patrick.net

 
  forgot password?   register

#housing #investing #politics more»
757,383 comments in 77,988 posts by 11,101 registered users, 4 online now: drBu, lostand confused, Strategist, YesYNot

new post

Islam

By resistance   2007 Sep 11, 1:35am   58 links   215,408 views   791 comments   watch (3)   quote      

Originally from http://www.faithfreedom.org/

A Call to the Muslims of the World from a Group of Freethinkers and Humanists of Muslim Origins

Dear friends,
The tragic incidents of September 11 have shocked the world. It is unthinkable that anyone could be so full of hate as to commit such heinous acts and kill so many innocent people. We people of Muslim origin are as much shaken as the rest of the world and yet we find ourselves looked upon with suspicion and distrust by our neighbours and fellow citizens. We want to cry out and tell the world that we are not terrorists, and that those who perpetrate such despicable acts are murderers and not part of us. But, in reality, because of our Muslim origins we just cannot erase the stigma of Islamic Terrorism from our identity!

What most Muslims will say:

Islam would never support the killing of innocent people. Allah of the Holy Qur'an never advocated killings. This is all the work of a few misguided individuals at the fringes of society. The real Islam is sanctified from violence. We denounce all violence. Islam means peace. Islam means tolerance.

What knowledgeable Muslims should say:

That is what most Muslims think, but is it true? Does Islam really preach peace, tolerance and non-violence? The Muslims who perpetrate these crimes think differently. They believe that what they do is Jihad (holy war). They say that killing unbelievers is mandatory for every Muslim. They do not kill because they wish to break the laws of Islam but because they think this is what true Muslims should do. Those who blow-up their own bodies to kill more innocent people do so because they think they will be rewarded in Paradise. They hope to be blessed by Allah, eat celestial food, drink pure wine and enjoy the company of divine consorts. Are they completely misguided? Where did they get this distorted idea? How did they come to believe that killing innocent people pleases God? Or is it that we are misguided? Does really Islam preach violence? Does it call upon its believers to kill non-believers? We denounce those who commit acts of violence and call them extremists. But are they really extremists or are they following what the holy book, the Qur'an tells them to do? What does the Qur'an teach? Have we read the Qur'an? Do we know what kind of teachings are there? Let us go through some of them and take a closer look at what Allah says.

What the Qur'an Teaches Us:

We have used the most widely available English text of the Qur'an and readers are welcome to verify our quotes from the holy book. Please have an open mind and read through these verses again and again. The following quotes are taken from the most trusted Yusufali's translation of the Qur'an. The Qur'an tells us: not to make friendship with Jews and Christians (5:51), kill the disbelievers wherever we find them (2:191), murder them and treat them harshly (9:123), fight and slay the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (9:5). The Qur'an demands that we fight the unbelievers, and promises If there are twenty amongst you, you will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, you will vanquish a thousand of them (8:65). Allah and his messenger want us to fight the Christians and the Jews until they pay the Jizya [a penalty tax for the non-Muslims living under Islamic rules] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued (9:29). Allah and his messenger announce that it is acceptable to go back on our promises (treaties) and obligations with Pagans and make war on them whenever we find ourselves strong enough to do so (9:3). Our God tells us to fight the unbelievers and He will punish them by our hands, cover them with shame and help us (to victory) over them (9:14).

The Qur'an takes away the freedom of belief from all humanity and relegates those who disbelieve in Islam to hell (5:10), calls them najis (filthy, untouchable, impure) (9:28), and orders its followers to fight the unbelievers until no other religion except Islam is left (2:193). It says that the non-believers will go to hell and will drink boiling water (14:17). It asks the Muslims to slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace and that they shall have a great punishment in world hereafter (5:34). And tells us that for them (the unbelievers) garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods (22:19-22) and that they not only will have disgrace in this life, but on the Day of Judgment He shall make them taste the Penalty of burning (Fire) (22:9). The Qur'an says that those who invoke a god other than Allah not only should meet punishment in this world but the Penalty on the Day of Judgment will be doubled to them, and they will dwell therein in ignominy (25:68). For those who believe not in Allah and His Messenger, He has prepared, for those who reject Allah, a Blazing Fire! (48:13). Although we are asked to be compassionate amongst each other, we have to be harsh with unbelievers, our Christian, Jewish and Atheist neighbours and colleagues (48:29). As for him who does not believe in Islam, the Prophet announces with a stern command: Seize ye him, and bind ye him, And burn ye him in the Blazing Fire. Further, make him march in a chain, whereof the length is seventy cubits! This was he that would not believe in Allah Most High. And would not encourage the feeding of the indigent! So no friend hath he here this Day. Nor hath he any food except the corruption from the washing of wounds, Which none do eat but those in sin. (69:30-37) The Qur'an prohibits a Muslim from befriending a non-believer even if that non-believer is the father or the brother of that Muslim (9:23), (3:28). Our holy book asks us to be disobedient towards the disbelievers and their governments and strive against the unbelievers with great endeavour (25:52) and be stern with them because they belong to Hell (66:9). The holy Prophet prescribes fighting for us and tells us that it is good for us even if we dislike it (2:216). Then he advises us to strike off the heads of the disbelievers; and after making a wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives (47:4). Our God has promised to instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers and has ordered us to smite above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them (8:12). He also assures us that when we kill in his name it is not us who slay them but Allah, in order that He might test the Believers by a gracious trial from Himself (8:17). He orders us to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies (8:60). He has made the Jihad mandatory and warns us that Unless we go forth, (for Jihad) He will punish us with a grievous penalty, and put others in our place (9:39). Allah speaks to our Holy Prophet and says O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern against them. Their abode is Hell - an evil refuge indeed (9:73).

He promises us that in the fight for His cause whether we slay or are slain we return to the garden of Paradise (9:111). In Paradise he will wed us with Houris (celestial virgins) pure beautiful ones (56:54), and unite us with large-eyed beautiful ones while we recline on our thrones set in lines (56:20). There we are promised to eat and drink pleasantly for what we did (56:19). He also promises boys like hidden pearls (56:24) and youth never altering in age like scattered pearls (for those who have paedophiliac inclinations) (76:19). As you see, Allah has promised all sorts or rewards, gluttony and unlimited sex to Muslim men who kill unbelievers in his name. We will be admitted to Paradise where we shall find goodly things, beautiful ones, pure ones confined to the pavilions that man has not touched them before nor jinni (56:67-71).In the West we enjoy freedom of belief but we are not supposed to give such freedom to anyone else because it is written If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good) (3:85). And He orders us to fight them on until there is no more tumult and faith in Allah is practiced everywhere (8:39). As for women the book of Allah says that they are inferior to men and their husbands have the right to scourge them if they are found disobedient (4:34). It advises to take a green branch and beat your wife, because a green branch is more flexible and hurts more. (38:44). It teaches that women will go to hell if they are disobedient to their husbands (66:10). It maintains that men have an advantage over the women (2:228). It not only denies the women's equal right to their inheritance (4:11-12), it also regards them as imbeciles and decrees that their witness is not admissible in the courts of law (2:282). This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness. Our Holy Prophet allows us to marry up to four wives and he licensed us to sleep with our slave maids and as many 'captive' women as we may have (4:3) even if those women are already married. He himself did just that. This is why anytime a Muslim army subdues another nation, they call them kafir and allow themselves to rape their women. Pakistani soldiers allegedly raped up to 250,000 Bengali women in 1971 after they massacred 3,000,000 unarmed civilians when their religious leader decreed that Bangladeshis are un-Islamic. This is why the prison guards in Islamic regime of Iran rape the women that in their opinion are apostates prior to killing them, as they believe a virgin will not go to Hell.

Dear fellow Muslims:Is this the Islam you believe in? Is this your Most Merciful, Most Compassionate Allah whom you worship daily? Could Allah incite you to kill other peoples? Please understand that there is no terrorist gene - but there could be a terrorist mindset. That mindset finds its most fertile ground in the tenets of Islam. Denying it, and presenting Islam to the lay public as a religion of peace similar to Buddhism, is to suppress the truth. The history of Islam between the 7th and 14th centuries is riddled with violence, fratricide and wars of aggression, starting right from the death of the Prophet and during the so-called 'pure' or orthodox caliphate. And Muhammad himself hoisted the standard of killing, looting, massacres and bloodshed. How can we deny the entire history? The behaviour of our Holy Prophet as recorded in authentic Islamic sources is quite questionable from a modern viewpoint. The Prophet was a charismatic man but he had few virtues. Imitating him in all aspects of life (following the Sunnah) is both impossible and dangerous in the 21st century. Why are we so helplessly in denial over this simple issue? When the Prophet was in Mecca and he was still not powerful enough he called for tolerance. He said To you be your religion, and to me my religion (109:6). This famous quote is often misused to prove that the general principle of Qur'an is tolerance. He advised his follower to speak good to their enemies (2: 83), exhorted them to be patient (20:103) and said that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256). But that all changed drastically when he came to power. Then killing and slaying unbelievers with harshness and without mercy was justified in innumerable verses. The verses quoted to prove Islam's tolerance ignore many other verses that bear no trace of tolerance or forgiveness. Where is tolerance in this well-known verse Alarzu Lillah, Walhukmu Lillah. (The Earth belongs to Allah and thus only Allah's rule should prevail all over the earth.).Is it normal that a book revealed by God should have so many serious contradictions? The Prophet himself set the example of unleashing violence by invading the Jewish settlements, breaking treaties he had signed with them and banishing some of them after confiscating their belongings, massacring others and taking their wives and children as slaves. He inspected the youngsters and massacred all those who had pubic hair along with the men. Those who were younger he kept as slaves. He distributed the women captured in his raids among his soldiers keeping the prettiest for himself (33:50). He made sexual advances on Safiyah, a Jewish girl on the same day he captured her town Kheibar and killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives. Reyhana was another Jewish girl of Bani Quriza whom he used as a sex slave after killing all her male relatives. In the last ten years of his life he accumulated two scores of wives, concubines and sex slaves including the 9 year old Ayesha. These are not stories but records from authentic Islamic history and the Hadiths. It can be argued that this kind of behaviour was not unknown or unusual for the conquerors and leaders of the mediaeval world but these are not the activities befitting of a peaceful saint and certainly not someone who claimed to be the Mercy of God for all creation. There were known assassinations of adversaries during the Prophet's time, which he had knowledge of and had supported. Among them there was a 120 year old man, Abu 'Afak whose only crime was to compose a lyric satirical of the Prophet. (by Ibn Sa'd Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir, Volume 2, page 32) Then when a poetess, a mother of 5 small children 'Asma' Bint Marwan wrote a poetry cursing the Arabs for letting Muhammad assassinate an old man, our Holy Prophet ordered her to be assassinated too in the middle of the night while her youngest child was suckling from her breast. (Sirat Rasul Allah (A. Guillaume's translation The Life of Muhammad) page 675, 676).The Prophet did develop a 'Robin Hood' image that justified raiding merchant caravans attacking cities and towns, killing people and looting their belongings in the name of social justice. Usama Bin Laden is also trying to create the same image. But Robin Hood didn't claim to be a prophet or a pacifist nor did he care for apologist arguments. He did not massacre innocent people indiscriminately nor did he profit by reducing free people to slaves and then trading them. With the known and documented violent legacy of Islam, how can we suddenly rediscover it as a religion of peace in the free world in the 21st century? Isn't this the perpetuation of a lie by a few ambitious leaders in order to gain political control of the huge and ignorant Muslim population? They are creating a polished version of Islam by completely ignoring history. They are propagating the same old dogma for simple believing people in a crisp new modern package. Their aim: to gain political power in today's high-tension world. They want to use the confrontational power of the original Islam to catalyse new conflicts and control new circles of power.

Dear conscientious Muslims, please question yourselves. Isn't this compulsive following of a man who lived 1400 years ago leading us to doom in a changing world? Do the followers of any other religion follow one man in such an all-encompassing way? Who are we deceiving, them or ourselves? Dear brothers and sisters, see how our Umma (people) has sunk into poverty and how it lags behind the rest of the world. Isn't it because we are following a religion that is outdated and impractical? In this crucial moment of history, when a great catastrophe has befallen us and a much bigger one is lying ahead, should not we wake up from our 1400 years of slumber and see where things have gone wrong? Hatred has filled the air and the world is bracing itself for its doomsday. Should we not ask ourselves whether we have contributed, wittingly or unwittingly, to this tragedy and whether we can stop the great disaster from happening?Unfortunately the answer to the first question is yes. Yes we have contributed to the rise of fundamentalism by merely claiming Islam is a religion of peace, by simply being a Muslim and by saying our shahada (testimony that Allah is the only God and Muhammad is his messenger). By our shahada we have recognized Muhammad as a true messenger of God and his book as the words of God. But as you saw above those words are anything but from God. They call for killing, they are prescriptions for hate and they foment intolerance. And when the ignorant among us read those hate-laden verses, they act on them and the result is the infamous September 11, human bombs in Israel, massacres in East Timor and Bangladesh, kidnappings and killings in the Philippines, slavery in the Sudan, honour killings in Pakistan and Jordan, torture in Iran, stoning and maiming in Afghanistan and Iran, violence in Algeria, terrorism in Palestine and misery and death in every Islamic country. We are responsible because we endorse Islam and hail it as a religion of God. And we are as guilty as those who put into practice what the Qur'an preaches - and ironically we are the main victims too. If we are not terrorists, if we love peace, if we cried with the rest of the word for what happened in New York, then why are we supporting the Qur'an that preaches killing, that advocates holy war, that calls for the murder of non-Muslims? It is not the extremists who have misunderstood Islam. They do literally what the Qur'an asks them to do. It is we who misunderstand Islam. We are the ones who are confused. We are the ones who wrongly assume that Islam is the religion of peace. Islam is not a religion of peace. In its so-called pure form it can very well be interpreted as a doctrine of hate. Terrorists are doing just that and we the intellectual apologists of Islam are justifying it. We can stop this madness. Yes, we can avert the disaster that is hovering over our heads. Yes, we can denounce the doctrines that promote hate. Yes, we can embrace the rest of humanity with love. Yes, we can become part of a united world, members of one human family, flowers of one garden. We can dump the claim of infallibility of our Book, and the questionable legacy of our Prophet.Dear friends, there is no time to waste. Let us put an end to this lie. Let us not fool ourselves. Islam is not a religion of peace, of tolerance, of equality or of unity of humankind. Let us read the Qur'an. Let us face the truth even if it is painful. As long as we keep this lie alive, as long as we hide our head in the sands of Arabia we are feeding terrorism. As long as you and I keep calling Qur'an the unchangeable book of God, we cannot blame those who follow the teachings therein. As long as we pay our Khums and Zakat our money goes to promote Islamic expansionism and that means terrorism, Jihad and war. Islam divides the world in two. Darul Harb (land of war) and Darul Islam (land of Islam). Darul Harb is the land of the infidels, Muslims are required to infiltrate those lands, proselytise and procreate until their numbers increase and then start the war and fight and kill the people and impose the religion of Islam on them and convert that land into Darul Islam. In all fairness we denounce this betrayal. This is abuse of the trust. How can we make war in the countries that have sheltered us? How can we kill those who have befriended us? Yet willingly or unwillingly we have become pawns in this Islamic Imperialism. Let us see what great Islamic scholars have had to say in this respect.Dr. M. Khan the translator of Sahih Bukhari and the Qur'an into English wrote: Allah revealed in Sura Bara'at (Repentance, IX) the order to discard (all) obligations (covenants, etc), and commanded the Muslims to fight against all the Pagans as well as against the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) if they do not embrace Islam, till they pay the Jizia (a tax levied on the Jews and Christians) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued (as it is revealed in 9:29). So the Muslims were not permitted to abandon the fighting against them (Pagans, Jews and Christians) and to reconcile with them and to suspend hostilities against them for an unlimited period while they are strong and have the ability to fight against them. So at first the fighting was forbidden, then it was permitted, and after that it was made obligatory [Introduction to English translation of Sahih Bukhari, p.xxiv.] Dr. Sobhy as-Saleh, a contemporary Islamic academician quoted Imam Suyuti the author of Itqan Fi 'Ulum al- Qur'an who wrote: The command to fight the infidels was delayed until the Muslims become strong, but when they were weak they were commanded to endure and be patient. [ Sobhy as_Saleh, Mabaheth Fi 'Ulum al- Qur'an, Dar al-'Ilm Lel-Malayeen, Beirut, 1983, p. 269.]Dr. Sobhy, in a footnote, commends the opinion of a scholar named Zarkashi who said: Allah the most high and wise revealed to Mohammad in his weak condition what suited the situation, because of his mercy to him and his followers. For if He gave them the command to fight while they were weak it would have been embarrassing and most difficult, but when the most high made Islam victorious He commanded him with what suited the situation, that is asking the people of the Book to become Muslims or to pay the levied tax, and the infidels to become Muslims or face death. These two options, to fight or to have peace return according to the strength or the weakness of the Muslims. [ibid p. 270]Other Islamic scholars (Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi, Ga'far ar-Razi, Rabi' Ibn 'Ons, 'Abil-'Aliyah, Abd ar-Rahman Ibn Zayd Ibn 'Aslam, etc.) agree that the verse Slay the idolaters wherever you find them (9:5) cancelled those few earlier verses that called for tolerance in the Qur'an and were revealed when Islam was weak. Can you still say that Islam is the religion of peace? We propose a solution.

We know too well that it is not easy to denounce our faith because it means denouncing a part of ourselves. We are a group of freethinkers and humanists with Islamic roots. Discovering the truth and leaving the religion of our fathers and forefathers was a painful experience. But after learning what Islam stands for we had no choice but to leave it. After becoming familiar with the Qur'an the choice became clear: It is either Islam or humanity. If Islam thrives, then humanity will die. We decided to side with humanity. Culturally we are still Muslims but we no longer believe in Islam as the true religion of God. We are humanists. We love humanity. We work for the unity of humankind. We work for equality between men and women. We strive for the secularisation of Islamic countries, for democracy and freedom of thought, belief and expression. We decided to live no longer in self-deception but to embrace humanity, and to enter into the new millennium hand in hand with people of other cultures and beliefs in amity and in peace.We denounce the violence that is eulogized in the Qur'an as holy war (Jihad). We condemn killing in the name of God. We believe in the sanctity of human life, not in the inviolability of beliefs and religions. We invite you to join us and the rest of humanity and become part of the family of humankind - in love, camaraderie and peace.

Arabic translation

الترجمة العربية

See http://www.centerforinquiry.net/isis and http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ for more.

#religion

Please copy this article, and distribute it as widely as possible, both online and physically. The future of humanity depends on it.

« First     « Previous     Comments 752-791 of 791     Last »

752   socal2   Jul 14, 8:36am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Patrick says

Murdering armed representatives of a government seems different to me than murdering unarmed civilians.

Does that mean all the cops and firefighters killed on 9/11 weren't victims of terrorism? How about all the troops killed at Fort Hood? They were all killed for ideological/political reasons.

I get it if we are talking about cops getting killed by trying manage a riot or if the cops are the aggressor in trying to arrest someone and that person fights back.

But I believe in this case, these cops were just guarding a religious site and some crazy Muslims walked up to them and tried to kill them.

753   someone else   Jul 14, 9:14am     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

I'm not saying it wasn't evil. I was just defining "terrorism" as the deliberate murder of unarmed civilians for political reasons. Killing armed representatives of a country is something else, maybe guerrilla warfare.

The 9/11 firefighters were unarmed, so that's terrorism. The 9/11 cops were killed essentially accidentally by a deliberate terrorist attack, which is an attack on civilians. Anyway, cops are not exactly representatives of a country.

Troops attacking troops is warfare, not terrorism, right? So are border guards troops? Not quite sure.

754   zzyzzx   Jul 14, 2:04pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

755   CBOEtrader   Jul 14, 7:42pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Dan8267 says

There was a time when the Islamic world was more advanced than the Europe and embraced mathematics. It took a turn for the worse when the "Islamic right" took over and decided that religious teachings were more important than science, art, and mathematics. Thankfully, that could never happen in America.

You are a genuine retard

756   Strategist   Jul 14, 8:15pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

CBOEtrader says

Dan8267 says

There was a time when the Islamic world was more advanced than the Europe and embraced mathematics. It took a turn for the worse when the "Islamic right" took over and decided that religious teachings were more important than science, art, and mathematics. Thankfully, that could never happen in America.

Dan, please do us a favor and become a Muslim.

757   curious2   Jul 15, 1:07am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Patrick says

I was just defining....

IDK why people insist on trying to re-define words that have definitions already.

Terrorism is illegal threats or force intended to coerce or intimidate governments or societies. It resembles hate crimes, where the intent is typically to coerce or intimidate a group of people, e.g. KKK lynching individual black people as warning to the others.

Patrick says

Murdering armed representatives of a government seems different to me than murdering unarmed civilians.

Yes, and I'm glad your politics have evolved. The same phyiscal action can have different consequences depending on context.

758   curious2   Aug 3, 7:03am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

In case anyone didn't notice (while MSM continued to obsess over Russia), Islam continued to do what Islam does. In Afghanistan, two more suicide attacks:

"At least 37 people died and more than 60 were injured [when an Islamic State] gunman killed the guards at a Shia mosque in Herat before entering inside and detonating a suicide vest in the midst of hundreds of worshippers.

The attack was claimed the next day by the Sunni militant group - which had recently threatened an increase in attacks on Shia Muslims." The dead included the father of the Afghan girl robotics team captain.

"The U.S. military in Afghanistan says that four American troops were wounded in the same suicide bombing near the city of Kandahar the previous day that killed two U.S. service members."

Like most countries that have allowed themselves to become more than 20% Muslim, Afghanistan is more than 90% Muslim and lacks the freedom that most westerners take for granted. I can certainly understand that many (perhaps most) of the population want to emigrate, but by bringing Islam with them, they enlarge the problem reather than solving it. In a recent case, a well meaning Marin County family adopted an Afghan "refugee," who went on to kill an American, claiming PTSD. A San Francisco jury acquitted the Afghan of murder, due to the PTSD. Spreading Islam makes Afghanistan's problems our problems, and some people have become so deranged (by TDS or 'white guilt' or whatever) that they don't care how man Americans get killed that way.

Whatever anyone says about President Trump, he deserves credit for speaking candidly about Islam, opposing hijrah, and ending the CIA "Hillary's War" jihadi program in Syria.

759   curious2   Aug 16, 3:48am     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

760   curious2   Aug 17, 1:05pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

"At Least 13 Dead, 100 Injured After Van Strikes Crowd In Barcelona
***
The driver of the vehicle fled the scene.
***
The Islamic State has claimed responsibility for the attack, the SITE Intelligence Group reports.
"

Islam commands believers to "strike terror into" the enemies of Allah and "kill the disbelievers wherever you find them." Islam is a word that means "submission," and it is a totalitarian doctrine of violent conquest. The charlatan Mohamed and his followers designed, fabricated, and optimized Islam for the express purpose of conquering as many people and territories as possible, and enforcing submission. Usually, countries have borders to guard against conquest. You can try to blame individual Muslims for doing what Islam commands them to do, but you should also blame the politicians who choose deliberately to spread Islam.

761   Dan8267   Aug 17, 2:27pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

socal2 says

Does that mean all the cops and firefighters killed on 9/11 weren't victims of terrorism?

No. 9/11 targeted noncombatants. Any bystander caught up in a terrorist attack is a victim of that terrorist act. The act itself is terrorism because it targets noncombatants.

socal2 says

How about all the troops killed at Fort Hood?

They are combatants. As such they are casualties of war. Attacking the military of a country is warfare, not terrorism. Attacking the civilians of a country is terrorism, not warfare. This is true whether the attackers are from the U.S. or the Middle East. This is true whether the attackers are acting on the behalf of a government or not.

Cops can be either combatants or non-combatants depending on how they are used. A police force acting like an invading army are combatants. Killing them is insurrection and resistance, not terrorism. Community police are non-combatants. Killing them is terrorism.

762   Dan8267   Aug 17, 2:29pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (2)   quote    

Strategist says

CBOEtrader says

Dan8267 says

There was a time when the Islamic world was more advanced than the Europe and embraced mathematics. It took a turn for the worse when the "Islamic right" took over and decided that religious teachings were more important than science, art, and mathematics. Thankfully, that could never happen in America.

Dan, please do us a favor and become a Muslim.

Just because you don't like this fact, doesn't make it any less true. Maybe you should re-watch Carl Sagan's Cosmos. He went over this in great detail.

You really need to start putting historical facts before your political agenda.

763   Strategist   Aug 17, 2:58pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Dan8267 says

Dan, please do us a favor and become a Muslim.

Just because you don't like this fact, doesn't make it any less true. Maybe you should re-watch Carl Sagan's Cosmos. He went over this in great detail.

You really need to start putting historical facts before your political agenda.

How come you don't like facts like 99.99999999999999999% of all terrorism is by Muslims?

764   someone else   Aug 17, 5:50pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

curious2 says

You can try to blame individual Muslims for doing what Islam commands them to do, but you should also blame the politicians who choose deliberately to spread Islam.

And I have to say we are all to blame simply by buying gasoline, because some large but unknowable part of that purchase price goes to fund Saudi Arabia and their network of terrorist-indoctrination madrassas around the world.

Perhaps one day we will get all the power we need from solar. If we can do anything to accelerate that day, it not only diminishes atmospheric harm, but also the harm of global Islamic terrorism.

765   Strategist   Aug 17, 6:12pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Patrick says

And I have to say we are all to blame simply by buying gasoline, because some large but unknowable part of that purchase price goes to fund Saudi Arabia and their network of terrorist-indoctrination madrassas around the world.

Perhaps one day we will get all the power we need from solar. If we can do anything to accelerate that day, it not only diminishes atmospheric harm, but also the harm of global Islamic terrorism.

Anti electric cars and anti solar propaganda is spread by oil companies, extreme right wingers, and the likes of OPEC.
The facts are:
Electric cars are NOT expensive to buy, and extremely cheap to run and maintain.
Solar power will cost you a fraction of what your electric company will charge for the same usage, and will never increase over time.
Electric cars, solar power, and battery costs continue to fall. It's only a matter of time before oil companies and OPEC go out of business.
e.g. In the last 5 years the S&P has gone up 75%. ExxonMobil shares have declined by 11% during the same time. :)

766   TwoScoopsMcGee   Aug 17, 6:40pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Strategist says

Electric cars are NOT expensive to buy, and extremely cheap to run and maintain.

But the rare earths that make up the battery are polluting as all hell, and if we converted to Electric Cars, we'll need to double the electric grid, which Can't Be Done with renewables anytime soon.

The solution is to start taxing the hell out of cars, and fall in love with density.

767   curious2   Aug 18, 3:01pm     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Patrick says

we are all to blame

Some more so than others. During the campaign, candidate Trump said repeatedly that we should "take the oil." Why do we insist on paying people who have committed acts of war against us and who vow to kill or subjugate us? If the military imbalance were reversed, they would not pay us; they would kill or subjugate us, impose their Sharia laws upon us, and demand all that we have as tribute to their superiority. Alas, President Trump has now fired his most prominent advisors who denounced Islam (Flynn, Bannon), and the President bowed down and got collared by the Saudi king. The whole system of deficit spending depends on Petrodollars, which flow from Nixon's disastrous deals with KSA, but why can't the USA take the oil and sell it directly? After WWI, America punished Germany by confiscating German IP here, which is why "aspirin" is a generic term here even though it remains Bayer's trademark in other countries. After 9/11, including Saudi support before and after the fact for al qaeda and other terrorists who have committed acts of war against the USA, why can't we do the same again?

768   drBu   Aug 18, 3:22pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

TwoScoopsMcGee says

The solution is to start taxing the hell out of cars, and fall in love with density.

Nuclear power is the logical answer.

769   Strategist   Aug 18, 3:22pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

TwoScoopsMcGee says

Strategist says

Electric cars are NOT expensive to buy, and extremely cheap to run and maintain.

But the rare earths that make up the battery are polluting as all hell, and if we converted to Electric Cars, we'll need to double the electric grid, which Can't Be Done with renewables anytime soon.

Don't buy the myth from big oil. The components of the battery are all recyclable. Even if we have to double the grid, we can do it with renewables over time.

770   drBu   Aug 18, 3:30pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

curious2 says

we should "take the oil.

If we do that, we become the same as them.

771   Strategist   Aug 18, 3:37pm     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

drBu says

curious2 says

we should "take the oil.

If we do that, we become the same as them.

Lets just make their oil worthless. We have the technology for alternative fuels. They are cleaner and better.

772   Dan8267   Aug 18, 3:47pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Strategist says

How come you don't like facts like 99.99999999999999999% of all terrorism is by Muslims?

If that were true, I'd gladly acknowledge it. However, it's utter bullshit. Most terrorism commuted in world history in general or American history in particular is not committed by Muslims. You are simply making up a falsehood.

Most victims of terror in American history have been victims of racial terrorism by white Christian conservatives. That's just a cold, hard fact. Racism has been a huge force throughout American history including in domestic terrorism, and even including in U.S. state-sponsored terrorism. Maybe if we open the borders and let all the Muslims in, than after 50 years or so, most American victims of terrorism would be victims of Muslims, but that's not the case in our actual history.

In any case, what the fuck does whether or not one political agenda has caused more terrorism than another have to do with the statements below.

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

CBOEtrader says

Dan8267 says

There was a time when the Islamic world was more advanced than the Europe and embraced mathematics. It took a turn for the worse when the "Islamic right" took over and decided that religious teachings were more important than science, art, and mathematics. Thankfully, that could never happen in America.

Dan, please do us a favor and become a Muslim.

Just because you don't like this fact, doesn't make it any less true. Maybe you should re-watch Carl Sagan's Cosmos. He went over this in great detail.

You really need to start putting historical facts before your political agenda.

My statement is correct. That's not an opinion. It is a fact. It's like saying that two is less than three. It is simply a true statement. Your statements are incorrect. This has nothing to do with political or religious opinions. Reality is objective. Facts are facts.

Is your belief that Islam is bad contingent about there never being a time when the Islamic world was more advanced than the Europe and embraced mathematics? If so, then your belief is wrong. If not, why deny the truth? You must have even less confidence in your position than I do.

773   curious2   Aug 18, 4:05pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

drBu says

If we do that, we become the same as them.

Not at all. In order to become the same as they, we would need to renounce freedom of speech and religion at home and abroad, impose a totalitarian doctrine at home, execute blasphemers, impose legal discrimination against women, and a long list of other things.

Dan8267 says

Most victims of terror in American history have been victims of racial terrorism by white Christian conservatives.

The Islamic kill ratio is vastly higher than the Muslim percentage of the population. In any event, the real contest is between Islam and western civilization based on the Enlightenment.

774   drBu   Aug 18, 4:06pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Strategist says

Lets just make their oil worthless. We have the technology for alternative fuels. They are cleaner and better.

Yes, that appears to be the only solution.

775   drBu   Aug 18, 4:06pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

curious2 says

Not at all. In order to become the same as they, we would need to renounce freedom of speech and religion, execute blasphemers, impose legal discrimination against women, and a long list of other things.

We would be taking something that is not ours.

776   curious2   Aug 18, 4:08pm     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

drBu says

We would be taking something that is not ours.

Do unto others as they would do unto you.

After WWI, the USA took German IP from German companies, as punishment for Germany's role in the war. In the Mexican-American war, the USA took California, New Mexico, and Texas (which had seceded from Mexico), though the US did pay around $20 million (equal to around $1 billion in today's dollars).

And don't even get Dan started on the taking of land from American Indians.

None of that made the USA the same as the Islamic countries.

777   drBu   Aug 18, 4:52pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

curious2 says

Do unto others as they would do unto you.

After WWI, the USA took German IP from German companies, as punishment for Germany's role in the war. In the Mexican-American war, the USA took California, New Mexico, and Texas (which had seceded from Mexico), though the US did pay around $20 million (equal to around $1 billion in today's dollars).

And don't even get Dan started on the taking of land from American Indians.

None of that made the USA the same as the Islamic countries.

Basically, you are advocating that the strongest can do whatever he wants. I tend to think this is a very bad strategy. My preference is that talent here comes up with solutions that will make idiotic countries/ideologies broke. We can certainly decrease the need for hydrocarbons/imported hydrocarbons. Fracking technologies developed in this country already have done that to some extent, further development of nuclear/solar etc will help also.

With respect to American Indians, I agree with Dan. It is beyond deplorable to sign treaties with them and then break them simply because "we can and we are stronger". Should American Indians do onto others that WAS done upon them? There was a tribe which, I believe, helped US greatly in 1812 war and then was screwed out of its land.

Furthermore, Bible has also something about turning the other cheek, if we want to quote it.

778   Strategist   Aug 18, 5:11pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

How come you don't like facts like 99.99999999999999999% of all terrorism is by Muslims?

If that were true, I'd gladly acknowledge it. However, it's utter bullshit. Most terrorism commuted in world history in general or American history in particular is not committed by Muslims. You are simply making up a falsehood.

Most victims of terror in American history have been victims of racial terrorism by white Christian conservatives. That's just a cold, hard fact. Racism has been a huge force throughout American history including in domestic terrorism, and even including in U.S. state-sponsored terrorism. Maybe if we open the borders and let all the Muslims in, than after 50 years or so, most American victims of terrorism would be victims of Muslims, but that's not the case in our actual history.

Today Dan, today. Will someone help me drag Dan out of the Middle Ages and into the 21st century. I think he's stuck in there.

779   curious2   Aug 18, 8:10pm     ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike   quote    

drBu says

turning the other cheek

is a really bad idea when a Saudi sword is on the backswing.

drBu says

Should American Indians do onto others that WAS done upon them?

They can't, but more could quit drinking and participate in the modern world. Meanwhile, some are prospering with tax-free casinos and I've heard at least one got elected to the Senate.

780   drBu   Aug 19, 8:13am     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

curious2 says

They can't, but more could quit drinking and participate in the modern world. Meanwhile, some are prospering with tax-free casinos and I've heard at least one got elected to the Senate.

We all know that she is not an American Indian and just used lies to be accepted into a better school and to further her career. However, this one has a substantial amount of Native American ancestry and he can hurt you, me, or anyone else, but he chooses not to:

781   Dan8267   Aug 19, 3:00pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Strategist says

Today Dan, today. Will someone help me drag Dan out of the Middle Ages and into the 21st century. I think he's stuck in there.

Funny, I think the exact same thing of you.

782   Dan8267   Aug 19, 3:02pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

drBu says

American Indian

The correct term is Native American. Apu is an American Indian.

783   Patrick   Aug 19, 3:09pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

The Indians themselves use the term "Indian" though. Who are we to correct them?

784   drBu   Aug 19, 3:16pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Academic term is Amerindian, at least in linguistics. Native Americans would include Aleuts and Eskimos (Inuit), who are distinct from the rest of original inhabitants. In general, I slightly dislike Native American term because it is PC and relatively recent, while American Indians is not offensive in any non-SJW-imaginable way.

785   curious2   Aug 19, 3:51pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

drBu says

accepted into a better school and to further her career.

So, by your own admission, Amerindians are treated better than ordinary citizens. Also, any objective comparison would show Amerindians have better opportunities today than before Europeans arrived in North America, in fact better than any other people almost anywhere else in the world today except Europe and some parts of Asia

Certainly Amerindians have much better opportunities here than they would as non-Muslims trying to survive in a Muslim country. Consider what happened to the people of Yathrib after they made the dreadful mistake of allowing Mohamed and his followers into their city, now known as Medina. Around the world today, Muslims continue to celebrate that hijrah.

If Chuck Norris wants to give me a tenured professorship at Harvard, and a Senate seat, please let me know.

786   drBu   Aug 19, 4:28pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

curious2 says

So, by your own admission, Amerindians are treated better than ordinary citizens. Also, any objective comparison would show Amerindians have better opportunities today than before Europeans arrived in North America, in fact better than any other people almost anywhere else in the world today except Europe and some parts of Asia

Certainly Amerindians have much better opportunities here than they would as non-Muslims trying to survive in a Muslim country.

1. Europeans have better opportunities today than they had 150-200 years ago as well. Amerindians are by no means an exception.

2. Amerindians are probably the only population group in US which should be treated differently than the rest. Their land was taken by force and deceit. Is it normal to sign a treaty with a tribe and then break the treaty when it is convenient? Should the broken treaties be reinstated and land given back to Amerindians? If not, then why not? What about tribes which helped Washington in independence war and later were still displaced (Oneida, I believe)?

3. Anyone in US has better opportunities than they would have in nearly any Muslim country. My personal opinion is that Muslim countries have not escaped early Middle Ages and that Islam is the most dangerous ideology that currently exists on Earth. One can not reason with most Muslims in any rational fashion because Mohammad. Basically, their ideology says that we are right BECAUSE we are right, and everyone else is wrong.

4. Having said that, attempts to take by force something that does not belong to us is wrong and has spectacularly backfired in past. Iran's democratically elected prime minister in 50's was overthrown by US and British intelligence because of oil, and indirectly this caused the Iranian revolution of 1979 and the current mullah's government.

787   curious2   Aug 19, 5:40pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

drBu says

Is it normal to sign a treaty with a tribe and then break the treaty when it is convenient?

It is normal for Muslims, from Mohamed to the Barbary States. Again, read about Yathrib and the Barbary Wars. "Allah is the best deceiver." The purpose of a treaty, from an Islamic POV, is to allow the Muslims to postpone war to their own advantage and then attack their "ally" by deception and surprise. The vanquished "allies" are then slaughtered or enslaved, not given preferential admissions to universities and certainly not elected to govern over Muslims (see Indonesia for a brief exception, now in prison, former Governor Ahok).

Your other questions appear rhetorical.

You have a point about Iran. The US should have taken more of the oil revenue and required the Shah to end Islam in Iran. France should not have sheltered Khomeini. Hindsight is 20/20. Nevertheless, the backlash against the Shah (and by extension the US) resulted mainly from (a) religion and (b) resentment of the Shah's government. I've been reading The True Believer, which Patrick recommended, and it fits the Iranian example fairly well. Iranians prospered enough that they were not abjectly poor, and yet the government fomented a mass movement especially among religious Muslims. If the USA had taken the oil and installed a Shah who would end Islam, and if the USA had done something about Khomeini (e.g. required France to expel him), then the conditions that enabled the Iranian revolution would not have obtained in the country.

Imagine your enemy has a sword, and a written plan to chop off your head with it. The sword and plan are both his personal property, but he does not recognize property rights or any other rights other than by force. If you are in a position to take away the sword and the plan, and tell him to do something better with his life, would you be wrong to do that? Must you wait until he has actually injured you by chopping off your head before you begin to oppose him?

Consider also that America has already cassus belli against KSA and Pakistan, and an unfortunate history of waging Saudi-backed wars against other countries, strengthening enemies while weakening friends.

788   Strategist   Aug 19, 7:19pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

drBu says

3. Anyone in US has better opportunities than they would have in nearly any Muslim country. My personal opinion is that Muslim countries have not escaped early Middle Ages and that Islam is the most dangerous ideology that currently exists on Earth. One can not reason with most Muslims in any rational fashion because Mohammad. Basically, their ideology says that we are right BECAUSE we are right, and everyone else is wrong.

You can't reason with a mind possessed by a devil. Just put it out of it's misery.

789   Strategist   Aug 19, 7:28pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

curious2 says

France should not have sheltered Khomeini. Hindsight is 20/20.

France still has not seen it's mistakes. They continue to screw up.
Don't forget Jimmy Carter, the fool who stopped supporting the Shah of Iran, which led to Khomeini gaining power.
Moral of the story....Only dictators controlled by us are good enough for every Islamic country.

790   Dan8267   Aug 19, 10:37pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Patrick says

The Indians themselves use the term "Indian" though.

Before or after Europeans called them that?

Patrick says

Who are we to correct them?

Someone who lives in the 21st century where 25% of the world's population is Indian and about 0% is Native American. You and I work in IT. Half the people with work with are Indians, real Indians. I've never met or seen a Native American with my own eyes. There are only a handful left. I doubt you've ever met on either. But we both work daily with actual Indians.

I prefer to use the correct terms because it makes no sense to say Indian to refer to such a rare group when there are so many Indians you interact with every single day of your life. It would be like calling horses cars. Sure, a few people may own horses, but it be damn confusing if people asked you what kind of hay you feed your car.

When you say Indian, I think they guy in the next office, not some long dead tribe of Native Americans. It makes no sense to use the same word to refer to a group you interact with daily and a completely unrelated group you've never interacted with in your entire life.

791   drBu   Aug 20, 7:38am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

curious2 says

Is it normal to sign a treaty with a tribe and then break the treaty when it is convenient?

It is normal for Muslims, from Mohamed to the Barbary States.

Should not be normal for us then.

With respect to Iranian oil, it WAS taken in late 50's after CIA/MI-orchestrated overthrow of Mosadegh. The point of his ovethrow was to remove oil from Iranian control. Consequently, taking of oil caused (however indirectly) Islamic revolution. Perhaps if Mosadegh was not overthrown, Iran would be a reasonably democratic country.

« First     « Previous     Comments 752-791 of 791     Last »

users   about   suggestions   contact  
topics   random post   best comments   comment jail  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home