Australian Politics Forum

Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl Member Run Boards >> Islam >> In defence of Islam http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1309087370 Message started by leon_the_14 on Jun 26^th, 2011 at 9:22pm

Title: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jun 26^th, 2011 at 9:22pm

Praise the name of Jehovah
His unity is in his oness
God, Lord and Creator is he and he alone
He is the God of Adam
He is the God of Moses
He is the God of Jesus
He is the God of Mohammed
He is the God of All
Praise his name

I am not writing this to promote the interests of any particular sect or defined religion for that matter. I am writing this because I am sick of people rubbishing the God of Abraham via the various sects and religions pertaining to him. The only creatures who have an interest in opposing the God of Abraham are atheists and satanists, the satanists play the pipe and dickhead atheists dance to their tune.

For the record I am a monotheist. I only believe in the God of Abraham, to me his name is Jehovah. With muslims he is called Allah and jews call him Yahweh, for the metaphysical/esoterically minded he is known as YHVH.
There is no other God....period.

I am not a muslim as it is accepted at the moment, muslims largely donot regard me as one because although I have no problem with the Koran I donot accept the Hadith. In the same way I do not accept supposed sayings of Jesus, especially the ones being touted in left wing churches. Now marxist clergy spout their godless ideology with old English idioms and simply claim that Jesus said them. The same with the hadith, apparantely Mohammed is still issuing his sayings but now it is in urdu. What makes it worse is that it is being peddled by illiterate paki mullahs and worse than that is that their followers accept it unquestionably because they have no access to information to compare it with.
So what is the problem people have with islam?
OK lets be brutally honest....
No drinking
No gambling
No pork
No adultery

I'll tell you a story, a 'christian' guy i knew went into a halal restuarant one Easter and wished the owner a happy easter. He then went on to do this to the others there eating, one muslim replied 'bugger you and bugger your Jesus!' The other muslims there took umbrage at this guy, telling this clown that as a muslim he should never say this. A week later he invited me for lunch, i went to see him. He then said he wanted to go to the halal resturant to which I agreed, he then took out a bottle of wine from the fridge and said he wanted to drink it there. I said if it was a halal restuarant then you cant drink there, he said that the owner allowed it (i'd never been there before so i did not know). When we arrived there I saw that it was definitely a halal restuarant, i told him that as a halal restuarant that it cannot have alcohol on the premises. I just assumed he would leave the bottle in the brown paper bag, so we sat down and placed our orders. He asked a member of staff for 2 glasses and a pitcher of water, as i was about to pour the water he said no. Then he took the bottle of wine out of the bag and slammed it on the table obviously trying to get the attention of other diners. As nearly all the other diners were white nobody gave a poo. He then said in a low rent public housing type drawl "IMA OZ-TRAY-LUN AND IM ALLOWD TA DRINK WHEREVER I DAM WELL WANT!!!!!!!!!"
As i said noone gave a poo about the wine or rant, i realised that his 'invitation' to lunch was a setup and he wanted me there as a backup in case things turned nasty.
As far as he was concerned he was a 'good christian' and yet indulges in every vice he can (whores, stealing, etc).

I've come across these sorts of people before, if a preacher says that drinking, gambling, whores etc. are bad he is deemed to be a religious nutjob or 'too conservative' and yet if the local mullah says the same thing then the response is 'i'm a christian! i'm allowed to do these things! this is my country bugger off back to baghdad!'
And if you ask where Jesus gives the thumbs up to these thing in the Bible, the response is 'i'm a (insert whatever nationality here) if you dont like it bugger off back with the rest of them!'

So what are these people actually defending? Their country of birth? Their religion? Or their lifestyle?
I'm going with the last one, For as much as they claim to love their nation and religion ultimately all they really care about is getting pissed and getting their dicks sucked. The nation/religion thing is just a barrier between their lifestyle and anything that would threaten it.
This applies to the stereotypes of redneck and marxist cracka

A nation is based on its communites and communities are based on families and the links between them. The economy of the community is based and functions on the needs and services provided by its individual members. There is a reciprical and complementary economy functioning from it. So WTF does the likes of drink and gambling contribute to such an economy? Nothing, the 'benefits' of drinking are only of a temporary nature and gambling relies on a 99% failure rate for the 'winners' to make any substantial income from it. If the love of money is the root of all evil, then greed is the impetus of that evil and failure is the impetus of both.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jun 26^th, 2011 at 9:24pm

For those who say that their nationally is the excuse to participate in activities that are currently deemed 'un-islamic' i would ask why would you support activities that act against the core of what your nation is built on, that being the community? If your nations' economy would collapse without drinking, gambling, porn, and prostitution would you be honestly able to believe that you live in a nation and are of equal value to every other citizen in that nation, or at least are equal to everyone else in your community (if you are actually in one)??
Are you the citizen of a nation or a member of staff in a anything for a buck corporation or some fringe dweller in a soweto type shantytown?

OK lets go through the bellyaches quickly.....

Islam is against drinking!
So are some other christian sects, so is alcoholics anonymous, cops and paramedics who have to attend motor accidents because some front bottom guzzled a bucket of beer and got behind the wheel. Doctors tend to feel the same when they treat alcoholics for liver damage or treat people who get beer bottles busted over their heads by the usual binge drinkers who hit the streets every friday and saturday night.

Islam is against gambling!
So are some other christian sects, so is gamblers anonymous as well as charities that have to deal with individuals and families that live on the breadline because of the psychological compulsion of 1 or 2 family members. Do some people gamble for recreation or the thrill? Some not all, most people do so because they dont believe they have any other way to make a decent sum of money to support their families/selves.

Islam is against pork!
FFS is eating pig meat that smacking important to you! Every Christmas people binge out on drink, pork and shellfish and every Christmas the hospitals fill up with slobs suffering food poisoning. I'm not pro or anti pork either way, if you like guzzling beer and gulping hot dogs then dont blame muslims if you end up in hospital with coronary problems. Muslims didnt force you to eat it and nor would they.

Islam is against adultery!
I thought that marriage was between 2 people, apparantley not in the West. You can say 'I do', walk out of the church and straight into a brothel or go bugger the local football team and it is your legal right to. People bitch that islam is against sex, well when you see how quicker and larger muslim generations reproduce I would say that is hardly the case. How they behave on the street and how they behave in the bedroom are 2 different things.

So are the 'unacceptable' islamic values actually just common sense? Well....does not the West have education systems that indoctrinate their children (victims???) not to use common sense and actually to oppose it?....or else redefine it?

Lets look at other things islam haters use.....

Islam is an arab religion for arabs only!
Wrong. Only 15% of muslims are arab (by race), you might throw in another 10% for half castes and mongrels as well as those who are arab by culture eg. Berbers, Somalis etc. Wonder why it is forbidden to draw Mohammed? Well according to the few written descriptions about him he had red/auburn hair and his nephew Ali (Nazrath Ali) had brown hair, hardly the traits of todays arabs. Chances are that when the golden horde left a good deal of dna as they swept through. Just like todays 'jews' largely are not descendants of Biblical era Israelites, todays arabs are most likely not pure semites. Does this make Mohammed a different dna makeup as compared to todays arabs? Maybe, but linguistically and culturally they are both still arabs. If islam was for arabs (at least by biogocal race) only then the numbers of muslims would be reduced by 75%.
Islam was originally about returning people to the God of Abraham, it regarded judaism and christianity as taken a wrong turn (cant disagree). It recognised that some jews and christians were practicing their faith as it was meant to be and that these people were already muslims even though they didnt realise it.
A muslim is a muslim regardless of whatever language, race or culture they use/practice as long as they adhere to the principles of islam.

Islam is full of terrorists!
What the bugger is the difference between a 200lb truck bomb detonating in a city street and a 200lb bomb being dropped on the same location by a jet? And what is the difference between those doing the deed?
I suppose it depends on whose interests they serve.

Example....
The invasion and occupation of iraq was deemed to be the decent thing to do, those who ordered it knew it was the financial thing to do (self interest, improving the lifestyle). When casualties began increasing among the occupational nations then the calls of 'islamic barbarians' started in earnest. Same people said that iraq must be occupied because it was 'the right thing to do', 'necessary for democracy' and.....'the christian thing to do'
If the vested interests who were looking for financial gain had their way then there would have been porn shops and sleazy bars on every street corner and probably a smacking casino in baghdad. Does this sound 'christian' to you? I suppose for most of the 'christians' who rebirth themselves whenever the issue of islam comes up then the answer would probably be yes (only because it opposes their atheist lifestyle)
Was it a christian thing to do? No.
Was it the atheist thing to do? Absolutely.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jun 26^th, 2011 at 9:25pm

To otherthrow a government is one thing, to seek to corrupt and destroy the communities of that nation is something else.
People by and large unfortunantely find their sense of reality from the TV, not from day to day life in the community because communities have by and large been white anted by the vices that islam opposes. So when people of the mid-east see DVDs and videos of movies that portray gangsters as successful businessmen, serial killers as celebrities and teenagers having orgies by the age of 16 as the norm, well I can fully understand why members of mid-eastern communities go around setting up IEDs wherever western forces are. I dont blame them I wouldnt want that sort of poo in my nation either.
The west seriously underestimated the value of family and community in iraq because it assumed that the same standards of degeneracy in the west were actually global.

Islam worships a moon god!
Then Adam, Moses and Jesus must have worshipped a moon god too. Allah was always the only God in arab tribes originally, but corruption set in and other gods were added so as to make the original faith of monotheism into a pagan one. Much the same in christianity to the extent that catholicism can be deemed to be seperate from the rest of the christian sects. Catholics pray to Father, Son, Holy Spirit, the Virgin Mary as well as the saints. Sounds more like an ancient Roman religion and most of the christian sects arent much better, they deem the Captain Underpants to be singular so as to claim that they are not pagans.
There is 1 GOD not 3!!!

Muslim is not a race, at least not biologically. However with marxist crackas and the allowance of them to make, define or even to redefine social aspects of the society. Being an arab whether biologically or culturally does not automatically make you a muslim, there are christian, jewish and atheist arabs. Regardless of their religion, nation or tribe they belong to. To be a muslim arab in an arab country is no big deal, there is no especial political capital for any political movement in arab countries to make from them. However in the west it is a different story. Muslims may be muslims, but they are also of the particular race they were born and of the particular culture they were raised in. This can be seen in that certain mosques will cater for certain ethnicities, you will find that certain mosques are frequented by say...indonesians, turks, arabs, indians etc. Marxists couldnt pitch at them as a whole or decieve them as a whole because despite being of the same religion, they identified their community by race and culture. Race and culture, the 2 things marxists absolutely despise after religion. They couldnt get any political capital or social impetus while these people subscribed to race, religion and culture, to pitch at one group of muslims would alienate the others due to percieved favouritism.

Another story.....
There was a bosnian muslim i knew who got into a street fight with a leb. He didnt know if the leb was a muslim or not and didnt care for that matter. He didnt like the leb because he was a leb. Soon other lebs joined in against him, he had to take off but he noticed that some of the lebs wore crucifixes and were most likely christian. The issue of religion was irrevelent, the fight was racial.
Ive heard other stories of this nature in the vicinity of mosques, especially in arab ones where black people who decided to turn up for prayer were either chased off or had the poo beaten out of them. All parties were muslim, it was racial.
Much like how you have black, white and hispanic churches.

So what the cracka marxists did was to take the most offensive thing to them namely religion and redefine it. Islam is now defined to mean ethnicity not religion. Using the atheist education system in the west they instilled both the 'race is a social construct' and 'racism is evil' into muslim children, especially in europe. When the marxists say to muslim populations that whites are racist they mean that whites oppose 'social progress' and 'social justice' and that any clash between them and whites is due to political factors.
Biological race has been replaced by political ethnicity, as for culture? Well who can define one form of culture to be higher than another? You have ethnic culture, national culture, corporate culture and then you have numerous sub cultures including that for queers, militant deaf, S&M perverts etc. Yet the mechanism for making all such 'cultures' equal (namely the government) is political. Redefine religion into ideology, once that is done it can only be practiced via the state and in doing so all communities will be bound by political ideology instead of family connections and God would be deemed irrelevent.
And karl marx would be rubbing his dirty little claws together, looking up from hell and laughing with delight.

If you have a problem with someone because of their race, then know why you have that problem. Dont allow the godless to dictate your reason or emotions to suit their political ideology.
Or should I say religious ideology?

No copyright on my writing
http://alturl.com/ccp7n

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 27^th, 2011 at 9:27am

leon_the_14,

Thank you for your considered thoughts on the faults, of all those persons who profess a faith in the God of Abraham.

In response...

On your Christian 'acquaintance', who went to assert his own cultural rights, in a halal restaurant.

I ask, was your Christian acquaintance 14 years old ?

That is to say, your description of him did 'paint' him as being juvenile.

On the vices and error of those who refer to themselves as Christians, Jesus had this to say....

Matthew 7:21
Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

What is the will of God ???

Jesus said it was this;

Matthew 22:36
Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

And;

Matthew 7:12
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.

+++

You told us of the Bosnian moslem who didn't like 'Lebs'.

And stated that the conflict between the Bosnian moslem, and the 'Leb', had a racial component.

Thank you.

But you did not appear to address or acknowledge the cause of the often very open moslem enmity for non-moslems....that moslem enmity [for non-moslems] as sourced from within ISLAM, and that is 'resident' within all moslem communities ???

Why the omission ?

Don't you think that in your discourse, you should address the reasons why, ISLAMIC doctrines compel, and encourage, moslems to always be in conflict with those who are not moslems ???

i.e.
Why did you 'overlook' the actual 'sanctification' of moslem violence against those who are not moslems, as is evident within the Koran, and the Hadith....

Dictionary;
sanctify = =
1 consecrate.
2 make legitimate or binding by religious sanction.
3 free from sin.
4 give the appearance of being right or good.

"....Lo! Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith."
Koran 2.98

"....those who reject Allah have no protector."
Koran 47.008
v. 8-11

"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123

"...And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah...Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan:.."
Koran 4.74-76

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111

"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

+++

As for your assertion, of there being only one God, i agree.

But, imo, the God who inspired the Koran, is not THAT God.

To confirm that hypothesis of mine, all you need do, is compare what is stated within the Koran [by the God called Allah],
....and then compare that, with what is stated in the OT Bible, by the God of Abraham.

you can see my exposition on that topic, here....
Jews kill 12 protesters
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1305553526/211#211

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 27^th, 2011 at 10:18am

Yadda wrote on Jun 27^th, 2011 at 9:27am:

+++

As for your assertion, of there being only one God, i agree.

But, imo, the God who inspired the Koran, is not THAT God.

Actually, it is well known that Mohammed himself acknowledged that SATAN had tricked him,
and Mohammed acknowledged that SATAN gave him verses, which Mohammed included in the Koran.

Google;
muhammad quran satanic verses

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jun 27^th, 2011 at 1:49pm

Quote:

On your Christian 'acquaintance', who went to assert his own cultural rights, in a halal restaurant.

I ask, was your Christian acquaintance 14 years old ?

That is to say, your description of him did 'paint' him as being juvenile.

Nope, but typical of a left winger

Quote:

You told us of the Bosnian moslem who didn't like 'Lebs'.

And stated that the conflict between the Bosnian moslem, and the 'Leb', had a racial component.

Thank you.

I believe all muslim/non muslim conflict is of a racial nature except when it occurs within racial groups. Here it is lebs vs everyone else, within muslim groups it is also racial eg. lebs vs turks

Quote:

As for your assertion, of there being only one God, i agree.

But, imo, the God who inspired the Koran, is not THAT God.

There is only one God, none of the prophets renounced the message of those who came before them.

As for muslim enmity for non muslims...it should be directed at atheists and pagans, add the Jesus is god televangelists as well.

Quote:

Actually, it is well known that Mohammed himself acknowledged that SATAN had tricked him,
and Mohammed acknowledged that SATAN gave him verses, which Mohammed included in the Koran.

Where does Mohammed acknowledge this?
Are you a submitter?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jun 27^th, 2011 at 10:03pm

Leon what are your thoughts on stoning the cheating child brides to death?

What about the death penalty for apostasy?

What about the destruction of democracy and denial basic freedoms like freedom of speech?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jun 28^th, 2011 at 2:57am

Quote:

Leon what are your thoughts on stoning the cheating child brides to death?

The method of execution is not important.
'Cheating child brides?' Assuming due process such as a fair trial and non bias in laying charges has been done. Then I wouldnt oppose it, if it the standard punishment practiced by that racial group/community then it is not up to me to interfere as I wouldnt want that group to interfere with my community.
If it were in my community then I would want all the facts before saying yes or no to any charges or sentence.

Quote:

What about the death penalty for apostasy?

Provided due process in charge and trial has been done then I wouldnt oppose it. After all, atheists would quite happily kill believers.

Quote:

What about the destruction of democracy and denial basic freedoms like freedom of speech?

Dunno.....ask someone who lived in an eastern bloc country. Or better still ring someone in N.Korea, their first hand experience should be truthful.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 28^th, 2011 at 11:22am

leon_the_14 wrote on Jun 28^th, 2011 at 2:57am:

Quote:

Leon what are your thoughts on stoning the cheating child brides to death?

The method of execution is not important.
'Cheating child brides?'

Assuming due process such as a fair trial and non bias in laying charges has been done. Then I wouldnt oppose it, if it the standard punishment practiced by that racial group/community then it is not up to me to interfere as I wouldnt want that group to interfere with my community.

leon_the_14,

Therefore, if the law in my community said that i could 'lawfully' take your sister captive, and rape her, and then sell her, that would be OK by you, because you would not wan to interfere with the laws of my community ???

Like all moslems, you are a very tolerant person leon_the_14.
/sarc off

Google,
"they had no right to say no"

Google,
"rape jihad"

Google,
beslan children raped then murdered, jihad

Google,
egypt muslims abduction christian wife daughter, muslim police arrest husband father

Google,
muslims christians persecution forced islamization

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jun 28^th, 2011 at 1:29pm

Quote:

Therefore, if the law in my community said that i could 'lawfully' take your sister captive, and rape her, and then sell her, that would be OK by you, because you would not wan to interfere with the laws of my community ???

Nope in that situation anything goes, I would look at the racial grouping of your community and retaliate appropriately.

Quote:

Like all moslems, you are a very tolerant person leon_the_14.

Stated before that I'm not a muslim.
Most mosques dont like/welcome whites, again I point out the issue of enmity is racial.

Quote:

Google,
"they had no right to say no"

Google,
"rape jihad"

Google,
beslan children raped then murdered, jihad

Google,
egypt muslims abduction christian wife daughter, muslim police arrest husband father

Google,
muslims christians persecution forced islamization

Ah yes, if you cant explain it in your own words....then google is your friend.

As for Beslan, the Ossetians were targeted because of their race. They are an Aryan people, the chechens, ingushes, arabs and other filth are Turanians.
But they got their shelter space in the country of their Turanian brothers -that being 'christian' Georgia.

Just like Bilal Skaf and his gang and the rapes that still occur to this day, but its not PC to mention them. Are you going to tell me that all the offenders were exclusively muslim? They were both leb christians and muslims, they are racially motivated.
It is lebs (circassian/arab mixes) against whites (mostly aryan).

As for the egyptian problems, that is due mostly to corruption as well as there being a racial element. Copts still retain a Greek/Maltese element to their culture and with some to their immediate ancestry.

Stop trying to blame religion for racial problems that would still occur even if it wasnt there.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by salad in on Jun 28^th, 2011 at 8:04pm

leon_the_14 wrote on Jun 26^th, 2011 at 9:24pm:

Lets look at other things islam haters use.....

Islam is an arab religion for arabs only!
Wrong. Only 15% of muslims are arab (by race), you might throw in another 10% for half castes and mongrels as well as those who are arab by culture eg. Berbers, Somalis etc.

Careful there Leon. Muslims love to play the race card when they are on the defensive. Also the person/thing/deity you call allah is know to us New Age Muslims as halla. In our alleged religion we don't care for the opinions of others.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 2:46am

Quote:

Since when is 'muslim' a race?
There is no biological basis for that claim, the same way that 'muslims' cannot claim to be discriminated against because of it.
Unless they wish to claim the marxist 'race is a social concept' mantra, in that case they are not muslims but apostates.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by abu_rashid on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 6:37am

Quote:

Since when is 'muslim' a race?

Muslim is not a race, but Muslims are overwhelmingly of racial backgrounds "different" to most Australians, hence the perception of Muslims as a "foreign race".

So in the minds of the ignorant (ie. about 95% of people on this forum), "islamics" is a race. Except when it doesn't suit them, and they want to avoid charges of racism and bigotry, when it all of a sudden becomes just a religion.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 8:33am

leon_the_14 wrote on Jun 28^th, 2011 at 1:29pm:

Quote:

Nope in that situation anything goes, I would look at the racial grouping of your community and retaliate appropriately.

[quote]Like all moslems, you are a very tolerant person leon_the_14.

Stated before that I'm not a muslim.

Most mosques dont like/welcome whites, again I point out the issue of enmity is racial.

As for Beslan, the Ossetians were targeted because of their race. They are an Aryan people, the chechens, ingushes, arabs and other filth are Turanians.

But they got their shelter space in the country of their Turanian brothers -that being 'christian' Georgia.

Just like Bilal Skaf and his gang and the rapes that still occur to this day, but its not PC to mention them. Are you going to tell me that all the offenders were exclusively muslim? They were both leb christians and muslims, they are racially motivated.

It is lebs (circassian/arab mixes) against whites (mostly aryan).

As for the egyptian problems, that is due mostly to corruption as well as there being a racial element. Copts still retain a Greek/Maltese element to their culture and with some to their immediate ancestry.

Stop trying to blame religion for racial problems that would still occur even if it wasnt there.

[/quote]

So, it doesn't matter that ISLAM, the 'religion', promotes violence towards, and intolerance of, all non-moslems.
[e.g. Koran 2.98 Koran 9.123]

So, it doesn't matter that ISLAM is a vicious political and 'religious' tyranny, which has always encouraged the murder of its critics.
[e.g. Koran 5.33 Koran 33.60,61]

So, it doesn't matter that ISLAM encourages, as a 'virtue', political and 'religious' fascism.
[e.g. Koran 9.29 Koran 3.85]

Because those who oppose ISLAM are NOT motivated by any sense of outrage at the injustices which are being promoted by ISLAM, and its followers.

Those who are critical of, and oppose ISLAM, are motivated by [their] racism, and are clearly racists.
/sarc off

+++

How Taqiyya Alters Islams Rules of War
"....
Hostility Disguised As Grievance
In their statements directed at European or American audiences, Islamists maintain that the terrorism they direct against the West is merely reciprocal treatment for decades of Western and Israeli oppression. Yet in writings directed to their fellow Muslims, this animus is presented, not as a reaction to military or political provocation but as a product of religious obligation."
http://www.meforum.org/2538/taqiyya-islam-rules-of-war

Google;
taqiyya - the muslim doctrine of deceit

Google;
we smile to the face "while our hearts curse them"

+++

THE WORDS OF A MAN WHO UNDERSTANDS WHAT ISLAM IS....

"....Battle, animosity, and hatred -- directed from the Muslim to the infidel -- is the foundation of our religion.."
OBL

ISLAM's way of achieving 'peace' explained - according to Osama Bin Laden...
OR,
Advice to real moslems, on how to be 'rightly guided' in your worldly relationships with infidels.

November 10, 2008
Raymond Ibrahim: "Islam's Doctrines of Deception"

Quote:

"As to the relationship between Muslims and infidels, this is summarized by the Most High's Word: ‘We renounce you. Enmity and hate shall forever reign between us -- till you believe in Allah alone’ [Koran 60:4]. So there is an enmity, evidenced by fierce hostility from the heart. And this fierce hostility -- that is, battle -- ceases only if the infidel submits to the authority of Islam, or if his blood is forbidden from being shed [i.e., a dhimmi], or if Muslims are at that point in time weak and incapable [i.e., taqiyya]. But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy! Such, then, is the basis and foundation of the relationship between the infidel and the Muslim. Battle, animosity, and hatred -- directed from the Muslim to the infidel -- is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them" (from The Al Qaeda Reader).
.....It bears repeating that this hostile world view is well supported by all of Islam’s schools of jurisprudence."

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:05am

Does anyone actually read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:12am

Lestat wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:05am:

Does anyone actually read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?

Lestat,

I think that what you really meant to say , was;

"Apart from myself, ....does anyone else read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?"

Clearly you yourself, peruse my posts Lestat. ;D

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by chicken_lipsforme on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 11:25am

Lestat wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:05am:

Does anyone actually read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?

Yes, it would suit your islamist ideals if Yadda would discontinue posting the truth I would imagine.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by abu_rashid on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 2:03pm

On the contrary we love Yadda posting here, he makes a good case for why Christians are loons and Muslims have a right to be upset.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 2:10pm

Yadda wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:12am:

Lestat wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:05am:

Does anyone actually read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?

Lestat,

I think that what you really meant to say , was;

"Apart from myself, ....does anyone else read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?"

Clearly you yourself, peruse my posts Lestat. ;D

haha...yeah, of course I do Yadda. I love reading your posts.

Who am I to correct your delusional fantasies. lol

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 2:15pm

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 11:25am:

Lestat wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:05am:

Does anyone actually read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?

Yes, it would suit your islamist ideals if Yadda would discontinue posting the truth I would imagine.

hehe, a zionist talking about the 'truth'. Now there's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one.

Though it doesn't surprise me that you find his 'cut and pastes' appealing. Pigs like to gather together, and roll in the mud.

:D

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 3:10pm

Lestat wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 2:15pm:

chicken_lipsforme wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 11:25am:

Lestat wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:05am:

Does anyone actually read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?

Yes, it would suit your islamist ideals if Yadda would discontinue posting the truth I would imagine.

Lestat,

You speak of a 'Zionist', as though 'Zionist' was a 'dirty' word.

Lestat,

Do you know, that the chief 'Zionist', is the God of Israel ?

Psalms 87:2
The LORD loveth the gates of Zion more than all the dwellings of Jacob.
3 Glorious things are spoken of thee, O city of God. Selah.

Psalms 137:1
By the rivers of Babylon, there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.
2 We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof.
3 For there they that carried us away captive required of us a song; and they that wasted us required of us mirth, saying, Sing us one of the songs of Zion.
4 How shall we sing the LORD'S song in a strange land?
5 If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning.
6 If I do not remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth; if I prefer not Jerusalem above my chief joy.
7 Remember, O LORD, the children of Edom in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Rase it, rase it, even to the foundation thereof.

Isaiah 62:1
For Zion's sake will I not hold my peace, and for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest, until the righteousness thereof go forth as brightness, and the salvation thereof as a lamp that burneth.
2 And the Gentiles shall see thy righteousness, and all kings thy glory: and thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the LORD shall name.
3 Thou shalt also be a crown of glory in the hand of the LORD, and a royal diadem in the hand of thy God.
4 Thou shalt no more be termed Forsaken; neither shall thy land any more be termed Desolate: but thou shalt be called Hephzibah, and thy land Beulah: for the LORD delighteth in thee, and thy land shall be married.
5 For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee.
6 I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold their peace day nor night: ye that make mention of the LORD, keep not silence,
7 And give him no rest, till he establish, and till he make Jerusalem a praise in the earth.

Zechariah 12:1
The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.
2 Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.
3 And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

Lestat,

You have a hatred for 'the Zionists' [i.e. those who love Jerusalem] ???

Listen to what the God of Israel says to those who speak, and boast, against him, the chief Zionist...

Ezekiel 35:10
Because thou hast said, These two nations and these two countries shall be mine, and we will possess it; whereas the LORD was there:
11 Therefore, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will even do according to thine anger, and according to thine envy which thou hast used out of thy hatred against them; and I will make myself known among them, when I have judged thee.
12 And thou shalt know that I am the LORD, and that I have heard all thy blasphemies which thou hast spoken against the mountains of Israel, saying, They are laid desolate, they are given us to consume.
13 Thus with your mouth ye have boasted against me, and have multiplied your words against me: I have heard them.

Moslems....

They are those people who are too proud [in their own heart] to listen to God.

They are those who dare to boast themselves, against God.

Psalms 83:1
Keep not thou silence, O God: hold not thy peace, and be not still, O God.
2 For, lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head.
3 They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones.
4 They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance.
5 For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:
6 The tabernacles of Edom, and the Ishmaelites; of Moab, and the Hagarenes;
7 Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek; the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre;
8 Assur also is joined with them: they have holpen the children of Lot. Selah.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 3:35pm

Lestat wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 2:10pm:

Yadda wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:12am:

Lestat wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:05am:

Does anyone actually read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?

Lestat,

I think that what you really meant to say , was;

"Apart from myself, ....does anyone else read Yadda's 'cut and paste' garbage?"

Clearly you yourself, peruse my posts Lestat. ;D

haha...yeah, of course I do Yadda. I love reading your posts.

Who am I to correct your delusional fantasies. lol

I know that that statement, is another moslem lie.

In Sharia jurisdictions, people like me, are murdered by moslems, for 'insulting' ISLAM.

IMAGE...

FROM ALLAH'S INSTRUCTION MANUAL FOR MOSLEMS

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world..."
Koran 5.33

Yadda, the 'mischief' maker.

I say, the truth teller.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 5:28pm

Quote:

Unfortunately the definition of 'race' is now being defined by political jargon (and left wing jargon at that).
Much like whites are 'christian' and arabs are 'muslim', so in marxist/frankfurt school theory changing ones religion should change ones race. Biologically this cannot be done, however in a political context it can if you believe race to be a 'social construct'. To go against the laws of nature in this way is pure atheism and yet so-called 'liberation christians' do so willingly. In that case they are not christian because their belief is atheistic so their belief is actually atheism.

Quote:

So, it doesn't matter that ISLAM, the 'religion', promotes violence towards, and intolerance of, all non-moslems.
[e.g. Koran 2.98 Koran 9.123]

So, it doesn't matter that ISLAM is a vicious political and 'religious' tyranny, which has always encouraged the murder of its critics.
[e.g. Koran 5.33 Koran 33.60,61]

So, it doesn't matter that ISLAM encourages, as a 'virtue', political and 'religious' fascism.
[e.g. Koran 9.29 Koran 3.85]

Because those who oppose ISLAM are NOT motivated by any sense of outrage at the injustices which are being promoted by ISLAM, and its followers.

Those who are critical of, and oppose ISLAM, are motivated by [their] racism, and are clearly racists.
/sarc off

Same thing can be said of atheism and yet it seems you do not have a problem with that.

Quote:

Google;
taqiyya - the muslim doctrine of deceit

Google;
we smile to the face "while our hearts curse them"

Taqiyya applies to shiites and not all muslims as a whole.
As for your 2nd 'google' that too also applies to atheists and labor party members for that matter.

Quote:

Moslems will claim that those who oppose moslem violence [to spread ISLAM], are 'racists'.

Moslems will claim that those who oppose moslem supremacism, are 'racists'.

Because, it is those 'racist' non-moslems who resist the spread of the influence of ISLAM, which cause moslem violence. [<---- moslem 'logic' expressed]

Did I not explain that 'race' is currently and unfortunately defined by politics instead of religion.
Why dont you 'google' racism and the frankfurt school for that matter?
You will find that the frankfurt school invented the term 'racism' and it only applies to whites. It is political capital.

Quote:

hehe, a zionist talking about the 'truth'. Now there's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one.

Zionists claim that Israel is a state for all jews and yet the askhenazi majority treat the sephardim as 2nd class citizens and its falashas and samaritans as garbage and yet would claim 'all jews are equal'.
If the askhenazi went back to azerbaijan where their ancestors originally came from (they are turkic not semites) then maybe this problem would go away.

Quote:

Do you know, that the chief 'Zionist', is the God of Israel ?

Hardly, zionism was founded on a cultural and racial (turanians only) basis. The founders of zionism were decidedly atheist.
The re-establishment of 'israel' can only be done by God (the only one ever).
To believe otherwise goes against prophecy, again another atheist trait.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by salad in on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 9:10pm

leon_the_14 wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 2:46am:

Since when is 'muslim' a race?

Hey don't tell me tell the muslims who like to scream racist or racism when it suits them. Start with Carnita Matthews.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 10:07pm

Quote:

The method of execution is not important.

So you see no difference between lethal injection and stoning to death? Are you aware of the correct Islamic procedure for stoning people to death? It is not quick and it is not painless.

Quote:

'Cheating child brides?' Assuming due process such as a fair trial and non bias in laying charges has been done. Then I wouldnt oppose it

So what matters is that the court gets the facts right, not whether the child actually deserves to die such a horrible death? You value procedure over justice?

Quote:

if it the standard punishment practiced by that racial group/community then it is not up to me to interfere as I wouldnt want that group to interfere with my community.

Is there no level of degradation that would make you want to interfere to protect the victims of another 'community'? How is this any different from our government interfering in abusive cults?

Quote:

If it were in my community then I would want all the facts before saying yes or no to any charges or sentence.

Suppose she really did cheat on the dirty old pedophile her parents convinced her to marry? Should she be stoned to death?

Quote:

Provided due process in charge and trial has been done then I wouldnt oppose it. After all, atheists would quite happily kill believers.

So you really do value procedure over justice? Anything goes, so long as the paperwork is in order?

Quote:

Dunno.....ask someone who lived in an eastern bloc country. Or better still ring someone in N.Korea, their first hand experience should be truthful.

You don't have an opinion on destroying democracy and denying people fudnamental human rights? Is this the sort of disinterest it takes to speak out in defense of Islam?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 11:25pm

Quote:

Hey don't tell me tell the muslims who like to scream racist or racism when it suits them. Start with Carnita Matthews.

She is a habitualy bad driver with a rap sheet as long as your arm.
She didnt realise she was being videoed when she did her act, she didnt do it for the courts rather she did it to intimidate the officer. It was to imply that she would complain to the politically correct police apparatchiks, the same bureaucracy that accepted her complaint without ID or proof in the 1st place.
She only did what every other offender would do in that position, playing the race card was wrong and the police were wrong in accepting it.

Quote:

So you see no difference between lethal injection and stoning to death? Are you aware of the correct Islamic procedure for stoning people to death? It is not quick and it is not painless.

When youre dead, youre dead

Quote:

So what matters is that the court gets the facts right, not whether the child actually deserves to die such a horrible death? You value procedure over justice?

No, justice is decided on the law, the facts and the judgment is decided by the community. That is the procedure.

Quote:

Is there no level of degradation that would make you want to interfere to protect the victims of another 'community'?

It depends where that community is.
If it is within Australia, then one would expect the law to intervene. Or if it doesnt then it is up to its citizens to cause it to.
However because of political correctness and corruption the law is not applied uniformly.
If it is overseas then you can act as a private person to interfere but you shouldnt expect your government to act solely on your behalf and opinion.

Quote:

How is this any different from our government interfering in abusive cults?

If the cults are in Australia then they are subject to Australian laws

Quote:

Suppose she really did cheat on the dirty old pedophile her parents convinced her to marry? Should she be stoned to death?

I take it that you are referring to a preteen girl who commits adultery while married to an adult male? Again, let the community decide.
What I find more disturbing about your question is that being you seem to find it wrong that she is married to a pedophile and yet think its not a big deal to sleep around with others

Quote:

So you really do value procedure over justice? Anything goes, so long as the paperwork is in order?

Law + facts + community x judgment = justice
Not political correctness which drowns justice in ideology procedures, bureaucracy and old fashioned self interest and corruption

Quote:

You don't have an opinion on destroying democracy and denying people fudnamental human rights? Is this the sort of disinterest it takes to speak out in defense of Islam?

Since when did the peoples and nations of the world appoint you to be their saviour?
Did you bother to ask them, or just appoint yourself because you are 'all wise'??
Plenty of ways to get to Libya and Yemen you know, I'm sure theres a spare place in the trench at the front line.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Belgarion on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 11:45pm

This thread is interesting. As an agnostic I find it strange that any person can claim to know Gods will, let alone have recieved a complete set of instructions on how ones life should be led. If God exists, (and I do not claim that he doesn't) what makes anyone think that an all powerful entity either wants or needs your worship or really cares what you do?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 9:18am

Belgarion wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 11:45pm:

Interesting you bring this up. This is what agnostics (and athiests for that matter) do not or do not want to understand.

You are right in one respect though...God does not need our worship. Whether we worship God or not, does not make one iota of a difference to His Glory, His Power.

God does not want us to worship Him for His sake...It is for 'OUR" sake. Worshipping God is not for 'His' beneift, it is for 'our' benefit.

When I pray my daily prayers, it is for my benefit, not His. God does not 'need' our prayers...you are correct. But he does 'want' our prayers. Why? Because he loves us, he created us.

There is a hadith, where it is stated that God gave only a fraction of the love He feels (1%) to the world and mankind. Thats to say, of all the love that is felt on earth throughout the ages, all the love a mother has for her child, or vice versa. A father for thier son, and vice versa. A husband for his wife, and vice versa. All this love, is only a fraction of the love that God has us.

He wants the best for us...and the best for us, is to worship Him. This is what we know. We don't know why, we don't know how, but we do know HE is our creator, and HE wants whats best for us.

Now the choice is ours. Either we reject His Message, reject His advice, reject His love. Or accept it.

As for your first question. We (muslims) know...from the Quran, and the example set from the last of His prophets. The Quran is the world of God, protected by Him, and the only of the scriptures that has stood the test of time, word for word, letter for letter, in its original form.

It is these words that have made grown men cry, these words that have inspired and brought down empires...it is the book that impacts those that read it in ways you cannot imagine.

It was these words, and His prophet, that inspired the most backwards of people at the time, to rise to one of the greatest empires this world has ever seen. The only true 'Kingdom of God', foretold by prophets before which the Christians are still ignorantly waiting for.

Unless you have actually read it for yourself, whole, with an open mind, then you cannot understand.

Of course, if you choose to take Yadda's cut and pastes, which I, as others have shown previously to be deliberate misleading quotes, or taken out of context (yes, I have actually found his quotes to be in fact blatant lies..he changes a word here, or a word there, which completely changes the meaning of the sentence..when this has been highlighted to him, he just replies with another half page cut and paste...gets boring really) as the text and meaning of the Quran...or what the media and anti-islamic sites tell you...well thats your perogative.

And your loss!

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 11:31am

leon_the_14 wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 5:28pm:

Quote:

Google;
taqiyya - the muslim doctrine of deceit

Google;
we smile to the face "while our hearts curse them"

Taqiyya applies to shiites and not all muslims as a whole.

Many ISLAMIC sources, would offer a different opinion.

And perhaps offer even, that your entire response in this forum is just another exposition of the art of Taqiyya, against the naive, and the uninformed.

e.g. #1,

Quote:

"I intend to demonstrate and prove that the concept of "al-Taqiyya" is an
integral part of Islam, and that it is NOT a Shi'ite concoction."

http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/1.html

e.g. #2,

Quote:

" TAQIYYAH (CALCULATED DECEPTION)

Sunnis Shi'ites

It is defined as presenting an In spite of the differences among

outer appearance that belies the various Shi'ite sects, they all

what one conceals inside, to pro- agree that taqiyyah is a prescrib-

tect oneself from harm. It is con- ed duty and a pillar of their faith.

sidered impermissible for a Their school of thought could

Muslim to deceive other not stand without it. They learn

Muslims, because of the Pro- its principles and methods and

phet's saying: Whoever deceives they practice it, especially if they

is not one of us." Resorting to are in dire circumstances. They

taqiyyah is permitted only in some exaggeratedly praise and flatter

special situations, like jihad those whom they consider

against those disbelievers who disbelievers, whom they con-

persecute Muslims. That is part of sider deserving of slaughter and

the etiquette of war. It is incum- destruction. The verdict of kufr is

bent on the Muslim to be truthful passed on anyone who is not of

and courageous in upholding the their sectarian school, and for

truth, and to be neither osten- them "the end justifies the

tatious, nor deceiving, nor means." Their ethics allow every

treacherous. He should give manner of lying, cunning and

sincere counsel, enjoin what is deception.

good and forbid what is evil."

http://www.amislam.com/khutoot2.htm#TAQIYYAHi
leon_the_14 wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 5:28pm:

As for your 2nd 'google' that too also applies to atheists and labor party members for that matter.

Maybe atheists and labour party members are not always candid in expressing their real views, but i do not know of any who threaten to murder, those who do not believe, what they believe, or threaten to murder those who resist their authority.

Moslems do.

FROM ALLAH'S INSTRUCTION MANUAL FOR MOSLEMS

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world..."
Koran 5.33

"those who wage war against Allah and His messenger" ???

The above wording is pure ISLAMIC sophistry, to justify a 'retaliation' against Allah's enemies.

e.g.
According to moslems, those who resist Allah's will, are real terrorists.

While those moslem cadres who murder 'unbelievers' in markets with bombs, are merely doing 'good works', to 'defend' ISLAM.

e.g.

Quote:

Bashir calls bombers 'counter-terrorists'
June 26, 2007
HARDLINE Islamic cleric Abu Bakar Bashir said today that extremists blamed for Indonesian bombings were role models for other Muslims and feted them as "counter-terrorists."
"There are no terrorists in Indonesia. What there are, are counter-terrorists," Bashir said.
......But he called on Indonesian Muslims to refrain from accusing people of terrorism, saying it would be tantamount to assisting the US.
Bashir spoke at a press conference to announce plans, together with 13 lawyers from the "Team for the Defence of Muslims," to file a suit demanding that Indonesia's counter-terrorism police unit be disbanded.
Lawyer Munarman alleged that the counter-terrorism squad was financed opaquely by the US, sought to make war against Islam and used torture to secure admissions from suspects.
He also said that the squad was discriminatory as it only acted against Muslims, adding the team planned to file the suit on tomorrow at the South Jakarta district court.
Bashir has redoubled his efforts to get Sharia law enforced in Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation, since his release from prison.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21973518-23109,00.html

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by abu_rashid on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 12:42pm

Well I must've taken the express class, because in all my years of studying Islam, I never came across the material about taqiyyah you're posting Yadda. As leon said, I've only ever heard of it in terms of the Shi'a, that they use it to conceal themselves amongst mainstream Muslims.

The only thing remotely close to what you're saying, that I've heard briefly taught is that if you are facing death, then pretending to revoke Islam is no sin upon you, if it saves your life.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Belgarion on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 6:21pm

Lestat wrote on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 9:18am:

Belgarion wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 11:45pm:

Organised religion, no matter what the faith, is nothing more than a means of social and political control. It holds out the promise of eternal life in the next world in return for obedience in this one. It bases its authority on a set of holy writings that have allegedly come directly from God to some inspired messenger. Questioning the message, and thus the authority of the religious leaders, is discouraged, and it has the handy catch-all of 'Gods will' to justify any actions by its adherents.

We have all seen the results of this. Any free thinking and intelligent person can see organised religion for what it is.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 7:57pm

Lestat wrote on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 9:18am:

Of course, if you choose to take Yadda's cut and pastes, which I, as others have shown previously to be deliberate misleading quotes, or taken out of context (yes, I have actually found his quotes to be in fact blatant lies..he changes a word here, or a word there, which completely changes the meaning of the sentence..when this has been highlighted to him, he just replies with another half page cut and paste...gets boring really) as the text and meaning of the Quran....

Lestat,

I do not misrepresent ISLAM to anyone.

And in fact, moslems themselves seem to understand what ISLAM is about, perfectly, from their own reading of ISLAMIC texts....

e.g. #1,
THE WORDS OF A MAN WHO UNDERSTANDS WHAT ISLAM IS....

"....Battle, animosity, and hatred -- directed from the Muslim to the infidel -- is the foundation of our religion.."
OBL

ISLAM's way of achieving 'peace' explained - according to Osama Bin Laden...
OR,
Advice to real moslems, on how to be 'rightly guided' in your worldly relationships with infidels.

November 10, 2008
Raymond Ibrahim: "Islam's Doctrines of Deception"

Quote:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2008/11/raymond-ibrahim-islams-doctrines-of-deception.html

n.b. the words....

".....But if the hate at any time extinguishes from the heart, this is great apostasy!"

Translation....

If the hatred for non-moslems, at any time extinguishes from the heart of a moslem, "this is great apostasy!"

i.e.
You can only be a REAL moslem, if you have a burning HATRED for non-moslems.

e.g. #2,

The text from the Koran....

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111

Here, the 'understanding' of what the Koran promotes and encourages, by an an ISLAMIC scholar....

"....the death of those who are killed for the cause of God gives more impetus to the cause, which continues to thrive on their blood."
ISLAMIC scholar, Sayyid Qutb, reputedly one of ISLAM's most influential thinkers.iMore moslems 'misunderstanding' ISLAM ???

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

AND,

Cleric preaches that violence is part of Islam
01/05/2007
In documents seen by The Daily Telegraph, al-Muhajiroun claimed: "Terrorism is a part of Islam" and "Allah made it obligatory to prepare and to terrify the enemy of Allah".
The article advised: "The kuffar of USA and UK are without doubt our enemy. There is no such thing as an innocent kafir, innocence is only applicable for the Muslims. Not only is it obligatory to fight them, it is haram [forbidden] to feel sorry for them."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1550211/Cleric-preaches-that-violence-is-part-of-Islam.html

AND,

Quote:

Live in peace till strong enough to wage jihad, says UK Deoband scholar to Muslims
London, Sept.8 [2007]
A Deobandi scholar believes Muslims should preach peace till they are strong enough to undertake a jihad, or a holy war.
Justice Muhammad Taqi Usmani was quoted by the BBC as saying that Muslims should live peacefully in countries such as Britain, where they have the freedom to practise Islam, only until they gain enough power to engage in battle.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2409833.ece

Funny isn't it, how many, many, moslems also 'misunderstand' what the Koran encourages.

Hilarious.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 8:30pm

Belgarion wrote on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 6:21pm:

Belgarion,

Unfortunately, regretfully, i must agree.

I will concede that i believe, that many sincere people are caught up within organised religions, but i still feel that for the most part many of those organised religions are, the blind leading the blind,
...and sometimes for very nefarious reasons.

"He that serves God for money, will serve the Devil for better wages."
Sir Roger L’Estrange

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 9:33pm

Quote:

When youre dead, youre dead

You seem to be missing the point leon. It is the long drawn out agony before the death that I was asking you about. What do you think of it? Is it a good thing or a bad thing. Very simple question here. I suppose you think it is good if the community supports it.

Quote:

No, justice is decided on the law, the facts and the judgment is decided by the community. That is the procedure.

So you have no sense of what is right and wrong other than what the law says? Justice only exists in legislation?

Quote:

If it is overseas then you can act as a private person to interfere but you shouldnt expect your government to act solely on your behalf and opinion.

You have completely avoided the question leon. Obviously the government is going to represent the views of more than one person in a democracy. You can have an opinion on whether we should intervene regardless of whether the government acts on your opinion. So what is your opinion? Should we only act as individual vigilantes and not as a community? How can you defer everything to the community but insist we act as individuals at the same time?

Quote:

If the cults are in Australia then they are subject to Australian laws

You referred to communities. What exactly do you mean? Do you mean nations - that we have no right to interfere across a recognised international border? The sovereignty of an extablished nation comes before all else - including the rights of its citizens?

Quote:

I take it that you are referring to a preteen girl who commits adultery while married to an adult male? Again, let the community decide.

There you go with the community thing again. What if that community is a cult in Australia? Does the government then decide? What if the community decides to inflict an prolonged agonising death on the girl? Is it all OK so long as 'the community' wants it? Is the community merely a convenient cop-oput whose definition you can change to suit what you want the outcome to be? Something to legitimise whatever decision you came to by some other means?

Quote:

What I find more disturbing about your question is that being you seem to find it wrong that she is married to a pedophile and yet think its not a big deal to sleep around with others

Don't tell me what I think. If you want to know what I think, ask me. I won't play your idiotic games to avoid giving my opinion.

Quote:

Law + facts + community x judgment = justice
Not political correctness which drowns justice in ideology procedures, bureaucracy and old fashioned self interest and corruption

So justice has nothing to do with what is fair and just? Whatever 'the community' decides is justice, so long as they write it down into law and get the facts right?

Quote:

Since when did the peoples and nations of the world appoint you to be their saviour?

I am asking you for your opinion, not to appoint me as anyone's saviour. I do not have to be a saviour to ask such a simple question, nor for you to answer it. All it takes is for both of us to be able to think for ourselves. Why are you so afraid to give your opinion? After all, this is your thread to speak out in defense of Islam, and all of a sudden you find yourself incapable of defending it, other than to say it is not your place or my place to have an opinion on whatever evil thing the Islamic 'community' mistakes for justice.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jul 1^st, 2011 at 4:06am

This is what you asked me....

Quote:

You asked me for my thoughts/opinion and I have already answered it.

Quote:

It depends on the crime committed, if there was a fair trial and if the jury (which is representative of the community) has come to an unanimous verdict without reservation of guilt aka majority rule. You as a member of the community may have reservation about how the sentence is carried out, but if according to the law which governs the community that's the punishment,...well that's the punishment.

Quote:

So you have no sense of what is right and wrong other than what the law says? Justice only exists in legislation?

I have a sense of right and wrong, remember common laws were based on the 10 Commandments but now it all about political correctness. Justice is about balance and the greater good of people within a society within the sovereign borders of the nation or its states/provinces. Justice can be achieved either within or without the state.

Quote:

You have completely avoided the question leon. Obviously the government is going to represent the views of more than one person in a democracy.

Doesn't mean they are going to represent the majority

Quote:

You can have an opinion on whether we should intervene regardless of whether the government acts on your opinion. So what is your opinion? Should we only act as individual vigilantes and not as a community? How can you defer everything to the community but insist we act as individuals at the same time?

You can have an opinion as an individual, if the majority of your fellow citizens agree that intervention is necessary and a good thing then it gives the government a mandate to do so. Otherwise you're on your own

Quote:

You referred to communities. What exactly do you mean?

The citizens of a nation are included in various communities eg. religious, racial, geographical etc. they in turn form a state community and those communities form a community of citizens (and non-citizens for that matter) on a national basis.
I suppose the better term would be 'society'

Quote:

Do you mean nations - that we have no right to interfere across a recognised international border? The sovereignty of an extablished nation comes before all else - including the rights of its citizens?

Who's we?
You wouldn't appreciate foreigners/governments interfering with our sovereignty, so why would they appreciate us doing the same? As I said, always a spare spot in the front line in Libya.

Quote:

There you go with the community thing again.

Yeah, aint the general public an annoyance?

Quote:

What if that community is a cult in Australia?

It would have to be a pretty big cult to the extent that it could elect politicians and bring about changes/new laws that would be accepted by the majority and have judges and juries that would enact on them.

Quote:

Does the government then decide? What if the community decides to inflict an prolonged agonising death on the girl?

The law decides if there is a charge to be made, then there is a trial by jury, then the judge makes the sentence (if jury find guilty), then an appeal could be made and if it fails the state carries out the sentence.

Quote:

Is it all OK so long as 'the community' wants it?

Wash, lather, rinse, repeat cycle

Quote:

Is the community merely a convenient cop-oput whose definition you can change to suit what you want the outcome to be?

Jury - 12 people selected at random whos individual opinions are no greater or lesser than other jury members.

Quote:

Something to legitimise whatever decision you came to by some other means?

I am not a 1 man prosecutor, jury, judge or executioner. No one is.

Quote:

Don't tell me what I think. If you want to know what I think, ask me. I won't play your idiotic games to avoid giving my opinion.

Oh cry me a nappyful

Quote:

So justice has nothing to do with what is fair and just? Whatever 'the community' decides is justice, so long as they write it down into law and get the facts right?

Yeah, let's not let the facts interfere with it.
Speaking of which you have asked for my opinion on hypotheticals, you have not defined a particular situation, nor provided facts, nor provided a reference to your hypothetical "situation". You've asked me to give an opinion on your opinion, here's my opinion -you're a goose

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jul 1^st, 2011 at 4:11am

And this bit

Quote:

If you're the best the SPA can muster then it should stop posing as a political party and start selling tupperware door to door....maybe then you'd get to see and understand the community

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by boogieman on Jul 1^st, 2011 at 11:12am

leon_the_14 wrote on Jun 26^th, 2011 at 9:22pm:

Propaganda galore!!!!

There is no defence for Islam. It's a religion. As such, like every other religion, it's a fake. There is no God, or Allah or whatever name you want to give your fantasy. You are deluded.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 1^st, 2011 at 12:41pm

Lestat wrote on Jun 30^th, 2011 at 9:18am:

Belgarion wrote on Jun 29^th, 2011 at 11:45pm:

This thread is interesting.

As an agnostic I find it strange that any person can claim to know Gods will, let alone have recieved a complete set of instructions

on how ones life should be led. If God exists, (and I do not claim that he doesn't) what makes anyone think that an all powerful entity either wants or needs your worship or really cares what you do?

....As for your first question. We (muslims) know...from

#1, the Quran, and

#2, the example set from the last of His prophets.

The Quran is the world of God, protected by Him, and the only of the scriptures that has stood the test of time, word for word, letter for letter, in its original form.

How ISLAMIC 'logic' works....

Moslems will declare;

"Mohammed was a prophet of God."

Q. Who said so?

A. Well, God told Mohammed. And then Mohammed told us. [....and that is how we moslems got the Koran too, ....straight from Allah!]

Q. Why should we believe what Mohammed said to us?

A. Because Mohammed was a prophet of God, silly.

Debating moslems, is a 'debate' in circular reasoning.

+++

Deuteronomy 19:15
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by salad in on Jul 1^st, 2011 at 9:39pm

boogieman wrote on Jul 1^st, 2011 at 11:12am:

I was once like you my child. I have been on a magnificent journey only made possible because of religion. I started out as a moderate Baptist. Then I became an immoderate Methodist. From there I joined the Little Pebble cult (I avoided sex with the leader 'Big Dong'). I then flirted with a Neo-Pagan religion where I was classed as a radical/extremist/frothing-at-the-mouth lunatic. It was OK because we could do all sorts of vile stuff and hide behind the religion. It was at this dangerous period of my life that I was introduced to the cult known as New Age Islam and I became a New Age Muslim and we worship Halla. Being a NAM allows me to act in a totally irrational manner and I can hate, detest, and vituperate anyone and anything and I can hide behind my religion.

The one drawback of being a NAM is wearing the black bin liner (compulsory for male NAMs).

When will you come to your senses?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 11:06am

Quote:

I realise it is punishment and they may have ticked all the boxes. Are you incapable of recognising any injustice in law other than an error of fact?

Quote:

I have a sense of right and wrong

Obviously you do, as you cannot bring yourself to directly defend these evil things that Islam requires of its followers, even in your own thread 'in defence of Islam.' But you cannot bring yourself to criticise it either, instead deferring to the law or 'cummunuity' opinion as a substitute for actually thinking for yourself.

Quote:

You can have an opinion as an individual,

I realise I can have an opinion, but I am yet to see any evidence that you can.

Quote:

if the majority of your fellow citizens agree that intervention is necessary and a good thing then it gives the government a mandate to do so.

Thanks for explaining democracy to me. Can you go one step further an have your own opinion?

Quote:

You wouldn't appreciate foreigners/governments interfering with our sovereignty, so why would they appreciate us doing the same?

I am not suggesting they would appreciate it. Instead, I am asking if you have an opinion on whether it is a good thing.

Quote:

Yeah, let's not let the facts interfere with it.

I am not suggesting we ignore the facts. I am suggesting that facts, legislation and majority opinion are not sufficient to constitute justice. You said yourself you have a sense of right and wrong, yet everything you post indicates you either do not are are afraid to express it.

Quote:

Speaking of which you have asked for my opinion on hypotheticals

I have asked your opinion about Islam.

Quote:

you have not defined a particular situation

Der. Isn't that what a hypothetical is?

Why are you so afraid to answer such simple questions? Is this a common theme among Muslims - spend ten pages giving excuses for not answering a question?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 3:18pm

freediver wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 11:06am:

Quote:

I realise it is punishment and they may have ticked all the boxes. Are you incapable of recognising any injustice in law other than an error of fact?

[quote]I have a sense of right and wrong

You can have an opinion as an individual,

I realise I can have an opinion, but I am yet to see any evidence that you can.

Quote:

if the majority of your fellow citizens agree that intervention is necessary and a good thing then it gives the government a mandate to do so.

Thanks for explaining democracy to me. Can you go one step further an have your own opinion?

Quote:

You wouldn't appreciate foreigners/governments interfering with our sovereignty, so why would they appreciate us doing the same?

I am not suggesting they would appreciate it. Instead, I am asking if you have an opinion on whether it is a good thing.

Quote:

Yeah, let's not let the facts interfere with it.

Speaking of which you have asked for my opinion on hypotheticals

I have asked your opinion about Islam.

Quote:

you have not defined a particular situation

Der. Isn't that what a hypothetical is?

Why are you so afraid to answer such simple questions? Is this a common theme among Muslims - spend ten pages giving excuses for not answering a question?[/quote]
I've already given my opinion, thoughts, answers, whatever.
You on the other hand just go around in circles and re-ask your same questions with different wording. You seem to have a severe case of moral relativism where you think that facts, law and community decision has no place in the execution of justice. Your version of justice is about what you think is right to your opinion, regardless of whether it is right or wrong to others. You've made clear that you think Islam is evil and are more concerned with your personal comfort zone regardless of its impact on everyone else and the greater good of the nation.
In other words beer, porn and casual sex for you are the be all and end all....eh?

Quote:

Ah yes, the typical godless response....you're deluded.
Or you're mentally ill, should be locked away, need a mindset modification, etc. etc.
You don't bother with a counter argument or raise any point of contention, just whine the set mantras as per all you god haters do.
Shove off, you're a flyweight

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 3:31pm

Quote:

You on the other hand just go around in circles and re-ask your same questions with different wording.

When you said that it depends on what the community wants and the paperwork, I thought maybe you misunderstood my question about whether it is OK to stone a cheating child bride to death. Are you trying to say you think it is a good thing to stone little girls to death for cheating on whatever old man was chosen as their husband? If so, it would avoid a lot of going round in circles if you simply said so. After all, I was asking for your opinion, not whether some backwards community on the other side of the world supports it.

Quote:

You seem to have a severe case of moral relativism where you think that facts, law and community decision has no place in the execution of justice.

No. In fact I went to some lengths to explain this is not the case.

Quote:

Your version of justice is about what you think is right to your opinion, regardless of whether it is right or wrong to others.

And you accuse me of moral relativism?

If I didn't care whether it was right or wrong to others, why would I go to such lengths to get you to offer your opinion?

Quote:

You've made clear that you think Islam is evil and are more concerned with your personal comfort zone regardless of its impact on everyone else and the greater good of the nation.

So the greater good of the nation is more important than whether a cheating child bride gets stoned to death? What exactly do you fear will happen to 'the nation' if Muslims refrain from stoning little girls to death?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 4:31pm

Quote:

When you said that it depends on what the community wants and the paperwork,

As well as the facts and circumstance

Quote:

I thought maybe you misunderstood my question about whether it is OK to stone a cheating child bride to death.

If the punishment has been decided after a full and open trial, then as the death penalty would be a standard punishment for adultery then I would not oppose it. As for the manner of execution I might digress. But no execution could be passed on 1 person for adultery, 1 person cannot commit adultery it takes 2. So there should be 2 people facing execution and until then I would oppose any punishment

Quote:

Are you trying to say you think it is a good thing to stone little girls to death for cheating on whatever old man was chosen as their husband?

In all your attempt to bait me with loaded questions you have not provided a scenario or circumstances of those involved.

Quote:

If so, it would avoid a lot of going round in circles if you simply said so.

See above

Quote:

After all, I was asking for your opinion, not whether some backwards community on the other side of the world supports it.

You have not presented a scenario.

Quote:

And you accuse me of moral relativism?

Self interest, MUH DIK,...yeah pretty much

Quote:

If I didn't care whether it was right or wrong to others, why would I go to such lengths to get you to offer your opinion?

Cause you're trying to bait me to answer out of context

Quote:

So the greater good of the nation is more important than whether a cheating child bride gets stoned to death?

Ultimately yes

Quote:

What exactly do you fear will happen to 'the nation' if Muslims refrain from stoning little girls to death?

Can you tell me the last time that muslims stoned little girls to death in AUSTRALIA?

Why do you have to argue your point in emotional language?
Oh that's right....you don't argue a point

How about this...Is it OK to beat minke whales to death with a baseball bat?
Is it OK to kill minke whales?
If so why isn't it OK to beat them to death with a baseball bat?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 6:26pm

Quote:

As for the manner of execution I might digress.

Wow. That almost sounds like an opinion. Would you actually digress, or are you just teasing me?

Quote:

But no execution could be passed on 1 person for adultery, 1 person cannot commit adultery it takes 2. So there should be 2 people facing execution and until then I would oppose any punishment

What if only 1 is married?

Quote:

In all your attempt to bait me with loaded questions you have not provided a scenario or circumstances of those involved.

Yes I have. A child bride cheats on the dirty old man her parents convinced her to marry. All the paperwork is in order. She actually committed the 'crime'. Now they want to stone her to death. Can you have an opinion now, or do I have to write a thesis on it first?

Quote:

Is it OK to kill minke whales?

Yes. See how easy it is to give an opinion?

Quote:

If so why isn't it OK to beat them to death with a baseball bat?

That would just be silly.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 10:11pm

leon_the_14 wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 3:18pm:

You seem to have a severe case of moral relativism where you think that facts, law and community decision has no place in the execution of justice.

leon_the_14 wrote on Jul 1^st, 2011 at 4:06am:

Quote:

So justice has nothing to do with what is fair and just? Whatever 'the community' decides is justice, so long as they write it down into law and get the facts right?

Yeah, let's not let the facts interfere with it.

Speaking of which you have asked for my opinion on hypotheticals, you have not defined a particular situation, nor provided facts, nor provided a reference to your hypothetical "situation".

You've asked me to give an opinion on your opinion, here's my opinion -you're a goose

"In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful."
Koran 1.1

Senario #1,

I'm an English teacher working in Sudan.
I suggest that the children in my class give a toy a name.
The broader Sudanese community are outraged at my insult to their religion, and my insult to the prophet of their religion.
They call for my death.
They insist on my death, for insulting the prophet of their religion.
Would their calls for my death, be a 'justice', a just act ?

Senario #2,

I'm a Christian teacher working in Nigeria.
I touch a students school bag, which contains a Koran.
The moslem students in the class murder me, because as an 'unclean' infidel, i have insulted their religion, by touching its holy book.
Is my murder by moslems, for insulting ISLAM, a 'justice', a just act ?

Google;
teacher touched desecrating koran killed

Google;
teacher sudan insult teddybear "must be killed by the sword"

leon,
Were those examples, just another example of more moslems, 'misunderstanding' ISLAM ???

Or were they yet another example of the 'symptom', of what ISLAM is ???

IMO, ISLAM is a human mental sickness, which causes moslems [when they are in a majority] to lash out in violence, and rage against local 'unbelievers'.

And isn't this the truth, that this is what ISLAM teaches to its adherents ???

That their violent rage, against unbelievers [who 'insult' ISLAM] is justified, and is 'sanctified' ???

+++

WHEREAS...compare the above, with...

THE PENALTY - If a soul shall sin through ignorance
...a 'monetary' penalty [i.e. the cost of a sin offering] would be exacted from an offender.

But his/her death is NOT required, .....for a 'sin through ignorance' against God's commandment, normally requiring death, as punishment.

The God of Israel is a just and righteous God.

The God of Israel will not slay any person who, 'sin through ignorance against any of the commandments of the LORD'.

Leviticus 4:27
And if any one of the common people sin through ignorance, while he doeth somewhat against any of the commandments of the LORD concerning things which ought not to be done, and be guilty;
28 Or if his sin, which he hath sinned, come to his knowledge: then he shall bring his offering, a kid of the goats, a female without blemish, for his sin which he hath sinned.
29 And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and slay the sin offering in the place of the burnt offering.

Numbers 15:22
And if ye have erred, and not observed all these commandments, which the LORD hath spoken unto Moses,
23 Even all that the LORD hath commanded you by the hand of Moses, from the day that the LORD commanded Moses, and henceforward among your generations;
24 Then it shall be, if ought be committed by ignorance without the knowledge of the congregation, that all the congregation shall offer one young bullock for a burnt offering, for a sweet savour unto the LORD, with his meat offering, and his drink offering, according to the manner, and one kid of the goats for a sin offering.
25 And the priest shall make an atonement for all the congregation of the children of Israel, and it shall be forgiven them; for it is ignorance: and they shall bring their offering, a sacrifice made by fire unto the LORD, and their sin offering before the LORD, for their ignorance:
26 And it shall be forgiven all the congregation of the children of Israel, and the stranger that sojourneth among them; seeing all the people were in ignorance.
27 And if any soul sin through ignorance, then he shall bring a she goat of the first year for a sin offering.
28 And the priest shall make an atonement for the soul that sinneth ignorantly, when he sinneth by ignorance before the LORD, to make an atonement for him; and it shall be forgiven him.
29 Ye shall have one law for him that sinneth through ignorance, both for him that is born among the children of Israel, and for the stranger that sojourneth among them.

Leviticus 4:1-4
Leviticus 4:22-24
Leviticus 5:15-19

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Karnal on Jul 2^nd, 2011 at 10:19pm

Effende, infidel touching Koran is punishable by death. They say this at airport, so no excuse for you!

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 12:43am

Quote:

Wow. That almost sounds like an opinion. Would you actually digress, or are you just teasing me?

If I don't have personal knowledge of the circumstances how can I have any conviction in whether such as sentence should be carried out. You seem to have this idea that muslims stone children to death if there's nothing better on TV.

Quote:

What if only 1 is married?

An act of adultery requires 2 people, whether 1 or both are married is irrelevant.
It is the act that defines the crime

Quote:

Yes I have.

No, you've given a vague description which you've redefined to your loaded questions.
You've not given me the location of this 'event' or much else.

Quote:

A child bride cheats on the dirty old man her parents convinced her to marry.

How old is this 'child bride'?
5?, 10?, 15?....what?
Did she make this choice of her own free will? Was she sold or otherwise coerced into it? Was it part of repaying a debt? Was the family under the threat of death by others if they didn't arrange this?
These are all factors in any court case

Quote:

All the paperwork is in order. She actually committed the 'crime'.

OK we'll say that the trial was fair, the appeal process has been exhausted and the community approves

Quote:

Now they want to stone her to death.

As long as all the other parties involved in this adultery are standing next to her when the stones are thrown, then as unpalatable as the execution(s) would be....then yes

Quote:

Can you have an opinion now, or do I have to write a thesis on it first?

I wouldn't trust you to write your own name, let alone know it

Quote:

Yes. See how easy it is to give an opinion?

Maybe I could write up a list of loaded questions for you with emotional language?

Quote:

That would just be silly.

It was a simple yes or no question (was it too simple for you to comprehend?)

Even Mr cut'n paste gets the idea of a scenario...

Quote:

Senario #1,

I'm an English teacher working in Sudan.
I suggest that the children in my class give a toy a name.
The broader Sudanese community are outraged at my insult to their religion, and my insult to the prophet of their religion.
They call for my death.
They insist on my death, for insulting the prophet of their religion.
Would their calls for my death, be a 'justice', a just act ?

Senario #2,

I'm a Christian teacher working in Nigeria.
I touch a students school bag, which contains a Koran.
The moslem students in the class murder me, because as an 'unclean' infidel, i have insulted their religion, by touching its holy book.
Is my murder by moslems, for insulting ISLAM, a 'justice', a just act ?

If they're kumbayah singing, progressive whites or just jigaboos it doesn't really matter, it's a win-win situation for everyone
Hang'em high

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 9:28am

Leon, given your frequent references to the views of the 'community', how do you feel about Islam's denial of democracy?

Quote:

As long as all the other parties involved in this adultery are standing next to her when the stones are thrown, then as unpalatable as the execution(s) would be....then yes

So you actually think Islamic law is not brutal enough?

Quote:

Maybe I could write up a list of loaded questions for you with emotional language?

Sure. And I can show you how to give a straight answer.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 5:27pm

Quote:

Leon, given your frequent references to the views of the 'community', how do you feel about Islam's denial of democracy?

Care to give an example of this?

Quote:

So you actually think Islamic law is not brutal enough?

Did I say that?
Can you quote me saying that punishments should be more brutal or that islamic law should be brutal?

Quote:

Sure. And I can show you how to give a straight answer.

No you just want to derail this thread.
How about I answer everything with 'That would just be silly'?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 7:13pm

Quote:

Care to give an example of this?

Yes. Islam forbids democracy. A good example of this is the historical Islamic empires, which followed Islamic law and forbade democracy. Why do you need examples of everything?

Quote:

Did I say that?
Can you quote me saying that punishments should be more brutal or that islamic law should be brutal?

Sure. Here you go. Not sure why you couldn't just read it in the quote I was responding too.

Quote:

As long as all the other parties involved in this adultery are standing next to her when the stones are thrown, then as unpalatable as the execution(s) would be....then yes

Quote:

How about I answer everything with 'That would just be silly'?

At least that would be an opinion - one I may actually agree with. Silly would be a good description of much of Islamic law, if it wasn't so evil.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 8:24pm

Quote:

Yes. Islam forbids democracy. A good example of this is the historical Islamic empires, which followed Islamic law and forbade democracy. Why do you need examples of everything?

Care to show where in the Koran it does?
There have been plenty of european and other non-islamic empires that didn't have the vote as well.

Quote:

Sure. Here you go. Not sure why you couldn't just read it in the quote I was responding too.

BS! You implied that I called for laws to be harsher and for punishments to be more brutal in execution than your 'hypothetical'. I did nothing of the sort

Quote:

At least that would be an opinion - one I may actually agree with. Silly would be a good description of much of Islamic law, if it wasn't so evil.

That isn't an opinion or even a yes or no answer. It's just a fob off to avoid answering a question.
You are one absolute lying sack of sh!t

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 9:25pm

Quote:

Care to show where in the Koran it does?

Ask Abu about it if you don't believe me.

Quote:

BS! You implied that I called for laws to be harsher and for punishments to be more brutal in execution than your 'hypothetical'. I did nothing of the sort

Yes you did. You suggested two people should be stoned to death rather than one. can you see how that is more brutal?

Quote:

That isn't an opinion or even a yes or no answer. It's just a fob off to avoid answering a question.
You are one absolute lying sack of sh!t

I gave you an answer, I support whaling. Perhaps you should give me an example of someone clubbing a Minke whale to death to allow me to have an opinion on it.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by leon_the_14 on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 9:47pm

Quote:

Ask Abu about it if you don't believe me.

You made the claim, so you back it up

Quote:

Yes you did. You suggested two people should be stoned to death rather than one. can you see how that is more brutal?

If they are both guilty, then both should be punished

Quote:

I gave you an answer, I support whaling. Perhaps you should give me an example of someone clubbing a Minke whale to death to allow me to have an opinion on it.

That would just be silly

Stop p!ssing my time away

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by abu_rashid on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 11:05pm

Leon, you'll soon learn that discussing any issue with fd is just a cause of neverending grief. He just hops from topic to topic, making one wild accusation after another, with very little, if any, dialogue actually occurring. Don't hold out for any of the evidences you asked him to bring, he'll just ignore you and start on about some other completely unrelated rant to avoid it.

He's a classic case of "If you can't bedazzle them with brilliance, then baffle them with bovine faeces".

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 4^th, 2011 at 8:34am

leon_the_14 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 8:24pm:

Quote:

Yes. Islam forbids democracy. A good example of this is the historical Islamic empires, which followed Islamic law and forbade democracy. Why do you need examples of everything?

Care to show where in the Koran it does?

There have been plenty of european and other non-islamic empires that didn't have the vote as well.

Voting is kufr -- unbelief

ISLAMIC law should replace 'man-made' law

...whereas, Sharia law is just, and is not 'interpreted' into unjust law by moslems ???

If not so, where is the example, in the world, where Sharia is applied justly ???

Google;
islam, no scrutiny, no freedom of speech, "and those who stir up sedition in the City"

Wherever ISLAM perchance, comes into authority in a land, ISLAM believes that nobody within that jurisdiction should ever again, be allowed to scrutinise or criticise ISLAM.
....on pain of death.

"Truly, if the Hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who stir up sedition in the City....whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain (without mercy)."
Koran 33.60,61

Q.
Why so ???

A.
All good moslems consider ISLAM, to be Allah's [already] perfect religion.

Ergo, the moslem 'logic' which is applied;

'Why would moslems be expected to reform ISLAM [or allow critical scrutiny of ISLAM], when moslems know that ISLAM is Allah's [already] perfect religion ???'

From childhood every moslem is taught to agree unquestioningly with ISLAM's laws and authority, as expressed and interpreted by the imam's.

Again, ISLAM is regarded by ALL moslems as Allah's [already] perfect religion.

And, if ISLAM is Allah's already perfect religion, there can be no need for scrutiny or criticism of ISLAM's 'form'.

What is required from moslems, is that they work, 'struggle' [i.e. Jihad], to impose ISLAM/Sharia, upon all of 'unbelieving' mankind.

"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:..."
Koran 9.111

+++

Typically those moslems who do want to reform ISLAM, are always accused of the crime of wanting 'innovation',
...i.e. of wanting to change ISLAM.

'Innovation', being the 'guilty' 'code word' used within ISLAM, to accuse and smear, those would reform ISLAM.

From time to time it is observed that some moslems do become critical of some aspect of ISLAM or its laws.

But when the views of a 'reformer' or critic, become widely known within a moslem community, typically such people are assassinated ['lawfully' murdered], by another member of the moslem community.

This follows the example of such punishments, which were instigated by Mohammed;

e.g.
On several occasions within ISLAM's 'religious' texts, it recorded how Mohammad 'enlisted' a fellow moslem, to perform an ISLAMIC 'religious' duty....
.....the murder of a critic of ISLAM.

In the following Hadith, is described, how Mohammad himself [the founder and inventor of ISLAM] secures the political assassination of an enemy of Allah, the powerless God.....

"Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?"....."
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/059.sbt.html#005.059.369

Q.
I ask, how can a man, hurt God ????

Within every Sharia jurisdiction, expressing 'kufur' is a crime, [which unless recanted is] punishable by death.

Google;
islam innovation, reform, is illegal

Within the lawful segment of the ummah, very instance of criticism and scrutiny of ISLAM, is looked upon as kufur [an expression of unbelief] - and as an 'insult' to Allah's religion. [whether from moslems, or non-moslems]

[In the following Koran verse, the term, 'Hypocrites', refers to 'backsliding' moslems]...

"Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? Allah hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, never shalt thou find the Way.
They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-"
Koran 4.88, 89

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Equitist on Jul 4^th, 2011 at 8:39am

Yadda: doing some divisive hatemongering and fearmongering, day in and day out and in the name of doG, to help keep the perpetual war of terror going...

::)

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 4^th, 2011 at 9:07am

leon_the_14 wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 8:24pm:

Quote:

Yes. Islam forbids democracy. A good example of this is the historical Islamic empires, which followed Islamic law and forbade democracy. Why do you need examples of everything?

Care to show where in the Koran it does?

leon,

I consider you to be a duplicitous and less than candid person.

Why do moslems, whenever they are speaking to, and addressing a non-moslem audience, always choose to imply a denial of what their religion really promotes ?

Are moslems so fearful, to reveal what their religion promotes, that they have to conceal it from themselves [their own community], and 'unbelievers' too ???

Do moslems feel that to openly promote, what their religion truly promotes, would be intellectually, indefensible ???
....an so, moslems choose to always misrepresent ISLAM to non-moslems ?

"Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things."
Koran 2.256

Whereas when moslems are addressing moslems.........

e.g.

Quote:

"[a respected moslem community spokesman has] called on Australian Muslims to spurn secular democracy and Western notions of moderate Islam...
...[moslems in Australia were told] 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 [said]"

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

Google;
"Sovereignty Belongs Unconditionally and Always To Allah"

Google;
one cannot be muslim, and secular

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 4^th, 2011 at 9:20am

Equitist wrote on Jul 4^th, 2011 at 8:39am:

Yadda: doing some divisive hatemongering and fearmongering, day in and day out and in the name of doG, to help keep the perpetual war of terror going...

Oh un-equal one,

Show me my error.

What have i said, which is untrue ???

What have i said, above, which is a 'misrepresentation' of ISLAM ???

Oh un-equal one,

This a place of debate, a place where ideas can be tested, and scrutinised.

Debate, is a contest of ideas.

Now please tell me.....

What is the idea, what are the ideas, which ISLAM promotes, which are so meritorious ???

Now is your chance, Oh un-equal one.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 4^th, 2011 at 7:33pm

abu_rashid wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2011 at 11:05pm:

Abu, can you answer leon's question - does Islam allow for democracy?

Quote:

That would just be silly

Stop p!ssing my time away

Yes it would be silly - just as silly as you asking me for an example of Islam opposing democracy.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 5^th, 2011 at 9:53am

Isn't it ironic, Freediver stating that Islam opposes democracy...when he doesn't even know the meaning of the word.

Do you know what 'democracy' means Freediver?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 5^th, 2011 at 6:31pm

It means the will of the majority.

Can you clarify Les? Does Islam oppose democracy?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 6^th, 2011 at 9:33am

freediver wrote on Jul 5^th, 2011 at 6:31pm:

It means the will of the majority.

Can you clarify Les? Does Islam oppose democracy?

bzzt. Wrong. Try again.

When you finally do some research and find out the meaning of 'democracy' (I'll give you a hint....its Greek, and is actually two words)...then perhaps we'll start taking you seriously.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 6^th, 2011 at 9:13pm

Democracy is an English word and when I use it I am speaking English, not ancient Greek. Or Muslim.

So are you also incapable of answering the question Lestat? Does Islam forbid democracy?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lisa on Jul 6^th, 2011 at 11:13pm

Lestat wrote on Jul 6^th, 2011 at 9:33am:

freediver wrote on Jul 5^th, 2011 at 6:31pm:

It means the will of the majority.

Can you clarify Les? Does Islam oppose democracy?

Democracy is a form of government in which all citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Ideally, this includes equal (and more or less direct) participation in the proposal, development and passage of legislation into law. It can also encompass social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination. The term comes from the Greek: δημοκρατία – (dēmokratía) "rule of the people",[1] which was coined from δῆμος (dêmos) "people" and κράτος (Kratos) "power", in the middle of the 5th-4th century BC to denote the political systems then existing in some Greek city-states, notably Athens following a popular uprising in 508 BC.

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

Now answer FD's question and quit the stalling tactics.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 9:21am

wow...if Wiki says it then it must be true. Is this the level of your research Lisa. Do a google search..and trust Wiki. Oh well....I guess its a simple solution for such a simple mind....

Democracy isn't an english word, it is a Greek word FD, and like I said, when you finally do some research and understand what it means, then I'll answer your question.

Besides, you have this delusion that you somehow have a say in the laws of the land. Don't be fooled, you don't!

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 6:57pm

Quote:

Democracy isn't an english word, it is a Greek word FD

No Les. Demokratia, demos and kratos are greek words. Democracy is an English word. I am writing in English. Understand?

Les you are yet to explain why your confusion over what language we are using has rendered you so incapable of answering a simple question. Would it make a difference to your answer, or is this just the standard practice for Muslims confronted with questions that make them feel uncomfortable? Your approach to such questions is remarkably similar to Abus. Do you have a textbook on not answering questions or something?

Does Islam forbid democracy?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lisa on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 7:01pm

Lestat wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 9:21am:

wow...if Wiki says it then it must be true. Is this the level of your research Lisa. Do a google search..and trust Wiki. Oh well....I guess its a simple solution for such a simple mind....

FFS I'm half Greek you idiot. I also have a BA with a double major in Modern Greek and English from Sydney University.

Now quit the stalling tactics .. they're past boring.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Chief on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 7:30pm

Lestat, just because you find a question difficult to answer doesn't mean you should avoid it.
So come on... give it a go.
Does Islam forbid democracy?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 10:10pm

Maybe answers are like virginity in Islam. Once you give it up, you can't take it back.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 8:14am

Chief wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 7:30pm:

Lestat, just because you find a question difficult to answer doesn't mean you should avoid it.

Yes, it does. [...from the perspective of moslems.]

Any truth which does not assist, or further the aims of ISLAM, must not be spoken, must not be acknowledged, by moslems.

Any truth which would bring ISLAM / moslems into 'disrepute', must not be spoken, must not be acknowledged, by moslems.

If a truth does not serve ISLAM's purpose [intended, eventual, local political supremacy], that truth must never be acknowledged by ISLAM / moslems.

Every thing which will tend to empower ISLAM / moslems is 'good' [even falsehoods which promote ISLAM, are 'virtuous'].

But, every thing which brings ISLAM / moslems into critical scrutiny is dismissed, avoided, not acknowledged.

Chief wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 7:30pm:

So come on... give it a go.
Q.
Does Islam forbid democracy?

A.
Yes.

Google;
democracy is kufr

kufr = = unbelief

Moslems regard unbelief as an insult to ISLAM/Allah.

Insulting ISLAM/Allah is punishable by death.

Wilful unbelief is also a crime against ISLAM/Allah.

Again, punishable by death - that is, their unbelief, renders the killing of any 'unbeliever', by any moslem, into 'lawful' act.

Quote:

Use children as troops, says cleric [Sheik Feiz Mohammed]
January 18, 2007
..."We want to have children and offer them as soldiers...Teach them this: There is nothing more beloved to me than wanting to die as a mujahid (holy warrior). Put in their soft, tender hearts the zeal of jihad and a love of martyrdom."
......"The peak, the pinnacle, the crest, the highest point, the pivot, the summit of Islam is jihad," he declares in the film, before denouncing "kaffirs" (non-Muslims).
"Kaffir is the worst word ever written, a sign of infidelity, disbelief, filth, a sign of dirt."

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=94224
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/014863.php

in the article above....
"...Kaffir is the worst word ever written..."

This word, 'Kaffir' is referring to unbelief.

And, it is also referring to those persons who are 'unbelievers'.

+++

"....those who reject Allah have no protector."
Koran 47.008
v. 8-11

"......the curse of Allah is on those without Faith."
Koran 2.089

"....Lo! Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith."
Koran 2.98
[i.e. 'Unbelief' is a crime.]

"...And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah...Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan:.."
Koran 4.74-76
[i.e. Fighting against 'unbelievers' is sanctified, fighting against 'unbelievers' is 'good works'. Because 'unbelievers' [of Allah] are in league with SATAN. So those who are indeed, good moslems will fight against the 'unbelievers'.]

So in those few Koran verses you have,
1/ motive,
2/ justification, and,
3/ sanctification,
of the murder of, and for all acts of moslem violence against all 'unbelievers', everywhere.

But will moslems living within Australia, ever acknowledge, these current moslem beliefs, and ISLAMIC doctrines which justify violence against all 'unbelievers', everywhere ???

Rarely.

In an unguarded moment, perhaps.

But mostly moslems will guard themselves, with their 'shield' of lies and falsehoods, concerning ISLAM's intent.

And so, moslems will continue to seek to misrepresent ISLAM to local non-moslems.

In ISLAM, that is who we are fighting against.

An enemy who will use [in those places where he is still politically weak,] every subterfuge available to him, to hide his intent, his malice, his enmity.

And all the while, he [the moslem] is busy 'teaching' his intended victim, how to best 'accommodate' him, and how they [his host, his intended victim] might better empower him, locally.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 9:30am

Chief wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 7:30pm:

Lestat, just because you find a question difficult to answer doesn't mean you should avoid it.
So come on... give it a go.
Does Islam forbid democracy?

To answer Freediver would be to acknowledge that he is worthy of discussion on this topic, which he definately is not.

Besides...this question has been answered a number of times in the past, by a number of posters. The fact that he is asking it again is telling. He is asking not because he wants to know...he is asking because he thinks he is making a point.

Your new here....but soon you will notice that Freediver is considered somewhat of a joke here, a charlatan...not one to take seriously.

You may also notice that not only I...but no one answers his question anymore, cause we learnt in the past, quite quickly that when we did answer his question, he very quickly replies with absolute nonsence, or he takes your answer, and twists it, to change its very meaning.

You don't know this yet, but don't worry, give it time....you will.

Now, to answer your question (I will give you the benefit of doubt)...that depends...on the meaning of democracy (more important...what it means to you).

If by democracy you mean the right to choose your leaders (which is the incorrect meaning), then Islam has no problem with this, as it occurred under the Islamic state long before the west, where in many instances, the people would choose the Caliph by giving their 'oath' to him. The one who had more bayah (votes), would be chosen as Caliph. Thier is nothing in Islam that forbids muslims from choosing their leaders, that I know of.

But if you mean democracy, by its true meaning, that being 'Law of Man'...then yes, Islam does oppose this, as we do not believe that the Law can or should be changed by the whim of what Man believes at the time.

Democracy, as a system of governance was introduced by the ancient Greeks. Do you honestly believe the system they practised is what is considered 'democracy' today??

Under a true democratic system...the law can be made by one man (dictatorship)....or by many men (parliament/society). In both cases, men are given the ability to create, and destroy laws.

This is a flaw in democracy which has been highlighted by many scholars, many of them non-muslims. If the majority think something to be right....even if it is clearly wrong, then the 'democratic' system will allow this to be so.

To use extremes...if in 100 years or so, people see no problem with killing female babies (like they did in the past), and it becomes the societal norm...under a democratic system (Law of man)...this abhorent act could be legal.

Do you think this is right??

But...in saying that, Islamically, as I am living in another country, I must (I am obligated under shariah law) to follow the laws of the country I live in, as long as it does not make me sin.

Of course, I expect Freediver (and maybe you too...) to completely ignore my last paragraph, to spread his hate and ignorance.

Oh well....

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 9:31am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 7:01pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 9:21am:

wow...if Wiki says it then it must be true. Is this the level of your research Lisa. Do a google search..and trust Wiki. Oh well....I guess its a simple solution for such a simple mind....

FFS I'm half Greek you idiot. I also have a BA with a double major in Modern Greek and English from Sydney University.

Now quit the stalling tactics .. they're past boring.

And you still don't know the meaning of the words 'Democracy'. I suggest you demand your money back for your education...or lack of it.

All those years at Uni, and you still need Wiki to 'educate' you. lol

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 11:39am

Lestat wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 9:30am:

Under a true democratic system...the law can be made by one man (dictatorship)....or by many men (parliament/society). In both cases, men are given the ability to create, and destroy laws.

This is a flaw in democracy which has been highlighted by many scholars, many of them non-muslims.

If the majority think something to be right....even if it is clearly wrong, then the 'democratic' system will allow this to be so.

That is truly a flaw with democracy.

But in a democratic system, citizens are allowed to criticise the current error in a law, and then change it, try to remedy that error.

THAT, is the great virtue which a democratic system has.

It allows self criticism.

WHEREAS,

ISLAM, does not allow self criticism.

ISLAM commonly murders the critics of error and wickedness [error and wickedness being often present, within Sharia jurisdictions], so as to create and maintain a wicked and evil political tyranny, over the governed.

Wherever ISLAM perchance, comes into authority in a land, ISLAM believes that nobody within that jurisdiction should ever again, be allowed to scrutinise or criticise ISLAM.
....on pain of death.

e.g.
"Truly, if the Hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who stir up sedition in the City....whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain (without mercy)."
Koran 33.60,61

Google;
islam, no scrutiny, no freedom of speech, "and those who stir up sedition in the City"iLestat wrote on Jul 8^th, 2011 at 9:30am:

To use extremes...if in 100 years or so, people see no problem with killing female babies (like they did in the past), and it becomes the societal norm...under a democratic system (Law of man)...this abhorent act could be legal.

Do you think this is right??

But...in saying that, Islamically, as I am living in another country, I must (I am obligated under shariah law) to follow the laws of the country I live in, as long as it does not make me sin.

Of course, I expect Freediver (and maybe you too...) to completely ignore my last paragraph, to spread his hate and ignorance.

Oh well....

Lestat,

In the world today, error and wickedness IS GLARINGLY PRESENT, within Sharia jurisdictions, and majority moslem nations.

But moslems NEVER, EVER, NEVER, EVER, criticise the authorities within those Sharia jurisdictions, within those majority moslem nations.

Do you think this is [morally] right??

...that moslems around the world would remain silent, when there is great evil and wickedness and corruption, which is clearly apparent within many majority moslem nations ????

All people like you [moslems], do is come into Western nations, and whine about the errors in Western nations,
....as though majority moslem nations were ISLAMIC paradises.

Western nations are not perfect.

But we are not afraid to be self critical.

Whereas, moslems are terrified of what self criticism, of ISLAM may reveal,
....and so, moslems NEVER, EVER, NEVER, EVER, criticise the errors of ISLAM.

All 'good' moslems are [moral] hypocrites,
...and all 'good' moslems will be condemned, and judged by God.

+++

"Satan makes them promises, and creates in them false desires; but satan's promises are nothing but deception.
They (his dupes) will have their dwelling in Hell, and from it they will find no way of escape."
Koran 4.120

"Then, on the Day of Judgment,.....Then would they offer submission (with the pretence), "We did no evil (knowingly)." (The angels will reply), "Nay, but verily Allah knoweth all that ye did;"
Koran 16.27, 28

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 9^th, 2011 at 9:24am

Quote:

To answer Freediver would be to acknowledge that he is worthy of discussion on this topic, which he definately is not.

What about the topic itself. What about all the people, including Leon who is here trying to defend Islam, who want to know Islam's stance on democracy? Don;t you think they deserved a straight answer about 4 pages back?

Quote:

Besides...this question has been answered a number of times in the past, by a number of posters.

So you could give a simple yes or no answer, but instead you chose to spend a few pages making excuses for not answering? Why? What is it about the answer that makes you so uncomfortable?

Quote:

The fact that he is asking it again is telling. He is asking not because he wants to know...he is asking because he thinks he is making a point.

No Les. I gave the answer. Leon did not believe me. So I suggested he might be more likely to take a Muslim's word for it. All I am after is clarification for Leon's benefit.

Quote:

Thier is nothing in Islam that forbids muslims from choosing their leaders, that I know of.

Are non-Muslims allowed to have any influence, or is this 'twisting' your meaning?

Quote:

But if you mean democracy, by its true meaning, that being 'Law of Man'...then yes, Islam does oppose this, as we do not believe that the Law can or should be changed by the whim of what Man believes at the time.

So the laws are the same, it's just a different person imposing them?

Quote:

But...in saying that, Islamically, as I am living in another country, I must (I am obligated under shariah law) to follow the laws of the country I live in, as long as it does not make me sin.

Of course, I expect Freediver (and maybe you too...) to completely ignore my last paragraph, to spread his hate and ignorance.

Oh well....

Les, have I ever suggested that Islam encourages people to break our laws? Or are you trying to twist my meaning?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 9^th, 2011 at 9:24am

Leon, do you believe me now? What do you think of Islam's stance on democracy?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Mod. on Jul 9^th, 2011 at 10:58pm

freediver wrote on Jul 9^th, 2011 at 9:24am:

Leon, do you believe me now? What do you think of Islam's stance on democracy?

Ha....(not having read the entire Thread) this is a chin sticking out.

Tell me freediver, what do you think of Islam's stance on democracy?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 2:00pm

I oppose any doctrine that rejects democracy. I feel the same way about Islam's stance on personal freedom.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by bobbythebat1 on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 3:00pm

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 2:00pm:

I oppose any doctrine that rejects democracy. I feel the same way about Islam's stance on personal freedom.

I reject any doctrine that wants to force me to believe in
something for which there is no proof.

Carl Sagan

Quote:

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion,
however satisfying and reassuring.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by bobbythebat1 on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 11:25pm

You Islamites should read Carl Sagan's books:

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/s/carl-sagan/

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 9:51am

Bobby. wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 3:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 2:00pm:

I oppose any doctrine that rejects democracy. I feel the same way about Islam's stance on personal freedom.

I reject any doctrine that wants to force me to believe in
something for which there is no proof.

Carl Sagan

Quote:

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion,
however satisfying and reassuring.

Islam does not force anyone to do or believe anything.

The only forcing thats going on is from western secular democracies, who send their armies into countries (Iraq/Afghanistan), and force them to open their markets, give away their resources, and enforce a western secular democratic way of life.

Perhaps you should take a look at what is being done IN YOUR NAME bobby, before having a go at these fantasies which don't exist.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 9:54am

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 2:00pm:

I oppose any doctrine that rejects democracy. I feel the same way about Islam's stance on personal freedom.

I reject any doctrine that rejects Islam. I feel the same way about the wests hypocritical stance on personal freedom.

The french women wearing the Burkha says hi. As does Irving, whilst sitting in an Austrlian jail for daring to deny the holocaust.

What was that about personal freedom??? Is it not a 'personal freedom' to reject democracy if I choose to do so?

Funny hey, for you its ok to reject my doctrine, but I can't reject yours. And you have the nerve to talk about 'personal freedoms'. I look forward to the day you actually practise what you preach!

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by bobbythebat1 on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 11:13am

Lestat wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 9:51am:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 3:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 2:00pm:

I oppose any doctrine that rejects democracy. I feel the same way about Islam's stance on personal freedom.

I reject any doctrine that wants to force me to believe in
something for which there is no proof.

Carl Sagan

Quote:

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion,
however satisfying and reassuring.

Rubbish - they kill non-believers.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 11:53am

Lestat wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 9:54am:

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 2:00pm:

I oppose any doctrine that rejects democracy. I feel the same way about Islam's stance on personal freedom.

....What was that about personal freedom??? Is it not a 'personal freedom' to reject democracy if I choose to do so?

Funny hey, for you its ok to reject my doctrine, but I can't reject yours.

And you have the nerve to talk about 'personal freedoms'. I look forward to the day you actually practise what you preach!

Lestat,

In an open society [which our democratic political system tries to foster], you have a right to choose for yourself, the political system under which you want to live.

Even if that means you moving to a country where a 'religious' tyranny is the political 'norm',
WE WILL ALLOW >> YOU << DO DO THAT.

But, in an open society, in a democratic political system, not you, nor anybody else, has a right to try to IMPOSE a 'religious' political tyranny upon others.

+++

Most of us here in Australia, believe in 'freedom of choice' Lestat.

You clearly believe that 'freedom of choice' means that you, Lestat, and others that believe as you believe, have the right to impose a 'religious' tyranny upon others.

Try it Lestat, just try it.

I dare you.

+++

You claim that you are a moslem Lestat.

That may be true.

But more importantly to me, you are a political fascist Lestat.

Dictionary;
fascism = = an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government.

Dictionary;
authoritarian = = favouring or enforcing strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by bobbythebat1 on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 5:39pm

Bobby. wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 11:25pm:

You Islamites should read Carl Sagan's books:

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/s/carl-sagan/

I wonder if Abu will read one of those books?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm

Quote:

Islam does not force anyone to do or believe anything.

Can you clarify? How do you reconcile this with, for example, the death penalty for apostasy? Is it because people get a choice between death and doing what the Muslims tell them to do?

Quote:

Is it not a 'personal freedom' to reject democracy if I choose to do so?

No one is stopping you. You are free to do as you please, up until your actions begin to deny other people their freedom.

Quote:

Funny hey, for you its ok to reject my doctrine, but I can't reject yours. And you have the nerve to talk about 'personal freedoms'. I look forward to the day you actually practise what you preach!

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by bobbythebat1 on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 11:38pm

Freediver - Logic won't work on these guys.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 9:48am

Bobby. wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 11:13am:

Lestat wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 9:51am:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 3:00pm:

freediver wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 2:00pm:

I oppose any doctrine that rejects democracy. I feel the same way about Islam's stance on personal freedom.

I reject any doctrine that wants to force me to believe in
something for which there is no proof.

Carl Sagan

Quote:

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion,
however satisfying and reassuring.

Rubbish - they kill non-believers.

Actually, it is you that is full of rubbish.

Last I checked it was non-muslim armies in Afghanistan and Iraq, that were killing muslims.

And when muslims defend themselves, you whine like the b(tch you are, complaining that muslims are 'killing non-muslims'.

Well here's an idea, how bout you stop invading our lands, raping our woman, and killing our civilians.

Its been going on for over a century...I suggest you go out and learn a thing or two about the meddling of western powers in the middle east, and the pain and suffering it has caused.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 10:03am

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Can you clarify? How do you reconcile this with, for example, the death penalty for apostasy? Is it because people get a choice between death and doing what the Muslims tell them to do?

lol, this is the problem with discussing anything with you. Time and time you are corrected, yet you come up with the same lies, repeated again and again. Its like you aim to beat people into boredom with your repetitive nonsense.

Apostasy laws in Islam are to do with treason, just as the US and many countries in the west also punish treason with death. But I don't expect someone with your limited abilities to understand.

And whats there to clarify. Tell me, who in Australia has ever been forced to practise Islam. Do you have any examples.

Who in Australia has ever received the death penalty for 'apostasy'..as you put it.

In fact, of the 2 billion muslims world wide, can you tell me in the last decade, how many have been given the death penalty for 'apostasy'.

The ironic thing is only 2 or 3 countries in the world actually enforce this law, and even then, very rarely, yet you continously bring this up. And you wonder why we don't take you seriously.

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

No one is stopping you. You are free to do as you please, up until your actions begin to deny other people their freedom.

So whats your problem with Islam and muslims in Australia then?

Are we not just practising what you have stated is our 'democratic rights'. Or do non-muslims in Australia have more rights then muslims?

By attacking Islam in Australia, are you not really attacking the right, for a muslims to have a different opinion then yours?

Besides, do you have any examples of this, where in Australia muslims have denied other people their freedom.

On the contrary, in the west it is non-muslims that are denying the freedoms of muslims. I don't think you need me to provide examples. You know what I am talking.

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Not true. Under Islamic law, the penalty for rejecting Islam is death, regardless of the implications for national security.

No Freediver, Under islamic law, the penalty for treason is death. Why do you keep peddling these lies?

India was under Islamic rule for hundreds of years, yet the majority of the population is still Hindu. Yes, Hindu's who rejected Islam.

Egypt still has a sizeable Christian minority, as do many arab countries. If your lies were true, they would not exist (much like the destruction of South American Indian culture by Christian Spain).

THe fact that their are many churches and synagogues in lands formuly ruled by Islam, is proof that your lies are just that...lies.

Christians/Jews/Hindu's, as well as African peoples all rejected Islam, yet flourished under its rule.

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Under Australian law, the converse is not true. You are given extraordinary freedom in comparison.

I somehow suspect that this would change if you and some others here got their way. Luckily enough, at the moment, you are but a minority of ignorance.

If you became a majority, and this changed, this would highlight the flaws of democracy.

If the majority believe something, it does not make it right.

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

The hypocrisy is all yours Les. You complain that we criticise the stupid things you say. You claim it limits your freedom. Yet you would replace it with a system where people would be killed for speaking their mind.

lol, there you go, lieing again. Please, show me where I said that 'it limits my freedom'. A quote will suffice.

Once again, you make something up to support your argument, why am I not surprised.

And under Islam, people are not killed for speaking their minds. Once again, another lie to cover up the fact that your argument is devoid of facts and substance.

Actually, ironic you bring this up, given that in this age, people in the west are locked away with no charge, merely for what they say, and not what they do.

But hey, we'll turn a blind eye to that....won't we FD?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 10:04am

Bobby. wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 5:39pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 10^th, 2011 at 11:25pm:

You Islamites should read Carl Sagan's books:

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/s/carl-sagan/

I wonder if Abu will read one of those books?

How bout you just read 'a book' Bobby. Do some research in regards to what the western governments have done in the middle east in the 20th century.

Its time your learnt a thing or two.

Your governments have been killing non-muslims for much of the 20th century, stealing our resources, oppressing our people.

Do humans not have the right to resist tyranny?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 10:35am

Bobby. wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 11:38pm:

Freediver - Logic won't work on these guys.

My whole purpose in criticising ISLAM, is that i want to confront everyday moslems with what ISLAM really promotes.

I want to reveal to moslems, those aspects of ISLAM, which reveal ISLAM as a vicious and violent [un-reformable] political tyranny.

I, or anyone else, can confront those who call themselves moslems, with the contents of ISLAM's own foundation texts, and, confront those who call themselves moslems with the vicious and violent conduct of many moslems [often living within majority moslem nations] towards non-moslems.

But those who call themselves moslems, will always refuse to acknowledge those truths [evidences] about ISLAM, about what ISLAM is inspiring, within those who call themselves moslems.

Often times, those very same people who call themselves good moslems, will be overheard [speaking among themselves] praising and justifying examples of moslem violence against non-moslems [while publicly disassociating themselves from such violence].

And those moslems [the ones who are confronted with evidences], will proceed to make 'motherhood' statements and claims, about what the 'real' ISLAM promotes, and is trying to achieve in the world.

But all of the time, those moslems [who are confronted with evidences], will reject every piece of objective evidence which does not conform to, and support, their own 'romanticised' idea of what ISLAM is, or is trying to achieve in the world.

Why so ?

Q.
Why can't those who call themselves moslems, acknowledge the truths [objective evidences] about ISLAM ???

A.
Moslems are not rational people.

A.
Moslems 'present' as people who are not interested [at all] in confronting objective truths, when those objective truths contradict what ISLAM has taught them.

e.g.

Lestat wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 9:51am:

Islam does not force anyone to do or believe anything.

The conclusion that i have come to, is that in their dealings with all non-moslems, moslems are not sincere people.

And very intentionally so.

Google;
taqiyya - the muslim doctrine of deceit

Google;
we smile to the face "while our hearts curse them"

A Study in Muslim Doctrine
"...while sincere friendship with non-Muslims is forbidden, insincere friendship - whenever beneficial to Muslims - is not."
http://www.meforum.org/2512/nidal-hasan-fort-hood-muslim-doctrine

+++

"If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him;...."
Koran 3.85

"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

ISLAMIC supremacism is promoted within ISLAM's primary foundation text....

"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

ISLAM calls on all moslems to engage in holy war with all 'unbelievers'.

In engaging in holy war with all 'unbelievers', ISLAM 'sanctifies' all moslems as righteous people...

"Ye [muslims] are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah. If only the People of the Book had faith, it were best for them: among them are some who have faith, but most of them are perverted transgressors."
Koran 3.110

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lisa on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 11:55am

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Quote:

Islam does not force anyone to do or believe anything.

Can you clarify? How do you reconcile this with, for example, the death penalty for apostasy? Is it because people get a choice between death and doing what the Muslims tell them to do?

[quote]Is it not a 'personal freedom' to reject democracy if I choose to do so?

No one is stopping you. You are free to do as you please, up until your actions begin to deny other people their freedom.

Quote:

Funny hey, for you its ok to reject my doctrine, but I can't reject yours. And you have the nerve to talk about 'personal freedoms'. I look forward to the day you actually practise what you preach!

Not true. Under Islamic law, the penalty for rejecting Islam is death, regardless of the implications for national security. Under Australian law, the converse is not true. You are given extraordinary freedom in comparison.

The hypocrisy is all yours Les. You complain that we criticise the stupid things you say. You claim it limits your freedom. Yet you would replace it with a system where people would be killed for speaking their mind.[/quote]

Well put.

Tis a pity the message will probably fail to get through .. again.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 1:10pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 11:55am:

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Quote:

Islam does not force anyone to do or believe anything.

No one is stopping you. You are free to do as you please, up until your actions begin to deny other people their freedom.

[quote]Funny hey, for you its ok to reject my doctrine, but I can't reject yours. And you have the nerve to talk about 'personal freedoms'. I look forward to the day you actually practise what you preach!

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lisa on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 2:02pm

Lestat wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 1:10pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 11:55am:

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Quote:

Islam does not force anyone to do or believe anything.

Well put.

Tis a pity the message will probably fail to get through .. again.[/quote]

Do you ever actually have anything to contribute ... [/quote]

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 6:55pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 9:26am:

Did you cum in your pants when you read this article? Be honest?

:D

This disgusting post sums up Lestat quite well.

We ought to keep it in mind whenever we see him post.

Speaking of contributions ..

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 2:33pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 1:10pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 11:55am:

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Quote:

Islam does not force anyone to do or believe anything.

Well put.

Tis a pity the message will probably fail to get through .. again.

Do you ever actually have anything to contribute ... [/quote]

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 6:55pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 9:26am:

Did you cum in your pants when you read this article? Be honest?

:D

This disgusting post sums up Lestat quite well.

We ought to keep it in mind whenever we see him post.

Speaking of contributions ..[/quote]

No less then you deserve.....

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 3:10pm

Lestat wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 10:03am:

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

An example of how, "under Islam, people are not killed for speaking their minds."

And an example of the degree to which, people living within Sharia jurisdictions, are free to speak their minds.

Quote:

Atheist living under Palestinian Authority still in jail for "defaming Islam" on Internet

"Rights groups have criticized his arrest as a demonstration of the limits on free speech under the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, which has trawled Internet sites like Facebook as part of a crackdown on dissent and unpopular views.
...Days after his arrest, shocked [local] residents called for him to be killed as a warning to others."

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/12/atheist-living-under-palestinian-authority-jailed-for-defaming-islam.html

As far as i know, this person has not been killed, yet.

This person has only been threatened with death, for expressing an opinion critical of ISLAM.

So it would be ridiculous to suggest that this person would at all be frightened of expressing his opinion of ISLAM, in the future.
/sarc off

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 3:40pm

Yadda wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 3:10pm:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/12/atheist-living-under-palestinian-authority-jailed-for-defaming-islam.html

SUPPLEMENTAL....

Google;
wiki Walid Husayin

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lisa on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 3:49pm

Lestat wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 2:33pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 1:10pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 11:55am:

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Quote:

Islam does not force anyone to do or believe anything.

Well put.

Tis a pity the message will probably fail to get through .. again.

Do you ever actually have anything to contribute ...

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 6:55pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 9:26am:

Did you cum in your pants when you read this article? Be honest?

:D

This disgusting post sums up Lestat quite well.

We ought to keep it in mind whenever we see him post.

Speaking of contributions ..[/quote]

No less then you deserve.....[/quote]

Lestat .. that comment only makes you look worse than ever.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 3:56pm

You know Lestat, my God is not afraid of people who do not believe in him.

He just says that such people are dumb.

+++

Lestat,

Why is your God, Allah, so, so, afraid of people who do not believe in him ???

Is he afraid that they may hurt him ???

In the following Hadith, is described, how Mohammad himself secures the political assassination of an enemy of Allah, the powerless, hurt, God.....

"Allah's Apostle said, "Who is willing to kill Ka'b bin Al-Ashraf who has hurt Allah and His Apostle?"....."
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/hadith/bukhari/059.sbt.html#005.059.369

Q.
I ask, how can a man, hurt God ????

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 13^th, 2011 at 9:27am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 3:49pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 2:33pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 2:02pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 1:10pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 11:55am:

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Quote:

Islam does not force anyone to do or believe anything.

Well put.

Tis a pity the message will probably fail to get through .. again.

Do you ever actually have anything to contribute ...

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 6:55pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 7^th, 2011 at 9:26am:

Did you cum in your pants when you read this article? Be honest?

:D

This disgusting post sums up Lestat quite well.

We ought to keep it in mind whenever we see him post.

Speaking of contributions ..

No less then you deserve.....[/quote]

Lestat .. that comment only makes you look worse than ever.[/quote]

Coming from you, and the disgusting human being you have shown yourself to be, I'll take that as a compliment.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lisa on Jul 13^th, 2011 at 9:33pm

Lestat .. given your blatant disrespect for yourself as well as the revolting manner in which you disregard women .. your latest vomitous contribution has proven what many of us have always suspected: you're beyond redemption.

Then again .. vile creatures like yourself have always been so.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:59am

Lestat,

In defence of ISLAM and Sharia, do you count ISLAMIC rape laws as being just ???

In defence of ISLAM.

"Pakistani Islamic party leader: a woman should not report rape unless she has four witnesses"
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/07/pakistani-islamic-party-leader-a-woman-should-not-report-rape-unless-she-has-four-witnesses.html

In Sharia jurisdictions, when a woman is raped, Sharia law requires that the woman must produce four >>MALE<< witnesses before a charge is brought against the rapist.
TRUE!

+++

Further, under ISLAMIC inheritance law.
Any daughter receives 1/2 the entitlement of any male heir.
e.g.
Where there is a son, and a daughter, to inherit an estate.
The estate is divided into 3 parts.
The son receives 2 parts.
The daughter receives 1 part.
TRUE!

"Allah (thus) directs you as regards your Children's (Inheritance): to the male, a portion equal to that of two females: if only daughters, two or more, their share is two-thirds of the inheritance; if only one, her share is a half...."
Koran 4.11

And do you agree Lestat, with Mohammed and Allah, that women are "deficient in intelligence", and that they are unreliable witnesses [i.e. women are liable to tell untruths..... "A racist policeman tried to tear off my burqa!!!!!" ] ????

"Once Allah's Apostle went out to the Musalla (to offer the prayer) o 'Id-al-Adha or Al-Fitr prayer. Then he passed by the women and said, "O women! Give alms, as I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-fire were you (women)." They asked, "Why is it so, O Allah's Apostle ?" He replied, "You curse frequently and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. A cautious sensible man could be led astray by some of you." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion." "
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #001.006.301

"On 'Id ul Fitr or 'Id ul Adha Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) went out to the Musalla. After finishing the prayer, he delivered the sermon and ordered the people to give alms. He said, "O people! Give alms." Then he went towards the women and said. "O women! Give alms, for I have seen that the majority of the dwellers of Hell-Fire were you (women)." The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is the reason for it?" He replied, "O women! You curse frequently, and are ungrateful to your husbands. I have not seen anyone more deficient in intelligence and religion than you. O women, some of you can lead a cautious wise man astray." Then he left. And when he reached his house, Zainab, the wife of Ibn Masud, came and asked permission to enter It was said, "O Allah's Apostle! It is Zainab." He asked, 'Which Zainab?" The reply was that she was the wife of Ibn Mas'ub. He said, "Yes, allow her to enter." And she was admitted. Then she said, "O Prophet of Allah! Today you ordered people to give alms and I had an ornament and intended to give it as alms, but Ibn Masud said that he and his children deserved it more than anybody else." The Prophet replied, "Ibn Masud had spoken the truth. Your husband and your children had more right to it than anybody else." "
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #002.024.541

Coz they [women] are all pathological liars.

They just cannot help themselves.

True Lestat ????

"A racist policeman tried to tear off my burqa!!!!!"

Google;
Carnita Matthews false complaint against racist Sydney policeman

I don't believe that it is women Lestat, who are pathological [i.e. they cannot help themselves] liars.

I believe it is all moslems, who are the pathological liars.

Google;
taqiyya - the muslim doctrine of deceit

Google;
we smile to the face "while our hearts curse them"

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 9:34am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 13^th, 2011 at 9:33pm:

lol, don't mistake disrespect for myself with disrespect for you. Its you Lisa, and I notice I am not alone in this regards.

And I don't disregard women, I disregard 'YOU'. Don't you get it, it is you that is the disgusting human being...you, not women, not anyone else, but YOU.

So I suggest you get off your high horse, and take a long hard look at yourself, and ask yourself why and how you became the disgusting human being that you now are.

When did you become a racist bigot? Your parents must be ashamed!

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 9:45am

Lestat wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 9:34am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 13^th, 2011 at 9:33pm:

Lisa,

I hope that you will not reply to Lestat.

She is just baiting you.

+++

Proverbs 15:28
The heart of the righteous studieth to answer: but the mouth of the wicked poureth out evil things.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lisa on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 11:09am

Yadda wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 9:45am:

Lestat wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 9:34am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 13^th, 2011 at 9:33pm:

Lisa,

I hope that you will not reply to Lestat.

She is just baiting you.

+++

Proverbs 15:28
The heart of the righteous studieth to answer: but the mouth of the wicked poureth out evil things.

Well said Yadda! In any event I've already thrown enough of my pearls before this troll baiting swine.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm

Quote:

Apostasy laws in Islam are to do with treason

They are also to do with apostasy. The fact that Islam requires a religious state may give it national security implications in extreme cases, but this does not change the fact that Islam imposes the death penalty for apostasy.

Quote:

just as the US and many countries in the west also punish treason with death

Maybe, but they do not punish apostasy with death. Can you see the difference?

Quote:

And whats there to clarify. Tell me, who in Australia has ever been forced to practise Islam. Do you have any examples.

Yet another weak attempt at diversion. This thread is about Islam, not Australian law.

Quote:

In fact, of the 2 billion muslims world wide, can you tell me in the last decade, how many have been given the death penalty for 'apostasy'.

If I did, wouldn;t you just complain that it was not a proper Islamic state so it does not count anyway?

Quote:

The ironic thing is only 2 or 3 countries in the world actually enforce this law, and even then, very rarely, yet you continously bring this up. And you wonder why we don't take you seriously.

I bring it up because it is part of Islam, which is what we are discussing.

Quote:

So whats your problem with Islam and muslims in Australia then?

I have made it very clear what my problem with Islam is. You are trying very deperately to change the topic to anything but Islam.

Quote:

By attacking Islam in Australia, are you not really attacking the right, for a muslims to have a different opinion then yours?

You are confusing the right to have an opinion with the right to promote evil ideologies without criticism.

Quote:

No Freediver, Under islamic law, the penalty for treason is death. Why do you keep peddling these lies?

Abu and Malik said it is true. So far you cannot bring yourself to deny that islam imposes death for apostasy, only to try to change the subject.

Quote:

I somehow suspect that this would change if you and some others here got their way.

Then you misunderstand what I am saying. I suggest you stick to what I actually say, not what you imagine my 'real intentions' are.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:27pm

Les, if you are so sure of yourself, perhaps you can tell everyone what the death penalty is for apostasy under Islam. I suggest you start by looking up what Islam considers apostasy to be, as you seem a bit confused.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 8:46am

Lestat wrote on Jul 12^th, 2011 at 10:03am:

freediver wrote on Jul 11^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

Can you clarify? How do you reconcile this with, for example, the death penalty for apostasy? Is it because people get a choice between death and doing what the Muslims tell them to do?

.....And whats there to clarify.

Tell me, who in Australia has ever been forced to practise Islam.

Do you have any examples.

Who in Australia has ever received the death penalty for 'apostasy'..as you put it.

Plenty of people, and in Australia.

Lestat,

LIVING WITHIN A COUNTRY LIKE AUSTRALIA, WHICH MOSLEMS CHOOSE TO DO....

Once we reach the age of majority [i.e. adulthood], in a society like Australia, shouldn't we be allowed to make [life] decisions for ourselves ?

Yet many moslem parents, and many members of the moslem community, will try to intimidate, and will sometimes persecute, and will sometimes MURDER, the children of moslems [who have reached majority].

Because they, as adults, have chosen, in an open society, to discard ISLAM as a life philosophy.

Isn't this [moslem violence, in Western nations, against ex-moslems] a direct attempt to force people [in countries like Australia, non-moslem countries] to practice ISLAM ???

And isn't ISLAM directly responsible for this moslem violence, in a country like Australia ???

Why not ???

Google;
australia muslim honour killings

Google;
uk muslim honour killings

Google;
uk ex muslim persecution violence

n.b.
The term 'honour killing' is a misnomer.

That term, has been adopted within the Western mainstream media, imo, to avoid directly associating the murder of moslem apostates, with ISLAM, by NOT directly calling these people [the victims of moslem violence, in Western nations], "a person murdered as a moslem apostate".

+++

The Hadith,
"...If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him."
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.260

Ultimately, you [good moslems] are going to get, exactly what you give Lestat.

Suck it up Lestat.

Ultimately, you are, what you choose.

You choose ISLAM.

You will have it, for all of eternity.

ISLAM = = submission, bondage, SLAVERY.

+++

Yadda said.....

LIVING WITHIN A COUNTRY LIKE AUSTRALIA, WHICH MOSLEMS CHOOSE TO DO....

Isaiah 26:10
Let favour be shewed to the wicked, yet will he not learn righteousness: in the land of uprightness will he deal unjustly, and will not behold the majesty of the LORD.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 9:50am

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

For the upteenth time, no Freediver, they are to do with treason. Many scholars have clarified apostasy laws, and said the same. Yet we are to believe that you know better then them. Righteo.

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

Maybe, but they do not punish apostasy with death. Can you see the difference?

No, their is no difference, because in Islam the apostasy laws ARE to do with treason.

I'm beginning to sound like a broken record. If your not going to accept our answers Freediver, then really, why do you bother asking.

And you wonder why we don't take you seriously.

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

Yet another weak attempt at diversion. This thread is about Islam, not Australian law.

Actually its not a diversion at all. Actually it is you who is diverting.

You say your opposed to Islam in Australia, and one of the reasons you trumpet is the apostasy laws. Yet you cannot name one example where muslims in Australia, have executed a killing due to apostasy.

You full of nothing but hot air.

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

If I did, wouldn;t you just complain that it was not a proper Islamic state so it does not count anyway?

No...I would highlight that it is such a small issue anyway that it is irrelevant.

It is the equivelant of rejecting Christianity in Australia because of abortion clinic bombings!

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

I bring it up because it is part of Islam, which is what we are discussing.

The death penalty for treason is a part of Islam, as it is a part of many countries laws.

What you are discussing isn't a part of Islam, except in your twisted hate filled mind.

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

I have made it very clear what my problem with Islam is. You are trying very deperately to change the topic to anything but Islam.

Yes you have, it has more to do with bigotry then anything else. You say you have a problem with any idealogy that infringes on 'personal freedoms'...yet seems you are to thick to realise that all laws, in some way...infringe on personal freedoms. That is the point of having laws.

I'm sure that there are plenty of Australians out there who smoke (or would like to) marijuana...aren't there 'personal freedoms' being infringed upon?

Oh...I get it...its only when Islam infringes on 'personal freedoms' which you have a problem with. Its ok for any other idealogy or set of laws to do so...but just not Islam.

Like I said...bigotry freediver.....

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

You are confusing the right to have an opinion with the right to promote evil ideologies without criticism.

But your opinion is an evil ideology (bigotry), and no one is talking about the right for you to criticize.

'Evil idealogy' is rather subjective....isn't it. As I said, I and many others would see your ideology as 'evil'. But you still have the right to express your opinions...are you not.

Just not enforce it, like western armies are in muslims lands enforcing their evil idealogies....

As for criticism....criticize all you like, no one takes you seriously or pays any attention.

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

Abu and Malik said it is true.

Really....care to provide a quote?

Its not the first time that you have lied, claiming that Abu has said things that he never said. And every time you are asked to provide evidence....you mysteriously disapear.

I suspect this instance is no different....

Besides, last I checked neither Abu or Malik are scholars, or experts in shariah law. I'll take the ruling of the scholars thanks...

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

So far you cannot bring yourself to deny that islam imposes death for apostasy, only to try to change the subject.

Really.... [/quote]

lol...are you really this thick...or just pretending. I've answered you rather clearly. In Islam, the apostacy law relates to treason....nearly all the reputable scholars in Islam have said so.

I've told you this a number of times, Abu has told you this (even though you lie and say otherwise)...yet still your thick head cannot or does not want to accept this.

Like I said, why ask us if you will not accept out answer. You ask questions, wanting to hear what your bigotted minds wants to hear.

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

Then you misunderstand what I am saying. I suggest you stick to what I actually say, not what you imagine my 'real intentions' are.

I understand exactly what you are saying....fortunately for us muslims, you lack the courage to act on your convictions.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 9:52am

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:27pm:

lol...listen to yourself. Your losing the plot...your actually asking me a question, in which you answer in the same very question your asking.

'Can tell everyone what the death penalty is for apostasy under Islam.'

lol...what the death penalty is for apostasy under Islam. hehe....lets see if your small ignorant mind can see what the problem with your question is.

I await with baited breath....

If your interested (which I suspect you are not) I suggest you do some reading.

http://apostasyandislam.blogspot.com/

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 10:02am

Lestat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 9:50am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

For the upteenth time, no Freediver, they are to do with treason.

Many scholars have clarified apostasy laws, and said the same. Yet we are to believe that you know better then them. Righteo.

Which just confirms what i have been stating for many years;

The West, all Western nations, should recognise that ISLAM is a political entity, and so, should treat ISLAM as a political entity.

And NOT as a religious entity.

ISLAM is, the political party of Allah, most gracious, most merciful.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 10:17am

Lestat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 9:50am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

Maybe, but they do not punish apostasy with death. Can you see the difference?

No, their is no difference, because in Islam the apostasy laws ARE to do with treason.

Wake up sleepers!!!

ISLAM is...The political party of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful, masquerading as a 'religion'.

Duh.

Dictionary,
religion = =
1 the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods. Ø a particular system of faith and worship.
2 a pursuit or interest followed with devotion.

Typically, 'religion' is understood to be the devotion to, and the worship of, a God.

Religion, does not justify the murder of all who would resist your WORLDLY, POLITICAL influence.

But ISLAM does justify the murder of all who would resist its WORLDLY, POLITICAL influence.

And that is why ISLAM is primarily a political ideology.

Which is focused intently on the generation of hatred, towards, and against, anyone who demonstrates any resistance to its political influence and authority.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 10:29am

Lestat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 9:50am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

I bring it up because it is part of Islam, which is what we are discussing.

The death penalty for treason is a part of Islam, as it is a part of many countries laws.

What you are discussing isn't a part of Islam, except in your twisted hate filled mind.

What i wrote on OzPol, back in 2008;

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1226196753/0#0
ISLAM is a facade, of falsehood and lies.

If you study ISLAM just a little, you will discover that ISLAM *behaves* in the world, it acts the part, of a violent, supremacist *political* philosophy.

ISLAM cloaks itself, indeed VEILS itself, behind the word 'RELIGION'.

In truth, ISLAM is fascism.

Dictionary,
fascism = = an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government.

ISLAM is a totalitarian 'government' system.

ISLAM is a system of laws.

ISLAM is about war fighting, it is a philosophy of lies, deception, of accumulating the booty of this world.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 10:40am

Lestat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 9:50am:

freediver wrote on Jul 14^th, 2011 at 7:25pm:

I have made it very clear what my problem with Islam is. You are trying very deperately to change the topic to anything but Islam.

Yes you have, it has more to do with bigotry then anything else.

You say you have a problem with any idealogy that infringes on 'personal freedoms'...yet seems you are to thick to realise that all laws, in some way...infringe on personal freedoms. That is the point of having laws.

I'm sure that there are plenty of Australians out there who smoke (or would like to) marijuana...aren't there 'personal freedoms' being infringed upon?

Oh...I get it...its only when Islam infringes on 'personal freedoms' which you have a problem with. Its ok for any other idealogy or set of laws to do so...but just not Islam.

Like I said...bigotry freediver.....

Bigotry ???

LOL

That is a case of the pot calling the kettle, if ever there was one.

+++

Bigotry ???

"THE RIGHT TO JUDGE"
"It is not the function of Islam to compromise with the concepts of Jahiliyya which are current in the world or to co-exist in the same land together with a jahili system........"
by SAYYID QUTB
http://www.islamworld.net/justice.html

Did you get that ???

Co-existence, with what is not ISLAMIC, is out!

Dictionary,
bigot = = a person who is intolerant of the opinions of others.

'Jahiliyya' [above] = = [un-ISLAMIC] lifestyle

Jahiliyya is a result of the lack of Sharia law,

"....Jahiliyya is a result of the lack of Sharia law, without which Islam cannot exist;"
"...true Islam is a complete system with no room for any element of Jahiliyya"
"...all aspects of Jahiliyya...are "evil and corrupt" "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahiliyya#Jahiliyya_in_contemporary_society

The 'Jahiliyya' [un-ISLAMIC] lifestyle is totally incompatible with ISLAM,
....in fact, to devout moslems, the mere existence of non-moslem communities is viewed as insulting to the authority of ISLAM.
You see, moslems [in their own eyes] are superior, and 'deserve' to have 'authority', to rule the whole world, for Allah.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 1:11pm

Can someone please turn the spam bot off, its becoming annoying.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 7:57pm

Les, can you explain why Abu thinks apostasy is a capital offence?

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 9^th, 2008 at 7:44pm:

Quote:

What is that again? I think there was some abiguity last time we touched on that.

Not from me, perhaps with Malik. Apostasy is a capital offense.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 9:58am

freediver wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 7:57pm:

Les, can you explain why Abu thinks apostasy is a capital offence?

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 9^th, 2008 at 7:44pm:

Quote:

What is that again? I think there was some abiguity last time we touched on that.

Not from me, perhaps with Malik. Apostasy is a capital offense.

Also, it was my understanding, probably from Abu or Malik, that this only applied to Muslims who reject Islam, not to people who were never a Muslim. Hence my query regarding definition take on apostasy.

[quote]Yes you have, it has more to do with bigotry then anything else. You say you have a problem with any idealogy that infringes on 'personal freedoms'...yet seems you are to thick to realise that all laws, in some way...infringe on personal freedoms. That is the point of having laws.

There is an important difference here Les. Living with other people infringes your freedom, because certain freedoms become incompatible. The difference is that some people want to design laws to protect personal freedom and only limit it to protect the rights and freedoms of others, whereas other ideologies (eg Islam) simply do away with freedom altogether. The inability to protect absolute freedom in a complex society does not mean that all legal systems treat freedom the same.[/quote]

lol, deliberately misquoting to support your lies. How pathetic Freediver. Why don't you post a link to the whole thread, so everyone can see your lies for what they are. Oh right...didn't think so.

Besides, do you think I am the spokesperson for Abu and Malik? Why don't you ask them.

I provided you a link, and have told you what I, as a muslim believe, and showed you that many muslims believe the same, yet you continue with the same lies.

Like I said, if anyone ever needed proof of why we don't take you seriously...then you need look no futher then here.

As for the rest of your double standard crap...like seriously, I find it rather boring and shallow...to say the least.

Tell me once again...how is smoking Marijuana...incompatible with your freedoms, and how does banning it 'protect the rights and freedoms of others'.

You see Freediver, you are so blind in your ignorance, that you cannot see Islam and Shariah law plays the exact same role as common law. Its just that we muslims have different values then you. We have different ethics, where you don't have them at all. For example, you feel its ok to ship your elderley off to homes, neglect them, ignore them and visit once or twice a year...in a shallow attempt to show you care. We on the other hand find this sort of thing abhorrent.

You think its fine for men and woman get stupidly drunk on a weekly basis, find a random partner and like animals, have sex with complete strangers. We find this rather barbaric.

So we have laws against these things. Just as you have laws against smoking Marijuana...as society see's this as unacceptable.

in what constitutes 'protect the rights and freedoms of others'.

Your double standards are staggering, and your failure to see those double standards is evidence of your lack of insight.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lisa on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 11:21am

Lestat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 1:11pm:

Can someone please turn the spam bot off, its becoming annoying.

What spam bot?? You mean the truth??

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 11:31am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 11:21am:

Lestat wrote on Jul 15^th, 2011 at 1:11pm:

Can someone please turn the spam bot off, its becoming annoying.

What spam bot?? You mean the truth??

well well, if it isn't the bimbo cheerleader who's arrived. Do you have your pom poms today??

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 7:49pm

Quote:

Why don't you post a link to the whole thread, so everyone can see your lies for what they are. Oh right...didn't think so.

I did Les.

Quote:

Besides, do you think I am the spokesperson for Abu and Malik?

When I previously suggested Abu supports the death penalty for apostasy, you accused me of lying and demanded I quote him. So I did.

Quote:

I provided you a link, and have told you what I, as a muslim believe, and showed you that many muslims believe the same, yet you continue with the same lies.

What lies exactly? If muslims like Abu consider you an apostate for having a different opinion, how is that going to help you if they ever get their way?

Quote:

You see Freediver, you are so blind in your ignorance, that you cannot see Islam and Shariah law plays the exact same role as common law. Its just that we muslims have different values then you.

Duh, why do you think I called the wiki page "Islam and Australian values"? We value freedom, you value the everyone's submission to your ideology. Right?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Aug 7^th, 2011 at 3:06pm

Les? Do you still think I was misquoting Abu on apostasy?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Sappho on Aug 7^th, 2011 at 4:25pm

Lestat wrote on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 9:58am:

You see Freediver, you are so blind in your ignorance, that you cannot see Islam and Shariah law plays the exact same role as common law.

The rules governing Apostasy in Islam are derived from the Hadiths and not Sharia. The Qur'an itself has no earthly punishment for apostasy against Islamic faith. This is why the penalties are so varied from the death penalty to no action at all.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Aug 8^th, 2011 at 9:16am

freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2011 at 3:06pm:

Les? Do you still think I was misquoting Abu on apostasy?

Yes Freediver, and you know you are. I'll ask again, why don't you post a link to the thread you posted...or are you afraid everyone will see you for the liar you are.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Aug 8^th, 2011 at 9:17am

Sappho wrote on Aug 7^th, 2011 at 4:25pm:

Lestat wrote on Jul 19^th, 2011 at 9:58am:

You see Freediver, you are so blind in your ignorance, that you cannot see Islam and Shariah law plays the exact same role as common law.

Sharia law is mostly derived from the Hadiths...so I'm not sure what your point is.

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Aug 9^th, 2011 at 4:03pm

Lestat wrote on Aug 8^th, 2011 at 9:16am:

freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2011 at 3:06pm:

Les? Do you still think I was misquoting Abu on apostasy?

Yes Freediver, and you know you are. I'll ask again, why don't you post a link to the thread you posted...or are you afraid everyone will see you for the liar you are.

Like I already said, I posted the link with the quote. I did not alter the quote in any way and I do not believe it misrepresents his views in any way. Why are you being so slow on this?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Lestat on Aug 10^th, 2011 at 9:46am

freediver wrote on Aug 9^th, 2011 at 4:03pm:

Lestat wrote on Aug 8^th, 2011 at 9:16am:

freediver wrote on Aug 7^th, 2011 at 3:06pm:

Les? Do you still think I was misquoting Abu on apostasy?

Yes Freediver, and you know you are. I'll ask again, why don't you post a link to the thread you posted...or are you afraid everyone will see you for the liar you are.

Like I already said, I posted the link with the quote. I did not alter the quote in any way and I do not believe it misrepresents his views in any way. Why are you being so slow on this?

Slow? Why are you such a liar. Like do you not have any shame?

You did not provide a link to the thread, despite me asking you to do so twice now.

And now you claim that you did provide a link...even though anyone can quite easily take a look at the page before this one and see that you did not.

This, plus the fact that the debate has never been about the punishment of apostasy, but in fact the question of what apostasy laws relate to, just once again shows what kind of a moron you really are.

But you already know that don't you Freediver....you can do no more then resort to taking abu out of context, and then use it to make a point...when ironically it has very little to do with what we were arguing about in the first place.

Or perhaps you can tell me what exactly is Abu's out of context quote got to do with me telling you (and providing evidence) that the apostasy laws in Islam, and its punishment relates to 'treason'.

'Treason'...do you get it, or do you need me to dumb it down for you further.

Sheesh, your ignorance can sometimes be so fustrating to deal with. Why do you just wear people down with your stupidity? Is this all you can rely upon?

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by Yadda on Aug 10^th, 2011 at 11:09am

Lestat wrote on Aug 10^th, 2011 at 9:46am:

......This, plus the fact that the debate has never been about the punishment of apostasy, but in fact the question of what apostasy laws relate to, just once again shows what kind of a moron you really are.

But you already know that don't you Freediver....you can do no more then resort to taking abu out of context, and then use it to make a point...when ironically it has very little to do with what we were arguing about in the first place.

Or perhaps you can tell me what exactly is Abu's out of context quote got to do with me telling you (and providing evidence) that the apostasy laws in Islam, and its punishment relates to 'treason'.

'Treason'...do you get it, or do you need me to dumb it down for you further.

Sheesh, your ignorance can sometimes be so fustrating to deal with. Why do you just wear people down with your stupidity? Is this all you can rely upon?

Lestat,

What you are getting at [i.e. 'what apostasy laws relate to'], is that [within a Sharia jurisdiction] criticism of ISLAM was always intended to be a capital offence.

Yes ?

"Truly, if the Hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who stir up sedition in the City....whenever they are found, they shall be seized and slain (without mercy)."
Koran 33.60,61

Title: Re: In defence of Islam
Post by freediver on Aug 10^th, 2011 at 5:45pm

OK Les. Here is the link again. I will make it bold and colourful so that you may see it this time.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1223540962/0#6

Quote:

And now you claim that you did provide a link...even though anyone can quite easily take a look at the page before this one and see that you did not.

You cannot actually see the absence of something. However the link is there. You should try looking for yourself.

Quote:

This, plus the fact that the debate has never been about the punishment of apostasy

And yet that is what we are arguing about, is it not?