Muslims to march on White House next September 11th

reply to post by ollncasino


well maybe "they" are not the muslims who demand sharia, executions for so-called blasphemies etc etc.

"they" is term that can easily be used to just engage prejudice

ETA: i came to this thread for debate on the OP, but didnt find it

Read all of the comments. The usual pro and anti islam stuff. olncas I reckon you have it pinned there mate. I say let em march. Encourage them to get as many of their supportive mates to be there. Then ....................... someone please make sure to get lots of photos of EVERY ONE OF THEM. Then there is a great record of who is who in the zoo.They want to show their strength, they want to push the envelope, then let them and use their toughness to know who to watch. It will make it easier if/when things go bad in the future. Like the pic of that maggot in sydney olncas

Originally posted by skalla

well maybe "they" are not the muslims who demand sharia, executions for so-called blasphemies etc etc.

"they" is term that can easily be used to just engage prejudice

I'm not allowed to refer to American Muslims as 'they' as that engages prejudice?

Can I refer to the support amongst young Muslims in the USA and Europe for suicide bombings or would that engage prejudice as well?

1 in 4 US Muslims aged 18-29 stated that suicide bombings of civilian targets in defence of Islam could be justified.

The numbers were higher in the UK & France.

More Support for Suicide Bombing of Civilian Targets Among Younger Muslims (aged 18-29)

USA 26%
UK 35%
France 42%
Germany 22%
Spain 29%

Pew Research Poll (2007)

Of course, 1 in 4 is a minority, so we have nothing to worry about...

reply to post by skalla


In your first post you spelled propaganda wrong and didn't use capitals

I think the guy was just avoiding your question and came up with a lame excuse as to why.

As for the OP............

I can understand them protesting if they think 9/11 was an inside job (which it clearly wasn't), but the demands on the host countries of these Muslims is out of order.

It's like them demanding sharia law here in the UK, why? This is the UK, not [insert]istan. You go to a country, you expect to follow their laws, their rules, their customs.

A good example is the Briton on death row in the Philippines(?) for drug smuggling, they knew the consequences of being caught in that country, now they pay the price.

reply to post by woogleuk


indeed, it was plain as day, generally i'll be too polite to call poeple out on that but it depends on the quality of their attempts to insult or derail, it's funny how some folk just expect you to fold!

also, i am not pedantic enough to scan everything scrupulously for spelling errors and typos.. i spotted the propaganda mistake and frankly couldnt be arsed, but i love spelling fairies and as anyone who is able to debate issues knows, that kind of nit picking is the preserve of those who have no answers and know they have met their match.. oh well eh?

it was bali where that granny is on death row btw, and she has only her self to blame, importing kilo's of coke to a country regardless of death penalty is just plain downright stupid, no sympathy here either

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by skalla

well maybe "they" are not the muslims who demand sharia, executions for so-called blasphemies etc etc.

"they" is term that can easily be used to just engage prejudice

I'm not allowed to refer to American Muslims as 'they' as that engages prejudice?

Can I refer to the support amongst young Muslims in the USA and Europe for suicide bombings or would that engage prejudice as well?

edit on 31-1-2013 by ollncasino because: (no reason given)

no thats fine by me, not that ypou need my permission, especially as you are using figues rather than just sugesting that everyone who belongs to a particular group is of identical mind - i didnt suggest that you cannot use that term, but you have adjusted your approach and i appreciate that.


and re: the suicide bombings thang, off topic dude, start a new thread, but then you know that

Originally posted by shivaX
Points to consider:-

*Christians and Jews do not get any protection in the middle east.
*They are not allowed to practice their own religion freely.
*They have to pay additional taxes aka Jizya.
*Our daughter's are being forcibly raped and converted to Islam everyday in Islamic countries.

So? I thought America was better than being hostile to legitimate citizens just because they follow a faith that treats people poorly elsewhere. They're not guilty of anything simply by association.

I suppose the civilians who get caught up in raids in Pakistan don't get any protection from American drones either.

reply to post by skalla


Demanding rights is one thing, to use the rules of the system to progress your own agenda and force others to follow you, is not what it's there for. Freedom of speech and religion is fine, but some Muslims want to use those rights to force "God" out and "Allah" in. They are certainly not known for religious tolerance.

reply to post by KingIcarus

I suppose the civilians who get caught up in raids in Pakistan don't get any protection from American drones either.

I suppose the civilians who got killed in 9/11,26/11 and other Islamic terrorist attacks didn't get any protection from Muslim's either.

reply to post by DAVID64

They are certainly not known for religious tolerance.

Thanks for making that clear.

Originally posted by skalla
and re: the suicide bombings thang, off topic dude, start a new thread, but then you know that

Islam don't support free speech if it criticizes Islam.

Muslim states have been trying, through the UN, to get any criticism of Islam made a criminal offense through out the world.

United Nations: Islamic States Will Push for US Free Speech Restriction

On Wednesday at the UN General Assembly, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) will seek to criminalize free speech and institute international blasphemy laws.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference is a 56-state group (56 sovereign states and the Palestinian Authority) and functions as the voice for the collective Muslim World.

Link

Islam doesn't support free speech if it criticizes Islam.

Originally posted by DAVID64
reply to post by skalla

 

Demanding rights is one thing, to use the rules of the system to progress your own agenda and force others to follow you, is not what it's there for. Freedom of speech and religion is fine, but some Muslims want to use those rights to force "God" out and "Allah" in. They are certainly not known for religious tolerance.

indeed, some muslims do, as do some people of other faiths.

it's certainly true that in the uk, and so it would seem in the us too, that some muslims (in my view more recent immigrants or those with the zeal of a recent convert) have real trouble understanding a tolerant society such as the uk, or the freedom of speech of the us.
however i feel this is an issue that people need to work on rather than simply condemn and draw up battle lines over and stereotype a minority.
if we live in nations that allow, and are built on immigration (obviously the us and uk fall into this category) then i think that we have to take it on the chin and find an intelligent way of enduring it, working with it and enabling positive change... role modelling is a good start, sadly i feel that there is not enough of that, and too much in the way of knee jerk tit for tat reaction without forethought as to where this leads.

Originally posted by shivaX
reply to post by KingIcarus

 

I suppose the civilians who got killed in 9/11,26/11 and other Islamic terrorist attacks didn't get any protection from Muslim's either.

Indeed they didn't.

However, the mistake you're making here is seeing 'Muslim' as some homogenic mass which is as ridiculous as seeing 'Christianity' as just one thing.

The people who commit terrorism are Extremists... no more connected to the ordinary man in the Pakistani street than - say - Timothy McVeigh was to you. In the same way small numbers of people sympathised with McVeigh, a small amount of people symathise with the extremists.

The ordinary man might disapprove of 'Western decadence' that he's taught is contrary to his religion, but it's a disapproval that extends only to not letting that decadance become something in his or his family's life. The ordinary man just wants to go to work, get paid, have dinner and live normally just like his Western counterpart.

Anyhow, I appreciate you probably won't agree with this, but the fact that many people seem to think Muslim and Extremist are completely interchangeable terms is probably the reason a million Muslims want to march on Washington.

It's not like you are personally responsible for drone strikes that kill civilians, but a Pakistani or whatever thinking all Americans are personally responsible is the same and equally irrational as instantly linking Muslims and Extremists.

I'm not Muslim, by the way.

reply to post by KingIcarus


Hmm .So what are your views about this Wikipedia article:-
ISLAMIC TERRORISM

Don't tell me its hoax.

reply to post by shivaX


Of course it's not a hoax. We have had it here in the UK, you know.

Anyhow, so what? What does that wiki page tell you? Some Muslims have engaged in terrorism. I'm sure there's a similar page for lots of religions / movements / political parties. Nelson Mandela engaged in terrorism, for instance.

Explain to me how that wiki page makes anyone on that proposed march in DC an extremist... tell me why their rights as American citizens are worth less than yours because people of the same religion did bad stuff elsewhere.

reply to post by skalla

is it possible that the propoganda and programming that you have been subjected is playing on some of your prejudices or fears and producing this internal struggle?

Not likely. It is more likely the historical facts surrounding the invention, rise, and spread of Islam. By their own definition, muslims cannot be citizens of the nations in which they reside. It is anathema to the teachings of their prophet Mohammed and contradictory to their system of social control called Sharia. Muslims residing on American soil cannot honestly uphold or defend the Constitution or my Bill of Rights. All they can do is employ deception by paying lip service to our culture, our values, and our laws while they continuously seek ways to move the Jihad forward.

Jihad is a mechanical process not a response. Jihad is the process by which muslims propagate their Islamic faith, their Sharia Law, and their questionable culture. Despite what the muslims say, Jihad is not a response to any perceived slights they have suffered at the hands of non-muslims. Jihad is not an internal struggle of the mind. Jihad is a process by which Islamic culture is spread.

This "Million Muslim March" is Jihad. It is a painfully obvious attempt to use the American culture, American values, and American laws as a cloak behind which the Jihad can be advanced. These muslims do not seek to participate in American culture, they seek to destroy it through the process of Jihad and then to replace it with Islamic culture and Sharia Law.

The muslims have used the process of Jihad to spread their culture, religion, and laws to great success for 1,400 years. From the Arabian Peninsula, to Byzantium, to Persia, to Northern Africa, to western China, to India, to Russia, Great Britian, America, Sweden, to the Philippines, to Malaysia. The process is exactly the same. Where there are muslims, there is eventually violent Jihad.

Muslims in America seek the exact same thing that muslims across planet Earth seek; the ascendance of Islam and Sharia across all the planet. To think otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

reply to post by KingIcarus


Oh so you want us to believe :-
Islam is peaceful.
Islamic terrorists do not exist.
We should encourage Jihad and Sharia for we will receive 72 virgins after death.

Good luck.

reply to post by KingIcarus

Some Muslims have engaged in terrorism.

Muslims do not engage in terrorism. Muslims employ the mechanical process of Jihad in an effort to spread their culture, religion, and laws. Do not mistake terrorism for Jihad or you will fall into a subtle trap that will eventually make you the terrorist and make the jihadis the "victims" of your "terrorism".

Muslims engage in Jihad.

reply to post by shivaX

Islamic terrorists do not exist.

There is no such thing as a muslim terrorist. There are only muslims engaged in Jihad. Muslims do not see Jihad as terror in the same manner a Westerner does. Jihad is the obligation of all muslims; from the subtle lie told to your face by a smiling muslim to the slaughter of non-muslim children in Beslan. It is all Jihad, Holy War, in the way of Mohammed and in celebration of their deity, the Allah.

Jihad is not terror. Jihad is the mechanical process, from lies to open violence, by which muslims spread their faith, their culture, and their laws.

reply to post by shivaX


I don't want you to believe anything. I just want you to apply some critical thinking to why you think all Muslims are bad because some of them committed terrorism.

Anyhow, I'm British (and an atheist for what it's worth), and this wiki article here tells me that an American Christian Sect calling themselves 'The Army of God' ( ) engaged in terrorism related to abortion and gay issues. So, by Shiva's logic, should I be wary of Christians? Americans? Both?

Doesn't make sense does it? I should be wary of Extremists. They all kill for spurious reasons and try to 'convert' people to their way of thinking by terrorising them.

I don't recall saying Islamic violence didn't exist. I don't recall saying it wasn't a problem within certain sections of their faith. I do, however, recall suggesting that having suspicions about American Muslims looking to protect their First Amendment rights on the basis that other Muslims on the other side of the planet do bad things is utterly, utterly retarded.

I don't agree with Mike's well written response about Jihad either, as it is taking Islam in an extraordinarily literal way. It is true that 'Jihad' has been used to spread Islam in the past, but it's actually an interpretation that has fallen out of favour. The gap between Westernised Islam and the very hardline stuff you find in Afghanistan/Iran etc is widening - out of necessity if nothing else.