Slashdot Mirror

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur...

And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.

Qur'an 4:24

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur...

O Prophet, We have made lawful for thee thy wives whom thou hast given their wages and what thy right hand owns, spoils of war that God has given thee, and the daughters of thy uncles paternal and aunts paternal, thy uncles maternal and aunts maternal, who have emigrated with thee, and any woman believer, if she give herself to the Prophet and if the Prophet desire to take her in marriage, for thee exclusively, apart from the believers -- We know what We have imposed upon them touching their wives and what their right hands own -- that there may be no fault in thee; God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.

Qur'an 33:50

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur...

Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, "Tell them." She was embarrassed. He said, "It is alright, and I do it myself." Malik said, "A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practising coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife, does not practise coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission."

Al-Muwatta 29:100

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur...

And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.

Qur'an 4:24

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur...

O Prophet, We have made lawful for thee thy wives whom thou hast given their wages and what thy right hand owns, spoils of war that God has given thee, and the daughters of thy uncles paternal and aunts paternal, thy uncles maternal and aunts maternal, who have emigrated with thee, and any woman believer, if she give herself to the Prophet and if the Prophet desire to take her in marriage, for thee exclusively, apart from the believers -- We know what We have imposed upon them touching their wives and what their right hands own -- that there may be no fault in thee; God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.

Qur'an 33:50

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur...

Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, "Tell them." She was embarrassed. He said, "It is alright, and I do it myself." Malik said, "A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practising coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife, does not practise coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission."

Al-Muwatta 29:100

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur...

And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you. Lawful unto you are all beyond those mentioned, so that ye seek them with your wealth in honest wedlock, not debauchery. And those of whom ye seek content (by marrying them), give unto them their portions as a duty. And there is no sin for you in what ye do by mutual agreement after the duty (hath been done). Lo! Allah is ever Knower, Wise.

Qur'an 4:24

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur...

O Prophet, We have made lawful for thee thy wives whom thou hast given their wages and what thy right hand owns, spoils of war that God has given thee, and the daughters of thy uncles paternal and aunts paternal, thy uncles maternal and aunts maternal, who have emigrated with thee, and any woman believer, if she give herself to the Prophet and if the Prophet desire to take her in marriage, for thee exclusively, apart from the believers -- We know what We have imposed upon them touching their wives and what their right hands own -- that there may be no fault in thee; God is All-forgiving, All-compassionate.

Qur'an 33:50

https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Qur...

Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, "Tell them." She was embarrassed. He said, "It is alright, and I do it myself." Malik said, "A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practising coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife, does not practise coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission."

Al-Muwatta 29:100

Criticizing Sharia is 'hate speech,'

Has that been established by a court of law in the USA?

the European Court of Human Rights determined on July 31, 2001, that "the institution of Sharia law and a theocratic regime, were incompatible with the requirements of a democratic society."

For the complete set of stats re which barbaric and medieval Islamic laws are still practiced today and where, see this link. Hopefully you are open to being educated and are not just a woefully ignorant bigot.

that's a misnomer

Actually, the 'beat your wife with a stick' law is a myth , at least for the US. However, it's condoned, even encouraged in other parts of the world. Interestingly enough, the US is bending over backwards to be tolerant of those parts of the world where wife-beating is the norm...

The main difference is that the core book of Islam not only justifies but demands abhorent behaviour.

Do you have any specifics?

The core book of Christianity not only justifies but demands abhorent behaviour.

Here are some death penalties:
http://valerietarico.com/2009/...

Here are some other "crazy" bits:
https://www.salon.com/2014/05/...

In any case, one can with some justification make the argument that the vast majority of christians reject a literal understanding of these types of passages, claiming that other passages supercede these or that they reflect the society in which they were written and that modern understanding has become more nuanced. They do not interpret the scriptures in a violent and opressive manner.

A similar argument can be made that the vast majority of muslims have a similarly nuanced approach to the abhorrent interpretations of their scriptures.

Just for easy access - here are some of the more "controversial" verses of the Koran/Quran/Qur'an they are not too great either:
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Top...

I wonder if they will be blocking goat porn

http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/...

Sorry, but you are plain wrong. Al Azhar University in Cairo (the highest authority on Sunni jurisprudence) has repeatedly stated that ISIS is an authentic Islamic entity. This is because ISIS is following the commandments of Sharia to the letter.

ISIS also follow the example of Mohammed exactly. Mohammed raped, slaughtered, lied, assassinated, looted, tortured, beheaded, molested children, etc etc and this is all well-attested in the hadith and commanded in the Koran. ISIS are doing *exactly* what Mohammed did, can commanded all Muslims to do. Fortunately, most Muslims are good human beings (which makes them bad Muslims, 'Takfiris' or apostates - note the Submission ideology [called "Islam" in Arabic] requires apostates to be killed).

To claim that ISIS are carrying out "cultural" practices and not the Submission ideology (aka "Islam") is a classic deception (known as "taqiyya" to Shia, and "idtirar" to Sunni) designed to pacify you so you don't resist Submission until it is too late. The Submission ideology (Islam) is completely alien to Westerners (who incorrectly assume that lying is prohibited, and that there is a Golden Rule producing equality between believers and unbelievers - when there is none, "kaffir"/infidels are considered subhuman that must be exterminated if Islam is to victorious):
http://www.islam-watch.org/aut...

So why you defend the evil Submission ideology rather than stand up for Global Enlightenment Civilization is beyond me. Perhaps you think that it is somehow noble to show tolerance to a deceptive, barbaric and totalitarian ideology that works to destroy Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Conscience, Sexual Equality, Equal Rights for Homosexuals, Science (which Islam considers blasphemy ever since the time of Al Ghazali), etc etc

I would suggest that you learn about the true nature of Islam, David - rather than defending an evil you know nothing about (hence, you are easily mislead into repeating the propaganda produced by its adherents). Here's a place you can start looking:
http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/...

Stop repeating the propaganda of the Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC - who work as a 57-country voting block in the United Nations). Stand up for Individual Liberty and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights rather than the Sharia deception of the "Cairo Declaration of Human Rights". Because making excuses for evil will make you complicit in the evil.

Speaking of which, here are the ISIS prices for slaves including boys and girls from 1 to 9 years old (which is permitted in Islam because Mohammed 'married' a child of 6 years, Aisha bint Abu Bakr):
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/...
Do you really want to be providing apologia for these perfectly 'halal' (legal) Islamic practices of sex slavery and especially child sex-slavery (which Mohammed indulged in, so it is permitted always in Islamic ideology).

Thanks Keith, and sound advice, in general.

However, I suggest you actually learn what Islam teaches its adherents. ISIS have misinterpreted nothing, they are practicing Islam *exactly* as Mohammed was said to have practiced it. Tolerating an evil is an evil. Learn was Islam and Sharia are as Muslims are taught to understand them, not the garbage that is fed to us under the famous 'taqiyya', 'kitman', 'muruna' doctrines (ie. in Islam is is not only permitted to lie to kaffir if it advances Islam, it is obligatory).

Here's a place to start understanding what Islam *actually* teaches:
http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/...

You are completely correct. In Sharia, 'slander' of Muslims does not mean telling falsehoods (as it does in the West), it means 'anything a Muslims doesn't want to hear' - especially from a 'kafir which is translated as infidel but is a pejorative closer to 'n*gger'. Non-Muslims are considered subhuman by Sharia.

Major Stephen Coughlin lays the truth about Sharia (Islamic Law) out for you:
Stephen Coughlin, Part 2: Understanding the War on Terror Through Islamic Law [58 mins]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...
Islamicists do not want you to know the truth about Islamic law, and they are obliged to lie to you it if advances Islam (there are for types of deception Islam commands: taqiyya, kitman, tawriya and muruna):
http://www.annaqed.com/en/isla...
http://www.islam-watch.org/aut...

When a Muslim cleric denounces "terrorism and killing of innocents" this is also a deception. Under Sharia, unlawful warfare is anyone who resists jihad. Our counter-terror forces and militaries are thus considered "terrorists" according to Sharia. Similarly, under Sharia "innocents" are Muslims *only*. Non-Muslims can never be innocent, their existence and disbelief is an affront to Allah (who is the Nabatean chief god Dushara).

So when a Muslim cleric condemns "terrorism and killing of innocents" they are condemning the West for killing Muslims and jihadis. They are using the "kitman" deception that Islam obliges them to.

In order to condemn the Charlie Hebdo attacks a Muslim cleric would have to use the words "we condemn jihadis and the killing of all civilians". But they do not - because they agree with the jihadis, as Islamic scripture requires them to.

The precedent for slaughtering the critics of Islamic evil comes from evil Mohammed himself, who ordered many assassinations of his critics:
http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/...

Of course, all of the claims of Islam are false. Historical evidence is emerging that PROVES the claims made about the origins of Islam are all completely false:
" An Historical Critique of Islam's Beginnings - Jay Smith " [72 mins]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Muslims who know about this scholarship want to suppress it - they are afraid of how the truth with cause their superstition to disintegrate and stop the global jihad in its tracks.

I don't want to discount the threat of fundimentalist religious lunatics(of any stripe), nor would I stand in the way of reasonable efforts to put them down, but lets be real here, and not blame an entire reliegon of 1.2 billion people for a handful of incidents, and fringe groups.

You a mixing a religion with it's followers. I have see no problem in blaming the religion of islam for what happened today, but I wouldn't dream of blaming the 1.2 billion followers of islam for it, as 1.199999999999999.. of them didn't have anything to do with it. The religion itself, however, have deep traditions of violence toward those who critizise or mock it, starting with the founder of the religion who himself ordered the killings of lots of poets writing critical poems about him, as well as others who dared question his legitimacy as god's prophet or in any ways mocked or disrespected him. As the prophet Muhammad is seen as the most perfect human being who ever lived, incapable of doing wrong, and is seen as an example to follow for all muslims(with his actions forming the basis of the Sharia laws), saying that what todays gunmen has nothing to do with islam is either dishonest, delusional or unfathomably naive.

I don't think it's Islam per se that's the problem here.

I do. Killing as a response to mocking is a tradition that was established by the prophet Muhammad himself. He ordered the killings of several poets for doing nothing else than writing negative poems about himself. Anyone who does not see how this is the reason for the killings today, considering that Muhammad is seen within islam as the most perfect human being ever and an example to follow for all muslims, is either delusional or extremely naive.

Guardians of Peace (GOP) [...] are now threatening to harm the families of Sony employees.

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

In the context of Islam, as in 'Islam is a religion of peace', the word 'peace' means 'not struggling against the will of Allah'.

So no, it probably doesn't mean what most people (native speakers of English) think it means.

hmmm what is the will of Allah?

Kill all that don't serve Allah
So fight them until there is no more infidels and all submit to the religion of Allah alone. Surah 8:39
O Prophet, urge the faithful to fight. If there are twenty among you with determination they will vanquish two hundred; if there are a hundred then they will slaughter a thousand unbelievers, for the infidels are a people devoid of understanding. Surah 8:65
Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war. Surah 9:5
Kill All Dogs and Pigs
Angels do not enter a house witch has either a dog or a picture in it. Hadith 4:539
Allah declares that all dogs must die, they are despised in my sight as swine are Hadith 4:540
Sex slaves are allowed
Also women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.[right hand = sex slaves] Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise. Surah 4:24 ( http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/... ) According to Qur'an 23:6, Qur'an 33:50, Qur'an 33:52, and Qur'an 70:30 a Muslim man is considered "chaste" so long as he only has sex with his wives (of whom he may have up to four) and his right-hand possessions (female captives/slaves). An unmarried Muslim man who has sex with his slave girl is still considered to be "chaste" by Islamic standards

Even if there was a secret islamophobic agenda,

What Secret?
UK Islamist Leader: Islam Will Dominate America
Muslim daubs war memorial with 'Islam will dominate the world' - but walks free after CPS says he was NOT racially motivated
Friday Prayers in Brazil: Islam Will Dominate the World
I want to see flag of Allah flying over Downing St

while (humans.count() > 0) {

  kill(humans.any());
}

I have a feeling it'll be closer to

while(muslims.count() > 0) {...

That's only because Islamic societies are stuck in the Dark Ages - literally.

Else they would do it first. There's a reason why non-Muslim societies are in what's called dar al-Harb - the House of War.

In my experience this type believes those two are interchangeable. They also tend to use that term for all folks of Middle Eastern or North African heritage and not just Arabs. This is likely because they are unaware other such groups exist. Bigotry and ignorance seem to be highly correlated.

Don't be rediculous. Anyone who reads about Islamic terrorism will be aware of the many white muslim terrorist. If anything they are to be despised more. At least those from Islamic cultures have the excuse that they are abused and brutalised as kids, taught that hatred and murder is good, and that non-muslims are evil.

Except that they both use the same original scriptures.

Again, this is another claim of Islam that simply is not true. There are *numerous* differences between Islam and the Torah & Christianity. The evil warlord Mohammed used Arian Christian heretics to base some of the superstiton in the Qur'an on - but these guys plagiarized several *major* things incorrectly. Here, please allow me to enlighten you with numerous additional sources that show that the Qur'an is not the direct and eternal word of God (another bold yet provably false claim, even when you don't consider the Sa'ana Qur'an), because it is plagarised from material written 500 - 1000 years earlier, gets it wrong, and then throws in a bunch of anti-scientific stuff to boot (that is, modern science *proves* statements in the Qur'an to be *false* - its claim to be *perfect* is simply rubbish):
http://www.1000mistakes.com/1000mistakes/index.php?Page=007_003_001_001
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/
http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/Main_Page

Now, you can choose to believe in an anti-scientific falsehood if you like. I'd rather not. It is clear that Islam makes many claims. Upon close examination those claims are *simply not true*. You can deny the sources I've given, but that is simply denial of reality because you would rather cling to the lie of the mythology you were born into. Making that choice is perfectly valid, (although stupid in the 21st Century, IMHO) - you just have to understand that you are choosing to deny all the evidence that shows the various claims of your superstition as false. Fortunately, as the wikiislam site shows, many people are realising the falsehood of religions and choosing to live a Free People (not slaves under Islam) and having to be virtuous because they want to be - not because they fear the nightmares of Bronze Age desert barbarians.

So all I or TBP have to do is clearly mark my pages as "archives" and legally get away with hosting child porn, TBP meta links, torrents and PDF books ?

Who cares? Our laws against all of those things are insane and anti-freedom.

Oh yes, things would be much better with Sharia law.

First there's this problem of there being ONLY ONE Bosnian Muslim division

I stand corrected, there was one *Bosnian* SS division but Two *yugoslavian* SS divisions. The other being the (Muslim) Albanian Skanderbeg 21st Waffen SS division
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_Waffen_Mountain_Division_of_the_SS_Skanderbeg_%281st_Albanian%29
So I concede you are correct. Only one *Bosnian* Muslim SS Division - but you must concede that I'm correct that there were *two* Muslim SS Divisions (zero would have been a better number of SS divisions of any nationality, don't you think?).

I am also corrected in my "hundreds of thousands" of statement. On further research the number is one hundred thousand "to a first order approximation" (78,000). Note that as part of the carnage I'm not only counting direct massacres, but also the rounding up and deportation to concentration camps. Or is all of that "ok with you" just because the Muslim ideology was no worse than the Nazi ideology (as in: totalitarian socialism, with genocidal aims against Jews and oppression of all moral Free People willing to speak out) ? Don't use that excuse, only evil people justify the slaughter in that way.

Please also note that I take pains to mention the trouble is with the doctrines of Islam, not with Muslims (who are enslaved by it). I do note that you never contest the Suras I presented which clearly call for genocide. Would you care to agree with me that they clearly call for genocide? and that these Suras are used today to justify rape and murder on a large scale today? could you please point to a Sura that abrogates 9:5? you can't, can you? you are quibbling about things around the edges while denying the reality of my core thesis - Islam commands Genocide. This is different from Christian Churches, who have also committed all sorts of crimes in the past, but the Christian *mainstream* is completely against genocide. Meanwhile Islam is still hell-bent on the genocide of Jews and the global subjugation of all non-Muslims into the Muslim political order. We both know this to be true.

While I haven't been to Bosnia nor Serbia I do get at least one side of the Kosovo story from a Serbian friend that I talk with daily. Of course he has a particular slant on events, but at least I have a local information source. While we are at it, I will state that the actions of Republika Srpska in Bosnia were wrong (and yes, bordering genocidal) - just so you know my views are independent of that friendship.

So we can dance around the numbers and whether the motivation of the Yugoslavian SS divisions was nationalism or religion (or both). However we can gauge your morality with a couple of quick yes or no questions:

Do you agree with the actions of the Muslim components of the Yugoslavian SS Divisions? yes or no?

Do you believe in conducting genocide of Jews and killing, conversion or subjugation of all non-Muslims in accordance with Sahih Muslim, 41:6985 and Suras 9:29? yes or no? (see the *lots* of commands for evil: http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1094048/pg1)

Do you agree that the Qur'an makes fighting obligatory ("fard") for all Muslim males once they reach sufficient strength to overcome the non-Muslims, as attested to in numerous Sura and hadith? yes or no? see http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Jihad_is_Compulsory_(Fard)

Of course, if you are a true Muslim you answered "yes" to all these questions. If you answered "no" to any of them (eg. as a secular person would) then you are an "apostate" and you will be killed just as soon as a devout Muslim can manage it (eg. if the rest of your family is devout).

Ok, you can try argue, "That's all history. It was World War II and everyone was at it". Well, if genocide is not a core part of Islamic Doctrine how do you excuse the *Grand Mufti* of Jerusalem calling for

Oops, missed some links that might help enlighten you:
http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/Main_Page
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.htm

Ah, one of the great dhimmi-wannabe sites.

Actually quite the opposite. What I pointed to is a daily list of fatal attacks. These are *facts*. It must be nice for you to live in a cocoon where you don't to examine *facts* and statistics and instead throw around perjoratives like 'loon' with no basis in fact. You sir, are the enemy for Freedom. Look at the facts/statistics goddamit !

"Muslims want self-determination, but not an American-imposed and defined democracy. They don't want secularism or theocracy," said the professor of Islamic Studies at Georgetown University in Washington.

More Leftists bollocks. Remember, the BBC has fallen greatly and is no longer an impartial source. How about you cross-check multiple independent sources as a proper researched would do. Then you would encounter survey results like these:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1510866/Poll-reveals-40pc-of-Muslims-want-sharia-law-in-UK.html
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_(Shari'ah)
Well, they already have that with 87 Sharia courts already operating in the UK. It is quite possible that these courts will be extended to non-Muslims in the future when they have disputes with Muslims. This has already happened in numerous states in the US, where the Constitution has already given way to Sharia in several court cases. Google is your friend if you want to find the truth.

So stop being lazy and use the Scientific Method - cross-check the *facts*.

Regarding your sig:

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Fabricated_Hadith#The_ink_of_the_scholar_is_more_holy_than_the_blood_of_the_Martyr

Well, damn. That's just sad. I really like that quote. It makes me think of how the Arabs used to be, building libraries and universities, saving all the ancient knowledge they'd accumulated over centuries while my ancestors were freezing in dirt floored huts, declaring science and philosophy a threat to their religion.

Regarding your sig:

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/List_of_Fabricated_Hadith#The_ink_of_the_scholar_is_more_holy_than_the_blood_of_the_Martyr

You seem to be saying that not all religions are the same, rightly pointing the great many crimes and evils done in the name of Islam, but insist that all Muslims are the same. Why the selective nuance?

I didn't mean to give that impression. All Muslims are the same in that they, like all religious folk, are equally deluded about superstition with no scientific evidence. I don't agree with this, but I have zero problem with this provided they keep their faith *personal*. Same with Christians and Jews and Hindus and Buddhists and Jains etc. My beef is when the supremacists want to impose their rules on us. These rules are couched in political correctness and dictate what we may or may not say. These rules say that our schools may not serve pork, that university gyms must segregate to keep the Muslims happy (with the implicit threat of violence or noisy demonstrations if they don't get their way). That's when it stops being personal and intrudes on *non-believers*. Occasionally Christianity does this, and Judaism almost never so. Muslims do differ from other faiths because their *core doctrines* state they will achieve global domination and have dominion over *non-Muslims* as well as Muslims. Around 20% of the Ummah (which works out to be around 300 million people) belive in this [that's why young jihadis often don't stand in court to recognize judges]. Around half of all Muslims are not active supremacists but do agree with the goals of the supremacists (that's around 700 million people) - the eventual imposition of Sharia on all people of the globe whether Muslim or not. This makes the Muslims very different to other modern faiths.
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Muslim_Statistics_(Shari'ah)

Look at the statistics. The narrative of the political Left (and mainstream media that promotes that narrative) is that the Islamist problem is only with 'extremists'. This is a complete lie. The statistics say that most Muslims want Sharia imposed around the globe - and Sharia claims non-Muslims under its jurisdiction. So yes, the "mainstream Muslims" you seek to defend do want to impose Sharia on *you and me* - they just don't believe in personally doing violence to achieve this (but almost always support jihadis doing the dirty work for them - since all sane and able Muslim men are supposed to wage jihad against unbelievers. This is a core doctrine. Fortunately most practicing Muslim men (those that visit the mosques rather than the 'cultural Muslims') wage jihad just by providing funds rather than physically taking arms.

Wake up and smell the homicide bombers. Islam is different. Lying (taqiyya) is permitted. Drugs are permitted. Homosexuality is not permitted in public but is absolutely rampant among Muslim men (who have no easy access to women). Pederastery is common. Child marriages are common (girls 10 - 15 are often married to men 40+). Wife beating is explicitly permitted by the Qur'an. Genocide (especially against Jews, Christians and atheists) is implied in the daily prayers. Jihad against all unbelievers is not only permitted, it is *oligitary* for all able Muslim men. We are lucky most of those who identify as Muslim see the theocracy as utter bullshit and go through the motions - since the Qur'an commands that apostasy is punishable by death (most of the young people of Iran fall into this category - they see Islam as fundamentally broken and the theocracy as their true enemy, not America). So yeah, Islam is very very different to other religions. Please read the Skeptics Annotated Qur'an (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/index.htm) and hadiths. You'll see how 'different' (as in, explicitly evil) Islam really is.

Do you think Christian pastors burn non Christian holy books to bolster freedom of expression? Or might it be because it's the wrong kind of holy book?

I don't care what their motivations are. The point is they are free to do it and

Most religions are like that because they do not tell believers what to do with contradictions. Islam does. Quran 2:106 says: "Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?". Here is a partial list of abrogations (keep in mind the Qur'an is not arranged chronologically.

This is a complicated topic, but to disparage Islam as inherently anti-Semitic, or to equate Muslims with Nazis is disgusting.

It's not disparaging, it's a simple statement of fact.

Where did the extra virgin come from?

Oh wait, I forgot to count the guy :-) /me ducks

wow, there is even a wiki for this stuff? lol
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/72_Virgins

And those 72 virgins are an urban legend

No they are not.

Even if they're not mentioned in the Qur'an, they're an integral part of the official Islam in many parts of the world. See the Surah Quran 55:72:

""" It was mentioned by Daraj Ibn Abi Hatim, that Abu al-Haytham 'Adullah Ibn Wahb narrated from Abu Sa'id al-Khudhri, who heard Muhammad saying, 'The smallest reward for the people of Heaven is an abode where there are eighty thousand servants and seventy-two houri, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine and ruby, as wide as the distance from al-Jabiyyah to San'a. """

See also: http://wikiislam.net/wiki/72_Virgins

[...] used to make saboteurs into religious fanatics they aren't.

Look, I love being politically correct as much as most left-wing Europeans, but anyone who yells "Allahu Akbar" ("God is great") and then presses the button counts as a religious fanatic in my book.

Don't worry. Islam is just as (IMHO more) barbaric than the Old and New Testaments.

While we're posting biased but well sourced links: http://www.wikiislam.net/

Posted AC to reduce the probability of my murder.

If people are so brainwashed by their religion that they think that they're going to be greeted by 17 virgins and everything will be better once this life is over, all bets are off.

Huh? It used to be 72 virgins, you insensitive clod!

(mod informative, not funny)

Dude, it's 72 virgins, not 17! And what they don't tell you is that all 72 of those virgins are great big gay men...