Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM? (Read 7694 times)
Calanen
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2241
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #30 - Dec 5th, 2008 at 6:00am
 
Gaybriel wrote on Dec 5th, 2008 at 12:32am:
zionism is different to judaism

just like terrorism committed by muslims is different to islam


I dont think you can equate zionism with terrorism. Zionism has become the code word for Islamic states to make all sorts of Jewish hate based attacks, re Zionist bankers, Zionist conspiracies etc. Instead of criticising jews (which they do anyway also) they insert the word Zionist.
Back to top
 

Quote:
ISLAM is a vicious [un-reformable] political tyranny, which has always murdered its critics, and it continues that practice even today.
Yadda
 
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #31 - Dec 5th, 2008 at 6:34am
 
Quote:
zionism is different to judaism

just like terrorism committed by muslims is different to islam


I would agree with the above.  Who came first - the extremists or the zionists.  The average jewish person (from what I've read) doesn't want to be associated with zionism and in many cases are ashamed that the zionists are jewish.  The zionists have had control of the US for many years, and probably play a prominent role in most western governments.  The extremists call themselves freedom fighters and it is these two groups who have created such a hell on earth for those in their warring path.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Calanen
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 2241
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #32 - Dec 5th, 2008 at 8:32am
 
mantra wrote on Dec 5th, 2008 at 6:34am:
[quote]zionism is different to judaism

just like terrorism committed by muslims is different to islam


Quote:
I would agree with the above.  Who came first - the extremists or the zionists.  The average jewish person (from what I've read) doesn't want to be associated with zionism and in many cases are ashamed that the zionists are jewish.  The zionists have had control of the US for many years, and probably play a prominent role in most western governments. 


What does Zionism mean to you?

Quote:
The extremists call themselves freedom fighters and it is these two groups who have created such a hell on earth for those in their warring path.


Depends upon your point of view. Most people have a short memory as to the Arab-Israeli conflict that doesnt bear much relationship to the truth.


Back to top
 

Quote:
ISLAM is a vicious [un-reformable] political tyranny, which has always murdered its critics, and it continues that practice even today.
Yadda
 
IP Logged
 
Gaybriel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1191
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #33 - Dec 5th, 2008 at 10:05am
 
Calanen wrote on Dec 5th, 2008 at 6:00am:
Gaybriel wrote on Dec 5th, 2008 at 12:32am:
zionism is different to judaism

just like terrorism committed by muslims is different to islam


I dont think you can equate zionism with terrorism. Zionism has become the code word for Islamic states to make all sorts of Jewish hate based attacks, re Zionist bankers, Zionist conspiracies etc. Instead of criticising jews (which they do anyway also) they insert the word Zionist.


I wasn't equating the two. I was pointing out the distinction between religion and religion based political ideology.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Yadda
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 21872
A cat with a view
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #34 - Dec 5th, 2008 at 10:14am
 
Soren wrote on Dec 4th, 2008 at 9:26pm:
tallowood wrote on Nov 30th, 2008 at 9:21pm:
tallowood wrote on Nov 30th, 2008 at 9:10pm:
Soren wrote on Nov 30th, 2008 at 8:01pm:
Islam is the only religion that would ever think of trying to intimidate people into not fearing it.


Atheism is second.  Smiley


No, I was wrong. The walrus is second after Islam.



Achh. Ve haf vays to make you luv us. Ze beatings vill continue until you lern to like us.
Orders must be obeyed at all times.

( how do you do this in mock Arabic?)





".....Ve haf vays."


LOL
Back to top
 

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31
 
IP Logged
 
Yadda
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 21872
A cat with a view
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #35 - Dec 5th, 2008 at 10:38am
 
Gaybriel wrote on Dec 5th, 2008 at 12:32am:
zionism is different to judaism

just like terrorism committed by muslims is different to islam




Correction....
Gaybriel doesn't like 'Zionists'.

Whether or not, Gaybriel likes 'Zionists' can't be definitively stated.
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1227427198/36#36

But I would suggest, what she has probably been told [by whom, i cannot imagine?], and believes, is that the Israeli 'Zionists' are persecuting innocent women and children in 'Palestine'?
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1229690857/137#137


Actually Zion, is just another word for Jerusalem [i believe].

Is it wrong for Jews to love Zion and their ancient homeland, Israel???

According to ISLAM it is....

News items,

Chief Muslim claims Jewish Temples never existed
March 15, 2007
"....The Jewish Temples never existed.......descriptions of the Jewish Temples in the Hebrew Tanach, in the Talmud and in Byzantine and Roman writings from the Temple periods were forged, and that the Torah was falsified to claim Biblical patriarchs and matriarchs were Jewish when indeed they were prophets for Islam."


Temple Mount '100% Islamic'
June 01, 2008
"....Taysir Tamimi, chief Palestinian Justice and one of the most influential Muslim leaders in Israel, argued the Jewish Temples never existed,...."


http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1227051349/0#0




+++++++


I know that it is of no consequence to Gaybriel, to ISLAMISTS, and to atheists,
....but who exactly is the 'head honcho' of the, 'Zionists'?

Well, if you believe in him, it is God.
.....the God of Israel.




Psalms 2:1
Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
3 Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4 He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
5 Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
6 Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8 Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9 Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.
10 Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth.
11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.



And those who stand against Israel, stand against the God of Israel.
....aka Jesus Christ, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

Jeremiah 23:6
In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.
7 Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that they shall no more say, The LORD liveth, which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt;
8 But, The LORD liveth, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I had driven them; and they shall dwell in their own land.






'Israel - in perspective'
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1226369723/0#0
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 5th, 2008 at 11:00am by Yadda »  

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31
 
IP Logged
 
Gaybriel
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1191
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #36 - Dec 5th, 2008 at 10:42am
 
who said I didn't like zionists?

any opinion I hold of zionists is not based upon the current situation in palestine.

thanks anyway
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #37 - Nov 9th, 2009 at 10:15pm
 
Soren wrote on Nov 30th, 2008 at 8:01pm:
Islam is the only religion that would ever think of trying to intimidate people into not fearing it.




Islam has nuffin to do wiv nuffin (No. 7214)


Islam, the religion of peace, tolerance and compassion - December 2, 2008 by Organisation of The Islamic Conference - OIC Website



With the multiplicity of terrorist attacks perpetrated recently by deviant and fanatic individuals, the General Secretariat of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) has noticed a tendency of a section of the media, to interpose the word “Islam” in reporting these incidences.
Islam, the religion of peace, tolerance and compassion, that sanctifies the human soul, and whose universal message is one of mutual peaceful coexistence among all the peoples of the world, regardless of their ethnicities, race, religions or languages, and which calls for kind reasoning and dialogue with all their fellow human beings, abhors and despises all such criminal acts and had enacted the utmost severe punishment for their perpetrators.

It is frustrating to see some circles, still, maliciously trying to establish conceptual link between such evil and wicked practices and Islam, the religion that condemns, scorns and outlaws them.

It is on the premise of this irrefutable fact that we, in the OIC, call upon all well-intentioned peoples of the world, not to give to these criminals any right to present Islam, a right that Islam itself denies them. Those who refer to the perpetrators, as acting on behalf of Islam, help them by offering them justification, anchor and premise that they don’t have or deserve. On the other hand, the generalization of the guilt of a few aberrant misguided individuals, to engulf the adherents of a religion of 1.5 billion followers is an outrageous judgment and amounts to an illegal collective punishment on a global scale. Moreover, any attempt to implicate all Muslims in such a wicked and wanton acts goes contrary to the well established principles of international law.

It is therefore hoped that media will avoid resorting to any reference to Islam when narrating such events in order not to disseminate erroneous information that might jeopardize the basic human rights of Muslims, the world over.




Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #38 - Nov 9th, 2009 at 10:18pm
 
Churchill had the answer a 100 years before:


It is, thank heaven, difficult if not impossible for the modern European to fully appreciate the force which fanaticism exercises among an ignorant, warlike and Oriental population. Several generations have elapsed since the nations of the West have drawn the sword in religious controversy, and the evil memories of the gloomy past have soon faded in the strong, clear light of Rationalism and human sympathy. Indeed it is evident that Christianity, however degraded and distorted by cruelty and intolerance, must always exert a modifying influence on men's passions, and protect them from the more violent forms of fanatical fever, as we are protected from smallpox by vaccination. But the Mahommedan religion increases, instead of lessening, the fury of intolerance. It was originally propagated by the sword, and ever since, its votaries have been subject, above the people of all other creeds, to this form of madness. In a moment the fruits of patient toil, the prospects of material prosperity, the fear of death itself, are flung aside. The more emotional Pathans are powerless to resist. All rational considerations are forgotten. Seizing their weapons, they become Ghazis--as dangerous and as sensible as mad dogs: fit only to be treated as such. While the more generous spirits among the tribesmen become convulsed in an ecstasy of religious bloodthirstiness, poorer and more material souls derive additional impulses from the influence of others, the hopes of plunder and the joy of fighting. Thus whole nations are roused to arms. Thus the Turks repel their enemies, the Arabs of the Soudan break the British squares, and the rising on the Indian frontier spreads far and wide. In each case civilisation is confronted with militant Mahommedanism. The forces of progress clash with those of reaction. The religion of blood and war is face to face with that of peace. Luckily the religion of peace is usually the better armed.


The Story of the Malakand Field Force by Winston Churchill, Longmans Colonial Library, 1897, p.40.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #39 - Nov 9th, 2009 at 11:01pm
 
The current truth is the same as the truth a hundred years ago. Truth is funny like that.



http://www.youtube.com/user/patcondell?ob=1



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
abu_rashid
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Aussie Muslim

Posts: 8353
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #40 - Nov 9th, 2009 at 11:40pm
 
You mean Churchill that guy who tried to pass laws for the "Eradication of the disease of feeble mindedness"?? The one who wanted to sterilise anyone who didn't live up to his lofty ideals of what a prospering Brit should be?

Yeh, great guy to get your inspiration from soren.
Back to top
 
abu_rashid  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #41 - Nov 9th, 2009 at 11:53pm
 
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 9th, 2009 at 11:40pm:
You mean Churchill that guy who tried to pass laws for the "Eradication of the disease of feeble mindedness"?? The one who wanted to sterilise anyone who didn't live up to his lofty ideals of what a prospering Brit should be?

Yeh, great guy to get your inspiration from soren.



Yeah, him. He would know what to do with the assorted bearded pinheads and jihadi 'palestinians' hiding in the US army. And their boosters on forums like this - "Eradication of the disease of feeble mindedness" indeed. Starting with a shave and proper clothes. Then new passport photos. Temporary travel documents. Tickets. Big, heavy boots for the farwell party.





Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
abu_rashid
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Aussie Muslim

Posts: 8353
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #42 - Nov 9th, 2009 at 11:57pm
 
A few more not so famous quotes from Mr. Churchill:

I will not pretend that, if I had to choose between communism and nazism, I would choose communism.
Speaking in the House of Commons, autumn 1937

I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes.
Writing as president of the Air Council, 1919

It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the east, striding half naked up the steps of the viceregal palace, while he is still organising and conducting a campaign of civil disobedience, to parlay on equal terms with the representative of the Emperor-King.
Commenting on Gandhi's meeting with the Viceroy of India, 1931

(India is) a godless land of snobs and bores.
In a letter to his mother, 1896

I do not admit... that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America, or the black people of Australia... by the fact that a stronger race, a higher grade race... has come in and taken its place.
Churchill to Palestine Royal Commission, 1937

(We must rally against) a poisoned Russia, an infected Russia of armed hordes not only smiting with bayonet and cannon, but accompanied and preceded by swarms of typhus-bearing vermin.
Quoted in the Boston Review, April/May 2001

"The choice was clearly open: crush them with vain and unstinted force, or try to give them what they want. These were the only alternatives and most people were unprepared for either. Here indeed was the Irish spectre - horrid and inexorcisable.
Writing in The World Crisis and the Aftermath, 1923-31

The unnatural and increasingly rapid growth of the feeble-minded and insane classes, coupled as it is with a steady restriction among all the thrifty, energetic and superior stocks, constitutes a national and race danger which it is impossible to exaggerate... I feel that the source from which the stream of madness is fed should be cut off and sealed up before another year has passed.
Churchill to Asquith, 1910

One may dislike Hitler's system and yet admire his patriotic achievement. If our country were defeated, I hope we should find a champion as admirable to restore our courage and lead us back to our place among the nations."
From his Great Contemporaries, 1937

You are callous people who want to wreck Europe - you do not care about the future of Europe, you have only your own miserable interests in mind.
Addressing the London Polish government at a British Embassy meeting, October 1944

So far as Britain and Russia were concerned, how would it do for you to have 90% of Romania, for us to have 90% of the say in Greece, and go 50/50 about Yugoslavia?
Addressing Stalin in Moscow, October 1944

This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States)... this worldwide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire."
Writing on 'Zionism versus Bolshevism' in the Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 1920
Back to top
 
abu_rashid  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #43 - Nov 10th, 2009 at 12:18am
 
Getting 9 or 10 out of 12 right - not bad.

And of course he ultimately redeemed himself admirably, in spades.  Can't say the same for any Muslim leader of the 20th century. Or the 19th. Or the 18th. And so on.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
abu_rashid
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Aussie Muslim

Posts: 8353
Re: WOULD YOU DEFY A BAN ON CRITICISING ISLAM?
Reply #44 - Nov 10th, 2009 at 12:34am
 
I bet this is one of your favourites isn't it??

"I do not understand the squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes."
Back to top
 
abu_rashid  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print