Posted on 09/10/2007 8:23:17 AM PDT by Cat loving Texan
If you want to counteract that image, I suggest you talk to your Muslim brethren and convince them to stop committing the atrocities that have fostered that image. I'd suggest wearing a knife-proof collar while you're there.
WTF??
Must be talking about these:
1. Don't beat the cat any more than necessary.
2. Same for your wives.
3. Everything and everyone else not covered by non-violent teachings 1 and 2 are fair game.
Stinking lying raghead SOB's.
I would like to correct you, if I may.
Islam and violence are inextricably intertwined. Mohammad used violence himself to advance his own power. The Sunnah and the Hadith, the example and traditions of Mohammad as well as the Koran, indicate that verses which are contradicted by later actions are actually superseded by the later verses and thus no longer operative.
I read a remarkable travel book, written by a Scot who crossed Afghanistan only months after the Taliban fell. The fatal error westerners make is assuming our words mean similar things...peace to us carries an entirely different meaning than achieving peace in Islamic terms. Peace in Islamic terms can mean when Islam has been accepted by all.
Note that it doesn't say this is a bad thing.
How underwhelming.
Gosh, it only took then 6 years to catch on? Well, better late than never, I guess.
Exactly.
" 'If we change one person's understanding of Islam,' he said, 'then this is worth it.' "
I THOUGHT they were supposed to be denouncing violence - 6 years too late, and in notably underwhelming numbers - not trying to change our hearts and minds.
But you don't understand...he's telling the truth, more or less: Islamists consider the murder of any kufre to "just". Murdering Muslims who prefer not to murder kufre is also considered "just". Murdering women, Muslim or infidel, is usually considered not only "just", but preferred method of kicking back and relieving the stress of a hard day spent beheading innocent people with dull knives...etc.
The question should be "what do Muslims consider "unjust"?
Maybe it's just me and the date...but I get a definite whiff if "radical cleric".
Another thing: she only RECENTLY heard this? She lives under a rock? This statement is disingenuous.
"Unjustly" ... aye, there's the rub.
The actual translation of said 'verse':
Surah 5:32...For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption[or, 'for spreading mischief in the land'] in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind....
And lest there be any doubt as to who are those that are 'guilty' of corruption in the earth, or of the 'spreading of mischief in the land', - and what should become of them - Surah 5 does not leave its reader with doubts...
Surah 5:33
The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement,
And another oldie, but baddie, from the Surah 5 collection of greatest hits:
Surah 5:51
O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for friends. They are friends one to another. He among you who taketh them for friends is (one) of them. Lo! Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.
But I'm sure it all sounds so pleasant and peaceful in its original Arabic...something surely got lost in the translation...
This may be a good time to bring up AGAIN why Obama is dangerous as long as the public remains ignorant of the truth about Islam. He was born a Muslim, to a radical Muslim father. There is no way that either he or his mother can be considered other than Muslim by Muslims. The fact that they're still alive shows complicity, IMO.
Wow, I didn't realize there were that many.
That's it in a nutshell! This is exactly what these lunatics believe. It's sick.
The evidence of the intentions of Islam belie your words.
They are counting on the general publics and especially the MSM’s ignorance of the koran. Those who have read it know that to be innocent in islamic eyes you must be a muslim. Otherwise you are guilty of a death crime.
“Taqiyya” is the religiously-sanctioned doctrine, with its origins in Shi’a Islam but now practiced by non-Shi’a as well, of deliberate dissimulation about religious matters that may be undertaken to protect Islam, and the Believers. A related term, of broader application, is “kitman,” which is defined as “mental reservation.” An example of “Taqiyya” would be the insistence of a Muslim apologist that “of course” there is freedom of conscience in Islam, and then quoting that Qur’anic verse — “There shall be no compulsion in religion.” {2:256} But the impression given will be false, for there has been no mention of the Muslim doctrine of abrogation, or naskh, whereby such an early verse as that about “no compulsion in religion” has been cancelled out by later, far more intolerant and malevolent verses. In any case, history shows that within Islam there is, and always has been, “compulsion in religion” for Muslims, and for non-Muslims.
“Kitman” is close to “taqiyya,” but rather than outright dissimulation, it consists in telling only a part of the truth, with “mental reservation” justifying the omission of the rest. One example may suffice. When a Muslim maintains that “jihad” really means “a spiritual struggle,” and fails to add that this definition is a recent one in Islam (little more than a century old), he misleads by holding back, and is practicing “kitman.” When he adduces, in support of this doubtful proposition, the hadith in which Muhammad, returning home from one of his many battles, is reported to have said (as known from a chain of transmitters, or isnad), that he had returned from “the Lesser Jihad to the Greater Jihad” and does not add what he also knows to be true, that this is a “weak” hadith, regarded by the most-respected muhaddithin as of doubtful authenticity, he is further practicing “kitman.”
from:
http://jihadwatch.org/islam101/
Start with the alleged "10%" of Islamists.
Excellent post. That’s how they see it.
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.