Exclusive: Islamist Terror Enclave Discovered in Texas

marg6043
reply to post by OpinionatedB

 

The irony, the agendas the hypocrisy, the danger, and that last one is real.

While it may be real, its not as prevalent within our borders as most would have you believe.

reply to post by vkey08


I suppose the problem I am having with your original post is that people complain about moderate Muslims not standing up to the Islamists/Extremists. So a group/organization is created to help understand Extremists and then the people complain about that also. Kind of like being between a rock and a hard place/"catch 22".

Can anyone suggest how moderate Muslims might respect their religion and themselves while disagreeing with more radical viewpoints like Sharia Law implementation globally? I just think that this is at the crux of the matter. It is mostly based on perception, this is how the world turns, and if helps calmness, I'm all for it.

reply to post by dlbott


You should not take offense. I greatly admire what the Infantry does and they were always there when called. But sometimes, in certain situations they were to overzealous (usually the Officers fault) and did more damage to the overall Commanders intent. I can testify to this because as an E-7 in charge of the mission, I have had to put many a LT in their place. They don't take to kindly to that.

Their role was to provide security since our team was to small to do so on it's own and still do the mission. Occasionally, we would get some gung-ho young Officer who wanted to make a name for himself. I was even brought up on charges one time for putting a female LT (MP) in her place because she was seriously screwing up my teams contacts. That one didn't get far at all.

Specific tools for specific jobs, ya know?

watchesfromwall
reply to post by vkey08

 

I suppose the problem I am having with your original post is that people complain about moderate Muslims not standing up to the Islamists/Extremists. So a group/organization is created to help understand Extremists and then the people complain about that also. Kind of like being between a rock and a hard place/"catch 22".

Can anyone suggest how moderate Muslims might respect their religion and themselves while disagreeing with more radical viewpoints like Sharia Law implementation globally? I just think that this is at the crux of the matter. It is mostly based on perception, this is how the world turns, and if helps calmness, I'm all for it.

have you looked at the article source? have you looked into that source?

i really hope you don't think that "news source" was created by, and is staffed by moderate muslims...

watchesfromwall
reply to post by vkey08

 

I suppose the problem I am having with your original post is that people complain about moderate Muslims not standing up to the Islamists/Extremists. So a group/organization is created to help understand Extremists and then the people complain about that also. Kind of like being between a rock and a hard place/"catch 22".

Can anyone suggest how moderate Muslims might respect their religion and themselves while disagreeing with more radical viewpoints like Sharia Law implementation globally? I just think that this is at the crux of the matter. It is mostly based on perception, this is how the world turns, and if helps calmness, I'm all for it.

edit on 21-2-2014 by watchesfromwall because: (no reason given)

If i can find the posts that Libertygal put up she had some good background on the whole thing, and it makes a little more sense after reading her stuff

reply to post by Daedalus

>>have you looked at the article source? have you looked into that source?

Yes, to both counts. I always thoroughly read sourced OPs and threads. If the creator and others take the time, so should I.

>>i really hope you don't think that "news source" was created by, and is staffed by moderate muslims...

Perhaps not all moderate Muslims but I dig deeper into the Board of Directors, and Expert Contributors, etc.

For example, view the founder of this source - who is both of the above - : aifdemocracy.org...

Again, My point is that moderate Muslims are being attacked for not speaking out against Extremists, and they have to start somewhere. If it means joining forces with others of the Abrahamic faiths, well at least that is better than no action at all. It may end up helping moderation find its way somehow, someway, sometime - leading to greater peace in this crazy world of ours.

reply to post by vkey08


Thanks for your reply. I've read most of your thread and S and F . I found the thread of interest and of value.

I guess it all boils down to - surprise to ATS - how much you trust the govt and various media outlets.

watchesfromwall
For example, view the founder of this source - who is both of the above - : aifdemocracy.org...

i'm slightly confused by the wording of this line....

are you saying the same person who founded the AIFD, founded the clarion project?

Daedalus

watchesfromwall
For example, view the founder of this source - who is both of the above - : aifdemocracy.org...

i'm slightly confused by the wording of this line....

are you saying the same person who founded the AIFD, founded the clarion project?

No. That isn't what he said.

From page one of the thread:

Advisory Board

In December 2010, the organization announced
an advisory board including:

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., Former Assistant Secretary
of Defense for International Security Policy, and
President of the Center for Security Policy
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, President and Founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy

rightweb.irc-online.org...

Advisors (as of 2013)

Frank Gaffney
Zuhdi Jasser

What he said:

but I dig deeper into the Board of Directors, and Expert Contributors, etc.

What you said:

looks like it's a pro-israel group trying to stir up fear and hatred against muslims

it explains everything, from their obviously bigoted site...

i'm no fan of terrorists....but to paint ALL
muslims as terrorists, as these folks seem to do, is just ignorant, bigoted, and reeks of "the
agenda"

(All emphasis mine)

This was from your post on page 2, second post from the top, in which you quoted offsite content and failed to provide a link.

Who knows what the source is, or how trustworthy it was? There was NO source.

I would provide a link to the post, but can't from my phone. I feel certain people can find it, however.

Just in case you didn't know...

* Proper Attribution for the posting of copyrighted material owned by others is defined as posting a relevant snippet of the online content not to exceed 10% of the entire piece, a properly formed link back to the source website, and a clear indication of the name
of the source website...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


The beauty of it all is, the Clarion group, while having some Jewish people, has moderate Muslims involved both on the board, as well as primary advisors and contributors, along with Middle East experts that likely identify as neither.

So, who looks guilty of being deceitful, really? Someone who posts with attributes, or someone who doesn't?

A person who actually knows some of the people involved are Muslims, or, someone who appears, either out of ignorance or intentionally, to have thought they were a pro-israeli group with an "agenda"?

It has been rather humerous, really, to watch.

About Clarion

www.clarionproject.org...

The Clarion Project draws together Middle East experts, scholars, human rights activists and Muslims to promote tolerance and moderation and challenge extremism.

Libertygal

Daedalus

watchesfromwall
For example, view the founder of this source - who is both of the above - : aifdemocracy.org...

i'm slightly confused by the wording of this line....

are you saying the same person who founded the AIFD, founded the clarion project?

No. That isn't what he said.

From page one of the thread:

Advisory Board

In December 2010, the organization announced
an advisory board including:

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., Former Assistant Secretary
of Defense for International Security Policy, and
President of the Center for Security Policy
Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, President and Founder of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy

rightweb.irc-online.org...

Advisors (as of 2013)

Frank Gaffney
Zuhdi Jasser

What he said:

but I dig deeper into the Board of Directors, and Expert Contributors, etc.

What you said:

looks like it's a pro-israel group trying to stir up fear and hatred against muslims

it explains everything, from their obviously bigoted site...

i'm no fan of terrorists....but to paint ALL
muslims as terrorists, as these folks seem to do, is just ignorant, bigoted, and reeks of "the
agenda"

(All emphasis mine)

This was from your post on page 2, second post from the top, in which you quoted offsite content and failed to provide a link.

Who knows what the source is, or how trustworthy it was? There was NO source.

I would provide a link to the post, but can't from my phone. I feel certain people can find it, however.

Just in case you didn't know...

* Proper Attribution for the posting of copyrighted material owned by others is defined as posting a relevant snippet of the online content not to exceed 10% of the entire piece, a properly formed link back to the source website, and a clear indication of the name
of the source website...

www.abovetopsecret.com...


The beauty of it all is, the Clarion group, while having some Jewish people, has moderate Muslims involved both on the board, as well as primary advisors and contributors, along with Middle East experts that likely identify as neither.

So, who looks guilty of being deceitful, really? Someone who posts with attributes, or someone who doesn't?

A person who actually knows some of the people involved are Muslims, or, someone who appears, either out of ignorance or intentionally, to have thought they were a pro-israeli group with an "agenda"?

It has been rather humerous, really, to watch.

About Clarion

www.clarionproject.org...

The Clarion Project draws together Middle East experts, scholars, human rights activists and Muslims to promote tolerance and moderation and challenge extremism.

edit on 21-2-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)

so terribly sorry....it was wikipedia...which isn't copyrighted, or owned by anyone...i suppose a link would have been nice, but i didn't think it necessary at the time, as i'm pretty sure posting snippets from wikipedia doesn't constitute a T&C violation...if it did, i'm sure i would have been thumped for it by now, as it appears a mod has already gone over this thread...

if it would make you feel better, i'd go add a link, but it's WAY past the 4 hour mark....though, i suppose i could send the link to a mod, and ask them to inject it into the post.. -shrug-

also, the wording of the post WAS confusing enough to warrant the question, AND i was asking someone else the question, not you. it's one thing to point out when someone else is factually inaccurate, it's another thing entirely, to use someone asking someone else(that isn't you) a question, as an excuse to go after them, and attempt to make them look foolish...very bad form..

so you write off the extent of pro-israeli intrests involvement as "while having some jewish people involved"? so you plan to completely ignore the points i quoted on page two, that it was founded by an israeli/canadian film producer, and that 3 of the founders are, or were full time employees of Aish HaTorah, and that CP's incorporation papers use Aish HaTorah's address as it's own, meaning they're run out of the same goddamn office...seriously, you're gonna ignore all that?

here, have a link.. en.wikipedia.org...

the only point i was EVER trying to make here, is that the "news outlet" appears to have ties to people with an agenda, and that this shouldn't be trusted as a sole source for a thread OP, unless, of course, the point of the thread was to call into question the veracity of the source, and it's information....which vkey was kinda doing...

discuss the facts, not me.

reply to post by TDawgRex


On that note, conventional warfare is a thing of the past anyways. US ground troops will never be engaged in conventional warfare again. Well, at least not in the traditional sense.

UW groups should be training people year round instead of being deployed. Soon enough, everyone will be UW.

Regardless, short shorts, shirt tucked in, and nut to butt drills have got to go. It is seriously #ed up that people are spending 3 months doing that every day just to go straight to their deployment and in some cases get killed. Was making them go nut to butt every day 10 times a day really necessary to training? Can't they just get their armor on and pack into a room for a few hours instead? It would be more beneficial to the aim of the training on top of not being so Naval in nature. I think we had 1 too many Navy guys influencing things...

Attn: Please keep the conversation on the topic and off each other.

reply to post by Daedalus

Most of the replies from you, to me, have been posts NOT to you. What' s your point? I answered, because it wasn't what he said. I pointed out rather succinctly, what he said.

And I, just like you, will reply any time I feel like it, to whom I feel like. Suck it up, cupcake, and put on your big boy pants. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

I have been called all sorts of names, been accused of being a muslim hater, all sorts of things. A lo of assumptions were made about me for simply posting factual evidence to a thread. I was screamed at

DECAF!! DECAF!!

And you are going to preach to me? Seriously?

I said there were jewish people involved. Never glossed over that, denied that, said it wasn't true.

I did, however, point out that the Muslim involvement in Clarion is quite prominent, along with other prominent, well known, astute people that have participated in think tanks and received a large amount of respect and notoriety for their positions and opinions are also involved with Clarion. That part cannot be denied, as well.

It would be rather difficult to take the stances suggested when you have the types of people involved, Moderate Muslims, who would most certainly have an issue about their reputations being entangled in that sort of misperception, don't you think? Perhaps, just perhaps, the nastiness that was posted about Clarion was far more partisan and biased than the other way around.

It has been amusing, from the beginning, realizing that most people hadn't caught on, it took long enough, really.

But, as was pointed out above, it's really sad that people complain that moderate muslims never take a stand, and when they finally do, they get slapped down because they have Jewish partners. How utterly, stinkin' sad. They can't win for losing. Say nothing, they are wrong, take a stand against extremism, they have an "agenda".

Some people will just never be happy.

Just sayin...

Done with the thread. The ending was delicious.

Libertygal
reply to post by Daedalus

 

Most of the replies from you, to me, have been posts NOT to you. What' s your point? I answered, because it wasn't what he said. I pointed out rather succinctly, what he said.

again, and it's really annoying that you can't seem to understand this....i pointed out factually inaccurate statements that you had made, regardless of whether or not the posts were addressed to me or not, does not change the fact that the statements were factually inaccurate.

what you did was go off on me, when i asked someone to clarify what they meant, which is only something the person who made the statement can do. there is a HUGE difference.

And I, just like you, will reply any time I feel like it, to whom I feel like. Suck it up, cupcake, and put on your big boy pants. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

deliberately antagonistic. never said don't reply.....what you shouldn't do is attempt to speak for someone, when they are the only one who can answer the question "what did you mean?"

I have been called all sorts of names, been accused of being a muslim hater, all sorts of things. A lo of assumptions were made about me for simply posting factual evidence to a thread. I was screamed at

DECAF!! DECAF!!

And you are going to preach to me? Seriously?

i never accused you of being a muslim hater...i asked if you had a problem with them, or disliked them...i was trying to get you to explain your position..it was a valid question. i was, and still am trying to understand why you give so much credence to a source that is dubious at best...i'm curious why you seem to agree with this "terrorists are everywhere" thing....if you don't agree with it, then i am sorry, and must have misunderstood you.

i was mentioning decaf, because you seemed to be rather hyper, and were all over the place.....you weren't making a whole lot of sense, and you kept harping on the "fact" that the people in texas, are in the same group that killed daniel pearl, when i demonstrated that this was simply not the case...

i was trying to get you to calm down....you made some valid points, and pulled up quite a bit of information, but your execution of connecting the dots was faulty.

I said there were jewish people involved. Never glossed over that, denied that, said it wasn't true.

this is very true....BUT, you seem to want to minimize it, and ignore the evidence to suggest that this "news outlet" is a front...

I did, however, point out that the Muslim involvement in Clarion is quite prominent, along with other prominent, well known, astute people that have participated in think tanks and received a large amount of respect and notoriety for their positions and opinions are also involved with Clarion. That part cannot be denied, as well.

they have one muslim on their board, and one "featured expert" who is a muslim, and another who is american-born, of egyptian descent, but is an expert on middle eastern affairs....that's hardly prominent.....on the other side of the spectrum, you have board members, and "featured experts" who are affiliated with pro-israel organizations, and D.C. thinktanks....it really doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in their ability to remain impartial, and report the facts without some form of spin..

It would be rather difficult to take the stances suggested when you have the types of people involved, Moderate Muslims, who would most certainly have an issue about their reputations being entangled in that sort of misperception, don't you think? Perhaps, just perhaps, the nastiness that was posted about Clarion was far more partisan and biased than the other way around.

the moderates involved want to demonize islamic extremism(and rightfully so), so long as their goals allign with the other entities involved, i don't see why they'd have an issue working with them...

again, i'll say, i was only pointing out the ties to groups, the slant and apparent agenda at work, and the spin...the (what, to me, looks like) propaganda, designed to insight fear, and paranoia...generating an air of "the enemy is everywhere"....it's a vibe that permeates their site...

But, as was pointed out above, it's really sad that people complain that moderate muslims never take a stand, and when they finally do, they get slapped down because they have Jewish partners. How utterly, stinkin' sad. They can't win for losing. Say nothing, they are wrong, take a stand against extremism, they have an "agenda".

plenty of moderate muslims speak out against islamic extremism, and jihad, and terrorism....it just doesn't get as loud a voice, because it promotes peace, rational thinking, and cooperation....things that are antithetical to the current designs of TPTB, which are domination, control, perpetual fear, and endless war.. because of this, it doesn't gather much mainstream attention...so we end up with endless reports of "oh my god, they're everywhere, and they wanna kill us all"...which scares the bejesus out of people..

Done with the thread. The ending was delicious.

sorry to see you go, i was quite enjoying the debate..

Libertygal
reply to post by Daedalus

 

DECAF!! DECAF!!

edit on 22-2-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)

I know this is off topic but, it is my thread and I have to acknowledge this one..

Decaf is the thread equivalent of Anthrax.. It should never be ingested unless you're trying to do serious harm to oneself.

Now back to your normally thready goodness, that is all from the Office of Coffee and other Caffeinated Beverages..

And remember this warning:



Back on topic... Daedalus: Libertygal has given some great information and done some awesome research. Stuff I honestly didn't have time to do myself due to other commitments, and my kids being stir crazy after a week and half off school. Some of it may have been slightly off, but, it was pretty well done and I have to give her some kudos...

Liberty: check yer U2U's there's one you didn't respond to

vkey08

Libertygal
reply to post by Daedalus

 

DECAF!! DECAF!!

edit on 22-2-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)

I know this is off topic but, it is my thread and I have to acknowledge this one..

Decaf is the thread equivalent of Anthrax.. It should never be ingested unless you're trying to do serious harm to oneself.

Now back to your normally thready goodness, that is all from the Office of Coffee and other Caffeinated Beverages..

And remember this warning:

i personally LOVE caffeine...but it makes some people hyper, and unfocused..

whenever someone is acting hyper, irrational, and unfocused, i recommend decaf -shrug- nice graphic, btw..

Back on topic... Daedalus: Libertygal has given some great information and done some awesome research. Stuff I honestly didn't have time to do myself due to other commitments, and my kids being stir crazy after a week and half off school. Some of it may have been slightly off, but, it was pretty well done and I have to give her some kudos...

that's the thing...i'm just not seeing "great information", and "awesome research"...i'm seeing her not wanna be wrong, so she digs up whatever makes her appear right, cherry pick the best parts from the sources, and then declare a win....

YOU, YOURSELF, raised the question of the veracity of the source....so i looked, not so much for you, but because i hate sensational, alarmist language, and because the "terrorists are everywhere" trope is SO overused....imagine my surprise when i found that the "news source" you sited was suspect....

i'm not calling you out for using what appears to be a B.S. source, because you questioned it yourself, in the OP...and you didn't declare it as absolute fact...you sited it as part of a trend you noticed, of articles popping up everywhere, trying to ramp up the fear level amongst the people "terror enclave in texas", and "possible shoe bombers", etc.....and you asked the question "what are they trying to prepare us for?".....i mean maybe all these articles are part of a larger predictive programming effort, to make us less sensitive to terror attacks, and the subsequent violation of civil rights....and to condition us that we are always in danger, to make us more willing to relinquish certain rights, and allow the government to take away rights they have no legal ability to take away...putting us back in the parent/child, master/subordinate mindset...who knows...

don't think the fact that you caught on to a trend, was lost on me...i saw it, and looking into the source of the article in the OP was just part of my efforts to dissect that trend....unfortunately, i got sidetracked along the way, with logical fallacies, and thread derailment...