Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Iraq Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Americans must respect Islam
salaam al-aqaaid    5/13/2004 10:18:35 AM
The outrageous atrocities commited by Americans at the Abu al-Grayyib prison complex speaks to a need for the United States Americans to give sensetivity training to its entire military so that they will no longer offind Muslims with the contemptious use of women as prison guards and unsavery adiction to homosexual pornographies. These things are offinsive to the Muslims community. Have you no shame? You must remove all women and homosexuals from contact with Muslim prisoners. This is offinsive.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
JMAC    RE:Correction: Condemning Terrorism- Info request.   12/6/2004 2:45:42 PM
Sorkoi wrote, "The idea that no there has been no Muslim condemnation of terrorism is simply belied by the facts." True enough. But you ought try weighing that with the "Death to America/Great Satan" dogma preached every friday from the middle eastern mosques. I don't think you would do well to question *those* facts either sir. That would explain the many thousands of jubilant "Muslims" in the PA, Egypt, etc... on 9/12 all holding banners of beloved brother Bin Laden. The small moderate voice was (and is still) completely outweighed by the cheering "death to US" *muslim* throngs. "Islamophobes on the list-" It doesn't require one to be an islamophobe to understand who our enemy is - or do you forget 9/11? "since what is being sought is no condmenation of terrorism but a sanctifation of the just nature of the American 'war on terror' and the nature of American world power itself." Thems foolish words -What's being "sought" are religious thugs who mean every person who doesn't believe as they do bodily harm and death (they have already inflicted it sir). Undeniably, *their* brand of Muslim theology calls for a jihad against America, and they do not seem like they are about to quit. Thankfully we do have the Power to stop them. I have no qualms about using that Power in such an effort. Over three thousand "reasons" are enough justification. Those muslims would just as much cheer your death as the death of any islamophobe. Perhaps that ought clue you in? Unless, of course, you're a Qutb type yourself... "This is the naracisism that under lies the claims that the US was attacked because of its virtues rather than its vices." This exhibits a singular lack of understanding of why we were attacked - the jihadists pronounced us the *Greater* Unbelief (because we're not obeying Allah by submitting to Islam) with the concomitant religious duty to erase us. It has nothing to do with either virtue or vices, it has everything to do with a religious jihad. Where you been man? JMAC
 
Quote    Reply

sorkoi2003    RE:Correction: Condemning Terrorism- Info request.   12/6/2004 3:34:31 PM
"But you ought try weighing that with the "Death to America/Great Satan" dogma preached every friday frokm the middle eastern mosques." Every Friday- in every moseque in Middle mEast majority moseques- what is the source of this informtion? A poll? A survey? "This exhibits a singular lack of understanding of why we were attacked - the jihadists pronounced us the *Greater* Unbelief (because we're not obeying Allah by submitting to Islam) with the concomitant religious duty to erase us." This is just silly rhetoric. OBL video messages are clear that reasons for attacking Pentagon WTC were do with American policies specifically what they see as the occupation of Saudia Arabia, support for regimes like Mubarak's and of course support for Israel.... The comment about naracissm is actually from report on Pentagon associated website- which I cited earlier- far as I am aware the report on 'Strategic Communication' was not written by Islamists. " It has nothing to do with either virtue or vices, it has everything to do with a religious jihad." There you go again- the jihad (and would be a non- religous jihad) is claim to be reaction to U.S policies. No you may accept that the policies were/are wrong. Its not about the being of the US but its doing. "The small moderate voice was (and is still) completely outweighed by the cheering "death to US" *muslim* throngs." Are all governments- part of this small 'moderate' voice? Maybe the US is not on the side of the people like in the Cold War but on the side of the regimes? "Islamophobes on the list-" It doesn't require one to be an islamophobe to understand who our enemy is..." Actually being Islamophobe is a hinderence to understanding who the enemy is. " Where you been man?" Not in Kansas but on planet Earth with the rest of humanity- where are you?
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:Correction: Condemning Terrorism- Info request.   12/6/2004 3:51:44 PM
sorkoi, if the greater mass of Arab language newspapers, the majority of respected Islamic scholars and the majority of Arab/Islamic governments in the world will come out publicly, day in and day out, and speak out in opposition to bin Laden, al Qaeda, al-Zarqawi, Hamas, the Shi'ite Jihad groups, etc., in both English and Arab languages, in their local media outlets as well as the international media, then I will start to think that Islam and the Arab world are against terrorism and religious/extremist violence. Until then, I'm not even close to convinced. As long as Islamic leaders continue to preach terrorist violence, as long as they continue to preach Sharia, to require that believers fight against non-Muslims, a paltry single anti-terrorist declaration means nothing. As long as the oligarchies that run most Middle Eastern countries continue to preach hatred, violence, anti-semitism, pro Nazi propaganda and more within their own government controlled media, such a declaration means nothing. The truth is, whether you like it or not, that Middle Eastern culture is one of violence, hatred and extremism. Being a moderate in that culture is a sure ticket to being targeted by one of the fundamentalist groups. These cultures and groups oppose the United States and the rest of Western civilization, not because of what we do, but because of who we are. Islamic extremists have been actively targeting the US since the 1970's, and all of the West since the 1930's, easily. Or did you not pay attention to the historical evidence of cooperation and common cause many Arab nations and/or resistance groups (in some cases) making common cause with the Nazi's in the 1930's. And many of these same groups then came to power in the 1950's and 1960's. The Ba'athists would be an obvious example. This isn't happening because there were US troops in Saudi Arabia in 1990, it started long before then. Failing to recognize that is what is leading you to your historically inaccurate conclusions about terrorism and Islamic extremism.
 
Quote    Reply

SGTObvious    RE:Educating Sorkoi.-architecture   12/6/2004 3:54:07 PM
"BTW what happened to lesson you were going to give on why Dome of Rock is not an example of Islamicate architecture... I was hoping to learn something." It's in another thread. One I started just for that purpose. Dome of the Rock is just another Hagia Sophia spinoff.
 
Quote    Reply

SGTObvious    RE:Educating Sorkoi.-architecture   12/6/2004 4:05:01 PM
Any serious suggestions to how might be included: I discount the following: Akkadians etc etc etc, ... as all of these were built on conquest. No, sometimes the "conquest" part is just a facet. In many cases, although the real estate deals might have been based in conquest, the reality is more complex, and the end result is wealth built (Rome, Britain, Incans, etc) rather than merely pre-existing wealth taken (Mongols, Muslims, etc). I've explained this. "Also, you need to stop thinking of the Arabs at time as an ethnicity with a specific homeland... as explained earlier." No, I don't. YOU need to understand that yes, the Arabs are just another ethnic group, and their origins are Arabia just as the Mongols started in Mongolia, the Berbers in North west Africa, and the Goths in the Baltic area. They did not magically spring from the dust across the Middle East. They launched themselves out from a heartland at a time when we still had Assyrians, Mesopotamians, etc, and conquered and absorbed them to such a degree that many of their descendents today call themselves Arabs. Still, though, the Saudis remind the others who the "real" arabs are every chance they get. There is a reason why, in Arab literature and folklore, the hero is the Beduoin.
 
Quote    Reply

rndmsfree    RE:Oh Looky, a real fundie   12/6/2004 5:46:54 PM
This is F-ing hilarious! >This you insult Islam with your Mash TV and Jamie Farr is a pig and an infidel. Just toying with ideas on how to disrespect islam: I wonder if anyone has written Shia/Sunni "slash" fiction... I'll bet that would get this joker's undies in a bunch.
 
Quote    Reply

PlatypusMaximus    RE:Reading 101   12/6/2004 9:05:38 PM
"Actually, I was talking about condemning terrorism in the wake of 9-11- since that how the tread had developed. So your reponse is kind of a red herring (or should that be red-neck herring :)." You attack because I'm good...You attack because I'm good...You attack because I'm good....must not sleep...clowns will eat me....oops. You'll not find a word so offensive, shameful or humiliating to me that I can't take it like the human being that I am. Most of the superior races demonstrate this trait. I was refering to actions, which speak louder than condemnations and transcripts of condemnations. Why would I need a non-racist word? Well, because some here are struggling with logic and reading. They think the words I use to identify our enemy, identify them by their race. That, and I'm trying to eliminate any unfortunate exclusions. Somewhat of a moot point anyway, as according to official UN stance, I cannot be a racist unless I'm Zionist.
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    RE:Correction: Condemning Terrorism- Info request.   12/6/2004 9:36:27 PM
This is just silly rhetoric. OBL video messages are clear that reasons for attacking Pentagon WTC were do with American policies specifically what they see as the occupation of Saudia Arabia, support for regimes like Mubarak's and of course support for Israel.... But of course. Given the fact that OBL never MENTIONED the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in his initial missives until after the attack on Afghanistan by US and allied forces. Im sure that was the primary reason. Of course. swhitebull - I'd STILL like to see how I.C.O. fits into all of this.
 
Quote    Reply

sorkoi2003    RE:Coffee terrorism.   12/7/2004 11:32:22 AM
"I'd STILL like to see how I.C.O. fits into all of this" So would I - I always thought the coffee drinkers consumers and producers had in for the tea drinkers and growers- that were the real world war is going on- 'war on terrorism' is simply a distration by coffee cultures so that that world does not see what they are doing to the tea cultures. Denouce coffee terrorism now- before its too late.
 
Quote    Reply

sorkoi2003    RE:Reading summer school   12/7/2004 11:43:15 AM
"Somewhat of a moot point anyway, as according to official UN stance, I cannot be a racist unless I'm Zionist" More mis-reading the UN had equated Zionism as form of racism - it had abandoned this stance back (I think the late 80s). Zionism as form of racism does not mean that racism does not have other forms like anti-semetism or Islamophobia. You don't have to be an ultra-Zionist to be racist- but I would have hard job imagining some somehow was an ultra-Zionist (e.g Kahane) could not be classified as racist. There more to racism than identifying people by 'race' as biological category. Biological racism lost its credibility in ashes of Auchwitiz and last offical racist regime in biological sense was apartheid South Africa. Racism has gone underground tends to implicit and coded. Identifying your enemy can be done without descent into racism- if one wants to.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics