Liberals are wrong on this issue.

[Thorgasm]

The roasting pan. The oven. The kitchen. The house. The block. The neighborhood. The city. The county. The state. The nation. The region. The world.

[9:33] He is the One who sent His messenger* with the guidance and the religion of truth, and will make it dominate all religions, in spite of the idol worshipers.

[48:28] He is the One who sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, to make it prevail over all other religions. GOD suffices as a witness.

Perspectives on Alternative Ministry Paradigms - Koran Quotes

I run around here claiming I can lick my eyebrows. It doesn't mean I really can.

Are you going to let them convert you? I'm not.

 

[Tucker Case]

I run around here claiming I can lick my eyebrows. It doesn't mean I really can.

Are you going to let them convert you? I'm not.

They can't convert anyone who has tried bacon at least once. That's a fool's errand.

 

[Laila]

As long as I can still eat bacon, I'm OK with that.

Don't worry.
When i make myself President of the US [You know, after we invade and control it] - I will ensure you can continue eating bacon

 

[bhkad]

I run around here claiming I can lick my eyebrows. It doesn't mean I really can.

Are you going to let them convert you? I'm not.

You won't have to convert. You'll just have a different set of 'rights.'

Lest us return to the issue of equality.

The idea is unacceptable to Islam.

For the non-believer cannot be the equal of the believer.

Even among the believers only those who subscribe to the three so-called Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam ( Ahl el-Kitab) are regarded as fully human.

Here is the hierarchy of human worth in Islam:

At the summit are free male Muslims

Next come Muslim male slaves

Then come free Muslim women

Next come Muslim slave women.

Then come free Jewish and /or Christian men

Then come slave Jewish and/or Christian men

Then come slave Jewish and/or Christian women.

Each category has rights that must be respected.

The People of the Book have always been protected and relatively well-treated by Muslim rulers, but often in the context of a form of apartheid known as dhimmitude.

The status of the rest of humanity, those whose faiths are not recognised by Islam or who have no faith at all, has never been spelled out although wherever Muslim rulers faced such communities they often treated them with a certain measure of tolerance and respect ( As in the case of Hindus under the Muslim dynasties of India.)

Non-Muslims can, and have often been, treated with decency, but never as equals.

Amir Taheri: "Islam Is Incompatible With Democracy"

 

[Laila]

Incredulity, real or not, about stealth jihad in the face of what has happened in Lebanon shows evidence of naiveté or unfamiliarity with the facts.

Bhkad, i can honestley say i don't take anything like that seriously.

 

[bhkad]

They can't convert anyone who has tried bacon at least once. That's a fool's errand.

Just as long as they can't make you convert then everything is ok, huh?

 

[Thorgasm]

You won't have to convert. You'll just have a different set of 'rights.'

They'll never have the means and will never break our will. Give me liberty or give me death and all that.

 

[bhkad]

Bhkad, i can honestley say i don't take anything like that seriously.

You tacitly acknowledged it yesterday when we were discussing Europeans having fewer babies than Muslims and you said it wasn't the Muslims' fault.

Demography guarantees an Islamic majority in time. And then the majority will simply vote in or out any changes they want.

It's the Demography, Stupid
The real reason the West is in danger of extinction.

by MARK STEYN
Wednesday, January 4, 2006 12:01 A.M. EST

Most people reading this have strong stomachs, so let me lay it out as baldly as I can: Much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most Western European countries. There'll probably still be a geographical area on the map marked as Italy or the Netherlands--probably--just as in Istanbul there's still a building called St. Sophia's Cathedral. But it's not a cathedral; it's merely a designation for a piece of real estate. Likewise, Italy and the Netherlands will merely be designations for real estate. The challenge for those who reckon Western civilization is on balance better than the alternatives is to figure out a way to save at least some parts of the West.

One obstacle to doing that is that, in the typical election campaign in your advanced industrial democracy, the political platforms of at least one party in the United States and pretty much all parties in the rest of the West are largely about what one would call the secondary impulses of society--government health care, government day care (which Canada's thinking of introducing), government paternity leave (which Britain's just introduced). We've prioritized the secondary impulse over the primary ones: national defense, family, faith and, most basic of all, reproductive activity--"Go forth and multiply," because if you don't you won't be able to afford all those secondary-impulse issues, like cradle-to-grave welfare.

Americans sometimes don't understand how far gone most of the rest of the developed world is down this path:

Extra - WSJ.com

 

[Laila]

You tacitly acknowledged it yesterday when we were discussing Europeans having fewer babies than Muslims and you said it wasn't the Muslims' fault.

What's your point?

Muslims are like what? 1%? 2%? in some countries
Yes we breed alot, but hell. We are still going to be a minority and always will be.
You seem to forget the other 90+% are white

 

[Thorgasm]

You tacitly acknowledged it yesterday when we were discussing Europeans having fewer babies than Muslims and you said it wasn't the Muslims' fault.

Demography guarantees an Islamic majority in time. And then the majority will simply vote in or out any changes they want.

Long live democracy.

 

[bhkad]

They'll never have the means and will never break our will. Give me liberty or give me death and all that.

Whether you know it or not the issue is being decided as we speak.

Comments like yours says that you are willing to wage a terribly bloody war on American soil where American patriots like yourself will have to fight in the streets and kill, wound and die to save America.

Guess what?

You are playing into their hands. The Islamists are licking their chops at that scenario.

The idea is to try to PREVENT bloodshed in America.

 

[bhkad]

What's your point?

Muslims are like what? 1%? 2%? in some countries
Yes we breed alot, but hell. We are still going to be a minority and always will be.
You seem to forget the other 90+% are white

I'm saying that if the West doesn't make any changes designed to save our culture and way of life, Islam will just silently increase it's influence and gain in population and political power until one day we will wake up and see what has happened and then non-Muslims will begin attacking Muslims, physically. But by then it will be too late.

Riots and wars will break out in America and al Qaeda will rise up in America to defend Muslims and blood will run in the streets.

The future looks Islamic.

Especially if we do nothing now.

Besides guns and violence, what is in place right now to stop an Islamic takeover?

 

[Laila]

I'm saying that if the West doesn't make any changes designed to save our culture and way of life, Islam will just silently increase it's influence and gain in population and political power until one day we will wake up and see what has happened and then non-Muslims will begin attacking Muslims, physically. But by then it will be too late.

Riots and wars will break out in America and al Qaeda will rise up in America to defend Muslims and blood will run in the streets.

The future looks Islamic.

Especially if we do nothing now.

You sound crazy.
I suggest you actually start dealing with reality.
US has around 2.8 million muslims; According to the few articles i read. This making up 0.5% of the total population of the US.

Are you trying to seriously say that 0.5% will rise up and take over US.
How do you presume we'd get pass the military? Or even the democratic process of the United States?

Oh wait let me guess.
We'd use magic to over take the world through God amirite? :roll:

 

[Thorgasm]

Whether you know it or not the issue is being decided as we speak.

Comments like yours says that you are willing to wage a terribly bloody war on American soil where American patriots like yourself will have to fight in the streets and kill, wound and die to save America.

Guess what?

You are playing into their hands. The Islamists are licking their chops at that scenario.

The idea is to try to PREVENT bloodshed in America.

No I'm not playing into anyone's hands. They don't have an air force or navy.

 

[Tucker Case]

I wouldn't hesitate to kill someone for a bacon sandwich.

 

[bhkad]

You sound crazy.
I suggest you actually start dealing with reality.
US has around 2.8 million muslims; According to the few articles i read. This making up 0.5% of the total population of the US.

Are you trying to seriously say that 0.5% will rise up and take over US.
How do you presume we'd get pass the military? Or even the democratic process of the United States?

Oh wait let me guess.
We'd use magic to over take the world through God amirite? :roll:

Here is a recipe used in the past to create an Islamic State:

Recipe for creating an Islamic State

Apply this recipe as needed based on the current state of a country. In other words if the target country has already completed certain steps, then move on to the next. Be willing to adapt to the local conditions. One more bit of general advice is the following:

The leaders (secular and religious) in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan have spent time studying the ways of power and they know that religion and people are just tools.

- Their own struggles with the British and other foreign powers have taught them to work from inside.

From DAGESTAN: FOCUS ON PAKISTAN'S TABLIGHI JAMAAT, B. Raman wrote:
"The cardinal aim of the Wahhabis, apart from their puritanical objectives, was the destruction of British power. They not only attacked the British openly as in the Frontier, but they also tried infiltrating secretly among the rank and file of the army in order to sow the seeds of disloyalty. In the course of time, the British realised what was going on and they decided that Wahhabi influence would be rooted out altogether.

[...]

- In the modern world there is no advantage to declaring war, if you are the aggressor. They learned a modern version of this from Russia.

- There is an advantage to using others to wage your wars. They learned this from Hitler's use of Franco to conquer Spain. They also followed his example in terms supplying their proxies with weapons and equipment, from behind the scenes, and using religion to control the press.

- Both these countries showed that you could use your opponent's populace as a source of troupes and funding if you presented yourself as: a defender of the truth which is being opposed by the evil powers that be. Encourage people to believe that they are working for peace and the good of their country, and you can get them to destroy their friends and themselves.


[...]


When you are weak
----------------------------

1. Remember that when you are weak that you should blend in and very, very few people need to be aware of the objectives and the methods. The mass of the population does not need to know and should not know that there is a plan. Remember yours is a religion of peace. At this point you want everyone to believe you are a peaceful and productive part of society, especially Muslims themselves.

The Reliance of the Traveller (section r-8.2) by Ahmad Ibn Naqib Al-Misri an analysis of the permissibility / obligation of lying by Imam Abu Hamid Ghazali wrote:

Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.

[...]

5. Build the proper mind set, in both Muslims and Non-Muslims, slowly and carefully. Very slowly assume control of sources of information and education (religious and secular).

Creating an Islamic State

I'm afraid I'm not as good at explaining this as those who have already written on the subject.

 

[Billo_Really]

He spewed some nonsensical liberal rhetoric. You proceeded to brown nose him for it.

You couldn't give an objective opinion if your life depended on it.

 

[Iriemon]

And this is a MINORITY in our society who has no power to wage any kind of REAL attack against Islam. Those who attack Islam in our society do it within the limits of our CONSTITUTIONALLY provided rights. Those who choose to break the law are prosecuted. Do you see that happening in the Arab world? I'd like to see Arab countries really crack down on their terrorist groups. Not just say they will.

YouTube videos? Is that what you're comparing bombing a Tel Aviv cafe to? Is that what you're comparing suicide bombings in Jerusalem to? Is that what you're comparing beheadings to? Iriemon your post is part of the problem. Notice how the first thing you pointed at was OUR society. Who, as bad as Muslim terrorists say it is, doesn't have hundreds of thousands of troops killing Muslims and people in their lands for the sake of our values, religion or morals. This is essentially why I've created this thread. Because of all the smoke screens liberals put up so they won't discuss the problem that is Islamic terrorism.

Hatuey,

Either you misread my post, or I didn't write it very clearly. I don't believe I made any comparison between terrorists and US society, and that certainly wasn't my intent.

To the contrary, my point was that posts liberals' posts are about bigots and lies, and not excuses, or comparisons, of terrorist acts.

I'm not sure of your point, however, in response to my posts. You seem to be implying that because of what terrorists do, it's OK to condemn Muslims as a whole and lie about Muslim nations.

Let's set a common denominator here. Do you agree all Muslims should be deported from the US? Is it OK to condemn and discriminate against all Muslims because of terrorist acts some carry out? Do you think it is OK to lie about Muslim countries to make them look worse?

If, as I suspect, the answer to these questions is no, then why would you have a problem with posts that point out bigotry and lies?

 

[Iriemon]

You point out what your relgion sees as wrong. You call those who state it "Bigots", which is not accurate. You never quantify your accusations and you CONSTANTLY make excuses for terrorist countries, groups, ect... even when their actions are inexcusible.

This is a serious failing on your part.

I suggest you quit with your non-sensical overly liberal terrorist apologist antics.

Each of your accusatory posts is worse than the last and every one of them is pointless.

If you cannot contribute to the discussion in some meaningful way, you should keep quiet.

From day 1 you have done nothing but show support for terrorists, their retarded cause, and the perverted Islam they use to brainwash their people.

You are clearly unable to tell the forrest from the trees.

Also...

The whole use of the term "bigot" on your part was simply as a means of disguising the guilt of those for whom you apologize.

It is your way of spinning the conversation. Nothing has changed. You're still wrong and those people are still terrorists.

Now please get a grip on yourself and cease being an apologist. Try ... thinking for yourself ... try not allowing Islam to think for you.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/basem...gets-halloween-christmas-removed-schools.html