Posted on 05/24/2006 9:32:07 AM PDT by Albion Wilde
Wafa Sultan:The clash we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions, or a clash of civilizations.... It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century. It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. It is a clash between human rights, on the one hand, and the violation of these rights, on other hand. It is a clash between those who treat women like beasts, and those who treat them like human beings. What we see today is not a clash of civilizations. Civilizations do not clash, but compete... [snip]
Host: I understand from your words that what is happening today is a clash between the culture of the West, and the backwardness and ignorance of the Muslims?
Wafa Sultan: Yes, that is what I mean.
Good point.
Hey! 45 years since Latin I with Ms Gormley! I do believe that the most common Caesarian phrase was, "..quae cum ita sunt!". As O'Reilly might pontificate, "What say You!"
I remember it as "Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres."
But I am not familiar with the philology of the source artifacts.
Humanity owes most of the discoveries and science of the 19th and 20th centuries to Jewish scientists.:')
>>>it's the ISLAMIST RADICAL fringe that is the problem! they are GARBAGE in semi-human form!>>>
If it the 'fringe' as you call that is radical, why are 90% of 'muslim countries' radical? Are there not enough good muslims that want to not be associated with the radical or are they just not as vocal with thier obedience to Allah?
I don't buy the 'it's only the bad ones' crap people want to say about Muslims. If people were killing in the name of Christ the same way Muslims are in the name of Allah I would leave that religion or get rid of the 'bad ones'.
It is a clash between the 21st century and 13th century, and if these glorified goat herders running the oil rich countries can't get it together, we're going to have to replace them.
Thanks for the ping.
Of course I did.
The only novelty here is that it's a muslim stating the obvious...
I wonder. I sat next to a very kind Muslim lady on the way from Chicago to Phoenix last night. She was not filled with the hatred of the barbarians we discuss, yet, as a devout follower of the Prophet, and, based on her unwavering faith, I would bet my last dime, that if told that the Prophet requires our conquest and our (non-Prophet-believers)"Dhimmitude" and slavery to the Muslim world, she would gladly participate in making us Dhimmis, simply to be a good and obedient Muslim. Watch out for those "peaceful Muslims". They may mean well (and I believe they really do mean well), but they are misguided in a very dangerous way, so don't kid yourself!!! We must watch our back. It is not a religion, but a cult, because the followers will not rise up (at least the moderates have not so far) and condemn the actions of the beheading blood-thirsty radicals. By the way, her version of Islam goes against everything I have been reading. For example, she was taught that Aisha was 16 when married and 19 when the marriage was consummated. Much of this goes on to get the "buy in", because so much of what's actually in the Quran is not acceptable to civilized society today. However, there is much other indoctrination too, as in about women and morals. For example, though she really believes about Aisha having been 19 (not 9) when their marriage was consummated, when confronted (by me) about Aisha having been 9, she didn't really seem horrified, but rather indicated that perhaps Aisha had already hit puberty and had been more mature than most girls of that age. Wafa Sultan has courageously pointed out these harsh realities about the "peaceful religion".
Great Ping!
That woman sure has guts . I pray that she is still a live today. What is says is true.
I have a lot of respect for her.
[Mrs T ]
They might say it, but that don't make it so.
Bacteria win, by many miles.
Was it the brilliant Bette Davis version? The more recent Cate Blanchett version barely comprehended the politics of the leader of the then-Free World.
Here is Google's take on it.
Out of your lips into God (of Abraham)'s ear.
To think that I learned it all wrong. My latin book had it as
Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres.
Of course I did. The only novelty here is that it's a muslim stating the obvious...
She clearly states in the video that she does not adhere to any religion, but is a secular humanist; then she defends the individual liberty to make a personal choice what to believe.
This is, I believe, distinct from the fascist American Left that not only opposes religion, but uses its ACLU attack dogs to try to convert everyone else to their atheocratic point of view.
Guys, let's not fight. What I found interesting here is that this avowed secularist, in contrast to the typical American radical leftist secularist, firmly supported the individual liberty to make one's own choice whether and what religion to embrace, and generously gave credit to Jews and to Americans for contributing the majority of scientific discovery and civilizing influences to the world. America was founded on "E Pluribus Unum" -- "Out of Many, One" -- and this is an example of the best of that philosophy.
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.