Skip to comments.Darwinists Trick Themselves in Texas
Posted on 03/30/2009 12:58:22 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
click here to read article
Looks like atlaw and allmendream are attempting to hijack and derail your thread here. As pretty much always, this is their intent of course.
That’s enough for now. Starting to see a pattern yet, Allmendream? Any comments, atlaw?
Are you two now prepared to participate, from start to finish, in the proposed debate thread?
That’s why I am trying to get them to agree to participate in the proposed debate thread (from start to finish) so that we can get this topic moved to the appropriate place...at which point the lame arguments of both of them (i.e. trying to distance revolutionary materialism from Islamist terrorism) will be completely eviscerated.
This was carried out by the Palestine Liberation Front:
Description: Under a five-pointed red star, from left to right, is a green map of Israel and the territories, an AK-47 rifle and a crescent. At bottom, in a semi-circle, are the words "Palestinian Liberation Front."
Explanation: The star symbolizes the group's Marxist-Leninist beginnings. The green map of Israel denotes the aim of eliminating what the group believes to be wrongful rule of Israel. The rifle symbolizes and affirms a commitment to armed struggle. The combination of red, green and black echoes the Palestinian flag and evokes Palestinian nationalism.
Starting to see a pattern yet, gentlemen. Should I go on. Are you ready to commit to starting a separate debate thread on the subject (in which you both agree to participate from START TO FINISH)?
Link at the bottom:
This is not surprising either, given the fact that both the PLO and the Baathist movement were originally creations of the Soviet Unionthe PLO is a Soviet inspired Communist movement.
This is evidenced in the Charters frequent use of familiar terms like Imperialist and Imperialism which are KGB coined invectives for the United States, and others like Vanguard, and Progressive which are familiar Soviet terms applied to communists and communist movements.
But you need not decipher words in the charter to reach that conclusion. Former CIA Deputy Director Ray Cline provided ample proof in his book Terrorism, The Soviet Connection.
And theres more. Ion Pacepa, acting chief of Romanian foreign intelligence, was the highest-ranking intelligence officer to ever defect from the Soviet Bloc. His group was tasked with training PLO leaders. In a recent interview with FrontPageMagazine.com, he stated:
The PLO was dreamt up by the KGB, which had a penchant for liberation organizations. In 1964 the first PLO council, consisting of 422 Palestinian representatives handpicked by the KGB, approved the Palestinian National Charter-a document that had been drafted in Moscow.
The most damning evidence against Arafats claimed aspirations for Palestinian statehood however, is his own words. In his FrontPage interview, Pacepa describes an exchange Arafat had with late Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu in 1978. Ceausescu had just informed him that Moscow wanted him to pretend that the PLO was willing to renounce terrorism in hopes of becoming a Palestinian state. Breznev thought that then President Carter would buy it:
But we are a revolution, Arafat exploded...We were born as a revolution and we should remain an unfettered revolution. Arafat expostulated that the Palestinians lacked the tradition, unity and discipline to become a formal state [emph. mine]...and he was not willing to put any laws or other obstacles in the way of the Palestinian struggle to eradicate the state of Israel.
But Ceausescu prevailed on Arafat:
Ceausescu...told [Arafat] that, if he would transform the PLO into a government-in-exile and would pretend to break with terrorism, the West would shower him with money and glory. But you have to keep on pretending, over and over...in the shadow of your government-in-exile you can keep as many terrorist groups as you want, as long as they are not publicly connected with your name.
Arafat was granted the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994 for renouncing terrorism and promising to change the PLO charters goal of eliminating Israel. None of these promises have been kept, despite Arafats solemn oaths, made over and over as Ceausescu suggested.
On September 13, 1993, the same day Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin signed the Declaration of Principles embodying those ideals for which he would later get the Nobel Prize, he explained his motives on Lebanese TV:
Since we cannot defeat Israel in war, we do this in stages. We take any and every territory that we can of Palestine, and establish sovereignty there, and we use it as a springboard to take more. When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us for the final blow against Israel.
As I mentioned earlier, a Palestinian state is not the PLOs goal, never has been. Once you accept this, it is easy to understand why he rebuffed former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Baraks extremely generous offer of statehood for Palestine.
Yasser Arafat was not a Moslem.
He was fully indoctrinated in the culture and ideology of radical communist revolutionaries and enjoyed the support and full backing of the Soviet Bloc. He was a Communist.
Pacepa flatly stated Arafat was a devoted Marxist-Leninist. This is not really news, any movement dreamt up by the KGB would, by definition, have to be communist at its core. Arafats professed belief in Islam, right down to TV shots of him bowing on a prayer mat in traditional Moslem fashion, is pure political theater, nothing more. So Arafats al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, while professing allegiance to Allah, are simply stooges carrying out the terrorist policies of the atheistic PLO.
My suspicion is that they tend to express themselves in socialistic/Marxist terminology of class warfare and oppression to the western world (which is attuned to secular socialism), and in Islamic jihadist terminology to the Muslim world.
[[which is attuned to secular socialism]]
Seems to be the sentiment of Secularists in this country who beleive we, America, are nothign but a bunch of oppressive thugs who must forever apologize and atone for our ‘sins’ of wanting democracy- Now we’ve got a president who is traveling hte globe ‘apologizing’ to terorist nations, and trying to appeaze and coddle them. Socialism is an insidious form of self-loathing, nation loathing that cedes power to those who hate us and wish us dead.
==GGG, The data you cite lacks a clear ‘smoking gun’ admission or statement from folks like Arafat denying belief in the Koran, or affirming atheistic communism specifically.
I have TONS AND TONS more. As Gen. Ion Pacepa flatly stated, Arafat was no Muslim. He was a hardcore Marxist-Lenist devoted to spreading revolutionary materialism. I would love to pick up this topic on a dedicated thread.
==It shows that they have been influenced by Marxist thought and beliefs, and they tend to express their struggle within that context. But that does not contradict their basic allegiance to the Koran.
He was an out-and-out atheistic communist. But I will grant you this, they used the language of the Qur’an to adapt their communist revolution to the particular circumstances in the Middle East. Just as they did in the Russia, just as they did in China, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, etc, etc.
Should have read: But I will grant you this, they used the language of the Quran to adapt their communist revolution to the particular circumstances in the Middle East. Just as they adopted their communist revolution to the particular circumstances in Russia, just as they did in China, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, etc, etc.
Radical Islam is in fact comprised of western scientific rationalists besotted by atheistic communism who are only disguised as Islamic fundamentalists.
Beneath their fake beards, these materialist atheists actually dream of existential oblivion when they blow themselves up, not 72 virgins in paradise. They preach the theory of evolution in their madrassas and mosques, and secretly keep away from prying eyes their holy statutes of Darwin, Wallace, Gould, Marx, and Lenin.
Indeed, if you look carefully, you can see that beneath the exterior of what appear to be Korans, they are actually carrying copies of evil western textbooks on evolutionary biology, geology, paleontology, etc., as well as an occasional copy of Das Kapital.
And GGG and Harun Yahya have hit upon the precise solution. What is needed to cure radical Islam of its terroristic endeavors is a thick layer of creationist supernaturalism, which will dull the senses of these cleverly disguised scientific rationalists and force them to rethink their lust for materialism, communism, atheism, and existential French novels by Camus and Simone de Beauvoir.
As odd as it might sound, only by introducing into Islamic fundamentalism the missing element of religious fundamentalism will the faux theocrats of the middle east be defanged.
This hidden "truth" can be discerned in the penumbras of the article Saudi Publications on Hate Ideology Invade American Mosques, but only with a pair of special "creation-truth" goggles (which can be purchased at CreationMart for $5.99, buy two get one free).
If you put on your goggles and read the following excerpt very carefully, you'll see that what radical Islam really needs most is more religion:
Saudi state education teaches children from an early age the virtues of jihad. State elementary and high school curricula have been replete with examples of jihad indoctrination and many of these same writings are now available to an expanding Muslim audience in America. One example is a book for third-year high school students published by the Saudi Ministry of Education that was collected from the Islamic Center of Oakland in California. The text, written with the approval of the Saudi Ministry of Education, teaches students to prepare for jihad in the sense of war against Islams enemies, and to strive to attain military self-sufficiency:
To be true Muslims, we must prepare and be ready for jihad in Allahs way. It is the duty of the citizen and the government. The military education is glued to faith and its meaning, and the duty to follow it.
Strength is defined in this textbook in physical, spiritual, and material terms, namely men, beliefs, and the latest advances in military technology:
Preparing the weapons for war and possessing them; even better than that is building special factories for manufacturing military vehicles, tanks, rockets, planes, and other things needed in modern warfare.
The text then assures students that the Kingdom does not concentrate only on defensive capabilities, but also on building an offensive arsenal to face,
the dangers of communism and the Crusades from the East and the West, and in the first cause for all the Arabs, the Palestinian cause and the liberation of the Al-Aqsa Mosque; the cause of Muslim Afghanistan and the causes of persecuted Muslim minorities around the world.
Wahhabi writings emphasize the obligatory nature of the purification that jihad produces, whether it be in overcoming external enemies, or perfecting the inner self. To Be a Muslim, published by Saudi Arabias International Islamic Publishing House and gathered from the Al-Farouq Mosque in Houston, Texas, exhorts Muslims to work for the establishment of functionally Islamic governments in all nations:
[Muslims should work] to form a society that is committed to the Islamic way of thinking and Islamic way of life, which means to form a government that implements principles of justice embodied in the sharia .Until the nations of the world have functionally Islamic governments, every individual who is careless or lazy in working for Islam is sinful.
The Houston mosque-goers are then instructed that change including political change is connected directly with jihad:
These responsibilities to change both oneself and the world are binding in principle, in law, in self-defense, in community, and as a sacred obligation of jihad .
Quoting from the writings of some of the leading militant ideologues of modern Islamic extremism, the tract instructs Houston mosque-goers to form Islamic opposition groups to face attacks from every materialistic ideology and system that threatens the existence of Islam as a global paradigm of thought and system of life. Because, it asserts, many Muslim countries are suffering either under the oppression of non-believing occupiers, or under the brutality of an evil minority, which governs through the iron fist and serves as the infidels local puppets, self-defense has become an imperative duty for all Muslims. To underscore the hardships involved in defending and spreading Islam, the Saudi text cites Muslim Brotherhood radical leader Sayyid Qutb, advocating the building of an organized movement of sufficient size and quality to carry on every level of Islamic work and also to handle unexpected situations and needs. The Saudi document quotes Qutb urging Muslims to join such movements,
[Believers] should realize that their self-value derives only from Islam, without which they are like animals or worse. They must know, however, that true honor can never be achieved unless they continue actively to involve themselves in the Islamic Movement. Those who remain in isolation will be in the Hellfire. Those who join in the Islamic Movement are joining themselves with honorable people.
According to the text, the path of Islamic activismsometimes a euphemism for jihadpurifies and liberates a person and teaches one to be strong. It is a path of blessings and honor.
Successful Islamic movements should liberate oppressed peoples, including of course Muslims, and the Saudi tract uses the term taghut, familiar among Islamists, to describe any power or system responsible for such oppression. Usually taghut is comprised of those who worship the false gods of modernist and postmodernist cultures, or those who adopt capitalist, socialist, communist, and other manmade systems, in whole or in part. Again, the tract appeals to an authoritative voice, the fiery Hasan al-Banna, the extremist founder of the Muslim Brotherhood:
Our task in general is to stand against the flood of modernist civilization overflowing from the swamp of materialistic and sinful desires. This flood has swept the Muslim nation away from the Prophets leadership and Koranic guidance and deprived the world of its guiding light. Western secularism moved into a Muslim world already estranged from its Koranic roots, and delayed its advancement for centuries, and will continue to do so until we drive it from our lands. Moreover, we will not stop at this point, but will pursue this evil force to its own lands, invade its Western heartland, and struggle to overcome it until all the world shouts by the name of the Prophet and the teachings of Islam spread throughout the world. Only then will Muslims achieve their fundamental goal, and there will be no more persecution and all religion will be exclusively for Allah .
This passage is a distillation of Islamist extremism: an adversarial posture fueled by a conspiratorial outlook, the candid call to jihad against the West, and a recipe for open-ended struggle practiced beyond the borders of Dar Al-Islam in the heart of enemy territory.
Well, who really believes what those guys say anyway.
While we backed Israel. The Soviets backed the Arabs. That doesn't inandofitself mean that the soviet backed Arabs were necessarily communist/socialist, and certainly doesn't mean that they abandoned Islam.
Islam is the motivation of Islamic terrorists. They say so. They follow religious leaders, not science teachers.
Osama Bin Lauden is an Islamic cleric, not a Biology professor. Your claim that they were motivated by the “Temple of Darwin” is just further evidence of how delusional your position is.
Here’s a little more on Arafat “the Muslim”:
Griffin: The existence of an interlocking terrorist network, supported directly and indirectly by the Soviet Union, is well-documented, and that leads to the second obvious pattern of terrorism. Its the fact that the leaders of these groups, almost without exception, claim to be acting in the name of Marx and Lenin. Further analysis reveals that these people are not the product of the working class, which they claim to represent, but come from the privileged middle class and upper class. Theyre intellectuals with college educations, and, in fact, its within the university environment that they become steeped in the theories of Marx and Lenin. Yassir Arafat, leader of the PLO, had entered the University of Cairo in 1951. He was the son of a wealthy merchant from Gassa.
In 1956, he was president of the leftist Palestine Student Union and was its delegate that year to the Communist World Festival of Youth in Prague, Czechoslovakia. In November of 1974, Arafat traveled to Moscow where he placed a wreath at the tomb of Lenin and was the personal guest of Leonid Brezhnev.12
What religious tradition did Arafat come from?
What religious text did Arafat quote from?
Again, your accusation was that GGG was mentored by Harun(or whatever) and that "radical Islam is creationist to the core. ". So citing a paper on Saudi Arabian terrorists is not relevant to supporting your audacious assertions. Here is evidence of how Wahhabi is viewed by other Muslims. Why Extremism Always Fails: Spanish Muslim Perspectives Abd el-Wahid Miranda
Two weeks after the World Trade Center disaster, a Black Muslim of my acquaintance visited a news store situated a few blocks from the site of the catastrophe. The store, which had reopened that day, was run by five Senegalese immigrants. Their Muslim background was clearly known to the lady who walked in, who came straight up to them and said: Were so sorry about what happened. Dont worry. We know it wasnt Muslims who did it. It was the Wahhabis!
The Western world is now beginning to understand why Wahhabism is so unpopular among Muslims. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, not usually given to subtle understandings of Muslim aqida issues, has said that the Saudis are having to essentially buy off their extreme groups in order to maintain themselves They are essentially funding a significant portion of what we are now dealing with -- Islam gone awry.
According to the Muslim journalist Stephen Schwartz, writing in the English journal The Spectator, Bin Laden is a Wahhabi extremist. So are his Egyptian allies, who exulted as they stabbed foreign tourists to death at Luxor not many years ago, bathing in blood up to their elbows and emitting blasphemous cries of ecstasy. So are the Algerian Islamist terrorists whose contribution to the purification of the world consisted of murdering people for such sins as running a movie projector or reading secular newspapers. The vast majority of Muslims in the world loathe Wahhabism because it is a violent break with tradition. To expose the extent of Saudi and Wahhabi extremist influence on American Muslims would deeply compromise many Islamic clerics in the US.'
Academic analysis has also concluded that Saudi Islam is at the core of the current crisis. Many studies cite the 1998 Harvard thesis of the Saudi dissident Nawaf Obeid, who writes: 'According to a high-ranking official in the [Saudi] Ministry of Justice, Sheikh Mohamed bin Jubeir [current chairman of the Saudi Consultative Council], who has been called the 'exporter' of the Wahhabi creed in the Muslim world, was a strong advocate of aiding the Taleban'.
Nonetheless, American daisy-cutter bombs are not landing on the Saudi universities in Madinah and Riyadh, in whose laboratories the new and hate-filled strains of Wahhabism are being designed. Neither is Saudi Arabia anywhere on the notoriously clumsy American list of states supporting terrorism. The Saudis, as usual, are exempted from any serious criticism, even when experts agree that while they may not themselves be the root of the problem, they are certainly watering it.
(courtesy ping to L1970)
I’m not saying that all Islamist terrorists are communist. I am simply pointing out that the vast majority of Islamist terrorist organizations are revolutionary materialists (to the core). To try to pretend this element doesn’t exist re: the Terror Network is to put your head in the sand and ignore the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
PS Let me know when you and atlaw are willing to rigorously participate in the proposed debate thread FROM START TO FINISH. I don’t want an “I’ll drop in from time to time” commitment. I want you both there until it becomes clear that your one-dimensional understanding of the enemy we face is SORELY lacking.
Call me crazy, Andrew (and I’m sure you will), but what you just posted actually supports my point. Or to put it in Andrew-speak — I don’t think what you posted means what you think it means, whatever it is you think it means.
I have given my conditions. Start the thread, invite me, and I will participate from start to finish.
I doubt you will follow through though, you have a rather sordid history of saying your going to set up a debate, not doing so, and then accusing people of backing out.
Are you playing that game again, or are you actually going to start a debate thread and invite me to it this time?
These Darwinist zealots want to hijack the war on terror and turn it into a war on Christianity and on all religion. They are the enemy within and their allies are the Godless Democrat Party.
==I doubt you will follow through though, you have a rather sordid history of saying your going to set up a debate, not doing so, and then accusing people of backing out.
Not this again! Do I have to go back and find the link where you backed out AGAIN??? Sheesh!
Back to the debate. Is atlaw in or out?
==These Darwinist zealots want to hijack the war on terror and turn it into a war on Christianity and on all religion. They are the enemy within and their allies are the Godless Democrat Party.
It’s nothing less than stunning to me that so-called conservatives, on the premier conservative website on the internet, absolutely refuse to acknowledge that many of the terrorist organizations around the world (to include the Middle East) are motivated by revolutionary materialism. Did they learn absolutely nothing from the Cold War?!?!
You never set up a debate. My last comment on the subject was that I was ready to debate as soon as you had your “pedigreed” Scientists signed on to Free Republic, but that there was no point if their entire debate tactic would be to say that scientists are all in on a conspiracy.
You never set up the debate, and then months later accused me of backing out of a debate that you never set up with a scientist who never signed on to Free Republic.
I agreed to debate, and now your throwing conditions. Will you take any objection to your conditions as “backing out”? I guess any excuse will do when you don't know science, and don't actually know any scientists willing to sign on to FR and debate.
And just so you don't try to quote mine a “backing out” of anything I have said.......
Post the thread, ping me to it, and I will participate “from beginning to end”.
They try not to ever think about the Cold War because they don’t want to acknowledge that atheist communism murdered more innocent people in the last century than all the religions have in the whole history of the world.
==Again, your accusation was that GGG was mentored by Harun(or whatever) and that “radical Islam is creationist to the core. “
Notice he has yet to supply any proof that Yahya is my “mentor”, that radical Islam is “creationist” to the core, or disprove my contention that many Middle Eastern terrorist organizations are revolutionary materialists bent on world revolution. I’m not holding my breath.
Just like a typical Darwinist, every piece of data supports your point, even contradictory data. Your claim was that Harun(or whatever) was GGG's mentor. Another claim was that "radical Islam is creationist to the core." Neither of those claims is supported by your post or my post. Since you have introduced another red herring that Wahabis are terrorists you may claim that my citation supports that red herring, but that still does not address your frivolous assertions which my citation does not support especially with respect to radical Islam and creationists. The radicals are simply Wahabist(or fomented by them).
Allmendream, don’t you remember?...I went back and found the reply where you backed out and posted it for all to see. I had Duesberg all set up. I showed you the email were he agreed to come on and debate you. I told Duesberg it was off because YOU backed out. Do you think Duesberg was afraid to debate you? I mean c’mon, you only have a M.S., and you’re not even a specialist in the field of AIDS. He would have torn you to shreds. No, the reason why the debate didn’t go forward is because at the last minute you said you had no interest in debating “conspiracy” theorists (or some such) on AIDS, so I told Duesberg the debate was off.
As for the debate thread re: the Soviet roots of Islamist terror, all I ask is that you get your fellow evo, Mr. Lawyer, to man-up and sign on the dotted line. After all, he was the one who got this whole thing started. Are you up for the debate, Mr. Lawyer?
BTW, if we have this debate thread, I hope you will consider participating. I want these so-called conservative materialists to know beyond a shadow of a doubt just how much modern terrorism has been influenced by the ideology of revolutionary communism.
The only “backing out” I did was to say that there would be little point to “debating” someone who; when I say Dr. X says this that and the other; they respond “Dr. X is faking his results, because he is part of the conspiracy.”.
If you take that as “backing out” it is a tacit admission on your part that my criteria could not be met, and conspiracy mongering is all your “pedigreed scientist” was going to engage in.
Moreover the debate that you were supposed to set up was with js####, who complained about the forum. I figured my last “yes, invite me” was sufficient, only to hear from you a couple months later that I “backed out” of a debate that you never actually set up, and were attempting to set up with a different debate partner.
I can see though that your once again trying to play the “nobody will debate me” game, and are evidently not interested in actually debating.
But I repeat. Post the thread, ping me to it, and I will participate “from beginning to end”.
You crack me up, Allmendream. I had forgotten that JS#### backed out of the debate, just like you. In the mean time, could you use your evo-influence to convince atlaw to participate in said debate. After all, this entire debate emerged because of his phony accusations. And remember Mr. Lawyer, this is from start to finish.
How many chances has Mr. Lawyer had to back up his assertions now? Let’s see, Mr. Lawyer came barging in with his false and slanderous accusations back in #24, and we are now close to 200 replies. What’s he waiting for do you suppose???
You never got any scientist “pedigreed” or otherwise signed on to FR willing to debate the subject, posted a debate thread, or pinged me to it.
It is an impossibility for me to “back out” of a situation you never actually set up.
But again you seem more interested in playing the nutter “nobody will debate me” game than in actually organizing a debate or continuing the debate that you were losing so convincingly on this thread. I guess when you are losing so bad the only tactic you know is to challenge to a debate, not set up a debate, and then make accusations of people backing out of a debate you never set up.
Well you successfully changed the subject from how Osama bin Lauden is a ISLAMIC cleric, not a biology teacher; how Islamic Jihad is an Islamic terrorist organization interested in jihad, and how Yasser Arafat had the Quran read over his grave, quoted the Quran, and extolled the virtues of martyrdom for Allah.
Just out of curiosity, Allmendream...Are you still interested in debating Duesberg (from start to finish)? If you are, I’ll see if I can set something up again. It will be a time limited debate, say 3 hours, where you guys will debate live. I’m not sure what Duesberg’s schedule looks like, but if you are still interested, I’ll see if I can set it up.
==I guess when you are losing so bad the only tactic you know is to challenge to a debate
What the heck are you talking about. You’re getting your rear-end kicked, as usual. I went through your silly quiz and proved you wrong on a number of them just doing a quick internet search. And btw, you were so roundly defeated by my responses, you never even bothered to reply. You might want to invest in some reality pills, my FRiend.
What religious ceremony was performed over his grave?
What religious tradition did he come from?
What God did he tell people they would go to after “martyrdom” bombings?
As I have said to you previously. Get him signed on to FR, post a thread, ping me to it; and I will debate - beginning to end.
But are you backing out of your defense of Islamic terrorism so soon? I much prefer that as a debate topic. What is stopping you from posting the debate thread?
It seems evident that you wish to keep moving the target while changing the subject, never actually setting anything up, and then accusing people of backing out of a debate thread that never existed.
What is “materialist” about the Islamic terrorists stated goal of setting up sharia law?
What is “materialist” about insisting that all land ever under the control of Islam be reconquered?
What is “materialist” about promising paradise and 72 virgins to those who kill themselves in your service?
Don’t worry yourself, AMD. The I will post the debate thread so you can defend Islamo-Communism very soon. I will also be contacting Dr. Duesberg to see if he will be willing to agree to debate you AGAIN. If he agrees, what three hour block of time would be best for you?
I can devote any week day night after 4:30 pm West Coast time to debating Duesburg.
Nice to see you again AndrewC.
I missed the blue text. ;)
You obviously know zero about the goals and METHODS of communist revolution.
What is “religious” about Stalin promoting the Russian Orthodox Church during WW II?
What is “religious” about Marxist-Leninist Arafat adapting the symbols of Islam to inflame the Muslim world against Israel?
What is “religious” about the communist IRA killing protestants (and Catholics, for that matter) in Ireland and Britain?
What is “religious” about so-called Catholic Liberation Theologians championing communist revolution in Latin America and Africa?
The foes who we face are Islamic and terrorists. Their religion is Islam, their tactic is terrorism, their goal is sharia law, reconquest of all lands once ruled by Islam, and to go to paradise with Allah.
Osama bin Lauden is a Islamic cleric, not a biology teacher. He is motivated by the Quran, not “on the Origin of Species”.
Nice to see you also. I hope that everything is well with you and yours. God bless you. We may disagree, but I really do respect you.
Think whatever you like, Allmendream. It will all come out in the debate thread. I’ll ping you when it’s up. And do see if you can use your evo-influence to get the fidgety Mr. Lawyer to show up too.
So it seems obvious that you would rather discuss debating this subject than actually discuss this subject.
What is the matter?
No easy answer for why Islamic terrorists recruit each other by talking about Islam, why they meet and conspire in Mosques to follow the religious edicts of an Islamic cleric who calls for terrorist attacks against us, the institution of sharia law, and the reconquest of all lands once ruled by Islam?
Like I said, I will ping you to the debate thread when it’s up. I’m sure you will do your best to deflect attention away from the communist roots of Islamist terrorism.
I already said that while we backed Israel the Soviets backed the Arabs. Just because the Soviets backed the Arabs doesn't mean that they gave up Islam.
Islamic terrorists speak the language of Islam to recruit terrorists. They issue religious edicts that say why Islam tells them to kill westerners. They promise those who “martyr” themselves paradise with 72 virgins. They say they are involved in a “jihad” or holy war.
I do not deny that many of these groups received aid and comfort from the Soviets, or that some few actually were dedicated Socialists and/or Marxists.
What you are attempting to deny (but now admitted) was that terrorists who claim Islam are in fact, as you called them now, “Islamic Terrorists”.
There is nothing “secular” about their aims, their motivation, or their rhetoric.
I didn’t say Islamic, I said Islamist. You might want to research the difference before the debate thread is up. And yes, I still claim that many of the Islamist terror groups were started and are controlled by revolutionary materialists. That’s not to say that all of them are, but many of them are, and almost all of them are influenced by this revolutionary ideology. But let’s save it for the debate thread, shall we?
I respect you as well.
God bless you and yours.