-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
A Qur'an Got Burnt at 9/11 Mosque Protest
- Thread starter Nosi
- Start date
-
- Tags
- koran burning
Methinks I smell a troll..
Almo
Masterblazer
What annoyed me about the guy wanting to burn the Koran on 9/11 is that it misses the point. As a political statement, burning a book is protected under the first amendment, so I don't dispute his right to do so.
But to label all of Islam as responsible for the attacks is just dumb.
I'm sure this has been said before in myraid ways (maybe even by Myriad), but I think it bears repeating.
But to label all of Islam as responsible for the attacks is just dumb.
I'm sure this has been said before in myraid ways (maybe even by Myriad), but I think it bears repeating.
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
hey liar, how about the evidence of your claim that the koran teaches to kill all khafir where ever you find them?
your refusal to deliver the verse that you believe teaches such a thing, is a clear sign that you perfectly well know it is not true and the verse token out of context and only quoted half.
you are a liar.
Not many perhaps, but I think the poster here who claimed the man who burned his own Quran as a political protest should be killed by fanatical Islamists ("I hope he gets a fatwa") does certainly qualify as sympathizing with Islamofascism, or radical Islam as it is sometimes called.
As for the others, I certainly agree they are not Islamic sympathizers, but there is something pathetic with the fact that the answer to "what has Islam contributed to civilization?" -- admittedly an unfair question -- is ALWAYS the same, namely, algebra and chemistry (and sometimes architecture), both inventions from 800+ years ago.
It's damnation by faint praise, much like the fact that whenever someone points out to some terrorist outrage committed by radical Muslims last week, someone points out that Jews and/or Christians did something that is just as bad -- 20 or 50 or 400 years ago.
Such faint praise is merely a roundabout way of emphasizing that, yes, Islam is far more violent and contributed far less to civilization -- in the last, say, 300 years at least -- than other religions.
Last edited:
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2007
- Messages
- 6,681
Hi timf1234,
Care to explain the "insider"-bit?
Are you an ex-Muslim? Or do you just live near a falafel shop?
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
you are a liar.
that guy you accuse has clarified what he meant with the nonsense he wrote, and it isnt what you now claim.
You totally failed to understand the post; too subtle for you, probably.
No one is following Torah. There is no follower of Torah who are committing suicide bombing all over the world.
It is the Quran and Muslims are the problem at this time.
Why did you even asked this stupid question.
You should have known my answer.
when 80% Muslims population in the world believe that the punishment for blasphemy should be death that tells me we got some over a billion, walking, talking, non-thinking, West hating, pre-programmed, suicidal robots are on the lose.
What is falafel shop?
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
the Jews believe in the Torah.
All holy books have been abused in the past to justify violence.
There was and is also Jewish terror. there was and is also Christian terror, we should blame those that commit such crimes, not those that read the same book but interpret it differently.
and your refusal to deliver evidence for you claim shows how dishonest you are, bye bye liar.
Last edited:
True, but for some strange, incomprehensible reasons, "christian fanatics" tend not to fly planes into buildings or blow themselves up in suicide terrorist attacks or shoot pregnant women at point-blank range for being Jews. It's not that it absolutely never happens, but is far, far rarer than Muslim fanatics doing the same thing, which is practically a daily occurence.
Perhaps the reason people would not react this way if "christian fanatics" did it is that christians fanatics tend not to do it.
Just a wild guess, here.
True, true. But what proportion of terrorist attacks are by such people? Take all the terrorist attacks reported, say, by CNN in, say, the last three months. How many were by Jews and Christians and how many by Muslims?
It's true of course that all Muslims are terrorists, but practically all terrorist organizations are Muslim.
You hit the nail on the head.
Every nation, every religion, every society has bad and good apple.
What matters is the statistics.
Here is the statistic.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
http://quran.com/2/191
Sahih International
And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.
Muhsin Khan
And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-al-Haram (the sanctuary at Makkah), unless they (first) fight you there. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.
that sounds like defense to me, not to you?
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
atm, surely, that was different once and will be different in future.
CNN doesn't report even 10% of the terrorism committed by Islamic neural network, the power of Memetic machines, called Muslims. Fox news does a little bit better but not much. World 13th richest person, Saudi Arabia's Muslim, Khalid Abdul Bin Tallet owns 7% of Fox news.
Following has pretty comprehensive list of the terror attacks around the globe.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
His "clarification" is that he merely meant by "fatwa" that Islamic scholars issue a religious opinion -- which we all know "has nothing to do with violence" (Mr. Rushdie might disagree, but I digress) -- "on his Nazi ass".
Sure. Because an appropriate punishment for outrageous behavior by a Nazi is surely a nonbinding, nonviolent, religious opinion issued by people of another religion. That's surely all he meant.
If you believe that, I means really believe it and not just pretend to, well, I've got a wonderful bridge in Brooklyn to sell you, cheap.
No, no, DC. It's quite clear he meant that he gets the same sort of "fatwa" as Salman Rushdie -- namely a death sentence -- if only because he also called the Koran burner a "Nazi" in the same post (and then repeated that Muslims should "put a fatwa on his Nazi ass".)
I am certainly not the only one who understood him to mean that: everybody else who replied to him did.
Last edited: