Here you go Abu:

Yadda wrote on Oct 14^th, 2008 at 1:43pm:

freediver wrote on Oct 13^th, 2008 at 3:12pm:



Well, I think there is a lot deliberate slippinmg and sliding and tapdancing.

Criticising Mohammed and the Koran - this is forbidden on excplicitly religious grounds. And if it was left at that we would have no conflict.

Islamist Mohammedans' political aims - Ah! Snag! Criticism of the very central political elements of Islam, Mohaammed's role as a political leader and model are also ruled beyond the pale because of - religious sensibilities.

This is why I think it is a guise, rather than an honest open presentation.

Chaucer's words: "the smyler with the knyf under the cloke" can be adapted to the age as "The smyler with the knyf within the boke."

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 14^th, 2008 at 9:41pm:



One of the rules of thee riot act for the islam board is this:
Insulting or inflammatory remarks about any religions, religious books or religious figures are not acceptable.

Perhaps it should be amended to say something likee thiss isntead:

Insulting or inflammatory remarks about any religions, religious books or religious figures are not acceptable as long as no political claims have been made on behalf of a religion or on the authority of religious figures.

It is unfair that political claims can be made from behind religions and responses criticising or attacking the political points are ruled out because they tear at religious cloak shielding the political remark.

Ater all, the whole webssite is called ozpolitic. In political debate only the customary rules of defamation should hold sway. There is no ground for religious privilage in political debate.  

So it is OK to question or explicitly reject the validity of koranic authority or mohammed in discussions where thy are cited or implied?

locutius wrote on Oct 14^th, 2008 at 4:44pm:


sorry hon I'm not muslim! I can ask muslims I know if you like though?

abu_rashid wrote on Oct 14^th, 2008 at 4:20pm:





'......Muslims in Australia, fled religious dictatorships, when most of them came from Lebanon and Turkey, neither of which was a religious dictatorship.'

abu, in recent years both of these countries, Lebanon and Turkey, have suffered from the encroachment of militant ISLAMIST's into those communities.

Those ppl, who love Sharia, and want to impose Sharia, upon ppl who are not muslims.

These Lovers of Sharia have shown that they are prepared to do *whatever* local conditions will allow, to achieve their aims.

In recent years, these Lovers of Sharia have transformed, what were relatively stable countries, into places were bombings and assassinations are now not unusual.

Again, ......who is doing this?

Lovers of Sharia are doing these things, ppl who's aim is to impose Sharia on all ppl, to impose an ISLAMIC 'religious' dictatorship on ppl who are not muslims.




You said i did not address these points regards Lebanon and Turkey.....

Turkey
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1223522110/56#56

Lebanon
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1223522110/62#62


And while i concede, my posts don't relate to muslims coming to Australia, fleeing religious dictatorships, these posts show the instability within these two countries, which being fostered by those Lovers of Sharia, devout muslims.

And i have no doubt that many Lovers of Sharia, who come to Australia from Lebanon and Turkey, are citing the political environment in those two countries, as a consideration, to seek to find a new start in countries like Australia.

So ISLAM, Lovers of Sharia, create the local problems [Lebanon and Turkey].

And then use the circumstance [created by their 'brothers'], as a reason to seek a home among infidels, in infidels countries.


Google,
Islam forbids Muslim emigration to the lands of the infidels


++++

.....and yet the Lovers of Sharia come.

ISLAM mandates intolerance of the Jahiliyya [an un-ISLAMIC] lifestyle.

"....Jahiliyya is a result of the lack of Sharia law, without which Islam cannot exist;"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahiliyya#Jahiliyya_in_contemporary_society


"THE RIGHT TO JUDGE"
"It is not the function of Islam to compromise with the concepts of Jahiliyya which are current in the world **or to co-exist** in the same land together with a jahili system........"
by SAYYID QUTB
http://www.islamworld.net/justice.html


Sayyid Qutb, was a renowned ISLAMIC 'philosopher', who was executed in Egypt [1966] for encouraging an ISLAMIC revolt against the Egyptian govt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qutbism

We don't need Muslims to criticise Muslims, the non-Muslims already waste enough of their time doing it for us. If you want to criticise yourself, fine, and make it a staple part of your culture, that's also fine, but don't pretend for a moment it's THE marker of an advanced society, or that it's compulsory for every society/culture to do it, as it's not. In this case it's simply a part of the propaganda war agaist Islam, to incite Muslims to infight and attack one another. Not biting today sorry, cast your line in deeper waters.