Libertarian Muslim

She's lied on record for her own benefit.. This is fact.. So, if I may ask.. Why would I believe anything she says? Would you in any other circumstance accept testimony of a liar or is it your intense hate for Islam that causes you to clutch at straws to the extent that you're willing to ignore the fact that she has lied for her own gain in the past and believe what she says? The fact is that the tribal practice of Clitoridectomy (removing the clitoris) is forbidden in Islam and the punishment prescribed for the guilty parties of this crime (the people who do the cutting and those who are accessories to it if I'm not mistaken) is death because of the fact that they take from women something which is their right, that is that sex should be enjoyable for them.. Yes, it gets practiced amongst a minority of Muslims who still follow tribalism, but this isn't only amongst the Muslim population there, I know of many Christian Orthodox Ethiopian girls from Ethiopia and Egypt that have had this crime committed against them.. It's a disgusting practice and the only thing that Islam does allow, is a hoodectomy, that is.. Removing the clitoral hood which in fact enhances female response and arousal as opposed to Female Genital Mutliation like the clitoridectomy which tries to remove it. Yet people like Ayaan Hirsi claim that Islam's teachings are to practice FGM. It's simply not true. Yes, it is something that needs to be looked into more. I don't believe it is a practice of Shariah that apostasy is as simple an issue as portrayed and stand by my comments before stating that it's only treason when the apostate fights against the Islamic State without renouncing citizenship or aids the enemies of the state. I think the Muslim world is in need of a reformation of sorts, not saying that Islam needs to be changed, rather the interpretation of Islam by Muslims, needs to be re examined to get the Muslim world back in line with Islamic principles and teachings. The key is education. Once this is done, the majority of the Muslim world will fall into line with the correct teachings and that will leave a few that are hostile towards it.. They will be turned out by their own communities. So you believe in God? If so, what brought this change on?

Those were words that makes me want to be an American.. That exact attitude makes me want to spread the ideals of Liberty throughout the Muslim world and work hard at it..

Oh man, seriously Michael? In Egypt during that time.. You were considered Muslim Brotherhood if you simply had a beard or went to the Mosque to pray.. You were arrested for nothing, and speaking out against the government that is a dictatorship was severely punishable.. Even today there are soldiers outside of Mosques to make sure that if you pray in the mosque at prayer time, you leave straight away afterwards and if you don't, they arrest you and torture you.. Abdul Rauf is a Sufi.. Not a Salafi.. I saw him in Qatar, all he talked about was religious dialogue and the need for it.. However, having said that.. I don't really believe that there is a need for religious dialogue between Christians and Muslims in most of the Middle East (barring the Gulf) as much as there is in the West.. I lived in Syria, visited Turkey and Lebanon and saw Muslims and Christians get along beautifully.. I do think there's a need for relationships between other religious groups such as between Jews and Christians, Jews and Muslims and other religions too.. Outside the St Georges Church in Syria, an old priest, believing I was a Christian from the West stopped me and begged for me to listen to him.. He told me that Christians and Muslims are not at war like the we're led to believe in the West, that they get along well and have great love for each other.. They attend the same functions and help each other in times of need.. Hmmm what group would look kindly to non adherents closing down their places of worship? What if Christians closed down a center devoted to spreading the ideas of Ayn Rand because they disagreed with it? Having said that, there have been both mosques and churches that have been closed down because there were no rights to build them in the first place, ie no council approval and no zoning for it.. We don't have objections for that providing the law is equal and fair..

I think the building of that mosque would benefit the US in ways you could never imagine.. Right now, extremists who are trying to fear monger Muslims into believing that the US is at war with Islam and trying to destroy it are having their job be made to look much easier.. But if such a mosque was allowed to be built after such intense and heated debate, it would serve as an example of the beauty of what the US is about.. About religious freedom, the freedom of expression and the belief that all people are equal regardless of their religion, color or race.. There could be no greater undermining of extremist preaching than this mosque being built.. Whilst I don't like everything Obama does, I do believe he said the right thing.. That this is not about judgment as to whether it's the wisest of ideas.. Rather it's about whether they have the right to build this mosque..

Adonis, Of course it is. That think tank is not in the habit of issuing reports without having sourced them. However, it did not give the sources, so I imagine many of them were classified. That's why I said I need to research this more. I only have time right now for these drive-by posts. I am coming on and, after a few minutes, going back to the thing I am working on. This is a topic that deserves more attention than that. Michael Okay sure, I understand you're quite busy and am sure you'll write something more detailed soon. But in the mean time, I just thought I'd let you know that when I was in Syria last year, I saw Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie visit the suburb where I lived with the UNHCR.. Immediately I started yelling out 'The adopters are coming! The adopters are coming!' While ushering poor Iraqi refugee children into nearby basements to safety from the greedy, over adopting claws of Hollywood couples.. Anyway, back to the topic.. I don't trust a word the CFR says, they're war mongers who financially benefit off of war and are trying to establish a One World Government.. I had a problem finding it, if you recall which one please let me know.. That instability issue is annoying.. I also have that with my Firefox too, so sometimes I write my responses in a blank gmail mail.

I'm not pointing fingers and yelling at all Michael.. The report is faulty because it only makes assertions that it hasn't backed up with evidence.. The US intelligence establishment also hasn't backed it up with evidence so you'll have to forgive me if I don't believe the lives of millions more people in the Middle East in addition to that of US troops are worth risking over something which hasn't been proven.. You also didn't answer the points that I made previously.. Where I stated that Iranians had access to Chemical and Biological weapons and not once used them even whilst they were being used against Iran by US backed Iraq, nor did they give them to their proxies to use against Isreal.. So what are you basing the assertion that Iran would give nuclear weapons to its proxies on exactly? I mean other than the fear mongering right? There's still absolutely no justification to attack Iran's nuclear facilities..

Tell us what would the consequences of such an attack be then? And why?

Right.. So the US government would never ever make a claim to justify a war with another country with bogus evidence and lies right? Right? Now to address the report.. Yes, Iran supports Hezbollah. That's not in question.. Iran also started sending money through to the PA after the US cut off funding.. But Iran wasn't the only country to send money.. So did a number of other nations.. But does Iran supply Hamas with rockets? I'm not sure.. Perhaps.. That could be part of the reason that Hamas no longer uses suicide bombers and instead uses rockets.. They are able to fight now with better technologies. I'm not grieving over that, as you're well aware I'm against suicide bombing because I believe it's forbidden in Islam.. Rocketing is not and providing that Hamas tries as much as possible to avoid casualties of unarmed Israelis I'm more than supportive of them fighting back using those rockets.. It's funny though, people get upset at Hamas for using rockets to fight the occupation of their land, and also when they used suicide bombings.. So is it the method of fighting that Hamas uses to resist the occupation of Palestinian land that you dislike or the fact that they resist at all? Because, if it's the inaccurate rockets you dislike, allow them to bring in guided missile systems to ensure that the Israeli military is hit most and innocent civilians are less likely to be hurt.. However, if you just don't want them to resist the occupation of their land then well.. What does that say about you? Do you somehow have the right to resist the occupation of your land but the Palestinians don't? What makes you more human than them? Are you serious? Hezbollah didn't attack Israel in 2006, they launched operations to take Israeli soldiers that were on their land as prisoners to negotiate prisoner swaps as they'd done numerous times with the Israelis.. This has been the only method they had at their disposal to liberate the thousands of Lebanese men, women and children held in Israeli prisons without charge or trial, some of which have been held there since 1982. The fact is that Israel had been planning for this war for more than a year in advance of the taking of Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah and this was admitted by Olmert and others. Then the Israelis just used it as an excuse to launch their war against Hezbollah and to try and finally get rid of them over a 3 week period. This backfired and the Israelis not only lost the war, but the myth of the invincibility of the Israeli war machine was also destroyed.. Also, to assert that Muqtada Al Sadr's forces are supported and supplied by Iran is not correct.. Yes, they may have some limited support by Iranian individuals but they certainly don't have any proper support.. If they did, you'd see them armed the same way that Hezbollah is with very advanced weaponry.. But they don't.

I'm sorry, but unmanned aircraft wouldn't be enough.. I mean unmanned vehicles are a means of deliverance of munitions.. I was referring to the munitions themselves.. I can assure you that public opinion in the US would never support the use of that type of force to be used against Iran.. The US public are aware that Iran poses no real threat to them and unless a false flag terrorist operation is committed in the US and the Iranians are blamed for it I don't believe for a single second that the US public would ever want a war with Iran.. I think the lies about Iraqi WMD's to start the Iraq war will make Americans be against such an attack for fear of repeating it.. So if the US does attack Iran, it will be drawn into a war that brings down whichever government launches it.. Be it Obama or someone else... And if it ever uses nuclear weapons.. Well the US population would also be against it.. And the repercussions for it will be horrendous.. Amen to that..

Okay, I have met the Sheikh who is building this mosque, he's certainly not trying to indoctrinate people to overthrow the US government.. In fact he's trying to build bridges with the initiatives he's set up like the Cordoba Initiative.. He's a gentle and kind man, who cares about justice and doing the right thing.. He is most certainly against any form of attacks on unarmed and innocent civilians and to associate him and his goals with that of Al Qaeda, alleging it's some kind of Victory mosque is downright offensive.. The extremists have made life more difficult for muslims than for anyone else..

Ok but she didn't state which terrorists Iran supports in the interview.. So I mean, can you be more specific.. If you're stating these things you should be able to name the terrorist groups which Iran supports and directs to commit attacks against civilians.. Also an interesting point is that any organization you do claim is supported by Iran, even though unsubstantiated would still be less than the support for terrorist organizations that the US government has given and still gives even today..

Well they've already started aiding the US in many ways.. The recent sanctions on Iran were a demonstration of that.. The Iranians had previously ordered several sets of the newest version of S-300 Surface to Air Missiles from Russia, these are some of the most advanced SAM systems in existence and would have made any air attacks against Iran very difficult even with stealth technology. However, Russia withheld sale of these weapons and then sanctions were passed making it illegal to sell them to Iran. This could be disastrous to Iran's layered defense system.. However the latest reports show that Iran was not only able to obtain these from Belarus, but have also developed their own by reverse engineering. The question is, have these nations who might support the US victory, either covertly or overtly acted quickly enough? I believe it's too late as Iran is well prepared for such eventualities..

What terrorism does Iran support exactly Michael? I think it's important to define this.. The only group that Iran provides substantial support and direction to is Hezbollah in the South of Lebanon that is fighting to liberate territories occupied by Israeli since 1982.. Never has Iran actually supported nor directed Hezbollah to intentionally target Israeli civilians to try and build up the Israeli civilian body count.. That's counter productive.. So what are you referring to? Also, the US has had nuclear weapons for more than 50 years, since then so has Britain, Russia, France, China, India and Pakistan and never have one of their proxies been given a nuclear weapon to use against their enemies.. Even during the Cold War when the nuclear threat was greatest it was not done.. Iran has also had access to chemical and biological weapons and never used such weapons themselves, nor have they given such weapons to their proxies.. So how can you qualify such a statement Michael? And that option would be what exactly?

Well Tony 1. If Iran is attacked, it will become a Jihad that engulfs the whole region and many Muslims from not only the region, but around the world will answer the call to Jihad. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable but we're not talking about the US attacking a secular dictatorship that has very little support outside of its own state, we're also not talking about the US attacking terrorists and extremists.. We're talking about the US attacking a nation and specifically targets that are near holy cities.. Which could kill many innocent civilians and destroy many holy sites.. We're also talking about attacking a place where the leader of the nation is a religious head for millions not just in Iran but all over the world and who is not afraid call such a Jihad.. 9/11 caused not only most Americans but most Westerners to want revenge for those attacks and want war which has led to overt wars on two nations, covert wars on many more.. Do you think that the Iranians have no pride? That they'd not act similarly if their own country was attacked? Do you expect them to just sit there and take such an attack without response? If you do, I think you're delusional.. I'm not chest beating, I'm not even blustering.. All I'm trying to do is make you aware that such a war will not be a piece of cake for the US like the war mongers who wish to encourage such a war in the West would have you believe.. That the Iranians are very prepared for this and I've given examples of how they're ready and willing to sacrifice and how they've got the technology and the tactics to do so efficiently. Does that mean I want such a war? No.. Absolutely not.. It would only make the Iranians who are fundamentalists stronger because it'll prove their point that the West is trying to ruin their nation and it will bring more and more people to their side.. The best reform is done in Iran when the West leaves it alone.. When the West interferes the reformers get upset because it makes their job even harder.. 2. Yes, I wrote that Iran will be much better off than the USA and believe that to be the case.. I explained why.. Do you disagree? If so, why do you disagree? 3. I have no Iran prejudice, I just have an understanding of the way that Iran works, the way the region works and the way that wars are fought.. Iran won't be a push over, they're much smarter than people give them credit for and over the past 20 years they've been preparing for this war and building their forces conventional and unconventional military forces in addition to their network outside of Iran whilst the US has been focused on Iraq and other places. This will be a war that the US won't be able to handle without nuclear weapons and I can assure you, using them will make things a lot worse. 4. As a Libertarian I believe each nation has he right to defend itself against transgression.. This right doesn't only apply to the US but applies to all nations.. Therefore, if you believe that being a Libertarian means simply accepting what the US government has to say and accepting what they do to innocent nations without question then I'm sorry, I think you have your definition of Libertarianism mixed up.. If the Iranians are attacked, then they have the right to defend themselves just as the Americans have the same right..

See, you say that.. But I'm not doing that at all. I have assessed Iran and the US' recent history in fighting, the socio political climate in both countries and the economies of both nations.. Iran will be much better off than the US No, it wasn't but it also benefited financially afterwards through numerous means, especially through the R&D benefits it got through Nazi scientists. In addition to that, having the currency that would be used for international transactions has been the US' savior over the past 50 years.. How much longer do you think that will last? The myth of the value of the US dollar which has no backing is wearing out, which is why countries are trying to use SDRs instead of USD.. What ever will sustain the US economy during and after a failed war with Iran which will cost trillions of dollars and many thousands of lives?? You have nothing left.. Do you think the US population could sustain that number again? Do you think the US population would put up with something like that in a war in a far away land, where they have no vested interest nor any ill will towards? Has Iran attacked the US? It's not the civil war and it's not like WW2 which required Pearl Harbor to be attacked for the US to get involved in. The Iranians, a proud people will be defending their country from attack and occupation.. Defending their honor as people.. Look at how many people they lost against US backed Iran from between 1980-89, they lost up to 1,000,000 of their own citizens defending their country, many of the Iranian soldiers were young teenagers, answering Khomeini's call to defend their country, wave after wave they gave their lives to defend Iran. Do you think it will be any different this time? Despite their resistance to their own government, like Americans the Iranians unite to fight foreign enemies that are attacking their country. The Iranians are smart enough to fight in a way, and have threatened to do so, to force the Americans to put boots on the ground in Iran by attacking US assets everywhere in the Gulf, in Iraq too which will just explode.. And once the Americans put boots on the ground it will be a quagmire and disaster that will surpass anything else seen before.. The Iranians have just started digging mass graves for US soldiers right next to the mass graves they made for Iraqi soldiers.. They're in final stages of preparation.. Before the battle, when two armies square off against each other and try and psych each other out.. But it's not just all talk.. The graves full of Iraqi soldiers should serve as a reminder that the Iranians should be taken very seriously.. What will result is simple.. The Americans will either have to withdraw being unable to keep hold of Iran and it will be the most humiliating defeat the US has ever witnessed.. Completely destroying US credibility.. The US could then realize that, the best bet at that stage or it could get really stupid in desperation and start using nuclear weapons.. Which will be even worse.. Yes the Iranians will suffer, but the backlash against the US for it, not just from the Muslim world, but from the people in the US will be so great that no regime in the US will be able to handle it.. No one will want such blood in their hands.. The Iranians are the home team, not the transgressor.. The people themselves in Iran would be more than willing to die protecting their country.. I definitely dislike any imperialism and that is especially applicable to imperialism from people claiming to do it in the name of Islam. I certainly don't support, never have supported and never will support any type of action which makes Muslims transgressors.. The fact is that we don't need to take countries over to spread Islam, in the West Islam is the fastest growing religion and we aren't even invading your countries.. 1. Muhammad pbuh didn't just help to do away with female infanticide.. He strictly forbade it.. He changed the whole way that their society worked.. There were strict punishments for such crimes.. 2. Muhammd did in fact forbid slavery and ended the type of slavery seen in the West up until only a few hundred years ago more than 1400 years ago.. .. But what we define as slavery is different to what you define it.. Although I think you pick and choose where you apply it.. 3. Blood fueds and honor killings? Yes there was huge successes in this.. Complete success? No.. People have free will, if they want to revert back to tribal practices then so be it.. But it's their actions.. It's not surprising though because the Muslims after his death came under the rule of people who had no right to rule and ruled in a manner which was wrong.. The people fell back into this tribalism as a result.. No, they kept their tribal bloodshed in the Arab peninsula which you might think is a good thing.. And actually, the Muslims didn't start the wars with the Byzantines nor the Persians.. So the Muslims responded and won..

Do you honestly think that people want to kill her because she speaks out against honor killings? Female genital mutilation? etc.. Absolutely not, there are millions of Muslims out there that speak out against such barbarity and no harm comes to them.. That is because the practices mentioned are not Islamic, they're cultural and you can find them amongst all religious groups in those regions.. Including Christians too.. The truth is that the people out there that want to kill her want to do so because she lies about Islam and the Prophet and intentionally tries to offend Muslims and insult the Prophet, she associates those disgusting practices with Islam when they are absolutely not a part of it. Is it right that she should be killed for this? No.. She should be dealt with in another matter as she already has been, discredited and shown to be the liar that she is.. And those who do try and harm her should be put in prison for their crimes.. What was she a victim of exactly? You don't know? She lied about everything.. About living in a war zone.. About forced marriage.. About honor killings etc.. Just so she could get asylum in the Netherlands.. She's been exposed too and admitted to most of it.. She is a liar and lied to get where she wanted in life.. For fame and money also.. It was all exposed on a documentary called 'Holy Ayaan' I then went to [16] and got the foilowing link: http://www.al-islam.org/short/apostasy/5.htm What I want to know from you, Adonis: 1) Is what it says in the article "Apostasy is equal to treason" accurate in that its explanation why Islam does not allow apostasy can be regarded as representing the belief accurately? If yes, 2) Do you agree with what, according to the Shari'ah law, awaits the apostate? If yes, why? If not, why not? I don't believe at all that one is obliged to stay Muslim if they want to leave Islam and certainly don't believe that there is a death penalty for those that leave Islam. In fact, to force people to stay Muslim is against any form of logic because they will only become hypocrites and unhappy. I would much prefer a thousand apostates I knew of than even one hypocrite. Those that were punished during the prophet peace be upon him's life were not punished for leaving Islam, rather they were punished for treason against the state, they not only left Islam but they went as far as to aid the Pagan Quraish against the Islamic State.. They did not leave the state and renounce their citizenship so they could fight against the people of Medina, rather they acted subversively against the State by plotting and acting.. I see no problem with such a punishment because their actions were that of treason. In most countries the punishment for treason is the death penalty..

Because there are extremists out there that would kill Ayaan Hirsi for what she says, just as they've done with any of their opposition whether those opposition hate Islam, or are Muslims who simply hate the cancerous ideals of Wahhabism. They do need to be stopped. Despite the lies that Hirsi has told and the misguided hate she incites towards Islam, rather than the practices of culturalism and tribalism that she has seen, I don't believe that killing anyone is going to benefit.. In fact, the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him was insulted and lied about more during his own life than he has been in the past 10 years and he didn't react like that.. So why should we?

Hmmm.. I do believe the Taliban in Afghanistan need to be defeated.. Their ideas are cancerous.. However, the world still doesn't seem to realize that this can not be done with only military power.. Afghanistan is a place where people will fight for their independence for decades until they get it.. They do not want to have their lands occupied and are very proud people.. I also believe that not all of the Afghan resistance should be classified as the Taliban, in fact a great number of them are just people who are against having occupiers in their land and these are people who don't support the Taliban's ideals and practices.. A comparison could be to look at a place like Chechnya.. The reason I bring this comparison is because the occupier is not the US and so it might be easier for people to understand without being biased.. Chechnya is a place where there are two groups fighting against Russia and its puppet government there. There are the extremists including a lot of foreigners who are trying to establish a Taliban or Saudi style Caucus wide 'Caliphate' under their strict black and white version of Islam where they can force women to cover everything, ban music, kill their opposition etc. And then are the Chechens that are fighting to liberate their occupied land and to establish their own Chechen republic as they have been doing for hundreds of years, to be independent and rule their own lives.. There are foreigners in these groups (mostly Turks, Bosnians and other Caucus peoples) but they're not like the extremists in the previous group.. They don't resort to dirty tactics and have no want to be ruled by some Wahhabi or Taliban style interpretation of Islam.. They simply want their freedom as any of us would after being humiliated, subjugated and occupied by a foreign force.. Afghanistan is the same.. The US and NATO are occupiers in that land, just as the Soviets and British were before them.. And just as the Russians are in Chechnya now.. They have no right to be there and the people there are proud and want to free their land from occupation.. If the US left (which it should), they could give military support the groups that are fighting against the Taliban (which the US refused to do previously and instead supported the Taliban) despite war heroes like Massoud, known as the Lion of Panjir begging for US assistance against the Taliban.. But the best thing the US could do would be to help the Muslim world promote education in that area.. Help places like Turkey that are trying to bring a correct understanding of Islam to the Muslim world, the correct and balanced view that was held by the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. That is the major fight, it's not a military one, it's one of ideals.. About who's ideas are better.. If the US was sincerely interested in helping Afghanistan succeed it would change its actions rather than promoting more violence..

Tasmania is not a nation state, it's a state of Australia.

You're mistaken if you think that Iran possesses only little rockets, their rockets are very advanced and they don't need chemical weapons.. Do you seriously think it would only be an air war? Those nuclear facilities are near Holy Cities such as Qom, an attack on those facilities will be an attack on the cities themselves and Iranians as a whole will demand a reaction, even from the Green Movement.. Nothing unites Iranians like a foreign power attacking, just like the Bay of Pigs united Cubans in Cuba against the US.. Also, Iran's military is one of the strongest in the region and they're not like Iraq was, first being attacked by a coalition of nations after a 10 year long war with Iran and then put under extreme sanctions for 10 years only to be pushed over.. The Iranians defeated the Iraqis in a conventional war during the 1980-1989 Iran Iraq War despite the fact that the Iraqis had Western Support and military technology at great cost to the Iranian people, millions died because they'd not been organized as they'd like to have been having just had a revolution.. Having said that, they still forced the Iraqis back.. In addition to that, even though the Iranians have been under sanctions for all of this time they've spent a lot of time and money on research and becoming self sufficient militarily, they design and manufacture the majority of their own weapons technologies including fighter bombers, tanks, attack helicopters, submarines, frigates, ICBM rockets, Missiles including guided missiles etc.. It is recognized that they are advancing scientifically in terms of research in development in many fields at a greater rate than any other nation on Earth.. The Iranians have spent the last 20 years preparing for war with the US and Israel because they always knew that the US would again try to again overthrow their government.. Then there are guerrilla wars, where the Iranians are masters.. They have successfully engaged in, trained and supervised guerrilla wars in the following theatres: Afghanistan: 1979-1989: MuAgainst the Soviet Union 1989-1994: Against the Warlords 1994-2001: Against the Taliban Iraq: 1980-1988: Kurds and Shia Against Saddam Hussein Lebanon: 1982-Today: Supporting Hezbollah against the Israelis The Iranians have perfected guerrilla warfare and advanced by huge amounts in conventional warfare in comparison to what they were in the 80's, this war will not just be a quick war like it was in Iraq and the Iranians will force American and Israeli troops to put their boots on the ground in Iran, and that will be their grave.. Within 48 hours 8 million combat trained Iranians would be deployed to fight against any force that attacks Iran.. Iran's conventional forces will engage in battle and their unconventional Revolutionary Guard will destroy every US asset they can reach both in the Middle East and abroad and ensure that the whole event is very costly for the US.. Whilst they do that, Hezbollah will attack the Israelis and launch thousands of rockets, more advanced than in 2006 and they'll be targeting Israels military bases.. At the same time, Israel will also make the mistake of attacking Syria because of Syria's support of Hezbollah and Iran and Syria will then open a new front.. Iraq will go in flames because right now, the majority of Shia within Iran under the guidance of Ayatollah Sistani have not fought against US forces.. Should the Iran be attacked, he'll give that order and you'll have many millions of Iraqis start fighting, you can kiss Iraqi army goodbye too because they won't be backing up the US. Without the use of nuclear weapons any country that tries to attack Iran will pay a huge price, and then if they do use such weapons.. Then the result will be even worse for them because they'll be attacking a holy place.. It will unite the Muslim world which is still quite divided and you'll have a much larger war.. This war, will not be something small like Israel's attack on Iraq's nuclear facility.. It'll turn into a regional war.. The US couldn't recover from it and neither could Israel..

1.5+ billion Yes Yes, providing that it's kept at this level at a respectful manner of discussion and discourse I'm sure you could have many a great years of dialogue that leads to mutual respect for each other even if you don't attain your goal of converting the Muslims. More religious? Can you explain? I actually would say that this number isn't just hundreds of millions, there are more than 1.5billion Muslims in the world with the vast majority, more than 99% would fit in this category. I'm sure the amount that are like this number less than one hundred thousand and the majority live in the West. I also think that the majority of these people are ignorant to the beauty of proper American ideals and would easily be swayed towards supporting the US once it could be properly demonstrated to them that Islam and those ideals are much closer than Islam is to extremist ideology. But they'd only be swayed through good example.. Not threatening or harming them. Tens of thousands? Perhaps but this number would be below fifty thousand for certain.. You know a great problem the West has is that they class all fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq as either being Taliban or Al Qaeda, religious extremists etc.. That's not the case at all.. Most fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq and other places just want to rid their land of occupiers and are nationalistic.. Just as any American would be if someone occupied their lands.. The problem with this is that group 3 is spread out across the whole world and neither group 1 nor 2 know who they are.. Therefore, to hold either group accountable for group 3's actions would only serve to help recruit for group 3.. The use of WMD's would be highly illogical due to the fact I just mentioned. That sounds good, but also engaging in trade will also help a trade with all nations will encourage an exchange of ideas with the population of those countries, more and more will come to your way of thinking through such trade. Agreed Ok, good.. See, I don't get what the problem here is.. You'd have to be crazy to think that even if Iran did attain nuclear weapons (which it has not been proven to be in the process of doing) that it would actually use them against Israel? Iranians aren't stupid, they wouldn't irradiate the Holy Land and have even been forbidden by their religious leadership which is their head of state from using ANY weapon of mass destruction. In fact, during the Iran-Iraq war where the US had given Iraq many WMDs to use on Iran and saturated Iranian cities with chemical weapons Iran still did not respond in a similar way because they've been forbidden from doing so. I do support Iran developing both civilian and military nuclear technology because Nuclear Weapons are out there in the world and are active in their region with Israel possessing more than 200 such nuclear weapons.. It would, in my opinion be foolish for Iran to not research and develop such technologies to at the very least understand them and try and find a means to defeat it the Israelis or US ever use such weapons against them.. I do also think that Israel should give it's weapons of mass destruction up and if it refused to do so then Iran should be able to develop their own to ensure Mutually Assured Destruction could act as a deterrent should Israel ever consider using them against Iran although I doubt Iran would ever use them anyway.. But if I were Iran and didn't intend to use them, I'd still threaten to use them if they were used against my country. It's not bluster.. If attacked, The Iranians will not be cowards like Saddam when his nuclear facility was destroyed.. Iran will take any attack as a declaration of war and respond back with an initial response by closing the Straight of Hormuz and launching rocket attack after rocket salvo against Israel and will be aiming for Israel's military bases and nuclear facilities and they have a lot of rockets.. They'll then get Hezbollah to attack Israel too.. Israel would be stupid enough to attack Syria too, then Syria won't sit this one out.. If the US gets involved then the US will suffer the loss of Iraq and Afghanistan.. It couldn't afford the war that it will have to go in, the people in the US are already sick of the wars and will most certainly be against it.. It will result in the end of the US empire because it will be a war that the US can't afford yet will print the bills to fight.. It will ultimately be defeated in because it wont be able to use nuclear weapons.. The economy will collapse..

First of all.. I don't have disgust for the USA, in fact I've said many times that I love the US.. I'm a great admirer of the Founding Fathers and the Declaration of Independence and Constitution.. What I don't like however is what the US government has become.. It has lost its way and has strayed very far from the ideals that it was supposed to be created on.. And you talk next about Libertarian's policy of 'as little intervention as possible' leading to the rise of the Soviet Union etc, well to be honest, military intervention didn't work to solve that problem either.. Look at the quagmire of Vietnam, the US lost 60,000 men fighting for nothing and still lost the war and today, they've built relationships with Vietnam and people invest in Vietnam now. More has been done to further relations in Vietnam since the war than could ever be achieved by such war. You can't go and launch a war on every dictator in the world, you can however lead by example and show a better way.. The people will see that and will eventually take their country back. Iran is a perfect example.. Everytime the US intervenes in Iran, the Iranian people will support a hardline government because they don't want their country taken over again.. If however the US extends a hand of friendship and engages in trade and diplomatic relations with Iran, the Iranian people will vote out regimes which are hardline in favor of those that seek better relationships with the West. It's about respect.. Show the Iranian people some respect and treat them as equals, it'll work wonders.

OR the US could stop interfering with Iran like they promised to by removing their terrorist forces from Iran and take the sanctions off too.. They could engage in trade and acts of good will to show they hold no emnity.. The hardline government in Iran would no longer be able to make the people fear US aggression and imperialism because it would no longer exist.. The Iranian people themselves would then vote out their government and if their government didn't go quietly they'd remove it themselves as they did the Shah.. The US gives legitimacy to the hardline government in Iran by its own actions of supporting terrorism and sanctions against the country.. Iranians don't want to be ruled by foreigners as what happened under the Shah, they're not given enough credit by the West as intelligent people who would act accordingly if the US drew down.. If however Israel attacks, then watch the Middle East burn and it will be the end of Israel and even the US if it gets involved because there is no way the US could engage in this war without using Nuclear weapons and people in the US would not stand for it.. Iran has already won this war no matter how much the US and Israel postures..

Haha yes I do.. But the lightbulb went out, surely this was the will of God, if God had meant for the lightbulb to be changed, then being all powerful He would have given new life to the current lightbulb or changed it Himself.. Due to the fact that this has not happened, we can only assume that God does not want us to have light.. That somehow there is benefit to living in darkness or perhaps we offended our Lord.. We should repent... Come on brothers, let us pray.. We should bow down and ask our lord for forgiv....... Owwww... Hit my head on the corner of the coffee table.. No light.. Ouch.. See here is where you're wrong.. My opinion on stoning isn't so simple.. I've explained it in far more detail previously and you should probably go and research what I've said more.. Next, to assume that the Muslim community is only .8% of the US population is silly.. There are many more, it's just that a huge amount have been afraid over the last 10 years that the Government will round them up and put them into camps like they did the Japanese and Germans and planned to do with the African Americans with Rex84. Secondly, the US has been perhaps the most successful nation in dealing with Muslims for the majority of the past few hundred years.. Muslims want to be Americans not just because of the opportunity, but due to the beauty of what it is to be an American.. Europe has no respect for religions other than their own.. That is why the US and New Zealand in my opinion are still the best places to live because they respect the rights of people far more in terms of religion compared to Europe. Nevertheless, you're right.. The issue of people like Ayaan Hirsi is very serious.. No doubt this woman has been exposed to be a liar and also quite hate filled in her actions.. But actually, this doesn't justify trying to kill her, in fact it only makes her stronger.. She has legitimate concerns about the cultural practices of parts of the Muslim world in Africa and the Gulf.. I agree with those concerns.. However, I disagree that somehow these are the teachings of Islam.. The problems can be fixed with education, that is what is necessary.. Not banning the Qur'an or Islam etc.. Europe's reactions to all of these events are making things worse for themselves, instead of engaging with the Muslim population they are demonizing and alienating them.. It will create more disenfranchised youth and eventually will lead to more extremism and even terrorism.. Is it right? No.. No one should resort to violence to voice an opinion, but at the end of the day the state also bears some responsibility for not respecting the natural rights of the individual.. If the state did that in the first place, then there would be no disenfranchised youth and sure there'd be a small amount, a very minute amount but the majority of the Muslim community wouldn't feel that way and they'd just continue as happy citizens like the overwhelming majority do in the USA. Yes, Europe will be overwhelmed by Muslims in then next 50 years, our population there is growing at a huge rate.. The question is, will these people have loyalty to the state and the European way of life or not? If trends continue as they are then they won't and conflict will occur.. It can easily be avoided though.. If Europe became more like the US and respected individual rights like the US constitution does as a constitutional republic then these wouldn't be issues because a section of the society wouldn't feel maligned, alienated or threatened.. Muslims in Europe are afraid of another European inquisition.. But don't expect them to just sit down and accept this treatment this time.. Any state that doesn't respect the natural human rights of individuals to the extent that they're willing to infringe on the rights of those individuals whether it's a European state or a Gulf state in my opinion has no right to exist in that form.. I'd wholly support anyone who's rights are infringed to the extent where their forced to leave the country they were born in to start asserting those rights and even if absolutely necessary use measured violence to safeguard their life, liberty and property.. As the US Declaration of Independence said.. You may not like that.. In fact I can almost guarantee that you wont.. But you obviously don't believe in natural rights for the individual and believe you can dictate to people what they can and can't believe.. You are an enemy of liberty.. Just don't expect to be able to take my natural rights without a long and bloody fight for them..

If I borrow a joke from my friend Jihad (yes, that's his name). How many Muslims does it take to change a lightbulb? One hundred. One to actually screw in the new lightbulb and ninety nine to criticize the way he did it. (Inside joke) Now for some Salam Cafe: After the Cronulla Riots where 5000 Anglo Australians rampaged through Cronulla assaulting any person of Middle Eastern appearance they could find Uncle Sam(eer) also thought he'd go to Frankston, another overwhelmingly Anglo Australian city in the State of Victoria to find out their opinions of Muslims: When the City of Camden refused to allow an Islamic School to be built in their township. Uncle Sam(eer) came to the rescue: Vote Uncle Sam(eer) for Mayor of Camden