Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 
Send Topic Print
Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence? (Read 14289 times)
moses
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 6353
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #120 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 3:38pm
 
------and they bought their money, women, kids all their good and chattels, with them so the muzzies could collect their war booty (give 1/5 of it to muhammad), in a land the said muzzies have never troden before.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #121 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 6:21pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 1:40pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 12:14pm:
The context does not significantly alter the meaning of what I quoted.


Thats right FD - provided of course we limit the context to exclude all those references to fighting against self defense - err I mean fighting against those who attack you first - (massive difference I know) and those who oppress you.


It is in the same verse Gandalf. You chopped the verse in half to alter the meaning. I do not have to go looking in completely different chapters of the Koran for verses that do not actually say what I claim they say to add "context". It is right there. You criticise me for  failing to quote the entire Koran at once, yet here you are leaving out the first half of the verse in a way that clearly alters its meaning, and no amount of referencing to other chapters will change that.

Do Muslims give themselves licence to misrepresent the context of the Koran by appealing to the context?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #122 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 6:38pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 6:21pm:
You chopped the verse in half to alter the meaning.


no, thats literally what you did FD:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2017 at 12:38pm:
The verse does explicitly state to fight them until "worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah".


(pretending the second half of the verse - " But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors" - doesn't exist)
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #123 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 6:39pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 6:38pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 6:21pm:
You chopped the verse in half to alter the meaning.


no, thats literally what you did FD:

freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2017 at 12:38pm:
The verse does explicitly state to fight them until "worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah".


(pretending the second half of the verse - " But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors" - doesn't exist)


That doesn't change the meaning Gandalf. Only if you invent what it is that they are supposed to cease.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #124 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 6:42pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 9th, 2017 at 9:49pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2017 at 8:15pm:
Kill the Mushriken wherever you find them.


[but]So as long as they are upright toward you, be upright toward them. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous.


Gandalf, are you arguing that this is not a misrepresentation of 9:7, which actually says:

7. How can there be a covenant with Allah and with His Messenger for the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) except those with whom you made a covenant near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah)? So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqun

Are you not misrepresenting a verse about people Muslims have a treaty with as being generally applicable?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 39921
Gender: male
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #125 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 7:21pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 1:40pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 12:14pm:
The context does not significantly alter the meaning of what I quoted.


Thats right FD - provided of course we limit the context to exclude all those references to fighting against self defense - err I mean fighting against those who attack you first - (massive difference I know) and those who oppress you.



Muslims have cleverly corned the 'victim' market so now everything they do is in self-defence.

Blowing up kids in Manchester? Self-defence. Trucks into crowds in Nice, Berlin, beheading French priests in France - all of it is self-defence.

Nobody believes this shite, not you, not me, nobody. Yet Muslims peddle it constantly.

You are not victims, pal. Your religion teaches you to be constantly warring, resentful little malcontents. Nobody else.  And you have no way out except apostasy (ie thinking for yourself) punishable by death.








Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #126 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 7:27pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 6:42pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 9th, 2017 at 9:49pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2017 at 8:15pm:
Kill the Mushriken wherever you find them.


[but]So as long as they are upright toward you, be upright toward them. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous.


Gandalf, are you arguing that this is not a misrepresentation of 9:7, which actually says:

7. How can there be a covenant with Allah and with His Messenger for the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) except those with whom you made a covenant near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah)? So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqun

Are you not misrepresenting a verse about people Muslims have a treaty with as being generally applicable?


Lets see who else is misinterpreting...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_Verse

A bit of reading for you - you'll find the article is full of scholarly arguments asserting that chapter 9 has a specific context - namely that the "kill the infidels" commands are directed only at those infidels who had already broken a treaty with the muslims, and had attacked first - eg:

Quote:
As per Muhammad Abdel-Haleem, translator of the Qur'an, while contextualizing 9:5 and bringing the wider sequential narrative:

It was these hardened polytheists in Arabia, who would accept nothing other than the expulsion of the Muslims or their reversion to paganism, and who repeatedly broke their treaties, that the Muslims were ordered to treat in the same way – to fight them or expel them. Even with such an enemy Muslims were not simply ordered to pounce on them and reciprocate by breaking the treaty themselves; instead, an ultimatum was issued, giving the enemy notice, that after the four sacred months mentioned in 9:5 above, the Muslims would wage war on them. The main clause of the sentence ‘kill the polytheists’ is singled out by some Western scholars to represent the Islamic attitude to war; even some Muslims take this view and allege that this verse abrogated other verses on war. This is pure fantasy, isolating and decontextualising a small part of a sentence. The full picture is given in 9:1–15, which gives many reasons for the order to fight such polytheists. They continuously broke their agreements and aided others against the Muslims, they started hostilities against the Muslims, barred others from becoming Muslims, expelled Muslims from the Holy Mosque and even from their own homes. At least eight times the passage mentions their misdeeds against the Muslims. Consistent with restrictions on war elsewhere in the Qur’an, the immediate context of this ‘Sword Verse’ exempts such polytheists as do not break their agreements and who keep the peace with the Muslims (9:7). It orders that those enemies seeking safe conduct should be protected and delivered to the place of safety they seek (9:6). The whole of this context to v.5, with all its restrictions, is ignored by those who simply isolate one part of a sentence to build their theory of war in Islam on what is termed ‘The Sword Verse’ even when the word ‘sword’ does not occur anywhere in the Qur’an


and lets not forget what you said about wikipedia:

freediver wrote on Mar 19th, 2017 at 3:34pm:
Gandalf, I suspect that most people consider wikipedia to be a far more reliable source of information than this site. For most general knowledge, many people use it as their go-to source for pretty much everything. If you insert something incorrect, particularly on such a controversial topic, it gets corrected within the hour. Try it.


What do you think FD - do you think this wikipedia article to be "a far more reliable source of information than this site" (ie your opposing interpretation)? Do you still reckon that if someone had inserted something incorrect, it would have been "corrected with the hour"?
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #127 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 8:39pm
 
Gandalf, are you not misrepresenting a verse about people Muslims have a treaty with as being generally applicable?

Are Muslims supposed to lie about the Koran like that?

And WTF is a "hardened polytheist"? Is that someone who won't "cease" being a polytheist, thereby forcing the Muslims to kill?

The more I read the Koran Gandalf, the more messed up I realise your religion is.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #128 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 9:29pm
 
So FD are you abandoning your previous line that "most people consider wikipedia to be a far more reliable source of information than this site"? Or are you going to concede that "most people" will trust the nuanced and contextualised non-hysterical explanations in that wiki article more than your rabid pitch?

freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 8:39pm:
And WTF is a "hardened polytheist"? Is that someone who won't "cease" being a polytheist


Who knows FD - did the author mention people who won't cease being a polytheist? Or did he give a lengthy explanation about treaty breakers and aggressors? I mean you couldn't possibly take the radical step of actually reading the quote I copied and pasted for you - could you?


Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 10th, 2017 at 9:35pm by polite_gandalf »  

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #129 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 9:54pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 8:39pm:
Gandalf, are you not misrepresenting a verse about people Muslims have a treaty with as being generally applicable?


No. Wikipedia, which as you yourself have argued most people will trust more than what is posted on this site (for example, your hysterical nonsense), and which has such good quality control it will "correct" anything wrong within an hour - cites numerous sources refuting the exact arguments that you are making, and pointing out that the verse only permits war against those who have actively violated treaties and attacked the muslims. The phrase "So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them" - therefore is absolutely universally applicable.

Don't worry FD - maybe you can go and edit wikipedia for yourself and enlighten the world with your profound insights. With a bit of luck your "contributions" might survive the hour - what do you think?
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 39921
Gender: male
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #130 - Jul 10th, 2017 at 11:33pm
 
Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?   There would be no Islamic violence without Muslims. Of course Muslims are responsible for Islamic violence (not just complicit but responsible).


Every post from gandalf is designed to paddle as far away as possible from that plain truth. That is what every post by gandalf is designed to achieve - paddle away from plain truth.

So you will have pages and pages of yea-but-no-but, all adding up to Muslims being responsible for Islam and Islamic violence.



Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #131 - Jul 11th, 2017 at 7:40am
 
Quote:
So FD are you abandoning your previous line that "most people consider wikipedia to be a far more reliable source of information than this site"? Or are you going to concede that "most people" will trust the nuanced and contextualised non-hysterical explanations in that wiki article more than your rabid pitch?


Not sure what distinction you are trying to make Gandalf.

Quote:
No. Wikipedia, which as you yourself have argued most people will trust more than what is posted on this site (for example, your hysterical nonsense), and which has such good quality control it will "correct" anything wrong within an hour - cites numerous sources refuting the exact arguments that you are making, and pointing out that the verse only permits war against those who have actively violated treaties and attacked the muslims.


So Islam only permits Muslims to go to war with people they have a treaty with? Is this really what you are saying Gandalf?

Quote:
No. Wikipedia, which as you yourself have argued most people will trust more than what is posted on this site (for example, your hysterical nonsense), and which has such good quality control it will "correct" anything wrong within an hour - cites numerous sources refuting the exact arguments that you are making, and pointing out that the verse only permits war against those who have actively violated treaties and attacked the muslims. The phrase "So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them" - therefore is absolutely universally applicable.


You left the bit of the verse out that says it is talking about treaties Gandalf. That is how you misrepresented it. You falsely portrayed it as being more general than it is.

polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 7:27pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 10th, 2017 at 6:42pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 9th, 2017 at 9:49pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 9th, 2017 at 8:15pm:
Kill the Mushriken wherever you find them.


[but]So as long as they are upright toward you, be upright toward them. Indeed, Allah loves the righteous.


Gandalf, are you arguing that this is not a misrepresentation of 9:7, which actually says:

7. How can there be a covenant with Allah and with His Messenger for the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) except those with whom you made a covenant near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah)? So long, as they are true to you, stand you true to them. Verily, Allah loves Al-Muttaqun

Are you not misrepresenting a verse about people Muslims have a treaty with as being generally applicable?


Lets see who else is misinterpreting...


Gandalf are you saying you are lying about the Koran because other Muslims are lying? You couldn't read the verse for yourself?
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 11th, 2017 at 7:48am by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #132 - Jul 11th, 2017 at 1:38pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 11th, 2017 at 7:40am:
You left the bit of the verse out that says it is talking about treaties Gandalf. That is how you misrepresented it. You falsely portrayed it as being more general than it is.


Grin - no thats literally what you are doing FD. That it is talking about treaties is precisely the point, and which is precisely the point the sources in the wiki article are making. As opposed to the BS you are attempting to pedal that it is simply a blanket command to kill infidels for all place and time.

Irony overload.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #133 - Jul 11th, 2017 at 2:36pm
 
I was the one who told you it was about treaties Gandalf. Look at the above posts.

The instruction to "be true" to the infidel if they remain true is in the context of those the Muslims have treaties with. You left out that context in order to falsely present it as being broader. You criticise me for only quoting an entire chapter and not the rest of the Koran, but you will leave out half a verse in order to misrepresent it.

Are you now saying that Islam only permits Muslims to go to war with people they have a treaty with?

Are you saying you are lying about the Koran because other Muslims are lying? You couldn't read the verse for yourself?

Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Are Muslims complicit in Islamic violence?
Reply #134 - Jul 11th, 2017 at 3:11pm
 
So let me get this straight FD, you are now acknowledging that Chapter 9 has a historical context, and that its not a universal command to "kill the mushriken" anywhere and everywhere around the world for all time and places?

What happened? Did you finally read the wiki article that blows your hysterical nonsense out of the water?
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 9 10 
Send Topic Print