PDA

View Full Version : Burning books in the US...'Burn Quran Day'


Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5

Uzi
08-24-2010, 03:52 PM
It's one of the Five Pillars.

For Sunnis. Shia is different.

Diogenes the Cynic
08-24-2010, 03:58 PM
It's one of the Five Pillars.

For Sunnis. Shia is different.
So what? We're only talking about Sunni.

Diogenes the Cynic
08-24-2010, 04:07 PM
Incidentally, even the Shia follow all Five of the Pillars, they just call them "obligations" instead of "Pillars." They still believe in mandatory charity, so it's a difference of semantics, not of actual practice.

Revenant Threshold
08-24-2010, 04:53 PM
Out of interest, how many mosques did you visit in order to come to an accurate summation of this lack of condemnation?

Oddly enough, the situation of non-unequivocal condemnation is one i've heard before, but the last time I heard it it was an accusation against the U.S., in general, with regards to the IRA.

Well, I am mostly going by public statements by Muslim leaders. Which Islamic news sources or Islamic groups do you follow to see this lack of condemnation?As for the lack of full throated condemnation of the IRA. Its probably because there was significant support for the IRA here in the states. Not the car bombings but there was solidarity for the oppressed Irish. I'm confused. You mean that in America there was a widespread support for a group that perpetrated terrorism, but that they were able to support those groups on the notion of solidarity for the oppressed while still condemning the terrorist acts themselves?

That seems relevant somehow.

Uzi
08-24-2010, 05:03 PM
So what? We're only talking about Sunni.

Oh, I'm sorry. I was unaware that Muslim=Sunni. I'm sure the ~200million Shias in the world appreciate it.

Both also have Jihad as a core belief. Whether it is called a pillar, obligation, or an ancillary of the faith is semantics, also. Which also makes it somewhat different from other major religions.

elucidator
08-24-2010, 05:16 PM
Your understanding of Islam is as shallow as your reasoning, it can come as no surprise that you reach absurd conclusions.

"Jihad" is most assuredly central to Islamic culture, just as "faith" is central to a Christian. In its most original form, it meant the struggle within oneself to completely submit to the will of Allah. It has been expanded over the years to fit various agenda, some admirable, some less so. But it does not "mean" aggressive struggle to force others to submit. Even in the context it is used, and the context you insist is the only valid context, it means the defense of Islam.

Uzi
08-24-2010, 05:42 PM
And yours is the 'all religions are equal' interpretation arrived at with little though, or reason. Your definition is only partly correct and is not as cut and dried as you wish it to be.
Jihad (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad)

elucidator
08-24-2010, 06:16 PM
So, you missed this part, did you?

...In western societies the term jihad is often translated as "holy war". Muslim authors tend to reject such an approach, stressing non-militant connotations of the word.....

Uzi
08-24-2010, 06:44 PM
No, I saw that part. Which is why I said you were only partly correct. It appears you missed the entire latter half of the article where it talks specifically about warfare. Why? Doesn't fit your worldview about the 'Religion of Peace'? Yeah, when everyone else is dead or subdued, then there is peace.

Lust4Life
08-29-2010, 10:55 AM
There seems to be an attempt to castigate Muslims for the terrorist acts of a few extremists that are not representative of them while shrugging off the actions of Christian terrorists.

Terrorism is usually conducted against the innocent and more then often the victims are random; given that the bomb you've placed in a pub/shop/street cannot discriminate between who it slaughters when it goes off.

Recently after an eight year investigation; it was revealed on the 24th of August 2010 that a Catholic priest who was the quartermaster for an I.R.A. "Brigade" was a central element in the atrocity conducted at the village of Claudy on the 31st of July 1972.

Three bombs were planted and killed nine people, one of whom was an eight year old girl.
Ironically the bombs killed more Catholics then Protestants.

The Brits became aware of who was responsible but didn't reveal that one of the main perpetrators was a Catholic priest; because they feared (probably rightly) that N.I. would take off and the Catholic population would almost certainly be butchered by outraged Protestants.

When I last looked Catholics and Protestants are Christians, as I nominally am.

We should hate the terrorist, not the religion that he/she believes in.

Uzi
08-29-2010, 12:14 PM
When I last looked Catholics and Protestants are Christians, as I nominally am.

We should hate the terrorist, not the religion that he/she believes in.

Last I looked Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, etc, were all human beings. And human beings are gullible enough to believe the ramblings of long dead prophets as the truth they should follow to the death, or more likely, the death of others.
And before someone goes off about communism and capitalism, no economic system says explicitly to kill their enemy like many religions do in one form or another. Some are more obvious about it like Islam. Do I blame the religion for what its followers do in its name specifically if the religious writings they follow condone their actions? Of course I do. Why wouldn't I or any other rational person?

But to address your example, does Jesus condone killing? Would he have agreed that the priest acted correctly? So, we can somewhat safely say that the priest acted outside what his prophet would have wanted him to do. It would be much harder to make the same argument with regard to Mohammed as he wasn't afraid to slaughter whole tribes who disagreed with him.

Damuri Ajashi
08-30-2010, 01:10 PM
Why since the end of WWII?

WTF was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

WTF was the firebombing of Dresden?

Saying something is the case since some time does not mean that it was not the case before that time. :rolleyes:

No but there must be some sort of significance to the WWII benchmark. I thought was that you were trying to somehow dostinguish war in a good cause versus war with ambiguous moral substance. My point is that by your definition, America was engaging in terrorism while it was fighting Hitler and Ito. Is that your position?

If you want to redefine already poorly defined words then I don't see how we proceed when I define terrorism as an ILLEGITIMATE form of assymetrical warfare and you define terrorism as killing people.

I've no particular desire to 'proceed' with you.[/quote]

Then WTF are you doing in Great Debates?

I was just pointing out that your tweaking your definition does not mean that it is accepted by everyone.

I think that my definition is VASTLY superior AND more widely accepted than your definition. I don't think its just a matter of opinion either.

Anyway, I suspect that many people would consider floating in the sea and lobbing munitions at a country when they don't have the technology to either properly defend themselves or fight back to be asymmetric warfare.

Still not how terrorism is defined. Lobbing missiles at civilians might be a war crime but it is not terrorism.

Damuri Ajashi
08-30-2010, 01:17 PM
Here is one example of why we don't want to play so fast and loose with words like terrorism

Who is to say whom is 'playing fast and loose'?

You are. Words don't mean whatever you want them to mean. If I make up definitions on my own without considering the commonly accepted definition of words it makes communication difficult.

Americans, generally, consider American forces who sit in extremely well defended ships and fire explosives into the capital city of some country virtually immune to any counter attack to be 'our brave troops'.

On the other hand they consider people who undertake extreme dangerous missions inside the US to be 'cowardly terrorists'.

I'm just saying that carefully defining words so that your own side isn't covered is itself pretty asymmetric and certainly will not be agreed by everyone.

I never said that terrorists are cowardly and I never said that everything the US does is legal (I think the invasion of Iraq was a war crime by our own standards) but terrorism means something more specific than "stuff we personally don't like"

You mentioned domestic violence earlier as an example of terrorism. I am no big fan of domestic violence either but it is not terrorism.

Damuri Ajashi
08-30-2010, 01:41 PM
No, I saw that part. Which is why I said you were only partly correct. It appears you missed the entire latter half of the article where it talks specifically about warfare. Why? Doesn't fit your worldview about the 'Religion of Peace'? Yeah, when everyone else is dead or subdued, then there is peace.

You act as if the Spanish Inquisition never happened (why do you think there are so few jews in Spain, they didn't kill them all, that was not the purpose of the inquisition).

You act as if the Crusades never happened.

Uzi
08-30-2010, 03:55 PM
You act as if that happened yesterday rather than 500+ years ago.
Re. The Crusades: Who do you think the Muslims got that land from in the first place? It wasn't ALL peacefully. But the point being, Jesus probably wouldn't have condoned those actions whereas Muhammad probably would have.

Kobal2
08-30-2010, 07:56 PM
Points to the Muslims for getting their own bloody religion right then.

Saying "yes, we did those terrible things in the name of Jesus, but at the time we'd just warped the basic tenets of our faith beyond any hope of recognition. So we oughta get a pass on that" is a really weaksauce excuse.
It's kind of like saying "Yes, y'r'honor, I shot my wife. But in my defense I thought she was a spider demon from Mars at the time. Can I go now ?", innit ?

Uzi
08-30-2010, 08:24 PM
I never said anyone should get a pass. But to use Jesus as an excuse to kill others, you have to go quite a bit further down the delusional path than if you were using Muhammad as an excuse for your actions.

Kobal2
08-30-2010, 09:16 PM
I never said anyone should get a pass. But to use Jesus as an excuse to kill others, you have to go quite a bit further down the delusional path than if you were using Muhammad as an excuse for your actions.

Not really, no. Both of them are long dead, and both of them are historical yet have quite a bit of fictional/mythical dimension tacked on long after they died and couldn't object anymore.
Putting any words or philosophy whatsoever in either of their mouths is a snap. Especially since both their holy books say everything and its contrary and we get to cherry-pick for victory.

Be much harder to go down the delusional path by using Joe Pesci as an excuse, cause he'll fuck you up.

Uzi
08-30-2010, 09:43 PM
Not really, no. Both of them are long dead, and both of them are historical yet have quite a bit of fictional/mythical dimension tacked on long after they died and couldn't object anymore.

Did Jesus ever say to kill anyone? Did Mohammad? I'm pretty sure Jesus didn't and Mohammad did. There is no tacking on of facts that Mohammad butchered people and said god condoned the acts.

Grey
08-30-2010, 10:29 PM
Do you just want New Testament or are you open to Old Testament since Jesus is God?

Uzi
08-31-2010, 12:23 AM
Do you just want New Testament or are you open to Old Testament since Jesus is God?

You do realize that Islam acknowledges the old testament, right? Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_the_Bible). So, whatever happened before either prophet pretty much equals out and they should be evaluated on their words alone, not what happened before.

Magiver
08-31-2010, 03:41 AM
Not really, no. Both of them are long dead, and both of them are historical yet have quite a bit of fictional/mythical dimension tacked on long after they died and couldn't object anymore.
Putting any words or philosophy whatsoever in either of their mouths is a snap. Especially since both their holy books say everything and its contrary and we get to cherry-pick for victory. Possibly the reason that Islam never outgrew it's violent past is that it's progenitor was a warrior who codified a strict enforcement of the rules whereas Christianity advanced beyond the old testament's brutality and focused on the new testament's non-violent prophet.

The idea that its a few extremists doesn't add up when you start to look at the size of organization such as Hamas, Hezbolla, the Taliban and a plethora of other groups committed to an extremely harsh interpretation of the religion. For that matter, there are entire countries that subscribe to the mentality of Hamas.

Kobal2
08-31-2010, 07:58 AM
Possibly the reason that Islam never outgrew it's violent past is that it's progenitor was a warrior who codified a strict enforcement of the rules whereas Christianity advanced beyond the old testament's brutality and focused on the new testament's non-violent prophet.

The idea that its a few extremists doesn't add up when you start to look at the size of organization such as Hamas, Hezbolla, the Taliban and a plethora of other groups committed to an extremely harsh interpretation of the religion. For that matter, there are entire countries that subscribe to the mentality of Hamas.

Or it could be socio-economic factors, not getting in on the New World action, endemic poverty, living in a damn sand bucket, colonization and de-colonization, intermittent meddling by the Western powers backing up this or that petty tyrant...

And the West became more open and enlightened because humanist philosophers clashed against religion and broke its yoke on society, because two World Wars liberated women, because hippies fucked in the mud and because scientists defied Church interdicts in secrecy. It has nothing to do with the benevolent guiding light of Christianity or any sort of religion whatsoever.

People don't go to religion to find a way to act, they act some way and then make religion say it's OK. It's what happened in the Crusades, it's what happened during the Catholic/Protestant wars, it's what happens with the Taliban, and it's what happens with that stupid book burning.

@Uzi : "Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.", Matthew 10:34. And FWIW, while I'm no Koran scholar, I believe most of the fire and brimstone in it is in the form of "Allah will deal with them" rather than "go and kill 'em".

Grey
08-31-2010, 08:21 AM
Do you just want New Testament or are you open to Old Testament since Jesus is God?

You do realize that Islam acknowledges the old testament, right? Link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_view_of_the_Bible). So, whatever happened before either prophet pretty much equals out and they should be evaluated on their words alone, not what happened before.Well of course but then again their prophet isn't claiming to be the God that killed the first born of Egypt because he had a snit fit.

Regardless, arguing over who has the nicest tribal religious book is an exercise in folly. Tribes aren't nice.

elucidator
08-31-2010, 10:44 AM
There are few, if any, forms of rationalization more repulsive than trying construct a "reasonable" basis for mindless hatred.

Uzi
08-31-2010, 11:44 AM
Well of course but then again their prophet isn't claiming to be the God that killed the first born of Egypt because he had a snit fit.

No, he is only claiming to be the voice of the god who killed the first born of Egypt. Again, a wash.

Regardless, arguing over who has the nicest tribal religious book is an exercise in folly. Tribes aren't nice.

That isn't what I'm arguing. I'm saying that if your book says to go and kill the heathens then it is more likely that you will do so because of it. Whereas if it tells you to do the opposite, then you are more likely to do that action instead.

People in this very thread acknowledged that Muslim's give to charity. Why do they do that? Well, it is written down in their book as one of its key principles. Jihad is another. Why would you expect them to follow one and not the other?

@Uzi : "Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.", Matthew 10:34. And FWIW, while I'm no Koran scholar, I believe most of the fire and brimstone in it is in the form of "Allah will deal with them" rather than "go and kill 'em".

I guess you have to do some interpretation. Jesus says he is bringing a sword. Any evidence that he wielded it? Nope. The Koran revers Jesus as a prophet. So, whatever he said is added to by what Muhammad said. So, we have a sword and we have Muhammad wielding it.
I'm not defending the Bible. It is evil, too. But there is a scale of evilness and the Koran is higher on that scale. Not all religions are equal. Well, unless you think that Scientology and Unitarianism are equal in which case there is no point in continuing the discussion.

Gyrate
08-31-2010, 11:54 AM
People in this very thread acknowledged that Muslim's give to charity. Why do they do that? Well, it is written down in their book as one of its key principles. Jihad is another. Why would you expect them to follow one and not the other?So, what, they kill infidels, strip them and send the clothes and shoes to Oxfam? :confused:

Kobal2
08-31-2010, 12:16 PM
That isn't what I'm arguing. I'm saying that if your book says to go and kill the heathens then it is more likely that you will do so because of it. Whereas if it tells you to do the opposite, then you are more likely to do that action instead.

History kind of argues against you, though. Thou shalt not kill, while seemingly quite clear, didn't lead to peace on Earth. And for all Jesus' preaching of tolerance and charity, Christendom was hardly a nice place to live and be poor in. Or be a Moor/Jew/heretic in.
As I said before, people may say they follow religion, but they don't. They act any way they feel like, then use religion to make it OK. Nice people don't give money to beggars because God says so, they do because they feel empathy and compassion for them. Nasty folks don't burn people at the stake because God says so, they do because they're cruel and have the power to unleash that cruelty on others.

People in this very thread acknowledged that Muslim's give to charity. Why do they do that? Well, it is written down in their book as one of its key principles. Jihad is another. Why would you expect them to follow one and not the other?

It's also been pointed that "jihad" doesn't mean war or any sort of violence per se, though.

I guess you have to do some interpretation. Jesus says he is bringing a sword. Any evidence that he wielded it? Nope. Which was my point : you can, if you're bent on cleaving heads, find a Jesus quote that makes it OK if you're willing to squint right. Just as, say, the Taliban are squinting hard to make the Koran say women should wear beekeeper suits at all times, for instance.

I'm not defending the Bible. It is evil, too. But there is a scale of evilness and the Koran is higher on that scale.Having not read the Koran, I cannot say. Hell, for that matter I haven't read the Bible much, either. During catechism, I always gravitated back to the Song of Songs, cuz it's got naughty bits in it.
I do know that the Muslim people I have met, went to school with, worked with or lived next to haven't proven to be any more or less "evil" than atheists or Christians.

Uzi
08-31-2010, 12:52 PM
As I said before, people may say they follow religion, but they don't. They act any way they feel like, then use religion to make it OK. Nice people don't give money to beggars because God says so, they do because they feel empathy and compassion for them. Nasty folks don't burn people at the stake because God says so, they do because they're cruel and have the power to unleash that cruelty on others.

So, when Hitler was exhorting his people to kill Jews, they really would have done so without having him say it was okay to do it first? Yuhuh.

It's also been pointed that "jihad" doesn't mean war or any sort of violence per se, though.

Wrongly, btw. Why are people ignoring what Muslims actually believe say and believe?

Which was my point : you can, if you're bent on cleaving heads, find a Jesus quote that makes it OK if you're willing to squint right. Just as, say, the Taliban are squinting hard to make the Koran say women should wear beekeeper suits at all times, for instance.

There is little ambiguity in what the Koran says with regard to those not Muslim. Yeah, we may all be people of the book, but we are not all to be treated similarly.

I do know that the Muslim people I have met, went to school with, worked with or lived next to haven't proven to be any more or less "evil" than atheists or Christians.

I worked with Muslims in Yemen for 9 years. They were very nice people, for the most part. But like anyone else on the planet they are subject to the culture they were raised in. Geert Hofstede calls culture the 'software of the mind' for good reason. Part of that culture is the religion. To say that people are not influenced, good and bad, by their religion is ignoring facts, plain and simple.

Kobal2
08-31-2010, 01:01 PM
So, when Hitler was exhorting his people to kill Jews, they really would have done so without having him say it was okay to do it first? Yuhuh.

God says so != leader says so. Nor did Hitler, as far as I'm aware, base his rantings on any book but his own.

Uzi
08-31-2010, 01:08 PM
And the people who implemented Communism did it on the basis of actually talking to Marx...?

Kobal2
08-31-2010, 01:11 PM
I honestly have no idea where you're getting at.

Magiver
08-31-2010, 01:12 PM
Or it could be socio-economic factors, not getting in on the New World action, endemic poverty, living in a damn sand bucket, colonization and de-colonization, intermittent meddling by the Western powers backing up this or that petty tyrant... Islam exists in every corner of the planet. Your thesis doesn't explain why other religions are not affected the same way.

And the West became more open and enlightened because humanist philosophers clashed against religion and broke its yoke on society, because two World Wars liberated women, because hippies fucked in the mud and because scientists defied Church interdicts in secrecy. It has nothing to do with the benevolent guiding light of Christianity or any sort of religion whatsoever.

The enlightenment exists because none of the other religions currently go ape-shit over cartoons. The historical perspective is that modern Islam is stuck in the middle ages. There hasn't been a Martin Luther moment and it doesn't look like there is going to be one anytime soon.

People don't go to religion to find a way to act, they act some way and then make religion say it's OK. It's what happened in the Crusades, it's what happened during the Catholic/Protestant wars, it's what happens with the Taliban, and it's what happens with that stupid book burning.

People absolutely go to religion to find a way to act. To suggest there isn't a connection between terrorist acts and a religious authoritative figure is not arguable. The difference here is that one leader destroys a book and another leader pronounces a death sentence on someone for writing a book. One is a freedom of expression, the other is murder.

Uzi
08-31-2010, 02:34 PM
I honestly have no idea where you're getting at.

People do things based upon what is written all the time. Editorials, newspapers, text books, and yes, even holy books. The difference being is that the latter supposedly has a god for the authority for its claims.

Kobal2
08-31-2010, 02:41 PM
Islam exists in every corner of the planet. Your thesis doesn't explain why other religions are not affected the same way.

They are. Or did you think the Tontons Macoutes were Muslims ?

The enlightenment exists because none of the other religions currently go ape-shit over cartoons. The historical perspective is that modern Islam is stuck in the middle ages. There hasn't been a Martin Luther moment and it doesn't look like there is going to be one anytime soon.

Right. The other religions currently go ape-shit over Korans, apparently ;)

People absolutely go to religion to find a way to act. To suggest there isn't a connection between terrorist acts and a religious authoritative figure is not arguable. The difference here is that one leader destroys a book and another leader pronounces a death sentence on someone for writing a book. One is a freedom of expression, the other is murder.

Yes. Religious leaders. Not religion, not the holy book, not their own God either.

When Urban II called for the first crusade, nothing he said had any backing whatsoever in the religion. Jesus never said Jerusalem was any special, he never said to go and kill people who didn't believe in him, he never said those who killed infidels would go to Heaven, and so on and so forth.
But Urban did, and going over to take the rich Levant seemed like a profitable entreprise so hey, let's Crusade for God ! It's what God wants !

That's my whole point : people follow their charismatic leaders, their own wants and needs and fears, they never follow the religion. If Christians did what Christ actually told them to do in their holy book, there would be no rich Christian, no Christian soldier, and certainly no Christian book burnings.
Knowing this, I'm inclined to roll my eyes when you or anyone else tells me "yes, them Muslims are angry and violent, that's because it says in their Koran to be like that".

Magiver
08-31-2010, 03:41 PM
Right. The other religions currently go ape-shit over Korans, apparently ;)
The difference is, and I pointed it out, nobody's life was threatened by the book burning whereas the cartoons sparked riots that killed people. I think flag burning and book burning are pretty childish forms of freedom of speech but that is what they are, freedom of speech.

The problem with Islam is that it has not moved forward since it's inception in many parts of the world. It's not just a few nut-jobs running around, it's a great many people. Consider how groups like the Taliban teach it to children to the exclusion of all other knowledge.

It may eventually fall under it's own weight in places like Iran but that day is slow in coming. The religious influence is real and prevalent in the free world. there are no restrictions for Imams such as Anwar al-Awlaki who go to school in the United States and mentor terrorists such as the Ft Hood shooter and the Detroit Christmas bomber.

elucidator
08-31-2010, 04:23 PM
You mention Luther. Are you aware of Martin Luther's virulently anti-semitic opinions? Know any Lutherans who are virulently anti-semitic because he said so? But wait, the founder of a religious community holds that community in his sway, they cannot evolve and change, according to you, they are forever in thrall. Horseshit.

There is a very strong tradition of tolerance and mutual brotherhood in Islam, it is most closely associated with the Sufi tradition. Guess which tradition is most prominently represented in America? Go ahead, take a wild stab. Guess which tradition is most closely associated with the terrible, terrible mosque.

Ask them why the came to America, you're probably going to hear about our values, how we respect and tolerate each others religious views. We sure fooled them, didn't we?

Magiver
09-01-2010, 03:48 AM
You mention Luther. Are you aware of Martin Luther's virulently anti-semitic opinions? Know any Lutherans who are virulently anti-semitic because he said so? But wait, the founder of a religious community holds that community in his sway, they cannot evolve and change, according to you, they are forever in thrall. Horseshit.

The Christian religions have evolved considerably since Martin Luther. The same cannot be said of nations with Islamic leadership.

There is a very strong tradition of tolerance and mutual brotherhood in Islam, it is most closely associated with the Sufi tradition. Guess which tradition is most prominently represented in America? Go ahead, take a wild stab. Guess which tradition is most closely associated with the terrible, terrible mosque. OK, well, there’s certainly a fair amount of mutual Islamic brotherhood in the news. And it does seem to have a very strong tradition behind it.

Ask them why the came to America, you're probably going to hear about our values, how we respect and tolerate each others religious views. We sure fooled them, didn't we? In what way have they been fooled? We don’t respect squat when it comes to religion. Primetime TV routinely lampoons Christianity. It’s practically a national sport.

Don123
09-01-2010, 08:06 AM
Them believing such horseshit does not validate it. It's still a big pile of stinky stuff. Nobody that doesn't live in an Islamic state has any obligation to observe the rules of that faith.

Fuck Mohammed. I think he was a pervert, and probably fucked pigs.

Fuck the Koran. It's just a book. Paper, ink, bindings.

Fuck Allah. He doesn't exist anyway.

Fuck Islam. They don't rule the world. People that disagree with their religion have every right to do so.
When did you turn into Der Trihs?

Who's saying that nobody has a right to disagree with their religion. There's a difference between disagreeing with a religion and going out of your way to deliberately insult everyone who believes in it.


I would donate one of my copies of the Koran to be burned but I’m using it for toilet paper. Ha ha.

Oops there goes verse 4:34, “Allah has ordained… it is OK to beat your wife” and down the toilet that page goes.


Got Koran any one, then use it for ass cleaning; it does a body good.


Don

Gyrate
09-01-2010, 08:09 AM
I would donate one of my copies of the Koran to be burned but I’m using it for toilet paper. Ha ha.

Oops there goes verse 4:34, “Allah has ordained… it is OK to beat your wife” and down the toilet that page goes.

Got Koran any one, then use it for ass cleaning; it does a body good.

DonIs this intended to be an example of how much more enlightened non-Muslims are?

Don123
09-01-2010, 08:13 AM
You mention Luther. Are you aware of Martin Luther's virulently anti-semitic opinions? Know any Lutherans who are virulently anti-semitic because he said so? But wait, the founder of a religious community holds that community in his sway, they cannot evolve and change, according to you, they are forever in thrall. Horseshit.

There is a very strong tradition of tolerance and mutual brotherhood in Islam, it is most closely associated with the Sufi tradition. Guess which tradition is most prominently represented in America? Go ahead, take a wild stab. Guess which tradition is most closely associated with the terrible, terrible mosque.

Ask them why the came to America, you're probably going to hear about our values, how we respect and tolerate each others religious views. We sure fooled them, didn't we?


Yeah tell me how nice muslims are---

The religion of peace making a differance one dead body at a time.


2010.08.31 (Hebron, Israel) - A pregnant woman is among four young Jews gunned down in cold blood by Palestinian terrorists.
2010.08.31 (Badakhshan, Afghanistan) - Three Oxmam humanitarian workers are taken out in a brutal roadside blast.
2010.08.31 (Kabul, Afghanistan) - Three supreme court employees are riddled with bullets by Holy Warriors.
2010.08.30 (Jalalabad, Afghanistan) - The Taliban assassinate a local official with a bomb.
2010.08.30 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Jihadi car bombers kill a civilian.
2010.08.30 (Mogadishu, Somalia) - Four guards at the presidential palace are killed during an al-Shabaab mortar attack.

Gyrate
09-01-2010, 08:25 AM
Catholics: violent bombing bastards

For August -

2010.08.14: Lurgan, County Armagh
2010.08.10: Cookstown, County Tyrone
2010.08.08: Kilkeel, County Down
2010.08.04: Bangor, County Down
2010.08.03: Londonderry, County Derry

Of course, unlike Afghanistan there's no war going on and unlike Iraq and Somalia Northern Ireland actually has a government and stable society. And still the Catholics wage war against a peaceful populace.

And of course this little recent revelation (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11069698). These radical clerics must be stopped!

This is fun. We should do this more often.

Don123
09-01-2010, 08:29 AM
I would donate one of my copies of the Koran to be burned but I’m using it for toilet paper. Ha ha.

Oops there goes verse 4:34, “Allah has ordained… it is OK to beat your wife” and down the toilet that page goes.

Got Koran any one, then use it for ass cleaning; it does a body good.

DonIs this intended to be an example of how much more enlightened non-Muslims are?

http://www.islam-watch.org/Lennard/Muhammad-Camel-Urine-Therapy-Islamic-medicine.htm

Can we burn the Hadith also?

Bukhari (hadith) 1:234

Narrated Abu Qilabah:

Anas said, “Some people of ‘Ukl or ‘Uraina tribe came to Medina and its climate did not suit them. So the Prophet ordered them to go to the herd of (Milch) camels and to drink their milk and urine (as a medicine)...

Hmmmm interesting…. Muhammad ordered a tribe to drink camel milk-n-pee smoothie as remedy to cure their aversion to dryness?


No wonder the middle east is filled with muslim terrorist.

Don

Don123
09-01-2010, 08:42 AM
Catholics: violent bombing bastards

For August -

2010.08.14: Lurgan, County Armagh
2010.08.10: Cookstown, County Tyrone
2010.08.08: Kilkeel, County Down
2010.08.04: Bangor, County Down
2010.08.03: Londonderry, County Derry

Of course, unlike Afghanistan there's no war going on and unlike Iraq and Somalia Northern Ireland actually has a government and stable society. And still the Catholics wage war against a peaceful populace.

And of course this little recent revelation (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-11069698). These radical clerics must be stopped!

This is fun. We should do this more often.

So you are saying Muslims are just as bad catholic child rapist?---

Ok I agree.

Ramadan (Islamic holy month) 2010 Scorecard Day 18


http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

In the name of The Religion of Peace (Islam)

Terror Attacks 125

Dead Bodies 535


In the name of All Other Religions in the same time frame

Terror Attacks --NONE---

Dead Bodies ---NONE---

However When the Religion of Peace checked into
this Mogadishu hotel last week, 33 other souls checked out. YES, Allah likes the blood of non-believers, even more so on his holy days.

Gyrate
09-01-2010, 08:55 AM
You agree that Catholics are "just as bad" as Muslims? Good to know.

I'd be careful though, Don. There are actual Muslims on this messageboard. Sure, they seem like nice people but you and Magiver have pulled back the curtain and revealed their true evil violent natures. And since they have to follow every single word in their book to the letter, once they read what you've written and check their Qu'rans to see what response they should make it'll be fatwas at dawn and...well, it's been nice chatting to you while it lasted.

My advice is to start keeping pigs in your house to drive them away, like crosses with vampires. Keep a piglet in your pocket when you go out, just in case.

Don123
09-01-2010, 09:18 AM
You agree that Catholics are "just as bad" as Muslims? Good to know.

I'd be careful though, Don. There are actual Muslims on this messageboard. Sure, they seem like nice people but you and Magiver have pulled back the curtain and revealed their true evil violent natures. And since they have to follow every single word in their book to the letter, once they read what you've written and check their Qu'rans to see what response they should make it'll be fatwas at dawn and...well, it's been nice chatting to you while it lasted.

My advice is to start keeping pigs in your house to drive them away, like crosses with vampires. Keep a piglet in your pocket when you go out, just in case.

I’m talking to you,

So you are justifying one evil act with another. The catholics blow people all to hell so it is OK if Muslims do it. Or is it Mohammad raped Aisha at age 9 so it is OK for catholic priest to rape children. Make up your mind.


It seems to me the Muslims on this board should be giving you a fatwas. And while they are at it have the Muslims give fatwas to Mohammad for all his crimes to humanity. How sick can you get to follow a child rapist in self justification?


It is highly symbolic in disgust to Islam to burn the Koran in public (just obey the fire laws). Muslims should not mind, they came to the USA for free speech to spread the word on how Mohammad ordered people to drink camel piss, beat your wife when needed and do a little head chopping to non-believers. Hey I’m just going by what the Koran and Hadith says, that should not bother them.

And as for catholic priest that rape children, they are the most horrible people that ever walked on this earth. It is a good thing I’m law abiding.

Muslims can put the Koran in the trash and walk away any time they want to, then they can drop the title of muslim---how nice, and the world will be better off.

Don

Martiju
09-01-2010, 09:32 AM
Hmmm, it really is taking longer than we thought, isn't it...

Gyrate
09-01-2010, 09:39 AM
I didn't say anything about child rape. I was talking about bombings.

And my point was that if you can use examples of Muslim bombings (all of yours taken from actual or virtual warzones) to paint the entire religion as violent, one could do the same for the Catholics and other religions. Heck, the Hindus and Catholics of the Tamil Tigers engaged in ethnic cleansing against Tamil Muslims for years, killing over 370 in the summer of 1990 alone, and sent suicide bombers to Buddhist shrines. And of course we all know what happened to the Bosnian Muslims. Despite your snide insinuations Muslims hardly hold the patent on mindless violence.

You are deliberately picking and choosing your data to portray all Muslims as bloodthirsty savages while deliberately ignoring similar barbarity amongst members of other groups, other factors (such as active states of war) that would contribute to the violence and the peaceful co-existence of the vast majority of Muslims in the world with people of other faiths. If you want a serious debate about the links between religious fundamentalism in Islam and the rise of modern terrorism I'll be happy to have one once you demonstrate some intent to argue in good faith and with relevant facts at your disposal.

And why aren't you talking to the Muslims? They don't bite (apart from Angua and then only during full moons). You might be surprised.

Uzi
09-01-2010, 10:34 AM
You are deliberately picking and choosing your data to portray all Muslims as bloodthirsty savages while deliberately ignoring similar barbarity amongst members of other groups, other factors (such as active states of war) that would contribute to the violence and the peaceful co-existence of the vast majority of Muslims in the world with people of other faiths. If you want a serious debate about the links between religious fundamentalism in Islam and the rise of modern terrorism I'll be happy to have one once you demonstrate some intent to argue in good faith and with relevant facts at your disposal.

Muslims are people like any other, but the difference is that their book condones what we would consider to be evil actions.
Yes, Muslims live in peace with people of other faiths, but usually when they are the minority and have little choice in the matter. Otherwise, when Muslims are the majority you usually have some form of Sharia as the basis for the law and all sorts of nuttiness derived because of it.

elucidator
09-01-2010, 10:45 AM
Jesus wept.

Steve MB
09-01-2010, 10:49 AM
I really need to go into the book business and put out loads of books that really offend people. Imagine how many of those Qurans they're buying just so they can burn them.

The paper edition or the Kindle edition (http://xkcd.com/750/)?

Gyrate
09-01-2010, 10:50 AM
Yes, Muslims live in peace with people of other faiths, but usually when they are the minority and have little choice in the matter. Otherwise, when Muslims are the majority you usually have some form of Sharia as the basis for the law and all sorts of nuttiness derived because of it.Indonesia is the world's most populous Muslim-majority nation with 86% of the population reportedly Muslim. A quick glance at the Wiki says "Although religious freedom is stipulated in the Indonesian constitution, the government officially recognizes only six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Roman Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism." That's not complete religious freedom but it's not the "nuttiness" we associate with Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Middle East (which is as much socio-political as it is religious) either. It does kind of suck if you're Jewish though.

Kobal2
09-01-2010, 10:52 AM
The Christian religions have evolved considerably since Martin Luther. The same cannot be said of nations with Islamic leadership.

Whelp, I guess the Sunni, Shi'a, Sufis and other sub-divisions of Islam can pack their gear and call the feud off. Magiver has spoken : Islam hasn't budged an inch since Muhammad. You muzzies are officially all the same, now.

On the other hand, it does mean that the Muslim Brotherhood you so fear is about to gain 'bout half a billion dudes as a result. You might want to call the Grand Re-unification of Islam off, Mac.

elucidator
09-01-2010, 10:59 AM
...It does kind of suck if you're Jewish though.

Well, of course not Jewish! Their holy book is full of slaughter and massacre, certainly can't trust the Jews.

(The previous is offered as sarcasm. If you cannot or did not immediately perceive the sarcasm, do not operate heavy machine or attempt to make your own oatmeal. You are too stupid.)

Gyrate
09-01-2010, 11:03 AM
(The previous is offered as sarcasm. If you cannot or did not immediately perceive the sarcasm, do not operate heavy machine or attempt to make your own oatmeal. You are too stupid.)
Awwww...

<puts away JCB oatmeal stirrer>

Buck Godot
09-01-2010, 11:33 AM
Muslims are people like any other, but the difference is that their book condones what we would consider to be evil actions.
Yes, Muslims live in peace with people of other faiths, but usually when they are the minority and have little choice in the matter. Otherwise, when Muslims are the majority you usually have some form of Sharia as the basis for the law and all sorts of nuttiness derived because of it.


Uzi quick Quiz:

Which passage comes from the bible and which comes from the Koran

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.


So go you both to him and say: Surely we are two apostles of your Lord; therefore send the children of Israel with us and do not torment them! Indeed we have brought to you a communication from your Lord, and peace is on him who follows the guidance;

Don123
09-01-2010, 11:42 AM
I didn't say anything about child rape. I was talking about bombings.

And my point was that if you can use examples of Muslim bombings (all of yours taken from actual or virtual warzones) to paint the entire religion as violent, one could do the same for the Catholics and other religions. Heck, the Hindus and Catholics of the Tamil Tigers engaged in ethnic cleansing against Tamil Muslims for years, killing over 370 in the summer of 1990 alone, and sent suicide bombers to Buddhist shrines. And of course we all know what happened to the Bosnian Muslims. Despite your snide insinuations Muslims hardly hold the patent on mindless violence.

You are deliberately picking and choosing your data to portray all Muslims as bloodthirsty savages while deliberately ignoring similar barbarity amongst members of other groups, other factors (such as active states of war) that would contribute to the violence and the peaceful co-existence of the vast majority of Muslims in the world with people of other faiths. If you want a serious debate about the links between religious fundamentalism in Islam and the rise of modern terrorism I'll be happy to have one once you demonstrate some intent to argue in good faith and with relevant facts at your disposal.

And why aren't you talking to the Muslims? They don't bite (apart from Angua and then only during full moons). You might be surprised.


Sorry about that I kind of lump all violent and hideous crimes into one bucket for this conversation, perhaps I should have said baby bombing and bus blowing up by muslims.

you said:

And my point was that if you can use examples of Muslim bombings (all of yours taken from actual or virtual warzones) to paint the entire religion as violent, one could do the same for the Catholics and other religions.


Ok, about as many civilians were killed by Muslims in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of conflict in Northern Ireland (3,181 killed in Ireland).

Reference:

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/violence/death95w.htm

The list goes on and on without end, at about 5-6 terrorist attacks daily reported from fairly valid sources as news papers and government reports go. It adds up daily to huge slaughter all laid at the feet of the religion of peace, Islam. You do not get to set your own standards if a terrorist attack is justified or not as in this case that just came up.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/2010/08/31/2010-08

this was also reported on AP

Hamas claims responsibility for ambush that killed four Israeli settlers, one a pregnant woman


This was a drive by shooting to make a political point as some sort of peace talks were started.

What is not included (or try not to be included as it is hard to tell some times) is when two armies make a stand and try to gun each other down in open combat. That is not counted as a terrorist attack.

Come, and stop playing your silly games, of course Islam justifies the slaughter they do to children of non-believers, or to those they think are helping the evil west, like human aid workers, what filthy criminals do not!

Terrorist attacks is what Mohammed (630 AD) commanded to do as he raided caravans, assassinated the competition, and proclaimed a commandment to strike terror in the heart of the non-believer. Not to mention plain old opportunity to kill the enemy's of Allah in vigilante crimes because the Koran says to do it, or they do not like the Christian church next door, and the muslim thinks Mohammad would burn it down if he was here.

This does not even mention the 5,000 plus a year of honor killings where a man thinks his wife is leaving Islam so he has the Koran backing to kill her as an apostate, or even kill his own daughter if she gets too “westernized”.

You are trying to defend what is NOT defendable, Islam is an absolute shit hole of savageness and brutality all backed up by the koran, hadith, and Mullahs where ever Muslims gather.


Are there some—even ONE Muslim--- that refuses these evil deeds that are direct commandments in the koran? Yes, but I have NO idea why they still call them selves Muslim, unless some other muslin has gun to their head or holding their family hostage. In Islam (Koran and Hadith) all apostates are to be killed by the closest available Muslim. And if that not work all Islamic counties make leaving Islam a capital crime with a death sentence in their Koran Sheria laws.

You are dealing with a savage cult here whose god given senses are warped that need to relearned as to what is right and wrong.

Of course non-Muslims commit filthy criminal acts--- but the difference is NOT in the name of religion! And in the USA we track those criminals down and delver the full force of our criminal justice system, even the death sentence where applicable. And Muslims damn well know that in the USA we are serious about fighting crimes, and we are NOT going to take the shit of law breakers any longer.

In the USA we read and KNOW the Koran and we KNOW what muslims are up to and how they LIE their ASS off about their religion. And God Damn IT we will burn their koran in public in protest to tell them all about it.

I cannot even open a daily paper from over seas and not see a big pile of dead bodies, or some lovely child ripped apart, laying at the feet of some filthy Muslim inspired by the Koran and hadith.

The best thing Muslims can do when they step on to USA ground is put the koran in the trash where it belongs and walk away from it. They can convert to any one of a hundreds gods of peace, or none at all, and I could care less. But do not be standing there saying Islam is peace when there is a big pile of dead bodies at their feet, as I do not buy it.


And one last point why are Muslims some what law abiding in the USA, it certainly is NOT their religion. Because 1 in 4 citizens have guns, and if any Muslim slugs come on to private property trying their midnight terrorist attack they will be shot dead a rock. It is our right in the Grand USA to protect our family and goods with fire power when needed and that we do be it from Muslims or any other filthy criminal. We are law abiding in this country and we are going to stay that way no matter what the child rapist Mohammad says in the Koran.


Don

Grey
09-01-2010, 11:51 AM
Imagine the Muslim wrought carnage to the north.:rolleyes:

elucidator
09-01-2010, 11:54 AM
.....no matter what the child rapist Mohammad says in the Koran

May the sweet Baby Jesus shut your mouth and open your heart.

qpw3141
09-01-2010, 11:57 AM
And one last point why are Muslims some what law abiding in the USA, it certainly is NOT their religion. Because 1 in 4 citizens have guns, and if any Muslim slugs come on to private property trying their midnight terrorist attack they will be shot dead a rock. It is our right in the Grand USA to protect our family and goods with fire power when needed and that we do be it from Muslims or any other filthy criminal. We are law abiding in this country and we are going to stay that way no matter what the child rapist Mohammad says in the Koran.

Oh, good grief! :rolleyes:

If a determined terrorist is determined to come onto your property for the purposes of enacting terrorism I'm sure they will make use of two important things to nullify your fire power:

1) Even more fire power of their own.
2) Surprise.

Uzi
09-01-2010, 12:10 PM
Indonesia is the world's most populous Muslim-majority nation with 86% of the population reportedly Muslim. A quick glance at the Wiki says "Although religious freedom is stipulated in the Indonesian constitution, the government officially recognizes only six religions: Islam, Protestantism, Roman Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism." That's not complete religious freedom but it's not the "nuttiness" we associate with Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Middle East (which is as much socio-political as it is religious) either. It does kind of suck if you're Jewish though.

52% of Muslims in Indonesia support some form of Sharia Link (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/indonesia/2187933/Indonesia-backs-sharia-law-poll-shows.html)
Another related Link (http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2650&Itemid=175)
And another Link (http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/09/18/indonesias-sharia-push-may-scare-investors-moderates/)

Uzi
09-01-2010, 12:13 PM
Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

You mean the old testament which both Christians AND Muslims revere?

Don123
09-01-2010, 12:19 PM
Muslims are people like any other, but the difference is that their book condones what we would consider to be evil actions.
Yes, Muslims live in peace with people of other faiths, but usually when they are the minority and have little choice in the matter. Otherwise, when Muslims are the majority you usually have some form of Sharia as the basis for the law and all sorts of nuttiness derived because of it.


Uzi quick Quiz:

Which passage comes from the bible and which comes from the Koran

Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.

So go you both to him and say: Surely we are two apostles of your Lord; therefore send the children of Israel with us and do not torment them! Indeed we have brought to you a communication from your Lord, and peace is on him who follows the guidance;





Look I'm not going to argue your bull shit of justifying one heinous crime with another.

IF Islam is so great, why is the world's carnage laid at their feet in this modern age? Don’t bother answering, as we both know why--- Islam is a savage brain dead cult.


SO if a heinous crime is in the bible OT, it is OK for Muslims to do the same---- YOU are some what weak in your argument. See how nice I am, I did not even call you a bad name.


But for the record, if it makes you happy, throw the OT on the fire also and teach the Catholics a lesson.

Some one has to take a stand for what is right and wrong, and certainly Muslims and their sympathizers will not, so I will do it.

And it is not like I am trying to hide any thing as the bible comes off the shelf to be read.

Look this up "Dark bible" on google.


Don

Kobal2
09-01-2010, 12:22 PM
I think what we can all take away from this thread is : Don123 is good law 'biding folk, and he'll shoot any sumbitch try and sez different ! :)

asterion
09-01-2010, 12:24 PM
If a determined terrorist is determined to come onto your property for the purposes of enacting terrorism I'm sure they will make use of two important things to nullify your fire power:

1) Even more fire power of their own.
2) Surprise.

You forget fear. So a Muslim terrorist's three weapons are fire power, surprise, fear, and an almost fanatical devotion to Osama....A Muslim terrorist's four weapons are fire power, surprise, fear, an almost fanatical devotion to Osama, and pretty nice headgear.

Damn it, I got my Fox talking points mixed up.

elucidator
09-01-2010, 12:25 PM
You mean the old testament which both Christians AND Muslims revere?

Not strictly true, at least not historically. For centuries, Christians regarded the Old Testament as irrelevant, having been superseded by Jesus' ministry. The revival of interest in the Old Testament is a relatively recent development. I recommend to you Bible and Sword by Barbara Tuchman, of Guns of August fame.

Don123
09-01-2010, 12:34 PM
And one last point why are Muslims some what law abiding in the USA, it certainly is NOT their religion. Because 1 in 4 citizens have guns, and if any Muslim slugs come on to private property trying their midnight terrorist attack they will be shot dead a rock. It is our right in the Grand USA to protect our family and goods with fire power when needed and that we do be it from Muslims or any other filthy criminal. We are law abiding in this country and we are going to stay that way no matter what the child rapist Mohammad says in the Koran.

Oh, good grief! :rolleyes:

If a determined terrorist is determined to come onto your property for the purposes of enacting terrorism I'm sure they will make use of two important things to nullify your fire power:

1) Even more fire power of their own.
2) Surprise.

So you give up and convert to islam out of theiir threats and the first thing you have to do in your conversion to Mohammad is kill non-believers, jews, and Christians.

How nice you are.

Well I'm not going to raise my hand to my neighbor without due cause, and some stupid brain dead "idiot Allah" is not a good cause. But if you convert to islam and come around my house on to my personal property looking for trouble, or to do the will of the child rapist Mohammad, you just might take your life in your own hands and then loose it.

And on the streets and in public and you are a muslim--- you are marked meat and watched, you step out of line and you will do the time in prision or jail.

Don

asterion
09-01-2010, 12:37 PM
Just what is the board policy on calling someone out as an Internet Tough Guy in GD?

qpw3141
09-01-2010, 12:41 PM
Oh, good grief! :rolleyes:

If a determined terrorist is determined to come onto your property for the purposes of enacting terrorism I'm sure they will make use of two important things to nullify your fire power:

1) Even more fire power of their own.
2) Surprise.

So you give up and convert to islam out of theiir threats and the first thing you have to do in your conversion to Mohammad is kill non-believers, jews, and Christians.

How nice you are.
:confused: Did you just type some words more or less at random?

Well I'm not going to raise my hand to my neighbor without due cause, and some stupid brain dead "idiot Allah" is not a good cause. But if you convert to islam and come around my house on to my personal property looking for trouble, or to do the will of the child rapist Mohammad, you just might take your life in your own hands and then loose it.

You might. Or they might just get in first with superior fire power. You know, like the Christians who murder family planning doctors do.

And on the streets and in public and you are a muslim--- you are marked meat and watched, you step out of line and you will do the time in prision or jail.


You just typed some more words more or less at random, right?

qpw3141
09-01-2010, 12:42 PM
If a determined terrorist is determined to come onto your property for the purposes of enacting terrorism I'm sure they will make use of two important things to nullify your fire power:

1) Even more fire power of their own.
2) Surprise.

You forget fear. So a Muslim terrorist's three weapons are fire power, surprise, fear, and an almost fanatical devotion to Osama....A Muslim terrorist's four weapons are fire power, surprise, fear, an almost fanatical devotion to Osama, and pretty nice headgear.

Damn it, I got my Fox talking points mixed up.

Give 'em the comfy chair, that's what I say!

Uzi
09-01-2010, 12:42 PM
You mean the old testament which both Christians AND Muslims revere?

Not strictly true, at least not historically. For centuries, Christians regarded the Old Testament as irrelevant, having been superseded by Jesus' ministry. The revival of interest in the Old Testament is a relatively recent development. I recommend to you Bible and Sword by Barbara Tuchman, of Guns of August fame.

I've always wondered why Christians keep the thing bundled within the bible. It makes no sense given the way the two seem so opposite from each other. It just gives credence to humans writing the things rather than some super being, who I expect would be more organized about disseminating his message.

Don123
09-01-2010, 01:16 PM
.....no matter what the child rapist Mohammad says in the Koran

May the sweet Baby Jesus shut your mouth and open your heart.

Hey I know more about Christianity than 98% of most Christians, and by far more skilled in the bible, because I like theology as an on going hobby. And guess what? Mohammad is still a filthy child rapist by Islam's own Koran and hadith.

http://www.islam-watch.org/Amarkhan/pedophilia-in-islam/pedophilia-islam.htm

Sahih Hadith of Abu Dawud (817-888/9)


3a. "‘A’ishah said: The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) married me when I was seven years old. The narrator Sulaiman said : Or six years. He had intercourse with me when I was nine years old." [Abu Dawud 2:2116, p.569]


That is the great problem, Muslims do not even read their own holy books, and are totally incapable of saying YES or NO. They are like drones filled with self justification and live a life out of books they have never read nor studied. Hence they are cult freaks. They are insane thinking that Allah works threw them to the murders of their kind, and they worship the child rapist Mohammad.

Maybe if we burn their books in public that might wake them up--see NO Allah showed up to put the fire out---so much for Islamic Voodoo.


Don

Der Trihs
09-01-2010, 01:21 PM
Maybe if we burn their books in public that might wake them up--see NO Allah showed up to put the fire out---so much for Islamic Voodoo.Given that they don't plate their tanks with Qurans I think they've already figured out their books aren't indestructible.

elucidator
09-01-2010, 01:22 PM
I've always wondered why Christians keep the thing bundled within the bible....

Read the book. It will also explain to you why so many Appalachian Americans have names like Ezekial, Jeremiah, and so forth. Oversimplified: once an English Bible became available to people who could read, a whole slew of English people became enamored of the Old Testament. Hence, the historical foundation for England's involvement with Zionism.

bbart4
09-01-2010, 01:23 PM
52% of Muslims in Indonesia support some form of Sharia Link (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/indonesia/2187933/Indonesia-backs-sharia-law-poll-shows.html)
Another related Link (http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2650&Itemid=175)
And another Link (http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/09/18/indonesias-sharia-push-may-scare-investors-moderates/)

Please... Sharia is a complicated issue. You can ask 10 muslims and get 10 different answers of what it actually means.

In Indonesia, there has been an effort to decentralize where some districts may enact their versions of sharia. Note that this isn't the same as in the ME. Usually it's under the guise of going after corruption. Plus in a VERY FEW areas where it has been implemented, non-muslims are not fully subject to it.

Your info is old.There's a huge backlash against sharia in Indonesia as there have been reports of abuse. The few local jurisdictions who have implemented them do not even have the budget to enforce it.

Declining support:
Link 1 (http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2010/07/25/support-sharia-law-minority-%E2%80%94-and-declining.html)
Link 2 (http://www.asianews.it/news-en/Support-for-Sharia-drops-by-10-per-cent-in-Indonesia-19035.html)

It is highly controversial:
Link 3 (http://www.voanews.com/english/news/Acehs-Sharia-Law-Still-Controversial-in-Indonesia-80257482.html)

elucidator
09-01-2010, 01:32 PM
Yes, sharia law is crude and primitive. But it must be remembered that when Mohammed arrived on the scene, there was no law for the Arabian people, nothing but clan loyalty and blood feuds. Sharia law, for all its failings, was a major step forward in civilization for them.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 01:44 PM
Whelp, I guess the Sunni, Shi'a, Sufis and other sub-divisions of Islam can pack their gear and call the feud off. Well that would just be super. Any guess of a time frame here? Can we pencil in next Tuesday? It would be great to read about a terror free week where nobody tried to blow up an airplane or strap a bomb to themselves and kill 30 people, or blow up a subway, a building, an embassy, kill a movie director, a cartoonist, a book writer, their daughter for holding hands with a boy, a man for holding hands with a man, blow up other religion's antiquities .......

These are not minor transgressions. They are not extensions of free speech. They represent a focused, codified application of religious intolerance.

I don't see it changing in my life time. If you have evidence to the contrary then share it with the rest of us.

Uzi
09-01-2010, 01:58 PM
Your info is old.There's a huge backlash against sharia in Indonesia as there have been reports of abuse. The few local jurisdictions who have implemented them do not even have the budget to enforce it.

Well, I wouldn't call it 'huge', but any progress is a good thing. My hope working in Yemen was that access to the media would be a beneficial thing. When you see a satellite dish on a stone hut in the middle of the desert, you figure they want information from further away than the local mosque. But watching the english versions of the local programming, you still find conspiracy theories broadcast like how the Zionists are evil and the Indians are going to blow up the Kaaba.

ZPG Zealot
09-01-2010, 02:08 PM
May the sweet Baby Jesus shut your mouth and open your heart.

Hey I know more about Christianity than 98% of most Christians, and by far more skilled in the bible, because I like theology as an on going hobby. And guess what? Mohammad is still a filthy child rapist by Islam's own Koran and hadith.

http://www.islam-watch.org/Amarkhan/pedophilia-in-islam/pedophilia-islam.htm

Sahih Hadith of Abu Dawud (817-888/9)


3a. "‘A’ishah said: The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) married me when I was seven years old. The narrator Sulaiman said : Or six years. He had intercourse with me when I was nine years old." [Abu Dawud 2:2116, p.569]


That is the great problem, Muslims do not even read their own holy books, and are totally incapable of saying YES or NO. They are like drones filled with self justification and live a life out of books they have never read nor studied. Hence they are cult freaks. They are insane thinking that Allah works threw them to the murders of their kind, and they worship the child rapist Mohammad.

Maybe if we burn their books in public that might wake them up--see NO Allah showed up to put the fire out---so much for Islamic Voodoo.


Don

Something tells me Don is living in the back woods somewhere and has never met an actual Muslim (except perhaps the E.R. doctor that patched him up the last time he had a fireworks accident).

ZPG Zealot
09-01-2010, 02:14 PM
Yes, sharia law is crude and primitive. But it must be remembered that when Mohammed arrived on the scene, there was no law for the Arabian people, nothing but clan loyalty and blood feuds. Sharia law, for all its failings, was a major step forward in civilization for them.

Sharia law and the old testament laws don't strike me as being extremley different (based on tribal codes). Much is made of Mohammid's consummating a marriage with a 9-year old girl, to modern ears it is very shocking, however very young marriages occurred among European Christians also. They were not the norm, but for reasons of politics and money, they did occur. Could someone with more knowledge of the bible inform us, is there anywhere in the bible that a minimum age for sexual intercourse or marriage is established? The only thing I have ever been able to find is the prohibition of sex between unmarried persons.

Deeg
09-01-2010, 02:15 PM
52% of Muslims in Indonesia support some form of Sharia Link (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/indonesia/2187933/Indonesia-backs-sharia-law-poll-shows.html)
Another related Link (http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2650&Itemid=175)
And another Link (http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/09/18/indonesias-sharia-push-may-scare-investors-moderates/)
What percentage of Christians want to ban same-sex marriages? How many want Young Earth Creationism taught at schools? Muslims really aren't that much different from Christians.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 02:26 PM
52% of Muslims in Indonesia support some form of Sharia Link (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/indonesia/2187933/Indonesia-backs-sharia-law-poll-shows.html)
Another related Link (http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2650&Itemid=175)
And another Link (http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2009/09/18/indonesias-sharia-push-may-scare-investors-moderates/)
What percentage of Christians want to ban same-sex marriages? How many want Young Earth Creationism taught at schools? Muslims really aren't that much different from Christians.
How many Muslims support gay marriage? More importantly How many Muslims support the death penalty for gay sex?

I think Muslims differ greatly from Christians in many parts of the world.

Deeg
09-01-2010, 02:36 PM
I would not be surprised if the Westboro Baptist Church supported the death penalty for gay marriage. The problem is that you're comparing the extremists of Islam with moderates of Christianity.

Der Trihs
09-01-2010, 02:47 PM
I would not be surprised if the Westboro Baptist Church supported the death penalty for gay marriage. The problem is that you're comparing the extremists of Islam with moderates of Christianity.
What I was going to say. You've got plenty of kill-the-gays, shoot-the-unbelievers, nuke-the-world fanatics among Christians. I see no reason to assume that if you put Christian extremists in charge of writing the laws the way that Islamic extremists are in, say, Saudi Arabia that you'd get anything more enlightened.

Uzi
09-01-2010, 02:53 PM
Luckily, they aren't in charge in most cases. But case in point, George Bush.

Der Trihs
09-01-2010, 02:58 PM
Luckily, they aren't in charge in most cases. But case in point, George Bush.Still not as extremist a Christian as the Islamic types in Saudi Arabia are. Not even all that extremist by American Christian standards. He did more damage by being an amoral overprivileged idiot than he did because of his religion.

elucidator
09-01-2010, 03:04 PM
The fanatic, the man who knows The Truth and will brook no disagreement, he is the enemy of us all. Maybe God will forgive the man who fans the flames of ignorant hatred. Maybe I will too, but I'll most likely wait till they're dead.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 03:05 PM
What I was going to say. You've got plenty of kill-the-gays, shoot-the-unbelievers, nuke-the-world fanatics among Christians. I see no reason to assume that if you put Christian extremists in charge of writing the laws the way that Islamic extremists are in, say, Saudi Arabia that you'd get anything more enlightened. And where are all the dead gays/non-believers? And by this I mean at the hands of Christians and not Muslims.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 03:06 PM
The fanatic, the man who knows The Truth and will brook no disagreement, he is the enemy of us all. Maybe God will forgive the man who fans the flames of ignorant hatred. Maybe I will too, but I'll most likely wait till they're dead. God's busy handing out virgins so you'll have to wait awhile.

Der Trihs
09-01-2010, 03:06 PM
What I was going to say. You've got plenty of kill-the-gays, shoot-the-unbelievers, nuke-the-world fanatics among Christians. I see no reason to assume that if you put Christian extremists in charge of writing the laws the way that Islamic extremists are in, say, Saudi Arabia that you'd get anything more enlightened. And where are all the dead gays/non-believers? And by this I mean at the hands of Christians and not Muslims.You do know that gay bashing is quite common?

elucidator
09-01-2010, 03:07 PM
They are gone to the place the candle flame goes when you blow it out. And if this shit keeps going, they'll be joined by some innocent Americans. I'm against that. You?

Deeg
09-01-2010, 03:40 PM
And where are all the dead gays/non-believers? And by this I mean at the hands of Christians and not Muslims.
There are quite a few buried in Northern Ireland.

Uzi
09-01-2010, 04:27 PM
And where are all the dead gays/non-believers? And by this I mean at the hands of Christians and not Muslims.[/QUOTE]

It happens, but there aren't any predominantly Christian nations that have the death penalty for being gay. None that I know of, at least.

Der Trihs
09-01-2010, 04:51 PM
It happens, but there aren't any predominantly Christian nations that have the death penalty for being gay. None that I know of, at least.Because the Christian fanatics who'd like such a penalty don't have the power to put it into law in as many places as the Islamic fanatics do, such as in theocracies like Saudi Arabia. That's the difference, not any imagined moral superiority of Christianity over Islam. American Christians are known to be heavily involved in the attempt to implement such a death penalty for homosexuals in Uganda; I see no reason to think they wouldn't cheerfully put such a law into force in America if they could.

qpw3141
09-01-2010, 05:06 PM
It happens, but there aren't any predominantly Christian nations that have the death penalty for being gay. None that I know of, at least.Because the Christian fanatics who'd like such a penalty don't have the power to put it into law in as many places as the Islamic fanatics do, such as in theocracies like Saudi Arabia. That's the difference, not any imagined moral superiority of Christianity over Islam. American Christians are known to be heavily involved in the attempt to implement such a death penalty for homosexuals in Uganda; I see no reason to think they wouldn't cheerfully put such a law into force in America if they could.

Maybe gays should have a jihad against American Christians.

Oh, God, the madness in this thread is catching! :eek:

Magiver
09-01-2010, 05:08 PM
There are quite a few buried in Northern Ireland. Except for the fact that it was a political conflict between the Irish and the English and did not involve Protestants and Catholics. Not only is it not promoted by religious leaders it is expressly condemned (http://www.cbcpnews.net/?q=node/7831).

Deeg
09-01-2010, 05:15 PM
Except for the fact that it was a political conflict between the Irish and the English and did not involve Protestants and Catholics. Not only is it not promoted by religious leaders it is expressly condemned (http://www.cbcpnews.net/?q=node/7831).
Hey, look, Muslim leaders condemn terrorism (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/5111092.stm). Again, you are comparing extremist Muslims with non-extremist Christians.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 05:16 PM
]Because the Christian fanatics who'd like such a penalty don't have the power to put it into law in as many places as the Islamic fanatics do, such as in theocracies like Saudi Arabia. There are so many things wrong with that statement. First, we are a nation ruled predominately by Christian politicians. And second, most terrorist acts are committed by organized groups of people and not governments.

Despite your view of the United States it is one of the most culturally diversified and tolerant nations on the planet.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 05:19 PM
Except for the fact that it was a political conflict between the Irish and the English and did not involve Protestants and Catholics. Not only is it not promoted by religious leaders it is expressly condemned (http://www.cbcpnews.net/?q=node/7831).
Hey, look, Muslim leaders condemn terrorism (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/west_midlands/5111092.stm). Again, you are comparing extremist Muslims with non-extremist Christians. No, I'm comparing the number of terrorist Muslims to terrorist Christians.

I can find numerous quotes from people like Abu Hamza al-Masri who would prefer England become part of a caliphate.

qpw3141
09-01-2010, 05:21 PM
Despite your view of the United States it is one of the most culturally diversified and tolerant nations on the planet.

On the tolerance front, sadly, evidence would seem to demonstrate otherwise.

And you seem to be one of the movers and shakers who would like to cut back on tolerance. :(

Der Trihs
09-01-2010, 05:21 PM
]Because the Christian fanatics who'd like such a penalty don't have the power to put it into law in as many places as the Islamic fanatics do, such as in theocracies like Saudi Arabia. There are so many things wrong with that statement. First, we are a nation ruled predominately by Christian politicians. Are you trying to equate "Christian politician" with "fanatic"?

And second, most terrorist acts are committed by organized groups of people and not governments. Because if it's done by a government it typically doesn't get the terrorist label even if the same act would get such a label if it was performed by something other than a government. Not that I was even talking about terrorism; I was talking about genocide.

Der Trihs
09-01-2010, 05:25 PM
I can find numerous quotes from people like Abu Hamza al-Masri who would prefer England become part of a caliphate.And there are Christian fanatics who'd like to destroy civilization in order to bring on the Second Coming. Should we judge Christians by them the way you want us to judge Muslims by the tiny minority that are terrorists?

Magiver
09-01-2010, 05:29 PM
Are you trying to equate "Christian politician" with "fanatic"? No, I'm trying to equate Christian leaders with Muslim leaders.

Because if it's done by a government it typically doesn't get the terrorist label even if the same act would get such a label if it was performed by something other than a government. Not that I was even talking about terrorism; I was talking about genocide.I missed the genocide committed by the United States. We stopped Saddam from wiping out the Kurds and we stopped the violence in Bosnia and we stopped Serbia from wiping out the Muslims in Montenegro.

Deeg
09-01-2010, 05:36 PM
No, I'm comparing the number of terrorist Muslims to terrorist Christians.
You've compared the Pope's condemnation of Northern Ireland terrorism with extremist Muslim terrorists.

I can find numerous quotes from people like Abu Hamza al-Masri who would prefer England become part of a caliphate.
You don't think that Pat Robertson would love US laws to reflect his version of conservative Christianity? According to this article (http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/pat_quotes/hindus.htm) Robertson advocated keeping Hindus out of the US. Then there's his blaming of 9/11 on homosexuals. This is a man who ran for president! What about Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority? This is different from Abu Hamza al-Masri how?

Magiver
09-01-2010, 05:39 PM
Despite your view of the United States it is one of the most culturally diversified and tolerant nations on the planet.

On the tolerance front, sadly, evidence would seem to demonstrate otherwise.

And you seem to be one of the movers and shakers who would like to cut back on tolerance. :( Really, how many Muslims have been slaughtered in the United States? In my neighborhood we have lots of Muslims and the last time some kid made fun of one of their elder's for not speaking English the neighborhood poured out on the street and dumped buckets of verbal shit on the little darling.

Criticizing the problems with Islamic terrorism does not in any way equate a lack of tolerance. We have mosques all over my city and state. We do not have anything statistically more intolerant of Islam than any other religion.

ZPG Zealot
09-01-2010, 05:46 PM
And where are all the dead gays/non-believers? And by this I mean at the hands of Christians and not Muslims.[/QUOTE]

It happens, but there aren't any predominantly Christian nations that have the death penalty for being gay. None that I know of, at least.

Uganda is trying to change that.

Kobal2
09-01-2010, 05:46 PM
And where are all the dead gays/non-believers? And by this I mean at the hands of Christians and not Muslims.

Brandon Teena's buried in Lincoln, Nebraska. Matthew Shepard was cremated, far as I can ascertain.

Want more, or is your point addressed, sternly talked to and sent back home weeping ?

ZPG Zealot
09-01-2010, 05:50 PM
Are you trying to equate "Christian politician" with "fanatic"? No, I'm trying to equate Christian leaders with Muslim leaders.

Because if it's done by a government it typically doesn't get the terrorist label even if the same act would get such a label if it was performed by something other than a government. Not that I was even talking about terrorism; I was talking about genocide.I missed the genocide committed by the United States. We stopped Saddam from wiping out the Kurds and we stopped the violence in Bosnia and we stopped Serbia from wiping out the Muslims in Montenegro.

Actually, it was Serbs wiping out the Muslims in Bosnia-Hercegovina and Kosovo. Ethnic cleansing in Montenegro (which is christian) never got as bad as the Bosnian lands (at least that we know of).

Magiver
09-01-2010, 06:03 PM
You've compared the Pope's condemnation of Northern Ireland terrorism with extremist Muslim terrorists. I made no such comparison. Your statement makes no sense. I pointed out that the actions were political in nature and were expressly condemned by religious leaders. It was not a religious war.

You don't think that Pat Robertson would love US laws to reflect his version of conservative Christianity? According to this article (http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/pat_quotes/hindus.htm) Robertson advocated keeping Hindus out of the US. Then there's his blaming of 9/11 on homosexuals. This is a man who ran for president! What about Jerry Falwell and the Moral Majority? This is different from Abu Hamza al-Masri how? Pat Robertson never promoted a religious caliphate and never advocated keeping Hindus out of the US. You didn’t read the article. He has never promoted violence. Abu hamza al-Masri convicted of soliciting to murder under the Offences against the Person Act 1861.

Deeg
09-01-2010, 06:28 PM
I made no such comparison. Your statement makes no sense. I pointed out that the actions were political in nature and were expressly condemned by religious leaders. It was not a religious war.
This is an example of your selective reasoning. IYO Northern Ireland was not religious in nature because a religious leader (belatedly) condemned it. Of course you pay no attention to the Muslim leaders who are condemning current terrorist activity.

Pat Robertson never promoted a religious caliphate and never advocated keeping Hindus out of the US. You didn’t read the article. He has never promoted violence. Abu hamza al-Masri convicted of soliciting to murder under the Offences against the Person Act 1861.
If you don't think that Pat Robertson wants a Christian equivalent to a religious caliphate in the US then I don't know what else to tell you. Maybe he hasn't been convicted of soliciting murder (there you go pulling out the extremists again) but he has constantly placed the blame for US disasters (like 9/11) on our un-Christian ways. If Roberts isn't extremist enough for you, what about the knuckleheads on Storm Front? What about a presidential candidate who belonged to the KKK? You think the KKK is all puppies and kittens?

Uzi
09-01-2010, 06:35 PM
Uganda is trying to change that.

So one non-muslim country is trying to implement the death penalty for gays vs the 7 (http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/lesbianactivism/f/DeathPenalty.htm) muslim countries who currently allow it. You think that is an argument in equating Christianity and and Islam as they currently stand then?

woodstockbirdybird
09-01-2010, 06:42 PM
Sure, you can equate them. They're both doing it for religious reasons. It's just a difference in quantity.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 06:43 PM
And where are all the dead gays/non-believers? And by this I mean at the hands of Christians and not Muslims.

Brandon Teena's buried in Lincoln, Nebraska. Matthew Shepard was cremated, far as I can ascertain.

Want more, or is your point addressed, sternly talked to and sent back home weeping ? And this is your example of national intolerance. Are you fucking kidding me? I weep for them just as I weep for the 87 people on American flight 11. I weep for them as I weep for the 60 people on United flight 175. I weep for them as I weep for the 59 people on American flight 77. I weep for them as I weep for the 40 people on flight United flight 93. I weep for them as I weep for the 2,606 people in buildings 1 and 2 of the World Trade center, many of them jumping to their deaths. I weep for them as I weep for the 125 people in the Pentagon.

Moving on to another day, I weep for the 13 people shot at Ft Hood by someone who took his religious instructions at an American mosque from an American educated Imam.

Want more or, do you want to start a spreadsheet comparing intolerance? Do you have enough tears for this conversation? Should I talk about the children on the plane who were riding without their parents and had to witness the terrorists cutting a flight attendant’s throat before they themselves died listening to the screams of the other passengers as they realized they were flying into a building? Should I post a video of as an American Jew getting his head cut off? Do the tears fall faster if I mention he had a name?

The reality is that for all the Pat Robertson’s who run their mouth they are not only harmless but would be met with deadly force by the vast majority of Americans if any attempt were made to do violence.

I’ll say it again, the United States is one of the most diverse and tolerant nations on the planet.

Uzi
09-01-2010, 06:46 PM
Sure, you can equate them. They're both doing it for religious reasons. It's just a difference in quantity.

So, you agree that there are a larger number of nutters who follow Islam then? Btw, no one has said that Christianity doesn't have its own 'cross' to bear.

FriarTed
09-01-2010, 06:49 PM
You mean the old testament which both Christians AND Muslims revere?

Not strictly true, at least not historically. For centuries, Christians regarded the Old Testament as irrelevant, having been superseded by Jesus' ministry. The revival of interest in the Old Testament is a relatively recent development. I recommend to you Bible and Sword by Barbara Tuchman, of Guns of August fame.

Oh, that is so wrong, it's impossible to say how wrong it is. Read any Christian writing of any tradition (excluding Gnostic & Marcionite) over the past 2000 years and they are obviously steeped in OT references. The NT was certainly seen as given primacy & the OT was interpreted through a Christian bias, but it still was revered as being the undergirding of the New Testament revelation of Christ.

woodstockbirdybird
09-01-2010, 06:58 PM
Sure, you can equate them. They're both doing it for religious reasons. It's just a difference in quantity.

So, you agree that there are a larger number of nutters who follow Islam then? Btw, no one has said that Christianity doesn't have its own 'cross' to bear.

No, I'd agree there are larger numbers of countries where the Muslim religion determines policy; I've met enough Christian nutters that I'd never claim there are less of them than Muslim nutters.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 07:14 PM
If you don't think that Pat Robertson wants a Christian equivalent to a religious caliphate in the US then I don't know what else to tell you. You can start by citing evidence of it instead of pulling opinion out of your ass or at least a certificate that you're a psychic capable of reading minds.

Maybe he hasn't been convicted of soliciting murder (there you go pulling out the extremists again) but he has constantly placed the blame for US disasters (like 9/11) on our un-Christian ways. If Roberts isn't extremist enough for you, what about the knuckleheads on Storm Front? What about a presidential candidate who belonged to the KKK? You think the KKK is all puppies and kittens? Since you're referring to Roberts as an extremist lets go with that. Where is the violence?

If you want to talk about the KKK that's fine. the last time they showed up at my city they required police protection and 100 feet of fencing to keep us from tearing them apart. The level on community tolerance for them is pretty low.

Kobal2
09-01-2010, 07:19 PM
And this is your example of national intolerance. Are you fucking kidding me?

Oh no, that was my example of extreme religious violence against gays, in a society which unlike Afghanistan isn't routinely violent. My example of national intolerance is the current groundswell of frothing anti-Muslim activism in the US, which happens to be turning violent (see cabby thread for details).

IOW, your posts are my cite.

ZPG Zealot
09-01-2010, 07:22 PM
Uganda is trying to change that.

So one non-muslim country is trying to implement the death penalty for gays vs the 7 (http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/lesbianactivism/f/DeathPenalty.htm) muslim countries who currently allow it. You think that is an argument in equating Christianity and and Islam as they currently stand then?

Actually I think it's an argument for praising the effects of the Separation of Church and State. To be blunt, if some fundamentalist Christian groups could get away with government control on the level of Wahabi Islam in Saudi Arabia they would be as bad. What stops those Christians from getting so bad, isn't their faith. It's simply having strong opponents.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 07:37 PM
Oh no, that was my example of extreme religious violence against gays, in a society which unlike Afghanistan isn't routinely violent. My example of national intolerance is the current groundswell of frothing anti-Muslim activism in the US, which happens to be turning violent (see cabby thread for details).
IOW, your posts are my cite.There is no ground swell of anti-muslim activism in the US.

Kobal2
09-01-2010, 07:43 PM
There is no ground swell of anti-muslim activism in the US.

Huh. I guess book barbecues must be one of those quaint US traditions that's always been going on but no one mentionned in the brochures until now. Or mosque arsons. Or assault on Muslims. Or virulent attacks on Muslims all over the news, blogosphere and whatnot.

We have always been at war with Eastasia, then ? Cause you know, I could have sworn...

Magiver
09-01-2010, 07:57 PM
Huh. I guess book barbecues must be one of those quaint US traditions that's always been going on but no one mentionned in the brochures until now. Or mosque arsons. Or assault on Muslims. Or virulent attacks on Muslims all over the news, blogosphere and whatnot.
. Book barbecues are non-violent freedoms of expressions and no mosques have been burned recently to my knowledge.

If you're referring to the recent torching of construction equipment to build the Murfreesboro mosque expansion then you should be aware of the community support (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4523264) that came out in defense of the mosque.

We don’t have the social/religious disparity that exists in France. There is no government institution tasked with maintaining a cultural identity.

Uzi
09-01-2010, 08:31 PM
Actually I think it's an argument for praising the effects of the Separation of Church and State. To be blunt, if some fundamentalist Christian groups could get away with government control on the level of Wahabi Islam in Saudi Arabia they would be as bad. What stops those Christians from getting so bad, isn't their faith. It's simply having strong opponents.

Well, the UK doesn't really have separation of state and church, so that argument is somewhat moot.

Why don't Muslim countries have that level of opposition then?

Fear Itself
09-01-2010, 08:39 PM
Pat Robertson never promoted a religious caliphate and never advocated keeping Hindus out of the US. You didn’t read the article. He has never promoted violence. Yes, Pat Robertson has advocated violence (http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200508220006):
Pat Robertson, host of Christian Broadcasting Network's The 700 Club and founder of the Christian Coalition of America, called for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

From the August 22 broadcast of The 700 Club:
ROBERTSON: There was a popular coup that overthrew him [Chavez]. And what did the United States State Department do about it? Virtually nothing. And as a result, within about 48 hours that coup was broken; Chavez was back in power, but we had a chance to move in. He has destroyed the Venezuelan economy, and he's going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism all over the continent.

You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war. And I don't think any oil shipments will stop. But this man is a terrific danger and the United ... This is in our sphere of influence, so we can't let this happen. We have the Monroe Doctrine, we have other doctrines that we have announced. And without question, this is a dangerous enemy to our south, controlling a huge pool of oil, that could hurt us very badly. We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don't need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It's a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with.
Let the feverish back-pedalling begin.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 08:49 PM
And he later apologized for it (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9047102/#slice-2). It was a short lived jihad on his part.

Kobal2
09-01-2010, 09:15 PM
Why don't Muslim countries have that level of opposition then?

Because in (some) Muslim countries, theocrats had more rifles. Then the opposition sort of... yeah. In many cases, courtesy of the West, too.

Book barbecues are non-violent freedoms of expressions and no mosques have been burned recently to my knowledge.

Consider (http://www.news4jax.com/news/23514333/detail.html) your (http://greenheritagenews.com/entries/human-rights-and-the-law/texas-mosque-targeted-by-arson-hate-graffiti-slurs) knowledge (http://www.news8austin.com/content/headlines/?ArID=119966&SecID=2) widened (http://articles.sfgate.com/2007-08-13/bay-area/17258314_1_mosque-one-alarm-blaze-arson-investigators). And that's just what pops up in the first two Google pages.
Besides, intolerance is intolerance. Being nominally non-violent doesn't make it any less hateful or outrageous. A peaceful KKK rally that ends with a burning cross in front of someone's yard is non violent, too. Yet if it happened all over the place, I'd be worried all the same.

If you're referring to the recent torching of construction equipment to build the Murfreesboro mosque expansion then you should be aware of the community support (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4523264) that came out in defense of the mosque.

What does that have to do with anything ? Is that supposed to make it OK ? Does the violence not count if it's denounced by others ? Do explain.

We don’t have the social/religious disparity that exists in France....

You're just not paying attention, are you ?

Uzi
09-01-2010, 10:10 PM
Besides, intolerance is intolerance. Being nominally non-violent doesn't make it any less hateful or outrageous. A peaceful KKK rally that ends with a burning cross in front of someone's yard is non violent, too. Yet if it happened all over the place, I'd be worried all the same.

Do you tolerate racists? Are you intolerant because you point out the flaws in their reasoning? There is a book that essentially condones the killing of people different than those who believe the message in it and we should be quiet about it? I don't think so. Making noise, or even burning books, is a whole lot different than killing people.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 10:36 PM
[quote=Uzi;12868038]

Consider (http://www.news4jax.com/news/23514333/detail.html) your (http://greenheritagenews.com/entries/human-rights-and-the-law/texas-mosque-targeted-by-arson-hate-graffiti-slurs) knowledge (http://www.news8austin.com/content/headlines/?ArID=119966&SecID=2) widened (http://articles.sfgate.com/2007-08-13/bay-area/17258314_1_mosque-one-alarm-blaze-arson-investigators). And that's just what pops up in the first two Google pages.
Besides, intolerance is intolerance. Being nominally non-violent doesn't make it any less hateful or outrageous. A peaceful KKK rally that ends with a burning cross in front of someone's yard is non violent, too. Yet if it happened all over the place, I'd be worried all the same.



What does that have to do with anything ? Is that supposed to make it OK ? Does the violence not count if it's denounced by others ? Do explain.

you went back 6 year to find grafiti , a failed arson and an actual arson on a mosque. Compare that to Churches burned (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=124615). You are clueless regarding anything that resembles perspective in a country the size of the United States.

And no, intolerance is not intolerance when it comes to actual violence. Again, it's a function of perspective.

Fear Itself
09-01-2010, 11:13 PM
And he later apologized for it (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9047102/#slice-2). It was a short lived jihad on his part.So you retract your claim.

tomndebb
09-01-2010, 11:34 PM
Do you tolerate racists?I can condemn racist actions without spewing drool-flecked spittle every time I mention the name of a person or group engaged in those actions.
There is a book that essentially condones the killing of people different than those who believe the message in it . . . .No. There is not. There is a book in which a couple of passages, apparently written during a period of strife, encourage pretty merciless treatment of a group of people who were being accused of threatening the author of the book.
Said passages, of course, are easy fodder for those who deliberately pick and choose "quotations" when they need to stir up hatred and fear, but there is no book that actually says what you claim it says.

Magiver
09-01-2010, 11:37 PM
And he later apologized for it (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9047102/#slice-2). It was a short lived jihad on his part.So you retract your claim. No. I think it's apparent that Pat Robertson and his minions don't pose any kind of threat.

I do think that the Imam who mentored the Ft Hood shooter is a threat.

Uzi
09-01-2010, 11:37 PM
Which would you rather have in your living room?
A (http://www.google.ca/imgres?imgurl=http://www.webdesign.org/img_articles/7072/BW-kitten.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.webdesign.org/photoshop/drawing-techniques/kitten-in-action-exclusive-tutorial.7072.html&h=293&w=400&sz=25&tbnid=ufBkmYiRIn12hM:&tbnh=91&tbnw=124&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dkitten&zoom=1&q=kitten&usg=__u1ZHCWdA3YpW_F6_19FNgCanc-E=&sa=X&ei=4Bp_TIWVJ5KesQOd8JD1Cg&ved=0CCsQ9QEwAw)
B (http://www.tiger-wallpapers.com/Siberian-Tigers/amur-tiger-on-ice/)
There both just cats, after all.

Don123
09-01-2010, 11:56 PM
you should know what you are burning

Here are 739 verses in the Koran of killings, burning alive, tortures, head and finger chopping, and other atrocities to numerous to mention.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/inj/long.html

Here is some sexy stuff that shows respect for women

"All married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess."
You can't have sex with married women, unless they are slaves obtained in war (with whom you may rape or do whatever you like). 4:24


Have sex with your women whenever, however, and as often as you like. 2:223

If your wife does not please you then beat her
4:34

Heaven is an orgy of youths, about 18 verses

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/sex/long.html

You may like this

"Marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four." 4:3

However Mohammad had 12 wives, a little special privilege here

Allah says it is lawful for Muhammad to marry any women he wants. 33:50-51

More stuff about women as they are half the worth of a man and women are to be hated, without repeating about 30 verses

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/women/long.html

The Koran is not all that big, you pull all the hate and killing out of it, what is left is repeat to nausea praises to Allah and Mohammad, some silly myths, stuff that makes no senses at all even in Arabic, some stupid stories butchered out of the bible, and all arranged by chapter length so it has no flowing context or time line. Yes that is right, the verses are in no particular order. Broken thoughts are all over the place.

No wonder muslims get mad at you when you say a truth, what a stupid book but it makes for good fire starter.

Good luck to you.

Don

Uzi
09-02-2010, 12:07 AM
Said passages, of course, are easy fodder for those who deliberately pick and choose "quotations" when they need to stir up hatred and fear, but there is no book that actually says what you claim it says.

Reason Project (http://www.project-reason.org/scripture_project/The_Quran:What_the_Quran_says_about_religious_tolerance/)

(4:91) “Take them and kill them wherever ye find them. Against such We have given you clear warrant.”
If the unbelievers do not offer you peace, kill them wherever you find them. Against such you are given clear warrant.

4:101 When ye travel through the earth, there is no blame on you if ye shorten your prayers, for fear the Unbelievers May attack you: For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies.

9:52 Say: “Can you expect for us (any fate) other than one of two glorious things- (Martyrdom or victory)? But we can expect for you either that God will send his punishment from Himself, or by our hands. So wait (expectant); we too will wait with you.”

9:5 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

No book, huh? You want to try that again? Or maybe god needs a better press agent than Muhammad to get his 'peaceful' point across.

Don123
09-02-2010, 12:09 AM
So you retract your claim. No. I think it's apparent that Pat Robertson and his minions don't pose any kind of threat.

I do think that the Imam who mentored the Ft Hood shooter is a threat.

True, and to that Imam obmam has a death warant out for him to shoot on sight. This is one thing I support obama on if you can find him. The Imama has trained many muslim terrorist and he should be killed, and he is an American no less living over seas.


Don

Don123
09-02-2010, 01:22 AM
As a point of interest how many did the KKK kill? About 3,853.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_were_killed_by_the_Ku_Klux_Klan

This reference could be correct, it is the most documented, dated, and itemized, but it never hurts to double check.

However it should be noted that the KKK by all main steam Christian churches is greatly condemned, and the title of Christian has been stripped from the organization by public opinion. The KKK are NOT Christians. And going by the bible NT I have to agree, they are NOT nor never have been a Christian organization, and to those KKK members that killed the innocent I hope they rot in HELL!


3,868 is a lot that was spread over a time frame of 1865 to 1981 was the last reported KKK killing. That is 117 years.

However that is about 2 years of “reported” Islamic terrorist killings that stands at 15,956 since 9/11, 2001. This is not counting the injured that eventually died as there is not a public record for that information but we know it must be in the added untold thousands just by the nature of injuries being struck by bombs, fire, and bullets.


So what is the death tally so far? Islam stands as the undisputed winner for the number of deaths and injured by Muslim terrorist attacks over the last nine years. Way to Go Mohammad, that is some nasty devil of a God you have.

But here is the good part, the vast majority of these Muslim terrorist killings are to their own kind! YEP other Muslims… ha ha ha way to go Mohammad! Islamic stupidity will never end.


I think it is about time we do a protest and burn some Korans, and so much more.


Don

elucidator
09-02-2010, 01:35 AM
You cause me to better understand Primo Levi's remark, about how Hell was the impossibility of reason.

Don123
09-02-2010, 01:44 AM
Do you tolerate racists?I can condemn racist actions without spewing drool-flecked spittle every time I mention the name of a person or group engaged in those actions.
There is a book that essentially condones the killing of people different than those who believe the message in it . . . .No. There is not. There is a book in which a couple of passages, apparently written during a period of strife, encourage pretty merciless treatment of a group of people who were being accused of threatening the author of the book.
Said passages, of course, are easy fodder for those who deliberately pick and choose "quotations" when they need to stir up hatred and fear, but there is no book that actually says what you claim it says.


http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/024-hell-and-hate.htm

Summary Answer:

There is no place in the Qur'an where Muhammad commands Muslims to love people of other religions. By contrast there are at least three dozen verses that tell Muslims to fight against non-Muslims and about 500 that speak of their place in Hell. They are from each period in Muhammad's life, scattered across 87 of the Qur'an's 114 chapters.

To put this in perspective, nearly one out of twelve verses in the Qur'an says that Allah hates non-Muslims to the extent that he will torment them for eternity in horrible ways. The Suras that make reference to this comprise about 95% of the Qur'an's total volume. If Allah creates infidels merely to fuel the fires of Hell, then there is little reason for Muslims to believe that such lives are of any worth in this world either.

user_hostile
09-02-2010, 02:25 AM
Summary Answer:

There is no place in the Qur'an where Muhammad commands Muslims to love people of other religions. By contrast there are at least three dozen verses that tell Muslims to fight against non-Muslims and about 500 that speak of their place in Hell. They are from each period in Muhammad's life, scattered across 87 of the Qur'an's 114 chapters.

To put this in perspective, nearly one out of twelve verses in the Qur'an says that Allah hates non-Muslims to the extent that he will torment them for eternity in horrible ways. The Suras that make reference to this comprise about 95% of the Qur'an's total volume. If Allah creates infidels merely to fuel the fires of Hell, then there is little reason for Muslims to believe that such lives are of any worth in this world either.

Don123, just for your own edification--why don't you read the Koran cover-to-cover and make up your own mind, rather than let a web-site decide it for you, okay? Challenge yourself--in spite of themselves, those crazy Muslims built one hell of civilization in the late 1000's and beyond; while the Europeans were still feasting on mud. More importantly, they preserved quite a bit of Western history, science, and culture that we would have otherwise lost. 'Cause as it stands right now, nobody's really paying attention to you or your arguments--people want to debate somebody who has something to say; they don't want to debate a proxy via website. Come back in a week and tell us what you discovered. :)

Don123
09-02-2010, 03:08 AM
Here are 164 verses of jihad in the Koran that have not been summarized.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Themes/jihad_passages.html

By your personal review you can clearly see that Jihad means Kill the enemies of Allah and Mohammad, and when you die trying your reward is massive in heaven, that in other places says is an eternal orgy with 72 angelic virgins to say the least.


“Each of the 164 Jihad verses in this list was selected based on how clearly and directly it spoke about Jihad, at least when considered in its immediate context. Most of the listed passages mention a military expedition, fighting, or distributing war spoils. Verses NOT generally listed are those that speak about aspects of Jihad other than the raiding, fighting and looting….”



“Abrogation is a reoccurring topic whenever verses of the Koran are discussed. As a rule, later verses counseling Holy War, such the Sword Verse (K 009:005), abrogate earlier verses counseling tolerance and peace, such as K 002:256. The Sword Verse is just one of the 164 Jihad verses listed below. It follows that not many, if any, of the Holy War verses in this list are abrogated.”


So the point being who are the enemies of Allah and Mohammad his so called “last” prophet? ALL who will not submit to the sword of Allah (non-believers)—for what the word Islam means “submit and bow”, hence mandatory prostrations to Allah in prayer. Bow or get killed is the over all theme of Islam, and has nothing to do with universal brotherly love to all, not even close.


Accordingly, out side of some myths, stupid stories of little value, and repetitious chanting of praises to Allah, the entire Koran is dedicated to war, hate, killing, slaughter, curses, torture and destruction to non-believers that is an obligations and Holy duty to perform by each and every Muslim unto all generations.


In addition it is impossible to be a moderate Muslim, as how can you moderately kill some one?

What Hasan did in his slaughter at Ft. Hood of 12 innocent people is exactly what ALL Muslims are commanded to do from the Koran, and the same with all the Muslim terrorist you read about every day.


It is impossible to reform Islam, as there simply is not the material in the Koran to do so. What you do have are Islamic hypocrites that refuse to fight that according to Mohammad in the Koran the hypocrites should be killed also. Islam is a deadly cult that has NO redemption and should never be classified as a religion but rather as a killing machine.


You bet, Burn the Koran, and hope that a few Muslims will find their way out of this brain dead cult. It can happen, some Muslims return to sanity and drop the title of a killer for Allah.


Don

Don123
09-02-2010, 03:34 AM
Summary Answer:

There is no place in the Qur'an where Muhammad commands Muslims to love people of other religions. By contrast there are at least three dozen verses that tell Muslims to fight against non-Muslims and about 500 that speak of their place in Hell. They are from each period in Muhammad's life, scattered across 87 of the Qur'an's 114 chapters.

To put this in perspective, nearly one out of twelve verses in the Qur'an says that Allah hates non-Muslims to the extent that he will torment them for eternity in horrible ways. The Suras that make reference to this comprise about 95% of the Qur'an's total volume. If Allah creates infidels merely to fuel the fires of Hell, then there is little reason for Muslims to believe that such lives are of any worth in this world either.

Don123, just for your own edification--why don't you read the Koran cover-to-cover and make up your own mind, rather than let a web-site decide it for you, okay? Challenge yourself--in spite of themselves, those crazy Muslims built one hell of civilization in the late 1000's and beyond; while the Europeans were still feasting on mud. More importantly, they preserved quite a bit of Western history, science, and culture that we would have otherwise lost. 'Cause as it stands right now, nobody's really paying attention to you or your arguments--people want to debate somebody who has something to say; they don't want to debate a proxy via website. Come back in a week and tell us what you discovered. :)

I have read the Koran cover to cover 3 times, and the bible cover to cover at least 10 times from my youth. So thank you for the advice.

However if I do not quote references you will ask for them, and if not supplied some will start their name calling contest to discredit my studies. So now you get to go argue with my references. Good luck to you, try another game to play.

You said:

Muslims built one hell of civilization in the late 1000's and beyond; while the Europeans were still feasting on mud. More importantly, they preserved quite a bit of Western history, science, and culture that we would have otherwise lost.

This is nothing but propaganda to the hilt that I have argued against many times before. Perhaps on another thread I will address it again. Then you can argue those reference and see how far you can get.

What I am showing here is a direct connection to Muslim terrorist behavior to the Koran and Hadith. Sorry if you do not like it, but so far you have yet to put any meat on the table other wise.

Good luck to you and your studies.


Don

BrightNShiny
09-02-2010, 05:23 AM
Here's an interesting quote about Islam (http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/reform/bush2003.htm):

It should be clear to all that Islam -- the faith of one-fifth of humanity -- is consistent with democratic rule. Democratic progress is found in many predominantly Muslim countries -- in Turkey and Indonesia, and Senegal and Albania, Niger and Sierra Leone. Muslim men and women are good citizens of India and South Africa, of the nations of Western Europe, and of the United States of America.

More than half of all the Muslims in the world live in freedom under democratically constituted governments. They succeed in democratic societies, not in spite of their faith, but because of it. A religion that demands individual moral accountability, and encourages the encounter of the individual with God, is fully compatible with the rights and responsibilities of self-government.

From Speech by President George Bush to mark the 20th anniversary of the National Endowment for Democracy, in Washington on 6 November 2003.

BrightNShiny
09-02-2010, 05:32 AM
I found another interesting quote about Islam. You see, way back, there was a thread here about a march in Iraq (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/archive/index.php/t-228525.html) against terrorism:

I think it's a good thing. Hope it spreads. I said in an earlier thread that it would be helpful if Mullahs from different sects came together and had a hug-fest. It would be even better if a Mullah would emerge espousing the true meaning of Islam (peace). Warring factions breed a feudal mentality that excludes the world around them. (bolding added)

BrightNShiny
09-02-2010, 05:58 AM
Even more interesting quotes about Islam (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/gwbush911islamispeace.htm):

Thank you all very much for your hospitality. We've just had a -- wide-ranging discussions on -- on the matter at hand. Like the good folks standing with me, the American people were appalled and outraged at last Tuesday's attacks. And so were Muslims all across the world. Both Americans and Muslim friends and citizens, tax-paying citizens, and Muslims in nations were just appalled and could not believe what -- what we saw on our TV screens.

These acts of violence against innocents violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith. And it's important for my fellow Americans to understand that. The English translation is not as eloquent as the original Arabic, but let me quote from the Koran, itself: In the long run, evil in the extreme will be the end of those who do evil. For that they rejected the signs of Allah and held them up to ridicule.1

The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war. When we think of Islam we think of a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world. Billions of people find comfort and solace and peace. And that's made brothers and sisters out of every race -- out of every race. America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country. Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads. And they need to be treated with respect. In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect.

From Address at Islamic Center of Washington delivered 17 September 2001, Washington, D.C.

Fear Itself
09-02-2010, 07:32 AM
So you retract your claim. No. I think it's apparent that Pat Robertson and his minions don't pose any kind of threat.So when we judge Muslims, it is not enough that they express violence, we also have to make a judgement about their intent? On what is that based? Or is it only Christians who get the second look at intent?

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 07:53 AM
4:91)If the unbelievers do not offer you peace, kill them wherever you find them. Against such you are given clear warrant.

See, I can bold significant parts as well. When you factor that bit in, it's just a mandate to strike back. Granted, it's not quite as flashy or impressive as "turn the other cheek", but we're not quite in Genghis Khan territory either.

When ye travel through the earth, there is no blame on you if ye shorten your prayers, for fear the Unbelievers May attack you: For the Unbelievers are unto you open enemies.

As it turns out, at the time they were. Besides, again this is not "hail, hail, hail and kill !" - flowery rethoric aside it just says it's OK to ease up on the kowtowing if your safety is at risk. Seems sensible to me.

“Can you expect for us (any fate) other than one of two glorious things- (Martyrdom or victory)? But we can expect for you either that God will send his punishment from Himself, or by our hands. So wait (expectant); we too will wait with you.”

Part of a long series of verses about how when you are called to war by your commander-in-chief, you damn well go to war and not try to cower back home like a pussy. It's your basic patriotic chest thumping war talk, "come on, we're going to murder them by the bushel and use their guts to grease the treads of our tanks, be there or be square".
Again, it's not quite Ghandi I'll grant you that much, but every tribe and culture behaves that way in times of war, don't they ? It's a rare commander who cries "Come with me, we don't have a chance in Hell ! Let's go and get our throats cut !"

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Interestingly, the verse just after that second one goes :

And if anyone of the Mushrikűn (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allâh) seeks your protection then grant him protection, so that he may hear the Word of Allâh (the Qur'ân), and then escort him to where he can be secure, that is because they are men who know not.

Context, my dear boy, context.
Turns out that part of the surat (read it here (http://www.ummah.net/what-is-islam/quran/noble/nobe009.htm)) boils down to "if they're cool with you, be cool with them, but if they be steppin', fuck'em". It seems to me to concern the safe passage of Mushrikűn in/through Muslim lands which is to be given (at least during certain months), nor should they be expected to observe Muslim customs and prayers while they're there, as long as they too respect the terms of the treaty. If they do betray their word, all bets are off.
Sinister ? You be the judge. By early medieval standards, that's not particularly bad a deal, when a time honoured strategy among Franks and Vikings was to invite your enemy to a piss-up under a banner of truce, then kill them all when they're good and drunk.

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 08:56 AM
No book, huh? You want to try that again? Or maybe god needs a better press agent than Muhammad to get his 'peaceful' point across.So, you cherry-picked the exact quotations to which I alluded that were written in the explicit context of specific historical events and you are pretending that they are general exhortations for universal behavior. That was pretty much what I said.

Your straw man about Islam being "peaceful" fails on the fact that I have never made any claim that it is a peaceful religion. I simply note that the dishonest mischaracterization that you have accepted regarding various suras does not support your claim that the religion actually encourages murder of all unbelievers.

Gyrate
09-02-2010, 09:00 AM
Turns out that part of the surat (read it here (http://www.ummah.net/what-is-islam/quran/noble/nobe009.htm)) boils down to "if they're cool with you, be cool with them, but if they be steppin', fuck'em". It seems to me to concern the safe passage of Mushrikűn in/through Muslim lands which is to be given (at least during certain months), nor should they be expected to observe Muslim customs and prayers while they're there, as long as they too respect the terms of the treaty. If they do betray their word, all bets are off.
Sinister ? You be the judge. By early medieval standards, that's not particularly bad a deal, when a time honoured strategy among Franks and Vikings was to invite your enemy to a piss-up under a banner of truce, then kill them all when they're good and drunk.You're missing the point, which is of course that all Muslims still do the "kill all the humans unbelievers!" thing and have not changed an iota since the Middle Ages, whereas the modern-day descendants of the Franks and Vikings have stealth bombers and robot drones and no longer need to waste good wine on their enemies. It's all about moving with the times.

</sarcasm>

Uosdwis R. Dewoh
09-02-2010, 09:13 AM
By early medieval standards, that's not particularly bad a deal, when a time honoured strategy among Franks and Vikings was to invite your enemy to a piss-up under a banner of truce, then kill them all when they're good and drunk.
Ah the old fork in the eye. Gets em every time.

Uzi
09-02-2010, 09:16 AM
Your straw man about Islam being "peaceful" fails on the fact that I have never made any claim that it is a peaceful religion. I simply note that the dishonest mischaracterization that you have accepted regarding various suras does not support your claim that the religion actually encourages murder of all unbelievers.

So, your claim that it doesn't say to kill the unbeliever is, in fact, false? Well, unless you remove the parts that actually say to do that, then you'd be correct. Unbelievable.
Because it does claim that you should kill unbelievers, or, to answer Kobal2, you must convert them. The choice is conversion, subjugation, constant war, or death.

And Gyrate, the my statements are not that will Muslims continue to do these things, but that their book condones it and because of that it is easier for the nutters to use it as their justification.

BrightNShiny
09-02-2010, 09:27 AM
Wow, I found another quote (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=79153) about Islam:

Islam is a peaceful religion. Islam is a religion that respects innocent human life.

National Security Advisor Interview with Al Jazeera TV, October 16, 2001.

Don123
09-02-2010, 09:56 AM
No book, huh? You want to try that again? Or maybe god needs a better press agent than Muhammad to get his 'peaceful' point across.So, you cherry-picked the exact quotations to which I alluded that were written in the explicit context of specific historical events and you are pretending that they are general exhortations for universal behavior. That was pretty much what I said.

Your straw man about Islam being "peaceful" fails on the fact that I have never made any claim that it is a peaceful religion. I simply note that the dishonest mischaracterization that you have accepted regarding various suras does not support your claim that the religion actually encourages murder of all unbelievers.

Then we can look at real life aplication of the Koran

http://markhumphrys.com/islam.killings.html#historical

This is the short list, go to the site for the exstened one

"Jihad destroyed a Christian Middle East and a Christian North Africa. Soon it was the fate of the Persian Zoroastrian and the Hindu to be the victims of jihad. The history of political Islam is the destruction of Christianity in the Middle East, Egypt, Turkey and North Africa. Half of Christianity was lost. Before Islam, North Africa was the southern part of Europe (part of the Roman Empire). Around 60 million Christians were slaughtered during the jihadic conquest. Half of the glorious Hindu civilization was annihilated and 80 million Hindus killed. The first Western Buddhists were the Greeks descended from Alexander the Great's army in what is now Afghanistan. Jihad destroyed all of Buddhism along the silk route. About 10 million Buddhists died. The conquest of Buddhism is the practical result of pacifism. Zoroastrianism was eliminated from Persia. The Jews became permanent dhimmis throughout Islam. In Africa over 120 million Christians and animists have died over the last 1400 years of jihad. Approximately 270 million nonbelievers died over the last 1400 years for the glory of political Islam.

These are the Tears of Jihad which are not taught in any school."

Gyrate
09-02-2010, 10:03 AM
Nice site.

If we're not allowed to discuss the Crusades and the Inquisition, the above is hardly germane.

Don123
09-02-2010, 10:06 AM
Wow, I found another quote (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=79153) about Islam:

Islam is a peaceful religion. Islam is a religion that respects innocent human life.

National Security Advisor Interview with Al Jazeera TV, October 16, 2001.


Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

2010.09.01 (Pattani, Thailand) - A Buddhist couple in their 50's are brutally murdered by Jihadi gunmen.

2010.09.01 (Lahore, Pakistan) - Twenty-nine Shia pilgrims in a procession are dismembered by a car bomb blast and two Sunni suicide bombers.

2010.09.01 (Helmand, Afghanistan) - Fifteen people at a market are badly injured, many with limbs torn from their bodies, by a Taliban blast.

2010.09.01 (Kandahar, Afghanistan) - Two Afghans are blown to bits by a Taliban bomb hidden on a motorcycle.

2010.08.31 (Mogadishu, Somalia) - Five men and three women are taken down by al-Shabaab bombers.

2010.08.31 (Kurram, Pakistan) - At least one woman and two children are among seven murdered in two home invasions by Religion of Peace radicals.

qpw3141
09-02-2010, 10:10 AM
Wow, I found another quote (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=79153) about Islam:



National Security Advisor Interview with Al Jazeera TV, October 16, 2001.


Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

2010.09.01 (Pattani, Thailand) - A Buddhist couple in their 50's are brutally murdered by Jihadi gunmen.

2010.09.01 (Lahore, Pakistan) - Twenty-nine Shia pilgrims in a procession are dismembered by a car bomb blast and two Sunni suicide bombers.

2010.09.01 (Helmand, Afghanistan) - Fifteen people at a market are badly injured, many with limbs torn from their bodies, by a Taliban blast.

2010.09.01 (Kandahar, Afghanistan) - Two Afghans are blown to bits by a Taliban bomb hidden on a motorcycle.

2010.08.31 (Mogadishu, Somalia) - Five men and three women are taken down by al-Shabaab bombers.

2010.08.31 (Kurram, Pakistan) - At least one woman and two children are among seven murdered in two home invasions by Religion of Peace radicals.

All these people were murdered by fanatics.

The fact that they happen to be Muslim is really neither here nor there.

It's the 'fanatic' element that is salient.

As a fanatic yourself (for who could say that someone who searches out lists of things with which to bash a religion is anything other than a fanatic), you actually share more with these people whom yo so despise than the more peaceful and tolerant members of their religion.

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 10:26 AM
Because it does claim that you should kill unbelievers, or, to answer Kobal2, you must convert them. The choice is conversion, subjugation, constant war, or death.

Errr... no it's not. Did you bother reading anything I said ? None of the passages you quoted are commandments to go out and purge the world by sword and flame, nor to subjugate other faiths. None of them. If you have others, please put them up.

And Gyrate, the my statements are not that will Muslims continue to do these things, but that their book condones it and because of that it is easier for the nutters to use it as their justification.
The Koran frames any discussion on warfare, the rules of war etc... in terms of "us vs. unbelievers", because it assumes that all Muslims will naturally be as one and live in perfect harmony with each other. Therefore, ipso facto, any discussion of "what to do if there's a war" assumes it's going to be a war with outsiders, and furthermore assumes that the outsiders will strike first. Because historically, that's what they did - that's why Muhammad had to flee to Medina in the first place. Then, and only then, did he start preaching armed resistance against oppression.

Of course, since the newly conquered Muslim world degenerated into internecine tribal warfare pretty much the minute Muhammad kicked it, there's in retrospect a tiny flaw in that underlying assumption. Still, setting up rules for warfare and treating the outgroup fairly in a time when warfare was "anything goes, and then you rape the corpses" was pretty darn progressive of him.

As for nutters, a self-respecting nutter could find justification for his actions in the lyrics of Helter Skelter. What of it ?

ZPG Zealot
09-02-2010, 10:51 AM
Wow, I found another quote (http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=79153) about Islam:



National Security Advisor Interview with Al Jazeera TV, October 16, 2001.


Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

2010.08.31 (Kurram, Pakistan) - At least one woman and two children are among seven murdered in two home invasions by Religion of Peace radicals.

And the people who have died in home invastions in the United States? Shall we describe their killers as Relgion of the Nailed Guy radicals?

Don123
09-02-2010, 12:13 PM
Nice site.

If we're not allowed to discuss the Crusades and the Inquisition, the above is hardly germane.

OK let us quick look at the Spanish inquisition, sounds good to me.

Let us keep in mind Islam had slaughtered their way across north Africa, invaded the Iberian peninsula starting around 711 AD. Muslims ravaged and brutalized the land that was not prepared for war and were mostly Christians living in peace. Muslims killed and slaved the local Christians and Jews in horrible suppression and forced conversions and gave a brutal slave tax.

Muslims then tried to enter France in their rape and pillage, and were a constant threat to Italy in raiding parties along the coast. The Muslims were stopped by Charles Martell (the Hammer) in 730 AD from entering Europe from Spain.

It took about 800 years to drive the Muslims out of Spain in constant wars at a great price of lives from one generation to the next. There was no love given to the Muslim invaders.

How many were killed in the Spanish Inquisition?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Inquisition

In a period lasting from 1540 to 1700, about 1,080 were killed that can be directly accounted for. Earlier estimates ranged from 3-5 thousand were killed over a period of 160 years, but this is based on estimated percentages. The exact figure is not known, and the study is on going.

Who were killed? It was not just the Islamic Moors that would not lay down their swords; there were some religious protestants, some criminals, no doubt some political rivals, and people thought to be of the devil as superstitions abounded.

Around 1480 to 1530 the last of the Muslims were subdued in Spain, and the Inquisition was the most active and reports are about 2,000 were killed that were mostly Islamic Jihads.

How brutal was it? Very brutal, but nothing that the Muslims had not done before as stacking human heads of Christians in a huge pile at the gates of some towns trying persuade the Nights and Crusaders not to continue the war of retaking Spain. The Muslim tactics of terror and brutality did not work this time, and the muslims were completly driven out.

The history of Spain is an on going study. Here is another site that some might be interested in for some greater detail of retaking Spain from Islam.

http://www.historyofjihad.org/reconquista.html

----

http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/11/the_truth_about_islamic_crusad.html

Muslims are quick to bring up the Christian Crusades, but say little of their political religion that was genocidal, savage, and brutal that marched across the Middle East and tried to enter Europe from the west. Muslims put Hitler to shame for all their genocides and mass slaughters.

Here is a dated listing of the Islamic crusades from 630 AD to 1095, up to the time of the first Christian Crusades. The Christian Crusades in fact divided the Islamic empire in half and stopped for a short time the Muslim conquest of Western Europe. One can clearly see that Western Europe was fighting for its life and survival against the savage Islamic empire.

The Islamic crusades, and the re-taking of Spain really should its own place on Great Debates. Perhaps at some other time but this is the thumb nail sketch for those that are interested.


Don

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 12:26 PM
Muslims ravaged and brutalized the land that was not prepared for war and were mostly Christians living in peace.

You, sir, owe me one drink for that spit take.

Don123
09-02-2010, 12:31 PM
Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

2010.09.01 (Pattani, Thailand) - A Buddhist couple in their 50's are brutally murdered by Jihadi gunmen.

2010.09.01 (Lahore, Pakistan) - Twenty-nine Shia pilgrims in a procession are dismembered by a car bomb blast and two Sunni suicide bombers.

2010.09.01 (Helmand, Afghanistan) - Fifteen people at a market are badly injured, many with limbs torn from their bodies, by a Taliban blast.

2010.09.01 (Kandahar, Afghanistan) - Two Afghans are blown to bits by a Taliban bomb hidden on a motorcycle.

2010.08.31 (Mogadishu, Somalia) - Five men and three women are taken down by al-Shabaab bombers.

2010.08.31 (Kurram, Pakistan) - At least one woman and two children are among seven murdered in two home invasions by Religion of Peace radicals.

All these people were murdered by fanatics.

The fact that they happen to be Muslim is really neither here nor there.

It's the 'fanatic' element that is salient.

As a fanatic yourself (for who could say that someone who searches out lists of things with which to bash a religion is anything other than a fanatic), you actually share more with these people whom yo so despise than the more peaceful and tolerant members of their religion.

Look here, if all you want to do is call names IWILL DO MY BEST NOT to entertain you.

It is people like you that get threads closed, of what I’m trying hard to go by the rules of the board.

So put something valuable on the table or walk away. I have been warned to stay to the facts and leave off personal insults to others. And I am not quite sure how to handle your stupid accusations and not be banned. It is for sure the Mods will not come to my defense, and are looking for any reason that I can be eliminate. I stand alone, so I will just put you on ignore for a time and see what happens.

So you do not like Muslims to be put in a bad light from their own holy books, hisotrical facts, and their behaviour today in terrorist activity---too GD bad for you, learn to live with it in tolerance that is not found in the Koran.


Don

BrightNShiny
09-02-2010, 12:47 PM
Latest Offerings from the Religion of Peace

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

2010.09.01 (Pattani, Thailand) - A Buddhist couple in their 50's are brutally murdered by Jihadi gunmen.

2010.09.01 (Lahore, Pakistan) - Twenty-nine Shia pilgrims in a procession are dismembered by a car bomb blast and two Sunni suicide bombers.

2010.09.01 (Helmand, Afghanistan) - Fifteen people at a market are badly injured, many with limbs torn from their bodies, by a Taliban blast.

2010.09.01 (Kandahar, Afghanistan) - Two Afghans are blown to bits by a Taliban bomb hidden on a motorcycle.

2010.08.31 (Mogadishu, Somalia) - Five men and three women are taken down by al-Shabaab bombers.

2010.08.31 (Kurram, Pakistan) - At least one woman and two children are among seven murdered in two home invasions by Religion of Peace radicals.

Why are you telling me? Is my name Condoleeza Rice? If you actually stood by what you've been posting, you would be condemning Rice, George W. Bush and most of the Republican Party for telling us that Islam is the religion of peace. Instead, you refuse to ever respond to them and keep spouting the same stuff at me. I'm not the one who said these things. You need to take it up with the Republicans, who spent the last decade telling us how peaceful Islam is. When the Republicans were running around telling us about peaceful Islam, where were you? Why weren't you sending Koran passages to them?

Really Not All That Bright
09-02-2010, 12:51 PM
Apparently Don123's bustling melon-cart business kept him from attending high school history.

Gyrate
09-02-2010, 12:59 PM
Muslims ravaged and brutalized the land that was not prepared for war and were mostly Christians living in peace.

You, sir, owe me one drink for that spit take.Did you do another one at "One can clearly see that Western Europe was fighting for its life and survival against the savage Islamic empire"?

Don, one gets the impression from your posts that you see Muslims as sub-human cartoon monsters, a mindless ravening horde bent on consuming the world like the aliens in independence Day. You claim that there are no such thing as moderate Muslims, that they are all following a command from Allah to kill unbelievers (apart from the ones that are so "stupid" that they kill each other), and that any Muslims that don't actively espouse violence are either lying or not following their religion correctly. All violent acts by Muslims are attributed solely to their faith despite considerable evidence of other signficant socio-political factors and generalized to apply to all Muslims. You cite deeply biased websites, cherrypicked quotes and flawed historical analyses, and when the biases are pointed out, the contexts given and the history corrected you ignore them and post more of the same.

And then you talk about their lack of "tolerance". What are we to do?

Really Not All That Bright
09-02-2010, 01:04 PM
The Hustle.

*dum dum dum di dum di dum dum dum dum dum dum di dum di dum dum dum*

elucidator
09-02-2010, 01:10 PM
What strikes me most about Muslims is there absolute and unflinching obedience to their holy book. Sure don't see that amongst Christians, can't remember the last time I saw one give away everything he owned to the poor, so that he could follow Christ. Don't know of anybody who refused standard funeral respect to a relative because the Good Book said so. Don't think our structure of consumer capitalism would thrive in a population of relentlessly dogmatic Christians.

So what makes them so different? Is it genetic? Hardly likely, Indonesian Muslims are very removed from Arabic Muslims.

If your going to make the case that Muslims are aggressive and warlike due to blind obedience to carefully selected texts, you have to account for why they are so different in that regard. And why they are not equally blindly obedient to those texts which insist on tolerance and generosity, esp. as regards Christians and Jews.

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 01:27 PM
Let us keep in mind Islam had slaughtered their way across north Africa,"Slaughtered their way across North Africa" sounds impressively horrible, but the reality was more the typical wars of conquest with armies fighting it out and captured cities being subjected to brief periods of rapine, followed by more peaceful rule--pretty much the way that the Europeans were behaving at the same time.. . . invaded the Iberian peninsula starting around 711 AD. Muslims ravaged and brutalized the land that was not prepared for war and were mostly Christians living in peace. There is no ten year period between the fifth century and 711 when Christians were not waging war on each other in the Iberian peninsula. After the Visigoths, Vandals, and assorted Germanic groups got done beating up the retreating Byzantine holdovers from the Roman era, they turned on each other in a series of civil wars and other internecine conflicts. In fact, Tariq ibn Ziyad, the Berber leader, was probably invited to invade by the Basques who wanted someone to put pressure on King Roderic who was waging war against them at the time.
The notion that the Iberians had their "peaceful" lives interrupted by the Berbers is just silly and completely contrary to actual historical fact.
Muslims killed and slaved the local Christians and Jews in horrible suppression and forced conversions and gave a brutal slave tax.Basically, no. The Jews were already being harrassed by the Christians pretty regularly and forced to convert to Christianity. (There was a brief period in the middle of the seventh century when the more onerous antJewish laws were repealed, but it was immediately followed by another round of persecution in which even the Jews who had converted to Christianity were persecuted and often murdered.)

The Berbers did enslave a number of people and several cities were brutally sacked--pretty much the way that the Christians to the North were treating each other at the same time. It was a horrible thing, but it had nothing to do with Islam or Christianity; it was just how humans tended to behave. As to the "brutal" tax, it is true that Muslims were exempted from part of the taxes, but the actual records indicate that the taxes levied were no more harsh than the taxes levied by the Christain monarchs that had been overthrown. (In fact, while I do not know the specifics of the Iberian taxes, in the East, the Muslim taxes were actually lower than the Byzantine taxes they replaced.)

Muslims then tried to enter France in their rape and pillage, and were a constant threat to Italy in raiding parties along the coast. The Muslims were stopped by Charles Martell (the Hammer) in 730 AD from entering Europe from Spain.The reality is that the "invasion" that was stopped at Tours was less a genuine invasion of conquest and more a raid in force looking for booty. Charles deserves credit for inflicting a sufficiently punishing defeat that the Arabs wandered back to the Pyrenees and settled down to ruling Iberia, but he did not actually stop an attempt to conquer France/Gaul or Christian Europe.

As to the raids on Italy, (and Southern France and the Baltics), they were pretty much part and parcel with the similar raids by Vikings in the North. Europe was pretty chaotic following the fall of Rome and no European nation invested in a good navy. That lack invited piracy and raids from any group that could assemble some ships to strike at European port towns, regardless whether the raiders worshipped Allah or Odin.

Muslims put Hitler to shame for all their genocides and mass slaughters. Utterly false.

The Islamic crusades, and the re-taking of Spain really should its own place on Great Debates. Perhaps at some other time but this is the thumb nail sketch for those that are interested.Thumbnail sketch? Even a thumbnail sketch should have enough basic facts to avoid being the caricature that you have painted.

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 01:34 PM
Did you do another one at "One can clearly see that Western Europe was fighting for its life and survival against the savage Islamic empire"?

Oh no, I had stopped reading then and there. Now you've made me read the whole hog, and we're up to a full six-pack. I really enjoyed how the 800 year grudgefest that was the Reconquista somehow became an example of how doggone bad them Muslims are. They're so evil, they make good peace-loving law abiding Christians want to go over to their lands and beat them up !

I mean seriously, Don. Your vision of history reads like 300 as written by Jack Chick and directed by Mel Gibson. With Hong-Kong bootleg subtitles. It's that inaccurate, cringe worthy, rage inducing, poorly thought out, lacking in even the most remote hint of objectivity and just plain bad.

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 01:38 PM
qpw3141, repeatedly calling another poster a "fanatic" is not permitted in Great Debates.

Do not do this again.

= = =

Don123, do not post who you are placig on your "ignore" list.


= = =

[ /Moderating ]

Gyrate
09-02-2010, 01:44 PM
Oh no, I had stopped reading then and there. Now you've made me read the whole hog, and we're up to a full six-pack. I really enjoyed how the 800 year grudgefest that was the Reconquista somehow became an example of how doggone bad them Muslims are. They're so evil, they make good peace-loving law abiding Christians want to go over to their lands and beat them up !I thought the efforts to demonstrate that the Spanish Inquisition wasn't really that bad were a nice touch.

Captain Amazing
09-02-2010, 02:00 PM
In fact, Tariq ibn Ziyad, the Berber leader, was probably invited to invade by the Basques who wanted someone to put pressure on King Roderic who was waging war against them at the time.

It's more likely that the invasion was triggered at the instigation at the sons of the previous king, who had fled to Tangiers after Roderic had become King. There, they, along with Jewish and Arian refugees who had fled Visigothic Spain to avoid persecution, incited Tariq to invade to restore them to power.

There was a Basque dynasty that converted to Islam and was a quasi-independent vassal state of the Caliphate, though, the Banu Qasi.

Uzi
09-02-2010, 02:14 PM
I simply note that the dishonest mischaracterization that you have accepted regarding various suras does not support your claim that the religion actually encourages murder of all unbelievers.

Do you agree that it condones it in defense of Islam and Muslims? Who decides what it needs to defend against and whom?

A few other quotes as support (Osama himself seems to agree):

4:76 Those who believe fight in the cause of God, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan.
(4:76) “Fight the minions of the devil.”
Believers fight for Allah; disbelievers fight for the devil. So fight the minions of the devil. (Quoted by Osama bin Laden in his ‘’letter to America’’ as a justification for the 11 September 2001 attacks.)

4:74 Let those fight in the cause of God Who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fighteth in the cause of God,- whether he is slain or gets victory - Soon shall We give him a reward of great (value).
(4:74) “Fight in the way of Allah. “
Allah will bestow a vast reward on those who fight in holy wars.

Magiver
09-02-2010, 02:27 PM
So what makes them so different? Is it genetic? Hardly likely, Indonesian Muslims are very removed from Arabic Muslims.

If your going to make the case that Muslims are aggressive and warlike due to blind obedience to carefully selected texts, you have to account for why they are so different in that regard. And why they are not equally blindly obedient to those texts which insist on tolerance and generosity, esp. as regards Christians and Jews. There have been a series of terrorist acts linked to radical Islam™ in Indonesia starting with the Bali bombing which killed 202 people.

The same general process that spawns terrorists in the Middle East exists in Indonesia. From the South Asia Analysis Group (http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers16%5Cpaper1596.html): Ansja’ad Mbai who heads the anti terror desk at the office of the Chief Security Minister said recently “50 % of Muslim clerics preaching at Friday prayers had often encouraged hatred and hostility against other religious groups” (Jakarta Post 24 October 2005).

Investigations of the major terrorist incidents in Bali and Jakarta since 2002 have revealed that some of these pesantren are “breeding extremists through radical interpretation of Islam”. Three of the men convicted for the Bali and Marriott Hotel attacks have been students of the Al-Mukmin boarding school founded by Abu Bakaar Bashir, the alleged head of Jemaah Islamiah.

Sidney Jones, a terrorism expert and Director of the International Crisis Group, has said that there are18 Islamic schools affiliated to the terror cell of Jemaah Islamiah in the country which were used to train Jihadis. She has also linked these schools with an university in Surakarta, Central Java.

Training children in a school dedicated to radical Islam™ appears to be the same recipe used by terrorist groups in the Middle East and around the world.

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 02:48 PM
Do you agree that it condones it in defense of [...] Muslims?

As does the law of every Western country, I believe. Ah, those bloody savages and their barbaric notions of "self-defense" !

Koran cherry-picks

I really enjoy this quote game of yours, can I play too ?

the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory. We will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost but will make it very certain that this form of treachery shall never again endanger us.

We will gain the inevitable triumph—so help us God.


For your convenience, I bolded the bits that you should consider extra spooky. Read the whole thing here (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_speech), it's really quite frightful. Lots of scary words.

bbart4
09-02-2010, 02:51 PM
There have been a series of terrorist acts linked to radical Islam™ in Indonesia starting with the Bali bombing which killed 202 people.

The same general process that spawns terrorists in the Middle East exists in Indonesia. From the South Asia Analysis Group (http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/%5Cpapers16%5Cpaper1596.html): Ansja’ad Mbai who heads the anti terror desk at the office of the Chief Security Minister said recently “50 % of Muslim clerics preaching at Friday prayers had often encouraged hatred and hostility against other religious groups” (Jakarta Post 24 October 2005).

...

Sidney Jones, a terrorism expert and Director of the International Crisis Group, has said that there are18 Islamic schools affiliated to the terror cell of Jemaah Islamiah in the country which were used to train Jihadis. She has also linked these schools with an university in Surakarta, Central Java.

Training children in a school dedicated to radical Islam™ appears to be the same recipe used by terrorist groups in the Middle East and around the world.

I like how you picked and chose your cites. Things are not static there. By quoting selectively you ignore the dynamics and fluidity of public opinions. Again, that data are old and not reflective of what's going on the ground.

Support for radicalism has been up and down in Indonesia. It was going up between 2002-2005. It was up during the heights of the Iraq war definitely. But it's been on the way down since. In fact in the last election in Indonesia, almost all Islamic parties suffered defeats.

Link1 (http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2009/0409/p06s10-woap.html)
Link2 (http://inside.org.au/indonesia%E2%80%99s-islamic-parties-in-decline/)

Uzi
09-02-2010, 03:06 PM
As does the law of every Western country, I believe. Ah, those bloody savages and their barbaric notions of "self-defense" !

Against what are they defending? When I defend myself, I am in peril for my life or property (depending on what jurisdiction I am in). I am not defending some made up notion of god.

For your convenience, I bolded the bits that you should consider extra spooky. Read the whole thing here (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_speech), it's really quite frightful. Lots of scary words.

Are you claiming the quote was from god? Are you claiming it should guide our actions today and into the future? Are you planning to start a religion based upon these words? Otherwise, what is your point?

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 03:15 PM
(Osama himself seems to agree)Exactly. Osama bin Laden, the zealot whose first targets were other Muslims who did not share his beliefs, chooses to interpret various passages of his scripture in a particular way--and you choose to support him in those efforts.

It is rather like quoting Richard Butler, Rob Matthews, and Eric Rudolph on the meaning of the Christian scriptures, then deciding that their views are what Billy Graham, Dorothy Day, and Philip Berrigan "really" believed.

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 03:45 PM
Against what are they defending? When I defend myself, I am in peril for my life or property (depending on what jurisdiction I am in). I am not defending some made up notion of god.

When it was written, they were defending themselves from Meccan authorities, I believe.
But in a more general sense, I think those verses would be applicable and inspirational/comforting and therefore quotable whenever some exterior power invades a Muslim community, kingdom or country with bad intentions. As I demonstrated, you can find echoes of the same concepts in most speeches made by leaders of countries facing invasion or communities facing persecution.

Isn't the idea that even though evil might triumph today, it will all be made right and just eventually half the point of the concept of god(s) ?

Are you claiming the quote was from god? Are you claiming it should guide our actions today and into the future? Are you planning to start a religion based upon these words? Otherwise, what is your point?

My point is you can cherry-pick any text for the scary bits, strip it of all context and make it sound aggressive.
Which doesn't make those scary bits universal, all encompassing or even literally true. Yes, that also applies to religious texts meant to edumacate medieval people. Yes, even if modern fanatics insist that they are.
I'll reiterate since you didn't read it the first time : Manson justified his actions with the lyrics of Helter Skelter. Does it make Paul McCartney a bad bad man ? All Beatles fans, maybe ? Who the fuck pays attention to what nutters say or believe, let alone base themselves on that to judge everyone else ?

Don123
09-02-2010, 03:45 PM
You, sir, owe me one drink for that spit take.Did you do another one at "One can clearly see that Western Europe was fighting for its life and survival against the savage Islamic empire"?

Don, one gets the impression from your posts that you see Muslims as sub-human cartoon monsters, a mindless ravening horde bent on consuming the world like the aliens in independence Day. You claim that there are no such thing as moderate Muslims, that they are all following a command from Allah to kill unbelievers (apart from the ones that are so "stupid" that they kill each other), and that any Muslims that don't actively espouse violence are either lying or not following their religion correctly. All violent acts by Muslims are attributed solely to their faith despite considerable evidence of other signficant socio-political factors and generalized to apply to all Muslims. You cite deeply biased websites, cherrypicked quotes and flawed historical analyses, and when the biases are pointed out, the contexts given and the history corrected you ignore them and post more of the same.

And then you talk about their lack of "tolerance". What are we to do?



To the Mods, I have tried, with much effort, to edit this down and still leave the usable context; I hope you find it acceptable.


Don, one gets the impression from your posts that you see Muslims as sub-human cartoon monsters, a mindless ravening horde bent on consuming the world like the aliens in independence Day.


You can be impressed any way you desire, that is not my problem to deal with.


You claim that there are no such thing as moderate Muslims,


My response:


Here read for yourself:

(These references are NOT copyrighted---but can be used for non-monetary purposes, as long as the source (web site) is identified.)

http://formermuslimsunited.americancommunityexchange.org/2010/03/13/exposing-the-myth-of-moderate-islam/

Exposing the Myth of Moderate Islam

It is time to put an end to the charade of “moderate Islam.” There is no such thing as moderate Muslim. Muslims are either jihadists or dormant jihadists – moderate, they are not.

by Ali Sina, FaithFreedom.org, March 14, 2010

(read more if you like at the site listed)

Ali Sina is a de-converted Muslim born and raised in the Islamic culture. He has written several books on Islam, has on line debates with top Islamic scholars on the validity of the Koran and Hadith, post many articles, and is an authority of the ins and out of the Islamic culture and history. I suggest you go argue with him, as he is a greater authority on the topic than you have shown yourself. His material is easily found on the net.

The list is very long of on line de-converted Muslims that agree with him in their own personal experiences and studies that have come to the same conclusion only said in different words but make the same points as that is why they de-converted to get away from the Islamic cult of death as they want no part of it.

There is also a very long list of Islamic preachers (on line) that call for the death of the USA, every Muslim do Jihad, raise up and take arms to kill the infidels, Allah demands Jihad, and many listen to them as Hamas the killed 12 at Ft. Hood, 9/11, and the 5-6 Islamic terrorist acts that happen every day that I have referenced repeatedly.

We also have 54 Islamic countries where Islamic Sheria supports the cult of death in all of its barbarous acts, as Saudi and Pakistan that are leading exporters of Jihads to the world at large with Iran being close behind and fighting for first place.

How Islam works is on this order, that is the same pattern they have used threw out history for the last 1400 years. Here is the fastest reference and more to come if you like.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/011-taqiyya.htm

fast summery confirmed on many other sites--

"There are two forms of lying to non-believers that are permitted under certain circumstances, taqiyya and kitman. These circumstances are typically those that advance the cause Islam … by gaining the trust of non-believers in order to draw out their vulnerability and defeat them."

Taqiyya - Saying something that isn't true.

Kitman - Lying by omission.

"…example of lying is when Muhammad used deception to trick his personal enemies into letting down their guard and exposing themselves to slaughter by pretending to seek peace. This happened in the case of Ka'b bin al-Ashraf (as previously noted) and again later against Usayr ibn Zarim, a surviving leader of the Banu Nadir tribe, which had been evicted from their home in Medina by the Muslims..."

Here are some Koran scriptures for back up.

Qur'an (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell a lie.
Qur'an (3:28) – take no friends of outsiders unless to deceive them
Qur'an (9:3) – (much of the chapter) ok to break your oath of peace after you gained safe travel from non-believers
Qur'an (40:28) - ok to hide your faith with lies
Qur'an (2:225) – Allah only judges your heart not your words
Qur'an (66:2) – Allah has already broken your oath
Qur'an (3:54) - Allah is the best of schemers


As far as interpretation goes it is hard core Islamic teaching (under death threat) to NEVER interpret the Koran on your own.

Conclusion:

To acknowledge the possibility of moderate Muslins that have their own interpretation of the Koran is to prove for fact there are extremist. So you are that skilled, perhaps better than God or Allah, to know a moderate Muslim from an extremist? You want to bet your life on it? You get to loose one time only and the game is over. Just ask the victims of 9/11---OH that is right, they are dead.

I say we burn the Koran in open protest to Muslims that we do not buy their Islam crap and lies any longer.

NOW, if you would like to reference, or give your opinion, what exactly is a moderate Muslim and how do you know, I would be happy to look at it.


Don

qpw3141
09-02-2010, 04:02 PM
NOW, if you would like to reference, or give your opinion, what exactly is a moderate Muslim and how do you know, I would be happy to look at it.

A moderate Muslim is one who lives his life quietly and with consideration for his friends, family and neighbours. (Bit like a moderate Christian, Hindi or Jew, really).

You can find them everywhere doing exactly that.

Of course, you also get the extremist Muslims who spend their time trying to rubbish religions other than their own and stir up hatred against them.

A bit like some Christians, really. ;)

Magiver
09-02-2010, 04:04 PM
(Osama himself seems to agree)Exactly. Osama bin Laden, the zealot whose first targets were other Muslims who did not share his beliefs, chooses to interpret various passages of his scripture in a particular way--and you choose to support him in those efforts.

It is rather like quoting Richard Butler, Rob Matthews, and Eric Rudolph on the meaning of the Christian scriptures, then deciding that their views are what Billy Graham, Dorothy Day, and Philip Berrigan "really" believed. The difference between the 2 religions, or all of them for that matter, is the level of discord that is actually taught and acted upon. Fred Phelps (official Christian whipping boy) represents the high end of vocal discontent with anything that moves. The politically correct thing to do is say that he doesn't represent Christianity. But he does represent the extremes of the religion. He's not mainstream but he's out there alive and well.

Take the example I cited regarding Islam in Indonesia. 50% of the Imams actively preach against other religions. There are schools dedicated to the extreme side of Islam and it is from these schools that terrorists come from. When comparing extreme Islam and extreme Christianity there are elements that stand out which makes violence more likely with Islam. The concepts of "brotherhood" creates an us versus them mentality that is made worse by the idea of reward through martyrdom. The fire is kept burning bright by 5 daily reminders of religious commitment.

The difference is that while the Fred Phelp's Christian extremists of the world exist, they aren't statistically likely to create a terrorist group. The opposite is true with Islam.

Uzi
09-02-2010, 04:14 PM
(Osama himself seems to agree)Exactly. Osama bin Laden, the zealot whose first targets were other Muslims who did not share his beliefs, chooses to interpret various passages of his scripture in a particular way--and you choose to support him in those efforts.

This is my point. He interprets it in a particular way. He doesn't have to move the bar much to do so even if he is moving the bar at all. Just because the majority believe otherwise doesn't make them right and him wrong. Unless you think that god's plan is determined by the majority's vote and actions. In which case you've made a good case for there not being a god.

If my new religion consisted of:
"Be kind to each other"
"Don't be an ass"

I'm sure someone could figure out how this says to hate others and be an ass. But, it would be a very long reach for them to do so.

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 04:32 PM
Just because the majority believe otherwise doesn't make them right and him wrong.No. Nor does it make him right and them wrong. But it does mean that if you are claiming that "Islam" says or does one thing or another when large numbers of Muslims disagree, then you are wrong.

bbart4
09-02-2010, 04:33 PM
Take the example I cited regarding Islam in Indonesia. 50% of the Imams actively preach against other religions. There are schools dedicated to the extreme side of Islam and it is from these schools that terrorists come from. When comparing extreme Islam and extreme Christianity there are elements that stand out which makes violence more likely with Islam. The concepts of "brotherhood" creates an us versus them mentality that is made worse by the idea of reward through martyrdom. The fire is kept burning bright by 5 daily reminders of religious commitment.

I would even doubt that claim if you read my cites upthread. Despite an overwhelming majority, Islamic parties lost big time last year in Indonesia, in fact, they never even gained significant number of seats in the parliament even at the heights of their popularity. Heck, Indonesia even had a female president a few years ago.

Just imagine if just, say 10%, of the whole muslim pop. have the mentality as you suggest they subscribe to, do you think the world would be likt it is today?

user_hostile
09-02-2010, 04:34 PM
Don123, just for your own edification--why don't you read the Koran cover-to-cover and make up your own mind, rather than let a web-site decide it for you, okay? Challenge yourself--in spite of themselves, those crazy Muslims built one hell of civilization in the late 1000's and beyond; while the Europeans were still feasting on mud. More importantly, they preserved quite a bit of Western history, science, and culture that we would have otherwise lost. 'Cause as it stands right now, nobody's really paying attention to you or your arguments--people want to debate somebody who has something to say; they don't want to debate a proxy via website. Come back in a week and tell us what you discovered. :)

However if I do not quote references you will ask for them, and if not supplied some will start their name calling contest to discredit my studies. So now you get to go argue with my references. Good luck to you, try another game to play.

You said:

Muslims built one hell of civilization in the late 1000's and beyond; while the Europeans were still feasting on mud. More importantly, they preserved quite a bit of Western history, science, and culture that we would have otherwise lost.

What I am showing here is a direct connection to Muslim terrorist behavior to the Koran and Hadith. Sorry if you do not like it, but so far you have yet to put any meat on the table other wise.

Good luck to you and your studies.


Don


I have read the Koran cover to cover 3 times, and the bible cover to cover at least 10 times from my youth. So thank you for the advice.

I stand corrected. Thanks for answering.

More importantly, they preserved quite a bit of Western history, science, and culture that we would have otherwise lost.

This is nothing but propaganda to the hilt that I have argued against many times before. Perhaps on another thread I will address it again. Then you can argue those reference and see how far you can get.

"Propaganda"? Come on Don123, you're smarter than that! Quite a bit of mathematics came from those Islamic caliphates. They were essential for the medieval European scholars who wanted to reboot their mud-eating education system. Where do you think we got the zero from? Yeah, okay India, but those Caliphating mathematicians quickly grasped the meaning and were quick to implement it into their world, and we in turn imported.

Have you ever been to an Islamic country BTW?

I have. In fact, one Muslim woman who had a little too much to drink gave me a nice kiss on the lips. That's the kinda jihad I'm looking for! Oh yeah! :cool:

Captain Amazing
09-02-2010, 04:43 PM
Just ask the victims of 9/11---OH that is right, they are dead.

You realize that at least 58 of the victims of 9/11 were themselves Muslims, that there were Muslim passengers on those planes, that there were Muslim employees in the towers and Muslim servicemembers in the Pentagon, and that there were Muslim police, firemen, and EMTs who were sent there that way. You also realize that most Islamic terrorism is against other Muslims. You realize all this, right?

You don't know much about Islam, and what's worse is that most of what you know about Islam isn't true.

BrightNShiny
09-02-2010, 04:49 PM
Here's a few more quotes (http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=139069028434) about Islam, from one of our great statesman:

We are not at war with Islam. This is a war within Islam, where a small minority of violent killers seeks to impose their view on the vast majority of Muslims who want the same things all of us want: economic opportunity, education, and the chance to build a better life for themselves and their families.

and

Australia rightly reminds us to keep our eye on Southeast Asia, where Indonesia has proved that Islam and democracy can co-exist. Indonesia has fought extremism inside its own border and is consolidating a multi-ethnic democracy that is home to hundreds of millions of Muslims. Those who say Islam and democracy are incompatible insult our friends in Indonesia.

From Speech in Hong Kong (9/23/09).

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 05:07 PM
Exactly. Osama bin Laden, the zealot whose first targets were other Muslims who did not share his beliefs, chooses to interpret various passages of his scripture in a particular way--and you choose to support him in those efforts.

It is rather like quoting Richard Butler, Rob Matthews, and Eric Rudolph on the meaning of the Christian scriptures, then deciding that their views are what Billy Graham, Dorothy Day, and Philip Berrigan "really" believed. The difference between the 2 religions, or all of them for that matter, is the level of discord that is actually taught and acted upon. Fred Phelps (official Christian whipping boy) represents the high end of vocal discontent with anything that moves. The politically correct thing to do is say that he doesn't represent Christianity. But he does represent the extremes of the religion. He's not mainstream but he's out there alive and well.So? I have never claimed that Phelps (or Butler or Matthews or Rudolph or Franklin Graham) are not Christians. They are, as you note, at the extremes of the religion. So your straw man about "political correctness" is irrelevant to anything I have said.

However, your attempt to flip that around and claim that Islam is some horrendous movement because it also has violent extremists fails on the evidence, as well.
In every case where "Islam" is demonstrating violence, it is simply the organizing vehicle to permit people who have been oppressed to react to that oppression or those whose lives have been thrown into chaos to take control of their lives again. In Indonesia, the Philipines, India, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Iran, and other countries, Muslims were persecuted or Islam was suppressed. In Europe, immigrants are treated harshly, but they can look around and see that the vast majority of their fellow immigrants are Muslim. In Iraq and Lebanon, the countries are in chaos and the overthrown regimes had made it a point to protect and favor one religious group over another. In Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and a number of other countries, the governments are corrupt and one strong voice demanding reform is that of the conservative faction of Islam. Since no one in the "Democratic" or "Christian" (or "secular") West ever worked to alleviate those situations, (and, in too many cases, actively supported the oppressors or even created the problems), then the Fundamentalist Muslims have an easy time getting their message out.

Take the example I cited regarding Islam in Indonesia. 50% of the Imams actively preach against other religions. There are schools dedicated to the extreme side of Islam and it is from these schools that terrorists come from. When comparing extreme Islam and extreme Christianity there are elements that stand out which makes violence more likely with Islam. The concepts of "brotherhood" creates an us versus them mentality that is made worse by the idea of reward through martyrdom. The fire is kept burning bright by 5 daily reminders of religious commitment.

The difference is that while the Fred Phelp's Christian extremists of the world exist, they aren't statistically likely to create a terrorist group. The opposite is true with Islam.If it were true that Islam was inherently more likely to produce terrorists, then Northern India should have been the home of terrorism more than 200 years ago, parts of the Philipines should have been wracked by terror for about as long, Indonesia's terrorist outbreaks should have begun in the 1950s, and the Shah of Iran should have been subjected to ongoing terrorism dating back to 1953. This is not the case. Islamic terrorism arose in the wake of social upheavals in the world that allowed suppressed Muslim groups to recognize that they might be able to become their own masters. Without making any silly claims about a "religion of peace," it is rather easy to see that the overall violence has less to do with the nature of Islam than it does with the particular situations where violence has broken out.

Gyrate
09-02-2010, 05:51 PM
The difference is that while the Fred Phelp's Christian extremists of the world exist, they aren't statistically likely to create a terrorist group. The opposite is true with Islam.I don't know about "statistically likely" but Christian terrorism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism) isn't exactly unknown, including everyone's favorite Christian group the Lord's Resistance Army (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord%27s_Resistance_Army#Massacres):The Lord's Resistance Army, a cult guerrilla army engaged in an armed rebellion against the Ugandan government, has been accused of using child soldiers and committing numerous crimes against humanity; including massacres, abductions, mutilation, torture, rape, porters and sex slaves. It is led by Joseph Kony, who proclaims himself the spokesperson of God and a spirit medium, primarily of the Christian Holy Spirit which the Acholi believe can represent itself in many manifestations. LRA fighters wear rosary beads and recite passages from the Bible before battle. Numbers killed are sketchy but the Wiki page suggests a couple of thousand in the last two and half years alone, over 100,000 displaced and well over 10,000 children abducted and forced to fight as soldiers. What terrible things these Christians do...

Don123
09-02-2010, 06:32 PM
However if I do not quote references you will ask for them, and if not supplied some will start their name calling contest to discredit my studies. So now you get to go argue with my references. Good luck to you, try another game to play.

You said:

Muslims built one hell of civilization in the late 1000's and beyond; while the Europeans were still feasting on mud. More importantly, they preserved quite a bit of Western history, science, and culture that we would have otherwise lost.

What I am showing here is a direct connection to Muslim terrorist behavior to the Koran and Hadith. Sorry if you do not like it, but so far you have yet to put any meat on the table other wise.

Good luck to you and your studies.


Don




I stand corrected. Thanks for answering.

More importantly, they preserved quite a bit of Western history, science, and culture that we would have otherwise lost.

This is nothing but propaganda to the hilt that I have argued against many times before. Perhaps on another thread I will address it again. Then you can argue those reference and see how far you can get.

"Propaganda"? Come on Don123, you're smarter than that! Quite a bit of mathematics came from those Islamic caliphates. They were essential for the medieval European scholars who wanted to reboot their mud-eating education system. Where do you think we got the zero from? Yeah, okay India, but those Caliphating mathematicians quickly grasped the meaning and were quick to implement it into their world, and we in turn imported.

Have you ever been to an Islamic country BTW?

I have. In fact, one Muslim woman who had a little too much to drink gave me a nice kiss on the lips. That's the kinda jihad I'm looking for! Oh yeah! :cool:


I will have to get back to you (soon I hope) on the Islamic golden age as of right now we are figuring on the best way to burn the Koran, and if we should or not, and who to invite if it happens.

Don

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 06:48 PM
I will have to get back to you (soon I hope) on the Islamic golden age as of right now we are figuring on the best way to burn the Koran, and if we should or not

Do consider, when making that important decision, that by doing so you implicitly forfeit your right to have an apoplectic shit fit any time Muslims, or communists, or students, or the French (the French !) burn an American flag for any reason whatsoever without rightly being fingered as a most craven hypocrite.

Are you positively sure you want to permanently let go of so recreational an outrage ?

Then again, you've already got that whole "All of them are intolerant, lock 'em all up !" shtick going, so maybe you've already got a contingency anti-cognitive dissonance plan for that eventuality.

Don123
09-02-2010, 06:50 PM
Just ask the victims of 9/11---OH that is right, they are dead.

You realize that at least 58 of the victims of 9/11 were themselves Muslims, that there were Muslim passengers on those planes, that there were Muslim employees in the towers and Muslim servicemembers in the Pentagon, and that there were Muslim police, firemen, and EMTs who were sent there that way. You also realize that most Islamic terrorism is against other Muslims. You realize all this, right?

You don't know much about Islam, and what's worse is that most of what you know about Islam isn't true.

I have not found any documentation of any Muslims being killed in 9/11 other than the terrorist. Perhaps you would like to supply it? I have heard about Muslims being killed in the buildings and each year the numbers get larger and larger—funny how the dead can multiply. How does that happen?


I have read about Muslims making claims that if any Muslims were killed in the buildings they are all happy now with 72 virgins in the bosom of Allah, and the Muslim terrorist did them a favor. How nice.

Don

Don123
09-02-2010, 07:02 PM
I will have to get back to you (soon I hope) on the Islamic golden age as of right now we are figuring on the best way to burn the Koran, and if we should or not

Do consider, when making that important decision, that by doing so you implicitly forfeit your right to have an apoplectic shit fit any time Muslims, or communists, or students, or the French (the French !) burn an American flag for any reason whatsoever without rightly being fingered as a most craven hypocrite.

Are you positively sure you want to permanently let go of so recreational an outrage ?

Then again, you've already got that whole "All of them are intolerant, lock 'em all up !" shtick going, so maybe you've already got a contingency anti-cognitive dissonance plan for that eventuality.


The French can burn the USA flag if they want to, there are no reports of the French government sending over suicide bombers to the USA, so I can have tolerance with them.

We also need to consider what to do with the ashes of the Koran. I say we have a formal toilet flushing party, or perhaps dispose of them at a pig farm.


Don

Magiver
09-02-2010, 07:10 PM
So? I have never claimed that Phelps (or Butler or Matthews or Rudolph or Franklin Graham) are not Christians. They are, as you note, at the extremes of the religion. So your straw man about "political correctness" is irrelevant to anything I have said.
I never suggested you didn’t think Phelps wasn’t a Christian. There is no straw man. I pointed out that the politically correct thing to do was paint him as an extremist minority which is exactly how Islamic terrorists are portrayed. Beyond that the next expedient excuse is to assign some other common denominator to explain Islamic terrorism. It can't be the religion, therefore it's: poverty, oppression, government etc…. None of that explains the Bali attack which has nothing to do with poverty oppression or government. What does explain the attack is 50% of the Imams spreading hatred of other religions along with schools dedicated to the same message. The difference between Phelps and the Imams spreading the same hateful message is that he and his minions aren’t killing people.

Don123
09-02-2010, 07:19 PM
Muslims Resume Building on Christian Graveyard in Pakistan

http://www.compassdirect.org/english/country/pakistan/24955/

Hard-line cleric defies local officials’ order to stop construction.
SARGODHA, Pakistan, September 1 (CDN) — Muslims led by a hard-line cleric on Friday (Aug. 27) resumed building on a Christian cemetery in Mandi Bhawaldin, desecrating more graves in spite of a local government order to halt construction, according to the All Pakistan Minorities Alliance (APMA).

OK that does it, we burn the koran and dump the ashes in a pig farm.

Don

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 07:27 PM
The French can burn the USA flag if they want to, there are no reports of the French government sending over suicide bombers to the USA, so I can have tolerance with them.

What ?! Wake up, man, we sent Jean-Paul Gaultier in a skirt ! Do you not know an open act of war when you see one ?

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 08:18 PM
I have not found any documentation of any Muslims being killed in 9/11 other than the terrorist. Perhaps you would like to supply it? I have heard about Muslims being killed in the buildings and each year the numbers get larger and larger—funny how the dead can multiply. How does that happen? You have never looked for any such documentation. It would require you to actually engage in serious fact seeking rather than simply repeating the nonsense you pick up from the hate sites you enjoy patronizing.

Here is one list:
http://islam.about.com/blvictims.htm


I have read about Muslims making claims that if any Muslims were killed in the buildings they are all happy now with 72 virgins in the bosom of Allah, and the Muslim terrorist did them a favor. How nice.The only place you would have read any such bullshit is on another "bash Islam" site. The "72 virgins" nonsense is a folk tale that is not part of Islam except in the way that a few odd Christians believe that little kids turn into angels when they die.

elucidator
09-02-2010, 08:19 PM
God damn it!

Sooner or later, people are going to start dying. Innocent Muslims will be murdered here. And our enemies will shout it from the rooftops: "See! See! America hates Islam! We have to kill them!" And their recruiting centers will overflow with eager young idiots.

So they will attack. And our own domestic variety of idiot will shout from the rooftops:"See! See! Islam hates America! We have to kill them!"

And we, the rest of us, the sane, the tolerant...we can't do anything but speak truth and fight ignorance. You can't kill hate, you can't fix stupid.

Jesus wept.

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 08:33 PM
I never suggested you didn’t think Phelps wasn’t a Christian. There is no straw man. I pointed out that the politically correct thing to do was paint him as an extremist minority which is exactly how Islamic terrorists are portrayed."Political Correctness" is simply the term you hurl whenever you cannot substantiate one of your claims. It is an invention that allows you to ascribe to others thoughts that have not actually been expressed without having to actually support your claim. Posting such a claim in response to a post of mine was simply a way to change the subject (while getting the actual issue wrong).

Are there some people who will do the "No True Scotsman" dance about Phelps? Sure. However they are as likely to be on the political Right (and thus opposed to "Political Correctness") as they are to be on the political Left (and thus targets of accusations of "Political Correctness").

None of that explains the Bali attack which has nothing to do with poverty oppression or government.It certainly is related to government suppression. Jemaah Islamiah, the group that carried out the attacks, is a radical Islamist organization that was founded by political refugees from the Suharto government's oppression of some aspects of Islam in Indonesia. The attacks were carried out against major Western tourist centers because the Jemaah Islamiah see the Western support for Suharto as a serious attack on Islam. (They also see Western values as a threat to their extremely conservative version of Islam, but that is hardly a separate issue from the actions of Suharto and his U.S. and Australian backers.) To deny that the attacks were related to govcernment oppression is to simply ignore the facts.

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 08:37 PM
Muslims Resume Building on Christian Graveyard in PakistanI would give your outrage the tiniest bit of credence if you had not ignored the fact that a Muslim cemetary in Jerusalem was paved over for a parking lot, then dug up for a building, later, with the concurrence of the Israeli courts.

Since you could not be bothered to be outraged by one desecration, I figure your outrage, here, is simply manufactured hatred.

Magiver
09-02-2010, 08:50 PM
"Political Correctness" is simply the term you hurl whenever you cannot substantiate one of your claims.

I provided a cited argument that linked the behavior of Muslims in Indonesia to the Middle East in response to a post that suggested otherwise. The term political correctness is applied to arguments that ignore core relationships between events in an attempt to avoid making any kind of judgment.

It certainly is related to government suppression. Jemaah Islamiah, the group that carried out the attacks, is a radical Islamist organization that was founded by political refugees from the Suharto government's oppression of some aspects of Islam in Indonesia. The attacks were carried out against major Western tourist centers because the Jemaah Islamiah see the Western support for Suharto as a serious attack on Islam. (They also see Western values as a threat to their extremely conservative version of Islam, but that is hardly a separate issue from the actions of Suharto and his U.S. and Australian backers.) To deny that the attacks were related to govcernment oppression is to simply ignore the facts.
"government suppression of some aspect of Islam" :rolleyes: Do you hear yourself speak when you type? There is no logical explanation to the attack. It was a senseless slaughter brought on by religious extremism which was taught in the mosques and in the schools.

Uzi
09-02-2010, 09:33 PM
No. Nor does it make him right and them wrong. But it does mean that if you are claiming that "Islam" says or does one thing or another when large numbers of Muslims disagree, then you are wrong.

Religion by majority vote. Kind of proves there is no god, doesn't it?

See, when god says fight the unbelievers where ever you find them, it actually means that we should all sit down together and eat cotton candy. That is what the majority believe, so it must be true. And those who actually think the words mean what they say, well, they are wrong.
Why have a book at all if the words in them are meaningless? And if you really want it to mean 'sit down and eat cotton candy', then change the words to reflect that.

elucidator
09-02-2010, 09:43 PM
Our Prime Directive is to fight ignorance. By your standards of interpretation, that means I should gun down dummies. You should think that over.

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 09:44 PM
The term political correctness is applied to arguments that ignore core relationships between events in an attempt to avoid making any kind of judgment.Inventing new definitions for the term does not change what it really means. It certainly has no bearing on anything I have posted.

"government suppression of some aspect of Islam" :rolleyes: Do you hear yourself speak when you type? There is no logical explanation to the attack. It was a senseless slaughter brought on by religious extremism which was taught in the mosques and in the schools.Do you ignore evcery fact that challenges your preconceptions?

Suharto persecuted Muslims.
Some of the Muslims Suharto persecuted formed a group to oppose him and were willing to carry out terrorist acts in to make their points.
Your statement the Bali attack which has nothing to do with . . . oppression or governmentis simply wrong.

Was the attack justified? In no way.
Are the members of Jemaah Islamiah violent scum? Absolutely.

However, they did not simply wake up one morning and decide to go kill people in some sort of jihad. They had a history that shaped their mindset and it was not simply reading the Qur'an and some hadiths; it included being persecuted for their religion.

The violent Islamists are wrong and need to be stopped, but making odd assertions, (that defy the facts), that they were simply following their religion does nothing but inflame other less hateful Muslims with a sense of persecution and rationalizes the behavior of kooks like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, and others to stir up non-Muslim idiots to violence against Muslims. (Yes, I know that the score currently leans heavily toward the Muslim fanatics, but that is a temporary accident of history. If we continue to heap scorn on and cause problems for people who are doing nothing wrong and acting in good faith, (such as Imam Rauf), then we are simply going to prolong the violence.)

Captain Amazing
09-02-2010, 09:56 PM
I have not found any documentation of any Muslims being killed in 9/11 other than the terrorist. Perhaps you would like to supply it? I have heard about Muslims being killed in the buildings and each year the numbers get larger and larger—funny how the dead can multiply. How does that happen?


http://www.world-memorial.org/EMT-MohammadSalmanHamdani.jpg

That's a picture of Mohammed Salman Hamdani, a Muslim Pakistani-American, an NYPD cadet/EMT, who was on his way to work when the planes hit the towers. He went in there to help evacuate people, and was still in there when the buildings collapsed. He chose to go in, to try to save people's lives, and he died for it.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/images/full-size/chowdhury.mohammad.jpg

This is Mohammed Chowdhury. As far as I know, he didn't save anyone's life. He was a waiter, who worked in Windows on the World, the World Trade Center's restaurant. His son was born two days after his death.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/images/full-size/doany.ramzi.jpg

This is Ramzi Doany, a Palestinian-American, who was an auditor at Marsh & McLennan, a brokerage firm with offices on floors 93-100 in the North Tower. The plane hit floors 93-99, and no one working in those offices survived. Here's a little bio of him on MMC's memorial page:

http://memorial.mmc.com/pgBio.asp?ID=82

That's 3 people. I can find more if you want.

Don123
09-02-2010, 09:58 PM
I stand corrected. Thanks for answering.



"Propaganda"? Come on Don123, you're smarter than that! Quite a bit of mathematics came from those Islamic caliphates. They were essential for the medieval European scholars who wanted to reboot their mud-eating education system. Where do you think we got the zero from? Yeah, okay India, but those Caliphating mathematicians quickly grasped the meaning and were quick to implement it into their world, and we in turn imported.

Have you ever been to an Islamic country BTW?

I have. In fact, one Muslim woman who had a little too much to drink gave me a nice kiss on the lips. That's the kinda jihad I'm looking for! Oh yeah! :cool:


I will have to get back to you (soon I hope) on the Islamic golden age as of right now we are figuring on the best way to burn the Koran, and if we should or not, and who to invite if it happens.

Don




http://www.corvalliscommunitypages.com/asia_pacific/mathindia.htm

You cannot have algebra without the concept and use of Zero.

“In India (Hindus) around the 5th century A.D. a system of mathematics that made astronomical calculations easy was developed. In those times its application was limited to astronomy as its pioneers were Astronomers. As tronomical calculations are complex and involve many variables that go into the derivation of unknown quantities. Algebra is a short-hand method of calculation and by this feature it scores over conventional arithmetic.”

Mohammad died in 632 AD, still stuck in Arabia, so clearly Islam could not have invented the concept of zero.


India was invaded by the Arab Muslims about the 13th century, found the existing math called Bijaganitam and gave it the Arab word 'Al jabr'.


"Between the 10th to 13th centuries the Christian Crusades resulted in a massive exchange of ideas. The technique of algebr (algebra) could have passed on to the west at this time."

So the only thing Islam gave to the concept of zero was their language and nothing more.

In India today they still name Bijaganit for algebra

NOW can I burn the Koran as it is proved that Islam is nothing but a pack of lie.


Don

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 09:59 PM
Religion by majority vote. Kind of proves there is no god, doesn't it?Only if you believce that god starts religions. ::: shrug ::: ['i]

See, when god says fight the unbelievers where ever you find them, it actually means that we should all sit down together and eat cotton candy. That is what the majority believe, so it must be true. And those who actually think the words mean what they say, well, they are wrong.
Why have a book at all if the words in them are meaningless? And if you really want it to mean 'sit down and eat cotton candy', then change the words to reflect that.Stringing together [i]non sequiturs and making illogical claims while ignoring the context of a text does not work well to make your case, I am afraid.

Your point is rather along the line of those ignorant people who claim that the bible says that "money is the root of all evil."

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 10:06 PM
Mohammad died in 632 AD, still stuck in Arabia, so clearly Islam could not have invented the concept of zero.Which, of course, no one here has claimed that they did.
So the only thing Islam gave to the concept of zero was their language and nothing more.NO. They passed on the concept to the Europeans, hence the term "Arabic numerals."

NOW can I burn the Koran as it is proved that Islam is nothing but a pack of lie.Wait. You post a straw man argument and totally miss the point that was made, and now you want to burn a book that has nothing to do with the sub-topic under discussion because you falsely claim that something that has not evenbeen discussed is "proved"?

The answer is no. You can, of course, buy or steal a copy of the Qur'an and burn it, but you cannot do so and justify your actions just because you are claiming to have proven something that you have failed to even address.

Don123
09-02-2010, 10:20 PM
I have not found any documentation of any Muslims being killed in 9/11 other than the terrorist. Perhaps you would like to supply it? I have heard about Muslims being killed in the buildings and each year the numbers get larger and larger—funny how the dead can multiply. How does that happen?


http://www.world-memorial.org/EMT-MohammadSalmanHamdani.jpg

That's a picture of Mohammed Salman Hamdani, a Muslim Pakistani-American, an NYPD cadet/EMT, who was on his way to work when the planes hit the towers. He went in there to help evacuate people, and was still in there when the buildings collapsed. He chose to go in, to try to save people's lives, and he died for it.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/images/full-size/chowdhury.mohammad.jpg

This is Mohammed Chowdhury. As far as I know, he didn't save anyone's life. He was a waiter, who worked in Windows on the World, the World Trade Center's restaurant. His son was born two days after his death.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/images/full-size/doany.ramzi.jpg

This is Ramzi Doany, a Palestinian-American, who was an auditor at Marsh & McLennan, a brokerage firm with offices on floors 93-100 in the North Tower. The plane hit floors 93-99, and no one working in those offices survived. Here's a little bio of him on MMC's memorial page:

http://memorial.mmc.com/pgBio.asp?ID=82

That's 3 people. I can find more if you want.

OH COME ON!!!

You are wasting my time. Those are only pictures of people that may have a Arab linage--- that does not prove they were Muslims! I have news for YOU, Islam is NOT a race! It is a set of ideas that people believe in.


These people may have died in the Muslim terrorist attack, how ever these people are in my country and I want the citizens protected from this filthy Islamic garbage. It is sad to see people cut down in the prime of life, and tears to see children slaughtered.

And YOU are here justifying the greatest terrorist cult on earth and that is Islam. How do you sleep at night?


Don

Don123
09-02-2010, 10:38 PM
Mohammad died in 632 AD, still stuck in Arabia, so clearly Islam could not have invented the concept of zero.Which, of course, no one here has claimed that they did.
NO. They passed on the concept to the Europeans, hence the term "Arabic numerals."

NOW can I burn the Koran as it is proved that Islam is nothing but a pack of lie.Wait. You post a straw man argument and totally miss the point that was made, and now you want to burn a book that has nothing to do with the sub-topic under discussion because you falsely claim that something that has not evenbeen discussed is "proved"?

The answer is no. You can, of course, buy or steal a copy of the Qur'an and burn it, but you cannot do so and justify your actions just because you are claiming to have proven something that you have failed to even address.

I am going to ignore your comment as it is not worth addressing. There are other points to make on this thread where my time would be better spent.


Don

elucidator
09-02-2010, 10:38 PM
Boy, Cap'n, you're really gonna look stupid once Don proves those people aren't Muslim. Feel sorry for you, you're gonna look like a total jackass.

Fear Itself
09-02-2010, 10:45 PM
Those are only pictures of people that may have a Arab linage--- that does not prove they were Muslims! So how can you prove the hijackers were Muslims? For all we know, they were Southern Baptists (except for that lout Mohammed Atta, looks more like a Seventh Day Adventist to me). Prove me wrong.

cosmosdan
09-02-2010, 10:56 PM
careful folks. Don't be postin another pack of lie.

we wouldn't want the terrorists to come ridin in on camels and get any more lucky strikes. After all they're already trying to build a terror mosque in Marlboro, TN.

Soon Koran will be reduced to smoke and ashes, no butts about it. We'll have a victory concert with my favorite band, Wheezer.

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 10:59 PM
Which, of course, no one here has claimed that they did.

They did however come up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inventions_in_the_Islamic_world) with a handful of stuff of little to no importance. Things like water purification, central heating, windmills, hospitals (and the basis for modern medicine), observatories, soap, coffee... you know, the kind of useless shite that never benefited the world, much less the non-Islamic world, in any way whatsoever.

Thankfully, during that time Christendom could rely on our own alchemists and monks to ... err...um...re-discover stuff the Romans and Ancient Greeks had invented centuries before ? Gee, this is really embarrassing. Oh, I know ! We did ascertain, with some authority I might add, that angels could not be in two places at once. Put THAT in your hookah and smoke it, Islamic golden age !

Kobal2
09-02-2010, 11:10 PM
These people may have died in the Muslim terrorist attack, how ever these people are in my country and I want the citizens protected from this filthy Islamic garbage.

You... you do realize there are Muslims in your country, right ? Millions of them ? American citizens, all of them ? The families of some of which having lived in the country for over a century ?
Just checking, here. I mean, you can't really blame me for going over the most basic of facts with you at this point.

tomndebb
09-02-2010, 11:10 PM
I am going to ignore your comment as it is not worth addressing. There are other points to make on this thread where my time would be better spent.

::: snerk :::

Der Trihs
09-02-2010, 11:17 PM
These people may have died in the Muslim terrorist attack, how ever these people are in my country and I want the citizens protected from this filthy Islamic garbage.

You... you do realize there are Muslims in your country, right ? Millions of them ? American citizens, all of them ? The families of some of which having lived in the country for over a century ?
They may look Muslim, but can you prove they are? They could all just be some of those sneaky Buddhists.

Don123
09-02-2010, 11:25 PM
The term political correctness is applied to arguments that ignore core relationships between events in an attempt to avoid making any kind of judgment.Inventing new definitions for the term does not change what it really means. It certainly has no bearing on anything I have posted.

Do you ignore evcery fact that challenges your preconceptions?

Suharto persecuted Muslims.
Some of the Muslims Suharto persecuted formed a group to oppose him and were willing to carry out terrorist acts in to make their points.
Your statement the Bali attack which has nothing to do with . . . oppression or governmentis simply wrong.

Was the attack justified? In no way.
Are the members of Jemaah Islamiah violent scum? Absolutely.

However, they did not simply wake up one morning and decide to go kill people in some sort of jihad. They had a history that shaped their mindset and it was not simply reading the Qur'an and some hadiths; it included being persecuted for their religion.

The violent Islamists are wrong and need to be stopped, but making odd assertions, (that defy the facts), that they were simply following their religion does nothing but inflame other less hateful Muslims with a sense of persecution and rationalizes the behavior of kooks like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter, and others to stir up non-Muslim idiots to violence against Muslims. (Yes, I know that the score currently leans heavily toward the Muslim fanatics, but that is a temporary accident of history. If we continue to heap scorn on and cause problems for people who are doing nothing wrong and acting in good faith, (such as Imam Rauf), then we are simply going to prolong the violence.)

Was Hasan persecuted over his Islamic religion when he was hired to teach it and to give lectures, unrestricted, at almost a hundred grand a year in pay? And then one morning he pulls out a gun and kills 12 totally innocent people at Ft. Hood that he never knew, and you says he was persecuted---Yeah right! Tell me another one.

Don

Captain Amazing
09-02-2010, 11:25 PM
OH COME ON!!!

You are wasting my time. Those are only pictures of people that may have a Arab linage--- that does not prove they were Muslims! I have news for YOU, Islam is NOT a race! It is a set of ideas that people believe in.

I'm aware. Well, ok, here's an article in the Daily News about Hamdani:

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2002/04/06/2002-04-06_muslim_cop_cadet_mourned.html

It's titled "Muslim Cop Cadet Mourned".

Here's an article about the "ground zero mosque" that mentions Chowdhury (bolding mine):

http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2010/aug/22/firestorm-a-mosque-at-park-place/?print

Mohammad Chowdhury was a waiter at Windows on the World on the 107th floor of the North Tower. The entire morning shift at the restaurant perished along with the people who had come for breakfast. That morning, Mohammad had prayed the pre-dawn prayer with his wife, Baraheen Ashrafi. She was nine months pregnant with their second child. He left for work and she never saw him again. Their son, Farqad, was born 48 hours after the terrorists struck, making him one of the first "9/11 orphans" to come into the world.

And you may be right about Doany, because I'm finding some information that suggests he was a Melkite. I could find somebody else who was a Muslim who died in the towers if that would change your mind.


These people may have died in the Muslim terrorist attack, how ever these people are in my country and I want the citizens protected from this filthy Islamic garbage. It is sad to see people cut down in the prime of life, and tears to see children slaughtered.

It is sad, and I also want the citizens of America protected....citizens including Mohammed Chowdhury and Muhammed Hamdani. It seems that part of protecting Americans means protecting Americans' rights, and one of those rights is the right to believe whatever you want and practice your religion so long as what you're doing isn't hurting anyone. And, as far as I can tell, even though Muhammed Atta's practice of his religion hurt people, Mohammed Chowdhury and Muhammed Hamdani's practice of their religion didn't hurt anyone. In fact, they were hurt by Muhammed Atta's practice of his religion.

I very much am concerned with people like Muhammed Atta being in this country. I'm not concerned at all with people like Muhammed Hamdani being in this country. The tragedy is that some people think that just because they practiced the same religion, the two Muhammeds believed the same thing.

And YOU are here justifying the greatest terrorist cult on earth and that is Islam. How do you sleep at night?

Usually on my stomach/right side with my right hand under my pillow. You're really not supposed to sleep that way because its bad for your back, but I've slept like that for quite a while. I usually sleep well (although I'm told I snore), but as I'm getting older, I'm prone to indigestion at night, which makes me wake up in the middle of the night nauseous, if I eat greasy or spicy food late at night. So, I'm more careful about what I eat now. Thanks for asking, though.

Der Trihs
09-02-2010, 11:37 PM
NOW can I burn the Koran as it is proved that Islam is nothing but a pack of lie.Go ahead. What do you think it is, their Soul Object and burning it will make Muslims everywhere fall down and turn to dust?

Uzi
09-02-2010, 11:43 PM
Stringing together non sequiturs and making illogical claims while ignoring the context of a text does not work well to make your case, I am afraid.

What context? It is a bunch of nonsense for the most part and the other half is about those that don't believe are going to burn and how Allah is merciful because of it. Which is why guys like Osama can easily interpret it any way they like to.

Don123
09-02-2010, 11:58 PM
These people may have died in the Muslim terrorist attack, how ever these people are in my country and I want the citizens protected from this filthy Islamic garbage.

You... you do realize there are Muslims in your country, right ? Millions of them ? American citizens, all of them ? The families of some of which having lived in the country for over a century ?
Just checking, here. I mean, you can't really blame me for going over the most basic of facts with you at this point.

That is why I think we should have a harmless Koran burning party to loosen up the Muslims; that this is America, and we have free speech in public, NO ONE or NO institution is above being criticized, that includes your child rapist Mohammad, and YOU Muslims will have to adapt to our ways, have tolerance not found in the Koran, and learn to live with it.

Now YOU Muslims, get out there and make some money, this is the land of the rich, and live the good life, as there is hope for your children to be better than you. Some of your children may even convert to being a Christian or an Atheist--- and YOU have NO say about it and you cannot do anything about it after they are 18y.

You cannot sell your daughters into marriage at age 9, as Mohammad took Aisha!

We are going to force you to be a hypocrite to your Islamic religion, you cannot kill non-believers when ever you see them as the Koran says to do.

(It just might work, it worked with the Mormons)


Don

elucidator
09-03-2010, 12:07 AM
My Congressman is Mr Ellison, a Muslim. Minnesota's dull common sense can hang like an placid cloud, but damned if it doesn't have its moments.

Monty
09-03-2010, 12:15 AM
Was Hasan persecuted over his Islamic religion when he was hired to teach it and to give lectures, unrestricted, at almost a hundred grand a year in pay? And then one morning he pulls out a gun and kills 12 totally innocent people at Ft. Hood that he never knew, and you says he was persecuted---Yeah right! Tell me another one.

How about you tell us one? Tell us who hired Major Hasan to teach his religion "at almost a hundred grand a year in pay." While you're about it, you could also tell us where he was hired to teach his religion for that price.

Kobal2
09-03-2010, 12:16 AM
Dude, who are you talking to, exactly ? I'm not a Muslim, I'm not even an American.

ETA : that was of course a response to Don's latest rant.

tomndebb
09-03-2010, 12:21 AM
Was Hasan persecuted over his Islamic religion when he was hired to teach it and to give lectures, unrestricted, at almost a hundred grand a year in pay? And then one morning he pulls out a gun and kills 12 totally innocent people at Ft. Hood that he never knew, and you says he was persecuted---Yeah right! Tell me another one. Hasan was the sort of unthinking, hate-filled person that you appear to be trying to emulate. (He was probably also mentally disturbed, but that is not yet established.) As such, he was very susceptible to the words of another purveyor of hatred.

I have made no claim that every Muslim who has ever committed a violent act was persecuted, so you are just posting one more straw man. The point to which you are irrelevantly responding is several posters claim that Islam is, per se, a hateful and evil religion that simply directs all its members to act in violent and hateful ways. My response is that the lack of such hateful violence among many Muslim groups over hundreds of years puts the lie to that claim, but that to the extent that there are several violent groups of Muslims active in today's world, we can find either persecution or societal chaos or conflict at the origin of those groups. Once a group embraces hatred and violence, it can take over their actions, of course, but the violent Muslim groups active today all had their origins in external violence or oppression rather than in a simple reading of the Qur'an or even a stint at a madrassah.

Don123
09-03-2010, 12:27 AM
NOW can I burn the Koran as it is proved that Islam is nothing but a pack of lie.Go ahead. What do you think it is, their Soul Object and burning it will make Muslims everywhere fall down and turn to dust?

I do not know what Voodoo believing Muslims are going to do, when the Korans go up in flames. Maybe they will throw themselves into the fire to put it out. So we had better get the fire department to stand by, with doctors, and attorneys, have cameras running so Muslims will not say we spit on them when we did not (as spitting at some one is a tort and that is forbidden).

Maybe we should get the cops out in riot gear to protect our rights of free speech.

We do not like the Koran and we do not like Islam, and we have a say about it. After we have our say we will go home and post on Great Debates and try not to get banned.


Don

tomndebb
09-03-2010, 12:37 AM
What context? It is a bunch of nonsense for the most part and the other half is about those that don't believe are going to burn and how Allah is merciful because of it. Which is why guys like Osama can easily interpret it any way they like to.You have really stopped making any sense, so I'll probably have to stop responding to you.

Your posts are a really silly mish-mash of attacks on the Qur'an for being wrong or foolish while insisting that you can reasonably be expected to interpret what it means and tell its followers what they are supposed to believe even though you deny that the work is in any way coherent, to begin with.

I will make one more attempt, although the information has already been posted in this thread more than once and you have ignored it.

The "violent" passages that you have quoted were written at the particuar time when the nascent Muslim community was under specific attack by the pagans of a particular city. They were direct instructions on the way to defend themselves from a particular group at a particular time. They were not general instructions ordering the murder of every non-Muslim they ever encountered for the rest of history.
It really does not matter whether the words in the verses were proclaimed by (a) God or dreamed up by Mohammed, himself. The point was that they were recorded as the exhortations before particular battles and they were kept in the Qur'an because the Muslim community won those battles.

So it is irrelvant whether they are the words of God or the words of Mohammed; they simply point back to a time when Muslims were in danger of being annihilated and provide inspiration for future Muslims to defend themselves if they are attacked.

tomndebb
09-03-2010, 12:39 AM
We do not like the Koran and we do not like Islam, and we have a say about it. After we have our say we will go home and post on Great Debates and try not to get banned.
So, how many of you are posting from that computer, anyway?

Don123
09-03-2010, 01:49 AM
Was Hasan persecuted over his Islamic religion when he was hired to teach it and to give lectures, unrestricted, at almost a hundred grand a year in pay? And then one morning he pulls out a gun and kills 12 totally innocent people at Ft. Hood that he never knew, and you says he was persecuted---Yeah right! Tell me another one. Hasan was the sort of unthinking, hate-filled person that you appear to be trying to emulate. (He was probably also mentally disturbed, but that is not yet established.) As such, he was very susceptible to the words of another purveyor of hatred.

I have made no claim that every Muslim who has ever committed a violent act was persecuted, so you are just posting one more straw man. The point to which you are irrelevantly responding is several posters claim that Islam is, per se, a hateful and evil religion that simply directs all its members to act in violent and hateful ways. My response is that the lack of such hateful violence among many Muslim groups over hundreds of years puts the lie to that claim, but that to the extent that there are several violent groups of Muslims active in today's world, we can find either persecution or societal chaos or conflict at the origin of those groups. Once a group embraces hatred and violence, it can take over their actions, of course, but the violent Muslim groups active today all had their origins in external violence or oppression rather than in a simple reading of the Qur'an or even a stint at a madrassah.

You said:

“…posters claim that Islam is, per se, a hateful and evil religion that simply directs all its members to act in violent and hateful ways.”

My answer is YES. I stand by my claim with the evidence of the Koran that I have posted (that you can read the book yourself), with thousands of customary terrorist acts of Muslims in the last 15 years with 10s of thousands dead and 3 times as many wounded, and with Islamic history of aggression for about 1,400 years, and by the preponderance of the evidence; nothing has changed since Mohammad of what the entire Islamic cult is built on who was nothing but a pedophile and a war monger to say the least (going by Islamic holy books).


Now your response is, the reason is persecution.

I say that is very lame of you and overly broad to the point of not being understandable as even serial killers feel persecuted when caught and punished.

Persecution is a “subjective feeling” that any one, for any reason, can conjure up. Even more so if a person believes in an almighty god telling them they are persecuted. Every non-believer, even the ones on the other side of the earth, persecutes a Muslim for the simple act of non-belief.

Accordingly, perhaps you would like to bring some limitations to your persecution theory and include the Koran.

You do NOT get the luxury of speaking for all Muslims and their subjective feelings. But I do have the objective evidence that all Muslim terrorist believe in the Koran. So I say burn the Koran, as no matter what I do I will be blamed for persecuting a Muslim.

Perhaps I should react as I’m being persecuted by Muslims for my non-belief in Allah, by their Koran threats and terrorist acts.


Don

Magiver
09-03-2010, 01:58 AM
Suharto persecuted Muslims.

Some of the Muslims Suharto persecuted formed a group to oppose him and were willing to carry out terrorist acts in to make their points. Suharto was out of office for 4 years prior to the Bali bombing. There is no logic to the idea that they were opposing him. It wasn't targeted at the government. It was targeted at symbols of Western cultural which corresponds to the messages handed down by Imams through mosques and schools. The driving force for the target was religion.

Don123
09-03-2010, 02:06 AM
We do not like the Koran and we do not like Islam, and we have a say about it. After we have our say we will go home and post on Great Debates and try not to get banned.
So, how many of you are posting from that computer, anyway?

Me, myself, and I---seeing I don’t believe in any gods.—ha ha.


Give me a little literary slack here and you will get a reward in heaven.

(Stop it Don)


Don

Don123
09-03-2010, 02:33 AM
What context? It is a bunch of nonsense for the most part and the other half is about those that don't believe are going to burn and how Allah is merciful because of it. Which is why guys like Osama can easily interpret it any way they like to.You have really stopped making any sense, so I'll probably have to stop responding to you.

Your posts are a really silly mish-mash of attacks on the Qur'an for being wrong or foolish while insisting that you can reasonably be expected to interpret what it means and tell its followers what they are supposed to believe even though you deny that the work is in any way coherent, to begin with.

I will make one more attempt, although the information has already been posted in this thread more than once and you have ignored it.

The "violent" passages that you have quoted were written at the particuar time when the nascent Muslim community was under specific attack by the pagans of a particular city. They were direct instructions on the way to defend themselves from a particular group at a particular time. They were not general instructions ordering the murder of every non-Muslim they ever encountered for the rest of history.
It really does not matter whether the words in the verses were proclaimed by (a) God or dreamed up by Mohammed, himself. The point was that they were recorded as the exhortations before particular battles and they were kept in the Qur'an because the Muslim community won those battles.

So it is irrelvant whether they are the words of God or the words of Mohammed; they simply point back to a time when Muslims were in danger of being annihilated and provide inspiration for future Muslims to defend themselves if they are attacked.



I can agree in a small part of what you wrote, but what you do not understand is the Islamic way of interpreting the Koran handed down from their highest Mullahs.

What you leave out is the common Islamic reasoning of abrogation i.e. the older verses in the Koran, that resemble some form of peace, are supplanted with the newer ones that are hate and destroy. Accordingly most all the verses that came early in Mohammad’s career of caravan raiding have much less value than the older ones when he went on war campaigns.

As far as Mohammad writing something, that is doubtful as he told Gabriel he did not know how to read and write. And the Koran was not complied until about 175 years after his death. And even still the book is a mess as it is organized by chapter length and not by flowing context as in a story.

So I have no fear of putting a match to it.

Don

tomndebb
09-03-2010, 03:27 AM
Suharto persecuted Muslims.

Some of the Muslims Suharto persecuted formed a group to oppose him and were willing to carry out terrorist acts in to make their points. Suharto was out of office for 4 years prior to the Bali bombing. There is no logic to the idea that they were opposing him. It wasn't targeted at the government. It was targeted at symbols of Western cultural which corresponds to the messages handed down by Imams through mosques and schools. The driving force for the target was religion.I did not say they were opposing him at the time of the bombing. You claim that there is nothing but religion behind the various terrorist groups. I noted that every one of the groups formed in response to oppression or societal chaos. Once a group has formed, it operates on its own logic that is not bound by mere facts. (Sort of like the way that demagogues can whip up fury at a Sufi community center under the pretense that it is connected in some imaginary way with the actions of Wahhabist terrorists nine years earlier.)
It is absolutely true that the Bali bombers were attacking Western cultural symbols--I said as much, myself--but the movement that encouraged the hatred that acted out in that way was not merely a group of religious people thinking bad thoughts, it was a specific movement that had arisen in a time of persecution and then continued its self-anointed "mission" after conditions had begun to change.
If the sole cause of the attacks is simply the religion of Islam, where are the same attacks in the 1980s, 1970s, 1960s, 1950s, etc.?

Monty
09-03-2010, 06:02 AM
What you leave out is the common Islamic reasoning of abrogation i.e. the older verses in the Koran, that resemble some form of peace, are supplanted with the newer ones that are hate and destroy. Accordingly most all the verses that came early in Mohammad’s career of caravan raiding have much less value than the older ones when he went on war campaigns.

Posting half-truths does not help your case. Here (http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Farooq_Ibrahim/abrogation.htm) is a real description of the doctrine of abrogation.

asterion
09-03-2010, 06:26 AM
NOW can I burn the Koran as it is proved that Islam is nothing but a pack of lie.Go ahead. What do you think it is, their Soul Object and burning it will make Muslims everywhere fall down and turn to dust?

Wait, so all Muslims are liches? Okay, now I'm scared.

bbart4
09-03-2010, 07:50 AM
Suharto persecuted Muslims.

Some of the Muslims Suharto persecuted formed a group to oppose him and were willing to carry out terrorist acts in to make their points. Suharto was out of office for 4 years prior to the Bali bombing. There is no logic to the idea that they were opposing him. It wasn't targeted at the government. It was targeted at symbols of Western cultural which corresponds to the messages handed down by Imams through mosques and schools. The driving force for the target was religion.

Ba'asyir, the head of JI, was on exile during Suharto's regime. Suharto practically chased all radical muslims out of the country (and even some more moderate ones also). Ba'asyir came back after Suharto's fall. JI reformed as Indonesia went democratic. They strengthened after 9/11 with Al-Qaida support.

Now they are on the run again, with Ba'asyir trying to distance himself from key JI terrorist suspects.

Uzi
09-03-2010, 08:17 AM
So it is irrelvant whether they are the words of God or the words of Mohammed; they simply point back to a time when Muslims were in danger of being annihilated and provide inspiration for future Muslims to defend themselves if they are attacked.

I see, and you think the average Muslim, some of the poorest and least educated people on the planet, are able to interpret this based upon what you have said here?

So, how do they interpret what the Koran actually says rather than what tomndebb wishes it to say: Seeing that he isn't there to give the 'correct' interpretation? Isn't that what the Hadiths (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith) are all about?

Forced Conversions (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/013-forced-conversion.htm)

On violence (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/023-violence.htm)

straight man
09-03-2010, 10:48 AM
I have not found any documentation of any Muslims being killed in 9/11 other than the terrorist. Perhaps you would like to supply it? I have heard about Muslims being killed in the buildings and each year the numbers get larger and larger—funny how the dead can multiply. How does that happen?

You are wasting my time. Those are only pictures of people that may have a Arab linage--- that does not prove they were Muslims! I have news for YOU, Islam is NOT a race! It is a set of ideas that people believe in.

<snip>

And YOU are here justifying the greatest terrorist cult on earth and that is Islam. How do you sleep at night?

Alternatively, you could just Google "list of muslims killed on 9/11" and go to the very first result, which has a list (http://islam.about.com/blvictims.htm). I mean, I know you're not going to accept it anyway, but it's worth pointing out that this stuff isn't exactly a secret. Anyway, how do you think it's even plausible to kill almost three thousand New Yorkers and not have any of them be Muslims?

Also, whether you like Islam or not, and whether you think it's a terrorist organization or not, it's certainly not a cult. The religion isn't all that insular (at least, not in its emigrant populations), its leadership doesn't believe differently from the masses, it no longer has a powerful, charismatic leader,...

Buck Godot
09-03-2010, 11:20 AM
Go ahead. What do you think it is, their Soul Object and burning it will make Muslims everywhere fall down and turn to dust?

I do not know what Voodoo believing Muslims are going to do, when the Korans go up in flames. Maybe they will throw themselves into the fire to put it out. So we had better get the fire department to stand by, with doctors, and attorneys, have cameras running so Muslims will not say we spit on them when we did not (as spitting at some one is a tort and that is forbidden).

Maybe we should get the cops out in riot gear to protect our rights of free speech.

We do not like the Koran and we do not like Islam, and we have a say about it. After we have our say we will go home and post on Great Debates and try not to get banned.

Don

I think its very clear what will happen. Most Muslims will shake their head at the stupid church and go on with their lives. Those in the US might feel a little more persecuted and fearful over the anti-Muslim bigotry that continues in the US. A relatively small number who were on the fence about whether to be radical or not might decide that this is enough proof that the US is waging a holy war and so tip over the the radical branch slightly increasing the chance of more attacks. A bunch of bigots in the US get to feel self righteously smug.

None of these seems to be a very good thing.

I have an idea lets get together a bunch of late term aborted fetuses and laugh while we feed them to dogs in front the a baptist church while wearing the skulls of dead babies on our heads. Since the children are already dead we aren't doing any real harm and are just exercising our free speech rights which is surely a good thing. If the Christians get offended its their own fault.

Gyrate
09-03-2010, 11:29 AM
"Voodoo believing Muslims"? Voodoo incorporates Catholic elements into West African belief systems; it has more to do with Christianity than with Islam.
I mean, you can't really blame me for going over the most basic of facts with you at this point. I think the first step would be to get Don to admit that Muslims are humans.

Don123
09-03-2010, 11:56 AM
I have not found any documentation of any Muslims being killed in 9/11 other than the terrorist. Perhaps you would like to supply it? I have heard about Muslims being killed in the buildings and each year the numbers get larger and larger—funny how the dead can multiply. How does that happen?

You are wasting my time. Those are only pictures of people that may have a Arab linage--- that does not prove they were Muslims! I have news for YOU, Islam is NOT a race! It is a set of ideas that people believe in.

<snip>

And YOU are here justifying the greatest terrorist cult on earth and that is Islam. How do you sleep at night?

Alternatively, you could just Google "list of muslims killed on 9/11" and go to the very first result, which has a list (http://islam.about.com/blvictims.htm). I mean, I know you're not going to accept it anyway, but it's worth pointing out that this stuff isn't exactly a secret. Anyway, how do you think it's even plausible to kill almost three thousand New Yorkers and not have any of them be Muslims?

Also, whether you like Islam or not, and whether you think it's a terrorist organization or not, it's certainly not a cult. The religion isn't all that insular (at least, not in its emigrant populations), its leadership doesn't believe differently from the masses, it no longer has a powerful, charismatic leader,...



I went to your site and made a note of it. I will grant you that there may have been some Muslims killed in the 9/11 attack other than the terrorist. By the reason of the numbers killed, more than likely that is the case.

To say how many or whom, it is not known and I do not see how any one can make the claim other wise.

My point is these dead innocent Muslims are being used for propaganda purposes, even more so as the mosque at ground zero is trying to be built against great protest. I find that trickery that Muslims use all the time trying to justify what cannot be justified. Muslims are known to hold up their dead as martyrs to advance the spread of Islam, and I simply do not buy into it.


And may I add all the more reason to hate that filthy religion, as Muslim terrorist do not even respect the lives of their own kind, and you do not know who will be the next Muslim terrorist as that is what the religion genders by the groves daily. When Islamic leaders say they have no shortage of suicide bombers, I believe them.

I admit it is a real problem and some what of a dilemma. I absolutely oppose dragging Muslims out of their homes at random in vigilante or mob rule and confine or shooting them. That is enough for me to take up arms in protection of the innocent. On the other hand it is dangerous to allow a suicidal religion, as Islam is proved to be, to take root in your neighborhood. I am left with education to the Muslims, social pressures, open to the public debates, perhaps even logic and reason to persuade them away from their cult into anything they desire as a faith, or no faith at all, just not Islam.

To have a public Koran burning party would send a message to Muslims of the great dislike to their killing cult, that we are not going to be pushed around by their threats of terrorism that is the dominate feature of Islam. And I do not care how many Islamic martyrs they hang on the wall.


Don

Fear Itself
09-03-2010, 12:13 PM
To have a public Koran burning party would send a message to Muslims of the great dislike to their killing cult, that we are not going to be pushed around by their threats of terrorism that is the dominate feature of Islam. If this was widely practiced in America, what do you think the response by Muslims would be?

Don123
09-03-2010, 12:26 PM
"Voodoo believing Muslims"? Voodoo incorporates Catholic elements into West African belief systems; it has more to do with Christianity than with Islam.
I mean, you can't really blame me for going over the most basic of facts with you at this point. I think the first step would be to get Don to admit that Muslims are humans.

By medical definitions Charles Manson ( a renown serial killer) is human also, but mentally he is worse than an animal. Accordingly he is locked up for life.

Voodoo Catholics---yep I stand by it. The difference being they have been defeated long ago and forced into being civil. And when they step out of line as in Ireland, the free world should raise up and put an end to it as fast as possible.

This stupid idea that a darkage belief in a god of some kind gives a person the right to go killing and intimidating the neighborhood is going to come to an end by the force and rule of laws and punishments.


Don

bbart4
09-03-2010, 12:28 PM
When Islamic leaders say they have no shortage of suicide bombers, I believe them.

What makes you believe them? Give me an estimate on what % of muslim pop. is capable of becoming such bombers?


On the other hand it is dangerous to allow a suicidal religion, as Islam is proved to be, to take root in your neighborhood. I am left with education to the Muslims, social pressures, open to the public debates, perhaps even logic and reason to persuade them away from their cult into anything they desire as a faith, or no faith at all, just not Islam.

What sort of education are you proposing?


To have a public Koran burning party would send a message to Muslims of the great dislike to their killing cult, that we are not going to be pushed around by their threats of terrorism that is the dominate feature of Islam. And I do not care how many Islamic martyrs they hang on the wall.


Don

Without the burning, increasing numbers of them have already suspected that everyone else is at war with them. This would just merely confirm their sentiments.

Gyrate
09-03-2010, 12:37 PM
Reading Don's posts is like reading a Chick tract.

Evil Muslim 1: HAW HAW HAW! Ahmed, our plan to infiltrate America and impose Sharia law is going forward as planned!

Evil Muslim 2: Yes, Omar! We have already gained permission to build a mosque directly on the hallowed land of Ground Zero and not in any way two blocks away in a disused Burlington Coat Factory, and have convinced many Americans that we are a peace-loving people! Soon all America will fall under the sword of Allah!

Fictional Don: Halt, terrorist scum! We American are not going to be pushed around by the threats of terrorism that is the dominate feature of Islam! I do not care how many Islamic martyrs you hang on the wall!

Evil Muslim 1: Filthy infidel! You cannot stop us! All billion or so of us worldwide are committed to the cause of violent jihad!

Fictional Don: Oh no? Let's see how you feel after I set fire to THIS KORAN!

Evil Muslim 2: By the beard of the Prophet Peace be unto Him and death to everyone else! He has set our holy book alight, and yet Allah has not struck him down!

Evil Muslim 1: How can this be? Could we have been so mistaken in our ways?

Evil Muslim 2: It must be so! Perhaps we should fall to our knees and pray to Jesus Christ for forgiveness of our sins, lest the Lord cast us into the fiery pit for all eternity!


That about how you see this book burning happening, Don?

Kobal2
09-03-2010, 12:45 PM
Reading Don's posts is like reading a Chick tract. [...]

Pssst, you forgot how new Chick converts can immediately quote chapter and verse. Otherwise, spot on :)

Uzi
09-03-2010, 12:50 PM
What makes you believe them? Give me an estimate on what % of muslim pop. is capable of becoming such bombers?

As a % of muslims, it is probably greater than a % of people in other major religions. Their book condones and reveres it. Why is it surprising that someone who reads the book interprets it that way and would act upon it?

bbart4
09-03-2010, 01:00 PM
What makes you believe them? Give me an estimate on what % of muslim pop. is capable of becoming such bombers?

As a % of muslims, it is probably greater than a % of people in other major religions. Their book condones and reveres it. Why is it surprising that someone who reads the book interprets it that way and would act upon it?

Because the data isn't convincing. People read so many things, yet most of them are rational enough to try to live peacefully with others. Do you think most muslims have rational enough minds?

So when muslims do it, it is because their book condones and reveres it. If non muslims do it, it's got nothing to do with their religion?

qpw3141
09-03-2010, 01:04 PM
What makes you believe them? Give me an estimate on what % of muslim pop. is capable of becoming such bombers?

As a % of muslims, it is probably greater than a % of people in other major religions. Their book condones and reveres it. Why is it surprising that someone who reads the book interprets it that way and would act upon it?

So mad people read books and get kookie ideas about them.

Rather like mad people listen to Beatles songs and get kookie ideas from them.

Let's destroy:

All the Muslims because of 9-11.
All the Christians because of the crusades.
All the Hindi's because of the killing at partition.
All the aetheists because why should those godless bastards survive.

That'll just leave the Buddhists and a few other minor religions until someone does some Don style research and fingers them. (Well, probably not the Jains, actually.)

straight man
09-03-2010, 01:12 PM
Evil Muslim 2: It must be so! Perhaps we should fall to our knees and pray to Jesus Christ for forgiveness of our sins, lest the Lord cast us into the fiery pit for all eternity!


That about how you see this book burning happening, Don?
Not to be cranky, but I think Don is atheist. (He's not exactly been complimentary toward Christians in this thread, anyway.)