| Welcome to Edl The Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Child sex in islam....shocking | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 29 2009, 02:23 PM (944 Views) | |
| Irishcomrad | Nov 2 2009, 06:30 PM Post #51 |
|
Banned
|
Saw the documentary already, these people are gangsters, exploiting the poor for financial gain, evil indeed, but no where does it come anywhere near suicide bombing, blowing up buildings, busses and trains, carnage and terror throughout this planet is caused by your brothers and not one come out to scream and shout it, not one. |
![]() |
|
| Irishcomrad | Nov 2 2009, 06:46 PM Post #52 |
|
Banned
|
ok, lets call them extremist christians for arguments sake, so how big is your extremist problem compared to ours? the truth is Sharia Law is the extremists handbook (unless your a thief of course cos you wouldnt have any hands) Your nutjob brothers have already imposed this heinious law in these countries Iran, Pakistan, Nigeria, Sudan, Egypt when it used to be only saudi arabia where non muslims, jews and women are not allowed in religously tolerant mecca 10. Islam commands that drinkers and gamblers should be whipped. In 2001, Iranian officials sentenced three men to flogging not only for illicit sex (see reason no. nine), but also for drinking alcohol. In 2005, in Nigeria a sharia court ordered that a drinker should be caned eighty strokes. In 2005, in the Indonesian province of Aceh, fifteen men were caned in front of a mosque for gambling. This was done publicly so all could see and fear. Eleven others are scheduled to undergo the same penalty for gambling. After going through two previous confusing stages before coming down hard on drinkers and gamblers, the Quran finally prohibits alcohol and gambling in Sura 5:90—91; they do not prescribe the punishment of flogging, but the hadith does. A poor 'criminal' was brought to Muhammad who became angry: The Prophet felt it hard (was angry) and ordered all those who were present in the house, to beat him [the drinker dragged into Muhammad's presence]. (Bukhari, Punishments, nos. 6774—6775) Thus, we see no offer of help for the alcoholic when he is dragged before Muhammad and his followers. Why does Muhammad not offer rehabilitation? Why does he immediately go to corporal punishment? The later classical legal rulings follow the Quran and the hadith, so we do not need to examine them here. It is sometimes argued that Islamic countries are pure, whereas the West is decadent. No one can argue with this latter claim, but are Islamic countries pure? The Supplemental Material, below, demonstrates that Islamic countries still have drinking and gambling in them. Here is the article that supports this tenth point and that analyzes the confusing Quranic verses on drinking and gambling. It analyzes the hadith and later legal rulings. 9. Islam allows husbands to hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear highhandedness in their wives. In 2004, Rania al—Baz, who had been beaten by her husband, made her ordeal public to raise awareness about violence suffered by women in the home in Saudi Arabia. Saudi television aired a talk show that discussed this issue. Scrolling three—fourths of the way down the link, the readers can see an Islamic scholar holding up sample rods that husbands may use to hit their wives. The Quran says: 4:34 . . . If you fear highhandedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great. (MAS Abdel Haleem, the Qur'an, Oxford UP, 2004) The hadith says that Muslim women in the time of Muhammad were suffering from domestic violence in the context of confusing marriage laws: Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'AbdurRahman bin Az—Zubair Al—Qurazi married her. 'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband and showed her a green spot on her skin caused by beating). It was the habit of ladies to support each other, so when Allah's Apostle came, 'Aisha said, "I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing women. Look! Her skin is greener than her clothes!" (Bukhari) This hadith shows Muhammad hitting his girl—bride, Aisha, daughter of Abu Bakr: Muslim no. 2127: 'He [Muhammad] struck me [Aisha] on the chest which caused me pain.' It is claimed that Islamic societies have fewer incidents of fornication and adultery because of strict laws or customs, for example, women wearing veils over their faces or keeping separate from men in social settings. But these results of fewer incidents of sexual 'crimes' may have unanticipated negative effects in other areas, such as the oppression of women. Generally, sharia restricts women's social mobility and rights, the more closely sharia is followed. For example, in conservative Saudi Arabia women are not allowed to drive cars. In Iran, the law oppresses women. For example, women's testimony counts half that of men, and far more women than men are stoned to death for adultery. Here is the supporting article for the ninth point. It has a long list of different translations of Sura 4:34, in order to resolve confusion over this verse, circulating around the web. This longer article has many links that demonstrate the oppression of women under Islamic law (scroll down to 'Further discussion'). 8. Islam allows an injured plaintiff to exact legal revenge—physical eye for physical eye. In 2003, in Saudi Arabia a man had two teeth extracted under the law of retaliation. In 2003, a court in Pakistan sentenced a man to be blinded by acid after he carried out a similar attack on his fianc�e. In 2005, an Iranian court orders a man's eye to be removed for throwing acid on another man and blinding him in both eyes. The Quran says: 5:45 And We ordained therein for them: Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal. But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation. And whosoever does not judge by that which Allah has revealed, such are the Zalimun (polytheists and wrongdoers . . .). (Hilali and Khan, The Noble Qur'an, Riyadh: Darussalam, 1996) This passage allows for an indemnity or compensation instead of imposing the literal punishment of eye for an eye. No one should have a quarrel with this option. According to the hadith, the plaintiff also has the option to forgive, and this is legitimate, provided a judge oversees the process. The problem is the literal law of retaliation. The hadith and later legal rulings demonstrate that this excessive option was actually carried out, as do the three modern examples linked above. Please go here for the supporting article that cites the hadith and later legal rulings. Islamic law calls all of humanity to march backwards 1,400 years BC and to re—impose the old law of retaliation—literally, and the evidence suggest that the Torah never intended the law to be carried out literally, as the supporting article demonstrates. 7. Islam commands that a male and female thief must have a hand cut off. Warning! This short article has photos of severed hands. The reader should never lose sight of the fact that this punishment is prescribed in the Quran, the eternal word of Allah. It does not exist only in the fevered imagination of a violent and sick radical regime like the Taliban, which once ruled in Afghanistan. A Saudi cleric justifies chopping off hands here. The Quran says: 5:38 Cut off the hands of thieves, whether they are male or female, as punishment for what they have done—a deterrent from God: God is almighty and wise. 39 But if anyone repents after his wrongdoing and makes amends, God will accept his repentance: God is most forgiving and merciful. (Haleem) At first glance, verse 39 seems to accept repentance before the thief's hand is cut off. But the hadith states emphatically that repentance is acceptable only after mutilation. Muhammad himself says that even if his own daughter, Fatima, were to steal and then intercede that her hand should not be cut off, he would still have to cut it off (Bukhari, Punishments, no. 6788) If the reader would like to see more hadith passages, modern defenses of this indefensible punishment (and a refutation of them), and the Biblical solution to theft, they should click on this long supporting article or this shorter one. 6. Islam commands that highway robbers should be crucified or mutilated. In September 2003, Scotsman Sandy Mitchell faced crucifixion in Saudi Arabia. He was beaten and tortured until he confessed to a crime he did not commit: a bomb plot masterminded by the British embassy. The article says of this punishment that it is the worst kind of execution and that two have been carried out in the last twenty years. In 2002 Amnesty International reports that even though Saudi Arabia ratified the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Convention against Torture) in October 1997, amputation is prescribed under both Hudud (punishments) and Qisas (law of retaliation). AI has recorded thirty—three amputations and nine cross—amputations where the alternate hand or foot is mutilated. The Quran says: 5:33 Those who wage war against God and His Messenger and strive to spread corruption in the land should be punished by death, crucifixion, the amputation of an alternate hand and foot or banishment from the land: a disgrace for them in this world, and then a terrible punishment in the Hereafter, 34 unless they repent before you overpower them: in that case bear in mind that God is forgiving and merciful. (Haleem) It may be difficult to accept, but the hadith says that Muhammad tortured these next people before he executed them. This scenario provides the historical context of Sura 5:33—34. The explanations in parentheses have been added by the translator: Narrated Anas: Some people . . . came to the Prophet and embraced Islam . . . [T]hey turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away . . . The Prophet ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they died. (Bukhari, Punishments, no. 6802) The next hadith reports that the renegades died from bleeding to death because Muhammad refused to cauterize their amputated limbs. Then the hadith after that one reports that the renegades were not given water, so they died of thirst. They probably died of both causes: thirst and loss of blood. See this short article for details on another example of Muhammad's use of torture. Islamic law says that these punishments are imposed for highway robbery, and in some cases crucifixion does not need a murder before it is imposed. For more information on Muhammad's brutality and the barbaric laws that flow out of it, go to the back—up article. 5. Islam commands that homosexuals must be executed. In February 1998, the Taliban, who once ruled in Afghanistan, ordered a stone wall to be pushed over three men convicted of sodomy. Their lives were to be spared if they survived for 30 minutes and were still alive when the stones were removed. In its 1991 Constitution, in Articles 108—113, Iran adopted the punishment of execution for sodomy. In April 2005, a Kuwaiti cleric says homosexuals should be thrown off a mountain or stoned to death. On April 7, 2005, it was reported that Saudi Arabia sentenced more than 100 men to prison or flogging for 'gay conduct.' These homosexuals were lucky. Early Islam would have executed them, as these hadith demonstrate. Ibn Abbas, Muhammad's cousin and highly reliable transmitter of hadith, reports the following about early Islam and Muhammad's punishment of homosexuals: . . . 'If you find anyone doing as Lot's people did, kill the one who does it, and the one to whom it is done' (Abu Dawud no. 4447). This hadith passage says that homosexuals should be burned alive or have wall pushed on them: Ibn Abbas and Abu Huraira reported God's messenger as saying, 'Accursed is he who does what Lot's people did.' In a version . . . on the authority of Ibn Abbas it says that Ali [Muhammad's cousin and son—in—law] had two people burned and that Abu Bakr [Muhammad's chief companion] had a wall thrown down on them. (Mishkat, vol. 1, p. 765, Prescribed Punishments) Though this punishment of a wall being toppled on them is extreme, the Taliban were merely following the origins of their religion. If the reader would like to see the confusion in the Quran on the matter of homosexuality, the severity in the hadith, and excessive rulings of classical fiqh, they should see the supporting article. This longer one has links to many discussions on Islamic punishments of homosexuals (scroll down to 'Supplemental material'). 4. Islam orders unmarried fornicators to be whipped and adulterers to be stoned to death. Fornication: In 2001, Iranian officials sentenced three men to flogging for illicit sex. The Quran says: 24:2 The fornicatress and the fornicator, flog each of them with a hundred stripes. Let not pity withhold you in their case, in a punishment prescribed by Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. And let a party of the believers witness their punishment. [This punishment is for unmarried persons guilty of the above crime (illegal sex), but if married persons commit it (illegal sex), the punishment is to stone them to death, according to Allah's law]. (Hilali and Khan). The additions in the brackets, though not original to the Arabic, have the support of the hadith. These command flogging only of unmarried fornicators: Bukhari, Punishments, nos. 6831 and 6833. The classical legal rulings follow the Quran and the hadith closely, so we do not need to analyze them here. According to this report, in Iran a teenage boy broke his Ramadan fast, so a judge sentenced him to be lashed with eighty—five stripes. He died from the punishment. Though his sad case does not deal with fornication, it is cited here because it shows that lashing can be fatal. Adultery: In December 2004, Amnesty International reports: An Iranian woman charged with adultery faces death by stoning in the next five days after her death sentence was upheld by the Supreme Court last month. Her unnamed co—defendant is at risk of imminent execution by hanging. Amnesty International members are now writing urgent appeals to the Iranian authorities, calling for the execution to be stopped. She is to be buried up to her chest and stoned to death. This gruesome hadith passage reports that a woman was buried up to her chest and stoned to death: And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al—Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on his face he cursed her . . . (Muslim no. 4206) The Prophet prayed over her dead body and then buried her. Truthfully, though, how effective was the prayer when Muhammad and his community murdered her in cold blood? The rest of the hadith says that Muhammad told Khalid not to be too harsh, but the Prophet's words drip with irony. Perhaps Muhammad meant that Khalid should not have cursed her. However, if they really did not want to be harsh, they should have forgiven her and let her go to raise her child. Later Islamic legal rulings follow the Quran and the hadith closely, so we do not need to analyze them here. Here is the back—up article that supports this fourth reason. 3. Islam orders death for Muslim and possible death for non—Muslim critics of Muhammad and the Quran and even sharia itself. In 1989, Iran's Supreme Leader issued a fatwa (legal decree) to assassinate Salman Rushdie, a novelist, who wrote Satanic Verses, which includes questions about the angel Gabriel's role in inspiring the Quran. Now the extremists in the highest levels in Iran have recently renewed the fatwa. In 2005, The Muslim Council of Victoria, Australia, brought a lawsuit against two pastors for holding a conference and posting articles critiquing Islam. Three Muslims attended the conference and felt offended. The two pastors have been convicted based on Australia's vilification law. While on trial, one of them wanted to read from the Quran on domestic violence (see 9, above), but the lawyer representing the Council would not allow it. The pastors are appealing their conviction. In 2005, British Muslims have been campaigning to pass a religious hate speech law in England's parliament. They have succeeded. Their ability to propagandize has not been curtailed. Opponents of the law say that it stifles free speech that may criticize Muhammad, the Quran, and Islam. Here are the classical legal rulings. First, the Muslim deserves death for doing any of the following (Reliance of the Traveler pp. 597—98, o8.7): (1) Reviling Allah or his Messenger; (2) being sarcastic about 'Allah's name, His command, His interdiction, His promise, or His threat'; (3) denying any verse of the Quran or 'anything which by scholarly consensus belongs to it, or to add a verse that does not belong to it'; (4) holding that 'any of Allah's messengers or prophets are liars, or to deny their being sent'; (5) reviling the religion of Islam; (6) being sarcastic about any ruling of the Sacred Law; (7) denying that Allah intended 'the Prophet's message . . . to be the religion followed by the entire world.' It is no wonder that critical investigation of the truth claims of Islam can never prevail in Islamic lands when the sword of Muhammad hangs over the scholars' head. The non—Muslims living under Islamic rule are not allowed to do the following (p. 609, o11.10(1)—(5)): (1) Commit adultery with a Muslim woman or marry her; (2) conceal spies of hostile forces; (3) lead a Muslim away from Islam; (4) mention something impermissible about Allah, the Prophet . . . or Islam. According to the discretion of the caliph or his representative, the punishments for violating these rules are as follows: (1) death, (2) enslavement, (3) release without paying anything, and (4) ransoming in exchange for money. These punishments also execute free speech—even repulsive speech—and freedom of religion or conscience. Ultimately, censorship testifies to a lack of confidence in one's position and message. If the message of Islam were truly superior, one could trust in the power of truth. As it stands, sharia with its prescribed punishments for questioning Muhammad, the Quran, and sharia itself testifies to their weakness since sharia threatens those who dare to differ. How confident was Muhammad (and today's Muslims) in his message that he had to rely on violence and force to protect his message, besides reason and persuasive argumentation? For the supporting article that analyzes the Quran and the hadith, both of which orders death to critics, click here. 2. Islam orders apostates to be killed. In Iran an academic was condemned to death for criticizing clerical rule in Iran. The rulers assert that he was insulting Muhammad and Shi'ite laws. He was charged with apostasy. This analysis tracks the application of apostasy laws around the world, citing many examples. Apostates are those who leave Islam, like Salman Rushdie (see the linked article in no. three, above), whether they become atheists or convert to another religion. They are supposed to be killed according to the Quran, the hadith, and later legal rulings. See the previous point no. three for acts that entail leaving Islam according to Islamic law. Here are the articles that support reason no. two. This is a short, but full article on apostasy, citing Quranic verses and hadith passages. Sayyid Maududi, a respected Islamic scholar, in this booklet argues that Sura 9:11—12 refers to apostates and that they should be put to death (scroll down to 'The Proof in the Quran for the Commandment to Execute Apostates'). This Muslim website has an overview of Islam on apostates. They should be given time to repent, but if they refuse, they must be killed. And the number one reason why sharia is bad for all societies . . . 1. Islam commands offensive and aggressive and unjust jihad. Muhammad is foundational to Islam, and he set the genetic code for Islam, waging war. In the ten years that he lived in Medina from his Hijrah (Emigration) from Mecca in AD 622 to his death of a fever in AD 632, he either sent out or went out on seventy—four raids, expeditions, or full—scale wars. They range from small assassination hit squads to kill anyone who insulted him, to the Tabuk Crusades in late AD 630 against the Byzantine Christians. He had heard a rumor that an army was mobilizing to invade Arabia, but the rumor was false, so his 30,000 jihadists returned home, but not before imposing a jizya tax on northern Christians and Jews. Money flowed into the Islamic treasury. So why would Muhammad get a revelation to dry up this money flow? What are some of the legalized rules of jihad found in the Quran, hadith, and classical legal opinions? (1) Women and children are enslaved. They can either be sold, or the Muslims may 'marry' the women, since their marriages are automatically annulled upon their capture. (2) Jihadists may have sex with slave women. Ali, Muhammad's cousin and son—in—law, did this. (3) Women and children must not be killed during war, unless this happens in a nighttime raid when visibility was low. (4) Old men and monks could be killed. (5) A captured enemy of war could be killed, enslaved, ransomed for money or an exchange, freely released, or beaten. One time Muhammad even tortured a citizen of the city of Khaybar in order to extract information about where the wealth of the city was hidden. (6) Enemy men who converted could keep their property and small children. This law is so excessive that it amounts to forced conversion. Only the strongest of the strong could resist this coercion and remain a non—Muslim. (7) Civilian property may be confiscated. (8) Civilian homes may be destroyed. (9) Civilian fruit trees may be destroyed. (10) Pagan Arabs had to convert or die. This does not allow for the freedom of religion or conscience. (11) People of the Book (Jews and Christians) had three options (Sura 9:29): fight and die; convert and pay a forced 'charity' or zakat tax; or keep their Biblical faith and pay a jizya or poll tax. The last two options mean that money flows into the Islamic treasury, so why would Muhammad receive a revelation to dry up this money flow? Thus, jihad is aggressive, coercive, and excessive, and Allah never revealed to Muhammad to stop these practices. For an analysis of the Christian Crusades and the Islamic Crusades, click here. For the supporting article of reason no. one, please go here. It also has a segment on the differences between jihad in Islam and the wars in the Old Testament. Another article on that topic can be read here. There are vast differences between Islam and Judaism on this topic. Therefore, Islam is violent—unjustly and aggressively. Conclusion The nightmare must end. Sharia oppresses the citizens of Islamic countries. Islam must reform, but the legal hierarchy in Islamic nations will not do this because the judges and legal scholars understand the cost: many passages in the Quran and the hadith must be rejected, and this they cannot do. After all, the Quran came down directly from Allah through Gabriel, so says traditional theology. So how can Islam reform? But reform it must. It can start by rewriting classical fiqh (interpretations of law). Again, though, that would mean leaving behind the Quran and Muhammad's example. How can the legal hierarchy in Islamic nations do this? In contrast, the West has undergone the Enlightenment or the Age of Reason (c. 1600—1800+), so western law has been injected with a heavy dose of reason. Also, the New Testament tempers excessive punishments. At least when Christianity reformed (c. 1400—1600), the reformers went back to the New Testament, which preaches peace and love. So religion and reason in the West permit justice to be found more readily—the Medieval Church is not foundational to Christianity; only Jesus and the New Testament are. Can Islamic countries benefit from an Enlightenment that may deny the Quran and the hadith? This seems impossible. Islamic law threatens Muslims with death if they criticize Muhammad and the Quran, not to mention denying them. Since Islamic law cannot be reformed without doing serious damage to original and authentic Islam—the one taught by Muhammad—then a second plan must be played out. Sharia must never spread around the world. At least that much is clear and achievable. The hard evidence in this article demonstrates beyond doubt that sharia does not benefit any society, for it contains too many harsh rules and punishments. One of the most tragic and under—reported occurrences in the West in recent years is the existence of a sharia court in Canada. Muslims are pushing for a sharia divorce courting Australia as well. Having a court of arbitration if it is based on western law and legal theory is legitimate, but sharia does not hold to this standard. Whether sharia is imposed gradually or rapidly, Canada should promptly shut down any sharia court, and Australia should never allow one. Such a court should never be permitted in the US, the rest of the West, or anywhere else in the world that is battling Islam. It is true that the Enlightenment teaches tolerance, but it also teaches critical thinking and reasoning. Sharia cannot stand up under scrutiny. It is intolerant and excessive, and Aristotle in his Nicomachean Ethics teaches the West that excess is never just. Thankfully, the province of Quebec, Canada, has forbidden sharia. This is the right initiative. Sharia ultimately degrades society and diminishes freedom. James M. Arlandson may be reached at jamesmarlandson@hotmail.com Supplemental material: In private emails to me or on websites, Muslim apologists (defenders) claim that the Islamic way of dealing with vices is superior to the western way, even in Islam's punishments like flogging and stoning. It is true that the West is filled with decadence, but are Islamic countries pure and pristine through and through, as these Muslim apologists imply? To anyone whose mind has not been clouded by a lifetime of devotion to Islam, the answer to this rhetorical question is obvious. Alcohol and other intoxicants and gambling serve as test cases. This article says that Bahrain, an island and independent sate that is connected to Saudi Arabia by a causeway, provides a 'breathing lung' for Saudis because this Islamic island allows the free flow of alcohol and a night life. The words 'breathing lung' in Bahrain mean that Saudi Arabia suffocates people. On the weekends an average of 40,000 cars line up to cross the bridge. This article discusses the smuggling of alcohol in Saudi Arabia and says: "Western analysts note that alcohol smuggling of the magnitude underway in Saudi Arabia —— perhaps tens of millions of dollars' worth of illegal merchandise annually —— would likely involve the complicity of Saudi customs agents and perhaps a higher—level patron." This article reveals how Iranians get around the official ban on alcohol, like beer and vodka and other intoxicants, like opium. A black market has sprung up—just like the one in America during Prohibition. This article says that even though the Taliban, the tyrants who formerly ruled Afghanistan, outlawed the growth of poppies, which are the source of opium, the leaders of the Taliban may have profited from the drug trade. The new and democratic government has a hard time keeping this drug under control. This article says that authorities in Turkey threaten to imprison online gamblers, and this page links to a report (scroll to the second one) that discusses how Turkey must deal with the problem of monetary interest, alcohol, and gambling. It is revealing to see how Muslim religious leaders try to squirm out of Quranic laws against interest, in order to help Islamic financial institutions make money. |
![]() |
|
| seppuku | Nov 3 2009, 04:59 AM Post #53 |
|
I'll just make clear that I'm not a Muslim. The Islamic extremist problem is bigger than the Christian one - and I think that's due to how Western society has progressed, we've had our equal rights movements, we've had religion challenged to a great deal, we have implemented secular laws and the laws of religion are less important, but not only that literal interpretations aren't so common, and even when they are, most people are too scared to act. But they used to be. This is why we have fewer Christian extremists, but the Bible and Qu'ran are equal on the "screwed-up-o-meter", and Christianity has quite a bloody history as it is. The problem, is those that listen to those screwed up parts and this is where we get out fundamentalists and extremists. Hence my stance will always be: "extremist religion must be stopped, peaceful religion must be promoted". So the statement applies to both Islam and Christianity, but also Judaism, Hinduism, Sikhism and all of the -isms out there. As an atheist the idea of everybody turning around and saying, "there is no God, so I'm giving up religion and getting on with my life" would be a dream come true, but it's not a realistic thing to hope for - especially as Christianity has ~2 billion followers and Islam ~1.5 billion, it'd take a whole lot of convincing. And just because Islam currently suffers from a larger extremism problem doesn't make the religion as a whole a death cult, it just makes extreme Islam a death cult. It's perhaps healthier to separate the two rather than lump them under the same umbrella.
This I agree with. Sharia is the main problem and things must change in the middle east and where extreme Islam exist. If Christianity's old way were reformed, so can extreme Islam. If the Bible had the same power in the West as the Qu'ran does in the middle east, then we'd be suffering from the similar problems. The bible calls for blood left, right and center. |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 3 2009, 05:22 AM Post #54 |
![]()
Kafir
|
I might also add to seppuku's point that saying one religion is currently more extreme than another (islam more so than christianity) does not necessarily justify the acts of the current less extreme religion. That's called moral equivalence. |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 3 2009, 06:19 AM Post #55 |
Patriot
|
Muhammad “married” Aisha when she was six years old. 'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old. Muslim 8. 3310 http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/muslim/008.smt.html Narrated 'Aisha:that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death). Bukhari 7. 62. 64 http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/062.sbt.html Narrated 'Aisha:that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)' Bukhari 7. 62. 65 http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/062.sbt.html Narrated 'Ursa:The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death). Bukhari 7. 62. 88 http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/062.sbt.html Arab year is lunar, which is shorter than solar year. In solar years, Aisha was 8 years 9 months old when Muhammad consummated his marriage with her. Consummate? This is a nice way to say raped her. According to Muslims, a woman must consent to her marriage or the marriage is null. How can a 6-years old child consent to her marriage? Without a consent, how can we call this relationship between a 51 years old man and a 6-years old child marriage? Some Muslims claim that it was Abu Bakr who approached Muhammad asking him to marry his daughter. This is not true. The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry." Bukhari 7.62.18 http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/062.sbt.html Even though Abu Bakr was fool enough to let Muhammad have sex with his little daughter, that marriage was invaled, because the only person who should have given consent was a minor. Aisha was unaware of what was going on and was surprised when Muhammad pulled down his pants and invited her to sit on his lap. She Narrated: When the Prophet married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and nothing surprised me but the coming of Allah's Apostle to me in the forenoon. Bukhari 7. 62. 90 http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/062.sbt.html Aisha was playing with dolls like any other 8 year old child would do. She was not ready for marriage and had no understanding of it. Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Bukhari 8. 73.151 http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/073.sbt.html Narrated Aisha: The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. Bukhari 5.234 http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/058.sbt.html Having sexual feelings for small children is called pedophilia. According to Ayatollah Montazeri, the most revered Shiite cleric of Iran , the “marriage” of Muhammad and Aisha was a political maneuver to placate the enemies of Islam. He wrote: The reason for this marriage was that the Prophet was under the intense pressure by his enemies like Abu Lahab and Abu Jahl and was completely dependant of the protection of other tribes. Abu Bakr had a lot of tribal influence. And rejecting his offer, in those conditions, for the Prophet was not prudent. In reality this marriage was symbolic and not to satisfy his sexual instinct, because, as a rule a 53-year-old man cannot have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl. This is nonsense. Abu Bakr was already a devout follower of Muhammad and his confidant. Abu Lahab and Abul Hakam (whom Muhammad derogatorily called Abu Jahl, father of ignorance) had nothing to do with Abu Bakr. How can having sex with a child placate one's enemies? Assuming this ridiculous excuse is true, what about Aisha? Was she only a pawn for Muhammad’s political maneuvers? In one thing the Grand Ayatollah is right. As a rule a 53-year-old man cannot have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl, unless he is a pedophile. The Islamocritic scholar, Abul Kasem, has demonstrated that in Islam there is actually no age limit for marrying a child. He found the following hadith which shows a Muslim man can marry an infant. However should one of his adult wives suckle that infant both wives become haram to him. Case of one of two wives suckling the other-If a man marry an infant and an adult and the latter should give milk to the former, both wives become prohibited with respect to that man [their husband], because if they were to continue united in marriage to him, it would imply the propriety of joint cohabitation with the foster-mother and her foster-daughter, which is prohibited, in the same manner as joint cohabitation with a natural mother and daughter-It is to be observed on this occasion, that if the husband should not have had carnal connexion with the adult wife, she is not entitled to any dower whatever, because the separation has proceeded from her, before consummation :-but the infant has a claim to her half dower. [Hedaya Vol. I Book III, page 71 (Ref. 6)] Abul Kasem also quoted the story of Umar marrying a child just four or five years old. Umme Kulthum was 4 or 5 years old when Umar married her. This child was his most favourite wife (just like prophet Mohammad). There is a great controversy about the identity of this child bride of Umar. Many scholars claim that she was the daughter of Ali and Fatima. Others say that Umme Kulthum was the posthumous daughter of Abu Bakar and Habiba. Abu Bakar died (13 A.H.) a few months before Umme Kulthum was born. She was the half sister of Aisha. So, Umar asked Aisha for the hand of Umme Kulthum when she (Umme Kulthum) was only 4 - 5 years old. Aisha agreed and Umar and Umme Kulthum got married. According to Abul Kasem’s calculations, Umar was 56 years old when he married this little girl. Why would he not wait for Umme Kulthum to reach the age of nine? Shouldn’t Umar follow the sunna (example) of his prophet? The answer is that Muhammad did not set any limits for child marriage. Ummar must have remembered when Muhammad expressed his desire to marry a crawling baby before death overtook him. This story is reported by Ibn Ishac, the most authentic biographer of Muhammad. Most other biographies are based on this monumental work of Ibn Ishak/Ibn Hisham (Suhayli, ii.79: In the riwaya of Yunus I.I recorded that the apostle saw her (Ummu’l-Fadl) when she was baby crawling before him and said, ‘If she grows up and I am still alive I will marry her.’ But he died before she grew up and Sufyan b. al-Aswad b. Abdu’l-Asad al-Makhzumi married her and she bore him Rizq and Lubaba….(Ref.3, page 311) http://www.faithfreedom.org/challenge/pedophile.htm Edited by Flower Power, Nov 3 2009, 06:25 AM.
|
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 3 2009, 06:37 AM Post #56 |
Patriot
|
14,327 Islamic terrorist attacks since 9/11 prove otherwise http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ |
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 3 2009, 06:40 AM Post #57 |
![]()
Kafir
|
The number of terrorist attacks is relative to the time period, nowadays islam is a more prevalent threat* to western democracy; where as in the past christianity was a threat to the rights and welfare of people worldwide (see inquisition, crusaders killing jews/pagans/non-religious/orthodox christians, European colonialism, etc...) So the only argument I see there is that islam is the current major threat today, which I agree with. Edit - typo Edited by AgeofEnlightenment, Nov 3 2009, 06:41 AM.
|
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 3 2009, 06:49 AM Post #58 |
Patriot
|
Islam teaches warfare against and subjugation of unbelievers (Qur’an 9:29), and this is confirmed in Sahih Muslim 4294. Also, all four principal Sunni schools agree on the importance of jihad warfare against non-Muslims (see Hanbali, Hanafi, Shafi’i and Maliki). |
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 3 2009, 07:02 AM Post #59 |
Patriot
|
I agree that Christianity has had a violent past, but as far as I know this was not because of the teachings of Jesus. Islam has been a constant threat throughout history, although there have been lulls, but this is directly related to the teachings of Muhammad. Nyazee concludes: “This leaves no doubt that the primary goal of the Muslim community, in the eyes of its jurists, is to spread the word of Allah through jihad, and the option of poll-tax [jizya] is to be exercised only after subjugation” of non-Muslims. But if this is so, why hasn’t the worldwide Islamic community been waging jihad on a large scale up until relatively recently? Nyazee says it is only because they have not been able to do so: “the Muslim community may be considered to be passing through a period of truce. In its present state of weakness, there is nothing much it can do about it.”http://s1.zetaboards.com/EDL_The_Forum/topic/2338485/1/ Edited by Flower Power, Nov 3 2009, 07:04 AM.
|
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 3 2009, 07:08 AM Post #60 |
![]()
Kafir
|
Not because of the teachings of jesus? You would be surprised. Currently I have had a debate about how Hitler was christian on another thread, and not only that but anti-semitism is in the NT, and that jesus has no problem with OT law (see Matthew 5:17-20). Anyone who thinks islam is violent on a scriptural level, but who makes a double-standard argument for christianity is an apologist. |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 3 2009, 07:23 AM Post #61 |
Patriot
|
I’m not a Christian, so I have no reason to apologise for its teachings, but as far as I know, Jesus never commanded his followers to kill someone of another faith, and this message is relevant today or in the future. If I am wrong, then please provide evidence. According to authentic hadiths or sayings of the Muslim prophet, Muhammad, calls on Muslims to kill Jews to bring about the Day of Judgment. This call is recited many times. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/08/usc-msa-removes-does-not-repudiate-genocidal-hadith.html Edited by Flower Power, Nov 3 2009, 07:26 AM.
|
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 3 2009, 07:29 AM Post #62 |
![]()
Kafir
|
Jesus didn't directly say to do that, but in christianity jesus is part of a trinity with makes him the same as god (well different christian sects argue over this), and that he does not object one bit to the cruelty of the laws described in the OT. The story of jesus, however, in the NT usually describes the jews as the killers of prophets, or christ killers. This was the same kind of languaging and justification for the crusaders and inquisitors to murder jews, and likewise Adolf Hitler used the same language during WWII. No use quoting islamic stuff at me because I am already aware of it, and agree it's a serious problem. |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 3 2009, 07:37 AM Post #63 |
Patriot
|
To be honest, I think it is pointless to debate Christian teachings because Christian’s are not responsible for thousands of terrorist’s attacks around the world. Edit: Just to clarify, I am not against discussing any religious beliefs, in fact I think it is healthy to debate, but I am tired and don’t care to debate Christianity at this time.
Edited by Flower Power, Nov 3 2009, 07:41 AM.
|
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 3 2009, 07:40 AM Post #64 |
![]()
Kafir
|
As I said before; not currently. If you were living in the 1930s, and were observing the forms of fascism that arised out of Spain, Italy, Austria, and Germany; you would say otherwise. My point is simple: comparing religions and saying one is superior because it commits less violent acts today compared to when it did in other parts of history is moral equivalence. I'm just trying to be fair and balanced. |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 3 2009, 07:45 AM Post #65 |
Patriot
|
I am well read in this period and I am not aware of any Government in the 1930’s who used Christian teachings to justify acts of violence. Also, I don’t believe Hitler was a Christian. I have read too much to the contrary. |
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| seppuku | Nov 3 2009, 07:47 AM Post #66 |
|
We already have provided evidence for the bible telling people to kill someone of another faith and evidence to say that Jesus advocates this in the bible too: The first 2 teachings of importance are directly from Jesus: John 5:46-47 Meaning. Belief in Jesus requires belief in Moses. To follow Jesus' writing is to also follow Moses'. This is probably why we have people quoting the 10 commandments and why Adam and Eve, Noah and Creation are deemed relevant to Christian teachings. The 5 books Moses wrote were Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Deuteronomy and Leviticus. By what Jesus' says, everything in those books are as relevant to the books where Jesus offers teaching. This is backed up by a quote Age of Enlightenment picked out: Matthew 5:17-20, This means - everything before Jesus in the bible, Jesus wants to still be in effect. Any laws made by previous prophets (including Moses) is not to be broken. The Old Testament is just as relevant as the New Testament. This leads me onto the old testament itself and what it says: Death to those who reject the verdicts of any judges or priests of the lords (this would include non-believers) Deuteronomy 17:12 Put to death those who do not seek the lord - regardless of age or gender. (again, death to non-believers) 2 Chronicles 15:12-13 Kill false prophets. Zechariah 13:3 Kill anybody close to you who preach other gods. Deuteronomy 13:7 [there's more than that] There's even some quite ridiculous laws too, for example, if a priest's daughter fornicates, she must be burned - that's Leviticus 21:9. Or death to women who are not virgins on their wedding night (Deuteronomy 22:20). Or kill those who work on the Sabbath (Exodus 31: 12-15) |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 3 2009, 07:52 AM Post #67 |
![]()
Kafir
|
http://nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm This best sums up the arguments about Hitler being a pagan, atheist, christian, or someone who used christianity to get in power. Benito Mussolini was also a christian, so were the fascist in Franco Spain, and prior to Hitler annexing Austria; the leaders there were planning for a counter-reformist catholic fascist state (clerical fascism). |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| seppuku | Nov 3 2009, 07:57 AM Post #68 |
|
As for Christianity's History, in recent History, they've been calm - well...Christian terrorism does still exist and some argue that in America it is on the rise and if you look at what some churches are preaching, we can already see the danger boiling. The Westboro Baptist church may be entertaining, but they're not the only church to start preaching hatred. It seems the churches are more interested in gain support at the moment, but who's to say that they won't turn nasty and not only preach violence and hatred but to actually go out and do it? Christianity actually has quite a dark history and it has mostly been reformed into being a peaceful religion, but I am genuinely frightened that some of our American brothers are going to change that. As for the religion of Hitler, nobody really knows, Christians claim he was atheist and atheists claim he was Christian - it is possible that he was, but I've not heard anything to suggest that his acts were because he was Christian - I am fairly sure his motives were different. |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 3 2009, 08:05 AM Post #69 |
![]()
Kafir
|
His rants about jesus, jews, communists/bolshevism, about positive christianity, starting a Reich church, etc.... are all very christian. There were also prominent prodestant and catholic ministers who supported him, including many members of the Vatican. I've already posted the link anyway, and I'm not really an atheist but people will thwart the idea of his obvious religious connections because of apologetics and shame that someone like this represented their religion. Even if you don't accept the argument he was christian, just about most of the SS, Gestapo, Germany's soldiers, etc... were all christian anyway. Edit - if you want to debate me on this, move on to the jolly BMSD thread: http://s1.zetaboards.com/EDL_The_Forum/topic/2438352/9 Edited by AgeofEnlightenment, Nov 3 2009, 08:25 AM.
|
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Irishcomrad | Nov 3 2009, 10:09 AM Post #70 |
|
Banned
|
The bible did reform, it reformed through the teachings of jesus christ that is why we have the New Testament which preaches peace and tolerance but unfortunately the Quaran is hell, blood and fire etc and the amount of muslims buying into this ideology the world over is akin a rapidly spreading cancer that is hell bent on destroying everything in its path that does not associate itself with their death cult. The reason it it called a death cult by many is due to their doctrine that compells them to smite the neck of the kuffar wherever they may be, fatwas, suicide bombers etc etc |
![]() |
|
| Paul81272 | Nov 3 2009, 10:27 AM Post #71 |
|
Member
|
We can all take little snippets of religious books and twist them to our advantage at the end of the day if you read the Old Testament it’s very similar to the Quran, the big difference is in the West we have evolved over the past couple of thousand years and in the Middle East they have not. Islamic fundamentalists want to bring all their barbaric religious/cultural practices to our shores and they want us to pay for it!! I don’t like any religion but generally I find Christians, Jews, Sikhs, Hindu’s etc don’t want to murder me because I don’t hold dear to their ideology. Your average Muslim I have no doubt wants to lead a care free life in the West and keep his religion pretty low key, but unfortunately gob s**te imams, Islamic fundamentalists and “community leaders” stir up hatred and the young Muslims lap it up, this sort of thing is not an isolated incident, it’s all over. I am sure we can all get paper cuttings and news reports showing non Muslims being attacked by what will be called a gang of Asians but of course we all know its Muslims. I was in West Watford a couple of weeks ago which has a huge Asian population, I was wearing my EDL shirt (which is the norm these days) and whilst walking around there were no comments, a few sly looks for sure, but nothing said, nothing done, later on (early evening) I waited for the usual Friday Prayers crowd and walked past Watford Mosque, the situation there was a little different!! It started with verbal abuse and when I tried to offer an explanation regarding the EDL and what we were about they didn’t want to hear about it, so I walked away after a bit of pushing and shoving and a couple of punches thrown in each direction, I was promptly followed by 8-12 Muslim youths who were obviously not after my contact details for further discussion. Unfortunately when they rounded the corner I was already facing their direction with my two brothers who were laying in wait (I am 18 stone (not fat) and the smallest of three) the Muslims were quickly away on their toes and we left to do a little shopping in the Harlequin shopping centre, jobs a good un. My point being that as individuals earlier in the day, they were not willing to react, but later and mob handed they all of a sudden find my views unpalatable. The mentality of your “Moderate Muslim” is one of intolerance, they hide behind their religion and use it as a shield, unfortunately our paranoid media and government are so afraid of upsetting minorities that they have ostracised the majority. Take the bull by the horns, deport or imprison all Imams/community leaders/radical Islamists that preach hate, intolerance and oppression. |
|
Islam is not a religion it’s a f**king cult, I am still waiting for David Koresh to appear!! This is my opinion and does not reflect the opinion of the EDL. The EDL is ONLY opposed to Islamic Extremism | |
![]() |
|
| seppuku | Nov 3 2009, 01:57 PM Post #72 |
|
Not according to the Gospels of Matthew and John. Jesus said that the laws and writings of the old testament are still relevant. |
![]() |
|
| Irishcomrad | Nov 3 2009, 02:15 PM Post #73 |
|
Banned
|
You can try and equate christian present day evil with muslim present day evil as much as you like but people are now waking up to the fact that the muslims all over the planet are a dangerous and violent race of religious bigots causing murder and mayhem, comparing that fact to christian world violence is akin to comparing a school yard bulley to Adolph hitler. So sympathise with their islamic and sharia ideology as much as you like and keep rooting for like for like evil comparisons. With you there is no debate because you believe christianity is no worste than islam in terms of modern day violence, honour killings, child marriage, oppression of women etc etc so we shall simply have to agree to disagree Edited by Irishcomrad, Nov 3 2009, 02:16 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| seppuku | Nov 4 2009, 07:21 AM Post #74 |
|
This is exactly what I'm not doing. I think sharia is bad that extremism is bad. They should be stopped. What I'm not doing is lumping everybody under the same umbrella as some evil death cult. Whilst there are more Islamic extremists than Christian ones, it doesn't make Islam as a whole a death cult, just extremist Islam. Don't you realise the difference?
Not quite, whilst Christian extremism is smaller, it is still extreme and Christian fundamentalism is growing in the US - how long is it before we start seeing more and more Christian extremists? In teachings, there really isn't anything that really separates Islam. In practice, the difference is the number of extremists. And you call one a death cult, yet not the other. How come you don't view it as: Moderate Islam = friendly Moderate Christianity = friendly Fundamentalist Islam = Intolerant, but not violent Fundamentalist Christianity = Intolerant, but not violent Extremist Islam = Violent and generally screwed up Extremist Christianity = Violent and generally screwed up Why do you cover all of Islam and all of its different followers under the same 'death cult' umbrella? Surely it should only be extremist Islam that is the 'death cult'? |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 07:49 AM Post #75 |
![]()
Kafir
|
Irishcomrad: I have warned you already about referring to muslims as a race of people in a negative and disparaging manner. You did it just again in your last response to seppuku and I'd like to remind you to stop using that language, or I will issue you with another warning. Edited by AgeofEnlightenment, Nov 4 2009, 08:26 AM.
|
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 4 2009, 08:22 AM Post #76 |
Patriot
|
Prime Minister objects to ’moderate Islam’ label ANKARA - Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan rejected attempts to call Turkey the representative of moderate Islam. "It is unacceptable for us to agree with such a definition. Turkey has never been a country to represent such a concept. Moreover, Islam cannot be classified as moderate or not," Erdoğan said, speaking at Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies late Thursday. http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/domestic/11360374.asp?scr=1 ------- John Hawkins: You know, when I interviewed Daniel Pipes he even told me that he thought moderate Islam was actually on the retreat. Robert Spencer: I would agree. The problem is as I said that moderates don't have a strong theoretical foundation within the classic Islamic texts. That being the case, they're not able to sustain a large scale movement. That's because they're constantly placed on the defensive by people who go back to the text and quote these passages that radicals use to justify violence. If they say, "We simply don't take that as being our marching orders for today" they're charged with disloyalty. So this is why moderate Islam is in retreat, because the radicals are so explicitly & persistently explaining what they do in light of the classic teachings. So there are millions of moderate Muslims, but moderate Islam is something that is only formulated by particular individuals in particular places. Most of the Muslims who are moderates are simply just ignoring the other aspects of the religion without confronting and refuting them on Islamic grounds. http://www.rightwingnews.com/interviews/spencer.php |
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 08:28 AM Post #77 |
![]()
Kafir
|
The minister of Turkey says that because Turkey is a secular society. We wouldn't call England, France, America, or any western country a representation of moderate christianity or Israel being a representative of moderate judaism. There is extremism in Turkey, and most islamic countries governed by sharia do not consider Turkey a purely islamic country. So it's a poor example to use. |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 4 2009, 08:56 AM Post #78 |
Patriot
|
I highlighted ‘Islam cannot be classified as moderate or not’, and I agree with this sentiment because I do not believe there is such a thing as ‘moderate’ or ‘extremist’ Islam. There may be examples of ‘moderate’ or ‘extremist’ Muslims, but there is only one Islam. Also, Recep Tayyip Erdogan is attempting to reverse Turkey’s secularism. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, along with President Abdullah Gul and their ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP), have been moving for quite some time to dismantle Turkish secularism and transform Turkey into a state governed by Islamic law. But as Prime Minister, Erdogan has not engaged in a direct assault on Turkish secularism. Instead, he and the AKP have steadily chipped away at it, reintroducing provisions of Islamic law piece by piece, while professing to uphold the country’s secular character. In 2004 Erdogan took steps to criminalize adultery, and late in 2005 the AKP banned alcoholic beverages in government cafes and restaurants in Ankara. In May 2008 a new law came into effect that effectively outlawed sale of alcohol by the glass in bars and restaurants. In the 1990s, as mayor of Istanbul, Erdogan was forthright about this goal, expressing his opposition to secularism in no uncertain terms: “You cannot be both secular and a Muslim! You will either be a Muslim, or secular!...It is not possible for a person who says ‘I am a Muslim’ to go on and say ‘I am secular too.’ And why is that? Because Allah, the creator of the Muslim, has absolute power and rule!” Saying that Allah has “absolute power and rule” is a fundamentally political statement. And from its inception Islam has been a political and social system, not just a religious faith in the way most Westerners conceive of religion. The establishment of Islamic law as the only legitimate system of government is a goal that Erdogan shares with Osama bin Laden and other jihadists around the world; they only differ regarding the best means to go about this. http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/06/spencer-the-stealth-jihad-in-turkey.html |
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 09:02 AM Post #79 |
![]()
Kafir
|
Then he is a closet extremist, so no surprise he would think that there's no such thing as a moderate/cultural/nominal muslim. I wouldn't also use a chap like this as my view on this topic, given his actions he doesn't sound bright. |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 4 2009, 09:12 AM Post #80 |
Patriot
|
I don’t know his views on moderate /cultural /nominal Muslims, but I agree with his sentiment that there is only one Islam. |
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 09:39 AM Post #81 |
![]()
Kafir
|
If he is a closet extremist, then obviously he will say that there's no such thing as cultural/nominal/moderates. If you feel that there is only one islam, and that is the extreme kind; then likewise you will have to be consistent and extend that definition to all religions. Edited by AgeofEnlightenment, Nov 4 2009, 09:39 AM.
|
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Paul81272 | Nov 4 2009, 10:09 AM Post #82 |
|
Member
|
There is only one Islam the same as there is only one Christianity etc. etc. it all depends on how you interpret the scripture and teachings, so the Quran and the Bible don’t change only your interpretation. Although I would add there is a marked difference between the Old Testament and the New. The teachings of Jesus were very peaceful compared to the teachings of the prophet Mohammad. The problem stems from the attitude of the religious Imams and bearded lunatics who are hijacking Islam for their own ends. It is down to “Moderate Muslims” to put a stop to it, although one question which always trips up “Moderate Muslims” is “what are your views on homosexuality?” if they are in the public eye (as on question time) there is usually a subtle pause then the answer they know they should give “oh it doesn’t bother me”!!!!!!!!) but asked in private and they are clear, there is no question that homosexuality is totally forbidden by the Quran and yes I know the bible says similar things but we have openly gay clergy and Rabbi’s etc., so clearly Christians, Jews, Sikh’s and Hindu’s have gone over that hurdle. The exact same thing is experienced with the Christian fundamentalists in the Deep South (USA), the difference being that they are not committing these terrible acts of violence and terrorism on a regular basis. AgeofEnlightenment, please refrain from issuing me with a warning, telling me off or sending me to my bedroom |
|
Islam is not a religion it’s a f**king cult, I am still waiting for David Koresh to appear!! This is my opinion and does not reflect the opinion of the EDL. The EDL is ONLY opposed to Islamic Extremism | |
![]() |
|
| Irishcomrad | Nov 4 2009, 10:16 AM Post #83 |
|
Banned
|
Are you suckinig up to people by way of threatening me when I reveal the truth about the growing intensisty of muslim extremism? Are you trying to show seppekku that by bullying a concerned member of EDL highlighting the true examples of muslim extremism is going to somehow get you browny points? I am part Irish, my wife is filipino we have a right to express our truths without you bullying or intimidating me with threats of warnings etc. Here is a nice report about how muslim extremists are unfolding on our planet, try and compare this with christian extremism if you can. And as I said to sepekku trying to compare present day muslim extremism with christian extremism is akin to comparing adolp hitler with a schoolyard bully. Enjoy the read........... What are the facts? Radical Islam is the common denominator. Four Al Qaeda conspirators were recently convicted of the deadly bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. Suspects linked to Osama bin Laden bombed the USS Cole in 2001. That same year, the Abu Sayyaf Group in the Philippines kidnapped and beheaded Christian missionaries. A group called Jamaah Islamiah committed the Bali nightclub massacre in October, 2002, which killed more than 200 innocent victims. In late 2002, an Islamic Chechen guerrilla group seized a packed Moscow opera house, causing the deaths of more than 100 people. But clearly, Israelis and Jews are primary targets of these terrorists. Last November, Muslims bombed an Israeli hotel in Kenya, killing 13. In Israel itself, the Islamic groups Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Hizbollah have murdered more than 600 civilians and injured over 4,000 in the last two years — a devastation in that tiny country equal to having more than 35,000 U.S. citizens killed and 230,000 wounded. These worldwide terrorist acts have two glaring elements in common. First, all were committed by radical Islamists — groups that advocate overthrowing Western democratic governments and replacing them with fundamentalist Islamic regimes. Second, all these groups believe that killing innocent people in terrorist acts is a legitimate way to achieve their goals. What does radical Islam really want? Despite the nationalistic focus of some of these terrorist groups, they all share dedication to aa common purpose: carrying out a jihad, or holy war, to rid the world of “infidels,” such as Christians, Jews and Hindus, and the establishment of a worldwide Islamic order. For example, although the immediate goal of Hamas (the terrorist Islamic Resistance Movement of the Palestinians) is local—to eliminate all Jews from Israel and the disputed territories—Hamas claims affiliation with the international Muslim Brotherhood, whose purposes are “building the Muslim state” and “mastering the world with Islam” through jihad. Likewise, while the Abu Sayyaf Group appears focused on ridding the Philippines of Christians—usually by beheading them—it has received funding from the Taliban in Afghanistan and other organizations affiliated with Osama bin Laden. It, too, is part of the international terrorist movement. The same is true of Chechen rebels: While their demands focus on regional independence, their philosophy is radical Islam, and they have shadowy connections to Al Qaeda. Of course Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden makes no secret of his murderous global design: To create worldwide Islamic rule by killing or subjugating non-Muslims, especially Jews and Christians. Why does radical Islam use terrorism? To most of the world, the idea of purposefully killing innocent people — even for a noble cause — is unthinkable. Likewise, the notion of suicide bombers: Most of the world’s religions consider human life to be God’s most precious gift, not to be sacrificed, except to save others. The jihadis believe otherwise. They justify heartless, cold-blooded killing of innocent women and children on behalf of Allah. They entice youngsters to commit suicide, to become “martyrs,” with the promise of sensual pleasures in the hereafter. What can be done? When our leaders tell us we are threatened by terrorism, they only tell half the story. Terrorism is clearly dangerous to our people and anathema to our social, religious and democratic values. Yet terrorism is not a goal in itself — it is a vicious tactic of warfare, used to achieve totalitarian ends. Indeed, if we declare our enemy to be terrorism, we fail to see our real enemy. The enemy is militant Islam, which uses terrorism to destroy democratic institutions and deny our basic freedoms. It is a tool being used ruthlessly to supplant our civilization with religious fundamentalism — to impose upon us a world order based on orthodox Islam, with its harsh rules of behavior, intolerance of diversity, subjugation of women and totalitarian political rule. It’s time we speak out: Radical Islam — not just the tactic of terrorism — threatens our country, the state of Israel and other democratic nations. It’s also time for moderate Muslims and their imams to raise their voices . . . and unequivocally condemn the violent aims of their brethren. The world waits for you to dissociate your faith from these bloody tactics and their authoritarian purposes. Finally, it’s time to fight back: We cannot pretend that we don’t know who is responsible for today’s deadly terrorist attacks, and we cannot suffer them passively. Just as the U.S. is responding aggressively to the threat of terrorism, so must Israel respond, since its people are being killed and maimed by terror attacks on a daily basis. Above all and for everyone’s good, militant Islam must be fought and defeated through a united effort by all civilized nations. |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 10:17 AM Post #84 |
![]()
Kafir
|
Do I have to repeat myself with everyone? Matthew 5:17-20 - Jesus clearly says here he has no problem with the laws of the old testament, and that he hasn't come to abolish them but to fulfill them. These laws are eternal. This also doesn't include the passages in Matthew and John detailing jews as being christ killers, or the killers of prophets (christian anti-semitism). We have also openly gay muslim clergy too, there is homosexuals in every group there is no exception. The truth is that all religions have violent and prejudicial scripture, while also some scripture for good. Seppuku has already stated that the difference being that fundamentalists from both religions interpret it literally to the letter, where as most followers are moderate and take the good while leaving the bad. Edited by AgeofEnlightenment, Nov 4 2009, 10:24 AM.
|
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 4 2009, 10:17 AM Post #85 |
Patriot
|
Not extreme, not moderate, just Islam. Edited by Flower Power, Nov 4 2009, 10:19 AM.
|
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 10:21 AM Post #86 |
![]()
Kafir
|
Irishcomrad: There's about as much sucking up done here as people being consistent with religious scripture; zero. You have a right to freedom of speech, including making stupid remarks that muslims are a race. Since when are they a race anyway? lol
Adolf Hitler compared to a schoolyard bully? lol You may have failed to notice, but fascism of the early 20th century was brought about, funded, armed, and acted out mainly by christians. This includes Franco of Spain, Mussolini of Italy, Hitler of Germany, and Austria. Are the KKK, a group formed out of a christian sect just a bunch of schoolyard bullies? What about the inquisition? What about the westboro baptist church and their slagging of anyone who's non-christian? Please, enough with the apologetics. Seppuku is actually right. Edited by AgeofEnlightenment, Nov 4 2009, 10:23 AM.
|
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 10:22 AM Post #87 |
![]()
Kafir
|
So you're saying there's both pros and cons in islam? Edited by AgeofEnlightenment, Nov 4 2009, 10:24 AM.
|
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Paul81272 | Nov 4 2009, 10:29 AM Post #88 |
|
Member
|
Clearly if anyone followed their particular religious teachings “by the book” all religions would be guilty of the same crimes. The difference is that worldwide a huge amount of Muslims are calling for the following of their scripture word for word including a lot of British born Muslims who hate our way of life, hate our society and are hell bent on changing it |
|
Islam is not a religion it’s a f**king cult, I am still waiting for David Koresh to appear!! This is my opinion and does not reflect the opinion of the EDL. The EDL is ONLY opposed to Islamic Extremism | |
![]() |
|
| Englishmidlandspride | Nov 4 2009, 10:33 AM Post #89 |
|
Member
|
Why is everybody shocked about this Islam must be stoped!! |
|
I've been dreaming of a time when To be English is not to be baneful, To be standing by the flag, not feeling shameful Racist or partial | |
![]() |
|
| Irishcomrad | Nov 4 2009, 10:33 AM Post #90 |
|
Banned
|
We do not say "all muslims are extremist" we say millions are all over the globe and their numbers are growing here is a nice read for you regarding the levels of muslim extremism and christiam extremism Extremism – Christian vs. Muslim – 3.04.2008 Recently I debated several individuals about Christian Extremism and Muslim Extremism. Their viewpoint was the all regions have extremism, and all extremism is equally bad. My point, as regular readers can probably predict, was that Islamic Extremism, past and present, far outweighs Christian Extremism in size, bloodshed, and the level of fanaticism. My fellow debaters brought up the old specter of the Crusades and various Christian Extremist groups of our modern age. Below is my counterpoint, which essentially ended the discussion. Whether or not I convinced my opponents of the validity of my views is unknown, but I would like to indulge in the fantasy that I have. Everyone here seems to have gotten the idea that I believe that Christians are incapable of evil. Where have I said that? Everyone is capable of evil, but some, due to their environment and religious teaching, are more prone than others. “Which Christians commit terrorist acts in the name of their religion and which Christians also use Biblical Scripture to justify those acts?” My original statement (above) was perhaps a little too broad so I will tweak it. “Which Christians commit terrorist acts in the name of their religion and which Christians also can successfully base their actions on Biblical Scripture? Anyone can proclaim that God commands them to kill the unbelievers and that the Bible says so. However, is that actually the case? While the Old Testament is a popular target, I will note that Christians do not celebrate the violence of the Old Testament, but view it as immoral and not representative of the Christian faith. Reverend David Holwick of First Baptist Church in Ledgewood, New Jersey: “I picked up the Bible just the other day and was reading the story of the times of Samuel. All sorts of ghastly incidents are related, and some passages are simply revolting to a mind accustomed to feel towards humanity as Christ felt. And the thing is that God is pictured as directing and helping it all. It is God who leads in the slaughter and He even inspires His children to the most unmerciful acts. Do not teach these parts to boys and girls as heroic deeds, to be admired and copied.” Also, where does the Bible give orders that Christians may go forth and kill infidels? Certainly violence has been exercised as “God wills it”, but is that a core value of modern day Christianity? Over the thousands of years that the Christian faith has existed, changes and revisions to doctrinal teaching have been made. Popular examples that people use to demonstrate that Christianity is just as bad, if not worse, than Islam are the Crusades, the IRA, and preachers. CRUSADES Popular wisdom holds that the Crusades were a conspiracy by powerful people to advance Christian theocracy and enrich the Church. As a result of this conspiracy, the peaceful and innocent Muslims were victimized in a Christian war of aggression. This theory ignores a few facts, such as the Muslim conquest of Christian lands before the First Crusade. 1) 635 AD – Jihadists (those who partake in Holy War) take Damascus 2) 636 AD – Jihadists take Basrah 3) 637 AD – Jihadists take Antioch 4) 638 AD – Jihadists take Jerusalem 5) 641 AD – Jihadists take Caesarea 6) 643 AD – Jihadists take Armenia 7) 641 -643 – Jihadists take Egypt 647-846 – Jihadists take Tunisia, North Africa, Persia (Iran), Spain, Sicily, and reached the outskirts of Rome. Also, they moved into France (Battle of Tours) and besieged Constantinople. 1004 AD – Fatmid (Egyptian dynasty) Abu Ali al-Mansur al-Hakim begins the demolition of Christian churches. 1004-1014 – 30,000 Christian churches destroyed, along with other Muslim persecutions of Christians 1071 AD – Seljuk Turks defeat Byzantines at Mankizert 1076 AD – Seljuk Turks take Syria 1077 AD – Seljuk Turks take Jerusalem 1095 AD – First Crusade launched Yeah, it really seems to me that the Christians were the aggressors in this instance. That said, as in all wars, atrocities were committed, but they were committed by both sides. Muslims and Christian soldiers were guilty, particularly when sacking cities. The Crusades are similar to the Bosnia and Serb War of the mid-1990s. Serb Christians ethnically cleansed and Bosnian Muslims (aided by vast numbers of foreign mujahidin) ethnically cleansed as well. In the Crusades, though, Muslims often preferred to live under Christian rule. Ibn Jubayr: “Upon leaving Tibnin (near Tyre), we passed through an unbroken skein of farms and villages whose lands were efficiently cultivated. The inhabitants were all Muslims, but they live in comfort with the Franj (Franks / French) — may God preserve them from temptation! Their dwellings belong to them and their property is unmolested.” “When these men compare their lot to that of their brothers living in Muslim territory, the latter suffer from the injustice of their co-religionists, whereas the Franj act with equity.” Bernard Lewis: “We have seen in our own day the extraordinary spectacle of a pope apologizing to the Muslim lands for the Crusades. I would not wish to defend the behavior of the Crusaders, which was in many respects atrocious. But let us have a little sense of proportion. We are now expected to believe that the Crusades were an unwarranted act of aggression against a peaceful Muslim world. Hardly. The first papal call for a Crusade occurred in 846 CE, when an Arab expedition from Sicily sailed up the Tiber and sacked St. Peter’s in Rome. A synod in France issued an appeal to Christian sovereigns to rally against “the enemies of Christ,” and the pope, Leo IV, offered a heavenly reward to those who died fighting Muslims. A century and half and many battles later, in 1096, the Crusaders actually arrived in the Middle East. The Crusades were a late, limited, and unsuccessful imitation of jihad — an attempt to recover by holy war what had been lost by holy war. It failed, and was not followed up.” The Crusades ended, and haven’t been repeated. Jihad has rarely stopped, and still has plenty of adherents and recruits willing to participate. IRA and other Irish terrorist organizations: These groups were fighting for political independence from the government of Great Britain. REAL IRA: “The RIRA’s ultimate objective is a United Ireland by forcing British withdrawal from Northern Ireland through the use of physical force. The organisation rejects the Mitchell Principles and the Belfast Agreement, comparing the latter to the 1921 Anglo-Irish Treaty which resulted in the partition of Ireland.[7] The organisation aims to uphold an uncompromising form of Irish republicanism and opposes any political settlement that falls short of Irish unity and independence. Sands-McKevitt, sister of hunger striker Bobby Sands and a founder of the RIRA’s political wing, the 32 County Sovereignty Movement, said in an interview that “Bobby did not die for cross-border bodies with executive powers. He did not die for nationalists to be equal British citizens within the Northern Ireland state”.[8] The RIRA adopts similar tactics to those used by the Provisional IRA in the 1990s, primarily using bombs in town centres to damage the economic infrastructure of Northern Ireland. The organisation also attempts to kill members of the security forces using landmines, home-made mortars and car bombs, and targets England using incendiary and car bombs to spread terror and disruption.[5]” PROVISIONAL IRISH REPUBLICAN ARMY: is an Irish Republican, left wing[3] paramilitary organisation that, until the Belfast Agreement, sought to end Northern Ireland’s status within the United Kingdom and bring about a United Ireland by force of arms and political persuasion. Since its emergence in 1969, its stated aim has been the overthrow of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland and their replacement by a sovereign socialist all-island Irish state.[4] ARMY OF GOD: Can their actions be justified through Biblical Scripture? Have they taken lives, and if so how many? What are their numbers? True, they have committed terrorist acts (fake anthrax), but to say that they are on the same level as Hizballah (Party of God) or Hamas is illogical. Hizballah and Hamas have killed thousands between them and don’t show any signs of stopping. THE COVENANT, THE SWORD, AND THE ARM OF THE LORD: Can their actions be justified through Biblical Scripture? Have they taken lives, and if so how many? What were their numbers? They had an evil ideology, and it wasn’t based in Biblical Scripture. I will also note that they surrendered and disbanded. Jihadist organizations have yet to do the same. THE LAMBS OF CHRIST: They claim to be non-violent, but a handful of members possibly connected with violence. One member was convicted of murder. Again, how large is their following? Can the murder and violence be connected to Biblical Scripture? What was the reaction of the larger Christian community? Unequivocal condemnation. GOD’S ARMY:It is clearly a terrorist organization that has used violence to achieve its goals. However, I will note the animism is nowhere in the Bible, rendering them not a Christian group so long as animism is part of their goal. THE LAMB’S OF CHRIST: One murder tied to it, but that murderer also belonged to God’s Army. Biblical justifications, anyone? Reaction of the Christian community to their actions? Number of followers? THE WHITE EAGLES: They were a terrorist group which committed atrocities during the Bosnian War. But, were their actions based on Biblical Scripture? I hate to sound like a broken record, but there is a reason for it, which I will explain. GUARDIANS OF THE CEDARS: They are a militia in Lebanon composed of Christians, with morally reprehensible ideals. However, note they fought Muslim militias of Palestine and Lebanon who sought to ethnically cleanse Christians from Lebanese territory. So we have a situation yet again where both sides are in the wrong — much like Bosnia and the Crusades. One of my main points was that these groups all claim to fight for God and Christianity. However, if their actions cannot be based on Biblical Scripture and modern day teachings of the Christian faith, then their claim is hollow. They are Christians who are terrorists and not Christian terrorists. Again, I never claimed that Christians cannot commit evil acts. I am simply pointing out their claims of fighting for God is false. PREACHERS Many like to point to Pat Robertson as a sign of Christian extremism. Though I disagree (greatly) with Robertson on many issues, he, like Fred Phelps, is no terrorist. He reserves the final judgment to God on his various issues, unlike Islamic clerics. Fred Phelps is not a terrorist. The worst thing he has done is run his mouth. If people are terrorized by one nut case and his small collection of followers (who happen to be his family) then God help us all. Phelps’ statements are morally reprehensible, but he has not killed anyone. He has not incited his followers to kill the targets of his rhetoric. As far as I am concerned he is just a pain in the ass. To equate with him with Islamists is farcical. British Columnist David Thompson (no fundamental Christian) “But while red-faced evangelists may say for instance, that gay people are wicked, damned to hellfire, et cetera, I don’t know any internationally renowned Christian leaders who are calling for the imprisonment and killing of gay people. Unlike the supposedly ‘moderate’ Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who insists that gay men and lesbians should be ‘killed in the worst possible manner’. Not condemned, ‘corrected,’ prayed for, or pitied, or any of the usual nonsense spouted by Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson et al.; but murdered—as brutally as possible.” There is also the fact the Islamist imams preach the gloried of Jihad and killing infidels. SCRIPTURE Here is the biggest issue. In the Qu’ran, jihad is glorified, killing the infidel is smiled upon, and Sha’ria is endorsed. Using this search engine (from a Muslim site) read the hadith and sura that MENACE provided. The passages are explicit and have not been changed. This means that they are still part of Islamic scripture which Islamists use to gain new recruits. And seeing as the Muslim world riots (violently) every time someone criticizes Islam, the revisions which need to occur won’t happen. IN CONCLUSION: I am not anti-Islamic, but anti-Islamist. An Islamist is someone who believes and/or participates in the following: 1) Desire for Sha’ria in all lands 2) Desire for a Muslim Caliphate (empire) 3) Actively wages violent Jihad 4) Gives monetary support to Jihad 5) Tacitly supports the goals of Jihad 6) Recruits for Jihad Note that Qu’ran 9:05 is officially known to some as “Verse of the Sword”. For my purposes, all passages supporting Jihad of the Sword will be called such: “Jihad of the Sword” – Qu’ran 8:12“Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them.” “Verse of the Sword” – Qu’ran 9:05“So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.” “Jihad of the Sword” – Qu’ran 9:29“Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” “Jihad of the Sword” – Qu’ran 9:30“And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!” This is just a small sample size of Qu’ranic scriptures that justify, defend, and encourage Jihad. I have linked the site here. If you want to check my work, simply type idolater, fight, and angel into the first search engine and select the proper verse number. You listed some terrorist groups which claim to be Christian. Here is my list: Abu Sayyaf – Philippines Al-Aqsa Martys’ Brigade – Gaza Strip / West Bank Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya (The Islamist Group) – Egypt Al-Qa’ida – globalAnsar al-Islam – Iraq Armed Islamic Group (GIA) – Algeria Army of Ansar al-Sunna – Iraq AZF – FranceEast Turkestan Islamic Movement – China Egyptian Islamic Jihad – Egypt Great Eastern Islamic Raiders’ Front – Turkey Hamas – Gaza Strip / West Bank Fatah – Gaza Strip / West Bank Harkat-ul-Mujahideen al-Alami – Parkistan Hizballah – Lebanon Islamic Movement of Central Asia – Central Asia Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan – Uzbekistan Jaish-e-Mohammed – Pakistan / Kashmir Jamaah Islamiyah – Indonesia Lashkar-e-Toiba – Pakistan / Kashmir Lashkar i Jhangvi – Pakistan Moro Islamic Liberation Front – Philippines Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group – Morocco / Europe Palestinian Islamic Jihad – Gaza Strip / West Bank Tawhid and Jihad – Iraq Al Qa’ida in Iraq – Iraq This is just a drop in the bucket. Which list is bigger, and which has taken more lives? Also, note that this is just the US State Department list, with a few additions. I haven’t included the Islamists fighting in Chechyna or the Caucasus region. I also have not included organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood, or Hizb ut-Tahrir who publicly have sworn off violence, but advance the Islamist agenda through funding, recruiting, and political means. I also have not included the janjaweed militias used in Sudan, or Islamist governments like Iran. Mike Grant – Samnite Gladiator |
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 4 2009, 10:34 AM Post #91 |
Patriot
|
Hey? I’m not sure that you are following me. In post 74, seppuku said ‘moderate Islam = friendly’, and all that I am saying is that I do not believe there is such a notion as ‘moderate Islam’. There may be ‘moderate Muslims’, but there is only one Islam, and if you believe the calling for warfare against and subjugation of unbelievers (Qur'an 9:29, hadith and 4 major schools of Sunni jurisprudence) is extreme, then we are in agreement that Islam is an extreme belief system, but that is not to say that there is something called ‘extremist Islam’. Do you understand where I am coming from? |
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| Paul81272 | Nov 4 2009, 10:36 AM Post #92 |
|
Member
|
spot on Flower Power |
|
Islam is not a religion it’s a f**king cult, I am still waiting for David Koresh to appear!! This is my opinion and does not reflect the opinion of the EDL. The EDL is ONLY opposed to Islamic Extremism | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 10:37 AM Post #93 |
![]()
Kafir
|
They are calling worldwide? No, the extremists are calling worldwide. If all muslims fit the way you are describing this situation, we would have had ourselves a superstate caliphate by now. Not discrediting it, just saying not every muslim agrees with it, the same way not every christian agrees with jesus camp or that George Bush received word from god to become president of America and be a delusional biggot. |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 10:39 AM Post #94 |
![]()
Kafir
|
Flower Power: It seems you pretty much agree with me, the difference being you don't discern extremist islam from moderate islam (you say there is no such thing in either case, which I can agree with). |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Paul81272 | Nov 4 2009, 10:44 AM Post #95 |
|
Member
|
World Wide Muslims are committing terrible acts of violence and oppression in the name of Islam and these are not isolated incidents, Islam is dangerous, moderate Muslims are not, but they are allowing extremist Islamists to hijack their religion. Moderate Muslims need to make themselves heard over and above the fundamentalists who are claiming Islam as their own and NOT in a moderate fashion. There is not one inhabited continent on this planet that does not have a major Islamic terrorist threat. |
|
Islam is not a religion it’s a f**king cult, I am still waiting for David Koresh to appear!! This is my opinion and does not reflect the opinion of the EDL. The EDL is ONLY opposed to Islamic Extremism | |
![]() |
|
| Irishcomrad | Nov 4 2009, 10:45 AM Post #96 |
|
Banned
|
Caliphate superstate is almost here, they want it and they want it real bad. Dont you go thinking that its just a pipe dream of a few nutjob muslim extremist, they have millions and millions worlwide and growing wanting the subjugation of the west, that is why we are here for goodness sake, cant you see what is unfolding before your very eyes? |
![]() |
|
| seppuku | Nov 4 2009, 10:52 AM Post #97 |
|
That is perhaps the core of our differences. It might be down to how we treat religion. I'd argue that when one has more than one sect and more than one way of looking at scripture, that you get different versions of that religion. A person who preaches 'peaceful' Islam obviously views the scripture differently to those who preach 'kill the infidels' Islam - it all comes from the same scripture, they give themselves the same label - except they believe the scripture has different messages. Edited by seppuku, Nov 4 2009, 10:53 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Flower Power | Nov 4 2009, 10:55 AM Post #98 |
Patriot
|
No, you agree with me LOL
|
|
Those who will not reason are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. Lord Byron (1788-1824) | |
![]() |
|
| AgeofEnlightenment | Nov 4 2009, 10:56 AM Post #99 |
![]()
Kafir
|
I can actually, I'm also well aware of some of the most dangerous terrorists and extremists in this category involved with this. I know they're not just a few people, they are thousands of people all over the world linked through organisations like the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamic Thinkers Society, Al-Muhajiroun, etc... Although think of this statistically. There are 1.5 billion muslims on this planet, that's more than 20 times the size of nazi Germany in WWII yet the nazis were able to inflict more damage in a short period than these scumbags have done in recent times. Not discrediting the idea that this terrorism exists, or that it's not a serious threat; but some people are exaggerating how prevalent this extremism is. They're also going to have a hard time starting their caliphate anyway since we have our troops stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan. |
|
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." Friedrich Nietzsche "All things must be examined, debated, investigated without exception and without regard for anyone's feelings." - Denis Diderot. "People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." - Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| Irishcomrad | Nov 4 2009, 11:04 AM Post #100 |
|
Banned
|
Seppuku and Age of Enlightenment have got their heads so far stuck in the sand they can kiss the shores of brisbane australia. Dont you know whats coming our way? do you know what is taught in muslims schools around this planet and even in our great country? These schools get their text books from that religiously tolerant Saudi Arabia where jews, christians and women may not enter mecca etc Check this report out for yourselves http://weiner.house.gov/reports/Saudi%20Hate%20Texts.pdf Edited by Irishcomrad, Nov 4 2009, 11:06 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · EDL Chat · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
1:26 AM Jul 11
|
Feliz Navidad (Gold) created by Sarah & Delirium of the ZNR








1:26 AM Jul 11