Hate Mail - 2010

TargetOfOpportunity.com Disclaimer:
We reserve the right to print any email that we receive.
We make no corrections for grammar or spelling.

Our Commentary is in Red.

Updated 24 December 2010

24 December 2010

Daniel wrote:

To whomever it may concern:

I've been reading your website and comments of other people from it. I completely understand where you are coming from and much of the things you argue are much relevant and truthful. Nevertheless, that was after I read your replies and arguments on people's mails. The main website looks as a complete propaganda set. I believe what you guys are portraying is as hateful and derogatory as extremist Muslim hate websites.

We have only stated what the leaders of Islam have stated and the historical facts. Any opinion offered is based on facts. We have the quotes. Printing the truth is not hatred.

Even though killing or murdering isn't mentioned, the way you portray Islam is as if the religion is based simply on hate, and all of its followers have a crazed and hateful ideology regarding western culture, not only radical Muslims. The first aspect of the whole issue, is that Islam is not based whatsoever in attacking other cultures, or harming them in any way. They argument about the jihad, an internal struggle, and self defense when needed. Per se, that's what the Koran states. Nevertheless, the Koran does have records of violent scenarios and battles, which can be very misleading. But again, in the Bible there are scenarios such as that, maybe not as extreme but certainly exist. The big difference of Islam with any other main religion, is that the Koran can be misinterpreted and used in the wrong context, such as thousands of brainwashed and charismatic radical Muslim leaders influence perceptive, young generations to adopt them into that violent and senseless insurrection that they call "Jihad". A jihad different from the Koran, a jihad led by a path of hate, injustice, aggression and violence; something that the Koran constantly refutes and absolutely always rejects.

Actually, murder and killing is mentioned by the leaders of Islam. We have the quotes from the Koran and the leaders of Islam. Islam's hatred and intolerance of non-Muslims is clearly documented. We see it every day. It is in the news around the world. We see and hear Muslims around the world chanting "Death to America". Their intentions are clear. Their hatred is clear. There is no misunderstanding their beliefs.

Second thing I wished to point out, is that one has to take in consideration that Islam is basically a young religion. It is going through the same metamorphosis Christianity went through only 600 years, let me remind you. It was by far more bloody, savage and cruel than how radical Islam is acting out in current times with other cultures. And Christianity doesn't even have texts that can be misinterpreted or manipulated into violence and hatred, which makes the whole situation even more unconceivable.

Islam is 1400 years old and it has adhered to the same goal it always had and that is the elimination of all other religions and the forced conversion of people of all other faiths. Christianity is only 300-600 years older as an established religion. Islam has killed far more people than Christianity has. What do you think happened to the infidels when the armies of Islam invaded and conquered?

Crusades extended through the corners of the world, imposing their culture and faith upon every new civilization they encountered. It was through Kingdoms and Empires that the Catholic Church and its minions played with the lives and livelihood of literally countless millions of people by using the armies of England and Spain to conquer and impose their religion and culture no matter what to wherever they went. India, Australia, South Africa, Northern lands of Africa, Nomadic people from Northern Europe, Eastern Europe, almost half of the Middle East .

Islam did the same only on a larger scale. Islam's goal was Conquer and Conversion or Conquer and Enslave and that is exactly what bands of marauding Muslim warlords did in the name of Allah, Muhammad, and Islam. Islam does not tolerate other religions or non-Islamic beliefs. Beliefs outside the scope of Islam are blasphemy.

And what a better example than the discovery of America? I consider Christopher Columbus one of the most perverse monsters ever to live, since it was due to him that millions and millions of indigenous people were slaughtered massively, conquered, enslaved, and forced to bury every aspect of their culture and their land. I do have in mind that indigenous tribes , such as Mayans and Aztecs, did sacrifice thousands of people every month.

Thank goodness they were stopped by the Christians that eventually moved into the New World. The reason that America celebrated Columbus Day is because his discovery brought about the formation of the United Stated of America, the beacon of freedom in the world. The Freedom and Independence that came out of his discovery is celebrated every 4th of July.

But the colonization completely annihilated all those hundreds of different civilizations that existed all around America. They were completely wiped out. Just as British and French wiped out dozens of Northern Native American tribes, to the brink of destruction.

Pretty much each Indian tribe was at war with every other Indian tribe. What happened to the local populations when Islam arrived? Even today, there are bands of Muslims killing Christians through Africa. Lebanon used to be a beautiful Christian country until they allowed Muslims to immigrate. Once the Muslim population reached 35-40%, there was civil war and Lebanon became a war ground.

Moreover, lets not forget the Inquisition, who committed the biggest atrocities ever seen against mankind, comparable to those in Nazi Germany on the 1940's. It lasted over 600 years. A period of oppression and darkness for all Europe, and death to those new lands conquered. Not to mention scientific segregation, which makes one think if all those discoveries done during the past century could have been done hundreds of years earlier.

Christianity did have its dark days, but Christianity grew out of it. Islam has been stuck in it for 1400 years. What have Muslims done for mankind? What have they invented? Aside from Islam, what do they offer? What strides in science have they made? How many Nobel Prizes have they won compared to other people?

What religion embraces Nazism? What religion is Mein Kampf a best seller? What religion supported the goals of Adolf Hitler and still does to this day? If you said Islam, you would be right.

It is infinitely inexplicable and impossible to comprehend the concept of the things that were done during these years, I really believe we cant grasp such a concept, and books simply decorate it and lay a few simple concepts that can be understood by the average person of what an abominable Representation of an institution that should be representing the Love of God and forgiveness.

Maybe you cannot grasp the terrible things that happened, but we can and they are nothing compared to Islam's self-proclaimed goal of world domination. There is nothing about Islam that spreads Love, Peace, or Tolerance. If you have any examples, we would love to hear them.

I believe one must lay the recent events on context, and not simply fall on a biased and relentless opinion regarding such a topic as this. Our judgment can be severely impaired by our current hate, and the thirst for revenge from a still fresh wound. But we as Americans simply cannot loose our minds either. That's what gives us the advantage. Even though Al Qaeda and Jihadists might have the weapon of terror which doesn't remain in one nation; we have the ability to rationalize the most effective and swift solutions without falling pray of that same hate they are using to attempt to break us.

We can also see the truth. Knowing and understanding the truth is not considered losing our minds or some form of hatred. Knowing the truth is what gives us the advantage. We have offered facts. We have printed quotes. We have videos from the leaders of Islam. We know what they say and we know their goals. We understand their agenda. There is no confusion here.

We have the ability to separate our spirituality and religion from our government, at least now days we do. If not, I believe that circle of cultivated hate will never cease to grow, but transcend from one generation to the next, and when we realize we'll have decades in between, and thousands of lives more lost than those who tragically died that September 11.

The best way to do that is to understand the evil that exists. We understand the evil in the Inquisition and the Middle Ages. There is not much argument there. We can also see the evil inherent in Islam and the threat it is to non-Muslims. You do not see groups of Christians yelling "Death to Muslims" or "Death to Jews", but we do see Muslims chanting "Death to America" and "Death to Jews" in groups that consists of thousands of Muslims lead by Muslim leaders.

--TOP--

09 December 2010

jeffmacneilly@xxxxxxxx.net wrote:

Hello,

I would like to thank you for your great exposition of the religious hatred that exists in our world today. It deeply disturbs me to know that there are religions out there that preach the stoning of adulterers, encourage the chopping off the hands of thieves, fuel the systematic extermination of entire ethnic groups, and command the bigoted intolerance of other religions (even to the point of violence). It sickens me that anyone can call Christianity a peaceful religion.

...Oh wait you were talking about Islam.

Where does Christianity call for the chopping of the hands of thieves or stoning of anyone? Where does Christianity call for the extermination of anyone? It is easy to see your hatred of Christianity. It is always strange to us how people hate the Judeo-Christian doctrine that the United States was founded and yet has no problem sympathizing with Islam as some sort of tolerant, loving, and peaceful entity.

If you really want to know the truth about Islam, read "Quotes From The Islamic World" and the truth about Islam will be revealed. You are free to disagree with us and we are sure you will, but you might as well have the truth about the doctrine that you seem to think is more tolerant than the "hate filled" entity you seem to think Christianity is.

Islam is in fact the ONLY religion that has a written proclamation (written by Muhammed himself) stating that all religions are to be equally respected.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey and Nathaniel (gay lovers)

We understand your hatred of Christianity because Christians think that your lifestyle is a sin and you hate the fact they hold that opinion. Well, you are not required to accept their opinion. You are free to believe as you see fit and this is because of the freedoms that the founding fathers established within the Judeo-Christian doctrine that forms the basis of the laws in the United States.

Of course, we do not know where you live, but it would be our best guess that you do not live in an Islamic state and instead you choose to live in America. It would also be a good guess that you do not desire to change this anytime in the near future.

Seeing as how you feel like speaking about Muhammad's view on tolerance, what was Muhammad's view on homosexuality?

Where do you see Islam tolerating any other religion? In Saudi Arabia where Islam is the law, the practice of other religions is illegal. There is an actual religious police that is charged with enforcement of Islam as the only religion. This pretty much ends any credibility for Muhammad's proclamation.

Islam is the only religion that is at war with every other religion. Islam is the only religion that is opposed to Freedom and Democracy. Islam is the only religion that actively wants to kill Jews and Americans. Islam is the only religion that has a zero tolerance for homosexuals and actively hangs homosexuals as a criminal offense. You do not see any of this in Christianity.

Allow us to offer you a few quotes.

"[Under Islamic Law], it [homosexuality] is punishable by death."
-- Awadh A. Binhazim, Adjunct Professor of Islam at the Divinity School and adviser to the Muslim Student Association at Vanderbilt University, 25 January 2010

"Christianity does consider homosexuality sinful, and Christians pray for homosexuals because of it, while Islamic law says they should be punished with death. See the difference?"
-- Awadh A. Binhazim, Adjunct Professor of Islam at the Divinity School and adviser to the Muslim Student Association at Vanderbilt University

"Christians are infidels, enemies of Allah, his Messenger, and the believers."
-- Saudi Sheikh Marzouq Salem Al-Ghamdi

"We do not have homosexuals in Iran like you do [in America]."
-- Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iranian President, speaking at Columbia University on 24 September 2007, responding to the question why Iran executes homosexuals

Examine that last quote. It might be relevant to your self-confessed lifestyle.

If you think that Islam is such a tolerant religion, try giving out free bibles in Saudi Arabia or Iran, kissing your homosexual lover in public in the city square in Tehran, or publicly stating that homosexuality is a normal lifestyle. That will only get you hung in the public square as a warning to others that wish to engage in a homosexual relationship.

--TOP--

09 November 2010

Dan Meyer wrote:

Three Questions:

1) Are you dogmatic pacifists or do you believe there is ever justification for violence?

We are not pacifists by any stretch of the imagination. A pacifist believes in "Peace at any Price". With our stance against terrorism, it is hard to see how you came to this conclusion. We believe in Independence, Self-Reliance, and Freedom. There is absolutely a justification for violence when it is warranted. Self-defense, coming to the aid of someone being assaulted, and stopping a crime in progress are three examples where violence might be justified.

2) Are laws ever justly broken? - in other words; could the "right" thing to do constitute breaking the law?

You are going to have to be more specific. The general nature of this question sounds more like a trap. For instance, here in America we have Freedom of Religion. At present, there is a movement to implement Shariah Law. Under Shariah Law, no religion other than Islam would be legal. In order to practice Christianity or Judaism, the laws of the Shariah would have to be broken. Perhaps you could give us an example of laws you think can be justly broken.

3) Where do we receive our morals and our sense of right and wrong? I ask because you seem very sure of your beliefs see things very "black & white" and I'm curious how things are so simple for you.

As a country founded on Judeo-Christian doctrine, the very foundation of the laws of the United States were based on Freedom and Judeo-Christian teachings. For the most part, our morals were taught to us by our parents as is done with most people. There are certain things that are right and wrong. Much of life falls into this "black and white" category. You tend to find gray areas when you try and rationalize or justify your actions that you know are wrong. For instance, it is wrong to destroy someone else's property. It is wrong to steal. It would be wrong for us to break in to your house and vandalize your possessions. It is wrong to hurt someone without provocation. It is just that simple.

Thanks in advance for your answers,
Dan

Dan, it was good to hear from again.

--TOP--

07 November 2010

Subject: Peta is a Terrorist organization

fdsa dsa wrote:

thank you so much to let me know about peta. i didnt know any thing about peta before. what i learned from your website. but i am kind of confuse what is your moral. is that they kill animals to save them form abusers, of they dont like people who support animal cruelty. you talked lot about peta but you didnt compare with slaughterhouse, lab, or circus cruelties. you tried to compare peta with 1 slaughterhouse, but that is not a fair statement. you should include whole U.S cruelties.

We are happy to inform you about the truth of PeTA. Allow us to try and unconfuse you. A well known fact is that PeTA supports groups and people that break the law by committing terrorist acts such as arson, vandalism, and theft. PeTA takes animals from people under the pretense of placing them into good homes and they rarely do if ever. Instead, it is much easier to just kill the animals rather than spare the time and expense to find a good home for these animals as promised.

To us, that is ethically and morally unsound and reprehensible, but based on their actions, that are PeTA's normal operating methods.

PeTA tries to make itself as some humanitarian organization, but such is not the case. Their budget is in the tens of millions that is based on helping animals, but if you give your animal to PeTA, it will not be helped. Instead, it is likely to be killed, stored in a freezer, and then tossed in a dumpster behind a shopping mall.

The difference is that slaughter houses, labs, and circuses are legal operations. If they are doing anything illegal, there is a legal remedy for that.

If you or PeTA wants to make these businesses illegal, there is a way to do that. This country is a country of laws and there is way to change or add new laws to address issues such as the issues that you mentioned. Breaking the law and committing illegal acts against people you do not like is not the way to change the law or stop what is a legal operation.

i noticed you didnt mention about pain but you mentioned about believes in your argument. vegetarian or non vegetarian dont come in believe category. we used to believe blacks are our slaves, women was our slaves, and etc. this is not a believe. believe is something that you cant prove. but hare you can prove the pain and suffering of an animals.

If you wish to be a vegetarian, you are free to do so.

If you think that animals are suffering, we have laws that prevent this. If you think more laws need to be enacted to address some animal suffering that is not currently law, by all means, go ahead and do what you need to do to change the law.

There was a time where Africans were slaves and if you remember history, the law was changed. An entire war was fought to ensure this change.

We do not remember a part of history when women were slaves, but by all means, feel free to educate us on this part of history we seemed to have missed.

Peta is less abusive than your MacDonald, KFC, slaughterhouses, labs, and circus.

How abusive is McDonalds? Aside from serving meat, what exactly have they done? If you think that any of these companies are breaking the law, report them to the authorities. Burning down a McDonalds, a slaughterhouse or a circus is not going to change anything. These actions will not change anything. All it does is to interfere with Capitalism, which is probably the intent, at least part of it. Acts like that do not save any animals because it does not stop the operation. The slack is taken up by another company and nothing has changed except that a crime has been committed and someone has been harmed.

It is funny how you say that PeTA is "less" abusive. PeTA should not be abusive at all. Their entire argument is that animals should not be harmed and yet virtually every animal that PeTA comes into contact with is killed by a member PeTA as is the policy of the PeTA organization.

Are you a vegan, environment friendly, and be kind with every one? if your are not then you are guilty too.Remember these words in your life, before you point out finger on someone else, look inside of yourself first. try to fix your self then start blaming others.

When you say be kind to everyone, do you mean? Do you mean by burning down a McDonalds? By eating meat as mankind has done for 5 million years... exactly what are we guilty of? You are talking nonsense here. We are pointing our finger at the truth. You may not like it, but that does not change the facts that we have printed.

as far as peta goes they are less abusive to animals, that is the whole argument, right! (the pain, the suffering). because peta is not against killing animals. they are against suffering. where it cost more for slaughterhouse to go with painless method.

Well, at least you admit that PeTA is abusive to animals. We know PeTA is not against killing animals because their placement program consists almost entirely of killing animals under the guise of finding good homes for them. They are against other people killing animals. They are against people eating meat and anyone that provides meat for food. If you or PeTA thinks that slaughterhouses should change the way that animals are killed for food, by all means, fight for a law that makes a new standard. There are already laws that set standards for animal treatment in every aspect of life. If you think the law needs to be changed go ahead and change the law.

Maybe you should take a look at what the actually goal of PeTA really is.

"In a perfect world, all other than human animals would be free of human interference, and dogs and cats would be part of the ecological scheme."
-- PeTA's Statement on Companion Animals

"Animal trainers, hunters, fishermen, cattlemen, grocers, and indeed all non-vegetarians are the moral equivalent of cannibals, slave-owners, and death-camp guards."
-- Ingrid Newkirk, President, PeTA

"Pet ownership is an absolutely abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation."
-- Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), Just Like Us? Harper's, August 1988, p. 50

"I don't approve of the use of animals for any purpose that involves touching them - caging them."
-- Dr. Neal Barnard, president, Physician's Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), and PeTA's Medical Advisor, The Daily Californian, February 9, 1989 quoting Bernard's address to an audience at International House at Berkeley

"Even if animal tests produced a cure [for AIDS], we'd be against it."
-- Ingrid Newkirk, national director, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PeTA), as quoted in Fred Barnes, "Politics," Vogue, September 1989, p. 542

"I will be the last person to condemn ALF (Animal Liberation Front)."
-- Ingrid Newkirk, PeTA's president and founder, The New York Daily News, December 7, 1997

"Arson, property destruction, burglary and theft are 'acceptable crimes' when used for the animal cause."
-- Alex Pacheco, Director, PeTA

This is the true goal of PeTA. This is what PeTA supports. Helping animals is not the goal of PeTA... it is their excuse. Their primary agenda has nothing do to with helping animals.

you are looking from single point of view. try to look from different angles. think why there are people around the world who are vegetarians, where they dont even know about peta? why they care about animals,

What does this have to do with PeTA being a terrorist organization as was the subject of this e-mail?

If peta are terrorist then what about you, what about slaughterhouse, labs, or circus. i can definitely tell that you eat meat.

What about us? How have we supported terrorism or broken the law? Have we received and killed animals under the pretext of finding them a good home? NO. Have we dumped the bodies of dead animals into dumpsters? NO. Have we supported terrorists and their actions? NO we have not. We have done none of these actions. PeTA has done these actions. So, what about us? Do you consider us criminals because we eat meat? Allow us to inform you of something you obviously do not know. Eating meat is not illegal or wrong.

If KFC is wrong for selling chicken to the public, then are the customers that purchase the chicken equally as guilty. Why not target the consumer? Why not follow a KFC customer home and protest outside of their home? This is a tactic that has never been tried. That would certainly be more effective than committing arson by burning down a KFC. This might make people stop eating at KFC and that is what they claim is their goal, right?

If the consumer does not buy the product from the seller, the business dries up because there is no demand for the product. Based on your e-mail, this might be hard for you to understand, but it is a question that is never asked. There is an answer for this and we will give it to you. The Eco-terrorists that engage attacks on businesses that deal in animals do so not to save the animals, but because they hate the business in question. For the most part, they do not care about the animals they are "saving", but rather use the excuse of "saving the animals" as a reason to justify their illegal activities.

i bet if you expose slaughterhouse like how you expose peta, your web pages will be in thousands where your currently 12 web pages on peta.

When slaughterhouses decide to start engaging in terrorism and start supporting people that commit terrorist actions such as arson, vandalism, and theft against vegetarians as a matter of policy, then we will be happy to mention them by name and act. When slaughterhouses decide to give money to known terrorists, we will have no problem in mentioning and writing about this fact.

As far as our lives are, "yes", we do eat meat virtually every day and we intend to continue to do so.

We hope our response has answered your questions and addressed your concerns.

--TOP--

02 October 2010

Danny Holubecki wrote:

The Animal Liberation Front might cause vandalism, but how could you even compare their actions to those of the terrorists involved in 9/11.

It is a simple comparison. They do not care about anyone that believes differently. They wish to do the most amount of damage to law abiding Americans. They share the same mentality. They hate others with a passion.

A.L.F. is separated from groups like this because their beliefs is harm no animal/human in their doings.

Explain the following:

On 25 February 2009, dozens of birds were killed at a private zoo in Italy in an arson attack claimed by radical animal rights activists. Several Molotov Cocktails were used to start the fire which killed some 40 hawks, buzzards and owls in an aviary at the Zoom Zoo near the northern city of Turin.

"This is for the imprisoned animals - Animal Liberation Front" was found spray-painted in red near the scene of the early morning attack.

None of these ALF activists cared one bit about the animals they killed. Why do ALF activists plant firebombs at the homes of people that have done no harm to any animal? Why do ALF activists vandalize women's clothing stores that do not sell furs with the belief they do sell furs? They do not care about people. They only care about their own selfish agenda and everyone else be damned.

They do harm property, yes, but they do this to save lives.

It must be acceptable then, right? The 9-11 terrorists did the same thing. They committed their acts of terrorism to save Muslims from the Great Satan (America).

So think about this, who has the body count at the end of the day, the animal abusers who make profit out of the suffering of thousands of animals every day, or the A.L.F. who committed some vandalism.

How many animals suffer at the hands (or claws) of other animals? If we are all equal, why do you single out humans? How do you find cures for diseases common to animals if you do not test on these same animals? How do you find cures for human diseases? We keep hearing there are alternatives to animal testing, but we never hear what these alternatives are. Perhaps you could enlighten us on these equally effective methods of research.

Why is PeTA headquarters never vandalized? All they do is kill animals.

Here is a question we never get an answer to from ALF supporters like you.

If it is ethically or morally right for "Animal Rights Activists" to attack and destroy property in the name of their cause, is it ethically or morally right for someone to target and commit an act of violence or destruction against you and/or your family for whatever reason they view as justifiable?

We await your answer.

Sincerly,
Go F*ck Yourself

It is too bad that you are unable to display the intellect or emotional composure to explain your view without resorting to the use of profanity. You do not have a good argument. You do not even have a good excuse.

--TOP--

E-mails from sIMON mARCHETERRE
1 of 3

22 September 2010

sIMON mARCHETERRE wrote:

Good day,

I've had many laughs while browsing your site.
Very very funny stuff.

I bet there are actual people who believe this non-sense.

I mean , how can someone seriously ''breakdown a religion without having studied it.

You'd have to be pretty full of yourself right?

Just tought I'd leave a comment to let you know that youre site is very funny and you should keep up the work.(I think thats the expression.)

I'm just glad someone like you decided to post this humourous stuff on here....
Youre just like Stephen Colbert and South Park put together.... but better !!!!

Keep up the work!!!!!

Alla ysalmak

Simon from Montreal.

Just about every e-mail we receive concerning Islam reads the same. We are criticized and ridiculed but the facts are never disputed.

What makes you think we have not studied Islam? We have certainly seen the results of Islam, Religion of Peace, and the untold numbers of killings Muslims have committed to prove that fact.

Perhaps you would like to dispute what we have written. We await your response with breathless anticipation.

--TOP--

E-mails from sIMON mARCHETERRE
2 of 3

22 September 2010

sIMON mARCHETERRE wrote:

I'm not looking to dispute youre verry small mided views. I even regret having written this sarcastic e-mail to let you know that you are totally bogus and give off an almost ''freaky '' vibe.

We were waiting for an educated response and as usual, we were disappointed. No one ever challenges the facts… they are only able to condemn us without an argument by flying off on some irrelevant tangent of hysterical off-subject. It looks as though you fall into this company as you have not shown that you have the ability to dispute anything we have said. On your first e-mail, you had the opportunity to challenge anything we said, but instead of saying anything intelligent, you resorted to ridicule, personal attacks, and sarcasm. This is what might be referred to as an emotional response to the website.

I was just trying to let you know that youre extreme views are ridiculous and do not warrant any kind of value to this world.

Which opinions do you see on this website to be extreme and/or ridiculous? What information is inaccurate?

What do you see on this website to be extreme and inaccurate? There is much that is extreme. Islam is an extreme religion that is at war with every other religion on the planet. Islam has no tolerance for any religion it deems not to be the true religion. There have been tens of thousands of examples of terrorist actions toward non-Muslims in the last 10 years. Why is it that by a large percentage, most terrorists are Muslims? What is it about Islam that encourages intolerance toward other religions?

Now, if you are responding to the fact that I am certain that you never studied Islam (or even any religion for tha matter) pls let me know what kind of studies you have in the field of religion. (now its your turn to dipute some facts)(you seem to like telling people this)
PS: ''having seen the results of Islam '' does not qualify as EDUCATION.'' so please spare me.

What facts do you wish us to dispute? You have not presented any facts.

You do not want us to use the results of Islam as an education in and of itself. We have no intention of ignoring the reality of the world. We understand what Islam is and we know that only Muslims can fix the problem. The people that control Islam are the ones that we hear leading crowds with "Death to America" chants. What are we supposed to learn from this? It is an education for non-Muslims that come directly from the leaders of Islam.

Nothing we say on this website will change anything about Islam. All we can do is to record the historical events and try and sort through the debris left in the shadow of Islamic terrorism.

If you are trying to claim that we have not studied Islam as much as any of the 9-11 terrorists and the others that we have cited their achievements, you would be right. They studied Islam for years and know far more about Islam than we probably ever will. They were Muslims well-versed in Islamic doctrine. It would be our bet that many could recite much of the Koran from memory. The same can be said for the rest of the Muslims we have quoted on "Quotes From The Islamic World". Did you read their quotes? Did you view the beheadings by true believers of Islam? Of course, you are free to disagree with our position.

1) I dont wish to dispute what you have written because your tought process is SO flawed at the root, I dont want to waste my time trying to re-build your crappy lego structure you call your opinions.

If our opinions and thought processes are so flawed, it seems that it would be relatively simple to disprove anything we stated. You can always make the excuse you do not want to waste your time correcting us, but what you really mean is that you are unable to make an intelligent argument disputing anything we have stated. You spent the time writing us, yet somehow, you did not want to "waste your time" forming an intelligent argument that actually addresses whatever it is you disagree.

2) Did you ever think that OTHER religions have killed in the name of their faith?(they actually still do)

How do they compare in number with the crimes and terrorist acts committed by Muslims in the last 60 years?

3) Are you ''OLD''??? because thats the only way I can Imagine you. An old, lonely , angry man who watches FOX news and hates anyone that is different then himself. (at least you have this site to pass your time.....I respect the elderly who accept and use new technologies.

Of course that is how you imagine us. That is what you want to see. You look down on us for having fact based opinions that are contrary to your own. Your contempt is a perfect example of you thinking "emotionally" rather than "intelligently" so you resort to responses like this that has nothing to do with the website content that you have not even addressed, much less disputed, but at least you are able to stay consistent with your demeanor.

PLS do not respond to this email unless an answer has been given as to your credentials.(if any....and life does not count)

Does knowledge of the history of Islam count? We read newspapers reporting current events around the world. We can read passages from the Koran. We can see the death and violence that comes from Muslims in the name of Allah, Islam, and Muhammad. What credentials would you see as acceptable?

I'm sad for you and will pray in your name.(to who? is none of your buisness)

We are going to maintain a "Don't ask, don't care" policy. We did not ask and we do not care. Once again, a comment totally off topic from anything we have ever stated.

Simon from Montreal
(and yes I speak french.....I bet that gives you the heebeejeebees)

We could not care less what languages you speak, but if you are from Montreal and with French being the sole official language of Quebec, we would expect you to speak French. Why do you believe that your ability to speak French bears any relevance to anything on this website?

PS: I studied theology and religious studies at Cambridge.

Propaganda King!!!!!!!

Did you graduate from Cambridge because if this e-mail is an example of the work of a Cambridge graduate, your professors need to be fired? You are talking about the University of Cambridge and not Cambridge Middle School, right?

It would seem that refuting anything we had to say that was not based in fact would be relatively easy for someone with your extensive education, but so far, you have either failed or refused to do so. There must be a reason for that. Until you actually decide to address whatever information it is that you find inaccurate, we can only take your reluctance or inability as a Cambridge educated religious scholar to be a confirmation of our accuracy.

--TOP--

E-mails from sIMON mARCHETERRE
3 of 3

23 September 2010

sIMON mARCHETERRE wrote:

N'uff said!!!!!!!(apparently you cannot justify yourself faced with a very clear questions) Are you even educated a little?

You have not said anything. In three e-mails, you have not addressed any specific part of the website. You have not addressed a single fact. You only asked four questions.

• You'd have to be pretty full of yourself right?
• Did you ever think that OTHER religions have killed in the name of their faith?
• Are you ''OLD''???
• Are you even educated a little?

We addressed one question. The others seemed to be more rhetorical in nature with a condescending quality.

Check and mate!!!!!

What do you think you won? You have not disputed a single fact on the website.

I like to see that you post only partial comments on your board and dont even bother to post the full responses if it does not place you in a position of power.(are you trying to filter the information on your site by any chance????hahaha.... look who's talking of censorship).

Every e-mail posted is done so in its entirety, exactly as received. As stated in the disclaimer at the top of this page, we do not modify any part of any e-mail other than inserting an (*) in place of vowels when the writer lacks the vocabulary skills required to intelligently communicate ideas and thoughts without the use of profanity. Aside from that, we have not change a single word of any e-mail published on the Hate Mail pages.

We never mentioned censorship. We certainly do not support censorship, but it would be a safe bet you wish you had the authority and power to censor this website.

Also, I just realized that you entitled your comment section '' Hate mail'' . Now that answers my question about your credibility and objectivity....wow....nothing else to say.

Have a wonderfull day!!!!!!

If you read the Hate Mail section, you would see that many e-mails are filled with nothing but vile hatred for anyone that holds values and beliefs contrary to their own.

--TOP--

14 September 2010

Subject: Cindy Sheehan

David Coker wrote:

She may be anti-semitic, but do you ever try to understand why so many Americans are. Google "Jews in the Obama Administration" and then look at their religious affiliations. A small amount of research will absolutely convince you that Talmudic Jews are historically behind many criminal enterprises. The slave trade in America, brothels in Europe, financing of war, control of banking, control of media, oppression of indigenous populations once they gain power. Bolshevism in large part was of Jewish origin. Of course if you are a Talmudic Jew you already know this and are just fronting a website to inundate the public with more propaganda.

David

Cindy Sheehan and others like her have at least one thing in common. They share anti-Semitic thoughts based in ignorance and prejudice and the systematic thinking "emotionally" rather than "intellectually". This is a common trait inherent with this mindset. Jews are an easy target because there are so many ignorant people that are quick to believe what she has to say. Cindy Sheehan and her friends side with Islamic terrorists and who is their sworn enemy - Israel and any living Jew. Cindy Sheehan's problems must be someone's fault, so why not blame the Jews? History has shown there are many ignorant and uneducated people that will side with her and give her a sympathetic ear.

You ignore the facts while maintaining the comfortable bigoted stereotypes that give you peace of mind, it is not the fact they are Jewish that is the problem, it is the Socialist and Liberal beliefs they hold dear. Religion is not their primary concern. They are not trying to convert anyone or force anyone to accept their religious beliefs. It is Socialist doctrine and he desire to control people that you should your focus rather than some illogical prejudice based on religion, skin color, or whatever reason you find to hate. It is funny how you want to blame the Jews and not President Obama.

If you are going to hold dear to your beliefs about Jews and the Obama Administration, then you have to ignore all of the other people that are not Jews. We notice you chose to completely ignore the other 97% of the people associated with the Obama Administration.

The same applies to your thoughts on Bolshevism, but as we stated earlier, Jews are an easy target for everyone's hatred and by doing so, it is a simple matter to dismiss and ignore the other 99% of the people that were active in the Bolshevik Revolution, which it seems you have done.

The Slave trade in America had nothing to do with the Jews. It was Muslims/Black Africans that sold slaves to Spanish slave traders. If you actually studied history, you would discover that it was the Spanish that first brought slaves into what eventually became the United States of America.

Being Jewish has nothing to do with why Obama chose his advisors. They were chosen based on their political beliefs that have nothing to do with Judaism. If you look with a more open mind, you will see that many Christians hold the same political beliefs. Of course, you may not want to see this fact as it invalidates your Zionist conspiracy theory.

Allow us to present a quote from what you consider the Jewish controlled media.

"Tell them [Jews] to get the hell out of Palestine... Remember, these people [the Palestinians] are occupied... and it's their land. It's not German or Poland's. They can go home... [The Jews] should go back to Poland, Germany and America."
-- Helen Thomas, White House Press Corps, White House Jewish Heritage Celebration, 27 May 2010

That pretty much destroys your theory of a Jewish controlled media. It is a Liberal controlled media that has nothing to do with being Jewish. Without meaning to be a broken record, believing otherwise is just another example of thinking "emotionally" rather than "intelligently".

You are right about a small amount of research. By limiting your research to anti-Semitic websites, you will find what you want to see, because that is what you would have to do to find the results you seek. If you actually researched the subject completely, you would find yourself more informed. Did you consider the contribution of Hillary Clinton? She is not Jewish, in fact, based on previous quotes, she holds very anti-Semitic opinions.

We are amused with the conspiracy theory about this website being a front for some sort of Zionist conspiracy while ignoring all of the information contained within the 150+ pages of this website.

Did you even take the time to read the website?

--TOP--

12 September 2010

aisha anwas wrote:

Just had a quick skim through your website. I am Muslim and I am upset the people believe that terrorists and extremists are the true face of Islam, these people use religion to try and brain wash and have power over people who do not have a full understanding of the Quran. They twist and confuse what is actually said in the Quran which is upsetting and I see it effect alot of lives. These terrorists and extremists are not the real face of Islam and I wish people would stop saying it is. It is sad for people like me who just want to get on with life and not be labeled and there are a lot of people like me, infact every Muslim I know feels the same way as me. Your website makes it seem that alot of Muslims are the way you portray them but if there where so many Muslims like that then surely I would know an extremist by now! I have freinds from all cultures and beliefs, a few are even Agnostic and I don't care, we believe differently, so what? I'm not going to brain wash them and turn them into suicide bombers.

Aisha

Terrorism becomes the face of Islam when Muslims do not speak the truth. Islamic terrorists are sub-human hate-filled murderers. Muslims all over the world should publically refer to these terrorists as sub-human garbage. Muslim Clerics should preach that suicide bombers are not living in Paradise with 72 virgins, but rather in a hell where their flesh is continually ripped and burned from their bodies and every moment for eternity they receive the total wrath of God's vengeance for the acts of terrorism, hatred, and murder committed in the name of Islam. They should preach it, but they do not. You rarely, if ever, hear Muslims refer to Islamic terrorists as the sub-human hate-filled garbage they are. Every time there is an act of terrorism committed by an Islamic terrorist, there should be an outcry of disgust and outrage from Muslims as there is from non-Muslims, but there is not. Instead, far too many Muslims regard these people as heroes worthy of praise and celebration.

Islam is defined by the terrorist acts committed by well educated Muslims living their lives by the Koran rather than from any acts of compassion. The non-Muslim world sees Islam from the actions of Muslims. The killings, acts of terrorism, and intolerance of non-Muslims are not figments of the imagination. They are nightmares come true.

You may not like what we have to say on this website, but you do not say we are wrong. It does not matter if you have friends from other cultures if you do not condemn the terrorist acts as we mentioned. We have had many Muslims e-mail us, but none of them have ever condemned any Muslim terrorist. They always make the claim that the terrorists are not true Muslims when everyone knows that most have studied Islam and can recite much of the Koran. Do you remember Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman? No one can say he was not a true Muslim.

Islamic terrorists are indeed true Muslims. They are following the Koran. They understand what they are doing and the reason they are doing it. As proud Muslims, they expect to be seen as Martyrs and to live in Paradise with 72 virgins as a reward for walking into a public market with a bomb strapped on their body and detonating it with the intent of killing as many people as possible.

We do not know who you know or who you associate with, but in all of your e-mail, you have not condemned a single terrorist or terrorist act committed in the name of Islam. Muslims have no problem condemning America, Israel, and anyone that sees Islam as a distasteful ideology, but they seem to have a problem condemning suicide bombers except to say they are not "true" Muslims.

--TOP--

17 August 2010

C D wrote:

To whom it may concern,

I was just wondering, because i was browsing through your site, looking hopefully for the signs of a satirical piece.

A pity really, because it would be a masterpiece.

You obviously did not look close enough. We have several editorials on the website for that are satirical in nature.

• "11 Rules You Did Not Learn In School"
• "A Letter Home"
• "Applying for a Marriage License"
• "Appreciation to France"
• "GOVERNMENTIUM"
• I am A Bad American
• If The Liberal Agenda Takes Control Of The Military
• "Left-Wing Protesters - A Photographic Record"
• "The USS Bill Clinton"

Did you miss all of these articles? What did you read on the website?

Acts of 'Terrorism' that you label are perhaps merely indicative of the moral corruption that now afflicts American society at an ever increasing rate.

They are absolutely signs of moral corruption and moral decay. This does not detract from the fact they are indeed terrorist acts.

All people have the right to protest, and the right to condemn what they see as morally reprehensible, which is what i feel i have the right to do.

All people do not have the right to protest and condemn what they see as reprehensible. We in America do have that right and nowhere on this website have we tried to stop anyone from doing such. You could see this website revealing factual information as an act of protest against those that do not want others to see this information.

Personally, i found your arguement unconvicing and cynical, as it reflected a protest toward small sample of the vices that afflict society, a caricature that was neither accurate nor factual. Ultimatly, it was the irony that you condemned radical action by a minority whilst being radical terrorists condemning majority and advocating your ideology through condemnation that amused me the most.

What information did you see as not factual? If you are going to say what we are wrong, you have to cite the example of what it is you see in inaccurate. Saying that we are wrong and disputing what we have stated are two different things and so far, much like most people that despise and loathe our existence, you have not disputed a single fact. If you have an actual argument, we wish you would present it.

We believe in Freedom, Independence, Self-Reliance, Democracy, Small Government, the Rule of Law, and the United Stated Constitution. Do you consider this to be some sort of radical terrorist doctrine? What do you think our ideology is?

You might consider reading the Mission Page to understand what this website is.

Rest assured, however , that if i see any of these so-called 'Targets of Opportunity". then I will

You did not finish your thought. What will you do?

--TOP--

11 August 2010

Salena Gomez wrote:

Hello there!

My name is Salena, I'm an 18 year old girl, who lives in the country in ohio. Sure I'm young, I'm only going into my senior year of high school. But I have some very strong well backed opinions. I support a good amount of the groups and such on your "Enemy Targets" List. (Such as PeTA, ALF, ELF etc.) I would first like to say I love that you get your "facts" from websites like petakillsanimals.com (I consider them a worse site then you!).

This is quite a lengthy e-mail. We will do our best to address each point. For an 18 year old, you certainly think you know a lot. Wait until you are 30 years old and decide to read this again.

We have facts from many sources. While you may not like the sources or the actual facts, that does not diminish their validity. If you are going to say a statement is incorrect, you have to explain why or your comment has no meaning. So, what facts do you dispute?

While I am on that subject though I would like to talk about the "7 Things You Didn't Know About PeTA", like the fact that I did know ALL of those things about PeTA and I still support them.

So you are confirming our facts.

1. Well duh. What do you think animal rights is?

If you are against medical research, how are new drugs going to be developed for veterinary clinics and hospitals? Why would you not want new and improved drugs that would help animals?

2. Yes I knew that PeTA is only made of humans who are on this earth. They aren't super heroes or wizards. They can't magically save or make room for all the unwanted and abused animals. Also like you have said many times yourselves PeTA has said they never denied this. So its not a secret people know this already. If the people who give PeTA these animals do not want a chance for the animals to be euthinized then give them to a No-Kill Shelter (Which are normally not healthy for the animals anyhow, they still can't find homes, so the shelters become over crowded.)

PeTA does not try to find homes for most of their animals. They place less than 10% of the animals they promise to place. They have often euthanized animals in the van right outside the house where they picked up the animal with the promise of placing the animal into a loving home.

3. Sure they give money to "criminals" they are just other animal rights activist who have to take more drastic actions because otherwise nobody cares!

Their actions are not drastic, they are illegal. PeTA gives financial support to known criminals with the knowledge they are committing criminal acts. It looks like we got that fact right. We believe that supporting criminals is not right. Obviously, you have a different take on the subject. You are willing to close your eyes and ignore the reality of their criminal behavior.

PeTA supports these criminals because behind closed doors, PeTA supports their criminal activity. While PeTA may not actually commit the illegal actions, they provide financial support when needed. We believe this is morally and ethically wrong, but obviously, you do not.

When PeTA asks for donations, people are lead to believe their primary function is to provide help for animals. This is not the case. PeTA's success rate for placement is probably not the topic of discussion because the numbers are so very disappointing. The fact that donations go to support criminals is what we are addressing. PeTA can give its money to anyone they want, but if they ask for donations, people have the right to know what their money is going.

4. PeTA "targets" children because adults are to ignorant already and won't change there ways. Otherwise the children will just be "brainwashed" in the other direction, of feeling no guilt for taking and using the lives of other animals, I say other because humans our in fact animals too) Also I don't believe PeTA really uses the two examples of propaganda shown besides I think the cartoons are way less graphic then the real photos and videos.

The two cartoons were downloaded from the PeTA website. PeTA does not have the right to teach children anything without the parents' permission. This might actually mean something to you when you have children of your own.

5. It's not like they are trying to be secret people still know about it it is still called PeTA!

The fact that the PeTA Foundation funds the PCRM is news to some people. The membership of the PCRM consists of less than 5% from the medical profession and the remaining 95+% are mainly activists of the extreme political Left and most of those are associated with groups such as the Animal Defense League, Animal Liberation Front, Earth Liberation Front, and SHAC. Facts that most people do know and facts you do not dispute.

6. Animals are handled and killed in the same fashion that other animals (humans) were handled and killed in those situations. It's horrible and mind opening. If they didn't do it this way people would not pay attention!

So you believe it is acceptable for PeTA to do whatever they feel like to get the attention they desire? Why would PeTA want to attack religious beliefs and offend people as a matter of routine? Is that their best strategy? What are they really trying to accomplish? What is their goal? We notice it is only Christians and Jews that are attacked, never Muslims.

PeTA is not in it to save animals. Perhaps some of the people are, but PeTA is not. The proof is in the number of animals they place compared to the local Chapter of the SPCA. If you take the time to read "The True Agenda of the Animal Rights Movement", you will see an insight to their true agenda.

7. Sure PeTA has "attacked" those foundations they use cruel animal testing which is against animal rights!

So you would rather have children suffer and die instead of trying to find a cure for these diseases. Since you know more than the researchers that are working on the cure, what is the alternative?

Okay now that that is out of the way. (I am getting excited I can't wait to see what you say in reply to this ) Now more people besides you consider ALF and ELF terrorist which is more understandable as they do "illegal" things. I still support them though I believe in what they are doing. Now you have to understand when I say support I don't mean I am going and giving them money all the time I haven't even been to a protest yet! (I am vegetarian, If I wasn't such a picky eater I would go vegan, because the dairy and egg industries are horrible) But I support them by spreading the word, supporting them in other (free) ways, and believeing in what they are trying to do. Even though I have very strong opinions and beliefs I am very open minded and accepting. This is why I can't wait to see what sort of intellegent hopefully fact based (ones I don't know of yet that could change my mind) reply I get.

We have asked many animal rights activists this question and we never get an answer. We will ask you the same question. If it is ethically or morally right for "Animal Rights Activists" to attack and destroy property in the name of their cause, is it ethically or morally right for someone to target and commit an act of violence or destruction against you and/or your family for whatever reason they view as justifiable? What if someone representing the ALF decided that your property should be destroyed because you were not Vegan, would that be morally right?

If you want to protest, go ahead. No one is stopping you. If you want to destroy property and burn down homes, that is not right.

One thing I do not understand about you and your website is this. Even though you love to post the identities of the people who send you hate mail and the leaders of your "terrorist" groups and all the facts about them you do not post anything about yourselves.

We do not post the identity of people that has sent us hate mail. We have had a few people e-mail us that were already on the website. Your claim is incorrect.

We do not post our identities because this keeps everyone safe. As you know, we do not go around vandalizing other people's property. The same cannot be said for the people you support. By keeping our identities hidden, we prevent a situation that places us in a position where we are forced to defend ourselves from illegal attacks that people representing the ALF, ELF, and other like minded groups like to commit. It does not stop anyone from expressing their views and it keeps everyone safer.

Of course, the next logical question is why do you care who we are and what do you want to do about it? Do you want to stop us from exercising our First Amendment Rights? After all, we are not trying to stop anyone else from exercising theirs.

If you are so proud of the work you do you think you would at least post pictures, first names, or a little bit about yourselves and how your website got started. I don't mean everything about yourselves as I know you are afraid of being "threatened or attacked" by these "terrorists". Other wise I just believe you are amaturish, ignorant, sexist, racist, american preaching, god worshipping, war loving, peace hating, animal killing, gay bashing, brainwashed fat lazy pigs. (Forgive me pigs for I have insulted you. I should say human men.)

We started the website to show terrorist groups unknown by most people. Most of these groups do not get the attention they deserve and people have a right to know about domestic terrorism.

Are you saying that if we posted photos and listed bios, none of the names you resorted calling us would apply? You can call us whatever you like, it matters not.

I mean not to jump to conclusions or be rude or anything I'm just saying that is the impression you are giving me as of now. Now I know what you will say to at least some of what I am calling you. So I will tell you some reasons why I say such things and defend myself since you will believe some of those things should be good and the next thing I know you will be calling me a terrorist.

Actually, you did mean to be rude. That was clearly your intent. There is no other way to interpret what you wrote. We have never referred to you as a terrorist. To be a terrorist, you first must engage in terrorism and we do not have any reason to believe you have done that.

amaturish- First your website is poorly put together (I can design you a better one if you would like, no strings attached, I go to vocational school for interactive media design so that is what I am good at things like web and graphic design. It would give you more of a better chance at getting your opinions out there with out being considered amaturish.) Your "facts" are mostly just quotes and come from other unreliable websites. You also preach like you are better then other human beings which is annoying (another word I should have added to the list)

The website was originally put together in HTML. The facts are accurate and that is all that really matters. You have not found any errors in the accuracy of the information. The quotes we present are accurate.

We have offered commentary based on facts you have not disputed. Just because you do not like the facts does not make them unreliable.

You have criticized the information, but you have not shown any inaccuracies. However, if you would like to put together a website showing your abilities, we would love to see what you can do. You made the offer, so give us an example of your work.

ignorant- this one is easy. You still believe the lies you were raised on.

What statements are you referencing that you see as lies? What information do you think is untrue or inaccurate?

sexist- some of the groups on your list and the things you say about them makes me believe this

What are these things you believe are sexist in nature that is not true. We noticed you failed to offer an example of our sexist statements.

racist- this goes along with sexist and american preaching.

You have accused us of being racist without citing a single example. Where have we said anything racist?

american preaching - for some reasons likely the brainwashing part you beilieve america is better then everyone else. That america is somehow perfect. "home of the free and brave" You beilieve americans are better then any other human who lives on this earth. (as is where racist fits in.) Don't get me wrong I am pretty happy to live here and know we do have some better rights then a few other countries. (but we are still messed up and not much better then many other countries)

Where did we ever say or suggest that America is perfect. What are they teaching you in school? The phrase is "Land of the Free and Home of the Brave," and being a proper noun, the word "America" should be capitalized.

We firmly believe in America's exceptionalism. There is a reason people from all over the world want to immigrate to America. It is the same reason you are happy to live here. You recognize that America is a country that has a foundation of rights that few countries have. We have our problems, but that does not stop us from being the first choice for most people from other countries wanting to live under the banner of freedom that America represents. We have clearly written about many of them. The very fact that some people think it is morally right to vandalize and destroy another person's property because they feel justified in doing so is just one of the problems.

god worshipping- ahh this is likely my favorite one another good brainwashing "I'm the best" type of thing.

Where was anything like this mentioned on the website?

Before you go and start preaching to me and saying stuff about god and how great religion is I'll say this. I am Agnostic, I have never gone to church, but I am well informed about religion more so then most church going people likely.

That is like saying you have used Microsoft Flight Simulator and claiming you know all about being a pilot. It sounds like you are the one that listens to what others say without any actual firsthand knowledge on the subject of religion.

I don't care if you tell me I can go to hell. (I've been told this before just because I am agnostic, I have also been told I beter eat meat because god wants me too) My Father is catholic, my mother is some other form of christian that somehow always slipps my mind, they have never taken me or my sisters to church, and we were never baptised. My older sister is also agnostic, my little sister does not like to think so much about religion last I knew she didn't believe in god and heaven and hell but reincarnation. I believe religion causes nothing but war. There is a difference between religion and beliefs. It is okay to have your own beiliefs of god and such. But when you go to church and are brainwashed you oppose other religions which creates war. Many church going people also think they are better then everyone else, closer to god, even if overall they are worse people then those of us who don't go. I am glad that reiligion is on the decline. I do not understand why the bible and such is not tooken as myth [I know people are just brainwashed and/or scared) as we have proven greek mythology wrong with science and now have proven things in the bible wrong people just interpret it differently and still say heaven and hell exist though they can not obviously be in the sky or under the ground. I also believe if god is real and all knowing he can see for himself who is good if they go to church or not. So until we can prove that god is real or that he isn't it I believe we have bigger issues to deal with in the present.

If you have never been to church, how do you know what goes on there? If you really believe that religion causes nothing but war, you are really showing the ignorance of your youth. Most religions give you a foundation for morals and ethics and how to treat others. Because this is not a religious based website, we will not address the subject matter any further other than to ask the following rhetorical question: What is your foundation for right and wrong?

war loving - I support the troops and all but we shouldn't have war anymore as it is. Back in the day when we were fighting for our freedom and such it was needed and useful. But with todays technology war is just pointless. This is why they had to create things like the NPT treaty . Now days we could just destroy each other destroying the whole world with these weapons. So I don't see the point of fighting with guns, smaller weapons, or anybody dieing including both americans and other people from around the world.

How exactly do you support the troops? Do you support them by protesting the war? Do you support their mission?

What should be done when Iran obtains a nuclear weapon and places it on a missile? We know you want to believe with all your being that all we want is to kill as many people as possible. Nothing could be further from the truth. Until you have served in an active duty military unit and/or have grown up a bit more than your entire 18 years of wisdom offers, you really cannot speak with any real authority on the subject except what someone else has told you.

peace hating - this also goes with the reasons for sexist as well as it is the opposite of war loving so makes sense if war loving does.

No one wants peace more than the soldier in the dirt actually fighting, so please until you have served in a front line unit, do not pretend you understand the complex nature of peace and the difficulty of maintaining it. You do not get peace by protesting. You have peace when the consequences of an attack are known and severe. When your enemy is afraid to attack you, there is peace.

animal killing - this one is obvious as you do not care about any other animals besides americans like you. I am guessing you go hunting or fishing. Most likely eat meat, or other animal by products. As well as support things like the skin industries, animal testing, animal entertainment industrys. Also since I consider other humans animals you likely support the killing of anybody not like you like your "terrorists" or people who live on this earth besides americans like you.

Everyone here eats meat and we absolutely love it. Just like our friends in nature such as lions, tigers, bears, and the other creatures that eat meat to survive. There is no substitute.

Exactly what did we say where we support killing anybody not like us? Where did we ever advocate killing anyone on the website? Aside from the Islamic terrorists that actively seek death for all non-Muslims, the only people that have suggested killing are animal rights activists.

gay bashing- yet again with some of the things you say against certain groups. Also with the ways you have been brainwashed you likely find them unnatural and believe something is wrong with them and that they are going to hell or something close to that.

Point out where we have supported any Gay bashing on this website.

brainwashed- this goes along with all the above mentioned things. You only believed what was put in front of you and now you turn around and try and do that favor for other people.

You really seem to be stuck on this brainwashing idea. Perhaps when you actually grow up and have to support yourself in the real world, you will see that people whom you do not agree with are not actually brainwashed. They just hold another opinion based on life experiences. It seems that "brainwashing" is the excuse you use whenever someone disagrees with your view on the world.

As you mentioned in the first sentence of your e-mail, you are 18 years old and not out of high school. You have only seen what has been placed in front of you.

fat lazy pigs - okay this one is just more of fun guessing. You know typical americans so a high chance that I am still correct.

Did you read "Are You A Liberal"? As we have written, it is very typical for those that are critical of this website to resort to insults, name calling, and personal attacks to defend their position.

So am I right? I would love for you to prove me wrong if not.

No, you are incorrect.

Also if you are so proud of america and against terrorist and everything why don't you create a list of you know actual terrorists too. I mean I get your point that these are the things people don't consider to be terrorists and you want them to know that they are. But why don't you add any actual terrorists.

We have created a list of actual terrorists. Did you not read the website? The Enemy Targets page is full of actual terrorists. If you want to see terrorists of an Islamic origin, read "Islam - A Religion Based on Terrorism".

Hmm.. I do believe that is about all I have to say for now. Still looking forward to further contact with you. Also to let you know I have posted links to your website and e-mail on to the peta2 boards. So you will likely be getting more of that hate mail you love cause we love sending it! Peace, F.A.R. peta2 street teamer Salena

We appreciate spreading the word. Thanks.

--TOP--

E-mails from Andy Stepanian
1 of 3

07 August 2010

Subject: Thanks for the free publicity.

Andy Stepanian wrote:

By your definitions of terrorism I am one, and I am proud to be such.

All the best,
Andy Stepanian

Thank you very much for visiting our website. It is seldom that we actually have someone listed on the website (Andrew Stepanian) actually write us and confirm our opinions and facts. You are welcome for the publicity, but all we did was to record history and offer some commentary based on the facts.

We appreciate you not trying to insult our intelligence by suggesting that your primary goal is helping innocent animals. As with the rest of the Animal Rights Movement, your primary goal is to attack and damage a company you do not like. You have no interest in trying to change the law by legal means, so you support illegal direct actions using terrorist tactics and acts of intimidation designed to inflict fear and terror upon your targeted victims. Animal Rights as some sort of goal is only secondary. The whole terrorist label is appealing in some romantic illusion of initiating change.

You make the statement you are sorry for the damage that was done by the "Direct Action Activists" working in the name of Animal Rights, but what did you really accomplish? You did not change anything. You did not change the law to prevent any of what you railed against from happening again. All you did was to inflict terror against men, women, and children and give yourself some notoriety with a criminal record. This might give you credibility in the Animal Rights Movement, but it does little else. Of course, that was probably your goal.

You can say you are sorry all you want, but would you change any of your actions that got you in trouble? Do you still support these actions? Aside from getting caught, would you do anything differently if you had the chance to rewrite history?

You like the definition we have of terrorist and you clearly state you proudly wear it as a badge of honor just like the Islamic terrorists that share the same vision and methods of getting things done. Obviously you still support the use of illegal actions of the Animal Rights Movement.

Allow us to end this reply with one question that no Animal Rights Activists have ever answered despite the many times we have asked it.

If it is ethically or morally right for "Animal Rights Activists" to attack and destroy property in the name of their cause, is it ethically or morally right for someone to target and commit an act of violence or destruction against you and/or your family for whatever reason they view as justifiable?

--TOP--

E-mails from Andy Stepanian
2 of 3

08 August 2010

Andy Stepanian wrote:

I'm past the chapter in my life where I thought my opinion matters, so you can take from any of this whatever you will. These are complicated issues and cannot be boxed in as simply as your site would like to put them.

The issues are simpler that you think. It is a matter of right and wrong. We were hoping you might be able to answer the question we asked, but yet again, we find ourselves in the same position where a believer in direct action is unable to answer or even address a simple question.

I believe I made mistakes along the way but as I look backward I know I made my choices based upon what I thought was morally right. Similarly you have every right to disagree with me.

We are not convinced that you did what you did because you thought it was morally right. You simply believed that what you were doing was deserved and you did not care that it was wrong. Perhaps you are able to convince yourself that because you believe it is deserved, that makes it morally right. The only problem with that is you do not have the authority to do so.

You made your choices based on your own selfish desires. You wanted to be important. You wanted to make a difference and you did not care who was hurt or damaged in the process. Every terrorist has made choices based on what he (or she) thought was morally right. The 9/11 terrorists did the same thing and for the same reasons. Based on your unsolicited, but welcome e-mail, you like the title of "terrorist" and you wear it with pride. Nothing has changed. It seems you still do not care about anything but your own desires.

Unlike what many people would like to say about myself and other defendants in my case none of us advocated that anyone's children or loved ones should be intimidated. I believe behavior like that is wrong, and likewise myself and my co-defendants always believed behavior like that was wrong and undermined our moral superiority.

Did you think the families of those you targeted would not be affected? How did you expect them to react? The whole reason for your actions was to cause harm in order to effect change. Did you really care any of your target's family was affected?

I don't expect you to take down the info you have on your website, I don't expect you to agree with my opinions, but I do hope you will take a moment to see me as a real person, and not some character you have created, and in the "real" world I am not that unreasonable.

All the best,
Andy

We see you as a person that accepts the title of Terrorist with pride based on our definition. Do you think that makes you an unreasonable person?

Allow us to present our question to you again. If it is ethically or morally right for "Animal Rights Activists" to attack and destroy property in the name of their cause, is it ethically or morally right for someone to target and commit an act of violence or destruction against you and/or your family for whatever reason they view as justifiable? Please answer that question and maybe we will be able to see that you are not that unreasonable.

--TOP--

E-mails from Andy Stepanian
3 of 3

08 August 2010

Andy Stepanian wrote:

To answer you last question, I draw the line at property destruction. If you take a look at my indictment (public record) I am not accused of targeting families, I was charged differently, I do not condone tactics that intimidate families. All I can do is lead by example and hopefully people will make similar moral choices.

So, you consider it a moral act to destroy someone's property? Do you not see this as a form of intimidation that might affect all members of the family unit? Should we all follow that example as a moral compass?

You never did answer the question, you evaded it. If someone decided that you should be targeted, is it morally right to destroy your property as a means to an end? It is a "Yes" or "No" answer.

I am against all violence, unless you consider property destruction violence. If the later is the case, then (in my head) we are having a semantical argument regarding the tactic.

If an arsonist burns down your house while you are not home, is that a violent act?

We live in a country that was founded on tactics and principles far more violent then property destruction, the fact that the animal rights movement has shown such tactical restraint speaks miles about the moral integrity of the people that comprise the movement.

We live in a country whereby everyone is expected to obey the laws of civilized society but the animal rights activists, such as yourself, seems to want to be exempt from the laws that everyone else is expected to follow.

This conversation is bound to become circular. I wont push the issue further, because I assume your nature is one that is anchored in your position, if you still find me to be unreasonable, then I am unreasonable.

Best,
Andy

You do not understand or accept the difference in right and wrong. To you, it is reasonable to destroy another person's property based on an arbitrary set of values. You should consider yourself lucky that the people whose property you destroyed do not follow your example and make the same moral choices that you consider reasonable.

--TOP--

24 July 2010

Waqas Tariq wrote:

i dont condemn any terrorist attack. why? coz muslims in afghanistan gaza and everywhere else in the world have been through the same. america england russia israel are all involved in the mass murder of muslims. Il tell you when these terrorist attacks will stop when the west and israel f*cks off out of afghanistan palestine (which is an occupation) send the f*ckers back to poland or wherever they never lived there there ancestors aint buried there! and also when they leave iraq alone and stop trying to control the muslim nations to steal oil. simple. stick it on hate mail your websites got more incorrect bullshit in it than the united states constitution.

If America was interested in the mass murder of Muslims, we would not allow Muslims to immigrate into America. If America was interested in killing all Muslims, we would carpet bomb Islamic countries and destroy the infrastructure of Muslims countries without rebuilding. If America was interested in killing Muslims, we would not have come to the aid of the Afghans when the USSR invaded in 1980. If any of what you stated held any crumb of truth, America would stop all food imports because it is known that very few Muslim countries are able to feed their populations without the help of other non-Muslim countries that have much better farmland. America is not interested in the mass murder of Muslims. Of course, the same cannot be said for the Islamic view of non-Muslims.

Islamic terrorist attacks by Muslims have taken place long before America decided to take a stand against Islamic terrorists. Islamic terrorist attacks will never stop because of the intolerance of other religions that the leaders of Islam teach their followers. Allow us to present a few quotes illustrating this fact.

"I am telling you that my religion [Islam] doesn't tolerate other religions. It doesn't tolerate. The only one law which needs to be spread, it can be here or anywhere else has to be Islam."
-- Cleric Abdul Nacer Benbrika in an interview with ABC (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) in November 2005

"Muslims must educate their children to Jihad and to hatred of the Jews, the Christians, and the infidels."
-- Saudi preacher Sheikh Muhammad Saleh Al-Munajjid

"Arabs, rise as one man and fight for your sacred rights. Kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion. This saves your honor. God is with you. "
-- Hajj Amin al Husseini on German Nazi radio

"What makes Allah happy? Allah is happy when non-Muslims get killed."
-- Abu Hamza al-Masn, former leader of Supporters of Shariah

"Peace for us means the destruction of Israel."
-- Yasser Arafat, Leader of the PLO, 1980

If you want to read more showing the true nature of Islam, allow us to refer you to all of the Islamic Links on this website.

We did not realize that Israel was operating in Afghanistan. This is news to us. The only reason America has a military presence in Afghanistan is because of the Taliban, an Islamic terrorist organization. Perhaps you need to refer to UN Resolution 181 and read "The Truth About The Palestinian People". Why do you take the time out of your day and read that article and let us know if we have made a mistake with the historical facts. Please keep in mind that Jews were in Israel long before there were any Muslims. There are many Jewish cemeteries that prove this point.

Here is a question we know you probably will not address. How many times is Jerusalem mentioned in the Bible and how many times is it mentioned in the Koran?

As far as your illogical and historically inaccurate statement concerning stealing oil from Muslim countries, when has America ever stolen any oil from any Muslim country? If you remember history, America led the coalition against Iraq in 1990-91 when Iraq decided to steal control of the Kuwaiti oil fields. If America wanted to take control of oil in the Middle East, that would have been the perfect opportunity. Such did not happen. America could have easily taken control of the Iraqi oil fields anytime in the last 20 years. Again, an event that never happened.

What facts do you maintain are incorrect on this website and what is it that you have against the US Constitution?

--TOP--

28 June 2010

Ashleigh Mott wrote:

To whom it concerns:

Your website, Target of Opportunity, if it wasn't so frightening, would be comical. I say that it's frightening because I know that there are lunatics out there who have Internet access and the same beliefs you do, and all that a good many would need is a spark (your website, for instance) to set them off, so they might go shoot an anti-war demonstrator, animal rights protester (both of which I happen to be), or abortion doctor, as part of what you might consider true patriotism. Believe it or not, there is more than one way to be a good American. Someone might even argue, as writer Mark Twain once did, that true patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it (and, let's face it, when has the government deserved respect in the last ten years? But I guess you guys would consider that "terrorist talk".

So, you think it is funny what we have written. You find humor in the terrorist acts that we report. You find it amusing that we openly support American troops, what they do, and their mission. This is unlike the Left-Wing that ridicules while, in the same breath, claims to support the Soldiers and Marines but not their mission. You find it laughable when we stand against those that attack us while war demonstrators actively call our troops killers and provide information, aid and comfort to the very people that are trying to kill them. You find it comical that law abiding citizens are attacked by criminals, their property vandalized and destroyed, and their means of providing a living and supporting their family is burned to the ground. You have a strange sense of humor. We hope you are not and do not ever become the target of such a group of people. We do not consider any of this to be any form of Patriotism and to our best of our knowledge, we have never stated as much.

Regardless of how you show Patriotism, it must contain the following attributes - devoted love, support, national loyalty, and defense of one's country. Of all the ways of being a good citizen, obeying the laws of society and respecting the rights of others is paramount.

Also, I read your "Are you a Liberal?" list, and there's several things I think you people ought to know:

-Not all liberals are pro-choice

That is a fact not that surprising. There are many Liberals that actually know the truth and history of Planned Parenthood and do not support the ideals of Margaret Sanger, its founder. Most want to hide the truth about the ideals of Eugenics that Margaret Sanger proposed.

-It's laughable when you far-right-wingers bitch about liberal celebrities, because, by and large, no liberal is actually trying to get a liberal actor or musician elected to office, but you guys have tried (and succeeded) in getting actors like Schwarzenegger and Reagan (yes, Reagan was an actor) elected to office

We will address the Liberal celebrities in a moment.

-I can guarantee you that few, if any, dead trees are the ones being logged every day

If you look at #247 in "Are You A Liberal", it is stated:

"You believe that no trees should be cut down, even if they are dead."

On more than one occasion, environmentalists have prevented removal of dead or dying trees. It was lost upon them that clearing the forest of dead trees is a forest fire prevention strategy that also allowed room for new growth and regeneration of the forest.

-Movies are not the same as real life

Where did we make that claim? We see Liberals protesting against violence, yet we see them glorifying violence in the movies they produce, and face it, Liberals out number Conservatives in Hollywood and the entire entertainment industry by a wide margin.

-No one is saying that heterosexuality is "learned"

We did not say it was learned behavior. It has been stated that heterosexuality was a learned behavior in LIFE Dec 31, 1971, giving credence that homosexuality is not morally or ethically wrong. From the book "Dialogues of the Sexual Revolution Volume I - HOMOSEXUALITY and SEXUALITY" Masters and Johnson have theorized that Heterosexuality is a learned behavior.

-Capitalism DOES oppress people (Jesus, what color is the sky on your planet?)

Capitalism does NOT oppress people. Capitalism does not prevent anyone from becoming independent, self-reliant, and self-sufficient. Capitalism allows people the freedom to make their own way. A Capitalist society allows the individual the opportunity to make the decisions that determine his or her future. When the government interferes and starts taxing at increasing levels, it stifles growth.

A Socialist form of government oppresses people. Making and keeping people dependent on the government for the essentials of life oppresses people. They have little to no chance of improving their Standard of Living as can be done in a Capitalist society. The more dependent a person is, the less free a person is. Freedom is the right of the individual to exist, live, and prosper for their own sake. This cannot be done with a high tax burden as is the case with any attempt to enact a "Redistribution of Wealth" policy. The higher the penalty for increasing one's Standard of Living, the lower the standard of living becomes for everyone.

Without Capitalism, the very computer that you are using to complain about how oppressive Capitalism is to poor people would not exist. Do you think that Steve Jobs and Bill Gates would have been able to accomplish what they have done without Capitalism? Do you think the government controlling the means of production would have ever allowed the public access to the Internet? The only reason you are allowed the freedoms you have now is directly due to Capitalism and America.

Are you saying that Socialist based ideals and control over people does not oppress people? There is a reason that people from all over the world try to immigrate into the United States every single day. There is a reason we have an illegal immigration problem. What country that lacks Capitalism do you like and where do you want live?

Do you realize America has the richest poor people in the world? The poor people in America have no idea what real poverty around the world is really like. In America, poor people are not starving to death, in fact, many are overweight. The average poor person has a place to live, a car, a television, a cell phone, access to healthcare, and probably some form of assistance from the government provided by someone else with a job whose productivity insures a strong economy provided by a company practicing the concepts of Capitalism.

Here is a fact you will not like. Capitalism allows for an ever increasing standard by which success is measured. Socialism, on the other hand, allows for an ever increasing standard of dependency. This is easy to see when you look at entitlements that keep growing in number and expanding to include more and more people.

Maybe we are assuming too much in your e-mail. What form of government do you believe is less oppressive on people and offers a higher standard of living and can you cite an example where this form of government is now in effect?

-Greenpeace doesn't engage in direct action (because they are a bureaucratic environmental corporation who know that they couldn't get donations from their rich supporters if they do)

So, the Capitalist society of the people asked to give donations is the reason they remain unable to engage in direct action tactics, but according to you, if they could obtain the wealth necessary to operate without donations i.e. being dependent on others, they would be a better and more effective organization. In essence, being dependent on others oppresses their ability to freely operate as they wish.

Allow us to address the Liberal Celebrities issue.

Have you ever heard of Al Franken...? Senator Al Franken? When we speak about Liberal celebrities, we are talking about the people that use their celebrity status to advance pet causes destructive to America. Allow us to present a small list of these people.

• Jane Fonda - Remember "Hanoi Jane" and her anti-American and anti-Military statements throughout her adult life.
• Martin Sheen - He and 71 other anti-nuclear protesters were arrested at the Nevada Test Site in a demonstration marking the 36th anniversary of the first nuclear test there. They were protesting the weapon that ended World War II and made the US a super power in the world. He wore a bucket on his head to protest the bombing of Hiroshima.
• Mike Farrell - Aside from his protesting American troops engaged in a war he never has to fight, he campaigns for the release of convicted cop killers.
• Edward Asner - He supported and supplied Communist forces in Nicaragua in the 1980s.

In typical fashion, it comes as no surprise to see the Hollywood Elite and others of a forgotten past, using their celebrity status, or what is left of it, to voice their opposition to what we have defined above as Patriotism by joining organizations like Moveon.org and other likeminded groups that share the same the ideals. This is what we are talking about, but you already knew this before you wrote the e-mail. Aside from the above celebrities, allow us to list a few more celebrities that join in the beliefs of Moveon.org that are in complete opposition to the values we support and believe.

Alan Rachins	Alexandra Paul	Alfre Woodard	Anjelica Huston
Armin Shimerman	Barbara Bosson	Blair Underwood	Bonnie Franklin
Bonnie Raitt	Bradley Whitford	Camryn Manheim	Carl Reiner
Cary Elwes	Casey Kasem	Charles S. Dutton	Chris Noth
Dana Daurey	Danny Glover	Dave Matthews	David Bale
David Clennon	David Rabe	Dennis Weaver	Diahann Carroll
Don Cheadle	Ed Begley, Jr.	Ed O'Neill	Elliott Gould
Esai Morales	Ethan Hawke	Eugene J. Carroll, Jr.	Gloria Steinem
Hector Elizondo	Helen Hunt	Howard Zinn	Jack Coleman
Jack Shanahan	Jackson Browne	James Whitmore	James Whitmore Jr.
Jane Kaczmarek	Janel Moloney	Jeananne Garafalo	Jessica Lange
Jill Clayburgh	John Fugelsang	Kathleen Chalfant	Ken Howard
Kent McCord	Kim Basinger	Larry Gelbart	LaTanya Richardson Jackson
Laurence Fishburne	Lily Tomlin	Lindsay Crouse	Loretta Swift
Marcia Strassman	Marsha Mason	Matt Damon	Melina Kanakaredes
Melissa Gilbert	Mia Farrow	Michael Stipe,	Mike Mills
Mimi Kennedy	Mitch Ryan	Noah Wyle	Olympia Dukakis
Paul Haggis	Peter Buck	Peter Coyote	Peter Onorati
Peter Yarrow	Rene Auberjonois	Richard Masur	Robert David Hall
Robert Duncan McNeill	Robert Greenwald	Robert Greenwald	Robert Guillaume
Samaria Graham	Samuel L. Jackson	Sean Patrick Flanery	Seth Peterson
Shelley Fabares	Studs Terkel	Susan Sarandon	Susan Sullivan
Suzanne Cryer	Theo Bikel	Tim Robbins	Tony Shalhoub
Vincent D'Onofrio	Wendie Malick	William Schallert

You always hear how these people and their followers claim to support the military, but you rarely hear of any of them actually serving in the military. Those that do are rarely respected by their subordinates and are seldom effective leaders. They always look down on members of the military. A very famous person these people respect made the following statement that pretty much sums up their true feelings.

"You know, education, if you make the most of it and you study hard and you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you -- you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
-- Senator John F. Kerry, speaking at Pasadena City College in a rally for California Democrat gubernatorial candidate Phil Angelides, 30 October 2006

They make the claim they support the military, but then they join organizations that call Soldiers and Marines serving on active duty "Killers" and advance rhetoric with false accusations of targeting and killing civilians for no reason, none of which is true, but it gives propaganda and support to the enemy.

Thank goodness these are not the people we rely on for the National Security and defense of the United States.

"Are You A Liberal" is nothing more than a collection of beliefs that come from the statements and actions of Liberals. It is nothing more than a list of common beliefs found among certain Liberal groups and people. Of course, not every belief listed belongs to every Liberal. However, it does show the general trend of ideology acquired from statements by self-proclaimed and well-known Liberals that shines the light of truth on Liberal philosophy.

How many of the 260+ items applied to you?

And before you can say it, no, I'm no rich supporter of the Democrats. I'm a college student, an anarchist, an environmentalist, a feminist, and an animal rights supporter. I know that even though I've never committed what you people would think of as a violent crime (like property destruction, or something), just those descriptions of myself might lead you to believe that I am a terrorist, which I'm not.

In other words, someone else, probably your parents, is paying the bills necessary for you to go to college. You never did say what college you are attending, but if you believe or are taught that Capitalism oppresses poor people, the college education you are receiving, the one that you are probably not paying for, is lacking on so many levels.

It is easy to be a Socialist or Anarchist or hold some other similar ideology when you have someone else giving you what you need and chances what they give you was earned under the Capitalist system you find so evil, oppressive, and unfair. Any system that encourages people to demand that others give them what they want or think they deserve is a system that will only provide a minimum existence based on what someone else decides you need. A belief system that is based on the "Redistribution of Wealth" and promises a Utopian society will only deliver despair, poverty, and hopelessness. History has proven this to be the inevitable result time and time again.

We never accused you of any crime. We logically concluded that vandalism and arson is a crime, but based on your comment, you do not. The hatred of the Animal Rights Activists involved in committing such a crime against the intended target is a violent act.

In closing, I'd just like to say that if you think animal rights/liberation groups and environmental groups are terrorist organizations, I wonder what would happen if any of you were to meet a real terrorist.

Ashleigh M.

That is funny, because it is people like us that are the ones protecting people like you from terrorism. In a terrorist attack, we are the ones that are the first and last line of defense against the terrorists that wish to kill Americans. It is people like us that have served and are currently serving in the military. It is people like us that are giving our troops our full support and not protesting against them and at the same time, empowering the enemy. A united front against terrorism is what is needed and a united front against terrorism is what the "Peace Movement" refuses to show. We should all consider ourselves very lucky that you were not around during in the 1940s because you would have been protesting against the efforts to stop the Nazis from invading Europe and the Japanese from taking control of the Far East.

--TOP--

We often receive e-mails showing the totally irrational and hysterical nature of Liberals that hate this website and loathe our existence. For your pleasure, we provide for you the following e-mails from indypain@*********.net proving this very point. With the exception of adjusting the profanity with an asterisk to maintain a certain level of decorum, we are printing these e-mails exactly as received.

E-mails from indypain@*********.net
1 of 4

18 June 2010

indypain@*********.net wrote:

Ot only are you the scum of the earth for creating such a despicable web site but you are also an astoundingly ignorant, un-conscious, mentally retarded, evil f*cking moron...there is a special place in hell reserved for satanic spawn like you...namaste. also :)

It sounds like we struck a nerve. What do you not like about the website? Did we write something inaccurate or untrue? Instead of hysterically resorting to name calling and personal insults, why not actually state what you find incorrect or where you have a problem with the website? Is this approach beyond your capacity to discuss a subject intelligently?

If we are everything you stated, then why are you even taking the time to write us? Based on the tone of your e-mail, it sounds like we stated a truth you find distasteful, but you have not contradicted anything we have stated. We would love to hear from you again. If you write us again, we would be happy to discuss whatever facts you wish to dispute, that is if you can control yourself to the point where you can think rationally without the hysterics and lack of focus we have seen on this e-mail.

--TOP--

E-mails from indypain@*********.net
2 of 4

19 June 2010

indypain@*********.net wrote:

sweet jeebus you Repiglickin retards is stoopid...do you realize you represent the most intellectually/ morally bankrupt inhabitants of this country...if you were any less intelligent I'm certain they'd have to re-classify your species as some sub-human subset that has branched off into an alternative evolutionary form that will hopefully die off soon, much like your Neanderthal relatives (and it doesn't matter if you morons don't BELIEVE in evolution cause it happens whether your tiny brains can comprehend the reality of the universe?) To quote your fearful leader and war criminal little dick cheney, 'GO F*CK YOURSELF!' also (looks like you teabaggin' $carah Palin-lovin' imbeciles are havin' a tough time realizin' you're almost extinct?!) Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish! also (yeah you gotta love the LARGE font method of response, and in all RED too...hell why didn't ya go full retard and use ALL CAPS?! :)

don't bother wasting any of your precious few brain cells responding cuz your dumb Repiglickin ass has been blocked...good luck coping with the mental illness, delusional personality disorder can be a BITCH! also :~)

This was a well-written letter displaying the full extent of your education. We commend you on the level of intelligent thought utilized to disprove the accuracy of this website and the values we represent. You are an absolute credit to Liberals throughout the world. It is abundantly clear, as evidenced by your e-mails, that you represent the highest standard of critical thinking within the groups and people that share your political beliefs.

The reason we did not use all uppercase letters is because using uppercase indicated yelling or the raising of your voice. Despite your e-mail, we are still in control of our emotions with the ability to intelligently discuss any aspect of the subject matter contained within the website. However, your e-mail does lend itself to the idea that you are responding "Emotionally" rather than thinking "Intellectually" because, aside from the personal insults, you have not actually formulated an intelligent thought about anything on this website.

The reason we use red font is to differentiate our response from the original e-mail and because there have been reports that have shown that Liberals tend not to like red font. Apparently that is true because it has certainly struck a nerve in you to the point that all you can do is to hurl insults and resort to personal attacks.

So... what information on this website do you dispute?

--TOP--

E-mails from indypain@*********.net
3 of 4

05 July 2010

indypain@*********.net wrote:

a wise old farmer once told me 'never argue with a Repig, it just frustrates you and irritates the Repig'...now really, F*CK OFF!!! MORONS. ALSO :)

We are still wondering why you ever wrote us. You have not made any kind of intelligent argument countering anything we have said. Yet again, you have constructed a well-written letter displaying the full extent of your education. All you have done is resorted to personal insults and name calling without making any intelligent argument supporting whatever it is you believe. You cannot even explain what it is that you believe. The subject of your e-mails was "Cindy Sheehan". Nowhere in any of your e-mails was Cindy Sheehan or any other person on this website mentioned. All you wanted to do was to spend time hurling insults at us because it makes you feel better. It is all you have. You do not have any intelligent ideas to dispute anything we have said. You cannot argue with the truth, all you can do is combat what we say with everything in your mental arsenal - nothing.

The ironic thing is that the farmer you speak of is probably a Conservative and a Republican. It is too bad you did not actually know the wise old farmer, he probably could have taught you something.

--TOP--

E-mails from indypain@*********.net
4 of 4

07 July 2010

indypain@*********.net wrote:

really, f*ck off morons, it's so easy to see why people can't stand you phony 'Christian', homophobic, xenophobic, bigoted,narrow-minded, ignorant Repigs...thank Gawd you people will be weeded out by evolution soon (and it doesn't matter that you don't 'believe in it, it works anyway! :) also

You write us and insult us, but you cannot dispute or hold an intelligent argument challenging anything we say. You cannot even articulate your ideas and thoughts. Your beliefs seem founded on hysterical and uncontrolled ranting and emotional outbursts more akin to a hissy fit rather than bearing any likeness to intelligent and analytical thought. All you can do is engage in a barrage of insults and profanity without advancing a single idea, aside from showing the abject hatred that forms the cornerstone of your beliefs. It is obvious that if you ever explained your position, the shear mind-numbing stupidity would become evident and your ideas would cease to be a factor. The proof of this is evident in your four e-mails where all you have done is thrown insults at us without showing the slightest inkling of rational thought. This effort must be one of your proudest moments, certainly an important intellectual milestone on your part. You should cherish the moment as long as you can as it is likely to be your life's greatest accomplishment.

--TOP--

16 June 2010

Mitch Franks wrote:

How dare you justify the killing of animals and the people that protect them. Your organization is no better than Hitler and his armies. You are monsters. God bless the ALF.
Mitch Franks

How can you justify the destruction and terrorist attacks on law abiding citizens? Seeing how you like to make comparisons to Hitler and the Nazi Party, allow us to present you with a few facts. The ALF holds the same values as Hitler and the Nazi Party. The Nazis were rabid animal rights supporters just like the ALF and we know how that ended. The attacks on people they target like Kristallnacht are exactly what the ALF does to people. The graffiti is only slightly different, but the inherent hatred remains the same.

So, you support the ALF. Well, suppose we examine what you actually support.

"Some say it is morally unacceptable but it is equally unacceptable to use animals in experiments. The children of those scientists are enjoying a lifestyle built on the blood and abuse of innocent animals. Why should then be allowed to close the door on that and sit down and watch TV and enjoy themselves when animals are suffering and dying because of the actions of the family breadwinner? They are a justifiable target for protest."
-- Robin Webb, Press Officer Animal Liberation Front

But, according to you, we are the monsters.

"The third policy is to take every reasonable precaution not to harm or endanger life, either human or non-human."
-- Robin Webb, Press Officer Animal Liberation Front

"And if someone wishes to act as the Animal Rights Militia or the Justice Department? Simply put, the third policy of the A.L.F. no longer applies."
-- Robin Webb, Press Officer Animal Liberation Front

But, according to you, we are the monsters.

Here is a classic case of the ALF in action.

On 6/14/2007 at approximately 4:30am, Linda's Fashions and Fur Salons, at 903 Old Scalp Avenue, Johnstown, PA, was visited under cover of night by masked activists. The letters ALF were spraypainted on the building, and a cinderblock was thrown through the front door. This action was carried out in solidarity with Earth Liberation Prisoner Jeffrey Luers, who recently began Year seven of his almost 23 year sentence, and all others who refuse to compromise in defense of our earth. We refuse to be intimidated by the forces of government repression, and we refuse to forget our comrades. Until all the cages are empty and all are free, our struggle continues. This is not the last you'll see of us Linda.

Linda's Fashions does not sell furs and have not for 20 years.

But, according to you, we are the monsters.

By supporting the ALF, you support firebombing attacks on people. Explain how these tactics are different than the Nazi supported attacks on Jews under Hitler.

There is no other way to say it. By supporting the ALF as you claim, you actively justify and encourage certain selfish, criminal, and negative aspects of society that you would never approve if they were inflicted on you or your family and friends. You support criminals. You support the Nazi tactics of the ALF. You support firebombing people's homes. You support harming children. You support an anti-Capitalist agenda... Any questions?

--TOP--

E-mails from Jana
1 of 2

14 June 2010

Jana wrote:

Good morning,

I am very impressed with your efforts to get people to hate islam , but unfortunately you cant stop it from being the fastest growing religion around the world, remember that islam only attacks what attacks it. Please take the time and effort to learn arabic and read the REAL quran & when you truly understand it, then you may post information about it.

Thank you

Peace.

It is not our efforts that get people to hate Islam; it is the actions and deeds of Islamic terrorists that kill innocent civilians in the name of Islam that get people to hate Islam. Since 11 September 2001, there have been over 15,000 acts of terrorism from Islamic terrorists. It is the lack of Muslims that speak against these actions that show indifference to the victims. All we (non-Muslims) ever hear from the Islamic community is how these Islamic terrorists are not true Muslims. Most of these terrorists are recruited from Islamic study centers and then trained to kill as many civilians as possible in terrorist attacks.

We have only presented the truth. If we have made an error, please be specific on what that mistake is and we will correct it. We never get an answer, but we will present the question again. What information on the website is incorrect?

The reason Islam is the fastest growing religion is because of the birthrate within the Islamic community and the lack of birthrate from western cultures. It is no secret that in the next 20 years, most of Europe will be Muslim because of this. Just because Islam is the fastest growing religion does not give it credibility or change anything about the religion. All that growth does, based on the Islamic history and trends of the last 1400 years, is to increase the hatred of other religions throughout the world and magnify what we have stated. It does not change what Islam is, it just increases the population of future terrorists throughout the world.

Certainly, one of the attractions of Islam is how women are treated and the power men have over their women. That alone is enough to attract a certain type of person. As a tenant of the religion, being able to marry very young girls, sometimes as young as 6 years old, is a strong attraction for pedophiles and rapists. Under Islamic law, rape can only be proven if the rapist confesses or if there are four male witnesses. Women who allege rape, without the benefit of the act having been witnessed by four men who subsequently develop a conscience, are actually confessing to having sex. If they or the accused happens to be married, then it is considered to be adultery.

Robert Spencer, a scholar of Islamic history and theology, has written two articles addressing this subject, "Rape in Islam: Blaming the Victim" and "Muslim Rape? They Were Asking for It".

Under Islamic law (Sharia), rape is virtually impossible to prove and even in more moderate countries. If the man claims that the act was consensual sex, there is very little that the woman can do to refute this. Islam places the burden of avoiding sexual encounters of any sort on the woman. The threat of rape, the requirement of witnesses to testify for the woman, the punishment for adultery for being raped, and let us not forget the honor killing aspect of Islamic culture is nothing more than a method of controlling the female population.

Now, what is it that WE have actually done to make people hate Islam?

--TOP--

E-mails from Jana
2 of 2

15 June 2010

Jana wrote:

I would first like to introduce my background to you , I am a female muslim woman and i do believe that the internet and media portrays my religion as a religion for terrorists and chauvinists , there are countless reasons for these efforts , if 9/11 did not occur , Presedent George bush would have no reason to declare 'war against terrorism' in Iraq and other (islamic) countries, Because George bush was able to do this america got its fuel resources from iraq therefore it lowered the gas prices in america therefore it enabled america to have a better economy ( or at least that was his goal) it is not just oil that has been taken from iraq it is many other resources. ( You may want to watch the documentary on this)

America did not take control of Iraqi oil reserves. We did not steal the oil like Iraq tried to do with Kuwait. It should also be noted that America did not take control of a single oil well from the Kuwaiti oil fields as payment for helping them fight the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in August 1990. America came to the aid of Kuwait. The fact is that most of the oil America imports comes from Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela. Whether you like it or not, the developed world runs on the free flow of oil.

If the 9-11 attack had not taken place, the world would be so different now. As far as America is concerned, Islamic terrorism would still be a problem confined in the Middle East.

But to make it clear what is wrong with your site is that you are saying that islam = terrorism . correct?.

No, it is not correct, but if that gets you through the day, there is little we can do to change your mind. If you read the Islam page, you would see that we refer to the problems of Islamic terrorism as "Radical Islam", because we recognize the fact that most people, while they may bear some prejudice toward other cultures, would just assume not take the time to actually fight a war. We clearly state that Radical Islam = Terrorism.

In islam and any other religion different people follow what they think is right for them . correct? There may be a christian who has read the bible and knows that one of the commandments is not to kill ( or murder any one) . yet there are Christians who murder others despite what they believe in.

It has been publically stated countless times by so many Muslims that the Koran remains for all Muslims the uncreated word of God Himself. It is valid for all times and places and its ideas are absolutely true and beyond all criticism. To question the Koran is to question the very word of God, and hence blasphemous and an insult to Allah. It is a Muslim's duty is to believe the Koran and obey its divine commands without question.

This is the same with islam , With islam we are suppose to follow something called Sunna. But not every muslim is a sunna ( sunna is strictly what is in the quran and what the quran and Allah says we should follow) . Not every muslim is a sunna and this is why we get differentiations on the opinions of islam. and this is also how terrorism arrised and how some people justify their terrorism as an islamic act.

Why do we not see any Muslims publically questioning and protesting against those that openly state their hatred for Jews and Western Culture as we have courageously listed in the "Quotes from the Islamic World"? Are we wrong? Did we misquote anyone? Why is there not worldwide Muslim outrage against these people?

And please reply to me when you find In the quran or any of the prophet sayings that say we should follow hitler or that we are supporters of his killings, because ofcourse you would know that there is a difference between a few peoples opinions ( the pictures that you posted of angry protestors) or actual hard evedence in the quran of our support.

If we are not mistaken, the Koran was written long before Hitler. We are surprised you did not know this. It is historically accurate to acknowledge that Muslims sided with and fought with Nazi forces during World War II. Perhaps you have not heard of Haj Amin Muhammad Al Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem. Allow us to divulge a few facts about this man that is held in high regard in Muslim communities around the world.

As grand mufti, al Husseini presided as the Imam of the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem, the highest Muslim authority in the British mandate.

History shows Al Husseini to be a brutal man with aspirations to rule a pan-Arabic empire in the Middle East. He rose to prominence by actively eliminating those he considered a threat to his control of Jerusalem's Arab population, and he heavily utilized anti-Jewish propaganda to polarize the two communities.

In 1920 and again in 1929, Al Husseini incited anti-Jewish riots by claiming the Jews were plotting to destroy the Al Asqa mosque. The riots resulted in the massacre of hundreds of Jewish civilians and a virtual end to the Jewish presence in Hebron.

The 1936 Arab revolt against the British is believed to have been at least partially funded by Nazi Adolf Eichmann, and Al Husseini again ordered armed Arab militias to massacre Jewish citizens.

In March 1944, Al Husseini broadcast a call for a jihad to "kill the Jews wherever you find them. This pleases God, history, and religion." Al Husseini personally recruited Bosnia Muslims for the German Waffen SS, including the Skanderberg Division from Albania and Hanjer Division from Bosnia. The Hanjer (Saber) Division of the Waffen SS was responsible for the murder of over 90 percent of the Yugoslavian Jewish population.

SS leader Heinrich Himmler was so pleased with Al Husseini's Muslim Nazis that he established the Dresden-based Mullah Military School for their continued recruitment and training. In 1944, Hanjer commandos parachuted into Tel Aviv and poisoned drinking wells in Jewish communities in an effort to stir up ethnic tensions.

All Muslims should publically condemn this man, but such is not the case.

As all religoins Islam does belive that it is the chosen religoin, Same as the any other holy book would say. Islam tought us NOT to discriminate against other religoins because if we do , we are non belivers ( dont believe me look it up) because the quran teaches us that these are books of god ( the bible & towra ) & as all other religoins we believe who ever is not our religoin will probably ( in gods willing) go to hell , except kids and people who are mentaly ill or born unable to understand between whats rightand wrong ( such as individuals with down syndrome) .

Judaism does not teach what you just stated. There is no attempt to convert anyone to Judaism with the goal to save their souls. When it is said that the Jews are the Chosen People, it is referring to the Jewish people being chosen by God to receive the Ten Commandments.

If you really believe that Islam teaches Muslims to be tolerant of other religions, why is Islam at war with all other religions? Why do we see such hatred spew from the mouths of Imams and the leaders of Islam around the world. Again, look at the quotes and listen to what they have to say. No one forces Muslims to commit the acts of terrorism against innocent people.

Last but not least , I am a female muslim woman with more rights than you can imagine , i can choose to put a scarf on my head or not, i can choose to pray or not , i can choose to leave my islamic environment and go to america for example. I am also in university getting an education ( sounds pretty free to me) and both my parents are religous muslims. I grew up happy & i still am happy and i only chose to maintain being muslim after further reaserch from all perspectives.

You should try to live that life under Taliban rule or in Iran where Radical Islam prevails. In Iran, the legal age of marriage for a woman is nine years old. You can bet a girl married that young is not going to any university. Were you forced to receive female circumcision or was it a choice you made? So many Islamic women are not so free to choose. What would happen if you openly rejected Islam and decided to convert to Christianity or Judaism?

Congratulations on being able to continue your education. How many Muslim women do not have that choice because of Islam?

And i am sorry to say this but if i were a person who has never heard of islam and i have just read the information on your website, i would instantly get a bad impression that may stick and turn into hate. This is a website of hate.

What is it that we have stated that is not true? The impression that most terrorists are Muslim is true. Radical Islam is behind the terrorism and Muslims around the world will not stand against it.

It is as if i make my own website saying Christians are racists they hate African americans! they are the KKK , ( which you may know that during their rituals they stated quotes from the bible) . i could say that, but not EVERY christian now or 50 years ago believed that it was something connected to god and Christianity . That would be false Christianity.

Here is the difference. Christians publically stand against the KKK by the millions. Every public rally the KKK assembles is met with massive public protest by Christians. With all the photos of the angry Muslims seen protesting, you never see any Muslims protesting against the radical element that is the cause for Muslim hatred that you compare to the KKK.

We are not Muslim and we can do nothing that will change anything about Islam or the effective outcome of Islam and how it is perceived by other "Infidels". You make the claim you are a Muslim. You and other Muslims are the only people that can change Islam and stop the evil associated with the religion due to the actions committed in the name of the religion. For evil to exist, the only thing that is required is for good people to do nothing and that is what we have seen from the Muslim world - nothing. There has been no public outcry and condemnation against the terrorism created by Islamic terrorists. Instead, during the 9-11 attacks, we saw Palestinian Arabs dancing in the streets and passing out candy in celebration. Suicide bombers are held as martyrs and heroes - something to be worshiped. How are the 9-11 hijackers thought of in the Islamic community?

Examine the case of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the bomber of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland. He was released from prison on compassionate grounds because he was suffering from prostate cancer and supposedly only has 3 months to live. Upon his return to Libya, he was given a hero's reception. Six months after his release, Megrahi, was living in a spacious two-storey villa with his wife and their five grown-up children in a prosperous suburb of Tripoli, the Libyan capital. The property has a spacious garden and an area where the family erects a large tent to entertain visitors for celebrations. His family was paid a substantial compensation by the Libyan Government after he was jailed for life and he has the support and admiration of Muslims around the world. This is the reward for Islamic terrorism. Not a single Muslim has ever publically stated any objection to the bombing or his release from prison even though he was responsible for the deaths of 270 people. His support is from Muslims everywhere. You cannot tell us these people were KKK styled Muslims.

The fact is Muslims celebrate terrorism against "Infidels". Those Muslims that do not actively celebrate it do very little to nothing to curtail it because there are so few Muslims that actively speak against Islamic terrorism loud enough to be heard. Islamic terrorism is not something you can remain neutral. Either you support it or you stand against it. If you do nothing, you are not standing against it and you allow it to flourish and grow.

--TOP--

09 June 2010

azeem latif wrote:

Dear Sir,
Hope u will be fine. sir i have visited ur site accidently and i request u to please shut down this site or remove the material about our prophet.
i know it would be very hard for u but i hope u must have humanity in ur heart and u could understand that cartoon making of our prophet is a very painful thing for us ( muslims) please i request u to remove all those cartoons.
God Bless you sir,
i hope u will understand my feelings.
Thank u very much.

This is an amazing e-mail. You are upset that we wrote about a historical event how certain cartoons published in a Danish newspaper upset the Muslim community months after their printing. That is incredible. Let us see what did not upset you, at least not enough to cause you to offer an opinion as you did with the cartoon.

• You are not upset about the 15,000+ Islamic terrorist attacks since 11 September 2001

• You are not upset about the beheading video clips we have on the website showing the pride that Islamic terrorists take in killing innocent people

• You are not upset when you reflect on the terrorist nature of Muslims when they use their bomb making skills to prove that Islam is a Religion of Peace

• You are not upset when Muslim terrorist attacks take place around the world

• You are not upset as you read the quotes from the leaders of Islam calling for the death of non-Muslims simply because they are not Muslim

• You are not upset with the intolerance of other religions shown by Muslims around the world

• You are not upset when Palestinians were dancing in the streets upon hearing of the 9-11 attacks

• You are not upset with the rich history of terrorism associated with Islam

• You are not upset with the listing of the numerous terrorist attacks by Muslims in the name of Allah, Islam and Muhammad, but a single cartoon causes you pain and mental anguish.

Does it not bother you that you never see Muslims speaking against any of what we just stated? In fact, you do not dispute a single fact on the website nor are you upset with a single fact that we have documented. No no no... You are upset about the publishing of a cartoon contest and the reaction of Muslims over the winning entry. This is what you find offensive and painful. We find your viewpoint to be astonishing on so many levels. This is the perfect example of a concept that we have always known about Islam. It is not peace you want, but rather acceptance of complete Islamic dominance over all people in all aspects of life.

Why is it that Muslims tolerate the Islamic terrorist attacking and killing Jews and Westerners around the world? You never see Muslims standing against the Islamic groups such as Hezbollah launching missiles into Israel or the use of suicide bombers walking into a crowded market place and killing as many people as possible. Do Muslims not see that is wrong? Where are the protests against actions like this? Instead, we see Muslims protesting carrying signs calling for the death of non-Muslims and supporting Nazi ideals. These photos we have on the website do not cause you any concern at all, but a cartoon by Kurt Westergaard published in a Danish newspaper and then months later in an Egyptian newspaper where it got all the attention from Muslims despite the rampantly growing Islam population in Denmark is what causes so much concern.

If you do not like the facts we have presented about Islam and its radical nature, you are welcome to dispute their accuracy. If you can show us where we are wrong, we will be happy to make the necessary change. No one ever does. You would be the first one to do so. So far, you have not, but we welcome your opinion.

--TOP--

02 June 2010

Jordan Hristov wrote:

Hello,

I saw your bullsh*ts in this site and cannot believe how manipulated and stupid you can be.

First at all the islamic people cannot be anti-semitic, because practically the Arabian tribes comes to be with semitic origin.As you probably know the islam has arabic origin.

Here is some news for you. Anti-Semitism is not anti-Arab, but anti-Jewish. Here is some more news to you. Islamic Arabs tend to dislike Jews along with everyone else, which they refer to as Infidels.

If you have some sort of education about that (which I totally doubt) you should know that semitic nations are usually described with their arabian-arameic alphabet. Other than that if you ask for the peace and freedom of that religion please think about the crusaders and the other religious and ideological wars in the middle east during the last 2000 years especially the colonial interests of England and France

Islam has always been intolerant of other religions.

To address your comment of having some sort of education, we will let your e-mail, printed exactly as received, to serve as the example showing the extent of your education.

The terrorism came around the beginning of 20th century as protection of other influences mainly English and French (as well as Russian).

Because of the Islamic belief Islam should reign supreme over all other religions, terrorism has been a major component of Islam against other religions for centuries.

By the way if you know something about the population of the jews during the last 1500 years you'll find out some interesting things. As you probably know there are a lot of Jews in Netherlands at present times (these jewish came to Netherlands mainly from south Spain during the mid centuries. But the interesting fact is why these jews were in south Spain before that and why?? I'll explain you... because the cristians torture jews since the Crisianity became the main religion in the Roman empire and they escaped in Caliphate of Cordoba for that reason. ) As you probably understand (I hope) the Caliphate is Islamic country ... well I'll explain you something during this time Cordoba has street lighting. That is around 6-7 centuries before discovering of American continents of Hispanics and 7-8 centuries before USA even exist.

We completely agree with you about the Spanish Inquisition. We did not know that Cordoba had street lighting. Thank you for that tidbit of information, but how does this relate to anything contained within this website?

Here is something you may not know. Jewish populations, along with other populations, have been persecuted and enslaved by Muslim populations since Muhammad invented Islam.

Here is something you may not know... The Jews that migrated to the Netherlands never tried to change or take over the country. They assimilated into the country. The same cannot be said for the Muslim immigrants. In 20 years, the Netherlands, as with most of Europe, will be predominately Muslim. What kind of a peaceful transition will that become?

I'm not muslim an, but these bullsh*ts which you write are just ridiculous.

Would you care to cite a specific example? What is it that we have written that you find ridiculous?

If you talk about enjoying of freedom you should know that the first autonomous university of the world is islamic. If you doubt please check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Azhar_University .... anyway the oldest university in the world which still exist is islamic too.

Have a nice day,

Jordan

This is another interesting tidbit of information. They had outdoor lighting and an old university. We are not sure what the connection is between talking about freedom and the existence of an Islamic university or how this has anything to do with anything we have actually stated, but apparently you have made some connection. We would love to hear more from you comparing irrelevant information we never mentioned and the factual material contained within the many pages of this website.

What facts on this website do you actually dispute? As with so many people that write to us complaining about our Islamic page, it is never actually stated we are wrong about anything, just that they do not like our existence and resort to personal attacks. Here is your chance to actually dispute our claims. We await your reply with breathless anticipation where you are able to disprove anything we have stated.

--TOP--

E-mails from Nadine Berumen
1 of 2

18 May 2010

Nadine Berumen wrote:

Animal rights will never go away. Keep you're mind closed and you will never grow as a person. I don't want to change you're mind I'm over that concept you won't listen so direct action is the only choice.

Do not worry, we are not going anywhere either and from the tone of your e-mail, we know that bothers you and the animal rights people that decide that they have the right to destroy other people's property based on their own values. If you do not like the fact that we have reported on a small portion of the crimes committed by the criminals of the animal rights movement, it does not bother us at all. We have only spoken the truth. If you do not like the truth, it is probably because the truth directly challenges the morality of your life.

From this intelligently written e-mail, we can certainly feel the "love to all things living" you have in your heart. It is too bad you have such contempt and disregard for the law along with your fellow human beings you choose to target just like a sex offender stalker. How would you feel if others shared that same attitude for the law and decided to act against you? No one from the animal rights movement can ever answer that question. Why is that?

It seems that you mind is closed to the point that you cannot even tell us why you are so upset with what we have said. We are listening; you are just not saying anything. We have no idea what specifically you do not like about us. If you are in the right and your mind was really open, why would you not want to change our minds on the subject? Is it because your ethics and morals are corrupted to the point you actually want to target law abiding citizens?

If direct action i.e. criminal activity is the only way that you can get your point across, you are using the same tactics as the KKK and their direct actions against those they did not like. By all means, you are welcome to explain the difference.

You never did actually say what it was about our existence that you found so disturbing. What is it that we have said that you find so terrible? Did we write something that was untrue?

I'm so glad there are people like you because it gives people like me more motivation to keep fighting for the animal liberation movement. This is a underground revolution but the more resistence we get from you the stronger we get. We are not going to go away. we have had to live with ignorant people like you and now we

Sent from my iPhone

It brings you happiness that people like us motivate you to break the law and destroy other people's property. That is an interesting statement. Do we really motivate you to commit crimes against other people?

We would like to address the last sentence, but you failed to finish your thought on what you were going to do after having to live with ignorant people like us. Perhaps you need more practice collecting your thoughts and sending complete e-mails from your iPhone.

--TOP--

E-mails from Nadine Berumen
2 of 2

11 June 2010

Nadine Berumen wrote:

Do not ever email me again

Sent from my iPhone

What a disappointment. We expected a well thought out and concise response supporting your position. One would have thought you might try and make an intelligent argument espousing your beliefs about whatever it is you dispute, but it appears you were unable to form even the most basic thought patterns in your feeble attempt to change our minds. This is just another example of the way people like you in the animal rights movement think "emotionally" rather than "intellectually".

You feel the laws of civilized society that everyone else is expected to follow and live by should not apply to you because in your mind, you have loftier ideals and principles, yet you are unable to make even the most rudimentary explanation defending your position. The inability to articulate any rational thought and explain how you would feel if a group of people with your attitude for the law decided to target you is exactly the level of intellect that runs rampant throughout the animal rights movement. You do not have a good argument. You do not even have a good excuse. Indeed, you are the quintessential embodiment of the animal liberation movement representing the very best these groups have to offer.

--TOP--

06 March 2010

Dan Meyer wrote:

Great site; if it wasn't for the gross hypocrisy.

This hypocrisy exists on several levels, two of which are painfully obvious:

1) Did we not start out as a nation of terrorists? I can imagine a site like this being hosted by King George II during the time of our Revolution, only his "targets of opportunity" would have been "radicals" and "terrorists" like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Thomas Paine, and the like.

The Pilgrims were not terrorists. The settlers at Jamestown were not terrorists. The Founding Fathers of the United States were not terrorists. This country did not start out as a group of terrorists and it has not become a nation of terrorists. It is too bad this is what you were taught to believe. The Founding Fathers believed in an ideal based on Freedom, Liberty, and Individual Rights. Imagine how different your life would be without their convictions of these values. Just think how different the world would be today without America?

If you are going to call the Founding Fathers terrorists, you have to include all of their followers too such as the entire Continental Army and anyone that ever supported or believed in the Constitution, because according to you, it was a document written by terrorists in furtherance of their terrorist agenda.

2) America would not exist today without the widespread violence and "terrorism" exacted on the indigenous people of this land. Take the definition of terrorism you use on your website: "Terrorism - The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or group against people or property with the intent of intimidation or coercion often for ideological or political reasons..." - that sounds like an excellent description of the history of American Indians since the arrival of Columbus. The only difference is we didn't outlaw the murder, rape, destruction and taking of lands, and genocide of these people.

This is where you show your hatred for Columbus and everything that lead to the creation of the United States of America and label all involved all as terrorists.

Violence took place on both sides. The Indians, or indigenous people as you refer to them, were not as peaceful as you claim. What you seem to forget is that Indian tribes were at war with each other all the time and had been for hundreds of years. They all did not live in peace with each other. If you want to claim the American Indian often got a raw deal, you get no argument from us. If you are going to assert that we are responsible for that raw deal, we will argue with you on that, for we had nothing to do with it.

I am not, by any means, saying that these people whom you suggest are "threats to America" are using sound logic or even fully justified in their actions.

We ARE saying that they are NOT justified in their actions. You seem to be having a hard time making that statement. We do agree with one point and that is they are not using sound logic. Their logic is based on Marxist and/or Anarchist Philosophy.

What you people at "target of opportunity" need to realize is that to see terrorists, you need only look into the mirror. Sure, the reflection might not look like a terrorist or even act like a terrorist, but look past that short-sighted gaze of imperialism and industrial culture and you might just begin to see a faint trail of blood that exists on every one of our hands if we take part in this culture.

No, you are just trying to justify their actions by saying that all of the Founding Fathers were evil terrorists and because we are against terrorism, we are hypocritical because we do not refer to George Washington and the other Founding Fathers of America as terrorists. You also assert that the terrorist actions of the groups mentioned on this website have used the same methods as the Founding Fathers and therefore should not be considered terrorists because they mean well and are actually fighting for a cause. You speak ill of the Founding Fathers, yet you make the claim that the people mentioned on this website are using the same methods and yet you cannot claim that they are actually terrorists. This is bit of hypocrisy on your part.

If you are going to make the claim we need to look into the mirror to see a terrorist, you first have to assert that we have actually committed an act of terrorism. You are not a terrorist until you commit the overt act. We have actually cited the examples of the terrorist actions committed by the people and groups listed on this website. We have cited the Marxist ideals they use to justify their methods. Apparently to you, just our existence is proof of terrorism or at least, guilt by association for living in a country founded by, as you put is, terrorists. Where are you from that you can remove yourself from this terrorist reflection in the mirror?

You want to believe that America is an imperialist country. Such is not the case at all, but we know you want to believe it with all your heart. Where does this leave you? What country do you live in where America has not been a positive influence on your life? If you really believe what you say, then what do you see when you look in the mirror? It is clear you have taken part in this culture because you are using a computer to send this e-mail to us and browse the internet created in this America and chances are you are using software created and pioneered in America.

Your site is about those people who put their lives on the line to stand up against huge corporations, an unforgiving government, and brutal law enforcement to fight for something very often unjust or illegal in its own right.

This website is about people that commit acts of terrorism and their ideals. What you fail to realize is that there is a way to change the laws these people rail against. The Founding Fathers made sure of that when they wrote and signed the Constitution.

But you're blind to the damage, destruction, and "terrorism" these corporations, governments, and law enforcement exact on the people, and the land of this great country. I don't blame you, it's the culture in which we live in that either ignores or justifies violence from one group of people to another and abhors violence directed back at it. A great example is sharks: we fear sharks and describe them as one of the most vicious killing machines on the planet. We talk about the victims of shark attacks (96 of them in 2006 [wikipedia]) and discuss the dangers of sharks and the fear they instill in the poor innocent beach-goer. What we don't talk about are the 100 million sharks killed by humans every year (wikipedia). 100 million! What exactly is the killing machine here? That should illustrate how the dominant culture bring us to the understanding that some violence (dropping bombs on Afghan/Iraqi cities, strip mining, clear cutting) isn't violence at all (or is ignored or is completely justified) while other brands of violence (civil disobedience [law breaking], tiny acts of vandalism, and small scale social disruption employed to stop the aforementioned brands of violence) are completely unacceptable.

Would you please state where or how we are blind to the damage that you claim? What exactly did we say to give you reason to make that assertion? All you do is compare the existence of corporations with shark fishing. We have cited many examples of the terrorism committed by these people and groups on this website. We have stated they are indeed acts of terrorism. We have clearly stated they are wrong. You are the one that has tried to justify them without claiming they are wrong.

I also don't think you should blame all this on a liberal/marxist/socialist agenda. The dichotomy of left and right is one of the things that is tearing this country apart by the seams! - it falsely assumes that people are on one side OR the other. Unfortunately many people fall into this dualistic trap and do perceive this idea of a divided nation of left and right. We forget that we all want relatively the same thing but we simply disagree on how to get there. The left and right agree on much more than this site would make people believe, and, (all this goes for the left as well) much can be accomplished if the large (yet often difficult to find) field of common ground can be found.

Thanks for reading,
Dan Meyer

We clearly have spoken against Socialist agendas and big intrusive government and the dangers hidden within these ideals. The fact that many of these terrorist groups hold very Left-Wing Marxist agendas is one of the dangers. Radical Environmental groups that support terrorist actions that you associate with the methods of America's Founding Fathers hold extreme Marxist ideals. This is no secret. These people are on one side... You do not see Conservatives supporting these terrorist actions. You even see them as terrorist's actions by making the justification they are the very same methods used by the Founding Fathers. But somehow in your mind, the Founding Fathers were evil but these people morally justified.

As far as we want the same thing, this is just not true. If you actually read the website, you could easily see this. Radical Environmentalists want to end animal farming, or as they refer to it, animal exploitation. They want to end pet ownership and anything that gives humans any dominance over animals. They do this by committing arson is many instances. We speak against this as an act of terrorism regardless of whether anyone is killed or not. You try and justify it with a comparison to the Founding Fathers whom you refer to as terrorists, then claim we are the epitome of hypocrisy.

Socialist ideals make people believe they are entitled to the government taking wealth from a certain segment of the population and giving it to another. This entitlement keeps getting bigger and bigger and including larger percentage of the population. You think we all want the same thing but this is just not true. Socialism allows for in ever increasing level of dependency. This is in direct opposition to Freedom and Liberty.

--TOP--

E-mails from Natalia Arias Perez
1 of 3

03 March 2010

Natalia Arias Perez wrote:

This website was thrust upon me by a schoolmate who wondered if she should use it as a source in her essay, I recommended not. I find this website disturbing, not where you link terrorism to evil for that is natural given historical events. But when you throw socialism into the same pile and claims that Americans are in danger from it. (and its always exclusively about Americans isn't it, too ignorant to think of the perspective of the rest of the planet) Socialism is not communism, nor is it even close, reading your website makes me conclude that none of you have actually read Marx or understand his philosophy. You have the most unfair society in the western world, and you continue to fear monger your people so that that won't change.

This is an interesting e-mail. We see Socialism as a threat to the Liberty and Freedom that Americans enjoy. It is strange how you mention that we are not including the dangers of Socialism to the populations of other countries, yet you then assert that Socialism is actually good for mankind. You see our perspective of the rest of the planet as not included in the danger of Socialism, yet you want assert that America is the most unfair society in the western world due to a lack of Socialism. Make up your mind. If we are not including the rest of the world in the dangers of Socialism and you believe that Socialism is good for the world and we do not understand anything about Karl Marx, why are you upset that we have not included the rest of the world? We do see that Socialism is a severe obstacle to growth and prosperity to any country that adopts that mentality, but most countries were not founded on principles of Liberty and Freedom as America was.

You state that we do not understand Karl Marx and that Socialism and Communism are not even close. You do realize that Karl Marx is known as the 'Father of Communism', right?

If you want to live in a Socialist society, go ahead, but why do you want to force the Socialist lifestyle onto those that do not wish to be enslaved by Socialist ideals? The question is rhetoric as we know the answer. Socialism needs successful people in order to have a source of wealth that can be taken away and redistributed it to others. Let us take a look at the definition of Socialism.

socialism
-noun
1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

Belief in Socialism is belief in big, excessive, and intrusive government. That is where we differ in what we believe the role of government should be. Conservatives believe in limited government that should provide for the population what they cannot provide for themselves... not what they will not provide for themselves.

Socialism is government control over its citizens. Socialism stagnates from an increasingly larger segment of the population receiving increasingly larger entitlements from the producers. More and more people are supported by less and less people. Under Socialism, the citizens do not have to work to earn their worth. They do not have to work to earn what the government takes from others and gives to them.

Communism shuns private/individual ownership of land or any vital resources. Instead, all the 'means of production' like land and other resources should be owned by the state.

Capitalism believes in private ownership of land and means of production. Every man relies on himself to earn his worth and is thereby not a drag on society.

Please explain the differences in Communism and Socialism and how they are completely different i.e. not closely related.

Socialism does not allow a person to achieve all they can because they are taxed to provide what others no longer have to provide for themselves. They do not have to as they have the government to take from others and give to them. It is a selfish ideal to have the government take wealth earned by others and give it to those that did not earn it. You probably believe that healthcare should be provided by the government. What about housing and food? Those are much more important than healthcare. Should those items be provided equally to all citizens of the world?

Perhaps it is you that do not understand what the dangers of Socialism are. The enslavement and ever increasing dependency on the government is the inevitable result of Socialism. There are reasons that so many people of the world flock to the United States or as you state, "the most unfair society in the Western World", and these reasons are Liberty and Freedom. Socialism only increases dependency. In Socialism, the government gives you what they believe you need, not necessarily what you actually need or want. If you give the government control of your life, you lose your Liberty and Freedom. We understand exactly what Karl Marx and his philosophy is. We clearly have him quoted.

"The socialist society of universal abundance will be regulated by a different standard. It will inscribe on its banners. FROM each according to his ability, TO each according to his needs."
-- Karl Marx

What he states in his philosophy is that those that can produce should be forced to pay for those that do not produce and need what he works to earn. Your efforts of your hard work is taxed and given to others that did not earn it - so much for keeping the fruits of your labor. There is no incentive to work hard or achieve more than your assigned quota.

We have more quotes from those with Marxist views if you care to read them. "Quotes From The Marxist World".

Socialism causes people to feel entitled to wealth produced by others. This is a drain on resources. Socialism is nothing but a scam where those that produce are forced to provide for those that DO NOT and WILL NOT produce what they need for life.

Whatever happened to being strong, free, and independent? You do not get that with Socialism. All you get with Socialism is an increased level of dependency. These are not the values on which American was founded. While it is nice to depend on others when you need to, it is better to be self-reliant and independent. This is known as Freedom and Liberty.

Many of the reasons that other countries can burden their citizens with the gift of Socialism are because most of the Western Cultures have America to protect them with the American Military. If Canada or England or France or Kuwait or any number of other countries is attacked, America is going to be the first country to send immediate military assistance as history has proven time and time again. These countries do not need anything more than a determined police force because America will be there to give them whatever military assistance they need.

I saw a billboard advert in London last week, it said that the average daily wage for a person in Afghanistan was $2.00 a day, and the average wage for a member of the Taliban was $15.00 a day, well then it all began to make a whole lot of sense, since this is a very impoverished country. You people disgust me, liberal democracy is the best political system in contemporary politics, and socialism is merely thinking about the welfare of your citizens, not about lining your own greedy pockets.

Assuming that everything you read on a billboard is true, are you upset that the average daily wage for an Afghan is so low or because the average wage for the Taliban member is so high by comparison? It is funny how we disgust you, but it is people like us that are the producers and have the fruits of our labor taken from us and given to people that feel what we earned belongs to everyone. Do you ever say 'thank you' or show any gratitude to those that give you what you want or do you just feel entitled to the hard work of others?

My school mate the comment that this seems to have been written by supporters of George W. Bush, she has a point it seems so.

I don't expect a response, I am writing this because as a political science major, your comments in regards to Marx insult my intelligence, and the whole bias portrayed here is very disturbing.

Natalia Arias Perez
Queens University

If you believe that we hold a Conservative view, you would be correct. We have an editorial "The Meaning Of Marxism" that you should read. We would love to hear what you have to say about our commentary to the article.

Why did you not expect a response from us? Did you think we would not have the courage to reply to you in an intelligent fashion? Did you think we could not define what we believe? Did you think we could not make an argument against Socialism?

You may tell your schoolmate that he or she may use this website as a source for whatever purpose they like whether they agree with us or not.

--TOP--

E-mails from Natalia Arias Perez
2 of 3

24 March 2010

Natalia Arias Perez wrote:

wow you really wasted alot of time trying to debunk me, I didn't even bother reading it all.

All we did was to address your e-mail courteously, intelligently, and honestly. It is interesting that you did not bother reading our response. We never considered responding to your e-mail was a waste of time. You took the time to write us and we showed you the consideration to read your entire e-mail and respond with an intelligent and well thought out reply. This seems to indicate that you are a close minded individual that seems to think that any thought that is contrary to your own is a not worthy of reading.

We hold certain value in our beliefs, ideals, and thoughts and sharing them are not considered a waste of time. It is strange that you believe sharing your closely held beliefs is a not worthy of a few minutes of your time. If you really believed in what you say and hold dear, you would not hesitate in making the best argument you could to support your beliefs. However, by your own statement, you could not be bothered; after all, you know the true value of what you believe.

It is not that we tried to debunk you; it is that we addressed your argument on each point and we did debunk you.

My 2 cents are very simple.
1 . you are immensly disturbing, maybe my argument had holes, but thats mostly because I don't care enough to write it better (I do have a life you know, and am have never been seriously bothered by what a bunch of loser americans thought or wrote, I moved to europe for that reason)

What you find disturbing is that our argument flies in the face of your ideals and you have no intelligent argument to counter the facts. Your argument did have holes in it. We proved that with our reply that you refused to read or failed, for whatever reason, to understand. Your apathy is apparent in the admission that you do not care about your own ideas enough to take the time to present them in an intelligent manner. It is probably not that you do not care to write it better, but rather that you cannot make a better argument for your ideals that you hold so dear.

2. Listen I am a child of communism, but I was brought up in a Capitalist socialist society, I have more first hand experience of both systems than you do. And I don't believe creating websites that spread hate is an intelligent pursuit for any right thinking adult.

So... you are a child of Communism... No kidding!!! (Note sarcastic tone)... Whoever would have imagined that? If you want to live as a Socialist, by all means, go ahead, but why do you feel the need to force others to lower their standard of living and accept a Socialist lifestyle.

We have not spread hate, we have written the truth. It is ironic that you consider yourself to be a "right thinking adult" as you openly decide to allow others to provide for you as indicated by your decision to embrace Socialism.

I enjoy healthcare benefits, a relatively low cost yet high quality education, a government that cares about me and not exclusively its bottom line, and at the end of the day I am immensly happy. So cut the crap, I honestly dont care, it took me this long to respond simply because I didn't check that email, thats how little I care. Enjoy fear mongering to your ignorant populace, the Americans I know living in London would be horrified by you.

Cheers

Natalia

Let just clear this up, you enjoy healthcare benefits provided by others. The quality of your education is apparent from your inability to even care about your ideas as indicated by your comment, "I don't care enough to write it better." That is well stated. You do not even care what you think as you make an apathetic attempt to share your thoughts with us.

You should be grateful there are people that produce more than they require so they can have the fruits of their labor taken from them and given to you because you think you deserve what they worked to earn. Do you ever thank them for that extra productivity you take from them to cover your lack of initiative or do you just believe you are entitled out of some belief that others should not have more than you even though they worked hard to earn it? It is lucky for you they accept this burden to provide for you because it is clear that if left to your own accord, you would have a hard time providing for yourself with that attitude. Ah, yes... it is clear that Communist ideals have made you a well-rounded individual capable of independent thought.

--TOP--

E-mails from Natalia Arias Perez
3 of 3

02 April 2010

Natalia Arias Perez wrote:

Alright hang on, I guess you want some intelligence from me.

What a novel idea. You wrote us and apparently now you have decided to offer some intelligence. Why would you think we did not want an intelligent reply from you?

It is a completely wrong assumption to say that I embrace communism, I am very familiar with the goods and bads of it, and in the case of my parents countries the bads outweighed the goods. However I definetely do embrace socialism, which is NOT communism.

So as we are not accused of putting words in your mouth, explain what you see as the difference between Socialism and Communism. Please, do not copy and paste a reply, but rather give us your actual opinion as we would love to hear what you have to say.

If you embrace Socialism, you embrace the idea that others should provide for you. This is dependency not independence. It is not the government that is providing for you, it is your citizens that have their money taken from them by the government and handed to you. Do you ever show your fellow citizens that have the ability to take care of you any level of gratitude or appreciation or do you just feel entitled to have the government take from them and give it to you?

I grew up in Canada, where socialism reigns and currently I live in the U.K., unlike my American cousins (and I have many) my life has not been distroyed by the pursuit of the almighty dollar, and my governments inability to give a damn for me. I have always believed in free market capitalism, but I have also always asserted that a country worthy of my respect would take care of its people. Universal healthcare for me is non negotiable, I will not live in a country that doesn't offer it, I can only hope your president can push through a decent health reform bill next time.

If Universal Healthcare i.e. Socialized Medicine is so good, why are there so many more people coming to the United States to live rather than US citizens leaving in flocks to go to foreign countries for healthcare. Do you realize that any American can have free healthcare by going to Canada. If any American citizen wants Socialized Healthcare, all they need to do is to legally cross the Canadian border and declare Political Asylum. By doing this, they do not give up their American citizenship, but they have instant access to the entire Canadian healthcare system at no charge.

I am or I can say was a great supporter of Obama since 2005 when I picked up his books and was genuinely moved by what he said, I am also an active campaigning member of Canada's liberal party.

This does not surprise anyone. The entire Redistribution of Wealth concept i.e. taking from those that produce and giving to those that feel entitled to the labor of others is exactly how you described yourself. It is not that the Government cares for you; it is that the Government controls you.

So I really don't appreciate being called close minded, since I believe that liberal democracy tempered with socialism and free market capitalism, can create the most happiness for the many at the least expense of the few.

You are the one that stated you did not bother reading our response. You only cared about what you had to say then ignored and refused to read our reply. That is the perfect example of being close-minded. You do not have to like it, but it is an accurate assessment. We, on the other hand, have addressed and explained in detail every point you made.

It is too bad you do not really understand the concepts of Freedom and Liberty. At least you admit that you are willing to take from others and give to those that do not earn it thereby creating and increasing a population that is and will always be dependent. That is what Socialism is and that is not Freedom or Liberty. It is total dependency on government.

Whatever happened to hard work and living a Free and Independent life? Under Socialism, all you get is dependency on Government and high taxes. But that seems to be what you consider an acceptable lifestyle.

On the subject of terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism my opinions are far from politically correct or even nice. I tend to agree with Geert Wilders opinions, and really have 0 patience for that religion or its adherents, and I'm not saying this ignorantly I grew up in a community with a very large muslim population, I know very well what their culture is, and for personal reasons I have no patience for it. However on that subject I will be willing to take abuse for my views, for I know very well that they are biased and negative.

You had better get used to Islam control, because in 30 years, most of Europe will be under Islamic control. When that happens, what country will you flee to then?

But on the subject of Communism, I know you are wrong, how can you be right when you never experienced communism, and when you can make such a tragic error as confusing socialism and communism and calling them both evil.

We did not know you were an expert on what we have experienced in our lives. Please... elaborate more on what we have experienced.

History has shown that Communism, Socialism, and Marxism are all forms of government that enslave the people and make them totally dependent on the government for many, if not all, aspects of life. They have nothing to do with Freedom and Liberty and unfair and evil by nature. As far as your comment that we have never experienced Communism, none of us here have experienced diphtheria either, but we are all sure we do not want to. We do not want to live under a Communist or Socialist regime. If we did, there are plenty of countries we could live our lives, but instead, we like living as free and independent individuals, free to provide for ourselves and free to make the decisions that control our lives. It could be that you do not understand what we mean when we speak of Freedom, so allow us to give you the definition.

Freedom - The right of the individual to exist, live, and prosper for their own sake...

If you know we are wrong about Socialism and Communism, please explain your view and where we are incorrect. The exchange of ideas is the reason for these e-mails, but based on your reply, you just do not seem to want to put any effort into making an intelligent argument.

We know exactly what Communism is and the dangers. We have seen the many people that have risked their lives to escape Communist regimes for the lure of Freedom offered here in America. How many people are flocking to Communist countries compared to how many people wish to leave these same countries with only what they can carry, but are not allowed to do so because the Government will not let them?

Socialism is there to help others, without it we are left with a system of greed, corruption and every one fends for themselves. And if you send me a message back saying that everyone should fend for themselves and not give a crap about their neighbours, I may begin to think that this website espouses social darwinism as well.

Socialism increases dependency and control of the population. That is what it does by design. What country gives more to the world than the United States? The United States is the most generous country on the planet and is always the first to help the world. It is in our nature as a people, so please do not insult our intelligence by saying that we do not help our neighbors. We are the first to come to the aid of people all over the world. We are always looking out for our neighbors, but why should I feed my neighbor when they are capable and in a position to feed themselves?

At any rate you are allowed you opinions in the matter of free speech, its just a tragedy that their so hatefilled and negative.

What did we say that was hateful and negative? You are the only one that has stated that your views are negative and biased and you did so in this very e-mail. We did not make this statement… you did.

But don't go accusing me of ignorance or stupidity or close mindedness, I may not waste time opening up to you, but at the end of the day I attend a U.K. university on full scholarships, have lived in many places and am fluently trilingual.

You make the claim that you are educated at the university level. Let us examine your quote.

"…maybe my argument had holes, but thats mostly because I don't care enough to write it better (I do have a life you know, and am have never been seriously bothered by what a bunch of loser americans thought or wrote, I moved to europe for that reason)."

What institution of higher learning did you attend that would prepare you make this statement? Your professors must be so proud.

The misspellings, grammatical errors, and the inability to care enough write an intelligent argument in an e-mail you wrote us to show us how we are so wrong on so much about Socialism and its finer points speaks volumes at the quality of this education.

If you do write back, do not go accusing me of supporting communism again, but respect my views for what they are.
Thank you

Natalia

It is interesting how you demand respect for your views, but you are not willing to offer that same consideration to others. We have given you respected for your views. In fact, we have printed them for all to see. We have addressed each and every point in your correspondence to us. The same cannot be said for you, not that we expect you to, it is just that you are so quick to demand respect from everyone else yet unwilling to show that same respect to those of whom you demand it. You did not even show us the courtesy of reading our reply to your first e-mail before you wrote us your reply. This is the perfect example of the Liberal characteristic of a closed mind completely intolerant of other views.

--TOP--

31 March 2010

kordell smith wrote:

This website is hypocritical, like Americans you guys just portray all the negativities in Islamic world, yet you do not compare other violence in other religions, nor do you compare and contrast the Bad of Islam with the Good of Islam, not all 1.5 billion muslims are terrorist this website is biased and ignorant of truth, as this American propaganda like all does not compare and contrast it only displays the Terrorist in Islam, and do not show the actual casual Muslim populations, like those in African countries. This website is hocus pocus, and a damn shame to intelligence.

It seems you did not read the website at all or at least all you did was to read what you wanted to read. We have clearly stated that the violence is a direct result of Radicals in Islam. You must have failed to read that part. We also stated that Islam as a religion is led by these Radicals.

We have shown the truth of 15,000+ examples of Islamic acts of terrorism. So far, you have not mentioned a single example of terrorism against Islam, and please, do not cite an example of self-defense against Muslim terrorists as an example of terrorism against Islam.

Where do you dispute a single fact on this website? Tell us specifically where we are wrong. Go ahead, cite the example.

As far as the Black Muslims in Africa, it is the Arab Muslims that are killing them, not the Christian Missionaries, Jewish settlers, or any other group of non-Islamic believers.

This website is nothing but a record of the truth. You do not have to like it, but so far, you have not disputed a single fact contained within the 150+ pages of this website.

We have cited the bad of Islam. Perhaps you can cite examples of the good of Islam, because so far, we have seen little of it. Where is it that Islam has shown tolerance of other religions compared to the tens of thousands of examples to the contrary?

--TOP--

26 February 2010

Hot Male wrote:

the effort that you done, and created a website totally against ISLAM, i would like to know what is your religion ? and is this your religion who allow you to use this kind of language for the religion of peace ISLAM, if you are christen then you can't be a christen without accepting ISLAM, simply i want to say please close this site otherwise you will burn in hell forever, if you have any question about ISLAM then please read Quran once , you will know the reality , if you have any question please send me your question i will answer you but you have no right to miss guide people by creating these kind of useless sites ,
you can download Holy QURAN here in 34 languages ,
http://www.allinthis.com/2009/12/15/download-holy-quran-pdf-book-in-34-languages/

please must reply me,
Thank You .

We have only reported the actions of Muslims and the tone that Islam shares with the rest of the world. We understand the desire for Islam to control and dominate all other religions and all people. A Christian can be a Christian without accepting Islam.

You refer to this website as useless. What information on this website do you dispute? Like so many others, you complain about the existence of this website, yet you do not dispute a single fact within the pages. We have quoted the Koran. We know what it says and how the Koran and Islam are practiced throughout the world. We know of the dangers that Islam is on other religions and people. We know the truth and you are only upset that we had the courage and education to write about it.

You say we will burn in hell forever... Well, to take your word for it does not scare us as much as having our throats cut by a Muslim in the name of Islam, the Religion of Peace because we do not believe as you do. That is a real possibility. Having an opinion about Islam based on the actions of Muslims is not going to cause anyone to burn in hell.

Freedom and Democracy has no place in Islam. Islam does not teach love, it only teaches total submission and hate of non-believers. We have seen the terror resulting from the Islamic way of life and non-Muslims want nothing to do with Islam.

Islam is led by Radicals that hate non-Muslims also known as "Infidels" and to these Radicals, infidels are not worthy of living. This can hardly be associated with a religion of Peace. Explain why Christianity is not a Religion of Peace. There are Christian Missionaries around the world that bring medical care and education to people that would otherwise not be able to receive such attention. Where does Islam do this without force or threat of death?

--TOP--

E-mails from Jo Neace Krause
1 of 5

20 February 2010

Jo Neace Krause wrote:

If another person points out a murderer to me, I dont stop and consider if that person is a Catholic or Athiest or Born Again Christian... I simply want to see the murderer arrested so he will not get away with shedding more blood.

We share the same view. It matters not what the murderer believes or values.

I happen to think we could all stop terrorism if we stopped what we have been doing to the Arabs for sixty years to please the Jewish political faction that has paid off our government and now points to the Arabs who resist us.....as terrorists to be killed.

Muslims have been killing Christians, Jews and other non-Muslims for the last 1400 years. Why do you blame the Jews for the Muslim attacks and terrorist campaigns against non-Muslims? Muslims out number Jews about 100 to 1. There is nothing that Jews can do to Muslims except defend themselves from Muslim attacks. The problem is that every Arab/Muslim country has used the Palestinians as pawns against Israel. They are not interested in helping Palestinian Arabs with anything. They are just useful as a political weapon against Israel.

We are sure that they appreciate what appears to be a pro-Arab, anti-Semitic view.

We happen to think that we could stop terrorism is Muslims stood against it. We happen to believe that if Peace and Love were cornerstones of Islam, the number of Islamic terrorist attacks would be 99% lower than it is today, but such is not the case and for reasons that are so clear. Islam is against Freedom and Democracy and is full of hatred toward non-Muslims, especially Jews. We know this because we know the historical facts and we understand what Islam really is.

Arabs and others have resisted the West for a long time. That did not make them terrorists. You do not become a terrorist without the overt act of terrorism. Based on their history of terrorist actions, not only is there something about Islam as a religion does not cause them to reconsider the terrorists acts committed in the name of Islam, the teachings of Islam actually seem to encourage these terrorist acts.

I have no love for the Arab world but I think what we are doing to them is WRONG.

If you are going to make that statement, apparently you do have some love for the Arab world... either that or you hate Western cultures more.

What exactly are we doing to them? We buy oil from them to the tune of trillions of dollars of income to them. They do not have to work for it, they only have to let us drill a hole in the ground and give them money for what comes out of the ground. We send American troops to help them when another country invades their country. We send help when famine ravages their country. We give foreign aid to help their country even though we know the leaders are going to take the lion's share and hide the acquired riches in their Swiss Bank accounts.

Muslims justify their terrorist actions and killing with the teachings of Islam. It is too bad that Islam does not teach Peace and Love as a primary mandate over killing non-Muslims. The world would be better off if they did, but that is not the current situation that we find ourselves in this day and age.

You do not see Christians, Hindus, Jews, Buddhists and other religions committing acts of terrorism like you do in Islam. Why is that? Could it be some major aspect of Islam stating Islam is superior to all other religions? Could it be that Islam must be accepted by the entire world as the final word of God and anyone that does not accept and live under the teachings of Islam is not worthy of living? Could it be that Islam sees other religions as an insult to God, Islam, and to Muslims alike? The reason that we stated it like that is because that is what the leaders of Islam teach Muslims. Islam is run by radicals and hatred toward other religions is the reality.

--TOP--

E-mails from Jo Neace Krause
2 of 5

21 February 2010

Jo Neace Krause wrote:

I dont see Muslims invading anyone's territory at present like we are doing. In fact, havent we always been the invaders in the MIddle East? I blame the Jews for setting up a "homeland" in the middle of someone's country, and then calling them terrorists for objecting. Why are we at war over this? We want what they have. We want their oil, and the Jews want the land. WE ARE THEIVES AND MURDERS.

You do not see Muslims invading anyone's country. Where have you been? This entire e-mail reeks of not remembering or understanding history. Everything that is taking place in Iraq now is a direct result of Iraq invading Kuwait. Remember that small incident. It was reported in all the newspapers and TV networks around the world. The reason we went back into Iraq was because Saddam Hussein violated the Ceasefire Agreement that ended Gulf War I in 1991.

Perhaps this would be a good time to bring up why Iraq invaded Kuwait. They wanted to take control of the Kuwaiti oil fields. Keep in mind that when we pushed the Iraqi army out of Kuwait, we did not keep the oil fields for our own as we could have easily done, we actually left Kuwait. We did not stick around and try to keep any of the oil.

Would you please explain what you mean when you say that we have always been invaders of the Middle East? Prior to attacking Iraq after their deliberate violation of the 1991 Ceasefire Agreement, which we have already addressed, we attacked the Taliban in Afghanistan after the 9-11 terrorist attacks on the United States. Prior to that, we did send a few advisors into Afghanistan to assist their fight against the Russians, and before that we did send a couple of dozen of troops in an unsuccessful attempt to rescue the American hostages in Iran in 1980. Before that, we had Allied troops in North Africa during World War II.

So you "blame the Jews for setting up a homeland in the middle of someone's country." Really... What country was that? Do you not know anything about the history of the Middle East? Jews have been in what is now Israel for the last 4000 years. While this might be news to you, allow us to explain in a bit more detail. Islam and therefore Muslims have only been around for the last 1400 years so you cannot say that they were there first. Rome took control of the area in the year 70. The Ottoman Empire maintained control of the land until 1917 when the British took control of the Palestinian Mandate until 1948. In 1948, United Nations Resolution 181 partitioned the territory from the British Mandate for Palestine into two states - one for Jews and one for Palestinian Arabs. After the 1948 War, Israel's War of Independence, Jordan absorbed excess land meant for the Palestinians Arabs. If Syria, Jordan, and Egypt had not attacked Israel, there would be a country of Palestine.

At the end of the 1948 war, the Arab allotted land was divided between Israel, Egypt (Gaza), and Jordan. The Egyptians refused to let the Gazans become independent or Egyptian citizens. Eventually, the Jordanians did allow some refugees become citizens, but not all. The Arab states are content to let their brother Arabs remain in those refugee camps that are really crowded and squalid towns and live like that since the UN supported them. Because of this, they make a great political tool used to invoke sympathy, especially in regard to the European countries.

If you take an honest look at the situation, Israel does not want Arab lands, but Arabs want to kill every Jew and take their land. Every time Israel has been attacked, it has been with the intent of destroying Israel, eliminating the Jews, and taking their land. It is not Israel that is trying to take Arab land, but the other way around. It was never Israel that took land meant for Palestinian Arabs, but other Arab countries. Take a good look at the map on the right to see the "Vast Israeli Empire". Israel always has to give up land for "Peace", but the attacks from Muslims keep coming. When have Arab Countries ever been asked to give up land for peace? When have Arabs ever been asked to give up anything for "Peace"? The fact is, Muslims do not want Peace... they only want no Jews. It is funny how Israel gave full citizenship to all Arabs after the 1948, but no Arab countries bothered to offer their brothers the same consideration.

In an attempt to explain the truth, allow us to direct you to the editorial "The Truth About the Palestinian People". Hopefully, this will help you understand the truth rather than whatever anti-Israel propaganda you choose to believe, because it is evident that is where you are getting much of your information.

YOU SEE: war is lucrative, and many good American men are without jobs, and war gives them a way out of this depression created deliberately to make an easy army available. Who is responsible for this economic disaster in USA? Same people who brought down Russia. Dont you understand anything?

Who is responsible for the economic disaster in America? The politicians that decide that taking away wealth from those that are productive and giving it to those that did not earn it. The politicians that decide that embracing socialist doctrine is what made America great. Did you take note that in the two days after Barrack Hussein Obama was elected the stock market dropped 2000 points? This was not a coincidence. The producers of this country knew what he was going to do and they did what they had to do to protect what they had earned. Since Obama was elected, he has taken control of GMC and Chrysler and both are in such financial trouble. Over a trillion dollars of new expenditures have been authorized thereby putting America in such debt it could cause economic collapse.

We would ask you if you understand what you are talking about, but it is clear you have no idea of the historical facts.

--TOP--

E-mails from Jo Neace Krause
3 of 5

21 February 2010

Jo Neace Krause wrote:

Firs off. Kuwait was part of Iraq until it was severed (i.e. robbed) from them for the oil. As I said, we want the oil, the Jews want an enemy defeated. Iraq was invaded not because they had weapons of mass destruction but because they were assisting their brothers the Palestinians and this had the Jews in the USA angry, of course. Iraq did not invade the foreign land of Kuwait. They were only taking back what was their own. The reason we went into Iraq was to kill them. Kill their children. Hang their leader, and pretend it was all for the good of mankind.

Kuwait belonged to Iraq, the west severed it from them. They were only reclaiming what was their own.

Kuwait is a sovereign nation and has been recognized as such by every sovereign country on the planet since 19 June 1961 when it acquired its Independence from Britain. In 1963, Iraq reaffirmed its acceptance of Kuwaiti sovereignty and the boundary it agreed to in 1913 and 1932, so any claim that Kuwait belonged to Iraq is nonsense. On 3 October 1932 from the League of Nations mandate under British administration, Iraq became an independent and sovereign nation, but by your logic, Britain had every right to attack and invade Iraq because Iraq used to belong to them, which of course is nonsense.

Allow us to address your oil argument. We, America and the Western World, did not take the Kuwaiti oil. We prevented Iraq from doing so. Kuwait still has their oil fields. If Saddam Hussein had abided by the 1990 Ceasefire Agreement, there would have been on reason to go back to Iraq and he and his sons would still be in power, free to torture his people as he liked with no outside interference.

Did you forget the 14 months of debate in Congress about Iraqi's violation of the Ceasefire Agreement? Did you forget the UN Weapons Inspectors that were thrown out of Iraq? Did you forget the use of sarin nerve gas on the Kurds? Or did you just ignore these facts? It is hard to understand how a person with any level of intelligence can make the assertion that the reason we went back into Iraq was to kill Iraqi citizens and kill Iraqi children, but that is what you stated. If this is what you want to believe, there is no chance you are going to accept the truth.

You are free to believe that Iraq and the world would be better off with Saddam Hussein in power. Most Iraqis, with the exception of the members of the Bath Party, do not agree with this picture. The thousands of citizens that were gassed with sarin nerve gas would certainly disagree with you, but it does not really matter as his people hung him for his crimes.

Oh, is that why Joe Liberman spread the news that Iraqi soldiers were tossing babies out the windows of Kuwaiti hospitals....I suppose old Joe loves babies, which is why he loves what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians kids....shooting them in the thighs, using audio weapons to break their ear drums, and destroy the roots of their teeth......and keeping them in jails away from their parents and the Red Cross. It's a concentration camp over there, say no more about it.

What are you talking about here? Was this addressed anywhere? If Israel is a concentration camp as you state, why do the Palestinians stay? No one is keeping them there. The question becomes what Arab country will take them. None of the Arab countries want their Muslim brothers. If you think about it, that would solve much of the problems. The Palestinians could have had a country anytime in the last 70 years, but they choose war against the Jews.

When Israeli soldiers are attacked, they have the right to defend themselves. Would you be happy if the attackers were killed? Would you rather the Israelis not use non-lethal weapons that did not kill as opposed to the sonic weapons that do not kill? You make it sound like Israeli soldiers are randomly killing for no reason at all... you know... like terrorists. That seems to be the way you want to view them... as terrorists.

Sure, ever hear of the Crusades? Read up on what these fanatics did to the people living there. You might understand why the women are kept in seclusion,and why the women's dress reflect what Napoleon's soldiers did to them when the French invaded in the l9th century.

We have heard of the Crusades. During the Crusades, the Crusaders captured Jaffa and Jerusalem in 1099, slaughtered many Jewish and Muslim defenders and forbade Jews to live in Jerusalem. They held the city until 1187. In that year, the Muslim ruler Saladin conquered Jerusalem. Under Muslim rule, the Jewish population was treated as badly as when the Crusaders were in power.

Yes, I do blame the Jews for this. And I think they will eventually lose because they are on the wrong side of justice here. If we continue to support their concentration camps and their racial policies, our love of Israel will make us less than American....it will make us, and the Jews nazis of the first order.

You blame the Jews for Muslim attacks on the Jews. You blame the victim. That makes sense. It was not Israel that attacked the Arabs in 1948, 1956, 1967, or 1973. It was the Muslims that attacked Israel. The Israelis have always had to defend themselves from Muslim aggression, at least for the last 1400 years.

Israel does not have any concentration camps. Israel is only trying to exist and the 1.6 billion Muslims want their total destruction and death.

The country of Palestine, that's what country. The people from which country has stood up to our planes and bulldozers and big money for sixty years. The cause of 911 if you will.

There is no country of Palestine, but if you want to believe that Jews stole Israel from the Palestinians, go ahead and ignore history. If you want to ignore the UN Resolution 181 where land was divided between Jews and Arabs, go ahead. If you want to ignore the fact that Jordan and Egypt took Arab land meant for Palestinian Arabs, feel free.

If you think there was a country of Palestine, you should be able to answer these questions.

• When was it founded and by whom?

• What were its borders?

• What was its capital?

• Who was the President?

• What was its form of government?

• What were its major cities?

• What constituted the basis of its economy?

• Who was the Palestinian leader before Yasser Arafat?

• Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation?

• What was the language of the country of Palestine?

• What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine?

• What was the name of its currency and what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, or Japanese yen on any particular date?

• And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur?

History has many turnings, slow turnings, fast sharp turns. I cannot pretend to defend or deny history, I can only judge what is happening within my own time......and I say we are wrong to keep killing Muslims who are fighting for their freedom against the colonial powers who have oppressed them for centuries.

You have been denying history in all of your e-mails. If you wish to lend your support to the Muslims who want to kill Jews as fast as they can, who were dancing in the streets upon hearing of the news of the 9-11 attacks, and who supported Iraq in the invasion of Kuwait, that is fine. But please do not insult our intelligence by making up lies about Concentrations Camps in Israel or American troops invading Iraq to kill as many civilians as possible.

Jews might have been in Israel for the last 4000 years but they have not had a Jewish state. They have been in the USA for 400 years but does that mean they should have a United Jewish States of America.

They did have a country in 1948 with UN Resolutions 181. Palestinian Arabs did also, but Jordan and Egypt took that land for themselves. Just look at the map on the right. That was the land to be a homeland for Jews and Arabs. We know in your mind you believe there is a United Jewish States of America, but it is only in your anti-Semitic conspiracy oriented mind.

The British and other land thieves had no right to partition Palestine. Palestine was for the Palestinians. Jewish Palestinians , Arab Palestinians. . The British and their evil Balfore agreement was set up the Zionists in USA to bring the USA into the war against Germany and force upon Germany the destructive Versailes Treaty...which the British Secretary of the Tresury then, Maynard Keynes, (Jewish )walked out because he knew it meant trouble. Which it did, of course. Gave rise to Hitler and the Holocaust.

The British had control of the land. They could do whatever they wanted with it. They had every right to partition the land. So could the Ottoman Empire that had it before the British. The British partitioned the land giving the Arabs a much larger portion of the land. The fact is that there was land partitioned for Palestinian Arabs knowing the hatred of the Jews by the Muslims. Arabs could have had their country in 1948, but instead they hated the fact the Jews were getting a small piece for their own so they tried to take it away and look what happened. Israel gave full citizenship to all Arabs within the borders. When 800,000 Jews were forced to leave Arab countries, Israel accepted them with open arms and citizenship. What Arab country did that for the Arabs? Except for a few Arabs that Jordan accepted, they were rejected by their Arab brethren.

So the Holocaust was the fault of the Jews. If that is what you want to believe. Why do you just say what you mean...? The Jews are wrong for wanting Israel and the Arabs are right for trying to take Israel from the Jews and making it an Arab country where there are no Jews. That sounds much like the Nazi Germany plan.

How nice if the countries of the Middle East would do what the Jewish bought USA dictated. As to Arab anger I feel it is justified. We have no business there. The maps you have up are showing how small Israel is, should tell you more than it tells me.

That is obvious. You do not want to see the truth. You seem to want to see a Jewish conspiracy where there is none. It is easy to tell that you see any Muslim aggression justified and any attempt to defend against as some unjustified attack. Let us take a look at a statement in your first e-mail.

"I have no love for the Arab world..."

It would seem that your statement in your first e-mail is somewhat disingenuous because it is clear you do.

I have no interest in a Jewish Homeland .

That is so very clear.

I look at what the Jews are doing to the Palestinians and I conclude : If they can do this to the Palestinians, they would do it to me. They have drained this nation for Israel.

Do you have any idea of the history of the Palestinians? They have been responsible for tens of thousands of acts of terrorism in Israel, but to you, these acts are justified. They have sworn death to Israel at every chance they get, but according to you, they are justified. They do not want peace; they wish and pray for the death of the Jews.

And it is about time we said something about it. It is obvious in the interest of the Jewish political factions to keep the Americans unemployed. This makes for a good pool of men for the wars they want to continue against the Arab world.

That is quite the conspiracy theory you have conjured up in your mind. It is the Muslims that are at war with America. You can deny this all you want, but we have documented the facts on this website where we have Muslims screaming "Death to America".

With America in hand, they can kill they all, and leave the USA holding the bag. It is not too far fetched to one day hear the Jewish media telling the Arabs, "Look what the American military has done to you. Join us in wiping out them out." Think that sounds paranoid? How can you explain the influx of muslims into the USA at the behest of Jewish organizations? Better look behind you, doc.

Actually, that is pretty farfetched, and "Yes" we do think that sounds very, very paranoid. But, if what you say is true about Jewish control of America, why is there any influx of Muslims into the USA at all?

OK. Vote for Ron Paul.

History lies. Men die.

It is clear you do not know your history and you seem unable to comprehend reality instead preferring to accept conspiracy theories and anti-Semitic propaganda.

--TOP--

E-mails from Jo Neace Krause
4 of 5

22 February 2010

Jo Neace Krause wrote:

ACTUALLY, MAN, YOU CAN HAVE ALL THE UNJUST TREATYS YOU WANT TO, LIKE THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES, WHICH NO ONE WOULD , COULD , OR SHOULD RESPECT......AND THEN GO TO WAR WHEN THEY FAIL, SCREAMING....OH, LOOK HOW THEY HAVE BROKEN THE TREATY.

It seems you are discussing the 1990 Gulf War Ceasefire. Saddam Hussein violated the agreement he signed. It was a fair and just agreement. We would leave him in power and he would stop all aggression against his Arab neighbors and end his WMD weapons programs. All he had to do was to let the UN Weapons Inspectors determine there were no WMDs as he stated to the world and he would still be in power. All he had to do was to play nice and we would not have a problem. But he did not do that. If we did not enforce the Ceasefire Agreement, any other future Ceasefire Agreements with any other country would be meaningless. Is that what you want? That was one of the problems with the Treaty of Versailles. The other was it did not allow Germany the opportunity to grow economically, which was a mistake and many said so. That mistake was not made with Saddam Hussein and Iraq. The violations of the Ceasefire Agreement were blatant and could not be ignored.

WHY DONT YOU JUST COME ON OUT AND SAY WHAT YOU REALLY BELIEVE??????? ::::::::::WE NEED WHAT THEY HAVE. WE WILL TAKE IT. DONT TRY TO MAKE UP MORAL EXCUSES AS TO WHY WE SHOULD TAKE WHAT WE WANT FROM THE ARABS. THE ARABS DONT MATTER. ONLY JEWS MATTER. SAY IT, YOU'LL FEEL CLEANER.

When you ask that question, it seems you have no idea what we believe. Allow us to enlighten you. We believe in Freedom, Liberty, and Democracy. We believe in a people having a freely elected government. We gave this to the Iraqi people for the first time in the last 10,000 years. Remember the ink stained fingers proving they had voted? In what must be a total surprise to you, we are not shooting innocent Iraqi civilians just to kill them. We are after the terrorists that are killing Iraqi civilians.

We like the statement in your e-mail.

"WE NEED WHAT THEY HAVE. WE WILL TAKE IT."
-- Jo Neace Krause

That is exactly the view the Arabs have for Israel. That is the goal of the Arab countries since 1948. We could not have stated it better ourselves. That is the difference... and a major difference it is. You are more than welcome to try and dispute this fact. America and Israel are not trying to take anything from the Arabs, but the same cannot be said for the Arabs. They would move into Israel this afternoon if they thought they could win and Israel knows this. That is why they are ever vigilant with security of their nation much to the irritation of people that simply do not care about Israel's right to exist.

Why are we in Iraq and Afghanistan? We are there to fight for our country, support our allies, and to remove roving bands of terrorists groups like al-Qaeda from killing and controlling entire populations. Removing these Radical Islamic groups gives everyone the opportunity and freedom to travel anywhere in the world without fear of being killed by terrorists. We are not trying to take anything from the Arabs. We are not there to kill Iraqi civilians as you stated. If you truly believe that we went back to Iraq for that purpose, you are severely misled and have absolutely no respect for the Marines and Soldiers the proudly serve America.

We are not interested in taking the oil fields from the Iraqis. If we were, we would have done so. We certainly have the ability to do so. The fact we are over in Iraq and Afghanistan the way we are is proof we care about the Arabs and Peace in the region. These people do matter as can be proven by the fact we are shedding our blood as we have done in Europe in World War I and World War II. The Jews in Israel have been the target of Muslim aggression and terrorism for the last 60+ years. Israel is not looking to expand their land holdings. The same cannot be said for the Muslims that are trying to kill them with missile attacks and suicide bombings.

Allow us to throw back what you felt was an important observation. Just say what you really believe. Do not try to makeup moral excuses as to why we should take what we want from the Jews. The Jews do not matter. Only Arabs matter. Say it; you will feel cleaner... oh wait... you already did.

We know this flies in the face of everything you believe, but that is what you are saying.

--TOP--

E-mails from Jo Neace Krause
5 of 5

22 February 2010

Jo Neace Krause wrote:

WE SHOULD LEAVE THE SADDAM HUSSEINS ALONE. WE DID THAT SORDID HANGING FOR ONE REASON AND ONE REASON ALONE, HE WAS SUPPORTING HIS BROTHERS IN PALESTINE AGAINST THE JEWISH TAKE OVER OF THEIR LAND. OUR LOVE FOR ISRAEL WILL MAKE US INTO NAZIS.......VIVA LA CODE PINK!!!!!!

Are we supposed to ignore the Saddam Husseins of the world when they invade a foreign country? Is that your idea? That is what Hussein thought the world would do when they invaded Kuwait. The Kuwaitis are certainly we did not ignore his actions. Where do you draw the line when a totalitarian regime invades another country? When do you draw a line in the sand? Or do you just ignore it and hope it does not affect you? These are rhetorical questions. There is no need to attempt to answer them. We already know your answers.

As we stated earlier, Saddam Hussein was in full control of his destiny. He knew what he had to do to stay in power and he decided not to do so. That was a mistake on his part. Allow us to correct you on yet another point. We did not hang Saddam Hussein. The people of Iraq tried him where he was found guilty and then he was sentenced to death. Before you decide to argue that America was in control, the Iraqis were more interested in executing him for the many years of abuse sustained at the hands of Saddam Hussein, his sons, and the rest of the Bath Party with their Nazi doctrine. But, by your own words, this is what you support.

Responding to your theory that we should leave the Saddam Husseins of the world alone is that they do not share that same ideal. They have no problem attacking and invading your country because they want what you have and they do not care what the rules are. Kuwait comes to mind. The use of sarin nerve gas on the Kurds and on Iranians is two other examples.

He was absolutely supporting his Palestinian brothers in Israel. He supported and financed terrorist attacks in Israel and apparently you support that strategy. If he was so concerned with the Palestinians and the Peace process, he would have given them sanctuary in Iraq. He would have received the Nobel Peace Prize for that. Iraq has plenty of land and Iraq was rich enough to assimilate them into the Iraqi population. He would have gotten world respect. He would have gone down in history as one of the greatest Islamic leaders in Middle East history. Just think how that would have brought peace to the region. But he did not choose that destiny for himself or for Iraq.

You just cannot comprehend the fact that there is no Jewish takeover of any Arab lands. You just cannot accept the historical facts. Whenever the Arabs attacked Israel such as in the wars in 1948, 1956, 1967, and 1973, there was captured land, but this is what happens when there is a war. What you do not understand and probably will never understand is that the Arab countries attacked Israel. Perhaps if the Arab countries would not attack Israel, there would be peace in the region. You criticize Israel for being attacked and for defending themselves. Just be honest, you do not believe that Israel has a right to exist.

We do like your view on Jews and that is the following statement. Do not try to makeup moral excuses as to why we should take what we want from the Jews. The Jews do not matter. Only Arabs matter.

As far as your Nazi comment, it is the Muslims that are in love with the Nazi regime and Nazi doctrine.

Did you visit our CodePINK page?

--TOP--

E-mails from glen beaulieu
1 of 4

13 January 2010

glen beaulieu wrote:

Hi,

I just wanted to say that your website is disgusting. If you wish to persecute radicals and terrorists and even dedicate a webpage to it thats fine nut your apparent desire to repeatedly persecute the ENTIRE muslim religion is just plain wrong. Now I'm not totally positive on this but I believe you are a site with chrsitian values or a christian bas no? even if your not, this still applies. I could go on for hours anout the violence in christianity and the visible brutality of the religion but I won't. Why? necause it is needless. The fact is that christianity is a hateful, close minded, and violent religion too, yet it is based off of peaceful principles. Does this than not apply to muslims too? regardless of whether there are radicals within a religion, the entire religion should not be put down as a whole. I have met many respectable, and peaceful muslims in my life. The reason behind twisted radicals ideas can be blamed on the dedication required to follow Islamic law and the misinterpretation of the Holy Qur'an. In fact many of these radicals are iliterate and are simply preaching that which their fathers taught putting this hatred into a constant circle. I just ask you revise your views a bit and stop blaming the religion which is clearly what you are doing, intentionally or not.

So what is it that we got wrong? What facts are you disputing? We get a lot of e-mail complaining about exactly what you have said - that we are disgusting and hateful and whatever other complaints you have about our existence, but you never actually state where we are inaccurate or incorrect with our facts. The reason no one ever does this is because we are accurate and correct. What you have conveniently ignored is the fact that we clearly present the label of "Radical Islam".

Christianity has had their moment in history of evil as can be attested to with the Spanish Inquisition. But the one fact you forget is that Christians are the ones that straightened out their religion. It is Christian missionaries that travel all over the world bringing medical aid, food, and education to people that would otherwise not have such amenities and they do so based on the teachings of their religion.

Whenever you hear of a hijacking or terrorist attacks, Muslims are the first ones that people think of and they are usually right. Suicide bombings, civilians being killed by explosives, and machine gun fire in the middle of a market place are the mark of Muslims showing the world that Islam is a Religion of Peace.

The only people that can bring change to Islam are Muslims themselves and so far, we have not seen any large numbers of Muslims making any real attempt at straightening out Islam by standing up against the radicals that control Islam and thereby making it into a peaceful religion and based on the current state of Islam, this change is not going to happen anytime in the near future.

Islam is the only religion that is at war with the rest of the religions of the world. Jews, Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists all seem to get along pretty well, but it is Islam that has no problem killing anyone that worships any of these religions. Why is that?

Islamic terrorists use Islam as a reason for terrorism. The entire justification for killing innocent people comes from the teachings of Islam. We have clearly listed the passages from the Koran that give Muslims the message to kill indiscriminately. We have shown the less than peaceful attitude of the way that Islam is taught. What did we get wrong?

--TOP--

E-mails from glen beaulieu
2 of 4

16 January 2010

glen beaulieu wrote:

Hi,

I did state the facts I disputed. That you are misrepresnting the Islamic faith. It is because of groups like this that radicals are allowed to thrive and breed hatred among their people. You claim that Islam is not a peaceful faith which it is. So when I do indeed state conflicting details don't dismiss it and still claim you are right. You are right that radical Muslims/ terrorists must be eliminated and/or dealt with but "an eye for an eye only makes the world blind" - Mahatma Gandhi.

You said was this website was disgusting and implied we were trying to persecute an entire religion. We clearly referred to "Radical Islam" as the cause for most of the terrorism throughout the world. You stated that Christianity was a hateful, close minded, and violent religion. You said that the Koran is misinterpreted. We have cited the Koran and many quotes from Islamic leaders that teach what Islam is to their followers. If the Koran is being misinterpreted, it is taking place in the Mosques by the leaders of Islam. But you have not disputed a single fact on the website. Everything we have placed on the website is accurate and true. You have only stated that the actions of Muslims and Islamic terrorists around the world do not accurately present a religion that is based in Love, Compassion, and Peace, but that is not our doing. That responsibility lies squarely on the shoulders of the Islamic terrorists that make up the voice of Islam and Muslims all over the world. We have only cited their efforts and given them full credit for what they have done.

You may not like what they have done, but that does not detract from truth. Do not blame the messenger for the deeds of others because of what is reported and kept for the historical record.

An eye for an eye might make the world blind, but there are none so blind as those that refuse to see. What we have on this website is the truth. You can loathe and detest us all you want, but you cannot dispute the facts on this website.

You should not be labelling the religion as one of violence for it is not. It is misunderstood but the foundations and teachings are based on peace. Terrorists wrongfully claim themselves as Muslims for in committing acts of terror they have violated the very foundations of Islam. Terrorists are Muslims in name alone.

We are only pointing out how Islam is being practiced and taught in Mosques all over the world. We have quoted the Koran and shown how it is less than tolerant of other religions and of non-Muslims. We understand that most Muslims are illiterate and uneducated, but they are being taught in mosques all over the world that infidels must be killed because it pleases Allah.

Perhaps a few quotes are in order.

"What makes Allah happy? Allah is happy when non-Muslims get killed."
-- Abu Hamza al-Masn, former leader of Supporters of Shariah

What is it about this statement that we have misquoted or misunderstood? This is what is being preached as the consummation and execution of Islam.

"Muslims must educate their children to Jihad and to hatred of the Jews, the Christians, and the infidels."
-- Saudi preacher Sheikh Muhammad Saleh Al-Munajjid

What part of this quote tells anyone that Islam is a peaceful and loving religion? This preacher is teaching children to hate at an early age.

"The white man is our mortal enemy, and we cannot accept him. I will fight to see that vicious beast go down into the late of fire prepared for him from the beginning, that he never rise again to give any innocent black man, woman or child the hell that he has delighted in pouring on us for 400 years."
-- Louis Farrakhan, City College audience in New York

"The death of over 120 white people is a very beautiful thing."
-- Malcolm X, Los Angeles on June 3, 1962 upon learning of a plane crash

What are we misinterpreting? How else are we supposed to accept this?

Muslims around the world are taught to hate non-Muslims because in their eyes Islam is the only true religion and anyone that believes differently is not worthy of living. This philosophy is not coming from us, but rather from pulpit from the leaders of Islam. There is nothing wrong with our views as they are accurate based on our observations of Muslims living by the teachings of Islam.

If you want to read more about the dangers of Islam, take a look at the following link we have assembled for the convenience of all in search of the truth about Islam.

Islamic Links on TargetOfOpportunity.com

If you want to consider Islam to be a religion of peace, then question should be why do they fail to teach Love and Peace and Tolerance instead of hate and dominance over all other religions that want nothing to do with Islam? Since 11 September 2001, there have been over 14,000 terrorist attacks on civilian targets by Islamic terrorists worldwide where Islam was the basis for the violence. What other religions have this same record?

--TOP--

E-mails from glen beaulieu
3 of 4

18 January 2010

glen beaulieu wrote:

Hello,

You will laso notice what religion is a majority in almost all developed countires: Chrisitanity. Yhis includes countries such as the U.S., Canada, U.K. (Scotland, Wales, England, Ireland), France, Italy, etc. You look where Islam is prominent: underdeveloped middle eastern countries. Now this is not to say all people there are uneducated but that a great many are.

If you examine history, you will see a time 500 years ago, at the end of the Dark Ages in Europe, everything was pretty much level as far as developing countries were concerned. Islam has spent a lot of effort keeping Islamic countries undeveloped, unproductive, and ignorant and they have been very successful.

When you take an honest look at countries such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the other oil rich Muslim countries, you will see very educated populations that have no intention of trying to educate their Muslim brothers in other countries. Much of what has kept them uneducated is Islam. The only reason that the oil producing countries have the financial resources is because of Western Culture that found oil and developed that part of the world to get the oil.

How can a religion move past discrimination and pure hatred when they know only the hatred their forefathers have taught them

You accurately described a very important part of Islam when you mentioned "discrimination and pure hatred". This is same subject matter you took issue with us stating. Leaving a religion that teaches hatred toward other religions would be a good start. If all Islam offers in these ignorant populations are "discrimination and pure hatred", a serious change would be a good idea. How many people will have to die to satisfy the bloodthirsty requirement to fill the hatred that is taught in Islam?

If the Koran is being misunderstood or misinterpreted, perhaps Muslim clerics that have an educated understanding of Islam should be sent to these countries to teach the Peace, Love, and Tolerance to those Muslims that only know hatred of non-Muslims from the teachings of Islam. This does not happen because this does not exist.

How can they eliminate these teachings when a vast majority have not read the Koran or can even read period. This task is near impossible without any form of educatio0n except for the teachings of their forefathers.

You do not know they have not read the Koran. The fact is most Islamic terrorists are well versed in what the Koran states. The 19 hijackers were well educated Muslims. If you look at the terrorists that come out of Yemen, you will see most are well educated Muslims. They have read the Koran and will give their life to serve Allah regardless how many people they have to kill to prove that Islam is a Religion of Peace.

Now you and me? we have the ability to look down on this and see cruelty, violence, hatred etc. and yes condemn it but you must do more than that. You must not hate but simply educate. Educate these people in the true teachings of their religion. Through this the goal of peace is more than obtainable.

Sincerely, Glen Beaulieu

One of the problems with Islam is that Muslims are taught that the only law that needs to be obeyed is Islamic law such as Sharia Law because these laws come from Allah whereas other laws come from men and are not valid in Muslim life. This is what they use as a justification to commit whatever crime they wish as long as it is justified in the Koran or Sharia Law.

Education is what this website does. We show the facts with video clips, photos, and quotations. We tell the truth about the dangers of Islam. We show their disrespect and hatred for all things non-Muslim. We have condemned what we have seen that is evil at the core. It is not up to us to teach the precepts of Islam as we are not Islamic scholars. It is up to the Muslim leaders that have failed to do what is necessary to make Islam a Religion of Peace. Not only have they failed to make Islam a peaceful religion, but they have gone out of their way to incite violence against all other religions. They speak ill of other religions while condemning those that speak the truth about Islam and often they do more than just condemn anyone that speaks against Islam... They offer death warrants, violence, and terrorism.

--TOP--

E-mails from glen beaulieu
4 of 4

13 January 2010

glen beaulieu wrote:

Hi,

I jus wrote in and I just read that you represent the left wing and marxist ideals? I now need you to STFU because if your talking about marxism and left-wings than you are talking about communism or at the very least socialism (if reffering to marx then it is clearly communism) I myself am a communism and am revolted by your representation of communism and/or socialism in every sense of the word. have you read the communist manifesto? obviously not! and if you have than you misread it. If you havent and your are simply a socialized than you need to read it because marx unintentionally founded socialism through communism. Read up on something before you go around boasting yourselves asa reprentative of it.

We have no idea where you understood that we represent the Left-Wing and any Marxist ideals because we do not. At no point have we ever represented or desired to advance any Marxist, Communist, or Socialist ideals. As you have most certainly misunderstood what our views are on Communism, allow us to clear up this misunderstanding. We despise Communism with every fiber of our existence. We know the truth about Communism and Socialism. Both of these forms of government take away freedom and liberty from people and make them property of the state. Communism enslaves people, takes away their freedom, and lower everyone's Standard of Living to the lowest level.

Have you ever read the Communist Manifesto? Have you studied history and seen how Communism has taken freedom and liberty from people and enslaved them to the state? We understand what Marxism, Communism, and Socialism is and we are aware of the dangers inherent with such systems of government. If you are going to challenge us on this, then you should read the editorials "Forms of Government" and "The Meaning of Marxism". You will note that "The Meaning of Marxism" comes directly from The Socialist Worker. All we did was to add our insightful commentary.

If Communism is so great, why do we not see a mass exodus of people from Capitalist societies running as fast as they can to live in the Communist Utopias such as Cuba, North Korea, or any other communist country? How many Russians wanted to leave the Soviet Union and migrate to the west? Compare that with the number of Americans wanting to leave the United States and move to the Soviet Union.

Do you remember the Berlin Wall? There was a reason that wall was built and that was to contain the residents of Communist controlled East Berlin. You always heard of Germans trying to escape East Berlin to freedom, but you never heard of any Germans trying to escape West Berlin to live in Communist East Berlin. Why did Communist East Germany have guarded borders and a no-man zone between East and West Germany? It was to imprison the citizens of East Germany.

What country do you claim citizenship? Is it a country with a Communist form of government? We can make all sorts of assumptions on this subject, but until we hear it from you, we do not really know and we really do want to know.

Most Communist countries cannot feed themselves. The USSR had a real problem with feeding the population. They always had to resort to buying grain from the United States. The reason is because Communism does not work. There were always lines for food, basic essentials, and everything else.

Compare North Korea to South Korea. They have basically the same resources, but they maintain a much different Standard of Living and a much different level of success. Why is that? Because Capitalism allows for an ever increasing standard by which success is measured. Communism allows for an ever increasing standard of dependency and reliance on the government to provide for the people. Remember the famous quote from Karl Marx.

"FROM each according to his ability, TO each according to his needs."
-- Karl Marx

Because work and effort is not shared equally, there is no incentive to work any harder than you have to. All you have to do is the minimum effort. Hard work is not rewarded. There is no incentive to improve if there is no reward for that effort. The big lie of Communism is that the means of production is controlled by the workers, but that is not true. The means of production is controlled by the government and in the end, the workers have very little say as to the means of production as promised.

By design, Communism and Socialism stifle competition, which is needed for innovation to occur. Capitalism thrives of competition which leads to innovation, better technology, economic growth and ultimately higher living standards.

In the USSR, there was always some 12 year plan that would lead to a perfect Socialist Utopia, but it never materialized because the Communist system of government does not work.

If you want to live your life as a Communist, you are free to do so in a Democratic Capitalist society, but in a Communist society, you are prohibited from keeping what you worked hard to earn. The fruits of your labor are taken from you and given to others that did not earn what you worked so hard to acquire.

--TOP--

03 January 2010

Farzad Soleymani - Marand wrote:

My name is not necessary.

I have read your reviewed your website thoroughly and absolutely cannot believe the amount of hypocrisy and misled information that your website displays, particularly about Islam. I am not writing to argue, as you do not seem to intake or understand anything that the writers to your website say. However it is clear that you do not know anything about Islam, and I request of you to study the Qur'an and comparative religion. I am not looking for a reply. This is a simple request. The same way that you feel about the United States, Muslims feel about Islam. And believe me, I have been around the world man times, and there is no religion more peaceful than Islam. Remember, a Muslim is a Muslim if he follows exactly what the Qur'an says, and a true Muslim hates a man who kills others for political reasons.

We can see the results of Islam and the love it shares with the rest of the non-Muslim world. We see the results of the "peaceful" nature of Islam on the news almost daily. We have cited thousands of examples that grow in number each and every day illustrating the love Muslims show the rest of the world.

Therefore I have one final request, and you will accept this if you truly believe that your 'information' is correct. You debate online with many people from across the world who disagree with you. You may have heard of a man by the name Dr. Zakir Naik. He is one of the most famous scholars of comparative religion living today. If you TRULY believe that all of the 'information' on your website is accurate, particularly the ones on Islam, then I challenge you to debate one of these scholars, preferably Dr. Zakir Naik, as he references every quote that he says, and there are many professionals on the side who double check him. In my heart I KNOW that you will decline this request, giving many reasons such as 'a threat to your life' and so fourth. Dr. Zakir Naik is risking his life everyday. Would you do this for ONE debate? Please think about this.

For some time now, we have had a video clip of Dr. Zakir Naik on the website giving him a pulpit with which to show his view of Islam. We have no problem debating anyone with the information contained within the 150+ pages of this website. If Dr. Zakir Naik wishes to debate the material on this website, he is welcome to write us anytime and challenge the accuracy of this website. As you can see from the years this website has been operating, we have taken on all manner of e-mail from all points of view.

If you believe the information is wrong, please point out where we are incorrect. You obviously have some issue with some part of what we have stated as being less than accurate or true. Please point out where we are incorrect. Remember, it is the actions of the people that worship the religion that determine the peaceful or violent nature of a religion and as we have seen from the bombings and terrorist actions, it is clear what the nature of Islam is. Again, we are not referring to a few random events. We are speaking about over 14,000 terrorist attacks since 11 September 2001. This is not including the tens of thousands or car bombs and terrorist attacks in the 60 years before that.

If you have not already read the Islamic links, here is an opportunity to do so now. The historical information contained within the many pages here might inform you of facts you are not currently aware of now. Our mission is to inform.

10 Obvious Reasons Why Islam is NOT a Religion of Peace

15 Iraqi War Myths

HAMAS Charter of 1988

Islam - A Religion Based on Terrorism

Islamic Terrorism in Israel

Quotes From The Islamic World

The Truth About the Palestinian People

When World War III Started

P.S. The One we call Allah is the exact same One Christians and Jews call God. If you do not agree with this, then it is undoubtfully clear that you have not studied Islam one bit.

Yours sincerely,
'Faz'

We agree with that statement. The problem is that millions of Islamo-Fascists that claim to practice Islam as the Koran teaches do not seem to believe that statement to the point of living in peace with other people that practice other religions. Based on their quotes to their followers, the leaders of Islam do not believe that statement either. If they did, there would be none of the killing or terrorism or calls for the beheading of disbelievers as we see so widespread in the teachings of Islam. If Islam was indeed a religion of peace, Muslims would not be at war with every other religion on the planet as opposed to Jews, Christians, Hindus, and people of other religions living side by side in peace. It only seems to be Islam that has the majority of conflicts with other religions, more than all the other religions combined, that only want to live a peaceful existence with others. All you have to do is to look at the photos on the website to see the hate that is so inherent with Islam.

--TOP--

Back to the Top

Dish Network Satellite TV

Total Website Count

Orbitz Promotion Codes

©Copyright 2005 - 2016 TargetOfOpportunity.com