[river rat]

The critical distinction today...is that the Muslims that are not terrorists, are NOT taking action or demanding the expulsion of the "radicals" from positions of authority in Islam..

Islamic clerics all over the world are preaching hate, murder and celebrating those killed in the name of Islam....This, more than anything - paints all those "silent" peaceful Muslims as FRAUDS.

Let one Christian preacher, simply use the WORD evil to describe Islam -- and the Muslims go nuts and clerics issue a fatwah for his death! Yes, they are a religion of peace..... NOT!

If Muslims will NOT refute the militant and radical version of their "Holy Book" ----Then Islam is the enemy. How much clearer must this be for people to recognize the real issue?

Semper Fi

[eastforker]

I agree,if one is not part of the solution then he is part of the problem.IMHO there can be no neutrality on this subject,you are either with us or you are with the terrorist.How hard is that for some to understand.

[truth_seeker]

If a Christian pastor stood in his church, and using religious/political double-talk admonished his flock to harm, kill abortion doctors, that would be an incitement to commit an illegal act of violence.

If a muslim cleric stood in his mosque, and using religious/political double-talk, admonished his flock to harm, kill Americans, Jews, Hindus, infidels, that would be an incitement to commit an illegal act of violence.

IOW he who issues the order is just as guilty, as he who pulls the trigger, flies the plane, etc. That the "order giver" is a religious figure makes no difference.

Surely this is easy to understand. It was understood at the Nuremberg trials.

A muslim cleric should NOT free to incite, by standing behind some protected veil of "religion." The effect is the same outcome: an illegal act of violence.

So for now, any nation wishing to enter/remain in the realm of civilization MUST clamp down HARD.

Those who can't or won't are the ENEMIES of civilization, and are explicitly permitting evil.

So Indonesia, Philipines and other nations had best get going. If the citizenry wishes to live under Sharia Law, let them be isolated.

Should a muslim nation allow their "islamic warriors" to roam the globe, that nation is the ENEMY. There should be perfect clarity, and no exeptions (Pakistan?).

It will be long, messy, hard to understand. But it must follow easily understood clarity.

Incitement, financial support, sanctuary must all be included in the test of who is our friend, and who is our ENEMY. I expect in the long run, Saudi Arabia, perhaps Egypt, Pakistan and others could have great difficulty.

In some places, the citizenry may overthrow the present civil governments, in favor of terrorist leaders. That will make the distinction of ENEMY status much easier for our side.