Is Islam a genuine threat?

reply to post by nearlyfabled


And if you ban cars, chance of people dying in a car accident will be reduced to zero. Why not ban cars and allow only walking, according to such logic?

You should not infringe on other peoples liberties unless the chance of harm is reasonably high, and the harm caused by such preventive legistation wont create far more harm.

How about the huge practical, societal and organisational costs of requiring all women to always travel with family guardians? What if a man has three daughters which all study in different cities? Will he split in three parts to travel with them all?

I've just realised something important here; which, I think, is the fundamental issue.

Nearlyfabled has described the Islamic model as having the potential to lead to a perfect society. However, whether that is true or not, it sidesteps the central issue.

Non-Muslims believe that we should have the ability to choose whether we accept Islam or not.

I've noticed this elsewhere. Muslims will talk to you about how wonderful Islam can be; but what is never mentioned is that irrespective of whether it truthfully is wonderful or not, the bottom line is that you have no choice. Resistance is futile.

Originally posted by nearlyfabled

Originally posted by TDawgRex

Originally posted by nearlyfabled
Let me make this clear, the only time killing is allowed (aside from corporal punishment) is in war. If a country wars against Muslims, obviously people will be killed. If Muslims conquer a land and the inhabitants refuse to convert or pay Jizyah, they will be fought until they do.
'Killing all disbelievers' is not something from Islam.

This is where I have a problem with Islam. I should not have to pay Jizyah in order to think my own thoughts.

Well that's just how it is. Islam requires itself to be recognized as dominant when it is in control of a region. It's either you follow our belief, or you pay the tax. It's not like Muslim's came up with this themselves, it's in the Qur'an - It's God's order.
But hey, if you pay the Jizyah, the Muslims are obliged to protect you in the case of war.

While I believe, I do not follow any religion. But I’m ok with those who do, as long as it’s peaceful and is not forced on me. There are many who say that the Qu’ran, the Bible, the Torah and other religious texts are Gods word, I beg to differ. Man has touched them over the centuries and they are tainted now.

I prefer to look at them as historical texts and pick the good out while discarding that which I do not agree with.

But they do make for fairly interesting reading though.

I would also say that while a land can be conquered, a strong spirit cannot be.

reply to post by petrus4


Yes, thats the problem. Lack of basic personal freedoms under islamic regime.

Anyway, finally some open radical muslim like the kind islamic forums are full of appeared on ATS. Next time, when our muslim apologists again say "true islam is not against basic human rights" or "extremists are only a tiny minority, islam is compatible with the west and democracy just like christianity" or "stoning is just a minor backward middle-eastern cultural thing, it has nothing to do with islam", we can just point them to this thread, where they have a muslim openly defending and advocating stoning, religious or gender discrimination laws. Straight from the horses mouth!

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by nearlyfabled

 

And if you ban cars, chance of people dying in a car accident will be reduced to zero. Why not ban cars and allow only walking, according to such logic?

That's the thing. These laws aren't based on logic. They're what God ordered.

And as to non-Muslims having no choice, look at it this way.. If Islam IS the truth, why should we allow other groups to harm society? This Earth doesn't belong to the Muslims or any group of people, it's God's. If he gives a part of land to the Muslims, should they not rule that land justly, following the rules that God gave them to rule his land with?

Originally posted by petrus4
There seem to be two very sharply polarised opinions. On the one hand, you have people who are adherents of the religion, who claim that it is oriented towards peace, and is capable of co-existing with other cultures and ideologies.

And then on the other hand you have the truth.

Ask those who claim Islam is about peace to name one example throughout history where muslims have managed to live in peace and co-exist with other cultures. The whole concept of multi-culturism goes against everything Islam as does this idea that there is such things as moderate and radical muslims. That is a concept invented by the Western Media which does not exist in reality. There is only one Islam and the reason it is so succesful is that it is based on a very specific set of ideas that cannot be misinterpreted and are designed in a way to ensure its success.

Here is a website that will help you understand what Islam is about -

Inquiry into Islam.

Originally posted by Maslo
"extremists are only a tiny minority, islam is compatible with the west just like christianity"

I wasn't aware that "the West," was compatible with Christianity anywayz; or at least not the average Dominionist nutcase you have in America.

Then again, mentioning the Dominionists in the same sentence as mainstream Christianity isn't entirely fair; the Dominionists are hardly mainstream, and their theological foundation also isn't exactly what you'd call airtight.

reply to post by Terrorist


Lol, a rather obtuse observation if I may say so myself.

Islam is doing a GREAT job of making people Islamaphobes by themselves. I highly doubt you've been around Muslims or have lived in Europe and seen first hand what Islam has brought us here. Instead you just regurgitate what you've heard from someone else, who has in return heard it from some one else again etc.

I'm not going to sit here and add all the evidence I've done so many times in the past on ATS because quite frankly, I'm tired of the whole thing. But idiocy like yours made me write this post.

Blond again: Only after moving to a school in western Oslo did Mari Morken (16) dare be blond again. "Why is it racism is we call them 'black' and not racism if they call us 'white'"? "I never called anybody 'Nigger' or 'Black' or anything like that. On the other hand, those of us who were White were talked about derogatorily.

It was negative to be White, Christianity and Norwegian culture was negative and there were many curses," says Mari Morken (16) and rattles them off "Whitey, potato and white cheese" Three years ago she couldn't take it any more. She moved from a school in Groruddalen to a school on the west side.

Every morning she takes the subway to the other side of the city to escape the curses and the bad class-environment. Where she goes now, it's good to have good grades, and she doesn't stand out because she's light. Before she made dark stripes in her medium-blond hair. Now she dyes her hair a bit lighter. She's in the process of 'taking back' her Norwegianity, and is happy to be blond without being branded 'whore' and cheap'.

"Ah, girl, blond whore!"

'Josephine' was met with these words on the first school day at a high-school in an immigrant-dominated suburb south of Stockholm. Josphine was quite baffled, since aside from her hair color there was nothing about her appearance that would indicate she was promiscuous. She didn't use makeup and had completely neutral clothing. It was exclusively her hair-color that branded her a 'whore'.

'Josephine' is one of the informants for researchers Maria Bäckman, who did an ethnographic field study in a suburb south of Stockholm, where ethnic Swedes make up about 20% of the population. They're therefore a minority. Klassekampen met Bäckman this week when she visited the University in Oslo and the Culcom research program (cultural complexity in the new Norway). She's the first in Sweden who researched ethnic Swedes as a minority. A similar study was not done in Norway.

Read the rest of the story here: Klassekampen.no translated article

And here's a story about a little Norwegian boy who was forced to go to a school in Oslo which had more Muslim's then anything else.



Part two



Never has Norway faced riots in Oslo with burning of cars and buildings. Never has Norway faced the crime rates we have today. Never has Norway dealt with a "rape spree" which has left ethnic Norwegian women brutalized on the street and many other ethnic Norwegian women afraid to go out at night in our OWN capital since we opened our borders to MASS-immigration.



Yeah nah, it's those "evil" Christians though! Yes sir! Let's bury our head in the sand and go bash Christianity some more! Ahyuk!

Interesting responses and comments. Personally I am seeing a failure of this islamic state being beneficial to society as a whole. As you pointed out a person outside of the faith must follow the islamic law to be left alone as well as pay a tax. This does not show tolerance. It does show pressure from a government that is based on a belief structure that it assumes is divine. I'm not really sure how you can honestly state that an islamic govt. is truly tolerant in the true sense of the word. If this were the case then there would really be no argument from people who didn't ascribe to that faith, but, since I do not, I do see issue with the rules that would be imposed upon me by such a govt.

That being said, I do have to say there is no "ideal" leadership or govt. type. There will always be conflicts due to personal beliefs and opinions. But, to say that any of the religious entities on the planet would be the ideal for a governing body is simply not going to cut it. By having a religious based govt. you are starting with a instant fight from other beliefs. To make the assertion that islamic govt. would not be an imposing govt. is turning a blind eye to the wishes of the rest of society in favor of your particular faith.

If people want to follow a set of rules they feel are divinely inspired then by all means feel free to do so. But, under no circumstances whatsoever should you feel the need to push any law or opinion that comes from said belief on another human being because you feel a deity commands it. Do not ask another to pay to live because they don't hold your belief. Everyone has the right to have faith just as they do to not have faith. Making them act within the confines of idiotic laws and pay tax because your deity said so is not by any being tolerant.

iwillnotsubmit.com...

Some here might find this interesting.

reply to post by petrus4

[2.190] ...fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you...[2.191] And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.

[193]...fight with them...[194]...whoever then acts aggressively against you, inflict injury on him according to the injury he has inflicted on you...

"An eye for an eye". No wonder they're "mad" at the percieved injustice of the "West" or the Jews.

[4.74] Therefore let those fight in the way of Allah, who sell this world's life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward. [4.75] ...fight in the way of Allah... [4.76] Those who believe fight in the way of Allah, and those who disbelieve fight in the way of the Satan. Fight therefore against the friends of the Satan... [4.77] ...when fighting is prescribed for them...Our Lord! why hast Thou ordained fighting for us?...

[4.94]...when you go to war in Allah's way... [4.95] ...those who strive hard [Jihad] in Allah's way with their property and their persons are not equal...Allah shall grant to the strivers [i.e., Jihadist] above the holders back a mighty reward.

Is it any wonder some Islamic militias will go to such lengths for reward. Whether it's blowing children up or other such atrocities.

Don't take my excerpts from the QuRan as truth, do the research yourself.

It's also worth mentioning and higlighting that the people who claim to be "moderate" Muslims very little often condemn extreme militias, or admit that their actions are based on passages from the QuRan.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/11f0c1ede2bf.jpg[/atsimg]

reply to post by NeverForget


Please provide proof of an incident when islamic militia targeted children.

reply to post by nearlyfabled


I wasn't aware that I implied children were a "target" of Islamic militias.

But children are often caught up in their attacks.

Originally posted by nearlyfabled
reply to post by NeverForget

 

Please provide proof of an incident when islamic militia targeted children.

www.johnstonsarchive.net...

Originally posted by Maslo

Originally posted by nearlyfabled
reply to post by NeverForget

 

Please provide proof of an incident when islamic militia targeted children.

www.johnstonsarchive.net...

These are terrorist attacks. Islam is only labelled twice, and one was an attack on army personel who wasn't even officially attributed to Muslims. The other was an attack by Islamic extremists, not part of a military group. The attack on a movie theatre is not agreeable by Islamic standards.

reply to post by nearlyfabled

Islamic standards

And what would you call the "Islamic standard"?

Islam doesn't have a central authority such as the "Pope" (Roman Catholic Church) to condemn acts and set a "standard", as poor as that stardard may be.

Islamic groups have different "standards" all over the globe.

Islam has the Quran, of which, as cited, has shown to wage a Holy war, especially on "Kafirs".

reply to post by nearlyfabled


All mentioned attacks by Afghanistan insurgents in the list are commited by Islamic militants (Taliban) in the name of Islamic state they want to reestablish.

6 November 2007 (terrorism)--A suicide bombing targeted a public event in Baghlani-jadid, Afghanistan. Afghan lawmakers were visiting a sugar factory and were being greeted by schoolchildren lined along the street when the attack occurred. Security personnel began shooting into crowds afterwards, firing for 3-5 minutes. The 77 killed included 6 Afghan lawmakers, 5 teachers, 5 adult civilians and police officers, and 61 children, all boys ranging in age from 8 to 18. Reports of the number injured vary, but include 93 students, at least 3 teachers, and possibly additional adults. Earlier reports of 106 injured of whom 84 were hospitalized may include some who later died of wounds. Five of those hospitalized were suffering from bullet wounds, and one lawmaker who died may have been killed by gunfire. On 17 November it was reported that a preliminary UN report found that up to two-thirds of the casualties were hit by bullets fired by bodyguards. [54]

12 November 2008 (terrorism)--A group of girls walking to school in Kandahar City, Afghanistan, were attacked at about 8:00 AM with acid by two men on a motorcycle. The men sprayed acid on the group of eight girls (15 girls in some reports), of whom three were seriously burned, three were treated and released from a hospital, and two were protected by full-length burkas and were uninjured. At least two of the seriously burned girls were blinded by the attack. According to some reports the men ripped headscarves off the girls before spraying them with acid. The girls' school, Mirwais Minna Girl's High School, was empty the following day with none of the 1500 students showing for school. Reported ages for injured girls include 14, 16, and 18. [57]

28 December 2008 (terrorism)--A suicide car bomber attacked a police and army post next to a primary school in Khost province, Afghanistan. The bomber apparently intended to strike a meeting of tribal elders meeting at the post, driving the explosive-laden 4x4 through the approach to the checkpoint and detonating it next to a group of about 20 children. Of 16 killed, 14 were children ages 8 to 10, one was an Afghan soldier, and the other may have been an Afghan security guard; another 58 people were injured including 40 civilians, many of them children. The children were gathering at the school for the last school day of the year to receive end-of-year certificates. [59]

9 July 2009 (terrorism)--A truck bomb exploded along a highway 45 km south of Kabul, Afghanistan, in a village near Mohammad. The truck was loaded with explosives covered with a load of wood and had run off the main Afghan highway and overturned. The truck exploded as police officers approached the truck to check it. The truck had come to rest in a stream between two schools and near some shops. The explosion killed 4 police officers, 16 primary students (ages 8-12) at the schools, and 5 other civilians, including shopkeepers; 5 civilians were injured. Two shops were completely destroyed, many homes collapsed with some partially collapsing up to 200 meters away, and debris was reportedly thrown 2 km away. [61]

Here is a couple more:
www.hyscience.com...
www.timeslive.co.za...

Originally posted by Seagle
Ask those who claim Islam is about peace to name one example throughout history where muslims have managed to live in peace and co-exist with other cultures.

I'm not one of those that claim that Islam is about peace (I think it's as much about peace as the other "book" religions), but I can name the Moorish occupation of the Iberian Peninsula.

During that time Muslims, Christians and Jews coexisted peacefully, either under Muslim or Christian rule.

To know if islam a threat or not you should learn about islam but not muslim, unless u can learn about muslim in general not just picking some examples you like.

There are extremist in every religion and culture. But that didnt describe the religions or cultures. The wise thing is to know extremist in any side and to know the good one and separated them. And lets all good people from every background make this world better and lets the knowledge to any side spreading so we can know eachother better and hope one day extremist will no longer there. Like in other religions, there are always some people who misinterpret religions, and steer it the way they want to fit into their own goal. And most likely people like this usually the loudest.

I want to explain a bit about jizya. It is a tax in a country that under islamic law. There are zakat, and jizya, both of them are tax. Differences is zakat for muslim, and jizya for non muslim. The amount of jizya is the same amount with zakat mall or tax of asset and revenue. So while non believer only pay for jizya, muslim must pay zakat mal along to zakat fitrah every eid al fitri, but not much in it.

The requirement for jizya and zakat is if only someone want to considered as a citizen, not about belief. If someone cant pay jizya or zakat because he/she is too poor, they will become a recipient, either from muslim or not muslim side. Cant find many country who do this still in these days.

Originally posted by petrus4
This is a question I've been trying to figure out for some time now; and it seems to be virtually impossible to get an honest answer.

There seem to be two very sharply polarised opinions. On the one hand, you have people who are adherents of the religion, who claim that it is oriented towards peace, and is capable of co-existing with other cultures and ideologies.

On the other hand, however, there seems to be an extremely large number of people, who believe that the ultimate goal of Islam as an overall religion, is the complete conquest, overthrow, and subversion of the entirety of the planet.

I really try and avoid racism, xenophobia, and other forms of prejudice. I have tried to undertake this investigation with honesty and objectivity, and to follow where the evidence leads; but I cannot lie. Said evidence does not seem to be in favour of those who are sympathetic towards Islam. I have read of rioting in France; I have read of majorities of the French and German populations viewing Islam as a threat to their national identity. I have recently seen, in local supermarkets, the Halal certification mark beginning to appear on food. John Cleese recently made the statement that London as a city is no longer culturally consistent with the rest of England at all.

All of these things, inexorably support a conclusion of gradual, creeping assimilation. I am aware of how politically incorrect drawing analogies between Islam and the Borg Collective may be; but they seem to be inescapable.

I'm aware that the American government has, in the past, thrived on a steady succession of global threats, in order to keep wars going, and give the military/industrial complex justification for its' continued existence. I am becoming gravely concerned, however, that in the case of Islam, the threat may actually be genuinely real; that there truly is an Islamic objective to conquer the planet.

Genuaine threat at the moment is NATO akka Bilderbergs...
WHat u think what will happen when u come to someones country and start shooting and killing everything that moves? Well the same thing that would happen in someone came to your neighbourhood and start shooting everything that moves.... got the picture? Islam was never threat to west,but it is to Izrael. So 2+2=5