Answers to Islamic Apologism

[Calanen]

Yes it seems your correct regarding the extremists .
And they are quickly multiplying !

There is no such thing as extreme Islam, there is just Islam - whose true aims and goals are extreme.

 

[doctorj]

They are there in bold for you.

Are they really questions if you ask them with the intention of answering yourself?

 

[Calanen]

Are they really questions if you ask them with the intention of answering yourself?

They are what are called FAQs, Frequently Asked Questions, which usually have the answers as well. Would not be much point otherwise, although you are right, from a strict standpoint, FAQs should be called Frequently Asked Questions and Answers.

Tell me, do you keep gloves in the glove box of your car? If not, is it still a glove box?

The questions as set out here, are common enough and there are answers to them. If you disagree with them, say why you do.

 

[mayk]

now why don't you point to your fabulous website? Where are your references? No advertisement yet....

So which religion do you think we should all follow?


Do you think we would care that much about Islam, if there was no oil in Islamic/Arab land. We never cared about china? or India or hmmmm....


Let me ask this final question. And let me be very frank about it. Which Islam? The one propagated by Saudis? or the one by Iran or the one by Malaysians? or the one followed in subcontinent (Pakistan, India, Bangladesh)? WHICH ONE IS GIVING YOU NIGHTMARES?

Islam is decentralized, and thus without a single power house. There are so many factions and sections in Islam that if the USA would stop interfering they would start fighting among themselves. Try going back only 30 years when Iraq and Iran were at each other's throat.

Your conspiratorial point of view that "Islam is about to get you", which most people will call paranoia, is just simply ridiculous.

 

[metric]

calanen wrote.

Also as a Muslim Brotherhood member told the captivated audience in 1993 at their summit, all war is deception:

"By way of deception, thou shalt do war"... Mossad

 

[Calanen]

now why don't you point to your fabulous website? Where are your references? No advertisement yet....

I don't have a website. I am not selling anything.

So which religion do you think we should all follow?

I don't care.

Do you think we would care that much about Islam, if there was no oil in Islamic/Arab land. We never cared about china? or India or hmmmm...

.

I don't know what this means. But Islam has been a big problem, long before there was oil or petroleum.

Let me ask this final question. And let me be very frank about it. Which Islam? The one propagated by Saudis? or the one by Iran or the one by Malaysians? or the one followed in subcontinent (Pakistan, India, Bangladesh)? WHICH ONE IS GIVING YOU NIGHTMARES?

There are four major schools of Islamic thought for sunnis and one for shias. None of them disagree on the premise which is a cause for concern, which says that Islam must destroy all other forms of government and law and impose sharia through the use of warfare. The only disagreement between them is whether to give us the chance to surrender first, how to divide the 'booty' or spoils of war, and what rights the newly conquered infidels have. There is otherwise from our perspective no difference.

Islam is decentralized, and thus without a single power house. There are so many factions and sections in Islam that if the USA would stop interfering they would start fighting among themselves. Try going back only 30 years when Iraq and Iran were at each other's throat.

Rubbish. There was no USA when the forces of Islam invaded Spain in 711. Or France in 732 (and got smashed by Charles the Hammer). Or again when they lost at the gates of Vienna in 1683.

And as for the USA being the source of any Islamic contention - this is ridiculous. In the 1780s, the Islamic Barbary states of Africa (the capital being in Tripoli) were attacking US shipping, killing and enslaving American sailors. There was no Israel then. No petroleum. No Bush's US foreign policy to blame. This puzzled the US Ambassador to France at the time, Thomas Jefferson. Why would these people attack the US, a new country, when they had no previous dealings or animosity between them?

The Barbary states, modern-day Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and Libya, are collectively known to the Arab world as the Maghrib (“Land of Sunset”), denoting Islam’s territorial holdings west of Egypt. With the advance of Mohammed’s armies into the Christian Levant in the seventh century, the Mediterranean was slowly transformed into the backwater frontier of the battles between crescent and cross. Battles raged on both land and sea, and religious piracy flourished.

The Maghrib served as a staging ground for Muslim piracy throughout the Mediterranean, and even parts of the Atlantic. America’s struggle with the terror of Muslim piracy from the Barbary states began soon after the 13 colonies declared their independence from Britain in 1776, and continued for roughly four decades, finally ending in 1815.

Although there is much in the history of America’s wars with the Barbary pirates that is of direct relevance to the current “war on terror,” one aspect seems particularly instructive to informing our understanding of contemporary Islamic terrorists. Very simply put, the Barbary pirates were committed, militant Muslims who meant to do exactly what they said.

Take, for example, the 1786 meeting in London of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Tripolitan ambassador to Britain. As American ambassadors to France and Britain respectively, Jefferson and Adams met with Ambassador Adja to negotiate a peace treaty and protect the United States from the threat of Barbary piracy.

These future United States presidents questioned the ambassador as to why his government was so hostile to the new American republic even though America had done nothing to provoke any such animosity. Ambassador Adja answered them, as they reported to the Continental Congress, “that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

Sound familiar?

The candor of that Tripolitan ambassador is admirable in its way, but it certainly foreshadows the equally forthright declarations of, say, the Shiite Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the 1980s and the Sunni Osama bin Laden in the 1990s, not to mention the many pronouncements of their various minions, admirers, and followers. Note that America’s Barbary experience took place well before colonialism entered the lands of Islam, before there were any oil interests dragging the U.S. into the fray, and long before the founding of the state of Israel.

http://www.nationalreview.com/script/printpage.p?ref=/comment/london200512160955.asp

Your conspiratorial point of view that "Islam is about to get you", which most people will call paranoia, is just simply ridiculous.

Have you read anything I've posted? Why is it ridiculous? I am simply quoting what members of Islam, say themselves. You have not sought to engage on the facts and evidence, but instead have just been dismissive without examining or presenting any facts of your own.

 

[Calanen]

calanen wrote.


"By way of deception, thou shalt do war"... Mossad

I think Mohammed said it before Mossad:

Hadith 4:269

Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah:
The Prophet said, "War is deceit."

 

[metric]

calanen, islam isnt 'here to get us' 'from within'. we invited them here. we encourage them to continue their faith here, we pay them baby bonus to have kids here, we supply them jobs, we welcome them.

islamophobes such as yourself are simply scared little children whom were once afraid of the boogieman. you have now grown up, (perhaps) and are still scared, this time of a boogieman, of whose creation, im not sure.

the powers that be, the ones invading so many muslim nations are not really anti-muslim. they recognise the power religion has over people. of course, it is a power that they desire, and so dont want to destroy it. they are simply trying to control that power......by defeating those that hold that power over those populations.

it is the lawless that is the enemy. not the god fearing.

 

[metric]

I think Mohammed said it before Mossad:

thats a pretty tame observation, by mohammed. you are drawing a long bow trying to demonise him because of it.....

seems you are into unplalatable quotes, read the talmud calanen, you may find another religion you hate.....and wonder if it is they that destroy from within...

 

[Calanen]

calanen, islam isnt 'here to get us' 'from within'. we invited them here. we encourage them to continue their faith here, we pay them baby bonus to have kids here, we supply them jobs, we welcome them

Who exactly is 'we'? Maybe you mean - 'you'. Do you even know what their faith is? At all? Ever read the koran or the hadith, or anything? But you just somehow *know* what Islam is?

And perhaps 'we' are very very foolish to invite into our midst, a 'faith' whose aim, and stated aim, is the destruction of our society through jihad and the imposition of sharia.

islamophobes such as yourself are simply scared little children whom were once afraid of the boogieman. you have now grown up, (perhaps) and are still scared, this time of a boogieman, of whose creation, im not sure.

This is I believe the ad hominem attack. The use of the term 'Islamophobe' is a made up word, that is used to demonise anyone who has legitimate criticisms of Islam. That is, to dismiss the person making the argument as unworthy, rather than engage the argument on the merits.

Also, the boogieman doesn't have stats this good:

the powers that be, the ones invading so many muslim nations are not really anti-muslim. they recognise the power religion has over people. of course, it is a power that they desire, and so dont want to destroy it. they are simply trying to control that power......by defeating those that hold that power over those populations.

I have no idea what this means, and I suspect, neither do you.

it is the lawless that is the enemy. not the god fearing.

Speaking of law, our law counts for nothing to Islam - as the only true law is sharia. Man made laws are an abomination in the eyes of allah, and can be freely ignored.

How about dealing with the facts and the evidence, rather than making schoolyard style comments about who you believe me to be?

 

[johenmo]

I have held interesting dicussions with Muslims over the decades from a number of countries & friends who lived in these countries. They have said that the holy Qur'an is not about violence. Parts do mention it but think of the time in which it was written. Ditto the New Testament

The range of views and actions of Muslims worldwide are so wide that it comes down to interpretation of the holy Qur'an. Different sects consume alcohol (think a group in Turkey). And which translation fo the Qur'an and teh hadiths are we talking about?

I have a favourite theory about Middle East violence - that it's related to sunlight. Scandanavians countries which are cold and dark for long periods are less violent than the hot always sunny countries. Ha ha ha.

The quote from 1786 - everyone was into conquest and empires. Look back before 600 AD (birth of Islam) - lots of violence, esp the Catholics.

What's common? A small number of egomaniacs who manipulate the masses using whatever tool is at thier disposal (religion, money, fear, nationalism, etc).

The Prophet Mohammed was kept by an older merchant woman (first wife Kadijah). He is reported not to have taken his other wives until after she died. He had his first revelations married to her. Which is interesting in terms of the place fo women in the different islaminc societies

Read "Nine Parts of desire" to see how women are treated in different Islamic societies.

People are the problem, not the religious teachings.

There will never be agreement on this thread...

 

[Stormin_Norman]

srsly. what the fuc|k is this sh|t doing on here?

barely a dozen posts and calanen post this rubbish.

 

[Calanen]

thats a pretty tame observation, by mohammed. you are drawing a long bow trying to demonise him because of it.....

If I wished to demonise Mohammed, I could do far far better than that. Perhaps the fact that he married a six year old and had sex with her when she was nine might be a good example. And there are many, many others.

No, I just quoted what a muslim said to his audience, and then I believe it was you who supposedly quoted 'mossad', whatever that means, someone at mossad I suppose, and then I just quoted mohammed himself. That's all. It's just a quote that was used by a member of the Muslim Brotherhood to add force to what he was saying about deceiving americans as to the true aims of the faith.

seems you are into unplalatable quotes, read the talmud calanen, you may find another religion you hate.....and wonder if it is they that destroy from within...

It's fair to say the Jewish Jihad doesnt have quite as much of a head of steam up. Putting this to one side - this technique is a logical fallacy called 'tu quoque', that is 'you too'. So instead of debating the merits of Islam, you can then divert away from that debate (which you would lose) and seek to have the participants justify the administration of George Bush, US foreign policy, Israel, the economy, the banks, the crusades...or pretty much anything else except debating the difficulties with Islam - on the merits.

Whatever the Talmud or any other book says or doesn't say, has no impact or bearing on what the books of Islam say, or what the philosophy of Islam says and does.

Not much debating on the merits here. Just pretty lowbrow obfuscation techniques.

 

[Stormin_Norman]

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/search.php?searchid=1939092

why are you on this forum?

not a single post of yours has anything to do with finance.

 

[doctorj]

Hmmm?

 

[bowman]

it is the lawless that is the enemy. not the god fearing.

From where I sit, Sharia law and the violent, neanderthal mindset that goes with it is the enemy.

Hows this for a Top 10.



10.Islam commands that drinkers and gamblers should be whipped.
9. Islam allows husbands to hit their wives even if the husbands merely fear highhandedness in their wives.
8. Islam allows an injured plaintiff to exact legal revenge””physical eye for physical eye.
7. Islam commands that a male and female thief must have a hand cut off.
6. Islam commands that highway Robs should be crucified or mutilated.
5. Islam commands that homosexuals must be executed.
4. Islam orders unmarried fornicators to be whipped and adulterers to be stoned to death.
3. Islam orders death for Muslim and possible death for non-Muslim critics of Muhammad and the Quran and even sharia itself.
2. Islam orders apostates to be killed (those who have abandoned the Islamic faith).
1. Islam commands offensive and aggressive and unjust jihad.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/Arlandson/top_ten_sharia.htm


Muhammed, gods messenger, saved some of his best messages for women.
He must have been a big hit at parties and on the lecture circuit.


Aisha complained that Muhammad’s followers made women like dogs and asses… Sahih Muslim, 4.1039

If there is a bad luck in anything then it is horse, the abode and the woman… Sahih Muslim, 26.5528, 5529

A prayer is annulled by a passing woman, a dog and a monkey... Sahih Bukhari, 1.9.490, 493,498

Women, houses and horses are evil omens... Sahih Bukhari, 7.62.30, 31, 32

An ass, a woman and a black dog annuls a prayer… Sunaan Nasai, 1.753

A menstruating woman and a dog cuts off a prayer... Sunaan Abu Dawud, 2.0703

Either a dog, an ass, a pig, a Jew, a Magian and a woman cuts off a prayer... Sunaan Abu Dawud, 2.0704

Women, slaves and camels are the same; must seek Allah's refuge from all these... Sunaan Abu Dawud, 11.2155

A house, a horse and a woman is an evil omen; a mat in a house is better than a barren woman… Sunaan Abu Dawud, 3.29.3911

A black dog is satan; a black dog or a donkey or a woman cancels a prayer… Sunaan ibn Majah, 2.952

Beat your wives if they commit sinful acts; women are captives of their husbands… Sunaan ibn Majah, 3.1851

A woman is a property; a righteous woman is the best property… Sunaan ibn Majah, 3.1855 (Please note: a pregnant camel during Muhammad’s time was the best property)

Seek refuge from a woman, a servant and cattle””they are evils… Sunaan ibn Majah , 3.1918

Muhammad’s final sermon””beat women… Sunaan ibn Majah , 4.3074

Women are your prisoners, treat them well, if necessary beat them but not severely… Tirmidhi, 104


http://www.islam-watch.org/AbulKasem/Women-Islam-Domestic-Animals.htm

http://www.islam-watch.org/index.html

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/abulkazem/Women_in_Islam.htm

 

[Calanen]

I have held interesting dicussions with Muslims over the decades from a number of countries & friends who lived in these countries. They have said that the holy Qur'an is not about violence. Parts do mention it but think of the time in which it was written. Ditto the New Testament

That's really not the same as reading it yourself though is it. It's not really evidence of anything except you spoke to some people. You don't even quote from the Koran, just what someone you spoke to *told* you was in it. That's pretty flimsy.

If you really want to know whether Islam disavows violence and is peaceful, go to the heart of Islam (say Pakistan or Saudi Arabia) and preach that from a street corner. You could measure your life in seconds, not minutes. The only place in which Islam is preached as being peaceful is in the West, or when such pronouncements are directed to western ears. Within the dar al Islam, this topic does not get much of a go at all.

The range of views and actions of Muslims worldwide are so wide that it comes down to interpretation of the holy Qur'an. Different sects consume alcohol (think a group in Turkey). And which translation fo the Qur'an and teh hadiths are we talking about?

Muddy the waters a bit, its all too complicated, no one understands - could mean anything? Favoured tactics of the moral relativist. The differences in interpretation are mostly about relatively trivial matters. The core beliefs of Islam under the four main schools were settled long ago, meaning they are not up for debate.

I have a favourite theory about Middle East violence - that it's related to sunlight. Scandanavians countries which are cold and dark for long periods are less violent than the hot always sunny countries. Ha ha ha.

Good luck with that.

The quote from 1786 - everyone was into conquest and empires. Look back before 600 AD (birth of Islam) - lots of violence, esp the Catholics.

Yes, could mean anything. Everybody did it, etc. More tu quoque - ie deflect criticism away from Islam and attempt to have a debate about Catholicism. The *reasons* why people did, and why Islam does things, stay the same, and we have a huge pattern of Islam seeking to attack and destroy other cultures for the same stated reasons - to impose sharia rule through jihad.

The Prophet Mohammed was kept by an older merchant woman (first wife Kadijah). He is reported not to have taken his other wives until after she died. He had his first revelations married to her. Which is interesting in terms of the place fo women in the different islaminc societies

Why does this matter?

Read "Nine Parts of desire" to see how women are treated in different Islamic societies.

I know how women are treated in Islamic societies. I have manuals of sharia law on my shelf. Amnesty International knows as well. That's a better source I feel than your book.

People are the problem, not the religious teachings.

Certainly if there were no people, the religious teachings would not mean much.

There will never be agreement on this thread...

Why does there need to be? I do not mind people disagreeing with me, but do so on facts and evidence - not with the flimsy platitudes recited by the multicultist masses.

 

[Stormin_Norman]

as long as you dont go mentioning similarly bigoted and sexist rubbish in the christian bible.

Calanen, what do you think of the crysler bankruptcy news?

 

[Calanen]

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/search.php?searchid=1939092

why are you on this forum?

not a single post of yours has anything to do with finance.

I posted in the thread on sharia finance.

 

[Stormin_Norman]

well done.

your computer should just have a mouse though.