Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"FEAR INC" Explore the $57 million network fueling Islamophobia in the United States

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
    ^ Thank you Jihad John
    Im not sure if thats meant to be a compliment or not Ill take it as a complement because there are both Muslim and Christin "holy warriors" of the past and present whom were good noble people. Jihad is not what ISIL is doing, Jihad is what Muslims like Noor Inyat Khan did during WW2.



    I took it upon myself to do further research on the MEF, and I'm pleasantly surprised at what I saw from folks like Steven Schwartz., there ought to be more of that from the MEF.

    Comment


    • #47
      "Jihad is not what Isis is doing"

      You're playing a role,aren't you ?
      Or are you that dumb?.
      Seriously?
      That rug really tied the room together

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by sebfrench76 View Post
        "Jihad is not what Isis is doing"

        You're playing a role,aren't you ?
        Or are you that dumb?.
        Seriously?
        Liberalism is a mental disorder.
        Credo quia absurdum.


        Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
          Trolls gotta troll. Best to ignore them.
          You know I do that. But so many others quote him.
          The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Taieb el-Okbi View Post
            Im not sure if thats meant to be a compliment or not Ill take it as a complement because there are both Muslim and Christin "holy warriors" of the past and present whom were good noble people. Jihad is not what ISIL is doing, Jihad is what Muslims like Noor Inyat Khan did during WW2.
            Not according to the Koran and Mohammad's definition and I feel like they're better judges of what is and isn't "Jihad."
            "Artillery lends dignity to what might otherwise be a vulgar brawl." - Frederick the Great

            Comment


            • #51
              Yeah I wish we'd all blackball him. He'd go away...
              Credo quia absurdum.


              Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Taieb el-Okbi View Post
                From the MEF source,

                14 centuries of Islamic history this increasingly unbearable, fanatical aggression against critics of Islam was almost unknown. It is new.
                There is the small problem that that is wrong, as already demonstrated with a few actual facts quoted in my previous post.

                A few more examples.

                - in 850, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, nobody less than a founder of the Muslim law, was tortured under accusation of blasphemy.
                - in 852, St. Isaac of Cordoba openly criticized the Muslim religion before Muslim authorities. Tortured, refused to recant. He is a martyr of the Catholic religion that some here claim to be members of.
                - in 922, a Sufi mystic, Al Hallaj, was hanged in Baghdad after a long imprisonment, for blasphemous and/or heretical statements in poetry.
                - in 1048, the Egyptian Coptic Patriarch Christodoulos was accused of blasphemy by Muslims because of a writing above his church's gate mentioning that the Christian Trinity was the one God.
                Fast forward...
                - in 1882, the police of Alexandria brough charges against a man named Mohammad Ramadan (duh), for "insulting the Mohammedan religion".
                Last edited by Michele; 11 May 15, 05:40.
                Michele

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by G David Bock View Post
                  [*]The New Testament teaches monogamy, one husband and one wife, thereby dignifying the woman. The Koran allows polygamy—up to four wives—and the possession of concubines, or sex-slaves. More literalist readings treat all women as possessions.[*]The New Testament discourages lying (e.g., Col. 3:9). The Koran permits it; the prophet himself often deceived others, and permitted lying to one’s wife, to reconcile quarreling parties, and to the “infidel” during war.[/LIST]

                  That link leads to some very revealing information about Salafism, and traditional literalist Islam.
                  "Radical" is the wrong word, I would cal it Fundamentalism.
                  Justifying egoism is not limited to preserving the self but also gratifying it—especially in the context of jihad. One can go on and on about the other Salafi fatwas permitting rape, incest, and prostitution for those fighting to empower Islam. Even renowned heroes like Khalid bin al-Walid—the “Sword of Allah”—celebrated in the Muslim world for his jihadi conquests, was, from a less hagiographic perspective, little more than a mass murdering, sadistic rapist.

                  More generally, Salafi-minded Muslims believe that all non-Muslims can be deceived, cheated, robbed, exploited, enslaved and/or killed—all in the self-interest of the Muslim, seen as one with the self-interest of Islam.

                  Why do they believe this? Because from a Salafi point of view, all free non-Muslim “infidels” who do not submit to Islamic law, or Sharia—Americans and Europeans for example—are natural born enemies, or harbis, and thus free game.
                  "Why is the Rum gone?"

                  -Captain Jack

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
                    Yeah I wish we'd all blackball him. He'd go away...
                    I suggest that we appoint him the unofficial Imam of the forums so that when he begins to preach the faithful can appreciate him and the rest of us can ignore his nonsense.

                    What do you guys think?

                    By the way, excellent work Michele-very well done.

                    Sincerely,
                    M
                    We are not now that strength which in old days
                    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
                      That link leads to some very revealing information about Salafism, and traditional literalist Islam.
                      "Radical" is the wrong word, I would cal it Fundamentalism.
                      "Radical" is used mostly by the "political correct" secularists (and "progressives") of the West. I agree that since the "perps" call themselves Fundamentalists and their agenda is literal and historical Islam, makes "Sun Tzu" sense to call them what they call themselves.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Wouldn't the true islamist "radicals" be the ones that claim to want to coexist peacefully with the rest of the world?
                        The First Amendment applies to SMS, Emails, Blogs, online news, the Fourth applies to your cell phone, computer, and your car, but the Second only applies to muskets?

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Hida Akechi View Post
                          Wouldn't the true islamist "radicals" be the ones that claim to want to coexist peacefully with the rest of the world?
                          Yes, why the Fundies target them as apostates.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            "Je sui Charlie" , remember that?

                            Seen anyone out there showing any solidarity with Pam Gellar in the rest of the world?
                            The Media?

                            Shows you how the Left prioritizes it's enemies list, don't it?
                            "Why is the Rum gone?"

                            -Captain Jack

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Nobody showed support here when Charlie was treated.We needed 17 deaths to put millions of people in the streets.
                              And it has nothing to do with Reps or Dems .
                              That rug really tied the room together

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by sebfrench76 View Post
                                Nobody showed support here when Charlie was treated.We needed 17 deaths to put millions of people in the streets.
                                And it has nothing to do with Reps or Dems .
                                Can't rep you again so soon.

                                Yes, that's the way it works. There were other attempts, including here in Europe. They did not get the same attention because they did not succeed, just like in the Texas case. It's foolish, I know; an attempted homicide should be considered as worrisome as a successful one, in terms of intention and motive. But it's the way it goes.
                                Michele

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X