I too read your first article and to be frank, this all has been presented and promoted by Obama for years. I find it pathetic and not really meriting argument. As an example, who ever would have suggested that we should not have declared war on Germany and the fascists because doing such would make more Germans join their army and fight us? I mean it is just too stupid to argue such an absurdity. I won't suffer through your second article because it too like Obama, analyzes the situation as though there is nothing but the big daddy US who is responsible for everything. That is not reality in life in this world. Yes the US assumed a significant role in politics in the ME after WWII that today, makes us a target for terrorism and the MB. But we did not create the terrorism or the MB. Most importantly, the MB does not equal Islam. It is a POLITICAL movement within the Sunni sect of Islam founded to restore the Ottoman Empire. Do you have a clue to what current countries where under that Empire? This is a brief history and counter to its jihad:
http://counterjihad.com/backgrounder/what-is-the-muslim-brotherhood/#backgrounder-section-3http://counterjihad.com/backgrounder/what-is-the-muslim-brotherhood/#backgrounder-section-3 Note that the MB buddied up with Hitler and his fascists. On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 2:42:22 PM UTC-6, Pittalum wrote: > > I posted 2 articles on why it's not a good idea to designate MB as a > terrorist organization. Did you read either of them? > > Janet Jackson has converted to Islam. They, as far as I know, are required > by that religion to donate to other Muslim charities. Do you think the MB > doesn't run any charities? That is exactly how Cat Stevens got caught up in > all that stupidity years ago... > > If either of the 2 articles I previously linked aren't of interest to you, > maybe this one will be. I recommend reading it too before you continue on > this war with Islam path you cons are so intent upon travelling... > > "A realistic look at America’s recent past in the Greater Middle East and > a humbler perspective on its global role suggest two unsatisfying but vital > conclusions. First, false lessons and misbegotten collective assumptions > contributed to and created much of today’s regional mess. As a result, > it’s long past time to reassess recent history and challenge long-held > suppositions. Second, policymakers badly overestimated the efficacy of > American power, especially via the military, to shape foreign peoples and > cultures to their desires. In all of this, the agency of locals and the > inherent contingency of events were conveniently swept aside." > > > http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/176245/tomgram%3A_danny_sjursen%2C_mission_unaccomplished%2C_15_years_later/#more > > I can only show you to the door. You have to turn the damn knob... > > > On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 2:53:32 PM UTC-5, btdt100 wrote: >> >> Where are you getting your stuff? Janet Jackson is a member of the Muslim >> Brotherhood? I can't substantiate any of that stuff. Are you not aware >> that being a Muslim and being a member of the Brotherhood are not the same >> thing? The Muslim Brotherhood is not a 'very old and very common >> organization'. It was founded in the 1920's after the fall of the Ottoman >> Empire so to restore a caliphate like the Ottoman Empire. That is to say, >> the dissolution of all the secular governments and establishment of rule >> over ALL Muslims and their countries by a religious man, preferrably a >> descendant of Mohammed. And yea, making public laws according to God's law >> - Sharia. You know, one of those theocracies you liberals claim to oppose >> when it comes to Christians or Jews. Do you have a clue to what you are >> defending? >> >> >> >> >> On Tuesday, February 21, 2017 at 10:11:45 AM UTC-6, Pittalum wrote: >>> >>> So, then you are in agreement that we should designate the entire, >>> sprawling organization of the* Muslim Brotherhood* as a terrorist >>> organization. Do you even know what that means, or the implications - or do >>> you understand how far flung that *organization* is? >>> >>> Does that mean you will then be Ok with, say, prosecuting Kareem Abdul >>> Jabbar, or Janet Jackson, or Shaquille O'Neill, or Cat Stevens (again) for >>> providing material support to terrorist organizations when they give money >>> to muslim charities that could easily be connected in some way to that very >>> old and very common organization? >>> >>> One of the things I find most irritating about conservatives is how >>> often they so easily jump to some rash conclusion or snap judgement with >>> little consideration to what will follow. >>> >>> Did either of you read either of the articles I linked to above? >>> >>>> >>>>> -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
