"Frank Reichert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in small part: > That issue is probably not a real convincing argument that > Islamic states, or governments, are tolerant simply because they > protected their population base against slave traders. The > larger issue here as I see it is fundamentalist Islamic Law, > period! This is likely what the majority of American Muslims > wish to impose upon America, whether that takes 10 years, 100 > years, or 500 years. And history shows, they are very patient in > achieving such goals. A cursory check of Europe and the growth > rates between Islamic minorities and that of the predominately > indigenous population over the next 100 years, indicates that the > 100-year time frame is obviously something they may be willing to > wait out until the time is convenient for Islamic domination over > the existing culture. Why would ANYONE really want to trade > "temporary liberty" for the end result of eventually being > subjected under absolute tyranny under Islamic Law?
Because "temporary" in this case is CENTURIES, more than people's lifetimes! Islamic Spain was freer than Christian Spain for centuries! Plotting anything longer than that is megalomaniacal and silly. Things change. In a century, the world could blow up. > > Islam now seems to > > be largely a religion of spite; the Black Muslims have been the most crudely > > & comically so. > This is silly! I don't see it that way at all. Islam is on a > giant roll! Currently Islam is on huge insurgent recruitment > effort that is adding thousands of new freedom fighters (or > terrorists, you choose your own label) to their cause each and > every day... and they will gladly kill you by taking their own > lives whenever possible to do so. How does any of that disagree with what I wrote above, or render it silly? Do you think there's a contradiction between spite and the will to kill people? Or between crudeness and comical understanding, and the will to kill people? > > Don't > > condemn Islam as not treating women in a certain way; rather, promote > > women's lib by explaining WHY that's BETTER for people. > > That maybe can help, but before you utter another word on this > subject, first read Ayaan Ali's biography. Because that's what > she IS doing, and they want to kill her for even suggesting such > things amongst Islamists! What I'm saying, is when you promote > such things as you just suggested, within the Islamic communities > within pluralistic democracies, you could be killed for doing so. There are many things I COULD be killed for. Do you see any way to PREVENT murders? Basically, if one person has it in for another badly enough, there's not a lot anyone can do about it. But we can be satisfied that, most of the time, most people aren't killing most other people. Do you see anything better than current methods of security & law enforcement that would reduce the toll even further? In Your Sly Tribe, Robert _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list Libnw@immosys.com List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
