The Common Denominator: Islam

[NYcarbineer]

...Persecuting everyone in a religion is what the Nazis did.

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

It will be up to the people of this country to determine what sort of middle-ground might be appropriate in the case of this newcomer threat-vector.

You've already stated your position. You want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Consitutional impediments to persecuting all Muslims.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How many Christians in this thread love their enemies and are willing to turn the other cheek?

So far I see the count is ZERO.

That means that either there are no Christians posting in this thread, or, there are Christians here who don't feel compelled to obey the teachings of their Lord and Saviour.

How is that possible?

How is it possible that Christians can ignore the Book and still be Christians, and yet,

Muslims, we are told, are bound in some way to be literal unequivocal followers of every word of the Koran?

Here's an idea, how about you people let some Muslims be Muslims the way you allow yourself to be a Christian, if that is what they choose?

 

[Redfish]

But 75% of them support terrorist acts in the name of islam.

What they support is violence in self-defense. As do you.

So all the people who have been killed due to islamic terrorism was just self defense?

Are 75% of Muslims committing acts of terror?

of course not, no one claimed they were.

You just did.

supporting and committing are not the same thing. You lied once again.

 

[Redfish]

See what I mean about hair-on-fire websites?

Michelle Malkin -- my there's a credible source. Especially since the poll she purports to mention goes to a Yahoo page
.--- which doesn't exist.

SMH

the link works just fine. maybe a computer 101 course is in your future.

 

[Redfish]

How many Christians in this thread love their enemies and are willing to turn the other cheek?

So far I see the count is ZERO.

That means that either there are no Christians posting in this thread, or, there are Christians here who don't feel compelled to obey the teachings of their Lord and Saviour.

How is that possible?

How is it possible that Christians can ignore the Book and still be Christians, and yet,

Muslims, we are told, are bound in some way to be literal unequivocal followers of every word of the Koran?

Here's an idea, how about you people let some Muslims be Muslims the way you allow yourself to be a Christian, if that is what they choose?

How about you turning your other cheek as they cut your head off. Show us how its done.

 

[Redfish]

How many Christians in this thread love their enemies and are willing to turn the other cheek?

So far I see the count is ZERO.

That means that either there are no Christians posting in this thread, or, there are Christians here who don't feel compelled to obey the teachings of their Lord and Saviour.

How is that possible?

How is it possible that Christians can ignore the Book and still be Christians, and yet,

Muslims, we are told, are bound in some way to be literal unequivocal followers of every word of the Koran?

Here's an idea, how about you people let some Muslims be Muslims the way you allow yourself to be a Christian, if that is what they choose?

No problem with that as long as they don't murder non-muslims, defile women, and preach hate to their young children.

What you don't understand about islam is that following the literal words of the koran is not optional. If Allah says it they must do it. They violate their religion if they dare to disagree with a single word. Why do you suppose that no muslim clerics have condemned the violence in the name of islam? Because they know that their lives would be over very quickly if they did.

 

[NYcarbineer]

What they support is violence in self-defense. As do you.

So all the people who have been killed due to islamic terrorism was just self defense?

Are 75% of Muslims committing acts of terror?

of course not, no one claimed they were.

You just did.

supporting and committing are not the same thing. You lied once again.

That makes no sense. What percent of all the Muslims on earth have committed an act of terror?

 

[Redfish]

So all the people who have been killed due to islamic terrorism was just self defense?

Are 75% of Muslims committing acts of terror?

of course not, no one claimed they were.

You just did.

supporting and committing are not the same thing. You lied once again.

That makes no sense. What percent of all the Muslims on earth have committed an act of terror?

its makes complete sense. 15% do it but 75-80% support it. The 10% who condemn it generally don't live very long.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[ Why do you suppose that no muslim clerics have condemned the violence in the name of islam? Because they know that their lives would be over very quickly if they did.

You really are so full of shit. You and PC make a good pair.

British Muslim Leaders condemn ISIS VIE International

 

[Kondor3]

...Persecuting everyone in a religion is what the Nazis did.

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

It will be up to the people of this country to determine what sort of middle-ground might be appropriate in the case of this newcomer threat-vector.

You've already stated your position. You want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Consitutional impediments to persecuting all Muslims.

I want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Constitutional impediments to monitoring and penetrating and censuring Islamic organizations which might prove necessary or appropriate to the safety and well-being of the country and its non-Muslim citizenry as Radical Islam grows in scope and momentum overseas and poses an increasing threat to us. Persecution is something quite different from that and is called Dhimmitude in some parts of the world.

Nice try at putting words into somebody else's mouth, though. Not. Epic fail, actually.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Are 75% of Muslims committing acts of terror?

of course not, no one claimed they were.

You just did.

supporting and committing are not the same thing. You lied once again.

That makes no sense. What percent of all the Muslims on earth have committed an act of terror?

its makes complete sense. 15% do it but 75-80% support it. The 10% who condemn it generally don't live very long.

300 million Muslims have committed an act of terror?

lol, could you list those?

 

[NYcarbineer]

How many Christians in this thread love their enemies and are willing to turn the other cheek?

So far I see the count is ZERO.

That means that either there are no Christians posting in this thread, or, there are Christians here who don't feel compelled to obey the teachings of their Lord and Saviour.

How is that possible?

How is it possible that Christians can ignore the Book and still be Christians, and yet,

Muslims, we are told, are bound in some way to be literal unequivocal followers of every word of the Koran?

Here's an idea, how about you people let some Muslims be Muslims the way you allow yourself to be a Christian, if that is what they choose?

How about you turning your other cheek as they cut your head off. Show us how its done.

I'd rather lead you into that kind of meltdown.

So Christians can ignore Christ and still be Christians. Very interesting.

How about you let Muslims ignore some of the Koran, and still be Muslims?

 

[NYcarbineer]

...Persecuting everyone in a religion is what the Nazis did.

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

It will be up to the people of this country to determine what sort of middle-ground might be appropriate in the case of this newcomer threat-vector.

You've already stated your position. You want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Consitutional impediments to persecuting all Muslims.

I want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Constitutional impediments to monitoring and penetrating and censuring Islamic organizations which might prove necessary or appropriate to the safety and well-being of the country and its non-Muslim citizenry as Radical Islam grows in scope and momentum overseas and poses an increasing threat to us. Persecution is something quite different from that and is called Dhimmitude in some parts of the world.

Nice try at putting words into somebody else's mouth, though. Not. Epic fail, actually.

So you wouldn't want to prevent mosques being built in the US, such as the so-called ground zero mosque?

 

[Kondor3]

...Persecuting everyone in a religion is what the Nazis did.

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

It will be up to the people of this country to determine what sort of middle-ground might be appropriate in the case of this newcomer threat-vector.

You've already stated your position. You want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Consitutional impediments to persecuting all Muslims.

I want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Constitutional impediments to monitoring and penetrating and censuring Islamic organizations which might prove necessary or appropriate to the safety and well-being of the country and its non-Muslim citizenry as Radical Islam grows in scope and momentum overseas and poses an increasing threat to us. Persecution is something quite different from that and is called Dhimmitude in some parts of the world.

Nice try at putting words into somebody else's mouth, though. Not. Epic fail, actually.

So you wouldn't want to prevent mosques being built in the US, such as the so-called ground zero mosque?

Never said anything about that one way or another.

 

[NYcarbineer]

...Persecuting everyone in a religion is what the Nazis did.

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

It will be up to the people of this country to determine what sort of middle-ground might be appropriate in the case of this newcomer threat-vector.

You've already stated your position. You want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Consitutional impediments to persecuting all Muslims.

I want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Constitutional impediments to monitoring and penetrating and censuring Islamic organizations which might prove necessary or appropriate to the safety and well-being of the country and its non-Muslim citizenry as Radical Islam grows in scope and momentum overseas and poses an increasing threat to us. Persecution is something quite different from that and is called Dhimmitude in some parts of the world.

Nice try at putting words into somebody else's mouth, though. Not. Epic fail, actually.

You said:

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

You made Islam the wooden horse, and the terrorists the threat inside, and then pointed out that the Trojans were defeated because either they didn't destroy the horse, or keep it out altogether.

So our mistake, to accurately translate your metaphor, is to not either destroy Islam, or keep it out of our country altogether, because of what might be inside the religion.

Don't then run away from what you said. Be a man...or whatever passes for a man in your world.

 

[Kondor3]

...Persecuting everyone in a religion is what the Nazis did.

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

It will be up to the people of this country to determine what sort of middle-ground might be appropriate in the case of this newcomer threat-vector.

You've already stated your position. You want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Consitutional impediments to persecuting all Muslims.

I want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Constitutional impediments to monitoring and penetrating and censuring Islamic organizations which might prove necessary or appropriate to the safety and well-being of the country and its non-Muslim citizenry as Radical Islam grows in scope and momentum overseas and poses an increasing threat to us. Persecution is something quite different from that and is called Dhimmitude in some parts of the world.

Nice try at putting words into somebody else's mouth, though. Not. Epic fail, actually.

You said:

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

You made Islam the wooden horse, and the terrorists the threat inside, and then pointed out that the Trojans were defeated because either they didn't destroy the horse, or keep it out altogether.

So our mistake, to accurately translate your metaphor, is to not either destroy Islam, or keep it out of our country altogether, because of what might be inside the religion.

Don't then run away from what you said. Be a man...or whatever passes for a man in your world.

Bait seen.

Bait rejected.

 

[NYcarbineer]

...Persecuting everyone in a religion is what the Nazis did.

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

It will be up to the people of this country to determine what sort of middle-ground might be appropriate in the case of this newcomer threat-vector.

You've already stated your position. You want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Consitutional impediments to persecuting all Muslims.

I want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Constitutional impediments to monitoring and penetrating and censuring Islamic organizations which might prove necessary or appropriate to the safety and well-being of the country and its non-Muslim citizenry as Radical Islam grows in scope and momentum overseas and poses an increasing threat to us. Persecution is something quite different from that and is called Dhimmitude in some parts of the world.

Nice try at putting words into somebody else's mouth, though. Not. Epic fail, actually.

So you wouldn't want to prevent mosques being built in the US, such as the so-called ground zero mosque?

Never said anything about that one way or another.

That wasn't the question. Do you support the right of Muslims to build mosques in America? Or are they the Trojan horses you were referring to?

 

[NYcarbineer]

...Persecuting everyone in a religion is what the Nazis did.

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

It will be up to the people of this country to determine what sort of middle-ground might be appropriate in the case of this newcomer threat-vector.

You've already stated your position. You want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Consitutional impediments to persecuting all Muslims.

I want to redefine Islam as something other than a religion so we can get around any Constitutional impediments to monitoring and penetrating and censuring Islamic organizations which might prove necessary or appropriate to the safety and well-being of the country and its non-Muslim citizenry as Radical Islam grows in scope and momentum overseas and poses an increasing threat to us. Persecution is something quite different from that and is called Dhimmitude in some parts of the world.

Nice try at putting words into somebody else's mouth, though. Not. Epic fail, actually.

You said:

Failing to recognize the nature of the wooden horse is what did the Trojans in.

You made Islam the wooden horse, and the terrorists the threat inside, and then pointed out that the Trojans were defeated because either they didn't destroy the horse, or keep it out altogether.

So our mistake, to accurately translate your metaphor, is to not either destroy Islam, or keep it out of our country altogether, because of what might be inside the religion.

Don't then run away from what you said. Be a man...or whatever passes for a man in your world.

Bait seen.

Bait rejected.

Did I misrepresent your metaphor? How?

 

[NYcarbineer]

of course not, no one claimed they were.

You just did.

supporting and committing are not the same thing. You lied once again.

That makes no sense. What percent of all the Muslims on earth have committed an act of terror?

its makes complete sense. 15% do it but 75-80% support it. The 10% who condemn it generally don't live very long.

300 million Muslims have committed an act of terror?

lol, could you list those?

It appears to be taking Redfish awhile to compile that list.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

As hard as it is to believe, the President of the United States...

This one:
Obama says the Islamic State 'is not Islamic.'

...

Sort of like saying the Westboro Baptist Church and the fun family Phelps are not Christian