1 "As long as I have the honor of representing the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia in the United States House of Representatives, The Koran is not going to be on the wall of my office."

If there are any Muslims in his district, he's not representing their religious beliefs in his government office (I assume it's his gov't office). If he was merely representing his own religious beliefs, this would just be an inelegant letter (though as a politician, he should be more politically savvy with his words), but he's saying this as a Representative of "the citizens of the 5th District of Virginia".

If his Judeo-Christian display -- and disregard of any other religion -- is only as a Representative of Virginia, then he's wrong.

I'd bet money that the stuff on the wall is up there because he's down with Buddy Christ, and that's fine by me, but his letter is puerile because of its implications that swearing in with the Bible is better than swearing in with the Qu'ran.

"When I raise my hand to take the oath on Swearing In Day, I will have the Bible in my other hand."

As opposed to that OTHER book.

Adding to that the xenophobic undertones of anti-Muslim sentiments on immigration and religious displays in his office, you just have someone who appears to be more of a hick than a thoughtful politician.

Virgil Goode may be a great guy, but he comes off as a blustering simp in his letter.

2 Byron - Visited London lately? How about Olso? Importing folks who do not want to assimilate, but would rather impose their view through intimidation and violence.

As to what Rep. Goode has on the wall of his office, I don't think he is obligated to display anything that he finds objectionable. Have you read the koran?

3 Makes me yearn for the old days. Every time one of those upppty minorities spoke up, we could have always hung them up in reflection.

Next thing you know we will have a woman or black president, now does that mean we all get the 3/5ths now?

Bet if we dont start weeding out the habits of those folk, we will be the minorities and they will seek to undue all the good that america has done for it's chosen.

4 In my opinion, Muslims who come to the U.S. seem to assimilate quite well. We have hardly any daily Muslim violence here compared to what many European countries face on a daily basis. I like to think it's the lack of Socialistic programs -- compared to the scale of European Socialism -- that allows people of other cultures to integrate more thoroughly to "America: The Concept".

Rep. Goode did mention a drain on our social services as one of the reasons he'd like to curtail Muslim immigration. Maybe an inability to utilize U.S. social services by anyone who isn't a citizen would allow all immigrants who come here to be of a more desirable stripe. After all, when you have to hustle to put food on the table, and see the success of others in your peer group, you have less time and tolerance for radicals.

This is not to say we don't get radicals, or that more radicals won't come to the U.S., but it seems to me the vast majority of Muslims in this country are not radicals, and assimilation into our American culture is what most of the Muslim immigrants want.

As for Rep. Goode's office wall, I don't really care what he puts on it. However, he gives no explanation why he wouldn't put a Qu'ran on his wall when asked about it by the Muslim student. From the tone of the letter, I interpreted his rejection not to his not being Muslim, but to his seeming general dislike of anything Muslim.

I personally have not read the Qu'ran, but I do read Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch blog every day. I highly recommend it.

Thank you for your questions and comments, MCPO Airdale.

5 I vote for "he is a bigot". Rep. Goode is responding to letters from constituents who are concerned about incoming Rep. Ellison using a Koran. Mr. Ellison's right to use the Koran is what our military (which includes Muslims) is fighting and dying for in the GWOT. Why would anyone care what book Mr. Ellison used? Substitute another book and see how ridiculous his statements are. Imagine someone getting upset that a congressman was using a New American (Catholic version) Bible instead of a King James. Or a Talmud instead of a Bible. The point is that Rep. Ellison is going to swear an oath on something he believes in and is important to him. Something he believes is bigger than himself. That's the point of holding any book out for someone to swear allegience on. For Rep. Goode to tie this to illegal immigration is silly.

6 Bryon: Talk about (pie in the sky). You don't have the slightest Idea what you are talking about. Assimilate my ass. You just haven't been slapped in the face with Islam yet.

7 ...but his letter is puerile because of its implications that swearing in
with the Bible is better than swearing in with the Qu'ran.

The Bible prohibits lying, and the Koran explicitly advocates lying (Taqiyya).  How can someone swear on a book which says it's okay to lie? Doesn't that kind of negate the entire purpose of the oath?

I'm not defending this guy - in fact I think he's dead wrong on diversity visas and is against the Koran swearing purely out of personal animus - but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Oh, and what's with all the moby trolls (duke) around here? Is it a seasonal thing?

8 Greyrooster: From your comments, I assume you disagree that most Muslims are assimilating well in the U.S.

Please tell me how most Muslims aren't assimilating well in the U.S.

9 MCPO Airdale:

I agree with you. I'm reading the Quran.

Maggie;
You have good points. I think if he swears on a Quran, thats fine, if that is more sacred to him. Maybe that way he'll keep his word? But Islam with Sharia, is at odds with our US Constitution. The Quran is a symbol for that too.

If he is using a Quran, he is giving a reason for concern regarding Sharia, and I feel no US politician can leave that kind of question hanging. He needs to come down against Sharia. If you don't believe me, I ask you kindly to please find out what Sharia is in more detail.

Byron;
Some run over Jews in SanFrancisco, and gun down Jewish women in Washington. Some try to start terrorist training camps near Portland Oregon. Some shoot everyday Americans from concealment, and train children to follow in their footsteps. Some even rent a big SUV to run down the infidel on college sidewalks. Some learnto fly jets into skyscrapers. Max Power has a reason to laugh.

I think we need some standards!

Custer Duke; Merry 'Effin' Christmas, I hope you wake up less of a bigot on New Years Day morning. I hope the coal in your stocking keeps you warm, I know mine will.

Good post. We need to keep an eye on Ellison, and see if he is worth a damn. Goode is OK, and I think he knows Islam's track record so far.

USA, all the way!

10 "In my opinion, Muslims who come to the U.S. seem to assimilate quite well"
 
FUNNIEST POST OF THE YEAR MONINEE!!!!!
 
IT HAS MY VOTE!

11 wooga: Quite right. However, is lying to the unbeliever considered a relic to non-extremist Muslims? I seem to recall hearing/reading that, but I can't be sure.

We know that there are many passages in the Bible that non-extremist Jews and Christians disregard for more modern concepts, such as killing adulterers and selling slaves, so knowing if Taqiyya is a disregarded concept to modern non-extremist Muslims is an important point.

Thank you for your comments. Your further opinion will be appreciated.

12 "Why would anyone care what book Mr. Ellison used? Substitute another book and see how ridiculous his statements are. Imagine someone getting upset that a congressman was using a New American (Catholic version) Bible instead of a King James"
 
HOW ABOUT AN ARCHIE COMICS DOUBLE DIGEST MAGGIE. MY KID SWEARS BY THEM!
 
THAT "R" BEHIND YOU NAME ISN'T FOR REPUBLICAN - RETARD CAME TO MIND FIRST...

13 Michael Weaver: You point out many good examples of extremists actions, and of course each action is horrible, but there are millions(?) of Muslims in the U.S. The actions of those few are warning signs about the possible extremes to which Islam can go -- warning signs that we are finally recognizing -- but do not necessarily reflect the majority of the Muslim community in the U.S. as a whole.

After all, what religion was the guy who shot from the bell tower at that school in Texas in the 60s? What religion was the Oklahoma Federal Building bomber? Anti-abortion clinic bombers and abortion doctor sniper? We can find extremists in any religion, but I think you'd agree that the majority of Christians and Jews are not extremists.

I'd still like to hear any opinions about how our lower level of social programs may promote assimilation of other cultures into our American culture. Bully or Bullsh*t?

Thank you for your comments, Michael Weaver.

14 Another Virginian macaca - we got rid of Allen, next is Warner

15 Here is a link to the stated Islamist agenda, along with news examples of how the desired steps are being slowly implemented in the US. Judge for yourselves.
 
http://islamthreat.blogspot.com/2006/12/why-virgil-goode-is-concerned.html#links

16 add "and elsewhere".
 
 

17 muslims and arabs are subhuman filth. they do not assimilate well in the USA or anywhere else.

the sooner we exterminate them and bring peace back to the world the better.

God Bless Virgil Goode and America.

18 Deport the Osama venerating Dervishes. The Religion of Peace is a violent political organization that is expediting its own demise. And as for the Mohammedan throatslitters in Iran, Syria and Lebanon, they need to taste some uranium. Rubble does not make trouble.

19 When you read this, please keep in mind, English citizens of which are 5% Muslims, can get on a plane for the U.S. without a visa, and come here as they wish. Keep in mind the young Muslims in France rioted.
Keep in mind it was those of the 5% of the Muslim residents of England that tried to bomb their own country and ours. They have no desire to assimilate. You will think about this when we start seeing body bombs blowing up in mid-western Wal-Mart in the future. You might laugh now but look around. Rep Goode is right and has the guts to tell the truth.


Islamist threat greater than IRA ever posed, says police chief


Tania Branigan, political correspondent
Saturday December 23, 2006
The Guardian
Britain faces a threat of "unparalleled nature" from Islamist terrorism which is greater than the dangers ever posed by the IRA, the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said yesterday.
There was no specific evidence of any immediate threat, he said, playing down a recent suggestion from the home secretary, John Reid, that an attack was highly likely before Christmas.
But officers and the intelligence services lacked the resources to follow all plots and had yet to penetrate terrorist networks effectively. He also warned that the government needed to establish greater control of its borders.
The level of threat is of an unparalleled nature and growing," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. "In terms of civilians - you would have to go back to probably either the second world war or cold war for that threat.
"The IRA, with very few exceptions, did not want to carry out mass atrocities, they didn't want to die, they gave warnings and they were heavily penetrated by the intelligence services. None of those apply with al-Qaida and its affiliates."
Sir Ian suggested the threat raised questions about the need to extend further the detention period for suspects. "With the IRA police were able to get behind an active unit and follow it pretty closely to the point where it was ready to cause an explosion. Here we have to move in so much more quickly - you end up with a lot of people and information," he said.
He was "quite confident" that he will face no charges over the death of Jean-Charles de Menezes, shot dead by police in Stockwell tube station last year, after the Independent Police Complaints Commission reports in the new year.
He also denied that the Forest Gate raid, in which one man was shot and from which no charges resulted, was a mistake. "I call it a cliff edge choice: if you fall one way you knock your head on the wall; fall the other way and you drop 200 ft into the sea."
Responding to claims MI5 had made mistakes in the run up to the 7/7 bombings, he said: "There are people the service knows about and can't have the resources to follow. The security services and police are choosing which plot to follow, because there are many."
Sir Ian believed the government must get greater control of the UK's borders and said he didn't "understand how we can continue" to let veiled women through passport controls, but agreed checks should be carried out in an appropriate manner. His remarks followed claims a suspect in the murder of PC Sharon Beshenivsky fled the country in a niqab.
Sir Ian called for a reduction in the form-filling for small scale offences, saying an officer could carry out only one arrest in an eight-hour shift. "We need to pull all that back so I can have my cops back on the street."
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1978079,00.html

20 When you read this, please keep in mind, English citizens of which are 5% Muslims, can get on a plane for the U.S. without a visa, and come here as they wish. Keep in mind the young Muslims in France rioted.
Keep in mind it was those of the 5% of the Muslim residents of England that tried to bomb their own country and ours. They have no desire to assimilate. You will think about this when we start seeing body bombs blowing up in mid-western Wal-Mart in the future. You might laugh now but look around. Rep Goode is right and has the guts to tell the truth.


Islamist threat greater than IRA ever posed, says police chief


Tania Branigan, political correspondent
Saturday December 23, 2006
The Guardian
Britain faces a threat of "unparalleled nature" from Islamist terrorism which is greater than the dangers ever posed by the IRA, the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, said yesterday.
There was no specific evidence of any immediate threat, he said, playing down a recent suggestion from the home secretary, John Reid, that an attack was highly likely before Christmas.
But officers and the intelligence services lacked the resources to follow all plots and had yet to penetrate terrorist networks effectively. He also warned that the government needed to establish greater control of its borders.
The level of threat is of an unparalleled nature and growing," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. "In terms of civilians - you would have to go back to probably either the second world war or cold war for that threat.
"The IRA, with very few exceptions, did not want to carry out mass atrocities, they didn't want to die, they gave warnings and they were heavily penetrated by the intelligence services. None of those apply with al-Qaida and its affiliates."
Sir Ian suggested the threat raised questions about the need to extend further the detention period for suspects. "With the IRA police were able to get behind an active unit and follow it pretty closely to the point where it was ready to cause an explosion. Here we have to move in so much more quickly - you end up with a lot of people and information," he said.
He was "quite confident" that he will face no charges over the death of Jean-Charles de Menezes, shot dead by police in Stockwell tube station last year, after the Independent Police Complaints Commission reports in the new year.
He also denied that the Forest Gate raid, in which one man was shot and from which no charges resulted, was a mistake. "I call it a cliff edge choice: if you fall one way you knock your head on the wall; fall the other way and you drop 200 ft into the sea."
Responding to claims MI5 had made mistakes in the run up to the 7/7 bombings, he said: "There are people the service knows about and can't have the resources to follow. The security services and police are choosing which plot to follow, because there are many."
Sir Ian believed the government must get greater control of the UK's borders and said he didn't "understand how we can continue" to let veiled women through passport controls, but agreed checks should be carried out in an appropriate manner. His remarks followed claims a suspect in the murder of PC Sharon Beshenivsky fled the country in a niqab.
Sir Ian called for a reduction in the form-filling for small scale offences, saying an officer could carry out only one arrest in an eight-hour shift. "We need to pull all that back so I can have my cops back on the street."
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,1978079,00.html

21 Uses for the Koran:
bug squasher
door stop
wood stove fuel
booster seat for toddlers
tire block for parking on hills
pressing dried flowers
spitball ammo
emergency hammer
I'm open to suggestions here...
 

22 Bryon Solomon: I can apply the exact subject matter and situtations that you use to any prison population in the United States. They assimulate well after release. THEN. Secondly, why do we need them to come here in the first place. Anyone who says we need more people are nuts. Try a freeway in Los Angeles. If we are going to allow more immigration it would be better to take in those that don't wish to cut our heads off, change or laws or religion. I personally haven't heard any muslims in American show any rage of what muslim terrorists do thoughtout the world. They are more passive which to me is one step before acceptance. My view. OUTLAW ISLAM.

23 This is America, which was founded on Christan beliefs and traditions. We wouldn't be America if we adopt all the insane practices of other countries. Why doesn't Elliott go to Iran and swear on the Quran there. He is here and should support the American way or leave. We can see the effects of Islam just by watching the news. Check out the story on Somalia and Iraq. Look at Iran. Those people that want to adopt the practices of other countries and make us in American put up with them, should go to the country that practices what they they want to practice. We aren't a muslin country - we arent' a copy of Mexico or China. We are American where the foundations are already set. Remember that saying, Love it or Leave it. Well, that's my point, if they swear on the Quran, aren't we Americans called infedals and are to be killed. Who's side is he on anyway. You are either for America or against it. There is no middle ground. Love it or leave it.

24 Ellison is just another white hateing black muslim. Just another Malcolm X. Hope he gets the same.

25 Wow, this is amazing. Maybe it's just me but I feel that if you look for the worst in people, you'll eventually find something. Most times the right thing to do and the hard thing to do are the same.

As for the American Way I thought we believed in freedom of religion? I don't remember the constitution saying freedom of christian religion, it just said freedom of religion.

It seems we're passing into a crossroads on many issues in the US. Everything isn't so black and white now. We have some of the nation that takes what was written in the constitution objectively and some that take it subjectively.

Do I think having a black, white, woman, muslim, jewish president will ruin this country? No, because I believe this country will do what's right. As long as we stand united we will prosper. Peace.

26 As for the American Way I thought we believed in freedom of religion? I
don't remember the constitution saying freedom of christian religion,
it just said freedom of religion.

Chaz,

according the the ACLU and the new Liberals, that's freedom FROM religion, remember?  Or was it only Christianity that you wish to be from.  As far as I'm concerned, the Left doesn't have a leg to stand on when they criticize anti-muslim elements in America.  They learned it from the best-- from YOU.

27

Michael Weaver - I am familiar with Sharia Law and I agree that it is at odds with the Constitution.  Should Rep. Ellison advocate Sharia Law, I would have a problem with that.  Again, my point is that Rep. Ellison's beliefs are not a problem for me because he has not demonstrated an intent to impose them on me.  I know people who's views are secular and they worry about elected officials who haves deeply held Christian beliefs.  But that's not a problem until they attempt to legislate those beliefs.  If a Christian believes divorce is wrong can he represent you in Congress?  Of course.  If a Jew believes in keeping a kosher house and you want to let the dairy and the meat products in your fridge come in contact with one another, can he represent you in Congress?  Of course. 

The bottom line is, don't judge the guy until he does something that requires it.

28 bordergal: Thank you for the link. I went to read the article about Daniel Pipes from Harvard Magazine and found it quite interesting.

The list of things Muslims would want is a mixed bag of good and bad, in my opinion. I'd rather not run through the whole list with my opinions, but I will if asked.

I do appreciate the link, though, because I don't recall hearing anything about Daniel Pipes before. Thank you, bordergal.

Greyrooster: Islamism recidivism seems an odd way to put the situation. I could understand some who would seek their "religious roots" and then be wooed into jihad by smooth-talking imams, but I think the percentages are small... small enough to still allow Muslims into the U.S., and small enough for us to still be able to stamp out the extremism.

I would like to see a stronger response from Muslims against jihad acts. They may be caught in a moral dilemma because those who do such acts are using the Qur'an to justify those actions. How do you stay Muslim while eliminating acts based on your holy book? How did Christians and Jews do this?

I do agree with Daniel Pipes when he says:
“It’s a mistake to blame Islam, a religion 14 centuries old, for the evil that should be ascribed to militant Islam, a totalitarian ideology less than a century old. Militant Islam is the problem, but moderate Islam is the solution.”

And just like any gang, a few rough members can cow many people with threats of violence against opponents and their families. U.S. laws may afford some comfort (RKBA and secular court system), but Muslims in general should be encouraged to join with their non-Muslim neighbors before they retreat fully into their own communities and distrust of each other makes the point of assimilation moot.

We need good Qur'an-based solutions for American Muslims to encourage them to speak out against Islamism while we fight the extremists, because if we choose only to talk or only to fight, we will lose the greater cultural war.

Thank you for your comments, Greyrooster.

29 I guess muslimes have been raping, pillaging, murdereing, and enslaving everyone they possibly can for the last 1400 years because Americans expect the worst from them. Even though they credit their foul religion for every atrocity they commit, we shouldn't judge them by their peaceful religion.


Scum-sucking dhimmies and muslim infiltrators. Goode is an America last piece of shit, and every lowlife who defends him is even worse.


It's all Whitey's fault, of course. If only Goode's ancestor Yakub hadn't created "White devils" in his laboratory a million years ago--the world wouyld know peace.

30 This is all just too funny. The muslims and lefturds are actually doing
us a favor by illustrating our cultural stupidity through their own
hypocrisy. Do we really need more proof that the concept of an open,
pluralistic society is impractical? We have somehow let ourselves be
convinced that our enemies' ideas and ways are superior to, or at least
as good as our own, and are only beginning to pay the price for such
sheepish idiocy.

Our national foreign policy is to squander our blood and treasure to
save a world intent upon self-destruction, while at the same time
welcoming the refuse from those same failed societies as equals into
our own, without ever stopping to consider the consequences of such an
irresponsible policy. Our childishly simplistic faith in the concept
that anyone can be made into a civilized, productive member of society
is the very cornerstone of our enemies' strategies against us, and
muslims regularly state that they are using our own liberalism against
us; meanwhile, we pretend not to notice.

So what to do? Well, anyone who knows me knows my answer, because it's
the only solution that will work; in a war, the only way to win is to
defeat the enemy, and the best and most final way to do that is to
exterminate them. Such a strategy has proven effective in the past -
here Carthage comes to mind, in the days when Rome was young and
strong, and had the power and will to face and destroy yet another
relentless Semitic invader - but we all know that we as a society have
become far too weak, effeminate, and apathetic to do what is necessary,
much the same as did the Romans, and so very soon, I'm afraid, we shall
join Rome in one final way - our extinction as a society. Frankly, if
we let it happen, then we deserve it.

31 Mr. Solomon, your obvious attempts at fair mindedness start to ring hollow. At some point you have to make a decision to follow what you know is right and stop thanking the religious bigots for their input. American values are neither Christian nor Islamic. So forget about the "love it or leave it" people. "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism" (Thomas Jefferson). This controversy is but a tempest within the much larger hurricane that will define the USA in the 21st century. And inspire yourself with the words of some of the many great Americans who have come before you. Mark Twain comes to mind (among many others), "whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect." To you others out there, get a grip. Will you kill me too because I disagree with you (seeing how rubble causes no trouble)?

32 Robert Miller:


I once had a good friend  with whom I fundamentally disagreed with on matters of ideology named Robert Miller, so I wont insult you.


The Founding Fathers, including Thomas Jefferson, were unequivical in citing Christianity as the basis for their uniquely American values--both publicly, and in their private correspondences. The quote you provided does not contradict their faith in God.
 


America has always been a religious (Christian,) country, and American society was built on  Judeo-Christian values more than anything else.


<sub>´´...can the liberties of a nation be thought secure,when we’ve removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of people that these liberties are the gifts of God.´´

"Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just."


"In questions of power, then, let no more be said of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution".


"I have sworn upon the altar of Almighty God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."-Thomas Jefferson</sub>

 

<sub>"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future.upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to sustain ourselves, according by the Ten Commandments of God."-James Madison


"The principles of all genuine liberty, and of wise laws and administrations are to be drawn from the Bible and sustained by its authority. The man therefore who weakens or destroys the divine authority of that book may be accessory to all the public disorders which society is doomed to suffer." -Noah Webster


"We hold these Truths to be self evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights,"-The Declaration of independence</sub>


Christians aren't the bigots--atheists are. Christians do not prevent atheists from practicing their nihilistic faith, but atheists are hard at work denying Christians their right to practice their faith.


The islamopithecines are even worse. They want to murder and enslave all non-koranimals.


You're on the wrong side of the ethical fence. It isn't necessary to be a Christian bashing bigot to be an atheist, but it sure seems to be the norm.

There is no equivalence between Christianity and islame. No Christian will ever try to saw your head off on video, fly a plane into your place of employment, or shoot your children--all in the name of God. You're upset with the wrong people.

33 OOPS! "Unalienable rights."

34 At some point you have to make a decision to follow what you know is
right and stop thanking the religious bigots for their input.

robert,

you just won both houses of Congress.  Doesn't the officially put you right square in the majority?  Yet instead of "reflecting" as per Mark Twain, what do you do?  You go ahead and say something as stupidly absolutist as that.   Thank you for illustrating how truly vacuous it is when you Libs quote great men.

35 Soloman: Because you wish to take the chance with muslims doesn't meant I do. If they promise in writing that in the future they will only attack you and yours and not me and mine, that would be acceptable to me. However, since they lie about everything in the past how could I trust them now? Why do you want them here to begin with? Why take the chance? They bring nothing of notable value with them.
 
 
A note for some. Our forefathers meant freedom of religion. Not freedom from religion. What they meant was that citizens had the right to practice religion and that the state had no right to deny them the right of PRACTICE. How libturds cannot understand this is beyond me.

36 dude... you're a dick

No one's 'demanding the use of the Koran.' Rep. Ellison is a Muslim. It's a personal choice for him, just like the choice to be a Christian, a Jew, or an Athiest is personal to so many others.

Imagine this:
"I'm Jewish. Is it cool if I use the Torah in a private swearing-in ceremony?"
"No, fucker. You're a Jew. You don't represent what America stands for. We need to close our borders to stop all these Jews from coming in, or soon they'll overtake our political institutions, subvert our moral values, and force us all to sing 'Dreidel Dreidel.'"

Rep. Goode has suggested that a Muslim cannot properly represent the interests of an American constituent, disregarding the fact that he was fairly ELECTED by one...
Furthermore, Rep. Goode purports that this 'unexpected mishap,' the election of a Muslim to office, is the result of lax immigration policy. I, on the other hand, think it's important to note that Rep. Ellison's family came to this country generations and generations ago. He is an AMERICAN by definition and by veneration, and to end where I began, he made a PERSONAL choice to follow Islam, and in this country, we seek to honor and respect such choices.

37 Chaz: The writers of the constitution didn't say freedom of Christian religion. But you can bet your ass that's what they meant. The weren't talking about muslims because there wasn't any here. When the slave holding members who assisted in writing the Constitution said freedom for all men. Who do you think they were talking about?  Black muslims? Things should be put in their true context.
 
As far as religion was concerned they were talking about the various forms of Christianity. Catholics, Protestants, The Church of England.  Not muslims, not buddist, not Hindus. But Christians. When slave owners were screaming freedom do you really think they were talking about their slaves back home picking cotton?

38 Solomon
And" thank you for your comments" sounds sissy. Who are you to be so assuming. The reality is, is that you are a newbe. Not the poster. Earn your stripes. Then you can act pompus.

39 Rep Ellison. Is a black muslim hater of white people, Jews, etc: Making excuses for him is bullshit.  The "dude you're a dick" tells it all. Not back to the ghetto. Prick!

40 lots to respond to, but I'm keeping this short anyway.

Using the Quran to swear in a member of Congress. Legal yes. Morally I am inclined to think it is like swearing in on a copy of "Mein Kampf". If there was a religion proclaiming Hitler as its religious/spiritual leader, they could make a similar claim. it would be legal.

Either one is a warning sign, flat out! Anti-American values are contained within each. Yes, there are moderates in Islam, and I have taken a position of offering them hope, and allowing they may have a place in modern society. I'm tolerant, but that doesn't quite render me a complete idiot. If Ellison doesn't loudly and publically, and undisputably proclaim that he is against Sharia law in the USA, he can't be trusted. PERIOD!!!

So now we have handed the prestige, the podium, the power over law, and the security clearances of a Congressman, to a Muslim, while we are at war, within, and without, with anti-American Muslims.

Trusting a Muslim with Congressional power, is like your parents loaning you the keys to their car, when you can't even manage to ride your damn tricycle.

If Ellison had a track record WE COULD SEE, for standing out against the anti -American Islamists, he might deserve that trust. Right now, there is nothing to make me believe he is worthy of the office to which he is elected. Rather, I blame his constituents for being lazy, and the media for obscuring who, and what Ellison is. We don't know him well at all. We can't be giving benefit of the doubt at this late point in the game.

The Christain, vs Atheist, vs Muslim discussion is interesting. It is true that Christian religion is the basis for much of the established national morality, including the freeing of the slaves, and efforts to reach the poor, and underpreviledged. Socialists hate that truth, and so do Muslims. Both tend to think their way is the better one, and neither care much for Christ.

They need to reread the First Amendement, and memeorize it word for word. Then they need to take each of those words, and read the dictionary definitions for them. They also need to read some freakin history from sources that haven't been revised for political reasons.

I have a pretty good collection from before the socialists started to change reality, and before the Islamists managed to blame Christianity for killing everyone who ever died.

Keeping it short, We have feedom of religion, but that doesn't make it a suicide pact. Atheism is not the state religion, and we should prevent Atheism or Islam, from becoming the state religion.

USA, all the way!

41 Unfortunately, all the negative things said in this thread about Muslims are unfounded. They are based on streotyping, untenable over-generalizations, hearsay, cheap propaganda, and simple bigotry. For example:

Wooga:

I can quote more than hundred verses prohibiting believers to lie (no matter to whom)! Can you give me ONE single verse that allows to lie?

Most of the 6666 verses in the Qur'an condemn lying in one way or another.

42
Here is the University of South Carolina link if you want to read it for yourself.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

Here a searchable version

http://www.islamicity.com/QuranSearch/

43 Michael Likes Hotwanger:


Dude...you're a dick. The koran contravenes the Constitution of the United States. The Bible and the Torah don't.


Rep. Goode made a PERSONAL choice to follow a paleolithic, hatemongering, cult that wants to overturn the Constitution and institute islamopithecine tribal rules (sharia "law.")


In this country, patriotic Americans seek to defend the Constitution from its leftist and islamopithecine enemies.


Fuck you, and fuck Rep. Goode Jihadi.

44 Yonis:


The unholy koran has no injunctions against lying to "infidels. You are a shit-eating.....liar. In other words, you're a good muslime.


Is "Yonis" the islamopithecine word for "anus?" I have to ask, because everything you write is shit.

45 At least no one called me a dick. And I suspect a battle of quotes from the founders and others would be fun. But my point seems to have gotten lost in the transation. Christian radicals may not saw off heads, they do kill for their beliefs, and not just in the past. Abortion doctor hit lists, or Oklahoma city come to mind. And besides, even if I am a "libturd" (nice)it's not Christians or Mulims or Jews I worry about. It's the extremists in all religions. Exactly the same people you worry about. The reason I don't care if Mr. Ellison uses a Qu'ran in his private ceremony is because it harms no one. That this minor deviation from the normal routine provoked Mr. Goode into a high dudgeon scares me. It's a bait and switch...Mr E is no immigrant, but Mr. G acts as though he is and raises the whole bigotry issue himself. And where's the proof that Mr. E hates "whitey"? All these demons coming out of the closet because Mr. G did not reflect on the true meaning of the document he was sworn to uphold. And by the way Mr. Bargholz, Thanks for the no insult part.

46 All of this activity and effort invested in commenting on the Virgil Goode story proves the efficacy of today's predominant political strategy - "Divide the public and whip them into a frenzy of fear over unimportant but highly emotional issues - gay marriage, flag burning, stem cell research, rampant Muslim immigration - and they'll forget about the mess we've made in Iraq and the thousands of young lives we're sacrificing for a cause no one can really articulate, much less justify". Works, doesn't it?

47 Reply to comment #41: Ha, ha, ha. You friggin idiot. Where have you been all you life. You have to be a friggin raghead. As such you are to be pitied and spit upon.

48 Reply to comment #45. Mr. E as you call him is a black muslim. Black muslims are anti white and anti American. Black muslims are as much a hate group as the KKK. Please show me where the current leader of the KKK hates blackie. Same bullshit queston.  The Klu Klux Klan's purpose is to hate blackie. The Black muslims' purpose is to hate whitey. To deny these facts is pure stupidity. Members of the KKK, American Socialist party, American Nazi party and Black muslims should not be allowed in government office. They are allowed their beliefs by the constitution but they should not be in positions where their beliefs are in direct conflict with the constitution.

49 To yonis first;
I'm holding the position so far, that Muslims can be 'good', or 'bad', like Germans in WW2 could be 'good', or 'bad'. If I recall US Navy Admiral Nimitz was a 'good' german. He was an American first, and he served his country well. He did not adopt the concept of a German world nationalism tha brought so many other Germans into conflict with western democracies.

I want to create a standard by which we may seperate 'good' Muslims from 'bad' ones. My starting point is easy to identify. If you are a Muslim who wants to replace our US Constitutional law, with Sharia law, I believe you can't be a 'good' Muslim as far as US security is concerned.

Frankly I don't want to stop anyone from deciding what hand they eat with, or what they eat, or any of those things that are ultimately a personal choice. I'm concerned with any movement that wants to replace our individual, and equal freedom of religion, with a system that holds one religion as superior.

Do you, yonis, want to replace the US Constitution with Sharia law? That is the first question. I ask you openly. We need to find a way to prove your answer isn't 'Taqiyya. If we can't see the truth in your answer, we can't trust you. I feel like I'm on thin ice even trying, and a lot of people here think I'm a dope for spending so much time on it. HELP!

To Others
Greyrooster has a point about Black Muslims in America. Malcolm X comes to mind. The Black Panthers come to mind. On the other hand I think the boxer Muhammed Ali, and the actor Wesley Snipes are/were both Muslims and didn't spout the anti-white racism of those others. There is a precedent in any case.

Robert Miller, find and show us the testimony that shows Christianity was McVeigh's motivation for the Oklahoma bombing.

Also, since the left likes to pretend the Founding fathers were 'mostly' non-Christian, I think a battle would be worthwhile. I think the hardest part will be all the typing required to ram the basic truth down the throat of anyone who thinks these were not by a large majority, Godly men. The socialist Left, isn't interested in any discussion that doesn't support their Godless agenda, so there is a lot of resistance to historical facts.

Jesus Christ does not command the faithful to Jihad, Robert. Your attempt to compare one religion with another is weak, and I'm sorry I had to tell you. Christ never had a 'Dhimmi' status for anyone.

Christ said "'You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. (Matthew 5:43)'"

It was not Christ who commanded, "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.(9:29)"

Jesus never told his followers how to divide up plunder. He never told them it was OK to plunder. Find another argument.

Bill Mangham;
Those issues you call 'unimportant' are only unimportant to you. If you get elected 'dictator' you get to decide what is important or not. Till then, I say your only offering your opinion. Just like your assesment of the situation in Iraq. An opinion. A typically leftist, defeatist one. My opinion is you will be happy if we do fail, so your ideological 'comrades' can try to claim they are more enlightened, and should be in charge. I guess that shows the politics that is prevelant on the left!

Happy New Year!
USA, all the way!

50 OH, and Robert Miller;

http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/

Where it goes we first read:
". . . Thomas Jefferson believed that the ethical system of Jesus was the finest the world has ever seen. In compiling what has come to be called "The Jefferson Bible," he sought to separate those ethical teachings from the religious dogma and other supernatural elements that are intermixed in the account provided by the four Gospels. He presented these teachings, along with the essential events of the life of Jesus, in one continuous narrative."

Since we both like Jefferson.

USA, all the way!

51 yonis;

I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but you need to understand that that Taqiyyah is a problem.

You asked for even one verse from the Quran allowing for deception by a devout Muslim. Here is one, and thats just at the moment. I know there is at least one more. I'm only trying to get to the bottom of all of this, so I hope you can help.

"Any one who, after accepting Faith in Allah, utters unbelief,
EXCEPT UNDER COMPULSION, his heart remaining firm in faith -- but such as
open their breast to unbelief, -- on them is Wrath from Allah, and theirs
will be a dreadful Chastisement [16:106]."

Here is a site going into the basis for Taqiyya;
http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/shia6b.txt

Also, the hadith site I'm using doesn't seem to have all the hadith available on it. Can you offer a reason why hadith sources I find referenced elsewhere, would not be found at

http://www.masmn.org/22.html

I'm using it as a primary research site, and if it is incomplete, I need to find a more complete reference.

USA, all the way!

52 yonis;

Here is another that at the very least leaves the door open. If you say you are my friend, and the Quran says this ...

"“Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah.” (Quran 3:2 "

... then what should I think of that? I guess it looks like I'm picking on you, but these are hard questions, and they need an answer. If you don't have an answer we can believe, then who can we turn to?

Also, don't get mad at me, because I'm still open to possibilities. Your lucky to have someone like me even asking. I'm hard core American, but that requires me to give you a chance to respond to accusations made against you (Muslims), while there is time.

The truth is, the time we have left for dialogue is going away fast. When that time is up, it won't matter anymore if we might have been friends. The American Civil War showed us that people who don't have a problem with each other personally, ended up fighting for different sides. Soon we will have to pick our sides. I know where that will put me. I don't know where that will put you.

Where will it put you?
What to you, is a moderate Muslim?

USA, all the way!

53 Robert Miller:


A battle of quotes from the Founders would be fun, but it would also convince you that they were devout Christians--including Jefferson. There are no quotes that contradict this. Even the quote you furnished was Jefferson's attempt to protect different sects of Christian belief, if I remember correctly. I know hi personal writing about "a separation of Church and state" was meant to defend churches from a state religion, not a a defense of secularism like the people who tend to quote it think.


Your characterization of religious extremists is specious. No Christian kills to please God. There is no Christian tradition of jihad. The people who murdered abortion doctors weren't killing in the name of God, they were punishing child murderers. There is no equivalency between Christianity and islame, moral or otherwise. Only islamopithecines are commanded by their faith to murder and enslave non-koranimals (jihad.)


None of the rampant religious violence plaguing the planet is Christian. None of it.


You're wrong about that supremacist hatemonger Goode, too. Allowing a racist turd like him to use a book that demands its followers to destroy the governments of man and institute a stone aged, supremacist theocracy in its place at a swearing in ceremony for service to the United States government is not only ludicrous, it's deeply harmful. He cant swear to uphold the Constitution on a terrorist primer that commands him to abolish it. Not honestly.


The rest of the House needs to slap him down hard. Greyrooster is right. The Nation of Islam is nothing but a depraved "I hate Whitey" club. Read their literature and listen to Louis Fairycoon speak. It's much worse than the KKK, La Raza, or any other separatist or supremacist group. It should be outlawed as a violent political movement bent on seceeding from the union, because that's exactly what it is.


Cheers.

54 Bill Mangrab:


Today's predominant political strategy is to lie and smear your political opponents, fail to formulate a plan for any perceived national problem, project all your dishonest and divisive tactics on your opponents, and capitulate to our impacable islamopithecine enemies--all in an effort to gain political power at the expense of the American people you're supposed to represent.


Your beloved Dhimmiecrats just used that strategy to win Congress, and you cant spin your way out of it..

55 I never said I was an atheist,nor anti-Christian (since I am a Catholic), nor denied that most of the founding fathers were Christian. However, they did try to find a way to limit, as Mr. Weaver points out about the Jefferson bible, the influence of religious dogma. It's hard for me to understand that this is controversial. And for sure I worry about Muslims who have declared war on the West (and of course anyone else who does not share their limited views). These people seem to have declared war on the world and life itself. And their big arguement is that the state and religion are not seperate spheres, that the power of the state should be used, and cannot otherwise legitimately be used, to further the aims of (their) God. Is it the arguement in this string that we should be fighting fire with fire by turning the US into a theocracy also? And, as an aside, Malcolm X repudiated the racial theories of the Nation of Islam after his pilgimage to Mecca because he met blond and blue-eyed Muslims. That is why he was assasinated by the followers of Elijah Muhammed.

56 Jeff
Religious extremeism exists, as you know. It is exactly that that is at issue. You skip over much history when you claim that Christians do not engage in religious wars. Perhaps it is only because The Church (as it used to be known) no longer has control of the levers of state power that you can claim that Christians are not responsible for any of the religious violence on the planet today. And that is exactly what I want to avoid. It will have to be our democracy that will confront Islamic extremeism, not American Christianity. And our democracy will have to enlist the help of all good people, of all faiths, to counter the Jihadists. They are a dangerous enemy because they do not value life and would rather die than live. I am all for giving them the martyrdom they so zealously seek. But not all Muslims agree with that interpretation of their religion. And we should not engage Islam as an all or nothing proposition. It would be the same as saying all Christians are alike. Then you pick out the worst Christians and say they are all like that. The world is a subtle place. Just as you oppose being labled an infidel, most Muslims probably object to being labelled Jihadists. And I agree with the calls for the moderate Muslims to start standing up for themselves and condemning the extremists. But you have to admit that it would be hard when to do so gets you labelled as a raghead or sandnigger by your fellow citizens. Oh wait, the 6 million Muslims Americans will be labelled non-citizens, therefore they have no rights. Their Holy Book is a subversive document. You see the dilema. They cannot swear on their bible to be good Americans, according to some of their fellow citizens. While you have been fairly moderate, you have to admit that some of the entries here have been, shall we say, over the top? Would you come out, as a Muslim-American, in this environment?
Cheers to you also

57 Robert:


I don't know if comment #55 was directed at me, but I'll address it anyway.


I never claimed you were an atheist, but I guess I did imply it strongly. You use all the same empty rhetoric about Christianity that atheists do. Fallacies about the Founding Fathers' religious beliefs, moral equivalencies between Christianity and islame, references to past misdeeds attributed to Christianity rather than describing the present, misconceptions about the nature of islame. etc.


The Founding Fathers imposed what you refer to as religious dogma. Most of the original states required Church attendance and tax donations. Our system of government is based on Christianity, as the Constitution and Declaration Of Independence say in clear black and white. Try to realize that Christianity does not deny a person his basic human rights--it affirms them. Jefferson edited his Bible for his own use, and he did not edit out divinity. I strongly suspect that you have no idea which parts he cut out.


Nobody wants to turn America into a theocracy to fight islame. That's a ridiculous assertion. I've had other people say that to me with a straight face, but it has no basis in fact. No Christian group in the country is pushing to legislate their religion.


Plenty of atheists are trying to legislate Christianity out of existence, as you know full well, and the islamopithecines are trying to impose sharia incrementally.


Malcolm X was an asshole till the day he died. Leaving the Nation of Islame for the original death cult of islame proper is nothing to brag about. In his final interview with Alex Haley, he expressed regret over some of his past racism, but reaffirmed other aspects of his racism. In any case, he is not remembered for his softening at the end of his life. He is remembered for his rabidly anti-White activism.


The point you missed is that Michael Weaver used X as an example of the racism of the NOI, not X himself. Malcolm's murder by the NOI confirms that racism, it doesn't dismiss it.


Historical Christianity has nothing to do with the present religious violence in the world. No Church on the planet preaches a doctrine of violence or domination. Islame does. There is no getting around that simple fact. To bring up the Spanish Inquisition, or violent Biblical passages would be specious, but you're insinuating that would be valid. The (Catholic) Church has no evil designs on the rest of humanity. You will never walk into a Church and hear calls for violence and oppression. Never. Walking into any mosque is a different matter entirely.


Christianity is not confronting islame--far from it. It is foolishly embracing that vile cult. Christian leaders are falling all over each other to appease islame--including the last two Popes.


Democracy put the Dhimmiecrats in control of Congress. They don't take control until Januuary, but they've already been traveling to the Middle East to kiss islamopithecine ass--even though this is illegal under U.S. law. They've hindered the Presiden't attempts to curb terrorism at every fucking step since 911, despite the fact that they don't have the authority to do so. So much for the democratic approach.


Jihad is not an interpretation of islame, it is one of the Seven Pillars of the entire religion. It is a commandment set forth in the koran, surahs, and hadiths by little Muhammad. There are no muslime moderates. Any muslime who acts moderately by rejecting genocide is a heretic, and marked for death by real koranimals. You have a lot to learn about islame.


Again, your comments about bad Christians are meaningless, because there is no Christian commandment for jihad.


Your main problem is that you are conflating muslims with islam, and Christians with Christianity. Islam is a deeply evil religion, regardless of who practices it. Christianity is a deeply peaceful religion, regardless of who practices it. Islam is what needs to be expunged, not muslimes willing to reject the cult.


There is no moral equivalency between Christianity and the death cult of islame, just as there is no moral equivalency between Jesus Christ and that degenerate Muhammad--who islamopithecines consider to have been the "perfect man." (He was a genocidal psychopath, a rapist, a thief, a slave raider, a misogynist, a liar, and a pedophile, among other things.)


As I wrote, koranimals cant object to being called jihadists, because their vile religion requires them to be jihadists. You're laboring under severe misconceptions about islame.


The vast majority of koranimals in America are citizens in name only. They put their religion above their country at all times, and want to turn America into an islamopithecine theocracy. Fuck them. They are rag-heads, Dune coons, etc.


The 6 million figure you quoted is absolute bullshit. It is the figure disseminated by CAIR and other jihadi front groups, a figure the left-wing media gleefully report without doing any fact checking. The real figure is 1.5 to 3 million.


The koran is not the muslime Bible. It is a terrorist manual, and when they swear on it, they are swearing to uphold jihad against America. Swearing on a real Bible does not conflict with America's constitution, and it sure as hell doesn't uphold the violent overthrow of its government.


It's not necessary to label islamopithecines as non citizens. It's necessary to outlaw islame as a political system bent on destroying Constitutional law and overthrowing the government. As you noted, islamopithecines consider their cult to be a religion and a form of governance. Any koranimal who refuses to follow American law needs to be deported.


Your last point is also based on a fallacy. The koranimals are not shy about demanding their rights and then some. They sue for special privileges constantly. They are trying to take over this country. That is their oft stated goal. They don't decry terrorism because they support it unreservedly.


You really need to read up on islame. You'll be shocked at what it's really all about. 

58 jenna jameson
jenna jameson hardcore
jenna jameson nude
jenna jameson porn
jenna jameson movies
jenna jameson

59 nzpm lwainkrg qcrixdwg rhbvz udpmao paguiow evflm

60 lrmtdaynz uagnbmc hgzsuy edqysumx lzjed yizjgr ctjwl