Islam in America

[nebula]

OK, new upload.

I would be interested in what you think after seeing it.

It looks like a bunch of fundamental muslims held a non-violent protest march.

The lady in red argued with a muslim woman about clothing, argued with a muslim man about respecting the law of the land when not in an Islamic country (although they were due to freedom of speech & peaceful assembly..not sure what the laws are exactly in Britain but in the US that would have been perfectly legal).

The lady in red argued with another muslim man and was told she would go to hell unless she changed. Although if the roles were reversed isn't that exactly what a fundamentalist christian would say about a muslim? That's what they believe, it makes sense he would say that.

I was expecting the woman to get harassed or attacked in some way because you wanted me to see the video, but that never happened (which is always possible when a bunch of angry people are together, regardless of religion).

So basically I didn't see much except a bunch of people with beliefs I don't have express them on the streets.

OK, interesting.

If this were a group of Christians , would you be as nonchelant about it?

[Oh Hamburgers!]

OK, interesting.

If this were a group of Christians , would you be as nonchelant about it?

Of course, think of all the anti-abortion rallys that occur in this country. A religiously motivated march against current laws.

Think about all the gay rights & anti-gay rights rallys that have occurred in this country.

Think about the tea party marches. Even here in Wisconsin we had a march on the capitol regarding the Union bargaining rights.

Protests and marches happen all the time. If they break out into violence they need to be stopped, but even if I disagree with the message it's basic freedom of speech.

[other one]

I'm going to try this one more time, burgers; in hopes that I just put out too much at one time. I was running a 104+ degree temperature when this started.

This is from a two day conference that I attended in December of 2011, i personally saw the legal copies of the court documents that this mentions, so I can say that it (for me) is not hearsay. Since I don't have the actual documents in my posession, I can't send them to you to see for yourself. I might add that the person who wrote this is John Guanadolo.

Mr. Guandolo is a 1989 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, a former active duty Infantry/Reconnaissance Officer in the United States Marine Corps, and a former Special Agent of the FBI in Washington, D.C. for over 12 years. He currently advises the government on a variety of issues.

This is part three of a multi part series that covers the discussion in this thread. I might add that the Conference that I attended was a continuing education class for local law inforcement. It's part of the legal education system that police officers must attend a certain number of hours a year. It is an official government training class

Thus far in our journey towards better understanding the threat from the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in the United States, we have laid the foundation of their global strategy, their foundational beliefs, and their arrival in the U.S. in the 1960’s. As we have discussed, the Brotherhood established their first organization in 1963 at the University of Illinois in Urbana – the Muslim Students Association (MSA) – and from the MSA, nearly every major Islamic organization in the United States was formed – all MB front groups.

But how did the Brotherhood actually insinuate itself into the fabric of America? How is it possible that today the most prominent Islamic organizations in North America are controlled by the Brotherhood and actually seek to subordinate the individual liberties of Americans (and Canadians) to the slavery of Shariah (Islamic Law)? In Part III of this series, we set out to help clarify the way the MB “settled” here in America. Please note the MB did so with their objectives clearly at the forefront of their minds – (1) re-establish the global Islamic state (Caliphate) and (2) implement Shariah (Islamic Law).

For this exercise I will use two extremely useful Muslim Brotherhood documents. The first is a speech given by Zaid Naman (aka Zeid al Noman), a member of the MB’s Board of Directors and the “Masul” (Leader) of the MB’s Executive Office in the United States. Naman was speaking in the early-1980’s to a group of Muslim Brothers in the U.S. A recording of this speech was discovered in the 2004 FBI raid of the Annandale, Virginia residence of Hamas/MB official Ismail Elbarasse, where the archives of the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. were found. The English transcript of this speech was entered into evidence at the US v HLF trial in Dallas 2008 – the largest successfully prosecuted terrorism financing and Hamas trial in U.S. history. This speech is so powerful because this group of Muslim Brothers shared the history and strategy of the Brotherhood here in the U.S. with the expectation their comments would never see the light of day.

The second source is the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategic document – An Explanatory Memorandum – dated 1991 and also seized during the Elbarasse raid in 2004. This document was written by Mohamed Akram, a senior Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood official in the U.S. at the time, and approved by the MB’s Shura Council and Organizational Conference – the two governing bodies within the MB structure here. (The third part of the MB structure is the “General Masul” or Leader of the MB for the entire U.S.)

Both of these documents were entered into evidence at the HLF trial and stipulated to by the defense, which means they are legally what they purport to be.

As you read this, consider the MB’s entire effort as a massive Influence Operation – or for the professionals, a massive counter-intelligence operations – not “terrorism.”

Naman acknowledges that after the formation of the MSA in the U.S. in the early 1960’s, there was not a lot of organization, and he describes this period as a “Gathering or a grouping for Islam activists without an organizational affiliation.” But the MSA was the center of the activity:

“As for Recruitment in the ranks of this Movement, its main condition was that a brother…must be active in the general activism in the MSA.” As Muslim Brothers came from various countries, they settled in small groups or “usras” (families), sometimes hundreds of miles apart. They were called to recruit other arriving Muslims into the Brotherhood, and do what they could with what they had. The object was to grow these usras into large groups of Muslim Brothers so, eventually, the growing concentric circles of influence covered large areas.

As Naman puts it: “The first generation of Muslim Ikhwans in North America composed of a team which included he who was Ikhwan in his country or he who was a member of the Worshipers of the Merciful Group or he who doesn’t have a direction but who is active in Islamic activism. This was the first point or group which gave or planted the Muslim Brotherhood seed in America.”

By the 1970’s, arriving Brotherhood members were upset with the lack of activism and recruitment in the U.S. by the MB already here. Saudi Muslim Brothers and others came to America and joined the ranks. They demanded clearer commitments and “Ikhwan formulas” of how to accept Muslims into the MB ranks of “this Dawa’a and to make work secret.”

The MB established 5-year plans, the first of which, from 1975-1980 was the period of “General work and dedication to general work organizations.” During this time the Brotherhood went through infighting and turmoil as it sought to organize and agree on strategies and tactics.

By 1980, the Brotherhood emerged with strong leadership and a more focused commitment to the long-term strategy. 1981-1985 was a period of “Regional Planning and Growth.” Over time, the Brotherhood organized regionally in the U.S. and formed “Coordination Councils” which had leadership and committees to begin better organizing their efforts. Plans were developed, and the Brotherhood came up with primary and secondary goals for the Movement at that time.

“The main goals which were approved by the executive office were five…First of all: Strengthening the internal structure; second, administrative discipline; third, recruitment and settlement of the Dawa’a; four, energizing the organizations’ work; five, energizing political work fronts. Also, it adopted eight of the secondary goals on top of which were: finance and investment; second, foreign relations; third, reviving women’s activities; four, political awareness to members of the Group; five, securing the Group; six, special activity; seven, media; eight, taking advantage of human potentials.” (emphasis added)

Later in the Q & A session, Naman is asked about the aforementioned statement. An unidentified Muslim Brother asks, “By ‘Securing the Group’ do you mean military securing?” Naman responds with: “No, Military Work is listed under ‘Special Work.’ Special work means military work. ‘Securing the Group’ is the groups security, the Group’s security against outside dangers. For instance, to monitor the suspicious movements…which exist on the American front such as Zionism and Masonry…etc. Monitoring the suspicious movements or the sides, the government bodies such as CIA, FBI, etc, so that we find out if they are monitoring us, are we not being monitored, how can we get rid of them. That’s what is meant by ‘Securing the Group.’”

The aforementioned comment needs little reinforcement, except to add that inherent to the MB structure is the “Special Section” which conducts “special activity” or activity more commonly known to us as “terrorism.” This includes assassinations, bombings, kidnappings, etc. And that’s what makes it “Special Work.”

Additionally, during the speech Naman mentions the differences between Muslim Brothers coming to the U.S. from various nations, and how difficult it is in those nations to partake in certain activities. He offers one pertinent example for us: “…if the asking brother is from Jordan, for instance, he would know that it is not possible to have military training in Jordan, for instance, while here in America, there is weapons training at many of the Ikhwan (Muslim Brotherhood) camps…”

When later asked by an apparently irritated Brother as to why some Brothers in the U.S. get weapons training and others do not, Naman responds with, “By God, the first thing is that you thank God and praise him because you found a camp to meet in. You know that, for instance, Oklahoma has become a blocked area for you. You cannot meet in it in the first place right? …My brothers, according to what I learned in Oklahoma they started to be strict about letting Muslims use the camps. They would ask them, for instance, to submit their name and would ask you to bring and ID or something to prove your name…In some of the regions when they go to a camp, they take two things, they would request a camp that has a range, a shooting range and one which has a range to shoot, one which has a range which they use for shooting. You would find that in some of the camps.”

These comments by Naman are in line with the MB’s “Phases of the World Underground Movement Plan,” a five phase plan to overthrow the United States which includes the comment under Phase IV: “Training on the use of weapons domestically and overseas in anticipation of zero hour. It has noticeable activities in this regard.”

Interestingly, Naman assesses that the Muslim Brotherhood’s efforts in the U.S. – and the West – are more cohesive than elsewhere in the world. “Except in America and in Europe, we do not find unified movements which work in that way, to be able to try to melt all of the Ikhwans (Muslim Brothers’) experiences into one pot…under one umbrella…Here in America we find the practical application for this…idea which is the Group’s unity in one movement.”

Just prior to this speech, in early 1981, the MB created the Shura Council here in the United States whose role is “planning and monitoring executive (MB) leadership.” “The current Shura Council came on board to finish what its brothers started on the span of the past seven years to lead this Group to new horizons, God willing, keeping its eyes on huge goals among which is the settlement of this Group.”

“By ‘settlement of the Dawa’a’, the Muslim Brotherhood Dawa’a is meant.”

Dawa’a is the “call to Islam.” In Muslim Brotherhood doctrine, this Dawa’a is the process by which the MB works to achieve its primary objectives. It is the foundation for the “Settlement Process.”

Per their strategic document, the goals of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Movement in North America are: (1) Establishing an effective and stable Islamic Movement led by the Muslim Brotherhood; (2) Adopting Muslim causes domestically and globally; (3) Expanding the observant Muslim base; (4) Unifying and directing Muslim efforts; (5) Presenting Islam as a civilization alternative; (6) Supporting the establishment of the Islamic State wherever it is.

Furthermore, this strategic document states: “It must be stressed that it has become clear and emphatically known that all is in agreement that we must “settle” or “enable” Islam and its Movement in this part of the world. Therefore, a joint understanding of the meaning of the word settlement or enablement must be adopted.”

“The Concept of Settlement…Settlement: That Islam and its Movement become a part of the homeland it lives in.”

“The Process of Settlement: In order for Islam to become ‘a part of the homeland’ in which it lives…the Movement must plan and struggle to obtain ‘the keys’ and the tools of this process in carry (sic) out this grand mission as a “Civilization Jihadist” responsibility which lies on the shoulders of the Muslims and – on top of them – the Muslim Brotherhood in this country.”

Understanding the role of the Muslim Brother in North America:

The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack.

Putting It Into Practice

The above paragraph IS the MB strategy. Civilization-Jihad “by their hands” – OUR hands. The Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy for destroying the United States is to get us, specifically our leadership, to do the bidding of the MB for them. The Muslim Brotherhood intends to conduct Civilization Jihad by co-opting our leadership into believing a counterfactual understanding of Islam and the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood, thereby coercing these leaders to enforce the MB narrative on their subordinates. Be assured they are doing this with great success.

Political, military, law enforcement, media, and religious leaders are being duped across America by the MB leadership. The approach tactics differ depending on the targeted organization – ie for media the approach may be a “civil rights” basis, while for Christian leaders it will be based on the Muslims’ claiming they are “also followers of Jesus” without the explanation that to the Muslims, Jesus was a Muslim prophet.

Here is how it works: a leader of an MB front, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) for

instance, who has been a Muslim Brother for 40 years, is a classically trained intelligence officer from a foreign nation, has been in the U.S. for 20+ years, and is a naturalized U.S. citizen, approaches a senior government official (usually with zero counterintelligence training). The Muslim Brother says he is from the largest and “most prominent Muslim organization in America” or words to that effect. He explains he has come to help the official discern fact from fiction about Islam and help deter “radicalization” as well as “Islamaphobia” in the local community. The Brother says he has experience in “building bridges” between the U.S. government and the Muslim community, and even produces photographs with other senior government officials and community leaders. The official, unaware ISNA is a MB and Hamas support entity, an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest successfully prosecuted Hamas case in U.S. history, and the “nucleus” for the Islamic Movement here, begins working with this Muslim Brotherhood leader. They have discussions in the government office building where the senior official works, and the Muslim Brother tells the official ISNA is “moderate” (because he says so) but if he or any of the Muslims at ISNA hear of any “radicals” in the area, they will be sure to let the official know. They also talk about the Brother’s concern about how “aggressive” the U.S. government is perceived in the local Muslim community, and the “fear of backlash” against them. “We want to help you,” the Hamas/MB leader will say, “but we need assurances from you that you will not unnecessarily target Muslims for investigation or go into our Mosques unannounced. In exchange, we will be sure to tell you if there is anything nefarious going on in the Muslim community.” The government official buys off on this and, in the interest of deepening the relationship with the Muslim and the community-at-large, the government official complies with the MB’s request and eases off. The two men have lunch weekly and develop a relationship – the government official thinks the Muslim Brother actually likes him. The Muslim Brother is actually quite likeable. He was trained to be “likeable” during his counterintelligence training in his home country, which he has perfected during his last 40 years of operating for many of those years in hostile countries before coming to the U.S.

Over time, the government official establishes policies and procedures based the advice given to him by the Muslim Brother, which the official has never backstopped to determine if it is factually accurate. A year later, evidence comes to light identifying the Muslim Brother and the true nature of his intentions. The government official must now make a choice. Does he cut off his relationship with his “Muslim friend” and, therefore, admit he was duped and created policies and procedures for his agency based on disinformation fed to him by a Muslim Brother? Or does he silence his subordinates who have brought facts forward clearly identifying the enemy? Sad to say, around the country today, the latter is occurring at a exponentially higher rate than the former.

This is Civilization-Jihad “by their hands,” and evidence of it can be seen in: our universities – many of which have MSA chapters and host Hamas and MB speakers on a regular basis with the support of university Presidents and Boards who silence students challenging the school or Hamas; our intelligence and national security apparatus where analysts and agents on the ground who understand the Muslim Brotherhood threat are disciplined, subject to internal investigations, and threatened with termination for doing their jobs, going after the MB, and speaking up about this threat; our war colleges – at which Muslim Brothers serve as Distinguished Professors or Chairs of Middle Eastern studies programs and pollute the dialogue and suppress any attempt to speak truth into the threats from the Islamic Movement; our financial institutions – many of which are “Shariah Compliant” per the MB’s request and at the direction of the U.S. Treasury Department; our churches and synagogues – which only seem to outreach to Muslim Brotherhood front groups (note: ISNA is the certifying authority for all Muslim Chaplains in DoD and in the U.S. Bureau of Prisons) and which join the MB in protests against government investigations of anything “Muslim” or “Islamic” (e.g. Congressman King hearings); and the list goes on.

The MB Settled in America to subordinate the Constitution to Shariah. The “Process” by which they did it is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process.” Their methodology is to subvert the primary/foundational institutions in our nation and co-opt our leadership. At a quick glance it appears the score at halftime of this football game is 200-0 in their favor. Time for us to take off the baseball uniforms and engage the MB on the football field.

[other one]

You can find that many places on the internet, I got it from John's organnization on a CD so I can't post some URL.

Hamburgers, may I add that your lack of looking deeper into this, and your posts here, you are actually helping the Muslim Brotherhood destroy Western Civilization and setting up Islamic rule. I hope it is not intentional, but none the case is reality.

[OneLight]

What will happen when the man of perdition comes and preaches false doctrine, trying to deceive even the very elect if you cannot see what is right in front of you in real life? It looks good, sounds good, feels good ... it must be good?!?

[Oh Hamburgers!]

@Otherone:

I'm sorry to hear about your fever, I hope you're feeling better!

I mentioned this a few times before, but the main problem I have with the writing is the premise. There are too many conclusions drawn without direct evidence backing them up. There are references of course, but the actual claims that are being made often lack a basis.

I'll try to break down why I don't think this material is substantial or sound enough to be taken seriously.

From several major terrorism trials in the United States, and other information, we now know nearly every major Muslim organization in North America is controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) or a derivative group. We know many are support entities for Hamas, and all of the Islamic organizations working with the U.S. government are controlled by the MB.

This is one of his primary points where he leaps into other conclusions: essentially he claims that the Muslim Brotherhood is tied into almost all Muslim organizations in the US. He later focuses on the MB itself and therefore tries to tie all muslim organizations into being controlled by the MB. But this leads to a few questions that I don't think are adequately answered:

-What sources does he have that tie the MB with nearly every major Muslim organization? Some funding? How much? What is their actual connection? I find it very hard to believe that the MB directly oversees all/most Muslim organizations in the US.

A few years later (1928) outside of Cairo,Egypt, Hassan al Banna and his colleagues formed the Society of Muslim Brothers. Their purpose: to re-establish the Caliphate under which Shariah (Islamic Law) is the law of the land, and liberate the Islamic nation from the yolk of foreign rule. The Creed of the Brotherhood was, and is today: "Allah is our goal; the Messenger our Guide; the Koran our law; Jihad is our Way; and martyrdom in the way of Allah is our highest aspiration."

Over the next decade, the "Muslim Brotherhood" built a multi-tiered system in furtherance of achieving its objectives - the same objectives they maintain today.

This is the proof he uses to say the MB's goals are to subvert the US system and establish Sharia law. However:

-Where is this proof? I didn't see where the MB states they plan to install Sharia law everywhere; did I miss it?

-Perhaps these muslims from 1928 were trying to subvert other countries... where is the connection that keeps the same mission statement today? I went onto their website and all I saw was this;

Our main misson is to present the Muslim Brotherhood vision right from the source and rebut misonceptions about the movement in western societies. We value debate on the issues and we welcome constructive criticism.

That was the mission statement I saw today.

Another thing that he focused on is the word "jihad". That's always been a contentious word because it can mean a holy war against outsiders but it can also refer to the war of self, just like Christians battle with internal sin & desires. Saying "Jihad is our way" can just as easily mean continuous self discovery/evaluation to get closer to Allah.

---

Anyways from there he tries to build a case that the MB is in higher echelons of the US, and agents are subverting the system by falsly befriending officials in higher-up positions & influencing policy. Again where is the proof that all these muslims in positions of power are all puppets of the MB, are acting under false pretenses, and have the goal of Sharia law (which as I mentioned earlier wasn't fully established in the article).

Frankly the belief that all muslims have an ulterior motive & are lying is akin to how Jews were viewed in Hitler's Germany. It's a black & white good vs evil type of situation that dehumanizes and plants fear in people that offers no middle-ground. Have you ever met someone who was 100% good or 100% evil? Is it really logical to assume that no muslims can be trusted, and that they all are conspiring to bring about Sharia law (when Sharia law isn't even in all Muslim countries in the first place) here in America?

In short I think the article makes vast generalizations and tries to tie far too many groups in with the MB, whose desires for Sharia law in the US today is not even firmly established in the paper.

I do not doubt there are many muslims in America that do desire to bring Sharia law, and I do not doubt there are many muslims in America that are interested in pursuing terrorist-type organizations. I have no problem with continued security in this country when it comes to sniffing out terrorist plots of punishing those who break the laws. However John Guandolo is going further and essentially putting the motives of all muslims into question because of their religion and saying that they cannot be trusted. I believe that is an unfair characterization and goes against what this country stands for.

Incidentally, the author didn't simply leave the FBI to go into the speaking circut; he was essentially forced out after committing a scandal. That does not impact my impression of the article based on its merits (or lack thereof) but it does show that Guandolo's reputation isn't exactly crystal clear, nor does he always have sound judgment (like all of us I suppose).

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2009/09/post_4.html

Hamburgers, may I add that your lack of looking deeper into this, and your posts here, you are actually helping the Muslim Brotherhood destroy Western Civilization and setting up Islamic rule. I hope it is not intentional, but none the case is reality.

If it was true it certainly would not be intentional, but I do not believe that assertion to be true because I don't think the MB is actively trying to destroy western civilization & setting up Sharia law, nor do I think they have a wide enough reach to come close to doing so.

[Oh Hamburgers!]

What will happen when the man of perdition comes and preaches false doctrine, trying to deceive even the very elect if you cannot see what is right in front of you in real life? It looks good, sounds good, feels good ... it must be good?!?

Is that directed at me?

If so, why do you think a difference of opinion makes me blind? I could just as easily say the same about you but that doesn't serve any pupose to further discussion and reach common ground.

[Guest shiloh357]

_{Part of the larger problem is the assumption that there is a such thing as "Moderate Islam." Islam does not have moderates. That is a western designation meant to excuse our willingness to pander to Islamic nations in the name of US interests. Our government could not surely justify negotiating or having diplomatic relatinos with a terrorist entity. So, we simply designate them as "moderates" in order to avoid having to explain why we are cozying up to despotic, terrorist thugs.}

_{Islam has ALWAYS been an ideaology of bloodshed. That is how Islam was historically spread. Muhommed was a psychopath, a murderer, a thief and and a pedofile. Were Muhommed alive today, he would not be respected as a religious leader. He would be locked up in prison and be considered mentally deranged and a threat to society.}

_{Liberal know-nothings try to compare Islam with the Christianity and there is no comparison. As for the crusades... The crusades were a response to Islamic violence against Christians. Islam essentially created the crusades. The crusades were not an attempt to spread Christianity, but to defend Christians from Islam.}

_{Islam is really nothing but a Sharia death cult. In addition, Islam has no intention of living on an even plain with other religions. It''s stated agenda is to make the world "The House of Islam." Islam is a government, more than it is a religion in the conventional use of the word "religion." Islam, is a foreign government seeking to wage a war on the US but not with armies and troops, but in terms of demographics. They can't win against us militarily, but they are seeking to spread Islam in our prisons and school systems.}

_{Islam, being that it is a foreign government should not be allowed to exist on American soil. One cannot be loyal or true American and be an adherant of Islam. Islam should be deported from the United States and all immigration to the US from islamic nations should be halted.}

_{Islam is altogether evil and is a blight on humanity. It is a cancer that needs to be cut out of the United States.}

[Oh Hamburgers!]

_{Part of the larger problem is the assumption that there is a such thing as "Moderate Islam." Islam does not have moderates. That is a western designation meant to excuse our willingness to pander to Islamic nations in the name of US interests. Our government could not surely justify negotiating or having diplomatic relatinos with a terrorist entity. So, we simply designate them as "moderates" in order to avoid having to explain why we are cozying up to despotic, terrorist thugs.}

_{Islam has ALWAYS been an ideaology of bloodshed. That is how Islam was historically spread. Muhommed was a psychopath, a murderer, a thief and and a pedofile. Were Muhommed alive today, he would not be respected as a religious leader. He would be locked up in prison and be considered mentally deranged and a threat to society.}

_{Liberal know-nothings try to compare Islam with the Christianity and there is no comparison. As for the crusades... The crusades were a response to Islamic violence against Christians. Islam essentially created the crusades. The crusades were not an attempt to spread Christianity, but to defend Christians from Islam.}

_{Islam is really nothing but a Sharia death cult. In addition, Islam has no intention of living on an even plain with other religions. It''s stated agenda is to make the world "The House of Islam." Islam is a government, more than it is a religion in the conventional use of the word "religion." Islam, is a foreign government seeking to wage a war on the US but not with armies and troops, but in terms of demographics. They can't win against us militarily, but they are seeking to spread Islam in our prisons and school systems.}

_{Islam, being that it is a foreign government should not be allowed to exist on American soil. One cannot be loyal or true American and be an adherant of Islam. Islam should be deported from the United States and all immigration to the US from islamic nations should be halted.}

_{Islam is altogether evil and is a blight on humanity. It is a cancer that needs to be cut out of the United States.}

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, I can tell you are very passionate about this issue.

I suppose if you support the world view that moderate muslims don't exist you can take it only one way: that 1.5 billion people (the 21% of the earth that is muslim) is altogether evil. They all desire Sharia law and will use violence whenever an opportunity arises. Any muslims in America are part of a global conspiracy to overthrow our democracy and institute a theocratic state.

or

You can instead support the notion that religions - like people - often have different gradients to them. Religion means different things to different people and some allow it to guide their lives and decisions more than others. In the same way people are not purely good or evil - people have flaws and they have good qualities. Some more than others, on either side. But certainly people are complicated and have different hopes, desires, fears, etc.

In my lifetime I have observed time and time again that the second viewpoint seems to fall in line with how the world works, and the first viewpoint often oversimplifies things and leads to fear, hate, and suffering. What world-view do you have, and what world have you observed in your lifetime?

But as I said, I suppose everyone is entitled to their opinion.

[jasoncran]

so shiloh might i ask is it wise that the army has been using locals to talk to locals? we did this under bush and obama still. they will know if you arent from their from your dialect and lack of knowledge of the local towns.