Religious discussion - 1

[Oh Jerusalem]

Originally posted by klc
No one on earth has the same DNA as Jews - we are as unique as they come.

I assume you meant this metaphorically. Scientifically, I have never heard of any such thing, except in the case of Jewish Cohanim, the priestly descendants of Aharon:

http://www.aish.com/societywork/sciencenature/The_Cohanim_-_DNA_Connection.asp

When considerring the intermingling of the Erev Rav among Israel during the exodus from Egypt, as well as the acceptance of converts throughout several thousands of years, I doubt that it is possible to detect a distinct Jewish DNA sequence in non-priestly Jews.

[cerulean]

As Jews we know instinctively that "God" is within us and "God" is us. We are God and God is Me. God is not to be found on the streets or in a book, it is to be found within the Self. I am Jew: I am God. Jesus and Mohammed did not understand this. They saw their individuality as the path to God-realisation but they can never reach God. Why? Because their existance is based entirely on the hatred of the Jew. Islam believes that for Islam to be great, the Jew must die. This was the same ideology behind Hitler's Holocaust. That ideology in itself evolved from Christian countries, which evolved from... Jesus. The two stumbling blocks to world peace are Jesus and Mohammed.

People thinking they are gods is somewhat problematic I think. I am not sure I fully understand your philosophy in this respect. Of course there are major theological problems from a traditional standpoint, but from the practical point of view, numerous problems would arise if people thought they were gods and acted as such.

I'm not sure I'd say Jesus and Muhammed are the main stumbling blocks to world peace. They're long gone. It's what their followers are saying about them that has been and currently is problematic.

[klc]

I have seen statistical evidence that all Cohen's are related and there is a DNA strain that's is a marker of full-blood Jews and people born to Jewish mothers; unfortunately I do not have the links available (on my other PC and I deleted system32.. oops!)

I remember seeing something on National Geographic a few months back, about a tribe of black African Ethiopeans who claimed to be Jewish. When they had their DNA tested and compared to Cohen's DNA, which is about as pure as you can get, the same marker that can identify Jews even after dilution was found.

Common traits are found within DNA between everyone, of course, but there is one particular strand that defines a "Jew".

People are unwilling to admit to that for fear of 'branding' the Jews as a race of people and thus being forced to admit atrocitues up to and including genocide were commited on them. How many people refute the idea that the Holocaust even happened? How many people would wish to deny the Jews Israel because they claim Jews are not a race but instead a religious sect?

We are all Jewish and as such must enact our right to a secure and free homeland.

The world must listen.

Shalom

[Oh Jerusalem]

Originally posted by klc
As Jews we know instinctively that "God" is within us and "God" is us. We are God and God is Me. God is not to be found on the streets or in a book, it is to be found within the Self. I am Jew: I am God.

I didn't see this until now.

As an Orthodox religiously educated Jew, I find your words above repugnant, if taken at face value.

Either clarify what you meant or quote some legitimate references.

[Oh Jerusalem]

Originally posted by klc
I have seen statistical evidence that all Cohen's are related

Fine. I even brought a link (one of many) as a sample reference.

and there is a DNA strain that's is a marker of full-blood Jews and people born to Jewish mothers; unfortunately I do not have the links available (on my other PC and I deleted system32.. oops!)[/B]

Why don't you search for it on the WEB and post the links back here.

[christian]

Originally posted by muslim4israel2
One day we will unite like in the past, a field a force of 400 million warriors to crush you like we should have those centuries ago. Our weakness coincided with our disunity and that is a matter of time before we scale up our Arabian Peninsula lands to swallow an illegitimate state of wall dwellers.

The age of Christendom ended in 1453, post that it was nationalistic empires in the west. France fought many christian armies, as did UK, ect. The days of a united Christen empire were gloriously ended by Sultan Mehmet al Fatih, in 1453.

The world shall come under our rule again.

MUSLIM 4 Israel

This shows how the average muslim think.
How the f*** you call your relgion is a peace religion? When you are starting a conquest?

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by klc
muslim4israel2

Racism has been pinned on you, you just don't want to admit it. Racism is prejudice - prejudice of believing that a particular person, due to his birth, is wrong. If someone was born a certain way - Jewish, for example - then believing that the individual is wrong for [b]being Jewish, that is racism. That is what you and 99% of all muslims believe (christians too)

What's this

ok, whatever. I take it you're in the UK, let's meet up homeboy and show each other who's boss.. I don't fancy your chances hickery bub, Asians like yourself are of a slight frame and of slight mind. You can't even spell properly! Contrast that to someone like me - a 6'2, 16-stone intellectual Jew. Put simply, your verbal and physical dexterity can only falter under self-induced morbousity; you have neither the intelligence nor desire to promulgate; your arguments are entirely false; you're a denigrator. I would destroy you and Mohammed in a blink of an eye but I believe you have a right to exist.

Please don't refer to all the asians. Many japanese , chinese and korea are secular pro-christian.
Especially, south korea is a secular pro-christian state .

[christian]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by klc
I have seen statistical evidence that all Cohen's are related and there is a DNA strain that's is a marker of full-blood Jews and people born to Jewish mothers; unfortunately I do not have the links available (on my other PC and I deleted system32.. oops!)

I remember seeing something on National Geographic a few months back, about a tribe of black African Ethiopeans who claimed to be Jewish. When they had their DNA tested and compared to Cohen's DNA, which is about as pure as you can get, the same marker that can identify Jews even after dilution was found.

Common traits are found within DNA between everyone, of course, but there is one particular strand that defines a "Jew".

People are unwilling to admit to that for fear of 'branding' the Jews as a race of people and thus being forced to admit atrocitues up to and including genocide were commited on them. How many people refute the idea that the Holocaust even happened? How many people would wish to deny the Jews Israel because they claim Jews are not a race but instead a religious sect?

We are all Jewish and as such must enact our right to a secure and free homeland.




[B]Yes. I admit the Jewish people is the smartest race in the world.
That is why people want to kill them, because of jeolousy.

[Oh Jerusalem]

Originally posted by christian
I admit the Jewish people is the smartest race in the world.


As one of the targets of your kindly intended remarks, I have to tell you that I resent what you're saying.

There are hundreds of millions of intelligent people in the world of all shapes and sizes. I know of no monopoly of intelligence by Jews nor have I ever seen the scores of a world-wide IQ test that proves your point.

[christian]

I can write you all the names of jews who change the course of history in this world. They are the leaders. They shape the idea of modern world today.

look at this link. This is no BS.

http://www.yahoodi.com/famous/famstart.html

[Oh Jerusalem]

Karl Marx was a Jew and I was highly unimpressed about the fact.

Come to think of it, the same can be said for Shimon Peres. :p

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by cerulean


People thinking they are gods is somewhat problematic I think. I am not sure I fully understand your philosophy in this respect. Of course there are major theological problems from a traditional standpoint, but from the practical point of view, numerous problems would arise if people thought they were gods and acted as such.

I'm not sure I'd say Jesus and Muhammed are the main stumbling blocks to world peace. They're long gone. It's what their followers are saying about them that has been and currently is problematic.

Here comes my ignorance. It has always been my understanding that Jesus has just returned home. I mean wasn’t he supposed to have been alive when he descended into the heavens. Catholics as I understand it sort of interchanges g-d with Jesus so in a way they are one and the same.

As far as Mohammed goes can you really say anyone is gone if their legacy still remains? I would certainly say that the two would most likely be remembered until the end.

As far as everyone being g-ds all I can say is to each his own. So if anyone wants to believe that Jews are all g-ds it doesn’t bother me.

[Shuki]

Originally posted by Oh Jerusalem


I didn't see this until now.



As an Orthodox religiously educated Jew, I find your words above repugnant, if taken at face value.

Either clarify what you meant or quote some legitimate references.

I have to agree with you, I do not support KLC's statement. From a personal standpoint I don't care what you believe, we are all equal, no person is better than another based upon religion only.

[L@mplighterM]

Yes. I admit the Jewish people is the smartest race in the world.
That is why people want to kill them, because of jeolousy.

Everything is relative and what does being smart mean?

Being smart sometimes doesn’t have a lasting effect.

Take for example the emergence of super bugs.

I think one could argue that the discovery of penicillin has benefited humanity perhaps more than anything else.

So one could certainly say that the discoverer was smart. Now humanity is facing a tremendous threat from bacteria that are anti-biotic resistant.

How will that play out? Who knows? It might turn out to be the worst discovery that man has ever made. At the time the discoverer was smart but what if it ends up costing more human lives in the end?

[Shuki]

Originally posted by Oh Jerusalem


Just curious. Are you Jewish (I assume yes by the name)? Orthodox?

Yep, I am MOT. I fell off of the derech a long time ago and haven't quite made it back. So I would not qualify myself as Orthodox- kind of somewhere betweeen Conservative and Frumland really.

[Oh Jerusalem]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
I think one could argue that the discovery of penicillin has benefited humanity perhaps more than anything else.

Penicillin was discovered by Sir Alexander Fleming but its implementation as a drug was the discovery of Howard Florey and Ernst Chain, the latter being Jewish refugee who fled Nazi Germany.

Well, one outta 3 ain't bad. :p

No points intended to be proven.

[klc]

If you look at world history, proportion-wise (ie number of Jews versus native population), Jews have advanced the modern world more than any other race of people.

Earlier, my mistake, I meant Muslims, not Asians. Apologies all round.

To clarify:

As Jews we know instinctively that "God" is within us and "God" is us. We are God and God is Me. God is not to be found on the streets or in a book, it is to be found within the Self. I am Jew: I am God.

Human consciousness, by its very definition, must have been divinely created and thus can only be divine in nature. Conscious awareness means that an individual, aware of his being, knows that he is seperate from himself and must therefore be creator in order for himself to exist.

On further reflection, one must contemplate the meaning of existance to come to an answer. If one is aware that he is he - I am I and not you - then that individual individuality, individual existance, can only be the gift of God - the creator of all. If one sees existance in terms of the human condition (feelings, thoughts, emotions), that is the gift of God, the gift to be able to experience and evolve. Knowing that one exists entirely within the framework of oneself, one cannot grow. There must be additional input to ones life in order for one's life to evolve. That input is to be found in God, the creator of all existance. But where is God to be found? Is God found in the heavens? no, a big empty vacuum and lots of stars live there. Is God found in a book? no, the book was written by humans and therefore carries human mistakes. God, by deduction, can only be found within oneself. That is not to say that one individual has the power of God (create the whole universe), but one can have the power of HUMAN Gods. God, as Humans know it, is a creation of the Human mind. So where does that inspirational idea that God exists come from? God. God, inside yourself. God is within you, but God is also external. God externally created the world and internally created you. God is Human, Human is God. Jews, knowledgable of this fact, automatically assume that God is within themselves and simultaneously outside. The two major religions in this conflict - Christianity and Islam - fail in "reaching" God, because the followers worship Jesus and Mohammed - fallable humans. That is where the mistake lies. To know God, one must have a firm belief in the internal and external creation of life, know that God is everything that ever was and ever is, and know that God is within you at all times.

If I know I exist, what gives me the knowledge to know that I am I? Do I give myself that knowledge? On the surface level, yes. But what gives me the knowledge to know that I am I? "God", "Being", "Allah", whatever. The Creator creates all knowledge.

Human Being is God unto himself, and as such can create whatever he desires in Human form. That is the gift of God, the ability to realise oneself fully.

[L@mplighterM]

There must be additional input to ones life in order for one's life to evolve. That input is to be found in God, the creator of all existance. But where is God to be found? Is God found in the heavens? no, a big empty vacuum and lots of stars live there. Is God found in a book? no, the book was written by humans and therefore carries human mistakes. God, by deduction, can only be found within oneself. That is not to say that one individual has the power of God (create the whole universe), but one can have the power of HUMAN Gods. God, as Humans know it, is a creation of the Human mind.

That doesn’t sound too different from “Free Will” are you then saying that this common denominator binds Christianity and Judaism together? Although both religions in my opinion share the concept of fatalism I would argue that the two (free will and fatalism) are diametrically opposite.

On the other hand I believe that “Fatalism” is further entrenched in Islam and Buddhism.

If you give the concept that G_d is a creation of the human mind I believe that you’ll find that it’s not the case. Without further elaboration I’ll just say that it’s a quest that you’ll have to make yourself.

[L@mplighterM]

Penicillin was discovered by Sir Alexander Fleming but its implementation as a drug was the discovery of Howard Florey and Ernst Chain, the latter being Jewish refugee who fled Nazi Germany.

Well, one outta 3 ain't bad.

No points intended to be proven.


Wish I had all the answers and names at my fingertips.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by NewsGuy
How about taking this religious discussion to the Religion section?

I was going to suggest that myself. Thanks!

[klc]

...If you give the concept that G_d is a creation of the human mind I believe that you’ll find that it’s not the case. Without further elaboration I’ll just say that it’s a quest that you’ll have to make yourself. [/B]

I've updated the post, I think you'll find the last 2 paragraphs complete the theory nicely!

[klc]

I'm not happy with that conclusion though.

I'm going to prove to you in incredibly simple terms that Man created God and Man is God.

This is pure science and religion crossover

(Get ready with the algebra..)



"Self" is Human Beings, individual people, persons with souls

"God" is God/Creator/Being

"Reality" is the world around us; existance, creation, life itself.

"Self" = a

"God" = b

"Reality" = c


I propose that a = b + c

Self = God + Reality

That the Self is the creator of God, the Universe and Everything

Using my equation, Reality can be expressed as:

c = a - b

Reality = Self - God

That means if, as most of the West believes, there is no God, then removing God from the equation means:

c = a

Reality = Self

hence Man is God.

Not so, I hear you say. That leads to the next logical conclusion that God is REAL and is the creator of all:

b = a - c

God = Self - Reality

Which means God (b) is Man - Reality (a - c), but Reality is the creation of God anyway, so God = Man - God (b = a - b) which one can only conclude that God = Man:

b = a

Not so again, you say! God is not man! So who is man? Man is man.

Self = God + Reality

a = b + c

so Man is Man or Self is Self:

a = a

If a = a
then Self = Self

and

If a = b + c
then Self = God + Reality

so

a = a(a + b + c)

or Human = Human x Human

That is to say, Human gives life to Human; Human creates life; Human is God, Human is Creator, Human is the Universe, Human is supreme being.[/quote]

Compare that to the present day conflict,

a = Israel
b = Solution
c = Peace

Everyone wants a Solution (b) to this conflict:

b = a - c

Which means that the Solution (b) has to happen before Peace (c). That clearly isn't going to happen, what with neither side willing to compromise. The compromise is Israel's very land, the full right of Israel to exist; Israel in its entirety secure in itself with no outside threat from anyone - Israel (a)

So we want Peace.

c = a - b

Which means for Peace (c) to ensue, Israel (a) must go without a solution (b); as I said, c = a - b. That cannot happen. There must be a solution to this crisis immediatly.

So what option is left? Israel must exist. Israel (a) wants a Solution (b) in order to achieve Peace (c). a = b + c.

So where does the solution come from? America (d) or UK (e) or France (f) or Germany (g) or Holland (h) or Italy (i)??? Too many countries that aren't directly involved. The only solution can come from Israel (a):

a = b

a = c

Israel = Solution

Israel = Peace

So does Israel know the solution? Of course it does.

a = (a + b + c)

or

a = (a + b + c)

Israel (a) is the creator of Israel (a), the creator of the Solution (b) and the creator of Peace (c); Israel = Israel; Israel must and can only exist.

It's logical, ethical and mathematically correct.

Israel has the right to exist! It already does - us Jews wouldn't be here if Israel did not already exist. It exists in our minds and in our hearts, we must work together to make it a reality.

Peace everyone

[Oh Jerusalem]

Originally posted by klc
It's logical, ethical and mathematically correct.

Unless your initial proposition, Self = God + Reality, is bologna in the first place.

I'll bet you can do wonders with NY Times crossword puzzles.

[L@mplighterM]

I'm outa here.

[klc]

Unless your initial proposition, Self = God + Reality, is bologna in the first place.

I'll bet you can do wonders with NY Times crossword puzzles.

True, but given contemporary definitions of "Man", "God" and "Reality", my theory solves the infinite loop.
______________________________________________

Further to that, if we were to say that Israel can only be defined by who lives there (Jews) and its land (Israel in its entirety), as in

Israel = a
Jews = b
Land = c

Then we can say

a = b + c

Proof:

If the Arab world had its way, Jews would no longer live in Israel. That means

a = c

or

Israel = Land

Which means the scrap of land they're fighting for is no more holy than my back garden.

The other Arab plan is to create West Bank/Gaza as seperate autonomous states. That means letting Islam into Israel:

a = b

or

Israel = Jew

Which means that Israel is only Israel if it is a Jewish state. Therefore,

a = b + c

or

Israel = Jew + Land

Israel as we know it, our homeland, must be complete and free from Islam in order to exist. What has binded us Jews together the past 3,000 years of the Diaspora? The dream of Israel, that one day Israel will exist ("Next year in Jerusalem!"). Israel can only exist if it is free from Islam and is a complete Jewish state secure in its boundaries, free from Islamic threat.

Islam cannot exist in Israel for Israel to exist:

c = a - b

or

Land (Palestine) = Israel - Jew

Palestine means the destruction of Israel as a unified country - Israel minus the Jew. In Israel's place will be Islam in the form of occupied territories. That will constantly threaten Jewish security and give chances time and time again for Islam to destroy Israel. Islam cannot be in Israel. If Israel were not to exist, then Islam and Palestine will:

(b + c) - a

(Jew + Land) - Israel

which means that if Jews can live on the land as well as Muslims, then Israel will no longer exist; it will be a new Islamic/Jewish state (lets call that D). So

(b + c) - a = D

which means that this new cr*p will exist; Israel will no longer exist, and us Jews will still be stuck in the Diaspora WAITING for a homeland.
______________________________________________

While I'm at it, I think I'll prove that Jew = God.

If

Jew = a
Human = b
Israel = c

We said that Human = Human x Human (Theory 1, first theory I made).

Israel = Jew + Land (Theory 2, directly above)

Jew = UNKNOWN. Who are we Jews?

I propose that for a Jew to be complete, he must be both Human and have Israel as his home.

"Human" means alive and not dead;

"Israel" means land complete with Jewish ownership, no Islam controlling parts of Israel.

so once again

a = b + c

Jew = Human + Israel

If death to Jews occured (Jihad and the Muslim world's plan)

then

a = c

or

Jew = Israel

and Muslim's plan will be complete; they will own Israel and the Jew will be no more.

If Israel were to no longer exist, ie, Muslims take control of Palestine (and eventually Israel proper) then

a = b

or

Jew = Human

Jew is alive, is Human, but will not be complete. Jew will not have Israel; it is the trilogy that enables the Jew to exist:

Jew = Human + Israel

a = b + c

or

Jew = Life + Land

and what created both Life and Land?

God. God gave existance to the life of humans and gave existance to the World, the Universe, and the Land we walk on.

Jew = God

Jew = God

a = (a + b + c)

then

a = a (a + b + c)

or

Jew = Jew x Jew

But given that Jew = God, that also means that

God = God x God

thus

a = a (a + b + c)

so

God = God

or

Jew = Jew

so

a = (a + b + c)

and

God = Jew

I thank you

[Oh Jerusalem]

Originally posted by klc
True, but given contemporary definitions of "Man", "God" and "Reality", my theory solves the infinite loop.

Life's a dictionary.

Right.

I'm outta here, too!

[klc]

Life's a dictionary.

Right.

I'm outta here, too!

Dictionaries are booka of knowledge; they define words as they've been used up until the moment the dictionary was created.

Let me complete the theory once and for all!

If Jew = God + Reality

then a = b + c

we'll use this as our basis.

If a = b + c

then b = a - c

and c = a - b

so God = Jew - Reality

and Reality = Jew - God

Therefore

c + b = a

and

b + c = a

so

Reality + God = Jew

and

God + Reality = Jew

Therefore

a = b = c

or

Jew = God = Reality

so

a = (a + b + c)

or

Jew = (Jew + God + Reality)

so

a = a

thus

a = (a + b + c)

so

a = a

so

a = a (a + b + c)

=

a - a = (a + b + c)

thus

aa = (a + b + c)

so Jew x Jew = Jew

thus

a = a

and

a = (a + b + c)

so

aa = (a + b + c)

Thus Jew must have existed before Jew did; Jew is the creator of himself, the creator of his God, and the creator of his reality.

Case closed.

[mrbaggins]

You cannot use unlike terms in equations.

Therefore... you are wrong :)

[Annaliese]

In Australia, Norway, Sweden and other Western nations, there is a distinct race-based crime in motion being ignored by the diversity police: Islamic men are raping Western women for ethnic reasons. We know this because the rapists have openly declared their sectarian motivations.

When a number of teenage Australian girls were subjected to hours of sexual degradation during a spate of gang rapes in Sydney that occurred between 1998 and 2002, the perpetrators of these assaults framed their rationale in ethnic terms. The young victims were informed that they were “sluts” and “Aussie pigs” while they were being hunted down and abused.

In Australia's New South Wales Supreme Court in December 2005, a visiting Pakistani rapist testified that his victims had no right to say no, because they were not wearing a headscarf.

And earlier this year Australians were outraged when Lebanese Sheik Faiz Mohammed gave a lecture in Sydney where he informed his audience that rape victims had no one to blame but themselves. Women, he said, who wore skimpy clothing, invited men to rape them.

A few months earlier, in Copenhagen, Islamic mufti and scholar, Shahid Mehdi created uproar when – like his peer in Australia – he stated that women who did not wear a headscarf were asking to be raped.

And with haunting synchronicity in 2004, the London Telegraph reported that visiting Egyptian scholar Sheik Yusaf al-Qaradawi claimed female rape victims should be punished if they were dressed immodestly when they were raped. He added, “For her to be absolved from guilt, a raped woman must have shown good conduct.”

In Norway and Sweden, journalist Fjordman warns of a rape epidemic. Police Inspector Gunnar Larsen stated that the steady increase of rape-cases and the link to ethnicity are clear, unmistakable trends. Two out of three persecutions for rape in Oslo are immigrants with a non-Western background and 80 percent of the victims are Norwegian women.

In Sweden, according to translator for Jihad Watch, Ali Dashti, “Gang rapes, usually involving Muslim immigrant males and native Swedish girls, have become commonplace.” A few weeks ago she said, “Five Kurds brutally raped a 13-year-old Swedish girl.”

In France, Samira Bellil broke her silence – after enduring years of repeated gang rapes in one of the Muslim populated public housing projects – and wrote a book, In the hell of the tournantes, that shocked France. Describing how gang rape is rampant in the banlieues, she explained to Time that, “any neighborhood girl who smokes, uses makeup or wears attractive clothes is a whore.”

Unfortunately, Western women are not the only victims in this epidemic. In Indonesia, in 1998, human rights groups documented the testimony of over 100 Chinese women who were gang raped during the riots that preceded the fall of President Suharto. Many of them were told: “You must be raped, because you are Chinese and non-Muslim.”

Christian Solidarity Worldwide reported that in April 2005, a 9-year-old Pakistani girl was raped, beaten with a cricket bat, hanged upside down from the ceiling, had spoonfuls of chillies poured into her mouth, and repeatedly bashed while handcuffed. Her Muslim neighbours told her they were taking revenge for the American bombing of Iraqi children and informed her they were doing it because she was an “infidel and a Christian.”

In Sudan – where Arab Muslims slaughter black Muslim and Christian Sudanese in an ongoing genocide – former Sudanese slave and now a human rights’ activist Simon Deng says he witnessed girls and women being raped and that the Arab regime of Khartoum sends its soldiers to the field to rape and murder. In other reports, women who are captured by government forces are asked; “Are you Christian or Muslim?” and those who answer Christian, are gang raped before having their breasts cut off.

This phenomenon of Islamic sexual violence against women should be treated as the urgent, violent, repressive epidemic it is. Instead, journalists, academics, and politicians ignore it, rationalize it, or ostracize those who dare discuss it.

In Australia, when journalist Paul Sheehan reported honestly on the Sydney gang rapes, he was called a racist and accused of stirring up anti-Muslim hatred. And when he reported in his Sydney Morning Herald column that there was a high incidence of crime amongst Sydney’s Lebanese community, fellow journalist, David Marr sent him an e-mail stating, “That is a disgraceful column that reflects poorly on us all at the Herald.”

Keysar Trad, vice-president of the Australian Lebanese Muslim Association said the gang rapes were a “heinous” crime but complained it was “rather unfair” that the ethnicity of the rapists had been reported.

Journalist Miranda Devine reported during the same rape trials that all reference to ethnicity had been deleted from the victim impact statement because the prosecutors wanted to negotiate a plea bargain.

So when Judge Megan Latham declared, “There is no evidence before me of any racial element in the commission of these offences,” everyone believed her. And the court, the politicians and most of the press may as well have raped the girls again.

<paragraphs cut to keep within word limit>

In France, in the banlieues, where gang rape is now known simply as tournantes or ‘pass-around,’ victims know the police will not protect them. If they complain, Samir Bellil said, they know that they and their families will be threatened.

However, Muslim women in the French ghettos are finally fighting back against gang rape and police non-action. They have begun a movement called, “We’re neither whores nor doormats.” They are struggling against the intrinsic violence that plagues their neighbourhoods and the culture that condones it.

In most French prosecutions, the Muslim rapists state that they do not believe they have committed a crime. And in a frightening parallel with the gang rapists in Australia, they claim the victim herself is to blame and accuse her of being a “slut” or a “whore.”

According to The Guardian, during the recent French riots, a Saudi Prince with shares in News Corporation boasted to a conference in Dubai that he had phoned Rupert Murdoch and complained about Fox News describing the disturbances as “Muslim riots.” Within half an hour he said, it was changed to “civil riots.”

Swedish translator, Ali Dashti, stated that in Sweden when three men raped a 22-year-old woman recently, they said one word to her. “Whore.” Such stories, according to Dashti, are in the Swedish newspapers every week. And, the politically correct “take great care not to mention the ethnic background of the perpetrators.”

Sweden’s English newspaper The Local reported in July that Malmo police commander Bengt Lindström had been charged with inciting racial hatred. He sent e-mails from his home computer to two city officials. To the head of healthcare, he wrote: “You...treat old Swedes who have worked hard building up the fatherland like parasites and would rather give my taxes to criminals called Mohammed from Rosengärd.”

In Malmo, the third largest city in Sweden, the police have admitted, Dashti says, that they no longer control the city. “It is effectively ruled by violent gangs of Muslim immigrants.” Ambulance personnel are regularly attacked and spat upon and are now refusing to help until a police escort arrives. The police are too afraid to enter parts of the city without backup.

In early 2005, Norwegian newspapers reported that Oslo had recorded the highest ever number of rape cases in the previous twelve months. However, Fjordman explained, the official statistics contained no data regarding “how immigrants were grossly over represented in rape cases”, and the media remain so strangely silent.

Oslo Professor of Anthropology, Unni Wikan, said Norwegian women must take responsibility for the fact that Muslim men find their manner of dress provocative. And since these men believe women are responsible for rape, she stated, the women must adapt to the multicultural society around them.

The BBC pulled a documentary scheduled for screening in 2004, after police in Britain warned it could increase racial tension. “In these exceptional circumstances... Channel 4 as a responsible broadcaster has agreed to the police’s request...” The documentary was to show how Pakistani and other Muslim men sexually abused young, white English girls as young as 11.

The number of rapes committed by Muslim men against women in the last decade is so incredibly high that it cannot be viewed as anything other than culturally implicit behaviour. It is overtly reinforced and sanctioned by Islamic religious leaders who blame the victims and excuse the rapists.

In three decades of immigration into Western countries, Islam has caused social upheaval and havoc in every one of its host countries. No other immigration program has encountered the problems of non-assimilation and religious ambiguity.

Everywhere in the world, Muslims are in conflict with their neighbours. And as Mark Steyn recently said, every conflict appears to have originated by someone with the name Mohammed.

<paragraphs cut to keep within word limit>

The complete article is here: http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20646

[Ossian]

"The BBC pulled a documentary scheduled for screening in 2004, after police in Britain warned it could increase racial tension. “In these exceptional circumstances... Channel 4 as a responsible broadcaster has agreed to the police’s request...” The documentary was to show how Pakistani and other Muslim men sexually abused young, white English girls as young as 11."

That is true but i don't think it presents the whole picture. It was pulled because there had only recently been race riots and mass street fights between Asian and White youths in the areas featured in the documentary. Also, i think it was wrong to ban it because it gave the B.N.P publicity who then used the banned documentary in their campaign ads. Like "The truth they don't want you to know" or summink. :rolleyes:

[Cato]

"The BBC pulled a documentary scheduled for screening in 2004, after police in Britain warned it could increase racial tension. “In these exceptional circumstances... Channel 4 as a responsible broadcaster has agreed to the police’s request...” The documentary was to show how Pakistani and other Muslim men sexually abused young, white English girls as young as 11."

That is true but i don't think it presents the whole picture. It was pulled because there had only recently been race riots and mass street fights between Asian and White youths in the areas featured in the documentary. Also, i think it was wrong to ban it because it gave the B.N.P publicity who then used the banned documentary in their campaign ads. Like "The truth they don't want you to know" or summink. :rolleyes:

So Britainia has abandoned the we can deal with anything spirit of Winstin Churchil for a cowardly hear nothing we don't want to know and hope it doesn't hurt us too much.

[rhodescholar]

Dont worry or fret too much people, the mass expulsions are just around the corner.

A few more riots and suicide bombings in major euro cities, and the incrementalism of mass deportations will start to get more mainstream discussion. A few more attacks after that - which are, of course, completely inevitable - and the party will begin.

[Ossian]

So Britainia has abandoned the we can deal with anything spirit of Winstin Churchil for a cowardly hear nothing we don't want to know and hope it doesn't hurt us too much.


I don't think so...as the original post said, it was the police who advised the that documentary be shelved. I trust them to make that judgement as it is the police who had to try and stop white and Asian youths from killing each other. What was the alternative?

[Annaliese]

Dont worry or fret too much people, the mass expulsions are just around the corner.

A few more riots and suicide bombings in major euro cities, and the incrementalism of mass deportations will start to get more mainstream discussion. A few more attacks after that - which are, of course, completely inevitable - and the party will begin.

Agreed.


For those posters concentrating on the British pulling the documentary as opposed to its substance, here's a little excerpt concerning the lovely home of Neville Chamberlain:

Just for starters, the memorandum proves the falsity of the common perception that the creation of Israel was a project of Western colonialism. The Nation shows that during the half year prior to the all-out Arab invasion on May 15, when Britain was responsible for security in its Palestine Mandate territory, it incited, micro-managed and did public relations work for a campaign of Arab troop infiltration and terror.

The intelligence documents cited below show that before the Arab invasion, British intelligence knew that the Arabs terrorizing the future Israel were being led in part by Nazi advisers. These included Bosnian Muslims from the infamous Handzar Division of the Waffen SS. According to a French intelligence document published by The Nation seven months later, the British sent thousands of Nazi prisoners of war, including top war criminals, to assist the Arab attack. This was after the Arab invasion. [1]

Consistent with British tolerance for and apparent employment of Nazi war criminals against new-born Israel, the Nation memorandum shows that the British adopted a propaganda line reminiscent of the Nazis' "Jewish-Bolshevik plot" motif. The British accused Jewish Holocaust survivors trying to get to Palestine of being Soviet Communist infiltrators. A 1948 article in the London Times shows that Arab leaders were saying the same thing:

[Text of London Times article starts here. To view scanned image of article, go to http://emperor.vwh.net/history/ltmay748.htm]


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php?id=5601

[Ossian]

Agreed.


1.For those posters concentrating on the British pulling the documentary as opposed to its substance, here's a little excerpt concerning the lovely home of Neville Chamberlain:

2.Just for starters, the memorandum proves the falsity of the common perception that the creation of Israel was a project of Western colonialism. The Nation shows that during the half year prior to the all-out Arab invasion on May 15, when Britain was responsible for security in its Palestine Mandate territory, it incited, micro-managed and did public relations work for a campaign of Arab troop infiltration and terror.

The intelligence documents cited below show that before the Arab invasion, British intelligence knew that the Arabs terrorizing the future Israel were being led in part by Nazi advisers. These included Bosnian Muslims from the infamous Handzar Division of the Waffen SS. According to a French intelligence document published by The Nation seven months later, the British sent thousands of Nazi prisoners of war, including top war criminals, to assist the Arab attack. This was after the Arab invasion. [1]

Consistent with British tolerance for and apparent employment of Nazi war criminals against new-born Israel, the Nation memorandum shows that the British adopted a propaganda line reminiscent of the Nazis' "Jewish-Bolshevik plot" motif. The British accused Jewish Holocaust survivors trying to get to Palestine of being Soviet Communist infiltrators. A 1948 article in the London Times shows that Arab leaders were saying the same thing:

[Text of London Times article starts here. To view scanned image of article, go to http://emperor.vwh.net/history/ltmay748.htm]


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php?id=5601

1. I think you mean me? I'm commenting on the British pulling the documentary because i'm British. As for the content...what do you want me to say? That paedophilia and rape are wrong? I kind of took it for granted that we all knew that.

2. What has this to do with Britain and its race relations in the 21st century? Britain and America are both guilty of paranoia regarding Communism at the start, and all throughout, the cold war. Mr Winston Churchill who is often quoted on this forum and in this thread as an outstanding example of Britishness said the same thing regarding Bolsheveiks did'nt he? :rolleyes: I'd say it seems your info is unsubstantiated and seems to be mostly anti-British propaganda. I will also keep an eye out for the next time someone uses info from The Times ot London Times to prove Britain is anti semitic. ;)

N.B. It is a lovely home, Neville Chamberlain not-withstanding. :)

[Annaliese]

Ossian,

1. Honestly, I didn't even notice you are British. It seemed a couple of posters had taken the thread as one about censorship rather than its title. Yep, we all know that sorta stuff is wrong...........however, I find it most unsettling when the 'politically correct' refuse to acknowledge it..........almost more galling to me is how much of the women's movement will overlook atrocities against us as long as they take place in certain 'politically correct' countries/cultures.

2. Rashomon: I didn't mean anything anti-British and I am sadly aware that America is certainly also guilty of paranoia regarding communism. All I intended when I ran across the original article was to post some more of the heinous acts perpetrated in the name of Islam and I ended up posting something else which I suppose I shouldn't have which was actually posted because of something another member wrote, i.e. "So Britainia has abandoned the we can deal with anything spirit of Winstin Churchill for a cowardly hear nothing we don't want to know and hope it doesn't hurt us too much." Apologies to all!

That Britain looks to be a lovely home goes without saying. ;)

[Ossian]

I apologise for being touchy. I wanted to make the point that the dreaded 'Its Political correctness Gone Wrong' mantra does'nt in my view, apply in this case. When we look into the reasoning behind such moves like the banning of the documentary in the U.K, we can see that it is a purely commonsense decision made to keep an already poisonous atmosphere of hate from both sides spilling over yet again into violence, which helps no one.

What interests me is that the B.N.P. raised a great stink about the, albeit serious, issues raised in this documentary. What a lot of people may not be aware of is that much of the B.N.P hierachy who claimed 'righteous indignation' have themselves been imprisoned for rape and sexual battery. This documentary was in danger of being used, not as a method of highlighting dangers to young girls in the North of England (so that something could be done about it), but rather as a tool for racism and an extreme right wing agenda.

To be honest i dont understand the reasoning behind the thread in general. Of course some rapists and peodphiles are Muslim men. There is no reason for these to be excluded from general censure. But this seems to me to label Islam as a whole for this, rather than the men themselves.

[Annaliese]

To be honest i dont understand the reasoning behind the thread in general. Of course some rapists and peodphiles are Muslim men. There is no reason for these to be excluded from general censure. But this seems to me to label Islam as a whole for this, rather than the men themselves.

If you don't understand the reasoning behind the thread in general, you needn't have responded to it. (my turn to be 'touchy' :D )

Islam does have a problem with the way it views and treats women: surely, you know that.

Here's a couple of old articles, so I guess I am blaming Islam (ducking and running now...........):

http://www.muslimtents.com/sistersinislam/PressStatements/06042000.htm

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5676

and, from Simon of IF: http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=2822

[Leon]

Dont worry or fret too much people, the mass expulsions are just around the corner.

A few more riots and suicide bombings in major euro cities, and the incrementalism of mass deportations will start to get more mainstream discussion. A few more attacks after that - which are, of course, completely inevitable - and the party will begin.

Aint never going to happen. The West (especially Eurabia) is scared of muslims and offending the Islamic world.

[Ossian]

1.If you don't understand the reasoning behind the thread in general, you needn't have responded to it. (my turn to be 'touchy' :D )

2. Islam does have a problem with the way it views and treats women: surely, you know that.

Here's a couple of old articles, so I guess I am blaming Islam (ducking and running now...........):

http://www.muslimtents.com/sistersinislam/PressStatements/06042000.htm

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5676

and, from Simon of IF: http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=2822

1.. Yup i'm having a very boring Christmas holiday i guess!

2. I find it hard to blame a religion for these wicked things. They are part of very old ingrained cultural thinking. I know plenty of muslims who decry them as basically that. Of course misogyny is present in the Quran, but it is also present in the bible. I don't see the need to blame Christianity any time some Brit wants to use his wife as a punch bag. Thats my two pennorth. i won't hijack your thread. :)

[Rune]

Muslim Rape Epidemic in Sweden and Norway - Authorities Look the Other Way (http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/02/muslim-rape-epidemic-in-sweden-and.html)

Rape: Nothing to do with Islam? (http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/08/rape-nothing-to-do-with-islam.html)

The Norwegian Government - Covering Up Immigrant Rapes (http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/07/norwegian-government-covering-up.html)

[Annaliese]

Muslim Rape Epidemic in Sweden and Norway - Authorities Look the Other Way (http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/02/muslim-rape-epidemic-in-sweden-and.html)

Rape: Nothing to do with Islam? (http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/08/rape-nothing-to-do-with-islam.html)

The Norwegian Government - Covering Up Immigrant Rapes (http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/07/norwegian-government-covering-up.html)

Thank you, Rune!

From the second link: "...I disagree that this has nothing to do with Islam. Muhammad himself had forced sex (rape) with several of his slave girls/concubines. This is perfectly allowed, both in the sunna and in the Koran. If you postulate that many of the Muslims in Europe view themselves as a conquering army and that European women are simply war booty, it all makes perfect sense and is in full accordance with Islamic law. And Muslims do follow their medieval religious laws, even today..."

[Ossian]

Thank you, Rune!

From the second link: "...I disagree that this has nothing to do with Islam. Muhammad himself had forced sex (rape) with several of his slave girls/concubines. This is perfectly allowed, both in the sunna and in the Koran. If you postulate that many of the Muslims in Europe view themselves as a conquering army and that European women are simply war booty, it all makes perfect sense and is in full accordance with Islamic law. And Muslims do follow their medieval religious laws, even today..."


"IF YOU POSTULATE" - Interesting choice of words for such a serious issue. What if we do not 'postulate' and concern ourselves with established facts?

[Annaliese]

"IF YOU POSTULATE" - Interesting choice of words for such a serious issue. What if we do not 'postulate' and concern ourselves with established facts?


1. Please continue posting here. I don't consider this ... or any ... "my" thread(s)! I appreciate reading (almost) everyone here and that certainly includes you, Ossian.

2. Have you ever read through, not just scanned, the following site? ... just curious ...

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/default.htm#attacks

[Muslima]

Thank you, Rune!

From the second link: "...I disagree that this has nothing to do with Islam. Muhammad himself had forced sex (rape) with several of his slave girls/concubines. This is perfectly allowed, both in the sunna and in the Koran. If you postulate that many of the Muslims in Europe view themselves as a conquering army and that European women are simply war booty, it all makes perfect sense and is in full accordance with Islamic law. And Muslims do follow their medieval religious laws, even today..."

You, named Annaliese,

You lie and distort shamelessly. Neither Islam nor the QUran allow forced sex you distorter of the truth. How dare you make up such fairy stories. I can post verses from the Quran telling believers not to force even their slave and concubines into sex. Rape is a crime punishable by death in Islam. In fact Islam is the only religion, in which slaves are given clear rights. The Quran and Sunnah make clear the obligations that people have to their slaves if they have any.

How dare you slander the Prophet like this. State your sources. Where did the Prophet force concubines and slaves into sex? References, and sources please.......His life is very well documented even by Western historians, and none have made these riduculous accusations.

Can you show me where you got this info from, and also what verses from the Quran, and the SUnna allow Muslim men to force women into sex.

[Muslima]

Aint never going to happen. The West (especially Eurabia) is scared of muslims and offending the Islamic world.

Stop exaggerating and lying. Europe has good relations with the Muslim world, that's the reason, and not because it's scared of Muslim's or offending the Muslim world.

Those who say, that Europe is scared of Muslim's or offending the Musllim worlld are either deluded, or plain jealous.

[Annaliese]

You, named Annaliese,

You lie and distort shamelessly. Neither Islam nor the QUran allow forced sex you dolt. How dare you make up such fairy stories. I can post verses from the Quran telling believers not to force slaves into sex. Rape is a crime punishable by death in Islam.

Can you show me where you got this info from, and also what verses from the Quran, and the SUnna allow Muslim men to force women into sex.

Name-calling isn't helpful, in my opinion. If you don't like all the links which were provided, comment on them ... there are plenty more where they came from. Also, referring to Leon as jealous is patently absurd.

[Muslima]

Name-calling isn't helpful, in my opinion. If you don't like all the links which were provided, comment on them ... there are plenty more where they came from. Also, referring to Leon as jealous is patently absurd.

Can you answer my questions please.

Comment on the links you say? Did you read my message? I said Islam doesn't allow rape. I'm sure you know that, very well, but choose to ignore it.

As well as answering my other questions, can you show me how you tally Islam allows rape with your links.

I don't have to prove anything here, you are the ones making the stupid accusatiions. Even the police in Norway aren't blaming Islam. It's people like you, desperate to smear, so desperate that you grasp at straws and make a laughing stock of yourself..

Answer my questions please

[Annaliese]

Can you answer my questions please.

Comment on the links you say? Did you read my message? I said Islam doesn't allow rape. I'm sure you know that, very well, but choose to ignore it.

As well as answering my other questions, can you show me how you tally Islam allows rape with your links.

I don't have to prove anything here, you are the ones making the stupid accusatiions. Even the police in Norway aren't blaming Islam. It's people like you, desperate to smear, so desperate that you grasp at straws and make a laughing stock of yourself..

Answer my questions please


I am sorry you don't care to read any of the cited articles or http://www.thereligionofpeace.com: 'shooting the messenger' is apparently your game. So, have a look at this thread entitled "Justification for rape in the Koran" ... http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=2822

[Muslima]

I am sorry you don't care to read any of the cited articles or http://www.thereligionofpeace.com: 'shooting the messenger' is apparently your game. So, have a look at this thread entitled "Justification for rape in the Koran" ... http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?t=2822

The Religion of peace.com website has a clear agenda to distort Islam. Even a fool can see that.

As for the thread , that you posted, there is nothing in it that says Islam allows forced sex.

Can you show me exactly where it says, men can force women to have sex. You keep posting links which are irrelevant to Islam, and nothing that is pertinent to your accusation.

I'm still waiting.............

[Achihud]

Annaliese, the 5 stars are from me. Although I must warn you. There is an odd thing going on, everywhere I put my posts 5-star threads dare to lose two or more of them. Last night/today it happened again. So I see this as part of an investigation. ;)

Besides that, you may take this as a compliment.

[Annaliese]

The Religion of peace.com website has a clear agenda to distort Islam. Even a fool can see that.

As for the thread , that you posted, there is nothing in it that says Islam allows forced sex.

Can you show me exactly where it says, men can force women to have sex. You keep posting links which are irrelevant to Islam, and nothing that is pertinent to your accusation.

I'm still waiting.............

The first entry of the thread references the Koran:

Chapter 33 verse 50 of the Koran:
"O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war, and the daughters of thine uncle on the father's side and the daughters of thine aunts on the father's side, and the daughters of thine uncles on the mother's side and the daughters of thine aunts on the mother's side who emigrated with thee, and a believing woman if she give herself unto the Prophet and the Prophet desire to ask her in marriage a privilege for thee only, not for the [rest of] believers. We are aware of that which We enjoined upon them concerning their wives and those whom their right hand possess that thou mayst be free from blame, for Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."

Thus, the Prophet is given sexual access to first cousins, captives, and any believing woman whom he desires to wed. In fact, he is given certain liberties denied to all others. Allah is here not only forgiving but also quite liberal, at least on the behalf of his Prophet. The term "whom your right hand possesses" refers to women captured in battle. Captive women were considered legitimate trophies of war and in fact the Prophet marries a Jewess whose husband has been slain. Although we can construe this practice to be "pro-sexuality," it is hard to imagine how this paleolithic approach to romance serves the interests of feminism.

..rules in Chapter 24 of the Koran are revealed in response to an alleged tryst between Aishah, Muhammad's child bride and a young soldier. Afraid of losing his prized pubescent amour, the Prophet was comforted when God revealed to him that she could not be convicted without four eyewitnesses. As the supposed "roll in the sand" between Aishah and her young soldier took place in the wastelands of Arabia, there was little chance of her accusers meeting these high standards of evidence.

(Inserted by Simon: The above is an example of how conveniently allah reveals himself to mohammad.

Note also the requirement for four [b]eyewitnessses to a rape essentially also condones rape in that it renders it practically impossible to prove it. )

[Annaliese]

Annaliese, the 5 stars are from me. Although I must warn you. There is an odd thing going on, everywhere I put my posts 5-star threads dare to lose two or more of them. Last night/today it happened again. So I see this as part of an investigation. ;)

Besides that, you may take this as a compliment.

I'm not certain if you are being serious, so I will simply compliment your signature. ;)

[Muslima]

The first entry of the thread references the Koran:

Chapter 33 verse 50 of the Koran:
"O Prophet! Lo! We have made lawful unto thee thy wives unto whom thou hast paid their dowries, and those whom thy right hand possesseth of those whom Allah hath given thee as spoils of war, and the daughters of thine uncle on the father's side and the daughters of thine aunts on the father's side, and the daughters of thine uncles on the mother's side and the daughters of thine aunts on the mother's side who emigrated with thee, and a believing woman if she give herself unto the Prophet and the Prophet desire to ask her in marriage a privilege for thee only, not for the [rest of] believers. We are aware of that which We enjoined upon them concerning their wives and those whom their right hand possess that thou mayst be free from blame, for Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."

Thus, the Prophet is given sexual access to first cousins, captives, and any believing woman whom he desires to wed. In fact, he is given certain liberties denied to all others. Allah is here not only forgiving but also quite liberal, at least on the behalf of his Prophet. The term "whom your right hand possesses" refers to women captured in battle. Captive women were considered legitimate trophies of war and in fact the Prophet marries a Jewess whose husband has been slain. Although we can construe this practice to be "pro-sexuality," it is hard to imagine how this paleolithic approach to romance serves the interests of feminism.

..rules in Chapter 24 of the Koran are revealed in response to an alleged tryst between Aishah, Muhammad's child bride and a young soldier. Afraid of losing his prized pubescent amour, the Prophet was comforted when God revealed to him that she could not be convicted without four eyewitnesses. As the supposed "roll in the sand" between Aishah and her young soldier took place in the wastelands of Arabia, there was little chance of her accusers meeting these high standards of evidence.

(Inserted by Simon: The above is an example of how conveniently allah reveals himself to mohammad.

Note also the requirement for four [b]eyewitnessses to a rape essentially also condones rape in that it renders it practically impossible to prove it. )

And i ask you again, where are verses in which the Prophet condones rape, where in the QUran or Sunnah. What do these verses have to do with the Norway rapes? Why havn't the Norwegian authorities blamed Islam? Why are you avoiding the issue? why do you not back up your nonsense with facts?


The verses above have nothing to do with what you said. There is no sexual hypocricy in Islam. This wasn't what you said originally. You said Islam allows rape.

The Prophet and Islam allows men to have multiple wives, (no different to men in the WEst having mistresses, except that Islam isn't hypocritical about it, and gives women rights, unlike in the West, where you have undignified paternity battles in court) and in days gone by, they could have slaves and concubines. If youre seriously interested in learning about the reasons for this i can show you. But i get the feeling you;'re not interested in that, but rather you're searching for material to distort and lie.

I'm going out now, and will deal with you when i get back.......in the meantime reveal more of your bigoted, hatemongering sources...........

[CLL1709]

Thank you, Rune!

From the second link: "...I disagree that this has nothing to do with Islam. Muhammad himself had forced sex (rape) with several of his slave girls/concubines. This is perfectly allowed, both in the sunna and in the Koran. If you postulate that many of the Muslims in Europe view themselves as a conquering army and that European women are simply war booty, it all makes perfect sense and is in full accordance with Islamic law. And Muslims do follow their medieval religious laws, even today..."

My suggestion to Western women for protection against these Muslims is a Glock semi-automatic. It will take down 17 at a clip.

[ygalg1]

My suggestion to Western women for protection against these Muslims is a Glock semi-automatic. It will take down 17 at a clip.
It does not matter if it happens to be a Muslim or anybody else, rapers have no place in this world

[Annaliese]

And i ask you again, where are verses in which the Prophet condones rape, where in the QUran or Sunnah. What do these verses have to do with the Norway rapes? Why havn't the Norwegian authorities blamed Islam? Why are you avoiding the issue? why do you not back up your nonsense with facts?


The verses above have nothing to do with what you said. There is no sexual hypocricy in Islam. This wasn't what you said originally. You said Islam allows rape.

The Prophet and Islam allows men to have multiple wives, (no different to men in the WEst having mistresses, except that Islam isn't hypocritical about it, and gives women rights, unlike in the West, where you have undignified paternity battles in court) and in days gone by, they could have slaves and concubines. If youre seriously interested in learning about the reasons for this i can show you. But i get the feeling you;'re not interested in that, but rather you're searching for material to distort and lie.

I'm going out now, and will deal with you when i get back.......in the meantime reveal more of your bigoted, hatemongering sources...........

The article I started this thread with deals with a virtual laundry list of muslims raping in various countries, yet you bring up Norway. Perhaps their current boycott of Israeli goods has something to do with their government turning a blind eye to the rapes.

To quote from the original post, "Everywhere in the world, Muslims are in conflict with their neighbours. And as Mark Steyn recently said, every conflict appears to have originated by someone with the name Mohammed."

You believe that multiple wives is equivalent to having a mistress or cheating in marriage? :rolleyes:

Well, "my" bigoted, hatemongering sources would be complimented, if they cared one way or the other, that someone like you referred to them in that manner.

By the way, I NEVER said Islam allows rape. When you get yourself all upset, perhaps you have hallucinations. I hope you get better in 2006, speaking of which, it is time for me to get ready and go party! ;)

[ShimonG]

And i ask you again, where are verses in which the Prophet condones rape, where in the QUran or Sunnah. What do these verses have to do with the Norway rapes? Why havn't the Norwegian authorities blamed Islam? Why are you avoiding the issue? why do you not back up your nonsense with facts?


The verses above have nothing to do with what you said. There is no sexual hypocricy in Islam. This wasn't what you said originally. You said Islam allows rape.

The Prophet and Islam allows men to have multiple wives, (no different to men in the WEst having mistresses, except that Islam isn't hypocritical about it, and gives women rights, unlike in the West, where you have undignified paternity battles in court) and in days gone by, they could have slaves and concubines. If youre seriously interested in learning about the reasons for this i can show you. But i get the feeling you;'re not interested in that, but rather you're searching for material to distort and lie.

I'm going out now, and will deal with you when i get back.......in the meantime reveal more of your bigoted, hatemongering sources...........


proof of mohammad authorized rape in the hadiths. one raihana (rihana), mohammad kept for himself. rihana's entire family was slaughtered before her eyes. Unlikely that she would "bed" mohammad willingly.

Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3371. Also, read what mohammad did to the tribe of banu-'l-mustaqliq.

The qoranic verse for Anti-semitism are:

2:88-90
2:100
3:111
5:60 (this is the "jews are pigs and monkeys" one)

But even the stone behind which a jew hides will say. o muslim, there is a jew hiding behind me, so kill him. they have incurred the curse and wrath of allah, who transformed them into monkey and swine

3:112
2:96


[i]The Prophet and Islam allows men to have multiple wives, (no different to men in the WEst having mistresses, except that Islam isn't hypocritical about it, and gives women rights, unlike in the West, where you have undignified paternity battles in court) and in days gone by, they could have slaves and concubines.

The west may well allow mistresses. However, if a man forces himself upon a woman (any woman, it could even be his own wife), it is RAPE. Of course, in the islamic definition, it may not be rape. islam's sense of right and wrong is radically different from that of the civlized world's. Oh, and i suppose each slave and concubine conceded to mohammad willingly?

Hope you are not a muslim woman. Coz if you are, you'd have to produce four male witnesses to the rape. otherwise the woman who is raped is declared guilty of fornication and stoned to death. The phrase "allah is merciful" has got to be the most oxy-moronic in the english languge or any language for that matter.

Oh, and do come back after you are done stepping out (desperately trying to look up Pickthal for rebuttal are you?). Well even the most apologetic translation of the koran and hadiths fails to hide the filth in your religion and its prophet. And please dont even bother to claim the prophets of judaism as your own, or i will tear you a new one. again.

[Muslima]

By the way, I NEVER said Islam allows rape. When you get yourself all upset, perhaps you have hallucinations. I hope you get better in 2006, speaking of which, it is time for me to get ready and go party! ;)

You said to Rune, you disagree that the rapes have nothing to do with Islam, (see your quote below) and now you say "I never said Islam allows rape" . Contradictory statement isn't it? Yet you didn't back up any of your accusations below




"Thank you, Rune!
From the second link: "...I disagree that this has nothing to do with Islam. Muhammad himself had forced sex (rape) with several of his slave girls/concubines. This is perfectly allowed, both in the sunna and in the Koran. If you postulate that many of the Muslims in Europe view themselves as a conquering army and that European women are simply war booty, it all makes perfect sense and is in full accordance with Islamic law. And Muslims do follow their medieval religious laws, even today..." "

You havn't backed up what you said above.
1. Where in the Quran and Sunnah is it perfectly allowed to rape concubines, slaves.
2. I asked you for a reference in which The Prophet forced sex
3. If European women are war booty, how do you explain the rapes comitted (majority ) by non Muslim men? Did you know the USA has the highest number of rape stats in the world? They're not comitted by Muslims.

You selectively pick out a number of news articles in which Muslim men rape, and then use those to make a sweeping bigoted generalisation about all Muslim men and the faith of Islam,

This can work in reverse, for it isn't difficult for anyone who wants to label Jewish men as rapists, killers or whatever, to selectively market a few news articles, and then say
"hey Judaism allows peadophilla, or rape or whatever"

Oh, and don't attempt to wiggle out of your lies by changing the subject to men being allowed multiple wives, just because you don't like the idea. I told you before there is no sexual hypocricy in Islam. (Making a big deal out of monogomy when the social fabric points to the opposite being true) The issue of men having mulitple wives has nothing to do with what you said. Stick to the subject please, the subject that you yourself raised.

[Muslima]

OK, let's use your logic here.

Siince Israel has the highest number women of women trafickers in the Mid East region. (Do a search on google and you will find countless links and news articles about Jewish dominance in porn, prostitution, and crime).

Do you now say that this has something to do with the Jewish religion? If not, why not, when there is a wealth of data that can corroborate this statement....

Can you now explain how would you rebut the following accusation based on your own logic, ...let's say for example if someone were to say to you...

"Jewish dominance in porn , prostitution and crime has a lot to do with Judaism"


Jewish Gangsters Raped, Killed Children As Young As 2 On Film
JEWISH CHILD PORN / SNUFF FILM RING DISCOVERED
http://www.ety.com/HRP/jewishstudies/snuffporn.htm

Prostitution/Traf in Jewish Communities
http://theawarenesscenter.org/prostitution.html#We

Israel's sex trade
by: Hasdai Westbrook and Victoria Blint
http://www.somethingjewish.co.uk/articles/864_israel_s_sex_trade.htm


JEWS AND "WHITE SLAVERY"
http://www.jewishtribalreview.org/10whsla.htm

[Muslima]

proof of mohammad authorized rape in the hadiths. one raihana (rihana), mohammad kept for himself. rihana's entire family was slaughtered before her eyes. Unlikely that she would "bed" mohammad willingly.

Sahih Muslim, Book 8, Number 3371. Also, read what mohammad did to the tribe of banu-'l-mustaqliq.

The qoranic verse for Anti-semitism are:

2:88-90
2:100
3:111
5:60 (this is the "jews are pigs and monkeys" one)

But even the stone behind which a jew hides will say. o muslim, there is a jew hiding behind me, so kill him. they have incurred the curse and wrath of allah, who transformed them into monkey and swine

3:112
2:96


[i]The Prophet and Islam allows men to have multiple wives, (no different to men in the WEst having mistresses, except that Islam isn't hypocritical about it, and gives women rights, unlike in the West, where you have undignified paternity battles in court) and in days gone by, they could have slaves and concubines.

The west may well allow mistresses. However, if a man forces himself upon a woman (any woman, it could even be his own wife), it is RAPE. Of course, in the islamic definition, it may not be rape. islam's sense of right and wrong is radically different from that of the civlized world's. Oh, and i suppose each slave and concubine conceded to mohammad willingly?

Hope you are not a muslim woman. Coz if you are, you'd have to produce four male witnesses to the rape. otherwise the woman who is raped is declared guilty of fornication and stoned to death. The phrase "allah is merciful" has got to be the most oxy-moronic in the english languge or any language for that matter.

Oh, and do come back after you are done stepping out (desperately trying to look up Pickthal for rebuttal are you?). Well even the most apologetic translation of the koran and hadiths fails to hide the filth in your religion and its prophet. And please dont even bother to claim the prophets of judaism as your own, or i will tear you a new one. again.

Shimon you prove your crass ignorance here in perfect style. I'm not going to waste my time on someone like you, whose only info comes from sites run by the low IQ and hatemongering brigade.

I dont even have to defend the Prophet against rape accusations, that you make, you only have to read his well documented life, and i'm not talking about those written by Muslims. Even his critical NON MUSLIM biographers, havn't accused him of rape. Your statesments border on the riduculous.

About your statement on rape being a crime in the West........are you serious? Are you saying rape is allowed in Islam?

About the Rehaniya incident, it is laughable. Learn about Islamic history from proper sources. Rape is punishble by death in Islam, or 80 lashes if the rapist is not married, and the Quran bans men from forcing slave girls into sex.

There is no anti-semitism in the Quran. The verses you mention, apply to specific incidents, they are not absolute but confined to a specific time/event/incident. The absolute verses are distinctly different to confined verses. Clearly you know nothing about the Quran.

Don't ever assume to discuss Islam with me, if you all you know is gathered from hate sites as is so apparent from your post.

You don't even bother to ask yourself if what you say is true, then why are so many WESTERN WOMEN (and men) CONVERTING TO ISLAM? check these links i posted here, in this thread and then come back and explain
Islam attracts highest numbers of converts worldwide
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=169523&postcount=8

Oh and Annaliese , i'm curious to hear your opinon on why so many western women convert to Islam if Muslim men are rapists as you imply

[Achihud]

There is no anti-semitism in the Quran. The verses you mention, apply to specific incidents, they are not absolute but confined to a specific time/event/incident. No comment!



But do mind the signature...;)

[Annaliese]

You said to Rune, you disagree that the rapes have nothing to do with Islam, (see your quote below) and now you say "I never said Islam allows rape" . Contradictory statement isn't it? Yet you didn't back up any of your accusations below

~~~rant, rant, rant~~~

Stick to the subject please, the subject that you yourself raised.

1. I did not make the statement you quoted. It was from Rune's second link, as so stated in my post.

2. The subject is the spate of rapes by muslims; it is not the koran. In other words, the thread-starting article was about actions and not words.

P.S. Cool job, ShimonG. :D

[Muslima]

1. I did not make the statement you quoted. It was from Rune's second link, as so stated in my post.

2. The subject is the spate of rapes by muslims; it is not the koran. In other words, the thread-starting article was about actions and not words.

P.S. Cool job, ShimonG. :D


Oh, so you didn't say it, but you endorsed it right, or else why did you copy and highlight it? That Fjordman website (scandinavian blog about Islam, some joke,What are his credentials? His knowledge? ) has even less credibility than the ones i posted about Jewish dominance in porn, etc.

Even an idiot can see what he is upto.........taking some news stories, adding his own spin and lies...........and for people like you to come by and eagerly lap up his nonsense.


He is no authority on Islam, his website is like jewwatch.com, only with 90% less credibility, as he adds his own ignorant spin.

Why did you not answer the quesions i posed about Jewish dominance in porn etc.

I'm getting sick of your evading the issue, running around in circles, refusing to answer direct questions, answering only what you want, and ignoring that which you can't. Unless you have something intelligent to add (highly unlikey) you are dismissed!

[Muslima]

No comment!



But do mind the signature...;)

Achihud , what are you rambling on about? Your signature? Definately NOT cool;)

I hope you find this link helpful in errrrr. revising your radical opinions about apes and pigs!
Does the Qur’an Sound Anti-Semitic?
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544884

[Achihud]

I hope you find this link helpful in errrrr. revising your radical opinions about apes and pigs! As long as you keep ignoring my clear invitation to visit a certain thread in IF, you can stick your link from outside IF where the sun doesn't shine! Your signature? It contains a link leading to a thread inside IF, haven't you noticed yet???
Achihud , what are you rambling on about? That these so-called "incidents" as you refer to them, NEVER HAPPENED!
But it would be stupid (and boring) to present the same evidence all over again to every trolling muslim around that for convenience sake chooses to ignore what he/she doesn't want to acknowledge. Namely that those antisemitic stories from the Qu'ran are nothing more then fairy tales. The longer you hesitate to accept my invitation, the better my signature exposes you as being a showcase that islam is nothing more then a self-conjuring mantra/big lie!

Such as this quote: There is no anti-semitism in the Quran. The verses you mention, apply to specific incidents, they are not absolute but confined to a specific time/event/incident.
Ta-da!

[Muslima]

As long as you keep ignoring my clear invitation to visit a certain thread in IF, you can stick your link from outside IF where the sun doesn't shine! It contains a link leading to a thread inside IF, haven't you noticed yet???
That these so-called "incidents" as you refer to them, NEVER HAPPENED!
But it would be stupid (and boring) to present the same evidence all over again to every trolling muslim around that for convenience sake chooses to ignore what he/she doesn't want to acknowledge. Namely that those antisemitic stories from the Qu'ran are nothing more then fairy tales. The longer you hesitate to accept my invitation, the better my signature exposes you as being a showcase that islam is nothing more then a self-conjuring mantra/big lie!

Such as this quote:
Ta-da!

OOOOPS!!!

I didn't realise you were bottling up so much Achihud! Well i didn't know about your invitation about visiting that thread! Anyhow i visited it.....and........same 'ole.....same 'ole........

What exactly is your point? I'm sure you already know the answer to that one, surely?

Look, i never said the incidents didn't happen, but if you want to learn about them, you have to go to the proper sources! The Quran was revealed over 22 years, and each verse has a history behind it, some verses refer to a specific incident, and some are absolute (commands to believers) . The Prophets battles with his enemies are documented in the QUran and Sunnah.

The history of this particular verse in Surah Al Maidah (about disobedient Jews being turned into apes) has been badly distorted, anyhow.....very briefly (a search on google will give you plenty of authentic Islamic links that can explain more fully) :
It's a symbolic punishment to those who didn't keep the Sabbath, and turned to idolatary. However, what the distorters don't tell you, is that the same punishment awaits disobedient Muslims too. They conveniently pick out the Jews here, as it suits the current political agenda. But the Prophet made it clear that amongst Muslim's there would be those who will be punished in the same way as they would comit the same sins the Book People did (idolatry). On Yom al Qiyamah, (day of judgement) the symbolic punishment will be carried out on those who merited it, the Book People and Muslims, unless God chooses to forgive.

I havn't got time to look up verses and surah's and Hadeeth's but if you search google, you will find plenty. I gave you one link myself, that site has more!

I'm sure you're aware that this verse was only recently distorted, because of Arab anger against Jews (over Israel) and never before in our 1400+ history with the Book People.

It has to be said, that those imam's who distort the verses to suit politcal agenda's are clearly wrong. Equally wrong , are those who take what they say as the truth! The blind leading the blind!

Achihud why do you blindly swallow what they say? Do you not bother to use your head and think that in anger they may be distorting the revelations?

[ShimonG]

Shimon you prove your crass ignorance here in perfect style. I'm not going to waste my time on someone like you, whose only info comes from sites run by the low IQ and hatemongering brigade.


And you pour your vile filth defending rapists. You are right. My sources are "low IQ" and "hate-mongering." AKA as the qoran and hadith. and by the way, what do you call a person who at the age of 50 forces himself on a little girl still playing with dolls? Argue the content if you have the decency to do so. the source is hardly relevant if the information is factual.



I dont even have to defend the Prophet against rape accusations, that you make, you only have to read his well documented life, and i'm not talking about those written by Muslims. Even his critical NON MUSLIM biographers, havn't accused him of rape. Your statesments border on the riduculous.

No, you CAN'T defend mohammad. rape is never defensible. the hadiths cover his well-documented life, which includes rape, allowing his followers to commit rape stating that allah allows it, murder, theft (of meccan caravans with one-fifth the booty handed over to mohammad) and authorizing the murder of his critics.

See, you are following the classical three steps of the mohammadan.
1. First demand proof
2. When proof is cited, using the koran and the hadiths no less, accuse the person presenting the evidence of "low IQ" etc. It is you who have a low IQ, ya moslem, for following such filth blindly.
3. When all else fails, state that other religions have done equally bad.

You have completed the first two. Start working on the third. Or are you too busy assembling that suicide belt with slogans of "itbah al-yahud" splashed across your forehead in a manner that would have done mohammand himself proud.

About your statement on rape being a crime in the West........are you serious? Are you saying rape is allowed in Islam?

Last i heard, rape is a cognizable offence in most civilized societies. Rape of women captured is allowed in islam.

RAPE OF NON-MUSLIM WOMEN OR KUFR WOMEN IS ALLOWED IN ISLAM AS DECLARED BY MOHAMMAD HIMSELF, STATING THAT YOUR "MERCIFUL (PUKE) ALLAH HIMSELF ALLOWS IT FOR THE FAITHFUL.

FOR A NON-MUSLIM RAPING A MUSLIM, IT IS CERTAIN PUNISHABLE BY DEATH. FOR A MUSLIM RAPING A MUSLIM, YOU'D REQUIRE FOUR MUSLIM WITNESSES, ELSE THE VICTIM IS GUILTY OF FORNICATION AND STONED AS AN ADULTRESS.

About the Rehaniya incident, it is laughable. Learn about Islamic history from proper sources. Rape is punishble by death in Islam, or 80 lashes if the rapist is not married, and the Quran bans men from forcing slave girls into sex.

Your ignorance is truly astounding. This is like the oft-declared islamic filth stating that "islam condemns the murder of innocents." NOTHING CAN BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

To understand this particular canard, one must first define innocent. No muslim, and certain not mohammad/allah consider a person not believing in mohammad/allah as INNOCENT. Therefore the murder of non-muslims is implicitly sanctioned in the qoran. No matter how loudly muslima's of the world may seek to lie and decieve.

There is no anti-semitism in the Quran. The verses you mention, apply to specific incidents, they are not absolute but confined to a specific time/event/incident. The absolute verses are distinctly different to confined verses. Clearly you know nothing about the Quran.

You've got to be the most shameful and deceitful muslim i have crossed words with. and considering that your religion itself is islam, that says a lot.

The above has to take the cake. First, the porki argues that there is no anti-semitism. Then admits the authencity of the verses that refer to jews as pigs and monkeys. And then seeks to exonerate islam by stating that UNDER CERTAIN CONTEXTS, IT IS OK TO CALL JEWS PIGS AND MONKEYS

Here is what is indisputable. That islam, in whatever context that apologists for islam may seek to offer, refers to jews as pigs and monkeys. Even this creature muslima does not dispute that. But seeks to gloss it over by stating that it is "only in a limited context." CAMEL PISS, I SAY. Go peddle your BS elsewhere. You stand utterly exposed by your own hate-filled qoran.

So, shove your "crass ignorance" where the sun dont shine. It is your religion and your prophet and your texts that are hate-filled. Pointing out the obvious is not. Clearly, either you yourself know nothing about your own cess-pool or are conveniently playing dumb.

I consider it my sworn duty to expose lying muslims like you. I consider it an eminent use of my time to expose your filth.

Don't ever assume to discuss Islam with me, if you all you know is gathered from hate sites as is so apparent from your post.

I certainly will, if you keep up your lying $hit. It is you who presume that this material is gathered from so-called hate sites. I suppose, any site that exposes the depravity of mohammand and the barbarity of the qoran must be default be a hate-site according to your duplicitious mohammadan definition.

You don't even bother to ask yourself if what you say is true, then why are so many WESTERN WOMEN (and men) CONVERTING TO ISLAM? check these links i posted here, in this thread and then come back and explain
Islam attracts highest numbers of converts worldwide
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=169523&postcount=8


Ah, so we have come to the final refuge of the scoundrel.
"Islam is the fastest growing religion"
"Westerners (Richard Reid being one) are attracted to islam"
"Why are women attracted to islam?"

ALL NON-SEQUITURS.
Because every muslims produces 10 children, and the islamic population explodes, i suppose it is the world's fastest growing religion. Well, if so. It is also the world most depraved, illiterate and poverty-ridden. AND IS THERE AN EXIT ALLOWED FROM ISLAM. WHAT HAPPENS TO THE MUSLIM WHO RE-NOUNCES ISLAM. APOSACY IS PUNISHABLE BY DEATH.

Westerners are also attracted to drugs. Gee, that must mean drugs is a good thing. More and more black inmates in the us prison system and finding allah. Of course, they are. Once they convert, all their murders and rapes and then forgiven as it is the muslims' right to do so against the kufr. Did mohammad not do the same? Does allah not grant the same?

Germans also happily followed the Nazis. Gee, that must make it right, does'nt it?

[rhodescholar]

The Religion of peace.com website has a clear agenda to distort Islam. Even a fool can see that.

As for the thread , that you posted, there is nothing in it that says Islam allows forced sex.

Can you show me exactly where it says, men can force women to have sex. You keep posting links which are irrelevant to Islam, and nothing that is pertinent to your accusation.

I'm still waiting.............

Are you clueless?

The article listed BY NAME islamic clerics both accepting and exhorting rapes of women. Those clerics are using islam to justify the rapes. What is not clear?

[Muslima]

And you pour your vile filth defending rapists. You are right. My sources are "low IQ" and "hate-mongering." AKA as the qoran and hadith. and by the way, what do you call a person who at the age of 50 forces himself on a little girl still playing with dolls? Argue the content if you have the decency to do so. the source is hardly relevant if the information is factual.



No, you CAN'T defend mohammad. rape is never defensible. the hadiths cover his well-documented life, which includes rape, allowing his followers to commit rape stating that allah allows it, murder, theft (of meccan caravans with one-fifth the booty handed over to mohammad) and authorizing the murder of his critics.

See, you are following the classical three steps of the mohammadan.
1. First demand proof
2. When proof is cited, using the koran and the hadiths no less, accuse the person presenting the evidence of "low IQ" etc. It is you who have a low IQ, ya moslem, for following such filth blindly.
3. When all else fails, state that other religions have done equally bad.

You have completed the first two. Start working on the third. Or are you too busy assembling that suicide belt with slogans of "itbah al-yahud" splashed across your forehead in a manner that would have done mohammand himself proud.



Last i heard, rape is a cognizable offence in most civilized societies. Rape of women captured is allowed in islam.

RAPE OF NON-MUSLIM WOMEN OR KUFR WOMEN IS ALLOWED IN ISLAM AS DECLARED BY MOHAMMAD HIMSELF, STATING THAT YOUR "MERCIFUL (PUKE) ALLAH HIMSELF ALLOWS IT FOR THE FAITHFUL.

FOR A NON-MUSLIM RAPING A MUSLIM, IT IS CERTAIN PUNISHABLE BY DEATH. FOR A MUSLIM RAPING A MUSLIM, YOU'D REQUIRE FOUR MUSLIM WITNESSES, ELSE THE VICTIM IS GUILTY OF FORNICATION AND STONED AS AN ADULTRESS.



Your ignorance is truly astounding. This is like the oft-declared islamic filth stating that "islam condemns the murder of innocents." NOTHING CAN BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

To understand this particular canard, one must first define innocent. No muslim, and certain not mohammad/allah consider a person not believing in mohammad/allah as INNOCENT. Therefore the murder of non-muslims is implicitly sanctioned in the qoran. No matter how loudly muslima's of the world may seek to lie and decieve.



You've got to be the most shameful and deceitful muslim i have crossed words with. and considering that your religion itself is islam, that says a lot.

The above has to take the cake. First, the porki argues that there is no anti-semitism. Then admits the authencity of the verses that refer to jews as pigs and monkeys. And then seeks to exonerate islam by stating that UNDER CERTAIN CONTEXTS, IT IS OK TO CALL JEWS PIGS AND MONKEYS

Here is what is indisputable. That islam, in whatever context that apologists for islam may seek to offer, refers to jews as pigs and monkeys. Even this creature muslima does not dispute that. But seeks to gloss it over by stating that it is "only in a limited context." CAMEL PISS, I SAY. Go peddle your BS elsewhere. You stand utterly exposed by your own hate-filled qoran.

So, shove your "crass ignorance" where the sun dont shine. It is your religion and your prophet and your texts that are hate-filled. Pointing out the obvious is not. Clearly, either you yourself know nothing about your own cess-pool or are conveniently playing dumb.

I consider it my sworn duty to expose lying muslims like you. I consider it an eminent use of my time to expose your filth.



I certainly will, if you keep up your lying $hit. It is you who presume that this material is gathered from so-called hate sites. I suppose, any site that exposes the depravity of mohammand and the barbarity of the qoran must be default be a hate-site according to your duplicitious mohammadan definition.



Ah, so we have come to the final refuge of the scoundrel.
"Islam is the fastest growing religion"
"Westerners (Richard Reid being one) are attracted to islam"
"Why are women attracted to islam?"

ALL NON-SEQUITURS.
Because every muslims produces 10 children, and the islamic population explodes, i suppose it is the world's fastest growing religion. Well, if so. It is also the world most depraved, illiterate and poverty-ridden. AND IS THERE AN EXIT ALLOWED FROM ISLAM. WHAT HAPPENS TO THE MUSLIM WHO RE-NOUNCES ISLAM. APOSACY IS PUNISHABLE BY DEATH.

Westerners are also attracted to drugs. Gee, that must mean drugs is a good thing. More and more black inmates in the us prison system and finding allah. Of course, they are. Once they convert, all their murders and rapes and then forgiven as it is the muslims' right to do so against the kufr. Did mohammad not do the same? Does allah not grant the same?

Germans also happily followed the Nazis. Gee, that must make it right, does'nt it?

1. I did not defend the rapists, clearly you are semi-blind.

2. No, you don't expose my deceit, you expose your own hatred, bigotry, and jealousy. I told you the Prophet's life is well documented. You know very well rape is not part of the Sunnah or Islamic tradition. To say that Islam allows rape of Non Muslim women is just too laughable for words.

3. Carry on hating , you will only damage yourself, you'll be one who suffers.

4. About your lies and venomous attacks on the Prophet....(shows how out of touch you are) the following links, are what prominent NON MUSLIM scholars, historians and academics have to say about Mohammed, these men are far more learned and intelligent than you ShimonG,(some are Jewish) and in the big picture, your opinions count for Zilch. I don't see any references on rape etc. here.......what are your comments on these links?;)

What non Muslims say about The Prophet

http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=169954&postcount=104

http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=169956&postcount=105

http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=169957&postcount=106

Top 100 most influential men in history. Muhammed No.1


The following is from Michael Hart's book and lists Prophet Muhammad as the
most influential man in History.
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=170180&postcount=128

Muhammed - Themost influential man in history- part 1 -extract from M Hart's book
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=170181&postcount=129


Muhammed - The most influential man in history..part 2-extract from M Hart's book
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?p=170183#post170183

Never mind it is clear what your problem is, ....

Me lady doth protest too much........... i think i understand where you're coming from.....as any psychoanalyst would deduce, it is common for someone with evil tendencies to project them onto those he doesn't like, hoping to paint them just as evil.....

one question..... Are you a rapist ?

"Note to self"

Silly girl! Of course he is not going to admit it!

[Muslima]

ShimonG can you explain these verses to me please. They are taken from the Torah and Talmud.
They allow rape, sex with 3 yr old girls, and selling of daughters.
Also, i want to know how you can criticise another religion, by distorting it, when your own has ever more clearer directives of what you accuse Islam of?

Looking forward to your comments......

The Talmud

Yebamoth 63a. Declares that agriculture is the lowest of occupations.

Sanhedrin 55b. A Jew may marry a three year old girl (specifically, three years "and a day" old).

Sanhedrin 54b. A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.

Kethuboth 11b. "When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing."


(Deuteronomy 20:10-14)


As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.



(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NAB)



If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.



(Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB)



"When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."


(Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)



When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)

[Muslima]

Are you clueless?

The article listed BY NAME islamic clerics both accepting and exhorting rapes of women. Those clerics are using islam to justify the rapes. What is not clear?

You answered your own question Rhodescholar, when you said "using Islam to justify" and i stand by what i said. That website has an agenda to distort the truth. First no imam there said rape is justified..
Second, the laws which are binding are those in the Quran and Sunnah. What scholars say is only their own interpretation, not necessarily correct, and what percentage of Muslim's follow the oddball clerics anyway? Can you answer this please.

I can't believe i'm writing this.
Do you not have Rabbi's who distort the Torah to suit their own agenda's? what about the one who was saying American's were punished by God (the hurricane) for the disengagement?

By the way, what do you have to say to the verses from Torah /Talmud, which justify rape, sex with 3 yr old girls, and selling daughters which i posted for ShimonG,

[Mediocrates]

ShimonG can you explain these verses to me please. They are taken from the Torah and Talmud.
They allow rape, sex with 3 yr old girls, and selling of daughters.
Also, i want to know how you can criticise another religion, by distorting it, when your own has ever more clearer directives of what you accuse Islam of?

Looking forward to your comments......


This is a misquote/mistranslation of what 'marriage' and 'child' are.


The Talmud

Yebamoth 63a. Declares that agriculture is the lowest of occupations.


neither here nor there


Sanhedrin 55b. A Jew may marry a three year old girl (specifically, three years "and a day" old).


see above.


Sanhedrin 54b. A Jew may have sex with a child as long as the child is less than nine years old.

It talks about what the punishment is, not what the crime is. The discussion does not mean that the act is permissible - in tractate
Makkoth, which discusses the laws relevant to the punihment of whipping,
there is no age-based exception to the penalty.

Kethuboth 11b. "When a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl it is nothing."

However, the whole discussion has to do with the circumstances under which a girl is considered to have lost her virginity and thus be ineligible for the entitlement of a virgin bride upon marriage; there is also a discussion in the same passage of being "injured by a piece of wood." The phrase which in its literal translation means "it is nothing" is a Talmudic idiom for "it has no bearing on this matter" - in this example, "it has no bearing on her status as a virgin."


(Deuteronomy 20:10-14)
As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you.

http://www.utoronto.ca/wjudaism/journal/vol1n1/v1n1elma.htm (http://www.utoronto.ca/wjudaism/journal/vol1n1/v1n1elma.htm)



(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NAB)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.


See above, definitional distinctions between virgin bride status and not.


(Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB)
"When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."


See above URL


(Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)[/quote]

From the marginal notes of the Stone edition Tanakh:

Until a girl reaches puberty the Torah gives her father the right to 'sell' her as a bondswoman but as the passage itself and the teachings of the Sages makes clear the right is given him for her benefit. He is permitted to ‘sell’ her because the sale is expected to result in her marriage to either her master or his son. In fact if neither of the two marries her, the Torah regards it as a betrayal of the girl (verse 8) If one of them chooses to marry her the purchase price received by the father will constitute betrothal money by means of which she will become consecrated to either of them (Kiddushim 18b) equivalent to the ring that is currently used to effect betrothal. Ordinarily a father should not exercise his right of betrothal while his daughter is still a child (Kiddushin 41a) but in the case of this passage he may do so because it is an opportunity to provide her future that would otherwise not be available. The girl goes free in one of three ways: at the end of 6 years, upon the advent of the Jubilee Year, when her puberty begins.

[Mediocrates]

FWIW this section, the MishPatim, is the civil code, not the religious code.

[Annaliese]

Thanks for bringing forward the truth, everyone except Muslima :D . Here is an article by the wonderful Robert Spencer:

Rape in Islam: Blaming the Victim

"For almost a year," observes Edward Said in this week’s edition of Cairo’s Al-Ahram Weekly, "American politicians, regional experts, administration officials, journalists have repeated the charges that have become standard fare so far as Islam and the Arabs are concerned. . . . To today’s practically unanimous chorus has been added the authority of the United Nation’s Human Development Report on the Arab world which certified that Arabs dramatically lag behind the rest of the world in democracy, knowledge, and women’s rights."

Said has no more patience for this sort of thing than he did when he wrote Orientalism and Covering Islam, the twin towers of today’s academic Islamophilia. He acidly dismisses the criticisms as "vague re-cycled Orientalist clichés of the kind repeated by a tireless mediocrity like Bernard Lewis."

Yet just as Said’s lament appeared, the French businesswoman Touria Tiouli went to court in the United Arab Emirates. Heedlessly risking the recycling of vague Orientalist clichés, Dubai officials have turned her charge that she was raped by three men on its head and accused her of zina, sexual activity outside marriage. In Dubai, a bastion of moderate Islam, this charge isn’t punishable by stoning, as it is in more hard-line Muslim countries — it only carries an 18-month jail sentence.

Tiouli continues to fight: on Sunday she entered a not guilty plea. To the claims of her attackers that she was a willing participant and, in fact, a prostitute whom they duly paid, she replied simply, "My lawyer will prove I did not consent. If I had consented, I would not have brought the case."

Indeed, it’s hard to imagine a prostitute in Dubai going to the police willingly under any circumstances. For Sharia courts all over the Islamic world seem only too willing to reinforce the stereotypes of Islam that Said deplores, particularly where women are concerned. In Nigeria, a woman named Sufiyatu Huseini suffered through circumstances remarkably similar to Tiouli’s. She said she was raped, but the man she accused denied it, and instead Huseini was charged with adultery.

Nigeria is no moderate Dubai: Huseini faced death by stoning until the verdict was overturned under international pressure. Countless other women in similar situations have already been stoned to death or jailed. According to Sisters in Islam, a Malaysian advocacy group for Muslim women, in Pakistan "three out of four women in prison . . . are rape victims."

This blame-the-victim mentality should be the worst nightmare of American feminists, were it not for the fact that they view it through rosy multiculturalist glasses. But does it really represent the hijacking of the Religion of Peace on a grand scale?

Not quite. These cases all unfolded according to the classic directives of the Sharia.

Traditional Islamic law, which is still very much in force in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran, Sudan, most (if not all) of post-Taliban Afghanistan, and elsewhere, completely disregards the testimony of women in cases of a sexual nature. Aside from physical evidence, the only way to establish rape is by the testimony of four male witnesses (who, by the way, must be Muslims in good standing) who actually saw the act itself. Without these witnesses and a confession from the accused rapist, the victim will stand condemned by her very accusation: she wasn’t raped, so she must be guilty of zina.

Moreover, the prosecution has been careful to point out that Tiouli didn’t call for help. "According to Islamic Sharia," says the Nigerian Imam Mallam Muhammad Sani Isa, "it cannot be considered rape unless you asked for help."

According to Aliyu Abubakar Sanyinna, the attorney general of Nigeria’s Zamfara state (where Huseini went through her ordeal), this codified miscarriage of justice is "the law of Allah. By executing anybody that is convicted under Islamic law, we are just complying with the laws of Allah, so we don’t have anything to worry about."

If like minds prevail next week in Dubai when the court issues a verdict in Tiouli’s case, she should resign herself to spending the next eighteen months behind bars.

There is yet hope. International indignation resulted in the overturning of Huseini’s death sentence and the commutation of a similar ruling against an 18-year-old Christian girl in Sudan, Abok Alfa Akok, to 75 lashes. Facing another worldwide outcry, the Nigerian government promised in October to end stonings for adultery. Also bowing to internal and external pressure, even the Islamic Republic of Iran declared early this year that it too was ending the practice.

All this is good, but it isn’t enough. Rape victims in these newly enlightened nations may not have to fear stoning but they still may face lighter sentences, as does Tiouli. They will continue to receive no sympathy for their ordeal or any honest investigation of the charges they have made.

Until the Sharia itself undergoes a thoroughgoing reevaluation, this is probably the best we can hope for. Thus — however much Edward Said and his ilk may gnash their teeth — those who traffic in "vague re-cycled Orientalist clichés" about women’s rights in the Islamic world must keep up the pressure.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5676

[Muslima]

This is a misquote/mistranslation of what 'marriage' and 'child' are.




neither here nor there



see above.


It talks about what the punishment is, not what the crime is. The discussion does not mean that the act is permissible - in tractate
Makkoth, which discusses the laws relevant to the punihment of whipping,
there is no age-based exception to the penalty.


However, the whole discussion has to do with the circumstances under which a girl is considered to have lost her virginity and thus be ineligible for the entitlement of a virgin bride upon marriage; there is also a discussion in the same passage of being "injured by a piece of wood." The phrase which in its literal translation means "it is nothing" is a Talmudic idiom for "it has no bearing on this matter" - in this example, "it has no bearing on her status as a virgin."


http://www.utoronto.ca/wjudaism/journal/vol1n1/v1n1elma.htm (http://www.utoronto.ca/wjudaism/journal/vol1n1/v1n1elma.htm)




See above, definitional distinctions between virgin bride status and not.



See above URL


(Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl's owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)



Thank you Med:)

Especially for the utoronto.ca link explaining the verses, it was most interesting and it also exposed ShimonG's and Annaliese's hypocricy. If they really loved Judaism, they would have bothered to clarify, instead of piling on hate on hate.

Exactly the same points that you mention (misquote, mistranslation, ) is what his/her ilk are doing to the verses which they distort to justify rape in Islam.

[Muslima]

Thanks for bringing forward the truth, everyone except Muslima :D . Here is an article by the wonderful Robert Spencer:





What do you mean except Muslima? When did i not tell the truth ?

[Achihud]

When did i not tell the truth? Hold on Muslima, you turn as fast topsy-turvy as a leaf does on a tree!
So here's my answer to #39. Well i didn't know about your invitation about visiting that thread! Anyhow i visited it.....and........same 'ole.....same 'ole........What's "same 'ole….same 'ole"? "Oh, let me go, I want my Mommy"? I havn't got time to look up verses and surah's and Hadeeth's but if you search google, you will find plenty. Yea right! "Oh, let me go, I want my Mommy!" I gave you one link myself, that site has more! Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Links are good for sharing info between like-minded people. Not for having a debate. Suppose everybody just provides links to prove his point. We would be spending all of our time reading each others encyclopaedia. Obviously there would be no time left for a constructive debate. If you want to use your links, then quote some of it to your own defence and I will read them. Don't be lazy, I never use links except leading to my own work.
Back to the actual subject; The history of this particular verse in Surah Al Maidah (about disobedient Jews being turned into apes) has been badly distorted (…) That's funny because jews & christians are usually the ones being accused of distorting OT & NT! Ironic isn't it? It's a symbolic punishment to those who didn't keep the Sabbath, and turned to idolatry. So if, according to you, all Qu'ran translations are distorted, presenting the story in the past tense of the revelation, as opposed to turning it into a parable as you have called it "a symbolic punishment", it is now time for you to tell me; which translation has it right? And please, Surah 5:60 is not going to suffice. You also have to show the right translations for 2:65-66 and 7:163-166! What exactly is your point? "symbolic punishment" Ha! My point exactly; it NEVER HAPPENED, incl. the whole story of 7:163-166! I'm sure you already know the answer to that one, surely? But I trust you have all the right translations? :p

[michal]

And i ask you again, where are verses in which the Prophet condones rape, where in the QUran or Sunnah. What do these verses have to do with the Norway rapes? Why havn't the Norwegian authorities blamed Islam? Why are you avoiding the issue? why do you not back up your nonsense with facts?


The verses above have nothing to do with what you said. There is no sexual hypocricy in Islam. This wasn't what you said originally. You said Islam allows rape. Try here... http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sira/index.htm

He cut the heads of men of a Jewish tribe in Arabia, and the next thing he did was to force one of their women to come into his tent... there was a guard at the door, just to play safe...

Honestly, I don't care what he preached, I care what he did... deeds speak louder than words...

The Prophet and Islam allows men to have multiple wives, (no different to men in the WEst having mistresses, except that Islam isn't hypocritical about it, and gives women rights, unlike in the West, where you have undignified paternity battles in court) ...Legalization of prostitution makes it morally acceptable?

[michal]

You said to Rune, you disagree that the rapes have nothing to do with Islam, (see your quote below) and now you say "I never said Islam allows rape" . Contradictory statement isn't it? Yet you didn't back up any of your accusations below.There is something interesting about Muslims... I talked to lot of them. You don't understand that we don't care what is in which sura or hadith, and is it there at all... we don't care if those rapists, of suicide terrorists, or any of those pray 5 times a day or not... we care about WHAT THEY DO TO US IN THE NAME OF ISLAM.

So the rest is on you... you should stop them... as they really make Islam look bad... but I don't care about it, you do... so do something about THEM, not about US... and stop blaming everybody else for your failures, but DO something to stop them.

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050721/morin.gif

[Luke90]

The BBC pulled a documentary scheduled for screening in 2004, after police in Britain warned it could increase racial tension. “In these exceptional circumstances... Channel 4 as a responsible broadcaster has agreed to the police’s request...”
I know it's a minor point, but The BBC and Channel 4 are two seperate broadcasters and I'm slightly confused by the quote.

[Ossian]

I know it's a minor point, but The BBC and Channel 4 are two seperate broadcasters and I'm slightly confused by the quote.

Maybe some people just could'nt resist the chance to take another POP at the 'evil' BBC...But LOL you are right of course Luke, the wierd and wonderful Channel 4 is in a world of its own and a law unto itself.

[Annaliese]

He cut the heads of men of a Jewish tribe in Arabia, and the next thing he did was to force one of their women to come into his tent...

and

There is something interesting about Muslims... I talked to lot of them. You don't understand that we don't care what is in which sura or hadith, and is it there at all... we don't care if those rapists, of suicide terrorists, or any of those pray 5 times a day or not... we care about WHAT THEY DO TO US IN THE NAME OF ISLAM.

So the rest is on you... you should stop them... as they really make Islam look bad... but I don't care about it, you do... so do something about THEM, not about US... and stop blaming everybody else for your failures, but DO something to stop them.

http://cagle.slate.msn.com/working/050721/morin.gif


Yes, actions vs. words ... just what I posted a couple of pages back.

With regard to beheadings:

Beheading in the Name of Islam

http://www.meforum.org/article/713

[Muslima]

So if, according to you, all Qu'ran translations are distorted, presenting the story in the past tense of the revelation, as opposed to turning it into a parable as you have called it "a symbolic punishment", it is now time for you to tell me; which translation has it right? And please, Surah 5:60 is not going to suffice. You also have to show the right translations for 2:65-66 and 7:163-166! "symbolic punishment" Ha! My point exactly; it NEVER HAPPENED, incl. the whole story of 7:163-166! But I trust you have all the right translations? :p

Due to the political climate, and what they see as oppression, some Muslims take one verse or a few, without looking at when they were
revealed or why, as well as the historical circumstances relating to them,
as an excuse to mistreat Jews. This is not correct.

God does criticize Jews in the Quran. He also criticizes Christians,
polytheists, and Muslims.

The purpose of the criticism is to invite people to reaffirm their faith in
the original teachings brought by the all Prophets and to correct the
group's behavior or respond to a question they raised.

Criticism of a people though, is not a license to stereotype them, and
certainly not an excuse to mistreat them individually or collectively with
bad attitudes or behavior. Even though in anger they use these verses and distort them, they know they are wrong. However , human nature is such, and there will be those who err. To err is human. I'm not condoning their actions here, just explaining why it goes on, and as i mentioned before, this problem is not specific to Islam.

The Qur’an specifically notes that such criticism is not directed against all Jews. Even when the Qur’an criticizes the Jews it always notes that “among them there are some...” who are pious and righteous people, who command what is right and forbid what is wrong and try to excel each other in acts of charity and goodness. The Qur’an says that such people are assured that whatever good they will do will not be denied them and they shall receive their reward with Allah (Al `Imran: 113-115).

Achihud, you know you make a big deal about God criticising Jews in the Quran, but what about when Prophet Moses warned you about the curses that would fall on the disobedient? God cursed and warned the believers through the Torah too, but obviously you don't consider the Torah to be "anti-Semitic" , so how fair is it to be so one sided?

Now to get back to your question, about the verses, and the story behind them, as i said before it's a symbolic punishment, and serves as a warning to believers not to transgress. That is the main school of thought, and another one is that the punishment was carried out, but that those punished perished without offspring, so either way those who distort the verse and pretend it is an absolute one, know they are wrong. Here is the story about the Sabbath breakers in those verses you mentioned......

The Sabbath Breakers
http://www.islamonline.net/English/ram2002/10/Quran/Stories/article05.shtml
Abdullah Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid, `Ikrimah, Qatadah, As-Sadiy and others said that they were the people of Aylah. Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) added that it was located between Madyan and At-Tur.

According to the above, the people of Aylah were adhering attentively to the teachings of the Torah and the prohibition of fishing on the Sabbath at that time. Amazingly, the fish used to appear openly on Saturdays and disappear on the other days of the week. {…when their fish came to them openly on the Sabbath day, and did not come to them on the day they had no Sabbath}. Almighty Allah says {Thus We made a trial of them for they used to rebel against Allah’s Command (disobey Allah)}. That is, We test them by sending great numbers of fish on the Sabbath because of their disobedience and rebellion.

When the people saw this, they made a trick to catch the fish on the Sabbath. They fixed their fishing nets and ropes and dug streams that would allow the seawater to run through and the fish to enter but never go back to the sea. They made all this on Friday, in preparation for the coming of the fish on Saturday. And thus, the fish came on the supposedly peaceful day, not knowing what had been prepared against them. They were caught in the nets, ropes and artificial streams.

When the Saturday came to an end, the people of Aylah were present to take their fat catch. Consequently, Allah the Almighty was angry with them, and He cursed them for their trickery and deception. When this was done by a group of them, the rest who had not participated in their sinful actions were divided into two groups. One group rejected their actions and trickery against the Law and Command of Allah the Almighty at that time. The second group did not reject or forbid them; rather they disapproved of the reaction of the first group that forbade the sinful ones, saying: {Why do you preach to a people whom Allah is about to destroy or to punish with a severe torment?}. In other words, what is the gain in preaching to a people who will inevitably be punished by Allah the Almighty?

But the first group, the preachers, replied: {In order to be free from guilt before your Lord (Allah). And perhaps they may fear Allah}. That is, we are commanded by Him to enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil. Thus, we do this out of our fear of His Torment. And perhaps those who committed these sins may repent to Allah and regret what they have done and thus be saved from the punishment of Allah and He will forgive them all.

Allah the Almighty says: {So when they forgot the remindings that had been given to them We rescued those who forbade evil}. That is, when they were heedless towards the godly preachers, We rescued the preaching group. But {We seized those who did wrong with a severe torment}. That is, We seized the doers of the sinful deed with a painful punishment {because they used to rebel against Allah’s Command (disobey Allah)}. Then, Allah explains the torment that befell them: {So when they exceeded the limits of what they were prohibited, We said to them: “Be you monkeys, despised and rejected.”}



Here, the point is that Allah the Almighty informs us that He destroyed the wrong-doers, saved the preaching believers, and left the believers who did not enjoin the good and forbid the evil. Scholars disputed regarding the third group. Some said they were rescued from harm. Others said that they were destroyed with the wrong-doers.

But the first view is the one accepted by the well-versed scholars, including Ibn `Abbas, head of the interpreters, who referred to this opinion in a debate with `Ikrimah. The latter, upon the victory of Ibn `Abbas, granted him a valuable garment as a reward.

It should be noted here that the second group of non-sinners were not mentioned with those rescued, even though they despised the sinful deed with their hearts. This is because they should have compelled their organs (hand or tongue) to act and declare their rejection of the wrong-doers’ act. So, they were saved with the preachers because they themselves did not commit the sinful deed, but rather rejected it with their hearts.

`Abdur Razzaq narrated after Juraij after a man (whose name is not known) after `Ikrimah after Ibn `Abbas; and Malik transmitted from Ibn Ruman, Shaiban, Qatadah and `Ata’ Al-Kharasani: Those who committed the sinful deed were abandoned by the rest of the people of the town. Some of them, the preachers, declared their rejection and denial of their deed. The sinners did not listen to them. Afterwards, they used to stay the night apart from the rest of the people of the town, and there were doors or barriers between them and the rest of the people, who were anticipating the punishment to befall them. One day, their doors did not open till the noon. The people became anxious and sent someone to look over the barrier to see what had happened to the sinners. When he looked, he found them turned into monkeys with tails, shouting. They opened the doors of the barrier, and the monkeys recognized their relatives while their relatives could not recognize them. At that the preachers said, “Did not we forbid you from doing this?” The monkeys made a sign with their heads denoting yes.

Then, `Abdullah Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) wept and said: Verily, we see many wrongdoings which we do not reject or deny or even make a comment!

Al-`Ufi narrated after Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him): The young men of the town were turned into monkeys, while the old men into pigs. Moreover, Ibn Abu Hatim narrated from Mujahid after Ibn `Abbas his saying: They did not live long and they left no offspring. Also, Ad-Dahhaq narrated from Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him): No monster lived more than three days. In addition, they did not eat, drink or leave offspring.

Ibn Abu Hatim and Ibn Jarir narrated after Ibn Abu Nujaih from Mujahid his saying: Only their hearts and not their figures were turned into monkeys and pigs. This is just like His Statement that reads: {The likeness of those who were entrusted with the (obligation of the) Taurat (Torah) (i.e. to obey its commandments and practice its laws), but who subsequently failed in those (obligations), is as the likeness of a donkey which carries huge burdens of books (but understands nothing from them)} (Al-Jumu`ah 5). But this view seems to be very strange, and it contradicts the apparent meaning of the Glorious Qur’an. Allah knows best!

[Muslima]

Try here... http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sira/index.htm

He cut the heads of men of a Jewish tribe in Arabia, and the next thing he did was to force one of their women to come into his tent... there was a guard at the door, just to play safe...

Honestly, I don't care what he preached, I care what he did... deeds speak louder than words...

Legalization of prostitution makes it morally acceptable?

Yes you're absolutely right, DEEDS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS. His deeds were exemplary.

Oh, and don't ever mention faithfreedom.org to me again, that website is a known distorter of the truth with an agenda to lie. You will have to do better that that, for i'm not going to waste time replying to their lies and nonsense.


As for your other points,

1. The Prophet did not cut the heads of any Jewish tribe. Learn history before you shoot your mouth off, learn what his enemies did, and how he responded. Certain Jews wanted him out of the way, and left no stone unturned, in trying to kill him, and undermine his authority, even to the extent of poisoning the city's water supplies. for they saw him as a threat to their power. He fought back and defeated them, they were his enemies, but his relations with the rest of the Jews , Christians and other's were no different to what they were with the Muslims. He even gave his dhimma equal rights.

2. Prostitution is not legal. Being allowed 4 wives, is not prostitution Michal.

3. As for the comment on taking a woman to his tent.....you're saying rape? This is laughable, the most powerful man on the Peninsula, head of state, who refused countless marriage proposals...do you think there was a shortage of women for him? beauties of the day? Don't you think his followers would have dumped his as Prophet if he had raped ?

Your statement itself is contradictory, ...Why would The Prophet need a guard at the door, if he had just "cut the head's off a Jewish tribe" and was about to rape one of their women? Raping women during war invalidates Jihad. One of the rules of Jihad is that women are inviolate, that is enemy women, can't be raped. If they are, the criminal faces severe retribution.

Get real Michal

[minusthejihad]

Being allowed 4 wives, is not prostitution

But it ain't RIGHT, neither.

[Ossian]

But it ain't RIGHT, neither.


I am a little rusty on the bible MTJ but i am pretty sure that Abraham and the ancient Israelites were allowed more than one wife.

[minusthejihad]

I am a little rusty on the bible MTJ but i am pretty sure that Abraham and the ancient Israelites were allowed more than one wife.

And your point is? Two wrongs make a right?

[michal]

Yes you're absolutely right, DEEDS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS. His deeds were exemplary.

Oh, and don't ever mention faithfreedom.org to me again, that website is a known distorter of the truth with an agenda to lie. You will have to do better that that, for i'm not going to waste time replying to their lies and nonsense. Yes, his deeds were exemplary indeed... but does he justify same deeds people do in the 21st cetury???

I posted Sira of Muhammad's life... that one was the only one I found online...

But, maybe this very same book from another website would be OK: http://onlineislamicstore.com/b3833.html


1. The Prophet did not cut the heads of any Jewish tribe. Learn history before you shoot your mouth off, learn what his enemies did, and how he responded. Certain Jews wanted him out of the way, and left no stone unturned, in trying to kill him, and undermine his authority, even to the extent of poisoning the city's water supplies. for they saw him as a threat to their power. He fought back and defeated them, they were his enemies, but his relations with the rest of the Jews , Christians and other's were no different to what they were with the Muslims. He even gave his dhimma equal rights. Yet another legend... for the ctitical reading of this source, take Stillman, Jews in Arab lands... I could post a link where can you buy it, but I only have amazon.com, aso first you have to let me know if these dirty kafirs of amazon.com are good enough for you.

2. Prostitution is not legal. Being allowed 4 wives, is not prostitution Michal. It is an injustice to women that screams to the skies. I mention prostitution every time someone tries to equalize adultery, that is ILLEGAL in Judaism, and Christianity, with poligamy.. as what... men have to have sex with more than one women, so let's make it legal?

3. As for the comment on taking a woman to his tent.....you're saying rape? This is laughable, the most powerful man on the Peninsula, head of state, who refused countless marriage proposals...do you think there was a shortage of women for him? beauties of the day? Don't you think his followers would have dumped his as Prophet if he had raped ? I wasn't in his head... were you? And I am not in your head either.

He/his army killed Raihana Bint Amr's father and hausband and then he wanted to convert her and marry her... give me a break!

Your statement itself is contradictory, ...Why would The Prophet need a guard at the door, if he had just "cut the head's off a Jewish tribe" and was about to rape one of their women? Raping women during war invalidates Jihad. One of the rules of Jihad is that women are inviolate, that is enemy women, can't be raped. If they are, the criminal faces severe retribution. Are you a woman or what? I would try to kill him, if he would took me to his tent the SAME day he/his men killed all my tribe, and, above all, my hausband and father.

As for the validity of jihad in those cases... does this sound familiar to you:
"We were lusting after women and chastity had become too hard for us, but we wanted to get the ransom money for our prisoners. So we wanted to use the "Azl" (Coitus Interruptus- where the man withdraws before ejaculating)...We asked the Prophet about it and he said: "You are not under any obligation to stop yourselves from doing it like that.." Later on the women and children were given for ransom to their envoys. They all went away to their country and not One wanted to stay although they had the choice.."

[Mediocrates]

I am a little rusty on the bible MTJ but i am pretty sure that Abraham and the ancient Israelites were allowed more than one wife.


Polygamy died out in practice in Judaism around the 3rd century. It was outlawed outright at the end of the 10th century.

I know muslim women who are familiar with muslim polygamy as it is practiced in the west. I can't find anyone to be that enthusiastic about it.

[Achihud]

Now to get back to your question, about the verses, and the story behind them, as i said before it's a symbolic punishment, and serves as a warning to believers not to transgress. What is a "symbolic punishment" to you:

a) that some jews were turned into pigs and monkeys
b) that some jews were turned into pigs and monkeys only from the inside (their heart)
c) that nothing turned into pigs and monkeys, it NEVER HAPPENED!

Stop beating about the bush, a symbolic punishment is no punishment at all!
It's a bedtime story!!! Here is the story about the Sabbath breakers in those verses you mentioned...... I see the story but where are the right translations???
I'm not interested in the interpretations of god-knows-how-many scholars you can possibly dig up! I want the right translations to compare them with, at least the right ones from your POV! What's the matter, are you afraid of showing them?
Further more, I asked you not to fob me off with links leading to an entire encyclopaedia. So now you start posting the encyclopaedia??? Achihud, you know you make a big deal about God criticising Jews in the Quran, (…) If it is permitted, I make a big deal about Allah (!) criticising jews in the Qu'ran! (…) but what about when Prophet Moses warned you about the curses that would fall on the disobedient? God cursed and warned the believers through the Torah too, but obviously you don't consider the Torah to be "anti-Semitic" , so how fair is it to be so one sided? I'm not calling Moses a false prophet, so I see no problem here!
What I would call a problem is your definition of a symbolic punishment from (just one of) your own quotes; Only their hearts and not their figures were turned into monkeys and pigs. But they still had their tails…see below; The people became anxious and sent someone to look over the barrier to see what had happened to the sinners. When he looked, he found them turned into monkeys with tails, shouting. Muslima, you really go topsy-turvy as fast as a leaf does on a tree! For heaven's sake, which version is the one that you believe in; "symbolic punishment" version a, b or c?
And don't tell me it's version d; Allah knows best! You've tried that already…:D

[Muslima]

What is a "symbolic punishment" to you:

a) that some jews were turned into pigs and monkeys
b) that some jews were turned into pigs and monkeys only from the inside (their heart)
c) that nothing turned into pigs and monkeys, it NEVER HAPPENED!

Stop beating about the bush, a symbolic punishment is no punishment at all!
It's a bedtime story!!! I see the story but where are the right translations???
I'm not interested in the interpretations of god-knows-how-many scholars you can possibly dig up! I want the right translations to compare them with, at least the right ones from your POV! What's the matter, are you afraid of showing them?
Further more, I asked you not to fob me off with links leading to an entire encyclopaedia. So now you start posting the encyclopaedia??? If it is permitted, I make a big deal about Allah (!) criticising jews in the Qu'ran! I'm not calling Moses a false prophet, so I see no problem here!
What I would call a problem is your definition of a symbolic punishment from (just one of) your own quotes; But they still had their tails…see below; Muslima, you really go topsy-turvy as fast as a leaf does on a tree! For heaven's sake, which version is the one that you believe in; "symbolic punishment" version a, b or c?
And don't tell me it's version d; You've tried that already…:D

I'm not sure what you mean by where are the right translations?

And, i'm not going topsy-turvy, or anything, it's just that i've never paid much attention to these verses, as you seem to be doing, since Jew's aren't the only ones critiscised in the Quran, as i've mentioned before, so are Muslim's.

The version i believe in (and what the majority believe in) is what i've said in my first post on this subject, and that is that it's a symbolic punishment, that God will carry out on Yom Al Qiyamah, unless he chooses to forgive. The Prophet warned us , that Muslim's who comit the same sins will also get the same punishment. ie. the verses serve as warnings, not condemnations...

If you're saying "a symbolic punishment" is one that didn't take place here, well ok, i can agree with that, in this instance a time frame was given though, (Day of Judgement) , and that's why it's called symbolic. If it was a punishment that never happened, that can only come about if it is forgiven!

Please explain why these verses bother you so much, that you use them in your signature?

[Muslima]

To all those who commented on polygamy, (being equal to prostitution for example.......sheeeeeeesh, )

It's not encouraged, but it's allowed. And only if the man is able to treat them equally, ie, divide his time, wealth, resources, between them.

Michal, you said it's for men, but in actual fact it's for the protection of women. It's a way out of a social dilemma, there are instances when a man may not be able to divorce, etc.

You can pretend all you want, but we all know that the so called "monogomy" does not work. It goes against human nature. Remember that recent survery that said 90% of men have "cheated" on their wives? and that was in the so called civilised west!

A woman doesn't have to be a co-wife if she doesn't want to. She can have it written into her marriage contract, that if her husband takes another wife, he has to give her the option of a divorce first. The Prophet excercised this right for his daugher, when she said she didnt want to be a co-wife.

All Islam does is deal with this problem in a non hypocritical manner. In Scandinavia, mistresses have equal rights to wives. So what is the difference between that and having more than one wife?

I heard that courts in Europe, USA and Canada, Australia, are increasingly giving more and more rights to children born out of wedlock, and mistresses and so on and so forth........Do you see the hypocricy?

To bar polygamy, you're going to have to suggest an alternative that humanity hasn't yet been able to discover.So Michal, what would you recommend? :P

So other than Minus and Michal, what do you others think about polygamy? would you practice it? would you support outlawing it? How about you Toga? looooooool

[michal]

To all those who commented on polygamy, (being equal to prostitution for example.......sheeeeeeesh, )

It's not encouraged, but it's allowed. And only if the man is able to treat them equally, ie, divide his time, wealth, resources, between them.

Michal, you said it's for men, but in actual fact it's for the protection of women. It's a way out of a social dilemma, there are instances when a man may not be able to divorce, etc.

You can pretend all you want, but we all know that the so called "monogomy" does not work. It goes against human nature. Remember that recent survery that said 90% of men have "cheated" on their wives? and that was in the so called civilised west!
If you would like to claim poligamy is not legalized prostitution, you shouldn't argue that adultery is natural to men... because, you come back exacly on the fact I stated - that poligamy is legalized prostitution :D (are you also using da'wa booklets or websites?).

And what kind of god is the one who institutes poligamy for that reason (men can't control themselves), although it is also ackonwledged that polgamy is AGAINST woman nature... unless hasuband is abusive... THEN it is better for her to get beaten only once to twice a weak, instead everyday.

And I will repeat once more (always the same argument comes out with the muslims defending something that cannot be defended) - ADULTERY IS ILLEGAL IN BOTH JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY... I guess "our" God thinks men are on a bit higher level than animals... they even have free will ;).

A woman doesn't have to be a co-wife if she doesn't want to. She can have it written into her marriage contract, that if her husband takes another wife, he has to give her the option of a divorce first. The Prophet excercised this right for his daugher, when she said she didnt want to be a co-wife. That is not true, and you know it:

http://www.wluml.org/english/index.shtml

To bar polygamy, you're going to have to suggest an alternative that humanity hasn't yet been able to discover.So Michal, what would you recommend? :P O yes, it did... monogamy.

As far as recomendation goes - stop pretending like men are animals, that can't control themselves... it is like allowing some form of murder, because that is in people's nature :D.

[Achihud]

Ahum...back on topic!
As far as recomendation goes - stop pretending like men are animals, that can't control themselves... it is like allowing some form of murder, because that is in people's nature. :D ...it is like allowing some form of rape, because it's women's nature of probably deserving it!

(...oh yeah, oh yeah, aha, aha...)

Please explain why these verses bother you so much, that you use them in your signature? Please visit the link properly and read...instead of scrolling through it! You may skip SteveK's off-topic contribution. And find out for a change way michal says "our" God.

[Muslima]

If you would like to claim poligamy is not legalized prostitution, you shouldn't argue that adultery is natural to men... because, you come back exacly on the fact I stated - that poligamy is legalized prostitution :D (are you also using da'wa booklets or websites?)...

I'm not saying men are adulterous, stop twisting my words. REad what i said with an open mind and without bigotry, if that is at all possible for you. You didn't rebut any of my points?
1. If polygamy is to benefit men only, why are wives and mistresses equal in law, in Scandinavia, and catching up in the other western countries?
2. Why didn't monogomy put a stop to the practice of children born out of wedlock to men who have mistresses?
3. Why does civil law in Western countries hold the man responsible for all his offspring, (by wives or other women), or rather why does it end in messy court battles, when it could be done in a less hypocritical manner
4. Why are you pretending that one system is superior to another when it is plainly hypocritical?

No i am using the Torah here, and the actions permitted by THE GOD OF THE JEWS.

Genesis 4: Lamech took two wives
Genesis 28: Esau takes an additional wife, Mahalath
Genesis 36: Esau takes two more Canaanite wives
Deuteronomy 21: Inheritance law when a man has two wives
Judges 8: Gideon had many wives
I Samuel 1: Elkanah and his wives Hannah & Peninnah
I Samuel 25: David takes Abigail and Ahinoam as wives
II Samuel 5: David takes further wives and concubines
I Kings 11: Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (wow!)
I Kings 20: Implies King Ahab had multiple wives
II Kings 24: King Jehoiachin had multiple wives
I Chronicles 2: A lot of begatting via multiple wives
I Chronicles 4: Ashur had two wives, Helah and Naarah
I Chronicles 8: Shaharaim had two wives, Hushim and Baara
I Chronicles 14: David takes more wive at Jerusalem
II Chronicles 11: Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines
II Chronicles 13: Abijah marries 14 wives
II Chronicles 21: King Jehoram had multiple wives
II Chronicles 24: Jehoiada had two wives
Daniel 5: King Belshazzar had wives and concubines

It is a fact that polygamy (plural marriage) is not forbidden in Judaism and Christianity.

Stories in the Old Testament indicate polygamy was an accepted part
of the social order and is technically legal under Jewish law. But the
practice has been banned for Jews in Europe since the 11th century,
when rabbinate leaders sought to ease tensions between Jews and their
Christian neighbors, who considered polygamy barbaric. Kalifon said the
view of polygamy for the Jewish people differed significantly from that of
early leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, which
renounced the practice by the turn of the 20th century.
"What Joseph Smith and Brigham Young did was make polygyny an
ideal, with an ideal man having more than one wife," he said. "In Judaism,
it is permitted but definitely not encouraged, [and] was never considered
an ideal."

Quran allows polygamy too, but not without restrictions:

And what kind of god is the one who institutes poligamy for that reason (men can't control themselves), although it is also ackonwledged that polgamy is AGAINST woman nature... unless hasuband is abusive... THEN it is better for her to get beaten only once to twice a weak, instead everyday..

Can you answer this please. Which God do you believe in? THE GOD OF JEWS ALLOWS POLYGAMY

The Torah God allowed Polygamy. Stop pretending to be something you are not. Your God is secularism, not the Torah God.

You have a bias, and you are so blinded by it, that you ridicule and disrespect your own religion. Your "God" does allow polygamy, it was banned later by MEN because they were living amongst Christians. Israel only barred polygamy recently, due to secular law, not religous. REad the links below.

Question 8.6:
I've heard polygamy is permissible among Sephardic and Yemenite Jews. Doesn't Judaism mandate monogamy?
http://shamash.org/lists/scj-faq/HTML/faq/08-06.html


Polygamy's Practice Stirs Debate in Israel
BY CHRISTOPHER SMITH
http://www.polygamyinfo.com/plygmedia%2001%20178trib.htm

Is polygamy still allowed today?
Rabbi N. Silberberg
http://www.askmoses.com/qa_detail.html?h=573&o=2488

Although the Torah does not forbid polygamy (as we see that Abraham, Jacob, Saul, David, Solomon, etc., had more than one wife), around 1000 years ago a great German rabbi, Rabbi Gershom "the Light of the Diaspora", banned polygamy. This ban was accepted as law by all Ashkenazi Jews but never was recognized by the Sephardic communities.


[In fact, a half a century ago when the Yemenite Jews immigrated to Israel, many of them had more than one wife (the Israeli government, which forbids polygamy, made an exception for those Jews who arrived with more than one wife). However, polygamy today is almost non-existent because most Sephardic Jews live in societies where polygamy is not socially (and/or legally) acceptable.]


Different reasons are given for this ban:


Some explain that this ban was instituted to prevent people from taking advantage of their wives (Maharik beshem Rashbo, cited in Darkei Mosheh, Even Ha'ezer 1, note 10), or to avoid potential infighting between rival-wives (Mordechai Ketuvot #291, cited in Darkei Moshe there note 12).


Others add, that perhaps Rabbi Gershom was concerned lest the husband be unable to provide properly for all wives (especially in difficult times of Exile) (Maharam M'Padua #14; Mishkanot Yaakov #1); lest he marry another wife in a different place which may lead to forbidden relationships between offspring (Mishkanot Yaakov there), or maybe he simply wanted to avoid the inherent rivalry and "hatred" between rival wives which may lead to a number of violations (Maharam Shick EH #4).


R. Yaakov Emden suggests that it was adopted from the Christian practice and laws to avoid Christian attacks against Jews who act otherwise (Sheilat Yaavetz II:15), but this argument has been attacked by many other halachic authorities.



And I will repeat once more (always the same argument comes out with the muslims defending something that cannot be defended) - ADULTERY IS ILLEGAL IN BOTH JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY... I guess "our" God thinks men are on a bit higher level than animals... they even have free will ;)..

Truly i am impressed by this statement! (sarcasm)
It is refuted by links i posted above. Rabbi's who clearly state polygamy was banned by MEN NOT GOD, which means your God allows it, but you think you know better than God. Oh, and please can you stop with this "your God" nonsense, your desperation (and Achihud's) to prove another God exists, doesn't impress me at all. THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD. By even acknowledging another you blasmpheme against your first commandment!
"thou shalt not acknowledge another God"

That is not true, and you know it:
http://www.wluml.org/english/index.shtml
O yes, it did... monogamy..
As far as recomendation goes - stop pretending like men are animals, that can't control themselves... it is like allowing some form of murder, because that is in people's nature :D.

Michal did you read what i said? That is only one of the reason's, (men being polygamous by nature) and i didn't say all men, nor that that is the reason. I wasn't pretending, but you are clearly so ignorant about even your own religion. But even amongst secularists, there are those who would strongly disagree with you. What about the modern secular academics who are calling for polygamy and saying it benefits women?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polygamy
extracts:
David Friedman and Steve Sailer have argued that polygamy tends to benefit most women and disadvantage most men. Friedman uses this observation to argue in favor of legalizing polygamy, while Sailer uses it to argue against legalizing it.

The Libertarian Party supports complete decriminalization of polygamy as part of a general belief that the government should not regulate marriages.

Individualist feminism and advocates such as Wendy McElroy also support the freedom for adults to voluntarily enter polygamous marriages.

[Muslima]

Please visit the link properly and read...instead of scrolling through it! You may skip SteveK's off-topic contribution. And find out for a change way michal says "our" God.

Oh i know why Michal says "our God", and i suppose this applies to you as well.

The problem with people like you and Micha is that don't respect your own books and God. You embrace secularism, and then try to pretend it is what "your God" advocated, when God did nothing of the sort.

This then helps you phsycologically think that you are "superior" because you revised the opinion's of "your God". You turn your God secular and then ridicule other's who refuse to do the same.

A god that needs revising by human's is not a God. He is a figment of some deluded minds. Just read Michal's post, and you will understand what i mean.

Michal you will never convince Muslim's to change the word's of God. No matter how much you may ridicule. It will never happen, we received the final revelation which will remain unchanged till the end. That was God's promise and it is absolute. Still in force today:) For for all your ridiculing you have not explained why so many people in WESTERN COUNTRIES are embracing and converting to "our God" if indeed you believe Allah is a different God.

By the way, a question for you and Michal ???

Do you know why you last your land in the first place? Yes, yes, it was because you didn't keep the Torah (God's law) and instead embraced man made law, like Michal is advocating!

Make no mistake, we're NEVER going to do the same! The Quran Rox :))))

[michal]

I posted twice...

[michal]

I'm not saying men are adulterous, stop twisting my words. REad what i said with an open mind and without bigotry, if that is at all possible for you. You didn't rebut any of my points? You are implying that with all what you are saying. Look at your arguments listed by numbers.

No i am using the Torah here, and the actions permitted by THE GOD OF THE JEWS. Written Torah doesn't equalize Judaism. There is Oral and Written Torah... doing only what written one says makes you a Karaite.

So, if Ashkenazic halacha says that poligamy is forbidden, than according to at least that "branch" of Judaism, poligamy is forbidden... just like Muhammad wanted making it temporary measures for the time of war in the beginning of the spreading in Islam (look what he says when his DAUGHTER is involved in the question ;))...

Can you answer this please. Which God do you believe in? THE GOD OF JEWS ALLOWS POLYGAMY

The Torah God allowed Polygamy. Stop pretending to be something you are not. Your God is secularism, not the Torah God.

You have a bias, and you are so blinded by it, that you ridicule and disrespect your own religion. Your "God" does allow polygamy, it was banned later by MEN because they were living amongst Christians. Israel only barred polygamy recently, due to secular law, not religous. REad the links below. It was, within the TRADITION of the Middle East... as I sadi above and will repeat: Written Torah doesn't equalize Judaism. There is Oral and Written Torah... doing only what written one says makes you a Karaite.


I've heard polygamy is permissible among Sephardic and Yemenite Jews. Doesn't Judaism mandate monogamy?
http://shamash.org/lists/scj-faq/HTML/faq/08-06.html

Polygamy's Practice Stirs Debate in Israel
BY CHRISTOPHER SMITH
http://www.polygamyinfo.com/plygmedia%2001%20178trib.htm

Is polygamy still allowed today?
Rabbi N. Silberberg
http://www.askmoses.com/qa_detail.html?h=573&o=2488 Yep... you know where they lived for centuries... but they can't practise it in Israel.

Although the Torah does not forbid polygamy (as we see that Abraham, Jacob, Saul, David, Solomon, etc., had more than one wife), around 1000 years ago a great German rabbi, Rabbi Gershom "the Light of the Diaspora", banned polygamy. This ban was accepted as law by all Ashkenazi Jews but never was recognized by the Sephardic communities. Written Torah doesn't equalize Judaism. There is Oral and Written Torah... doing only what written one says makes you a Karaite.

Different reasons are given for this ban: Beauty of Judaism... I love this :).

It is refuted by links i posted above. Rabbi's who clearly state polygamy was banned by MEN NOT GOD, which means your God allows it, but you think you know better than God. Oh, and please can you stop with this "your God" nonsense, your desperation (and Achihud's) to prove another God exists, doesn't impress me at all. THERE IS ONLY ONE GOD. By even acknowledging another you blasmpheme against your first commandment!
"thou shalt not acknowledge another God" Written Torah doesn't equalize Judaism. There is Oral and Written Torah... doing only what written one says makes you a Karaite.

Michal did you read what i said? That is only one of the reason's, (men being polygamous by nature) and i didn't say all men, nor that that is the reason. I understood... those, thjat can't control their sexual desire, and are adulterous, have the poligamy as the way out... so adultery ceased to be seen as something that is bad...

There is only one God, and you don't worship yet another... why then can't you be a companion, friend, sexual partner to only one woman? Why do you need idol worshiping?

I wasn't pretending, but you are clearly so ignorant about even your own religion. But even amongst secularists, there are those who would strongly disagree with you. What about the modern secular academics who are calling for polygamy and saying it benefits women? :D

If the hausband is abusive, and you don't have the right to divorce, or don't have a chance to live as divorcee, or hausband would take your kids away from you after the divorce... by all means.

And please, don't be a hypocrite, and cite people (secular people, mostly atheists), who would be your first victims, when there would be a kalifate... after all, in that case I am still considered as part of the people of the book, and they as atheists, can have only one choice - to convert to islam, or to die.

[Mediocrates]

Ok then take it at it's face value. The Torah doesn't forbid slavery either yet there is no (longer) any slavery in Judaism. OTOH, in Arab cultures, without being specifically Islamic there is still slavery. Does that analogy work better for you?

Similarly there is no longer any theocratic Judeo nations any longer even though this is plainly set forth in Torah, however there are states which are more than nominally theorcratically Islamic whether you accept their particulare degree of adherence to Sharia or not.

So whether something is or is not in Torah is largely a pointless argument in this context.

[Muslima]

You are implying that with all what you are saying. Look at your arguments listed by numbers.

Written Torah doesn't equalize Judaism. There is Oral and Written Torah... doing only what written one says makes you a Karaite.

So, if Ashkenazic halacha says that poligamy is forbidden, than according to at least that "branch" of Judaism, poligamy is forbidden... just like Muhammad wanted making it temporary measures for the time of war in the beginning of the spreading in Islam (look what he says when his DAUGHTER is involved in the question ;))...

It was, within the TRADITION of the Middle East... as I sadi above and will repeat: Written Torah doesn't equalize Judaism. There is Oral and Written Torah... doing only what written one says makes you a Karaite.

Yep... you know where they lived for centuries... but they can't practise it in Israel.

Written Torah doesn't equalize Judaism. There is Oral and Written Torah... doing only what written one says makes you a Karaite.

Beauty of Judaism... I love this :).

Written Torah doesn't equalize Judaism. There is Oral and Written Torah... doing only what written one says makes you a Karaite.

I understood... those, thjat can't control their sexual desire, and are adulterous, have the poligamy as the way out... so adultery ceased to be seen as something that is bad...

There is only one God, and you don't worship yet another... why then can't you be a companion, friend, sexual partner to only one woman? Why do you need idol worshiping?

:D

If the hausband is abusive, and you don't have the right to divorce, or don't have a chance to live as divorcee, or hausband would take your kids away from you after the divorce... by all means.

And please, don't be a hypocrite, and cite people (secular people, mostly atheists), who would be your first victims, when there would be a kalifate... after all, in that case I am still considered as part of the people of the book, and they as atheists, can have only one choice - to convert to islam, or to die.

Michal, i don't understand what you mean by "karaite",

You said your "God" doesn't allow polygamy.

1. If your God doesn't allow polygamy, what do you have to say about all your Prophet's who were polygamous? I can use the same argument against them that you use for The Prophet (Mohammed) . Are you saying your God turned a blind eye to something you considered so evil? Your God allowed women to be abused? (since you consider this abusing women)

2. Oh and don't be a hypocrite, and avoid answering my question. We were not talking about what would happen under a future Caliphate, we were talking about why SECULAR people do not agree with your analysis on polygamy.

3. You did not comment on the long list of Polygamous Jewish men i posted, who were living in ISRAEL, NOT MUSLIM LANDS.

4. You can twist and turn all you want but you can't change facts. IT WAS RABBI'S WHO BANNED POLYGAMY, AND NOT THE JEWISH GOD

5. You are selective about what you choose to regard as Judaism. If one branch of Judaism outlawed polygamy, fine. What do you have to say about the branches that didn't? Can you give me a clear answer to this. You know very well the Rabbi that outlawed it, did so because of CHRISTIAN PRESSURE. The Jews on Muslim land's faced no such pressure, that;s why kept the Torah like it was and didn't need to change laws.

Can't you see your hypocricy here? You are saying the Christian societies, who forced Rabbi's to rethink their practice knew better? Do you have such little faith and pride in your own culture and religion?

6. Women in Islam can get a divorce if they are abused.
I told you before your Islamic knowledge is BS. Either get educated or stop throwing your lies about Islam that you get from hate sites, in my face. How would you like it if i brought stuff from David Dukes site and rubbed it in your face?


Answer my questions please.

[Muslima]

Ok then take it at it's face value. The Torah doesn't forbid slavery either yet there is no (longer) any slavery in Judaism. OTOH, in Arab cultures, without being specifically Islamic there is still slavery. Does that analogy work better for you?

Similarly there is no longer any theocratic Judeo nations any longer even though this is plainly set forth in Torah, however there are states which are more than nominally theorcratically Islamic whether you accept their particulare degree of adherence to Sharia or not.

So whether something is or is not in Torah is largely a pointless argument in this context.

Well Med, your argument is a totally different one to Michal's, that is why, i don't agree with your last statement. If it's in the Torah or not is relevant in this context because Michal said "our God" meaning the "jewish God" doesn't allow polygamy.

You are saying polygamy became outlawed, like slavery was. That is a different subject to what Michal raised. And in actual fact, not many Muslim men practice polygamy nowaday's. It's either the very rich or the very poor who do, since the conditons are so onerous, that the middle classes don't bother.

Michal said that the " Jewish God" does not allow polygamy. Clearly that is a colossal lie. THE GOD OF THE TORAH ALLOWED POLYGAMY. RABBI'S OUTLAWED IT IN SOME BRANCHES OF JUDAISM. That is a fact that Michal can't accept.

It's worth mentioning that slavery was outlawed in Islam too, the Prophet made it clear that freeing a slave is one of the best things a believer can do. Slavery was allowed but regarded as a social necessity, that should be outlawed but without causing harm to the slaves. ie. it couldn't be done immediately, otherwise slaves would be left destitute ......etc. etc.

By the way, why hasn't anyone commented on the other points i raised, about how secular societies are giving mistresses the same rights as wives? and men being made legally responsible for offspring out side marriage? WHY THE HYPOCRITICAL DOUBLE STANDARD?

Can someone please rebut these arguments in a sensible manner?

[Mediocrates]

Michal, i don't understand what you mean by "karaite",



It's a cult, a sect.

4. You can twist and turn all you want but you can't change facts. IT WAS RABBI'S WHO BANNED POLYGAMY, AND NOT THE JEWISH GOD


point?

5. You are selective about what you choose to regard as Judaism. If one branch of Judaism outlawed polygamy, fine.
they all did.


What do you have to say about the branches that didn't?
there aren't any


Can you give me a clear answer to this. You know very well the Rabbi that outlawed it, did so because of CHRISTIAN PRESSURE.
no it was banned because of the oppression both of you put us under. whether it was overt dhimmi oppression or pogroms, it became infeasible to draw attention to any wealth and power in the Jewish community.


The Jews on Muslim land's faced no such pressure, that;s why kept the Torah like it was and didn't need to change laws.

This is nonsense.

6. Women in Islam can get a divorce if they are abused.
I told you before your Islamic knowledge is BS. Either get educated or stop throwing your lies about Islam that you get from hate sites, in my face. How would you like it if i brought stuff from David Dukes site and rubbed it in your face?


in practice polygamy is practiced extralegally. one legally divorces one wife and marries another while living with both. it's not so uncommon.

[Mediocrates]

Michal said that the " Jewish God" does not allow polygamy. Clearly that is a colossal lie. THE GOD OF THE TORAH ALLOWED POLYGAMY. RABBI'S OUTLAWED IT IN SOME BRANCHES OF JUDAISM. That is a fact that Michal can't accept.


More precisely Torah neither allows nor forbids it but understands that at the time it happened for either personal or Levirate reasons.

Levirate:
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=293&letter=L

[minusthejihad]

The problem with people like you and Micha is that don't respect your own books and God. You embrace secularism, and then try to pretend it is what "your God" advocated, when God did nothing of the sort.

This then helps you phsycologically think that you are "superior" because you revised the opinion's of "your God". You turn your God secular and then ridicule other's who refuse to do the same.

A god that needs revising by human's is not a God. He is a figment of some deluded minds. Just read Michal's post, and you will understand what i mean.

Michal you will never convince Muslim's to change the word's of God. No matter how much you may ridicule. It will never happen, we received the final revelation which will remain unchanged till the end. That was God's promise and it is absolute. Still in force today:) For for all your ridiculing you have not explained why so many people in WESTERN COUNTRIES are embracing and converting to "our God" if indeed you believe Allah is a different God.

By the way, a question for you and Michal ???

Do you know why you last your land in the first place? Yes, yes, it was because you didn't keep the Torah (God's law) and instead embraced man made law, like Michal is advocating!

Make no mistake, we're NEVER going to do the same! The Quran Rox :))))

How's the self-righteous smug air up there?

[Achihud]

Oh, and please can you stop with this "your God" nonsense, your desperation (and Achihud's) to prove another God exists, doesn't impress me at all. Let's find out what real desperation is, shall we? Well i didn't know about your invitation about visiting that thread! Anyhow i visited it.....and........same 'ole.....same 'ole........
From your 'didn't know' in topsy-turvy #39 back to...look at the date:

http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=169611&postcount=34

In there I told you that it was a link to a thread where you could find what it all means…look at the date:

http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=169798&postcount=79

So you went on ignoring it and I kept teasing...look at the date:

http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=175644&postcount=34

Until you couldn't control yourself any longer…look at the date:

http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=175693&postcount=37

And all this because you prefer to call these symbolic punishments "incidents" as if it already happened. Incidents we both agreed on that it NEVER HAPPENED!
What kind of an incident is an incident that never happened, trolling scrolling lying Muslima???

But it would be stupid (and boring) to present the same evidence all over again to every trolling muslim around that for convenience sake chooses to ignore what he/she doesn't want to acknowledge. Namely that those antisemitic stories from the Qu'ran are nothing more then fairy tales. FAIRY TALES!!! Unless you care to share with us what the right translations are...

And please, address me properly next time instead of hiding in a post to michal what you have to say about me!

[Achihud]

Is there anyone in favour for a muslima-dessert?


The purpose of her #69 to me was (pretty much) Allah = God!

The title she has chosen to back this (worthless) claim up:

"ACHIHUD, LEAVE GOD OUT OF THIS, (Question of you and Michal)"

So in order to buy this claim from Muslima's BS-religion, I'm asked right from the start 'to leave God out of it'!!!

Congrats!…Muslima, you captured the true spirit of islam from Ay to Zay!

So why should I bother to comment on the content of #69 except perhaps for this?

Make no mistake, we're NEVER going to do the same! What, leave God out of it?
As I said before, you go as fast topsy-turvy as a leaf does on a tree! But still… The Quran Rox I'm sure it does…with no proper translations to back up your claim about the "symbolic punishment" so that version a & b are finally replaced by version c, that it NEVER HAPPENED!

Muslima, I'm getting tired of frolicking around with your topsy-turvy response for response’ sake! When are you going to post the right translations? Then I can finally move on to do some REAL demolishing of your pathetic "Allah = God" claim.



…toc-toc-toc-toc…
…toc-toc-toc-toc…
…toc-toc-toc-toc…
…toc-toc-toc-toc…
(…these are my fingers on the table…)

[Muslima]

Is there anyone in favour for a muslima-dessert?


The purpose of her #69 to me was (pretty much) Allah = God!

The title she has chosen to back this (worthless) claim up:

"ACHIHUD, LEAVE GOD OUT OF THIS, (Question of you and Michal)"

So in order to buy this claim from Muslima's BS-religion, I'm asked right from the start 'to leave God out of it'!!!

Congrats!…Muslima, you captured the true spirit of islam from Ay to Zay!

So why should I bother to comment on the content of #69 except perhaps for this?

What, leave God out of it?
As I said before, you go as fast topsy-turvy as a leaf does on a tree! But still… I'm sure it does…with no proper translations to back up your claim about the "symbolic punishment" so that version a & b are finally replaced by version c, that it NEVER HAPPENED!

Muslima, I'm getting tired of frolicking around with your topsy-turvy response for response’ sake! When are you going to post the right translations? Then I can finally move on to do some REAL demolishing of your pathetic "Allah = God" claim.



…toc-toc-toc-toc…
…toc-toc-toc-toc…
…toc-toc-toc-toc…
…toc-toc-toc-toc…
(…these are my fingers on the table…)

I'm not frolicking around, and why do you make it sound like i'm hiding something from you? I've said all i know on this subject, and posted the links i could.
If you want the translations to the verses that you mentioned, well here they are.....

Al A'râf
Surah 7. The Heights

Surah Al- Araf:

7.163 . Ask them ( O Muhammad ) of the township that was by the sea , how
they did break the sabbath , how their big fish came unto them visibly upon
their sabbath day and on a day when they did not keep sabbath came they not
unto them . Thus did We try them for that they were evil livers .

7.164 . And when a community among them said : Why preach ye to a folk whom
Allah is about to destroy and punish with an awful doom , they said : In
order to be free from guilt before your Lord , and that haply they may ward
off ( evil ) .

7.165 . And when they forgot that whereof they had been reminded , We
rescued those who forbade wrong , and visited those who did wrong with
dreadful punishment because they were evil livers .

7.166 . So when they took pride in that which they had been forbidden , We
said unto them : Be ye apes despised and loathed!

Surah:5.60.
Say: Shall I inform you of him who is worse than this in retribution from
Allah?
Worse is he whom Allah has cursed and brought His wrath upon (The JEWS),
and of whom He turned into apes and swine,
and he who served the Shaitan; these are worse than any others in the world
and more erring from the straight path.

What is the big deal about them?

[scattergood]

I'm not frolicking around, and why do you make it sound like i'm hiding something from you? I've said all i know on this subject, and posted the links i could.
If you want the translations to the verses that you mentioned, well here they are.....

Al A'râf
Surah 7. The Heights

Surah Al- Araf:

7.163 . Ask them ( O Muhammad ) of the township that was by the sea , how
they did break the sabbath , how their big fish came unto them visibly upon
their sabbath day and on a day when they did not keep sabbath came they not
unto them . Thus did We try them for that they were evil livers .

7.164 . And when a community among them said : Why preach ye to a folk whom
Allah is about to destroy and punish with an awful doom , they said : In
order to be free from guilt before your Lord , and that haply they may ward
off ( evil ) .

7.165 . And when they forgot that whereof they had been reminded , We
rescued those who forbade wrong , and visited those who did wrong with
dreadful punishment because they were evil livers .

7.166 . So when they took pride in that which they had been forbidden , We
said unto them : Be ye apes despised and loathed!

Surah:5.60.
Say: Shall I inform you of him who is worse than this in retribution from
Allah?
Worse is he whom Allah has cursed and brought His wrath upon (The JEWS),
and of whom He turned into apes and swine,
and he who served the Shaitan; these are worse than any others in the world
and more erring from the straight path.

What is the big deal about them?

The big deal is that these citations are the very basis for rampant anti-semitism in the Arab and Muslim world:


Islamic claims that certain Jews had been transformed into lowly animals
Al-Jahiz (d. 869), a ninth century Islamic zoologist and belles-lettriste who authored The Book of Animals, writes that the mouse, cheetah, eel, white ant (termite), and lizard were originally sinful Jews. (See Al-Jahiz, Omar bin Bahar, Kitab Al-Hayawan. Cairo: Mustafa Al-Bai Al-Halabi and sons (1943), Col. I, p. 309.)

Qur'an 7:163 says that God told a group of Sabbath-breakers living by the sea "Be ye apes, despised and rejected" to punish them for breaking the Sabbath. This verse (interpreted to mean that they were turned into apes) is sometimes used by hostile groups to mock the Jews, on the grounds that these must have been Jews, since the Sabbath is a commandment which (according to Islam) God demanded of Jews but not of his other followers. Thus Hamas says:

"Allah did not mete out the punishment of transformation on any nation except the Jews. The significance of it is actual change in the appearance of the Jew and perfect transformation from human to bestial condition... from human appearance to the form of genuine apes, pigs, mice, and lizards..." (Source: The Hamas monthly publication Falastin Al-Muslima (London), September 1996, series of articles by Ibrahim Al-'Ali, pp. 54-55.)
Similarly, the following quotes are excerpted from a sermon broadcast on Palestinian TV by Dr. Mustafa Najem, Dec. 6, 2002:

"The Jews...are the brothers of monkeys and pigs...Allah has warned us against their evil and their arrogance, and has said: 'You will find that the most brazen among mankind, with hatred towards the believers, are the Jews and the Idolaters.' [Koran, 81,5]...The Jews are Jews, and we are forbidden to forget their character traits even for a moment, even for a blink of an eye. O Servants of Allah! The Jews are those who tried to murder your Prophet in order to expunge the call (to Islam)....Prayer and blessing to the Imam of the Jihad fighters, Mohammed, who waged a Jihad against the Jews...The Jews...are Idolaters, heretics, whose faith is false."
In the Islamic Aghlabid dynasty (9th through 11th century, North Africa) Jews were forced to wear a patch that had an image of a monkey, and were also forced to affix said image to their homes. (For Christians, the image was of a pig.) (F. Viré, "Kird," Encyclopedia of Islam, Second Edition.)


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_anti-Semitism#20th_century_anti-Semitism_by_Islamic_clerics

or



The popular Al-Jazeera talk show, "The Opposite Direction," recently addressed the issue of whether Osama bin Laden has served the cause of Islam, or damaged it. Appearing on the program were Osama Safar, a Kuwaiti columnist who opposed bin Laden and Abdallah Bin Matruk Al-Haddal, a Saudi preacher from the Ministry of Islamic Affairs in Saudi Arabia, who supported bin Laden

....

"I don't believe that the attack on America [on September 11th] was perpetrated by bin Laden or the Muslims. I think differently. I believe it was a scheme. What is happening now is a continuation of an ancient attack. It is a continuation of the Jewish deception and the Jewish-Zionist wickedness which infiltrates the U.S.... I am surprised that the Christian U.S. allows the 'brothers of apes and pigs' [meaning the Jews] to corrupt it. [The Jews] have murdered the prophets and the messengers. [The Jews] are the most despicable people who walked the land and are the worms of the entire world. They are all evil. And why? Because they are deceiving and plotting aggressors..."

http://www.memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP34302

And these are just the ones that I could find in a 1 minute search of google that had been translated into English. How many times every day in hundreds of thousands of Madrass's is this claim of dehumanization of Jews made based on Quranic texts? Countless I would imagine....that's why it is a big deal.

[Muslima]

The big deal is that these citations are the very basis for rampant anti-semitism in the Arab and Muslim world:



or



And these are just the ones that I could find in a 1 minute search of google that had been translated into English. How many times every day in hundreds of thousands of Madrass's is this claim of dehumanization of Jews made based on Quranic texts? Countless I would imagine....that's why it is a big deal.

Actually, this is something that needs to be tackled in the Arab world.

It has to be said that most people know what the true meanings of these verses are, but the current political situation makes them swallow or believe what they want to believe, and of course there are religious leaders out there, fanning the flames, and giving them ammunition. Ignorance feeding ignorance,and it ain't right. In fact it's downright despicable. But actually what has more impact is what they see on screens, and even if they do have doubts, then they tend to think
"Oh , yes, well i heard earlier, this is what to expect"
What feeds it are media reports, one image on a TV screen, is worth a thousand words......etc. etc.

If it's any consolation they are a minority......but they have a loud voice...and shout it from the roof tops.......

[minusthejihad]

Actually, this is something that needs to be tackled in the Arab world.

Yeah, well they have a lot of work to do:

http://www.mererhetoric.com/archives/11272016.html

Iranian President Claims Islam is Not a Religion of Peace

In what was undoubtedly his intention, Ahmadinejad is boasting that he's unpopped the cork of genocidal Muslim violence against Jews:

Tehran, Iran, Jan. 03 – Iran’s hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told a parliamentary committee that his remarks calling for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and describing the Holocaust as a "myth" had a profound impact on Muslims around the world, providing a "shock" that was needed "to awaken the Muslims who are in a state of lethargy", a government-owned news agency reported on Tuesday... "Some in Iran and abroad thought that we were making these speeches without a specific plan and policy, but we have been pursuing a specific strategy in this regard", the Iranian president told a group of Islamist student activists in a midnight meeting last week, according to the Persian-language website Khedmat, which was launched by Ahmadinejad’s campaign team during the presidential elections last year. "The wave [that these speeches created] has a lot of supporters among young people in the Muslim world and it will continue to move forward", Ahmadinejad said.

In a continuation of recent "maybe we will and maybe we won't" misinformation, today Israel is claiming that yes, it can destroy Iran's nuclear weapons. This, of course, is in sharp contrast some of the best public military analysts in the world, who beg to differ because they think that Iran has passed a point of no return. Thanks Europe!

[scattergood]

Actually, this is something that needs to be tackled in the Arab world.

It is good to see that you agree, but I think there is a lot more work than you think needs to be done. When the heads of state (Iran and Malasia) produce diatribes against Jews and Israel with very very little condemnation or offical legal positions (KSA) exclude Jews from visiting, or the media (PA, Egypt and Lebanon) produce Protocol of the Elders of Zion mini-series that are lapped up, there is a MAJOR problem. This problem is two fold:

1) That such widespread, deeply ingrained discrimination exists.
2) That dissent against this view isn't tolerated.

If and when a free press, free assembly, freedom of religion are available in Islamic countries, then and only then will this problem of Jew bashing have even the possibility of being done away with. Until then, it is totalitarianism as usual in the Sharia states.

It has to be said that most people know what the true meanings of these verses are, but the current political situation makes them swallow or believe what they want to believe, and of course there are religious leaders out there, fanning the flames, and giving them ammunition.

Who says it? Who are most people? Unless they stand up and change the system at some point they are the system. During the civil rights movment here in the USA it was the strong dissent of non-black, non-southern folks from all over the country that stood up and changed the system of ingrained racial discriminatin. Until Muslims in these countries stand up and be counted for tolerance, they are staying at home and being counted for intolerance.

Ignorance feeding ignorance,and it ain't right. In fact it's downright despicable. But actually what has more impact is what they see on screens, and even if they do have doubts, then they tend to think
"Oh , yes, well i heard earlier, this is what to expect"
What feeds it are media reports, one image on a TV screen, is worth a thousand words......etc. etc.

Yes, but they have a choice to watch or not. They have a choice to support a state that spews such dribble. And to deny them that choice, denies them the choice to do good or do evil, to have any power over their own lives. To deny that they have that choice gives all the power over one person's life to the producers and disseminators of such intolerance.

If it's any consolation they are a minority......but they have a loud voice...and shout it from the roof tops.......

When 70% of the Palestinians belive that violence is a good thing, when there is no outcry in Iran for calling for Israel to be wiped off the earth, when the UN can have events with maps that don't even recognize Israel at the events, then it kind of doesn't matter if it is a minority or not. They are in power and it has been getting worse not better beause not nearly enough people stand up to them in the Muslim world. There is a very famous poem by a German pastor:

When they came for the communists,
I remained silent;
I was not a communist.

When they locked up the social democrats,
I remained silent;
I was not a social democrat.

When they came for the trade unionists,
I did not speak out;
I was not a trade unionist.

When they came for the Jews,
I did not speak out;
I was not a Jew.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came...

What happens if the forces of intolerant and totalitarian Islam expand and win in your corner of the world? Do you live up to their standards of Islam? Do you do EVERYTHING they think you should? Will there be anybody left to defend you?

[michal]

Michal, i don't understand what you mean by "karaite"... That means to belong to the heresy within Judaism, that acknowledge, and therefore apply, only Written Law (so, on Shabat, that is the core of Judaism, and so special, they sit in the dark and cold, and eat cold fod... let me be plain)...

Therefore, all of numerous Torah quotes as arguments in this context in which you are using them are invalid, unless Oral Law is taken into consideration, which you didn't do.

That means, if you want to talk about Jewish (meaning Rabbinical Judaism here) Law (Halacha), considering poliagmy, you must cite relevant parts of Written Torah (which you, more or less did), then some Mishna about that... going deeper to Talmudic discussions, post Talmudic (like Rambam or Shulkhan Arukh) to Responsa literature, minhagim (customs), but also to poskim (and we do consider their proposals today on lot of issues)... I didn't want to complicate a lot, just to give you a hint...

I also think that Islam is not as simple religion as da'wa people (misionaries) are trying to show, and that Islam lays on both Kuran and Hadith, and Sunna (minhag over here), but also is very legislative religion and Sharia (Halakha) is not there just for fun.

Our exegesis is different, so neither can I look at Islam through my Jewish eyes, nor can you understand Judaism trhough your Muslim perspective.

Just that I don't go to muslim forums, and trying to push what I think Islam is through their throats. Or, like in your case, trying to turn the topic upside down, as you don't like somebody is telling you the truth about rapes in the West.

2. Oh and don't be a hypocrite, and avoid answering my question. We were not talking about what would happen under a future Caliphate, we were talking about why SECULAR people do not agree with your analysis on polygamy. I answered this... but I also wander about Islam being very selective what will it take from the secular world... only what fits the rulling class within it - men. And of course, Islam just loves to take minority rulings of secular world... So, when it comes to women, family law (in the case of kids from divorced marriages belong to the father and so on), then you spit all over that secular world... psychologists who explain weel being of children as well... if you already used the word hypocrite.

3. You did not comment on the long list of Polygamous Jewish men i posted, who were living in ISRAEL, NOT MUSLIM LANDS. They do now... the came from the Muslim lands already married. If they married in Israel they broke the law as poligamy in Israel is not allowed.

4. You can twist and turn all you want but you can't change facts. IT WAS RABBI'S WHO BANNED POLYGAMY, AND NOT THE JEWISH GOD Again... look at my first answer... if you really want to discuss about Judaism, do read somethig outside of aboutsonsofmonkeys&pigs.com, or dawacentral.com, and thet we can talk about it.

5. You are selective about what you choose to regard as Judaism. If one branch of Judaism outlawed polygamy, fine. What do you have to say about the branches that didn't? Can you give me a clear answer to this. You know very well the Rabbi that outlawed it, did so because of CHRISTIAN PRESSURE. The Jews on Muslim land's faced no such pressure, that;s why kept the Torah like it was and didn't need to change laws. See above (now I do need to answer all over again, as when I skip some repetition, you claim I didn't asnwer).

Can't you see your hypocricy here? You are saying the Christian societies, who forced Rabbi's to rethink their practice knew better? Do you have such little faith and pride in your own culture and religion? Look above.

6. Women in Islam can get a divorce if they are abused.
I told you before your Islamic knowledge is BS. Either get educated or stop throwing your lies about Islam that you get from hate sites, in my face. How would you like it if i brought stuff from David Dukes site and rubbed it in your face? In theory, they can... but that means they go back to their father... without their children, of course... and they, they usually have to marry again (well, in theory, they don't need to, but we are talking life here).

And... I am much better educated in Islam, then you are in Judaism... thanks to da'wa people who are so BORING that, even if I had my ears closed all the time, I would have learnt a lot... and don't be so melodramatic about David Duke... after all I clearly see where you take your information about Judaism... thanks to these da'wa guys I previously met, of course.

[Muslima]

And... I am much better educated in Islam, then you are in Judaism... thanks to da'wa people who are so BORING that, even if I had my ears closed all the time, I would have learnt a lot... ""

Sorry to say this but you are totally ignorant about Islam. I never claimed to be an expert either on Islamic law or Jewish Halacha. But any fool can see what you're trying to do. You didn't answer any of my questions and you think that by diverting attention you can get away with nonsense. Sorry, but i'm not buying.

When i said, explain the list of Jewish men who were polygamous, i didn't mean those living on Arab lands, i meant these,

Genesis 4: Lamech took two wives
Genesis 28: Esau takes an additional wife, Mahalath
Genesis 36: Esau takes two more Canaanite wives
Deuteronomy 21: Inheritance law when a man has two wives
Judges 8: Gideon had many wives
I Samuel 1: Elkanah and his wives Hannah & Peninnah
I Samuel 25: David takes Abigail and Ahinoam as wives
II Samuel 5: David takes further wives and concubines
I Kings 11: Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (wow!)
I Kings 20: Implies King Ahab had multiple wives
II Kings 24: King Jehoiachin had multiple wives
I Chronicles 2: A lot of begatting via multiple wives
I Chronicles 4: Ashur had two wives, Helah and Naarah
I Chronicles 8: Shaharaim had two wives, Hushim and Baara
I Chronicles 14: David takes more wive at Jerusalem
II Chronicles 11: Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines
II Chronicles 13: Abijah marries 14 wives
II Chronicles 21: King Jehoram had multiple wives
II Chronicles 24: Jehoiada had two wives
Daniel 5: King Belshazzar had wives and concubines


Here is the verse from Deuteronomy in which God talks about inheritance rights for men who have more than one wife.
"Deuteronomy 21: Inheritance law when a man has two wives "

16
when he comes to bequeath his property to his sons he may not consider as his first-born the son of the wife he loves, in preference to his true first-born, the son of the wife whom he dislikes.
17
On the contrary, he shall recognize as his first-born the son of her whom he dislikes, giving him a double share of whatever he happens to own, since he is the first fruits of his manhood, and to him belong the rights of the first-born.

The only restriction on polygamy is a ban on taking a wife's sister as a rival wife (Lev. 18:18). The Talmud advises a maximum of four wives.


If polygamy were adultery it would have been banned by God when he gave the laws to Prophet Moses, since all abhorrent acts were forbidden. But it wasn't, it was banned many centuries later by Rabbi's and this alone exposes your nonsensical comments about "our God" being superior to "your God" . You didn't even explain why "your God" didn't ban the practice. Or why there are clear verses in The Torah which tell men how to divide property amongst wives and that they can't marry 2 sisters at the same time.

How does all the above compare with what you said below



And what kind of god is the one who institutes poligamy for that reason (men can't control themselves), although it is also ackonwledged that polgamy is AGAINST woman nature... unless hasuband is abusive... THEN it is better for her to get beaten only once to twice a weak, instead everyday.

And I will repeat once more (always the same argument comes out with the muslims defending something that cannot be defended) - ADULTERY IS ILLEGAL IN BOTH JUDAISM AND CHRISTIANITY... I guess "our" God thinks men are on a bit higher level than animals... they even have free will

So after all this, please can you answer "yes" or "no" to this question?


Did "your God" allow polygamy, or not?

[michal]

Sorry to say this but you are totally ignorant about Islam. I never claimed to be an expert either on Islamic law or Jewish Halacha. But any fool can see what you're trying to do. You didn't answer any of my questions and you think that by diverting attention you can get away with nonsense. Sorry, but i'm not buying.

When i said, explain the list of Jewish men who were polygamous, i didn't mean those living on Arab lands, i meant these Moshe was given both Written and Oral Torah on Sinai. You can't discuss Judaism only according to the Written Torah. I will repeat this till next ywera, and won't be boared... it says lot about youur intellectual honesty though.

And no, I am not selling... Judaism is not missionazing religion ;).


Genesis 4: Lamech took two wives
Genesis 28: Esau takes an additional wife, Mahalath
Genesis 36: Esau takes two more Canaanite wives
Deuteronomy 21: Inheritance law when a man has two wives
Judges 8: Gideon had many wives
I Samuel 1: Elkanah and his wives Hannah & Peninnah
I Samuel 25: David takes Abigail and Ahinoam as wives
II Samuel 5: David takes further wives and concubines
I Kings 11: Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines (wow!)
I Kings 20: Implies King Ahab had multiple wives
II Kings 24: King Jehoiachin had multiple wives
I Chronicles 2: A lot of begatting via multiple wives
I Chronicles 4: Ashur had two wives, Helah and Naarah
I Chronicles 8: Shaharaim had two wives, Hushim and Baara
I Chronicles 14: David takes more wive at Jerusalem
II Chronicles 11: Rehoboam had 18 wives and 60 concubines
II Chronicles 13: Abijah marries 14 wives
II Chronicles 21: King Jehoram had multiple wives
II Chronicles 24: Jehoiada had two wives
Daniel 5: King Belshazzar had wives and concubines There is a place and time for everything. It was and it is not any more. I answered you that. There was a slavery once upon a time as well... times changed... Jewish Law is not so simplistic as da'wa sites are telling you.

And... hypocricy again... oh please, wa cant talk if you cite faithfreedom.org :'-(((((... but, on the same token, you are citing www.sonsofmonkeys&pigs.com (http://www.sonsofmonkeys&pigs.com) on regular basis... in fact, I have a feeling you don't even read what I write.

Amazing.

If polygamy were adultery it would have been banned by God when he gave the laws to Prophet Moses, since all abhorrent acts were forbidden. But it wasn't, it was banned many centuries later by Rabbi's and this alone exposes your nonsensical comments about "our God" being superior to "your God" . You didn't even explain why "your God" didn't ban the practice. Or why there are clear verses in The Torah which tell men how to divide property amongst wives and that they can't marry 2 sisters at the same time. Problem with Islam is that it is trying to go back to the 7th century... following this logic, we would have slaves, and not use car, electricity, and so on... No, I am not avoiding the question, I answered above.

So after all this, please can you answer "yes" or "no" to this question?


Did "your God" allow polygamy, or not?Not any more. Judaism is not "yes", "no", and "beep... wrong answer... yoiu are going to hell" type of religion... it is much more than that.



Now, you can try go back to the topic ;)... or you don't need to, this can also be your answer.... intellectual dishonesty.

[Muslima]

Not any more. Judaism is not "yes", "no", and "beep... wrong answer... yoiu are going to hell" type of religion... it is much more than that.


Now, you can try go back to the topic ;)... or you don't need to, this can also be your answer.... intellectual dishonesty.

You know what Michal? I've just about had it with your BS. And you're not answering "yes" or "no" because if you say "yes" it exposes your lies, and if you say "no", then you are denying the truth in the Torah.


I'm getting sick of your evading the issue, and then using Judaism as an excuse to hide behind. Who do you think you are to decide whether Judaism is a "yes" and "no" religion? You don't have the decency to admit when you are wrong, of course that would bring you back to earth with a bump from that high horse you're sitting on.
I'm getting sick of your continual self serving hypocritical nonsense, your constant habit, of projecting your own bigotry on others, what the hell is pigsandmonkeys.com? I'm sick of your shoving words down my throat, i don't recall having appointed you as my speaker?
I'm sick of your distortions of history and your brazen lies picked up from hate sites, that you try to pass of as historical facts.

And MOST OF ALL i'm sick of your offensive manner of communication and the way you put your horrible views acrosss, from the fate of atheists in the future Caliphate, to whether the "dirty kafirs" at Amazon.com are good enough for me.

Go and get a life, get an education and get the hell out of my way! Dismissed!

[SteveMetch]

Aint never going to happen. The West (especially Eurabia) is scared of muslims and offending the Islamic world.

Where are the Nationalist when you need them? I think the US was too effective in killing off the super race in Nazi Germany. There appears to be too few men left in Old Europe to defend it from the Islamo-fascist.

Europe has two choices before it. Live or Die. Choose life.

By the way, Muslims know all about cutting off things for certain crimes.

Now what could we threaten to cut off that would discourage rape, prevent future rapes once they happen and reduce the Islamo-fascist birth rate at the same time?

[michal]

You know what Michal? I've just about had it with your BS. And you're not answering "yes" or "no" because if you say "yes" it exposes your lies, and if you say "no", then you are denying the truth in the Torah. That is Judaism... that is why we are here for such a long time, despite all odds. Read a bit about Judaism, and then bring your judgments about it... not before... da'wa central takes it out of context. Rather read Jewish authors... try here (http://www.jewfaq.org/toc.htm) for the beginning, than take some books. Don't uderestimate God ;).

Go and get a life, get an education and get the hell out of my way! Dismissed!I am not your dhimmi, and you can't talk to me like that. This is forum, everyone here is allowed to say what she/he wants to say.

But I do understand - the subject of the topic is one you are avoiding... but the, why did you come at the first place?

[sharonbn]

ehh, people, I understand the intense emotions that this topic raises in your hearts. I understand the need to express your point in the strongest terms.

I just want to point out that some members here were offended by the blatant words in this thread. I ask that you tone down your words, show basic respect for others and observe RoR of this forum.

[minusthejihad]

People should be emotional. Muslim men are raping Western women and they need protection.

[Luke90]

I don't have the actual numbers but I would imagine that rapes of western women by muslims aren't very significant compared to rapes of western women by western men.

[Achihud]

I don't have the actual numbers but I would imagine that rapes of western women by muslims aren't very significant compared to rapes of western women by western men. Luke90, thank God it's still not about numbers, it's about justification to rape inspired on racism and religious prejudices. Do you want your daughter to be called a pig while she is being raped and because of that 'justification'?

In fact, do you want your daughter to be raped at all...:rolleyes:

[Luke90]

My point is more that it's not something I'm going to get emotional about, nor something that I think is common enough for me to be worried about.
Personally I find it unlikely that these rapists would have not committed the offences without their religion. They may use it as an excuse or justification but I don't think it would be the underlying reason.

[Annaliese]

My point is more that it's not something I'm going to get emotional about, nor something that I think is common enough for me to be worried about.
Personally I find it unlikely that these rapists would have not committed the offences without their religion. They may use it as an excuse or justification but I don't think it would be the underlying reason.


Surely you realize that women are not considered equal to men in Islam. If you take the time to read through this thread, you will find many excellent arguments, statements and articles that flesh this out. Rape is merely one more manifestation of the brainwashing that goes on and I, as a woman, am concerned about it (as are many Muslim women ... see one of my links to one such group on page one of this thread).

[physics]

That's correct. Judaism treats its women much betttttter than Islam. Muslim women are nothing more than tools to satisfy the power hungry Muslim men.

[BeamStar]

In Australia's New South Wales Supreme Court in December 2005, a visiting Pakistani rapist testified that his victims had no right to say no, because they were not wearing a headscarf.

The complete article is here: http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20646

It's funny you should mention that - I have heard the same thing before, but it is strenuously denied by Muslims as part of their code.

I'm not sure who to believe

[Annaliese]

It's funny you should mention that - I have heard the same thing before, but it is strenuously denied by Muslims as part of their code.

I'm not sure who to believe


From an article concerning Russian muslims: "The Muslim women who addressed to the court were motivated by the fact that underage female Muslims (under 13-14 years old) are always obliged to cover all the body with clothing, except for the face and hands. The Islamic holy book the Quran tells Muslim women to do this in order to avoid tempting males.. Only her husband and close relatives are allowed to see a woman with her hijab off. Otherwise, the woman commits a sin." http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/87/344/9992_muslims.html

Here are some other sources: http://www.abrahamic-faith.com/Islam%20exposed/sweden-norway-rape.html

http://www.omdurman.org/femicide.html

http://www.faithfreedom.org/oped/Fjordman51213.htm

and the more general article: http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=5676

[Mediocrates]

Satmars frown on women working or driving you know. They told you they were hardcore.:mad:

[ShimonG]

[/COLOR]
Thank you Med:)

Especially for the utoronto.ca link explaining the verses, it was most interesting and it also exposed ShimonG's and Annaliese's hypocricy. If they really loved Judaism, they would have bothered to clarify, instead of piling on hate on hate.

Exactly the same points that you mention (misquote, mistranslation, ) is what his/her ilk are doing to the verses which they distort to justify rape in Islam.

I think you need to pull your nose out of your porcine nether regions and stop believing that it smells of roses.

Many here besides me have shown mohammad to be a murderous thief and rapine filth. To any muslim, even when one provides proof from the qoran or the hadiths (like that one on azl) is never sufficient. Inventive lies are spun to put a positive spin on even the most filthy and murderous acts of mohammad.

My intention is not to convince any muslim. That will never happen.

But i have made great strides in exposing this filth among my christian, buddhist and hindu friends. One read of the Sword of the Prophet, which is backed by extensive research, is enough to convince the most skeptical of the "kufr." Seminal work has also been done by Robert Spencer and Bat Yeor. Collectively, it is enough to expose the depravity of mohammad and islam.

Another of my objectives is to DE-LINK my own faith with that of the filth of islam and mohammad. I make it a point to tell my friends that mohammad had and has no right to lay claim to our prophets as also prophets of his murderous allah. That mohammad and islam have nothing in common with my faith. And slowly but steadily i have managed to achieve that.

As for prevaricators like muslima, the day is not far when you will wallow in your own filth. When the civilized world has enough of your "peaceful" religion and will deservedly spit on your and your kind. Already there is less tolerance among the world's faiths, hastened by the constant barrage of jehad and suicide bombs, that islam is evil personified. And that it must be combated with the combined might of the civilized world.

In conclusion, Samuel Huntington did not quite get it right. It is not the clash of civilizations. But rather the clash of civilizations on one side and islam on the other.

You can keep peddling and justifying your filth. I'll make sure that no non-muslims i come in contact with no longer remain ignorant enough to fall for your lies.

[Muslima]

But i have made great strides in exposing this filth among my christian, buddhist and hindu friends. One read of the Sword of the Prophet, which is backed by extensive research, is enough to convince the most skeptical of the "kufr." Seminal work has also been done by Robert Spencer and Bat Yeor. Collectively, it is enough to expose the depravity of mohammad and islam.


You can keep peddling and justifying your filth. I'll make sure that no non-muslims i come in contact with no longer remain ignorant enough to fall for your lies.

Oh ShimonG , who let you out of your asylum today?? or did you forget to take your daily med's? duhhhhhhhhhhhhh


I see your problem is much bigger than what i thought! Hallucinating are we ?
Stop lying, you know very well that is not true.

Islam is the fasting growing faith in conversions. You're not doing a good job with your "Christian and Buddhist friends".

Do you even know who Robert Spencer's following is? or how many books Bat Yeor sold? "The sword of the Prophet" is for people like you, ie. irrelevant, and who only see what they want to see.




You can keep peddling and justifying your filth. I'll make sure that no non-muslims i come in contact with no longer remain ignorant enough to fall for your lies
.

Tch Tch,
You really describe yourself perfectly here!

It must really kill you, to see how POPULAR Islam is. No wonder you're grasping at straws!

I told you before in the big picture your opinions are meaningless and hold about as much credibility as the sun being made of ice, and the "Elvis is still alive" crowd . Oh and unless you have something new to add, i suggest you don't use me as a vent for your pathetic and DOOMED attempts at history revising and out and out lies!

Now go and take your daily medications!

[ProudInfidel]

'Offensive' remarks taken straight from Koran, defence says (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,174-2001006,00.html)
January 20, 2006

COPIES of the Koran were handed to the jurors in the Abu Hamza trial yesterday as his defence argued that some of the cleric’s “offensive” statements were drawn directly from Islam’s holy book.

Edward Fitzgerald, QC, for the defence, said that Abu Hamza’s interpretation of the Koran was that it imposed an obligation on Muslims to do jihad and fight in the defence of their religion. He said that the Crown case against the former imam of Finsbury Park Mosque was “simplistic in the extreme”.

He added: “It is said he was preaching murder, but he was actually preaching from the Koran itself.” :mad:

Mr Fitzgerald cited two verses of the book that Abu Hamza would rely on, among many others, as theological justification for the words that had led to him being charged. They were Chapter 2, verse 216 and Chapter 9, verse 111. He said that all the great monotheistic religions had scriptures that contained “the language of blood and retribution”.

Abu Hamza’s remarks, which the prosecution alleges amount to an attempt to stir up racial hatred against the Jewish people, were, Mr Fitzgerald said, a reference to the Hadith — sayings of the Prophet Muhammad — in which fighting between Jews and Muslims is predicted.

The Hadith says that the trees will call out to the Muslims “there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him”.

The defence counsel said this was “a highly unusual case” because unlike most prosecutions for incitement to murder it did not involve someone telling a specific person to kill an identifiable individual.

Abu Hamza’s sermons had to be viewed in context, coinciding with conflicts in Afghanistan, Algeria, Bosnia, Kosovo and the Palestinian territories. Mr Fitzgerald said that the West had initially been on the side of the Mujahidin in Afghanistan when they were fighting the Soviet Union army. There had even been a James Bond film, The Living Daylights, in which 007 fought alongside the Mujahidin.

He added: “Mr Hamza has said things that most people will find deeply offensive and hateful. But he is not on trial for describing England as a toilet. There is no crime of simply being offensive.”

Muslima, may be you should stop worrying about people taking medications in time, and sync your version of the Koran to the version which the bigots like Abu Hamza preach and justify it accordingly.. and its radical interpretation which is finding a lot of "popular" support and your role in accepting/countering it "TODAY". Please keep us posted on the eventual version that will emerge.. To make it simple, is the Koran you read and the one that Abu Hamza reads/preaches the same ?? , if it is then do we need a thorough review of the contents in Koran ??


What are your views on the above topic ?? other than the usual "Rapes and Violence and radicals " are there in the west too.. True!!, but nobody justifies it in the the name of religion. Ever heard "I raped/killed them cause my religious book said so ??".

So if you belive Islam is a religion of Peace, will you condemn the actions of Abu Hamza and the likes ?? why aren't any fatwas out .. renouncing this radical interpretation of Islam ?. The mullahs surely love issuing fatwa's on a day to day basis, is the matter at hand not too important ? or may be the moderates are for PR (and/or) do/dont forward the hidden agenda's of the Islamist's..

So will the "Al-Takkiya" still continue ??

[ShimonG]

Oh ShimonG , who let you out of your asylum today?? or did you forget to take your daily med's? duhhhhhhhhhhhhh

I believe you have me confused with mohammad here. And i see again that you fail to address any substantive issues.

Yo Porki, dont you have a suicide belt to work at or something.


I see your problem is much bigger than what i thought! Hallucinating are we ?
Stop lying, you know very well that is not true.


Actually, drug use is rampant amongst muslims. Again, i think you confuse me with mohammad. Lying, murdering, drug use etc, there were mohammad's trademarks.


Islam is the fasting growing faith in conversions. You're not doing a good job with your "Christian and Buddhist friends".

Sure. If every one of you porkis produce ten kids per wife, the number of muslims in the world is bound to explode. And it is already doing so.
Given that islam tolerates murder, rape and theft which no other than mohammad himself did, the appeal must be very strong to some folks.

HERE's THE 64K QUESTION. WHAT HAPPENS TO A MUSLIM WHO RENOUNCES ISLAM???? He/She is declared an apostate and hunted down. So, your filth that masquerades as a religion will not any one leave.

Like that Hotel California song. YOU CAN CHECK OUT ANY TIME YOU LIKE, BUT YOU CAN NEVER LEAVE.

Both hindus and buddhists have faced horrific savagery and rapine at the hands of islam. They already know the hate in muslims. What i have managed to do is show that the hatred in the muslims derives straight from that perverted murdering thief mohammad. Not very difficult to achieve, when IT IS THE TRUTH.

WHEN I SHOW MY CHRISTIAN FRIENDS THAT HADITH WHERE MOHAMMAD ALLOWS HIS FOLLOWERS TO RAPE JEWISH PRISONERS, YOU SHOULD SEE THE LOOK ON THEIR FACES. AND THEN THE FUN PART. I TELL THEM HOW MUSLIMS LIKE TO COMPARE MOHAMMAD TO JESUS. IT MAKES THEM WANNA PUKE. NOT ONE CHRISTIAN I HAVE MET SO FAR IN THE US LIKES THE COMPARISON BETWEEN THEIR JESUS AND YOUR ODIOUS MOHAMMAD.



Do you even know who Robert Spencer's following is? or how many books Bat Yeor sold? "The sword of the Prophet" is for people like you, ie. irrelevant, and who only see what they want to see.

Yes, it is for people like me who were perplexed at the hate in islamic societies, who could not understand the wellspring of islamic anti-semitism, hatred and violence. The sword of the prophet was the first book that gave me an understanding of this islamic hatred.

Tch Tch,
You really describe yourself perfectly here!

As long as you dont ascribe mohammadan qualities to me, i will take it as a compliment. LOL.


It must really kill you, to see how POPULAR Islam is. No wonder you're grasping at straws!

Oh absolutely. To see you porkis multiply like rabbits with each fine islamic mother raising ten children each for jehad. Fills my heart with wonder. Look at what a fine job your mom did.

Statistics is again a wonderful thing. At one point, one-third the world was communist. Gee, that must mean communism was very popular. In fifty years, the population of muslims has exploded for the complete lack of family planning. This explosion in population, with a few pathetic converts, is being touted as popularity. Har Har, you ignorant conniving swine. What madrassah did they let you loose from to haunt us jews????

I told you before in the big picture your opinions are meaningless and hold about as much credibility as the sun being made of ice, and the "Elvis is still alive" crowd . Oh and unless you have something new to add, i suggest you don't use me as a vent for your pathetic and DOOMED attempts at history revising and out and out lies!

Now go and take your daily medications!

No, my unbeloved porki. It is you and your filth that will be relegated to the dustbins of history. As the non-islamic world surges forward, you will be left wallowing in your mohammadan filth. Once the oil runs out, you will be either begging or blackmailing, two tasks admirable to the qoran.

As far as credibility goes, judging by the response on this thread alone, i'd say it is your credibility that you need to worry about. With regards to my educational efforts, i think you and your kind will certainly needs medications to cope with my efforts.

The best part again: is the look of disgust and utter repugnance on the face of my christian friends when i told them the propensity of muslims to compare mohammad with islam. that look says it all.

So, go work on your suicide belts and your chants of itbah al yahud or whatever it is that your mullah and mohammad have been feeding you. think up some new lies of mohammad and do come back for some whoop-asss.

[Annaliese]

So, go work on your suicide belts and your chants of itbah al yahud or whatever it is that your mullah and mohammad have been feeding you. think up some new lies of mohammad and do come back for some whoop-asss.


I like that part, Shimon. :cool:

[minusthejihad]

Oh ShimonG , who let you out of your asylum today?? or did you forget to take your daily med's? duhhhhhhhhhhhhh


I see your problem is much bigger than what i thought! Hallucinating are we ?
Stop lying, you know very well that is not true.

Islam is the fasting growing faith in conversions. You're not doing a good job with your "Christian and Buddhist friends".

Do you even know who Robert Spencer's following is? or how many books Bat Yeor sold? "The sword of the Prophet" is for people like you, ie. irrelevant, and who only see what they want to see.


.

Tch Tch,
You really describe yourself perfectly here!

It must really kill you, to see how POPULAR Islam is. No wonder you're grasping at straws!

I told you before in the big picture your opinions are meaningless and hold about as much credibility as the sun being made of ice, and the "Elvis is still alive" crowd . Oh and unless you have something new to add, i suggest you don't use me as a vent for your pathetic and DOOMED attempts at history revising and out and out lies!

Now go and take your daily medications!


Actually, Bat Yeor and Robert Spencer are great writers who provide a good service for those who are used to the general whitewashing that radical Islam gets everyday in the world press.

And as far as something's Popularity (which of course implies no quality whatsoever)....

Paris Hilton is incredibly popular. She is also a complete moron and a ho.... but she is popular!

[ShimonG]

Actually, Bat Yeor and Robert Spencer are great writers who provide a good service for those who are used to the general whitewashing that radical Islam gets everyday in the world press.

Precisely the point i was trying to make. The islamists are ever too ready to then label these writers as hateful.

Paris Hilton is incredibly popular. She is also a complete moron and a ho.... but she is popular!

Hilarious.

[ShimonG]

In Porkistan, hindu girls are often abducted, gang-raped and forcibly married to the rapists. Here's how islam gets its converts.

Mind you that this practise has sanction of the qoran itself, as i have shown previously. When mohammad himself indulges in such acts, is it any surprise that his followers do so too.

[Hammer of Thor]

I don't have the actual numbers but I would imagine that rapes of western women by muslims aren't very significant compared to rapes of western women by western men.



This is not true,here in norway we have gang rapes all the time,70% by muslim men.

[Hammer of Thor]

Dont worry or fret too much people, the mass expulsions are just around the corner.

A few more riots and suicide bombings in major euro cities, and the incrementalism of mass deportations will start to get more mainstream discussion. A few more attacks after that - which are, of course, completely inevitable - and the party will begin.


This is allready started to happen,i watched the news today,and the exstreme right party fremskrittspartiet (progress party) went up 5% since these cartoon-riots started,just wait until they start killing norwegians,they will be the biggest party in Norway

[Cato]

Thanks for the info HammerOfThor.

Since you are Norwiegen I have a question for you.

Do you ever wish that your leader had the courage of Rasmussen?

[Luke90]

This is not true,here in norway we have gang rapes all the time,70% by muslim men.
67.2% of statistics are made up.
Do you have a source?

[Reffo]

This is not true,here in norway we have gang rapes all the time,70% by muslim men.
67.2% of statistics are made up.
Do you have a source?Luke, I must admit that when I read your response, I had a chuckle and my tendency was to agree with you. I then just decided to Google it (using the words: "gang rape statistics"), just for fun, and to my surprise I came up with quite a few relevant hits. Here are a couple:

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0802/steyn1.asp

Mr. Reimers, though, will be happy to know his view is echoed across the hemispheres. Five days before 9/11, the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet reported that 65% of the country's rapes were committed by "non-Western" immigrants -- a category which, in Norway, is almost wholly Muslim. A professor at the University of Oslo explained that one reason for the disproportionate Muslim share of the rape market was that in their native lands "rape is scarcely punished" because it is generally believed that "it is women who are responsible for rape."I can vouch that the case in Australia that Mark mentions was widely publicised at the time. The papers were full of it for quite a while and there was a huge outcry about the racist attitudes of the perpetrators towards the hapless Aussie girls.

http://fjordman.blogspot.com/2005/02/muslim-rape-epidemic-in-sweden-and.html

Alarmed at last week's police statistics, which revealed that in 68% of all rapes committed this year the perpetrator was from an ethnic minority, leading Muslim organisations have now formed an alliance to fight the ever-growing problem of young second and third-generation immigrants involved in rape cases against young Danish girls.

As Robert Spencer has demonstrated, rape can indeed be linked to Islamic teachings of Jihad, and even to the example of Muhammad himself, his Sunna. Above all, it is connected to Islamic notions of the role of women in society, and their behaviour in the public sphere. An Islamic Mufti in Copenhagen sparked a political outcry after publicly declaring that women who refuse to wear headscarves are "asking for rape." Apparently, he isn’t the only Muslim in Europe to think this way:

Luke

I am against all forms of racism and generalisations and I certainly would not like to label all Muslims as criminals, if for no other reason than because I know a lot of decent Muslims who are decent and law abiding. Another reason that I have against generalisations is that it's leading down the slippery slope. Yesterday it was Jews (and today as well), today it's Muslims etc...So I am dead set against tarring everyone with the same brush.

Having said that though, if there are real statistics that support the idea that it's fashionable at least among some Muslims to vent their hate against society by using this abominable practice of gang rape, then any PC considerations should be set aside and this phenomenon needs to be discussed honestly and dispassionately. Then suitable measures need to be adopted to put a stop to it no matter what and no matter who gets offended. Period!

[Luke90]

Reffo,
I stand corrected. Worrying statistics indeed.
Apologies to Hammer of Thor too, for the unduly sarcastic response.

[Hammer of Thor]

Reffo,
I stand corrected. Worrying statistics indeed.
Apologies to Hammer of Thor too, for the unduly sarcastic response.


No offence taken:)

[SteveMetch]

Luke

I am against all forms of racism....

Actual that association is in fact racist. This isn’t about race any more than Nazism was about Germans. It’s about a world view propagated by Mohammed.

... and generalisations and I certainly would not like to label all Muslims as criminals, if for no other reason than because I know a lot of decent Muslims who are decent and law abiding.

A decent Muslim is one that doesn’t practice Islam.

Another reason that I have against generalisations is that it's leading down the slippery slope. Yesterday it was Jews (and today as well), today it's Muslims etc...So I am dead set against tarring everyone with the same brush.

Yes you’re right, one day you’re denouncing Racist Fascism, Communism and Rapists the next thing you know your going after everyone else. Yep a very slippery slope indeed.

Having said that though, if there are real statistics that support the idea that it's fashionable at least among some Muslims to vent their hate against society by using this abominable practice of gang rape, then any PC considerations should be set aside and this phenomenon needs to be discussed honestly and dispassionately.

Concerning interviews with people who knew London bombers “Gee he was real nice guy but then he started to really get serious about Islam”. Surprise Surprise Surprise. What have learned boys and girls.....A decent Muslim is one that doesn’t practice Islam.

Then suitable measures need to be adopted to put a stop to it no matter what and no matter who gets offended. Period!

Let’s see in Islam they cut of your hand when you steal. What could we cut off for a punishment of rape? Here’s a clue, it will also reduce the Islamic birth rate.

[Reffo]

SteveMetch

I am not an apologist for Militant Islamism and never have been. I do agree that the Jihadist doctrine is every bit as abominable as Nazism was/is. It is true that at this time in our history, Islam seems to have been hijacked by some very intolerant and supremacist elements who are giving it a bad name and causing upheaval in the world. However, I make a distinction between people and doctrines/religions. And I am convinced that we cannot and should not tar all those people with the same brush who call themselves Muslim because as I said before, that path just leads down the slippery slope. Also, my personal experience tells me that as with any other group of people, Muslims are made up of all types: good, bad and indifferent.

[SteveMetch]

SteveMetch

I am not an apologist for Militant Islamism and never have been. I do agree that the Jihadist doctrine is every bit as abominable as Nazism was/is. It is true that at this time in our history, Islam seems to have been hijacked by some very intolerant and supremacist elements who are giving it a bad name and causing upheaval in the world. However, I make a distinction between people and doctrines/religions. And I am convinced that we cannot and should not tar all those people with the same brush who call themselves Muslim because as I said before, that path just leads down the slippery slope. Also, my personal experience tells me that as with any other group of people, Muslims are made up of all types: good, bad and indifferent.

This is where we disagree. If I told you that Nazism had been hijacked by Hitler what would your response be?

Islam, as defined by the Koran, Hadiths, Mohammed’s life example, and world history is evil to its core. Anything we might agree as "good" is completely self supportive and independent of Islamic doctrine and can be found in all other religious or atheistic systems. At which point why even bother with all the other violent Islamic baggage.

In addition, just because some says they are something doesn’t make them that in fact. By your definition of what a Muslim is I could be a Muslim as well. I just disagree with 99% of everything Islam teaches. At what ratio of adherence does one become a Muslim, Communist, a Christian, and Jew or whatever it may be? This is a variant of your "common brush" argument but is an important point.

Second question if someone is only 15% Nazi does this make them a Moderate Nazi? I'm sure most of us might be able to get along with a 15% Nazi but this doesn't make Nazism moderate. In addition those that practice 100% of Nazism have not "Hijacked" Nazism.

[Muslima]

This is where we disagree. If I told you that Nazism had been hijacked by Hitler what would your response be?

Islam, as defined by the Koran, Hadiths, Mohammed’s life example, and world history is evil to its core. Anything we might agree as "good" is completely self supportive and independent of Islamic doctrine and can be found in all other religious or atheistic systems. At which point why even bother with all the other violent Islamic baggage.

In addition, just because some says they are something doesn’t make them that in fact. By your definition of what a Muslim is I could be a Muslim as well. I just disagree with 99% of everything Islam teaches. At what ratio of adherence does one become a Muslim, Communist, a Christian, and Jew or whatever it may be? This is a variant of your "common brush" argument but is an important point.

Second question if someone is only 15% Nazi does this make them a Moderate Nazi? I'm sure most of us might be able to get along with a 15% Nazi but this doesn't make Nazism moderate. In addition those that practice 100% of Nazism have not "Hijacked" Nazism.

SteveMetch, clearly you are ignorant about Islam, about Muslim's, and your bigotry is astounding.

How dare you say, the only decent Muslim is a non practicing one. For your information you ignorant *********, the bomber you described, is not of the majority of Muslim's.

What the distorters practice is not Islam. Oh and by the way, part of your problem is that you keep comparing Nazism to Islam, there is no comparison.

Get a life, and get an education. You and that "old Reb" character, preach the same old bigoted line , again and again. You make yourself look like complete bumpkins!

Say something interesting or shut up! Contrary to what you think there are people who can think !
Dismissed!

[Annaliese]

Muslima, I'm sorry to inform you, but:

The Führer's Mufti (http://christianactionforisrael.org/medigest/may00/arabnazi.html): After World War I, the Great Powers of Europe jockeyed for influence in the Middle East's oil fields and trade routes, with France and Britain holding mandates throughout most of the region. In the 1930s, the fascist regimes that arose in Italy and Germany sought greater stakes in the area, and began courting Arab leaders to revolt against their British and French custodians. Among their many willing accomplices was Jerusalem Mufti Haj Amin el-Husseini, who fled Palestine after agitating against the British during the Arab Revolt of 1936-39. He found refuge in Iraq – another of Her Majesty's mandates – where he again topped the British most wanted list after helping pull the strings behind the Iraqi coup of 1941. The revolt in Baghdad was orchestrated by Hitler as part of a strategy to squeeze the region between the pincers of Rommel's troops in North Africa, German forces in the Caucuses and pro-Nazi forces in Iraq. However, in June 1941 British troops put down the rebellion and the Mufti escaped via Tehran to Italy and eventually to Berlin.

Once in Berlin, the Mufti received an enthusiastic reception by the "Islamische Zentralinstitut" and the whole Islamic community of Germany, which welcomed him as the "Führer of the Arabic world." In an introductory speech, he called the Jews the "most fierce enemies of the Muslims" and an "ever corruptive element" in the world. Husseini soon became an honored guest of the Nazi leadership and met on several occasions with Hitler. He personally lobbied the Führer against the plan to let Jews leave Hungary, fearing they would immigrate to Palestine. He also strongly intervened when Adolf Eichman tried to cut a deal with the British government to exchange German POWs for 5000 Jewish children who also could have fled to Palestine. The Mufti's protests with the SS were successful, as the children were sent to death camps in Poland instead. One German officer noted in his journals that the Mufti would liked to have seen the Jews "preferably all killed." On a visit to Auschwitz, he reportedly admonished the guards running the gas chambers to work more diligently. Throughout the war, he appeared regularly on German radio broadcasts to the Middle East, preaching his pro-Nazi, anti-Semitic message to the Arab masses back home.

To show gratitude towards his hosts, in 1943 the Mufti travelled several times to Bosnia, where on orders of the SS he recruited the notorious "Hanjar troopers," a special Bosnian Waffen SS company which slaugh-tered 90% of Bosnia's Jews and burned countless Serbian churches and villages. These Bosnian Muslim recruits rapidly found favor with SS chief Heinrich Himmler, who established a special Mullah Military school in Dresden.

The only condition the Mufti set for his help was that after Hitler won the war, the entire Jewish population in Palestine should be liquidated. After the war, Husseini fled to Switzerland and from there escaped via France to Cairo, were he was warmly received. The Mufti used funds received earlier from the Hilter regime to finance the Nazi-inspired Arab Liberation Army that terrorized Jews in Palestine.

... and if you don't like the source, simply do a search of your own. It's true, Muslima. Sorry ...

[Muslima]

Muslima, I'm sorry to inform you, but:



... and if you don't like the source, simply do a search of your own. It's true, Muslima. Sorry ...

Anna, WW2 was a war, and people didn't exactly have religion on their minds, it was about survival ,


To forever link Nazi's with Muslims is the most riduculous thing, expecially since this website is about Christians in Israel, what role did
Chrisitianity play in this? Europe was Christian , not Muslim,

Lets get this straight, you're saying Muslim ties to Nazism due to the opportunate pairings during the war are more significant than Nazism's ties to Christianity?

[Annaliese]

Muslima, I don't want to quibble with you.

If you want to play 'dueling sources' , however, I think we both know your source on the other thread is not the Wall Street Journal.

[SteveMetch]

SteveMetch, clearly you are ignorant about Islam, about Muslim's, and your bigotry is astounding.

How dare you say, the only decent Muslim is a non practicing one.

Free speech you might check in to it some time. You known what we in the evil west practice instead of your beloved Trashcanistan or whatever God forsaken place you immigrated from. I can only imagine what a cartoon of Porky Pig in a Turban would bring about in the Muslim world. Dadt Dadt Dadt thats all folks.

For your information you ignorant *********, the bomber you described, is not of the majority of Muslim's.

Ah yes those “Bursting” with peace Muslims we hear so much about are not real Muslims are they. While over 40% of Muslim in England want Islamic Law. Yah real moderate. Could you give us infidels some advice I how we are supposed to tell the difference? Preferable before they spontaneously explode right in front of us.

What the distorters practice is not Islam. Oh and by the way, part of your problem is that you keep comparing Nazism to Islam, there is no comparison.

For the Nazi the aim was to purge the world of racial impurity, for the Muslim, to purge the world of religious impurity. Does the House of War and the House of Submission ring a bell. Yah big difference. Oh and they both hated Jews and Christians. Oh they were on the same side in WW1 and 2.

Get a life, and get an education. You and that "old Reb" character, preach the same old bigoted line , again and again. You make yourself look like complete bumpkins!

Bigoted, this isn’t about race. You could be some blue eyed Norwegian for all I care. This is about the doctrine of Islam. Not what you think it is but about what is preached daily in the Middle East.

Say something interesting or shut up! Contrary to what you think there are people who can think !
Dismissed!

Yes sir right away sir.

Well I guess we in the modern world can all stop talking about this, Muslima has spoken. It’s just one big misunderstanding. I don’t know how we could have possible thought that Islam is anything but the strongest force of peace and forgiveness the world has ever known. All those guys yell Allah Aukbar as the sever prisioners heads, fly airplanes full of people into buildings full of people, explode car bombs at hospitals and weddings, gun down children in school, say the solution to Zionism is just nuclear one bomb away, etc. yah you’re right how could I have ever come to that conclusion about Islam?

We all must be crazy.

[Annaliese]

Steve, it's the religion of peace (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/) ... remember?

[savvy]

To forever link Nazi's with Muslims is the most riduculous thing, expecially since this website is about Christians in Israel, what role did
Chrisitianity play in this? Europe was Christian , not Muslim,


Europe during WW2 was secular, with separation of religion and state. Nazi Germany was the state, not the church. Islamic countries have no such distinction between religion and state. Hitler believed he was Christ liberating Jews. Anybody who professes to being Jesus Christ in the flesh is the Anti-Christ.

[QUOTE]Lets get this straight, you're saying Muslim ties to Nazism due to the opportunate pairings during the war are more significant than Nazism's ties to Christianity?

Christians were around at this time. The fact the Muslims from other nations specifically joined the SS to target jews, does make their pairing with the nazi's more significant.

[Reffo]

This is where we disagree. If I told you that Nazism had been hijacked by Hitler what would your response be?

Islam, as defined by the Koran, Hadiths, Mohammed’s life example, and world history is evil to its core. Anything we might agree as "good" is completely self supportive and independent of Islamic doctrine and can be found in all other religious or atheistic systems. At which point why even bother with all the other violent Islamic baggage.

In addition, just because some says they are something doesn’t make them that in fact. By your definition of what a Muslim is I could be a Muslim as well. I just disagree with 99% of everything Islam teaches. At what ratio of adherence does one become a Muslim, Communist, a Christian, and Jew or whatever it may be? This is a variant of your "common brush" argument but is an important point.

Second question if someone is only 15% Nazi does this make them a Moderate Nazi? I'm sure most of us might be able to get along with a 15% Nazi but this doesn't make Nazism moderate. In addition those that practice 100% of Nazism have not "Hijacked" Nazism.Steve, I was talking about the 1.2 billion or so people who describe themselves as Muslims and I stand by my earlier comment that they, like us, have good, bad, indifferent and certainly many misguided and ignorant people amongst them. And when it comes to the ignorant, misled and misguided, perhaps they even have a few more of those than us at this time although we have a few as well and certainly we cannot and should not classify all Muslim people as inherently evil.

Now, when it comes to religion, I believe that all religions including Islam, Christianity and Judaism can be used as a force for good or evil. At this time in our history, some pretty nasty groups are driving the agenda for Islam and unfortunately the more moderate elements seem to be too subdued and many others are misguided. But in fairness, historically we have seen attempts to distort both Christianity and Judaism by misguided and/or nasty elements. And those attempts have seen various degrees of success. In the case of Christianity, the period of the Inquisition comes to mind and in the case of Judaism there was a period in the Middle Ages when false Messiahs such as Shabtai Zvi attempted to subvert Judaism for their own individual gratification and he did manage to gather quite a bit of following before he was unmasked as a false idol.

I am not attempting to excuse all the wrongs that are being promoted in the name of Islam by some very unscrupulous people who call themselves Muslims. Nor am I denying that these people have managed to mislead large numbers of their fellow Muslims. All I am trying to do is put a perspective on it and I hope that I am not wrong because if I am, then this world of ours is in even a bigger mess than I think it already is in!

[Reffo]

SteveMetch

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that there is nothing wrong with how, many if not most Muslims seem to practice Islam these days. I tend to believe people like Irshad Manji (I am sure you have heard of her) who is a Muslim herself but is critical about how her own religion evolved (or perhaps rather has not evolved). She wrote a book about it called: "The Trouble with Islam", its a book worth reading if you haven't read it yet. Although Irshad is critical of many of her coreligionists, she has not renounced Islam. She feels that her religion has something to offer if it would not be held back by the clerics who live in the past and preach hate.

So, the fact that people like her exist and speak up, tells me two things: First that there are decent Muslims around (she gets quite a lot of supportive emails from fellow Muslims) and secondly that if she thinks that her religion has redeeming qualities then I believe her. Here is her official Web site:

http://www.muslim-refusenik.com/

[Muslima]

[QUOTE]



Christians were around at this time. The fact the Muslims from other nations specifically joined the SS to target jews, does make their pairing with the nazi's more significant.

It is no more significant than the Zionist pairing with Hitler. In fact this is much much worse, .........not only do they pair with someone out to exterminate their entire race, but they let their fellow bretheren die ?

Savvy, can you go this thread and comment on my post number 40, and you too if you don't mind, Anna.

Books exposing Zionist collaboration with Nazi's
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?p=182890#post182890

[Muslima]

While over 40% of Muslim in England want Islamic Law. Yah real moderate. Could you give us infidels some advice I how we are supposed to tell the difference? Preferable before they spontaneously explode right in front of us



For the Nazi the aim was to purge the world of racial impurity, for the Muslim, to purge the world of religious impurity. Does the House of War and the House of Submission ring a bell. Yah big difference. Oh and they both hated Jews and Christians. Oh they were on the same side in WW1 and 2.



Bigoted, this isn’t about race. You could be some blue eyed Norwegian for all I care. This is about the doctrine of Islam. Not what you think it is but about what is preached daily in the Middle East.



First about your nonsense on Islam, if all you say were true, then Islam wouldn't be gaining converts the way it is, in every country in the world, check these links i posted here, and then think why are so many people turning to Islam....

Islam attracts highest numbers of converts worldwide
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=169523&postcount=8

Secondly, bigot means intolerance of RELIGION not race. Racist means intolerance of race. Sheeeeeeeeeeeeesh,,,,,,,

Thirdly, house of war, and house of submission is not a Muslim term it is a term invented by liars to distort Islam.

Finally, so much for your Muslim's being on the same side as Hitler, that is an exaggeration and you know it! It wasn't about religion it was about politics, and each group had their own agenda,.
Can you comment on the links i posted in this thread, and tell me what you have to say about Zionist's being on the same side as Hitler, and not only refusing to help European Jews but letting them die.

Post number 40
Books exposing Zionist collaboration with Nazi's
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?p=182890#post182890

[Reffo]

Muslima

Have you heard of Tokyo Rose and Lord Haw Haw? No? They were traitors and collaborators who betrayed the allies and worked for the Japanese and Germans in WW2. They too, like Leni Brenner, Naim Giladi and Tom Segev were traitors to their people. In the same way, these three, whom you mention as references are in fact experts at propaganda, lies and of smearing their own people. Like Tokyo Rose and Lord Haw Haw who served the Japanese/Germans, these traitors serve the interests of their Arab masters and they too smear their own people and Zionism with all sorts of lies. They are shameless revisionists of history who collaborate with terrorists.

It is interesting to note though that because Israel is a democracy it allows these people to speak their minds and they don't do to them what Palestinians do to people whom they label as collaborators (you know the scene....). The Israelis are even more tolerant about it than the allies were after the war. Lord Haw Haw was hanged by the Brits and Tokyo Rose was imprisoned by the Yanks.

[SteveMetch]

SteveMetch

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that there is nothing wrong with how, many if not most Muslims seem to practice Islam these days. I tend to believe people like Irshad Manji (I am sure you have heard of her) who is a Muslim herself but is critical about how her own religion evolved (or perhaps rather has not evolved). She wrote a book about it called: "The Trouble with Islam", its a book worth reading if you haven't read it yet. Although Irshad is critical of many of her coreligionists, she has not renounced Islam. She feels that her religion has something to offer if it would not be held back by the clerics who live in the past and preach hate.

So, the fact that people like her exist and speak up, tells me two things: First that there are decent Muslims around (she gets quite a lot of supportive emails from fellow Muslims) and secondly that if she thinks that her religion has redeeming qualities then I believe her. Here is her official Web site:

http://www.muslim-refusenik.com/

There is a fundamental deference between doctrine and followers. Doctrine in the end is nothing but words on paper. Adherents give life to that paper. The complex interaction and contradictions within the doctrine is further complicated via human interpretation, social interaction, and historical evolution. The US Constitution was written over 200 years ago, we have amended multiple times and are still having debates over core elements in it to this very day.

The foundational elements of Christianity are Non-violent. Run it through the randomizer above and you get some who do Evil in its name.

The foundational elements of Islam are Violent. Run it through the randomizer above and you get some who do Good in its name.

At the end of the day we can only compare what the doctrine teaches because that is complicated enough.

Nazism, as defined in Mien Kampf, is Evil. Did some Germans, who read Mien Kampf, take some positive message out of it like “Hard work” “Loyalty” “Self-Sacrifice” etc. Yes. But the overall Racist message was thoroughly evil. In addition, the motivating factor of Hard work, Loyalty and Self-Sacrifice was to murder or enslave all non-Arian peoples.

Allah’s requirement for Muslims to subject all of mankind to his will is thoroughly evil. It completely contradicts the notion of freewill a strong component of all other major religions. Hey having 3 out of 4 major religions be fundamentally good is not bad.

[savvy]

Islam attracts highest numbers of converts worldwide

You'r argument is called fallacy of appealing to the masses. The best things come in small packages, just look at the Jews, all the contributions of Islam and it's followers combined do not come anywhere close to Jewish contributions to the world. If Europe turns Muslim, they'll go bankrupt.

[minusthejihad]

Books exposing Zionist collaboration with Nazi's
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?p=182890#post182890

You are such a fool. Are there any mods in here?

[savvy]

Originally Posted by savvy
Books exposing Zionist collaboration with Nazi's
http://www.israelforum.com/board/sho...890#post182890

I never posted that.

[SteveMetch]

First about your nonsense on Islam, if all you say were true, then Islam wouldn't be gaining converts the way it is, in every country in the world, check these links i posted here, and then think why are so many people turning to Islam.

Islam attracts highest numbers of converts worldwide
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showpost.php?p=169523&postcount=8....

It could have something to do with the sword and the explosive birth rate. You may have heard about the Genocide of Africans by Muslims? Most Muslims can’t read the Koran. Which in addition to the above facts is yet another explanation of Islam’s “Popularity”. Of course diseases spread rapidly and kill people as well but I don’t think that’s a proof as to there Goodness or Legitimacy.

Secondly, bigot means intolerance of RELIGION not race. Racist means intolerance of race. Sheeeeeeeeeeeeesh,,,,,,,.

You mean Bigot as in:
“There is no God but Allah and Mohhammed is his prophet”

Qur’an 9:71 “O Prophet, strive hard [fighting] against the unbelievers and the Hypocrites, and be harsh with them. Their abode is Hell, an evil refuge indeed.”

Qur’an 8:59 “The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them.”

Qur’an 4:168 “Those who reject [Islamic] Faith, Allah will not forgive them nor guide them to any path except the way to Hell, to dwell therein forever. And this to Allah is easy.”

Qur’an 4:114 “He who disobeys the Apostle after guidance has been revealed will burn in Hell.”

Tabari VIII:130 “The Messenger said, ‘Two religions cannot coexist in the Arabian Peninsula.’ Umar investigated the matter, then sent to the Jews, saying: ‘Allah has given permission for you to be expelled.”

Yah Mohhammed, sorry Allah, is just so accomedating of alternate view points. What a sweet heart.

And yes I am a Bigot who is intorlerant of intorlerant people.

Thirdly, house of war, and house of submission is not a Muslim term it is a term invented by liars to distort Islam.

Well it appears you practice a “unique” form of Islam. All Muslim are liars except for you. We have final found the one true peaceful Muslim may P*** and S*** be upon him. Now how do convence all the Allah Aukbar head cutters you are right? I mean without lossing your head in the process after all for some silly reason some of this Liar Muslims think you are a Hypocrite.

Qur’an 4:77 “Have you not seen those to whom it was said: Withhold your hands from fighting, perform the prayer and pay the zakat. But when orders for fighting were issued, a party of them feared men as they ought to have feared Allah. They say: ‘Our Lord, why have You ordained fighting for us, why have You made war compulsory?’”

Qur’an 9:67 “The Hypocrites enjoin what is forbidden, and forbid what Islam commands. They withhold their hands (from spending in Allah’s Cause [Jihad]). They have forgotten Allah so He has forgotten them. Verily the Hypocrites are oblivious, rebellious and perverse.”

Finally, so much for your Muslim's being on the same side as Hitler, that is an exaggeration and you know it! It wasn't about religion it was about politics, and each group had their own agenda,.
Can you comment on the links i posted in this thread, and tell me what you have to say about Zionist's being on the same side as Hitler, and not only refusing to help European Jews but letting them die.

Post number 40
Books exposing Zionist collaboration with Nazi's
http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?p=182890#post182890

Muslim teaching on the Jewish Holocaust 101

1) The Holocaust didn’t happen or was exaggerated.
2) If it did the Jews deserved it.
3) Third the the Jews did it to themselves.

Looks like you and current government in Iran have a lot in common.

Genesis 12:3 I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse; and all peoples on earth will be blessed through you.

Qur’an 5:13 But because of their breach of their covenant We cursed the Jews, and made their hearts grow hard.

Let see God needs to Curse himself or Allah is not the God of the Jews. Maybe Allah is the Meccan Mood God.

Of course since Allah denys the resurrection of Jesus Christians have been warned 600 years prior to Mohhammed to regard that as spirit from Satan.

Amazing how everything just lines right up. I love it when a plan comes together.

[minusthejihad]

I never posted that.
My bad, i tried quoting Muslima, but somehow your name got drawn in, I'll fix it.

[Reffo]

Allah’s requirement for Muslims to subject all of mankind to his will is thoroughly evil. It completely contradicts the notion of freewill a strong component of all other major religions. Hey having 3 out of 4 major religions be fundamentally good is not bad.I am not here to defend or attack any religion but it seems from your post that you have not really looked at what Irshad Manji says. I really do suggest that you look at her writings, preferrably, read her book. You will be pleasantly surprised by her. She actually writes about free will as well and that is one of her criticisms of how Islam is practiced these days, she says that true Islam does encourage free thinking (I think she calls it ItsJihad?) but at a point of time in their history, this has been subverted for political reasons and ever since then, Islamic thinking has been monopolized by the Mullahs.

[savvy]

Reffo, Irshad Manji is a Canadian Muslim and a Lesbian. She already has a fatwa on her head and isn't liked by Muslims here in Canada.

[Reffo]

Savvy

I am sure that she is not liked by many traditional Muslims but that does not make her less of a human being and nor does her sexual orientation (with which I personally don't identify). However, she has some very interesting points to make about Islam and it seems that there are many Muslims who do identify with her point of view, although it is highly probable that they are unfortunately in the minority.

[minusthejihad]

there are many Muslims who do identify with her point of view, although it is highly probable that they are unfortunately in the minority.

huh? where? The only Muslims I saw at any of her televised speeches were other apostates and lesbians. I did not see any "moderate" Muslims there at all.

[Reffo]

Well Minus, I cannot argue about it. Perhaps her point of view is not supported by enough Muslims. I did say that she is supported by a minority and it is probably a very tiny minority at that (pity about that) but she does seem to get quite a few emails from people who call themselves Muslim and who share her views. Of course she also gets many abusive emails from other Muslims. But that's not really the point! The point is that her views are very interesting because she is a Muslim who is prepared to examine her own faith critically but from a positive point of view as well. She is a breath of fresh air and I for one would like to see more like her and there are a few more like her who are prepared to speak up but many others are just too scared....

[minusthejihad]

No, I agree with you completely.

[ShimonG]

I am not an apologist for Militant Islamism .....

Actually, I think you are, whether you realize it or not as shown below.


I do agree that the Jihadist doctrine is every bit as abominable as Nazism was/is.

There is no difference between jihadist doctrine and islam. islam is jihadist doctrine. This is your rationalization for islam or militant islamism as you call it. Again, there is no difference, if one reads about mohammad, the sunnah, the hadiths and islam.



It is true that at this time in our history,.......

Another example of your apologism (if that's a word). NOT ONLY AT THIS TIME IN OUR HISTORY. Islam has always behaved in the most barbaric manner possible. The most heinous record of loot, murder and rape belongs to islam THROUGHOUT its history. If anything, the ability of potential victims (Israel) to hit back has reduced the toll of innocent victims of islam.

Islam seems to have been hijacked by some very intolerant and supremacist elements who are giving it a bad name and causing upheaval in the world.

Not true. The islamists, as you call them are behaving EXACTLY as mandated by their barbaric and rapine religion.


However, I make a distinction between people and doctrines/religions

Neither islam nor muslims make such distinctions. However, such distinctions are often used my apologists to make islam somehow appear civilized and give credence to the canard that islam has been hijacked.


And I am convinced that we cannot and should not tar all those people with the same brush who call themselves Muslim because as I said before, that path just leads down the slippery slope. Also, my personal experience tells me that as with any other group of people, Muslims are made up of all types: good, bad and indifferent.

Yes, there are a miniscule number of "good muslims." Who truly abhor such behavior. That is because it is a statistical certainty that even islam cannot wipe out decency in every human being that it contracts.

However, a lot of these moderate muslims would gladly fund jehadists to slit the throat of a jew, rape a jew.

A moderate muslim is one who funds terror, without actually getting his/her hands dirty.

[ShimonG]

What happens to a muslim who wants to leave islam? Or even criticizes islam? We all know that.

So, like the song, You can check out anytime you like, BUT YOU CAN NEVER LEAVE.

To those morons (YOU ARE DISMISSED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) who tom-tom the converts, first answer if one can leave islam AS EASILY AS JOINING IT.

SHEESH, WHAT A MOHAMMAD!!

[Reffo]

ShimonG

I am sorry that you think that I am an apologist for militant Islam. I suppose as you say maybe inadvertantly I am if you are right that there is no difference between Islam and Militant Islam. I must admit that I am not a religious scholar and I don't really know the subtleties of Islam in particular or for that matter that of any other organised religion. My own belief system is that I believe in God and in humanity. As far as religion is concerned, I think that all religions can and have been used for both good and evil. And as far as Islam is concerned, I do agree with you that Islam does seem to have a particularly violent and intolerant streak in it against non believers and yes, historically it has a lot to answer for. But from what little I do know about Islam, it also has some humane qualities and not all it's history has been violent and intolerant. Furthermore, the fact that it has managed to retain about 1.2 billion followers suggests to me that it must have some redeeming qualities and that it offers something positive to it's followers.

Having said all that, rest assured that I have not set out to be deliberately difficult or controversial. I have said what I said based on what I consider to be common sense. I have no vested interest in defending Islam because like you guys (SteveMetch, Savvy, Minus) I too am frustrated and apalled by what is being perpetrated today in the name of Islam. I suppose though that my perspective differs from yours in the sense that I blame the elites of Islam rather than Islam itself. I happen to think that the elites of Islam today (and yesterday as well) have been using their own interpretation of Islam to fool their own masses in order to further their own selfish agendas which is to point their fingers at other scapegoats (Jews, Christians, Americans, Infidels, Zionists...hobgoblins etc) anyone except the ruling elites. This has been a time honoured and well tried tactic by all tyrants who wanted to preserve their positions of privilige.

In any case, if I am wrong and if Islam itself is to blame then I suggest to you that the world is in bigger strife than most of us have imagined. Why? because when we are dealing with something like religion, people don't seem to be rational and we will have an extremely hard time to convince the followers of Islam to change their ways. In fact, I don't think that we will be able to convince them at all and I think you can figure out the implications of that. However, if I am right, then at least we have some hope that in time the current Islamic elites will be replaced by a more moral or at least more pragmatic leadership.

[Annaliese]

In any case, if I am wrong and if Islam itself is to blame then I suggest to you that the world is in bigger strife than most of us have imagined. Why? because when we are dealing with something like religion, people don't seem to be rational and we will have an extremely hard time to convince the followers of Islam to change their ways. In fact, I don't think that we will be able to convince them at all and I think you can figure out the implications of that. However, if I am right, then at least we have some hope that in time the current Islamic elites will be replaced by a more moral or at least more pragmatic leadership.

First you need to convince some of us that islam is a religion ...

[SteveMetch]

I am not here to defend or attack any religion but it seems from your post that you have not really looked at what Irshad Manji says. I really do suggest that you look at her writings, preferrably, read her book. You will be pleasantly surprised by her. She actually writes about free will as well and that is one of her criticisms of how Islam is practiced these days, she says that true Islam does encourage free thinking (I think she calls it ItsJihad?) but at a point of time in their history, this has been subverted for political reasons and ever since then, Islamic thinking has been monopolized by the Mullahs.

Yes I am very familiar with this line of wishful thinking on the part of some Muslims. Unfortunately Islamic Theology is fundamentally based on predestination. The Judeo/Christian concept of God is that he is Good and his creation perfect in its essence. Evil enters the world through nature and freewill. In Islam Allah wills both Good and Evil hence the Muslims constant reference to “Allah willing” or “It is written”. This a critical point because a Jew or Christian seeing 9/11 believes that humans,exercise their freewill, committed evil. The Muslims see 9/11 as a something willed by Allah and by definition is neither Good nor Evil as we would understand it. Evil for Muslims is not submitting to the will of Allah. These foundational mindsets cannot be merely brushed over. In addition, the predestination Muslims have the full force of Islamic theology on their side. Just some examples;

Qur’an 64:11 “No calamity occurs, no affliction comes, except by the decision and preordainment of Allah.”

Qur’an 48:14 “To Allah belongs the sovereignty of the heavens and the earth: He forgives whom He wills, and He punishes whom He pleases.”

Qur’an 3:145 “No person can ever die except by the permission of Allah, the term being fixed as by writing.”

Bukhari:V6B60N473 “While we were in a funeral procession, Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Every created soul has his place written for him either in Paradise or in Hell. They have a happy or miserable fate predestined for them.’ A man said, ‘Apostle! Shall we depend upon what is written and give up doing deeds? For whoever is destined to be fortunate, will join the fortunate and whoever is destined to be miserable will go to Hell.’”

I think we all suffer from wishful thinking. All people of a good heart wish Islam was not what it is. That maybe this is just some big misunderstanding. That maybe Islam can be reformed like Christianity was. The big difference is Christianity was reformed by getting back to its roots where as the reformation of Islam requires it to abandon theirs.

[Reffo]

First you need to convince some of us that islam is a religion ...Why would I want to convince anyone of that?

[ShimonG]

......Furthermore, the fact that it has managed to retain about 1.2 billion followers suggests to me that it must have some redeeming qualities and that it offers something positive to it's followers..........

In any case, if I am wrong and if Islam itself is to blame then I suggest to you that the world is in bigger strife than most of us have imagined.

Howdy, Reffo.

RE: the first part of the above quote. It is not axiomatic that because an ideology has 1.2 billion followers, it MUST have redeeming qualities. Communism had a greater number of followers than that. Also, AND ONCE AGAIN, the fact that one CANNOT LEAVE ISLAM EXCEPT IN A SHROUD COUPLED WITH THE FACT THAT THEY ARE REPRODUCING AT A RAPID RATE, contributes to this 1.2 billion number.

Regarding the second point, YES, we are in for a much bigger fight than we ever imagined. It is common for decent folks to believe in the inherent decency of others. I used to be that way too, believing that there SIMPLY MUST be something decent in islam. Sadly, there is NONE.

[ShimonG]

The big difference is Christianity was reformed by getting back to its roots where as the reformation of Islam requires it to abandon theirs.

PERFECTLY SAID. Exactly what i was trying to get at, but you put it very eloquently.

The corollary to the above is that a reformation of islam IS SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE. If it reformed, it would not remain islam.

[Reffo]

First you need to convince some of us that islam is a religion ...
Why would I want to convince anyone of that?Sorry Annaliese, I had another look at your post and I can now see why you asked me that question. So here is a more detailed response:

The point is not whether they are or are not a religion. You might say that they are not a religion and someone else might say that they just don't really know but the point is that they (the Muslims) have religious feelings. And the point that I was trying to make was that religiosity is an emotional state. It is a belief system, it's to do with faith and logic takes a "back seat" to faith. Consequently, it is very difficult to convince people in that state of mind that everything that they believe in is wrong! That's why it's irrelevant what we think about Islam, what matters is how they think.

[Reffo]

SteveMetch, ShimonG

Like I said, I am not a religious scholar and I am certainly not an expert on the Islamic religion. It is also quite possible that I am a bit of a wishful thinker as well, firstly because I would like to think that at the end of the day there is a solution to all this mess. And secondly, I just don't want to write off nearly one fifth of the world's population (Muslims) as a lost cause.

So what do you guys think? Given your outlook on this topic, what are the solutions? Indeed, is there a solution?

[Annaliese]

Sorry Annaliese

No need to apologize!

I had another look at your post and I can now see why you asked me that question.

I'm glad. Thank you.

[SteveMetch]

SteveMetch, ShimonG

Like I said, I am not a religious scholar and I am certainly not an expert on the Islamic religion. It is also quite possible that I am a bit of a wishful thinker as well, firstly because I would like to think that at the end of the day there is a solution to all this mess. And secondly, I just don't want to write off nearly one fifth of the world's population (Muslims) as a lost cause.

So what do you guys think? Given your outlook on this topic, what are the solutions? Indeed, is there a solution?

The only hope I have is that there were also a lot of communists that suddenly disappeared. Was this because they changed internally or the external threat and ignorance was removed. Authoritarian systems like Islam only survive and propagate through fear and ignorance. The existential threat of the modern world, of which OBL and his like have talked about extensive, is the openness of thought and free speech. This is why the cartoons struck such a cord. Cartoons of Hitler durning Nazi Germanys rule would have resulted in death as well.

Even now, citizens of Communist China, can’t have Google. Why, because the government fears that the masses will learn about alternate ideas and viewpoints in the modern world. Tiananmen Square was the result of just such information.

In the end Muslims are not hopeless just ignorant. I think what will happen is each generation of Muslims will become less attached to Islam and more attached to the Modern world. Iran is a good example of this. The kool-aid drinkers are so violent because they fear what I have said is already coming to pass.

[Achihud]

So what do you guys think? Reffo, you may count me in as well! (...) the point that I was trying to make was that religiosity is an emotional state. Funny that, because it’s supposed to be all about common sense. The emotional state of a religion is a reversed barometer of that very common sense by which religion must lead one to the truth. It is a belief system, it's to do with faith and logic takes a "back seat" to faith. Only when that belief system strays from truth. Consequently, it is very difficult to convince people in that state of mind that everything that they believe in is wrong! Worse, it’s merely impossible!
Why do you think that God couldn’t give the land of Canaan to Abraham right away? That's why it's irrelevant what we think about Islam, what matters is how they think. What matters is that we know how they think! They think that they will win in the end. That makes a reformation to them not necessary unless we force them to reform in the same way that they hope we will submit to them. It reminds me of that song from Billie Joël; “We didn’t start the fire, it was always burning since the world’s been turning.”

God used the force of water once. He said He wouldn’t do it again, so we ought to know that next time it will be happening the other way round.

The solution Amos was talking about…and all the others!

[Reffo]

SteveMetch
In that case I think that this conflict is likely to last several generations.

Achihud
I would prefer not to turn this into a wider discussion about religion because I have no interest in swaying anyone from their religious beliefs (even if I could do so which I doubt). In any case, I respect anyone who is truly pious and who stands by his/her religion. Personally, I believe in God, I believe in humanitarian values but I must admit that organised religion does not do much for me. Don't get me wrong, I don't knock religion because I think that it can be and has been a force for good but unfortunately it has also been a cause for much suffering and even evil (because unscrupulous people misuse it to further their own agenda and interpretations of it). I think that since we all agree that God has given us free will, I think that we as individuals have to work out what is the right path for us and in order to maximise our chance of coming up with good answers, we should draw on all sorts of inputs including from religion but not only from it.

What matters is that we know how they think! They think that they will win in the end. That makes a reformation to them not necessary unless we force them to reform in the same way that they hope we will submit to them.I definitely don't disagree with the first part of what you say. Where I have some doubts though is where you say: "unless we force them....." I wish you were right but in reality I think that forcing them will not be easy and as I said, it will take generations but I suppose you are right that one way or the other, it is they who will have to make the bigger change. I suppose that hopefully collectively humanity on the whole will have to do a lot of changing for the better as well and I hope that it's not just the idealist in me that makes this wish, I just hope that it's a practical wish....

[Achihud]

Achihud
I would prefer not to turn this into a wider discussion about religion because I have no interest in swaying anyone from their religious beliefs (even if I could do so which I doubt). Fair enough!
Although nobody reads forums, they can be used to spy on our religious defence mechanisms. We would only harm ourselves if we tried to convert each other. It is wise however to start from a common ground from were we can tune in to each other so that we can come to a better understanding of our mutual differences and perhaps, share some valuable info on a free basis.
(…) Personally, I believe in God, I believe in humanitarian values but I must admit that organised religion does not do much for me. (…) I think that since we all agree that God has given us free will, I think that we as individuals have to work out what is the right path for us and in order to maximise our chance of coming up with good answers, we should draw on all sorts of inputs including from religion but not only from it. If you do not mind me saying so, I think we have a lot in common.
Where I have some doubts though is where you say: "unless we force them....."
With "unless we force them" I didn’t mean that the Coalition of the Willing should go and get the oil without paying for. We all know that instead of that, the US has a conscience! But as a result of that, our oil dollars and euro’s are being used to stab us in the back with terrorism funding. And since there is no short term solution (just colonize the region) we have to look for the long term solution. This is where christian zionism differs from the jewish one. We don’t hope for or expect an islamic reformation, even in the long run. We try to fit the pieces of the puzzle in our Bible.

For me, it goes that far that I can’t be a good zionist unless every form of institutionalized religion is personally abandoned!

[Reffo]

It is wise however to start from a common ground from were we can tune in to each other so that we can come to a better understanding of our mutual differences and perhaps, share some valuable info on a free basis.I agree with you

If you do not mind me saying so, I think we have a lot in common.Glad to hear it.

With "unless we force them" I didn’t mean that the Coalition of the Willing should go and get the oil without paying for. We all know that instead of that, the US has a conscience! But as a result of that, our oil dollars and euro’s are being used to stab us in the back with terrorism funding. And since there is no short term solution (just colonize the region) we have to look for the long term solution. This is where christian zionism differs from the jewish one. We don’t hope for or expect an islamic reformation, even in the long run. We try to fit the pieces of the puzzle in our Bible. You may have misunderstood what I meant. I certainly did not mean to intimate anything like "invasion for oil" and I do agree with you that contrary to fashionable propaganda (at least in some circles), the US DOES have a conscience, I only wish that some other countries who criticize it should have one too! In fact, what I am fearful of is that because of the prevailing double standards, the hypocrisy and the short term thinking in this world of ours, it is not an easy proposition to "force them". In fact, even if the west would act with unity of purpose (which it certainly is not today), the job would not be an easy one. Nevertheless, I am not totally pessimistic, I think the time will come when the west will act in unison and I think that will bring about positive results. Where we might differ is our projection of what is possible. In my view, the followers of Islam will continue to follow their religion but they can and will be forced to become more tolerant because if they don't, then the rest of the world will lose their tolerance towards them, things will come to a head and the Jihadis/Islamists will not be the winners.

[Achihud]

In my view, the followers of Islam will continue to follow their religion but they can and will be forced to become more tolerant because if they don't, then the rest of the world will lose their tolerance towards them, things will come to a head and the Jihadis/Islamists will not be the winners. Their gamble is that democracies are whores of their own economies and therefore will not unite. That worked for Hitler so it should work for them and it will! But that was at the beginning of the casino evening...

[Reffo]

Achihud

Unfortunately their gamble can be justified, at least in the beginning. But like Hitler, who took the same gamble and was also successful in the beginning, their gamble too will backfire in the longer term. And like I said, in another thread about Hamas, paradoxically, the greater their early success, the greater will be their downfall in the longer term. The only thing that we cannot be sure about is what will transpire in between.

My assessment of the likely outcome differs from SteveMetch's, ShimonG and Savvy's in that I think that the outcome will be a more moderate and tolerant Islam and in return there will be tolerance towards them. I could be wrong but my interpretation of what SteveMetch and Savvy said was that Islam cannot be tolerant by their very nature and therefore they will have to be totally defeated (SteveMetch, Savvy, ShimonG please correct me if I am wrong in that interpretation). Anyway, where do you stand on this, Achihud?

[Achihud]

Unfortunately their gamble can be justified, at least in the beginning. But like Hitler, who took the same gamble and was also successful in the beginning, their gamble too will backfire in the longer term.
I see another succeeding gamble comparison going on and we can’t do anything about it. I mean the difference between racism and jew-hatred! Hitler knew that he could never replace christianity with paganism from the inside. So he gambled right that if he removed the judaism roots from within our societies, christianity would just become extinct. It’s the same as when you cut the roots from a tree, the tree will die.
Then he gambled right again, when he sensed that he could never sell this ‘antisemitism’ to Germany unless in the guise of an ideology based on eugenic studies that already existed even in the UK and US. As a result we are now saddled with misconceptions such as antisemitism = racism! As if every semite is a jew, while Hitler’s war on judaism wasn’t about racism. It was about exterminating your religion with his jew-hatred. But because judaism is a pretty closed religion, this jew-hatred almost equals pure racism.
So now we have the misconception called ‘antisemitism’ that can be used against Western civilization by the Jihadists; “Let’s just hunt the jews down on European soil, torture, rape and kill and if we are being accused of racism, we’ll just say; it’s no racism, it’s political! But you ‘islamophobic’ Europeans are all to well known for your racist nature. So back off, we have some work to do in here!” See, we can’t kill the misconception called antisemitism, what should be called jew-hatred! And we can’t kill the new jew-hatred because the king of kings’ misconception will be that islamophobia will be called racism! And all human right watchers and leftists are going to protect it with their lives so that all jews on our soil have to suffer…yet again!

And the muslims can always spare some sacrifices, they call it glorious martyrdom!
I could be wrong but my interpretation of what SteveMetch and Savvy said was that Islam cannot be tolerant by their very nature and therefore they will have to be totally defeated (...). Anyway, where do you stand on this, Achihud? Reffo, I see no difference between Japanese kamikaze strategies and glorious martyrdom for Allah’s cause. In the end it will be all or nothing to them.
Further, let’s use some imagination and transfer all the poor Palestinians to let’s say, Quwait and all the rich and prosperous Quwaities to Gaza! I bet for 5 bucks that within a week all Palestinians will have a free flight ticket back to Gaza. I don’t know if the Quwaities will return home however, maybe they hire some poor Malaysians to keep Quwait running.

[ShimonG]

............. ShimonG please correct me if I am wrong in that interpretation).

No. You are not incorrect. I see a violent confrontation, and the sooner the better. I must say though that your hopefulness and (in my opinion, wrong) belief in expecting any decency in islam reminds me of my younger, naive days.

[Reffo]

Reffo, I see no difference between Japanese kamikaze strategies and glorious martyrdom for Allah’s cause. In the end it will be all or nothing to them.Yes, I agree. But where our perspectives may differ is in the who the "them" are. The way I see it, the 1.2 billion Muslims are not a uniform entity, they don't all think alike. I think they too are diverse like us although because of the repression and the misinformation that they are subjected to, they may come across more as if they are of one mind but IMO, they can probably be grouped into the following broad groups:

The die hard fundamentalist Jihadis
The ruling elites
The misguided masses
The better informed but quietly repressed people who are too scared to speak up
The few lonely dissidents

Unfortunately, I believe that at this stage of history, after perhaps a thousand year of repression and ignorance, the Muslims of categories one to three far outnumber the last two categories.

I see a violent confrontation, and the sooner the better. I must say though that your hopefulness and (in my opinion, wrong) belief in expecting any decency in islam reminds me of my younger, naive days.Yes, I see one too. Actually, right now we are already at war but many in the west still don't acknowledge it (I am certainly not one of those who are in denial). However, right now, the pattern is that the Jihadis are fighting full time in Iraq, Afghanistan and Israel but elsewhere they are just relatively minor needling to other westerners, a bomb in this city then a few months later suicide bombings in another place, murdering someone who is too critical of them (a la Holland) rioting, hate speeches etc but they have not yet repeated quite the major attack of 9/11. I think they want to cause fear and havoc but they are not yet keen to provoke the west to react the same way as they reacted after 9/11. I think their tactic is to try to defeat the West by the "death of a thousand cuts" and with their demographic time bomb.

I do disagree with you though if you are saying that all 1.2 billion Muslims are inherently evil. I may be naive but I just don't accept that. However, it does not mean that right now a lot of them are not willing to hurt us, I think they do. But in my opinion, the Muslims who fall into categories 3, 4 and 5 above are reformable in the longer term (4 and 5 easily and 3 a lot harder) and even some from category 2 can be made to "see the light" with a lot of arm twisting and "gentle persuasion" (I don't really mean gentle). Only those hardened elements of category 1 are totally irredeemable and they must be mercilessly eliminated.

One thing is for sure though, things will get a lot worse before they get better!

[Annaliese]

One thing is for sure though, things will get a lot worse before they get better!

Rather than nitpick each point ... (this is a very happy day for me! :D) ... I want to simply add my complete agreement with the sentence I have excerpted from your post (concurring with the opinion of ShimonG as well, of course). :cool:

[Reffo]

Rather than nitpick each point ... (this is a very happy day for me! :D )...Good on ya...I hope it's really good news. I wouldn't nitpick either on a happy day.....:D

SteveMetch, Shimong, Achihud

I may have given you the impression that I don't understand your POV but I hope that's not really the case. My understanding is that you too don't consider all Muslim people as inherently evil but rather their belief system which you likened to an ideology.

I on the other hand believe that the problem is not necessarily their religion but rather the way that many of their religious leaders have come to interpret and emphasise some aspects of their religion. Unfortunately too many of their Mullahs, Imams and Ayatolahs have chosen to emphasise the militant, supremacist and fatalistic aspects of Islam which are undoubtedly part of that religion. However, it does not just stop there. My understanding is that like Christianity and Judaism, Islam also contains moral aspects such as social justice, self improvement, fairness and those are not the values that have been emphasised lately, certainly not towards non Muslims (the last 1000 years or so). Many historians agree that the reasons for this were political because it suited the elites to divert the attention of the masses away from their real oppressors.

I think that we may all agree that at this stage the war is not being conducted in an optimum way. Why? Because we are not ruthless enough, we are not targeting the right enemy, we have too many appeasers amongst us and we are not consistent and dogged enough in the pursuit of our goals. So the question is: what is the best way to win this war?

I don’t really agree with you that Islam itself as the problem and I don’t really see it go the same way that Communism went because as I mentioned before, I don’t see how a religion, which is much more attached to the psyche of it’s followers than an ideology can be eliminated. And even if you could achieve your goal in the longer term, it would take many, many generations.

The way I see it, in order to win this war, the west will need to target those elements of Islamic society who are perpetrating the problems and they are the Jihadis, some of the clergy (probably many of them) and many of the ruling elites who created them and are still in many instances support them secretly. Unlike us, those particular groups are already fighting an all out war against us, they:

Are ruthless
Target anyone who represents a stumbling block to them, Muslim or otherwise
Sabotage Western efforts to improve life in Islamic countries (for example in Iraq and Afghanistan)
Target and intimidate their critics
Emphasise the wrong aspects of Islam
Spread disinformation, propaganda and deliberately inflame their masses
Infiltrate the west and the ranks of their opponents in the Muslim world
Use subterfuge and speak out of both sides of their mouths

The above list is not exhaustive but it all adds up to the same thing: They are unscrupulous and they stop at nothing. I think that the West needs to get much more serious about how it fights this war and, like they, it needs to be much more pragmatic about the methods that it uses. Perhaps we too should shift to the use of clandestine hit and run warfare and we should be prepared to progressively intimidate the intimidators and those who directly or indirectly support them. And just to spell it out a bit more, a lot more of the puppet masters, the teachers/tutors, the inciters and the financiers of terror need pay the ultimate price. Conversely, the genuine moderates (rather than the pretend ones) need to be propped up, protected and rewarded. And yes, I must admit that even this way it may take a generation or two to defeat the fanatics but at least it is a practical proposition.

[ShimonG]

I may have given you the impression that I don't understand your POV but I hope that's not really the case. My understanding is that you too don't consider all Muslim people as inherently evil but rather their belief system which you likened to an ideology.

Howdy Reffo, you are correct. I dont believe that all muslims are evil for the sole reason that statistically speaking, even islam cannot destroy inherent decency in every human it infests. Islam is definitely evil personified.

I on the other hand believe that the problem is not necessarily their religion but rather the way that many of their religious leaders have come to interpret and emphasise some aspects of their religion.

I respectfully disagree. What makes you think that the mullah's interpretation is incorrect? Can you substantiate your belief with an example where islam was misinterpreted? I on the other hand believe that the reason that muslims are given to mindless violence and evil is PRECISELY because that is exactly what islam is!

Unfortunately too many of their Mullahs, Imams and Ayatolahs have chosen to emphasise the militant, supremacist and fatalistic aspects of Islam which are undoubtedly part of that religion.

I think it was Labyu who stated it quite eloquently. Paraphrasing him (hopefully accurately), if one does not emphasise the evil in Islam, it no longer remains islam. Remember that the conciliatory verses in islam belong to the earlier period when mohammad was still trying to vainly convince the jews of his prophethood. Of course, even then the Jews were too smart to fall for that $hit. The later verses spew venom at the jew/christian because by then mohamad had given up all hopes of getting himself recognized as the true prophet by the jews. The later verses abrogate all earlier verses. So, if you want to cite some earlier verses that point to "redeeming qualities of islam", you should note their abrogation as well. They are no longer valid. Which brings me to the next point: One, I dont think Gabriel had anything to do with mohammad. Just because Gabriel is alleged to have revealed to mohamad does not make it true. With all the other evil that mohammad committed, lies would not be out of character for him. Again, witness how his revelations regarding taking any woman he lusted for to bed served to only gratify him and no one else. Contrast that to the Universality and decency of the Ten Commandments.

Second, was Gabriel and/or allah so confused that he abrogated his own earlier verses? What the freaking point? There are numerous such inaccuracies/inconsistencies in the qoran to very clearly denote no divine connection whatsoever between mohammad/qoran and any G_d.

However, it does not just stop there. My understanding is that like Christianity and Judaism, Islam also contains moral aspects such as social justice, self improvement, fairness and those are not the values that have been emphasised lately, certainly not towards non Muslims (the last 1000 years or so). Many historians agree that the reasons for this were political because it suited the elites to divert the attention of the masses away from their real oppressors.

With due respect again, please do not associate islam with Judaism. I really dont care if mohammad/islam is associated with christianity. That is up to the Christians to dispute.

How is the need for four male witnesses to a rape fairness? Where is the justice in looting, murdering and raping in the name of allah?

o the question is: what is the best way to win this war?

That's the million dollar question, aint it?

I don’t really agree with you that Islam itself as the problem and I don’t really see it go the same way that Communism went because as I mentioned before, I don’t see how a religion, which is much more attached to the psyche of it’s followers than an ideology can be eliminated. And even if you could achieve your goal in the longer term, it would take many, many generations.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. It is not axiomatic that because a billion people follow a religion, it must be good. Its a non sequitur.

The way I see it, in order to win this war, the west will need to target those elements of Islamic society who are perpetrating the problems and they are the Jihadis, some of the clergy (probably many of them) and many of the ruling elites who created them and are still in many instances support them secretly. Unlike us, those particular groups are already fighting an all out war against us, they:

Are ruthless
Target anyone who represents a stumbling block to them, Muslim or otherwise
Sabotage Western efforts to improve life in Islamic countries (for example in Iraq and Afghanistan)
Target and intimidate their critics
Emphasise the wrong aspects of Islam
Spread disinformation, propaganda and deliberately inflame their masses
Infiltrate the west and the ranks of their opponents in the Muslim world
Use subterfuge and speak out of both sides of their mouths

The above list is not exhaustive but it all adds up to the same thing: They are unscrupulous and they stop at nothing. I think that the West needs to get much more serious about how it fights this war and, like they, it needs to be much more pragmatic about the methods that it uses. Perhaps we too should shift to the use of clandestine hit and run warfare and we should be prepared to progressively intimidate the intimidators and those who directly or indirectly support them. And just to spell it out a bit more, a lot more of the puppet masters, the teachers/tutors, the inciters and the financiers of terror need pay the ultimate price. Conversely, the genuine moderates (rather than the pretend ones) need to be propped up, protected and rewarded. And yes, I must admit that even this way it may take a generation or two to defeat the fanatics but at least it is a practical proposition.

A short answer to the above is that a muslim CAN only be a moderate if he completely ignores virtually every tenet of the qoran. And if so, does he remain a muslim?

It is clear that we agree as well as disagree on a lot of issues. Regardless, it is nice to converse with someone who is at least honest. We dont have to agree on every single thing.

Shalom.

[Reffo]

It is clear that we agree as well as disagree on a lot of issues. Regardless, it is nice to converse with someone who is at least honest. We dont have to agree on every single thing.

Shalom.Yes, I agree, Shalom to you too.

[SteveMetch]

More discussion concern Islam and Rape.

“A Muslim rape epidemic is sweeping across Europe. A distinguished panel tells us why.”

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21502

A more F*??##-up culture you will not find.

I think its time to impose the "use it in rape lose it" policy.

Preventing future rape and reducing the number of new Muslims a win win for everyone.

[Mediocrates]

I didn't see a clear definition or quantification of 'epidemic'. They seemed intentionally vague on the point.

[SteveMetch]

I didn't see a clear definition or quantification of 'epidemic'. They seemed intentionally vague on the point.

Let’s see 80% of the rapes are committed by a group (ie Muslim Males) which represents only 2% of the population.

I don’t know what the rape rate is (ie rapes per 10,000 women per year) but that is not the main issue of the discussion. What is the main issue is the 80% number. Do the math if we deported half of the Muslims Males in Europe the "reported" rape rate would go down by 40%. Sound like a good idea to me. In fact why don’t we deport 100%.

[Mediocrates]

80% of some nonspecific fraction of the total. Did you know though that some French cities are ~40-50% Arab? Maybe it's true maybe it's not but it seems pretty unscientific.

[SteveMetch]

80% of some nonspecific fraction of the total. Did you know though that some French cities are ~40-50% Arab? Maybe it's true maybe it's not but it seems pretty unscientific.

All that means is that you more likely to get raped in those areas. The math still stands, the crime of rape is disproportionately committed by Muslim males.

And again its not "Arabs" we need to worried about its Muslims.

[ShimonG]

Wafa Sultan
http://www.memritv.org/search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1050#

Irshad Manji
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/139/story_13970_1.html

[gronf]

Thank you, Rune!

From the second link: "...I disagree that this has nothing to do with Islam. Muhammad himself had forced sex (rape) with several of his slave girls/concubines. This is perfectly allowed, both in the sunna and in the Koran. If you postulate that many of the Muslims in Europe view themselves as a conquering army and that European women are simply war booty, it all makes perfect sense and is in full accordance with Islamic law. And Muslims do follow their medieval religious laws, even today..."


I havn't read the whole thread so this was said before probably. This whole rape scam is one of the oldest ways for racists to defame people. You can really find it throughout the history and today in many many many many variations. Those allegations are as old as they are wrong. Why should they be true this time.

[minusthejihad]

I havn't read the whole thread so this was said before probably. This whole rape scam is one of the oldest ways for racists to defame people. You can really find it throughout the history and today in many many many many variations. Those allegations are as old as they are wrong. Why should they be true this time.

Well, since you haven't offered any proof that they are wrong, why should we believe you anyway? You really don't know how this whole debate thing works do you?

[gronf]

Well, since you haven't offered any proof that they are wrong, why should we believe you anyway? You really don't know how this whole debate thing works do you?

Well, I thought you lived long enough to have heard of such charges before. White people accusing black people to rape their women, Arabs who claim that Jews rape their women and on and on and on. But if you want a proof that this is a very common technique. I just ask google ...

and viola http://www.wakeupordie.com/html/action/jewsrape/jewsrape.html another shocking examlpe that prooves my point. Its one of the oldest allegations and one of the most effective ones. Still causing riots in the UK.

Studies show however that most rapists "prefer" their own race. But it seems to be a deep fear of man that is touched there.

[Ossian]

deleted

[minusthejihad]

Well, I thought you lived long enough to have heard of such charges before. White people accusing black people to rape their women, Arabs who claim that Jews rape their women and on and on and on. But if you want a proof that this is a very common technique. I just ask google ...

and viola http://www.wakeupordie.com/html/action/jewsrape/jewsrape.html another shocking examlpe that prooves my point. Its one of the oldest allegations and one of the most effective ones. Still causing riots in the UK.

Studies show however that most rapists "prefer" their own race. But it seems to be a deep fear of man that is touched there.

Are you denying that Muslim gangs across Europe and even Australia have been raping Western women? You are saying this is all just a myth? How many factual examples from reputable Newspapers should I go and dig for you before you admit you are wrong? Seriously, I'd like to know before I spend the time to make you look like a fool. I've got other things I can go do and I'm sure you'll make a post in another thread that won't take as much work for me to do so.

[gronf]

Are you denying that Muslim gangs across Europe and even Australia have been raping Western women? You are saying this is all just a myth?


Quite smart of you


How many factual examples from reputable Newspapers should I go and dig for you before you admit you are wrong? Seriously, I'd like to know before I spend the time to make you look like a fool.

Well for an "epidemic" this should be quite a few. But I'm satisfied with three. And see it coming that we will disagree on how reputable newspapers are.

Forget about the Frontpage Magazin. I will not accept it as reputable.

[Leon]

Well, I thought you lived long enough to have heard of such charges before. White people accusing black people to rape their women, Arabs who claim that Jews rape their women and on and on and on. But if you want a proof that this is a very common technique. I just ask google ...



except its kind of hard trying to escape the fact that there have been a number of gang rape incidents in Australian & European cities where the culprits were indeed young Arab men and the victims young white infidels.
I dont know about the European cases, but here in Australia, the victims were specifically targetted because they were "white aussie sluts."

If Arab claims of Jews raping their women can be adequetly verified , than fine - I cant agrue with that.

[gronf]

I dont know about the European cases, but here in Australia, the victims were specifically targetted because they were "white aussie sluts."

I wrote a mail to abc news. Its an Australien news source that I would trust. Maybe they surprise me. This will take some weeks anyway but I will accept it if they tell me that you are true. Alone I cannot believe it.

[Reffo]

gronf

Here is a link to the ABC website on the unfortunate attacks. Believe me (if you can), the newspapers were talking just about nothing else when this came to light:

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/s676658.htm

X was the leader of a brutal gang of rapists, who on three occasions, raped four young women. His activities and those of his gang spread terror in Sydney in August 2000, just before the commencement of the Olympic Games.

The gang consisted of varying numbers of men, up to about fourteen. Not all of them have been caught. Those who have been caught and brought to justice were either identified by the victims or pleaded guilty because evidence had been found to connect them with the offences.

The activities of the gang were organised by the use of mobile phones and there was a considerable degree of planning and co-ordination involved in each set of attacks.

As is common with rapists, the gang members treated each of their victims with callous indifference and considerable cruelty.

All the men, being of Lebanese origin, spoke Arabic and at various times during the night, the men in each car communicated with one another in that language, using mobile phones. Neither of the victims understood Arabic.

Y, Hajeid, X and H came from the Greenacre area and it seems likely to me that all the others came from this same area. It was to a park in this area that the men in the van and those in the car went to for the purposes of committing the offences of which they were convicted. H and S1 pleaded guilty before trial.

[Reffo]

The Sydney Morning herald is also quite a left wing oriented newspaper and here is what it wrote about the gang rapes:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/07/13/1026185124700.html

So now we know the facts, straight from the Supreme Court, that a group of Lebanese Muslim gang rapists from south-western Sydney hunted their victims on the basis of their ethnicity and subjected them to hours of degrading, dehumanising torture. The young women, and girls as young as 14, were "sluts" and "Aussie pigs", the rapists said. So now that some of the perpetrators are in jail, will those people who cried racism and media "sensationalism" hang their heads in shame? Hardly.

The journalists, academics, legal brains and politicians who tried to claim last August that the gang rapes of south-western Sydney were just a run-of-the-mill police blotter story being beaten up by racists, scaremongers and political opportunists don't ever want to acknowledge the truth about that ugly episode in Australian history. They don't want to acknowledge the fear and tension that ran through a part of Sydney they rarely visit and can never understand.

[Leon]

The Sydney morning Herald and its sister paper the Age newspaper are the Australian version of the left-wing British Guardian.

The ring leader of the group got fifty years in jail - unheard of in any rape case in Australia. The sentence was handed down partly because of the sheer organised brutuality of the crime - once again unheard of in this country - and partly (or more importantly) because the rape was race motivated.

[gronf]

OK, I get the picture. There was one case 6 years ago. It was a horrible crime and a horrible criminal. What an Arsehole.

Nevertheless this does not prove the point of a rape epidemic to me. One case 6 years ago. As you show me papers were full of it in Australia. And they would e in Europe. No yellow press would miss this one out. So if there would be a rape epidemic I wouldn't miss it for sure.

If you take the links posted hier like fjordman ... every child can see that even the photo of a "rape victim" was obviously made up. The frontpage magazin brings the same fraud photo. For me it is clear to see that those are racist, extremist sites.

You know if there are racial tensions it needs a single spark to light an explosion. Rape does always fine in such cases.

But after all take Jeff Dahmer raped black people even eating them he was more horrible than Bilal Skaf. Nobody in this forum would accuse white people of systematic rape of black people. Although it's hardly 150 years ago that raping black women was legal for white man in some areas. Or take the lynch-rape problem in Alabama 50 years ago. I saw Nazi propaganda movies making people aware that Jews are eager to rape that pure blond german women. Sorry for me it's the same old rubbish all over. And I am hard to convince of the opposite. I learnt in school that people who are telling me such things are most likely lying. This proved right to this very day. And I'm sure it will in future. I was working in Göteborg for three month. I saw no muslim rape gangs sweeping Sweden.

[Reffo]

gronf

You are rehashing what was already discussed earlier int this thread just look at it (say a bit before and after post 113)

[Leon]

[QUOTE=gronf]OK, I get the picture. There was one case 6 years ago. It was a horrible crime and a horrible criminal. What an Arsehole.

It wasn't just "one case" six years ago. A number of girls were raped over an entire two year period in sydney. I suggest you read up on the whole thing - especially the victims accounts (in each case the victims were told they were "white aussie sluts," etc). Nine men were jailed but there were rumors that more guys were involved. And If I'm not mistaken similiar cases occurred in Europe. But I will stick to events in Australia, since I live here and know what goes on here best. Curiously, in response to the rape at least two influential Islamic clerics said that the rape victims had brought it on themselves (with the way they dress etc).

More importantly its not just rape that is the problem. Rape aside, local Australians - especially in Sydney's suburburbs - have been harrassed for many years. There has been at least one reported racially motivated killing against an Australian a few years ago in Sydney and many incidents of racially motivated bashings and assaults. For many years, locals at Sydney's cronulla beach were assaulted and harrassed by gangs of Lebanese youth. Most of the victims who were harrassed were girls on the beach who were deemed "inappropriatly dressed" by the Lebanese youth in accordance to what they interpreted as Islamic law. Unfortunatly, all those years of harrasment from a bunch of racist thugs - culminating in the bashing of two life guards - sparked a recent riot in Cronulla last december.

A former police detective, Tim Priest, gives an interesting account (http://www.australian-news.com.au/The%20rise%20of%20Middle%20Eastern%20crime%20in%20 Australia.pdf)of events of the past 20 years in Sydney.

If you take the links posted hier like fjordman ... every child can see that even the photo of a "rape victim" was obviously made up. The frontpage magazin brings the same fraud photo. For me it is clear to see that those are racist, extremist sites.

Are the Sydney morning herald and Age newspapers, racist and extremist sites too?


But after all take Jeff Dahmer raped black people even eating them he was more horrible than Bilal Skaf. Nobody in this forum would accuse white people of systematic rape of black people.

Dahmer also killed and raped white people as well. Whats your point? Where is the relevance? Dahmer's motivation was a sick sadistic desire to murder & eat people. Bilall skaf was purley motivated by race and a complete disrespect for the culture and life style of his adopted country. I cant believe I even have to explain the irrelvance in your point.

Although it's hardly 150 years ago that raping black women was legal for white man in some areas. Or take the lynch-rape problem in Alabama 50 years ago.

What is your point? you might as well as bring up the crusades as a sort of justificatoin for this as well.


But oh no it even gets worse...


I saw Nazi propaganda movies making people aware that Jews are eager to rape that pure blond german women. Sorry for me it's the same old rubbish all over. And I am hard to convince of the opposite. I learnt in school that people who are telling me such things are most likely lying.

If one can adequetly prove to me that Jewish gangs were gang raping german women and were motivated by race and religion in doing so - no problem. As a Jew and a grandson of holocaust survivors, I wont have any issues with Nazi propaganda, if it were proven true.

And why bring the Nazis into the equation? You of all people -a German- should know not to do this. You immidiatley lost all credibility, if you had any in the first place.

Which reminds me - here is Wafa Sultan, a brave Muslim woman being interviewed on Al-Jazeera:

The Jews have come from the tragedy (of the Holocaust), and forced the world to respect them, with their knowledge, not with their terror, with their work, not their crying and yelling. Humanity owes most of the discoveries and science of the 19th and 20th centuries to Jewish scientists. 15 million people, scattered throughout the world, united and won their rights through work and knowledge. We have not seen a single Jew blow himself up in a German restaurant. We have not seen a single Jew destroy a church. We have not seen a single Jew protest by killing people. The Muslims have turned three Buddha statues into rubble. We have not seen a single Buddhist burn down a Mosque, kill a Muslim, or burn down an embassy. Only the Muslims defend their beliefs by burning down churches, killing people, and destroying embassies. This path will not yield any results. The Muslims must ask themselves what they can do for humankind, before they demand that humankind respect them.


For your benefit and understanding, perhaps Sultan should have also added "not a single Jew who raped a German woman" () next to "We have not seen a single Jew blow himself up in a German restaurant."

[gronf]

Dahmer also killed and raped white people as well. Whats your point?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer
"Most of his victims were African American and Asian gay men whom he sexually assaulted."

Thats my point


If one can adequetly prove to me that Jewish gangs were gang raping german women and were motivated by race and religion in doing so - no problem. As a Jew and a grandson of holocaust survivors, I wont have any issues with Nazi propaganda, if it were proven true.


Hello? Earth to Leon. Have you read what I said? Of course it was NOT proven true. And I learned in school that such things will never prove true. Thats why you can't convince me.

Got it this time?? Read again what I wrote. And you will see that my point is that they DID NO such thing but were alleged to do it. My point was that such rapes are exceptions because most rapists rape their own race.

Well, anyhow as Raffo said all allguments appeared allready. Jus wanted to clean myself from the accusation of accusing Jews of being rapist. I said the OPPOSITE.

[Mil]

Don't warry boys and girls we, the Untermenchen, don't understand the idealistic Europeans.

[minusthejihad]

Well it is sort of difficult when they put up strawman arguements like:

We say: "Group A has been accused of a crime and here is the proof"

They say: "Well Group B was accused and it was false" so... "If Group B was innocent, then surely Group A is also"!

Yeah dude, whatever!

[Leon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer
"Most of his victims were African American and Asian gay men whom he sexually assaulted."

Thats my point



Hello? Earth to Leon. Have you read what I said? Of course it was NOT proven true. And I learned in school that such things will never prove true. Thats why you can't convince me.

Got it this time?? Read again what I wrote. And you will see that my point is that they DID NO such thing but were alleged to do it. My point was that such rapes are exceptions because most rapists rape their own race.

Well, anyhow as Raffo said all allguments appeared allready. Jus wanted to clean myself from the accusation of accusing Jews of being rapist. I said the OPPOSITE.


You completley missunderstood me. I didnt accuse you of "believing in Nazi propaganda. Quite the opposite.

My point is - how can you bring this into the equation - nazi lies & blood libels about Jews along with Nazi perscution of Jews - and compare it to what you precieve to be the mistreatement and persecution of Arab Muslims, when there indeed has been a phenmenon of racially motivated rapes, bashings, harrasements and (yes even) killings by gangs of Muslim youth in Australia and other countries.

[gronf]

You completley missunderstood me. I didnt accuse you of "believing in Nazi propaganda. Quite the opposite.

OK, if I misunderstood you, I appologize for my rough tone.

[water]

thank god for Bush some one has to do some thing


If you call yourself muslim you are guilty
you are standing with rapist and murders
your are anything but peaceful

[Muslima]

thank god for Bush some one has to do some thing


If you call yourself muslim you are guilty
you are standing with rapist and murders
your are anything but peaceful

What kind of a crackpot statement is this?

[water]

if you carry the bannar you are a full part of what your party dose

[water]

if you think that the people who are going around with white sheets on there heads are not saying black are less then me you fool yourself


its the same with every muslim
there are standing with kidnapper who are cutting off the heads of there prey for all the world to see
they are guilty

[The Baron]

There is certainly an higher crime incidence (for all crimes) in some Muslims communities

And this is indeed related to the very low status of woman in Islam...

One case : I'm from Canada. The worst spree murderer we had was Marc Lépine...he killed 15 female students, because he hated feminists (in a remarkable and ashaming showcase of cowardice, the male students in the classroom left the place when asked...)

Marc Lépine real name was Abu Gharib, or something like that. He had been raised by his very retrograd Algerian father...


All that said, I don't know if the whole thing is more CULTURAL than RELIGIOUS....

[xman]

Ithink that no one was terrorist like israel & usa .israel has many weapon but the palestinians people didn't have any think ,therewith israel denominated this poor people "terrorist", israel killed this people and shoot them so the palstinians cast the jewels .
in the end i want to ask my self first you second , who is the terrorist israel or the palstinians ?????

please reply me .

[The Baron]

Wow, maybe you should label your posts ''BAN ME" ! This would be even quicker...

So, let's see. Who is advocating suicide bombings against non military targets ? (against military targets, well, this would be another thing, but most bombers are against civilians. Which is why, BTW, I found the term KAMIKAZE completly misleading. Real kamikazes attacked purely military targets)

Who have in it's charter the destruction of the other ?

Altough morally highly questionnable, Israelis targeted assassinations are NOT terrorism-it would have been better to put on trial Yassine or the others, but they were anything but innocent vicitms...

[Gilgamesh]

What get the most on my nervs is the "Israeli-Arab" xman of Umm-el Pahem, has no problem eating from the plam of MY hand, celebrating from MY tax payer money, enjoying OUR great many social programs, benefits, affirmative action, privelages from the law, he ia sparred from serving in the army for 3 years like we Jews, Druz and others do... Yet he still has complaints and "problems". If the Muslem doesn't like Jewish company in the Jewish land of Israel, I suggest he pack up his belonging and get the hell out of my face.

What is the best expression for a creature who bites the hand that feed it? Cause shameless ungreatful SOB ain't strong enough to describe the creature.
Even dogs are not that ungreatful. Dogs are better then Israeli Arabs anyday. Won't you agree, xman?

[NewsGuy]

[SIZE="3"]Ithink that no one was terrorist like israel & usa .israel has many weapon but the palestinians people didn't have any think ,
xman,

I am always amazed at this reasoning, which I've seen very often on the Web. The reasoning goes, as you said, that Israel is at fault because it has a strong military, and the Palestinians must be right because they are militarily weak.


In reality, this is nonsense. Not only does it defy logic, but it is also factually incorrect.

The Palestinians have a large rocket-manufacturing industry that produces Kassam rockets, which are shot daily into Israeli population centers. The rockets are aimed at civilian infrastructure and at kindergartens, community centers and private homes.

The Palestinians also are part of 22 Arab countries, including those who are the richest on earth and have armies that, combined, far outweigh the IDF.

The Palestinians also receive more foreign aid per capita than Israel and are supported by more nations than Israel.

Nonetheless, the Palestinians send suicide bombers to mass-murder Israelis at Pizza stores, shopping malls, pubs, etc., They elected Hamas, which doesn’t even recognize Israel's right to exist, is responsible for hundreds of suicide bombings, and is affiliated with al Qaeda.

But most importantly, Israel has "many weapons," because without those weapons it would be wiped off the map by the Arabs in one big Jihad-genocide, which is the true Arab national dream. Let's face it.

The Palestinians, on the other hand, do not need weapons at all. Instead, they need to get over their primitive culture that glorifies violence, racism, and terrorism, and just agree to stop their Jihad.

If that ever happened, in a matter of a few weeks, Israel's Leftist government will be more than happy to hand over to the Palestinians as much Jewish land as the Palestinians would like.

You want the West Bank? You will have it. You want Gaza? You already have it. You want Jerusalem? You already have part of it and will have even more. You want Tel Aviv? You already have part of it and will have even more. Haifa? You already have it. The Israeli Leftists will gladly do your job for you if only you stop with the terrorism.

[minusthejihad]

but the palestinians people didn't have any think

And that's the whole problem, isn't it? :)

[The Baron]

This is kinda getting of topic...

I must say I disagree with the opinion that the Israelian left will hand over everything

[Cato]

Baron

Even Gay Marriage?

Gilgamesh not all Israeli Muslims are fiends like x-man is.

However I over all agree with you, the Israeli Arabs who work to destroy Israel should leave, they not only make things hard for Jews, Druze, and Bedouins, they also make things intolerable for good honest Israeli Muslims who want to have nothing to do with them or their extremist agenda.

[The Baron]

I guess this sentence means that the Left have made an issue of gay marriage ? (always found this issue very funny…)

The fact that Israel should guarantee the rights of it's Muslim citizens is really an non-issue. (the argument ''They don't do this to us ! Let's do the same'' is maybe working for the kindergarden...not for democracies)

[Gilgamesh]

Gilgamesh not all Israeli Muslims are fiends like x-man is. The dominating majority of the Arabs, (outside couple of Badawin clans I have personal knowledge of), think like x-man, only they chose their words more wisely when talking to a naive sap like you are, Cato.

However I over all agree with you, the Israeli Arabs who work to destroy Israel should leave, they not only make things hard for Jews, Druze, and Bedouins, they also make things intolerable for good honest Israeli Muslims who want to have nothing to do with them or their extremist agenda.Yes, but how can you make out of them? If an Arab works against Israel, say between 19:37 to 22:12, and on the rest of the time he is only passive Jihadist, except on working hours, when he is outspoken pro-coexistance... Cato, you call to punish Arabs who act against the state, yet such arabs are allowed time and time again to be elected to the Knesset, recive benefits and so on. You call to punish Arabs who are not loyal, based on the certian Kaffia (sort of speak) they were, while you disreguard the obvious situation when an Arab can change through different Kaffiais in an hour!!!

[Gilgamesh]

This is kinda getting of topic...

I must say I disagree with the opinion that the Israelian left will hand over everythingWell, in this case it turned out you're ill informed.

The process in which the Left has left his mind and handing over everything is already underway. It begun in 1993 and gathering pace.

Politicians are required to do somthing which is also internationaly PC. Since combating terror isn't fast enough or PC enough, then their only option is to run away. Never before we had politicians that scrupolus and that cinical.

When politicians, like some of our population, has shed all values other then immidiate self indulgence, then there is nothing left, there's nothing worth fighting for no more. This is the spiral we are in.
Yet, I am optimistic. The spiral is due for another turn, when people begin to understand that persuing common interest and team work would allow them to realize realize their personal goals much faster. We need a vision that would bring gather our entire society. We have no such vision.

[The Baron]

My incredible sense of intution allow me to reach the following conclusion : you disagree with left policies (which is completly your right, ah, ah, ah !!!!)

So, to come back with the earlier thread...what do you think of the Lépine/Gaib thing ?

[Gilgamesh]

So, to come back with the earlier thread...what do you think of the Lépine/Gaib thing ?
Could you please refer me to the post in question? I am not terribley sure, I understand to which incedent you've mentioned.

[The Baron]

Ok, this make reference to the Polytechnique killing, and it's a perfect case of how Muslims have sometimes problems with female rights.

(the guy name was Marc Lépine...but his REAL name was, err...Abu Garib, or something like that.)

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/marc_lepine/8.html

[Gilgamesh]

Ok, this make reference to the Polytechnique killing, and it's a perfect case of how Muslims have sometimes problems with female rights. It's some understatement... well put!

(the guy name was Marc Lépine...but his REAL name was, err...Abu Garib, or something like that.)

http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/mass/marc_lepine/8.html

This is only ONE of the crimes muslems are involve in.
Much tougher to proove, are "car accidents" Arabs are involve in, in much greater ratio then their relative part of society. In Israel, Arabs are involve at least TWICE their their relative proportion in society, with fatal car "accidents". Aspecialy when the Arab truck drivers. We, Israelis who live in the north and south of Israel, increasingly belive the "accidents" are not "accidents" at all. Just some kind of terrorism while hiding the motives and exploing the lax judgment in courts and "affirmative" justice toward Arabs.

[The Baron]

On this point, I heavily suspect that this is related to the fact that there is probably more Arab trucks drivers than Israelians truck drivers...

[FOGOMAINS]

Ithink that no one was terrorist like israel & usa .israel has many weapon but the palestinians people didn't have any think ,therewith israel denominated this poor people "terrorist", israel killed this people and shoot them so the palstinians cast the jewels .
in the end i want to ask my self first you second , who is the terrorist israel or the palstinians ?????

please reply me .

A straight answer : not Israel:cool:

[Gilgamesh]

On this point, I heavily suspect that this is related to the fact that there is probably more Arab trucks drivers than Israelians truck drivers...It only seems that way, cause you keep hearing more of Arab truck drivers involved in REPEATED horrific fatal "accidents". i.e. the same driver was involved in SEVERAL "accidents" over his career.

[The Baron]

There is probably something like this, yes...

Allow me however to point out that in Québec, there is real ''serial killers'' on the roads, but it's for a very prosaic reason : alcool while driving...(This means : maybe they are bad drivers, and that's all...)

[Luke90]

some kind of terrorism while hiding the motives
How can it be terrorism if they're hiding their motives?
Surely to cause terror it has to be clear that something is being done deliberately. There's no such thing as subtle terrorism disguised as accidents. It's absurd by definition.
If the figures are as you say they are then there may be some other factors at work but the suggestion that it's "subtle terrorism" is laughable.
Even IF significant numbers of the accidents are deliberate (which I still find unlikely) it surely cannot be classed as terrorism.

[Cato]

The dominating majority of the Arabs, (outside couple of Badawin clans I have personal knowledge of), think like x-man, only they chose their words more wisely when talking to a naive sap like you are, Cato.

Yes, but how can you make out of them? If an Arab works against Israel, say between 19:37 to 22:12, and on the rest of the time he is only passive Jihadist, except on working hours, when he is outspoken pro-coexistance... Cato, you call to punish Arabs who act against the state, yet such arabs are allowed time and time again to be elected to the Knesset, recive benefits and so on. You call to punish Arabs who are not loyal, based on the certian Kaffia (sort of speak) they were, while you disreguard the obvious situation when an Arab can change through different Kaffiais in an hour!!!

None of the Bedouin Clans think like x-man, if you count Druze as Arabs niether do the Druze, and there are many Muslims who do not think like x-man either.

Arabs who fight with Israel, including Israeli Arabs are it's enemies, and I am all for people like Bishari being given the boot and losing citizenship, along with other Arab enemies.

However loyal Israeli Arabs should be rewarded for their loyalty, not all Muslims are the same, and there are many Muslims who are not anti-Israel or anti-zionist.

There are problems yes, there are problems in Jaffa, in Haifa, in Tel Aviv, in Beersheba, but there are also problems between the Welsh and the English in Britain, nobody suggests extreme measures for the Welsh/English Problems, although if a Welshman advocated the destruction of Britain, urged all fellow Welshman to kill every Englishman they saw, supported Britain's enemies, and turned traitor to the country you would see that Welshman get put on trial for treason, convicted.

[Gilgamesh]

None of the Bedouin Clans think like x-man, if you count Druze as Arabs niether do the Druze, and there are many Muslims who do not think like x-man either. Most of the Beduin clans do think like x-man, other then a couple I personaly know.

I didn't count in Druz. Read my post.

Arabs who fight with Israel, including Israeli Arabs are it's enemies, and I am all for people like Bishari being given the boot and losing citizenship, along with other Arab enemies. Amen to that.

However loyal Israeli Arabs should be rewarded for their loyalty, not all Muslims are the same, and there are many Muslims who are not anti-Israel or anti-zionist. The issue I've raised in former post, was that one can not distinct between the two. An Arab may say on thing in the morning and say a whole diffrent thing in the after noon, and practice in reality a thired thing altogather.

There are problems yes, there are problems in Jaffa, in Haifa, in Tel Aviv, in Beersheba, but there are also problems between the Welsh and the English in Britain, nobody suggests extreme measures for the Welsh/English Problems, I have never suggested an extrem massure, so why you bring it up?
Had the Arabs in Israel were behaving 10% as good as the Welsh, then we had a whole diffrent, better M-E. But it's not the case, so your analogy sucks!.

although if a Welshman advocated the destruction of Britain, urged all fellow Welshman to kill every Englishman they saw, supported Britain's enemies, and turned traitor to the country you would see that Welshman get put on trial for treason, convicted.True.

[Cato]

"Most of the Beduin clans do think like x-man, other then a couple I personaly know."

Fine then name one

"I didn't count in Druz. Read my post."

Ok

"Amen to that."

Remember we Liberals are not the morons who imported the Ottoman Millet System, and gave it life past it's time, which is what caused the problems we are facing of disloyalty and treason, and so we are the most eager to remove it and send it to the history books were it belongs.

"The issue I've raised in former post, was that one can not distinct between the two. An Arab may say on thing in the morning and say a whole diffrent thing in the after noon, and practice in reality a thired thing altogather."

This isn't the Byzantine Empire in the 6th century. Arabs who joined the army, went to College, have a degree and a job, express loyalty and have never been involved in terrorism can be depended on not to turn traitor. Even ones who do not join the army but consistently express loyalty and have never done any crime or harmed jewish nieghbours can be counted on.

"I have never suggested an extrem massure, so why you bring it up?"

Expelling the Muslims from Israel is extreme.

"Had the Arabs in Israel were behaving 10% as good as the Welsh, then we had a whole diffrent, better M-E. But it's not the case, so your analogy sucks!."

I agree, so lets replace the Welsh English problems with the Basque Spanish ones, while the Arabs have consistently been worse then the Basques it is a fair analogy. Basques who advocate the destruction of Spain find themselves convicted for treason very quickly with no possibility of appeals.

"True."

The Britons know how to deal with radical Welsh haters, but find themselves in a sea of confusion when it is an Arab or Muslim Traitor.

[Luke90]

Cato, have you ever visited England or Wales?
Your Welsh/English example is slightly bizarre. There aren't really any problems between us. If a welshman advocated the destruction of England he'd most likely be laughed at. The most radical the Welsh get is that some of them are pretty emotional about preserving their language.
Although apparently there's still an old law on the books that makes it legal for an Englishman to shoot a Welshman with a bow and arrow as long as it's inside Chester's city walls and after midnight. I'm not aware of anyone having tried it recently.
Perhaps you were thinking of Northern Ireland?

[Cato]

Cato, have you ever visited England or Wales?
Your Welsh/English example is slightly bizarre. There aren't really any problems between us. If a welshman advocated the destruction of England he'd most likely be laughed at. The most radical the Welsh get is that some of them are pretty emotional about preserving their language.
Although apparently there's still an old law on the books that makes it legal for an Englishman to shoot a Welshman with a bow and arrow as long as it's inside Chester's city walls and after midnight. I'm not aware of anyone having tried it recently.
Perhaps you were thinking of Northern Ireland?

Southern Wales yes, but try North Wales, or try going into a bar there and calling the Welshmen in it English.

[attitude]

In Australia, Norway, Sweden and other Western nations, there is a distinct race-based crime in motion being ignored by the diversity police: Islamic men are raping Western women for ethnic reasons. We know this because the rapists have openly declared their sectarian motivations.

When a number of teenage Australian girls were subjected to hours of sexual degradation during a spate of gang rapes in Sydney that occurred between 1998 and 2002, the perpetrators of these assaults framed their rationale in ethnic terms. The young victims were informed that they were “sluts” and “Aussie pigs” while they were being hunted down and abused.

In Australia's New South Wales Supreme Court in December 2005, a visiting Pakistani rapist testified that his victims had no right to say no, because they were not wearing a headscarf.

And earlier this year Australians were outraged when Lebanese Sheik Faiz Mohammed gave a lecture in Sydney where he informed his audience that rape victims had no one to blame but themselves. Women, he said, who wore skimpy clothing, invited men to rape them.

In Sweden, according to translator for Jihad Watch, Ali Dashti, “Gang rapes, usually involving Muslim immigrant males and native Swedish girls, have become commonplace.” A few weeks ago she said, “Five Kurds brutally raped a 13-year-old Swedish girl.”

In France, Samira Bellil broke her silence – after enduring years of repeated gang rapes in one of the Muslim populated public housing projects – and wrote a book, In the hell of the tournantes, that shocked France. Describing how gang rape is rampant in the banlieues, she explained to Time that, “any neighborhood girl who smokes, uses makeup or wears attractive clothes is a whore.”

Unfortunately, Western women are not the only victims in this epidemic. In Indonesia, in 1998, human rights groups documented the testimony of over 100 Chinese women who were gang raped during the riots that preceded the fall of President Suharto. Many of them were told: “You must be raped, because you are Chinese and non-Muslim.”

Christian Solidarity Worldwide reported that in April 2005, a 9-year-old Pakistani girl was raped, beaten with a cricket bat, hanged upside down from the ceiling, had spoonfuls of chillies poured into her mouth, and repeatedly bashed while handcuffed. Her Muslim neighbours told her they were taking revenge for the American bombing of Iraqi children and informed her they were doing it because she was an “infidel and a Christian.”

In Sudan – where Arab Muslims slaughter black Muslim and Christian Sudanese in an ongoing genocide – former Sudanese slave and now a human rights’ activist Simon Deng says he witnessed girls and women being raped and that the Arab regime of Khartoum sends its soldiers to the field to rape and murder. In other reports, women who are captured by government forces are asked; “Are you Christian or Muslim?” and those who answer Christian, are gang raped before having their breasts cut off.

This phenomenon of Islamic sexual violence against women should be treated as the urgent, violent, repressive epidemic it is. Instead, journalists, academics, and politicians ignore it, rationalize it, or ostracize those who dare discuss it.

In Australia, when journalist Paul Sheehan reported honestly on the Sydney gang rapes, he was called a racist and accused of stirring up anti-Muslim hatred. And when he reported in his Sydney Morning Herald column that there was a high incidence of crime amongst Sydney’s Lebanese community, fellow journalist, David Marr sent him an e-mail stating, “That is a disgraceful column that reflects poorly on us all at the Herald.”

Keysar Trad, vice-president of the Australian Lebanese Muslim Association said the gang rapes were a “heinous” crime but complained it was “rather unfair” that the ethnicity of the rapists had been reported.

Journalist Miranda Devine reported during the same rape trials that all reference to ethnicity had been deleted from the victim impact statement because the prosecutors wanted to negotiate a plea bargain.

So when Judge Megan Latham declared, “There is no evidence before me of any racial element in the commission of these offences,” everyone believed her. And the court, the politicians and most of the press may as well have raped the girls again.

<paragraphs cut to keep within word limit>

In France, in the banlieues, where gang rape is now known simply as tournantes or ‘pass-around,’ victims know the police will not protect them. If they complain, Samir Bellil said, they know that they and their families will be threatened.

However, Muslim women in the French ghettos are finally fighting back against gang rape and police non-action. They have begun a movement called, “We’re neither whores nor doormats.” They are struggling against the intrinsic violence that plagues their neighbourhoods and the culture that condones it.

In most French prosecutions, the Muslim rapists state that they do not believe they have committed a crime. And in a frightening parallel with the gang rapists in Australia, they claim the victim herself is to blame and accuse her of being a “slut” or a “whore.”

According to The Guardian, during the recent French riots, a Saudi Prince with shares in News Corporation boasted to a conference in Dubai that he had phoned Rupert Murdoch and complained about Fox News describing the disturbances as “Muslim riots.” Within half an hour he said, it was changed to “civil riots.”

Swedish translator, Ali Dashti, stated that in Sweden when three men raped a 22-year-old woman recently, they said one word to her. “Whore.” Such stories, according to Dashti, are in the Swedish newspapers every week. And, the politically correct “take great care not to mention the ethnic background of the perpetrators.”

Sweden’s English newspaper The Local reported in July that Malmo police commander Bengt Lindström had been charged with inciting racial hatred. He sent e-mails from his home computer to two city officials. To the head of healthcare, he wrote: “You...treat old Swedes who have worked hard building up the fatherland like parasites and would rather give my taxes to criminals called Mohammed from Rosengärd.”

Oslo Professor of Anthropology, Unni Wikan, said Norwegian women must take responsibility for the fact that Muslim men find their manner of dress provocative. And since these men believe women are responsible for rape, she stated, the women must adapt to the multicultural society around them.

The BBC pulled a documentary scheduled for screening in 2004, after police in Britain warned it could increase racial tension. “In these exceptional circumstances... Channel 4 as a responsible broadcaster has agreed to the police’s request...” The documentary was to show how Pakistani and other Muslim men sexually abused young, white English girls as young as 11.

The number of rapes committed by Muslim men against women in the last decade is so incredibly high that it cannot be viewed as anything other than culturally implicit behaviour. It is overtly reinforced and sanctioned by Islamic religious leaders who blame the victims and excuse the rapists.

In three decades of immigration into Western countries, Islam has caused social upheaval and havoc in every one of its host countries. No other immigration program has encountered the problems of non-assimilation and religious ambiguity.

Everywhere in the world, Muslims are in conflict with their neighbours. And as Mark Steyn recently said, every conflict appears to have originated by someone with the name Mohammed.

<paragraphs cut to keep within word limit>

The complete article is here: http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=20646


Well times have changed in Australia now
There were riots in the beach side suburb of Cronulla late last year that everyone probably saw on their news
They were racially based but the arab community bought it on themselves
For year large gangs of middle easterners would congragate in large gangs in beach side suburbs like Bondi and Manly and cause alot of trouble and start fights and harrass young woman at the beach. This happened for years
Finally they went over the line when a middle eastern gang assaulted 2 junior life gaurds who were only 16 years old
Thousands of Australian's converged on these suburbs and attacked every middle easterner they could find
They were attacked on the beaches, in shops on trains everywhere
Australians had had enough and came out in force to claim back there beach side suburbs
Now Middle easterners wont even go near the beach
They say the riots were racially motivated but they seem to forget it was their actions that started the riot
The parnets of these people responsible claim racial abuse against their children but why didnt the parnets stop them and raise them correctly with good values. The parents are as much to blame as the rioters or the gang rapists
As for the Middle easterners who gang raped Australian woman and were caught
One was sentenced to over 50 years in Gaol
Australian Gaol's are evil and harsh places and you can bet these middle eastern gang rapists now have husbands in Gaol and are getting regularily gang raped themselves:D