Conquer Club

Pam Geller, Tea Party spokesperson and leader in the Party-wide effort to crush the First Amendment in the USA offers some rousing comments to her supporters at CPAC. Sadly, she offers no proof either, nor does she inform her First Amendment-hating supporters (the Tea Party) what's wrong with having Muslims in CPAC in the first place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFHZpy8wpnE

I am digusted.


Those beautifull crown moldings ruined by the cheapest chinese built "EXIT" lights, furthermore the one over the public mic is crooked. The US&A is done!

How will the Tea Party combat the Muslim Brotherhood infiltration of CPAC? Maybe some of the resident Tea Baggers in the forum could help answer this question.

Pam's blog is almost unreadable and merely screeches about the Muslim infiltration without providing strategies for eradicating it, despite advocating that be done. Is anyone else better informed than I am on Ms. Geller? I'm surprised she didn't quit after the "Ground Zero Mosque" debacle.

pimpdave wrote:... what's wrong with having Muslims in CPAC in the first place.

The Muslim Brotherhood gave rise to groups such as Hamas, al-queda, and al-shabob. I guess if you want to equate all Muslims with them, that's your prerogative, but that wasn't done by the Tea Party in the CPAC speech.

Pam is suggesting that we should investigate each Muslim group in the US just because they are Muslim groups on the US? I'm having difficulty following what she's trying to say from this short clip.

Juan_Bottom wrote:Pam is suggesting that we should investigate each Muslim group in the US just because they are Muslim groups on the US? I'm having difficulty following what she's trying to say from this short clip.

i wouldn't mind shipping them all back to the middle east

patsfan12 wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote:Pam is suggesting that we should investigate each Muslim group in the US just because they are Muslim groups on the US? I'm having difficulty following what she's trying to say from this short clip.

i wouldn't mind shipping them all back to the middle east

My girlfriend and her family are Muslims from Bosnia. I wouldn't mind shipping all the religious people in this country back to the Middle Ages.

pimpdave wrote:...nor does she inform her First Amendment-hating supporters (the Tea Party) what's wrong with having Muslims in CPAC in the first place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFHZpy8wpnE

I can counter that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrRxFoBSPng

\

pimpdave wrote:...nor does she inform her First Amendment-hating supporters (the Tea Party) what's wrong with having Muslims in CPAC in the first place.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFHZpy8wpnE

#1 are you having fun?

#2 are you almost dun?

The Tea Party thrives on the first amendment. How can you get the issues so perverted?

I know. It's like...

Juan_Bottom wrote:

patsfan12 wrote:

Juan_Bottom wrote:Pam is suggesting that we should investigate each Muslim group in the US just because they are Muslim groups on the US? I'm having difficulty following what she's trying to say from this short clip.

i wouldn't mind shipping them all back to the middle east

My girlfriend and her family are Muslims from Bosnia. I wouldn't mind shipping all the religious people in this country back to the Middle Ages.

Same here. I'm dating a Muslim from Bangladesh. I really do feel like those who hate Muslims never met one in their lives or they wouldn't necessarily think the way they do.

Yeah, I guess a little sharia law might be OK...

Phatscotty wrote:
The Tea Party thrives on the first amendment. How can you get the issues so perverted?

So then how do you square that with the Tea Party-wide effort to eradicate all Muslims from the organization?

Also, how does one identify a Muslim? What if there are secret Muslims you don't know about? I mean, there must be if they've infiltrated! How will you eradicate them from your party and consequently shut them out of participatory democracy?

Night Strike wrote:

pimpdave wrote:... what's wrong with having Muslims in CPAC in the first place.

The Muslim Brotherhood gave rise to groups such as Hamas, al-queda, and al-shabob.

This is true in the sense that the Baptists or Republicans in the south gave rise to the KKK. That is, because it is a Muslim group and was fighting for power within Egypt initially, some others who disagreed with the brotherhood or who wanted to take what they started further. (also, note that the original KKK was disbanded, then reformed as a more violant group).

Night Strike wrote:I guess if you want to equate all Muslims with them, that's your prerogative, but that wasn't done by the Tea Party in the CPAC speech.

The Muslim brotherhood was "extremist" several decades ago. It was labeled such by the Egyptian leader because they represented a threat to his dictatorial power. It has not been an extremist group for some time. They are a conservative group, but not advocating violance. They currently advocate adherance to Islam, but tolerance. They are roughly equivalent to some of the less extreme conservative Christian groups here in the US.

I don't "like" the brotherhood, any more than I "like" some conservative Christian groups here in the US (though they share my same basic faith), because I think they are too close to theocracy for my taste. However, to call them terrorists is wrong.

To claim they are such a serious threat and to ignore the similar demands and influence of the conservative Christian groups in the US.. as many within the Tea Party and as you, Nightstrike very much have done, is hypocritical.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

pimpdave wrote:... what's wrong with having Muslims in CPAC in the first place.

The Muslim Brotherhood gave rise to groups such as Hamas, al-queda, and al-shabob.

This is true in the sense that the Baptists or Republicans in the south gave rise to the KKK. That is, because it is a Muslim group and was fighting for power within Egypt initially, some others who disagreed with the brotherhood or who wanted to take what they started further. (also, note that the original KKK was disbanded, then reformed as a more violant group).

Not really. Hamas is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. There's no denying that. It's in no way as vague a connection as the KKK is to the South.

Al-Qaeda was mainly founded and funded by Saudi Arabia and their extensive network of Wahabi madrasas (madrasa in arabic just means school, but their education/indoctrination program generally is Islamic fundamental and violent).

Al-Shabob is just some faction that resulted from the Ethiopians invading Somalia and roughing things up. If they have connections to Al-Qaeda, they're remote--like an acquantance you never really call, you just say, "Hey, what's up" to him in the hallway.

And they have even infiltrated CPAC.

HapSmo19 wrote:Yeah, I guess a little sharia law might be OK...

The irony is that many of the heaviest critics of any kind of Islamic power are the SAME folks who see no problem with bringing in conservative Christian values to law.

Theocracy is Theocracy... it matters not if your religion happens to fall under their umbrella or not, imposing religious values onto society is just wrong. (that is, saying "this must be so" because of religion and not because of objective proof of ultimate harm to soceity)

PLAYER57832 wrote:This is true in the sense that the Baptists or Republicans in the south gave rise to the KKK.

Player... the KKK was a Democratic organization... not Republican.

jimboston wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:This is true in the sense that the Baptists or Republicans in the south gave rise to the KKK.

Player... the KKK was a Democratic organization... not Republican.

Yeah, and the KKK switched to Republican when a Democrat signed the Civil Rights Act. Saying the Democrats of today are anything like the Democrats of the Reconstruction era is as ignorant as saying the Republicans are the same as they were in 1850.

BigBallinStalin wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

pimpdave wrote:... what's wrong with having Muslims in CPAC in the first place.

The Muslim Brotherhood gave rise to groups such as Hamas, al-queda, and al-shabob.

This is true in the sense that the Baptists or Republicans in the south gave rise to the KKK. That is, because it is a Muslim group and was fighting for power within Egypt initially, some others who disagreed with the brotherhood or who wanted to take what they started further. (also, note that the original KKK was disbanded, then reformed as a more violant group).

Not really. Hamas is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. There's no denying that. It's in no way as vague a connection as the KKK is to the South.

History is not your forte, is it?

What I said about the south is true.

You want to confuse "springing from" with "being the same".

Christianity very much arose from Judaism. Protestantism very much arose from Roman Catholicism. Yet, they are hardly the same.

per the KKK.. initially, it was founded to fight against some pretty "obnoxious" (corrupt, idiotic) reconstructionists (reconstructionists some say were put in place literally to keep the south down, to punish the south). It evolved into something more negative and violant, thus was dissolved by the founder. What we know of the clan, however, can very much trace origins to some beliefs put forward by groups like the Baptists. In some cases, political meetings for Republicans were KKK meetings. Since Republicans tend to favor more the republican style government.. that is, representation by a few, it was used to concentrate power among the white powerful. This is one big reason, for example, you do not have anything like legislation from petitions of the people, etc. (in many states, you can get ballot measures from collecting enough signatures).

anyway, I don't claim to be an expert in history, but my high school teacher was from the south and considered it his duty to educate we largely liberal californian kids as to the "truth" behind why the south succeeded, etc. (note, he was NOT a racist!, this was not about glorifying the KKK or anything close, he taught us clearly how harmful that movement was to the south as a whole)

jimboston wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:This is true in the sense that the Baptists or Republicans in the south gave rise to the KKK.

Player... the KKK was a Democratic organization... not Republican.

Sort of. Lincoln was Republican, but anyway....
My basic point is that there is a big difference between "arising from" and "being the same as".

PLAYER57832 wrote:

jimboston wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:This is true in the sense that the Baptists or Republicans in the south gave rise to the KKK.

Player... the KKK was a Democratic organization... not Republican.

Sort of. Lincoln was Republican, but anyway....
My basic point is that there is a big difference between "arising from" and "being the same as".

I don't know what your basic point was.

What you wrote implied that the KKK was formed by the Republican Party... which is simply not true.

It's OK to admit your wrong once in awhile Player.

pimpdave wrote:

jimboston wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:This is true in the sense that the Baptists or Republicans in the south gave rise to the KKK.

Player... the KKK was a Democratic organization... not Republican.

Yeah, and the KKK switched to Republican when a Democrat signed the Civil Rights Act. Saying the Democrats of today are anything like the Democrats of the Reconstruction era is as ignorant as saying the Republicans are the same as they were in 1850.

Not talking about the KKK of today... nor are we talking about the KKK of the 50's and 60's.

Player was implying that the KKK was formed by Republicans... that Republicans "gave rise" to the KKK. That's simply false.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

BigBallinStalin wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Night Strike wrote:

pimpdave wrote:... what's wrong with having Muslims in CPAC in the first place.

The Muslim Brotherhood gave rise to groups such as Hamas, al-queda, and al-shabob.

This is true in the sense that the Baptists or Republicans in the south gave rise to the KKK. That is, because it is a Muslim group and was fighting for power within Egypt initially, some others who disagreed with the brotherhood or who wanted to take what they started further. (also, note that the original KKK was disbanded, then reformed as a more violant group).

Not really. Hamas is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. There's no denying that. It's in no way as vague a connection as the KKK is to the South.

History is not your forte, is it?

What I said about the south is true.

You want to confuse "springing from" with "being the same".

Christianity very much arose from Judaism. Protestantism very much arose from Roman Catholicism. Yet, they are hardly the same.

per the KKK.. initially, it was founded to fight against some pretty "obnoxious" (corrupt, idiotic) reconstructionists (reconstructionists some say were put in place literally to keep the south down, to punish the south). It evolved into something more negative and violant, thus was dissolved by the founder. What we know of the clan, however, can very much trace origins to some beliefs put forward by groups like the Baptists. In some cases, political meetings for Republicans were KKK meetings. Since Republicans tend to favor more the republican style government.. that is, representation by a few, it was used to concentrate power among the white powerful. This is one big reason, for example, you do not have anything like legislation from petitions of the people, etc. (in many states, you can get ballot measures from collecting enough signatures).

anyway, I don't claim to be an expert in history, but my high school teacher was from the south and considered it his duty to educate we largely liberal californian kids as to the "truth" behind why the south succeeded, etc. (note, he was NOT a racist!, this was not about glorifying the KKK or anything close, he taught us clearly how harmful that movement was to the south as a whole)

... I'm not refuting what you said about the south is true...

I stated that you're wrong to compare that relationship as similar to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas (see the above underlined part).

The south is a large, obscure "organization."

The Muslim Brotherhood isn't. It funds Hamas. It indocrinates Hamas. It's Hamas' foster parent.

Hamas is to the Muslim Brotherhood IS NOT the KKK is to the South.

That's what I've been saying.

This is the statement Player made - "Republicans in the South gave rise to the KKK."

This is a false statement. The Repubilcans in the South did not give rise to the KKK. Perhaps a better statement is the conservatives in the South gave rise to the KKK.

There is no argument here, erego please stop arguing about it.

And Player, this is why I get angry with you because you will not admit when you are wrong. Ever.