Is this World War III?

The book was found open to a page describing, in Latin script, Psalm 83, in which God hears complaints of other nations' attempts to wipe out the name of Israel.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/25/D8J37LGG3.html

The symbolism in this story is ... well, interesting to say the least; and the timing of the discovery of this particular manuscript in Ireland is -- errie.

Germaine to this article? I think so, on a number of levels.

Radical inherents of Christianity also raped pilaged & plundered in the middle east over hundreds of years, & it's worth pointing out that there was remarkably little violence towards Christians in the Slavic part of the Ottoman empire over an even longer time.

Farah writes: "The West has the power to destroy every Islamic country in the world. It's not a consideration. Yet, everyone reading this column understands intuitively and intellectually that if the shoe were on the other foot, the West would be in big trouble."

I believe, one day the shoe will be on the other foot. Muslim nations like Iran are in pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. How much of the world will be laid waste one day? Time will tell. Appeasement proceeds at a pace.

"Radical inherents of Christianity also raped pilaged & plundered in the middle east over hundreds of years"

Posted by: just_think at July 26, 2006 06:43 AM

I have 3 points to make regarding the above:

1 - Firstly, there are NO degrees of Christianity, for example, a person is either a Christian or not, you either follow Jesus Christ or you don't, your spiritual father is either God or the devil... i think you get the point!

And if they WERE "radical" about their beliefs those actions would be precisely what they would NOT do, because rape and pilage etc goes completely and utterly against Christian beliefs!

2 - Secondly, if those people did in fact call themselves Christian, then i can guarantee you that they were lying buddy!

3 - Thirdly, please qoute the source of your laughable heretical post and just think a bit before makeing such idiotic statements again!

just_think,

There needs to be a correction made.

There is HUGE differences between Islamic violence and Christian violence. The Christian faith NEVER, ever promotes or condones violence. Anyone who is Christian that did any violence did it against the Christian scriptures and spiritual pratices. It is not only wrong, but sinful to do violence.

Islam from day one has always allowed and as a matter of fact have given blessings to jihad violence, based on the Koran and the Hadith. Look it up.

Christian leaders have not only condemmed any violence done in the name of the Christian faith, but even Pope John Paul II has even apoligized to those people or communities that were victims in the year 2000.

No such condemmnations comming from the Muslim leadership, let alone saying the words, "we are sorry". Often there is a celibration that goes on. Look it up.

Take this as a gentile but firm correction.

I remember one day on JW, there was this discussion going on and Infidel Pride had posted, if I remember correctly "World War III began in 662 A.D.". He was correct. He is correct.

I liked this article. It would have been even more effective if it included a little bit of histroy of jihad conquests, and the present day scene as a direct consequence of that, as also the fact that NONE of the cultures was ever as ruthless as to destroy this evil completely, thereby allowing it to comeback again. With disastrous results for them. The author does note that islam has this ruthlessness.

Just_Think,

What absolute bunk. Within 90 years of mohammed's death (after his example of well-documented terrorism, murder, pedophilia, broken treaties, etc. etc.) Jihad conquered the entire Middle East, North Africa, Spain, into S. France. I will not even begin recounting the similar campaigns to the East. Virtually all the lands mentioned were Christian. Jihad against Europe continued until the Second Siege of Vienna in the 17th century. It finally receeded due to the overwhelming strength of Western, Christian civilization. Slavery, Piracy, murder, dhimmitude, etc. were endemic throughout Islamic history. The first genocide in history was Islam vs. Armenian Christians.

Now, let's compare the "horrors" on the Christian side: The crusades, a belated reaction to hundreds of years of Jihad, lasted less than 200 years. It was focused on a dinky piece of land which was the holiest real estate to Christians (remember, non-Muslims can be killed "today" for going anywhere near Mecca or Medina). When Europe had the power to crush the Ottoman Empire, European nations went to war to keep Islam intact. The Crimean War is a good example.

Christianity has dark moments, when Christians did not follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. However, Christians self-corrected. They faced up to historic wrongs and repented and recognized those wrongs. It is worthy of note that throughout history Christians were the ones forcing other "name only Christians" to do the right thing. For example, it was Christians in Parliament who got the laws passed to end slavery. It was Christian abolitionists that countered southern slavery. It was Christian ministers who led the civil rights movement in the US.

On the other hand, any corrections to Islam came from the outside. S. Arabia did not outlaw slavery until 1962. This was only under pressure from outside. Ditto for Piracy, Dhimmitude, etc. The reason: Lying, murder of infidels, Dhimmitude, rape of infidels, treaty breaking, killing of POW's, etc. are all "holy" by the Koran and Hadiths. The prescriptive commands in the Koran are clear about "holy" violence against infidels. Jesus Christ gave the prescriptive commands for Christians, and you will find no violent commands against other religions.

Let's quit the garbage of moral equivalency. This is the reason Europe is just about to go under, and why the US has little time to wake up. White guilt, Christian guilt, Western guilt are the best allies of the Islamists. Idiots who parrot the garbage of the "evil Christian/West/White man" are only helping spread Jihad

I know the Asia Times can be a bit left-leaning, but it is still interesting to notice that the author of this piece thinks neither China nor India will do anything substantial in the world war of Islam vs. the West. They will quietly watch us bleed, and will be rather happy about this since it will pave the way for their own global ascendancy:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/HG25Aa02.html

World War III - what, me worry?

The end game that most right-wing observers look to now is a conflagration that sees the West take on Islam, supported by a coalition of willing allies in Africa and Asia. Meanwhile, Islam counts on its army of the faithful to lend support.

Be that as it may, I believe that both the West and Islam overestimate their hold on, if not their importance to, the Chinese and Hindu civilizations. The prospect of World War III, rather than forcing them to choose sides, is more likely to cause policy paralysis, despite the fact that both India and China stand to benefit from the conflagration. While it is in their interest to cause an outright war between the two sides, they are more likely to engage in navel-gazing.

I do not see the likelihood of India playing any role in a direct confrontation between Islam and the West, and therefore it is more likely that it sits on the sidelines waiting for the West to do its job.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/HG26Aa01.html

I predict that future generations of Indians and Chinese will literally worship George W Bush and Osama bin Laden for having pushed the West into a disastrous conflict with Islam.

Rather than India, I believe the West would turn to China if this eventuality were to arise. The chief reason, as I wrote before, is that India's 150 million Muslims in essence rule out any chance of direct Indian involvement in the battle.

Despite all the historical reasons that India's right wing would extend, there is no chance of the country participating in a war between the West and Islam. Failing to find an ally that will directly occupy Pakistan and Iran, the West will be left with no alternative but to attempt this on its own, with the US, Russia and the United Kingdom providing a bulk of the manpower.

The outcome will be a sufficient weakening of both the West and Islamic power over the following 20 years.

just-think:

err-uh, perhaps you should; obviously, it will be a new experience that you might enjoy more than trying to set bait for a perfectly worthless dipute over nonesense.

Fjordman,
That article is badly flawed. Historic facts are either bent, or excluded. Present scenario is VERY different as well.

Re: Is this World War III?
Astute observation by Joe Farah

Re: "Only death and destruction of all infidels will quench the beast's appetite for blood and power."

The Muslim mind does not seem to clearly differentiate fact from belief. Even intelligent Muslims have their minds (and judgement) foot bound by this hallucinatory Submission vision. There is a tendancy to projection, displacement, paranoia, delusions of grandure, delusions of persecution -and just plain rotten judgement in the Muslim mind-set.

The Submission-Infidel conflict is going to end in a nuclear tragedy for the Muslim world (especially the Mideast). Muslims underestimate the revulsion and anger of the non-Muslim world (especially Israel) re Jihad.

People like Nasrallah and Ahmadinejad and too many Muslims are "Jerry's kids" when it comes to reality. I'm not optimistic re peace with Submission. Their own internal "logic" will doom them. What they dream for Israel is going to be their fate.

just-think

Let's get something straight. 'Christians' did not participate in the crusades. The Roman Catholic organization did it. They even told their soldiers that if they died in battle, they could go straight to paradise instead of purgatory! Sound familiar?

The Church is NOT an organization or man-made religion designed to control people. The Church is the Body of Christ. Christ is the head of the church.

Many evils have been done in the NAME of Christianity, but no where in the scriptures did Christ EVER tell his Church to do such things.

There has always been a true Church and there always will be. God will always keep for himself a remnant.

Frank,

As time goes on, IMHO, I am seeing more of Islam as a mental disorder. I just do not understand why Islam is even given the title of a religion because of the load of contradictions it has. More and more I am calling it a cult because of how it clings to its believers as tight as a drum.

Assalamau-Laikum all,

This war is very important and lets be honest...it IS a clash mostly of religions.

What I need to understand is why you peoples thousands of miles away are so interested in supporting the religion of christianity/Judiasm as it was not your indeginious religion at the time of Jesus (PBUH) or Mohd (PBUH). Lets look at the facts:

The first invasion of the British Isles (Britannia) by the Romans took place in 55 BC under Julius Caesar, but it did not lead to any significant occupation. He had some interesting, if biased comments concerning the native inhabitants. "All the Britons," he wrote, "paint themselves with woad, which gives their skin a bluish color and makes them look very dreadful in battle" ("De Bello Gallico").

It was not until a hundred years later, following an expedition ordered by the Emperor Claudius, that a permanent settlement of the grain-rich eastern territories of Britain began in earnest.
In what is now Wales, the Romans were awestruck by their first sight of the druids. The historian Tacitus described them as being "ranged in order, with their hands uplifted, invoking the gods and pouring forth horrible imprecations" ("Annales").

NOW THIS IS YOUR TRUE RELIGION ---- NOT CHRISTIANITY.

Rome, of course, became Christianized with the conversion of Constantine in 337, and thanks to the missionary work of Martin of Tours in Gaul and the edict of 400 AD that made Christianity the only religion of the Empire, the people of Britain (myopically) adopted the new religion.

YOUR old Celtic gods had to slink off into the mountains and hills to hide, reappearing fitfully and almost apologetically only in the poetry and myths of later ages.

As for christianity the truth is that nobody knows what Yeshua ha-Nazri, the crucified carpenter who started this cult, believed -- there is simply no evidence whatever.

What we do have is about 4th-Century copies of the writings of certain of his followers, testifying to what they thought they heard him
say. We have what appear to be letters from Paul, Peter, and some of the other early Apostles, and scholarship affirms that these letters seem to be
authentic, in that they are almost certainly from the 1st Century A.D. (The Gospel of John and Revelations, however, are VERY late 1st Century or 2nd Century).

Other than Luke and Acts, and the letters from Paul and Peter, we have precious little evidence of what the Church believed in the very early
years of the current era. In the period of the persecutions (A.D. ~60 to A.D. 325, we have fragments and pieces -- which show that there were a great variety of ideas current in the late Roman world, some of which the writers liked and some of which they did not.

There is, no account of what was actually believed by the whole of Christendom until
fairly late -- 5th or 6th Century. The last of the 7 Canonical Ecumenical Councils pretty much settled what Orthodoxy meant Orthodox rhetoric likes to portray Christian belief as monolithic
and received from the mouth of Christ himself -- this is somewhat less than the truth (or more, if you look at it as "creative embroidery") As a
matter of practical fact, we can see evidence that Christian belief has been in a state of (gradual) flux since the earliest days. Some ideas
change, but not quickly, and not universally, and not lightly.

So some guy in the ME COULD have been the messiah, COULD have said these things outlined in the bible BUT NOBODY IS SURE.

So it is hard for me to understand why WMD is being passed to Israel so that they can defend a belief of something that MIGHT have been said OR NOT.

I am dumbstruck that peoples in the most technologically advanced state ever created by man can stand by words which may have been a figment of imagination.

Please peoples get real...I will be 1st in line to say that all humans (especially jews due to the incalculable horrors they have had to face in the 2nd world war) must be able to live in peace....but it is daft to place Isreal in the middle of where it will always be in harm's way.

Think about all the wars and the sufferings that could have been avoided.

I think the Amerekie still has time to mass move their friend out of harms way and let the Arabian peninsula remain Islamic.

americaningermany

No Winston Churchill, No Margaret Thatcher, No Ronald Regan. You're right. Just a load of PC twits running the show.

Dangerous times.

We need someone with the courage of their convictions that isn't afraid to stand against the PC winds and isn't bought off by lobbists. Good luck!

Democrats are hoping that Bush hating will get them into office - not so that they can change the government, but so they can BE the government. Republicans think they have the vote all wound up because they think people fear what the Democrats might do. None of them are worth spit.

"Sometimes they are set back--for years, decades, centuries."

If we look at Islam and the ummah in totality, the jihad has never been set back for a century. There's lots of physical jihad fighting in the cause of Allah in every century since Islam's inception. I'm not even sure that the ummah has ceased jihad for a decade. (Islamic jurisprudence does not let a truce last more than 10 years).

Naseem
Our Imaginary Friend is heaps better than your
imaginary fiend!

bigcatgirl13106-

re: "As time goes on, IMHO, I am seeing more of Islam as a mental disorder."

I'm at that point, too.

Naseem - I do not think you are a muslim. I think you are a muslim 'poser' athiest/socialist and are just here to try to wind people up.

Get a life.

You should spend your time doing a little reasearch on islam's moon god that came from their MANY gods. You'll find that it is indeed a demonic religion.

The moon god was around in OT days and was one of many false gods which would have originated in Babylon.

The moon god allah, which was one of many of their false gods at that time. See Judges 8:21

So Zebah and Zalmunna said, "Rise yourself, and kill us; for as a man is, so is his strength." So Gideon arose and killed Zebah and Zalmunna, and took the crescent ornaments that were on their camels' necks.

New King James version

Then Zebah and Zalmunna said, Rise thou, and fall on us; for as is the man, so is his strength. And Gideon arose, and slew Zebah and Zalmunna; and he took the moons that were on their camels' necks.

J.N.Darby Translation 1890 Info

Maybe Jihadwatch can have a benifit for "Jerry's Mohammad kids." Being Reality Challenged is Submission.

http://members.tripod.com/dry_heaves/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/jerrys.gif

What I need to understand is why you peoples thousands of miles away are so interested in supporting the religion of christianity/Judiasm as it was not your indeginious religion at the time of Jesus (PBUH) or Mohd (PBUH). Lets look at the facts:

By Naseem

As I can see your need for Jihad to defend your Islam ...Its not a matter of who worships what.Its the matter that there is Islam running around promoting violence and terrorizing people who are the Infidel.I can not thing of any other religion that has this kind of mass terror..I cant think of one that has not modernized to become a civil quest.So in my opinion(becasue I am a free thinker and I can do that)Lets not talk about what they did hundreds of years ago..Times have changed and its time to come out of the caves and be civil human beings.I dont care if you worship or beleive in the tooth fairy..Its modern times for the world and Islam need to jump on board.We dont live in 400 ad.

Naseem,

It is curious that you come onto this site to bother the Christians. As I have pointed out before, if you are an Ahmadi in Pakistan (is that correct?), your enemies are not Christians (another persecuted minority there). Your enemies are Sunnis and Shia. Don't you think that the whole premise of your project here on JW/DW is flawed? If mainstream Islam achieves the success which you claim, Ahmadis will be slaughtered by Muslims. If mainstream Islam fails, Ahmadis will survive. So shouldn't you be criticizing mainstream Islam, or at least trying to help you fellow Ahmadis?

(BTW, you don't seem like an Ahmadi, and unless I've missed something over the past several months, you don't provide us with information about the Ahmadis in Pakistan. Mostly what we hear from you is gloating about the progress of Islamic imperialism, and that is more in the style of the Sunnis and Shia).

Try this-the poster for the "Jerry's Kids" benifit is at the bottom.

http://members.tripod.com/dry_heaves/id2.html

as noted above

"Think about all the wars and the sufferings that could have been avoided"

Ah, only if mighty Mo had not instilled "Death to the infidel" .

Only if mighty Mo had not shown his people that it is better to kill than to live.

Only if mighty Mo had delivered peace and harmony instead of war and pillage.

only if mighty MO had shown compassion instead of treachery.

I agree wars and sufferings could have been avoided --only if.

It is true that there are conflicts and differences of opinion in Christianity. It is also true that many things done in the name of Christ are easily proved to be incompatible with the teachings of the Bible, thus, many people calling themselves Christian have not really come to the point of accepting Him as Lord of their life and living in obedience to the Scriptures.

No other belief system or world view, however, directly contradicts human ideas of what pleasing God should consist of. Only Christianity teaches that we are unable to save ourselves. That there is nothing within us to offer God that would be pleasing to Him. God Himself has done the work necessary to make us acceptable to Him, and He offers salvation as a free gift to those who will accept it.

To state that the schisms and alleged lack of evidence within Christianity is comparable to the history and origins of Islam is laughable. No other historical figure has been as thoroughly examined as has Jesus Christ. The physical evidence in the form of ancient documents is abundant. Actual eyewitness testimony was written down within decades of the events by the witnesses. Islam relies on oral tradition over many generations.

Jesus Christ taught us to love our enemies and to do good to those who spitefully use us. Again, this is totally contrary to our natural human inclinations/logic.

But because of this, I would much rather see Muslims liberated in their hearts and minds and set free from this cult, instead of destroyed.

By the way, the definition of a cult is when the Lord Jesus Christ is not seen as God, and when a human personality holds more sway over the followers rather than the teachings of Scripture. Islam certainly qualifies as a cult.

Naseem,
So an ideal world in your view would be where: People of European descent should cast off Christianity and become pagans, Jews should relocate to a new land (maybe in Alaska), and the "Arabian pennisula" should remain islamic. Unfortunately, no matter where they go, the Jews will always be "in harms way" as long as there are people who follow Mohammed's teachings and examples.

Stand fast in the liberty ,

Perfecty said...

Its modern times for the world and Islam need to jump on board.

God(not Allah/Shmallah) forbid that Islam "jumps on board".
It is not our business to try save that horrid monstrosity from itself by allocating it a place "on board". No! Islam should be permitted to drown in its own goo. Let's stop nursing that mad, murderous, sick troglodite now and have some fun witnessing it turning into one giant Somalia.

I see even in our own country our religions don't agree with each other but I don't see any terrorizing of the masses...Oh wait no I did see that from Islam on Sept 11th.Not from a Catholic or a Jew and so on...Yes we have the occasional David Koresh and we allow them to be freaks in the confines of their own place.But when you begin to brainwash rape and kill then its not tolerated.And it should not be tolerated by the Muslims.Its just the plain lack of humanity.I guess when your Islam you leave your conscience at the door.

Assalamau-Laikum Stand Fast,

Thank you for your input to the questions I posed. You at least is to let you have had the courtesy to answer on the subject matter.

Most of the others simpy fobbed me off as a "christian hater", wind up merchant or a sunni/shia muslim.

I am an Ahmadi Muslim, one of my goals here is to let you know that there is peace in Islam within the Ahmadi community. i.e. that Ahmadi Islam & christians can live together.

My question regarding the validity of JC is extremely pertinent to this debate. Peoples are killing and peoples are dying while millions get displaced as a direct result of this belief.

Multiple wars have been fought and others will be fought too...right down to the annialation of hugh sections of the human race.

If all this is done by peoples who don't know whether JC was for real or not...why are are doing this to muslims who are already downtrodden...can you see where I am coming from?

Many here have commented on the intelligence of the followers of Islam.

I suggest reading an academic book review of a work of Dr. Richard Lynn, University of Ulster, in England, discussing race and intelligence. It basically looks at 620 IQ studies covering the scores of 813,000 individuals and maps the results. An executive summary of the results: Japanese-107; East Asian-106; European-100; Turkey-90; Africans residing in the West-85; Middle Easterners-84; Africans in Africa-71; Bushmen-54. The author attributes the scores of the two lowest groups to poor nutrition.

A quick, good spirited jab at our European UN friends like Nazeem-the highest scoring subgroup of Europeans was from North America, attributed to ‘Selective Migration’. The same Professor recently studied the IQs of British Jews (different study) and found them in the range of 110-113. And now a cheap shot because I just can’t help myself: if Kofi had only had Wheaties…

Read the review at:
http://www.gnxp.com/blog/2006/02/world-of-difference-richard-lynn-maps.php

why are are doing this to muslims who are already downtrodden...can you see where I am coming from?
well it was your own words that said you stay poor and hungry for Allah.So ......

I am dumbstruck that peoples in the most technologically advanced state ever created by man can stand by words which may have been a figment of imagination. .

by Naseem

This statement reveals a lot of the problem. Jealousy. Civilization has made us what we are. Islam, and allah, has kept muslims where they are. Poverty stricken, intelligent stricken, war mongering, irresponsible, self loathing, backward, criminal and illogical.

Muslims are irrational. They can't distinguish between religion and civilization. Had it not been for thinking outside the box (religion) we wouldn't be where we are today.

Naseem, if it were up to you, would you prefer the whole world ride donkeys, wash clothes in the nearest creek, live in tents, cook over camel dung, hunt every day for dinner, and not ever see the stars? I personally like my standard of living. I'm not made to live life as it was in the middle ages. Apparently you are.

Muslims are downtrodden as a direct result of their self imposed rules of life. They have never changed or amended the death cult status imposed by the infamous mighty MO. Historically, they have never recognized the rights of those who choose a lifestyle other than submission.

The Newest Phase of a Very Old War

http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2004/10/newest-phase-of-very-old-war.html

Domestos,

Thank you for the link..

It is all true and right to say Christians committed violent acts againts others and against other sects within their faith. The horrors are many such as burning witches, attacking pagans (in europe), Catholic churchs war against all those who did not like the pope, attacks on technology (like the catholic churchs ban on sciences and certain weapons) and many many more. HOWEVER let us look at today and not then. Christians have shall I say evoloved and thus are not on the rampage. They have to a degree accept secular governments as the best way to solve problems (seperation of church and state) and have accepted other religions (sometimes kicking and screaming) like Jews and Hindus.

ISLAM however has not stopped or evolved. They do not accept secular rule and still live in a 7th-10th century world. They want Islam for all and have a need to blow themselves up and take us with them. Thus they are a danger to all. It is easy to turn this into a Christians Vs. Islam debate or a Jewish Vs. Islam debate but that hides the fact that Islam is still doing it. They are still running a slave trade. They are still killing non-muslims. They still think they rule the world.

Christians gave up those dreams and those ideals long ago. I must say (even though I might be a heathen to Christians) Jesus is whole heck more likable then Mohammad. Jesus fits the secular modern world well too even if his followers sometimes fail. Even Ben Franklin who was known to question chrisitian dogma did have to admit that Jesus was a good role model (hint it is helpful if your religion has "good" role models). Mohammad however does not fit our world at all unless you get off on raiding caravans, stealing camales, grabing females, etc etc....sort of a desert viking or a arabian Harold Hardrada. It is the religion of bandits not builders.

Naseem, we are fighting for something other then religion.

We are fighting for our civilization, which Islam would wipe from the face of the planet.
Christianity is but a small part of the whole. Poetry, literature, music, art, philosophy, political thought, science.....the list of what the west has created is endless.

I for one will never live under a religion that was obviously inspired by someone who was mentally ill, and vicious with it.

Whether or not you believe in the divinity of Christ, his moral standing as a man is still millions of times more admirable then the example posed by Mohammed.

Bint Marwin murdered with her babe at her breast by Mo's wish comes to mind.

The thought of Christ ordering or approving of such an act is unthinkable.

You might want to consider this biblical passage, Naseem.

Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Ye shall know them by their fruits. Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

I know this is off topic but is there another anti Jihad board I can review?

greatcometof1577

You speak about pagans like historically they were some kind of caring and compassionate people. Let me assure you, the Vikings did not garner their nasty reputation by being caring and compassionate towards others. Europe was a lawless place until Christians arrived, it was Christians who turned the barbarians into non-barbarians. The basis of all western law is derived from the Judeo-Christian Bible, so you should have a bit more respect for Judeo-Christian values, if it wasnt for them, you would still be living in a nice “secular” albeit completely lawless society, just like all those nice pagan barbarians that came before you. Now it is good that secular people have evolved to the point of accepting Judeo-Christian values as their own, but it is bad when they pretend they invented them.

keep_enemy_close,

There are many excellent anti-jihad blogs out there. A few of my favorites: Little Green Footballs, Gates of Vienna, Faith Freedom, and Mark Steyn's web site.

By the way, yesterday you said you might not be the "sharpest knife in the drawer", or words to that effect. Well, welcome to the club. Neither am I, but when it comes to awareness of the biggest threat to our children's future, we are still smarter than 99% of the Ivy League professors and Pentagon strategists out there. Keep informed, and God bless your husband and family.

naseem has managed to hijack an entire thread yet again !

Infidel33,
Thank you I will check those out.Just want to get all the information I can.I have friends asking me a lot of questions as to why I feel the way I do.Want to give them honest answers but educated ones.

Arjun

Thanks, but someone else had made that observation, and I entered into a 'semantic' discussion about instead of III, it would be I, or 0, since it started before the Great War/ WWI. Of course, only one side in this war - the Islamic side - has recognized it as such, while the other side(s) have been totally oblivious to it. For instance, who in the Infidel world would believe that at around the same time, King Richard the Lion Heart and Prithviraj Chauhan were fighting the same enemy, albeit different commanders in different sites? Not many would make that connection, but it wouldn't be lost upon Muslim historians looking at the big picture.

Does the Bible promote violence?
Which Testament?
The Old Testament certainly does record God ordering the complete destruction of settlements, the "post of God" solution. The New Testament reveals a more loving, kind and generally more approachable God, but one who is willing to use violence against evil.

Jesus explaining his mission on earth...
MATTHEW 10:34 Think not that I came to send peace on the earth: I came not to
send peace, but a sword.

Jesus on self defence...
MATTHEW 22:35 When I sent you forth without purse, and wallet, and shoes, lacked
ye anything? And they said, Nothing. 36And he said unto them, But now,
he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise a wallet; and he that hath
none, let him sell his cloak, and buy a sword. 37For I say unto you, that
this which is written must be fulfilled in me,

But when Peter tries to stop the arrest of Jesus in the garden...
MATTHEW 26:52 Then saith Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into its place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.

Because Jesus had to be arrested to fullful the promise of the prophets!

This last is repeated in...
REVELATION 13:10 If any man is for captivity, into captivity he goeth: if any man
shall kill with the sword, with the sword must he be killed. Here is the
patience and the faith of the saints.

This is a crime control edit! Not an injunction against self-defence.

The last Word on the use of violence to bring about a just world...
REVELATION 19:11 And I saw the heaven opened; and behold, a white horse, and he that sat
thereon called Faithful and True; and in righteous he doth judge and make war.

To paraphase to great: Christianity is not a suicide pact either!
Personally, I'd use a line of flame-throwing tanks!

Every Muslim, every member of the Ummah knows that there's a war on, from childhood. And it helps if Allah makes the Infidels woolly headed and wimpy.

Take this story about some headway in the blasts case made by the crime branch of Bombay police:

"During questioning, Ansari insisted jehad had only just begun and there would be a massive war" well, well, what do you know!...read on:

http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1043763

Infidel Pride,
Way past time we started to look at that 'big picture'. Way past time we connected all the dots.

Naseem:

I don't believe that Muslims and Christians can live together in peace. We are seeing this in our world today. Islam dictates that its followers require that everyone who is not Muslim either submit or be treated as an inferior.

The God of the Bible never forces a person to accept Him or His Son. He invites. In history, some people thought it was pleasing to God to force people to become Christians. But such a technique is futile, because Jehovah looks on the heart and if the confession of faith is made under duress without being true, it is useless and of no value to God. True believers know this.

Whereas in Islam, allah is unknowable, will not have a personal relationship with you and doesn't seem to care if people recite truthfully, as long as they submit.

So the true Christian will never force another, but the true Muslim is required to force another. The Muslim is not the enemy of the Christian, but the Christian is definitely seen as the enemy by the Muslim.

just_think (or is it peacenlove yet again) says "Radical inherents of Christianity also raped pilaged & plundered in the middle east over hundreds of years, & it's worth pointing out that there was remarkably little violence towards Christians in the Slavic part of the Ottoman empire over an even longer time." - and has promptly shown his inability to think. Serbs and other Christians had their sons kidnapped by their Turkish overlords and turned into Janissaries (slave soldiers) and their daughters into virtual prostitution to some wizened fat Turk. Picture the scene of these weeping Christian families for 400 or 500 years in countries like Serbia, Greece, Bulgaria, Romania etc as they had their kids forcibly taken away from them under the duress of death, and if Turkish rule was so great, then why did Serbs fight against the Ottomans, likewise why did the Greeks rise up against them in the 1820s after numerous past attempts to shake off Ottoman rule, and repeatedly seek Russian help to gain them their independence.

Naseem,

Your historical research and analysis is an absolute joke. I have seen the surviving copy of a major fragment: the Gospel of John Chpt 17. All respectable historians date this multi-paragraph fragment to the early 2nd century AD. It is dated within about 20 years of being written. The importance of this writing is that later Biblical Scholars were to discover that later surviving manuscripts had the identicle wording. Proof the perfection in later translations. This fragment, and many others help confirm the authenticity of the New Testament writings.

In addition, over 6,000 surviving manuscripts of the canonized New Testament writings are from within about 100-200 years of the original writings. This is to be compared with historic works like "Caesar's Gallic Wars" (handful of surviving manuscripts from about 1000 years after original writing) and Josephus (similar to the Gallic Wars).

27 secular Roman and Jewish historians that mention Christian beliefs shortly after the crucifixion. "Jesus is Lord" was the earliest creed, and most historians date that within about 2 years of the crucifixion. Many Roman historians write about the martyrdom of Christians who would not take the "Libellus": "Caesar is Lord". Remember, Rome was an extremely religiously tolerant empire. Christians would have escaped persecution with the belief that Jesus was only a "prophet".

In Addition, Luke (author of Gospel of Luke and Acts) has been proven historically accurate of extra-religious matters (rulers, places, etc.). The Gospel of Luke and Acts make clear that early Christians believed Jesus was the Son of God, Messiah, and only Way to salvation. Read Acts 4 when Peter was hauled in front of the Sanhedrin.

I could go on and on. The critical part is that Christianity grew on the blood and sacrifice of those who died claiming Jesus was God and had resurrected from the dead. All the apostles, except John, went to historic deaths claiming Jesus was God and rose from the dead. NO man dies for a known lie. Certainly not 11 men (not counting Paul). Muslims die for a lie because they believe the garbage Koran to be true. They didn't see things like a resurrection.

In addition to all this, those 27 extra-Christian sources confirm the crucifixion. Even rational atheists normally have to admit Jesus was crucified (even if they believe he was a man). The early Jews certainly had motivation to make this claim, as it would have helped stop the Christian movement. However, too many eye witnesses prevented this absurdity.

Now let's go to Islam: The Koran was written about 550-600 years after the New Testament writings. Unlike Christianity, which didn't change Hebrew Scripture (it is the Old Testament), Islam changes everything in Hebrew and New Testament writings. mohammed learned bits and pieces of these religions and made up his own. As he was illiterate, he didn't get it right. Some "final revelation".

The problems with the Koran is that it claims the Bible is true and the Koran is final revelation (Surah 3:7 and Surah 5:45-50). Then it goes on to change all the most important writings/stories of the Bible. 600 years after the fact, mohammed claims that everyone was wrong and Jesus wasn't crucified.

How can you "think" and tell me about the supposed historic problems with the Bible vs. Koran. Why didn't the Koran take the Bible "as is" and add the final revelation? At least Christianity is rational: It didn't tell the Jews they were wrong and make up the Old Testament. The Hebrew Scripture came first.

Face it Naseem. You have bought into an utter lie. mohammed was a false prophet and we are seeing his "fruits" around the world.

I reckon what is happening is the beginning of the end times. Firstly, if you read in 1 John 2: 22-23, it says very clearly 'Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ. He is anti-christ who denies the Father and the Son.' Who else but Mohammed so vehemently denies that Christ is the Son of God. The same Mohammed who curses Christians for our belief in Jesus' Sonship and condemns us to hell. Again in St John of Damascus' critique of Islam in his book The Fountain of Knowledge, the great Saint speaks of Mohammed as being the forerunner of the anti-christ.
So, if you consider the fact that the west has gone into decline, there has been a general falling away already, with secularism having made its stronghold, especially in Europe, while Islam continues to grow and flourish and conquer us through demography, then no doubt we are witnessing the beginning of the end when the anti-christ will come. Indeed he is already here in the form of Islam.

I knew it. I knew it. I knew it.

When I started reading that idiotic drivel I KNEW it was from Naseem. Sure 'nuff, when I paged down to the end, there it was: confirmation from the Land of Oz.

And proof positive that islam is a cult of irrational perverts. They pervert everything. How can they be reasoned with? In order to reason with a person, that person must have a dedication to the truth. They must want to seek truth, and know how to do so. With muslims, there is no such dedication. Truth to them is nothing but what someone can forcefully assert, and their major technique is: Confusion through Lies. Thus the genuine attempts of others to arrive at truth and understanding is corrupted. So, you see, the muslims pervert the search for truth, and the use of reason.

Yes. The irrational persion, the non-rational person, the person with no reason, is, by definition, mentally ill. Of course, the mentally ill almost NEVER recognize their own illness (obsessive compulsives and depressives generally excepted). Their malfunctioning brains convince them that everybody ELSE is wrong.

And the war goes on.

We have misnumbered the World Wars, but not in the way the author suggests. We cannot deny the threat of enemies other than the jihadists. Churchill refered to the Seven Years War, know in North America as the French and Indian War, as a world war. Many consider the Napoleonic Wars a world war. The Kaiser may have been a blowhard, but do not underestimate the threat posed by the military machine originally built by Bismark, added to the forces of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the Ottoman Empire. Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were grave threats, contrary to conspiracy theories. Some consider the Cold War a world war. The current war against Jihadists is World War VI. Or if you wish to consider it part of a conflict that began in the Middle Ages than consider it World War I Part IV. Part I was the conquest of North Africa, Spain, and the Invasion of France stopped at the Battle of Tours. Part II was the Crusades, Part III began with the conquest of Constantinople (not Istanbul)and ended with the Seige of Vienna and Hunyadi of Hungary's resistance. Part IV did not begin on 9/11, it began when Khomenni took the American embassy hostages. Only time will tell if there are any Martels, Scandabegs or Hunyadis today. Feel free to add anything I've missed.

I have this horrible habit at times of glossing over the original post. Joe Farah is right about it being WWI. However, since that name has originally been taken by the Great War of 1914, is it arithmetically correct to call it WW0, or World War (-1)?

The basis of all western law is derived from the Judeo-Christian Bible

Roman Law was of prime importance. It's actually where the important legal concept of the person comes from - Latin persona (a mask). (IIRC, Ibn Warraq has some interesting things to say in Why I am not a Muslim about the lack of this concept in Islamic "civilization".)

But I'm at a loss to understand what could have been going on in the earlier poster's mind when she suggested that "Britons" should be practising Druidism.

In the first place, this is a confusion between different senses of the term "Briton". A form of the word was used by Ancient Romans to refer to the inhabitants of the British Isles and it seems to be a corruption of the word "Pretani", that being one of the tribes inhabiting the area. It also has a modern, political, meaning - as a term consciously chosen to refer to both Englishmen and Scots after the Act of Union of 1707. There is no connection between the two usages. Furthermore, it is doubtful whether "the Celts" who are popularly thought of as being synonymous with the Britons, ever settled the British Isles in numbers. Insofar as they may be thought of as an ethnos at all (as opposed to disparate groups sharing some cultural forms) they were likely no more than a upper stratum of society. (The same may be true of the Anglo-Saxons. These are all disputed matters.)

Secondly, the statement assumes that religious belief is a matter of choice, whereas, in truth, it is not clear that habit and culture do not play a role here. Besides, it is not clear to me that I choose my beliefs on the basis of their (assumed) suitability for me, as opposed to, for example, reflecting on what the evidence obliges me to believe.

Thirdly, no one knows what the Druids did. All we have to go on is a handful of references in some Latin and Greek texts. And one is, perforce, unable to practise what is unknown.

Fourthy and finally, it does however seem likely that the Druids practised hujman sacrifice. Therefore, it seems to me that it would be a bad idea for me to adopt this religion unless I wanted the police knocking on my door. Of course, the police are inclined to turn a blind eye to violence perpetrated by some religions - chiefly Islam - but I daresay that, since I am not a member of an "ethnic minority" (and, therefore, entitled to special dispensation, in fact if not in law) they would make an exception for me if I were to practise Druidic human sacrifice and carry out an arrest.

27 secular Roman and Jewish historians that mention Christian beliefs shortly after the crucifixion. "Jesus is Lord" was the earliest creed, and most historians date that within about 2 years of the crucifixion. Many Roman historians write about the martyrdom of Christians who would not take the "Libellus": "Caesar is Lord". Remember, Rome was an extremely religiously tolerant empire. Christians would have escaped persecution with the belief that Jesus was only a "prophet".

I am beginning to believe that the shahada
http://muttaqun.com/shahada.html
is the prophecied "mark of the beast"
Revelation 20:4
And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.

prophesied↑

Witness
More on the finding of the psalms in the bog.
http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/2006/07/i_have_a_renewe.html

In 1299 primitive islamic Turkish tribesman achieved victories abainst parts of the Byzantine Empire due to a steady stream of GHAZIS, or warriors of the faith, who poured in from all parts of the Middle East to battle against the Christian enemies of Islam. By 1340 all of Asia Minor had fallen to the star and crescent which eventually led them across Hungary to the walls of Vienna. This is history. Today they call themselves jihadists. But, they are the same today as then. Suicidal hoards. Research the Order of St. John, the crusades, Malta and you will understand the length of this war. If the islamo fascist brand of Islam ever get nukes, then it our will will be truly tested.

Naseem,

In you other posting, didn't you say, "In the fullness of time, Arabs will Annihilate Israel?

Now, you're cast youself as downtrodden?

Yeah, right. Your Hizbullah is still intake indeed--without a pair of pants bellow its waist.

Carolyn2, thanks for your interesting thought about prophecy.

I have had to radically rethink my previous ideas about the last days since beginning to learn about Islam. Circa 1975, when I first comtemplated the events of Revelation, it seemed that the major players in the last days would be the Soviets, Europeans and possibly the Chinese.

Now a whole new threat has emerged, of which much of the world is still ignorant. I think in so many ways, 9/11 changed us in the infidel world forever. To think that an ideology this extreme could exist and be in the minds of so many humans, is nearly impossible to believe. That people can justify the taking of innocent life and actually be pleased with and confident in themselves for doing so!

I don't know what to say about how to number this war, but it seems clear that the battle is now engaged.

Naseem -

Your solution to the problems in the Middle East are so callous and stupid, that I hardly know where to begin. Uprooting the Jews from Israel is NOT an option, nor the "solution" to this crisis; but rather showing love and support to "your cousins", the Jews, and to embrace them with open arms as family and friends.

And your question about "why Americans care about Israel" is pathetic and warped, and hardly the kind of question I would expect from a "peace loving" Muslim like yourself. Why do we care about Israel? Are you kidding? We care about Israel because it's what we DO, Naseem. We CARE about those who have been wronged. We care about Israel because it's the right thing to do!!

Israel is the BIRTHPLACE OF THE JEWS. It isn't the birthplace of the Palestinians, but the Jews, and for that one reason alone they should keep that land.

How would you feel, Naseem, if you were driven out of YOUR homeland and then told that you had no right to it....even after your purchased it back? Think you might consider that a tad-bit unfair? Well, of course you would.

Welcome to planet earth and the American Way!

Hell -- the Jews PURCHASED that land!!

Through mass immigration muslims have infiltrated our nations and their jihad "soldiers" are in the position of destroying us from within.

Even Winston Churchill would have been afraid of this one.

Posted by: americaningermany at July 26, 2006 08:37 AM

Does anyone here ever contemplate the radical demographic shifts of the last thirty years and wonder what started them, and why? The West, ONLY THE WEST, has been overrun by third-world, non-white immigrants, most of whom are illiterate or close to it, unskilled, unassimilable, bellicose, and very unhappy in the Western lands in which they CHOSE to live. In fact, most of them claim to be the victims of bigotry, prejudice, blah, blah, blah.

Western people have been conditioned, especially in Europe, to think that multicultural societies are perfectly normal and to suggest otherwise is tantamount to racial hatred, bigotry and the usual politically correct epithets and condemnations. People are afraid to even discuss race and according to the EU, it doesn't exist. But minority groups do not hesitate to flaunt their "differences", and have become shrill in their demands for special privileges based upon race, religion, or some peculiar perversion or deviation from what used to be considered "normal" behavior. The headlines in the news are devoted almost entirely to the grievances of one minority group or another, and most of these putative grievances are either imaginary or ridiculous.

The point I'm trying to make is this: certain geographical areas, like the Middle East, remain populated by indigenous inhabitants. There are very few Western immigrants. Japan, Korea, and many other countries maintain their own unique cultures and identity by preventing outsiders from moving in and changing them. They are proud of their cultures, their national origins, and they intend to preserve them. But the West has been invaded by the rest and we are told that only foreign cultures are important and worthy of protection. We must graciously welcome anyone and everyone to our countries, give them the fruits of our labor, and never utter a word of complaint while our very identity is being obliterated.

I have nothing against other cultures but they don't belong in my country because we have our own culture. There are forces that have been at work for over thirty-five years to ensure the demise of predominately white, Western countries. Within fifty years, there will be none. But you can bet that Japan, Korea, Saudi ARabia, etc. will remain ethnically pure and culturally intact. What is fair about this?

I remember one day on JW, there was this discussion going on and Infidel Pride had posted, if I remember correctly "World War III began in 662 A.D.". He was correct. He is correct.

610 * 623 * 732* 1066* 1215 * 1453 * 1492 * 1683 * 1928 * 1938 * 1948 * 1996 * 2001

Shouldn't that be 623 AD? This is when Mo kicked off the blood-letting, which is Jihad, which is the quintessence of Islam. Hate. Murder. Take.

Significantly, 623 was about extortion, robbery, kidnapping, murder, ransom, anti-Semitism, mass murder, and sex slavery. The Moslems kicked off their wealth gathering that year. The Moslems kicked off their mass recruiting campaign that year. It was a very bad year.

I know this is off topic but is there another anti Jihad board I can review? Posted by: Keep enemy close

http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/
http://www.waronjihad.org/

Hope this works

I know this is off topic but is there another anti Jihad board I can review? Posted by: Keep enemy close
............

One good site is Daniel Pipes. He doesn't seem to be posting quite as frequently as he once did, but still very useful overall. I think the correct url is below, or you can google it.

http://www.danielpipes.org

Assalamau-Laikum Champ,

It has been a while since we last spoke, I hope you are in the best of health and well on the way to becoming a proud grandmom.

Myself, I am still trying to adjust to all the "free" time I have now that Anwer has gone. I don't feel like praying at the moment and just simply ask for Allah's forgiveness for not praying on that day...it's gonna have to do because that's all I have for now!

You say "Your solution to the problems in the Middle East are so callous and stupid, that I hardly know where to begin. Uprooting the Jews from Israel is NOT an option, nor the "solution" to this crisis;"

Why not...if the muslim enemy outlined in the Koran is not there ...why the need to fight. This is not to say that Israel should not exist...just not in harm's way. Champ realise that Israel is NEVER going to be safe there...that's reality....you can say that muslims are stupid for following the edict in the koran "never take the jew & christian as your friend" ( I have taken you as a friend) BUT this is gonna result in perputal war 4ever...which will eventually spread to your hometown too.

In short ...it is a stupid place to setup Isreal in the middle of Arab lands.

You say "Israel is the BIRTHPLACE OF THE JEWS. It isn't the birthplace of the Palestinians, but the Jews, and for that one reason alone they should keep that land".

Sorry this won't wash....Hell, large portions of the USA is the birthpace of the red indians, same for the abos in Australia, Maoris in NZ, even the sikhs lost large portions of their land to Pakistan...they don't get their birth place back do they?

Champ you are thinking with your heart...think with your mind...the jews need to be taken out of harm's way....that's reality.... I am merely offering a solution on the table.

even the sikhs lost large portions of their land to Pakistan...they don't get their birth place back do they?

Despite being from India, I'll back a demand for Khalistan (something that Pakistan has in the past supported), provided it has Lahore has its capital, includes all of Pakistani Punjab and NWFP (Peshawar too was Sikh, not Pathan) and have a huge statue dedicated to Hari Singh Nalwa, who while dead, frightened off the Afghan troops at the battle of Jamrud (I'm sure shor's abujan didn't tell you that?). All Mohammedans can be transfered to KSA. After all, those big handsome Arabs need slaves, and there are some 200m of you, so...

You too need to be out of harms way. I'm assuming that being Qadiani, Wahabi KSA or Qatar would be unsafe for you. How about Oman, or UAE?

Susanp, here is a Frontpage article on the Immigration Act of 1965, it explains how a few rich men decided to flood our country with 3rd world refugees.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=4991

Stand fast in the liberty, I don't know if I am even close, but things are falling into place. Israel is back in the land after 2000 years. The events necessary to say "it is the last day" are happening as we watch.

Thanks Carolyn2, but I'm very familiar with the traitors who started the deluge that will ultimately destroy America. The chief architect and author of this and the most recent debacle of an immigration bill, Ted Kennedy, is a disgrace. I cannot enunciate the utter contempt and enmity I have for that sorry excuse of an American. But he has been joined by many who were supposed to be on our side, including the president. Although I partially understand what they are aiming for, I remain astounded that they are determined to concede every ounce of our sovereignty and destroy the middle class in America.

The new name of the game in America is identity politics in a multicultural society---a multicultural society imposed by the upper echelons of the American elite. Nobody condemns non-Western nations for sustaining their ethnic populations and preserving their unique cultures. The aren't called racists or bigots, and nobody holds rallies and demonstrations all over these countries in protest of "apartheid."

When an American complains about America being overrun by Mexican peasants or surly muslims, my God, the indignation is explosive and the accusations of racism, bigotry, and hate flood the airwaves like a tsunami. Even Schwartzenegger caved on illegal immigration after he witnessed what he called " an incident of blatant prejudice" when a woman shouted "I want my country back." What is prejudicial about that remark? That is just the beginning of the coming backlash as more and more unsuitable, unassimilable, incompatible immigrants flood this country.

The elites responsible for deliberately polluting America with third world immigrants don't have to contend with their crime, their slums, or the enormous expense they create for municipalities and states. Their children don't have to suffer in the deplorable public school system which in some places, is on the verge of collapse because of multilingual issues, overcrowding, and extreme poverty. They are entirely isolated from these undesirable people, so why should they care?

Nobody ever asked me if I wanted a "multicultural" society, where dozens of languages are spoken and special interest minority groups are the prime focus of politicians and lawmakers. This issue was never put on a ballot to be voted on, but "minorities" are sacred, protected, and the recipients of endless federal perks, just for being "different." The egalitarian defenders and protectors of the endless and ever expanding minority groups, in their radical, over-compensating efforts to ensure equality, have accomplished precisely the opposite. It's going to be interesting when it explodes in their stupid faces, as what's left of the rapidly fading majority unleashes its fury.

Great post Susanp, as always. I figured your question was rhetorical, but linked to the article in case some who come here didn't know the beginning of our woes.