY WERE IRRELEVANT !"

But what's more defining is what several news source stories cut out in their version of the even.
Here are links to the reports that I'm referring to.

Unusual Answer from Panelist Receives Standing Ovation at Benghazi Coalition Meeting

This is the Discussion on Islam vs. Radical Islam Many Americans Have Been Waiting To Hear

Heritage Foundation Panelist on Radical Islam

These slightly different versions stirred my curiosity to dig into the full story myself.
Below is MY TRANSCRIPT of the 9 minutes and 17 seconds of video of the event. (I'm a retired air traffic controller/supervisor and I have done official transcripts before.)

Full Context: Benghazi Accountability Coalition Event

Full Context: Benghazi Accountability Coalition Event ( 9:17 )
Published on Jun 17, 2014 by The Heritage Foundation
The exchange between questioner Saba Ahmed and a panel at a June 16, 2014, event, "Benghazi: The Difference It Makes Is Accountability!"
the Benghazi Accountability Coalition hosted by the Heritage Foundation. On the panel Chris Plante, Clara Lopez, Brigitte Gabriel, and Frank Graffney


SABA AHMED: As-salamu alaykum. Peace to you all.
My name is Saba Ahmed.
I'm a Law Student at American University.
I am here to ask you a simple question.
I know that we portray Islam and all Muslims as bad, but there is 1.8 billion Muslims followers of Islam.
We have 8 million plus Muslim Americans in this country, and I don't see them represented here.
But my question is
how can we fight an ideological war with weapons?
How can we ever end this war?
The jihadist ideology that you talk about - it's an ideology.
How can you ever win this thing if you don't address it ideologically?

CHRIS PLANTE: Frank.

FRANK GAFFNEY: Well, um, I'm glad to see you're representing Muslims in this company.
Uh, I don't want to speak for anybody else, but I think I can say safely that there isn't anybody on this panel that thinks that all Muslims are the problem.
I certainly don't.
What we have been trying to help people to understand is the ideology, to use your tern, the doctrine, if you will, uh the program, agenda.
I don't know what best way to describe what "Sharia" is.
But that's the default line, I think, between Muslims who are … decidedly the problem,
because they believe it is "Allah's will", God's will, to impose that will on everybody else, Muslim and non-Muslim, alike, on one hand.
And on the other hand, you have lots of Muslims who don't follow that program.
They don't even know what it's about,
don't speak Arabic,
aren't imbued with the traditions of the faith as out of Saudi Arabia, for example.
And they are NOT necessarily the problem, at least not yet.
But what makes these policy things so important it seems to me, and why it is imperative that we understand it ...
It's not just that we don't know that we're fighting
an "ideological war" against people who ARE ABSOLUTELY CONVINCED OF THE SUPREMACY OF THEIR IDEOLOGY
but because as a practical matter, we're engaged in a situation that is becoming vastly worse in part because we keep embracing people who are imbued with that ideology.
This is why I come back to this idea of legitimating and engaging and funding and arming the Muslim Brotherhood.
These are exponents of "Sharia".
It is part of their agenda, very explicitly, to impose it, as I say, on everyone else.

So I thank you for the question and I think we absolutely do need to deal with it as an ideologically war, at least in part or at least understand the the ideology that is driving THE VIOLENT JIHAD ON THE ONE HAND,
AND EVERY BIT AS IMPORTANTLY WHAT THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD CALLS THE "CIVILIZATION JIHAD" ON THE OTHER.

Many in the government, if they're thinking about this at all, are focused on the sort of dangling, shiny object, dangerous as it is, of "VIOLENT JIHAD".
But they're missing ENTIRELY, that other piece that I talked about in connection with Huma Abedin and others,
which is … the SUBVERSION, the not-so-much non-violent form of Jihad, as the PRE-VIOLENT FORM OF JIHAD, with which they hope ultimately to take us down just as surely as the others who embrace VIOLENT JIHAD seem to.
But at the end of the day, it is something that brings them together,
whether it is ISSI,
whether it is the Taliban,
whether it's Al Qaida,
whether it's the Muslim Brotherhood,
whether it's dozens of others,
IS "Sharia" .
And we DO have to get THAT straight.

BRIGITTE GABRIEL: Great ,,,

Crowd: ( applause) [Video time ( 4:06 )]

BRIGITTE GABRIEL: Great question.
I am so glad you're here.
And I am so glad you brought that up, because this …, because it gives us an opportunity to answer.
What I find so amazing is, since the beginning of this panel, which we are here about Benghazi attack against our people; not one person mentioned
Muslims,
we are here against Islam,
or we're launching war against Muslims.
We are here TO DISCUSS
HOW 4 AMERICANS DIED,
and WHAT OUR GOVERNMENT IS DOING.

We are NOT here to bash Muslims.
YOU were the one who brought up the issue about 'most Muslims', NOT US.

And since you brought it up, allow me to elaborate with my answer.

There are 1.2 BILLION Muslims in the world today.
OF COURSE NOT ALL of them are radicals.
The majority of them are peaceful people.
The radicals are estimated to be between 15 to 25% according to ALL intelligence services around the world.
That leaves 75% of them, ma … a peaceful people.

But when you look at 15 to 25% of the world's Muslim population,
you're looking at 180 million to 300 million people DEDICATED TO THE DESTRUCTION OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION.
That is as big of the United States.

So why should we worry about the radical, 15 to 25%?
BECAUSE IT IS THE RADICALS THAT KILL.
BECAUSE IT IS THE RADICALS THAT BEHEAD AND MASSACRE.

When you look throughout history, when you look at all the lessons of history,
most Germans were peaceful.
Yet the Nazis drove the agenda.
And as a result, 60 million people died, almost ah, … 14 million in concentration camps. 6 million were Jews.
The peaceful majority were IRRELEVANT.

When you look at Russia, most Russians were peaceful as well.
Yet the Russians were able to kill 20 million people.
The peaceful majority were irrelevant.

When you look at China for example, most Chinese were peaceful as well.
Yet the Chinese were able to kill 70 million people.
The peaceful majority were IRRELEVANT.

When you look at Japan prior to World War II, most Japanese were peaceful as well.
Yet, Japan was able to butcher its way across Southeast Asia, killing 12 million people, mostly killed with bayonets and shovels.
The peaceful majority were IRRELEVANT.

On September 11th in the United States, we had 2.3 MILLION Arab Muslims living in the United States.
It took 19 hijackers,
19 radicals,
to bring America down to its knees,
destroy the World Trade Center,
attack the Pentagon, and … and kill almost 3000 Americans that day.
THE PEACEFUL MAJORITY WERE IRRELEVANT !

SO FOR ALL OUR POWERS OF REASON, and US TALKING ABOUT moderate and peaceful Muslims, I'm glad you're here.
But WHERE ARE THE OTHERS SPEAKING OUT?

AND SINCE YOU ARE THE ONLY MUSLIM REPRESENTATIVE …

Crowd: ( overwhelming applause)

BRIGITTE GABRIE: ( speaking to the large crowd and waving her hands down to lower the noise) Save your applause until the end.

Crowd: ( overwhelming applause)

BRIGITTE GABRIEL: Thank you.

Crowd: ( overwhelming applause)

BRIGITTE GABRIEL: (Laughing) Thank you.

AND SINCE YOU ARE THE ONLY MUSLIM REPRESENTATIVE IN HERE, YOU TOOK THE LIME LIGHT INSTEAD OF SPEAKING ABOUT
WHY our government …
And I assume
You're an American?

[Ahmed responded yes.]

BRIGITTE GABRIEL: You're an American Citizen?

[Ahmed responded yes.]

BRIGITTE GABRIEL: So, as an American citizen, you sat in this room, and INSTEAD of standing up as saying a question,
or asking something about our 4 Americans that died and what our government is doing to correct the problem,
YOU STOOD THERE TO MAKE A POINT ABOUT PEACEFUL, MODERATE MUSLIMS.
I wish you brought 10 with you TO QUESTION THEM ABOUT WHAT, HOW WE CAN HELP OUT GOVERNMENT RESPONSIBLE It is time
we take political correctness and THROW IT IN THE GARBAGE CAN WHERE IT BELONGS,
and STOP CALLING IT "SAME FAITH" .

[Video time ( 8:00 )]

Crowd: ( Shouts of "Yeah" and overwhelming applause)

CHRIS PLANTE: And they'll be refreshments afterwards.

Crowd: ( Laughter and overwhelming applause)

CHRIS PLANTE: (to Clare Lopez) Ah, did you want to respond to the ah … ?

CLARE LOPEZ: (Shaking her head no) I don't want to.

CHRIS PLANTE: You think, ah (laughing) you think that … another time .

CLARE LOPEZ: (Shaking her head no) I can't follow that.

CHRIS PLANTE: ( Laughing) ( Pointing to Saba Ahmed) You had a follow-up that you'd ah …
I'd uh …
Yeah, go ahead. Go ahead.

[Video time ( 8:31 )] (Video of part of the large crowd and Saba Ahmed asking question)

SABA AHMED: … A comment.
Thank you for your responses.
And I do really hope that other Muslims will start showing up at these conservative forums.
But, you know, as a peaceful … ah, American Muslim I would like to think that I'm not that irrelevant.
I would like, I'm just as much an American and Im very deeply saddened about the lives that were lost in Libya.
And I hope that we will find justice for them and their families and …
But I don't think that this war can ever be won BY JUST THE MILITARY.
You have to address the war … You have to bring the Muslims to the table TO ADDRESS THIS.

CHRIS PLANTE: I think that … I think everyone agrees that it can't be won JUST by the military, and I that everyone has said that.
You, … Can you tell me WHO the head of the uh, Muslim Peace Movement IS?

SABA AHMED: Huh, I guess that's me right now, sir. (she's smiling)
Thank you.

CHRIS PLANTE: Uh, yeah, well uh … (smiling)
Thank you.

(Crowd clapping)

END of video.

[onedoug]

And, the current President is an enemy islamist.

[HotHunt]

Somehow “workplace violence” and “man-made disaster” come to mind after reading this article.

[stevie_d_64]

Facing radical islam is not so much a physical stand off, but one of exposure...

By that I mean, if we know how many folks (citizens) who are taking up arms and physically affiliating with radical Islamic group(s)...

Then I say that if we have the numbers, then we know who these people are...

Lets publish their names, and personal information, in a very public manner...

Sedition and treason by our citizens is a very clear and precise Constitutional, and legal definition, that requires legal proceedings...

I say this in reference to the individuals traveling to Syria and Iraq who are conducting this activity...

Shame is a wonderful social condition, that brings about one of two things in this case...

The accused come home to defend their actions...Perfectly acceptable, and legal...

Or...

They are killed on the battlefield...

The latter here being a totally acceptable result...One that we should engage with ALL due prejudice and vigor...

Just my opinion...

[stevie_d_64]

Case in point...

http://news.yahoo.com/british-jihadist-mum-threatens-behead-christians-reports-113331874.html

Totally acceptable to release this information...I would not mind additional details on this person...