Azzam Tamimi of the Institute of Islamic Political Thought in London is a frequent guest on talk shows, and he spreads the predictable soothing syrup about how most Muslims abhor violence, etc. But when he speaks to Muslim audiences, he sings a different tune. How different? Dan Sytman (thanks to LGF), cohost of "Sytman & Boze" on Seattle's Talk 770 KTTH radio, has put together an audio file showing exactly how different. Take a listen.
Yes, snakes are smooth talkers, their tongues perfumed by their poison....
Sigh, you expose him and now he will lose business. Soon he will be unemployed and drawing welfare. You have turned him from a working man to an “Asian youth” pissed off at the world and demanding we all submit.
Robert-
Do we have something similar with which to honor the slippery Ibrahim Hooper?
-XRDC
There's a shock, a muslim that speaks out of both sides of his mouth!
Let's hope that the lefty-liberal champagne socialists in the UK get to hear this! Maybe it would discourage them from marching beside this kind of scum........but I doubt it.
Birds of a feather....
Wow!
NPR is a unbelievable... not only them obviously but I mean I can see this same guy interviewing Hitler and asking him why he think England doesn't like his policies...
Taqiyya 101. This file should be saved for educational purposes.
His shrill, demented bleating at the rally was as annoying to listen to as his jihadist-fascist rhetoric was disturbing. Made me want to stuff a pork sausage down his throat to shut him up.
WildandCrazyGuy,
You can compile a list just as long about Christians. Its very easy to hate blindly, this is what Islamic extremists do and this is what you are doing.
Re: Duplicity from Azzam Tamimi
Hitler deliberately followed a tactic of "talk peace and prepare for war" in the 1930's. He fooled a lot of people in Britain with this tactic (except Winston Churchill). Azzam Tamimi is cut from the same cloth as Hitler. He's a fascist and the speech before Muslims sounds like a demented Nazi rally-complete with demented sieg heils. He should be deported from Britain and this played as he gets on the plane going back to Dar-al-Mental-Illness.
WildandCrazyGuy,You can compile a list just as long about Christians.Posted by: Moose
You can Moose? Why don't you do just that. I think all of us would like to see it. In the meantime, we'll all keep our eye out for Lutheran suicide bombers, Jewish jihadists, and Catholic hijackers.
Moose, why pick on Christians? Are you anti-Christian? Christians are not calling for jihad or threatening to take over the world or chopping heads off people if they don't convert! Christians may get upset when they hear the evil that Islam (a demonic false religion) is teaching and following, but they are not dong the evil that Islam is doing.
CHRISTIANS never did this. Remember, true Believers were also victims of the crusaders and were burnt at the stake many years because they would not 'convert'.
The Church is not an organization or building. It is the body of believers in Christ. Christ is the head of the Church. True Believers live according to His Word.
Find anywhere where Jesus told us to do the things that Islam is doing.
Please do not equate fundamentalist Islam with Bible-believing Christians.
Mind you i'm not anti-Christian in the least, but i'll indulge you Kojak.
Spanish inquisition (christians killing muslims and jews)
the sacking of constantinople (christians killing christians)
slavery
european colonialism
ww1
ww2-genocide of the jews by christians
cold war (between 2 superpowers that are traditionally christian)
If you want terrorism:
Bader meinhoff
red brigades
IRA
kkk
These were all events or movements perpetrated by Christians, not Muslims. .
However the point is that people commit crimes, not religions.
Despite what you may think, the majority of shooting wars muslims are engaged in are SECULAR wars, meaning it has nothing to do with spreading Islam but everything to do with nationalism. The difference is that in times of crisis, Muslims culturally turn to their religion for inspiration so this could be misconstrued a religious motivation.
Feeble try Moose.
Bader meinhoff
red brigades
IRA
kkk
None of these organizations were Christian. The first two were composed of Marxist atheists.
Moose you are totally unaware that the Jihadist killers of today always refer to the Koran to provide justifications for their mass murders. They always provide theological justifications for their heinous deeds.
Take Timothy McVeigh. Show me where he used the Bible to justify his actions. Show me where any person who was born Christian has referred to Bible or Christian doctrine to justify his murders.This simply does not happen today
Despite what you may think, the majority of shooting wars muslims are engaged in are SECULAR wars, meaning it has nothing to do with spreading Islam but everything to do with nationalism. The difference is that in times of crisis, Muslims culturally turn to their religion for inspiration so this could be misconstrued a religious motivation.
LOL
That is totally dumb. All Muslim wars are Jihads. They all are designed to terrorize, kill and subjugate the infidel. All of Mohamed's wars were Jihads and Muhammad engaged in at least 40 battles. Islam has being emulating this fiend ever since. Muhammad was a killer and pedophile. He is the model for all Muslims. They will tell you this. Why they seek to emulate a fiend is beyond me.
My advice is read some books about Islam.
Who is Azzam Tamimi? He runs some phony "Islamic Thought" group in London, supported by rich Arabs. He's a "Palestinian" Arab, not that that matters, and in an interview with Tim Sebastian, this supporter of Hamas -- this agent of Hamas --declared that he, Azzam Tamimi, would be happy to be a suicide bomber himself.
For years Azzam Tamimi has been offered up by the BBC as a Muslim voice, a voice of sweet reason. Perhaps they do not know his sinister leanings. More likely they do not care. Nor, one discovers, do others. He appeared yesterday, August 15, on NBC news, in a remarkably uninformative report on Muslims in London. Two years ago, Time Magazine saw fit to offer Azzam Tamimi a full page on which to offer taqiyya to the American audience, without identifying his Hamas connections.
Azzam Tamimi is also a sometime collaborator with John Esposito. That doesn't surprise you, now, does it? While Esposito has not yet called him his "ustadh" or "teacher" he has, even when Azzam Tamimi's Hamas connections were noted, his defense of terrorism was noted, his declaration to Tim Sebastian who was interviewing him for British television that he, Azzam Tamimi, would be happy himself to be a suicide bomber, never repudiated his association with Tamimi. Just think -- John Esposito, now running a separate "Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding" at Georgeotwn, the university run by the Jesuits, and bearing and therefore sullyiingt the Georgetown name (why can't Georgetown simply sever the tie? Don't want to give up whatever loot Esposito throws off to the university? Is that it? Any deep-pocked and deep-principled alumni of Georgetown care to tell that university what it thinks of having John Esposito, friend of Azzam Tamimi, continue to formally be linked to that university, and to use, and exploit, its name to further, by denying, by explaining away, by engaging in every sort of taqiyya himself, the Jihad against the entire non-Muslim world? John Esposito, former adviser on Islam, to the Clinton Administration, head of the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding that began with money from a rich Lebanese contractor, and which has been supported by Saudi money in more recent years, is a friend and supporter of the man whose voice, half-strangled with hysteria and hate, you can hear merely by clicking on the link above.
This is what things have come to. Time Magazine. The BBC. The Georgetown Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. All open to the likes of Azzam Tamimi. But when Robert Spencer gets ready to appear on CNN, that appearance is canceled. Or cancelled. Both are unacceptable.
Moose,
Yes, people commit crimes, and lots of different people throughout history have committed terrorism. But you ignore the issue of doctrinal support. To hypothesize that an ideology is a causal factor in a given action, you have to find justification for the actions in the doctrines. The New Testament (NT) does not give Christians permission to carry out terrorism or violent imperialism. BTW, I am no Christian apologist. I think there are significant problems in those NT scriptures. However, none of those problems involves using terrorism or violent imperialism to establish the religion.
In contrast, in Islam, The Koran, Sunnah, and all major schools of Islamic jurisprudence demand that Muslims carry out terrorism and violent imperialism wherever the establishment of sharia law is blocked. Most importantly, many Muslims today are following these directives and many, many more support those who are following those directives (supporting the jihadists is also mandatory according to the Islamic texts).
This is a common misconception. Muslims enagaged in shooting and other wars are all engaged in trying to set up Islamic governments, sharia law. The IRA is not interested in establishing medieval Catholic laws. Islam, though having a minor and superfluous religious element, is largely a secular and nationalistic enterprise. (Without political and military clout, it would simply die out in a few generations). To pretend that Islam is not political is simply to expect people to believe Mohammad's deception about hearing convenient "revelations" from "Allah". In fact, if Muslims merely treated Islam as a religion and kept it out of politics and law, and stopped trying to impose it on others, we would not be having this discussion and there would be no need for websites such as JW.
Re:
"european colonialism"
Nothing in the NT about colonialism. Lots in the Koran and Sunnah about colonialism, lots of Muslims throughout history following those commands.
"ww1"
What in the NT called for that?
"ww2-genocide of the jews by christians"
Nothing in the NT calls for that. Hitler had to depart from and otherwise distort the Christian texts considerably (e.g., he actually altered the text, added new parts and commandments, etc., tried to replace extant Christian religion with his "German faith", and so on. The Bible was written by Middle Eastern men, but Hitler considered them racially inferior. This is not to say that anti-Semitic sentiment in the NT, and in European culture historically, did not contribute to the atrocities, but that is a far cry from the direct commands for extermination of the Jews, for example, that are called for in Koran and Sunnah.
"cold war (between 2 superpowers that are traditionally christian)"
Nonsense. U.S. was predominantly Christian, but a secular society; Soviet Union was predominantly atheist (especially those actually in power and determining policy). The motivation for the Cold War had to do with the problems of basic survival, and social and political differences, not the spread of Christianity or the establishment of a theocracy. Islamic wars are primarily about establishing or re-establishing Islamic rule and Islamic laws.
More on Tamimi and Esposito from Martin Kramer:
"Thursday, September 26, 2002. Ask Professor Esposito. The fame of Professor John Esposito, director of Georgetown University's Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, rests upon his purported ability to sort Islamist extremists from Islamist moderates. Too often, he warns us, we wind up throwing all of the Islamists into one box. That's a mistake, and to avoid it, we need none other than Professor Esposito, with his finely honed sense of who is extreme and who isn't.
So I am puzzled. Professor Esposito has an academic partnership with one Azzam Tamimi, a Palestinian residing in London. They have co-edited a book. Tamimi has published another book in a series edited by Esposito (in the preface, Tamimi calls Esposito "my ustadh," my teacher). Tamimi also runs something called the Institute of Islamic Political Thought in London. Esposito sits on its board of advisors—the only American to do so. In short, this seems to be a close liaison. The problem is, Azzam Tamimi is Hamas.
This is no great secret. Palestinian political scientist Muhammad Muslih, in a study on the foreign policy of Hamas done for the Council on Foreign Relations, calls Tamimi "a Hamas member" (p. 18). Yes, he is an "academic" of sorts: he has a Ph.D. in political theory from the (ten-year-old) University of Westminster. And yes, he sometimes has interesting things to say about Islam and democracy. But would Professor Esposito have us believe that Tamimi is one of his Islamist "moderates"?
Consider, for example, an interview given by Tamimi to the Spanish daily La Vanguardia, issue of November 11, 2001. Headline: "I admire the Taliban; they are courageous." Tamimi begins by assuring the interviewer that "everyone" in the Arab world cheered upon seeing the Twin Towers fall. "Excuse me," says the interviewer, "did you understand my question?" Tamimi: "In the Arab and Muslim countries, everyone jumped for joy. That's what you asked me, isn't it?" The interview continues in this vein, to a point where Tamimi accuses the United States propping up all of the dictators in the Arab world. "They must be eliminated if anything is to change." Interviewer: "And how to eliminate them?" Tamimi: "The people of those countries should rebel, fight, sacrifice, spill blood. The French Revolution cost lives. The American revolution cost lives. Liberty is not given, it is taken!" Later, Tamimi gives his solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict: "The Israelis stole our houses, which are today occupied by Jews from Poland, Russia, Ukraine, Morocco, Ethiopia, Brooklyn. They should return to their homes, and give ours back to us!...That's non-negotiable. Therefore I support Hamas."
Want more? In March, Tamimi accused the United States of shutting down mosques; a spokesperson of the U.S. embassy in London replied that his accusations "don’t seem to be based on valid evidence or any evidence at all." Yet lo and behold, in May he turned up at a mosque in northern Virginia, where he gave an extreme lecture calling for the elimination of Israel (a Muslim press report described him as "visibly agitated"). In July, he was in South Africa, hammering at the same theme: "You do not share your home with a burglar and a thief; why wish this for the Palestinians? All of Palestine is for them." And those suicide bombers?
Do not call them suicide bombers, call them shuhada [martyrs] as they have not escaped the miseries of life. They gave their life. Life is sacred, but some things like truth and justice are more sacred than life. They are not desperate, they are hopefuls...[The Israelis] have guns, we have the human bomb. We love death, they love life.
Now I don't maintain that Tamimi is a terrorist or a material supporter of terrorism. I don't even suggest that the United States should keep him from his appointed rounds in this country. (He was on the program of a dubious "peace" conference convened last month at the University of Rhode Island.) Perhaps he comes and goes so freely as part of some brilliant State Department scheme to keep a line out to Hamas. But Tamimi should be recognized for what he is: an unabashed apologist for a listed terrorist group.
And this brings us back to Tamimi's liaison with Ustadh Esposito. After all, if Tamimi is some sort of "moderate"—and a candidate for close scholarly collaboration—then one wonders just where Professor Esposito would draw the line. My impression is that he has never met an Islamist he didn't like. And I am left puzzled at just what an Islamist would have to say to enter his bad books.
But Professor Esposito can always prove me wrong. For example, he might resign from the board of Tamimi's institute, in light of Tamimi's statements over the past year. I'd welcome such a move on this very weblog. For despite Professor Esposito's long record of error in interpreting Islamism, I haven't despaired of him yet."
WildandCrazyGuy,
You can compile a list just as long about Christians. Its very easy to blindly, this is what Islamic extremists do and this is what you are doing.
Interesting claim. I'm trying to recall which pope called for the extermination of Israel; or which Christian group it was that filmed the beheading of an unbeliever.
Funny thing, I just can recall that happening so I did a little reseach and didn't really turn up anything.
Lets see, was it the Catholics that hijacked the planes; no, no, it was the Baptists! No, that's not right either -- Moose, you're just going to have to enlighten me on this list of Christian atrocities in the name of religon, because I gotta plead ignorance on this one.
Maybe it was those non-denominationals; no, no, it was, uhhh -- let me see, it was ...
Moose,
In addition to the clear difference in scriptural commands between Jesus Christ and Mohammed (anyone with half a brain, who has read the New Testament "prescriptive" commands of Jesus Christ, with elaboration by the Apostles, compared with "prescriptive" commands of the Koran and Hadiths cannot fail to note):
Think: What major Christian denomination has not admitted and repented for actions like the inquisition, slavery, etc? Even the crusades, which lasted only 200 years (vs. over 1000 years of Jihad for about 100 times the landmass of the crusades) are condemned by virtually every major Christian group. These non-Christian actions were hundreds of years ago, and yet Christians still admit and repent.
Interestingly, Christianity was the element that ended the abuses within Christianity. Christian abolitionists, for example, forced the end of slavery. It didn't come from the outside.
Now, think about Islam. Where do we see any kind of admission and repentance for over 1000 years of Jihad? Where do we see repentance for over 1000 years of dhimmitude? Where do we see repentance for over 1000 years of Islamic slavery (much worse than Western slavery)? Saudi Arabia didn't outlaw slavery until 1962, and that was only under outside pressure.
I could go on and on. The point is that Christians admit to being sinners in need of repentance. Islam teaches that Muslims are born good and evil only comes from the non-Muslim world. Islam has never been responsible for all the violence and slavery and dhimmitude and terror throughout history. Just ask Muslims. There is nothing in which to repent. Islam is all about the "Golden Age" of Islam. No repentance, no admission of fault. No nothing. Infidels deserved what they got.
Another prime difference: Christianity is about forgiveness and leaving the past behind. Christ brought the message the all sins could be forgiven and all humans were within hope of salvation. Islam is all about revenge and the past. Getting even. This justifies all the violence we see in the world. Muslims live like the crusades were yesterday and not 800 years ago. This is why YOU are most certainly a Muslim. Only a Muslim would bring up the crusades.
What matters is TODAY!!!!!!! Christians are not killing people around the world. Christians in Africa and the Muslim world have more reason to commit terror, if the justification is what Muslims use (oppression, poverty, etc.). AT LEAST GIVE CREDIT WHERE CREDIT IS DUE. CHRISTIANS HAVE SHOWN THE TRUE TEACHINGS OF JESUS CHRIST IN RECENT YEARS WHILE MUSLIMS ARE FOLLOWING MOHAMMED'S VIOLENT COMMANDS. LET'S QUIT USING 500+ YEAR OLD EXAMPLES. I'M WILLING TO FORGET JIHAD FROM 500 YEARS AGO IF MUSLIMS WOULD QUIT KILLING EVERYONE NOW!!!!
I'M WILLING TO FORGET JIHAD FROM 500 YEARS AGO IF MUSLIMS WOULD QUIT KILLING EVERYONE NOW!!!!
Posted by: hello123
When you dream my friend at least you dream big.
Tamimi provides a perfect, if not downright SPECTACULAR, example of what I have often said in earlier posts: IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO BELIEVE MUSLIMS WHO CLAIM THAT VIOLENCE IN THE NAME OF ISLAM AND AL-LAH IS WRONG.
Here, on the one hand, we see an example of a Muslim who takes a stand denouncing Islamic terrorism and violence in public where the western democracies and their leaders and media (read: Cindy Sheehan and company) can see him, and then takes ANOTHER ENTIRELY DIFFERENT (read: 180 degrees turnaround)PLATFORM where his fellow Muslims are present to listen ADVOCATING MAXIMUM MASS MURDER AND MAYHEM IN THE NAME OF AL-LAH. Notice his Muslim audience members are all on the same frequency level: "let's go out and kill unbelievers!"
Allah, in the "Glorious Kuran", commands and demands violence and deceit of his followers. And Tamimi is fully obedient to al-lah as we can see all too well. He is a good Muslim, good mass murderer, and superlative liar!!!! Just what al-lah wants from Muslims!
The moral of the story is: Never listen to anything a Muslim says. Never! and I mean NEVER!!!!
WIth Islam, it is the KILLING THAT IS THE RELIGION. Nothing else really matters.
You are the infidel. You are targeted for murder, America.
DELIVER US ALL FROM ISLAM AND ITS EVIL, MURDEROUS MINIONS AND BOGUS MESSIAHS!!!!
Both unacceptable, I suppose that when I contact all of my friends that have come through Georgetown's elite alumni. There might be a proverbial backlash. Funny how this knowledge thing keeps rolling. Get the word out! The tenets of localism tie in deeply to founded collegiate accquaintances. America realy is not that large, we hold a tight ship.
To Archimedes: I just had the pleasure of reading your thoughtful and interesting post above. On another subject, permit me to ask whether you ever tried to confirm and better ground the numbers and pattern shown in the following article? The article was written by one Omar Malomaari, whom I know. You pointed out there is no need to choose a grouping method for the countries Omar discusses, and that a software program could be used to measure the inverse correlation shown. If you could either point me to a source from which I could simply learn how to do that (non-grouping procedure), or else if you could do the non-grouping test yourself, I'd be very grateful. If there is indeed a strong inverse correlation, as initially appears to be the case, this could be a strong argument for immigration restrictions on Islam, and could be the basis of an internet petition that could be made convenient for anyone to send to his representatives in Congress. -- Traeh
Article by Omar Malomaari
Immigration Advisory
In this post I expand my last one, and take Freedom House rankings of civil liberties/political rights in every country in the world, and correlate those rankings with the percentage of a country's population that is Muslim. (Recall that the best possible Freedom House ranking is "1" for civil liberties and "1" for political rights, for a total score of "2". Costa Rica, Germany, Taiwan, the U.S. and Canada are examples of nations that earned a "2" ranking. The worst possible ranking is 7 for civil liberties and 7 for political rights, for a total of 14. Saudi Arabia and Syria are examples of countries ranked "14".)
For 2005, here is the inverse relation I found between Muslim population percentages and civil liberties/political rights:
23 nations in the world had populations that were 91%-100% Muslim. These nations earned an average Freedom House ranking of 10.4 for civil liberties and political rights.
13 nations had populations that were 71-90% Muslim. These nations earned an average Freedom House ranking of 9.6.
8 nations had populations that were 51-70% Muslim. These nations earned an average ranking of 9.3
14 nations had populations that were 20-50% Muslim. These nations earned an average ranking of 8.4.
The world's remaining 130 or so nations had populations that were 0% to 19% Muslim, and earned an average Freedom House ranking of 5.1.
So the 2005 period covered by the 2006 Freedom House report shows that the lower the percentage of Muslims in a country, the better off that country tended to be in terms of civil liberties/political rights.
As I mentioned in my last post, there are a few exceptions to that overall pattern, like Mali. Mali is 90% Muslim, but was given a "4" ranking, which is sufficiently good to put Mali in Freedom House's "free country" category.
Talk of who makes money. Talk of who has clout, and follow the money. Talk of education, follow money. Talk of terrorism, follow money. Keep an eye on who cashes the bucks, and you either find a charitable organization funding Islam, or a non charitable organization funding Islam.
Speaking of snakes, I was once told of a story that went like such, A woman saw a hawk predate on a snake, the snake bit the hawk and the hawk let it go. The snake fell to the ground and the woman, being kind in nature, consulted the snake. Fed the snake, nurtured the snake, and gave it strength. The snake, when fully healed from the hawkish bite, gained strength and bit the woman that had fed it. The woman asked, Why would you bite me? I helped you in times of hardship? The snake said to the woman, look Bitch, you knew I was a snake! Nuff Said.
Speaking of snakes, I was once told of a story that went like such, A woman saw a hawk predate on a snake, the snake bit the hawk and the hawk let it go. The snake fell to the ground and the woman, being kind in nature, consulted the snake. Fed the snake, nurtured the snake, and gave it strength. The snake, when fully healed from the hawkish bite, gained strength and bit the woman that had fed it. The woman asked, Why would you bite me? I helped you in times of hardship? The snake said to the woman, look Bitch, you knew I was a snake! Nuff Said.
With regard to a previous dispute about deleting posts that contain vulgarities. People, think. R.S. is identified in the media with this site. It would be bad PR to have a visitor who heard about this site on, say, CNN to stumble upon things like 'raghead', 'cameljockey', etc.
witness: No you can't. And historical analyses will prove that. islam has nurdered many times the number of people kiled by Christianity.
And the reaason Christianity has killed far less people than has Islam is that killing VIOLATES Christian principles. Christianity is derived from the sam e wellspring as Judaism, and shares the 10 Commandments which include 'THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT MURDER."
Those Christians who killed in the name of Jesus by their own doctrine openly violated this commandment and faced judgment at the hands of their deity--that is if they believed in Jehovah. If they diidn't believe in Jehovah then they weren't Christians, were thye? if they weren't Christians then you can't blame Christianity can you?
In Islam, there are such Kuranic verse as "and whent he sacred months have passed, slaughter the nonbelievers everywhere they are found, besiege them, capture them , torture them...."
In other words, Islam not only permits murder but INSTIUTINNALIZES MURDER> CHristianity outlaws it by dint of the 10 COmmandments.
Let's get real and get our facts right.
Or they could read about the truth of Islam, Shock and awe equates to none of Jihad Watcher's interpretations. The odd thing about this site, is that all of us have attacked it on a daily basis trying to railroad what it and Hugh and Robert have to say. Yet none of us, or you, can deliberate an antidote to truth. Such aforementioned pioneers on the Koran and Arabic texts, can only be negated by said actualization of said texts. Until you can translate Aramic, or Arabic, and understand the meaning which it entails, you should consult a local Imam to contradict any verses that deem Islam as Peaceful, which means peace can only be, when Islam rules the world, and or when you convert, submit to second class citizenship, which means a equivalency of slave or women, which women are circumscized without anaesthetics at ages well beyond puberty. Or die, now tell me of this peace you speak of.
OT
Dhimmi Carter on the war between Israel and hezbo
http://service.spiegel.de/cache/international/spiegel/0,1518,431793,00.html
/he gives me a headache
Here ya go, Moose
http://www.coranix.com/beastycult.htm
Carolyn: The Tamil Tigers are also very good at suicide bombing. And they're not muslim.
george_rem
The Tamil Tigers, and almost all Tamil separatist groups were not Muslim terrorists, but they were Leftists. Their support came from, among other places, Libya, and from India itself, only one state - Tamil Nadu - supported this movement prior to 1991 (This ended after the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi by the LTTE). It was purely an ethnic separatist movement, dedicated to a Tamil homeland, but while their campaign had a strong linguistic fervor, one thing it definitely wasn't was a Hindu movement, or else, Hindu organizations in India and elsewhere would also have supported it. They didn't.
In contrast, al Qaeda, Hamas, Hizbullah, al Aqsa, Lashkar e Toiba, Jemiah Islamiah, et al. all commit their acts in the name of Islam. And there isn't a credible Islamic movement that rebuts it.
Apples and pineapples.
Moose, you said...You can compile a list just as long about Christians. Its very easy to hate blindly, this is what Islamic extremists do and this is what you are doing.
Religious people have indeed done some stupid things in history, along with the many wonderful things that they have done like education, welfare, health, etc etc,,, however we are here and now,, who cares about the mistakes in history of any religious group, this horror is here now and is part of this religion where as distruction is not part of the bible, Jesus did NOT tell his people to go out and slaugher like mohammad did, Jesus said to love his enemies, and most other religions do also, he did NOT tell his people to take the world by force like Mohammad did,, "Slaughter all those who will not submitt", Jesus did not tell anyone to raid caravans and take slaves, Jesus said that all men are free... So Moose you can live in the mistakes that religious people made over time, but I prefer to stop these animals now before they take and rape my little girls..
Moose, I think you are either a Muslim or are deluded,,, many of the fights against Muslims were to stop Muslims taking their land from them...
Koran 8:12 “I shall terrorize the infidels. So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle.”
Koran 8:67 “It is not fitting for any prophet to have prisoners until he has made a great slaughtered in the land.”
Tabari IX:69 “He who believes in Allah and His Messenger has protected his life and possessions from us. As for those who disbelieve, we will fight them forever in the Cause of Allah. Killing them is a small matter to us.”
Bukhari:V5B59N516 “When Allah’s Apostle fought or raided people we raised our voices saying, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Allahu-Akbar! None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’”
Ishaq:285 “Then the Apostle went raiding in the month of Rabi u’l-Awwal making for the Quraysh. Then he raided the Quraysh by way of Dinar.” Tabari
Koran 33:26 “Allah made the Jews leave their homes by terrorizing them so that you killed some and made many captive. And He made you inherit their lands, their homes, and their wealth. He gave you a country you had not traversed before.”
Koran 59:2 “It was Allah who drove the [Jewish] People of the Book from their homes and into exile. They refused to believe and imagined that their strongholds would protect them against Allah. But Allah came at them from where they did not suspect, and filled their hearts with terror. Their homes were destroyed. So learn a lesson, O men who have eyes. This is My warning…they shall taste the torment of Fire.”
Ishaq:286 “Meanwhile the Apostle sent Sa’d on the raid of Abu Waqqas. The Prophet only stayed a few nights in Medina before raiding Ushayra and then Kurz.”
Bukhari:V5B59N569 “I fought in seven Ghazwat battles along with the Prophet and fought in nine Maghazi raids in armies dispatched by the Prophet.”
Ishaq:289 “Our lances drank of Amr’s blood and lit the flame of war.”
Tabari VII:20/Ishaq:287 “Abd Allah told his Companions, ‘A fifth of the booty we have taken belongs to the Apostle.’ This was before Allah made surrendering a fifth of the booty taken a requirement.”
Ishaq:288 “Allah divided the booty stolen from the first caravan after he made spoils permissible. He gave four-fifths to those He had allowed to take it and one-fifth to His Apostle.”
Tabari VIII:116/Ishaq:511 “So Muhammad began seizing their herds and their property bit by bit. He conquered home by home. The Messenger took some people captive, including Safiyah and her two cousins. The Prophet chose Safiyah for himself.” (and no one stopped them then and no one is stopping them now)
Bukhari:V5B59N512 “The Prophet had their men killed, their children and woman taken captive.”
BEF,
"There's a shock, a muslim that speaks out of both sides of his mouth".
Not out of "mouth" but out of both sides of the opposite orifices.
Incredible! But then the “Danish” cartoons shown to Muslims were not the actual cartoons but really offensive forgeries and the British Press hardly mentioned that.
Can someone with the necessary computer skills see this is passed to the all the British Media?
Just so they cannot say they do not know.
Moose? More like goose and another feeble individual thinking this WW is christian vs muslim. Go find out what a despot mohammad was for starters and keep in mind that this rock spider is considered a perfect model for muslims to emulate...
As a general rule any Muslim who publicly deprecates 'modernity' is (almost certainly) an Islamist. Here's Tamimi on the Japanese. They are missing something, he seems to suggest, but what? What could possibly be the cure for their demographic woes...?
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/azzam_tamimi/2006/03/japan_a_nation_with_an_overdos.html
The main Londinistan "sheikhs" are:
Azzam Tamimi
Omar Mahmoud Othman a.k.a. Abu Qatada
Saad Rashed Mohammad al-Faqih a.k.a. Abu Othman
Mustafa Kamel Mustafa a.k.a. Abu Hamza al-Masri (serving a 7-year sentence)
Abdulmunim Mustafa Halimah a.k.a. Abu Basir (or Baseer) at-Tartusi
Hani al-Said al-Siba'i Yusuf a.k.a. Hani al-Siba'i
Yasser Al-Siri, an affiliate of
Muhammad al-Massari, a former bin Ladin employee, and a Qaeda wannabe
Abubaker Deghayes, in Brighton
Several of these people pose as academics in Islamic "research" organizations. Several operate websites. All are hungry for publicity. Most are refugees who would be executed if the UK excreted them back to their Muslim countries of origin.
Rowan,
You used a word I haven't heard to articulate a condition that furthers denial and promotes a sickening co-dependent dynamic: "enable".
Yes. A very appropriate definition of the non-muslim response in countries "new" to Islamic Facism.
Our culture has been careening down a path of co-dependent behavior for at least 3 or 4 generations...or more.
We have developed a very deep ability to deny what is right before us in order to survive in many family situations. Since we have this unfortunate skill honed to a fine point, it would follow that we would employ this co-dependent reaction to handle other threatening issues. This observation is brilliant. It is so engrained in the culture of US and Europe that it is not addressed as part of the myopic naivite we are seeing in the impotent responses of the western governments against the Islamic Facist world movement now underway more than ever.
Let us not abdicate our ability to stay alert, and call a pig a pig.
Folks,
Just heard the Quicktime audio recording and I thought I was transfered back to the days of Adolph Hitler and Nazi Germany.
Moose,
The truth is that the Christian faith did and still do so much GOOD then bad. That list is even longer. Accept it as a gentle correction.
Another prime difference: Christianity is about forgiveness and leaving the past behind. Christ brought the message the all sins could be forgiven and all humans were within hope of salvation. Islam is all about revenge and the past. Getting even. This justifies all the violence we see in the world. Muslims live like the crusades were yesterday and not 800 years ago. This is why YOU are most certainly a Muslim. Only a Muslim would bring up the crusades.
What matters is TODAY!!!!!!! Christians are not killing people around the world.
=================
This is exactly right. When you compare Christianity and Islam, you must do so in the same time period. Otherwise, it is comparing apples and oranges.
This debate reminds me of what I heard on TV yesterday. A group of muslim young men gathered around a camera crew and they told the interviewer, "We are not Christians, we do not turn the other cheek!" In other words, it never ends. They will have their revenge, and it is never enough.
Christianity has had its share of mass-murders in its time. The Spanish/Catholic conquest of South America. The Incas and other indigineous belief systems, language and culture, along with hundreds of thousands of innocent lives - all wiped out in a crazy mission to spread Catholicism. They succeded and today all of South America's indigineous and native culture/language/traditions are lost. Same goes for English/Protestant conquest of North America and the Native Americans. Colonialism was always accompanied by a true desire to "spread" the Christian faith which was one of the main reasons (apart from wealth) that sailors reached out to new worlds. In those days, there were little more than sailors/soldiers and missionaries on the ships. In Africa and Asia of 2006, poor communities are bribed (with food and basic necessities) to convert to Christianity by so called missionaries. KKK bases its "philosophy" on hard core Christian beliefs. Slavery was common to Christianity and Islam.
We need not go over Islam's bloody past as it is well documented on this site and others (www.faithfreedom.org etc).
My point being that one evil (Islam's bloody past and present) cannot cancel out another (Christianity's bloody past).
45 years ago in England the 19-year-old leader of a gang kicked another quite innocent young man to death, a very unusual event at the time. As the eldest he was tried and hanged and there was not the slightest campaign to get the sentence commuted. Today that would be unthinkable and he would probably get 5 years for second-degree homicide. My point? That is how far ideas have moved in just 45 years so how can you make objective judgements about things done centuries ago?
There were Christians who fought against excesses such as the Jesuits who built forts to protect their converts from “Christian” slavers. Yes orthodox Christians defended black slavery, but non-conformist Christians (Methodists, Baptists, Quakers etc.) fought against it and ended it. Almost all Christians look back on their misdeeds with embarrassment and shame and have no desire to repeat them. They do not see them as a guide for their actions today.
Whatever their faults the Christian Churches took on the job of trying to make men and women less greedy, vicious and stupid than they naturally are. Given the near impossibility of the task the have not done too badly.