Posted on 07/04/2012 10:51:05 PM PDT by damonw
FULL VIDEO: Fox Appearance 7-3 & 7-4
I have been spending much of my time at Eric Allen Bells’ Facebook page and new website for the past month or so. You may not know him yet, but he is a liberal film maker and writer who had a drastic change of view about Islam, and much of everything else, as a result of doing a documentary on the mega-mosque in Murfreesboro Tennessee. For Eric, the impetus to look at Islam again was a conversation he had with a Christian Coptic Cab driver in which the driver disagreed with him that the changes happening in Egypt are a good thing. The driver told him a regime change would be fatal to his family back home. For me the impetus was the responce of Muslims and non-Muslims, around the world and online, to Pastor Terry Jones’s Burn A Koran Day almost two years ago.
Eric is very blunt and right on in his assertions about Islam, most specifically that Islam is “the worst, most deadly idea in the history of the world”. I think all three videos put together here are a must see, as rarely have such truths about Islam been spoken freely on any mainstream media. Eric has been studying Islam now for about 2 years and he knows his stuff and is very articulate.
(Excerpt) Read more at thereligionofconquest.info ...
Later
I don't understand any of this. This reminds me of the multiple "angles" that would run simultaneously in professional wrestling. You would have the evil Nazi German, the "Pearl Harbor" Japanese, the Red Terror, the Arab sheik, the Cuban assassin, the bullying cowboy, and the evil gay. Each one claimed to be "the greatest wrestler of all time." Yet they never got mad at each other. They were all on the same side because they were all heels, and each one was feuding with a different "babyface."
In American politics today we have all these simultaneous "angles." We have the Marxist angle, the secular humanist angle, the gay angle, the Black angle, the Mexican angle, and now the islamic angle. They never get mad at each other. And conservatives are supposed to be against each and every one of them. Trouble is, to do so they must twist themselves into knots.
One minute conservatives are screaming to the high heavens that this is a chr*stian nation and the libs and gays had better learn that. Then suddenly conservatives thump Tom Paine and Voltaire as they lambast islam for being mean to gays, atheists, and feminists and because their conception of god as being completely sovereign over every facet of life is alien from All American Protestantism with its separation of church and state. Then the Blacks come along and religion disappears entirely in a fratricidal war among alleged co-religionists.
G-d shouldn't tell governments what to do? But homosexuality should be against the law? But not in moslem countries? What the hey? Is anyone listening to himself?
Now before I get zotted and strung up, it isn't just us conservatives who are tying ourselves into knots. Until a couple decades ago the Arab/moslem community was a pariah that no politician would touch with a ten foot pole other than the David Dukes, the J.B. Stoners, the Pat Buchanans, and the Charley Reese's. Liberals wouldn't spit on an Arab (because Israel was so naughty and revolutionary). And now all of a sudden that is all forgotten. The KKK's former butt-boys are the new Oppressed Who Can Do No Wrong, and Israel is now Rhodesia. What did either Israel or the Arabs do to cause this reversal?
Now the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, once a mainstay of the World Anti-Communist League, is the new Cuba and Saudi princes are trying to sound like a cross between angry Sixties revolutionaries and nineteenth century anarcho-syndicalists. What is going on here?
And it turns out that liberals are actually for religious fanaticism and homophobia so long as it isn't rednecks doing it. So liberals defend gays from conservatives and conservatives defend gays from moslems.
Am I the only person on this forum whose head is spinning? (No Exorcist references, please!)
Is anyone trying to think logically about all this stuff at once instead of switching automatically from one position to the other depending on which "angle" just happens to be running at the moment?
The subject of this thread is a "former" liberal who still sounds exactly like a liberal to me. He's still for exactly the same stuff he used to be for . . . he's merely consistent. And the liberals who are attacking him are defending what they themselves attack in less politically correct populations.
Does anyone see what I'm getting at?
I don't know how else to put it, so I'll just make one more quasi-related point before posting this and resigning myself to my fate:
American conservatives are fond of attacking islam because its claims on life are total. But G-d's claims on all of life are exactly that: total. Before the novelty of "separation of church and state" this was almost universally recognized (though it had an antecedent in the chr*stian "render unto Caesar"). Do FReepers ever realize that the Jewish religion they claim to think so highly of is just as totalistic as islam? Is Judaism evil because it dictates how Jews are to tie their shoes? Or do Jews get a pass only because they are "honorary chr*stians" (an "honor" they rightly reject)?
No, I'm not apologizing for islam, a false religion. But I am suggesting that our current crisis has roots that go back much further than the Sixties and that conservatives crusading against "theocracy" makes about as much sense as liberals defending the rights of moslems to be homophobes.
Pinging a couple of friends just so someone will see this who knows me and won't misunderstand what I'm trying to say.
Marxism/Socialism found and continues to find as useful tools-- the so-called "good people" of Islam, led by the structure of Islamic leadership (informed by the insane memory of Mohamed)-to be extremely helpful in the spread of worldwide communism.
The purists of the Marxist world continue to believe that Lenin was just not followed properly, and that's why it failed. And the purists are the kind of people who cultivated our current islamic present_dent and the crazy Marxists moving his agenda.
It is called shifting alliances, during the cold war many places did not want Communism, but we made of the mistake of assuming that meant they liked us, because we didn't want Communism either. But now that the Soviets are gone, the Saudi's et al. can return to the Anit-American Angle.
The Alliance between the U.S. and U.S.S.R during WW2 is a good example. Just because both were Anti-Nazi, doesn't mean we want the same thing. As such we ended up on opposite sides after the war.
BFL
Hear, hear! There’s nothing quite like reading about the epiphanies that lead other former liberals towards a realistic view of the world.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/converting-mamet_561048.html?page=1
[Sarcasm] B-B-But the Bolsheviks were Jews!!! The poor wittle muzzies were victims of Zionist Bolshevism just like whites in Africa were! [/sarcasm]
Honestly, you folks have no idea how many people still say this. Just run a simple web search and prepare to hurl.
Thanks for the link.
Thanks for the link.
You are both quite welcome.
Why some people insist on taking you on a trip through Wonderland to get to a video that’s readily available is beyond me.
(Couldn’t be they’re pimping for hits now, could it?)
Mooslum-Commie EVIL BUMP
Fascism, Nazism, Communism lasted a generation or several generations but Islam has lasted for 1400 years. When Islam gets its claws into a nation it is very difficult to get free. Islam is a cult that grew through warfare, unlike other cults that never managed to gain such widespread power. Islam controls people from within and without. It controls people’s thinking and controls them from without by threats. Islam controls the family pitting one family member against another. If one person wants to be free of Islam, his or her own family members will turn them in. Islam is a true cult because in a cult it is the cult leader who counts, no one else has rights. Look at the Jeffs cult and you will get a look at how cults work, people are required to do everything for the cult leader even sacrificing their own family members. Jeffs is supreme in the same way that Mohammed was supreme and the mullahs that have taken his place as the cult leaders are supreme today. If is very difficult to crack the nut that is Islam.
Still wrong. Countries have recovered and survived communisim. Spain succeeded in the Reconquista and Greece survived, but they are the exceptions. Once Islam takes over, its over.
Did you forget about Israel?
ALL of these divergent "angled" constituencies fit into the various pigeonholes of liberals. This is because that is HOW they view the world--every individual is some cause or subset which they massage for a VOTE in an election as needed-- the "special interests" they constantly lambaste.
Conservatives, who view people as people-no matter who they are- with unalienable rights given to each by GOD (even if they don't believe in the same or.. any GOD), have to twist into knots to deal with each of these "touchy" reactive subsets (gays, muzzies, illegal immigration, minorities-- you name it, they all have axes to grind). As Conservatives this is not really possible and so is quite disturbing. The socialists pander for the vote, and only care about holding power for "greater" goals.
My posting to Pontiac was to demonstrate how Lenin and other leaders of pre-Stalinist Bolshevism viewed Muslims-- as grist for the mill that would become the totalitarian STATE. Later, Stalin blamed/purged the "jewish" Bolsheviks (most of them anywya) and Lenin and the rest is terrible history of a psychopath statist. The liberals/socialists/Marxists in this country are STATISTS. And they are anti-Semitic (anti-religion esp. Christianity) selectively hating practicing orthodox Jews,and using muslims as needed to accomplish STATIST goals, just as the Bolsheviks did.
Again, in my opinion, amongst these statist liberals are many who have denounced whatever relgious/spiritual beliefs they had in favor of the state, or who have aligned themselves with politically co-opted churches/branches of religion who need to feel good about themselves. It is something the Founding Fathers well recognized-- that there cannot be civil freedom without spiritual/moral ethics. But in the future socialist/Marxist State these beliefs are so--- "passe" to the superior State. And, they are quite WRONG, ignoring human nature and natural law- and it is why they have always failed. Deo Vindice.
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.