At War With EVIL (FReeper GaryMontana)

Free Republic | 10-14-2002 | GaryMontana

[TheJFan]

Hardly deviant.

I'm a polylingual individual who's actually spent some time overseas, spent time with people of all religions, and has in fact seen the way our great country is perceived by a number of nations. And I can to a certain degree understand why.

[blam]

The only comments that you and TheJfan have ever made on FR has been to this thread. I'd say you have an agenda.

News/Activism | posts by DeviantMind

#99: At War With EVIL (FReeper GaryMontana)
To: blam
99 posted on 10/17/02 4:10 PM Central by DeviantMind

#97: At War With EVIL (FReeper GaryMontana)
To: texson66
97 posted on 10/17/02 2:56 PM Central by DeviantMind

#94: At War With EVIL (FReeper GaryMontana)
To: texson66
94 posted on 10/17/02 2:08 PM Central by DeviantMind

#93: At War With EVIL (FReeper GaryMontana)
To: 7thson
93 posted on 10/17/02 2:06 PM Central by DeviantMind

#92: At War With EVIL (FReeper GaryMontana)
To: Red Jones
92 posted on 10/17/02 2:01 PM Central by DeviantMind

#91: At War With EVIL (FReeper GaryMontana)
To: Smile-n-Win
91 posted on 10/17/02 1:57 PM Central by DeviantMind

#16: At War With EVIL (FReeper GaryMontana)
To: neutrino
16 posted on 10/14/02 2:59 AM Central by DeviantMind

[TheJFan]

It was a coincidence that I was shown to the forum. Of course, the only comments that I have ever made would be to this thread. It's my first day here. Give me time and I'm sure you will see many responses over all.

The fact that you felt pressed to justify you're automatic suspicion of myself however amuses me. Is the presence of another individual whom has disagreed with the views of others that intimidating? If so, I apologize and will attempt to water down my words in the future, so as not to cause offense.

[DeviantMind]

In truth, the reason that there are no other posts you recognize as being from me is simple: having not logged on for a long time (no internet access), I had forgotten my old log-in and password. It was either Madcat or Madcat 202, but without a password both of those are useless. I decided, also, that a new name would be appropriate.

I find it disappointing that you need to justify yourself by attacking the length of our time on these forums. You have done an outstanding job of steering the conversation away from the point and onto a stage which requires me to defend myself. Bravo, you have displayed the single most used tactic of the uninformed activist.

And of course, the fact that yours was the only post I have read which warranted my response most -CERTAINLY- means I have an agenda. Would you be so kind as to inform me of what it is?

I post to threads which interest me. Yours interested me. This is my right, and I will continue to exercise it. I certainly hope that the moderators of this website will keep in mind that I have not attacked any members, have not instigated any flame wars or anything of the sort when they read this thread. All I did was post my opinion on someone else's article. To attempt to deny me the right to do so is highly un-Constitutional, and hypocritical of all that you folks seem to stand for.

So, is there anyone here who wishes to return to the topic at hand and continue what SHOULD have been an intelligent, educated, mature and highly interesting conversation?

[DeviantMind]

In truth, the reason that there are no other posts you recognize as being from me is simple: having not logged on for a long time (no internet access), I had forgotten my old log-in and password. It was either Madcat or Madcat 202, but without a password both of those are useless. I decided, also, that a new name would be appropriate.

I find it disappointing that you need to justify yourself by attacking the length of our time on these forums. You have done an outstanding job of steering the conversation away from the point and onto a stage which requires me to defend myself. Bravo, you have displayed the single most used tactic of the uninformed activist.

And of course, the fact that yours was the only post I have read which warranted my response most -CERTAINLY- means I have an agenda. Would you be so kind as to inform me of what it is?

I post to threads which interest me. Yours interested me. This is my right, and I will continue to exercise it. I certainly hope that the moderators of this website will keep in mind that I have not attacked any members, have not instigated any flame wars or anything of the sort when they read this thread. All I did was post my opinion on someone else's article. To attempt to deny me the right to do so is highly un-Constitutional, and hypocritical of all that you folks seem to stand for.

So, is there anyone here who wishes to return to the topic at hand and continue what SHOULD have been an intelligent, educated, mature and highly interesting conversation?

[DeviantMind]

My apologies for the dual posting. Could a moderator please remove one of the duplicates? Thank you.

[blam]

"It was either Madcat or Madcat 202, but without a password both of those are useless. I decided, also, that a new name would be appropriate."

There is not nor has there ever been anyone registered as 'madcat' or 'madcat 202'. (...and it really does not matter)

I do find it a very large coincidence that the only two dissenters to this article signed onto FR and just 'mysteriously' found their way to this thread and made their first ever and only posts ever on FR to this thread. Don't you find that peculiar? (It hints at collusion, huh?)

I have 'pinged' GaryMontana to argue the substance of the article with you, he authored it.

[DeviantMind]

"There is not nor has there ever been anyone registered as 'madcat' or 'madcat 202'. (...and it really does not matter)"

This is untrue. For about a year I logged on under that name. Now, do you have anything of substance to say, or do you insist on arguing over irrelevant points?

[Smile-n-Win]

I'll begin by addressing the comment about my name. I chose it to represent the fact that I am not one to simply fall in line, to accept without questioning or to walk along like a lemming until I fall off a cliff because I was too ignorant to find things out for myself.

As I understand it, "deviant" means "deviating from the norm in a negative way." To express "deviating from the norm in a positive way," I would have chosen "excellent" or "outstanding" or "independent" or "creative" or "innovative" or "out of the box." I would never have thought of "deviant," which is commonly associated with forms of behavior that qualify as, or resemble, mental illness.

So, you see, we misunderstood you, because the way you chose to express yourself had a different meaning for us. Perhaps we misunderstand Muslims, too: maybe all they want to say is "we're a religion of peace," but as long as they express this by flying planes into buildings and blowing up bars and restaurants, we cannot help but "misunderstand" their actions as saying "we're a religion of death and destruction."

You cannot blame us for that, can you? Or, to put it another way, if I called you a brainless idiot (say, in the presence of a prospective employer who trusted my opinion), and then later I claimed I had said it to express my admiration for your intellectual faculties, you wouldn't really believe me--would you?

My point was that the accusations that -ISLAM- has declared war are ludicrous. A system of religious beliefs cannot declare war. Nations wage war, men declare war, factions fight wars, religions do not.

Islam may be considered a faction of the religion of Monotheism. As you said, factions may fight wars. Therefore, Islam may fight wars. (But I don't really see how nations and factions may be said to fight wars, while religions cannot. By saying that nations may wage wars, you acknowledge that it is OK to say of a group of people that they make war--even if not all members of the nation agree with the objectives of the war--yet you claim it is not OK to say of a religion that they make war.)

Hair-splitting aside, the problem is that some Muslim individuals have declared war on the non-Muslim world--or, at the very least, on the United States--and too many Muslims follow their leadership. What do you propose we do about this problem?

[Smile-n-Win]

I certainly hope that the moderators of this website will keep in mind that I have not attacked any members, have not instigated any flame wars or anything of the sort when they read this thread. All I did was post my opinion on someone else's article. To attempt to deny me the right to do so is highly un-Constitutional

FR's moderators are very reasonable. However, the Consitution of the United States does certainly not forbid them to ban you. The First Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law [...] abridging the freedom of speech[.]" The Fourteenth Amendment extends this prohibition to the state governments. It says nothing about Free Republic moderators--this site is private property, and the owner is free to choose whom he admits as a poster.

[DeviantMind]

I will commend you on your post, as it is the first I have had the chance to read that actually did what I was hoping: address my response in a mature, positive, constructive and intelligent way.

I will concede the point that semantics may have interfered in the interpretation of the original post, as well as further posts. A very well written, and thought out response on your part.

Now on to your comment on my change of attitude. I realize that my original post was harsh, and I know I have a tendency to be harsh when posting online. That was part of the reason for my attempt to at least make -one- positive comment directed to Mr. Montana, and no, I wouldn't blame him for not believing it. That is his choice.

As for your argument on Islam being a faction within the "religion of Monotheism," I can understand your train of thought. Since Monotheism is "a doctrine or belief that there is only one God," and Islam, Christianity, Judaism and a few other minor religions share this belief, it can be argued that they are simply "factions" within the larger whole. It would be more to the point that they are sub-cults within a larger cult, but your argument is sound.

The reasoning behind my statement that a religion cannot declare war falls under the pretense that, with one known exception, there are no major religions (Islam included) that have one specific seat of power (a holy site is not synonomous with a seat of power) or a hierarchial power structure crowned by a single individual who has world-wide power in that religious group. A religious group (faction, religiously based government, religiously driven terrorist cell, etc) may carry out acts of war, but without a presiding body of leadership, a single religion cannot do so.

You have commented that a group of Muslims have declared war on the non-Muslim world. THAT I most certainly agree with, as it was specifically noted that it was a group within the whole, not the whole.

What do I propose we do? This is where I begin agree with Mr. Montana. Tighter security on immigration and tourism (ie- Imigrant and Non-imigrant Visas) is needed, to start. The U.S. needs to start enforcing the policy of tracking down those who violate the terms of their Visas. Only recently did INS begin to do fingerprinting of incoming foreigners. This should have been done years ago, and sadly we are focusing only on the Arab individuals. While our current problems were orchestrated by Arabs, there is nothing that says people of other ethnicity won't jump on the bandwagon. I believe we need to put a tighter grip on ALL incoming non-Americans. This obviously leaves out the domestic threats, but I am still considering what should be done about this. When I come up with something, I'll be sure to share it.

As an aside, I would like to apologize to Mr. Montana, not for arguing against his post, but for the manner in which I did it. A friend of mine here read my posts, and said that I was very harsh when I'm online, and in hindsight I agree. So, despite the fact that I'm sure my apology won't be believed or accepted, I apologize to Mr. Montana and everyone else involved in this thread for the harshness of my posts, if not for the content.

Devon Weir
DeviantMind (whose name does NOT mean he hates America, believes in societal suicide or anything of the sort)

[Smile-n-Win]

What do I propose we do? This is where I begin agree with Mr. Montana. Tighter security on immigration and tourism (ie- Imigrant and Non-imigrant Visas) is needed, to start.

Hear, hear! This is where I begin to agree with you. Who would have thought!

[nastypumps]

...either something's dreadfully wrong with my computer or my burka's on too tight, can't see even one of your counter-arguments to GaryM...please resend them.

[nastypumps]

...Hey, you're not so bad...your last response crossed while I was writing my own nasty rant balame it on my burka...We are getting closer in thought & I always appreciate people who re-evaluate themselves as you have done, so am doing same.

[philetus]

Islam writhes in its own death throes, trying to take the rest of civilization with it.

I don't know how you came up with this. Islam is not in a death throe.
Not while it's unwitting foes are protecting it.

The U.S. has not declared war on islam and is actually abetting it.
We have approximently 8 million muslims in the US today.
They will not go quietly.

[Hank Kerchief]

They will not go quietly.

Good! So long as they go.

Hank

[chasio649]

bump

[Hank Kerchief]

2. The Al Qaeda terrorist network, is based in Moslem countries and supported financially by the so called pious Moslem leadership of Saudi Arabia

This particular statement is at least partly inaccurate. The House of Saud and the Al Qaeds are not exactly on good terms. See todays article TERRORISM: Al Qaeda Targets Boy Scouts.

But, there is an even more subtle evil eminating from the House of Saud. It supports a huge anti-Ameircan pro-Islamic-jihad fifth column in this country in the form of Muslim Schools, mosques, and propaganda organizations (e.g. "charities"). For example: The Wahhabi Fifth Column

There is no "good" form of Islam. Until people stop pretending Islam is just another religion, and start calling it what it is, the most repressive, violent, and backward ideology in the world, it will continue to opress its women, prevent all cultural and economic development and spread its violence and terror throughout the world. To call an ideology that turns people into murderers, repressors, and suicidal maniacs a religion, especially "a religion of peace," (as some idiots do) is almost as evil as that ideology itself. It is not a religion, it is disease, and the only cure for the disease is to eradicate it.

Hank

[fiercemoderate]

Nowadays, you find few Christians DEFENDING the Inquisition.
The ones that do probably support Islamist terror, given the
affinity of extremists in both camp for the cult of Jew hatred.
Unfortunately, there are still plenty of prominent and privileged Muslims (by no means all but a scary number) who
defend the Holocaust (or deny it) and other lovely stuff.

[BeamofLight]

Islam is evil on earth and must be vanquished to save all of humanity. It is sad to say, but this cult of hate, and tyranny will throw the world into World War 3, far more destructive than the last great war. But in the end the evil serpant that is islam will be forever vanquished by all the worlds great religions, and peoples. I wish the world would wake up and realize the evil around us. We have to fight islam around the globe to save humanity from this evil.