|
Post by fretslider on Aug 26, 2014 16:33:02 GMT -5
[ It is the intolerant people who are the problem; multiculturalists by definition oppose intolerance. Very funny. Why is Islam so intolerant, then. Why do muslims think they are superior? The cultural marxists delude themselves at every turn.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 16:39:00 GMT -5
[ It is the intolerant people who are the problem; multiculturalists by definition oppose intolerance. Very funny. Why is Islam so intolerant, then. Why do muslims think they are superior? The cultural marxists delude themselves at every turn. Well, as I am no sort of Marxist that attempt at an argumentem ad hominem misses its mark as usual. And in answer to your question, in the first place 'Islam' is NOT a monolithic ideology; it is a collection of sects with widely and wildly differing opinions. So lambasting 'Islam' is meaningless because the net is cast so wide it cannot possibly catch any fish within it. Secondly by definition those Muslims who ARE intolerant are NOT multiculturalists nor are they supporters of it. Has the penny dropped yet? Fundamentalist Muslims (like any other type of advocate of intolerance) OPPOSE multiculturalism and are NOT multitculturalists.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 19:58:14 GMT -5
within a country there should be one standard culture that is observed by all; then have your little festivals for ethnic cultures on the side.
|
|
|
Post by markindurham on Aug 27, 2014 2:26:37 GMT -5
Good, eh? Yet according to some, we should accede to these verminous scum's wishes, in order to be 'multicultural'. Yeah, right... Mark, we all engage at times in comments of a polemical nature but to deliberately distort one thing and try to pretend it is something entirely different is not an honest method of proceeding in argument. No genuine multiculturalist would support any kind of attempt to oppress or suppress those of a different ethnicity or faith. Only those who subscribed to a monoculturalist viewpoint would do that. So as so often you are firing your cannons at the wrong enemy! It is the intolerant people who are the problem; multiculturalists by definition oppose intolerance. Au contraire. I fire my guns at the right enemy. That enemy is islam, supported by its apologists. Islam cannot coexist peacefully with others; the instruction manual forbids it. Islam is by its very definition intolerant. QED.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Aug 27, 2014 2:28:42 GMT -5
Very funny. Why is Islam so intolerant, then. Why do muslims think they are superior? The cultural marxists delude themselves at every turn. Well, as I am no sort of Marxist that attempt at an argumentem ad hominem misses its mark as usual. And in answer to your question, in the first place 'Islam' is NOT a monolithic ideology; it is a collection of sects with widely and wildly differing opinions. So lambasting 'Islam' is meaningless because the net is cast so wide it cannot possibly catch any fish within it. Secondly by definition those Muslims who ARE intolerant are NOT multiculturalists nor are they supporters of it. Has the penny dropped yet? Fundamentalist Muslims (like any other type of advocate of intolerance) OPPOSE multiculturalism and are NOT multitculturalists. I don't recall saying you are a marxist, maybe I hit a nerve, eh. Islam is nothing but trouble and should really be eradicated for the good of mankind. Cue the moderate myth.... Islam by definition is anti multicultural where non-muslims are concerned - just look around, ISIS, BOKO, Rotherham, Birmingham; all totally odious stuff. The penny dropped a long time ago, Islam is nothing but trouble and the response of the cultural Marxists? www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2735211/I-called-liar-racist-exposing-horror-SUE-REID.htmlAbsolutely disgusting
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 17:05:33 GMT -5
Mark, we all engage at times in comments of a polemical nature but to deliberately distort one thing and try to pretend it is something entirely different is not an honest method of proceeding in argument. No genuine multiculturalist would support any kind of attempt to oppress or suppress those of a different ethnicity or faith. Only those who subscribed to a monoculturalist viewpoint would do that. So as so often you are firing your cannons at the wrong enemy! It is the intolerant people who are the problem; multiculturalists by definition oppose intolerance. Au contraire. I fire my guns at the right enemy. That enemy is islam, supported by its apologists. Islam cannot coexist peacefully with others; the instruction manual forbids it. Islam is by its very definition intolerant. QED. If you really were firing your guns at the right enemy you would not feel the need to regard those who disagree with you as being 'apologists for Islam' when in reality the overwhelming majority of them are nothing of the kind. So if you seriously believe that anyone who does not share your wholly negative perception is 'an apologist for Islam' then you are I am afraid in the muddy waters of political paranoia and conspiracy theorists. The reality is that most people are tolerant and wish that other people were. Your statement that 'Islam cannot coexist peacefully with others' is falsified by the fact that the majority of Muslims DO manage to coexist peacefully with others. 'The instruction manual' - which one? The Quran? The Hadiths? Individual mullahs? - does NOT forbid peaceful coexistence NOR does it forbid tolerance. On the contrary it enjoins it. Now I am an agnostic and I regard anyone whose religious beliefs lead them to become dogmatic and intolerant as suffering from a rather sad kind of mental illness. But as I have said repeatedly a fanatic of ANY description CANNOT be a multiculturalist because multiculturalism by its very definition is inclusive and tolerant of diversity. So the FACT is that it is NOT multiculturalism that has 'fuelled jihad' but monoculturalism.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 27, 2014 17:15:10 GMT -5
Well, as I am no sort of Marxist that attempt at an argumentem ad hominem misses its mark as usual. And in answer to your question, in the first place 'Islam' is NOT a monolithic ideology; it is a collection of sects with widely and wildly differing opinions. So lambasting 'Islam' is meaningless because the net is cast so wide it cannot possibly catch any fish within it. Secondly by definition those Muslims who ARE intolerant are NOT multiculturalists nor are they supporters of it. Has the penny dropped yet? Fundamentalist Muslims (like any other type of advocate of intolerance) OPPOSE multiculturalism and are NOT multitculturalists. I don't recall saying you are a marxist, maybe I hit a nerve, eh. Islam is nothing but trouble and should really be eradicated for the good of mankind. Cue the moderate myth.... Islam by definition is anti multicultural where non-muslims are concerned - just look around, ISIS, BOKO, Rotherham, Birmingham; all totally odious stuff. The penny dropped a long time ago, Islam is nothing but trouble and the response of the cultural Marxists? www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2735211/I-called-liar-racist-exposing-horror-SUE-REID.htmlAbsolutely disgusting If you really believe that 'Islam is nothing but trouble' you really need to open your eyes rather than listening to the blinkered and brainwashed propaganda of the EDL or similar types of undesirable. Islam is a variety of different opinions and that is a simple FACT. As I am neither a cultural Marxist (nor any kind of Marxist) and I am far more politically incorrect than you will ever be, Fret, I simply note your story with sadness but the attitudes it displays are not mine. But it is abundantly clear that the penny has NOT dropped that IF what you claim was true - that Islam is antimulticultural - then on your own principles multiculturalism CANNOT be fuelling jihad but the ABSENCE of multiculturalism. It really is simple logic; you have contradicted yourself by your statement which is therefore false by definition.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 27, 2014 23:37:11 GMT -5
In this thread about Islam, my apologies to Mike for using his words to key-off into a comment:
“ . . . If you really believe that 'Islam is nothing but trouble' you really need to open your eyes rather than listening to the blinkered and brainwashed propaganda of the EDL or similar types of undesirable. . . . Islam is a variety of different opinions and that is a simple FACT. . . . “
Certainly there are different sects of Islam, maybe around 20 or so, and each has their own Iman or school to promote a specific position. Even so Islam is quite straight foreword in its basic philosophy and that basic philosophy is in its texts, that is, the Qur’an and the Sunna.
Westerners often find these writings to be seemingly confusing, not always rational as are philosophical writings in the West.. However, here one will find that these texts are rational, even (as some have suggested) hyper-rational. However, that form of rationality can be said to have been developed from another form of logic than the logic we accept in the West.
Even so,it is fair to make the assertion that 'all' Muslims agree that, “There is no god, but Allah and Mohammed is His messenger.”
This is the beginning, of Islam, and it is also the foundation of Islam and it is the totality of Islam. However, it is not enough worship Allah, you 'must' worship as Mohammad worshiped. To do this a Muslim uses the Qur'an and the Sunna. For the Westerner this is where the confusion begins as Islam is comprised of a rational made up of abrogation and dualism. This is most apparent in the separation of the Qur'an, that is, the Qur'an as represented during Mohammad's 13 years in Mecca is in many ways quite different for what followed beginning in Medina. During Mohammad's life new verses were being added to it and those added during the period of Mecca were where the peaceful passages are primarily found. Beginning with Madina these passages became violent and representing a Jihad concept of violent conquering. That which confuses those in the West is that, in Qur'anic logic, two statements can contradict each other and both are true. This is the dualistic logic as the following demonstrates:
In the Qur'an there are many contradictions, such as, Qur'an 2:109 says, that Muslims should be tolerant and forgiving to People of the Book. (Note: People of the Book are Jews and Christians).
On the other hand Qur'an 9:29 says, to attack People of the Book until they pay the jizyah, the dhimmi tax, submit to Sharia law and be humbled.
Now add to this the reality that the Sunna is actually comprised of two different texts. One is the Sira 'the biography of Mohammad,' and there is the Hadith which is a 'collection of small stories and traditions about Mohammad.' All of this is comprised of contradictions that those of the West find confusing at best but the followers of Islam accept as true.
While this is a long subject with many elements some basic assertions can be made:
Islamic doctrine is found in the Qur'an, the Sira and the Hadith – the Trilogy. Any explanation of Islam that does include the doctrine found in the Trilogy is wrong or incomplete.
The Qur'an is a small part of Islamic doctrine. The Sunna of Muhammad is textually more important than the Qur'an.
The Qur'an can be understood by reconstructing the Qur'an of Mohammad, the historical Qur'an.
The kafir is the major doctrine focus of Islam. The kafir has the lowest status of all animal life. The doctrine of the kafir is defined as political Islam.
Islam's success was not based on the religion alone, but also on politics and jihad.
The Sira devotes most of its attention to jihad and politics, not religion.
Islamic doctrine is dualistic in its reasoning and ethics.
Jew hatred is an integral part of the Trilogy.
There is no unmitigated good in the Qur'an for kafirs.
Jihad was integral to Islam's success and forms a large part of the Trilogy.
The Islamic doctrine subjugates women.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 28, 2014 3:48:36 GMT -5
all ISLAM COMES FROM THE SAME ROOT...Mohammed etc etc as others have pointed out
mike wrote"""""Your statement that 'Islam cannot coexist peacefully with others' is falsified by the fact that the majority of Muslims DO manage to coexist peacefully with others.""" while in actual numbers this is a truth...the reality is that actually in many societies they are constantly trying to change society to suit them selves and they have always done this when in a country which is not muslim the UK Ddenmark F rance Australia etc etc all a matter of degree their behaviour in muslim run countries however does give the lie to peaceful coexistence..Pakistan..Egypt Somalia Nigeria to name but a few where its any thing but peaceful co existence...and all those other countries which havepast histories of non peaceful co existence when under muslim rule
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 28, 2014 13:41:30 GMT -5
if there was a peaceful coexistence, then why did the Muslim woman in America bitch about the sign that advertised bacon? She can take her "offensive" and shove it up her ass and go where bacon isn't consumed or shut up.
|
|
|
Post by men an tol on Aug 28, 2014 15:05:15 GMT -5
Your point is well taken Chefmate, there is not now or in the past, peaceful coexistence with Islam. To them we are Kafir and Muslims cannot abide Kafir or they are not Muslims.
|
|
|
Post by markindurham on Aug 28, 2014 21:53:44 GMT -5
if there was a peaceful coexistence, then why did the Muslim woman in America bitch about the sign that advertised bacon? She can take her "offensive" and shove it up her ass and go where bacon isn't consumed or shut up. smiley 1 But no doubt the bleats of "It's only a few" etc will be ringing out...
|
|
|
Post by markindurham on Aug 28, 2014 22:18:19 GMT -5
Au contraire. I fire my guns at the right enemy. That enemy is islam, supported by its apologists. Islam cannot coexist peacefully with others; the instruction manual forbids it. Islam is by its very definition intolerant. QED. If you really were firing your guns at the right enemy you would not feel the need to regard those who disagree with you as being 'apologists for Islam' when in reality the overwhelming majority of them are nothing of the kind. So if you seriously believe that anyone who does not share your wholly negative perception is 'an apologist for Islam' then you are I am afraid in the muddy waters of political paranoia and conspiracy theorists. The reality is that most people are tolerant and wish that other people were. Your statement that 'Islam cannot coexist peacefully with others' is falsified by the fact that the majority of Muslims DO manage to coexist peacefully with others. 'The instruction manual' - which one? The Quran? The Hadiths? Individual mullahs? - does NOT forbid peaceful coexistence NOR does it forbid tolerance. On the contrary it enjoins it. Now I am an agnostic and I regard anyone whose religious beliefs lead them to become dogmatic and intolerant as suffering from a rather sad kind of mental illness. But as I have said repeatedly a fanatic of ANY description CANNOT be a multiculturalist because multiculturalism by its very definition is inclusive and tolerant of diversity. So the FACT is that it is NOT multiculturalism that has 'fuelled jihad' but monoculturalism. Well, you can believe what you like, but until there is a large scale and public uprising by the muslim community against any form of islamic extremism I and many others will continue to hold a negative opinion of islam. I fear that snow will fall in Hades, as it were, before we see such a thing, but, as ever, I stand to be corrected. If, and basis present evidence it is an enormous IF, it happens then I will be the first to hold my hand up and admit that I was in error. I'm not << in the muddy waters of political paranoia and conspiracy theorists>> at all; indeed I laugh in the face of such obfuscation. Nice try, but epic fail
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 29, 2014 4:40:14 GMT -5
I lurve the way this sort of coment is constantly trotted out
""""If you really believe that 'Islam is nothing but trouble' you really need to open your eyes rather than listening to the blinkered and brainwashed propaganda of the EDL or similar types of undesirable."""
why is it assumed by YOU that people are blinkered..brainwashed by the propaganda of the EDL etc why is it even necessary to think people MUST have fallen for propagenda to have reached their conclusions..... this assumption of superiority and arrogant dismisive distain for those of apposing conclusions is very childish in its attitude people can use their own hearing/seeing/life experiences to decide for them selves on this and other issues and frankly all I am seeing is so much wordy twaddle or as Mark put it obfuscation
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2014 16:10:59 GMT -5
If you really were firing your guns at the right enemy you would not feel the need to regard those who disagree with you as being 'apologists for Islam' when in reality the overwhelming majority of them are nothing of the kind. So if you seriously believe that anyone who does not share your wholly negative perception is 'an apologist for Islam' then you are I am afraid in the muddy waters of political paranoia and conspiracy theorists. The reality is that most people are tolerant and wish that other people were. Your statement that 'Islam cannot coexist peacefully with others' is falsified by the fact that the majority of Muslims DO manage to coexist peacefully with others. 'The instruction manual' - which one? The Quran? The Hadiths? Individual mullahs? - does NOT forbid peaceful coexistence NOR does it forbid tolerance. On the contrary it enjoins it. Now I am an agnostic and I regard anyone whose religious beliefs lead them to become dogmatic and intolerant as suffering from a rather sad kind of mental illness. But as I have said repeatedly a fanatic of ANY description CANNOT be a multiculturalist because multiculturalism by its very definition is inclusive and tolerant of diversity. So the FACT is that it is NOT multiculturalism that has 'fuelled jihad' but monoculturalism. Well, you can believe what you like, but until there is a large scale and public uprising by the muslim community against any form of islamic extremism I and many others will continue to hold a negative opinion of islam. I fear that snow will fall in Hades, as it were, before we see such a thing, but, as ever, I stand to be corrected. If, and basis present evidence it is an enormous IF, it happens then I will be the first to hold my hand up and admit that I was in error. I'm not << in the muddy waters of political paranoia and conspiracy theorists>> at all; indeed I laugh in the face of such obfuscation. Nice try, but epic fail You are entitled to believe that the earth is flat if you so wish but your demand for 'a large scale and public uprising by the Muslim community against islamic extremism' has been happening for about ten years now. Over a million Turks marched AGAINST it; even leading Saudi clerics have now condemned it; most British Muslim associations have condemned it; and so on. The problem is that those with closed eyes and closed minds refuse to see because they are too blinkered by their preconceptions. In any event the fundamental ERROR in this whole thread is the very title of it. By definition multiculturalism is opposed to jihadism and therefore by definition jihadists have NOT been fuelled by multiculturalism but are reacting against it. Simple logic and language. Now I imagine there is more hope of the Ayatollah Khameini converted to Christianity than there is of you admitting that you are wrong but I live in hope that perhaps you may see the light of reason and recognise your error.
|
|