"I'm a moslem. And you are not."



"Allah is my god, and Mohammed is his prophet."



THIS FOLLOWING, IS AN EXPLANATION OF THE 'LOGIC', THE 'MORALITY', WHICH ISLAM INCULCATES, INTO EVERY MOSLEM.....


Its simple, I'm a moslem. I am a righteous human being [because I'm a moslem, Koran 3.110], and you are not.

Its simple, I'm a moslem, and my god, Allah, says that if you don't want to be a moslem [if you reject our kind invitation to become a moslem], then i am at war with you,
....and, i can 'lawfully' kill you.

My hatred for you is very moral, and it is a legitimate hatred, because you [wittingly, or unwittingly] are serving SATAN.

Allah, my god, says so.

You have actively aligned yourself with SATAN's cause, because you have rejected Allah's perfect religion.

Allah, my god, says so.

If you have rejected Allah's perfect religion, it is because you are one of the oppressors of mankind.

Allah, my god, says so.



"...And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of [i.e. for] those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?...Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan:.."
Koran 4.74-76



+++

Within the Koran, Allah is clear, those who have rejected Allah's perfect religion are the evil, and the guilty persons, among mankind.

And unending warfare is declared, by Allah, against those who reject Allah's perfect religion, i.e. every non-moslem, and every non-moslem jurisdiction...




"....Lo! Allah is an enemy to those who reject Faith."
Koran 2.98


"....those who reject Allah have no protector."
Koran 47.008
v. 8-11


"O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty (unto Him)."
Koran 9.123


"Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain:...."
Koran 9.111


"Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. "
Koran 9.29


"Ye [moslems] are the best of peoples, evolved for mankind, enjoining what is right, forbidding what is wrong, and believing in Allah.......[and it is the 'unbelievers' who] are perverted transgressors."
Koran 3.110


And on, and on, and on it goes.......





And Mohammed, the Prophet of ISLAM, also says what Allah says, that if you don't want to be a moslem, that moslems can 'lawfully' kill you.


"...If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him."
hadithsunnah/bukhari/ #004.052.260




FROM ISLAMIC LAW

"Ibn 'Abbas reported that the Prophet said: "The bare essence of Islam and the basics of the religion are three [acts], upon which Islam has been established. Whoever leaves one of them becomes an unbeliever and his blood may legally be spilled. [The acts are:] Testifying that there is no God except Allah, the obligatory prayers, and the fast of Ramadan."...."
fiqhussunnah/#3.110

n.b. "Whoever......becomes an unbeliever.....his blood may legally be spilled."

Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)

    If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 11:37am:

Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB

What is it folks, Bible lessons from SPOT ????

Yeah!!!

And i concur, we should all read our Bibles, regularly.




"The Bible will keep you from sin, or sin will keep you from the Bible."
Dwight L. Moody (American Evangelist, 1837-1899)

Do you believe that a woman should marry her rapist?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 1:41pm:

Do you believe that a woman should marry her rapist? SOB

You probably don't realise this among many other things, but to reject islam and it's vile teachings, doesn't automatically make you a christian.

BigOl64 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 1:47pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 1:41pm: Do you believe that a woman should marry her rapist? SOB You probably don't realise this among many other things, but to reject islam and it's vile teachings, doesn't automatically make you a christian.

Are you trying to tell me yadda doesnt call himself xtian?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 1:56pm:

BigOl64 wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 1:47pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 1:41pm: Do you believe that a woman should marry her rapist? SOB You probably don't realise this among many other things, but to reject islam and it's vile teachings, doesn't automatically make you a christian. Are you trying to tell me yadda doesnt call himself xtian? SOB

you will have to ask yadda.

I reject islam and its teachings, try calling me a christian.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 11:37am:

Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB

It doesn't take a genius to figure out this meant something quite different in it's day to what you take from it now.

A raped woman would be considered damaged goods - not an attractive marriage prospect, doomed to struggle in life alone due to a crime committed against her.  But by forcing the rapist to marry her, it would give her a much easier life, by making the man responsible for her upkeep for life - in effect, giving back what he had taken away by his crime.  Compare the outcome to today - How does imprisoning a rapist for X years give anything back to the modern rape victim?  It punishes, but it does not even attempt to put things right.

... wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 2:01pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:37am: Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB It doesn't take a genius to figure out this meant something quite different in it's day to what you take from it now. A raped woman would be considered damaged goods - not an attractive marriage prospect, doomed to struggle in life alone due to a crime committed against her.  But by forcing the rapist to marry her, it would give her a much easier life, by making the man responsible for her upkeep for life - in effect, giving back what he had taken away by his crime.  Compare the outcome to today - How does imprisoning a rapist for X years give anything back to the modern rape victim?  It punishes, but it does not even attempt to put things right.

Hi wesley,
Why did you effect the change? just this mo heard about it.
New getup does suit you though. the top hat, is that for a spot (no pun intended) of fox hunting?
cute..
(apologies to the others for being off topic)

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 1:41pm:

Do you believe that a woman should marry her rapist? SOB

No.

Do you SPOT ?







SPOT,

Can you believe that moslem men, actually have the right to rape non-moslem women, because they are, non-moslem women ?

ISLAM say's that moslem men can, 'lawfully' rape non-moslem women, any non-moslem woman who is the captive, of a of moslem man.

ISLAM has been at war with non-moslems, for 1,400 years.






http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/swedenrape.gif


Google;
muslim rape, sweden

Yadda wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 3:19pm:

Can you believe that moslem men, actually have the right to rape non-moslem women, because they are, non-moslem women ? ISLAM say's that moslem men can, 'lawfully' rape non-moslem women, any non-moslem woman who is the captive, of a of moslem man. ISLAM has been at war with non-moslems, for 1,400 years.

e.g.
Unveiled women in Iran, are routinely arrested, detained, and then raped, by Iranian police.



Google,
"they had no right to say no"

Google,
"rape jihad"

Google,
beslan children raped jihad

Yadda wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 3:29pm:

Yadda wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 3:19pm: Can you believe that moslem men, actually have the right to rape non-moslem women, because they are, non-moslem women ? ISLAM say's that moslem men can, 'lawfully' rape non-moslem women, any non-moslem woman who is the captive, of a of moslem man. ISLAM has been at war with non-moslems, for 1,400 years. e.g. Unveiled women in Iran, are routinely arrested, and then raped, by Iranian police. Google, "they had no right to say no" Google, "rape jihad" Google, beslan children raped jihad

you are disgusting turning the rape issue to your Islam bashing crusade. If you were serious about this issue, you would not demean the topic. 

sanofi wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 3:35pm:

Yadda wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 3:29pm: Yadda wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 3:19pm: Can you believe that moslem men, actually have the right to rape non-moslem women, because they are, non-moslem women ? ISLAM say's that moslem men can, 'lawfully' rape non-moslem women, any non-moslem woman who is the captive, of a of moslem man. ISLAM has been at war with non-moslems, for 1,400 years. e.g. Unveiled women in Iran, are routinely arrested, and then raped, by Iranian police. Google, "they had no right to say no" Google, "rape jihad" Google, beslan children raped jihad you are disgusting turning the rape issue to your Islam bashing crusade. If you were serious about this issue, you would not demean the topic.

Awwwww poor, poor, diddums,       .....is the truth about moslem rapes, of non-moslem women, to uncomfortable for you to bear ???

You poor, poor, sensitive thing.






Q.
Why don't you address the issues raised, instead of denigrating me ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIe06T43LpE&feature=related

BigOl64 wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 2:00pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 1:56pm: BigOl64 wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 1:47pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 1:41pm: Do you believe that a woman should marry her rapist? SOB You probably don't realise this among many other things, but to reject islam and it's vile teachings, doesn't automatically make you a christian. Are you trying to tell me yadda doesnt call himself xtian? SOB you will have to ask yadda. I reject islam and its teachings, try calling me a christian.

But im not calling you an xtian. That is a blatant strawman. Yadda is the xtian.

SOB

... wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 2:01pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:37am: Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB It doesn't take a genius to figure out this meant something quite different in it's day to what you take from it now. A raped woman would be considered damaged goods - not an attractive marriage prospect, doomed to struggle in life alone due to a crime committed against her.  But by forcing the rapist to marry her, it would give her a much easier life, by making the man responsible for her upkeep for life - in effect, giving back what he had taken away by his crime.  Compare the outcome to today - How does imprisoning a rapist for X years give anything back to the modern rape victim?  It punishes, but it does not even attempt to put things right.

Same as the muslims

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 4:43pm:

... wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 2:01pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:37am: Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB It doesn't take a genius to figure out this meant something quite different in it's day to what you take from it now. A raped woman would be considered damaged goods - not an attractive marriage prospect, doomed to struggle in life alone due to a crime committed against her.  But by forcing the rapist to marry her, it would give her a much easier life, by making the man responsible for her upkeep for life - in effect, giving back what he had taken away by his crime.  Compare the outcome to today - How does imprisoning a rapist for X years give anything back to the modern rape victim?  It punishes, but it does not even attempt to put things right. Same as the muslims SOB

Perhaps.  Is there a similar sentiment expressed in the koran?  If so, please post it.

Yadda wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 3:19pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 1:41pm: Do you believe that a woman should marry her rapist? SOB No. Do you SPOT ? SPOT, Can you believe that moslem men, actually have the right to rape non-moslem women, because they are, non-moslem women ? ISLAM say's that moslem men can, 'lawfully' rape non-moslem women, any non-moslem woman who is the captive, of a of moslem man. ISLAM has been at war with non-moslems, for 1,400 years. http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/swedenrape.gif Google; muslim rape, sweden

Yeah yadda but the xtian bible is the same

(Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB)

    "When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house.  But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb.  After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife.  However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."

(Judges 5:30 NAB)

    They must be dividing the spoils they took: there must be a damsel or two for each man, Spoils of dyed cloth as Sisera's spoil, an ornate shawl or two for me in the spoil.   (Judges 5:30 NAB)

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 4:47pm:

"When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house.  But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb.  After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife.  However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."

What is the problem here?
A woman alone would have had litle hope of survival - turning her loose would likely mean a long, slow death.  Would that be preferable?

Not so shocking when you think about them for a few seconds are they?


Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 4:43pm:

Same as the muslims

Did you come up with a quote supporting this yet?

The problem is that Muslims like Abu and the Sydney protestors think that these ancient standards are the highest moral goals to be aimed for today - Abu for example wants rape in similar circumstances to be legalised.

Spot does not appear to recognise a distinction between what is written and what people actually think. He defines what religions are, never mind what the religious people actually believe, and he judges all religious people by what he projects onto them.

freediver wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 6:20pm:

The problem is that Muslims like Abu and the Sydney protestors think that these ancient standards are the highest moral goals to be aimed for today - Abu for example wants rape in similar circumstances to be legalised. Spot does not appear to recognise a distinction between what is written and what people actually think. He defines what religions are, never mind what the religious people actually believe, and he judges all religious people by what he projects onto them.

Nice projecting there freediver. You are the one that refuses to acknowledge that the muslims dont take their whole book literally either.

SOB

Abu does, and I expect most of the 400 protestors marching behind the beheading signs do too.

You are completely missing the point spot. Who cares whether they take the whole book literally, or half the book, or only the bit about chopping people's heads off. What matters is that they want to chop your head off. Why is it so hard for you to figure out what is important? You seem to be constantly getting confused over trivial minutia and completely oblivious to the issues people are discussing. Is it some attempt at a debating technique that lets you maintain your stance that all religions are equal by pretending to have no interest in freedom and fundamental human rights, and pretending that it does not matter what the religious people actually believe?

... wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 4:45pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 4:43pm: ... wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 2:01pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:37am: Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB It doesn't take a genius to figure out this meant something quite different in it's day to what you take from it now. A raped woman would be considered damaged goods - not an attractive marriage prospect, doomed to struggle in life alone due to a crime committed against her.  But by forcing the rapist to marry her, it would give her a much easier life, by making the man responsible for her upkeep for life - in effect, giving back what he had taken away by his crime.  Compare the outcome to today - How does imprisoning a rapist for X years give anything back to the modern rape victim?  It punishes, but it does not even attempt to put things right. Same as the muslims SOB Perhaps.  Is there a similar sentiment expressed in the koran?  If so, please post it.

Yadda is making that claim and i am talking to him. Ask him for a link.

SOB

freediver wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 7:55pm:

Abu does, and I expect most of the 400 protestors marching behind the beheading signs do too. You are completely missing the point spot. Who cares whether they take the whole book literally, or half the book, or only the bit about chopping people's heads off. What matters is that they want to chop your head off. Why is it so hard for you to figure out what is important? You seem to be constantly getting confused over trivial minutia and completely oblivious to the issues people are discussing. Is it some attempt at a debating technique that lets you maintain your stance that all religions are equal by pretending to have no interest in freedom and fundamental human rights, and pretending that it does not matter what the religious people actually believe?

It was only a few that had the signs. The rest (and some have even gone on TV and said this) dont. Bit like that party @ the election that wanted to burn lesbians @ the stake. Did you make a fuss that all xtians want to burn lesbians @ the stake?

SOB

Islam is Mohammed's balm for his own and his fellow Arabs'  inferiority complex.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 6:45pm:

freediver wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:20pm: The problem is that Muslims like Abu and the Sydney protestors think that these ancient standards are the highest moral goals to be aimed for today - Abu for example wants rape in similar circumstances to be legalised. Spot does not appear to recognise a distinction between what is written and what people actually think. He defines what religions are, never mind what the religious people actually believe, and he judges all religious people by what he projects onto them. Nice projecting there freediver. You are the one that refuses to acknowledge that the muslims dont take their whole book literally either. SOB

If Muslims don't take things too seriously, how come the 'religion of peace' has spent its entire existence waging an internecine war? Being continued as we speak in Syria and close to speading into Turkey? 'I'm a Muslim, and you are not' is what they think of each other, let alone everybody else.

Grey wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 9:01am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:45pm: freediver wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:20pm: The problem is that Muslims like Abu and the Sydney protestors think that these ancient standards are the highest moral goals to be aimed for today - Abu for example wants rape in similar circumstances to be legalised. Spot does not appear to recognise a distinction between what is written and what people actually think. He defines what religions are, never mind what the religious people actually believe, and he judges all religious people by what he projects onto them. Nice projecting there freediver. You are the one that refuses to acknowledge that the muslims dont take their whole book literally either. SOB If Muslims don't take things too seriously, how come the 'religion of peace' has spent its entire existence waging an internecine war? Being continued as we speak in Syria and close to speading into Turkey? 'I'm a Muslim, and you are not' is what they think of each other, let alone everybody else.

I didnt say they didnt take things seriously. Some do some dont just like everyone else. They are ppl afterall. I said LITERALLY. You know like we arent supposed to take the talking snake and rib story literally.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 9:07am:

Grey wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 9:01am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:45pm: freediver wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:20pm: The problem is that Muslims like Abu and the Sydney protestors think that these ancient standards are the highest moral goals to be aimed for today - Abu for example wants rape in similar circumstances to be legalised. Spot does not appear to recognise a distinction between what is written and what people actually think. He defines what religions are, never mind what the religious people actually believe, and he judges all religious people by what he projects onto them. Nice projecting there freediver. You are the one that refuses to acknowledge that the muslims dont take their whole book literally either. SOB If Muslims don't take things too seriously, how come the 'religion of peace' has spent its entire existence waging an internecine war? Being continued as we speak in Syria and close to speading into Turkey? 'I'm a Muslim, and you are not' is what they think of each other, let alone everybody else. I didnt say they didnt take things seriously. Some do some dont just like everyone else. They are ppl afterall. I said LITERALLY. You know like we arent supposed to take the talking snake and rib story literally. SOB

I don't know why you bother defending Islam Spot. It's backwardness is as plain as the nose on your face. And, on the face of it, there are similarities with Christians and Jews, but in OUR society we've got them sorted. In the main, Christians and Jews are moderate. If Muslims were, in the main, moderate as well we wouldn't have a problem.

Either they adapt to our society, which means joining us in the 21st C, or we adapt to them. Go backwards a few hundred years. Nagging works, the number of smokers is drastically reduced, paedophiliia is no longer something the RC's can sweep under the table. The fact that moderate Muslims were dragged out last week to criticise their own fanatics was a victory for our society.

When even somebody as dedicated to human equality, fairness and humaneness as Mary Robinson criticises Islam, you have to admit there's something wrong.

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/mary-robinson/4293554

Grey wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 11:36am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 9:07am: Grey wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 9:01am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:45pm: freediver wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:20pm: The problem is that Muslims like Abu and the Sydney protestors think that these ancient standards are the highest moral goals to be aimed for today - Abu for example wants rape in similar circumstances to be legalised. Spot does not appear to recognise a distinction between what is written and what people actually think. He defines what religions are, never mind what the religious people actually believe, and he judges all religious people by what he projects onto them. Nice projecting there freediver. You are the one that refuses to acknowledge that the muslims dont take their whole book literally either. SOB If Muslims don't take things too seriously, how come the 'religion of peace' has spent its entire existence waging an internecine war? Being continued as we speak in Syria and close to speading into Turkey? 'I'm a Muslim, and you are not' is what they think of each other, let alone everybody else. I didnt say they didnt take things seriously. Some do some dont just like everyone else. They are ppl afterall. I said LITERALLY. You know like we arent supposed to take the talking snake and rib story literally. SOB I don't know why you bother defending Islam Spot. It's backwardness is as plain as the nose on your face. And, on the face of it, there are similarities with Christians and Jews, but in OUR society we've got them sorted. In the main, Christians and Jews are moderate. If Muslims were, in the main, moderate as well we wouldn't have a problem. Either they adapt to our society, which means joining us in the 21st C, or we adapt to them. Go backwards a few hundred years. Nagging works, the number of smokers is drastically reduced, paedophiliia is no longer something the RC's can sweep under the table. The fact that moderate Muslims were dragged out last week to criticise their own fanatics was a victory for our society. When even somebody as dedicated to human equality, fairness and humaneness as Mary Robinson criticises Islam, you have to admit there's something wrong. http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/mary-robinson/4293554

Most muslims ARE moderate. someone has to say something when you ppl like to say they are all radicals. the ones in australia have adapted. Except a few but we have psychopaths too.

SOB

There would not be so many Islamic outrages around the world, committed by (ahem) 'extremists', if the so called (ahem) moderate Muslims didn't let them do it, get away with it, set the agenda by it, year in, year out.

But everywhere you look in the Muslim world, there is absolutely no pushback from the 'vast majority of moderates' against the 'tiny minority of extremists'.

The apes of Islam marched through Sydney a few weeks ago. I haven't seen a moderate, assimilated, reasonable, well-behaved and good-natured  crowd of Muslim marching since, repudiating the apes. Has anyone? No. It has never happened. I daresay, it never will.


The dichotomy of 'moderate' and 'extremist' Muslims is utter eyewash.

... wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 2:01pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:37am: Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB It doesn't take a genius to figure out this meant something quite different in it's day to what you take from it now. A raped woman would be considered damaged goods - not an attractive marriage prospect, doomed to struggle in life alone due to a crime committed against her.  But by forcing the rapist to marry her, it would give her a much easier life, by making the man responsible for her upkeep for life - in effect, giving back what he had taken away by his crime.  Compare the outcome to today - How does imprisoning a rapist for X years give anything back to the modern rape victim?  It punishes, but it does not even attempt to put things right.

Oh here we go. It's okay for the bible/christian values to be outdated so don't quote them. But it's okay to quote "muslim" teachings and claim them to be what all muslims believe in. You idiot.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 3:13pm:

... wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 2:01pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:37am: Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB It doesn't take a genius to figure out this meant something quite different in it's day to what you take from it now. A raped woman would be considered damaged goods - not an attractive marriage prospect, doomed to struggle in life alone due to a crime committed against her.  But by forcing the rapist to marry her, it would give her a much easier life, by making the man responsible for her upkeep for life - in effect, giving back what he had taken away by his crime.  Compare the outcome to today - How does imprisoning a rapist for X years give anything back to the modern rape victim?  It punishes, but it does not even attempt to put things right. Oh here we go. It's okay for the bible/christian values to be outdated so don't quote them. But it's okay to quote "muslim" teachings and claim them to be what all muslims believe in. You idiot.

I can't help thinking that your little switcheroo there was deliberate.

It had to be, otherwise your snivelling would be even more glaringly silly. The point: all the slash and burn in Islamic teaching is NOT outdated as far as the self-respecting Mohamedan is concerned. Their stuff doesn't date.  Inash'allah and pbuh and all that, don't you know. The Ummah mongering is all about return to the pure, 7th century life of Mohammed and his merry men. To you, a joke. To them, life's very meaning.

Grey wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 9:01am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:45pm: freediver wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:20pm: The problem is that Muslims like Abu and the Sydney protestors think that these ancient standards are the highest moral goals to be aimed for today - Abu for example wants rape in similar circumstances to be legalised. Spot does not appear to recognise a distinction between what is written and what people actually think. He defines what religions are, never mind what the religious people actually believe, and he judges all religious people by what he projects onto them. Nice projecting there freediver. You are the one that refuses to acknowledge that the muslims dont take their whole book literally either. SOB If Muslims don't take things too seriously, how come the 'religion of peace' has spent its entire existence waging an internecine war? Being continued as we speak in Syria and close to speading into Turkey? 'I'm a Muslim, and you are not' is what they think of each other, let alone everybody else.

Grey,

What you stated, imo, is exactly correct.

And a 'similar' truth, is that ISLAM teaches [everyone who consider themselves to be...] a moslem, that they have an obligation [to Allah] to kill those, 'and you are not' persons, if they 'insult' ISLAM.

And 'insulting' ISLAM, can be as trivial, as scrutinising the sunna of Mohammed, the prophet of Allah, which is the ISLAMIC historic record, of Mohammed's life.

'Disbelievers' are not permitted, to scrutinise ISLAM, or its [recorded by moslems] history.

Why not ???





John 3:21
......he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

sanofi wrote on Oct 4^th, 2012 at 3:35pm:

Yadda wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 3:29pm: Yadda wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 3:19pm: Can you believe that moslem men, actually have the right to rape non-moslem women, because they are, non-moslem women ? ISLAM say's that moslem men can, 'lawfully' rape non-moslem women, any non-moslem woman who is the captive, of a of moslem man. ISLAM has been at war with non-moslems, for 1,400 years. e.g. Unveiled women in Iran, are routinely arrested, and then raped, by Iranian police. Google, "they had no right to say no" Google, "rape jihad" Google, beslan children raped jihad you are disgusting turning the rape issue to your Islam bashing crusade. If you were serious about this issue, you would not demean the topic.

sanofi,

See below.

It is for you too.






sir prince duke alevine wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 3:13pm:

Oh here we go. It's okay for the bible/christian values to be outdated so don't quote them. But it's okay to quote "muslim" teachings and claim them to be what all muslims believe in. You idiot.

Christians [and even Jews] cannot lawfully marry an 8 year old girl, and then have sexual relations with her.

Moslems can, and they can 'lawfully' do that.






sanofi,

Regarding the crime of rape.


Is this information relevant to understanding the prevelance of the crime of rape committed against non-moslem women [inside Western 'host' nations], by men from moslem communities/culture ?...


Oslo, Norway: 69 percent increase in rapes (76 rapes in 91 days). Share of non-Westerners among 'attack-rapists': 100 percent.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/04/oslo-norway-69-percent-increase-in-rapes-76-rapes-in-91-days-share-of-non-westerners-among-attack-ra.html

AND....
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/01/stavanger-norway-nine-out-of-ten-rapists-are-men-from-minority-groups.html

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2011/12/islamic-cleric-misunderstands-islam-issues-fatwa-permitting-jihadis-to-kidnap-imprison-and-rape-infi.html

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2005/12/western-muslims-racist-rape-spree.html




And this.....
UK, young girls plied with drugs, then raped,
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1329870100/0#0



See post # 14, same thread...
This is an example of a very rare [Western eyes] glimpse into the crime of child rape within Sharia jurisdictions, being exposed.
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1329870100/14#14

In ISLAMIC societies, where crimes causing shame are hidden, young girls are *effectively* treated [by their own families] as a commodity to be traded, to the social advantage of the family.

It could be argued that the [normally hidden, and very probably, common] crime of child rape is *effectively* 'lawfully' sanctioned inside all ISLAMIC [Sharia 'regulated'] societies.







Yadda wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2012 at 1:42pm:

When anyone asks a moslem, to point to an example of a good, and just, benevolent Sharia society, a virtuous society based in ISLAMIC law, today, no moslem can point to such an example. Not in all of the ISLAMIC world, is there even one example of such a society, a virtuous ISLAMIC society. The reality in the world, is quite opposite. Because almost all examples of ISLAMIC and Sharia guided societies in the world today, are nests of oppression, depravity, corruption, violence, injustice, and human poverty.

Grey wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 11:36am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 9:07am: Grey wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 9:01am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:45pm: freediver wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:20pm: The problem is that Muslims like Abu and the Sydney protestors think that these ancient standards are the highest moral goals to be aimed for today - Abu for example wants rape in similar circumstances to be legalised. Spot does not appear to recognise a distinction between what is written and what people actually think. He defines what religions are, never mind what the religious people actually believe, and he judges all religious people by what he projects onto them. Nice projecting there freediver. You are the one that refuses to acknowledge that the muslims dont take their whole book literally either. SOB If Muslims don't take things too seriously, how come the 'religion of peace' has spent its entire existence waging an internecine war? Being continued as we speak in Syria and close to speading into Turkey? 'I'm a Muslim, and you are not' is what they think of each other, let alone everybody else. I didnt say they didnt take things seriously. Some do some dont just like everyone else. They are ppl afterall. I said LITERALLY. You know like we arent supposed to take the talking snake and rib story literally. SOB I don't know why you bother defending Islam Spot. It's backwardness is as plain as the nose on your face. And, on the face of it, there are similarities with Christians and Jews, but in OUR society we've got them sorted. In the main, Christians and Jews are moderate. If Muslims were, in the main, moderate as well we wouldn't have a problem. Either they adapt to our society, which means joining us in the 21st C, or we adapt to them. Go backwards a few hundred years. Nagging works, the number of smokers is drastically reduced, paedophiliia is no longer something the RC's can sweep under the table. The fact that moderate Muslims were dragged out last week to criticise their own fanatics was a victory for our society. When even somebody as dedicated to human equality, fairness and humaneness as Mary Robinson criticises Islam, you have to admit there's something wrong. http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/mary-robinson/4293554

Ahhh no answer for that so you go on the attack. Normal i guess for a religious nut full of hate for another religion.

SOB

Soren wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 3:00pm:

There would not be so many Islamic outrages around the world, committed by (ahem) 'extremists', if the so called (ahem) moderate Muslims didn't let them do it, get away with it, set the agenda by it, year in, year out. But everywhere you look in the Muslim world, there is absolutely no pushback from the 'vast majority of moderates' against the 'tiny minority of extremists'. The apes of Islam marched through Sydney a few weeks ago. I haven't seen a moderate, assimilated, reasonable, well-behaved and good-natured  crowd of Muslim marching since, repudiating the apes. Has anyone? No. It has never happened. I daresay, it never will. The dichotomy of 'moderate' and 'extremist' Muslims is utter eyewash.

How exactly would the moderates stop the extremists without becoming extremists themselves? What do you do to stop the KKK and westboro?

SOB

Soren wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 7:14pm:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 3:13pm: ... wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 2:01pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:37am: Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB It doesn't take a genius to figure out this meant something quite different in it's day to what you take from it now. A raped woman would be considered damaged goods - not an attractive marriage prospect, doomed to struggle in life alone due to a crime committed against her.  But by forcing the rapist to marry her, it would give her a much easier life, by making the man responsible for her upkeep for life - in effect, giving back what he had taken away by his crime.  Compare the outcome to today - How does imprisoning a rapist for X years give anything back to the modern rape victim?  It punishes, but it does not even attempt to put things right. Oh here we go. It's okay for the bible/christian values to be outdated so don't quote them. But it's okay to quote "muslim" teachings and claim them to be what all muslims believe in. You idiot. I can't help thinking that your little switcheroo there was deliberate. It had to be, otherwise your snivelling would be even more glaringly silly. The point: all the slash and burn in Islamic teaching is NOT outdated as far as the self-respecting Mohamedan is concerned. Their stuff doesn't date.  Inash'allah and pbuh and all that, don't you know. The Ummah mongering is all about return to the pure, 7th century life of Mohammed and his merry men. To you, a joke. To them, life's very meaning.

If its not outdated then how to you explain the millions of moderates?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 5:17am:

Soren wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 3:00pm: There would not be so many Islamic outrages around the world, committed by (ahem) 'extremists', if the so called (ahem) moderate Muslims didn't let them do it, get away with it, set the agenda by it, year in, year out. But everywhere you look in the Muslim world, there is absolutely no pushback from the 'vast majority of moderates' against the 'tiny minority of extremists'. The apes of Islam marched through Sydney a few weeks ago. I haven't seen a moderate, assimilated, reasonable, well-behaved and good-natured  crowd of Muslim marching since, repudiating the apes. Has anyone? No. It has never happened. I daresay, it never will. The dichotomy of 'moderate' and 'extremist' Muslims is utter eyewash. How exactly would the moderates stop the extremists without becoming extremists themselves? What do you do to stop the KKK and westboro? SOB

The KKK and Wesboro have been stopped.


Or are you trying to equate Koran burning with flying planes into buildings, suicide bombing trains, buses, schools, markets etc?

Soren wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 7:09am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:17am: Soren wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 3:00pm: There would not be so many Islamic outrages around the world, committed by (ahem) 'extremists', if the so called (ahem) moderate Muslims didn't let them do it, get away with it, set the agenda by it, year in, year out. But everywhere you look in the Muslim world, there is absolutely no pushback from the 'vast majority of moderates' against the 'tiny minority of extremists'. The apes of Islam marched through Sydney a few weeks ago. I haven't seen a moderate, assimilated, reasonable, well-behaved and good-natured  crowd of Muslim marching since, repudiating the apes. Has anyone? No. It has never happened. I daresay, it never will. The dichotomy of 'moderate' and 'extremist' Muslims is utter eyewash. How exactly would the moderates stop the extremists without becoming extremists themselves? What do you do to stop the KKK and westboro? SOB The KKK and Wesboro have been stopped. Or are you trying to equate Koran burning with flying planes into buildings, suicide bombing trains, buses, schools, markets etc?

When was the last time a plane was flown into a building? Seems to me that arent around anymore to do it again. And the KKK and westboro have not been "stopped" they are just lying in wait.

SOB

Give up Spot. Both Christianity and Islam have their ugly sides. At this stage, Islam is clearly the uglier of the two sisters. Arguable it depends on which angle you look at them, but neither would win a beauty contest, and neither deserve to be defended. I would however, continue to allow reasonable people everywhere to pursue whatever religion they want to pursue as long as they don't use it as an excuse to be cruel to others.

Given the fact that neither is as pure as the driven snow, any blasphemy claims are just a tad precious and I would staunchly defend the right to criticise any world view.  I would regard aspects of both religions to be blasphemy in that they distort the "god" of nature if you can call it that, with the worst aspects of  human nature and the need to subvert and oppress their adherents. Early Christianity reads like a Who's Who of miscreants, perverts and thugs. Islam is no better. Islam even has a thug prophet.   

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Oct 5^th, 2012 at 3:13pm:

... wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 2:01pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 11:37am: Laws of Rape   (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)     If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father.  Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. SOB It doesn't take a genius to figure out this meant something quite different in it's day to what you take from it now. A raped woman would be considered damaged goods - not an attractive marriage prospect, doomed to struggle in life alone due to a crime committed against her.  But by forcing the rapist to marry her, it would give her a much easier life, by making the man responsible for her upkeep for life - in effect, giving back what he had taken away by his crime.  Compare the outcome to today - How does imprisoning a rapist for X years give anything back to the modern rape victim?  It punishes, but it does not even attempt to put things right. Oh here we go. It's okay for the bible/christian values to be outdated so don't quote them. But it's okay to quote "muslim" teachings and claim them to be what all muslims believe in. You idiot.

It is not just a claim. Ask Abu. He believes these things. He wants people to be stoned to death for saying or thinking the wrong thing. 400 of them marched through Sydney behind banners calling for murder. We are currently engaged in two wars with these people, because they are fighting tooth and nail against democracy.

Do you think it is all just some kind of coincidence alevine?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 7:57am:

Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 7:09am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:17am: Soren wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 3:00pm: There would not be so many Islamic outrages around the world, committed by (ahem) 'extremists', if the so called (ahem) moderate Muslims didn't let them do it, get away with it, set the agenda by it, year in, year out. But everywhere you look in the Muslim world, there is absolutely no pushback from the 'vast majority of moderates' against the 'tiny minority of extremists'. The apes of Islam marched through Sydney a few weeks ago. I haven't seen a moderate, assimilated, reasonable, well-behaved and good-natured  crowd of Muslim marching since, repudiating the apes. Has anyone? No. It has never happened. I daresay, it never will. The dichotomy of 'moderate' and 'extremist' Muslims is utter eyewash. How exactly would the moderates stop the extremists without becoming extremists themselves? What do you do to stop the KKK and westboro? SOB The KKK and Wesboro have been stopped. Or are you trying to equate Koran burning with flying planes into buildings, suicide bombing trains, buses, schools, markets etc? When was the last time a plane was flown into a building? Seems to me that arent around anymore to do it again. And the KKK and westboro have not been "stopped" they are just lying in wait. SOB

Brilliant!! Islamists and Al Qaida have disappeared but the baptists are lying in wait, ready to - do what?

Snapshot of the last few days:
2012.10.05 (Douentza, Mali) - Islamists fire on a civilian vehicle, killing two passengers
2012.10.05 (Jalingo, Nigeria) - Fundamentalists bomb a bar, killing at least one person.
2012.10.04 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Mujahid bombers take out five Iraqis.
2012.10.03 (Magas, Ingushetia) - Four Russian policemen are ambushed and killed by Religion of Peace extremists.
2012.10.03 (Aleppo, Syria) - Three suicide car bombings by al-Nusra terrorists leave nearly fifty dead.
2012.10.02 (Mubi, Nigeria) - At least twenty-six Christian students are singled out and executed by Islamists at their campus. Some are shot, others have their throats cut.


Baptists killing in the name of Bapt in the last 100 years:

0

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 5:15am:

Grey wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 11:36am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 9:07am: Grey wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 9:01am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:45pm: freediver wrote on Oct 4th, 2012 at 6:20pm: The problem is that Muslims like Abu and the Sydney protestors think that these ancient standards are the highest moral goals to be aimed for today - Abu for example wants rape in similar circumstances to be legalised. Spot does not appear to recognise a distinction between what is written and what people actually think. He defines what religions are, never mind what the religious people actually believe, and he judges all religious people by what he projects onto them. Nice projecting there freediver. You are the one that refuses to acknowledge that the muslims dont take their whole book literally either. SOB If Muslims don't take things too seriously, how come the 'religion of peace' has spent its entire existence waging an internecine war? Being continued as we speak in Syria and close to speading into Turkey? 'I'm a Muslim, and you are not' is what they think of each other, let alone everybody else. I didnt say they didnt take things seriously. Some do some dont just like everyone else. They are ppl afterall. I said LITERALLY. You know like we arent supposed to take the talking snake and rib story literally. SOB I don't know why you bother defending Islam Spot. It's backwardness is as plain as the nose on your face. And, on the face of it, there are similarities with Christians and Jews, but in OUR society we've got them sorted. In the main, Christians and Jews are moderate. If Muslims were, in the main, moderate as well we wouldn't have a problem. Either they adapt to our society, which means joining us in the 21st C, or we adapt to them. Go backwards a few hundred years. Nagging works, the number of smokers is drastically reduced, paedophiliia is no longer something the RC's can sweep under the table. The fact that moderate Muslims were dragged out last week to criticise their own fanatics was a victory for our society. When even somebody as dedicated to human equality, fairness and humaneness as Mary Robinson criticises Islam, you have to admit there's something wrong. http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/mary-robinson/4293554 Ahhh no answer for that so you go on the attack. Normal i guess for a religious nut full of hate for another religion. SOB

I'm an Atheist Spot. I concur entirely with Muso.

Soren wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 1:29pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 7:57am: Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 7:09am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:17am: Soren wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 3:00pm: There would not be so many Islamic outrages around the world, committed by (ahem) 'extremists', if the so called (ahem) moderate Muslims didn't let them do it, get away with it, set the agenda by it, year in, year out. But everywhere you look in the Muslim world, there is absolutely no pushback from the 'vast majority of moderates' against the 'tiny minority of extremists'. The apes of Islam marched through Sydney a few weeks ago. I haven't seen a moderate, assimilated, reasonable, well-behaved and good-natured  crowd of Muslim marching since, repudiating the apes. Has anyone? No. It has never happened. I daresay, it never will. The dichotomy of 'moderate' and 'extremist' Muslims is utter eyewash. How exactly would the moderates stop the extremists without becoming extremists themselves? What do you do to stop the KKK and westboro? SOB The KKK and Wesboro have been stopped. Or are you trying to equate Koran burning with flying planes into buildings, suicide bombing trains, buses, schools, markets etc? When was the last time a plane was flown into a building? Seems to me that arent around anymore to do it again. And the KKK and westboro have not been "stopped" they are just lying in wait. SOB Brilliant!! Islamists and Al Qaida have disappeared but the baptists are lying in wait, ready to - do what? Snapshot of the last few days: 2012.10.05 (Douentza, Mali) - Islamists fire on a civilian vehicle, killing two passengers 2012.10.05 (Jalingo, Nigeria) - Fundamentalists bomb a bar, killing at least one person. 2012.10.04 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Mujahid bombers take out five Iraqis. 2012.10.03 (Magas, Ingushetia) - Four Russian policemen are ambushed and killed by Religion of Peace extremists. 2012.10.03 (Aleppo, Syria) - Three suicide car bombings by al-Nusra terrorists leave nearly fifty dead. 2012.10.02 (Mubi, Nigeria) - At least twenty-six Christian students are singled out and executed by Islamists at their campus. Some are shot, others have their throats cut. Baptists killing in the name of Bapt in the last 100 years: 0

You dont even know all those ppl were muslims. Anyway we shouldn't be in other ppls faces telling them what6 to do and how to live. Iraq is our fault. Most of those ppl are fighting for their freedom.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 5:15am:

Grey wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 11:36am: I don't know why you bother defending Islam Spot. It's backwardness is as plain as the nose on your face. And, on the face of it, there are similarities with Christians and Jews, but in OUR society we've got them sorted. In the main, Christians and Jews are moderate. If Muslims were, in the main, moderate as well we wouldn't have a problem. Either they adapt to our society, which means joining us in the 21st C, or we adapt to them. Go backwards a few hundred years. Nagging works, the number of smokers is drastically reduced, paedophiliia is no longer something the RC's can sweep under the table. The fact that moderate Muslims were dragged out last week to criticise their own fanatics was a victory for our society. When even somebody as dedicated to human equality, fairness and humaneness as Mary Robinson criticises Islam, you have to admit there's something wrong. http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/mary-robinson/4293554 Ahhh no answer for that so you go on the attack. Normal i guess for a religious nut full of hate for another religion. SOB

You label anyone who disagrees with you about religion as a 'religious nut'. That's how nutty you are. Like squirrel sh!t.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 4:18pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 1:29pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 7:57am: Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 7:09am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:17am: Soren wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 3:00pm: There would not be so many Islamic outrages around the world, committed by (ahem) 'extremists', if the so called (ahem) moderate Muslims didn't let them do it, get away with it, set the agenda by it, year in, year out. But everywhere you look in the Muslim world, there is absolutely no pushback from the 'vast majority of moderates' against the 'tiny minority of extremists'. The apes of Islam marched through Sydney a few weeks ago. I haven't seen a moderate, assimilated, reasonable, well-behaved and good-natured  crowd of Muslim marching since, repudiating the apes. Has anyone? No. It has never happened. I daresay, it never will. The dichotomy of 'moderate' and 'extremist' Muslims is utter eyewash. How exactly would the moderates stop the extremists without becoming extremists themselves? What do you do to stop the KKK and westboro? SOB The KKK and Wesboro have been stopped. Or are you trying to equate Koran burning with flying planes into buildings, suicide bombing trains, buses, schools, markets etc? When was the last time a plane was flown into a building? Seems to me that arent around anymore to do it again. And the KKK and westboro have not been "stopped" they are just lying in wait. SOB Brilliant!! Islamists and Al Qaida have disappeared but the baptists are lying in wait, ready to - do what? Snapshot of the last few days: 2012.10.05 (Douentza, Mali) - Islamists fire on a civilian vehicle, killing two passengers 2012.10.05 (Jalingo, Nigeria) - Fundamentalists bomb a bar, killing at least one person. 2012.10.04 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Mujahid bombers take out five Iraqis. 2012.10.03 (Magas, Ingushetia) - Four Russian policemen are ambushed and killed by Religion of Peace extremists. 2012.10.03 (Aleppo, Syria) - Three suicide car bombings by al-Nusra terrorists leave nearly fifty dead. 2012.10.02 (Mubi, Nigeria) - At least twenty-six Christian students are singled out and executed by Islamists at their campus. Some are shot, others have their throats cut. Baptists killing in the name of Bapt in the last 100 years: 0 You dont even know all those ppl were muslims. Anyway we shouldn't be in other ppls faces telling them what6 to do and how to live. Iraq is our fault. Most of those ppl are fighting for their freedom. SOB

They are all Muslims.

And observe, if you are capable to observe, that only one atrocity on that list was in Iraq. We are not in Mali, Nigeria, Syria.

"we shouldn't be in other ppls faces telling them what to do and how to live" - you never miss an opportunity to tell the Israelis what to do and how they should live.

Soren wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 5:25pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 4:18pm: Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 1:29pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 7:57am: Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 7:09am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:17am: Soren wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 3:00pm: There would not be so many Islamic outrages around the world, committed by (ahem) 'extremists', if the so called (ahem) moderate Muslims didn't let them do it, get away with it, set the agenda by it, year in, year out. But everywhere you look in the Muslim world, there is absolutely no pushback from the 'vast majority of moderates' against the 'tiny minority of extremists'. The apes of Islam marched through Sydney a few weeks ago. I haven't seen a moderate, assimilated, reasonable, well-behaved and good-natured  crowd of Muslim marching since, repudiating the apes. Has anyone? No. It has never happened. I daresay, it never will. The dichotomy of 'moderate' and 'extremist' Muslims is utter eyewash. How exactly would the moderates stop the extremists without becoming extremists themselves? What do you do to stop the KKK and westboro? SOB The KKK and Wesboro have been stopped. Or are you trying to equate Koran burning with flying planes into buildings, suicide bombing trains, buses, schools, markets etc? When was the last time a plane was flown into a building? Seems to me that arent around anymore to do it again. And the KKK and westboro have not been "stopped" they are just lying in wait. SOB Brilliant!! Islamists and Al Qaida have disappeared but the baptists are lying in wait, ready to - do what? Snapshot of the last few days: 2012.10.05 (Douentza, Mali) - Islamists fire on a civilian vehicle, killing two passengers 2012.10.05 (Jalingo, Nigeria) - Fundamentalists bomb a bar, killing at least one person. 2012.10.04 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Mujahid bombers take out five Iraqis. 2012.10.03 (Magas, Ingushetia) - Four Russian policemen are ambushed and killed by Religion of Peace extremists. 2012.10.03 (Aleppo, Syria) - Three suicide car bombings by al-Nusra terrorists leave nearly fifty dead. 2012.10.02 (Mubi, Nigeria) - At least twenty-six Christian students are singled out and executed by Islamists at their campus. Some are shot, others have their throats cut. Baptists killing in the name of Bapt in the last 100 years: 0 You dont even know all those ppl were muslims. Anyway we shouldn't be in other ppls faces telling them what6 to do and how to live. Iraq is our fault. Most of those ppl are fighting for their freedom. SOB They are all Muslims. And observe, if you are capable to observe, that only one atrocity on that list was in Iraq. We are not in Mali, Nigeria, Syria. "we shouldn't be in other ppls faces telling them what to do and how to live" - you never miss an opportunity to tell the Israelis what to do and how they should live.

How do you know they are muslims?

Anyway i am not defending extremists - thats a strawman.

There are millions of moderates.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 5:40pm:

How do you know they are muslims? Anyway i am not defending extremists - thats a strawman. There are millions of moderates. SOB

You have equated people who have not killed anyone in the name of Christianity with people who kill every day in the name of Islam. That is the point, bozo.
One guy in the US burns a Koran is the same to you as hundreds, thousands of murders in the name of Islam.
And you will rather die in a ditch than admit that your equivocation is utterly baseless and therefore utterly stupid, if not sinister.

How do I know they are Muslims? It's magic - or must appear to be magic to you. Here, you can try, too:

2012.10.05 (Douentza, Mali) - Islamists fire on a civilian vehicle, killing two passengers

2012.10.05 (Jalingo, Nigeria) - Fundamentalists bomb a bar, killing at least one person.

2012.10.04 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Mujahid bombers take out five Iraqis.

ANd another 32 yesterday: http://paktribune.com/news/Al-Qaeda-local-wing-claims-responsibility-for-Iraq-bombings-253935.html

2012.10.03 (Magas, Ingushetia) -Four Russian policemen are ambushed and killed by Religion of Peace extremists.

2012.10.03 (Aleppo, Syria) - Three suicide car bombings by al-Nusra terrorists leave nearly fifty dead.
(Mubi, Nigeria) - At least twenty-six Christian students are singled out and executed by Islamists at their campus. Some are shot, others have their throats cut.

SOB, you are just too bloody stupid for words.

Soren wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 5:58pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:40pm: How do you know they are muslims? Anyway i am not defending extremists - thats a strawman. There are millions of moderates. SOB You have equated people who have not killed anyone in the name of Christianity with people who kill every day in the name of Islam. That is the point, bozo. One guy in the US burns a Koran is the same to you as hundreds, thousands of murders in the name of Islam. And you will rather die in a ditch than admit that your equivocation is utterly baseless and therefore utterly stupid, if not sinister. How do I know they are Muslims? It's magic - or must appear to be magic to you. Here, you can try, too: 2012.10.05 (Douentza, Mali) - Islamists fire on a civilian vehicle, killing two passengers 2012.10.05 (Jalingo, Nigeria) - Fundamentalists bomb a bar, killing at least one person. 2012.10.04 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Mujahid bombers take out five Iraqis. ANd another 32 yesterday: http://paktribune.com/news/Al-Qaeda-local-wing-claims-responsibility-for-Iraq-bombings-253935.html 2012.10.03 (Magas, Ingushetia) -Four Russian policemen are ambushed and killed by Religion of Peace extremists. 2012.10.03 (Aleppo, Syria) - Three suicide car bombings by al-Nusra terrorists leave nearly fifty dead. (Mubi, Nigeria) - At least twenty-six Christian students are singled out and executed by Islamists at their campus. Some are shot, others have their throats cut. SOB, you are just too bloody stupid for words.

Oh really? Seems to me you must be wrong since you are resorting to the name calling again. Whats the matter? Wrong again?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 6:01pm:

Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:58pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:40pm: How do you know they are muslims? Anyway i am not defending extremists - thats a strawman. There are millions of moderates. SOB You have equated people who have not killed anyone in the name of Christianity with people who kill every day in the name of Islam. That is the point, bozo. One guy in the US burns a Koran is the same to you as hundreds, thousands of murders in the name of Islam. And you will rather die in a ditch than admit that your equivocation is utterly baseless and therefore utterly stupid, if not sinister. How do I know they are Muslims? It's magic - or must appear to be magic to you. Here, you can try, too: 2012.10.05 (Douentza, Mali) - Islamists fire on a civilian vehicle, killing two passengers 2012.10.05 (Jalingo, Nigeria) - Fundamentalists bomb a bar, killing at least one person. 2012.10.04 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Mujahid bombers take out five Iraqis. ANd another 32 yesterday: http://paktribune.com/news/Al-Qaeda-local-wing-claims-responsibility-for-Iraq-bombings-253935.html 2012.10.03 (Magas, Ingushetia) -Four Russian policemen are ambushed and killed by Religion of Peace extremists. 2012.10.03 (Aleppo, Syria) - Three suicide car bombings by al-Nusra terrorists leave nearly fifty dead. (Mubi, Nigeria) - At least twenty-six Christian students are singled out and executed by Islamists at their campus. Some are shot, others have their throats cut. SOB, you are just too bloody stupid for words. Oh really? Seems to me you must be wrong since you are resorting to the name calling again. Whats the matter? Wrong again? SOB

I am not name calling you, SOB. And I am not wrong about you, or Islam.

You are stupid. They are bloody.

Both ridiculous.

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QR6X-I2fNSo/0.jpg

By the way to be just a tad picky, Christian and Muslim extremists are at each other throats in Nigeria. Google Akhwat Akwop.

http://saharareporters.com/news-page/christian-militants-southern-kaduna-threaten-fulani-herdsmen-give-seven-days-evacuation-no

all muslim atrocities are balanced and cancelled out. equivalence is restored. makes sense to some.

Soren wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 5:18pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:15am: Grey wrote on Oct 5th, 2012 at 11:36am: I don't know why you bother defending Islam Spot. It's backwardness is as plain as the nose on your face. And, on the face of it, there are similarities with Christians and Jews, but in OUR society we've got them sorted. In the main, Christians and Jews are moderate. If Muslims were, in the main, moderate as well we wouldn't have a problem. Either they adapt to our society, which means joining us in the 21st C, or we adapt to them. Go backwards a few hundred years. Nagging works, the number of smokers is drastically reduced, paedophiliia is no longer something the RC's can sweep under the table. The fact that moderate Muslims were dragged out last week to criticise their own fanatics was a victory for our society. When even somebody as dedicated to human equality, fairness and humaneness as Mary Robinson criticises Islam, you have to admit there's something wrong. http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/mary-robinson/4293554 Ahhh no answer for that so you go on the attack. Normal i guess for a religious nut full of hate for another religion. SOB You label anyone who disagrees with you about religion as a 'religious nut'. That's how nutty you are. Like squirrel sh!t.

Religious nuts cant be agreed or disagreed with. Adults that believe in fairies. . . . . nothing to disagree with there. . .  just keep out of thier reach because they get violent sometimes especially the xtians.

SOB

Soren wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 6:03pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 6:01pm: Soren wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:58pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 5:40pm: How do you know they are muslims? Anyway i am not defending extremists - thats a strawman. There are millions of moderates. SOB You have equated people who have not killed anyone in the name of Christianity with people who kill every day in the name of Islam. That is the point, bozo. One guy in the US burns a Koran is the same to you as hundreds, thousands of murders in the name of Islam. And you will rather die in a ditch than admit that your equivocation is utterly baseless and therefore utterly stupid, if not sinister. How do I know they are Muslims? It's magic - or must appear to be magic to you. Here, you can try, too: 2012.10.05 (Douentza, Mali) - Islamists fire on a civilian vehicle, killing two passengers 2012.10.05 (Jalingo, Nigeria) - Fundamentalists bomb a bar, killing at least one person. 2012.10.04 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Mujahid bombers take out five Iraqis. ANd another 32 yesterday: http://paktribune.com/news/Al-Qaeda-local-wing-claims-responsibility-for-Iraq-bombings-253935.html 2012.10.03 (Magas, Ingushetia) -Four Russian policemen are ambushed and killed by Religion of Peace extremists. 2012.10.03 (Aleppo, Syria) - Three suicide car bombings by al-Nusra terrorists leave nearly fifty dead. (Mubi, Nigeria) - At least twenty-six Christian students are singled out and executed by Islamists at their campus. Some are shot, others have their throats cut. SOB, you are just too bloody stupid for words. Oh really? Seems to me you must be wrong since you are resorting to the name calling again. Whats the matter? Wrong again? SOB I am not name calling you, SOB. And I am not wrong about you, or Islam. You are stupid. They are bloody. Both ridiculous. http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QR6X-I2fNSo/0.jpg

There are millions of non-violent muslims. 

SOB

Spot, they are all non-violent until they turn violent.


Quote:

because they get violent sometimes especially the xtians

So why is it you are too scared to make fun of the Muslims but heap poo on other religions at any opportunity?

freediver wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 9:05am:

Spot, they are all non-violent until they turn violent. Quote: because they get violent sometimes especially the xtians So why is it you are too scared to make fun of the Muslims but heap poo on other religions at any opportunity?

Strawmen again. Post 53. ALL religions (that includes islam doesnt it?).

Everyone is non-violent until they turn violent but most ppl never do turn violent.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 9:52am:

freediver wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 9:05am: Spot, they are all non-violent until they turn violent. Quote: because they get violent sometimes especially the xtians So why is it you are too scared to make fun of the Muslims but heap poo on other religions at any opportunity? Strawmen again. Post 53. ALL religions (that includes islam doesnt it?). Everyone is non-violent until they turn violent but most ppl never do turn violent. SOB

So you feel the need to qualify that by saying 'especially the christians', even though it's clearly not true  and don't expect anyone to tell you how stupid that is?

... wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 9:55am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 9:52am: freediver wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 9:05am: Spot, they are all non-violent until they turn violent. Quote: because they get violent sometimes especially the xtians So why is it you are too scared to make fun of the Muslims but heap poo on other religions at any opportunity? Strawmen again. Post 53. ALL religions (that includes islam doesnt it?). Everyone is non-violent until they turn violent but most ppl never do turn violent. SOB So you feel the need to qualify that by saying 'especially the christians', even though it's clearly not true  and don't expect anyone to tell you how stupid that is?

In context i was talking about the nuts. Everyday nuts that some of them are prolly here in this forum. They lash out @ any criticism of their religion yet criticise other religions all the time. Besides some of the nuts here seem to think is okay to criticise EVERYONE in islam. Just showing what its like on the receiving end. the nuts dont like it do they.

SOB

Quote:

Strawmen again. Post 53. ALL religions (that includes islam doesnt it?).

You tell me Spot. You seem to make an exception for Islam. This is a perfect example - the only criticism of Islam that you can dig up are indirect ones like this. Guess how many posts back I would have to go to find a specific criticism from you of another religion? You are afraid to say anything about Islam and you aren't even aware of it yourself.


Quote:

Everyone is non-violent until they turn violent but most ppl never do turn violent.

There are a lot of Muslims turning violent at the prospect of democracy, or a silly youtube video, or countless other things that no sane person would get violent over. You obviously recognise this or you would not be so scared of criticising Islam. You just aren't conscious of it yet.

muso wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 10:36am:

Give up Spot. Both Christianity and Islam have their ugly sides. At this stage, Islam is clearly the uglier of the two sisters. Arguable it depends on which angle you look at them, but neither would win a beauty contest, and neither deserve to be defended. I would however, continue to allow reasonable people everywhere to pursue whatever religion they want to pursue as long as they don't use it as an excuse to be cruel to others. Given the fact that neither is as pure as the driven snow, any blasphemy claims are just a tad precious and I would staunchly defend the right to criticise any world view.  I would regard aspects of both religions to be blasphemy in that they distort the "god" of nature if you can call it that, with the worst aspects of  human nature and the need to subvert and oppress their adherents. Early Christianity reads like a Who's Who of miscreants, perverts and thugs. Islam is no better. Islam even has a thug prophet.

Off with his head!!!
:P




muso,

There are many moslems, here in Australia, who would kill you for saying such a thing, IF THEY COULD, if you weren't protected by Australian laws [....laws which moslems view as none binding, where such laws conflict with ISLAMIC law !!].

Would you deny that assertion ?


IMAGE
http://images.smh.com.au/2012/09/15/3637564/art-protest3-620x349.jpg
Sydney, 2012, moslem street protests.

muso wrote on Oct 6^th, 2012 at 7:53pm:

By the way to be just a tad picky, Christian and Muslim extremists are at each other throats in Nigeria. Google Akhwat Akwop. http://saharareporters.com/news-page/christian-militants-southern-kaduna-threaten-fulani-herdsmen-give-seven-days-evacuation-no

Yeah muso !

And i blame those damned Christian extremists, for all of the conflict in Nigeria !!!

I really do!!
:P



After all, we all know that moslems are a peaceable people, who are tolerant, and respectful of others......

And anyone who says anything different, is a bigot, or maybe, a bigot AND a racist !!

IMAGE
http://www.jihadwatch.org/London_Bus_2.jpg
ISLAM IS PEACE, in London

Image source...
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/10/islam-is-peace-media-campaign-in-uk.html

freediver wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 10:38am:

Quote: Strawmen again. Post 53. ALL religions (that includes islam doesnt it?). You tell me Spot. You seem to make an exception for Islam. This is a perfect example - the only criticism of Islam that you can dig up are indirect ones like this. Guess how many posts back I would have to go to find a specific criticism from you of another religion? You are afraid to say anything about Islam and you aren't even aware of it yourself. [quote]Everyone is non-violent until they turn violent but most ppl never do turn violent.

There are a lot of Muslims turning violent at the prospect of democracy, or a silly youtube video, or countless other things that no sane person would get violent over. You obviously recognise this or you would not be so scared of criticising Islam. You just aren't conscious of it yet.[/quote]

BS. I  criticise extremist islam if theres a reason. You are there criticising moderate islam. You dont have any idea. Obviously you dont know any muslims. Extremists of any religion are bad. I dont m,ake exception for islam - the reason i have to speak up allthe time is because you are demonising them ALL. I see you compeltely ignored my last point.

The muslim you reckon are turning violent @ the prospect of "democracy" would be the ones whose countries we are occupying. Funny how they dont want to be forced into someone elses mould.

On the other hand nobody is "turning violent" here because they chose to live here. A couple ppl have beheading signs but they are the psychos - we have those too in "non-muslim" protests. Remember how the media portrayed all the aboriginals as violent when they cleared them from the canberra tent city earlier in the year.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 5:09am:

Religious nuts cant be agreed or disagreed with. Adults that believe in fairies. . . . . nothing to disagree with there. . . just keep out of thier reach because they get violent sometimes especially the xtians. SOB

Hey SPOT,

Atheists in the UK, at universities, are not allowed to 'disrespect' Mohammed.

Today, in the UK, 'disrespecting' Mohammed, is a 'racist' hate crime.


Reading University ejects atheist society for pineapple labeled "Muhammad"
".....By labelling the depiction of Muhammad as racist, the LSE Union essentially passed a blasphemy law, limiting student’s ability to criticise or mock religions and threatening punishment to those that do."
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/10/the-dreaded-pineapple-of-hate-reading-university-ejects-atheist-society-for-pineapple-labeled-muhamm.html




But hey SPOT, no matter how much we must learn to accommodate the wishes of moslems here, in Australia, you won't have to worry about it.

Because your moslem friends will always 'love' people like you.

:D

Moslems will always be welcoming and friendly, towards people like you.

Moslems 'love' gay atheists.

Honest.



On the other hand, if your moslem friends eventually get nasty, and threaten you, you could always pretend to convert.

Right ?

Hey, how would they know !!!!!

Right ?

Because if moslems believe in [sky] fairies, they'd believe a person like you, wouldn't they ??????

Yadda wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 11:43am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 5:09am: Religious nuts cant be agreed or disagreed with. Adults that believe in fairies. . . . . nothing to disagree with there. . . just keep out of thier reach because they get violent sometimes especially the xtians. SOB Hey SPOT, Atheists in the UK, at universities, are not allowed to 'disrespect' Mohammed. Today, in the UK, 'disrespecting' Mohammed, is a 'racist' hate crime. Reading University ejects atheist society for pineapple labeled "Muhammad" ".....By labelling the depiction of Muhammad as racist, the LSE Union essentially passed a blasphemy law, limiting student’s ability to criticise or mock religions and threatening punishment to those that do." http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/10/the-dreaded-pineapple-of-hate-reading-university-ejects-atheist-society-for-pineapple-labeled-muhamm.html But hey SPOT, no matter how much we must learn to accommodate the wishes of moslems here, in Australia, you won't have to worry about it. Because your moslem friends will always 'love' people like you. :D Moslems will always be welcoming and friendly, towards people like you. Moslems 'love' gay atheists. Honest. On the other hand, if your moslem friends eventually get nasty, and threaten you, you could always pretend to convert. Right ? Hey, how would they know !!!!! Right ? Because if moslems believe in [sky] fairies, they'd believe a person like you, wouldn't they ??????

Bit like disrespecting jews huh? Wonder if criticisers of islam will get their own name like anti-semitism - oh wait a lot of muslims are semites too!

Why the gay crack though?

SOB

Quote:

BS. I  criticise extremist islam if theres a reason.

Is that why you cannot find a single example of you criticising Islam directly? Face it spot, you are too scared to, and you don't even know it. You constantly make excuses for Islamic extremists instead.


Quote:

You are there criticising moderate islam. You dont have any idea. Obviously you dont know any muslims.

What about Abu? Why are you afraid to discuss him at all. He is a perfect example of a self proclaimed moderate, peaceful Muslim, who also wants to stone people to death.


Quote:

The muslim you reckon are turning violent @ the prospect of "democracy" would be the ones whose countries we are occupying. Funny how they dont want to be forced into someone elses mould.

You mean letting them choose their own leaders?


Quote:

On the other hand nobody is "turning violent" here because they chose to live here.

Unless of course they find a youtube video that insults Muhammed. Plenty of Australian Muslims are in jail right now for plotting terrorism. I bet you have excuses for them too. Or you don't even know they exist.

Yadda wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 11:19am:

muso wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 7:53pm: By the way to be just a tad picky, Christian and Muslim extremists are at each other throats in Nigeria. Google Akhwat Akwop. http://saharareporters.com/news-page/christian-militants-southern-kaduna-threaten-fulani-herdsmen-give-seven-days-evacuation-no Yeah muso ! And i blame those damned Christian extremists, for all of the conflict in Nigeria !!! I really do!! :P

I blame lack of education, ingrained prejudice and savagery. The Christian and Muslims in Nigeria are both culpable. Reason is not getting much of a  voice on either side, but some are trying their utmost, and good luck to them. How do you think you would fare in that position, Yadda? Can you see yourself in the shoes of Pastor James Wuye? Could you be a peacemaker in that situation? - and which of your emotions would prevail? Your compassion for humanity or your hatred of Islam?

http://www.buildingpeace.org/think-global-conflict/issues/religion-and-peacebuilding

http://www.buildingpeace.org/sites/usip.qorvisdev.com/files/images/10.26.2011%20an%20african%20answer%207386.jpg

freediver wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 12:26pm:

Quote: BS. I  criticise extremist islam if theres a reason. Is that why you cannot find a single example of you criticising Islam directly? Face it spot, you are too scared to, and you don't even know it. You constantly make excuses for Islamic extremists instead. [quote]You are there criticising moderate islam. You dont have any idea. Obviously you dont know any muslims.

What about Abu? Why are you afraid to discuss him at all. He is a perfect example of a self proclaimed moderate, peaceful Muslim, who also wants to stone people to death.


Quote:

The muslim you reckon are turning violent @ the prospect of "democracy" would be the ones whose countries we are occupying. Funny how they dont want to be forced into someone elses mould.

You mean letting them choose their own leaders?


Quote:

On the other hand nobody is "turning violent" here because they chose to live here.

Unless of course they find a youtube video that insults Muhammed. Plenty of Australian Muslims are in jail right now for plotting terrorism. I bet you have excuses for them too. Or you don't even know they exist.[/quote]

Why should i? You are the one that wants to brush everyone with the same brush. I have criticised some acts by muslims but im not going to join your demonisation of an entire religion when yours is just as bad. You blame the religion for everything they do when its the ppl themselves using religion as an excuse. I guess thats a good thing for you cause then you can do stuff and blame your religion.

Why are you so obsessed with abu? I dont know his views - only what you tell me (which i dont believe) and that stupid discussion a month or so ago where you refused to accept his answers.

SOB

Yadda wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 10:56am:

muso wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 10:36am: Give up Spot. Both Christianity and Islam have their ugly sides. At this stage, Islam is clearly the uglier of the two sisters. Arguable it depends on which angle you look at them, but neither would win a beauty contest, and neither deserve to be defended. I would however, continue to allow reasonable people everywhere to pursue whatever religion they want to pursue as long as they don't use it as an excuse to be cruel to others. Given the fact that neither is as pure as the driven snow, any blasphemy claims are just a tad precious and I would staunchly defend the right to criticise any world view.  I would regard aspects of both religions to be blasphemy in that they distort the "god" of nature if you can call it that, with the worst aspects of  human nature and the need to subvert and oppress their adherents. Early Christianity reads like a Who's Who of miscreants, perverts and thugs. Islam is no better. Islam even has a thug prophet.    Off with his head!!! :P muso, There are many moslems, here in Australia, who would kill you for saying such a thing, IF THEY COULD, if you weren't protected by Australian laws [....laws which moslems view as none binding, where such laws conflict with ISLAMIC law !!]. Would you deny that assertion ?

Which part of the highlighted text don't you understand?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 12:14pm:

Bit like disrespecting jews huh? Wonder if criticisers of islam will get their own name like anti-semitism - oh wait a lot of muslims are semites too!

So, you do not mind at all, if atheists in the UK, will be accused of being hate crime 'racists', if they 'disrespect' or criticise, Mohammed / moslems ?

Clearly, you are a very tolerant person,
.....except when it comes to Jews Zionists, Israelis, 'xtians', Yaddas',    .....have i missed anyone else ???








Quote:

Why the gay crack though? SOB

Are you 'coming out', and declaring that you are NOT gay ???

muso wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 12:43pm:

Yadda wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 10:56am: muso wrote on Oct 6th, 2012 at 10:36am: Give up Spot. Both Christianity and Islam have their ugly sides. At this stage, Islam is clearly the uglier of the two sisters. Arguable it depends on which angle you look at them, but neither would win a beauty contest, and neither deserve to be defended. I would however, continue to allow reasonable people everywhere to pursue whatever religion they want to pursue as long as they don't use it as an excuse to be cruel to others. Given the fact that neither is as pure as the driven snow, any blasphemy claims are just a tad precious and I would staunchly defend the right to criticise any world view.  I would regard aspects of both religions to be blasphemy in that they distort the "god" of nature if you can call it that, with the worst aspects of  human nature and the need to subvert and oppress their adherents. Early Christianity reads like a Who's Who of miscreants, perverts and thugs. Islam is no better. Islam even has a thug prophet.    Off with his head!!! :P muso, There are many moslems, here in Australia, who would kill you for saying such a thing, IF THEY COULD, if you weren't protected by Australian laws [....laws which moslems view as none binding, where such laws conflict with ISLAMIC law !!]. Would you deny that assertion ? Which part of the highlighted text don't you understand?

Quote:

Muso, You are such an 'even handed' fellow aren't you ?     :D

Yadda wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 12:46pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 12:14pm: Bit like disrespecting jews huh? Wonder if criticisers of islam will get their own name like anti-semitism - oh wait a lot of muslims are semites too! So, you do not mind at all, if atheists in the UK, will be accused of being hate crime 'racists', if they 'disrespect' or criticise, Mohammed / moslems ? Clearly, you are a very tolerant person, .....except when it comes to Jews Zionists, Israelis, 'xtians', Yaddas',    .....have i missed anyone else ???

I didnt say that. I just think we should be able to criticise any religion - you - however - are lopsided and only think it applies to islam but nobody should criticise the jews.


Quote:

Are you 'coming out', and declaring that you are NOT gay ???

I dont think its any of your business. You were trying to use it as an insult though.

SOB

Yadda, I'm sure that you take your hatred of Muslims seriously, just as the worst elements of Islam take their hatred for Jews and Christians every bit as seriously. Collectively, I'm sure the Abrahamic religions have an uncanny knack of pointing the finger and applying the "evil" label, thus justifying and perpetuating the "lead" industry.   

After all, it keeps the likes of Northrop Grumman in business, and I'm sure those good old boys "praise the lord"  every Sunday after a gruelling week in the Texas heat manufacturing all those munitions to fight evil.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 12:57pm:

Yadda wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 12:46pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 12:14pm: Bit like disrespecting jews huh? Wonder if criticisers of islam will get their own name like anti-semitism - oh wait a lot of muslims are semites too! So, you do not mind at all, if atheists in the UK, will be accused of being hate crime 'racists', if they 'disrespect' or criticise, Mohammed / moslems ? Clearly, you are a very tolerant person, .....except when it comes to Jews Zionists, Israelis, 'xtians', Yaddas',    .....have i missed anyone else ??? I didnt say that. I just think we should be able to criticise any religion - you - however - are lopsided and only think it applies to islam but nobody should criticise the jews. Quote: Are you 'coming out', and declaring that you are NOT gay ??? I dont think its any of your business. You were trying to use it as an insult though. SOB

*kicks Yadda in the nuts*.. oh, I am sorry, I was aiming for those shedim behind you..

muso wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 1:08pm:

Yadda, I'm sure that you take your hatred of Muslims seriously, just as the worst elements of Islam take their hatred for Jews and Christians every bit as seriously. Collectively, I'm sure the Abrahamic religions have an uncanny knack of pointing the finger and applying the "evil" label, thus justifying and perpetuating the "lead" industry.    After all, it keeps the likes of Northrop Grumman in business, and I'm sure those good old boys "praise the lord"  every Sunday after a gruelling week in the Texas heat manufacturing all those munitions to fight evil.

muso,

I don't need a Bible, to tell me that ISLAM is a death cult.

No person with a functioning moral compass needs a Bible, to tell them that ISLAM is a death cult.

I don't need a Bible, to tell me that ISLAM is pure evil.

No person with a functioning moral compass needs a Bible, to tell them that ISLAM is pure evil, and that ISLAM encourages the very worst and most wicked conduct, in human beings.



"And what is good, Phaedrus? And what is not good? Need we ask anyone to tell us these things?"
Plato
and found in, Zen And The Art Of Motorcycle Maintenance




And my hating moslems ?

ISLAM is the cause, moslems are a symptom [i.e. the 'effect'].

.....but moslems have to choose ISLAM, moslems have to continue to embrace ISLAM.

.....and that, is a moral choice, that moslems consciously make.

Quote:

Why should i? You are the one that wants to brush everyone with the same brush.

I'm not the one saying that all religions are equal. Of course you don't have to. I just thought you might want to prove that you aren't afraid to criticise Islam. You certainly criticise other religions enough over comparitively trivial issues.


Quote:

I have criticised some acts by muslims but im not going to join your demonisation of an entire religion when yours is just as bad.

So you are happy to demonise all relgions and all religious people, but you think criticising Islam is unfair? You are the worst of the bunch when it comes to tarring everyone with the same brush.


Quote:

You blame the religion for everything they do when its the ppl themselves using religion as an excuse.

Are you suggesting they would call for the beheading of people who insult the prophet if they were not Muslims? Do you think they bwould be calling for someone else's head just out of general frustration with the world?


Quote:

Why are you so obsessed with abu?

I talk to actual Muslims about Islam. You run away from the topic. It is not obsession. I am just not afraid to talk about it.


Quote:

I dont know his views - only what you tell me (which i dont believe)

You don't believe it even when I post links for you to where Abu himself said it. You are afraid to believe it.


Quote:

and that stupid discussion a month or so ago where you refused to accept his answers

If he doesn't answer the question that is actually asked I am not so scared of him that I will pretend he did. The only thing that was stupid was the lengths you went to to avoid the topic and pretend he said something that he did not actually say.

It is useless trying to talk to you. You pick a concept and go for it twisting everything and quote mining and making things up to make it fit. Today you are accusing me of being afraid of muslims. Well i have lived with muslims and they are easier to get along with than xtians. Xtians are overly judgemental and worry about what other ppl are doing/thinking too much. They want everyone to be just like them.

My point (as usual) is that most muslims are moderate as with other religions however you ppl demonise all the muslims so i do it back @ your religion to prove a point but you dont get it and you just continue with it. As i have said many many times i dont mind moderates of any religion but i have to admit they are all silly. Invisible beings that wrote books DIFFERENT books and distributed them amongst humanity so that ppl have different names for these beings and think all the others are "evil".

SOB

Yadda wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 1:26pm:

No person with a functioning moral compass needs a Bible, to tell them that ISLAM is a death cult. [/highlight]

Well, I've heard Catholics call the Born-Again movement a "Death Cult" and vice versa. Do you think that Catholics are a death cult too? It's quite a useful slur among religious people these days. The slur of the month perhaps?

Do you also believe that the Pope is the Anti-Christ?  Some do.

muso wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 2:02pm:

Yadda wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 1:26pm: No person with a functioning moral compass needs a Bible, to tell them that ISLAM is a death cult. [/highlight] Well, I've heard Catholics call the Born-Again movement a "Death Cult" and vice versa. Do you think that Catholics are a death cult too? It's quite a useful slur among religious people these days. The slur of the month perhaps? Do you also believe that the Pope is the Anti-Christ?  Some do.

And the mormons with their ongoing goal of converting all the dead . . .

SOB

The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps.

Grey wrote on Oct 7^th, 2012 at 8:57pm:

The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps.

Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 6:32am:

Grey wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 8:57pm: The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps. Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion. SOB

Perhaps the best definition of 'religion' is, 'a philosophy that rules your life'.

That aside, what I'm saying is that most Nazis WERE moderates. People ARE sheeple, they follow the line of least resistance.

That being the case, if you take the line that 'you can't crticise a movement if the majority of its members are moderate', you cannot criticise any movement at all.

All movements are gangs. It doesn't matter if they're called Hells Angels, Zionists, Christians, Greenies, The ALP or the smacking Temperance union. The objective is power to the leadership who are convinced that if everybody followed their lead the world would be a better place. They all will coerce, (pressurize) their members to follow the line, and as they grow large will pressurize others to join. Ultimately they will all turn to violence to round up the stragglers.

It's so successful a model that our society is ruled by gangs. At the moment the best we can hope for is some kind of balance. A state that's been achieved to a degree in the democratic, secular world. It's not a perfect way to carry on. People come up with plausible ideas to base a gang on, (let's make the world SAFER) and our freedom is eroded incrementally and we are driven towards BEIGE.

But the Islamic movement IS different. Its successes in modern times, begining perhaps with the capture of Persia (Iran), has renewed the fervour and world domination looks like a very real possibility to them. The coercive urge is strong and needs resisting.

Grey wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 11:11am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:32am: Grey wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 8:57pm: The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps. Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion. SOB Perhaps the best definition of 'religion' is, 'a philosophy that rules your life'. That aside, what I'm saying is that most Nazis WERE moderates. People ARE sheeple, they follow the line of least resistance. That being the case, if you take the line that 'you can't crticise a movement if the majority of its members are moderate', you cannot criticise any movement at all. All movements are gangs. It doesn't matter if they're called Hells Angels, Zionists, Christians, Greenies, The ALP or the smacking Temperance union. The objective is power to the leadership who are convinced that if everybody followed their lead the world would be a better place. They all will coerce, (pressurize) their members to follow the line, and as they grow large will pressurize others to join. Ultimately they will all turn to violence to round up the stragglers. It's so successful a model that our society is ruled by gangs. At the moment the best we can hope for is some kind of balance. A state that's been achieved to a degree in the democratic, secular world. It's not a perfect way to carry on. People come up with plausible ideas to base a gang on, (let's make the world SAFER) and our freedom is eroded incrementally and we are driven towards BEIGE. But the Islamic movement IS different. Its successes in modern times, begining perhaps with the capture of Persia (Iran), has renewed the fervour and world domination looks like a very real possibility to them. The coercive urge is strong and needs resisting.

hegemony?

Grey wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 11:11am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:32am: Grey wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 8:57pm: The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps. Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion. SOB Perhaps the best definition of 'religion' is, 'a philosophy that rules your life'. That aside, what I'm saying is that most Nazis WERE moderates. People ARE sheeple, they follow the line of least resistance. That being the case, if you take the line that 'you can't crticise a movement if the majority of its members are moderate', you cannot criticise any movement at all. All movements are gangs. It doesn't matter if they're called Hells Angels, Zionists, Christians, Greenies, The ALP or the smacking Temperance union. The objective is power to the leadership who are convinced that if everybody followed their lead the world would be a better place. They all will coerce, (pressurize) their members to follow the line, and as they grow large will pressurize others to join. Ultimately they will all turn to violence to round up the stragglers. It's so successful a model that our society is ruled by gangs. At the moment the best we can hope for is some kind of balance. A state that's been achieved to a degree in the democratic, secular world. It's not a perfect way to carry on. People come up with plausible ideas to base a gang on, (let's make the world SAFER) and our freedom is eroded incrementally and we are driven towards BEIGE. But the Islamic movement IS different. Its successes in modern times, begining perhaps with the capture of Persia (Iran), has renewed the fervour and world domination looks like a very real possibility to them. The coercive urge is strong and needs resisting.

Strawmen of the highest order. Maybe strawgods hey?

You make up a definition then say i ascribe to it then knock it down. Bravo. You dont even need me for this discussion.

SOB

Quote:

Bravo. You dont even need me for this discussion.

Finally, a moment of lucidity.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 12:01pm:

Grey wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 11:11am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:32am: Grey wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 8:57pm: The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps. Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion. SOB Perhaps the best definition of 'religion' is, 'a philosophy that rules your life'. That aside, what I'm saying is that most Nazis WERE moderates. People ARE sheeple, they follow the line of least resistance. That being the case, if you take the line that 'you can't crticise a movement if the majority of its members are moderate', you cannot criticise any movement at all. All movements are gangs. It doesn't matter if they're called Hells Angels, Zionists, Christians, Greenies, The ALP or the smacking Temperance union. The objective is power to the leadership who are convinced that if everybody followed their lead the world would be a better place. They all will coerce, (pressurize) their members to follow the line, and as they grow large will pressurize others to join. Ultimately they will all turn to violence to round up the stragglers. It's so successful a model that our society is ruled by gangs. At the moment the best we can hope for is some kind of balance. A state that's been achieved to a degree in the democratic, secular world. It's not a perfect way to carry on. People come up with plausible ideas to base a gang on, (let's make the world SAFER) and our freedom is eroded incrementally and we are driven towards BEIGE. But the Islamic movement IS different. Its successes in modern times, begining perhaps with the capture of Persia (Iran), has renewed the fervour and world domination looks like a very real possibility to them. The coercive urge is strong and needs resisting. Strawmen of the highest order. Maybe strawgods hey? You make up a definition then say i ascribe to it then knock it down. Bravo. You dont even need me for this discussion. SOB

No I did't make up a definition of 'religion', that's one of the standards. Do you disagree with it? Why?


Quote:

Magpie - Hegemony?

Yes of course. It's not inevitable. It's quite possible and produces very satisfactory results, when people co-operate as communities of equals, rather than gangs.

Grey wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 3:15pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 12:01pm: Grey wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 11:11am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:32am: Grey wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 8:57pm: The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps. Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion. SOB Perhaps the best definition of 'religion' is, 'a philosophy that rules your life'. That aside, what I'm saying is that most Nazis WERE moderates. People ARE sheeple, they follow the line of least resistance. That being the case, if you take the line that 'you can't crticise a movement if the majority of its members are moderate', you cannot criticise any movement at all. All movements are gangs. It doesn't matter if they're called Hells Angels, Zionists, Christians, Greenies, The ALP or the smacking Temperance union. The objective is power to the leadership who are convinced that if everybody followed their lead the world would be a better place. They all will coerce, (pressurize) their members to follow the line, and as they grow large will pressurize others to join. Ultimately they will all turn to violence to round up the stragglers. It's so successful a model that our society is ruled by gangs. At the moment the best we can hope for is some kind of balance. A state that's been achieved to a degree in the democratic, secular world. It's not a perfect way to carry on. People come up with plausible ideas to base a gang on, (let's make the world SAFER) and our freedom is eroded incrementally and we are driven towards BEIGE. But the Islamic movement IS different. Its successes in modern times, begining perhaps with the capture of Persia (Iran), has renewed the fervour and world domination looks like a very real possibility to them. The coercive urge is strong and needs resisting. Strawmen of the highest order. Maybe strawgods hey? You make up a definition then say i ascribe to it then knock it down. Bravo. You dont even need me for this discussion. SOB No I did't make up a definition of 'religion', that's one of the standards. Do you disagree with it? Why? Quote: Magpie - Hegemony? Yes of course. It's not inevitable. It's quite possible and produces very satisfactory results, when people co-operate as communities of equals, rather than gangs.

Most ppl think of religion as groups of ppl worshipping a deity. That is what ppl think of - most ppl dont go to google and look up alternate meanings to fit their arguments.

Also the standard meaning of "nazi" of either armies of germans killing ppl or of white racists nowadays.

SOB

There's nneed to be rude SOB. My definition of religion was the one I found most satisfactory during University days. I say again, do you disagree? Why?

I used Nazis as analogous. Most members of the Nazi party joined up for the same reason most Russian communist party members joined up. To 'get ahead' in a world dominated by those gangs. I don't understand how you can find the simple concept I'm forwarding as argument so difficult to understand.

Grey wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 6:07pm:

There's nneed to be rude SOB. My definition of religion was the one I found most satisfactory during University days. I say again, do you disagree? Why? I used Nazis as analogous. Most members of the Nazi party joined up for the same reason most Russian communist party members joined up. To 'get ahead' in a world dominated by those gangs. I don't understand how you can find the simple concept I'm forwarding as argument so difficult to understand.

How was i rude?

Perhaps it was the way you tried to tell me what i think?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 6:33pm:

Grey wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:07pm: There's nneed to be rude SOB. My definition of religion was the one I found most satisfactory during University days. I say again, do you disagree? Why? I used Nazis as analogous. Most members of the Nazi party joined up for the same reason most Russian communist party members joined up. To 'get ahead' in a world dominated by those gangs. I don't understand how you can find the simple concept I'm forwarding as argument so difficult to understand. How was i rude? Perhaps it was the way you tried to tell me what i think? SOB

No I don't. You have consistently told us that most Muslims are moderate; have you not? That is the issue that I'm addressing is it not?

islam itself is not moderate. that's the point, i think.

Grey wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 7:10pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:33pm: Grey wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:07pm: There's nneed to be rude SOB. My definition of religion was the one I found most satisfactory during University days. I say again, do you disagree? Why? I used Nazis as analogous. Most members of the Nazi party joined up for the same reason most Russian communist party members joined up. To 'get ahead' in a world dominated by those gangs. I don't understand how you can find the simple concept I'm forwarding as argument so difficult to understand. How was i rude? Perhaps it was the way you tried to tell me what i think? SOB No I don't. You have consistently told us that most Muslims are moderate; have you not? That is the issue that I'm addressing is it not?

Spot says a lot of things. That doesn't mean he has thought about it for more than a few seconds. Good luck trying to get a sensible answer out of him.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 6:32am:

Grey wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 8:57pm: The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps. Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion. SOB

Right there. You said it. I did not. you put me offside before you even tried to make a point. Then you called me rude.

Meanwhile i say most muslims are moderate yes. Most muslims dont care what other ppl are. They tend to their own lives and affairs. They dont go out "evangelising" like other religions. The extremists are like extremists of any religion and use their religion as an excuse to commit whatever evil they want.

Since you want to godwin nazis into the conversation - thats exactly what hitler did. He was a self-confessed xtian and he used his religion as an excuse for his extremist atrocities. Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? Nope. Its just a religion.

SOB

freediver wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 10:01pm:

Grey wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 7:10pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:33pm: Grey wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:07pm: There's nneed to be rude SOB. My definition of religion was the one I found most satisfactory during University days. I say again, do you disagree? Why? I used Nazis as analogous. Most members of the Nazi party joined up for the same reason most Russian communist party members joined up. To 'get ahead' in a world dominated by those gangs. I don't understand how you can find the simple concept I'm forwarding as argument so difficult to understand. How was i rude? Perhaps it was the way you tried to tell me what i think? SOB No I don't. You have consistently told us that most Muslims are moderate; have you not? That is the issue that I'm addressing is it not? Spot says a lot of things. That doesn't mean he has thought about it for more than a few seconds. Good luck trying to get a sensible answer out of him.

How would you know?

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 5:36am:

Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB

i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think.

Bertram wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 2:23pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think.

Bertram,

Your error is that you are making an assumption, that SPOT can think, rationally.

Bertram wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 2:23pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think.

You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons.

SOB

Yadda wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 2:35pm:

Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. Bertram, Your error is that you are making an assumption, that SPOT can think, rationally.

Awww yadda trying his hand @ insults again. Give up you are no good @ it.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 2:48pm:

Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB

You don't have to join Islam in Muslim nations?

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 2:49pm:

Yadda wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:35pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. Bertram, Your error is that you are making an assumption, that SPOT can think, rationally. Awww yadda trying his hand @ insults again. Give up you are no good @ it. SOB

Most every post you make, proves my point.

The fact that you cannot see it, is not an 'insult'.

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 2:48pm:

Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB

you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam.

moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary.

Quantum wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 2:52pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB You don't have to join Islam in Muslim nations?

Not all. Maybe some theocracies but not in indonesia or malaysia  . . . .i dont know if you actually have to anywhere though. There are even xtians in palestinian territory.

SOB

Yadda wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 3:10pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:49pm: Yadda wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:35pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. Bertram, Your error is that you are making an assumption, that SPOT can think, rationally. Awww yadda trying his hand @ insults again. Give up you are no good @ it. SOB Most every post you make, proves my point. The fact that you cannot see it, is not an 'insult'.

How exactly does trying to insult me prove that no muslims are moderate? All it does is show that you are not moderate.

SOB

Bertram wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 3:15pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam. moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary.

Sorry I dont get it. What does socialism have to do with anything?

Are you saying yadda moved the goalposts again? Yeah he does that all the time. Doesnt matter he is stuck on that slogan.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 3:21pm:

Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:15pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam. moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary. Sorry I dont get it. What does socialism have to do with anything?

you are joking? you seemed to know this morning.


Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 5:36am:

Since you want to godwin nazis into the conversation - thats exactly what hitler did. He was a self-confessed xtian and he used his religion as an excuse for his extremist atrocities. Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? Nope. Its just a religion. SOB

Bertram wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 4:17pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:15pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam. moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary. Sorry I dont get it. What does socialism have to do with anything? you are joking? you seemed to know this morning. Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Since you want to godwin nazis into the conversation - thats exactly what hitler did. He was a self-confessed xtian and he used his religion as an excuse for his extremist atrocities. Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? Nope. Its just a religion. SOB

Nope i ddint mention socialism there either . . . . .

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 4:21pm:

Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:17pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:15pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam. moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary. Sorry I dont get it. What does socialism have to do with anything? you are joking? you seemed to know this morning. Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Since you want to godwin nazis into the conversation - thats exactly what hitler did. He was a self-confessed xtian and he used his religion as an excuse for his extremist atrocities. Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? Nope. Its just a religion. SOB Nope i ddint mention socialism there either . . . . . SOB

My goodness...

Quantum wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 5:58pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:17pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:15pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam. moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary. Sorry I dont get it. What does socialism have to do with anything? you are joking? you seemed to know this morning. Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Since you want to godwin nazis into the conversation - thats exactly what hitler did. He was a self-confessed xtian and he used his religion as an excuse for his extremist atrocities. Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? Nope. Its just a religion. SOB Nope i ddint mention socialism there either . . . . . SOB My goodness...

Heh my bad i didnt see the "national" there. Still doesnt explain what he is talking about though.

SOB

Grey wrote on Oct 8^th, 2012 at 11:11am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:32am: Grey wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 8:57pm: The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps. Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion. SOB Perhaps the best definition of 'religion' is, 'a philosophy that rules your life'. That aside, what I'm saying is that most Nazis WERE moderates. People ARE sheeple, they follow the line of least resistance. That being the case, if you take the line that 'you can't crticise a movement if the majority of its members are moderate', you cannot criticise any movement at all. All movements are gangs. It doesn't matter if they're called Hells Angels, Zionists, Christians, Greenies, The ALP or the smacking Temperance union. The objective is power to the leadership who are convinced that if everybody followed their lead the world would be a better place. They all will coerce, (pressurize) their members to follow the line, and as they grow large will pressurize others to join. Ultimately they will all turn to violence to round up the stragglers. It's so successful a model that our society is ruled by gangs. At the moment the best we can hope for is some kind of balance. A state that's been achieved to a degree in the democratic, secular world. It's not a perfect way to carry on. People come up with plausible ideas to base a gang on, (let's make the world SAFER) and our freedom is eroded incrementally and we are driven towards BEIGE. But the Islamic movement IS different. Its successes in modern times, begining perhaps with the capture of Persia (Iran), has renewed the fervour and world domination looks like a very real possibility to them. The coercive urge is strong and needs resisting.

I reposted that so the context in which Nazis were introduced is clear. Of course Muslim countries coerce moderate and non-believers. Why even the Sephardim, those Jews who remained in the middle east and lived happily with Arabs for centuries have been forced to go to Israel,  where the the Zionists in turn treat them as second class citizens.

[quote author=50736C775C6C655C416C7164030 link=1349314004/102#102

How exactly does trying to insult me prove that no muslims are moderate? All it does is show that you are not moderate.

SOB[/quote]
Define moderate!

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 6:05pm:

Quantum wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:58pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:17pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:15pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam. moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary. Sorry I dont get it. What does socialism have to do with anything? you are joking? you seemed to know this morning. Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Since you want to godwin nazis into the conversation - thats exactly what hitler did. He was a self-confessed xtian and he used his religion as an excuse for his extremist atrocities. Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? Nope. Its just a religion. SOB Nope i ddint mention socialism there either . . . . . SOB My goodness... Heh my bad i didnt see the "national" there. Still doesnt explain what he is talking about though. SOB

i do not believe that you do not know that nazi is short for national socialism. i think you are being dishonest, all of a sudden pretending to not follow the discussion when this very morning you had a full grasp about nazis.

i don't believe you are genuine. if it's not too much trouble for you, i would like to ask you to ignore my posts and do not respond to anything i post. none of it is for you and i really don't want to be hijacked by this sort of blatant dishonesty. i'd rather have some intelligent disagreement with others than have this sort of silly pretence from you, pretending not to know the most basic thing from morning to evening.

so please, ignore my post from now on. thanks.

Grey wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 6:16pm:

Grey wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 11:11am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 8th, 2012 at 6:32am: Grey wrote on Oct 7th, 2012 at 8:57pm: The SOB argument: Most Nazis were moderate, therefore they shouldn't be criticised as a movement for running death camps. Where have i ever said nazis were moderate? Its not even a religion. SOB Perhaps the best definition of 'religion' is, 'a philosophy that rules your life'. That aside, what I'm saying is that most Nazis WERE moderates. People ARE sheeple, they follow the line of least resistance. That being the case, if you take the line that 'you can't crticise a movement if the majority of its members are moderate', you cannot criticise any movement at all. All movements are gangs. It doesn't matter if they're called Hells Angels, Zionists, Christians, Greenies, The ALP or the smacking Temperance union. The objective is power to the leadership who are convinced that if everybody followed their lead the world would be a better place. They all will coerce, (pressurize) their members to follow the line, and as they grow large will pressurize others to join. Ultimately they will all turn to violence to round up the stragglers. It's so successful a model that our society is ruled by gangs. At the moment the best we can hope for is some kind of balance. A state that's been achieved to a degree in the democratic, secular world. It's not a perfect way to carry on. People come up with plausible ideas to base a gang on, (let's make the world SAFER) and our freedom is eroded incrementally and we are driven towards BEIGE. But the Islamic movement IS different. Its successes in modern times, begining perhaps with the capture of Persia (Iran), has renewed the fervour and world domination looks like a very real possibility to them. The coercive urge is strong and needs resisting. I reposted that so the context in which Nazis were introduced is clear. Of course Muslim countries coerce moderate and non-believers. Why even the Sephardim, those Jews who remained in the middle east and lived happily with Arabs for centuries have been forced to go to Israel,  where the the Zionists in turn treat them as second class citizens.

I lived in several muslim countries and never was bothered by them. They never tried to make me muslim. They didnt care what we did.

Tarring them all with the same brush is the problem. There are countries in turmoil that happen to be muslim countries and they have radicals in charge. Others do not. This is why we dont want radical religious ppl in our governments. Theocracies dont work.

SOB

Bertram wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 7:59pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 6:05pm: Quantum wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:58pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:17pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:15pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam. moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary. Sorry I dont get it. What does socialism have to do with anything? you are joking? you seemed to know this morning. Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Since you want to godwin nazis into the conversation - thats exactly what hitler did. He was a self-confessed xtian and he used his religion as an excuse for his extremist atrocities. Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? Nope. Its just a religion. SOB Nope i ddint mention socialism there either . . . . . SOB My goodness... Heh my bad i didnt see the "national" there. Still doesnt explain what he is talking about though. SOB i do not believe that you do not know that nazi is short for national socialism. i think you are being dishonest, all of a sudden pretending to not follow the discussion when this very morning you had a full grasp about nazis. i don't believe you are genuine. if it's not too much trouble for you, i would like to ask you to ignore my posts and do not respond to anything i post. none of it is for you and i really don't want to be hijacked by this sort of blatant dishonesty. i'd rather have some intelligent disagreement with others than have this sort of silly pretence from you, pretending not to know the most basic thing from morning to evening. so please, ignore my post from now on. thanks.

I didnt say that i didnt know it. Learn to read. I misread it and didnt see the "national" same as you just didnt read what I said. The difference is that you are doing it on purpose.

@ any rate there are moderate muslims.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 10^th, 2012 at 5:47am:

@ any rate there are moderate muslims. SOB

Just as there were/are amongst the  Nazis, Khmer Rouge, Bolsheviks, Catholic Inquisitors, Goths, Visigoths, Huns, mongol hordes, chinese red guards, KKK and more than likely the westboro baptist church.

;D

Grey wrote on Oct 10^th, 2012 at 10:28am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 10th, 2012 at 5:47am: @ any rate there are moderate muslims. SOB Just as there were/are amongst the  Nazis, Khmer Rouge, Bolsheviks, Catholic Inquisitors, Goths, Visigoths, Huns, mongol hordes, chinese red guards, KKK and more than likely the westboro baptist church. ;D

I doubt there are any moderates in westboro. Radicals are the only ones that would be drawn to it.  However its not "just like" any of those - its more like xtianity where MOST of them are moderate.

SOB

Bertram wrote on Oct 9^th, 2012 at 7:59pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 6:05pm: Quantum wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:58pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:17pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:15pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam. moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary. Sorry I dont get it. What does socialism have to do with anything? you are joking? you seemed to know this morning. Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Since you want to godwin nazis into the conversation - thats exactly what hitler did. He was a self-confessed xtian and he used his religion as an excuse for his extremist atrocities. Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? Nope. Its just a religion. SOB Nope i ddint mention socialism there either . . . . . SOB My goodness... Heh my bad i didnt see the "national" there. Still doesnt explain what he is talking about though. SOB i do not believe that you do not know that nazi is short for national socialism. i think you are being dishonest, all of a sudden pretending to not follow the discussion when this very morning you had a full grasp about nazis. i don't believe you are genuine. if it's not too much trouble for you, i would like to ask you to ignore my posts and do not respond to anything i post. none of it is for you and i really don't want to be hijacked by this sort of blatant dishonesty. i'd rather have some intelligent disagreement with others than have this sort of silly pretence from you, pretending not to know the most basic thing from morning to evening. so please, ignore my post from now on. thanks.

That reminds me of when spot spent several months pretending that he is incapable of following links, quotes etc so he couldn't be held accountable for what he said and all his little self contradictions.

freediver wrote on Oct 10^th, 2012 at 12:25pm:

Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 7:59pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 6:05pm: Quantum wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:58pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 4:17pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:21pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 3:15pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:48pm: Bertram wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 2:23pm: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? SOB i think yes, that is happening in muslim countries. you can't leave islam and declare yourself an atheist, for example, which is a pretty moderate and harmless thing, you of all people would think. You dont have to join though. Try leaving the JWs or the mormons. SOB you were talking about moderate muslims, not about non-muslims converting to islam. moderate muslims can't leave islam in muslim countries. so they are not free to express their views and so the comparison to national socialism is not arbitrary. Sorry I dont get it. What does socialism have to do with anything? you are joking? you seemed to know this morning. Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 9th, 2012 at 5:36am: Since you want to godwin nazis into the conversation - thats exactly what hitler did. He was a self-confessed xtian and he used his religion as an excuse for his extremist atrocities. Everyone knows that the nazis in the german war werent all extremists. They had no choice. It was join up or be killed. They had to play along for the sake of their lives and families lives. Is that happening with muslims? Nope. Its just a religion. SOB Nope i ddint mention socialism there either . . . . . SOB My goodness... Heh my bad i didnt see the "national" there. Still doesnt explain what he is talking about though. SOB i do not believe that you do not know that nazi is short for national socialism. i think you are being dishonest, all of a sudden pretending to not follow the discussion when this very morning you had a full grasp about nazis. i don't believe you are genuine. if it's not too much trouble for you, i would like to ask you to ignore my posts and do not respond to anything i post. none of it is for you and i really don't want to be hijacked by this sort of blatant dishonesty. i'd rather have some intelligent disagreement with others than have this sort of silly pretence from you, pretending not to know the most basic thing from morning to evening. so please, ignore my post from now on. thanks. That reminds me of when spot spent several months pretending that he is incapable of following links, quotes etc so he couldn't be held accountable for what he said and all his little self contradictions.

BS you quotemined me. the fact that the links are on the quotes is beside the point.

SOB

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 10^th, 2012 at 12:02pm:

Grey wrote on Oct 10th, 2012 at 10:28am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 10th, 2012 at 5:47am: @ any rate there are moderate muslims. SOB Just as there were/are amongst the  Nazis, Khmer Rouge, Bolsheviks, Catholic Inquisitors, Goths, Visigoths, Huns, mongol hordes, chinese red guards, KKK and more than likely the westboro baptist church. ;D I doubt there are any moderates in westboro. Radicals are the only ones that would be drawn to it.  However its not "just like" any of those - its more like xtianity where MOST of them are moderate. SOB

Moderate is a relative term. The majority of any of those groups were moderate, you can bet money on it. Cepting the Westboro baptist church who aren't really big enough for a moderate majority. That said most Muslims aren't within a century of being as moderate as most Christians on issues like equality for women, blasphemy or human rights.

Grey wrote on Oct 10^th, 2012 at 1:45pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 10th, 2012 at 12:02pm: Grey wrote on Oct 10th, 2012 at 10:28am: Sir Spot of Borg wrote on Oct 10th, 2012 at 5:47am: @ any rate there are moderate muslims. SOB Just as there were/are amongst the  Nazis, Khmer Rouge, Bolsheviks, Catholic Inquisitors, Goths, Visigoths, Huns, mongol hordes, chinese red guards, KKK and more than likely the westboro baptist church. ;D I doubt there are any moderates in westboro. Radicals are the only ones that would be drawn to it.  However its not "just like" any of those - its more like xtianity where MOST of them are moderate. SOB Moderate is a relative term. The majority of any of those groups were moderate, you can bet money on it. Cepting the Westboro baptist church who aren't really big enough for a moderate majority. That said most Muslims aren't within a century of being as moderate as most Christians on issues like equality for women, blasphemy or human rights.

I dont know where the word "moderate" even got into the discussion. Prolly freediver. I originally said that not all muslims are terrorists and that most of them live peaceful lives not bothering anyone else. They may not live the same way we do as regards "rights" but well you would be surprised how many "westerners" live that way too oppressing women etc but its hidden. There are even women out there who encourage it. Especially in texas. Theres something in  the book that says women should do whatever the man says or something.

SOB