[mojo2]

Useful Idiots: Islam’s Best Soldiers
By Amil Imani
FrontPageMagazine.com | August 18, 2006

Islam enjoys a large and influential ally among the non-Muslims: A new generation of “Useful Idiots,” that Lenin identified as those who lived in liberal democracies and furthered the work of communism. This new generation of Useful Idiots also lives in liberal democracies but serves the cause of Islamofascism—another virulent form of totalitarian ideology.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=23947

I imagine some of you being wide eyed and innocent tools, others of you I believe are willing dupes and another group acts as puppet masters.

[Ghoser777]

And others of us just have a different opinion (as the article states is possible).

[SpaceMonkey]

These threads are hilarious.

[invisibleX]

Islam is not totalitarian.

Islam is not fascist.

I've yet to see a single solidified army of islamofascists so how can they have soldiers?

If the ignorant are islams best soldiers frankly I'm not all that worried.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by invisibleX

Islam is not totalitarian.

Islam is not fascist.

I've yet to see a single solidified army of islamofascists so how can they have soldiers?

If the ignorant are islams best soldiers frankly I'm not all that worried.

You are SO pre-9/11 in your thinking.

[hyteckit]

mojo2, a fascist. What's new?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by hyteckit

mojo2, a fascist. What's new?

I'm not a fascist. But, if after all the evidence has been presented to convince all of us of what's going on anyone who doesn't grasp the idea must be a bit slowcist.

Here's an analysis of the Koran re: global jihad.

the analysis of Dar al Harb provided by the leading 20th expert on this Muslim conception, Armand Abel:

Together with the duty of the “war in the way of God” (or jihad), this universalistic aspiration would lead the Moslems to see the world as being divided fundamentally into two parts.

On the one hand there was that part of the world where Islam prevailed, where salvation had been announced, where the religion that ought to reign was practiced; this was the Dar al Islam.

On the other hand, there was the part which still awaited the establishment of the saving religion and which constituted, by definition, the object of the holy war. This was the Dar al Harb.

The latter, in the view of the Moslem jurists, was not populated by people who had a natural right not to practice Islam, but rather by people destined to become Moslems who, through impiousness and rebellion, refused to accept this great benefit.

Since they were destined sooner or later to be converted at the approach of the victorious armies of the Prophet’s successor, or else killed for their rebelliousness, they were the rebel subjects of the Caliph.

Their kings were nothing but odious tyrants who, by opposing the progress of the saving religion together with their armies, were following a Satanic inspiration and rising up against the designs of Providence. And so no respite should be granted them, no truce: perpetual war should be their lot, waged in the course of the winter and summer ghazu. [razzias]

If the sovereign of the country thus attacked desired peace, it was possible for him, just like for any other tributary or community, to pay the tribute for himself and for his subjects. Thus the [Byzantine] Empress Irene [d. 803] “purchased peace at the price of her humiliation”, according to the formula stated in the dhimma contract itself, by paying 70,000 pounds in gold annually to the Caliph of Baghdad.

Many other princes agreed in this way to become tributaries – often after long struggles – and to see their dominions pass from the status of dar al Harb to that of dar al Sulh. In this way, those of their subjects who lived within the boundaries of the territory ruled by the Caliphate were spared the uncertainty of being exposed arbitrarily, without any guarantee, to the military operations of the summer ghazu and the winter ghazu: indeed, anything within the reach of the Moslem armies as they advanced, being property of impious men and rebels, was legitimately considered their booty; their men, seized by armed soldiers, were mercilessly consigned to the lot specified in the Koranic verse about the sword, and their women and children were treated like things.

So far, we live in the Dar al Harb, the part of the world where Islam has not yet spread. And "through impiousness and rebellion," we have "refused to accept this great benefit of Islam."

And because we're destined sooner or later to be converted to Islam at the approach of the victorious armies of the Prophet’s successor, (al Qaeda or Hezbollah or the Muslim Brotherhood or the Iranian military or one of those groups or individuals) or else killed for our rebelliousness, we're the rebel subjects of the Caliph.

Our government and national leaders are seen by the jihadists as nothing but odious tyrants who, by opposing the progress of the saving religion together with their armies, are following a Satanic inspiration and rising up against the designs of Providence (Islam).

And so no rest should be given us. No truce: perpetual war should be our lot, waged in the course of the winter and summer ghazu.


This is what faces us and you call the government our enemy???

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by hyteckit

mojo2, a fascist. What's new?

What basis do you have to call him a fascist?

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

What basis do you have to call him a fascist?

How about advocating the killing all Muslims?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by hyteckit

How about advocating the killing all Muslims?

You are not only a liar but you are ignorant.

Prove it.

You can't. Please apologize.

Unless you are talking about this.

Ibn Hudayl (see p.40), a 14th century Granadan author of an important treatise on jihad, elucidated the allowable tactics facilitated the violent, chaotic jihad conquest of the Iberian peninsula, and other parts of Europe:

It is permissible to set fire to the lands of the enemy, his stores of grain, his beasts of burden – if it is not possible for the Muslims to take possession of them – as well as to cut down his trees, to raze his cities, in a word, to do everything that might ruin and discourage him…[being] suited to hastening the Islamization of that enemy or to weakening him. Indeed, all this contributes to a military triumph over him or to forcing him to capitulate.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles...e.asp?ID=22141

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by mojo2

You are not only a liar but you are ignorant.

Prove it.

You can't. Please apologize.

But I guess it's fine to accuse me of wanting to see Israelis exterminated. You're a classy guy, abe.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by mojo2

I'm not a fascist.

[...]

[Cut-and-paste blather in HUGE, easy-to-read type]

Shouting doesn't make you less stupid.

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by analogika

Shouting doesn't make you less stupid.

I can't imagine why you'd just admit that without any reason but since you did, why not share with us what worked for you?

[mojo2]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

But I guess it's fine to accuse me of wanting to see Israelis exterminated. You're a classy guy, abe.

You are not only a liar but you are ignorant.

Prove it.

You can't. Please apologize.

[Helmling]

Abe is mojo?

Well, huh.

I don't understand the conservative paranoia about Islamic fundamentalism. My father has been seduced by this too, trying to scare me into supporting the war in Iraq by predicting that if we don't pursue this "War on Terror" then my children will have to live under Sharia law at some point in the future.

I fail to see how the Islamic fundamentalists are a threat to our way of life. They have proven they can threaten our lives, even our economy, but is our society so fragile that these backward, violent little monsters can really endanger it? Sorry, abe or mojo or whoever, but I have more faith in America, in democracy, and in freedom.

No, the best of what we are is not threatened from without...now from within is another story...

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by mojo2

You are not only a liar but you are ignorant.

Prove it.

You can't. Please apologize.

How short is your attention span? From the Cease Fire thread:

Originally Posted by abe

Your arguments betray a hatred for Israel. I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt but you make it difficult to ignore it.

You are more than an unwitting tool. You simply support jihad.

Check please.

[greenG4]

Originally Posted by Webster's

fas·cism (fshzm)
n.

A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

This pretty much describes a large group of Islamics. Not all of course, but many. The above is exacly what many of them fight for. The religion itself may not be, but many of the people in it are.

[tie]

Originally Posted by mojo2

I imagine some of you being wide eyed and innocent tools, others of you I believe are willing dupes and another group acts as puppet masters.

Great article! I'd say the no. 1 useful idiots are the SUV drivers, and people like Bush who want to keep sending oil money to Middle Eastern terrorist organization. If we double fuel efficiency in our cars, which we have the technology to do today for a comparable amount of money to what we are spending in Iraq (talking trillions), then the whole Middle East will go the way of sub-Saharan Africa. And, frankly, good riddance.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

Check please.

Just because he said you're a Jew-hater and a supporter of jihad does not mean he also accused you of wanting to see the extermination of Israelis.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Just because he said you're a Jew-hater and a supporter of jihad does not mean he also accused you of wanting to see the extermination of Israelis.

Uh...yes, yes it does. He has constantly been quoting Jihadist mantras on the destruction of Israel, after all.

Unless you would like to join me in admiting that there isn't a Global Jihadist Agenda, with a red phone headquartered somewhere in a cave in Tora Bora, which would be a welcome change of pace.

EDIT: Is it wrong that I'm still cashing Osama's checks, even though I don't really, you know, "feel" it, anymore? Hm.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Just because he said you're a Jew-hater and a supporter of jihad does not mean he also accused you of wanting to see the extermination of Israelis.

Which jihad did you think he was talking about? The one where everybody goes to Hometown Buffet and talks about their problems?

[invisibleX]

Originally Posted by mojo2

You are SO pre-9/11 in your thinking.

Right. Fear, terror, and panic really cleared our minds. I mean who doesn't think rationally when they've had the crap blown out of them?

[Spliff]

Mojo,

For the sake of MacNN's servers, please go back on the meds. Take 'em all: lithium, Xanax, Valium, Wellbutrin . . . anything, just as long as it works.

You, Pachead, and Ca$h are the Holy Trinity of Charmless Obsessive-Compulsives.

[hyteckit]

Originally Posted by mojo2

You are not only a liar but you are ignorant.

Prove it.

You can't. Please apologize.

Unless you are talking about this.



FrontPage magazine.com :: The Global Jihad by Andrew G. Bostom

My apologizes. You don't hate Muslims, nor do you want them dead.

[zwiebel_]

Originally Posted by analogika

Shouting doesn't make you less stupid.

Good one

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Which jihad did you think he was talking about? The one where everybody goes to Hometown Buffet and talks about their problems?

There are varying degrees of support for what is termed jihad. Many people support jihad through their wilfull ignorance, and, consequently, their denial of the truth. Look at Colin, for example - here's a guy who is so pathetically ignorant he thinks Islam's holiest site is in Israel, yet he speaks authoritatively about the conflict in support of Islamic aggression. Colin is the typification of many PL know-nothings who have bought into - and serve - the Islamist propaganda machine.

[Dork.]

I'm currently one of Arabia's best soldiers. But's that's only because I'm in the process of crushing the Romans in my current Civ IV game. Civ is great to put the world into context, especially now that they've put religion into it: Mecca is the Hindu holy city in my current game, and Islam was founded in St. Petersburg, (which is only a few tiles to the South. Of course, as the latest religion to be founded, by the time Islam manifested itself in the city, my Camel Archers had already swept across the plains of Russia and rendered Catherine the Not-So-Great....) Before spreading my tanks across the globe, I aggressively spread my Hindu missionaries, because every city (foreign or domestic) which has Hindus in it gives me extra commerce when they come and visit the Holy City!

But I did have a serious reason to post here: I just realized that the only reason that mojo2 is worked up is that he's read that one of the main missions of Islam is do convert people, by the sword if necessary, and unite everyone in one global faith. It occurs to me, though, that Christianity went through this phase itself, at one point. And yet, somehow, after all the bloodshed and armies, the only land the Pope owns is a few gardens and old buildings in Rome.

Am I a useful idiot because I believe Sharia law can never happen here? From what I've read of that, I believe that it is contrary to the Constitution, just like I've been very vocal that certain Administration policies violate the Constitution. I'm not alone in my concerns about the Administration, and the events of this week prove that we're vigilant in protecting the Constitution. Why does mojo2 think we'll roll over and let foreign "Islamic Fascists" get away with it if we won't even give our President a free pass?

[Big Mac]

When evil goes unopposed, it can rampage through civil societies and cause incredible events to come to pass. A few decades before the ascendance of Hitler, few could have fathomed the death machine for which Germany would be responsible. All it took was a loss of a major war and an economic depression to prepare the German people to support the destruction of European Jewry and other "undesirables." And look at Spain's recent reaction to one terrorist attack right before an election - their government fell and was replaced by one that was ready to appease the terrorists. The masses can be easily swayed. Far too many people here sympathize with the murderers already. Unfortunately, it really wouldn't take that much pressure to convince a large portion of Americans to acquiesce to the dictates of the Islamists.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by mojo2

You are not only a liar but you are ignorant.

Prove it.

You can't. Please apologize.

Please don't use the size tag, mojo.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

When evil goes unopposed, it can rampage through civil societies and cause incredible events to come to pass. A few decades before the ascendance of Hitler, few could have fathomed the death machine for which Germany would be responsible. All it took was a loss of a major war and an economic depression to prepare the German people to support the destruction of European Jewry and other "undesirables." And look at Spain's recent reaction to one terrorist attack right before an election - their government fell and was replaced by one that was ready to appease the terrorists. The masses can be easily swayed. Far too many people here sympathize with the murderers already. Unfortunately, it really wouldn't take that much pressure to convince a large portion of Americans to acquiesce to the dictates of the Islamists.

You grossly oversimplify things. The vast majority of Spaniards was opposed to the war before the attacks in Madrid. And also the story of Fascism is a bit more complicated than that (it had to do with the lack of democratic tradition in Germany, Italy and Spain).

[Troll]

In case you haven't yet worked out from all of the conspiracy thread he posts that Aberdeenwriter/Mojo2/[insert login here] is a fruitcake, then this thread probably does it for you. This is the same person, after all, that thought that people that were against the Iraq war were "foreign agents" working to destroy the US!

[Troll]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

When evil goes unopposed ...

Evil? What is evil? What does it look like? Who decides what is evil?

Why do you speak in tongues? Use real words - talk about terrorism or ideas or something tangible. "Evil" is just a word like "terror" or "love" that can mean whatever you want it to mean.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

You grossly oversimplify things. The vast majority of Spaniards was opposed to the war before the attacks in Madrid. And also the story of Fascism is a bit more complicated than that (it had to do with the lack of democratic tradition in Germany, Italy and Spain).

Spain still gave into the terrorists - I don't see how you can deny that fact. And I wasn't talking about fascism generally. I was referring to the Holocaust. Before Hitler's ascendancy few Germans could have imagined that Germany would eventually perpetrate the Holocaust, but Germany allowed evil to creep in and got swept up by it to such an extent that they came to enthusiastically support it.

Originally Posted by Troll

Evil? What is evil? What does it look like? Who decides what is evil? Why do you speak in tongues? Use real words - talk about terrorism or ideas or something tangible. "Evil" is just a word like "terror" or "love" that can mean whatever you want it to mean.

You don't know what evil is when you see it? You don't know what terrorism is when you see it? You're a moral relativist. And there is no help for you.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Spain still gave into the terrorists - I don't see how you can deny that fact.

I'm not denying anything. But there was a rather large predisposition against the war in Iraq (I am too lazy to dig up polls right now, but even before the attacks, 80-90 % of Spaniards were against the war in Iraq). So the mood did not shift after the attacks, the opposition to the war was clear from the very beginning of the operation.

I agree that the attacks might have tipped the balance in favor of the current government, but you have made it look like Spain's public support for the war in Iraq suddenly stopped after the attacks -- and this is incorrect. In essence, the Spanish government did not give in to the terrorists, but to the public which opposed the war.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Spain still gave into the terrorists - I don't see how you can deny that fact.

Because the attack did not change the people's opinion, they gave into the terrorists? What kind of logic is that?

[Troll]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

You don't know what evil is when you see it?

No, I'm afraid I don't know what evil is in the context you're using it in. Evil is a religious term. Priests define what evil is. It's not something you can see. There is no empirical way of determining what is and what isn't evil.

What you're trying to do is completely transparent. You're trying to introduce religious imagery that can't be challenged. You want this to be about religion so you point at something and declare it evil. And the other side does exactly the same thing and round and round we go.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by greenG4

A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator,

Such as Bush believing he can operate outside the US constitution?

Originally Posted by greenG4

suppression of the opposition through ... censorship,

Such as the right attacking news agencies who report on unconstitutional practices?

Originally Posted by greenG4

belligerent nationalism

Such as the right accusing anyone criticising the government of not being a "patriot"?

Originally Posted by greenG4

belligerent racism

Such as the right claiming America is in danger of being taken over by Arabs?

[vmarks]

Originally Posted by Dork.

Am I a useful idiot because I believe Sharia law can never happen here? From what I've read of that, I believe that it is contrary to the Constitution, just like I've been very vocal that certain Administration policies violate the Constitution. I'm not alone in my concerns about the Administration, and the events of this week prove that we're vigilant in protecting the Constitution. Why does mojo2 think we'll roll over and let foreign "Islamic Fascists" get away with it if we won't even give our President a free pass?

CAIR wants to see Sharia replace the Constitution.

Everytime a court makes a decision that grants a special concession, some folks may see that as a step closer to Sharia rule. Depending on which folks are doing the observing, this could be a good thing (CAIR) or a bad thing (Constitutional law fans.)

Such concessions include things like the hijab-on-driver's-license-photo, the Qur'an as swearing-in-at-court. At the height of it are things like in Canada, where Ontario quashed the movement to have Sharia tribunals instead of Canadian courts - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4236762.stm .

[Buckaroo]

Would the actions of the New York Times and Los Angles Times be considered as Soldiers for Islam?

[Sky Captain]

Originally Posted by vmarks

CAIR wants to see Sharia replace the Constitution.

Everytime a court makes a decision that grants a special concession, some folks may see that as a step closer to Sharia rule. Depending on which folks are doing the observing, this could be a good thing (CAIR) or a bad thing (Constitutional law fans.)

Such concessions include things like the hijab-on-driver's-license-photo, the Qur'an as swearing-in-at-court. At the height of it are things like in Canada, where Ontario quashed the movement to have Sharia tribunals instead of Canadian courts - BBC NEWS | Americas | Sharia law move quashed in Canada .

But when a group becomes the majority, their views and ideology becomes law.
And some here just won't believe this.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

But when a group becomes the majority, their views and ideology becomes law.
And some here just won't believe this.

I suppose that's why Israel's law mandates Judaism and why England's law is so darn Christian-centric.

[Sky Captain]

Not quite.
Fundamentalists are not in power in England or Israel.
But are in power in Iran.
And soon to be Canada if the people choose them as leaders.

And it could happen here in the US.
Imagine of the majority here elected a mob of Pat Robertsons?

It happened with Fascism and Marxism.

[greenG4]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak

Such as Bush believing he can operate outside the US constitution?


Such as the right attacking news agencies who report on unconstitutional practices?


Such as the right accusing anyone criticising the government of not being a "patriot"?


Such as the right claiming America is in danger of being taken over by Arabs?

I've seen people twist the truth before, but this takes the cake.

[Chuckit]

Aside from the first one (which is hardly an unprecedented claim either), I don't see how you can dispute any of these. People on the right do all of those things. In fact, this thread is an example of the last two.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Troll

In case you haven't yet worked out from all of the conspiracy thread he posts that Aberdeenwriter/Mojo2/[insert login here] is a fruitcake, then this thread probably does it for you. This is the same person, after all, that thought that people that were against the Iraq war were "foreign agents" working to destroy the US!

now THAT was one of the most mindbogglingly stupefying things I've ever read.

This utter classic of MacNN hilarity, wrought by someone very, very obviously of less-than-sound mind: http://forums.macnn.com/95/political...foreign+agents

Enjoy.

[greenG4]

Originally Posted by greenG4

I've seen people twist the truth before, but this takes the cake.

I can dispute ALL of them. I will grant that occasionally the last two apply to a select few of the right. The top two are simply wrong. They have been discussed a number of times in other threads. I am assuming he was referring to what the liberals have coined "domestic wire-tapping" even though it's simply listening in on calls to/from suspected/known terrorists outside the US. The NYT made a stupid descision to try to make the administration look bad. Regardless of the latest court ruling it's NOT unconstitutional. But, most have already made up their mind about it (you and I included) and it's not even worth debating anymore.

[Pendergast]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

Not quite.
Fundamentalists are not in power in England or Israel.
But are in power in Iran.
And soon to be Canada if the people choose them as leaders.

And it could happen here in the US.
Imagine of the majority here elected a mob of Pat Robertsons?

It happened with Fascism and Marxism.

Obviously, all those Muslim Marines represent a danger to Freedom in North America!

Let's be safe! Let's convert them all to Judaism!

[Dakar]

I missed the part where it explained why this made them their 'best' soldiers.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by Dakar

I missed the part where it explained why this made them their 'best' soldiers.

Well, really it just makes them "one of" the best. Which means they're not the worst.

[Kr0nos]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

And it could happen here in the US.
Imagine of the majority here elected a mob of Pat Robertsons?

Could?

King George II, Ridiculous Rummy and John Asscroft not good enough for you?

/* Sidenote

They are just showing a CNN special called "Terrorism 2.0" LOL

One of the first ones to adopt the new hype was Ahmadinejad with his intardweb blog! w00t!111