Religion of Peace Publishes Hit List

From his writings in this and other threads.

You're not entitled to answer a question that was asked directly to someone else. Mind your own business.

Then you're Absolutely wrong. Because that's exactly where it's from.
(Sura 8:12, 9:5, 9:73, 9:123, et al)

 

Post-Hijra scripture tends to deal with specific incidents Sura 8 for example includes the Battle of Badr, while Sura 9 the Battle of Tabuk. Taking those verses in isolation of the rest of the Sura and in the absence of the setting and you lose its meaning. Those verses have nothing to do with a declaration of terrorism against all peoples. The early Ummah didn't operate that way, and they absolutely could have.

No thanks.

 

And yet Islamic radicalism does remain a global threat to peace and security. I don't know what your faith is, but you shouldn't ignore the terrible deed committed by some militant Islamist groups, nor try to justify them or brush them aside. your standard tactic seems to be deflection and it isn't very impressive.

 

' Deflection ' bollox ! You've just personally exonerated Islam from nuclear weapons and the entire Second World War. Thank you.

Now compare the casualties resulting from Islamic resistance to judeo-christian aggressions. To attempt to refer to Islam as ' the religion of peace ' with even a hint of sarcasm is cutting-edge ignorance.

 

Don't be absurd, this is an open public forum. PM private questions if you like. Good luck with that !

 

This doesn't make any sense. Muslims did actually fight in the Second World War, but of course Muslim states were generally not the main belligerent powers. I don't think anyone ever suggested otherwise so I'm not sure why you feel that an exoneration is in order.

Terrorism is an unacceptable form of resistance. Period.

I don't agree with the OP, but nor would I honestly call Islam a "religion of peace". fighting is very much so allowed within Islam; it isn't a religion of suffering and passiveness like Christianity tends to be. I'd also say the same thing about Judaism too. Judaism and Islam weren't born into regions with stable political and social orders as Jesus and Christianity were. There evolution is thus naturally different from one another.

 

Pompous rhetoric, old chap, following a resounding , if involuntary, exoneration of Islam.

 

I noticed that you weren't able to respond directly to anything though there 'chap'.

 

Unnecessary, old bean. You've silenced the thread's advocates all on your own.

Well, perhaps with a little encouragement.

 

I was never in line with the threads' "advocates".

That doesn't change the fact that you're wrong too.

 

Nobody said that you were.

There was no such ' fact '. Islam's contribution to latter-day slaughter has been minimal- even including Islamism's rogue elements...and even they haven't murdered a number approaching the victims of neoZionism's excesses.

 

That doesn't change the fact that radical Islamic groups are currently a significant threat to international peace and security; and that there are very unsavory groups such as Al Qaeda that engage in quite terrible acts that should be neither excused, deflected from, or justified.

I'm not sure why everything has to be a competition with you, why is it so hard to simply say "yeah, these guys aren't good people and are a problem?"

 

I like to look at things on a case-by-case basis. I'm not prepared to condemn anything which might be a justified retaliation just because the US of AIPAC propaganda machinery spits out that I should.

 

So you don't think of Al Qaeda as an illegitimate terrorist organization?

 

OFF TOPIC.[/QUOTE]

Time to get your eyes examined. You can't see the BIG PICTURE.

 

Here is an article that will fortify your post above

Extreme Hate Speech are Broadcasted on British TV
Sun, February 17, 2013

http://media.radicalislam.org/files/2-2013/xfSjzWuUe8Er.png


Zakir Naik, co- owner of Peace TV“Shocking” is the way one British commentator described the extremist hate speech being broadcast on some of Britain's 14 free Muslim TV channels.

Yet as Islamic preachers of hate indiscriminately use these channels to spread their inflammatory and violent messages of terrorism and intolerance, Ofcom (the Office of Communications), Britain's official “communications watchdog” has only now begun to investigate this phenomena.

And despite the fact that these stations regularly feature preachers who promote murder, jihad and other violence, as well as homophobia and anti-Christian and anti-Jewish views, the most Ofcom has managed to do to date is to “reprimand” them (with the exception of one case where a fine was actually levied).

Ofcom’s investigation came after much criticism and outrage. Their initial investigation found serious breaches of Britain’s broadcasting guidelines. As a result, a series of rulings and directives have been initiated against the stations.

Yet most of Ofcom's reprimands have amounted to nothing more than a “slap on the wrist.”

Although the channels have small audiences compared to the mainstream channels, experts are warning against this ever-increasing phenomenon. In the past, extremist Muslim speakers were previously confined to small audiences in local mosques; now they are now able to reach thousands of people (in Britain and beyond) by broadcasting their extremist teachings on TV.

Among the cases cited by Ofcom was a program aired on Noor TV called Paighm-e-Mustafa (Message of Mustafa) that featured the influential and popular imam Muhammad Farooq Nizami.

During the program Nizami said, "Whoever shows disrespect for Prophet Muhammad will be given the death penalty. In the whole world, there should be slaves of Muhammad everywhere, and disrespectful people should be eliminated. One has to choose one’s own method. Our way is the peaceful way, but when someone crosses the limits, faith-based emotions are instigated."

After investigating the facts, Ofcom told the owners of Noor that it is “considering” imposing a fine.



Another case cited by Ofcom were speeches by Dr. Zakir Naik, the co-owner of Peace TV who broadcasts mainly from India. Naik, a well-known speaker on the subject of Islam and comparative religion and is the founder and president of the Islamic Research Foundation, was banned from entering Britain in 2010 after the Home Secretary Theresa May ruled his presence was "not conducive to the public good."

In one of his programs Nakir said, ". . . if a Muslim … becomes a non-Muslim, he should be put to death." He posted on his internet site that "every Muslim should be a terrorist."

Ofcom’s response was to “reprimand” the station.

 

No. I think that it's a convenient term which is applied to any opposition to US/Zionist hegemony. That's the safest standpoint, imo, when it isn't possible to know the details of events. I am, naturally, more suspicious of Western media translations of events as they are , essentially, the mouthpieces of their governments- and those governments represent the aggressors.

No need to respond. I see you have some tomes of plagiarism to address.

 

I was saying you had to dig long and hard not I, I make those issues my business. Still I wonder what is your point, I have always agreed that there are bad groups of any religion etc, including my religion. As for the many diverse crimes, that is why I posted the web address, still I don’t know what your point is, I too condemn violence and terrorism as a Christian. When I criticize Islam Ii ALWAYS DELINEATE the difference between moderate Islam and radical Islam, using a r prefix and even wrote a thread explaining why I do not condemn the majority of Muslims.

And? If you are taking issue with only the long and hard comment ok you had to Google desperately to find your information lol. Also I will compare recent violence committed by radicalized Islam adherents and those committed by Christians any day. The truth is at this point in time radical Islam is the king of terrors in number of murdered etc,

Why didn’t you say that at first we could have saved a lot of typing lol. I only blame radical Islam for what radical Islam does. I have a surgeon that is a Muslim so I am not biased against the religion. As I said I condemn all terrorism and violence except for demonstrable self defense (in the case of violence). That is why I am also no fan of any government. I love my country but do not trust its leaders. With regards;

reva

 

That's pretty disgusting. Al Qaeda has engaged in atrocious acts with the deliberate targeting of civilians and you're a hypocrite to call the US evil if you are unwilling to even assert the same about such an organization as Al Qaeda.

 

Well, it's cutting-edge stupidity for anybody to expect someone else to condermn an organisation which they don't believe exists. Have fun chasing the inventions of your military-industrial complex.

 

Then you assumed wrong.

My point was that I don't need to "google desperately" for example of violence engaged in by Chrsitian populations. IT is actually pretty common for anyone who keeps tabs on international conflict. the larger point dealt with a direct response to faulty logic engaged in by Blackrook. You can feel free to read the thread to get at it.

They are more prevalent on the international terrorist scale, but I'm not sure I would agree with the number of murders. That is a tricky thing to calculate. For example: the Rwandan Genocide was engaged in by a largely christian population. Now certainly it wasn't simply about religion, but should we include that? How about the war in the DR Congo that was / has been the largest international conflict since WWII? How about things like apartheid? Of if we go back to the earlier 1900's colonization?

If we are talking about modern history (the past 100 - 150 years) then that's not a game that Christianity would win. Not that it is even a competition to begin with.

I made it clear earlier in the thread, you're also welcome to read my posts in full before responding to them.

 

lol now you are suggesting that Al Qaeda doesn't even exist? So you don't think that Osama bin Laden existed? That the Haqqini Network exists? That Jamaat Al-Jihad ever existed or that Al Qaeda in Iraq, AQIM or AQAP exist? You don't believe that Al Shabaab of Somalia declared for Al Qaeda either? I knew you were into conspiracy theories but this is pretty insane.

 

I would suggest that while these groups do exist their threat is vastly over estimated. Thats not to say that a thin blade cannot kill of course.

Its clear that you have indeed managed to silence the peddlers of ignorance who have started and supported the line in this OP.

 

That's statistics, actually

Jonsa posted this link a few days ago

favorable opinion
country ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Al Qaeda Hamas Hezbollah
Egypt ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 19%.........................39 .........................20
Jordan ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 14% ........................44.... ....... ............29
Lebanon ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 2%......................... 30........................40
Palest Terr ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,28%.... ....................42........ ........... ....61
tunisia ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 16%.........................50 ......... .............46
Turkey ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 6%......................... 10.........................6

http://www.pewglobal.org/database/?i...ble&mode=table

 

Weekly Standard and Memri who per wiki is "MEMRI's founding staff of seven included three who had formerly served in military intelligence in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF)" = two ZioNAZI organizations.

Yeah, loads and loads of credibility there.