I had the good fortune of hearing Tariq Ramadan speak recently. Following are some of his comments and perspective which I found interesting.

The London bombers

The London bombers were fully ‘integrated/westernised’ culturally, socially and intellectually, but not psychologically. That is, they still identified themselves with the Iraqis with an ‘us vs them’ mentality. What was missing was a sense of belonging in the new culture. This is a two way street because people not only have to accept the new society they live in, they also have to be accepted. In practical terms, the society and the media have to stop portraying them as immigrants. Both groups have to drop the ‘us vs them’ mentality.

In France for example, Muslims are often described as 5th generation immigrants. How long until they are described as French citizens? Integration has been successful when people stop talking about integration. We need a post integration discourse.

Isolation is a defense mechanism common to all immigrants as a mechanism to protect self identity. Only after they are comfortable with that can they engage the broader community.

Scripture – immigrant Muslims must separate the text of the scripture from the context. They have left a place where both the text and context were the same or similar. They need to separate the culture from the religion and select from the new culture and the old religion. Tariq described himself as Swiss by nationality, Egyptian by memory, European by culture, universalist by principle, Moroccan by adoption (he like Morocco). You cannot ask people to abandon a history or memory that defines them.

‘Australian values’ are often used to exclude because people look for how we differ from others and define our values around those differences, rather than in an absolute sense.

Post September 11 many American Muslims were asked whether they are an American first or a Muslim first. This is as dumb as asking someone whether they are a vegetarian or a poet. When you eat you are a vegetarian and you don’t demand everyone else at the table be a poet. When you go to a poetry reading you don’t expect others to be vegetarian. Likewise an Australian Muslim may vote as an Australian, but mourn the death of their father as a Muslim.

There is no ‘double loyalty’. Muslims should and in general do abide by the law of their country – help your brother when he is right and when he is wrong (by not allowing him to do wrong). This does not mean blind nationalism – can protest within the framework of the law, or even go against the law within the framework of your conscience.

Beware of binary definitions – eg ‘good’ vs ‘bad’, extremists vs mainstream Muslims. Oversimplifying an issue does not help solve it. Extremist Muslims are overrepresented in the media and do not represent Islam.

Practical challenges for Muslim immigrants:

Define Islam in a positive manner, by what it is, rather than by what it isn’t. Recreate textbooks written where Islam is not dominant, so as to remove the cultural burden. Train local imams and set up appropriate institutions, so imams are aware of and sensitive to local culture. Don’t ‘Islamise’ local problems. Socio economic problems (eg ghettoisation in France) need socioeconomic solutions, not blaming on Islam. Avoid victim and minority mentality – Muslims must speak as a citizen, not a minority representative. Show your presence and expose problems by contributing creatively (eg music).

Islam has only been a major presence in Australia for 20 years – much shorter than Europe or America. There has been a silent revolution within Muslim groups. They have come a long way and we need to be fair to them. We will all ‘catch up’.

France – riots caused by socio economic, not religious problems. People complained of real problems and were told simply to ‘integrate’ even though they had been ‘ghettoised’. They had integrated and rioting (the french way) was proof of this.

Historical problems – in Muslim countries, secularism has been associated with colonialism, imposition of a new system and dictatorship, hence the misplaced opposition to secularism in the Arab world.

Islam is the first ‘transnational’ problem of it’s kind in that the number of people involved is creating fear among others that they may lose their identity. The global discourse is not helping.

Islamic extremists – let them speak and challenge them publicly, don’t ban them and drive them underground. Tariq wants extremists to come to his presentations so he can do this.

The Archbishop of Cantebury was misrepresented. What he suggested already exists in British law for Muslim and Jewish groups. It can be done within the framework of current law due to legal flexibility. Sharia law is not about importing a foreign model. Western Justice systems do a far better job of protecting fundamental sharia principles than many Islam dominated countries (eg Saudi Arabia). Money is silencing criticism of the Saudis.

Tariq has been targeted and described as dangerous by ideologues and governments who want to polarise – by those who want the ‘clash’ to come. They want people to be suspicious of him so they don’t listen openly. He was disallowed entry into the US because he should have ‘reasonably known’ that a group he donated to in 2002 was dangerous, even though US homeland security didn’t blacklist them until 2003. The judge upheld this on the grounds that the blacklisting should be retroactive. There were 11 factual errors in the judgment.

Master of Islamist doublespeak


THE Swiss Islamic activist Tariq Ramadan has been invited by Griffith University to be the keynote speaker at its conference opening in Brisbane today.

The fact that Australia is allowing Ramadan to enter the country at all will raise eyebrows in security circles elsewhere. Ramadan is the grandson of Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood: the spiritual backers of al-Qa'ida and Hamas and whose goal is to Islamise the world.

While it is, of course, unfair to tar someone with his grandfather's views, there is ample reason to think that in the case of Tariq Ramadan the apple has not fallen far from the tree.

Ramadan has been banned from entering the US because of his alleged association with extremists. The Geneva Islamic Centre, with which he is closely associated, has been linked to terrorists of the Algerian FIS (Islamic Salvation Front) and the GIA (Armed Islamic Group). A Spanish police report claimed that Ahmed Brahim, an al-Qa'ida leader jailed in Spain, was "in frequent contact" with Ramadan, a claim he has denied.

Yet the Swiss activist has not only been allowed into Britain but is ensconced at St Anthony's College, Oxford as a research fellow and is much lionised by the British establishment, appearing at security seminars on Islamism and even serving as an adviser to the British Government on tackling Islamic extremism.

So how to explain this wild divergence of views about Tariq Ramadan? And does Australia have cause to be concerned?

Ramadan's message is highly seductive to a Western world terrified by Islamic radicalism. For Ramadan preaches the comforting message of an unthreatening Islam that can accommodate itself to modernity and to the West. He does so in a charismatic style combining high intellect, a winsome French accent and impossibly hip glamour. To the desperate British establishment, the picture he paints so beguilingly of a way out of the Islamist nightmare has made him into the rock star of the counter-terrorism circuit.

But closer scrutiny of what he actually says - and perhaps even more importantly, does not say - suggests the talented Mr Ramadan is an Islamist wolf in moderniser's clothing. To the Islamic world he says one thing; to credulous Western audiences quite another in language that is slippery, opaque, manipulative and disingenuous.

His reputation as a Muslim reformer owes everything to the wishful thinking of those who want so much to believe in him that they fail to grasp what he is really saying.

Partly, this is because much of his work is in French. The writer Caroline Fourest has analysed it and her book, Brother Tariq: the Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan has just been translated from French into English.

All who are concerned to halt the spread of radical Islamism should read this book. For it shows without doubt that the poster boy for Islamic reform is in fact one of the most sophisticated proponents of the global jihad.

Ramadan claims he has "no functional connection" with the Muslim Brotherhood. But he was trained at the Leicester Islamic Foundation in England, the controversial institution that propagates the doctrines of the key Islamist ideologues Maulana Maududi and Syed Qutb and which aims to promote "an Islamic social order in Great Britain".

And Ramadan has repeatedly said that his grandfather's views have "inspired" him and "there is nothing in this heritage that I reject".

So what is the heritage of Hassan al-Banna? He did not just promote the most reactionary and oppressive Islamic fundamentalism. He also devised a strategy of "graduated conquest" - pursued by the Muslim Brotherhood around the world - by which not only the countries of the former medieval Islamic caliphate, but all countries where Muslims live, are to be gradually Islamised and then taken over by an Islamic government under sharia law.

This is the "heritage" Ramadan endorses. The only difference is that he has developed a particularly subtle strategy for seducing the West into embracing Islamist thinking without realising what is happening.

On the issue of terror, he is particularly slippery. Professing to oppose terrorism, he denies that his grandfather had anything to do with jihadi violence. Yet al-Banna explicitly supported the armed jihad which he considered to be the highest and "most sacred" form of holy war.

Ramadan claims his grandfather limited this to "legitimate defence" or "resistance in the face of injustice". But this is precisely the weaselly formulation by which Islamists justify the "resistance" of human bomb terrorism in Israel or Iraq.

Behind the honeyed words about reform and tolerance which have entranced his Western fan club, Ramadan has consistently lined himself up with the forces of obscurantism, intolerance, hatred and violence.

The first association he set up in 1994, the Muslim Men and Women of Switzerland, promoted confrontation and stirred up tension. He wrote the preface for a compilation of fatwas by the European Council for Fatwa whose president, Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has said human bomb operations in Israel and Iraq are a religious duty.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23307666-7583,00.html

Master of Islamist doublespeak


The first association he set up in 1994, the Muslim Men and Women of Switzerland, promoted confrontation and stirred up tension. He wrote the preface for a compilation of fatwas by the European Council for Fatwa whose president, Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has said human bomb operations in Israel and Iraq are a religious duty.

Through his stronghold in the Union of Young Muslims in Lyon, he radicalised thousands of young French Muslims. In 1993, he was involved in a successful attempt in Geneva to stop production of a play by Voltaire on the grounds that it insulted Islam.

In a telling exchange with the future French President Nicolas Sarkozy, he refused to condemn stoning to death for adultery, calling merely for a moratorium on this barbaric practice. And all those who oppose him he labels Islamophobes, Jews or Zionists. The desperation to embrace this most devious "reformer" is gravely misplaced. Truly moderate Muslims are undermined and indeed endangered by Ramadan at every turn.

Far from offering a way to modernise Islam, he proposes instead to Islamise modernity. And he is all the more dangerous precisely because his weapon is not a bomb-belt but his tongue. Some may say that, even if his thinking is reactionary, that is no reason to refuse to let him into the country. This naive view ignores the fact that the Islamists' war of civilisation is being conducted principally on the battleground of ideas.

Terrorism merely backs up the Muslim Brotherhood's fundamental strategy of cultural infiltration, incitement, demoralisation and conquest.

As Fourest has written, the strategy of Ramadan is to globalise the Islamic awakening that is part of that strategy. In May 2003, the Appeal Court of Lyon agreed that language employed by preachers such as Ramadan "can influence young Muslims and can serve as a factor inciting them to join up with those engaged in violent acts". Wherever he goes, Ramadan is a pied piper leading the young to jihad by his mesmeric tunes. Through his appeal, he is probably the most dangerous Islamist in the Western world.

Thanks to the short-sightedness of the British Government, brother Tariq has been given a platform to radicalise innumerable young Muslims. Does Australia really want to follow suit?

Melanie Phillips is a columnist with the Daily Mail in Britain and the author of Londonistan.

How can you scrutinise what someone doesn't say?

Not speaking strongly against terrorism is tacit approval.

I can assume from not opposing terrorism that they are for it.
Moreso in aussiemuslim they openly support the melbourne terroists.

Please post the response from the muslim society about the murder of the school aged kids in jersualem

Not speaking strongly against terrorism is tacit approval.

No it isn't.

"...For them there is in store a goodly portion out of that which they have earned. Allah is swift at reckoning.

....Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.      

...But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves...

... whoever has killed any person, and whoever has touched any slain, purify both yourselves and your captives ....."

What is wrong with these extracts? Does the fact that they are contained in a Holy book tell us something fundamental about the religion itself?

Musician35 - perhaps ypu have a point. But a bit harsh to judge a faith on 4 spot quotes.
Even by my books. Perhaps if the actions of the leader and many more quotes and directions supported that, could be a case.

Oh - look what I found !!!!
Bukhari:V1B1N6 "Just issue orders to kill every Jew in the country."

Ishaq: 676 "‘You obey a stranger who encourages you to murder for booty. You are greedy men. Is there no honor among you?' Upon hearing those lines Muhammad said, ‘Will no one rid me of this woman?' Umayr, a zealous Muslim, decided to execute the Prophet's wishes. That very night he crept into the writer's home while she lay sleeping surrounded by her young children. There was one at her breast. Umayr removed the suckling babe and then plunged his sword into the poet. The next morning in the mosque, Muhammad, who was aware of the assassination, said, ‘You have helped Allah and His Apostle.' Umayr said. ‘She had five sons; should I feel guilty?' ‘No,' the Prophet answered. ‘Killing her was as meaningless as two goats butting heads.'"

Ishaq:369 "Thereupon Mas'ud leapt upon Sunayna, one of the Jewish merchants with whom his family had social and commercial relations and killed him. The Muslim's brother complained, saying, ‘Why did you kill him? You have much fat in you belly from his charity.' Mas'ud answered, ‘By Allah, had Muhammad ordered me to murder you, my brother, I would have cut off your head.' Wherein the brother said, ‘Any religion that can bring you to this is indeed wonderful!' And he accepted Islam."


Tabari IX:113 "Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur'an."

fancy that :-)

I do have a point, but only the first paragraph that I quoted was taken from the Qu'ran. The others were all taken from the Bible (Numbers 31).

My point was that we should be cautious in condemning Islam on the basis of their Holy book while at the same time depicting Christianity as more enlightened. There are some totally barbaric texts in the Bible that just don't meet the standards of modern ethics and society values. For example:

Leviticus 20 :

20:10  And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

I could come up with a lot more examples, but I'm sure you've seen them all before.  

mussician, yes, I recognised them.
numbers and leciticus are in the OT and for the jews to follow.
christians are not beholden by the OT.

christianity IS a mile different from islam.
Look at what christian and islamic countries have produced.
Chalk and cheese.

http://news.smh.com.au/muslim-leaders-back-advisory-body-plan/20080311-1yom.html

Muslim community leaders strongly support moves to improve the image of Islamic society in Australia.

Sporting stars, academics and businesspeople will be among those asked to sit on a new advisory body proposed by the federal government, News Ltd reports.

The delegation would set out to find ways of dissolving public misconceptions of Muslims as being overly religious.

A previous advisory body was abolished by the former Howard government after a trouble-plagued 12 months.

While Muslim community leaders welcomed reports of the proposals, they warned any such body would have to be truly representative to be effective.

Haset Sali, spokesman for the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils (AFIC), said the Muslim community was more than "just a few clerics".

Mr Sali said many of the clerics were migrants and, while their spiritual knowledge was sound, they often had problems engaging with the wider community.

freediver - hahahah

"many of the clerics were migrants and, while their spiritual knowledge was sound, they often had problems engaging with the wider community. "


So, what hilali said was correct, muzzies don't disagree with what their clerics say.  
Aussies wont accept that violent nonsense, we won't accept that here.
Take it away and go.

They don't disagree with the spiritual aspects of what they say. That doesn't mean they agree with everything. This is the distinction Tariq was trying to shed light on. It is similar to the Pope trying to make pollution a cardinal sin. That was primarily a response to cultural pressure, not timeless spiritual wisdom.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 10^th, 2008 at 9:40pm:

mussician, yes, I recognised them. numbers and leciticus are in the OT and for the jews to follow. christians are not beholden by the OT.

That's maybe your personal idea, but it's not backed up by Scripture. The Old Testament is important to Christians. It forms the backdrop and reference point for the entire NT. That's why it's included in the Bible:

Matthew 5:

5:19  Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

also Matthew 15.3 - 15.7

15:3  But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?      
15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.

(and I understand the context here)

Also read Luke 17:26-32

17:32  Remember Lot's wife.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 10^th, 2008 at 9:40pm:

christianity IS a mile different from islam. Look at what christian and islamic countries have produced. Chalk and cheese.

True. Examples are breakdown of the family unit, higher homicide rates, higher teenage pregnancy rates, much higher teenage abortion and venereal disease rates and higher rates of violent crime, dysfunctional society, drugs,  drunkenness etc. - oh and let's add George W Bush.

Having said that, of course religion is only a facet of a society or culture, and correlation does not causation prove (Musician35's First Law). That's why we should be cautious in such broad statements.

I don't disagree with you that Islam has its serious problems that need to be tackled, but Christianity is not entirely blameless either.  

Sorry for the necropost, but FD I'd be interested in your thoughts about this muslim reformer today.

Do you still think he was unfairly maligned by the authorities? Are his efforts to find common ground between muslims living in the west and the non-muslim majority something that should be commended - or should we be beating him down with the standard labels like "typical muslim liar", "taqqiya practitioner", "doublespeaker" etc?

Surely this statement is an absolute affront to the values of freeedom, wouldn't you agree?...

There is no ‘double loyalty’. Muslims should and in general do abide by the law of their country – help your brother when he is right and when he is wrong (by not allowing him to do wrong). This does not mean blind nationalism – can protest within the framework of the law, or even go against the law within the framework of your conscience.

Beware of binary definitions – eg ‘good’ vs ‘bad’, extremists vs mainstream Muslims. Oversimplifying an issue does not help solve it. Extremist Muslims are overrepresented in the media and do not represent Islam.

Quote:

Sorry for the necropost, but FD I'd be interested in your thoughts about this muslim reformer today.

There are a few questions I would put to him that I would not have thought of back then. I suspect he is in the same basket as you.


Quote:

Do you still think he was unfairly maligned by the authorities?

I do not know why he was maligned or whether it was unfair.


Quote:

Surely this statement is an absolute affront to the values of freeedom, wouldn't you agree?...

Not at all. I can't even see how it relates to freedom.

freediver wrote on Sep 11^th, 2014 at 7:13pm:

[quote] Not at all. I can't even see how it relates to freedom.

Really? All you have to do is scroll back and read how you related it to.Freeedom.

Sorry - you’re saying you can’t see how it relates to Freeedom now.

Once you changed your mind, you erased all understanding that went with it.

wrote on Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:43am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 10th, 2008 at 9:40pm: christianity IS a mile different from islam. Look at what christian and islamic countries have produced. Chalk and cheese. True. Examples are breakdown of the family unit, higher homicide rates, higher teenage pregnancy rates, much higher teenage abortion and venereal disease rates and higher rates of violent crime, dysfunctional society, drugs,  drunkenness etc. - oh and let's add George W Bush.

How exactly are these the result of christian living? I think these things are prevalent where Christianity is abandoned, not where it is embraced.

wrote on Mar 12^th, 2008 at 10:43am:

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 10th, 2008 at 9:40pm: christianity IS a mile different from islam. Look at what christian and islamic countries have produced. Chalk and cheese. True. Examples are breakdown of the family unit, higher homicide rates, higher teenage pregnancy rates, much higher teenage abortion and venereal disease rates and higher rates of violent crime, dysfunctional society, drugs,  drunkenness etc.

How exactly are these the result of christian living? I think these things are prevalent where Christianity is abandoned, not where it is embraced.

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, a renowned jew hater killer and hitler lover. He was killed for trying to overthrow the Egyptian Government.

The MB chant:

"Allah is our objective.
The Prophet is our leader.
The Quran is our law.
  Jihad is our way.
  Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."

He had a son in law called Said Ramadan who was expelled from Egypt when the first crackdown on the MB occurred. Went to Saudi Arabia and set up  the World Islamic League.
In a rare decision on orthodox Muslim faith the Muslim World League declared in April 1974 (by fatwa) that followers of the Ahmadiyyah movement are to be considered "non-Muslims“.[11]

Federal agents raided the U.S. offices of the Muslim World League after the attacks of 9/11. Abdurahman Alamoudi, who worked for the League, was convicted for sending funds to terrorist groups.[12]

Hended up in Switzerland and wrote "The Project".

Below is the Muslim Brotherhood's 1982 manifesto titled "The Project", apparently penned by Sa'id Ramadan, the brother-in-law of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Project was distributed to Muslim Brotherhood members around the world who were ordered to strictly guard The Project's content from outsiders. They did so until a copy of The Project was discovered during a Swiss police raid of a senior Muslim Brotherhood financier's home in Switzerland in November 2001.

"The Project" outlined the Muslim Brotherhood's 25 strategies to subjugate the world under Islam (elements of particular intrigue are in boldface and italicized):

1.  Network and coordinate actions between like-minded Islamists organizations;

2.  Avoid open alliances with known terrorist organizations and individuals to maintain the appearance of "moderation";

3.  Infiltrate and take over existing Muslim organizations to realign them towards the Muslim Brotherhood's collective goals;

4.  Use deception to mask the intended goals of Islamist actions, as long as it doesn't
     conflict with Shari'a law;

5.  Avoid social conflicts with Westerners locally, nationally or globally, that might damage the long-term ability to expand the Islamist powerbase in the West, including the support of full-time administrators and workers;

6.  Conduct surveillance, obtain data, and establish collection and data storage capabilities;

7.  Put into place a watchdog system for monitoring Western media to warn Muslims of international plots fomented against them";

8.  Cultivate an Islamist intellectual community, including the establishment of think-tanks and advocacy groups, and publishing "academic" studies, to legitimize Islamist positions and to chronicle the history of Islamist movements;

9.  Develop a comprehensive 100-year plan to advance Islamist ideology throughout the world;

10. Balance international objectives with local flexibility;

11. Build extensive social networks of schools, hospitals and charitable organizations dedicated to Islamist ideals so that contact with the movement for Muslims in the West is constant;

12. Involve ideologically committed Muslims in democratically-elected institutions on all levels in the West, including government, NGOs, private organizations and labor unions;
     
13. Instrumentally use existing Western institutions until they can be converted and put into service of Islam;

14. Draft Islamic constitutions, laws and policies for eventual implementation;

15. Avoid conflict within the Islamist movements on all levels, including the development of processes for conflict resolution;

16. Institute alliances with Western "progressive" organizations that share similar goals;

17. Create autonomous "security forces" to protect Muslims in the West;

18. Inflame violence and keep Muslims living in the West "in a Jihad frame of mind";

19. Support Jihad movements across the Muslim world through preaching, propaganda, personnel, funding, and technical and operational support;

20. Make the Palestinian cause a global wedge issue for Muslims;

21. Adopt the total liberation of Palestine from Israel and the creation of an Islamic state as a keystone in the plan for global Islamic domination;

22. Instigate a constant campaign to incite hatred by Muslims against Jews and reject any discussions of conciliation or coexistence with them;

23. Actively create Jihad terror cells within Palestine;

24. Link the terrorist activities in Palestine with the global terror movement;

25. Collect sufficient funds to indefinitely perpetuate and support Jihad around the world.

Said Ramadan is Tariq Ramadan's father. With a genealogy/upbringing/indoctrination like that its a wonder he is allowed to travel anywhere , he also thinks the sharia should be used in western countries.


"According to the book Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan, the professor's sermons have radicalized countless young people in the gritty Muslim suburbs of France.

In 2003, a French court found that language used by preachers like Ramadan "can influence young Muslims and can serve as a factor inciting them to join up with those engaged in violent acts."

Ran out of room so here are the links to my previous post.


http://fathersymeon.blogspot.com.au/

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2012/September/Islams-Savior-or-Muslim-Brotherhoods-Heir/

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_al-Banna

Adamant wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 12:25pm:

The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, a renowned jew hater killer and hitler lover.

How interesting but neither sentiment is mentioned in his Wikipedia biography.  On what are you basing it, Adamant? 

All the references I've found online appear to be based on such questionable sources as the MEMRI.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 2:11pm:

Adamant wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 12:25pm: The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, a renowned jew hater killer and hitler lover. How interesting but neither sentiment is mentioned in his Wikipedia biography.  On what are you basing it, Adamant?  All the references I've found online appear to be based on such questionable sources as the MEMRI.    ::)

Are you suggesting memri mistranslates things? How would you know?

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 2:11pm:

Adamant wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 12:25pm: The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, a renowned jew hater killer and hitler lover. How interesting but neither sentiment is mentioned in his Wikipedia biography.  On what are you basing it, Adamant?  All the references I've found online appear to be based on such questionable sources as the MEMRI.    ::)

Which God do you follow? Oh ignorant one! Even Gandalf has not commentated on the jew haters crimes.

You do know how to use search engines/read history books? Maybe not eh! :)

I am sorry for you Brian so sorry. ;D

Ignorance is bliss so they say. ::)

I will put your dilemma down to that, ignorance. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Goodbye Brian

Adamant wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 4:29pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 2:11pm: Adamant wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 12:25pm: The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, a renowned jew hater killer and hitler lover. How interesting but neither sentiment is mentioned in his Wikipedia biography.  On what are you basing it, Adamant?  All the references I've found online appear to be based on such questionable sources as the MEMRI.    ::) Which God do you follow? Oh ignorant one! Even Gandalf has not commentated on the jew haters crimes.

My religious belief has no bearing on the questions I've asked, Adamant.  Why do you have problems answering a simple question asking for your source of that statement?   ::)


Quote:

You do know how to use search engines/read history books? Maybe not eh! :)

Yes.  I did before I asked it.  Which is why I am mystified there is no mention of it in his biographical entry but plenty of mentions of it in pro-Israeli or Zionist websites only.


Quote:

I am sorry for you Brian so sorry. ;D Ignorance is bliss so they say. ::) I will put your dilemma down to that, ignorance. ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D Goodbye Brian

I'll put it down to, "I don't know, I copied it off a website and didn't bother to note down the URL," shall I, Adamant?   ::)

Brain, you are a submissive.

Soren wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 8:57pm:

Brain, you are a submissive.

Yes, that's why I keep talking back to you, Soren.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 9:10pm:

Soren wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 8:57pm: Brain, you are a submissive. Yes, that's why I keep talking back to you, Soren.   ::)

Does he whisper passionately into your ear?

Mormor!

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 9:10pm:

Soren wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 8:57pm: Brain, you are a submissive. Yes, that's why I keep talking back to you, Soren.   ::)

Brian.

The Peacock.

If I make a derogatory comment against you and other protected species I will suffer a ban!

I named someone a bigot, and they are just like you me and all others who post here.

I suffered a ban. You have stated that of me and you called me racist, (no proof required as far as you are concerned)

I will only in future make comment and not respond so that Gandalf is unable to ban me.

If the Fvkcwit bans me from the Extreme forum again I will respond.

In the extreme!

Adamant wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 10:22pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:10pm: Soren wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 8:57pm: Brain, you are a submissive. Yes, that's why I keep talking back to you, Soren.   ::) Brian. The Peacock. If I make a derogatory comment against you and other protected species I will suffer a ban! I named someone a bigot, and they are just like you me and all others who post here. I suffered a ban. You have stated that of me and you called me racist, (no proof required as far as you are concerned) I will only in future make comment and not respond so that Gandalf is unable to ban me. If the Fvkcwit bans me from the Extreme forum again I will respond. In the extreme!

Oooh, I am frightened now!  How?  You going to throw a brick through my window?  I'm hiding under the bed already!   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 12:47am:

Adamant wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:22pm: Brian Ross wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:10pm: Soren wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 8:57pm: Brain, you are a submissive. Yes, that's why I keep talking back to you, Soren.   ::) Brian. The Peacock. If I make a derogatory comment against you and other protected species I will suffer a ban! I named someone a bigot, and they are just like you me and all others who post here. I suffered a ban. You have stated that of me and you called me racist, (no proof required as far as you are concerned) I will only in future make comment and not respond so that Gandalf is unable to ban me. If the Fvkcwit bans me from the Extreme forum again I will respond. In the extreme! Oooh, I am frightened now!  How?  You going to throw a brick through my window?  I'm hiding under the bed already!   ::)

Brian I cant help gain intelligence, if you don't know how to look for things on the net don't post.

Regarding your belief of me becoming violent is concerned that is just gross stupidity on your ignorant part, it just shows what a really naïve petty little man you are!

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 12:47am:

Oooh, I am frightened now!  How?  You going to throw a brick through my window?  I'm hiding under the bed already!   ::)

Is there room under there with all the Reds and Muslims and other monsters that go bump in the night?   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 10:28am:

Is there room under there with all the Reds and Muslims and other monsters that go bump in the night

Plenty of room for lice brian said in a pm to me.

Adamant wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 3:50pm:

|dev|null wrote on Sep 14th, 2014 at 10:28am: Is there room under there with all the Reds and Muslims and other monsters that go bump in the night Plenty of room for lice brian said in a pm to me.

No I did not.  I have never sent you a PM, Adamant.    ::)

Adamant wrote on Sep 14^th, 2014 at 9:34am:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 14th, 2014 at 12:47am: Adamant wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 10:22pm: Brian Ross wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 9:10pm: Soren wrote on Sep 13th, 2014 at 8:57pm: Brain, you are a submissive. Yes, that's why I keep talking back to you, Soren.   ::) Brian. The Peacock. If I make a derogatory comment against you and other protected species I will suffer a ban! I named someone a bigot, and they are just like you me and all others who post here. I suffered a ban. You have stated that of me and you called me racist, (no proof required as far as you are concerned) I will only in future make comment and not respond so that Gandalf is unable to ban me. If the Fvkcwit bans me from the Extreme forum again I will respond. In the extreme! Oooh, I am frightened now!  How?  You going to throw a brick through my window?  I'm hiding under the bed already!   ::) Brian I cant help gain intelligence, if you don't know how to look for things on the net don't post. Regarding your belief of me becoming violent is concerned that is just gross stupidity on your ignorant part, it just shows what a really naïve petty little man you are!

So, when you threaten me with "extreme" action I shouldn't be worried about you resorting to violence?   Why should I believe you?  You've just lied about me sending a PM to you.   ::)

I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are.

Adamant wrote on Sep 15^th, 2014 at 10:53am:

I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are.

Adamant wrote on Sep 13^th, 2014 at 10:22pm:

If the Fvkcwit bans me from the Extreme forum again I will respond. In the extreme!

Sure looks like a threat to me!   :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

Adamant wrote on Sep 15^th, 2014 at 10:53am:

I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are.

I note you present no evidence of this PM,  I wonder why you would lie?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 15^th, 2014 at 5:49pm:

Adamant wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 10:53am: I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are. I note you present no evidence of this PM,  I wonder why you would lie?   ::)

Good question, why would you?  Are we playing being an academic this week or not?   ;D

Datalife wrote on Sep 15^th, 2014 at 5:54pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 5:49pm: Adamant wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 10:53am: I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are. I note you present no evidence of this PM,  I wonder why you would lie?   ::) Good question, why would you?  Are we playing being an academic this week or not?   ;D

Making excuses for Adamant DL?  Being an apologist for his lying?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

Adamant wrote on Sep 15^th, 2014 at 10:53am:

I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are.

Bump

Adamant wrote on Sep 17^th, 2014 at 7:56pm:

Adamant wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 10:53am: I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are. Bump

Is that an extreme response, Adamant?   ::)

Perhaps I should call the Police and report you for threatening behaviour?  ;D

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 17^th, 2014 at 11:47pm:

Caliph adamant wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 10:53am:I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are. Bump

Bump

Adamant wrote on Sep 19^th, 2014 at 2:24pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 17th, 2014 at 11:47pm: Caliph adamant wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 10:53am:I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are. Bump Bump

Repetition of nonsense doesn't make it anything other than nonsense.   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

Adamant wrote on Sep 19^th, 2014 at 2:24pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 17th, 2014 at 11:47pm: Caliph adamant wrote on Sep 15th, 2014 at 10:53am:I most certainly did Not threaten you, what petty little man you truly are. Bump Bump

I'm not sure what you're hoping to achieve with this incessant "bumping".   Are you auditioning for a position as a table rapper?   ::)