Novak: Jihad in Yemen

So. Life, under islam, reeks. What's new?

No muslims. No mosques.

Take away Western aid, or Western help, or Western aid-workers or guest-workers or soldiers, take away any Western presence, whether from an oil-rich Muslim state or one without any oil, and one will get a state that tends toward anarchy and violence. Somalia is another example. So is Pakistan, which without American aid and debt forgiveness, and remittances from, and contacts with, the West, would sink even further. This sinking should not be stopped. Peri Bathous -- The Art of Sinking not In Poetry, but In Statecraft -- should be a subject taught in the military academies and universities. How to play on the natural weaknesses of mortal enemies, how not to resurrect them but to allow them to battle among themselves. Pass out copies of "Millions of Cats by Wanda Gag. Think of the moral. More Yemens and Somalias would, from the Infidel point of view, be most welcome. For Somalia and Yemen at the moment can do us little harm, preoccupied -- perhaps forever -- with their own internecine strife. If properly bottled up, so that they cannot move to the West, they will have to figure out for themselves what they can or cannot continue to do. It is like Iran. Twenty-five years of the Islamic Republic of Iran has done great damage to the image, and influence, of Islam. An unintended -- but in retrospect a natural -- consequence of direct rule by Muslim clerics. Such a disaffection had to be.

The other strategy -- give them aid, so that "poverty" will not make people "turn to terrorism" (what nonsense), being careful to say nice things about Islam at every turn and trying always to boost Muslim self-esteem by repeating the cockeyed Muslim view of history -- is exactly the wrong thing to do. Nor will building "democracy" (which could only be undertaken by those who are not clear themselves on what "democracy" is, or how long it took to develop in the advanced, non-Musim, Western world), do much to limit the Islamic threat to the non-Muslims of the world. We are asked to accept on faith, as a given (etant donne) that "democracy" -- defined primitively as merely free elections -- is enough to limit or deflect or diminish the fervor of Islam.

Why should we accept this? The historical record provides evidence of the exact opposite. Cf. Turkey, from 1924-2004 (a good 80 years to study). Cf. Western Europe, where the faith of those Muslims born in Europe is more uncompromising than that of their fathers.

No muslims. No mosques.

Havoc

I believe you have that backwards:

No mosques. No Muslims.

I for one want all mosques closed until they can show how their Koran does not violate the United States Constitution.

That should close them indefinately

Hugh

"Take away Western aid, or Western help, or Western aid-workers or guest-workers or soldiers, take away any Western presence, whether from an oil-rich Muslim state or one without any oil, and one will get a state that tends toward anarchy and violence. Somalia is another example. So is Pakistan"

But it's the 'Great Satan's fault. Just ask all of the Islamic leaders.

"which without American aid and debt forgiveness, and remittances from, and contacts with, the West, would sink even further. This sinking should not be stopped. Peri Bathous -- The Art of Sinking not In Poetry, but In Statecraft -- should be a subject taught in the military academies and universities. How to play on the natural weaknesses of mortal enemies, how not to resurrect them but to allow them to battle among themselves"

What about the children Hugh? or the non-Muslims who are born there?

Just let them suffer and die?
and what about the next generation of them?

How many generations of them will it take?

How many has it been?

Why not just make an utter fool of 'allah'? [which can easily be done] who is the cause of so much torment?

Take down 'allah' - and those nations will begin to prosper. he preaches violence - and violence begets anrachy and poverty.

Get that message out [which is my goal] and the Islamic leaders will begin to look like the over-bearing bastards that they are.

With the true cat out of the bag - how much longer will the people under them tolerate them? the people who have suffered the most by them?

ia786, Brownwonder, Mr. Haidon, Naseem:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20050505/ts_usatoday/pleasuremarriagesregainpopularityiniraq

Back to Story - Help
'Pleasure marriages' regain popularity in Iraq By Rick Jervis, USA TODAY
Thu May 5, 6:15 AM ET

In the days when it could land him in jail, Rahim Al-Zaidi would whisper details of his muta'a only to his closest confidants and the occasional cousin. Never his wife.

Al-Zaidi hopes to soon finalize his third muta'a, or "pleasure marriage," with a green-eyed neighbor. This time, he talks about it openly and with obvious relish. Even so, he says, he probably still won't tell his wife.

The 1,400-year-old practice of muta'a- "ecstasy" in Arabic - is as old as Islam itself. It was permitted by the prophet Mohammed as a way to ensure a respectable means of income for widowed women.

Pleasure marriages were outlawed under Saddam Hussein but have begun to flourish again. The contracts, lasting anywhere from one hour to 10 years, generally stipulate that the man will pay the woman in exchange for sexual intimacy. Now some Iraqi clerics and women's rights activists are complaining that the contracts have become less a mechanism for taking care of widows than an outlet for male sexual desires.

The renaissance of the pleasure marriage coincides with a revival of other Shiite traditions long suppressed by the former regime. Interest in Shiite customs has accelerated since Shiite parties swept Jan. 30 elections to become the biggest bloc in the new National Assembly.

"Under Saddam, we were very scared," says Al-Zaidi, 39, a lawyer from Sadr City, a sprawling Shiite neighborhood in eastern Baghdad. "They would punish people. Now, all my friends are doing it."

A turbaned Shiite cleric who issues wedding permits from a street-side counter in Sadr City says he encourages permanent marriages but gives the OK for pleasure marriages when there are "special reasons." The cleric, Sayid Kareem As-Sayid Abdullah Al-Mousawi, says he grants licenses for muta'a in cases where the woman is widowed or divorced, or for single women who have approval from their fathers.

Shiites, Sunnis split

"Clerics who blessed them were hounded by security during the previous regime," he says. "I can assure you, these (muta'a) marriages are flourishing in (Shiite cities) Najaf, Karbala and Kadhamiya in an amazing way. There are a lot of hotels (patronized) by Shiites who approve of such marriages."

Shiites and Sunnis both permit men to take more than one permanent wife, but the rival branches of Islam are deeply split over pleasure marriages.

Most Shiite scholars today consider it halal, or religiously legal. Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the highest religious authority in Shiite Islam, sets conditions and obligations for muta'a on his Web site. ("A woman with whom temporary marriage is contracted is not entitled to share the conjugal bed of her husband and does not inherit from him ...")

Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari and other Shiite lawmakers have said they want Iraq's new constitution to use the sharia, or Islamic law, as its basis. That could give muta'a formal legal protection. Sunni Arabs and Kurds, who are mainly Sunni, oppose the idea. But the practice is growing among Sunnis and Shiites alike.

Sunni scholars fear that giving official sanction to pleasure marriages - many of which are only verbal agreements between the couple - are little more than legalized prostitution that could lead to a collapse of moral values, especially among young people.

"We have reports about one-hour pleasure marriages that are flourishing among students," says Sheik Ali Al-Mashhadani, a Sunni imam at the Ibn Taimiya mosque in Baghdad. "I'm advising parents to watch their sons very carefully, particularly those who are in the colleges and universities."

Short-term marriages were considered idolatry by Saddam's ruling Baath Party in the 1970s and '80s, says Kamal Hamdul, president of the Iraqi Bar Association. Muta'a were punishable by fines or prison, he says. Couples took the practice underground, meeting in out-of-the-way apartments and hotels - and rarely telling even family members.

Pleasure marriages began to resurface after the fall of Baghdad in 2003. One reason is that Shiites, 60% of Iraq's population, have a greater ability to shape social mores than they did under Saddam, a Sunni Arab whose top aides were also Sunnis.

Payments to women vary

A woman agreeing to a pleasure marriage that involves a one-time encounter might be able to count on about $100. For a muta'a that runs longer, she might be paid $200 a month, though the amounts vary widely and can depend on whether she has children.

Zeinab Ahmed, 31, lost her husband in a car accident five years ago. She says she has considered entering into a muta'a contract with a man, but the stigma attached has kept her from doing so.

"All my friends who have done this have told me they got married in this way just to meet their sexual desires," Ahmed says, "but later on they started to love that man, and he does not accept to get married permanently. ... Most of the men, at the end of the contract, they feel contempt towards the woman."

Contracts for pleasure marriage strongly favor men.

Married women can't enter a muta'a, although a married man can. Men can void the contract at any time; women don't have that option unless it's negotiated at the outset. The couple agrees not to have children. A woman who unintentionally gets pregnant can have an abortion but must then pay a fine to a cleric.

Women's rights activists are concerned. Salama Al-Khafaji, a Shiite lawmaker who supports the concept of sharia law but advocates for women's rights, calls the re-emergence of muta'a an "unhealthy phenomenon."

With the right intentions, she says, muta'a can serve the noble purpose of helping divorced and widowed women. But too many men are using temporary marriages to exploit women for sex, she says. Her solution is to reinforce the importance of permanent marriages with work programs for newlywed couples and education campaigns.

"A woman who practices muta'a does not usually feel comfortable about it," Al-Khafaji says. "People these days are creating excuses to practice these acts."

Al-Mousawi, the Shiite cleric, says the practice of pleasure marriages is open to abuse and misinterpretation. He says he is particularly troubled by kiss-and-tell men. "After they've finished with the woman, they've told their friends about her beauty and given a description of her body, which is something absolutely unacceptable in Islam," he says.

Al-Zaidi, the Sadr City lawyer, says his motivations are spiritual. In 2002, he says he persuaded a Sunni widow to enter into a one-year muta'a with him, even though at first she refused.

To him, pleasure marriages are legitimate in God's eyes. They bring responsibility and formality to what would otherwise be squalid and sinful, he says. "There is a noble goal in this kind of marriage," says Al-Zaidi, still married to his first wife and has five children. "It's to eradicate moral corruption."

In the past, some muta'a contracts have been struck when permanent, legal marriages were not possible.

Ayad Muhammed Ali fell in love eight years ago with a woman who walked into his Baghdad tailor shop. She was a widow with two young sons whose husband, a member of an underground group outlawed by Saddam, had been executed by Saddam's men. The woman also was richer than Ali, so her family would never have consented to a legal marriage.

The lovers agreed to a yearlong muta'a in 1993 and have renewed their contract every year since, he says. In the decade after their muta'a, the couple never dared meet in the open. In April 2003, the month U.S. forces swept into the capital, they began meeting in public places for the first time, he says.

"I was always so afraid someone would find out and I'd go to prison," says Ali, 29. "Now, I'm not afraid. My only fear is her family."

Copyright © 2005 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.

Copyright © 2005 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Questions or Comments
Privacy Policy -Terms of Service - Copyright/IP Policy - Ad Feedback

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/destinations/2005-05-04-zanzibar-behavior_x.htm

No kissing please, Zanzibar Islamists tell tourists

ZANZIBAR, Tanzania (Reuters) — Islamist groups in Zanzibar are worried by what they see as increasingly inappropriate behaviour by Western tourists, saying their actions offend the Indian Ocean islands' conservative Muslim culture.
The organizations are also concerned about the spread of bars on the islands off mainland Tanzania, whose beaches and coral reefs make it a haven for honeymooners.

"Tourists should not indulge in sex acts or kiss openly, this is not something that people can accept," Farid Hadi, chairman of the Zanzibar Imams' Association (Jumaza), said on Wednesday.

"Every society has norms to be respected. We want a law that stipulates that while tourists are accepted, there are standards that forbid wearing very short dresses in public.

"In Islam non-Muslims can pursue their ways provided that, when doing so, they keep to themselves in a segregated manner."

Abdallah Said Ali, Secretary of the Society for Islamic Awareness, (UAMSHO), says the courts tend to side with the tourist industry's argument that too strict an interpretation of laws controlling alcohol sales are bad for business.

"When we tried to take legal action against one bar on those grounds we failed, and we were told we were trying to destroy the economy," he said.

Tourism is the second biggest foreign exchange earner for Zanzibar, but is expected to increase in importance because of the collapse of the islands' clove export trade due to a fall in prices caused by global oversupply.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2005 Reuters Limited. Click for Restrictions.

What Muslims really believe:

Engineering major Mohssen Abdullah Hussein, 19, who is more conservative, said, "Islam was not spread only by talk, but also by force. Still, I am saying it was possible to avoid the things that happened in Basra."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-03-20-young-iraqis_x.htm

Young Iraqis 'will make or break' democracy
By Elliot Blair Smith, USA TODAY

BAGHDAD — Shiite Muslim fundamentalists loyal to cleric Muqtada al-Sadr waded into a picnic of about 700 Basra University students last week. They beat several students with sticks and fired their guns in the air.

"There is no meaning to democracy without being able to express yourself," says Nadiya Shaban, 22, a student at Baghdad University.
By Elliot Blair Smith, USA TODAY

The clash in the southern Iraqi city was symbolic of deeper fissures in a society struggling with change.

The non-partisan Iraqi Prospect Organization says 60% of Iraqi university students believe democracy is superior to any other form of government, according to a nationwide poll published today.

But young Iraqis' understanding of democracy is "superficial," according to the pollsters.

Not surprisingly in a country destabilized by two years of violence, the pollsters found a belief that democratic freedom begins with the individual's right to be secure, rather than freedom of speech and assembly.

The dramatic philosophical divide between al-Sadr's fundamentalists, who battled U.S. and Iraqi forces last year in Baghdad and Najaf, and students who represent more progressive aspirations for Iraq's future, is likely to sharpen.

"Iraqi youth are the ones who will make or break the democratization of the country," said Ahmed Shames, chairman of the Baghdad-based Iraqi Prospect Organization, which interviewed 834 Iraqi university students about democracy in December and January.

Reactions to attack

Under pressure from government authorities, who denounced last Wednesday's attack and promised to investigate, al-Sadr's office in Basra issued a written apology to the students over the weekend. The youths' offenses appear to have been that male and female students sat together, dressed casually and listened to music celebrating spring's arrival.

Immediately after the attack, al-Sadr supporter Sheik Ahmed al-Basri defended the actions of the attackers. He expressed outrage that students at the picnic had engaged in "dancing, sexy dress and corruption."

Al-Basri added, "We beat them because we are authorized by Allah to do so, and that is our duty. It is we who should deal with such disobedience and not the police."

Students and their families demonstrated for three days in Basra after the assault. Some university students in other parts of the country reacted with outrage or apprehension over the fundamentalists' attack.

"The religious leaders have their social positions and respect, but that doesn't mean that they have the right to make others obey their orders by force," said Furssan Salah Al-Deen Ahmed, 22, a third-year political science student at the University of Baghdad.

"These fundamental groups know well how to monopolize fear and strike back at democracy," said Nadiya Shaban, 22, a fourth-year political science student at the university.

Shaban said she believes in freedom of speech. "There is no meaning of democracy without being able to express yourself," she said. But she also fears retaliation. "Let us take gradually to the (democratic) process," she said.

Engineering major Mohssen Abdullah Hussein, 19, who is more conservative, said, "Islam was not spread only by talk, but also by force. Still, I am saying it was possible to avoid the things that happened in Basra."

Al-Sadr's influence

Iraqi Prospect Organization's Shames said al-Sadr's group has made strong inroads at university campuses when mainstream political movements are all but invisible there. "The most organized groups inside the university are people loyal to Muqtada al-Sadr," he said. "They are definitely not playing a positive role in improving the understanding of democracy."

By comparison, he added, more mainstream parties have not made "a good effort to educate university students what democracy is."

The Iraqi Prospect Organization's interviews with university students — half in Baghdad and the rest distributed evenly in the north and south — showed that university students' enthusiasm for democracy is accompanied by a weak grasp of what democracy means.

For instance, 91% of the polled students said living without fear of arrest is essential to democracy. A third said majority rule is not essential. Almost half said the right to belong to one's political party of choice is not an essential component of democracy.

Many young adults here have lived through three wars — a decade-long conflict with Iran and two clashes with the United States and its allies — and United Nations-sponsored sanctions. Shames said they are fearful that the country's new democracy is too fragile to withstand fractious party politicking and vigorous debate.

"People see criticizing the government as (equivalent to) being opposed to the new government, as being opposed to the new Iraq," Shames said. "It shows how much needs to be done to improve the understanding of democracy."

Other attitudes on government

In other findings:

•44% agree the president should be able to exercise absolute power during crises.

•45% agree the judiciary should defer to the executive branch on key decisions.

•55% agree the army should be allowed to intervene and govern when necessary.

Defense Ministry spokesman Majid al-Sari condemned last week's attack on the students in Basra.

"No group can take the government's role, especially when dealing with students, the future leaders of society," al-Sari said.

At the University of Baghdad, several students agreed.

Maysa'a Atta Meersa, 20, a chemistry major who is a follower of Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the Shiite leader who has sought to moderate religious intervention in political life, feared the situation could get worse. "I am thinking very seriously with my family about this matter," Meersa said. "We might leave Iraq if these things (get worse)."

Munther Alwan, 29, a fourth-year political science student, was defiant.

"Everybody has his life and has the right to express himself the way he likes," he said. "The time of Saddam and his terror has gone and will never be back."

Contributing: Sabah al-Anbaki and Mohamed Hayder Sadeq in Baghdad, Adil Hamid in Basra

Beth -

I think of it as a single concept, maybe a "duality". Like the Holy Trinity ...

No muslims. No mosques.
(Think: "No muslims/mosques.")

- Havoc

Mentat,

Sorry but I cant argue on behalf of what Shias do. I dont know much about thier religion, thier practice of Mutah, or anything else. YOu may want to ask a shia. In the meantime here is an audio file by Dr. Saleh As-Saleh, who on another post i mistakingly referring to him as a student of knowledge (talibul ilm) but he is in fact a daiy (person engage in active dawah), in this audio he speaks about the issue of mutah- or marriage of enjoyment. I hope you benefit from it.

In it, he will bring your proofs from the texts and other great scholars of the past, and differences of opinion.

http://www.understand-islam.net/audio/andromeda.php?q=f&f=/Women+In+Islam

It is entitlted Nikaah Al-Mutah

Ok if you have problems downloading it let me know.

Here is it directly:

I don't say no muslims, no mosques. I only argue for separation of societies. People will ultimately believe what they want, and if that includes nonsense so be it, so long as my society and that of my children is not being worsened. Even Farid Hadi (the above chairman of the Zanzibar Imams' Association) agrees with that.

That being said, the islamic model does not seem a good one to emulate for anyone. Mut'a is nothing more than a thin veil (so to speak) for prostitution. There's nothing "respectable" about it; and to agree not to have any children such that any accidental pregnancies result in abortion strikes me as the worst kind of reasoning for the termination of a human embryo. It is nothing more than mere convenience, which even the most ardent pro-choice advocate doesn't support here. Notably, too, doesn't islam disapprove of abortion? Only in certain cases, it seems.

Repulsive, all around.

Geoff

Hugh,

As much as you would like to starve Muslim countries for not submitting to you, or the West, which ever you think God has ordained, I am not sure that is practical or revenue incentive freindly.

Consider the sales of arms to countries all over the world. Most of them made in the North, by America, Canada, Russia, etc. Now these countries or the shareholders of the companions, know full well that these arms do in fact get into the hands of millitias from Cambodia to Cuba, and in Africa they even get into the hands of child soldiers hopped up on drugs. Sierra Leon and Liberia come to mind.

Now if companies in the West cant even, or dont want to, stop that kind of flow of Western goods, how to you expect your genius plan of comming to fruition?

Geoff,

You too? I am in favor of segregation as well. Not on the basis of color but on the basis of ideas. Intergration came at the end of a bayonet, which suggest that it isnt natural or long term. I believe in free trade, friendly relations between countries but no mixing. I am the idea based Bull Connor.

It's a mystery as to why Brownfinger would think that Hugh would want to starve anyone; I don't read that anywhere in his article. And to what end? And is this to say that muslim countries can't produce their own food? Surely that most basic of abilities is not lacking.

Moreover, a simple parting of the ways is what islamicists have been asking for for ages; "get rid of the kufroons, those distractors, so that we can contemplate our navels for another 1400 years."

Ultimately there would be people and companies opposed to that - like the Saudis, for instance - but such opposition could be overcome. It always can.

On another note, I hope people like Brownfinger can find the counselling they need; in her case specifically, to deal with her racism.

Geoff

I might add: mixing is perhaps not wise. It might be best to relegate all further contact to a thing of the past: an iron veil, so to speak.

Geoff

Havoc

I am thinking. It takes the mosques to make Muslims. That's why I say it this way:

No Mosques. No Muslims. [Smile]

Geoff [I love your sense of humor]

But on this - seriously speaking,

I totally agree with the separating of the cultures.

Islam CAN NOT be mixed within non-Muslim societies because it is a sure recipe for a major bloodbath. Lots of infidels for the Muslims to slaughter.

And I am offended - that the Islamic countries don't feel they already have their fair portion of the earth.

Why not leave the U.S. alone?

Is asking for one complete non-Muslim nation too much?

If not - then they'll have people like me to deal with...and I don't like allah - nor his murderous preachings.

Like the Holy Trinity

The word - 'Trinity' appears NO where in the Bible.

Those who teach that concept of Trinity also believe the Mother's name is Mary.

But the Lord of the New Testament - the one they say they represent - will call them liars.

um Geoff - Did you write those? or did some one else?

Hugh:

I like your theory and your reasoning.

Now, if disengagement was to happen, no more aid, reduced support to Aegypt, Yemen, Pakistan (and all those other fly-infested holes) would that not inevitably bring about the "Somaliaziation", a whole lot of failed states that turn into havens for terrorists and fiefdoms of clans?

Would that not invite more strive and terror along with piracy, kidnappings etc. which is the traditional business of Mohammedans?

I am looking forward to your theories on that!

Brownwonder-
I doubt that Hugh wants to starve anyone. However, those on this website are fortunate enough to live in countries that are peaceful and prosperous. If Muslim countries are unstable and dangerous, many will want to immigrate to the west. I sympathize. However, when a western country lets in immigrants from pathological societies, the problem could spread to what is now a healthy host-with potentially deadly consquences for the host. We have already seen indications of infection with some of the literature now available in US mosques, etc.

How would you suggest dealing with this dilemma, in a manner that is both humane and safe?

Beth, I cannot claim to speak for the great Imam Mustafa P. Bin-Itely. As I have been told, should one claim to speak from knowledge one may receive a double punishment!

But it's curious how's he's such a wise, funny guy, and that we're never seen in the same place together. However, it is for certain that his solutions are entirely his own and not written nor duplicated elsewhere by others.

I suppose that Imam Mustafa P. might consent to offer additional islamic "jurisprudence", if needed. I'll ask him.

Geoff

Interesting side note about Palestinian reactions to the Israeli pullout:

At Tnuvot Katif, a large produce-packaging plant here, I watch for a while as about two dozen workers, most of them local Arabs, get heads of tall leaf lettuce ready for export. More than half of Tnuvot’s 127 year-round employees are Arab; they in turn account for about 2 percent of the 3,500 Arabs employed by Gaza’s Jewish firms.

During a break in the shift, I ask some of workers if they like their jobs. They shrug. But when I ask what they think of the plan for Israeli withdrawal, they grow animated. If the Israelis go, they tell me through an interpreter, they’ll lose their jobs. If the plant shuts down, they’ll be out of work, and if the Palestinian Authority takes it over, they’ll still be out of work — their jobs will go to workers with better connections to the PA’s ruling thugs.

“If that’s how you feel,” I ask, “why don’t you oppose the disengagement publicly? Why don’t you tell the PA that you want your Jewish neighbors to stay?”

When my question is translated, the men look at me as if I’m crazy.

“It’s forbidden!” replies Randoor, the only one of the workers who would give even a first name. “We’re not allowed to say that!”

I press him: Why not? What would be so bad about saying that Jews and Arabs should be able to live together? But Randoor shakes his head and crosses his wrists, as if being handcuffed. “They might put us in jail,” he says. “They might call us ‘collaborators.’ ” In the jungle that is Palestinian society, being called a “collaborator” can be a death sentence. Indeed, the PA’s newly elevated security chief — a cold-blooded killer named Rashid Abu Shabak — is known in Gaza as the “collaborator hunter.”

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/05/08/everybody_loses_in_sharons_gaza_plan/

That term "collaborator" does seem to get bandied about a lot.

Geoff

SPQR,

You know I used to live in the Bay Area as well. I was on the border of Berkely and Oakland. I would walk to the Ashby Bart Station on the weekends and buy all kinds of junk. I love it up there. Its very nice. I just cant stand all those hippies.

Listen laws keep people intergrated, not anyones desire for racial, culture, utopia. And the state must enforce the laws. Police carry guns, militaries carry canons. Whatever. In America we are still segregated for one reason or another whether deliberately or historically.

Now I am sure you dont mind living next to the sweet Chinese family but let a bunch of section 8 negros move into your neighborhood. I bet you will not be seeing KUMBYEYA!

'but let a bunch of section 8 negros move into your neighborhood'

brownwonder~ your last statement can't be backed up by Anything anyone has said here. You sound like some other people I know. Please stick to the facts. What you said is racist bullshit.

Beth,

Whatever is done at a Mosque, teaching, prayer, Iftar etc, can be done anywhere. So you can knock down a mosque or two, somoene will pitch a tent in their backyard. It isnt really a big deal. In fact the Mosque I go to is just a big house. Nice antique Victorian, hard wood, huge rooms, big back yard, with children running around.

Beth, I cannot claim to speak for the great Imam Mustafa P. Bin-Itely. As I have been told, should one claim to speak from knowledge one may receive a double punishment!

I'm dying.

Brownwonder-
I live in California. My neighborhood is relatively integrated, with blacks, phillipinos, whites, hispanics....and so on.
The only problem I have is with the people around the corner (who are hispanic) who have let their house turn into a dump.
Race unimportant, shared values, VERY IMPORTANT.
Section 8 is ok if they are poor but decent people. If they are a bunch of lowlife bums, (regardless of race) no thanks.

Beth, Havoc,

Shutting down mosques might be a start.

You should note that if you want to eliminate what people believe (which we do), forced conversions will never work. It doesn't work for any religion. As far as I know, there is no compulsion to tell the truth in ANY religion, let alone Islam.

Get rid of the mosques, and Muslims will start meeting in basements. Ban the Koran, and they will start reading it online. In fact, many of the enterprising ones will start attending churches so that we think that they are trustworthy, then they will infiltrate our intelligence services.

This is what happened in Spain in 1525. Note that 85 YEARS passed, with numerous rebellions, until the Spanish finally learned what to do to solve the problem.

http://users.ipfw.edu/jehle/COURSES/s450/MORISCO.HTM

As far as I see it, there are very few options that will actually fix the problem.

a) Expulsion
b) Permanent internment
c) Massacre
d) A combination of the above

The next question is, how do we get from a to b in as short a time as possible?

1. Secure our borders so that we can control down to a very small number of people who goes in and who goes out of the West. This will no doubt be expensive. It will cost NOTHING compared to the current war we are in.

2. Identify (covertly) who is likely to be a Muslim.

3. End Muslim immigration.
...

n. Internment/Expulsion.

It's a big step from 3 to n, but I sure as hell don't want to wait 85 years to implement it. Shutting down CAIR may be part of that solution, but heading down the forced conversion track is pointless IMO because history shows us it is not a solution.

Same 7th century religion, the only difference is that we are now in the 21st century as opposed to the 16th.

Beth,

Whatever is done at a Mosque, teaching, prayer, Iftar etc, can be done anywhere. So you can knock down a mosque or two, somoene will pitch a tent in their backyard. It isnt really a big deal. In fact the Mosque I go to is just a big house. Nice antique Victorian, hard wood, huge rooms, big back yard, with children running around.

brownwonder - but it's the statement of America - that I'm interested in.

And if America were to ever become so bold - I believe some people would be less apprehensive in condemning them.

It also sends a strong message to the children of America.

Brownwonder - I don't care who lives next to me, so long as

1) they don't bludge off my taxes.
2) They are not Muslim.

"bunch of section 8 negros move into your neighborhood"

Does that comment come from the same segment of your brain as stupid "white girl"????

Out of curiousity, how long has racism been a part of islam? Beth, I think you had some quotes on this.

Geoff

Race unimportant, shared values, VERY IMPORTANT.
Section 8 is ok if they are poor but decent people. If they are a bunch of lowlife bums, (regardless of race) no thanks.

treehugger? So True So true!

Three different objections are raised:

One is sentimental ("what about the children?"). Well, what about the children? The children in this country and in the Western world, who are likely to suffer if children in the Muslim world continue to multiply. Will those children be better off if Islam expands, and Muslims are a greater percentage of the population all over the Western world? My sympathies are not universal; Love For the Whole Wide World is not in my line. If some can be converted, and hence rendered harmless, fine. But I doubt it.

The second is the charge, from a confused New Muslim still trying to work her Secret Decoder Ring, and repeatedly asking for instruction at various threads (all she need do is go to www.faithfreeom.org and get all the instruction in Islam she needs), that I wish to "starve" Muslims. Nonsense. They can have all the seeds and gardening advice and rakes and spades and even tractors they can pay for, with the moneyu those rich Muslims, those fabulously rich Muslims, the ones in such countries as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the U.A.E., and in quite a few other oil-producing countires, should be able to use to buy some of that seed, rakes, spades, and tractors. No, I'm not trying to starve anyone. I would love it if the entire Muslim world spent time in farming, in small villages, where there was no television, no audiocassettes, no videocassettes. Just a simple quiet village Islam, with the rest of the world merely a haze.

The third charge is that unsettled areas such as Somalia will "breed terrorism." No. Islam "breeds terrorism" -- and it can breed it in Paris or Marseille, in Hamburg or Berlin, in Bradford or London, in Milan or Jersey City or Moscow. There is not much threat today from Somalia, nor from the Yemen -- as long as Somalis and Yemenis are kept in Somalia and the Yemen, respectively. They are so busy making war on one another, that they lack even the possibliity of being disappointed, or bored, with live, which then helps people turn to Islam and more Islam, and the fun and duty of the Jihad that can justify their bored or disappointing existences.

Above one poster asks of another, a Muslim, the following:

"If Muslim countries are unstable and dangerous, many will want to immigrate to the west."

That is not why Muslims wish to immigrate. They wish to immigrate because our societies are altogether more decent, interesting, and prosperous than are those they leave behind. Unfortunately, they appear to have little interest in sloughing off the very cause of the backwardness and awfulness in the countries they come from. They cannot bring themselves to recognize that the problem, the problem for Muslims, is Islam. It is too much of a mental leap. So they come to the Infidel lands, but come as those who are wedded to Islam, and see the role of Muslims as one which entitles them to spread Islam, in any ways that they see fit, who think they are entitled to change their host countries to make them compatible with Muslim desires, whatever this does to the political and social arrangements of the unneccesary Infidels in the lands that they happen to inhabit and, for a while yet, to possess. Though it seems fantastic, many Muslims do regard the lands of others as belonging to Allah and to his Believers; for them, it is only a matter of time. Few in the West like to think about this, or to take it seriously. They are able to llok back on how the Western world failed to identify other madnesses (all sorts of documentaries about the rise of Hitler, the career of Stalin, the Cultural Revolution, can be watched with equanimity), but cannot recognize when they exhibit the same blithe behavior as that of those they can so easily condemn today.

The poster, having noted that Muslims "will want to immigrate to the West" adds: "I sympathize."

I don't.

As far as I see it, there are very few options that will actually fix the problem.

a) Expulsion
b) Permanent internment
c) Massacre
d) A combination of the above

The next question is, how do we get from a to b in as short a time as possible?

1. Secure our borders so that we can control down to a very small number of people who goes in and who goes out of the West. This will no doubt be expensive. It will cost NOTHING compared to the current war we are in.

Rational Islamophobe? First - I could not agree about the border. It's been a complaint of mine for decades. [I watch these things]

Second - you left out one thing

Lets call it choice e.

2Cr 10:4 The weapons [Scriptures] of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;

Hbr 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword.

But choice e keeps getting rejected - which is most ironic - since it will have FAR MORE power with the 'extremists' than the mere words of men that they consider to be infidels.

CORRECTION!

Rational Islamophobe? First - I could not agree - MORE! - about the closing of the border.

CAIR dung

http://www.anti-cair-net.org/press_014_05

Hugh,

You are so long winded, I hope you arent making up for some other short coming. Hee Hee!

Anyway,

"Unfortunately, they appear to have little interest in sloughing off the very cause of the backwardness and awfulness in the countries they come from. They cannot bring themselves to recognize that the problem, the problem for Muslims, is Islam. It is too much of a mental leap."

I fail to see how Islam causes poverty in Somalia but not in Haiti, or Cambodia. As I have mentioned to Beth, I am starting this new book called THe Mystery of Capital: Why it works in the West but fails everywhere else (including non Muslim countries)

The author Hernando De Soto argues that its about the dead capital in these countires that cant be utilized due to the fact that in some places, like Egypt, people dont own thier own homes and cant use it as capital. The entreprunerial spirit is there but little else. Perhpaps if Mr. De Soto wasnt such a PC junky he would argue in that last chapter that in places that are Islamic, its Islam that keep them poor, but in Peru, or Liberia, its about the lack of foreign invest and capital. When I am done I will let you know.

"Though it seems fantastic, many Muslims do regard the lands of others as belonging to Allah and to his Believers; for them, it is only a matter of time."

They would have to provide thier proof.

I have mine for the obligation of leaving Darul Kafur for Darul Islam.

[Sooratun-Nisaa‘ 4:97-99]
Verily, as for those whom the angels take (in death) while they are wronging themselves (as they stayed among the disbelievers even though emigration was obligatory for them), they (angels) say (to them): In what (condition) were you? They reply: We were weak and oppressed on the earth. They (angels) say: Was not the earth of Allaah spacious enough for you to emigrate therein? Such men will find their abode in Hell what an evil destination! Except the weak ones among men, women and children who cannot devise a plan, nor are they able to direct their way. These are they whom Allaah is likely to forgive them, and Allaah is Ever Oft Pardoning, Oft-Forgiving.

Narrated by Umar ibn Al Khattab,

The Messenger of Allah (salaalahu alahi wa salam) said, The value of an action depends on the intention behind it. The emigration of the one who emirgrates for Allah and his Messenger is for the sake of Allah and his Messenger, and the one who emigrates for gaining a wordly advantage or to marry a woman is for what he has emigrated for.

Also migration to a Muslim land expatiates sins.

Hugh: Bullseye!

Question:

How would you suggest to deal with the inevitable increase in kidnappings for ransom, piracy and terror that would skyrocket if these countries were to be left on their own?

Browniebomber:

Bye bye & good riddance!
(don't let the door hit you on the way out!)

Mentat:

Please do not include me in your list of Islamists. I am not one of them.

Hugh. Excellent piece.

Yours sincerely

Thomas

brownloadofcrap says,

"Hugh,

You are so long winded, I hope you arent making up for some other short coming. Hee Hee!"

You need a swirly.

Havoc:

Could you expand on your statement: "no Muslims", "no mosques"? I have a good idea what you are trying to say, but could you flush this out a bit? Does genocide enter into the equation to attain these goals? How can this practically be achieved?

Yours sincerely

Thomas

Hugh-are you saying that you can't sympathize at all with a Pakistani woman wanting to get out as fast as possible? Given that Pakastani men seem to be addicted to wife burning and lots of other fun fundamentalist games?

How about allowing only limited FEMALE muslim immigration to the west?

I also said that I sympathize, but I am not willing to allow the infection to spread in my country. If there is a humane option that will prevent that, however, I'm all for it.

Hugh = good post above. I see all that Brownwonder can do is quote scripture - well done Hugh.

"Also migration to a Muslim land expatiates sins." - BW = takeover infidel lands. Thanks for showing your true intent.

Happy Mother's Day.

http://hamstermotor.motime.com/post/451119

Rational Islamophobe -

I do not propose to shut the mosques down. I propose to raze them. Bulldoze them. Clear?

Further, I'm not saying you can't be a muslim. I am just saying that you can't be one here, in the USA. muslims Must choose between islam and US citizenship. The two don't go together.

No muslims; No mosques.

O/T:

The headline at DrudgeReport.com reads:

HOLLYWOOD SLUMP: Boxoffice down 11th straight weekend; Off 24%...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ridley Scott 'Heaven' Sparks Controversy: 'Bin Laden's version of history'...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The word's spreading to more mainstream internet news sites about the inaccuracies of Kingdom of Heaven. That's good. Also, good-Kingdom of Heaven only took in $20 million at the box office this weekend. It's a flop.

Havoc:

Best of luck to you getting Muslims such as myself stripped of my citizenship. Your comment is alarming. So every single Muslim should be deported? Every one? Shouldnt we aim to distinguish those who do not seek the overthow of the government and the installation of shariah? Have you considered the practical implications?

I live in New Zealand now, but I am an American. Good luck in stripping me of my citizenship, you better be prepared for a fight.

You make no moves to distinguish to honest and good American Muslims and Muslims who support Islamism. The tyranny you offer for a secular Muslim such as myself is no different to that of an Islamist. You both want to eliminate us.

Yours sincerely
Thomas

I'm getting closer to breaking Brownwonders Salific code...I'm sneaking up on the source of her particular insanity...You see I also lived on the Berkely/Oakland,Ca USA, border. 1620 Prince st to be exact. I also walked to the Bart station where they had a cool weekend flea mkt I walked in Brownwonders footprints, I saw what she saw, I see the source of her contamination, it's the hippies. I kind of like hippies but some of them do have bugs that jump...My family were the only white people in four square blocks...Living there for seven years was an enlightening experience...But Berkely is corrupt...every kind of polution is rampant there. It's a liberal enclave. It produces jillions of people like Brownwonder. As soon as I decode her statement that she doesn't like hippies, I think the Salific code is broken...

Migration to a muslim land expatiates sins? LOL

Like the old clerical dispensations one used to be able to buy in the 900-1400's?

Good god. And this is meant to be a "more logical" choice in religion than Christianity or Judaism. That must be a joke; and yet, it's scarcely amusing.

Geoff

Thomas - you still haven't answered my question. If all Muslims became as 'liberal' as you at interpreting the Koran, how do you stop other Muslims, from reading it and taking it literally??

There is a sea of Muslims out there, some of whom are waging a war against us infidels. How do you propose we work out who is a nominal Muslim and who isn't. Do we wait until they nuke us? Do we wait for another 9/11?

As long as there is the Koran, there will be readers who take it literally.

Well 3rdtimelucky:

It is not something that can take overnight quite obviously. It has to start in individual communities at a grassroots level. It has to be pushed into mosques and Islamic centres. This happens in a very very very small number of communites. My proposal was a way forward, which is more than so called Muslim reformers give these days. these reformers talk about teh need for reform, without putting words into action.

Please visit www.free-minds.org for an idea of this approach I have mentioned. I would encourage you to actually read it, and see where i am coming from.

So let me get this straight, instead of attempting to distinguish between good vs bad, you would rather not distinguish at all? It seems as if yu are advocating this line of genocide that Havoc and Terminator have. Or even make the attempt? And what should people like myself do, simply accept that I do not have a right to believe in Islam and convert to Christianity? Not going to happen pal.

Instead of being overbroad and reactionary, peaceful Muslims must be sought out and relationships must be built with them. I am an American born Muslim. I have every right to believe as I will and practise as I will. You have no right to strip me of my citizenship or rights unless I am a subjective threat. If you come for me, be prepared for a fight. You have no greater right to exist or believe than I do.

I am on your side. All I am asking is that you make the effor to distinguish. Or is it too much trouble for you? Robert Spencer and Daniel Pipes, have worked to assist us and help give us a voice (while remaining justifiably skeptical about our prospects). But instead of kicking us down and calling for all of our deaths or deportation, Robert and Pipes have chosen to cautiosly support real reformists.

Yours sincerely
Thomas

This continuous talk of deportation of every Muslim and genocidal overtones is disgusting. I fully support containment and monitoring of Muslims, but deportation and genocide is despicable and immoral. All because you are too lazy to even try to distinguish. Here is a news flash, many Muslims are ignorant of their religion. Many Muslims do not read or understand Qur'an or the principles of dhmmitude and jihad. This battle needs to be fought strategically. And the way forward is as Hugh suggests.

I feel sorrowful for my fellow Muslims who are good Americans and who do not take the Qur'an and ahadith literally. You would dismiss them as vermin within a second, without distinguishing and send.

Yes Thomas I agree with you - education is the key. But I still believe that if the Koran exists, so to will extremism. I didn't say "kill all Muslims" - you assumed that in what I was writing. Please don't put words into my mouth.

I am merely asking you, as a Muslim, how are we infidels supposed to tell between a nominal one (one who doesn't believe the Koran was inspired by god - hence not take it literally), and one who wants to kill us???

Can you see the problem the West faces? We are fighting an ideology, not a group of people. Something our leaders refuse to admit with their generic "War on Terror". And delay in that question could mean catastrophe for either side, if not both.

Besides, how can you believe in a book that you don't accept as literal? Sure you might be able to derive a moral code from it (which in my opinion, is one of violence from the Koran), but if its not the word of god, then how can you believe it?

I ommitted the following from my last post inadvertantly.

You would dismiss them as vermin within a second, without distinguishing and send deport them from their own country without attempting to subjectively ascertain their beliefs. This is not freedom, it is totalitarianism at it worst, and is against the principles of natural law, the US Constitution, the UN Declaration on Human Rights and human decency.

Also migration to a Muslim land expatiates sins.

Posted by: brownwonder at May 8, 2005 07:22 PM

I believe the word you are looking for is "expiates." Nothing you said made any sense to me, did you understand it?

Hugh didn't suggest that muslims should be starved but hey, is it our responsibility to feed muslims? If you people didn't use charitable proceeds to fund terrorism, maybe you could buy some food for your starving brothers and sisters. We're infidels, remember? We're filthy and so is our money and our food. Allah would much prefer that you all starve to death rather than take charity from infidels and quite frankly, it infuriates me to see my tax money used to support sorry, lazy, barbaric sloths who won't work or do anything to improve their own countries and societies.

It is absolutely disgraceful for the U.S. to give billions of dollars to Egypt, the God-forsaken, heathen Palestinians, Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan. We are helping our enemies wage war against us; we are committing suicide. It is insane. Nobody but my family has ever given me a damn thing. If I didn't have a penny to my name, I would starve before I would apply for welfare or food stamps. Muslims are so imbued with false pride they kill their own mothers, sisters, daughters, aunts, cousins, nieces to restore their "honor." But it doesn't shame them one iota to behave like helpless children and accept the charity provided by people who work hard and share their wealth. Muslims don't know what honor and pride are.

Thanks 3rd time. I apologise for putting words in your mouth, it was improper. Muslims should be judged on their individual actions and beliefs. I think Daniel Pipes created the perfect litmus test in his "modernity test" argument last year. There are many Muslims, in my view, that reject shariah, but nonetheless believe in the Qur'an.

The Qur'an in my view cannot be the literal word of God. There are too many internal inconsistencies, because it has been tampered with and tweaked to serve political agendas. This is why the Qur'an cannot be taken literally.

I cannot posit an exacting formula on how to distinguish good from bad Muslims. I should not have to either. Being a Muslim however rightfully raises a red flag. I take no issue with monitoring or profiling of Muslims, However i do take issue with mass deportation without ascertaining a clear subjective threat. At the same time we can take steps to discourage new Muslims from arriving in this country through rigorous and robust immigration procedures. But no I do not have a clear solution on how good vs bad Muslims should be judged.

Mr. Haidon is absolutely correct, of course. In addition to sliding down the slope of immorality to dehumanization, to viewing other human beings as animals or worse, a psychological process that the anti-Jihad movement attempts to combat in Islam itself, talk of deportation, internment camps, genocide, helps along the Jihad and Spencer's opponents; people like Omar Safi can pluck these comments from this site and misrepresent Spencer's work and carry on the whitewash of Islamic practices and history; posters make these comments at the expense of Spencer's credibility. Jihadists surely take pleasure in every word. The brilliance of Hugh Fitzgerald may also become tainted by association, as if someone threw mud on a light that aims to educate, motivate study and action grounded in knowledge with a reasonable purpose.

"The Qur'an in my view cannot be the literal word of God" - so how can you believe in Islam? (I mean that in a nice way).

I too really would like to see education as the key, without the need for bombs and bullets (but I do see the need to defend ourselves using such things). Its just a pity that our governments have not committed themselves to educating people to the same tune as the amount spent on this "generic" War on Terror.

But Thomas, how can we have this "education"? In Australia, and I believe NZ, and soon coming to the USA and GB, we have "hate" laws (its like Orwell’s 1984 is coming true - "thought crimes"). These laws were pushed into being by many groups, none more so that the various Islamic groups in Australia.

So when we do have this educational debate what happens? An expert Scholar on Islam(an infidel) is hauled before the courts, $200,000 later, and many many death threats later, he is found guilty of "hate". Truth is no defense.

Why? He read the Koran out aloud to an infidel audience, and they laughed in disbelief. He is guilty of making people laugh. How can we have education when the Muslims themselves stifle any critical analysis that they disagree with, by throwing people before the courts? These Muslims would be counted as liberal - even by your standards.

Daniel Scot will probably end up in jail. Why??, he exercised his Freedom of Speech, something that is integral to democracy. In fact Robert Spencer, if in Australia, would end up in the same boat.

So Thomas, we cannot debate openly. And there is no time left. The Muslims have already called for Sharia law in Western Australia. How can we give time, when they won't give us time of day to learn? I want the open, public debate re Islam and the West. But Muslims are stifling it. Not once did Scot say "kill or harm the next Muslim you come across". I've been to his seminars - and heard what he says, I've read his books - its far from hate. Muslims are actively enguaged in our law making system, yet they stifle debate on their philosophy. These are not the actions of a group who believes in democracy. Yet these are “liberal” Muslims.

It is comforting to know that you agree to 'measures' until this War on Terror is sorted out - and I commend you for that.

I say lets have the debate, it beats bombs and bullets any day. Then let the people decide what to do on the "home front".

PS - thanks for the apology above.

Thomas - I checked out your web site quoted above. It quotes many passages from the Koran. But if I took a red highlighter to my Koran (yes I do own one), and highlighted all the verses dealing with killing, waging war, and condemdation of unbelievers to hell, and then used a green highlighter to highlight all the passages about love (other than sexual), well there would be very little green and a truck load of red.

But I looked at it through respect for your polite replies. I cannot however respect the Koran (no offence), as if I read the entire chapter of some of those verses quoted, well there would undoubtably be "red" ones following.

Is there a specific place I am to go there?

Kia ora 3rd timelucky:

I agree the focus of Western governments has been completely misguided. The focus, as Hugh and Robert have pointed out many times should be on Islam and Jihad. Until these become the focal point of any war, the war will not be won.

The situation in Australia is grave. Clearly the state and federal governments are not ready to act, which is a huge mistake.

Ah, yes the Scot case and the despicable result that followed. I fully support Daniel Scot and his right to speak. Religious vilification laws have been designed to insulate Islam from criticism. I do not think we will see them in NZ. In fact a traditional Muslim MP Dr Ashrof Chodharry has vowed to fight against any such law. The New Zealand Chapter of the Free Muslim Coalition Against Terrorism has actually been lobbying MP's to vote against the introduction of such legislation. As an example of what non-literalis Muslims can do, I have also prepared submissions to the NZ Select Committee on expanding our counter-terrorism legislation framework. I have also to my surprise received a great deal of support from the Muslim comunity here. This is one of the reasons why I feel hope. Because, I am witnessing some movement (albeit small) on the grassroots level.

But we need alot more action from so called moderate Muslims as opposed to just talk.

Cheers mate

Thomas

Well said JTF.

Cheers
Thomas

Good thing I'm wrong on the "hate" laws in NZ. I hope you never have them. Why aren't you NZ Muslims writing letters to Australian newspapers (maybe you are - I'm shooting from the hip here) saying how you think these laws are rediculous?

If there is one thing that would grab attention here in Australia its a NZder telling an Australian what to do! Try The Age Newspaper or the Herald Sun - both papers have covered the case well.

Good point, we should have done this. That might be our next project. It is important. I have not been keeping track to see if the other principlaities have followed suit.

Thomas this is from your web site www.free-minds.org (my comments in CAPS) :-

2. Who is Presenting the Evidence?

The Quran warns us not to accept any evidence that we have not 'verified' and also warns us in accepting evidence from 'wicked' parties:

"O you who believe, if a wicked person brings any news to you, you shall first investigate, lest you commit injustice towards some people, out of ignorance, then become sorry and remorseful for what you have done." (49:6)

The news that has been coming-out regarding the events of 9/11 have all been controlled through the investigative channels of the US government and have been fed to the press. (I DON'T DOUBT IT - BUT THE BUILDINGS AREN'T THERE ANYMORE, AND MY RELATIVES WITNESSED MUSLIMS IN THE LOCAL KEBAB SHOP DANCING FOR JOY AS IT WAS TELEVISED)

- This is a government built on the rights of the native Americans who were herded into 'reservations' and many of them massacred; (HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT THEY WERE THERE FIRST? IN FACT EVERY SOCIETY - WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ISRAEL - ABRAHAM BOUGHT THE LAND, OR WON IT IN DEFENSIVE WARS - IS PLANTED OVER THE TOP OF ANOTHER? THEY HAVE ACTUALLY FOUND EURO BONES THAT PREDATE THE INDIAN BONES IN NTH AMERICA. ALL OF THEM DIED VIOLENTLY WITH BLOWS TO THE HEAD - SIMILAR TO A TOMMOHAWKE WOUND. THIS IS HIGHLY PLAUSEABLE AS THE VIKINGS WERE GREAT SEA NAVAGATORS. SO MAYBE THE INDIANS WERN'T THE FIRST THERE, OR THE ONLY ONES THERE? WE DON'T KNOW. THAT HOWEVER DOESN'T EXCUSE TREATMENT OF THE INDIANS - BUT NOT ALL OF THEM WERE INNOCENT EITHER!! ITS ALL ACADEMIC REALLY. BESIDES MANY NATIVE AMERICANS WENT WILLINGLY TO DIE IN WW2 FOR THE USA - ITS A BIT DIFFERENT TO THE MUSLIM SOLDIERS THROWING GENADES AT THEIR USA COMRADES)

- This is the same government which told its people that Germany had sunk one of its ships to enter WWI (the ship it turned out was well in-tact with no such incident ever taking place)(IT DID GET SUNK, THEY DISCOVERED THAT IT WAS CARRYING ARMS, AND THE GERMANS HAD EVERY RIGHT UNDER ARTICLES OF WAR TO SINK IT - I HAVE ALSO SEEN DOCUMENTRIES INTERVIEWING THE SURVIVORS. 80 SOMETHING YEAR OLD PEOPLE HAVE NO REASON TO LIE ABOUT SUCH THINGS. TREASURE HUNTERS ARE NOW SPENDING HEAPS TO RECOVER IT, AS IT ALSO HAD GOLD ON BOARD);

- This is the same government which dropped TWO atomic bombs on civilians in Hiroshima & Nagasaki!; (AFTER THE JAPS BOMBED THE CRAP OUT OF PEARL HABOR - LUCKY THE YANKS HAVE EXTENDED MERCY TO THE MUSLIM WORLD SO FAR - MAYBE THE YANKS AREN'T AS BARBARIC AS PEOPLE MAKE OUT - BUT LIKE ANYONE THEY DO HAVE THEIR LIMITS - NOTE ALSO THAT THE ESTIMATED CASUALTIES OF US SERVICEMEN TO INVADE JAPAN WOULD HAVE BEEN IN THE TENS OF THOUSANDS, AND A SIMILAR AMOUNT OF JAPANESE WOULD HAVE DIED - A SIMILAR AMOUNT WHO DIED ANYWAY IN THE A-BOMB STRIKES. IF ANYTHING THE A-BOMB SAVED LIVES, AS IT FORCED JAPAN TO SURRENDER IN ITS WAR OF AGGRESSION - THAT SHE STARTED)

- This is the same government which created a big foe in 'Communism' and led to the Cold War which eventually led to the demise of the Soviet Union (during WWII, the US and USSR were allies against Germany - USSR was a Communist state then as well as later); (THE COMMUNISTS THREATENED THE WEST - JUST LIKE ISLAM IS. I HAVE VIETNAMESE FRIENDS HOW SUFFERED HORRIBLY AT THE HANDS OF COMMUNISTS - BUT LETS NOT MENTION THAT, NOR HOW MANY STALIN, MAO, CASTRO, POL POT ETC HAVE KILLED. THE WEST HAD EVERY RIGHT TO FIGHT COMMUNISM. AND THE POINT IS???? FIGHTING EVIL IS BAD? IS THAT WHAT THIS ISLAMIC WEB SITE IS SAYING? WAS THE JIHAD AGAINST THE USSR IN AFGANISTAN BAD ALSO, THEY WERE FIGHTING COMMUNISTS?)

- This is the same government which instigated the Korean war, and then later invented a crisis to place its forces in Vietnam; (ACTUALLY THE NORTH INVADED THE SOUTH IN BOTH CASES - HAVE A CHAT TO A SOUTH KOREAN - THE MOST PROSPEROUS OF THE TWO STATES ABOUT THAT SOMETIME)

- This is the same government which propagated the Gulf War by using the false testimony of the Kuwaiti Ambassador's daughter to Congress (she said she was a nurse in Kuwait and saw the Iraqi atrocities to the babies in the hospital)(ET AL ABOVE - SADDAM INVADED - TANKS ROLLING THROUGH KUWAIT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH ARAB DAUGHTERS IN CONGRESS - SATILLITE TECNOLOGY IS WONDERFUL);

- This is the same government which is still holding an 'embargo' against Iraq which has caused the death of over 1/2 million children (according to UNICEF -> THE UN - THE SAME BODY THAT WAS STEALING MONEY FROM THESE CHILDREN WITH THE OIL FOR FOOD PROGRAM - WHY IS YOUR ISLAMIC WEB SITE THOMAS SUPPORTING THESE UN THEIVES?). The US is stating that this decade long embargo is needed to rid Saddam of his weapons - the same weapons that the US government sold him!(ACTUALLY FRANCE, RUSSIA AND GERMANY SOLD HEAPS MORE AND MUCH MORE DEADLY TECHNOLOGY - NO MENTION OF THIS - THOMAS THIS IS VERY SELECTIVE AND VERY ANTI USA);

- This is the same government which went in to liberate Kuwait from Iraqi invasion, yet feeds Israel with money and arms to continue its invasion of Palestine!.
(AGAIN - VERY SELECTIVE. THE US GIVES THE SAME AMOUNT OF AID TO EGYPT, JORDAN, THE PA, AS IT DOES TO ISRAEL. IN FACT IF YOU ADDED UP WHAT THE USA GIVES TO THE ARABS, IT WOULD SURPASS THAT GIVEN TO THE ISRAELITES. PALESTINE THOMAS IS NOT A COUNTRY. IT IS ACTUALLY SUMERIA AND JUDEA - JEWISH LAND, LONG BEFORE THE MUSLIM INVASION)

Thomas, I'm sorry, but on closer inspection your website is nothing more than a wolf in sheeps clothing. It is scathing of the US. But the fact is, Australia AND NZ where you reside would not be what they are if were not for the "Great Satan" in WW2 (even if they entered it for selfish reasons - whoopy - we all act in self interest, that doesn't discount those US soldiers who died giving us Freedom).

Good point, we should have done this. That might be our next project. It is important. I have not been keeping track to see if the other principlaities have followed suit.

Thanks for this. Could you send thelink to the article. There are numerous authors on this website. I have found overall however the website to be an excellent resource for the Qur'anic approach to Islam. It shows, using a fairly methodical appraoch why Muslims should abandon ahadith and Sunnah. Also note that the website makes a solid theological argument against the death penalty for apostacy.

It might not have the perfect view on everything, but to me, in terms of theology, presents a way forward.

Sorry Thomas - what I should have said was that while its scathing of the US, the article was titled, "Who is presenting evidence" and then it goes on with half truths.

Critique yes - but, in my opinion, and with history to back it up, the Islamic web site is giving half truths to manipulate its opinion. This is the difference between propaganda and truth. Truth is consistent. It does not lie, it does not tell half truths for a half truth is but a lie. This website is not promoting "free minds". The bit about the A Bomb is really "old hat". The US actually warned the Jap's several times that they had the power to do something "big" BEFORE dropping the 1st bomb.

The US actions actually showed PATIENCE, for while the Japs were delaying, US soldiers were dying. How many societies would do that? The Japs ignored them, the US actually pleaded with the Japs to give up after the first bomb. History shows how hard hearted the Japs were back then. Thomas, what would you choose if it were your US sons dying at the hands of an agressor - what would you have done different from the US?

I'm getting the article for you now. Me harping on about the A Bomb - well it really gets to me when people bag the US for what they did = without thinking the situation through.

Thomas - doesn't all this inconsistency bother you - not only in the Koran (as you have stated) but also in the Website that you rely? I'm glad it works for you, and I'm glad you don't believe in "killing" infidels, but if my eternity was built on so many inconsistencies - man I'd be thinking, and I'd be worried.

http://www.free-minds.org/articles/politics/fitna.htm

- Thomas thats the article I posted above

Thanks

To 3rdtimelucky:
about your 02:02AM post-

"Thomas this is from your web site www.free-minds.org (my comments in CAPS)"

"Thomas, I'm sorry, but on closer inspection your website is nothing more than a wolf in sheeps clothing. It is scathing of the US."

Thanks 3rdtimelucky, for your analysis of the website and for bringing it to my, or rather our, attention. I really appreciate your defense of my country. The U.S. isn't perfect, but what country is?

To Thomas:

I find your website highly offensive. It's extremely anti-American. It all but calls the U.S. "the Great Satan". Referring Americans to this website is counter-productive to your cause.

I must be honest, I comptely loathe with what the Americans did to the Japanese. It was a shameful act that Americans should mourn. Did it end the war and cause more good than harm? Yes. But I will not celebrate it. It was a deliberate targeting of civilians, not the military. But again, I appreciate the hard decisions that had to be made. But not everyone will see it this way.

Not everyone will agree on the Palestinian-Israeli issue or the role of the US Iraq. This debate rages in non-Muslim circles as well. I will not condemn the website, which is a theological

Certain authors at this website may have different political opinions. That is fine. Most of the articles however are on point. We all do not have to agree with the standard conservative by line now do we?

I did not support the war in Iraq. I did not believe there was a justifiable legal basis. Nonetheless I support the effort now, and realise that the job must be complete.

Again, I read this website for its theological content, not its political ramblings. And you will find in most of the articles that this organisation supports general secular principles and provides a more humane vision of Islam that is being presented currently. But again, as you point out it is not perfect.

Excellent articles on the site:

http://www.free-minds.org/articles/hadith/hadithmyth.htm

http://www.free-minds.org/articles/hadith/conflict.htm

Cheers

To 3rdtimelucky:
about your 02:02AM post-

"Thomas this is from your web site www.free-minds.org (my comments in CAPS)"

"Thomas, I'm sorry, but on closer inspection your website is nothing more than a wolf in sheeps clothing. It is scathing of the US."

Thanks 3rdtimelucky, for your analysis of the website and for bringing it to my, or rather our, attention. I really appreciate your defense of my country. The U.S. isn't perfect, but what country is?

To Thomas:

I find your website highly offensive. It's extremely anti-American. It all but calls the U.S. "the Great Satan". Referring Americans to this website is counter-productive to your cause.

So if Islam ruled the world, then the Shia's and Sunni's would still be at each other's throats.

What's that about the religion of peace?

Hi Thomas

I read your second lot of links posted above. But again solely relying on the Koran, well you yourself has admitted that:-

1) You cannot take it literally

Doesn't this create a problem by then relying on its verses? Which ones can you choose and which ones can't you choose to rely on? And if you do choose, who are you to pick and choose which parts of 'god's word' applies and which ones don't? What about the numerous contradictions in the Koran (try highlighting the verses on death, hell, and war in red, and try highlighting the verses about loving your neighbor and god in green)?

God is constant, not to mention perfect, so he wouldn't contradict Himself.

Of interest in the article was:-

"that a MESSENGER will come to CONFIRM PREVIOUS SCRIPTURE"

That actually contradicts the 4th and 3rd last verse in the Bible, where it says. "don't add to the words, don’t take away". In other words, Revelation by John was the last. Confirm? Love in the Bible is mentioned heaps and heaps of times (if you want the stat's say so - it will take me time to find it), in fact its commanded that we love one another. Nowhere in the Koran is such a command, so how does it confirm 'scripture'?

I'm also yet to find any "quirky" things in the Koran that prove God wrote it.

Take the book of Numbers, where it goes into the Numbers of each tribe and how they had to camp in the desert around the Ark. It's incredibly boring. But on close inspection you will find that the shape the encampment made was a huge cross - long before crucifixion existed. The tribal symbols around the Ark, the Ox, The Eagle, The Lion, The Man - the same faces you find in Revelation and Daniel. They are also represented by the men who wrote the Gospel - Matthew presented Christ as the Messiah, showed his genealogy from the tribe of Judah, tribal symbol = The Lion. Mark, protrayed Christ as a servant, symbol = The Ox. Luke, protrayed Christ as the Son of Man; symbol = Man. John protrayed Christ as the Son of God; symbol = Eagle (Dan).

The Bible has consistency in such an intricate way - man couldn't have written it on his own. I mean think about it, - 40 different authors - ever played Chinese whispers? It should be full of deviations. The Koran, one man - and its full of contradictions and abrogation’s. Think about it.

There is heaps more but other posters would be, well sick of me by now (especially Brownwonder)- that show the consistency of the Bible. But there are none in the Koran?

Note to self: "Do not piss off Terminator".

Ouch.

Havoc:

Could you expand on your statement: "no Muslims", "no mosques"? I have a good idea what you are trying to say, but could you flush this out a bit? Does genocide enter into the equation to attain these goals? How can this practically be achieved?

Yours sincerely

Thomas

Thomas? If the mosques are not stopped - genocide is exactly what will take place....and here is why:

004.101 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.

009.030 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; in this they but imitate what ''' the unbelievers ''' of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

009.123 O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you.

047.004 Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks. [Behead them!]

It has already been exposed that Saidi Arabia is 'spreading hate teachings' {I guess a code phrase so as not to alarm the public] - the Saudi government takes the Koran more litterally than most other Islamic nations [excluding Iran]

Feed those teachings to the young? and America is going to reap what she sows.

As for the solution? America has already rejected it....her ONLY solution.

"Also migration to a Muslim land expatiates sins."

brownwonder? 009.030 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; in this they but imitate what ''' the unbelievers ''' of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

009.123 O ye who believe! fight '''the unbelievers'''' who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you.

047.004 Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks.

What kind of sense does it make to mix those kind of believers in with a majority Christian society?

You have no right to strip me of my citizenship or rights unless I am a subjective threat

Thomas - no has the right to strip you of your citizenship - unless you commit treason.

The United States Constitution says so.

If you 'collaborate' with these following teachings - then doesn't that make you guilty of commiting treason?

004.094 O ye who believe! When ye ''''go abroad'''' in the cause of Allah, investigate carefully, and say not to any one who offers you a salutation: "Thou art none of a believer!" Therefore carefully investigate.

004.100 He who forsakes his home in the cause of Allah, finds in the earth Many a refuge, wide and spacious.

008.074 Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith, in the cause of Allah as well as those who give them asylum and aid, - these are all in very truth the Believers. \Treason!

004.101 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.

009.004 But the treaties are not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term.

009.005 But - when the forbidden months are past [when the 'treaties' expire} then fight and slay the Pagans "wherever" ye find them - and seize them, beleaguer them and lie in wait for them - in every stratagem of war.

009.029 Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission - and feel themselves subdued.

002.193 And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah.

008.067 It is not fitting for a prophet that he should have prisoners of war [slay them] until he hath thoroughly subdued the land.

Those words from allah are inciting treason Thomas. They also preach murder - another violation.

And what about you brownwonder? Aren't those teachings of the Koran inciting treason?

They also incite a massive slaughter against all who believe in the Son of God - along with those who don't believe in God at all.

Unless Americans who don't want to loose the freedom that they know - they will take those very words of allah - and they will play them like a broken record - because some JUST DON"T GET IT - if we don't.

They clearly violate ALL humanitarian laws.

Who deleted my post? @#%*

"You cannot take it literally"

Thomas - that ONLY means one thing then: That your allah can not be taken - litterally.

his words are deceptive - and murderous. And for the very fact that he likes to refer to the Bible a lot - don't you think that a God Who condemns ALL forms of violence between all humans is a better way?

I am in no way trying to convert you. I'm not your teacher - and never will be.

BUT - setting that argument aside - the question still remains - Is there a better way - For ALL of mankind?

There is heaps more but other posters would be, well sick of me by now

3rdtimelucky - not the ones who can see the True solution.

I believe they are the ones who are 'on the dry land'

The sea is parting [left and right] - and Pharoah's army is persuing.

ever played Chinese whispers?

Yes! We played it in school. Amazing game - isn't it?

3rdtimelucky,

Many thanks for locating this crap on the "free" Muslims website. Thanks to you, I conclude that Kamal Nawash is a FRAUD.

Others (You know who you are),

Please lighten up on the anti-Muslim rhetoric. We CANNOT fight the bigotry of Islam when we make sweeping statements that can be interpreted as bigotry. We CAN fight Islam without violating the first ammendment if we focus our efforts on the words of the Koran and Hadith that are clearly subversive to liberal democracy (like Sharia and military jihad).

Please lighten up on the anti-Muslim rhetoric. We CANNOT fight the bigotry of Islam when we make sweeping statements that can be interpreted as bigotry. We CAN fight Islam without violating the first ammendment if we focus our efforts on the words of the Koran and Hadith that are clearly subversive to liberal democracy (like Sharia and military jihad).

Andrei Rublev - thank you.

That is the key - to exposing and destroying an enemy to freedom.

Another great post Hugh. I'm quickly becoming a fan.
One request don't mention obscure philosphers and authors and don't use esoteric words and terms.

I'm educated, but not that educated.

Beth: You mean well, but are a dreamer. There is no chance of "taking down Allah". Have you ever argued with a Muslim? Here's a sample. They believe that anyone who reads the Qur'an, Will see the light, know the truth, and if one persists in non belief after reading the Qur'an, then one is of Shaytan and are being deliberately deceptive.

In other words they have your same belief, opinion or view as regards the divine "beauty" and truth of their belief. Try also conversing with converts to Islam from Christianity, it only gets worse.

Robert Thanks a ton for the link to Jane Novak.

I take the liberty of requoting her here.

Free Muslims Against Terrorism.Org is sponsoring a March Against Terrorism Mar 14, 2005. in Washington DC, The Reform Party of Syria is in, , and Kurds, Assyrains, Lebanese, Kopts, Pakistanis, among others.

But where prey tell is that loudmouth idiot Zogby and his group? Still too busy trashing the US in the Arab News to take a stand against terrorism? LGF: Noticeably absent: CAIR, the Muslim Students Association, the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, and the Islamic Society of North America.

Maybe CAIR would join if they called it A March Against Terrorism Except When Its Legitimate Resistance, Then Its OK To Kill Babies or maybe a March Against Terrorism Against Muslims but Wipe Out All the Infidels and Apostates You Want. I’m out of aspirin, can you tell? I’m also cross eyed from research. I have a very lot of research to do for a new project. You really have to hand it to FMAT. Its a good organization.

Said Jane @ 5:32 am

Maybe I should ask her if she knows of any fatwa of kufr or irtidad issued against Islamist terrorists.
I'm positive that the answer is no, not even the Madrid Fatwa recently issued was of any import.

Comments to 3rd time lucky and to Thomas.

Thomas first

I feel sorrowful for my fellow Muslims who are good Americans and who do not take the Qur'an and ahadith literally.

But that is the problem Thomas, Muslims who take the Qur'an and ahadith literally. Then you go to reject the ahadith (which is a contradiction of the above), however a hadith rejector is an apostate, a sham mulsim as you should well know. I a kaffir know that (and much much more).

Qur'an, ahadith, sira all part of Shari'ah, and Islam is Shari'a, without Shari'ah there is no Islam.

And it is impossible to take ALL of the Qur'an literally, because Ubul Qassim constantly abroggated himself, as new needs arose and he needed to justify his actions, by putting Allah on his knee and speaking the justifying prose.

For instance: His earlier "there is no compulsion in religion" was abroggated later by the verse of the sword.

And there is not only internal evidence of contradiction and changing his mind, but if Allah believed that sperm issued from between the rib and the backbone, then that alone is proof that the work is not of God.

However that which lies between the backbone and the rib is the prostrate gland, which is also the gland of male sexual orgasm and arousal, in fact if stimulated it will cause orgasm and ejaculation. Now how did Ubul Qassim know that?

Second issue: How can you be a loyal and trusted citizen of any country in Darul Harb? The abode of infidels. When you are forbidden to, on pain of damnation, by Ubul Qassim. You have two choices to be an Muslim and thus loyal (to the point of taqiyyah and kitman to avoid fitnah... and fitnah is worse than slaughter) your Ummah and the Moslemah or to be an apostate and pledge loyalty to Dar al Harb.

You cannot be both a loyal citizen of Dar al Harb and be a TRUE Muslim at the same time. You have to make a choice, and if you choose Dar al Harb, then you renounce Islam and become murtadd and forefiet your life and property.

3rd Time Lucky:

What consistency are you talking about in the Bible. I will limit my examples to just two.
Two contradictory versions of creation in Genesis, two contradictory versions of the geneaology of Jesus in the New Testament. I just googled Biblical Contradictions and came up with 419,000 hits, but this one will do for starters (if you read it address the issue, not the source} Biblical Contradictions

I also google Qur'an Contradictions and came up with 22,300 hits, including Muslim sites which attempt (but fail) to answer the contradictions.

Notice that the Qur'anic contradiction site is Christian, who fails to follow the injunction of removing the beam from his own eye before pointing out the mote in the other.

On the other hand, being a lapsed Catholic, what that church has going for it is, that it doesn't rely on the Bible or it's literalness for dogma. As it's source of authority is the line of succession of Petrus (the Pope).

Hmm, a lot of modernist (liberal) Protestant churches don't take the Bible literally, it is only Dominionists and Evangelicals who try and take the Bible literally, thus placing them in the same baliwick as Muslims who take the Qur'an literally.

In other words they have your same belief, opinion or view as regards the divine "beauty" and truth of their belief. Try also conversing with converts to Islam from Christianity, it only gets worse.

Giaour - No , they don't.

And you keep missing my point - which actually is not a point - but a fact.

The words of the Koran are the problem... [the very cause of Islamic violence] and I will give specific ones - of which I think you will agree in no uncertain terms - that they are?

If not - then help to explain them.

The title of this website is 'Jihad Watch'

[Correct me if I missed something there]

And after I give them....there won't be ANY New Testament Scriptures following.

Why?

Because this about where the violence is coming from - and there aren't any Scriptures to be given.

You can go and look for some to give - but believe me - you'll only be wasting your time.

And that needs to be said - to keep the focus on the cause - rather than diverting to "the blame tactic"

What is causing so much horrid bloodshed in the name of Islam?...

004.101 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.

008.074 Those who believe, and adopt exile, and fight for the Faith, in the cause of Allah as well as those who give them asylum and aid, - these are all in very truth the Believers.

[That is treason - in America. It is a serious violation]

004.092 Never should a believer kill a believer [But the 'unbelievers' - they are commanded to slay. That includes ALL who believe in the Son of God...

009.030 The Jews call 'Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouth; in this they but imitate what ''' the unbelievers ''' of old used to say. Allah's curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the Truth!

009.123 O ye who believe! fight the unbelievers who gird you about, and let them find firmness in you.

047.004 Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers in fight, smite at their necks. [Behead them!]

Thereby, provoking massive bloodshed Giaour - in America....simply because the overwhelming of them claim to be Christians.

008.067 It is not fitting for a prophet that he should have prisoners of war [slay them] until he hath thoroughly subdued the land.

Again - that is treason Giaour, in America

009.004 But the treaties are not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term.

009.005 But when the forbidden months are past [when the 'treaties' expire} then fight and slay the Pagans ''''wherever'''' ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war.

Giaour? Why would you choose to ignore the most serious and provacative incitement to carry out mass murder this world has ever seen?

Is it because you'd rather these Truths not be exposed?

Or is it because you haven't seen those teachings yet?

Because they are atrocious - beyond words.

What do you think of them?

Try also conversing with converts to Islam from Christianity, it only gets worse.

I'm not their teacher - and never claimed to be.

I will never be their teacher.

I'm only sharing was is available to all - and it is powerful

I just googled Biblical Contradictions and came up with 419,000 hits {Quote by Giaour]

3rdtimelucky? Yeah - and one of them that they are very proud of - is about the number stalls Solomon had for his horses.

In One Scripture it says he had 4000.

In another Scripture - it says he had 40,000.

But those who would rather twist the Scriptures unto their own destruction - have overlooked this:

1Ki 9:10 And it came to pass at the end of twenty years, when Solomon had built the two houses, the house of the LORD, and the king's house.

There where TWO houses.

They LOVE the one about stoning - and again - have twisted the Scriptures unto their own destruction.

You can look at these - if you'd like to take a closer look http://palestinename.com/stonings.htm

In short - Jesus is the Stone.

It is His Word spoken through the mouths of His servants that 'stone' them to death. [This death is the eternal one]

And it is the angels [NOT HUMANS] who carry out the punishment at the end.

This isn't even the tip of the iceberg when it comes to twisting the Scriptures - but if your interested in finding others that they love to twist - Just remember:

You don't need anyone to teach you. You can go look in the Bible for yourselves.

As far as choosing Christianity? That's your own business.

Those who think that I'm trying to convert others - are not being truthful.

Because I haven't even touched upon the Scriptures that would.

That's NOT what Jihad Watch is about

Giaour:

You have no bsuiness telling me, what as a Muslim I should or should not believe. You do not have a monopoly on Islam.

3rd Time and others: Again, www.free-minds.org, in my view, is an excellent source for the argument that Sunnah should be de-emphasised or abolished in Islam. It is not perfect, but it is a way forward.

Cheers
Thomas

Hugh,

You may be long-winded, but I still support you for Secretary of State!

Rational Islamophobe,

As you already know, Muslims cannot be consistent with the requirements of Islam and simultaneously truthfully swear to uphold the Constitution.

Please add to your list of possible actions the legal prohibition against Muslims participating in any situation requiring an oath to support/defend of the Constitution.

This would include naturalization, many political offices, membership in the armed forces, many judgships, and many, many, other sensitive positions.

Given that any Muslim who has been naturalized is guilty of fraud, I would support the stripping of citizenship from any naturalized Muslim.

Such an exclusion would substantially slow the progress of the Islamic fifth column in this country.

Susan,

"Muslims don't know what honor and pride are."

Quran please?

Treehugger,

"Hugh-are you saying that you can't sympathize at all with a Pakistani woman wanting to get out as fast as possible? Given that Pakastani men seem to be addicted to wife burning and lots of other fun fundamentalist games?"

YOu know being burned isnt such a bad thing. The body does send chemicals to the body and people will eventually not feel the burning sensation. Also other way for Muslims to recieve matrydom is by being burned, killed in jiha,d drowned, die in child birth, some stomach diseases, killed by an animal, you can die a marytr in your bed, based on your intentions of going for jihad.

Under the Sharia you cant burn a Muslim, not even cremating is permissible. THe Paksitanis take wife burning from the Hindus. You see why it is important not to imitate the kafur?

How about allowing only limited FEMALE muslim immigration to the west?

Some sisters are even more jihadi than the men. foolish girls.

"Giaour: Two contradictory versions of creation in Genesis (ACTUALLY I ONLY SEE ONE VERSION), two contradictory versions of the geneaology of Jesus in the New Testament (ACTUALLY THERE ISN'T - ONE IS THE LEGAL GENEAOLOGY, ONE IS THE PHYSICAL). I just googled Biblical Contradictions and came up with 419,000 hits (OF COURSE YOU DID - I COULD DO THE SAME FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE GIAOUR - SO WHO'S RIGHT AND WHO'S WRONG - ITS AN OLD FIGHT - IT'S WHY PILATE SAID, "WHAT IS TRUTH???"), but this one will do for starters (if you read it address the issue, not the source}"

Giaour - I would love to go into this - but as this is JW and would be out of place. However suffice to say that Humanism/atheism have killed billions in its short life - and I have a feeling that you are a Humanist (correct me if I'm wrong).

Obviously you are not going to convince me of any contradiction in the Bible. But if you are serious about these so called contradictions - get hold of a book called "Cosmic Codes" by Chuck Missler (an american) - he gets right into the so called bible contradictions - the book will seriously challenge your mind. Also I can give you plenty of other sources if you want, I look at, and question such contradictions all the time in Bible study - and suffice to say, I'm yet to be convinced that the Bible isn't divine - in fact reading on from the "contradition" - I see otherwise.

But on a different note at least we can agree on one thing. While the Humanist and Christian have been waging a fight against each other in the West since Darwin's book of evolution (even though many top secular scientists are now questioning evolution - eg the bloke who discovered DNA for one), rarely have either of us sought to destroy the other using whatever means are available, rather the two sides have debated and used the democratic process, and unfortuneatly the court room. The Islamists is a little more abosolute. While you can tolerate me, I can tolerate you - the Islamists will only tolerate if we convert. You must agree on that?

Everybody believes in something - including you Giaour. To me the terms "atheist" or "Humanist" is the greatest in oxymoran terms - but thats my opinion (eg I don't BELIEVE in anything!)

And on a final note - Christian and Humanist - both are in the firing line when it comes to the true Muslim. They may seek to divide and conquer, but in the end they will screw us both.

Giaour - from your web site
"Note that there are "days", "evenings", and "mornings" before the Sun was created. Here, the Deity is referred to as "Elohim", which is a plural, thus the literal translation, "the Gods". In this tale, the Gods seem satisfied with what they have done, saying after each step that "it was good".

The second one (Genesis 2), the Yahwist tradition, goes:

Earth and heavens (misty)
Adam, the first man (on a desolate Earth)
Plants
Animals
Eve, the first woman (from Adam's rib)"

May I suggest that you look at the Bible in the original Hebrew context? Especially as this site is using Hebrew terms - Elohim does not mean "gods"

Beth - I agree!!

Susan,

"Muslims don't know what honor and pride are."

Quran please?

Posted by: brownwonder at May 9, 2005 08:21 PM

What planet are you from? Sorry, I threw my Qur'an away when I realized that only Arabic speakers can understand what it really says but I can tell you this, there's nothing in it about honor, pride, humility. Nor does it mention divine or human compassion and decency. If I wanted to be a savage homicidal maniac, I could teach myself. I gleaned nothing from the Qur'an that wasn't absurd, obscene, heinous,or Satanic.

A book written centuries ago, many years after your putative prophet died, is not a reliable guide to the universe. In case you haven't heard, there have been a few developments in the world since the Middle Ages. The Qur'an is an Arabic fairy tale and a war manifesto, but you should have memorized it verbatim if you're a good muslim. What's wrong, don't you understand Arabic?

Let just muslim women immigrate? You mean women like brownwonder?
Remember the celebrations on 9-11?

http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=4030
Not the women either.

Carolyn...Brownwonder already immigrated...she said she had lived in Berkeley, Ca USA. She walked to the Ashby Bart Station on wkends and bought stuff at a flea mkt. I lived in the same area for seven years...she knows the territory...Knowing that she has been Berkeleyized explains a lot...That was the key to breaking her Salfic code.

Susan,

"What planet are you from? Sorry, I threw my Qur'an away when I realized that only Arabic speakers can understand what it really says but I can tell you this, there's nothing in it about honor, pride, humility."

You know the complier of Sahih Bukhari was a central Asian Muslim from Bukhar Tajikistan. He wasnt an arab but his book of hadith is the most authentic in the Muslim world. Except with those filthy Shia.

"I gleaned nothing from the Qur'an that wasn't absurd, obscene, heinous,or Satanic."

Ok then, go read your bible and learn how to stone your wife to death when her father cant prove she was a virgin on her wedding day.

Hmm! Whats that smell?

Susan,

"What planet are you from? Sorry, I threw my Qur'an away when I realized that only Arabic speakers can understand what it really says but I can tell you this, there's nothing in it about honor, pride, humility."

You know the complier of Sahih Bukhari was a central Asian Muslim from Bukhar Tajikistan. He wasnt an arab but his book of hadith is the most authentic in the Muslim world. Except with those filthy Shia.

"I gleaned nothing from the Qur'an that wasn't absurd, obscene, heinous,or Satanic."

Ok then, go read your bible and learn how to stone your wife to deaath when her father cant prove she was a virgin on her wedding day.

Hmm! Whats that smell?

Duh Swami,

"Carolyn...Brownwonder already immigrated...she said she had lived in Berkeley, Ca USA. She walked to the Ashby Bart Station on wkends and bought stuff at a flea mkt. I lived in the same area for seven years...she knows the territory...Knowing that she has been Berkeleyized explains a lot...That was the key to breaking her Salfic code."

DuhMi, I only lived there for a few months. I would I tell you people where I live now, I have my family here, you think I would expose them to you people? YOu must be crazy. Besides I am an American, born and bred. My family is an immigrant one.

Susan,

I think Imam Bukhari was from Uzbekistan, but central Asian definetly. There was a very famous Muslim Scholar,pst away in the 90s, I mean a major scholar by the name of Muhammed Nasir ud-Deen Al Albani, from Albania. He was a Muhadith, a person of hadith. I hear that he had this huge library and that if you read to him a sentence from a book he would be able to tell you the paragraph, page and book it came from.

Here is his site:

http://www.albani.co.uk/

It isnt mandatory for a Muslim to learn Arabic but if you want to further your Islamic studies you best learn the language. Maybe I will memorize the Quran but until then, I use ayats and Surahs from the Quran in my prayers. So long as Muslims fulfil thier obligations to thier lord than all is well. InshaAllah...

Susan,

I think Imam Bukhari was from Uzbekistan, but central Asian definetly. There was a very famous Muslim Scholar,pst away in the 90s, I mean a major scholar by the name of Muhammed Nasir ud-Deen Al Albani, from Albania. He was a Muhadith, a person of hadith. I hear that he had this huge library and that if you read to him a sentence from a book he would be able to tell you the paragraph, page and book it came from.

Here is his site:

http://www.albani.co.uk/

It isnt mandatory for a Muslim to learn Arabic but if you want to further your Islamic studies you best learn the language. Maybe I will memorize the Quran but until then, I use ayats and Surahs from the Quran in my prayers. So long as Muslims fulfil thier obligations to thier lord than all is well. InshaAllah...

Giaour: - re Elohim yes its used as a plural - (eg Father Son and Holy Spirit - even Christ refered to these!):-

from http://www.khouse.org/articles/1995/42/:-
We discover that, from the first verse of Genesis, Elohim is a plural noun used with singular verbs. (THE DEFINIFITION ON YOUR SCEPTIC SITE IGNORED THIS) This plurality even shows up in our English translations in Genesis 1:26, 3:22, and 11: 7.

If we examine the text in Ecclesiastes 12:1, we note that the source text is also in the plural:

Remember now thy Creator(s) in the days of thy youth, while the evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them;

Also, Isaiah 54:5:

For thy Maker(s) [is] thine husband; the Lord of hosts [is] his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.

The famous Old Testament benediction, Numbers 6:24-27:

The Lord bless thee, and keep thee: (The benevolent love of God, the Father of mercies and fountain of all good);
The Lord make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: (The redeeming and reconciling grace of our Lord Jesus Christ);
The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. (The purity, consolation, and joy received by the communion of the Holy Spirit. )

Compare this with the New Testament benediction in 2 Corinthians 13:14:

The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, [be] with you all. Amen.

Elohim - is used to describe the plurality of God in the Bible (again shows the diferent dimension - other than the physical that exists, and how God transends them). If you really want more Giaour,http://www.khouse.org/articles/1995/42/

Someone REALLY doesn't know where the prostate gland is located.

Someone REALLY doesn't know where the prostate gland is located.

Posted by: CGW

CGW - you're point is?????

t isnt mandatory for a Muslim to learn Arabic but if you want to further your Islamic studies you best learn the language. Maybe I will memorize the Quran but until then, I use ayats and Surahs from the Quran in my prayers. So long as Muslims fulfil thier obligations to thier lord than all is well. InshaAllah...

Posted by: brownwonder at May 10, 2005 01:55 AM

Brownwonder, I have been studying Islam for almost twenty-five years. You might say that Islam is an obsession of mine, although I am a devout and practicing Christian. The knowledge I have acquired about Islam has reinforced my Christian beliefs and actually made me a better Christian.

From my perspective, Islam is the biggest scam ever perpetrated against humanity. Muhammad, if he even existed, was a greedy, blood-thirsty, medieval warlord with a voracious sex-drive. He probably suffered from epilepsy and imbibed hallucinogenic substances, which induced his dreams or "trips." His companions, being the superstitious pagans that they were, attributed his bizarre behavior to a supernatural influence, and began haphazardly recording his incoherent babbling while he was high on the equivalent of LSD, PCP, or magic mushrooms. Eventually, they convinced him that the spirits were communicating with him, which flattered his macho ego, elevated him to a lofty and powerful position, and allowed him to get the pick of the booty, slaves, and plenty of sex.

I could elaborate further with my theories, but what's the point? You're convinced that Islam is the only true religion and I'm convinced that it's a farce. If it was an innocuous farce, we wouldn't be here right now. But it is a very malevolent farce (force) that threatens the world, so it's back to the salt mines.

I think I'll pass on learning Arabic. I'm busy right now trying to warn my fellow citizens about Islam. Or you could say that I'm recruiting soldiers for a different Salvation Army, the one that will save Western Civilization. It's a very important job and it requires much of my time.

3rdtimelucky:

I was referring to Giaour's post above where reference is made to the production of sperm in the unholy qur'an and then the location of the prostate gland is indicated "between the ribs and the spine".

Thanks CGW - wan't sure.

Susanp - well said!