What really irks me about the tea party is their foreign policy and views on Muslims

[Depressed Liberator]

Maybe it's because I have family in Iran, but I feel strongly about foreign policy, wars, etc. This whole non issue with the mosque being built in the vicinity of where the World Trade Center used to be is really pissing me off. This talk about a war with Iran is pissing me off. I fucking hate Glenn Beck and his hijacking of what was our movement. I hate him because of his constant war mongering with Iran.

And I know the Beck and tea party apologists will come say things like, "But where would our movement be without them?" Same place it is now. Most of the tea parties I attended or people I have seen or read about in them are just neocons who are using the opportunity to advance their shitty agenda. Almost everyone is stuck in the left-right paradigm. It's all about being against the Democrats, and once there is another Republican in the White House, things will be all back to normal for them. Our movement? Still will be stuck where it is.

[Kregisen]

Sadly you're correct.....look at the advanced polls, the tea party is voting for Romney and Huckabee more than non tea-party Republicans are.

Its all a joke.....and if a Republican wins the presidency in 2012, the tea party is GONE.

[silverhandorder]

That is to be expected there are a lot of republicans with no ideology. Go out and mingle, you will find out not everyone is an asshole.

What should really irk you is how fake anti war left is.

[Noob]

Of course this what happens when the Neocons take over.

[lester1/2jr]

It's amazing all these years after 9/11 and after all the years in iraq that there are still ANY hawks. It's insane really

[paulitics]

The shift in power has already happened. I can feel it, the neocons are in control in anticaption of the republican controlled congress.

A new movement needs to be born NOW, and this time we need to make it clear that the government needs to be downsized in all areas.

[Stary Hickory]

It's amazing all these years after 9/11 and after all the years in iraq that there are still ANY hawks. It's insane really

Not as many as you would think. Don't mistake support for Romney for support for the wars. ATM in the eyes of the tea party there is no mainstream candidate that has a chance of winning who has better foreign policy views. A guy like Rand Paul could easily get elected with the tea party.

Many in the tea party want to make sure Obama is gone, they will vote for any strong Republican candidate, but they would also jump all over a non establishment candidate if it was thought he would win. Someone like Rand Paul or Sandford is a good bet with them.

[oyarde]

I was not aware the Tea Party had official policies on Islam and Foreign policy.Can someone post it ?

[Stary Hickory]

I was not aware the Tea Party had official policies on Islam and Foreign policy.Can someone post it ?

Exactly, there is none.

[Depressed Liberator]

I was not aware the Tea Party had official policies on Islam and Foreign policy.Can someone post it ?

There are plenty of groups that doing stuff to oppose the mosque in NYC. And every tea party I have been to has discussed Obama "apologizing to the world" and our lack of support for Israel (wut?), stuff like that.

[specsaregood]

What really irks me about the tea party is their foreign policy and views on Muslims

The "tea party" represents a wide variety of people with a wide variety of views. Keep that in mind when you try to tie them all up in a collective nutshell. My experience is that foreign policy is not nearly the #1 issue to most "tea party" people. I might suggest focusing on the issues where you agree with the majority of the members. Then tie it back in with the issues you disagee upon.

[oyarde]

There are plenty of groups that doing stuff to oppose the mosque in NYC. And every tea party I have been to has discussed Obama "apologizing to the world" and our lack of support for Israel (wut?), stuff like that.

I have not really seen any of that except maybe on Hannity.

[WaltM]

so lets take back the one we started, anti-warfare, anti-welfare!
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=257443

[CryLibertyOrDeath]

I agree with Rand Paul on the issue of the mosque.

[speciallyblend]

this is a created issue by the neo-cons and fear-mongering wing of the gop! this does nothing but alienate this radical wing of the gop!! we must take advantage of this and call them out some how!!!

[CryLibertyOrDeath]

70% of the American people agree that the mosque shouldn't be built there. I don't know why you think that the GOP agreeing with them is going to alienate anyone but the Democrats who think it should be built there.

[speciallyblend]

70% of the American people agree that the mosque shouldn't be built there. I don't know why you think that the GOP agreeing with them is going to alienate anyone but the Democrats who think it should be built there.

then this country is pretty screwed i would say possibly beyond repair!! It alienates me for sure! i want nothing to do with these 70% of fear worshipers!!

[maqsur]

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-16-2010/mosque-erade?xrs=share_copy

[Kregisen]

70% of the American people agree that the mosque shouldn't be built there. I don't know why you think that the GOP agreeing with them is going to alienate anyone but the Democrats who think it should be built there.

Whether or not something SHOULD happen is irrelevant to whether we should be STOPPING someone from doing it.

For health reasons you shouldn't smoke or eat fast food, 100% of people have to agree with that....however, I'm hoping the vast majority still think we all have our own choices to make.

The way Fox slants the issue into a question of whether or not a mosque SHOULD be built there is very biased.

[rnestam]

"ANTI-WAR?....REALLY??? RON PAUL 2012"

Would be a good freeway sign in 'blue states'

I am a converted Lefty to the movement, so are most followers I know being in MA...there are millions of votes on the left to be had...People I know will vote for the most anti-neocon's regardless...and it's looking nice for us that the new boss is the same as the old boss......

[speciallyblend]

"ANTI-WAR?....REALLY??? RON PAUL 2012"

Would be a good freeway sign in 'blue states'

I am a converted Lefty to the movement, so are most followers I know being in MA...there are millions of votes on the left to be had...People I know will vote for the most anti-neocon's regardless...and it's looking nice for us that the new boss is the same as the old boss......

i totally agree with you! have been saying this since i joined the gop yrs back!

[Minuteman2012]

I don't have a positive view of Muslims, though I am not a member of the Tea Party. One of the reasons I am a non-interventionist is because I don't think we should get caught up in the irrationality of Islamic politics. Their religion is an antithesis to the concept of Liberty and Justice.

And this Cordoba Mosque(anyone who has studied Islamic History like I have, knows the significance of Cordoba as the staging point for the Islamic invasion of Spain and the rest of Europe) at ground Zero really makes my view more negative towards the religion. It is incredibly disrespectful towards those who died and as a negative symbolic connotation in Islam. In the, past,mosques were built at battle sites and conquered areas to show the spiritual and physical dominance of Islam in the area, and this Imam, who is a radical, no doubt has the same purpose. If his purpose was cultural dialogue, he could have built an interfaith cultural center there. But if he wanted to build a mosque to honestly fit an excess of Muslims in the area he could have put it in several other available spots. This clearly is not a coincidence, it didn't happen by accident. I oppose any government action to stop it, but encourage strikes by organized labor to prohibit the mosque from being built.

[freshjiva]

I don't have a positive view of Muslims, though I am not a member of the Tea Party. One of the reasons I am a non-interventionist is because I don't think we should get caught up in the irrationality of Islamic politics. Their religion is an antithesis to the concept of Liberty and Justice.

And this Cordoba Mosque(anyone who has studied Islamic History like I have, knows the significance of Cordoba as the staging point for the Islamic invasion of Spain and the rest of Europe) at ground Zero really makes my view more negative towards the religion. It is incredibly disrespectful towards those who died and as a negative symbolic connotation in Islam. In the, past,mosques were built at battle sites and conquered areas to show the spiritual and physical dominance of Islam in the area, and this Imam, who is a radical, no doubt has the same purpose. If his purpose was cultural dialogue, he could have built an interfaith cultural center there. But if he wanted to build a mosque to honestly fit an excess of Muslims in the area he could have put it in several other available spots. This clearly is not a coincidence, it didn't happen by accident. I oppose any government action to stop it, but encourage strikes by organized labor to prohibit the mosque from being built.

Collectivism...objectivism.
Groups...individuals.

I hope you understand the analogy and why I used it in response to your post.

[rnestam]

I don't have a positive view of Muslims, though I am not a member of the Tea Party. One of the reasons I am a non-interventionist is because I don't think we should get caught up in the irrationality of Islamic politics. Their religion is an antithesis to the concept of Liberty and Justice.

And this Cordoba Mosque(anyone who has studied Islamic History like I have, knows the significance of Cordoba as the staging point for the Islamic invasion of Spain and the rest of Europe) at ground Zero really makes my view more negative towards the religion. It is incredibly disrespectful towards those who died and as a negative symbolic connotation in Islam. In the, past,mosques were built at battle sites and conquered areas to show the spiritual and physical dominance of Islam in the area, and this Imam, who is a radical, no doubt has the same purpose. If his purpose was cultural dialogue, he could have built an interfaith cultural center there. But if he wanted to build a mosque to honestly fit an excess of Muslims in the area he could have put it in several other available spots. This clearly is not a coincidence, it didn't happen by accident. I oppose any government action to stop it, but encourage strikes by organized labor to prohibit the mosque from being built.

If it is private property, do what they will....If it is in NY, no one outside of NY should care...I have not studied Islam, but from what I have heard they have a soft spot for Orphans....someone should recommend a list of every Orphaned child made on 9/11 be carved into a stone monument right inside the damn mosque. Now that would be touching, and go a long way to soften the tone. I'm sure there are other things that could be done that hit on the Islamic religion to honor the dead of that day, but instead of talking about it and testing how far they will go to prove their prayers will be for peace and not war, it becomes a black and white topic to horde sheeple votes...I am 100% against any protests against this site, not because letting it happen would "show our tolerance", but because it would show we don't give a fuck about anything but individual liberty period. Come to America and do as you will as long as it harms no one else period. That is a message 1000x stronger than tolerance. Tolerance is just permission from a stronger force, but we need to pound that the strongest force here is "you", the individual. Build whatever you want, where ever you want, as long as it doesn't fall over and kill someone you're good. America.

Anyway, back on topic, can't fucking wait until the 2012 election season so I can 24/7 slam all my Obama loving friends into Ron Paul votes.....YEAHHHHHH!!!! All about the slow sell, and they are sitting defenseless ducks right now. Just try and be nice and watch the votes pour in...

[Minuteman2012]

I just want to stop the mosque through peaceful liberty oriented means like strikes, no force whatsoever.

[rnestam]

I just want to stop the mosque through peaceful liberty oriented means like strikes, no force whatsoever.

And I think the people will do just that. If average citizens show up and protest everyday they will close there doors eventually. I would rather see it built, then closed if they show disrespect after the fact... Than anything organized, even on the street level.

Like the whole "Rand Paul Civil Rights Act" thing. There was a story of a pool somewhere that turned away a black kid, it made national news and everyone got pissed and they crumbled. But if the pool was never built, then the people would never have had the chance to snub it on there own. A lunch counter would never survive these days as a whites only, not because the government saved us from racism on paper, but because it is the people will as good individuals, minds got changed for the better. Let them build it, let them disrespect us, and it won't last long....but who knows, maybe it will do more good than any hearts and minds campaign in the battle could. Just have to let it play out I guess. But again, I am not studied on the meanings of certain building etc. so I know you know better, but a coy response that lets them build, then reacts to any disrespect if it happens would serve us better. It is NY, they won't play, place is getting mobbed after the first anti-American speech is spewed. And if they know that too, than a "pro-American" Mosque at ground zero could be amazing.

[BlackTerrel]

And this Cordoba Mosque(anyone who has studied Islamic History like I have, knows the significance of Cordoba as the staging point for the Islamic invasion of Spain and the rest of Europe) at ground Zero really makes my view more negative towards the religion. It is incredibly disrespectful towards those who died and as a negative symbolic connotation in Islam. In the, past,mosques were built at battle sites and conquered areas to show the spiritual and physical dominance of Islam in the area, and this Imam, who is a radical, no doubt has the same purpose.

Yes. The great Islamic triumph at the Burlington Coat Factory.


I just want to stop the mosque through peaceful liberty oriented means like strikes, no force whatsoever.

Like what kind of strike? That the people who oppose it will refuse to go? I don't think that will stop them...

[RM918]

The private property argument has not gotten me anywhere with folks who watch Glenn Beck. The ones I speak with agree that the city or the federal government shouldn't stop them from building there, but they think this is just a gigantic dick move by the people building this place. Especially how they want to open it on 9/11 next year, everything about it just looks suspicious and with the purpose of pissing people off.

Me, personally, I know the only reason we're hearing about this is the fact that the establishment wants to drum up hatred against Muslims and provide yet another distraction from their incompetence at home and abroad. Despite the fact the guys drumming up this controversy were the exact ones that failed us on 9/11, let bin Laden go and continue to refuse to hunt down the monsters that committed this act in favor of milking the event dry for every horrific pet project they can muster.

They don't see it, though. They hate seeing people 'roll over for Muslims' and encourage this sort of thing, even though we'd build a military base right next to goddamned Hiroshima.

[Pauls' Revere]

What gets me is we get all upset about a Islamic Mosque in our country but we dont think twice about our military bases in Islamic countries. Seems we have a double standard.

List of US Military bases worldwide:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

[ibaghdadi]

I don't have a positive view of Muslims, though I am not a member of the Tea Party. One of the reasons I am a non-interventionist is because I don't think we should get caught up in the irrationality of Islamic politics.
"Irrationality of Islamic politics" = I don't understand them, don't care to understand them, so instead of trying to understand them or admitting my ignorance, I'll just say they don't make sense.


Their religion is an antithesis to the concept of Liberty and Justice.
Care to tell me why my religion, and the religion of many here at RPF, and many more in the liberty movement, is an "antithesis to the concept of liberty and justice"? A society cannot be built, a civilization cannot exist, without liberty and justice.


And this Cordoba Mosque(anyone who has studied Islamic History like I have, knows the significance of Cordoba as the staging point for the Islamic invasion of Spain and the rest of Europe) at ground Zero really makes my view more negative towards the religion.
I can see where you get your information about "Islamic History" from. And it's quite telling that the choice of name of the center (it's not a mosque) by some person gives you a negative view towards the ENTIRE religion. Very revealing.


In the 10th-11th centuries Córdoba was one of the most advanced cities in the world, as well as a great cultural, political, financial and economic centre. The Great Mosque of Córdoba dates back to this time; under caliph Al-Hakam II Córdoba received what was then the largest library in the world, housing from 400,000 to 1,000,000 volumes.

Incidentally, it's not a mosque (it's an Islamic youth center with a prayer room), and it's not called Cordoba any more (Park 51 is the latest name).

I'll let Keith Olbermann take it from here. I know, he's a douche, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

YouTube - Keith Olbermann Special Comment: There Is No 'Ground Zero Mosque' - 08/16/10 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZpT2Muxoo0)

"Antithesis to the concepts of liberty and justice". That's one for the books.

[silentshout]

I completely agree with you, OP, and the others that are disgusted with this. It puts me off going to any tea party type events around here..this is the kind of stuff they go on about, well at least according to a friend of mine who has gone to one of their local events. I just don't think I'd fit in well there.

[Minuteman2012]

Yes. The great Islamic triumph at the Burlington Coat Factory.



Like what kind of strike? That the people who oppose it will refuse to go? I don't think that will stop them...

No a labor strike.

[Minuteman2012]

"Irrationality of Islamic politics" = I don't understand them, don't care to understand them, so instead of trying to understand them or admitting my ignorance, I'll just say they don't make sense.


Care to tell me why my religion, and the religion of many here at RPF, and many more in the liberty movement, is an "antithesis to the concept of liberty and justice"? A society cannot be built, a civilization cannot exist, without liberty and justice.


I can see where you get your information about "Islamic History" from. And it's quite telling that the choice of name of the center (it's not a mosque) by some person gives you a negative view towards the ENTIRE religion. Very revealing.



Incidentally, it's not a mosque (it's an Islamic youth center with a prayer room), and it's not called Cordoba any more (Park 51 is the latest name).

I'll let Keith Olbermann take it from here. I know, he's a douche, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

YouTube - Keith Olbermann Special Comment: There Is No 'Ground Zero Mosque' - 08/16/10 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZpT2Muxoo0)

"Antithesis to the concepts of liberty and justice". That's one for the books.

I know about Islamic politics, but I don't care to change it, or deal with it, with loss of American life and treasure. They will westernize in due time through free trade and cultural exchange. This is happening with Iran despite sanctions and the fact we don't talk with Iran.

Plenty of states can exist without liberty and justice, most societies in human history have been totalitarian. Sharia law is out of line with our constitution, most notably in that it recognizes no right of religious freedom, and treats religious/irreligious minorities as second class citizens. Equal protection under the law is essential in a free society, and sharia creates a two tiered society.

I just took a Medieval Studies Class at my university, and it was hardly anti-muslim, it merely stated historical facts. The fact is, Islam did try to conquer the known world and built mosques on conquered territory.

Cordoba House is part of park 51, the name cordoba house was never revoked.

It is half a football field away from ground zero, it is at ground zero. I will let Michelle Malkin take it from here, I mean, even a war mongering neo con is right twice a day.
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/08/15/ground-zero-mosque-2/

[Baptist]

I've never been to NY and probably never will. I could care less if the mosque gets built and am sick of hearing about it. If I had it my way, somebody would build a 13-story billboard that says "9/11 was an inside job" on the site.

In regards to the wars, I will never again support any war no matter what the circumstances. I hope we lose these wars because we are in the wrong.

[Minuteman2012]

I haven't give money to anything other than the Rand Paul campaign, but if Greg Gutfeld goes ahead with the gay bar across the street from the Mosque, I plan on giving money anyway I can.
:)
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/greg-gutfield-to-open-a-gay-bar-next-to-ground-zero-mosque-to-cater-to-islamic-gay-men/

[ibaghdadi]

Sharia law is out of line with our constitution, most notably in that it recognizes no right of religious freedom, and treats religious/irreligious minorities as second class citizens.
Elaborate.


The fact is, Islam did try to conquer the known world and built mosques on conquered territory.
And Christians didn't? Most was dynastic expansion to fill the coffers of kings and sultans with little regard for religion. Much like in Europe, many sultans waged war on each other and looted each others coffers.

The whole "Islam spread through conquest" myth is just tired. Indonesia is the largest Islamic country in terms of population. No Muslim soldier has ever set foot there.

There are more than 75 million Muslims in Nigeria (over 50% of the population). No Muslim soldier has ever set foot there.

A full quarter of the population of South India is Muslim. No Muslim soldier ever set foot there.

[JohnEngland]

The "tea party" represents a wide variety of people with a wide variety of views. Keep that in mind when you try to tie them all up in a collective nutshell. My experience is that foreign policy is not nearly the #1 issue to most "tea party" people. I might suggest focusing on the issues where you agree with the majority of the members. Then tie it back in with the issues you disagee upon.

This.

But just on a related note, which I think relates to both the Republicans and Democrats (because, let's be honest, they're both for war):

As an outsider to America (ie England), I just don't get this support for Israel. Yes, I know it's primarily a religious thing, and I'm a proper Catholic and all, but nevertheless, the rest of Christianity around the world doesn't have this insane worship of this small strip of land.

Why is it that so many in [what appears] America specifically can have very sensible positions on economics and the role of government - in fact, Americans understand liberty and individualism better than any other country - but when it comes to Israel, the same people just throw their brains out the window and demand World War 3!

I'm pretty sure Americans haven't always had this devotion. Perhaps only since the 1950s onwards?

And, on another side note: Why do so many think that America can just go around bombing whatever country they want? Perhaps this is one of the social consequences of being a superpower - I'm sure that back in the day, we Brits used to think the same!

Well anyway, I know on this forum many of us are asking the same questions. When will common sense prevail in this world? :p

[Minuteman2012]

Elaborate.


And Christians didn't? Most was dynastic expansion to fill the coffers of kings and sultans with little regard for religion. Much like in Europe, many sultans waged war on each other and looted each others coffers.

The whole "Islam spread through conquest" myth is just tired. Indonesia is the largest Islamic country in terms of population. No Muslim soldier has ever set foot there.

There are more than 75 million Muslims in Nigeria (over 50% of the population). No Muslim soldier has ever set foot there.

A full quarter of the population of South India is Muslim. No Muslim soldier ever set foot there.
Well, I will give one Sunni examples and one Shia example.

In Iran, a shia nation, under blasphemy laws, conversion from Islam earns the death penalty, proselytizing and publishing zoroastian/christian/jewish literature is illegal, there is heavy surveillance of churches, and churches cannot do services in persian.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_Iran
http://www.persecution.org/suffering/countryinfodetail.php?countrycode=21

In Saudi Arabia, it is illegal to be a non-muslim, flat out, it earns the death penalty.

Apostasy earns anywhere from imprisonment, to loss of citizenship, to caning, to the death penalty in muslim countries with strict sharia/ Here are the list of countries:
Saudi Arabia
Iran
Algeria
Five States in Malaysia
Yemen
Bahrain
Oman
Qatar
Jordan
http://christianquoter.blogspot.com/2009/02/speak-up-on-behalf-of-apostates-from.html
http://www.missionandjustice.org/9-detained-in-yemen-for-apostasy/
And many countries do nothing about vigilantes who kill apostates

No, not really, Christianity spread through missionaries in the near east and europe and the British Isles. And even if Christianity did, it wouldn't excuse Islam engaging in it.

So what? They conquered the arabian peninsula, Persia, the levant, north, Africa, and southern spain, by force, just because not all islamic countries were conquered by muhammad's armies, doesn't mean most countries which are Islamic today weren't.

[00_Pete]

a) I dont think their opinions regarding Muslims and the WOT are as bad as some claim, most of this comes from the leftist media, you know the "racist rednecks hillbillies who hate ayrabs...etc...etc...". Unfortunatly, when it comes to "cultural" things many libertarians buy what the leftist propaganda says.

b) The opinions of some of them regarding this issues just "come with the package" and people should be smart like Rand Paul is, work with it instead of working against it. Sometimes you just have to bullsh*t people to do the right thing. I remember watching a Rothbard lecture where he clearly says (in half words) that libertarians should be more like Marxists when it comes to bullsh*t...

[nobody's_hero]

I find that a good strategy in winning over Muslim-haterz is to just say "fuck 'em." You have to make it sound like we aren't giving up anything.

Ex.:

"You know [insert teocon's name here], I don't see why our troops should have to stay over there and help those backward ragheads to rebuild their nation. We've been over there for ten years now [actually a lot longer, but don't confuse their tiny brains, since everything in their mind started since 9/11], and those people won't step up and take control of their own country. I say, "f*ck 'em". It's time to come home, stay on our guard, and if anyone messes with us, we just blow 'em up. We don't have to give up our security, but we sure as hell ought to stop putting our troops' lives on the line for theirs."

Now, that's spun a bit, but I've found that maybe, 40% of the time, it actually works.

[ibaghdadi]

Saudi Arabia
Iran
Algeria
Five States in Malaysia
Yemen
Bahrain
Oman
Qatar
Jordan

Please don't conflate what a certain government or political party does with "Islam". Saudi Arabia also prohibits women from driving, and Tehran is the only capital in the world that doesn't have a Sunni mosque. This is hardly "Islamic".

I don't get my opinions about Christianity from the Spanish Inquisition, for example.

The long list that you gave are exactly the "tyrannical regimes" that we Muslims keep complaining receive US financial and military aid.

To get the final word on "apostasy" in Islam, read this detailed article (http://bit.ly/cT6B7z). It's quite long and goes into significant detail.



So what? They conquered the arabian peninsula, Persia, the levant, north, Africa, and southern spain, by force, just because not all islamic countries were conquered by muhammad's armies, doesn't mean most countries which are Islamic today weren't.

And while successive Islamic empires spread very fast, much of the expansion was by dynasties of sultans who aimed at personal glorification. Islam was not forced upon the population. Egypt, for example, remained majority Christian for the first 400 years after Islamic rule and only became Islamized after the Crusades, some argue as a reaction to the brutality of the Crusader armies.

Quote:

“History makes it clear, however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated” [De Lacy O’Leary in ‘Islam at the Crossroads,’ London, 1923]


I'm really puzzled by the enmity I see for Islam as a religion, culture and civilization - I really am. Very rarely do I find a Christian who is able to have respect for Islam. I mean, Christians did some very horrible things in the past, and the Bible has many surprisingly bloody passages.

Yet I don't equate this with Christianity and I am able to have a deep respect for Christianity, and never did nor ever will say that it's an antithesis to liberty and justice.

[BlackTerrel]

I've never been to NY and probably never will. I could care less if the mosque gets built and am sick of hearing about it. If I had it my way, somebody would build a 13-story billboard that says "9/11 was an inside job" on the site.

In regards to the wars, I will never again support any war no matter what the circumstances. I hope we lose these wars because we are in the wrong.

Honestly your type of attitude pisses me off as much if not more than that of the tea party expressed in the OP. And to be frank it is views like yours that turn people off the message and to the neocons.

If you want America to lose keep it to yourself.


"You know [insert teocon's name here], I don't see why our troops should have to stay over there and help those backward ragheads to rebuild their nation. We've been over there for ten years now [actually a lot longer, but don't confuse their tiny brains, since everything in their mind started since 9/11], and those people won't step up and take control of their own country. I say, "f*ck 'em". It's time to come home, stay on our guard, and if anyone messes with us, we just blow 'em up. We don't have to give up our security, but we sure as hell ought to stop putting our troops' lives on the line for theirs."

Pretty much. Although you don't have to come it from a perspective of being so smart and they have "such tiny brains".

If you make the argument that the wars are not in our interests - it costs a lot of our own money, resources, and lives, and doesn't actually cause any good or stop the terror threat - you will be in good shape. 90% of people will either agree with you or at least cede that you have a valid point.

If you make the point expressed by some here "we're so bad", "they're so great", "I hope we lose" you will be rejected by 90% and never accomplish anything.

It's all about whether we want to 1) help stop the wars or 2) we want to get on some fucking moral high ground and preach and laugh about how everyone else is so dumb. To me it's a pretty easy #1 and the gist of what you said is the most effective way to do that.

[Minuteman2012]

Please don't conflate what a certain government or political party does with "Islam". Saudi Arabia also prohibits women from driving, and Tehran is the only capital in the world that doesn't have a Sunni mosque. This is hardly "Islamic".

I don't get my opinions about Christianity from the Spanish Inquisition, for example.

The long list that you gave are exactly the "tyrannical regimes" that we Muslims keep complaining receive US financial and military aid.

To get the final word on "apostasy" in Islam, read this detailed article (http://bit.ly/cT6B7z). It's quite long and goes into significant detail.




And while successive Islamic empires spread very fast, much of the expansion was by dynasties of sultans who aimed at personal glorification. Islam was not forced upon the population. Egypt, for example, remained majority Christian for the first 400 years after Islamic rule and only became Islamized after the Crusades, some argue as a reaction to the brutality of the Crusader armies.

Quote:


I'm really puzzled by the enmity I see for Islam as a religion, culture and civilization - I really am. Very rarely do I find a Christian who is able to have respect for Islam. I mean, Christians did some very horrible things in the past, and the Bible has many surprisingly bloody passages.

Yet I don't equate this with Christianity and I am able to have a deep respect for Christianity, and never did nor ever will say that it's an antithesis to liberty and justice.

I didn't realize tyranny was ok because the US subsidized it, maybe you are on the wrong form. The line here, that is, Ron Paul's line, is that we oppose aid to tyrannical regimes which create enemies for us, and want to stay out of irrational middle eastern politics. And why should I not trust Iranian or Saudi Clerics on the matter? The say the Koran and hadith dictates the death penalty. What makes you any more of a religious authority? Is it not possible you just represent an entirely different strand of Islam? It seems like the majority of Islamic authorities(not all, but most, think this is a suitable penalty). And it is a nice an lengthy article, but the Hadith, which correct me if I am wrong, is an Islamic holy book. I will link it here.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/apostasy.htm

Look, I am sure you are a nice guy, and I am sure there are nice Muslims, but there are damning passages in your holy books that are used as fodder for tyrannical governments in the middle east to oppress their people. And unfortunately, they make up a large sect of your religion. Look, maybe you aren't a literalist, I think this is a good thing. If that is the case, we need more muslims like you. Islam needs an enlightenment and this radical nonsense needs to be quelled once and for all by moderate muslims.

Islam was most certainly forced on the populations of arab tribes throughout the middle east, either they converted or were military defeated then converted.

[Fozz]

Please don't conflate what a certain government or political party does with "Islam". Saudi Arabia also prohibits women from driving, and Tehran is the only capital in the world that doesn't have a Sunni mosque. This is hardly "Islamic".

I don't get my opinions about Christianity from the Spanish Inquisition, for example.

The long list that you gave are exactly the "tyrannical regimes" that we Muslims keep complaining receive US financial and military aid.

To get the final word on "apostasy" in Islam, read this detailed article (http://bit.ly/cT6B7z). It's quite long and goes into significant detail

And while successive Islamic empires spread very fast, much of the expansion was by dynasties of sultans who aimed at personal glorification. Islam was not forced upon the population. Egypt, for example, remained majority Christian for the first 400 years after Islamic rule and only became Islamized after the Crusades, some argue as a reaction to the brutality of the Crusader armies.

I'm really puzzled by the enmity I see for Islam as a religion, culture and civilization - I really am. Very rarely do I find a Christian who is able to have respect for Islam. I mean, Christians did some very horrible things in the past, and the Bible has many surprisingly bloody passages.

Yet I don't equate this with Christianity and I am able to have a deep respect for Christianity, and never did nor ever will say that it's an antithesis to liberty and justice.

You have made some excellent posts in this thread.

[ibaghdadi]

I didn't realize tyranny was ok because the US subsidized it, maybe you are on the wrong form.
Well I never said that it's OK, don't know how you got that. These regimes would be long gone if the US didn't subsidize them.


And why should I not trust Iranian or Saudi Clerics on the matter?
Because they are not independent. Just follow the money - who pays their salaries? The very fact that they're willing to condone tyranny in the name of religion should make it very clear they aren't to be trusted.


The say the Koran ... dictates the death penalty.
There isn't a single verse in the Qur'an that says that apostates should be killed. In fact, the Qur'an's message is exactly the opposite:


Qur'an 10:99: If it had been thy Lord's will, they would all have believed,- all who are on earth! wilt thou then compel mankind, against their will, to believe!

Here the Qur'an states that if God wanted he would make all people believers, so who is anyone to actually force people to believe?


What makes you any more of a religious authority? Is it not possible you just represent an entirely different strand of Islam?
All Islamic rulings go back to the Qur'an (in word and spirit) and to the authenticated hadith (interpreted within context). Different schools can argue over the interpretation but not over the sources. Each successive generation is expected to add to the "fiqh" or understanding of the religious texts within the context of their society and times. This isn't a view held by me personally, it's canonical.


It seems like the majority of Islamic authorities(not all, but most, think this is a suitable penalty).
There's no doubt that it used to be at a previous historical epoch. The article cites examples that modern Muslims largely abandoned it. I'm quoting the article here:

Abandoned by the leading Sunni authority in 1844:

Punishment for apostasy (in any case, extremely rare) was not in practice enforced in later times and was completely abolished by the [Ottoman] Turks by a decree of the Ottoman government in 1260/1844.
(The New Encyclopedia of Islam, by Cyril Glasse, p.54)


Abandoned by the leading Arab authority in 1953:

The debate triggered by the Ottoman reform was continued when al-Azhar University in Cairo, the supreme religious authority in the Arab world, delivered a formal fatwa (religious edict) in 1958, which confirmed the abolition of the classical law in this area.
(T.J. Winters writing for Newsweek)



And it is a nice an lengthy article, but the Hadith, which correct me if I am wrong, is an Islamic holy book.
"Hadith" isn't a holy book, it's a collection of the sayings of the Prophet. Hadiths come in various levels of "authenticity", ranging from "strong" (i.e. it's almost certain the prophet said it) to "weak" (i.e. it's almost certain the prophet didn't say it). Furthermore, hadiths cannot be taken without their context because unlike the Qur'an, they are not considered timeless.


there are damning passages in your holy books that are used as fodder for tyrannical governments in the middle east to oppress their people.
Yes, and that's precisely our complaint. "Official" clerics are in the employ of the dictators and their job is simple - to use religion to keep people servile to the tyrants. Virtually all Muslims see through this, and widely believe that these regimes are anti-Islamic. When the late Sheikh Tantawi, the "Grand Mufti" of Egypt died not too long ago, many Muslims passed greeting messages (I saw more than a few on Facebook, for example.)


Islam needs an enlightenment and this radical nonsense needs to be quelled once and for all by moderate muslims.
I'll quote the article again:

The point is that the Islamic state had embraced change and reform of their religious understanding. The debate had begun, but after World War I, the Allies occupied Turkey and Arab lands. They broke up the Ottoman Empire, and carved out mandate states, installing despots into power, something which of course retarded further Muslim intellectual growth.

The modern Muslim world is living with the consequences of these events. Unfortunately, feelings of anti-Westernism have emerged as a backlash to colonialism and subsequent events. Extremists and religious fundamentalists began to define themselves in opposition to the West; the more the West condemned their extreme understandings of Islam, the more “street cred” these fundamentalists garnered. Hey, if the West hates you, and the West is the colonialist, then you must be right! Such was the thought process.

[bunklocoempire]

Depressed Liberator- What really irks me about the tea party is their foreign policy and views on Muslims


I hear ya.




From a post I put up on another forum. "Hallowed ground" has been the latest catch phrase. :rolleyes: But a good talking point.:)


Bunkloco wrote:These arguments kinda sound familiar, where have I heard them?

Oh yeah. Not a mosque being jammed down someone’s throat, but foreign troops.

In other words, we would have no mosque in our nation of property rights and religious freedom “overlooking hallowed ground”, but we believe our troops should be welcomed through out the world on other's “hallowed ground”. :confused:

I imagine a good number of Osama followers view/ed foreign military and monetary support in their area as 'recruiting for Satan', as well as 'gaining a foothold' etc..

What do ya know, disdain for foreign intrusion and mistrust of foreign government is a common thing.


Note the date.


http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1998.html
The following text is the second fatwa originally published on February 23, 1998, to declare a holy war, or jihad, against the West and Israel.
It is signed by Osama bin Laden, head of al Qaeda; Ayman al-Zawahiri, head of Jihad Group in Egypt, and several other Islamic terrorist groups.

Praise be to God, who revealed the Book, controls the clouds, defeats factionalism, and says in His Book: "But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war)"; and peace be upon our Prophet, Muhammad Bin-'Abdallah, who said: I have been sent with the sword between my hands to ensure that no one but God is worshipped, God who put my livelihood under the shadow of my spear and who inflicts humiliation and scorn on those who disobey my orders.

The Arabian Peninsula has never -- since God made it flat, created its desert, and encircled it with seas -- been stormed by any forces like the crusader armies spreading in it like locusts, eating its riches and wiping out its plantations. All this is happening at a time in which nations are attacking Muslims like people fighting over a plate of food. In the light of the grave situation and the lack of support, we and you are obliged to discuss current events, and we should all agree on how to settle the matter.
No one argues today about three facts that are known to everyone; we will list them, in order to remind everyone:

First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.
If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.

Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres, as though they are not content with the protracted blockade imposed after the ferocious war or the fragmentation and devastation.
So here they come to annihilate what is left of this people and to humiliate their Muslim neighbors.

Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula.

All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on God, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al-Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said: "As for the fighting to repulse [an enemy], it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed [by the ulema]. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life." On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God."

This is in addition to the words of Almighty God: "And why should ye not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)? -- women and children, whose cry is: 'Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will help!'"
We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson.

Almighty God said: "O ye who believe, give your response to God and His Apostle, when He calleth you to that which will give you life. And know that God cometh between a man and his heart, and that it is He to whom ye shall all be gathered."
Almighty God also says: "O ye who believe, what is the matter with you, that when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of God, ye cling so heavily to the earth! Do ye prefer the life of this world to the hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place; but Him ye would not harm in the least. For God hath power over all things."
Almighty God also says: "So lose no heart, nor fall into despair. For ye must gain mastery if ye are true in faith."

And I put this on another forum in reply to an anti-individual freedom "article":


"...Most Americans, however, seem to understand that we are engaged in a battle for the soul of America. No amount of genuflection toward our enemies will make us safer. And each accommodation we make in the name of political correctness brings us one step closer to ruin.
It is both fascinating and infuriating that the mosque’s supporters do not understand this simple truth. Or perhaps they do understand it, but simply choose to ignore it."


Joe Muslim in the Middle East would agree about his 'hallowed ground'. Disdain for foreign intrusion and mistrust of government is a universal theme.


Bunkloco wrote:"...Most muslims , however, seem to understand that we are engaged in a battle for the soul of the Holy Land. No amount of genuflection toward our enemies will make us safer. And each accommodation we make in the name of political correctness brings us one step closer to ruin.

It is both fascinating and infuriating that the Coaltion Force supporters do not understand this simple truth."

That ain't guilt or hating America, it's understanding human nature and applying it evenly so as to avoid things like perpetual war. Ignore human nature at your own risk.

By the way, it is an election cycle and time of course to pound home the supposed "differences" between the two parties. What a coincidence that the mosque should be talked about endlessly by both. :rolleyes:



Bunkloco

[Minuteman2012]

I will only post once more on this issue, but that verse you cited is just a verse against forced conversion, but it doesn't say that you shouldn't kill apostates.

[acptulsa]

Our people in Montana held the first Tea Party in over two hundred years. So how is this movement in no way ours?

What I find depressing is how much more seriously this is taken since the opportunistic has-beens popped up. Seriously now. The MSM spend twenty years doing its damndest to convince everyone not to take Newt Gingrich seriously, and now they crown the bastard king of our movement.

Yes, events are depressing, 'liberator'. But don't let depression convince you to try to convince us to give up on our baby just when we can do the most good by attending and speaking out!

[Slutter McGee]

You guys are getting all confused. There is a difference between the Establishment and Neo-cons. Neo-cons could care less about co-opting the teaparty movement. The establishment is certainly trying though.

The neo-con agenda is being carried out by Obama just like it was by Bush. Why should they care about a Republican controlled congress?

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[Minuteman2012]

You guys are getting all confused. There is a difference between the Establishment and Neo-cons. Neo-cons could care less about co-opting the teaparty movement. The establishment is certainly trying though.

The neo-con agenda is being carried out by Obama just like it was by Bush. Why should they care about a Republican controlled congress?

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

This.

[Vessol]

You guys are getting all confused. There is a difference between the Establishment and Neo-cons. Neo-cons could care less about co-opting the teaparty movement. The establishment is certainly trying though.

The neo-con agenda is being carried out by Obama just like it was by Bush. Why should they care about a Republican controlled congress?

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

They like playing opposite sides. It's like a swing, sometimes they'll push one side sometimes they'll push another. It's all to continue power.

[Slutter McGee]

I know it seems like I am always playing semantic games, always arguing the differences between neo-cons, establishment, traditional republicans etc. But I think these distinctions are key to understanding who our political enemy really is.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

[ibaghdadi]

I will only post once more on this issue
Fair enough...


but that verse you cited is just a verse against forced conversion, but it doesn't say that you shouldn't kill apostates.
Well killing apostates is a fancy type of forced conversion. "Convert back or we'll kill you."

Besides, my point was that there isn't a single verse in the Qur'an supporting death for apostates, and that point stands.

[ibaghdadi]

I know it seems like I am always playing semantic games, always arguing the differences between neo-cons, establishment, traditional republicans etc. But I think these distinctions are key to understanding who our political enemy really is.

+1

I don't think they are semantic games at all, I think they're important distinctions and should be made clear.

[oyarde]

Well I never said that it's OK, don't know how you got that. These regimes would be long gone if the US didn't subsidize them.


Because they are not independent. Just follow the money - who pays their salaries? The very fact that they're willing to condone tyranny in the name of religion should make it very clear they aren't to be trusted.


There isn't a single verse in the Qur'an that says that apostates should be killed. In fact, the Qur'an's message is exactly the opposite:


Here the Qur'an states that if God wanted he would make all people believers, so who is anyone to actually force people to believe?


All Islamic rulings go back to the Qur'an (in word and spirit) and to the authenticated hadith (interpreted within context). Different schools can argue over the interpretation but not over the sources. Each successive generation is expected to add to the "fiqh" or understanding of the religious texts within the context of their society and times. This isn't a view held by me personally, it's canonical.


There's no doubt that it used to be at a previous historical epoch. The article cites examples that modern Muslims largely abandoned it. I'm quoting the article here:

Abandoned by the leading Sunni authority in 1844:


Abandoned by the leading Arab authority in 1953:



"Hadith" isn't a holy book, it's a collection of the sayings of the Prophet. Hadiths come in various levels of "authenticity", ranging from "strong" (i.e. it's almost certain the prophet said it) to "weak" (i.e. it's almost certain the prophet didn't say it). Furthermore, hadiths cannot be taken without their context because unlike the Qur'an, they are not considered timeless.


Yes, and that's precisely our complaint. "Official" clerics are in the employ of the dictators and their job is simple - to use religion to keep people servile to the tyrants. Virtually all Muslims see through this, and widely believe that these regimes are anti-Islamic. When the late Sheikh Tantawi, the "Grand Mufti" of Egypt died not too long ago, many Muslims passed greeting messages (I saw more than a few on Facebook, for example.)


I'll quote the article again:

Some of these regimes may be gone if not helped.What would replace them ? Take a look at Egypt as an example.The govt. subsidizes food.Without that , the starving would revolt.

[ibaghdadi]

Some of these regimes may be gone if not helped.What would replace them ? Take a look at Egypt as an example.The govt. subsidizes food.Without that , the starving would revolt.

Well such governments tax people, impose very high customs and tariffs, monopolize vast tracts of irrigable land making people go through an impossible process to get a permit to actually grow anything there... and then turn around and says "you'll starve if it weren't for your government."

I'd say people are starving because of such government.

[VirginiaRising]

Why are people still treating the "Tea Party" like a real organization?

They are people who attend Tea Parties, but there is no "official" party line is there? Wouldn't that defeat the whole original purpose?

Don't tell me the MSM is drowning out memories already of early Tea Partiers who made it clear they were NOT a political party?

That's what's irking me.

[oyarde]

Well such governments tax people, impose very high customs and tariffs, monopolize vast tracts of irrigable land making people go through an impossible process to get a permit to actually grow anything there... and then turn around and says "you'll starve if it weren't for your government."

I'd say people are starving because of such government.

I see your point.I think there is a problem in some of those areas that the land would not produce enough to feed the population.There is an Indiana National Guard unit in Afghanistan that is an agriculture unit.They are teaching irrigation and diversified crop growing.Maybe that would be a better way of giving foreign aid than what is done now.I would like to quit sending foreign aid money to Egypt ( as an example) , but I do know they use that money to feed the people.