The Shotgun Blog
« Coyne Shames Arbour | Main | Iranian people don't support Hezballah »
Saturday, July 22, 2006
Islam must be stopped
I cannot abide by apologists calling Islam a religion of peace. Not when every new day brings fresh tales of violence. Not when the devil that they call Allah rewards murder with polygamous sex. Not when their undeserved supremacy is fought for in countries big and small around the globe.
Somalia's Islamic council has vowed a "holy war" against its neighbors, Ethiopia. In retaliation, Ehiopia is moving troops into lawless areas of Somalia from fear of invasion by powerful Islamists.Sheikh Hassan Dahir Aweys said Somalia will not overlook further incursions from Ethiopia. He was supported by hundreds of people demonstrating for support of Islamists in the capital.
If everything from smoking to lead paint to pitbulls can be banned because they are dangerous and deadly, why can't Islam? At what point is a death cult afforded the status of legitimate religion, and why? What makes Mohammed any better than Jim Jones?
Islam must be labelled for what it truly represents: wholesale slaughter and a corrupt ideology of sex and death. It must be stopped.
Posted by RightGirl on July 22, 2006 in Religion | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/22305/5494616
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Islam must be stopped:
» True Hate from azerbic - Antonia Zerbisias - Toronto Star Blog
You know, this blog is often accused by righties (and one capital-Liberal blogger who sits on the board of the Canada Israel Committee) for being a haven for ''anti-Israel'' wingnuts. I personally have been denounced by B'nai Brith and other [Read More]
Tracked on 24-Jul-06 4:02:03 PM
» In the National Post: Divided They Blog from The Adventures of Accordion Guy in the 21st Century :: Joey deVilla's Weblog
In the Issues & Ideas section of today's National Post, you'll find Adam Radwanski's op-ed piece titled [Read More]
Tracked on 31-Jul-06 2:45:04 PM
» In the National Post: Divided They Blog from The Adventures of Accordion Guy in the 21st Century :: Joey deVilla's Weblog
In the Issues & Ideas section of today's National Post, you'll find Adam Radwanski's op-ed piece titled [Read More]
Tracked on 31-Jul-06 3:00:05 PM
» Relapsed Catholic, RightGirl, and Adam Radwanski - Slugfest! from ThePolitic.com
Kathy Shaidle lays the boom to Radwanski about his sorry excuse for punditry. If you havent been paying attention, here is the gist: RightGirl made some colorful remarks about Islam, Radwanski writes some colourful remarks about b... [Read More]
Tracked on 1-Aug-06 8:06:30 PM
Comments
Technically, it's a philosophy that brings peace on earth by eliminating all dissent.
Posted by: Set you free | 22-Jul-06 6:26:38 PM
SYF - oh, well that makes it all ok! :)
Posted by: RightGirl | 22-Jul-06 6:31:55 PM
We need to stop Muslims from manipulating our Government, policies and ways of life.
1) Immediately restrict Muslim immigration.
2) Citizens must be loyal to Canada before their native nations.
3) Stop the political correctness and false accusation that our concerns are bigotry or racism
4) Muslims who are already here must assimilate or we can unleash a backlash.
5) Eveyone must show patriotism and loyalty
Posted by: fw | 22-Jul-06 7:03:35 PM
Good points, fw....and as an added thought, "ignore all accusations of racism" because that ploy has been used far too long to restrict many people from speaking out in defence of Canada.
Posted by: anonymous | 22-Jul-06 7:21:01 PM
Anyone who has a coherant thought about saving the country or themselves is a racist. So we just have to change the meaning of the word.... it's the Canadian way, after all.
RG
Posted by: RightGirl | 22-Jul-06 7:39:06 PM
Islam in itself has nothing to do with this violence. In fact, if you read your history carefully, you will find that NO religion has ever played a central role in mass violence. A thousand years ago, the Muslim world was peaceful and noted for its highly advanced civilization and scholars, whereas Christian Europe was a backwater hip-deep in blood.
Radical Islamism isn't a religion; it's a movement, just as Marxism and political correctness are movements. Religion, however, is all too convenient a hook on which to hang one's ambitions to lend a superficial veneer of respectability. In Europe everything from the Crusades to burning witches was cloaked in the mantle of God's work to justify what were, even by standards of the time, rather revolting deeds.
The struggle in the Middle East isn't about ideology; it's about that oldest, most basic of things that Man has ever fought over--land. Local Arab leaders find it convenient to whip up public sentiment against Israel because it distracts their people from complaining about their own lack of freedom. Declaring it a holy war based on obscure passages from a sacred text is, as observed above, the oldest trick in the book.
As to why so many Arabs resent Jews and the West, perhaps it's because the West has more wealth and power--power they once had themselves, and feel the West has gained at their expense. This isn't so much Muslim against Jew as it is rich man, poor man.
Having said all the above: Jihadism, discrete from Islam, must and will be crushed. Ooh-rah-ey.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 22-Jul-06 8:14:51 PM
"Not when the devil that they call Allah rewards murder with polygamous sex."
Apparently you haven't heard RG, but the Shotgun gives polygamous sex the big thumbs-up. After all, one man can impregnate many wombs -- that's why we have to keep Canadian women out of combat!
Don't believe me? Ask Speller and William Gairdner.
Posted by: Jim in Toronto | 22-Jul-06 8:25:13 PM
Perfectly coherent RG. Ban Islam.
Posted by: Rémi Houle | 22-Jul-06 8:37:18 PM
Jimmy Slander, to state a fact is not the same as supporting an action. Yes, one man can impregnate many women, but it's Lefties like you who support casual sex.
Neither myself nor William Gairdner support casual uncommitted sex.
Neither myself nor William Gairdner are representative of the whole Shotgun blog.
Two lies in one comment. You are a very experianced liar.
Does lying bother you or your fellow travellers at all?
Posted by: Speller | 22-Jul-06 8:49:44 PM
RG,
I must disagree with you.
What you see in Somalia is not Islam, it's Wahabbism, a radical sect that is less than 300 years old (same thing in Afghanistan and Pakistan). In Iran, it's Khomeinism, a version of Shia Islam considered ridiculous by anyone not on the Iranian payroll.
In Iraq, Saddam was a Ba'athist (an Arab version of Nazism), and was desperate for any anti-American terrorist he could find.
I know several Muslims who are nothing like the violent psychopaths we are fighting. They are Uighurs from occupied East Turkestan. They are Sufi Muslims, one of the oldest and most mystical sects of that faith. They want nothing to do with the Ba'athists, Khomeinists, Wahabbists, etc.
Islam is not the enemy. The enemy is a slew of tyrants who pervert religion, ideology, and everything else to get and keep power. If your looking for a unifying arc, look to their common benefactor: the Chinese Communist Party.
Check out the link in my last Shotgun post; I think you'll find it illuminating.
Posted by: D.J. McGuire | 22-Jul-06 9:54:00 PM
I'll stand on guard for RightGirl when the Fatwa comes. Bring it on!!!
It's important to stop pretending that Islam is one of the "Great Religions" worthy of endless tolerance and respect. It is the antithesis of anything "Great" that the other major religions stand for. Let it be judged by its actions, and dealt with accordingly.
Posted by: NCF TO | 22-Jul-06 10:01:55 PM
The followers of Muhammed are the enemy of anyone who doesn't want to convert.
The Koran itself declares that Muslims CANNOT befriend non-Muslims.
One Thousand Fourteen Hundred Years of Islam's history are there for anyone who cares to see it on the InterNet.
The bloody borders of Islam are a testament to continuing Jihad.
Jihad is a requirement of their religion, their children are born Muslim, and ANYONE who quits Islam is under the threat of DEATH!
And NO, Jihad is not an individual's inner spiritual struggle, as we saw in the invasion of Somalia this week, it is another word for WAR.
Posted by: Speller | 22-Jul-06 10:08:40 PM
Islam is simply a fascist political organization.
Religion usually considers morality to be a central component - but, Muslims use children as 'body armour', they hide amongst children while trying to kill others in the hope that those they are trying to kill won't shoot back.
In this way, Muslims acknowledge that people of other religions are morally superior to them, especially Jews apparently.
Posted by: philanthropist | 22-Jul-06 10:37:34 PM
RG, I couldn't agree with you more. This PC crap is going to kill the West. Moonbats are nothing but terrorist enablers.
Posted by: The Atheist Jew | 22-Jul-06 10:42:25 PM
DJ:
Those ‘peaceful' Muslims you describe are Muslim LIght.
If peace is what they seek, there are better alignments they could make.
Sura 9:5 specifically instructs followers that non-Muslims must be put to the sword, makes this a requirement and specifically says that this verse superceded all previous verses.
People are drawn in with beautiful lyrics and when the right time comes, the imams go on a recruiting drive for warriors. Anybody disagreeing is also subject to death.
I've mentioned this verse several times and never been challenged on its authenticity by any Moslem apologist who observes our writings.
Here's the contrast between Jesus (for inner peace) and Muhammad (enforced peace):
“My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingship were of this world, my servants would fight.''
– John 18:36 to the Sanhedrin.
“I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.''
Your friends may be interested in reading: The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (And the Crusades) by Robert Spencer. It's a must-read, very short and readable book that busts a lot of myths spewed by our political classes and MSM.
Posted by: Set you free | 22-Jul-06 10:49:38 PM
Historically, when Christianity was the "underdog" in global rivalry with Islam, and felt itself in an insecure, threatened, and uncertain state, there were many things we regard today as beyond the pale committed in it's name - the crusades and spanish inquisition, to cite a couple. Perhaps those involved were "Christofascists" of their day.
The awful things we see committed in Islam's name have little to do with religion, what they are are just manifestations of a difficult and unchanging side of human nature, where what matters is power and most of all, status. The only thing that changes over time is which group is dominant at a particular point in history.
/cynicism off
Posted by: deb | 22-Jul-06 10:55:59 PM
WW III has already started and the radicals (Islamic, Muslim, Wahabbism I don't care what you call it) are the enemy. The lib-left weenies need to forget the politically crap, stop trying to 'negotiate' with terrorists and join the fight. FW's list is really good but should include one more point: anyone not willing to assimilate into Canada gets sent back where they came from.
Posted by: JohnnyR | 22-Jul-06 10:59:30 PM
deb:
As Spencer points out, the Eastern Christians ‘took it' for five centuries of Muslim expansion, watching placidly as their brothers were slaughtered by Mohammedans (look it up in Wikipedia).
The Crusades were a response to a plea for help as the Mohammedans were at the gates of Constantinople, the centre of the Byzantine Empire.
At no time in previous history did Arabs lay a claim to the lands in which Christianity was the predominant religion for 630 years. They overran those non-Arab lands when Muhammad came along, suggesting this was a warrior cult, not a religion.
Ironically, we can thank another Muslim militant from the east, Tamerlaine, that the First Great Jihad did not take all of Europe. By distracting the eastern flank, Muslim expansion was finally stopped in southern France. Eventually, they were driven out, causing great nostalgia among those of Osama bin Laden's ilk.
Without the efforts of the Crusades, as poorly as they eventually turned out and as divisive they proved to be in Christendom, all of Europe would be under the Muslim yoke today.
Given the choice, I am glad I live in a country which has maintained much of its Judaeo/Christian values. I shudder to think how life would be under the Muslim yoke.
You have much to learn.
Posted by: Set you free | 22-Jul-06 11:08:23 PM
If the "muslim yoke" were what we were living under, and societies where Islam prevailed were the more economically and culturally predominant, your muslim equivalent would no doubt be making statements about what it would be like to live under the Christian yoke.
It was human nature I was talking about, not a scorecard of who did what to whom. A pedantic recounting of historical events is irrelevant to the point I was making.
Posted by: deb | 22-Jul-06 11:35:20 PM
Deb:
I hate equivalencies.
Christianity celebrates the potential of human beings through pursuit of inner peace; Islam clearly continues to demonstrate the brutal side of human nature.
Those are what their texts state and all you have to do is compare their intents and their goals.
Another example of Muhammad vs Jesus, this time about how to treat other sometimes unsavoury human beings:
“But love your enemies and do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return; and your reward will be great and you will be sons of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the selfish.''
Luke 6:35.
“ Let not the believers take for friends or helpers unbelievers rather than believers. If any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah; except by way of precaution, that ye may guard youself from them.'
Qur'an 3:28
Jesus said do good, even to those who despise you. Muhammad said only take other believers (defined as Muslims) as your friends ... and look at all non-Muslims with suspicion.
I stand by my statement that you have a lot to learn.
Posted by: Set you free | 23-Jul-06 12:11:24 AM
Deb:
Furthermore, Christianity is not a religion of conquest.
Nobody is forced to convert, only invited to learn.
Contrast that with Sura 9:5, the Sword of God verse. I personally know people who lost close relatives in the past 30 years. They were told “choose Allah or choose death.''
I cannot find any equivalent direction in my Bible, that is to kill people if they do not accept the beauty of Christianity.
Posted by: Set you free | 23-Jul-06 12:15:21 AM
KICK THEM ALL OUT OF HERE
U.K. terror trial hears Ottawa man describe bomb device
July 22, 2006
LONDON -- In a conversation secretly recorded by Britain's spy agency, Momin Khawaja of Ottawa told a man he was visiting in London about a transmitter he allegedly built to trigger bomb blasts around the city, a London terror trial heard Friday.
"When you press the button on the transmitter it receives a signal and . . . all you need to do is have detonator wires hooked up and that will send a charge down the line to whatever your sending it to," explains a voice prosecutors allege is Khawaja's.
The conversation was recorded by the MI5 internal security service in late February 2004 in the London-area of apartment of Omar Khyam, the suspected ringleader of an alleged London terror cell.
Police and prosecutors say the group was planning to use 600 kilograms of ammonium nitrate, an agricultural fertilizer, to bomb sites in and around the British capital, possible including the city's biggest nightclub as well as a large shopping mall outside London.
Khyam, 24, and six other young British Muslim men are on trial for their alleged roles in the foiled plot. They have pleaded not guilty.
Khawaja is to stand trial in Ottawa in January on Canadian charges for his alleged participation. The 27-year-old computer expert has been in an Ottawa jail since his March 2004 arrest by the RCMP. He, too, denies the allegations.
Police say Khawaja visited Khyam for two days to show him photographs on the Internet and explain the workings of the remote transmitter, which he called a "Hi-Fi Digimonster."
The bugged conversation was played for jurors Friday.
A month after the conversation, on March 29, 2004, RCMP officers raided the Ottawa family of Khawaja and found what they say were evolving prototypes of the Hi-Fi Digimonster.
In his second day of testimony, Sgt. Joseph Friset, an RCMP electronics and explosives expert, said Friday he believes the device discussed in the conversation were the same Hi-Fi Digimonsters found in Khawaja's home. Police tests with a replica of the device found it could signal a bomb detonator up to 300 metres away, he said.
He told court that officers also found electronic jamming devices in their search of the home. Police believe they were intended to prevent stray radio signals triggering an accidental detonation, he said.
But Khawaja's father, Mahboob, recently told the Ottawa Citizen his son's work with jammers was part of an innocent potential business venture.
In 2003, while Mahboob was working in Saudi Arabia, he talked by phone with Momin and another son in Ottawa about a possible new business venture in Saudi Arabia to sell customized cellphone jammers. The devices prevent cellphones from working in the immediate area, in a mosque or hospital, for example.
Mahboob Khawaja believes authorities intercepted the call, misinterpreted the conversation and used it as part of the basis for the accusations against his son.
Earlier this week, the trial heard that Khawaja was allegedly planning to build up to 30 of the transmitters. Jurors also heard that the RCMP raid on Khawaja's home turned up three rifles and ammunition under his bed and books on terrorism, jihad and guerrilla warfare.
Prosecutors also revealed several e-mails allegedly written by Khawaja to Mr. Khyam and others discussing his technical progress on making the transmitters and of possible ways to smuggle them into Britain.
In another e-mail, he praised Osama bin Laden, leader of the al-Qaida terrorist network.
The trial continues.
Posted by: woodbridge | 23-Jul-06 1:49:38 AM
"The struggle in the Middle East isn't about ideology; it's about that oldest, most basic of things that Man has ever fought over--land. "
NOT just the little tiny piece of land in israel!
THAT IS THEIR FOCUS TO UNITE MUSLIMS EVERYWHERE!
They are fighting with every single group next tothem. And have been spreading islam from day one in around the year 800 by the sword AND THE CRADLE, THE CRADLE, THE CRADLE
Muslim world population was 750 million around 1980 total it is over 1.1 billion which is about 40% higher in just one generation AND PURPOSELY WHY EVEN THE SLIME MUSLIMS WE SEE HERE IN CANADA NOW WEARING HIJABS, BURKAS, STICKING THEIR ASSES IN THE AIR AT THEIR SMELLY HOT MOSQUES THAT ARE ALLOVER THE COUNTRY INCLUDING OUR TAXPAYER FUNDED UNIVERSITIES WHO EVEN HAVE MUSLIM PROFESSORS SPREADING THEIR HATE AS WELL.
THEY ARE BREEDING LIKE RATS HERE TOO. WHY DOI WE NEED IMMIGRANTS ANYWAY? BECAUSE LEFT SAYS A BUNCH OF BULLSH-- LIES? LOOK WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO OUR TRAFFIC, OUR HOUSING COSTS, OUR WAY OF LIFE, THE SECURITY MEASURES WE ALL FACE, THE WORRIES ABOUT OUR SAFETY, THE AMERICAN BORDER THAT AROUND THE YEAR 2000 THEY WERE PLANNING TO ABOLISH THOSE BORDER STOPS BETWEEN THE 2 COUNTRIES, OUR PLANE FLIGHT WASTE OF TIME BECAUSE OF THESE MUSLIMS,TORONTO PLANNED BOMBINGS,RESSAM, ETC. ETC, ETC---SORRY BUT WE DONT NEED THEM AND IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE
HOW MANY WERE BORN TODAY HERE OR MAYBE IN LEBAON THAT ARE NOW CANADIAN/MUSLIMS?
KICK THEM ALL OUT!
DO NOT DO BUSINESS WITH THEM!
DONT HIRE THEM!
LOTS OF GOOD JOBS IN ARABIA FOR THE STYLE OF LIFE THEY LIKE.
Posted by: woodbridge | 23-Jul-06 2:07:14 AM
The remark of a poster, "Deb," that 'a pedantic recounting of historical events is irrelevant' to the subject of 'human nature,' of which the poster was speaking, gives the game away. Socialists are concerned to recondition 'human nature' as they wish it to be and do not care to bother themselves with the untidiness of humans behaving 'out of order.' This is also the typical left-wing attempt to deny the relevance of history; if it doesn't agree with your theory of how human robots should behave, simply airbrush it. Every belief system, whether religious, political or social, will have members who stray from or demean the innate message. That is not the point being made here. Islam's core Doctrines, those beliefs which define it, are the problem. If 'Deb' feels otherwise, then he/she has a duty to learn about Islam and then return to the debate. For my part, I wish to add that part of 'reclassifying' Islam as a social/political doctrine (and one that is inimical to Western societies!) is that it has the advantage of removing from Islam its 'charity status' enjoyed as a religion. It has been obvious for some time that mosques are used as fund-raising centres to support terrorism and that their present charity status means that monies can be moved more freely cross-borders than if Islam were proscribed as an organisation (which is what we are all really talking about here, isn't it? Correct me if I have misunderstood anyone?) I also comend these websites: wwww.jihadwatch.org and www.gatesofvienna.blogspot.com They both have superb articles on up to date situations and also historical, thought-provoking issues about Islam. We have a duty to disseminate this knowledge because only then will people realise the truly evil nature of this dogma.
Posted by: Centurion | 23-Jul-06 3:33:27 AM
Check out TheReligionOfPeace.com for daily updates of "peaceful" proselytizing.
Posted by: Joel K. | 23-Jul-06 6:19:04 AM
We do need to build a solid organization to change the laws and start exporting those trouble makers.
Just try to calculate how many of them would be here in 2 generations if we let them. How would Canada look like at that time? We have no choice but to ban that evil ideology and stop immigration of Islamofacists.
Posted by: Rémi Houle | 23-Jul-06 7:05:27 AM
To say Islam is a religion of peace is a hard sell given the rampant terrorism and killing being wrought throughout the world in it's name. Call it radical Islam, it's still very much connected and springs from the core of the religion. Such evil and hatred has to be methodically and purposely entrenched to have it's adherents become cowardly killers and offering their young as suicide bombers.There are far too many contradictions for those on the outside to understand, those inside the faith are best able to put the peace back in Islam. At this point it can't claim peace as it's tenet,while allowing cloak and dagger operations against innocent people throughout the world. It's rampant and Islamists should be very concerned if they want to live with the rest of humanity in peace.
Posted by: Liz J | 23-Jul-06 7:26:54 AM
Hey, Woodbrige, lighten up! Take off the caps lock. All that yelling is bad for the larynx and makes you look like a bit of a retard.
And while you’re at it, loosen the tinfoil hat my friend, it’s cutting off circulation to that air pocket where your brain’s supposed to be.
Posted by: David | 23-Jul-06 7:29:11 AM
It is high time the Western public saw Islam for what it really is.
Let's just post an online copy of the Q'uran right here to help the debates. Heck, all the Muslim "scholarship" should be held up for scrutiny right here. Then there would be no more need for name-calling, or accusations. We could read EXACTLY what they wrote.
Do it Ezra!
Posted by: bcf | 23-Jul-06 10:51:23 AM
bcf:
Here's the rub with understanding Islam - those western scholars who do study and understand the faith and culture often have agendas of their own.
Since the key to understanding Islam is a knowledge of Arabic, we are forced to depend on those who know it for knowledge. This makes it harder to understand which is Islam and which is the scholar's opinion. This depends of course on their integrity, which I am sure some have.
Others however may be less reliable. A famous Islamic scholar named Juan Cole is a notorious critic of US policy in the Middle East.
Case in point: a part-time instructor of Islamic Studies at the University of Wisconsin, a white Christian American no less, is now in trouble for saying that 9/11 was the work of VP Cheney.
http://us.cnn.com/2006/US/07/21/Sept.11.prof.ap/index.html
So long as these barriers exist, our understanding of the Islamic mind will be seriously limited. On the other hand, their interpretation of the Western mind suffers a similar handicap. No wonder we can't get along.
Posted by: Scott | 23-Jul-06 11:26:10 AM
With regard to 'Scott's' last posting, may I again suggest that posters avail themselves of the following website: www.islamundressed.com
You will find there translations of the Koran by Islamic (Moslem) scholars as well as Western Islamic scholars and in many cases there will be comparisons of the same 'sura'(verse). It is a scholarly but also forthright site. In many 18th and 19th century translations of these verses, the Western islamic scholars deliberately "sugar-coated" the harshness of the original Aramaic (and then Arabic) verses. This was partly a result of the 18 and 19th century 'romanticism' of Eastern cultures. Where I live there is presently an exhibition of the 'seraglio' (they actually mean the harem, not the male enclosure) and it is being presented, under EU auspices, as a romantic notion, completely disregarding the inherent degradation of women and the actual slavery which made these harems possible. The title of the website 'islamundressed' actually refers, as the website moderator explains, to Hans CHristian Anderson's tale of the Emperor's New CLothes. If you recall, once the child pointed out that the emperor was naked, people were then freed from the stricture to remain respectful and obeisant. It is an important message. Knowledge, genuinely sought, will make us free. The lamps are going out all over Europe, as Sir Edward Grey remarked as the First World War loomed; it is essential that you in Canada and America learn all you can to defeat this crime against humanity. In Europe today, a link was cut to a brilliant website www.fjordman.com (done by EU of course!). This website still continues but, significantly, the Dutch government has referred to it as 'xenophobic.' It emphatically is not, but is very accurate historically (he is actually Scandinavian and can be read on www.gatesofvienna.blogspot ) You owe it to everyone to learn and impart and pass on to everyone you know, not just on this website, but to everyone, this knowledge.
Posted by: Centurion | 23-Jul-06 12:40:35 PM
With regard to 'Scott's' last posting, may I again suggest that posters avail themselves of the following website: www.islamundressed.com
You will find there translations of the Koran by Islamic (Moslem) scholars as well as Western Islamic scholars and in many cases there will be comparisons of the same 'sura'(verse). It is a scholarly but also forthright site. In many 18th and 19th century translations of these verses, the Western islamic scholars deliberately "sugar-coated" the harshness of the original Aramaic (and then Arabic) verses. This was partly a result of the 18 and 19th century 'romanticism' of Eastern cultures. Where I live there is presently an exhibition of the 'seraglio' (they actually mean the harem, not the male enclosure) and it is being presented, under EU auspices, as a romantic notion, completely disregarding the inherent degradation of women and the actual slavery which made these harems possible. The title of the website 'islamundressed' actually refers, as the website moderator explains, to Hans CHristian Anderson's tale of the Emperor's New CLothes. If you recall, once the child pointed out that the emperor was naked, people were then freed from the stricture to remain respectful and obeisant. It is an important message. Knowledge, genuinely sought, will make us free. The lamps are going out all over Europe, as Sir Edward Grey remarked as the First World War loomed; it is essential that you in Canada and America learn all you can to defeat this crime against humanity. In Europe today, a link was cut to a brilliant website www.fjordman.com (done by EU of course!). This website still continues but, significantly, the Dutch government has referred to it as 'xenophobic.' It emphatically is not, but is very accurate historically (he is actually Scandinavian and can be read on www.gatesofvienna.blogspot ) You owe it to everyone to learn and impart and pass on to everyone you know, not just on this website, but to everyone, this knowledge.
Posted by: Centurion | 23-Jul-06 12:41:11 PM
Woodbridge wrote: "NOT just the little tiny piece of land in israel!"
No, not just that, although it does provide a concrete focus for this ideological struggle to revolve around. Otherwise the Palestinians would have been accepted by other local nations long since, thus ending the problem. But they'll never do it, because that's the one concrete beef they can bring to the table. The rest is just ideological claptrap and unsupportable bigotry.
What we're seeing from Muslims is resentment, the same sort of resentment that the poor show whenever they bad-mouth the rich, even though they'd take the rich person's place in a second without a backward look at the people they left behind. Muslims were great once; they feel they should be great again. But they haven't yet accepted the fact that they'll have to do some serious retooling of their culture and attitudes for that to happen. Since no one likes work, they find a scapegoat. Europeans did (and do) the same with Jews, which is why there's a modern state of Israel to begin with.
The hands of all men are against all men. That is an eternal truth of the human condition. Those who would gain understanding would do well to examine the underpinnings of human nature instead of obsessing over the heraldry.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 23-Jul-06 1:11:50 PM
For anyone not to say that Islam is not the enemy is ignorant completely of Islam....that is not to say all 1 billion muslims are the enemy but those that hold to literal orthodox islam as in Sunni or Shia Islam, are indeed the potential enemy of all of us...
As one who has actually studied Islam for over 20 years and has 2 muslim friends that apostazised from this cult, I can assure you that the texts of Islam in the Quran and Hadiths and the Sunnah are inherently and brutally violent....
All you have to do is study the life of Muhammed to know what islam is all about.....he was a violent, murdering, looting, raping bully.....and so is his islam...
Again, only the ignorant would say otherwise!!!
Posted by: Albertanator | 23-Jul-06 4:53:48 PM
Interesting to read that there is no relation between the history of Islam and to-day's situation, and I beg to differ.
Islam has never ever been a religion of peace, and its track record confirms this from its beginning and continuing on to-day.
This is not saying that every single Muslim practises terrorism, etc., but the justification for killing "infidels" is a core part of Islam.
Those who continue to promote the lie of it being a religion of peace on equal terms with all major religions are, by their actions, assisting these thugs.
Posted by: Alain | 23-Jul-06 4:56:48 PM
Sorry, Woodbridge may not be nuanced, but he is essentially correct. This is the beginning of WW III, frame all policy around this. The global jihadists must be countered: tear down the mosques, level immigration, dispel trouble makers, limit media exposure, invoke relevant security acts...does PC Canada have the backbone....well, no...it will take an attack closer to home to wake PC Canada up. But essentially muslims have declared war, and western countries must respond. Muslims wish domination through passive jihadism but seem to be in active mode now -- it seems to be working.
Posted by: lostarc | 23-Jul-06 5:58:17 PM
bcf: No point in posting a copy of the Q'uran, Koran, whatever, we would never be able to define the right interpretation on any given issue. Further it might not be the true copy, apparently the real one is printed in Saudi Arabia, so, forget that idea The problems will continue in the Muslim world as long as the faith is all-encompassing , breaking down into cultish factions of radicals brainwashing with hatred spawning terrorists.
Posted by: Liz J | 23-Jul-06 6:36:05 PM
Liz, I fail to see your point, since accepted translations of the Koran do exist.
But fair enough, let us say that even if we accept the argument that the history of Islam is not important, and that unless we read and understand Arabic we cannot truly know what it says, all we need is to read and listen to what the Muslim clerics are preaching. This is especially so since they quote from the Koran in their sermons. Why is it so difficult for people to understand that when our enemies tell us what they have in store for us in clear and plain language that we still cannot accept the truth? It is not as if they try to say nice things to us in English, French, etc., and then give their real intentions only in Arabic. No, they tell us over and over, yet we refuse to believe them.
Posted by: Alain | 23-Jul-06 7:15:00 PM
Albertanator, if you think the Koran is the only holy book with sex, violence, hate and intolerance in it, you need to pick up a copy of the Old Testament. David was expected to kill a hundred Philistines just to win the hand of King Saul's daughter. God instructed Saul, through the prophet Samuel: "Now go, attack Amalek, and put under herem, all that belongs to him. Spare no one, but kill alike men and women, infants and sucklings, oxen and sheep, camels and asses!" And Samson wasted three thousand people sitting on the roof of the Tempe of Dagon as vengeance for the loss of his eyes.
Remember, the Jews and the Arabs are both Semitic peoples, first cousins ethnically and linguistically. (Only a family quarrel could be this bitter.) They are more alike than different, and early Hebrew history is filled with vindictive miracles and the intolerance of God's "chosen people" towards the Gentiles. (Sound familiar?) The difference is that the Jews have been somewhat mellowed by 2,000 years of living among Europeans and are thus able to embrace modern life, while many Arabs are still caught in the tribal ways of thinking that have defined the Middle East since before Noah took up carpentry.
Oh yes. God spoke wisdom when He observed that "I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiff-necked people."
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 23-Jul-06 8:32:24 PM
"Anyone who has a coherant thought about saving the country or themselves is a racist."
Maybe, RightGirl, but you're the genuine article. You're condemning hundreds of thousands of Canadians who mean you no harm because of what a bunch of psycopaths do in the name of their religion. You suck beyond the means I have to describe it.
Posted by: Chris Selley | 23-Jul-06 8:41:09 PM
Shane's comments are meaningless here. Another example of wanting to compare what is not comparable.
No other group is preaching the murder of non believers and no other group is putting such hatred into practice regardless of what is written in their religious texts.
I would bet that those who insist that Islam is no different from other "religions" and deserves equal treatment would demand immediate prosecution of a group preaching and carrying out the murder of abortion providers. They would insist that such people should never be allowed in Canada, and I would agree no matter how I view abortion.
Posted by: Alain | 23-Jul-06 8:48:32 PM
Alain, the fact that you think that no valid comparisons exist doesn’t mean they don’t. It just means you think so. While it’s true that Christians and Jews today do not preach the murder of non-believers, rewind history 400 years and you’ll see a lot of it. Only recently has the West evolved beyond such tribal ways of thinking, largely because of the separation of Church and state that does not exist in most Islamic countries. Hell, in Czarist Russia, where the Church had still not separated from the state, “Bei Zhidov!” “Beat the Kikes!” presaged savage pogroms well into the 20th century.
I’ve got news for you, Alain; history did not begin in 1968, no matter how many Canadians believe otherwise. And yes, I favour prosecution of those who murder abortionists, but also the prosecution of the abortionists and their customers, whose hands are no less bloody.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 23-Jul-06 9:23:17 PM
Muslim apologists need to educate themselves!
While not all Muslims are terrorists and many can't "hurt a fly" and are labeled "Moderates", is irrelevant of the religion of Islam. They are only Muslim by name. IE. they hardly follow ALL of the practices and duties of "true" Muslims. I've known Muslims who rarely pray. They tend to call themselves moderates.
True Muslims' (Islamists) goals and duties are to spread Islam to "Dar el Harb" (house/place of War) by any means possible. They will push for an Islamic state when their population is larger. And if there is opposition, they will wage Jihad which will result in a civil war. Canada will not be our Canada any more.
I challenge the apologists who think that Islam is a religion of peace to live in an Islamic
country.
Islam must be stopped before it's too late.
Posted by: fw | 23-Jul-06 11:00:58 PM
Shane's interpretation of violence in the Old Testament is Marxist-Atheist-Anarchist garbage, and his comparison of Jews to Muslims is pure insanity. In Judaism, there is nothing even remotely comparable to the concept of Jihad. There is no punishment for apostasy. There is no command to imperial conquest - in fact, there is a melancholy acceptance of its destiny as a diaspora minority, at least until the Messiah arrives.
Judaism is obsessed with life on this earth, and making life on this earth better for all. The "Chosen People" moniker is misinterpreted by idiots like Shane. God did not choose the Jews as his favorites, as some sort of superior race. He "chose" the Jews to be his role models to humanity, burdening them with the responsibility to act according to the highest moral standards at all times. The stories of the Old Testament are examples of the never-ending struggle of humanity to separate itself from the savagery of the animal kingdom, and move beyond beastly impulses - not, as in the Koran, encouragement to return to the law of the jungle.
Posted by: NCF TO | 23-Jul-06 11:21:43 PM
I'm not apologizing for anyone, FW. However, the "classic" Muslim (that is, pre-1948) was noted for his modesty, generosity, and hospitality, traits which persist to this day in many Islamic countries. Iranians and Lebanese in particular have been reported by travelers to be very friendly on the whole.
It's true that most Islamic countries are "honour" societies that will cheerfully lynch people (or, nowadays, blow them away) over disagreements we would find trifling. But remember the turbulent 18th and 19th centuries in Europe and America and ask yourself if we're really that far ahead.
Bottom line: You can find justification in any religion for violence. Obscure passages from the Bible have been used to justify the Crusades, the Consquistadores, the Inquisition, and the slave trade, although the basic message of the Bible is peace and tolerance.
There is nothing Islamic about murder. It therefore follows that there's nothing Islamic about Islamists.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 23-Jul-06 11:29:56 PM
NCF TO wrote: “Shane's interpretation of violence in the Old Testament is Marxist-Atheist-Anarchist garbage, and his comparison of Jews to Muslims is pure insanity.”
A reasonable course would be to quietly rebut the argument. The fact that you have chosen to inject such virulent emotion into your reply smacks of intolerance and immaturity. Here, have some Kool-Aid.
NCF TO wrote: “In Judaism, there is nothing even remotely comparable to the concept of Jihad. There is no punishment for apostasy.”
Tell it to the Amalekites, the Philistines, the Egyptians, the Canaanites...
NCF TO wrote: “There is no command to imperial conquest - in fact, there is a melancholy acceptance of its destiny as a diaspora minority, at least until the Messiah arrives.”
Excuse me, I have already provided one example of a conquest ordered by God. There are others as well.
NCF TO wrote: “Judaism is obsessed with life on this earth, and making life on this earth better for all. The "Chosen People" moniker is misinterpreted by idiots like Shane.”
Calling names, NCF, is an excellent way to discredit yourself without doing any harm whatever to my argument. I suggest you find another tack. All this one does is paint you as a petulant adolescent in need of a good belting.
NCF TO wrote: “God did not choose the Jews as his favorites, as some sort of superior race. He "chose" the Jews to be his role models to humanity, burdening them with the responsibility to act according to the highest moral standards at all times.”
So why were they considered unclean after entering the house of a heathen? Wow, there’s an incentive to missionary work. Refusing to use the same utensils and drinking vessels or even to draw water at the same time of day are good ones, too.
NCF TO wrote: “The stories of the Old Testament are examples of the never-ending struggle of humanity to separate itself from the savagery of the animal kingdom, and move beyond beastly impulses - not, as in the Koran, encouragement to return to the law of the jungle.”
The stories of the Old Testament are the collected history, lore, and religious evolution of the ancient Hebrews. As for Mohammed, he realized that blood feuds were bleeding his people dry and fought against “jungle law” all his life. He was noted for his clemency and wisdom, and considered Christ one of his major role models. People certainly won’t be saying the same about you in a thousand years.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 23-Jul-06 11:46:42 PM
Shane's comments are an hilarious but sick result of moral relativism....his ignorance of Islam is only matched by his ignorance of the Tanach!!
As someone that has also studied the Hebrew texts, I can assure you that you are comparing apples and oranges...
Now I realize I am probably wasting my time on you but a few things to consider if you are remotely open minded...
First, the harsh injunctions in the Tanach are limited only to the Hebrew people....and for a particular point in time....they are descriptive but not prescriptive....in other words , those passages of wiping out brutal cultures like the Amalekites and others, are not normative and do not teach open ended warfare and jihad on the non jewish world....
Secondly, everything harsh in the early parts of the Tanach must be seen against the falleness of man and the hardness of man's heart's......
Thirdly, note that whilst the harshness in the Hebrew Bible is early on, that it gives way to the far more peaceful teachings of the Psalms and prophets, major and minor....
Fourthly, for the Christian community, the harshness is further eroded by the Greek Community...
And so on and so forth.....
Shane, all your doing is picking some verses out of their context and somehow you think you have created the same monster as islam...
Take note friend....IN Islam, the decent mellow part of the Quran is early on while muhammed is given his revelation in Mecca where he was peaceful.....BUT, it is when he gains power in Medina later on that he turns out to be an absolute tyrant and murderer....Take note that it is here that he had 900 innocent jews beheaded and took the surviving women into his harems and for his fellow muslims....it is in Medina where the True Muhammed comes out and all the brutal teachings of Islam that have been practiced for 1400 years were developed...
In otherwords, while the Bible gets more peaceful as you go through it, the Quran and Hadiths get more violent as you go through it....
You have been schooled....go and learn these things on your own so you won't sound so ignorant to those of us who have actually spent a long time studying such matters...
Better yet, cozy upto some Ex Muslims to learn the ins and outs of the deranged teachings of Darul Islam!!
Posted by: Albertanator | 24-Jul-06 12:04:23 AM
FW, I would add that while I agree that Islam needs to be stopped and destroyed, equally dangerous is liberalism which has enabled Islamic hordes in our midst to do such evil...
This battle is only beginning to gear up....it is only going to get far far worse from here....
And honestly, I do not know which is worse....Islam or Liberalism???? Both evil to their core and neither can be reasoned with...
Posted by: Albertanator | 24-Jul-06 12:08:33 AM
Shane,
With all respect, you don't understand the Muslim mind, culture, and goals.
I'd also like to remind you that they're already manipulating our Government, policies and ways of life. Protests against our Government's stance with Israel, abuse of our immigration and citizenship policies, the death threats if we draw cartoons of Mohamed, are only very few examples. Yet you fail to see that they bring their hatred for Israel, their bigotry towards other religions, and manipulation of our ways of life.
Speaking of their history, which you seem to be obsessed with, was full of violence. They only spread Islam by the sword. But after all, history does not matter; what matters is the present and future.
Here's a few facts about Islam:
1) Their false prophet Mohamed was a child molester and married a 6 year old child!
2) Mohamed was a rapist
3) The Koran is filled with hatred and calls to kill the non believers. (that's us)
The list is too long to list here.
The whole "religion" is asinine. They believe that the devil stays in their nose while they are sleeping at night. They believe that there are 2 angles on their shoulders, one records their good deeds while the other records the bad deeds. etc. etc. many more ridiculous believes, to long to list here.
Again, If you think Islam is a religion of peace, go live in a Muslim Country. We're better off without them.
Posted by: fw | 24-Jul-06 12:45:19 AM
Many of the commenters here have responded to Shane's comments as if he was making some defense of radical Islamists. He clearly was not. Read his 11:29:56 comment, and ask yourself if it's not reasonable, especially compared to the know-all attacks that followed it.
Posted by: EBD | 24-Jul-06 1:23:27 AM
The rhetorical attacks on Shane are a response to his relativism, not his defense of Islam. By dragging Judaism and Christianity into the argument, he is making the ultimate insult to Jews and Christians. Shane, I suggest you find another way to criticize Islam, as your moral equivalency arguments are both foolish and offensive.
Posted by: NCF TO | 24-Jul-06 6:13:40 AM
And, by the way, Shane, how do you know what a "classic" pre-1948 Muslim was like? Do you have a time machine? Do you have 100-year-old Muslim friends? I'm afraid the combination of political correctness and Islamic propaganda has turned your mind to mush.
Posted by: NCF TO | 24-Jul-06 6:17:35 AM
Albernator, considering the diarrhoeal discharges of rudeness and name-calling you seem prone to sink in, you're the last one to be accusing anyone of not having an open mind. You could disagree like an adult, yet you choose to be a loudmouthed dink.
True, the decrees against the Amalekites and Canaanites were largely one-time deals. However, there is evidence that the Canaanites were absorbed more than they were wiped out. Also, the Hebrews denounced every culture that surrounded them as devil-worshippers--a very harsh characterization. While it's true that the Jews after Abraham did not practice human sacrifice like the surrounding cultures did, it is unlikely that they were completely without redemption. The Egyptians were hard masters, but they made many worthy contributions to civilization even though the Jews refused to do their Pharaoh even the fundamental honour of referring to him by name.
The harsh dictums in the Tanach must be seen against the "falleness" of man? What the hell is that? I assume that's some sort of weird typo. Also, the Bible doesn't tell the whole story. It portrays Solomon as a wise and beloved king, but the historical record tells us that he cruelly oppressed his people, imposing heavy taxes to support his magnificence and, of course, his Temple. And perhaps the greatest Biblical hero, King David, wasn't an angel either. He ignored the rape of his daughter by his son and on his deathbed passed on to Solomon a list of the people he wanted whacked, notably Joab.
Also, you've got the thrust of my point backwards; I am not making Judaism out to be the monster you call Islam. I contend that NEITHER is a monster. It's true that great cruelties have been committed in the name of all three Abrahamic faiths until uncomfortably recent times (and one of them is still going strong), but you make the grave error of applying modern ethics to historical laws and situations. For instance, the destruction of the Amalekites is supposed to have been the direct word of God. Perhaps the ancient Hebrews could accept with a clear conscience that the slaughter of infants was God's will. We, today, cannot. Even most Muslims today would be horrified by such an order.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 8:45:36 AM
And Albernator, the worse threat is the reactionary paranoia that currently describes "liberalism." Radical Islamism may take a few lives, but Trudeaupian liberalism may take away our society. Already there have been irredeemable losses. Canada is now an anti-nation whose sole justification for existence is to not be American, populated by a diverse collection of peoples bereft of any common identity or idea of what they are doing together.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 8:50:11 AM
You forget your history, FW. Christianity was also spread by the sword and, later on, the musket. You live in a country where Christianity was spread by the musket. And Christians have murdered more people in history than Muslims ever did. Hitler may or may not have been Christian, Stalin certainly wasn't, but they came from Christian backgrounds and presided over countries with Christian traditions. And what about the conquest of the New World, the witch burnings, and the religious wars of the early modern era?
The "devil in the nose" and "angels on the shoulder" superstitions you describe are just that--superstitions. You take these as proof of backwardness and, ultimately, evil. And yet it's Christians who won't go near a black cat, refuse to walk under a ladder, refuse to put a floor 13 in their buildings, and stay in all day if they spill the salt.
Oh yes. Christians aren't supposed to HATE either.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 8:57:36 AM
NCF wrote: "The rhetorical attacks on Shane are a response to his relativism, not his defense of Islam. By dragging Judaism and Christianity into the argument, he is making the ultimate insult to Jews and Christians. Shane, I suggest you find another way to criticize Islam, as your moral equivalency arguments are both foolish and offensive."
Moral relativity is defined as "the belief that nothing is objectively right or wrong and that the definition of right or wrong depends on the prevailing view of a particular individual, culture, or historical period."
My arguments are not based on what I consider to be a flawed philosophy, a "cop-out" if you will. They are based on the fact that demonizing your opponent is as old as Man and that there are both uplifting and deplorable things--both in the sacred writings and in the actual histories--of both religions and the countries that believe in them. That's not moral relativism. That's looking with both eyes open.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 9:04:22 AM
NCF wrote: "And, by the way, Shane, how do you know what a 'classic' pre-1948 Muslim was like? Do you have a time machine? Do you have 100-year-old Muslim friends?"
Well, you see, NCF, the library has these really cool things. They're called BOOKS, and I suggest you pick one up sometime. The fact that some of them were printed before your lifetime doesn't mean they're not worth reading.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 9:06:48 AM
Shane Matthews, the Israelites we right to consider the nations around them devil worshippers.
They worshipped the demon/god Baal Molech.
Sacrificing children and infants they Baal worshippers dropped the children in the arms of the brass statues of their demon/god.
The statues were hollow and had raging furnaces inside.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molech
Shiite celebration of Ashoura is a Baal Molech worship ritual.
http://www.wirephoto.com/jenwallace/Features/Ashoura.html
http://cellar.org/iotd.php?threadid=3012
http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2683782
1 KINGS Chapter 18
26 And they took the bullock which was given them, and they dressed it, and called on the name of Baal from morning even until noon, saying, O Baal, hear us. But there was no voice, nor any that answered. And they leaped upon the altar which was made.
27 And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.
28 AND THEY CRIED ALOUD, AND CUT THEMSELVES AFTER THEIR MANNER WITH KNIVES AND LANCETS, TILL THE BLOOD GUSHED OUT UPON THEM.
29 And it came to pass, when midday was past, and they prophesied until the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that there was neither voice, nor any to answer, nor any that regarded.
30 And Elijah said unto all the people, Come near unto me. And all the people came near unto him. And he repaired the altar of the LORD that was broken down.
31 And Elijah took twelve stones, according to the number of the tribes of the sons of Jacob, unto whom the word of the LORD came, saying, Israel shall be thy name:
32 And with the stones he built an altar in the name of the LORD: and he made a trench about the altar, as great as would contain two measures of seed.
33 And he put the wood in order, and cut the bullock in pieces, and laid him on the wood, and said, Fill four barrels with water, and pour it on the burnt sacrifice, and on the wood.
34 And he said, Do it the second time. And they did it the second time. And he said, Do it the third time. And they did it the third time.
35 And the water ran round about the altar; and he filled the trench also with water.
36 And it came to pass at the time of the offering of the evening sacrifice, that Elijah the prophet came near, and said, LORD God of Abraham, Isaac, and of Israel, let it be known this day that thou art God in Israel, and that I am thy servant, and that I have done all these things at thy word.
37 Hear me, O LORD, hear me, that this people may know that thou art the LORD God, and that thou hast turned their heart back again.
38 Then the fire of the LORD fell, and consumed the burnt sacrifice, and the wood, and the stones, and the dust, and licked up the water that was in the trench.
39 And when all the people saw it, they fell on their faces: and they said, The LORD, he is the God; the LORD, he is the God.
40 And Elijah said unto them, Take the prophets of Baal; let not one of them escape. And they took them: and Elijah brought them down to the brook Kishon, and slew them there.
Posted by: Speller | 24-Jul-06 10:24:45 AM
Although Shane Matthews rightly questions 'liberalism', he seems unwilling to acknowledge that the three most significant wars to hit Europe in the past two centuries were the result of the Napoleonic dream of a United Europe, Nazism and Communism, all three grounded in secularism and a repudiation of Europe's Judaeo-Christian foundations, even though, of course, we all realise that anti-semitism was the most vile aspect of Nazism which is, essentially, a socialist doctrine. Liberalism, joined to secularism and socialism is now enslaving European peoples and colluding with Islam to create the hell on earth of Eurabia. Since Mr Matthews is so keen on books, once again, I recommend www.islamundressed.com and www.jihadwatch.org and www.gatesofvienna.blogspot.com You will find islamundressed the best for a statement of Islam's doctrines done by fullsome quotations and several translations by Islamic and Western scholars of the major works of Islam so you will not be able to complain that you are not being presented a quite full picture of this dogma which has been described by a Moslem scholar as "a religion without a theology, a secular wolf dressed as a religious lamb." I would say at the moment that your 'defence of Islam' is dependent upon attacks on Judaism and Christianity rather than a defence per se of Islam which makes me think you know absolutely nothing about its Doctrines, its Military History or its mores. Enlighten yourself.
Posted by: Centurion | 24-Jul-06 10:34:17 AM
Speller, the Celts also practiced human sacrifice, yet even their enemy Julius Caesar does not describe them as devil worshippers. Indeed, once conquered, non-Roman peoples were extended Roman citizenship and many became Senators and generals. Devils, like barbarians, are where you find them. That the Hebrews were a cut above the surrounding nations, morally speaking, I willingly admit. But there is no evidence whatever that the devotees of Baal and Beelzebub were worshipping the literal Satan. It seems that even after 3,000 years people still define themselves by who they're not.
I'm quite familiar with the passages you quote; Elijah the Tishbite is my favourite prophet. You left out the part about where they were to put no fire under, the cloud the size of a man's hand, and Elijah guiding Ahab's chariot to the gates of Jezreel through the sheeting rains. In fact, some ancient Rabbis were reluctant to include the story of Elijah in the Scriptures because of the vindictive nature of his miracles. A similar fate almost befell the Book of Esther.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 12:04:30 PM
How can iSLAM be a "religion of peace" when it was founded by a mass murderer (men, women,children) and beheader (same list), rapist and pedophile (sexually violated a six year old girl), looter and pillager, and backstabber and liar, who Muzzlims (muzzling free speech everywhere) consider the "perfect man" in all ways?
It can't; it is neither a "religion" nor "peaceful."
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 12:04:59 PM
It's the dhimmitude, dude.
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 12:07:41 PM
I'm not attacking any of the three faiths, Centurion. Merely pointing out that all have had their dark moments while at the same time insisting that all are spiritually uplifting, based on duty to one's God, family, and society, and therefore meet the litmus test of what constitutes a "good" religion. Indeed, the Vatican maintains that redeeming value is to be found in most religions. The fact that certain nut bags justify murderous acts with creative interpretations thereof does not mean the religion itself is bad.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 12:07:47 PM
P.S. Secular humanism--also known as "liberalism"--is itself a religion, with its own system of sacred cows, articles of faith, and an elite popularly regarded as "prophets," so don't you agnostic folks get to thinking you're better than anybody else.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 12:09:32 PM
Wharold, you ought to start reading about some of the things the Israelite leaders did.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 12:10:42 PM
What is the Muzzlim claim to Jerusalem again? Was it all a dream?
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 12:12:15 PM
Shane, again your ignorant of Islam to be sure....
Comparing the madness that is muhammed to Solomon or David or is brutally idiotic...again, I do not know what is worse...your knowledge of the Hebrew Bible and its context and the Quran and the Sunnah?????
Honestly this is such a no brainer.....Islam, Nazism, Marxism.......all brutal evil systems...
Just look at Muhammed's example and teachings???
Sorry for the ad hominen but I am tired of dealing with your ilk over the last many many years......people that live by the cheap philosphy of moral equivication....
I am not saying Islam is the only evil we are facing today....Liberalism is just as bad....choose your poisen..........it's all ugly...they both need to be destroyed but that isn't likely because most people in the west are so brain addled with moral relativism they cannot even tell the difference between right and wrong....indeed, some people cannot even tell the difference between the evil that is Muhammed's teachings and the Hebrew/Greek Bible????
Posted by: Albertanator | 24-Jul-06 12:22:54 PM
Are you talking about the one-time commandment regarding Canaan given to the ancient Israelites or are you trying to equate regular folks to so-called "prophets?"
Centurion is exactly right that you seem unable to talk about iSLAM without bending the discussion into comparisons. iSLAM is neither a "religion" or capable of or interested in "peace" if it means we get to live free of iSLAM.
Mohammad was exactly the REVERSE of the kind of "perfect man" other faiths and non-faiths are trying to produce which explains perfectly the illiterate bloodlust of today's 7th century Muzzlim.
Pretending iSLAM is "peaceful" and a "religion" won't make it "peaceful" or a "religion."
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 12:27:59 PM
I do not understand islamic mission, as espoused by the islamo-facists. I have found in my life, that in order to understand something, you have to actually KNOW it.
Well, when I see what these nuts are about, as in the terrorism and killing of innocent men and women, babies and children, I further myself, that I do not want to KNOW IT!
I preferred a time, in my mind, when I had no idea that some of Arabs, and their groups, had cooperated with Hitler.
I preferred a time, when I did not know that Arabs had kicked almost 1,000,000 Arab Jews out of their lands, because they were Jews.
I preferred a time in my life, when I did not know about the Holocaust, and that people held the ambition to kill me and my family.
I preferred a time, when I did not know that the Lebanese people, had safe harboured, and become en masse numbers, a terrorist group with massive killing capabilities.
I preferred a time in my life, when I had no clue, as to the delicate nature of the state of israel. YUP! Me, the Jew, really had no clue that people were living their lives with the aim of destroying Israel.
I preferred a time, when I did not know about the KKK.
I preferred a time when I knew nothing about the terrorist education system. Yes, that includes everything from the grade school educational texts, to the Universities, to the Phd's in Holocaust denial, and the propaganda machines, through the ISM. You can google the PA textbooks online. They do not teach their children that israel exists, or discuss the numbers of Jews who live, work, play and have been born in Israel.
I preferred a time, when I thought the ISM, the International Solidarity movement, was a group of University socialists. Wow, was I ever ignorant back then, and that was bliss.
I preferred at time when I saw a woman in the black hijab, and face fully covered, as really being just a woman. Now I know that they are dressing men in those things, to hide their faces and make them move around in anonymity and I cannot see any face covering hijab in the same light. I can tell, because of the way they walk. And you see them on their own sometimes, which means they are not women, as observant women would never be walking around without a male escort.
I preferred a time, when I did not know the islamic position on pets. You know, they do not keep animals as pets. They view pets as unclean, and will not touch any. The only reason for animals, is like their view of women, for work, producing food or offspring.
I preferred a time, when I thought that they who held beliefs that the west was full of infidels, was held by a minority of folks, who had no access to education, and who still believed that the world was flat. Now I know that they actually teach anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism in their Universities. memri.com
I preferred a time, when I had no knowledge about female genital mutilation. You know, when someone told me, they expected me to accept it as just another cultural way of living in the world. I said, that if they believed that this was OK for the women, then they should do the same thing to the men, and cut it all off. Yes, the entire external genitalia. Yes, they called me sexist, but they expect it as OK for women, and then rape them to impregnant them. You know, they do not do it without being torn open! SICK!It is the number one health issue, in those nations that practice FMG.
I preferred at time when I thought that no one could be brainwashed into blowing themselves up, to kill innocent people. I preferred a time when, if that happenned, the person was considered mentally sick, instead of holding a politically justifiable position, that is considered to be the fault of the victims.
I preferred a time in my life, when it would be inconceivable that a Canadian join in a terrorist group against my homeland. Oh, and also my ancient homeland as well. That be Israel, of course. And Canada, that is my homeland.
I preferred a time when it was inconceivable in my mind, that people could fly large jets into the World trade centre, and kill thousands of people, while injuring millions. I do not believe that we western folks have recovered from that attack. Maybe we never will.
I preferred a time in my life, when to do the above, in trains, planes and automobiles, ships and boats, was inconceivable.
I preferred a time in my life, when I did not have a list of all the international terrorist groups, and that the gross majority of them were islamofacist groups, or of islamic origins. You know, there are so many, I cannot list them all off. And, although Kahane has bene listed as a Jewish terrorist group, there has not been a single terrorist attack by them? And there are no existing Jewish terrorist groups. Cana anyone think of a Christian terrorist group? At present, I cannot!
I preferred a time in my life, when I did not know these things that I know today. And I know the innocent people around me, that they do not know, and that not knowing, is a preciouse gift, while it lasts. I prefer they do not know, but know that as time goes by, that they too will be disturbed from their sleepy states.
I preferred not knowing. But, now I know.
Posted by: Lady | 24-Jul-06 1:51:00 PM
"Why is it so difficult for people to understand that when our enemies tell us what they have in store for us in clear and plain language that we still cannot accept the truth?" - Alain, 7:15 PM
~~~~~~~~~
I love all these (apparently) Christians selectively citing from the Qu'ran to conclude that Islam is a religion of hate and war, and selectively quoting from the New Testament to conclude that Christianity is a religion of peace.
Well, what else can we learn about "The Prince of Peace" and his religion from the Bible? What do Christians "tell us what they have in store for us in clear and plain language"?
- "But those mine enemies which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither and slay them before me” (Luke 19:27)
- “THINK NOT THAT I AM COME TO SEND PEACE ON EARTH. I CAME NOT TO SEND PEACE BUT A SWORD. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.” (Matthew 10:34-35)
- “I am come to send fire on the Earth… SUPPOSE YE THAT I AM COME TO GIVE PEACE ON EARTH? I TELL YOU, NAY; BUT RATHER DIVISION. For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two and two against three.” (Luke 12:49-53)
- "Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but MUST BE IN SUBMISSION, AS THE LAW SAYS. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; FOR IT IS DISGRACEFUL FOR A WOMAN TO SPEAK IN THE CHURCH. (I Corinthians 14:34-35)
- "Have you allowed all the women to live?" he [Moses] asked them.... "Now ... KILL EVERY WOMAN WHO HAS SLEPT WITH A MAN, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man." (Numbers 31:1-18)
- "If a man have a stubborn and REBELLIOUS SON ... Then shall his father and his mother ... bring him out unto the elders of his city ... And ALL THE MEN OF HIS CITY SHALL STONE HIM WITH STONES, THAT HE DIE." (Deuteronomy 21:18-21)
I could go on (and on and on and on) of course, including about the promotiong of slavery, trading of daughters as bounty, etc. but the point is made.
Ted
Cerberus
http://canadiancerberus.blogspot.com
Posted by: Ted | 24-Jul-06 1:59:22 PM
Ted conveniently ignores the entire actual history of Islam to this very day.
That is a history documenting in excess of 1400 years of slaughter and subjugation of non-Muslims by followers of Mohammed.
The Koran/Hadith quotes, PLUS the Muslim people acting out the quotes, PLUS the current Muslim political and religious leaders using the quotes to urge Muslims to action against our civilization is a combination impossible to ignore.
Keeping all that information together in their heads at the same time and drawing the clear conclusions the information indicates is too difficult for Leftists.
Posted by: Speller | 24-Jul-06 2:16:23 PM
Takes a lot of work to remain an ignorant shill for iSLAM, eh, Ted?
Do you know where Dar al-Harb is, Ted?
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 2:23:15 PM
BTW, I'm not a Jew or xtian, but a Noahide.
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 2:25:09 PM
You keep saying it's a no-brainer, Albertanator, but you keep tripping over your own tongue in your headlong rush to avoid providing proof. You can't compare it, you can't compare it, you're an ignorant toad, all because I say so; blah, blah, blah.
Your preference for insults and catcalls over facts makes you look even more the dimwit. Perhaps you are more like the jihadists than you imagine. Certainly you have the requisite tendency towards bigotry.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 2:26:44 PM
Wharold wrote: "BTW, I'm not a Jew or xtian, but a Noahide."
A poison pill coated with either chocolate or vanilla is still a poison pill.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 2:28:24 PM
Lady, what you prefer does not matter. That which is, is. You can either hide from it or deal with it. Guess which way works better.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 24-Jul-06 2:29:53 PM
Wow, Shane, I never took you for a Muzzlim, but I stand corrected.
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 2:30:47 PM
From your *advice* to Lady, as for hiding from it or dealing with it, you should really come out in the open about iSLAM but I expect too much for you. Ask your imam what to say next.
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 2:33:50 PM
Again Shane, your the shill for the evil that is Islam..
Prove to me the following my little dhimmi...
Did Muhammed not marry a 6 year old girl and screw her when she was 9 and he was in his fifties?? We call that pedophilia or do you approve of such actions?
Did Muhammed not advocate rape of captive women in the Sahih Burkari?
Did mahound not teach the murder of those that leave Islam ???
Did muhammed not encourage throughout the quran endless violence on non muslims ad infinitum???
Did Muhammed not teach the beating of unsubmissive wives????
Did Muhammed not order the murder of poets who made fun of him?
The answer is of course yes to all of the above...and their is much more in the evils that is islam...
Refute these FACTS jackass and then point out where Christianity teaches the same you moral equivicating coward!!
Posted by: Albertanator | 24-Jul-06 2:34:48 PM
Shane won't admit it but he is obviously a muslim or either one of the most incredibly stunned dhimmi fools I have had the displeasure to meet....of course Ted from above gives him a good run for that title also...
Regardless......liberal dhimmi shills or islamists...either way, they are the enemy ....
Posted by: Albertanator | 24-Jul-06 2:37:47 PM
Lots and lots of Christian violence on the rest of us in the 20th Century wharold. Think Native Americans/Canadians, think KKK, think white supremacists, think Oklahoma bombing, think Hawaii, etc.. And that's just this continent and only last century. If you want to get into history, it would be very very interesting to add up the casualties on either side.
Muslims have no monopoly on violence, my friend.
The point of the quotes is as stated in my comment: many selectively pick out quotes from the Qu'ran to conclude that it is a religion of hate and war, then the same can be done to the Bible. Many selectively pick out violence over the last 1500 years by Muslims, then the same can be done to Christians.
If you want to solve a problem, you have to understand it. That's not apologizing for anything. Hate and bigotry interfere with any kind of resolution.
Ted
Posted by: Ted | 24-Jul-06 2:39:22 PM
Albertanator: what objection do you have for my comment? I was merely quoting from the Bible. For many many, the whole entire Bible is infallibly and wholly and LITERALLY THE TRUTH. Are you saying you hate the Bible as well as Muslims? Are you saying you hate fundamentalist and evangelical Christians as much as Muslims? This is their calling. It says so plainly that Jesus came as a divider with sword and fire, not as the Prince of Peace. That some have mistaken his word and intent doesn't change what he actually said.
And, by the logic of many above, what is written in the Bible must obviously be at the core of its belief system.
Ted
Posted by: Ted | 24-Jul-06 2:43:08 PM
Ted, I'll take another piece of advice from the Greek Bible....'Do not cast pearls in front of swine'............
Looking at your blog and your 'insight', you are a waste of time and as ignorant as they come...only Shane rivals you...
Please actually discuss Islam with Ex Muslims you lying scoundral...
Visit the great Canadian Ex Muslim, Ali Sina...
www.faithfreedom.org
And you just might learn a thing or two...same goes for you Shane....
Posted by: Albertanator | 24-Jul-06 2:46:47 PM
Jesus is the Prince of Peace. The peace that He brings is not peace between men and men, but by giving himself as a sacrifice, Christ bought peace between men and God.
Posted by: Speller | 24-Jul-06 2:49:05 PM
And Ted, read a little closer....I am disparaging the murderous cult of Islam....not all Muslims...when you have 1 billion people, you are obviously going to have much diversity....many muslims are nominal or quite secular in their islam and pose no threat to the West...
It is the practicing muslim that fully embraces the Quran and Sunnah that is the potential danger..
Do you understand what a dichotomy is???
My 2 best friends are Ex Sunni Muslims of Indian descent......I am far closer to muslims then a liberal liar like yourself could ever be.....I grew up with them.....I attack Islam....not muslims.....
Posted by: Albertanator | 24-Jul-06 2:50:04 PM
Where is one lie in whay I posted Albertanator?
But I'll give you one back. You say you don't disparage all Muslims?? Again, mere quotations and I'll let readers judge for themselves:
"For anyone not to say that Islam is not the enemy is ignorant completely of Islam....All you have to do is study the life of Muhammed to know what islam is all about.." Albertanator Jul 23, 2006 4:53:48 PM
"I agree that Islam needs to be stopped and destroyed" Albertanator Jul 24, 2006 12:08:33 AM
"Islam, Nazism, Marxism..... all brutal evil systems" Albertanator Jul 24, 2006 12:22:24
Posted by: Ted | 24-Jul-06 2:59:03 PM
Don't bother with Shane and Ted, they're converts to Islam. They don't really know much about the religion they were duped into.
FYI recent converts to Islam:
Islam is asinine, filled with bigotry and hatred towards the Infidels.
They call Christians and Jews apes and pigs.
They believe that the devil lives up the nose while they are asleep at night(bukhari vol. iv no. 516).
The apologists are also duped when Muslims fool them by claims there are also good teachings in the Koran. That is also a lie. "good" deeds are intended for other Muslims not the infidels (non believers who will burn in hell).
What really matters now is the problems, civil unrest, and the burden on our free society.
To say the least, they are incompatible with our society.
Islam is disgusting!
Posted by: fw | 24-Jul-06 3:10:41 PM
Actually Ted, I don't apologize for xtianity's evil (coz I'm not xtian) either but also recognize historical periods like the Crusades were a push-back to the imperialism of iSLAM.
If you want to see the difference contrast and compare how we use the crescent moon (on outhouses) and how Muzzle'ems use it (on mosques).
The ONLY way iSLAM could be "hi-jacked" away from its original intent would be if Mr. Dressup, Captain Kangaroo or Mr. Rogers overthrew the imams in the Great Mosque in Mecca, where no infidel may set foot but luckily THAT'S not racist, hateful or religious intolerance; nope, good clean fun to keep the infidels from contaminating Saudi Arabia.
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 3:11:49 PM
"Islam, Nazism, Marxism..... all brutal evil systems" Albertanator Jul 24, 2006 12:22:24
I couldn't agree more and if that makes me "iSLAMophobic" then I'm consistent coz I'm also "naziphobic" AND allergic to being beheaded.
How about you? Ever lost your head to iSLAM?
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 3:15:44 PM
"Hitler, The Mufti Of Jerusalem And Modern Islamo-Nazism
This news report from Bayerischer Rundfunk explains in detail the cooperation between the Nazis and the Muslim Arab leaders during WW2.
It goes on to explain how high ranking heads of the SS fled to the Arab world and carried on their activities under the protection of leaders such as President Nasser and how modern Islam has adopted a Nazi style ideology of hate and conspiracy against the Jews."
http://ibloga.blogspot.com/2006/07/hitler-mufti-of-jerusalem-and-modern.html
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 3:18:45 PM
Before 1500, there were an estimated 100 million native Canadians and Americans living in North America. By the time the genocide formally ended against the "infidels" there was maybe 5 million. The KKK spoke for Christians in lynching not just blacks (which they did not think of as Christians but only as abominations) but Jews. The pograms in Eastern Europe, even after the Holocaust, were not done by Nazis but Christians.
You'll see in my list earlier and this one, I didn't need to go back to the crusades.
Posted by: Ted | 24-Jul-06 3:19:59 PM
Wharold: I didn't use that quotation to call anyone Islamophobic, just to refute Albertanator's claim that he didn't generalize about the whole religion.
In fact, I haven't called anyone a bigot or phobic or racists (although some of you clearly don't understand the difference between a race and a religion, leave that for another day).
Indeed, unlike Wharold and Albertanator and so many others here, I haven't even substituted childish name calling for argument.
Posted by: Ted | 24-Jul-06 3:23:17 PM
http://justifythis.blogspot.com/
Posted by: wharold | 24-Jul-06 3:26:52 PM