Right, right, sure, sure. I'm sure those two boys in the photo were hiding oil from the Iranian government. BTW, the "quote" in your signature is completely manufactured. James Madison never said or wrote that. It's a bald-faced lie made up by conspiracy kooks.
It is not accurate as a literal quote but neither is it far off the mark: "Not the less true is it, that the liberties of Rome proved the final victim to her military triumphs; and that the liberties of Europe, as far as they ever existed, have, with few exceptions, been the price of her military establishments. A standing force, therefore, is a dangerous, at the same time that it may be a necessary, provision. On the smallest scale it has its inconveniences. On an extensive scale its consequences may be fatal." Federalist 41
This is just to clarify a point to the OP and to many of my fellow DP-ers. Why are attacks by Islamic groups called Islamist terrorism? Other terror groups like the LTTE (Tamil Tigers) or the IRA (Irish Republican Army) have Hindus or Christians but are not called Hindu or Christian terrorists? It is undoubtedly true that there are other terrorists as well, for instance the Naxalites or Maoists. The reason why the adjective 'Islamists' is used is that no other terror group invokes religious sanction or quotes religious texts to justify their acts. In fact, the Tamil Tigers has Hindus as well as Christians (their spokesperson for many years was Anton Balasingham, a Christian). Neither has the IRA nor Tamil Tigers ever quoted any religious scriptures to justify their actions, the Islamists have and continue to do so. The link between religious places and schools to these acts, is also well established. Finally, the Islamist terrorists themselves have time and again openly admitted the religious nature of their ultimate goal -- Islamisation. It would be dishonest if this reality is ignored. Now, think long and hard.
No I just think its interesting that one of Madison's most popular quotes wasn't his at all. Whoever said it first, it is quite a catchy way of saying what Madison said in his less modern language: "Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged against provisions against danger, real or pretended from abroad." "A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty." "No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare." Is it an accurate quote? No. Is it an accurate reflection of Madison's thoughts, basically a re-write of his actual sourced quotes? Yes. So I understand where the mix up comes from...and I don't think its a misrepresentation of Madison at all.
Islamist Watch has a good collection of writings from Islamist scholars which document this statement quite extensively.