Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

Cool. To begin do you understand the principle of abrogration? This is critical.

Let us look at Sura 9. It has many evil ideas in it and is used daily to justify evil acts (eg. to a devout Muslim, jihad against unbelievers is legal and in fact mandatory; that's why what we call terrorism is not illegal under Islamic jurisprudence; they consider it "terrorism" when we defend ourselves from it). Note that there is no verse that abgrogates Sura 9 and Sura 9 abrogates all the other nice verses of the Qur'an (eg. the oft-quoted, "Let there be no compulsion is religion" is abrogated - it simply does not apply; some claim that this verse has not been abrogated but they are negating the rules about abrogation to do so. Sura 9 is among the last This is false. You can't just change the principles of Islam to suit your argument). My understanding of Sura 9 is the same as Osama bin Laden's and Quradhawi's and Qtub's and Al Azhar's. We agree it all means the same thing and abrogates the other verses. It is you that has a differing interpretation of the Qur'an than the four Sunni and single Shia school of jurisprudence. Here's an analysis of the verse, easy to digest and covers both the historicity and supporting evidence:
http://answering-islam.org/Silas/swordverse.htm

Can you counter this and still follow the Islamic rules of interpretation? no you can't. This verse stands. This verse is evil. Hence, Islam is evil - and this is why millions of people are oppressed and the Islamic schools of jurisprudence support this. Stop supporting evil. Even better, fight this evil through word and deed (at least stop hassling people on slashdot who do understand the Islamicists interpretation of Islam, which is the *mainstream* interpretation).

It would be nice if Islam was a religion of peace but it simply isn't. All the Islamic schools and a majority of Muslims (who, incidentally, live in South-East Asia, not the Middle East) agree with the interpretations I've given.

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

False. This is not about me or what I believe. I hate no-one. This is about what the Qur'an commands its followers to do. You are looking at things in the wrong way (personal attacks) rather than what the Qur'an does or does not command. The Qur'an is evil. There are nice versus in it but these are all "abrogated" - look up the term in an Islamic context if you don't know what that means. This is why my understanding of the Qur'an agrees with Osama bin Laden's, and Qaradhawi's, and Erdogan's and Al Azhar's. And that is why your assessment is wrong.

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

You are the one telling muslims that their religion is evil.

Because it is evil! you haven't even read the Qur'an and hadiths. If you had then we wouldn't be having this conversation. The only reason you are defending the ideology of Islam is because you don't know anything about its core doctrines or the actions of the major players to subvert the liberties of the Free World, eg. OIC

So if you want to learn something how about you read a non-apologetic analysis of the Qur'an. eg. see the following objective analysis of the Qur'an that points out the scientific falsehoods, numerous contradictions, plagerism of Judaic and Christian texts (copies thart still gets all sorts of things wrong) Then you finally might start to understand what people are trying to say *based on a reading of the Qur'an* - not on your guesswork without actually reading it. You are defending Islam based on 'cultural Muslims' that don't actually follow its teachings. That's why those of us who actually have read the Qur'an think your position is clueless since it is not based on an understanding of the mainstream teachings (which are horrific to Western sensibilities). If you ever do read it you won't believe that other believe that crap (actually, most Muslims only follow what their imam tells them, and they pray in Arabic which they do not understand, and they never read the Qur'an, when they do they often become apostates because of the hideous teachings but can't declare openly because apostasy is punishable by death. Even Qarwadari [you know who he is, right?] admitted a few weeks ago that with the death penalty for apostasy Islam would have died out a millenia ago - many Muslims are either cultural (Muslims in name only) or are secretly apostates but live under continual fear of discovery. Why you would defend this evilness is beyond me. Perhaps you should start reading objective analyses of Islam and its historical implications around the world (eg. 270 million people killed because Sura 9:5 and others commanded it).

So yeah, when I tell Muslims their religion is evil it is *because I know what I'm talking about*. Just like all the counter-jihadis. We're not racist as you suppose. We're pointing out to Muslims that have never read the Qur'an and are being lied to by their imams what the Qur'an really says. We're also trying to stop the "honor" killings and female genitial mutilation that cultural artifacts but imposed as religious obligations for followers (again with the threat of the consequences of apostasy for those that don't submit to the commandments of the imams).

So yeah, I feel it's a good thing to tell non-Muslims the truth about Islam. I try to explain to Muslims too if they have open minds (very hard to deprogramme many of them, until they are ready). Their leaders won't do it (they're far far worse than the Christian clergy for hypocracy and distorting reality to suit their ends - horrific slanders about the Jews). The Liberal Left won't do it (since they have common cause with the Islamists to smash the West and install their own systems of control). The media won't do it (since the liberal arts institutions journalists emanate from are left-leaning so they become cultural relativists too afraid to discern good from clear evil). Our political elites won't do it - they lack the courage to stand up for any principals (rightly or wrongly).

So no, I don't hate Muslims -- they are bigger victims than we are. I hate Islam not because I don't understand it, but because I've examined it closely and found it to insanely evil. In fact the preachments and hadiths (acts of Mohammed) are scarely to be believed - which is why someone like you is so skeptical of the claims we make. It turns out what we say is true because it is what is written in the religious documents of the Qur'an and hadiths. This insanity and indoctrinated hatred is what the Free World and Israel are fighting against. You don't have to believe me, but it is the reality of the current world.

I'm not asking you believe me. But if you have an open mind and desire justice and liberty for all people then perhaps you'll listen and believe an ex-Muslim like Wafa Sultan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir_JNPn_GNM
Please Google any of her other videos to learn the truth of what it means to be a Muslim in a Muslim majority country (not a Muslim in the West where what remains of our humanist principles still moderate the growing Islamist actions). You can also check out the testimonies of ex-Muslims at wikiislam, http://www.wikiislam.net/wiki/People_Who_Left_Islam

If you loved your Muslim friends you'd learn the truth about Islam yourself (wikiislam is widely acknowledged as an unbiased source in a sea of taqiyya and right-wing hysteria). You then might try and ask your friends questions that got them thinking about what they really know about Islam - and how the insanity and evilness of its teachings and examples apply in the 21st Century. Islam intends to take the world back to the morality of the 7th Century - but force if necessary (as in, ignorant, superstitious, misogynistic barbarism). What moral person who understands the truth about Islam (which is simple really; it is an inhumane, totalitarian, theocratic political ideology) would not speak out? Are you moral? will you speak out about Islam once you learn about it's *mainstream* interpretation that is violent and evil? Important note: all four Sunni schools and the Shia school agree on the horrible bits; Al Qaeda are not an extremist view as the media often lied to you; they are *devout* Muslims following the *mainstream* interpretation; but an 'expert' on Islam like you already knew that right? if you didn't know that (or don't know enough Islamic scripture to try and refute that assertion), then you have some homework to do, yes?

I hope you discover the truth one day - then you have a chance to do real good. Until then, you are a "useful idiot" for the Islamicist agenda. Please do better than that.

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

Whatevz. You keep creating and knocking down false strawmen of your own making. Hopefully one day you'll wake up to the fact you are defending totalitarian tyrrany - since no one was worried about your nice cultural Muslim friends the defence of Islamists is the only result of your apologistics.

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

Man, you're the loon. No matter how one tries to explain oneself you will stick with your initial deluded and inaccurate position.

I'm not racist, some of my best friends are black.

Don't be an idiot. There is nothing wrong with *respectfully* calling someone of African descent a "black" if they do it themselves. Why deny reality - and all races certainly refer to other races with such terms. Do you feel that statements are only racist when Europeans make them? then who is the racist? who sees the World through racist lenses? you do, because you are racist although you think you are not. What actually matters is the intent - whether you are intending to insult or not. Only a racist would think that it is ok for them to say things but others may not (you are presuming I'm a white). Only a fool denies the reality that some people are pale and some not so.

Same old hate the sin, love the sinner bullshit.

Rubbish. This is much closer to "Hate National Socialism, love the Germans". Islam is an ideology, very much akin to National Socialism in many ways. The statement you made shows you are a cultural relativist that lacks discernment. The "sin" of Islam is not "coveting your neighbor" or even the commandments to commit taqiyya. It is the shooting of little girls that want education - because *mainstream* Islamists follow Mohammeds words about women being "easily confused" and don't agree with female education - sure not every Muslim feels this way (especially not 'cultural Muslims' that are not even considered Muslims by the Islamists or Qur'an; they are apostates) but when hundreds of millions do then one cannot deny the cause as being Islamic doctrine). The "sins" of Islam include commandments for every able bodied man to make war on unbelievers, permit rape and oppression of women (due to the laws about witnesses to rape), permit killing of virgins for adultery, permit disgusting child marriages (because Mohammed did this), prevent adoption (because Mohammed forced his adopted son's wife to marry him), promote inequality (where non-Muslims are second class citizens to be humiliated as they pay jizya), deny science (after Al Ghazali there is no science, and no point studying science, everything is only subject to Allah's will), then there is the commandment and subsequent and continuing campaign for 1400 years to subdue the entire World to make it submit to Islam, then there is the polygamy and maltreatment of women, then there is the utter hypocrisy about homosexuals (where they condemn them in public but in private the Muslim men with no access to women take their sexual urges out on each other, and children). Only an immoral person would defend this. Unfortunately cultural relativism strips one of reason, discernment and morality. It is very sad that people defend the evil ideology of Islam, people like you.

Once again I will say it. I have no problem with 'cultural' Muslims. The proponents of liberty only have a problem with Islamists and the evil ideology of Islam. Your friends are not the problem, Islam is. So stop being a muppet and defending the indefensible - no one wants to hurt your friends. We only want to defend liberty in the West that is being eroded by the Islamists (eg. UN HRC Resolution 16/18) and their amoral cultural relativist defenders, like yourself.

It is not amoral to discriminate against evil ideologies (in fact it is very moral). So get a clue, eh?

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

Shows how much you don't know. I have Shia Muslim friends. You see, you lack understanding again and misattribute a caricature of some right wing guy to me. Both false. I have zero problem with Muslims (and hate no-one, so stop making shit up). I have a problem with an evil ideology called Islam (whose main victims are, in fact, Muslims). Most Muslims are cool precisely because they are not pious and do not follow the dictates of Islam. I hope you can comprehend that. The Muslims that are devout and strictly follow Islam are the ones to be concerned about. They believe they are on a mission from Allah and can do as they wish to anyone. National borders, sovereignty, Western laws, natural justice mean nothing to these guys. One is right to be concerned with the rise of such 'Islamists' and warn others about them (since most people, including you apparently, are ignorant of the difference between Muslims and Islamists, and that ideology of Islam is the root of much of the strife in the World today). Does that help you get it now? Or do you still want to project your incorrect mental model onto me and the World?

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

Wait, what? Did I read that right? Did you just claim that the US funnelled weapons to an Al Qaeda franchaise through the US consulate in Benghazi? Really? And you got a +5 for that bullshit? Man.

You really are a muppet that is completely ignorant of what is going on in the World. Then, despite your ignorance, you insult those that do know more than you. Here is General William G Boykin who has a strong supposition that Ambassador Stevens was running guns through Benghazi. Here's an interview with Boykins:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article33698.htm
Note that Boykins was *commander* of U.S. Special Forces Command, the deputy under secretary of defense for intelligence and a CIA staffer. The interview was conducted by a reputable agency, CNS News.

You apoplectic rage was misplaced. Admit it, you have a poor grasp on what is going on. You have the temerity to throw insults at me when you don't even know the facts. I would be ashamed if I was you. Sometimes people know more about a subject than you do. So I would suggest chillin' and opening your mind to what people are trying to tell you. Also, a trivial search on Google will reveal a wealth of facts (including the video link I've posted). Isn't it better to do you research rather than making an (incorrect) assumption as you did.

It is always ok to be wrong. It is arrogance to ignore facts presented to you just because they don't fit with your (incorrect) current worldview. If you open your closed mind and use the Scientific Method you would greatly profit from the diverse points of view on Slashdot.

Stop assuming you already know everything.
Do. your. research.

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

You really have no rebuttal do you. You have no proof, dismiss factual data and cannot rationally counter the points I made and data I linked. So you come up with the dhimmi-esque statements. You are the dhimmi but are too ignorant to see this. If you have verifiable counter points I'm all ears - but you don't, you lack any sophistry so resort to idiotic pop-psychology arguments. There is no point debating you - you simply won't consider facts presented to you - and instead come up with a bullshit deflection that projects your own jeans-creaming fantasy. Lame.

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

Well again, it would be easier to disregard that argument if so many of the people who are anti-Islam weren't racists.

That is completely false. Most of the opponents of the *ideology* of Islam are not racist in any way. The are proponents of liberty for all men. The problem is that Islamists slander these liberty defenders as racist (which is completely counter-factual), the mainstream media repeat this slander, and unfortunately moral people (which probably includes yourself) believe the slander rather than independently checking what the counter-jihadis have to say. Counter-jihadis like Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are routinely slandered as racist yet nothing could be further than the truth. They repeatedly say they have no problem with Muslims, they do have a problem with the evil ideology called Islam. If only people like yourself would listen to what the jihadis were saying (that the Qur'an is the motivation for their terrorism), what the counter-jihadis were saying (liberty for all, and Islam is diametrically opposed to Enlightenment/secular humanist values).

Political correctness only requires that you be explicit about which elements of Islam you're talking about.

False again. Political correctness requires you be "nice" and "not offend anyone". You cannot speak *Truth* in case some hyper-sensitive Islamist gets offended by such truth (note: Islamic Law defines slander as something a Muslim does not want to hear - even if completely true). Political correctness is all about not speaking the plain truth, and there is no right to offend. In this way Political Correctness is the antithesis of Free Speech. One cannot support Political Correctness and Free Speech - they are in opposition. I choose to support liberty for all men and Free Speech, Equality for Women, Freedom of conscience, Equality of all races, Homosexual rights, animal rights, protection of minors, etc. That's why I try and make a case against Islam, Political Correctness, and the swathes of the Political Left and Right that support these and oppose Liberty. So don't call us proponents of liberty racists, it just shows you don't understand what we are talking about and what we fighting against. :)

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

You are living in the bubble of dhimmi-wannabees.

The way you use that word shows you don't really understand it at all.

The problem with that list is that it is basically any attack that a muslim has any sort of involvement in. You could make a similar list of attacks by christians around the world, doesn't mean they are doing it because they are christian.

Could you? you really think that? what a load of bullshit. Plus, there is a fundamental difference. Islam specifically comments all able bodied men to wage jihad on unbelievers. Of course, since you have read the Qur'an you will realise verses like Sura 9:5 abrogate all the peaceful verses and command this. This is *mainstream* Muslim doctrine. Perhaps you haven't ever read the Qur'an and hadiths and don't realise just how evil they are. Rather than acknowledge you are ignorant about the subject you spew insults that opponents of the *ideology* of Islam are 'loons'. Rather than be a dick perhaps you should actually read the Qur'an for yourself. No sane non-dhimmi would ever defend it. Either you are complicit or you are an idiot to defend the indefensible evil. You then proceed to dismiss facts (eg. the massive attack statistics where the jihadis say they are motivated by Qur'anic teachings, but your apply your racist judgement and give them a pass instead of accepting the reasons they *say themselves*) . How about you get a clue and stop excusing evil. You are being a dhimmi and it is undignified and shameful. Stand up for liberty of all people - oppose the evil ideology that is Islam (instead of making excuses for it). Oh yeah, and please do some objective research.

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

I understand your point of view but it is two decades out of date. The Left is not for individual liberties or Free Speech. Look at how the Left demonize anyone with any dissenting view. Example: If you believe in global warming (undeniable) but are still skeptical/researching its cause (whether the most significant cause is anthropomorphic or not) then you will shot down in flames. If you criticize Islam (an ideology) you are shot down as a racist (its a non-sequiteur, that that doesn't matter to the Left). Yes, the Right are bad, as you say. I agree. It turns out that the Libertarians are the ones promoting individual liberties. Yes, they are not perfect, and their economic programme may be too lassiez faire - but it is all moot if the Left and Right don't act to stop the creeping Sharia and its enabler, Political Correctness, that is eroding Free Society.

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

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*.

Comment Re:Video is mostly factually correct (Score 1) 188

Your counter facts, please. Otherwise you could look at some of the references I supplied and get a clue at what I was trying to say :) That link, http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks ought to clue you in to the reality of Islam a fair bit. The Obama Administration is deluded by the Leftist "narrative" of cultural equivalence and that "moderate" Islamists can be supported and "extremists" sidelined.

The *facts* are that the mainstream of Islam approves and supports jihad and global Sharia (Google for the surveys). Negotiation and appeasement won't work. This is a fight to the death between the supporters of Enlightenment values and the Islamists.

I suggest you do the research yourself. Look at the agenda of the OIC (Stephen Coughlin's videos on YouTube are simply the best explanation). Read the Qur'an and hadiths - they would be condemned as an ideology of utter hate speech if they weren't cloaked in a fig leaf of plagiarized superstitious mumbo-jumbo. Check the *facts* rather than just going by what you think you know. That's all I ask.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Most of us, when all is said and done, like what we like and make up reasons for it afterwards." -- Soren F. Petersen

Working...