Anti-Islam march in German city of Dresden

[weegee]

While you were arguing about this here....84 of the 500 kids taken hostage in Peshawar (Pakistan)today...are DEAD!!!!! Thats right DEAD.

Who lives by a religion that kills kids and their leaders do nothing to stop it????????

Germany is right to protest.....goood on them

[mickyboy]

there is a whole wide world between a ISLAMIST and MUSLIM like a catholic and a IRA extremist same catholic but it does seem that people for some reason want to force there lifestyle unto ours a guy talking on the bbc radio being muslim when asked why he wanted to force his religion on to otheres replied we have to let people know that allah is the one and only creator and if we make enough noise and shout loud enough people will listen and then will realise that the only way is to let allah into your heart only the stupid and ignorant who do not will suffer and therefore must be destroyed in the end it we be them against the rest unrest is just around the corner

[Naam]

While you were arguing about this here....84 of the 500 kids taken hostage in Peshawar (Pakistan)today...are DEAD!!!!! Thats right DEAD.

Who lives by a religion that kills kids and their leaders do nothing to stop it????????

Germany is right to protest.....goood on them

for the record: Germany is not protesting, a tiny minority of Germans are.

[cup-O-coffee]

Its about time that we Europeans recognise the threat caused by Islamic extremist AND American Christain extremists.

Stop with the foolish talking points. Radical Islam dwarfs the problems caused by any other religion. There is no legitimate comparison.

They are a bunch of perverts!!! "“Question 13: Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female slave who has not reached puberty?

“It is permissible to have intercourse with the female slave who hasn’t reached puberty if she is fit for intercourse; however if she is not fit for intercourse, then it is enough to enjoy her without intercourse.” Any women who is not a Muslim can be treated in this manner...

Religion is anathema to humankind. Credit is given to religion where it is not due. Invisible friends are the crutches man uses to replace the characteristics he was born with, but which have been stripped from him by "civilized" society.

The best part of mankind is not the result of religion or of invisible friends. It is the result of mankind finding that within himself and accepting the fact that it is he from whom it originates, and not some invisible friend.

The quote above can be demonstrated in many religious books, such as Mishnah from Kethuboth 11a and others. Please dispense with quoting old books written by wicked old men who intention to control others minds and enslave them with superstitious beliefs.

Religion is a prosthetic on the body of mankind that is not needed, unless you want to kill and hurt people and feel good about it afterwards.

[harryfrompattaya]

While you were arguing about this here....84 of the 500 kids taken hostage in Peshawar (Pakistan)today...are DEAD!!!!! Thats right DEAD.

Who lives by a religion that kills kids and their leaders do nothing to stop it????????

Germany is right to protest.....goood on them

for the record: Germany is not protesting, a tiny minority of Germans are.

As a American I say Germany is up the Creek without a paddle how do they get out of trouble

I do want to be attack but I want to hear your solution

As I see the Finial Solution is a Muslim Germany

[Saradoc1972]

While you were arguing about this here....84 of the 500 kids taken hostage in Peshawar (Pakistan)today...are DEAD!!!!! Thats right DEAD.

Who lives by a religion that kills kids and their leaders do nothing to stop it????????

Germany is right to protest.....goood on them

for the record: Germany is not protesting, a tiny minority of Germans are.

It might be nowhere a general strike but it's sizeable. And don't forget they've been at it for 8 weeks now with some (much) smaller gatherings in other German towns.

A couple of major trade unions could, together, rally 25000 people maximum, so with 15000 Pegida is at least in the same league. Certainly nowhere near the protests against NATO double-track in 1979, but still.

Oh yes, and the Pakistan school...

The IRA never even thought about blowing up a school or a church, and neither did their Protestant counterparts. They'd have lost every last bit of support from their respective communities if they had done such a thing. But with muslims it's apparently different, once radicalized. No regrets, no limits, it's just Allah, Allah, Allah and kill the infidels. Or just anyone, those kids were muslims after all.

Basically, it's just "I want to be caliph instead of the caliph!" (if you know those comic books) and even if islam were to be the only religion left on the planet, they'd just be at each other's throat until hell freezes over, over the question who is the better muslim and hence caliph with all the worldly power Sharia brings.

The problem with islam is that it lends itself to radicalization and unbelivable cruelty. If you just read it without any explanation, that's just what it says.

So, alongside Pegida, I advocate a rather tight rein on anything muslim in western countries, especially Islam tuition at school, so kids learn about a moderate and evolved islam.

[jacky54]

there is a whole wide world between a ISLAMIST and MUSLIM like a catholic and a IRA extremist same catholic but it does seem that people for some reason want to force there lifestyle unto ours a guy talking on the bbc radio being muslim when asked why he wanted to force his religion on to otheres replied we have to let people know that allah is the one and only creator and if we make enough noise and shout loud enough people will listen and then will realise that the only way is to let allah into your heart only the stupid and ignorant who do not will suffer and therefore must be destroyed in the end it we be them against the rest unrest is just around the corner

But an Islamist IS a Muslim, just one that actually gets off his arse and does what the Koran and Allah command. The so called moderates are (in the eyes of the Islamist) hypocrites who will burn in hell as the Koran says. The IRA were political not religious, not a sane comparison and the IRA have not been waging a 1400 year war against unbelievers in an attempt to bring about islamic world rule, as envisaged by the prophet in one of his visions.

Edited December 16, 2014 by jacky54

[Morakot]

The problem with islam is that it lends itself to radicalization and unbelivable cruelty. If you just read it without any explanation, that's just what it says.

Terribly sorry, but this sounds like undifferentiated hogwash.

[Ulysses G.]

Actually, he is closer to the truth than you are. If one reads the Quran literally, he is right.

[Saradoc1972]

The problem with islam is that it lends itself to radicalization and unbelivable cruelty. If you just read it without any explanation, that's just what it says.

Terribly sorry, but this sounds like undifferentiated hogwash.

Nope, quite differentiated actually.

I am not saying islam is evil along with hundreds of millions of muslim followers, I am just saying it lends itself to radicalization because of what is literally contained in that holy book of theirs.

There is one passage after the other calling for the killing of infidels, their subjugation, violent strife and whatnot.

These describe what was going on in times even before the middle-ages, along with the hadites. Strife, clan-wars, and bloodshed everywhere, not just around muslims.

To make a peaceful religion out of that needs a lot of explanation and historical context. Salafists, on the other hand, take the quran literally, and as German secret service officers put it: not every salafist is a terrorist, but so far all terrorists were salafists.

And even then there are some recipes for direct action you can't explain away, The bible on the other hand, in the old testament at least, only describes the outcome of violence (i.e. where god granted his chosen people a victory or whatever), and is not being graphic about it. Apart from one two pieces of hard to find text, it is two steps further apart from directing a reader towards a violent course of action than the quran is.

Again: I am not saying islam preaches violence, it is just so much easier to jump to the conclusion it does, if someone vulnerable meets the wrong sort of people.

[Morakot]

A lot of confusion Sara! You clearly don't understand elementary textual analysis, if you compare an ultra-fundamentalist reading of the Quran to a liberal interpretation of the old testament.

A text itself cannot be inherently more dangerous that another text. All what matter is context --informed by historical circumstance-- that shapes certain interpretations.

Indeed nowadays we don't normally see "radicalised" ultra-fundamentalist readings of the old testament, because over several centuries certain socio-political developments in Europe have eradicated the hinterland* that would allow for such manifestations. But that was not always the case. For example, in the past the efforts of John Wycliffe and Jan Hus were severely curtailed because the bible was considered far too dangerous to be read without adequate guidance and interpretation.

[* Hinterland: a bundle of indefinitely extending and more or less routinised and costly literary and material relations that include statements about reality and reality itself; a concrete metaphor for absence and presence.]

Edited December 16, 2014 by Morakot

[jacky54]

109 suras at least in the koran that promote violence, now where do these terrorists get their motivation from, not difficult is it?

[jpeg]

I do believe this is the reason why Muslims on Phuket co-exist with their Buddhist neighbours peacefully on Phuket, as opposed to Yala/Pattani (and throughout the World). Do please correct me if any of you PC force fed brigade disagree, with reasons why.

What happens to countries that Muslims occupy?

As long as the Muslim population remains around or under 2% in any given country, they will be for the most part be regarded as a peace-loving minority, and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the case in:

United States -- Muslim 0.6%

Australia -- Muslim 1.5%

Canada -- Muslim 1.9%

China -- Muslim 1.8%

Italy -- Muslim 1.5%

Norway -- Muslim 1.8%

At 2% to 5%, they begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, often with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark -- Muslim 2%

Germany -- Muslim 3.7%

United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7%

Spain -- Muslim 4%

Thailand -- Muslim 4.6%

From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for

Muslims. They will increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature halal on their shelves -- along with threats for failure to comply. This is occurring in:

France -- Muslim 8%

Philippines -- 5%

Sweden -- Muslim 5%

Switzerland -- Muslim 4.3%

The Netherlands -- Muslim 5.5%

Trinidad & Tobago -- Muslim 5.8%

At this point, they will work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves (within their ghettos) under Sharia, the Islamic Law. The ultimate goal of Islamists is to establish Sharia law over the entire world.

When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions. In Paris , we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam , with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam. Such tensions are seen daily, particularly in Muslim sections, in:

Guyana – Muslim 10%

India -- Muslim 13.4%

Israel -- Muslim 16%

Kenya -- Muslim 10%

Russia -- Muslim 15%

After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues, such as in:

Ethiopia -- Muslim 32.8%

At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare, such as in:

Bosnia -- Muslim 40%

Nigeria – Muslim 50.4%

Chad – Muslim 50.3%

Lebanon -- Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, nations experience unfettered persecution of non-believers of all other religions (including non-conforming Muslims), sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon, and ***ya, the tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania -- Muslim 70%

Malaysia -- Muslim 60.4%

Qatar -- Muslim 77.5%

Sudan -- Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out the infidels, and move toward 100% Muslim, such as has been experienced and in some ways is on-going in:

Bangladesh -- Muslim 83%

Egypt -- Muslim 90%

Gaza -- Muslim 98.7%

Indonesia -- Muslim 86.1%

Iran -- Muslim 98%

Iraq -- Muslim 97%

Jordan -- Muslim 92%

Morocco -- Muslim 98.7%

Pakistan -- Muslim 97%

Palestine -- Muslim 99%

Syria -- Muslim 90%

Tajikistan -- Muslim 90%

Turkey -- Muslim 99.8%

United Arab Emirates -- Muslim 96%

ADDED:

In future please supply a link to material to the source.

Edited December 16, 2014 by soundman
ADDED.... In future link to source please.

[jpeg]

This thread would be far more 'popular' if someone could find a pic of one of the protesters carrying a swastika ....

I don't think there's a need for that considering what happened today in Sydney.

And again, whose first thought on seeing this headline wasn't muslim extemists?

[Saradoc1972]

No text is dangerous in itself, unless you throw it at someone. I'd rather get whacked with a relatively small quran, if it comes to that.

My textual analysis is a lawyer's - can't help myself. So I go through literal interpretation, then semantic within the scope of a given text, then historical, then teleological (not theological, that's a cold joke! Stems from Greek telos=missile as in: what is the aim?), in that order.

So in a historical context and with a telelogical interpretation islam would nowadays aim at a "greater jihad" meaning strife to perfect oneself spiritually and go out and do good. The whackos only see the "small jihad" which indeed calls for conquering by whatever means.

If I then think of those 50% German Turks, Kurds, and Arabs only passing the lowest level of secondary education (and that's not much - it's sometimes said there is no measurable progress beyond what they learned at primary school) and those up to 20% failing to get even that, I don't think they can look behind seemingly clear sentences like "Slay the infidels whereever you find them". And they will certainly not be able to consolidate that with other passages mandating there can be no force in religious matters.

Actually - we might be singing from the same songsheet here. That Hinterland line of arguing is actually quite intriguing.

The Christian churches obviously had a lot of academic work over the centuries, culminating in Martin Luther throwing out a lot of what he thought of as rubbish. More importantly, all big churches have a hierarchical structure through wich they can sort out what is canon and what is not; the Pope, the bishops, synodes, and so on.

Islam has never had any of that. While there are islamic universities of different levels of reputation, there is no centralization and the umma has failed to evolve here. Hence, every hodscha in the smallest of mosques can basically make up his own interpretation of islam. Hence, Islam has so far, for 14 centuries, not been able to get rid of what you call hinterland, and here we are.

There was one professor at a Cairo university who went public a couple of years ago wishing for an islam version of Martin Luther. Got killed two months after.

So I think we can consolidate both lines of thinking.

Both holy, holy books are no easy read unless you have a lot of guidance. With the bible you drag yourself through what might as well be a phonebook in Genesis, and then there is parabel after parabel in short stories about this or that prophet or saint, I never got round actually reading quran, but its more like psalms. Which are more or less meaningless in the Christian Psalterium unless you get them explained to you.

With muslims, one of the problems are the madressas, where kids only get taught to pronounce arabic syllables. There is not explanation as what the text means. and if you don't have Arabic, e.g. the Turks, you have to rely on hearsay as to what your overly important religion actually says.

Hence, the way I see it, Islam does in modern times not necessarily preach violence and strife, but lends itself to that interpretation through the text in their holy book itself and the structural deficites within the umma. (along with a social dimension)

And radicalization comes easy, as the extremists don't have to reinvent the wheel. It's all in that book the guy grew up with and was told it was swell.

Edited December 16, 2014 by Saradoc1972

[Mosha]

United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7% and they got Muhammed to #1 spot in baby boys names this year.

[uptheos]

United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7% and they got Muhammed to #1 spot in baby boys names this year.

Given the size of their families, what's to stop every boy being given that official name?

[Saradoc1972]

Little update from German newspapers and the AfD party:

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/afd-rechtfertigt-pegida-mit-sydney-geiselnahme-a-1008725.html (in German)

The AfD have finally solidarised themselves with the Pegida movement referring to the Sydney siege, claiming one guy was enough to endanger the German populace in a press handout:

http://www.alternativefuer.de/adam-die-gewaehlten-liegen-falsch-nicht-die-waehler/ (German, translation by yours truly)

You only get to Australia if you follow the rules. And those are tough: the government regulates immigration, intercepts illegal immigrants well before the shoreline and sends them back to their home countries.

Despite all of this an islamist fanatic, universaly labelled a lone wolf, managed to take five hostages, two of which were killed during a rescue attempt by police. "This shows", AfD spokesman Konrad Adams explained,"there is no need for mass-immigration to endanger people. A single person totally suffices."

Still, top politicians believe they can ridicule PEGIDA by hinting at their followers' purported ignorance as to whom they were protesting against, as the country of Saxony was widely trailing behind with regard to proportions of foreigners.

"By that they are only proving they don't understand what is going on." Adam continues, "A feeling of personal security does not depend on what you see in statistics. Only politicians closing their eyes to reality can believe that."

Not the voters were deluded, but those voted for.

[ggt]

Muslims are going to take over the world if counties do not limit their immigration...they will not save non-Muslims from extermination once their numbers are sufficient to carry-out the worldwide religious domination that Mohammed preached...no I am not exaggerating...

One day you will be given the choice to convert to Islam and Sharia law or die...just that simple...is actually happening now in some ME countries as the Muslim armies purge their territories of infidels...

Infidels are non-Muslims and other Muslims who do not believe in their particular brand of Islam...

It is just a matter of time...

Edited December 16, 2014 by ggt

[Naam]

United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7% and they got Muhammed to #1 spot in baby boys names this year.

a strong indication that the United Kingdom is doomed. the Queen will move to Scotland, a Grand Mufti will reside in Buckingham Palace, Westminster Abbey will get four minarets...

[AlQaholic]

The war has already started.

The world of tomorrow will be border-less, as we already see with ISIS. The notion of nations is an already historic concept. Future generations will be divided by common cause and ideas, not by borders, in this new world, governments will become extinct as physical institutions.

A common indication of this new phenomena is the "followers" on facebook for example, bordering on cults.

[bkkgooner]

Muslims are going to take over the world if counties do not limit their immigration...they will not save non-Muslims from extermination once their numbers are sufficient to carry-out the worldwide religious domination that Mohammed preached...no I am not exaggerating...

One day you will be given the choice to convert to Islam and Sharia law or die...just that simple...is actually happening now in some ME countries as the Muslim armies purge their territories of infidels...

Infidels are non-Muslims and other Muslims who do not believe in their particular brand of Islam...

It is just a matter of time...

You sound like a lunatic. Go take a nap.

I will never in my life be forced to become a muslim or be executed, Islam has not taken over any western country or come even remotely close to it. Islam is a global security threat in the sense of rampage and murder but not in the sense of ever invading and taking control of a single Western nation. If you think that is true I am not sure what else to tell you.

Great avatar pic though so I don't want to argue with you.

Edited December 17, 2014 by bkkgooner

[Morakot]

So I think we can consolidate both lines of thinking.

Nice talking to you Saradoc! I see your predicament... Forgive me, social scientists find it always tempting to poke fun at those who come to read case law as statutes.

To be honest, you make some very interesting points. I agree that the reformation of the Christian churches had a profound influence on contemporary Christianity (include Catholicism). Not to say that there are no liberal forms of Islam, but it has less to draw on and it is much more a recent development that lacks the "congealment" we saw see in Christianity that came at high cost over centuries in Europe.

The other point you raise about institutions and centralisation, I find more controversial. Many Christian churches (apart from the obvious example of the Catholic church) are decentralised to varying degrees. Some, like Presbyterians, have no bishops and tend to locally decide what is valid and what is not. In Islam (as for some Christian churches) there are powerful overarching organisations that direct and influence faith and believers. The Muslim Council of Britain, is an excellent example of this; while it does not make theological pronouncements, it gives concrete practical guidance for people how to practice their faith. I have to admit, I don't know what the situation is in Germany but in the UK the vast majority of Muslim are moderate and those who are not are usually shunned and scolded.

There was one incident, last year in London, where a handful of young radicalised people wanted to introduce some aspects of Sharia law in their neighbourhood. They demanded from unsuspecting night-time revellers who passed a mosque on the street, to dispose of their alcoholic beverages they openly carried (in British drinking culture style). Not only did the Muslim Council of Britain condemn the young people's action, but the local imam at that mosque delivered a Khutbah that Friday where he explained how "unislamic" these demands were as the were afflicted on non-Muslims. So, this decentrality in a sense, can be also be a strength that people can locally interpret and guide without tightly woven networks of wider authoritative power.

Edited December 17, 2014 by Morakot

[Morakot]

United Kingdom -- Muslim 2.7% and they got Muhammed to #1 spot in baby boys names this year.

a strong indication that the United Kingdom is doomed. the Queen will move to Scotland, a Grand Mufti will reside in Buckingham Palace, Westminster Abbey will get four minarets...

Westminster Cathedral already has "minarets", at least according to some Ukip muppet!

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/nov/27/-sp-ukip-mistakes-westminster-cathedral-for-mosque

Edited December 17, 2014 by Morakot

[arjunadawn]

Re death worship: who has a savior king draped over a cross, and who ritually consumes his flesh and blood every week?

Christians deserve no pass in this regard. They have set up warrior states to enslave the entire planet, and murder millions who would hinder them. Why are they so different from their Islamic cousins?

Its a fair question: It is oddly primitive and barbaric, this regicide and deification of crucifixion. Were it not for the fact that christ was the last in a fairly long line of dying and rising gods it might even seem unique, but it is not. It is archaic, barbaric, and under the color of faith or the divine bridges the dark ages of man's past to what should be more enlightened days (now)- as a protected emulate of... reality? Your right in that when transubstantiation is actually explained it is simple cannibalism- it cannot be explained otherwise! But you equate the two and ask why one is given a pass? It is a valid observation but a false question.

You could just as easily explained the remarkable color of orange and how it envelopes fruit and while this is true, ask why it is given a pass from Islam also. What is appreciable here as a topic [OP] has no bearing on orange fruit or dead gods on crosses. What existed once as a warrior class of monks savaging the non christian world has no relation to questions today. This is as utterly unrelated as the orange. Eating gods, kneeling to Buddha, oranges, or Jews nodding to the Wailing Wall have no bearing on the questions that fundamentally make islam topical and alarming today to Germans, and from my perspective, universally. Islam is different today [from others] because islam threatens with extinction every single aspect of every single society, its cultural history, gods, forefathers, and values and traditions (one can just look to the 100,000,000.00 dead Hindus and Buddhists in the subcontinent during the Second Jihad and see this is the exact same behavior as the First Jihad, or the current, Third Jihad, or consider the destruction of the Buddhas of Bumiyan or the ancient libraries of Timbuktu today!- there is no end to this nihilism other than opposing it). There is hardly a threat equal this under the color of religion, certainly not the stumbling catholic church or christian fundamentalists. (However, while islam is different today from the things noted there is absolutely nothing changed about Islam since its inception; Islam is for the most part exactly the same as during the 7th century. The mandate is divine expansion, submission, extinction, enslavement to Al Lah. Islam has not changed, modernity grew around it while it slept, ensconced in Ottoman backwaters and oppressed by regional strongmen. Islam has never changed!).

Islam is, by every account, dissembling on one hand, and savagely waring with the world with the other. Under the assigned label "moderate" (because no muslim self assigned this label) the Ummah remains quiet, indifferent, indeed excited at the increasing rise of islam in the world consciousness (The islamic Sunnah variously protests this or that, but not much- the islamic Sunnah mostly endorses through fatwa all you see happening). Islam is no different, now, than badboy actors in Hollywood who are keenly aware that good, bad publicity, doesn't matter- only publicity matters. There is enough "islam" in the news daily by 2015 to realize that whether the body of the news reports are good or negative the end result for the goal of dar al salam is being realized. Islam's singular goal is islamic world dominion- the House of Peace (Peace here means submission). The good reports, the bad reports, all the reports, doesn't matter as Islam inculcates daily into the universal psyche.

[The manic]

Re death worship: who has a savior king draped over a cross, and who ritually consumes his flesh and blood every week?

Christians deserve no pass in this regard. They have set up warrior states to enslave the entire planet, and murder millions who would hinder them. Why are they so different from their Islamic cousins?

Christ did not preach hate. Don't be silly and contentious. If our western christian states were so bad people in their 100,000 would not try to live there, legally or otherwise. To equate Islam with Christianity is facile and lazy thinking. There is no comparision.

[arjunadawn]

Re death worship: who has a savior king draped over a cross, and who ritually consumes his flesh and blood every week?

Christians deserve no pass in this regard. They have set up warrior states to enslave the entire planet, and murder millions who would hinder them. Why are they so different from their Islamic cousins?

You are 100% correct; you are exact, to the point, and capture the total disgust of the christian actions upon the different, the helpless, and people who think differently. The problem is your observation is in the wrong century. Can you really make an argument that has as its common connection " the long train of time?" You and I live today. There has not been a christian hegemony in centuries and its been close to a thousand years since the dream of an empire evaporated from the Holy See (not coincentally as a direct result of the continued islamic jihad and the felling of Byzantium).

I also used to equate christians and muslims (and jews) as cousins; but this is utterly wrong and mistaken. There appears to be a blood lineage to Ischamael and Hagar, and Sarah and Abraham, but that is tribal only. What has actually happened and quite evident in in both scripture and the text, is one desert god among many frequently worshiped at the kaba in mecca was elevated to some local tribal supremacy by their prophet- Al Lah. As the various jewish factions in both mecca and medina were fairly powerful tribes and repudiated the concept of the supremacy of Al Lah (over the Four Letters [grk] YHWH god) because Al Lah most certainly was not monotheistic. After all, Al Lah had a consort, Al Lat.

The prophet made various changes, albeit secondary to the whisperings of Gabriel, to accommodate the Jews to gain converts (this action is later abrogated in the Koran when the prophet makes changes after the jews rebuke him noting God was testing the jews, and they failed again). He also made the qibla in the direction of the Second Temple and dropped the consort Al Lat as an accommodation to the jews, who were aghast. The Jews would have none of this and repudiated this new prophet. The prophet changed the direction of the qibla back to Mecca, where he was recently chased out of to Medina, re-consolidated his forces in Medina, and then killed everyone in Medina (who had not accepted his kinda offer of inclusion), then turned once more to Mecca for payback. The end result was subsuming this amalgam of a desert deity with the rough approximations of the Hebrew and Christian god, and this quasi end result has since been called the God of Ibrahim, Allah, or the same god as the others- the practical appearance is quarreling cousins for sure. This is no more true than saying Elohim or the Tetragrammaton YaHWeH is the same as Ahura Mazda, Horus, or other Sumerian deities. It is utterly contrived, syncretistic fabrication. Al Lah is most surely not the same god as the christian and jews.

Islam has all the trappings of a religion, all of them; however, it also has so much more than any religion has ever possessed inherrent to itself in this part of recorded history (excepting the christian age). Islam is thus fairly and rightly worthy of critique as an ideology, apart from any debate on the merits of its faith. Thus it is unnecessary to make any observations about the validity or profoundity of their god, Al Lah, or revelations of the prophet; there is simply no place to insult, digress, or address such things- also, it makes no sense to start a conversation here. It is simply not a discussion practical men should have as it can only invite insult and confusion. However, when considering the vehicle in which Islam spreads, its Shar'ia fabric that is as equally binding on believers as non believers, then this should be considered objectively, openly, and independent of deity or religious orthodoxy. Because Islam extends into the secular space, the judicial space, the social and political and military space, it is worthy of observation and critique without the rebuke of blasphemy or such nonsense. The ideology of Islam demands to be explored by a western world that is increasingly having its post enlightenment institutions subsumed by some backwater desert warmongering, death worshiping ideology. If people want to believe in Islam, not believe, I don't care. It is none of my business and I wish them equally peace. But the Shar'ia is an infectious ideology that threatens all moral virtue and enlightenment.

Islam is not like Christianity.

NOTE: Why include Christians alone in your timeless comparison; there were a number of other dying and rising gods? Why not include them in your rebuke as well?

[Saradoc1972]

[Germany calling ... Germany calling ]

German Minister for Economy and Social Democrats leader Sigmar Gabriel advocates taking the PEGIDA protests serious and discuss their motives.

Among the Pegida-protesters "many were joining because they felt frightened and not being taken seriously by policy-makers regarding their diffuse fears of `foreign domination`", said Gabriel talking to Germany's leading tabloid "BILD".

"We need to approach those people, but there can be no lack of clarity in that discussion". Among the protesters were some neo-nazis and radicals, from which a "crystal clear" dissociation was mandatory. Rabble-rousing against minorities "that could very well explode into violence" was intolerable, Gabriel stressed.

http://www.derNewsticker.de/news.php?id=296423&i=dsklch

[The manic]

Re death worship: who has a savior king draped over a cross, and who ritually consumes his flesh and blood every week?

Christians deserve no pass in this regard. They have set up warrior states to enslave the entire planet, and murder millions who would hinder them. Why are they so different from their Islamic cousins?

You are 100% correct; you are exact, to the point, and capture the total disgust of the christian actions upon the different, the helpless, and people who think differently. The problem is your observation is in the wrong century. Can you really make an argument that has as its common connection " the long train of time?" You and I live today. There has not been a christian hegemony in centuries and its been close to a thousand years since the dream of an empire evaporated from the Holy See (not coincentally as a direct result of the continued islamic jihad and the felling of Byzantium).

I also used to equate christians and muslims (and jews) as cousins; but this is utterly wrong and mistaken. There appears to be a blood lineage to Ischamael and Hagar, and Sarah and Abraham, but that is tribal only. What has actually happened and quite evident in in both scripture and the text, is one desert god among many frequently worshiped at the kaba in mecca was elevated to some local tribal supremacy by their prophet- Al Lah. As the various jewish factions in both mecca and medina were fairly powerful tribes and repudiated the concept of the supremacy of Al Lah (over the Four Letters [grk] YHWH god) because Al Lah most certainly was not monotheistic. After all, Al Lah had a consort, Al Lat.

The prophet made various changes, albeit secondary to the whisperings of Gabriel, to accommodate the Jews to gain converts (this action is later abrogated in the Koran when the prophet makes changes after the jews rebuke him noting God was testing the jews, and they failed again). He also made the qibla in the direction of the Second Temple and dropped the consort Al Lat as an accommodation to the jews, who were aghast. The Jews would have none of this and repudiated this new prophet. The prophet changed the direction of the qibla back to Mecca, where he was recently chased out of to Medina, re-consolidated his forces in Medina, and then killed everyone in Medina (who had not accepted his kinda offer of inclusion), then turned once more to Mecca for payback. The end result was subsuming this amalgam of a desert deity with the rough approximations of the Hebrew and Christian god, and this quasi end result has since been called the God of Ibrahim, Allah, or the same god as the others- the practical appearance is quarreling cousins for sure. This is no more true than saying Elohim or the Tetragrammaton YaHWeH is the same as Ahura Mazda, Horus, or other Sumerian deities. It is utterly contrived, syncretistic fabrication. Al Lah is most surely not the same god as the christian and jews.

Islam has all the trappings of a religion, all of them; however, it also has so much more than any religion has ever possessed inherrent to itself in this part of recorded history (excepting the christian age). Islam is thus fairly and rightly worthy of critique as an ideology, apart from any debate on the merits of its faith. Thus it is unnecessary to make any observations about the validity or profoundity of their god, Al Lah, or revelations of the prophet; there is simply no place to insult, digress, or address such things- also, it makes no sense to start a conversation here. It is simply not a discussion practical men should have as it can only invite insult and confusion. However, when considering the vehicle in which Islam spreads, its Shar'ia fabric that is as equally binding on believers as non believers, then this should be considered objectively, openly, and independent of deity or religious orthodoxy. Because Islam extends into the secular space, the judicial space, the social and political and military space, it is worthy of observation and critique without the rebuke of blasphemy or such nonsense. The ideology of Islam demands to be explored by a western world that is increasingly having its post enlightenment institutions subsumed by some backwater desert warmongering, death worshiping ideology. If people want to believe in Islam, not believe, I don't care. It is none of my business and I wish them equally peace. But the Shar'ia is an infectious ideology that threatens all moral virtue and enlightenment.

Islam is not like Christianity.

NOTE: Why include Christians alone in your timeless comparison; there were a number of other dying and rising gods? Why not include them in your rebuke as well?

Thanks for the erudite history of Islam. A rare insight into a malevolent ideology.

[arjunadawn]

Muslims are going to take over the world if counties do not limit their immigration...they will not save non-Muslims from extermination once their numbers are sufficient to carry-out the worldwide religious domination that Mohammed preached...no I am not exaggerating...

One day you will be given the choice to convert to Islam and Sharia law or die...just that simple...is actually happening now in some ME countries as the Muslim armies purge their territories of infidels...

Infidels are non-Muslims and other Muslims who do not believe in their particular brand of Islam...

It is just a matter of time...

You sound like a lunatic. Go take a nap.

I will never in my life be forced to become a muslim or be executed, Islam has not taken over any western country or come even remotely close to it. Islam is a global security threat in the sense of rampage and murder but not in the sense of ever invading and taking control of a single Western nation. If you think that is true I am not sure what else to tell you.

Great avatar pic though so I don't want to argue with you.

It is utterly outrageous that you say "muslims are going to take over the world." It seems ridiculous that if countries do not limit immigration they will be enabling this horrible end you speak of. One day people will be given the choice to convert to Islam and Sharia law or die. Hahaha. You have got to be kidding me. You think only "time" will make this inevitability apparent?

Yes, you sound like a lunatic. I agree with 100% of every thing you said. Moreover, all your ridiculous or exaggerated observations can be clearly suggested by numbers, demographics, and simple mathematics; I say suggested because many things can be twisted or manipulated to appear one way or another. But not all things. If such a thing as you suppose even has a 10% probability (and this is incredibly low estimate) then the consequences of not taking your post seriously is madness.

Like your post or not, it is specific and to the point. When a response begins with "you sound like a lunatic. Go take a nap." you know you have hit upon someone who's mind is unable or unwilling to grasp the merit or enormity of your post. Sadly, the merit of your post will be apparent within the lifetime of those of us posting here today.