The not-so-veiled threat to non-Muslims in Tennessee

[Uncensored2008]

You've got absolutely no room to talk "lying" after equating me to the New York Times, putting words in my mouth about Bin Laden and the whole Khmer Rouge psychosis, junior.

You should huff less Sterno, seriously.

Quoting the ultra-left NY Times refuted your idiotic claim - that's how it works, stupid.

Your posts are doing nothing but making your allies look stupid. I'll ignore you; they can't.

You are a lying fool, Pogo. You have an agenda to promote the Islamic terrorists in your war against civil rights and Constitutional governance.

We have a thread on the stupidest statements by leftists; yours that "9/11 had nothing to do with religion" now goes to the top.

TM got nothing on you, fucktard.

Of course, you're not nearly as stupid as TM or Shallow, you're just lying through your fucking teeth.

 

[Pogo]

does 'Islamic jurisprudence' allow for criticism of Islam....?

Depends on the jurisprudential branch, or even on the personal individual beliefs of a Muslim.



They aren't always killed, or even imprisoned. Once again, it depends on the jurisprudential sets.

why are there honor killings....?

Because of traditional gender practices. Honor killings are in no way unique to Islamic territories. I had to deal with them all of the time in India, the DR Congo, Ghana, and southern Nigeria as well. They are cultural, not theological.

"it all depends" is your answer.....? wow that sure explains the killing hate that runs rampant through Islam throughout the world....

so in the meantime we are supposed to kowtow to 'hate crime' blasphemy laws here in America because "it all depends".....?

i'm sure you also supported the mosque over Ground Zero.....because "it all depends"....

Interesting you should mention Masjid al-Farah; I keep pointing out to the (other) ignornant bigots that Masjid al-Farah is a Sufi congregation, whereas the 9/11 gang, to the extent they practiced any Islam at all, were Wahabbists. And that Sufis have also been victimized by Wahabbi attacks. But nooooo, they'd rather preserve the comic book fantasy by lumping 'em all together as "Muslims" as if they're all the same ("they all look alike to me"). The equivalent of labeling a conglomeration of Laotians, Koreans, Burmese and Indonesians as "gooks".

Ah, you prolly don't even know what Masjid al-Farah is...

 

[Pogo]

when you can't oppose the facts you libs always attack the messengers...

That blog isn't composed of facts. It's composed of opinion.

DUH.

DUH....that's YOUR opinion....

You are correct sir. It is my opinion that you are dense for not seeing that.

 

[Pogo]

You've got absolutely no room to talk "lying" after equating me to the New York Times, putting words in my mouth about Bin Laden and the whole Khmer Rouge psychosis, junior.

You should huff less Sterno, seriously.

Quoting the ultra-left NY Times refuted your idiotic claim - that's how it works, stupid.

Your posts are doing nothing but making your allies look stupid. I'll ignore you; they can't.

You are a lying fool, Pogo. You have an agenda to promote the Islamic terrorists in your war against civil rights and Constitutional governance.

We have a thread on the stupidest statements by leftists; yours that "9/11 had nothing to do with religion" now goes to the top.

TM got nothing on you, fucktard.

Of course, you're not nearly as stupid as TM or Shallow, you're just lying through your fucking teeth.

Wow, it sure is a grumpy life being a bigot.

 

[Osomir]

"it all depends" is your answer.....?

Generally speaking yes. Because as i have already said: Islam is not a single entity. It isn't monolithic so when you ask generalized questions like that you are going to get generalized answers. Islam isn't like Catholicism. There is no Islamic Pope that tells Muslims what to think.

For the most part, Muslims are to decide for themselves what to believe, how to practice the Quran and, if they even decide to do so, interpret the Hadiths. Some Muslims will take direction from scholars, people who are considered well versed on the subjects, or from village elders, or tribal chiefs. This is where followings come into play (outside of some Shiite branches which have the historical Imams as guidance). Even then fatwas and the like are official opinions, Muslims do not have to follow them even if they are issued by the guy who they normally like to take direction from.

Also, when it comes to formulating hard lawsets, there is debate among pretty much everyone with an opinions, but outside of that there is also the issue of local custom which can and absolutely does get codified into religious lawsets along with everything else. It is called Urf, and that makes Islamic law sets very different from one region to the next, particularly withinb tribal societies IE Yemen, Mali, Pakistan, Somalia, etc.

So yes. It depends.

 

[Kondor3]

"...Guess I just don't have a taste for soap opera or living in Doctor Doom comics..."

Indeed. Neither do your opposites in these exchanges. We merely have different perceptions of reality with respect to the threat and incompatibility of Islam transplanted to The West.

"...But you're still bringing your preconceptions to a meeting you're afraid to watch for fear those preconceptions will have to be revised..."

No. Actually, I have browsed through a good 50% of the video, looking for substance, and have concluded that Popular Reaction is as I described it earlier. I am afraid of very few things other than intransigence and cowardice and appeasement and giving aid-and-comfort to the enemy and being seen as standing alongside a hostile alien belief-system rather than alongside my own people; least of all, some pi$$ant meeting saturated with propaganda.

"...Then tell me who's intimidating who."

Oh, I have no doubt that the Meeting Organizers and Propaganda Presenters found the local Popular Reaction to be intimidating.

Good.

That tells me that Survival Instinct and Common Sense are still alive-and-well amongst my fellow countrymen.

Those damned Infidels... ya just cant' get any respect outta them when vomiting-up propaganda on behalf of a foreign, alien, hostile political-religious belief-system...

 

[g5000]

i see you didn't answer my question....

when reformation happens let us know....

and also when you denounce your anti-American aspects of sharia...

No there is one Quran, but that isn't what most Islamic jurisprudence is based on. Your "argument" completely ignores how Islamic jurisprudence is formed and even what it is in the first place.

There is also no single Sharia code so your last statement doesn't make any sense.

does 'Islamic jurisprudence' allow for criticism of Islam....?

why are apostates killed....?

why are there honor killings....?

why was the world set on fire because somebody made a cartoon of Mohammed.....?

Why were crosses burned on lawns by Christians?

Why were there lynchings of negroes by Christians?

Why are Christians blowing shit up in Ireland?

Why are Christian leaders diddling little boys on a large scale? How come no one protests them when they want to build a new megachurch in their town? They must support pedophilia.


I guess Christianity is a shit religion, eh?



There are assholes in every religion, dipshit

 

[g5000]

We see the naked bigotry of the faux Right in full bloom these days. Spewing the exact same ignorant confirmation bias every racist and bigot the world over uses to justify their bigotry.

They don't even try to hide it any more.

Don your armbands, citizens! Flag pins are a suitable substitute. Heil Beck!

We must purify. Papers! Papers, please!

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wow. I must say that your understanding of Islam is, simply put, more than a little off. I work in international affairs, and I specialize in Africa. As such I am required to have a working understanding of religious principles from African religious sets including Islam.

And just about everything quoted above is 100% factually wrong.

Yawn.

Sunni and shiite is a pretty general dividing classification system. The word Shia literally means "follower of" and there used to be hundreds if not thousands of such groups depending on the scholar they followed.

And the first fabrication

The commonly-known term is shortened from the historical "Shia-t-Ali," or "the Party of Ali." The Shia are those who held that leadership must follow the bloodline from the Warlord Muhammad. They are the Muslims who followed Muhammad's son in law, Ali bin Abu Talib.

It had nothing to do with "what scholar they followed.

The Sunni were those who elected by the clergy, Abu Bakr to be Caliph. The Sunni hold that there is no line of succession.

Now it is fewer today, but say Houthis do no believe the same thing that Sufis do, or that Jafari Iranian Shiites do. That's not how it works. There are a lot of different schools of jurisprudence within Sunni Islam as well even besides the four main branches

And the next falsehood or misdirection.

Which of these deny or deviate from Shahada? (There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his Prophet.)


Which of these reject

Salat: Prayer

Zakāt: Alms

Sawm: Fasting

Hajj: Pilgrimage to Mecca

(Hanbalism, Hanafi Shafi and Maliki). Suggesting they are all the same shows only a very
surface level understanding of Islam.

Finally, Sunnis and Shiites tend to hold different hadith collections as cannon. In fact it is often a major contentious point between sub-groupings.

Utterly false.

"Canon" is not really an Islamic term, but I use it for clarity. It means "accepted as authoritative."

"Hadith" is similar to a gospel, it is the first hand account of Muhammad. The most trusted is Sahih al-Bukhari, compiled by the Persian scholar Mohamed al-Bukhari, a Shiite. Yet the Sunni hold the Sahih al-Bukhari as second only to the Koran.

Why? Because the divide between Sunni and Shia is more political than doctrinal - despite your claim.

Two other works are Canon, Sahih Muslim and Muwatta Imam Malik. All Muslims accept these Hadith.

Now the writings of Ahmad ibn Hanbal are not accepted by all, but they are neither Canon, nor Hadith.

In fact you either have to be brand new to Islam, or you have to be trolling in order to have made your post.

Oh, that must be it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wow, it sure is a grumpy life being a bigot.

Opposing terrorism is "bigotry."

Things we learn from the Bolsheviks....

 

[Pogo]

"...Guess I just don't have a taste for soap opera or living in Doctor Doom comics..."

Indeed. Neither do your opposites in these exchanges. We merely have different perceptions of reality with respect to the threat and incompatibility of Islam transplanted to The West.

"...But you're still bringing your preconceptions to a meeting you're afraid to watch for fear those preconceptions will have to be revised..."

No. Actually, I have browsed through a good 50% of the video, looking for substance, and have concluded that Popular Reaction is as I described it earlier. I am afraid of very few things other than intransigence and cowardice and appeasement and giving aid-and-comfort to the enemy and being seen as standing alongside a hostile alien belief-system rather than alongside my own people; least of all, some pi$$ant meeting saturated with propaganda.

"...Then tell me who's intimidating who."

Oh, I have no doubt that the Meeting Organizers and Propaganda Presenters found the local Popular Reaction to be intimidating.

Good.

That tells me that Survival Instinct and Common Sense are still alive-and-well amongst my fellow countrymen.

Those damned Infidels... ya just cant' get any respect outta them when vomiting-up propaganda on behalf of a foreign, alien, hostile political-religious belief-system...

Good for you; I believe you're the first to put a toe in the video-water, however reluctantly.

This part concerns me though:

I am afraid of very few things other than intransigence and cowardice and appeasement and giving aid-and-comfort to the enemy and being seen as standing alongside a hostile alien belief-system rather than alongside my own people; least of all, some pi$$ant meeting saturated with propaganda.

Are you saying that the followers of a particular religion are "the enemy"? A religion, as opposed to a political group, nation or fanatical subgroup? And how are we to define the word "alien"?

I'd also re-ask for time marks on some samples of this here "propaganda". You know, specifics.

TIA.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

"it all depends" is your answer.....?

Generally speaking yes. Because as i have already said: Islam is not a single entity. It isn't monolithic so when you ask generalized questions like that you are going to get generalized answers. Islam isn't like Catholicism. There is no Islamic Pope that tells Muslims what to think.

For the most part, Muslims are to decide for themselves what to believe, how to practice the Quran and, if they even decide to do so, interpret the Hadiths. Some Muslims will take direction from scholars, people who are considered well versed on the subjects, or from village elders, or tribal chiefs. This is where followings come into play (outside of some Shiite branches which have the historical Imams as guidance). Even then fatwas and the like are official opinions, Muslims do not have to follow them even if they are issued by the guy who they normally like to take direction from.

Also, when it comes to formulating hard lawsets, there is debate among pretty much everyone with an opinions, but outside of that there is also the issue of local custom which can and absolutely does get codified into religious lawsets along with everything else. It is called Urf, and that makes Islamic law sets very different from one region to the next, particularly withinb tribal societies IE Yemen, Mali, Pakistan, Somalia, etc.

So yes. It depends.

so then you wouldn't be opposed to banning sharia courts in America....or requiring Islamic immigrants from swearing against the anti-American parts of sharia before coming here....or requiring muslims already here to integrate better.....or shutting down and preventing the spread of those mosques or educational facilities funded by foreigners that continue to spread the anti-American version of Islam and which spawn terrorism...

 

[ScreamingEagle]

No there is one Quran, but that isn't what most Islamic jurisprudence is based on. Your "argument" completely ignores how Islamic jurisprudence is formed and even what it is in the first place.

There is also no single Sharia code so your last statement doesn't make any sense.

does 'Islamic jurisprudence' allow for criticism of Islam....?

why are apostates killed....?

why are there honor killings....?

why was the world set on fire because somebody made a cartoon of Mohammed.....?

Why were crosses burned on lawns by Christians?

Why were there lynchings of negroes by Christians?

Why are Christians blowing shit up in Ireland?

Why are Christian leaders diddling little boys on a large scale? How come no one protests them when they want to build a new megachurch in their town? They must support pedophilia.


I guess Christianity is a shit religion, eh?



There are assholes in every religion, dipshit

is that why you scream against Christians......? then why aren't you screaming against Muslims too.....?

 

[g5000]

does 'Islamic jurisprudence' allow for criticism of Islam....?

why are apostates killed....?

why are there honor killings....?

why was the world set on fire because somebody made a cartoon of Mohammed.....?

Why were crosses burned on lawns by Christians?

Why were there lynchings of negroes by Christians?

Why are Christians blowing shit up in Ireland?

Why are Christian leaders diddling little boys on a large scale? How come no one protests them when they want to build a new megachurch in their town? They must support pedophilia.


I guess Christianity is a shit religion, eh?



There are assholes in every religion, dipshit

is that why you scream against Christians......? then why aren't you screaming against Muslims too.....?

I don't scream against either. I am illustrating confirmation bias in a way that can penetrate your thick skulls.

I am a deeply religious person, which is one of the many reasons why I oppose this disgusting naked bigotry infecting the faux Right.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Why were crosses burned on lawns by Christians?

Why were there lynchings of negroes by Christians?

Why are Christians blowing shit up in Ireland?

Why are Christian leaders diddling little boys on a large scale? How come no one protests them when they want to build a new megachurch in their town? They must support pedophilia.


I guess Christianity is a shit religion, eh?



There are assholes in every religion, dipshit

is that why you scream against Christians......? then why aren't you screaming against Muslims too.....?

I don't scream against either. I am illustrating confirmation bias in a way that can penetrate your thick skulls.

I am a deeply religious person, which is one of the many reasons why I oppose this disgusting naked bigotry infecting the faux Right.

disgusting bigotry.....? excuse me but Muslim jihad is killing Christians......not the other way around....

 

[Kondor3]

"...Are you saying that the followers of a particular religion are 'the enemy'? A religion, as opposed to a political group, nation or fanatical subgroup?..."

Almost. Damned close. Getting there.

It's not hard to do, when you are dealing with a Political and Cultural and Legal and Militancy mechanism married to a particular set of Religious Dogma, unlike any other mainstream religion; one that is used time-and-again to radicalize and militarize and mobilize adherents worldwide when advancing The Faith or defending Co-Religionists or when stealthily penetrating other cultures until a tipping-point is reached (see: Europe).

I would invalidate the idea myself in a heartbeat, if Spirituality or Religion were the only aspect of this belief-system; however, given its high-profile, extant, and highly-operative worldly and secular aspects and behaviors, tucked-into its Religious aspects so closely so as to come close to defying identification, well, the idea takes on considerable traction.

Your mileage obviously varies, and that's fine - just don't be surprised when the majority of your countrymen see through the disguise and object strenuously to the worldly and secular aspects of the belief-system enjoying as much protection as the Spiritual.

Your countrymen are a little more intelligent and sophisticated and perceptive than you are giving them credit for, I fear, and your sales pitch really isn't being well-received in most quarters - a state of affairs for which I am profoundly grateful.

"...And how are we to define the word '"alien'?..."

Any belief system that originates from outside the European-Christian framework of Europe, the Americas, and most of Oceania, that forms the basis for our laws and culture and philosophy and worship and society.

There are relatively harmless 'alien' belief-systems like Hinduism and Buddhism and Confucianism and the like which do not seek to change their host society (The West) and which do not become obnoxious and insistent upon their my-way-or-the-highway viewpoint and which safely and happily integrate with Western secular society.

And then there is Islam, which is also an 'alien' belief-system, which does not meet those criteria, in the eyes of a great many.

"...I'd also re-ask for time marks on some samples of this here 'propaganda'. You know, specifics. TIA."

No. The simple act of pitching Islam to the community is, itself, an act of propagandizing, so feel free to pick any time(s), from the opening moments of the meeting to the closing moments, that you feel worthwhile. I won't be investing any more time in that myself.

 

[Pogo]

Why were crosses burned on lawns by Christians?

Why were there lynchings of negroes by Christians?

Why are Christians blowing shit up in Ireland?

Why are Christian leaders diddling little boys on a large scale? How come no one protests them when they want to build a new megachurch in their town? They must support pedophilia.


I guess Christianity is a shit religion, eh?



There are assholes in every religion, dipshit

is that why you scream against Christians......? then why aren't you screaming against Muslims too.....?

I don't scream against either. I am illustrating confirmation bias in a way that can penetrate your thick skulls.

I am a deeply religious person, which is one of the many reasons why I oppose this disgusting naked bigotry infecting the faux Right.

Confirmation bias

That's exactly why I keep bringing up the Roeders and Rudolphs. They want it both ways; when "we" do it it's some lone nut (publicly anyway) going against the Bible; when "they" do it it's intrinsic to, and even ordered by, the Quran.

Hypocritical inconsistency.

 

[Pogo]

"...Are you saying that the followers of a particular religion are 'the enemy'? A religion, as opposed to a political group, nation or fanatical subgroup?..."

Almost. Damned close. Getting there.

It's not hard to do, when you are dealing with a Political and Cultural and Legal and Militancy mechanism married to a particular set of Religious Dogma, unlike any other mainstream religion; one that is used time-and-again to radicalize and militarize and mobilize adherents worldwide when advancing The Faith or defending Co-Religionists or when stealthily penetrating other cultures until a tipping-point is reached (see: Europe).

I would invalidate the idea myself in a heartbeat, if Spirituality or Religion were the only aspect of this belief-system; however, given its high-profile, extant, and highly-operative worldly and secular aspects and behaviors, tucked-into its Religious aspects so closely so as to come close to defying identification, well, the idea takes on considerable traction.

Your mileage obviously varies, and that's fine - just don't be surprised when the majority of your countrymen see through the disguise and object strenuously to the worldly and secular aspects of the belief-system enjoying as much protection as the Spiritual.

Your countrymen are a little more intelligent and sophisticated and perceptive than you are giving them credit for, I fear.

"...And how are we to define the word '"alien'?..."

Any belief system that originates from outside the European-Christian framework of Europe, the Americas, and most of Oceania, that forms the basis for our laws and culture and philosophy and worship and society.

There are relatively harmless 'alien' belief-systems like Hinduism and Buddhism which do not seek to change their host society (The West) and which do not become obnoxious and insistent upon their my-way-or-the-highway viewpoint and which safely and happily integrate with Western secular society.

And then there is Islam, which is also an 'alien' belief-system, which does not meet those criteria, in the eyes of a great many.

"...I'd also re-ask for time marks on some samples of this here 'propaganda'. You know, specifics. TIA."

No. The simple act of pitching Islam to the community is, itself, an act of propagandizing, so feel free to pick any time(s), from the opening moments of the meeting to the closing moments, that you feel worthwhile. I won't be investing any more time in that myself.

So, 404 not found. We have more in common that we thought, because that's the same answer I came up with. We only differ on willingness to admit that it isn't there.

And thanks for the chuckle identifying Islam as a religion that "seeks to change its host society", while blissfully missing the exact same trait in Christianism. That's what I'm talkin' about. I'll never understand why it's so important to get fixated on a tree and miss the fact that you're standing in a forest.

Onward, Christian soldiers...♬

 

[ScreamingEagle]

is that why you scream against Christians......? then why aren't you screaming against Muslims too.....?

I don't scream against either. I am illustrating confirmation bias in a way that can penetrate your thick skulls.

I am a deeply religious person, which is one of the many reasons why I oppose this disgusting naked bigotry infecting the faux Right.

Confirmation bias

That's exactly why I keep bringing up the Roeders and Rudolphs. They want it both ways; when "we" do it it's some lone nut (publicly anyway) going against the Bible; when "they" do it it's intrinsic to, and even ordered by, the Quran.

Hypocritical inconsistency.

please point out the western country where large numbers of even non-violent fundamentalist Muslims have have successfully integrated....

the Muslim Brotherhood is alive and well in America and they are anti-American.....we need to rout them out...

 

[Osomir]

And the first fabrication

The commonly-known term is shortened from the historical "Shia-t-Ali," or "the Party of Ali." The Shia are those who held that leadership must follow the bloodline from the Warlord Muhammad. They are the Muslims who followed Muhammad's son in law, Ali bin Abu Talib.

It means followers of Ali and the Shia root means "follower of" as I stated. They didn't all follow Ali, not even when he was alive. In fact a large faction broke off from his followers when he decided not to do battle with Muawiya over the rightful line of succession.

There were a number of different groups and that diversity grew over time and as the minority branches chose different individuals to follow (that's why we have differences in say Ismaili Shiites and Jafari 12er shiites.

Simply put, you are grossly oversimplifying again, and if you know enough to know of the political divisions at the start of the Ummah's development then you should know enough to know that what you are pushing is way off.

And the next falsehood or misdirection.

Which of these deny or deviate from Shahada? (There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is his Prophet.)


Which of these reject

Salat: Prayer

Zakāt: Alms

Sawm: Fasting

Hajj: Pilgrimage to Mecca

None of those questions / assertions in any way counter what it is i said. There are different denominations within Sunni and shiite schools, I even named specific ones for you.

Utterly false.

"Canon" is not really an Islamic term, but I use it for clarity. It means "accepted as authoritative."

"Hadith" is similar to a gospel, it is the first hand account of Muhammad. The most trusted is Sahih al-Bukhari, compiled by the Persian scholar Mohamed al-Bukhari, a Shiite. Yet the Sunni hold the Sahih al-Bukhari as second only to the Koran.

Yeah, that's a neat copy and paste from wikipedia and all, but most Shiites don't consider Bukhari's collection to be authoritative. They tend not to give it the Sahih prefix. Hell not all Muslims even utilize hadith collections.

Two other works are Canon, Sahih Muslim and Muwatta Imam Malik. All Muslims accept these Hadith.

No they dont. that isn't even close to true.