. . . if they have to force peple to follow it:

Quote:

Veiled police smash 80,000 beer bottles Posted 2 hours 50 minutes ago Islamic police have smashed 80,000 bottles of beer in the Nigerian city of Kano, enforcing a sharia law ban on consumption of alcohol that exists in much of the country's north. More than 12 veiled female sharia police, called Hisbah, destroyed the beer bottles with sticks amid shouts of "Allahu Akbar" - God is great - on the outskirts of the northern city in a ceremony. The ceremony was attended by government officials as part of "efforts to rid the state of immorality," Kano state Hisbah chief Saidu Dukawa said. Kano city is the capital of the state by the same name. "The sale and consumption of alcohol, like all forms of drugs and intoxicants, is illegal in Kano state, which practices sharia law and by this event we are enforcing that ban," Dr Dukawa said. Thirteen trucks brought the bottles of beer to the venue. The alcohol had been seized at the weekend by sharia police as the bottles were being delivered to the city from the mainly Christian south, where most of the country's breweries are located. Although the sale and consumption of alcohol is banned in Kano state, beer trucks find their way to taverns in the predominantly Christian Sabongari neighbourhood, which is practically exempt from sharia law. Since 1999, when Nigeria returned to civilian rule after years of military dictatorship, around 12 states in the predominantly Muslim north have reintroduced Islamic sharia law, though it has been selectively applied in many cases.

(ABC website)

Such a great religion, the Isamic abomination, they have to force people to follow it!

Hi Darwin,
though I agree with your statement I feel this more belongs in the "extremism exposed" forum.

It is much more extreme than spiritual.
Well, it is not spititual at all.

Take care

Done Sprint, you are right, it is not terribly spiritual destroying people's property whilst you tell them how they have to live their lives.

I don't defend one religion over any other, but hey - It's Northern Nigeria, folks. It's a bit like saying that Christianity is crap because of what the LRA did in Uganda.

Sub-Saharan Africa is a crappy place, although I still have some great friends there. I've been there and I can testify to that fact. It doesn't matter whether they are Christians, Muslims or Animists. They do some pretty insane things.

Northern Nigeria is actually the epicentre of the terrestrial anus.

If you want a different Muslim attitude to grog (which none of our resident Muslims will tell you about), just have a beer at Ned Kelly's bar in Dubai, or sit sipping Heineken al fresco in the Plaza at İzmir, Turkey while you listen to the odd plaintiff call to prayer from the Minarets as the sun goes down and the oily looking hookers start to emerge next to the major hotels.  

Indonesia is much the same.  From memory, their beer is quite good, as is Malaysian beer.

Impeccably multicultural and cosmopolitan - except you won't find Christians and Animists smashing you beer on account of it being against their religion. Not even in Nigeria, the epicentre of the anus of the world (for the benefit of our more genteel audience - is that like the middle of the hole in the donut?)

Soren wrote on Aug 4^th, 2010 at 2:16pm:

(for the benefit of our more genteel audience - is that like the middle of the hole in the donut?)

Well epicentres are associated with earthquakes, so if you imagine the hole in the doughnut together with an  overtone of flatulence, you get the general idea.

In other parts of the world you don't get Christians ritually killing children either. Animists do it too.

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/01/29/uk.ritual/?related?related


Quote:

The author…concluded that belief in possession, witchcraft and exorcism was widespread in the UK and around the world, in African churches which had been influenced by evangelical Christianity, in Anglican churches in the UK but also in other religions which involved a belief in good and evil.

- and I'm not being totally squeaky clean. There are parts of Africa that I would not go back to for any sum of money. Sub-Saharan African versions of Christianity and Islam are very different to other versions.

In Guinea, sex is regarded pretty well in the same light as shaking hands from the early teen years upwards. The actual religion that people follow has no effect on that or any other practice. In most parts of Subsaharan africa, it's the same - and that includes 'Born Again' Ghana,  Muslim Senegal and largely Animist Togo.

Environmental management means -  if it moves, eat it, if it's a chemical, dump it anywhere or burn it.  Oh they have an EPA in most of these countries of course. Some of their officers even venture out from the cities and make appropriate tutting sounds, write copious notes then head back to their offices never to be seen again unless there is some Western money involved.

This has gotta be a joke right????

Christian countries regularly destroy illegal marijuana... and I very much doubt any of you would consider it to be the exact same thing.

The idea that substances are controlled and forbidden and are destroyed when confiscated is certainly not peculiar to Islamic societies, and btw, the Nigerian ruler is a Christian.

Quote:

For women in Indonesia, simply removing a headscarf can be a life-changing act. Courtney Trenwith met one woman who did just that. Yolanda Nursanty was fleeing a violent student protest, with the Indonesian riot police hot on her heels, when she did what no conservative Muslim woman was supposed to do. She publicly removed her jilbab, the Islamic headscarf. As leader of the swelling rally that had turned bloody and uncontrollable, she faced a jail term and possible beating if the police, brandishing metal batons and riot shields, identified her. Hiding in the toilet of a mosque, Yolanda desperately needed a disguise; removing her headscarf was about the only option available to her. It saved her - she was never caught. Nine years on, Yolanda continues to hide from her past as secretary of the national labor movement, including changing her name...........

the horror of it - removing her "letterbox lady" outfit !!!!!!!!

ain't nothing spiritual in islam

covering one's beauty is indeed a spiritual act.

being a miserable, hateful, pathetic little toad certainly isn't that spiritual, so you'd wanna cut down on that first I think.

uhuh, and having 4 wives is a spiritual act ?
what about beating them when they won't lay down and spread their legs for you after 4 days, that spiritual too?

killing those that leave your perverse belief system, that spiritual too ??


thanks abu, you have clearly portrayed islam here for all to see.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 12^th, 2010 at 2:43pm:

uhuh, and having 4 wives is a spiritual act ? what about beating them when they won't lay down and spread their legs for you after 4 days, that spiritual too?

Yes, my friend, it is spiritual act. But I know you will spread wide so no problem.

Quote:

uhuh, and having 4 wives is a spiritual act ?

For the one who is man enough to take care of them, yes.


Quote:

what about beating them

You (and a few other dead-heads) keep repeating this charge, yet I don't see a lot of evidence. But I do see mountains of evidence that women in Western/Christian societies suffer a lot of abuse due to their alcohol and/or drug fuelled 'partners' having very little respect for women other than as commodities that can be used and abused, sold and flashed around.


Quote:

killing those that leave your perverse belief system, that spiritual too ??

All societies have treason laws... nothing out of the ordinary there.


Quote:

thanks abu, you have clearly portrayed islam here for all to see.

About all you've portrayed is how much of a goon you are.

Soren wrote on Aug 4^th, 2010 at 2:16pm:

Impeccably multicultural and cosmopolitan - except you won't find Christians and Animists smashing you beer on account of it being against their religion.

No - the Christians tend to hammer nails in the heads of children they believe to be witches.

Of course, they have much respect for private property.

abuthedeciever


Quote:

For the one who is man enough to take care of them, yes.

what about for the 3 men who have no wife to share thier life with ?
or the 2 women who get 1/4 a man to "share" ?


Quote:

what about beating them You (and a few other dead-heads) keep repeating this charge, yet I don't see a lot of evidence. But I do see mountains of evidence that women in Western/Christian societies suffer a lot of abuse due to their alcohol and/or drug fuelled 'partners' having very little respect for women other than as commodities that can be used and abused, sold and flashed around.

beating your wife is in the koran.
in western society that sort of thing is illegal.
muslims are the biggest slave traders.


Quote:

killing those that leave your perverse belief system, that spiritual too ?? All societies have treason laws... nothing out of the ordinary there.

so it'ld be ok to murder anyone who wants to leave aussie then ?



Quote:

thanks abu, you have clearly portrayed islam here for all to see. About all you've portrayed is how much of a goon you are.

better the goon I am than an intolerant violentlly inclined religionutjob who blindly follows the rantings of a sexaddict




karnal
Quote:

No - the Christians tend to hammer nails in the heads of children they believe to be witches. Of course, they have much respect for private property.

sorry, I can't find that in the bible, nor have I ever been invited to a head hammering of suspected witches.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 12^th, 2010 at 3:08pm:

Quote: killing those that leave your perverse belief system, that spiritual too ?? All societies have treason laws... nothing out of the ordinary there.

An excellent demonstration of Islam's political nature.
It is a political system with a mish-mash of religious parody smeared on top. No cherry.

Cherries are forbidden.

as is alcohol, music, kite flying, any other belief, a genuine election, a woman being out without appropriate male supervision , schools for females or leaving the crap belief system.

oh, also God is forbidden to talk to anyone in hte last 1500 years. According to moh the illiterate

1500? What about Moh?

moh, he was illiterate.
so the koran was 4th hand, at best

You're not being very nice to Moh. Maybe you should give him a go.

I take it you've read the Koran, SC.

was he illiterate or was he not illiterate ?
yes/no ?

Avoiding the question means "yes"

I have read a bit of it in various bookshops thanks.
Sort of lost me where it talked about "chopping off alternate hand and foot"
Proved to me just how extreme it is.

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 13^th, 2010 at 3:40pm:

was he illiterate or was he not illiterate ? yes/no ? Avoiding the question means "yes"

Effende, you want to buy watch? I have nice Dickie Tracey watch with radio. Come come, you look!

Quote:

I have read a bit of it in various bookshops thanks. Sort of lost me where it talked about "chopping off alternate hand and foot"

So you were strolling through Angus & Robertsons one day and you just happened to pick up a Qur'an and coincidentally stumbled onto a verse that said to chop off alternate hands and feet?  ;D

Better than you pick up a Bible and accidentally open it to a page about slaughtering little infants.... I suppose.

karnal - that means yes.

typical deceiving muslim.
exactly the same as abu

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 13^th, 2010 at 9:15pm:

Quote: I have read a bit of it in various bookshops thanks. Sort of lost me where it talked about "chopping off alternate hand and foot" So you were strolling through Angus & Robertsons one day and you just happened to pick up a Qur'an and coincidentally stumbled onto a verse that said to chop off alternate hands and feet?  ;D Better than you pick up a Bible and accidentally open it to a page about slaughtering little infants.... I suppose.

The only difference is that you open the Koran anywhere - and it's giberish. I have attemted to read it many, many times. It is unreadable. It is just a load of unconnected blah. Thomas Carlyle summed it up really well:

I must say, it [the Koran] is as toilsome reading as I ever undertook. A wearisome confused jumble, crude, incondite; endless iterations, long-windedness, entanglement; most crude, incondite; -- insupportable stupidity, in short! Nothing but a sense of duty could carry any European through the Koran . . . It is the confused ferment of a great rude human soul; rude, untutored, that cannot even read; but fervent, earnest, struggling vehemently to utter itself in words . . . We said "stupid:" yet natural stupidity is by no means the character of
Mahomet's Book; it is natural uncultivation rather. The man has not studied speaking; in the haste and pressure of continual fighting, has
not time to mature himself into fit speech . . . The man was an uncultured semi-barbarous Son of Nature, much of the Bedouin still clinging to him: we must take him for that. But for a wretched Simulacrum, a hungry Impostor without eyes or heart . . . we will not
and cannot take him. Sincerity, in all senses, seems to me the merit of the Koran; what had rendered it precious to the wild Arab men . . . Curiously, through these incondite masses of tradition, vituperation, complaint, ejaculation in the Koran, a vein of true direct insight, of what we might almost call poetry, is found straggling.


Spot f...ing on, I say!!!!

I have never read any of 'The Koran' - but Soren's description of reading it could equally apply to my readings of the Holy Bible...

Equitist wrote on Aug 13^th, 2010 at 10:55pm:

I have never read any of 'The Koran' - but Soren's description of reading it could equally apply to my readings of the Holy Bible...

You don't read and you don't think. Talking will not make up for these deficiencies.

Any idiot can say that one thing is the same as another. It takes a bit of intellect to perceive difference. But you wouldn't know what the hell I am talking about.

Soren wrote on Aug 13^th, 2010 at 11:05pm:

Equitist wrote on Aug 13th, 2010 at 10:55pm: I have never read any of 'The Koran' - but Soren's description of reading it could equally apply to my readings of the Holy Bible... You don't read and you don't think. Talking will not make up for these deficiencies. Any idiot can say that one thing is the same as another. It takes a bit of intellect to perceive difference. But you wouldn't know what the hell I am talking about.

LOL...at the risk of stating the obvious: ditto!  ::)

Soren, my guess is you've honestly never read any part of the Qur'an.

You might have gleaned the occasional hand-picked quote from Jihadwatch, but that's about it.

Sit down and seriously read the book, and I think you'll find that the trash you posted above is nothing but that... trash.

I can hand pick stuff out of the Bible which just sounds like complete jibberish... for example:

If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox [shall be] quit. But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. If there be laid on him a sum of money, then he shall give for the ransom of his life whatsoever is laid upon him. Whether he have gored a son, or have gored a daughter, according to this judgment shall it be done unto him. If the ox shall push a manservant or a maidservant; he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned. And if a man shall open a pit, or if a man shall dig a pit, and not cover it, and an ox or an ass fall therein; The owner of the pit shall make [it] good, [and] give money unto the owner of them; and the dead [beast] shall be his.

Stoned any oxen lately have we? remember not to eat the flesh thereof..  ;D

And remember to be sure to close any pits you open, lest any oxen or asses fall therein.


Quote:

Any idiot can say that one thing is the same as another. It takes a bit of intellect to perceive difference. But you wouldn't know what the hell I am talking about.

I agree, saying they're the same is just insulting. How on earth anyone can put the noble and splendid words of the Qur'an al-Kareem on the same level as this is just beyond me. The Qur'an is a book of pure guidance which doesn't deserve to be compared in any measure with this ox stoning and pit covering stuff.

Perhaps your ox were wont to push with his horn in time past.  ;D

The point is not whether the Koran is the only giberish. The point is that the Koran is giberish.  That in itself would be no biggie.

Your insistence that it is the unadulterated word of Alah is the startling thing. You are saying that it is exactly as it was dictated to Mohammed. But that is not possible. Apart from the various textual and historical contradictions and variants, the very organisation of the text is obviouly not as it could have been dictated to Mohammed.


Here's the Atlantic article. Read and learn. The section 'Looking at the fragments' yields fruit early on and sums up the sh!t creek this particular islamic doctrine is up.
http://www.derafsh-kaviyani.com/english/quran1.pdf

The Jews and the Christians at least have the sense of proportion not to claim to have direct acess to god's mind as text (the early illiterate Muslims' fetish). They at least have the sense of proportion to speak only of inspiration, not dicattion. But Islam, in all things a gauche parody, always goes too far.

Quote:

The point is not whether the Koran is the only giberish.

As I said, don't put the words of God with your books. They are not on the same playing field.

Interesting you use the term Gibberish though (Gibberish: the word comes from the name of the famous 8th-century Islamic alchemist, Jabir ibn Hayyan, whose name was Latinized as "Geber", thus the term "gibberish" arose as a reference to the incomprehensible technical jargon often used by Jabir and other alchemists who followed.) ie. The backward Europeans didn't understand what on earth he was on about, since he was speaking about chemistry, physics, mathematics etc. topics completely foreign to them.


Quote:

The point is that the Koran is giberish.

So far we've only seen you admit this when shown excerpts from your own book. I have yet to see any such credible examples from the noble book of God. Just a few European nit-wits jabbering on about how they think you can interpret one language by means of another, just because they have some shared vocab. The kind of stuff only idiots would subscribe to that have absolutely no understanding of modern linguistics. Probably the kind of kooky stuff Europeans would've still been subscribing to back in Jabir's time.


Quote:

The Jews and the Christians at least have the sense of proportion not to claim to have direct acess to god's mind as text (the early illiterate Muslims' fetish). They at least have the sense of proportion to speak only of inspiration, not dicattion. But Islam, in all things a gauche parody, always goes too far.

The mockery would not be complete without this crowning piece of jahiliyyah.

So what pray tell is Sola Scriptura??? A deviant Jain philosophy or something??? You're a rank amateur soren, rank amateur.

Not to mention the Yahoud, whose most celebrated and trusted authority, Rambam, taught: "Moses was the Torah's author, receiving it from God either as divine inspiration or as direct dictation in the Hebrew year 2449 AM (1313 BCE)."

Rank amateur...

Sprintcyclist wrote on Aug 13^th, 2010 at 9:18pm:

karnal - that means yes. typical deceiving muslim. exactly the same as abu

My friend, you have not told me you do not want watch.

Name your price, my friend.

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 16^th, 2010 at 12:53am:

The mockery would not be complete without this crowning piece of jahiliyyah. So what pray tell is Sola Scriptura??? A deviant Jain philosophy or something??? You're a rank amateur soren, rank amateur. Not to mention the Yahoud, whose most celebrated and trusted authority, Rambam, taught: "Moses was the Torah's author, receiving it from God either as divine inspiration or as direct dictation in the Hebrew year 2449 AM (1313 BCE)." Rank amateur...

"So many Muslims have this belief that everything between the two covers of the Koran is just God's unaltered word," he says. "They like to quote the textual work that shows that the Bible has a history and did not fall straight out of the sky, but until now the Koran has been out of this discussion. The only way to break through this wall is to prove that the Koran has a history too. The Sana'a fragments will help us to do this."
Puin is not alone in his enthusiasm. "The impact of the Yemeni manuscripts is still to be felt," says Andrew Rippin, a professor of religious studies at the University of Calgary, who is at the forefront of Koranic studies today. "Their variant readings and verse orders are all very significant. Everybody agrees on that. These manuscripts say that the early history of the Koranic text is much more of an open question than many have suspected: the text was less stable, and therefore had less authority, than has always been claimed."


Islam claims too much for the Koran and a little bit of deviation from 'god's unaltered word' will see it collapse (hence the murderous threats and insistence of no critique). The same cannot be said for either Judaism or Christianity because neither of these two established itself on quite as outl;andish foundations as Islam. Not even the sola scripura notion goes as far as Islam.

Soren wrote on Aug 16^th, 2010 at 11:39am:

abu_rashid wrote on Aug 16th, 2010 at 12:53am: The mockery would not be complete without this crowning piece of jahiliyyah. So what pray tell is Sola Scriptura??? A deviant Jain philosophy or something??? You're a rank amateur soren, rank amateur. Not to mention the Yahoud, whose most celebrated and trusted authority, Rambam, taught: "Moses was the Torah's author, receiving it from God either as divine inspiration or as direct dictation in the Hebrew year 2449 AM (1313 BCE)." Rank amateur... "So many Muslims have this belief that everything between the two covers of the Koran is just God's unaltered word," he says. "They like to quote the textual work that shows that the Bible has a history and did not fall straight out of the sky, but until now the Koran has been out of this discussion. The only way to break through this wall is to prove that the Koran has a history too. The Sana'a fragments will help us to do this." Puin is not alone in his enthusiasm. "The impact of the Yemeni manuscripts is still to be felt," says Andrew Rippin, a professor of religious studies at the University of Calgary, who is at the forefront of Koranic studies today. "Their variant readings and verse orders are all very significant. Everybody agrees on that. These manuscripts say that the early history of the Koranic text is much more of an open question than many have suspected: the text was less stable, and therefore had less authority, than has always been claimed." Islam claims too much for the Koran and a little bit of deviation from 'god's unaltered word' will see it collapse (hence the murderous threats and insistence of no critique). The same cannot be said for either Judaism or Christianity because neither of these two established itself on quite as outl;andish foundations as Islam. Not even the sola scripura notion goes as far as Islam.

You do realize you're skirting dangerously close to blasphemy, don't you, old boy?

Reason to pause
The Closing of the Muslim Mind: How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist Crisis by Robert R Reilly

Reviewed by Spengler


Mainstream Islam rejected Greek-derived philosophy at the turn of the 12th century, when Abu Hamid al-Ghazali established a theology of divine caprice. In the normative Muslim view of things, Allah personally and immediately directs the motion of every molecule by his ineffable and incomprehensible will, according to the al-Ghazali synthesis, directly and without the mediation of natural law. Al-Ghazali abolished intermediate causes, that is, laws of nature, leaving great and small events to the caprice of the absolute tyrant of the universe.

In place of Hellenistic reasoning, Islam turned to a literal reading of the Koran. Robert Reilly recounts Islam's abandonment of Hellenistic reason, and blames it for the subsequent decline of Muslim civilization and the rise of radical Islam.

....


Reilly's focus on 12th-century Islamic irrationality might lead to the optimistic conclusion that if only we could persuade Muslims to read Aquinas, the war of civilizations might be averted. The trouble is that the Muslim embrace of irrationality is not only objective (at the level of theology), but also existential: it is infused into the entire complex of social relations in the Muslim world which allow untrammeled exercise of the will without covenantal constraints. This includes Koran-sanctioned wife-beating and, by extension, honor killings, genital mutilation, child marriages and other relics of paganism.

To transform Muslim societies into something approximating the covenantal model of the West would require nothing less than unraveling the whole web of relationships that bind families and clans. To traditional Muslims this appears as an existential threat. Many of them would rather die than submit, which is why to so many Muslims suicide seems attractive as an existential choice.





Read all of it here: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/LH24Ak01.html

Hence my point that Islam, as practised today, is a gross and dangerous perversion of mind and sensibility.

Quote:

So far we've only seen you admit this when shown excerpts from your own book. I have yet to see any such credible examples from the noble book of God. Just a few European nit-wits jabbering on about how they think you can interpret one language by means of another, just because they have some shared vocab. The kind of stuff only idiots would subscribe to that have absolutely no understanding of modern linguistics. Probably the kind of kooky stuff Europeans would've still been subscribing to back in Jabir's time.

-Abu

Well who would have guessed that the all knowing, all seeing, (all singing, all dancing?) Allah, would not have foreseen that ancient arabic, or pushtu, or whatever ancient language the koran was written in, would not be the dominant language of the world for ever, or ever?
Not only did he not foresee that, he also made his message ONLY understandable to those who naturally think in that ancient iteration of that ancient language, as apparently it is untranslatable to any other language, and if that is the case, perhaps he is right, and his unalterable word was only meant for the ears of a handful of arabs, fourteen centuries ago.

Great, that means the rest of us do not need to listen to their load of bollocks, we have enough of our own with bible bashers.

Personally I don't think any religion is crap as long as people can gain comfort and direction from it, where it harms no-one and does not promote hate and division.
My problem with it is where politics meet religion, and then some groups or individuals interpretation of the holy books.
Islam isn't the only religion where the political sphere and religion has crossed over.
Only 500-600 years ago, the Catholics had there Inquisition burning thousands of supposed heretics alive at the stake.
They used fire because they weren't allowed to pierce the flesh according to their interpretation of the good book.
The lesson is that the Catholic and Islamic experience clearly demonstrate that Politics and Religion don't mix at all.
Not one little bit.