Hat Tip.
They think? I thought they had to ask an imam what to think.
This, of course, pre-supposes the gift of convergent synapses.
It should have been “Do muslims believe their’s is the one and only religion and they should follow the Qu’ran?”
All answers will flow from a simple “Yes” or “No”. Since we know the answer is “Yes” then we also know that they support the terrorists by their inaction.
We can’t fix what’s wrong with them by force. We cannot deal with them on the same basis and in the same terms we do with other nations or cultures. If we deal with them at all, it needs to be at arm’s lenght and they need to be kept isolated. I know we have a history and tradition of allowing freedom of religion, but letting them come here and set up mosques is like letting the Chinese buy land on American soil and set up military bases.
What is Islam based on?
Mohammed went into “trances” and fits (like epileptic fits) when he was given the “word of God” and would shout out what he was told. These would be written down by his followers. This is the makeup of the Koran.
When Mohammed was just walking and talking and acting like “normal”, his words and deeds were written down by his followers and this went into the Hadith. Now, acting “normal” for Mohammed was taking 12+ wives (including a 6 year old), taking slaves (including sex slaves), executing infidels, conducting raids for treasure, etc.
Now, this is where it gets complicated.
A large part of the words he spoke in trances were “taken back” by Mohammed. He determined them to be the work of the devil (thus they are called the “Satanic Verses” and these are the same verses that Mr. Salman Rushdie got in trouble for writing about).
Now, how Mohammed determined which verses were from God and which were from Satan I do not know.
Also, there were literally dozens of widely different versions of the Koran and Hadith floating around for several hundred years after Mohammed death until a Fatwah was decreed to destroy all but one version. Now, even Mohammed could not remember what he was told by God and forgot it (those are his words as written in the Hadith) so I do not know how the powers in charge decided which was the correct version.
Also according to the Hadith, Mohammed turned people into monkeys, you can determine a child’s sex depending on whether the male or female has an orgasm first (that advice came directly from the Angel Gabriel), dogs and cats are evil and should be killed, that the devil lives in your nose at night (and how to get rid of him in the morning), chess is forbidden, muslims have one intestine while infidels have seven, don’t pray looking up or your eyes will be snatched away, that one wing of a fly is poison but the other is the cure, that drinking camel urine is good for you and I could go on.
And that Mohammed himself didn’t even know if he was going to heaven. If even Mohammed doesn’t know, what chance does the average muslim have?
And for some non-PC info, Mohammed was described as a white man.
Now, if you can bear it, to compare to the Gospels of New Testament.
Jesus was someone who lived a very humble life and was killed for basically saying he was a King and Son of God (blasphemy) by the powers in charge (Roman and Jewish). The government wanted Jesus destroyed and wanted his growing movement destroyed (as it threatened their power). If, after 3 days, the followers of Jesus proclaimed he has risen from the dead, (just as he predicted), and is truly our Savior, the High Officials would have wanted to destroy such a “myth.” They could have easily done this by producing the dead body of Jesus and saying “Your Messiah is still dead and so is your movement” or producing many eye witnesses of the dead Jesus. But they couldn’t.
The letters that make up the New Testament were written by the eye witnesses of the events of Jesus. They were written in just one generation when many other eye witnesses were still alive. They were written without collusion from other Apostles. Even if any of the Apostles wanted to “add” to the “myth” of Jesus, they would have done so in a very disjointed and easily detectable fashion. Yet, the main Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John) that describe the life of Jesus are amazingly in harmony with one another and the small differences are consistent with what we would see today if four people witnessed a major event and wrote about the event apart from each other. The Gospels can be traced back to their sources and are basically unchanged from their originals.
The Bible is the most investigated historical document in the history of the world. It has been investigated by scientists, philosophers and archeologists using technology undreamed of when the Bible was written. It is been desperately tried to be “disproved” for over 2000 years, yet, the Bible still stands as the truth.
The stories of Jesus still make sense to us today. It may be because they are true, it may be because they are based in love or it may be because they were written to tell the people of the Word of God.
Regards,
2banana
Amazing! The mind boggles.
Ask a typical Arab Muslim in the Middle East if he supports the 9/11 hijackers and you'll probably get a lukewarm expression of disapproval for the specific action taken, followed by an animated rant about how it was all Israel's fault. Ask him if he would like to move the United States and live in New York permanently and be an American and he'll also say yes, no matter how many Jews he might end up with as neighbors.
So saying we have 1.3 billion active enemies is way off the mark - but it's unlikely in turn that we can convince very many of them to help the US forces capture their brothers. The cultural milieu of the Middle East will remain fertile ground for the production of angry young men for some time to come.
Allow me.
Good Muslims follow the tenets of their religion.
The ones who dont are not moderate - they are lapsed.
Sorry, folks, I don’t care what Moslems “think,” because I don’t believe that they’re capable of any rational conceptualization. If any of them were, they would have rallied to our side and supported us, or at least condemned 9/11 and all subsequent attacks, instead of lapsing into the dead-pool silence that typifies the “Moslem moderate.”
Rational people do not riot in the streets over editorial cartoons, nor do they stone their own family members because of purported slights to some weird-a$$ version of religously imposed “honor.”
What continues to boggle the mind is the leftist lean-over-backward attempts to mollify them: Somalis taxicab drivers can violate the American Disabilties Act by refusing to transport persons with “helper” dogs,” and face only possible fines and potential suspension for that transgression, but my employer is penalized with draconian and punitive measures if equal access isn’t guaranteed to disabled workers on the jobsite? Footbaths in schools, airports, and the workplace are created to accommodate Islamic practitioners in their prayer rituals—but I can’t look forward to seeing a creche in the public square at Christmas time because that’s a violation of the separation of church and state? Let’s modify job titles so that the burkha-clad checkout folk at the supermarket don’t have to touch your triply shrink-wrapped pork purchases—instead, you’re inconvenienced while the store attempts to find some clerk who lacks that sharia imposition. My kids can’t attend voluntary Bible-reading classes, whether for secular or religious studies at their schools, because the First Amendment prohibits the use of public facilities for the propagation, promulgation, or simple exploration of comparative religious beliefs; yet the Muzzies get government subsidies to provide scheduling, room space, and whatever other technologies necessary to promote the religion of “peace” in the airports, jails, schools, and every other venue that CAIR has decided is important to the destruction of Western civilization?
We no longer have to fear the so-called “slippery slope”—
Americans are already plunging, willingly, into subservience to the twelfth caliphate.
The Dhimmocrats, the ACLU, and their allegiance to “political correctness” and “multiculturaldiversity” are the pipers luring the vermin out into the streets, rather than consigning them to the hell to which they belong.
And I’m supposed to be concerned about “what Moslems think”?
They don’t think — they react.
They think WHAT EVER they are TOLD to think..
What do mudslimes think? I’ll tell you — the first mudslime that tries to impose his will on me will *think otherwise* when I’m done with him. Islam is cancer that needs to be cut, poisoned and radiated into remission.
bttt
How many angels dance on the head of a pin ? This situation in Christendom led to the Reformation and the Counter Reformation.
Without a living theology for more than a century, Islam as a religious tradition today simply lacks the vocabulary needed for discussing issues of contemporary import. The character of contemporary Muslim debate has been further secularized by a recent avalanche of new terms into all the main languages of Islam: Arabic, Persian, Turkish and Urdu among others. Almost all of these terms are borrowed from various European languages, especially English and French, and at least implicitly express Western ideas and ideals. How does an Arabic speaker today discuss human rights, civil society, pluralism, accountability, elections, democracy, good governance, the rule of law and social justice without going beyond Islamic frameworks and concepts? It is impossible, which is why even Muslim clergy now regularly appeal to wider audiences by employing the terms of the Western political lexicon. Muhammad Khatami, a former president of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and a mid-ranking Shi‘a mullah, quotes Hobbes, Hegel and Locke more often than he does any Shi‘i scholar or imam.
Interesting. I heard this as a military brat in Libya, where there were no technological terms in Arabic to use in training their armed forces. Isn't that one of the ideas of Wittengenstein, that language forms reality ?
Not only is debate in the Muslim world today this-worldly, it is overtly political. Seen from the outside, Islam may look to be a monolith. In reality, it is a house of a thousand mansions, as riven by sectarian differences as is Christianity. Shi‘a have as much in common with Sunnis as Anabaptists have with Catholics, and each of the two main schools is divided into dozens of smaller branches that often disagree even over fundamentals of the faith. And that is one of the reasons why current debate has remained predominantly political—at least until very recently—for those engaged in it recognize that conducting it at a religious level would provoke murderous and self-destructive schismatic tensions. Even for those with deep religious convictions, the prudent course is to avoid overt religiosity and to seek a broader Islamic consensus on political issues.
This hasn't prevented Oodles of Muslim-on-Muslim slaughter, far worse than any caused by the West.
For example, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, one of the “guides” of the Muslim Brotherhood, an Arab Sunni movement, can never agree with Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Supreme Guide of Khomeinist Shi‘i Iran, even on Islam’s basic principles. For Qaradawi, there are three such principles: the unity of God (tawhid), Muhammad’s prophethood (nubuwwah) and the Day of Reckoning (yawm al-ma‘ad). Khamenei, however, adds two more: justice (‘adl) and the rule of the imamate (imamah). It is only in politics that the two can find a terrain d’entente by calling, for example, for the destruction of Israel or the expulsion of the United States from the Muslim world. This politicization of debate in Islam is everywhere to be seen. In most mosques anywhere in the world, even in Brooklyn, God makes only a cameo appearance in sermons delivered to the faithful these days. Instead, worshippers hear about “Zionist conspiracies”, “Islamophobia”, “the corruption of Western civilization” and the U.S. “attempt at imposing its hegemony on the world.”
Among the most appalling aspects of this religion, and one noted by practitioners of other faiths.
This distortion of religion is simply unsustainable, and it is increasingly unpopular. Most people seek religious affiliation for the comfort and stability it brings, for the bonds it provides to family and the solace it offers in times of sickness, disappointment and tragedy. Politicized religion cheapens and denies all this, and Muslims who understand and value their traditions will not allow themselves to be thus dispossessed. Increasingly common are remarks like those of Murad Ahmed, a British Muslim who wrote, after the revelation in late January of a radical plot to abduct and behead a British soldier of Muslim faith: “It’s a failing of our ‘silent majority’ for being silent too long. For cowering in the face of the perceived moral superiority of nutcases because they seem to believe in the faith more than we do. It’s time to get a megaphone and tell these people that they don’t speak for us.”
And we in the West exacerbate this trend by falling all over ourselves to acquiece to the Muslim-grievence groups, which merely opens the gap between Muslims and non-Muslims in a society.
Islamism in its various forms is a mortally wounded beast. It has lost most of the major political debates of contemporary life and is in retreat on most core issues of Islamic political, economic and social practice. But it still manages to maintain a vast audience by appealing to xenophobia: more specifically, to virulent anti-Semitic and anti-American sentiments. In religious and cultural terms, the Jew is the quintessential “other” whom Muslims ought to simultaneously admire and fear. The American represents the “other” in terms of political and military power.
And this is where Islam becomes a problem for us. The rest of it is a problem for Muslims and is theirs to solve. But somehow, someway, Dar es Salaam needs to get the message that their behaviors which threaten our well-being will NOT be tolerated. Afghanistan was a start, but the Democrats have undermined any lesson to be drawn from Iraq. This will redouble the costs to us, in blood and treasure, of convincing the radicals of Islam that their behaviors won't be tolerated.
Which means some bloody decades ahead.
bump
Attention all Liberals...