Slashdot Mirror

Ignoring some fact there, aren't ya Sparky? BTW they have a name for the kind of fallacy you're trying to pull, its called Tu quoque, also known as the "You lynch negroes" fallacy for the fact that it was used often by Stalin's supporters to cover over his atrocities...nice company you keep.

As for what you are selectively ignoring is the fact that Israel has attempted to broker a cease fire with hamas several times only to be met with more rockets filled with nails aimed at civilian centers, the last of which was last week BTW, it lasted all of 42 minutes before iron Dome was activated by incoming shells. I won't even bother with your hypothetical Christians, because I can find a whacko or two that calls for the killing of any race and that is frankly a fucking joke compared to the murder of rape victims and cutting the hands off alleged thieves, but lets go straight to your "majority of Muslims are peaceful...shall we? Boy I'm betting after this you'll wish you can kept your mouth shut because the facts? NOT on your side. Try reading a little bit before you speak because it will frankly make you look less foolish.

The second link BTW even explains WHY Muslims are violent, its because unlike the Torah and the Bible it was written extremely vague, so that its easy for Mullahs to continue the violence, quote" God commanded the Hebrews to kill Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusitesâ"all specific peoples rooted to a specific time and place. At no time did God give an open-ended command for the Hebrews, and by extension their Jewish descendants, to fight and kill gentiles. On the other hand, though Islam's original enemies were, like Judaism's, historical (e.g., Christian Byzantines and Zoroastrian Persians), the Qur'an rarely singles them out by their proper names. Instead, Muslims were (and are) commanded to fight the people of the book "until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled"and to "slay the idolaters wherever you find them."

But of course you will likely ignore the facts because it isn't from a site like HuffyPo that fits your preconceived (most likely ultra left) biases, just like how the ultra left was making for some hilarious entertainment by the way they kept tapdancing trying to continue to support their theory that Brown was "executed by teh man" despite ever mounting evidence he was a violent criminal. Just like them I'm sure you'll ignore the evidence and continue to pretend that Islam and the other religions are equal, which is as delusional as saying crime is the same in poor and rich neighborhoods because once, five years ago, a rich woman killed her cheating husband on the nice side of town! Shock!

Meanwhile anybody with more than 2 functioning braincells will be able to see through your bullshit by simply turning on any news outlet from any place on the planet and watch the beheading of the week, maybe enjoy a few stonings...BTW since the religions are equally violent, perhaps you can show me the Christian equivalent of Farfur? Because I have seen a LOT of western kid's shows over the years and I don't remember EVER seeing one teaching lovely songs like how I should get into heaven with the heads of Jews and Muslims on my belt...perhaps you can provide a link to that show?

As to Muslims, in Islam 101 identifies the verses in the Quran that match the verses of the Ten Commandments. The author, I.A. Arshed Ph.D, says

I have been pursuing the recent debate going on in the Press about Ten Commandments. Quran claims to testify what had been revealed before it (Torah and Gospel). I give passages in Exodus 20 (3-17) and the parallel verses of the Quran to show that Islam also testifies the Ten Commandments (which are upheld by other religions also as Universal Code of conduct.)

As far as I know, Muslims believe that everyone is born a Muslim. It doesn't matter who the father is. John McCain is a muslim.

Source: http://islam101.com/dawah/newBorn.htm

Can you give a damn reference for what you claim? You like to invent beliefs for Muslims?

No I tell the truth about islam, unlike most of its defenders. Here is a reference for Islam existing always: http://www.cpsglobal.org/content/islam-beginning-time Here is a quote for everyone being born a muslim http://www.islam101.com/dawah/newBorn.htm . Incidentally that is being used to justify the death sentence of a Christian cleric, they say he is an apostate because everyone is born a muslim.

Here is one of the many cases in the hadith of someone being killed for contradicting islamic teaching http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/103739

I'm not in a position to approve or disapprove of anything, as the guys who translate it know far more about it than I. I don't even speak Arabic. That being said, the most widely respected translations into English that I know of are those by Yusuf Ali and Pickthall. Google can turn up their full texts quite easily.

http://www.islam101.com/quran/yusufAli/
http://www.ishwar.com/islam/holy_quran_(pickthall)/

I like to read with two translations open at once, just to clarify contextual use of words and things like that. Hope that helps!

It's the requirement in the Koran that Muslims subdue, by murder if necessary, other religious thought (which includes atheism of course).

It is simply not true that the Koran says anything of the sort. That verse you point to, 9, refers to defense. To summarize, that verse says "do not attack anyone who makes peace with you, as during times of treaty you are forbidden from war with them. But if they break the peace, the forbidden time is over and they are to be attacked.

Here's the full translation of that verse if you like. You'll find that Muslims are totally forbidden from attacking anyone with whom there is any form of treaty, peace agreement or mutual understanding. Only those who break these agreements and are hostile may be attacked out of self defense. In fact the very first line of that surah is "A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances:".

Later it says: "(But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous". In other words, we are commanded to be true to any arrangements, unless it is broken by the other side first.

Even in your quote it says that even after they have broken an agreement, if they later apologize, they are to be forgiven. Vengefulness and vindictive behavior are forbidden.

Taking a single line out of context is a a good way to demonstrate one's ignorance of the truth. It is often done, though, by people determined to spread FUD.

Oh, and here's a bonus one: you don't hate "the west" but you hate Saudi Arabi's king for consorting with "the west"??

This is such a dramatic misunderstanding of my point that I'm going to assume it is deliberate and ignore it.

I know quite a few muslims. Thankfully none are true adherents of their creed (the koran) or I'd be a dead man, as I follow Jesus and believe that Mohammed was one of those that the new testament warns about receiving a false gospel from (eg Galatians 1).

Actually, the Bible foretells (if you believe that anyway) of the coming of prophet Mohamed. But don't take my word for it, go ask your local priest.

In that case, no further discussion is helpful or necessary.

I suppose you ignored the fact that I pointed out that the violence and "bringing low" part was bits you made up.

No, thinking of it that way is specifically what I refuse to do.

Err... why? Islamic jurisprudence simply assumes that all Muslims are citizens of a Muslim nation, and that non-citizens have extra obligations. Seems quite reasonable to me.

...from their own land.

Well, after land is acquired, after either treaty or conquest, the new government will change the rules. I suggest you look to Native Americans, Australian Aboriginies, South African blacks and South American civilizations at the hands of European conquerors before you get all high horse saddled about this issue. Then find me an example from history (and don't refer me to some revisionist Internet trash) where a Muslim nation (and I don't mean one of these modern day middle eastern basket cases) has done anything remotely comparable. I think you'll find that historically (i.e., prior to the 20th century) Muslim nations were looked to as the place to go if you were a people in need of shelter from tyranny. There's a reason that the phrase "Arab hospitality" has survived to this day, despite the image that modern Arabs have of being an obtuse exclusive bunch.

Then, according to you, the Quran is just plain wrong. Unless the fighting refered to in Sura 9:29 is really an armwrestling tournament perhaps? Tiddlywinks? Perhaps decades of studying the Quran will make it mean debating?

Please remember that I am Muslim, and while you may disagree with me I would appreciate it if you remained at least polite.

In any case, that whole chapter refers to actions to be taken in a war against non-Muslims who are belligerent and will not live peacefully. I have had this discussion already with someone, so I will only point out the following:

The very first line of that chapter states that it is "A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances:-". In other words, if you have an agreement with non-Muslims to live peacefully, be they implicit or explicit, they are immune from attack.

With regards to non-Muslims who ask for help it says: "If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure.". Doesn't sound all that bloodthirsty to me.

"How can there be a league, before Allah and His Messenger, with the Pagans, except those with whom ye made a treaty near the sacred Mosque? As long as these stand true to you, stand ye true to them: for Allah doth love the righteous." So honor agreements you make with non-Muslims.

"Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you?" Yes, I agree, them's fightin' words. But I believe that it's pretty clear from the lines immediately preceding it that the fightin' is to be done in defense, and not just 'coz you're in a bad mood.

Feel free to read the whole thing rather than taking a single line out of context. It's pretty easy to take a single line from practically any text and make it sound like the text is saying something completely contrary to what it is actually saying.

Sura 9:29 Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

Not so much inaccurate as incomplete. If you look through just about any writing and cherry pick a selected sentence, you can make it sound like more or less anything you want. Have you read the chapter you are quoting from? Forgive me for assuming, but I'll assume you haven't and shed some light for you.

That whole chapter refers to defense. It is about fighting those who fight Muslims. The whole chapter is about who can and cannot be fought militarily. It opens with the line A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances: which indicates that non-Muslims who have an agreement to live peacefully are declared immune from war. Furthermore, non-Muslims who ask Muslims for asylum are to be granted it: If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure.

Another reference to fighting in response to aggression: Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you?

But don't take my word for it, you can find the whole chapter translated here.

"The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and his messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be to be killed or crucified, or to have their hands and feet chopped off on opposite sides, or to be expelled out of the land. Such will be their humiliation in the world, and in the next world they will face an awful horror." (Koran, 5:33-34)

This one explicitly states that it is the punishment due to those who wage war against Muslim people. The line that follows it: Except for those who repent before they fall into your power: in that case, know that Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. indicates that even if people did wage war against a Muslim nation, if they ask for forgiveness, they are to be spared the punishment. So, this quote is saying "if you are attacked, fight back, but forgive them if they say sorry". Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

"When we decide to destroy a population, we send a definite order to them who have the good things in life and yet sin. So that Allah's word is proven true against them, then we destroy them utterly." (Koran, 17:16-17)

This is actually a reference to Allah's own administration of justice. A plague of locusts, floods or other disasters Sodom and Gomorrah style. Throughout the Quran, the regal "We" is used when (as Muslims believe) Allah is referring to himself. The line before reads: nor would We visit with Our Wrath until We had sent an apostle (to give warning). which suggests that the intent of the verse is to say that if people are given a message and they ignore it, they can expect locusts, floods or sulphur raining down from the sky. Nothing like "hey guys go kill people you don't like", it's more like God saying "ignore me and I shall punish you!". Pretty standard Godly thing to say, really.

"Remember Allah inspired the angels: I am with you. Give firmness to the believers. I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their fingertips off of them." (Koran, 8:12)

A reference to what the angels will supposedly do. If you don't believe in angels, you have nothing to worry about.

I don't see any incitement for Muslims to run around killing people, as convenient as it may be for you to believe that such incitement is to be found. Here's a full text translation for you to read, if you find anything else you think amounts to an incitement to kill infidel scum feel free to point it out. Here's a spoiler tho: Allah, just like the Christian God, commands adherence to the general principle that Thou Shalt Not Kill, hence you will not find places where it says "Kill These Guys just 'Coz".

I am sick to death of ignorant non-Muslims taking a single line completely out of context. Your quote refers to Pagans who violate treaties or peace accords, the line immediately before the one you quote reads: So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous.

With reference to Pagans who have agreed to live peacefully without waging war, the line immediately following the one you quoted reads:

If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure.

In fact, the opening line of the chapter you are quoting from reads:

A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances:

Which seems to me to be a pretty clear indication that Pagans who agree to a mutual alliance or engagement to live together without waging war are explicitly protected. The full translation of that chapter can be found here, along with a full index of the Quran in English, so when next you feel like taking something out of context you can check it up to prevent making a horse's arse of yourself.

Context is your friend.

I am sick to death of ignorant non-Muslims taking a single line completely out of context. Your quote refers to Pagans who violate treaties or peace accords, the line immediately before the one you quote reads: So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous.

With reference to Pagans who have agreed to live peacefully without waging war, the line immediately following the one you quoted reads:

If one amongst the Pagans ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah. and then escort him to where he can be secure.

In fact, the opening line of the chapter you are quoting from reads:

A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances:

Which seems to me to be a pretty clear indication that Pagans who agree to a mutual alliance or engagement to live together without waging war are explicitly protected. The full translation of that chapter can be found here, along with a full index of the Quran in English, so when next you feel like taking something out of context you can check it up to prevent making a horse's arse of yourself.

Context is your friend.

(how often do you hear people in the USA discussing the pro's of Communism or Islamic extremism?).

Every single day in the USA. Ever heard of the Communist Party or the Socialist Party? Ever notice how many different mosques there are in the USA, of which several DO condone violence?

Maybe YOU need to do a little historic research before you hit the Submit button.

Online, a simple google search provides an online copy at Islam101 and MuslimAccess, but it has no commentary. Keep in mind it's an interpretation, the actual Arabic has a rhythm and even rhymes.

Than how about you prove me wrong?

For the time being this is as close as I've got to proof.

that's more than you've provided.

The Anonymous Coward in the parent post, sharing his insight, says: "Yeah. Fuck Allah in the ass with a rusty mickey mouse statue."

Assuming it is a Christian point of view, it is very odd, since by saying that he insults God himself.

Nice summary on the history of the various names for God can be found here: http://www.islam101.com/tauheed/whoisAllah.htm

A selected snippet:
"There is evidence that the word Allah existed before the birth of Muhammad PBUH for thousands of years. It is probably the oldest name man used to call God. Most likely, Adam used the word Allah to call the Lord."

http://www.islam-guide.com/contents-wide.htm

http://www.islam101.com/science/bucaille.html0

Jizyah Unbelievers are required to pay jizyah (poll tax) in lieu of security provided to them as the Dhimmis (Protected People) of an Islamic state, and their exemption from military service and payment of Zakah. Jizyah symbolizes the submission of the unbelievers to the suzerainty of Islam.

In Islamic law, however, this is simply not the case. The life of a Muslim is considered superior to that of a non-Muslim, so much so that whilst a non-Muslim killing a Muslim would be executed, the reverse would not occur. [5] This is despite the fact that murder is normally considered a capital offence in Islam, with regular executions in most Muslim states. This inequity is also demonstrable in the blood rate paid to non-Muslims where murder or injury has occurred, which is half that of a Muslim. [6] Effectively, this ruling means that a Muslim need not fear the usual retribution for murder if he kills a non-Muslim. The law deliberately and consciously does not protect non-Muslims as it does Muslims. The position of Islamic law is not that human life is sacred, but that Muslim life is so.
-----
the Christian must gain at least another Christian witness even to match the testimony of the Muslim
-----
Obviously, this considerably disadvantages non-Muslims, and becomes of practical import when we consider the frequent charges of blasphemy used by Muslims against Christians in places like Pakistan, which usually have an ulterior motive (often personal or land disputes). Legal conditions such as these give unscrupulous Muslims the idea that it is 'open season' on minorities. A similar ruling endangers the inheritance rights of Christian wives of Muslims. [8] Again, this gives opportunity to dishonest Muslim relatives of a widow.
----
The consequence of this is that in an Islamic State - specifically the Khilafah - non-Muslims should be denied Government posts, since the state exists for the Muslims, who alone are true citizens, whilst the non-Muslims are merely conquered residents, and the Jizyah signifies this
----
As this state of things inevitably produce chaos and disorder, it is the duty of the true Muslims to exert their utmost to bring an end to their wicked rule and bring them under a righteous order
----
AL-HEDAYA Vol. II (Hanafi Manual)
...capitation-tax is due only in lie of destruction... That is to say, is imposed as a return from the mercy and forbearance shown by the Muslims, and as a substitute for that destruction which is due upon infidels.
AL-HEDAYA Vol. II (Hanafi Manual)
[On infidels refusing either to embrace the faith, or to pay tribute, they may be attacked.]

...approves of violence against infidels and those who leave Islam as their native or chosen religion. Fighting and killing are described as beloved activities. Apostacy is punished by death.

In my book the people that pick up the Koran and say "Hey this is cool, there's some profound stuff in here" are okay, if they accept the minor tweaks by tacitly eating pork or drinking alcohol but if their country of origin is a Pakistani madrasa then he has the culture built not around the Koran but around other crap (see above) ingrained in him, the type of guy that believes he's the second coming or something. If your Muslim friends refuse to denounce AL-HEDAYA Vol. II (Hanafi Manual) then they must kill people that don't pay the Jizyah as these people are no longer entitled to protection in an Islamic state.

However just as the mafia doesn't represent every Italian, extremists don't represent Koranic Islam, they represent a very warped Islam (Pakistan madrasa edition) which I say is unreservedly evil. Many say that Islam is spreading, but here's the secret - it's not Koranic Islam that's spreading.

Go directly to heaven if killed in a just cause, or battle (the word which you unequivocally use). Killing civilians is a ticket the other way.