Islam Must Rule the World

[S.A.M.]

See, you can't even read my responses, now you're making up your own. Where did I say Mohammed killed anyone? There is no historical record of his having done so.

And in the Michael tradition (ignoring all explanations that do not fit my preconceived views of what the answer MUST be, even though my opinions are based on oral traditions by authors who have asserted that the source was biased and there is no independent verification, but what does that matter when my own mind is made up?):

Have you stopped beating your girlfriend? YES OR NO?

Anyway, back to your own homespun fantasies (Aesops fables, Greek tragedies and other folk tales about Medusa). As you were.

 

[ashpwner]

i think the oposite i think that without religion is only way to salvation of the world.

 

[cosmictraveler]

i think the oposite i think that without religion is only way to salvation of the world.

But there has to be some form of control. If there's none we will have choas. Religion, for the most part, has kept some people under control for many years. Releasing them into the unknown world of reality will short circut their feeble brains and cause them to freak out.

 

[Michael]

And in the Michael tradition (ignoring all explanations that do not fit my preconceived views of what the answer MUST be, even though my opinions are based on oral traditions by authors who have asserted that the source was biased and there is no independent verification, but what does that matter when my own mind is made up?):

SAM, I posted the information pertaining to the Islamic Historian.
Do we know for a fact that he was right? No.
Do we know for a fact if Mohammad really lived? No.
Do we know when the Qur'an was written and by whom? No.
But what we do know is what people generally believe. And as I posted he was, and is, a respected reputable Historian that the majority of Muslims believe. Which is the whole point.

See, you can't even read my responses, now you're making up your own. Where did I say Mohammed killed anyone? There is no historical record of his having done so.

Muslim Morality

2) Do you Sam believe that Mohammad had killed someone or commanded that someone be killed?

Of course he did, after all he was the Judge and while he was alive passed legal rulings. I'm sure that in his legal position, he must have put murderers and terrorists to death, if they were not forgiven by their victims (in Islamic law, a victim can either forgive, demand compensation or blood retribution from the Judge)

Have you stopped beating your girlfriend? YES OR NO?

No, I beat her at tennis every time we play.


The question you are asking is nonsensical. It implies I am presently punching my girl friend. Which is silly because I am not.


I am asking when was the Qur'an canonized?
By whom?
What day?

See the difference?

The story about the singing girl comes directly from Muslim tradition. I read it on a Muslim News site. I asked you opinion: Given the information presented, do you SAM think, that the death sentence handed down by Mohammad was a moral one? Yes or No. Why?

Do you SAM think that the Institutionalization of Slavery is moral? Yes or No. Why?

According to Muslim scholars is there a consensus that Mohammad owned Slaves? Yes or No.

Starting to see the difference?
Michael

 

[Michael]

We can not know why Islamic societies stopped producing art of the human form. But I’d say it’s pretty damn scary it happened. Shocking really.

 

[GeoffP]

So they decided to return the favor?

No. They emigrated and made the foolish error of fighting back to protect themselves, silly dhimmis.

Where did the Poles, gypsies and other remnants of the rest of the 5 million victims of the Holocaust go. Does anybody know, or even care?

Well, the Poles are still in Pol-and, toasty. Maybe you've met some? They seem to have come through intact to a general degree, since you don't seem to "know" where they went.

Homosexuals also persist and exist - again, since you don't seem to "know where they went". I would think that their persecution in the Holocaust would make it difficult to harass them as a group also, but it doesn't seem to have really caught on, unfortunately. Not that much of a surprise, I suppose; there's probably a billion or so people worldwide who hate all Jewish people too, despite the above.

The Roma - not "gypsies", if you please - dispersed, I believe. In this at least you are finally correct - they have received little notice either during the Holocaust or after.

Also GeoffP I have already pointed you to a source of accurate information on the creation of Israel, based on Israeli declassified documents. Your persistent refusal to educate yourself on the matter (if the documents were online, I could link them but they are not) can only mean that you prefer to see the Israelis as victims even when they are the oppresors.

Er...how is it "accurate information", exactly? That is to say: how do I know it is? I only have your word to go on, which...well, you know. Are you demanding I should buy the book? I should note out in counter that Jihadwatch is accurate information, too: and readily available on line, for free. I have less interest in pursuing your often fantastic arguments with cash purchase; particularly as you have always refused to come to grips with my points.

As such I see no point wasting my breath responding to your false information.

:yawn: I have to say that I've never seen any such evidence; I assume it's in the book you demand I buy. I've been honest throughout our little tête-à-tête but the favour has never been returned from you. Which false information is it I am meant to have provided? You give no clue. I suppose the reader is meant to infer that I only provide false information; unfortunately, the reader usually knows better.

How many new mosques have been built. You are being extremely silly in this regard. I don't recall when a temple, or a mosque or a church was last built in Bombay either.

How many new mosques require ecclesiastical permission from a religion that regards their message as so sinful that the merest admission of it's validity by a muslim is the greatest sin imaginable? Do you deny that the temples of other religions may be neither repaired nor constructed in islamic countries?

Here is one:

You can look up the rest.

ONE only? Please.

 

[GeoffP]

How many mosques since 1975? Was the refusal to build due to zoning regulations?

Besides its not an isolated phenomenon:

Australia:

Traffic issues.

US:

Green space preservation.

I assume you don't care about those things then? And you always seemed to be on the side of the locals vs the "interlopers".

And thats just a random look at the first page of google. To somehow project it as an attitude exclusive to Muslims is not only ignorance, it is spreading unwarranted hatred.

When muslim countries have ubiquitous laws that restrict the rights of other religions, then they deserve to be pilloried. Zoning restrictions aren't the same as supremacist laws.

 

[GeoffP]

Be sure to be polite, it will open many hearts and doors. ME appreciate nothing more than politeness. And stick up for yourself, they don't like wussies.

Or Jews that fight back. They like a certain kind of wussie. It's very particular.

 

[S.A.M.]

SAM, I posted the information pertaining to the Islamic Historian.
Do we know for a fact that he was right? No.
Do we know for a fact if Mohammad really lived? No.
Do we know when the Qur'an was written and by whom? No.
But what we do know is what people generally believe. And as I posted he was, and is, a respected reputable Historian that the majority of Muslims believe. Which is the whole point.



Muslim Morality




No, I beat her at tennis every time we play.


The question you are asking is nonsensical. It implies I am presently punching my girl friend. Which is silly because I am not.


I am asking when was the Qur'an canonized?
By whom?
What day?

See the difference?

The story about the singing girl comes directly from Muslim tradition. I read it on a Muslim News site. I asked you opinion: Given the information presented, do you SAM think, that the death sentence handed down by Mohammad was a moral one? Yes or No. Why?

Do you SAM think that the Institutionalization of Slavery is moral? Yes or No. Why?

According to Muslim scholars is there a consensus that Mohammad owned Slaves? Yes or No.

Starting to see the difference?
Michael

Kust because your folk tale comes from a Muslim site, does not change the fact that its origins are still suspect. Or do you consider that reading about WMDs on the US government site makes them a reality?

Sad, really, I had expected better from a scientist. You cannot argue on an oral tradition as if it were established fact, not when its citations indicate it to be a suspect story. Thats like getting excited over a bar graph without statistics to show standard deviation. There is just not enough information to argue on data that, in itself, means absolutely nothing, not even to satisfy your fantasies.

 

[S.A.M.]

No. They emigrated and made the foolish error of fighting back to protect themselves, silly dhimmis.

Thats where you are wrong, they did not "emigrate"; they were handed a country that put them as far away from proper society as possible and they proceeded to depopulate the locals and ethnically cleanse them, a process that they have carried out for the last 60 years, unhampered. The entire act of giving over part of a country that is already populated to a population from elsewhere would be laughed at if it was a Western country that was being handed over. If Muslims who are persecuted in Europe were subjected to a Holocaust and demanded the chunk of the Americas as compensation, how many people do you think would consider it a jolly good idea?

If there were no Holocaust, would there be an Israel? That is not emigration.

Well, the Poles are still in Pol-and, toasty. Maybe you've met some? They seem to have come through intact to a general degree, since you don't seem to "know" where they went.

Right. You see? They did not need to be sent to Iceland or New Zealand or the mountains of Thor to recover from their wounds.

Homosexuals also persist and exist - again, since you don't seem to "know where they went". I would think that their persecution in the Holocaust would make it difficult to harass them as a group also, but it doesn't seem to have really caught on, unfortunately. Not that much of a surprise, I suppose; there's probably a billion or so people worldwide who hate all Jewish people too, despite the above.

See previous comment.

The Roma - not "gypsies", if you please - dispersed, I believe. In this at least you are finally correct - they have received little notice either during the Holocaust or after.

What no country for old Romas?

Er...how is it "accurate information", exactly? That is to say: how do I know it is? I only have your word to go on, which...well, you know. Are you demanding I should buy the book? I should note out in counter that Jihadwatch is accurate information, too: and readily available on line, for free. I have less interest in pursuing your often fantastic arguments with cash purchase; particularly as you have always refused to come to grips with my points.

The accuracy of Jihadwatch is through media manipulation. Like I said, all you have to do is read the book and declare what information is false, otherwise all you are doing is perpetuating a myth that has already taken countless lives.

:yawn: I have to say that I've never seen any such evidence; I assume it's in the book you demand I buy. I've been honest throughout our little tête-à-tête but the favour has never been returned from you. Which false information is it I am meant to have provided? You give no clue. I suppose the reader is meant to infer that I only provide false information; unfortunately, the reader usually knows better.

Almost everything you provide from Jihad watch and the like is information carefully slanted to conceal the truth. When they say, two militants killed in Israel, they don't add that this follwed a week long lockdown on electricity and food supply, or daily insurgencies that have thousands of people in prisons (including young children). It may be the "truth" but its carefully designed truth. But perhaps you prefer that kind?

How many new mosques require ecclesiastical permission from a religion that regards their message as so sinful that the merest admission of it's validity by a muslim is the greatest sin imaginable? Do you deny that the temples of other religions may be neither repaired nor constructed in islamic countries?

You live in lala land. All building requires permission.

But of course all Muslims are terrorists in the dark

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0913-10.htm

ONE only? Please.

Its called falsification. Takes only one example to indicate the falsity of a theory. And I provided more later on.

http://www.wwrn.org/article.php?idd=20887&sec=59&con=42

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20031001/ai_n12526734

http://www.interfaithstudies.org/freedom/burma.html

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1879728,00.html

After all, we are focusing on the negative, right?

Every time someone defends a right, he is seen as a fundamentalist. So the mere act of wearing the headscarf is interpreted as an act of violence against society

 

[GeoffP]

Well you would be wrong, because they had no where near a million men. So go on and believe your one million persians myth.

No - now it's up to 2 million.

You said, a man in the US is an american, so therefore I am American, and Israelis are American, right? Now, that's not right.

You seemed to have some confusion about nationality. I was attempting to educate you. You were prattling on about how you thought Israelis lived primarily in the US or something. This generally isn't so.

Handed her ass? Again, you do not know the difference between Major Victory and Victory, or should I say minor victory? Because that's what it was.

The routing of four armies by a rag-tag bunch of nonsoldiers armed with rifles and Molotovs? That's a near unbelievable rout. If it wasn't history, I wouldn't have thought it possible.

1) You've never been to Israel, since Israel is in fact a sprawling ghetto

Evidence? Define? This would appear to be hyperbole.

2) Oh no, they are similar, never did I say that they were medival BS, they do live similary (same food, same lifestyles), the same types of lives. If Israel beats her children, then nvm my claim, we have a very different culture.

Haha! Too late, child-beater. You've as good as admitted it.

Tell you what, take a vacation to Syria, Latakia preferabbly is a vacation hotspot (beautiful beaches and hotels), and then start talking again and lets see what your opinion is.

That place? I hear it's kind of a Syrian ghetto. Do they still beat their children there? Anyway; how is talking to a bunch of Syrians going to change my opinions on Israel? Should I not then take a bus to Israel and repeat the experiment to see if they change back? I think you're just being silly.

 

[GeoffP]

Kust because your folk tale comes from a Muslim site, does not change the fact that its origins are still suspect.

Just because your story about Israel ethnic cleansing comes from an Israeli does not change the fact that its origins are still suspect.

Or do you consider that reading about WMDs on the US government site makes them a reality?

Sigh. False analogy. The US was in opposition to the nation they claimed had the WMDs. The islamic site is on side with the tradition they claim has the decapitation. A proper analogy would be an American site claiming that America had WMDs. I sincerely hope Mike is not going to let you slide this nonsense by.

Also, I would have assumed that you understood that the acceptance of this story as fact by any proportion of the islamic community was a bad thing; and, because it occurs on an individual human level, distinct from issues of statistics since one practitioners or another might use it as support to go out and hack heads off. Maybe you could detail your history of combatting such attitudes in your religious community.

 

[S.A.M.]

Just because your story about Israel ethnic cleansing comes from an Israeli does not change the fact that its origins are still suspect.

Sure, but from an Israeli academic and historian who accessed the declassified documents of the government and names places and dates and locations

Sigh. False analogy. The US was in opposition to the nation they claimed had the WMDs. The islamic site is on side with the tradition they claim has the decapitation. A proper analogy would be an American site claiming that America had WMDs. I sincerely hope Mike is not going to let you slide this nonsense by.

Yup, so why are you using their sources? Why not independently verified sources?

Also, I would have assumed that you understood that the acceptance of this story as fact by any proportion of the islamic community was a bad thing; and, because it occurs on an individual human level, distinct from issues of statistics since one practitioners or another might use it as support to go out and hack heads off. Maybe you could detail your history of combatting such attitudes in your religious community.

There are a lot of creationists as well. Does that mean creationism is true. Argument from popularity is no indication of validity. And nor is spreading misinformation like this going to achieve anything. Addressing the facts, otoh, can actually lead to people realising that they are both misinformed and following a fallacy (as has been done in the case of female genital mutilation, quite successfully) Depends on what your aim is though, to merely spread hatred about a group or actually address their concerns and help educate them.

 

[GeoffP]

Thats where you are wrong, they did not "emigrate"; they were handed a country that put them as far away from proper society as possible

Miscomprehension. They chose to go there; they weren't sent there.

and they proceeded to depopulate the locals and ethnically cleanse them

As the locals attempted to do to them, under the archaic islamic concept of dhimmitude from centuries gone by - or else suppress them altogether as second class citizens. I notice you don't complain about that prospect.

The entire act of giving over part of a country that is already populated to a population from elsewhere would be laughed at if it was a Western country that was being handed over.

Possibly. Perhaps it would be more reasonable if it were a tiny, tiny chunk of land almost unoccupied by anyone, and given to a people with a historical perogative to the region and who had then been ethnically cleansed by an invading power. Say, equivalent to - oh, I don't know - native North Americans.

See, like Jews in the ME, native North Americans inhabited North America for thousands of years, and were then purged by invading Europeans (not unlike how Hindus in Pakistan were also purged). Jews, too, lived in the ME for thousands of years, and were then purged by invading muslims. I think that N. Am. natives have a right to a lot more of their land back, because they have a historical connection to the place, one might say. Jewish people are essentially displaced Middle Easterners, as you well know.

If Muslims who are persecuted in Europe were subjected to a Holocaust and demanded the chunk of the Americas as compensation, how many people do you think would consider it a jolly good idea?

They would have to have an ethnic/historical tie to the place, which they don't. So, on that basis, your analogy fails again.

If there were no Holocaust, would there be an Israel? That is not emigration.

It is flight to somewhere safe - somewhere they might, say, have been told Jews had been living in peace with their muslim overlords - I mean, protectors - for a thousand years. (Too bad no one told them the reasons behind that peace, I guess.)

Right. You see? They did not need to be sent to Iceland or New Zealand or the mountains of Thor to recover from their wounds.

Sam...there's no such thing as the mountains of Thor.

Poles of course have a historical origin in Poland. (Do you know where that is?) I assume you don't see Jewish people as having a historical origin in "Jewland"? Hehe, little joke. Of course, you know as well as I that Jewish people originate in Israel. It's strange that you see the Israelis as interlopers to the region, considering the amount of invading that islam has historically gotten around to.

What no country for old Romas?

Did they ever have one, even?

The accuracy of Jihadwatch is through media manipulation. Like I said, all you have to do is read the book and declare what information is false, otherwise all you are doing is perpetuating a myth that has already taken countless lives.

The accuracy of Jihadwatch is media reporting. Robert Spencer does not write the news. And what myth is this again?

Almost everything you provide from Jihad watch and the like is information carefully slanted to conceal the truth. When they say, two militants killed in Israel, they don't add that this follwed a week long lockdown on electricity and food supply, or daily insurgencies that have thousands of people in prisons (including young children). It may be the "truth" but its carefully designed truth. But perhaps you prefer that kind?

LOL. What they also don't say is that the militancy has gone on for thirty years, or who started the Intifada, or why, or why there were any of the previous wars, or why the Israelis had to take up arms in the first place.

You live in lala land. All building requires permission.

Repair requires permission too? Displaying religious symbols in public requires permission? Insulting some drooling ancient merchant requires permission? Breathing requires permission after accidentally raking leaves against a mosque, or being mouthy to an islamic judge? And you really don't see a trend here. Hmm.

Its called falsification. Takes only one example to indicate the falsity of a theory. And I provided more later on.

Ah! Then your case that mosques are being refused in the West is also - and more widely - falsified since permission is normally granted. Yes, I see now.

After all, we are focusing on the negative, right?

Sure are! Well, those of us that can focus are.

 

[GeoffP]

Sure, but from an Israeli academic and historian who accessed the declassified documents of the government and names places and dates and locations

Like a muslim site that accessed the declassified documents of Mohammed? I haven't even read the book yet, or ordered it.

Yup, so why are you using their sources? Why not independently verified sources?

Because when I use nonislamic sources to discuss islam all the muslims on the site tell me that I have no right to use nonislamic sources. I would just love to do so, but everyone tells me I'm bad, and wrong.

There are a lot of creationists as well. Does that mean creationism is true. Argument from popularity is no indication of validity. And nor is spreading misinformation like this going to achieve anything. Addressing the facts, otoh, can actually lead to people realising that they are both misinformed and following a fallacy (as has been done in the case of female genital mutilation, quite successfully) Depends on what your aim is though, to merely spread hatred about a group or actually address their concerns and help educate them.

Good! Excellent! So you'll be calling up that islamic site and putting them on notice. Could you PM me a copy of your (imminent) email to them? I'm not arguing from popularity, but rather arguing: their political agenda is bad. Perhaps something should be done about it? Or now will you embrace their agenda, as you sometimes do, and tell me nothing should be done about it?

"Don't attack islam, attack the extremists! Wait, those guys aren't extremists, they're muslims! Don't attack islam!"

Etc, etc, ad nauseam.

 

[S.A.M.]

Like a muslim site that accessed the declassified documents of Mohammed? I haven't even read the book yet, or ordered it.

Please link me to this Muslim site

Because when I use nonislamic sources to discuss islam all the muslims on the site tell me that I have no right to use nonislamic sources. I would just love to do so, but everyone tells me I'm bad, and wrong.

Independent verification,you cannot use sources that use the Islamic sources, without verifying the claims.

Good! Excellent! So you'll be calling up that islamic site and putting them on notice. Could you PM me a copy of your (imminent) email to them? I'm not arguing from popularity, but rather arguing: their political agenda is bad. Perhaps something should be done about it? Or now will you embrace their agenda, as you sometimes do, and tell me nothing should be done about it?

Its the internet. you're supposed to use your brain. If you want that is.

"Don't attack islam, attack the extremists! Wait, those guys aren't extremists, they're muslims! Don't attack islam!"

So its not your purpose to educate then, merely to attack. Okay.:shrug:

 

[GeoffP]

Please link me to this Muslim site

The one Michael was talking about. Or any radical site.

Independent verification,you cannot use sources that use the Islamic sources, without verifying the claims.

And when they are, char-broil? What then?

Its the internet. you're supposed to use your brain. If you want that is.

I do; not everyone is so gifted, of course.

No, it's just that you spend so much of your time telling me how bad and evil I am, and how wrongly I'm interpreting islam. And yet, I've never oppressed a dhimmi, or hacked anyone's head off for insulting Mohammed or islam, or even for insulting their beard. I can only assume - since, as a moderate, you're strongly opposed to extremism - that you've been after these sorts of sites and opinions at least as hard as you criticize non-muslims for having, apparently, the same opinions as you. So I was just curious to see what you were going to write to this site to deter them from their misinterpretation that causes us silly kufr to misunderstand islam in an even worse way - by not killing or oppressing anyone, but rather just by protesting and criticising.

So its not your purpose to educate then, merely to attack. Okay.

LOL - ok, you keep believing that then. We must never criticize extremists, no matter what they say or do, toasty. It's only "education" if you support islam - whatever that entails at whatever level, but certainly extending as far as "don't ever criticize islam for any reason". Education, as you know, cannot ever be critical. There cannot be conflict. Why, even the ancient Greeks thought so! They never used argumentation to make a point. (Or rhetoric, for that matter.) Of course not.

So I guess my criticisms are entirely unjustified. The right path must be kept distinct from error, and critical analysis. And after all, it's not like anyone has ever been or is being oppressed in the name of your religion.

www.jihadwatch.org
www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch

No?

 

[S.A.M.]

The one Michael was talking about. Or any radical site.



And when they are, char-broil? What then?



I do; not everyone is so gifted, of course.

No, it's just that you spend so much of your time telling me how bad and evil I am, and how wrongly I'm interpreting islam. And yet, I've never oppressed a dhimmi, or hacked anyone's head off for insulting Mohammed or islam, or even for insulting their beard. I can only assume - since, as a moderate, you're strongly opposed to extremism - that you've been after these sorts of sites and opinions at least as hard as you criticize non-muslims for having, apparently, the same opinions as you. So I was just curious to see what you were going to write to this site to deter them from their misinterpretation that causes us silly kufr to misunderstand islam in an even worse way - by not killing or oppressing anyone, but rather just by protesting and criticising.



LOL - ok, you keep believing that then. We must never criticize extremists, no matter what they say or do, toasty. It's only "education" if you support islam - whatever that entails at whatever level, but certainly extending as far as "don't ever criticize islam for any reason". Education, as you know, cannot ever be critical. There cannot be conflict. Why, even the ancient Greeks thought so! They never used argumentation to make a point. (Or rhetoric, for that matter.) Of course not.

So I guess my criticisms are entirely unjustified. The right path must be kept distinct from error, and critical analysis. And after all, it's not like anyone has ever been or is being oppressed in the name of your religion.

www.jihadwatch.org
www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch

No?

Critcising Islam is as effective as the War on Terror; if you cannot grasp that, discussions are pointless; you cannot make war on a concept, you can only address facts; your own views are based on flimsy ground, how can you possibly convince anyone else? Its like going to a conference where a wannabe scientist is presenting facts that are based entirely on unpublished data and old wives tales. The initial response of anyone listening would be to wonder what they were doing there.

If you are going to argue about Islam on the basis that several people are uneducated as to the veracity of the "folk tales" and that radical sites are using them to promote their brand of extremism, my only response would be "Duh?" since I have already indicated that education is necessary, not criticism.

And please, an ex "Christian writer" with NO knowledge of Arabic writing on Islam? Its like going to an aborigine and asking him what he thinks of democratic capitalism.

Or worse

http://hgs.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/19/1/51

You did know your favorite Islamophobe is banned for hate speech?
I don't see any difference between him and Count Sudoko's favorite racist sites
Doing nothing but promoting hatred worldwide.

 

[GeoffP]

Critcising Islam is as effective as the War on Terror; if you cannot grasp that, discussions are pointless; you cannot make war on a concept, you can only address facts; your own views are based on flimsy ground, how can you possibly convince anyone else?

Are you alluding to your failure to address the issues with radicals on this basis? I agree that thus far the discussion has been pointless; but that is not my doing.

Its like going to a conference where a wannabe scientist is presenting facts that are based entirely on unpublished data and old wives tales. The initial response of anyone listening would be to wonder what they were doing there.

Unfortunately for your point, the fact of excess by political islam and its adherents is well established. It is not in any way an unsupported point - as even the odd "moderate" can be tricked into saying when the sun is particularly bright or the air thin.

If you are going to argue about Islam on the basis that several people are uneducated as to the veracity of the "folk tales" and that radical sites are using them to promote their brand of extremism, my only response would be "Duh?" since I have already indicated that education is necessary, not criticism.

And I reiterate: how are you educating these people? With your silence? Tacit approval? Tell me of your method so highly successful that it gives you time to argue with critics of islamic extremism instead of the extremists themselves. Perhaps your technique could then be replicated, to the gain of all.

And please, an ex "Christian writer" with NO knowledge of Arabic writing on Islam? Its like going to an aborigine and asking him what he thinks of democratic capitalism.

Ah! Argument from false authority. Only when you understand will you understand. Until you submit to islam, you may not criticize it; after you submit, you could simply be decapitated for it. You see, this is exactly what I was talking about before. By the same token, you have no authority to discuss naturalistic evolution with me, or to recite the shahada, which is an unsubstantiated slaner against a religion which - as you infer - muslims have no right to criticize since they have no knowledge thereof.

You did know your favorite Islamophobe is banned for hate speech?

:yawn: Revoked.

I don't see any difference between him and Count Sudoko's favorite racist sites
Doing nothing but promoting hatred worldwide.

By reporting on the excesses of political islam, and the liturgical support that extremists draw on from religious sources, to harm and oppress others. Yes, it's www.Jihadwatch.org that are the heinous ones.

 

[GeoffP]

And please, an ex "Christian writer" with NO knowledge of Arabic writing on Islam? Its like going to an aborigine and asking him what he thinks of democratic capitalism.

Actually, on second thought, I'm not going to let you walk so easily on this one.

You compare - and I assume the above is meant to be my caricature - me critcizing islam with an aborigine criticizing democratic capitalism. Perhaps the aborigine wouldn't be able to cite Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations, but he could certainly describe the negative effects of capitalism on him, his family and his society, if pertinent. And this is the scope of his concern with the system; as it impacts him and his system. I had thought that you previously were much supportive of the reaction of uncomplex, oppressed native peoples to their more organized, industrialized oppressors?

So this is my point, too: you can like the criticism, or lump it, as the Americans say.