Friday, September 11, 2009

Rubbish, pure rubbish.

Once again, that illustrious rag, "Time" magazine writes a story SO full of obvious holes, it looks like a wheel of Swiss Cheese, after it was used for Uzi practice.
.
I'll link to the entire story below, but here's the gist, and title actually.
.
Poll: Muslim Americans Still Struggling for Acceptance
.
I'll buy the premise. But "Time" decided to bloat the issue, in ways that seem ridiculous to me. Here are some cherry picked examples.
.
.
A new poll from the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life finds that Americans see Muslims as encountering more discrimination than any other religious group.
.
here's a hint, "Time" editors, POLL THE GROUP IN QUESTION IF YOU WANT ACCURACY!!
.
.
Today, the broad tolerance that existed in the days following 9/11 has largely evaporated. Nearly 40% of Americans still say they think Islam is more likely to encourage violence, according to a new Pew Forum survey, and only a minority hold favorable views of Muslims (the latest poll does not distinguish between Muslims and Muslim Americans).
.
OK, so we lump all them together. If the topic is MS13 (not terrorism) and then we're asked if Spanish people are low life scum (but no distinction is made between gang bangers with violent tendencies, and honest citizens) those numbers would be cockeyed too, methinks.
.
.
It may well be, however, that an uncomfortable gray area exists between tolerating Muslim Americans and fully integrating them into U.S. society
.
HELLO, boobs at "Time"!! They have to assimilate themselves into our culture. We can't force them, if for no other reason, because of our Constitution. I guess being atheistic, liberal morons removes the basic knowledge of freedom of religion and association from the brain. (when you read the article you'll see that this integration bon mot was after a few sentences about Muslims being told they can't wear traditional clothing for drivers license photos or at work where a uniform is required.)
.
.
"Freedom in America is indivisible from the freedom to practice one's religion," said Obama. "That is why the U.S. government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab, and to punish those who would deny it."
.
except for those listed items about ID photos and mandatory uniform requirements has any of us heard that ANY clothing, has been outlawed or denied, to anyone, from any group in our country? Strippers and nudists have to wear clothes too for drivers license photos and at work!! I guess strippers just start out dressed, but you get the idea.
.
'Here's the entire article, I link, you decide.
.
I guess it would have been to easy for "Time" to do articles about what NON-Muslim Americans are doing, feeling, saying 8 years after 9/11? The only time I see something specifically Caucasian in the MSM, it's about white supremacists or far right wing religious groups or someone accused of a crime. I guess white people suck!! Is THAT why we deserved to be attacked, because as a race, we suck?
.
(I've had the flu...chills...aches...102 degree fever...screaming headaches...for two days, so I'm signing this one as)
.
.
Schteveo Bin Whinin (in honor of Muslim 'mericans)

15 comments:

Missy said...

Maybe if their leader stopped giving blessings to the murder of innocent people they would feel better.

Schteveo said...

OK, I'll bite.

Except for a few religions or sects of religions, Catholics with the Pope, Buddhists and the Dali Lama (and that's really just Tibetan Buddhism), Mormons and whoever is their leader now, I wasn't aware the Muslims had "their leader". The Sunni and Shia definitely have separate leadership. It is the very basis of the origins of those sects. And yet we have jihadi from both sects who buy into the rhetoric of slaughter and Caliphate.

There is an Islamic Legal Council in Baghdad, but as far as I know, they've never made such speeches. They look at legalistic aspects of Sharia Law as sent to then from around the world. Most jihadis see their local Imam as THE TRUE Leader. Moqtada al-Sadr is a prime example of just one that we hear of regularly.

I don't think the real problem is the Islamofscist Leaders who get the jihadis wound up, the real problem is moderate Muslim Leaders who are mum and do NOT tell young men, and now women, to READ the Koran, and see what it says about infidels, enemies, "the people of the book", and just what a jihad can be. It can be a struggle to overcome a compulsion, or to strive to fed the poor, etc.

Years ago I worked with an engineer who's first name was Jihad. His father named him that because he was an only child and it took his parents years to have him. His mother was almost 40. I knew what jihad meant, and he verified it, It means to struggle, strive, exert, not HOLY WAR. That Holy War crap is Wahhabist bull shit.

Missy said...

Sorry Schteveo .. I should have said Leaders not leader and by leaders I mean Mullahs and clerics and the like.

"Grammie" or whatever name he wants to call me!! said...

H1N1 Steve?

Missy said...

Oh and Schtevo is Jihad meant inner-struggle why did Mohammed HIMSELF use that term as a duty to rape slaughter and pillage in the name if Islam in the KORAN? It does NOT mean inner struggle, it means war, it means conquest .. read the Koran not some probably uber liberal mooslamb who tries to allegorize the koran when it is not meant to be allegorized.

Anonymous said...

Mohammed used Jihad, because it was struggle "inner the place he wanted to conquer"

See ... still an inner struggle.

Schteveo said...

Again, we're seeing the difference in RADICALS and moderates. And yes The Prophet was radical, according to many of the Muslims I've worked with. Likewise, the current Pope would be way shy of repeating the Inquisition.

As people, and religions change and get older, they usually mellow. That is what the Wahhabists teach, that they need a RETURN TO that kind of jihad. But most Muslims don't buy it. If they did, there'd be many more of us dead and wounded. Allah told Mohamed NOT to go after "people of the book", that being the branches of religion who saw Abraham as a prophet. That would be Christians and Jews, but Mohamed did and now, jihadis go after anyone who isn't radical. Beyond that, the Koran specifically says not to kill Muslims, especially women and children, but again, that isn't followed either.

Not all Irish join the IRA, not all Germans were Nazi's, not all Russians were Communists...absolutes rarely, if ever, apply.

The guys who currently wage war against any and all, in the name of Allah, are no more Muslims than Jim Jones or David Koresh or Fred Phelps are / were Christians. And I understand that quite often religious beliefs are hard to swim through, but going out on two or three lines from books hundreds or thousands of pages long, is not being a follower of anything. It's just an excuse to act out. Often violently in modern times.

Then again, the Indian Thuggee cult killed between 50,000 and 2 MILLION people over 150 years, according to Indian and British records. And in India, who would miss "just" 2 million people over that period. But it's still a weird killer CULT, not standard Hindu theology.

Missy said...

Steve think about what you just said "The prophet was radical" Um, the prophet IS the religion .. he is not radical, he is the standard-bearer. He WROTE what is to them the Word of God. Thats like Christians not aspiringto be like Jesus because Jesus was radical. Radicals are not radicals, they are just the mooslims that take their religion seriously, who actually listen to the Koran. The moderates not MINO .. muslims in name only. Comparing the pope today to the pope during the inquisition is not an equal comparison to mooslims of today vs mohammed. Oh and Steveo the Koran is not written chronigically .. if you read it chronologically you will see in the beginning that he needed support so he preacher tolerance and as soon as he was strong enough Mohammed himself uttered the words "Kill all the jews."

Missy said...

"The guys who currently wage war against any and all, in the name of Allah, are no more Muslims than Jim Jones or David Koresh or Fred Phelps are / were Christians."

Um, Steve so Mohammed was not a Muslim? And when mohammed spefically said that if you do not take up arms you are NOT a muslim was wrong (even though he spoke the word of god) and you are right?

Spider said...

Ahh, Time Magazine, Joseff Goebbels favorite.

As for Mooselambs, i say wrap them all in pig skin and hang them!

Schteveo said...

I think I missed making my ultimate point. (I ain't up to snuff yet)

The Prophet (supposedly) wrote down the Koran, the word of Allah, then promptly forgot to go by, or live by, or lead by the great majority of what he was "given".

In that way, moderate Muslims say, he erred. He was NOT divine, so he was susceptible to error.

A good Muslim says Allah IS the religion, Mohamed is simply the Greatest Prophet. Radicals usually quote one or two stanzas and yell Allah hu Akbar, and blow somebody up. Or in Mohamed's case, rape a child or kill a Jew.

My name is Url said...

Who cares? They were barbarians then and they are barbarians now. To paraphrase the great prophet Fingerpoots, "Cap 'em all"

Schteveo said...

I realize I'm never going to convince anyone, but I'll keep making the point. I despise absolutes and generalities.

Anonymous said...

Ok, then just cap most of them.

Anonymous said...

Medications Classes http://colorobsessiongallery.com/ - buy valium online The quick acting nature of the drug makes it a drug that many doctors turn to for the vast majority of its known uses. [url=http://colorobsessiongallery.com/]valium medication[/url]