Please read this message carefully, as I took some time to compose it. I hope the story of my changing political outlook will partly explain to those on the left why America has shifted to the right.

Today it is impossible for me to remember the first time the word "Muslim" had any meaning in my mind. I do not even remember reading the word during my parent's lifetime. If the word was even mentioned in a derogatory sense, my parents would probably have considered those who used it this way as uneducated bigots.

It was not until I reached adulthood that I frequently ran up against the word "Muslim", partly in connection with political controversies.
These references aroused a slight aversion in me, and I could not avoid an uncomfortable feeling which always came over me when I had to listen to religious disputes. But at that time I had no other feelings about the Muslim question.

There were very few Muslims in my home town. Over the course of time the few Muslims who lived there had become Americanized in external appearance and were so much like other human beings that I looked upon them simply as Americans. The reason why I did not then perceive the absurdity of such an illusion was that the only external mark which I recognized as distinguishing them from us was the practice of their strange religion. As I thought that they were persecuted on account of their Faith my aversion to hearing remarks against them grew almost into a feeling of abhorrence.

I did not in the least suspect that there could be such a thing as anti-Islamic thought. In the Muslim I still saw only a man who was of a different religion, and therefore, on grounds of human tolerance, I was against the idea that he should be attacked because he had a different faith.

And so I considered that the tone adopted by some of the "right-wing" media on issues such as Palestinian question was unworthy of the cultural traditions of the great American people. Generally speaking, the television reports and newspaper articles which dealt with this issue did not belong to the quality media--but I did not then understand the reason of this--and so I regarded them more as the products of jealousy and envy rather than the expression of a sincere, though wrong-headed, feeling.

But any indecision which I may still have felt about that point was removed by the activities of a certain section of the Muslims themselves.
A great movement, called Al-Quaeda, arose among them. Its aim was to establish a worldwide Islamic caliphate, and the movement attained a high-profile on September 11th, 2001, when four planes were hijacked, and the world trade centre and the Pentagon were attacked.

To outward appearances it seemed as if only one group of Muslims championed this movement, while the great majority disapproved of it, or even repudiated it. But careful observation of the situation showed that those outward appearances were purposely misleading. These outward appearances emerged from a mist of theories which had been produced for reasons of expediency, if not for purposes of downright deception. For that part of Islam which was styled "moderate" did not disown the extremists as if they were not members of their race but rather as brother Muslims who publicly professed their faith in an unpractical way, so as to create a danger for Islam itself.

Thus there was no real rift in their internal solidarity.

This fictitious conflict between Al-quaeda and the "moderate muslims" soon disgusted me; for it was false through and through and in direct contradiction to the moral dignity and immaculate character on which that religion had always prided itself.

What soon gave me cause for very serious consideration were the activities of the Muslims in certain branches of life, into the mystery of which I penetrated little by little. Then I began to examine the world media. The deeper my soundings went the lesser grew my respect for that media which I had basically admired. Its style became still more repellent and I was forced to reject its ideas as entirely shallow and superficial. To claim that in the presentation of facts and views its attitude was impartial seemed to me to contain more falsehood than truth.

I saw the liberal policy of the media in another light. Its dignified tone in replying to the attacks of Muslims and its dead silence in other cases now became clear to me as part of a cunning and despicable way of deceiving the readers. Its brilliant theatrical criticisms always praised the Muslims and its adverse, criticism was reserved exclusively for Americans.

The language of the liberal US media as a whole had the accent of a foreign people. The general tone was openly derogatory to America and this must have been definitely intentional.

I tried to debate my problems with the Islamic faith on website discussion forums.
The muslims would lay down truisms and platitudes; and, if you accepted these, then they were applied to other problems and matters of an essentially different nature from the original theme. If you faced them with this point they would escape again, and you could not bring them to make any precise statement. Whenever one tried to get a firm grip on any of these apostles one's hand grasped only jelly and slime which slipped through the fingers and combined again into a solid mass a moment afterwards.

If your adversary felt forced to give in to your argument, on account of the observers present, and if you then thought that at last you had gained ground, a surprise was in store for you on the following day. The Muslim would be utterly oblivious to what had been said the day before, and he would start once again by repeating his former absurdities, as if nothing had happened. Should you become indignant and remind him of yesterday's defeat, he pretended astonishment and could not remember anything, except that on the previous day he had proved that his statements were correct.

Sometimes I was dumbfounded. I do not know what amazed me the more--the abundance of their verbiage or the artful way in which they dressed up their falsehoods.

As I critically reviewed the activities of the Muslim people throughout long periods of history I became anxious and entertained nightmare fantasties of the dystopian Islamic superstate.

The Islamic doctrine repudiates the principles of the freemarket and social darwinism for numbers and force, the repression of women, and the brutal dictates of Sharia law.

If the Muslim teaching were to be accepted as the foundation of the life of the universe, it would lead to the disappearance of all order that is conceivable to the human mind. Thus it denies the individual worth of the human personality, it criticizes the teaching that nationhood has a primary significance, and by doing this it takes away the very foundations of human existence and human civilization.

And thus the adoption of such a law would provoke chaos in the structure of the greatest organism that we know, with the result that the inhabitants of this earthly planet would finally disappear.

Consider the attitude of a Muslim Iman towards any question?, even one of quite insignificant importance, concerning the Muslims as a race, and compare his attitude with that of the majority of our clergy, whether Catholic or Protestant.

The Islamic State has never been limited in space. It has been spread all over the world, without any frontiers whatsoever, and has always been constituted from the membership of one race exclusively. That is why Islam has always formed a State within the State. One of the most ingenious tricks ever devised has been that of sailing the Muslim flag under the flag of Religion and thus securing that tolerance which Americans are always ready to grant to different religious faiths.

The situation after 9/11, 2001, was quite similar to that of 1939, and I was convinced that the first task then of a truly patriotic Government was to seek and find those forces that were determined to wage a war of destruction against Islam and to give these forces a free hand. The Republican party, and George W Bush, wisely saw the importance of that task

It must always be remembered that in many instances a hardy and healthy nation has emerged from the ordeal of the most bloody wars, while from peace conditions which had been artificially maintained there often resulted a state of national decay that reeked to the skies. The fate of a nation cannot be changed in kid gloves. And so in the year 2001 it was clear brutal action needed to be be taken to stamp out the vipers that battened on the body of the nation.

At this time--I admit it openly--I have developed a profound admiration for the great man of the Middle East, whose ardent love for his people inspired him not to bargain with Israel's internal enemies but to use all possible ways and means in an effort to wipe them out. What places Ehud Olmert in the ranks of the world's great men is his decision not to share Israel with the Muslims but to redeem his country by assisting in the destruction of Al-Quaeda.

What dwarfs many of our weak politicians in America appear by comparison with him. And how painful it is to think that our country could point to a Ronald Reagan as its leader as recently as twenty years ago.

On September 11, 2001, US soil suffered its greatest atrocity. To-day, on June 13, 2006 it is again established throughout the world, enjoying full liberty, stronger than ever before.

It is time to speak out. Those of us who understand the truth have too long been silenced by the stifling shroud of political correctness-if what I say strikes a chord with you, then please voice your support. Please forward this message to your friends and colleagues. Then we may at last see the truth emerge.

If you would like to join a political party devoted to the aforementioned issues, send mail to thetruthaboutislam911@yahoo.com.

This video should interest you...alot.

http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.a...050wmv&ak=null

Welcome to USPO!!

That’s an awful lot of words to say so little. Why are you so interested in Muslims? Were you thinking of becoming one before this enlightenment? Do you really know that much about Islam, do you really think Muslims are that much different from other organized religious followers?

I've given up asking moderators to get rid of these types of threads contaiminating this section of the forum. They are not political, religious or discussion threads - they are rants and have no place in this section. Though ought to go into one of the upper (partisan-spam) forums where they belong (with all the other similar such rants).

Um... the term "Al-Quaeda" (regardless of spelling variations) originates in Washington DC, post-911.

The 'movement' you speak of isn't a singluar body and didn't exist at that time and thus, cannot be rationally asserted to have such a specific goal.


Why do warmongers and crusaders like to pretend they are American patriots?

__________________
[I]Remember what the dormouse said, 'feed your head'. [/I]

Your opinion is that they are rants not worthy of your noting. That being the case, what is it you think you're going to accomplish here ?

You aren't required to COMMENT. Your input isn't REQUIRED.


But here it IS

Ahhh. I see why you're here in this thread you think is so far beneath you.

You're here to give your OPINION that "warmongers and crusaders like to pretend they are American patriots."

You thought it didn't belong here but then went on and found it worthy of COMMENT ?

So, which IS it ?

__________________
[I]They exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator. . . . Therefore, God gave them up to passions of dishonor; for their females exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature.[/I] - Romans 1:25-26

Use liberals artistic manipulation of logic and language against them.

aproudamerican,


Welcome to USPOL. I will just say this. I generally don't have patience to read that kind of very long thread, espeically when it's not particularly filled with a lot of content. I suggest you make it more concise next time.

That being said, well one impression I got from skimming your post is that you seem to be ignorant of just how fractured the Muslim world has been throughout most of its history. The Muslim world has always contained many sectarian and ethnic schisms and more recently national ones, so you need to read some history there. Also, you seem to be arguing the backwardsness of the Muslim religion but didn't Christianity also have a ban on usury? How can you have modern banking without "usury?" Didn't the Catholic Church also try to keep its influence on public education until secular and national forces pushed it out? How do you know that this has not occurred in some Muslim countries? How do you know it will not occur?

You really need to learn more about Islam before you can make these kinds of sweeping and uninformed generalizations that you have made here.


WEB

Plagiarism is a violation of the forum rules even if Hitler isn't alive to protest, and as such, this thread is closed. If you intend to post in the future, please include all "borrowed" material in quote blocks and cite your source, though I can certainly understand why you wouldn't want to.

__________________
[b][SIZE=2]"Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have... The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases."[/b][/SIZE]

-Thomas Jefferson