Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Our enemy, unfortunately, IS Islam...AND Political Correctness
self | 9/22 | self

Posted on 09/22/2001 7:32:10 AM PDT by gg188

Experts cited in other FR posts tell us there are MANY terrorist cells here among us now. Who do we have to fear more---THEM or POLITICAL CORRECTNESS??


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-152 last
To: liberallarry
I'm sure as heck not a liberal but the talk in this thread of fighting Islam is a huge mistake. B.Laden wants us to attack mainstream Islam. Laden's approach counts on us to push mainstream Moslems his way and you guys are doing his bidding. I loathe Bin Laden but have to say his realpolitik touch is better than the thinking I'm seeing here. Disheartening.
141 posted on 09/25/2001 4:33:26 AM PDT by lly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: lly
I recognize your views as legitimate. I hope that you're right but fear that you're not.

And while I think it's absolutely necessary to discuss these things publicly there's not a day that goes by that I don't thank the Heavens for allowing me to be a big-mouthed advocate rather than the guy who actually has to pull the trigger.
142 posted on 09/25/2001 8:32:33 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: innocentbystander
The same words that Hitler said: "We are right, we fight for freedom".
40 milions casualties in the world.

I think he was ready to win, maybe too mach

Vittorio - Italy

143 posted on 09/25/2001 9:08:59 AM PDT by vigen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Darth Sidious
bttt
144 posted on 09/25/2001 5:52:32 PM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: BlueLancer
bump to the top
145 posted on 09/25/2001 5:53:48 PM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: gg188
Evidently you didn't listen to the President's recent speech. I did, and was quite moved by it. Our enemy is not Islam. Our enemy is, and always has been, hatred. The fanatics who killed 7000 people in NYC were not inspired by God, but by hatred.
146 posted on 09/25/2001 6:31:11 PM PDT by juliabrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson
bttt
147 posted on 09/26/2001 4:03:28 AM PDT by BlueLancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]

To: AndyJackson
bttt
148 posted on 09/27/2001 10:21:21 AM PDT by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
It came from this thread, which doesn't necessarily make it true, and doesn't, as you said, "prove it." I wouldn't, however, bet our nation against it. Sorry for the delayed attribution.

_____________________________________________________

Some Dare to Speak about Islam as It Is.

Your Opinion/Questions Editorial Keywords: POLITICALLY CORRECT TERROR

Source: World News Daily, From the Las Vegas Review Journal

Published: 9/27/01 Author: WND
Posted on 09/28/2001 07:32:24 PDT by Francohio

But as Mideast expert Daniel Pipes wrote this week,

"The president dismissed al-Qaida's version of Islam as a repudiated 'fringe form of Islamic extremism.'

Hardly. Muslims on the streets of many places – Pakistan and Gaza in particular – are fervently rallying to the defense of al-Qaida's vision of Islam.

Likewise, the president's calling the terrorists 'traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam' implies that other Muslims see them as apostates, which is simply wrong.

Al-Qaida enjoys wide popularity – the very best the U.S. government can hope for is a measure of Muslim neutrality and apathy."

Although without question there are millions of peaceful, tolerant and decent Muslims, what we're talking about here is a particular brand of Islam -- a rapidly expanding one at that -- often called "Islamism." Like communism and Nazism, it is a brutal, coercive utopian movement bent on nothing less than total world domination.

It's what President Bush described, in his excellent Sept. 20 speech to the nation, as heir "of all the murderous ideologies of the 20th century ... they follow in the path of fascism, and Nazism, and totalitarianism." Yes, the president, to his credit, characterized the enemy correctly, albeit briefly and incompletely. But he gave no sense of the size of the enemy.

Take a deep breath. Of the world's approximately 1.2 billion Muslims, an estimated 10 to 15 percent are of the militant "Islamist" strain. Do the math – that's well over 100 million human beings who, to a greater or lesser degree, are caught up with what amounts to the world's most dangerous cult.

Paul Marshall, senior fellow at the Center for Religious Freedom at Freedom House, told this writer that right now perhaps eight to 10 governments are "scared of being toppled" if they stand up to the Islamic "jihad" against the West. Citing Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen, Jordan, Indonesia and other potential "coalition" members, Marshall said such states "are afraid their country could be destabilized if they support the West too much, which shows that opposition to American action is not simply from a few hundred people."

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3bb489f8439b.htm

149 posted on 09/30/2001 12:00:57 PM PDT by gg188
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: virgil
That is a weakness of republics. See Roman Empire

That's sort of an oxymoron isn't it? I mean, it was the Empire that fell in corruption and decadence, not the Republic.

Your point is valid for the reasons given. But,IMO,the Roman republic would never have fallen under this kind of circumstance simply because the populace, during the Republican period, was unified and homogenous and had not fallen into the effete decadence of the later Empire.

150 posted on 09/30/2001 1:29:53 PM PDT by Chuckster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: A1/92FA'68
Your point is valid for the reasons given. But,IMO,the Roman republic would never have fallen under this kind of circumstance simply because the populace, during the Republican period, was unified and homogenous and had not fallen into the effete decadence of the later Empire.

I see what you're saying. As you probably know, the fall of Rome was a very long process. I think the beginning of end had its roots in the Republic. The civil war and in the Senate. The Senate and people became so frustrated by "dead lock" and I know that term is over simplfying what happened. What they wanted was 1 man to come along and save the Republic. They got an Emperor. With that in mind I am a little concerned to say the least about Presidents who rely on executive orders to "get things done". I think it was a very long time before the Roman citizens actually realized that they no longer lived in a Republic. The Emperors did what they could to keep that illusion alive. Thanks for your reply.

151 posted on 10/03/2001 3:32:51 PM PDT by virgil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]

To: BlueLancer
Bump to the top.

Don't know why but for some reason it seemed appropriate to bump post #128 right now.

152 posted on 08/09/2008 8:25:27 AM PDT by null and void (Barack Obama - International Man of Mystery...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-152 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson