Up from 141. "Italy to expel 700 suspected militants," from ISN Security Watch, with thanks to The One Who Must Not Be Named:
ISN SECURITY WATCH (16/08/05) – The Italian police on Monday said they had arrested more than 100 suspected Muslim militants and planned to expel hundreds more in a massive “anti-terror” sweep made possible by new legislation granting broader powers to police.More than 141 suspected militants have been arrested, and officials claim to have questioned 32,000 suspects since the introduction of new anti-terrorism legislation last month.
In late July, the Italian parliament passed legislation granting greater powers to police and making it easier to detain people on suspicion of membership in a militant group. Civil liberties groups have harshly criticized the legislation.
The move comes only weeks after one of the suspects in the failed 21 July attack on the London transport system, Hussain Osman, was detained in Rome. Osman is among 701 people Italy plans to expel or extradite for alleged involvement in terrorist activities.
The arrests also coincide with warnings from Italian Interior Minister Giuseppe Pisanu, who said that though there was no specific evidence of an impending attack, the risk was real and had forced Italy into an intense and prolonged state of alarm in the wake of the July bombings in London and Egypt.
Wonder if Oriana Fallaci's writings have had an impact on this? She is condemned in public and a group of "vigilante" types that organized secretly to confront this problem were arrested in Italy a few months ago. I haven't heard anything since about that. At least Italy is taking the threats seriously for now. I guess the planned attacks on the water system got their attention finally after London.
Borg:
Paolo, I'm sure can speak to this with far greater accuracy than I can, but although Oriana is facing charges, they were brought against her by a Muslim professional agitator who also campaigned to have crucifixes removed from Italian classroooms. The judge who agreed to hear the case, did so despite recommendations to the contrary by a prosecutor. It remains to be seen as to whether she will be convicted.
The Italian people went through hell as the authorities struggled against the Mafia in the 1970s and 80s, not to mention the activities of ultra-left radicals. I suspect the vast majority are just as appalled by what the jihaddists are trying to inflict on their country as Oriana is.
It is good to see some governments in Europe begin to take action against Islamic zealots. In the UK the courts will make it difficult to eject them due to it's interpretation of the Human Rights Act as being more important in law than the rights of the citizens to protection from these animals.
I guarantee other members of the EU who have also signed up to this garbage do not have a problem with deportation.
Here in the UK we seem to like housing feeding and nurturing assholes. Will we ever do what is right?
Given that Italy's Muslim settlers number around 1 million, and 32,000 have been suspected of persuing jihad, we can say that 3.2% of the Italian Umma are probably terrorists, or will be in the future. And those are just the ones the Italians have detected...
Osman is among 701 people Italy plans to expel or extradite for alleged involvement in terrorist activities.
Robert at August 17, 2005 06:25 AM
Given that Italy's Muslim settlers number around 1 million, and 32,000 have been suspected of persuing jihad, we can say that 3.2% of the Italian Umma are probably terrorists, or will be in the future.
St Dunstan at August 17, 2005 09:18 AM
So, Italy would be expelling 32,000 Italian settlers soon. Which country is the beneficiary of this reverse brain drain? We believe Italy allowed them to settle because their talents were considered to be useful for Italy.
"We believe Italy allowed them to settle because their talents were considered to be useful for Italy."
Of course you do, Mohideen.
We believe that they were allowed to settle there because of a misguided and foolish immigration policy fostered by the European Union, otherwise known as Eurabia.
http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/083864077X/qid=1124288873/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_2_1/701-5667049-4766764
Do it. It is one of a government's duties to protect it's citizens from dangerous conditions. That's why toxic waste sites are reclaimed, that's why all manner of laws are passed to control drugs/firearms/vehicular operation, laws which the citizens agree to abide by for the health and well-being of all. So too then, a government is required to effect the removal of individuals who have expressed their desire to do harm to the country they reside in.
Democracy depends on the willing cooperation, in good faith, of the members of society. To leave in place those who would actively work towards the degradation or destruction of the democracy is suicide, and insanity.
St Dunstan:
-Quote-
Given that Italy's Muslim settlers number around 1 million, and 32,000 have been suspected of persuing jihad, we can say that 3.2% of the Italian Umma are probably terrorists, or will be in the future. And those are just the ones the Italians have detected...
-Quote-
I haven't got time to look up the original source right now, but didn't a recent poll in the UK suggest that about 2% of Muslims in the UK support violence against UK citizens? Assuming a total UK Muslim population of about 1.5 million, this equates to about 30,000 individuals, if my Maths is correct. Quite close to the Italian estimate! Worrying numbers lost on the mainstream media, who reasoned, at the time of the survey, that 2% is really a very small and hence insignificant percentage!
Mohideen-
Any contribution that muslims can/are willing to make to western society is ffset by
(1) no loyalty to the host country,
(2) followed by the failure to police their own communities,
(3) compounded by the failure of many immigrants to even attempt contributing to their host countries (see Pakistani welfare figures for the UK),
(4) and the desire of a certain portion of the population to kill infidels.
What a bargin! Sarc on/
Boudicca:
So, In England one in fifty muslims wants us dead, whilst in Italy the figure is one in thirty. Both figures are pretty informative, and both figures illustrate the short-sightedness of those who object to muslims attracting the attention of the police more often than average.
Mohideen sez:
"We believe Italy allowed them to settle because their talents were considered to be useful for Italy."
Talents such as:
Sedition, proselytizing, agitating, fomenting hatred, living of welfare, breeding like rats, desecrating churches, conspiring to commit acts of terror?
Italy will fix 'em once the bombs go off!
We believe that they were allowed to settle there because of a misguided and foolish immigration policy fostered by the European Union, otherwise known as Eurabia.
http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/083864077X/qid=1124288873/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_2_1/701-5667049-4766764
Mentat at August 17, 2005 10:28 AM
The link given by Mentat is about a book written by Ye’or Bat and Bat Ye’or. This book was published during January 2005. The following review – the only review as of now – has the following:
===
Where many Muslims claim that a Jewish conspiracy controls America, Ye'or holds that Muslims now control Europe:
…
In interpreting recent events, Ye'or moves beyond solid history into the realm of conspiracy theory. And she does this kind of writing very well. Her arguments are compelling. Her indictments of hate crimes by Muslims are damning. Her knowledge is vast and her memory is long. She does not forget a crime against her people. For Ye'or, it seems that the difficult path towards forgiveness and civil relations is closed.
===
The above review is written by Brian Griffith, author of “The Gardens of Their Dreams: Desertification and Culture in World History.” A review of Griffith’s book is given at:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1856497992/qid=1124313861/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-3858169-5682304?v=glance&s=books
A review of the book by Griffith has:
===
The author interestingly shows how women are the first to suffer from environmental degradation. He uses the examples of lands facing - or that have faced - important desertification processes to show how a liberal society where men and women share more or less equal status can shift to favor the dominance of males.
===
The above possibly explains how the religion of Islam based on the Holy Quran has resulted in getting perceived as harsh on women. However, the Holy Quran says as below in 39:6:
===
39:6 He created you (all) from a single person: then created of like nature his mate; and He sent down for you eight head of cattle in pairs: He makes you in the wombs of your mothers in stages one after another in three veils of darkness. Such is Allah your Lord and Cherisher: to Him belongs (all) dominion. There is no god but He: then how are ye turned away (from your true Center)?
===
God Almighty created both males and females of like nature. Possibly the desert environment – causing the mother to stay home looking after the children, and the father to be exposed to the harsh environment – resulted in male domination.
Indeed, Islam is more inclined to the female than the male. A separate day was fixed for the female alone to receive instruction as given in Tradition numbered 413 in Volume 9 of Sahih Al-Bukhari:
===
Narrated Abu Said
A woman came to Allah's Apostle and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Men (only) benefit by your teachings, so please devote to us from (some of) your time, a day on which we may come to you so that you may teach us of what Allah has taught you." Allah's Apostle said, "Gather on such-and-such a day at such-and-such a place." They gathered and Allah's Apostle came to them and taught them of what Allah had taught him. He then said, "No woman among you who has lost her three children (died) but that they will screen her from the Fire." A woman among them said, "O Allah's Apostle! If she lost two children?" She repeated her question twice, whereupon the Prophet said, "Even two, even two, even two!" (See Hadith No. 341, Vol. 2)
===
Another Tradition on the same question is the one numbered 25b in Volume 4 of Fiqh-us-Sunnah:
===
The Reward of a Person Losing a Child
Bukhari reported from Anas that the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: "A Muslim who loses three of his children before they come of age will be brought to Paradise by Allah as a mercy to him for losing them."
Bukhari and Muslim reported from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri that he said: "Some women asked the Prophet, peace be upon him: 'Appoint a (separate) day to (admonish) us.' The Prophet, peace be upon him, told them: 'If a (Muslim) woman's three children die, they will be a protection for her from Hell.' A woman asked him, 'And what if two of her children die?' He replied: 'And (even) if two of her children die'."
===
As a separate day was fixed for giving instructions to women, no such day was fixed for the men. A man is granted the mercy of Paradise if he loses three children, whereas a woman is granted Paradise if she loses two children only.
We recounted all these just to show that Islam, if properly understood, would bring happiness to all.
Worrying numbers lost on the mainstream media, who reasoned, at the time of the survey, that 2% is really a very small and hence insignificant percentage!
Boudicca at August 17, 2005 11:38 AM
Most surveys have a sampling error of 3% to 4%. Thus, 2% is less than the sampling error. So also is 3.2% in Italy. Thus, making a policy based on sampling errors is extremely unfair to the affected population.
Mohideen:
I couldn't care less what your 'profit' says.
I am concerned about Jihad warfare, Islamic hatred and terror that threatens our way of life.
Obviously, nobody "properly understands" Islam, otherwise there wouldn't be mayhem and murder wherever Mohammedans reside.
Pack it in!
It is strange that France can deport muslim fanatics at the drop of a hat while Britain is unable to. Both France and Britain have signed up to the same EU HR convention, so what gives.
I read that France is even bringing in a law that will allow it to deport muslim fanatics who are born and raised in France.
Talents such as:
… proselytizing …
Terminator at August 17, 2005 06:24 PM
From http://www.answers.com/proselytize&r=67 we find:
===
proselytize
v.intr.
1. To induce someone to convert to one's own religious faith.
2. To induce someone to join one's own political party or to espouse one's doctrine.
v.tr.
To convert (a person) from one belief, doctrine, cause, or faith to another.
===
What are we doing in this site, discussing with each other? Are we not trying to persuade one to another point of view? How can one hold proselytizing as a crime?
Italy will fix 'em once the bombs go off!
Terminator at August 17, 2005 06:24 PM
As in 9/11 in USA and 7/7 in UK by false flag operations carried out by their own governments?
Obviously, nobody "properly understands" Islam, otherwise there wouldn't be mayhem and murder wherever Mohammedans reside.
Terminator at August 17, 2005 07:35 PM
Really? As far as we know from 2001 till date, the false flag operations were carried out in USA and UK only; just the two countries that have declared unprovoked war on Afghanistan and Iraq. Hasty generalization is not accepted as a proper course of action.
I read that France is even bringing in a law that will allow it to deport muslim fanatics who are born and raised in France.
DP111 at August 17, 2005 07:35 PM
That is fantastic! To which country would France deport its citizens?
"Indeed, Islam is more inclined to the female than the male."
Pardon me while I laugh until I cry
for all the muslim women who live and die
under the spell of the prophet of hell.
Tell me another lie, mohideen.
Mohideen:
Islam is a cesspool and you are the maggot that swims in it.
Your propaganda is straight out of "war is deception" from the Koran and OBL's war manual.
You'll find no buyers here on JW.
Mohideen Ibramsha posted: That is fantastic! To which country would France deport its citizens?
I have no idea. That is what struck me as well. Where would France deport them to?
Maybe this was just to frighten some of the muslim fanatics. I do not know. OTH, if push came to shove, France would not care. I suppose then that they would have to seek asylum in Britain, or maybe in dar ul islam.
I'm reminded of the case of Lord Haw Haw, who BTW was tried for treason in Britain and hanged, even though he was not British, and consequently had not sworn allegiance to Britain. As such, he could not legally be a traitor. But that did not matter to British authorities in time of war.
The exigencies of war.
France is still a colonial power.
They have remote Islands in the Pacific and they would not have the sort of MSM that is hellbent on bringing down the US.
It won't take the French long to build a (few) concentration camps. And if Islamic countries are unwilling to take back the plotters and troublemakers France will not hesitate to let them 'disappear'.
Have no illusions about the French!
The shysters, AI and the 'human left' do not have power in France like in the US or UK.
Mohideen,
You wrote ...
"That is fantastic! To which country would France deport its citizens?"
It's called EXILE and if you've read any MODERN history, it was commonly used in lieu of imprisonment and/or execution for deposed NOBLES or Heads of State.
The POINT of exile was that he/she/it be STATELESS, forever dependant on the kindness of the new HOST nation.
In my opinion, much too kind.
Well God Bless the Italians for showing some strength!! Hopefully as the West becomes more and more aware of what Islam really is and its vile teachings, deportations and stripping of citizenship will eventually become commonplace!!
Islam deserves the same contempt as Nazism or Marxism!! The fact that we ever allowed into our borders was an incredibly brain dead idea.......now to reverse that trend is going to take a lot of work....
It is either them or we find our countries become the continual victims of murderous Islam as many have already found out!!
Mohi spews:
Might have known it... yet another Islamic kook who subscribes brainlessly to idiotic conspiracy theories.
-Boudicca-
Worrying numbers lost on the mainstream media, who reasoned, at the time of the survey, that 2% is really a very small and hence insignificant percentage!
Boudicca at August 17, 2005 11:38 AM
-End Quote-
-Mohideen-
Most surveys have a sampling error of 3% to 4%. Thus, 2% is less than the sampling error. So also is 3.2% in Italy. Thus, making a policy based on sampling errors is extremely unfair to the affected population.
-End Quote-
Mohideen
I agee that surveys of this nature will have a sampling error which is actually pretty well impossible to calculate. There are also several other possible sources of error in such polls that are probably more serious. They can be refusals to be interviewed, question wording, order of questions, interviewer bias, etc.. However if, as I believe in the UK case, 1000 muslims were polled, this means that there were definitely 20 who advocated violence against UK citizens. It is highly improbable that the survey happened to select a sample group with the only 20 in the country sharing this mindset and it is reasonable with a sample of this size to extrapolate the result to a larger population. Even 20 equates to potentially 5 suicide bombing teams! Of course I don't know, but I would expect a similar survey amongst any other religious community in the UK to give a result of 0% in response to a question asking about supporting violence against UK citizens.
Mohideen:
Only someone with serious psych problems or personality disorders buys the "false flag" sh!t you keep harping on.
However if, as I believe in the UK case, 1000 muslims were polled, this means that there were definitely 20 who advocated violence against UK citizens.
Boudicca at August 18, 2005 03:04 AM
The survey under discussion, if the description in
http://www.turkishweekly.net/news.php?id=17520
is correct, has very different inputs. Quoting from that article, we have:
===
The Mori poll for the BBC also suggests the 7 July bomb attacks have not led to an upsurge in racial intolerance.
The survey questioned 1,004 people in the UK. A booster survey of 204 British Muslims was conducted for comparison.
…
Poll results were based on a nationally representative sample of 1,004 GB adults aged 16 and over, with the data weighted to reflect the population profile.
In addition, 204 interviews were conducted among Muslims - 112 with people who had agreed to be re-contacted from previous surveys and 92 using random digit dialling - with the data weighted to reflect the Muslim population profile.
All interviews were conducted on 8 and 9 August 2005.
BBC News
10 August 2005
===
So, 1,004 GB adults were surveyed; not Muslims in GB. What are the results connected to 2%? Quoting from the same news article, we have:
===
Only 2% of the national population described themselves as "very racially prejudiced", but Mr Page said the survey's other findings suggest a "substantial minority of British people are not tolerant".
===
It is the 2% of the national population, not the Muslims, who have responded. We do not know where from we picked up the statement that 20 Muslims advocated violence against UK citizens.
May be what we have seen in our discussions is a clear demonstration of our biases producing strange results.
Mohideen
Thanks for putting me right on this. I got the wrong percentage from the wrong poll.
The Muslim only poll was this one from YouGov:
http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/TEL050101030_1.pdf
YouGov questioned 526 British Muslims between 15th and 22nd July 2005; the raw data were weighted to reflect the Muslim population of Great Britain by age, gender and country of birth.
One of the most telling questions was:
Do you think the bombing attacks in London on July 7 were justified or not?
And the Percentage results:
On balance justified 6%
On balance not justified 11%
Not at all justified 77%
Don’t know 6%
So, it was 6% who felt the attacks on 7/7 were justified. This corresponds to over 30 individuals out of a smaller sample than I originally suggested. And another 30 or so didn't know what they thought. This suggests a serious problem to me.
I will say again that in any other UK religious community, and indeed any decent right-minded community, I would expect a 0% agreement with the I-think-the-7/7-attacks-were-justified option.
I am afraid I cannot understand how any religion can condone these actions. It is nothing short of obscene!
I am afraid I cannot understand how any religion can condone these actions.
Boudicca at August 18, 2005 10:04 AM
True, no religion condones these actions, real Islam included. However, the mutilated Islam accepted by many in this site by applying the ‘Principle of Abrogation’ encourages these actions. From a rational point of view, this should encourage persons to abandon the ‘Principle of Abrogation,’ which is untrue and look at Islam in its totality.
To be fair, I must admit that quite a few misguided Muslims who advocate the so called ‘Global Jihad’ also mutilate Islam applying the same ‘Principle of Abrogation.’ Thus, we must abandon the ‘Principle of Abrogation’ if we are to win the misguided youth to normal civic life. Hence, we recommend that the real Islam be emphasized so that terrorism is banished. Blaming Islam or Muslims without taking appropriate corrective actions does not help.
Do you think the bombing attacks in London on July 7 were justified or not?
And the Percentage results:
On balance justified 6%
On balance not justified 11%
Not at all justified 77%
Don’t know 6%
So, it was 6% who felt the attacks on 7/7 were justified.
Boudicca at August 18, 2005 10:04 AM
In view of the opinion given at 3.43 pm above, we conclude that at least 6% of the UK Muslims believe in the mutilated Islam. In the same survey, we have:
===
It is frequently said by some Muslims, as well as non-Muslims, that some imams, possibly from
other countries, are trying to ‘radicalise’ young Muslims by preaching hatred against the West.
Do you believe, or not believe, that some imams are preaching in this way?
Yes, do believe this 47
No, do not believe it 36
Don’t know 17
Have you yourself heard one or more imams preaching in this way?
Yes, frequently 5
Yes, but only once or twice 22
No, never 69
Don’t know 3
===
The fact that 5% of the respondents have heard one or more Imams preaching hatred ties with our understanding that mutilating Islam encourages violence.
What is the natural inclination of the British Muslims? It is shown in the following response.
===
Which of these views comes closest to your own?
‘Western society is decadent and immoral, and Muslims should seek to bring it to an end, if necessary by violence’ 1
‘Western society is decadent and immoral, and Muslims should seek to bring it to an end, but only by NON-VIOLENT means’ 31
‘Western society may not be perfect, but Muslims should live with it and not seek to bring it to an end’ 56
Don’t know 11
===
Borg and Waterdragon: given the dilatory nature of some branches of Italian justice, I would be surprised if the case against Oriana Fallaci even went to court before cancer claims her. As Waterdragon says, this is the individual initiative of a misguided judge acting on the complaint of the most discredited agitator in Italy, a man whose names makes Muslims, let alone other Italians, grind their teeth. Waterdragon: it is not only that the long war against Mafia and terrorism (the Italian secret services were rounding up Palestinian bombers as early as the seventies) has made terrorism and political murder understandable (and hateful) to us, it is also that it has provided the Italian police forces and security services with a great deal of technical knowledge and insight. We have been fighting this enemy for long; only the hysterical irresponsible left have any delusions left about it and the need to use all legal means to fight it.
Mohiddeen, you are incredible. Who the Hell do you think these people are, so many Leonardi? "Reverse brain drain" - a tiny part, seven hundred out of some hundreds of thousands of a notoriously undereducated immigrant group working mainly in catering, from one of the most talent-rich countries in Europe? This is Italy you are talking about. Do you even know what Italy is and what it has been for a couple of thousand years? As for your reasoning... "terrorism must be opposed," even though terrorist outrages are in fact the work of the nefarious secret services of the host countries themselves. I suggest you read some Aristotle and bone up on the Law of Non-Contradiction.
As for your reasoning... "terrorism must be opposed," even though terrorist outrages are in fact the work of the nefarious secret services of the host countries themselves.
Paolo at August 18, 2005 04:54 PM
I am at a loss. I have alluded to the secret services of USA and UK only. Are you saying that in Italy also it is the secret service causing the terrorist attacks? I have no knowledge of that. If that be so, why expel the immigrants?
The statement, “terrorism must be opposed,” is a general statement irrespective of the perpetrator of the terrorist act. Just because the secret services are fomenting terrorism, we cannot accept the same. Can we?
Re: Mohideen August 17, 2005 7:37 PM
Indeed, prosyletizing is not a crime and it is reassuring to hear you say it. When Moslems in general recognize this right, when Moslems defend the right of non-Moslems to prosyletize, --even if those being reached out to are Moslems-- and when non-Moslems can freely prosyletize and worship, unharrassed, anywhere in the world, including Mecca, Tehran, Medina, Lahore, etc. then the world will have come a long way towards peace.
Brain drain indeed..
.........................
It is so hard to find good hookah puffers and daytime gonad scratchers these days.
when non-Moslems can freely prosyletize and worship, unharrassed, anywhere in the world, including Mecca, Tehran, Medina, Lahore, etc. then the world will have come a long way towards peace.
Chatillon at August 18, 2005 07:39 PM
Inside the Arabian Peninsula there could be only one religion: Islam. Non-Muslims are welcome to proselytize any where outside the Arabian Peninsula.
Mohideen August 18, 2005 10:43; August 17, 2005 7:37
So if I understand your words correctly, there is only one region in the world where prosyletization or missionary work is forbidden and a criminal activity: the Arabian Peninsula. Presumably Moslems have made it a criminal activity. This all contradicts your earlier statement that prosyletization is not a criminal activity. Did you forget about this detail in your earlier posting, or were you afraid that stating this fact might sound a little arrogant and overwheening?
As for non-Moslems being "welcome" to prosyletize anywhere else, thank you but I don't really think my comment was intended to request permission. However, perhaps you can explain to me how the American Christian missionaries in Afghanistan were arrested for prosyletization under the Taliban in 2001 without an outdry from Moslem human rights workers to free them.
Mohideen August 18, 2005 10:43; August 17, 2005 7:37
So if I understand your words correctly, there is only one region in the world where prosyletization or missionary work is forbidden and a criminal activity: the Arabian Peninsula. Presumably Moslems have made it a criminal activity. This all contradicts your earlier statement that prosyletization is not a criminal activity. Did you forget about this detail in your earlier posting, or were you afraid that stating this fact might sound a little arrogant and overwheening?
As for non-Moslems being "welcome" to prosyletize anywhere else, thank you but I don't really think my comment was intended to request permission. However, perhaps you can explain to me how the American Christian missionaries in Afghanistan were arrested for prosyletization under the Taliban in 2001 without an outcry from Moslem human rights workers to free them.
However, perhaps you can explain to me how the American Christian missionaries in Afghanistan were arrested for prosyletization under the Taliban in 2001 without an outcry from Moslem human rights workers to free them.
Chatillon at August 19, 2005 10:24 AM
I have absolutely no interest in looking into the minds of other human and explaining their actions. The better way to develop harmony is to concentrate on the future rather than harping on the past. All that I try is to communicate my understanding of Islam in an effort to increase happiness all around.
In the Garden, God Almighty prescribed only one prohibition to Prophet Adam, peace be upon him, and mother Eve, Allah be pleased with her: that they taste not of one single tree. Yet Satan made it a point to seduce them and cause their downfall.
Islam – the only religion communicated to mankind all through the ages – has reserved a very small space in such a wide earth just to ensure a place for purity of faith and for research in Islamic aspects – the Arabian Peninsula. Should that single reservation be the point of contention?
This all contradicts your earlier statement that prosyletization is not a criminal activity.
Chatillon at August 19, 2005 10:24 AM
My earlier statement was in relation to the discussions between the members of this forum: Jihadwatch. Since Jihadwatch is not part of the Arabian Peninsula, I did not see any reason to specify that aspect of the special status of the Arabian Peninsula.
"I have absolutely no interest in looking into the minds of other human and explaining their actions."
-- from a posting, by a Muslim, above
For the pathological mental condition that is Islam, the best exhibits are now being provided by a poster himself. Think of the statement he makes, the flaunting of an indifference to mere humans -- when Allah and Allah alone, and the laws of Allah -- are all that matter. A complete indifference to humans, to their thoughts, feelings, their interior existence. They must outwardly conform to the strictures set down by Allah, and recorded over 23 years, by a tireless Muhammad. Extraordinary.
And then there is this, equally telling excerpt from the same poster:
"Islam – the only religion communicated to mankind all through the ages – has reserved a very small space in such a wide earth just to ensure a place for purity of faith and for research in Islamic aspects – the Arabian Peninsula. Should that single reservation be the point of contention?"
With what self-assurance he insists that Islam is "the ony relgion communicated to mankind all through the ages" (god knows what that means) and that is it really so much to ask if the "Ararian Peninsula" should be permanently off-limits to non-Muslims (save for the temporary wage-slaves, who are there only for a few years, and must not be allowed to practice any part of their own religions while on the "sacred" soil of that Arabian Peninsula. After all, it is such a "very small space" and "in such a wide earth." But the Arabian Peninsula is vast, and in the view of the previous postings of this poster, even vaster than we might regard it, for his own definition of it includes all of Israel which, come to think of it, would therefore as part of that "Arabian Peninsula" have to be cleansed of its non-Muslims as well. Hmm -- how would those Jews, and those Christians, be removed from this northern part of the "Arabian Peninsula"?
Such candor is welcome. It offers us a view into the workings of a mind on Islam, and the psychology of Muslims, unmediated by taqiyya, kitman, or home-grown guile. We who are not Muslims, and therefore not indifferent to what goes on inside the minds of men, should be grateful for this unwitting display posted for our examination and analysis.
We can now go to Andre Servier, and to Raphael Patai, and see what does, or does not, conform to their observations.
Hmm -- how would those Jews, and those Christians, be removed from this northern part of the "Arabian Peninsula"?
Hugh at August 19, 2005 12:29 PM
Once the war mongers are destroyed, we expect peace to prevail. When peace prevails, we expect the Jews, Christians, and others to study Islam as well as their religions. We also expect the Muslims to study another religion so that they too can interact with the Jews, Christians, and others respecting their sentiments. We expect such study would result in the non-Muslims recognizing the correctness of Islam and their becoming Muslims peacefully. That is what happened to the Arabs after the Hudaibiya treaty. Islam was never spread at the point of the sword; it never would be also.
So, the Jews and Christians would be removed when they of their own volition become Muslims.
Think of the statement he makes, the flaunting of an indifference to mere humans -- when Allah and Allah alone, and the laws of Allah -- are all that matter. A complete indifference to humans, to their thoughts, feelings, their interior existence.
Hugh at August 19, 2005 12:29 PM
Only God Almighty knows the hearts of every one of His creation. No mortal can claim to peek into the mind of another person. It is this impossibility of looking into someone else’s mind that prompted me to say: "I have absolutely no interest in looking into the minds of other human and explaining their actions." No indifference: simply an acknowledgement of inability. That is all.
save for the temporary wage-slaves, who are there only for a few years, and must not be allowed to practice any part of their own religions while on the "sacred" soil of that Arabian Peninsula.
Hugh at August 19, 2005 12:29 PM
It is a transgression to permit a non-Muslim to stay inside the Arabian Peninsula for more than 18 days. Every non-Muslim is welcome as a guest. Those, the rulers of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, who followed the advice of their masters from USA and flaunted the Sunnah would be asked to explain their behavior on the Day of Judgment.