Hamas gunmen attack Fatah police jeep, killing 8
Associated Press
May. 15, 2007 02:37 PM
GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Hamas gunmen riddled a Fatah police jeep with gunfire at close range Tuesday, killing eight policemen in the most ruthless round yet of factional fighting, pushing the Palestinian unity government closer to collapse.

Gunmen in black ski masks took up positions in the streets and terrified residents huddled in their homes. Israel, too, was briefly drawn into the battle.

"I don't know when it's going to end and what the future will bring," said Salman Abu Arafeh, 42, a Gaza City interior decorator who was pinned down by gunfire in his apartment for hours, along with his wife and two children. A total of 15 people were killed in Tuesday's fighting.
     

 





An Egyptian mediator said a truce was reached late Tuesday - the third in as many nights. The others have collapsed within hours.

In the West Bank, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called for the immediate implementation of a security plan that would put all rival forces under one command. However, his call is unlikely to be heeded: the fighting made it clear the Hamas-Fatah power struggle was never really resolved, despite formation of the unity government in March.

Gaza's turmoil further weakened hopes for a resumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, despite a new push by the Arab world to bring the sides to the table, based on an offer of Arab recognition of Israel in exchange for an Israeli withdrawal from all lands it occupied in the 1967 Middle East War.

Israel has expressed major reservations, but Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Jordan's King Abdullah on Tuesday that he's ready to meet with Arab leaders in Israel or anywhere else to talk about the idea. Abdullah, in turn, asked Olmert to set a timetable for reaching a peace deal.

Negotiations, however, are inconceivable if the Palestinians descend into a protracted civil war.

This week's fighting was the worst since Hamas and Fatah agreed to share power in February. In all, 23 people have been killed and dozens wounded in three days of street fighting. Among the injured was a 10-year-old girl caught in the crossfire late Tuesday and critically wounded by a gunshot to the head, Palestinian rescue workers said.

In the deadliest battle, Hamas gunmen fired rockets, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars early Tuesday at a training base for Fatah forces guarding the Karni cargo crossing with Israel. U.S. security experts had helped set up the base to improve security at Karni.

After the initial attack, Hamas fired on Fatah reinforcements rushing to the scene, and one of the jeeps carrying Fatah fighters veered off the road and crashed. Hamas gunmen surrounded the vehicle and riddled it with gunfire, said one witness, who works in a nearby factory.

"It was unbelievable. May God help us," said the man, who gave only his first name, Jamil, out of fear for his safety.

Eight men were killed, hospital officials said. Fatah security men also came under fire as they tried to move the bodies away from the overturned jeep.

Two Israeli helicopter gunships and three tanks moved toward the area, and Hamas fighters quickly withdrew. At one point, a major in the Palestinian Presidential Guard was killed by Israeli army fire as he tried to leave the crossing, security officials said.

Before sundown, Hamas said it fired rockets at Sderot, an Israeli town near Gaza in retaliation for the Israeli attack. Residents counted more than 20 rockets. One rocket hit a house, seriously wounding an Israeli woman. It was the first time in three weeks that Hamas has claimed responsibility for a rocket barrage.

Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz summoned army commanders for late-night consultations. Earlier, defense officials said Israel would not be dragged into the fighting.

However, Israel closed Karni, the only route for cargo into Gaza. The closure means Gaza will soon run out of fuel for its power plant and electricity to most of the strip could be shut down by Wednesday, said Abdel Karim Abdeen, head of the Palestinian Energy Authority.

The current fighting had many of the elements of previous Hamas-Fatah clashes: combatants kidnapped scores of rivals, set up roadblocks to search cars, took over rooftops of high-rises and often fired randomly in crowded residential areas.

Around Abbas' seaside compound in Gaza City, security forces searched cars and inspected motorists' ID cards. They gave those with beards - a possible sign of Hamas support - an extra close look.

Both sides have become more ruthless this time, with Fatah accused of an execution-style killing of two Hamas supporters Sunday and Hamas ambushing the Fatah jeep Tuesday. This might make it more difficult to negotiate a cease-fire and revive the coalition.

At the core of the fighting is the unresolved power struggle between Hamas, which won parliamentary elections last year, and Abbas' Fatah, which has dominated Palestinian politics for four decades. Squeezed by an international aid boycott, Hamas realized it could not govern alone and brought Fatah into the government. But the two sides never worked out their differences, particularly over security.

While the power-sharing deal largely halted factional fighting for three months, both sides continued to smuggle weapons through tunnels under the Egypt-Gaza border, preparing for the next round.

The U.N has confirmed Iran has expanded its rather than reduced its nuclear program.
Sanctions now appear likely after its failure to meet the 60 day deadline.
Iran has installed 2 networks of 164 centrifuges in its underground enrichment plant, sparking fears they are assembling nuclear weapons.

Bloody hell, Why does'nt the U.N strike Iran NOW  while we still have the chance?
We invaded Iraq for less!
I seriously dont understand the worlds leadership.

There never will be peace in the mid east anyway, as long as israel exists.
Jews and muslims are like oil and water. does not mix no matter what.
Russia is'nt doing anything, could'nt they do something? Or are they scared of sandmonkeys now after their afghanistan affair?
Any how i believe the west still has the capabilty to fight another war.
I mean if we could fight and win the second world war, which was a total war and against very well trained,fanatical soldiers of japan and germany why cant we defeat the arabs?

I think Russia and China are pro Iran - in fact a lot of this has to do with Russia and Iran joining forces to launch the new Iranian oil trading bourse, which will be in direct competition to the US.  As Iran will begin eventually trading oil in Euros, this may affect the US economy fairly severely, so the yanks are worried.

To think of bombing China and Iran is absolute insanity - but then the US has an insane president, so it might be on the books.  China and Japan hold many $ trillions of US credit notes - so whatever move the US makes, they will have to tread carefully.  If their debts are called in, the US will end up being owned by the Chinese.  Now that would be interesting, except we will be affected as well.

AusNat, I wouldn't worry about nukes being in the hands Muslims too much. Pakistan have had them for years, and they've never used them. They should be aware that IF they use it, the USA will blow them sky-high.

My only concern is the use of them on Israel... wait a minute... scratch that... our only HOPE is for them to use it on Israel. 


Seriously though, our only concern is for them to use it for 'negotiation' and to get 'money.'
I severely doubt they can build a launcher capable enough to reach any western country. Only other Muslim countries.

So hopefully, they'll use it on themselves. The less Muslims that remain on this earth the better.

In my opinion, Iran having nuclear weapons is more good than bad. 

hi all, after reading though this forum i noticed that there are alot of anti-islamic topics being discussed.

i can't help but notice the irony in some posts, where they criticise muslims for being intolerant, but then they themselves are intolerant of muslims. personally, i think that's a case of the "pot calling the kettle black".

wouldn't it make more sense to take the moral high ground and not stoop to their level? since hate only breeds hate, so by hating them u actually make the situation worse. that's is what Jesus meant when he said "turn the other cheek".

i will be interested in hearing other people's thoughts.

Yeah, i also noticed that.
i think it's because people tend to rely on emotions, rather than thinking logically.

Correction:     "do not look...." 

freediver you can edit if you want

Quote:

This is a very good point!

I fear that the Muslim part is only half the story, remove the Muslim element and you will still find these people seeking out a minority to defecate on from great heights. Remove all ethnic minorities and no doubt they will find minorities to target within their own 'pure' group.

Quote:


I wouldnt call them ''pure'' but yeah we would be targeting  communists, anarchists etc.

ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 16^th, 2007 at 3:27pm:


by not tolerating the intolerant, u can no longer call urself tolerant.
that's a tongue twister. basically, u can't say that ur tolerant if u return the favour and hate them back.

do u understand now?   

zoso wrote on Mar 16^th, 2007 at 3:39pm:



Glad to see you are still on your high horse zoso.

Communists/socialists and anarchists are just as bad for society as islam.
They all will send us back into the stone age.
After they are gone, im happy.

Have i ever said i see the asians as a threat?? NO. so there goes your theory of bigotry.

Quote:

And like your own opinions, all of these examples are free to be expressed in our country, whether they are good or not is irrelevant it is the freedom that counts. Remembering that 'expression' and 'actuality' are very different things.

Freedom of speech is a strongly held Australian value, Aussie Noodle. One you seem to enjoy utilising. Tell me, if these groups you identify have their freedom of expression stripped from them, who is to say you should not have the freedom to express your noodle views stripped from you?

Quote:


Pfft. Great solution. 


Quote:


I guess you got me there. 

ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Mar 16^th, 2007 at 4:10pm:

It was an analogy to my main point: Our hedonistic capitalist free and liberal society will steal their children away from their strict old world views.

And before you say I'm overly optimistic again, would you consider my point about human drive towards selfishness and hedonism 'optimisitc' ??

Skeptic when you made a Jesus comment I wonder how much the Islams would adhere/tolerate that?
I think its unbeliveable the Islams are coming about as they do. I don't necessary hate them but am suspcious. Who knows which middle easterners are extreme or not? The extremists usually go after innocents/bystanders so no wonder people are up in arms. It is their shock and awe strategy and is getting their message across to the world. I can't see to turn the cheek. It just not might necessarily be a religious war. And by the way it seems any group to get some kind of respect need to get violent for the masses to respect them. Are we all really civilized or uncivilized?

I think I will later. Thanks

Quote:


dee, why would muslims need to adhere to the teaching of Jesus when he said "turn the other cheek"?

my point is, we are a majority christian population and our society has been moulded by christian teachings. so why are we not using those teachings when dealing with potential terrorists?

Gavin wrote on Mar 19^th, 2007 at 11:40am:


Exactly. it's really weird that dee was asking whether muslims would obey the "turn the other cheek" rule, why should they? it's not their belief.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 19^th, 2007 at 1:27pm:


yes, but their account of Jesus (and his teachings) is different to the christian version, so the "turn the other cheek" rule which is in christian teachings might not be in Islamic teachings.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 19^th, 2007 at 3:33pm:


actually sprintcyclist from what i gather from muslims i know, Jesus and the virgin Mary are mentioned extensively in the koran. the teachings of Jesus, according to muslims, centered on worshipping only one God without partners, which is the same as what Mohammed preached. 

In terms of the teachings of "turn the other cheek" and other stories in the modern day bible, they believe that the original bible sent by Jesus has been distored by man after Jesus was raised to heaven. they do kind of have a point, especially when u have christians admit that some verses of the bible are not found in the original manuscripts, e.g. Mark 16:9-20.

so it's entirely possible that the "turn the other cheek" verses are a fabrication.

Gavin wrote on Mar 19^th, 2007 at 4:14pm:

You realise this... NOW?

Not only is it a hand me down of a hand me down of a hand me down of a.... ad infinitium. It was assembled by a council of men with entire texts missing, the new testament was written entirely after the time of Jesus, some of it centuries. It has been translated so many times from different languages much of the original contexts have been lost. Example: originally translated into ancient greek (yes you heard it) the bible originally had two words for 'love' one meaning love as in general love for things, the other meaning love as in love between a man and a woman, this context was lost where we now have only the word 'love' and the onus is on the reader to decide on the context. Considering the vast quantity of Christian sects all with their own interpretations I'd say this is quite the problem!

Ok I'll stop being an @ss now... sorry for my outburst I didn't mean any of it and I'm probably all wrong. You're allright mate

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 19^th, 2007 at 7:40pm:


sprintcyclist, skimming through the koran and actually reading it are two different things. the koran itself is quite a large text and is roughly the same size as the New Testament, so i highly doubt u can make a comment about Jesus not being mentioned in it by just skimming it.

HI skeptic and Gavin,
How are you both ?

skeptic - yes, that is why I was careful to say I had just "flicked" through it, and had not read it all.
A good flick through does let me know quite a few things. Have you had a look at it ??
It is written by an unintelligent man and has no "relationships" or empathy in it.
There is no "flow" of a story or moral in it. It is extremist , the more the extreme action, the better.
There is no moral code in it.
I read not a word from Jesus in there.  I did not say Jesus is missing from there, I said there is very little mentin of him.
It is mainly threats, laws, bloodythirsty acts.

gavin - There are a few footnotes like that in the Bible.  Some of the older versions were translated with respect to the current king. ie, he would execute them if there was someting they printed that he did not like.
It is a sign of the transparency and honesty of the translators that the translators DO include footnotes such as this. 
Within 2000 years and many translations, variations will occur. That is human.
If there would be NO variations, that would be suspicious. They are all referenced back to the original manuscripts and what was decided to keep there. It has not changed.
It is the human factor that varies, not Gods Word and the message given within.

I think the Christian philosophy was that it was done under God's guidance. The whole thing about the 'original' manuscript is moot as it was all written down by people at some stage after it happened anyway.

freediver wrote on Mar 20^th, 2007 at 1:54pm:

And constructed by a council of men. Men who had a vested interest in maintaining a church.

I'm no expert... reaaaly far from it, but every single quote I hear from Jesus freaks sounds to me like he was trying to get people to circumvent the whole institutionalised church bit. I really don't get the impression that setting up a christian religion was his intention... But maybe thats just me. The bible is the word of men, good bad or other is irrelevant.

Jesus had a remarkably similar philosophy to Gandhi the way I see it. Anyway, enough I shouldn't even open my mouth in religious conversations...

Hi Gavin, freediver and skeptic ,

Gavin - fair enough, you are allowed to disagree. God warned about adding or deleting words from His Bible. Yet another human failing He warned us specifically about, but we still went ahead and did it ??
If some parts were not in the original, it may have been added later. Perhaps I could "leave" those out as I read it ??
Thorough of the translators include ALL previous versions and to tell us which parts were not in the original.  Very open, transparent and honest of them. 
Certainly no deception involved.


Freediver - yes, written under Gods guidance and leading. Was written after or during the actual events.


Skeptic - given I saw few if any comments on Jesus, and no direct quotes from him at all,  that ALL instructions were solely from mohammad  I feel my comments are fair.
Feel free to do as I did. have a read through in a bookshop. Give us all your impression.


Freediver - I would agree that Jesus was "unimpressed" with the "religious" leaders of the day.
As he probably would be of today.  There is a MASSIVE difference between "religion" and "spirituality". Guess which one we are meant to be - according to the Bible ??
IMHO - The Bible IS the Word of God, written and interpereted by man.
Ghandi was pretty good. I read a biography about him - "freedom at midnight", I think . Really good.
I also admire the buddhists for their renown peaceful ways. 


God is bigger than a "religion" or a "church", in my thinking.
Feel free to open your mouth !!

Quote:

Unless of course you are a follower of Kabbalah! 

All you need to do is TOUCH the words! PRAISE the LORD! 

Sprintcyclist wrote on Mar 20^th, 2007 at 4:10pm:


Of course you haven't seen a direct quote from Jesus in the koran, u only "flicked" through it, rather than reading it.

Like i said before, if i wanted to know about a religion i would read their religious books entirely. flicking through it for a few minutes while in a bookstore doesn't make me an expert on the religion.

Hi sheptic and gavin,
How have you both been ?
Skeptic - yes, you have said that before. No need to repeat yourself. I have researched muslim stuff a bit and did have a look at the koran. Unjust to base my thoguhts on jsut what others say.
I am not an expert in muslim stuff, but know a bit about it. 

Gavin - I saw few if any mentions of Jesus in the koran. Nor has a muslim ever given me a quote about him. They are all from mohammad. 
Jesus is mentioned in the Koran, fleetingly.
yes, it is possible due to the honesty and transparency given in the Bible to assume some parts were not in the orginal scripts.  It shows the versions are related directly back to the original maunscripts and have also taken into account other versions of the Bible since then. 
Much better than learning aramic, hebrew and ancient greek.
Pretty naughty of someone to add them later if that is what happened!!

It seems to me that he understands you loud and clear.

Brian Ross wrote on Apr 26^th, 2007 at 11:34am:



If you agree with this tired view of our good friend, Brian Ross, despite the fact that:

• The support for Hilaly and assorted other extremist Muslim leaders throughout Australia with similar views
• The terror plots within Australia
• The revenge attacks after the Cronulla protests
• The rise in crime in Bankstown, Lakemba and other Muslims occupied areas across Australia
• The isolation of Islamic communites from the greater Australian community
• The formation of extremist Islamic political parties within Australia
• Similar patterns emerging throughout the rest of the world

...and despite the fact that the Muslims make up about 1-2% of the total Australia population, then please, follow this link, it's right up your alley...

http://piv.pivpiv.dk/

THREE Singaporean Muslim women, all married to the same man, have been sentenced to jail for persuading some of his under-age daughters to have sex with him.

The man, who has 10 wives and 64 children, was sentenced to 32 years in prison and 24 strokes of the cane in April 2006 after he was found guilty of raping five of his under-age daughters.

The man, citing the Koran, had told his wives and daughters that he had complete ownership over his children, including the right to have sex with his daughters, the papers showed.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,21790684-5003402,00.html



One can see where his is coming from. It is in the koran I guess (not read that part myself) but that is the intention of it. 
eg it says "a woman is worth 1/2 a man" and "most of the people in hell will be women", mohammads said to one of his henchmen, his "killing of some women means no more than two goats butting heads."
mohammad himself married a 6 year old girl, then slept with her when she was 9 .
Of course, muslims justify this, saying women then were "different "  then!!!!!

from memory, Lot does not do that.  I could be wrong


The other rough quotes I have given support his understanding.
One wonders how else it could be interpereted ?

Ah, you are entirely correct Gavin. i was thinking of Job for some reason !
Yes, Lot does indeed committ incest, after sodom and gemorrah fall.  Well, moreso his daughters do it to him while he has lost his mind.
The justness of that story is good. Of course it is not an action God approves of. Lot has a short life after that.  The offspring are destined for bad things.
God gave me a word of understanding about that one.
Did you see the indepth discussion of that in cracker ?

That action is a crime in the old testament. But that antiwoman attitude is in the koran. Hence that mans actions in singapore are commensurate with the koran. As I have given in other quotes.

have a good weekend gavin

Here is a mass of quotes for you Gavin.
I can find more, have some at home


"Slay them wherever you find them...Idolatry is worse than carnage...Fight against them until idolatry is no more and God's religion reigns supreme." (Surah 2:190-)

"Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it." (Surah 2:216)

"The only true faith in God's sight is Islam." (Surah 3:19)

"Believers, do not make friends with any but your own people...They desire nothing but your ruin....You believe in the entire Book...When they meet you they say: 'We, too, are believers.' But when alone, they bite their finger-tips with rage." (Surah 3:118, 119)

"If you should die or be slain in the cause of God, His forgiveness and His mercy would surely be better than all the riches..." (Surah 3:156-)

"If you wish to replace a wife with another, do not take from her the dowry you have given her..." (Surah 4:20)

"Forbidden to you are...married women, except those you own as slaves." (Surah 4:20-, 24-)

"Seek out your enemies relentlessly." (Surah 4:103-)

"Try as you may, you cannot treat all your wives impartially." (Surah 4:126-)

"The Jews and Christians say: 'We are the children of God and His loved ones.' Say: 'Why then does He punish you for your sins?" (Surah 5:18)

"Believers, take neither Jews nor Christians for your friends." (Surah 5:51)

"Believers, when you encounter the infidels on the march, do not turn your backs to them in flight. If anyone on that day turns his back to them, except it be for tactical reasons...he shall incur the wrath of God and Hell shall be his home..." (Surah 8:12-)

"If you fear treachery from any of your allies, you may fairly retaliate by breaking off your treaty with them." (Surah 8:51-)

"...make war on the leaders of unbelief...Make war on them: God will chastise them at your hands and humble them. He will grant you victory over them..." (Surah 9:12-)

"It ill becomes the idolaters [non-Muslims] to visit the mosques of God..." (Surah 9:17)

"Fight against such as those to whom the Scriptures were given [Jews and Christians]...until they pay tribute out of hand and are utterly subdued." (Surah 9:27-)

"It is He who has sent forth His apostle with guidance and the true Faith [Islam] to make it triumphant over all religions, however much the idolaters [non-Muslims] may dislike it." (Surah 9:31-)

"If you do not fight, He will punish you sternly, and replace you by other men." (Surah 9:37-)

"Prophet make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home." (Surah 9:73)

"Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Deal firmly with them." (Surah 9:121-)

"Say: 'Praise be to God who has never begotten a son; who has no partner in His Kingdom..." (Surah 17:111)

""Fight for the cause of God with the devotion due to Him...He has given you the name of Muslims..." (Surah 22:78-)

"Blessed are the believers...who restrain their carnal desires (except with their wives and slave-girls, for these are lawful to them)...These are the heirs of Paradise..." (Surah 23:1-5-)

"As for the faithful who do good works and believe what is revealed to Muhammad...He will forgive them their sins..." (Surah 47:1)

"Muhammad is God's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Surah 48:29)

"Shall the reward of goodness be anything but good?...Dark-eyed virgins sheltered in their tents...They shall recline on green cushions and fine carpets...Blessed be the name of your Lord..." (Surah 55:52-66-)

These are from an exmuslim woman
Muslim women are not allowed equal right to their inheritance (Quran 4:11-12) because they are only worth half of a man's share. In most Islamic countries, women are not allowed to vote and are certainly not allowed to be elected to public office.

Islamic justification for raping woman prisoners can be found because Muhammad gave permission for Muslim warriors to rape enemy prisoners "except those (captives and slaves) whom your hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you.." Surah 4:24. The key words for the Islamic legal code are "whom your hands possess" and "thus Allah has ordained for you."

Muslim Quranic (bible) verse 4:34 instructs Muslim men to "admonish" and "beat" their wives if they become "rebellious" and that "men are the managers of the affairs of women because Allah has preferred men over women and women were expended of their Rights."
In an Islamic court of law, it takes the testimony of two women to override the testimony of one man. Justification for this legal tradition is found in Quran 2:282.

Quranic verse 24:31 warns Muslim women not to make eye contact or allow any part of their skin or jewelry to be seen by strangers, "and tell the believing women to lower their gaze and protect themselves from illegal sexual acts, and not show off their adornment [to all men] and boys]." As a result of this verse, if an adult girl (9 years and older) is raped by an adult man, she will be considered at fault because she was careless and provoked the attack. Her parents will be expected to severely punish or kill her for dishonoring her family.


What God told me about the moral of the stpory of Lot was "You will be judged by your actions."

Interesting, but none of those quotes justify a man to sleep with his own daughters.

So i'm guessing u started this typical muslim-bashing thread, to show us how bad Islam since it allows a guy to sleep with his own daughters. Yet, u can't provide a quote to show that.

Here are a few others


Sura IV.34:”As for those [women] from whom you fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge [or beat] them ”
Sura IV.34: “Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you, take no further action against them. God is high, supreme.”
Sura IX verse 73    Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate.”



Here are some of the passages from the Sira revealing Muhammad’s hatred of the Jews :
1. “Kill any Jews that falls into your power” said the Prophet: p.369
2. The killing of Ibn Sunayna, and its admiration leading someone to convert to Islam: p.369
3. The killing of Sallam ibn Abu’l –Huqayq: pp.482-483
4. The assassination of Ka‘b b.al-Ashraf ,who wrote verses against Muhammad: pp.364-369
5. The raid against the Jewish tribe of the Banu‘l-Nadir, and their banishment. pp.437-445
6. The extermination of the Banu Qurayza, between 600-800 men. pp.461-469
7. The killing of alYusayr. pp.665-666

Sura 37:22-23 implies that women will be punished on Judgment Day for sins committed by their husbands.


going home now. Happy reading and studying Gavin 

sprintcyclist, can u post the quote from the Koran that says a man can sleep with his own daughters? this is the fourth time i've asked, does that quote even exist? i have a strong feeling that such a quote doesn't exist, since u seem to be posting other quotes that are irrelevant to the topic being discussed.

is there a quote in the Koran that says a man can sleep with his own daughters??
that's all i want to know, yes or no.

no need for u to post other quotes.

Hi gavin,

No, I did not say the koran said to do that. That is what the guy said. I said the mans actions are commensurate with the teachings given in the koran about women.
as is shown in the quotes I have given
That sort of extremism is encouraged , as is shown in the quotes I have given, verses notated as you asked.

the quotes given encourage violent dominating actions that most people (except muslims) would consider to be extremist.
They also demonstrate a sexist attitude toward women.
Put the two together, what do you get ??


If trad disagrees with many of the koran quotes he should stop being a muslim as he does not agree with it's teachings. 
I mean, if the Bible told me to kill all nonchristians, I'ld think that was pretty off.

"Mr Trad's personal reservations about the passage."  cutting out the semantics, he disagrees with the koran.

No, islam is completely different. The Bible has not changed. Nor the koran.
Look at how Jesus treated women.  Look at how mohammad treated them.


I have not reinterpereted the koran at all. I have not even interpereted it.
There is no need to, you make up your own mind from direct quotes I have provided, complete with references.
I can see how that man got his theory on HIS desires being met, and HIS right to do whatever HE wanted.
Can you ?

Find one.

Find one that supports it.

Find one that supports any of the other assassinations, beheadings, domination, sexist, extremist actions supported in the quotes I have given.

Sure, it happens, but it is not supported or rewarded. The opposite.

Ah yes, Islam..... The choice of civilized men.

Quote:


What a great prophet ay!
I wonder if all the pedo's in the world would turn to islam if they knew about this.

IT'S not just clouds that shroud Waziristan's treacherous high country. Up here on the Afghan border, a veil of state secrecy also cloaks a new Taliban wave breaking eastward across Pakistan.

Against the totemic thump of the drums of war, dust churns as the bodies of suspected anti-Taliban spies are dragged behind Toyota utes - as many as four at a time.

The severed heads of those who cross the fanatical jihadis are held aloft in cheering, jeering crowds. And in the bazaar, just a few rupees buys one of the hottest selling new DVDs - that's the one in which a 12-year-old boy wields the decapitation knife.

Now heard for the first time in years, the boom of the dhol drums summons the lashkars - tribal armies - for an episode in George Bush's war on terror that reads like a South Asian version of Conrad's Heart of Darkness.

But this incendiary mix of extremist Islam and guerilla war unfolds amid great confusion. As President Pervez Musharraf wrestles with an explosive political crisis of his own making in Islamabad, two deadly wars are playing out on the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

First, there is a dangerous spillover from the US and NATO-led struggle to pacify neighbouring Afghanistan. But within Pakistan a brutal, fundamentalist uprising also frays the fabric of a society that, politically at least, has been broadly secular for decades.

In remote Miram Shah, the Herald was a captive as much as it was a guest of the Pakistani security forces - and where the military minders had us corralled, the drums were silent. All the Conradian horror happens outside the high, protective walls of this military fortress which is home to the Tochi Scouts - a unit of Pakistan's border-protection forces.

We were kept inside, pinned down amid the crisp white table linen in an officers' mess built by the British more than a century ago. The aged pipes and drums of the scouts' former colonial masters were a feature display - still draped with the regimental tartan and a tiger skin.

Framed and faded pages from the The Illustrated London News, dated 1878, recounted Britain's travails in past Afghan wars. A glass case among the antique and silver weaponry held the pistol used by the scouts' first British commanding officer in the late 1800s.

Step away from the marbled terraces and the gardens were English country, as they might have been in the time of the Raj. The lawns were flat and tight, like a billiard table; the flower beds were manicured - nodding cornflowers, stocks and foxgloves. An oak cast an eerie shadow and creepers in tubs climbed the ornate veranda posts.

Going beyond the walls was deemed to be out of the question - "too dangerous," we were told in one breath; "there is nothing for you to see - everything is peaceful," we heard in the next.

But despite the smother blanket that the authorities have thrown over the country's sprawling western flank, news of administrative chaos, fundamentalist thuggery and security madness does seep to the outside world. Here is a summary of life in Pakistan's grandly named North-West Frontier Province during a recent Herald assignment in Pakistan.

The Taliban had taken over the historic small-arms bazaar at Dara Adam Khel, near Peshawar, where long lists of those they intended to kill as spies were plastered on walls. Barbers' shops, internet cafes and businesses selling video and audio cassettes and CDs in bazaars across the region are regularly torched or bombed.

In towns like Barawal, in the Dir district, there were pitiable pleas from barbers who had complied with the Taliban threats - they were being ruined because customers were less likely to come in for a haircut unless they could have a shave at the same time. After Dir, the barbers in Bajaur took a hiding; and then it was the turn of their colleagues in Mardan to receive the infamous night letters: "Our beloved Muslim brothers ... shaving off beards is a great sin."

Militants march into boys' schools, demanding the right to lecture and recruit pupils for jihad. They hurl grenades at teachers who object and kidnap school principals who persist in opposing them. Girls' schools are constantly harassed and tribal elders deny women the right to vote. Curfews and school closures are a part of daily life as women and children are evacuated from restive centres like Tank in the frontier province.

Banks are robbed. Government compounds, including those of the security forces, and NGO depots are bombed or commandeered. The country's security forces and government ministers are under deadly attack. Suicide bombings are on the rise. Gas pipelines and power pylons are sabotaged and railway lines are blown up. Civilians die in the crossfire.

More than 120 tribal elders who opposed the Taliban or were deemed to be siding with the erratic regime in Islamabad had been murdered. Hit-lists of difficult mullahs are circulated, containing dozens of names. The mutilated bodies of some so named turn up on roadsides ... with notes fixed to their clothing denouncing them as US spies.

The whole article at :
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/05/21/1179601331182.html

This is why we have to stay in iraq

I read an article in the Australian a while back claiming that they did find definite links between Sadam and Al Qaida. It was an article about how badly the war is going.

I think I looked for a link at the time but they didn't have it online. I probably posted something about it in one of the Iraq threads.

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/thread-list/topic.html#cn

sprintcyclist, do u read u write up before u hit the "post" button? since i get the feeling that u don't.
u posted another article, this time about Pakistan, which doesn't relate to our presence in Iraq at all.

again, do u have any evidence that Iraq was actively involved in training/funding terrorism against the US and/or Australia that warranted us going to war?

i reckon if u think about it, and i mean really think about it, then u would realise that Iraq wasn't involved in terrorist attacks at all and that Iraq only became a hot spot when we decided to go in there anyway (on false evidence as well). the reason being that we did a stupid thing by overthrowing Saddam Hussein who did a good job of keeping those terrorists down.

Do you want the war there or here ?

You are trying to create a false dichotomy.

Hi Gavin,
Sure, the presidents of the free world acted correctly upon what seems to be in false information. With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.
Course, was impossible ot see what was happening iinside there, same as iran now with their nukes.

I support their actions. Fully

iraq now has had their first free election for decades, if not for ever.
sadam crushed anyone he wanted there.

Freediver - fair observation.
However the war is happening all over the globe. eg thailand.

Hi Gavin,

In my first post I did say "That is why we should stay in iraq."
Not about linking iraq to terrorism. we did a good thing to go there, albeit possibly on false info

The way to resolve a problem is to confront it. Not to pretend it is not there.

Militant islamists have been funded by saudi for some years. The war has bought that to common knowledge.
If we do not confront them now, over there. It will be later, over here.

I beleive that is not a false dichotomy. I believe it is an option we have.
There is little that will stop islamists. Only death or education.
Ever tried to talk to an extremist ?

they have always been interested in killing  westerners.
It is in the koran. "Kill all the jews, kill all the christians, kill all the unbelievers."

a saying from palestein is "First comes saturday, then sunday". Meaning, first the jews, then the christians.

mohammad was normally slaughtering nonmuslims, as soon as he died, the other muslims started to murder each other. They have not stoped.

That is in the Bible in the prophecy about Ishmael, whom they follow

Hi freediver .

So what defines "who gets in their face" ?

Lets see ..... the koran says "make islam dominant over all religions", "Kill all nonbeleviers."

So, anyone who is not with them is "in their face".
As hilali infers strongly, they are bad muslims to do anything else.
mohammad was a mass murdering paedophile, they follow him

The war is better over there than here. It is not a false dichotomy

Quote:


Not true FD. The Islamists are driven by a desire to ''Dominate the world''.

freediver wrote on Jun 6^th, 2007 at 4:14pm:


Hey you've got it!
I feel i know the enemy pretty well, and i'm still learning.
And what they want is the opposite of what we want.

And let us not forget Malcom X and his black panthers.

Wherever would they get a plan to take over the world !!!!!!!!

Don't know, if they are just as happy killing each other, must be a "volatile" bunch. To say the least .

Quote:


http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/limit-muslim-migration-australia-warned/2007...

Interesting.

Quote:


How so??? 


Quote:


And why do you think that is, mantra? -Because Jews have more influence in the media.


Quote:


Really? I am. 



Quote:


I hope so. 

The more tension that occurs, the more people will wake up to the reality of multiculturalism. 

I think otherwise. we cant live with them because they wont live with us.