Understanding the Enemy [Archive] - Page 3 - House of Politics

jb_1430

01-16-2008, 12:00 PM

Using Biblical law...
In Mark 7:9, Jesus is critical of the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as prescribed by Old Testament law....

Luke 19:22-27, Jesus orders killed anyone who refuses to be ruled by him.

You couldnt have provided a better example of my point. I and others have presented verse after verse of commandments made to Muslims by Muhammad such as "slay the idolaters, verse after verse of hadiths extolling the virtues of jihad spoken by muhammad to the Muslims. Ive asked repeatedly for this Christian doctrine that you all say is just like the verses of Islamic text we have quoted. Finally you cough something up, and we might presume this is your best available evidence of what you allege, and this is what you have.
Mark 7:9 in fact is not Jesus being critical of anybody because it is the "Pharisees and teachers of the law" who were critical of Jesus' disciples, asking them "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with 'unclean' hands?" Jesus responds to them quoting Moses.

Luke? The Parable of the Ten Minas? Nooooo, Jesus is ordering nobody to do anything. Its a parable about a king who "orders killed anyone who refuses to be ruled by him".
I would accuse you of being a liar, but I know you just glomed it off some anti christian website making some lame arguement that christianity is just as violent as Islam. Another point would be that there are not any Christians using these verses to justify killing anybody. If there were, I couldnt really be critical of the doctrine because they are twisting the doctrine to mean something that CLEARLY defies the plain meaning of the words. "Jesus orders killed"??? nooooo Jesus is telling a parable about a non existant king who "orders killed".

Luke 19
11While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, ..."A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a]'Put this money to work,' he said, 'until I come back.' .....15"He was made king,

26"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. 27But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me."
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=19&version=31

Mark 7
5So the Pharisees and teachers of the law asked Jesus, "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with 'unclean' hands?"
6He replied, "Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites; as it is written:...
10For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother,'[d] and, 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'[e]

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=7&version=31

Coyote

01-16-2008, 12:00 PM

By the way, Muslims themselves aren't unified as to the role of the Hadiths.

According to Wikipedia:
The overwhelming majority of Muslims consider hadith to be essential supplements to and clarifications of the Qur'an, Islam's holy book. In Islamic jurisprudence, the Qur'an contains many rules for the behavior expected of Muslims. However, there are many matters of concern, both religious and practical, on which there are no specific Qur'anic rules. Muslims believe that they can look at the way of life, or sunnah, of Muhammad and his companions to discover what to imitate and what to avoid. Muslim scholars also find it useful to know how Muhammad or his companions explained the revelations, or upon what occasion Muhammad received them. Sometimes this will clarify a passage that otherwise seems obscure. Hadith are a source for Islamic history and biography. For the vast majority of devout Muslims, authentic hadith are also a source of religious inspiration.

However, some contemporary Muslims argue that the Qur'an alone is sufficient. Examples of such Muslims groups are Tolu-e-Islam (Resurgence of Islam), Free Minds, and United Submitters International. Muslims who take the "Qur'an alone" viewpoint are regarded as deviant by mainstream Muslim scholars, and by the vast majority of Muslims. Hadith-trusting Muslims argue that many Qur'anic instructions are impossible to fulfill without guidance from the ahadith. (The Qur'an does not, for example, specify how many prayer cycles constitute fulfillment of each of the daily prayers. See salat.) It is also important to note that most Muslims claim that the Qur'an cannot be fully explained by itself alone or read with complete understanding -- which is why the Hadith is referred to as the "second source" of Islam. While the Qur'an states "We have made it (the Qur'an) easy to understand and in your own tongue (language) may you take heed." (Qur'an 44:58), there are great debates between Muslims regarding the views stated in the Qur'an, and also those stated in the Hadith.

Coyote

01-16-2008, 12:03 PM

You couldnt have provided a better example of my point. I and others have presented verse after verse of commandments made to Muslims by Muhammad such as "slay the idolaters, verse after verse of hadiths extolling the virtues of jihad spoken by muhammad to the Muslims. Ive asked repeatedly for this Christian doctrine that you all say is just like the verses of Islamic text we have quoted. Finally you cough something up, and we might presume this is your best available evidence of what you allege, and this is what you have.
Mark 7:9 in fact is not Jesus being critical of anybody because it is the "Pharisees and teachers of the law" who were critical of Jesus' disciples, asking them "Why don't your disciples live according to the tradition of the elders instead of eating their food with 'unclean' hands?" Jesus responds to them quoting Moses.

Luke? The Parable of the Ten Minas? Nooooo, Jesus is ordering nobody to do anything. Its a parable about a king who "orders killed anyone who refuses to be ruled by him".
I would accuse you of being a liar, but I know you just glomed it off some anti christian website making some lame arguement that christianity is just as violent as Islam. Another point would be that there are not any Christians using these verses to justify killing anybody. If there were, I couldnt really be critical of the doctrine because they are twisting the doctrine to mean something that CLEARLY defies the plain meaning of the words. "Jesus orders killed"??? nooooo Jesus is telling a parable about a non existant king who "orders killed".

So in other words you are providing context and analysis to Christian passages which you deny to Muslim ones... .

bewitched

01-16-2008, 12:28 PM

back to reality folks....
here's an example of the enemy at work:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A former congressman and delegate to the United Nations was indicted Wednesday as part of a terrorist fundraising ring that allegedly sent more than $130,000 to an al Qaeda and Taliban supporter who has threatened U.S. and international troops in Afghanistan.

The former Republican congressman from Michigan, Mark Deli Siljander, was charged with money laundering, conspiracy and obstructing justice for allegedly lying about lobbying senators on behalf of an Islamic charity that authorities said was secretly sending funds to terrorists.

A 42-count indictment, unsealed in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Missouri, accuses the Islamic American Relief Agency of paying Siljander $50,000 for the lobbying -- money that turned out to be stolen from the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Siljander, who served two terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, was appointed by President Reagan to serve as a U.S. delegate to the United Nations for one year in 1987.

jb_1430

01-16-2008, 12:38 PM

Christians throughout history have recognized that the a doctrine of war or approach to a holy war is a biblical deduction based upon the interpretation of numerous passages in the Bible (for example: Eccles. 3:1, 8; Matt. 5:44; 24:6-7; Acts 10:1-23; Rom. 13:1-7; 1 Tim. 2:2; 1 Pet. 2:13-17).

And another good example of our point. Here are the above verses. I skipped the Acts:10 as I cant imagine what it was included for. They dont advocate war against unbelievers.

1 There is a time for everything,
and a season for every activity under heaven:

8 a time to love and a time to hate,
a time for war and a time for peace.

38"You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'[g] 39But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

44But I tell you: Love your enemies[i] and pray for those who persecute you,

6You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places.

Acts 10:1-23; 3One day at about three in the afternoon he had a vision.????? (Not sure of the relevance)

1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing.

1I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone—2for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness.

13Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, 14or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. 15For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. 16Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. 17Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.

http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/index.php?action=getVersionInfo&vid=31#books

jb_1430

01-16-2008, 01:02 PM

So in other words you are providing context and analysis to Christian passages which you deny to Muslim ones... .

No, I am providing the text. Ignore my words and read the text using a literal interpretation and you can plainly see that your claim is a LIE. Jesus isnt commanding anybody to do anything. "Jesus orders killed"??? Its a fabricated lie. Are you actually arguing that your interpretation is supported by the text???? You are more delusional than I thought if so. Tel you what, why dont you just copy and paste from the text the words that lead you to conclude that "Jesus orders killed anyone who refuses to be ruled by him" as youve not yet provided ANY quotes to support your assertions.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=19&version=31

bewitched

01-16-2008, 01:06 PM

thread hijacked.
by Jesus.
call the cops.

jb_1430

01-16-2008, 01:19 PM

Muslims who take the "Qur'an alone" viewpoint are regarded as deviant by mainstream Muslim scholars, and by the vast majority of Muslims. Hadith-trusting Muslims argue that many Qur'anic instructions are impossible to fulfill without guidance from the ahadith.

Your making my point. And

Bukhari's collection is recognized by the overwhelming majority of the Muslim world to be one of the most authentic collections of the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh).
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/sbtintro.html

Bukhari Haddiths is primarily what Ive posted from here on the group. Put Jihad in the search function, and then try to argue with a straight face that Jihad is an inner struggle with oneself.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/searchhadith.html

just the first one that comes up on the search

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25:
Narrated Abu Huraira:
Allah's Apostle was asked, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, "To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's Cause."

bewitched

01-16-2008, 01:23 PM

Your making my point. And

Bukhari Haddiths is primarily what Ive posted from here on the group. Put Jihad in the search function, and then try to argue with a straight face that Jihad is an inner struggle with oneself.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/reference/searchhadith.html

just the first one that comes up on the search

*fingers in ears*
I can't hear you.

jb_1430

01-17-2008, 07:22 AM

All three of the monkeys, "see no evil", "hear no evil" and "speak no evil" come to mind. They not only dont want to hear it, they dont want it spoken.

bewitched

01-17-2008, 08:08 AM

All three of the monkeys, "see no evil", "hear no evil" and "speak no evil" come to mind. They not only dont want to hear it, they dont want it spoken.

exactly.
and when the enemy is upon the monkeys they will become bushmeat.

unless we face the fact that there is Islamic violence and the threat against the West we are vulnerable and taking the risk of losing our freedom, country, and lives.

reverting to biblical verse does nothing to stop the present violence that is a threat to our National Security. it's a cheap cop-out and denial and ineffective.

those who take action and fight for the US should be commended.

bewitched

01-17-2008, 09:15 AM

jb_1430

01-17-2008, 10:15 AM

speaking of monkeys.
sapience isn't something that Christianity or Islam possess, it's a human characteristic. if sapience (judgement) allows humans to act in a certain manner, such as terrorism, then their judgement is poor. human nature that is guided to make poor judgement by hate preaching clerics or religion can be changed. and it is this change that is necessary to stop terrorism.

Its not their judgement. "judgment is only Allah's". Wouldnt be so bad if he was a pascivist preaching turn the other cheek and do unto others instead of "slay the idolaters".

[5.44]...and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.
[5.45] ..and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust.
[5.47] ... and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors.
[5.48] And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it, therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed,
[12.40] ... judgment is only Allah's; He has commanded that you shall not serve aught but Him; this is the right religion but most people do not know:

bewitched

01-17-2008, 10:16 AM

from the enemy's mindset: (which is the most important thing to understand)
On January 3, 2008, the Islamist forum http://ek-ls.org (hosted by NOC4Hosts Inc. in Florida, USA) posted a communiqué titled "As You Condemn Others, So You Will Be Condemned" by the terrorist group Harakat Al-Shabab Al-Mujahideen. In the communiqué the group threatens to attack the capitals of African countries which are participating in the peacekeeping force in Somalia.
[...]

"… We stress that we will retaliate. Whoever banishes Muslim nations [from their lands] grants us permission to banish his people [from their land]; whoever kills our women – we shall kill his women; whoever attacks our dignity – we shall give him what he deserves; whoever turns our mothers into widows and our children into orphans – we shall turn his mother into a widow and increase [the number of] his orphans…"

[...]

"The soldiers and people of the states that are participating in the occupation of our country have become part of the Crusader alliance led by the global criminal Bush, and [partners in] the war he is waging on all the Muslims. Thereby, they have made themselves targets for attacks by the Muslims who are protecting themselves and their religion.

"And just as they rallied under the banner of the global Crusade against Islam, we [now join] the mujahideen in the global Islamic war against the Cross; just as the Abyssinians [Ethiopians] are helped by their brethren, the worshippers of the Cross, so do we have our Muslim brethren in all the countries of the world, including the countries from which [the soldiers of the peacekeeping force in Somalia] come – [namely] Ethiopia, Uganda, Burundi and so on… They stand with us and we stand with them against [our] common Crusader enemy."

numinus

01-19-2008, 06:16 AM

I answered the golden rule. the Islamic golden rule is to treat brothers as you would yourself. that means only Muslim brothers, because the Quran clearly states that others (non-muslims) are not equal.

LOL. Of the 40 years of islamic practice, have you not encountered the term 'people of the book', the same people being contemplated in the passage I provided?

I also answered apartheid and nazism. Germany and South Africa are not religious governmental countries.

Apartheid is a CHRISTIAN nationalist movement of the afrikaner. Nazism generously employed christian symbolism in their anti-jew propaganda. You have answered NOTHING - merely demonstrated your utter lack of education.

moving forward is difficult. I know.
so maybe you can comment on:
"Ressentiment is a reassignment of the pain that accompanies a sense of one's own inferiority/failure onto an external scapegoat. The ego creates the illusion of an enemy, a cause that can be "blamed" for one's own inferiority/failure. Thus, one was thwarted not by a failure in oneself, but rather by an external "evil". This issuing of "blame" leads one to desire revenge, or at least believe in the possibility of revenge; this lust for revenge may take many forms, as in the Christian conception of the Last Judgment, or the socialist conception of revolution. In each case, a sense of powerlessness creates the illusion of an enemy; one suddenly conceives oneself to be oppressed rather than merely weak, a phenomenon that spawns externally-directed bitterness (lust for a perceived "revenge").

Ressentiment lies at the heart of much of Nietzschean thought, particularly in regard to Judaism and Christianity. Nietzsche believed that these religions stemmed from a desire to invert the natural order of the world, to establish the prevalence of weakness over strength. Judea's position of weakness in the Roman Empire was itself the origin of ressentiment, of the moral system that elevated pity (the weak) over vitality (the strong). The immense strength of the Roman Empire could not be overwhelmed in a physical sense; Judea's inferiority manifested as hatred for Roman rule. Judaism redefined the strength of the Roman Empire as evil, weak, or depraved, envisioning a wrathful God who would effect a revenge. "Jewish" weakness caused hatred for Roman overlordship, which was thus damned as evil, merely because it dared to be strong."

There is nothing to comment on. I do not see how this deals with epistemology. Human knowledge is a subjective view of an objective reality. One's emotions has nothing to do with propositional logic.

As for nietzche, he never proposed any systematic philosophy - merely a hodge-podge of essays more suited in psychology rather than political science or ethics.

He was declared clinically mad prior to his death, fyi - which neatly summarizes my opinion of his work.

numinus

01-19-2008, 06:25 AM

Soooo lets see it. Show me ANYTHING from the bible that was used to justify the actions of the Catholic church.

http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_and_the_Papacy.asp

Then two important things were told the apostle. "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 16:19). Here Peter was singled out for the authority that provides for the forgiveness of sins and the making of disciplinary rules. Later the apostles as a whole would be given similar power [Matt.18:18], but here Peter received it in a special sense.

So, tell me - is there an end to your ignorance?

jb_1430

01-19-2008, 08:18 AM

http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_and_the_Papacy.asp

Then two important things were told the apostle. "Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven" (Matt. 16:19). Here Peter was singled out for the authority that provides for the forgiveness of sins and the making of disciplinary rules. Later the apostles as a whole would be given similar power [Matt.18:18], but here Peter received it in a special sense.

So, tell me - is there an end to your ignorance?

I dont have this need of yours to proclaim your ignorance in every other post. You do it just fine each time you post.
Not sure what kind of tortured interpretation of those verses the Catholics used to justify atrocities. Islam is up front and straight about it.

[2.191] And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.

[2.193] And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah...

2.216] Fighting is enjoined on you, and h is an object of dislike to you; and it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you, and it may be that you love a thing while it is evil for you, and Allah knows, while you do not know.

[2.244] And fight in the way of Allah,...

[2.246] ...May it not be that you would not fight if fighting is ordained for you? They said: And what reason have we that we should not fight in the way of Allah, and we have indeed been compelled to abandon our homes and our children. But when fighting was ordained for them, they turned back, except a few of them, and Allah knows the unjust.

[3.169] And reckon not those who are killed in Allah's way as dead; nay, they are alive (and) are provided sustenance from their Lord;

[4.74] Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world's life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward.

[4.76] Those who believe fight in the way of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the way of the Shaitan. Fight therefore against the friends of the Shaitan; surely the strategy of the Shaitan is weak.

[9.5] 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.

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

[9.111] Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain;

[9.123] O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

[47.4] So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them,

48.16] Say to those of the dwellers of the desert who were left behind: You shall soon be invited (to fight) against a people possessing mighty prowess; you will fight against them until they submit; then if you obey, Allah will grant you a good reward; and if you turn back as you turned back before, He will punish you with a painful punishment.

[5.44]... and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.

[5.45] ..and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust.

[5.47] ... and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors.

[5.48] And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it, therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed,

[12.40] ... judgment is only Allah's; He has commanded that you shall not serve aught but Him; this is the right religion but most people do not know:
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/koran/browse.html

numinus

01-20-2008, 08:26 AM

I dont have this need of yours to proclaim your ignorance in every other post. You do it just fine each time you post.
Not sure what kind of tortured interpretation of those verses the Catholics used to justify atrocities. Islam is up front and straight about it.

That is as 'up front and straight about it' as can ever be. Within that verse lies the WHOLE DOCTRINE OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY. It establishes the SUPREMACY of the petric tradition against ALL other christian traditions.

A few days ago, your ignorance was mildly amusing. Now, it isn't even that. It is simply an utter bore.

numinus

01-20-2008, 09:33 AM

show me where Germany and South Africa are non-secular.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History..._Apartheid_era

There are numerous distinct differences between segregation and apartheid:

Segregation was a more elastic strategy which was not officially concurrent with religious ideas; apartheid was ostensibly based on a Christian National dogma of the 'calling' and 'mission' of Afrikanerdom.

jb_1430

01-20-2008, 10:14 AM

That is as 'up front and straight about it' as can ever be. Within that verse lies the WHOLE DOCTRINE OF PAPAL INFALLIBILITY. It establishes the SUPREMACY of the petric tradition against ALL other christian traditions.

A few days ago, your ignorance was mildly amusing. Now, it isn't even that. It is simply an utter bore.

Your demonstrating my point for me.

[B]Christian doctrine was used to justify atrocities.

Soooo lets see it. Show me ANYTHING from the bible that was used to justify the actions of the Catholic church.

and the best you can do is

19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven: whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.'
18 'In truth I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Takes a pretty freakin tortured interpretation of those two verses to justify atrocities. Especially when compared to -

[2.191] And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.
[2.193] And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah...

2.216] Fighting is enjoined on you, and h is an object of dislike to you; and it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you, and it may be that you love a thing while it is evil for you, and Allah knows, while you do not know.

[2.244] And fight in the way of Allah,...

[2.246] ...May it not be that you would not fight if fighting is ordained for you? They said: And what reason have we that we should not fight in the way of Allah, and we have indeed been compelled to abandon our homes and our children. But when fighting was ordained for them, they turned back, except a few of them, and Allah knows the unjust.

[3.169] And reckon not those who are killed in Allah's way as dead; nay, they are alive (and) are provided sustenance from their Lord;

[4.74] Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world's life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward.

[4.76] Those who believe fight in the way of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the way of the Shaitan. Fight therefore against the friends of the Shaitan; surely the strategy of the Shaitan is weak.

[9.5] 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.

[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.

[9.111] Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain;

[9.123] O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

[47.4] So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them,

48.16] Say to those of the dwellers of the desert who were left behind: You shall soon be invited (to fight) against a people possessing mighty prowess; you will fight against them until they submit; then if you obey, Allah will grant you a good reward; and if you turn back as you turned back before, He will punish you with a painful punishment.

numinus

01-20-2008, 10:46 AM

Your demonstrating my point for me.

and the best you can do is

Takes a pretty freakin tortured interpretation of those two verses to justify atrocities. Especially when compared to -

Papal infallibility is codified in the dogmatic constitution of the church - which in turn was used for all sorts of wars.

And what do you suppose hadiths are if not the analogous equivalent of the dogmatic constitution of the church, eh?

As I said, absolutely no critical thought can be discerned from you.

bewitched

01-20-2008, 10:49 AM

numinus

01-20-2008, 11:27 AM

gez, what a bad attitude you have to go along with your name calling and other rude remarks.

Bad attitude???

My attitude, fyi, is impecably pleasing. Nothing but sunshine and cheer.

you will never understand the enemy.
I wish you luck. you're gonna need it.

The only thing I do not understand is your utter infatuation with goat-herder logic. I'm afraid no amount of luck would help me on that one.

jb_1430

01-20-2008, 11:45 AM

Papal infallibility is codified in the dogmatic constitution of the church - which in turn was used for all sorts of wars.

Aaaand your still making my point for me. They used the "dogmatic constitution of the church", catholic doctrine, not biblical doctrine. Biblical doctrine established Peter as the leader of the disciples, nothing more.

jb_1430

01-20-2008, 11:50 AM

gez, what a bad attitude you have to go along with your name calling and other rude remarks.

Its the only substance in his posts. He needs something to respond with.

numinus

01-21-2008, 07:54 AM

Aaaand your still making my point for me. They used the "dogmatic constitution of the church", catholic doctrine, not biblical doctrine. Biblical doctrine established Peter as the leader of the disciples, nothing more.

Are you brain-dead or something?

Catholic doctrine is an INTERPRETATION of biblical text in the same way that hadith is an INTERPRETATION of the koran.

While you can make the distinction between bible and catholic dogma, you can't seem to make the distinction between koran and hadith.

Logic has much to do with a CONGRUENCE RELATION. Your inability to discern congruence leads to the reasonable conclusion that you have no logic, whatsoever.

jb_1430

01-21-2008, 08:26 AM

Are you brain-dead or something?

Catholic doctrine is an INTERPRETATION of biblical text in the same way that hadith is an INTERPRETATION of the koran.

While you can make the distinction between bible and catholic dogma, you can't seem to make the distinction between koran and hadith.

Logic has much to do with a CONGRUENCE RELATION. Your inability to discern congruence leads to the reasonable conclusion that you have no logic, whatsoever.

And you are about as dumb as a rock. "Interpretation"?? A tortured interpretation that has little to nothing to do with the actual text. And what you dont understand is that the hadiths are words and deeds of Muhammad, written by others, just like the New Testament . Jesus didnt write a book. Muhammad did. And its called CATHOLIC doctrine, not christian doctrine for a reason. Its purely a doctrine of the catholic church.
Like I said, if

19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven: whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.'
18 'In truth I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven; whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.

is the best you have, I couldnt ask for a better demonstration of my point.

numinus

01-21-2008, 08:40 AM

And you are about as dumb as a rock. "Interpretation"?? A tortured interpretation that has little to nothing to do with the actual text. And what you dont understand is that the hadiths are words and deeds of Muhammad, written by others, just like the New Testament . Jesus didnt write a book. Muhammad did. And its called CATHOLIC doctrine, not christian doctrine for a reason. Its purely a doctrine of the catholic church.
Like I said, if

What a moron you are!

Mohammed didn't write the koran.

is the best you have, I couldnt ask for a better demonstration of my point.

And here it is obvious that you can't comprehend the gravity of the text.

Forgiveness of sins is a radical departure from judaism. It was one of the 'evidence' (according to the bible) that condemned jesus in the eyes of the sanhedrin. It is one of the reasons why no synthesis between christianity and judaism is possible today.

jb_1430

01-21-2008, 09:06 AM

What a moron you are!

Mohammed didn't write the koran.

He couldnt read or write so he recited the words to a scribe. Did you have a point? or just a need to respond?

Coyote

01-21-2008, 09:52 AM

And you are about as dumb as a rock. "Interpretation"?? A tortured interpretation that has little to nothing to do with the actual text. And what you dont understand is that the hadiths are words and deeds of Muhammad, written by others, just like the New Testament . Jesus didnt write a book. Muhammad did. And its called CATHOLIC doctrine, not christian doctrine for a reason. Its purely a doctrine of the catholic church.
Like I said, if

is the best you have, I couldnt ask for a better demonstration of my point.

You are playing semantical games here.

Catholicism and Christian were synonomous for centuries. There was no distinction as they were the dominant - by far - sect in the world and the first main Christian Church. Catholic doctrine WAS Christian doctrine and vice versa. It wasn't until the advent of Martin Luther that that changed and Christianity was viewed seperate from the Catholic Church.

jb_1430

01-21-2008, 10:03 AM

You are playing semantical games here.

Catholicism and Christian were synonomous for centuries. There was no distinction as they were the dominant - by far - sect in the world and the first main Christian Church. Catholic doctrine WAS Christian doctrine and vice versa. It wasn't until the advent of Martin Luther that that changed and Christianity was viewed seperate from the Catholic Church.

It was the printing press and the distribution of bibles(christian doctrine) that lead to the reformation. Anyone reading the actual text could see the catholic church was full of shiite.

Coyote

01-21-2008, 03:47 PM

It was the printing press and the distribution of bibles(christian doctrine) that lead to the reformation. Anyone reading the actual text could see the catholic church was full of shiite.

Unfortunately no. Reading the actual text is what such warm fuzzy groups as the Christian Reconstructionists do.

All it means is that there are more possible interpretations of doctrine since everyone can now interpret it for themselves. In otherwords - they're all full of shiite.

The problem with doctrine in the Koran, NT, OT - both Christian and Muslim - is that it contains numerous passages that can be interpreted to condone violence and bloodshed and intolerance. It also contains numerous passages that can be interpreted to condone peace, tolerance and compassion.

In the end - it doesn't matter - not a bit - which is more violent. As long as you will have people selecting those passages to justify bloodshed, they will. As long as you have people selecting only those passages that promote peace - they will. And it's all doctrine and it's irrelevent until someone interprets it to justify an action.

What matters is not what the doctrine actually says - it's what people think it says.

numinus

01-21-2008, 05:35 PM

He couldnt read or write so he recited the words to a scribe. Did you have a point? or just a need to respond?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koran

Verses in the Qur'an originated from verbal tradition, as Islam holds the text was almost entirely memorized by Muhammad's companions as Muhammad recited them, although some verses are believed to be written by Muhammad's companions during Muhammad's dictation. In the Sunni tradition, the collection of the Qur'ān took place under the Caliph Abu Bakr, this task being led by Zayd ibn Thabit Al-Ansari.

What a complete bonehead!

jb_1430

01-21-2008, 05:42 PM

The problem with doctrine in the Koran, NT, OT - both Christian and Muslim - is that it contains numerous passages that can be interpreted to condone violence and bloodshed and intolerance.

Notice how you CONSTANTLY make this claim and rarely if ever supply any evidence regarding Christian doctrine. When I make any claims regarding Islamic doctrine I can supply more verses from the koran and hadiths than anyone would take the time to read that clearly and unequivically demonstrate my point, and writings from Muslims that interpret the verses literally.
Youve provided TWO!, two verses from the New Testament, that we might presume are the best or only evidence you could come up with.

In Mark 7:9, Jesus is critical of the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as prescribed by Old Testament law.
So if you can't redeem them, break their necks.
Luke 19:22-27, Jesus orders killed anyone who refuses to be ruled by him.

Mark 7:9?? well, I guess if you ignore what it actually says you might come to that conclusion. Jesus is quoting Moses and accuses the pharisees of being hypocrites. He is quoting Moses.
'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.' from Exodus 21:17 and Lev. 20:9.
and he abrogates the jewish law regarding diet-
14Again Jesus called the crowd to him and said, "Listen to me, everyone, and understand this. 15Nothing outside a man can make him 'unclean' by going into him. Rather, it is what comes out of a man that makes him 'unclean.' "

Luke 19:22-27???? Your charachterization above is made up BS. Thats the Parable of the Ten Minas. Its a parable about a nonexistant king who orders people killed. Jesus did no such thing.

11While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable,...

The fact that this is the best and only evidence you have DEMONSTRATES my point. Sure, if like you, you ignore the text, make up some shiite in its place, then you can come up with such interpretations. Islam makes it difficult to come to any other interpretation other than a violent one.
Did you make up the above interpretations or did someone else do it for you.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=48&chapter=7&version=31

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=49&chapter=19&version=31

jb_1430

01-21-2008, 06:09 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koran

Verses in the Qur'an originated from verbal tradition, as Islam holds the text was almost entirely memorized by Muhammad's companions as Muhammad recited them, although some verses are believed to be written by Muhammad's companions during Muhammad's dictation. In the Sunni tradition, the collection of the Qur'ān took place under the Caliph Abu Bakr, this task being led by Zayd ibn Thabit Al-Ansari.

What a complete bonehead!

Did you have a point? If only a portion was recited to a scribe from muhammad, and the rest was recited by muhammad to others who later recited to a scribe, whats the point? And the Muslims believe differently than wikipedia towel head.

The Quran was revealed over a period of twenty-three years and was written down in its entirety during the Prophet’s lifetime, although the verses were not gathered together in one volume at that time (Al-Katani, V.2, p.384).
http://www.quran.net/quran/PreservationOfTheQuran.htm

Unlike the Sunnah, the Qur'an is quite literally the Word of Allah, whereas the Sunnah was inspired by Allah but the wording and actions are the Prophet's. The Qur'an has not been expressed using any human's words. Its wording is letter for letter fixed by no one but Allah.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/

numinus

01-21-2008, 08:38 PM

Did you have a point? If only a portion was recited to a scribe from muhammad, and the rest was recited by muhammad to others who later recited to a scribe, whats the point? And the Muslims believe differently than wikipedia towel head.

Its quite futile for you to ask the point since you are incapable of comprehending ANY point.

How do you think that is different from the gospels of matthew and mark, academic opinion of which suggests an earlier, eye-witness account as their source, hmmm?

Fact is, you do not even know the difference between authorship and oral tradition. What you have demonstrated is your utter ignorance on the very topic you pretend competence in.

jb_1430

01-21-2008, 10:07 PM

Its quite futile for you to ask the point since you are incapable of comprehending ANY point.

How do you think that is different from the gospels of matthew and mark,

The Quran was revealed over a period of twenty-three years and was written down in its entirety during the Prophet’s lifetime. The New Testament was written 100-300 years after Jesus' lifetime.

numinus

01-22-2008, 12:00 AM

The Quran was revealed over a period of twenty-three years and was written down in its entirety during the Prophet’s lifetime. The New Testament was written 100-300 years after Jesus' lifetime.

That would be the oldest surviving copy. Almost all biblical scholars agree that this copy was itself copied from a source that is within the window of an eye-witness account. That document is the hypothetical Q document.

Certainly, this is more credible than the assertion that the koran is a a faithful and verbatim account of mohammed's words, handed down through oral tradition.

The temerity with which you presume to teach me is astounding. In fact, your logical abilities is nothing more than the cumbersome plodding of a pachyderm.

jb_1430

01-22-2008, 04:39 AM

What you or wikipedia think isnt really relevant.

That would be the oldest surviving copy. Almost all biblical scholars agree that this copy was itself copied from a source that is within the window of an eye-witness account. That document is the hypothetical Q document.

Certainly, this is more credible than the assertion that the koran is a a faithful and verbatim account of mohammed's words, handed down through oral tradition.

The temerity with which you presume to teach me is astounding. In fact, your logical abilities is nothing more than the cumbersome plodding of a pachyderm.

jb_1430

01-22-2008, 05:09 AM

The ultimate goal of the enemy.

http://www.mituk.org/?p=64

The Khilafah system is the dream of most Islamic movements around the world today as an ultimate objective, since the last remnants of this system were destroyed at the hands of Kemal Ataturk on the 3rd of March 1924. Called the Othmani Caliphate at its demise, the Khilafah system of governance existed ever since the lifetime of Messenger Muhammad when he established the first Islamic State in 622 CE. There was then an unbroken chain of Islamic States for 1302 years until its destruction in 1924.

The Khilafah system is not implemented anywhere in the world today, rather every country in the Muslim world today implements a form of capitalism, monarchy or other form of dictatorship or secular system. Unlike the leaders who rule today, the Khaleefah (or Emir/Amir/Ameer) – who has been given authority by the Muslims to rule over the Khilafah – must ensure that only the Shari’ah is implemented internally and that it is also carried to the world as the foreign policy of the State.

The Taliban had the dream of bringing back this unique system of governance. However, beset with civil war and attempts to overthrow them, they came close to reaching this ideal only to be halted in the final stages of their embryonic development.

So why would the West, and in particular George Bush and Tony Blair, be so vehemently against the re-establishment of such a system? Is it because they are concerned at how women were obliged to cover themselves in public, is it because they opposed capital punishment or is it because they understand that establishing the Khilafah means the re-emergence of this beacon of light on the earth and the beginning of the end of man made systems of law?

It is clear that the latter is the real cause for concern. The Khilafah system is in truth an affront to all capitalist or other man made systems of ruling because it rejects all their ideologies, foundations and institutions. It does not accept secularism, democracy, liberalism or freedom and nor does it accept for any body to have any say over it such as the United Nations or their Security Council.

Hence, the Khilafah would be in one camp whilst the rest of the world would be in the other. Sovereignty for God verses sovereignty for man, the law of God verses the law of man, a civilisation based on divine commands verses a civilisation based on the whims and desires of man. This is the real reason why the American and British governments are firmly against its emergence.
...
The Muslim Ummah (community) has been described by scholars as a pregnant woman in her last stage of pregnancy – she has a short time before delivery. The only question is whether it will be a natural birth delivered through public opinion and awareness leading to change or whether it will be carried out via a caesarean operation requiring a military coup or bloody revolution.
...
One such attribute is the fact that the Khilafah state does not have fixed borders; rather, it has always had frontiers which are expanded whenever the Islamic State can launch jihad to remove the obstacles in the way of implementing divine law or when the bordering country accepts Islamic law and order peacefully. This is contrary to the concept of nation states and the United Nations which prohibits annexation of countries and thereby maintains the hegemony of the current larger states over the divided and smaller (often Muslim) ones.

Another problem which the leaders of the capitalist world share is the fact that the Khaleefah, when appointed, will never agree to permanent peace with any nation, rather its foreign policy is built on the basis of temporarily having ceasefires so long as Islam is allowed to be propagated in the other country, though once the time limit expires the Islamic State may advance and annex the land to implement the Shari’ah there without notice. The maximum ceasefire allowed in Islam being 10 years....

Capitalists and the proponents of secularism also know that the strength of a nation is not its physical capability or monetary wealth but rather its thoughts and concepts, its intellect and driving force. They also realise that once the Khilafah is established on Earth there will once again be education for the masses based purely on the revelation from the Qur’an and teachings of the Messenger Muhammad; Western corruption from Hollywood and the pornography, cosmetics and fashion industries exploiting the procreation instincts will be banned; consuming and trading in drugs and alcohol will be illegal; and monopolising wealth or commodities and engaging in usurious transactions will also be illegal.

Without such time wasting and taming influences, the emerging Islamic State will be able to concentrate on nurturing a nation of people that are willing to sacrifice their lives for the sake of pleasing God.

The emerging Khilafah will therefore have a formidable army which will be very hard to confront. Even the few resistance fighters in Iraq with this mindset are keeping the full might of the US and UK armies busy. With no hang ups about what the United Nations might say and nothing to check their actions except the divine Text, the fear of the Khilafah will no doubt reach pandemic proportions.

numinus

01-22-2008, 07:00 AM

What you or wikipedia think isnt really relevant.

It is relevant insofar as to prove your ignorance regarding the subject you pretend to know.

Coyote

01-22-2008, 08:00 AM

That would be the oldest surviving copy. Almost all biblical scholars agree that this copy was itself copied from a source that is within the window of an eye-witness account. That document is the hypothetical Q document.

Certainly, this is more credible than the assertion that the koran is a a faithful and verbatim account of mohammed's words, handed down through oral tradition.

The temerity with which you presume to teach me is astounding. In fact, your logical abilities is nothing more than the cumbersome plodding of a pachyderm.

There have been interesting studies done on how stories changed as they get passed on.

jb_1430

01-22-2008, 08:16 AM

It is relevant insofar as to prove your ignorance regarding the subject you pretend to know.

And if your depth of knowledge can get past the wikipedia stage, you might come to realize that you dont have the slightest idea what you are talking about.

The quran was written during the life of the prophet peace be upon him.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Islam-947/History-Writing-Quran.htm

Each revelation of the Holy Quran was written down by the Prophet's scribes under his instruction and supervision.
http://www.quran.gov.ae/content/view/27/71/lang,english/

In the first two sections of this work, a review was made of the alterations undergone by the Old Testament and the Gospels before they were handed down to us in the form we know today. The same is not true for the Quran for the simple reason that it was written down at the time of the Prophet;
http://www.islam-guide.com/bqs/15authenticity.htm

The revelations Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) received were written down during his lifetime on different writing materials. However, they were not bound into one single book. This is confirmed by a report that says "when people came to Medina to learn about Islam, they were provided with copies of the chapters of the Quran, to read and learn them by heart." ("Sahifa Hammam ibn Munabbih," by Hamidullah, 1979, p.64)
http://www.arabicbible.com/islam/hit.htm

A record of the exact words revealed by God to the Prophet Muhammad through the Archangel Gabriel, the Quran holy book was memorized by Muhammad, recited to his Companions to memorize, and written down by scribes, who cross-checked it during his lifetime.
http://blessingscornucopia.com/Islam_Muslim_Islamic_Sunnah_Islam_Quran_and_Archan gel_Gabriel.htm

The Prophet himself was unlettered, did not knew how to read and write, therefore he called upon his numerous scribes to write the revelation for him. Complete Quran thus existed in written form in the lifetime of the Prophet.
http://www.galway.iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel3.htm

The compilation and printing of the Quran (in the sense of written documents) were made during the lifetime of the prophet.
http://www.wideopenwest.com/~salamradio/Hadeeth.htm

Scribing during the life of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). The Revelation scribes wrote down the Quran, according to the order of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), on pieces of cloth, leather, bones, and stones. Its verses were ordered and arranged according to Allah's inspiration.
http://www.sunnah.org/history/quran_compiled.htm

The Quran was written in the Prophets time. It was also momorized by many people.
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/archive/index.php/t-165299.html

bewitched

01-22-2008, 11:03 AM

get past comparing Christianity to Islam and we can make some progress. until then you will not understand the enemy.

jb_1430

01-22-2008, 12:11 PM

get past comparing Christianity to Islam and we can make some progress. until then you will not understand the enemy.

Im not comparing. I am showing that there is no comparison.

bewitched

01-22-2008, 12:29 PM

Im not comparing. I am showing that there is no comparison.

I wasn't really referring to you. you should have no need to even go there. this conversation is going in the typical "verses" circle.

the enemy is Islamic terrorism. period. no verses will change that.
and in case no one has noticed, thoday the UN council has agreed that Iran shouldn't continue it's nuclear path.
further, think about the US in a deep recession, which is being compared to the Great Depression and how vulnerable we would be to a powerful enemy.

Coyote

01-22-2008, 01:42 PM

get past comparing Christianity to Islam and we can make some progress. until then you will not understand the enemy.

Oh, I understand the enemy alright...it's called extremism.

Coyote

01-22-2008, 01:43 PM

and how vulnerable we would be to a powerful enemy.

How vulnerable we would be TO an enemy...or

how vulnerable we would be FOR an enemy?

bewitched

01-22-2008, 02:55 PM

Oh, I understand the enemy alright...it's called extremism.

and now the next step is to understand the numbers of current daily extremism and how it will grow in the future.

bewitched

01-22-2008, 02:57 PM

How vulnerable we would be TO an enemy...or

how vulnerable we would be FOR an enemy?

how vulnerable we will be. how's that?
with an ecomony that is sinking and ME countries bailing us out allows them ownership and more power over the US. just add 12 terrorist attacks in major cities and Sharia Law isn't far behind.

bewitched

01-22-2008, 05:04 PM

is this extreme?
from Macomb Michigan paper
"Police said anti-Jewish and anti-Christian fliers were found on cars parked in a lot on the northwest corner of 15 Mile and Ryan roads.
Advertisement

Sterling Heights police Detective Sgt. Paul Jesperson said three separate complaints were filed by residents Tuesday who found the fliers on their windshields.

He said the flier said: "Kill Jews and Christians if they don't believe in Allah and Mohammad."

It further advises people to "Fight those who do not believe."

numinus

01-22-2008, 07:58 PM

And if your depth of knowledge can get past the wikipedia stage, you might come to realize that you dont have the slightest idea what you are talking about.

I have a jesuit primary and secondary education, fyi. Unlike you, I don't need any other source to understand my own religion.

Coyote

01-22-2008, 08:01 PM

how vulnerable we will be. how's that?
with an ecomony that is sinking and ME countries bailing us out allows them ownership and more power over the US. just add 12 terrorist attacks in major cities and Sharia Law isn't far behind.

When the economy starts to sink, you'll see politicians start to scramble to find a good enemy to rally against. Truth and accuracy are irrelevent. Just keep people scared and they won't have to worry about the economy or anything else. About time for another 9/11...

jb_1430

01-23-2008, 03:56 AM

I have a jesuit primary and secondary education, fyi. Unlike you, I don't need any other source to understand my own religion.

What religion would that be? It is Islam we are discussing and that you do not understand.

jb_1430

01-23-2008, 04:02 AM

When the economy starts to sink, you'll see politicians start to scramble to find a good enemy to rally against. Truth and accuracy are irrelevent. Just keep people scared and they won't have to worry about the economy or anything else. About time for another 9/11...

Your views are becoming clearer. We dwell in different plains of existance.

bewitched

01-23-2008, 05:30 AM

is this extreme?
"Muhammad Ayn-al-Nas, a 26-year-old Moroccan, started his journey in Casablanca. After flying to Turkey and then to Damascus, he reached his destination in a small Iraqi border town on Jan. 31, 2007. He was an economics student back home, he told the al-Qaeda clerk who interviewed him on arrival. Asked what sort of work he hoped to do in Iraq, Nas replied: "Martyr."

bewitched

01-23-2008, 05:31 AM

Coyote

01-23-2008, 06:33 AM

conspiracy theory world.
sad for you.

Nah. Not me.

I'm not talking about government involvement in 9/11. That's b.s.

I'm saying that in hard times a country NEEDS an enemy. Whether it's the commies of yesterday or the Islamofascists of today.

We created and empowered bin Laden because we needed him. He was a nothing until we began paying attention to him.

We created a thousand more bin Laden's when we chose to invade Iraq on false pretexts. Now, in order to maintain waning public support for our fictional "war on terror" - which is really best handled through international police work rather than military means - we need to keep the fear alive in the public minds. Like we did the commies.

You're doing a good job:D

bewitched

01-23-2008, 07:08 AM

Nah. Not me.

I'm not talking about government involvement in 9/11. That's b.s.

I'm saying that in hard times a country NEEDS an enemy. Whether it's the commies of yesterday or the Islamofascists of today.

We created and empowered bin Laden because we needed him. He was a nothing until we began paying attention to him.

We created a thousand more bin Laden's when we chose to invade Iraq on false pretexts. Now, in order to maintain waning public support for our fictional "war on terror" - which is really best handled through international police work rather than military means - we need to keep the fear alive in the public minds. Like we did the commies.

You're doing a good job:D
that's just not true. we didn't create Ossama. there is a real man and he has a real Islamic mission against the West because of his theology.

your "fictional" war on terror is a conspiracy theory. there is a real Ossama with a real agenda. there is a concise 7 phase plan to destroy the West and it wasn't made up by the Bush Administration or the US. unless the American public realizes this then we face millions of deaths and probably destruction of this country as we know it.
but please, keep your head buried in the sand and write it off as a conspiracy if that makes you feel safe.

care to address all the examples of "extreme" that I posted? huh?

numinus

01-23-2008, 08:50 AM

What religion would that be? It is Islam we are discussing and that you do not understand.

Whether you choose to argue islam to christianity to god knows where, I am always miles ahead of you.

numinus

01-23-2008, 08:51 AM

Your views are becoming clearer. We dwell in different plains of existance.

No. YOU dwell in an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT plane of existence from the rest of us.

bewitched

01-23-2008, 09:20 AM

Whether you choose to argue islam to christianity to god knows where, I am always miles ahead of you.

ha. hardly.
and it's this distorted reality that will get millions of Americans killed.

Coyote

01-23-2008, 09:57 AM

ha. hardly.
and it's this distorted reality that will get millions of Americans killed.

No, it's the flouride in the water.

Coyote

01-23-2008, 10:16 AM

that's just not true. we didn't create Ossama. there is a real man and he has a real Islamic mission against the West because of his theology.

I'm not saying he's fictional. Don't be so literal. The policies of the US, USSR and other western countries in the Middle East and Afghanistan created a situation that allowed bin Laden to become powerful and allowed his message to become attractive. It is not too dissimilar from the punative post-WW1 measures instituted against Germany that paved the way for a man like Hitler to sell his political message. On top of that, like with Sadam, the CIA supported him against the Soviets in Afghanistan - playing with fire. They did not literally create him, but in many ways they created the "legend".

Not only that but bin Laden represented a single focus of "evil" that the US labeled and paid considerable public attention to. What was bin Laden before that? Just another terrorist. He gained power and prestige among Islamic radicals by confronting the US and being acknowledged by the US, creating the image of David vs. Goliath to many would be Jihadists.

your "fictional" war on terror is a conspiracy theory. there is a real Ossama with a real agenda. there is a concise 7 phase plan to destroy the West and it wasn't made up by the Bush Administration or the US. unless the American public realizes this then we face millions of deaths and probably destruction of this country as we know it.
but please, keep your head buried in the sand and write it off as a conspiracy if that makes you feel safe.

Sounds llike you're the one with the conspiracy theories :D

care to address all the examples of "extreme" that I posted? huh?

I addressed some. But again, I can find examples of "extreme" in many different faiths...and have. What's your point? None appear to represent mainstream Islam.

numinus

01-23-2008, 10:21 AM

ha. hardly.
and it's this distorted reality that will get millions of Americans killed.

No. Behaving like a dumb animal and falling for goat-herder logic is already getting americans killed.

bewitched

01-23-2008, 10:46 AM

I'm not saying he's fictional. Don't be so literal. The policies of the US, USSR and other western countries in the Middle East and Afghanistan created a situation that allowed bin Laden to become powerful and allowed his message to become attractive. It is not too dissimilar from the punative post-WW1 measures instituted against Germany that paved the way for a man like Hitler to sell his political message. On top of that, like with Sadam, the CIA supported him against the Soviets in Afghanistan - playing with fire. They did not literally create him, but in many ways they created the "legend".

Not only that but bin Laden represented a single focus of "evil" that the US labeled and paid considerable public attention to. What was bin Laden before that? Just another terrorist. He gained power and prestige among Islamic radicals by confronting the US and being acknowledged by the US, creating the image of David vs. Goliath to many would be Jihadists.

Sounds llike you're the one with the conspiracy theories :D

I addressed some. But again, I can find examples of "extreme" in many different faiths...and have. What's your point? None appear to represent mainstream Islam.

no one created Ossama except Islam. period.

the 7 phase plan was documented on Saddam's computer and other AQ documentation picked up by intelligence agencies.

all the extreme examples I gave you were from mainstream places. and there are no mainstream Christians out there behaving the same way.

Coyote

01-23-2008, 11:08 AM

no one created Ossama except Islam. period.

the 7 phase plan was documented on Saddam's computer and other AQ documentation picked up by intelligence agencies.

Source?

all the extreme examples I gave you were from mainstream places. and there are no mainstream Christians out there behaving the same way.

I'm not talking about mainstream "places". I'm talking about mainstream Islam.

jb_1430

01-23-2008, 11:43 AM

What was bin Laden before that? Just another terrorist. He gained power and prestige among Islamic radicals by confronting the US and being acknowledged by the US, creating the image of David vs. Goliath to many would be Jihadists.

???? Before 9/11 he had the power to bomb the WTC, foreign US embassies, Kobar towers and 3000 Americans in an instant. Now he has the power to splatter some Pakistannis or Iraqi Shiites up against a wall. Before 9/11 we ignored him, after, anything but. Continuing to ignore him after 9/11 would have likely brought a continuation of what we got before 9/11 and increased his prestige among the muslims even more. Especially since our invasion of Iraq, his support among the Muslims has declined. Seems to me, everything is opposite of what you believe.

bewitched

01-23-2008, 11:48 AM

No. Behaving like a dumb animal and falling for goat-herder logic is already getting americans killed.

it hasn't even begun yet.
there is a plan for the destruction of the West and millions will die in the US.

bewitched

01-23-2008, 11:50 AM

Source?

I'm not talking about mainstream "places". I'm talking about mainstream Islam.

yes, mainstream places in Islam. you still avoid all the examples I have given of mainstream extreme in Islam. denial?

source? Saddam's computer, AQ documents. get a report from ijet.

9sublime

01-23-2008, 12:07 PM

it hasn't even begun yet.
there is a plan for the destruction of the West and millions will die in the US.

Yes, there is a plan by Islamic terrorists, but I don't see it taking over the world. I mean, look at communism. I bet you would have been on the red scare bandwagon all the way post world war II shouting your mouth off about the end of the world nearing and a need to blow up anyone foreign.

Come off it, your fear is consuming you.

bewitched

01-23-2008, 12:22 PM

Yes, there is a plan by Islamic terrorists, but I don't see it taking over the world. I mean, look at communism. I bet you would have been on the red scare bandwagon all the way post world war II shouting your mouth off about the end of the world nearing and a need to blow up anyone foreign.

Come off it, your fear is consuming you.

I have no fear.
but the Pentagon doesn't write off a plan because they don't think it's a good one. they prepare for the worst.
so you can think it won't work all you want, what is important is that the enemy thinks it will work.

bewitched

01-23-2008, 01:11 PM

is this extreme?
"MONTREAL - In a previously undisclosed interview with CSIS investigators, alleged al-Qaeda sleeper agent Adil Charkaoui described how members of Montreal's Arab community were recruiting people for jihad before 9/11.
"Charkaoui explained that many are called but few are chosen. It's a funnel effect," according to a summary of the April, 2001, interview with the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, just added to the court record.

"The person responsible for recruitment attends certain nerve centres, such as mosques. Someone whom the recruiter considers to have potential will be invited to meetings where he will be exposed to certain activities having to do with jihad. The person is tested. If any flaw is detected related to the security that he must respect to participate in jihad activities, he will be expelled from the group immediately."

jb_1430

01-23-2008, 02:40 PM

I have no fear.
but the Pentagon doesn't write off a plan because they don't think it's a good one. they prepare for the worst.
so you can think it won't work all you want, what is important is that the enemy thinks it will work.

http://www.mituk.org/?p=64

The Khilafah system is the dream of most Islamic movements around the world today as an ultimate objective, since the last remnants of this system were destroyed at the hands of Kemal Ataturk on the 3rd of March 1924...

Unlike the leaders who rule today, the Khaleefah (or Emir/Amir/Ameer) – who has been given authority by the Muslims to rule over the Khilafah – must ensure that only the Shari’ah is implemented internally and that it is also carried to the world as the foreign policy of the State...

So why would the West, and in particular George Bush and Tony Blair, be so vehemently against the re-establishment of such a system? Is it because they are concerned at how women were obliged to cover themselves in public, is it because they opposed capital punishment or is it because they understand that establishing the Khilafah means the re-emergence of this beacon of light on the earth and the beginning of the end of man made systems of law?

It is clear that the latter is the real cause for concern. The Khilafah system is in truth an affront to all capitalist or other man made systems of ruling because it rejects all their ideologies, foundations and institutions. It does not accept secularism, democracy, liberalism or freedom and nor does it accept for any body to have any say over it such as the United Nations or their Security Council.

Hence, the Khilafah would be in one camp whilst the rest of the world would be in the other. Sovereignty for God verses sovereignty for man, the law of God verses the law of man, a civilisation based on divine commands verses a civilisation based on the whims and desires of man. This is the real reason why the American and British governments are firmly against its emergence.

The Muslim Ummah (community) has been described by scholars as a pregnant woman in her last stage of pregnancy – she has a short time before delivery. The only question is whether it will be a natural birth delivered through public opinion and awareness leading to change or whether it will be carried out via a caesarean operation requiring a military coup or bloody revolution. ...

jb_1430

01-23-2008, 02:45 PM

Same plan from a different perspective.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE4DE173BF930A1575AC0A9669582 60&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Saddam to US Ambassador 1990

…If you use pressure, we will deploy pressure and force. We know that you can harm us although we do not threaten you. But we too can harm you. Everyone can cause harm according to their ability and their size. We cannot come all the way to you in the United States, but individual Arabs may reach you.
You can come to Iraq with aircraft and missiles but do not push us to the point where we cease to care….

http://pierrelegrand.net/2006/07/21/saddamterrorconvention.htm

Iraq 1993

The moment of confrontation had come. President Bush warned Saddam Hussein that if he continued to interfere with United Nations weapons inspectors and to shoot at American warplanes over Iraq, he would have to pay the consequences. So Islamic radicals from all over the Middle East, Africa and Asia converged on Baghdad to show their solidarity with Iraq in the face of American aggression. Chechens in Persian-lamb hats, Moroccans in caftans, delegates who hailed “from Jakarta to Dakar,” as one Senegalese put it, poured into Baghdad’s Rashid Hotel, where Saddam’s minions urged them to embrace jihad as “the one gate to Paradise.” And the greatest holy warrior of all? “The mujahed Saddam Hussein, who is leading this nation against the nonbelievers,” they were told. “Everyone has a task to do, which is to go against the American state,” declared Saddam’s deputy Ezzat Ibrahim. The Americans had colonized Lebanon; they had colonized Saudi Arabia. But the line against them would be drawn in Iraq. Believers would triumph, said Ibrahim: “Our stand now can lead us to final victory, to Paradise.”

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/02/17/transcripts/clinton.iraq/

Tuesday February 17, 1998 Clinton speech pentagon
…Saddam Hussein's Iraq reminds us of what we learned in the 20th century and warns us of what we must know about the 21st. In this century, we learned through harsh experience that the only answer to aggression and illegal behavior is firmness, determination, and when necessary action.

In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more the very kind of threat Iraq poses now a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us unnoticed.

If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of mass destruction program.

But if we act as one, we can safeguard our interests and send a clear message to every would-be tyrant and terrorist that the international community does have the wisdom and the will and the way to protect peace and security in a new era….

(5 days later like a puppet on a string)

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm

23 February 1998 Fatwa

…No one argues today about three facts that are known to everyone…..

First, for over seven years the United States has been occupying the lands of Islam in the holiest of places, the Arabian Peninsula, plundering its riches, dictating to its rulers, humiliating its people, terrorizing its neighbors, and turning its bases in the Peninsula into a spearhead through which to fight the neighboring Muslim peoples.

If some people have in the past argued about the fact of the occupation, all the people of the Peninsula have now acknowledged it. The best proof of this is the Americans' continuing aggression against the Iraqi people using the Peninsula as a staging post, even though all its rulers are against their territories being used to that end, but they are helpless.

Second, despite the great devastation inflicted on the Iraqi people by the crusader-Zionist alliance, and despite the huge number of those killed, which has exceeded 1 million... despite all this, the Americans are once against trying to repeat the horrific massacres….

Third, if the Americans' aims behind these wars are religious and economic, the aim is also to serve the Jews' petty state and divert attention from its occupation of Jerusalem and murder of Muslims there. The best proof of this is their eagerness to destroy Iraq, the strongest neighboring Arab state, and their endeavor to fragment all the states of the region such as Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Sudan into paper statelets and through their disunion and weakness to guarantee Israel's survival and the continuation of the brutal crusade occupation of the Peninsula….

On that basis, and in compliance with Allah's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it

bewitched

01-23-2008, 04:50 PM

progress. well done gentlemen. please continue.

bewitched

01-23-2008, 05:47 PM

extreme?
"KABUL, Afghanistan - The number of students and teachers killed in Taliban attacks has tripled in the past year in a campaign to close schools and force teenage boys to join the Islamic militia, Afghanistan's education minister says.
While the overall state of Afghan education shows improvement, Education Ministry numbers point to a sharp decline in security for students, teachers and schools in the south, where the Taliban thrives: The number of students out of classes because of security concerns has hit 300,000 since March 2007, compared with 200,000 in the previous 12 months, while the number of schools closing has risen from 350 to 590."

oh my... no comments on this extreme behavior... oh well. maybe the point has sunk in already. thank god.

jb_1430

01-23-2008, 06:18 PM

extreme?
"KABUL, Afghanistan - The number of students and teachers killed in Taliban attacks has tripled in the past year in a campaign to close schools and force teenage boys to join the Islamic militia, Afghanistan's education minister says.

They also realise that once the Khilafah is established on Earth there will once again be education for the masses based purely on the revelation from the Qur’an and teachings of the Messenger Muhammad; Western corruption from Hollywood and the pornography, cosmetics and fashion industries exploiting the procreation instincts will be banned; consuming and trading in drugs and alcohol will be illegal; and monopolising wealth or commodities and engaging in usurious transactions will also be illegal.
http://www.mituk.org/?p=64

Coyote

01-23-2008, 07:07 PM

yes, mainstream places in Islam. you still avoid all the examples I have given of mainstream extreme in Islam. denial?

source? Saddam's computer, AQ documents. get a report from ijet.

Mainstream Islam is not extreme Islam.

Simple mathmatics ought to tell you that. Unless your enslaved to MSM's version of reality.

Do you have a link for those sources? I can't find anything.

Coyote

01-23-2008, 07:09 PM

Coyote

01-23-2008, 07:09 PM

dupe post

Coyote

01-23-2008, 07:13 PM

???? Before 9/11 he had the power to bomb the WTC, foreign US embassies, Kobar towers and 3000 Americans in an instant.

Before 9/11? 9/11 was his one big act. Period.

Now he has the power to splatter some Pakistannis or Iraqi Shiites up against a wall. Before 9/11 we ignored him, after, anything but. Continuing to ignore him after 9/11 would have likely brought a continuation of what we got before 9/11 and increased his prestige among the muslims even more. Especially since our invasion of Iraq, his support among the Muslims has declined. Seems to me, everything is opposite of what you believe.

He wasn't ignored.

After 9/11 his support among Muslims notably declined. Until we invaded a sovereign country. Even then - he has still been largely denounced. His popularity is limited to would be jihadists and sympathizers with foreign occupation. He is a cult figure. And probably dead.

Coyote

01-23-2008, 07:14 PM

jb_1430

01-24-2008, 04:19 AM

After 9/11 his support among Muslims notably declined.

Oooh show us ANYTHING to indicate your not just makin this shiite up as you go along.

bewitched

01-24-2008, 05:17 AM

Mainstream places in Islam does not equal mainstream Islam.

Try again.

huh? all the examples of extremism I gave are all mainstream Islam.
you can try to toy with words Mr. Clinton and the definition of little words but until you understand Islam is not a religion of peace you shall remain under-informed.

bewitched

01-24-2008, 05:41 AM

extremism?
"On at least two occasions this week, Hamas staged scenes of darkness as part of its campaign to end the political and economic sanctions against the Gaza Strip, Palestinian journalists said Wednesday.
In the first case, journalists who were invited to cover the Hamas government meeting were surprised to see Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh and his ministers sitting around a table with burning candles.

In the second case on Tuesday, journalists noticed that Hamas legislators who were meeting in Gaza City also sat in front of burning candles.

But some of the journalists noticed that there was actually no need for the candles because both meetings were being held in daylight.

"They had closed the curtains in the rooms to create the impression that Hamas leaders were also suffering as a result of the power stoppage," one journalist told The Jerusalem Post. "It was obvious that the whole thing was staged."

bewitched

01-24-2008, 05:42 AM

bracing for extremism?
"Holland is on high alert in anticipation of the upcoming release of yet another anti-Islam film, this one created by far right Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders, who has been living under high security since the death of Theo van Gogh in 2004 (van Gogh was murdered on the streets of Amsterdam by a radical Muslim in retaliation for a film that he directed, Ayaan Hirsi Ali's "Submission"). The government has recommended the evacuation of all its embassies "in sensitive areas," and has been engaging for weeks now in discussions with police officials as to the best way to handle the riots and violence they expect will erupt when the film is aired. And even Hirsi Ali, creator of "Submission," when interviewed in the Dutch press, ironically called the film "too provocative," suggesting that violent responses are indeed likely."

bewitched

01-24-2008, 05:44 AM

extreme reaction and decision?
"A story based on the Three Little Pigs has been turned down from a government agency's annual awards because the subject matter could offend Muslims.
The digital book, re-telling the classic fairy tale, was rejected by judges who warned that "the use of pigs raises cultural issues".

The awards which rejected the book are run by Becta, the government's educational technology agency.

The judging panel also attacked the book's stereotyping of builders.

The book's creative director, Anne Curtis, said that the idea that including pigs in a story could be interpreted as racism was "like a slap in the face".

bewitched

01-24-2008, 05:46 AM

extremely ridiculous!
"KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia — Malaysia's only state run by the Islamic opposition party will get stricter about enforcing separate lines for men and women at supermarkets, an official said Tuesday.
Authorities in the northern state of Kelantan — governed by the opposition Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party — will fine supermarkets and shops if they let men and women use the same lines at checkout counters, said party spokesman Anual Bakri Haron.
Chief Minister Nik Aziz Nik Mat has called for stricter enforcement "to safeguard the ladies" from being harassed and to avoid close proximity between opposite sexes while lining up to buy groceries, Anual said. "He wants the enforcement to be looked into thoroughly."

bewitched

01-24-2008, 05:47 AM

extremely Nazi-like.
"Malaysian authorities confiscated Christian children's books, claiming the illustrations of prophets such as Moses and Abraham violate Islamic Shariah law.
The independent news agency Malaysakini reported the Internal Security Ministry confiscated the literature from bookstores in two cities and one small town in mid-December."

bewitched

01-24-2008, 05:47 AM

extreme control.
"RIYADH, Saudi Arabia — Women in Saudi Arabia can now stay in a hotel or a furnished apartment without a male guardian according to decision by the Ministry of Trade, reported the local press Monday.
The daily Al-Watan, which is deemed close to the Saudi government, said the ministry issued a circular to the hotels asking them to accept women in their rooms even if they were alone provided that all their information immediately be [reported] to a police station in the area.
The decision was adopted after a study conducted by the Interior Ministry, the Supreme Commission of Tourism and the religious police authority known as the Commission for the Propagation of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice.
Saudi women, under strict Islamic law, suffer severe restrictions on daily life as they are not allowed to be anywhere with an unrelated man, cannot drive, appear before a judge without a male representative, or travel abroad without a male guardian's permission."

bewitched

01-24-2008, 05:50 AM

extreme bs.
"Islamabad, January 17:: A radical Islamic group in Pakistan’s Khyber Agency bordering Afghanistan has warned that any man shaving his beard will have to pay a fine of Rs 5,000."

bewitched

01-24-2008, 05:52 AM

extreme Sharia Law in the UK?
"Ibrahim Mogra, chairman of the Muslim Council of Britain's inter-faith committee, admits that to non-Muslims some laws may seem harsh on women. Those who are married to a man with a number of wives can be treated badly, for instance. But he insists that sharia is an equitable system.

"It may mean that a woman married under Islamic law has no legal rights, but the husband is required to pay for everything in marriage and in the case of a divorce all the woman's belongings are hers to keep."

In fact, Sheikh Mogra argues that sharia in Britain would give rights to women. "A Muslim man can take a second wife under sharia law and treat her as he wants, knowing that she has no legal rights in Britain. It means that she is regarded as no more than a mistress and he can walk out on her when he wants."

Critics warn, however, that in giving even parts of sharia law official status, Britain would be associating itself with a system that in many ways was intolerable according to Western values.

Professor John Marks, author of The West, Islam and Islamism, points out that apostates from Islam can suffer severe punishment, even honour killings.

"There are more violent cases that are being related to people who choose to convert from Islam," he says.

A survey by Policy Exchange found that 36 per cent of young British Muslims believed that a Muslim who converted to another religion should be "punished by death".

9sublime

01-24-2008, 05:52 AM

Here's an idea. Quote what you are replying to - or even better condense all these replies into one or two posts.

9sublime

01-24-2008, 05:54 AM

Coyote

01-24-2008, 07:58 AM

Whey! Fear mongering. You start the post 'sharia law in the UK?' despite the fact that there has been no movement to sharia law in the UK - just some random Muslim saying he wants it. The article was quite out of context because it is not like the government of the UK is saying they are considering sharia law or anything near that.

Don't confuse him with facts...

Coyote

01-24-2008, 07:59 AM

Here's an idea. Quote what you are replying to - or even better condense all these replies into one or two posts.

Excellent idea...all those individual posts are beginning to seem spamlike.

Coyote

01-24-2008, 08:01 AM

Oooh show us ANYTHING to indicate your not just makin this shiite up as you go along.

Support for Bin Laden, Violence Down Among Muslims, Poll Says (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/14/AR2005071401030.html)

Coyote

01-24-2008, 08:03 AM

huh? all the examples of extremism I gave are all mainstream Islam.
you can try to toy with words Mr. Clinton and the definition of little words but until you understand Islam is not a religion of peace you shall remain under-informed.

Mainstream: Representing the prevalent attitudes, values, and practices of a society or group.

You are giving how many cases out of what...2 billion or something Muslims world wide and you are pretending it's mainstream? And most of those cases occur in a handful of countries under religious law?

Try again.

jb_1430

01-24-2008, 10:03 AM

Support for Bin Laden, Violence Down Among Muslims, Poll Says (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/14/AR2005071401030.html)

I was looking for something to support your assertion, not mine.

Coyote

01-24-2008, 10:14 AM

I was looking for something to support your assertion, not mine.

My assertion was that support for Osama went down after 9/11.

From the article:

"Most Muslim publics are expressing less support for terrorism than in the past. Confidence in Osama bin Laden has declined markedly in some countries, and fewer believe suicide bombings that target civilians are justified in the defense of Islam," the poll concluded.

bewitched

01-24-2008, 11:23 AM

Don't confuse him with facts...

I'm a she.
and the one's in the thread who claim there are a few "extremists" out there causing terror, or that terror is completely gone... can address my examples.
thanks.

bewitched

01-24-2008, 11:24 AM

Support for Bin Laden, Violence Down Among Muslims, Poll Says (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/14/AR2005071401030.html)

poll vs reality.
which one do you choose?
ummm, let me guess.

bewitched

01-24-2008, 11:25 AM

Mainstream: Representing the prevalent attitudes, values, and practices of a society or group.

You are giving how many cases out of what...2 billion or something Muslims world wide and you are pretending it's mainstream? And most of those cases occur in a handful of countries under religious law?

Try again.

all my examples represent the attitude, values, and practices. that's what you aren't understanding. Islam is very simple. and 2 billion believe this simple theology.

jb_1430

01-24-2008, 11:28 AM

My assertion was that support for Osama went down after 9/11.

From the article:

"Most Muslim publics are expressing less support for terrorism than in the past. Confidence in Osama bin Laden has declined markedly in some countries, and fewer believe suicide bombings that target civilians are justified in the defense of Islam," the poll concluded.

I claimed

you claimed

[QUOTE=Coyote;30271]After 9/11 his support among Muslims notably declined. Until we invaded a sovereign country.

you showed a comparison of May 2003 to 2005. 1 1/2 months after Iraq invasion compared to 2005. 1 1/2 YEARS after Afghanistan. Support for Bin laden began dropping after we began pounding the shiite out of him. Youve not shown anything to indicate what the support was before 9/11. I suspect 9/11 INCREASED his support.
Summer 2002 73% of lebanese supported suicide bombings, this is AFTER 9/11. Support for such things is soaring. We pound the shiite out of Afghanistan and Iraq and then it drops to 39% in 2005.

pocketfullofshells

01-24-2008, 12:19 PM

"TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's president said on Sunday the publication of a U.S. intelligence report saying Iran had halted a nuclear weapons program in 2003 amounted to a "declaration of surrender" by Washington in its row with Tehran.

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad also dismissed in an interview with state television the prospect of new U.N. sanctions against Iran over its refusal to halt sensitive atomic work.

"It is too far-fetched," he said when asked whether he expected the U.N. Security Council to impose fresh sanctions on Iran following two such resolutions since last December.

Ahmadinejad, who often rails against the West, told a rally earlier this month that the December 3 publication of the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate was a "victory" for Iran."

it's important to note the stance Iran is taking. it's aggressive and wartone.

and Bush is peace and roses.......of course they are, both sides are...it plays well to there people. Look at the debates, the Republicans are trying to show off who looks like they may kill Iran more .....

Coyote

01-24-2008, 05:13 PM

all my examples represent the attitude, values, and practices. that's what you aren't understanding. Islam is very simple. and 2 billion believe this simple theology.

Oh?

Reality doesn't happen to support your opinion.

Coyote

01-24-2008, 05:14 PM

and Bush is peace and roses.......of course they are, both sides are...it plays well to there people. Look at the debates, the Republicans are trying to show off who looks like they may kill Iran more .....

Rhetoric.

But it ratcheted up when Bush proclaimed the "axis of evil". Peace and roses.

Coyote

01-24-2008, 05:17 PM

I claimed

you claimed

you showed a comparison of May 2003 to 2005. 1 1/2 months after Iraq invasion compared to 2005. 1 1/2 YEARS after Afghanistan. Support for Bin laden began dropping after we began pounding the shiite out of him. Youve not shown anything to indicate what the support was before 9/11. I suspect 9/11 INCREASED his support.
Summer 2002 73% of lebanese supported suicide bombings, this is AFTER 9/11. Support for such things is soaring. We pound the shiite out of Afghanistan and Iraq and then it drops to 39% in 2005.

Support for suicide bombing doesn't equal support for bin Laden.

In addition, you imply that support for suicide bombing is down because we invaded Iraq. That might be true. But the truth of that might be because of the collossal amount of bloodshed, violence and civil war that followed our ill-planned invasion. People may well be sickened by the mindless excess of violence.

jb_1430

01-24-2008, 09:16 PM

Support for suicide bombing doesn't equal support for bin Laden.

In addition, you imply that support for suicide bombing is down because we invaded Iraq. That might be true. But the truth of that might be because of the collossal amount of bloodshed, violence and civil war that followed our ill-planned invasion. People may well be sickened by the mindless excess of violence.

Whats your point? We know support for Bin Laden has gone down after the invasions of both Afghanistan and Iraq. We have NO evidence that it went down after 9/11, before the invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq.

bewitched

01-25-2008, 05:30 AM

Oh?

Reality doesn't happen to support your opinion.

reality. here's another moderate muslim... doctor.
"London dentist Sohail Qureshi told the police he was just off to celebrate the Muslim festival of Eid with his family in Pakistan…
But instead of dental floss and fluoride, Qureshi, 30, tried to board a plane at Heathrow Airport with $18,000 in cash, a night vision scope, two metal batons, terror handbooks, extremist material, military information on CDs and medical supplies."

Coyote

01-25-2008, 06:27 AM

reality. here's another moderate muslim... doctor.
"London dentist Sohail Qureshi told the police he was just off to celebrate the Muslim festival of Eid with his family in Pakistan…
But instead of dental floss and fluoride, Qureshi, 30, tried to board a plane at Heathrow Airport with $18,000 in cash, a night vision scope, two metal batons, terror handbooks, extremist material, military information on CDs and medical supplies."

Wow - one case.

You do understand what a valid sampling is don't you?

Coyote

01-25-2008, 06:36 AM

Some interesting stuff.

Source: http://www.contextsmagazine.org/content_sample_v1-4.php

A minority of Muslims support Islamist organizations, and not just because they are illegal in many countries. There are only a handful of reputable surveys on the subject, but they show consistently that most Muslims oppose Islamists and their goals. Surveys in 1988 found that 46 and 20 percent of respondents in Kuwait and Egypt, respectively, favored Islamist goals in religion and politics. A 1986 survey in the West Bank and Gaza found 26 percent calling for a state based on shariëa, and polls in the same regions showed support for Hamas and other Islamist groups dropping from 23 percent in 1994 to 13 to 18 percent in 1996-97. A 1999 survey in Turkey found 21 percent favoring implementation of shariëa, consistent with other surveys in the mid-1990s. In a Gallup poll of nine Muslim societies at the end of 2001, only 15 percent of respondents said they considered the September 11 attacks to be morally justifiable.

bewitched

01-25-2008, 06:43 AM

Wow - one case.

You do understand what a valid sampling is don't you?

I've given a dozen samples. and you ignore them all. because you are in denial.
hopeless.
good luck to you!

bewitched

01-25-2008, 06:44 AM

jb_1430

01-25-2008, 02:23 PM

Some interesting stuff.

Source: http://www.contextsmagazine.org/content_sample_v1-4.php

A minority of Muslims support Islamist organizations, and not just because they are illegal in many countries. There are only a handful of reputable surveys on the subject, but they show consistently that most Muslims oppose Islamists and their goals. Surveys in 1988 found that 46 and 20 percent of respondents in Kuwait and Egypt, respectively, favored Islamist goals in religion and politics. A 1986 survey in the West Bank and Gaza found 26 percent calling for a state based on shariëa, and polls in the same regions showed support for Hamas and other Islamist groups dropping from 23 percent in 1994 to 13 to 18 percent in 1996-97. A 1999 survey in Turkey found 21 percent favoring implementation of shariëa, consistent with other surveys in the mid-1990s. [/B]

When it reaches 51%, will Islam lose this immunity from criticism you insist upon?

Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK
By Patrick Hennessy and Melissa Kite
Last Updated: 12:14am GMT 20/02/2006

Four out of 10 British Muslims want sharia law introduced into parts of the country, a survey reveals today.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia19.xml