Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Truth About Islam -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ichy Smith who wrote (9272)	7/31/2007 2:05:38 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20106

I understand your logic. You demonstrate a problem of being uninformed by your descriptor (but Islam as a whole destroys israel). Islam as a whole does not exist until or unless there is a Caliphate government that all Muslims agree to support. If that descriptor was valid, I might agree with you. If the Pope were to direct an attack on the USA, I'd say, OK, bomb the Vatican. If Mecca directs an attack on the USA, I'd say, OK, bomb Mecca. But if you read my description of Mecca, which is valid, you can see the flaw in that idea. Your descriptor quite frankly describes something that doesn't exist. Some nation like Iran or Siria or Palestine, or a combination might try to destroy Israel but they would not be supported by other Muslim nations. You should be able to recognize that as a geopolitical act of war, a nation (or allies of nations) commits. We can find religious people to say it is supported by the religion just as we can find some who condemn it. It isn't a prophesy of Islam and there is no consistant interpretation of Islam that supports that idea. I seriously doubt the head rabbis in Israel would support your proposal because it would be unjust to the targets, escallates the conflict to a World War in which we have committed the greatest immoral act of history, and resolves nothing. If Iran or its representatives like Hezbollah bomb Israel, bomb Iran. If Meccans bomb Isreal, ok, bomb Mecca. Otherwise, I couldn't support it for reasons given, repeatedly.

To: Ichy Smith who wrote (9272)	7/31/2007 2:46:16 PM
From: Cage Rattler	Respond to of 20106

Absolutely; I believe it is known as the "Samson Option."

To: Ichy Smith who wrote (9272)	8/1/2007 6:11:05 PM
From: Proud_Infidel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20106

They aren't suing because......THEY HAVE NO CASE! Imams not suing flight passengers ("Flyin' Imams") KSTP.com ^ \| 7/31/07 kstp.com Six imams removed from a U.S. Airways plane said they would not sue the passengers whose concerns led them to being kicked off the flight. In federal court Tuesday, the attorney for the imams said, "We don't contemplate naming any private passenger as a defendant." After the November flight, the imams sued the airport, the airline and 'John Does,' which left open the possibility of suing anonymous passengers. The attorney for one of the passengers says the imams' offer comes only as congress is about to give immunity to those reporting suspicious behavior. "The offer is only made after congress passes the immunity provision with the threat of assessing fees and costs against parties suing those making reports in good faith," Gerry Nolting said. U.S. Airways and the Minneapolis- St. Paul airport will ask a judge to dismiss the imams' lawsuit next month.