 |
Western liberals and feminists are strong supporters of women's and gay rights, so I've been wondering why are they so silent about radical Islam? Radical Islam is extremely hostile towards women and gay rights so you'd think that liberals and feminists would condemn them.
The problem is the Jihadi's hate Western society, just like the liberal/Marxist/Feudalists. Feminist leaders seem to have gotten in line behind Hillary, one of the best Feudalists around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Catsmine
Hi Cats,
What are liberal/Marxist/Fedualists?
Tut
Hi.Quote:
Originally Posted by TUT317
The pundits are getting lots of air time lately discussing labels so I thought I'd take a swing. "Liberal" is becoming a bad thing so "Progressive" is the label a lot of left wingers are going to. Most of the original "Progressives" turned out to be Marxists if you study their biographies. By and large, they seem to want to take my money in taxes and order me about without having to obey those orders themselves - hence my term "Feudalists."
Mel Brooks moment - It's good to be da king!
Hi again Cats,Quote:
Originally Posted by Catsmine
Thanks for the explanation. American politics is a bit too confusing for me. I am from Australia.
Regards
Tut
American politics is a divisive mess. I'm from Canada.Quote:
Originally Posted by TUT317
Yes liberals and feminists have a dim view of the role women are assigned in Islam but what are you going to do? You can't change a religion or its followers.
In Quebec the law had passed that a woman cannot vote without having her face available for identification. That's only natural, that's the best way to combat voter fraud.
You anti-Islamic Racists!Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
According to Iran, anyway.
The fight should be taken up when its tries to rear its ugly head. Like with wanting to impose sharia law on everyone. Governments have to respect religion but they shouldn't be ruled by it. And it this point in time the radical muslims are trying to exploit that to its fullest.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeedKarma
I think the problem lies with the media, as usual. I know plenty of women that most people would label as feminists (believers in equal pay, equal rights, gay rights,. ) that are extremely vocal regarding their, shall we say, "disdain" over the radical islamic view. Their choice of words are quite a bit harsher than "disdain." On that issue, they are right in line with the Rush Limbaughs of the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by earl237
Regarding liberals, I don't know what to say to that. I find someone who claims to be a true & complete hardcore liberal or a true & complete hardcore conservative is a rarity, at least in my neck of the woods. The lines between the two parties are more blurred than anyone in the media would have you believe. Are you speaking about the ones on display for public viewing, the ones in the news all the time? If so, you are right. They don't speak out enough about the problem in the way the conservatives do. I guess those liberals are too concerned about political correctness. Either that, or they are too concerned about losing their following and popularity, which translates into loss of ratings & income. The pundits on television and elsewhere don't give a damn about anyone but themselves and their pocketbooks. And before any conservatives pipe in to agree with me, my blanket statement applies to the conservatives on public display as well.
Hello earl:Quote:
Originally Posted by earl237
I haven't noticed that they are. Can you show me something, like an article maybe? You're not suggesting, are you, that because liberal women don't favor our current wars, that they SUPPORT radical Islam?? Really?? Do you have an article for THAT, or did Glenn Beck tell you?
excon
It's an alliance of convenience. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.Both would like to see Western Civilization perish or reformed in their image .Both would like to see the end of the nation state.Both would like to see the destruction of Israel .
Modern Liberalism & Islam: An Uncanny Resemblance
Hello again,
Excuse me. I'M a liberal and a feminist. I support gay rights. The idea that liberals and feminists support our enemy and wish to see western culture perish, is as shamefully INCORRECT as the death panel lie they told over and over again.
The Republicans have ONE thing right, though. If you tell a lie again and again, and you get ALL your Republican buddies to tell the SAME lie, eventually the lie gets some traction. But, it doesn't change a lie into the truth.
excon
PS> (edited) By the way, THIS liberal feminist left some blood on the battlefield DEFENDING western culture. I don't think any of the right wing war mongers here have carried a weapon into battle. They just TALK like they have.
Tom, I took this from your link:
"Welcome to Canada Free Press
Canada Free Press (CFP) is a proudly independent, 24-7 electronic newspaper, updating several times--and sometimes several hours-- a day. More than 100 writers and columnists file regularly to CFP from all corners of the globe.
Although we have been posting to the Internet for more than 12 years, on May 15, 2009 CFP celebrated its fifth anniversary as a daily.
Espousing Conservative viewpoints, cornerstone of which contain love of God, love of family, love of country, CFP maintains a loyal and growing readership. "
What was I talking about regarding the media earlier? Tom, are you possibly one of those conservative media hounds who gets paid to join different web sites & attempts to brainwash the average masses? The article you posted is a blatantly slanted (and In my opinion crazy & inane) blog Tom. How can any logical, rational, and independent thinking person take that seriously? From your responses to the threads here I do think you are rational & logical. I cannot believe you posted what you have here. So, the only conclusion I can come up with is that you are a shill.
For shame Tom, for shame.
JAL your name says it all
Hahahhahahahahahha... oh tom, you crack me up!Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
I notice you didn't deny my charge.
Deflect, deflect, deflect
The mantra of the conservative & liberal media hound.
Your charge is too ridiculous to waste my time with , For the record . I come here of my own choosing and give opinion and my contribution for free(I don't even do the pay pal thingy). I enjoy this site ,and although one day I hope it grows to a point where it has an influence ;at this point in time ;why would anyone waste their time shilling to influence the handful of regulars that come to this board ?
But I am happy that this board now has 2 monitors to determine if a link is appropriately PC. NK was gettting lonely .
Tom, for all I know, you spend your days on as many Q & A sites as you can, expounding your conservative rhetoric. But don't worry, I will tear down the liberal blogs too when I see them. Opinion pieces are simply that. I prefer to deal with facts. I have mentioned that on a previous thread.
So, thanks for the warm welcome.
But only after making the morning rounds of the neocon websites to get the talking points first.Quote:
Originally Posted by Just_Another_Lemming
Draftee, you're taking a little too much credit on yourself. I volunteered and my sweat is all over Central America and my blood's in the Canal Zone.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Your media buddies still don't mention the beheadings, the stonings, the honor rapes. They couldn't drum up any anti-American sentiment if those came to public attention.
JAL you greeted me with a specious charge based on your own speculation as your first reply to my posting .
Your welcome .
BTW ,show me where a link for facts would be found for this subject ? This whole OP is pure speculation.
Tom, are you sure this whole OP is pure speculation? It appeared to me, from Earl's point of view, that it isn't. Since he hasn't returned to respond to the Exdude's question, all I can do is simply wait and see what he has to say but, since I didn't start the thread, and I don't believe what he has written is fact, I can't show you any. Sorry.
I guess I don't understand. It certainly appears as if you were responding to Excon's query by posting your link as a way to back up Earl's OP. So, you weren't? You were simply posting your opinion? I thought people usually state that in their initial responses. I guess this forum doesn't work the way the others have that I have been on. Or, are you just backpedaling a wee bit now?
A good example of what I was talking about was Attorney General Eric Holder's refusal to use the words "radical Islam" in an interview from May of this year. YouTube - Eric Holder Refuses To Say "Radical Islam"
Another good example was the Muslim army psychiatrist who went on a shooting rampage in Texas. He couldn't have been more obvious about his radical views, wearing a pin that said "soldier of Allah" and trying to convert patients to Islam. The army refused to fire or discipline him, instead promoted or transferred him for years. After the shooting, the media never once used the words "radical Islam" or "Muslim", instead trying to blame the rampage on some "pre-traumatic distress" nonsense.
Funny, those two examples speak nothing to your initial premise about liberals and feminists.
Hi Earl. Thanks for showing up again.
I too am having trouble making the connection. That's okay. I guess I will just stand by my original posting to your OP on this thread.
You don't get out of this place much do you? Those tom is referring to are not shy about it, I read such comments regularly... even here.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
I've been asking this same question here for years, earl. I don't know what finally smacked them in the face, maybe it was their lack of outrage over Neda, but the media and the left finally jumped on board over the impending stoning in Iran of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani for adultery, so kudos even though they're late to the party.
I'm still trying to determine what is an acceptable source for this or other topics on this board .
I say the "traditional " self proclaimed "gate-keepers " of the
4th estate have become so discreditted that they do not deserve their exalted positions . Theirs is at best ,just one more voice in the debate.
I point to the Washington Compost's Ombudsman's recent admission that they fumbled the ball on the Justice Dept's refusal to pursue charges against the New Black Panther's for voter intimidation . During the 2004 elections it was the bloggers who exposed the obvious attempt by someone with the assistance of Dan Rather of CBS to fabricate documents that allegedly proved there was favoritism used when President Bush was awarded a position in the Texas National Guard .The documents provided during '60 Minutes II ' were forgeries.
These are cases that the bloggers from all spectrum and the cable news were miles ahead of the story .The so called legitimate sources fumbled the ball badly.
At the advent of the country politics was polorized because the folks and the leadership actually believed in something . The pamphleteer was the blogger of the day ,and the newspapers were the instruments the leaders used to disseminate their views. Often the nations leaders published anonymously .
There was nothing wrong with that.
It's easy to disregard or dismiss a link outright because of the source . It's a little tougher to dispute the content of the link.
Getting back on subject... Earl ; I would recommend ' Unholy Alliance : Radical Islam and the American Left ' by
David Horowitz .
Tom, I don't want to get off topic either but I feel I should point out my POV so that you understand what I am saying and where I am coming from.
The blog you posted here, although well written, was an opinion piece. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I simply don't feel they should be used as a factually based item when someone requests some solid facts, as Excon did. Don't worry, if I trip over another thread in which he does the same to you, I will call him out on it.
I understand what you are stating regarding D Rather, etc... I agree. I have a HUGE problem with the media along with the majority of our politicians (party affiliation doesn't come into play for me).
This country's founders at times, were as bad if not worse, than today's politicians. Many times, their outright lies ruined the careers of their political foes. When enough time has passed, all pictures get painted a rosier shade. Simply because they "blogged" in their day & a great many of the masses believed everything they read was the honest truth, doesn't mean we should follow suit.
Earl, by all means, read Tom's recommendation. I have heard of the book and haven't had a chance to check it out. But I will now.
I wasn't responding to Ex . If I were I would point out liberal icons like Noam Chomsky who goes out of his way to trash America ,the West ,and Israel every chance he gets...
Or I would point out that a champion of the left in the 1960s William Ayers was instrumental in the recent flotilla incident and other outrageous provocations in Gaza .
I would point out that the President of the United States went on an apology tour to Cairo and Ankara .Then he insulted the state leader of Israel in the White House ,making him sit and wait while Obama ate a meal.
I would point out all the "western "liberal lawyers who assist the Palestinians in lawfare against Israel and the liberal judges in Europe who treat Israeli officials as criminals while they ignore whatever violations of so called international law the officials of Muslim states routinely commit.
I would point out ,like you did ,this obsession of the left with political correctness where it has come to a point that the American government struggles to find an appropriate name for the enemy we fight.
Those are just a few examples of what the basis of Earl's question is about.
LOL! THAT is more like it! You wouldn't have heard a peep out of me if you had posted all that after Exdude's response.
Getting back on subject... Earl ; I would recommend ' Unholy Alliance : Radical Islam and the American Left ' by
David Horowitz .[/QUOTE]
I read a review of this book on amazon.com. It sounds great and very well written. I hope it will be available in Canada.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:07 AM. |