OK, the Muslims who say they are anti American are honest at least. The moderates who say they seek peace are lying. They are all infiltrating American society to take it over. They are recruiting in prisons are it works very well. In some Muslim countries Catholic churches are not allowed and are sometimes burned down. The doctor who speaks in this film is a Muslim. Therefore he can not be trusted. He is infiltrating us and must be silenced.
The OP is a newcomer with trollish tendencies. Checking out his other posts, he’s a xenophobic lowbrow. He should have posted this in GD–perhaps with a brief paragraph summarizing what he actually believes. But words are hard. Sentences & paragraphs are even harder.
You say that you are not “educated.” It’s not too late. Educate yourself. You are writing here–so we know you can read! Check out some different online sources–many will have some kind of bias, but reading enough different ones will make you able to see where they are coming from. Check out some books from the library.
Hint one: It’s “Islam”–not “Islamism.”
Because I have better things to do with MY free time? If its not worthy of a description from the poster why should I spend my time watching it?
It can “address” it all it likes; that won’t make the idea any less ridiculous. When you are outnumbered a hundred or more to one and the other side controls all the major organizations in the country, you WILL lose in any conflict. You might as well worry about a violent insurrection by, say, gays; there’s more of them.
It’s stupid and destructive, like all religions. That doesn’t change the fact that it is extremely weak in this country and incapable of posing a serious threat.
:rolleyes: If you would watch the video you would understand why what you wrote is so inappropriate. But hey, why inform yourself when you can spout from mountaintop of ignorance?
ivan, I know you’re not a newbie. Surely you’ve noticed that when a Pit thread consists pretty much of a link and a “recommended viewing” label, there’s likely an agenda being pushed.
Nothing wrong with pushing an agenda; but when it’s done this way, it’s like an invitation to us Dopers to figure out what it is on our own.
I’m not interested in wasting a half hour of my time listening to someone speechifying about an impossible threat. The fact that you are all for it further underlines my opinion, since you have always been the go-to guy for bigotry of all descriptions. As soon as someone starts spouting about the Terrible Threat that “X” poses to Western Civilization, I can be sure you’ll pop up and try to defend him/her.
Man, you loves you some ignorance, don’t you?
And it makes me giggle that you and others simply WILL NOT WASTE YOUR PRECIOUS TIME looking at a well-produced video offered in Post # 1, but read to Page 3—and post—in that same thread.
You can’t make this stuff up…
Ok, i’ve finished watching the video.
As a starter, I maintain my position as far as **magellan’s **comments. I’d also say that he seems to be unfortunetly suggesting that disagreeing with the guy in question is to disagree with any semblance of the area he’s in, which seems unreasonable. To disagree with someone does not mean rejecting all he says to any degree - and in fact I seem to recall that was his objection to my own point just upthread, assuming I understood it. Anyway, the video.
He points out that there are a minority of Muslims who believe in Islamic dominance, and while he says that they are, in general, not violent, he says that they share many of the same goals as Al Qaeda and similar groups. I would tend to disagree. From what little I saw in the video, those he filmed to make his point seemed to be of the opinion that it was only a matter of time (I think one person used those exact words). Islamic dominance of the general public seemed to me, for those people, not at all different from any radical group that believes the world needs to “open its eyes”, and that eventually all will see the “truth”. And I don’t mean simply religious people; it’s a style of thought that occurs in most philosophical or political or whatever causes to some extent. Whereas I would characterise Al Quaeda and suchlike as considering Islamic dominance to be something that needs to be fought for; rather than their way of life getting by on its own merits, there is an enemy which must be fought, and ideas must be imposed; in fact, i’d wager that that point is backed up by the film itself, given the importance placed on the gentleman in question’s document.
Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, and in America? It’s possible, but i’d need to see stats.
There’s the stat of condoning of suicuide bombings, my problems with which i’ve already talked about in the other current thread. However, an interesting part of this is that, seemingly, the number of those condoning suicide bombings in certain situations seems to be synonomised with radical Muslims; putting, immediately after, those attacks which have been attempted makes the suggestion that this subset is all one and the same - my initial reaction was that this is far too high a number, which makes it interesting that wedged in between is talking head “Some people underestimate the threat” points; i’ll give it credit for being a well-crafted video, at least. Perhaps this is an issue left out due to the abridgement, which would be fair enough, but it doesn’t really go into much detail as to how far these plans got before they were discovered. Nor does it explain to what extent those plans were created by differing groups, or differing backing groups, which seems an issue.
There’s the point that seemingly moderate Islamic groups may actually not be. Fair point to those cases where people have been arrested or brought up on charges. But I don’t see anything wrong with condemning acts of terrorism yet refusing to condemn Hamas or the like as a whole, considering what must be a fine line to walk at times. He points out that there may be deception at play, but his examples of actual issues have been ones where the people in question actually came right out and said those things, which seems odd. I think overall his deception point is too vague. He points out that on his document there are moderate groups that should be considered helpful, but he seems to assume that means complicity, deliberate aid, with the same end goals in mind, which doesn’t seem reasonable.
There’s a short bit of Muslims leaders apparently being “caught out” in declaring radical intent, nothing of which strikes me as encouraging violence or being vastly different from any kind of philosophical meeting or leader. He seems to be seeing the general desire and interest for Islam to, basically, win, as just being essentially the kind face hiding the secret malice within, which doesn’t seem a fair assumption to the extent he’s claiming it.
He points out that, were radical Islamists to win, we’d pretty much be in the shitter. Yes, fair play. But the question is not just of “Ah, but what if they won?” it is “Can they win?” I mean, pretty much any radical or violent group getting their way would be horrific; this part of the argument doesn’t seem helpful to me. It seems obvious. And, certainly, there are places in the world where these kinds of horrifying acts are already taking place. But we know this.
The final point is that there is a battle between “our” civilisation and barbarism. But the conflation just doesn’t work for me. He sets out that there are Muslims who desire to have Islam come out on top through, well, normal means. He shows that there are Muslims that are willing to perform horrific, terroristic acts in order to impose Islam on people. But then he uses the latter as justification to stop the former. He suggests that it is, essentially, all one battle, all the same war; the Muslim on the street preaching that Islam will one day be accepted by all is a fellow soldier standing rank in rank with the one detonating his vest in a public place. That if we want less of the one, we need less of the other. Which seems pretty much entirely counterproductive and inaccurate, to me. And too, there is the idea that, just as acts of terror are a threat, the chance of America becoming an Islamic country is not only a potential but a quite possible threat, one which without opposition is likely, deserves and requires videos about, which seems like utter bollocks to me.
In all honesty, if I had to sum up my problems with the video, it would be conflation and vagueness. He identifies threats, and then generalises them. I would tend to agree that he does seem Islamophobic, despite being Muslim himself.
I thought it was pretty crappy. Part of why we must fear for America is because they are allowed to use corporal punishment on their wives. Same in Argentina. Do we fear them for that? But he poisoned the well by saying that any Muslim who said he was peaceful was lying, except him of course. …and buy a toothbrush.
I like arguing on message boards. Which is why I argue on message boards. I don’t like watching half hour or more videos that according to the people promoting them claim the impossible. And a half hour here and an hour there pretty soon add up to quite a lot of time.
Nope. Not what he said.
Okay. Well, you might find your valuable time better spent pecking out posts that aren’t grounded in ignorance. The OP points you to a video. Now, it’s a pretty shitty OP, and I certainly wouldn’t blame anyone from just rolling their eyes and moving on to another thread. But, sheeze, if you’re going to read 3 or 4 pages and bother typing anything at all, it seems like you’d be doing yourself, not to mention others, a favor by informing yourself first.
OK, I watched the movie:
It starts with a terrorist incident in Russia that killed over a hundred school children (I guess to highlight how terrible these terrorists are) and says these are bad men.
The narrator is a muslim Doctor here in America.
He understand that there is as very small minority of Muslims that are “radicalized” ( several clips of members of Islamic Thinkers Society - Wikipedia). He admits almost none of them are violent but they DO want to revive the Caliphate (and include America in the Caliphate).
-Its kind of like equating people who picket abortion clinics with the people who bomb them.-
There are a few Glenn Beck and Kudlow clips where they talk about some poll that shows 26% of muslims under 30 who think that suicide bombing is sometimes justified (15% of them think it is justified often).
Then it shows Guiliani and Lieberman talk about how there really is a terrorist threat and that threat is coming from radical Islam.
-Its as if shouting the obvious loudly enough will make people gauge the threat in the same way as you-
Then he goes into the “true agenda” of the muslim leadership here in America. Its not just “voilent Jihad” (which he can’t seem to make a really good case for) it is also “cultural Jihad”
its a conspiracy among muslim leaders to take over the country.
The movie makes a big deal of the reluctance of mainstream muslim community leaders (who denounce terrorism) to categorically denounce Hamas and Hezbollah and not just the terrorists in Hamas and Hezbollah.
It points to a document by the muslim brotherhood that goes on to list mainstream muslim groups as potential accomplices in creating a global caliphate.
He is basically saying that the moderate muslims in America are not really moderate. they are secret radicals that are all in cahoots with muslim brotherhood.
He points out how muslims are recruiting criminals in prison.
He points out how muslims are persecuting Christians.
He points out what life is like in countries that follow sharia law.
He shows some taliban guy beating some woman in Afghanistan and the fashion police arresting a woman in iran.
He shows a bunch of kids in Palestine and with the taliban doing some horrible things, this could be YOUR kids if you let the terrorists take over America. And if they are willing to send thier own children to their deaths, how much value will they place on YOUR children’s lives? Huh?!?!
Then he shows the incident in Russia again with all those dead children.
In the end, if you didn’t realize that there are terrorists in the world and a lot of them are driven by radical islamic ideology, then this movie might be enlightening. If you realize that terrorists exist, many of them are radical muslims and that IF they could take over the USA then this country would be a VERY different place then all the new stuff is hyperbole or conspiracy theory.
So basically the video is saying “Let’s oppress them before they oppress us”, is that about it?
No, and yes.
It doesn’t come out and say that. In fact, so far as I can tell, there is no particular call to arms, other than one to “wake up”. Perhaps the full version of the film is more enlightening as regards what plans should be made to counteract this threat.
I would argue that yes, this is to some extent the conclusion that it wants you to draw from the video. That’s the impression that I recieved at times. But I can’t point to any clear statement saying this. It may just be my own biases affecting my perception.
Thank you for taking a hit for the team.
Sarcasm. :dubious:
Has anyone ever told you how GOOD you are at it? On a scale of 1-10, well, the absolute value of that number is so astonishingly large that I doubt anyone could ever even COUNT that high.
The fact the the actual number is negative is why I tend to go with plain reading of your posts first, of course. You should work on some way of tagging the posts where you’re not intending the plain reading.
I was told there would be no math.