Religion or more?

[BVulgaris]

a rough draft source of his bio: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tawfik_Hamid

Im glad his underlying message is to teach tolerance to the world. Hopefully by example?

Another interesting source here unclemarty. I most agree with his second to last paragraph. I think much of the general populous would agree with such social changes. Just look at studies within baghdad before the invasion. It was becomming a rather secular city, though a shadow of secular tyranny ran from saddam's sons. There were real grassroots movements for social reform.

post invasion. phew.... good luck even thinking of wearing a bikini anywhere!

[sobrohusfat]

Mosab Hassan Yousef. This palestinian former son of Hamas explains it on Arabic BBC

http://shoebat.com:80/videos/sonHamas3.php

[BVulgaris]

very interesting interview.... there are parts of what he says that i agree with, i have some doubts about the traditions or hadiths.

Here is an incredible paper on the subject of the Quran vs. Hadiths. Please take time to read (as much time as you need to digest, verify etc.), the author makes some very interesting and important points.
http://www.barry-baker.com/Articles/doc ... HADITH.pdf

[BVulgaris]

A very interesting Fatwa! ( a bit late.... i dont know why i didnt see more about this in the news? Must have missed it!)
http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.com/is ... rorism.htm

[unclemarty]

Islam and the Left - two sides of the same coin
"Sultan Knish" Wednesday, June 30, 2010

poster-1931h.jpg

On the surface of it they seem to have very little in common. The left claims to be progressive, embraces gay bars, abortions, feminism, worker's rights civil rights, multiculturalism and obscene slogans. The Islamists throw acid in women's faces, hang gays on every streetcorner and repress minorities and freedom of expression. This seeming contrast baffles many who demand to know how for example the left can champion Islamic regimes which mandate the death penalty for homosexuality. The answer is very simple. The people asking the question have mistaken the facade for the reality.

...The social progressivism of the left has never been anything but a fraud. A tool used to recruit bohemian activists to fight on their side, while purging them once the revolution was successful. The left tries to overturn the values of a target society as part of a comprehensive revolutionary assault. That doesn't mean that its actual values are different. Once the left gains absolute power, it seeks to create a static and unchanging system. The perfect Utopian society with immovable laws administered by an endless political bureaucracy. In the real world this translates into a repressive search for stability. Which means banning exactly the same things that the left had been fighting for. And the first thing to be banned is always the right to dissent. A right that the left insists on for itself when it is out of power, but does not permit to others when it is.

...The Left tells its followers that they're smarter and more moral than ordinary people. What it really means is that they're dumber and more willing to sacrifice for its goals. The Islamists tell their followers that they're braver and more religious than ordinary people. What they mean, is that their followers are suicidally stupid and easily led around the nose. The common denominator isn't very hard to see. The Left is the Islam of the West. And Islam is the Left of the Middle East. But labels like that are virtually meaningless. Both are just totalitarian movements using gullible idiots following an ideology worked out by vicious greedy men to seize power. That is all there is to it in the end.

The rest is just technique...

full article:
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2010/06 ... -coin.html

[Big ned]

Very perceptive and well stated unclemarty. Interestingly enough, Obama down in the states used the progressives to get elected and now that he is trying to move to the middle a little more (I still believe he is a raging socialist, but not a communist as some of his advisors are) he is starting to realize that the far left progressives are not willing to turn their cheek when he comes up empty handed with some of his campaign promises for them. The black panthers, members of the weather underground and the communist party are starting to turn on their leader and Obama thinks it is still just a political shell game.

He'd better stop playing the press about the Tea Party and start paying real attention to the real radical extremists on the left, because they have a tendency to do more than just write slogans on a poster.

[nolanrh]

From the article:

There has never been any contradiction between the left making common cause with Islamist movements and regimes that murder gay people. Because if the Left in the West ever gained absolute power, they would murder them too.

The reason used by the article? Because the U.S.S.R did it!

Very perceptive and well stated unclemarty.

... wow

[Big ned]

I'm not sure what you are getting at with that connection. The article clearly states that the left has it's goal of creating a government run utopia much like communist or Marxists regimes. Was the USSR not an example of that? I see the connection very clearly. If you took time to read anything about the far left communists who then changed their names to "progressives" to hide their agendas... perhaps pick up saul alinsky's "Rules for radicals" which seems to be the Obama administrations play book because they are following it to the tee. The connection is quite clear.

[nolanrh]

I'm not sure what you are getting at with that connection. The article clearly states that the left has it's goal of creating a government run utopia much like communist or Marxists regimes. Was the USSR not an example of that? I see the connection very clearly. If you took time to read anything about the far left communists who then changed their names to "progressives" to hide their agendas... perhaps pick up saul alinsky's "Rules for radicals" which seems to be the Obama administrations play book because they are following it to the tee. The connection is quite clear.

I assumed that your comment regarding perception was referring to the article's arguments and I meant to provide an example of how ludicrous those arguments are. The goal of the left is not necessarily to create a government run utopia. The left has various forms with various goals. That is why it is ridiculous to suggest that you can predict what a "left" group would do absolute power by looking to the USSR and assuming everything would just be the same. At best this article can compare different radical Islamic ideas to the ideas of communist regimes run my dictators during certain time periods.

The real ridiculousness is in generalizing both the Islamic religion and left wing political positions into caricatures based on their radical components that everyone must fit into and we should all fear. If this article was even remotely honest it would clearly set out that it is referring to the radical components and not the majority who are coloured with the various shades of each ideology. Well, I'm not scared. I'm not scared of Islam and I'm not scared of the left.

[Big ned]

So are we to extrapolate what we think would be their goals in todays society, or should we learn from history what men have done in the past when they have attained such power? I prefer to look at history rather than make a random best guess based on my own opinions (or your opinions).

[Mr Danksworth]

When us 'reds' get back into power the first thing we are going to do is make everyone get abortions and we are going to make all of the Mormons get gay-married. Paranoid much?

[tsu]

If you took time to read anything about the far left communists who then changed their names to "progressives" to hide their agendas... perhaps pick up saul alinsky's "Rules for radicals" which seems to be the Obama administrations play book because they are following it to the tee. The connection is quite clear.

Some advice, stop watching glenn beck so much.

[Mr Danksworth]

^
Don't sweat it, Neddy and his ilk cannot live without fear and ignorance. It insulates them from the world.

[tsu]

Its funny because what fox news calls dangerous radicals 90% of western democracy's including Canada call sanity. Even Harper would probably be a extremist socialist in fox news's strange reality.

[Big ned]

If you do not know history, you are doomed to repeat it.
You do very well trying to discredit by mocking, but the truth is that history shows what happens when you go down that road. It doesn't happen overnight, but history shows what is the end result. We are talking here about democracies. In Canada, the majority agrees with where our country is and how it is run (for the most part). In the republic of the United States, there is program after program right now being passed that is against the will of the people... upwards of 60% are against the health care bill, the bill they just passed on the economy (neither bill was read before passing) and thankfully in November they will lose control of the house and possibly senate and the madness will stop. There may even be some repealing that happens.

Not a scare monger... just a a student of history. You do very well at playing out the cloward and piven strategy... it does usually come with mockery, but no hard evidence or even a well thought out rebutal....
Now if Glen Beck is so far off the mark, be so kind as to produce evidence rather than your opinion. I"ll be waiting with baited breath for some real analysis. My guess is that the only Glen Beck you have watched is what is posted on the Huffington post.. n'es pas?