Indonesia: Police do nothing to protect Ahmadiyah mosque from Islamic Defenders Front attacks

A Moroccan court on Friday sentenced one of the country’s most famous rappers to one year in prison over a video critical of the police, judicial officials told AFP

Read more: http://www.maghrebchristians.com/2012/05/12/moroccan-rapper-jailed-over-video/#ixzz1uf8zbDnv

Youssef

"The Ahmadis are considered heretics by mainstream Muslims, in part because they eschew violent jihad"

If they reject violent jihad.... they are heretics of the muslim faith because the koran is their sole supreme authority. It's worrisome that too few people in the west are aware of that fact.

In case it's not said enough - Thank You Robert, for all of the brave work you are doing. Please keep up the good work. Never stop. God Bless you.

"Police were on scene at the location of the attack, yet they did not take any adequate measures to prevent the it."

Quiet please! And pass the popcorn.

islam, where bad is good and badder is better.

Remember this video? The lynching of Ahmadis by a muslim mob, check out the policeman reaction... NOTHING!

http://crossmuslims.blogspot.com/2011/02/indonesia-lynching.html

Who are the Ahmadiyas?

Read:

"The Ahmadiyas,the only Truly Peaceful and Progressive Group in the Muslim World,that is Rejected as being Muslim by the Sunnis and Shias"

http://www.antisharia.com/2011/06/02/the-ahmadiyasthe-only-truly-peaceful-and-progressive-group-in-the-muslim-worldthat-is-rejected-as-being-muslim-by-the-sunnis-and-shias/

ALSO CHECK OUT

"Debate between Michael Licona and Yusuf Ismail on “Did Jesus die by Crucifixion in the 1st Century?”

http://www.antisharia.com/2012/05/12/debate-between-michael-licona-and-yusuf-ismail-on-did-jesus-die-by-crucifixion-in-the-1st-century/

Awesome Imaginary Debate by Michael Licona:a Debate between Paul and Muhammad about the Resurrection of Jesus

It is the first and so far the only book of its kind.Two historical figures do a formal debate live on TV,with a moderator in front of a live audience of tens of thousands.The book shows how the debate proceeds and in the end it is left to the reader to decide who was more convincing.Here are the contents of the book “Paul Meets Muhamad:a Christian-Muslim Debate on the Resurrection”(2006):

1.Paul’s Opening Statement

2.Muhammad’s Opening Statement

3.Paul’s Rebuttal

4.Muhammad’s Rebuttal

5.Discussion Period:Part 1….followed by Discussion Period Part 2,3,4,5,6 and 7 (where moderator asks questions)

6.Muhammad’s Closing Statement

7.Paul’s Closing Statrement

8.Moderator’s Conclusion

"The Progressive,Peaceful Alevis,a Shia Group,the Second Biggest Religious Group of Turkey"

http://www.antisharia.com/2011/07/13/the-progressivepeaceful-alevisa-shia-groupthe-second-biggest-religious-group-of-turkey/

It's common for the police to stand around sucking their thumbs while Mahoundians rampage...It's in sharia...There is no Islamic penalty for rampaging...so no interference or arrests are called for...

Maybe the Ahmadis and the Lady Gaga fans should join forces and fight back.

This is an illustration of why democracy (actually, a republic form of government) in a Muslim country is dysfunctional. The non-violent Muslims give political cover to the violent Muslims. In a democracy, the institutions like the police are accountable to the politicians. In a country like the United States, where the majority of the electorate values real justice, generally open violence is not tolerated.

But, where Muslims form a majority, or a large proportion of the electorate, it is politically very difficult for the police to take effective action against violent jihadists, particularly if the jihadists are willing to die, and so must be stopped before any demonstrable damage is done.

We can see the beginnings of this in the US and Canada, where political cover organizations like CAIR bring political pressure against preventative police work. Once Muslims become 25% or more of the population, it will be virtually impossible for the police to carry out effective, preventative operations against Muslims planning jihadi violence.

The safest Muslim countries for non-Muslims are actually those countries under strong dictatorial rule, or rule by a well-established hereditary monarchy. Pressures by the United States on Muslim countries to democratize are worse than naive.

Under no circumstances should a Western nation occupy Muslim territory. Guerrilla warfare is the most effective type of strategy, and can be carried out with low-tech means. Muslims are not going to change their viewpoint. Western countries should NOT look for popular representation or Western justice in Muslim countries. They should also under no circumstances allow ANY Muslim immigration. If the Ahmadiyas wish to exist in an environment of freedom, they should go all the way, and renounce Islam altogether. Until they do that, they will simply add to the political cover of violent jihadis.

"The Ahmadis are considered heretics by mainstream Muslims, in part because they eschew violent jihad (but not dawah or Sharia)." --Robert

I have often heard/read this over the years, but I've never seen any authoritative Ahmadi source that rejects all forms of jihad warfare. Perhaps it's there, but I haven't encountered it. Or perhaps they don't go as far as the mainstream Muslims do (e.g., in supporting offensive warfare to spread Islam). Anyways, as far as I'm aware, the Ahmadis do accept violent jihad warfare, at least in "defensive" form. Given the ambiguity and elasticity of "defense" of Islam, what they adopt in terms of permissible military actions may be not much different from mainstream Islam.

I agree, from what I've read, that the Ahmadis do support sharia, and, regarding da'wa, from what I have seen they are aggressive proselytizers

I like the way Islam consistently label their aggression (jihad) as "defense." They are defending Islam when they attack defenseless Ahmadiyah mosque. Crazy-making.