The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > If you can't stand the missionary heat, you should get out of Abraham's spiritual kitchen > Comments

If you can't stand the missionary heat, you should get out of Abraham's spiritual kitchen : Comments

By Irfan Yusuf, published 21/9/2006

If Muslims become defensive or even hint at violence, they will be personifying and confirming the Pope's claims.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
A gracious response Irfan - may be the pope could learn a lesson.

This may amuse (and it shouldn't offend Muslim sensibilities).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1879703,00.html
Posted by K£vin, Monday, 25 September 2006 1:54:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Irfan. finally you have the terminology correct 'Islam haters'

We have moved on from 'Muslim haters'.

KHAIBAR.
http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Muir/Life4/chap21.htm

Amrozi yelled "Jews...remember Khaibar"! he said... So, what we might ask was 'Khaibar' about ?

It was a final and wealthy refuge of the Jews in Arabia.

Muir reports that Mohammed wanted the place and the treasure, so he invented an excuse "Angel Gabriel told me they want to attack us" and attacked them first by surprise.

In summary, the following happened.

1/ Forts were destroyed
2/ Kinana, a Jewish chief of the main citadel, was TORTURED with unspeakable horrors by Mohamed to reveal the location of the treasure.
3/ After finally killing him, (decapitation) and with his headless corpse still laying on the blood soaked ground, his bride was located and deliberatey brought past her husbands remains, and Mohamed decided he would MARRY her. (her beauty was widely known even in Mecca)
4/ This 'marraige' took place well before the lawful period of 4months and 10 days, thus Mohamed contravened his own 'revelations' for the sake of lust. I find no godliness in him whatsoever.
5/ Islamic tradition claims she "readily gave herself to this new alliance", but then... it would wouldnt it, otherwise the character of Mohamed would be even more in question.

Now.. in cases like this, Imams will tell you there is a 'deeper wisdom' involved. But to me, its pretty clear what went on.

So, the reason I am so against "Islam" is because of what the founder did. It brings me back to the concept of Ivan Millat...if he had established a religion, his followers would be saying there is some 'deeper wisdom' about his serial killing activities.

The saddest thing in all this, is that people will stand up and speak about this cruel thug as 'Allahs perfect example'....and actually believe it.
King David, after his own sin based on lust, repented "My sin is ever before me" -Mohamed just revelled in His.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Monday, 25 September 2006 7:38:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Irfan,

Protestant bashing seems almost as lateral a possibility as Muslim bashing. However it is arguable. Why do I think the BBC has given you and the article writer you referred to playful ideas which will have less serious consequences than the BBC's mischief?

Sunisle,

“where was BenedictXVI as the so-called Jewish state was commiting war crimes in Lebanon, and the daily terror inflicted on Palestinians by this rogue state.

Easy. In a public statement cf. University lecture on the 16th July after Israeli attacks at that time he said:

“In recent days the news from the Holy Land is a reason for new and grave concern for all, in particular because of the spread of warlike actions also in Lebanon, and because of the numerous victims among the civilian population. At the origin of these cruel oppositions there are, sadly, objective situations of violation of law and justice.”

Then there are the Christian nations that have murdered hundreds of thousands in Iraq...and elsewhere...and still counting.

As a Cardinal he reportedly condemned the war ab initio.

“As for “preventive war,” Ratzinger flatly stated in September 2002, the “concept of a ‘preventive war’ does not appear in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.””

"The big question: what are his motives for what he said...and more imporantly, didn't say. Are we to preume that he is unconcerned about present day violations of the Geneva Conventions and more interested in stirring up more hate."

As a conclusion to the straw man argument that would be correct - had he not commented on those issues. However he did comment on those issues and unless you wish to cling to the BBC’s early reporting he clearly did not attempt to stir up hate in his speech.
Posted by mjpb, Monday, 25 September 2006 10:05:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Some quite lucid points you make mjpb,
The Pope (even if I'm not a Papist) is a part of "Abraham’s spiritual kitchen" - he eats from the same table as Irfan, so to speak.

Perhaps, no matter how logical the dialogue of Pope Benedict, he's simply not judged on this basis. He's judged more so politically and on the 'irrationality' of religion, Catholicism in particular - any other platform he has seems to be ignored.

In the same vein, I prefer to think of Irfan, not as a Muslim but as an 'Aussie' bloke who could give me a good argument down at the pub -and I would probably share a meal with him (if invited).
Posted by relda, Monday, 25 September 2006 10:37:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Don’t I even get a thank you Irf; I did supply you with the answer, and the documentation to your Hypothetical questions that nobody in the kitchen could answer,
Not bad for an Illiterate White Anglo Trash of Convict stock hay Irfan. Your words “Remember”? And I am not even the Pope.
Posted by All-, Monday, 25 September 2006 4:07:29 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For the record, I am not a Christian, Jew or Muslim, so I have no partisan axe to grind. I have, however, read the Quran. As I write this, I have before me a translation by the highly-regarded Iraqi-born scholar N.J. Dawood. Wading through the Quran has been a task as tedious as wading through thick mud. It is mind-numbingly didactic and repetitive. It contains virtually none of the poetic beauty of the Psalms, or the sublime transcendence of the Hindu Upanishads. For every sura that advocates mercy and declares that there should be no compulsion in religion, another can be revealed which commands Muslims to kill non-believers wherever they are found. It is manifestly false to claim that all of those aggressive verses are written in a purely "defensive" context. Muhammad had a knack for having politically-expedient "revelations".
When periods of tolerance and mutual respect did exist in the past under Muslim rule, it was not due to a literal interpretation of Quranic dogmas in all areas of social life, but to the more enlightened and broad-minded perspectives of certain individual Muslim rulers.
Even during the so-called Golden Age of Islam, it was not unusual for Christians and their priests, such as those in Spain, to be executed for the mere "crime" of being critical of Muhammad.
If the Pope had openly insulted Buddha, Lao-Tzu, Guru Nanak, Krishna, Moses, Zoroaster or Baha Allah, how likely is it that Buddhists, Taoists, Sikhs, Hindus, Jews, Zoroastrians or Bahais would be rioting in the streets, burning churches and shooting nuns because of the mere expression of an opinion? About as likely as the Pope dressing like Madonna and performing half-naked on stage. Yet Muslims have proved, repeatedly, that they will riot at the drop of a hat. In the field of psychology, it is commonly accepted that a tendency toward impulsive knee-jerk anger and violence is a clear sign of deep-rooted insecurities. If Muslims are so confident in the alleged objective truth of their faith, it is pertinent to ask why they are so thin-skinned in the face of mere criticism.
Posted by sonofeire, Monday, 25 September 2006 8:13:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy