I'm so confused, budhists monks set themselves on fire to make a point, but these brave muslims send kids to do their dirty work, what a bunch of cowards!!!

Posted by: OLD SARGE at January 20, 2007 8:55 AM

OMG!!! Mohammedanism just has to be one of the most misunderstood religions ever!! The non Muslims misunderstand it and most Muslims misunderstand it. What a mess

Actually the Koran is a chaotic unchronological mess. The Hadiths are a mess. The Ayatollahs and Mullahs look messy and sloppy. Why would Islam not be a mess? Islam produces illogical disorderly people with too many of the men tending toward parasitism where they kick back in their smoke shops with their hookahs and over sugared mint tea while their brainwashed women do all the donkey work. That is slothful and messy!

Posted by: dennisw at January 20, 2007 9:36 AM

A couple of questions for the sheik:
first, Why are you still among the living? Why haven't you gone to claim your reward of all those virgins (or the boys like pearls, Allah is so considerate of those with different gender orientations) by being killed in battle or making yourself a suicide bomber? For, as it is written (tho maybe not in the koran): "Actions speak louder than words", and "Talk is cheap", and "I've heard you talk the talk, now let's see you walk the walk."
Second, why do you blaspheme against the prophet Mohammed, the perfect man, whom we should imitate in all things? Mo never committed suicide, yet you suggest we should do something that, by not doing it, he in effect forbade. It seems that there's a fatwad just wsiting to be issued against you, my dear sheik.

Posted by: ebonystone at January 20, 2007 9:49 AM

There is a funny little movie with William Bendix titled "Kill the Umpire." I don't think a single unpire has ever been killed because of this exhortation. If muslim made a movie titled "Kill the Kafir", you can bet your life savings that hundreds and hundreds of non-Muslims will become dead.

Muslims who preach this should be locked up and the key melted.

Posted by: Pelayo at January 20, 2007 9:50 AM

What's so laughable is that ANY media reporting is TOO MUCH for Islamists, because their own words (when not tailored for Western consumption) condemn them, again and again.

Posted by: Dumb Ox at January 20, 2007 9:53 AM

Same old story. Anything a non-muslim says, regardless of the context, is automatically viewed as islamophobic. Everything a muslim says is always taken out of context by all non-muslims. Who really has the phobia here?

Posted by: tblab at January 20, 2007 9:57 AM

Why use the word firebrand as a adjective to describe this dreg? "Firebrand" is a neutral word to describe a fervent believer. Hell's bells, Thomas Paine could have been called a firebrand. News writers need to begin using better adjectives for Mohammedan preachers, but they won't.

How about "Bloodthirsty cleric Sheik Feiz Mohamed."

Posted by: Pelayo at January 20, 2007 10:05 AM

Muslim internet forums were buzzing with criticism of the media for running the story yesterday, accusing news outlets of misinterpreting the meaning of jihad, which can also mean a peaceful quest to be a good Muslim.

Who cares if it ALSO means that? The precise problem is that it doesn't ONLY mean this.

Posted by: venividivici at January 20, 2007 10:08 AM

lol u see fez's hats? lol he has whack fashion and whack views.....def not an aussie....

instead of saying "Gday mate" sheik would say "Jihad mate"

instead of saying "throw some chops on the barbie" he would say "throw some jews on the barbie"

instead of saying "she'll be right" he would say "she'll be allright to rape"

instead of saying "no worries mate" he would say "u better worry u kuffir"

instead of saying "lets go the beach and swim" he would say lets "kill the imodest muslim chicks in the burkhinis"

instead of saying "wanna go out for a coffe?" he would say "wanna go out and kill kuffir?"

instead of saying "ill get a bacon and egg mc muffin thanks" he would scream "die western infidel scum - alahu ahkbar" whilst setting of the bomb

Posted by: W_D_J_D at January 20, 2007 10:17 AM

Of course, he meant "kill them by means of a personal struggle against things like mischievousness, temptation and personal harm."
--- posted by Robert

On camera or the radio Spencer is so professorial, such the academic. But, deep down, the man can be a sarcastic smart-ass. Where merited, to be sure.

God bless America.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at January 20, 2007 10:26 AM

Re: "If you're a hardliner, you'll say these in lectures; if you're a moderate, you'll keep these views to yourself," Mr Mallah said.

Islam is a religion of deception. It's not "reformable". War is deception. Deception is war. There is never any plain speaking honesty from Muslims, but always a hidden agenda, always hypocrisy-deception. That reality is finally becoming conscious to non-Muslims in America. Deception is systemic in Islam.

Posted by: Frank at January 20, 2007 10:29 AM

"If you're a hardliner, you'll say these in lectures; if you're a moderate, you'll keep these views to yourself"

What is he, some kind of Islamophobe?!?

Posted by: Null at January 20, 2007 10:30 AM

Alarmed Pig Farmer-

Robert is a rational man. For that reason, I'm sure that at one time he thought that all these Jihad issues could be honestly discussed by honest and reasonable Muslims and non-Muslims and things would be settled by honesty and reason. I'm sure he looks back at that view as being very naieve.

One day, he will realize that Islam is not reformable. He still has some hope left in that regard, but it's not going to happen. This conflict will end in the Mideast and it will not end via the use of reason.

Posted by: Frank at January 20, 2007 10:51 AM

If martyrdom is the highest pinnacle of his ambition, why is he still alive?

Surely he could have found a war to fight in (heaven knows, as a muslim he's spolit for choice) in between making money selling these DVDs.

Posted by: Celsius at January 20, 2007 11:04 AM

Reforming Islam reminds me of the old saying that "you can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit". Deception is too deeply rooted in the belief-system. The truth about Mohammad makes "reform" impossible. "War is deception" is the unchangeable truth about Mohammad. How do you reform that? It has to be destroyed.

Posted by: Frank at January 20, 2007 11:30 AM

The amount of times I have read the following quote:

"misinterpreting the meaning of jihad"

I have always wondered how anyone can misinterpret the phrase:

"Kill all non-believers"

If I were to say in public:

"Throw all Muslims out of the country"

could I or, and more to the point, would I be able to claim in court that I was misinterpreted? And would this be accepted by the court?? We all know the answer to this.

Posted by: Alan(UK) at January 20, 2007 11:32 AM

He surely meant 'kill the kuffars with kindness & compassion"-can't you feel the love already?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at January 20, 2007 11:38 AM

One day, he will realize that Islam is not reformable.

My guess is that he and Fitzgerald have understood that for a long time, probably from their outset. They're just maintaining respectabilty, per the Islam Fictive Reality, for the time being.

Of necessity to be able to spread the reality word via the media, as required by circumstance. Go bless 'em.

Posted by: Alarmed Pig Farmer at January 20, 2007 11:49 AM

Oh no, such words are not inciting hatred & violence, that’s just their manner of harmless speaking. These zombies for Allah are so use to sucessfully playing their suicidal host countries for suckers that they are sure they can get by with & talk their way out of anything short of actually being caught red handed beheading a nun – even then some might try to defend it as a freedom of expression act.

Lock these guys up for life! Make tougher laws. Deport their followers! But most of all stop this stupid, suicidal Muslim immigration! NO its not “racist” or “bigoted” to do so and their immigration is not all right because “most of them are nice & peaceful folk who don’t approve of radicals”. Stupid! You don’t need all of them to be radicals to have bloody terror & eventual demographic takeover & sharia. Why is the West so stupid?

Posted by: FM at January 20, 2007 11:54 AM

It is an open and shut case.
He says to our faces that he wants us dead.
Unless there is some type of spiritual blindness at work here, this is easy to understand.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at January 20, 2007 12:00 PM

APF-

I can see Hugh suggesting where and when to deceptively rabbit-punch in the matter as he coaches Robert. Robert will say "Isn't that outlawed in boxing"? Hugh will say, "Yes. War is deception".

Posted by: Frank at January 20, 2007 12:05 PM

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.sensesofcinema.com/images/05/cteq/rabbit_punch.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/cteq/05/37/rabbit_punch.html&h=199&w=264&sz=46&hl=en&start=1&tbnid=Kpv6igL2wnkTnM:&tbnh=84&tbnw=112&prev=/images%3Fq%3Drabbit%2Bpunch%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26rls%3DGGLJ,GGLJ:2006-36,GGLJ:en

Posted by: Frank at January 20, 2007 12:08 PM

This should work..

http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/cteq/05/37/rabbit_punch.html

Posted by: Frank at January 20, 2007 12:09 PM

THE GOD I KNOW says

For we war not against FLESH&BLOOD
BUT
Against spiritual powers in high places

Love your enemy so you will blameless
Heap hot coals of fire upon the heads of your enemies
Love those who hate you
Pray for those who despitefully use you

God is also the God of the stranger & foriengner

Let us just focus on GOD
My God does not say - KILL

Posted by: holy warrior at January 20, 2007 12:41 PM

If one might bring up the historical point of "firebrands", it used to be government policy from America, Britain, France, Russia....well still is in Russia and China, that elected officials have meetings with intelligence officers, point out to key Parliment or Congressional officials the need to sanction specific "firebrands" and then a kook from their own network looking to move up or a mysterious heart attack eliminates said firebrand.

The media gets on board with a story of terrorists eating themselves or firebrands have high blood pressure and have heart attacks. The conspiracy bloggers all say it is the evil CIA or FSB. The terrorists rant....but not quite so loud and tend to behave a whole lot more as they know heart attacks are catching.

These Muslims are terrified of dying. The moment that justice is dispensed in this war on the firebrands is the moment the fires start being put out. Animals in a forest learn quickly to keep quiet and turban heads will learn to behave too.

Skinheads sitting in American prisons and rotting in graves by FBI bullets can not be all wrong.

Posted by: Lame Cherry at January 20, 2007 12:50 PM

holy warrior,
I'll let you go hug the jihadis.
I'll confront evil and the devil, thank you very much.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at January 20, 2007 1:34 PM

holy warrior --

Please clarify your above post by answering these two questions:

1) Do you believe that Jesus Christ is FOR or AGAINST war? Does Jesus make any exceptions to this?

2) Is Jesus completely against killing another human being under ANY circumstance?

I am a Christian, and there are plenty of Biblical passages that support war and killing. Jesus did say to 'love your enemies', but in The Book of Revelation He also said that 'He would make war' on those who oppose Him upon His return.

There are countless passages in the Bible where God destroyed the unrighteous, and sometimes he used war to accomplish that end.

Jesus instructed His own disciples to prepare for their journeys, and one of the items He told them to bring was their sword -- a literal sword for protection.

During Christ's arrest in the garden, Peter used his sword on a Roman soldier by cutting off his ear, indicating that carrying a sword was permitted by Christ.

Jesus rebuked Peter, not because he shouldn't use his sword for self-defense, but because in this unique situation Jesus didn't want anything to stop Him from fulfilling His destiny; and His destiny was to be placed under arrest and to be taken to the cross to die for our sins.

Posted by: champ at January 20, 2007 2:14 PM

Maybe Jesus had this conversation with Peter.....

"Peter, how many times have I asked you to get rid of that sword? You KNOW how I feel about killing."

Obviously Jesus approved of Peter carrying a sword. Maybe it was ornamental purposes?

Posted by: champ at January 20, 2007 2:23 PM

"It is saying to stand up for yourself, to defend yourself and defend your land."

The whiners should stand up for themselves,THINK for themselves, be grateful for living in the lands of the free, instead of listening to these crazed mullahs,imams etc.

They need to defend themselves, and their children from being happily lead to their graves by these muslim monsters.

There is no need to defend the lands they are living in as these do not belong to them.
If they must defend lands from where they came from, then they need to go back there, taking the mosque motormouths back with them.
It's too simple...

Posted by: freetoBEfree at January 20, 2007 2:24 PM

Oh, and I will not let my children and grandchildren be forced to worship baal.
Who loves more?
Love is not weakness.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at January 20, 2007 2:37 PM

Simply targeting obvious Imams like this one won't be enough.

The swamp of Islam will belch up his type with great regularity -- but without clearing out the muck, filth and decay of the underlying rotten core, poisonous bubbles will emerge and emerge and emerge. Feiz Mohammed is but a symptom of the larger festering bog, a gaseous byproduct of the rotting heart of Islam.

Targeting such person would be like capturing the fumes from a sewer imagining that the sewer is caused by the fumes and can be removed or cleaned up by the capturing of the fumes.

These poisonous Imams won't be cleared up until the entire rotting hulk of Islam is washed away from our land.

Posted by: jsla at January 20, 2007 3:22 PM

Let this Shitty Sheik lie & whine about being
'misunderstood'.As with rest of his ilk,notice he is still living [in great comfort] yet exhorts
his moronic,brainwashed followers to be suicide bombers.If your average Muslim had intelligence
they would be asking themselves "Why must I sacrifice myself & my children while our leaders
stay home and send their kids to the best Infidel
colleges?" Sometimes it is a comfort to see the stupidity of our enemies.Islam will never prevail while we have dogs & Pigs and free speech.

Posted by: Morgane at January 20, 2007 3:22 PM

Mike Savage made the point a few weeks ago that it would be a good idea to post to websites and place on billboards the photos of suicide bombers after they have done their work. It's a gruesome reality that Sheik Feiz Mohamed does not desire for himself. I think it's an excellent idea.

http://www.jtf.org/israel/aaa.israel.plo.suicide.bomber.fingerprints.crop.jpg

Posted by: Frank at January 20, 2007 3:35 PM

Hi folks, I've been reading here for a while but Champ's comments finally prmpted me to bite the bullet, as it were, and sign up to reply.

Champ, I think I can see what you're trying to get across and I support it, to a certain extent.

The commandments tell us not to kill, or murder, depending on your interpretation of the exact wording. Generally the scriptures are quite down on violence and murder "in the name of god". APart from the invasion and conquering of Canaan, the Israelites generally weren't required to fight offensive wars, and indeed they were punished several times for attacking nations who weren't at war with them.

Never is there any scripture in the bible that calls for death and murder as a means of spreading conversion, but only as a tool for punishing those who had specifially rejected God's message, which more often than not was Israel herself.

Now the particular passages you reference in the new testament refer to two different things. From the original language of the various versions of the arrest of Jesus, it is quite clear that the sword Peter carried wasn't meant to be there. Jesus would have known it was there, of course. The other passage you've referenced, where Jesus tells his disciples to carry a sword, is a warning that the blessing they had been living under until that point - of having him around, and being protecte by his mere presence - would soon depart from them. In Israel at that time it was necessary to be armed while travelling for a great many reasons, chief of which was defending yourself from the wildlife. The area was teeming with big cats and other predators. Banditry was a problem as well, but the wildlife wasn't picky about who it ate, and they were as likely to be picked off by a hungry lion as you were.

Up to that point the disciples apparently hadn't carried weapons of any sort; they were living under a supernatural protection. After Jesus left them they would be travelling alone, and would need defence. Now, it's also possible to interpret the passage in question as a requirement to be well armed with knowledge of the scriptures, but this is probably just a happy coincidence.

I shall repeat, nowhere is there a specific command to kill, and go on killing, and Jesus was quite specific; he came to fulfil the law that existed, not destroy it. One of those was was "do not kill." In this sense, killing is anything unwarranted, rather than a blanket ban on any death at the hands of another, otehrwise the subsequent use of war as a means to conquer Canaan would be a contradiction of God's word, and the entire raison d'etre of the law would be nullified before it was even put to much use.

Jesus, and the disciples in various epistles, also made it clear that submission to the secular government was necessary as far as it didn't conflict with Christian law. They also made it clear that, while we are submitted to the law of God, and consequently in no particular need of satying alive, nevertheless we should always be on our guard to defend others against the predations of evil, however this might be carried out. This defence inevitably leads to some joining the armed forces, in order to carry out that particular duty in a much wider fashion. Never, though, should we assume that defence requires pre-emtptive assaults against those who aren't threatening us in order to convert them to our way of thinking.

In short, we should not "kill". We fight in defence, and only for defence, and we should not even consider using threats and war in order to try and "convert" people. Christians can therefore take their place in the army and serve as they wish, but they shouldn't presume to claim they are killing in the name of God. But, for defence, it's necessary to occasionally shoot at people who are shooting at you. Those that give up their life for another wil save it.

And that's the fundamental difference between islam and judeo-christian thought. Islam sees self-sacrifice as a means to take others with you. They honour the "brave" warrior who enters a hopless battle in order to slaughter his enemy, whether they're armed or not. We honour those who stand against hopless odds, not to kill the enemy, but to save our own, our friends and brothers from death.

I'd beter stop now before I end up writing an essay... :D

Posted by: Archonix at January 20, 2007 3:39 PM

http://www.lankalibrary.com/images/neelan3.jpg

http://www.tonyrogers.com/news/suicide_bomber_residue.htm

Posted by: Frank at January 20, 2007 3:42 PM

Here's a sneak preview on a song I'm recording right now:

They say 'we love death and you love coca colaaaa...'

I sez 'how can I help to get yor ass to Allaaaaa...'

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at January 20, 2007 4:21 PM

Archonix --

Thanks for writing, and welcome to Jihad Watch!

First, I want to make it ABUNDANTLY clear that I totally and completely agree with you: conversion should never be forced on anyone through any means, especially through murder and/or intimidation. I am 100% against Islam's position on this practice, and I believe their religion to be false and demonic, so I wanted to clear that up first and foremost; and I'm sorry if my post implied otherwise.

Secondly, I'm a little confused as to why you said, "it is quite clear that the sword wasn't meant to be there"; referring to being in the Garden of Gethsemane. What makes you say that, and do you have scripture in support of that assertion? I find nothing in the bible that states that the sword wasn't meant to be there.

As far as the disciples carrying a sword while traveling for protection against animals ONLY, I would have to disagree because scripture isn't exactly clear on whether or not it was used for protection against animals or attacks by humans. I would have to say both.

And suggesting that the 'sword' may represent being "armed with knowledge" is at best a stretch because you have to consider the context of what Jesus was saying. Jesus was speaking in very practical terms, instructing them to make sure they had enough food and water for their travels. So the context of this passage supports, it doesn't suggest, that Jesus meant a literal sword.

"Thou Shall Not Kill" is one interpretation. "Thou Shall Not Murder" is another. I believe the original Hebrew if referring to murdering someone, not killing them. Both the Old and New Testament support capital punishment too, and a simple Google search would give you scripture upon scripture in support of it as well.

Even Jesus supported capital punishment, but most people don't know or believe that. Jesus also talked about hell more than heaven, but that doesn't stop people from believing that hell does not exist.

I found a good website that supports capital punishment for "murderers" from a biblical perspective if you want to check it out:
http://www.geocities.com/a_christian_conservative/

The point you made about the Bible being against making a "preemptive assaults" strike is a REAL stretch, and a position that I would say is a very dangerous one to take.

And the context by which you made this statement is puzzling because in no way have I ever said that we should "use a preemtive assault to change someone's way of thinking", unless you were speaking to someone or something else.

Write again, this has been very educational and stimulating.

Take care!

Posted by: champ at January 20, 2007 4:46 PM

With that said -- I support making a preemptive strike against Iran & it's allies by destroying each and every one of their nuclear facilities NOW!

Posted by: champ at January 20, 2007 4:58 PM

"If you're a hardliner, you'll say these in lectures; if you're a moderate, you'll keep these views to yourself."

So that's why we haven't heard the big public outcry against Muslims treating people like crap. The "moderates" are TOTALLY okay with the way non-Muslims are treated by other vicious Muslims...they are just not allowed to say so. Check! Those pesky DVD's...

Champ, Holy Warrior, Carolyn & Archonix,

Lest we be deluded by the heavy PC mentality surrounding us, it is ALWAYS okay to defend one's self and one's family and friends from being annihilated. And it is even more important to do so against Islam. Jesus exhorts us in the Gospel not to be afraid of those who can destroy the body but of those who can destroy the body and the soul. Islam is quite capable of doing both. And that is my biggest personal concern. To kill the body is disturbing but doesn't bother me as much as the thought of Islam getting it's tennacles around my children and grandchildren and the only way we are going to end this threat is to destroy it.

It's either us or them. They use terror to get their way and a lot of people just can't or won't stand up to terror. They will sacrifice their freedom for the illusion of security and in the end, will have nothing but slavery and NO security. Reasoning with these folks just doesn't work. Look at what the "peace loving Imams" on the channel 4 dispatches have to say about those who disagree with them...1) women wear the hijab or we hit her, 2) kuffar should be crucified and left to hang for three days and bleed to death, 3) the systems of the infidels need to be destroyed, 4) Muslims need to take over all the governments of the world. I don't want that and as long as I'm still breathing I will fight against that, and God will not condemn me for it. And when it comes down to a physical fight between the Muslims and the rest of us, which we have a pretty good idea it will since it is now happening in Somalia, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Thailand, etc., we will be condemned of a grave sin if we DO NOT stand up against it and defend our countries and our people. Knowing what we now know we will not be let off the hook if we surrender to demonic Islamism.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 20, 2007 5:00 PM

'Secondly, I'm a little confused as to why you said, "it is quite clear that the sword wasn't meant to be there"; referring to being in the Garden of Gethsemane. What makes you say that, and do you have scripture in support of that assertion? I find nothing in the bible that states that the sword wasn't meant to be there.'

Champ, I think Archonix is referring to the accounts in the Gospels of Jesus' passion. In St. Luke, Ch.22, vs 48-51:

And Jesus said to him: Judas, dost thou betray the Son of man with a kiss? And they that were about him seeing what would follow, said to him: Lord, shall we strike with the sword? And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. But Jesus answering said: Suffer ye thus far. And when he had touched his ear, he healed him.

And more importantly, St. MAtthew, Ch 26, vs 50-54 says:

Then they came and laid hands on Jesus, and held him. And behold one of them that were with Jesus, stretching forth his hand, drew out his sword: and striking the servant of the high priest,cut off his ear. Then Jesus saith to him: Put up again thy sword into its place: for all that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Thinkest thou that I cannot ask my Father, and he will give me presently more than twelve legions of angels? How then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that so it must be done?

The point is not that we are not allowed to defend ourselves. The point Jesus was making was that if Peter and the other disciples defended Jesus by the sword then the divine plan would be altered and Jesus would not have been able to fulfill the Scriptures and do that awesome thing that He did, i.e., die a truly gruesome death and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that He truly is God by rising again on the third day.

When I think of how Mohammad is praised in Islam for being such a super man and how Christ is demoted to a mere prophet, when Jesus did rise from the dead and Mohammad is still rotting in his grave, it makes me want to puke. But I digress.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 20, 2007 5:19 PM

"He surely meant 'kill the kuffars with kindness & compassion'-can't you feel the love already?"

Killing me softly with Jihad
Reciting Koran with his words
Killing me softly with Jihad
Killing me softly, with Jihad...

I heard he preached a khutba,
I heard he had a style,
And so I came to see him and listen for a while
And there he was this Imam
Stranger to my eyes

Chorus:
Cutting my neck with his curved sword (one time, one time)
Reciting Koran with his words (two times, two times)
Killing me softly with Jihad
Killing me softly, with Jihad
Denoucning my whole life with his words
Killing me softly, with Jihad...

Posted by: remote_control at January 20, 2007 5:25 PM

Sheik & Remote,

I love your music, guys! You really rock my world.

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at January 20, 2007 5:36 PM

I second that! I'm sure we could put together a musical - perhaps Mark Steyn would contribute a song or two? The Sandy Pants,... oh, the Sandy Pants can.. Anything to get that out of my head.

Posted by: Brett_McS at January 20, 2007 6:27 PM

Off topic from the UK:

I cannot shake your hand, sir. I'm a Muslim and you're a man

Ummah News Links

Posted by: ummahnewslinks at January 20, 2007 7:41 PM

"And suggesting that the 'sword' may represent being "armed with knowledge" is at best a stretch"

I said as much. The context is very clear, but it can be used as a jumping-off point for theological discussion of the necessity to be well versed in teh scripture. Happy coincidence, see?

"As far as the disciples carrying a sword while traveling for protection against animals ONLY, I would have to disagree because scripture isn't exactly clear on whether or not it was used for protection against animals or attacks by humans. I would have to say both."

I never said ONLY. I said MAINLY. Practical considerations require a look at what sort of dangers they would encounter on the roads in Judea of that time, and the biggest danger was the wildlife, then the bandits, raiders, rebels, murderers and other such things.

"I find nothing in the bible that states that the sword wasn't meant to be there."

The implication is that the sword was brought without permission.

Otherwise, I freely admit that my logic is not 100%, and you've raised some interesting points that I'll have to consider. My statement re "pre-emptive assaults" is probably best seen as a digression from the thread of the conversation, or an attempt to philosophise around the complex issues raised by the requirements scripture places on christians. I tend to do that a lot, and I don't always consider the words I'm using. "Pre-emptive" is probably the wrong phrase, as it can be used in a defensive way. Perhaps I should have said "unprovoked" instead. The passage makes a lot more sense that way.

Posted by: Archonix at January 20, 2007 7:48 PM

"Off topic from the UK:

I cannot shake your hand, sir. I'm a Muslim and you're a man

Ummah News Links

Posted by: ummahnewslinks "

Thanks Ummah.

I was just wondering how this new policewoman will ever be able to arrest any male and clap handcuffs on him?

Posted by: Gramfan at January 20, 2007 9:28 PM

Re: I cannot shake your hand, sir. I'm a Muslim and you're a man

Looks like this woman is just window dressing, to show that the Metro Police Force is diverse. She will probably remain on the police force because of this reason, even if she is clearly an awful police officer. I've got nothing against diversity (I'm an Indian-American) but diversity does not work if a person with sub-par qualifications is hired as window dressing.

Robert, this is a good story to put up.

Posted by: wrathofasma at January 20, 2007 10:43 PM

I say---Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!!

Ecclesiastes the third chapter says there is a time and season to fight, a time for war and a time for peace. Welcome to WW111. Whatcha gonna do when they come for you!!!

Can I go ahead and offically declare that I am islamophobic. Yep, I have a phobia about any islamo-nazi coming to kill, rape, or behead me or my family!

LOL

Islam isnt a religion. Its mental illness contracted from demonic possession. Sad, isnt it?

Posted by: guide inside at January 21, 2007 2:45 AM

Re: "guide inside".

Wholeheartedly agree with you - we should start preparing for WWWIII.

It's the same problem the world over (incl Australia) - the apologists keep ranting on about free speach ETC ETC ETC - Blah Blah Blah while the Muslims say what they like, do what they like and then have the audacity to hide behind our laws, use our free legal aid system, live with us, bludge off our unemplyment systems etc etc etc.

Whilst ever my butt points to the ground I WILL NEVER allow these mongrels to undermine our society, rape & kill my daughters or EVER think they will win this "holy war" against us.

You already have one recruit in Aust - and I'll wager there's many more lining up behind me.

Posted by: Phil the Aussie at January 22, 2007 3:53 AM