*** Democrats defend naming Muslim to House Intelligence panel ***

[LongTermGuy]

`Top Democrats are defending their appointment of a Muslim congressman to the House Intelligence Committee after protests erupted on social media, warning the move is dangerous.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi this week appointed Rep. Andre Carson of Indiana to the panel, which oversees the government's intelligence departments and activities. Much of the business that comes before the committee is classified.`

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/1nancy32.jpg

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-defend-naming-muslim-house-intelligence-panel-173656959--politics.html


************************

`Only the symbolism counts......
That's ALL that matters to liberals....Symbolism.`

[Drummond]

`Top Democrats are defending their appointment of a Muslim congressman to the House Intelligence Committee after protests erupted on social media, warning the move is dangerous.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi this week appointed Rep. Andre Carson of Indiana to the panel, which oversees the government's intelligence departments and activities. Much of the business that comes before the committee is classified.`

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/1nancy32.jpg

https://news.yahoo.com/democrats-defend-naming-muslim-house-intelligence-panel-173656959--politics.html


************************

`Only the symbolism counts......
That's ALL that matters to liberals....Symbolism.`



Evidence of traitorous intent from the Dems ??

I truly think so. Whatever everyone's precise reasoning, whatever 'checks' done beforehand, they SURELY know that this is at minimum a 'risky' thing to do !!!

For what little it's worth in this context .. the UK Conservative Party made the mistake of being 'PC trendy' enough to allow a certain Baroness Warsi (Muslim) to a high ranking position in our Conservative Party. They ended up regretting it. She publicly attacked the Conservatives for avoiding criticism of Israel during their last major conflict with Hamas in Gaza. She also quit the Party over it.

The Labour Party (Socialist trash) were warm in their praise of her stance.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/baroness-warsi-resigns-over-gaza-conflict-saying-she-can-no-longer-support-government-policy-9648529.html


Labour was quick to respond to the news. Sadiq Khan, the shadow Justice Secretary, said it was "very courageous of my brave friend Sayeeda Warsi to resign over this Government's inexplicable silence and total weakness on the Gaza crisis".

Ed Miliband has previously criticised the Prime Minister for failing to send a "clearer message to Israel" over the conflict.


On Saturday, the Labour leader said it was "wrong" of Mr Cameron not to publicly oppose Israel's incursion into Gaza, adding: "His silence on the killing of hundreds of innocent Palestinian civilians caused by Israel's military action will be inexplicable to people across Britain and internationally."

[LongTermGuy]

Evidence of traitorous intent from the Dems ??

I truly think so. Whatever everyone's precise reasoning, whatever 'checks' done beforehand, they SURELY know that this is at minimum a 'risky' thing to do !!!

For what little it's worth in this context .. the UK Conservative Party made the mistake of being 'PC trendy' enough to allow a certain Baroness Warsi (Muslim) to a high ranking position in our Conservative Party. They ended up regretting it. She publicly attacked the Conservatives for avoiding criticism of Israel during their last major conflict with Hamas in Gaza. She also quit the Party over it.

The Labour Party (Socialist trash) were warm in their praise of her stance.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/baroness-warsi-resigns-over-gaza-conflict-saying-she-can-no-longer-support-government-policy-9648529.html


Pure stupidity...muslim will always support muslims and the koran

http://anakbrunei.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/DSF4362.jpg

[Jeff]

I guess the Dems figure hell we gave the big ofice to a Muslim so why not, how much more damage can he do the the Muslim in Charge.

[aboutime]

http://icansayit.com/images/Musbrohoodmem.jpg


Would someone care to tell me WHICH part of this IMAGE you FAILED to understand?

The person in question is now...in CONGRESS. No wonder AL SHARPTON is so fearless, and happy?

[tailfins]

Pure stupidity...muslim will always support muslims and the koran

http://anakbrunei.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/DSF4362.jpg


Mercy! Those are women that SHOULD cover their face. Aunt Esther would be an improvement.

[LongTermGuy]

Mercy! Those are women that SHOULD cover their face. Aunt Esther would be an improvement.


*Just an observation....fat and puffy butter faces.. Anyone walking around with their `hidden` learned hate it's going to show as ugliness on the outside ...wearing the 3rd world male induced garbage outfits doesn't help either.....

[fj1200]

And the actual reason for keeping him off is?

[jimnyc]

And the actual reason for keeping him off is?

Does there need to be a reason? Some think it's bad for policy, or America, and that reasoning would be good enough. It may be incorrect, but you asked for a reason.

[fj1200]

Yes, I think an actual reason would be appropriate. Why bad policy? Why bad for America? :)

[jimnyc]

Yes, I think an actual reason would be appropriate. Why bad policy? Why bad for America? :)

Appropriate does NOT mean necessary. They can respond with "fuck off, we don't need a reason" if they choose. You asked for a reason, I gave one, you didn't like it, now asking more questions. Like I said though, they can keep him off if they just don't like the color of his hair - or even if they simply don't want controversy created. Point is - no reason is needed.

[fj1200]

Appropriate does NOT mean necessary. They can respond with "fuck off, we don't need a reason" if they choose. You asked for a reason, I gave one, you didn't like it, now asking more questions. Like I said though, they can keep him off if they just don't like the color of his hair - or even if they simply don't want controversy created. Point is - no reason is needed.

I'm under the impression that the Democrats can name anybody they want but I could be wrong. If I'm not wrong then yes, they need a reason other than guilt by religion.

[jimnyc]

I'm under the impression that the Democrats can name anybody they want but I could be wrong. If I'm not wrong then yes, they need a reason other than guilt by religion.

I never stated they couldn't, but you're free to quote where I stated as much. Just as others are free to decline to appoint him, or just not want him him appointed, for no good reason - those doing the appointing can also do the appointing, without reason or with a specified reason.

And NO, they do NOT need to provide a reason. One can simply object, or vote against and such, they do NOT need to provide a reason to anyone.

Do you have a citation that states they need a reason?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

And the actual reason for keeping him off is?

Rumor has it his prayer rug is pink and he only washes it once every decade..
T'aint that enuff??? --Tyr

[fj1200]

I never stated they couldn't, but you're free to quote where I stated as much. Just as others are free to decline to appoint him, or just not want him him appointed, for no good reason - those doing the appointing can also do the appointing, without reason or with a specified reason.

And NO, they do NOT need to provide a reason. One can simply object, or vote against and such, they do NOT need to provide a reason to anyone.

Do you have a citation that states they need a reason?

I would imagine that they need to do so by whatever rules they've adopted.


It is in Committee(s) that bills get the most scrutiny and attention and that most of the work on a bill is done. Committees play an important role in the legislative process by providing members the opportunity to study, debate and amend the bill and the public with the opportunity to make comments on the bill. There are three types of House Committees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_Committees), these are: 1) standing committees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_committees) elected by members of the House, 2) select committees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Select_or_special_committee_(United_States)) appointed by the Speaker of the House (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speaker_of_the_House), and 3) joint committees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_committees) whose members are chosen according to the statute or resolution that created that committee. As the House Rules limit the amount of floor debate on any given bill the committees play an important function in determining the final content and format of the bill.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedures_of_the_United_States_House_of_Represent atives

My guess is that Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants.


House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi appointed Carson to the position, which oversees government intelligence departments and activities.
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4616084,00.html


Rumor...
T'aint that enuff??? --Tyr

I didn't think you needed that much.

[jimnyc]

I would imagine that they need to do so by whatever rules they've adopted.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedures_of_the_United_States_House_of_Represent atives

My guess is that Pelosi can appoint whomever she wants.

Yep, kinda what I just said, that they can do so, and don't need a reason. Just as others can vote against if it requires a vote, without a reason for doing so. My whole point here is that one can be against this appointment without having to justify their reasoning. The only time one has to justify what they do is come election time, when their constituents might want to know how, what and why they support or are against certain things.

And I do believe this was Pelosi's call. And while they have defended the appointment, even that was not necessary.

[fj1200]

^Sorry, I guess I was looking for an actual reason why he should be opposed. Not a vacuous, "because we say so."

[NightTrain]

I've got several reasons why he should not be in Congress, let alone on that committee with access to intelligence on the war against terrorists.

He's a thinly veiled radical muslim that wants to install more muslims in the Cabinet to "push back on anti-sharia legislation" - those are his words.

Farrakhan was present when he was born; has close family ties and endorsed him for that seat. Farrakhan is about as radical as you can get, short of detonating a special vest.

He wants American schools to be modeled after madrassas, "where the foundation is the Quran."

One of his biggest issues is that law enforcement "continues to spy upon our communities"... I don't doubt that he has concerns about that, being a radical muzzie in America. The evidence points to him pretending to be a 'moderate' muslim, like they all do when questioned, and seeing as how our #1 security concerns are indeed against muslims, having one on the Intelligence Committee is fraught with danger for our military and covert ops personnel.

[aboutime]

http://icansayit.com/images/Musbrohoodmem.jpg


Would someone care to tell me WHICH part of this IMAGE you FAILED to understand?

The person in question is now...in CONGRESS. No wonder AL SHARPTON is so fearless, and happy?


Looks like another REMINDER is needed here. For those who watch OBAMA'S LIE FEST tonight. Watch the audience for one, or more of the people shown.

[gabosaurus]

Would the same objections appear if Dems blocked the naming a Tea Party member to an intelligence committee?

[aboutime]

Would the same objections appear if Dems blocked the naming a Tea Party member to an intelligence committee?


Wouldn't happen since Dems have no INTELLIGENCE.

[NightTrain]

Would the same objections appear if Dems blocked the naming a Tea Party member to an intelligence committee?

If he were a radical muslim? Absolutely.

[gabosaurus]

You believe every Muslim is "radical." Which is akin to me envisioning every Catholic priest as a pedophile.

[Perianne]

Would the same objections appear if Dems blocked the naming a Tea Party member to an intelligence committee?

I am sure the objections would be the same if the Tea Party had

1. bombed the World Trade Center;
2. flew two jets into the World Trace Center, killing thousands of Americans;
3. beheaded children, raped their mothers, and hanged their fathers;
4. declared death to America;
5. made suicide bombers of themselves;

Need I go on?

[tailfins]

3. beheaded children, raped their mothers, and hanged their fathers;

You mean the guys on the Group W bench? Mother rapers? Father stabbers? Father rapers!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m57gzA2JCcM

[tailfins]

You believe every Muslim is "radical." Which is akin to me envisioning every Catholic priest as a pedophile.


The DO serve the same god: Lucifer! I try not to single out Muslims. One apostate "religion" is no better or worse than the other.

[Kathianne]

Backing up NT with a source:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/389811/andr-carson-islamists-choice-house-representatives-daniel-pipes

OCTOBER 7, 2014 6:30 PM
André Carson, Islamists’ Choice for the House of Representatives (http://www.nationalreview.com/article/389811/andr-carson-islamists-choice-house-representatives-daniel-pipes)

Leading Islamist groups are contributing more to Democrats than to Republicans by a ratio of 17 to 1. By Daniel Pipes (http://www.nationalreview.com/author/daniel-pipes)

In politics, the adage goes, follow the money. And so, data abound for contributions from trial lawyers, insurance brokers, and even optometrists.


But what about Islamists, those Muslims who seek to replace the Constitution with the Koran and apply Islamic law in its entirety and severity — who, in other words, seek not just to tweak the tax code but to change the nature of the United States?


Until now, their campaign contributions have been unknown. A new initiative of the Middle East Forum’s Islamist Watch provides a first look at the dimensions of this lobby, using a sortable database. The Islamist Money in Politics (http://www.islamist-watch.org/money-politics) (IMIP) project finds that, over the past 15 years, prominent figures associated with six leading American Islamist organizations have donated almost $700,000 to federal U.S. candidates.
Those six are the


http://www.nationalreview.com/sites/all/modules/custom/nro/nro_filter/images/bullet_blue.gifCouncil on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)


http://www.nationalreview.com/sites/all/modules/custom/nro/nro_filter/images/bullet_blue.gifIslamic Circle of North America (ICNA)


http://www.nationalreview.com/sites/all/modules/custom/nro/nro_filter/images/bullet_blue.gifIslamic Society of North America (ISNA)


http://www.nationalreview.com/sites/all/modules/custom/nro/nro_filter/images/bullet_blue.gifMuslim Alliance in North America (MANA)


http://www.nationalreview.com/sites/all/modules/custom/nro/nro_filter/images/bullet_blue.gifMuslim American Society (MAS)


http://www.nationalreview.com/sites/all/modules/custom/nro/nro_filter/images/bullet_blue.gifMuslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC)


Associates of CAIR lead the way in dollar terms, making over $430,000 in campaign contributions to candidates for federal office. That’s a nice piece of change from a group named as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in America’s largest terror-financing case, in which the federal judge found “ample evidence” of CAIR’s links to Hamas.


Overall, Islamist money is relatively minor in the forthcoming 2014 congressional elections, but IMIP information has several benefits. It holds politicians accountable for accepting funds from a soiled source. It signals the Islamist lobby’s affections and intentions. And it tells voters who takes money from individuals linked to enemies of the United States and its allies.


In Indiana, Democratic representative André Carson has received almost $34,000 from Islamist sources for his congressional runs since 2008. In contrast, his Republican opponent this November, newcomer Catherine Ping, has received not a dime from them. That’s the same Carson who appeared at the 2012 annual ICNA–MAS convention (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/06/andre-carson-schools-should-be-modeled-after-madrassa_n_1654510.html), where he encouraged American schools to look “at the model we have in our madrassas, . . . where the foundation is the Qur’an.”


...

[Kathianne]

A bit more:

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/12/27/muslim-congressmans-ferguson-panel-at-chicago-islamic-convention-features-al-qaeda-webmaster-taliban-fundraiser/


Muslim Congressman’s Ferguson Panel at Chicago Islamic Convention Features Al-Qaeda Webmaster, Taliban Fundraiser (http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/12/27/muslim-congressmans-ferguson-panel-at-chicago-islamic-convention-features-al-qaeda-webmaster-taliban-fundraiser/)


UPDATE: Rep. Carson responds to this article (http://carson.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/carson-statement-on-his-attendance-at-the-icna-chicago-convention). See the update, “Congressman Walks Back Appearance at Islamic Terror Group’s Chicago Convention (http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2015/01/01/congressman-walks-back-appearance-at-islamic-terror-groups-chicago-convention/).”
Congressman Andre Carson found himself in strange company Saturday evening when he was scheduled to be featured on a panel with a known Al-Qaeda webmaster and Taliban fundraiser, Mazen Mokhtar, during the just-concluded 2014 Muslim American Society/Islamic Circle of North America (MAS/ICNA) 2014 convention held in Chicago.


The panel was titled “Ferguson is our issue: We Can’t Breath.”
Here’s a promotional video of the three-day event:

(See site for video)


One attendee tweeted that the joint Carson/Mokhtar panel was the “most important session” of the convention:
https://twitter.com/nytojannah/status/549008937169997824

Mokhtar is presumably well-known to Carson, one of two sitting Muslim members of Congress, since Mokhtar is well-known to the FBI.

In 2004, Mokhtar was named in a federal affidavit in the case of a UK-based Al-Qaeda website that raised money for the Taliban and other terrorist organizations.

According to the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A48936-2004Aug7.html):


Meanwhile, a New Jersey man is under investigation for having helped a British computer specialist, also arrested in London this week, allegedly solicit funds for a terrorist group by creating and operating an exact replica of the British man’s Web site.

Mazen Mokhtar, an Egyptian-born imam and political activist, operated a Web site identified in an affidavit unsealed Friday by the U.S. attorney’s office in Connecticut. The Web site solicited funds for the Taliban and Chechen mujaheddin, according to the affidavit. It is an exact replica of Web sites operated by Babar Ahmad, who was arrested in England on a U.S. extradition warrant this week.

The affidavit said the New Jersey home of the mirror Web site operator, identified on a Web site as Mokhtar, was searched in the recent past and that copies of Azzam Publications sites, operated by Ahmad, were found on Mokhtar’s computer’s hard drive and files.

Officials at the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement office, which is leading the investigation, declined yesterday to comment on Mokhtar or the New Jersey investigation.


A CNN report (https://web.archive.org/web/20040801000000*/http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/09/nj.terror.suspect/index.html) (now removed from their website) added:


Federal officials are investigating a man accused of running Web sites that are exact replicas of those used to solicit funds for the Taliban and Chechen mujahedeen, according to a criminal complaint filed Friday by the U.S. attorney’s office in New Haven, Connecticut.

Law enforcement sources identified the man as Mazen Mokhtar, 36, of New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Those sources said Mokhtar is the “specific individual who resides in the United States” referred to in the affidavit as working with Babar Ahmad to solicit funds for the “blocked organizations … in an effort to support their goals.”


Predictably, when Mokhtar’s name surfaced in the investigation, the Muslim community rallied around him and the media began pushing the “moderate Islamic cleric” narrative (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58065-2004Aug11.html).

In fact, the accusations by federal law enforcement authorities have barely made a dent in Mokhtar’s rise to prominence in the Islamic community.

Mokhtar currently serves (http://masuc.org/ticamp/mokhtar/) as the executive director of the national MAS. A 2004 Chicago Tribune investigative report (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-09-19/news/0409190261_1_muslim-brotherhood-brotherhood-members-islamic/5), published just a month after Mokhtar was named in the federal affidavit, noted that MAS was founded by Muslim Brotherhood members to conceal their ties to the Egyptian Islamic group.

In 2007, federal prosecutors described the group in a federal court filing (http://www.investigativeproject.org/1111/government-reminds-court-of-cairmas-ties-to#) saying that MAS was “founded as the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States”:

...

[Kathianne]

and a bit more:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/01/pelosi_appoints_a_racebaiting_muslim_to_a_national _security_committee.html


January 19, 2015Pelosi appoints a race-baiting Muslim to a national security committeeBy M Catharine Evans (http://www.americanthinker.com/author/m_catharine_evans/)


Nancy Pelosi has appointed (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/andre-carson-muslim-intelligence-committee-114213.html) Muslim congressman Andre Carson (D-IN) to the House’s Permanent Select Committee just a week after Islamic terrorists slaughtered 17 people in Paris. Carson has familial ties to Louis Farrakhan, hates the Tea Party, and sees U.S. schools as ripe for Islamic indoctrination.


In 2007, Andre Carson tried to distance himself from the anti-Semitic Nation of Islam leader in order to secure his grandmother's congressional seat. The late Julia Carson and Farrakhan, according to the Indy Star, went "way back." Carson's wife even said Farrakhan was with Julia the night Andre was born.


Before she died in December 2007, Congresswoman Julia Carson requested that Farrakhan speak at her funeral service.
Wishing to honor his grandmother's dying wish to have Farrakhan say a few words over her casket, Carson sought guidance from Imam Muhammad Siddeeq of the Al Nurah Islamic Center in Indianapolis. Siddeeq said Andre needed to make a “choice between following Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, with its street credibility on social matters but record of divisiveness, or more universal Islamic teachings that promote tolerance. At crunch time, Siddeeq said, Carson chose tolerance.”


When Farrakhan not only showed up but tacitly endorsed (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEFigTXHOPM&feature=youtu.be) Andre Carson for Congress, stating, "[Julia] wants [Andre] to succeed her,” Carson had to quickly meet with various Jewish groups to insist he was not a “Louis Farrakhan Muslim.”
Carson's “crunch time tolerance” was short-lived, and just long enough to secure his victory in a March 2008 special election.

...

At a 2011 Congressional Black Caucus job fair, Carson told (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/31/rep-carson-tea-party-wants-to-see-black-americans-hanging-on-tree/) the audience that “some of them in Congress right now of this Tea Party would love to see you and me ... hanging on a tree.”

Sounds like a “Farrakhan Muslim” to me.


In 2012, at an Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) convention, Carson suggested (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/06/andre-carson-schools-should-be-modeled-after-madrassa_n_1654510.html) that American schools should be modeled after madrassas, “where the foundation is the Quran.”


Incidentally, Carson's wife, Mariama Shaheed-Carson, received a (http://www.themindtrust.org/news/2014/may/longtime-district-educator-awarded-the-mind-trusts-education-entrepreneur-fellowship) $250,000 Mind Trust award recently to start her own charter school in Indianapolis. Since both believe that “the Muslim family is under attack” in America, there's little doubt that taking “American education to the next level” involves sharia.


Carson also spoke at the May 2014 “Activism in Islam: Be Engaged” ICNA conference in Baltimore. Four years after his slurs against the Tea Party, Carson told the 2014 ICNA audience members “in 2010 we saw a vote the bums out movement ... and Americans voted the bums out and brought in lunatics.” After the IRS targeted Tea Party groups, this kind of rhetoric is further proof that Carson doesn’t belong in Congress, much less on an intelligence committee.


In the same video, Carson (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvOsSIsj5NE&feature=youtu.be) says we need more Muslims in the Cabinet. If 20,000 Muslims, out of 8 million in America, gave $100, the $2 million would help install Muslim representatives who could “push back on anti-sharia legislation.” One of the most important issues, says Carson, is that “law enforcement continues to spy on our communities.” With the support of CAIR, ISNA, and ICNA, Carson wants activist groups to act as “incubators” in order to develop the next Nancy Pelosis, Keith Ellisons, and Barack Obamas.

[LongTermGuy]

``Leading Islamist groups are contributing more to Democrats than to Republicans by a ratio of 17 to 1.

``In politics, the adage goes, follow the money. And so, data abound for contributions from trial lawyers, insurance brokers, and even optometrists.``

[NightTrain]

You believe every Muslim is "radical." Which is akin to me envisioning every Catholic priest as a pedophile.

You're full of shit.

Show me where I've said that.

[NightTrain]

Backing up NT with a source:

...

Thanks, Kathi... that was sloppy of me not to include some supporting links. Ooops.

[NightTrain]

It would seem that Gabby 'forgot' all about her bold statement. She's all about making those until facts are requested.

Those crickets are deafening.

[jimnyc]

It would seem that Gabby 'forgot' all about her bold statement. She's all about making those until facts are requested.

Those crickets are deafening.

When she refuses to return to threads for the past 8 years or so, it's not due to intelligence. We all know how smart she is from going to Cal, so that's certainly not the issue. :)

Anytime you call her on not returning to support her comments she will give you the "I'm not on here all day like you" crap. Huh? Doesn't matter, just reply when you do come back, no biggie if we wait a little for replies - but the fact is she has 2 or 3,000x never come back to support her crap.

[NightTrain]

Yes, she did go to SoCal, you know. It's not for stupid people. She got two degrees there.

One was enough to qualify for her moonbat wings. They gild them for the 2nd degree.

[gabosaurus]

I don't argue with you guys for the same reason while I don't bang my head against walls or mud wrestle with pigs. It doesn't hurt you guys to bang your heads against walls. And you enjoy mud wrestling much more than I do. :cool:

[NightTrain]

I don't argue with you guys for the same reason while I don't bang my head against walls or mud wrestle with pigs. It doesn't hurt you guys to bang your heads against walls. And you enjoy mud wrestling much more than I do. :cool:


No, you don't argue/debate because you're completely outclassed and are bereft of any factual ammunition or even a modicum of logic.

So, you make retarded comments and are unable to defend them - because you're stupid. You continue to make stupid comments because stupid is as stupid does.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I didn't think you needed that much.

When a man knows the history and the current hideous actions of a group he needs no rumors to confirm the legitimacy
of his judgment made after doing diligent research...
Perhaps you need such but I, the wizened old avid reader based my comments upon well researched facts.

As is well represented by these DP threads authored by myself and backed by well noted sources!
Enjoy!!!! And should you even read--please try to learn something. ;)-Tyr



http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?37131-Most-recent-muslim-terrorist-attacks



http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?36912-I-take-my-stand-you



http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?48200-Allah-in-our-schools



http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?48157-This-is-Islam-by-Koranic-command!



http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?48092-High-School-Islamic-vocabulary-lesson-part-of-Common-Core-standards

[fj1200]

... a group...

That's a leftie answer. Lefties see the group, conservatives see the individual.

[aboutime]

You believe every Muslim is "radical." Which is akin to me envisioning every Catholic priest as a pedophile.


Nothing anymore different than how YOU accuse everyone you disagree with, to be a Tea Party Member. IS IT?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

That's a leftie answer. Lefties see the group, conservatives see the individual.

Da muslims murder in groups or as lone-wolf individuals--I see both. Why don't you? ;)

One of us sees clearly while the other sees thru a confused ideology methinks.
As you offered no counter to the links I provided I must conclude you reject that truth merely to
not have to admit your viewpoint has major flaws..
Tis' thus concluded by me....Tyr

[fj1200]

Da muslims...

My ideology is clear. That you back a leftie argument with another leftie argument doesn't surprise me because you'd rather drop ideology if it means that you stay on message. Somebody needs to call out lefties err, leftie arguments when they rear their ugly heads and apparently it falls to me. :)