Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
That's right. Irrespective of what the constitution of the United States might say, the overall impact how the collection of people who call themselves Americans comport themselves in relation to the rest of the world is what the United States actually is in the practical sense.
Those who clearly contravene the constitution of the United States is no less American, and America is no less responsible for their actions.
I'm beginning to get a sense of the idiocy Muslims' harbour. Like our secular governments being cults - what a fucking joke! And then there were some outright untruths regarding saudi practices not aligning with Islam - news flash! saudi practices are specifically aligned with Islam. Maybe you are the uninformed Muslim trying to be the sort of apologist so desperately needed... hmm?
Cult of the Muhammadenians (enjoy).
Cult of the Muhammadenians
Angola, a nation of South Africa, has officially outlawed Islam as a cult. It is the first in our history to take such an honest stand against the tyranny of Muslims who through their only source of conviction emulate the “perfect example”, that of Muhammad the prophet – an immoral deceitful war criminal who took to violent extremes in order to convert others to his following or otherwise demoralize those people who refused to accept his account of Allah's message; Basically, you had to convert or be killed, or in times of abject humiliation, non-Muslims' would be dehumanized in their home towns, made to wear identifying clothing or marks to distinguish them from Muslims and forced to pay a daily extortion tax to avoid the wrath of Muslims. This tax, the jizya, would vary in amount, was usually a considerable sum of money, and could be revoked on whim – meaning that the only option left for one who wanted to continue living – is to join Islam… The current media tells us that this isn't happening anymore however the truth has never been further from the reach of uninformed citizen. We have to be vigilant in our search for the truth. Our future existence depends on it!
The “religion of peace” is a false dictum and I'll explain why. The first directive given to the newcomer, or “revert” as Muhammad stipulates, is to read the Qur'an. Muhammad is an accepting and tolerant person albeit a kook but accepted for who he is nonetheless, however, after he established a following his oppressive nature increased accordingly and he became intolerant and eventually violently bigoted toward the people who had taken him into their city, Yathrib. Once over thrown the city was renamed Medina and deemed a holy city of Islam. Now this is relevant to us today as Muslim asylum seekers, immigrants, and illegal immigrants take it upon themselves to “reclaim” all the land in the world (as they're of the belief that all the lands of the Earth belong to Islam), and through there sheer numbers are using our democratic society to establish Islam in non-Islamic countries. The first such request is for mosque(s), as was Muhammad's first undertaking in Medina, ahead of his own homestead. From within the mosque a leader of the cult of Islam directs Muslims' on their duties in the political, social, economical, and general conduct as expected of them for the undermining of our fundamentally Judeo-Christian societal culture. The contradiction between Muhammad's message of peace and the messages of war which follow have more recently been addressed by Islamic scholars who established a rule of negation meaning that (where there is contradiction within the Qur'an) the newer statement takes precedence over the previous one. In light of the progressively violent nature of Islam, it's worth mentioning, the interested person is likely to become Muslim before understanding the true nature of Islam, and may himself propagate the peaceful nature of Islam himself. Another excellent reason why Islam has been protected from – as such – public criticism of its inherently violent nature has to do with a peculiar frame of reference unique to Islamic Muslim train of thought. The first and most significant of these is 'Logic of Dualism'. While contemporary understanding as adopted among the rest of the world's populace employ the 'Logic of Contradiction' (meaning that two contradictory statements cannot both be true), those utilizing a logic of dualism are unable to make such critical evaluations based on logical reasoning in this way. In our most formidable approach toward critical analysis of contradictory evidence within the Qur'an (as far as directly opposing Muslim argument) the statistical analysis is employed to determine for instance the percentage of truth applicable between the contradictory statements. Islam is 3% peaceful, and 97% violent, for example. Furthermore, Muslims' are forbidden by law (sharia) to question the nature of Islam, any sort of innovative or critical analysis, or even to learn from a kaffir (non-Muslim); to quote a scholar on Islam, Dr. Bill Warner, Phd: “Islam is unique in that it has its own political, legal, and education system”. He was subsequently banned from returning to that country. You can visit his site to learn more at politicalislam.com. As he subsequently remarked on the topic “I wasn't being critical of Islam … it's like saying the sky is blue. I don't know why it is, it just is!”. One more contributing factor to the suppression of Islam's violent nature, and very far from the comprehension of honest Judeo-Christian morality is what's known as “taqiyya” (among other forms of deception known as tawriya, kitman, and muruna) which is a directive of Allah to deceive unbelievers through outright lying, and by Allah, for one such purpose – to prevent unrest/conflict of differences. Clearly, if we knew the ultimate goal of Islam is to bring the entire world under its rule, and every person reluctant to “revert” heinously murdered, or that by leaving Islam, or acting in any way against those goals of Islam were literally legally punishable by death, we would certainly oppose sharia, and would likely impose much greater restrictions of the freedoms of Muslim people, as the Angola government did this year. While china already imposes reasonable restrictions on Muslim establishment, it has also announced formally “Islam is a dangerous political movement”. This was in response to a verbal attack on China's stance on Islamic influence in their own country and following those restrictions implemented on Islamic development and acceptable Muslim behaviour.
Democracy might be facilitating Islamification but it is cultural relativism which is effectively accommodating Muslims in their Islamic effort. The sociological perspective is one of the first conceptual frames of reference taught in western sociology classes. The main underlying premise is directed against the opposition of different cultures, beliefs, and inherently attitudes. The overt premise being the principled and logical perspective that such views, etc people hold have been shaped by their circumstances. Finally, that no culture is inherently better any other which brings me back to cultural relativism. On the whole, a person forms any opinion with the association of good and bad emotion to a given thing. So we could look upon war torn Saudi-Arabia and (if we're psychopathic) form a positive opinion of a war driven culture. However most of would naturally prefer peace over this wanton destruction and would therefore be of a negative opinion. What the politically correct “police” would have you believe is that there are no objective negatives just differences. The rational person would form a more concrete conclusion regarding his preferred culture which constitutes accommodating and peaceful ends. Democracy is failing us because it's incapable of addressing the issues relating to Islamification; The best government to oppose the impending threat facing so many countries now is going to be republican. Ancient Greece, the Roman Empire, and Abraham Lincoln were all respected for their republican leadership. According to the Pew Research Center, 2010, 50 of the world's countries are Muslim. That figure is likely much higher now as Muslim's were recently accounted as having a birth rate which is 4x higher than non-Muslim people. This further contributes to Islamic influence and expense on host countries of Islamic people. Russian people are reported to be avoiding reproduction and for the past 4 years (2011-2015), Muhammad has been the most common baby's name in Russia, as it has been within Islamic countries around the world. 8 out of 10 of the world's most dangerous countries are Muslim, and this figure is likely lower than it would be were non-Muslim people able to speak out against their oppressive enemy, and be heard for that matter! What confounds me most regarding the state of affairs related to terms such as racist or bigot being attributed to people opposed to Islam is the utter lack of acknowledgment that appointed Islamic leaders all around the world refer to us as their enemy, the enemy of Islam. What's become of the education of today's generation? These people believe that they're fighting against racial discrimination or bigotry directed specifically toward people who are retaliating against an agenda. It seems misinformation isn't only prominent but also propagated. These people believe they're fighting for basic freedoms but are generally unaware that they're promoting a totalitarian ideology which has at its core a legal system so strict on basic conduct that they won't even have the freedom to question what they believe anymore. This could be the fate of Australia: Forget equal rights, woman won't even be allowed in public without a man, let alone without being suffocated by converings on her entire body, nor will she have an identity anymore, she will be a possession of her husband to beat, and rape at any whim of his disapproval. For those of you believe this isn't the message of Muhammad, I will include a passage from an English translation of the Qur'an as accepted by most scholars to be the most accurate English translation, that of Syed Abul A'la Maududi. All subsequent quotes from the Qur'an will be taken from this translation.
4:34 “Men are the managers of the affairs of women because Allah has made the one superior to the other and because men spend of their wealth on women. Virtuous women are, therefore, obedient; they guard their rights carefully in their absence under the care and watch of Allah. As for those women whose defiance you have cause to fear, admonish them and keep them apart from your beds and beat them.”
Here's one of the more polite passages directing the treatment of non-Muslims. I've chosen this “polite passage in place of harsher ones because the use of the direct English translation “beat” has been properly applied (where this is often not the case in English translations of the Qur'an.
8:12-14 “And remember when your Lord was inspiring the angels with this: “I am with you: so keep the Believers steadfast. I am now going to fill the hearts of the disbeliever's with awe: so smite their necks and beat every Joint of their bodies. This is because they have opposed Allah and His Messenger: whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger, surely Allah is very severe for him in retribution. This is the punishment for you: so taste it now: and you should know that there is the torment of Hell for those who deny the Truth.”
The passage to follow 8:14 orders Muslims against turning their back to the unbelievers when in battle except as a strategy, or to join another Muslim military force. You may have heard that the Qur'an isn't the only “holy” Islamic text – that there's a “trilogy”. All three, in fact, are accounts of the abhorrent Muhammad. The Qur'an is Muhammad's words (as he was illiterate, he had scribes transcribe the text for him – one of whom was so fed up and abandoned the tiresome project), there's the Hadith which is the accounts of Muhammad following traditions of the time – basically attests to those traditions being ethical practices, and then there is the Sera which are accounts of Muhammad's life of which there are many due to documentation by recorded personal accounts of Muhammad. The Sera are a large part of the conflict between Shia and Sunnu Muslims in the Middle East. Some are generally accepted by both groups others aren't generally accepted by either. Both, however, agree upon jihad.
The definition of jihad differs depending on whether you're a Muslim or not. Between Muslims', jihad is defined as “the personal struggle against sin” which is the definition the general population accepts to be definitive of jihad among the majority of Muslims. The definition of jihad applicable to non-Muslims is as follows: “the war against the unbelievers”. This is significantly offensive toward our way of life (or lives for that matter), and deserves to be made public knowledge. We've been declared enemies of Islam, yet we're told to accommodate the substantial requests of Muslim people throughout the western world. Is this a sign that Islam can't be engaged in war, or that the leaders in government don't have the spine to take on the task of declaring Islam separate from the views of their national identity, that we're more prepared to surrender without a fight and more prepared to adopt Islam as our personal “religion”; are we no longer willing to go to war to defend our freedoms and national identity? I'd like to think a majority in Australia will vote against support of Islam but I know that's only a pipe dream. Most simply don't have the time to investigate Islam, are unwilling to, or even reluctant to question Islam which is a direct result of the actions taken by Muslim people to silence, or otherwise suppress negative opinion of Islam (as they do indeed between themselves, even disallowing mediocre challenges), and the boycotting of such personal enquiry through media intervention, and the gullibility of westerners in our assumption that a person “of the faith” would never lie regarding the nature of their so-called religion. Such is the COA for Muslims' the world over. We're too busy collapsing on idealistic appreciation of our accomplished attitudes regarding politically correct cultural relativism, and false assumption of cultural awareness – that we respect other cultures, is obviously a false dichotomy from the opposing cultural favoritism we currently enjoy. As the latter takes precedence in the way we enjoy our privileges as a granted and ignore the outcries of those who implore them to consider those undesirable aspects of a culture which decries itself on the oppressed heap we associate with those who actually represent the oppressed. This is psychological warfare we're engaged in but most are like ostriches with their heads in the sand unwilling to acknowledge our status as an enemy, too soft to consider that our country would ever become the war stricken dust bowl of so many Islamic countries. It's almost unfathomable to me, as well, as I appreciate our multicultural nature of inclusiveness as much as the next modern Australian citizen, yet recognize now how such an attitude toward a hostile alien invasion simply fails. Muslim's are not going to deviate from the teachings of the Qur'an without leaving Islam entirely (or being rejected by Muslim's everywhere for “apostasy”, or leaving Islam). The fact of the matter is: Muslims do not believe Muhammad wrote the Qur'an but that it was written by Allah, who keeps a copy of the Qur'an in heaven, and that only the Qur'an is the perfect truth according to Allah (for everything Allah say's is the truth), and yet “Allah is the greatest deceiver.”
8:30-37 “It is worth-while to remember the time when those who rejected the Truth, were making plots against you to capture you or to slay you or to exile you. They were plotting their plots and Allah was devising His schemes: and Allah's schemes are most effective of all. When Our Revelations were recited to them, they said, “Well, we have heard: if we will, we also can fabricate such things: for these are the same ancient tales which have been told again and again by the former people.” And recall also to mind the thing they said, “O God! If it is the Truth sent down by Thee, rain down stones on us from the heavens or send down any other painful torment on us. At that time Allah would not send down any torment on them for you dwelt in their midst nor does Allah chastise people while they are asking His forgiveness. But now there is no reason why He should not send a torment on them, when they are barring the way to the Masjid-i-Haram whereas they are not its lawful guardians. Indeed, the Godfearing people alone can be its lawful guardians, but most people do not know this. And what is their “prayer” near the House of Allah? It is nothing but whistling and clapping of hands. So now take the chastisement and taste the torment in requital for your persistent denial of the Truth. Those who have denied the Truth spend their wealth in blocking the Way of Allah, and will on spending still more of it. But in the end, these very efforts of theirs will become a cause of their regret: then they will be overcome, and the disbelievers shall be gathered and driven towards Hell; so that Allah may separate the filthy from the pure and gather together every sort of filth and then throw the whole heap into Hell: these are indeed the real losers.”
The Arabic word Islam means submission and Muslim means one who submits. Now, as I've already told you, the Qur'an is a book of rules forbidding and compelling Muslim behaviour and these vary depending on the Muslim's situation. This is far different to other religions but I think western intellectuals might see Islam as a sort of kindred spirit in its outwardly appearance like the theocracy our modern society was once itself – I'd like to add that I'm not disputing Islam's infancy as a developing society (one where religion is the head of the state, and government), but that the prevalence of political jurisdiction and metering out punishments for disobeying or failing to implement those rules separate Islam from our own way, once more, as being equivalent by today's standards a resemblance of a fascist ideology, or a cult, as the adherents (Muslims) believe non-Muslim people should be subject to its laws, subsequent punishments and whose right to life is non-existent except for the mercies afforded by the collector of Islam's regularly fluctuating extortion penalty the option for which can be removed at any time without notice (of course) and there would leave only one possibility for survival – if afforded them – to convert to Islam which they then cannot leave under the penalty of an even worse death than having been killed prior to becoming Muslim. To be completely honest, in considering the backward state of Islamic society in the Middle East when considering the duration in which Islam has so totally dominated their populace (any wonder why), and in terms of being without the separation of government and religion but instead ascribing the punishments to be carried out from the Qur'an as the official law of the Islamic country it is my opinion that the Middle East has remained backward and endured due to both the constant war on its people and the deterrent factors of such war stricken areas of would be contributors. It isn't a misfortune of the many Muslim's who are involved in such war but more significantly the misfortune of those whom Muslim's impose such war themselves.
Copyright TruthWorthy, 2015. All rights reserved.
Coming soon: Banner image-link to new anti-islam forum.
Her nationality was revoked after all. Which made her "less American".
TruthWorthy
The way you write "OUR SECULAR GOVERNMENTS" just pours narcissism to extended levels, you're so full of them "secular governments" that some of them -ironically- threatens the world with nukes -or actually use them twice-, or bomb the crap out of countries then whine about "dogs of war who are loaded with grudges enough to melt mountains"..yeah "ze terrorists"..and they just forgot they bombed their countries back to the stone age for stinky oil, ironic. "OUR SECULAR GOVERNMENTS"..
About saudi practices.. ummm let's have an example shall we ?
Quran says :
Sura 7 Verse 31
( 31 ) O children of Adam, take your adornment at every masjid, and eat and drink, but be not excessive. Indeed, He likes not those who commit excess.
Saudies :
------
Quran says :
Sura 17 Verse 26, 27
( 26 ) And give the relative his right, and [also] the poor and the traveler, and do not spend wastefully.
( 27 ) Indeed, the wasteful are brothers of the devils, and ever has Satan been to his Lord ungrateful.
Saudies :
And after all :
Oh yes..a "secular kiss", full of "warm slippery ..." enough , ew..
Yes..
You can't be serious now ..please don't tell me it's the same angola !!
if it is, then this is mere propaganda, taken from an anti-theist, you should rise above that. Would you like to eat "kabsa" with the saudies ? bring in the brave secular president of angola who vomits corruption on breakfast too.
(September 27, 2015 at 1:40 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: The Jewish Babylonian Talmud says that they're good to go at any age. And the age of consent was seven in Delaware in 1895. It used to be ten in California. Slave owners didn't have to worry about such things.
Too bad this issue with Islam is persistent today.
They are about a century behind. It's a minor thing in the scheme of things.
(September 27, 2015 at 9:25 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: Hahahahaahaha ^__^
That happened in Saudi Arabia during "Haj"; and the guy in blue camo is from the Saudi law enforcement/Army. The guy who got slapped is a foreigner who came to practice Haj.
That happens in their streets, during the holiest days in the years ^_^. Do you think for real that they will apply a law against domestic violence ?
They only "pay the right media group" to "broadcast a big fat lie" to the kingdom a better name internationally.
This is a tribal society that disbelieved in Islam from a long time, yet keeps hiding behind it to collect the income of the Haj (millions pay to visit the holy mosque). This is a tribal society that tells people to worship the king.
Too sad you don't get their language.
Do you see the hell that Muslims reached ?
And still, you'll find ignorant people thinking I'm "crazy" when I say : lots of Muslims abandoned their faith & Quran a long while ago..
I'm not laughing because I like any of the above. Inside I cry, in both agony and irony. But don't believe these Saudies, ever. And don't insult Islam by saying they're Muslims.
So the Arabs don't believe in their own ethnocentric religious fairy tale but all of the other dummies do. It's just like the ethnocentric Jewish religious fairy tale in that respect.
(September 27, 2015 at 12:04 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: TruthWorthy
The way you write "OUR SECULAR GOVERNMENTS" just pours narcissism to extended levels, you're so full of them "secular governments" that some of them -ironically- threatens the world with nukes -or actually use them twice-, or bomb the crap out of countries then whine about "dogs of war who are loaded with grudges enough to melt mountains"..yeah "ze terrorists"..and they just forgot they bombed their countries back to the stone age for stinky oil, ironic. "OUR SECULAR GOVERNMENTS"..
There is a healthy sort of pride (and I suppose it's not entirely dissimilar to the sort you experience), that of accomplishment. It is something like understanding the world for what it truly is and thus improving you understanding. It is the realisation that a long held belief has been erroneously taken for granted to be the truth. And so it is with religious belief, and our secular state and legal system. I can undoubtedly state that it is better than a theocracy because it has logical foundations. As I stated, in my last post, muslims are deprived of logic of contradiction (accepted around the world for its incisiveness, reasoning, truth deriving qualities); unlike the logic of dualism which basically can't establish an issue with contradiction (yes, the coran is actually full of them), and is unable to divide any untruth from the system of negotiation it's based upon. Basically that means we have to take a statistical analysis (for appeasing simpletons - for want of a better understanding), and ascertain a conclusion based on that - for example, in the same way the coran is 3% peaceful, while 97% violent. I could draw a conclusion that between the argument whether the coran is peaceful or violent, it is extremely violent. The peaceful aspects are negligible.
(September 27, 2015 at 12:04 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: About saudi practices.. ummm let's have an example shall we ?
coran says :
Sura 7 Verse 31
( 31 ) O children of Adam, take your adornment at every masjid, and eat and drink, but be not excessive. Indeed, He likes not those who commit excess.
Sura 17 Verse 26, 27
( 26 ) And give the relative his right, and [also] the poor and the traveler, and do not spend wastefully.
( 27 ) Indeed, the wasteful are brothers of the devils, and ever has Satan been to his Lord ungrateful.
Saudi royals are criticised and appreciated by the muslim community. You choose to use them as an example of abuse of wealth and therefore not aligned with Islam in one instance while in another you embrace their wealth for jihadist operations (which you obviously are less prone to disclose publicly but which the gratitude is ever prevalent by the recipients). You quietly praise them and openly disrespect some of their practices. You aren't attacking them but the practices they're committing, right?
(September 27, 2015 at 12:04 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: About your excellent 'fascist cult of Islam post'
the first word I spotted was "Angola banned islam".
... bring in the brave secular president of angola who vomits corruption on breakfast too.
Quite!
Actually, I did make a slight error in that part. Angola government simply hasn't recognised Islams legal status and for other reasons relating to scriptural alignment and fundamental beliefs and practices deems it a sect. The mosques which were destroyed were simply built without any sort of permission.
I apologise to everyone for the misinformation. I would always prefer the truth over lies...
Being that this is the only argument you've staked against my post, we shall all presume you accept the remainder to be true and correct.
(September 27, 2015 at 2:45 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:
(September 27, 2015 at 5:03 am)TruthWorthy Wrote: Too bad this issue with Islam is persistent today.
They are about a century behind. It's a minor thing in the scheme of things.
I highly doubt a century would bring them up to speed with the rest of the world (which puts them much further back than maybe even 500 years), because even with the example being set by the rest of the world, the muslim world is not only unwilling but unable to change. They'll follow their hadith to the bitter end of their civilisation (of course along with the coran) as one hadith says 'innovation is a mistake..'.
Coming soon: Banner image-link to new anti-islam forum.
(September 27, 2015 at 12:04 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: TruthWorthy
The way you write "OUR SECULAR GOVERNMENTS" just pours narcissism to extended levels, you're so full of them "secular governments" that some of them -ironically- threatens the world with nukes -or actually use them twice-, or bomb the crap out of countries then whine about "dogs of war who are loaded with grudges enough to melt mountains"..yeah "ze terrorists"..and they just forgot they bombed their countries back to the stone age for stinky oil, ironic. "OUR SECULAR GOVERNMENTS"..
There is a healthy sort of pride (and I suppose it's not entirely dissimilar to the sort you experience), that of accomplishment. It is something like understanding the world for what it truly is and thus improving you understanding. It is the realisation that a long held belief has been erroneously taken for granted to be the truth. And so it is with religious belief, and our secular state and legal system. I can undoubtedly state that it is better than a theocracy because it has logical foundations. As I stated, in my last post, muslims are deprived of logic of contradiction (accepted around the world for its incisiveness, reasoning, truth deriving qualities); unlike the logic of dualism which basically can't establish an issue with contradiction (yes, the coran is actually full of them), and is unable to divide any untruth from the system of negotiation it's based upon. Basically that means we have to take a statistical analysis (for appeasing simpletons - for want of a better understanding), and ascertain a conclusion based on that - for example, in the same way the coran is 3% peaceful, while 97% violent. I could draw a conclusion that between the argument whether the coran is peaceful or violent, it is extremely violent. The peaceful aspects are negligible.
(September 27, 2015 at 12:04 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: About saudi practices.. ummm let's have an example shall we ?
coran says :
Sura 7 Verse 31
( 31 ) O children of Adam, take your adornment at every masjid, and eat and drink, but be not excessive. Indeed, He likes not those who commit excess.
Sura 17 Verse 26, 27
( 26 ) And give the relative his right, and [also] the poor and the traveler, and do not spend wastefully.
( 27 ) Indeed, the wasteful are brothers of the devils, and ever has Satan been to his Lord ungrateful.
Saudi royals are criticised and appreciated by the muslim community. You choose to use them as an example of abuse of wealth and therefore not aligned with Islam in one instance while in another you embrace their wealth for jihadist operations (which you obviously are less prone to disclose publicly but which the gratitude is ever prevalent by the recipients). You quietly praise them and openly disrespect some of their practices. You aren't attacking them but the practices they're committing, right?
(September 27, 2015 at 12:04 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: About your excellent 'fascist cult of Islam post'
the first word I spotted was "Angola banned islam".
... bring in the brave secular president of angola who vomits corruption on breakfast too.
Quite!
Actually, I did make a slight error in that part. Angola government simply hasn't recognised Islams legal status and for other reasons relating to scriptural alignment and fundamental beliefs and practices deems it a sect. The mosques which were destroyed were simply built without any sort of permission.
I apologise to everyone for the misinformation. I would always prefer the truth over lies...
Being that this is the only argument you've staked against my post, we shall all presume you accept the remainder to be true and correct.
Quote:
(September 27, 2015 at 2:45 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: They are about a century behind. It's a minor thing in the scheme of things.
I highly doubt a century would bring them up to speed with the rest of the world (which puts them much further back than maybe even 500 years), because even with the example being set by the rest of the world, the muslim world is not only unwilling but unable to change. They'll follow their hadith to the bitter end of their civilisation (of course along with the coran) as one hadith says 'innovation is a mistake..'.
I wonder if their invasion of Europe will be successful? They had a lot of help from various collaborators but now some average people are starting to have second thoughts. They might end up converting some fence-sitters and collaborators like the commie Merkel to Islam.
(September 28, 2015 at 3:57 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:
(September 28, 2015 at 3:06 am)TruthWorthy Wrote:
There is a healthy sort of pride (and I suppose it's not entirely dissimilar to the sort you experience), that of accomplishment. It is something like understanding the world for what it truly is and thus improving you understanding. It is the realisation that a long held belief has been erroneously taken for granted to be the truth. And so it is with religious belief, and our secular state and legal system. I can undoubtedly state that it is better than a theocracy because it has logical foundations. As I stated, in my last post, muslims are deprived of logic of contradiction (accepted around the world for its incisiveness, reasoning, truth deriving qualities); unlike the logic of dualism which basically can't establish an issue with contradiction (yes, the coran is actually full of them), and is unable to divide any untruth from the system of negotiation it's based upon. Basically that means we have to take a statistical analysis (for appeasing simpletons - for want of a better understanding), and ascertain a conclusion based on that - for example, in the same way the coran is 3% peaceful, while 97% violent. I could draw a conclusion that between the argument whether the coran is peaceful or violent, it is extremely violent. The peaceful aspects are negligible.
Saudi royals are criticised and appreciated by the muslim community. You choose to use them as an example of abuse of wealth and therefore not aligned with Islam in one instance while in another you embrace their wealth for jihadist operations (which you obviously are less prone to disclose publicly but which the gratitude is ever prevalent by the recipients). You quietly praise them and openly disrespect some of their practices. You aren't attacking them but the practices they're committing, right?
Quite!
Actually, I did make a slight error in that part. Angola government simply hasn't recognised Islams legal status and for other reasons relating to scriptural alignment and fundamental beliefs and practices deems it a sect. The mosques which were destroyed were simply built without any sort of permission.
I apologise to everyone for the misinformation. I would always prefer the truth over lies...
Being that this is the only argument you've staked against my post, we shall all presume you accept the remainder to be true and correct.
I wonder if their invasion of Europe will be successful? They had a lot of help from various collaborators but now some average people are starting to have second thoughts. They might end up converting some fence-sitters and collaborators like the commie Merkel to Islam.
Spoiler alert: comment from above linked page written by 'Love Teresa'.
Plzzz STOP minimizing what the terrorist in the whitehouse has done to destroy this country!!!! You lame liberal jackazzes think you know more then the older generations about the muslim people!!!! You don't you silly idiot. The plan to islamize this country no doubt has taken a few years, but it's been Obama's complete agenda is to poke fun at the conservative people in the country while schmoozing the lame brain, pot heads watching John Stewart. You handed our country over to a terrorist and you should be ashamed!!!!! If you have children, they will hate you for what you have done! You are enamored with a CON MAN!!!!!!!!!!! Tell your liberal fanatics with no moral compasses that they are getting exactly what God has allowed to happen because of your enormous pride and arrogance. God said if you want a muslim, you got a muslim!!!
BS!!!!! Obamanation is very much in with the muslim brotherhood who is conquering this country. The reason the muslim countries aren't taking in any of the gazillion muslims is because they are very much tryng to islamize the west!!!
Muslim refugees are being turned away by Saudi Arabia for this reason
EMERGENCY PLEASE READ!
HERE IS PROOF THE MASS IMMIGRATION SCAM IS A MUSLIM INVASION!
Saudi Official Says They Are DELIBERATELY Ignoring Refugees, To Allow The Spread Of Islam To Flood The West
‘We’re letting them go to Europe, isn’t that enough?’
Riyadh: The Saudi government has responded to increasing backlash over the lack of refugees that the country has agreed to host in the recent refugee crisis.
Khabaristan Times had earlier reported on Muslim Ummah unanimously deciding to be offended by EU’s refugee policy, and elaborated on Saudi Arab’s reaction to an extent.
Many have lost their lives in trying to reach European countries for a better life for themselves and their families. Recent images of a young boy, lying dead on a beach, have caused a new uproar asking Arabic nations to act.
“We are ignoring the issue as a strategic maneuver. If these refugees go and settle in the west then they will take the beacon of light i.e. Islam, with them,” an official from the Saudi government said.
“What we are doing is waiting for them to set up camp so that they can show these infidel nations how to save themselves from kufr,” he said.
So, we can look forward to this:
As long as the Muslim population remains around 1% of any given country they will be regarded as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to anyone. In fact, they may be featured in articles and films, stereotyped for their colorful uniqueness:
United States -- Muslim 1.0%
Australia -- Muslim 1.5%
Canada -- Muslim 1.9%
China -- Muslim 1%-2%
Italy -- Muslim 1.5%
Norway -- Muslim 1.8%
At 2% and 3% they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs:
Denmark -- Muslim 2%
Germany -- Muslim 3.7%
United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%
Spain -- Muslim 4%
Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%
From 5% on they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population.
They will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. ( United States ).
France -- Muslim 8%
Philippines -- Muslim 5%
Sweden -- Muslim 5%
Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%
The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%
Trinidad &Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%
At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islam is not to convert the world but to establish Sharia law over the entire world.
When Muslims reach 10% of the population, they will increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions ( Paris --car-burnings). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats ( Amsterdam - Mohammed cartoons).
Guyana -- Muslim 10%
India -- Muslim 13.4%
Israel -- Muslim 16%
Kenya -- Muslim 10%
Russia -- Muslim 10-15%
After reaching 20% expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning:
Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%
At 40% you will find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare:
Bosnia -- Muslim 40%
Chad -- Muslim 53.1%
Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%
From 60% you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and Jizya, the tax placed on infidels:
Albania -- Muslim 70%
Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%
Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%
Sudan -- Muslim 70%
After 80% expect State run ethnic cleansing and genocide:
Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%
Egypt -- Muslim 90%
Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%
Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%
Iran -- Muslim 98%
Iraq -- Muslim 97%
Jordan -- Muslim 92%
Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%
Pakistan -- Muslim 97%
Palestine -- Muslim 99%
Syria -- Muslim 90%
Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%
Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%
United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%
Coming soon: Banner image-link to new anti-islam forum.
Quote:There is a healthy sort of pride (and I suppose it's not entirely dissimilar to the sort you experience), that of accomplishment. It is something like understanding the world for what it truly is and thus improving you understanding. It is the realisation that a long held belief has been erroneously taken for granted to be the truth. And so it is with religious belief, and our secular state and legal system. I can undoubtedly state that it is better than a theocracy because it has logical foundations. As I stated, in my last post, muslims are deprived of logic of contradiction (accepted around the world for its incisiveness, reasoning, truth deriving qualities); unlike the logic of dualism which basically can't establish an issue with contradiction (yes, the coran is actually full of them), and is unable to divide any untruth from the system of negotiation it's based upon. Basically that means we have to take a statistical analysis (for appeasing simpletons - for want of a better understanding), and ascertain a conclusion based on that - for example, in the same way the coran is 3% peaceful, while 97% violent. I could draw a conclusion that between the argument whether the coran is peaceful or violent, it is extremely violent. The peaceful aspects are negligible.
Nice story. But I don't actually think so. The state of our world today was only achieved post world war 2, the shock which followed after the first & especially the second war are the ones which made "many countries" not wanting to have "another war" or anything that might lead to it.
In other words, you're taking pride in the industrial revolution that is interconnected with a state of "fear" from another world within a world that just got out of a world war that took the lives of millions -cough cough; unleashed by secular states"..
Then we come to the 3% peace 97 % thingy..what did you base that on ? actually did you read the Quran ?
Let's see some verses since this is the "religious" forum :
Quran :
Sura 4 Verse 63 ) Those are the ones of whom Allah knows what is in their hearts, so turn away from them but admonish them and speak to them a far-reaching word.
-
(Sura 8 Verse 61) And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He who is the Hearing, the Knowing.
-
(Sura 2 Verse 190 ) Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors.
Where did you get your numbers from ? I see; are they from the brave secular president of Angola ??
Then again, please don't mix your anti-theism with secularism, quoting Jack David Eller :
Quote:secularity is best understood, not as being "anti-religious", but as being "religiously neutral" since many activities in religious bodies are secular themselves and most versions of secularity do not lead to irreligiosity
So pleeeaaase.
Quote:Saudi royals are criticised and appreciated by the muslim community. You choose to use them as an example of abuse of wealth and therefore not aligned with Islam in one instance while in another you embrace their wealth for jihadist operations (which you obviously are less prone to disclose publicly but which the gratitude is ever prevalent by the recipients). You quietly praise them and openly disrespect some of their practices. You aren't attacking them but the practices they're committing, right?
I ? embraced the saudi support for Jihadists ?
Are you born delusional, or you just take a certain type of drug that simulates "delusions" ?
Saudi Arabia is a "sykes-picot" state, i.e created by the ex British empire, with a "puppet string of kings" that act as allies to the British empire, after it fell, 'merica took them under its armpit making them "her puppets"; ya know oil is a lovely thing, together they enjoyed building up proxies of Jihadist to defeat the soviet union : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone
A proxy that got out of control in many places, and gave the world one of the biggest headaches in history.
So again, a delusion won't make you win an argument.. Argue with reason, not by "forging" lies and saying that the opposing side said which they didn't say.
Again : a tribal society, that is allied with a greedy capitalistic vampire, to strip the region out of its resources & cause wars left & right so war economy can make more $$$$$.
Take the story of "Qarun" from the Quran. to me, the Sauds are just the same :
Quran : Sura 28
( 76 ) Indeed, Qarun was from the people of Moses, but he tyrannized them. And We gave him of treasures whose keys would burden a band of strong men; thereupon his people said to him, "Do not exult. Indeed, Allah does not like the exultant.
( 77 ) But seek, through that which Allah has given you, the home of the Hereafter; and [yet], do not forget your share of the world. And do good as Allah has done good to you. And desire not corruption in the land. Indeed, Allah does not like corrupters."
( 78 ) He said, "I was only given it because of knowledge I have." Did he not know that Allah had destroyed before him of generations those who were greater than him in power and greater in accumulation [of wealth]? But the criminals, about their sins, will not be asked.
( 79 ) So he came out before his people in his adornment. Those who desired the worldly life said, "Oh, would that we had like what was given to Qarun. Indeed, he is one of great fortune."
( 80 ) But those who had been given knowledge said, "Woe to you! The reward of Allah is better for he who believes and does righteousness. And none are granted it except the patient."
( 81 ) And We caused the earth to swallow him and his home. And there was for him no company to aid him other than Allah, nor was he of those who [could] defend themselves.
( 82 ) And those who had wished for his position the previous day began to say, "Oh, how Allah extends provision to whom He wills of His servants and restricts it! If not that Allah had conferred favor on us, He would have caused it to swallow us. Oh, how the disbelievers do not succeed!"
Quote:Quite!
Actually, I did make a slight error in that part. Angola government simply hasn't recognised Islams legal status and for other reasons relating to scriptural alignment and fundamental beliefs and practices deems it a sect. The mosques which were destroyed were simply built without any sort of permission.
I apologise to everyone for the misinformation. I would always prefer the truth over lies...
Being that this is the only argument you've staked against my post, we shall all presume you accept the remainder to be true and correct.
Quote:Angola, naturally, doesn’t welcome journalists. It took me about five years to get a journalist visa to get into Angola, and after my reporting I doubt I’ll get another visa as long as the current regime remains in power. So at The Times, we poured a lot of time and effort into the story of what corruption does to a country.
Quote:It’s pretty heartbreaking to see kids suffering untreated from disease and unable to attend school, or to meet a mom who has lost 10 children — and it’s not just sad, but infuriating when you see it in a country that is rich with oil and diamonds
You just don't get it yet are you ? mmm by bringing an example with "Angola", you already lost all credibility to me..i.e I won't be wasting my time discussing you ..
(September 27, 2015 at 10:34 am)AtlasS33 Wrote: By that concept, we can consider the American constitution -for example- prop for the nationalist cult called "America" which injects fear into its followers -from imprisonment- to follow in a certain system of tax paying & eternal work, while building a corral around them composed of law-enforcement individuals to prohibit them from doing such matters -such as smoking marijuana-, with the penalty of termination if the resisted, or jail and economical fines if they were caught carrying it or smuggling it.
Following your concept now, I renounce all countries as cults, having constitution as one of their props, identical in function & identical in all appearance (i.e the USA is the same as Saudi Arabia, China is the same as France)..
This is an idiotic comparison. Surely you can tighten up your thinking and spot your error yourself.
![[Image: kabsa-mandi.jpg]](https://ucaelinewsmakers.files.wordpress.com/2012/09/kabsa-mandi.jpg)
![[Image: PIC-160-1346605224.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=pic.almsdar.net%2Fuploadcenter%2Fuploads%2F09-2012%2FPIC-160-1346605224.jpg)
![[Image: saudi-oil.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.marketoracle.co.uk%2Fimages%2Fsaudi-oil.jpg)
