"Islam is like a drug"

[Skybird]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,druck-717589,00.html

I use to not launch threads on Islam as often anymore as I used to do years ago. I almost do not do it anymore at all, just react to other people's threads. But this interview is about a person that I recently have referred to repeatedly in two threads, and that I hold in a certain ammount of respect, althought I do not agree with anything he thinks and says, and I also do not agree with his views of that you can take Sharia and Quran away from Islam and still call what is left as "Islam" anymore (he thinks Islam can be reformed by deleting major parts of it, while I think in poltiica effect it is monolithic (he even confirms that himself in the interview), cannot be reformed by picking the rosins only, but must be replaced), and finally I think that he is not being fully consistent with his claims and somewhat contradicts himself when he says he has left major essential content of Islam behind him, but still insists on seeing himself as a Muslim. Where he does so, he is mixing up ethnic and cultural origin, with ideologic education.

However.

I have experienced him live some time ago and chatted with him for some minutes or so, I liked him for his calm and polite behavior, and I think that if Muhammedan communities would listen more to people like him and would bring up more thinking minds like him, problems for all of us would be significantly smaller.

Sometimes one must not agree on every single detail - and still can be able to come to terms with each other. This is a good man. We would desperately need many more like him - to educate the ignorrant masses in the Islamic world - and to replace the many idiotic know-it-alls on our side of the river who carelessly trade our freedoms and identities and dignity away, because they do not understand that only the strong are able to practice tolerance if they wish (or not): the weak never are tolerant, but just suffer what they must.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,druck-717589,00.html

[Takeda Shingen]

http://charliesgames123.webs.com/photos/Album-1/i%20like%20where%20this%20thread%20is%20going.jpg

[antikristuseke]

Religion self contradictory, surely this is a jest.
Like it or not skybird, religions change over time, christianity was a bloodthirsty religion in the past but has mellowed out for the most part, the same will happen to islam. It is not going to happen overnight though.

[Skybird]

Islam is not a religion like Christianity or Judaism, and even more: it is more political than religious an ideology anyway. This comparision that you try, is tried very often - but it is completely ignoring the nature of Islam. Primarily it is a political movement - the religion only has a supporting secondary function.

As long as this is not understood in the West, any approach to and any understanding of Islam must necessarily fail from beginning on. Even more, in our secular culture that differs between religion and politics, we render ourselves as defenceless to Islam's political movement, that it tries to make untouchable to opposition and criticism and questioning, under the protecting umbrella of guaranteed Western freedom of religious practicing. This is not what our constitutional guarantees for freedom of religion have been meant for: it is not meant to make political agendas unavailable for critical review, opposition and political dispute.

[antikristuseke]

Christianity was allso more of a political ideology in the past, at least at the higher levels, then the darndest thing happened, it changed.

[Tchocky]

I think it's time to replace this record player.

[STEED]

I think it's time to replace this record player.

What with?

A tape deck?

[antikristuseke]

I vote for an 8-track

[Penguin]

well, old Marx already knew that 150 years ago ;)
However indeed an interesting interview and one of the religious persons who has some views which I as an agnostic can support. Of course he also gets threats from radicals :nope:
In this interview (available only in german) http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/32/32217/1.html he states that he considers the spiritual side of islam as timeless as well as he says that the "earthly-juristic" side belongs into the 7th century and has nothing to lose in the 21st century. :up:

[HunterICX]

I vote for an 8-track

an Edison cylinder

HunterICX

[STEED]

an Edison cylinder

HunterICX

:o:rotfl2::rotfl2:

[AVGWarhawk]

Where is Tribesman? :hmmm:

[nikimcbee]

:o:rotfl2::rotfl2:
:haha:+2

[JU_88]

"Islam is like a drug (bla bla bla muslims eat babies etc etc.)"


I think you are the one on drugs.
I'm bored with your nonsense. (As is everyone else by the looks of it.)

[TLAM Strike]

Islam is not a drug. Drugs make you feel good and mellow out, every one on Islam I've seen is yelling nonsense, blowing themselves up, and burning stuff.

:hmmm:

Ok maybe Islam is a bad trip... :haha:

[Gerald]

Islam is not a drug, one more to what other religions are, but rather a request that generations have built up over a very long time.

[Tribesman]

Where is Tribesman?
I was down the pub, now I am waiting for the wife to come home from the pub so I can go to a friends gig at 10.
In the meantime.....
muslims muslims muslims , conspiracy , secrets, islam, muslim....muslim muslim muslim "academic studies" my german koran is the only true version ...muslims muslims muslims....black people ruin soccer:yeah:
Damn, if I keep on stealing Skybirds thunder he will have to take it to the Vanguard News Network.
Oh yeah demomographic culture muslim islam with a Karl Popper for good measure:rock:

[AVGWarhawk]

I was down the pub, now I am waiting for the wife to come home from the pub so I can go to a friends gig at 10.
In the meantime.....
muslims muslims muslims , conspiracy , secrets, islam, muslim....muslim muslim muslim "academic studies" my german koran is the only true version ...muslims muslims muslims....black people ruin soccer:yeah:
Damn, if I keep on stealing Skybirds thunder he will have to take it to the Vanguard News Network.
Oh yeah demomographic culture muslim islam with a Karl Popper for good measure:rock:


I knew you would be around the way. :haha: Have fun!

[The Third Man]

So believing in a large religious phisoophy is seen as dangerous, but believing in a lagre government is not seen as dangerous?

Both require a narrative and belief to survive.

[Tribesman]

believing in a lagre government is not seen as dangerous?

We shall know that when the lagre nation with its lagrenese government comes to conquer the world.
after of course the jews muslims papacy liberals communists media illegal aliens genuine aliens and the official government have all had their turn at threatening the foundations of society.
Oh yeah thats now isn't it, run and hide the lagres are on the march in september

[The Third Man]

We shall know that when the lagre nation with its lagrenese government comes to conquer the world.
after of course the jews muslims papacy liberals communists media illegal aliens genuine aliens and the official government have all had their turn at threatening the foundations of society.
Oh yeah thats now isn't it, run and hide the lagres are on the march in september

As much as your post shows the difference between those who believe in individual liberties and your stance that government can resolves all evils and make things better, it requires a government to grow and individuals to decrease.

This nation by idea and Constitution is based on the power/freedom of the individual. To move away from those ideas allows others to place themselves as monarchs/dictators. Those who do not see that are often known as Imperialists.

The rest of your post makes little sense.

[Skybird]

For those getting late out of their beds today, just a hint. "Islam is like a drug" is not by me, but it is a quote from the essay and also it's published headline (-> "In a sense, Islam is like a drug, like alcohol. A small amount can have a healing and inspiring effect, but when the believer reaches for the bottle of dogmatic faith in every situation, it gets dangerous." ) . I assume it was too much asked of some smartheads here to at least read that interview before the usual anti-Skybird rants got started. Well, everyone according to his intellectual capacity. I got news for some of you. The interview is not about Skybird at all. ;)

Don't deal with me, but deal with that man and what he says. He knows Islam better than probably you all together. He is Egypt, is Muslim, was raised as a Muslim by a father being a Muslim teacher who wanted him to become a Muslim scholar, lived in a Muslim country before he came to Germany, is educated in Islam, got academic education in the West in politology and other branches - and Skybird has relatively little (nothing to be precise) to do with his statements. Skybird gave some lines on why he disagrees with him and on what, and that he nevertheless can get along with that guy for certain reasons.

Running computers by your own since long, I assume you know what to do with a link and how to click on it, yes...!? :06:

[Gerald]

Possible, but you started the thread, :O:

[antikristuseke]

Yes, but that applies to every religion equaly, it even applies to new age pseudo religious crap.

[Sammi79]

So believing in a large religious phisoophy is seen as dangerous, but believing in a lagre government is not seen as dangerous?

Both require a narrative and belief to survive.

:hmmm: I do not believe in religious pseudofact, nor do I believe anything that a member of a government tells me. In that sense they are similar I guess, they both talk a lot of talk about nothing in particular and avoid answering simple questions in a straight-forward manner.

To correct your spelling though (sorry), Lager has a druglike soporific power that cannot be denied, I do believe in the power (and the danger) of Lager, especially those strong foreign ones. If Carlsberg ran the government... Who knows?

[The Third Man]

:hmmm: I do not believe in religious pseudofact, nor do I believe anything that a member of a government tells me. In that sense they are similar I guess, they both talk a lot of talk about nothing in particular and avoid answering simple questions in a straight-forward manner.

To correct your spelling though (sorry), Lager has a druglike soporific power that cannot be denied, I do believe in the power (and the danger) of Lager, especially those strong foreign ones. If Carlsberg ran the government... Who knows?

Belittling others doesn't raise yourself. It is too bad you cannot develope an argument.

[Sammi79]

Belittling others doesn't raise yourself. It is too bad you cannot develope an argument.

I am sorry Third Man, I did not mean to belittle you, It was meant as a joke truthfully. I did read the linked interview and found it mildy interesting although I'm sceptical by nature. This man is gaining popularity in high circles, by saying all the right things and I can't help but think maybe he has his own agenda. Like I said, I can't help being suspicious, living in Britain with a British government you know? anyway don't you believe in the power of Lager? :O:

[antikristuseke]

Belittling others doesn't raise yourself. It is too bad you cannot develope an argument.http://www.zgeek.com/forum/gallery/files/1/7/9/1/0/troll_fail.jpg

[Oberon]

I'd have used the term virus myself, like most religions. One is converted and then tries to convert others, and so forth...

[Skybird]

I'd have used the term virus myself, like most religions. One is converted and then tries to convert others, and so forth...
:) Oh. Herpes spiritus simplex. Virostatica, anyone? :DL


http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/7017/korancartoon.png (http://img838.imageshack.us/i/korancartoon.png/)

[Stealth Hunter]

So believing in a large religious phisoophy is seen as dangerous, but believing in a lagre government is not seen as dangerous?

Both require a narrative and belief to survive.

But only one is relevant here.

You never waste an opportunity to try to drudge up your beliefs own politics, do you?:nope:

:) Oh. Herpes spiritus simplex. Virostatica, anyone? :DL


http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/7017/korancartoon.png (http://img838.imageshack.us/i/korancartoon.png/)

Yep, that's militant Islam for you.

[Rilder]

(-> "In a sense, Monotheism, Polytheism, Atheism, Cowtheism, Masterbatetheism, Colbertheism is like a drug, like alcohol. A small amount can have a healing and inspiring effect, but when the believer reaches for the bottle of dogmatic faith in every situation, it gets dangerous." )

Fixed that up for you. :yep:

[antikristuseke]

Personally I would only lump gnostic atheism into that list and would keep agnostic atheism out of it.
Allso, what the hell is wrong with masturbation, bloody prudes I tell you:stare:

[krashkart]

^^ Masturbation will make your toes fall off. Didn't you know that? :D

Islam is not a drug. Drugs make you feel good and mellow out, every one on Islam I've seen is yelling nonsense, blowing themselves up, and burning stuff.

:hmmm:

Ok maybe Islam is a bad trip... :haha:

Do not drop the brown acid. :DL

[Sailor Steve]

Belittling others doesn't raise yourself. It is too bad you cannot develope an argument.
:rotfl2:

[Zachstar]

Another Bigot post from you Skybird. Had a read of his book again? Does it not get old after the thousandth time? Prison written books arent that good ya know.

[Skybird]

Fixed that up for you. :yep:

For "me"? Why? It is not my words you quote. Anyhow, the man speaks about Islam. That's what the interview is about. So that he mentiones Islam, is no surprise. Nor does Islam become any better by yoiur attempt to relativise it in regard to other ideologies. Some are better, some are worse. Some were bad and became better, some stay as bad as they always have been.

Distraction tactics of yours.

[Skybird]

Another Bigot post from you Skybird. Had a read of his book again? Does it not get old after the thousandth time? Prison written books arent that good ya know.
Another quality rant by you - revealing that you do not even know what you are about. The new book by him to which he refers, I have not read at all, and he has not written it or any of the former ones in prison. Just another unfair attempt by you to defame somebody who knows the matter better than you in order to make his more competent message unheared by the crowd. Bigottery, anyone?

Incredible. The author represents the best in what the West always wants to see and refers to as moderate Islam - but since the author does not say what the PC guys have allowed to be said and want to hear, he gets defamed as somebody suspicious who has bread his thoughts "in prison".

Let'S see how you undercut your already low standards the next time you show up.

[Tribesman]

Another quality rant by you - revealing that you do not even know what you are about. The new book by him to which he refers, I have not read at all, and he has not written it or any of the former ones in prison. Just another unfair attempt by you to defame somebody who knows the matter better than you in order to make his more competent message unheared by the crowd. Bigottery, anyone?

And there was me thinking that "his book" was once again "my struggle"which Sky takes his views from.

[Zachstar]

Another quality rant by you - revealing that you do not even know what you are about. The new book by him to which he refers, I have not read at all, and he has not written it or any of the former ones in prison. Just another unfair attempt by you to defame somebody who knows the matter better than you in order to make his more competent message unheared by the crowd. Bigottery, anyone?

Incredible. The author represents the best in what the West always wants to see and refers to as moderate Islam - but since the author does not say what the PC guys have allowed to be said and want to hear, he gets defamed as somebody suspicious who has bread his thoughts "in prison".

Let'S see how you undercut your already low standards the next time you show up.

You know DARN well I was not talking about his book. If you cant connect "Wrote in Prison" and "Bigot" And then where you claim you are from... Ya then you just don't get it. Clue: Worst Bigot in history.

[Zachstar]

And there was me thinking that "his book" was once again "my struggle"which Sky takes his views from.

Got it before the man who ought to know his history did... Hah

[Skybird]

Ah, that is what you mean. Now I get it. You might be surprised but not for everybody it is that obvious a link at all when somebody refers to a moderate Muslim criticising Islam, and for that in return gets compared to Nazism.

Well, calling somebody a Nazi when he criticises Islam, tells more about your own damaged thinking, than about Abdel-Samad's, or mine. But that additional self-displaying of yours was not really needed anymore to illustrate who you are.

[Skybird]

Yep, that's militant Islam for you.
In the first that is what Muhammad's Islam is - during his life already he acted like this, although the final version of the one and only standard Quran still took some time to be formed up after his death.

[XabbaRus]

OK, it seems at the moment every second thread you start is about berating Islam.

We understand you don't like Islam. Everyone is clear on that. However in the opinion of a moderator it is almost approaching spam llike levels. Like a certain member no longer with us who spammed his anti Obama rhetoric.

Therefore I am requesting that you refrain from posting more critiques of Islam in separate threads, please lump all into one thread, I can even help my merging the disparate threads.

regards.

[Diopos]

"Islam is like a drug"

Uhmm ... I was always under the impression that "Love Is A Drug" ...:hmmm:

:DL

.

[krashkart]

"Islam is like a drug"

Uhmm ... I was always under the impression that "Love Is A Drug" ...:hmmm:

:DL

.


I heard somewhere that video gaming is addictive. Psshaw right! Hang on, gotta take care of something in Farmville... *clicky clicky* http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/picture.php?albumid=258&pictureid=2286


UPDATE - Aw this sucks. I got my ass kicked in Mob Wars again. :( OTOH my strawberries are doing quite well. =D

[Gerald]

"Love Is A Drug" ...:hmmm:

:DL

[/QUOTE] :DL

[AngusJS]

Islam is like a drug...but what was even more like a drug were the drugs.

[Takeda Shingen]

...but what was even more like a drug were the drugs.

Homer Simpson :up:

[Zachstar]

Ah, that is what you mean. Now I get it. You might be surprised but not for everybody it is that obvious a link at all when somebody refers to a moderate Muslim criticising Islam, and for that in return gets compared to Nazism.

Well, calling somebody a Nazi when he criticises Islam, tells more about your own damaged thinking, than about Abdel-Samad's, or mine. But that additional self-displaying of yours was not really needed anymore to illustrate who you are.

Maybe because in the years before WW2 many groups were using similar tactics to attack the Jews. It seems moderate before the death camps.

So yes if you feel such way about Islam I am equally able to say you read Hitler's book before breakfast.

[Happy Times]

Maybe because in the years before WW2 many groups were using similar tactics to attack the Jews. It seems moderate before the death camps.

So yes if you feel such way about Islam I am equally able to say you read Hitler's book before breakfast.

How can you people be so skewed?:damn::damn::damn::damn::damn:

It is Islam that compares to NS as an ideology.

National Socialism and Anti-Semitism in the Arab World
http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-kuntzel-s05.htm

[CCIP]

...even assuming that the institution of Islam is as bad as you make it out to be, and your solution to it is not "final", then what? If this doesn't resemble the logic behind the Holocaust (although I think in some regard it does), then it certainly resembles the logic behind the internment of ethnic Japanese in Allied countries during WWII. Or the ethnic Ukrainians during WWI. Or Soviet deportations of various ethnic groups under Stalin.

But those were necessary to combat threats too, right?

[Zachstar]

How can you people be so skewed?:damn::damn::damn::damn::damn:

It is Islam that compares to NS as an ideology.

National Socialism and Anti-Semitism in the Arab World
http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-kuntzel-s05.htm

A muslim group paid to build religious buildings for the Jewish faith to build peace and understanding. So as long as ANYONE treats subsim to a almost daily barrage of Anti-Islam bigotry. I will consider them to be active readers of "My Struggle" Hell I will fully admit I thought of that one because I know he is from Germany. Why not? He paints an entire class of people as something they are not. Perhaps a little taste of his own bullcrap will help him understand.

[Skybird]

Maybe because in the years before WW2 many groups were using similar tactics to attack the Jews. It seems moderate before the death camps.

Read a better history book, if this really is your conclusion.

So yes if you feel such way about Islam I am equally able to say you read Hitler's book before breakfast.

This is no game of keeping a balance between two statements on a one-to-one basis. If one thing gets crtiicised for being bad, saying so does not automatically mean it is bad in itself a statement, too, just to establish an imaginery balance again. You argue on a basis of an eye for an eye, it seems.

1. Islam is deeply antisemitic itself. It always was, and still is. That goes back to the time when Muhammad was shown his intellectual limits by Jewish scholars in dabte - a deeply narcissistic offence to his ego. He reacted not by getting better education, but launching two wars and committing genocide.

2. The Jews in the third Reich were victims of crime. Muhammeddans are not. Precisely, they are the most dominant subgroup in the vast majority of categoeires of violent crime, massively overrepresented both compared to the local native population in European countries, and other migrant groups.

3. The hate o Jews in the Nazi era was based on arranged claims and forged evidence, it was based on irrationality and hysteric fear. Islam-criticism is based on empirically proven facts and Islam'S very own claims, demands and scripture. It is rational.

4. Antisemitism is a sociological and cultural phenomenen, and is more than 2000 years old. Islamophobia is a propaganda term introduced by the Saudis, Khomenei and the PC bridgade in the West. It is just 30 years old.

5. Islam in the West enjoys more freedoms and rights - and makes excessive use of them - than it does ion any Muslim country. If they all feel so supressed and discriminated, I wonder why the hell they are here.

6. The situation of Christian and Jewish and other minorities in Muslim countries does not compare. They are the object of systemtic discrimination and oppression everywhere, sometimes more, sometimes less. Their communtieites have been constantly reduced or driven out since over 1000 years. Everywhere. Rare exceptions from the rule every couple of months, do not change the rule, nor does this reverse the historic trend.

In general you can compare everything with everything. Bikinis with Burkhas. Facism with Liberalism, holocaust with Islam-criticism. It makes sense, like a German author has written some month ago, in the same way like it makes sense to compore a hippo with a human: both eat, both sleep, both multiply in a heterosexual manner. You can think that way, if you want, it is your right. And it is my right to not take you serious.

Killing heretics. Killing "offenders". Enslaving women. Executioning by stoning. Prostitution by 24 hours-marriages. Racism against all infidels, especially Jews. Totalitarian social control. Supremacism and the rrsulting arrogant and haughty attitude towards others. Total intolerance against other cultures, and the demand for their subjugation and final destruction. Protection money. Legalising lie and deception to drive Islam'S cause. Terrorism, and the ideologic justification through the Quran. Msrdering homosexuals. Limb-amputation for even minor crimes which may even have been committed by despair: hunger, for example. Honour killings in families. Patriarchalic terror inside families, and the psychological crippling of the following generation. Inferiority complexes combining with unlimited narcissism, producing a very instable, self-igniting psychological mixture. Sexual inheritance. Dealing with female victims of family crimes and rape as if they are the perpetrators. Superstitious anti-intellectualism and the total lack of ability for critical self-reflection. Fatalkism motivated by superstition, resulting in lacking compassion for the fate of others (and thus lacking efforts to come to others help - floodings in Pakistan being the latest example). Intensive missionsing in the West, land-taking, and increaisnginly influencing education and legislation. - The problem is not to criticise all this, it is not irrational to do so, it is not phobic, but it is very rational, very healthy and reasonable, it is self-defenmce in favour of freedom and liberty and our own cultural identities, it is based on proven empirical facts en masse, on scripture, and the thinking of hundreds of millions of Muslims worldwide. Some poeple try to always distract by pointing out how diverse Islam is. But politically, the whole global Ummah speaks with one voice, aims at the same direction, reaches for the same goals. This is what I mean when saying there is only one Islam. Islam is not just any religion like Christianity and Judaism: it is politics and conquest more than it ever was the case with the church in the West during the reign of the church. The problem is not to criticise all this, but the problem we have is the object of this criticism. You can try to ignore it and make it disappear by endlessly relativising it and stressing the most absurd comparisons (which only illustrate your own irrationality), but this will not make them go away, but leaves them only the time to grow stronger and stronger.


Was den Islam von anderen Religionen unterscheidet

Der Islam hingegen wird als Religion dargestellt, wobei der westliche Religionsbegriff willkürlich übertragen wird auf den Islam, ohne die elementaren Unterschiede des Islam im Vergleich zu anderen Religionen auch nur ansatzweise zu berücksichtigen. Diese sind der politische Herrschaftsanspruch, die hierzu gehörende Rechtssprechung, die in einzigartiger Weise Religion und Justiz verschmolzen hat, sowie das zentrale Vorbild für die islamische Gesellschaft in Form des Propheten Mohammed. Dieser war kein pazifistisch-religiöser Verkünder wie Jesus oder Buddha, sondern Regent eines Staates, der Angriffskriege führte, Karawanen ausrauben ließ, Attentate an Kritikern in Auftrag gab, Sklaven hielt und als Richter fungierte.

[Skybird]

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Jesus-Muhammad.htm

[Biggles]

The point of this thread is....?:yawn:

[Rilder]

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Jesus-Muhammad.htm


Ah yes the "Muslims have to follow every word of their holy book while Christians only have to follow parts of their book that they agree with" Crowd.

Love thy neighbor, I bet you could twist that around to "Kill all your non-christian neighbors then love thy new neighbors that are christian"

[krashkart]

The point of this thread is....?:yawn:

At the pointy end. hee hee hee :D

[Stealth Hunter]

In the first that is what Muhammad's Islam is - during his life already he acted like this,

I don't recall the part where he launched military campaigns on non-Muslims precisely because they were not Muslims. I do recall him invading Mecca because of his pissyness over the Treaty of Hudabiyyah and later Arabia after the confederate tribes mobilized an army larger than his own and prepared to invade him in turn out of their anti-Meccan politics.

although the final version of the one and only standard Quran still took some time to be formed up after his death.

A bit like the Bible and Torah, which the Qur'an borrows heavily from.:yep: The final versions were not completed until years later and after undergoing many revisions.

Ah yes the "Muslims have to follow every word of their holy book while Christians only have to follow parts of their book that they agree with" Crowd.

Love thy neighbor, I bet you could twist that around to "Kill all your non-christian neighbors then love thy new neighbors that are christian"

"Could"? Plenty have- Christian sect against Christian sect, Christianity against non-Christian religions. If not witches and Jews in Spain (more recently, Christians have taken after witches in Africa and Asia), Jews in Germany following the Black Plague, Protestant Christians (Huguenots) in France, and Muslims in the various Crusader Wars of the Middle East... and more Jews there in the latter as well.

[Happy Times]

...even assuming that the institution of Islam is as bad as you make it out to be, and your solution to it is not "final", then what? If this doesn't resemble the logic behind the Holocaust (although I think in some regard it does), then it certainly resembles the logic behind the internment of ethnic Japanese in Allied countries during WWII. Or the ethnic Ukrainians during WWI. Or Soviet deportations of various ethnic groups under Stalin.

But those were necessary to combat threats too, right?

Enforce our secular societies and rule of law without hesitation and abandon multiculturalism as an ideology, demanding full integration to our core values.

Present our objections and criticism openly and with vigor to muslim communities and nations about any possible issues.

Demand muslim nations that support and endorce terrorism to cease or be open to retaliatory measures ranging from economic to military actions, saudi arabia should be on top of that list.

We can start discussing about the exact policies when we get past the debate should something even change in our outlook.

[Stealth Hunter]

Enforce our secular societies and rule of law without hesitation and abandon multiculturalism as an ideology, demanding full integration to our core values.

Present our objections and criticism openly and with vigor to muslim communities and nations about any possible issues.

Demand muslim nations that support and endorce terrorism to cease or be open to retaliatory measures ranging from economic to military actions, saudi arabia should be on top of that list.

We can start discussing about the exact policies when we get past the debate should something even change in our outlook.

Have fun starting World War III.:up:

[Happy Times]

Have fun starting World War III.:up:


We are perfectly in our rights to do this, if that leads to WW3 then it clearly is something we just have to fight then.

If someone perceives use of only diplomacy and dialog as a sign of weakness, then it just wont work, any escalation of a conflict is then of their own doing.

[Platapus]

http://charliesgames123.webs.com/photos/Album-1/i%20like%20where%20this%20thread%20is%20going.jpg

That is one STEEP street. :o:o

I wonder where that is?

[Platapus]

The point of this thread is....?:yawn:

Skybird does not like "them Mooslims". Because you know how they all are. :yep:

[Takeda Shingen]

http://charliesgames123.webs.com/photos/Album-1/i%20like%20where%20this%20thread%20is%20going.jpg

That is one STEEP street. :o:o

I wonder where that is?

I think that it might be San Fransisco.

[Biggles]

We are perfectly in our rights to do this, if that leads to WW3 then it clearly is something we just have to fight then.

Who gave you those rights? Just curious.:hmmm:

[Happy Times]

Who gave you those rights? Just curious.:hmmm:

Twisting a little are we?
Well who gave you the right to ruin our civilisation and future just to feel warm and fluffy from inside and because you dont think anything is worth fighting for?

[Biggles]

Twisting a little are we?
Well who gave you the right to ruin our civilisation and future just to feel warm and fluffy from inside and because you dont think anything is worth fighting for?

I uh........



WHAT!?!??!

[Skybird]

I don't recall the part where he launched military campaigns on non-Muslims precisely because they were not Muslims.




The Timeline
630 Two years before Muhammad's death of a fever, he launches the Tabuk Crusades, in which he led 30,000 jihadists against the Byzantine Christians. He had heard a report that a huge army had amassed to attack Arabia, but the report turned out to be a false rumor. The Byzantine army never materialized. He turned around and went home, but not before extracting 'agreements' from northern tribes. They could enjoy the 'privilege' of living under Islamic 'protection' (read: not be attacked by Islam), if they paid a tax (jizya).
This tax sets the stage for Muhammad's and the later Caliphs' policies. If the attacked city or region did not want to convert to Islam, then they paid a jizya tax. If they converted, then they paid a zakat tax. Either way, money flowed back to the Islamic treasury in Arabia or to the local Muslim governor.
632—634 Under the Caliphate of Abu Bakr the Muslim Crusaders reconquer and sometimes conquer for the first time the polytheists of Arabia. These Arab polytheists had to convert to Islam or die. They did not have the choice of remaining in their faith and paying a tax. Islam does not allow for religious freedom.
633 The Muslim Crusaders, led by Khalid al—Walid, a superior but bloodthirsty military commander, whom Muhammad nicknamed the Sword of Allah for his ferocity in battle (Tabari, 8:158 / 1616—17), conquer the city of Ullays along the Euphrates River (in today's Iraq). Khalid captures and beheads so many that a nearby canal, into which the blood flowed, was called Blood Canal (Tabari 11:24 / 2034—35).
634 At the Battle of Yarmuk in Syria the Muslim Crusaders defeat the Byzantines. Today Osama bin Laden draws inspiration from the defeat, and especially from an anecdote about Khalid al—Walid. An unnamed Muslim remarks: 'The Romans are so numerous and the Muslims so few.' To this Khalid retorts: 'How few are the Romans, and how many the Muslims! Armies become numerous only with victory and few only with defeat, not by the number of men. By God, I would love it . . . if the enemy were twice as many' (Tabari, 11:94 / 2095). Osama bin Ladin quotes (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/low/middle_east/2751019.stm) Khalid and says that his fighters love death more than we in the West love life. This philosophy of death probably comes from a verse like Sura 2:96. Muhammad assesses the Jews: '[Prophet], you are sure to find them [the Jews] clinging to life more eagerly than any other people, even polytheists' (MAS Abdel Haleem, The Qur'an, Oxford UP, 2004; first insertion in brackets is Haleem's; the second mine).
634—644 The Caliphate of Umar ibn al—Khattab, who is regarded as particularly brutal.
635 Muslim Crusaders besiege and conquer of Damascus
636 Muslim Crusaders defeat Byzantines decisively at Battle of Yarmuk.
637 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iraq at the Battle of al—Qadisiyyah (some date it in 635 or 636)
638 Muslim Crusaders conquer and annex Jerusalem, taking it from the Byzantines.
638—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Iran, except along Caspian Sea.
639—642 Muslim Crusaders conquer Egypt.
641 Muslim Crusaders control Syria and Palestine.
643—707 Muslim Crusaders conquer North Africa.
644 Caliph Umar is assassinated by a Persian prisoner of war; Uthman ibn Affan is elected third Caliph, who is regarded by many Muslims as gentler than Umar.
644—650 Muslim Crusaders conquer Cyprus, Tripoli in North Africa, and establish Islamic rule in Iran, Afghanistan, and Sind.
656 Caliph Uthman is assassinated by disgruntled Muslim soldiers; Ali ibn Abi Talib, son—in—law and cousin to Muhammad, who married the prophet's daughter Fatima through his first wife Khadija, is set up as Caliph.
656 Battle of the Camel, in which Aisha, Muhammad's wife, leads a rebellion against Ali for not avenging Uthman's assassination. Ali's partisans win.
657 Battle of Siffin between Ali and Muslim governor of Jerusalem, arbitration goes against Ali
661 Murder of Ali by an extremist; Ali's supporters acclaim his son Hasan as next Caliph, but he comes to an agreement with Muawiyyah I and retires to Medina.
661—680 the Caliphate of Muawiyyah I. He founds Umayyid dynasty and moves capital from Medina to Damascus
673—678 Arabs besiege Constantinople, capital of Byzantine Empire
680 Massacre of Hussein (Muhammad's grandson), his family, and his supporters in Karbala, Iraq.
691 Dome of the Rock is completed in Jerusalem, only six decades after Muhammad's death.
705 Abd al—Malik restores Umayyad rule.
710—713 Muslim Crusaders conquer the lower Indus Valley.
711—713 Muslim Crusaders conquer Spain and impose the kingdom of Andalus. This article (http://memri.org/bin/articles.cgi?Page=archives&Area=sd&ID=SP87305) recounts how Muslims today still grieve over their expulsion 700 years later. They seem to believe that the land belonged to them in the first place.
719 Cordova, Spain, becomes seat of Arab governor
732 The Muslim Crusaders stopped at the Battle of Poitiers; that is, Franks (France) halt Arab advance
749 The Abbasids conquer Kufah and overthrow Umayyids
756 Foundation of Umayyid amirate in Cordova, Spain, setting up an independent kingdom from Abbasids
762 Foundation of Baghdad
785 Foundation of the Great Mosque of Cordova
789 Rise of Idrisid amirs (Muslim Crusaders) in Morocco; foundation of Fez; Christoforos, a Muslim who converted to Christianity, is executed.
800 Autonomous Aghlabid dynasty (Muslim Crusaders) in Tunisia
807 Caliph Harun al—Rashid orders the destruction of non—Muslim prayer houses and of the church of Mary Magdalene in Jerusalem
809 Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sardinia, Italy
813 Christians in Palestine are attacked; many flee the country
831 Muslim Crusaders capture Palermo, Italy; raids in Southern Italy
850 Caliph al—Matawakkil orders the destruction of non—Muslim houses of prayer
855 Revolt of the Christians of Hims (Syria)
837—901 Aghlabids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Sicily, raid Corsica, Italy, France
869—883 Revolt of black slaves in Iraq
909 Rise of the Fatimid Caliphate in Tunisia; these Muslim Crusaders occupy Sicily, Sardinia
928—969 Byzantine military revival, they retake old territories, such as Cyprus (964) and Tarsus (969)
937 The Ikhshid, a particularly harsh Muslim ruler, writes to Emperor Romanus, boasting of his control over the holy places
937 The Church of the Resurrection (known as Church of Holy Sepulcher in Latin West) is burned down by Muslims; more churches in Jerusalem are attacked
960 Conversion of Qarakhanid Turks to Islam
966 Anti—Christian riots in Jerusalem
969 Fatimids (Muslim Crusaders) conquer Egypt and found Cairo
c. 970 Seljuks enter conquered Islamic territories from the East
973 Israel and southern Syria are again conquered by the Fatimids
1003 First persecutions by al—Hakim; the Church of St. Mark in Fustat, Egypt, is destroyed
1009 Destruction of the Church of the Resurrection by al—Hakim (see 937)
1012 Beginning of al—Hakim's oppressive decrees against Jews and Christians
1015 Earthquake in Palestine; the dome of the Dome of the Rock collapses
1031 Collapse of Umayyid Caliphate and establishment of 15 minor independent dynasties throughout Muslim Andalus
1048 Reconstruction of the Church of the Resurrection completed
1050 Creation of Almoravid (Muslim Crusaders) movement in Mauretania; Almoravids (aka Murabitun) are coalition of western Saharan Berbers; followers of Islam, focusing on the Quran, the hadith, and Maliki law.
1055 Seljuk Prince Tughrul enters Baghdad, consolidation of the Seljuk Sultanate
1055 Confiscation of property of Church of the Resurrection
1071 Battle of Manzikert, Seljuk Turks (Muslim Crusaders) defeat Byzantines and occupy much of Anatolia
1071 Turks (Muslim Crusaders) invade Palestine
1073 Conquest of Jerusalem by Turks (Muslim Crusaders)
1075 Seljuks (Muslim Crusaders) capture Nicea (Iznik) and make it their capital in Anatolia
1076 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) conquer western Ghana
1085 Toledo is taken back by Christian armies
1086 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) (see 1050) send help to Andalus, Battle of Zallaca
1090—1091 Almoravids (Muslim Crusaders) occupy all of Andalus except Saragossa and Balearic Islands
1094 Byzantine emperor Alexius Comnenus I asks western Christendom for help against Seljuk invasions of his territory; Seljuks are Muslim Turkish family of eastern origins; see 970
1095 Pope Urban II preaches first Crusade; they capture Jerusalem in 1099
[/quote]
from: http://www.americanthinker.com/2005/11/the_truth_about_islamic_crusad.html

I also want to remind you that Muhammad in the last decade of his life has orderd and led roughly 70 predatory raids and wars and punishing expeditions against other tribes that had not already converted to Muhammad's ideology and claim for power, or who threatened or were in danger to become apostates again, refusing to pay the protection money and to follow Muhammad. Muhammad's late life also already saw direct clashes with troops of the Bycantine empire - and it was not the Bycantines invading the Arabab peninsula, but Muhammed's "movement" reaching out at all directions.

Edit:
I realise that this just has been mentioned again in the Timeline above, first date mentioned: 630.

[Skybird]

http://grendelreport.posterous.com/media-hype-anti-muslim-hate-crimes-are-increa


(...)Since 2001, hate crimes against Muslims have decreased significantly, according to FBI statistics. After 2002, hate crimes against Muslims have not risen above 13 percent of all anti-religious crimes, and the most recent data from 2008 calculates them at 7.8 percent.

Despite this evidence to the contrary, each year has brought claims by prominent Muslim leaders that anti-Islamic hate crimes are actually growing – with the allegations usually coming right after a terrorist attack or at a time when Muslim leaders are lobbying on political issues.
(...)
The statistics reflect a disconnect between the assertions of increased Islamic hate crimes and reality. Nine years after the Sept. 11 attacks, activists and the media are using allegations of anti-Muslim prejudice to distract from problematic community issues like Islamic terrorism.


On the other hand:


Monthly Jihad Report

August, 2010

Jihad Attacks: 196

Countries: 23

Religions: 5

Dead Bodies: 811

Critically Injured: 1602


Number of deadly Islamic terror attacks since 9/11 2001: 16067

[Gerald]

Could not they be here a bit longer lines, :hmmm:

[Stealth Hunter]

630[/U] Two years before Muhammad's death of a fever, he launches the Tabuk Crusades, in which he led 30,000 jihadists against the Byzantine Christians. He had heard a report that a huge army had amassed to attack Arabia, but the report turned out to be a false rumor. The Byzantine army never materialized. He turned around and went home, but not before extracting 'agreements' from northern tribes. They could enjoy the 'privilege' of living under Islamic 'protection' (read: not be attacked by Islam), if they paid a tax (jizya).
This tax sets the stage for Muhammad's and the later Caliphs' policies. If the attacked city or region did not want to convert to Islam, then they paid a jizya tax. If they converted, then they paid a zakat tax. Either way, money flowed back to the Islamic treasury in Arabia or to the local Muslim governor.

So I was correct... Muhammad never launched any military campaigns on non-Muslims precisely because they were not Muslims. The brief affair known as the Tabuk "Crusades" amounted to the Byzantines and Arabic peoples threatening one another with imposed warning acts hinting to possible future hostilities- such fighting never materializing under Muhammad, of course. Yuhanna Ru’ba, governor of Aylah, called upon Muhammad at Tabuk, and he made a treaty of peace with the proclaimed prophet, paying the Jizyah tributary funds for the commotion caused. So did the people of Jarba and Adhruh, and they were all granted peace under Muhammad as well as guaranteed safety of their territory and their ships and caravans by land and sea transversing the Arabic peninsula which Muhammad had since taken from the hostile confederate tribes. The treaties were written by Muhammad and Yuhanna, and they were delivered to the respective parties. Yuhanna was received by Muhammad for his contributions cordially and was given due respect.

The armies never met and fought each other.

There was no major talk of these events between the Byzantines. Muhammad saw that there was no movement of troops by the enemy who seemed to have abandoned the border towns, and so he gave orders for his army of 40,000 men (30,000 infantry supported with 10,000 cavalry) to march home. Only a Christian tribal chief, Ukaydir Abdul Malik, who was the ruler of Dumatul Jandal and enjoyed the patronage of the Byzantines, was reported to be harboring hostile designs against Muhammad due to anti-Meccan sentiments. Muhammad sent a confidant, Khalid, with 500 troops to captured Ukaydir so that he might be brought to Muhammad to explain his actions. Muhammad spared Ukaydir's life on the condition that he surrender unconditionally and would pay the Jizyah for his hostility.

In consequence of all these events, many tribes of the region agreed openly to join Muhammad- abandoning the Byzantines and consequently enlarging the existing Islamic state. The rest of what you have posted there has no relevance whatsoever to Muhammad's life, nor the supposed militaristic action you imply he carried out on the "nonbelievers".

I also want to remind you that Muhammad in the last decade of his life has orderd and led roughly 70 predatory raids and wars and punishing expeditions against other tribes that had not already converted to Muhammad's ideology and claim for power, or who threatened or were in danger to become apostates again, refusing to pay the protection money and to follow Muhammad.

The raids you speak of were over trade goods and resources. This is nothing new or uncommon to the old nomadic Arab tribes of the region- simply because so many vital assets like food and water are scarce there and always have been. Actually, it's because of these raids over these resources that Muhammad came to own Medina (and later Mecca), for at Badr, almost all the Quraysh leaders had been killed or had disappeared into the desert and were never seen again (this same clan owned Mecca). Similarly, this was done with at Banu Qaynuqa, which was one of the most powerful strongholds for goods in the region, Thi Amr, Bahran, Uhud, al-Asad, Banu Nadir, and Nakhla. The Battle of the Trench was a siege the aforementioned confederate tribes launched at Medina- which ended in a great victory for the Muslims there. The few other battles Muhammad fought in or presided over were between the remnants of the Quraysh, Bedouins, Jewish nomadic tribes (Khaybar), and remaining Arabic confederate tribes (as was the case with Ta'if and Autas) in the region who were never friendly towards the Meccans- let alone Muhammad who owned the city.

The claim that there were a total of 70 raids and wars he led is a remarkably unfounded one- let alone that he led them solely based upon the issue of religion.

Muhammad's late life also already saw direct clashes with troops of the Bycantine empire -

There were no "direct clashes" as you put it between Muhammad's forces and the Byzantine Empire in his lifetime. The closest the two sides ever came to fighting was at Tabuk. It's called a crusade, yet it involved forces that were hardly suited for the times for a single battle and nobody died in it. The first time Arabs and Byzantines fought one another was in 674 AD, not over religion- but over weapons and food trade routes. The families in the region rejected the notion that Byzantine caravans should be allowed to pass through without having to pay taxes. The first actual war between Muslims and the Byzantines came in 820 following Michael II's rejection of the Abbasid Caliphate's border settlement plans over the Anatolian Peninsula.

and it was not the Bycantines invading the Arabab peninsula, but Muhammed's "movement" reaching out at all directions.

It's kind of hard for a 188-year-old corpse to launch... well, anything, really, let alone a war. You've evidently forgotten, too, that the Byzantines did not become such a well-known empire in history because of their usage of peaceful methods. They conquered and killed for land like everybody else did.

http://i52.tinypic.com/2dazukl.jpg

They were pushing into the Arabian peninsula and had been doing so since Justinian's time, indeed continuing throughout the remainder of the 6th century. Not only had they done it to the Arabs, but they were also doing it in Africa and Europe.

[Skybird]

When you accept to simply ignore the fact that Muhammad intimidated or pushed by force his rulership over Arab tribessince he fled from Mekka and arrived in Medina, and when you ignore that he repeatedly attacked Jewish tribes and tried to kill them, and when you ignore that in the past years of his life he sent his troops - and mostly commanded himself - on around 70 occasions against Arabb and toher triobes that fell off his cult and claim for power, or threatened to do so, when you simply ignore all this and say it is not true, then communciations become smeaningless. It is true - there is not a single book on Islam I ever read where it is not told like this. You can be picky and say that soemtimes his approaching war band already was enough a threat to bring the rebllious tribe back into line, okay - but to me the thread of force and the actual using of force in this context makes not much a difference.

Islam has conquered by force territories that were not it'S own, and where it was not present orignally. Bycantine empire at that time was engaged in a long series of wars that came in the wake of the splitting of Rome, especially with the Sassanides from Persia, and at the time of Muhammad, Konstantinopel already was deadlocked and paralysed with an inefficient bureaucratic administration, and resulting inner tensions and powerstruggles that seriously hampered it'S ability to project military influence over all of the former Roman empire'S territory in the East - that is the reason why the not much loved rule of the Bycantinians in North africa was relatively easy to be broken up by Islam in a series of combinations of conquests and intimidations and briberies. Before, the Rabas had traded with both the Sassanides and the Bycantinians, and much of the wealth of the Quraysh that let them come to great influence and power and destabilised the social system of the tribal societies of the Arabs, was due to their profiteering from trading the Persians against the Eastromans.

Islam already moved aggressively against others to subjugate them when Muhammad still was alive - and that subjugation was because the others were not submitting to Islam/Muhammad. And that qulifies very well as aggression because of "the other not being Muslim". Who do you want to kidd here when saying Muhammad never attacked others for not being Muslim? Islam is designed on the basis of aggressive missionising, from beginning on. Muhammad, using "religion" as a tool to justify his claims for power and to make himself unavailable for any criticism without the critic risking assassination over claimed "heresy" and "offence" (it still runs like this today), missionised and subjigated by threteaning violence or using violence all the time, and for the rest of his life after he arrived in Medina.

So do not tell me he did not do like this. He did. And still today, Islam does like this, basing on the explanation that there are two houses, one of war and pone of peace, and there cannot be peace as long as there is the house of war, and thus the house of war must be overthrown.

You are denying one of the essential very basics, Stealth Hunter. I also want to remind you of Muhammad'S explicit attacks against the three Jewish tribes at Medina, and the effective genocides against one of them. For the standards of that time, wiping out all males of that tribe, estimations range between 700 and 900, and leading all girls and women into sexual slavery, by both deeds effectively ending the cultural tradition of that tribe, qualifies for what in the present we understand as "genoicde" according to the UN anti genocide convention.

On the individual level, Muhammad repeatedly ordered the assassination of critics, as well as unwanted characters that learned too much about his "spiritual link" towards Allah and that it was not any spiritual or holy or divine at all, but fiction.

Finally, Islam is deeply anti-semitic and hateful towards Jews, from beginning on.

Muhammad not acting against and attacking others for not being on his side, or not being Muhammeddan (=Muhammad'S loyal followers)...? Don't fool yourself.

BTW, you mentioned the jizyah in a context that gave me the impression you wanted to say that it was just a standard deal according to the diplomatic rules of that time, common habit so to speak. But the jizyah is to be payed by everybody not submitting to Islam, it is not just a singular action like in the case you described it. It is meant to be so humiliating and hurting that the other finally agrees to convert in order to escape it. It serves the same purpose as the mandatory discrimination of so-called dhimmis. - If the other converts, he has still to pay, the zakat, which is a moral-religious obligation that all Muslims have to serve as long as their wealth is in excess of the nisab, a financial threshold meaning that if you have less than the nisab, you are freed from the duty for zakat. But different to the jizyah, which is nothing else but protection money, the zakat indeed is an internal regular payment of Muslims to their communities, it could be seen as a social wellfare tax, but it could also support jihad, since a separation of political and religious orientation in Islam does not exist. - Muhammad accepted moving Beduins which were hard to control, to not submit formally to Islam and his claim for power, as long as they payed the jizyah. So when he demanded the Bycantine representative to pay jizyah, he demanded nothing less than acceptance of a state of inferiority and submission, kind of, to Muhammad's claims. Today, time and again clerics and sometimes even politicians in Muslim countries demand that Western nations should pay jizyah to them. Many things given to them and done for them are taken for granted and as if they are natural, because the sdame attitude of mind tells them that it is their right to demand the West always giving to them anyway. In Germany, even the Greens seem to raise demands now that German citizens shall pay an additional "solidarity money" (the second of this type, the first was meant for fiannciang the revuilkding of the East after reujnification), as it is called here, which should be used on boosting Islam in Germany and raise more Islamic institutions like mosques and culture centres that are hoped "to help integration".

A lack of such imjstitutions is hardly the problem with integrating Muslims. That there already are so very many such institutions and according communities, is likely the reason why integration failed.

[Tribesman]

Oh you mean the Lockheed stimulus package?

So Skybird got caught making stuff up again on his favourite subject where he is the "expert".:yeah: