At least some still have the guts to stand up for the truth in the face of the worldwide propaganda effort that prohibits anyone from speaking honestly about him.

---

Hone Harawira: Bin Laden 'fought for freedom'

http://www.3news.co.nz/Portals/0-Articles/209839/osamaharawira.jpg?width=300
Osama bin Laden and Hone Harawira

Controversial ex-Maori Party MP Hone Harawira has called Osama bin Laden a freedom fighter, saying the former terrorist mastermind should be "honoured", not "damned", as according to Maori custom.

According to the English subtitles of Maori Television's Native Affairs, Mr Harawira said bin Laden "pursued independence for his people, his family and his tribe", reports the New Zealand Herald.

"I acknowledge him and bid him farewell," said Mr Harawira. "Return to your ancestors who wait for you beyond the veil of death.

"Despite what the media has said, his family, his tribe, his people are in mourning.

"They mourn for the man who fought for the rights, the land and the freedom of his people. We should not damn them in death, but acknowledge the positive aspects of life."

Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples said utu, or revenge, was a Maori custom, but was uncomfortable at celebrations over bin Laden's death.

"We don't agree with the extent of the celebrations or with anyone celebrating the assassination of anyone and then the person's body being discarded into the sea," he told Te Karere.

Source: 3 News

Quote:

They mourn for the man who fought for the rights, the land and the freedom of his people.

Is this what you think too Abu?

George Bush said:


Quote:

" you're either with us or you're with the terrorists "

What does that say about Abu?

fd,


Quote:

Is this what you think too Abu?

Yes!

Bobby,


Quote:

George Bush said...

Funny how you claim to be against all war, and despise Bin Laden since you consider him a warmonger and killer of innocents, yet you have no trouble proudly quoting this butcher who ordered the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslim civilians.

More proof, if any were needed, of your hypocritical stance regarding the value of Western vs. Muslim life.

The irony is that this Maori would be regarded as an ignorant savage by Bin Laden and his followers, worthy only of subjugation and contempt. Pehaps Harawira should find out more about the traditional place of native peoples under islam before indulging in such hero worship.

Yeh right, that's why Muslims came to Australia prior to the British, and yet didn't eradicate the locals as part of the fauna, but actually treated them as human beings, intermarrying with them.

Keep peddling that kind of garbage if it makes you feel better about your pathetic position.

abu_rashid wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 12:38pm:

Yeh right, that's why Muslims came to Australia prior to the British, and yet didn't eradicate the locals as part of the fauna, but actually treated them as human beings, intermarrying with them. Keep peddling that kind of garbage if it makes you feel better about your pathetic position.

I thought that was the Dutch.  Or are you talking the Macassan traders ?

As the Dutch were not Muslims, yes the Maccassans.

But the situation can be applied wholesale to every land that Muslims ever travelled to. They never eradicated or colonised or subjugated local populations, they treated them as equals and offered them membership of the Islamic Caliphate.

abu_rashid wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 11:53am:

fd, Quote: Is this what you think too Abu? Yes!

Even the bit about defending the rights and freedoms of the people?

Most certainly.

Even Michael Scheuer, who headed the CIA's Bin Laden tracking unit, came to the same conclusion after spending many years studying the man's life.

I really can't se why you find it so surprising, not everyone gullibly swallows the lies propagated in the media. Let me guess, you actually thought he hid behind his wife right? Even though the guy would fearlessly dig trenches solo on the front lines when the Soviets were bombing the Mujahideen, and nobody else would do it, you actually believe the garbage from the U.S... right?

So he would defend the right of his brother to convert from Islam to another religion? He would defend the right of a woman to choose for herself what to wear?

Or do you mean he defended 'Islamic' rights and freedoms, which is like having an opposite day?

fd we're all adults here I assume, so you can dispense with the infantile concept pf freedom that you seem to be clinging onto.

Freedom is not absolute, for anyone, nor is it universal for anyone. Your constant attempts to equate the freedom of self-determination for a nation/people with individual freedoms to carry out certain acts really displays what kind of an intellectually immature mind we're dealing with here. Please try a little harder.

A very disturbing topic.

Quote:

Freedom is not absolute, for anyone, nor is it universal for anyone.

So stoning someone to death for changing their religion is not an attack on freedom of religion, it is just another 'type' of freedom of religion? It is 'freedom, Islamic style'?


Quote:

Your constant attempts to equate the freedom of self-determination for a nation/people with individual freedoms

I am not doing that. Freedom is always an individual thing. Otherwise it is some kind of nationalism.


Quote:

A very disturbing topic.

Does this answer your question about Islam Lisa?

So, it appears now that we can no longer define freedom fighters from terrorists.

He gave up his homeland and went off to do his own thing.
As a rich man he could have done a lot to help his people.
What he did was for his own ego, nothing more, nothing less.

Deborahmac09 wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 4:38pm:

So, it appears now that we can no longer define freedom fighters from terrorists. He gave up his homeland and went off to do his own thing. As a rich man he could have done a lot to help his people. What he did was for his own ego, nothing more, nothing less.

And this is the guy you want us to sacrifice our freedom of speech for?

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1304675544

Deborahmac09 wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 4:38pm:

What he did was for his own ego, nothing more, nothing less.

You mean like Hitler?

It's very disturbing to see Abu viewing Osama in any positive light.

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 4:58pm:

Deborahmac09 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 4:38pm: So, it appears now that we can no longer define freedom fighters from terrorists. He gave up his homeland and went off to do his own thing. As a rich man he could have done a lot to help his people. What he did was for his own ego, nothing more, nothing less. And this is the guy you want us to sacrifice our freedom of speech for? http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1304675544

Did you miss the part where I said


Quote:

Sometimes holding one's tongue is the right thing to do.

You did? Well go read what I said again, instead of picking bits and peaces!

Lisa Jones wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 5:00pm:

Deborahmac09 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 4:38pm: What he did was for his own ego, nothing more, nothing less. You mean like Hitler? It's very disturbing to see Abu viewing Osama in any positive light.

Was the jumped up little corporal a terrorist?
no, He was a Megalomaniac. The only simalarity is they were both evil men.

So we should only self censor a little bit, or in response to the really evil lunatics?

freediver wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 5:11pm:

So we should only self censor a little bit, or in response to the really evil lunatics?

We should think about the consiquences, are they worth it?
Will it make matters worse, better, and yes even in the long run.
I have never said in all matters it is not worth speaking out.

yet you stood by and said nothing when someone wished harm on my daughters. You talk about silence, well you seemed to be pretty silent there yourself. Something you are condemning me for.

Deborahmac09 wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 4:38pm:

So, it appears now that we can no longer define freedom fighters from terrorists.

Deborah, I think its always been a case of one man's freedom fighter being another man's terrorist.

The entire concept of "terrorism" has become a farce, designed to delegitimise the actions of enemies and thereby legitimise the actions of the self. It is a self-deluding concept, which we in the West have bought hook, line and sinker, no doubt due to the mass hysteria that was created to faacilitate this acceptance.


Deborahmac09 wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 4:38pm:

He gave up his homeland and went off to do his own thing. As a rich man he could have done a lot to help his people. What he did was for his own ego, nothing more, nothing less.

It appears to me the mistake in your reasoning here is that you seem to think Usamah is a Saudi Arabian. He is no more Saudi Arabian than I am Turkmenistani... These countries were all recent concoctions of the colonialists within the last 100 years. His homeland is just as much Afghanistan, as it is Saudi Arabia, as it is Yemen as it is Morrocco, as these are the lands of Islam, and it is the lands of Islaam, and the Muslims that he was defending, not the fabricated little pet kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Quote:

yet you stood by and said nothing when someone wished harm on my daughters.

You already seem to be realising that freediver's concept of freedom is a little warped.

Whatever suits his place in the argument is what goes, he couldn't give a damn if someone threatens you or your family, to him that's irrelevant.

Quote:

The entire concept of "terrorism" has become a farce, designed to delegitimise the actions of enemies and thereby legitimise the actions of the self. It is a self-deluding concept, which we in the West have bought hook, line and sinker, no doubt due to the mass hysteria that was created to faacilitate this acceptance.

I thought Islam also deligitimised Osama's actions. Most Muslims seem to think so at least. Are they lying?

Why don't you ask them? I can only speak for myself, I have no idea why any Muslim would hold such a view.

Abu,

Quote:

Funny how you claim to be against all war, and despise Bin Laden since you consider him a warmonger and killer of innocents, yet you have no trouble proudly quoting this butcher (Bush) who ordered the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent Muslim civilians.

Most of the people in Iraq were killed by other Muslims not Bush.
Once again Abu re-writes hsitory.

He has to Bobby .. coz the truth is too much to take.

abu_rashid wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 7:09pm:

Why don't you ask them? I can only speak for myself, I have no idea why any Muslim would hold such a view.

I thought you might 'have your finger on pulse' a bit more than me when it comes to the Islamic community. So I am asking you.

It seems you think Islam supports Osama's actions. Does that include 9/11?

Are you aware of what most Muslims think on the matter?

Lisa Jones wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 9:30pm:

He has to Bobby .. coz the truth is too much to take.

Hi Lisa,
He drives me crazy.

"
Quote:

If anyone dies in Iraq it has to be the Yanks who did it

"

We all know that Muslims made bombs & blew up
innocent people by the hundreds every day in Iraq -
even outside Mosques!

I do know that the embargo on Iraq killed over 100,000 people
due to the lack of supplies of plumbing pipes etc. to ensure safe water.
That was a mistake of the United Nations & Saddam -  who was always
making life hard for the WMD inspectors.
He ran a cat & mouse game for 10 years.
Once again - Abu says - that was the Yanks who did it -
re-writing history to always put the Yanks in a bad light.

A little reminder to Abu about history -
the Yanks saved us from being invaded by the Japs in WW2.
We only exist because of the Yanks.

abu_rashid wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 5:50pm:

Deborahmac09 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 4:38pm: So, it appears now that we can no longer define freedom fighters from terrorists. Deborah, I think its always been a case of one man's freedom fighter being another man's terrorist. The entire concept of "terrorism" has become a farce, designed to delegitimise the actions of enemies and thereby legitimise the actions of the self. It is a self-deluding concept, which we in the West have bought hook, line and sinker, no doubt due to the mass hysteria that was created to faacilitate this acceptance. Deborahmac09 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 4:38pm: He gave up his homeland and went off to do his own thing. As a rich man he could have done a lot to help his people. What he did was for his own ego, nothing more, nothing less. It appears to me the mistake in your reasoning here is that you seem to think Usamah is a Saudi Arabian. He is no more Saudi Arabian than I am Turkmenistani... These countries were all recent concoctions of the colonialists within the last 100 years. His homeland is just as much Afghanistan, as it is Saudi Arabia, as it is Yemen as it is Morrocco...

Exactly. Or Malaysia. Or Brunei. Usamah is a brother to all his countrymen and as such is a welcome guest in all Muslim households.

He will be sure to leave a tip.

Salaam Aleikum.

abu_rashid wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 12:57pm:

As the Dutch were not Muslims, yes the Maccassans. But the situation can be applied wholesale to every land that Muslims ever travelled to. They never eradicated or colonised or subjugated local populations, they treated them as equals and offered them membership of the Islamic Caliphate.

You really need to educate yourself. Here is a good starting place:

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

Belgarion wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 11:37pm:

abu_rashid wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 12:57pm: As the Dutch were not Muslims, yes the Maccassans. But the situation can be applied wholesale to every land that Muslims ever travelled to. They never eradicated or colonised or subjugated local populations, they treated them as equals and offered them membership of the Islamic Caliphate. You really need to educate yourself. Here is a good starting place: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade

lol...the Maccassans were arabs?? And you reckon he needs an education. Here's a bit of a hint...next time before you make yourself foolish...do some research. And try a book.....it can do wonders for those with 'limited' abilities such as yourself.

Oh...and under arab rule, slaves often achieved great heights, to the point of becoming rulers themselves (Mameluks/Seljuk Turks). Compare this to the lot of slaves in the US and the west....

I think its you who needs educating.

Quote:

Compare this to the lot of slaves in the US and the west...

Which is?

Abu is this why you got banned from that Islam site - because of your support of OBL?

Abu, they said on the radio that Osama had six wives. Is this western propaganda?

Lestat wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 10:17am:

Belgarion wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:37pm: abu_rashid wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 12:57pm: As the Dutch were not Muslims, yes the Maccassans. But the situation can be applied wholesale to every land that Muslims ever travelled to. They never eradicated or colonised or subjugated local populations, they treated them as equals and offered them membership of the Islamic Caliphate. You really need to educate yourself. Here is a good starting place: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_slave_trade lol...the Maccassans were arabs?? And you reckon he needs an education. Here's a bit of a hint...next time before you make yourself foolish...do some research. And try a book.....it can do wonders for those with 'limited' abilities such as yourself. Oh...and under arab rule, slaves often achieved great heights, to the point of becoming rulers themselves (Mameluks/Seljuk Turks). Compare this to the lot of slaves in the US and the west.... I think its you who needs educating.

Where have I claimed the Macassans were Arabs and what is the point of your comment anyway?  Seems you are trying to get off topic as you have no comeback to the truths I have illustrated.

If you truly believe that the muslims never eradicated or colonised the local populations of the lands they invaded then you really have been brainwashed by the dark age cult you support. ::)

Belgarion, according to Abu they all willingly 'reverted' to Islam, without the need to kill any of them for paganism.

Bobby. wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 9:58pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 9:30pm: He has to Bobby .. coz the truth is too much to take. Hi Lisa, He drives me crazy. " Quote: If anyone dies in Iraq it has to be the Yanks who did it " We all know that Muslims made bombs & blew up innocent people by the hundreds every day in Iraq - even outside Mosques! I do know that the embargo on Iraq killed over 100,000 people due to the lack of supplies of plumbing pipes etc. to ensure safe water. That was a mistake of the United Nations & Saddam -  who was always making life hard for the WMD inspectors. He ran a cat & mouse game for 10 years. Once again - Abu says - that was the Yanks who did it - re-writing history to always put the Yanks in a bad light. A little reminder to Abu about history - the Yanks saved us from being invaded by the Japs in WW2. We only exist because of the Yanks.

Notice Abu never commented on the above.

Belgarion wrote on May 11^th, 2011 at 7:50pm:

Where have I claimed the Macassans were Arabs and what is the point of your comment anyway?  Seems you are trying to get off topic as you have no comeback to the truths I have illustrated.

Abu made a statement abou Macassan traders, and then you reply with a wiki on the arab slave trade. Your implication was clear. If you were not making this claim, then why post a link on arabs, when the discussion was clearly in regards to Macassans.

As to combacks to the 'truths' you have posted...they need to be 'truths' in the first place. We have all seen your fantasies that you believe to be 'truths'.


Belgarion wrote on May 11^th, 2011 at 7:50pm:

If you truly believe that the muslims never eradicated or colonised the local populations of the lands they invaded then you really have been brainwashed by the dark age cult you support. ::)

The truth is in the pudding. Communities in muslim conquered lands have survived to this very day. There are Berbers in North Africa...Copts in Egypt, Christian and Jewish in the middle east.

300 years after Egypt was conquered, 50% of the population were still Christian.

When muslims conquered Jerusalam, they were welcomed as liberators...by jews and Christians alike. Compare this to the crusader conquest a few hundred years later, where Jews/Christians and muslims were all slaughtered by the European animals. I guess a leopard just cannot change its spots hey.

I suggest you learn a thing or two and read about Cordoba...which Jews themselves describe as the golden age of their civilisation.....occurred under muslim rule.

To this day, Churches, Synagogues and hindu temples survive in areas conquered by muslims...the same cannot be said about Christianity.

All cultures not only survived...but in fact flourished under Islamic rule. Indian, Jewish, Persian, Turk just to name a few.

I think your confused...it is a fact that Christianity is the cult that has eradicated every people and culture it has conquered. From the Saxon crusades in the dark ages (how many Druids or Tree temples survived the Christians Scourge)....to the Conquisitors wiping out the Aztecs/Omnecs and other South American cultures. From the inquisition...to the crusades. Crusades in the middle east, the Albegensian crusades, crusades against the Cathars....heck, they even tried and almost succeeded in wiping out Jews. Nearly all cultures that were unfortunate enought to cross paths with the Christians were all but destroyed...American Indian,  Aboriginal amongst many others.

Actually...I challenge you to name one culture...just one that was not destroyed by the Christian Barbarians.

Go on...just one?

Unfortunately for you....a simple look at history, and your lies can easily be exposed.

freediver wrote on May 11^th, 2011 at 7:20pm:

Abu, they said on the radio that Osama had six wives. Is this western propaganda?

I know your not to bright FD...but I'm sure even you can figure this one out.

Or can you?

freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 7:01pm:

Quote: Compare this to the lot of slaves in the US and the west... Which is?

lol@Freediver.

freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 7:01pm:

Abu is this why you got banned from that Islam site - because of your support of OBL?

How sad an existence you must lead. Trolling Islamic sites to see why Abu was/is banned.

Don't you have a life of your own?

freediver wrote on May 11^th, 2011 at 8:18pm:

Belgarion, according to Abu they all willingly 'reverted' to Islam, without the need to kill any of them for paganism.

So all those remaining Christians and Jews that survived under 1200 years of Islamic rule...why didn't they 'revert'...if they were all forced, as you believe???

300 years after Egypt was conquered....approx. 50% of the population were still Christian. This is an undisputed fact, accepted by all historians.

How do you explain this FD...if all were 'forced to convert' as you believe.

I suggest you do some reading. It is Christianity and the west that has tried to destroy every culture it came in contact with.

BobbyTheBat....let me get this straight.

Are you claiming that the Americans have not been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's?

From the thousands upon thousands of bombs droped on Iraq by the US...to the sanctions...and you really don't think the US is responsible.

Really?

Lestat wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 9:21am:

Belgarion wrote on May 11th, 2011 at 7:50pm: Where have I claimed the Macassans were Arabs and what is the point of your comment anyway?  Seems you are trying to get off topic as you have no comeback to the truths I have illustrated. Abu made a statement abou Macassan traders, and then you reply with a wiki on the arab slave trade. Your implication was clear. If you were not making this claim, then why post a link on arabs, when the discussion was clearly in regards to Macassans. As to combacks to the 'truths' you have posted...they need to be 'truths' in the first place. We have all seen your fantasies that you believe to be 'truths'. Belgarion wrote on May 11th, 2011 at 7:50pm: If you truly believe that the muslims never eradicated or colonised the local populations of the lands they invaded then you really have been brainwashed by the dark age cult you support. ::) The truth is in the pudding. Communities in muslim conquered lands have survived to this very day. There are Berbers in North Africa...Copts in Egypt, Christian and Jewish in the middle east. 300 years after Egypt was conquered, 50% of the population were still Christian. When muslims conquered Jerusalam, they were welcomed as liberators...by jews and Christians alike. Compare this to the crusader conquest a few hundred years later, where Jews/Christians and muslims were all slaughtered by the European animals. I guess a leopard just cannot change its spots hey. I suggest you learn a thing or two and read about Cordoba...which Jews themselves describe as the golden age of their civilisation.....occurred under muslim rule. To this day, Churches, Synagogues and hindu temples survive in areas conquered by muslims...the same cannot be said about Christianity. All cultures not only survived...but in fact flourished under Islamic rule. Indian, Jewish, Persian, Turk just to name a few. I think your confused...it is a fact that Christianity is the cult that has eradicated every people and culture it has conquered. From the Saxon crusades in the dark ages (how many Druids or Tree temples survived the Christians Scourge)....to the Conquisitors wiping out the Aztecs/Omnecs and other South American cultures. From the inquisition...to the crusades. Crusades in the middle east, the Albegensian crusades, crusades against the Cathars....heck, they even tried and almost succeeded in wiping out Jews. Nearly all cultures that were unfortunate enought to cross paths with the Christians were all but destroyed...American Indian,  Aboriginal amongst many others. Actually...I challenge you to name one culture...just one that was not destroyed by the Christian Barbarians. Go on...just one? Unfortunately for you....a simple look at history, and your lies can easily be exposed.

Yes Abu mentioned Macassan traders, and went on to say "But the situation can be applied wholesale to every land that Muslims ever travelled to." So make sure you read your masters posts correctly before leaping to his defence.

I find it amusing that muslim apologists must look back to the crusades to find examples of western mass brutality, yet I only have to look at the news each night to see yet another muslim atrocity somewhere in the world.

And if you are so concerned about 'christian' exploitation of aboriginals, why do you live in Australia reaping the benefits of that exploitation?

Hypocrisy  thy name is Lestat

Lestat wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 9:31am:

BobbyTheBat....let me get this straight. Are you claiming that the Americans have not been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's? From the thousands upon thousands of bombs droped on Iraq by the US...to the sanctions...and you really don't think the US is responsible. Really?

I don't think so.
They did not deliberately bomb civilians.
I am sure that most of those deaths were caused by the internal civil war
when Iraqis murdered each other.

Lestat wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 9:23am:

freediver wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 7:01pm: Quote: Compare this to the lot of slaves in the US and the west... Which is? lol@Freediver.

Les, wasn't it 'western interference' in the Islamic lands that lead to the ending of slavery there - at least in a nominal sense?


Lestat wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 9:24am:

freediver wrote on May 10th, 2011 at 7:01pm: Abu is this why you got banned from that Islam site - because of your support of OBL? How sad an existence you must lead. Trolling Islamic sites to see why Abu was/is banned. Don't you have a life of your own?

What makes you think I was trolling Islamic sites?


Quote:

300 years after Egypt was conquered....approx. 50% of the population were still Christian. This is an undisputed fact, accepted by all historians. How do you explain this FD...if all were 'forced to convert' as you believe.

Islam makes a distinction between Abrahamaic and non-Abrahamic religions. That is why I used the term paganism. Tell me Lestat, what is the proper islamic punishment for being a pagan?

Belgarion wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 1:39pm:

I find it amusing that muslim apologists must look back to the crusades to find examples of western mass brutality, yet I only have to look at the news each night to see yet another muslim atrocity somewhere in the world.

The crusades is but one of a history of murder and bloodshed. Interesting how you've chosen to ignore all the others.

And you talk of 'muslim attrocities' on the news each night. Well...I know its seems you are rather dumb as well as blind, but how bout you open your eyes and ears...you may actually see what 'Christian' armies and people are doing...and the attrocities they are committing.


Belgarion wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 1:39pm:

And if you are so concerned about 'christian' exploitation of aboriginals, why do you live in Australia reaping the benefits of that exploitation? Hypocrisy  thy name is Lestat

Not concerned...just highlighting your hypocricy. Besides...I was born here dipshit.

Interesting that I asked you to name one civilisation that was not destroyed by Christianity...once civilisation that flourished. And you were unable to..decided to dodge that question hey.

Bobby. wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 1:47pm:

Lestat wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 9:31am: BobbyTheBat....let me get this straight. Are you claiming that the Americans have not been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's? From the thousands upon thousands of bombs droped on Iraq by the US...to the sanctions...and you really don't think the US is responsible. Really? I don't think so. They did not deliberately bomb civilians. I am sure that most of those deaths were caused by the internal civil war when Iraqis murdered each other.

Really? You truly believe this.

I didn't realise that their were still people that were this naive.

So those drones bombing villages in Afghanistan. That isn't deliberate?

Wow...you guys just have an excuse for everything don't you. Got it all worked out down pat.

Just about any attrocity can be justified. Yeah...we get it.  ::)

freediver wrote on May 12^th, 2011 at 6:15pm:

Les, wasn't it 'western interference' in the Islamic lands that lead to the ending of slavery there - at least in a nominal sense?

No it wasn't.


freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 7:01pm:

What makes you think I was trolling Islamic sites?

What else are you doing there. And why do you care whether Abu was banned, or why?

Like I said....you must lead a sad existence.


freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2011 at 7:01pm:

Islam makes a distinction between Abrahamaic and non-Abrahamic religions. That is why I used the term paganism. Tell me Lestat, what is the proper islamic punishment for being a pagan?

Oh..so now that you argument has been exposed as the lies it is, you change the goal posts. Its not all religons now...only pagan religins now.

Yet Indian Hindu's survived to this very day, under Islamic rule. How do you explain that?

Some anamilistic religons in Africa also survived Islamic rule, and still exist to this day.

Tell me FD...how did the pagan religions fair under Christian conquests
? Can you name one that has survived? Just one? Met any druids lately? Or how bout any aztecs?

Lestat wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:41am:

freediver wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 6:15pm: Les, wasn't it 'western interference' in the Islamic lands that lead to the ending of slavery there - at least in a nominal sense? No it wasn't.

So what was it then?


Quote:

What else are you doing there. And why do you care whether Abu was banned, or why?

I'm just interested, that's all. You are making a far bigger deal of it than me. How about yuou just let Abu speak for himself? Do you think he needs your protection or something?


Quote:

Oh..so now that you argument has been exposed as the lies it is, you change the goal posts. Its not all religons now...only pagan religins now.

No change. That's what I originally said.


Quote:

Yet Indian Hindu's survived to this very day, under Islamic rule. How do you explain that?

Failure to impliment Islamic law. Do you agree? All the examples you give are pretty far from Islam's historical centre.

What is the proper Islamic punishment for paganism?

Lestat wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 9:33am:

Belgarion wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 1:39pm: I find it amusing that muslim apologists must look back to the crusades to find examples of western mass brutality, yet I only have to look at the news each night to see yet another muslim atrocity somewhere in the world. The crusades is but one of a history of murder and bloodshed. Interesting how you've chosen to ignore all the others. And you talk of 'muslim attrocities' on the news each night. Well...I know its seems you are rather dumb as well as blind, but how bout you open your eyes and ears...you may actually see what 'Christian' armies and people are doing...and the attrocities they are committing. Belgarion wrote on May 12th, 2011 at 1:39pm: And if you are so concerned about 'christian' exploitation of aboriginals, why do you live in Australia reaping the benefits of that exploitation? Hypocrisy  thy name is Lestat Not concerned...just highlighting your hypocricy. Besides...I was born here dipshit. Interesting that I asked you to name one civilisation that was not destroyed by Christianity...once civilisation that flourished. And you were unable to..decided to dodge that question hey.

If you were born here then by your own reasoning you must be complicit in the opression of the aboriginals.

What you do not understand about Christianity is that it has adapted to changing circumstances over the last 2000 years. It did go through a period of brutal oppression, but has moved on. Part of that moving on has been the acceptance of secular government and the rise of western civilisation based partially on christan tenets, but not on religious domination. Therefore modern civilisation has been partially shaped by christianity, but not destroyed by it.

You probably find it difficult to grasp this concept, since the religion you so rabidly defend is an all or nothing deal with no room for questions. In your eyes religion must always dominate the lives of men. Hence it is doomed to fail. If you really were born here you have no excuse for falling under the spell of such a backward cult.

freediver wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 7:37pm:

So what was it then?

Are you capable of doing any research for yourself, or do you need everything spoon fed to you.

Besides, you wouldn't believe me anyway, so why ask.


freediver wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 7:37pm:

I'm just interested, that's all. You are making a far bigger deal of it than me. How about yuou just let Abu speak for himself? Do you think he needs your protection or something?

Yeah right...just interested.

Read my post again again....i'm not defending Abu at all. More making an observation about YOU. Its a sad individual that trolls message boards trying to get 'information' about a poster.

Seems you lead a rather sad existence.


freediver wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 7:37pm:

No change. That's what I originally said.

No it isn't. Didn't your mother teach you not to lie FD?


freediver wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 7:37pm:

Failure to impliment Islamic law. Do you agree? All the examples you give are pretty far from Islam's historical centre.

Yet Islamic law was implemented in India for hundreds of years. So once again, history exposes your ignorance for what it is.


freediver wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 7:37pm:

What is the proper Islamic punishment for paganism?

You tell me FD? What is it?

Islam welcomes pagans into the fold, raises their status, and they flourish as muslims. Where they were once blind, they can now see.

As oppose to Christianity, which just wipes them out, their lives, thier culture and all.

As for you FD...seems you are still blind. I pity you!

Belgarion wrote on May 14^th, 2011 at 1:01pm:

If you were born here then by your own reasoning you must be complicit in the opression of the aboriginals.

Not complicit..no, neither I nor my forefathers had any role in their oppression. However, have I benefited from this oppression...no doubt. THerefore yes, I do have a debt to the aboriginal people, and least of all I should acknowledge what was done to them...least of all.

Do you acknowledge the suffering that your ancestors (I am assuming your anglo-saxon) inflicted on the aboriginals?


Belgarion wrote on May 14^th, 2011 at 1:01pm:

What you do not understand about Christianity is that it has adapted to changing circumstances over the last 2000 years.

I understand far more about Christianity then you apparently do.


Belgarion wrote on May 14^th, 2011 at 1:01pm:

It did go through a period of brutal oppression, but has moved on.

Has it? Like I said, I don't see any muslim armies in Christian lands. No...quite the opposit in fact.

Its quite obvious the brutal oppression by Christians never ended, in fact it continues to this day. Its just that your relevance in todays world has diminished. Christians are mocked in their own western socieity.


Belgarion wrote on May 14^th, 2011 at 1:01pm:

Part of that moving on has been the acceptance of secular government and the rise of western civilisation based partially on christan tenets, but not on religious domination. Therefore modern civilisation has been partially shaped by christianity, but not destroyed by it.

lol...talk about re-writing history. Western civilisation rose in spite of Christianity. It is no coincedence that only when the power of the church was curtailed, only when independant thought was allowed, despite all the efforts of the church, did western civilisation rise.

Ever heard of the renaisance...the reformation. What do they have in common? It was the fact that Christianity was weakened that allowed the west to flourish. Christianity for thousands of years did nothing but hold Europe back.

lol...you Christians almost destroyed Europe, and if it wasn't for the Islamic inspired Renaisance, western civilisation would still be suppressed by the church. Bit rich that you now claim that you were the driving force for western civilisations 'rise'.


Belgarion wrote on May 14^th, 2011 at 1:01pm:

You probably find it difficult to grasp this concept, since the religion you so rabidly defend is an all or nothing deal with no room for questions. In your eyes religion must always dominate the lives of men. Hence it is doomed to fail. If you really were born here you have no excuse for falling under the spell of such a backward cult.

The religon I follow still has relevance in this world. Where yours in nothing, even in its countries which profess to be 'Christians'. I understand this must eat your inside, but the sooner you accept your lot the better.

Even today, the majority of Australians reject Christianity. More would rather be identified as 'athiests' then to follow your ridiculous pagan beliefs riddled with inaccuracies and hypocricy. Any person with a semblence of logic cannot be Christian, because Christianity is inherrently illogical.

Your beliefs have more in common with the ancient Egyptian trinity, and the cult of Mithra, then it does with the Abrahamic religons. Western secular society does not take your seriously...it barely tolerates you. Keeps you hanging around as a toy thing...to play with occasionally, to mock continously. You are a weapon for the athiests!

As for falling under the spell of a backward cult...I'm muslim...not Christian. I haven't fallen under a backward jewish cult...umm, that would be you!

Lestat wrote on May 16^th, 2011 at 9:43am:

Belgarion wrote on May 14th, 2011 at 1:01pm: You probably find it difficult to grasp this concept, since the religion you so rabidly defend is an all or nothing deal with no room for questions. In your eyes religion must always dominate the lives of men. Hence it is doomed to fail. If you really were born here you have no excuse for falling under the spell of such a backward cult. The religon I follow still has relevance in this world. Where yours in nothing, even in its countries which profess to be 'Christians'. I understand this must eat your inside, but the sooner you accept your lot the better. Even today, the majority of Australians reject Christianity. More would rather be identified as 'athiests' then to follow your ridiculous pagan beliefs riddled with inaccuracies and hypocricy. Any person with a semblence of logic cannot be Christian, because Christianity is inherrently illogical. Your beliefs have more in common with the ancient Egyptian trinity, and the cult of Mithra, then it does with the Abrahamic religons. Western secular society does not take your seriously...it barely tolerates you. Keeps you hanging around as a toy thing...to play with occasionally, to mock continously. You are a weapon for the athiests! As for falling under the spell of a backward cult...I'm muslim...not Christian. I haven't fallen under a backward jewish cult...umm, that would be you!

IMO, you are correct, Christianity has lost its relevance in Western society.
...though imo, the West, owes much in its early formative development, to the Judaeo-Christian religions.

But why has Christianity has lost its relevance in Western society ?

IMO, because Christians have [largely] stopped reading their scriptures.
[we have stopped being influenced by the ideas and concepts contained within our Bible]

In abandoning the message contained in their scriptures, most Christians have instead, been 'overcome', by their love for this world.




Whereas;
IMO, ISLAM has relevance in the moslem world, for exactly that same reason.

Allah promises to moslems the whole world [sex salves, and the property of others, as war booty], as a reward for fighting in his cause [to spread Allah's 'perfect' religion].

e.g.

"...Thou (O Muhammad) seest them bowing and falling prostrate (in worship), seeking bounty from Allah and (His) acceptance. The mark of them is on their foreheads from the traces of prostration. Such is their likeness in the Torah and their likeness in the Gospel - like as sown corn that sendeth forth its shoot and strengtheneth it and riseth firm upon its stalk, delighting the sowers - that He may enrage the disbelievers with (the sight of) them. Allah hath promised, unto such of them as believe and do good works, forgiveness and immense reward."
Koran 48.29


"I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "The example of a Mujahid [religious fighter] in Allah's Cause-- and Allah knows better who really strives in His Cause----is like a person who fasts and prays continuously. Allah guarantees that He will admit the Mujahid in His Cause into Paradise if he is killed, otherwise He will return him to his home safely with rewards and war booty." "
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.046



So, live or die, Allah promises to moslems rewards on earth, or in Paradise, so long as they fight in his cause [to spread his 'perfect' religion].




In fighting for Allah, Allah promises, ON EARTH, to moslem men war booty [including sex slaves], and all that their little hearts could desire.

And for those ISLAMIC warriors who die fighting the Jihad, there is the promise of a 'heavenly bordello', where moslem men can continuously deflower virgins, and drink from rivers of wine, as rewards in their paradise.

"A similitude of the Garden which those who keep their duty (to Allah) are promised: Therein are rivers of water unpolluted, and rivers of milk whereof the flavour changeth not, and rivers of wine delicious to the drinkers, and rivers of clear-run honey; therein for them is every kind of fruit, with pardon from their Lord."
Koran 48.29

This is the promised reward of good moslems.

Even though moslems KNOW, that on earth, illicit sex is punishable by death, and that drinking alcohol is not permitted to moslems.

Lestat says....

Quote:

"Any person with a semblence of logic cannot be Christian, because Christianity is inherrently illogical."

IMO, we Christians, today, have been deceived by our 'cares' for this world.

IMO, moslems have been deceived by ISLAM - and for exactly the same ungodly motives, as Christians have pursued.




+++

Christians are pagans ???

Christians worship a trinity of three God's ???


Deuteronomy 6:4
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

John 10:30
I and my Father are one.

John 14:8
Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9  Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

John 4:24
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Lestat wrote on May 16^th, 2011 at 9:43am:

Belgarion wrote on May 14th, 2011 at 1:01pm: If you were born here then by your own reasoning you must be complicit in the opression of the aboriginals. Not complicit..no, neither I nor my forefathers had any role in their oppression. However, have I benefited from this oppression...no doubt. THerefore yes, I do have a debt to the aboriginal people, and least of all I should acknowledge what was done to them...least of all. Do you acknowledge the suffering that your ancestors (I am assuming your anglo-saxon) inflicted on the aboriginals? Belgarion wrote on May 14th, 2011 at 1:01pm: What you do not understand about Christianity is that it has adapted to changing circumstances over the last 2000 years. I understand far more about Christianity then you apparently do. Belgarion wrote on May 14th, 2011 at 1:01pm: It did go through a period of brutal oppression, but has moved on. Has it? Like I said, I don't see any muslim armies in Christian lands. No...quite the opposit in fact. Its quite obvious the brutal oppression by Christians never ended, in fact it continues to this day. Its just that your relevance in todays world has diminished. Christians are mocked in their own western socieity. Belgarion wrote on May 14th, 2011 at 1:01pm: Part of that moving on has been the acceptance of secular government and the rise of western civilisation based partially on christan tenets, but not on religious domination. Therefore modern civilisation has been partially shaped by christianity, but not destroyed by it. lol...talk about re-writing history. Western civilisation rose in spite of Christianity. It is no coincedence that only when the power of the church was curtailed, only when independant thought was allowed, despite all the efforts of the church, did western civilisation rise. Ever heard of the renaisance...the reformation. What do they have in common? It was the fact that Christianity was weakened that allowed the west to flourish. Christianity for thousands of years did nothing but hold Europe back. lol...you Christians almost destroyed Europe, and if it wasn't for the Islamic inspired Renaisance, western civilisation would still be suppressed by the church. Bit rich that you now claim that you were the driving force for western civilisations 'rise'. Belgarion wrote on May 14th, 2011 at 1:01pm: You probably find it difficult to grasp this concept, since the religion you so rabidly defend is an all or nothing deal with no room for questions. In your eyes religion must always dominate the lives of men. Hence it is doomed to fail. If you really were born here you have no excuse for falling under the spell of such a backward cult. The religon I follow still has relevance in this world. Where yours in nothing, even in its countries which profess to be 'Christians'. I understand this must eat your inside, but the sooner you accept your lot the better. Even today, the majority of Australians reject Christianity. More would rather be identified as 'athiests' then to follow your ridiculous pagan beliefs riddled with inaccuracies and hypocricy. Any person with a semblence of logic cannot be Christian, because Christianity is inherrently illogical. Your beliefs have more in common with the ancient Egyptian trinity, and the cult of Mithra, then it does with the Abrahamic religons. Western secular society does not take your seriously...it barely tolerates you. Keeps you hanging around as a toy thing...to play with occasionally, to mock continously. You are a weapon for the athiests! As for falling under the spell of a backward cult...I'm muslim...not Christian. I haven't fallen under a backward jewish cult...umm, that would be you!

You make my point for me. Western civilisation is based on Judeo-Christian ethics, not blind adherence to religion.  Reason dominates western thinking and we have advanced beyond religious dogma and brainwashing. A renaissance and reformation under islam would have been impossible. How someone such as yourself born in an advanced society like Australia could ever fall under the spell of a backward religion like Islam is beyond me.

One of the reasons Christianity was so successful is because it borrowed from other religions, the trinity from ancient Egypt, Christmas from the Germanic/Norse peoples, Easter from the Romans etc. This made it acceptable to many different peoples. It is a flexible religion and this has allowed it to survive for 2000 years.

You make the point that many westerners have rejected religion altogether. This is not a problem for anyone except religious extremists such as yourself. What makes you think that Islam has any relevance to the modern world  and that people will accept it in place of Christianity, paganism, atheism or any other belief, or lack of?

Just to be clear here, I was raised a Christian altough we were never fanatics about it, the same as most people. I now consider myself an agnostic and think that anyone who claims to know Gods will is certifiably insane.

"Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof:...."


1 Corinthians 1:22
For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
23  But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
24  But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
25  Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.



...barking Yadda.

freediver wrote on May 13^th, 2011 at 7:37pm:

Quote: Yet Indian Hindu's survived to this very day, under Islamic rule. How do you explain that? Failure to impliment Islamic law. Do you agree?

No. Shah Jahan is renowned in India - among Hindus - for being an enlightened ruler. I believe that "Islamic law" is flexible enough to accommodate other religions, and there are examples of this throughout history.

Karnal wrote on May 16^th, 2011 at 2:14pm:

freediver wrote on May 13th, 2011 at 7:37pm: Failure to impliment Islamic law. Do you agree? No. Shah Jahan is renowned in India - among Hindus - for being an enlightened ruler. I believe that "Islamic law" is flexible enough to accommodate other religions, and there are examples of this throughout history.

Allah bless benevolent moslem overlords, i know that i do, every day.


Quote:

Pakistan: Christian student kidnapped, forced to convert to Islam and marry Muslim; police do nothing ...Lahore (AsiaNews) – A 24-year Christian woman from southern Punjab was abducted by a Muslim man who, after forcing her to convert to Islam, also forced her to marry him. Although her family filed a formal report of kidnapping, the police did not act immediately, either to stop the abduction or to arrest the culprits. Likewise, her family has gone to court to get her released to no avail; the young student nurse remains in fact in the hands of her kidnappers. This, according to a local priest, is part of an “alarming” trend in anti-Christian violence. He is, to put it mildly, “disappointed by the behaviour of local authorities”. A human rights activist confirms that the region of Pakistan where the woman lives is a “safe haven for extremists” who perpetrate abuses and kidnappings “with total impunity”. ...“This [Muslim] family has a history of kidnapping young Christian women and forcing them to convert,” said Bilquees Marriam, Farah’s mother, adding that they act with impunity because they are backed by a local Member of the National Assembly, who belongs to the ruling party.    The woman and her other six children went to the police to file the abduction report, but the duty officer refused to take a First Information Report (FIR).

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/05/pakistan-christian-student-kidnapped-forced-to-convert-to-islam-and-marry-muslim-police-do-nothing.html


Allah Akbar!



THE RELIGION OF PEACE - and benevolent moslem overlords
http://thereligionofpeace.com/




Moslems like Karnal are liars, DO NOT BELIEVE THEIR WORDS.

Moslems like Karnal tell you things which they wish you to believe.

These moslems are history revisionists, ALL MOSLEMS ARE.
[i.e. moslem ALWAYS rewrite history 'after the fact', erasing anything which would show ISLAM/moslems in a bad light.]

All moslem tell us how wonderful it would have been, in past ages, to have been conquered non-moslem peoples, living with the blessing of being ruled by benevolent moslem overlords.





IMAGE...
http://www.jihadwatch.org/London_Bus_2.jpg
ISLAMIC 'SNAKE OIL' - on the side of a London buses.

DO NOT BELIEVE A WORD OF WHAT MOSLEMS TELL YOU...

...LOOK AT WHAT MOSLEMS AROUND THE WORLD DO, EVERYDAY.

BELIEVE THAT!

THE RELIGION OF PEACE - and benevolent moslem overlords
http://thereligionofpeace.com/





LIES...
"....and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, "We are Christians": because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant.
And when they listen to the revelation received by the Messenger, thou wilt see their eyes overflowing with tears, for they recognise the truth: they pray: "Our Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses.
"What cause can we have not to believe in Allah and the truth which has come to us, seeing that we long for our Lord to admit us to the company of the righteous?"  "
Koran 5:82-84


TRUTH...
Google;
christians muslims persecuted

Allah Uakbar, effende.

Quote:

Are you capable of doing any research for yourself, or do you need everything spoon fed to you. Besides, you wouldn't believe me anyway, so why ask.

I have done my research. I ask because I want to know what you think.


Quote:

Read my post again again....i'm not defending Abu at all.

For someone who isn't defending Abu you are going to extraordinary lengths to defend him. You answer all the questions I direct at him (or at least, you respond with vaccuous insults) but won't answer any questions directed at you.


Quote:

Its a sad individual that trolls message boards trying to get 'information' about a poster.

Are you suggesting that asking for Abu's opinion on Osama is stalking or something?


Quote:

Yet Islamic law was implemented in India for hundreds of years. So once again, history exposes your ignorance for what it is.

So why is it you can't tell us what the proper Islamic punishment for paganism is? Isn't it hypocritical of you to accuse me of being ignorant of what the proper punishment is when you can't answer yourself?


Quote:

Islam welcomes pagans into the fold, raises their status, and they flourish as muslims. Where they were once blind, they can now see.

When I asked what the punishment was, I was obviously referring to pagans who don't convert to Islam.

abu_rashid wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 12:57pm:

As the Dutch were not Muslims, yes the Maccassans. But the situation can be applied wholesale to every land that Muslims ever travelled to. They never eradicated or colonised or subjugated local populations, they treated them as equals and offered them membership of the Islamic Caliphate.

What history books to you read?
Pity that history disagrees with your tale.

abu_rashid wrote on May 7^th, 2011 at 12:57pm:

As the Dutch were not Muslims, yes the Maccassans. But the situation can be applied wholesale to every land that Muslims ever travelled to. They never eradicated or colonised or subjugated local populations, they treated them as equals and offered them membership of the Islamic Caliphate.

Abu,

That is untrue.

ISLAMIC doctrine requires that the native peoples of new lands, be FIRST, 'invited' to embrace ISLAM,
...IF THEY REFUSE, they are required to pay tribute money to moslems,
...IF THEY REFUSE to be pay tribute money to moslems and refuse the subjugation [over their lives] of moslem authority [under Sharia law], then they [and indeed any person] may be, and often were, 'lawfully' slaughtered, for 'offending' Allah/ISLAM.

ISLAM's doctrines, give the lie to what you have said.

ISLAM promotes muslim superiority and ISLAMIC supremacism.

And wherever ISLAM was spread by the sword, moslems always subjugated local native peoples.

Wherever ISLAM was spread 'peacefully' by the persuasion, moslems subsequently, always forcefully subjugated the remaining local non-moslem peoples.

What you assert, is not in accord with ISLAM's history [of seeking, and imposing ISLAMIC supremacism, upon native peoples],  is not in accord with ISLAM's own doctrine [of required moslem superiority], nor  is it in accord with what ISLAM's own foundation texts declare.






EVIDENCE in support of my claims...

From ISLAMIC texts...

"A man came to the Prophet and asked, "A man fights for war booty; another fights for fame and a third fights for showing off; which of them fights in Allah's Cause?" The Prophet said, "He who fights that Allah's Word (i.e. Islam) should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause." "
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.065
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.080i


"Allah 's Apostle said, " I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' ...."
hadithsunnah/bukhari #004.052.196


"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29




Examples from statements made today, by our contemporary ISLAMIC 'authorities'...

Pakistani cleric: 'We want Islamic law for all Pakistan and then the world. We would like to do this by preaching. But if not then we would use force.'
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/12/pakistani-cleric-we-want-islamic-law-for-all-pakistan-and-then-the-world-we-would-like-to-do-this-by.html



Creed of the sword
September 23, 2006
...the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdel Aziz al-Sheikh.
...Saudi Arabia's most senior cleric also explained.....THE THIRD OPTION OF VIOLENCE AGAINST NON-MUSLIMS WAS ONLY A LAST RESORT, IF THEY REFUSED TO CONVERT OR SURRENDER PEACEFULLY TO THE ARMIES OF ISLAM.
...The resulting doctrine of war was described by the great medieval philosopher Ibn Khaldun: "In the Muslim community, the holy war (jihad) is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and the (obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force." (The Muqaddimah)
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/creed-of-the-sword/story-e6frg6n6-1111112254761

n.b.
"...In the Muslim community, the holy war (jihad) is a religious duty"

"...the (obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force."



In another example, a respected moslem community spokesman has told Australian moslems that they must shun "secular and erroneous concepts such as democracy and freedom".

"Leaders of the global Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir have called on Australian Muslims to spurn secular democracy and Western notions of moderate Islam....
   British Hizb ut-Tahrir leader Burhan Hanif told participants at a conference in western Sydney yesterday that democracy is "haram" (forbidden) for Muslims, whose political engagement should be be based purely on Islamic law.
   "We must adhere to Islam and Islam alone," Mr Hanif told about 500 participants attending the convention in Lidcombe."
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/07/australia-members-of-hizb-ut-tahrir-say-country-is-god-forsaken-and-that-muslims-must-shun-secular-a.html




All moslems understand that under authentic ISLAM, all moslems have a religious obligation to undermine and destroy any other [societal] authority, and replace it with Sharia [ISLAMIC law].



An Oz moslem cleric, explains ISLAM's reason for being....

IMAGE
http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200508/r54561_147958.jpg

Australian Islamic leader defends jihad.
".....Abu Bakr says he does not accept other religions.
"I am telling you that my religion doesn't tolerate other religion. It doesn't tolerate," he said.
"The only one law which needs to spread, it can be here or anywhere else, is Islam." "
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200508/s1430551.htm




Abu ???