DogOnPorch Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 1 minute ago, dialamah said: It works on the gullible. The Quran indeed works on the gullible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: That would be the be the fault of the gullible. Should one taylor one's speech to limit its effect on the brainless? The Quran = Hate Speech...apparently...as that's what I am quoting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 1 minute ago, DogOnPorch said: The Quran = Hate Speech...apparently...as that's what I am quoting. Apparently, according to the hate speech laws in Canada, it's not hate speech if it's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted September 19, 2017 Report Share Posted September 19, 2017 4 minutes ago, bcsapper said: That would be the fault of the gullible. Should one tailor one's speech to limit its effect on the brainless? I dunno, should they? Should we never object to ISIS telling potential recruits why they need to kill infidels because only the gullible will fall for it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 2 minutes ago, dialamah said: I dunno, should they? Should we never object to ISIS telling potential recruits why they need to kill infidels because only the gullible will fall for it? That would be against the law. It would be against the law if I did it too. We both know we're not talking of such things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 (edited) 13 minutes ago, dialamah said: I dunno, should they? Should we never object to ISIS telling potential recruits why they need to kill infidels because only the gullible will fall for it? Actually...it's the concept of Jihad that is causing the issues. Not ISIS...which is just following what the Quran dictates. The whole idea that one gets one's sins washed clean and preferential treatment in Paradise if one dies in the cause of furthering Allah is...as we've seen...bloody dangerous thinking. I know you'd like to keep it simple and blame me... Edited September 20, 2017 by DogOnPorch 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 Oddly nobody else sees the irony of worrying that the Quran might inspire violence in the 'gullible'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 Just now, DogOnPorch said: Oddly nobody else sees the irony of worrying that the Quran might inspire violence in the 'gullible'. It's hate speech. It should be banned in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: It's hate speech. It should be banned in Canada. I'm against censorship. 100% Same goes for Mein Kampf....although I'd argue that one needs to also read 'Table Talk' to see the real Hitler in action... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 (edited) 12 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said: I'm against censorship. 100% Same goes for Mein Kampf....although I'd argue that one needs to also read 'Table Talk' to see the real Hitler in action... Yeah, me too. I was pointing out the irony of trying to ban speech that seeks to oppose hate speech, as hate speech. I have a copy of Mein Kampf somewhere. I couldn't get through it though. Edited September 20, 2017 by bcsapper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 2 minutes ago, bcsapper said: That would be against the law. It would be against the law if I did it too. We both know we're not talking of such things. Do you think ISIS recruiters start out by saying kill infidels? Nah, they work up to it. Develop hatred gradually, build it up, lead the person to the action you want them to take. Already on this forum we have Capricorn and Pik who are all good with Muslims getting attacked and killed because "we don't want Islam". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, dialamah said: Do you think ISIS recruiters start out by saying kill infidels? Nah, they work up to it. Develop hatred gradually, build it up, lead the person to the action you want them to take. Already on this forum we have Capricorn and Pik who are all good with Muslims getting attacked and killed because "we don't want Islam". If they start out by expressing a legally held opinion then I'm okay with that. At some point they move on to the violent bits. That I'm not okay with. You appear to want them to stop at a different point than me, and you want to apply that to everyone. In all discussions, or just about Islam? I have not come across anyone who is all good with Muslims getting attacked and killed, unless we are talking about those who deserve it. That said, as much as that is an utterly reprehensible view, (if they don't deserve it) it is a legally held one. Edited September 20, 2017 by bcsapper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 Just now, bcsapper said: Yeah, me too. I was pointing out the irony of trying to ban speech that seeks to oppose hate speech, as hate speech. I have a copy of Mein Kampf somewhere. I couldn't get through it though. It's for the gullible. Table Talk, however, is candid conversations (taking place mostly at the Berghof) as recorded by Martin Bormann's office. So one gets to see Hitler relaxed and among friends. It's odd...really odd. Hugh Trevor Roper arranged it whose name might be familiar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 6 minutes ago, dialamah said: Do you think ISIS recruiters start out by saying kill infidels? Nah, they work up to it. Develop hatred gradually, build it up, lead the person to the action you want them to take. Already on this forum we have Capricorn and Pik who are all good with Muslims getting attacked and killed because "we don't want Islam". It's all found in the Quran...all the hate...kill the infidels...etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 34 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said: I know you'd like to keep it simple and blame me... Monster. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 Just now, OftenWrong said: Monster. I am rather fond of the career of Alexander the Great. He was a violent drunk if Plutarch can be trusted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 But...oddly enough....I feel no urge to invade Asia Minor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 1 hour ago, bcsapper said: If they start out by expressing a legally held opinion then I'm okay with that. At some point they move on to the violent bits. That I'm not okay with. You appear to want them to stop at a different point than me, and you want to apply that to everyone. In all discussions, or just about Islam? I have not come across anyone who is all good with Muslims getting attacked and killed, unless we are talking about those who deserve it. That said, as much as that is an utterly reprehensible view, (if they don't deserve it) it is a legally held one. So nothing should be objected to until it becomes illegal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 1 hour ago, dialamah said: So nothing should be objected to until it becomes illegal? Anything can be objected to. That's the objector's right. Object to anything you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 3 minutes ago, bcsapper said: Anything can be objected to. That's the objector's right. Object to anything you want. Clearly, we agree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altai Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, jacee said: Maybe use "Israeli" instead, to be more clear about what the problem really is. However, this has limited relevance to Canada. Here I searched for some more details, Yehudi derives from Yehud. Yehud (Judah) is one of the sons of Jacob. The word Jewish is just a linguistic difference, so Yehudi and Jewish means same things. Its for sure the word Yehudi (Jewish) is also used the name of a belief because Allah says "They wanted you to accept to be a Yehudi or Christian." So in summary, the word Jewish does not only mean an ethnic but it also mean a belief. Edited September 20, 2017 by Altai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 16 hours ago, dialamah said: Yeah, that all pretty much backs up what I said. ....plus my source gave more. Quote Quran Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose. "for a greater purpose," can be just about anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 (edited) 17 hours ago, dialamah said: Their religion says they can lie to infidels if to do otherwise would result in their death. The latter is something the anti-Muslim crew like to gloss over. It's understandable that Muslims would find nothing wrong with what Mohammad did, right? It's only logical to assume that Mohammad is raised up as an example to follow. Deception and lies, are therefore, acceptable. Quote Another example of lying is when Muhammad used deception to trick his personal enemies into letting down their guard and exposing themselves to slaughter by pretending to seek peace. This happened in the case of Ka'b bin al-Ashraf (as previously noted) and later against Usayr ibn Zarim, a surviving leader of the Banu Nadir tribe, which had been evicted from their home in Medina by the Muslims. At the time, Usayr ibn Zarim was attempting to gather an armed force against the Muslims from among a tribe allied with the Quraish (against which Muhammad had already declared war). Muhammad's "emissaries" went to ibn Zarim and persuaded him to leave his safe haven on the pretext of meeting with the prophet of Islam in Medina to discuss peace. Once vulnerable, the leader and his thirty companions were massacred by the Muslims with ease, probably because they were unarmed - having been given a guarantee of safe passage (Ibn Ishaq 981, Ibn Kathir v.4 p.300). Such was the reputation of early Muslims for lying and killing that even those who "accepted Islam" did not feel entirely safe. Consider the fate of the Jadhima. When Muslim "missionaries" approached their tribe, one of the members insisted that they would be slaughtered even though they had already "converted" to Islam (to avoid just such a demise). However, the others believed they could trust the Muslim leader's promise that they would not be harmed if they simply offered no resistance. (After convincing the skeptic to lay down his arms, the unarmed men of the tribe were tied up and beheaded by the missionaries - Ibn Ishaq 834 & 837). https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/taqiyya.aspx Edited September 20, 2017 by betsy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 10 hours ago, DogOnPorch said: The Quran = Hate Speech...apparently...as that's what I am quoting. It's an outright discrimination on the non-Muslims. And if infidels are supposed to be taken out..... ..........boy, we're talking promoting a massive global cleansing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted September 20, 2017 Report Share Posted September 20, 2017 1 hour ago, betsy said: It's an outright discrimination on the non-Muslims. And if infidels are supposed to be taken out..... ..........boy, we're talking promoting a massive global cleansing. The Quran states that the Unbeliever is to be fought until all religion is for Allah...this would include atheists like myself...who must also submit to Allah. ...uncool niece or what?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts