Posted on 10/20/2004 1:42:10 AM PDT by kattracks
I'm guessing it'll be a biowar attack. Look at how hysterical we get over fewer flu vaccines.
Imagine genetically modified smallpox or the equal let loose in America.
I thought this might be worthy of an Oklahoma ping, since its current news in Tulsa.
Why should our children be taught the teachings of such an evil man.
Muslims decided to follow a prophet called Muhammad. Why? I’ll never understand why these people have decided to do such a thing. This man was not Holy and pure without sin, like the Muslims claim.
The Prophet Muhammad had nine wives http://www.1upinfo.com/encyclopedia/M/Muhammd-enemies-and-converts.html I’ve got news for the Muslims, having nine wives is something that the western society does condemn. To this day it is against the law in the United States to have more than one wife. The western society man is not as full of lust, sex, and sin as the Prophet Muhammad. The western society man, like Adam, is grateful to God for giving him one woman. The western society man is not greedy like the devil.
With all this said, no way in hell was the prophet Muhammad pure. Lust and sex is involved with every relationship especially in nine different relationships, and what makes the prophet Muhammad think that it was right to marry his own 6 year old niece Aishah (Ayesha). Also what makes him think that is was right to consummate his marriage to her when she was 9 years old and he was 54 years old. http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha.htm
Anyone who claims that they are submitted to God should not lust over a child, but prophet Muhammad did. This action alone was the devil’s work. The prophet Muhammad was a pedophile and being a pedophile is carrying out the devil’s work. The Western society does not condone this type of behavior, the Muslims do. I wonder how they can explain this to God.
Muslims decided to follow a prophet called Muhammad because he claimed that the angel Gabriel appeared to him. Why did the Muslims decide to take Muhammad’s word that the angel Gabriel appeared to him? There was never anybody who could back up his claim, only him.
I will always wonder why the angel Gabriel did not appear to someone else, to let them know that Muhammad was chosen by God. This is what I don’t understand, why the Muslims never questioned this. Why they only took his word for it and followed him.
When God chose the Virgin Mary, who was pure without sin, at that point Gabriel also appeared to others and there was proof that God was involved. The angel Gabriel appeared to the Virgin Mary, he also appeared to the shepherds and Joseph and the Eastern star guided the wise men to the baby Jesus (The son of God and the last true Prophet.). Oh, I do believe with my whole heart that Gabriel did appear to Joseph because if he hadn’t we all know that a middle eastern man would not have stayed with Mary.
Anyone, like Muhammad can claim that they ascended into heaven or that they split the moon during a lunar eclipse. Notice that he screwed up when he claims that he ascended into heaven and said that Moses was a tall brown curly-haired man. We all know that Moses hair turned white. But I like the fact that he claims Jesus was wearing the good ole American colors, red and white.
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/islam.htm
Jesus rose from the dead, Muhammad did not. Jesus was the Son of God, Muhammad was not. Jesus did many miracles, Muhammad did not. Jesus was seen by over 500 people when He went up to heaven, Muhammad was put in a grave. Jesus quoted scriptures written thousands of years before His coming while Muhammad made up his own scriptures and claimed that he preached to genies as his proof of being a prophet. Muhammad even contradicted himself when he quoted his various fairy tales. Muhammad sinned against many people. Jesus sinned against no one. Not ONE of Jesus' enemies could ever truthfully say anything bad about Him. People that Muhammad tortured could certainly talk bad about him.
http://www.jesus-is-lord.com/islam.htm
You're in a good mood today, Merle. Was Momma nice to you this morning? Make your favorite breakfast?
Good article.My local school here in Union City NJ is in an uproar today .The School now has an Islamic Society (the school in %99 Hispanice by the way ) The Islamic Society has put booklets called The Black Stone " in all the teachers mailboxes. Its religious material . Some articles look down upon Jew and Roman Catholics and 1 poem ends with a line saying it's OK to be a terrorist in a Democracy ..This school , by the way . swa the trade centers come down outside our windows. The Board of Ed says its OK for them to distribute thos mags and have an Islamoic Club in a public school//Anyone know the law in NJ for this ? I hear only a few teachers publically expressed their disgust on this .All others are afraid of their jobs ..Help anyone ?
Stephen Schwartz, writing in Tech Central Station in a piece entitled Columbus Day Dreams, says there is now a mission underway to assert that Columbus hired a Muslim navigator to guide his ships.
No doubt because of the five Jews generally accepted to be on the voyage, one was a navigator. Next it will be the interpriter who, though Jewish, did speak Arabic.
Politics, not history, is behind this new tale.
By Robert Spencer
Not too many years ago, I witnessed a small band of angry protesters stalking down a Manhattan street chanting, "Columbus! Did Not! Discover! America!" I remember how quickly Columbus became a symbol of all that was wrong with the West: racism, imperialism, colonialism — and don't forget smallpox and cholera.
But now the old sea dog can come in from the cold, though an unlikelier candidate for a multicultural poster child could hardly be found. In a press release issued late last month titled "Islamic Influence Runs Deep in American Culture," Phyllis McIntosh of the State Department's Washington File burbles that "Islamic influences may date back to the very beginning of American history. It is likely that Christopher Columbus, who discovered America in 1492, charted his way across the Atlantic Ocean with the help of an Arab navigator."
Rewrite the history books, indoctrinate the children, and you can own the future. The bit about the Arab navigator is not just being put out by State, but will also be taught in Massachusetts public schools this year. Some lucky Massachusetts teachers were recently treated to a week-long workshop called "The Genesis and Genius of Islam." It featured professors from Boston College, College of the Holy Cross, Harvard, and Bridgewater State College, including Ibrahim Kalin, assistant professor of religious studies at Holy Cross. According to a local Massachusetts paper, Kalin said that "Islamic sailors were the best seamen of the day," and "noted that even Christopher Columbus had several Muslim sailors on his voyage that wound up in the New World."
Unfortunately for State and the schoolchildren of Massachusetts, there is not a shred of historical evidence for this. While assertions of this kind can readily be found on Islamic websites, none of the preeminent historians of Columbus's voyages — not Samuel Eliot Morison, Salvador de Madariaga, Paolo Emilio Taviani, or any other — has any record of this Muslim presence among the crew. And remember, Columbus was only sailing in the first place to find a way for European traders (who were Christians in those days) to avoid land routes to the Far East. Those land routes were controlled by Muslims, and passed through areas only recently conquered from Christians — most notably, the ancient holdings of the Byzantine empire, whose capital, Constantinople, had fallen to the Muslims in 1453. Columbus was commissioned by Ferdinand and Isabella, who had just defeated the last Muslims in Spain and driven them out of the country.
Did Columbus tag after the retreating Muslims and hire a navigator and a few sailors? According to the leading authority on Columbus's voyages, the historian Samuel Eliot Morison, the name of Columbus's navigator was Martín Pinzón, who served as captain of the Pinta. Of the known names of his crew members, there is an abundance of Juans and Pedros, but nary a Mahmoud or Ahmad. In those days, Christian names almost always meant the bearer was a Christian. As Muhammad Ali and Yusuf Islam can tell you, it is unlikely that a Muslim would have borne a Christian name.
It is even more unlikely that Muslim crewmen would have willingly served under Christians. Muslim Spain was not the multicultural paradise of modern myth; it was, rather, a sharia state in which non-Muslims were forbidden to hold authority over Muslims. This law was sometimes ignored, but that always aroused the resentment of the Muslim populace. Would Muslim sailors who had so recently been citizens of this state have willingly signed on to take orders from Christians — and men against whom they had just been at war?
Further, Muslim sailors would not have found Columbus's ships a congenial atmosphere: Columbus firmly believed that the Christian God had called him to this mission. In the diaries he kept during the voyage, he praised Ferdinand and Isabella for being "Catholic Christians, and princes who love and promote the holy Christian faith," as well as for being "enemies of the doctrine of Mahomet, and of all idolatry and heresy."
Columbus's crew prayed often on the ship — Christian prayers, not multicultural ones, and certainly not the maghrib and isha prayers or any other of the five daily prayers of Islam. "At sunset," according to Morison, "the Blessed Virgin was saluted with her ancient canticle, Salve Regina." Neither Morison nor any other historian of Columbus's voyages records any protest by Muslim crewmen against this overt display of Christian religiosity. Columbus's crew, historians record, even broke out in Te Deum, laudamus when they sighted land. Of the captain himself, Morison notes that "as a pious Christian, faithful in his religious duties, Columbus kept a book of hours in his cabin, and whenever possible said his prayers in private at the appointed hours."
There was an Arabic speaker on hand — but he was of Jewish, not Muslim background. According to historian Thomas W. Jodziewicz of the University of Dallas, "There was a converted Jew on board Columbus' ship who spoke Arabic: if Chinese or Japanese folks were contacted, he would supposedly be able to communicate with them!"
So why are the State Department and the Massachusetts public schools purveying all this hooey? Repeated calls to the State Department and Phyllis McIntosh went unreturned; the State Department's Bureau of International Information Programs issues a blizzard of press releases on its website, but offers no clear or easy way to contact a live human in the office. Its contact procedures are labyrinthine, self-contradictory, and generally culminate in an answering machine on which messages go unreturned.
Why would an "information" bureau play so hard to get? Could it be to fend off embarrassing questions from Americans while spreading politically motivated, ahistorical fairy tales to an eager international audience? The agenda is clear: This is about contemporary p.c. politics, not history.
It's all presented as an exercise in understanding. Speaking of his students, a Massachusetts history teacher who attended the workshop asked, "How can they understand Iraq if they don't know the history of the people?" Indeed. But it really isn't the history of Iraq, or of Columbus's voyages, that State and the Massachusetts educrats are interested in. What they're really on about is the history — and future — of the United States.
The multiculturalist fantasy is designed to make Americans more accepting of an influential Islamic presence in this country. But unfortunately, since few at the State Department seems concerned about how to screen terrorists out of this Islamic presence, they're likely to find that the Muslims to whom they have surrendered their history — and whom they have invited into their future — are no more multicultural than their forefathers of 1492.
oh, [bleep]
just DAMN IT!
Isn't this illegal? Otherwise we'd have other religions proseletyzing in schools. Separation of church and state and all that. In the meantime, while they fight over legal details, let's do it to them. Send ministers and priests and rabbis to 'explain their particular religion and gently but firmly point how how bizarre and wicked Islam is.
Th quote, 'Everything we need to know is in the Koran,' explains why their culture and religion has been mired in the Dark Ages for the past thirteen hundred years and counting.
That's simply not true. Where did you get this idea?
Freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion. We need God (or in this case Allah) back in our public schools.
And for "equal time", lets have all the little kiddies partake in Baptism, while their classmates read out the responses
Our Constitutional system originally envisioned a nations made up of constituent geographical states whose union was symbolized by a national capital on a federal territory that was not part of any state and thus a capital with no vote in the electoral college. This is rapidly being transformed into a union made up of "beautiful" exotic ethnocultures united by a WASP host population dispersed throughout the other ethnic groups like mortar among bricks. Since the Host is mortar rather than a brick, liberals simply do not understand why it wants to be treated like a brick. Hence the celebration of exotic religions while public expression of the host religion is deemed inappropriate.
What would liberals do without us "abstractions" doing the grunt work of holding their glorious union of ethno-cultural millets together? This need of an abstract host population is one reason liberals oppose the Confederate Battle Flag. If the Abstract Host Population were to claim an ethnic identity of some sort it would cease to be an abstraction and without the mortar the bricks tumble into ruin. And personally, I'd kinda like to see that happen.
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.