Muslims and Free Speech

Protectionist · Jan 5, 2013

clax said:
The Koran is doctrine, being Muslim, is following the teachings of Mohammad. So if you follow the teachings of Mohammad you are Muslim.

Being a soldier is a profession not a religion. Hi explained this fallacy the first time you used it. to be a soldier you have to be a member of the army. To be a Muslim you don't have to be a member of anything.

No matter how many times you attempt to define Islam, you offer no hard evidence. So until you can produce I see no reason to continue this discussion

The teachings of Mohammed AKA Mo the Pedophile, are written in the Hadiths and they are synonomous with (if not worse than) the Koran. Both are the foundation of Islam. That is the evidence. You can disbelieve it if you choose. You're free to disbelieve anything. You can believe that fish can't swim if you like - no law against it. :giggle:

Protectionist · Jan 5, 2013

chris7375 said:
This is why people who cherry pick a text make me laugh.

This text alone is not a call for a jihad :giggle: it is telling them they have the right to protect themselves from the unbeliever.

Again you cherry pick one part of the book without revealing the rest. Yo are an expert you say? The way I read the following passages is yet again not a call for a jihad though more an explanation of God's wrath on unbelievers. I believer our New testament says things of a similar nature.

Where do you see a call for a jihad? I still have yet to see it. Again this text is about God's Wrath on the sinner and unbeliever. Yet again the New Testament of the Bible states similar things.

Where is the jihad calling in this passage. What I see is a call to fight a Spiritual battle. The hardness they are to show is there faith. Again does not the New Testament say this but in a different way.

None of the following passages call for a jihad.

What do you think jihad means Holy war lmao. If you do then you are way off the mark.

Most think this term means "holy war," an attempt to spread the Muslim religion and punish non-believers violently. And the Koran, like most sacred texts, leaves itself open to interpretation. The word comes from the Arabic word "jahada" which means "to struggle." It is a core concept of the Muslim religion and primarily refers to the internal struggle to be a better Muslim (by forsaking sin, controlling anger, and so on) and also the outer struggle to better mankind by spreading Islam.

That is what jihad means.

FALSE! I've heard this utter NONSENSE definition 1000 times from phony Islamapologists who constantly repeat it, thinking that of they just repeat it enough times, it will be believed.

Jihad means CONQUEST. It means destroying "infidel" culture and replacing it with Islam.

You ask idiotic questions. Where in the suras I mentioned do I see a call for jihad ? IN EVERY ONE OF THEM> Just read them. "SLAY THE IDOLATORS". Does that sound like "internal struggle" to you ? Sheeesh! It sounds like the 270 million people around the world that Muslim marauders have killed over the course of 14 centuries, fullfilling the commands of the Koran to wage war (that means attacking and KILLING) against the unbelievers.

You talk like a paid Muslim Brotherhood mouthpiece. I can see they've got you programmed.

As for the "cherry-picking (another common Islampaologist talking point tactic), if a murderer had been a great doctor all his life, and cured many people of illnesses, and given money to charity, and done volunteer work to help the poor, would you say one is "cherry-picking", to convict him for murder if he had (evidence conclusively showed) committed a first-degree premeditated murder on some people ?

David · Jan 5, 2013

chris7375 said:
Israel is the only problem we should be involved in though not through force. Though Israel has shown it can take care of itself when it needs too.

Screw Israel, they're our #1 enemy in the region but the Israeli lobby keeps us towing the party line despite all the attacks (military and otherwise) they've launched against us. Cut them lose and let the Muslims and Jews decide who rules Jerusalem, it shouldn't be our problem anymore.

tecoyah · Jan 5, 2013

Protectionist said:
The teachings of Mohammed AKA Mo the Pedophile, are written in the Hadiths and they are synonomous with (if not worse than) the Koran. Both are the foundation of Islam. That is the evidence. You can disbelieve it if you choose. You're free to disbelieve anything. You can believe that fish can't swim if you like - no law against it. :giggle:[/QUOT]

One is left to wonder which translation of the Qu'ran you have read...and how much of it you decided to pay attention to.

The Qu'ran seems to me no less brutal than the bible(s)...but as we seem to be a "Christian Nation", it is an evil book.

Protectionist · Jan 5, 2013

tecoyah said:
Protectionist said:

The teachings of Mohammed AKA Mo the Pedophile, are written in the Hadiths and they are synonomous with (if not worse than) the Koran. Both are the foundation of Islam. That is the evidence. You can disbelieve it if you choose. You're free to disbelieve anything. You can believe that fish can't swim if you like - no law against it. :giggle:[/QUOT]

One is left to wonder which translation of the Qu'ran you have read...and how much of it you decided to pay attention to.

The Qu'ran seems to me no less brutal than the bible(s)...but as we seem to be a "Christian Nation", it is an evil book.

Click to expand...

Wonder no more. I've read the Koran since 1959. 18 translations of it. Most recently, Shakir, Arberry, Pickthall, Dawood, and even the CAIR-approved (sanitized for western readers) Ali translation.

Whitewash the Koran if you like. No law against being a Jihadist ass-kisser.

Protectionist · Jan 5, 2013

David said:
Screw Israel, they're our #1 enemy in the region but the Israeli lobby keeps us towing the party line despite all the attacks (military and otherwise) they've launched against us. Cut them lose and let the Muslims and Jews decide who rules Jerusalem, it shouldn't be our problem anymore.

Israel has launched military attacks against "us" ? Really! Who is this "us"you're referring to ?

David · Jan 5, 2013

Protectionist said:
Israel has launched military attacks against "us" ? Really! Who is this "us"you're referring to ?

USA... Who else would I be talking about?

Cicero · Jan 5, 2013

ThirdTerm said:
Sharia law is clearly a danger to European society and anyone who advocates or practices Sharia should be probed his extremist links as he could be a member of an al-Qaeda sleeper cell and Islamist parties are on the rise in the Arab world after the Arab Spring and imposing Sharia law on more secular Muslims is their main political platform and those extremists are hampering the region's further democratisation.

No, this is incorrect. For one thing, the nomenclature is mistaken. "Sharia law" as you seem to understanding is something of a myth. Sharia is actually a broad a broad religious concept, not a legal system in the Western sense. You are possibly thinking about fiqh jurisprudence, although you seem to have the misconception that Islamic jurisprudence is a monolith. It is not. These narrow and incorrect caricatures of Islamic legal systems are far off base, frankly.

Cicero · Jan 5, 2013

David said:
USA... Who else would I be talking about?

What attacks are you referring to, exactly?

David · Jan 5, 2013

Cicero said:
What attacks are you referring to, exactly?

USS Liberty, all of those Israeli spies in our prisons, all of the stolen tech (including nuclear weapons), Israel's active efforts to sabotage our intelligence operations in the Mideast, Israel's assassinations of pro-US Muslim leaders. Even the CIA considers them our #1 threat in the Mideast.

tecoyah · Jan 5, 2013

David said:
USS Liberty, all of those Israeli spies in our prisons, all of the stolen tech (including nuclear weapons), Israel's active efforts to sabotage our intelligence operations in the Mideast, Israel's assassinations of pro-US Muslim leaders. Even the CIA considers them our #1 threat in the Mideast.

Damn..the conspiracy forum is gonna get Busy.

Cicero · Jan 5, 2013

David said:
USS Liberty, all of those Israeli spies in our prisons, all of the stolen tech (including nuclear weapons), Israel's active efforts to sabotage our intelligence operations in the Mideast, Israel's assassinations of pro-US Muslim leaders. Even the CIA considers them our #1 threat in the Mideast.

I believe the USS Liberty was an instance of friendly fire from the 60s. As to instances of espionage, that is not uncommon even among friendly nations. I have my qualms about Israel, particularly with their relations to the Palestinians, but it is quite wrong to think that they are in any way militarily opposed to the United States. The fact that the CIA considers Israel a threat to the mideast, if true, needs to be explained in more detail. Certainly Israel is a destabilizing factor in the region, but not a direct threat to US interests.

tecoyah · Jan 5, 2013

"
The USS Liberty incident was an attack on a United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli Air Force jet fighter aircraft and Israeli Navy motor torpedo boats, on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War.[3] The combined air and sea attack killed 34 crew members (naval officers, seamen, two Marines, and one civilian), wounded 171 crew members, and severely damaged the ship.[4] At the time, the ship was in international waters north of the Sinai Peninsula, about 25.5 nmi (29.3 mi; 47.2 km) northwest from the Egyptian city of Arish.[1][5]
Israel apologized for the attack, saying that the USS Liberty had been attacked in error after being mistaken for an Egyptian ship. Both the Israeli and U.S. governments conducted inquiries and issued reports that concluded the attack was a mistake due to Israeli confusion about the ship's identity,[2] though others, including survivors of the attack, have rejected these conclusions and maintain that the attack was deliberate.[6]
In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 (US$22.2 million in 2013) as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the final U.S. bill of $17,132,709 for material damage to the Liberty itself plus 13 years' interest.[7]"

Your belief is correct, the assumption is not.,,in my opinion. Extrapolation and personal opinion are inherent in us all, the probelm seems to arise when we claim this to be fact.

Protectionist · Jan 5, 2013

David said:
USA... Who else would I be talking about?

When ? Where ? How ? Sources please.

Protectionist · Jan 5, 2013

Cicero said:
No, this is incorrect. For one thing, the nomenclature is mistaken. "Sharia law" as you seem to understanding is something of a myth. Sharia is actually a broad a broad religious concept, not a legal system in the Western sense. You are possibly thinking about fiqh jurisprudence, although you seem to have the misconception that Islamic jurisprudence is a monolith. It is not. These narrow and incorrect caricatures of Islamic legal systems are far off base, frankly.

Sharia law has many legal aspects. And it is highly in contradiction to US law. There are many examples. One was the New Jersey rape/restraining order case where a blockhead judge refused a wife of a Muslim husband, a restraining order, based on Sharia law (based on Koran suras - 4:34, 2:223, 4:24, et al) that gives him the OK to treat his wife like his property.

The judgement was overturned in an appeals court, but the woman had to live without the restraining order for a long time, waiting for that appeal verdict.

The Center for Security Policy has a list of dozens of these cases.

http://shariahinamericancourts.com/

Protectionist · Jan 5, 2013

tecoyah said:
"
The USS Liberty incident was an attack on a United States Navy technical research ship, USS Liberty, by Israeli Air Force jet fighter aircraft and Israeli Navy motor torpedo boats, on June 8, 1967, during the Six-Day War.[3] The combined air and sea attack killed 34 crew members (naval officers, seamen, two Marines, and one civilian), wounded 171 crew members, and severely damaged the ship.[4] At the time, the ship was in international waters north of the Sinai Peninsula, about 25.5 nmi (29.3 mi; 47.2 km) northwest from the Egyptian city of Arish.[1][5]
Israel apologized for the attack, saying that the USS Liberty had been attacked in error after being mistaken for an Egyptian ship. Both the Israeli and U.S. governments conducted inquiries and issued reports that concluded the attack was a mistake due to Israeli confusion about the ship's identity,[2] though others, including survivors of the attack, have rejected these conclusions and maintain that the attack was deliberate.[6]
In May 1968, the Israeli government paid US$3,323,500 (US$22.2 million in 2013) as full payment to the families of the 34 men killed in the attack. In March 1969, Israel paid a further $3,566,457 in compensation to the men who had been wounded. On 18 December 1980, it agreed to pay $6 million as settlement for the final U.S. bill of $17,132,709 for material damage to the Liberty itself plus 13 years' interest.[7]"

Your belief is correct, the assumption is not.,,in my opinion. Extrapolation and personal opinion are inherent in us all, the probelm seems to arise when we claim this to be fact.

Incidents of war killings of "friendly fire" are common any time and any where war occurs. There were hundreds of these in World War II alone, which killed Americans, Brits, Russians, Germans, Scots, Danes, Japs, etc.

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

tecoyah · Jan 5, 2013

David said:
USS Liberty, all of those Israeli spies in our prisons, all of the stolen tech (including nuclear weapons), Israel's active efforts to sabotage our intelligence operations in the Mideast, Israel's assassinations of pro-US Muslim leaders. Even the CIA considers them our #1 threat in the Mideast.

Agreed, accepted, an obvious....but I was replying to that.

David · Jan 5, 2013

Protectionist said:
Incidents of war killings of "friendly fire" are common any time and any where war occurs. There were hundreds of these in World War II alone, which killed Americans, Brits, Russians, Germans, Scots, Danes, Japs, etc.

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

Friendly fire my ass, we told Israel the ship was in the area, it was smaller the ship it was 'mistaken' for, it was American flagged, it identified itself, the Israelis who attacked asked for confirmation of their orders as they knew it was an American ship and the USS Liberty continued to identify itself after the attack started. It was an intentional act of war to keep the US from knowing about it's actions in Egypt and we just rolled over and took the shush money because of some idiotic desire to bring about the end days as per Revelations and a bunch of rich Jewish nationalists.

Cicero · Jan 5, 2013

Protectionist said:
Sharia law has many legal aspects.

I really think the correct term for what you're talking about is "fiqh" not "sharia."

And it is highly in contradiction to US law. There are many examples. One was the New Jersey rape/restraining order case where a blockhead judge refused a wife of a Muslim husband, a restraining order, based on Sharia law (based on Koran suras - 4:34, 2:223, 4:24, et al) that gives him the OK to treat his wife like his property.
The judgement was overturned in an appeals court, but the woman had to live without the restraining order for a long time, waiting for that appeal verdict.

I don't see how that relates. That is an instance of American common law, not sharia/fiqh.

The Center for Security Policy has a list of dozens of these cases.

http://shariahinamericancourts.com/

I am afraid I don't have time to check that link out at the moment, and I admit to some trepidation about doing it at all. It seems like a reactionary, alarmist site just from the name.

I don't see any good cause to be alarmed about the Islamic religion, it is a beautiful religion of peace. I don't have much respect for anybody who would suggest the contrary, especially anybody who would do so without a thorough understanding of Islam. A thorough understanding of Islam includes understanding the difference between sharia and fiqh.

chris7375 · Jan 6, 2013

Protectionist said:
FALSE! I've heard this utter NONSENSE definition 1000 times from phony Islamapologists who constantly repeat it, thinking that of they just repeat it enough times, it will be believed.

Jihad means CONQUEST. It means destroying "infidel" culture and replacing it with Islam.

You ask idiotic questions. Where in the suras I mentioned do I see a call for jihad ? IN EVERY ONE OF THEM> Just read them. "SLAY THE IDOLATORS". Does that sound like "internal struggle" to you ? Sheeesh! It sounds like the 270 million people around the world that Muslim marauders have killed over the course of 14 centuries, fullfilling the commands of the Koran to wage war (that means attacking and KILLING) against the unbelievers.

You talk like a paid Muslim Brotherhood mouthpiece. I can see they've got you programmed.

As for the "cherry-picking (another common Islampaologist talking point tactic), if a murderer had been a great doctor all his life, and cured many people of illnesses, and given money to charity, and done volunteer work to help the poor, would you say one is "cherry-picking", to convict him for murder if he had (evidence conclusively showed) committed a first-degree premeditated murder on some people ?

Again you are wrong in the meaning. You are picking a meaning that is what modern day Extremist say it means. The true meaning is as I said it.

I am far from a muslim mouth piece. You talk like a racist bigoted person who does not allow anyone to believe something unless it falls in line with what you believe.

You did exactly that you cherry picked those scripture from the koran to fit your meaning like many people do. So what you are telling me is that you know how these Muslims are taught and this is what they are told those scriptures mean. What idiotic question it was simple where does it say to create a jihad? The bible tells Christians to fight also though we are to fight with prayer, worship in God, and being a role model. So you are the Koranic Scholar you are telling me that again this is how all Muslims are taught to slay us. I disagree and know Muslims who would also. Do I personally believe what the muslims believe no I do not I am Christian through and through. Though there beliefs are not mine I do not hate them for what they believe.

Do you know who created the extremist in the Middle East today? DO you know history? I am very well versed in History. The modern day Muslim Extremist was created by the US in 1979. If you don't believe me look it up it is well documented.

Why were they created? They were created to fight the former Soviet Union with a few goals the US were expecting from doing this. The First was they did not want the SU to have anymore of a foot hold in the Middle East then they already had. Second was oil the US was afraid that if the SU did win it could very well disrupt our oil supply. The third was the last reason in committing the SU to Afghanistan as they did they hoped it would drag out and be expense in cost and would eventual cause the collapse of Communism in the Soviet Union which is what it did.

So you are made at a extremist our government created. Do you know why they fought and they still do? It is simple really they warned us that when we entered Saudi Arabia they looked upon it as an invasion. We made promises that we had no plans on staying in the ME yet what did we do. This started well before the current war. We occupied Saudi Arabia during the first Gulf war and never left. The told us if we did not leave they would fight us. We did not leave and they did what they promised. They look at us for what we are an occupying force and they fight thus with that in mind.

Russia learned and stayed out of it and they have not been targeted. If we left the lands they would no longer need to fight us. They fight us for only one reason which is what you fail to grasp. They fight us because they see us as invaders which is exactly what we are.

Tell me if China invaded and occupied us would you sit and let it happen or would you make it difficult for them. I would make it difficult for them this is my homeland not theirs. That is exactly what they are doing though their tactics I find wrong but they achieve what they want by using them.

Muslims and Free Speech

Similar threads