Israel in the Gaza Strip

[cuttlefish]

please take the time to read Islam 101

ahem ... yeah like a site called "Jihadwatch" with all sorts of paranoid paraphenalia about Islam and Jihad is going to present a nice balanced article on Islam What a joke.

Check out the articles here - they've got the real truth: www.ibelieveeverybitofparanoidcr*pIread.com

 

[disarray]

so let me get this straight, you make assumptions about the site, its author and its content based solely on its url?

did you look at the site? did you read ANY of the link i posted? did you put any effort whatsoever into discovering who the authors of the site are, why they put the site together, the message they are putting forward, the publicised debates they have with islamic scholars, their numerous published books, articles and lecture tours, their work with the FBI, military and terrorism task force, or look at the FAQ explaining in detail their credentials?

yeah it sure is much easier just to sit back and spout your opinion without any evidence and dismiss out of hand reasoned and solidly referenced primary source material because you make some halfassed assumption based on the title of a url

 

[rederob]

yeah it sure is much easier just to sit back and spout your opinion without any evidence and dismiss out of hand reasoned and solidly referenced primary source material because you make some halfassed assumption based on the title of a url

Or...
you make well informed commentary like....

there is no "collective destiny" for jews or muslims, their entire faith revolves around being seperate, exclusive and superior.

there is no solution.

 

[cuttlefish]

so let me get this straight, you make assumptions about the site, its author and its content based solely on its url?

did you look at the site? did you read ANY of the link i posted? did you put any effort whatsoever into discovering who the authors of the site are, why they put the site together, the message they are putting forward, the publicised debates they have with islamic scholars, their numerous published books, articles and lecture tours, their work with the FBI, military and terrorism task force, or look at the FAQ explaining in detail their credentials?

yeah it sure is much easier just to sit back and spout your opinion without any evidence and dismiss out of hand reasoned and solidly referenced primary source material because you make some halfassed assumption based on the title of a url

Yes prior to posting my previous response, I did waste a few minutes skimming through the material on the 'lesson' on the site - which started out seemingly reasonable but deteriorated. I noticed the unusual name for the site and had a bit of a look at why the site was put together and saw a whole bunch of fear mongering material on Islam.

What suprises me is that you would even think that anyone would consider literature posted on this site a credible source of factual information on Islam.

So no - it wasn't a halfassed assumption - but it did only require about 5 minutes perusal to confirm to me what I suspected the site stood for.

 

[disarray]

Or...
you make well informed commentary like....

or you could even learn to differentiate between when a person is giving a personal opinion or when they are presenting (what they believe to be) facts. hint: one of them usually provides outside references, the other doesn't.

What suprises me is that you would even think that anyone would consider literature posted on this site a credible source of factual information on Islam.

oh i don't know, maybe because they directly reference the koran and the teachings of islamic scholars? call me crazy i know.

 

[cuttlefish]

oh i don't know, maybe because they directly reference the koran and the teachings of islamic scholars? call me crazy i know.

Oh look - I found out about another site on the web that also promotes itself as having a lot of 'factual' stuff.

Its called 'www.jewwatch.com' - what a coincidencentally similar sort of name to the site you referred us to. It promotes itself as The Internet's Largest Scholarly Collection of Articles on Jewish History" and as “a Not-For-Profit Library for private study, scholarship, or research.”.

I'm sure it will have lots of direct references to the Hebrew Bible showing how they're trying to take over and destroy the world as well. Seems like everyone's up to it.

Have a read of what wikiepedia has to say about Jew Watch: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew_Watch

(for those that can't be bothered following the wikipedia link here is an excerpt from the first paragraph:

Jew Watch is a controversial website that describes itself as “The Internet's Largest Scholarly Collection of Articles on Jewish History" and as “a Not-For-Profit Library for private study, scholarship, or research.” The site is widely categorized as an antisemitic hate site[1].

 

[cuttlefish]

Here's an excerpt from what wikipedia has to say about the Jihad Watch web site:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad_Watch#Criticism

"The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), called Jihad Watch an "Internet hate site" and claimed it is "notorious for its depiction of Islam as an inherently violent faith that is a threat to world peace." [12] Guardian writer Brian Whitaker describes Jihad Watch as a "notoriously Islamophobic website",[13] while other critics such as Dinesh D'Souza,[14] Karen Armstrong,[15] and Cathy Young,[16] point to what they see as deliberate mischaracterizations of Islam and Muslims by Spencer as inherently violent and therefore prone to terrorism. Various attempts to block the site based on allegations of "hate speech" have been mostly unsuccessful.[17][18] In response to criticism, Spencer states that he vehemently rejects the "Islamophobe" label, "which is only a tool used by Islamic apologists to silence criticism".[19]"

Hardly the first place I would go looking at for unbiased information on the Islamic religion.

 

[rederob]

or you could even learn to differentiate between when a person is giving a personal opinion or when they are presenting (what they believe to be) facts. hint: one of them usually provides outside references, the other doesn't.

I guess I am used to personal opinions having a basis in fact, or accepted understandings - religious "beliefs" aside.
Perhaps you can tell us which of your opinions should be ignored as they have no reasonable basis.

 

[wayneL]

Please disregard my previous post, if anyone saw it. It was supposed to be a PM.

Humble apologies.

 

[disarray]

Oh look - I found out about another site on the web that also promotes itself as having a lot of 'factual' stuff.

Its called 'www.jewwatch.com' - what a coincidencentally similar sort of name to the site you referred us to. It promotes itself as The Internet's Largest Scholarly Collection of Articles on Jewish History" and as “a Not-For-Profit Library for private study, scholarship, or research.”.

well some of it may very well be factual. i know first hand that a one time jewish girlfriend made it perfectly clear she was only going to marry a jew and a jew only. and maybe there are references in jewish religious texts that contain passages about treating goyim as second class citizens. and shock horror! jews have committed atrocities throughout the ages! (i love the one where they tricked some city into getting circumcised and then butchered the male populace while they were recovering)

so what's your point? i never said jews were angels did i? nice straw man you built up there though. it is good that you brought this to my attention though because it further reinforces my point that there are deep religious aspects to the current conflict which both sides possess, which are offensive to our western cultural ideals and so are open to criticism.

now what you can do, if you have a point to make about the jews, is gather your facts, reference them, and make your point with factual backing. then people can debate THE POINTS and THE FACTS on their merits!

or you can let wikipedia form your opinions for you because it all seems like far too much effort for you to debate the points or refute the facts that have been presented. and a big LOL to the criticism from CAIR, there is a truly respectable organisation if ever i saw one

I guess I am used to personal opinions having a basis in fact, or accepted understandings - religious "beliefs" aside.

accepted by who? you see to me FACT in this case (of criticising islam) is the actual written words and recorded historical actions of the prophet mohammed, the koran and the teaching of islamic scholars. if you have different facts or a different accepted understanding, then state it.

Perhaps you can tell us which of your opinions should be ignored as they have no reasonable basis.

perhaps you can figure that out for yourself, or you can go join cuttlefish on wikipedia and let that form your opinion for you.

 

[wayneL]

disarray,

Have you read the Bible? The whole enchilada?

It wasn't that long ago that Christian European society lived with similar absurd bloodlust and brutality as do the radical Islamists. I'm sure we could dig up a modern example somewhere in the world if we look hard enough.

All these religions contain deep contradictions. Christianity and Judaism is no different in this regard. Yes there are radical elements within Islam, I have also seen the other side, where they just want to live life, love their children, make some money and enjoy life... just like us.

While the radicals can go and rot in hell as far as I'm concerned, the average Muslim is a very friendly chap(ess). As long as (s)he knows you don't automatically hate them, they make fine friends.

 

[mayk]

A little off topic, but still interesting.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/15/david-miliband-war-terror

'War on terror' was wrong
The phrase gives a false idea of a unified global enemy, and encourages a primarily military reply

The call for a "war on terror" was a call to arms, an attempt to build solidarity for a fight against a single shared enemy. But the foundation for solidarity between peoples and nations should be based not on who we are against, but on the idea of who we are and the values we share. Terrorists succeed when they render countries fearful and vindictive; when they sow division and animosity; when they force countries to respond with violence and repression. The best response is to refuse to be cowed.

I agree with what he is saying. New thinking and strategy, with long term objectives is needed. Interesting comments too.

 

[rowie]

DISARRAY - So this is where you get your information from? Jihad watch - What a joke, it truly is laughable that you prescribe to rubbish sites like that and believe it as the truth. Insult to your intelligence mate, although not sure how intelligent you really are if your gullible enough to fall for that crap... My advice, take some time to sift through the garbage and get a balanced understanding of the religion from sources that dont have hidden agendas to further their fanatical causes.

 

[wayneL]

An illustration:

Thanks mayk, Real Humans there.

 

[rederob]

So, your facts in this case are:

accepted by who? you see to me FACT in this case (of criticising islam) is the actual written words and recorded historical actions of the prophet mohammed, the koran and the teaching of islamic scholars. if you have different facts or a different accepted understanding, then state it.

And your personal opinion includes:

there is no "collective destiny" for jews or muslims, their entire faith revolves around being seperate, exclusive and superior.

there is no solution.

I now have no difficulty in seeing your logic.
If ever there was a justification for Israel's actions, you nailed it.

 

[disarray]

disarray,

Have you read the Bible? The whole enchilada?

yep, it's an interesting history (with a dash of fairytale)

It wasn't that long ago that Christian European society lived with similar absurd bloodlust and brutality as do the radical Islamists. I'm sure we could dig up a modern example somewhere in the world if we look hard enough.

i never said christianity had a spotless history either. what i did say however was islam, by its very nature, is a violent and oppressive philosophy with clearly stated aims and methods of warfare against ALL non-believers. this is a danger to civilised society. it is no coincidence that areas with large muslim populations / borders with muslim nations suffer endless terror and murder at the hands of the followers of the religion of peace.

as far as modern christian massacres, there are the abortion clinic bombings in the states, and globally there is conflict in indonesia between the christians and ... guess who ... you won't believe it ... the muslims. there is also christian / muslim conflict in the philippines, and christian / muslim conflict in sudan and various parts of africa. there's also hindu / muslim conflict in india, buddhist / muslim conflict in thailand, more christian / muslim conflict in the balkans. are you sensing a pattern here?

All these religions contain deep contradictions. Christianity and Judaism is no different in this regard. Yes there are radical elements within Islam, I have also seen the other side, where they just want to live life, love their children, make some money and enjoy life... just like us.

for sure, but the point i am making again is THERE IS NO MODERATE ISLAM. moderate muslims sure, but the core philosophy of islam espouses murder and subjugation. islam itself means "submission" and they take that seriously. muttering platitudes about "its only a small number of extremists" is to totally overlook the fundamental principles of the religion as laid out by mohammed in the koran. you may notice the koran becomes more bloodthirsty as mohammed grows in power.

While the radicals can go and rot in hell as far as I'm concerned, the average Muslim is a very friendly chap(ess). As long as (s)he knows you don't automatically hate them, they make fine friends.

i'm sure they do, but once again the koran SPECIFICALLY STATES -

5.51: O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

3.118: O you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than your own people; they do not fall short of inflicting loss upon you; they love what distresses you; vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater still; indeed, We have made the communications clear to you, if you will understand

3.28: Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends rather than believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing of (the guardianship of) Allah, but you should guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully; and Allah makes you cautious of (retribution from) Himself; and to Allah is the eventual coming.

now what we need to ask of our muslim "friends", and guard against, is when push comes to shove, will muslims in our lands follow our western systems or follow the explicit teachings of the koran? we have a right to ask these questions, while being aware of the islamic principle of al taqiyyah (ie. lying to infidels).

judging by the state of england (which the CIA has described as an "islamic cesspool" and where imams routinely agitate for the implementation of sharia law and outright destruction of the west), the obscene wave of muslim rape throughout the western world (go google rape stats in sweden) and the fact that there are 751 areas in france that are no longer under french control, but instead practice sharia law where honour killings, polygamy and murders for apostasy are commonplace, then we should be asking who are these people and what do they stand for? what is their motivation? what does their philosophy preach?

instead people just mouth the usual "small minority, religion of peace" platitudes and bury their heads in the sand, hoping that "multiculturalism" will save the day. it won't, and the west needs to grow a pair and stand up for our values instead of bending over to accommodate people who follow an utterly intolerant philosophy.

and rowie, i've done plenty of reading thanks and formed my own opinion. now go ahead and refute the points about mohammed being a psycho and the koran having numerous entries regarding the islamic requirement to spread jihad and take over the world (as well as endless youtube videos of imams spouting the same) or take your tears somewhere else. or better still, show me the "nice" parts of the koran where mohammed isn't butchering jews, raiding caravans, raping slaves, fking children or exhorting his followers to go and commit acts of depravity. do this, and i'll show you the bits i just mentioned and then we can nut out the contradiction.

 

[disarray]

I now have no difficulty in seeing your logic.
If ever there was a justification for Israel's actions, you nailed it.

i'm saying i don't see jews and muslims getting along because of their religious differences and the bad history between them. that is my personal opinion based on my understanding of things. clear enough for you?

 

[rowie]

yep, it's an interesting history (with a dash of fairytale)



i never said christianity had a spotless history either. what i did say however was islam, by its very nature, is a violent and oppressive philosophy with clearly stated aims and methods of warfare against ALL non-believers. this is a danger to civilised society. it is no coincidence that areas with large muslim populations / borders with muslim nations suffer endless terror and murder at the hands of the followers of the religion of peace.

as far as modern christian massacres, there are the abortion clinic bombings in the states, and globally there is conflict in indonesia between the christians and ... guess who ... you won't believe it ... the muslims. there is also christian / muslim conflict in the philippines, and christian / muslim conflict in sudan and various parts of africa. there's also hindu / muslim conflict in india, buddhist / muslim conflict in thailand, more christian / muslim conflict in the balkans. are you sensing a pattern here?



for sure, but the point i am making again is THERE IS NO MODERATE ISLAM. moderate muslims sure, but the core philosophy of islam espouses murder and subjugation. islam itself means "submission" and they take that seriously. muttering platitudes about "its only a small number of extremists" is to totally overlook the fundamental principles of the religion as laid out by mohammed in the koran. you may notice the koran becomes more bloodthirsty as mohammed grows in power.



i'm sure they do, but once again the koran SPECIFICALLY STATES -







now what we need to ask of our muslim "friends", and guard against, is when push comes to shove, will muslims in our lands follow our western systems or follow the explicit teachings of the koran? we have a right to ask these questions, while being aware of the islamic principle of al taqiyyah (ie. lying to infidels).

judging by the state of england (which the CIA has described as an "islamic cesspool" and where imams routinely agitate for the implementation of sharia law and outright destruction of the west), the obscene wave of muslim rape throughout the western world (go google rape stats in sweden) and the fact that there are 751 areas in france that are no longer under french control, but instead practice sharia law where honour killings, polygamy and murders for apostasy are commonplace, then we should be asking who are these people and what do they stand for? what is their motivation? what does their philosophy preach?

instead people just mouth the usual "small minority, religion of peace" platitudes and bury their heads in the sand, hoping that "multiculturalism" will save the day. it won't, and the west needs to grow a pair and stand up for our values instead of bending over to accommodate people who follow an utterly intolerant philosophy.

and rowie, i've done plenty of reading thanks and formed my own opinion. now go ahead and refute the points about mohammed being a psycho and the koran having numerous entries regarding the islamic requirement to spread jihad and take over the world (as well as endless youtube videos of imams spouting the same) or take your tears somewhere else. or better still, show me the "nice" parts of the koran where mohammed isn't butchering jews, raiding caravans, raping slaves, fking children or exhorting his followers to go and commit acts of depravity. do this, and i'll show you the bits i just mentioned and then we can nut out the contradiction.

The quotes you provided are not from the koran Einstien!! They are man made hadiths that were invented by scholars to suit theyre agendas 300 years after the death of Muhammad. Like I said before, educate yourself from a balanced view of the religion before making up garbage here. Clearly you are providing false and misleading information.

 

[rowie]

Dissarray - Heres a direct quote from the koran:

Surely, those who believe, those who are Jewish, the converts, and the Christians; any of them who (1) believe in GOD and (2) believe in the Last Day, and (3) lead a righteous life, have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.

 

[mayk]

The quotes you provided are not from the koran Einstien!! They are man made hadiths that were invented by scholars to suit theyre agendas 300 years after the death of Muhammad. Like I said before, educate yourself from a balanced view of the religion before making up garbage here. Clearly you are providing false and misleading information.

Rowie, these quotes are from Koran.
First quote reference:
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/005.qmt.html
The first reference:

YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Take not into your intimacy those outside your ranks: They will not fail to corrupt you. They only desire your ruin: Rank hatred has already appeared from their mouths: What their hearts conceal is far worse. We have made plain to you the Signs, if ye have wisdom.
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Take not for intimates others than your own folk, who would spare no pains to ruin you; they love to hamper you. Hatred is revealed by (the utterance of) their mouths, but that which their breasts hide is greater. We have made plain for you the revelations if ye will understand.
SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than your own people; they do not fall short of inflicting loss upon you; they love what distresses you; vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater still; indeed, We have made the communications clear to you, if you will understand.

The Second reference:

YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Take not into your intimacy those outside your ranks: They will not fail to corrupt you. They only desire your ruin: Rank hatred has already appeared from their mouths: What their hearts conceal is far worse. We have made plain to you the Signs, if ye have wisdom.
PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Take not for intimates others than your own folk, who would spare no pains to ruin you; they love to hamper you. Hatred is revealed by (the utterance of) their mouths, but that which their breasts hide is greater. We have made plain for you the revelations if ye will understand.
SHAKIR: O you who believe! do not take for intimate friends from among others than your own people; they do not fall short of inflicting loss upon you; they love what distresses you; vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater still; indeed, We have made the communications clear to you, if you will understand.

Third reference:
http://www.usc.edu/schools/college/crcc/engagement/resources/texts/muslim/quran/003.qmt.html

YUSUFALI: 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 yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah.
PICKTHAL: Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoso doeth that hath no connection with Allah unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them, taking (as it were) security. Allah biddeth you beware (only) of Himself. Unto Allah is the journeying.
SHAKIR: Let not the believers take the unbelievers for friends rather than believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing of (the guardianship of) Allah, but you should guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully; and Allah makes you cautious of (retribution from) Himself; and to Allah is the eventual coming.