Al Qaeda to jihadis: ‘Target white Americans, avoid minorities, because US mislabels attacks as ‘hate crime’

[JayJayH 546]

Radical Islamic terrorism.

Extremism fueled by gun culture.

The publication, “Inspire guide: Orlando operation,” which seeks to capitalize on the terror attack carried out by gunman Omar Mateen who pledged allegiance to ISIS, plainly encourages extremists to attack Americans.

While Mateen chose to target what the guide refers to as a “homosexual nightclub,” noting that killing gay people is “the most binding duty and closer to human nature,” it suggests to “avoid targeting places and crowds where minorities are generally found in America,” because “the federal government will be the one taking full responsibility.”

[...]

In conclusion the authors note that while Mateen killed and injured almost a third of attendees at the nightclub, an extremely high tally for a ‘lone wolf,’ he could have killed even more by making explosives if he followed the simple guides that appear in previous editions of the group’s “Inspire” magazine.

http://www.foreigndesknews.com/world/us/al-qaeda-jihadis-target-white-americans-avoid-minorities-us-mislabels-attacks-hate-crime/

Edited July 3, 2016 by JayJayH

[Boiler 45,525]

Sounds racist?

[Póg mo 1,749]

Radical Islamic terrorism.

Extremism fueled by gun culture.

The publication, Inspire guide: Orlando operation, which seeks to capitalize on the terror attack carried out by gunman Omar Mateen who pledged allegiance to ISIS, plainly encourages extremists to attack Americans.

While Mateen chose to target what the guide refers to as a homosexual nightclub, noting that killing gay people is the most binding duty and closer to human nature, it suggests to avoid targeting places and crowds where minorities are generally found in America, because the federal government will be the one taking full responsibility.

[...]

In conclusion the authors note that while Mateen killed and injured almost a third of attendees at the nightclub, an extremely high tally for a lone wolf, he could have killed even more by making explosives if he followed the simple guides that appear in previous editions of the groups Inspire magazine.

http://www.foreigndesknews.com/world/us/al-qaeda-jihadis-target-white-americans-avoid-minorities-us-mislabels-attacks-hate-crime/

It's a great pity the warnings about invading Iraq weren't headed. Oh well, when all else fails blame Liberals. Edited July 3, 2016 by Póg mo

[JayJayH 546]

It's a great pity the warnings about invading Iraq weren't headed. Oh well, when all else fails blame Liberals.

Never blamed liberals for turning Iraq from a ****hole into an even worse ****hole. That's on the Bush administration and its incompetent handling of post-occupation Iraq, and in part the Obama administration's premature pullout. I was one of the liberals protesting the war.

Now I'm one of the liberals perplexed by the new left's strange tendency of blaming everything but Islamism.

[Póg mo 1,749]

Never blamed liberals for turning Iraq from a ****hole into an even worse ****hole. That's on the Bush administration and its incompetent handling of post-occupation Iraq, and in part the Obama administration's premature pullout. I was one of the liberals protesting the war.

Now I'm one of the liberals perplexed by the new left's strange tendency of blaming everything but Islamism.

I guess for anyone who actually pays attention, they probably aren't really comfortable with using a broad brush to paint an entire religion as the enemy. ISIS/ISIL has, and continues to murder Muslims and it is Muslims who are fighting ISIS. Edited July 4, 2016 by Póg mo

[OriZ 3,157]

Never blamed liberals for turning Iraq from a ****hole into an even worse ****hole. That's on the Bush administration and its incompetent handling of post-occupation Iraq, and in part the Obama administration's premature pullout. I was one of the liberals protesting the war.

Now I'm one of the liberals perplexed by the new left's strange tendency of blaming everything but Islamism.

It is pretty perplexing, what has happened to the left. There are very few center-left people left....they are mostly loony left now. Whereas there still is a sizable amount of moderate right folks.

[Póg mo 1,749]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

So basically the article says he should have used explosives.

[JayJayH 546]

I guess for anyone who actually pays attention, they probably aren't really comfortable with using a broad brush to paint an entire religion as the enemy. ISIS/ISIL has, and continues to murder Muslims and it is Muslims who are fighting ISIS.

I agree. But focusing entirely on the (nothing to do with) Islamic State and pretending they're the only (nothing to do with) Islamic terrorist group out there helps no one except for virtue signaling liberals - Particularly, it doesn't help the millions of secular Muslims who are persecuted every day for trying to reform the religion.

It's like people heard Donald Trump say "ban Muslim immigration" once and then decided that any time Islamism is called out for the medieval ideology that it is, it's "Islamophobia."

In addition to ISIS, radical (nothing to do with) Islamists supporters of Al Qaida, Jabath al-Nusra, the Taliban, Boko Haram, Abu Sayyaf, Jemaah (nothing to do with)Islamiyyah, Ansar al-(nothing to do with)Islam, Hesbollah, Hamas etc. etc. etc. kill more Muslims than anyone. Not to mention the governments of the Gulf Countries, the (nothing to do with) Islamic Republic of Iran, the (nothing to do with) Islamic Republic of Pakistan, (nothing to do with) Islamic Saudi Arabia etc. etc. etc.

I'm in no way saying that all Muslims are represented by the (nothing to do with) Islamic State or its leader Abu Bakr al Baghdadi - who has a PHD in (nothing to do with) Islamic studies from the (nothing to do with) Islamic University of Baghdad.

One of my favorite writers and journalists is a Muslim reformist - Maajid Nawaz. It's not a coincidence that the term "regressive left" was coined by a secular, western Muslim. Later popularized by ex-Muslims like Sarah Haider when western liberals began calling her a racist bigot after speaking out against apostasy laws in Islamic culture.

PS. If you think I'm being unfair to Muslims, just know that I chuckle just as much when I see a woman in a hijab, as I do when I see a Mormon woman in a white robe, or Amish in a Victorian dress. Only laughing at hijabis makes me "racist" though

So basically the article says he should have used explosives.

Yes, as Al Qaida argues, using guns makes liberals in the West fixated on blaming gun laws rather than Islamism the ideology behind it.

Edited July 4, 2016 by JayJayH

[JayJayH 546]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Like when SJWs constantly search for new things to be racist/sexist/bigot?

Edited July 4, 2016 by JayJayH

[OriZ 3,157]

Like when SJWs constantly search for new things to be racist/sexist/bigot?

Posting that link, in and of itself, was a psychological projection.

[Póg mo 1,749]

I agree. But focusing entirely on the (nothing to do with) Islamic State and pretending they're the only (nothing to do with) Islamic terrorist group out there helps no one except for virtue signaling liberals - Particularly, it doesn't help the millions of secular Muslims who are persecuted every day for trying to reform the religion.

What is your solution? Continue to aid friendly dictators, in the hope they will reform their ways? Maybe we should nuke all the countries that we don't like? I have heard more than a few peace loving Christian Americans suggest such a response. Funnily, the same people call Muslims extremists. Maybe we could force all Muslims to wear a babge, so we can identify who they are? How about forced re-education for anyone who might possibly poss a threat? How does Americas continued support of the likes of Saudi Arabia fit into your grand plan?

Robert Fisk one of few Western journalists actually paying attention, and not going around throwing meaningless labels on people, has suggested a solution.

1K

Voices

A plan must be made for life after Isis in the Middle East

In the Second World War, Allied leaders planned for the post-war world a United Nations years before the conflict ended. We must do the same for the Middle East.

Robert Fisk @indyvoices Sunday 7 February 2016190 comments

1K

syrian-soldiers-isis.jpg

Government troops walk past Isis flag in recaptured Syrian town Getty Images

There are times in the Middle East when nightmares and delusions take the place of the real and growing tragedy which is consuming the Arab lands. More and more earnest are the calls for peace as more and more nations launch more and more air raids, from Kabul to the Mediterranean, and down through Sinai and Yemen and across to Libya. The bloodbath is real, yet no one plans for a future for Life after Isis. By my reckoning, there are now 11 different national air forces bombing five different Muslim countries to degrade and destroy their enemies. But what comes afterwards?

History teaches us that for 100 years now, the people of this magnificent, dangerous region have sought justice and received only injustice. Foreign and proxy occupation, corruption and dictatorship the hands of the torturer have taken from them the one value which so many millions finally sought in the great Arab awakening of 2011: dignity. Yet what are we doing about this? Why have we never addressed the great historical injustices which have caused this human earthquake?

1K

Voices

A plan must be made for life after Isis in the Middle East

In the Second World War, Allied leaders planned for the post-war world a United Nations years before the conflict ended. We must do the same for the Middle East.

Robert Fisk @indyvoices Sunday 7 February 2016190 comments

1K

syrian-soldiers-isis.jpg

Government troops walk past Isis flag in recaptured Syrian town Getty Images

There are times in the Middle East when nightmares and delusions take the place of the real and growing tragedy which is consuming the Arab lands. More and more earnest are the calls for peace as more and more nations launch more and more air raids, from Kabul to the Mediterranean, and down through Sinai and Yemen and across to Libya. The bloodbath is real, yet no one plans for a future for Life after Isis. By my reckoning, there are now 11 different national air forces bombing five different Muslim countries to degrade and destroy their enemies. But what comes afterwards?

History teaches us that for 100 years now, the people of this magnificent, dangerous region have sought justice and received only injustice. Foreign and proxy occupation, corruption and dictatorship the hands of the torturer have taken from them the one value which so many millions finally sought in the great Arab awakening of 2011: dignity. Yet what are we doing about this? Why have we never addressed the great historical injustices which have caused this human earthquake?

After entering Aleppo, the Syrian army may set its sights on Raqqa

Instead, we conjure up imaginary armies as if the real ones arent frightening enough. We dream up 35,000 Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Syria when perhaps there are a thousand and 20,000 Afghan Hazara Shia and hordes of Iraqi Shia militiamen in Syria and another 10,000 Hezbollah and this is before we even remember David Camerons ghost army of 70,000 warriors ready to fight for democracy. The Turks are about to invade Syria, we are told, but they havent. Then there are the thousands of Saudi soldiers which our favourite Gulf monarchy is ready to send to Syria to fight Isis although presumably theyll have to leave their air-conditioned Mercedes limousines back at the start line. As for the Russians, Im surprised nobody has yet suggested that they arrived in Syria with snow on their boots.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/a-plan-must-be-made-for-life-after-isis-in-the-middle-east-a6860276.html

[JayJayH 546]

What is your solution? Continue to aid friendly dictators, in the hope they will reform their ways? Maybe we should nuke all the countries that we don't like? I have heard more than a few peace loving Christian Americans suggest such a response. Funnily, the same people call Muslims extremists. Maybe we could force all Muslims to wear a babge, so we can identify who they are? How about forced re-education for anyone who might possibly poss a threat? How does Americas continued support of the likes of Saudi Arabia fit into your grand plan?

Robert Fisk one of few Western journalists actually paying attention, and not going around throwing meaningless labels on people, has suggested a solution.

Sometimes a 'strongman' is better than the alternative. I'd hate to see what would become of Saudi Arabia if the al-Saud family collapsed. That being said, frankly, I think the only Middle Eastern countries we should support are the few emerging, secular, actual democracies in the region - Tunisia.. Any others? Turkey pre-Erdogan perhaps. The likes of Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf etc. we should stay far away from - (This is how liberals could easily convert conservatives to the cause of shifting away from fossil fuels btw.)

I never said we give Muslims a badge. I don't call "Muslims" extremists. I stand with secular Muslims who are working every day to reform their religion. I simply think liberals should treat Islam the same way they treat any other religion. If there was a global network of organized Christian groups, numbering in the millions, waging holy war to instill Old Testament law upon the Earth - You think liberals would take it seriously? Or do you think the left in the west might argue that guns and orthodox Jews were the underlying issues?

I'm fully aware than not all Muslims are extremists. But I think we have different versions of what we call extreme. I generally think of anyone who believe death is the appropriate sentence for homosexuality, apostasy, adultery, blasphemy etc. is a religious extremist. They exist in America. They form majorities of the population in large swathes of the Middle East and South Asia.

We've been sold this meme of Islamophobia to cover anyone who insults or criticizes Islam. From a liberal's perspective, I really don't get this. I think insulting and ridiculing Islam is a good thing. I think insulting and ridiculing Answers in Genesis and the Westboro Baptist Church is a good thing. The catholic church didn't stop burning people at the stake because the great thinkers of the enlightenment were scared to offend the religion. Islam is in dire need of a secular reformation, and what's holding it back in the west is this strange alliance between conservative clerics and far left liberals both refusing to accept this.

When Al Qaida has to instruct its holy warriors to use bombs instead of guns, and to only attack white Americans, so as to not give liberals the ammo to launch their rage at the GOP.. I'd say the denial on the far left has reached ridiculous levels.

Edited July 4, 2016 by JayJayH

[Póg mo 1,749]

Sometimes a 'strongman' is better than the alternative. I'd hate to see what would become of Saudi Arabia if the al-Saud family collapsed. That being said, frankly, I think the only Middle Eastern countries we should support are the few emerging, secular, actual democracies in the region - Tunisia.. Any others? Turkey pre-Erdogan perhaps. The likes of Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf etc. we should stay far away from - (This is how liberals could easily convert conservatives to the cause of shifting away from fossil fuels btw.)

I never said we give Muslims a badge. I don't call "Muslims" extremists. I stand with secular Muslims who are working every day to reform their religion. I simply think liberals should treat Islam the same way they treat any other religion. If there was a global network of organized Christian groups, numbering in the millions, waging holy war to instill Old Testament law upon the Earth - You think liberals would take it seriously? Or do you think the left in the west might argue that guns and orthodox Jews were the underlying issues?

I'm fully aware than not all Muslims are extremists. But I think we have different versions of what we call extreme. I generally think of anyone who believe death is the appropriate sentence for homosexuality, apostasy, adultery, blasphemy etc. is a religious extremist. They exist in America. They form majorities of the population in large swathes of the Middle East and South Asia.

We've been sold this meme of Islamophobia to cover anyone who insults or criticizes Islam. From a liberal's perspective, I really don't get this. I think insulting and ridiculing Islam is a good thing. I think insulting and ridiculing Answers in Genesis and the Westboro Baptist Church is a good thing. The catholic church didn't stop burning people at the stake because the great thinkers of the enlightenment were scared to offend the religion. Islam is in dire need of a secular reformation, and what's holding it back in the west is this strange alliance between conservative clerics and far left liberals both refusing to accept this.

I have no problem ridiculing ISIS, Hezbollah, Saudi Arabia, but I do have problem with people going around saying, or implying that because ISIS are bad, therefore the entire Muslim religion is somehow not to be trusted. Your need to label everyone on the left as somehow being unable to criticize the above, is completely off the mark.

When Al Qaida has to instruct its holy warriors to use bombs instead of guns, and to only attack white Americans, so as to not give liberals the ammo to launch their rage at the GOP.. I'd say the denial on the far left has reached ridiculous levels.

ISIS not doing it to prevent Liberals from launching attacks against the GOP, but to try and drive a wedge between white Americans and minorities, or in matter of fact, to help exploit pre-existing fear of people who aren't white. Good job for falling for what ISIS is trying to do.

[TBoneTX 45,309]

An inappropriate, baiting post has been removed. Please apply self-restraint.