It is currently Sat Nov 17, 2018 9:28 am

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 72 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Muslims and peace...
PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:21 pm 
High Goddess of Atlantis
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am
Posts: 4792
My experience is that there are those Muslims who do not interpret the Quran as some suggest they must (Kevin... smile).

The Muslims I know speak out for peace and speak out against terrorism. (With one exception who is in prison).

Here are a few links provided by my Mulsim friend who is very passionate about her religion and peace.

http://www.cair.com/default.asp

http://www.americanmuslims.info/archive.asp

http://www.metimes.com/storyview.php?St ... 2227-3029r

http://www.americanmuslims.info/

http://www.noterror.info/index.aspx

~dancer~


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2007 8:50 pm 
Savior (mortal ministry)
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 8:32 am
Posts: 922
Location: In my Hammock--I Wish
TD

Thank you for posting those sites....moderate Muslims..hopefully will start to have a louder voice and the media will allow their voices to be heard.....Watch the Glenn Beck program...

www.glennbeck.com/tv/

This link should tell you where and when he is on

_________________
When I wake up I will be hungry....but this feels so good right now aaahhhhhh........


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 13, 2007 9:55 pm 
Most of the Muslims I've met IRL are nice people. And in my country most are moderate. But extremist views do exist, and are fed by some of the Muslim community. For example, why Sheik Hilaly has not yet been dumped as Australia's Muslim leader is not only baffling, but unconscionable. His latest statement is that Muslims in Australia have more right to live here than those of convict ancestry. His comments have again been condemned by some Muslim leaders, but he's still there, still the leader. No other public figure would survive a comment like that. Catholic Archbishops have been forced to resign for saying much less. There's a double standard here. When 9/11 occurred I saw some Muslim reaction - almost tears of joy, and boxer Anthony Mundine (son of former world champion boxer Tony Mundine) said "they deserved it". Mundine is an Australian-born Aboriginal who converted to Islam, has money and fame, and nothing to gripe about. Some of this is obviously racially motivated, and they may view Christianity as a religion for "nice white people who live in leafy-green suburbs" and drive Ferraris.

I've met some terrific Muslim families in the last five years, but I have to say, thank God their children are growing up as Aussies and adopting the Aussie lifestyle, and there's little chance they will want to adopt strict Muslim culture. As long as that happens, I feel safe.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 6:50 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:27 am
Posts: 2750
Quote:
My experience is that there are those Muslims who do not interpret the Quran as some suggest they must (Kevin... smile).


I never said Muslims "must" do anything, but I believe you are jmping to conslusions about how Muslims you know interpret the Quran. When I pressed you on this you said they go to their Imam. Well, duh? That doesn't leave much room for their own private interpretation then now does it?

After viewing these links…. TD, you cannot possibly be serious.

None of your links provide examples of prominent Muslim figures or groups condemning Islamic terrorists by name. The largest American Muslim school in Virginia teaches kids that Osama bin Ladin is an innocent. Try to get a CAIR representative to denounce Hamas for example. The attempt has been made too many times but they always skirt the issue and start talking about American or Israeli terrorism. You got one obscure article by a Muslim talking about how she knows Muslims who condemn terror- superficial and about as meaningful as your assertions - but like you she provides no names of any Imams, and she doesn’t condemn any by name either. She doesn’t define what she considers terrorism also. The last link is some weird website with no information about who runs it, how many people support it, what they consider terrorism, etc. The photos on the website are not of American 9-11 victims but rather Muslim victims in other countries, which tells me they are more focused on calling Israel and America terrorists.

Recently one Muslim tried to form a “march against Terror” and when he tried to get CAIR involved they refused. What does it say to Americans when Muslims in the community refuse to participate in a "March Against Terror"? A grand total of 100 people showed up, most of whom were not even Muslims!! http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20050512 ... -6912r.htm . Hussein Ibish of the Progressive Muslim Union said this particular Muslim,"has gone too far in apologizing to the American public for radical Islamic terrorism."

When confronted with questions, CAIR refuses to denounce terrorists (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Re ... stake president?ID=9461). When terrorists are found and convicted, it is not surprising that CAIR deems (http://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/cgi-b ... slam/CAIR/) their convictions "hate crimes." Nor is it surprising that CAIR will lie (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Re ... p?ID=18480) about such things on Hannity and Colmes. Shortly after the attacks in Sept 2001, CAIR placed on its web site, under a picture of the World Trade Center in flames, a plea: “Donate to the New York/DC Emergency Relief Fund.” Once clicked, the link redirects to the Holy Land Foundation, an Islamic “charity” whose assets were frozen by the Government because it had given millions to Hamas. Did you get that? CAIR was trying to use the 9-11 event to further fund terror! Steven Pomerantz, the FBI's former chief of counter terrorism, says (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic ... E_ID=32242) CAIR's "leaders and its activities effectively give aid to international terrorist groups." Even worse, CAIR has employed (http://www.danielpipes.org/article/394) at least three convicted terrorists, yet it is supposed to be a benign "civil rights" group. CAIR has established itself as the representative for American Islam, having been invited to the White House numerous times since 9-11. CAIR is the defendant in a 9-11 lawsuit (http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/394) put forward by the family of FBI agent John O'Neill, who was murdered during the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center. CAIR's parent organization, Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), was created by the number two leader of Hamas, Mousa Abu Marzook (http://www.adl.org/terror/marzuq.asp). What does it say about American Islam when the most vocal and prominent Muslim organization is a front for militant Islam?

"By Allah, the West should not be condemned for thinking that every Muslim is a terrorist, when it sees all these shameful deeds and the Muslims remain as silent as the dead." (Dr. Ahmad Al-Baghdadi, Al-Siyassa, July 20, 2005)

Try again TD.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:12 am 
High Goddess of Atlantis
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am
Posts: 4792
Hi Kevin....

My Muslim friend, last night in a discussion wrote this in an email to me... "there are over 1 billion Muslims on the earth and just about that many perspectives on what Islam means to them. ; ) There is no priests, no pastors, no leadership head...just God and the Qur'an."

My understanding is that in Islam, belief is between the believer and God. The Imam is the local person one goes to for help and direction. Do you disagree with this?

Do you agree that there are those who embrace Islam who do not agree with terrorism? Who believe the Quran speaks of peace? Who interpret the Quran differently that terrorist?

You seem to suggest that Islam is one united belief system with one interpretation of the Quran.... the one the terrorist embrace.

You speak of Muslim leaders not speaking out... but my understanding is Islam does not embrace a heirarchal form of leadership in any sense of the word.

I'm not arguing that there are some violent terrorist-minded Muslims in the world. I'm suggesting that there are those who embrace Islam but who do not interpret the Quran as you suggest they do. I just do not think all of the Muslim community is like you think they are.

~dancer~

And no I'm not kidding with the links I sent...:-) they are examples of believing Muslims people speaking out against violence, terrorism... and trying to bring peace to our world.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 8:52 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:27 am
Posts: 2750
I can produce citations from religious authorities. You and your friend only produce assertions from unnamed people about unnamed beliefs. Your Muslim friend provides you with links to an organization that funds terrorism, employs terrorists and is monitored closely by the FBI and has made scary public declarations such as how the USA should eventually become an Islamic state.

This is supposed to be your evidence that many Muslims reject terrorism?

I mean come on, you’re killing your own position here.

Quote:
My understanding is that in Islam, belief is between the believer and God. The Imam is the local person one goes to for help and direction. Do you disagree with this?


I have already agreed with this... twice. But the imam relies on Islamic texts, Islamic jurisprudence to counsel fellow Muslims. 80% of American mosques are controlled by Saudi Arabia’s fundamentalist brand of Islam.

Quote:
Do you agree that there are those who embrace Islam who do not agree with terrorism?


Of course. But they remain silent, probably because they are 1) very few or 2) scared to speak out due to repercussions from mainstream Islam. I already pointed out the example of a Mosque excommunicating a Muslim simply because he spoke out against an Islamic terrorist.

Quote:
Who believe the Quran speaks of peace?


The quran does speak of peace in some contexts, but understanding of the Quran is in order for realizing that the less tolerant, aggressive passages abrogate the earlier passages that seem to speak of love and peace. This is why those educated in Islam and its religious texts have a tendency to lean towards extremism/radicalism. Incidentally, the Quran does not speak of the golden rule which exists in most religions, and in fact it teaches that God doesn’t love humanity as a whole; he only loves Muslims. Since God hates the rest of us, it is incumbent upon all Muslims to hate us as well. Do all Muslims follow this? Certainly not. Why? Well it certainly isn’t because they know the Quran well. It probably has more to do with western culture rubbing off on them as they try to make a medieval religion compatible with western values. I mean come on, is it just a coincidence that the Muslims claiming to reject this stuff are generally those living in the West?

Quote:
Who interpret the Quran differently that terrorist?


Terrorists have religious authorities of the highest order backing them up. In Sunni Islam there are no pastors nor is there a Pope, but that doesn’t change the fact that Islam has an Islamic law that governs all Muslims. Just as an example, according to Islamic law apostates are to be killed. That is the judgment from jurists representing all four schools of Sunni jurisprudence. That is why apostates living in America run for their lives and are under constant threat even from American Muslims. This is why Irshad Manji, a Muslim liberal living in Canada, cannot give talks at universities without the Muslim Student Association – largest Muslim organization in N. America - lining up against the back wall to stare her down for intimidation purposes.

When I comes to debate time, those who keep insisting the Quran does not support terrorism, either flee the scene or lose royally.

Quote:
You speak of Muslim leaders not speaking out... but my understanding is Islam does not embrace a heirarchal form of leadership in any sense of the word.


And…? How does that change the fact that their Imams speak out about cartoons and false rumors of discrimination, they represent the Muslim communities when they feel the need, yet when it comes to their own members “hijacking” the faith, they absolutely refuse to come out and condemn them by name? This is just excuse making for their refusal to speak out against terrorists. We know they can speak out because they often do. The problem is, what are they speaking out, about!

Just last week this article revealed some downright scary information about what goes on in Mosques: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/ ... 30,00.html

Quote:
Secret video footage reveals Muslim preachers exhorting followers to prepare for jihad, to hit girls for not wearing the hijab, and to create a 'state within a state'. Many of the preachers are linked to the Wahhabi strain of Islam practised in Saudi Arabia, which funds a number of Britain's leading Islamic institutions.


And as I said before, this is the same exact brand of Islam is responsible for funding roughly 80-85% of all the mosques in North America. These Imams get their Friday sermons faxed from Rihad.

Quote:
I'm suggesting that there are those who embrace Islam but who do not interpret the Quran as you suggest they do. I just do not think all of the Muslim community is like you think they are.


This has never been the issue, nor have I questioned it. You’re demonstrating that you don’t understand my point since I never said anything about how “all of the Muslim community” is like. Again, this started when I outlined the concept of the Quran by Islam in general. My description of this concept fits the vast majority of that “one billion” people. Your friend is kidding herself if she thinks there are a billion different concepts of the Quran, but I doubt that is what she is saying anyway. The Quran is understood as the cornerstone of Islamic faith by all Muslims. There is no room for maneuvering on that point.

Quote:
And no I'm not kidding with the links I sent...:-) they are examples of believing Muslims people speaking out against violence, terrorism... and trying to bring peace to our world.


You provided links to an organization that is a front for Islamic terrorism, and you call it an example of “Muslims speaking out against terrorism and trying to bring peace”?
What the hell TD?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 3:28 pm 
High Goddess of Atlantis
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am
Posts: 4792
Hi Kevin...
Quote:
I can produce citations from religious authorities. You and your friend only produce assertions from unnamed people about unnamed beliefs.


What "religious authorities" are you talking about? There are no authorities in Islam. There are no prophets, leaders, priests, or some authority figure.

Who is going to speak out? Lets say a muslim woman wants to speak out against terrorism. What is she supposed to do? Call the local tv station? Get CNN to interview her? Write an article for the New York times? Individuals do what they can to promote peace and speak out against terrorism but it is not so easy to be heard. It is MUCH easier for a church with a leader or prophet to get an audience with the world's media!

Those Muslims I know speaking out against terrorism do what they can... but they are regular people without connections in high places.

Kevin... you write,

Quote:
Your friend is kidding herself if she thinks there are a billion different concepts of the Quran, but I doubt that is what she is saying anyway. The Quran is understood as the cornerstone of Islamic faith by all Muslims. There is no room for maneuvering on that point.


This is where I disagree with you... I agree the Quran is understood as the cornerstone of Islamic faith. No question. But... how the Quran is understood and embraced is NOT as clear cut as you seem to think. This is my point.

I agree that much of the world does indeed hold to archaic harmful beliefs discussed in the Quran. But not everyone interprets it in the same way.

I do think I misunderstood your position to some degree.... you seem to agree that many American Muslims do not hold to the same beliefs as those Muslims in the East. The extent, with one exception of Muslims I know are all American.

I'm still learning here and am open to more understanding. I recently read, The End of Faith, and also Karen Armstrong's latest book, "The Spiral Staircase," so am trying to get different perspectives on this issue. I just know that the Muslims I know are peaceful, loving, amazing people, who condemn terrorism and violence of every kind.

Many LDS folks get angry when others tell them what they believe based on scripture/prophetic statements/early historical documents... apologists often say if someone wants to know about their beliefs they need to ask an LDS believer. Should we not do the same with Muslims? On the other hand, my observation is that LDS people/apologists/leaders are not always forthcoming, trust worthy, or fully honest... perhaps there are those Muslims who are similar?



~dancer~


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:28 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:27 am
Posts: 2750
Quote:
What "religious authorities" are you talking about? There are no authorities in Islam. There are no prophets, leaders, priests, or some authority figure.


Of course Islam has its authorities. You said so yourself, the regular folk go to the Imams for instruction. Why in the world would they do that if they are their own authorities who can interpret the Quran for themselves? There is no central authority like the Pope is for Catholicism or the Prophet is for Mormonism, but there are recognize authorities who have the final say in public matters. In Sunni Islam there are four schools of jurisprudence which pronounce judgments and interpretations of sharia law. They are authorities. Sharia law is central to what Islam is. Ask your Muslim friends what they think about sharia and that should probably tell you everything you want to know about their loyalties.

The highest authority among Shi'ite Muslims is an Ayatollah. In Sunni Islam muftis are responsible for making fatwas - religious declarations on sharia.

Now in Catholicism people can run to the Pope to find out what true Catholicism is. In Mormonism they can go to the First Presidency. Your friend seems to think that as long as there is no central authority in Islam then any self-proclaiming Muslim can declare true Islam form himself. This might work for some on a personal level, but it doesn’t wash for Islam as a whole. Your friend falls into the tiny minority category that would, as I said before, be expunged from Muslim societies abroad. A lack of a central authority does not help those who want to say terrorism has nothing to do with “true Islam” because they are in no position to declare what true Islam is either. There are essentially two sides here. One side argues that the vast majority of Muslim authorities have a better understanding of Islam and their opinions far outweigh those few Muslims living in the west. Further, those authorities are the ones leading sermons n Friday and indoctrinating the Muslim populace. If Islam is such a private-personal religion with “no authority,” then why do Muslims go to mosques and attend sermons at all? Why is it not OK to use these sermons as some kind of barometer in ascertaining what Muslims are actually learning? That is all I am doing.

But it isn’t just the authorities since most Muslims outside the west consider western Muslims to be somewhat on the fringe: “People in America think they are going to be the vanguards of change...But for Arab Muslims in the Middle East, American Muslims continue to be viewed on the margins of the faith.”(Georgetown University professor of Islamic studies Yvonne Haddad, March 18, 2005) Again, considering American Muslims to be in a position to declare true Islam is like giving polygamous “Mormons” in Colorado city the same privilege to declare real Mormonism. Actually the Colorado city Mormons would constitute a greater percentage of the whole than would western Muslims.

Quote:
Who is going to speak out? Lets say a muslim woman wants to speak out against terrorism. What is she supposed to do? Call the local tv station? Get CNN to interview her? Write an article for the New York times? Individuals do what they can to promote peace and speak out against terrorism but it is not so easy to be heard.


This is just excuse making that flies in the face of the fact that Muslims do in fact speak out. Again, it isn’t a question of whether they can, it is an issue of what they choose to speak about. We know they can. They have no problems protesting cartoons, alleged discriminations, profiling at the airports, protesting speakers they consider “Islamophobic” et cetera, without benefit of a central speaker. They go to great efforts to protest and speak out on trivial or illegitimate concerns – threatening non-Muslims in the process - but they remain silent on what they insist is the largest threat to their faith: those “hijackers” of Islam. The hypocrisy is absurd. Well, if this is true, and you’re being “hijacked”, prove it then. Do something about it and stop focusing all your attention and efforts to stigmatize critical debate on the issues at hand, because that is what they are trying to do. Islamic radicals are against free speech and even the most “moderate” voices try to make American society bow down to sharia law by outlawing any critical speech as “hate speech.” In shariah law, to speak critically of Muhammed or the Quran is punishable by death. This is the standard Muslim immigrants are used to and they want to keep it that way. But what they don’t care about is the fact that to ban critical discussion is to take a huge element out of what made western society great: free speech.

CAIR is the Jesse Jackson of the Muslim community. A con-artist that goes around threatening companies with lawsuits if they do anything that seems politically incorrect. For instance, CAIR just encouraged Muslims to write up complaints about their treatments on airlines during the haaj, mainly because it adds legitimacy to their existence. They live to complain about non-issues, bigot-bait, race-bait, support terrorism through the back door, and then expect gullible people to accept their claim that they are only interested in civil rights. They write up reports about hate-crimes, most of which are fabricated, and use it to gain the “concerns” of politicians who love to play the anti-bigot card. They are a political group of the worst kind who wants to replace the constitution with sharia law through the back door.

So you can imagine my surprise when you provided CAIR as an example of Muslims wanting peace. CAIR is a front for terrorism and always will be.

Quote:
This is where I disagree with you... I agree the Quran is understood as the cornerstone of Islamic faith. No question. But... how the Quran is understood and embraced is NOT as clear cut as you seem to think. This is my point.


But your point is supported by nothing except anecdotes from what Western Muslims have said to you personally. You cannot produce citations from religious authorities who wield influence over entire Muslim populations. I can do this all day long from the highest authorities in Islam; those in Mecca and Cairo.

Quote:
I agree that much of the world does indeed hold to archaic harmful beliefs discussed in the Quran. But not everyone interprets it in the same way.


If that is all you are saying then I never disagreed with it. I never said many of the things you read from my posts. Of course there are some self-proclaiming Muslims who go against the grain and have their own personalized form of Islam, but my point is that they are on the fringe and represent nothing other than their own form of religion they like to call Islam. They would be excommunicated or socially expunged if living anywhere else. Even in America they are on the fringe. And with global Islam in perspective, they are even further on the fringe. Again, to speak out against Islamic terrorists could mean excommunication from American Mosques. To say Osama bin Ladin was a terrorist cold mean expulsion from American Islamic high schools. But if any of this was said in the East their lives would be in danger. For a Muslim to put forth the effort to “March against terror” in America means embarrassment and isolation.

All of these FACTS speak loudly about what I am saying. You can always find spurious individuals to support just about anything, but the record shows they do not represent the norm, even in a western society. Your claim that the “educated” Muslims reject radicalism is undermined by the researched facts. Education in Islam, education in Arabic and Islamic texts, means one has a greater tendency to become a radical. It is primarily the ignorant who are illiterate who do not become radicals, either in thought or deed. Muslims in America become educated in sciences and field that have nothing to do with Islamic studies, and they gradually become products of their host society. Often the result is that they try to hold on to their heritage as “Islam” while trying to conform it to western sensibilities. They want it both ways, but the fact is Islam at its core is incompatible with western society because Islam and the Sunnah and sharia law cannot be divorced from one another.

Many of the Muslims we see who are “regular” people are not those who believe sharia law is the highest law in the land. But then again, many of them appear “regular” and support everything we like to think they don’t.

And FTR, I am not telling Muslims what they believe. You keep trying to turn this around like that when I have never said any such thing. I am simply saying what is the norm in Islam based on research, not what a few western Muslims who are living out of the Islamic element, tell me.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: can't you see the coming war?
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:38 am 
Nursery

Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:33 am
Posts: 6
Dartagnan is right, we are in a war for our culture. The Moslim religion is a disease that is infecting our country and way of life. They cannot understand our values unless you wake up and recognize the threat on your doorstep you will be praying to Meca every day. The Moslim cannot understand the West because they cannot accept the depravity of their own culture. They will kill anything that stands in their way of world domination. They are all terrorists, they just don't know it yet.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:59 am 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:27 am
Posts: 2750
To further put this relativism to rest, take Mormonism for example. There are about the same number of Mormons as there are Muslims in N. America.

Yet you don’t see

1) Mormon bishops getting deported for inciting terrorists.
2) Mormon spokespersons advocating disloyalty to America
3) Mormon leaders denouncing terror publicly and then secretly approving it
4) Mormons remaining dead silent when polygamous sects try to say they are LDS.
5) Mormon PR groups demanding special privileges given to no other religious group.

If all things are truly equal, then surely there should be some example of a Mormon bishop getting deported for terror ties. Surely there must be some examples of Mormons protesting America, burning flags, declaring their God’s law is to dominate the White House, et cetera.

If don’t we see any of this, then why not?

It is because Mormonism and Islam are fundamentally different. All religions are not equal. You can replace Mormon with Baptist above, or Hindu, or Catholic, or Baha’i, and you’ll get the same result. Islam is a 6th century religion that is designed not to change. Muslims can only conform to our way of life if they discard several incompatible Islamic elements, such as the belief that sharia law is superior to secular laws.

Just to give you an idea, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was not accepted in the Islamic world, and instead of outright rejecting it, they proposed another version. The big difference was that people were not given the freedom to choose their own religion. That is because in Islam, once you are Muslim, you are not given the right to change your mind and become Catholic or something else.

One LDS expert in Islam once said the following: http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=2337#comments

Quote:
I am particularly concerned about the Muslim principle that apostates from Islam should be killed. Not excommunicated. Killed. I have spoken with a few devout Muslims here in America and asked them their opinion of this — and they emphatically supported it. Basically, there is no legal or acceptable way in Islam to leave the Islamic religion. This is completely contrary to the principle of freedom of religion and it is violent. Since there is no specific legal apparatus described in the ahadith to achieve this, it also (as far as I can tell) promotes a certain degree of vigilantiism. It is true that there is a Qur’anic verse that says “la iqraha fi din” (or, “there is no compulsion in religion’) but the exegesis of this leads to the general interpretation that it only applies to people who aren’t already Muslims. In other words, once you are a Muslim you must be a Muslim for life. And because this teaching is attributed to Muhammad, many Muslims accept that it cannot be questioned or abrogated by reasoning.

The picture is complicated. I believe the vast majority of Muslims in the world today will never lift their hands in violence against others. I have Muslim friends and I think we should be friendly and respectful of Muslims. But I don’t think we should blind ourselves to extremely negative realities out there.

I was in a class a long time ago where a Palestinian Muslim classmate raised the idea that jihad was simply a peaceful comment, an inner struggle to command one’s carnal desires and obey Allah. My response was that he “had better open his eyes to reality.” After the class he expressed his anger towards me and basically told me if I said anything like that again he’d physically hit me. Some months later 9-11 happened.

Since then we (this classmate and I) have reconciled but I’ve often looked back at that as an example of how the realities in the graduate classroom do not always match the ugly realities on the ground.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Muslims and peace...
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:15 pm 
Nursery

Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:33 am
Posts: 6
truth dancer wrote:
My experience is that there are those Muslims who do not interpret the Quran as some suggest they must (Kevin... smile).

The Muslims I know speak out for peace and speak out against terrorism. (With one exception who is in prison).

Here are a few links provided by my Mulsim friend who is very passionate about her religion and peace.


You are dead wrong. When they are given their orders these individuals will kill you because you are an infidel. Either you submit and become one of them or you will die. The Moslim mind is completely incompatable with the Western society. These "Western Moslims" are just sleeper agents waiting to kill infidels. They might not even know it, but when Alah commands them, they will kill whoever does not submit ot their "religion of peace".

They cannot be allowed to continue to live in our country unless they leave their mind washing religion at the door. There cannot be any coexistance because they will not allow it. You are falling into their trap by believing their lies. You should read the following website...

http://www.jihadwatch.org/

The website is run by a world renowned scholar. He knows the truth about the Moslim horde. It is not just that they will conquer america, they really want to and are worming themselves into our government as we speak. In 100 years the USA will not exist unless something is done.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Muslims and peace...
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 12:32 pm 
He-Who-Has-Not-Sinned (Recently)
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:49 pm
Posts: 4627
Location: MI6-Private Quarters
Richardlionhart wrote:
You are dead wrong. When they are given their orders these individuals will kill you because you are an infidel. Either you submit and become one of them or you will die. The Moslim mind is completely incompatable with the Western society. These "Western Moslims" are just sleeper agents waiting to kill infidels. They might not even know it, but when Alah commands them, they will kill whoever does not submit ot their "religion of peace".

They cannot be allowed to continue to live in our country unless they leave their mind washing religion at the door. There cannot be any coexistance because they will not allow it. You are falling into their trap by believing their lies. You should read the following website...


So what are you suggesting Richard? The outright cleansing of America?

The problem with your ideas are that they run contrary to everything America stands for. We may not agree with some segments of a religion, but that doesn't mean the deportment of every Muslim. If a muslim makes an attack, then we deport them or imprison them or whatever. What you're suggesting is akin to Nazi Germany, arresting people based on their beliefs rather than their actions.

And once the Muslims are gone what then? We already got rid of one headache, why not another? What about hardline socialists? What about homosexuals? What about African-Americans? What about Hispanics? When you say "our country" who exactly are you talking about?

This country is a democracy, and it's as much mine as it is yours and everyone else who holds American citizenship. You can't pick and choice your fellow citizens because they have as much right to be here as you do, whether you're family has been here 10 generations or if you're 5 minutes past the citizenship test. Really does anyone have a right to be here except Native Americans?

By the way, do you seriously think that 12 million American muslims could take over the country? The right to bear arms (you know, the amendment right after that "freedom of speech and religion" thingy) is well in place, not to mention the US military.

Bond

_________________
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:08 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:27 am
Posts: 2750
Quote:
The problem with your ideas are that they run contrary to everything America stands for.


Which is what?

Quote:
We may not agree with some segments of a religion, but that doesn't mean the deportment of every Muslim.


Of course I don’t think anyone is suggesting that.

Quote:
If a muslim makes an attack, then we deport them or imprison them or whatever.


We should be far stricter than that, and we are. Some are deported for supporting terrorists in other ways.

Quote:
What you're suggesting is akin to Nazi Germany, arresting people based on their beliefs rather than their actions.


That is not what he said at all. I sense a bigot-baiting campaign on the horizon, which is usually the case whenever Hitler is mentioned.

Quote:
And once the Muslims are gone what then? We already got rid of one headache, why not another? What about hardline socialists? What about homosexuals? What about African-Americans? What about Hispanics? When you say "our country" who exactly are you talking about?


None of these other groups pose a national threat like that of radical Muslims; the “enemy within” so to speak. Their own “moderates” are contemplating the prospects for overthrowing our government, and our free speech allows them to burn our flag and march in the street and bad-mouth America. Are gays trying to overrun the government and impose a theocracy that would force everyone to be Muslim or suffer dhimmitude status? Are Hispanics doing that? Of course not every Muslim is a radical but the fact is, only Muslims become Muslim radicals. We should stiffen our immigration policies on Muslims even more. Non-citizens have no rights to become American citizens. If they come it is because we let them come. We are not obligated to be impartial as to who gets to come, and the immigration system has never worked that way. We should also pay closer attention to them at airports and stop strip searching the grey-haired old lady for the sake of political correctness. Yes, we should profile. Police do it all the flippin time, so why would it be any different for an issue as crucial as national security? Profiling is a successful system that helps aid investigators and those who are on our side trying to stop future 9-11s.

Quote:
This country is a democracy, and it's as much mine as it is yours and everyone else who holds American citizenship.


Unfortunately that is somewhat true. People actually do come here legally with the intent on destroying American from within, and as long as they keep their actions limited to words, America’s free speech policy forbids any legal repercussions.

Quote:
You can't pick and choice your fellow citizens because they have as much right to be here as you do, whether you're family has been here 10 generations or if you're 5 minutes past the citizenship test.


What we can do is take pride in American culture and try to salvage it before it disappears. Do you really think the founding fathers would recognize anything in American today? Muslims get away with stuff Christians could only dream of. They have played the pity card perfectly since 9-11 and Americans are so afraid to death about appearing prejudiced, they’ve bent over backwards to accommodate them at every turn. Just look at how those idiot Imams acted on the airplane a few weeks ago - scaring the hell out of people for the sole purpose of making a public spectacle so they can cry about discrimination once they have been removed. That is how good Muslims have it in America. They actually have to stage events to add discrimination cases to their prepared list of gripes.

Quote:
By the way, do you seriously think that 12 million American muslims could take over the country?


There are only about 2-3 million Muslims in America – the 12 million is a CAIR invention made for political purposes. If you can convince the politicians there are 12 million active Muslims in America, you can get them to lean your way.

And Muslims are taking over Europe as we speak. How? By out-breeding them by a ration or 6 to 1. Britain is already becoming Islamic in many respects, as are other European countries that were not prepared for the immigration flood when they opened the gates. France’s economy has been devastated by the flood, and as we speak Muslims represent 70% of the government welfare and about that same percentage occupies its prisons. And riots are continuing even still as thousands of Muslims rage in the streets setting cars on fire. Should we wait until we have France’s problem or should we dam up the flood before it is too late?

We have been lucky in some sense because many of our Muslim immigrants are from Saudi Arabia, and are already privileged. France receives the poor and destitute from Algeria and N. Africa out of guilt. And now they are paying for it. We should all learn from what is happening in Europe instead of imitating it.

Quote:
The right to bear arms (you know, the amendment right after that "freedom of speech and religion" thingy) is well in place, not to mention the US military.


But one step at a time is the idea, and they are doing it. They are already making efforts to get rid of free speech by trying to categorize virtually any criticism of Islam as “hate speech.” They have succeeded in this in Italy and Australia for example. Fallaci, the popular Italian journalist who was dying of cancer at the time, was supposed to be tried for hate speech simply because she wrote a book warning about the same things I have said. She left the country and died just a couple of months ago. Another preacher in Australia was tried and sentenced for hate speech when all he did was say a truism about something Muhammed did. If Muslims had their way here, they’d have us all locked up for critically examining Islam which is ironic since they are the ones marching down the street with posters saying “behead those who insult Islam.”

They are also trying to make it illegal to profile Muslims at airports which would aid the terrorists in more ways than one. Who the hell wants to search a Muslim when they know it will be a federal crime to do so? Of course the new Muslim congressman Keith Ellison is all for it, as is Nancy Pelosi! I am only glad I am in Brazil so I don’t have to watch America’s demise up close and personal.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:14 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:27 am
Posts: 2750
The Muslim Student Association (MSA) is the largest Muslim organization in North America. Today, over 150 MSA chapters exist on American college campuses, including BYU. What exactly is this organization's business? Read how patriotic some of our Muslim students are acting. At a meeting in Queensborough Community College in March 2003, a guest speaker named Faheed declared, "We reject the U.N., reject America, reject all law and order. Don't lobby Congress or protest because we don't recognize Congress. The only relationship you should have with America is to topple it … Eventually there will be a Muslim in the White House dictating the laws of shariah." During an October 2000 anti-Israeli protest, former MSA president Ahmed Shama at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) stood before the Israeli consulate in Los Angeles, shouting "Victory to Islam! Death to the Jews!" MSA West president Sohail Shakr declared at the same rally, "the biggest impediment to peace [in the Middle East] has been the existence of the Zionist entity in the middle of the Muslim world." Prior to September 11, 2001, the MSA formally assisted three Islamic charities in fundraising: the Holy Land Foundation, Global Relief, and Benevolence Foundation. Afterwards, all three were accused by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of having serious links to terrorism and were ordered closed. The MSA chapter of the University of Southern California, says on its website that the duty of Muslims is to: "Defend the rights of Muslims abroad, and to see to it that Islam can spread freely in non-Muslim lands (including the use of force). Organize jihad against any non-Muslim government which prevents Muslim da'wah from entering its land." The MSA's presence serves as a feather in a University's cap of diversity, and no formal inquiry into its motives or political agenda is acceptable. They are immune to criticism and given the benefit of the doubt. Here are some more eye-opening remarks:

Zaid Shakir, former Muslim chaplain at Yale said:

Quote:
Muslims cannot accept the legitimacy of the secular system in the United States, for it "is against the orders and ordainments of Allah . . . the orientation of the Qur'an pushes us in the exact opposite direction as the forces that are at work in the American political spectrum.


Fawaz Damra, a convicted Imam from Ohio said:

Quote:
The first principle is that terrorism, and terrorism alone, is the path to liberation...If what they mean by jihad is terrorism, then we are terrorists.


Sami Al Arian, South Florida professor who receives praise and support from academia's most prominent scholars, said:

Quote:
Let us continue the protests. Let us damn America. Let us damn Israel. Let us damn their allies until death. Mohammad is leader. The Qu’ran is our constitution. Jihad is our path. Victory to Islam. Death to Israel. Revolution! Revolution! Until Victory! Rolling, rolling to Jerusalem.


Ibrahim Hooper of Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) said:

Quote:
I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.


Omar Ahmad of CAIR said:

Quote:
Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran…should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.


Siraj Wahhaj is a convert to Islam, the recipient of some of the Muslim community's highest honors, and called "one the most respected Muslim leaders in America." He said:

Quote:
I have a vision in America, Muslims owning property all over, Muslim businesses, factories, halal meat, supermarkets, all these buildings owned by Muslims. Can you see the vision, can you see the Newark International Airport and a John Kennedy Airport and LaGuardia having Muslim fleets of planes, Muslim pilots. Can you see our trucks rolling down the highways, Muslim names.


The first Islamic missionaries from abroad arrived in the 1920s and unblushingly declared: "Our plan is, we are going to conquer America."( Andrew T Hoffert, "The Moslem Movement in America," The Moslem World, 20 (1930), p. 309.)

Ihsan Bagby Professor of Islamic Studies at University of Kentucky, (Ph.D. from University of Michigan) said:

Quote:
Ultimately we can never be full citizens of this country, because there is no way we can be fully committed to the institutions and ideologies of this country.


Imam Muzammil H. Siddiqi of the Islamic Society of North America, said: "We must not forget that Allah's rules have to be established in all lands."

And of course, this is peanuts when compared to the statements from Muslim authorities abroad. If you're a natural multicultural relativist (MR), I know what you're thinking. Something along the lines of, "Well all religions in America can produce examples of extremists who wish to conquer America and change its laws." That they can is beyond question. That they in fact do, is something that needs to be demonstrated before the MR doctrine is taken for granted. MRs don't want to interact much with the reality that undermines their assumptions. I would like to propose a challenge for anyone who can demonstrate examples of just one or maybe two Mormons, or Baptists, or Catholics, or Jews who believe the constitution should be overthrown by their religion. Since Mormons in America number about the same as Muslims, and the latter three outnumber them, assuming all things are equal, surely this should be an easy task. Further, it isn't just some looney Muslims who make these comments. This is the doctrine that is spewed at Islamic rallies on our own University campuses. My point here is simple. If we cannot fall back on the prominent Muslim organizations to be "moderate" in their voices, where else can we turn?


"When an Arab torches a school, it’s rebellion. When a white guy does it, it’s fascism." - Alain Finkielkraut


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 1:46 pm 
He-Who-Has-Not-Sinned (Recently)
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 10:49 pm
Posts: 4627
Location: MI6-Private Quarters
dartagnan wrote:
Quote:
The problem with your ideas are that they run contrary to everything America stands for.

Which is what?


America stands for something different to everybody. My views and yours are different, but we are allowed to say what we want, thus freedom of speech. Until a Muslim has made a violent action or shown any evidence of wrongdoing, shouldn't they get the benefit of the doubt?

Quote:
Quote:
We may not agree with some segments of a religion, but that doesn't mean the deportment of every Muslim.

Of course I don’t think anyone is suggesting that.


Richard said: "They cannot be allowed to continue to live in our country unless they leave their mind washing religion at the door. There cannot be any coexistance because they will not allow it."

He's saying that all Muslims have to give up their religion if any of them have a problem with America, or they shouldn't be allowed into the country. Obviously he wants a more homogenous population (without Muslims), that can be brought about by deportation or death or deconversion, but its still a violation of freedom of religion if they are forced to leave their religion behind. Of course Richard has the right to say whatever he wants about Muslims and their religion.

Quote:
Quote:
If a muslim makes an attack, then we deport them or imprison them or whatever.

We should be far stricter than that, and we are. Some are deported for supporting terrorists in other ways.


Agreed

Quote:
Quote:
What you're suggesting is akin to Nazi Germany, arresting people based on their beliefs rather than their actions.

That is not what he said at all. I sense a bigot-baiting campaign on the horizon, which is usually the case whenever Hitler is mentioned.


I misspoke and will retract my mentioning Nazi Germany. Hopefully a holocaust or any type of hate crime won't happen against Muslims. But Richard is still vaguely painting all Muslims as dangerous neighbors because they are Muslims, rather than because of any real actions of violence.

Quote:
Quote:
And once the Muslims are gone what then? We already got rid of one headache, why not another? What about hardline socialists? What about homosexuals? What about African-Americans? What about Hispanics? When you say "our country" who exactly are you talking about?


None of these other groups pose a national threat like that of radical Muslims; the “enemy within” so to speak. Their own “moderates” are contemplating the prospects for overthrowing our government, and our free speech allows them to burn our flag and march in the street and bad-mouth America. Are gays trying to overrun the government and impose a theocracy that would force everyone to be Muslim or suffer dhimmitude status? Are Hispanics doing that? Of course not every Muslim is a radical but the fact is, only Muslims become Muslim radicals. We should stiffen our immigration policies on Muslims even more. Non-citizens have no rights to become American citizens. If they come it is because we let them come. We are not obligated to be impartial as to who gets to come, and the immigration system has never worked that way. We should also pay closer attention to them at airports and stop strip searching the grey-haired old lady for the sake of political correctness. Yes, we should profile. Police do it all the flippin time, so why would it be any different for an issue as crucial as national security? Profiling is a successful system that helps aid investigators and those who are on our side trying to stop future 9-11s.


My statement here was highly sensational and wrong. Obviously those groups are much more a long standing part of peaceful America than Muslims and are looked up as less a threat. The point is that once roads are taken by the majority to silence the minority, what stops the majority from taking care of other disruptive minorities. It's a very slippery slope.


Quote:
Quote:
You can't pick and choice your fellow citizens because they have as much right to be here as you do, whether you're family has been here 10 generations or if you're 5 minutes past the citizenship test.

What we can do is take pride in American culture and try to salvage it before it disappears. Do you really think the founding fathers would recognize anything in American today? Muslims get away with stuff Christians could only dream of. They have played the pity card perfectly since 9-11 and Americans are so afraid to death about appearing prejudiced, they’ve bent over backwards to accommodate them at every turn. Just look at how those idiot Imams acted on the airplane a few weeks ago - scaring the hell out of people for the sole purpose of making a public spectacle so they can cry about discrimination once they have been removed. That is how good Muslims have it in America. They actually have to stage events to add discrimination cases to their prepared list of gripes.


Of course the Founding Fathers wouldn't recognize most of it. Thomas Jefferson would have a heart attack at how dumb we are despite all of our technological resources and John Adams would have a fit to realize Paris Hilton is a role model for some people. But hopefully they would realize that freedom of speech and choice is a gift. What we do with it is our business.

I thought the Imam on the plane incident was an attempt to gather sympathy. And for the record I don't think Muslims should be given a free reign. But they do have rights, and until they step over the line they get the same benefit as every American. The government can't step over the line and get them until they are overt in their actions towards America.
Quote:
Quote:
By the way, do you seriously think that 12 million American muslims could take over the country?


There are only about 2-3 million Muslims in America – the 12 million is a CAIR invention made for political purposes. If you can convince the politicians there are 12 million active Muslims in America, you can get them to lean your way.

And Muslims are taking over Europe as we speak. How? By out-breeding them by a ration or 6 to 1. Britain is already becoming Islamic in many respects, as are other European countries that were not prepared for the immigration flood when they opened the gates. France’s economy has been devastated by the flood, and as we speak Muslims represent 70% of the government welfare and about that same percentage occupies its prisons. And riots are continuing even still as thousands of Muslims rage in the streets setting cars on fire. Should we wait until we have France’s problem or should we dam up the flood before it is too late?

We have been lucky in some sense because many of our Muslim immigrants are from Saudi Arabia, and are already privileged. France receives the poor and destitute from Algeria and N. Africa out of guilt. And now they are paying for it. We should all learn from what is happening in Europe instead of imitating it.


I meant 2 million, I don't know where that extra 1 came from. Can't agree more. Europe is filling with Muslims. What do you suggest we do in America? Close the borders?

Quote:
Quote:
The right to bear arms (you know, the amendment right after that "freedom of speech and religion" thingy) is well in place, not to mention the US military.


But one step at a time is the idea, and they are doing it. They are already making efforts to get rid of free speech by trying to categorize virtually any criticism of Islam as “hate speech.” They have succeeded in this in Italy and Australia for example. Fallaci, the popular Italian journalist who was dying of cancer at the time, was supposed to be tried for hate speech simply because she wrote a book warning about the same things I have said. She left the country and died just a couple of months ago. Another preacher in Australia was tried and sentenced for hate speech when all he did was say a truism about something Muhammed did. If Muslims had their way here, they’d have us all locked up for critically examining Islam which is ironic since they are the ones marching down the street with posters saying “behead those who insult Islam.”

They are also trying to make it illegal to profile Muslims at airports which would aid the terrorists in more ways than one. Who the hell wants to search a Muslim when they know it will be a federal crime to do so? Of course the new Muslim congressman Keith Ellison is all for it, as is Nancy Pelosi! I am only glad I am in Brazil so I don’t have to watch America’s demise up close and personal.


Just because Muslims are getting a few protections doesn't mean they're immune. You still have the right to say whatever you want. Get together a few million of your friends of similar views and run for President and change the policy.

You're in Brazil? Are you an American citizen?

_________________
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:28 pm 
I'm pretty sure Kevin doesn't want Muslims in America deprived of their freedoms, and I think what he's saying is that they should speak out more, and insidious versions of Islam are a cancer to a healthy society. We have taken one step further, and extremist Muslims can be deported or jailed. Extremist Muslim websites are also shut down by ASIO (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation). The fact is that more (non-violent) voices raising concern, whether Muslims or non-Muslims, I think is a good thing. The last thing we need is a too Chamberlain-like "peace in our time" approach, because before we know it Christmas will not be the only thing the sympathisers sacrifice in the name of "multiculture". The policy in my country is come here if you like, but adopt or at least respect the lifestyle we have had for over 200 years, or don't bother coming.


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 2:58 pm 
High Goddess of Atlantis
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am
Posts: 4792
Hi Kevin..

You are correct that I do not have a ton of research to support my opinion.

My opinion is based on those Muslims I know.

With one exception the Muslims I know are peaceful, loving, caring, wonderful American citizens who are outraged at terrorism and who interpret the Quran differently than extremists.

I am uncomfortable with those who suggest Muslims are evil, cruel, horrible people who want to destroy America, kill us all, and take over the world!

I understand the horrors going on in the world, related to Islam... I also know Muslims trying to make a difference.

I do feel you and Richard are condemning all of Islam based on reading, texts, and terrorists groups rather than how some Muslims experience the world and their religion....similarly to how many critics condemn Mormonism based on texts, outmoded teachings, and unusual doctrine that may not be a part of modern mainstream Mormonism.

I just see a need to separate those peace loving, good, decent, moral Muslims who are doing their best to bring peace to the world and enlighten believers of their religion, and those terrorists who bring sorrow and horror to the world.

These Muslims exist. They may be a minority; they may not be a vocal as some would like; they may not be influential but they are here doing what they can.

So there you have it! :-)

~dancer~


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 3:28 pm 
truth dancer wrote:
These Muslims exist. They may be a minority; they may not be a vocal as some would like; they may not be influential but they are here doing what they can.

So there you have it! :-)

~dancer~


Truth Dancer: You are naïve.

Kevin: You are a poorly-read right winger who speaks the politics of hate.

Aside from the initial conquest by Islam (I could say something about Constantine's army; the Crusades), Islam proved to be a fairly peaceful religion, permitting Christian and Jewish visitors free access to their respective holy places. At one time, Arab scholars were the height of knowledge, preserving many of the classical texts we now enjoy today.

The Christian crusades changed things. Not only did these Crusade kings massacre entire villages of Christian dissidents and Jews, they brutalized the Moslem population and refused Moslem worship.

Today, we have so-called "experts" such as the one Richard points to in his post, Robert Spencer, who tell us what Muslims believe by quoting 1000-year-old texts. Spencer, described by Richard as a world-class scholar, lacks a doctorate in any field and wrote his Master's paper on Christian History.

No doubt Islam has now transformed itself into a brutal religion. But, you should ask why? How would you feel if British troops appeared on your doorstep in the 1940s and forced you from your home in Palestine at the point of a bayonet? Now, living in refugee camps outside of your homeland, for decades no less, you see that the United States provides more foreign aid to Israel that to any other nation on earth? How should you feel?

The problem could be resolved by renouncing monetary support for Israel. After all, how was this any different than the Soviet support of Cuba?

P


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:09 pm 
High Goddess of Atlantis
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 6:40 am
Posts: 4792
Hi P...

Quote:
Truth Dancer: You are naïve.


Why? Because I believe my friends who are Muslim and speak out against terrorism? Because I believe there are those Muslims who want peace? Because when my friends share their beliefs of peace and interpret the Quran differently than some suggest they do, I believe them?

Whatever....

As I mentioned on the other thread... I used to live in a community with a very large Muslim population. I have spent a significant amount of time trying to learn and understand Islam from MUSLIMS. I have spent significant amounts of time in very personal conversations as a therapist with Muslims women. I have attended numerous conferences and lectures by MUSLIMS in an attempt to learn. I have also read literature showing the negative side of Islam... End of Faith for an example. I also have been in court with a Muslim from Pakistan who kidnapped, tortured, and abused a client of mine. I am very familiar with his beliefs and how his religion impacted his behavior. Trust me, I know the dark side in its intricate and most horrific details.

I also have a Muslim friend who speaks out for peace in her online community... no she has not been killed. :-(

No, I am not an expert on Islam... I have never claimed such a thing. But I believe those who have shared their lives and beliefs with me. Until I have some reason to do otherwise I will continue to do so.


~dancer~


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 6:59 pm 
truth dancer wrote:
Whatever....


Excellent rejoinder.

Anecdotal evidence is evidence of nothing. That's all you have; things your friends say to you. I have Muslim employees. I don't look at their conduct and equate them to all Islam. At least Kevin cites authorities. I don't agree with them, however.

P


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 15, 2007 8:34 pm 
God
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 10:27 am
Posts: 2750
Quote:
Kevin: You are a poorly-read right winger who speaks the politics of hate.


And you’re just the run-of-the-mill sciolist who cannot argue points intelligently so you have to resort to these emotionally charged assertions. Gee, who would have ever predicted bigot-baiting from a left winger?

Poltics of hate? What in Sam Hill did I say that could possibly be understood as “hate.”

Quote:
Aside from the initial conquest by Islam


You’re misinformed. The Islamic conquests lasted centuries, it was not some “initial” swoop that took place and then abruptly ended. Islam was always knocking on the door of Christian territory, having finally been held back at the gates of Vienna.

Quote:
I could say something about Constantine's army; the Crusades


Then go for it. Embarrass yourself further if you must. The Crusades represented a defensive attempt to reclaim by the sword what Islam had taken by the sword. This is a fact. Christianity was on the verge of annihilation on at least one occasion. Unlike Islam, there was no such thing as a “Christian army” so the pilgrimage was called by the Pope, at the behest of Byzantine rulers, to defend the kingdom from annihilation as well as free Palestinian Christians from oppression.

Quote:
Islam proved to be a fairly peaceful religion


It is difficult to rationalize how a religion constantly at war – waging war - trying to conquer new territories, could be deemed a “peaceful” religion. But ignoring history is usually what people like you have to do to maintain this silliness.

Quote:
permitting Christian and Jewish visitors free access to their respective holy places.


I guess you’re completely unaware of the fact that Islam frequently built Mosques on sites where Synagogues or Cathedrals initially stood. The symbolism is obvious: your religious has been replaced. The grandest church of Byzantium, Hagia Sophia in Istanbul, for centuries a mosque and now a museum, should be made available for Christian services but it isn’t. The Umayyad Mosque in Damascus is built over a Byzantine church and to this day contains a shrine said to contain the head of John the Baptist. Christians are not allowed to pray there either. Yet, Israel refuses to tear down the famous Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem because it would offend Muslims; even though it was beforehand the Temple mount for Jews, and for Christians, the Church of the Holy Wisdom. In 1009 A.D. the Fatimid Caliph Hakim had ordered the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. This was one of the many atrocities which prompted the belated defense we know as the crusades.

And what you fail to mention is that Jews and Christians were forbidden to practice their faith publicly, although the Popes granted Jews that privilege on several occasions. Even worse, Jews and Christians had to abide by dhimmitude laws, which usually precluded any construction of new chapels or synagogues and refusing the privilege of making renovations to older buildings. The idea was to let the existing generation rot away as their offspring were compelled to convert to Islam due to the overwhelming economic/social burden that was foisted upon them as dhimmis. And of course, polytheists did not initially qualify for dhimmi status so they were given two choices only: convert or die. Only later did some of the Caliphs realize it was more beneficial for them, economically speaking, to grant them dhimmi status. The taxes paid by non-Muslims provided the life-line for the Islamic economy. Why kill a cow when you can milk it?

But hey, Islam was peaceful right? At least that is what we keep hearing from the historical revisionists who refuse to hear the testimonies of those who were subjugated by Islam’s laws.

The fact is Jews were granted more privileges by the Pope than they were under Islamic rule. But the problem was the Byzantine rulers, who never did represent Christianity.

Quote:
At one time, Arab scholars were the height of knowledge, preserving many of the classical texts we now enjoy today.


Sure, a natural result of conquest, especially the conquest of such a vast territory, is the inheritance of scientific accomplishments of the host societies. Muslim scholars built upon the works of others but that benefit faded relatively quickly. Many accomplishments are assumed to be Islamic when they actually aren’t. But the golden age is mainly a myth. There is nothing “Islamic” about much of it, and in fact, many contributors were anything but Islamic.

For example, Islam is credited with the first hospital, but nobody seems to mention the fact that because of Islam, medical science immediately hit a brick wall. Why? Because they were not allowed to dissect the human body nor were they allowed drawing designs of the human body for medical books. Even today you have Muslims creating a health hazard because they refuse to wash their hands in hospitals that use soap containing alcohol.

Quote:
The Christian crusades changed things.


Do you have any idea how ignorant this statement is? So the crusades are to blame for the collapse of their so-called golden age? You have it all backwards. Centuries of Islamic aggression prompted the Crusades, not vice-versa. The crusades were a relatively short-lived, weak attempt that accomplished little. The number of non-combatants killed during Crusade raids doesn’t even begin to compare to Islam’s invasion of India where scholars estimate 100 million people were killed. But hey, Islam is a religion of peace right? Be sure to keep rehearsing that in your mind or else you might be compelled to face reality.

Quote:
Not only did these Crusade kings massacre entire villages of Christian dissidents and Jews, they brutalized the Moslem population and refused Moslem worship.


Very true, but that is what happens when you call a bunch of people from all corners of the continent to unite in battle with not organization and leadership. The Crusades were a big mistake, but Christianity was desperate to say the least. The atrocities you speak of were not ordered by the Church.

Quote:
Today, we have so-called "experts" such as the one Richard points to in his post, Robert Spencer, who tell us what Muslims believe by quoting 1000-year-old texts.


Do you have any idea how stupid you sound? Those 1000 year old texts are cherished in Islam and knowledge of them pretty much distinguishes the layman from the expert. What do you think those Imams are relying upon when counseling Muslims? The ahadith is what. The biographies of Muhammed as well. You think knowledge of these texts mean nothing to Muslims? They represent the official interpretation of the Quran for crying out loud.

Quote:
Spencer, described by Richard as a world-class scholar, lacks a doctorate in any field and wrote his Master's paper on Christian History.


Which means his commentary on the Crusades should be given its proper respect, and of course, he disagrees with anything you would probably have to say on that matter. If you’re desperate for Ph.Ds to corroborate Spencer, then how about Daniel Pipes (Ph.D Harvard) Martin Kramer (Ph.D Princeton) or David Cook (Ph.D., University of Chicago).

Quote:
No doubt Islam has now transformed itself into a brutal religion


No it hasn’t. It is simply going back to its roots. Muhammed was unlike Christ in that he created a theocracy from the start whereas Christ taught the separation of Church and State. Render under God what is God’s and to Caesar what is his.

Quote:
But, you should ask why? How would you feel if British troops appeared on your doorstep in the 1940s and forced you from your home in Palestine at the point of a bayonet?


Oh no, another Hamas apologist. Here it is folks, the famous “It is because of America and Israel that some Muslims are violent!” Osama bin Ladin’s mission had little or nothing to do with Palestinian cause. He is fed up with the US presence in the Gulf. The Palestinian suicide bombers are only a small fraction of the Islamic terrorism that has spawned across the globe, most of which has nothing to do with Israel/Palestine. You sound like that idiot Juan Cole who tried to say bin Ladin’s actions were in response to an event in the region which hadn’t even taken place yet.

Quote:
Now, living in refugee camps outside of your homeland, for decades no less, you see that the United States provides more foreign aid to Israel that to any other nation on earth? How should you feel?


I would be pissed off at my parents for having so many children living as refugees. I would further be pissed that they left the country in hopes to see Israel destroyed by the Arab nations. Then when Israel won the war, they were dumb enough to think they could just walk back in after their own Muslim brothers refuses to grant them citizenship into their countries (except Jordan). Would you allow immigrants to come to America who were hell bent on seeing its destruction? Get your facts straight.

Quote:
The problem could be resolved by renouncing monetary support for Israel.


Uh huh.

Quote:
After all, how was this any different than the Soviet support of Cuba?


Cuba was not a new country that was facing hostilities from every corner at the beginning of its creation.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 72 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Grudunza, Philo Sofee and 54 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Revival Theme By Brandon Designs By B.Design-Studio © 2007-2008 Brandon
Revival Theme Based off SubLite By Echo © 2007-2008 Echo
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group