@Arceus
It's not okay to assault people (unless they're attacking first or trying to), but if you're going to disrupt events and prevent speakers from speaking, I can't say I'm sorry for you either. You're kinda asking for it.
Don't be stupid.
"He gave a similarly winking response when his supporters have turned violent in the past. Two men in Boston said they ambushed and brutally beat a homeless Latino man because they were “inspired” by Trump, who later explained his supporters “are very passionate” and “love this country.”"
Aside from the fact that you cut parts of the full quote, he also made another statement that read:
"Boston incident is terrible. We need energy and passion, but we must treat each other with respect. I would never condone violence."
I'm not surprised that both the left and the establishment right attack him so virulently with lies. Both have their reasons. The far left hate the US and the west and want to dismantle every aspect of it (including national sovereignty and culture), the center left and establishment right are corporate shills and they can't control Trump because he funds his own campaign.
@Passerby
"Your best example of a relentlessly violent Islamic state sworn to convert or destroy any and all nonbelievers is the pro-UN Saudi Arabia who has maintained strong relations with the decidedly Unislamic member nations (although US relations have become strained) and not, for example, their feuding neighbour Iran?"
Did you just ignore the part about them being weaker now that the Islamic world is fragmented and doesn't have the caliphate that Ataturk abolished? That's why they're not fighting, it's all about weakness, not reform of the jihad doctrine.
Plus you ignored the ideological warfare in the form of subversive mosques being funded all over the west with Saudi money. Soviet communists did the same thing with active measures. Before the Soviet tanks rolled into Eastern Europe and other places, they had many sympathizers and useful idiots in those countries to facilitate the takeover and the indoctrination into communism of sections of society. It's easier to take over a country that has been weakened from within. Sun-Tzu the ancient Chinese military leader talked about this.
"To fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy’s resistance without fighting."
Islam is very similar to a trojan horse and the kind coming out of Saudi Arabia is especially virulent (though you should not underestimate non-Wahhabi Islam either, they're all radical and oppressive when compared to secular western values)
"They legislate morality as they interpret it extremely harshly but you'll note that being Christian, atheist, or Jewish isn't outlawed."
No, but you can't practice another religion and you can't come out as an atheist because it will be seen as an automatic blasphemy. It's especially dangerous for an ex-Muslim to do so. An expat Christian or atheist might get away with just a deportation. No such luck if you were ever at any point in your life Muslim.
"Hell the extemity of their moral policing has even been lauded by some Christians who want varying degrees of it introduced to North American society."
And like the regressive left, those kind of Christians are useful idiots too. That's all I can say. They don't represent the US though. If they did, they could pass their laws. Don't believe that the Constitution alone is a defense against tyranny, the 2nd amendment was specifically created because the founders feared the government turning too tyrannical so they wanted to make sure the population could resist physically.
"I find it interesting you consider Kony's Christianity a cult of personality but Osama bin Laden whose oranization was founded on his charisma and died with him"
This is your major mistake in your post. The jihad doctrine has been part of Islam since the 7th century when verse 9:29 first appeared. Muslims have been waging jihad one way or another long before Osama and they'll continue long after he's forgotten, unless there is a reform in Islam.
The global jihad terror movement certainly didn't die with him. All that happened is that many of the jihadists and their sympathizers switched from AQ to ISIS a couple of years ago because ISIS claimed to be the caliphate (Osama never called himself caliph and didn't think it was the right time to declare a caliphate because of the weak state of the Muslim world). Other Muslims who maybe wouldn't have supported AQ started to support ISIS, again because they saw it as their best shot to revive the caliphate. Put simply, ISIS was more bold than AQ and these Muslims want strength.
It's not a personality cult at all, it is a movement. Baghdadi could die tomorrow and someone would just take his place.
Read Robert Spencer's books, they're well sourced, including quotes from Quran and hadiths.
