Ad looks pretty good to me

dhimmitude sucks.

I have an idea: Why don't they use pics of the Terrorist attacking the Church of the Nativity or synagogues instead?

Stop appeasing murders

Move along, folks. Nothing to see here.

/after viewing ad

Dhimmi City!

Doesn't Boeing know that is what MOAB's are for?

OK enough with the bullshit
CARPET BOMBING BEGINS IN 2 MINUTES

Nice ad; that's how I'd like my tax money spent.

I want Bell and Boeing to start attacking Wahhabist mosques here in the US.

Their stock would go up 60% overnight.

Really, CAIR has no sense of humor.

/sarc off

Small nuke would be much better.

Awad added that American Muslim groups are always ready to consult with corporations and media outlets on issues related to religious diversity and culturally-sensitive advertising.

But CAIR is not somehow capable of making a statement denouncing muslim terrorism.

It's all quite simple:

Stop hiding in Mosques, and we'll stop attacking you in them.

CAIR + ACLU = ENEMIES OF THE US

So they cannot show factual pictures? However, more Abu Graib pictures need to be shown.

WTF?

What's the problem? Mosques are normally full of weapons and terrorists, not to mention that the imams preach terror to a very supportive congregation inside. Didn't see CAIR lashing out at actual destruction of synagogues in Gaza by their brethren...

Hey Guess what...

sometimes the truth hurts! That's exactly what is and what is going to continue to happen in Iraq. Granted we are not gunning solely for mosques...but when necessary!

Cheers
J

Wouldn't it be great if the ADL had the power that CAIR does? Of course, the ADL doesn't have people behind it with scimitars, either.

I think that Bell and Boeing didn't want to lose aircraft sales to the Saudi military.

One thing that the Saudis have learned well and understand thoroughly is that money talks.

Why do you think the Saudi's just bought a significant stake in Fox? I'd love to know just how much Saudi money is sloshing around our State Department in one form or other.

It's convenient to think of our enemy in terms of the terrorist detonating his explosive wrap or the Jihdadi shouldering the RPG. When this story is finally written, we will learn that the worst of them were the ones passing out greenbacks.

And terrorists in the Pali territories weren't using ambulances and mosques in violation of the Geneva Convention

From the CAIR statement on the ad:

CAIR, America's largest Muslim civil liberties group, has 31 offices and chapters nationwide and in Canada. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

Notice how it doesn't say anything about promoting peace between peoples.

If I recall, terrorists were using these as sanctuary from US forces trying to hunt them down.

This ad is truthful in that the enemy uses mosques to hide from US troops.

LLL says: "We should show the pictures of US troops occupying New Orleans."

Its only a matter of time. In a decade or two, we'll be going from mosque to mosque since the [bigoted word]s have ably demonstrated they have no desire to purge the radicals from their midst.

Thanks CAIR for letting me see (and d/l) the ad! Now that's the stuff I want to see!

Ospry's rock! (CAIR sux, Nodrog swallows...)

“The CV-22 advertisement that appeared in the National Journal is clearly offensive, and did not proceed through the normal channels within Boeing before production.

That should teach 'em to never again hire an elcubo ad agency.

21 prester john

Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

I also notice that it's all about Muslims and ramming their death cult down our throats.

enhance the understanding - infiltrate prisons, schools

protect civil liberties - allow Gitmo prisoners the same rights as American citizens

empower American Muslims - force others into dhimmitude

build coalitions that promote justice and understanding - file lawsuits

Heck,Im glad the ad is offensive. I'd rather be on offense than defense.

Are you kidding me? Boeing actually wrote, "clearly offensive" and "dismayed with its contents?"

Let me get this straight...Boeing is ashamed of the actions of US troops in combat because they are fast-roping into an intersection near a mosque. It's not even clear (and, in fact, it is improbable) that the objective of the assault is the mosque.

Boeing is offended. CAIR is offended. When the f*** do I get to be offended?!

What's wrong with the picture in the ad? It's not a reconstruction (or at least doesn't seem to be) -- it looks like an actual photo from combat operations. So, the mosque attack actually happened.

Why would CAIR not want people to see that? If they think it's outrageous, wouldn't they instead let it go forward and be published?

My theory is that they don't want people to see the ad because implied, behind the scenes, is that the mosque merited attacking -- i.e. Muslims were using it to attack from. (Which of course has happened countless times in Iraq). I think CAIR doesn't want us to be reminded of that.

The alternate theory, which is the exact opposite of my first theory, is that the ad didn't get wide enough circulation, so CAIR purposely publicized it and included the pfd so MORE people would see it framed within CAIR's narrative and be outraged.

Either way works for me.

OT but related:
As long as we're on the subject of caving into terrorists and their supporters...

Bush Delays Action Against Saudi Arabia By BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration has postponed punishing Saudi Arabia for restricting religious freedom, giving the U.S. ally six more months to show it has made progress in its treatment of religious minorities.

One year ago, the State Department declared that religious freedom was absent in the Arab kingdom. Under U.S. law, the Bush administration could have imposed sanctions such as trade restrictions — as it has done with some other countries.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice notified Congress last week that she had authorized a 180-day waiver of action against Saudi Arabia "in order to allow additional time for the continuation of discussions leading to progress on important religious freedom issues."

Rice raised the issue last week in a meeting in Washington with the Saudi foreign minister, Prince Saud al-Faisal, and stressed the importance of continuing to work on this issue, State Department spokesman Kurtis Cooper said.

Last week, the department notified Congress that Rice had banned commercial export of certain defense articles to Eritrea. The African country was cited a year ago along with Saudi Arabia and Vietnam as having records of serious concern on religious freedom.

It was the first time sanctions were applied to any country under U.S. religious freedom law.

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom, a federal agency established by Congress in 1998 to promote religious freedom around the world, disclosed Rice's action on Friday.

More here:
[Link: news.yahoo.com...]

zombie! you are so linked ...
you are all over me like a cheap suit

Whos gonna wanna buy the CV22 if everyone thinks Boeing and Bell are a bunch of pussies.

Keep the ad Boeing, its exceptionally appropriate.

running out to make a pick-up
but DONT GO!
i intend to get good and drunk!

Something tells me it's all happening in the mosques.
I do believe it, I do believe it's true.

/Simon & Garfunkel

#29 John Galt
"Let me get this straight...Boeing is ashamed of the actions of US troops in combat because they are fast-roping into an intersection near a mosque."

Just so everyone's on the same page factually, that's not an actual picture. The V-22 (which I guess they're calling CV-22 now) is not yet operational.

The Islamics play fucking loud:

How does it feel ...
To be on your own...
Just like a Boeing Stone

#30 zombie -

Well, Allah only allows good things to happen in mosques. Just ask Aisha.

#34 AtlasShrugged

DONT GO! i intend to get good and drunk!

So...can I be all over you like a cheap suit?

Maybe if the dirty scumbags didnt hide weapons and ammo in mosques we wouldnt have to raid them. But logic makes a Muslim/LLL head explode, so dont bother.

A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy group

Why is it that left sided pressure groups are always called "civil rights" organizations?

Is the Catholic League (or whatever it's name is) referred to in that way?

My solution?
Stop building mosques, then we have a finite number to destroy, calculating the ammunition and helicopter fuel becomes so much easier then.
Stop allowing them to be built here,period!

#32 AtlasShrugged

zombie! you are so linked ...
you are all over me like a cheap suit

I think a lot of people on this site wish they could be that suit.

(Now don't get any ideas, folks -- she's talking about Net traffic being funneled to her blog from a link I gave her in my Galloway report, which is being trackbacked all over.

At least I hope that's what she means...)

Can't show a badly photoshopped picture of a mosque being fictionally attacked - but actually burning synagogues in Gaza, now that's just fine!

F*ck the ROPOOT.

#37 Manny

Thanks. I knew that, but let my emotions shut off the rest of my brain before I posted...must start using the Preview function.

/slinking away, feeling kinda stupid

I am sooo sick of caving in to these *&^%$.

#46,F*#K The ROPOOT?

Religion of peace over our tank?
Religion of peace out over there?
Religion of peace on oblong trees?

And I thought I was touchy...but the CAIR bunch has me beat by a longshot...

hiya lizards finished supper, on my 2nd labbatt
IMHO i think this should be an art work at the WTC. real life bonze would look cool!

Religion
Of
Pedophiliac
Overbearing
Obtuse
Terrorists

sounds right to me...

#49 mbruce:

Religion Of Peace On Our Terms.

well f*ck a duck! stop shooting, storing weapons and harboring islamofascists in mosques. simple solution, no?

F allah
F islam
F the koran
F all mosque
F all muslims
F mohammed or how ever you spell its stupid name

Am I being clear enough

Every thing I need to know about islam I learned on nine eleven

CAIR needs to STFU...

Until they come clean and denounce the murdering goatf*ckers that continue to walk into markets and schools full of women and children with jackets made out of dynamite and Semtex and setting them off.

Until they denounce the acts of every branch of Al Qaeda for things like the beheadings of people who only want to get them to the 20th century in terms of freedom and democracy.

Until they ostracize and marginalize the evil Wahabbist elements that have hijacked their religion.

Until they do this, and more, and knock off the PC, "we are so oppressed" bullshit and get with the program, they need to to STFU and work on their own affairs and worry alot less about the affairs of others...

#29 John Galt
Let me get this straight...Boeing is ashamed of the actions of US troops in combat because they are fast-roping into an intersection near a mosque. It's not even clear (and, in fact, it is improbable) that the objective of the assault is the mosque.

Boeing is offended. CAIR is offended. When the f*** do I get to be offended?!

I'm so damn tired of the appeasers. Why do so many companies have no guts what-so-ever and simply bend over for these asshole bastards? When is a pro-American organization going to start suing CAIR and mosques for the inflamatory things they say?

When are we going to get through even one week without someone else bending over for CAIR?

Boeing hasn't been and isn't ARABIST enough for these people? Ohmagawd! Such a Dhimini Company all these years..

Am I the only one who thinks the ad was a misjudgement, and should have been withdrawn? Sure, CAIR are a bunch of extremist-supporting, hypersensitive assholes posing as moderates; and yes, we have had the need to attack mosques that have been used as ammo dumps and operations bases by terrorists. That doesn't make this ad appropriate. This isn't like that idiot who complained about the Burger King ice cream logo, I think they had a legitimate complaint here (Hey, it had to happen eventually, didn't it?).

#29 John Galt

Boeing is offended. CAIR is offended. When the f*** do I get to be offended?!

Forget about being offended and start shrugging.

I thought most people would be so stunned to see an Osprey finally flying that they wouldn't notice much else in the ad.

That said, screw Boeing and Bell. Go make nerf blasters you pussies. Should have simply issued a statement saying "To our knowledge, CAIR has done nothing to address the problem of Muslims committing war crimes by operating out of mosques. We have. Refer to ad photo if in doubt. There's no more dangerous place for the enemies of America to be than in the shadow of one of our Ospreys operated by the finest fighters the world has ever known. Purchase inquiries accepted at 202-555-1234."

#58 Gringo

When are we going to get through even one week without someone else bending over for CAIR?

When there's no one left to bend.

#31 MJ--Ahh Hmmm. What a shock!

44 zombie

At least I hope that's what she means...)

hey i don't deserve that!

do i?

Looks kind of prophetic to me. Where's the Terminator?

I think they had a legitimate complaint here

About what: Showing that mosque and jihadis are connected?

I'm not one for impulse purchases.

That said, if I had a spare $50M lying about, I'd buy a CV-22 solely on the basis of this ad. Be a dandy hunt camp fly-in machine. Among other uses...

If you want to go into the ME Issues deeper, DO look at history of US Businesses and the "Arab" World. Will YOU get your eyes opened. There are "Arabist" US Businesses as well as Arabist Govnt People . Lots of hiring from State/CIA/ Congress back and forth from those Businesses..Old ESTABLISHED businesses..Old ELITE Businesses..Its just Business as Usual.

Great picture!

Come on, people. No matter what CAIR visualizes (who cares) it IS a stupid ad. "It descends from the heavens - ironically it unleashes hell"
"Consider it a gift from above."

What crap - it's a movie poster photoshop of a real technological advancement.

#24 crusader

In a decade or two? Hell, it will be much, much sooner than that. Enough Americans are close to the breaking point with these barbarians, and the feds are ratcheting up the arrests and interdictions of the radical slammies as we speak. CAIR and its allies are close to overplaying their hand, and that hand will be slapped big time in the near future. Too many eyes are on them and their brethren. They better not misbehave.

Those guys were not attacking a mosque.

They were liberating it from terrorists!

Cair has a problem with this because...?

finsihing glass numero 1
will hit vino numero does when I make the second drop off to sleep over numero dos...

in the meantime download Dalida's Besame Mucho
in my honor...

my favorite cover of this classic

SALUD, DINERO Y AMOR

OT: Courtesy of James Taranto, here's an absolutely mind-melting spewing of anti-American vitriol and blood-libel. (The author is a professor of journalism; is anyone surprised by that fact?)

pimf!

PIMF OF MY ENEMY IS MY FRIEND

76 AtlasShrugged

I'm going to warm up some fabulous pasta I made the other night. Fresh out of vino, but I do have a decent bourbon.

"Besame Mucho"?

Neah. Have my Josh Groban CD's.

# 65- Vickie

As long as the US will not confront the Al-Saud, expect nothing from the WoT.

What's particularly awful in that story is this:

"Last week, President Bush waived financial sanctions on Saudi Arabia for failing to make significant efforts to stop slave trade in prostitutes, child sex workers and forced laborers."

ot joe&val are back. g-d save us

#68 savage_nation: Showing our troops in action against terrorists in the middle east - a great idea for an ad. Showing them apparently attacking a mosque under the slogan "It descends from the heavens. Ironically, it unleashes hell"? that's going out of your way to be offensive, and removes the defence that the mosque 'was just part of the background'.

#69 jrdroll: I acknowledged that. But this is a staged publicity photo, not a news story. I am as sick as everyone here at the craven way the media goes out of its way to 'avoid causing offence' by suggesting that some Muslims might be terrorists. That doesn't mean that we should have no sensitivity to the feelings of Muslims at all, just that we should treat them as we treat all other religions.

Two things:

I challenge you to take a picture in urban Iraq which doesn't show a mosque.

If these are the p*&&ies who built the V-22, maybe we don't actually want any.

I do not see anything wrong with the ad.
If they don't like it, don't look at it.
Hehehehehe

On the other hand this is good:goodbye

We cannot possible win the war against islamic terror by being PC. They know it, and that is why they trot out all the PC guidelines at the drop of a hat. They know that PC is tying both hands behind our back, and they are going to stoke that PC flame as much as they can. Islam is the most intolerant movement in history (good grief, there's even a "How to" book written by an islamic leader detailing the correct way to beat one's wife!), and they know our suicidal PC allows them to be brazen about it without any fear of repercussions. There will come a time, though, when PC ends up on the ash heap of history. And when that time comes, its adherents will be in for a rude awakening.

Why doesn't the ACLU file suit to force Boeing and Bell to publish the ad, AND all the early versions of it that they have saved to disc, or sitting in their flat files! COME ON, we gotta see them ALL! I mean, they will offend the enemy, like the Abu Ga-Ga photos, so PUBLISH THEM!

On the cover of Newsweek ! ! !

/some weird mode off

CAIR has it's feelings hurt again? I'm shocked, I tell you.

#84 haakondahl: It's the slogan, combined with the mosque that's the problem, not the mosque its self. CAIR might disagree with that point, but just because they're a bunch of fuckwits, it doesn't make the ad appropriate.

#84 haakondahl -

If these are the p*&&ies who built the V-22, maybe we don't actually want any.

If you take a look at the bottom left, "Team Osprey" is made up of nearly every major defense contractor.

Great, I've got new wallpaper!

The only thing the Ad should show is rubble!

#83 jic

So, the ad shows soldiers inserting on a mosque. Big deal, what's the problem with that?

They're probably there because some terrorists are storing weapons in it or something. When that happens, it ceases to be a mosque, and becomes an ammo dump, and thus, open target for attack.

My question about the ad is - why does it even exist? Exactly who is Bell/Boeing advertising the CV-22 to? I mean, only governments, or more narrowly only OUR government and a few select allies, will be buying it if and when it ever becomes operational. Who are they advertising to?

Bell/Boeing should redo the ad to show the soldiers inserting on CAIR headquarters.

I would PAY to buy that poster.

#45 rayra

If there is an American Beslan, there will be no holding us back. If they kill our kids it will be a whole different ball game. All I can say is if that day ever comes, I would not want to be a Moslem in America. But surely they can't all be that stupid. But, then again, so many of them say they love death. Well, to them, I say: Kill our kids, and you'll get death, and then some.

My question about the ad is - why does it even exist?

These kinds of ads have been in magazines that directly target a military/government audience (such as Avaition Week & Government Executive) for years. They have to advertise to keep the magazines going.

#94 Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus

"They're probably there because some terrorists are storing weapons in it or something. When that happens, it ceases to be a mosque, and becomes an ammo dump, and thus, open target for attack."

I agree, but this isn't a news photo, and combined with the slogan, it's unnecessarily offensive. This isn't about going out of the way to avoid hurting Muslim feelings. Frankly, the ad is just plain stupid.

I don't care so much. I'm satisified that the message is being put out that underneath the surface of civility we currently maintain, we're ready to go.

Where can I get a poster size color picture of that ad?

They're replacing it with a picture of a V-22 attacking a New Orleans Levee.

#83 jic

That doesn't mean that we should have no sensitivity to the feelings of Muslims at all, just that we should treat them as we treat all other religions.

Can anyone name( other than CAIR) exactly what the building is in the photo? Might it be a church?

#97 LC LaWedgie

Ah, thanks for the info!

#98 jic

I don't view the photo as being specifically about attacking a mosque, nor do I view the caption as intimating that. The photo is grainy, chances are the WASP copyists who put it together hadn't the foggiest idea what the building even was. And the caption, well, that's just the typical gung-ho stuff you'd throw into any ad like this to sell such a product, eh?

#98 jic

I agree, but this isn't a news photo, and combined with the slogan, it's unnecessarily offensive. This isn't about going out of the way to avoid hurting Muslim feelings. Frankly, the ad is just plain stupid.

No, it's not a news photo - and there isn't anything about it that is offensive. We are at war, in case you had forgotten. If we are too PC to advertise war machines that are to be used in the war then we have already lost.

Check out this non-pc poster.

Who cares about CAIR?

CAIR could convince 99% of the US population that muslims were the most peaceful people on the face of the earth and...

then some jihadi blows up a busload of babies and...

it's on Hadji

Thanks, CAIR. Great ad. I would not have seen it - and thousands of others would not have enjoyed the great content of the ad - had you not first complained, then posted it in pdf format.

I downloaded it.

Thanks again.

#103 jdroll

No, it really is a mosque. The crescent moon on the pole on top, and the Arabic shahada on the left-hand side give it away.

#103 jrdroll: Excellent thought

Might it be a church?

The military is coming to rescue the the members of the church from the terrorists.

#102 savage_nation: I'm not a Muslim sympathiser. I think my comments make that quite clear.

#103 jrdroll: If that's a church, or a synagogue, or a dry cleaner, then it's going out of its way to look like a mosque.

If there is an American Beslan, there will be no holding us back. If they kill our kids it will be a whole different ball game. All I can say is if that day ever comes, I would not want to be a Moslem in America. But surely they can't all be that stupid. But, then again, so many of them say they love death. Well, to them, I say: Kill our kids, and you'll get death, and then some.

Lots of folks thought 9/11 would have evoked that response.

Lots of folks were wrong.

Has CAIR or any other such group apologized for the Palistinian raid on the Church of the Birth of Christ?

No need to answer, I know the answer is no they haven't.

Yet another bend over, drop trou, grab ankles with askance for forgiveness to our new masters. They (islamofacists) are playing us like a Stradivarius. Time to stop the madness.

/*spit*

#103 jrdroll 9/30/2005 04:10PM PDT
#83 jic
109 Steve

IMHO, it is a mosque. If it's a church, then it's a church with a minaret.

#112

Good point. Here's a few other places CAIR might apologize for destroying:

September 1996: Palestinian rioters destroy a synagogue at Joseph's Tomb in Nablus.
October 2000: Joseph's Tomb burnt down after the Israeli garrison guarding it was temporarily withdrawn during Palestinian attacks. It has since been rebuilt by the Palestinian Authority – as a mosque honoring a Muslim figure.
October 2000: The ancient synagogue in Jericho was deliberately torched and completely destroyed, while another historic synagogue in the city, with an ancient mosaic floor, is damaged and lies derelict.
Since 1996, Rachel's Tomb near Bethlehem has been attacked numerous times by snipers, bombs and Molotov cocktails, forcing the Israel Defense Forces to build elaborate defenses and deploy extensive personnel around it.

[Link: www.zoa.org...]

OT: I see Atlas Shrugged is a fan of Ayn Rand? What is the value behind her thought. I saw a bio of her and read part of of the book. I must have missed the gist of Ayn Rand. She seemed unhappy to me.

Looking at that Osprey and the text next to it I've got just one question to the Arab League: "Hey guys, how does it feel when someone else opens the gates of hell?"
*maniac laughter*
/off for the next level of "Close Combat: First to Fight" ;)

#111 Crusader

Lots of folks thought 9/11 would have evoked that response. Lots of folks were wrong.

Yep. We have not yet begun to plumb the depths of our apathy and tolerance of suffering.

#104 Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus: If the slogan is not referring to the Mosque, then it makes little sense.

#105 Sarah D: We are fighting a war against terrorism, speciffically against Islamic terrorism and it's supporters. We are not fighting a war against Islam. In fact, it's Muslims who have the most to gain from this war, as the majority of the people of Iraq and Afghanistan seem to understand.

PC Targets?

An Igloo.

John Roberts' House.

A log cabin.

The Vatican.

The Crawford Ranch.

An SUV.

Rush Limbaugh.

#108 titus

No, it really is a mosque. The crescent moon on the pole on top

Is that what that thing on the pole is? So a crescent is a symbol of Islam. Wonder if Stage II jury member for the Flight 93 Memorial and Andy Warhol Museum Director Thomas Sokolowski knew that?
[Link: littlegreenfootballs.com...]

well, its not like the ROP has ever used mosques to stockpile weapons, no, that would be not peaceful like, yeah, thats the ticket

We are not fighting a war against Islam.

The longer I watch CAIR and the governments of the Islamic world, the more I doubt that premise.

#114 Cattt: Yes it most likely is a mosque but I do not read the language.

What constitute a minerat?

#108 I cannot make out if that is a cresent on top of the pole or something else.

#119 jic

Were we fighting a war against the citizens of Hiroshima or Nagasaki?

We are fighting a war against terrorists who hide munitions IN MOSQUES. If that upsets CAIR then they need to have a talk to the jihadis about it, not Boeing for pointing out the truth.

You seem to want to appease CAIR. Why is that?

sure the minaret isnt a kassam rocket sticking out?

#119 jic

We are not fighting a war against Islam

Having seen and read what's posted on MEMRI it is obvious Islam is at war with the world.

#116 hazzyday

OT: I see Atlas Shrugged is a fan of Ayn Rand? What is the value behind her thought. I saw a bio of her and read part of of the book. I must have missed the gist of Ayn Rand. She seemed unhappy to me.

Hazzy, I happen to be an expert on Ayn Rand and her philosophy, Objectivism. If you, or anyone else, have lengthy questions, feel free to e-mail me at (kcolville @ kc.rr.com) and I'll be more than happy to respond.

But to answer your question in short, she summed up her philosophy this way: "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute."

The value behind her philosophy is fundamentally that she upholds that the world around us exists independent of anyone's mind; that it is not a figment of our imagination; that man's mind is capable of grasping that world; and that his mind is his only means of grasping that world.

There's a lot more, but that's the nickel tour.

I think she was, at times, quite unhappy, because she saw how much potential man had as a rational, heroic being, and how short he often fell from that ideal. Still, she was most often very happy, in love with the greatness of man and his achievements and of life on this earth.

I figure if a person thinks the add is offensive, then a person can refrain from buying him/herself an Osprey. Freedom of speech and commerce. Right?

#122 savage_nation and #126 Sarah D.: Read my comments again, and I think it's fairly clear what I think of CAIR. Just to save you the time, I will summarise-

CAIR are a bunch of hypersensitive terrorist supporting scumfucks who bully anyone who the see as 'opposing Islam', which is basically anyone who has said anything that can be interpreted in any way as even the mildest criticism of Islam. It makes me sick the way that the media and politicians suck up to them. That doesn't mean that they can't, on occasion, make a valid complaint, and my thinking that this specific complaint is valid doesn't mean I support them.

It's like if we did a propaganda campaign in WII which inulted some of our alies (yes, we do have muslim alies. And I don't mean the Saudis, I mean ones that actualy help us) for no good reason.

#114 cattt

IMHO, it is a mosque. If it's a church, then it's a church with a minaret.

Looking at the picture I'm wondering how the muezzin is able to get to the top 5 times a day to call the faithful to pray?

#128 jdroll: Part of it, yes. And it's going to get slammed down hard, if those who would appease it don't get in the way.

Boeings newest aircraft, produced in conjunction with Bell Aerospace, was rolled out of the hanger today to be met with total silence. The newest attempt at stealth design with collaboration from CAIR resembled a giant Islamic shitbird, apologetically sitting in a palm tree. The Saudi Government cancelled it's advance sight unseen order for 200 planes and butchered the Boeing execs on the spot.

jrdroll, I apologise for misspelling your name.

Loved it --- my new wallpaper.

MJ..Like we ALL didn't know the history of this particular group and the Saudis? Its incredible.

That Country attacked the USA INSIDE our own Country and they are "holding hands" down there. I don't care WHO doesn't like that I'm saying this.

I'm stumped. People would put their own children's future up for grabs to support this ONE set of people.

You would think it would give ya pause to learn that after Msss. Bander got caught giving money to Terrorists (forget the phony excuses please) that Msss. Bush Sr calls HER up and commiserates with HER..And so did Msss. Powell. You would THINK that there would be pause to question what the FUCK ..James FUCK THE JEWS Backer is doing back in the WH..tho under the radar. You would wonder why NORQUIST is a frequent ON the Books and OFF the Books visitor to the WH..and You would wonder why no one noticed that Arabist Bush SR.."fixed" his son's Inaugural Address to mollify Europe and the Arab World. What the HELL is going on?

Most Repbs DIDN'T Vote for Bushes current ME Policy..least I thought they didn't.

Why are people supporting people that say Islam is a ROP? Why are people supporting people that are setting up to establish a Palistinian State? Why are people supporting people that in real life play FOOTSIE with a Country that ATTACKED THE US? Thats the bottom line here.

#136 jic

typoes hear good forbidd

Demanding apologies is 90% of CAIR's mission.

Steve:

There's a crescent on the top, a dumpy little minaret on the left, and the sign on the side says Mohammed Mosque. Other than that---

:)

Maybe it's a planetarium.

Gee, now why would they look for terrorists in a mosque?

I'm sensing a lot of anger on this thread...

#140 savage_nation: What does the number of my comments have to do with anything? I think it's the content that matters, and that content has repeatedly condemned terrorists, condemned Muslim extremists, condemned CAIR, condemned those who make excuses for all of the above, and supported the war against terrorism. It also contained criticism of what I think is a badly thought out ad campaign, and therefore I must be an islamist plant? I don't even know any muslims socially, but of course that's a lie too, isn't it? Unbelievable.

I heard on the "Mychal Massie Show" on RightTalk.com that Anti-CAIR and CAIR will be slugging it out in court in June 2006.

Have you got your tickets?

#121 jrdroll

Is that what that thing on the pole is? So a crescent is a symbol of Islam.

Definitely.

#142 cattt

a dumpy little minaret on the left

From the photo is it a minaret or an building in the distance?

"an islamist plant?"

A palm tree? Those lousy CAIR palm trees.

To answer the question:"How do we know it's a Mosque?"

A: The AAA guns on the roof, the AK-47 barrels sticking out of the windows, and the CAIRS lawyers slinking out the back after picking up thier Saudi checks.

145 Peacekeeper

I'm sensing a lot of anger on this thread...

Anger (in this instance) may be constructive. At least there is discussion here. The majority of Americana can't be bothered with the details. They're led to believe within their 5 minute daily exposure to world events and news that Islam is 'benign', and that America is the agressor and the repressor. Another domestic attack will (most unfortunately) separate the wheat from the chaff.

We should hammer CAIR with complaints and force them to apologize for every despicable, cruel, murderous act perpetrated by arabs and moslems all over the world.

Maybe that will shut them up.

You have to admit we have established ourselves as the most polite and sensitive warriors in history.

It's as if it were 1942 and The American Nazi Party was demanding FDR apologize to all the good and decent Nazis who make up the majority of Nazism.

#152 savage_nation: That's the dumbest thing I've ever read.

My question, is this ad a really photo of actual
combat in iraq? If so rerelease the ad with, American forces free a mosque that was taken over by... and print the date and place.

#158 savage_nation: We are on the same side, you cretin. But since you have repeatedly accused me of supporting CAIR, of supporting terrorism, and of betraying America, I have nothing more to say to you.

#121 jdroll

Yeah, let me think...where was it I saw a crescent recently...?

#133 jdroll

The wonders of modern sound equipment, is my guess.

#119 jic

Why does the slogan not make any sense if the mosque isn't meant? The Osprey comes down from the heavens, i.e. flies (which is the part *I* find hardest to believe about all this), and then makes life hell for those it lands crashes on. I think it's a stretch to say this has to be referring to the mosque. I doubt the copy artist even knew what the building was, since most Westerners wouldn't.

#160 Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus: To me, all that pseudo-religious language only works if it refers to the Mosque. Otherwise, it just seems out-of-place. And I think most westerners would recognise that building as a mosque.

I think we will just have to disagree on this one.

#83 jic

Showing them apparently attacking a mosque under the slogan "It descends from the heavens. Ironically, it unleashes hell"? that's going out of your way to be offensive, and removes the defence that the mosque 'was just part of the background'.

You fail to name who it's offensive to, but I'll assume you mean it's Muslims. Well, you should be applauding the fact that it's offensive to Muslims. We're just attacking any old mosque, because it's a mosque. We're attacking a base of enemy operations where terrorists and combatants cowardly gather to kill us. What's the problem? The ad says, "We will stop at nothing to kill the enemy, and our machine does a great job of saving our boys' lives." You can't be opposed to that, huh?

I hate to say this but I am going to have to agree with CAIR on this ad. This is very offensive. Put yourself in CAIR shoes and ask how you would feel if your main technology of transportation is donkeys.

#162 Lazarus

We're just attacking any old mosque, because it's a mosque.

Sorry, that should read "We're not just attacking any old mosque, because it's a mosque."

PIMBane

#133 jrdroll

Looking at the picture I'm wondering how the muezzin is able to get to the top 5 times a day to call the faithful to pray?

I don't know if it's this way in every mosque, I was in a mosque when the call to prayer was being sung and he just stood on the ground floor and his voice carried up, with no amplificaion. (I was a tourist in Egypt.)

#163 Acesover8ts

Of course it's offensive to CAIR. The only question that matters is, "Why should a rational man care?"

#133 jrdroll

Looking at the picture I'm wondering how the muezzin is able to get to the top 5 times a day to call the faithful to pray?

or do you mean:

Looking at the picture I'm wondering how the SNIPER> is able to get to the top 5 times a day to SHOOT AT CHILDREN?

#83 Lazarus: I have made it clear that attacking a mosque that's being used as a ammo dump or a base of operations by terrorists is fine. Mocking-up a context-free ad picture, and combining it with that slogan, is just pointless Muslim-baiting. We shouldn't be afraid to offend Muslims, in fact, our fear of offending them has given them much too much power in our societies. But setting out to offend them for no good reason is just silly, childish behavior, that serves no purpose other than to show that we are not afraid of offending Muslims.

When we cause offence, it should be when we call CAIR the thugs and liars they are, when we condemn those who make excuses for islamists, when we demand that mosques expel the preachers of hate, when we stop giving in to those who think that an ice cream lid that looks a little like the Arabic for Allah (if you add some bits, take away others, turn it on it's side, and squint a little) is a deliberate assault on Islam. How would this campaign be less effective if it was less offensive? Cause offence in the service of a goal, not just for the hell of it.

Whoops, I meant "#162 Lazarus". #83 was my comment.

OK.

Point here is that CAIR should not be considered for ANYTHING, by ANY American.

The should be ostracized and closed down, and all CAIR Officials be shunned and banned from political activity in America.

They are not entitled to have opinions on anything in America because CAIR is the enemy.

They have declared they are the enemy of America, often. They are the neo-KKK of our Time. The new Nazi's.

#169 jic

I have made it clear that attacking a mosque that's being used as a ammo dump or a base of operations by terrorists is fine. Mocking-up a context-free ad picture, and combining it with that slogan, is just pointless Muslim-baiting. We shouldn't be afraid to offend Muslims, in fact, our fear of offending them has given them much too much power in our societies. But setting out to offend them for no good reason is just silly, childish behavior, that serves no purpose other than to show that we are not afraid of offending Muslims.

But the ad isn't context-free. It's clear the mosque is in a war zone. The ad says, if you are at war with us, hiding in a mosque will offer you no refuge.

jic, don't drop the context. We're not going around blasting mosques in Dearborn or Vancouver or Nairobi or London. Hell, we're not even blasting them in Iraq, when they're being used to cut our guys down.

The target of this ad is the enemy, not Muslims as such. You say offending them for no good reason is just silly, but it's not for no good reason. It's so that they know we won't hold back.

Perspective - are they even rapelling down the mosque? It appears they aren't. That's a minor point though. Should it be picture of the Reichstag? Iwo Jima?

#173 Lazarus: We have made that clear in the real world by not holding back. That ad contributes nothing.

#160 Titus

The wonders of modern sound equipment, is my guess.

Bad guess. Loser.

#165 lively

I don't know if it's this way in every mosque

Did you LOOK at the picture?

If I were President of Boeing I'd have released a statement along to lines of:

If you are offendend, we don't care. Our job is to find efficient ways of killing our enemies.

If you are our enemy, we will kill you. Before you kill us.

Now fuck off. Eat (pig) shit. And die.

If Boeing or Bell apologizes I will NEVER fly on a Bell or Boeing aircraft again. Hit em in their pocketbooks

When we mentioned the Krauts in WWII, I wonder if Marlene Dietrich was offended? I guess we should have called them "extremist Krauts," or some such thing. Sorry, not good analogy, but it's been a long day. I agree we shouldn't try to hurt Muslims feelings, but come on. It really is so tiresome.

In fact we should all do a search and find out if any of our Senators or Congressmen voted Pro Boeing or Pro Bell on any act and if so get them out of office.

Hey, anyone remeber this "ad" from Boeing? (bandwidth and work warning: self-executing powerpoint presentation with low-level sound)

#169 JIC:
"Cause offence in the service of a goal, not just for the hell of it."

You are one of the reasons I just love LGF.

You have an excellent argument. I let my blind hatred of moslems get the better of me sometimes.

Much respect to you.

..."I will NEVER fly on a Bell or Boeing aircraft again..."

#179 Dov, if you will never fly on a Boeing aircraft again, your only other choice is the Froggistani Airbus.

A fine aircraft, but I'd rather put my $ in the pockets of Boeing shareholders than the Froggistani government.

Somebody needs to create a logo incorporating a dog, a circle-slash, and a terrorist with the legend. "I Will Not Be CAIR's Bitch." And all the non-dhimmified blogs can post it on their mastheads.

Before and After! Apoligize for that, and solve the problem. Yeah, didn't think so! God bless our troops, who are fighting this scum!

I like how DHIMMIS are saying protect the Mosque/arms cache

#186 mattm :

Right on brother! Here, here.

A better ad would have shown an Apache chain gunning armed men running out of a mosque.

#175 jic

We have made that clear in the real world by not holding back. That ad contributes nothing.

If you think we are not holding back, then you are a complete fool. And you're in good company. Ever heard of a nuclear missle?

Here's an e-mail I just sent to Boeing. Mary Foerster is the Boeing corp-droid who apologized and declared the ad offensive.

An Open Letter to Mary Foerster, VP Boeing IDS

Ma'am
The CV-22 "Unleash Hell" advertisement is not offensive. The advertisement depicts American servicemen descending from American equipment into an area where Americans are currently fighting and dying. Boeing should at least have mustered a "so what?" defense along the lines that it is difficult to take a picture of urban Iraq without including a mosque, that a mosque is a natural part of any Iraq scene. Boeing could even have told the truth, that some of the most intense fighting has centered on mosques, and not because America simply wanted to knock a few over; but that the terrorists cravenly use mosques as cover, and that is why a mosque appears in your advertisement.
Instead, your first action was to buckle in the face of criticism from CAIR, a front group for the terrorists. This is shameful behavior from any American, and particularly from a company making great profits from the fight against those terrorists. Boeing has now joined the ranks of Burger King and the museum Tate Britain in unprincipled appeasement of the terrorists. I invite you to look up those incidents.
The American servicemen who go to battle in your equipment deserve better than your cowardice here at home. This is a war being fought on many fronts, and for all the money Boeing makes supplying one front, you ought to show some steel on the homefront.

Sincerely,

Haakon B. Dahl

#191 haakondahl

Good letter. Well done.

Hey what is smoldering :here

I am waiting for CAIR to protest the photos of the palestinian kids with AKs...

#193 jrdroll

A car?

I'm thinking of converting, but only if I can come up with a really catchy new name, like, Abu Arafat Mohammed Mohammed Mohammed, -- oh darn, that's not quite it, how about Mohammed Abu Mohammed Arafat Abu Abu Abu Splodie -- no -- er, maybe, aw nevermind. Forget it.

My real question is, why are MOONBATS running these important defense companies, willing to dhimmitize themselves at CAIR's childish and whiny objection, it's just plain senseless.

Next Up: CAIR extracts apologies and servitude from Caterpillar -- yeah right.

What -- in a war, are we not allowed to attack Ammunition Storage Depots, a.k.a. Mosques?

Strange world we live in.

#116 hazzyday

OT: I see Atlas Shrugged is a fan of Ayn Rand? What is the value behind her thought. I saw a bio of her and read part of of the book. I must have missed the gist of Ayn Rand. She seemed unhappy to me.

She was unhappy. She was a genius who became extremely popular, followed by extremely unhinged. Her earlier works were fantastic, but it does take a bit of masochism to sit down and read more than one, as she tends to beat you about the head and shoulders with her not subtle allusions. That said, I greatly enjoyed reading books written by somebody who, if alive today, would not take a single molecule of shit off of these terrorists.
But as her clear-headed and right-thinking philosophy (so says me) gained in popularity, she became exactly what she claimed she was farthest from; a cult leader, complete with dominance games and peculiar sexual arrangements. Granted, this is a fairly uncharitable interpretation--but try asking a "card-carrying" objectivist about Leonard Piekoff sometime.

For an example of some of her best writing, I recommend The Virtue of Selfishness, a paperback collection of essays. Puts the lie to LLL altruism, and discusses trhe real motivations of those who ask you to give and give and give. And much more.

CAIR and the ACLU are currently running our national and international politics.
If it doesn`t meet CAIR`s and ACLU`s standards,it`s a no-go.
These two organizations are currently dictating what the american public can and cannot say,read,write,and do.
Our leaders are spineless cowards,our institutions and corporations,no matter how big or influential,are rolling over and paying jyzia,they are accepting the dhimmi status without the slightest intention of putting up a fight.
The left has neutered this country and we better get burqas for our women and get ready to grow beards,in accordance with the tenets of islam.

To Quote from the "Article";

CAIR will follow up with all parties involved to determine how the ad was produced and to help prevent similar incidents in the future.

Damn! ... Legalized psyops ... brought directly in your face by the "PC" Media ... the "If you fail to follow our line of thinking then we will squash you like a bug (or so they think) media" AND brought to you by ... all those fearful of such an attack on their motives.
All this at the exact time When, what we should be doing is DEFENDING our motives. Folks, WE ARE NOT "BAD" PEOPLE! And especially not "BAD" because some Airhead thought, "This ad is racist and demeaning" ... Ask Nick Berg about racist and demeaning!

I'm absolutely sure the dude who thought this ad up was thinking, "We will show you.. You dirty terrorist Islamist pigs" ... SO WHAT! It's a friggin military helicopter for Christ's sake (Opps!).

HELICOPTER/PLANE ... ER AH ... HELIPLANE? ... IT'S A FRIGGIN PIECE OF MILITARY MACHINERY ANYWAY ...

(I only read enough to get pissed off THEN I went to the picture :-@ )

#198 haakondahl

But as her clear-headed and right-thinking philosophy (so says me) gained in popularity, she became exactly what she claimed she was farthest from; a cult leader, complete with dominance games and peculiar sexual arrangements. Granted, this is a fairly uncharitable interpretation--but try asking a "card-carrying" objectivist about Leonard Piekoff sometime.

It's great that you regard Ayn Rand as a genius and Objectivism as "right-thinking", but you do her a great injustice by calling her "unhinged" and a "cult leader". I can only guess that you got this slanderous script from the Branden sympathizers.

And while I don't have a card, I am an Objectivist, and you can ask me anything you like, including about Dr. Peikoff.

It's a shame that so many people's understanding of Rand comes from those who scream the loudest: the people who mocked and hated her. Her work stands on its own, but taking an unbiased look at her life just makes one appreciate her brilliance all the more.

Whoa,,, check out the newest hit by our old pal Yusf Islam, the artist formerly known as Cat Stevens, I think he's really found his 'calling.'

Adhan (Call to Prayer) by Yusuf Islam... 3.85 Mb

Catchy.

Source

#202 Lazarus
Thanks for the props on the letter. Probably another one down the drain, but I can hope...

As for Rand, I didn't get my information from sympathizers of anybody, and I'm not following a script. I got my information from Ayn Rand's own writings. I first started to get creeped out when I discovered that part of her canon was that one may not pick and choose among her ideas. She demanded a complete adherence to her every word in order to accept and understand any part of it. While I understand the idea of appreciating the whole of a thing rather than its parts, this insistence of hers that no word or notion of hers is mistaken or even subject to challenge is a very cultish one. She claims to hold science in high regard, but when it comes to her own ideas, there shall be no dissent, and there shall e no scientific inquiry. Just as she drew on the traditions of philosophers before her, perhaps another would come after and magnify her work. Perhaps a college student at an objectivist club meeting would wish to discuss some negative implications of her philosophy. (If not for debate and discussion on a college campus, why have meetings? just buy the book!)
You know another group with an "all or nothing" stipulation? SCIENTOLOGY. That's right, the Kim Jong Il of religions. And unfortunately, for the same reason.

All of that said, I do NOT wish to "pee on" Ayn Rand or Objectivism. There's a lot of good stuff in there. But I do NOT need to accept her mealy-mouthed explanations of her adulterous relationship with Branden (explained to his wife and her husband, no less, that those two were the only two in the world who could possibly appreciate each other, so superior were they) in order to understand the natural fit between capitalism and democracy.

If you find that sort of thing defensible, then you are welcome to it. But if that is something you would rather not try explain, perhaps you find yourself in a position similar to mine. Awestruck and disappointed, all at once.

#204 haakondahl

As for Rand, I didn't get my information from sympathizers of anybody, and I'm not following a script. I got my information from Ayn Rand's own writings. I first started to get creeped out when I discovered that part of her canon was that one may not pick and choose among her ideas. She demanded a complete adherence to her every word in order to accept and understand any part of it. While I understand the idea of appreciating the whole of a thing rather than its parts, this insistence of hers that no word or notion of hers is mistaken or even subject to challenge is a very cultish one. She claims to hold science in high regard, but when it comes to her own ideas, there shall be no dissent, and there shall e no scientific inquiry. Just as she drew on the traditions of philosophers before her, perhaps another would come after and magnify her work. Perhaps a college student at an objectivist club meeting would wish to discuss some negative implications of her philosophy. (If not for debate and discussion on a college campus, why have meetings? just buy the book!)

Well, I'm sorry to have lumped you in with the Branden/Kelley jerks then. It's just that 99.9% of the time, they're the source of criticisms you mentioned.

The "dogma" criticism is among the most common leveled at Rand. Hopefully, my explanation will remove any doubt you have that that charge is baseless.

Objectivism is meant to be a complete philosophy. That means it is a formal presentation of the essential principles that comprise man's proper view of himself, the world he lives in, and the relationship between the two.

Rand didn't leave any gaps, and would've said so if she had. Now, you can always apply those principles to new fields or current fields that haven't really been thoroughly developed. For instance, near her death, Ayn Rand was gearing up to apply Objectivism to mathematics and physics, but she ran out of time and her health was failing. Since then, others, such as Dr. Peikoff and Objectivist physicists and mathematicians have continued her work. The principles remain, but there are always new areas of knowledge to apply them to.

This goes right to the "dogma" charge. Among the most important principles that Ayn Rand preached was the independent excerise of man's mind. She must've said tens of thousands of times in her life that the contents of your mind are no good unless you know them to be true for yourself. What cult leader says to his followers, "Don't believe anything I say until you've reasoned it out for yourself!"?

Rand didn't stumble onto Objectivism by chance. It was a long, thorough process of looking at things for what they are and checking her premises against reality and integrating what she learned into a coherent whole, because she recognized early in her life that man needs a coherent, integrated view of his life in order to live properly.

So ultimately, she said, here's my philosophy. It's right, and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong, but it's no good sticking to what I say is right unless you've determined its validity for yourself.

It never ceases to stun me how people say she "demanded" this and "commanded" that, but I guess they get stuck on the idea that she believed in what she professed, and they never bother to ask, "Was she right?"

Ask yourself this. If you had an idea about something, say, that reality exists, or that your name is what it is, or that murder and theft are bad ways for men to live by, would you qualify it by saying, "but you don't have to believe me, because I don't want to be dogmatic or a cultist."? Of course not. You'd say, "I'm right, and I know why I'm right, and that's all there is to it."

And she showed extraordinary patience with her detractors in explaining why what she said was right was right. That is not the mark of dogmatist.

(continued...)

#204 haakondahl

Perhaps a college student at an objectivist club meeting would wish to discuss some negative implications of her philosophy. (If not for debate and discussion on a college campus, why have meetings? just buy the book!)

One may well find the need to attempt to find negative implications of Objectivism, but one should do so with intellectual honesty, not just to find a convenient bag to try to punch holes in.

I belong to a discussion group that meets twice a month, and we have plenty to discuss. Hell, it's hard for us to stop talking even after four or five hours. I never work my brain or mouth so hard. But we don't meet to bring Objectivism down. We meet to discuss current events and personal matters in the context of a rational philosophy, and to blow off steam from an irrational world, and we have no shortage of material to discuss.

All of that said, I do NOT wish to "pee on" Ayn Rand or Objectivism. There's a lot of good stuff in there. But I do NOT need to accept her mealy-mouthed explanations of her adulterous relationship with Branden (explained to his wife and her husband, no less, that those two were the only two in the world who could possibly appreciate each other, so superior were they) in order to understand the natural fit between capitalism and democracy.

No, you certainly don't have to delve into the unhappy chapters of her life to appreciate what her ideas can mean. Rand and Branden did believe they had minds that were superior to their respective spouses, and that life was too unbearable for them to live apart, so they fashioned an untenable romance for twelve years. It didn't work, and really was doomed to fail, but Rand, for her part, was honest with her husband, and insisted that her affair with Branden be known to her husband Frank and his wife Barbara.

One can fairly say, she should've known that such a relationship just can't work, but it did work pretty well for most of the twelve years, until Branden betrayed Rand, broke from Objectivism, and lied to Rand about his affair with yet another woman. Her journal entries confirm during those twelve years that while her affair with Branden had some advantages, it was never totally satisfactory and she always had doubts and regrets about it.

She wasn't perfect, but she was about as close as anyone ever gets. She was a giant. I don't find the affair to be all that defensible. I could never in a million years "cheat" on my wife (though I'm not married), even with her consent. For me, a romantic relationship is with one person and one person only, and if it's marriage, it's forever. But to an extent, I understand why Rand did it. Branden offered her an intellectual and emotional bond that her husband Frank could not, even though she loved Frank to death. It's easy to throw stones at her posthumously, but when you see the full picture, you can understand her motivation. I think the most one could accuse her of is being a little too hopeful and trusting of Branden.

That said, I appreciate your honest description of how you see Rand and Objectivism, and I mean it when I say, I'm glad you find merit in her ideas. If you'd ever care to discuss it further by e-mail, feel free to contact me at kcolville @ kc.rr.com.

The ad in question is awfully silly.

Mosques aren't attacked by US forces dropping out of Ospreys.

Mosques are attacked by al-Qaeda Sunnis using suicide car bombs.

I don’t like the advertisers showing a picture of SO forces repelling down to the top of a mosque either. I hope our military takes this to heart next time they plan an operation.

Next time…flatten the friggin mosque to a pile of pebbles, then land the bird on top of a pile of fu*king rubble.

No mosque, no muslims…no problem.

this ad RULES

This would make a great Caption Contest.

You know, like this one.

Hopefully the next ad will feature SF guys landing on top of CAIR HQ guns ablaze.

It's not a F**king religion, it is a cult.

i'm glad boeing and bell corrected this error. obviously, our nation's enemies never come out of mosques. who ever thinks that must be 'racsist' or an 'islamophobe'.

while their at it, they should probably apologize to the former Nazis and imperial Japanese.

its important not to hurt anyone's sensitive feelings.

we all know the key to the war on our enemies is to pretend they really are not our enemies.

Great ad -- too bad American corporations seek to appease our enemies.

If their mindset was present during World War II, we would have lost the war.
 

Funny, I don't remember an apology from CAIR to Boeing (or anyone else) on behalf of Islam for hijacking their products, murdering their crews and passengers plus nearly 3000 innocent people on the ground.
I must have missed that.

Troops attacking a mosque is not offensive.

Using a mosque to attack troops is.