'Follow the Islamic way to save the world,' Prince Charles urges environmentalists


http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/09/article-1285332-09F73EB2000005DC-940_468x340.jpg

Prince Charles yesterday urged the world to follow Islamic 'spiritual principles' in order to protect the environment.

In an hour-long speech, the heir to the throne argued that man's destruction of the world was contrary to the scriptures of all religions - but particularly those of Islam.

He said the current 'division' between man and nature had been caused not just by industrialisation, but also by our attitude to the environment - which goes against the grain of 'sacred traditions'.

Charles, who is a practising Christian and will become the head of the Church of England when he succeeds to the throne, spoke in depth about his own study of the Koran which, he said, tells its followers that there is 'no separation between man and nature' and says we must always live within our environment's limits.

The prince was speaking to an audience of scholars at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies - which attempts to encourage a better understanding of the culture and civilisation of the religion.

His speech, merging religion with his other favourite subject, the environment, marked the 25th anniversary of the organisation, of which he is patron.

He added: 'The inconvenient truth is that we share this planet with the rest of creation for a very good reason - and that is, we cannot exist on our own without the intricately balanced web of life around us.

'Islam has always taught this and to ignore that lesson is to default on our contract with creation.'


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285332/Follow-Islamic-way-save-world-Charles-urges-environmentalists.html

TC, would you mind highlighting the relevant scriptures for us?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/09/article-1285332-09F73EB2000005DC-940_468x340.jpg



True Colours wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 11:57am:

'Follow the Islamic way to save the world,' Prince Charles urges environmentalists http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/09/article-1285332-09F73EB2000005DC-940_468x340.jpg Prince Charles yesterday urged the world to follow Islamic 'spiritual principles' in order to protect the environment. In an hour-long speech, the heir to the throne argued that man's destruction of the world was contrary to the scriptures of all religions - but particularly those of Islam. He said the current 'division' between man and nature had been caused not just by industrialisation, but also by our attitude to the environment - which goes against the grain of 'sacred traditions'. Charles, who is a practising Christian and will become the head of the Church of England when he succeeds to the throne, spoke in depth about his own study of the Koran which, he said, tells its followers that there is 'no separation between man and nature' and says we must always live within our environment's limits. The prince was speaking to an audience of scholars at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies - which attempts to encourage a better understanding of the culture and civilisation of the religion. His speech, merging religion with his other favourite subject, the environment, marked the 25th anniversary of the organisation, of which he is patron. He added: 'The inconvenient truth is that we share this planet with the rest of creation for a very good reason - and that is, we cannot exist on our own without the intricately balanced web of life around us. 'Islam has always taught this and to ignore that lesson is to default on our contract with creation.' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1285332/Follow-Islamic-way-save-world-Charles-urges-environmentalists.html

Prince Charles is prolly confused.

???

I cannot think why ?           :P

Maybe Prince Charles was 'thinking of ISLAM' [and ISLAM's respect for the environment], on an occasion when he had his head between Camilla's thighs ???

???





Google;
green in islam

Google;
symbols in islam, green

freediver wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 12:33pm:

TC, would you mind highlighting the relevant scriptures for us?

Here are some examples of the importance of caring for the environment and nature in Islam:


The Prophet often emphasised the importance of cleanliness, with sayings such:

“...Cleanliness is half of belief...”
- Saheeh Muslim


The Prophet was reported to have forbade polluting water supplies.

The Prophet also put many restriction on cutting trees - in particular fruiting and flowering trees and established reserves   wherein no trees could be cut at all.

On migrating to Medina, the Messenger of God organized the planting of trees and of date groves. He made the forests and green spaces conservation areas, where every sort of living creature lived. These were called sanctuaries (hima). For example, a strip of land approximately twelve miles wide around Medina was proclaimed a sanctuary and made a conservation area. We know that he proclaimed other areas, similar to this, sanctuaries. All these show the paramount importance —as a religion— Islam gives to nature conservancy and protection of all nature’s living creatures.



Improving land and planting trees

Anas reported that the Messenger of God said: "Never does a Muslim plant trees or cultivate land and birds or a man or a beast eat out of them but that is a charity on his behalf.
- Saheeh Muslim


“Whoever plants trees, God will give him reward...”
- al-Musnad

“Whoever reclaims and cultivates dry, barren land will be rewarded by God for the act. So long as men and animals benefit from it He will record it for him as a charity.”
- Haythami, Majmau al-Zawaaid


“Whoever plants a tree, reward will be recorded for him so long as it produces fruit.”
- Haythami, Majmau al-Zawaaid


The Prophet said: "A Muslim who plants (trees) and from their fruits the human beings or the beasts or birds eat, that will be counted as an act of charity on the Day of Judgement."
- Saheeh Muslim



Preservation of animals and their species


Even pest animals are not allowed to be exterminated or completely wiped out, but species must be preserved. When the culling of pest dogs became necessary in Madina, the prophet forbade the complete extermination of dogs describing them as a nation (species).


"There is not an animal [that lives] on the earth, nor a being that flies on its wings, but [forms part of] communities like you..."
- the Quran, al-Anam, v.38


If without good reason anyone kills a sparrow, or a creature lesser than that even, the living creature will put his grievance to God on the Day of Judgement, saying: ‘So-and-so killed me for no purpose.
- an-Nasaa'i


“We were on a journey with God’s Messenger when we came across a bird the size of a sparrow with two chicks. We seized the chicks, whereupon the hen started beating its wings and screeching. God’s Messenger turned and when he saw what we had done, asked: ‘Who separated those chicks from their mother? Return them at once!’ So we left them free.”
- Abu Dawood




Conserving and not wasting the Earth’s resources:


O children of Adam!...waste not by excess, for God loves not the wasters.
- the Quran, al-Araf, v.31


“The Messenger of God appeared while Sa‘d was taking the ablutions. When he saw that Sa‘d was using a lot of water, he intervened saying: "What is this? You are wasting water.” Sa‘d replied asking: “Can there be wastefulness while taking the ablutions?” To which God’s Messenger replied:  “Yes, even if you take them on the bank of a rushing river.”
- Musnad & Ibn Majah



Altering nature is evil

...And he [Satan] said: "I will take an appointed portion of your servants; Verily, I will mislead them, and surely, I will arouse in them false desires; and certainly, I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and indeed I will order them to change the nature created by God."...
- the Quran, an-Nisaa, v.118-9


So direct your face toward the religion in orthodoxy; the pure natural disposition of God which He created mankind upon. Do not change God's Creation. That is the correct religion, but most of the people do not know.
the Quran, ar-Rum, v.30

How about Colonel GhadafI TC? He created Green Square in Tripoli.

Some of them are actually pretty good. Not sure about the merits of attempting to cultivate dry, barren land though. Many scientists attribute rising desertification in the middle east and Africa at least partly to this.

How are you supposed to interpret "don't change God's creation"?

freediver wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 9:38pm:

Not sure about the merits of attempting to cultivate dry, barren land though. Many scientists attribute rising desertification in the middle east and Africa at least partly to this.

Cultivating, or at least attempting to cultivate barren land doesn't affect anything in the desertification process. Its the over-cultivation of arable, or semi-arable land that causes desertification.

True Colours wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 8:25pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 12th, 2013 at 12:33pm: TC, would you mind highlighting the relevant scriptures for us? Here are some examples of the importance of caring for the environment and nature in Islam: The Prophet often emphasised the importance of cleanliness, with sayings such: “...Cleanliness is half of belief...” - Saheeh Muslim

Then why exactly are Muslim countries the dirtiest places on earth? Instanbul is the only clean Muslim city I have seen, and even then the locals go to great lengths each day to mess the place up. If it wasn't the army of street cleaners it would be as disgusting as Cairo.


Quote:

The Prophet was reported to have forbade polluting water supplies.

Which is an easy law to live by in the Islamic world. How exactly do you go about polluting rivers of shlt anyway? They should collect the radioactive water in Japan and dump it in the Nile. It would be a win win as far as cleaning the earth up.

Mohammed was a conservationist, and would never destroy nature/natural things.

Mohammed especially prohibited cutting down trees.

Don'tchyaknow.








True Colours wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 8:25pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 12th, 2013 at 12:33pm: TC, would you mind highlighting the relevant scriptures for us? Here are some examples of the importance of caring for the environment and nature in Islam: The Prophet often emphasised the importance of cleanliness, with sayings such: “...Cleanliness is half of belief...” - Saheeh Muslim The Prophet was reported to have forbade polluting water supplies. The Prophet also put many restriction on cutting trees - in particular fruiting and flowering trees and established reserves   wherein no trees could be cut at all.

i
Quote:

Sahih Muslim, Book 19: Chapter 10: JUSTIFICATION FOR CUTTING DOWN THE TREES AND BURNING THEM Book 019, Number 4324:     It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be burnt and cut. These palms were at Buwaira. Qutaibah and Ibn Rumh in their versions of the tradition have added: So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed the verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks, it was with the permission of Allah so that He may disgrace the evil-doers" (lix. 5). Book 019, Number 4325:     It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) caused the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be cut down and burnt. It is in this connection that Hassan (the poet) said:     It was easy for the nobles of Quraish to barn Buwaira whose sparks were flying in all directions.     in the same connection was revealed the Qur'anic verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks." Book 019, Number 4326:     'Abdullah b. Umar reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) burnt the date-palms of Banu Nadir.

Don'tchyaknow.

It was not permitted to cut down trees - until Mohammed cut down trees.

Then Mohammed received a new surah - in which Allah justified Mohammed's actions.



Quote:

".....the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) ordered the date-palms of Banu Nadir to be burnt and cut.....So Allah, the Glorious and Exalted, revealed the verse:" Whatever trees you have cut down or left standing on their trunks, it was with the permission of Allah so that He may disgrace the evil-doers"

What a guy that Allah was !!         ;)

As soon as Mohammed made some infringement, OR, as soon as Mohammed had some new little LUST for something,
....and straight away Mohammed would receive a message/vision from Allah, justifying and allowing his action/lust.

Wow!

Allah musta really, really, thought highly of his apostle, Mohammed.         :P





033.050
YUSUFALI: O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee; and daughters of thy paternal uncles and aunts, and daughters of thy maternal uncles and aunts, who migrated (from Makka) with thee; and any believing woman who dedicates her soul to the Prophet if the Prophet wishes to wed her;- this only for thee, and not for the Believers (at large); We know what We have appointed for them as to their wives and the captives whom their right hands possess;- in order that there should be no difficulty for thee. And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

033.051
YUSUFALI: Thou mayest defer (the turn of) any of them that thou pleasest, and thou mayest receive any thou pleasest: and there is no blame on thee if thou invite one whose (turn) thou hadst set aside. This were nigher to the cooling of their eyes, the prevention of their grief, and their satisfaction - that of all of them - with that which thou hast to give them: and Allah knows (all) that is in your hearts: and Allah is All-Knowing, Most Forbearing.





Break a promise/oath, so we can gain some pleasure ?

NOT A PROBLEM!

066.001
YUSUFALI: O Prophet! Why holdest thou to be forbidden that which Allah has made lawful to thee? Thou seekest to please thy consorts. But Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

066.002
YUSUFALI: Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths (in some cases): and Allah is your Protector, and He is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom.





+++

Compare how the God of Israel regards us keeping our 'oaths' [keeping our word]...

With a comparison of how important, Allah the God of ISLAM regards us keeping our 'oaths' [keeping our word]...

Look here...
"Love is not love Which alters when it alteration"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1295407319/0#0

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/09/article-1285332-09F73EB2000005DC-940_468x340.jpg



True Colours wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 11:57am:

'Follow the Islamic way to save the world,' Prince Charles urges environmentalists http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/06/09/article-1285332-09F73EB2000005DC-940_468x340.jpg Prince Charles yesterday urged the world to follow Islamic 'spiritual principles'.....

Interesting.

........that True_Colours should be touting what a person like Prince Charles promotes.

And that a person like Prince Charles, should be promoting - ISLAMIC 'spiritual principles'.







Q.
Remind me....
How do moslems refer to unbelievers again ?

Don't moslems call us infidels ?



Q.
What is the root of the word 'infidel' ???

Dictionary;
infidelity = = the action or state of being sexually unfaithful.




Prince Charles.

An advocate for - ISLAMIC 'spiritual principles'.

Yup.








Are the high echelons of Christendom [today] our moral examples ?

Do you think so ?

Or should our society respect Prince Charles, because his is a 'prince' among men ?




Isaiah 1:21
How is the faithful city become an harlot! it was full of judgment; righteousness lodged in it; but now murderers.
22  Thy silver is become dross, thy wine mixed with water:
23  Thy princes are rebellious, and companions of thieves: every one loveth gifts, and followeth after rewards: they judge not the fatherless, neither doth the cause of the widow come unto them.



Jeremiah 9:24
......let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD.
25  Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will punish all them which are circumcised with the uncircumcised;
26  Egypt, and Judah, and Edom, and the children of Ammon, and Moab, and all that are in the utmost corners, that dwell in the wilderness: for all these nations are uncircumcised, and all the house of Israel are uncircumcised in the heart.








1 Samuel 16:7
But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.

Quantum wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:00am:

True Colours wrote on Aug 12th, 2013 at 8:25pm: freediver wrote on Aug 12th, 2013 at 12:33pm: TC, would you mind highlighting the relevant scriptures for us? Here are some examples of the importance of caring for the environment and nature in Islam: The Prophet often emphasised the importance of cleanliness, with sayings such: “...Cleanliness is half of belief...” - Saheeh Muslim Then why exactly are Muslim countries the dirtiest places on earth? Instanbul is the only clean Muslim city I have seen, and even then the locals go to great lengths each day to mess the place up. If it wasn't the army of street cleaners it would be as disgusting as Cairo. Quote: The Prophet was reported to have forbade polluting water supplies. Which is an easy law to live by in the Islamic world. How exactly do you go about polluting rivers of shlt anyway? They should collect the radioactive water in Japan and dump it in the Nile. It would be a win win as far as cleaning the earth up.

I think the original rule was not to poison wells, in the context of warfare. The same with not chopping down trees - in the context of "scorched earth" style warfare. Not that Muhammed's army didn't chop down trees as a military strategy. It depends on whether it is "wanton" apparently. I think it was a bit of a stretch to put these ones on the list.

True Colours wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 8:25pm:

The Prophet was reported to have forbade polluting water supplies. Islam gives to nature conservancy and protection of all nature’s living creatures [b]Preservation of animals and their species[/b

Can you cite the verse where the profit supposedly forbade polluting water supplies or did you pluck that from your ass?

The dopey profit did say polluted water was not polluted-

Quote:

The people asked the messenger of allah: Can we perform ablution out of the well of Budaah, which is a well into which menstrual clothes, dead dogs and stinking things were thrown? He replied: Water is pure and not defiled by anything. www.sunnah.com/abudawud/1/66

The false prophet said water is not defiled by dead dogs, menstrual blood or stinking things!

There is no verse in the Quran where Allah tells you to boil drinking water to make it safe to drink yet there are many verses where boiling water is used for the purpose of torture.

Why did allah the most merciful of those who show mercy neglect to tell muslims to boil their drinking water yet include many verses about torture using boiling water, was Mohammad a fraud?

Quote:

Those who abide eternally in the fire are given to drink scalding water that will sever their intestines. www.quran.com/47/15

What did the poor little Geckos  do to piss Mohammad off, did they break a treaty?

Quote:

Allah's apostle commanded the killing of Geckos, and he called them noxious little creatures. www.sunnah.com/urn/255620

Perhaps Muhammed was fond of ants and their utopian society.

freediver wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 9:38pm:

Some of them are actually pretty good. Not sure about the merits of attempting to cultivate dry, barren land though. Many scientists attribute rising desertification in the middle east and Africa at least partly to this. [quote]

No. The improvement of desert land does not create desert - if that improvement means planting trees and improving the quality of the soil.

I have seen properties in Australia where semi-Arid land has been turned into lovely gardens simply by improving the soil quality and planting shrubs and trees.


What mainly causes desertification is the removal of existing trees and shrubs in semi-arid land.

Islam promotes the planting of trees, not their removal.

Using copious amounts of water in irrigation, can cause salinity. This can be exacerbated by the removal of existing trees that would normally prevent rising water tables. Islam discourages the wasting of water, the removal of trees, and encourages the planting of new trees.

I have witnessed myself the greening of the desert in Saudi Arabia - especially around the region of Jeddah and Mecca.

http://www.permaculturenews.org/images/spackman_planting_days_01.jpg

http://www.cepf.net/SiteCollectionImages/other/479x295_JuniperNursery_RaydahProtectedArea_SaudiArabia.jpg


The Saudis have planted drought resistant trees many areas such as in the outskirts of Mecca:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/88/319760111_fbca4bfb2d.jpg



You find these greening of the desert projects going on all over Saudi Arabia.

In Jubail:

http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/myfiles/Images/2013/03/25/ki02.jpg


In Tabuk:

http://www.freshplaza.com/2008/saudi1.jpg


In Madina:
http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/59768672.jpg

http://images.detik.com/content/2011/10/29/157/hijau1.jpg


http://images.detik.com/content/2011/10/29/157/hijau2.jpg


http://images.detik.com/content/2011/10/29/157/hijau3.jpg


http://images.detik.com/content/2011/10/29/157/hijau4.jpg



In Jeddah:

http://images.travelpod.com/tw_slides/ta00/9b4/490/palm-trees-on-the-jeddah-makkah-road-riyadh.jpg


In Riyadh:

http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/16195180.jpg

http://internationalnurserecruiter.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/City-of-Riyadh1.jpg

http://arabianmusings.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/me-pups-in-diplomatic-quarter_-riyadh-saudi-arabia.jpg?w=593



freediver wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 9:38pm:

How are you supposed to interpret "don't change God's creation"?

When interpreting the Quran, scholars do not look at a vrse in isolation but rather try to look at supporting texts to understand them.

One of the verses regarding changing God's creation mentions the pagan practice of slitting the ears of cattle - and the mutilation of ears is still practiced in Western cultures today:

http://www.mcanamibia.org/files/images/IMG_3128(1).JPG

One could extend this to other practices such as cutting off sheep tails, and other forms of mutilation practiced in Western farming.

I also interpret it as a warning that man should not unnecessarily alter God's creation. For example, I try to avoid eating foods that are contaminated with pesticides. I also avoid GMO foods when possible.


There are hadeeth where prophet Muhammed explained the benefits of eating wholemeal/grain bread over highly processed wheat breads. in light of these evidences, I try to avoid processed foods as well.

freediver wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 9:59am:

I think the original rule was not to poison wells, in the context of warfare.

Actually there also many hadeeth in regards to protecting water sources from pollution and contamination which have absolutely nothing to do with warfare.

For example, there are hadeeth regarding the washing of hands before touching water vessels, and prohibitions on relieving oneself near water supplies.

Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 10:39am:

Quote: The people asked the messenger of allah: Can we perform ablution [for prayers] out of the well of Budaah, which is a well into which menstrual clothes, dead dogs and stinking things were thrown? He replied: Water is pure and not defiled by anything. www.sunnah.com/abudawud/1/66

This was a case where Jews had contanimated a well.

The prophet said that this well could continue to be used for washing for prayers - after the contaminates had been removed - and it means that water that smells and looks clean can be used for washing prayers - not necessarily for drinking.




Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 10:39am:

There is no verse in the Quran where Allah tells you to boil drinking water to make it safe to drink...

Uncontaminated water does not need to be boiled. I have drunk unboiled water from natural water supplies many times.



Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 10:39am:

Quote: Allah's apostle commanded the killing of Geckos, and he called them noxious little creatures. www.sunnah.com/urn/255620

Quote:

Reptiles and the risk of Infectious Diseases Reptiles such as snakes, turtles, tortoises and lizards have become popular as pets...their unusual appearance is very appealing to small children. However they require careful handling as they carry a range of germs that can lead to human illness (especially in small children, pregnant women, the elderly and people with serious disease such as cancer)... ...All reptiles carry a range of germs including bacteria, viruses, parasites and worms. Many of these can be transmitted on to the family of reptile owners. The most significant of these include: Salmonella: Salmonella are commonly found in all types of reptiles and can spread from reptiles to humans when something contaminated with reptile faeces is placed in the mouth. For example, infants can become infected with Salmonella by drinking bottles of formula contaminated by contact with the reptile/reptile faeces. Salmonella infection causes diarrhoea, headache, fever and stomach cramps and can result in septicaemia (blood poisoning). Dehydration can be severe. In 2008, there were 449 cases of salmonellosis, fifteen cases of which had recent contact with reptiles. Nine of these fifteen cases were under one year of age. Botulism: Botulism is a serious and life-threatening illness caused by a toxin released by the Clostridium bacterium that causes paralysis and death. Clostridium is found widely in the environment including soil and mud as spores and animals that live close to the ground are commonly contaminated with clostridium. Clostridium commonly contaminates reptiles, especially aquatic reptiles. Adults and older children have a range of bacteria that overgrow the spores responsible but small babies under the age of one year have not yet developed this protection. It has recently been recognised that exposure to turtles or to turtle feed was the likely cause in at cases infant botulism in Ireland.  Accordingly, the HPSC advises that reptiles...are not appropriate pets for small children and should not be kept in households in which there are children under the age of five... Other infections: illness such as campylobacteriosis (a bowel infection), leptospirosis (a liver disease), trichinellosis (a disease of muscles, the nervous system and the heart and lungs) have been associated with keeping reptiles and while most are treatable, some can be very serious. That said the risk for most people keeping reptiles does not pose a significant health risk, as long as proper hygiene is maintained. Most people have a low risk of getting ill with Salmonella infection from contact with reptiles and this risk can be reduced further by following the advice below. Reptiles should not be kept as pets in a house where there are children under the age of five. All reptiles should be considered to be contaminated with one (or many) of the above bacteria). Pregnant women, elderly or frail adults or immunosuppressed people (e.g. people with cancer, HIV/AIDS, people with a CD4 count less than 200) should avoid all contact with reptiles. After handling your reptile always wash your hands with hot, soapy water... ...Reptiles must be kept out of the kitchen, dining areas, and any other area in which food is prepared... ...Older children who handle reptiles should avoid putting their hands near their mouths until they have washed their hands. Nor should children put objects that the reptile has touched near their mouths. Reptiles should not be kept in child-care facilities or crèches; they are not appropriate pets for small children. Follow expert advice on the feeding and welfare (e.g. environment) of your reptile as stress to the animal can cause it to shed Salmonella and other pathogens. http://www.hpsc.ie/hpsc/A-Z/Zoonotic/ReptilesandRisksofInfectiousDiseases/

You were making a good case until you attempted to justify the gecko killing thing.

True Colours wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

Islam promotes the planting of trees,

1300 years of tree planting;
http://midwestbymideast.tripod.com/the_other_middle_east/thumbnails/400x300/2004_0805Image0026.JPG

"Our work here is done. Praise Allah!!!"

Do you really think none of us have been to the home of Islam; The Middle East. Outside of just a handful of cities the place is a desert wasteland. There is no tree planting going on anywhere. Even the cities with them are hardly green. Just a few gardens, mostly around tourist areas and government properties. The only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads. When it comes to rees, they haven't exactly had a Napoleon renovating the place.   

True Colours wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 11:52am:

freediver wrote on Aug 12th, 2013 at 9:38pm: Some of them are actually pretty good. Not sure about the merits of attempting to cultivate dry, barren land though. Many scientists attribute rising desertification in the middle east and Africa at least partly to this. Quote: No. The improvement of desert land does not create desert - if that improvement means planting trees and improving the quality of the soil. I have seen properties in Australia where semi-Arid land has been turned into lovely gardens simply by improving the soil quality and planting shrubs and trees. What mainly causes desertification is the removal of existing trees and shrubs in semi-arid land. Islam promotes the planting of trees, not their removal. History records that the [ISLAMIC] Ottoman Empire taxed land according to the number of trees, thereby causing local desertification [because landowners cut down their trees to avoid taxation]. Google; ottoman taxed trees, caused desertification Google; ottoman, landowners cut down their trees to avoid tax Read the account of Mark Twain, on his visit to the 'holy land' in 1867 [quote] Mark Twain in the Holy Land Mark Twain visited Israel in 1867, and published his impressions in Innocents Abroad.  He described a desolate country – devoid of both vegetation and human population: “….. A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds… a silent mournful expanse…. a desolation…. we never saw a human being on the whole route…. hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country.” He was amazed by the smallness of the city of Jerusalem: “A fast walker could go outside the walls of Jerusalem and walk entirely around the city in an hour. I do not know how else to make one understand how small it is.” And he described the Temple Mount thus: “The mighty Mosque of Omar, and the paved court around it, occupy a fourth part of Jerusalem. They are upon Mount Moriah, where King Solomon’s Temple stood. This Mosque is the holiest place the Mohammedan knows, outside of Mecca. Up to within a year or two past, no christian could gain admission to it or its court for love or money. But the prohibition has been removed, and we entered freely for bucksheesh.” Chapters 45-56 of Innocents Abroad can be read on Shechem.org. More quotes from pilgrims to the Holy Land can be found on the COJS website.

http://zionismandisrael.wordpress.com/2008/08/28/mark-twain-in-the-holy-land/


http://cojs.org/cojswiki/Quotes_from_Pilgrims_to_the_Holy_Land

Yadda wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:53pm:

Read the account of Mark Twain, on his visit to the 'holy land' in 1867 Quote: Mark Twain in the Holy Land Mark Twain visited Israel in 1867, and published his impressions in Innocents Abroad.  He described a desolate country – devoid of both vegetation and human population: “….. A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds… a silent mournful expanse…. a desolation…. we never saw a human being on the whole route…. hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country.”

For centuries before 1867 [and for decades after that], moslems had been the sole 'stewards' of all of the lands, around and in the region of Israel.



Dictionary;
steward = =
1 a person who looks after the passengers on a ship or aircraft.
2 a person responsible for supplies of food to a college, club, etc.
3 an official appointed to supervise arrangements at a large public event.
4 short for shop steward.
5 a person employed to manage another’s property, especially a large house or estate.       chiefly historical an officer of the British royal household, especially an administrator of Crown estates.
· v. act as a steward of.
– DERIVATIVES stewardship n.




Why was the holy land a desolate land 'devoid of both vegetation and human population', in 1867 ?

Somehow, it must have been the fault of those Zionists.                 :P

Honest!!!

True Colours wrote:

Quote:

Altering nature is evil ...And he [Satan] said: "I will take an appointed portion of your servants; Verily, I will mislead them, and surely, I will arouse in them false desires; and certainly, I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and indeed I will order them to change the nature created by God."... - the Quran, an-Nisaa, v.118-9

Taqiyya again T.C.

What AN-NISA (WOMEN) 118 /119 really says:


Quote:

AN-NISA (WOMEN) 004.118  YUSUFALI: Allah did curse him, but he said: "I will take of Thy servants a portion Marked off; PICKTHAL: Whom Allah cursed, and he said: Surely I will take of Thy bondmen an appointed portion, SHAKIR: Allah has cursed him; and he said: Most certainly I will take of Thy servants an appointed portion: AN-NISA (WOMEN) 004.119  YUSUFALI: "I will mislead them, and I will create in them false desires; I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and to deface the (fair) nature created by Allah." Whoever, forsaking Allah, takes satan for a friend, hath of a surety suffered a loss that is manifest. PICKTHAL: And surely I will lead them astray, and surely I will arouse desires in them, and surely I will command them and they will cut the cattle' ears, and surely I will command them and they will change Allah's creation. Whoso chooseth Satan for a patron instead of Allah is verily a loser and his loss is manifest. SHAKIR: And most certainly I will lead them astray and excite in them vain desires, and bid them so that they shall slit the ears of the cattle, and most certainly I will bid them so that they shall alter Allah's creation[/b]; and whoever takes the Shaitan for a guardian rather than Allah he indeed shall suffer a manifest loss.

It is very clear that allah and not satan is doing the cursing and threatening to take a portion of the servants in verse 118.

Verse 119 is a continuation of the curse and threat by allah.

Again very clearly allah says that he will lead them astray to slit the ears of cattle and alter creation (alter creation in this case refers to slitting a cows naturally whole ear) it has nothing to do with the environment.


True Colours wrote:

Quote:

So direct your face toward the religion in orthodoxy; the pure natural disposition of God which He created mankind upon. Do not change God's Creation. That is the correct religion, but most of the people do not know. the Quran, ar-Rum, v.30

First off let me say I can't find an ar-Rum, the closest thing I can come up with is AL-ROOM (THE ROMANS, THE BYZANTINES) v 30: (I have quoted 29 & 30 because they are in conjunction)   


Quote:

AL-ROOM (THE ROMANS, THE BYZANTINES).029  YUSUFALI: Nay, the wrong-doers (merely) follow their own lusts, being devoid of knowledge. But who will guide those whom Allah leaves astray? To them there will be no helpers. PICKTHAL: Nay, but those who do wrong follow their own lusts without knowledge. Who is able to guide him whom Allah hath sent astray? For such there are no helpers. SHAKIR: Nay! those who are unjust follow their low desires without any knowledge; so who can guide him whom Allah makes err? And they shall have no helpers. AL-ROOM (THE ROMANS, THE BYZANTINES).030  YUSUFALI: So set thou thy face steadily and truly to the Faith: (establish) Allah's handiwork according to the pattern on which He has made mankind: no change (let there be) in the work (wrought) by Allah: that is the standard Religion: but most among mankind understand not. PICKTHAL: So set thy purpose (O Muhammad) for religion as a man by nature upright - the nature (framed) of Allah, in which He hath created man. There is no altering (the laws of) Allah's creation. That is the right religion, but most men know not - SHAKIR: Then set your face upright for religion in the right state-- the nature made by Allah in which He has made men; there is no altering of Allah's creation; that is the right religion, but most people do not know--

Verse 29 tells muslims that wrongdoers follow their own lusts because allah has sent them astray. (once again allah is the deceiver of men)

Verse 30 tell muslims to devote themselves to islam. Because islam is the nature in which allah created man. you cannot alter the way man was created (in islam). islam is the right religion, but most people do not recognize the right religion (islam)

The two verses have theological meaning, not environmental

freediver wrote on Aug 12^th, 2013 at 9:38pm:

How are you supposed to interpret "don't change God's creation"?

Good question, FD I think we'll need to ask Y this one. He's the expert on Islamic doctrine here.

The world's largest muslim population is world's worst environmental vandal.

Indonesian Forest Facts

The forests of Indonesia, along with their thousands of plant and animal species, are being destroyed at an alarming rate due to massive logging and clearing for palm oil plantations. Indonesia’s tropical forests are of global importance, covering over 98 million hectares (242,163,274 acres). The rapid deterioration of tropical forests is causing incalculable losses in terms of biodiversity and is pushing species such as the orangutan ever closer to extinction. -

Twelve percent of all mammal species, 16% of reptile and amphibian species, and 17% of bird species are found on the 17,000 islands that constitute Indonesia.” -

Most of Indonesia’s forests are found in the Indonesian half of New Guinea, and on the islands of Borneo and Sumatra. The forests of Indonesia represent 10% of the world’s remaining tropical forests. Indonesia’s forests are the second largest in the world after the forests of Brazil. Unfortunately, over the years Indonesia has lost up to 80% of its original forest habitat and continues to lose 6.2 million acres (2,509,051 hectares) a year. Indonesia entered the Guinness Book of World Records in 2008 and 2009 for having the highest rate of deforestation of any country in the world! -

Source

True Colours wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:38pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 10:39am: Quote: The people asked the messenger of allah: Can we perform ablution [for prayers] out of the well of Budaah, which is a well into which menstrual clothes, dead dogs and stinking things were thrown? He replied: Water is pure and not defiled by anything. www.sunnah.com/abudawud/1/66 This was a case where Jews had contanimated a well. Is there anything the filthy yahud are not responsible for? The prophet said that this well could continue to be used for washing for prayers - after the contaminates had been removed - and it means that water that smells and looks clean can be used for washing prayers - not necessarily for drinking. Where did he say that? That verse mentions nothing of the sort, he said the water was not defiled by anything. Would you wash with water that came from a well with a rotting rancid dog carcass along with menstrual blood and other stinking things? Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 10:39am: There is no verse in the Quran where Allah tells you to boil drinking water to make it safe to drink... Uncontaminated water does not need to be boiled. I have drunk unboiled water from natural water supplies many times. A few Cholera epidemics in the Islamic world, must be gods will eh? Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 10:39am: [quote]Allah's apostle commanded the killing of Geckos, and he called them noxious little creatures. www.sunnah.com/urn/255620

Quote:

Reptiles and the risk of Infectious Diseases Reptiles such as snakes, turtles, tortoises and lizards have become popular as pets...their unusual appearance is very appealing to small children. However they require careful handling as they carry a range of germs that can lead to human illness (especially in small children, pregnant women, the elderly and people with serious disease such as cancer).

[/quote]


Quote:

Allah's messenger said- He saw a person enjoying himself in paradise because of the tree he cut from the path which was a source of inconvenience to the people. www.sunnah.com/urn/263410

So MO saw someone in Paradise who cut a tree that was an inconvenience?


Quote:

The apostle of allah burned the palm tree of the banu al nadr and cut them down at al buwairah, So Allah the exalted sent down the palm trees you cut down or left. www.sunnah.com/abudawud/15/139

It sounds like Mo was a slash and burn type of person, the quran tells muslims to follow the example he set in 33/21.

If you get the houris and an everlasting erection to service them for cutting trees that are in the way how does that discourage people from cutting down trees?

moses wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 2:48pm:

True Colours wrote: Quote: Altering nature is evil ...And he [Satan] said: "I will take an appointed portion of your servants; Verily, I will mislead them, and surely, I will arouse in them false desires; and certainly, I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and indeed I will order them to change the nature created by God."... - the Quran, an-Nisaa, v.118-9 Taqiyya again T.C.

There is no taqiyya in Islam. I feel sorry for you that you are so deluded that you cannot see the truth before your eyes.


moses wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 2:48pm:

It is very clear that allah and not satan is doing the cursing and threatening to take a portion of the servants in verse 118. Verse 119 is a continuation of the curse and threat by allah. Again very clearly allah says that he will lead them astray to slit the ears of cattle and alter creation (alter creation in this case refers to slitting a cows naturally whole ear) it has nothing to do with the environment.

[/quote]


This claim of yours is so stupid that I am tempted to put this in the 'Islamophobes retarded' thread.


Verse 119 is a continuation of what Satan said he would do to God's servants in retaliation for God cursing him.

No scholar in the history of Islam has ever interpreted verse 119 to be anything other than that.



Quote:

Allah cursed him. And he [Shaitan (Satan)] said: "I will take an appointed portion of your slaves; Verily, I will mislead them, and surely, I will arouse in them false desires; and certainly, I will order them to slit the ears of cattle, and indeed I will order them to change the nature created by Allah." And whoever takes Shaitan (Satan) as a Wali (protector or helper) instead of Allah, has surely suffered a manifest loss.  http://www.dar-us-salam.com/TheNobleQuran/

Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar translation:

Quote:

God cursed him. And Satan said: "Truly, I will take to myself of Thy servants, an apportioned share; and I will cause them to go astray. And I will fill them with false desires. And I will command them, then they will slit the ears of the flocks. And I will command them, and they will alter the creation of God." And whoever takes Satan to himself for a protector other than God, then, surely, he lost, a clear loss.

Al-Muntakhab translation:

Quote:

Allah has cursed him and afflicted him with such evils as indicate divine wrath and a malignant fate. His insolence was such as to promise, Allah to incite a determinate number of His servants to evil.  "I will lead them wrong," he said, "and I will lead them by the nose to an evil line of conduct and arouse in them vain desires and stir up their sinful sensuous appetite." "I will command them to receive the pagan superstition and slit and cut the ears of cattle and I will command them to change the course and order of things wherein they were set at the creation." And he who puts himself under the tutelage of Al-Shaytan besides Allah, shall have been a great loser.

Muhammad Taqi Usmani translation:

Quote:

whom Allah has cursed. He (the Satan) said, "Surely I will take an appointed share from Your slaves; and I will lead them astray, and I will tempt them with false hopes, and I will command them, whereby they shall slit the ears of cattle, and I will command them, whereby they shall alter the creation of Allah." Whoever takes the Satan for friend, instead of Allah, incurs an obvious loss.

Shabbir Ahmed translation:

Quote:

Allah has rejected Satan for saying, "Verily, of your servants I will take my due share." (A great many people follow their own Satans and the clergy eats a portion from their wealth in the name of God; that is Satan's share)  Satan (Iblis) in allegorical terms had said, "I surely will lead them astray, I will entice them, confound them." According to Satan's promise, these representatives of his mislead men and women away from the Qur'an, and confound them with ritualism and superstitions, such as magic, dreams, astrology, amulets, numerology, ghoul, exorcism, and vain beliefs. Marking cattle's ears, choosing red cows or black goats for specific sacrifices, are superstitions that the clergy propagates. They try to present the Laws of Allah operative in the World of Creation in a distorted fashion. They assign miracles to living or dead "saints" ignoring the Law of Cause and Effect. Whoever befriends this handiwork of Satan, has ignored Allah. Such a person is verily a loser and his loss is manifest.

Dr. Munir Munshey translation:      

Quote:

Allah cursed (Shaitan), and (in response) he said, "I will lure away a large number of Your servants (as my followers).  "I will definitely mislead them. I will certainly stir up vain and wanton desires in them. I will command them and they will split the ears of the cattle _ (a common practice of the idol worshippers). I will persuade them, and they will change and corrupt the nature (of the order) of things that Allah has created." Whoever takes Shaitan as his master instead of Allah, has indeed incurred a severe and significant loss!

Karnal wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 2:56pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 12th, 2013 at 9:38pm: How are you supposed to interpret "don't change God's creation"? Good question, FD I think we'll need to ask Y this one. He's the expert on Islamic doctrine here.

As you wish.






In those words;
"don't change God's creation"
ISLAM/Mohammed is trying to establish 'a standard' in his religion [i.e. a set and immovable 'datum' within the religion of, ISLAM].
To establish an understanding among its followers, that ISLAM is Allah's religion, and to establish that ISLAM is perfect.
THEREFORE, the exhortation to men, "don't change God's creation".


"So set thou thy face steadily and truly to the Faith: (establish) Allah's handiwork according to the pattern on which He has made mankind: no change (let there be) in the work (wrought) by Allah: that is the standard Religion: but most among mankind understand not."
Koran 30.30

Google;
innovation in religion, banned, islam





Like i said, ISLAM/Mohammed is trying to set a standard in >> his << [i.e. Mohammed's] religion.
Mohammed was saying that ISLAM [as it was revealed to Mohammed], is 'set in concrete' and is unchangeable - Mohammed/Allah says this, so as to prohibit/prevent any other 'interpretation' of ISLAM, except his own!
So that others must accept ISLAM, as per, being interpreted by Mohammed.

But, Mohammed himself, proved to be, the greatest innovator - OF ISLAM.
e.g.
Mohammed was constantly changing Allah's 'perfect' religion - with every new revelation from Allah, to justify and to sanctify each new lust that Mohammed wished to exercise.




And Mohammed was such an 'innovator' in this regard, that many moslems were beginning to mumble that Allah seemed to often change his mind - depending upon Mohammed's circumstances.

And many moslems [of the age] also noticed how Allah often rushed, to reveal a new instruction, that seemed conveniently designed to satisfy Mohammed's current [carnal] desire.

And this mumbling among the ranks did not go unnoticed by Allah!!

But thankfully, Allah had the presence of mind, to reveal new Koran passages to Mohammed, to explain Allah's double mindedness and his servile nature [towards Mohammed]....


"O ye of Faith! Say not (to the Messenger) words of ambiguous import, but words of respect; and hearken (to him): To those without Faith is a grievous punishment.
It is never the wish of those without Faith among the People of the Book, nor of the Pagans, that anything good should come down to you from your Lord. But Allah will choose for His special Mercy whom He will - for Allah is Lord of grace abounding.
None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?"
Koran 2.104-106





Mohammed WAS A FRAUDSTER, and throughout his life, the greatest innovator - OF ISLAM.

And throughout history moslems have been both Mohammed's dupes and his co-fraudsters and innovators - OF ISLAM.

The 'religion' which ALL moslems follow, is called 'Mohammed-ism'.




Mohammad -the role model for muslims
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1375098020/51#51


"Dear muslim, YOU are the kuffar"
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1229682951/0#0








Even Aisha knew that Mohammed was a fraud.


islam murders
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1317254052/28#28

Quote:

It is recorded within ISLAMIC texts that even Aisha Mohammed's 9 year old child bride recognised how Allah's always seemed rush to satisfy Mohammed's next, immediate, worldly, desire... Narrated Aisha: "I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Apostle and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).' (33.51) I said (to the Prophet), "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires."  " hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #006.060.311 Even Aisha knew that Mohammed was a fraud. Aisha knew that Mohammed, was a fraud and the author, and the creator, of his own god, benefactor, and his very own divine 'servant', ....Allah. It was not Mohammed, that served Allah. It was Allah that was the servant of Mohammed. Every time that Mohammed wished to exercise a new lust, Mohammed's servant, Allah obligingly presented Mohammed with a new revelation, sanctioning each new lust.

Quantum wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:48pm:

Outside of just a handful of cities the place is a desert wasteland.

Another know-it-all who knows nothing.

There are forests in Saudi, Oman, Jordan, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon. I have seen some of them with my own eyes.

Oman: 
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/2010/12/765px-Salalah_Oman.jpg



Yemen

http://www.pumapix.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Cloud-Forest-and-Escarpment-in-Hawf.jpg

http://www.pumapix.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Cloud-Forest-in-Hawf1.jpg



Lebanon


http://www.theodora.com/wfb/photos/lebanon/aabadayat_forest_lebanon_photo_gov.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/Lebanon_cedar_forest.jpg/800px-Lebanon_cedar_forest.jpg

http://www.spnl.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Ehden-web-1024x672.jpg


http://www.bloggingbeirut.com/images/may06/theBlanket.jpg

http://www.discoverlebanon.com/en/posters/images/ehden_forest.jpg

Syria

http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/43908459.jpg

http://l.yimg.com/g/images/spaceout.gif

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2009/20090713_latakia.jpg

http://sana.sy/servers/gallery/201102/20110228-131425_h334172.jpg


Jordan

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GawU3ukm8HE/T8zyzdiQaAI/AAAAAAAAESo/1Wp2zhR12Do/s1600/ajloun-jordan-forest-pine-trees.jpg


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Uyi3-BJEbhU/T8zzC-c6-mI/AAAAAAAAESw/xbiVxsVQmz0/s1600/ajloun-jordan-forest-pine-trees3.jpg

http://cdn.greenglobaltravel.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_9569.jpg


http://cdn.greenglobaltravel.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_9575.jpg

http://cdn.greenglobaltravel.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_9685.jpg

http://www.7iber.com/wp-content/uploads/img_9064-570x379.jpg




Quantum wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:48pm:

There is no tree planting going on anywhere.

This a forest planted in the last few years between Mecca and Jeddah

http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/myfiles/Images/2013/03/12/ki08-big.jpg

The forest covers an area of 4 million sq. meters and has some 160 different kinds of trees, some of which are four meters high.

Many plants are available in the forest that provide pleasant smells such as henna and jasmine.

True Colours wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 7:28pm:

Quantum wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 12:48pm: Outside of just a handful of cities the place is a desert wasteland. Another know-it-all who knows nothing. There are forests in Saudi, Oman, Jordan, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon. I have seen some of them with my own eyes. Oman:  http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/files/2010/12/765px-Salalah_Oman.jpg Yemen http://www.pumapix.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Cloud-Forest-and-Escarpment-in-Hawf.jpg http://www.pumapix.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Cloud-Forest-in-Hawf1.jpg Lebanon http://www.theodora.com/wfb/photos/lebanon/aabadayat_forest_lebanon_photo_gov.jpg http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e1/Lebanon_cedar_forest.jpg/800px-Lebanon_cedar_forest.jpg http://www.spnl.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Ehden-web-1024x672.jpg http://www.bloggingbeirut.com/images/may06/theBlanket.jpg http://www.discoverlebanon.com/en/posters/images/ehden_forest.jpg Syria http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/43908459.jpg http://l.yimg.com/g/images/spaceout.gif http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2009/20090713_latakia.jpg http://sana.sy/servers/gallery/201102/20110228-131425_h334172.jpg Jordan http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-GawU3ukm8HE/T8zyzdiQaAI/AAAAAAAAESo/1Wp2zhR12Do/s1600/ajloun-jordan-forest-pine-trees.jpg http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Uyi3-BJEbhU/T8zzC-c6-mI/AAAAAAAAESw/xbiVxsVQmz0/s1600/ajloun-jordan-forest-pine-trees3.jpg http://cdn.greenglobaltravel.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_9569.jpg http://cdn.greenglobaltravel.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_9575.jpg http://cdn.greenglobaltravel.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_9685.jpg http://www.7iber.com/wp-content/uploads/img_9064-570x379.jpg Quantum wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 12:48pm: There is no tree planting going on anywhere. This a forest planted in the last few years between Mecca and Jeddah http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/myfiles/Images/2013/03/12/ki08-big.jpg The forest covers an area of 4 million sq. meters and has some 160 different kinds of trees, some of which are four meters high. Many plants are available in the forest that provide pleasant smells such as henna and jasmine.

And here is proof that Australia is a frozen wasteland;

http://www.downunder-naidion.com/resources/userdata/images/image/user_articles/2007/06/snow-canberra-australia-3.jpg

Do you really want to argue that most of the Middle East is not sand and rock? Do you really think you will fool anyone?

Quantum wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 9:55pm:

Do you really want to argue that most of the Middle East is not sand and rock? Do you really think you will fool anyone?

You weren't arguing that. You were arguing, in your words:


Quantum wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:48pm:

There is no tree planting going on anywhere.

Quantum wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:48pm:

The only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads.

...and TC has thoroughly blown those silly little claims out of the water.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 10:34pm:

Quantum wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 9:55pm: Do you really want to argue that most of the Middle East is not sand and rock? Do you really think you will fool anyone? You weren't arguing that. You were arguing, in your words: Quantum wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 12:48pm: There is no tree planting going on anywhere. Quantum wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 12:48pm: The only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads. ...and TC has thoroughly blown those silly little claims out of the water.

No he hasn't. This is what I said;

"Do you really think none of us have been to the home of Islam; The Middle East. Outside of just a handful of cities the place is a desert wasteland. There is no tree planting going on anywhere. Even the cities with them are hardly green. Just a few gardens, mostly around tourist areas and government properties. The only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads. When it comes to rees, they haven't exactly had a Napoleon renovating the place."

All he showed were pictures of natural forests plus plantations in and around cities. Where is the evidence of this mass tree planting going on throughout the Islamic lands?

He showed you pictures of reforestation projects, where you claimed there was "no tree planting going on anywhere".

He showed you vast tracts of native greenery - even in what was previously desert - where you claimed "the only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads".

Are you really going to continue attempting to defend this ridiculous argument of yours?

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 11:43pm:

He showed you pictures of reforestation projects, where you claimed there was "no tree planting going on anywhere". He showed you vast tracts of native greenery - even in what was previously desert - where you claimed "the only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads". Are you really going to continue attempting to defend this ridiculous argument of yours?

My argument is that if you go to the Middle East you will drive around for days on end looking at sand and rocks. The only thing you will see beside the road is not trees that have been planted, but piles of rubbish. A few native forests in Lebanon is hardly proof of tree planting for the last 1300 years throughout the Islamic lands. Lebanon has had forest long before Muhammad raped his first child. If you want to see tree planting going on in the Middle East then you have to go to Israel. Even then it is still mostly isolated to the Sea of Galilee and along the Syrian border. The areas along the Dead Sea look like the rest of the Middle East; a rocky barren sandpit (funny enough, these barren areas seem to be where most of the Muslims live)

Quantum wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 12:36am:

Lebanon has had forest long before Muhammad raped his first child

And yet this is an example of something "growing in the land of islam" that isn't "a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish..." Add to that the forest and bush lands of Syria, Jordan, Oman, Yemen etc...


Quantum wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 12:36am:

If you want to see tree planting going on in the Middle East then you have to go to Israel.

Uhhh except all the tree planting projects in Saudi Arabia - including a 4 million square metre forest between Mecca and Jedda that TC just showed us.  :D

Can we just agree that you are completely full of sh!t here so we can all move on please?  :)

Charlie has conversations with plants. Enough said.

I found a few more verses and hadeeth that are relevant:


The importance of nature's balance is mentioned in the Quran:


“Verily, all things have We created by measure” (Quran 54:49)

“…Everything to Him is measured.” (Quran 13:8)

“And We have produced therein everything in balance.” (Quran 55:7)


So establish weight with justice and fall not short in the balance.
(Quran 55:9)


“There shall be no damage and no infliction of damage.” (Al-Hakim)

“The world is beautiful and verdant, and verily God, be He exalted, has made you His stewards in it, and He sees how you acquit yourselves.” (Saheeh Muslim)


“There is a reward in doing good to every living thing.” (Saheeh Al-Bukhari, Saheeh Muslim)

Every animal is a worshipper of God - even an ant.

“The seven heavens and the earth and all the beings therein proclaim His glory: There is not a thing but celebrates His praise, but you understand not how they declare His glory…” (Quran 17:44)

There are several hadeeth explaining that the recompense for starving an animal is Hell. There are also several hadeeth explaining that providing water to thirsty animals can save people from going to Hell.

The Most Merciful One is merciful towards those who are merciful. Act kindly to those on the earth so that those in the heavens [the angels] will be merciful to you. (Tirmithi)

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 2:16am:

Quantum wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 12:36am: Lebanon has had forest long before Muhammad raped his first child And yet this is an example of something "growing in the land of islam" that isn't "a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish..." Add to that the forest and bush lands of Syria, Jordan, Oman, Yemen etc...

Which have not been planted by Muslims as some tree growing exercise as part of their religion. You are getting seriously desperate in your attemp to defend true colours BS.


Quote:

Quantum wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 12:36am: If you want to see tree planting going on in the Middle East then you have to go to Israel. Uhhh except all the tree planting projects in Saudi Arabia - including a 4 million square metre forest between Mecca and Jedda that TC just showed us.  :D Can we just agree that you are completely full of sh!t here so we can all move on please?  :)

You have never gone to the Middle East have you? That can be the only reason for your ignorant naive view about your holy lands.

Saudi Arabia is 2,150,000 square km. Your defence is that they have planted 4 square km of trees. That's all you have put forward. You write it as square meters to make it sound big. 4,000,000 square meters makes it sound a lot. But this isnt office space we are taking about. 1300 years of environmentalism and all you have is a recent development of 4 square km; and that is just Saudi Arabia. Look how big the rest of the Islamic lands are and where is all the tree planting?

You Muslims really think that all us infidels came down in the last shower. Your arguments are BS.

Quantum wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 9:33am:

Which have not been planted by Muslims as some tree growing exercise as part of their religion. You are getting seriously desperate in your attemp to defend true colours BS.

You really want to keep going with this dance?

I'll remind you again of what you said:


Quantum wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:48pm:

Do you really think none of us have been to the home of Islam; The Middle East. Outside of just a handful of cities the place is a desert wasteland. There is no tree planting going on anywhere. Even the cities with them are hardly green. Just a few gardens, mostly around tourist areas and government properties. The only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads. When it comes to rees, they haven't exactly had a Napoleon renovating the place.

BS claim #1: apart from a few gardens in a handful of cities, the islamic middle east is "a desert wasteland". TC just gave you a whole swag of pictures showing this is clearly not the case.

BS claim #2: "there is no tree planting going on anywhere". TC just showed you half a dozen or so tree planting projects in Saudi Arabia alone.

You are clearly now attempting to qualify your original claims of completely zero native greenery (outside a "handful of cities") and not a single tree planting project - by turning it into some watered down statement of "well this is mostly the case", but it is still important to remember what you originally tried to claim. Why? Because bigotry like yours is built on stereotypes like this - making sweeping generalisations like "islam is crap because in the land of islam its *ALL* poo and desert and rubbish - and no effort is being made to improve it". So when the stereotypes that form the basis of prejudice are shown to be full of sh!t (as it has been here), then the prejudice itself comes into serious questioning.

Quantum wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 12:36am:

...if you go to the Middle East you will drive around for days on end looking at sand and rocks.

http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/images/israelmap.jpg
The land of Israel...

Deuteronomy 11:12
....the eyes of the LORD thy God are always upon it....



The borderline between Egypt and Israel, going from the Mediterranean sea to Elat, is visible from space.

The land is darker, more vegetated, on the Israel side.

Why so ?








Deuteronomy 11:10
For the land, whither thou goest in to possess it, is not as the land of Egypt, from whence ye came out, where thou sowedst thy seed, and wateredst it with thy foot, as a garden of herbs:
11  But the land, whither ye go to possess it, is a land of hills and valleys, and drinketh water of the rain of heaven:
12  A land which the LORD thy God careth for: the eyes of the LORD thy God are always upon it, from the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year.
13  And it shall come to pass, if ye shall hearken diligently unto my commandments which I command you this day, to love the LORD your God, and to serve him with all your heart and with all your soul,
14  That I will give you the rain of your land in his due season, the first rain and the latter rain, that thou mayest gather in thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil.
15  And I will send grass in thy fields for thy cattle, that thou mayest eat and be full.



Leviticus 25:23
The land shall not be sold for ever: for the land is mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with me.






What is the name of Israel ?

Google;
israel, a prince with god


The name of Israel [in this world], is a 'standard' [to rally to], for those who love God - AND HIS RIGHTEOUSNESS.




Psalms 83:4
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.

Psalms 129:5
Let them all be confounded and turned back that hate Zion.

To the Israelites, God said....
Leviticus 25:23
The land shall not be sold for ever: FOR THE LAND IS MINE; for ye are strangers and sojourners with me.

Joel 1:6
For a nation is come up upon MY LAND,...

Joel 2:18
Then will the LORD be jealous for HIS LAND, and pity his people.

Joel 3:2
I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted MY LAND.

Zechariah 12:2
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.

Isaiah 14:26
This is the purpose that is purposed upon the whole earth: and this is the hand that is stretched out upon all the nations.
27  For the LORD of hosts hath purposed, and who shall disannul it? and his hand is stretched out, and who shall turn it back?

Isaiah 51:17
Awake, awake, stand up, O Jerusalem, which hast drunk at the hand of the LORD the cup of his fury; thou hast drunken the dregs of the cup of trembling, and wrung them out.
18  There is none to guide her among all the sons whom she hath brought forth; neither is there any that taketh her by the hand of all the sons that she hath brought up.
19  These two things are come unto thee; who shall be sorry for thee? desolation, and destruction, and the famine, and the sword: by whom shall I comfort thee?
20  Thy sons have fainted, they lie at the head of all the streets, as a wild bull in a net: they are full of the fury of the LORD, the rebuke of thy God.
21  Therefore hear now this, thou afflicted, and drunken, but not with wine:
22  Thus saith thy Lord the LORD, and thy God that pleadeth the cause of his people, Behold, I have taken out of thine hand the cup of trembling, even the dregs of the cup of my fury; thou shalt no more drink it again:
23  But I will put it into the hand of them that afflict thee; which have said to thy soul, Bow down, that we may go over: and thou hast laid thy body as the ground, and as the street, to them that went over.

Isaiah 52:1
Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.
2  Shake thyself from the dust; arise, and sit down, O Jerusalem: loose thyself from the bands of thy neck, O captive daughter of Zion.
3  For thus saith the LORD, Ye have sold yourselves for nought; and ye shall be redeemed without money.

Psalms 122:6
Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: they shall prosper that love thee.







OPEN YOUR EYES.

Isaiah 40:1
Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God.
2  Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she hath received of the LORD'S hand double for all her sins.
3  The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.

Yadda wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 11:38am:

The borderline between Egypt and Israel, going from the Mediterranean sea to Elat, is visible from space. The land is darker, more vegetated, on the Israel side. Why so ?

Um.. because the image stops at the Sinai Desert? Extend the image just a bit more to the west and you will no doubt see the extemsive "darkness" of the Nile Delta. Also there is a pretty large expanse of "dark" to the east of Israel in Syria, and also to the north in Lebanon.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 11:53am:

Yadda wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 11:38am: The borderline between Egypt and Israel, going from the Mediterranean sea to Elat, is visible from space. The land is darker, more vegetated, on the Israel side. Why so ? Um.. because the image stops at the Sinai Desert? Extend the image just a bit more to the west and you will no doubt see the extemsive "darkness" of the Nile Delta. Also there is a pretty large expanse of "dark" to the east of Israel in Syria, and also to the north in Lebanon.

gandalf,

Is your point, that a tributary of the Nile river must run along the Israeli side, of the Egypt and Israel border ???



gandalf,


I ask again;

In this arid area, why is the land darker, more vegetated, on the Israel side of the border between Egypt and Israel ???







http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/images/israelmap.jpg
The land of Israel...

Deuteronomy 11:12
....the eyes of the LORD thy God are always upon it....



The borderline between Egypt and Israel, going from the Mediterranean sea to Elat, is visible from space.

The land is darker, more vegetated, on the Israel side.

Why so ?






p.s.

The 'demarcation' line is clearly visible on the image.

But gandalf does not have eyes that can discriminate a difference - between Egypt, and Israel.

:P

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 10:26am:

Quantum wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 9:33am: Which have not been planted by Muslims as some tree growing exercise as part of their religion. You are getting seriously desperate in your attemp to defend true colours BS. You really want to keep going with this dance? I'll remind you again of what you said: Quantum wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 12:48pm: Do you really think none of us have been to the home of Islam; The Middle East. Outside of just a handful of cities the place is a desert wasteland. There is no tree planting going on anywhere. Even the cities with them are hardly green. Just a few gardens, mostly around tourist areas and government properties. The only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads. When it comes to rees, they haven't exactly had a Napoleon renovating the place.    BS claim #1: apart from a few gardens in a handful of cities, the islamic middle east is "a desert wasteland". TC just gave you a whole swag of pictures showing this is clearly not the case. BS claim #2: "there is no tree planting going on anywhere". TC just showed you half a dozen or so tree planting projects in Saudi Arabia alone. You are clearly now attempting to qualify your original claims of completely zero native greenery (outside a "handful of cities") and not a single tree planting project - by turning it into some watered down statement of "well this is mostly the case", but it is still important to remember what you originally tried to claim. Why? Because bigotry like yours is built on stereotypes like this - making sweeping generalisations like "islam is crap because in the land of islam its *ALL* poo and desert and rubbish - and no effort is being made to improve it". So when the stereotypes that form the basis of prejudice are shown to be full of sh!t (as it has been here), then the prejudice itself comes into serious questioning.

And your entire argument is that if someone pisses in the desert it is no longer a desert. You are trying to find the smallest exception to disqualify the norm. Funny how this logic doesn't work both ways though. If one Muslim out of a thousand blows up a bus it is in no way a reflection on them or the religion as a whole. But plant a few trees in an area of hundreds of thousands of square km and the place is a shinning example of environment transformation.

Lets be clear on this. The northan parts of the Middle East are full of trees. Everyone knows this! This area was green long before Islam existed. In no way is this evidence of Islam planting trees. The southern part of the Middle East - the part where Islam actually stated from - is sand and rock with the occasional tree and shrub area. Again, nothing new. No one actually believes that the south areas of the Middle East are devoid of any plants at all. Again, this has nothing to do with Islam. So where is the evidence of Islam planting trees? So far we have seen pictures of an area claimed to be 4 square km. 1300 years and this is the only evidence presented. You will have to do a lot better than that before you can claim BS on anything I've said.

Yadda wrote on Aug 13^th, 2013 at 12:53pm:

Mark Twain visited Israel in 1867, and published his impressions in Innocents Abroad.  He described a desolate country – devoid of both vegetation and human population:

LOL

I am tempted to post this in the retarded islamophobes thread.

Yadda, you do realise that there was no Israel until 1948?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

True Colours wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 2:15pm:

Yadda wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 12:53pm: Mark Twain visited Israel in 1867, and published his impressions in Innocents Abroad.  He described a desolate country – devoid of both vegetation and human population: LOL I am tempted to post this in the retarded islamophobes thread. Yadda, you do realise that there was no Israel until 1948?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Try to follow the argument for once.

The land in question is modern day Israel. This is a comparison of that land then (1867) till the land today. It is no different to saying that hundreds or thousands of years ago people landed in Australia. But the name Australia didn't exist back then either. We say "Australia" so people know what land is being talked about.

Stop trying to catch people out. You are looking like a bigger idiot every post you make.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 11:53am:

Yadda wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 11:38am: The borderline between Egypt and Israel, going from the Mediterranean sea to Elat, is visible from space. The land is darker, more vegetated, on the Israel side. Why so ? Um.. because the image stops at the Sinai Desert? Extend the image just a bit more to the west and you will no doubt see the extemsive "darkness" of the Nile Delta. Also there is a pretty large expanse of "dark" to the east of Israel in Syria, and also to the north in Lebanon.

Good question Yadda. My first thought would be goats.

Gandalf, you have completely missed the point. Have another look at the picture and the question Yadda asked. The answer has nothing to do with where the image ends.

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 2:46pm:

Gandalf, you have completely missed the point. Have another look at the picture and the question Yadda asked. The answer has nothing to do with where the image ends.

The "point" Yadda was attempting to make was that the backwardness of Egypt is evidenced by the contrast in cultivated greenery between the two sides of the Egypt-Israel border. East of the border lies the great advanced "green" state of Israel, to the west, the backward primitive "desert" state of Egypt. My point is that the border of Egypt runs through the Sinai Desert. *MY* point is that the cultivation of Egypt is not defined by what is or isn't cultivated in the Sinai desert. The Sinai Desert comprises a tiny fraction of the Egyptian state. The Egyptian state is basically built along the fertile land of the Nile delta - as it has been for about 10 thousand years. So if you would only extend Yadda's satelite image a few hundred kms west, we would all marvel at the wonders of the "green" Egyptian state. It would be a bit like saying Australia is a backward uncultivated country - by pointing to the great expanse of the central deserts, while ignoring the huge amount of productive land on the eastern half.

That fenceline provides a perfect comparison Gandalf. Comparing the Nile delta with the Israeli desert is utterly meaningless, though it is no surprise that you attempt to deflect to that. On the other hand comparing either side of the fenceline does tell you something. I'm not sure what the answer is yet, but I know for certain it is not "hey, look over there".

You might as well tell your neighbour who complains about the dust blowing out of your backyard that the important point is how green it is in the Amazon.

I'm not sure what your point is. Perhaps you think Muslims are responsible for building the Nile river and reclaiming the delta from the sea, but that fenceline is just an accident of geography.

Quantum wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 1:30pm:

And your entire argument is that if someone pisses in the desert it is no longer a desert. You are trying to find the smallest exception to disqualify the norm.

Smallest exceptions are all I need to debunk the stupid claims you were making. Do I need to requote to you exactly what you said?



Quote:

But plant a few trees in an area of hundreds of thousands of square km and the place is a shinning example of environment transformation.

The fact that there are a few trees being planted is enough to debunk your original claim, and expose it as nothing but stereotyping and prejudism. Remember what you said? "Nothing" growing except trash by the side of the road?

But really, whats this argument all about? Aggressive reforestation/environmental transformation by Israel - compared to the muslim states is proof of their superiority over the muslims - right? Thats the point you are trying to make. Its a kindergarten level argument that ignores the fact that most muslim countries already have a bountiful revenue source in natural resources - especially oil. Never mind that Israel has very little of this, and therefore is forced to engage in a more rigorous "greening" program to make up for their lack of resources. Gulf states have an extremely high standard of living, and do not pay any income taxes. So I'd say their comparitive lack of environmental transformation is due to the fact that they are doing fine without it.


Quote:

1300 years and this is the only evidence presented. You will have to do a lot better than that before you can claim BS on anything I've said.

If I showed you only one tree being planted by the Saudis, then that already makes your argument BS.

True Colours wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 2:15pm:

Yadda wrote on Aug 13th, 2013 at 12:53pm: Mark Twain visited Israel in 1867, and published his impressions in Innocents Abroad.  He described a desolate country – devoid of both vegetation and human population: LOL I am tempted to post this in the retarded islamophobes thread. Yadda, you do realise that there was no Israel until 1948?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Well, Israel means a struggle with G_d. Perhaps Y was referring to that.

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 3:46pm:

On the other hand comparing either side of the fenceline does tell you something. I'm not sure what the answer is yet, but I know for certain it is not "hey, look over there".

I'll tell you what it means FD - over half of the border is as the same darkness on both sides - as it is rocky, barren mountainous land. Of the remaining, about half of that is the Gaza strip - which as you lot are always at great pains to point out, is administered by the muslim Hamas. Perhaps you or Yadda can offer some profound analysis as to how the impoverished, penned up Gazans are so much more advanced than the Egyptians? And what of the remaining about 25% of the border in question? Perhaps that one side of the fence represents a critical part of one country's economy, while the other side represents an inconsequential extremity of another country?

Can you just think this through please FD? How many times the size of Israel is Egypt? The majority of Egypt is wasteland desert - including their eastern extremity where the Sinai Desert is. Yet the small strip of arable land they rely on is probably bigger than the entire state of Israel - I'm guessing. That is more than enough to support the Egyptian state - even with its significantly larger population. Compare this to Israel - no natural resources, and already contending with close to half of their country being the barren, non-arable expanse of the Negev desert. The great "mystery" of this contrasting borders, if you ask me, is quite simply the fact that one country have been forced through necessity to develop their side, while the other country on the other side simply don't need to worry too much about it - since their richness lies well west of that region.

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 2:46pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 11:53am: Yadda wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 11:38am: The borderline between Egypt and Israel, going from the Mediterranean sea to Elat, is visible from space. The land is darker, more vegetated, on the Israel side. Why so ? Um.. because the image stops at the Sinai Desert? Extend the image just a bit more to the west and you will no doubt see the extemsive "darkness" of the Nile Delta. Also there is a pretty large expanse of "dark" to the east of Israel in Syria, and also to the north in Lebanon. Good question Yadda. My first thought would be goats.

FD,

No argument.

Clearly the land along that border area, in Egypt, is being more heavily grazed.

But the contrast along that border, also is indicative of the contrast between how the Jewish people manage a resource, and how moslems manage the same resource.

i.e.
ISLAMIC culture would tend to allow 'righteous' ['can do no wrong'] moslems to always over exploit and 'rape' resources which fall under their control.

And the example along the Egypt/Israel border just highlights and is indicative of the difference between how Jewish culture and how ISLAMIC culture treats a natural resource like land - imo.i


Quote:

Gandalf, you have completely missed the point. Have another look at the picture and the question Yadda asked. The answer has nothing to do with where the image ends.

No FD, there is clearly a Zionist river under the land on the Israeli side of the border.

MY THEORY IS THAT those Zionists are prolly siphoning off the water for their secret underground Zionist river, from the Egyptian Nile!!!

Those Zionists are stealing Egyptian water, for their secret Zionist river using a secret Zionist pipeline from Egypt!!

Honest!






ALSO,

Dontyaknow, that those Zionists have been training poisonous snakes to attack Palestinians.

We should more properly refer to these serpents as 'ZIONIST snakes'!


Israel Incites Snake Attacks
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/09/israel-incites-snake-attacks.html

Quote:

Arabs in Samaria have complained that attack snakes are being sent into the area from the Israeli city of Ariel, one woman has been bitten by one such snake. The local Palestinians base this accusation on the fact that a woman nearby to Ariel was bitten by a snake which witnesses say then fled back towards the city. The Palestinians interpreted the snake's heading as a clear indication that the reptile was a trained assassin working for Mossad.

Those ingenious, sneaky, dastardly Zionists!!!!!

Those Zionists are just too clever for us slaves of Allah!



Or, maybe the Zionists have cast spells on the snakes, with the aid of SATAN ?

Yes! That is it!!!!

SATAN is working with the Zionists, to attack the innocent moslems!

Yadda wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 5:38pm:

Clearly the land along that border area, in Egypt, is being more heavily grazed.

Or... it could be just untouched, unimproved desert... maybe?


Yadda wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 5:38pm:

SLAMIC culture would tend to allow 'righteous' ['can do no wrong'] moslems to always over exploit and 'rape' resources which fall under their control.

So the Sinai was once a flourishing garden of Eden was it? Until the muslims came along... :P

Y, do you have any evidence that the Sinai was EVER productive land, that has since been over exploited and "raped" into barrenness by the big bad muslims?


Yadda wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 5:38pm:

No FD, there is clearly a Zionist river under the land on the Israeli side of the border.

No, the Israelis have obviously worked very hard to "make the desert bloom" in that area - and they have evidently done a very good job, and should be commended. However what the Israelis do through necessity isn't in any way indicative of how productive or otherwise the muslims are on the other side of the fence - just because they choose not to develop one particular area of their country - because, unlike the Israelis, they have other more productive areas that are already developed and provide adequately for the people.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 4:13pm:

Quantum wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 1:30pm: And your entire argument is that if someone pisses in the desert it is no longer a desert. You are trying to find the smallest exception to disqualify the norm. Smallest exceptions are all I need to debunk the stupid claims you were making. Do I need to requote to you exactly what you said? Quote: But plant a few trees in an area of hundreds of thousands of square km and the place is a shinning example of environment transformation. The fact that there are a few trees being planted is enough to debunk your original claim, and expose it as nothing but stereotyping and prejudism. Remember what you said? "Nothing" growing except trash by the side of the road? But really, whats this argument all about? Aggressive reforestation/environmental transformation by Israel - compared to the muslim states is proof of their superiority over the muslims - right? Thats the point you are trying to make. Its a kindergarten level argument that ignores the fact that most muslim countries already have a bountiful revenue source in natural resources - especially oil. Never mind that Israel has very little of this, and therefore is forced to engage in a more rigorous "greening" program to make up for their lack of resources. Gulf states have an extremely high standard of living, and do not pay any income taxes. So I'd say their comparitive lack of environmental transformation is due to the fact that they are doing fine without it. [quote]1300 years and this is the only evidence presented. You will have to do a lot better than that before you can claim BS on anything I've said.

If I showed you only one tree being planted by the Saudis, then that already makes your argument BS.
[/quote]

You are a particularly special breed of stupid aren't you. You complain about kindergarten stuff, read what you have above.

"Smallest exceptions are all I need to debunk the stupid claims you were making."

Really?

* Can someone say Australia is hot? Not when you're around. It snows in Australia.
* Can someone say Australia is dry? Not when you're around. It rains in Australia.
* Can someone say Russia is cold? Not when you're around. They get hot days in Russia.
* Can someone say Siberia is full of trees? Not when you're around. There are some areas where there are no trees.
* Can we say that the Arctic is made of Ice? Not when you're around. There are some rocks up there as well.

Any more stupid examples needed? Your idea that you need just one tiny example to disqualify the norm is beyond retarded. More retarded is when you are changing the subject!

"The fact that there are a few trees being planted is enough to debunk your original claim,"

"I'd say their comparitive lack of environmental transformation is due to the fact that they are doing fine without it"

"If I showed you only one tree being planted by the Saudis, then that already makes your argument BS."

Forgetting what this is about so quickly? The tree planting was supposed to be for religious reasons to be environmental. Did you forget the opening post? The original claim was that Islam says to plant trees, hence Islam is good for the environment.

* 1 Tree would not be proof of that being put into practice!
* A small park would not be proof of this being put into practice!
* Economical reasons would not excuse neglecting this command!
* The fact that there are areas that have had trees there for thousands of years does not show this being put into practice!

Do I need to make it clearer?

* True colours argument is that Islam is environmentally friendly because it plants tress.
* My argument is that you can go all over the Middle east and you won't see this tree planting happening (except in Israel)
* Your argument is that if the Saudis plant just one smacking tree then that proves True Colours claim.

You are so desperate to argue in the favour of Islam you don't even know what the bugger it is you are arguing about.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 4:40pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 3:46pm: On the other hand comparing either side of the fenceline does tell you something. I'm not sure what the answer is yet, but I know for certain it is not "hey, look over there". I'll tell you what it means FD - over half of the border is as the same darkness on both sides - as it is rocky, barren mountainous land. Of the remaining, about half of that is the Gaza strip - which as you lot are always at great pains to point out, is administered by the muslim Hamas. Perhaps you or Yadda can offer some profound analysis as to how the impoverished, penned up Gazans are so much more advanced than the Egyptians? And what of the remaining about 25% of the border in question? Perhaps that one side of the fence represents a critical part of one country's economy, while the other side represents an inconsequential extremity of another country? Can you just think this through please FD? How many times the size of Israel is Egypt? The majority of Egypt is wasteland desert - including their eastern extremity where the Sinai Desert is. Yet the small strip of arable land they rely on is probably bigger than the entire state of Israel - I'm guessing. That is more than enough to support the Egyptian state - even with its significantly larger population. Compare this to Israel - no natural resources, and already contending with close to half of their country being the barren, non-arable expanse of the Negev desert. The great "mystery" of this contrasting borders, if you ask me, is quite simply the fact that one country have been forced through necessity to develop their side, while the other country on the other side simply don't need to worry too much about it - since their richness lies well west of that region.

You can see the difference along the entire fenceline Gandalf. Not just part of it. Are you suggesting that Israel is putting all of that desert to some sort of use in a way that makes it greener, whereas Egypt's side is more arid because they ignore it?

Your concepts of "forcing" sound good until you scratch the surface. The fact is, the Egyptians are dirt poor. If anyone is feeling a need to exploit every inch of what they can, it would be them. Having 50 million people crammed into another part of the country that gets a bit more water doesn't really change that. There is no "richness" drawing everyone away so no-one pays attention to it, just shared poverty in greater and lesser human concentrations.

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 6:07pm:

You can see the difference along the entire fenceline Gandalf. Not just part of it.

Really? I must be having problems with my sight then. Here it is again:

http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/images/israelmap.jpg

I reckon about 75% of that border is identical on both sides - ie where all the rocks and mountains are. I'm pretty sure no agricultural improvements have been going on there - either side of the border.


freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 6:07pm:

Are you suggesting that Israel is putting all of that desert to some sort of use in a way that makes it greener, whereas Egypt's side is more arid because they ignore it?

Thats exactly what I'm saying - in the small part that you can actually see a difference. Funnily enough, the Gazans seem to be doing the same. Maybe something to do with both the Gazans and Israelis not having much choice about what land they need to use?


freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 6:07pm:

Your concepts of "forcing" sound good until you scratch the surface. The fact is, the Egyptians are dirt poor. If anyone is feeling a need to exploit every inch of what they can, it would be them. Having 50 million people crammed into another part of the country that gets a bit more water doesn't really change that. There is no "richness" drawing everyone away so no-one pays attention to it, just shared poverty in greater and lesser human concentrations.

I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Does anyone actually live in the Sinai? What evidence is there that the region has been over-exploited - or exploited at all? The vast majority of Egyptians live along the Nile Delta - I've never heard of that area being so overused that they need to start exploiting the Sinai (a tiny part of the country) to ease the burden on the Nile. Have you? Yadda seems to think its been "raped" to the point of being unusable. Is there any evidence that they have exploited that area at all - let alone "raped"??

Quote:

I reckon about 75% of that border is identical on both sides - ie where all the rocks and mountains are.

Take a closer look. Start by asking yourself how you know so easily where the border is.


Quote:

I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Does anyone actually live in the Sinai?

There must be someone out there doing something to make a difference you can see from space.


Quote:

What evidence is there that the region has been over-exploited - or exploited at all?

Like I said, I don't have the answer to that. We're still arguing over whether there is a difference and whether it really matters.


Quote:

The vast majority of Egyptians live along the Nile Delta - I've never heard of that area being so overused that they need to start exploiting the Sinai

It's not an all or nothing thing Gandalf. It's not like they'll one day realise the delta is overcrowded and that all 80 million of them should move into the desert. It's like you are arguing that there is no farming in Tasmania because the nightlife is better in Sydney.


Quote:

Is there any evidence that they have exploited that area at all - let alone "raped"??

Yes Gandalf, the photo.

Quantum wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 6:04pm:

You are a particularly special breed of stupid aren't you. You complain about kindergarten stuff, read what you have above. "Smallest exceptions are all I need to debunk the stupid claims you were making." Really? * Can someone say Australia is hot? Not when you're around. It snows in Australia. * Can someone say Australia is dry? Not when you're around. It rains in Australia. * Can someone say Russia is cold? Not when you're around. They get hot days in Russia. * Can someone say Siberia is full of trees? Not when you're around. There are some areas where there are no trees. * Can we say that the Arctic is made of Ice? Not when you're around. There are some rocks up there as well.

No, comparable statements would be:

- Australia is entirely hot
- Australia is entirely dry
- There are no areas in Sibera where there are no trees

etc etc...

Again, what you said:


Quote:

There is no tree planting going on anywhere .

Quote:

The only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads.

No tree planting going on anywhere in the muslim world - none, nada, zilch. I therefore have to show you just one tree being planted to disprove this statement.

Nothing growing in the land of islam except plastic bottles and rubbish - no plant life growing - none, nada, zilch. I therefore have to show you just one plant growin in the land of islam to disprove this statement.

Am I getting through yet?

You have of course accepted the absurdity of your claim by talking now about such plant life being an insignificant exception to the rule - though you refuse to acknowledge this openly.

But who cares right? Your point is clearly that planting and revegetation is not the islamic world's strong point. Fair enough. But your original BS claim betrays classic prejudism that is expressed through outrageous stereotypes ("all black people are stupid", "all jews are crooks" - and "all muslims are unclean and don't give a hoot about the environment"). Once your stereotypes are blown out of the water, the prejudices that those stereotypes are based on, are called into some serious questioning.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 7:11pm:

Quantum wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 6:04pm: You are a particularly special breed of stupid aren't you. You complain about kindergarten stuff, read what you have above. "Smallest exceptions are all I need to debunk the stupid claims you were making." Really? * Can someone say Australia is hot? Not when you're around. It snows in Australia. * Can someone say Australia is dry? Not when you're around. It rains in Australia. * Can someone say Russia is cold? Not when you're around. They get hot days in Russia. * Can someone say Siberia is full of trees? Not when you're around. There are some areas where there are no trees. * Can we say that the Arctic is made of Ice? Not when you're around. There are some rocks up there as well. No, comparable statements would be: - Australia is entirely hot - Australia is entirely dry - There are no areas in Sibera where there are no trees etc etc... Again, what you said: Quote: There is no tree planting going on anywhere . [quote]The only thing growing in the land of Islam is a collection of plastic bottles and rubbish along the side of the roads.

No tree planting going on anywhere in the muslim world - none, nada, zilch. I therefore have to show you just one tree being planted to disprove this statement.

Nothing growing in the land of islam except plastic bottles and rubbish - no plant life growing - none, nada, zilch. I therefore have to show you just one plant growin in the land of islam to disprove this statement.

Am I getting through yet?

You have of course accepted the absurdity of your claim by talking now about such plant life being an insignificant exception to the rule - though you refuse to acknowledge this openly.

But who cares right? Your point is clearly that planting and revegetation is not the islamic world's strong point. Fair enough. But your original BS claim betrays classic prejudism that is expressed through outrageous stereotypes ("all black people are stupid", "all jews are crooks" - and "all muslims are unclean and don't give a hoot about the environment"). Once your stereotypes are blown out of the water, the prejudices that those stereotypes are based on, are called into some serious questioning.[/quote]

Is there a particular reason why discussing anything with Muslims on this forum is impossible? Even here we needed 2 pages to get down to the heart of the issue. Your ridiculous reading of the word "anywhere" and "the only thing" to be taken as absolutes.

Do you enjoy making an idiot of yourself? Do you think that proving a smart arse comment as being literally wrong is some kind of victory? The fact that you took my "The only thing growing.... rubbish along the side of the road" comment as something that need to be disproved by showing one tree growing is laughable. It was a provoking comment that is not supposed to be taken literally to that extreme. A normal English speaking Australian would know that of course, so I'm not surprised you didn't get it.

At the end of two pages, it seems all this was just looking for an argument to deflect pressure off your brother TC's BS comments. There is no mass tree planting effort in the name of Islam. Islam therefore is in no way helping the environment through tree planting. That doesn't mean that it is necessary damaging the environment (yet if you actually do go there you will see the streets and rivers are indeed full of rubbish), but it certainly is not helping the environment with trees as TC claims.      

Quantum wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 7:41pm:

Even here we needed 2 pages to get down to the heart of the issue. Your ridiculous reading of the word "anywhere" and "the only thing" to be taken as absolutes.

Prejudice is born from these absolutes. Its not a trivial matter. Debunking these stereotypes is critical to exposing prejudice for what it is - ignorant bigotry that has little basis in fact.


Quantum wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 7:41pm:

There is no mass tree planting effort in the name of Islam

Isn't there? Depends on your definition of "mass". TC posted quite a few pictures of what looked liked fairly substantial tree planting projects. I have also found other projects in the UAE and Syria. Google tree planting in the arab world, and its fairly clear that there is quite a bit of awareness amongst arabs, and quite a few projects are both being implemented and in the pipeline. The evidence suggests that your portrayal of a trash-infested barren arab world, where there is no interest in environmental issues, is dubious at best.

Have you figured out where the border is yet gandalf?

Yes I have FD - it is clearly visible.

Here you go, perhaps this will help. I have added an arrow where I think the light/dark contrast becomes visible on the border. South of that arrow is just as dark on either side of the border as far as I'm concerned. I also added another marker to point out another area of greenery - this is in Syria. Does this mean that Syria is awesome like Israel?

http://i42.tinypic.com/14ncsuc.jpg

Also this might be useful:

http://i40.tinypic.com/x4qi6w.jpg

Map of all of Egypt. Notice the great big patch of green along the Nile, especially at the top? Thats the heart and soul of Egypt - not the Sinai. I have also added a marker to show the same Israeli-Egypt border position from the original image.

Again, do you have any evidence that the Sinai on the Egyptian side of the border was ever over-exploited or "raped" by muslims to make it unfarmable? No. The Sinai was never farmed - cultivated or grazed. It has a population of less than a million, and tourism is almost its sole industry.

Perhaps you should get your eyes checked Gandalf. There is a very clear difference along the whole border. The second map you posted makes the difference look even more dramatic. The only reasonable conclusion is that something man-made is causing a difference in the landscape that is big enough to be obvious from space.


Quote:

Thats the heart and soul of Egypt - not the Sinai.

Not sure why you keep pointing this out. Does Islam only apply at the heart and soul of Egypt? Are Egyptians unaware that the rest of the country exists?

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 8:11pm:

Quantum wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 7:41pm: Even here we needed 2 pages to get down to the heart of the issue. Your ridiculous reading of the word "anywhere" and "the only thing" to be taken as absolutes. Prejudice is born from these absolutes. Its not a trivial matter. Debunking these stereotypes is critical to exposing prejudice for what it is - ignorant bigotry that has little basis in fact. Quantum wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 7:41pm: There is no mass tree planting effort in the name of Islam Isn't there? Depends on your definition of "mass". TC posted quite a few pictures of what looked liked fairly substantial tree planting projects. I have also found other projects in the UAE and Syria. Google tree planting in the arab world, and its fairly clear that there is quite a bit of awareness amongst arabs, and quite a few projects are both being implemented and in the pipeline. The evidence suggests that your portrayal of a trash-infested barren arab world, where there is no interest in environmental issues, is dubious at best.

Again I have to ask if you have ever actually been to the Middle East? Forget websites looking to talk up the great work being done. Actually seen it?

Turkey is clean, no doubt about that. At least the western half of the country. Cleaner than Israel even, which is actually a bit over rated. But Jordan? Egypt? Cairo is a tip. Even indian cities are cleaner than that place. The roads in and out have little walls of rubbish to either side where the junk has been built up like snow. Much the same can be said for the roads in Jordan and Lebanon (at least the southern area). These are hardly indicators of having a plan for the environment. One off government works hardly cover up the norm.

Gandalf, take any section of that border from either picture, cut out a square the size of the arrow you drew next to it with the border cutting the square roughly in half, flip it and/or rotate it 90 degrees, and post it back up. We will tell you which side is Israel.

Then get your eyes checked. Or get a better monitor.

freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 10:11pm:

Not sure why you keep pointing this out. Does Islam only apply at the heart and soul of Egypt? Are Egyptians unaware that the rest of the country exists?

I literally can't fathom your confusion.

Israel is tiny and has a far higher population density than Egypt - about 352 per square km compared to about 82 per square km. Israel have obviously deemed it extremely important to develop and cultivate all the possible land they can. Egypt can be much more picky, and in fact rely on, and have always relied on for about 10 thousand years, on the Nile River. The Nile River does not run through the Sinai. 

Its actually an acknowledgement of Israel's achievement - they have, through necessity, made the desert bloom. They should be commended for that. Egypt on the other hand have the gift of the Nile, they have it much easier. They haven't had the need to improve and develop the desert of the Sinai. So I really don't know why you and Yadda are complaining about deflections and dishonesty. Is it because I won't partake in the absurd game of pretending its all due to irresponsible over-cultivating and "raping" of the soil by muslims?


freediver wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 10:23pm:

Gandalf, take any section of that border from either picture, cut out a square the size of the arrow you drew next to it with the border cutting the square roughly in half, flip it and/or rotate it 90 degrees, and post it back up. We will tell you which side is Israel.

Whatever. I still don't see it. In any case my point is still valid. If its greener its because the Israelis made it greener - not because the Egyptians made their side less green.

Quantum wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 10:23pm:

Again I have to ask if you have ever actually been to the Middle East?

I have. I have lived in the Middle East, and have visited 10 of the major Arab cities in Western Asia. I have also driven thousands of kilometres through the region. I have seen the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, and the Meditteranean from Arab lands. I found it fairly clean - in fact often better than Australia.

The fact is that the level of cleanliness is fairly relative to the wealth of the country. The Gulf countries are the cleanest.




Nearly 3/4 of Lebanon's population is either Christian, Shia, Druze or Jewish, so it is not really the place to see whether people are living by the environmental standards set out in Islamic hadeeth.

True Colours wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 12:55am:

Quantum wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 10:23pm: Again I have to ask if you have ever actually been to the Middle East? I have. I have lived in the Middle East, and have visited 10 of the major Arab cities in Western Asia. I have also driven thousands of kilometres through the region. I have seen the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, and the Meditteranean from Arab lands. I found it fairly clean - in fact often better than Australia.

Who the bugger are you trying to kid sonny? Often better than Australia you say... one of the cleanest countries in the world, but not often as clean as the Middle East :D

Do you really think anyone will believe that you have been all over the Middle East and some how found it fairly clean? FFS.

Cairo. No different to any Sydney Suburb really.

http://www.inhabitat.com/wp-content/uploads/garbagecity-ed01.jpg

Jordan. Could be along any Australian road.

http://d3p1chd7tgpadi.cloudfront.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Peter-West-Carey-Jordan2012-0713-2329.jpg

No one can go through the Middle East and think it is clean. Especially not to Australian levels, which not being Singapore type spotless, is still unbelievably clean on a world scale.

That picture from Jordan is not some one off bit along the road. You can drive for ages along any Jordan road and the rubbish just never ends. Km after km, a never ending snake of rubbish along the side of the road.   


Quote:

Nearly 3/4 of Lebanon's population is either Christian, Shia, Druze or Jewish, so it is not really the place to see whether people are living by the environmental standards set out in Islamic hadeeth.

I think you have that back to front. There are more Muslims in Lebanon then any other religion by a long way. Funny enough it the southern and mostly Muslim areas that has the dirties streets.

True Colours wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 12:55am:

I have. I have lived in the Middle East, and have visited 10 of the major Arab cities in Western Asia. I have also driven thousands of kilometres through the region. I have seen the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, and the Meditteranean from Arab lands. I found it fairly clean - in fact often better than Australia.

Thats the biggest load of rubbish ever told, these countries are filthy sh!tholes with almost non existent sanitation programmes.. The middle east is almost exactly like Asia in this regard, the extreme proliferation of plastic rubbish almost everywhere with no consistent or viable plan to clean it up.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 11:19pm:

freediver wrote on Aug 14th, 2013 at 10:11pm: Not sure why you keep pointing this out. Does Islam only apply at the heart and soul of Egypt? Are Egyptians unaware that the rest of the country exists? I literally can't fathom your confusion. Israel is tiny and has a far higher population density than Egypt - about 352 per square km compared to about 82 per square km. Israel have obviously deemed it extremely important to develop and cultivate all the possible land they can. Egypt can be much more picky, and in fact rely on, and have always relied on for about 10 thousand years, on the Nile River. The Nile River does not run through the Sinai.  Its actually an acknowledgement of Israel's achievement - they have, through necessity, made the desert bloom. They should be commended for that. Egypt on the other hand have the gift of the Nile, they have it much easier. They haven't had the need to improve and develop the desert of the Sinai. So I really don't know why you and Yadda are complaining about deflections and dishonesty. Is it because I won't partake in the absurd game of pretending its all due to irresponsible over-cultivating and "raping" of the soil by muslims?

gandalf,

The objective fact, is that the borderline between Egypt and Israel, going from the Mediterranean sea to Elat, is visible from space.

On one side of the border is Israel - the land is managed by Jews.

On the other side of the border is Egypt - the land is managed by Mohammedan's.

So what ? .....you ask ?



This is my [already stated] point.....


Yadda wrote on Aug 14^th, 2013 at 5:38pm:

....the example along the Egypt/Israel border just highlights and is indicative of the difference between how Jewish culture and how ISLAMIC culture treats a natural resource like land - imo.

What is wrong with my argument gandalf ?

Look again, at the photo-map of Israel from space.

On one side of the border is Israel - the land is managed by Jews.

On the other side of the border is Egypt - the land is managed by Mohammedan's.





gandalf,

Q.
1/ If the Mohammedan's are more righteous than Jews,
2/ if the Mohammedan's have a more virtuous and righteous culture, more righteous than anyone else on the planet [i.e. because Mohammedan's follow Allah's Koranic laws vs every one else's 'man-made laws'],
3/ if ISLAM is Allah's perfect religion for all of mankind,
then why is there less desertification on the Jewish side of the Egypt/Israel border [when the Jews are sub-humans [the children of apes and pigs], a people that Allah says moslems must exterminate] ?




gandalf,

Allah declares that the moslem is superior to other people, BECAUSE OF HIS INDISPUTABLE VIRTUE.

Allah's perfect 'religion' affirms it to them!

"Ye [moslems] 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





So if moslems are people 'enjoining what is right, [and] forbidding what is wrong', why do 'righteous' moslems 'tend' to create deserts - wherever they have lived ?

The whole of North Africa [has been ISLAMIC for the past 1,400 years], Afghanistan, Pakistan, Jordan, Sudan, Iraq, Syria, Egypt.



e.g.
Why have Indonesians [and Malaysians] been raping [destroying] their unique rainforests for the last few decades ?

Is it because they can ?




And what will be left, when they have chopped down all of their unique rainforests ?

A landscape full of Palm oil plantations ?

Quote:

Why have Indonesians [and Malaysians] been raping [destroying] their unique rainforests for the last few decades ? Is it because they can ? And what will be left, when they have chopped down all of their unique rainforests ? A landscape full of Palm oil plantations ?

Google;
palm oil plantations, rainforests



In past centuries, the Indonesian [and Malaysian] rainforests were too extensive to quickly destroy 'by human hands', but now, because of the mechanisation of logging [using huge machinery] in the last few decades, vast areas in Indonesian and Malaysia have been deforested - for commercial gain - by a corrupted culture of greed.

Both of these societies have been predominantly influenced by ISLAMIC culture and 'values'.

No ?

Yadda wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 2:05am:

gandalf, Q. 1/ If the Mohammedan's are more righteous than Jews, 2/ if the Mohammedan's have a more virtuous and righteous culture, more righteous than anyone else on the planet [i.e. because Mohammedan's follow Allah's Koranic laws vs every one else's 'man-made laws'], 3/ if ISLAM is Allah's perfect religion for all of mankind, then why is there less desertification on the Jewish side of the Egypt/Israel border [when the Jews are sub-humans [the children of apes and pigs], a people that Allah says moslems must exterminate] ?

Y, as I've attempted to explain many times now, if Israel don't develop the land on their side of the Egyptian border, they don't have much land left to develop. Egypt on the other hand has many times more land than Israel, and can be a bit more picky with choosing which land to develop. Why don't they make the Sinai desert bloom? Probably because its not economical to do so. They can stick to the Nile Delta and be quite comfortable. Especially now they have the High Aswan Dam.

As I said, Israel should be commended for what they have achieved, but its by no means a reflection on what the Egyptians, or any other neighbouring musims haven't achieved - or what you were attempting to claim before - what they have destroyed. What about the Gazans Y? How do you explain the fact that their land is just as dark as the Israeli land? Are you going to argue that Hamas are great advanced environmental managers? By your logic you should.

Incidentally, if you want to look at great achievements by muslims in advancing a nation in a desolate desert, look no further at Gaddafi's incredible system of aquifers that make up the world's largest man-made irigation system. A system that helped Libya achieve the highest standard of living in all of Africa.

Quantum wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 1:47am:

Who the bugger are you trying to kid sonny? Often better than Australia you say... one of the cleanest countries in the world, but not often as clean as the Middle East Cheesy Do you really think anyone will believe that you have been all over the Middle East and some how found it fairly clean? FFS.

Have you been to the Gulf countries Quantum? TC did make special mention of them. I have heard they are very clean - which would support the idea that a nations' cleanliness is, more than anything, a function of the nation's wealth and prosperity.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 3:12am:

Have you been to the Gulf countries

I have Gandalf don't like them much myself Dubai for instance does not have a sewage system.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Drq-WhpmfkU

Maybe they find other things more important.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2392892/Roman-Abramovich-loses-worlds-biggest-yacht-owner-title-Emirati-royals-390m-590ft-super-yacht.html

Did you know that Byzantium north Africa was one of the most productive food bowls it was the largest grower of olives in the world at the time. Now it is a desert. I wonder if that is climate change or laziness by the inhabitants?

http://www.amazon.com/Byzantium-Surprising-Life-Medieval-Empire/dp/0691143692

Adamant wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 10:44am:

Dubai for instance does not have a sewage system.

No adamant, you have fallen for a hoax:
http://www.hoax-slayer.com/dubai-sewage-trucks.shtml

Dubai has a functioning sewage system, but was stretched for a very brief period in 2009 due to rapid population growth. During that time trucks were brought in as a stop-gap measure before the required expansion of infrastructure was completed:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitation_in_Dubai#2009_Sewage_Issues


Adamant wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 10:44am:

Did you know that Byzantium north Africa was one of the most productive food bowls it was the largest grower of olives in the world at the time. Now it is a desert. I wonder if that is climate change or laziness by the inhabitants?

Once again I think you are mistaken. I'm pretty sure the same areas that were used for olives during Byzantine rule are used for olives - and other crops - today. Those areas are not desert - but a temperate mediterranean climate where stuff can still grow.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 12:11pm:

Adamant wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 10:44am: Dubai for instance does not have a sewage system. No adamant, you have fallen for a hoax: http://www.hoax-slayer.com/dubai-sewage-trucks.shtml Dubai has a functioning sewage system, but was stretched for a very brief period in 2009 due to rapid population growth. During that time trucks were brought in as a stop-gap measure before the required expansion of infrastructure was completed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanitation_in_Dubai#2009_Sewage_Issues

The hoax slayer has been proved wrong on several occasions.

Dubai still trucks about 1/4 of their sewerage in.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22598906

Dubai 1955-
Cement imports started
Stainless steel kitchenware imported from India
Toyota cars intoduced.

Dubai 1956-
First concrete block house is built
Dubai police force founded

Dubai 1959-
First airport opens
Airline hotel opens with 8 rooms and kerosene lighting

Dubai 1961-
Dubai's first central water supply system is installed.
First power station starts delivering electricity

1963-
Dubai builds first bridge

1964-
Satwa and Karama were the first to receive running water

1965- first street lights installed

www.dubaiasitusedtobe.com/pages/singlepages/timeline1.shtm#.Ug1Rrn_F-ho

All those Islamic contributions to science somehow bypassed Dubai!

At least Dubai is a little more progressive in jailing rape victims instead of stoning them to death.

The hoax was that, in adamant's words, Dubai "does not have a sewage system".

This I think you would agree is demonstrably untrue.

Adamant wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 10:44am:

Did you know that Byzantium north Africa was one of the most productive food bowls it was the largest grower of olives in the world at the time. Now it is a desert.

I am tempted to put this in the Islamophobes retarded thread.

Let's look at Egypt alone.

Egypt still has a massive agricultural sector - it employs about 10 million people, and constitutes nearly 20% of GDP.

Egypt grows large amounts of citrus, rice, wheat, vegetables, potatoes, sugar, dairy products and fruits.


Egypt's wheat production alone is 6 million tonnes. 5 million tonnes is enough to supply Australia's needs.

When Prophet Muhammed passed away, the population of the Byzantine Empire was less than half of Australia's current population. Even when the Empire was at its peak its poulation was not much more than Australia's is now.


Today, Egypt alone produces more than enough food to feed the amount of people that lived in the Byzantine Empire at its peak.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 2:54pm:

The hoax was that, in adamant's words, Dubai "does not have a sewage system". This I think you would agree is demonstrably untrue.

So when did they build their sewerage system, how many years is it after the POMS and Romans built sewerage systems?

True Colours wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 3:13pm:

Adamant wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 10:44am: Did you know that Byzantium north Africa was one of the most productive food bowls it was the largest grower of olives in the world at the time. Now it is a desert. I am tempted to put this in the Islamophobes retarded thread. Let's look at Egypt alone. Egypt still has a massive agricultural sector - it employs about 10 million people, and constitutes nearly 20% of GDP. Egypt grows large amounts of citrus, rice, wheat, vegetables, potatoes, sugar, dairy products and fruits. Egypt's wheat production alone is 6 million tonnes. 5 million tonnes is enough to supply Australia's needs. When Prophet Muhammed passed away, the population of the Byzantine Empire was less than half of Australia's current population. Even when the Empire was at its peak its poulation was not much more than Australia's is now. Today, Egypt alone produces more than enough food to feed the amount of people that lived in the Byzantine Empire at its peak.

Quote:

Millers and bakers in the worlds largest wheat importing nation say stocks of imported wheat have sunk to levels that could reduce the availability  of the flour they need to produce bread of an acceptable quality. With 1 in 4 Egyptians living below the poverty line of $1.65 a day, millions depend on loaves that sell for less than 1 US cent per loaf, a state regulated price unchanged since 1989. www.cnbc.com/id/100863687

If you were a retarded muslim you would use a technically and logically incorrect word like Islamophobe.

If Islamophobia is a legitimate word then surely Judeophobia must be a word that can be used for muslims who dont like jews.

Are you attempting to make some sort of point there Baron?

If they were that primitive right up until very recently, then its just credit to them for achieving so much in such little time - given how rich they are now - wouldn't you agree?

True Colours wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 3:13pm:

I am tempted to put this in the Islamophobes retarded thread.

What are you a mod now?

Read this and weep retard!


Today, Egypt imports some 80 percent of its agricultural products. “Everything starts with the farm,” said Mohammed Barghash, “If a country is unable to provide its own food, it is not worthy of the name.”

“If the U.S. is the mother of democracy, it should go to the people and help them feed themselves,” said Barghash. “Yet still we import most of our wheat from America."


http://www.ethiopianreview.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=35707

Egypt is reported to be the world’s largest importer of wheat. In 2010, the oil minister stated that Egypt imports 40% of its food, and 60% of its wheat.

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/egypts-food-problem-in-a-nutshell-2011-1

Now answer this question asked by myself originally posted on.
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376195051

How many Christians killed Christians in the name of Christianity over the period of Ramadan in America so that we are able to compare scores.

Adamant wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 3:51pm:

Today, Egypt imports some 80 percent of its agricultural products. “Everything starts with the farm,” said Mohammed Barghash, “If a country is unable to provide its own food, it is not worthy of the name.”

The point TC was contending was your BS claim that since Byzantine rule finished, North Africa went from productive bread basket to desert. Nothing you have said suggests this is the case, and pointing to Egypt's inefficient use of their vast fertile land doesn't change this.

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 4:44pm:

Adamant wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 3:51pm: Today, Egypt imports some 80 percent of its agricultural products. “Everything starts with the farm,” said Mohammed Barghash, “If a country is unable to provide its own food, it is not worthy of the name.” The point TC was contending was your BS claim that since Byzantine rule finished, North Africa went from productive bread basket to desert. Nothing you have said suggests this is the case, and pointing to Egypt's inefficient use of their vast fertile land doesn't change this.

I did not mention Egypt He did. It was not an East African country I was  writing about GET YOUR FACTS in order before trying to call my posts BS. I clearly stated NORTH AFRICA! What part of that cant or wont you muslims understand, get the book or remain ignorant.

P/S why will TC not answer a simple question.


Adamant wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 3:51pm:

Now answer this question asked by myself originally posted on.http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1376195051 How many Christians killed Christians in the name of Christianity over the period of Ramadan in America so that we are able to compare scores

But it is BS adamant - you said North Africa - Egypt is part of North Africa, and it is controlled by muslims. On all fronts we are exposing your and Yadda's themes about muslims over-exploiting their land to the point of desertification as the joke that it is.

But even if we dismiss Egypt, and talk about what you meant - "classic" north Africa - centred around ancient Carthage, encompassing the very north of modern day Libya, Tunisia and Algeria - you have still yet to support your claim that after the Byzantines left, it went from bread basket to desert. That is complete BS - pure and simple. It didn't become desert - it is still not desert. It is a temperate mediterranean climate that is still a rich agricultural area.


Adamant wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 5:23pm:

P/S why will TC not answer a simple question

It is not a simple question, its a retarded question. There are over 2 billion christians worldwide, and you expect him to pick out a number of how many of them were murdered in the name of christianity during a given period? How stupid can you get? There might have been hundreds or thousands or less than 10, who the f*ck knows?? And what does it prove?

Adamant wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 3:51pm:

True Colours wrote on Aug 15th, 2013 at 3:13pm: I am tempted to put this in the Islamophobes retarded thread. What are you a mod now? Read this and weep retard! Today, Egypt imports some 80 percent of its agricultural products. “Everything starts with the farm,” said Mohammed Barghash, “If a country is unable to provide its own food, it is not worthy of the name.”

Do you realise that Egypt's population todays is about 8 times greater than the entire Byzantine Empire's population was 1400 years ago?

If Egypt with a population of 82 million can produce 20% of the food it consumes today, that means it is producing more than enough food to feed the entire Byzantine Empire's population of 10 million 1400 years ago.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Byzantine_Empire_600AD.png/800px-Byzantine_Empire_600AD.png


Therefore, Egypt is still a bread basket. It is just one with a massive population.

Egypt is the size of the state of South Australia, yet produces enough wheat to feed all of Australia.

Quote:

Israel is tiny and has a far higher population density than Egypt - about 352 per square km compared to about 82 per square km. Israel have obviously deemed it extremely important to develop and cultivate all the possible land they can.

Do you have any evidence for this?


Quote:

Egypt can be much more picky, and in fact rely on, and have always relied on for about 10 thousand years, on the Nile River. The Nile River does not run through the Sinai.

Egypt imports at least 40% of it's food, up to 80% by some reports. It is dirt poor and cannot actually 'afford' to do so. Israel by comparison produces about 95% of it's own food, despite being more than wealthy enough from other industries to import food. It probably grows so much more for strategic/geopolitical reasons than hunger. If any group is actually in a position of necessity, it is the Egyptians, not the Israelis.


Quote:

Nearly 3/4 of Lebanon's population is either Christian, Shia, Druze or Jewish, so it is not really the place to see whether people are living by the environmental standards set out in Islamic hadeeth.

Right, I keep forgetting, Shites aren't Muslims.


Quote:

The hoax was that, in adamant's words, Dubai "does not have a sewage system". This I think you would agree is demonstrably untrue.

Technically yes, if trucks moving a sh1tload of it counts as a 'system'.


Quote:

If they were that primitive right up until very recently, then its just credit to them for achieving so much in such little time - given how rich they are now - wouldn't you agree?

Gandalf what it means is that they remained primitive up until they received windfall income from oil, and even then they still lagged behind what you would expect. Socially, they have still barely progressed beyond Muhammed's standards, again largely due to foreign interference (eg banning slavery). It is not some great achievement, it was pretty much handed to them on a platter by global economic circumstance. The non-oil rich countries like Egypt are probably a fair indication of where they would be without the oil.

freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 7:56pm:

Do you have any evidence for this?

The population densities are on google, the second sentence is common sense.


freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 7:56pm:

Egypt imports at least 40% of it's food, up to 80% by some reports. It is dirt poor and cannot actually 'afford' to do so. Israel by comparison produces about 95% of it's own food, despite being more than wealthy enough from other industries to import food. It probably grows so much more for strategic/geopolitical reasons than hunger. If any group is actually in a position of necessity, it is the Egyptians, not the Israelis.

I don't disagree with any of that. But what point are you making? What were we arguing again? I'm pretty sure my only dispute was Yadda's claim that the Sinai had been "raped" by the muslims into a desert. Then adamant chimed in with his "North Africa is all desert since the muslims moved in" gem. But I don't believe you made those claims, so I'm not really sure why we are jabbering here. Do you agree that Yadda's claim was completely baseless?


freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 7:56pm:

Technically yes, if trucks moving a sh1tload of it counts as a 'system'.

Are you just being contrary for contrary's sake?

The claim was that Dubai had no physical permanently built sewage system, and it was entirely dependant upon trucks to take it all away. That is wrong, the claim made in the video is wrong, its as simple as that.


freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 7:56pm:

Gandalf what it means is that they remained primitive up until they received windfall income from oil,

And? Are you trying to say that only muslim countries stop being "primitive" only after they start to get wealthy? I'd say poverty and primitiveness go hand in hand - regardless of the religion.


freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 7:56pm:

Socially, they have still barely progressed beyond Muhammed's standards, again largely due to foreign interference (eg banning slavery). It is not some great achievement, it was pretty much handed to them on a platter by global economic circumstance. The non-oil rich countries like Egypt are probably a fair indication of where they would be without the oil.

You've got no argument from me that the UAE hasn't made great strides in social progressiveness. But let me point out - yet again - that your point about foreign interference is completely backwards. The UAE has *NOT* banned slavery - in fact they have reintroduced it as a direct consequence of their rapid oil-driven growth. Like all the Gulf States. They import Indian workers, abuse them, and make it literally impossible for them to leave. That is slavery in anyone's book. The point? That this has all happened while it has been a US client. 

True Colours wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 7:26pm:

Egypt with a population of 82 million can produce 20% of the food it consumes today

Well, maths is not the randy fvckers' strong point, is it?

Quote:

The population densities are on google, the second sentence is common sense.

I mean that they are actually greening the desert, rather than the egyptians damaging their side?


Quote:

I don't disagree with any of that. But what point are you making?

Here it is again for you: If any group is actually in a position of necessity, it is the Egyptians, not the Israelis.


Quote:

I'm pretty sure my only dispute was Yadda's claim that the Sinai had been "raped" by the muslims into a desert. Then adamant chimed in with his "North Africa is all desert since the muslims moved in" gem.

You also spent a long time insisting that only part of the border has a difference you can see from space. You have mentioned the Nile delta many times, but have not made a sound argument that it somehow distracts the Egyptians from the Sinai.


Quote:

The claim was that Dubai had no physical permanently built sewage system, and it was entirely dependant upon trucks to take it all away. That is wrong, the claim made in the video is wrong, its as simple as that.

Great. A filthy oil rich country that still doesn't have a proper sewage system.


Quote:

And? Are you trying to say that only muslim countries stop being "primitive" only after they start to get wealthy?

Actually no, I explained that socially, they are still very primitive, having barely moved beyond Muhammed's standards.


Quote:

I'd say poverty and primitiveness go hand in hand - regardless of the religion.

True. But ugly goes right to the bone. Islam manages to combine primitiveness with great wealth.


Quote:

The UAE has *NOT* banned slavery - in fact they have reintroduced it as a direct consequence of their rapid oil-driven growth. Like all the Gulf States.

I meant real slavery, not rpetend slavery.


Quote:

They import Indian workers, abuse them, and make it literally impossible for them to leave.

Literally?

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 5:51pm:

It is not a simple question, its a retarded question. There are over 2 billion christians worldwide, and you expect him to pick out a number of how many of them were murdered in the name of christianity during a given period?

No! He clearly stated that the Christians of America KILLED as many Christians during Ramadan as muslims killed muslims over the same period, my question was prove it. He cannot can he retard.

freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 10:13pm:

I mean that they are actually greening the desert, rather than the egyptians damaging their side?

I kind of thought its common knowledge that Israel is greening the desert. Israel "makes the desert bloom" has been a common cliche for as long as Israel has been around. But what you are suggesting makes far less sense - since its all desert it would have to be a case of both sides greening the desert (again, why would Egypt bother?), and on the Egyptian side, they went too far, causing it to go (back) to desert. Since neither you or Yadda has provided any evidence of Egypt not just cultivating the Sinai - but cultivating it to the point of it becoming barren - I think we can dismiss this theory.


freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 10:13pm:

Here it is again for you: If any group is actually in a position of necessity, it is the Egyptians, not the Israelis.

And? The article adament posted shows that the Egyptians have more than enough arable land along the Nile and Nile delta - the problem is making efficient use of it. Surely if you're going to make a point from this, the obvious thing would be to find out whether or not Egypt has in fact done anything - ie cultivated this area to the point of "raping" the soil no?  I'll give you a hint: no such cultivation has happened. Egypt has never cultivated the Sinai. There have been plans to develop an agricultural sector in the Sinai since 2010, but as yet nothing has really materialised.


freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 10:13pm:

You have mentioned the Nile delta many times, but have not made a sound argument that it somehow distracts the Egyptians from the Sinai.

LOL - My argument is not that the Egyptians are "distracted" from the Sinai, my argument is that the Egyptians have never attempted to cultivate the Sinai. I don't need to talk about the Nile to demonstrate that - I simply point out that not a god-damned thing has been done by the Egyptians to cultivate that area. I'd say thats a pretty smacking "sound" argument wouldn't you say?  My argument therefore is that Yadda's claim that the Egyptians have "raped" the soil of on their border with Israel (on the Sinai) is complete BS. If you two want to even begin to develop some sort of argument that the Egyptians have over-exploited the soil in that region, I would have thought it pretty freaking obvious that the first thing you do is to show me all the activity done by the Egyptians to cause that over-exploitation. Yes??


freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2013 at 10:13pm:

Literally?

Literally. Workers from South Asia have to hand in their passports when they arrive, and are not allowed to leave until they have paid off their visa. They work 12 hours a day, 6 days a week in gruelling conditions, and are paid a pittance - most of which they send to their families back home. There is no concept of workers rights, unions are banned, and striking is illegal. Can you tell me any meaningful difference between this and "real" slavery?

I'm not sure why you scoff at this - I mean you were not shy to point out the UAE's primitiveness - yet somehow you are not prepared to call a spade a spade in regards to modern day slavery. Is it because it sits uncomfortably with your rosy world view of western countries causing their client states to turn away from slavery?

Quote:

I kind of thought its common knowledge that Israel is greening the desert. Israel "makes the desert bloom" has been a common cliche for as long as Israel has been around. But what you are suggesting makes far less sense - since its all desert it would have to be a case of both sides greening the desert (again, why would Egypt bother?), and on the Egyptian side, they went too far, causing it to go (back) to desert. Since neither you or Yadda has provided any evidence of Egypt not just cultivating the Sinai - but cultivating it to the point of it becoming barren - I think we can dismiss this theory.

I never said they cultivated it. My first thought was goat herding.


Quote:

And? The article adament posted shows that the Egyptians have more than enough arable land along the Nile and Nile delta

No gandalf, they do not have enough. They are importing food that they cannot afford.


Quote:

They work 12 hours a day, 6 days a week in gruelling conditions, and are paid a pittance - most of which they send to their families back home.

That's an odd thing for a slave to do.


Quote:

There is no concept of workers rights, unions are banned, and striking is illegal. Can you tell me any meaningful difference between this and "real" slavery?

Choice. They can choose whether to enter the country. They can choose whether to send most of their earnings back home. It might be a tough choice, but it is not the same as slavery. Not having western standards of employee protection law does not equate to slavery.


Quote:

I'm not sure why you scoff at this - I mean you were not shy to point out the UAE's primitiveness - yet somehow you are not prepared to call a spade a spade in regards to modern day slavery.

Actually, many of them do have genuine slaves. But I think it is illegal.


Quote:

Is it because it sits uncomfortably with your rosy world view of western countries causing their client states to turn away from slavery?

It doesn't "sit uncomfortably" at all. I'm just calling it as I see it. I still think they are primitive and that their treatment of these people is evidence of that. However the Muslim leaders have for example pointed out that these people are not slaves and thus the employers do not have a "right" to have sex with them whenever they want.

freediver wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 8:51am:

I never said they cultivated it. My first thought was goat herding.

Its a desert FD. They don't hvae to overgraze it for it too look like a desert. Its been desert since time immemorial. The only difference between the Israeli side and the Egyptian side is that the Israelis have improved it, the Egyptians have just left it as its always been.


freediver wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 8:51am:

No gandalf, they do not have enough. They are importing food that they cannot afford

They do have enough - the problem is inefficient use, and competition from cash crops and biofuels. Either way its a moot point - it doesn't prove that this is the reason for the sinai looking less green than the Israeli side of the border.


freediver wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 8:51am:

That's an odd thing for a slave to do

I agree. Traditionally, slaves are treated much much better - particularly the slaves in Muhammad's time.


freediver wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 8:51am:

It doesn't "sit uncomfortably" at all. I'm just calling it as I see it. I still think they are primitive and that their treatment of these people is evidence of that. However the Muslim leaders have for example pointed out that these people are not slaves and thus the employers do not have a "right" to have sex with them whenever they want.

No, they just beat and abuse them, and attempt to kill them - and when they defend themselves, get executed by the state
(see recent case of Indonesian maid in Saudi Arabia).

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 3:30pm:

Its been desert since time immemorial

No it has not Gandalf.


polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 3:30pm:

the problem is inefficient use

No, it is the laziness of the muslim who thinks the world owes him a living.

In around 46bc the tribute to Rome from North Africa in grain was around 50,000 tonnes over a period of about one hundred years the tribute rose to 500,000 tonnes that is TRIBUTE not actual production. In those days North Africa fed itself and many others. Today North Africa and all the Arab states produce 42 million tonnes yet they require 120 million tonnes.

I wonder what went wrong with muslim utopia?

Adamant wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 4:41pm:

In around 46bc the tribute to Rome from North Africa in grain was around 50,000 tonnes over a period of about one hundred years the tribute rose to 500,000 tonnes that is TRIBUTE not actual production. In those days North Africa fed itself and many others. Today North Africa and all the Arab states produce 42 million tonnes yet they require 120 million tonnes.

Muslims increased grain production from 0.5 million tonnes to 42 million and you are still complaining.

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/HATERS+GONNA+HATE.+CHECK+DAT_fb2482_3271490.jpg

Adamant wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 4:41pm:

I wonder what went wrong with muslim utopia?

A case of being randy fvckers beyond their means. The hair fetish has something to do with that.
And being innocent of maths.

Adamant wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 4:41pm:

No it has not Gandalf.

Yes it has adamant. At least show me some evidence to back up your claim.

True Colours wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 5:47pm:

Adamant wrote on Aug 16th, 2013 at 4:41pm: In around 46bc the tribute to Rome from North Africa in grain was around 50,000 tonnes over a period of about one hundred years the tribute rose to 500,000 tonnes that is TRIBUTE not actual production. In those days North Africa fed itself and many others. Today North Africa and all the Arab states produce 42 million tonnes yet they require 120 million tonnes. Muslims increased grain production from 0.5 million tonnes to 42 million and you are still complaining. http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/HATERS+GONNA+HATE.+CHECK+DAT_fb2482_3271490.jpg

There are so many levels of stupid in that reply it is hard to know where to start. Maybe looking at the 2000 years of technology and development that should have seen an even greater increase? Perhaps the smaller quantity of man power then compared to now. How about the need verses the supply which throttled potential production back then? Or maybe something more basic, like comparing a tribute then to outright production now? No, I really don't know where to start...   

True Colours wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 5:47pm:

Muslims increased grain production from 0.5 million tonnes to 42 million and you are still complaining

Spoken like a true Islamic dunce. Read TRIBUTE.

Tax payed to Rome in that period was between 1 to 3 % of income by people who did not live in Rome. Rome was a tax free City State. If 500,000 tonnes were 3% of production what is the figure you come up with for TOTAL production? ( Another question I wont get an answer to)

If Islam, over its time in North Africa increased production of grain as much as Rome did over the 100 years that I mentioned today they should be producing?
Yes calculators wont go that high!


polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 16^th, 2013 at 9:03pm:

Yes it has adamant. At least show me some evidence to back up your claim.

No it was not and I have no intention of proving it to you, search for yourself you lazy muslim.

Quote:

Its a desert FD. They don't hvae to overgraze it for it too look like a desert. Its been desert since time immemorial. The only difference between the Israeli side and the Egyptian side is that the Israelis have improved it, the Egyptians have just left it as its always been.

Do you have any evidence of this? I am aware of Israel "greening the desert" but I doubt this means spreading their resources uniformly over the entire desert and rocky/hilly areas, as well as the Palestinian areas. Their goal is presumably food production, not lines on maps you can see from space. And the argument is not about whether it looks like a desert.


Quote:

They do have enough - the problem is inefficient use, and competition from cash crops and biofuels. Either way its a moot point - it doesn't prove that this is the reason for the sinai looking less green than the Israeli side of the border.

FFS, I have just spent the last few pages trying to explain that to you. You are the one insisting that the Nile delta somehow proves the Egyptians have no "need" to do anything in the Sinai. You bring it up pretty much every single post. You harp on and on about a moot point, seem oblivious when people try to explain to you that it is a moot point, but when even that turns out to contradict your argument then you start complaining that it is a moot point.  :D


Quote:

Muslims increased grain production from 0.5 million tonnes to 42 million and you are still complaining.

TC, are you having trouble with your reading comprehension or something? Adam even predicted your confusion and explicitly stated that that is not what happened.

freediver wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 8:56am:

Do you have any evidence of this? I am aware of Israel "greening the desert" but I doubt this means spreading their resources uniformly over the entire desert and rocky/hilly areas, as well as the Palestinian areas. Their goal is presumably food production, not lines on maps you can see from space. And the argument is not about whether it looks like a desert.

Right, I see you are still talking about the entire border. .I reject that. The area closest to the coast - about 25% of the border - is pretty obviously greener because of cultivation. You can read into whatever you want about the rocky remainder - as far as I'm concerned its equally barren on either side. The fact that the border is visible means there is a visible border - not that it is different terrain on either side.


freediver wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 8:56am:

FFS, I have just spent the last few pages trying to explain that to you. You are the one insisting that the Nile delta somehow proves the Egyptians have no "need" to do anything in the Sinai. You bring it up pretty much every single post. You harp on and on about a moot point, seem oblivious when people try to explain to you that it is a moot point, but when even that turns out to contradict your argument then you start complaining that it is a moot point

What this is about, if you haven't worked it out already, is its dead easy to reject what I was rejecting - Yadda's absurd claim that its lighter on the Egyptian side because of the big bad muslim's over cultivating and "raping" of their side of the border. There is no history at all that I can find of Egypt ever cultivating that area, let alone raping it. Its smacking sand dunes for f*cks sake. The only cultivation that happens in the Sinai is on the southern tip - mostly off that map.

Quote:

Right, I see you are still talking about the entire border. .I reject that.

You are blind. I have offered you a litmus test for this.


Quote:

The area closest to the coast - about 25% of the border - is pretty obviously greener because of cultivation.

It's obviously greener. I would not say the reasons are obvious.


Quote:

The fact that the border is visible means there is a visible border - not that it is different terrain on either side.

Why is the border visible, if not for the different vegetation? Are you suggesting we can see the fenceline from space? Perhaps the photo was taken in winter and the Jewish side is darker because of the shadow of the enourmous fence? Those Jews are pretty cunning eh?


Quote:

What this is about, if you haven't worked it out already, is its dead easy to reject what I was rejecting - Yadda's absurd claim that its lighter on the Egyptian side because of the big bad muslim's over cultivating and "raping" of their side of the border.

Of course it is easy to say yadda is wrong, but it is not so easy to convince anyone.


Quote:

There is no history at all that I can find of Egypt ever cultivating that area

Goats. Just in case you miss it yet again I will repeat myself. Goats. Goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats goats. Got it? Can we for once skip the stage where I spend 5 pages trying to get you to acknowledge a simple point?


Quote:

Its smacking sand dunes for f*cks sake.

That's what happens Gandalf. Did I mention the goats? Perhaps you don't know what they are:

http://youtu.be/PpccpglnNf0

freediver wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 4:34pm:

Why is the border visible, if not for the different vegetation?

Its visible because you can see a white line along it. I don't know what this line is, but that clearly the border. Its not visible because its different terrain either side of it.


freediver wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 4:34pm:

Of course it is easy to say yadda is wrong, but it is not so easy to convince anyone

New concept for you FD - burden of proof. Look it up.


freediver wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 4:34pm:

That's what happens Gandalf. Did I mention the goats? Perhaps you don't know what they are:

Goats are not herded on sand dunes. Are you trying to be funny?

Quote:

Its visible because you can see a white line along it. I don't know what this line is, but that clearly the border.

I think that is one of the many goat tracks on the Egyptian side. There are lots of them, with a few relatively straight bits along parts of the border.


Quote:

Its not visible because its different terrain either side of it.

So now it is not visible? You can only see the border because of the invisible white line along it that marks the dramatic change in vegetation?


Quote:

New concept for you FD - burden of proof. Look it up.

I'm still trying to get you to see what is right in front of you. If a photo is not enough proof, I'm not sure what else to offer. Perhaps if I found a passage in the Koran predicting it then you would believe what you see?


Quote:

Goats are not herded on sand dunes. Are you trying to be funny?

No, they herd them along the remaining tracts of vegetation. Are you completely unfamiliar with the contribution made by goat herding to desertification? Is the only thing you know about this topic what you read in the Koran about the glorious Muslim reclamation of the desert?

freediver wrote on Aug 17^th, 2013 at 7:48pm:

I'm still trying to get you to see what is right in front of you. If a photo is not enough proof, I'm not sure what else to offer. Perhaps if I found a passage in the Koran predicting it then you would believe what you see?

The photo (supposedly) only proves that there is a difference in terrain. You said yourself you don't know why it is. Yadda came in with a completely baseless claim that it was because of over-cultivation. Its his claim, he needs to prove it.

Do you believe that goat herding contributes to desertification?

I don't have the foggiest idea FD - I've never looked into it. Have you? Do you think its reasonable for Yadda to crow that this is a clear cut case of muslims "raping" the soil without offering any evidence that its been over-exploited?

The photo itself is evidence. I thought the goat-herding thing was pretty well known. It's partly why we try to wipe out herds of goats and even camels in our arid regions, rather than trying to build them up.

freediver wrote on Aug 18^th, 2013 at 9:03am:

The photo itself is evidence.

It is not evidence of the Egyptians "raping" the soil.

Yes it is. Do I need to get out a dictionary?

It is evidence of it being desert, not that it became desert because of muslims raping the soil - thats pure speculation on your part. You understand that deserts can become desert without man's interference right?

polite_gandalf wrote on Aug 19^th, 2013 at 12:40pm:

It is evidence of it being desert, not that it became desert because of muslims raping the soil - thats pure speculation on your part. You understand that deserts can become desert without man's interference right?

The fact that it is yellow in the photo is evidence that it is desert. The fact that the yellow ends at the border is evidence that the Egyptians are part of the problem.