More Ramadan peace and tolerance as a Pakistani mullah threatens to burn down a refugee camp rather than see earthquake survivors eating during the day during Ramadan. From "Feeding the survivors during Ramadan," from the BBC, with thanks to Tom:
Feeding 1,200 people with no kitchen requires a bit of preparation.You need to light fires, boil rice and cook meat. It takes several hours. You have to get going in advance.
But one of the local mullahs did not see it that way and he paid Mohammed Mustafa a visit.
"What are you doing?" he shouted. "Don't you know it's Ramadan now? This is just not permitted.
"You can't cook food during the day. It's against Islam. Stop or I'll burn this place down - your tents, your pots, everything."
It just warms your heart doesn't it?
In honor of Ramadan I am eating an ungodly (pardon the pun) amount of pork during the day this month.
Mo' pork is mo' better. The other white meat.
Wow. Bloody wow.
With PR like this, who needs agencies?
Esp after folks see the minions of allah the all merciful at work, what more is required? With mercy like this, who needs vengeance.....
f.g.
As a matter of fact, I'm having roast pork for dinner tonight - on the barbeque. I'll drink to the mullah.
The smart-aleck remarks above smack of intolerance, racism, and Islamophobia.
Pass the sauce, Shaughn, before it gets dark.
mnft? did someone call me?..uh, I'll have the barbecued pork and a bottle of '78 Khollar Estate shiraz..and post a cheque to Pakistan, night-time delivery.
Shaugan - Please .... not the old islamaphobia again... What, the truth that islam is a hate mongering, evil creed that doesn't even care for it's own followers too much to handle? Offended by the reference to ,( oh my god/gods/ or lack of deity....), pork, well get over yourself!
The rest of the world, (non muslims)are seeing the muslims for what they are! I say , get the media to splash this across the front pages....
Help for hungry not allowd by islam's mullahs durring their month of worship! (to their pagan inspired moon god)
As long as muslims kill or injure other muslims, I'm fine with that. Islam is such a s-itty religion that it undermines itself. I feel sorry for the "huypocrites" who have to pretend they are muslims, so as not to be slaughtered by allah's faithful, but there is nothing we can do, at least while we have corrupt cowards for leaders.
As long as the mullah has his own belly full!
That is just bizarre ! Just when you think they couldn't be any more absurd, up pops a half baked mullah to prove me wrong.
"Shaughn - Please .... not the old islamaphobia again."
-- posted by balticwaves
Just kidding. Sorry. But once every few months, I have to do that just to see for myself how amazing it is that such a claim can be made seriously, and even more shockingly actually taken seriously. So my joke wasn't silly, but instead was kinda like doing a ping from a submarine.
You're right, the mullah's action only proves that Islam is a cult of death, not a religion of life. The value of life trumped by the demand for ceaseless submission.
Shaughn, hurry with that sauce, will you! I'm hungry again.
Shaughn:
The roast isn't yet ready - about 20 minutes. Right now I'm having a nice El Dorado 5 year rum(straight). Cheers to the Mullah!
I just wish the articles that are posted here were shown in the mainstream media. Unfortunately, it's only a small number (comparatively) of us who see this. If everyone else got to see it there surely couldn't be any doubt left as to the true nature of Islam and its peaceful and tolerant ways.
I e-mailed this to my congressman, both of my Senators, Fox news, Michele Malkin, and Michael Savage.
Perhaps that will help.
Suspects in court as Dutch police 'foil terror plot to target MPs'
One MP said yesterday: "We Dutch still advocate freedom and tolerance but we will not have our country seen as a soft touch by undesirables.
"Holland has a good standard of living, our young people are highly educated and cultured.
"Immigrants wishing to settle here and make a contribution are for the most part welcome but we will not be dragged back into the brutal Middle Ages by terrorists."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=0PF20WUS0QSYLQFIQMFSM5OAVCBQ0JVC?xml=/news/2005/10/18/wneth18.xml&sSheet=/portal/2005/10/18/ixportal.html
I thought there were exceptions to breaking the fast which would apply here, like illness. Just when you thought Islam couldn't get any more inhumane or ridiculous, along comes this article.
ia786 and King Tolerance should be celebrating this. In ia`s words Allahu Akbar and his peace.
The peace of death.
In the immortal words of Charles Dickens, Islamic law is a ass.
Well, I'm a vegetarian, but I am willing to sprinkle baco-bits on my tofu burger in honor of Ramadan.
We need mo mullahs...
A demonstration of the irrationality of some religious practices...
Something about this story doesn't make sense. Almost all Muslims spend the day cooking for iftar (breaking of the fast in the evening). There's absolutely no religious reason why cooking isn't allowed during the day. Moms and Aunties often start cooking iftar in the early afternoon. It seems like something has been left out of this story or misreported.
From 'The Modern Muslima': "How many of you spend your entire morning cleaning up after suhoor or last night's iftar, and then spend your entire afternoon cooking up that "special dish" your family requested...?"
Note: entire afternoon = daytime. Muslims regularly gather at mosques during the day in order to cook.
Sounds either like a fake story or a story about some schizoid.
From the BBC report:
"Surely," Mohammed Mustafa argued, "if the people are hungry they must eat? Look, they're suffering. I'm a Muslim too. These people have nothing, they need this food."
It was a vitriolic exchange but, in classic Pakistani style, they eventually worked out a compromise.
"Cook in the day if you must," the mullah grumbled, "but if I see anyone here eating during daylight hours I'll be back and I'll set this place alight."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/4341604.stm
...I'd have to say the mullah was feeling the need to assert his authority, Jennah. Probably to relieve some of the stress he was feeling over having no control over them.
Over 3000 terrorists killed in earthquake.
http://us.rediff.com/news/2005/oct/17quake10.htm?q=tp&file=.htm
From above: "ia786 and King Tolerance should be celebrating this."
King: Uh, no - you all are doing a fine job with your pork and "pass the sauce" jokes. Snore.
Getting serious for a moment, this is a fine example of using religion to oppress people. The mullah described here is a corrupt, power-hungry asshole and I denounce him in the most withering terms, as I do your jokes and comments like "As long as muslims kill or injure other muslims, I'm fine with that."
Gary: "I'd have to say the mullah was feeling the need to assert his authority, Jennah."
King: WOW!!!!! For once, you are right on the money, Gar! Now, take this momentum, look at the chessboard and think of your next move....
Nahhh, kt. I'll settle for Wizard Chess. Next Harry Potter movie is out in November!
Ahhh, yes, Wizard Chess. Game for those who live in their own world of make-believe, making up rules as they go along, and selective ignorance of fact. Right up your allie.
Not at all. But thanks for proving yourself with ad-hominem attacks!
Meantime, remind us how 1000 years of arab slave trade (most of that occuring after Mohammed) was ended by muslim governments, world-wide.
Oh wait:
http://africanhistory.about.com/library/weekly/aa040201a.htm
http://rajeev2004.blogspot.com/2005/05/islamic-fundamentalism-and-sex-slave.html
http://www.answering-islam.org/ReachOut/slavetrade.html
...Meanwhile Christians put an end to their own nearly two centuries ago - quite likely because they thought better of it after a time (which is called learning from your mistakes. Yes, I do see how events in past influence things.
I wish we had a simlar prohibition in the West about aiding Muslims...
"What are you doing?" he shouted. "Don't you know it's a MUSLIM you're helping?! Don't you know that his religion is antithetical to everything you hold dear? Don't you know that he will turn anything you give him into a weapon to use against you? Don't you know that if you train him to fly a plane, he will crash it into the sea, or skycrapers, or fields in Pennsylvania to murder as many of you as possible? Don't you know that if you help him exploit the resources in his region and then pay him money for those resources that he will turn around and spend that money on indoctrination for hatred and vengeance against you? Don't you know that if you share your nuclear technology with him that he will turn around and sell it to anyone with cash? Don't you know that if you save his children from polio, influenza, bubonic plague, that he will raise those children to wage "jihad" on you? Don't you know that if he had the opportunity and the capability, he would cut off your hand, slice out your tongue, chop of your head if he thought you had "insulted" his religion? Don't you know that your very existence is so very odious to him that he would like to murder you? Don't you know that he wants to lay waste to your lands, infiltrate your institutions, undermine your laws, and your culture, and your way of life to implement his "religion" of Islam? DON'T HELP THAT MUSLIM! This is just not permitted...."
Gary: "Not at all. But thanks for proving yourself with ad-hominem attacks!"
King: Puhleeeeeez! You have one of the richest ad hominem, "tu quoque" styles around here.
Gary: "Meantime, remind us how 1000 years of arab slave trade (most of that occuring after Mohammed) was ended by muslim governments, world-wide."
King: More ignorance of some history, eh? I remind you that the slave trade was one of the pillars that the United States thrived on in its early years. A slave trade that was 100% European and heavily involved with Christianity. The African slaves that were brought to the US were, indeed, forcefully converted to Christianity. I certainly do know that Arabs were just as involved and do not argue that.
Gary: "Yes, I do see how events in past influence things."
King: No, you only see how the events you wish to acknowledge in their entirety influence things.
jsla: "DON'T HELP THAT MUSLIM!"
King; What poisonous, hysterical rubbish.
I know many Muslims and have been to the M.E. several times. My head is still attached, my tongue is still in my mouth. I've been threatened far more often by street thugs with drug habits than I ever have been by any person who claims to be Muslim.
Just answer One question, kt:
Members of Which religion are still practicing slavery today?
(it sure as Hell is not Christianity. You can't seem to grasp the learned from our mistakesand moved on to better things concept)
To paraphrase Dan Akroyd, "King, you ignorant slut..."
Saudi Arabia only got around to "outlawing" slavery in 1962 -- fully 99 years after the Emancipation Proclamation... Everyone knows that the Saudis still practice DE FACTO slavery TODAY -- yet you're always attempting to find equivalency between the West and Muslims to blunt our righteous criticism of their deplorable religion. Your preposterous and relentless efforts to sully the West and excuse the revolting CURRENT DAY practices of Muslims and Islamic nations is just ludicrous...
Slavery alive and well in Saudi Arabia:
http://www.therazor.org/?p=131
Still with us (Nigeria):
http://www.economist.com/agenda/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3737154
How the West ended slavery (but, apparently, only IN the West):
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4126
And yet you Excuse slavery by muslims, which has been going on for at Least Twice as long as it did in the West, kt.
You can't seem to answer it.
Gary: "Members of Which religion are still practicing slavery today?"
King: Which religion you ask? Probably all of them:
What religions are in Russia?
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/7071-13.cfm
"Islamic nations like Malaysia (and to a much lesser extent, Hindu Nepal) officially frown on the sex trade in Asia, while "Christian" and Buddhist nations like the Philippines and Thailand tend to turn a blind eye to it."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26296
What religion are they in the U.S.?
http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives/052501/052501a.htm
"An estimated 10,000 women from the former Soviet Union have been forced into prostitution in Israel."
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/03/08/women.trafficking/
Would you like your humble pie with tea or coffee?
'how the events you wish to acknowledge in their entirety influence things. '~ kt
I acknowledge all events.
It is You who select which ones you critique by.
The West Ended slavery.
Muslims Still Practice It.
We learned.
islam hasn't.
When do YOU propose to convince Them to end it?
http://www.frontline.org.za/news/end_of_islam.htm
KingTolerance, you wanns explain the backgrounds of the Maryland slave traders?
I would command you to take your tea with a healthy dose of obfuscation, but I know you like it like that anyway.
jsla: "Your preposterous and relentless efforts to sully the West and excuse the revolting CURRENT DAY practices of Muslims and Islamic nations is just ludicrous..."
King: Sully the name? I'm merely telling you fact. The West is and always has been complicit in the same things you seem to pin on SOME Muslims. In turn, you sully the name of an entire religion while turning a complete blind eye to facts that are served up to you with a neat little bow.
Preposterous, ludicrous, whatever little adjective you want to place there is fine with me for they will not eclipse fact.
Only One of those 4 articles mentions Christians. I don't see you disputing any of the half dozen or more I have put up, of muslims trafficing in slaves.
Gary: "The West Ended slavery. We learned.
islam hasn't."
King: See above, try again. Slavery is alive and well in various forms in the West.
Incase you missed it: "Islamic nations like Malaysia (and to a much lesser extent, Hindu Nepal) officially frown on the sex trade in Asia, while "Christian" and Buddhist nations like the Philippines and Thailand tend to turn a blind eye to it."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26296
Shaughn: "KingTolerance, you wanns explain the backgrounds of the Maryland slave traders?"
King: I have no idea what you are referring to. Care to elaborate BEFORE you engage in ad hominem?
Gary: "Only One of those 4 articles mentions Christians. I don't see you disputing any of the half dozen or more I have put up, of muslims trafficing in slaves."
King: You asked: "Members of Which religion are still practicing slavery today?" I responded "Probably all of them" and gave you various links to slave trades all over the world, including Israel and the U.S. You may have to query each of the slave traders to see which religion they identify with and defile with their behavior. Oh, wait - you don't care.
I've already said that I am acutely aware of slave trade in Islamic nations. I am also acutely aware of slave trade elsewhere, with other people of religious persuations. I also reminded you, several times in other threads, that the Amierican slave trade was steeped in European Christian influence, but you seem to want to leave that in the past.
Probably because we don't practice it NOW, kt. You don't seem too concerned about Ending the islamic version of slavery, eh?
By your reasoning, I should be able to expect Russia to pay me restitution for the partition of Poland.
According to your thinking, the Egyptians have the right to sue the Jews for whatever treasures were taken from Egypt when Moses took the Jews out of bondage:
http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP55603
King: ully the name? I'm merely telling you fact. The West is and always has been complicit in the same things you seem to pin on SOME Muslims. In turn, you sully the name of an entire religion while turning a complete blind eye to facts that are served up to you with a neat little bow.
JSLA: Sully the name? I'm merely telling you fact. Islam is and always has been complicit in the very things you seem to pin on SOME Westerners, and for which you must search deep into the past to find even remotely similar transgressions by SOME "Christians" in order to compare their ancient actions against CURRENT DAY ACTIONS of MUSLIMS across the globe! You tiresomely refer to ancient Western history to dredge up chimera and phantoms, some of which date back a thousand years, in order to find the cute"little" symmetry you're so fond of... In turn, you sully the name of an entire culture while turning a complete blind eye to facts that are served up to you with a neat little bow.
They´re eliminating muslims, they´re crazy and mad, very mad.
By the way KT -- I'm sure I'm not the only one who's bored by your silly and weird fondness for third person self reference, and your bizarre need to find symmetry in every posting. Prozac or other antidepressants are sometimes prescribed for OCD... Have you considered this for your condition?
Gary: "Probably because we don't practice it NOW, kt."
King: I've already posted you links that show that slavery is ALIVE AND WELL IN THE WEST. Read them and deal with it. You or I do not partake but that does not mean it does not exist NOW.
Gary: "You don't seem too concerned about Ending the islamic version of slavery, eh?"
King: I denounce slavery in the most withering terms regardless of its origin. I acknowlege all of it, not just the Islamic based stuff you are stuck on. As many Westerners engage in the slave trade either through trafficking or use of it as your Muslims. That's my point.
Gary: "By your reasoning, I should be able to expect Russia to pay me restitution for the partition of Poland."
King: Not what I'm saying in the least.
Gary: "According to your thinking, the Egyptians have the right to sue the Jews for whatever treasures were taken from Egypt when Moses took the Jews out of bondage"
King: Uh, no. Not sure what direction you are trying to go. Again, I question your chess skills.
jsla: "You tiresomely refer to ancient Western history to dredge up chimera and phantoms, some of which date back a thousand years"
King: Really? A few of the links I posted above are happening now, in 2005. Want a mail order bride? Ask the Russians. Need to get laid in the Phillipines or Thailand? The Buddhists don't seem to mind, it seems they turn a blind eye to the sex slave trade.
Moreover, the American slave trade ended, by law, in 1863 which is hardly "ancient histroy." This freshness still causes issues in the US but I digress.
The rest of you rather unoriginal "rebuttal" testifies that you are impenetrable to balance and only wish to blame Islam so I shall leave it at this.
jsla: "By the way KT -- I'm sure I'm not the only one who's bored by your silly and weird fondness for third person self reference, and your bizarre need to find symmetry in every posting."
King: Glad the third person reference bothers you enough to tell me! I could not care any less what you think. As for your psychiatric advice, I think I'll pass. Anyone who seems to think balance is "cute symmetry" and is bad in a debate is self disqualifying to give out any sort of advice.
Ta
King: Blibbity blabbety -- blah blah blah...
jsla: you've promised before to never respond to my posts again-- but like any Muslim, your word is worthless indeed!
Time to get this thread back on topic:
That Muslim cleric in Pakistan sure was scum, huh?
By the way, true debate requires the judicious use of logic and proof. King -- your boneheaded posts employ little or none of both...
"but like any Muslim, your word is worthless indeed!"
King: But like any bigot who is called on their myopic, slanted views, you resort to insult, tuck your tail and scurry off. What an excellent "Dhimmiwatcher" you make!
King: But like any bigot who is called on their myopic, slanted views, you resort to insult, tuck your tail and scurry off. What an excellent "Dhimmiwatcher" you make!
jsla: couldn't have said it better myself! You're doing a great job today of shooting yourself in the foot! What an apt description of the flavor and jist of your ALL of your posts!
OK, so I take it that since Romper Room has surfaced and you giving out of free psychiatric advice means that you concede the following:
1. Russians do have an active, present day slave trade.
http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/7071-13.cfm
2. Some Muslims, especially those in Malaysia officially frown on the sex trade in Asia, while "Christian" and Buddhist nations like the Philippines and Thailand tend to turn a blind eye to it."
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=26296
3. The US is in on the act and drives a global, underground slave market.
http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives/052501/052501a.htm
4. "An estimated 10,000 women from the former Soviet Union have been forced into prostitution in Israel."
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/03/08/women.trafficking/
As always your premises are COMPLETELY FALSE:
1. Russia isn't really a very good example of the West, you foolish idiot... As such, there would never be a time where I would hold it up as a paragon of Western values, and the idea that you somehow have confused Russia with the West tells us all what a complete nicompoop you are!!! Silly. The idea that if certain villains in Russia engage in human trafficking doesn't abrogate the FACT that the KORAN codifies slavery, that the RELIGION of ISLAM endorses slavery, and that TODAY, millions upon millions of Muslims are involved directly in the trafficking of slaves - In addition, your fatuous posting does not indicate ANYWHERE that there is anything in Russian law which promotes this despicable act of human trafficking, whereas ISLAM DOES!!! Those who do such in Russia are OUTLAWS -- those who traffic in Islam are pious Muslims...
2. Completely FALSE and risible... I am having trouble catching my breath I am laughing so hard -- THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS ARTICLE which indicates that the degenerates discussed are "Christian" and your using of this post to attempt to bolster your slanders against Westerners is evidence that you don't have little to work with indeed.. In addition your absurd post facto attempts to hold 'the West' responsible for actions of Asians is beyond contempt. As always your deflections away from the deplorable reality of Islam fails -- and you're left alone in the dust and clouds of your fantasist constructs.... A big Homer Simpson "DOH..." goes out to KT!!!
3. Again - the actions of the Russian Mafia -- hardly attributable to "the West..." Where exactly do you hail from KT? Or are you completely retarded?
4. And again -- Seems like your truck is with Russia you pustulant American hating bigoted foul mouthed slanderer... You apologist for Islam. You putrescent propagandizing seditious scrofulous scumbag...
(I meant to express that last part with all due respect, KT! Thanks for debating with me! You lose!)
Anyway -- in an attempt to get this thread back ON TOPIC:
That Pakistani Islamic cleric sure was mean, huh?
The difference you are *deliberately* ignoring, KT, is that, in the West, these activities are covert and illegal, whilst in the Arab world, their status is less defined, ranging from socially accepted (Saudi Arabia) to overt and legal, such as in the Sudan. Secondly, and of near-equal importance, you seek to equate the criminal sex trade, with the myriad legal statuses across the Western world, and the trafficing in women that accompanies it, with chattel slavery and its rather singular definitionary status in the eyes of the world at large.
Now, sex trafficking in the west is usually handled by criminal organizations, relying on the corruptible. These organizations, ethnic "Mafias" in the main, generally deal with like unto like (Ukrainian women usu. transported and controlled by Ukrainian mobsters, etc.) and are not an accepted part of American society but are, in fact, illegal and covert activities. Slave trading in the Arab world, such as the Sudan, is openly plied, from slaver raiding by state-supported militias to the actual overt ownership of slaves. These are not comparable practices.
More broadly, you seek to equate the exceptions in the non-Islamic world with the rule in the Arab Islamic world. While I will allow that these are perhaps both too large and varigated populations to work with, I suspect were we to refine our dicussion, your thesis would be the one to suffer from greater specificity. Your arguement requires a certain amount of cherry-picking and obfuscation on your part, as well as no small amount of double-think. Likewise, your track record for ad hominem attack and needless taunts suggest that you're not hear for a serious discussion of issues, but rather for some sort of sophomoric ego gratification. This is, as I have noted before, why they refer to you as a troll. If you are truly here to "elevate the discussion," then do so, without the childish taunts and verbal chest-beating.
jsla in hysterics: "Russia isn't really a very good example of the West, you foolish idiot"
King: tsk, tsk. Never said it was! I only offered the Russian article as a form of non-Islamic, current slave trade.
Stike one...
jsla:"THERE IS NOTHING IN THIS ARTICLE which indicates that the degenerates discussed are "Christian""
King: I only offered the Phillipine and Thiland article as a form of non-Islamic, current slave trade. The quote still stands, however.
Stike two...
jsla: "you pustulant American hating bigoted foul mouthed slanderer... You apologist for Islam. You putrescent propagandizing seditious scrofulous scumbag..."
King: Strike three.
jsla: "Thanks for debating with me! You lose!"
King: Hysterics and tantrum notwithstanding, you are beneath debate and unclear on the concept. I do thank you for making sure the "best" you have to offer has been recorded here, for all to read. Your effort requires no further comment from me.
Ta
"I've already posted you links that show that slavery is ALIVE AND WELL IN THE WEST. "
Hmm -- in addition to being a pustulant American hating bigoted foul mouthed slanderer, an apologist for Islam, and a putrescent propagandizing seditious scrofulous scumbag...
you're a liar too! There it is in a quote from YOUR OWN LYING MOUTH from YOUR OWN POST ABOVE -- all of these links refer to the Russian Mafia, or reference ubiquitous prostitution from which no country is immune -- yet you attempted to utilize them and put them forward as indictments of "slavery ... ALIVE AND WELL IN THE WEST. "
Pretty flimsy, and pathetic...
Tsk Tsk indeed! Cheer up, pal -- I'm sure your Muslim friends will eat it up, though! I'm sure they won't challenge your falseness!
Seriously KingTolerance, even with all the ridiculous name-calling by jslu, you were officially owned by Cthulhu (and jslu). Lets all just accept it and move on ;)
Cthulhu: "The difference you are *deliberately* ignoring, KT, is that, in the West, these activities are covert and illegal, whilst in the Arab world, their status is less defined, ranging from socially accepted (Saudi Arabia) to overt and legal, such as in the Sudan."
King: Not ignoring that at all, I am aware of and denounce it. Covert or not, slave trade does exist in the West and is perpeturated by all osrts of people who claim to be religious.
Cthulhu: "These organizations, ethnic "Mafias" in the main, generally deal with like unto like (Ukrainian women usu. transported and controlled by Ukrainian mobsters, etc.) and are not an accepted part of American society but are, in fact, illegal and covert activities."
King: Uh, I know.
Cthulhu: "Slave trading in the Arab world, such as the Sudan, is openly plied, from slaver raiding by state-supported militias to the actual overt ownership of slaves."
King: OK, so if the Sudanese government, one of the most corrupt, foul "governments" on the planet right now permits slavery then all of Islam does?? Not following the logic. You are, once again, extrapolating that all Muslims agree with the barbaric behavior of some Muslims.
Cthulhu: "Likewise, your track record for ad hominem attack and needless taunts suggest that you're not hear for a serious discussion of issues......"
King: My track record for wanting serious debate speaks for itself as evidenced by me bothering to answer you respectfully.
As for ad hominem, I dish it as I get it. If you are going to sit there and dismiss the likes of monikers like "Terminator", "Duh Swami", and their borderline nihlistic posts in lieu of lecturing me about being a troll, I take your objective advice with a grain of salt.
"Seriously KingTolerance, even with all the ridiculous name-calling by jslu, you were officially owned by Cthulhu (and jslu)"
King: What is this, a locker room filled with 13 year old boys??? Sheesh.
Watch out now everybody, I suspect Kingtootyourhorn is turned on at the thought of a locker room full of 13 year old boys...
Corbin: "Seriously KingTolerance, even with all the ridiculous name-calling by jslu, you were officially owned by Cthulhu (and jslu)"
King: What is this, a locker room filled with 13 year old boys??? Sheesh.
Corbin: Nope :) just a bunch of amused sideliners enjoying watching you sink in your 'intellectual' blather. Don't mind me. Please continue!
..K. Tolerance has always made me thing of the adage about public virtue being private vice..
..I bet the notion of locker rooms full of 11-13 year old boys is Kings(private vice)
The lunatic King Kong:
"Tsk tsk, sheesh,"
"Education" by comics, by the looks of it.
Arabs have provided black slaves to the pharaohs and later to the Romans, long before Islam! It is their traditional 'business', and Mohammed sanctioned and perpetuated it in the Koran.
The western world had only a very brief encounter with slavery, and if you can find me some descendants of those slaves who would rather go back to Africa, be sure that there are many among us who would pay them for the ticket.
Saudis (tourists) have just been caught here in Australia for mistreatment and nonpayment to their Philippine maids who ran away. Its just the nature of these people, they can't help themselves.
The pimps in France are at least 70 % Mohammedans, but I know Kings answer already,
"Tsk tsk, sheesh...."
Before I forget: The West had a brief involvement in slavery.
100 years, 150 years? We have rectified it, we are done with it.
Arabs have thousands of years of slavery to account for, and they (still) think they are justified doing it. They even have "Allahs" blessing for it!
That's the difference.
Corbin: "just a bunch of amused sideliners enjoying watching you sink in your 'intellectual' blather. Don't mind me. Please continue!"
King: All you need are pom-poms and a cute little cadence and your cheer-leading from the sidelines will be complete! Two posts from you and ZERO said. I certainly do not mind you.
Otterfisher: "I bet the notion of locker rooms full of 11-13 year old boys is Kings(private vice)"
jsla:"I suspect Kingtootyourhorn is turned on at the thought of a locker room full of 13 year old boys..."
King: LOL, we have Beavis and Butthead in here trying to hang with the big boys. Who would have thunk it? Debate gets interesting and out comes the adolescent humor. I may be onto some cognitive theory....
Philosophy.
An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence.
A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated.
Rejection of all distinctions in moral or religious value and a willingness to repudiate all previous theories of morality or religious belief.
Thank you ever so much for mentioning me in your post above. I am flattered that you think I am worthy of the fame and noteriety. Do you think of me often? Honestly, you dont need to thank me, I'm just trying to help you.
And the name...I included "DUH" intentionally to give liberals, Islamic apologists, muslims and other assorted dumb shts something to talk about.
It's a ruse and you fell for it. Dont take it too hard, it's just a joke.
And as far as borderline nihlistic is concerned, please produce a post or a quote of mine that fits any of the above definitions.
I hope you feel better soon. Just follow the doctors advice and everything will be ok...
In my excitement, I forgot to address the above post to Kingky. Oh silly me...
"I thought there were exceptions to breaking the fast which would apply here, like illness. Just when you thought Islam couldn't get any more inhumane or ridiculous, along comes this article."
Legal exceptions: Pregnant women, menstruating women, travelers, and chronically ill are /forbidden/ to fast.
Those who can but have severe problems fasting are exempt. Instead they are supposed to feed at least one hungry person or make up the missed days within the upcoming year. These include the elderly, the young, those having situational difficulties, diabetics, the weak, breast feeding women, etc...
The mufti is having post-traumatic stress disorder/memory loss or something. I'm Muslim and I've never heard anything like this in my life. If the people have been going without food and are weak, then they are exempt and are encouraged to eat. It's not supposed to be irrational.
p.s. But as I said above, there's nothing wrong whatsoever with cooking during the day. We're supposed to break the fast asap, as soon as the sun retreats, so the food should be ready and waiting. Agreed with others... the guy's flexing his muscles. Apparently the lack of control over natural disasters has hurt his machismo.
How does one negotiate with a mad mullah, while living in Pakistan, under Islamic rules? Well, barring the possibility that the mullahs and the society at large are going to drop Islam overnight, an ad hoc approach would be to use the Koran. The end of verse 5:3 would be useful, because it explicitly excuses the sin of eating what Allah has forbidden when it adds "...whoever is compelled by hunger, not inclining willfully to sin, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful." Has the mullah read 5:3? Maybe someone should read 5:3 to him.
Archimedes: can you see any use in reading (Islamic crap) to a mad dog?
I would suggest you to move on, and think about how to help the people that deserves help. Firstly, non-Muslims and ex-Muslims.
jennah: "I'm Muslim and I've never heard anything like this in my life. If the people have been going without food and are weak, then they are exempt and are encouraged to eat. It's not supposed to be irrational."
King: Thank you, Jennah. This is the same thing that has been corroborated by 100% of the Muslims I have spoken to about this.
Joel: "I would suggest you to move on, and think about how to help the people that deserves help. Firstly, non-Muslims and ex-Muslims."
King: Shameful, hateful speech. Feel free to speak your mind and I will feel free to tell you what an ass you are...
Cthulhu: "The difference you are *deliberately* ignoring, KT, is that, in the West, these activities are covert and illegal, whilst in the Arab world, their status is less defined, ranging from socially accepted (Saudi Arabia) to overt and legal, such as in the Sudan."
King: "Not ignoring that at all, I am aware of and denounce it. Covert or not, slave trade does exist in the West and is perpeturated by all osrts (sic) of people who claim to be religious."
Ah, but you are comparing apples and oranges. For starters, the simple fact that the slave-owner in, say, the United States or Europe is liable for prosecution, whilst the one in the Arab world is liable to be held up as "emulating Mohammed, the perfect man" suggests that there no honest comparison between the two. In the former, the slave is a victim, the slave owner, a criminal. In the latter, it is socially acceptable, even laudable.
Cthulhu: "These organizations, ethnic "Mafias" in the main, generally deal with like unto like (Ukrainian women usu. transported and controlled by Ukrainian mobsters, etc.) and are not an accepted part of American society but are, in fact, illegal and covert activities."
King: Uh, I know.
Then please, if you would, answer the following question: when did "ethnic Mafias" qualify as "people who claim to be religious?" Mileage will vary, of course, from organization to organization, but I do think, however, your ideas of what constitutes "people who claim to be religious" may be overly broad if it includes these ethnic Mafias.
Cthulhu: "Slave trading in the Arab world, such as the Sudan, is openly plied, from slaver raiding by state-supported militias to the actual overt ownership of slaves."
King: OK, so if the Sudanese government, one of the most corrupt, foul "governments" on the planet right now permits slavery then all of Islam does?? Not following the logic. You are, once again, extrapolating that all Muslims agree with the barbaric behavior of some Muslims.
I believe that if you read my post closely, I specified "Arab Muslim world," which may still be overly broad, but comes much closer to a qualified yes on their treatment of slavery. It is, as a minimum, at least as accurate as your apparent definition of "people who claim to be religious." I believe you will find that those areas where slavery, by this I mean chattel slavery, is still legal or enjoys the benign ignorance of the state are, coincidentally, concentrated in the Arab peninsula and in North Africa -- areas which do enjoy a certain amount of Muslim influence to their culture. Let us look at the 5th annual "Trafficking in persons report from United States, where 14 nations "that are not doing enough to stop international human trafficking are (new to the list) Bolivia, Cambodia, Jamaica, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Togo, United Arab Emirates and (continuing to be on the list) Myanmar, Cuba, Ecuador, North Korea, Sudan and Venezuela."
I believe that we have half of these nations are either Arabian or African, with kleptocracies, totalitarian states and war-torn nations rounding out the other half.
Cthulhu: "Likewise, your track record for ad hominem attack and needless taunts suggest that you're not hear for a serious discussion of issues......"
King: "My track record for wanting serious debate speaks for itself as evidenced by me bothering to answer you respectfully.
As for ad hominem, I dish it as I get it. If you are going to sit there and dismiss the likes of monikers like "Terminator", "Duh Swami", and their borderline nihlistic posts in lieu of lecturing me about being a troll, I take your objective advice with a grain of salt. "
Leaving discussion of your track record aside and assuming arguendo that you are truly here to provide enlightenment and intelligent debate, you need to work on your spine and self-control. Accepting your critique of the above gentlemen on its face, for the moment, you allow yourself to be pulled down to their level much to easily. If you are truly the bigger man, why not act like it? If you wish to lead, then act like a leader. If you wish to educate, then act like an educator, bringing fact and substance to your posts, rather than ad hominem attack and chest beating. To act in the fashion of those you wish seek to disparage and then complain that others pay you short-shrift is illogical, as a minimum. You go much further if you could disagree without being disagreeable.
Kingky...I see you have your 'condition' somewhat under control...good for you...
I'm waiting for you to come up with a statement or post of mine that fits the dictionary definition of 'nihlistic', as I listed in above post.
King to Joel: Shameful, hateful speech. Feel free to speak your mind and I will feel free to tell you what an ass you are...
Do you talk like that to people you disagree with in person? You must have lumps all over you. I feel your pain...I once had lumps like that myself, it's no fun. Ruins your sex life too, but again, I dont have to tell 'you' about 'that' do I...
Cthulhu: "Then please, if you would, answer the following question: when did "ethnic Mafias" qualify as "people who claim to be religious?""
King: For example, the Italian mafia are notorious for "whacking" people and showing up in church to "pray." The Jewish, or "kosher" mafia were notirous for the same crime style as the Italains and even kept kosher! Obvioulsy, their religious behaviors are superficial, as is the behavior of corrupt thugs and criminals who think they're also religious Muslims. They're not. Many Muslims not only denounce thuggery, they detest it in the most withering terms and do not partake of such treachery. That's my point...
Cthuluh: "I believe you will find that those areas where slavery, by this I mean chattel slavery, is still legal or enjoys the benign ignorance of the state are, coincidentally, concentrated in the Arab peninsula and in North Africa..."
King: I believe you will find that those same areas you speak of are also aomong the most wretched places on Earth in all aspects. They are corrupt, disgusting places ruled by two-bit thugs who use religion to oppress and dominate. Its not surprise that slavery is yet another thing on their menu.
Cthuluh: "you need to work on your spine and self-control."
King: I accept your constructive criticism. With all due respect, however, my posts are most certainly based on fact and substance as well as my own anecdotal opinion. You are free to disagree and tell me why and I shall be glad to engage in civil discussion about it. That's why I'm here!
Well kingky, I guess you are going to ignore my requests to explain yourself regarding my nihlistic posts. I was hoping you would not reveal yourself as a loud mouth who makes comments they cant back up...geez I'm disappointed in you...Well I guess denial is a symptom of your 'condition' and you cant help it.
I am only trying to help you, by giving you a chance to redeem yourself in front of all these good people. Confession is a great catharsis, you will feel better when you confess that you cant back up what you say...Try it, your blood pressure will subside and those veins on your forhead will stop pulsating...
Cthulhu: "Then please, if you would, answer the following question: when did "ethnic Mafias" qualify as "people who claim to be religious?""
King: For example, the Italian mafia are notorious for "whacking" people and showing up in church to "pray." The Jewish, or "kosher" mafia were notirous for the same crime style as the Italains and even kept kosher! Obvioulsy, their religious behaviors are superficial, as is the behavior of corrupt thugs and criminals who think they're also religious Muslims. They're not. Many Muslims not only denounce thuggery, they detest it in the most withering terms and do not partake of such treachery. That's my point...
I would point out that the Italian Catholics and the Jews (presumably of European extraction) would be hard pressed to find a leader of their respective religions to affirm or endorse their behavior. There are "religious" leaders around the world who endorse violent jihad against the infidel and, likewise, preach slavery and other, unsavory practices, as they are in the Koran. Can you name a single rabbi or bishop who outwardly proclaims their support for slavery based on a reading of their respective religious texts? Muslims have mullahs and imams who do just that.
Additionally, lip service, either that by the Mafia capo to his religion or the Muslim "on the street" towards civilized behavior takes a back seat to actual deeds. An unhealthy fraction of Muslims in England, when polled, stated they would not inform on fellow Muslims planning "jihad," say, a bombing attack. I do not worry about what they say to the camera, I worry about their willingness to do what is right, based on enlightened self-interest.
On a more concrete note, neither the Catholic Italians or the Jews would likely find someone within their church hierarchy that affirmed their "whacking" as a matter of policy. The Muslim can.
Cthuluh: "I believe you will find that those areas where slavery, by this I mean chattel slavery, is still legal or enjoys the benign ignorance of the state are, coincidentally, concentrated in the Arab peninsula and in North Africa..."
King: I believe you will find that those same areas you speak of are also aomong the most wretched places on Earth in all aspects. They are corrupt, disgusting places ruled by two-bit thugs who use religion to oppress and dominate. Its not surprise that slavery is yet another thing on their menu.
Ah, but their religion approves these practices. There is no impetus for them to strike the item "from their menu," as they are emulating Mohammed, Allah's own "perfect man."
Secondly, could it be that they are wretched precisely because their religion condones the conditions and symptoms of their wretchedness? Their religion condones amputation as punishment, chattel slavery for both labor and sex, the exploitation of children and a whole host of other things that we in the "western world" have criminalized and sought, with varying degrees of success, to eliminate from society. Admittedly, we do have failures from time to time, but, these are the exceptions, not the rules. Even the most "liberal" of states in the US does not grant the ability to marry / grant consent until puberty -- in Iran, its age nine, based upon Mohammed's marriage to Aisha, which he consummated when she was nine. Yes, our police occasionally use "excessive force," but, on the whole, were you to be arrested, would you prefer Saudi police, Turkish police or Americans to do your arresting and interrogating?
Back to topic. My thoughts:
To see this type of attitude out of a mullah, from my perspective, cannot simply be justified as a frustrated leader who is 'losing control'. Listen to the comment:
"It's against Islam. Stop or I'll burn this place down - your tents, your pots, everything."
Compare that to Mayor Nagin in New Orleans, who was obviously 'losing control' of his own city during the katrina tradgedy yet all he did was curse at the camera and blame the higher-ups. There were no threats to burn his precious city to the ground. I see a distinct difference in the apparent barbarism of islamic law in the mentality of an "Allah-ordained" leader and it doesn't suprirse me one bit. Islam is locked into the dark ages in many other cultural aspects also: Clothing, Slavery, Government, Judicial System, Equal Rights etc.
I just don't buy the 'crazy talk machisimo' excuse. This is very much what to expect from an islamic religious zealot who really feels the need to perform acts of arson to enforce his version of sharia law.
I can't imagine a leader with a western mindset wanting to burn down rescue centers no matter what stress the individual is subject to.
Oh and Cthulhu I find your posts very enlightening and your constitution is inspiring.
Corbin
Joel CatalA:
In response to your comments:
1. In case this wasn't clearly implied in my posting, yes, I do think the Koran is mostly nonsense, and hate-filled. I certainly reject the Koran doctrine as a whole. What I was suggesting was that an exemption within it should be used, ad hoc, to solve an emergent problem, by the people immersed in that culture. I would not be suprised if the Pakistani citizens arguing (as reported in the BBC article) with their mullah were not appealing to the very reasonable exceptions that jennah cited, which are ultimately based on the Koran and other Islamic texts and traditions.
2. As I said, the role of Islam in Pakistani society is not going to change overnight, particularly in the rural areas. In the immediate context of trying to solve the basic problem of feeding people, an immediate solution is needed. The mullah in question actually wanted to stop people from eating and even preparing food during the day. But the mullah in question has a strong obligation to follow the Koran. Therefore, an immediate way of pacifying this guy, and allowing people to be fed, unhindered, would be to appeal to the ultimate authority for all Muslims, the Koran (believed to be Allah's word). The mullah has a duty to follow the Koran, including the exemption at the end of 5:3. As jennah has pointed out--and she apparently knows more about this than either you or I--there are quite a lot of reasonable exemptions allowed for. That should be enough to solve the problem at hand, for the moment. Addressing the large problems in the Koran, for the people actually involved in this crisis, would not be an immediate concern. But I ask you Joel, which do you think would be a more effective solution for the people in the immediate situation, my proposal, or yours?
3. As for your suggestion that I "move on," I think you need a better way to address statements that you don't like.
4. As for your proposal to help non-Muslims and ex-Muslims first, aren't you falling into the same religious intolerance which you attribute to Muslims? In this case, we are talking about bringing the basic necessities of life to families in a crisis. And you are talking about depriving them of food because they are Muslims. Do you really wish to stand by those sweeping, categorical statements?
Posters above, some of them of the Mohammedan faith, point out that reading the Koran to the Mullah and informing him of the 'exemption at he end of 5:3 may have 'solved' the problem and disabused the religious zealot.
70 % of Mohammedans are illiterate. I suspect that in
that particular area, illiteracy is up to 90 %.
The Mullah may himself be stupid and poor, but being able to read from the Koran puts him in a position of authority and that is what this is all about.
It is a wrong presumption that conditions in 3rd-world countries somehow compare with civilized countries. That is simply not the case.
Sheik,
True, illiteracy is very high in the region. However, only a few people would have to know of the exceptions to the eating restrictions, and be able to cite them from the Koran, and communicate them to others. (I would have guessed that the exceptions were common knowledge to the people there, with Ramadan being an annual event and it being a long-standing tradition, but I could be wrong).
The assumptions inherent in my suggestion are based in part on my conception of the scenario described in the news story. From the description, it seemed like there would have been a large number of people present. It also sounded like there would have been aid workers, etc., present. If these aid workers (presumably not all locals) were not informed, perhaps they should have been informed, during the planning of their mission, of the exceptions allowed. (That would not be a trivial piece of information).
It is not clear from this BBC news story whether this one mullah was representing the opinions of all the mullahs in the area, or just his own. Perhaps the other mullahs disagreed with him...we just don't know. As to whether this mullah was just making some wild statements in anger, we don't know. The story does say that there was at least one man openly disobeying the fast (he was drinking juice and smoking, both forbidden), and nothing was done about that. There was at least one other mullah on the scene as well, but no angry threats from him were reported. Finally, if the reporter had known about the exceptions to the restrictions, maybe he could have asked people about that, drawing their attention to it.
The highlight verbal exchange in the story, featured by dhimmiwatch, was between an educated, presumably literate, "westernized" Pakistani relief worker-organizer, Mohammad Mustafa, and one mullah. Both were essentially claiming to be doing their Muslim duty: Mustafa claimed that such a duty required getting the food to people ("Surely if the people are hungry they must eat? Look, they're suffering..."), whereas the mullah claimed the people had to wait. The exception at the end of the Koran's 5:3 would probably have helped Mustafa tactically in arguing his case against the mad Mullah, had Mustafa cited it explicitly. It is worth pointing out that Mustafa's own statement was, knowingly or not, quite consistent with the end of 5:3.
Having said all of that, no, I don't support the Koran overall. Overall, I condemn its overriding theme of intolerance and incitement to violent and imperialistic actions. That one would have to search for loop-holes and exceptions in it just to find a practical peaceful solution itself speaks volumes about its shortcomings as a guide to living.
Secondly, could it be that they are wretched precisely because their religion condones the conditions and symptoms of their wretchedness? Their religion condones amputation as punishment, chattel slavery for both labor and sex, the exploitation of children and a whole host of other things that we in the "western world" have criminalized and sought, with varying degrees of success, to eliminate from society. Admittedly, we do have failures from time to time, but, these are the exceptions, not the rules. Even the most "liberal" of states in the US does not grant the ability to marry / grant consent until puberty -- in Iran, its age nine, based upon Mohammed's marriage to Aisha, which he consummated when she was nine. Yes, our police occasionally use "excessive force," but, on the whole, were you to be arrested, would you prefer Saudi police, Turkish police or Americans to do your arresting and interrogating?
Posted by: Cthulhu at October 19, 2005 12:11 PM
Hear, hear! Thank you for pointing out these facts for our resident Islamic apologist, who is hell-bent and determined to prove that Islam and Christianity, and Western and Islamic cultures are morally equivalent. He doesn't relent, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to disprove his fallacious comparisons; he is utterly dedicated to the task of reducing the U.S., the West, to the depths of depravity, on par with the scourge of Islam.
King: "Many Muslims not only denounce thuggery, they detest it in the most withering terms and do not partake of such treachery. That's my point..."
As demonstrated amply above, they could, if they chose, find numerous imams who would approve of it. The right to do so is written in their religious texts. What then?
Prophet Geoff
BBUH
"Thank you for pointing out these facts for our resident Islamic apologist..."
King: Not an apologist in the least. I simply point out the glaring hypocrisy you choose to ignore as you slander one entire religion. I know its painful to hear about Christianity's bloody history and its painful to learn about the West's involvement in creating some of the modern day conundrums we face. I could also argue that you are an apoligist for Chrisianity and its bloody, often divisive spread, and Western policy.
King: "Not an apologist in the least. I simply point out the glaring hypocrisy you choose to ignore as you slander one entire religion. I know its painful to hear about Christianity's bloody history and its painful to learn about the West's involvement in creating some of the modern day conundrums we face. I could also argue that you are an apoligist for Chrisianity and its bloody, often divisive spread, and Western policy."
I would point out that you end up comparing medieval history to current events, which, again, ends up being apples and oranges. Likewise, many (not all, but many) of the events that you like to cite have temporal "spurs" that are equal to if not greater than the spiritual ones. For example, the Crusades were as much about trade and caravan routes as it was about religion. Likewise, you have a tendency to shear away the Islamic provocations that precede the "Christian atrocities" you like to cite. Again, to examine the Crusades, you ignore the Islamic wars of conquest that immediately precede said Crusades.
Moral equivalency, particularly moral equivalency based upon inequivalent time periods and with a selective "cherry-picking" of the issues and causes involved, is a flimsy refuge. Likewise, you complain that there are those on this board who "broad-brush" Islam for the behavior of a "few bad apples," yet freely smear Christianity in the same fashion... This ultimately undermines both your credibility on the whole and your immediate arguements in the specific.
I would also add to Cthulhu's excellent post above that this site isn't called "Dredging up ancient Christian history in order to understand the concocted pretexts of Islamic militants today..."
Though certain scrofulous scum unsuceessfully attempt to turn it into such...
King: "Not an apologist in the least. I simply point out the glaring hypocrisy you choose to ignore as you slander one entire religion. I know its painful to hear about Christianity's bloody history and its painful to learn about the West's involvement in creating some of the modern day conundrums we face. I could also argue that you are an apoligist for Chrisianity and its bloody, often divisive spread, and Western policy."
KT, Believe it or not, I am an educated person, well schooled in World History, particularly Middle Eastern History, and AMERICAN HISTORY. I have extensively studied the bloody history of Christianity and I make no apologies for it; I was not alive during that era of Christianity so I am NOT GUILTY. I have never owned slaves and I consider slavery abhorrent. Again, I AM NOT GUILTY. I have never killed an Indian or stolen Indian land, and I sincerely regret the cruelty and injustice that the American Indians suffered at the hands of early Americans. It was wrong, I am sorry, but I AM NOT GUILTY FOR THE CRIMES OF MY ANCESTORS. Please get it through your thick skull: YOU HAVE REVEALED NOTHING ABOUT HISTORY, CHRISTIANITY, OR WESTERN CIVILIZATION THAT I DIDN'T ALREADY KNOW.
The definition of the word "slander" is to make false and malicious statements that are detrimental to a person's reputation. I have made no false or malicious statements about Islam. Islam is MALICIOUS and everything I have ever stated about it is true. You are an apologist for Islam whether you wish to admit it or not. On the other hand, I am a polticially incorrect, albeit honest, person who refuses to defer to an insidious ideology that is not only repulsive, but deadly.
When I find one aspect of Islam worthy of praise and respect, I'll let you know. I'm not very hopeful; I've been looking for over twenty years. Some people think that if you ignore a threat it will eventually go away. Some people, like you, are deluded relativists who believe that you can put people from disparate cultures, with no commonalities, in close proximity and force them to tolerate and respect each other. Muslims cannot coexist harmoniously with anyone, not even other muslims. I'm terribly sorry, but I am too selfish and proud to make any compromises on behalf of muslims or to make them feel "right at home" in my country. Islamic culture is revolting to me; it is offensive and sickening. I tolerate muslims because I have no choice but I will sacrifice NOTHING to appease, empower, or enhance their influence. Islam does not belong in Western societies.
What you don't understand is that despite the mistakes and putative "crimes" of my predecessors, I believe that America is a great nation. I don't hate my heritage or my country; in fact, I am very proud of both. America is far from perfect and I am not oblivious to what was and is bad about it, but I believe the good far exceeds the bad. There is absolutely no moral or any other equivalence between America and the West, and the desolate, retrograde, inferior civilization spawned by Islam. Spin it anyway you want, but that's a fact.