Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums - RDF feed
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
If you are not Muslim you should be raped and killed
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,344409,00.html Quote: "Because non-Muslims are never innocent, they are guilty of denying Allah and his prophet," Quote: "You are innocent if you are a Muslim," Choudary tells the BBC. "Then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are not a Muslim, then you are guilty of not believing in God." Choudary said he would not condemn a Muslim for any action. "As a Muslim, I must support my Muslim brothers and sisters," Choudary said. "I must have hatred to everything that is not Muslim."
Re: If you are not Muslim you should be raped and killed
And these fanatics that kill IN THE NAME OF god are the ones that are making the rest of the Muslim religion look bad. Seriously, I know many a muslim person, and learnt their beliefs as I went searching for my religion, and I can tell you quite clearly that there is NOTHING of hatred like this in their Qur'an. And by I mean they kill in the name of god, I mean that I can go out on the street and kill in the name of BlazerOx if I wanted to. Doesn't matter if he wants me to or not, I'm still killing in his name. Again, just because one group of fricked up zealots are interviewed, don't believe that to be the stereotype of the entire religion, for IT IS NOT. EDIT: Also, FOX media is told to cover all the fanatics, and zealots, and crazy fools, to make ALL muslims look bad. Now really, why should you trust the media that is run by the government? Control the media, control the mind. Think about that.
Never said I believe in it. If you're trying to piss me off then you're failing.
ARE YOU TRYING TO TELL ME EXTREMISTS ARE BEING EXTREME AGAIN?! I'm in total shock here to be honest, give me a moment.
Know about this already. http://www.prophetofdoom.net/
There are extremists in any religion. FOX is a good example of it in Christianity.
Fox news seems more of just right wing bias, not neccisarily Christian bias. Though I guess, EVERY media source is biased in some way. Even little Jimmy that says the world's gonna end. That biased bastard, he didn't even consider Mars.
About the rape part. How hot are the women (more than one?) that will be raping me and how soon after said rape do I get killed? I might be intrested ...
I think it'd more of be they'd kill you first. THEN rape you.
That's not scary at all. I've heard way more hate-filled, and emotionally charged words originate from the mouths of Xbox fanboys, PS3 nerds, and Wiitards.
renalpha wrote on Wed, 02 April 2008 04:43 *zips pants open and starts to pee on the quran* hold on i also got to take a shit *takes a shit on the quran* OMFG i got cold hands * Uses the bible to start the fire and after that uses the Quran to make the fire bigger* seriously fuck you all who believe, fuck the religion fuck it. I don't know which one is more of an extremist...the Islamic Fundamentalist...or you.
nikki6ixx wrote on Wed, 02 April 2008 14:29 That's not scary at all. I've heard way more hate-filled, and emotionally charged words originate from the mouths of Xbox fanboys, PS3 nerds, and Wiitards. Gaming fanboy trolls are nothing compared to religious zealots. Whens the last time you heard of a gamer performing a suicide bombing?
Blazer wrote on Wed, 02 April 2008 18:43 Gaming fanboy trolls are nothing compared to religious zealots. Whens the last time you heard of a gamer performing a suicide bombing? Never. But I think people take these dirtbags much too seriously. Plenty of religions glorify martyrdom (suicide bombings, etc). These words are just coming from some idiot, and only reflect the views of a tiny minority. I think it's [NE]Fobby[Gen] who's been hammering away at this, and he's right - most Muslims don't care what these "Jihadists" say. Edit: Spelling
nikki6ixx wrote on Wed, 02 April 2008 19:00 But I think people take these dirtbags much too seriously. Plenty of religions glorify martyrdom (suicide bombings, etc). These words are just coming from some idiot, and only reflect the views of a tiny minority. You really think it is only a couple of crazies that have the "all infidels must die" mindset? "Suicide bombers in Iraq have killed at least 13,000 men, women and children -- our most conservative estimate gives a total figure of 13,132 -- and wounded a minimum of 16,112 people. If we include the dead and wounded in the mass stampede at the Baghdad Tigris river bridge in the summer of 2005 -- caused by fear of suicide bombers -- the figures rise to 14,132 and 16,612 respectively. Again, it must be emphasized that these statistics are minimums. For 529 of the suicide bombings in Iraq, no figures for wounded are available. Where wounded have been listed in news reports as "several", we have made no addition to the figures. And the number of critically injured who later died remains unknown. Set against a possible death toll of half a million Iraqis since the March 2003 invasion, the suicide bombers' victims may appear insignificant; but the killers' ability to terrorize civilians, militiamen and Western troops and mercenaries is incalculable." I'm sure now you will say "but they are just trying to get the US to leave their country". That doesn't change the fact that their religion gives them a nice loophole which allows them to be murderous bastards in exchange for going to heaven. Most people would be afraid of fighting or pissing off someone that has nothing to lose...what about an opponent that gets his #1 goal in life if he kills you and your friends? Point being...that someone who gets to go to heaven if he kills you, should be taken a lot more seriously than spoiled little kiddie gamers spouting smacktalk. Again, I'm not saying that all Muslims are of that mindset, or should be mistrusted by default. What I'm saying is that if a Muslim says "You have insulted Allah, prepare to die!", you should give that a lot more weight and concern than some snot-nosed punk on xbox live saying "omg faggot I'm gonna cut your balls off!".
The men and women performing suicide bombings in places like Iraq, and Palestine are doing them because: a) Their life totally sucks. The children have absolutely nothing to aspire to, to be more than they are. It's a sense of hopelessness. b) The families raise their children to become martyrs, because there is no opportunity for their children. It's also an offshoot of the lack of birth control in those areas. c) The Muslims in the Middle East have been treated like shit by the Western Powers at the BEST of times. When we're not blowing up one of their states, we're being condescending towards them. They have begun to view the West as invaders, and they rightly should, because we are. The West have been the ones to create countries like Iraq, and Lebanon for colonial purposes, totally ignoring the ethnic makeup of those regions. Therefore, they view their region, religion, and race as being threatened. When someone's back is up against the wall, against an enemy that is superior militarily and economically, they'll fight dirty, simply because it's for survival; and you get the suicide bombings. They know the mothers are going to keep pushing out new ones. But they still want some form of justification, ANY small form... and perverted religious fanatics give them that small justification. When there's no hope, you'll want to hear anything, just anything; and radical preachers prey upon that. Their religion doesn't have loopholes. For every violent phrase, there are about several that preach peace, and tolerance. The Bible is no different, and neither is the Torah. If they were all Catholics out there, they'd still be blowing themselves up, because there is an ENTIRE section in the Bible that could be interpreted as God saying it's OK to kill Jews, because they killed his son. Edit: Four things. 1) Quote: Editor Note: The question / answer session is a satirical and fictional account based on Quranic verses and statements of Muslims who unfortunately take some hateful teachings of the Quran literally. Some readers have been mistaking it as a genuine conversation. http://www.islam-watch.org/AyeshaAhmed/London-Imam-Attempt-to-Carry-Out-Sunna.ht m 2) It's essentially porn. Holy books are fucking steamy, and make a Harlequin look like Dr. Seuss. I find it pretty freakin' hilarious that a bunch of Islamic horn-dogs are actually going to demonstrations and saying they should carry off with sweet, white, Western 'booty' . I can't stop laughing!!! 3) The gaming kiddie thing was a joke. But I'm still more afraid of gaming kiddies than I am of Muslims. Fewer things are scarier than some tiny Korean yelling at you, (and drenching you with saliva) about why PS3 is better than any other system in the world. 4) I'm the one here who should be scared of this sort of stuff. I used to date an Iraqi girl from a Business Class. She was a sweetie. And I've still yet to be murdered in some honour killing.
So do you. So. do. you. I find that that the quaran actually lets them get away with it. Osama bin laden hasn't helped much either.
What is all this pro-Muslim sympathy BULLSHIT in this thread? Karandras wrote on Wed, 02 April 2008 03:32 And these fanatics that kill IN THE NAME OF god are the ones that are making the rest of the Muslim religion look bad. Seriously, I know many a muslim person, and learnt their beliefs as I went searching for my religion, and I can tell you quite clearly that there is NOTHING of hatred like this in their Qur'an. And by I mean they kill in the name of god, I mean that I can go out on the street and kill in the name of BlazerOx if I wanted to. Doesn't matter if he wants me to or not, I'm still killing in his name. Again, just because one group of fricked up zealots are interviewed, don't believe that to be the stereotype of the entire religion, for IT IS NOT. EDIT: Also, FOX media is told to cover all the fanatics, and zealots, and crazy fools, to make ALL muslims look bad. Now really, why should you trust the media that is run by the government? Control the media, control the mind. Think about that. Hell with you sympathizer and appeaser. You can't even be a half-decent liar. Frankly, let me break it to you: the old bullshit "stop sterotyping religion" is no longer a valid argument. In fact, that excuse is void since mid 2003 at least in regards to Islam. Yet, you make such claims while COMPLETELY ignoring several crucial variables that may turn you crap-logic upside down. 1. It is not wrong but it is merely unfair to call all members of said religion as "extremist" without proper justification. 2. Locations, history, and population data must be taken into serious consideration before making bullshit statements like "just because one group of fricked up zealots are interviewed..." garbage. Having said so, let me ask you this: were any of your Muslim friends living IN the Middle East? Guess not. Or were they living happy lives in Australia? Guess so. Let me tell you something: I have lived in a certain Middle East nation for seven years that is well-known for it's oppression of "infidel" religions. Seven years is plenty of first-hand experience and interaction with a volatile religion and it's believers none of the FUCKING media outlets could ever cover in a thousand years. You see, I don't give a flying fuck about your Muslim friends living in prosperous 1st World nations just as I don't give a flying fuck about my Muslim friends who live here in the US. There is a massive educational and cultural divide that seperates the Muslims that live in prosperous countries and those living in backward nations which employ devious in-humane religious ploys to keep their citizens in a constant state of control. This applies to anyone who claims Islam is a peaceful religion and that "most Muslims don't care" about what is currently going on in their native lands. Yes, they do care...all of them. And most of them are pretty pisst about it. The simple truth is, you may have a friend here in the States or Europe or Australia, living and being your best friend and all that bullshit but you overlook an important thing: The majority of them are too busy enjoying the opportunities and dreams and hopes prosperous nations provide them with. Sure there are exceptions (the ungrateful immigrants who form shell copies of their previous societies in Western lands). The lack of such opportunities in culturally-backward nations like those in the Middle East along with a seriously fucked up religious text to motivate the idle brain-washed masses creates the perfect formula for sprialling downward. You seriously think it's only a couple of crazies? Very liberal shits like you are the ones who completely downplay the problem while the media on the other hand needs to do a lot of shit more to reach out with real news. The unfortunate truth is that Jihad has permeated ALL levels of Muslim society today. Anyone carefully following the news (not from CNN, Fox, BBC crap) can realize that the wars in Afganistan and Iraq has created a dangerous perception in Islamic peoples that their society, culture, heritage, and most importantly their religion is under a full-fledged anti-Islamic attack from the West. And guess what? They are at a hightened awareness right now at the situation around them. Muslim children, boys and girls, are being brainwashed by their parents and their local Mosque leaders with this concept of "macho Islam Jihad" in levels never before seen. Islamic media outlets are blazing out mind-control programs stating the global ambitions of Islam. Islam has a massive manpower advantage that will affect the war on terror. While idiots think all is fine, Islam already has 5 year olds ready to do Allah's bidding for the next 20-30 years. And guess what? Terrorism will only grow. It has now become a local thing that every Muslim is giving more and more attention to. The distinction between Islamic terrorist and Islamic civilian is so razor thin in Middle East nations you have no idea just who the fuck any Islamic male could be. Defender? Resistance fighter? Allah's servant? "Concerned Muslim"? "The I don't give a shit" types? "I like Americans" types? No matter who the person is, the fucking religion is providing a firm platform of unification. And it is becoming a cultural thing where pretty much anyone has the chance to participate. The wars are providing a very nice opportunity for these murderes to kill for their Allah. And you don't have to be a suicide bomber or torturer to do Islam's dirty Jihad work. Just get a pail of water and hide out in the safehouse so when your brothers come home after killing Allah's enemies, you can quench their thirst after the battle. The fatass Quran provides MANY instances to kill unbelievers. In fact there are 109 verses that specifically call for violence. And not just against non-Islamic "infidels" but also against other Muslims that that refuse to take a stand against the "enemy" whoever the hell that maybe.In NO WAY are there enough peaceful verses to balance out the hate. In the Bible, the violent verses areways embedded within historical context i.e. within a story. In Islam, it is written distinctly seperately like the equivalent of the Ten Commandments. That is fucking far too dangerous and provides a huge chance to be taken literally...and this is exactly what the Muslims have done throughout their history. Islam has a HISTORY OF VIOLENCE and bloodshed that appeasers will conveniently avoid to say. Muhammad was not like Jesus going to city after city healing people and talking the big talk. Muhammad sat on a camel with his sword and led men and destroyed villages, slaughtered the men, raped the women and gave them as gifts to his men, and too the children into captivity. This is a true account and I am not exaggerating anything. WHY DO THE FUCKING APPEASERS AND ISLAMIC SYMPATHIZERS OVERLOOK THIS CRUCIAL FACT? That bloody history continues today. Muslims, driving by the Quran, tend to rely more on force rather than reason. There are centuries of history to back this up. SO IN NO WAY IS THE WEST responsible for current Middle East problems (but definitely for poor management of the problem). The root of the problem is their fucking religion that drives them. It all boils down to religion and THE FUCKING SHIT ROCK in Jerusalem. And those who sympathize keep forgetting what started all this. Undeservingly, and without any provacation, the Muslims did this: Toggle Spoiler 9/11 And nikki says the West is to blame? BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. You see, the false exaggerated concept of the colonization and territory-dividing is really not that bad compared to the centuries old inherited violence of Muslims. And those who are still in doubt can get a book on the Cold War and start reading. Were all Russians during the Cold War bad? Hell no. Only their government, soldiers and many fanboy citizens. There were many Russians who would have rather lived in harmony with Westerners. But yet, any nuclear attack on any Russian city would have killed those same friendly Russians. But at such a global level of conflict with massive economic, military, political trends, it is simply IMPOSSIBLE AND IRRATIONAL to cut slack for neutrals and friendlies within the enemy ranks. It's not about any group but the survival of the human race as a whole. This is what should be understood with Islam though thank fuck the war is confined to a few Middle East nations only. That's reality and it has been that way since the beginning of humanity. If you don't like it, then you can go to hell. If you thought this post was too long, then GTFO of this subforum.
Starbuzz wrote on Thu, 03 April 2008 19:12 And nikki says the West is to blame? BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. Um... Ok...
nikki6ixx wrote on Fri, 04 April 2008 01:36 Starbuzz wrote on Thu, 03 April 2008 19:12 And nikki says the West is to blame? BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. Um... Ok... He just served your ass on a platter and that's all you can come up with. Wow. Go Starbuzz.
Aircraftkiller wrote on Fri, 04 April 2008 11:16 He just served your ass on a platter and that's all you can come up with. Wow. Go Starbuzz. Well, actually, his argument is terrible, and doesn't even refer to any real evidence whatsoever. But I figured that maybe he'll find out for himself that he's very, very wrong on so many levels. The Western powers have a LOT to do with the animosity of the Middle Eastern peoples, be it through direct military intervention, or more covert operations, like the CIA-engineered toppling of Mohammad Mossaddeq who was democratically elected in parliament. There are plenty of other examples. And the Muslim's don't have a history of violence. The Islamic empires' history is much less violent than that of other empires like that of the Roman Empire, or British Empire. In fact, I'd have to say that there was no other empire that was as tolerant, and accepting of other religions, and peoples. The empire brought prosperity to the Middle East, Africa, and Spain. It was also home to massive libraries and literary depositories that are actually responsible for saving much of the Greek, and Roman philosophy we know of today.
nikki6ixx wrote on Fri, 04 April 2008 12:20 Aircraftkiller wrote on Fri, 04 April 2008 11:16 He just served your ass on a platter and that's all you can come up with. Wow. Go Starbuzz. Well, actually, his argument is terrible, and doesn't even refer to any real evidence whatsoever. But I figured that maybe he'll find out for himself that he's very, very wrong on so many levels. Of course, my argument was so terrible you just quoted one small sentence and replied with a "Um... Ok..." It's not my fault if I tell you something that you have made up your mind to not accept. I feel no need to make things up nor do I have any hidden agenda to further. Simply saying "no real evidence" is irrational. I speak what I have learned through reading history and what I have seen and experienced. On the other hand, your irrational support of Islam based on faulty logic and emotions concerns me the most. nikki6ixx wrote on Fri, 04 April 2008 12:20 The Western powers have a LOT to do with the animosity of the Middle Eastern peoples, be it through direct military intervention, or more covert operations, like the CIA-engineered toppling of Mohammad Mossaddeq who was democratically elected in parliament. There are plenty of other examples. I already referred to these incidents and specifically gave the blame to Western powers when I said this: Quote: SO IN NO WAY IS THE WEST responsible for current Middle East problems (but definitely for poor management of the problem). Please note highlighted words. And once again, you ignore Islamic history. nikki6ixx wrote on Fri, 04 April 2008 12:20 And the Muslim's don't have a history of violence. The Islamic empires' history is much less violent than that of other empires like that of the Roman Empire, or British Empire. In fact, I'd have to say that there was no other empire that was as tolerant, and accepting of other religions, and peoples. The empire brought prosperity to the Middle East, Africa, and Spain. It was also home to massive libraries and literary depositories that are actually responsible for saving much of the Greek, and Roman philosophy we know of today. Are you kidding me? Please...either you stay neutral and give an unbiased opinion based on credible history but please don't push any of your exceedingly irrational agenda. If the Islamic empires you refer to were so intellectual and forward-thinking as you claim, why is the Middle East nations a symbol of backwardness today? Every Western empire left behind a legacy you can see with your eyes today and at work. What is Islam's legacy? 1 violent book and 2 rocks of which 1 of them is the curse of the world. Go figure.
Starbuzz wrote on Fri, 04 April 2008 12:46 If the Islamic empires you refer to were so intellectual and forward-thinking as you claim, why is the Middle East nations a symbol of backwardness today? So how would you argue for empires like the Mayan, or Inca's? Those empires were very advanced, and yet the territory their descendants inhabit now is generally made up of third world countries riddled with poverty and drug lords. The Ottoman Empire, which was a product of the Islamic Caliphate, was a relatively strong empire, given its circumstances. Some of the reasons that empire failed is because of poor decision-making in government, confusion about Arab/Religious identity, and siding with the Germans in World War I. To their credit, the Ottoman's proved to be a tough enemy for the Allies, who thought they'd walk all over them. But in the end, the Ottoman's lost, and the territory was split up by the Western Powers. The Western Powers were double dealing between different Arabs, and organizations, and in the end gave them the screw. Instead of allowing the Arabs a homeland of sorts, the area became a mess of states created only to serve the needs of the French and English. Lebanon, and Syria were split from each other, despite their ties. England took three pieces of territory comprissed of Sunni's and Shia's and Kurds, called it Iraq, and called it a day; but not before lopping off Kuwait, creating yet another border. I'd be pretty pissed off if someone promised me a territory for my people, only to find out I was being totally lied to. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_Palestine) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal-Weizmann_Agreement) The Islamic empire was not intolerant towards other religions. Instead, they believed that the Jews, and Catholics believed in the same God, so they rationalized that they were all one of the same. Christians, and Jews worked in the bureaucracy. In fact, Christians held some very high positions within the 'Divan' (Imperial Court), including the rank of Grand Vizier, which can essentially be likened to as a modern-day Prime Minister. Pretty much every other power had isolated the Jews, including the Romans, but the Islamic Caliphate was very liberal towards them. Starbuzz wrote on Fri, 04 April 2008 12:46 Every Western empire left behind a legacy you can see with your eyes today and at work. What is Islam's legacy? 1 violent book and 2 rocks of which 1 of them is the curse of the world. Go figure. Here's a sample. Eat your heart out. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_science Edit: And you make reference to Muhammad sitting on his camel, and allowing his followers to rape, and plunder the city of Mecca. That hasn't exactly been proven, but I won't doubt it either. And even if you think that was totally bad, I have a name for you. 'Constantine'
After reading all the posts, I'd have to agree with nikki on this one.
Ryu wrote on Sun, 06 April 2008 01:08 Religion is stupid. Fact. Yes and no. Yes, it makes fanatics and lunatics, zealots, etc etc. But it also can make people happy. So it's all up to the believer. I'm agnostic, by the way. In case you didn't guess.
Karandras wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 09:20 Ryu wrote on Sun, 06 April 2008 01:08 Religion is stupid. Fact. Yes and no. also can make people happy. this makes fait a good thing, if u have cancer for example u can still hope lol and pray for urself u will survive it.. heartless but true but shit im laughing.
renalpha wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 13:50 Karandras wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 09:20 Ryu wrote on Sun, 06 April 2008 01:08 Religion is stupid. Fact. Yes and no. also can make people happy. this makes fait a good thing, if u have cancer for example u can still hope lol and pray for urself u will survive it.. heartless but true but shit im laughing. Who's the heartless one here? The one hoping to live, or the one making fun of him/her for hoping?
Originally Blue wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 18:21 renalpha wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 13:50 Karandras wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 09:20 Ryu wrote on Sun, 06 April 2008 01:08 Religion is stupid. Fact. Yes and no. also can make people happy. this makes fait a good thing, if u have cancer for example u can still hope lol and pray for urself u will survive it.. heartless but true but shit im laughing. Who's the heartless one here? The one hoping to live, or the one making fun of him/her for hoping? The one who faces life and reality without relying on false illusions.
Starbuzz wrote on Sun, 06 April 2008 21:28 Originally Blue wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 18:21 renalpha wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 13:50 Karandras wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 09:20 Ryu wrote on Sun, 06 April 2008 01:08 Religion is stupid. Fact. Yes and no. also can make people happy. this makes fait a good thing, if u have cancer for example u can still hope lol and pray for urself u will survive it.. heartless but true but shit im laughing. Who's the heartless one here? The one hoping to live, or the one making fun of him/her for hoping? The one who faces life and reality without relying on false illusions. That wasn't what I was asking.
Originally Blue wrote on Sun, 06 April 2008 21:31 Starbuzz wrote on Sun, 06 April 2008 21:28 Originally Blue wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 18:21 renalpha wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 13:50 Karandras wrote on Sat, 05 April 2008 09:20 Ryu wrote on Sun, 06 April 2008 01:08 Religion is stupid. Fact. Yes and no. also can make people happy. this makes fait a good thing, if u have cancer for example u can still hope lol and pray for urself u will survive it.. heartless but true but shit im laughing. Who's the heartless one here? The one hoping to live, or the one making fun of him/her for hoping? The one who faces life and reality without relying on false illusions. That wasn't what I was asking. Seriously. A person makes fun of another person's beliefs, simply because they are his beliefs; not bigotry?
How do we all know that religion wasn't created by some dude in a shack out in the middle of nowhere?
BurnItDwn wrote on Mon, 07 April 2008 03:32 How do we all know that religion wasn't created by some dude in a shack out in the middle of nowhere? This is what all debates about religion finally boil down to. Faith.
Sorry for the late bump. I was deployed to the middle east for ~6 months (I was fortunate compared to other US Soldiers). Naturally, I heard arguing like this over there for hours... people would go back and forth with points and frankly, I got confused what I was "suppose to believe". So, I did what any curious person would do, I started reading the Quran myself. Their old testament is remarkably similar to the christian old testament (though they seemingly have some different/extended passages in it?). I read the King James version many many years ago. Oddly, I couldn't get very far before I came across passages like (paraphrasing) "non-Muslims go to heaven as well if they are good people", and other various passages that suggest they don't even have to convert people to "save them". Now this is odd... for a religion that is supposedly violent against the non-believers as I've been told, why would they send them all to heaven? Or what is this? Human judgment taking on a supposed divine role? We could argue many things here but it all boils down to this -> people grow afraid of what they do not understand. As I see it both sides don't understand each other and thus RATIONALIZE VIOLENCE against each other. It is much easier to blame "them" than ourselves. We overlook our own problems to focus on the causes outside of ourselves. Why fix a problem when its easier to outsource it? The fearful lash out to "get them before they get us" or to "take vengeance on them".. in either case a "crime" must have been perceived by either party and only through lack of communication and understanding are these true crimes against a civilized people are carried out. Both sides see their way as the way of right and justice. Also, outright saying a group of people are inherently evil / bent on our destruction is ignorant. To fix this problem, understand your enemy, their stories, and what they have endured. Is it joe america's fault that their life sucks -- well, not directly (imo). However, as an educated American, I would like to know the history of the groups of people I'm suppose to hate -- looking for this information only leads me to more questions and really wondering what this entire war is about. For example, please find the following information: The history of group in Iraq supposedly "al-queda". When did they get there and who started that group? Why were almost all of the 9/11 hijackers from Saudia Arabia? What's the big deal with the Iran/Iraq contra scandal and why is Gates back in the administration after that?! How can a war on terrorism be won? Do you have a peace treaty signed with "terrorism"? If we're such an enlightened nation based on peace why do we spend the most on the military more-so than the entire rest of the world combined? "Freedom" has never been more under the gun than now. If this is "free", I'd hate to know what our version of facism is... Stephen Colbert had it right -> our biggest export in this country is "democracy". Saddam Hussein, whom was brought to power by us not too long ago, did bad things to his people yes, yet we were his ally when he killed all those people you've most likely heard about -- we didn't seem to care much then... only those whiny liberals were crying foul then (and nobody listens to them). The list can go on and on, but what I most find disturbing is how many high ranking people in the administration that were resigned, including the people that claimed that the "answer" cannot be military in nature to solve our problem in the middle east. So, I go back to how do we solve the problem? If you suggest "kill them all", I beckon you to look in the mirror and ask yourself a very serious question: are *you* the enemy you so desperately want to find in the world that is outside of ourselves? "but terrorists only listen to force" -> surely that's what we think when that's the "answer" we've been using for so long. Correct me if I'm wrong plz, but I thought answers were invented to solve problems. Kudos to the students of history, now do yourselves a favor and pick up the history book of your enemies and find the truth in the mixing of the two and see how not definite anything becomes.
The problem is rapid globalisation. We force our western science and culture on them (simply because if they don't follow they are likely to starve and stuff like that) even though they are at that point not ready for it. In my eyes religion is not the problem, the problem are the people who abuse it and more importantly those in that same religion who allow it.
Good call ghost, I would have to say Muslims are not the only violators of this... as I'm sure all the Christians out there can attest to all the "misinterpretations" of the bible and thus the MANY different sects of Christianity (but mine is the right one LOL)... just as we are always right, so are they.
Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. Maybe some torrorist said it. Who knows...
In addition to this, I also was enlightened to another question -- what makes a person any religion? I don't consider myself a Christian, yet my friend who does consider himself to be asked me this: You've read the bible (yes) -- so, would you say you liked what jesus ("the word" in islam btw) spoke to the people about? I answered yes. He then called me Christian -- something I would never really consider myself? What makes a Muslim? A Christian? A Buddhist? etc? You go to a specific place of worship at some given time? Your parents told you that you are? You've read a holy book and now you "belong"? I find it sad that people are quick to erect curtains around ourselves to segregate "us" versus "them" because it is easier to classify our enemies in to a group rather than see our similarities. Can I not be a Muslim and a Christian at the same time? If you think about this, then you will realize how asinine the idea of not being a religion means we should die/be raped/etc. Don't give in to fear -- it is a powerful tool of control used very effectively by "them" and "us"
Quote: In addition to this, I also was enlightened to another question -- what makes a person any religion? I don't consider myself a Christian, yet my friend who does consider himself to be asked me this: You've read the bible (yes) -- so, would you say you liked what jesus ("the word" in islam btw) spoke to the people about? I answered yes. He then called me Christian -- something I would never really consider myself? What makes a Muslim? A Christian? A Buddhist? etc? You go to a specific place of worship at some given time? Your parents told you that you are? You've read a holy book and now you "belong"? I wouldn't say simply "liking" the things Jesus said makes you a Christian - Muslims take Jesus as a prophet, but they are not Christians. If you believe that God came down as Jesus, and got crucified for your sins to be forgiven, then you're a Christian. If you believe God is the almighty and superior being, and that Muhammed is the last Prophet after the ones in the Old Testament and New Testament, then you're a Muslim. If you adhere to the teachings of Buddha and detach yourself from material things, then you are a Buddhist.
and Jesus was Jewish... well, the historical Jesus (I think?) =D
There is no god / are no gods. 50% of the world's problems solved
Yrr wrote on Sat, 21 June 2008 07:57 There is no god / are no gods. 50% of the world's problems solved Religion brings differences. There's got to be a god. The world's problems can be solved if we all treat others the way we would like to be treated.
pawkyfox wrote on Sat, 21 June 2008 16:18 Yrr wrote on Sat, 21 June 2008 07:57 There is no god / are no gods. 50% of the world's problems solved Religion brings differences. There are more than enough differences.
egoflux0 wrote on Sat, 21 June 2008 05:33 and Jesus was Jewish... well, the historical Jesus (I think?) =D Yes he was a Jew, and brought only a few new teachings that weren't previously in Judaism. But for the most part he just confirmed the Torah and all the commandments. Which makes me wonder why Christians don't follow the Jewish commandments, if Jesus told you to do so (not eating pork, not eating dairy with beef, women veiling their hair after getting married, and all that.
It's not about culture, it's about religion. If Jesus prescribed the Old Testament commandments, then they should be followed by Christians, right?
HeavyX101 wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 19:10 Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. Maybe some torrorist said it. Who knows... who said it? well, the qu'ran does. thankfully it wasn't written by allah or by mohammed, since allah/god/whatever either doesn't exist or doesn't give a shit about us, and mohammed couldn't read or write.
HeavyX101 wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 19:10 Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. If you are a muslim, then you should stop being one right now since you obviouly don't know the qur'an. [40.70]Those who reject the Book and that with which We have sent Our Apostle; but they shall soon come to know, [40.71] When the fetters and the chains shall be on their necks; they shall be dragged [40.72] Into boiling water, then in the fire shall they be burned; http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=733153 @Spoony: Before you spout blatent bullshit like that, consider that no one has found proof that God/Allah does or doesn't exist or that Muhammed couldn't write.
I guess Catholics should start killing Jews, seeing as they, you know, killed the son of God. Any religious book is filled with bullshit, that a reader can take or leave. Those of a rational mind, aka, the majority, will ignore the extremities.
Muad Dib15 wrote on Sun, 22 June 2008 19:30 HeavyX101 wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 19:10 Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. If you are a muslim, then you should stop being one right now since you obviouly don't know the qur'an. [40.70]Those who reject the Book and that with which We have sent Our Apostle; but they shall soon come to know, [40.71] When the fetters and the chains shall be on their necks; they shall be dragged [40.72] Into boiling water, then in the fire shall they be burned; http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=733153 Nice, you quoted a verse talking about hellfire Doesn't mean Muslims should go out and kill unbelievers. It's talking about afterlife.
Muad Dib15 wrote on Sun, 22 June 2008 18:30 @Spoony: Before you spout blatent bullshit like that, consider that no one has found proof that God/Allah does or doesn't exist pay attention to what I actually said, chief. Quote: since allah/god/whatever either doesn't exist or doesn't give a shit about us do you seriously doubt that one of the above is true? Muad Dib15 wrote on Sun, 22 June 2008 18:30 or that Muhammed couldn't write. oh, he could write despite not being able to read, could he? do you even know anything about Muhammed?
[NE Fobby[GEN] wrote on Sun, 22 June 2008 23:04]Nice, you quoted a verse talking about hellfire Doesn't mean Muslims should go out and kill unbelievers. It's talking about afterlife. perhaps those verses, but the Qu'ran and the Hadith are riddled with direct instructions to carry out violence against unbelievers, Jews, homosexuals etc. it makes Mein Kampf look downright friendly.
Radical Muslims kill people in the name of Allah. That is disturbing. Whole nations live for revenge on very old grudges, don't they know how to forgive and forget. ugh
I've never really understood why people use words like "radical" or "extreme" in this context, when "practicing" seems more appropriate.
It's politically correct. You catch much less grief if you concede that most Muslims are respectable people, and just insult those that take direct action against others in terrorist fashion.
cheesesoda wrote on Sun, 08 February 2009 11:22 It's politically correct. You catch much less grief if you concede that most Muslims are respectable people, and just insult those that take direct action against others in terrorist fashion. Pretty much that. And the liberal views being held by the overwhelming majority, arising from the humanistic values we're indoctrinated with.
cheesesoda wrote on Sun, 08 February 2009 09:22 You catch much less grief if you concede that most Muslims are respectable people I do concede that, actually... the folly is when people think that says anything good about their religion, when if anything it's in spite of their religion.
It is justifiable to draw a line between those who truly practice their religion (terrorists, Westboro baptist) and those who are religious for spiritual rejuvenation and self-sustenance.
Of course, just as with drugs. But the law says otherwise on that matter.
this is BS. west is hiring and training these people so they can be used as excuses to kill thousands of people and occupy their countries. world is fair, isnt it?
the West trains muslims to strap explosives to a child with down's syndrome and then force her to walk into a crowded marketplace full of civilians, eh? as for killing thousands of people, you do know that the staggering majority of deaths in Iraq are Muslims killing civilians, surely? American and British troops risking their lives trying to prevent it? of course there is legitimate debate as to whether we should've gone in in the first place, as with so much of Western foreign policy, but none of that invalidates criticism of Islam and the endless misery it is responsible for. as for Anjem Choudary, what's strange is he apparently used to be a drinker and drug user in his youth, before he found Islam. he denies that past (although photos seem to prove otherwise), but I'm not sure why - he seems to've been a far better person before Islam corrupted him into a dangerous, delusional bigot.
trust me, if i were the president of the world. i would ban these (...) for existing.
There's nothing with people believing the tooth fairy exists, but as soon as they act on the tooth fairy's command to kill people, they don't deserve existence.
Spoony wrote on Mon, 30 March 2009 03:45 the West trains muslims to strap explosives to a child with down's syndrome and then force her to walk into a crowded marketplace full of civilians, eh? as for killing thousands of people, you do know that the staggering majority of deaths in Iraq are Muslims killing civilians, surely? American and British troops risking their lives trying to prevent it? of course there is legitimate debate as to whether we should've gone in in the first place, as with so much of Western foreign policy, but none of that invalidates criticism of Islam and the endless misery it is responsible for. as for Anjem Choudary, what's strange is he apparently used to be a drinker and drug user in his youth, before he found Islam. he denies that past (although photos seem to prove otherwise), but I'm not sure why - he seems to've been a far better person before Islam corrupted him into a dangerous, delusional bigot. Sounds pretty metal.
Spoony wrote on Mon, 30 March 2009 01:45 the West trains muslims to strap explosives to a child with down's syndrome and then force her to walk into a crowded marketplace full of civilians, eh? as for killing thousands of people, you do know that the staggering majority of deaths in Iraq are Muslims killing civilians, surely? American and British troops risking their lives trying to prevent it? of course there is legitimate debate as to whether we should've gone in in the first place, as with so much of Western foreign policy, but none of that invalidates criticism of Islam and the endless misery it is responsible for. as for Anjem Choudary, what's strange is he apparently used to be a drinker and drug user in his youth, before he found Islam. he denies that past (although photos seem to prove otherwise), but I'm not sure why - he seems to've been a far better person before Islam corrupted him into a dangerous, delusional bigot. Almost all of these people are wrong, because they have been corrupt, and brainwashed to believe wrong things, and for a start suiciding is not allowed in Islam and neither is killing innocents. A lot of these people who were brainwashed were probably depressed or something, and easy to brainwash into doing these terrible things.
Muad Dib15 wrote on Sun, 22 June 2008 18:30 HeavyX101 wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 19:10 Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. If you are a muslim, then you should stop being one right now since you obviouly don't know the qur'an. [40.70]Those who reject the Book and that with which We have sent Our Apostle; but they shall soon come to know, [40.71] When the fetters and the chains shall be on their necks; they shall be dragged [40.72] Into boiling water, then in the fire shall they be burned; http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=733153 @Spoony: Before you spout blatent bullshit like that, consider that no one has found proof that God/Allah does or doesn't exist or that Muhammed couldn't write. Who are they?And when will they come to know?
Those who reject the Book, as it clearly says. Are you mentally retarded?
"@Spoony: Before you spout blatent bullshit like that, consider that no one has found proof that God/Allah does or doesn't exist or that Muhammed couldn't write." extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence enjoy spending your time believing some mentally retarded pedophile supposedly said concerning something that has no proof and defies all logic
Pyr0man1c wrote on Fri, 17 April 2009 15:23 Muad Dib15 wrote on Sun, 22 June 2008 18:30 HeavyX101 wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 19:10 Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. If you are a muslim, then you should stop being one right now since you obviouly don't know the qur'an. [40.70]Those who reject the Book and that with which We have sent Our Apostle; but they shall soon come to know, [40.71] When the fetters and the chains shall be on their necks; they shall be dragged [40.72] Into boiling water, then in the fire shall they be burned; http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=733153 @Spoony: Before you spout blatent bullshit like that, consider that no one has found proof that God/Allah does or doesn't exist or that Muhammed couldn't write. Who are they?And when will they come to know? Sorry I didn't make myself clear, my fault at the first question when will this happen EDIT:oops...
Muad Dib15 wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 02:30 HeavyX101 wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 19:10 Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. If you are a muslim, then you should stop being one right now since you obviouly don't know the qur'an. [40.70]Those who reject the Book and that with which We have sent Our Apostle; but they shall soon come to know, [40.71] When the fetters and the chains shall be on their necks; they shall be dragged [40.72] Into boiling water, then in the fire shall they be burned; http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=733153 @Spoony: Before you spout blatent bullshit like that, consider that no one has found proof that God/Allah does or doesn't exist or that Muhammed couldn't write. Muad Dib15 you are the most stupid creature this world and this community ever seen. obviously you have no idea about quran nor arabic. even posting this about you is waste of time. and to the people who thinks its the muslims who are killing the civilians in iraq: innocent 100 civilians werent being killed in a car explosion every day before the occupation. its all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, period.
archerman wrote on Sat, 18 April 2009 07:01 Muad Dib15 wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 02:30 HeavyX101 wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 19:10 Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. If you are a muslim, then you should stop being one right now since you obviouly don't know the qur'an. [40.70]Those who reject the Book and that with which We have sent Our Apostle; but they shall soon come to know, [40.71] When the fetters and the chains shall be on their necks; they shall be dragged [40.72] Into boiling water, then in the fire shall they be burned; http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=733153 @Spoony: Before you spout blatent bullshit like that, consider that no one has found proof that God/Allah does or doesn't exist or that Muhammed couldn't write. Muad Dib15 you are the most stupid creature this world and this community ever seen. obviously you have no idea about quran nor arabic. even posting this about you is waste of time. and to the people who thinks its the muslims who are killing the civilians in iraq: innocent 100 civilians werent being killed in a car explosion every day before the occupation. its all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$, period. Yeah, you're right, it's entirely America's fault that the Iraqi insurgency see's it fit to kill scores of their owncivilians with suicide bombing tactics, hunt and execute anyone who cooperates with coalition forces, torture and execute captured American soldiers for show and strap bombs to mentally deficient women and babies. Hail the glorious Iraqi freedom fighters! Death to the American imperial scourge!!
archerman wrote on Sat, 18 April 2009 07:01 Muad Dib15 wrote on Mon, 23 June 2008 02:30 HeavyX101 wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 19:10 Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. If you are a muslim, then you should stop being one right now since you obviouly don't know the qur'an. [40.70]Those who reject the Book and that with which We have sent Our Apostle; but they shall soon come to know, [40.71] When the fetters and the chains shall be on their necks; they shall be dragged [40.72] Into boiling water, then in the fire shall they be burned; http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=733153 @Spoony: Before you spout blatent bullshit like that, consider that no one has found proof that God/Allah does or doesn't exist or that Muhammed couldn't write. I have no counter-argument whatsoever so I'm just gonna do a ad hominem and claim you lack sufficient knowledge on the Quran and Arabic, even though the quoted verses are from one of the most used English translations of the Quran. Then I'm gonna point that the completely unrelated fact that there were no car bombing every day before the occupation. Because Saddam was secular and repressed every kind of terrorism so their was no ability to kill all the members of the other sect. So the only reason they didn't kill each other like animals is because they couldn't.
Even Einstein thinks the idea that the brain survives death is ridiculous. Although he's a Jew so he is a greedy inferior son of a bitch according to the Koran.
Pyr0man1c wrote on Sun, 19 April 2009 04:37 And what religion are you? Dutch.
☻/ /▌ / \
madrackz wrote on Sun, 19 April 2009 06:35 ☻/ /▌ / \ thanks for the info.
so say we all. wrote on Sun, 19 April 2009 04:37 Dutch I lol'd
Pyr0man1c wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 13:37 Almost all of these people are wrong, because they have been corrupt, and brainwashed to believe wrong things Indeed. Islam is almost certainly wrong (at least, not inspired by a god... or if so, inspired by an appalling one who doesn't deserve our respect, let alone our obedience), and it is usually spread by brainwashing. Though I'm not sure that's what you meant. Pyr0man1c wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 13:37 and for a start suiciding is not allowed in Islam That's actually more complicated than it seems. Islam may oppose suicide, but it also makes incredible promises of reward to those who die in battle (the whole 72-virgins business... I've discussed the absurdity and immorality of that in another thread, perhaps I can copy-paste that if you like). This, of course, is why so many Muslims specifically choose a weapon which ensures that, in 'battle' (bit of a euphemism there), the Muslim will die. Pyr0man1c wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 13:37 and neither is killing innocents. Depends on your definition of 'innocent'. Islam specifically instructs the death penalty for such things as homosexuality, apostasy, and being Jewish. Are these crimes in your eyes? If so, you presumably don't believe in freedom of religion (Islam absolutely does not), nor the freedom to enjoy one's personal life with a consenting person if one happens to be gay (either by nature or by the will of Allah) Pyr0man1c wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 13:37 A lot of these people who were brainwashed were probably depressed or something, and easy to brainwash into doing these terrible things. Being depressed might help, although I would argue that the real problem is Islam's iron grip on education. Even in Britain in my primary and secondary schools, which were supposedly secular (i.e. not outwardly Christian), Christian daily prayer was compulsory and no religious education included the disclaimer "by the way, kids, there's no proof for any of this, there are much better explanations available, and an enormous amount of blood has been spilled over it all". This in Britain in this day and age. Imagine how bad things must be in an Islamic country. So yes, brainwashing. Pyr0man1c wrote And what religion are you? Loaded question. "Do you have a religion?" is a better question, I feel. Ma1kel wrote Then I'm gonna point that the completely unrelated fact that there were no car bombing every day before the occupation. Not unrelated at all, but I'll get to that when I reply to the other guy. Ma1kel wrote Because Saddam was secular and repressed every kind of terrorism so their was no ability to kill all the members of the other sect. So the only reason they didn't kill each other like animals is because they couldn't. Saddam was absolutely not secular. He didn't have sharia, but calling him secular on that basis is like calling Hitler peaceful because his death toll was lower than Stalin's. Ma1kel wrote Even Einstein thinks the idea that the brain survives death is ridiculous. Although he's a Jew so he is a greedy inferior son of a bitch according to the Koran. Einstein being Jewish is a common misconception. He openly stated that he was not religious, did not believe in a 'god'. archerman wrote and to the people who thinks its the muslims who are killing the civilians in iraq: innocent 100 civilians werent being killed in a car explosion every day before the occupation. Ah, now we come to it. I'm not sure why Ma1kel called this fact 'unrelated', but he's not quite as far off the mark as you are. It is true that the sectarian violence in Iraq was not really going on before the invasion. The key word there is 'sectarian', look it up if you aren't familiar with it. The violence is predominantly Sunni vs Shia, a fight which has been going on for over a thousand years, albeit not necessarily in that particular space and time. It started in Iraq specifically because some Sunnis chose to start it. They started a campaign of violence against Shia targets. The main idea, other than the general goal of killing 'heretics', was to provoke the Shias into fighting back, which would draw Sunni Muslims into groups like al-queda to protect themselves. Basically a recruiting tool. And once sectarian violence starts, it tends to spiral pretty damn quickly and is extremely difficult to stop. American and British troops are not really the targets; they're just in the way (because they're risking their lives to stop Muslims killing civilians). The general gist of the violence is Sunnis killing Shia and Shias killing Sunnis, both for the main reason that "they're killing us". By the way, I was quite disappointed that you didn't respond to my last post in your direction, which was this one: Spoony wrote on Thu, 02 October 2008 06:03 archerman wrote on Tue, 30 September 2008 16:20 Do you believe in the death penalty? according to islam, (there are many aspects to discuss this but i will tell you what i think) God gives you life, and only God can take it away. so, i support every kind of punishment, but not death penalty. according to islam? stop me if I'm wrong, but the qur'an and hadith specifically instruct the death penalty for apostasy, homosexuality and Judaism, none of which are even crimes by any sane definition. archerman wrote on Tue, 30 September 2008 16:20 premarital sex is exteremly forbidden is islam, to protect the family. its also the second reason of why europe is getting older: "family" has been losing its importance since 70's. but anyway, everyone is free to do what they want. not under sharia they're not, and not when a poor helpless girl forcibly suffers islamic circumcision (if there is anything more sickening than this that goes on in the current day and age, it's news to me) archerman wrote on Tue, 30 September 2008 16:20 Do you think same sex marriage should be legalized? we shouldnt do it just because alligators are doing it (u heard it right). its another thing that harms the idea of family. its against the nature of man. presumably this is about homosexuality itself, not homosexual marriages. "against the nature of man"? doesn't this rather contradict the idea of intelligent design? if you grant that sexuality is not actually a choice, and if you also happen to believe that we were created from a clot of blood by allah, you can't really argue that it's "against the nature of man" archerman wrote on Tue, 30 September 2008 16:20 Are you afraid others will judge you from reading some of your answers? screw the others, im an individual of my own. but i can discuss any of my ideas civilly anywhere, anytime. It's rare to find a Muslim who will.
Spoony wrote on Mon, 30 March 2009 02:45 the West trains muslims to strap explosives to a child with down's syndrome and then force her to walk into a crowded marketplace full of civilians, eh? as for killing thousands of people, you do know that the staggering majority of deaths in Iraq are Muslims killing civilians, surely? American and British troops risking their lives trying to prevent it? of course there is legitimate debate as to whether we should've gone in in the first place, as with so much of Western foreign policy, but none of that invalidates criticism of Islam and the endless misery it is responsible for. as for Anjem Choudary, what's strange is he apparently used to be a drinker and drug user in his youth, before he found Islam. he denies that past (although photos seem to prove otherwise), but I'm not sure why - he seems to've been a far better person before Islam corrupted him into a dangerous, delusional bigot. No, not muslims in general. Muslim extremists killing other muslims. Most muslims abhor the way the things being done by extremists "IN THE NAME OF ALLAH!!!" just clearing things up here.
Muad Dib15 wrote on Tue, 21 April 2009 20:32 No, not muslims in general. Muslim extremists killing other muslims. Most muslims abhor the way the things being done by extremists "IN THE NAME OF ALLAH!!!" just clearing things up here. This statement, when compared to the post you're replying to, doesn't make sense. Quote: as for killing thousands of people, you do know that the staggering majority of deaths in Iraq are Muslims killing civilians, surely? You don't see me saying "muslims in general"; you just see me pointing out the fact that the vast majority of the murders being committed in Iraq are committed not by American or British troops, but by Muslims. This is not the same as saying "all Muslims are murdering bastards"; certainly many people who claim to be Muslims don't actually do what Islam commands them to do, and what the "perfect man" Mohammed did. But then, I would argue that this is not really a case of the murdering ones being "extremists", more a case of the peaceful ones not really being Muslims, either through really understanding Islam or their human conscience rebelling against it. Either way, Mohammed would have almost certainly killed them for that.
its obvious that almost none of you have any knowledge about religion, sociology, or whatever it takes to discuss such a topic. what a community.
archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 04:06 its obvious that almost none of you have any knowledge about religion, sociology, or whatever it takes to discuss such a topic. what a community. okay.
archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 04:06 its obvious that almost none of you have any knowledge about religion, sociology, or whatever it takes to discuss such a topic. what a community. Am I among the "almost none", because it seems that for the second time in a row you're unable to refute anything I say on the subject. Judging by some of your posts I would claim that I know more about Islam than you seem to, which is precisely why I criticise it.
Spoony wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 17:35 archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 04:06 its obvious that almost none of you have any knowledge about religion, sociology, or whatever it takes to discuss such a topic. what a community. Am I among the "almost none", because it seems that for the second time in a row you're unable to refute anything I say on the subject. Judging by some of your posts I would claim that I know more about Islam than you seem to, which is precisely why I criticise it. i can make you stfu face to face in 30 sec in Turkish on this subject. i dare you. go learn some Turkish then come back. so tell us what do you know about islam, like what fake translations your ideas are based on.
archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 19:05 Spoony wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 17:35 archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 04:06 its obvious that almost none of you have any knowledge about religion, sociology, or whatever it takes to discuss such a topic. what a community. Am I among the "almost none", because it seems that for the second time in a row you're unable to refute anything I say on the subject. Judging by some of your posts I would claim that I know more about Islam than you seem to, which is precisely why I criticise it. i can make you stfu face to face in 30 sec in Turkish on this subject. i dare you. go learn some Turkish then come back. so tell us what do you know about islam, like what fake translations your ideas are based on. Oooh, so Islam's brutality is the fault of TRANSLATION! I should have known. Only in English can a religion have such evil connotations.
Muad Dib15 wrote on Sun, 22 June 2008 18:30 HeavyX101 wrote on Thu, 19 June 2008 19:10 Well, I'm a muslim. And i dont think that the non-belivers of islam should get punnished. And i dont think that allah would of say that. If you are a muslim, then you should stop being one right now since you obviouly don't know the qur'an. [40.70]Those who reject the Book and that with which We have sent Our Apostle; but they shall soon come to know, [40.71] When the fetters and the chains shall be on their necks; they shall be dragged [40.72] Into boiling water, then in the fire shall they be burned; http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=733153 @Spoony: Before you spout blatent bullshit like that, consider that no one has found proof that God/Allah does or doesn't exist or that Muhammed couldn't write. the quran has a lot of contradictions; while you can find violent passages like that easily, you can also find passages like the one that says that murdering someone is equivalent to murdering the entire population of the world (in the eyes of 'allah') moral of the story - it's all bullshit
i meant my english is not good. learn to read (my signature).
Ryan3k wrote the quran has a lot of contradictions; while you can find violent passages like that easily, you can also find passages like the one that says that murdering someone is equivalent to murdering the entire population of the world (in the eyes of 'allah') moral of the story - it's all bullshit the thing is, the prophet muhammed originally tried spreading his religion in the same sort of way that jesus is alleged to've done, i.e. non-violent preaching. for a few years, islam was a religion of peace (or at least, not one of violence) - trouble is, it didn't work - hardly anyone gave a shit, so he tried a different method, i.e. force. there are some "peaceful" statements in the qur'an and hadith, most of which come from his early "career" before he re-invented himself as a murderous, slave-taking warlord. there are many people who like to use these statements to prove that islam is a "religion of peace", which is about as strong a case as saying Hitler was a peaceful man because he used to be a painter. sure, he was, but not a particularly successful one and if any objective historian was asked to make a list of the ten most important facts of Hitler's life, painting would probably not be there. archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 18:05 i can make you stfu face to face in 30 sec in Turkish on this subject. Judging by your abject failure to refute a single thing I've said in English, I find that rather difficult to believe. Your statement also sounds eerily like a threat. archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 18:05 go learn some Turkish then come back. Come back where, to an English-speaking forum? I never claimed I could speak Turkish, nor do I hang around places where speaking Turkish is the norm. If the language barrier is why you're utterly failing to refute a single thing I've said (I disagree - I think it's more a case that you don't know your religion particularly well), why don't you try improving your English instead of demanding I learn Turkish? archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 18:05 so tell us what do you know about islam, like what fake translations your ideas are based on. I've already told you some things I know about Islam. Three times in a row now you've demonstrated your inability to argue against them.
Spoony wrote on Fri, 24 April 2009 19:28 Ryan3k wrote the quran has a lot of contradictions; while you can find violent passages like that easily, you can also find passages like the one that says that murdering someone is equivalent to murdering the entire population of the world (in the eyes of 'allah') moral of the story - it's all bullshit the thing is, the prophet muhammed originally tried spreading his religion in the same sort of way that jesus is alleged to've done, i.e. non-violent preaching. for a few years, islam was a religion of peace (or at least, not one of violence) - trouble is, it didn't work - hardly anyone gave a shit, so he tried a different method, i.e. force. there are some "peaceful" statements in the qur'an and hadith, most of which come from his early "career" before he re-invented himself as a murderous, slave-taking warlord. there are many people who like to use these statements to prove that islam is a "religion of peace", which is about as strong a case as saying Hitler was a peaceful man because he used to be a painter. sure, he was, but not a particularly successful one and if any objective historian was asked to make a list of the ten most important facts of Hitler's life, painting would probably not be there. archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 18:05 i can make you stfu face to face in 30 sec in Turkish on this subject. Judging by your abject failure to refute a single thing I've said in English, I find that rather difficult to believe. Your statement also sounds eerily like a threat. archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 18:05 go learn some Turkish then come back. Come back where, to an English-speaking forum? I never claimed I could speak Turkish, nor do I hang around places where speaking Turkish is the norm. If the language barrier is why you're utterly failing to refute a single thing I've said (I disagree - I think it's more a case that you don't know your religion particularly well), why don't you try improving your English instead of demanding I learn Turkish? archerman wrote on Thu, 23 April 2009 18:05 so tell us what do you know about islam, like what fake translations your ideas are based on. I've already told you some things I know about Islam. Three times in a row now you've demonstrated your inability to argue against them. Toggle Spoiler Spoony wrote on Sun, 22 June 2008 23:28 well, the qu'ran does. thankfully it wasn't written by allah or by mohammed, since allah/god/whatever either doesn't exist or doesn't give a shit about us, and mohammed couldn't read or write. hz. muhammed okur-yazar degildi; ancak cebrail ona ayetleri okurdu, o da ezberlerdi (bazen yanındakilerle beraber), daha sonra da katiplerce bunlar yazılırdı. kur'an-ı kerim,diğer ilahi kitaplarin aksine, dogrudan dogruya allah'in sözleridir. Spoony wrote on Tue, 24 June 2008 12:03 oh, he could write despite not being able to read, could he? do you even know anything about Muhammed? sen hz. muhammed hakkinda ne biliyorsun söyle de ögrenelim. Spoony wrote on Tue, 24 June 2008 12:04 perhaps those verses, but the Qu'ran and the Hadith are riddled with direct instructions to carry out violence against unbelievers, Jews, homosexuals etc. it makes Mein Kampf look downright friendly. escinseller hakkinda bir sey diyemem; ancak yahudiler ve inanmayanlar zaten kur'an'da allah'a karsi geldikleri için yer bulmuslardir. kur'an sadece bu isleri yapanlara uymamayı ögütler. kaldi ki kul bir yaklasirsa allah on yaklasir. bu da kur'an'da defalarca belirtilmistir. surasi kesindir ki "senin dinin bana, benim dinim bana"dir. inanmayanlara eziyet kesinlikle yasaklanmistir. Spoony wrote on Wed, 11 February 2009 11:25 I do concede that, actually... the folly is when people think that says anything good about their religion, when if anything it's in spite of their religion. concede? gerçekler acidir, kabulleneceksin. Spoony wrote on Mon, 30 March 2009 10:45 the West trains muslims to strap explosives to a child with down's syndrome and then force her to walk into a crowded marketplace full of civilians, eh? as for killing thousands of people, you do know that the staggering majority of deaths in Iraq are Muslims killing civilians, surely? American and British troops risking their lives trying to prevent it? of course there is legitimate debate as to whether we should've gone in in the first place, as with so much of Western foreign policy, but none of that invalidates criticism of Islam and the endless misery it is responsible for. as for Anjem Choudary, what's strange is he apparently used to be a drinker and drug user in his youth, before he found Islam. he denies that past (although photos seem to prove otherwise), but I'm not sure why - he seems to've been a far better person before Islam corrupted him into a dangerous, delusional bigot. amerika irak'a girmeden fasist de olsa bir düzen vardi; kimse kimseyi belirttigin sekilde öldürmüyordu. ancak saddam'in devrilmesiyle meydana gelen otorite boslugu, mezhep ayriliklari (ki mezhep dediklerinin kökenleri birdir), amerika'nin orayi kasimasina zemin hazirlamistir. kasimaktan kasit irak'i parçalamak, kürtlere özerklik vermek, petrolü kendilerine ayirmaktir. hedef her zamanki gibi türkiye'dir. sakin ola bana oradaki yabanci askerleri savunayım deme. binlerce yillik topraklardaki insanlara hele hiç laf etme. elin herifi müslüman olduktan sonra sapittiysa diğer 1.5 milyar kisi ne yapsın? Spoony wrote on Tue, 21 April 2009 00:52 Pyr0man1c wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 13:37 Almost all of these people are wrong, because they have been corrupt, and brainwashed to believe wrong things Indeed. Islam is almost certainly wrong (at least, not inspired by a god... or if so, inspired by an appalling one who doesn't deserve our respect, let alone our obedience), and it is usually spread by brainwashing. Though I'm not sure that's what you meant. Pyr0man1c wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 13:37 and for a start suiciding is not allowed in Islam That's actually more complicated than it seems. Islam may oppose suicide, but it also makes incredible promises of reward to those who die in battle (the whole 72-virgins business... I've discussed the absurdity and immorality of that in another thread, perhaps I can copy-paste that if you like). This, of course, is why so many Muslims specifically choose a weapon which ensures that, in 'battle' (bit of a euphemism there), the Muslim will die. Pyr0man1c wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 13:37 and neither is killing innocents. Depends on your definition of 'innocent'. Islam specifically instructs the death penalty for such things as homosexuality, apostasy, and being Jewish. Are these crimes in your eyes? If so, you presumably don't believe in freedom of religion (Islam absolutely does not), nor the freedom to enjoy one's personal life with a consenting person if one happens to be gay (either by nature or by the will of Allah) Pyr0man1c wrote on Thu, 16 April 2009 13:37 A lot of these people who were brainwashed were probably depressed or something, and easy to brainwash into doing these terrible things. Being depressed might help, although I would argue that the real problem is Islam's iron grip on education. Even in Britain in my primary and secondary schools, which were supposedly secular (i.e. not outwardly Christian), Christian daily prayer was compulsory and no religious education included the disclaimer "by the way, kids, there's no proof for any of this, there are much better explanations available, and an enormous amount of blood has been spilled over it all". This in Britain in this day and age. Imagine how bad things must be in an Islamic country. So yes, brainwashing. Pyr0man1c wrote And what religion are you? Loaded question. "Do you have a religion?" is a better question, I feel. Ma1kel wrote Then I'm gonna point that the completely unrelated fact that there were no car bombing every day before the occupation. Not unrelated at all, but I'll get to that when I reply to the other guy. Ma1kel wrote Because Saddam was secular and repressed every kind of terrorism so their was no ability to kill all the members of the other sect. So the only reason they didn't kill each other like animals is because they couldn't. Saddam was absolutely not secular. He didn't have sharia, but calling him secular on that basis is like calling Hitler peaceful because his death toll was lower than Stalin's. Ma1kel wrote Even Einstein thinks the idea that the brain survives death is ridiculous. Although he's a Jew so he is a greedy inferior son of a bitch according to the Koran. Einstein being Jewish is a common misconception. He openly stated that he was not religious, did not believe in a 'god'. archerman wrote and to the people who thinks its the muslims who are killing the civilians in iraq: innocent 100 civilians werent being killed in a car explosion every day before the occupation. Ah, now we come to it. I'm not sure why Ma1kel called this fact 'unrelated', but he's not quite as far off the mark as you are. It is true that the sectarian violence in Iraq was not really going on before the invasion. The key word there is 'sectarian', look it up if you aren't familiar with it. The violence is predominantly Sunni vs Shia, a fight which has been going on for over a thousand years, albeit not necessarily in that particular space and time. It started in Iraq specifically because some Sunnis chose to start it. They started a campaign of violence against Shia targets. The main idea, other than the general goal of killing 'heretics', was to provoke the Shias into fighting back, which would draw Sunni Muslims into groups like al-queda to protect themselves. Basically a recruiting tool. And once sectarian violence starts, it tends to spiral pretty damn quickly and is extremely difficult to stop. American and British troops are not really the targets; they're just in the way (because they're risking their lives to stop Muslims killing civilians). The general gist of the violence is Sunnis killing Shia and Shias killing Sunnis, both for the main reason that "they're killing us". By the way, I was quite disappointed that you didn't respond to my last post in your direction, which was this one: Spoony wrote on Thu, 02 October 2008 06:03 archerman wrote on Tue, 30 September 2008 16:20 Do you believe in the death penalty? according to islam, (there are many aspects to discuss this but i will tell you what i think) God gives you life, and only God can take it away. so, i support every kind of punishment, but not death penalty. according to islam? stop me if I'm wrong, but the qur'an and hadith specifically instruct the death penalty for apostasy, homosexuality and Judaism, none of which are even crimes by any sane definition. archerman wrote on Tue, 30 September 2008 16:20 premarital sex is exteremly forbidden is islam, to protect the family. its also the second reason of why europe is getting older: "family" has been losing its importance since 70's. but anyway, everyone is free to do what they want. not under sharia they're not, and not when a poor helpless girl forcibly suffers islamic circumcision (if there is anything more sickening than this that goes on in the current day and age, it's news to me) archerman wrote on Tue, 30 September 2008 16:20 Do you think same sex marriage should be legalized? we shouldnt do it just because alligators are doing it (u heard it right). its another thing that harms the idea of family. its against the nature of man. presumably this is about homosexuality itself, not homosexual marriages. "against the nature of man"? doesn't this rather contradict the idea of intelligent design? if you grant that sexuality is not actually a choice, and if you also happen to believe that we were created from a clot of blood by allah, you can't really argue that it's "against the nature of man" archerman wrote on Tue, 30 September 2008 16:20 Are you afraid others will judge you from reading some of your answers? screw the others, im an individual of my own. but i can discuss any of my ideas civilly anywhere, anytime. It's rare to find a Muslim who will. yazilanlari gözlerinle okumani öneririm. söyledigin seylerin gerçek islam'la alakasi yok. bunca zirvaligi yazmaya vakit ayiracagina arapça ögrenip kur'an'i oku. Spoony wrote on Wed, 22 April 2009 13:11 You don't see me saying "muslims in general"; you just see me pointing out the fact that the vast majority of the murders being committed in Iraq are committed not by American or British troops, but by Muslims. This is not the same as saying "all Muslims are murdering bastards"; certainly many people who claim to be Muslims don't actually do what Islam commands them to do, and what the "perfect man" Mohammed did. But then, I would argue that this is not really a case of the murdering ones being "extremists", more a case of the peaceful ones not really being Muslims, either through really understanding Islam or their human conscience rebelling against it. Either way, Mohammed would have almost certainly killed them for that. bu sanki ikinci dünya savasinda savasan alman erlerini katillikle suçlamak gibi bir sey. mantikli ol, mantikli konus, canimi al. sonuç olarak, yazdigin bütün bu zirvalik klasik tümevarim yaklasimi. bu yüzdendir ki bir ayaginiz çukurda. batacaksiniz zaten az kaldi, sikin disinizi. bu yazdiklarim devede kulaktir. fazlasi için zırvalamaya devam et. go get the translation of the text above. Spoony wrote on Fri, 24 April 2009 19:28 I've already told you some things I know about Islam. Three times in a row now you've demonstrated your inability to argue against them. these are not what you know, these are what you want to believe. theres not a single thing you know about islam. you arent even muslim and probably never lived in an islamic community for some time. the only inability i have is my lack of english. you are the one with the inability, its obvious. other than that i definetely have more knowledge about islam, muslims and religion than you have.
You're not helping your case by using your own language. You're on a forum that speaks English. If Spoony, or anyone else wanted to debate Islam on a Turkish speaking forum, they'd take the time to learn the language out of politeness. Using your own langauge to defend yourself in a debate is rude, and it only cheapens your argument because we aren't entirely sure what you're saying is actually composed of real words, or contains any information that lends itself to the argument. Plus, as someone who is speaking for the other side, resorting to sayings like 'stfu' , and your overall bitter attitude is not doing you any favours either.
I'll just repeat what I said earlier. Spoony wrote Come back where, to an English-speaking forum? I never claimed I could speak Turkish, nor do I hang around places where speaking Turkish is the norm. If the language barrier is why you're utterly failing to refute a single thing I've said (I disagree - I think it's more a case that you don't know your religion particularly well), why don't you try improving your English instead of demanding I learn Turkish? Furthermore, if you persist in your belief that "fake translations" are the reason I hold any of the views on Islam I have expressed, why do you trust me to translate your responses? Surely you ought to do it, to lower the risk of more "fake" translations? And, for the slightly more practical reason that you have do have a reasonable grasp of English, whereas I know no Turkish at all, and never said I did?
spoony come back to renegade
That seems terrible, however I have never watched FOX news! lol