Why is Islam so dangerous?

[sooda]

That message was not directed at you but at sooda who for some reason mentioned president Bush out of nowhere.
Link here


The truth and nothing but the truth.

Discussing why Bush invaded Afghanistan.

1. Is Enron Behind The War In Afghanistan?, From Robert ...
   https://ratical.org/ratville/CAH/oilwar1.html
   I've added a few url's from oil industry websites to this forwarded email as further evidence of Enron's involvement in the motivation for the war in Afghanistan. Reading this material will allow you to see the Enron scandal and its ties to Bush-Cheney in a whole new light.
   
   
2. Sherman DeBrosse : Pipeline Politics and the Afghanistan War
   https://theragblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/sherman-debrosse-pipeline...
   Nov 06, 2009 · Enron was facing a financial crisis, and the pipeline would make Enron lands in the Caspian Basin very valuable. ... and Italy were present. In July, war with Afghanistan was again discussed at the Group of Eight meeting in Genoa. An Indian observer was also present for these discussions and even contributed plans. ... (Juan Cole) Institute for …
   

 

[ChristineM]

That message was not directed at you but at sooda who for some reason mentioned president Bush out of nowhere.

Ok, it would help if you actually quoted the post you were replying to

 

[ChristineM]

I think Catholic bombs are not going off all
around the word.

At the moment. We cannot say the same of recent history

 

[Raymann]

Here we're talking about the claim that Christians have committed 50 times more religious related crimes than Muslims according to Professor Juan Cole (whoever he is).

The statistics are very legitimate.

So where are those statistics?
Can you provide a link?

Ok, it would help if you actually quoted the post you were replying to

I did. I even left you a link to check it.
You might need to pay a visit to your ophthalmologist
Link Here

 

[ChristineM]

Here we're talking about the claim that Christians have committed 50 times more religious related crimes than Muslims according to Professor Juan Cole (whoever he is).

So where are those statistics?
Can you provide a link?

I did. I even left you a link to check it.
You might need to pay a visit to your ophthalmologist
Link Here

Your post #290 that i replied to did not contain any quoted text or reference on any sort about who it should be addressed to

 

[Audie]

I also mentioned that it appeared to be a variation of malignant nationalism.



Would they have been just as dangerous if we left them alone to begin with? What if we didn't give them any weapons in the first place? How did they manage to get weapons and access to technologies which allow them to "roam freely around the world"? Think about it.

If "we" left them alone, "they" would still be wandering
the desert with camels and tents?

If "we" etc, they would not be kidnapping and
setting off bombs in Philippines.

No probs with them in China either.

 

[Raymann]

Your post #290 that i replied to did not contain any quoted text or reference on any sort about who it should be addressed to

The following two lines are a copy of the last message on post #290 that I wrote.

sooda said: ↑
The Bush family consider themselves Christians,

You don't see those two lines on #290?

I noticed that when you quote something the user id doesn't show sometimes, only the message shows.
That's what I see from my pc.

 

[Audie]

Here we're talking about the claim that Christians have committed 50 times more religious related crimes than Muslims according to Professor Juan Cole (whoever he is).

So where are those statistics?
Can you provide a link?

I did. I even left you a link to check it.
You might need to pay a visit to your ophthalmologist
Link Here

16 posts and you get all pointleely snarky with
Christine, as sensible a poster as you will find.

Like cool it, bud. "Friendly forum". Not
MMA forum.

 

[Audie]

At the moment. We cannot say the same of recent history

The Cs and the Ps were going at it pretty good
in Ireland for a bit there, though it was not about
religion.

The muslims are at it all over the world.

 

[Audie]

That message was not directed at you but at sooda who for some reason mentioned president Bush out of nowhere.
Link here


The truth and nothing but the truth.

That is a saying. Lots of people think they
somehow have the turth at their command.

 

[ChristineM]

The following two lines are a copy of the last message on post #290 that I wrote.

sooda said: ↑
The Bush family consider themselves Christians,

You don't see those two lines on #290?

I noticed that when you quote something the user id doesn't show sometimes, only the message shows.
That's what I see from my pc.

I note that whenever i quote a poster that quote is included along with the users ID.
I also note that several times you have made posts that apparently contain only your wording without any indication of who you are responding to. If this is a problem with your account then maybe you need to contact admin.

To me your post #290 read in its entirety :-
---------------
Is that your favorite conspiracy theory on that subject?
Does that make more sense than going after the master mind of 9/11 (Bin Laden) who at the moment was in Afghanistan?
The 19 terrorists had known links with Al Qaeda.
What kind of proof The Taliban wanted?
A letter of admission?

Here you're lost again.
I was asking the credentials Professor Juan Cole has to claim that Christians commit 50 time more terrorist crimes than Muslims?
And you jump in the middle saying Bush family considers themselves Christians?
What that has to do with anything?
----------

Note, no apparent quote text

 

[ChristineM]

The Cs and the Ps were going at it pretty good
in Ireland for a bit there, though it was not about
religion.

The muslims are at it all over the world.

When you study the history yes it was about religion dating back to to the early 1600 when cromwell imposed protestant rule over the native catholics.

Even in later days of nationalist killings it was still along religious lines

 

[Audie]

When you study the history yes it was about religion dating back to to the early 1600 when cromwell imposed protestant rule over the native catholics.

Even in later days of nationalist killings it was still along religious lines

I am no particulr fan of the Catholic church, or of
Protestant either.

Just, if not religion but national independance was
the issue, it hardly seems fair to compare asymmetrical
warfare to the world wide mus terror campaign.

 

[sayak83]

If you are concerned, simply read the Quran and find out if the book's statement supports violence and killing of civilians of other religions.

I have and I have not found any.

 

[Audie]

Was there something about seeking out
to kill the Jew?

In the event Christians and Muslims
alike find it apprpriate to seek gods help
killing others, and praise same when they
succeed.

What actual difference does it make if there are
no specific instructions, but people read it
in anyway?

 

[ChristineM]

I am no particulr fan of the Catholic church, or of
Protestant either.

Just, if not religion but national independance was
the issue, it hardly seems fair to compare asymmetrical
warfare to the world wide mus terror campaign.

Being a brit who lived through the latter and most bloody part that terror campaign, was injured by it, watched my aunt loose an arm to it, one has a tendency to study the history quite intently just to see why. In the case of NI religion and nationalism are very, very closely intertwined.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

How would you know what I know?
I perfectly understand what Sharia is.

Christian majority countries are mostly secular (religion and government are separate entities), therefore the laws in place are agreed by democratic means.

And if Islamic countries democratically decide to have sharia legal systems, would that not be equally democratic?

Who is using the straw man fallacy now?
What makes you believe I don't accept islamic scholars?
Stop assuming things no one is saying.

I'm not assuming anything. You have blatantly demonstrated that you don't consider the Bible to be as promoting of violence as the Koran. If you are as familiar as you claim with either book, that necessitates a double standard on your behalf. But by all means, if you wish to claim that you accept the apologetics of Islamic scholars, cool, we can end the thread, I guess.

Wrong again. I'm putting my concerns in the right place.
The fact that most Muslims don't approve terrorism doesn't mean Islamic terrorists don't come from the same background than moderate Muslims come from and they use the same exact scriptures.
In other words, moderates and terrorists share the same background, go to the same mosques and believe in the same scriptures.
I don't blame moderates for the actions of terrorists.
I wonder why the terrorists interpret the scriptures that way.

You just defeated your own argument. If moderate Muslims use the same texts as extremist Muslims, clearly there is some other factor at work than the texts to create extremist Muslims

 

[Audie]

Being a brit who lived through the latter and most bloody part that terror campaign, was injured by it, watched my aunt loose an arm to it, one has a tendency to study the history quite intently just to see why. In the case of NI religion and nationalism are very, very closely intertwined.

Hm, yes, that would affect you!

Something like how Japanese atrocities in
HK profoundly affected me, though it was
many years before I was born.

 

[Notanumber]

This is informative –

Education is the key.

We have a dualistic legal system in the UK and looks like the USA is heading down the same road.

 

[Raymann]

And if Islamic countries democratically decide to have sharia legal systems, would that not be equally democratic?

Of course it would and I think that would be the most logical way to go for a Muslim country so that is my point:
Why none of the 53 Muslim countries dare to implement what they believe to be the perfect law system given to them by God?

You have blatantly demonstrated that you don't consider the Bible to be as promoting of violence as the Koran

You keep misunderstanding me.
I really don't care what the Bible or the Quran says, what I care is how people react after reading those scriptures.
Some Muslims (terrorists) get all aggressive and violent and cold heartedly commit the most heinous criminal acts against innocent people based on the readings of the Quran.
On the other hand Christians read the Bible and its violent passages and somehow use their common sense and know what not to do. See the difference?

You just defeated your own argument. If moderate Muslims use the same texts as extremist Muslims, clearly there is some other factor at work than the texts to create extremist Muslims

Could it be difference of INTERPRETATION?
Could it be evil people (Imams) promoting evil interpretations of the same scriptures moderates use?
Listen to Anjem Choudary and you'll understand what an evil Imam think Islam should look like.
Are we getting in on the same page now?