Naked female Anti-War kooks 'stripped for peace' spelling "No Bush"
BunnERabbit
I wonder how these brave women would fair if they 'stripped for peace'
in *any* Islamic nation, Iraq or North Korea? Are these women so naive
of world politics as to misunderstand the true nature of those who wish
us harm and their intent of world domination? Do these women have a
fucking proverbial clue as to the treatment of females by Muslims?
This isn't about folks wearing fur or even environmental issues that I
myself have concern over. It's about us as a species fighting tyranny
so that the civilized world remains intact.
Or perhaps I missing something as I have no recollection of any protests
of any flavor when Clinton carpetbombed Serbia, fired wanton missiles at
aspirin factories and the numerous air strikes upon Iraq during his
administration.
--
Keith
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/news/WABC_020703_stripforpeace.html
Anti-War Protesters, Brave The Elements And Bare All In Central Park
(New York-AP, February 7, 2003) — The snowstorm closed schools and
delayed airlines, but didn't deter 30 women who stripped for peace in
Central Park on Friday.
Braving 20 degree temperatures and heavy flurries, the anti-war
activists - ranging in age from 20 to 50 - gathered shortly after 7 a.m.
beneath a park overpass at 72nd Street, where they shed their coats,
scarves, hats - and everything else.
Squealing and jumping up and down to stay warm, they ran stark naked
into the park and lay head to toe over letters - "No Bush" - they had
etched in the 3-inch snow.
Two minutes later, the women regrouped under the overpass, got dressed,
hugged and shared thermoses of steaming hot coffee and tea.
Spontaneously, 12 of them sprinted out naked again, this time spelling
out the word "war."
"This was exhilarating," declared Heidi Cuppari, 29, owner of a
Manhattan pet supply company. "I was thinking about all the people who
are going to be in war in hellish situations and I thought I could take
a little snow."
The storm began early Friday and was expected to increase in intensity,
blanketing the metropolitan region with 4 to 6 inches of snow before
ending by mid-afternoon, said Jeffrey Tongue, a meteorologist with the
National Weather Service.
<snipped>
The Central Park peace demonstration was organized by Wendy Tremayne, an
unemployed Manhattan artist.
"I was going to start a campaign to get everyone to send stinky socks to
Bush to let him know that war stinks. But there's nothing like getting a
bunch of women on something," Tremayne said.
On her Web site, Tremayne still urges people to "just grab an envelope,
add postage and mail a stinky sock" to the White House.
There were no police. But a lone bird watcher spotted the naked group
through her binoculars from 60 feet away.
"It was definitely a nonviolent protest, with a taste of the 60s in it,"
said an amused Nancy Pindrus.
(Copyright 2003 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.)
_____
"Cosmic upheaval is not so moving as a little child pondering the death
of a sparrow in the corner of a barn." -Anouk Aimee, French Actor
_____
"Death is better, a milder fate than tyranny", Aeschylus (525BC-456BC),
Agamemnon
_____
"I wear no Burka." - Mother Nature
----------
The mailbox, BunnE...@webtv.net has been circumvented to fight spam.
To send mail... ecolibertarian AT webtv DOT net
----------
Achmed Burfaang
the bird" . . . or something like that.
It's also a testament to the raw sex appeal of these nut-cases; they
get naked in Central Park - and no one notices. Were any of these
slutbags at Kent State back in the '60's?
On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 03:13:49 -0500 (EST), BunnE...@webtv.net
(BunnERabbit) wrote:
>
>
>I wonder how these brave women would fair if they 'stripped for peace'
>in *any* Islamic nation, Iraq or North Korea? Are these women so naive
>of world politics as to misunderstand the true nature of those who wish
>us harm and their intent of world domination? Do these women have a
>fucking proverbial clue as to the treatment of females by Muslims?
>
>This isn't about folks wearing fur or even environmental issues that I
>myself have concern over. It's about us as a species fighting tyranny
>so that the civilized world remains intact.
>
>Or perhaps I missing something as I have no recollection of any protests
>of any flavor when Clinton carpetbombed Serbia, fired wanton missiles at
>aspirin factories and the numerous air strikes upon Iraq during his
>administration.
>--
>Keith
>
>http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/news/WABC_020703_stripforpeace.html
>
>Anti-War Protesters, Brave The Elements And Bare All In Central Park
>
>(New York-AP, February 7, 2003) =97 The snowstorm closed schools and
tscottme
Achmed Burfaang <na...@orca.net> wrote in message
news:3e44f09b...@nntp.ix.netcom.com...
> Were any of these slutbags at Kent State back in the '60's?
>
No, but their children were there. Why is it the ugly women are the
ones taking off their clothes?
Achmed Burfaang
that Murphy was an optimist!
On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 07:09:21 -0600, "tscottme" <blah...@blah.net>
wrote:
Jack
> Keep in mind the old proverb that, "A hand in the bush is worth two on
> the bird" . . . or something like that.
>
> It's also a testament to the raw sex appeal of these nut-cases; they
> get naked in Central Park - and no one notices. Were any of these
> slutbags at Kent State back in the '60's?
>
>
yes they were, and that's why, 40 years later, everyone is desperate not to notice.
Jeremy the Great
to make.
I am sure Clinton would have changed his opinion for 30 naked women,
but I don't see Bush doing that. What point were they trying to make
by stripping naked and laying down in snow besides the fact that they
are idiots?
Jerry Springer Bin Laden show i.e the God chosen jew
***************************************************************************
God bless the Jews for helping Osama bin Laden!
The Bible states that any nation that supports Israel will be blessed.
Well,Jews are blessing America the Christians nation too.
Quotes from Reverend Billy Graham spiritual leader to George W. Bush
and former President Nixon tapes:
The released tapes have been edited and pruned. But Haldeman kept a
diary of the conversation. After Reverend Billy Graham left, Nixon
told his henchman: "You know it was good we got this point about the
Jews across . . .
the Jews are an irreligious, atheistic, ""immoral bunch of bastards.""
As Haldeman records, Graham had earlier observed that ""the Bible says
there are satanic Jews"" and there's where our problem arises". That
problem was "the total Jewish domination of the media . . . this was
something that would have to be dealt with."-Dawn/The Guardian News
Service.
Graham begins by advising Nixon on campaign strategy. The evangelist
has been invited to lunch at Time magazine. "You better take your
Jewish beanie" (yarmulke), Haldeman jokes. Nixon is in darker mood. He
broaches something that "we can't talk about publicly" - Jewish
influence in the media. All the big news organs are "totally dominated
by the Jews". Graham agrees, adding, piously, that it is the Jews "who
are putting out the """""pornographic stuff""""""".
This stranglehold has got to be broken or this country's going down
the """drain,"""'' Billy Graham said,
God bless the Jews for helping Osama bin Laden to destroy America!
God chosen Jews in porn !!!!
Jews dominate the production and distribution of porn. Leading
pornographers with Jewish names include Wesley Emerson, Paul Fishbein,
Herbert Feinberg a.k.a. Mickey Fine, Lenny Friedlander, Bobby
Hollander, Rubin Gottesman, Fred Hirsch and his children Steve and
Marjorie, Paul "Norman" Apstein, Steve Orenstein, Theodore Rothstein,
Reuben and
David Sturman, Ron Sullivan, Sam and Mitch Weston (Spinelli).
Jews accounted for most of the leading male performers of the 1970's
and '80's. Hebrew studs include Buck Adams, Bobby Astyr, R. Bolla
(Richard Parnes), Jerry Butler (Paul Siderman), Seymour Butts (Adam
Glaser),David Christopher (Bernie Cohen), Steve Drake, Jesse Eastern,
Jamie
Gillis, Ron Jeremy (Hyatt), Michael Knight, Ashley Moore, David
Morris, George
Payne, Ed Powers (Mark Arnold), Harry Reems (Herbert Streicher), Dave
Ruby, Herschel Savage, Carter Stevens (Mal Whorb), Marc Stevens, Paul
Thomas (Phil Tobias), Marc Wallice, Randy West and Jack Wrangler.
Jewish female performers include Avalon, Jenny Baxter (Jenny Wexler),
Busty Belle (Tracy Praeger), Chelsea Blake, Tiffany Blake, Bunny Bleu,
Lee Carroll (Leslie Barns), Blair Castle/Brooke Fields (Allison
Shandibal), Courtney/Natasha/Eden (Natasha Zimmerman), Daphne (Daphne
Franks),Barbara Dare (Stacy Mitnick), April Diamond, Jeanna Fine,
Alexis Gold,
Tern Hall,Heather Hart, Nina Hartley, C. J. Laing (Wendy Miller),
Frankie Leigh (Cynthia Hope Geller), Gloria Leonard, Traci Lords (Nora
Louise
Kuzman), Amber Lynn, Tonisha Mills, Melissa Monet, Susan Nero,
Scarlett 0.(Catherine Goldberg), Tawny Pearl (Susan Pearlman), Nina
Preta, Tracey Prince, Janey Robbins (Robin Lieberman), Alexandra Silk,
Susan Sloan, Annie Sprinkle (Ellen Steinberg), Karen Summer (Dana
Alper), Zara Whites and Ona Zee(Ona Simms).
God bless the Jews!
Dr Mad Hatter
"Achmed Burfaang" <na...@orca.net> wrote in message
news:3e44f09b...@nntp.ix.netcom.com...
Norma
> That's a common proof of the existence of O'Toole's Law, which states
> that Murphy was an optimist!
Oh gee!! And I really loved Murphy's law. Something new to learn. Norma
BTW, in those 50'w crowd, I have heard there were those who thought that
nakedness was cool, but not all. But I like nakedness when I am home alone
or sleeping. Doesn't everyone?
Norma
"Dr Mad Hatter" <al...@wonderland.com> wrote in message
news:b23hjd$ggp$1...@mawar.singnet.com.sg...
> Anyone got any pictures of these desperate women?
If you like, I could send you mine. :-)) Norma
abu mohammed
North Koreans over the last 40 years. Get a life... World domination? the
same goes for Iraq.... what were the casualties in the war in 91? Under 100
killed by opposition forces?
The USA is planning on killing 50% of the republican guard in the first week
of the attack coming. These men have families! This will result in
casualties in excess of 100,000. The USA discounts life because it is not
american life. shame on the USA.
Iraq has never attacked US soil. and only attacked US allies after it was
massively attacked itself.
Iraq has shows great restraint in not striking back on US targets, and it
would be VERY easy to do. We have 3 million illegal immigrants in
california! and let me tell you they did not go through customs when the
came across the border. Just as easy to smuggle drugs, bio agents, chemical
agents as well.
Wake up, you are being duped.
BTW... there is no plan to change the laws concerning nudity in IRAQ or any
other place the USA is invading.. so ranting against moslems as a reason to
invade Iraq is just a red herring.
coasti nvestib
"Jeremy the Great" <Jra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:80c5f84.03020...@posting.google.com...
> I am curious to know what exactly the point was that they were trying
> to make.
Sex Sells......??
---------- and now for something completely different---------------
Michael Jackson popouri:
"The kid's not alright" :
http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/comment/0,7493,888534,00.html
"Michael Jackson's changing faces" :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/flash/0,5860,547930,00.html
"Jackson 'devastated' by Bashir film":
http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,889879,00.html
"Michael Jackson statement":
http://media.guardian.co.uk/broadcast/story/0,7493,889878,00.html
------ cut -------
"I'd rather fuck myself with a dildo than fuck you "
- "Sex Sux" - The Kirkendahl Void with SuperX
(from Hour of Slack XXX #2.mp3) http://www.subgenius.com/ts/hos2.html
Molotov - "Chinga tu Madre"
(this song F-N ROCKS!!!!! get it at same link as above - GET IT NOW!!)
--------- cut ------------
On Sat, 8 Feb 2003 03:13:49 -0500 (EST), BunnE...@webtv.net
(BunnERabbit) wrote:
>
>
>I wonder how these brave women would fair if they 'stripped for peace'
>in *any* Islamic nation, Iraq or North Korea? Are these women so naive
>of world politics as to misunderstand the true nature of those who wish
>us harm and their intent of world domination? Do these women have a
>fucking proverbial clue as to the treatment of females by Muslims?
>
>This isn't about folks wearing fur or even environmental issues that I
>myself have concern over. It's about us as a species fighting tyranny
>so that the civilized world remains intact.
>
>Or perhaps I missing something as I have no recollection of any protests
>of any flavor when Clinton carpetbombed Serbia, fired wanton missiles at
>aspirin factories and the numerous air strikes upon Iraq during his
>administration.
>--
>Keith
Keith - you need to be frigged "3-way" adleast once....gives you
a *whole new perspective* on life - three 20 YO's - one sittin on
yer face, one goin down on your johnnie, and the last one wearin
a 12" long purple strap-on, rammin it up-yer-butt ALL DONE
SIMULTANEOUSLY. (I experienced this once in a hotel
in a rather amusing part of Naples, the best $500 I'd ever spent)
(
Kokolums
our women in uniform to "strip for war". :)
The Holy Kafir
"Jeremy the Great" <Jra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:80c5f84.03020...@posting.google.com...
> I am curious to know what exactly the point was that they were trying
> to make.
Maybe they were protesting a lack of razors, Nair and shaving cream?
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
<bicycle...@hotmail.com> wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>
>Keith - you need to be frigged "3-way" adleast once....gives you
>a *whole new perspective* on life - three 20 YO's - one sittin on
>yer face, one goin down on your johnnie, and the last one wearin
>a 12" long purple strap-on, rammin it up-yer-butt ALL DONE
>SIMULTANEOUSLY. (I experienced this once in a hotel
>in a rather amusing part of Naples, the best $500 I'd ever spent)
That's quite a bit more than we really needed to know.
--
V.G.
"Useful idiots follow suit. Artist my ass; I went to
grade school." - Allen L. Barker explains everything.
(This sig file contains not less than 80% recycled SPAM)
Sarcasm is my sword, Apathy is my shield.
John Griffin
> I wonder how these brave women would fair if they 'stripped for peace'
> in *any* Islamic nation, Iraq or North Korea? Are these women so naive
> of world politics as to misunderstand the true nature of those who wish
> us harm and their intent of world domination? Do these women have a
> fucking proverbial clue as to the treatment of females by Muslims?
That pack of stupid cunt stoked the primitive mohammedans hatred
and fanatical intolerance to new heights. Seeing that Americans
behave like that will do nothing but strengthen those savages'
belief that the modern world must be destroyed. The next wave
of cowardly terrorist acts will include moslem women walking
around New York with C-4 tampons looking for gatherings like that
to blow to hell in the name of that pervert mohammed.
> This isn't about folks wearing fur or even environmental issues that I
> myself have concern over. It's about us as a species fighting tyranny
> so that the civilized world remains intact.
A little thought would have told them that, but a little
is more thought than that group could muster.
> Or perhaps I missing something as I have no recollection of any protests
> of any flavor when Clinton carpetbombed Serbia, fired wanton missiles at
> aspirin factories and the numerous air strikes upon Iraq during his
> administration.
They knew that if they stripped, Clinton would show up
and finger them.
> [ sniiiiiippp ]
> Squealing and jumping up and down to stay warm, they ran stark naked
> into the park and lay head to toe over letters - "No Bush" - they had
> etched in the 3-inch snow.
How stupid. If they're naked, you could see that (no bush)
for yourself.
> <snipped>
>
> The Central Park peace demonstration was organized by Wendy Tremayne, an
> unemployed Manhattan artist.
"Unemployed" is the natural state of a protest industry pawn.
> "I was going to start a campaign to get everyone to send stinky socks to
> Bush to let him know that war stinks. But there's nothing like getting a
> bunch of women on something," Tremayne said.
>
> On her Web site, Tremayne still urges people to "just grab an envelope,
> add postage and mail a stinky sock" to the White House.
Oh, good...let the White House mail clerk know that
you're a fucking stupid, childish idiot. That oughta
convince him that we need to share the planet with a
demented maniac who enjoys killing people and has the
means to kill hundreds of thousands of them.
> There were no police. But a lone bird watcher spotted the naked group
> through her binoculars from 60 feet away.
> "It was definitely a nonviolent protest, with a taste of the 60s in it,"
> said an amused Nancy Pindrus.
The "taste" of the 60s, for sure. (Not the 1960s or the
1860s, the 0060s.)
One other thing is for sure. There were no babes in that mob.
Achmed Burfaang
is what you didn't know. That 12" long purple strap-on was actually
the gonorrhea-infested member of Salvatore Paolucci, a village idiot
who was led to screw goats by neighborhood gangs.
coasti nvestib
> I remember being in Naples that evening. The best part of the story
> is what you didn't know. That 12" long purple strap-on was actually
> the gonorrhea-infested member of Salvatore Paolucci, a village idiot
> who was led to screw goats by neighborhood gangs.
SHIT man, NOW I know why I kept smellin all that GARLIC
Achmed Burfaang
refund!
fake ailens
> is what you didn't know. That 12" long purple strap-on was actually
> the gonorrhea-infested member of Salvatore Paolucci, a village idiot
> who was led to screw goats by neighborhood gangs.
Like this.............?????
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2157254970&category=20135
Shakeel Virk
: This isn't about folks wearing fur or even environmental issues that I
: myself have concern over. It's about us as a species fighting tyranny
: so that the civilized world remains intact.
Can you say brainwashed ?
Millions of women choose out of their own free will to be Muslims.
Who are you to tell them they can't make that choice ?
Look in America, Europe, Canada, and other non-Muslim countries and see
for your self. Women in these countries continue to follow Islam, and
there have been many converts to Islam within these countries.
Your brainwashed verison of Islam is not what Muslims follow. Learn about
Islam learn about it's true teachings instead of mere propoganada.
The Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) made it compulsory for all Muslim men and
all Muslim women to increase their knowledge.
You should follow this teaching of the Prophet (pbuh) and increase your
knowledge of Islam.
: Or perhaps I missing something as I have no recollection of any protests
: of any flavor when Clinton carpetbombed Serbia, fired wanton missiles at
: aspirin factories and the numerous air strikes upon Iraq during his
: administration.
Bush is a warmonger. Clinton was not. Bush wants war, he is heavily
pushing for war and in the processing doing good damage to the economy.
He is an angry little man with far too much power and far too few
braincells.
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>: This isn't about folks wearing fur or even environmental issues that I
>: myself have concern over. It's about us as a species fighting tyranny
>: so that the civilized world remains intact.
>
>Can you say brainwashed ?
Yes, I believe that was what he was getting at.
John Griffin
> In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
> : This isn't about folks wearing fur or even environmental issues that I
> : myself have concern over. It's about us as a species fighting tyranny
> : so that the civilized world remains intact.
>
> Can you say brainwashed ?
>
> Millions of women choose out of their own free will to be Muslims.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Hilarious! When do the daughters
of Muslims make that choice? Right after they remind them
that the primitive religion of islam imposes an automatic
death penalty for apostasy?
> Who are you to tell them they can't make that choice ?
No sweat, idiot, the "mullahs" (the slavemasters who shave
and sew up their cracks, imprison them in their homes, tell
them who they can marry and control every detail of their
lives) have already made it for them.
> Look in America, Europe, Canada, and other non-Muslim countries and see
> for your self. Women in these countries continue to follow Islam, and
> there have been many converts to Islam within these countries.
Similarly, many people in those countries have started using
hard drugs. So what? A certain proportion of a large enough
population will latch onto any dumb idea that comes along.
> Your brainwashed verison of Islam is not what Muslims follow. Learn about
> Islam learn about it's true teachings instead of mere propoganada.
>
> The Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) made it compulsory for all Muslim men and
> all Muslim women to increase their knowledge.
of the rules by which islam runs ever aspect of their lives.
Mohammed was a pervert. "Prophet," my ass.
> You should follow this teaching of the Prophet (pbuh) and increase your
> knowledge of Islam.
Yeah, we should all screw nine year old girls. Get a grip, imbecile.
> : Or perhaps I missing something as I have no recollection of any protests
> : of any flavor when Clinton carpetbombed Serbia, fired wanton missiles at
> : aspirin factories and the numerous air strikes upon Iraq during his
> : administration.
>
> Bush is a warmonger. Clinton was not. Bush wants war, he is heavily
> pushing for war and in the processing doing good damage to the economy.
> He is an angry little man with far too much power and far too few
> braincells.
rotfl. Such a grandiose assessment coming from a drone.
BunnERabbit
3s...@qlink.queensu.ca (Shakeel Virk), Wrote:
>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit
><BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>>This isn't about folks wearing fur or even
>>environmental issues that I myself have
>>concern over. It's about us as a species fighting
>>tyranny so that the civilized world remains
>>intact.
>Can you say brainwashed ?
The unbearable irony of a Muslim using the term "brainwashed"?
>Millions of women choose out of their own free
>will to be Muslims.
No one believes you cretin. Hundreds of millions of women are subjected
to tyranny, execution, stoning, discrimination, slavery, torture and
rape in dozens of Islamic infested nations including Saudi Arabia,
Yemen, Oman, UAE, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Libya, Sudan, Nigeria, Somalia,
Algeria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Afghanistan, et
al, ad nauseam. No Islamic nation allows women nor men as well freedom
of religion of any other freedoms for that matter. They live in a 7th
century death cult.
>Who are you to tell them they can't make that
>choice ?
The irony meter is smoking. Please do educate us concerning the Burka
and Hijab Mr. Virk. Inquiring infidels want to know.
>Look in America, Europe, Canada, and other
>non-Muslim countries and see for your self.
You mean the targeted rapes by Muslims of non Muslim women in Australia,
Denmark and elsewhere? The threats of death including 'fatwas' against
those that try to leave Islam? Did you forget to mention the systematic
genocide and forced conversions of non Muslims in the rest of the world?
And what of the increasing violence by Muslims in Europe and elsewhere
who demand fascist Islamic dogma rather than assimilate in the host
nation?
>Women in these countries continue to follow
>Islam, and there have been many converts to
>Islam within these countries.
Is it a Muslim's duty to flat out lie and fabricate statistics?
>Your brainwashed version of Islam is not what
>Muslims follow.
The irony meter is broken.
>Learn about Islam learn about it's true
>teachings instead of mere propaganda.
That Muhammad enslaved and raped a 9 year old little girl? That Islam
is spread by the sword and one must either convert or murder the
'infidel'? There is not ***one*** Muslim dominated nation on the planet
that is not a tyrannical theocracy and where the few non Muslims that
remain enjoy even basic Human rights. Even Turkey which is currently
the least offensive voted in Islamic parties and only remains so because
of a military dictatorship by proxy.
>The Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) made it
>compulsory for all Muslim men and all Muslim
>women to increase their knowledge.
Knowledge of what? Nothing of value comes from Muslim culture as it is
anti free market, anti technology and anti intellectual among others.
>You should follow this teaching of the Prophet
>(pbuh) and increase your knowledge of Islam.
I follow the teachings of Mother Nature. Her most important gift is
free will. Islam and free will are dipolor concepts.
>>Or perhaps I missing something as I have no
>>recollection of any protests of any flavor when
>>Clinton carpetbombed Serbia, fired wanton
>>missiles at aspirin factories and the numerous
>>air strikes upon Iraq during his administration.
>Bush is a warmonger. Clinton was not.
You deny the events in Serbia, Somalia, Iraq and elsewhere during the
Clinton Administration?
>Bush wants war, he is heavily pushing for war
>and in the processing doing good damage to
>the economy.
I agree. Saddam should be let loose to conquer the mideast,
subsequently destroying much of Islam in the process. Much of the
terrorist financing would dry up as well.
>He is an angry little man with far too much
>power and far too few braincells.
Why are you at a University in Canada rather than at one in a Muslim
nation? And why isn't there non Muslims immigration into a Muslim
nations? If civilized western culture is abhorrent to Muslims, then why
do they subject themselves to such torment? Or perhaps ;-)
--
Keith
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
(BunnERabbit) wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>
>>Millions of women choose out of their own free
>>will to be Muslims.
>
>No one believes you cretin. Hundreds of millions of women are subjected
>to tyranny, execution, stoning, discrimination, slavery, torture and
>rape in dozens of Islamic infested nations
Hey, don't forget the genital mutilations!
Shakeel Virk
:>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit
:><BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
:>Can you say brainwashed ?
: The unbearable irony of a Muslim using the term "brainwashed"?
Muslim are far more open-minded then those fanatical war mongers
who support Bush. You guys can't think logically. The proof is in
your responses. If you have something worth saying then say it, and
stop the insults on Muslims.
Use logic and present a good argument if you have one. Like Muslims
do.
:>Millions of women choose out of their own free
:>will to be Muslims.
: No one believes you cretin.
They don't ? Or do you mean you don't believe me ?
If you don't then look it up. Find out how many Muslim women attended
Mosque services in Canada, US, and Europe in the past few days for Eid
prayers.
You are wrong and I am right. That is a fact. Go convince yourself by
looking up the facts.
: Hundreds of millions of women are subjected
: to tyranny, execution, stoning, discrimination, slavery, torture and
: rape in dozens of Islamic infested nations including Saudi Arabia,
: Yemen, Oman, UAE, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Libya, Sudan, Nigeria, Somalia,
: Algeria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Afghanistan, et
: al, ad nauseam.
And yet when they leave they continue to follow Islam ? Why ?
Ever wonder why ? Maybe because your anti-Islam hatemongering beliefs are
false ? Maybe because you don't have a clue about the teachings of Islam
and speak as if you know everything ?
: No Islamic nation allows women nor men as well freedom
: of religion of any other freedoms for that matter. They live in a 7th
: century death cult.
Sorry but there is a huge Muslim population in virtually every country of
the world including the US. All these people choose to follow Islam.
If you knew anything about its teachings you might become a Muslim
yourself. Get out of your cage of ignorance and learn something.
:>Who are you to tell them they can't make that
:>choice ?
: The irony meter is smoking. Please do educate us concerning the Burka
: and Hijab Mr. Virk. Inquiring infidels want to know.
Hijab is something women choose to wear and Islam is not the only religion
which prescribes it. If you look at the most holy women in Christianity
you will find that their dress is almost identical to Hijab worn by women
in the middle east.
:>Look in America, Europe, Canada, and other
:>non-Muslim countries and see for your self.
: You mean the targeted rapes by Muslims of non Muslim women in Australia,
: Denmark and elsewhere? The threats of death including 'fatwas' against
: those that try to leave Islam? Did you forget to mention the systematic
: genocide and forced conversions of non Muslims in the rest of the world?
Is that what you really think ? Go to a Mosque. Any mosque. Talk to the
women and ask them why they are Muslims. Speak to them. Learn from them.
You will be amazed at what you will hear.
Your brainwashed views are simply false.
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>: 3s...@qlink.queensu.ca (Shakeel?Virk), Wrote:
>:>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit
>:><BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
>:>Can you say brainwashed ?
>
>: The unbearable irony of a Muslim using the term "brainwashed"?
>
>Muslim are far more open-minded then those fanatical war mongers
>who support Bush.
That's what you've been brainwashed into thinking.
DrPostman
with The Prophecy and "For Entertainment Purposes Only" availed us of their
wisdom with:
>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>: 3s...@qlink.queensu.ca (Shakeel?Virk), Wrote:
>:>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit
>:><BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
>:>Can you say brainwashed ?
>
>: The unbearable irony of a Muslim using the term "brainwashed"?
>
>Muslim are far more open-minded then those fanatical war mongers
>who support Bush. You guys can't think logically. The proof is in
>your responses. If you have something worth saying then say it, and
>stop the insults on Muslims.
>
>Use logic and present a good argument if you have one. Like Muslims
>do.
Yea, so open minded, except when it comes to women, for just one small example.
>:>Millions of women choose out of their own free
>:>will to be Muslims.
>
>: No one believes you cretin.
What's not to believe. They are going to be allowed to drive now
in some Muslim countries. Yahoo! What an advancement for
Women Rights. All one has to do is see how women are treated
in muslim countries. I bet you enjoy that aspect of your religion
and you are intimidated by educated and emancipated women.
>They don't ? Or do you mean you don't believe me ?
>
>If you don't then look it up. Find out how many Muslim women attended
>Mosque services in Canada, US, and Europe in the past few days for Eid
>prayers.
Wow, they let them out of the house in a burka to go to prayers. How advanced.
>You are wrong and I am right. That is a fact. Go convince yourself by
>looking up the facts.
Go back to the 7th Century run country you came from.
>: Hundreds of millions of women are subjected
>: to tyranny, execution, stoning, discrimination, slavery, torture and
>: rape in dozens of Islamic infested nations including Saudi Arabia,
>: Yemen, Oman, UAE, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Libya, Sudan, Nigeria, Somalia,
>: Algeria, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Afghanistan, et
>: al, ad nauseam.
>
>And yet when they leave they continue to follow Islam ? Why ?
>Ever wonder why ? Maybe because your anti-Islam hatemongering beliefs are
>false ? Maybe because you don't have a clue about the teachings of Islam
>and speak as if you know everything ?
Perhaps a lifetime of abuse has them so traumatized they don't know
anything else, like a battered woman.
>: No Islamic nation allows women nor men as well freedom
>: of religion of any other freedoms for that matter. They live in a 7th
>: century death cult.
>
>Sorry but there is a huge Muslim population in virtually every country of
>the world including the US. All these people choose to follow Islam.
>If you knew anything about its teachings you might become a Muslim
>yourself. Get out of your cage of ignorance and learn something.
Most of them do choose, but not all of them. I agree that there are some
Islamic communities that aren't as strict, but only because their women
would rebel if they tried to enforce Sharia.
>:>Who are you to tell them they can't make that
>:>choice ?
>
>: The irony meter is smoking. Please do educate us concerning the Burka
>: and Hijab Mr. Virk. Inquiring infidels want to know.
>
>Hijab is something women choose to wear and Islam is not the only religion
>which prescribes it. If you look at the most holy women in Christianity
>you will find that their dress is almost identical to Hijab worn by women
>in the middle east.
Wrong. Even the Catholic Church has told its nuns that they don't have to
wear habits any more, and 99% of them don't. Or are you describing some
isolated christian cults?
>:>Look in America, Europe, Canada, and other
>:>non-Muslim countries and see for your self.
>
>: You mean the targeted rapes by Muslims of non Muslim women in Australia,
>: Denmark and elsewhere? The threats of death including 'fatwas' against
>: those that try to leave Islam? Did you forget to mention the systematic
>: genocide and forced conversions of non Muslims in the rest of the world?
>
>Is that what you really think ? Go to a Mosque. Any mosque. Talk to the
>women and ask them why they are Muslims. Speak to them. Learn from them.
>You will be amazed at what you will hear.
I have, and sense a lot of fear from many of them who have husbands that come
from the MidEast.
>Your brainwashed views are simply false.
Spot the irony.
--
Dr.Postman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors of afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULT® member #15-51506-253.
You can email me at: jamie_eckles(at)hotmail.com
"The services provided by Sylvia Browne Corporation are highly
speculative in nature and we do not guarantee that the results
of our work will be satisfactory to a client."
-Sylvia's Refund Policy
Jack
<religious kookery snipped>
>
> If you don't then look it up. Find out how many Muslim women attended
> Mosque services in Canada, US, and Europe in the past few days for Eid
> prayers.
>
>
hey Shak, don't you play for the L.A. Lakers?
but seriously ... you muslins desperately need to get laid, that's
your problem. how many embassy burnings, riots, bombings, mullah
hectorings do you attend -- and never once encounter a woman? you
people are wound up tighter than a drum. life is more than strap-on
explosives. for allah's sake, find a woman, a camel, or Goddam Insane
himself and take care of yourselves before you mohammadens plunge the
world into another dark age.
as we say here in the heart of america, "akaballah iminnasaloon, mah
bruddah"
very truly yours,
/s/
Jack,
Ft. Zinderneuf,
the desert
cc: god
Cyrakis
> Is that what you really think ? Go to a Mosque. Any mosque. Talk to the
> women and ask them why they are Muslims. Speak to them. Learn from them.
> You will be amazed at what you will hear.
I learned all I need to learn about islam on 9/11.
Shakeel Virk
: Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message news:<b2h4f4$m91$1...@knot.queensu.ca>...
Did you learn all you needed to learn about Christianity from the Oklahoma
bombing ? How about Waco Texas ? How about World War I ? How about
World War II ? How about from Hitler ? How about from Paul Bernardo ?
How about Susan Smith ? How about Manson ?
Ignorant and illogical. You warmongering, Islam hating Americans (not all
Americans) need to:
1) Get educated.
2) Develop some logic.
3) Be more humble (I'll take it as my job to humble you)
Shakeel Virk
: On 13 Feb 2003 21:59:00 GMT, Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> in accordance
: with The Prophecy and "For Entertainment Purposes Only" availed us of their
: wisdom with:
:>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
:>: 3s...@qlink.queensu.ca (Shakeel?Virk), Wrote:
:>:>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit
:>:><BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
:>your responses. If you have something worth saying then say it, and
:>stop the insults on Muslims.
:>
:>Use logic and present a good argument if you have one. Like Muslims
:>do.
: Yea, so open minded, except when it comes to women, for just one small
: example.
Women choose to follow Islam. Go talk to them. Find out for yourself, the
level of your ignornace is very high. Learn something from women, unless
your ego is too big.
: What's not to believe. They are going to be allowed to drive now
: in some Muslim countries. Yahoo!
Great Ignornant one, you speak so much yet know so little. Islam has no
laws regarding driving cars. Islam is over 1500 years old at that time
cars did not exist.
The driving you refer to is a Saudi Arabian law NOT an Islamic law. Get
your facts straight before you open your mouth next time.
Your arguments are weak. I crush them easily. I want you close-minded
Americans (not all Americans) to open your minds and think more freely.
Let go of your hate, and think rationallly.
I don't mind you presenting logical arguments against Islam, that would be
interesting. Your arguments lack reason, and display your ignorance to
educated.
: What an advancement for
: Women Rights. All one has to do is see how women are treated
: in muslim countries. I bet you enjoy that aspect of your religion
: and you are intimidated by educated and emancipated women.
Muslims live in Canada, Europe, the US and continue to follow Islam out of
their own free will. So your argument is not against Islam it's against
the laws of certain countries. Use your mind. Use your brian. Let go of
your hatred.
:>If you don't then look it up. Find out how many Muslim women attended
:>Mosque services in Canada, US, and Europe in the past few days for Eid
:>prayers.
: Wow, they let them out of the house in a burka to go to prayers.
: How advanced.
Great is your ignornace. There are Muslim women doctors, teachers,
lawyers, nurses, voluteers, and so much more working in Canada, US, Europe
and in many other parts of the world.
It's your ignorance which is the problem. My sister in law is a doctor
who works in New York City. My wife who recently moved to Canada worked
as a Biomedical Scientist in England. My other Sister in law is a high
school teacher.
These are the facts. In fact Muslim women have excelled in education in
Canada. Many of them are at top of there classes.
:>You are wrong and I am right. That is a fact. Go convince yourself by
:>looking up the facts.
: Go back to the 7th Century run country you came from.
Your the one living in ignornace. When did you or your family come to
North America ? My family might have been here longer then yours.
: Perhaps a lifetime of abuse has them so traumatized they don't know
: anything else, like a battered woman.
Or perhaps your a great ignoramous ? I don't say that to insult you, I
say it because it is a fact. Learn something. Get educated.
:>Sorry but there is a huge Muslim population in virtually every country of
:>the world including the US. All these people choose to follow Islam.
:>If you knew anything about its teachings you might become a Muslim
:>yourself. Get out of your cage of ignorance and learn something.
: Most of them do choose, but not all of them. I agree that there are some
: Islamic communities that aren't as strict, but only because their women
: would rebel if they tried to enforce Sharia.
Is that right 'expert' ? You are pathetic. Your accusations are baseless,
and never ending. You obviosuly know very little.
: Wrong. Even the Catholic Church has told its nuns that they don't have to
: wear habits any more, and 99% of them don't. Or are you describing some
: isolated christian cults?
No Muslim women 'has' to wear Hijab. It is a choice they make.
If anybody forces it on them, they themselves are going against
the teachings of Islam. The Holy Quran clearly states:
"There should be no compulsion in religion".
I'll educate you slowly.
Shakeel Virk
: On 11 Feb 2003 22:47:44 GMT, Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca>
:>Can you say brainwashed ?
: Yes, I believe that was what he was getting at.
He and the rest of you hatemongering, war hungry, Americans (not all
Americans) are ill informed, and are brainwashed by the Bush
administration.
Bush says Iraq is hiding WMD therefore they are.
Bush says Iraq is a real threat to the US therefore they are.
Bush says bomb Iraq therefore we should.
Bush says they are evil therefore they are.
Bush says buy duck tape so we run out and buy duck tape, we are
clueless.
These dumb Americans (not all Americans) might cut off all fresh air to
their homes and suffocate to death and blame Bin Laden for that as well.
Bush said so therefore it must be true.
Stop mindlessly following Bush. Challenge his insane claims, his an angry
little man who has far too much power, and far to few brain cells.
Shakeel Virk
: Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote
:> In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Hilarious! When do the daughters
: of Muslims make that choice? Right after they remind them
: that the primitive religion of islam imposes an automatic
: death penalty for apostasy?
Ignorant. Another ignoramous, surprise, surprise.
Your no challenge. I can crush your arguments with very little
effort. Use some logic, use some reasoning, present a good argument
against Islam if you can. These weak arguments you put foward
can be defeated by childern.
Now to crush your weak claim that Islam teaches Muslims to kill apostates:
"Those who believe, then disbelieve, then again believe, then disbelieve,
and then increase in disbelief, Allah (God) will never forgive them nor
will He guide them to the way." (Quran 4:138)
In this verse we are told of those people who give up belief, then again
beleive. But if the Islamic Law was death for giving up belief, how do
these people "beleive gain, then disbelieve, and then increase in
disbelief" ?
We find no verse after or before this one, which states that apostates
should be killed.
Not only this but we also read in the Holy Quran:
"There should be no compulsion in religion. Surely, right has become
distinct from wrong; so whosoever refuses to be led by those who
transgress, and believes in Allah, has surely grasped a strong handle
which knows no breaking. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing."
(Quran 2:257)
Now if the Islamic Law was to kill anybody who gives up Islam, then we
would find a major contradiction in the verse above, which states that
there should be no compulsion in religion. If threat of the death
sentence is not compelling somebody, please explain what is. ??
:> Look in America, Europe, Canada, and other non-Muslim countries and see
:> for your self. Women in these countries continue to follow Islam, and
:> there have been many converts to Islam within these countries.
: Similarly, many people in those countries have started using
: hard drugs. So what? A certain proportion of a large enough
: population will latch onto any dumb idea that comes along.
Is that your entire argument ? Is that all you have ?
Surely you can do better.
: Mohammed was a pervert. "Prophet," my ass.
There is no compulsion for you to believe. It's your choice, but
you are in no position to make an educated decision. Learn something
first. Use your brain, use some logic, be rational, open your mind
and think freely like Muslims.
:> You should follow this teaching of the Prophet (pbuh) and increase your
:> knowledge of Islam.
: Yeah, we should all screw nine year old girls. Get a grip, imbecile.
Hatred will not lead you to the truth. Studying and and opening your
close mind should be your path.
: rotfl. Such a grandiose assessment coming from a drone.
Again feeble attempts at personal attacks instead of looking at the
issue. Closed-minded people
Count 1
> laws regarding driving cars. Islam is over 1500 years old at that time
> cars did not exist.
>
> The driving you refer to is a Saudi Arabian law NOT an Islamic law. Get
> your facts straight before you open your mouth next time.
Yes - but the SA constitiution clearly states its laws are based on the
Quran. Its an Islamic culture that puts these restrictions on its women,
not western. It should be noted that SA is one of the only countries in the
region that still have this kind of barbaric thing.
> No Muslim women 'has' to wear Hijab. It is a choice they make.
This is simply not true in several muslim countries. Either legally or
culturally.
> If anybody forces it on them, they themselves are going against
> the teachings of Islam. The Holy Quran clearly states:
>
> "There should be no compulsion in religion".
>
> I'll educate you slowly.
Please pick up the pace.
Lets look at your quote about compulsion. Why did you not include the
preceeding and succeeding passages?
**********
Allah! There is no god but He,-the Living, the Self-subsisting, Eternal. No
slumber can seize Him nor sleep. His are all things in the heavens and on
earth. Who is there can intercede in His presence except as He permitteth?
He knoweth what (appeareth to His creatures as) before or after or behind
them. Nor shall they compass aught of His knowledge except as He willeth.
His Throne doth extend over the heavens and the earth, and He feeleth no
fatigue in guarding and preserving them for He is the Most High, the Supreme
(in glory).
Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error:
whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy
hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things
Allah is the Protector of those who have faith: from the depths of darkness
He will lead them forth into light. Of those who reject faith the patrons
are the evil ones: from light they will lead them forth into the depths of
darkness. They will be companions of the fire, to dwell therein (For ever).
*********
I see the use of the word 'compulsion' here as stengthening the argument
that Islam is the only religion. I DO NOT see it as some kind of argument
for Islamic egalitarianism.
Also - what about the time Allah revealed this revelation? It was in his
first two years of arriving at Medina. This was a time when Mohammed needed
to convince the people of Medina that the religion he was creating was the
correct one.
Any - please continue to enlighten us on the wonders of Islam.
blackgold
"Shakeel Virk" <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message
news:b2j46m$o5k$2...@knot.queensu.ca...
Shakeel Virk
:> The driving you refer to is a Saudi Arabian law NOT an Islamic law. Get
:> your facts straight before you open your mouth next time.
: Yes - but the SA constitiution clearly states its laws are based on the
: Quran. Its an Islamic culture that puts these restrictions on its women,
: not western.
Saudi Arabia can claim the moon is made of cheese that doesn't make it
true, does it ?
If they claim that women driving is against Islam then they need to
provide the proof. If you repeat their nonsense then you need to provide
the proof. Simply stating "Saudi Arabia said so" doesn't cut it.
Understand ?
: It should be noted that SA is one of the only countries in the
: region that still have this kind of barbaric thing.
:> No Muslim women 'has' to wear Hijab. It is a choice they make.
: This is simply not true in several muslim countries. Either legally or
: culturally.
I see your problem. You think a countries laws are equal to Islamic laws.
No it's more then that. You take every 'bad' law and take it to be
'Islamic law'.
One might ask why don't you take the fact that in Pakistan women do drive
as an example of Islamic teachings ? Why do you choose to select Saudi
Arabian law to represent Islamic law ?
I think the answer is your hatred of Islam. You decided to let Saudi
Arabia represent Islamic Law when they ban women from driving, and you
decided not to select other 'Muslim' countries. You will find the worst
laws in each country and attribute those to Islam. That is not being
just.
The fact is no countries laws represent the religion of Islam. Islam must
be judged for it's own teachings not the laws of Saudi Arabia or any other
country.
:> If anybody forces it on them, they themselves are going against
The verses clearly say there should be NO COMPULSION in religion. Simple
as that. Of course if you choose to follow Islam then there are rewards
(according to Islam). If you choose to disbelieve then there are
consequences. That is the religion. The choice is every individuals to
make. Like it or not.
I know you don't believe it but that is not the point. The point is
compulsion or no compulsion, and the Quran is clear on it. Even your own
quote provides the proof.
Let me also state I appreciate you making an effort to have an
intellectual discussion not like the rest of the hatemongering,
irrational posts.
: Also - what about the time Allah revealed this revelation? It was in his
: first two years of arriving at Medina. This was a time when Mohammed needed
: to convince the people of Medina that the religion he was creating was the
: correct one.
I'm not trying to convert you. You don't believe it, "for you your
religion and for me mine" (another Quote from the Quran).
The point is there is NO compulsion in Islam. It's all based on free will
and making free choices in your life. You don't believe it, that is your
choice. I do believe it that is my choice. No compulsion in religion is
the direct teachings found in the Quran.
: Any - please continue to enlighten us on the wonders of Islam.
Okay:
We read in the Holy Quran:
"And they say, 'None shall ever enter Heaven unless he be a Jew or a
Christian.' These are their vain desires. Say, 'Produce your proof, if
you are truthful.'
Nay, whoever submits himself completely to God, and is the doer of good,
shall have his reward with his Lord. No fear shall come upon such,
neither shall they grieve."
[Quran 2:112-113]
We also read in the Holy Quran:
"Surely, those who have believed, and the Jews, and the Sabians, and the
Christians - whoso believes in God and the Last Day and does good deeds,
on them shall come no fear, nor shall they grieve."
[Quran 2:70]
You see how open Islam is. Even Jews and Christians will go to heaven if
they believe in God, the Last day and do good works.
That is what the true Islam teaches.
Jack
> In soc.culture.usa Cyrakis <cyr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message news:<b2h4f4$m91$1...@knot.queensu.ca>...
> : <snip>
someone masquerading as L.A. Laker center Shak wrote:
> Ignorant and illogical. You warmongering, Islam hating Americans
its not that we hate you islams. its just that if the Israelis choose
to kick your asses around a little now and then, we just don't give a
flying fuck about it. but hate you? we'd have to actually think
about you first.
<snip>
> 3) Be more humble (I'll take it as my job to humble you)
now, that's a laugher.
PS, are you one of those female-strippers this thread is about?
The Department of Defense
that everyone knew wasnt true we would definately question him...Thing is he
has support from alot of Americans because Islam is what it is and you cant
hide actions by words like most double talking muslims try to do....The
actions of islamic people say it all and I would venture to bet that if
there was a unbiased version of mo and his gutter cult presented before the
American public then Bush's support would rise to the 80 to90 percent
approval rating.... fact is most Americans dont know the facts other than
the actions by islamic countries but if they knew the story behind it
......they would get nauseated.....just like you are making me....
"Shakeel Virk" <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message
news:b2j46m$o5k$2...@knot.queensu.ca...
Count 1
> provide the proof. If you repeat their nonsense then you need to provide
> the proof. Simply stating "Saudi Arabia said so" doesn't cut it.
>
> Understand ?
Doesn't cut what? SA bases its laws on the teachings of Islam. Attempting
to suggest it doesn't is ignorant. SA has laws banning female travel in a
variety of foms ( I know - I've been there ).
This is only one example of discrimination according to gender 'fundamental'
Islamic countries put in place.
Understand? Islam is inherently discriminatory. If a country is fighting
discrimination and imposing laws that allow equal justice for all regardless
of gender - then they are not being 'Islamic'.
I'm sorry for you, but there really is no way to get around this. Its one
of the primary reasons westerners consider Islam to be a meaningless
religion stuck in the 16th century.
> I see your problem. You think a countries laws are equal to Islamic laws.
> No it's more then that. You take every 'bad' law and take it to be
> 'Islamic law'.
?? - You said no Muslim women 'has' to wear hijab. You are wrong.
> One might ask why don't you take the fact that in Pakistan women do drive
> as an example of Islamic teachings ? Why do you choose to select Saudi
> Arabian law to represent Islamic law ?
Because SA is useful to my argument. Oman, Malaysia, Morrocco - indeed most
other Islamic countries - are not. Most other Islamic countries are tying
to modernize their culture and their religion. The fact that its taken them
this long to see it as a priority now speaks volumes to Islam's affect on a
culture.
> I think the answer is your hatred of Islam. You decided to let Saudi
> Arabia represent Islamic Law when they ban women from driving, and you
> decided not to select other 'Muslim' countries. You will find the worst
> laws in each country and attribute those to Islam. That is not being
> just.
I don't need to be 'just'. I need to be honest. So do you. You are not
honest when you say no women needs to wear hijab, and you are being
dishonest when you say Islam doesn't create laws for driving. I know the
quran does not specifically mention wether a woman can drive a car or not -
but the foundation of the law is found in the discriminatory interpretation
of Islam SA uses.
Deal with it.
> The fact is no countries laws represent the religion of Islam. Islam must
> be judged for it's own teachings not the laws of Saudi Arabia or any other
> country.
We'll get to that.
> : I see the use of the word 'compulsion' here as stengthening the argument
> : that Islam is the only religion. I DO NOT see it as some kind of
argument
> : for Islamic egalitarianism.
>
> The verses clearly say there should be NO COMPULSION in religion. Simple
> as that.
No - I am afraid it is not as simple as that. It is infact much more
complicated. The word compulsion here means there is no compulsion once you
become a muslim. It means there is no compulsion to leave Islam - indeed
the remainder of the passage indicates this.
BTW - many religions try to remove compulsive acts by making desire -
greed - avarice - covetous - behaviour a sin.
Of course if you choose to follow Islam then there are rewards
> (according to Islam). If you choose to disbelieve then there are
> consequences. That is the religion. The choice is every individuals to
> make. Like it or not.
Why are there consequences if there is not compulsion (if one uses your
understanding of compulsion in the verse)? I would think the existence of
'consequences' creates the 'compulsion'. ( convert - or you burn in hell -
that's also in this compulsion verse.)
> I know you don't believe it but that is not the point. The point is
> compulsion or no compulsion, and the Quran is clear on it. Even your own
> quote provides the proof.
LOL! Clearly my own quote proves nothing. Neither does your significantly
more limited quote. The quran is clear on nothing - this is why there are
so many divisions within Islam dating back to the first hours after the
prophets death.
You really need to bone up on your islamic history.
> Let me also state I appreciate you making an effort to have an
> intellectual discussion not like the rest of the hatemongering,
> irrational posts.
Thank you - but I can't return the compliment. You seem to enjoy spreading
lies and making ignorant statements in your defense of the indefensible.
> The point is there is NO compulsion in Islam. It's all based on free will
> and making free choices in your life. You don't believe it, that is your
> choice. I do believe it that is my choice. No compulsion in religion is
> the direct teachings found in the Quran.
No - it is not - and much of the teachings of the quran admonishes those
that do not believe.
> : Any - please continue to enlighten us on the wonders of Islam.
>
> Okay:
Oh god...
> You see how open Islam is.
Move from theory to implementation. What are the standard characteristics
of an 'Islamic regime'? It is discrimination based on gender, theocracies,
barbaric and primitive punishments for non existent crimes.
You keep moving from one area to another. Islam as a spirituality is one
topic. Islam and how it affects the laws and cultures of countries is
another.
Even Jews and Christians will go to heaven if
> they believe in God, the Last day and do good works.
>
> That is what the true Islam teaches.
Funny how the more true to Islam a country becomes - the farther away it
gets from humanity. ( Iran - SA - Afghanistan - Northern Nigeria - Somalia )
Cyrakis
> : I learned all I need to learn about islam on 9/11.
>
> Did you learn all you needed to learn about Christianity from the Oklahoma
> bombing ? How about Waco Texas ? How about World War I ? How about
> World War II ? How about from Hitler ? How about from Paul Bernardo ?
> How about Susan Smith ? How about Manson ?
I'm not a Christian. When Christian fanatics start killing people
wholesale, I'll call for their destruction too.
Shouldn't you be hiding in a cave somewhere anyway?
Shakeel Virk
: Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message news:<b2j0eu$j36$2...@knot.queensu.ca>...
:> In soc.culture.usa Cyrakis <cyr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
:> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message news:<b2h4f4$m91$1...@knot.queensu.ca>...
:> : <snip>
: someone masquerading as L.A. Laker center Shak wrote:
:> Ignorant and illogical. You warmongering, Islam hating Americans
: its not that we hate you islams.
'we' ? I was refering to people who are warmongers and 'Islam hating
Americans', as quoted above.
If you are not one of those who hates Islam then you do not fit in the
'we' category.
: its just that if the Israelis choose
: to kick your asses around a little now and then, we just don't give a
: flying fuck about it.
Ignoramous. There are millions of Muslims living in North America.
Palestianians make up a very small portion of Muslims.
: <snip>
:> 3) Be more humble (I'll take it as my job to humble you)
: now, that's a laugher.
Keep laughing but the more you read the more you will learn.
Even with all of that hatred and ignorance something might seap through.
Shakeel Virk
:> provide the proof. If you repeat their nonsense then you need to provide
:> the proof. Simply stating "Saudi Arabia said so" doesn't cut it.
:>
:> Understand ?
You obviously failed to comprehend the simple points, so I will explain it
to you in a more simple manner. Review:
I say:
Saudi Arabian Laws do not equal Islamic Laws.
You say:
Saudi Arabian Laws do equal Islamic Laws.
Agreed ?
My question is why do you select Saudi Arabia why not Oman ?
Your answer (as I understand it):
Beacuse you don't have to be just. You have to be honest.
Your answer makes not sense to me. You will have to be more clear.
Oman Laws state women can drive.
Saudi Arabia Laws state women can't drive.
(Islam does not have a law regarding driving)
Both Oman and Saudi Arabia are predominately Muslim countries.
Yet they have contradictory Laws regarding driving.
Islam can't teach both women can drive and women can't drive.
So you ignore Oman and say the Islamic law is women can't drive.
Which is the height of illogic.
Logic would say Islam has not given a law regarding driving.
Islamic laws come from the Quran. Not from Saudi Arabia.
Do you now see your problem ?
If not, would you consider it right to state Christian laws as American,
or German or any other predominately Christian country ?
Salvery was common in the US does that mean Christianity taught Whites to
enslave Blacks ?
How about Hitler. He claimed to be Christian and Nazi Germany was built
on his version of Christianity. Would you say that Christainity teaches
people kill Jews ?
Why then do you take Saudi Arabian law to represent Islamic law ?
Be honest and be just. Do both and you will come to the correct
conclusion.
: Doesn't cut what? SA bases its laws on the teachings of Islam.
So they claim. Yet women can't drive in Saudi Arabia. Which Islamic law
is that based on ?
: Attempting to suggest it doesn't is ignorant.
It is ? Why is it ignorant when you know full well that Islam has no law
regarding driving (Islam is over 1500 years old, cars were invented less
then 200 years ago).
Saudi Arabian law obviously doesn't equal Islamic Law. This is a fact,
and the driving is one of many proofs of this.
: SA has laws banning female travel in a
: variety of foms ( I know - I've been there ).
I also know this. It is not the point of dispute. The point of dispute
is whether or not Islam teaches that women shouldn't drive. Your case so
far has been weak to non-existant.
: This is only one example of discrimination according to gender 'fundamental'
: Islamic countries put in place.
No it isn't. If you want to show that Islam teaches women not to drive
cars then show it from the Quran (Islamic Holy Book).
Islamic Law does not equal Saudi Arabian Law. You have yet to show why it
does.
: Understand? Islam is inherently discriminatory.
You have failed to demonstrate why.
: If a country is fighting
: discrimination and imposing laws that allow equal justice for all regardless
: of gender - then they are not being 'Islamic'.
The laws of country are not the same as the laws of a religion. In Canada
I follow all of the laws of the country, yet freely practice my religion.
The two can go hand and hand.
: I'm sorry for you, but there really is no way to get around this. Its one
: of the primary reasons westerners consider Islam to be a meaningless
: religion stuck in the 16th century.
There are millions of 'Westerners' who practice Islam every day. Your
just ignorant to that fact.
:> I see your problem. You think a countries laws are equal to Islamic laws.
:> No it's more then that. You take every 'bad' law and take it to be
:> 'Islamic law'.
: ?? - You said no Muslim women 'has' to wear hijab. You are wrong.
According to Islamic law there is no compulsion in religion. It is the
choice of the woman. If I force a woman to wear hijab that reflects on
me, not on Islam. If Saudi's force women to wear hijab that reflects on
them, not on Islam. Islamic teachings are in the Quran.
: I don't need to be 'just'. I need to be honest. So do you. You are not
: honest when you say no women needs to wear hijab, and you are being
: dishonest when you say Islam doesn't create laws for driving.
I am ?
Prove it.
Here is my argument:
According to Islam there should be no compulsion in religion.
Therefore women should not be compelled to wear Hijab. However many women
choose to wear Hijab because it is prescribed in Islam.
Give your counter argument.
My second argument:
Islam was revealed over 1000 years before cars were invented. Islam has
no teachings regarding driving cars.
Your counter argument:
: I know the
: quran does not specifically mention wether a woman can drive a car or not -
: but the foundation of the law is found in the discriminatory interpretation
: of Islam SA uses.
What interpretation ? According to Saudi leaders the law regarding
driving is NOT rooted in Islam. They accept this. It is a decision made
by the people of Saudi Arabia and does not in any way reflect upon Islam.
They also have a law which states one driver per house hold. Does that
also automatically become an Islamic law ?
What if they change the laws tomorrow ? Does that mean Islamic laws also
changed around the world ?
Your illogical. You have to see your wrong.
:> The verses clearly say there should be NO COMPULSION in religion. Simple
:> as that.
: No - I am afraid it is not as simple as that. It is infact much more
: complicated. The word compulsion here means there is no compulsion once you
: become a muslim.
It does ? How did you come to that conclusion ?
The verse states:
"There should be no compulsion in religion. Surely, right has become
distinct from wrong; so whosoever refuses to be led by those who
transgress, and believes in Allah, has surely grasped a strong handle
which knows no breaking. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing."
(Quran 2:257)
In fact what it is saying is don't force people to follow Islam.
Right (Islam) is clear for all to see and those who accept it have grasped
a strong handle.
: It means there is no compulsion to leave Islam - indeed
: the remainder of the passage indicates this.
What ? Where do you come to that conclusion. Spell it out for me because
I am not following you at all.
: Why are there consequences if there is not compulsion (if one uses your
: understanding of compulsion in the verse)?
It's like school. There is no compulsion to get a good education, but if
you don't there will be consequences.
There is no compulsion to get a drivers liscence but if you don't there
will be consequences (you won't be allowed to drive).
etc.. etc...
What's your problem with that ?
: I would think the existence of
: 'consequences' creates the 'compulsion'. ( convert - or you burn in hell -
: that's also in this compulsion verse.)
If you don't believe in Islam, then why would you believe your going to
'burn in hell' for rejecting it ? That isn't very compelling is it ?
: No - it is not - and much of the teachings of the quran admonishes those
: that do not believe.
So ? What's wrong with that ? I don't believe Jesus is the Son of God
and Christians might say I will go to hell for that. I don't have a
problem with that.
I simply don't believe it, and if it is true I will suffer the
consequences.
What is your problem with that ?
That's reality. There are always consequences to decisions we make, good
and bad consequences. That's everyday life, like it or not.
If you can't face that reality then I don't know how to help you.
Shakeel Virk
You definitely say it like you see it. Although I disagree, I have to
admit you don't seem to be brainwashed like so many others.
: I dont think Americans blindly follow Bush...if he told everyone something
: that everyone knew wasnt true we would definately question him...Thing is he
: has support from alot of Americans because Islam is what it is and you cant
: hide actions by words like most double talking muslims try to do....
The basic problem is many fail to seperate the religion from the laws of a
country.
Direct your anger at the laws of the country when you don't like the laws
of that country.
Direct your anger at Islam when you don't like Islamic laws.
But PLEASE make sure that the laws you refer to are in fact Islamic laws.
The typical logic around here is that Saudi Arabia has this law therefore
Islam is backwards. Which is the height of illogic.
The US was founded on 'Christian values' yet the participated in enslaving
Black people. Does it follow that Christianity teaches slavery ?
Understand. It's not that complicated.
: The
: actions of islamic people say it all
Ignornance is your problem. There are millions of Muslims who live
peaceful lives, they give to the poor, they help each other, the feed the
hungry, the donate blood, and they work hard to make a living.
You are only aware of the fanatics who claim to follow Islam yet comitt
murder. Islam clearly teaches murder is forbiden as well as committing
suicide. However many Americans don't realize this, because they are
ignorant and choose to believe anything negative about Islam without doing
the proper verifications.
: approval rating.... fact is most Americans dont know the facts other than
: the actions by islamic countries but if they knew the story behind it
: ......they would get nauseated.....just like you are making me....
I am please to have 'nauseated' you and many others. I often read crap
written against Islam and just ignore it. This time I am going to give
the liars a public beating. They are going realize that there 'arguments'
stand on no ground, and there ignorance is going to be exposed.
This may be 'nauseating' for those hatemongering types but sometimes it is
necessary.
The Department of Defense
> In soc.culture.usa The Department of Defense <bl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> You definitely say it like you see it. Although I disagree, I have to
> admit you don't seem to be brainwashed like so many others.
>
> : I dont think Americans blindly follow Bush...if he told everyone
something
> : that everyone knew wasnt true we would definately question him...Thing
is he
> : has support from alot of Americans because Islam is what it is and you
cant
> : hide actions by words like most double talking muslims try to do....
>
> The basic problem is many fail to seperate the religion from the laws of a
> country.
In America we have seperation of church and state... I am Catholic and I
believe this is the right choice and I believe that Jesus himself wanted it
that way...i.e. Give to Caesar what is his... and God what is his....
What is meant by Sharia? isnt that when there is an pro islamic government
then they IMPOSE ISLAMIC LAW????
>
> Direct your anger at the laws of the country when you don't like the laws
> of that country.
Why do you think I and many others direct our anger at liar countries like
S.A. Egypt and Iran
>
> Direct your anger at Islam when you don't like Islamic laws.
I also have anger toward Iraq not because of the people ...because they help
facilitate terrorism.....same with N.K. ..... i.e. if you are fucked up with
your government then you are fucked up with your government
>
> But PLEASE make sure that the laws you refer to are in fact Islamic laws.
4 male witnesses for a female to convict a male.....enough said.... China
doesnt have that law....USA, New Zealand Russia and not even the horrific
fucked up N.K. have that law.....where do you hear about that law....ISLAMIC
countries.....
>
> The typical logic around here is that Saudi Arabia has this law therefore
> Islam is backwards. Which is the height of illogic.
How in the world is that illogical......S.A. is one of the most perfect
examples of what Islamic school of thought is about...Give the other
countries that are becoming islamic a few more years to deteriorate....(But
I concur that is only speculation)
>
> The US was founded on 'Christian values' yet the participated in enslaving
> Black people. Does it follow that Christianity teaches slavery ?
This is true but where did we get the slaves from.....ISLAMIC slave
traders.... and we corrected that.....and that wasnt a Christian thing..it
was a money thing....Christians of GOOD heart knew it was wrong....and alot
of bloodshed happend to correct this barbaric practise in our past....we
have grown since then....islamic countries still to this day has
slaves....what a crock of shit that argument is....
>
> Understand. It's not that complicated.
No its not that complicated you are full of shit....
>
> : The
> : actions of islamic people say it all
Clearly the ones you read about.... who is making 90 percent of the
headlines.... islamic people.....not by there acts of kindness and miracles
discoveries that come from islamic countries.....but violence and
bloodshed...
>
> Ignornance is your problem. There are millions of Muslims who live
> peaceful lives, they give to the poor, they help each other, the feed the
> hungry, the donate blood, and they work hard to make a living.
I would definately agree with you...there are alot of good islamic
people...That would be like saying all Christian or Hindu or Buddist are
good people....Simply not true..... painfully true to my religion that there
are fucked up priests.....Never said that all islamic people are bad.....
>
> You are only aware of the fanatics who claim to follow Islam yet comitt
> murder. Islam clearly teaches murder is forbiden as well as committing
> suicide. However many Americans don't realize this, because they are
> ignorant and choose to believe anything negative about Islam without doing
> the proper verifications.
Maybe if more muslims would voice their outrage towards this PUBLICLY then
that would not be such a problem.... hmmmm? get it? The only group that
makes an effort is RAWA ....So make your "true" islam known publicly....but
this wont happen because it hasnt happened yet....billion or so followers
and hardly an outcry against all the murderers and thugs in islamic
countries like iran.....
>
> : approval rating.... fact is most Americans dont know the facts other
than
> : the actions by islamic countries but if they knew the story behind it
> : ......they would get nauseated.....just like you are making me....
The only reason you are making me nauseated is because you spend your time
preaching your crap here when you should be organizing you billion followers
to clean up their acts in their countries....quit trying to sugar coat
islam......clean it up instead...
>
> I am please to have 'nauseated' you and many others. I often read crap
> written against Islam and just ignore it. This time I am going to give
> the liars a public beating. They are going realize that there 'arguments'
> stand on no ground, and there ignorance is going to be exposed.
>
> This may be 'nauseating' for those hatemongering types but sometimes it is
> necessary.
>
I am not a hatemongerer...I like all types if I was a hatemongerer I wouldnt
eat falafel as much as I do.... I just would like you to clean up your
religion before it destroys the world....thats all...
Count 1
through had to give up. You clearly lack rudimentary comprehension skills.
You keep asking where in Islamic law it says women can't drive - although I
went to great pains to tell you I know its not found directly in Islam - but
Islamic countries are the only ( major )ones where they are found.
Here is a copy of the SA constitution.
http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/sa00000_.html
Article 1
The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a sovereign Arab Islamic state with Islam as
its religion; God's Book and the Sunnah of His Prophet, God's prayers and
peace be upon him, are its constitution, Arabic is its language and Riyadh
is its capital.
I don't know how I can make it any clearer. SA is an Islamic country - SA
has laws stating women can't drive. SA says its laws are
Note: I did not say Islam says women can't drive - but SA does and SA bases
its laws on 'God's book and Sunnah of his prophet'.
Is that clear enough for you now? WE ALL KNOW ISLAM DOES NOT HAVE A LAW FOR
RESTRICTIONS ON DRIVING OR COMPUTER HACKING OR INSIDER TRADING OR ANY OTHER
MODERN DAY THING!!
> : It means there is no compulsion to leave Islam - indeed
> : the remainder of the passage indicates this.
>
> What ? Where do you come to that conclusion. Spell it out for me because
> I am not following you at all.
That is painfully clear. Its not complex. Reread what I wrote and try to
read the passages I quoted with a desire to comprehend.
> : Why are there consequences if there is not compulsion (if one uses your
> : understanding of compulsion in the verse)?
>
> It's like school.
Bullshit - nowhere does the quran state I will burn in hell if I don't go to
school. However this verse does state I will burn in hell if I don't
believe.
It is clearly not like school.
> : I would think the existence of
> : 'consequences' creates the 'compulsion'. ( convert - or you burn in
hell -
> : that's also in this compulsion verse.)
>
> If you don't believe in Islam, then why would you believe your going to
> 'burn in hell' for rejecting it ? That isn't very compelling is it ?
?? - with this passage you have confirmed your idiocy. I don't even believe
in hell and nothing I have written indicates I do. The point was about
compulsion but clearly you either missed it or are deliberately putting
words in my mouth to avoid the fact that you are defeated in this debate.
Conclusion - the quote you offer regarding compulsion and islam in fact
states the opposite of what you think it states.
> : No - it is not - and much of the teachings of the quran admonishes those
> : that do not believe.
>
> So ? What's wrong with that ? I don't believe Jesus is the Son of God
> and Christians might say I will go to hell for that. I don't have a
> problem with that.
Again - that's not the point. The point is - much of the quranic teaching
proves there is significant compulsion in Islam.
> If you can't face that reality then I don't know how to help you.
If I ever think I needed help from a muslim who has less knowledge of their
religion than I do I'll let ya know.
Shakeel Virk
: its laws on 'God's book and Sunnah of his prophet'.
: Is that clear enough for you now? WE ALL KNOW ISLAM DOES NOT HAVE A LAW FOR
: RESTRICTIONS ON DRIVING OR COMPUTER HACKING OR INSIDER TRADING OR ANY OTHER
: MODERN DAY THING!!
I already understand your problem.
Your saying the Saudi Arabian Law = Islamic Law.
That is what you are saying right ? Please correct me if I am mistaken.
If you believe Saudi Law = Islamic Law you are then contradicting yourelf.
Saudi Arabia has a law banning women from driving. You state above:
"WE ALL KNOW ISLAM DOES NOT HAVE A LAW FOR RESTRICTIONS ON DRIVING.."
So the obivious question is how do you resolve this contradiction ?
If you believe:
1) Saudi Law = Islamic Law
2) Saudi Law bans women driving.
3) Islam does not have a law for driving.
You can't believe all 3.
:> : Why are there consequences if there is not compulsion (if one uses your
:> : understanding of compulsion in the verse)?
:>
:> It's like school.
: Bullshit - nowhere does the quran state I will burn in hell if I don't go to
: school. However this verse does state I will burn in hell if I don't
: believe.
You will have a harder time finding a good job if you don't go to school.
If you choose not to believe that, you may suffer the consequences.
But enough of this. One thing at a time. Resolve your Saudi=Islam
contradiction first. Then we can move on.
Shakeel Virk
:> Did you learn all you needed to learn about Christianity from the Oklahoma
:> World War II ? How about from Hitler ? How about from Paul Bernardo ?
:> How about Susan Smith ? How about Manson ?
: I'm not a Christian. When Christian fanatics start killing people
: wholesale, I'll call for their destruction too.
When ? Does World War II not mean anything to you ? How about all of the
murders taking place in the US everyday ?
: Shouldn't you be hiding in a cave somewhere anyway?
Why so you can continue to believe in the myths you hold so dearly ?
Come on, you talk tough but when challenged you would like nothing more
then for me to go hide in a cave. Be a man, stand up and defend your
side through reason and logic. Can you do that for me ?
Shakeel Virk
: "Shakeel Virk" <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message
: news:b2jqi7$m7t$3...@knot.queensu.ca...
:> In soc.culture.usa The Department of Defense <bl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: In America we have seperation of church and state... I am Catholic and I
: believe this is the right choice and I believe that Jesus himself wanted it
: that way...i.e. Give to Caesar what is his... and God what is his....
: What is meant by Sharia? isnt that when there is an pro islamic government
: then they IMPOSE ISLAMIC LAW????
Good question. What is Islamic Law ?
Saudi Arabia claims to follow Islamic Law but so do other countries
which have laws different then Saudi Arabia ?
Is there hundreds of different versions of 'Islamic Law' ?
Is Islamic law anything people say it is ?
Answer:
Islamic law is found in the Holy Quran. All Muslims believe
the Holy Quran is the word of God there is no dispute about this.
If the Quran says it then it is Islamic.
An analogy for Christian would be the Bible. If the Bible teaches
it then it is Christian law.
I know this is a short and simplified answer but that is all you really
need to know. There is also Sunna and Hadiths but we don't need to get
into that.
:> The US was founded on 'Christian values' yet the participated in enslaving
:> Black people. Does it follow that Christianity teaches slavery ?
: This is true but where did we get the slaves from.....ISLAMIC slave
: traders.... and we corrected that.....and that wasnt a Christian thing..it
: was a money thing....Christians of GOOD heart knew it was wrong....
Exactly! It WASN'T a 'Christian thing'. Just like blowing up the WTC is
not an 'Islamic thing' or banning women from driving is not an 'Islamic
thing'.
You understand the argument when applied to your religion, please try to
understand it when applied to Islam.
:> Ignornance is your problem. There are millions of Muslims who live
:> peaceful lives, they give to the poor, they help each other, the feed the
:> hungry, the donate blood, and they work hard to make a living.
: I would definately agree with you...there are alot of good islamic
: people...That would be like saying all Christian or Hindu or Buddist are
: good people....Simply not true..... painfully true to my religion that there
: are fucked up priests.....Never said that all islamic people are bad.....
But do you use those priests to represent Christianity ?
No you do not.
Why then do you use extremists to represent Islam ?
The vast majority of Muslims are peaceful, law abiding citizens.
:> You are only aware of the fanatics who claim to follow Islam yet comitt
:> murder. Islam clearly teaches murder is forbiden as well as committing
:> suicide. However many Americans don't realize this, because they are
:> ignorant and choose to believe anything negative about Islam without doing
:> the proper verifications.
: Maybe if more muslims would voice their outrage towards this PUBLICLY then
: that would not be such a problem.... hmmmm? get it?
That is sooooo true. The peacful law abiding Muslims unfortunately are
often quiet. They don't speak out. More education about Islam and
Muslims is needed in the West, and Muslims are the ones who need to make
these efforts. I fully agree with you.
: The only reason you are making me nauseated is because you spend your time
: preaching your crap here when you should be organizing you billion followers
: to clean up their acts in their countries....quit trying to sugar coat
: islam......clean it up instead...
Islam stands on it's own, I don't need to 'clean it up'. As for fanatics
and countries with fanatical laws changing that is easier said then done.
Direct your anger at Saudi laws and you and I will not butt heads.
When you attack Islam that's different then attacking Saudi laws.
: I am not a hatemongerer...I like all types if I was a hatemongerer I wouldnt
: eat falafel as much as I do.... I just would like you to clean up your
: religion before it destroys the world....thats all...
I don't consider you to be a hatemonger. The problem is you can't seem to
separate the religion from the laws or actions of countries.
Until you realize that Islam does not equal Saudi Arabia or Iraq or Iran
you will continue to have problems defending your beliefs.
Islam is not the problem. Fanatics are.
Christian fanatics and predominately Christian countries have carried out
acts Jesus would never approve of. I don't blame Christianity I blame
the people. Same applies for Islam, Hinduism, Buddishm or any other
RELIGION.
Islam literally means Peace and Submission.
Islam promotes peace, as hard you might find that to believe.
David Garvin
>
> Islam literally means Peace and Submission.
> Islam promotes peace, as hard you might find that to believe.
>
>
>
>
Excellent post. I deleted most of it from this reply in the hopes that others
will seek your post and read it. I couldn't
agree more. Salaam (I hope that's how it's spelled!) <g>
Jon
<3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
> In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> :> The driving you refer to is a Saudi Arabian law NOT an Islamic law. Get
> :> your facts straight before you open your mouth next time.
>
> : Yes - but the SA constitiution clearly states its laws are based on the
> : Quran. Its an Islamic culture that puts these restrictions on its women,
> : not western.
>
> Saudi Arabia can claim the moon is made of cheese that doesn't make it
> true, does it ?
So we should believe your word over the Saudi clerics?
> If they claim that women driving is against Islam then they need to
> provide the proof. If you repeat their nonsense then you need to provide
> the proof. Simply stating "Saudi Arabia said so" doesn't cut it.
>
> Understand ?
If you feel that no nation should base its laws on the Qu'ran or
Shariah then perhaps your time would be better spent lobbying those
Islamic nations that DO base their laws on Shariah, rather than
sticking your head in the sand here.
> :> No Muslim women 'has' to wear Hijab. It is a choice they make.
It's simply against the law in SA for a woman to go in public without
being dressed according to Shariah law, this includes the Hijab ...
It is also against the law for a woman to go in public without a Mahram
(husband or male blood relative), also Shariah law... by extension of
this it is illegal for a woman to leave the country without the
permission of her father or husband.
> : This is simply not true in several muslim countries. Either legally or
> : culturally.
>
> I see your problem. You think a countries laws are equal to Islamic laws.
They are if the laws are based on Shariah .. this is the whole point of
implementing Shariah laws, that the law is equal to Islamic laws.
> No it's more then that. You take every 'bad' law and take it to be
> 'Islamic law'.
No, he's only pointing out bad Islamic laws.
> One might ask why don't you take the fact that in Pakistan women do drive
> as an example of Islamic teachings ? Why do you choose to select Saudi
> Arabian law to represent Islamic law ?
Perhaps because SA professes to base its laws on Shariah law, Pakistan
does not.
> I think the answer is your hatred of Islam. You decided to let Saudi
> Arabia represent Islamic Law when they ban women from driving, and you
> decided not to select other 'Muslim' countries. You will find the worst
> laws in each country and attribute those to Islam. That is not being
> just.
It is if those nations declare their laws to be "Islamic law",
especially if the Umams, Mullahs and Ayatollahs of those nations
declare them to be Shariah.
> The fact is no countries laws represent the religion of Islam. Islam must
> be judged for it's own teachings not the laws of Saudi Arabia or any other
> country.
The Islam clerics of many nations would disagree with you... on the
subject of Islamic law who do we believe? ..You? ..or the Islamic
clerics?
--
- Jon
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
<omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>
>> I see your problem. You think a countries laws are equal to Islamic laws.
>> No it's more then that. You take every 'bad' law and take it to be
>> 'Islamic law'.
>
>?? - You said no Muslim women 'has' to wear hijab. You are wrong.
Hey, Muslim women can *choose* not to wear hijab, as long as they
don't mind either staying in their home all the time, or, you know,
being stoned to death. That's because they have been given Islamic
Choice! It's for their own protection, really, same as always
traveling with a male relative. If the typical towel-head were to see
an unaccompanied something that was identifiable as a woman, she's
just asking to get raped, and she would have no one to blame but
herself.
You have to think these things through, and look at it from the Muslim
Perspective.
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>In soc.culture.usa Jack <heavyf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>: Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message news:<b2j0eu$j36$2...@knot.queensu.ca>...
>:> In soc.culture.usa Cyrakis <cyr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>:> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message news:<b2h4f4$m91$1...@knot.queensu.ca>...
>:> : <snip>
>: someone masquerading as L.A. Laker center Shak wrote:
>
>:> Ignorant and illogical. You warmongering, Islam hating Americans
>
>: its not that we hate you islams.
>
>'we' ? I was refering to people who are warmongers and 'Islam hating
>Americans', as quoted above.
>
>If you are not one of those who hates Islam then you do not fit in the
>'we' category.
>
I do not hate Islam. I hate Muslims.
dep-of-def
borders and internal problems...?
Why is it that most "peaceful" muslims dont speak out against the extremists
and extremist governments?
Do you think if the amount of Christians act TODAY the way Islamic radicals
act then dont you think everyone else would have a field day with this? But
it seems their are more apologists for radical islamic actions....
I would think that it all comes down to the lives of two men.....Jesus and
Mohammed.....if I was to model my life after one of the two ( and believe me
I cant even come close to him) I would choose Jesus anyday.... I think it
would be way easy to follow Mohammed footsteps....by the stories I have read
.......rape pillage conquer.....that would be easy..... Jesus life was about
Peace and Submission...... I think thats what it boils down to.....
"Shakeel Virk" <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message
news:b2k4e4$4ro$4...@knot.queensu.ca...
John Griffin
> In soc.culture.usa John Griffin <theonetru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote
> :> In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> : HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!! Hilarious! When do the daughters
> : of Muslims make that choice? Right after they remind them
> : that the primitive religion of islam imposes an automatic
> : death penalty for apostasy?
>
> Ignorant. Another ignoramous, surprise, surprise.
> Your no challenge. I can crush your arguments with very little
> effort. Use some logic, use some reasoning, present a good argument
> against Islam if you can. These weak arguments you put foward
> can be defeated by childern.
Your self image exceeds you by a near world-record margin.
What you can actually do is to parrot what you've been told
to parrot. Whip out the stupid book that controls every
aspect of the mohammedan savage's life and start crushing...
<snicker>
> Now to crush your weak claim that Islam teaches Muslims to kill apostates:
>
> "Those who believe, then disbelieve, then again believe, then disbelieve,
> and then increase in disbelief, Allah (God) will never forgive them nor
> will He guide them to the way." (Quran 4:138)
If "Allah" (Myth) will never forgive people who dump the primitive
beliefs the "mullahs" pound into them, the "mullahs" will be
no more forgiving. They'll tie them up in a sack and stone
them to death or throw them over a cliff.
> In this verse we are told of those people who give up belief, then again
> beleive. But if the Islamic Law was death for giving up belief, how do
> these people "beleive gain, then disbelieve, and then increase in
> disbelief" ?
So you'll have to go through all those stages before the
"mullahs" (slavemasters) are free to kill you.
> We find no verse after or before this one, which states that apostates
> should be killed.
We don't look too carefully, do we? I bet one of your
heroes, Osama bin Laden, could find it for you. Of course
"Allah (Myth) will never forgive them" is the death sentence.
> Not only this but we also read in the Holy Quran:
Correction:
For "Holy Quran," read "The guide to 7th century living."
> "There should be no compulsion in religion. Surely, right has become
> distinct from wrong; so whosoever refuses to be led by those who
> transgress, and believes in Allah, has surely grasped a strong handle
> which knows no breaking. And Allah is All-Hearing, All-Knowing."
> (Quran 2:257)
Cool! That means that women from civilized countries can go to
the primitive backwaters infested by islamic savages and live
among the population according to the customs of their own cultures.
HAHAHAHAHAHAR DE HAR HAR.
> Now if the Islamic Law was to kill anybody who gives up Islam, then we
> would find a major contradiction in the verse above, which states that
> there should be no compulsion in religion. If threat of the death
> sentence is not compelling somebody, please explain what is. ??
"Allah (Myth) will never forgive them." That sort of thing
scares the shit out of superstitious fools. Since "Allah"
condones killing babies and other innocents for absolutely
no reason, the primitive fool who has been beaten from
infancy into total belief in that "Quran" garbage will most
certainly be afraid to cross the savages who enforce it.
> :> Look in America, Europe, Canada, and other non-Muslim countries and see
> :> for your self. Women in these countries continue to follow Islam, and
> :> there have been many converts to Islam within these countries.
>
> : Similarly, many people in those countries have started using
> : hard drugs. So what? A certain proportion of a large enough
> : population will latch onto any dumb idea that comes along.
>
> Is that your entire argument ? Is that all you have ?
> Surely you can do better.
What I said completely explains why a few manipulable women
would allow themselves to be drawn into that living hell.
It's just "statistics." As you yourself demonstrate, the
left side of the normal curve of any attribute will always
be populated. Anyway, there are far more "converts" to
faux-Islam (Farrakhan's hate group) than to your stupid
primitive religion.
> : Mohammed was a pervert. "Prophet," my ass.
>
> There is no compulsion for you to believe. It's your choice, but
> you are in no position to make an educated decision. Learn something
> first. Use your brain, use some logic, be rational, open your mind
> and think freely like Muslims.
Is that your entire argument? Is that all you have?
Certainly you can't do better, but you could quote some
more versus from that fuckin' book that tells you every
move to make.
> :> You should follow this teaching of the Prophet (pbuh) and increase your
> :> knowledge of Islam.
>
> : Yeah, we should all screw nine year old girls. Get a grip, imbecile.
>
> Hatred will not lead you to the truth. Studying and and opening your
> close mind should be your path.
Are you married to a nine-year-old? You would be, of course,
if you could find one that didn't think you're too boring,
assuming you could afford the price her parents demand. I
wouldn't exactly hate you for screwing little kids like your
revered Pervert did, but they would.
> : rotfl. Such a grandiose assessment coming from a drone.
>
> Again feeble attempts at personal attacks instead of looking at the
> issue. Closed-minded people
Do you actually think you're capable of misleading even one
modern human, you dumb, primitive fool?! Snipping the personal
attack that prompted my reply, and then making such a feeble
attempt to shriek about a personal attack is the behavior of
a retarded little kid. (At least you're consistent.)
John Griffin
I hope you someday develop to the point where you can see
the humor in someone like you, a mindless store-and-forward
device, trying to count brain cells.
Bush hasn't convinced me of any of those things, but you've
convinced me that even if they were all shown to be absolutely
true, you'd spout the same childish gobble.
Jon
<3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
> In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> :> If they claim that women driving is against Islam then they need to
> :> provide the proof. If you repeat their nonsense then you need to provide
> :> the proof. Simply stating "Saudi Arabia said so" doesn't cut it.
> :>
> :> Understand ?
>
> You obviously failed to comprehend the simple points, so I will explain it
> to you in a more simple manner. Review:
>
> I say:
> Saudi Arabian Laws do not equal Islamic Laws.
You can say it till your blue in the face, SA disagrees with you ..
every Islamic cleric in SA disagrees with you.
Rather than stick your head in the sand why don't you use your position
as a good Muslim to lobby SA and other nations who practise Shariah law
to change their constitutions?
> You say:
> Saudi Arabian Laws do equal Islamic Laws.
>
> Agreed ?
>
> My question is why do you select Saudi Arabia why not Oman ?
>
> Your answer (as I understand it):
>
> Beacuse you don't have to be just. You have to be honest.
>
> Your answer makes not sense to me. You will have to be more clear.
>
> Oman Laws state women can drive.
> Saudi Arabia Laws state women can't drive.
> (Islam does not have a law regarding driving)
>
> Both Oman and Saudi Arabia are predominately Muslim countries.
> Yet they have contradictory Laws regarding driving.
I don't know why he chose to focus on SA, perhaps because SA is the
epicenter of Islamic culture... perhaps because Omam does not implement
Shariah law (does it?).
> : SA has laws banning female travel in a
> : variety of foms ( I know - I've been there ).
>
> I also know this. It is not the point of dispute. The point of dispute
> is whether or not Islam teaches that women shouldn't drive. Your case so
> far has been weak to non-existant.
The fact you are focusing on a technicality such as driving exposes you
as being disingenuous... his point, I believe, is to show Shariah law
(practised in many Muslim nations) as being inherently sexist and
*designed* to keep the woman in servitude to the man.
The laws against driving cars are simply extensions of Sharia laws.
When you base your laws on Shariah, with its severe limitations on
travel, work, marriage, even speaking to men, it becomes very easy to
continue this oppression to modern activities such as driving.
Rather than confront this, agree, and join him in lobbying Islamic
nations that practise this barbarism you instead attempt to make
apologies for it, cover it up and claim it is not Islamic when it
clearly is.
> : This is only one example of discrimination according to gender 'fundamental'
> : Islamic countries put in place.
>
> No it isn't. If you want to show that Islam teaches women not to drive
> cars then show it from the Quran (Islamic Holy Book).
Evasive.
> Islamic Law does not equal Saudi Arabian Law. You have yet to show why it
> does.
You are asking the wrong person.. as a muslim you should be DEMANDING
this information from the Saudi government, their clerics and their
religous "police".
> : Understand? Islam is inherently discriminatory.
>
> You have failed to demonstrate why.
No, you have failed to confront the truth.
> : If a country is fighting
> : discrimination and imposing laws that allow equal justice for all regardless
> : of gender - then they are not being 'Islamic'.
>
> The laws of country are not the same as the laws of a religion.
Depends on which country you're talking about.
> In Canada
> I follow all of the laws of the country, yet freely practice my religion.
> The two can go hand and hand.
I hope you enjoy the seperation of state and religion.. millions of
your fellow muslims do not. Rather than help them you simply condemn
them through your refusal to confront Sharia practises in Islamic
countries.
> : I'm sorry for you, but there really is no way to get around this. Its one
> : of the primary reasons westerners consider Islam to be a meaningless
> : religion stuck in the 16th century.
>
> There are millions of 'Westerners' who practice Islam every day. Your
> just ignorant to that fact.
Nobody is ignorant of western Muslims .. his statement is true,
westerners *do* look at Islamic nations who practise Sharia with
disgust.
> :> I see your problem. You think a countries laws are equal to Islamic laws.
> :> No it's more then that. You take every 'bad' law and take it to be
> :> 'Islamic law'.
>
> : ?? - You said no Muslim women 'has' to wear hijab. You are wrong.
>
> According to Islamic law there is no compulsion in religion. It is the
> choice of the woman. If I force a woman to wear hijab that reflects on
> me, not on Islam. If Saudi's force women to wear hijab that reflects on
> them, not on Islam. Islamic teachings are in the Quran.
errr.. doesn't the Qu'ran command Women to "guard their private parts"
and cover their heads.. as well as command men a similar thing but
without the Hajib?
> : I don't need to be 'just'. I need to be honest. So do you. You are not
> : honest when you say no women needs to wear hijab, and you are being
> : dishonest when you say Islam doesn't create laws for driving.
>
> I am ?
> Prove it.
> Here is my argument:
>
> According to Islam there should be no compulsion in religion.
This is in regard to which religion a person chooses to follow...
People are allowed to be Christian in an Islamic country .. just not
allowed to practise their religion openly, I think they also have to
pay a special tax.
> Therefore women should not be compelled to wear Hijab.
They are in Saudi Arabia, under Sharia law.. women ARE commanded to
wear the Hijab.
personally I think the Hajib is a tangent to the wider debate of
women's rights under Islamic law.
Some time ago a fellow posted a long article concerning human rights
under Islam .. a good chunk of it related to women's rights .. here's a
rather lengthy excerpt from that post-
<89486bdd.03011...@posting.google.com>
---- begin quote ---
4. Rights of Women
Have women really got rights in Islam? To explain this point, I ought
to add that Adam, the progenitor of mankind, according to Genesis, the
First Book of Moses, defied God to please his woman called "Eve." The
significance of this event demonstrates the natural grip of woman on
man.
To fathom the significance of this act, one must realise that God had
kept Adam in the Garden of Eden, abounding in lush trees laden with
luscious fruits; its ground was emerald green, studded with heavenly
streams of milk, honey and wine; its valleys echoed with melodies of
the chirping birds that created a musical environment; the more
hilarious aspect of the Garden of Eden was that there was no toil,
pain, disease or death, and all provisions were abundant and free. Yet
Adam flouted the Divine Command to win favour of his woman and
preferred pain to pleasure, mortality to immortality and drudgery to
free living.
The act of rewarding man with such a delightful opulence made God
believe that Adam would not choose anything but Him. It is baffling to
note that Adam preferred Eve, his woman, to God and all the fantastic
luxuries. In this game of selection, God lost to woman because of her
sex-appeal to man.
Realising the significance of faminine charm, the Prophet Muhammad
treated woman as the final goal of existence; in this life woman is to
serve as the source of gratification for man, and salvation i.e.
achieving entry into paradise in the next world, means sexual
enjoyment of houris - the most beautiful virgins that await lucky men
to offer them their carnal delights.
This Islamic plan, which is executed through a legal code, also serves
as the bait for attracting followers. However, there is a big paradox
to be resolved if this scheme is to operate successfully: woman has
got to be reduced to the status of a slave for neutralising all her
resistance to man's will. For this purpose, women must be stripped of
all their human rights, because a woman with rights, is bound to claim
equality. But, unless this process is conducted skillfully, women are
bound to rebel against Islam, and may thus cause its downfall. This is
the reason that Islam accords some spurious rights to women to fool,
snool and rule them.
Islam appears gentle, generous and genuine in this field, but its
veneer soon crumbles when we judge the Islamic law in the light of
practical life. Historically, there is no doubt that Islam is the
first religion that appears to have given women the following rights:
1. The right to inherit property, and
2. The right to divorce man.
But in effect, these rights are spurious because they cannot be
exercised by women for the following reasons:
1 a. Allah has subjected women to the law of purdah, that is, they
must not participate in social life.
"And so to the believing women, that they
cast down their eyes and guard their private
parts, and reveal not their adornment
save such as is outward; and let them cast
their veils over their bosoms, and not reveal .."
(Light XXIV: 30)
Again, the Koran says:
"O Prophet, say to the wives and daughters
and the believing women, that they draw
their veils close to them .."
(The Confederates XXXIII: 55)
In addition to veiling, Allah confines women's activities within the
four-walls of their homes:
"Remain in your houses; and display not
your finery, as did the pagans of old."
(The Confederates XXXIII: 25)
With a view to depriving women of their rights, the Koran lays it
down:
"Men are the managers of the affairs of women
for that God has preferred in bounty
One of them over another .....
Righteous women are therefore obedient .....
And those you fear may be rebellious
admonish; banish them to their coaches
and beat them." (Women IV: 35)
Since a woman is obliged to wear a veil and restricted within her
home, and man is appointed her manager with the authority to beat her
if she does not obey him, her property rights are just an attractive
gimmick: they are a body without a soul, a locomotive engine without
steam and a bow without arrows.
2a. A woman's right to divorce is called "Khula." A man can undo his
matrimonial tie quite independently and at will, whereas the wife has
to achieve this goal through the process of law, which is very
cumbersome to say the least. Also, she is subject to the wrath of God
and curses of angels if she takes this step without complete
justification. Again, in a male chauvinistic society, it is likely
that her pleas will have no effect on the ears of a male judge, who is
used to deriding, depressing and dominating women.
According to Ibn-e-Majah, vol. 1, page 571: A wife must not seek
divorce from her husband without a serious cause. If she does, she
will not enter paradise. If she can prove her case, she will be
awarded decree only if she returns all that her husband had bestowed
on her as an entitlement or outright gift. A woman who seeks Khula,
cannot expect settlement!
The laws of inheritance treat one male equal to two females (Women IV
10). The law of evidence is even harsher: not only two women equal one
man but she may not be allowed to tender evidence where male witnesses
are available.
In view of the following limitations that Islam has imposed on woman,
one can honestly conclude that it has been done deliberately to
deprive her of human rights for converting her into a sexual toy so
that men should flock to Islam:
1. Woman has a religious duty to produce the maximum number of
children, Ibn-e-Majah reports in Vol. 1, page 518 and 523 in his
"SUNUN:" The Prophet said "Getting married is my basic doctrine. Whoso
does not follow my example, is not my follower. Marry, so that I can
claim preference over other communities (Jews and Christians) owing to
commanding a greater number of followers . "
"MISHKAT" reports in Vol. 3 page 119, a similar hadith:
"On the Day of Judgement, I shall have the greater number of followers
than any other prophet ..."
Having the largest following was obviously the greatest passion of the
Prophet Muhammad, and could be realised only by subjecting woman to
the exclusive burden of motherhood. A woman who is the mother of a
dozen children, obviously does not have time to think about her human
rights. Her mind is likely to be tortured by the fear of what happens
if she is deserted by her husband. This is powerful enough to keep her
under his thumb.
2. The second condition that governs woman's status in Islam is stated
by the Koran in "Iron: 25:"
"And monasticism they invented - We
did not prescribe it for them - only
seeking the good pleasure of God; but
they observed it not as it should be observed."
Simply stated, these verses mean that the Christians flouted God's
will by practising monasticism because enjoyment of women by man is
"the good pleasure of God. "
Thus woman is nothing but the source of pleasure to man. However, it
implies that, in return for being the provider of delight, she is
entitled to love and reverence as her fundamental rights. In fact,
every woman is conscious of it and wants to be treated respectfully,
but Islam in line with the Semitic philosophy, which states that man
must have sexual pleasure by command, opposes this attitude. In
marriage, there is no Islamic concept of consent in carnality: Woman
in Islam is man's tillage and he is empowered to use her as he wishes.
This is the reason that Islamic law aims at man's ascendancy,
inflicting a corresponding humiliation on woman. The reader can judge
this truth from the following:
"Women have such honourable rights as obligations
but their men have a degree above them."
(The Cow: 225)
This is a highly debated verse, and Islamic zealots are always
stretching it to prove equality of sexes. Therefore, I may quote from
the hadith to demonstrate its truth:
"If women comply with your commands, do not
molest them ..Iisten carefully, they have a right
over you that you take care of their food and
wear."
(Ibn-e-Majh, Vol. 1, p. 519)
Woman's rights are limited to her maintenance provided she obeys her
man. Instead of indulging in further discussion of this point, I may
state the usually held Islamic belief that man is superior to woman.
In fact, the Koranic law supports this idea to the hilt. Here is the
explanation:
1. " ..marry such women
as seem good to you, two, three, four."
( Women: 1)
Here man is given the lawful prerogative to have four wives of his own
choice at the same time. The Muslim scholars have been putting various
interpretations on this verse to avoid the shame of polygamy. For
example, they say, woman is not allowed polyandry (having more than
one husband at the same time) because it becomes impossible to know
the father of the child. This argument does not hold good when we are
talking about the basic rights of man and woman, which constitute the
principle of equality.
Again, this point of view is nullified by the scientific advances:
firstly, invention of the Pill has given woman control over her body,
and she does not have to have children unless she wants them.
Secondly, clinical tests today, can establish the fatherhood of a
child with certainty. Therefore, this type of argument proves nothing
but futility, frivolity and fictitiousness of the Islamic law, which
seeks to impose male dominance on woman in the name of fairness,
felicity and fruitfulness.
Add to the above, the Islamic law of concubinage which allows a man as
many unmarried women in his harem as he can afford. For example, Akbar
the Great of India had 5,000 concubines and his son, Jehangir, had no
fewer than 6,000! There is only one description for them - private
brothels. Yet the Muslim scholars talk of morality and women's rights.
3. We are told, as men have rights over women so women have rights
over men. This is quoted as the proof of equality. In fact, this is
highly misleading because relationship of their mutual rights makes
man the master and woman the slave.
The only mentionable right that woman has over man is the right to be
fed and clothed. I have already quoted a hadith to this effect. Now
look at the other side of the coin:
"If I were to order someone to prostrate before other
than God, I would have commanded woman to
prostrate before her husband.
If a husband tells his wife to keep carrying a load of
stones from that red mountain to that black mountain,
she must obey him whole heartedly."
(Ibn-e-Majah, Vol. 1, ch. 592, p 520)
4. "By God, who controls the life of Muhammad, a woman cannot
discharge her duty towards God until she has discharged her duty
towards her husband: if she is riding a camel and her husband
expresses his desire, she must not refuse."
(Ibn-e-Maja, Vol. 1, ch. 592, p 520)
Again, if a man is in a mood to have sexual intercourse, the wife must
come immediately even if she is baking bread at a communal oven.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1, p 428)
5. One should also bear in mind that Islam does everything to stop a
woman from divorcing her man, and this is especially true if she
happens to be a mother because it is father, who takes custody of
children. This cruelty is legitimised by Islam to establish man's grip
over woman.
6. So great is the Islamic discrimination against woman to favour man
that it starts right from the lowest rung of the social ladder:
"Aisha said that she had a slave and a slave-girl who
were married. She told the Prophet that she wanted to
set them free. He said that she ought to free the slave
(man) first."
(Ibn-e-Majah,Vol. 2, ch. 130, p 100)
7. The same attitude asserts itself in the field of inheritance and
legal evidence. Though I have already stated Islamic views on these
subjects, I may add a word or two about the law of evidence regarding
women:
" ..And call in to witness,
two witnesses, men; or if the two be
not men, then one man and two women,
such witnesses as you approve of .."
(The Cow: 280)
Thus, legally, one man is equal to two women!
8. Nothing is more erroneous than the assumption that the Islamic
concept of polygamy is confined to four wives; its hidden meaning is
much deeper than what appears because it carries a sense of built-in
mirage:
"And if you desire to exchange a wife
in place of another ..take of her nothing .."
( Women: 20)
It implies that a Muslim husband is entitled to keep substituting one
wife with another provided the number does not exceed the prescribed
limit of four at the same time. He can do so easily because he has the
power to divorce at will, without giving a reason for his action. This
is how Hassan, a grandson of the Prophet multiplied the number of his
wives, ranging over seventy. It was his practice to marry during the
day, and after a night or two, he would divorce her to marry again.
9. Having intercourse with a concubine, who is a helpless woman, is a
first degree crime against humanity. The Roman Law made it punishable
by death but Islam encouraged this indecency to attract followers.
There is no law against the concubine-rapists but there is swift
retribution against an indecent woman, and her man can inflict this
punishment on her without fear of legal retribution.
"Such of you women as commit indecency
call four of you to witness against them;
and if they witness; then detain them
in their houses until death takes them
or God appoints for them a way." (Women: 20)
Since nobody has explained satisfactorily the meaning of: "Or God
appoints for them a way," the punishment for an indecent woman cannot
be anything but death by incarceration. And this is in addition to
other forms of punishment e.g. flogging and stoning.
10. The true Islamic value of woman becomes evident when we realise
that her marriage is not substantive but precarious. If a man does not
like his daughter-in- law, and tells his son to divorce her without
giving a reason for it, he must do so.
(Tirmzi,Vol. 1 p 440)
a. There is also a famous tradition of the Prophet ascribed to Katib
al Waqidi and proudly recited by the mullahs to declare brotherhood of
the fellow-Muslims:
"Behold my two wives and select the one you like the best."
This brotherly gesture was made by a Medinite Muslim (an Ansar) to an
immigrant Muslim, when the Prophet fled Mecca along with his followers
to seek refuge in Medina. The offer was accepted readily and the
offerer divorced the wife chosen by the offeree!
It shows that woman is just a souvenir in Islam. Look at the following
hadith as well:
b. In the battle fought against FAZARA under the command of Abu Bakr,
a very pretty Arab girl was given as share of booty to Salama Bin
Al-Akwa. He had not seduced her when the Prophet met him in the
street, and said, " O Salama, give me that girl, may God bless your
father." Salam said, "She is for you, Messenger of Allah! By Allah I
have not yet disrobed her. "
The Messenger of Allah sent her to the people of Mecca, and
surrendered her as a ransom for a number of Muslims, who had been kept
there as prisoners.
(Muslim: 4345)
The Prophet himself accepted women as a gift. The Coptic Mary, who
bore him a son, is an example in point.
11. The Prophet declared from the pulpit at Hajj, a wife must not
spend anything belonging to her husband without his permission, and
this prohibition equally applied to buying foodstuff.
(Tirmzi Vol. 1, p 265)
The Prophet himself accepted women as a gift. The Coptic Mary, who
bore him a son, is an example in point.
12. Even in religious matters of great importance, a wife is subjected
to her husband's command. There are several hadiths which say that a
wife may not observe fasting without her husband's permission in case
he wants to have sexual intercourse with her.
( Tirmzi, Vol . 1, p 300 )
13. Islam treats woman as a devil owing to her erotic effect on man:
The Prophet unintentionally looked at a woman and was aroused. He went
home and had intercourse with Zainab (one of his pretty wives). He
said, "Woman faces you as Devil. If you are affected by her charm,
have intercourse with your wife because she has the same thing as the
woman who affected you."
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1, p 428)
14. Woman is twisted by birth:
The Prophet said:
Woman has been created from a rib which is twisted.
If you try to straighten it, you will break it. It is
desirable to make the best use of it as it is.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1 p 440)
15. Here is a surprising hadith:
The woman whose husband remains happy at night, and
every night, she will be admitted into paradise.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1, p 428)
It obviously means that for a woman, gratification of man's lust is an
act of worshipping God!
a. This is the reason that another hadith says:
The woman who decorates herself for anyone other than her own husband
is like darkness of the Day of Judgement.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1, p 430)
16. A woman is a calamity for man by her very nature:
The Prophet said that he had not left for man any calamity which could
hurt him except woman.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 2 p 286)
Add to the above, the following to realise woman's status in Islam:
17. A woman is not a believer if she undertakes a journey which may
last three days or longer, unless she is accompanied by her husband,
son, father or brother.
(Tirmzi, p 431)
18. If a woman refuses to come to bed when invited by her husband, she
becomes a target of the curses of angels. Exactly the same happens if
she deserts her husband's bed.
(Bokhari, Vol. 7 p 93)
19. The women, who are ungrateful to their men, are the denizens of
hell; it is an act of ingratitude for a woman to say:
"I have never seen any good from you."
(Bokhari Vol. 7, p 96)
20. A woman in many ways is deprived of the possession of her own
body. Even her milk belongs to her husband.
(Bokhari Vol. 7, p 27)
She is not allowed to practise birth-control either.
21. The Prophet said: "When wife vexes her husband, then houri of
paradise utter curses on her saying, 'may God destroy you because he
is with you only for a short time; he will shortly leave you to come
to us.'
(Ibn-e-Majah, Vol. 1, p 560)
22. The Prophet said, "A woman's evidence carries half the weight of
that of a man .. it is owing to lack of wisdom on their part. However,
they are also injurious to the dignity of faith and cannot be allowed
to say prayer during the period of menstruation or observe tasting."
(Mishkat, Vol. 1, p 19)
23. The Prophet said: "Beware of women because the calamity that the
Israelite suffered was caused by women."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 70)
24. The Prophet said: "Misfortune is a part of womanhood, residence
and horse."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 70)
25. The Prophet said: "No woman should perform a marriage ceremony of
another woman or her own because such a woman is the true seducer."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 78)
26. The Prophet said: "If Eve was not created, no woman would have
been dishonest towards her husband."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 98)
27. The Prophet said: "When a man calls his wife to bed and she
refuses and he is angered, then angels keep cursing her all night
..even the Master of Sky (God) is annoyed with her until husband is
reconciled with her."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 100)
28. The Prophet said: "When a woman dies, if her husband was pleased
with her, she goes to paradise."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 102)
29. The Prophet said: "On the Day of Judgement, a husband shall not be
questioned for beating his wife."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 105)
a. Beating is a speciality of Islam for taming the "feminine brutes."
The Koran says: "And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish
them to their couches, and beat them. If they then obey you, look not
for any way against them." (Women: 35)
It has been said that, due to shortage of women, the Arab practised a
culture which was nearly matriarchal, that is, women had high social
positions in their clans, and were, therefore, inclined to dominate
men. The Prophet Muhammad was himself an employee of Khadija whom he
married, despite the fact that she was fifteen years older than he
was.
The Prophet was endowed with a masculine social approach and wanted
men to be dominant for creating a hardy, warrior Arab nation, capable
of conquering the world. This is the reason that the Koran gave men an
absolute authority to subdue women by beating, if necessary. It was an
essential part of subjugating woman to man's sexual suzerainty. Men,
certainly made the best use of this prerogative. A hadith says:
" ..women had become bold with their men, and so the Prophet
authorised beating them. As a result, seventy women, during one
evening, gathered at the residence of the Prophet to complain ruefully
against their husbands, who they thought, were not good people."
(Ibn-e-Majah, Vol. 1, p 553)
30. I ought to repeat that with wife-beating goes the Koranic behest
of purdah, which has been a major cause of destroying female
liberties:
"And say to the believing women, that they
cast down their eyes and guard their private
parts, and reveal not their adornment
save such as is outward; and let them cast
their veils over their bosoms, and not reveal
their adornment save to their husbands .."
(Light XXIV: 30)
Again:
"O Prophet, say to the wives and daughters
and the believing women, that they draw
their veils close to them:"
(The Confederates 33: 55)
31. Then came the further Koranic command for women:
"And stay in your houses .."
(The Confederates 33: 25)
Thus the Muslim woman was totally secluded from society and became a
source of sexual enjoyment and political pawn for man. One ought to
bear in mind that the Prophet himself concluded alliances with
powerful men through marriages: Abu Bakr and Umar were his
fathers-in-law, and Uthman and Ali were his sons-in- law. These are
the men who are considered next to the Prophet in rank and dignity for
the part they played in spreading Islam and establishing the Arab
Empire.
Recent rise of women as political heads in Pakistan, Bangladesh and
Turkey, does not represent the Islamic ethos but a rebellion against
it, showing its spiritual decline.
--- end quote ---
--
- Jon
Jon
<3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
> In soc.culture.usa Cyrakis <cyr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> : <snip>
> :> Did you learn all you needed to learn about Christianity from the Oklahoma
> :> bombing ? How about Waco Texas ? How about World War I ? How about
> :> World War II ? How about from Hitler ? How about from Paul Bernardo ?
> :> How about Susan Smith ? How about Manson ?
>
> : I'm not a Christian. When Christian fanatics start killing people
> : wholesale, I'll call for their destruction too.
>
> When ? Does World War II not mean anything to you ?
Who declared war on Hitler and won?
> How about all of the
> murders taking place in the US everyday ?
how is this relevant? .. are you trying to cast street level crime as
religious activity?
> : Shouldn't you be hiding in a cave somewhere anyway?
>
> Why so you can continue to believe in the myths you hold so dearly ?
> Come on, you talk tough but when challenged you would like nothing more
> then for me to go hide in a cave. Be a man, stand up and defend your
> side through reason and logic. Can you do that for me ?
The logic is weighted against you. It's time you started to admit that
Islam needs to clean house in a big way, just as Christianity did
before it.
--
- Jon
The Holy Kafir
"Shakeel Virk" <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message
news:b2k2p9$4ro$1...@knot.queensu.ca...
> In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> : Note: I did not say Islam says women can't drive - but SA does and SA
bases
> : its laws on 'God's book and Sunnah of his prophet'.
>
> : Is that clear enough for you now? WE ALL KNOW ISLAM DOES NOT HAVE A LAW
FOR
> : RESTRICTIONS ON DRIVING OR COMPUTER HACKING OR INSIDER TRADING OR ANY
OTHER
> : MODERN DAY THING!!
>
> I already understand your problem.
> Your saying the Saudi Arabian Law = Islamic Law.
>
> That is what you are saying right ? Please correct me if I am mistaken.
>
> If you believe Saudi Law = Islamic Law you are then contradicting yourelf.
>
> Saudi Arabia has a law banning women from driving. You state above:
> "WE ALL KNOW ISLAM DOES NOT HAVE A LAW FOR RESTRICTIONS ON DRIVING.."
>
> So the obivious question is how do you resolve this contradiction ?
>
> If you believe:
>
> 1) Saudi Law = Islamic Law
> 2) Saudi Law bans women driving.
> 3) Islam does not have a law for driving.
>
> You can't believe all 3.
The spirit of islamic law is to treat women as second hand, as objects,
little better than speaking cattle. The spirit of the law is against women,
this no driving law is simply an extension of that spirit applied to modern
machines. You can whine and bitch this is not the case all you want, and I
will call you a liar, so please proceded with your obligitory islamic
defense.
The Holy Kafir
> In soc.culture.usa Cyrakis <cyr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> : <snip>
> :> Did you learn all you needed to learn about Christianity from the
Oklahoma
> :> bombing ? How about Waco Texas ? How about World War I ? How about
> :> World War II ? How about from Hitler ? How about from Paul Bernardo ?
> :> How about Susan Smith ? How about Manson ?
>
> : I'm not a Christian. When Christian fanatics start killing people
> : wholesale, I'll call for their destruction too.
>
> When ? Does World War II not mean anything to you ? How about all of the
> murders taking place in the US everyday ?
That's equivocation. The motives of the combatants in WWII was not to
promote a religion. Jihad is.
>
> : Shouldn't you be hiding in a cave somewhere anyway?
>
> Why so you can continue to believe in the myths you hold so dearly ?
> Come on, you talk tough but when challenged you would like nothing more
> then for me to go hide in a cave. Be a man, stand up and defend your
> side through reason and logic. Can you do that for me ?
He has 1400 years of islamic imperialism and conquest to use as evidence for
his position.
John Griffin
> (I'll take it as my job to humble you)
Oh, shit...I damn near fell out of my chair laughing at the
idea of someone of your low caliber humbling someone! What
are you going to do...hit him with some quotes from that
guide to 7th century living you keep referring to? Of course
you are; that's you absolute limit, and even if you had the
knowledge and talent, you wouldn't dare to do otherwise.
You're funny.
DrPostman
with The Prophecy and "For Entertainment Purposes Only" availed us of their
wisdom with:
>In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>:> The driving you refer to is a Saudi Arabian law NOT an Islamic law. Get
>:> your facts straight before you open your mouth next time.
>
>: Yes - but the SA constitiution clearly states its laws are based on the
>: Quran. Its an Islamic culture that puts these restrictions on its women,
>: not western.
>
>Saudi Arabia can claim the moon is made of cheese that doesn't make it
>true, does it ?
>
>If they claim that women driving is against Islam then they need to
>provide the proof. If you repeat their nonsense then you need to provide
>the proof. Simply stating "Saudi Arabia said so" doesn't cut it.
>
>Understand ?
You don't know what Sharia is, do you? Look at what is happening in
Northern NIgeria where they are trying to enforce it. That country
is slowing melting down because of it.
--
Dr.Postman USPS, MBMC, BsD; "Disgruntled, But Unarmed"
Member,Board of Directors of afa-b, SKEP-TI-CULT® member #15-51506-253.
You can email me at: jamie_eckles(at)hotmail.com
"The services provided by Sylvia Browne Corporation are highly
speculative in nature and we do not guarantee that the results
of our work will be satisfactory to a client."
-Sylvia's Refund Policy
DrPostman
with The Prophecy and "For Entertainment Purposes Only" availed us of their
wisdom with:
>In soc.culture.usa DrPostman <Loo...@mysig.formail> wrote:
>: On 13 Feb 2003 21:59:00 GMT, Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> in accordance
>: with The Prophecy and "For Entertainment Purposes Only" availed us of their
>: wisdom with:
>:>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>:>: 3s...@qlink.queensu.ca (Shakeel?Virk), Wrote:
>:>:>In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit
>:>:><BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>:>Muslim are far more open-minded then those fanatical war mongers
>:>who support Bush. You guys can't think logically. The proof is in
>:>your responses. If you have something worth saying then say it, and
>:>stop the insults on Muslims.
>:>
>:>Use logic and present a good argument if you have one. Like Muslims
>:>do.
>
>: Yea, so open minded, except when it comes to women, for just one small
>: example.
>
>Women choose to follow Islam. Go talk to them. Find out for yourself, the
>level of your ignornace is very high. Learn something from women, unless
>your ego is too big.
Quite a number of TV news magazines have tried to interview women in
countries run by Sharia. No woman has been allowed to be interview about
their lives so far.
>: What's not to believe. They are going to be allowed to drive now
>: in some Muslim countries. Yahoo!
>
>Great Ignornant one, you speak so much yet know so little. Islam has no
>laws regarding driving cars. Islam is over 1500 years old at that time
>cars did not exist.
>
>The driving you refer to is a Saudi Arabian law NOT an Islamic law. Get
>your facts straight before you open your mouth next time.
The Saudi's run their country using Sharia. Sharia can even be interpreted
to say you should die for flying a kite.
>Your arguments are weak. I crush them easily. I want you close-minded
>Americans (not all Americans) to open your minds and think more freely.
>Let go of your hate, and think rationallly.
That's how you treat your women, crush them easily. You are a religious
fanatic and we are laughing AT you.
>I don't mind you presenting logical arguments against Islam, that would be
>interesting. Your arguments lack reason, and display your ignorance to
>educated.
You say this to everyone, it is getting stale now.
>: What an advancement for
>: Women Rights. All one has to do is see how women are treated
>: in muslim countries. I bet you enjoy that aspect of your religion
>: and you are intimidated by educated and emancipated women.
>
>Muslims live in Canada, Europe, the US and continue to follow Islam out of
>their own free will. So your argument is not against Islam it's against
>the laws of certain countries. Use your mind. Use your brian. Let go of
>your hatred.
Bring to your mind the image of women under the Taliban, and tell me how
much free will women have in your religion.
>:>If you don't then look it up. Find out how many Muslim women attended
>:>Mosque services in Canada, US, and Europe in the past few days for Eid
>:>prayers.
>
>: Wow, they let them out of the house in a burka to go to prayers.
>: How advanced.
>
>Great is your ignornace. There are Muslim women doctors, teachers,
>lawyers, nurses, voluteers, and so much more working in Canada, US, Europe
>and in many other parts of the world.
>
>It's your ignorance which is the problem. My sister in law is a doctor
>who works in New York City. My wife who recently moved to Canada worked
>as a Biomedical Scientist in England. My other Sister in law is a high
>school teacher.
But women living under Sharia are in a different world. THAT is what muslims
want most of all, a world run by Sharia.
>These are the facts. In fact Muslim women have excelled in education in
>Canada. Many of them are at top of there classes.
>
>:>You are wrong and I am right. That is a fact. Go convince yourself by
>:>looking up the facts.
IKYABWAI. How grown up of you to try to use that.
>: Go back to the 7th Century run country you came from.
>
>Your the one living in ignornace. When did you or your family come to
>North America ? My family might have been here longer then yours.
Before 1792? I doubt that.
>Is that right 'expert' ? You are pathetic. Your accusations are baseless,
>and never ending. You obviosuly know very little.
I've seen what the Taliban did. I know plenty.
>: Wrong. Even the Catholic Church has told its nuns that they don't have to
>: wear habits any more, and 99% of them don't. Or are you describing some
>: isolated christian cults?
>
>No Muslim women 'has' to wear Hijab. It is a choice they make.
>If anybody forces it on them, they themselves are going against
>the teachings of Islam. The Holy Quran clearly states:
That's why the Taliban beat them up if they showed so much as a bit of ankle,
right?
>"There should be no compulsion in religion".
>
>I'll educate you slowly.
>
No you won't, you will continue to cling to your 7th Century superstition.
DrPostman
with The Prophecy and "For Entertainment Purposes Only" availed us of their
wisdom with:
>An analogy for Christian would be the Bible. If the Bible teaches
>it then it is Christian law.
And law based entirely upon the bible is just as repressive. Theocracies suck.
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>>If they claim that women driving is against Islam then they need to
>>provide the proof. If you repeat their nonsense then you need to provide
>>the proof. Simply stating "Saudi Arabia said so" doesn't cut it.
>>
>>Understand ?
>
>You don't know what Sharia is, do you? Look at what is happening in
>Northern NIgeria where they are trying to enforce it. That country
>is slowing melting down because of it.
Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folks, either.
DrPostman
<vgor...@pobox.alaska.net> in accordance with The Prophecy and "For
Entertainment Purposes Only" availed us of their wisdom with:
>On Sat, 15 Feb 2003 06:21:05 GMT, DrPostman <Loo...@mysig.formail>
>wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>
>>>If they claim that women driving is against Islam then they need to
>>>provide the proof. If you repeat their nonsense then you need to provide
>>>the proof. Simply stating "Saudi Arabia said so" doesn't cut it.
>>>
>>>Understand ?
>>
>>You don't know what Sharia is, do you? Look at what is happening in
>>Northern NIgeria where they are trying to enforce it. That country
>>is slowing melting down because of it.
>
>Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of folks, either.
Kind of Karmic, eh?
Thom Wilkerson
> Look at what is happening in Northern
> NIgeria where they are trying to enforce
> it. That country is slowing melting down
> because of it.
And here is yet another mostly over-looked story of the glories of
shari'a and Islam at work:
Islamists Leave 'Killing Field'
of Civilians
Team finds remains of unarmed villagers in southern Sudan
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31033
And just wait until the islamo-fascists in Paris, Brussels and Berlin
start openly calling for the same 'Jihad Is Our Way' "crusade" to begin
against all those pacifist Europeans.
Thom Wilkerson
> Look at what is happening in Northern
> NIgeria where they are trying to enforce
> it. That country is slowing melting down
> because of it.
And here is yet another mostly over-looked story of the glories of
Count 1
No I am not and have repeatedly in this thread. As I said - please attempt
comprehension.
I reiterate this (written several posts ago) which explains my position
I know the quran does not specifically mention wether a woman can drive a
car or not -
but the foundation of the law is found in the discriminatory interpretation
of Islam SA uses.
So yes - you were mistaken. Nowhere did I state SA law equals Islamic law.
I said SA laws are derived from Islamic Laws and the Wahhabi interpretation
of such.
> But enough of this. One thing at a time. Resolve your Saudi=Islam
> contradiction first.
There never was a contradiction to resolve. I hope you see that now.
> Then we can move on.
Indeed. Lets start with your explanation for quoting the quran out of
context and your lies regarding the requirements of hijab.
Cyrakis
> : <snip>
> :> Did you learn all you needed to learn about Christianity from the Oklahoma
> :> bombing ? How about Waco Texas ? How about World War I ? How about
> :> World War II ? How about from Hitler ? How about from Paul Bernardo ?
> :> How about Susan Smith ? How about Manson ?
>
> : I'm not a Christian. When Christian fanatics start killing people
> : wholesale, I'll call for their destruction too.
>
> When ? Does World War II not mean anything to you ?
Sure it means something to me. It's a great example of Americans going
around the world to kill large numbers of fascists. A worthy cause
that hopefully we are ready to embark upon again. This time killing
islamofascists.
> How about all of the
> murders taking place in the US everyday ?
Lock em up. They aren't part of some vast religious empire conspiracy
as far as I can tell, unlike you muslims.
>
> : Shouldn't you be hiding in a cave somewhere anyway?
>
> Why so you can continue to believe in the myths you hold so dearly ?
No, so you can try to avoid getting turned into a fine red paste by an
American bomb.
> Come on, you talk tough but when challenged you would like nothing more
> then for me to go hide in a cave. Be a man, stand up and defend your
> side through reason and logic. Can you do that for me ?
I think the facts speak for themselves. You are defending a theocratic
system from the 7th century, and you are doing it using a
technological construct built by the US from the 20th century. A
construct that is inimical to islam, because it promotes the free
exchange of ideas. In simpler terms, you're a fucking idiot.
Now, shouldn't you be hiding in cave and shagging your camel or
something?
Shakeel Virk
: In article <b2jpl2$m7t$1...@knot.queensu.ca>, Shakeel Virk:> I say:
:> Saudi Arabian Laws do not equal Islamic Laws.
: You can say it till your blue in the face, SA disagrees with you ..
No they don't. I have heard embassadors from Saudi Arabia to Canada
on live radio declare that the driving ban is a Saudi law which has
nothing to do with religion.
I have also demonstrated that by the simple fact that cars did not exist
1500 years ago so how could Islam make a law about them ?
You and the rest of the people on your side have completely failed in
showing why it is an Islamic law and why Islam is to blame.
Complete faliure.
: every Islamic cleric in SA disagrees with you.
Wild claim without a shred of evidence. Even if it is true it doesn't
prove anything. If all 'American clerics' decide American law is based on
Islam would that make it true ?
The truth does not depend on what people think. Was the world flat 800
years ago ?
: Rather than stick your head in the sand why don't you use your position
: as a good Muslim to lobby SA and other nations who practise Shariah law
: to change their constitutions?
I live in Canada, my first priority is to Canada.
: I don't know why he chose to focus on SA, perhaps because SA is the
: epicenter of Islamic culture... perhaps because Omam does not implement
: Shariah law (does it?).
All of those countries claim to. Pakistan claims it's laws are based on
Islam, yet the laws greatly differ from Saudi Arabia ????
Islam is a religion it has it's own laws and teaches people how to live.
If you want to attack Islam then do so based on it's laws and teachings.
Direct your anger at Saudia Arabia, not Islam.
: The fact you are focusing on a technicality such as driving exposes you
: as being disingenuous... his point, I believe, is to show Shariah law
: (practised in many Muslim nations) as being inherently sexist and
: *designed* to keep the woman in servitude to the man.
But it's not rooted in Islam.
Islam gives women the most respect.
: Rather than confront this, agree, and join him in lobbying Islamic
: nations that practise this barbarism you instead attempt to make
: apologies for it, cover it up and claim it is not Islamic when it
: clearly is.
So you say. Bring foward your arguments. I have heard your claims, and
the likes of repeatedly, yet not a shred of evidence to support it.
I know far more about Islam then most of you, and I know far more Muslim
women then most of you. I know how they live, and I know the freedoms
they have. These are Islamic teachings, and they live Islamic lifestyles.
In some countries muslim women are mistreated but that's not what Islam
teaches. That's what the countries do, and it's not because Islam tells
them to. So blame them not Islam.
:> No it isn't. If you want to show that Islam teaches women not to drive
:> cars then show it from the Quran (Islamic Holy Book).
: Evasive.
Anything you want to show against Islam, use Islamic sources such as the
Quran to prove your point.
I'm not going to use Hitler (self professed Christian) to find out about
Christianity. I expect you not to use Osama Bin Laden to judge Islam.
Who here is really being evasive ? I'm saying it like it is.
You just don't have the knowledge to keep up.
:> Islamic Law does not equal Saudi Arabian Law. You have yet to show why it
:> does.
: You are asking the wrong person.. as a muslim you should be DEMANDING
: this information from the Saudi government, their clerics and their
: religous "police".
I'm no politician, and even if I was I don't dictate Saudi laws.
If people in Saudi Arabia choose to live the way they do, then that is
there choice. If you don't like it don't go there. Live in Sweden or
something.
To pretend your soooo concerned about Saudi's is hard for me to believe,
but even if you are blame them not Islam.
:> : Understand? Islam is inherently discriminatory.
:>
:> You have failed to demonstrate why.
: No, you have failed to confront the truth.
How did you demonstrate it ?
: errr.. doesn't the Qu'ran command Women to "guard their private parts"
: and cover their heads.. as well as command men a similar thing but
: without the Hajib?
Yes. If your a Muslim and you have the will power then that is what is
expected. If you disagree with Islam then don't follow it. What is your
problem with that ?
:> Therefore women should not be compelled to wear Hijab.
: They are in Saudi Arabia, under Sharia law.. women ARE commanded to
: wear the Hijab.
Whose 'Sharia law' ? and how many versions of 'Sharia law' are there ???
If I say 'Sharia law' teaches us to kill, does it make it 'Sharia law' ??
Think about it.
It makes no sense. Islam has laws, if you can show it is based on Islamic
laws then you have case against Islam. Until that time blame Saudi
Arabia.
Shakeel Virk
: So yes - you were mistaken. Nowhere did I state SA law equals Islamic law.
: I said SA laws are derived from Islamic Laws and the Wahhabi interpretation
: of such.
You can't have it both ways. Either blame Saudi Arabia or blame Islam.
1) You accept the fact that Saudi Laws do not equal Islamic Laws.
2) You Saudi laws are a Wahhabi interpretation of Islami Laws.
3) You know Saudi's don't let women drive.
4) You know Islam has no law regarding driving.
So who are you blaming ? Islam ????
Sounds to me your anger should be at Saudi Arabia.
You can't simply state 'interpretations' or Wahhabi 'interpretations' and
expect us to simply say 'Yes it is Islamic', can you ????
Interpretations have to be supported and defended using the Quran.
If you can show that the Quran supports the ban on women drivers through
your magical 'interpretation' I would love to hear it.
Otherwise any Kook can interpret anything to mean anything.
The American consitution could be interpreted to mean women can't drive.
Defend the interpretation and then you have a case against Islam.
Until that time, you have no evidence against Islam. Your anger should be
with Saudi Arabia.
:> Then we can move on.
: Indeed. Lets start with your explanation for quoting the quran out of
: context and your lies regarding the requirements of hijab.
I quoted the Quranic verse I needed. You gave more verses, all which
supported my point. "There should be no compulsion in religion".
What is your argument ?
Which 'lie' did i say regarding hijab ?
Shakeel Virk
: "Shakeel Virk" <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message
: news:b2k2p9$4ro$1...@knot.queensu.ca...
:> In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
: The spirit of islamic law is to treat women as second hand, as objects,
: little better than speaking cattle.
Wild unsubstantiated claims. I could say the same about you, but without
evidence it means nothing. Just like your wild claims.
Can't you guys think ? At least defend yourself. Your making it far to
easy for me to give you a beating. Defend yourself. Use your mind.
If you really believe what your saying put foward some evidence.
: The spirit of the law is against women,
Again. Another wild claim. Without support. I could say the same thing
about you. Your spirit is againt women.
Hey that's easy. Your also a big loser. You smell bad too. This is easy.
Wild claims without evidence. Any fool can play your game. Defend
yourself or keep your mouth shut. Otherwise I will continue to beat you.
: this no driving law is simply an extension of that spirit applied to modern
: machines.
Wild claim. No evidence provided. My turn. You eat dog crap. This is
easy. Make wild claims and refuse to give a shred of evidence to support
it.
:You can whine and bitch this is not the case all you want, and I
: will call you a liar, so please proceded with your obligitory islamic
: defense.
Wow. Is that your argument ? Your going to call me a 'liar'. The
humanity. What will I do ?
You haven't presented an argument. Only wild claims after which your
going to call me a liar ????
The Holy Kafir
> In soc.culture.usa The Holy Kafir <x@x.x> wrote:
>
> : "Shakeel Virk" <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message
> : news:b2k2p9$4ro$1...@knot.queensu.ca...
> :> In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> : The spirit of islamic law is to treat women as second hand, as objects,
> : little better than speaking cattle.
>
> Wild unsubstantiated claims. I could say the same about you, but without
> evidence it means nothing. Just like your wild claims.
Islam does not give women the same rights or value as men, that is a fact.
You can whine about the language I use to express it, but you can not deny
that fact. You certainly can attempt to defend it, and I will call you a
liar.
>
> Can't you guys think ? At least defend yourself. Your making it far to
> easy for me to give you a beating. Defend yourself. Use your mind.
> If you really believe what your saying put foward some evidence.
Your dusty old book is evidence, 1400 years of history is evidence.
>
> : The spirit of the law is against women,
>
> Again. Another wild claim. Without support. I could say the same thing
> about you. Your spirit is againt women.
Islam does not give women the same rights or value as men, that is a fact.
You can whine about the language I use to express it, but you can not deny
that fact. You certainly can attempt to defend it, and I will call you a
liar.
> Hey that's easy. Your also a big loser. You smell bad too. This is easy.
> Wild claims without evidence. Any fool can play your game. Defend
> yourself or keep your mouth shut. Otherwise I will continue to beat you.
Fuck you too, muslim pig eating terrorist.
>
> : this no driving law is simply an extension of that spirit applied to
modern
> : machines.
>
> Wild claim. No evidence provided.
Islam does not give women the same rights or value as men, that is a fact.
You can whine about the language I use to express it, but you can not deny
that fact. You certainly can attempt to defend it, and I will call you a
liar.
> My turn. You eat dog crap. This is
> easy. Make wild claims and refuse to give a shred of evidence to support
> it.
The evidence is thet they are not allowed to drive you stupid fucking
bastard.
>
> :You can whine and bitch this is not the case all you want, and I
> : will call you a liar, so please proceded with your obligitory islamic
> : defense.
>
> Wow. Is that your argument ? Your going to call me a 'liar'. The
> humanity. What will I do ?
You are a liar.
>
> You haven't presented an argument. Only wild claims after which your
> going to call me a liar ????
>
You are a liar. Your problem is that you are too fucking stupid to realize
that what we are arguing about is the fucking evidence you stupid muslim
bastard.
Damn you're dumb.
Count 1
> 4) You know Islam has no law regarding driving.
>
> So who are you blaming ? Islam ????
>
> Sounds to me your anger should be at Saudi Arabia.
Both actually. I blame Islam for creating the culture were arbitrary
differences in gender can translate into public policy and Saudi arabia for
using it to create backwards laws.
> Otherwise any Kook can interpret anything to mean anything.
Certainly. I'm discovering that all the time with you.
> Until that time, you have no evidence against Islam. Your anger should be
> with Saudi Arabia.
As above.
> : Indeed. Lets start with your explanation for quoting the quran out of
> : context and your lies regarding the requirements of hijab.
>
> I quoted the Quranic verse I needed. You gave more verses, all which
> supported my point. "There should be no compulsion in religion".
You used one quote and none of its surrounding material. The word compulsion
does not refer to islamic egailitarianism but to non compulsive behaviour
when you are in a 'religion'.
> What is your argument ?
As above - why do we need to repeat ourselves with you?
> Which 'lie' did i say regarding hijab ?
That women are not required to wear it. I can think of two countries where
you are wrong.
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>: So yes - you were mistaken. Nowhere did I state SA law equals Islamic law.
>: I said SA laws are derived from Islamic Laws and the Wahhabi interpretation
>: of such.
>
>You can't have it both ways.
We're Americans. We can have it any way we want it.
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>Wild unsubstantiated claims.
Got that right!
Vanilla Gorilla (Monkey Boy)
<omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
>> What is your argument ?
>
>As above - why do we need to repeat ourselves with you?
Matthew 13:15
For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of
hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should
see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand
with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
Shakeel Virk
: Shakeel Virk wrote:
:>
:> Islam literally means Peace and Submission.
:> Islam promotes peace, as hard you might find that to believe.
:>
: Excellent post. I deleted most of it from this reply in the hopes that others
: will seek your post and read it. I couldn't
: agree more. Salaam (I hope that's how it's spelled!) <g>
Thanks David I appreciate the support. I'm heavily out numbered here. :)
Shakeel Virk
:> So who are you blaming ? Islam ????
:> Sounds to me your anger should be at Saudi Arabia.
: Both actually. I blame Islam for creating the culture were arbitrary
: differences in gender can translate into public policy and Saudi
: arabia for using it to create backwards laws.
First Islam has nothing to do with the driving laws of Saudia Arabia.
Second gender differences exist. This is a fact which even the most
extreme feminists can not deny. Islam recognizes these differences and
when viewed with honesty they are out of respect for women. I don't
expect you to understand this because your idea's about Islam are sooo
wrong.
Take for example in Western cultures. Do you think we have gender
equality ? Do you think we really want gender equality ?
You might say 'yes!', but if your honest and use your mind I am sure you
would not support complete gender equality. For example should we force
women to compete with men in sports ?
At the olympics should we pit the male athletes against the females ? or
should we separate them on the basis of gender ?
The exact same applies in Islam. There are differences between men and
women and Islam recognizes these differences, and due to these differences
there are certain things which are expected from men which aren't from
women and vice versa. But the differences are minor and few. Driving is
not one of them.
:> Which 'lie' did i say regarding hijab ?
: That women are not required to wear it. I can think of two countries where
: you are wrong.
Countries laws do not equal Islamic laws.
Islam does tell women to wear hijab, but it is still the womans choice.
Whether she decides to follow the Islamic teaching or not is up to her.
If Saudi Arabia forces women to wear hijab and the women do it out of fear
of Saudi authorities then that is not a religious act.
Muslims follow Islam to win the pleasure of God not Saudi authorities.
Shakeel Virk
: Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote
:> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote
: Your self image exceeds you by a near world-record margin.
: What you can actually do is to parrot what you've been told
: to parrot. Whip out the stupid book that controls every
: aspect of the mohammedan savage's life and start crushing...
: <snicker>
Logic my friend. You make wild claims against Islam.
ie. Islam teaches to kill apostates.
To refute your wild claims I quote the Quran.
That's called presenting a logical argument.
If you made false claims about the American Constitution
I would have quoted it.
Are you that simple minded ? Do I really have explain
why I quoted the Quran ?
If you want to learn about the American Constitution then begin
by reading it. If you want to learn about Islam then begin
by reading the Quran.
Simple.
: If "Allah" (Myth) will never forgive people who dump the primitive
: beliefs the "mullahs" pound into them, the "mullahs" will be
: no more forgiving. They'll tie them up in a sack and stone
: them to death or throw them over a cliff.
You are so full of hate and ignorance. Bad combo my friend.
: So you'll have to go through all those stages before the
: "mullahs" (slavemasters) are free to kill you.
Hate and ingnorance.
: We don't look too carefully, do we? I bet one of your
: heroes, Osama bin Laden, could find it for you.
Bin Laden was on the US tax payer payroll. Your just ignorant.
The only reason I have continued to hammer you ignorant people
is because there are many reading who do not write. They are
reading your lack arguments. They are seeing you stand on
no ground, and have nothing worth saying.
They are also probably thinking I am very arrogant the way
I publically challenge you, but when I'm so right and so much
more knowledgable, and so out numbered I need to make my point
clear.
You guys have no arguments. All you do is attack without a shred
of evidence on your side.
Shakeel Virk
: On 15 Feb 2003 21:17:04 GMT, Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca>
: We're Americans. We can have it any way we want it.
I think your confusing Americans with those who go to Burger King.
Shakeel Virk
: wrote in alt.fan.art-bell:
:>In soc.culture.usa Jack <heavyf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
:>: Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message news:<b2j0eu$j36$2...@knot.queensu.ca>...:>:> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message news:<b2h4f4$m91$1...@knot.queensu.ca>...
:>: someone masquerading as L.A. Laker center Shak wrote:
: I do not hate Islam. I hate Muslims.
At least your being honest about it. That would explain your
brainless arguments, hate can cause us lose reason.
We often don't think rationally when we are filled with hate.
The rest of you hatemongers should also take the first step
V.G. has taken. The first step is to admit you have a problem.
Good work V.G. you are setting a good example for the rest of
the hatemongers.
Shakeel Virk
: O.K. why is it Islamic countrys are the ones with the most problems on their
: borders and internal problems...?
It has to do with many factors but Islam is NOT one of them.
Look at Africa for example. Are the Christian African countries
better off then the non-Christian ones ?
If Islam is really the problem, then why do the same Muslims excel
in Canada, US and other countries ?
Most Muslims I know in Canada have very good jobs, or are in University.
It's not the religion. It's the countries that are the problems.
If it was the religion then we would find Muslims in Canada in major
trouble. Yet many Muslims excel in education, get good jobs, and live
good lives.
The Islam is not the problem, it is the governments and leaders of
these countries. Blame them not Islam.
Muslims also believe in Jesus peace be upon him. Muslims believe he was
sent by God (Allah). We believe he was honest and carried out the work of
God. All Muslims believe this. Muslims have the utmost respect for Jesus
(pbuh).
Honest Nev
> Islam does not give women the same rights or value as men, that is a fact.
> You can whine about the language I use to express it, but you can not deny
> that fact. You certainly can attempt to defend it, and I will call you a
> liar.
>
> > My turn. You eat dog crap. This is
> > easy. Make wild claims and refuse to give a shred of evidence to support
> > it.
>
> The evidence is thet they are not allowed to drive you stupid fucking
> bastard.
don`t like it up you, do you, you fucking spaz? We`re all waiting for
a koran-quote that prohibits women from driving cars, else admit
you`re the densest bull-shitter the world has ever seen.
yrs nev
Jon
<3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
> Islam gives women the most respect.
You snipped and refused to answer the many points made in my post
showing the precise opposite of what you claim... let me paste them
back in for you -
Some time ago a fellow posted a long article concerning human rights
under Islam .. a good chunk of it related to women's rights .. here's a
rather lengthy excerpt from that post-
<89486bdd.03011...@posting.google.com>
---- begin quote ---
4. Rights of Women
Have women really got rights in Islam? To explain this point, I ought
to add that Adam, the progenitor of mankind, according to Genesis, the
First Book of Moses, defied God to please his woman called "Eve." The
significance of this event demonstrates the natural grip of woman on
man.
To fathom the significance of this act, one must realise that God had
kept Adam in the Garden of Eden, abounding in lush trees laden with
luscious fruits; its ground was emerald green, studded with heavenly
streams of milk, honey and wine; its valleys echoed with melodies of
the chirping birds that created a musical environment; the more
hilarious aspect of the Garden of Eden was that there was no toil,
pain, disease or death, and all provisions were abundant and free. Yet
Adam flouted the Divine Command to win favour of his woman and
preferred pain to pleasure, mortality to immortality and drudgery to
free living.
The act of rewarding man with such a delightful opulence made God
believe that Adam would not choose anything but Him. It is baffling to
note that Adam preferred Eve, his woman, to God and all the fantastic
luxuries. In this game of selection, God lost to woman because of her
sex-appeal to man.
Realising the significance of faminine charm, the Prophet Muhammad
treated woman as the final goal of existence; in this life woman is to
serve as the source of gratification for man, and salvation i.e.
achieving entry into paradise in the next world, means sexual
enjoyment of houris - the most beautiful virgins that await lucky men
to offer them their carnal delights.
This Islamic plan, which is executed through a legal code, also serves
as the bait for attracting followers. However, there is a big paradox
to be resolved if this scheme is to operate successfully: woman has
got to be reduced to the status of a slave for neutralising all her
resistance to man's will. For this purpose, women must be stripped of
all their human rights, because a woman with rights, is bound to claim
equality. But, unless this process is conducted skillfully, women are
bound to rebel against Islam, and may thus cause its downfall. This is
the reason that Islam accords some spurious rights to women to fool,
snool and rule them.
Islam appears gentle, generous and genuine in this field, but its
veneer soon crumbles when we judge the Islamic law in the light of
practical life. Historically, there is no doubt that Islam is the
first religion that appears to have given women the following rights:
1. The right to inherit property, and
2. The right to divorce man.
But in effect, these rights are spurious because they cannot be
exercised by women for the following reasons:
1 a. Allah has subjected women to the law of purdah, that is, they
must not participate in social life.
"And so to the believing women, that they
cast down their eyes and guard their private
parts, and reveal not their adornment
save such as is outward; and let them cast
their veils over their bosoms, and not reveal .."
(Light XXIV: 30)
Again, the Koran says:
"O Prophet, say to the wives and daughters
and the believing women, that they draw
their veils close to them .."
(The Confederates XXXIII: 55)
In addition to veiling, Allah confines women's activities within the
four-walls of their homes:
"Remain in your houses; and display not
your finery, as did the pagans of old."
(The Confederates XXXIII: 25)
With a view to depriving women of their rights, the Koran lays it
down:
"Men are the managers of the affairs of women
for that God has preferred in bounty
One of them over another .....
Righteous women are therefore obedient .....
And those you fear may be rebellious
admonish; banish them to their coaches
and beat them." (Women IV: 35)
Since a woman is obliged to wear a veil and restricted within her
home, and man is appointed her manager with the authority to beat her
if she does not obey him, her property rights are just an attractive
gimmick: they are a body without a soul, a locomotive engine without
steam and a bow without arrows.
2a. A woman's right to divorce is called "Khula." A man can undo his
matrimonial tie quite independently and at will, whereas the wife has
to achieve this goal through the process of law, which is very
cumbersome to say the least. Also, she is subject to the wrath of God
and curses of angels if she takes this step without complete
justification. Again, in a male chauvinistic society, it is likely
that her pleas will have no effect on the ears of a male judge, who is
used to deriding, depressing and dominating women.
According to Ibn-e-Majah, vol. 1, page 571: A wife must not seek
divorce from her husband without a serious cause. If she does, she
will not enter paradise. If she can prove her case, she will be
awarded decree only if she returns all that her husband had bestowed
on her as an entitlement or outright gift. A woman who seeks Khula,
cannot expect settlement!
The laws of inheritance treat one male equal to two females (Women IV
10). The law of evidence is even harsher: not only two women equal one
man but she may not be allowed to tender evidence where male witnesses
are available.
In view of the following limitations that Islam has imposed on woman,
one can honestly conclude that it has been done deliberately to
deprive her of human rights for converting her into a sexual toy so
that men should flock to Islam:
1. Woman has a religious duty to produce the maximum number of
children, Ibn-e-Majah reports in Vol. 1, page 518 and 523 in his
"SUNUN:" The Prophet said "Getting married is my basic doctrine. Whoso
does not follow my example, is not my follower. Marry, so that I can
claim preference over other communities (Jews and Christians) owing to
commanding a greater number of followers . "
"MISHKAT" reports in Vol. 3 page 119, a similar hadith:
"On the Day of Judgement, I shall have the greater number of followers
than any other prophet ..."
Having the largest following was obviously the greatest passion of the
Prophet Muhammad, and could be realised only by subjecting woman to
the exclusive burden of motherhood. A woman who is the mother of a
dozen children, obviously does not have time to think about her human
rights. Her mind is likely to be tortured by the fear of what happens
if she is deserted by her husband. This is powerful enough to keep her
under his thumb.
2. The second condition that governs woman's status in Islam is stated
by the Koran in "Iron: 25:"
"And monasticism they invented - We
did not prescribe it for them - only
seeking the good pleasure of God; but
they observed it not as it should be observed."
Simply stated, these verses mean that the Christians flouted God's
will by practising monasticism because enjoyment of women by man is
"the good pleasure of God. "
Thus woman is nothing but the source of pleasure to man. However, it
implies that, in return for being the provider of delight, she is
entitled to love and reverence as her fundamental rights. In fact,
every woman is conscious of it and wants to be treated respectfully,
but Islam in line with the Semitic philosophy, which states that man
must have sexual pleasure by command, opposes this attitude. In
marriage, there is no Islamic concept of consent in carnality: Woman
in Islam is man's tillage and he is empowered to use her as he wishes.
This is the reason that Islamic law aims at man's ascendancy,
inflicting a corresponding humiliation on woman. The reader can judge
this truth from the following:
"Women have such honourable rights as obligations
but their men have a degree above them."
(The Cow: 225)
This is a highly debated verse, and Islamic zealots are always
stretching it to prove equality of sexes. Therefore, I may quote from
the hadith to demonstrate its truth:
"If women comply with your commands, do not
molest them ..Iisten carefully, they have a right
over you that you take care of their food and
wear."
(Ibn-e-Majh, Vol. 1, p. 519)
Woman's rights are limited to her maintenance provided she obeys her
man. Instead of indulging in further discussion of this point, I may
state the usually held Islamic belief that man is superior to woman.
In fact, the Koranic law supports this idea to the hilt. Here is the
explanation:
1. " ..marry such women
as seem good to you, two, three, four."
( Women: 1)
Here man is given the lawful prerogative to have four wives of his own
choice at the same time. The Muslim scholars have been putting various
interpretations on this verse to avoid the shame of polygamy. For
example, they say, woman is not allowed polyandry (having more than
one husband at the same time) because it becomes impossible to know
the father of the child. This argument does not hold good when we are
talking about the basic rights of man and woman, which constitute the
principle of equality.
Again, this point of view is nullified by the scientific advances:
firstly, invention of the Pill has given woman control over her body,
and she does not have to have children unless she wants them.
Secondly, clinical tests today, can establish the fatherhood of a
child with certainty. Therefore, this type of argument proves nothing
but futility, frivolity and fictitiousness of the Islamic law, which
seeks to impose male dominance on woman in the name of fairness,
felicity and fruitfulness.
Add to the above, the Islamic law of concubinage which allows a man as
many unmarried women in his harem as he can afford. For example, Akbar
the Great of India had 5,000 concubines and his son, Jehangir, had no
fewer than 6,000! There is only one description for them - private
brothels. Yet the Muslim scholars talk of morality and women's rights.
3. We are told, as men have rights over women so women have rights
over men. This is quoted as the proof of equality. In fact, this is
highly misleading because relationship of their mutual rights makes
man the master and woman the slave.
The only mentionable right that woman has over man is the right to be
fed and clothed. I have already quoted a hadith to this effect. Now
look at the other side of the coin:
"If I were to order someone to prostrate before other
than God, I would have commanded woman to
prostrate before her husband.
If a husband tells his wife to keep carrying a load of
stones from that red mountain to that black mountain,
she must obey him whole heartedly."
(Ibn-e-Majah, Vol. 1, ch. 592, p 520)
4. "By God, who controls the life of Muhammad, a woman cannot
discharge her duty towards God until she has discharged her duty
towards her husband: if she is riding a camel and her husband
expresses his desire, she must not refuse."
(Ibn-e-Maja, Vol. 1, ch. 592, p 520)
Again, if a man is in a mood to have sexual intercourse, the wife must
come immediately even if she is baking bread at a communal oven.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1, p 428)
5. One should also bear in mind that Islam does everything to stop a
woman from divorcing her man, and this is especially true if she
happens to be a mother because it is father, who takes custody of
children. This cruelty is legitimised by Islam to establish man's grip
over woman.
6. So great is the Islamic discrimination against woman to favour man
that it starts right from the lowest rung of the social ladder:
"Aisha said that she had a slave and a slave-girl who
were married. She told the Prophet that she wanted to
set them free. He said that she ought to free the slave
(man) first."
(Ibn-e-Majah,Vol. 2, ch. 130, p 100)
7. The same attitude asserts itself in the field of inheritance and
legal evidence. Though I have already stated Islamic views on these
subjects, I may add a word or two about the law of evidence regarding
women:
" ..And call in to witness,
two witnesses, men; or if the two be
not men, then one man and two women,
such witnesses as you approve of .."
(The Cow: 280)
Thus, legally, one man is equal to two women!
8. Nothing is more erroneous than the assumption that the Islamic
concept of polygamy is confined to four wives; its hidden meaning is
much deeper than what appears because it carries a sense of built-in
mirage:
"And if you desire to exchange a wife
in place of another ..take of her nothing .."
( Women: 20)
It implies that a Muslim husband is entitled to keep substituting one
wife with another provided the number does not exceed the prescribed
limit of four at the same time. He can do so easily because he has the
power to divorce at will, without giving a reason for his action. This
is how Hassan, a grandson of the Prophet multiplied the number of his
wives, ranging over seventy. It was his practice to marry during the
day, and after a night or two, he would divorce her to marry again.
9. Having intercourse with a concubine, who is a helpless woman, is a
first degree crime against humanity. The Roman Law made it punishable
by death but Islam encouraged this indecency to attract followers.
There is no law against the concubine-rapists but there is swift
retribution against an indecent woman, and her man can inflict this
punishment on her without fear of legal retribution.
"Such of you women as commit indecency
call four of you to witness against them;
and if they witness; then detain them
in their houses until death takes them
or God appoints for them a way." (Women: 20)
Since nobody has explained satisfactorily the meaning of: "Or God
appoints for them a way," the punishment for an indecent woman cannot
be anything but death by incarceration. And this is in addition to
other forms of punishment e.g. flogging and stoning.
10. The true Islamic value of woman becomes evident when we realise
that her marriage is not substantive but precarious. If a man does not
like his daughter-in- law, and tells his son to divorce her without
giving a reason for it, he must do so.
(Tirmzi,Vol. 1 p 440)
a. There is also a famous tradition of the Prophet ascribed to Katib
al Waqidi and proudly recited by the mullahs to declare brotherhood of
the fellow-Muslims:
"Behold my two wives and select the one you like the best."
This brotherly gesture was made by a Medinite Muslim (an Ansar) to an
immigrant Muslim, when the Prophet fled Mecca along with his followers
to seek refuge in Medina. The offer was accepted readily and the
offerer divorced the wife chosen by the offeree!
It shows that woman is just a souvenir in Islam. Look at the following
hadith as well:
b. In the battle fought against FAZARA under the command of Abu Bakr,
a very pretty Arab girl was given as share of booty to Salama Bin
Al-Akwa. He had not seduced her when the Prophet met him in the
street, and said, " O Salama, give me that girl, may God bless your
father." Salam said, "She is for you, Messenger of Allah! By Allah I
have not yet disrobed her. "
The Messenger of Allah sent her to the people of Mecca, and
surrendered her as a ransom for a number of Muslims, who had been kept
there as prisoners.
(Muslim: 4345)
The Prophet himself accepted women as a gift. The Coptic Mary, who
bore him a son, is an example in point.
11. The Prophet declared from the pulpit at Hajj, a wife must not
spend anything belonging to her husband without his permission, and
this prohibition equally applied to buying foodstuff.
(Tirmzi Vol. 1, p 265)
The Prophet himself accepted women as a gift. The Coptic Mary, who
bore him a son, is an example in point.
12. Even in religious matters of great importance, a wife is subjected
to her husband's command. There are several hadiths which say that a
wife may not observe fasting without her husband's permission in case
he wants to have sexual intercourse with her.
( Tirmzi, Vol . 1, p 300 )
13. Islam treats woman as a devil owing to her erotic effect on man:
The Prophet unintentionally looked at a woman and was aroused. He went
home and had intercourse with Zainab (one of his pretty wives). He
said, "Woman faces you as Devil. If you are affected by her charm,
have intercourse with your wife because she has the same thing as the
woman who affected you."
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1, p 428)
14. Woman is twisted by birth:
The Prophet said:
Woman has been created from a rib which is twisted.
If you try to straighten it, you will break it. It is
desirable to make the best use of it as it is.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1 p 440)
15. Here is a surprising hadith:
The woman whose husband remains happy at night, and
every night, she will be admitted into paradise.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1, p 428)
It obviously means that for a woman, gratification of man's lust is an
act of worshipping God!
a. This is the reason that another hadith says:
The woman who decorates herself for anyone other than her own husband
is like darkness of the Day of Judgement.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 1, p 430)
16. A woman is a calamity for man by her very nature:
The Prophet said that he had not left for man any calamity which could
hurt him except woman.
(Tirmzi, Vol. 2 p 286)
Add to the above, the following to realise woman's status in Islam:
17. A woman is not a believer if she undertakes a journey which may
last three days or longer, unless she is accompanied by her husband,
son, father or brother.
(Tirmzi, p 431)
18. If a woman refuses to come to bed when invited by her husband, she
becomes a target of the curses of angels. Exactly the same happens if
she deserts her husband's bed.
(Bokhari, Vol. 7 p 93)
19. The women, who are ungrateful to their men, are the denizens of
hell; it is an act of ingratitude for a woman to say:
"I have never seen any good from you."
(Bokhari Vol. 7, p 96)
20. A woman in many ways is deprived of the possession of her own
body. Even her milk belongs to her husband.
(Bokhari Vol. 7, p 27)
She is not allowed to practise birth-control either.
21. The Prophet said: "When wife vexes her husband, then houri of
paradise utter curses on her saying, 'may God destroy you because he
is with you only for a short time; he will shortly leave you to come
to us.'
(Ibn-e-Majah, Vol. 1, p 560)
22. The Prophet said, "A woman's evidence carries half the weight of
that of a man .. it is owing to lack of wisdom on their part. However,
they are also injurious to the dignity of faith and cannot be allowed
to say prayer during the period of menstruation or observe tasting."
(Mishkat, Vol. 1, p 19)
23. The Prophet said: "Beware of women because the calamity that the
Israelite suffered was caused by women."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 70)
24. The Prophet said: "Misfortune is a part of womanhood, residence
and horse."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 70)
25. The Prophet said: "No woman should perform a marriage ceremony of
another woman or her own because such a woman is the true seducer."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 78)
26. The Prophet said: "If Eve was not created, no woman would have
been dishonest towards her husband."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 98)
27. The Prophet said: "When a man calls his wife to bed and she
refuses and he is angered, then angels keep cursing her all night
..even the Master of Sky (God) is annoyed with her until husband is
reconciled with her."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 100)
28. The Prophet said: "When a woman dies, if her husband was pleased
with her, she goes to paradise."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 102)
29. The Prophet said: "On the Day of Judgement, a husband shall not be
questioned for beating his wife."
(Mishkat, Vol. 2, p 105)
a. Beating is a speciality of Islam for taming the "feminine brutes."
The Koran says: "And those you fear may be rebellious admonish; banish
them to their couches, and beat them. If they then obey you, look not
for any way against them." (Women: 35)
It has been said that, due to shortage of women, the Arab practised a
culture which was nearly matriarchal, that is, women had high social
positions in their clans, and were, therefore, inclined to dominate
men. The Prophet Muhammad was himself an employee of Khadija whom he
married, despite the fact that she was fifteen years older than he
was.
The Prophet was endowed with a masculine social approach and wanted
men to be dominant for creating a hardy, warrior Arab nation, capable
of conquering the world. This is the reason that the Koran gave men an
absolute authority to subdue women by beating, if necessary. It was an
essential part of subjugating woman to man's sexual suzerainty. Men,
certainly made the best use of this prerogative. A hadith says:
" ..women had become bold with their men, and so the Prophet
authorised beating them. As a result, seventy women, during one
evening, gathered at the residence of the Prophet to complain ruefully
against their husbands, who they thought, were not good people."
(Ibn-e-Majah, Vol. 1, p 553)
30. I ought to repeat that with wife-beating goes the Koranic behest
of purdah, which has been a major cause of destroying female
liberties:
"And say to the believing women, that they
cast down their eyes and guard their private
parts, and reveal not their adornment
save such as is outward; and let them cast
their veils over their bosoms, and not reveal
their adornment save to their husbands .."
(Light XXIV: 30)
Again:
"O Prophet, say to the wives and daughters
and the believing women, that they draw
their veils close to them:"
(The Confederates 33: 55)
31. Then came the further Koranic command for women:
"And stay in your houses .."
(The Confederates 33: 25)
Thus the Muslim woman was totally secluded from society and became a
source of sexual enjoyment and political pawn for man. One ought to
bear in mind that the Prophet himself concluded alliances with
powerful men through marriages: Abu Bakr and Umar were his
fathers-in-law, and Uthman and Ali were his sons-in- law. These are
the men who are considered next to the Prophet in rank and dignity for
the part they played in spreading Islam and establishing the Arab
Empire.
Recent rise of women as political heads in Pakistan, Bangladesh and
Turkey, does not represent the Islamic ethos but a rebellion against
it, showing its spiritual decline.
--- end quote ---
Now if you know how to read .. and read the Qu'ran .. you cannot claim
that "Islam gives women the utmost respect"... to do so is to simply
lie... if you practise your faith in a way that is different to what is
written in the Qu'ran then why don't you just muster the courage to
admit you ARE NOT A PRACTISING MUSLIM!?!?!
--
- Jon
Jon
<3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
> In soc.culture.usa Jon <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
> : In article <b2jpl2$m7t$1...@knot.queensu.ca>, Shakeel Virk
> : <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
> :> In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> :> I say:
> :> Saudi Arabian Laws do not equal Islamic Laws.
>
> : You can say it till your blue in the face, SA disagrees with you ..
>
> No they don't. I have heard embassadors from Saudi Arabia to Canada
> on live radio declare that the driving ban is a Saudi law which has
> nothing to do with religion.
>
> I have also demonstrated that by the simple fact that cars did not exist
> 1500 years ago so how could Islam make a law about them ?
>
> You and the rest of the people on your side have completely failed in
> showing why it is an Islamic law and why Islam is to blame.
> Complete faliure.
actually you completely failed to address the paragraphs I wrote
responding to your little tangent on driving laws .. in fact you failed
so much and so deliberately that you even SNIPPED the revelant
paragraphs from your reply .. let me paste them back in for you-
The fact you are focusing on a technicality such as driving exposes you
as being disingenuous... his point, I believe, is to show Shariah law
(practised in many Muslim nations) as being inherently sexist and
*designed* to keep the woman in servitude to the man.
The laws against driving cars are simply extensions of Sharia laws.
When you base your laws on Shariah, with its severe limitations on
travel, work, marriage, even speaking to men, it becomes very easy to
continue this oppression to modern activities such as driving.
Rather than confront this, agree, and join him in lobbying Islamic
nations that practise this barbarism you instead attempt to make
apologies for it, cover it up and claim it is not Islamic when it
clearly is.
--
- Jon
Jon
<3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
> In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> :> 4) You know Islam has no law regarding driving.
> :> So who are you blaming ? Islam ????
> :> Sounds to me your anger should be at Saudi Arabia.
>
> : Both actually. I blame Islam for creating the culture were arbitrary
> : differences in gender can translate into public policy and Saudi
> : arabia for using it to create backwards laws.
>
> First Islam has nothing to do with the driving laws of Saudia Arabia.
>
> Second gender differences exist. This is a fact which even the most
> extreme feminists can not deny. Islam recognizes these differences and
> when viewed with honesty they are out of respect for women.
here's that repost yet again ...
Again, the Koran says:
The Prophet said:
Again:
--- end quote ---
--
- Jon
Jon
<3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote:
> In soc.culture.usa The Holy Kafir <x@x.x> wrote:
>
> : "Shakeel Virk" <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote in message
> : news:b2k2p9$4ro$1...@knot.queensu.ca...
> :> In soc.culture.usa Count 1 <omnipi...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> : The spirit of islamic law is to treat women as second hand, as objects,
> : little better than speaking cattle.
>
> Wild unsubstantiated claims. I could say the same about you, but without
> evidence it means nothing. Just like your wild claims.
>
> Can't you guys think ? At least defend yourself. Your making it far to
> easy for me to give you a beating. Defend yourself. Use your mind.
> If you really believe what your saying put foward some evidence.
OK...
John Griffin
The question regarding how mohammedans view women is settled
by His Imamence himself at
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/index.php
From what I've seen there, it seems that if you consider women
as anything other than servants, amusement and brood stock,
you're a sinner.
A pertinent example is at this page, or you can find it
by putting "drive" in the search keyword. It's the first
one on the list.
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=7272
He says that the act of driving itself is not prohibited, but
it's impermissable because (paraphrasing) women can't be trusted
to go outside by themselves. The imam's answer seems to imply that
moslem males have an almost fanatical distrust among themselves.
They need some therapy or something. Anyway, such paranoia might
explain why they hate and fear infidels.
I also wanted to mention that it isn't necessary for you to
proclaim your personal superiority over everyone else and to
tell us you're crushing them. That's lame. It does provide
a marker for the casual reader who's looking for a good place
to just skip to another article, and it might get a few
chuckles, but that's all. Anyway, whenever you're right about
that, we'll all notice. We will not be holding our collective
breath. You need to improve by learning from the people who
are trying to help you here. You need to push the religious
indoctrination out of your head and see what they're showing
you. Pray about it later. I suppose the fear of being stoned
to death is harsh, but be strong. Each new learning experience
will improve your act. Start by looking up "your" in a book.
John Griffin
> In soc.culture.usa John Griffin <theonetru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote
> :> In soc.culture.usa John Griffin <theonetru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> :> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote
> :> :> In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
>
> : Your self image exceeds you by a near world-record margin.
>
> : What you can actually do is to parrot what you've been told
> : to parrot. Whip out the stupid book that controls every
> : aspect of the mohammedan savage's life and start crushing...
> : <snicker>
>
> Logic my friend. You make wild claims against Islam.
> ie. Islam teaches to kill apostates.
> To refute your wild claims I quote the Quran.
>
> That's called presenting a logical argument.
>
> If you made false claims about the American Constitution
> I would have quoted it.
>
> Are you that simple minded ? Do I really have explain
> why I quoted the Quran ?
rotfl!
Cretin Shakeel thinks I asked why he quotes The Guide For
7th Century Living. His lack of reading comprehension is
almost as serious as his indoctrination.
> If you want to learn about the American Constitution then begin
> by reading it. If you want to learn about Islam then begin
> by reading the Quran.
>
> Simple.
>
> : If "Allah" (Myth) will never forgive people who dump the primitive
> : beliefs the "mullahs" pound into them, the "mullahs" will be
> : no more forgiving. They'll tie them up in a sack and stone
> : them to death or throw them over a cliff.
>
> You are so full of hate and ignorance. Bad combo my friend.
No, actually what I said is the way it is. Why did they tell
you to deny it?
> : So you'll have to go through all those stages before the
> : "mullahs" (slavemasters) are free to kill you.
>
> Hate and ingnorance.
Hey, it's what The Pervert wrote in your silly book. You can
believe, disbelieve, believe, disbelieve and then disbelieve
some more, and the mythical Allah will never forgive you.
The fact that you snipped that would suggest that you actually
understood it, but if you aren't allowed to, you won't.
> : We don't look too carefully, do we? I bet one of your
> : heroes, Osama bin Laden, could find it for you.
>
> Bin Laden was on the US tax payer payroll. Your just ignorant.
"Your just ignorant" would define you as ignorant, if
you hadn't already ignorantly written the non sequitur,
among other dozens of childishly ignorant remarks.
> The only reason I have continued to hammer you ignorant people
> is because there are many reading who do not write. They are
> reading your lack arguments. They are seeing you stand on
> no ground, and have nothing worth saying.
You da man. HAHA<choke>HAHAH@#$@#<gasp>HAHAHHAHAHAHAH!!!
There are people who "hammer" others, and there are other
people who like to hear themselves say they do. You'll be
one of the former when Allah and that dead pervert Mohammed
dance a tarantella on the surface of the Mediterranean.
As to why you continue your empty bleating, it's most
likely just because you're stupid.
> They are also probably thinking I am very arrogant the way
> I publically challenge you, but when I'm so right and so much
> more knowledgable, and so out numbered I need to make my point
> clear.
I doubt that anyone is thinking you're arrogant. "What the
fuck basis does that brainwashed tool of religion think he
has for arrogance?!" is what normal people say to that.
> You guys have no arguments. All you do is attack without a shred
> of evidence on your side.
Uh-huh... Nothing you're allowed to understand.
The Holy Kafir
"Honest Nev" <honest_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:a5ec705.03021...@posting.google.com...
Fuck you too, dick head.
The spirit of the law is clearly against women, you can not deny that you
jack ass. Women not being allowed to drive is a manifestation of that
spirit. You, like a childish little prick and islamist apologist fuck want
to ignore that reality because it suits your purposes for the moment.
You snipped the message where I made the point about the spirit of the law
because you didn't want to have to deal with that aspect, your snip is the
proof that you are a lying fuck. So eat shit and die, mother fucker.
The Holy Kafir
"Jon" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:160220031837314359%nos...@nospam.com...
Jon, they will not answer you honestly because they can not. This is typical
islamo-fascist behavior.
The Holy Kafir
You're a muslim, your religion is full of bigotry, why not admit your
problems?
Jon
wrote:
> Jon, they will not answer you honestly because they can not. This is typical
> islamo-fascist behavior.
You're so correct.. the favourite tactic is to look for tangents in
debate so as to avoid the guts of the issue being debated.
--
- Jon
The Holy Kafir
"Ronald Grant, Inc. " <R...@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:3e53b972....@news.direcway.com...
> On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 10:47:39 -0500, "The Holy Kafir" <x@x.x> wrote:
>
> >So eat shit and die, mother fucker.
>
> spirit live on still. If so, it is not as unpleasent as the eating of
> shit you hope. As for the mother fucker, I am not knowing.
>
>
> Life is like a box of mullets.
> Seymore D'fare
Take what meaning from it you will. It was not directed at you, do with it
as you will.
ELC
> I wonder how these brave women would fair if they 'stripped for peace'
> in *any* Islamic nation, Iraq or North Korea? Are these women so naive
> of world politics as to misunderstand the true nature of those who wish
> us harm and their intent of world domination? Do these women have a
> fucking proverbial clue as to the treatment of females by Muslims?
>
You don't seem to have a problem with how women are treated in Saudi
Arabia, the home of Islam, and the fact that we are buddies with them.
Shakeel Virk
: On 15 Feb 2003 22:19:09 -0800, honest_...@yahoo.co.uk (Honest Nev)
: wrote:
:>
: "Women are hereby prohibited from driving automobiles, which will not
: be invented for another 1300 years. An exception is made for the
: Honda Accord."
LOL!! Now that is truly funny!! :)
Shakeel Virk
: wrote:
:>It has to do with many factors but Islam is NOT one of them.
: Islam has kept your culture well anchored in the middle ages.
My brother has a degree a Biochemsitry and a diploma in Computer
Engineering both from Canada. His wife is a degree in Biology a well as
her Bachelor of Education from Canada. My ohter brohter's wife just
started a job as an anstheziologist (sp?) (that's a doctor who gives the
sleeping gas) in New York City.
My wife has a degree in Biomedical Science from England.
In fact young Muslims are excelling and are contributing to the countries
they live. They are tax payers, and hard workers. More ofthen then not
they also give to the poor, and help others in there communities.
If that's what you call being 'anchored in the middle ages' then you had
better study some history.
: How
: have your people progressed, shackled by Islam? What role does cause
: and effect play in a culture that sees events occurring only by the
: will of Allah without regard to the laws of physics?
Muslims believe Allah created the laws of physics. Muslims throughout
history have studied science. One of the greatest physicists of our time
was a Muslim. Dr. Abdus Salam is well respected in the field of physics.
Do some research before you open your mouth.
: You, my friend, are out the ass talking.
You, my friend, want to live in your make believe world in which Muslims
live in caves and spend their time abusing women. I know your wrong, but
your head is thick, and I'm not going to convince you in one day.
It'll take time but the truth will surface.
Shakeel Virk
:> In soc.culture.usa John Griffin <theonetru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
:> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote
:> :> In soc.culture.usa John Griffin <theonetru...@hotmail.com> wrote:
:> :> : Shakeel Virk <3s...@qlink.queensu.ca> wrote
:> :> :> In soc.culture.usa BunnERabbit <BunnE...@webtv.net> wrote:
:>
: Cretin Shakeel thinks I asked why he quotes The Guide For
: 7th Century Living. His lack of reading comprehension is
: almost as serious as his indoctrination.
You are the height of illogic.
1) You make claims against Islam.
2) I prove them false by quoting the Quran.
3) You respond by saying you don't want quotes from the Quran.
What would you like ? To find out about Islam the ultimate
source is the Quran.
Not to be insulting but you have to pretty damn
stupid not to follow.
Let's try again:
1) I make claims against the American constitution.
2) You provide text from the constitution proving me wrong.
3) I respond good argument you win. OR
I quote another piece of the constituion to defend my side.
That's how it should work. You have utterly failed.
I give you a grade of F for faliure.
In terms of effort I also give you an F, I know you can do
better. Either that or concede the point.
: No, actually what I said is the way it is. Why did they tell
: you to deny it?
Who told me to deny it 'mullah's ? I quoted the Quran your the
one brining mullah's into the conversation. But I'm too smart
for your petty attempts. Try again.
:> : So you'll have to go through all those stages before the
:> : "mullahs" (slavemasters) are free to kill you.
As I said above, I'm too smart too smart to fall for these
childish attempts. You have 4 options:
1) Go away.
2) Admit you are wrong.
3) Try to prove you are right.
or
4) Continue taking a beating.
Take your pick.
So far I have proved:
1) Saudi Law does not equal Islamic Law.
2) Islam has not banned women from driving.
3) Islam does not teach Muslims to kill apostates.
If you disagree with any of the above feel free to present
your arguments.
Have a nice day..