No, Muslims Should NOT Be Allowed To Serve In Public Office

[Rigby5]

Because the Jews were dhimmis. And the world was getting smaller and massacres attracted attention. Islam says to dominate by any means necessary. Why lie about it?

in 1990 Palestine was under the control of the OTTOMAN EMPIRE.
Jews were willing to BUY (that is for MONEY) land in Palestine-----
the Turks were DELIGHTED TO SELL-------wake up to reality,
rigby, habibi. Jews began BUYING land from the Turks in the early
1800s

Wrong again.
The Ottoman Empire was Muslim, and it was illegal in the Ottoman Empire to sell land to Jewish immigrants.
Jews only bought a tiny amount of land in Palestine before it was made illegal.
And Turks never has the rights to sell any land.
They only owned the land the way the Queen of England owns all of the UK.
It only means she gets a cut of the property tax.
It does not mean she can sell any of it.
Only the one with tenants rights can sell property back under the Ottoman Empire.

wrong again----the Ottomans mitigated the filth of shariah and DID SELL
LAND TO JEWS in Palestine. There were parts of the Ottoman empire
that were more autonomous and in those parts the local mullahs and sheiks did cling to the vile stench of shariah. The policies of the Ottomans really bothered those muslims who like the stink of shariah.

Sorry, but that is really stupid.

Ottoman did not have the legal right to sell any land anywhere in Palestine.
They only owned the taxation rights, not the occupation rights.

Sharia comes from the Old Testament and is actually Jewish.

You are a liar but you can do better than that. That statement proves you are not even worth listening to about Islam. Go away.

If you knew anything at all about history, you would know that Mohammad got chased out of Mecca, and had to take refuge in Medina.
Since Medina was a Jewish stronghold, Mohammad formed Islam there out of Judaism, in order to be as much like Judaism as possible, in order to get Jews there to support him.
Islam is almost identical to Judaism in every way, except that since he was indebted to his wealthy wife, he modified Judaism slightly in order to give women more rights.
Sharia actually predates Mohammad entirely.
If you think I am wrong, then tell us a single thing that Sharia says that is different than what Judaism says?

 

[Lastamender]

 

[irosie91]

Trust me bud...I know your type, you are scared shitless of becoming a realist. Facts and statistics scare the shit out of all PC blinded pussies...that’s all by design. You’ll pretend dark folks are good for America despite all the facts staring you right in the face...they got you nutless fools right where they want you. Good job, you should be proud.

If that's what you bigots truly b'lieve, then why don't you move to a country with no "dark folks?"

“Bigots”?
You think one must be a bigot in order to accept and acknowledge stats and facts?
Do you always hate statistics and facts? Don’t you use such things in your daily routine? The ones related to ethnicity scares the piss out of you huh?
Who taught you that? How does your pussification in this regard benefit you?

Yes, "bigots." Your seething hatred of those not like you reeks in your posts. It's who you are, embrace it. So when are you moving to a country where there are no "dark folks?"

seething hatred of those not like you

Read the Koran if you want to see seething hatred of people not like you.

The Quran is easy to read, and it contains not a single passage promoting hate or unnecessary violence.
It is a bit strict in my opinion, but clearly condemns any theft of murder.
And the proof is that Muslims are not the ones carving up the world into empires.
That is mostly the US now, and used to be Gt. Britain, France. and Spain at one time.

wrong again------muslim jurisprudence and muslim laws upon dhimmis is BRUTAL---- please feel free to ask questions-----I have lots of examples ----Remember----my own mother-in-law was SAVED FROM BRUTAL RAPE BY THE LOCAL IMAM PIG-----in the country in which hubby was born----local rulers were called Imam----even the king was called Imam

 

[Lastamender]

in 1990 Palestine was under the control of the OTTOMAN EMPIRE.
Jews were willing to BUY (that is for MONEY) land in Palestine-----
the Turks were DELIGHTED TO SELL-------wake up to reality,
rigby, habibi. Jews began BUYING land from the Turks in the early
1800s

Wrong again.
The Ottoman Empire was Muslim, and it was illegal in the Ottoman Empire to sell land to Jewish immigrants.
Jews only bought a tiny amount of land in Palestine before it was made illegal.
And Turks never has the rights to sell any land.
They only owned the land the way the Queen of England owns all of the UK.
It only means she gets a cut of the property tax.
It does not mean she can sell any of it.
Only the one with tenants rights can sell property back under the Ottoman Empire.

wrong again----the Ottomans mitigated the filth of shariah and DID SELL
LAND TO JEWS in Palestine. There were parts of the Ottoman empire
that were more autonomous and in those parts the local mullahs and sheiks did cling to the vile stench of shariah. The policies of the Ottomans really bothered those muslims who like the stink of shariah.

Sorry, but that is really stupid.

Ottoman did not have the legal right to sell any land anywhere in Palestine.
They only owned the taxation rights, not the occupation rights.

Sharia comes from the Old Testament and is actually Jewish.

You are a liar but you can do better than that. That statement proves you are not even worth listening to about Islam. Go away.

If you knew anything at all about history, you would know that Mohammad got chased out of Mecca, and had to take refuge in Medina.
Since Medina was a Jewish stronghold, Mohammad formed Islam there out of Judaism, in order to be as much like Judaism as possible, in order to get Jews there to support him.
Islam is almost identical to Judaism in every way, except that since he was indebted to his wealthy wife, he modified Judaism slightly in order to give women more rights.
Sharia actually predates Mohammad entirely.
If you think I am wrong, then tell us a single thing that Sharia says that is different than what Judaism says?

Where is the proof of what you say? I proved what I said with Islamic text, you are just running your mouth.

 

[irosie91]

in 1990 Palestine was under the control of the OTTOMAN EMPIRE.
Jews were willing to BUY (that is for MONEY) land in Palestine-----
the Turks were DELIGHTED TO SELL-------wake up to reality,
rigby, habibi. Jews began BUYING land from the Turks in the early
1800s

Wrong again.
The Ottoman Empire was Muslim, and it was illegal in the Ottoman Empire to sell land to Jewish immigrants.
Jews only bought a tiny amount of land in Palestine before it was made illegal.
And Turks never has the rights to sell any land.
They only owned the land the way the Queen of England owns all of the UK.
It only means she gets a cut of the property tax.
It does not mean she can sell any of it.
Only the one with tenants rights can sell property back under the Ottoman Empire.

wrong again----the Ottomans mitigated the filth of shariah and DID SELL
LAND TO JEWS in Palestine. There were parts of the Ottoman empire
that were more autonomous and in those parts the local mullahs and sheiks did cling to the vile stench of shariah. The policies of the Ottomans really bothered those muslims who like the stink of shariah.

Sorry, but that is really stupid.

Ottoman did not have the legal right to sell any land anywhere in Palestine.
They only owned the taxation rights, not the occupation rights.

Sharia comes from the Old Testament and is actually Jewish.

You are a liar but you can do better than that. That statement proves you are not even worth listening to about Islam. Go away.

If you knew anything at all about history, you would know that Mohammad got chased out of Mecca, and had to take refuge in Medina.
Since Medina was a Jewish stronghold, Mohammad formed Islam there out of Judaism, in order to be as much like Judaism as possible, in order to get Jews there to support him.
Islam is almost identical to Judaism in every way, except that since he was indebted to his wealthy wife, he modified Judaism slightly in order to give women more rights.
Sharia actually predates Mohammad entirely.
If you think I am wrong, then tell us a single thing that Sharia says that is different than what Judaism says?

a single thing? you have made this too easy. Jews cannot eat camels but muslims can. You want more?.

 

[Lastamender]

 

[Lastamender]

Games Muslims Play:

Read this and learn how apologists work and the real truth about Islam. It is sourced with Islam's own words and the facts are undeniable.
Games Muslims Play

Given Islam's violent history and the unfavorable contrast that its oppressive practices have against 21st century values, Muslim evangelists are hard-pressed to repackage their faith in the modern age. Apologists have come to rely on tricks involving semantics and half-truths. This propaganda is, in turn, repeated verbatim by other unsuspecting (yet sincere) Muslims and well-meaning progressives outside the faith.

Here we try to expose some of these games, and help truth-seekers find their way through the maze of disingenuous and false claims about Islam and its history.

 

[protectionist]

The Quran is easy to read, and it contains not a single passage promoting hate or unnecessary violence.
It is a bit strict in my opinion, but clearly condemns any theft of murder.
And the proof is that Muslims are not the ones carving up the world into empires.
That is mostly the US now, and used to be Gt. Britain, France. and Spain at one time.

It is cover to cover hate and unnecessary violence (jihad). It advocates (if not commands) mass murder/genocide.

Rigby is aware of how pathetically ignorant many of the people in this thread are about Islam, and he is taking full advantage.

Muslims (ISIS) were carving up the world, and then along came Trump.

 

[irosie91]

Rigby ----feel free to ask questions-----you seem to me to be a muslim kid who
got his head filled with silly BS about islam and its history

 

[Pogo]

Mostly your characterization of the OP. You don't seem to know he's pulled this same malarkey before on this board, over and over, always with the same Special Pleading Fallacy, "oh it's not a violation of the First Amendment because... because... oh I know, Islam is not a religion. Yeah that's the ticket. Hyuk hyuk".

The First Amendment was literally the first building block of this country. If he doesn't know that, he doesn't know shit.

Oh and he sure as hell doesn't know any Muslims. Except he did know one, and came to this board confessing that he wanted to kiss her but wrestled himself to the ground and avoided the unclean so that he could keep his bigotry virginity intact.

There are people on this board who constantly pine for halving the nation along political fronts….

If the OP is worried about muslims wanting to destroy the nation, he would be well served to address those here first.

That they claim to be “americans” shows how little they know about America.

It is fascinating to watch the same people that talk about the 2nd Amendment all the time want to ignore most of the rest of them.

These people hate our Constitution and yet claim to love the country...despite the fact those two things are mutually exclusive

Republicans are the only ones who even pretend to give the Constitution lip service.

Try to pretend you have a 1st amendment in fucking Portland or Berkeley, I dare you.

Highlighting yet again how alike the wingers are...left wing or right wing...same damn bird.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No because in Republican controlled areas freedom of speech and every Constitutional amendment still exists.

You'll need to make that case to the OP, who claims Republicans --- that's ALL Republicans --- oppose that Constitution.

As already noted that Constitution was drawn up and ratified with zero Republicans. That's because they were all stuck at the Fort McHendry airport before Washington took them back from Cornwallis of Yorktown and the Very Fine People from a wonderful place in Germany. Believe me.

 

[protectionist]

Is that why YOU want to divide Americans based on religion, expressly against the U.S. Constitution?

I haven't said anything about religion, nor do I divide. I simply accept what is already divided (by the Constitution) > law abiding Americans, and criminal, supremacist Muslims.

 

[Lastamender]

There are people on this board who constantly pine for halving the nation along political fronts….

If the OP is worried about muslims wanting to destroy the nation, he would be well served to address those here first.

That they claim to be “americans” shows how little they know about America.

It is fascinating to watch the same people that talk about the 2nd Amendment all the time want to ignore most of the rest of them.

These people hate our Constitution and yet claim to love the country...despite the fact those two things are mutually exclusive

Republicans are the only ones who even pretend to give the Constitution lip service.

Try to pretend you have a 1st amendment in fucking Portland or Berkeley, I dare you.

Highlighting yet again how alike the wingers are...left wing or right wing...same damn bird.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

No because in Republican controlled areas freedom of speech and every Constitutional amendment still exists.

You'll need to make that case to the OP, who claims Republicans --- that's ALL Republicans --- oppose that Constitution.

As already noted that Constitution was drawn up and ratified with zero Republicans. That's because they were all stuck at the Fort McHendry airport before Washington took them back from Cornwallis of Yorktown and the Very Fine People from a wonderful place in Germany. Believe me.

Try staying on topic useful idiot. A job you half qualify for.

 

[protectionist]

You'll need to make that case to the OP, who claims Republicans --- that's ALL Republicans --- oppose that Constitution.

As already noted that Constitution was drawn up and ratified with zero Republicans. That's because they were all stuck at the Fort McHendry airport before Washington took them back from Cornwallis of Yorktown and the Very Fine People from a wonderful place in Germany. Believe me.

I didn't say that Republicans oppose the Constitution. They don't. But Democrats and their Muslim buddies do.

 

[protectionist]

If it were real, the signs would not likely be in English, would they?

They would, and are.

 

[Rigby5]

Or how about SAWING living human beings HEADS OFF? Ya... that's ISLAM... what a LOVELY bunch of EVIL, straight from the halls of HELL...

Wrong again.
but it says that the purpose of that is because an ax or heavy sword can do it the quickest and least painful.
Using a knife is totally against the Quran then.
So then this has to be ISIS, which is known for being the opposite of Islam.
ISIS is a fake organization created by the US, to try to make Muslims look bad.
Again, not a single Muslim cleric supports ISIS.

The Quran says that beheading is the only legal means of execution,

Let's see the verses that say that.

There are dozens, but all can be interpreted as one wishes.
So lets just go back to logic.
What is the quickest and most painless means of execution?
It is NOT the electric chair, (which ensures the most pain possible), or the gas chamber, (with slow suffocation). It is the guillotine. It is fastest and leaves the least sensory mechanism in place.
Clearly being merciful was the intent of the Quran.
And clearly ISIS is not Muslim, at all or in any way.

 

[Rigby5]

{...
Death and tomb
A few months after the farewell pilgrimage, Muhammad fell ill and suffered for several days with fever, head pain, and weakness. He died on Monday, 8 June 632, in Medina, at the age of 62 or 63, in the house of his wife Aisha.[187] With his head resting on Aisha's lap, he asked her to dispose of his last worldly goods (seven coins), then spoke his final words:

O Allah, to Ar-Rafiq Al-A'la (exalted friend, highest Friend or the uppermost, highest Friend in heaven).

...}
Muhammad - Wikipedia

humans did not die at the ate of 62 from NOTHING----he was never well again
after SAFIYAH poisoned him. I am well passed 62----not poisoned and doing fine

You claimed he raped someone at 62, and people did not live nearly as long back then.
There is no evidence anything you wrote is remotely true.
You are just making things up.
He did not invade Medina, but came back for a celebration.

wrong---he died at 62 ---that was a bit after he murdered Safiya's husband and
father and raped Safiya. You imagine that 62 year old "CONQUERING HEROS"
are unable to rape. That's funny. The life span of people has not changed----
if they die before about 75 -80 it is BY CAUSE ------not because of the date
on the calendar. Nothing I have written is just "made up" ----you are spitting
khutbah jumaat crap

You claim to have knowledge, but everything you write is totally contradicted by everyone else.
That means you either are making it up, or you have really, really bad sources that it is foolish for you to believe.
Just try doing a little research first, before posting garbage that wastes our time.

For example Safiyah was not a rape victim, but one of Mohammad's wives.

{...
Safiyyah bint Huyayy was one of the wives of the Islamic Prophet Muhammad.[1]She was, along with all other wives of Muhammad, titled Umm-ul-Mu'mineen or the "Mother of Believers".[2]

After Muhammad's death, she became involved in the power politics of the early Muslim community, and acquired substantial influence by the time of her death.
...}
Safiyya bint Huyayy - Wikipedia

Why do you use Wikipedia, you should be able to show us in Islamic text what you say. You do not know anything but the sugar coated bullshit apologists try to pass off as truth. Not going to work here.

I am just in a hurry and the Quran is way to large.
Its not like I read it often.
It is too strict for my tastes.
If I was going to pick a religion, it would likely be something like Buddhism.

 

[Rigby5]

2:191-194 Religion is for Allah..."
2:216-218 "Fighting is Ordained for You Though You Dislike It..."
2:244 "Fight in the Way of Allah..."
3:28, 5:51 "Take Not the Jews and Christians as Friends..."
3:56 "Disbelievers Will Be Punished in This World..."
3:151 "We Shall Cast Terror into the Hearts of Those Who Disbelieve..."
4:74 "Sell the Life of This World for the Hereafter..."
4:89 "If They Turn Away, Seize Them and Kill Them..."
4:95 "Not Equal are the Believers Who Sit at Home and Those Who Fight for Allah..."
4:104 "And Do Not Be Weak in Pursuit of the Enemy..."
5:33 "Those Who Do Mischief in the Land Shall be Killed or Crucified..."
8:12 "I will Cast Terror into the Hearts of Those who Disbelieve... Strike off Their Heads..."
8:39 "Fight Them Until There is No More Fitna and Religion Be Only for Allah..."
8:59-60 "Make Ready Against [the Disbelievers] All Steeds of War..."
9:5 "Slay the Idolaters Wherever You Find Them..."
9:29 "Fight Those Who Believe Not in Allah..."
9:30 "They Say 'Son of God', May Allah Destroy Them..."
9:38-42 "If You March Not Forth, He Will Punish You With a Painful Torment..."
9:73 (9:88, 9:11) "Strive Hard Against the Unbelievers and Hypocrites and Be Unyielding..."
9:123 "Fight Those of the Unbelievers Who are Near to You..."
18:65-81 "They Proceeded, Till They Met a Boy, Whom He Killed..."
47:4 "When You Meet Those Who Disbelieve, Smite Them at Their Necks..."
47:35 "Be Not Faint-Hearted, Crying for Peace When You Should Be Uppermost..."
61:4 "Surely Allah Loves Those Who Fight in His Way..."
61:9 "He Sent Muhammad to Make Islam Superior over All Other Religion..."
66:9 "Strive Hard Against the Disbelievers and Be Severe Against Them..."

All totally out of context.
Like the 9th Surrah that is often quoted.
The actual title for that one is Forgiveness and Redemption.
It ONLY talks about killing them AFTER they have broken treaties and tried to kill you twice.
Only then are you supposed to kill them where ever they try to hide.
The context always says that making peace is to be preferred.

 

[Lastamender]

Or how about SAWING living human beings HEADS OFF? Ya... that's ISLAM... what a LOVELY bunch of EVIL, straight from the halls of HELL...

Wrong again.
but it says that the purpose of that is because an ax or heavy sword can do it the quickest and least painful.
Using a knife is totally against the Quran then.
So then this has to be ISIS, which is known for being the opposite of Islam.
ISIS is a fake organization created by the US, to try to make Muslims look bad.
Again, not a single Muslim cleric supports ISIS.

The Quran says that beheading is the only legal means of execution,

Let's see the verses that say that.

There are dozens, but all can be interpreted as one wishes.
So lets just go back to logic.
What is the quickest and most painless means of execution?
It is NOT the electric chair, (which ensures the most pain possible), or the gas chamber, (with slow suffocation). It is the guillotine. It is fastest and leaves the least sensory mechanism in place.
Clearly being merciful was the intent of the Quran.
And clearly ISIS is not Muslim, at all or in any way.

I have posted truths about Islam. Which, if any, can you prove are wrong? Stop deflecting and deal with what Islam says not what you think it says. The Koran is to be taken literally, it says so itself. Now explain why the hate is not hate with Islamic sources, not Wikipedia. I do not think you know enough to handle that. Your posts prove it.

 

[Rigby5]

You are free to like or dislike anything you want, but all people deserve representation, including religions you do not like.
So you can't discriminate against anyone based on their religion.

But we (by the Constitution) discriminate against Muslims based on their looney supremacist ideology (masquerading as a religion)

There is a supremacist aspect to Islam that I do not like, but I also see that in ALL religions.
At least Islam specifically says that Christianity and Judaism are ok and equal paths to God.

 

[Lastamender]

2:191-194 Religion is for Allah..."
2:216-218 "Fighting is Ordained for You Though You Dislike It..."
2:244 "Fight in the Way of Allah..."
3:28, 5:51 "Take Not the Jews and Christians as Friends..."
3:56 "Disbelievers Will Be Punished in This World..."
3:151 "We Shall Cast Terror into the Hearts of Those Who Disbelieve..."
4:74 "Sell the Life of This World for the Hereafter..."
4:89 "If They Turn Away, Seize Them and Kill Them..."
4:95 "Not Equal are the Believers Who Sit at Home and Those Who Fight for Allah..."
4:104 "And Do Not Be Weak in Pursuit of the Enemy..."
5:33 "Those Who Do Mischief in the Land Shall be Killed or Crucified..."
8:12 "I will Cast Terror into the Hearts of Those who Disbelieve... Strike off Their Heads..."
8:39 "Fight Them Until There is No More Fitna and Religion Be Only for Allah..."
8:59-60 "Make Ready Against [the Disbelievers] All Steeds of War..."
9:5 "Slay the Idolaters Wherever You Find Them..."
9:29 "Fight Those Who Believe Not in Allah..."
9:30 "They Say 'Son of God', May Allah Destroy Them..."
9:38-42 "If You March Not Forth, He Will Punish You With a Painful Torment..."
9:73 (9:88, 9:11) "Strive Hard Against the Unbelievers and Hypocrites and Be Unyielding..."
9:123 "Fight Those of the Unbelievers Who are Near to You..."
18:65-81 "They Proceeded, Till They Met a Boy, Whom He Killed..."
47:4 "When You Meet Those Who Disbelieve, Smite Them at Their Necks..."
47:35 "Be Not Faint-Hearted, Crying for Peace When You Should Be Uppermost..."
61:4 "Surely Allah Loves Those Who Fight in His Way..."
61:9 "He Sent Muhammad to Make Islam Superior over All Other Religion..."
66:9 "Strive Hard Against the Disbelievers and Be Severe Against Them..."

All totally out of context.
Like the 9th Surrah that is often quoted.
The actual title for that one is Forgiveness and Redemption.
It ONLY talks about killing them AFTER they have broken treaties and tried to kill you twice.
Only then are you supposed to kill them where ever they try to hide.
The context always says that making peace is to be preferred.

All totally out of context.

The Koran has no context. It is contradictions, repetition, and babble. The Hadith brings the context to the Koran. And we see plenty of hate for non-Muslims as anyone would that reads it.