so long as he refrains from putting food on my family.
2006-09-05 16:39:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by powhound 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
While there almost certainly are fascists who claim to follow the Islamic faith, the term "islamofacist" is incompatible with someone being a radical terrorist. Why?
Because by definition a fascist is attempting to establish a right-wing authoritarian hierarchical government. Most terrorists do not make a habit of forming governments.
2006-09-05 16:52:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by coragryph 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
No more than anyone else. There is some historical truth to what he is saying, several Nazi's escaped to countries like Syria and Iran. They were welcomed and some even became professors, they carried the torch that we failed to fully extinguish when we rescued Europe. One of the last ones died in Damascus not long ago, these monsters had a profound impact on the places they hid in, hence we are still in a way fighting my grandfathers War only the stage has changed.
2006-09-05 16:42:13
·
answer #3
·
answered by spider 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
Apart from his voc-ab-ility to create new words enough for a dictionary to be published every year, the poor chap is indeed dumb. Thankfully, being stupid (Harvard MBA notwithstanding) is better than being evil.
But wish there was someone more sensible and responsible at this position. The kind of damage he does, from bombing down Iraq searching for N-bombs (and then not getting any), and blaming Saddam for 9/11 (which, if u scan the media archives, is what he initially did), to promoting democracy in Iraq (more soldiers have died here than even in Vietnam) and turning the blind eye to the Saudi monarchy (Osama bL is from Saudi Arabia), is stupid and hypocritical at best, and stupid and dangerous at worst.
In the free world outside the US, one doesn't know who to be more scared of - Laden's bombs or US missles. Any of them could rain down on you, for no apparent reason whatsoever. And yes, without any international sanction!
One waits for him to leave. Asap!!!
2006-09-05 16:51:01
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
because of the fact he stands for what he believes in and he does not hear to human beings like Micheal Moore who make money off inflicting paranoia. And if meaning that he's dim witted, conceited, moronic, and numb nuts then you certainly must be notably clever.
2016-10-14 09:06:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, he is, or at least his writers/spin doctors/puppet masters are. Now, prepare for a barrage of idiotic answers from the right-wing web-o-sphere.
whiteboyasiangirl: what do the Holocaust and Stalin have to do with this question? I can hear 'fallacy of logic!' in the near distance.
Check out this link, George D: http://www.couplescompany.com/Features/Politics/Structure3.htm
You might like the bits about protection of corporations and the intertwining of government and religion.
2006-09-05 16:36:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by tiko 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
He and I must be on the same drug, because I have seen buildings fall, heads being cut off, ships exploding and soldiers dying at the hands of the Islamofascists who do not exist in your world.
I suppose the Holocaust never happened and the 20 million people that Stalin murdered are just on vacation. Put on your tin foil hat and go back to your parents basement
2006-09-05 16:37:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
Coragryph, you are a retard. By definition a fascist is someone who tries to start a right wing government?
Fascism is a term used commonly since WWII to refer to governments that use autocratic power to narrowly regiment society and particularly as it pertains to some kind of idea of racial or cultural supremacy. For example: Hitler and his aryan ideology. Oh, MY! What a good example of fascism that was.
Right wing ideologies have nothing to do with fascism in as much as there are Black conservatives, white conservatives, academic conservatives, arab conservatives, atheist conservatives, religious conservatives, Jewish conservatives, etc. etc. etc.
Fundamentally liberalism and conservativism as seen in America depend on specific definable philosophical considerations of the world and how to function in the world.
Fascism does not depend upon any kind of foundational ethic of morality of polity, but upon some intensely nationalistic or racially motivated spirit of pride. Without regard to any particular philosophy, the fascist moves forward in the belief that his fundamental superiority is the foundation of his legitimacy and he works to closely regulate a society for the perfection of that particular racial or national order.
The president of Iran is a perfect example of a fascist individual. In as much as his particular brand of fascism is driven by an idea of Islamic supremacy, to call him an Islamofascist is a perfectly legitimate signification of his ideology and his allegiances.
Many great statesman throughout history, not to mention a whole host of philosophers, poets, historians, etc. etc. etc. have coined terms that describe more precisely an idea as it occurs in that moment of history.
The Islamofascism works now, because we have fascists, by very definition, who are Islamic in their fascism.
Have you heard of the word normalcy. Where did that come from? Do you know?
2006-09-05 16:54:21
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
He is a liar and immoral man.
He knows that his statement is only going to motivate the far religious right in a religious war... he is running us straight to hell.
2006-09-09 12:59:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by BeachBum 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bush has power and wealth on his side, therefore his dumbness is not frowned upon-ed but, simply accepted. Sadly, we have to live with the moron til' election time.
2006-09-05 16:36:27
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
This is nothing new, Bush makes up words all the time.
However, in this case the use of the term fascist is simply projection.
2006-09-05 16:35:17
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋