The Islam religion has been a deception since day 1.

On day 1, Mohammad found the Islam religion by lying that he had met with an angel. He did that to benefit himself foremost.

Ask any Muslim, not a single one (including Tariq Ramadan) is able to provide the slightest evidence that Mohammad had actually met an angel.

Do you realise the significance of this ?? It means - the Islam religion is a hoax, a lie.

So the Islamic house of card starts tumbling down once you consistently question its foundation - there is nothing there !!

Tariq Ramadan is but a very skilful promotor of Mohammand's lies and deception. All his persuasive teachings are nothing but red herrings.

.

So much to work with.....

John (Passy) first.

<<she (Phillips) generates fear and hate and helps entice some who succumb to her siren call onto the rocks of the system.>>

Yet, John you also say:

<<The Left is quietly rebuilding its support among workers in the puppet countries, waiting for and helping to build the mass upsurges that could send Bush’s allies to the gallows and liberate Palestine.>>

-Quietly building
-Upsurge (? err you really mean revolution right?)
-Send Bush's allies.. to the Gallows.

If you MEAN 'Gallows of history'.. in this rather sensitive 'anti terrorism' climate it might be wise to 'SAY' so :)

I really struggle to find your newly discovered 'historical metaphore' in that ... the context is very clear. "Upsurge (Revolution)->Leaders to the Gallows"

I can't for the life of me see 'Liberation' being applicable to Israeilies who are already Liberated and have a democratic vote. How more to they need to be 'liberated' and from what? err..'capitalism'?

C.J. I don't have a problem with Ramadan being allowed to speak, I don't recall saying he can't. But what I would want is honest Journalists with huge testicles who can ask the really hard questions, and at the same time have the historical and theological ammunition to cope with the spin he would respond with.

I also want the legal freedom to stand outside such a meeting, with signs such as "Islam permits child abuse". "Islam is warlike" "Islam permits domestic violence" "Mohammad Tortured and Mutiliated Prisoners"
As long as THAT can take place without you opposing it, I'm happy. If you 'do' feel that such statements are wrong, then that would call for a rather detailed discussion, after which I feel confident you would be in agreement.
You see. it can all be argued powerfully from:

The Quran
The Hadith
The History/Biography of MOhammad
The contemporary beliefs and practices of Arab Muslim countries.
The very real reactions of real Muslims in Western countries

which..I think you will agree has to be persuasive.

Passy, Bushbasher and Ginx- three representatives of probably the most demonstrably FAILED religions of all time-Socialism.
You'd think they would have grown up by now, wouldn't you?
But no, they are stuck back in their nineteen seventies student activist paradigm, condemned forever to repeat the liturgy of their simplistic beliefs.
Anyway all that is off subject. The subject here is the religion of Islam, and the Islamists.
Just this morning is yet another example of Muslims causing trouble, this time in China. Funny isn't it? Islamists against Hindus. Islamists against Sikhs. Islamists against Buddhists. Islamists against Jews. Islamists against Christians.
Islamists against Secularists.
Can we see a pattern here, anyone?

Thanks Froggie.

I love your Islamists against everybody argument. A recent survey showed 93% of Muslims opposed taking life in the name of religion. (I may not have the exact opposition but it was along those lines.) At the beginning of the Iraq invasion a majority of Americans supported Bush.

And I note with interest you don't even attempt to rebut my figures about Bush imposing a September 11 on innocent Iraqis every 3 weeks. Has rationality deserted the Right?

But I'll play the game. How many countries in the 20 th and 21 st Centuries have islamists invaded? There were a few, I admit. Taking the definition of islamist to include baathists (a long stretch I admit) and secularists and including internecine invasions I think the figure could be counted on one's fingers.

How many countries has say the US invaded since 1900? Hmmm. I don't have the list in front of me, but I suspect the answer is in the hundreds. And the US is only one of the major imperialist or would be imperialist powers. World Wars One and Two saw the imperialist barons fight each other and invade each other's territories. And of course Russian imperialism invaded Eastern Europe after World War Two and imposed its dictatorial rule on those nations.

I wonder who the real enemy is. Islamist extremists or imperialism?

The Phillips' fear mongering (and the enthusiastic but pathetic echo it gets on this site) against Muslims (not just Islamists) is part of the process of tyeing Western workers to "their" imperialism and dieing in its name if needs be.

And by the way, socialism is not a failed religion. There is nothing religious about arguing for a democratisation of society to ensure production occurs to satisfy human need.

Such ideas cannot be labelled as failed. Socialism has never existed.

Guys, while you're on about hypothetical grand issues of ideological struggles, there are people suffering, right now, in this country, because some people find it easier to categorise people under a single banner, be it religion or otherwise.

Earlier I posted a link from an article in the Australian about what it's like for young muslims here - I thought I'd include a few excerpts to bring things back to the here and now.

---

"It seems like every time something happens overseas, whether it's an attack or a bombing, it's like you're blamed for it, we always have to defend it, you know, miles and miles away. What have Muslims in Australia got to do with foreign policy overseas?" asks Walid.

Wehbe is worried about where it will all end. "Well, they're going to have more issues naturally, and they're going to have more problems and our community is going to have more problems ... The division between us and ... you could say the other community, because that's how they've sort of placed us - us and them - there's going to be a greater barrier until we can work out things. So maybe we'll have more crime, because they feel lost, they don't know where to turn, maybe more killings, maybe. God knows."

Their sentiments are echoed in a landmark report from the Global Terrorism Research Centre at Monash University based on a three-year-study with the Victoria Police, which warns that Australia's approach may be compounding the danger of terrorism.

The report, released just before the federal election, found: "The Australian Government's approach to the prevention of terrorism is at odds with the best available knowledge on the threat of terrorism and the way that threat is countered." It warns that "poorly calibrated counter-terrorism policing" that marginalises and alienates sections of society can exacerbate the risk.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,23337783-7583,00.html

Sally Neighbour - 'Young and alienated in their own country'

Passy, you ask, “How many countries in the 20th and 21st Centuries have islamists invaded? There were a few, I admit.”

To make a worthwhile point, you need to ask, “How many countries could they have invaded if they wanted to, but decided against it?” You might get a larger number.

When comparing the US with fundo Islam, you need to take into consideration their ability to do harm. The US has a great deal more of this ability. To make a real comparison, you’d have to arm Islam with all the US’s nukes. Put another way: the US, allowing for all its misbehaviour and dubious agendas, could have done a lot more harm than it has, if it had the fundo Muslim mindset. Don’t you agree?

I know the US has done, and does, a lot of awful things. But, given its size, its power (eg the 150,000 nukes you mentioned yesterday), its pride and its tendency to be opinionated and think it’s right all the time, I’m actually surprised it hasn’t done a great deal more harm.

By contrast, if the fundo Muslims acquire some nukes (not 150,000 but just a few), just hold on to your hat.

Note, I’m talking about fundamentalists here, not Muslims generally. Mind you, as Froggie points out, there seem to be a lot of very destructively troublesome Muslims in a lot of countries. And, remember the global Islamic tantrum about those Danish cartoons? There seemed to be a lot of “ordinary” Muslims involved in that little display. Even if their wrath was whipped up by manipulative Arab-trained activists, it’s still a bit of a worry, isn’t it, that so many can be activated so easily?

Mind you, this may not make them “the real enemy” you speak of. For all my apprehension about Islam, I think they’re small bikkies compared with global warming. And also small bikkies compared with the pervasive abuse of power by the powerful at the expense of the powerless – not just in Western capitalist democracies, but everywhere.

Pax,