Skip to comments.Terror on the dole (4-22-04)
Posted on 07/07/2005 2:35:12 PM PDT by libertarianben
Four young British Muslims in their twenties - a social worker, an IT specialist, a security guard and a financial adviser - occupy a table at a fast-food chicken restaurant in Luton. Perched on their plastic chairs, wolfing down their dinner, they seem just ordinary young men. Yet out of their mouths pour heated words of revolution.
(Excerpt) Read more at thisislondon.co.uk ...
As a parent you need to do more than speak anxiously at your child's arrest.
Cockroaches, termites ... there is only one solution.
I suspect this warrior may not be wearing it today!
If animals like these confronted me in my neighborhood, I just might go home and grab my Crusader Jacket; and wish them luck.
I never imagined enjoying [censored ] [censored ]; but that is changing.
There are actually all sorts of solutions. However you are right in that all solutions arrive at the same results.
It's getting close to the time where people will have to take these idiots at their word, and kill before they themselves are killed. These people are not fighting for recognition, or sympathy to a cause, or co-existence with the rest of the world. They want domination, in an all-or-nothing fashion.
I say they get nothing. See my tagline.
"The mosques say one thing to the public, and something else to us. Let's just say that the face you see and the face we see are two different faces," says Abdul Haq. "Believe me," adds Musa, "behind closed doors, there are no moderate Muslims."
"Perched on their plastic chairs, wolfing down their dinner, they seem just ordinary young men. Yet out of their mouths pour heated words of revolution."
Could be any college campus in the US, or any café in any blue state city. Maybe that's why the reflexive, automatic support of Islam in leftist circles... common cause.
Boys, it's a small island, and it's gonna get smaller really, really soon. I strongly suggest you either leave, hide, or get out of the wannabe jihadi business while you're still alive and well to have the choice.
Sayful Islam: total support for bin Laden.
He no longer works, even though he is able-bodied, he admits, preferring instead to claim housing benefit and jobseeker's allowance. He smiles sheepishly and says the irony is not lost on him that the British state is supporting him financially, even as he plots to "overthrow it".
I really have reservations about saying this but it has come down to this in my mind. Expel and deport all foreign-born Muslims and closely monitor the US/British born muslims. Sounds cruel but since they can't police their own vermin terrorists we will gladly do it. Get them out of our nations if they can't suppress their evil murderous ways. I say Good Riddance....go back to your miserable poverty hell holes where you belong...and take our own traitorous leftists with ya who sympathize with your deadly ideologies.
Think "Cartago delenda est"!
Excellent post. Now that is what I call journalism. Can you imagine our MSM laying bare the cold hard facts of what is happening. Pandering to Islam will not work. Islamic scholars have to be come really loud in public and private in their denunciation of Islamic radicalism.
So is Islam.
It is eerie how all these otherwise unconnected groups like secular humanists, Democrats/socialists/communists, facsists, and Islamists now seem so tightly knitted together.
the Left has knit itself to Islam, but Islam cares nothing for any of them as anything other than a tool to accomplish their aims.
"Socialism is a cancer of the soul.
So is Islam"
Note the last 5 letters in 'SociALISM" spells ISLAM. The remaining 'SOCI'ety. ISLAM SOCIety...... think about it!
Both forms of govt. remove rights and foster poverty. Interesting, ay?
Yes, but with the American college kids, it's all just talk. They aren't remotely interested in blowing themselves up.
What if we just switch their chicken with arsenic-laced pork??
Nice. Bastard needs to be shot.
"They aren't remotely interested in blowing themselves up."
No need to now, is there? Just throw as many roadblocks in the way of preventing such attacks as you can, and there you go... suicide bomber by proxy.
Prior to seeing the group at the fastfood restaurant, Sayful meets me at his semi-detached rented home in Bury Park, Luton's Muslim neighbourhood. He no longer works, even though he is able-bodied, he admits, preferring instead to claim housing benefit and jobseeker's allowance. He smiles sheepishly and says the irony is not lost on him that the British state is supporting him financially, even as he plots to "overthrow it".
British tax-payers supporting the enemy - & we are doing the same. WHY? - the communist, socialist, liberal left is why. But Sayful and his friends laugh at the idea that they are local pariahs. "The mosques say one thing to the public, and something else to us. Let's just say that the face you see and the face we see are two different faces," says Abdul Haq. "Believe me," adds Musa, "behind closed doors, there are no moderate Muslims."
But Sayful and his friends laugh at the idea that they are local pariahs. "The mosques say one thing to the public, and something else to us. Let's just say that the face you see and the face we see are two different faces," says Abdul Haq. "Believe me," adds Musa, "behind closed doors, there are no moderate Muslims."
Islam is not a religion, but a cult which must be recognized for what it is, then outlawed and utterly destroyed. It is a dangerous serpent poisoning every life-sustaining vein of civilized society. Only a New Crusade to cut off its many heads will rescue our civilization and way of life.
We read and here a neverending stream of this filth yet don't say muslim and Geno**** in the same breath or you will be branded a fanatic. The solution is singular, simple and obvious but not easy.
You are, of course, welcome to your opinion. I didn't say that all Muslims are evil. But when they are called to the core of Islam by mullahs, they are called to kill infidels. If your Muslim friends do not hate Christians and Jews...and if they befriend them, they are (in the minds of serious Muslims and Islam itself) apostates.
It is the goal of Islam to dominate the world. You have heard that haven't you?
Learn a little bit about Islam. I think you will be surprised by its true intent.
A Muslim who is anti-mullah is no longer a Muslim. It's like talking about a Catholic who rejects the authority of the pope, or an Orthodox Jew who rejects the Torah
You CANNOT be both a "very religious" Muslim, and also take the side of the US against fellow Muslims. Someone who claims he's a very religious Muslim and also loyal to the US is lying. It is central to Islam that the loyalty of Muslims is to Islam before all else, and to the conquest and subjegation of the non_Islamic world
Riiiiiight. Just like there are moderate Nazis and middle-of-the-road Communists.
It's time the planet is cured of the worldwide mental illness known as Islam. Destroy every islamic holy site. Vaporize Mecca, Medina, Qom, and their filthy mosque in our "Holy City" of Jerusalem.
Demonstrate to them that allah, their filthy moon-god, is worthless and impotent. Destroying their faith is the only way to win this war.
Think Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Tokyo, Berlin and Dresden. We haven't had much trouble from the Japanese and Germans lately.
There you go! How can we get the Prez and Tony Blair to understand that.
Islam must go...and the happiest folks to see it go will be moderate Muslims.
If we are going to win this war, we must strike at the heart of the enemy.
Striking the toe or fingernail of the enemy might slow it down, but it won't kill it.
Islam must die.
The British are way too polite. They need to eradicate this scum from their country.
Last response on my part, you are obviously not a Christian and you obviously know nothing of Islam.
Christianity at its core is to spread love. Islam at its core is to spread its cult of hate by any means possible...but the sword is preferred.
If a Christian decides to leave the faith, Christians weep. If a Muslim decides to leave the faith...death.
You must be living in a cave not to know this.
If you would like to learn about Islam and Christianity, let me know. Otherwise, see ya.
This article should be mailed to everyone you know and posted at every website you visit.
1,400 Years of Christian/Islamic Struggle: An Analysis
By Richard C. Csaplar, Jr.
CBN.com I was very disappointed to see that U.S. News would publish a clearly false article, adopting the world's clearly false, politically correct (PC) view of the place of the Crusades in history. What makes it even worse, the article hides its views under the additional headline falsehood, "The Truth About the Epic Clash Between Christianity and Islam."
Let me explain.
The opening heading states, "During the Crusades, East and West first met." This is just totally in error, as any person with the slightest knowledge of history well knows. East and West had been fighting for at least 1,500 years before the first Crusade.
To give just a few examples -- the Persians invaded Europe in an attempt to conquer the Greeks in the fifth century B.C. The Greek, Alexander the Great, attempted to conquer all of Asia, as far as India, in the fourth century B.C. Both the Persians of the east and the Greeks of the west set up colonial empires founded upon bloody military conquest. The Romans established by bloody military conquest colonies in Mesopotamia, northwestern Arabia, and Assyria in the second century A.D.
A different type of bloody conquest occurred through the movement of whole tribal groups between the east and the west. Again, just to name a few, the Huns, the Goths, and the Avars came from as far away as western Asia, central Asia, and China respectively in the fifth through the seventh centuries A.D. Indeed, the Avars from northern China and Mongolia were besieging Constantinople in 626 A.D., at the very moment Mohammed was a merchant in Arabia. Indeed, the Avars, by this siege, were one of the forces that weakened the Byzantines (there were many other, perhaps more important, forces) to the extent that most of the Byzantine mid-eastern empire fell relatively easily to the Muslims.
But let's give the writer the benefit of the doubt and say that the author meant that "During the Crusades, Islam and Christianity first met." This, of course, is also totally false.
Let us review the Muslim conquest. In 624, Mohammed led a raid for booty and plunder against a Meccan caravan, killing 70 Meccans for mere material gain. Between 630 A.D. and the death of Mohammed in 632 A.D., Muslims -- on at least one occasion led by Mohammed -- had conquered the bulk of western Arabia and southern Palestine through approximately a dozen separate invasions and bloody conquests. These conquests were in large part "Holy wars," putting the lie to another statement in the U.S. News article that proclaimed the Crusades "The First Holy War," as if the Christians had invented the concept of a holy war. After Mohammed's death in 632, the new Muslim caliph, Abu Bakr, launched Islam into almost 1,500 years of continual imperialist, colonialist, bloody conquest and subjugation of others through invasion and war, a role Islam continues to this very day.
You will note the string of adjectives and may have some objection to my using them. They are used because they are the absolute truth. Anyone denying them is a victim of PC thinking, ignorant of history, or lying to protect Islam. Let us take each word separately before we proceed further in our true history of the relationship between the Christian west and the Islamic east.
The Muslim wars of imperialist conquest have been launched for almost 1,500 years against hundreds of nations, over millions of square miles (significantly larger than the British Empire at its peak). The lust for Muslim imperialist conquest stretched from southern France to the Philippines, from Austria to Nigeria, and from central Asia to New Guinea. This is the classic definition of imperialism -- "the policy and practice of seeking to dominate the economic and political affairs of weaker countries."
The Muslim goal was to have a central government, first at Damascus, and then at Baghdad -- later at Cairo, Istanbul, or other imperial centers. The local governors, judges, and other rulers were appointed by the central imperial authorities for far off colonies. Islamic law was introduced as the senior law, whether or not wanted by the local people. Arabic was introduced as the rulers' language, and the local language frequently disappeared. Two classes of residents were established. The native residents paid a tax that their colonialist rulers did not have to pay.
Although the law differed in different places, the following are examples of colonialist laws to which colonized Christians and Jews were made subject to over the years:
Christians and Jews could not bear arms -- Muslims could;
Christians and Jews could not ride horses -- Muslims could;
Christians and Jews had to get permission to build -- Muslims did not;
Christians and Jews had to pay certain taxes which Muslims did not;
Christians could not proselytize -- Muslims could;
Christians and Jews had to bow to their Muslim masters when they paid their taxes; and
Christians and Jews had to live under the law set forth in the Koran, not under either their own religious or secular law.
In each case, these laws allowed the local conquered people less freedom than was allowed the conquering colonialist rulers. Even non-Arab Muslim inhabitants of the conquered lands became second class citizens behind the ruling Arabs. This is the classic definition of colonialist -- "a group of people who settle in a distant territory from the state having jurisdiction or control over it and who remain under the political jurisdiction of their native land."
We will talk about "bloody" as we proceed. Because the U.S. News article related only to the Christian west against the Muslim east, except in this paragraph I will not describe the almost 1,500 years of Muslim imperialistic, colonialist, bloody conquest and subjugation of others through invasion and war to the east of Arabia in Iraq, Persia, and much further eastward, which continues to this day...read more...
Please read #37 below for enlightenment. That is, unless learning is against your religion or lack thereof.
Hey Buddie...we have been nicer than others would have been. Don't you care about the truth. Or do you want to continue in the Lie...(as in People of the Lie...as in the Father of Lies...Allah...Al Ilah...Satan)
Thx Freddie...vanished in thin air. Must have a lack of conviction...or might be a muzzie. Whatever, he is gone.
Truth is the most powerful insecticide...
Er...I don't think that has been said by me. Tell me a bit about yourself. I think you know about me. I am a devout Christian. What are you? Are you a trickster or are you honest (are you capable of real dialogue...or just "taqiyya")?
Muslims are commanded to show mercy and generousity to other Muslims. Their duties towards infidels is quite different. They are commanded to fight the infidel, and killing innocents is acceptable collateral damage. You say you've read the Koran. Do you remember the following passages? :
From my copy of the Koran:
Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day ... until they pay the tribute readily, being brought lowThe Sunnah is also a central document of Islam
O ye who believe! Choose not for friends such of those who received the Scriptures before you
Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush...
And slay them wherever ye find them ... Such is the reward of disbelievers.
Sunnah Volume 4, Book 52, Number 53:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:Sunnah Volume 4, Book 52, Number 63:
The Prophet said, "Nobody who dies and finds good from Allah (in the Hereafter) would wish to come back to this world even if he were given the whole world and whatever is in it, except the martyr who, on seeing the superiority of martyrdom, would like to come back to the world and get killed again (in Allah's Cause)."
Narrated Al-Bara:The Hadith Volume 4, Book 52, Number 176:
A man whose face was covered with an iron mask (i.e. clad in armor) came to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shall I fight or embrace Islam first? "The Prophet said, "Embrace Islam first and then fight." So he embraced Islam, and was martyred. Allah's Apostle said, A Little work, but a great reward. "(He did very little (after embracing Islam), but he will be rewarded in abundance)."
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar:The Hadith Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177:
Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' "Narrated Abu Huraira:Volume 4, Book 52, Number 196:
Allah's Apostle said, "The (Final) Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."Narrated Abu Huraira:Volume 4, Book 52, Number 256:
Allah 's Apostle said, " I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' and whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,' his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive him.)"Narrated As-Sab bin Jaththama:Volume 4, Book 52, Number 265:
The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima [sanctuary; inviolate zone] is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle."
[ translation: the women and children of infidels are acceptable "collateral damage". A Muslim has no need to avoid killing them while attacking infidels (as the Palestinian suicide bombers demonstrate repeatedly) ]Narrated Al-Bara bin Azib:Volume 4, Book 52, Number 268:
Allah's Apostle sent a group of the Ansar to Abu Rafi. Abdullah bin Atik entered his house at night and killed him while he was sleeping.Narrated Abu Huraira:Volume 4, Book 52, Number 271:
Allah's Apostle called,: "War is deceit".Narrated Jabir:Volume 4, Book 52, Number 280:
The Prophet said, "Who is ready to kill Ka'b bin Ashraf (i.e. a Jew)." Muhammad bin Maslama replied, "Do you like me to kill him?" The Prophet replied in the affirmative. Muhammad bin Maslama said, "Then allow me to say what I like." The Prophet replied, "I do (i.e. allow you)." [ie, its OK to use lies and deception to get close to an enemy you want to kill]Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:Volume 4, Book 52, Number 283:
When the tribe of Bani Quraiza was ready to accept Sad's judgment, Allah's Apostle sent for Sad who was near to him. Sad came, riding a donkey and when he came near, Allah's Apostle said (to the Ansar), "Stand up for your leader." Then Sad came and sat beside Allah's Apostle who said to him. "These people are ready to accept your judgment." Sad said, "I give the judgment that their warriors should be killed and their children and women should be taken as prisoners." The Prophet then remarked, "O Sad! You have judged amongst them with (or similar to) the judgment of the King Allah."Narrated Abu Juhaifa:Volume 8, Book 82, Number 829:
I asked Ali, "Do you have the knowledge of any Divine Inspiration besides what is in Allah's Book?" 'Ali replied, "No, by Him Who splits the grain of corn and creates the soul. I don't think we have such knowledge, but we have the ability of understanding which Allah may endow a person with, so that he may understand the Qur'an, and we have what is written in this paper as well." I asked, "What is written in this paper?" He replied, "(The regulations of) blood-money, the freeing of captives, and the judgment that no Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel."Narrated Al-Mughira:Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:
Sa'd bin Ubada said, "If I found a man with my wife, I would kill him with the sharp side of my sword." When the Prophet heard that he said, "Do you wonder at Sa'd's sense of ghira (self-respect)? Verily, I have more sense of ghira than Sa'd, and Allah has more sense of ghira than I."Narrated 'Ikrima:Volume 9, Book 84, Number 58:
Some Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment (fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle, 'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'"Narrated Abu Burda:
Abu Musa said, "I came to the Prophet along with two men (from the tribe) of Ash'ariyin, one on my right and the other on my left, while Allah's Apostle was brushing his teeth (with a Siwak), and both men asked him for some employment. The Prophet said, 'O Abu Musa (O 'Abdullah bin Qais!).' I said, 'By Him Who sent you with the Truth, these two men did not tell me what was in their hearts and I did not feel (realize) that they were seeking employment.' As if I were looking now at his Siwak being drawn to a corner under his lips, and he said, 'We never (or, we do not) appoint for our affairs anyone who seeks to be employed. But O Abu Musa! (or 'Abdullah bin Qais!) Go to Yemen.'" The Prophet then sent Mu'adh bin Jabal after him and when Mu'adh reached him, he spread out a cushion for him and requested him to get down (and sit on the cushion). Behold: There was a fettered man beside Abu Muisa. Mu'adh asked, "Who is this (man)?" Abu Muisa said, "He was a Jew and became a Muslim and then reverted back to Judaism." Then Abu Muisa requested Mu'adh to sit down but Mu'adh said, "I will not sit down till he has been killed. This is the judgment of Allah and His Apostle (for such cases) and repeated it thrice. Then Abu Musa ordered that the man be killed, and he was killed. Abu Musa added, "Then we discussed the night prayers and one of us said, 'I pray and sleep, and I hope that Allah will reward me for my sleep as well as for my prayers.'"
Islam is to be imposed by force.* Mohammed said, "I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, "None has the right to be worshipped but Allah, and whoever says, " None has the right to be worshipped but Allah , his life and property will be saved by me." (otherwise it will not). Vol. 4:196
Apostasy is punishable by death.* Mohammed said, "Whoever changes his Islamic religion, kill him." Vol. 9:57
Ethnic cleansing is practiced.* Mohammed said to the Jews, "You should know that the earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle (Mohammed) and I want to expel you from this land (The Arabian Peninsula), so, if anyone owns property, he is permitted to sell it." Vol. 4:392
* Mohammed's last words at his deathbed were: "Turn the pagans (non-Muslims) out of the Arabian Peninsula." Vol. 5:716
He who disbelieves in Allah after his belief in Him, (is the liar) except he who is compelled while his heart remains steadfast with the faith (has nothing worry). But who opens his breast for infidelity; on these is wrath of Allah, and for them is a great torment.
--Quran, Surah 16 (an‑Nahl), verse 100
This verse of the Quran refers to the incident when 'Ammar bin Yasir (May Allah be pleased with both) had to utter some words against Islam to save himself from the Quraishite infidels.
The Qur'an clearly allows hiding one 's true faith when one is in danger of one's life. This rule is called taqiyah.
Question 1: What is the meaning of "Taqiyah"?
Answer: Its literal meaning is to safeguard; to defend; to fear; piety (because it saves one from the displeasure of Allah).
Question 2: What is its significance in Islamic terminology?
Answer: In Islamic terminology it means "to save life, honour. or property (either one's own or of other believers) by hiding one's belief or religion".
I imagine the rule would apply in a lesser way to a Muslim who hides his jihad sympathies.
APPENDIX I TAQIYAH Or DISSIMULATION`Allamah Tabataba'iOne of the most misunderstood aspects of Shi'ism is the practice of dissimulation or taqiyah. With the. wider meaning of taqiyah. "to avoid or shun any kind of danger," we are not concerned here. Rather, our aim is to discuss that kind of taqiyah in which a man hides his religion or certain of his religious practices in situations that would cause definite or probable danger as a result of the actions of those who are opposed to his religion or particular religious practices.
Among followers of the different schools of Islam, Shi'ites are well known for their practice of taqiyah. In case of danger they dissimulate their religion and hide their particular religious and ritual practices from their opponents.
The sources upon which the Shi'ites base themselves in this question include the following verse of the Holy Quran: "Let not the believers take disbelievers for their friends in preference to believers. Whoso doeth that hath no connection with Allah unless (it be) that ye but guard yourselves against them [tattaqu minhum. from the same root as taqiyah], taking (as it were) security [tuqatan. again from the same root as taqiyah]. Allah biddeth you beware (only) of Himself. Unto Allah is the journeying" (III, 28). As is clear from this sacred verse, God, the,Most Exalted, forbids with the utmost emphasis wilayah (meaning in this case friend- ship and amity to the extent that it affects one's life) with un- believers and orders man to be wary and have fear in such a situation.
In another place He says, "Whoso disbelieveth in Allah after his belief-save him who is forced thereto and whose heart is still content with Faith-but whoso findeth ease in disbelief: On them is wrath from Allah. Theirs will be an awful doom" (Quran, XVI, 106). As mentioned in both Sunni and Shi'ite sources this verse was revealed concerning `Ammar ibn Yasir. After the migration (hijrah) of the Prophet the infidels of Mecca imprisoned some of the Muslims of that city and tortured them, forcing them to leave Islam and to return to their former religion of idolatry. Included in this group who were tortured were Ammar and his father and mother. Ammar's parents refused to turn away from Islam and died under torture. But Ammar. in order to escape torture and death, outwardly left Islam and accepted idol worship, thereby escaping from danger. Having become free, he left Mecca secretly for Medina. In Medina he went before the Holy Prophet-upon whom be blessings and peace--and in a state of penitence and distress concerning what he had done asked the Prophet if by acting as he did he had fallen outside the sacred precinct of religion. The Prophet said that his duty was what he had accomplished. The above verse was then revealed.
The two verses cited above were revealed concerning particular cases but their meaning is such that they embrace all situations in which the outward expression of doctrinal belief and religious practice might bring about a dangerous situation. Besides these verses, there exist many traditions from the members of the Household of the Prophet ordering taqiyah when there is fear of danger.
Some have criticized Shi'ism by saying that to employ the practice of taqiyah in religion is opposed to the virtues of courage and bravery. The least amount of thought about this accusation will bring to light its invalidity, for taqiyah must be practiced in a situation where man faces a danger which he cannot resist and against which he cannot fight. Resistance to such a danger and failure to practice taqiyah in such circumstances shows rashness and foolhardiness. not courage and bravery. The qualities of courage and bravery can be applied only when there is at least the possibility of success in man's efforts. But before a definite or probable danger against which there is no possibility of victory throwing oneself before a cannon that is being fired or lying down on the tracks before an onrushing train-any action of this kind is nothing but a form of madness contrary to logic and common sense. Therefore, we can summarize by saying that taqiyah must be practiced only when there is a definite danger which cannot be avoided and against which there is no hope of a successful strug gle and victory.
The exact extent of danger which would make permissible the practice of taqiyah has been debated among different mujtahids of Shi'ism. In our view, the practice of taqiyah is permitted if there is definite danger facing one's own life or the life of one's family, or the possibility of the loss of the honor and virtue of one's wife or of other female members of the family,or the danger of the loss of one's material belongings to such an extent as to cause complete destitution and prevent a man from being able to continue to support himself and his family. In any case, prudence and the avoidance of definite or probable danger which cannot be averted is a general law of logic accepted by all people and applied by men in all the different phases of their lives.
While all forms of religious fanaticism are negative, only Islam raises slaughter of all Kafirs (non-Muslims) to a holy creed, it teaches Muslim to gloat over the killing of non-Muslims and celebrate their death. Hence Islam is the most demented and dangerous form of religious fanaticism. And it is not Islamic fanaticism that is to be blamed, for Islam itself is fanaticism. From its root to its fruit Islam is the most violent, and virulent form of this delusion that the unknown universe is a god and all those who do not accept this brand of fantasizing of the unknown universe have to be slaughtered. This is so since Islamic fanaticism was born in a barren and harsh desert environment that gave birth to the paranoid mentality of the Bedouin Arabs among whom was born Mohammed (yimach shmo ve-zichro - may his name and memory be obliterated), the founder of this blood-thirsty creed Islam. This blood-thirsty Muslim mentality has trickled down to the newest convert to Islam be he or she Brown Black, Yellow or White. Most importantly it makes Islam the worst enemy of quest and science and of all human progress. While all religions are opposed to science as the Pope was to Galileo and Copernicus; but it is Islam which is the most blood-thirsty expression of this challenge of religion to reason. So Islam will have to be the first to be removed from the path of human progress and the reply to Islam to be effective would have to be more blood-thirsty and paranoid than Islam itself. Those opposed to Islam will have to be like the hunter who aims between the eyes of the man-eater tiger and shoots till the tiger is dead meat. The hunter bears no enmity with the tiger, but shoots him dispassionately, so that he himself can live, and NOT end up by becoming the dinner of the man-eater. This has to be the attitude, not based on a hate of Islam, but a determination to put a full and final end to Islam, so that Human society can progress without the hindrance of any religion obstructing its path.
There are some scientists who conduct experiments to prove their points...and there are others who do so to find the truth.
Which are you, Mylo?
Have you made allowance for the possibility that you are wrong?
How the bluff of Islam can be called, if we are to succeed in meeting the Muslim challenge to Human Civilization
All fanaticism is negative, all religious fanaticism is very negative and persistent be it Hindu, Christian, Muslim or any other, and Islam is the most bloodthirsty expression of religious fanaticism; motivated as the Muslims are by the Instruction Manual of Terrorism the Quran that has the ravings and rantings against the Kafirs (unbelievers) from the worlds most successful terrorist and the founding father of organized terrorism; Prophet Mohammed-ibn-Abdallah.
Reading about the Fidayeen attacks by Homicide bombers posing as a Jewish Rabbis, ordinary travellers in Jerusalem or as security guards and construction workers in Iraq, should be an eye opener at the Pentagon and the Oval office about the Muslim mind. The Muslim Homicide (or rather Genocide) Fidayeen bombers are now dead and so they can cause no more harm to anyone. This gives us insight into a morbid, but very real fact that A good Muslim, is a dead Muslim. Many would recoil while reading such morbid-sounding statements. But all the Israeli schoolchildren and bus passengers killed were done to death by Muslims who also killed themselves in the bargain, the hijackers of the airliners on 9/11 could cause that apocalyptic destruction, because they too decided to die while killing others. Apart from 9/11, the Riyadh, Baghdad, Jerusalem, Casablanca, Karachi, Mumbai, Bali, Chechnya Bomb blasts ..and many more to come, all prove the same point.
A Muslim is in the business of killing killing himself/herself while killings others of his/her species. If the human sanity is to survive Islam, then the bluff of Islam needs to be called. And it can be called only when Islam and all its believers face the threat and real prospect of being sent into the stillness of death. A stillness from where they could do no more harm to anyone else. In this scenario at times some innocents may get killed. Cant help it when the scenario dictates that you either kill or be killed.
Those who want succeed in fighting the Jihad, have to out-match the boldness and paranoid commitment of the Muslims by declaring that their singular mission is to wipe out Islam from the face of this planet whatever that may cost in terms of human lives...
I do not have time for debate or even dialogue. I won't for a time either, but your posts (Tag included) stand out as I did a quick perusal of the FR tonight as I was taking a moment to see reactions concerning this mornings events.
Here is something that you might want to consider looking at.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.