A thread devoted to how Islamic radicalism is being combated by Muslims.

To start off, Slough, in the UK, where locals have started an anti-Radicals campaign themselves.   This could serve as quite a good pattern for other communities.

Jordan Plans Crackdown on Unauthorized Mosques to Combat Radical Islam

French imams, chaplains seek ways to combat Islamist radicalisation

The foot soldiers of deradicalisation.

Of course, the usual Islamophobes will declare all this as "taqiyya" by Muslims and that all those who oppose the radicals' interpretation of Islam must be apostates, yet isn't that the very message the radicals would like conveyed, so therefore, are the Islamophobes part of the problem, rather than the solution as they claim?    ::)

[url=http://online.wsj.com/articles/jordan-plans-crackdown-on-unauthori zed-mosques-to-combat-radical-islam-1411157776]extract from 1st link[/url]

Quote:

AMMAN—In a new push to combat radical Islam, Jordanian authorities are developing plans to crack down on the construction of thousands of unauthorized mosques and to place government-appointed preachers in their pulpits. Of 8,600 mosques in U.S.-allied Jordan—most of them illegally built, 4,500 are led by preachers, or imams, who aren't appointed by the government, according to official figures. Imams at legal mosques are...

So islam is a perverse belief which under self regulation creates anti social degenerates, in order to be acceptable to modern society islam has to have strict government surveillance and government appointed theological leaders?

extract from 2nd link

Quote:

About 30 imams from southeastern France, meeting in Avignon on Wednesday, said action was urgently needed because about 300 young French Muslims are reported to have left their region to fight alongside jihadist forces in Syria. Their meeting, which debated practical options such as surveillance cameras in mosques to spot jihadi recruiters and centrally written sermons for Friday prayers, will be followed by further sessions in other regions in the coming months.

Once again islam cannot self regulate in order to be relevant to the 21st century, surveillance and censored preaching is required.

extract from 3rd link

Quote:

At dusk two local community workers trudge the streets of Waltham Forest looking for young people. But this is no ordinary youth outreach. They are searching for those most at risk of becoming radicalised. This part of north-east London has one of the biggest Muslim communities in the country and some radical preachers are based here.

islam creates people who have to be sought out and monitored before they commit attrocities.

What a legacy islam, allah, muhammad, and qur'an has left for muslims in the 21st century. being spied upon and suppressed doctrinal speech.

The real answer is clean up the doctrine of islam, not spies and censorship of speech.

Q/. Why do muslims need spy cameras and suppressed / censored preachings in the mosques?

A/. Because unsupervised preaching of islamic doctrine leads to atrocities being committed in the name of islam and allah

Q/. Why don't they modernize their doctrine, get rid of the hate speech, terrorism, torture and mass murder?

A/.They can't:

qur'an 6:34: Rejected were the messengers before thee: with patience and constancy they bore their rejection and their wrongs, until Our aid did reach them: there is none that can alter the words (and decrees) of Allah. Already hast thou received some account of those messengers.

qur'an 10:64: For them are glad tidings, in the life of the present and in the Hereafter; no change can there be in the words of Allah. This is indeed the supreme felicity.

So islam is doomed to oblivion, it is an outdated evil doctrine, totally unfit for modern civilized society. 

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2014 at 2:41pm:

A thread devoted to how Islamic radicalism is being combated by Muslims.

And how their efforts are undermined:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Soren wrote on Nov 28^th, 2014 at 6:14pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm: A thread devoted to how Islamic radicalism is being combated by Muslims. And how their efforts are undermined: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

What?  An Islamophobic website?  Yes, that would definitely undermine their efforts, Soren.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 28^th, 2014 at 6:51pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 6:14pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm: A thread devoted to how Islamic radicalism is being combated by Muslims. And how their efforts are undermined: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ What?  An Islamophobic website?  Yes, that would definitely undermine their efforts, Soren.    ::)

Listing Islamic outrages is phobic now?

You are a Maoist, dicko, to a much greater extent than I thought you'd admit to.  Criticism is now PHOBIA!!! 

So much for exchange of ideas and debate.


Brain, you are a f Vcken disgrace to Western notions of free and open debate. You are more of a fascists and an oppressor than anything else.

You want ideas shut down, suppressed, outlawed. You are a heresy-sniffing fascist.

Carry on. You know you will. You will not be shamed.

Do we have a right to combat something we are not even able to criticise?


freediver wrote on Sep 15^th, 2013 at 6:22pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Sep 15th, 2013 at 5:39pm: Quote: Is this the Islam you are so keen to defend with your "fair deal" nonsense, what about those who no longer believe in that bullshit barfed up by a 7th century desert bandit do they deserve a fair deal like article 18 of the Universal declaration of human rights? [quote]7 nations where atheism is punishable by death. All 7 establish Islam as the state religion. Pakistan,Saudi Arabia,Iran,Afghanistan,Sudan,Mauritania and the Maldives www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/10/the-seven-countries-where-the-state-can-execute-you-for-being-atheist/ I make no excuses for those nations and their laws, BV.  I merely recognise that it is their right to create and unfortunately impose those punishments.   It is terrible but I also recognise I have no right or ability to criticise them.  I am neither a member of their religion or a citizen of any of those nations.

[/quote]

Soren wrote on Nov 28^th, 2014 at 9:26pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 6:51pm: Soren wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 6:14pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm: A thread devoted to how Islamic radicalism is being combated by Muslims. And how their efforts are undermined: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ What?  An Islamophobic website?  Yes, that would definitely undermine their efforts, Soren.    ::) Listing Islamic outrages is phobic now?

The website is, Soren.

I'm a Maoist?  Yeah, sure.   ::) ::)

Quote:

At least 120 dead in Nigeria mosque attack At least 120 people have been killed and 270 others wounded in a bomb and gun attack at the mosque of one of Nigeria's top Islamic leaders. The attack at the Grand Mosque in Kano, the biggest city in the mainly Muslim north of the country, came just as Friday prayers had started. The mosque is attached to the palace of the Emir of Kano Muhammad Sanusi II, Nigeria's second most senior Muslim cleric, who last week urged civilians to take up arms against Boko Haram. The blasts came after a bomb attack was foiled against a mosque in the northeastern city of Maiduguri earlier on Friday, five days after two female suicide bombers killed over 45 people in the city. National police spokesman Emmanuel Ojukwu said the bombers blew themselves up in quick succession then "gunmen opened fire on those who were trying to escape".Ojukwu said he did not know whether the suicide bombers were male or female, after a spate of attacks by women in recent months, and did not give an exact figure on the number of gunmen. But he said an angry mob killed four of the shooters in the chaotic aftermath. Witnesses in the city said they were set on fire.An AFP reporter at the Murtala Mohammed Specialist Hospital morgue counted 92 bodies, most of them men and boys with blast injuries and severe burns. As night fell, hundreds of people were desperately trying to use the lights on their mobile phones to identify loved ones.But a senior rescue official said later that there were at least 120 dead and 270 wounded. Emergency workers were still trying to visit all hospitals, he added. The Emir of Kano last week told worshippers at the same mosque that northerners should take up arms against Boko Haram, which has been fighting for a hardline Islamic state since 2009.Boko Haram have a record of attacking prominent clerics. In July 2012 a suicide bomber killed five people leaving Friday prayers at the home of the Shehu of Borno in Maiduguri. Boko Haram attacks in recent months have ranged from the far northeast of Nigeria, across the wider north and northwest, using hit-and-run tactics, suicide bombings and car bombs. Authorities in Cameroon, Chad and Niger have all expressed concern about Boko Haram's ability to conduct cross-border strikes, particularly as the dry season approaches. - source

I still reckon spy cameras in mosques and censorship of imam's prayers will achieve nothing.

Critical analysis of the qur'an is forbidden, therefore while ever islam exists, islamic terrorism will run rampant, as allah commanded.

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 22^nd, 2014 at 2:41pm:

A thread devoted to how Islamic radicalism is being combated by Muslims.

Please define islamic radicalism brian,is anything profit mo did considered Islamic radicalism?

With the term Islamic radicalism does that imply islam is the source of this radicalism and it is propagated by muslims?

Our government spends a lot of money on programs for immigrants-
www.ag.gov.au/NationalSecurity/Counteringviolentextremism/Documents/bcr-grants-2012-13.pdf
Perhaps if we were more selective on who we let in we wouldn't have to spend money trying to get them to fit in.

Stick to the subject of the thread, Baron.   ::)

Please provide references to reports of Muslims combating Islamic Radicalism.   

Gandalf once suggested that Muhammed's order to execute gay people (both the giver and the taker) is not in fact an order to kill gay people, unless of course they are acting like the citizens of Lot.

Does that count?

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 6:54pm:

Stick to the subject of the thread, Baron.   ::) Please provide references to reports of Muslims combating Islamic Radicalism.

That rules out the Kurds, then. They didn’t declare war on Uncle, so they’re not Muselmen.

British Muslims speak out against the proposed Mega-Mosque of Westham in the UK.

Meanwhile, in Australia: Fighting Islamist terrorism: Communities the key

More than bills and bombs.

Islamic reformer

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 6:54pm:

Stick to the subject of the thread, Baron.   ::) Please provide references to reports of Muslims combating Islamic Radicalism.

I am not sure what Islamic radicalism is brian,is the death penalty for the crime of atheism considered Islamic radicalism or mainstream Islamic thought?

Quote:

In 13 countries around the world,all of them muslim,people who openly espouse atheism or reject the offical state religion of Islam face execution under the law. www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/10/us-religion-atheists-idUSBRE9B900G20131210

Since the thread title is combating Islamic radicalism can you define and clarify what islamic radicalism is,does it include death for atheists or is that mainstream rather than radical thought?

Who put the Mo back in Muhamedism?
Who put the ram back in the Ramadan it in ya?
Who was that man?
I'd like to shake his hand.
Oh, it was Gandalf.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 7:23pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 6:54pm: Stick to the subject of the thread, Baron.   ::) Please provide references to reports of Muslims combating Islamic Radicalism.    I am not sure what Islamic radicalism is brian,is the death penalty for the crime of atheism considered Islamic radicalism or mainstream Islamic thought? Quote: In 13 countries around the world,all of them muslim,people who openly espouse atheism or reject the offical state religion of Islam face execution under the law. www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/10/us-religion-atheists-idUSBRE9B900G20131210 Since the thread title is combating Islamic radicalism can you define and clarify what islamic radicalism is,does it include death for atheists or is that mainstream rather than radical thought?

Islamic radicalism is another name for the fomenting of and support for Islamism, Baron. 

I am surprised that you've resorted to asking such a question, afterall, haven't you been railing against the concept now for several years?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 28^th, 2014 at 10:36pm:

Soren wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 9:26pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 6:51pm: Soren wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 6:14pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm: A thread devoted to how Islamic radicalism is being combated by Muslims. And how their efforts are undermined: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ What?  An Islamophobic website?  Yes, that would definitely undermine their efforts, Soren.    ::) Listing Islamic outrages is phobic now? The website is, Soren. I'm a Maoist?  Yeah, sure.   ::) ::)

SO all the news stories it links to are not true?

And what the hell is Islamophobia? Can't you oppose a religion or an ideology?  Can't you be an an antiIslamist, like you can be an antifascist or an anticommunists?


What is it about Islam that makes you insist that it must not be opposed and disliked?  It is an ideology, not a genetic condition. You can join it, you can leave it. It is an ideology.
You can love it, you can hate it, you can sh!t it as a religion as you can sh!t all other religions. It is not special in any way. if anything, it is doing a lot of harm around the world. 
It is not doing any good in the world.

Why do you have to like it or accommodate it, or tolerate it? Why can't you simply oppose it as you can oppose all other distasteful and destructive ideologies? 

Exactly. Why can’t one oppose the tinted races? Bearded numpties? Arabic?

No one has the right to be offended, old boy, and all should be offended each and every day.

Wow ...I mean Brian has started this thread and Karnal is gee the last one to answer....why don't you guys get yourself a room?

Soren wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 10:48pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 10:36pm: Soren wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 9:26pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 6:51pm: Soren wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 6:14pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm: A thread devoted to how Islamic radicalism is being combated by Muslims. And how their efforts are undermined: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ What?  An Islamophobic website?  Yes, that would definitely undermine their efforts, Soren.    ::) Listing Islamic outrages is phobic now? The website is, Soren. I'm a Maoist?  Yeah, sure.   ::) ::) SO all the news stories it links to are not true?

How does that answer my question about your claim that I'm a Maoist, Soren?


Quote:

And what the hell is Islamophobia?

Quote:

Islamophobia is a term for prejudice against, hatred towards, or fear of Islamic doctrine, Muslims, or of ethnic groups perceived to be Muslim. While the term is widely recognized and used, both the term and the underlying concept have been criticized.

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia]Source[/url]


Quote:

Can't you oppose a religion or an ideology?  Can't you be an an antiIslamist, like you can be an antifascist or an anticommunists?

You could be, if you weren't such a zealot about it, Soren.  It is all a question of degree, how vehement you are, and the fact that your attitudes are more akin to bigotry than mere opposition.  You engage in religious persecution, not criticism.  ::)


Quote:

What is it about Islam that makes you insist that it must not be opposed and disliked?  It is an ideology, not a genetic condition. You can join it, you can leave it. It is an ideology.

There's that thatching again, Soren.  Perhaps you'd care to quote me where I have said it can't be opposed, disliked or even criticised by you?   ::)


Quote:

You can love it, you can hate it, you can sh!t it as a religion as you can sh!t all other religions. It is not special in any way. if anything, it is doing a lot of harm around the world.

I'd agree that some of it's adherents are, Soren but the religion itself is actually powerless.  It is afterall, just a philosophy.  It is it's more extreme believers whom cause the problems.  You, however, make no effort to differentiate between moderates and extremists.  Why?  Does your bigotry blind you to their differences?   ::)


Quote:

It is not doing any good in the world.

According to whom?  You?  Your opinion is rather biased, now isn't it?   ::)


Quote:

Why do you have to like it or accommodate it, or tolerate it? Why can't you simply oppose it as you can oppose all other distasteful and destructive ideologies?

Perhaps because you need to remember John 8:7?  Your intolerance of other religions merely reflects back on you.  Why should they tolerate your views?  Mmmm?    ::)

brumbie wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 11:32pm:

Wow ...I mean Brian has started this thread and Karnal is gee the last one to answer....why don't you guys get yourself a room?

Who made you moderator?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 30^th, 2014 at 1:08am:

Soren wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 10:48pm: Quote: And what the hell is Islamophobia? [quote]Islamophobia is a term for prejudice against, hatred towards, or fear of Islamic doctrine, Muslims, or of ethnic groups perceived to be Muslim. While the term is widely recognized and used, both the term and the underlying concept have been criticized. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamophobia]Source[/url]

You claim to be an academic brian and you use a source which academics reject.

The wiki islamophobia article was written by a muslim, the ex muslim Ali Sina from Iran refutes the slur and ad hominem Islamophobia here-
www.faithfreedom.org/oped/sina60526.htm

Please cite where you thin Dr Ali Sina is wrong in his article brian ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29^th, 2014 at 9:59pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 7:23pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 6:54pm: Stick to the subject of the thread, Baron.   ::) Please provide references to reports of Muslims combating Islamic Radicalism.    I am not sure what Islamic radicalism is brian,is the death penalty for the crime of atheism considered Islamic radicalism or mainstream Islamic thought? Quote: In 13 countries around the world,all of them muslim,people who openly espouse atheism or reject the offical state religion of Islam face execution under the law. www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/10/us-religion-atheists-idUSBRE9B900G20131210 Since the thread title is combating Islamic radicalism can you define and clarify what islamic radicalism is,does it include death for atheists or is that mainstream rather than radical thought? Islamic radicalism is another name for the fomenting of and support for Islamism, Baron.  I am surprised that you've resorted to asking such a question, afterall, haven't you been railing against the concept now for several years?   ::)

So what is Islamism brian,does it have anything to do with Islam?

Is death for apostasy a radical or mainstream thought, can you clarify that for us.

Quote:

It is it's more extreme believers whom cause the problems.

In the west it is, because the moderates are sensible enough not to pick a fight they cannot win. Where Islam dominates, the moderates cause plenty of problems too. No-one is forcing these people to sell their children off to dirty old men. If it wasn't for the constitution Malaysia inherited, at least one of their states would have the death penalty for blasphemy, thanks to the wonders of democracy.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30^th, 2014 at 8:33am:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 9:59pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 7:23pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 6:54pm: Stick to the subject of the thread, Baron.   ::) Please provide references to reports of Muslims combating Islamic Radicalism.    I am not sure what Islamic radicalism is brian,is the death penalty for the crime of atheism considered Islamic radicalism or mainstream Islamic thought? Quote: In 13 countries around the world,all of them muslim,people who openly espouse atheism or reject the offical state religion of Islam face execution under the law. www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/10/us-religion-atheists-idUSBRE9B900G20131210 Since the thread title is combating Islamic radicalism can you define and clarify what islamic radicalism is,does it include death for atheists or is that mainstream rather than radical thought? Islamic radicalism is another name for the fomenting of and support for Islamism, Baron.  I am surprised that you've resorted to asking such a question, afterall, haven't you been railing against the concept now for several years?   ::) So what is Islamism brian,does it have anything to do with Islam? Is death for apostasy a radical or mainstream thought, can you clarify that for us.

Still waiting for you to clarify if death for apostasy is a radical or mainstream thought in Islam brian.

A good article by Tarek Fatah on the myth of deradicalizing Islamic radicals

Quote:

Relying on Islamic religious clerics and Islamists to fight radicalization is like employing a fox to guard the chicken coup. The challenge i said is to prevent radicalization. 1. Lay hate speech charges against muslim clerics 2.Every mosque must be monitored for hate speech where the word Kuffar is invoked 3.Any mosque indulging in active politics must have its charitable status revoked 4.Donations of more than $20 must be made by cheque or credit card to avoid money laundering www.meforum.org/4898/the-myth-of-de-radicalization-of-islamic-radicals

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 30^th, 2014 at 1:08am:

Perhaps you'd care to quote me where I have said it can't be opposed, disliked or even criticised by you?

Right there in the same post, numty.



Brian Ross wrote on Nov 30^th, 2014 at 1:08am:

It is all a question of degree, how vehement you are, and the fact that your attitudes are more akin to bigotry than mere opposition.  You engage in religious persecution, not criticism.

As with Communism or Fascism or Nazism., I am expected to find something good in islam, too?




SO I someone is completely opposed to something he is a bigot, by your reckoning.

And you wonder how you got the reputation of a spineless, stupid heresy-sniffing propagandist.

Brian has previously claimed that he has no right or even ability to criticise this sort of thing. I guess the closest he will allow himself to come is to champion foreign Muslims who do. That's not bigoted, is it Brian?

Now, returning to the purpose of the thread and away from these silly Islamophobic distractions:

Pro-Israel Muslims seek alternative to radical Islam as a means for peace.

Education can inoculate young Muslims against radicalism

American Muslims Speak Out Against Radical Islam, Support NYPD

Muslims rally against radical Islam.

Is Islamophobia distracting you from your struggle against Islamic radicalism Brian?

You say I walk the line. F.cuk, they move it every time.

Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 30^th, 2014 at 8:33am:

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 9:59pm: Baronvonrort wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 7:23pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 6:54pm: Stick to the subject of the thread, Baron.   ::) Please provide references to reports of Muslims combating Islamic Radicalism.    I am not sure what Islamic radicalism is brian,is the death penalty for the crime of atheism considered Islamic radicalism or mainstream Islamic thought? Quote: In 13 countries around the world,all of them muslim,people who openly espouse atheism or reject the offical state religion of Islam face execution under the law. www.reuters.com/article/2013/12/10/us-religion-atheists-idUSBRE9B900G20131210 Since the thread title is combating Islamic radicalism can you define and clarify what islamic radicalism is,does it include death for atheists or is that mainstream rather than radical thought? Islamic radicalism is another name for the fomenting of and support for Islamism, Baron.  I am surprised that you've resorted to asking such a question, afterall, haven't you been railing against the concept now for several years?   ::) So what is Islamism brian,does it have anything to do with Islam? Is death for apostasy a radical or mainstream thought, can you clarify that for us.

Islam has nuffin' to do wiv nuffing', don't you know?  LEAST of all with Islamism. Anyone who notices ANY similarity between the words Islam and Islamism is a BIGOT!!  A persecutor!! Zealot!

Pretend, everyone, whatever you do, pretend that Islam has nuffin' to do wiv nuffin'.  It's your multicultural DUTY!

Brian Ross wrote on Nov 30^th, 2014 at 1:08am:

Soren wrote on Nov 29th, 2014 at 10:48pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 10:36pm: Soren wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 9:26pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 6:51pm: Soren wrote on Nov 28th, 2014 at 6:14pm: Brian Ross wrote on Nov 22nd, 2014 at 2:41pm: A thread devoted to how Islamic radicalism is being combated by Muslims. And how their efforts are undermined: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ What?  An Islamophobic website?  Yes, that would definitely undermine their efforts, Soren.    ::) Listing Islamic outrages is phobic now? The website is, Soren. I'm a Maoist?  Yeah, sure.   ::) ::) SO all the news stories it links to are not true? How does that answer my question about your claim that I'm a Maoist, Soren?

You behave like a Maoist - a heresy-sniffin', always denouncin', narrow-minded, snarlin', insufferable apparatchik.

Quote:

A friend told me recently that the horrific conduct of ISIS -- Islamic State in Iraq and Syria -- has left many people with the impression that all Muslims are like ISIS. However, a simple Google search reveals the Muslim response to ISIS. Muslim volunteers from the humanitarian group Islamic Relief provided food parcels, 2,000 hygiene kits and about 32,000 articles of clothing to over 3,000 Christian and other families who fled the ISIS persecution. More than 17,000 displaced people have been sheltered in the Hussainiyat -- Shii congregation halls, mosques and other religious buildings. The Holy Shrines of Imam Ali and Imam Hussain and the city of Basra opened their doors to host displaced Christian and other families and serve their needs. In solidarity with their Christian neighbours, Muslim social activists launched the "I am Nazrene (Christian)" campaigns. An Iraqi TV host broke down in tears and referred to Christians as our "own flesh and blood." Law Professor Mahmoud Al Asali gave up his life by standing in solidarity with his Christian brothers and sisters. Sunni and Shii clerics in Iraq jointly drafted and distributed a religious edict to over 50,000 mosques declaring ISIS as an un-Islamic terrorist organization. Sheikh Taha al Karkhi, grand preacher in Baghdad, declared that resisting and standing up against ISIS is a religious duty. Over 80 Muslim intellectuals, activists and religious leaders in India jointly urged the United Nations to hold ISIS accountable for its brutality, which they termed as a "crime against humanity" and "religious cleansing." Over 100 British Sunni and Shii Imams released a powerful video to urge Muslim youth to stay away from ISIS, which they branded as an illegitimate and vicious group. About 5000 Norwegian Muslims rallied in Oslo against ISIS. The Caliph of the Ahmadiyyah Muslim community and the Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, a group representing 57 countries and 1.4-billion Muslims, also forcefully condemned ISIS. The Indonesian President urged Muslim leaders to unite their efforts, prohibited Indonesians from joining ISIS and blocked the ISIS Internet sites. In North America, the two largest Muslim umbrella groups -- Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) -- issued statements condemning ISIS. CAIR strongly urged American Imams and other community leaders to speak out against American Muslims traveling abroad to join extremist groups like ISIS. Conservative and progressive Muslims are united in their condemnation of ISIS. Yasir Qadhi, a conservative Muslim leader, stated that the Prophet warned us about groups who would spread bloodshed and yet think of themselves as the best of worshipers. He further mentioned that, "no amount of the evils of American foreign policy can justify the murderous rampage of ISIS and its ilk." On the progressive side, Mike Ghouse of the World Islamic Congress went so far as to call for drone attacks against ISIS. From Switzerland academic Elham Manea urged Muslim communities and nations to look inward and vanquish intolerant dogma and regressive politics to remove ISIS. Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV) USA President, Ani Zonneveld, tweeted that IS does not stand for Islamic State but "International Scum." The eighth annual MPV retreat will also focus on countering supremacist ideologies espoused by groups like ISIS. Shahla Khan Salter, Director of Universalist Muslims in Canada has stated, "if we become aware of any individual or group, specifically promoting ISIS, their activities shall be reported to the RCMP, for inciting hatred, as ISIS is clearly committing genocide." In Canada, Muslim leaders in Manitoba unconditionally condemned the ISIS persecution of Christians and Yazidis as an affront to Islam. About 200 Sunni and Shia Muslims gathered outside Calgary City Hall to condemn ISIS. The President of the Shii group stated that he and other community leaders were working hard to wean youth away from radicalization and that the Government of Canada should be vigilant about the influx of radical elements. About 200 members of the Kurdish community, many of whom are Sunni Muslims, also gathered in Calgary and asserted that the international community should support the Kurdish forces fighting against ISIS to protect global stability and security. Imam Soharwardy, who founded the first anti-terrorism NGO -- Muslims Against Terrorism -- in Calgary, went on a 48 hour fast to draw attention to the issue of radicalized Canadian youth. He wants Muslim youth considering going overseas to join ISIS to instead reach out to him. He claimed receiving death threats from both radical Muslims and Islam bashers. Yet, he is firm in asserting that Muslims must unite to isolate deviant groups like ISIS and that the government should be more vigilant. ISIS has no theological base to stand on. Media sources indicate how two British men who pleaded guilty to terrorism offenses had bought 'Islam for Dummies' and "The Koran for Dummies." Far from being devout adherents of faith, who are guided by humility and service to humanity, those drawn towards groups like ISIS are motivated by a hunger for power and thrills.

Continued next post.

Quote:

Muslim religious rulings are quite clear against targeting of civilians and collateral damage. According to Oxford based Malaysian jurist, Shaykh Muhammad Afifi al Akiti, Islamic law specialists are appalled by the legal style of "jihadi fatwas" and reject them as anomalies and misguided innovations. There is no legal precedent in Islamic jurisprudence on circumventing the prohibition of targeting civilians. Perpetrators of such acts are treated as major sinners meriting punishment in this life and the hereafter. However, despite all these condemnations, the conflation of Muslims with fringe groups has become normative. The Internet is rife with comments like there are "too many Muslims in Canada", "they need to completely renounce Islam," "they need to be sent back to their country" and "those in the Middle East should all be nuked." Perhaps such sentiments arise out of a concern that, notwithstanding the umpteen condemnations, change is not happening. People are also aghast that hundreds of ISIS fighters have emerged from those living in Western countries that offer relative economic stability and human rights. On the other hand, even Tarek Fatah, Canadian media personality whose views are construed as opposed to most Muslims, wrote in his book "The Jew is not my Enemy":     "The task of these Muslim reformers is obstructed not just by the Islamists and the jihadis but also by non-Muslims who would rather these reformers fail so that Muslims continue to be seen as a people devoid of reason and consumed by hate." Given the vicious cycle of hate, fuelled by Islamists and Islamophobes, Muslim comedian and writer, Dean Obeidallah, has said we should build stronger interfaith communities. We have to stand united against fear mongering and hate, otherwise groups like ISIS will have won. Instead of giving into complaints and negativity, we need to offer positive solutions to eliminate the ISIS menace that affects Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Progressive Muslim leader, Dr. Amina Wadud writes, we cannot allow ourselves to fall into a cataclysmic way of thinking by "just nuke em"-type comments. Etty Hillesum, who was murdered in Auschwitz during the Holocaust, taught us that we have to destroy within ourselves things that make us destroy others. Notwithstanding their differences, Muslims of all stripes -- Sunni, Shii, Ismaili, Ahmadi, LGBTQ -- must unite to amplify their efforts to isolate groups like ISIS and not allow Islamophobia to dishearten them. A wide array of Islamic texts, including the Prophet's covenant at St. Catherine's monastery, compels Muslims to stand against groups like ISIS. The admonition of the Prophet (upon whom be peace) is clear, "Whosoever wrongs a Jew or Christian will have myself as his prosecutor on the Day of Judgment."

[http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/junaid-jahangir/muslims-against-isis_b_5715563.html]

Open letter to Baghdadi - 123 Imams sign an open letter condemning ISIS.   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

London's Sunday Times front-page article on the fatwa, authored by Quilliam  Foundation's  Sheikh Dr Usama Hasan and supported by five of Britain’s most prominent imams, condemning Islamic State (IS).   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

Oh HB, thats nothing - I can think of 100 inane, retarded rhetorical questions to deal with that:

- is ISIS carrying out stoning just as its commanded in the Quran, or whatever?

- is ISIS executing prisoners just as its commanded in the Quran, or whatever?

- is ISIS trading sex slaves  just as its commanded in the Quran, or whatever?

- name a single action that is inconsistent with islam?

- does ISIS have the word "Islam" in its name?

etc etc - ad infinitum

I think the "or whatever" sums it up, Gandy.   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

Muslims Against ISIS Part 1: Clerics & Scholars

Muslims Against ISIS Part 2: Islamist Leaders

Why are you continually told here that IS represents real Islam?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Quote:

Association of Muslim Scholars in Iraq

No "islam" in their name - ISIS win.

http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/11/28/isis-calls-for-poisoning-and-running-down-westerners/

Adamant wrote on Dec 1^st, 2014 at 7:01pm:

http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/11/28/isis-calls-for-poisoning-and-running-down-westerners/

Why are you promoting Islamic radicalism, Adamant?   Can't you read the thread's title?  We only want stories about combating Islamic radicalism here!   ::)

I'd suggest publication of this case would be an excellent introduction for potential recruits to the reality of being recruited to IS: Islamic State: Indian recruit tells investigators he quit terrorist group after being made to clean toilets   ;D

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 1^st, 2014 at 7:49pm:

Adamant wrote on Dec 1st, 2014 at 7:01pm: http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/11/28/isis-calls-for-poisoning-and-running-down-westerners/ Why are you promoting Islamic radicalism, Adamant?   Can't you read the thread's title?  We only want stories about combating Islamic radicalism here!   ::)

I'm giving an opposing viewpoint.  Am I not allowed to do that Brian? Is this your own personal fiefdom now Brian, do we have to "bend it like Brian"? ::) ::) ::) ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Brian, by labeling this radicalism 'Islamic' aren't you unfairly tarring all Muslims with the same brush?

What right do you have to declare something Islamic?

MORE than $440 million in education funding to counter Islamic radicalism in Indonesia would be shelved under Abbott government budget cuts

Part of the Government’s new $630 million counter-terrorism package has been set aside for programs, designed in consultation with the Muslim community,

Just think if it wasn't for the vile malevolent evil of islamic doctrine how much better off our budget would be.

How much has the islamic doctrine of rape, torture, terrorism, hatred and mass murder cost us over the years?

Why in the 21st century are muslims still accepting the above doctrine as infallibly perfect and unchangeable?

islam the cloaca of 21st century society. 

moses wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 11:12am:

How much has the islamic doctrine of rape, torture, terrorism, hatred and mass murder cost us over the years? Why in the 21st century are muslims still accepting the above doctrine as infallibly perfect and unchangeable?

Most of them aren't.

Where are these muslims who claim the qur'an is not infallibly perfect and unchangeable?

I wonder if Gandalf would unequivocally state that the qur'an is NOT infallible Not perfect and can be changed? 

moses wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 11:21am:

I wonder if Gandalf would unequivocally state that the qur'an is NOT infallible Not perfect and can be changed?

translation: I wonder if Gandalf will unequivocally state that the qur'an is NOT the rigid, intolerant, violence-celebrating manual for hatred that moses thinks it is.

I know that the Koran, "is NOT infallible Not perfect and can be changed".  There is more than enough evidence that it has been changed, several times since the death of Mohammed. Just as the Bible has.  Even more importantly the interpretation of such holy works to suit the times isn't unusual but I'm not Gandalf.    ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

The facts are, the doctrine is the prime cause of islamic atrocities, muslims will never cite the teachings of hate, rape, torture and mass murder, as wrong and not to be followed in the 21st century.

Therefore islamic terrorism will always be part and parcel of islam.

moses wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 11:54am:

The facts are, the doctrine is the prime cause of islamic atrocities, muslims will never cite the teachings of hate, rape, torture and mass murder, as wrong and not to be followed in the 21st century.

So, you willing to condemn the Bible with it's numerous passages which are the cause of Christian atrocities?   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 11:50am:

I know that the Koran, "is NOT infallible Not perfect and can be changed".  There is more than enough evidence that it has been changed, several times since the death of Mohammed.

Can you cite any muslims apart from Zuhdi Jasser who will agree with you on the Quran being not infallible not perfect and can be changed,we are waiting....

Can you cite the evidence the Quran has been changed several times since the death of Muhammad, we are waiting...

Did Muhamad's sock puppet Allah say Islam has been perfected in the Quran, do muslims say unlike the buy-bull the Quran has never been altered?


Quote:

Allah speaking- This day i have perfected for you your religion and......... quran.com/5/3

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 12:25pm:

Can you cite any muslims apart from Zuhdi Jasser who will agree with you on the Quran being not infallible not perfect and can be changed,we are waiting....

And why on earth would he? I think HB made it pretty clear he disagrees with muslims on this.


Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 12:25pm:

Can you cite the evidence the Quran has been changed several times since the death of Muhammad, we are waiting...

umm... haven't you yourself argued this?

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 12:38pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 12:25pm: Can you cite the evidence the Quran has been changed several times since the death of Muhammad, we are waiting... umm... haven't you yourself argued this?

Yes i have, i would like to see what evidence HB has, is there anything wrong with that?

well ok, I'm just wondering why you act like a jerk when you ask him.

What I believe isn't really important, now is it Baron?  I am not a Muslim nor do particularly think much of Islam.  It is just another opiate of the masses like Christianity.  It is used to keep the masses compliant and dumb by their oppressive rulers and exploiters.   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

As to the perfect preservation of the Koran... and... ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

HotBreath wrote:
Quote:

So, you willing to condemn the Bible with it's numerous passages which are the cause of Christian atrocities?

A Christian atrocity would by definition have to be caused by Christian doctrine wouldn't it?

islamic atrocities are carried out in accordance with islamic doctrine by muslims.

I've asked you before but you always run from the obvious question, what Christian doctrine are they following?

Cue: muslim apologists cite ancient (about 3,414,years old ) Hebrew text from the O.T.

Which will be refuted by quoting 2,414 year old passages from the N.T. that revoke the ancient barbarities.

All muslims and their apologists have got is dishonesty.

Truth will win in the end. Result: islam will be destroyed.

moses wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 4:59pm:

HotBreath wrote: Quote: So, you willing to condemn the Bible with it's numerous passages which are the cause of Christian atrocities? A Christian atrocity would by definition have to be caused by Christian doctrine wouldn't it?

Yep.  Abortion clinics firebombed, abortion clinic nurses and doctors assassinated.  LGT people murdered.  Non-whites murdered.  All done by Christians quoting the Bible, Christian doctrine.


Quote:

I've asked you before but you always run from the obvious question, what Christian doctrine are they following?

That contained in the Bible.  The Old Testament is an integral part of the Bible.  So, when these Christian murderers are quoting the Old Testament they are quoting Christian doctrine.   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

Quote:

Cue: muslim apologists cite ancient (about 3,414,years old ) Hebrew text from the O.T.

The same old same old: That contained in the Bible.  The Old Testament is an integral part of the Bible.  So, when these Christian murderers are quoting the Old Testament they are quoting Christian doctrine.


Quote:

Which will be refuted by quoting 2,414 year old passages from the N.T. that revoke the ancient barbarities.

Always refuted by Luke 16:16 Romans 3:20 Romans 3:28 Galatians 2:16 Galatians 3:11

All muslims and their apologists have got is dishonesty.

Truth will win in the end. Result: islam will be destroyed.

If the Old Testament has been "refuted" why is it still an integral part of the Bible?

If the Old Testament has been "refuted" why do Christians still preach from the Old Testament?

This is obviously an example of Christian taqiyya and hitman.  They lie about what their religion really contains, expecting laymen to believe them.   :D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D ;D

The ancient Law has been refuted as you well know. There are still parts of the O.T. relevant today. The law is not.

Now I know that the next part of your dishonesty will go along the lines of why is it still there.

Well I could say to you why are the ancient Aztec temples still in existence and actually protected by law, do the descendants of the Aztecs still practice live human sacrifice to their gods? According to your dishonesty they must be.

There are still copies of repealed laws in western countries which had flogging, hangings etc. as part of their justice system do they still carry out these barbarities today? According to your dishonesty they must do.

The coliseums still exist in Rome protected by law, do they still feed Christians to the lions? According to your dishonesty they still do.

The list could go on for all civilized countries which have copies of rescinded barbaric laws from ages ago, do they still practice them? According to your dishonesty they must do.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 1^st, 2014 at 5:07pm:

Oh HB, thats nothing - I can think of 100 inane, retarded rhetorical questions to deal with that: - is ISIS carrying out stoning just as its commanded in the Quran, or whatever? - is ISIS executing prisoners just as its commanded in the Quran, or whatever? - is ISIS trading sex slaves  just as its commanded in the Quran, or whatever? - name a single action that is inconsistent with islam? - does ISIS have the word "Islam" in its name? etc etc - ad infinitum

The Islamic State has nuffin' to wiv Islam just as the Pope and Catholicism have nuffin' to wiv Christianity.  The Eastern Orthodox Patriarch has nuffin' to dow wiv Christianity. The Dalai Lama has nuffin do wiv Buddhism.

Soren wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 6:13pm:

The Islamic State has nuffin' to wiv Islam

Of course S - just like the muslims who condemn IS have nuffin to wiv Islam right?

moses wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 11:54am:

The facts are, the doctrine is the prime cause of islamic atrocities, muslims will never cite the teachings of hate, rape, torture and mass murder, as wrong and not to be followed in the 21st century. Therefore islamic terrorism will always be part and parcel of islam.

But according to you, not to Judaism in spite of its teachings of hate, rape, torture, etc.

When will you reveal your secret reason why, Moses?

We’re on the edge of our seats.

moses wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 5:49pm:

The ancient Law has been refuted as you well know. There are still parts of the O.T. relevant today. The law is not.

What about the lore?  Isn't Christian doctrine based upon the examples contained in the Bible (in total) rather than just the stated "laws"?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

|dev|null wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 3:01pm:

moses wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 5:49pm: The ancient Law has been refuted as you well know. There are still parts of the O.T. relevant today. The law is not. What about the lore?  Isn't Christian doctrine based upon the examples contained in the Bible (in total) rather than just the stated "laws"?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

How many programs are there combating christian radicals, is it zip zilch none?

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 11:43am:

moses wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 11:21am: I wonder if Gandalf would unequivocally state that the qur'an is NOT infallible Not perfect and can be changed?  translation: I wonder if Gandalf will unequivocally state that the qur'an is NOT the rigid, intolerant, violence-celebrating manual for hatred that moses thinks it is.

No Gandalf will spin what you said into something else and avoid the question.

quran.com/2/2

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2014 at 5:11pm:

Yep.  Abortion clinics firebombed, abortion clinic nurses and doctors assassinated.  LGT people murdered.  Non-whites murdered.

Non whites murdered,a vague statement hurling blame, must be a leftist.

So how many abortion clinic nurses and doctors have been assassinated in the USA and Australia, can you count the deaths of doctors and nurses on one hand?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence,No data on Islamic countries?

Are abortions done in the Islamic world, do rape victims give birth to their attackers children?

Does the Islamic republic of Iran throw gays from cliffs and tall buildings as well as hang them,Ahmadinejad did say there are no homosexuals in Iran, Hitler said there were no gays in Germany.

The Saudis  cure homosexuals with a large sword, they chop their heads off in chop chop square.

karnal wrote:
Quote:

But according to you, not to Judaism in spite of its teachings of hate, rape, torture, etc. When will you reveal your secret reason why, Moses? We’re on the edge of our seats.

Your selective memory kicking in again? As I recall I said I have no idea. Perhaps it could possibly be that the O.T (I presume the Torah is the same) has 48 Prophets and 7 Prophetesses, these multiple sources may provide the doctrine which allows the followers to progress as a normal functioning reformist society.


Maybe because Jews have a higher I.Q. than muslims, this has enabled them to make a success of living in the 21st century.

Maybe islamic inbreeding and it's associated mental health and physical problems has put the muslims so far behind the Jews in the societal stakes, that they can never achieve what the Jews have.

As I also said before, the islamic doctrine is the product of one piece of human evilness muhammad, a thief, liar, pedophile, rapist, terrorist, torturer and mass murderer. The doctrine he preached is the mirror image of his persona, he preached that his doctrine was infallible, final, perfect, and never to be changed, thus the entrenched atrocities of islam perpetuate, while ever islam exists.

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 4:18pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 3:01pm: moses wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 5:49pm: The ancient Law has been refuted as you well know. There are still parts of the O.T. relevant today. The law is not. What about the lore?  Isn't Christian doctrine based upon the examples contained in the Bible (in total) rather than just the stated "laws"?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D How many programs are there combating christian radicals, is it zip zilch none?

The Governments of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda & the USA are taking joint legal and military action against Joseph Kony, Baron, so there is one.   ::)

moses wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 7:27pm:

karnal wrote: Quote: But according to you, not to Judaism in spite of its teachings of hate, rape, torture, etc. When will you reveal your secret reason why, Moses? We’re on the edge of our seats. Your selective memory kicking in again? As I recall I said I have no idea.

Ah.

So you're saying that your entire argument about Islam is a hunch. A personal belief. You have a few hypothesies, but no idea.

Good point, Moses. Some people base their views on facts. Some base them on tested theories. Others base them on untested theories that appear to make, on the face of it, logical sense.

And then there are those people (all too common these days) who base their views on no idea.

You are, of course, free to have no idea. Many do. But if you want to convince others of your point of view, you will need to be able to present a credible idea. You will need to present some facts, tested theories, or an untested, but logical explanation.

Without this, Moses, your views don't hold any weight. They would certainly not stand up in any court of law, and they don't measure any academic test regarding evidence for your argument. You have no sources, no facts, and not even a clear or persuasive argument.

All those words you use amount to little more than birds chirping, or horns honking, or the gutteral sounds of those screaming in pain - or pleasure.

Pleasure or pain? I think it's both. You try to find pleasure through the repetition of an endlessly-repeated utterance. And you express your pain in your attempt to transfer it onto others. Consider this:


Quote:

... the islamic doctrine is the product of one piece of human evilness muhammad, a thief, liar, pedophile, rapist, terrorist, torturer and mass murderer.

You are perfectly free to state this, but those who question its legitimacy have no obligation to accept it. After all, as you confess, you have no idea.

By your own measure, the Jews must be just as bad as Muslims, Judaism just as evil as Islam - worse. After all, Judaism's prophets were much more bloodthirsty than Muhammed, and its laws compelled Jews to commit much more cruelty than Muslims.

Given you have no idea, this is the only logical conclusion we can arrive at.

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 4:36pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 5:11pm: Yep.  Abortion clinics firebombed, abortion clinic nurses and doctors assassinated.  LGT people murdered.  Non-whites murdered. Non whites murdered,a vague statement hurling blame, must be a leftist.

So when an Islamophobe hurls a vague comment about how "Muslims chop heads off" or "Muslims are all Terrorists", they're really being Leftist?   :o :o :o ;D ;D ;D :D :D


Quote:

So how many abortion clinic nurses and doctors have been assassinated in the USA and Australia, can you count the deaths of doctors and nurses on one hand?

Are we talking about principles or numbers?  Amazing how often Islamophobes will suddenly try and diminish the crimes of Christians by saying, "Oh, it's only a tiny minority!" or, "How many have been killed?"   They don't allow that line of argument for Muslims why should we accept it for Christians?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

Karnal wrote:
Quote:

Ah. So you're saying that your entire argument about Islam is a hunch. A personal belief. You have a few hypothesies, but  no idea. Good point, Moses. Some people base their views on facts. Some base them on tested theories. Others base them on untested theories that appear to make, on the face of it, logical sense. And then there are those people (all too common these days) who base their views on no idea. You are, of course, free to have no idea. Many do. But if you want to convince others of your point of view, you will need to be able to present a credible idea. You will need to present some facts, tested theories, or an untested, but logical explanation. Without this, Moses, your views don't hold any weight. They would certainly not stand up in any court of law, and they don't measure any academic test regarding evidence for your argument. You have no sources, no facts, and not even a clear or persuasive argument. All those words you use amount to little more than birds chirping, or horns honking, or the gutteral sounds of those screaming in pain - or pleasure. Pleasure or pain? I think it's both. You try to find pleasure through the repetition of an endlessly-repeated utterance. And you express your pain in your attempt to transfer it onto others. Consider this: & You are perfectly free to state this, but those who question its legitimacy have no obligation to accept it. After all, as you confess, you have no idea. By your own measure, the Jews must be just as bad as Muslims, Judaism just as evil as Islam - worse. After all, Judaism's prophets were much more bloodthirsty than Muhammed, and its laws compelled Jews to commit much more cruelty than Muslims. Given you have no idea, this is the only logical conclusion we can arrive at.

Yes I am quiet happy to admit that I can't produce an exact single  opinion of why the Jews don't carry on like muslims.

I am quiet happy to stay with my probabilities as to why the Jews are superior to muslims in every aspect of their life E.G.:

Perhaps it could possibly be that the O.T (I presume the Torah is the same) has 48 Prophets and 7 Prophetesses, these multiple sources may provide the doctrine which allows the followers to progress as a normal functioning reformist society.

Maybe because Jews have a higher I.Q. than muslims, this has enabled them to make a success of living in the 21st century.

Maybe islamic inbreeding and it's associated mental health and physical problems has put the muslims so far behind the Jews in the societal stakes, that they can never achieve what the Jews have.

It's probably a combination of all of the above.

I firmly believe  that I know the reason for the blood crazed degeneracy of the muslim terrorist E.G.:

The islamic doctrine is the product of one piece of human evilness muhammad, a thief, liar, pedophile, rapist, terrorist, torturer and mass murderer. The doctrine he preached is the mirror image of his persona, he preached that his doctrine was infallible, final, perfect, and never to be changed, thus the entrenched atrocities of islam perpetuate, while ever islam exists.

Published: 3:10 pm, Thursday, 4 December 2014 About 60 Australians are believed to be fighting with Islamist terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq, with the UN estimating about 200 foreign fighters joining IS every month.

The pinup boys of the apologists for islam, rushing to obey islamic doctrine and join a terrorist organization.

Moses, you’ve just stated exactly the same argument with exactly the same hunches in exactly the same order as your previous post - with one addition:

You firmly believe it.

This is all well and good, but you can hardly go around condemning others who don’t firmly believe your own unproven ideas. If you want others to believe it, you need to make some sense. You need to persuade, rather than repeating the same line over and over again.

This is the Yadda technique, and it has never worked. Most don’t even bother to read it.

I’m.sure there are plenty of interesting reasons why Jews are not carrying out the laws of Leviticus as we speak. But there are also reasons why Muslims are not living a 7th century Meccan lifestyle.

There is no proof of higher IQ scores in one religion or another, but it wouldn’t matter if there was. IQ measures abstract reasoning, and a person’s IQ score can rise and fall over a lifetime.IQ also changes vastly over generations as education and technological development occurs. Agrarian people tend to have lower IQs than urban professional people, simply because farm.workers don’t develop skills in visual and conceptual analysis. They don’t need these skills.

Inbreeding is not prevelant in Muslim communities any more than it is in Hindu or Christian communities. Regardless of this, inbreeding has no effect on the violent, backward phenomenon you’re describing. The most inbred communities in the world are generally the rich and powerful. The European aristocracy survives to this day. Many royals suffered from haemophilia and other disorders due to inbreeding.

Back to the drawing board, Moses. If you want others to believe that Islam is more evil than any other religion, you really need to show how. It’s not enough to just keep repeating the same thing, over and over again.

Rather than telling me you really believe this, tell me why. If you can’t do this, how can I possibly believe your argument?

|dev|null wrote on Dec 3^rd, 2014 at 3:01pm:

moses wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 5:49pm: The ancient Law has been refuted as you well know. There are still parts of the O.T. relevant today. The law is not. What about the lore?  Isn't Christian doctrine based upon the examples contained in the Bible (in total) rather than just the stated "laws"?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D

Bump!  Moses?   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D

Christian doctrine is based on the doctrine / teachings of Christ.

karnal wrote:
Quote:

Moses, you’ve just stated exactly the same argument with exactly the same hunches in exactly the same order as your previous post - with one addition: You firmly believe it. This is all well and good, but you can hardly go around condemning others who don’t firmly believe your own unproven ideas. If you want others to believe it, you need to make some sense. You need to persuade, rather than repeating the same line over and over again. This is the Yadda technique, and it has never worked. Most don’t even bother to read it. I’m.sure there are plenty of interesting reasons why Jews are not carrying out the laws of Leviticus as we speak. But there are also reasons why Muslims are not living a 7th century Meccan lifestyle. There is no proof of higher IQ scores in one religion or another, but it wouldn’t matter if there was. IQ measures abstract reasoning, and a person’s IQ score can rise and fall over a lifetime.IQ also changes vastly over generations as education and technological development occurs. Agrarian people tend to have lower IQs than urban professional people, simply because farm.workers don’t develop skills in visual and conceptual analysis. They don’t need these skills. Inbreeding is not prevelant in Muslim communities any more than it is in Hindu or Christian communities. Regardless of this, inbreeding has no effect on the violent, backward phenomenon you’re describing. The most inbred communities in the world are generally the rich and powerful. The European aristocracy survives to this day. Many royals suffered from haemophilia and other disorders due to inbreeding. Back to the drawing board, Moses. If you want others to believe that Islam is more evil than any other religion, you really need to show how. It’s not enough to just keep repeating the same thing, over and over again. Rather than telling me you really believe this, tell me why. If you can’t do this, how can I possibly believe your argument?

I don't really expect you to believe anything Karnal. You do your own thing I'll do mine, only time can prove who is right or wrong.

I have a few varied opinions on why Jews are superior to muslims in the societal ladder of the 21st century, multiple sources of doctrine (48 prophets 7 prophetesses) higher I.Q., they don't inbreed to the extent that muslims do, therefore have less mental and physical health problems per capita, etc.

I know that muslims who commit atrocities do so because of their islamic doctrine.

I know that muhammad (thief, liar, pedophiles, rapist, terrorist, torturer and mass murderer) is the sole source of islamic doctrine.

Having read the qur'an I know he preached that every one of the atrocities he committed was sanctified as an infallible, perfect, never to be changed islamic duty.

Therefore while ever islam exists islamic terrorism, torture and mass murder will prevail.

|dev|null wrote on Dec 4^th, 2014 at 2:39pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 3rd, 2014 at 4:36pm: |dev|null wrote on Dec 2nd, 2014 at 5:11pm: Yep.  Abortion clinics firebombed, abortion clinic nurses and doctors assassinated.  LGT people murdered.  Non-whites murdered. Non whites murdered,a vague statement hurling blame, must be a leftist. So when an Islamophobe hurls a vague comment about how "Muslims chop heads off" or "Muslims are all Terrorists", they're really being Leftist?   :o :o :o ;D ;D ;D :D :D Quote: So how many abortion clinic nurses and doctors have been assassinated in the USA and Australia, can you count the deaths of doctors and nurses on one hand? Are we talking about principles or numbers?  Amazing how often Islamophobes will suddenly try and diminish the crimes of Christians by saying, "Oh, it's only a tiny minority!" or, "How many have been killed?"   They don't allow that line of argument for Muslims why should we accept it for Christians?   ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

I started threads comparing Islam to both Christianity and Judaism after a few empty-headed remarks by Brian et al. The Muslims and their apologists couldn't get away fast enough, especially the Christianity one. Yet they still trot out the same comparisons in order to change the subject at every opportunity.

moses wrote on Dec 5^th, 2014 at 4:58pm:

Christian doctrine is based on the doctrine / teachings of Christ.

Yet Christians preach from The Old Testament, Moses.    ::)

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2014 at 7:07pm:

I started threads comparing Islam to both Christianity and Judaism after a few empty-headed remarks by Brian et al. The Muslims and their apologists couldn't get away fast enough

Can you please link to these threads?

Quote:

Inbreeding is not prevelant in Muslim communities any more than it is in Hindu or Christian communities. Regardless of this, inbreeding has no effect on the violent, backward phenomenon you’re describing. The most inbred communities in the world are generally the rich and powerful. The European aristocracy survives to this day. Many royals suffered from haemophilia and other disorders due to inbreeding.

So the Royal family, who don't actually engage in inbreeding any more, are evidence that inbred communities are generally the rich and powerful?

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2014 at 7:35pm:

Quote: Inbreeding is not prevelant in Muslim communities any more than it is in Hindu or Christian communities. Regardless of this, inbreeding has no effect on the violent, backward phenomenon you’re describing. The most inbred communities in the world are generally the rich and powerful. The European aristocracy survives to this day. Many royals suffered from haemophilia and other disorders due to inbreeding. So the Royal family, who don't actually engage in inbreeding any more, are evidence that inbred communities are generally the rich and powerful?

The inbreeding of the European Royal Houses (it wasn't just confined to the UK's house of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha), was infamous and produced haemophilia.  The Hapsburgs, among whom mandibular prognathism was a family trait a noticeable deformation of the lower lip, known commonly as the "Hapsburg lip" .   This inbreeding continued into the mid-20th century and is only now being changed.   ::)

Brian Ross wrote:

Quote:

Yet Christians preach from The Old Testament, Moses

Are you dishonestly implying that the O.T. is adhered to in it's entirety?

Why are you afraid to say that Christians preach from certain parts of The Old Testament Brian?

Oh that's right you have to be dishonourable in order to apologize for islamic text which consecrates human rights atrocities as the higher path for muslims.

moses wrote on Dec 5^th, 2014 at 5:21pm:

karnal wrote: Quote: Moses, you’ve just stated exactly the same argument with exactly the same hunches in exactly the same order as your previous post - with one addition: You firmly believe it. This is all well and good, but you can hardly go around condemning others who don’t firmly believe your own unproven ideas. If you want others to believe it, you need to make some sense. You need to persuade, rather than repeating the same line over and over again. This is the Yadda technique, and it has never worked. Most don’t even bother to read it. I’m.sure there are plenty of interesting reasons why Jews are not carrying out the laws of Leviticus as we speak. But there are also reasons why Muslims are not living a 7th century Meccan lifestyle. There is no proof of higher IQ scores in one religion or another, but it wouldn’t matter if there was. IQ measures abstract reasoning, and a person’s IQ score can rise and fall over a lifetime.IQ also changes vastly over generations as education and technological development occurs. Agrarian people tend to have lower IQs than urban professional people, simply because farm.workers don’t develop skills in visual and conceptual analysis. They don’t need these skills. Inbreeding is not prevelant in Muslim communities any more than it is in Hindu or Christian communities. Regardless of this, inbreeding has no effect on the violent, backward phenomenon you’re describing. The most inbred communities in the world are generally the rich and powerful. The European aristocracy survives to this day. Many royals suffered from haemophilia and other disorders due to inbreeding. Back to the drawing board, Moses. If you want others to believe that Islam is more evil than any other religion, you really need to show how. It’s not enough to just keep repeating the same thing, over and over again. Rather than telling me you really believe this, tell me why. If you can’t do this, how can I possibly believe your argument? I don't really expect you to believe anything Karnal. You do your own thing I'll do mine, only time can prove who is right or wrong. I have a few varied opinions on why Jews are superior to muslims in the societal ladder of the 21st century, multiple sources of doctrine (48 prophets 7 prophetesses) higher I.Q., they don't inbreed to the extent that muslims do, therefore have less mental and physical health problems per capita, etc. I know that muslims who commit atrocities do so because of their islamic doctrine. I know that muhammad (thief, liar, pedophiles, rapist, terrorist, torturer and mass murderer) is the sole source of islamic doctrine. Having read the qur'an I know he preached that every one of the atrocities he committed was sanctified as an infallible, perfect, never to be changed islamic duty. Therefore while ever islam exists islamic terrorism, torture and mass murder will prevail.

This is the third time in a row where you’ve posted exactly the same thing.

Only this time, you’ve whittled down your "firmly believe" to "only time will tell who is right or wrong".

You don’t want me to believe? Why would anyone spend their time outlining an argument they didn’t want their readers to believe?

Every time you post here, Moses, you want people to believe. You present an argument to persuade. We all do. If you didn’t have this intention, you’d post inane krap, such as:

Stop the boats.

SHAME LABOR SHAME.

Pathetic, leftards, just pathetic.

Shurely shome mishtake.

Miam miam.

Or, one of my favourites:

Sometimes a question is just a question.

moses wrote on Dec 5^th, 2014 at 4:58pm:

Christian doctrine is based on the doctrine / teachings of Christ.

It might be based on the teachings of Christ, but Christian doctrine is the creation of St Paul.

freediver wrote on Dec 5^th, 2014 at 7:35pm:

Quote: Inbreeding is not prevelant in Muslim communities any more than it is in Hindu or Christian communities. Regardless of this, inbreeding has no effect on the violent, backward phenomenon you’re describing. The most inbred communities in the world are generally the rich and powerful. The European aristocracy survives to this day. Many royals suffered from haemophilia and other disorders due to inbreeding. So the Royal family, who don't actually engage in inbreeding any more, are evidence that inbred communities are generally the rich and powerful?

Of course. The rich and powerful.always interbreed. This is how they they keep their wealth and power in the family.

moses wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 5:14pm:

Brian Ross wrote: Quote: Yet Christians preach from The Old Testament, Moses Are you dishonestly implying that the O.T. is adhered to in it's entirety?

No.  Are you claiming that Christians don't refer to The Old Testament at all and have totally abandoned it's teachings?


Quote:

Why are you afraid to say that Christians preach from certain parts of The Old Testament Brian?

Why do you believe I'm afraid to say it?

Why are you afraid to even admit that they do preach from any parts of The Old Testament, Moses?

Even more alarming is your obvious unwillingness to admit that some Christians follow the teachings of The Old Testament and use it to justify their actions.


Quote:

Oh that's right you have to be dishonourable in order to apologize for islamic text which consecrates human rights atrocities as the higher path for muslims.

How is it "dishonourable" to mention that Christians draw upon The Old Testament for their faith, Moses?

You seem to want to disown completely The Old Testament.  You keep claiming that it has been superseded.  Yet, in this post, for the first time you're admitting that Christians do draw upon it for preaching.   Funny how it's taken this long to get that admission out of you, Moses.    ::) ::)

Karnal wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 7:04pm:

freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2014 at 7:35pm: Quote: Inbreeding is not prevelant in Muslim communities any more than it is in Hindu or Christian communities. Regardless of this, inbreeding has no effect on the violent, backward phenomenon you’re describing. The most inbred communities in the world are generally the rich and powerful. The European aristocracy survives to this day. Many royals suffered from haemophilia and other disorders due to inbreeding. So the Royal family, who don't actually engage in inbreeding any more, are evidence that inbred communities are generally the rich and powerful? Of course. The rich and powerful.always interbreed. This is how they they keep their wealth and power in the family.

Where do you get this from? Days of our Lives? Is marrying a rich person the same as marrying your sister Karnal? Have you ever been dumped for not being rich enough?

freediver wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 7:36pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 6th, 2014 at 7:04pm: freediver wrote on Dec 5th, 2014 at 7:35pm: Quote: Inbreeding is not prevelant in Muslim communities any more than it is in Hindu or Christian communities. Regardless of this, inbreeding has no effect on the violent, backward phenomenon you’re describing. The most inbred communities in the world are generally the rich and powerful. The European aristocracy survives to this day. Many royals suffered from haemophilia and other disorders due to inbreeding. So the Royal family, who don't actually engage in inbreeding any more, are evidence that inbred communities are generally the rich and powerful? Of course. The rich and powerful.always interbreed. This is how they they keep their wealth and power in the family. Where do you get this from? Days of our Lives? Is marrying a rich person the same as marrying your sister Karnal? Have you ever been dumped for not being rich enough?

Come come, I’m from a rich, inbred family of grinners from Lahore.

Where did you get your Diaspora idea from, FD? I’m curious.

It's an old Biblical story. I have thought about it, and I still cannot recall where I got the idea from. I'll let you know if I do remember. It was probably something someone posted here.

The idea that Jews tend to be socially progressive I got from a female American Rabbi.

freediver wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 9:28pm:

It's an old Biblical story. I have thought about it, and I still cannot recall where I got the idea from. I'll let you know if I do remember. It was probably something someone posted here. The idea that Jews tend to be socially progressive I got from a female American Rabbi.

Orthodox Jews aren't and would spit in your eye for suggesting they were, FD.  Indeed, in many ways, there isn't all that much to choose between Orthodox Jews and traditional Muslims as far as social attitudes go, even down to how they treat women and non-believers.   ::)

freediver wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 9:28pm:

It's an old Biblical story. I have thought about it, and I still cannot recall where I got the idea from. I'll let you know if I do remember. It was probably something someone posted here. The idea that Jews tend to be socially progressive I got from a female American Rabbi.

The Jewish Diaspora is not in the Bible, FD. The Torah predates it by at least a thousand years.

I’ve Googled your argument. I can’t find it anywhere.

Jews being socially progressive is a completely different idea to a belief that Jews abandoned the laws of Moses. If anything, Jewish progressiveness shows that people can change in spite of their religious laws and texts.

When you remember, please let me know.

I probably came up with it myself then.

I am sure there is something in there about God scattering the chosen people. Maybe it happened a few times.

Jews also identify with slaves, for some reason.

Maybe in a few thousand years Muslims will be the progressives, but they'll have to suffer a lot first.

freediver wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 10:06pm:

I probably came up with it myself then.

Good work, FD, but you still haven’t said exactly what your idea is.

Do you remember what you came up with?

The diaspora makes Jews less hostile to the idea of separation of church and state. It means that despite the superficial similarities with Islamic law, the religion differs fundamentally in that it does not call upon it's followers to create a religious state.

Is that what you were talking about? Going to ask me for proof now?

Not being proselytising is another fundamental difference with Islam that pretty much rules out what Muhammed did. There is no empire building to bring people into the Jewish fold or under Jewish law. It is exclusive to the point of leaving other people alone.

freediver wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 10:19pm:

The diaspora makes Jews less hostile to the idea of separation of church and state. It means that despite the superficial similarities with Islamic law, the religion differs fundamentally in that it does not call upon it's followers to create a religious state..

The entire history of the Jews, from the Exodus to 1947, is not about creating a religious state, but finding a promised land.

Muslims are not compelled to create a religious state any more than Jews are. If you took the Book of Leviticus to the letter, you would indeed create a religious state.

Israel is now secular because the British and the UN were quite careful.to leave it that way. Also, the young Zionists who created Israel were predominantly socialists. The Jews who emmigrated there from the West were largely social democrats. Few made it there from Russia, because Stalin wouldn’t allow it.

The Diaspora was not an historical event, but a series of events over time. Jews did follow the laws of Moses, including the stonings and beheadings, after the destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem.

The never-ever argument applied to Jews is just as silly as the one applied to Muslims. The reason there are so many Muslim bastards in the world today is not the influence of a never-ever sinister prophet, but the rise of Islamic fundamentalism.

Based on the Jews’ much more sinister prophets and kings, it stands to reason that if the Jews became just as dogmatic and literalist about their own traditional laws, they would be much bigger bastards than ISIL.

Karnal wrote:
Quote:

The reason there are so many Muslim bastards in the world today is not the influence of a never-ever sinister prophet, but the rise of Islamic fundamentalism.

Who is responsible for islamic fundamentalism?

fundamentalism noun: The interpretation of every word in the sacred texts as literal truth

As muhammad is the sole prophet of islam, he is the singular influence of islamic fundamentalism.

moses wrote on Dec 7^th, 2014 at 3:03pm:

Karnal wrote: Quote: The reason there are so many Muslim bastards in the world today is not the influence of a never-ever sinister prophet, but the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. Who is responsible for islamic fundamentalism? fundamentalism noun: The interpretation of every word in the sacred texts as literal truth As muhammad is the sole prophet of islam, he is the singular influence of islamic fundamentalism.

Right. So Jesus is the singular influence of Jim.Jones, the Reverend Moon, the papal wars, the Inquisitions, and on and on.

Is that what you’re saying?

Karnal wrote:
Quote:

You don’t want me to believe? Why would anyone spend their time outlining an argument they didn’t want their readers to believe? Every time you post here, Moses, you want people to believe. You present an argument to persuade. We all do. If you didn’t have this intention, you’d post inane krap, such as:

I wrote : I don't really expect you to believe anything Karnal

You're committed to the false islam is not to blame policy, you will strive to apportion equal guilt to Christians, the west, Jews, America, democracy till your dying day.

Just as I am committed to islam is the sole cause of islamic atrocities.

Neither of us will change our minds.

For the undecided on this issue, they can make up their minds as they go along.

Those of us who have come to a conscious conclusion will keep presenting our own personal view point.

Karnal wrote:
Quote:

Right. So Jesus is the singular influence of Jim.Jones, the Reverend Moon, the papal wars, the Inquisitions, and on and on. Is that what you’re saying?

If you can quote the doctrine of Christ they are / were following you have a point. If you can't back up your statement with teachings of Christ, you're lying.

Brian Ross wrote:
Quote:

No.  Are you claiming that Christians don't refer to The Old Testament at all and have totally abandoned it's teachings? & Why are you afraid to even admit that they do preach from any parts of The Old Testament, Moses? & Even more alarming is your obvious unwillingness to admit that some Christians follow the teachings of The Old Testament and use it to justify their actions. & You seem to want to disown completely The Old Testament.  You keep claiming that it has been superseded.  Yet, in this post, for the first time you're admitting that Christians do draw upon it for preaching.   Funny how it's taken this long to get that admission out of you, Moses.

Dishonest knavery becomes you Brian.

Mosaic Law was discarded 2014 years ago by Christ.

You are unable to understand the difference between the 3,414 year old Mosaic Law (which was superseded by Christ) and other parts of the O.T. which are relevant to Christians?

moses wrote on Dec 7^th, 2014 at 3:22pm:

Karnal wrote: Quote: Right. So Jesus is the singular influence of Jim.Jones, the Reverend Moon, the papal wars, the Inquisitions, and on and on. Is that what you’re saying? If you can quote the doctrine of Christ they are / were following you have a point. If you can't back up your statement with teachings of Christ, you're lying.

That’s strange, because I’ve heard plenty of Muslim leaders come out to say ISIS are not following the teachings of Muhammed.

Mendacious or srupid? Stupid or mendacious?

Sometimes a question is just a question.

Karnal wrote on Dec 6^th, 2014 at 10:44pm:

The never-ever argument applied to Jews is just as silly as the one applied to Muslims. The reason there are so many Muslim bastards in the world today is not the influence of a never-ever sinister prophet, but the rise of Islamic fundamentalism.

Good to see the grown ups in charge again.

Karnal wrote:
Quote:

That’s strange, because I’ve heard plenty of Muslim leaders come out to say ISIS are not following the teachings of Muhammed.

They say?

Well here's your big chance, go and ask them for an explanation that clearly shows how the fundamentalists have got it wrong.

moses wrote on Dec 7^th, 2014 at 3:34pm:

Brian Ross wrote: Quote: No.  Are you claiming that Christians don't refer to The Old Testament at all and have totally abandoned it's teachings? & Why are you afraid to even admit that they do preach from any parts of The Old Testament, Moses? & Even more alarming is your obvious unwillingness to admit that some Christians follow the teachings of The Old Testament and use it to justify their actions. & You seem to want to disown completely The Old Testament.  You keep claiming that it has been superseded.  Yet, in this post, for the first time you're admitting that Christians do draw upon it for preaching.   Funny how it's taken this long to get that admission out of you, Moses. Dishonest knavery becomes you Brian. Mosaic Law was discarded 2014 years ago by Christ. You are unable to understand the difference between the 3,414 year old Mosaic Law (which was superseded by Christ) and other parts of the O.T. which are relevant to Christians?

No, I am not.  My point has always been that many Christians refer to The Old Testament and all to often forgotten what you claim about it being superseded, themselves, Moses.

You appear unable to accept that many Christians still practice Old Testament Christianity, Moses.  Why?   We have the example of Yadda, who frequently refers to The Old Testament to justify his viewpoint yet you are silent on it.  Why?

Do I detect hypocrisy on your part?   ::)

moses wrote on Dec 8^th, 2014 at 7:43pm:

Karnal wrote: Quote: That’s strange, because I’ve heard plenty of Muslim leaders come out to say ISIS are not following the teachings of Muhammed. They say? Well here's your big chance, go and ask them for an explanation that clearly shows how the fundamentalists have got it wrong.

He doesn't have to ask them, Moses.  They already have:


Quote:

World's top Muslim leaders condemn attacks on Iraqi Christians Two of the leading voices in the Muslim world denounced the persecution of Christians in Iraq, at the hands of extremists proclaiming a caliphate under the name Islamic State. The most explicit condemnation came from Iyad Ameen Madani, the Secretary General for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the group representing 57 countries, and 1.4 billion Muslims. In a statement, he officially denounced the "forced deportation under the threat of execution” of Christians, calling it a "crime that cannot be tolerated.” The Secretary General also distanced Islam from the actions of the militant group known as ISIS, saying they "have nothing to do with Islam and its principles that call for justice, kindness, fairness, freedom of faith and coexistence.” Meanwhile, Turkey's top cleric, the spiritual successor to the caliphate under the Ottoman Empire, also touched on the topic during a peace conference of Islamic scholars. In a not-so-veiled swipe at ISIS, Mehmet Gormez declared that "an entity that lacks legal justification has no authority to declare war against a political gathering, any country or community.” He went on to say that Muslims should not be hostile towards "people with different views, values and beliefs, and regard them as enemies.” Their remarks come at a time when Christian leaders in Iraq have called on Muslim leaders worldwide to denounce the anti-Christian violence in the country. In the past decade, the majority of Iraqi Christians have either fled the country or taken refuge in the autonomous region of Kurdistan. The declaration of a "caliphate" by Islamist militants in Iraq lacks legitimacy and their death threats to Christians are a danger to civilization, Turkey's top cleric, the successor to the last caliph's most senior imam, said. Islamic State, an armed group formerly allied to al Qaeda that has captured swathes of territory across Iraq, last month declared its leader, Ibrahim al-Baghdadi, "caliph" - the historical title last held by the Turkish Ottoman sultan who ruled much of the Muslim world. "Such declarations have no legitimacy whatsoever," Mehmet Gormez, head of the Religious Affairs Directorate, the highest religious authority in Turkey, which, although a majority Muslim country, has been a secular state since the 1920s. "Since the caliphate was abolished ... there have been movements that think they can pull together the Muslim world by re-establishing a caliphate, but they have nothing to do with reality, whether from a political or legal perspective." Gormez said death threats against non-Muslims made by the group, formerly known as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), were hugely damaging. "The statement made against Christians is truly awful. Islamic scholars need to focus on this (because) an inability to peacefully sustain other faiths and cultures heralds the collapse of a civilization," he told Reuters in an interview.

[url=http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/07/25/worlds_muslim_leaders_condemn_attacks_on_iraqi_christians/1103410]Source[/url]

Egypt’s highest religious authority – Al-Azhar’s Grand Mufti Shawqi Allam -  denounced the Islamic State as a threat to Islam and said that the group violates Islamic law

Saudi Arabia's highest religious authority, Grand Mufti, Abdulaziz al-Sheikh, said on Tuesday that terrorism, which he accuses the groups of committing on a systematic scale, had no place in Islam's ideology.

So, you don't think they're condemning it on theological grounds, Moses?   ::)

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 8^th, 2014 at 10:57pm:

So, you don't think they're condemning it on theological grounds, Moses?

There are two completely air tight rebuttals to this point Brian:

1. they are stupid
2. they are mendacious (google: taqqiya)

Now you'll get all sorts of inane arguments as to why its one or the other, but ultimately it will come down to this basic argument: "oh come on, I've read the Quranic translation, I'm sure thats what it means - and here I'll throw in a quote from jihad-watch, plus a quote from some nutjob muslim leader that no one listens to to prove it".

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 8^th, 2014 at 11:29pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 8th, 2014 at 10:57pm: So, you don't think they're condemning it on theological grounds, Moses? There are two completely air tight rebuttals to this point Brian: 1. they are stupid 2. they are mendacious (google: taqqiya) Now you'll get all sorts of inane arguments as to why its one or the other, but ultimately it will come down to this basic argument: "oh come on, I've read the Quranic translation, I'm sure thats what it means - and here I'll throw in a quote from jihad-watch, plus a quote from some nutjob muslim leader that no one listens to to prove it".

Ah.  Yes, I know what to expect but I remain hopeful there will be some honesty displayed for a change.  At heart, I suppose I am and remain always an optimist.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote:


Quote:

No, I am not.  My point has always been that many Christians refer to The Old Testament and all to often forgotten what you claim about it being superseded, themselves, Moses. You appear unable to accept that many Christians still practice Old Testament Christianity, Moses.  Why?   We have the example of Yadda, who frequently refers to The Old Testament to justify his viewpoint yet you are silent on it.  Why? Do I detect hypocrisy on your part?

Many Christians quote from the O.T., do they Quote from the Mosaic Law?

Do you know the difference between Mosaic Law and other parts of the O.T.?

Why do you misrepresent the fact that Christ disposed of Mosaic Law Luke 16:16?

Why do you misrepresent the fact that justification by Mosaic law was renounced Romans 3:20  Romans 3:28  Galatians 2:16  Galatians 3:11?

There are parts of the O.T. that are timeless, the law is finished.

Why the continual dishonesty on your part?


Quote:

[quote] moses wrote: Well here's your big chance, go and ask them for an explanation that clearly shows how the fundamentalists have got it wrong.

Brian Ross wrote:
Quote:

He doesn't have to ask them, Moses.  They already have: etc. etc.

Then Gandalf wrote:
Quote:

There are two completely air tight rebuttals to this point Brian: 1. they are stupid 2. they are mendacious (google: taqqiya) Now you'll get all sorts of inane arguments as to why its one or the other, but ultimately it will come down to this basic argument: "oh come on, I've read the Quranic translation, I'm sure thats what it means - and here I'll throw in a quote from jihad-watch, plus a quote from some nutjob muslim leader that no one listens to to prove it".

[/quote]

Neither of you have shown the slightest bit of evidence that the fundamentalists have got the doctrine wrong.

Why do you both run away from this issue?

moses wrote on Dec 9^th, 2014 at 9:51am:

Neither of you have shown the slightest bit of evidence that the fundamentalists have got the doctrine wrong. Why do you both run away from this issue?

By which Allah guides those who pursue His pleasure to the ways of peace and brings them out from darknesses into the light, by His permission, and guides them to a straight path.

Quran 5:16

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

Quran 2:256

And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression.

Quran 2:193

Words of The Prophet:

Someone said to the Prophet, ‘Pray to God against the idolaters and curse them.’ The Prophet replied, ‘I have been sent to show mercy and have not been sent to curse.’

Thus says the Prophet, ‘Verily those who are patient in adversity and forgive wrongs are the doers of excellence.”

God is not merciful to him who is not so to mankind.

But this is not the first time I've produced these quotes is it moses? Would you say these excerpts from Islamic Doctrine support or refute the actions of ISIS like slaughtering non-combatants, raping and pillaging?

Finally, don't you ever f _ucking dare tell me I've never shown the slightest bit of evidence that the fundamentalists have got the doctrine wrong.   :)

moses wrote on Dec 9^th, 2014 at 9:51am:

Brian Ross wrote: Quote: No, I am not.  My point has always been that many Christians refer to The Old Testament and all to often forgotten what you claim about it being superseded, themselves, Moses. You appear unable to accept that many Christians still practice Old Testament Christianity, Moses.  Why?   We have the example of Yadda, who frequently refers to The Old Testament to justify his viewpoint yet you are silent on it.  Why? Do I detect hypocrisy on your part? Many Christians quote from the O.T., do they Quote from the Mosaic Law?

Absolutely. They point to Leviticus to uncover the Will of God. The quote on lying with a man as with a woman is often coined to condemn homosexuality.

Christian societies have been putting sodomites to death for 2 millennia. A popular form of torture and execution during the Middle Ages was The Spike. Today, homosexuals in African Christian communities are often murdered, justified by Leviticus. Christians were active in campaigning to keep homosexuality illegal in NSW, when it was legalized as recently the 1980s - again referencing Mosaic law.

Your Romans citation says why:


Quote:

3.20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

Sin, for Christians after Augustine, is defined as being "of the flesh" rather than, for example, the dietary principles of Mosaic law, which were disposed of by St Paul in order to appeal to Romans.

Luke does not dispose of Mosaic law. Read 16:17:


Quote:

The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone forces his way into it.[a] 17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.

And read Jesus Himself. Matthew 5:17:


Quote:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

Gandalf wrote:
Quote:

By which Allah guides those who pursue His pleasure to the ways of peace and brings them out from darknesses into the light, by His permission, and guides them to a straight path. Quran 5:16 Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things. Quran 2:256 And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression. Quran 2:193 Words of The Prophet: Someone said to the Prophet, ‘Pray to God against the idolaters and curse them.’ The Prophet replied, ‘I have been sent to show mercy and have not been sent to curse.’ Thus says the Prophet, ‘Verily those who are patient in adversity and forgive wrongs are the doers of excellence.” God is not merciful to him who is not so to mankind. But this is not the first time I've produced these quotes is it moses? Would you say these excerpts from Islamic Doctrine support or refute the actions of ISIS like slaughtering non-combatants, raping and pillaging? Finally, don't you ever f _ucking dare tell me I've never shown the slightest bit of evidence that the fundamentalists have got the doctrine wrong.

You have not shown one bit of evidence that the fundamentalists have got it wrong.

You have shown contradictory verses only.

You have not produced any verses / doctrine which absolutely extinguish torture and death for disbelievers, hypocrites and corrupters, which extinguish the hate speech, which extinguish the self alienation from society, which extinguish taqiyya and kitman, which extinguish hijrah and jihad.

To show that something is abolished you need verses which absolutely says so, inconsistencies prove nothing.

I give as an example some verses in the N.T. which absolutely show that the Mosaic law of the O.T. (the favourite of your apologists) was finished.


Quote:

Luke 16:16  The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached , and every man presseth into it. Rom 3:20  Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Rom 3:28  Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Gal 2:16  Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Gal 3:11  But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

What this means is that man was not to be stoned to death etc. as  punishment for sins, instead they were to seek forgiveness through faith in Christ.

Nowhere in the qur'an, are the verses which substantiate the actions of fundamentalists, shown as being wrong.

Karnal wrote:

Quote:

Your Romans citation says why: [quote] 3.20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of sin.

Sin, for Christians after Augustine, is defined as being "of the flesh" rather than, for example, the dietary principles of Mosaic law, which were disposed of by St Paul in order to appeal to Romans.

Luke does not dispose of Mosaic law. Read 16:17:


Quote:

The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone forces his way into it.[a] 17 But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one dot of the Law to become void.

And read Jesus Himself. Matthew 5:17:


Quote:

Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

[/quote]

You have answered your own questions Karnal, through the law we become conscious of sin, however we cannot be declared righteous by observing the law.

To path to righteousness is not by the deeds of the law, you are justified by faith in Christ.

The law did not become void, it was fulfilled: 

As Christ said in Mathew 5:17  Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Fulfill verb: to bring to a successful and favourable  finish or completion;

Consequently if the O.T. Law has been successfully brought to a conclusion, it is finished, not applicable to today's Christian.


Quote:

Absolutely. They point to Leviticus to uncover the Will of God. The quote on lying with a man as with a woman is often coined to condemn homosexuality. Christian societies have been putting sodomites to death for 2 millennia. A popular form of torture and execution during the Middle Ages was The Spike. Today, homosexuals in African Christian communities are often murdered, justified by Leviticus. Christians were active in campaigning to keep homosexuality illegal in NSW, when it was legalized as recently the 1980s - again referencing Mosaic law.

We've been through the bit where Christ concluded the law successfully, He declared it finished.

Now for people who go against the Doctrine of Christ, well once again we see that the answer is contained in the N.T.

Mat 15:9  But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Mar 7:7  Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

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

Mat 7:22  Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

Mat 7:23  And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Seems clear to me that Christ has unambiguously stated that people who give their own commandments as the doctrine of Christianity, people who commit iniquity are rejected by Christ they are not Christians.

Unlike islam, Christianity can be examined by it's doctrine.

Surely the acts of Christians determines how Christianity should be judged?   Christians throughout history have committed atrocities against both believers and non-believers, justifying their actions by reference to Christian doctrine, quoting bible chapter and verse.   You can't wriggle out that easily Moses!   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 8^th, 2014 at 11:29pm:

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 8th, 2014 at 10:57pm: So, you don't think they're condemning it on theological grounds, Moses? There are two completely air tight rebuttals to this point Brian: 1. they are stupid 2. they are mendacious (google: taqqiya) Now you'll get all sorts of inane arguments as to why its one or the other, but ultimately it will come down to this basic argument: "oh come on, I've read the Quranic translation, I'm sure thats what it means - and here I'll throw in a quote from jihad-watch, plus a quote from some nutjob muslim leader that no one listens to to prove it".

If no-one listens to him, why is he a leader?


Quote:

Surely the acts of Christians determines how Christianity should be judged?

The acts of Christians determine how those Christians should be judged. It is only when there is a clear link to Christianity that Christianity can rightfully be judged by them.


Quote:

Finally, don't you ever f _ucking dare tell me I've never shown the slightest bit of evidence that the fundamentalists have got the doctrine wrong.

Hmmm. You've never shown the slightest bit of evidence that the fundamentalists have got the doctrine wrong.


Quote:

Thus says the Prophet, ‘Verily those who are patient in adversity and forgive wrongs are the doers of excellence.”

... after a hard day of torturing, thieving, having sex with little girls and beheading a few treacherous Jews.


Quote:

But this is not the first time I've produced these quotes is it moses? Would you say these excerpts from Islamic Doctrine support or refute the actions of ISIS like slaughtering non-combatants, raping and pillaging?

If they utter the same platitudes after a hard days raping and pillaging, verily they follow the example of the prophet and are doers of excellence.

Please point out where the Jew Yeheshua declared the laws of Moses "finished", Moses.

I’ll wait for this.

moses wrote on Dec 9^th, 2014 at 9:51am:

Brian Ross wrote: Quote: No, I am not.  My point has always been that many Christians refer to The Old Testament and all to often forgotten what you claim about it being superseded, themselves, Moses. You appear unable to accept that many Christians still practice Old Testament Christianity, Moses.  Why?   We have the example of Yadda, who frequently refers to The Old Testament to justify his viewpoint yet you are silent on it.  Why? Do I detect hypocrisy on your part? Many Christians quote from the O.T., do they Quote from the Mosaic Law?

Immaterial, Moses.  They act upon what they read in The Old Testament.  They use The Old Testament to justify their actions.   Until you address that, you will get no where.    ::)

moses wrote on Dec 9^th, 2014 at 5:29pm:

You have not shown one bit of evidence that the fundamentalists have got it wrong. You have shown contradictory verses only.

It is evidence, you just don't think its convincing evidence.

If verses that contradict what ISIS believes is not evidence that they have it wrong, please explain to me what would be?



moses wrote on Dec 9^th, 2014 at 5:29pm:

You have not produced any verses / doctrine which absolutely extinguish torture and death for disbelievers, hypocrites and corrupters, which extinguish the hate speech, which extinguish the self alienation from society, which extinguish taqiyya and kitman, which extinguish hijrah and jihad.

Don't try and be clever moses, you said I have no evidence that the fundamentalists have got it wrong - don't try and twist this into something else. What I presented is crystal clear evidence against their doctrines - just one example is their belief that killing innocent civilians is islamically justified. A very clear piece of evidence against this belief is in the Quranic command "Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression." Can you conjur up an argument that explains how targeting and killing innocent women and children is not violating this command? Give it a shot moses, this should be fun.

Quote:

What I presented is crystal clear evidence against their doctrines - just one example is their belief that killing innocent civilians is islamically justified.

Do you have any evidence that they believe this? Or do they merely believe, as with that well known UK Imam, that no non-Muslims are innocent? They probably practice the same sort of hypocrisy that defines Islam and the life of Muhammed.

|dev|null wrote on Dec 9^th, 2014 at 5:46pm:

Surely the acts of Christians determines how Christianity should be judged?   Christians throughout history have committed atrocities against both believers and non-believers, justifying their actions by reference to Christian doctrine, quoting bible chapter and verse.   You can't wriggle out that easily Moses!   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D

And now they don't. Because they reformed themselves.

Soren wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 7:17pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 9th, 2014 at 5:46pm: Surely the acts of Christians determines how Christianity should be judged?   Christians throughout history have committed atrocities against both believers and non-believers, justifying their actions by reference to Christian doctrine, quoting bible chapter and verse.   You can't wriggle out that easily Moses!   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D And now they don't. Because they reformed themselves.

A small minority still do, Soren.   Therefore, using your logic, all Christians are responsible.  When are you as a Lutheran going to do something about say, Joseph Kony?   ::)

Karnal wrote:
Quote:

Please point out where the Jew Yeheshua declared the laws of Moses "finished", Moses. I’ll wait for this.

Christ said in Mathew 5:17  Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

Fulfill verb: to bring to a successful and favourable finish or completion;

Synonyms: cease, close, complete, conclusion, end, finale, finish, stop, terminate.

Synonym noun: Two words that can be interchanged in a context are said to be synonymous relative to that context

Brian Ross wrote
Quote:

Immaterial, Moses.  They act upon what they read in The Old Testament.  They use The Old Testament to justify their actions.   Until you address that, you will get no where.

I reiterate:Many Christians quote from the O.T., do they Quote from the Mosaic Law?

Do you know the difference between Mosaic Law and other parts of the O.T.?

Why do you misrepresent the fact that Christ disposed of Mosaic Law Luke 16:16?

Why do you misrepresent the fact that justification by Mosaic law was renounced Romans 3:20  Romans 3:28  Galatians 2:16  Galatians 3:11?

There are parts of the O.T. that are timeless, the law is finished.

Why the continual dishonesty on your part?

Gandalf wrote:
Quote:

It is evidence, you just don't think its convincing evidence. If verses that contradict what ISIS believes is not evidence that they have it wrong, please explain to me what would be?

You are saying that a contradictory verse is proof the other muslim is wrong.

Well isis believe exactly the same thing, the verses they follow contradict your verses. Therefore you are wrong.

Which of you are right? I know that muslims who conduct jihad and hijrah are a grade higher than other muslims, so islamic doctrine is leaning towards them.


Quote:

Don't try and be clever moses, you said I have no evidence that the fundamentalists have got it wrong - don't try and twist this into something else. What I presented is crystal clear evidence against their doctrines - just one example is their belief that killing innocent civilians is islamically justified. A very clear piece of evidence against this belief is in the Quranic command "Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression." Can you conjur up an argument that explains how targeting and killing innocent women and children is not violating this command? Give it a shot moses, this should be fun.

Well we all know that fundamentalists take the commands of: torture and death for disbelievers, hypocrites and corrupters, commands of hate speech, commands of self alienation from society, commands of taqiyya and kitman, commands of hijrah and jihad, as crystal clear evidence your contradictions are wrong.

Two points are in their favour, 1/.they are emulating muhammad, 2/.the qur'an unambiguously states they are a higher grade of muslim than others.

I say again: You have not produced any verses / doctrine which absolutely extinguish the above evil in the qur'an.

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 8:01pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 10th, 2014 at 7:17pm: |dev|null wrote on Dec 9th, 2014 at 5:46pm: Surely the acts of Christians determines how Christianity should be judged?   Christians throughout history have committed atrocities against both believers and non-believers, justifying their actions by reference to Christian doctrine, quoting bible chapter and verse.   You can't wriggle out that easily Moses!   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D And now they don't. Because they reformed themselves. A small minority still do, Soren.   Therefore, using your logic, all Christians are responsible.  When are you as a Lutheran going to do something about say, Joseph Kony?   ::)

Has any one ever said that all muslims are responsible for the buggerbuggery of some? 

Brian Ross wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 8:01pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 10th, 2014 at 7:17pm: |dev|null wrote on Dec 9th, 2014 at 5:46pm: Surely the acts of Christians determines how Christianity should be judged?   Christians throughout history have committed atrocities against both believers and non-believers, justifying their actions by reference to Christian doctrine, quoting bible chapter and verse.   You can't wriggle out that easily Moses!   ;D ;D :D :D ;D ;D :D :D And now they don't. Because they reformed themselves. A small minority still do, Soren.   Therefore, using your logic, all Christians are responsible.  When are you as a Lutheran going to do something about say, Joseph Kony?   ::)

You've done this schtick already, Brain.

Where you go horribly wrong is that Kony is in charge of Nowheresville. 

The 'tiny minority' of fundamentalist Islamists, on the other hand, are in control of a number of countries and they are also in control of huge chunks of Islamic education in a number of other countries, Muslim or otherwise, including Australia.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 9:18am:

moses wrote on Dec 9th, 2014 at 5:29pm: You have not shown one bit of evidence that the fundamentalists have got it wrong. You have shown contradictory verses only. It is evidence, you just don't think its convincing evidence. If verses that contradict what ISIS believes is not evidence that they have it wrong, please explain to me what would be? ." Can you conjur up an argument that explains how targeting and killing innocent women and children is not violating this command? Give it a shot moses, this should be fun.

Are you conceding there are verses that contradict each other in the Quran Gandalf?


Quote:

Then do they not reflect upon the Quran,if it had been from any other than Allah they would have found within it much contradiction quran.com/4/82

Muslims can never agree on anything from niqab to Islamic terror to the Islamic state,perhaps all the contradictions have something to do with it.

Is there a verse where Mo says killing innocent women and children is ok?

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 9:13pm:

Are you conceding there are verses that contradict each other in the Quran Gandalf?

no.


Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 9:13pm:

Is there a verse where Mo says killing innocent women and children is ok?

no.

What is the Islamic concept of "innocence" Gandalf?

The Quranic quote I provided for moses is as good as any:

"Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression."

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 10:37pm:

The Quranic quote I provided for moses is as good as any: "Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression."

You mendacious, twisted, spineless PB.

The Quran means that as Taqiyya.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 10:37pm:

The Quranic quote I provided for moses is as good as any: "Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression."

This is the Islamic concept of innocence? No wonder the British Imam took such license with the term.

Is there even an Arabic word that translates to innocent?

moses wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 8:06pm:

Brian Ross wrote Quote: Immaterial, Moses.  They act upon what they read in The Old Testament.  They use The Old Testament to justify their actions.   Until you address that, you will get no where. I reiterate:Many Christians quote from the O.T., do they Quote from the Mosaic Law? Do you know the difference between Mosaic Law and other parts of the O.T.? Why do you misrepresent the fact that Christ disposed of Mosaic Law Luke 16:16? Why do you misrepresent the fact that justification by Mosaic law was renounced Romans 3:20  Romans 3:28  Galatians 2:16  Galatians 3:11? There are parts of the O.T. that are timeless, the law is finished. Why the continual dishonesty on your part?

Take the matter up with your fellow Christians, Moses.  They are the ones who use The Old Testament to justify their actions.

You can keep burying your head in the sand if you wish but it won't stop those Christians from misusing your religion to justify their heinous acts against innocent people.

If you're going to try and hold all Muslims accountable for the actions of a tiny minority of Terrorists, then I see no reason not to hold you and your fellow Christians accountable for what the tiny minority of Christian Terrorists do.  Fair's fair, Moses.    ::)

Brian Ross wrote:
Quote:

Take the matter up with your fellow Christians, Moses.  They are the ones who use The Old Testament to justify their actions. You can keep burying your head in the sand if you wish but it won't stop those Christians from misusing your religion to justify their heinous acts against innocent people. If you're going to try and hold all Muslims accountable for the actions of a tiny minority of Terrorists, then I see no reason not to hold you and your fellow Christians accountable for what the tiny minority of Christian Terrorists do.  Fair's fair, Moses.

There's only two viewpoints as far as I'm concerned

First:

I accept Christian doctrine as it is written in the teachings of Christ.

I accept Christianity / Christians as defined by the teachings of Christ.

I accept that Christ extinguished parts of the O.T.

I accept (as per the teachings of Christ) that people who induce their own precepts, are rejected by Christ, therefore they are not Christians

I accept that you and other apologists always try and pervert the above teachings in order to apologize for islamic terrorism

I am very happy to let the doctrine of Christianity be the adjudicator of what constitutes Christians/ Christianity.

Second:
I hold the doctrine of islam Which promotes (torture and death for disbelievers, hypocrites and corrupters, hate speech, self alienation from society,  taqiyya and kitman, hijrah and jihad, a prophet of islam has to be a mass murderer) accountable for islamic terrorism.

Any muslim who accepts the above commands as infallible, perfect, can never be changed, also accept and are responsible for the terrorism, torture and mass murder they spawn.

As with Christianity, I am also very happy to let the doctrine of islam be the adjudicator of what constitutes islamic terrorism it's followers and supporters.

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 10^th, 2014 at 10:37pm:

The Quranic quote I provided for moses is as good as any: "Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression."

Why aren't Muslims abide by this?

Because they interpret ANY resistance to their particular agenda as 'oppression'. And once they can claim 'oppression', their only, eager response is violence.

That verse is a licence to violence, not a call to tolerance. That is why Muslims are violent in the face of any resistance to their doctrines.

There is no example of tolerant Islam in the world today. The victim mentality is used as an excuse and justification for unspeakable violence and oppression.  That is why agit-prop line of victimhood is essential for the Muslims 'narrative'.  It is a load of bollocks but Muslims will not let it go because there is no justification for their daily barbarity. Victimhood is a thin veneer they think will excuse them. It's nonsense. They prosecute people mercilessly and are subject to persecution mostly by other Muslims.

Utter, shameless scam, 'Islamophobia' is.

I agree, old boy. Fancy claiming victimhood for being carpetbombed. I’ll bet those Muslim women in headscarves you give a piece of your mind to take offence as well.

It’s all an elaborate ruse to blame oppression. Me? I blame Islam. The Muselman does offend me so.

And as we all know, no one has the right to not be offended.

Soren wrote on Dec 12^th, 2014 at 8:30pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 10th, 2014 at 10:37pm: The Quranic quote I provided for moses is as good as any: "Let there be no hostility except to those who practise oppression." Why aren't Muslims abide by this?

I think you either mean, "Why aren't Muslims abid[ing] by this" or "Why [don't] Muslims abide by this?"  Soren.   ::)

You really need to stop doing this by phone.   ;D

Karnal wrote on Dec 13^th, 2014 at 2:49pm:

I agree, old boy. Fancy claiming victimhood for being carpetbombed. I’ll bet those Muslim women in headscarves you give a piece of your mind to take offence as well. It’s all an elaborate ruse to blame oppression. Me? I blame Islam. The Muselman does offend me so. And as we all know, no one has the right to not be offended.

Sydney Muslim survives co-worker's stare.

Phew!! A close shave.

Soren wrote on Dec 20^th, 2014 at 2:09pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 13th, 2014 at 2:49pm: I agree, old boy. Fancy claiming victimhood for being carpetbombed. I’ll bet those Muslim women in headscarves you give a piece of your mind to take offence as well. It’s all an elaborate ruse to blame oppression. Me? I blame Islam. The Muselman does offend me so. And as we all know, no one has the right to not be offended. Sydney Muslim survives co-worker's stare. Phew!! A close shave.

Quite so.

And as every schoolboy knows, that Muselman should have raced down to Martin Place, broke through the police tape, and thrown himself on his fellow Muselman’s gun.

Even then, Moslems would not be doing enough to prevent the extremists among them, but at least another Moslem would have been taken out.

Allah Uakbar, no?

Soren wrote on Dec 20^th, 2014 at 2:09pm:

Karnal wrote on Dec 13th, 2014 at 2:49pm: I agree, old boy. Fancy claiming victimhood for being carpetbombed. I’ll bet those Muslim women in headscarves you give a piece of your mind to take offence as well. It’s all an elaborate ruse to blame oppression. Me? I blame Islam. The Muselman does offend me so. And as we all know, no one has the right to not be offended. Sydney Muslim survives co-worker's stare. Phew!! A close shave.

Phew man that was a close call.

Nancy Mourad, 24, a cancer researcher in Sydney, said that the day after the siege, a man shouted at her on the train, “Bloody Muslims, go back to your country.”

Gee I dunno why this nasty man would say that in hug a muselman week.