Re: OT: Physicians for a National Health Program

["Edmund Fitzgerald" <ef@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

"Frank Olson" <use_the_email_links@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:Duf9j.11171$_r2.2202@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Edmund Fitzgerald wrote:
>
>>> No.  But we do have guys the likes of the idiot that runs "Bountiful".
>>> We have "nut jobs" like Koresh.  The "Christian Faith" has many
>>> proponents, some of whose views are rather "extreme".  A Muslim fanatic
>>> wouldn't hesitate to throw his life away (as long as he believed what he
>>> was doing carried the "blessing" of Allah.  There are many similarities
>>> between the "training camps" of someone like Bin Laden and Daniel Koresh
>>> or any equally extremist "white power" group.  We do have a "different
>>> morality" in North America as opposed to the middle east.  >
>>
>> Let me say it again.  Pure Horeshit.  There are no organizations of
>> Christian crusaders running amuck all over the world beheading and
>> blowing up whoever they please.
>
> Actually there is an organization whose "head" professes to be "Christian"
> that is running amok "blowing up" and killing whoever they please
> (actually their focus is on some people they call "terrorists"). They even
> carry a flag that looks exactly like yours.
>

This sounds like a cut and past from Rosie's blog.  You are a Rosieophile
and just don't know it (or either hiding the truth from us - not that you
would do that of course).

>
>> You and Rosie appear to have similar views vis a vie Christians being as
>> big a threat as Muslim terrorists.
>
> Rosie's obviously a "nut job".  There are many "Christian" criminals that
> are/were as big a threat as Muslim terrorists (McVeigh is no longer with
> us).

Hey!  Look whose calling Rosie a nut job.

>> I think if you would give her a fair chance she could probably convince
>> you that George Bush really did blow up the World Trade Center buildings.
>
> Bullshit.  Next you're going to tell us that it's impossible to roll a
> Boeing 737.
>

I bet Rosie would believe you if you told her George Bush said it couldn't
be done.



>>
>>
>> Where we make
>>> the biggest mistake is trying to impose that same morality on a people
>>> that simply don't understand it (or our way of life).
>>
>>
>> If that's true then I suggest it's a bad idea for them to immigrate to
>> our counties since it would be to difficult for them to adapt to our
>> morality and laws because of their fundamental lack of understanding.
>
> On the contrary, those that do decide to immigrate here are much more
> moderate (and Western) in their views.  I have many Muslim friends and
> customers.  They're extremely nice people and deeply committed to making
> the community (as a whole) better.
>

Shortly after I read this I heard breaking news of a Toronto area Muslim man
who killed his high school age daughter because she took off the her hijab
(head cover) while at school.  The news reprort said her 26 year old
brother had lured his sister into a "death trap" involving the father.

This news report also had an apologist Catholic priest explain that not all
Muslim men murder their children.  You never hear Muslims speak up
themselves against these kinds of atrocities.  Why is that?  Could they fear
repercussions from a raging mob of their fellow adherents of the peaceful
religion?


>>
>>
>>> They've *always* been using "big knives, guns, and bombs".
>>
>>
>> With all the talk of your martial arts prowess I wasn't quite sure you
>> had this understanding.
>
> I understand what I read.
>
>
>>  I know what I would do - I would not hesitate to kill a terriorist to
>> save the lives of your family or any other innocents.  I understand we
>> are in a global war with Islamic Jihadist.   And people are geting
>> killed.  Not in great numbers as in our other wars, but this time no end
>> is in sight.
>
> Ah, yes...  the "war on terror".  I'm sorry to "burst your bubble", but
> you can't make "war" on terrorism.


You claim to understand what you read so I suggest you reread what I wrote.
No where did I write "war on terror".  What I wrote was that we are in a
global war with Islamic Jidhadist. Terror is one of the tactics the Islamic
Jidhadist use.  Do you understand the distinction Frank?




>>>> If a co-conspritor of the phony Jihadists was in custody and it was
>>>> understood he had information about your kidnapped family's whereabouts
>>>> would you be willing to pour water over his face in an effort to save
>>>> the
>>>> lives your family?
>>> I believe that there are means available to obtain this kind of
>>> information that doesn't involve torture.  I certainly don't believe we
>>> should be paying a murderer like Clifford Olson (no relation) so he
>>> would lead the police to the bodies of his victims.
>>>
>>
>> First off I've not convinced pouring water down someone's nose is
>> torture.
>
> Let's say it's not exactly the preferred method of interrogation and leave
> it at that.
>
>
>
>> Liberals, and perhaps yourself, tend to think anything that that makes
>> someone the least bit uncomfortable is torture.
>
> There you go again...  Thinking for me.  Now you're starting to argue like
> Bass.



>> Islamic Jihadist, as you may have noticed, behead their captives,
>> mutilate their bodies, and hang them up on public display.
>
> Terrorists do that.  If you want to call them "Islamic Jihadists" then by
> all means do so.


They call people to join their Jihad.  Wouldn't it follow that they would be
Jihadist?


Personally, I think any terrorist is pretty "sick"
> and twisted by any standard.  If you have to make a point by slaughtering
> innocents, you're not going to accomplish what you thought (at least in my
> view).



Terrorist are those who attempt to use terrorism to accomplish their goals.
Search and destroy is the basic remedy for terrorism. The vast majority of
terrorist operations in the world today are Islamic Jihadist.


>
>> Liberals, for some reason, don't seem to consider what the Jihadists do
>> to be torture, or at least you never hear one say so.
>
> I think most "Liberals" view terrorism the same way we do.
>


>>>> If you wouldn't, I'd be willing to do it for you.  Your kendo (thought
>>>> that was a card game) is not going save your family under these
>>>> circumstances.
>>> I'm pretty handy with Bokken, Katana and Wakasachi.  Kendo is the "way
>>> of the sword".
>>>
>>
>> That's nice.  But you won't pour water down a terrorist's nose to save
>> your family.
>
> I don't know if that sort of "torture" would actually work.  People can be
> "convinced" to say anything.  How would you know he was telling the truth
> in time to properly intervene (or that you were even talking to someone
> that knew enough) to "save" your family?  What I said was there are
> methods available that are better than torture.  The problem is you have
> to *know* exactly whom to use them on.  You'd also have to "prejudge"
> someone as being "a terrorist".  In my country (and yours) the Law states
> you're innocent until proven guilty.  And I would hesitate to judge
> someone as "guilty by association".  Does the fact that Brinks provides
> service to a known criminal organization make them suspect as well?  Some
> here would think so, but it wouldn't stand in a court of law.  :-)
>
>
>
>>
>> I see you went to great lengths not to answer the last two questions.
>
>
> I'll answer them for you now.  There's something called "freedom of
> religion" in both Canada, and the US.  There's also something called "the
> Law" which is based on our own mores and jurisprudence.  When "religious
> belief" goes against the Laws of the land, the Laws (and our own mores)
> should win.  Not-with-standing, the Law in many Islamic states is based on
> the Quran, so we have countries like Iran still stoning women and treating
> them as subservient to men.  However, many Islamic states are quite
> moderate in their views and more "western" in their thinking.
>
> It's the individuals you refer to as "Islamic Jihadists" that also take a
> more literal view of the Quran.  I watched a rather interesting interview
> of a Muslim cleric on the BBC the other day.  He was speaking (lecturing
> actually) on a television program originally broadcast by Al Jazira on the
> "proper way" to beat your wife.  Even though he advocated not using
> anything that would "mark her", the thought of raising my hand to someone
> I love is simply abhorrent to me.  You conveniently ignore the fact that
> "Western thought" and "Eastern though" is about as far apart
> geographically as it is philosophically.  This shouldn't preclude (or even
> prevent) people from the East from immigrating to our country. I do
> believe that when they do make that choice, they have to live by the laws
> and mores that prevail.  I don't think you'll find many "Islamic
> Jihadists" living here.  I think they would find our culture completely
> abhorrent.  Being an "Islamic Jihadist" is sort of like a natural form of
> "immigration control".  :-)

It doesn't take many Islamic Jihadist to kill thousands of people. Nineteen
jihadist killed 3,000 +  on 9/11.   So what if they found our culture
abhorrent?

Even so hasn't Canada apprehended some home grown Islamic terror
conspirators in the recent past?

Concerning the Muslim man in the Toronto area that killed his daughter I'll
take a guess that the Canadian judicial system will say it was a "mistake"
to try to impose their laws and morality on this father and son and then
pack them off  back to Pakistan.

We'll see.