Fox News: Westboro is a Left-Wing Cult

[MoFinz]

Their voice is silenced. Violently. In the streets in front of their neighbors for everyone to see. Then their bodies are left in the street to rot, which is among the most disrespectful things that can be done in Islam. They are terrified physically, emotionally, and spiritually. It's hard to imagine because we don't have to live with it here in the states. If the civilians also had access to RPGs, assault weapons, and everything that the terrorists do? Maybe we would start to see some opposition. Unfortunately, they don't. It's not worth it to voice opposition when they have no way to defend themselves...

I dunno....i would have thought the Taliban and A-Q started out as subversive groups.....sure, we helped armed them, but they had to express the will to fight before we did. Despite their overwhelming numbers that some have alleged, and in every Islamic country i can ever recall reading about, no Mullah has stepped forward and attempted to collect the people.
Maybe it's just me, but if it's so oppresive, wouldn't you think they would collectively at least TRY to shake off the yoke of terror? Is it better to live as a subjugated coward or die as someone truly professing Allah's will?
Just throwing it out there......

[Locke]

I dunno....i would have thought the Taliban and A-Q started out as subversive groups.....sure, we helped armed them, but they had to express the will to fight before we did. Despite their overwhelming numbers that some have alleged, and in every Islamic country i can ever recall reading about, no Mullah has stepped forward and attempted to collect the people.
Maybe it's just me, but if it's so oppresive, wouldn't you think they would collectively at least TRY to shake off the yoke of terror? Is it better to live as a subjugated coward or die as someone truly professing Allah's will?
Just throwing it out there......

I don't know enough about Islam to answer that question. What I do know is that it's not worth having your wife and kids executed in the streets because you talked out against these people. If it was just the person who said something? I guess we may see a few martyrs pop up in an attempt to spark something. But it's similar to the drug cartels in Mexico. They kill your family first, then you. Besides, outside of Afghanistan, there is nothing to rebel against. In these other countries, these terror groups are a presence, not the government. It might be different in other countries if a group like the Taliban was in charge, but I can't say since it's not the case. I think Afghanistan is a lost cause for the foreseeable future. In the meantime, Al Queda is similar to Westboro in the minds of most other countries. In fact, the only difference between the 2 at this point is that Al Queda has killed and Westboro hasn't. If Westboro ever kills someone, no one will be able to convince me that there is a difference between the 2, except one says God and one says Allah...

[GoFins!]

So.....gun control is a good idea?

No "J/K" necessary. It does show one example of where gun control can lead.

At what ratio do the people take back their country if they despise the Taliban and A-Q so much? At what point do the good men stand up and rally the oppressed to action?

This could be a great debate

Yes, it could.

[MoFinz]

I don't know enough about Islam to answer that question. What I do know is that it's not worth having your wife and kids executed in the streets because you talked out against these people. If it was just the person who said something? I guess we may see a few martyrs pop up in an attempt to spark something. But it's similar to the drug cartels in Mexico. They kill your family first, then you. Besides, outside of Afghanistan, there is nothing to rebel against. In these other countries, these terror groups are a presence, not the government. It might be different in other countries if a group like the Taliban was in charge, but I can't say since it's not the case. I think Afghanistan is a lost cause for the foreseeable future. In the meantime, Al Queda is similar to Westboro in the minds of most other countries. In fact, the only difference between the 2 at this point is that Al Queda has killed and Westboro hasn't. If Westboro ever kills someone, no one will be able to convince me that there is a difference between the 2, except one says God and one says Allah...

To quote a line from The Patriot...."Do only childless men fight wars?" It's hard to believe that all those people against A-Q and the Taliban have not at least tried to rise up from their opressors. I know they may be way outgunned, but they way out number the terrorists i'm being told. Gandhi never fired a gun, but he spoke out and led people.....
As far as Westboro and A-Q being the same, sans murders.....what do you bet the odds are at least ONE member of Westboro houses guns...and as crazy as they are, as despicable as some of their actions are, you never heard of one of them going on a shooting spree.....now isn't that an interesting thought for comparison? A-Q has unlimited access to guns and obviously the will to kill.....Westboro does not.


To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

[GoFins!]

I think this is where the U.S. is somewhat correct in intervening. On paper, helping Iraq set up a government and establish a military is the best way to keep terrorists out of there. In reality, the people who live there have to be OK with it, and how can they be? The U.S. invaded their country, destroyed their homes, killed thousands of civilians directly or indirectly, and completely changed their way of life. If a country came to the U.S. and said, "Help us. We need you to guide us in setting up a functional government and military. Our people are 100% behind your presence", I think it would work. Good luck with that happening...

It seems like the governments, no matter how awful they are by American standards, morals and values, are always much more moderate, and less prone to perpetuate violence against other countries, than those wanting to overthrow them. Are there any recent examples to the contrary?

Could this is why we are NOT intervening in Syria. When radical muslims aren't fighting other muslims they seem to actively target the Israel and the West. Is it in our own best interest to not bring muslim vs muslim violence to an end?

[GoFins!]

Nor should we fight others wars unless we have a vested interest and they come to us seeking help.

I agree that we shouldn't consider intervening unless we have an important vested interest. We should not help any group that is likely to turn on us as soon as we help them in their current struggles regardless of how much they ask/beg for help - and, based on history, that would seem to exclude any muslim revolutionaries.

[GoFins!]

Their voice is silenced. Violently. In the streets in front of their neighbors for everyone to see. Then their bodies are left in the street to rot, which is among the most disrespectful things that can be done in Islam. They are terrified physically, emotionally, and spiritually. It's hard to imagine because we don't have to live with it here in the states. If the civilians also had access to RPGs, assault weapons, and everything that the terrorists do? Maybe we would start to see some opposition. Unfortunately, they don't. It's not worth it to voice opposition when they have no way to defend themselves...

First of all, KUDOS for not blaming MoFinz "misperceptions" on our media skewing the news.

I understand why a single voice would not stand up against terrorsts. I don't understand how terrorists have such open access to RPGs, assault weapons, etc, etc, etc, but the terrorist hating governments don't.

[GoFins!]

In fact, the only difference between the 2 at this point is that Al Queda has killed and Westboro hasn't. If Westboro ever kills someone, no one will be able to convince me that there is a difference between the 2....

I think it's a stretch comparing threats of terrorism to annoying behavior, but other than that I understand and agree with your point.

The difference now is in the way the masses react - and much of that is for the reasons you have already given. If Westboro was armed to the teeth and the masses weren't I doubt we'd have the same show of opposition.

This goes back to one of my original "ignorant" questions. Westboro engages in annoying and offensive behavior because they have rights and protections under our Constitution. Once they overstep those rights and protections our authorities will come down on them immediately.

"Outside of Afghanistan", what allows radical muslims to engage in terrorism? Have active are muslim governments in opposing, pursuing and prosecuting terrorists?

[GoFins!]

To quote a line from The Patriot...."Do only childless men fight wars?" It's hard to believe that all those people against A-Q and the Taliban have not at least tried to rise up from their oppressors. I know they may be way outgunned, but they way out number the terrorists i'm being told.

- muslims hate terrorists
- muslims vastly outnumber terrorists
- terrorists oppress muslims
- muslims and their governments lack the will or ability to stand up to terrorists ?

I'd sure like that last line to make sense.

Gandhi never fired a gun, but he spoke out and led people.....

Do you think Ghandi's tactics would be effective against radical muslims? Weren't Ghandi's tactics viable due to the relative civility of the oppressors?