ALL: We can learn as much from what Mormon FREEPERS don't address in a response as much as what they do address.
Note that in the excerpts I culled out from this article in post #1, I highlighted FOUR Lds leader references to Mohammed. And these were all highly pro-Mohammed statements!
* One was from Mitt Romney's G-G Grandfather, Lds "apostle" Parley P. Pratt;
* Another from another Lds "apostle," George A. Smith
* A third from a BYU professor (Toronto)
* A fourth from the highest level of Lds hierarchy -- a First Presidency statement from 1978.
Now did Jeff Head, FREEPER Mormon, respond at all to these pro-Mohammed Lds statements? (NO!!!)
He ducked. He skirted. He shied away. He waived off addressing them. He veered. He bobbed. He weaved. He darted away. He ran. He slithered away.
Nope. No head-on addressing Mohammed from Jeff, lest he either...
...(a) counter these four positive Lds leader statements about Mohammed, & thereby put these leaders whom he's supposed to "sustain" in a bad light;
...or (b) show the world that, he, too, is pro-Mohammed and likewise presents him in a positive light.
Jeff, 9/11 didn't change Mohammed. It simply highlighted the pro-violent Quranic jihadist passages already there -- the ones already attributed to Mohammed!
Bottom line: Mormon leadership has been "up" on Mohammed for a LONG time -- given that Parley P. Pratt was an Lds "apostle" at the time of Joseph Smith's era & given that the Lds First Presidency has been making such statements in Jeff Head's lifetime!
Mitt? Sounds to me like he's pro-Mohammed, too.
If you're Muslim, Mitt, Mitt, he's your man...nobody can "foreign policy" Islam like Romney can!
[Oh, and btw, quite interesting to see Lds leadership so upbeat and positive about Mohammed and Islam in general...yet Lds "scripture" labels the "professors" of Christian sects as 100% "corrupt" ("all") per Joseph Smith, History, vv. 18-19, Pearl of Great Price]
But whadda we to expect? The Muslims call Christians "infidels" -- and Joseph Smith & co. came along to tag-team with them and call ALL Christians and their denominations "apostates." Why, they're on the same page, aren't they?...'twas probably "unveiled" by the same "angel" -- the one Mohammed thought at first was a jinn (demon) until a relative convinced him otherwise.
Colo, nobody skirted anything. I addressed what you posted and did so as I chose and please...sorry if it is not exactly what you wanted me to say, but I am not trying to impress or argue with you, just establishing the counter to what you are posting here.
You talk about people who spoke of Mohammed and Islam back in the 1800s when they had very little knoweldge of them or acquantence and had never traveled there or interfaced with them.
These men were not perfect and they had their opinions like we all do on such things, except today we know a lot more...and after 911, for a lot of [people it became more cl;ear, though me and mine knew already and wanted our nation to respond more strongly for several years.
As I have said on an earlier post, I did not agree with what Jospeh Smith said about Mohammed, but I also take it in the context of what he was experiencing at Far West and what had happened at Haun’s Mill. He was very emotional, and understandably so. Of course that part is not explained in your quote, you just lift it up and say, “Ha! There, see!”
Out of the emotion, and a lack of the knoweldge that we have today regarding Islam, IMHO, he misspoke...but since he and his family friends, relatives and neighbors had had an extermination order evoked by a governor and an army was there to inact it...and thousands of people were about to be evicted and lose everything accept the clothes on their back...and if they did not then they were to be exterminated and driven by the sword...so they then pretty much left a trail of blood in the snow, men woman and children as they walked across Missouri at the time...I’ll give him the benefit of a doubt and understand the strength of his emotions at the time.
Bruce R. McKonkie, who an Apostle in the Church in more modern times until his death a few years back, had very strong, negative things to say about Islam and the Koran...so we can find quote and counter quote if you want.
But to try and say that the LDS, or infer that the LDS are somehow confederated or allied with, or soft on radical islam is just a pure sham and attempt to demonize and marginalize a gropup of good people whose sons and daughters, fathers, brothers, sisters, etc. have gone to fight for our country against this enemy and continue to do so today.
Their life’s blood is the testament against this reproach that you are making.
As I stated to you once before, I will not let such a comparison, motivated by pure dislke bordering on hatred for the religious belief of those people, be made without speaking out against it.
Consider me having done so now on this thread and I am happy to let others read and make their own judgements.