• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Woman Profiled on 9/11

I'm sorry, but both of these statements are false. Who is telling you this stuff?
No, both statements are correct and if you'll do a little reading of the Koran, Hadith and Sira you'll find the same.
Maybe there are some morons out there who DO interpret their religion like that but by and large this is ridiculous. Muslims are NOT mindless robots who sit there feverishly wringing their hands waiting for the time when they get to conquest the earth... most are worried about paying bills, putting food on the table, just like you and me. geez
If you'd read my post you would have seen that we're on the same page on that point. There are many muslims who have no interest in Jihad, but their books command it and in recent times, notably the rise of the ayatolla Kohmeini, have been receiving ever more instruction into the conquest related elements in said books.
 
No, both statements are correct and if you'll do a little reading of the Koran, Hadith and Sira you'll find the same.

Koran and Muslim relatives yes, Hadith and Sira no. I've read the passages and context of those who claim their war on western society is justified, and it looked a lot to me like they're making quite a stretch. And that's about as far as I'll go on this one...
 
No, both statements are correct and if you'll do a little reading of the Koran, Hadith and Sira you'll find the same.
If you'd read my post you would have seen that we're on the same page on that point. There are many muslims who have no interest in Jihad, but their books command it and in recent times, notably the rise of the ayatolla Kohmeini, have been receiving ever more instruction into the conquest related elements in said books.

OK, let's say then that for the sake of argument, that the Koran does nothing except demand conquest (I've never read it cover to cover so I don't know that it does or doesn't), BUT in any case - so what?
 
I've read the passages and context of those who claim their war on western society is justified, and it looked a lot to me like they're making quite a stretch.
If you understood how the importance of text is determined you'd see that it's no stretch whatsoever, not to mention that the only time in which peaceful portions were written was during the period before military supremacy was established. Once military conquest became a reality, both it and the focus on how to treat non-muslims became the main thrust.
OK, let's say then that for the sake of argument, that the Koran does nothing except demand conquest (I've never read it cover to cover so I don't know that it does or doesn't), BUT in any case - so what?
Okay, let's take the bait. If that's the case, then you'd better get ready, because even if you pay attention only to recent history, it's evident what direction in which things are headed.

There are a great many muslims who want nothing to do with war, but the ones who do are very serious, and if we're not equally serious then our childrens futures will suffer badly for it.
 
Okay, let's take the bait. If that's the case, then you'd better get ready, because even if you pay attention only to recent history, it's evident what direction in which things are headed.

There are a great many muslims who want nothing to do with war, but the ones who do are very serious, and if we're not equally serious then our childrens futures will suffer badly for it.

Well, with "recent history". I think you're kind of off on a tangent. "Recent history", has a lot to do with a lot of things - cultural issues, socio-economic issues, bad political moves. Look at what's going on in the world - Africa, Asia, the Middle East...what the Koran does or does not say is a tiny, puny, almost insignificant part of what's going on in the world and why.
 
Islam does not believe in separation of Church and State

Neither do a large percentage of various religious sects in the United States - Evangelical Protestants (who dominate state and local governments all throughout the South), conservative Catholics, Mormons (who absolutely dominate Utah and have strong influence in nearby states), Ultra-Orthodox Jews

Given that the above are far more numerous (and can exert much more real-life power) than "Islamics" in the US, I would submit that they are far more dangerous to the Nation than your bogeyman du-jour since all of those 'homegrown' groups agree that their own Scripture absolutely supersedes the Laws of Man up to and including the Constitution of the United States
 
I thought this guy was Amish, just sans beard...

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSbXezDoXK_UE6THnDreCXmWD0sGqnfeJ8DdbBORiOWz3YcnMLEU84ehsE-.jpg
 
Well, with "recent history". I think you're kind of off on a tangent.
Not a tangent at all and it's interesting to note that the biggest defenders of islam are those who have done no research, finding one of two choices of public consensus to be good enough for them.

History having gone out of vogue is replaced by the laughing of fools who would have you believe that educated concern is equivalent to paranoia.
 

Latest posts