The Goal of Militant Islam

[WarBicycle]

The goal of militant Islam is to force its will upon the rest of the world; fortunately, we have its history of violence against non-believers to give us a better appreciation and realization of what to expect should they accomplish their ambitions. The politically correct living in the West are quick to acquiesce to what they perceive as reasonable Muslim demands for religious rights. However, how Muslims go about achieving the remainder of their demands should be cause for concern.

When a nation’s Muslim population is approximately 1%, they are not considered a threat and are considered an integral, but unique segment of society.

United States -- Muslim 1.0%

Australia -- Muslim 1.5%

Canada -- Muslim 1.9%

China -- Muslim 1%-2%

Italy -- Muslim 1.5%

Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

Once they real 2% to 3% of a nation’s population they attempt to expand their influence by recruiting or converting other disenfranchised youth. In order to accomplish this they target street gangs and inmates serving time in prison.

Denmark -- Muslim 2%

Germany -- Muslim 3.7%

United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%

Spain -- Muslim 4%

Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

Once they reach 5% of a nation’s population, they make exceedingly unreasonable demands from authorities out of proportions to their small share of the population. For example they will insist on the availability of halal food regardless of the added expense to the institution; they will demand modesty hours at public pools; they will demand the right for women to cover the faces on photo ID; and, most important, they will use the threat of litigation should and institution or employer fail to comply. They will also pressure the government in power to allow them to govern themselves under Sharia law. A couple of years ago they attempted this in Ontario, forcing the government to prohibit all religious-base tribunals to settle family disputes. CBC News

France -- Muslim 8%

Philippines -- Muslim 5%

Sweden -- Muslim 5%

Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%

The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%

Trinidad &Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

Once Muslims reach 10% of a nation’s population the trouble begins. One can expect unruly or mob behavior whenever they feel they have been victimized. (Riots and car burning in France). They will also physically attack and kill or threaten any non-Muslim that insults Islam. (Netherlands - Theo van Gogh; Denmark – Mohammed cartoons; Britain - Salmond Rushdie)

Guyana -- Muslim 10%

India -- Muslim 13.4%

Israel -- Muslim 16%

Kenya -- Muslim 10%

Russia -- Muslim 10-15%

One Muslims exceed 20% of a nations population one can expect near instant rioting, armed militia terrorizing the population, random killings and the burning of Christian and Jewish institutions. Ethiopia is presently fighting Islamic militias in Somalia in order to prevent from having easy access to its Muslim population.

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

Once Muslims reach 40% of a nation’s populations expect massacres, terror attacks and ongoing warfare. We have a large Serbian, Croatian and Slovenian population where I live. In the mid 1980’s local Serbs were predicting a civil war in Bosnia and Kosovo. I thought they were exaggerating, I was wrong.

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%

Chad -- Muslim 53.1%

Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

Once Muslims reach 60% of a nation’s population you can expect ethnic cleansing, and Sharia law being used as a weapon of intimidation.

Albania -- Muslim 70%

Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%

Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%

Sudan -- Muslim 70%

Once Muslims reach 80% of a nation’s population, you can expect State organized genocide and ethnic cleansing. When Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Iran after 15 years of exile his government executed tens of thousands of opponents of his regime. The same happened when the Taliban took over Afghanistan.

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%

Egypt -- Muslim 90%

Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%

Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%

Iran -- Muslim 98%

Iraq -- Muslim 97%

Jordan -- Muslim 92%

Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%

Pakistan -- Muslim 97%

Palestine -- Muslim 99%

Syria -- Muslim 90%

Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%

Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%

United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

Once a nation becomes 100% Muslim, you have a sort of Islamic nirvana because everyone is Muslim. One would think that this accomplishment would usher in decades of peace, but it will not. At this point Muslims will start killing each other. Proof positive, we do not live in a perfect world.

Afghanistan -- Muslim 100%

Saudi Arabia -- Muslim 100%

Somalia -- Muslim 100%

Yemen -- Muslim 99.9%

Source

Edited April 21, 2008 by WarBicycle

[eyeball]

I wonder what a society made up of varying percentages of WarBicycles would look like?

I suspect we're somewhere between 5 and 10% now so we're probably already in deep trouble.

[WarBicycle]

Al-Qaeda's No. 2 In another answer, al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country "under the laws of the infidels."

Great, perhaps it is time we send them home.

[Peter F]

Al-Qaeda's No. 2 In another answer, al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country "under the laws of the infidels."

Great, perhaps it is time we send them home.

They are home.

[AngusThermopyle]

They are home.

So from that answer am I to believe that you're fine with Radical Islam making inroads into Western nations? Thats very strange to say the least, who would be fine with Radicals forwarding an agenda at the expense of the non radical majority?

[Peter F]

So from that answer am I to believe that you're fine with Radical Islam making inroads into Western nations? Thats very strange to say the least, who would be fine with Radicals forwarding an agenda at the expense of the non radical majority?

Believe whatever you please.

Warbike posted:

Great, perhaps it is time we send them home.

My reply (They are home) means that warbikes post was senseless.

Tell you what, you tell me what "Radical Islam" is and what "inroads into western nations" means and I'll tell you if I'm fine with it or not and why.

[AngusThermopyle]

Tell you what, you tell me what "Radical Islam" is and what "inroads into western nations" means and I'll tell you if I'm fine with it or not and why.

You really don't know what Radical Islam is?

Most strange. Lets see, the simple form. Radical Islam comprises of those fanatics who believe blowing people up to make a point is fair game. Radical Islam is comprised of those who would kill others who disagree with them, or "offend" them. Radical Islam is comprised of those who hate and incite violent action against those they hate. Radical Islam is comprised of those who would change the customs and institutions of host countries. Radical Islam is comprised of those who use innocents as mules for carrying remote bombs.

Thats the short answer of what Radical Islam is, understand now?

Inroads is the changing of host cultures, the push to adopt Sharia law, you do know what Sharia is don't you? Inroads are made when minority populations feel free to behave any way they wish, always contrary to the accepted norms of the host society.

So, you feel these elements are desirable? Or perhaps you just have trouble distinguishing between radical and moderate. Or perhaps, inconceivable as it may be to me, you desire the spread of radical ideologies.

That being the case, if in fact it is, how bout we give free reign to all religiously based groups to use force to further their agendas? Or is it just Radical Islam that you feel should be free to use force in the pursuit of their goals?

Wait a minute, maybe I missed your point. perhaps you meant to say that Radical Islam does not use force, violence and hate to further their agenda.

Edited April 22, 2008 by AngusThermopyle

[Peter F]

You really don't know what Radical Islam is?

Nope.

Most strange. Lets see, the simple form. Radical Islam comprises of those fanatics who believe blowing people up to make a point is fair game. Radical Islam is comprised of those who would kill others who disagree with them, or "offend" them. Radical Islam is comprised of those who hate and incite violent action against those they hate. Radical Islam is comprised of those who would change the customs and institutions of host countries. Radical Islam is comprised of those who use innocents as mules for carrying remote bombs.

Thats the short answer of what Radical Islam is, understand now?

Yes, thank-you.

Inroads is the changing of host cultures, the push to adopt Sharia law, you do know what Sharia is don't you? Inroads are made when minority populations feel free to behave any way they wish, always contrary to the accepted norms of the host society.

Okay, so now I know what 'inroads' is.

So, you feel these elements are desirable?

Radical Inroads? Of course not. Whatever would give you that idea? Perhaps you jumped to a conclusion because I don't subscribe to a policy of mass deportations based soley on the pronouncements of somebody else in some other land. I guess to you if Chavez of Venuzuela says something about the USofA being the enemy of South America then all those of South American heritage should be deported back to where-ever they came from.

Or perhaps you just have trouble distinguishing between radical and moderate.

I don't think so...Deporting muslims because some other muslim said something nasty is Radical. Moderate is not blaming people for the words of another.

Or perhaps, inconceivable as it may be to me, you desire the spread of radical ideologies.

Radical as you define it? I do not desire that in any way whatsoever.

That being the case, if in fact it is, how bout we give free reign to all religiously based groups to use force to further their agendas? Or is it just Radical Islam that you feel should be free to use force in the pursuit of their goals?

as it is not the case the questions are moot

Wait a minute, maybe I missed your point. perhaps you meant to say that Radical Islam does not use force, violence and hate to further their agenda.

Yes, you most certainly did miss my point. There is nowhere to deport Muslims if said muslims are Canadians.

Now why you would think that means I think there are no terrorists in this world or irresponsible or illegal uses of force, violence and/or hate to further peoples agenda's is beyond me.

Perhaps you should check your strawmen at home. They serve no purpose here.

[oreodontist]

I wonder what a society made up of varying percentages of WarBicycles would look like?

Fortunately the percent of Warbicycles and other bigots is diminishing in western societies. I'll tell my Muslim friends to feel free to have a couple more kids despite Warbicycles paranoid hysteria.

Ooooo the Muslim boogyman is gonna getcha...ooooo

[WarBicycle]

Tell that to the Lebanese, fifty years ago Lebanon was a Christian country and the jewel of the Middle East, today it is in shatters thanks to militant Islam. Your Muslim friends represent a small minority in Canada, once their numbers increase to the 5 to 10 percent range one can expect nothing but trouble from them. History has a habit of repeating itself; Muslims have been troublemakers throughout the world since the religion was founded in the 7th century.

[oreodontist]

Tell that to the Lebanese, fifty years ago Lebanon was a Christian country and the jewel of the Middle East, today it is in shatters thanks to militant Islam. Your Muslim friends represent a small minority in Canada, once their numbers increase to the 5 to 10 percent range one can expect nothing but trouble from them. History has a habit of repeating itself; Muslims have been troublemakers throughout the world since the religion was founded in the 7th century.

All 'those generic Muslims' Sure it's not 'the Negroes' or 'the Jews'

Ooooo the Muslim boogyman .... is gonna getcha...ooooo

look out!!!!!!.....it's a Muslim !

[M.Dancer]

Tell that to the Lebanese, fifty years ago Lebanon was a Christian country and the jewel of the Middle East, today it is in shatters thanks to militant Islam. Your Muslim friends represent a small minority in Canada, once their numbers increase to the 5 to 10 percent range one can expect nothing but trouble from them. History has a habit of repeating itself; Muslims have been troublemakers throughout the world since the religion was founded in the 7th century.

Ahem...50 years ago lebanon was still divided amongst Christians, Muslims and Druze. The constitition and parliament they inherited from the French displays that reality.

[Oleg Bach]

Ahem...50 years ago lebanon was still divided amongst Christians, Muslims and Druze. The constitition and parliament they inherited from the French displays that reality.

Look at the brick work on our ancient Christian churches..rotting away! But not the mega-mosques funded by the hateful Saudi royal family that funds the building of hundreds of mosques in North America and Europe - displaceing Christians...and it's all our own fault for abandoning our roots and doctrines for greed ridden secualrism..the goal not of "militant" Islam but of plain ordinary Islamics is to eventually wipe us out and have our children bowing to the east in unison like insects in some ultlitarian hive - and Islam is an ugly utlitarian idea that removes individual rights and freedoms - where as ancient real Christianity protected the rights of the singular individual ("I have not come to save the whole flock but to find the ONE sheep that has fallen into the pit"). When the civil and human personal rights of ONE individual are lost - the rights of the mass are lost! Christ was a very logical devine guy..where as Mohamid - married a rich old widow who funded his so-called spiritual adventure that consisted of conversion by the sword..and once the Muslims are establish in firm number on our turf - Mark my words..they will use violence to convert our grandchildren if they see fit. BUT - we gave up Christianity - the first and most noble social democracy based on TRUTH...as far as that the long dead head of Islam - if it was not for his wifes money would have been an utter failure - Christ change the world without a buck in his jeans...Islam need Saudi money.....they are materialist and all materialist will use violence to over run us.

[Peter F]

Tell that to the Lebanese, fifty years ago Lebanon was a Christian country and the jewel of the Middle East, today it is in shatters thanks to militant Islam. Your Muslim friends represent a small minority in Canada, once their numbers increase to the 5 to 10 percent range one can expect nothing but trouble from them. History has a habit of repeating itself; Muslims have been troublemakers throughout the world since the religion was founded in the 7th century.

I'm unsure if its Militant Muslims or unqualified Muslims that deserve our fear and loathing? Sometimes you separate the two and sometimes you lump them all together. Is it particular muslims or is it all muslims?

Please help.

--Terrified in Tunder Bay

[WarBicycle]

Militant Muslims, the remainder are no different from us; they get go to work, and keep to themselves or their families.

[Peter F]

The goal of militant Islam is to force its will upon the rest of the world; fortunately, we have its history of violence against non-believers to give us a better appreciation and realization of what to expect should they accomplish their ambitions. The politically correct living in the West are quick to acquiesce to what they perceive as reasonable Muslim demands for religious rights. However, how Muslims go about achieving the remainder of their demands should be cause for concern.

When a nation’s Muslim population is approximately 1%, ...blah blah blah

Source

You forgot an essential sentence at the 99% level

To satisfy their blood lust, Muslims then start killing each other for a variety of reasons.

Muslims, you see, lust after blood. Christian states do not. Thus Muslims are dangerous since by being muslim they have the blood-lust. Whereas Non muslims don't have that.

Thus the incessant state of warfare in Muslim Europe since the rise of the Roman Empire....no, wait a sec..that can't be right. It was white/olive skinned followers of judeo-christian sects that have been killing each other in droves over the last 1000 years.

...but we don't have blood lust. We're civilized. We call that Political-Economic Realities.

[GostHacked]

So from that answer am I to believe that you're fine with Radical Islam making inroads into Western nations? Thats very strange to say the least, who would be fine with Radicals forwarding an agenda at the expense of the non radical majority?

Are you just as fine with those same 'western' people landing here in North America that did a good number of native indians? What kind of inroads did that get?

[Peter F]

Hmmm...based on what warbike has said:

Muslim population of Canada is 1.9%

When a nation’s Muslim population is approximately 1%, they are not considered a threat and are considered an integral, but unique segment of society.

Once they real 2% to 3% of a nation’s population they attempt to expand their influence by recruiting or converting other disenfranchised youth. In order to accomplish this they target street gangs and inmates serving time in prison.

Once Muslims reach 10% of a nation’s population the trouble begins. One can expect unruly or mob behavior whenever they feel they have been victimized. (Riots and car burning in France). They will also physically attack and kill or threaten any non-Muslim that insults Islam

So until the 10% is reached we won't have mulsim militancy.

So far Canada is safe...Muslims havn't quite reached to point of expanding influence by recruiting street gangs and convicts (not sure how that expands influence for their coming political and economic demands at the 5% level, but then who am I to argue with university profs)

Yet, because Al-Queda's No.2 says something, we should "Send them all home"

Yet, because Canada's 1.9% Muslims makes them benign and unique then muslims of the non-militant nature "... are no different from us; they get go to work, and keep to themselves or their families"

So when should we send them all home? Now? when they're no different from us? or later when they are 10%? or when they don't "keep to themselves or thier families"?

I thought it was bad for them to keep to themselves or thier families. Don't they then have influence far out of proportion to thier numbers when they do that?

What you are saying is all over the F'ing place. You sound like a conspiracy theorist.

[AngusThermopyle]

Now why you would think that means I think there are no terrorists in this world or irresponsible or illegal uses of force, violence and/or hate to further peoples agenda's is beyond me.

Perhaps you should check your strawmen at home. They serve no purpose here.

Nice to see that you're posting at your usual irrational level.

At what point did I equate all Muslims as being equal to radical/Militant Muslims? Could you show me where I said any such thing please?

Could you also show me where I said all Muslims should be deported? No! Actually I didn't think you could, as usual you were just making shit up as you went along.

Given the title of the thread, specifically the use of the word "millitant" do you find it out of line to deport millitant/radical muslims?

Do you actually have a point that extends beyond hysterical posturing and misunderstanding of the subject under discussion?

[Peter F]

At what point did I equate all Muslims as being equal to radical/Militant Muslims? Could you show me where I said any such thing please?

At what point did I say you did? Could you show me where I said any such thing please?

Could you also show me where I said all Muslims should be deported? No! Actually I didn't think you could, as usual you were just making shit up as you went along.

Well lets see...

Warbike says "Send them all home"

I say "They're already home"

You say I support radical muslims

I say whats a radical muslim

You tell me

I say Oh yeah, I hate those guys but that doesnt mean we should deport all muslims

You sayIm shoving words in your mouth.

Perhaps you should take a pill and realize what the discussion is about here. Here...I'll type in bold letters so's you can have someone read it to you

Warbikes claims that muslims are out to destroy us all is a bullshit generalization. The fact that I must support Radical Muslims because I disagree with warbikes demonization of muslims is also bullshit.

Stop bullshitting!!!

Given the title of the thread, specifically the use of the word "millitant" do you find it out of line to deport millitant/radical muslims?

and given Warbikes mixing of militant muslims with just plain ol muslims...that muslims have been a pain in the worlds backside since the 7 century...that when the muslim population reaches a certain percent then thier blood lust kicks in and they start killing each other after killing everyone else etc etc...

Do pray tell what sort of feeble mental exercise you had to go through to determine he only meant 'militant' muslims?

Can you actually read? Do you always insert words into peoples posts? Are you that Blind???

Do you actually have a point that extends beyond hysterical posturing and misunderstanding of the subject under discussion?

Hey...I even let you define the terms and you still have no idea what ur arguing about.

Now run along...

Edited April 23, 2008 by Peter F

[Guest American Woman]

QUOTE=AngusThermopyle @ Apr 22 2008, 01:09 PM: So from that answer am I to believe that you're fine with Radical Islam making inroads into Western nations? Thats very strange to say the least, who would be fine with Radicals forwarding an agenda at the expense of the non radical majority?

Are you just as fine with those same 'western' people landing here in North America that did a good number of native indians? What kind of inroads did that get?

I think this is what has some people so scared-- they know 'western' people took over other nations, destroying their cultures, so they realize it is possible to do, and thefefore it could happen to us.

[WarBicycle]

The title of this thread is The Goal of Militant Islam, would you bleeding heart Liberals feel better if I change it to Islam | the Religion of Peace?

[Peter F]

The title of this thread is The Goal of Militant Islam, would you bleeding heart Liberals feel better if I change it to Islam | the Religion of Peace?

Change it to whatever you like.

If this thread is about 'militant' islam whats all this bull about "when the percentage of muslims reach 5% of the population...and 10% of the population -20%-40%100%"

I don't think the author of the article was speaking only of militant muslims .

[WarBicycle]

Read the thread again, as their numbers increase militants will use intimidation tactics against other Muslims and recruit thugs from our prisons to do the dirty work.

[Peter F]

Read the thread again, as their numbers increase militants will use intimidation tactics against other Muslims and recruit thugs from our prisons to do the dirty work.

Okay I admit defeat...you don't mean muslims in general you only mean Militant muslims. Fine.

Now lets review your posts in light of the above clarification.

Warbikes post #1 of this thread (italics mine):

The politically correct living in the West are quick to acquiesce to what they perceive as reasonablemilitant Muslim demands for religious rights. However, how militant Muslims go about achieving the remainder of their demands should be cause for concern.

When a nation’s militant Muslim population is approximately 1%, they are not considered a threat and are considered an integral, but unique segment of society.

Ahjeez now we already find contradictions... How can 1% of Muslim population be militant and "not considered a threat" and how can Militant muslims be considered an integral but unique segment of society" ?

What makes such muslims militant at all? Thier unthreatening behaviour; thier integration but unique status; Thats militant?

Same thing for 2-3% level. Militant muslims recriut amongst disenfranchised youth, streetgangs and prisoners.

What is it that makes these muslims militant? There are Christian missions out doing the exact same thing and no one considers that 'militant' or dangerous.

5% level: they (militant muslims) make exceedingly unreasonable demands ;they will insist on the availability of halal food ; they will demand modesty hours at public pools; they will demand the right for women to cover the faces on photo ID; and, most important, they will use the threat of litigation should and institution or employer fail to comply. They will also pressure the government in power to allow them to govern themselves under Sharia law.

...Whats so militant about that? Thats the normal process of lobbying and politics in a democratic open society.

and we go on to "Once militant Muslims reach 10% of a nation’s population the trouble begins"

hmmm...

Guyana -- Muslim 10%

India -- Muslim 13.4%

Israel -- Muslim 16%

Kenya -- Muslim 10%

Russia -- Muslim 10-15%

Those percentages actually mean 'militant' muslims and not just plain ordinary nonkilling muslims ...

'cept the CIA Factbook from wich the numbers are taken don't specify that those percentages mean Militant Muslims as seperate from muslims. Otherwise Militant Muslims make up 16% of the population of Israel....and non-militant muslims make up some other non-specified proportion of the population of Israel. To carry on enters the realm of ludicrous.

So I contend that the article doesn't make any logical sense if 'Muslim' means Militant Muslims, but actually has a bigotted logic if 'muslims' means exactlty what the author says: muslims. Wich would explain why the author doesn't say militant muslims. You see, he knows how to structure an argument (such as it is).

Warbikes post #3 of this thread:

Al-Qaeda's No. 2 In another answer, al-Zawahri said it was against Islamic religious law for any Muslim to live permanently in a Western country "under the laws of the infidels."

Great, perhaps it is time we send them home

.

Warbike only means 'Militant' muslims. Yet al-Zawahri doesn't mean militant muslims but all muslims. Sorry...I don't buy it. If thats what you meant, that's what you would have said. You meant what al-Zawahri referred to - all muslims, thus no qualification in your reply.

Warbikes post #10:

... today it is in shatters thanks to militant Islam.

Very clear and straitforward. You mean what you wrote. Understood.

Your Muslim friends represent a small minority in Canada, once their numbers increase to the 5 to 10 percent range one can expect nothing but trouble from them. History has a habit of repeating itself; Muslims have been troublemakers throughout the world since the religion was founded in the 7th century.

Warbike still means militant muslims. but we run into more contradictions:

Warbike was responding to Oreodontists' post #9

I'll tell my Muslim friends to feel free to have a couple more kids despite Warbicycles paranoid hysteria

Did Oreodontist mean his Militant Muslim friends? Perhaps...but I doubt it. I doubt very much Oreodontist has 'militant' muslim friends (that is the blood lusting type of muslim). Who would?

When warbike responds about the historic dangers of Oreodontists 'muslim' friends he doesn't appear to mean Militant Muslims at all. Just Oreodontists friends. Why would Warbike assume Oreodontist's friends are militants?

I suspect the answer to that is because Oreo's pals are Muslims.

The horse is dead. Further beatings will get nowhere.

Muslims are just as much the victims of terrorism and state reaction to terrorism as any Israeli, American, Spaniard, Christian, Hindu, or anyone else. Everyone invokes thier diety to justify thier actions - thus 'crusade' and 'Evil' and 'Good'. To claim Islam a threat to civilization and our very lives is just a bigotted generalization that lumps the Terrorists and Radicals and Militants and war-sickened Afghani's and bleeding-hearts and innocents all into the same group.

That is morally contemptable. We have a problem with Militants and Radicals then lets take action against Militants and Radicals in particular...not everybody under the sun.

Edited April 23, 2008 by Peter F