# A nation of naive sheep we are going to be slaughtered



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

How do you reach out to people whos bottom line is subjugate to Islam or die :roll:

Most in Poll Back Outreach to Muslims

By Jon Cohen and Jennifer Agiesta
Washington Post Staff Writers 
Monday, April 6, 2009; A10

Most Americans think President Obama's pledge to "seek a new way forward" with the Muslim world is an important goal, even as nearly half hold negative views about Islam and a sizable number say that even mainstream adherents to the religion encourage violence against non-Muslims, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

There is still a broad lack of familiarity with the world's second-largest religion -- 55 percent of those polled said they are without a basic understanding of the teachings and beliefs of Islam, and most said they do not know anyone who is Muslim. While awareness has increased in recent years, underlying views have not improved.

About half, 48 percent, said they have an unfavorable view of Islam, the highest in polls since late 2001. Nearly three in 10, or 29 percent, said they see mainstream Islam as advocating violence against non-Muslims; although more, 58 percent, said it is a peaceful religion.

Muslims make up about 1 percent of all U.S. adults.

Majorities of Americans with sympathetic and unsympathetic views about Islam said it is important for the president to try to improve U.S. relations with Muslim nations, with those holding more positive views much more likely to call those moves "very important." In his inaugural address, Obama extended an offer to leaders of unfriendly Muslim nations that the United States "will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist." Overall, nearly two-thirds said Obama, who arrived yesterday in Ankara, Turkey, will handle the diplomatic mission "about right." Nearly a quarter, though, said he will probably "go too far." Nine percent said it is more likely he will not go far enough.

Nearly half of Republicans said Obama is apt to overreach in his efforts to advance U.S. relations, while large majorities of Democrats and independents said they think he will walk the right line.

Republicans are also more apt than others to hold negative attitudes toward Islam, with six in 10 having unfavorable views, compared with about four in 10 for Democrats and independents. Among conservative Republicans, 65 percent view Islam unfavorably; liberal Democrats, in contrast, are 60 percent positive.

This partisan divide is also apparent on the question of whether mainstream Islam encourages hostility toward non-Muslims, with Republicans about twice as likely as Democrats to say it does. Nearly half of conservative Republicans see centrist Islam as a promoter of violence.

Perceptions of Islam as a peaceful faith are the highest among non-religious Americans, with about two-thirds holding that view. Among Catholics, 60 percent see mainstream Islam as a peaceful faith; it is 55 percent among all Protestants, but drops to 48 percent among white evangelical Protestants.

There are deep divisions in perceptions of Islam between younger and older Americans as well: More than six in 10 younger than 65 said Islam is a peaceful religion, but that drops to 39 percent among seniors.

As in previous surveys, unfamiliarity breeds skepticism: 53 percent of those who profess an understanding of some Islamic teachings view the religion favorably, compared with 31 percent of those who said they do not have that fluency. Those who have such a background are also significantly more likely to see the religion as peaceful. Similar patterns exist for those who know a Muslim. And views of Islam are more positive among those with more formal education.

In a Pew poll in March, 11 percent of Americans mistakenly identified Obama as a Muslim, about the same proportion to do so during the presidential campaign.

The Post-ABC poll was conducted by telephone March 26-29 among a national random sample of 1,000 adults. The results have a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

This is just a sample of some of the news I get from Voice of the Martyrs.
http://www.persecution.com/

The fellow I know that is involved with this publication was very high in the Pakistan army. He now has a death order should he ever return to his native country. He was formally schooled in Islam for 20 some years. He said the Koran that Americans can get their hands on is very watered down and that he would send me a copy of original interpretation. It's in essence kill all the infidels unless they pay a heavy tax and do not worship or display any religious items.

America is becoming more dumbed down by the day. The discouraging thing is those who think they are intellectual are the least knowledgeable. They will tell you how they have a neighbor that isn't violent etc., but the Koran spells it out. Be modest and meek until you are stronger, then rise up and kill them all.



> Recent News
> Three Christians Dead in Eritrean Prisons
> In the last three months, three Christians have died in Eritrean prisons. (02-05-2009) full story
> 
> ...


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

> Among conservative Republicans, 65 percent view Islam unfavorably; liberal Democrats, in contrast, are 60 percent positive


.

I would love to hear the positives explained here, and further explain how those positives outweight the basic belief...I'm sorry, COMMAND..to kill infidels.

I'll admit upfront I'm one of the 31% who knows little about the "religion", but that lack of knowledge stems mainly from losing the desire to learn more after I got to the killing part. :wink:

So please help me to understand what I'm missing.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> "We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country," Obama said.


This guy isn't stupid, he is DECEPTIVE. Not in his respect for Islam, but in his pseudo respect for America and Christianity.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

This is just one more piece of security he is dribbling down his leg. Another is the US to lead the way of nuclear disarmament as well as massive cut backs on military funding. Scary isn't it.

"Change" we can all bank our last clean pair of underwear on.

What was that word......PRUDENT!!


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

Obama, the great deceiver...


----------



## DecoyDummy (May 25, 2005)

Nothing new here that I haven't been saying for months ... Make that years ...

Here is info from five years ago ... and the dynamic is unchanged ... but the Political ramifications for America are greatly changed with the new Administration.

Dictionary definition of

CALIPH ... successor of Muhammad as temporal and spiritual head of Islam.

CALIPHITE ... the office or dominion of a CALIPH

THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE GREAT CALIPHATE 
By Larry Abraham January 29,2004

The war against terror did not begin on September 11,2001, nor will it end with the peaceful transition to civilian authority in Iraq, whenever that may be. In fact Iraq is but a footnote in the bigger context of this encounter, but an important one none the less.

This war is what the Jihadists themselves are calling the "Third Great Jihad." They are operating within the framework of a time line which reaches back to the very creation of Islam in the seventh century and are presently attempting to recreate the dynamics which gave rise to the religion in the first two hundred years of it's existence.

No religion in history grew as fast, in it's infancy, and the reasons for the initial growth of Islam are not hard to explain when you understand what the world was like at the time of Muhammad's death in 632 AD. Remember that the Western Roman Empire was in ruins and the Eastern Empire, based in Constantinople, was trying desperately to keep the power of it's early grandeur while transitioning to Christianity as a de facto state religion. The costs to the average person were large as he was being required to meet the constantly rising taxes levied by the state along with the tithes coerced by the church.

What Islam offered was "the carrot or the sword." If you became a convert, your taxes were immediately eliminated, as was your tithe. If you didn't, you faced death. The choice was not hard for most to make, unless you were a very devoted martyr in the making.

In the beginning, even the theology was not hard for most to swallow, considering that both Jewry and Christianity were given by the Prophet. There is but one God-Allah, and Muhammad is his Prophet, as was Jesus, and the pre-Christian Jewish Prophets of the Torah (Old Testament). Both were called "children of the book" ... the book being the Koran, which replaced both the Old and New Testaments for the former Christians and Jews.

With this practical approach to spreading "the word" Islam grew like wild fire, reaching out from Saudi Arabian Peninsula in all directions. This early growth is what the Muslims call the "First Great Jihad" and it met with little resistance until Charles Martel of France, the father of Charlemagne, stopped them in the battle of Tours in France, after they firmly established Islam on the Iberian Peninsula.

This first onslaught against the West continued in various forms and at various times until Islam was finally driven out of Spain in 1492 at the battle of Granada.

The "Second Great Jihad" came with the Ottoman Turks. This empire succeeded in bringing about the downfall of Constantinople as a Christian stronghold and an end to Roman hegemony in all its forms. The Ottoman Empire was Islam's most successful expansion of territory even though the religion itself had fractured in to warring sects and bitter rivalries with each claiming the ultimate truths in "the ways of the Prophet."

By 1683 the Ottomans had suffered a series of defeats on both land and sea and the final, unsuccessful attempt to capture Vienna set the stage for the collapse of any future territorial ambitions and Islam shrunk into Sheikdoms, Emir dominated principalities and roving tribes of Nomads. However, by this time a growing anti-western sentiment, blaming it's internal failures on everyone but themselves, was taking hold and setting the stage for a new revival known as Wahhabism, a sect which came into full bloom under the House of Saud on the Arabian Peninsula shortly before the onset of WWI. It is this Wahhabi version of Islam, which has infected the religion itself, now finding adherents in almost all branches and sects, especially the Shiites.

Wahhabism calls for the complete and total rejection or destruction of anything which is not based in the original teachings of The Prophet and finds it's most glaring practice in the policies of the Afghani Taliban or Shiite practices of the late Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran. It's Ali Pasha (Field Marshall) is known as Osama bin Ladin, the leader of the "Third Jihad" who is Wahhabi as were his 911 attack teams, 18 of which were also Saudi.

The strategy for this "holy war" did not begin with the planning of the destruction of the World Trade Center. It began with the toppling of the Shah of Iran back in the late 1970's. With his plans and programs to "Westernize" his country, along with his close ties to the U.S and subdued acceptance of the state of Israel, the Shah was the soft target.

Remember "America Held Hostage"?

Thanks, in large part to the hypocritical and disastrous policies of the Jimmy Carter State Department, the revolution was set into motion, the Shah was deposed, his armed forces scattered or murdered and stage one was complete. The Third Jihad now had a base of operations and the oil wealth to support its grand design or what they call the "Great Caliphate."

What this design calls for is the replacement of all secular leadership in any country with Muslim majorities. This would include Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, all the Emirates, Sudan, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Malaysia, Indonesia and finally what they call the "Occupied Territory" Israel.

As a part of this strategy, forces of the Jihad will infiltrate governments and the military as a prelude to taking control, once the secular leadership is ousted or assassinated. Such was the case in Lebanon leading to the Syrian occupation and in Egypt with the murder of Anwar Sadat, along with the multiple attempts on the lives of Hussein in Jordan, Mubarak of Egypt and Musharraf in Pakistan. Pakistan is a particular prize because of its nuclear weapons. (Please note al Qaeda call for the Islamic-militant overthrow of Musharraf in Pakistan on March 25, just yesterday.)

The long-range strategy of the Third Jihad counts on three strategic goals.

First, the U.S. withdrawing from the region just as it did in Southeast Asia, following Vietnam.

Second, taking control of the oil wealth in the Muslim countries, which would be upwards to 75% of known reserves.

Third, using nuclear weapons or other WMDs to annihilate Israel.

A further outcome of successfully achieving these objectives would be to place the United Nations as the sole arbiter in East/West negotiations and paralyze western resistance, leading to total withdrawal from all Islamic dominated countries.

Evidence of the Bush Administration awareness of this plan is found in the events immediately following the 9/11 attack. The administration's first move was to shore up Pakistan and Egypt, believing that these two would be the next targets for al Qaeda, while Americans focused on the disaster in New York. The administration also knew that the most important objective was to send a loud and clear message that the U.S. was in the region to stay, not only to shore up our allies, but to send a message to the Jihadists.

The attack on Afghanistan was necessary to break-up a secure al Qaeda base of operations and put their leadership on the run or in prison.

The war in Iraq also met a very strategic necessity in that no one knew how much collaboration existed between Saddam Hussein and the master planners of the Third Jihad or Hussein's willingness to hand off WMDs to terrorist groups including the PLO in Israel. What was known were serious indications of on-going collaboration as Saddam funneled money to families of suicide bombers attacking the Israelis and others in Kuwait

What the U.S. needed to establish was a significant base of operations smack dab in the middle of the Islamic world, in a location which effectively cut it in half. Iraq was the ideal target for this and a host of other strategic reasons.

Leadership of various anti-American groups both here and abroad understood the vital nature of the Bush initiative and thus launched their demonstrations, worldwide, to "Stop The War". Failing this, they also laid plans to build a political campaign inside the country, with the War in Iraq as a plebiscite, using a little known politician as the thrust point - Howard Dean. This helps to explain how quickly the Radical Left moved into the Dean campaign with both people and money, creating what the clueless media called the "Dean Phenomenon".

By building on the left-wing base in the Democrat party and the "Hate Bush" crowd, the campaign has already resulted in a consensus among the aspirants, minus Joe Lieberman, to withdraw the U.S. from Iraq and turn the operation over to the U.N. And, if past is prologue, i.e., Vietnam, once the U.S. leaves it will not go back under any circumstances, possibly even the destruction of Israel.

Should George W. Bush be defeated in November we could expect to see the dominoes start to fall in the secular Islamic countries and The Clash of Civilizations, predicted several years ago by Samuel Huntington, would then become a life changing event in all of our lives.

What surprised the Jihadists following the 9/11 attack was how American sentiment mobilized around the president and a profound sense of patriotism spread across the country. They were not expecting this reaction, based on what had happened in the past, nor were they expecting the determination resolve of the President himself. I also believe this is one of the reasons we have not had any further attacks within our borders. They are content to wait, just as one of their tactical mentors; V.I. Lenin admonished&#8230;"two steps forward, one step back".

A couple additional events serve as valuable footnotes to the current circumstances we face: the destruction of the human assets factor of the CIA during the Carter presidency, presided over by the late Senator Frank Church. This fact has plagued our intelligence agencies right up to this very day with consequences which are now obvious. And, Jimmy Carter himself, the one man who must bear the bulk of the responsibility for setting the stage of the Third Jihad. Americans should find little comfort in how the Democrat contenders constantly seek the "advice and counsel" of this despicable little hypocrite.

Lastly, we should not expect to see any meaningful cooperation from Western Europe, especially the French. Since failing to protect their own interests in Algeria (by turning the country over to the first of the Arab terrorists, Ammad Ben Bella), the country itself is now occupied by Islamic immigrants totaling twenty percent of the population.

We are in the battle of our lives, a battle which will go on for many years possibly even generations. If we fail to understand what we are facing or falter in the challenge of "knowing our enemy" the results will be catastrophic. Imagine a world where al Qaeda regimes control 75% of the world's oil, have at their disposal nuclear weapons, legions of willing suicide soldiers, and our national survival is dependent on the good graces of Kofi Annan and the United Nations.

There is one final footnote which may be the scariest of all. Either none of the Democrats currently leading the drive to their party's nomination are aware of the facts of the Great Caliphate and Third Jihad or they do know and they don't care so long as their power lust is satisfied. But, I can guarantee you one thing for sure: some of their most ardent supporters are aware of this and will do anything they can to bring it about.

********** End Report **********


----------



## buckseye (Dec 8, 2003)

> It's in essence kill all the infidels unless they pay a heavy tax and do not worship or display any religious items.


Damn I think they got us.


----------



## tigerdog (Jan 24, 2008)

Throughout much of Islam's history, it has truly been a religion of deceit and violence. While I'm not in anyway an expert in Islam, I had spent some time studying and researching this religion several years ago. I wrote a research paper that focused on one particular sect in particular. They were whole-heartedly focused on complete dominance and would achieve it by any means necessary. Many people realize the violence committed by Muslims. But the training and planning behind the violence is amazing. Some small groups of Muslims, or at times generations of Muslims, would be trained specifically for one specific task. They were trained how to gain the trust of their enemies. They'd act friendly, gain trust, gain more trust, until they found themselves in the right positions to carry out attacks. These attacks were then relatively easy since they had won their victims' trust. Often these attacks were assassinations of important leaders. Muslims are willing to spend their entire lives making others believe they are something they are not. All of the trickery is to set themselves in a position to steal, kill, and destroy.
Do I believe that Muslims would lie about their teachings and deliberately attempt to misinform others about their religion? I've seen little that would make me doubt it. They are infiltrating our country and many other countries as well. We have Muslim's with significant influence. We likely have many more Muslims with far greater power than we realize. They aren't going to reveal their hand too early. They are planning, strategizing, training, and patiently waiting for the right times to strike.
The poll cited above has some problems. Are the majority of Democrats that claim to be educated on the fundamentals of Islam and view it positively truly educated in Islam, or are they claiming to be educated about Islam because they might have heard a lecture or two on the subject at some point in their lives? Like I've said. I'm not an expert. However, I know enough to make me concerned. 
As Plainsman has noted, their are some ex-Muslims who are willing to educate you if you are willing to listen. And they are sharing this information knowing very well that returning to an Islamic nation is a death penalty for them.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

I attempted to learn a little more about Islam, it didn't go well. I couldn't get over the fact that Mohammed was a pedophile, and maybe even a gay pedophile, the hypocrisy of the religion, and the fact that it is really anything goes. The interpretation of islam is as various as hockey officiating or a baseball strike zone. The muslims could have used a visit from Moses or someone and picked themselves up a few stone tablets so they could have some clarity. That is why they will never have peace, and until we blaze a trail from India to the Mediterranean neither will we. Obama should be reaching out to cerain muslim countries, not all of them. One of the few lessons he could learn from George W. is 'you are either with or you are against us".


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

TK33 said:


> he could learn from George W. 'you are either with or you are against us".


I think I'm starting to like your dialogue more and more.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

During Obama's campaign he said the democrats would not be weak, he said something along the lines of "we are the party of Roosevelt, do not tell me we can't defend the country". I hope that he is trying the sugar instead of salt routine to garner support abroad, we need it. This needs to be a shortlived strategy because time is of the essence.

Europe is doing nothing to support us or protect themselves, this is truly a problem for the entire western civilization. I don't know what it is going to take for the Europeans to understand that there is a night and day difference between radical islam and the USSR or Hitler. This time the yanks from across the pond can't protect them, they have to protect themselves.

I am not giving up on Obama's foreign policy yet, the Bush administration bombed foreign policy, Obama has a lot of work to do but one thing he has going is he is a good statesman but the kiss *** festival will have to end soon and tough action will have to follow, namely in Pakistan.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

TK33 said:


> Obama has a lot of work to do but one thing he has going is he is a good statesman but the kiss a$$ festival will have to end soon and tough action will have to follow, namely in Pakistan.


As well as Iran and North Korea. His administration will hang Israel out to dry in the interim, especially if they tip their hand towards a preemptive strike/counter strike.

Being a good statesman for everywhere else and crappin' on your own country doesn't set well with me. I'm afraid his kiss azz festival has done it's damage, we will now be seen as weak and an easy target. Hope it doesn't come to fruition.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

It will be hard to help Europe because the enemy is within their population now. Islam is spreading like a bacterial pandemic. Obama is the beginning of our infection. The only antibiotic is a return to our roots. The democrat party is the progressive party alright, but they are progressing in the wrong direction. Further from the dignity of human life, further from personal responsibility, further from national security, further from the constitution, further from God himself.

We are giving it all up for the free meal. Keep in mind the meal is only free from the perspective of a parasite. Is what Obama doing now what his supporters voted for last fall, or did they simply vote as parasites? Europe will succumb to it's Islamic infection, but it remains to be seen if we can cure ourselves of the parasites within us. Unfortunately if Obama continues his European suck up we could get their infection too.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

> Is what Obama doing now what his supporters voted for last fall, or did they simply vote as parasites?


Everyone knew Obama was going to be a good statesman, everyone knew Obama or McCain was/is going to have to rebuild ties that we have lost in the last decade, and everyone knows we need more support both financial and physical from our so called allies, if we actually have any anymore. That is why people voted for Obama on the foreign policy side, if we are going to succeed in not only the fight against radical islam but also the global economic fight we need friends. Do we give them the world, no but we have to start somewhere. I don't agree with how he sold us out in Europe but that is how the world views us right now.


----------



## Csquared (Sep 5, 2006)

Are we fighting radical Islam now?

Seriously?

I submit we _were_, as it is my opinion that was our reason for occupying Iraq, not because of WMD's...but not so sure anymore that controlling the spread of radical Islam is near the top of our list of things to do. 

And Plainsman, your last post was extraordinary. LOTS of important points packed into those two paragraphs. I doubt there's much argument that Obama is President largely due to the number of people willing to trade sovereignty for that free meal you mentioned.

.........and that scares me much more than he does.


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

Csquared said:


> Are we fighting radical Islam now?
> 
> Seriously?
> 
> ...


Iraq was not about WMD's, it was about settling an old score between two clans. They maybe had weapons, we may never know. Saddam threatened HW and Clinton should have greased him then but he left it for W. to take care of.

Obama and Gates seem to have their eyes on Pakistan. They will be next, if we are not fighting radical islam I would like to know what we are fighting because all they have is opium.

We needed Obama to go overseas and try to mend some fences. He took it too far and now his administration is in damage control, ie saying that he leaned over at the Saudi king and didn't actually bow :eyeroll: I would like to know what he was leaning over for, apparently he was trying to scratch his back via his a$$


----------

