Sharia myth sweeps America

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by essence

IB, I have real problems engaging you in debate when my mind is entranced by your beautiful avatar.

But - so you support everything which went on under the macarthy era?

McCarthy was a bully and a drunkard, but his assertion that there were communist agents at work in the U.S. government compromising U.S. secrets was valid. Likewise with sharia law: where it is practiced, it compromises the rights, freedoms and safety of women.

[essence]

My favorite album of all time is 'blood on the tracks', so what is so bad about a bit of blood?

ps the girl I licked on your behalf was the source of my obsession with that album. I played it every time (for 5 years) I visited her in jail.

[essence]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

McCarthy was a bully and a drunkard, but his assertion that there were communist agents at work in the U.S. government compromising U.S. secrets was valid. Likewise with sharia law: where it is practiced, it compromises the rights, freedoms and safety of women.

I agree, where sharia law is fully used, it is evil and exploitative.

But is that what is suggested in US? I think not.

[Dr. Pecker]

Sharia law has also swept the middle east, parts of Africa and southeast Asia. I guarantee you, a long time ago, libtards in indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and othersuch places thought that would never happen.

[dilbert firestorm]

sharia law is more than a religious law. It is both, a religious & political law based on the Koran which forms the foundation of a theocratic state like Saudi Arabia, Iran. It is also defines a way of life a muslim should follow.

sharia law only takes place when muslims become a majority and that's when they start to run roughshod over many non-muslim rights and religions thru beatings, burnings and murder.

btw, there are hardly any christians and jews in Iraq, there used to be thousands, but they all have been driven out by muslims.

Islam as others pointed out is not kind to women (considered men's property and honor killings are common) and non-muslims (considered unworthy of any rights, they have rights but its very limited and depending on the charity of whoever is ruling).

It may have aspects that are peaceful, but Islam by its very nature is a violent religion.

this position maybe extreme, but I would favor that Islam be outlawed in this country, that would require a constitutional admendment.

[Dr. Pecker]

Well,.freedom of.religion should.still be in place...maybe Sharia law is already banned under the Monroe doctrine?

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

McCarthy was a bully and a drunkard, but his assertion that there were communist agents at work in the U.S. government compromising U.S. secrets was valid. Likewise with sharia law: where it is practiced, it compromises the rights, freedoms and safety of women.

Many of McCarthy's concerns were proven to be valid. After the collapse of the USSR, KGB documents were released which revealed the extent of Soviet penetration into our government. Names of Soviet agents were released. McCarthy has been largely vindicated by history. Of course the left's propoganda machine has convinced most people that McCarthy was a lunatic.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/venona/intercepts.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zfq6URia1Zw

http://conservapedia.com/Venona_files

[Cpalmson]

Originally Posted by Dr. Pecker

Well,.freedom of.religion should.still be in place...maybe Sharia law is already banned under the Monroe doctrine?

The Monroe Doctrine is not U.S. Law and can't be the basis for anything legal. The Monroe Doctrine is a set of broadly based foreign policy ideas most of which is that European powers should keep their hands off the Western Hemisphere--i.e. the Americas.

I despise radical/fundamentalist Islam probably more than anyone else, yet, I'm not willing to go as far as to want to ban Islam from the U.S. That would simply put us on their level.

What we need is to empower and enlighten the "moderate" Muslims. We need to encourage them to have their version of the "Reformation". What is lacking in the Muslim world is their version of Martin Luther. The Muslims need a set of thesis posted at the gates of Mecca. These thesis would clearly spell out that terrorism is not part of Islam. It would spell out that those associated with terrorism are heretics. It would spell out that Jihad is not a literal war against the infidels. It would re-inforce their core belief that Islam is a religion of peace. The Muslims need to take 2 pages from Ghandi and the Catholic Church. 1) to effect change, use non-violent means and 2) value and respect all human life. As of now, moderate Muslims are too chicken shit to seek this level of reform.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Cpalmson

The Monroe Doctrine is not U.S. Law and can't be the basis for anything legal. The Monroe Doctrine is a set of broadly based foreign policy ideas most of which is that European powers should keep their hands off the Western Hemisphere--i.e. the Americas.

I despise radical/fundamentalist Islam probably more than anyone else, yet, I'm not willing to go as far as to want to ban Islam from the U.S. That would simply put us on their level.

What we need is to empower and enlighten the "moderate" Muslims. We need to encourage them to have their version of the "Reformation". What is lacking in the Muslim world is their version of Martin Luther. The Muslims need a set of thesis posted at the gates of Mecca. These thesis would clearly spell out that terrorism is not part of Islam. It would spell out that those associated with terrorism are heretics. It would spell out that Jihad is not a literal war against the infidels. It would re-inforce their core belief that Islam is a religion of peace. The Muslims need to take 2 pages from Ghandi and the Catholic Church. 1) to effect change, use non-violent means and 2) value and respect all human life. As of now, moderate Muslims are too chicken shit to seek this level of reform.

The biggest problem in reforming Islam is the basic difference between the Bible and the Koran. Christians believe that the Bible is the inspired word of God. Muslims believe that the Koran is the literal word of God. That means there is no room for interpretation. It makes the religion inflexible.

I agree with your conclusion that Islam needs a reformation; I'm just not sure it's possible.

[satexasguy]

Like any religion, Muslims are hypocrites in their beliefs. Many devout muslims will take a weekend and go to Dubai to engage in prostitutes and drink. Then they sneak back to their country and act holier than thou.

I know several Muslims here in the USA that are good people. I personally know them and have discussed the attitude towards Muslims. They admit that the small majority of extreme muslims are the ones giving their faith a bad name.

Bottom line is that every religion has extremists that make the rest look bad.

I consider myself a Christian but do not believe in all that the faith professes. Remember that not too long ago (relatively speaking), the Catholic church had their dark days with the inquisition.

[Jackie S]

Yeh, not shit. As bad as some of this Sharia Law crap is, it is mild compared to the antics of The Grand Inquisitor Torquemada during the Spanish Inquisitions.

If someone is standing before you with a sword, and says, "believe, or die", does it make much difference if it is a Catholic, or a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Buddist.

A person is free to practice what ever faith they wish. But, when that faith compells them to act in a manner that is contrary to the Laws of our Constitutional Republic, then they can not be tolerated.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Yeh, not shit. As bad as some of this Sharia Law crap is, it is mild compared to the antics of The Grand Inquisitor Torquemada during the Spanish Inquisitions.

If someone is standing before you with a sword, and says, "believe, or die", does it make much difference if it is a Catholic, or a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Buddist.

A person is free to practice what ever faith they wish. But, when that faith compells them to act in a manner that is contrary to the Laws of our Constitutional Republic, then they can not be tolerated.

You're comparing Christian abuses from hundreds of years ago with current day practices of Islam. Christians have moderated the more extreme views in the Bible. Christians don't execute people for adultery and homosexuality anymore. The Muslims still do. Islam needs to lighten the fuck up.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Yeh, not shit. As bad as some of this Sharia Law crap is, it is mild compared to the antics of The Grand Inquisitor Torquemada during the Spanish Inquisitions.

If someone is standing before you with a sword, and says, "believe, or die", does it make much difference if it is a Catholic, or a Muslim, a Hindu, or a Buddist.

A person is free to practice what ever faith they wish. But, when that faith compells them to act in a manner that is contrary to the Laws of our Constitutional Republic, then they can not be tolerated.

Jackie S you are badly informed. Concerning the number of autos-da-fé during Torquemada's tenure as Inquisitor General, there is a general consensus among the scholars that about 2,000 people were burned at the stake due to prosecution by the Spanish Inquisition in the whole of Spain between 1480 and 1530 [wiki].

The Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, commonly known as the Spanish Inquisition (Inquisición española), was a tribunal established in 1480 by Catholic Monarchs Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile. . .
Various motives have been proposed for the monarchs' decision to fund the Inquisition such as increasing political authority, weakening opposition, suppressing conversos, profiting from confiscation of the property of convicted heretics, reducing social tensions and protecting the kingdom from the danger of a fifth column [wiki].

Jackie, you really should read about the Islamic Khanates of Eastern Europe and western Asia: especially Timur the Lame.

Timur conquered in the name of Allah. “Tamerlane captured the city of Herat in 1383 and went on to take much of Persia as well. He ruled fairly according to many reports but when confronted by any kind of revolt or resistance was known to slaughter entire cities to a man. In the city of Isfahan, Tamerlane built pyramids made from thousands of skulls. He did this in response to a revolt in which several of his tax collectors were killed.” http://ancientstandard.com/2011/01/2...n-of-the-arts/

At Isfizar (1383) he captured 2,000 prisoners. Previously, Tamerlane had built cairns out of the skulls of his vanquished foes, “but his time he went one better, building the two thousand prisoners into a pyramid of brick and mortar while still alive, in an attempt to intimidate other cities into remaining quiet. When he was 'satisfied with this vengeance' Tamerlane moved south into Sistan, the target for his next campaign.” [http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/siege_isfizar.html] Hence, in one event, Tamerlane matched Torquemada’s fifty year total.

On 17 December 1398. Timur entered Delhi and the city was sacked, destroyed, and left in ruins. Before the battle for Delhi, Timur executed more than 100,000 captives, mostly Hindus [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_in_the_Indian_ subcontinent#Timur].

In one instance, Tamerlane had his thousands of vanquished men bound at the ankles and at the wrists with their hands behind their backs. The victims were bent double and their heads were then pushed between their knees and their knees were bound to hold their heads in place. These bound victims were then laid in a dry moat. Wood planks were then placed across the moat and buried in dirt.

“ His troops, while well fed and supplied, were not paid and instead were encouraged to loot the cities that they captured. Loot included precious metals and stones as well as women and horses. Totals suggest that he may have killed as many as fifteen to twenty million people during the course of his military career.”[ http://ancientstandard.com/2011/01/24/timur-mass-murderer-or-patron-of-the-arts/ ]

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Jackie S you are badly informed. Concerning the number of autos-da-fé during Torquemada's tenure as Inquisitor General, there is a general consensus among the scholars that about 2,000 people were burned at the stake due to prosecution by the Spanish Inquisition in the whole of Spain between 1480 and 1530 [wiki].

The Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition, commonly known as the Spanish Inquisition (Inquisición española), was a tribunal established in 1480 by Catholic Monarchs Ferdinand II of Aragon and Isabella I of Castile. . .
Various motives have been proposed for the monarchs' decision to fund the Inquisition such as increasing political authority, weakening opposition, suppressing conversos, profiting from confiscation of the property of convicted heretics, reducing social tensions and protecting the kingdom from the danger of a fifth column [wiki].

Jackie, you really should read about the Islamic Khanates of Eastern Europe and western Asia: especially Timur the Lame.

Timur conquered in the name of Allah. “Tamerlane captured the city of Herat in 1383 and went on to take much of Persia as well. He ruled fairly according to many reports but when confronted by any kind of revolt or resistance was known to slaughter entire cities to a man. In the city of Isfahan, Tamerlane built pyramids made from thousands of skulls. He did this in response to a revolt in which several of his tax collectors were killed.” http://ancientstandard.com/2011/01/2...n-of-the-arts/

At Isfizar (1383) he captured 2,000 prisoners. Previously, Tamerlane had built cairns out of the skulls of his vanquished foes, “but his time he went one better, building the two thousand prisoners into a pyramid of brick and mortar while still alive, in an attempt to intimidate other cities into remaining quiet. When he was 'satisfied with this vengeance' Tamerlane moved south into Sistan, the target for his next campaign.” [http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/siege_isfizar.html] Hence, in one event, Tamerlane matched Torquemada’s fifty year total.

On 17 December 1398. Timur entered Delhi and the city was sacked, destroyed, and left in ruins. Before the battle for Delhi, Timur executed more than 100,000 captives, mostly Hindus [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_conquest_in_the_Indian_ subcontinent#Timur].

In one instance, Tamerlane had his thousands of vanquished men bound at the ankles and at the wrists with their hands behind their backs. The victims were bent double and their heads were then pushed between their knees and their knees were bound to hold their heads in place. These bound victims were then laid in a dry moat. Wood planks were then placed across the moat and buried in dirt.

“ His troops, while well fed and supplied, were not paid and instead were encouraged to loot the cities that they captured. Loot included precious metals and stones as well as women and horses. Totals suggest that he may have killed as many as fifteen to twenty million people during the course of his military career.”[ http://ancientstandard.com/2011/01/24/timur-mass-murderer-or-patron-of-the-arts/ ]

Well yea, but he was pro-choice so it's ok.

[Iaintliein]

Don't sweat it sweetie. . . those are mythological stones.



What could possibly go wrong with letting the Sharia camel's nose into the tent?