1. Define fascism
2. Explain which country enemy combatants (aka "terrorists") are fighting for, taking into account their status as defined by Bush which allowed him to deny them the protections afforded under the Geneva Conventions
3. Explain what Islam as a religion has to do with #1, specifically stating where religion is mentioned in the definition
3. Explain how you can possibly link #2 with #1 and make any logical sense
10 points to the braniac who can actually explain how the term "Islamofascist" is not a non sequiter
2006-10-01
23:47:15
·
7 answers
·
asked by
That English Dude
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Gee - half an hour an the best zinger I've gotten is a wingnut complaining I've misspelled Republican. Personally I think the epithet Republitard is far more apt in it's use than Islamofascist is by the White House...Republicans on here, on the whole, are retards, hence the contraction 'Republitard'. If Bush & co can make up words, why can't I? And so far, zero attempts to actually answer my questions. Surprise, surprise. You right-wing dipsh!ts have absolutely lived up to my expectations.
2006-10-02
00:21:34 ·
update #1
OK - the second #3 should've been 3b. Unlike Bush, I can admit even the most minor mistakes
2006-10-02
00:24:09 ·
update #2
OK beerbohms - quite a surprise, a wingnut with a brain (you're not a Liberal masquerading are you?). My judgement is close, but no cigar. Pity I can't give you 7 points. The terrorists are fighting for a religious ideology, not a form of government per se, though I'll grant that the Quran does offer a system of what could be viewed as laws. They view the West as infidels who must be converted, but that's hardly a political goal. They don't want to rule our nation, they merely want us to follow their religion. If you look at the origins of fascism in Mussolini's Italy, you'll see that it is very much a state-sponsored policy of repression, which works hand-in-glove with commercial interests. Hence in Nazi Germany, big business actively backed the Third Reich, profiting massively along the way. To apply the classic definition of fascism to religious extremists is patently illogical. In point of fact, the USA meets essentially all the criteria that defines a fascist state. Care to refute
2006-10-02
00:43:26 ·
update #3
see no evil - like that wonderfully moral, upstanding Republican Mark Foley? He's a marvelous example of butch manhood, ain't he? Nearly as nice an example to follow as the Republitard leadership that knew about this perv for at least 5 years and yet did zero about it to protect impressionable teenage boys. Yeah - yours is the party of family values and traditional morals, all right.
2006-10-02
00:54:37 ·
update #4
Muse - opinions vary. I have heard it said that Muslims do not, in point of fact, consider Jews or Christians to be Muslims. Why? Muslims are the followers of Ishmael (spellings vary), whereas Jews are the followers of Isaac. The tribes split off and haven't been reunited. Also, Muslims believe in one god, indivisible. Hence the Christian belief in a trinity is an anathema to Muslims. In both cases, only once a person has embraced the teachings of Mohammed and accepted Allah as the one true god do they become a Muslim. So sorry dude, I ain't wrong.
2006-10-02
01:02:17 ·
update #5
And Muse - I didn't say Muslims, I said the religious extremist terrorists. Islam preaches tolerance of all forms of worship. Naturally, Muslims would prefer non-Muslims shared their religious beliefs, but the Quran (on the whole) states that people must come to Allah of their own devices. A forced conversion is no conversion at all.
2006-10-02
01:06:53 ·
update #6