Muslims threw Christians overboard during Med voyage

originally posted by: pteridine

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: pteridine
As I see it, the problem is that Islam is stuck in the seventh century. Apparently, they have never had any sort of reformation and are still living by the rules that brought some sort of rule of law to those that had none in the seventh century.
When will they move toward the present? When will all the Imams speak against terror by those who would kill for no reason? When will the thin-skinned, insecure Muslims stop the death penalty for "insulting Islam," a rather vague term that could mean anything? A cartoon is punished by death? How barbaric is the so-called "religion of peace?"

Now, most want Sharia in the countries they immigrate to. Do they really expect the rest of the world to step back over 1000 years to cater to their whim? What was their goal when they did immigrate?

Google is your friend. Perhaps you should search for "Muslim statements against terrorism" before spouting that Muslims aren't speaking up against it.

Also, the Prophet Muhammad and all other Arabs are Semites. The point is that there's a double standard when prosecuting anti-Semitism as hate speech for Jews, but not for him. and that hate speech against Judaism isn't tolerated, but hate speech against Islam is.

Are cartoons or images considered hate speech? Prosecution is one thing and murder by insecure barbarians is another. See Charlie Hebdo. Google is your friend.

You know the irony? Look at what happened when a German newspaper published a Rabbi version of the Charlie Hebdo cover "by mistake". [DISCLAIMER: For readers who don't want to see either cover, don't check the links]

Berlin - German Paper Apologizes Over Fake Charlie Hebdo Cover Depicting Orthodox Jew
German paper apologizes for anti-Semitic cartoon
German paper publishes, in error, an anti-Semitic cartoon

Everything was the same on the cover except the hat & colors. Yet Haaretz & Jerusralem Post labeled the Rabbi version "anti-Semitic". You might not have seen this story because Western media apologized & shut it up quickly. But that's the double standard we keep talking about. And the fact that the Prophet Muhammad is a Semite as well. So why isn't it considered anti-Semitism in regards to him when it is in regards to a Rabbi?

For the record, I don't support bigotry against either group. But you can't tell me you don't see the hypocrisy.

EDIT: And no, Google is your friend lol Your move

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: pteridine

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: pteridine
As I see it, the problem is that Islam is stuck in the seventh century. Apparently, they have never had any sort of reformation and are still living by the rules that brought some sort of rule of law to those that had none in the seventh century.
When will they move toward the present? When will all the Imams speak against terror by those who would kill for no reason? When will the thin-skinned, insecure Muslims stop the death penalty for "insulting Islam," a rather vague term that could mean anything? A cartoon is punished by death? How barbaric is the so-called "religion of peace?"

Now, most want Sharia in the countries they immigrate to. Do they really expect the rest of the world to step back over 1000 years to cater to their whim? What was their goal when they did immigrate?

Google is your friend. Perhaps you should search for "Muslim statements against terrorism" before spouting that Muslims aren't speaking up against it.

Also, the Prophet Muhammad and all other Arabs are Semites. The point is that there's a double standard when prosecuting anti-Semitism as hate speech for Jews, but not for him. and that hate speech against Judaism isn't tolerated, but hate speech against Islam is.

Are cartoons or images considered hate speech? Prosecution is one thing and murder by insecure barbarians is another. See Charlie Hebdo. Google is your friend.

You know the irony? Look at what happened when a German newspaper published a Rabbi version of the Charlie Hebdo cover "by mistake". [DISCLAIMER: For readers who don't want to see either cover, don't check the links]

Berlin - German Paper Apologizes Over Fake Charlie Hebdo Cover Depicting Orthodox Jew
German paper apologizes for anti-Semitic cartoon
German paper publishes, in error, an anti-Semitic cartoon

Everything was the same on the cover except the hat & colors. Yet Haaretz & Jerusralem Post labeled the Rabbi version "anti-Semitic". You might not have seen this story because Western media apologized & shut it up quickly. But that's the double standard we keep talking about. And the fact that the Prophet Muhammad is a Semite as well. So why isn't it considered anti-Semitism in regards to him when it is in regards to a Rabbi?

For the record, I don't support bigotry against either group. But you can't tell me you don't see the hypocrisy.

EDIT: And no, Google is your friend lol Your move

So Haaretz put out a Jewish fatwah and sent terrorists to kill the cartoonist and editors for insulting Judaism? Google is your friend again. See if Mossad killed off a cartoonist or editorial staff. The double standard is that Islam demands respect and yet shows none for other religions.
What would happen if every publication published the Charlie Hebdo cartoon once a week? What would happen if identical cartoons were published depicting Mohammed, a Rabbi, and the Pope? Whose religion is so insecure that it is afraid of words and pictures?

Your move.

a reply to: pteridine

My religion isn't insecure about anything, though people of all persuasions can be. Actual Muslim scholars said this about the attacks:
What Muslim scholars have to say about the Charlie Hebdo attack

And other Muslims said this about it:
www.alternet.org...

While obviously some people were outraged by it, that doesn't mean that all or even most Muslims wanted fatwas against it or violence. And you seem to be forgetting the first police killed at the Charlie Hebdo attack was a Muslim. And then remember the other Muslim who saved the 15 Jews in the bakery right after the Charlie Hebdo attacks? www.dailymail.co.uk... ge-huddling-stay-warm.html Why is it that you don't give credit to the Muslims who are against the violence and only acknowledge the negativity?

And you didn't address the double standard I keep bringing up with Muslims wanting to be treated equally under hate speech laws. And the fact that the Rabbi version of the Charlie Hebdo cover was deemed offensive, anti-Semitic, and taken down. The newspaper even apologized for it. But the same image depicting another Semite is applauded and seen as free speech because it was a Muslim Semite. And they were printed at the same time! That's BS & I know you can see the hypocrisy in it.

Also, if people really wanted to "stick it to the extremists", they could've taken a better route. They could've easily retaliated with stories on Wahabism, who funds them, who arms them, their leaders' overseas assets, and calls to go after them. Or at least called for their governments to stop propping up their regimes & selling them the same weapons they use against us in other countries. That would've had a lasting impact.

But they didn't. Instead they took the weak way out & intentionally insulted an entire religion, when we had nothing to do with the attacks. I was chillin with my family in when it happened. Why would people blame me for it? Think of it like this. If the Mafia did an attack on a newspaper for doing a derogatory story on one of their leaders. Would the best way to protest them be to do newspaper articles insulting all Italians & intentionally trying to provoke any hotheads in the Italian community? Or would it be better to go after the people who actually did the crime, and "protest" by exposing their network to the light of day?

But the collective punishments & insults towards all Muslims is what gets people so pissed off. Kind of like invading Iraq & Afghanistan for 9/11, which was carried out by Saudis & Yemeni terrorists (according to the official story). People keep painting all Muslims with the same brush which is just dumb.

a reply to: enlightenedservant

I note that you were unable to find murders of German cartoonists who insulted Judaism even though Google is your friend. Think lawsuit and not assassination for those that transgress and hurt the feelings of the thin-skinned. Certainly, faith is strong enough to withstand words and cartoons.

See some earlier posts regarding the surveys of Muslims in various countries. It seems that now would be a good time for the Muslim community to reinterpret the Koran more in line with a time more recent than 692. Most are no longer jockeying camels along the Silk Road. How about a reformed Islam that allows that Mohammed was a man of his time but whose teachings can no longer be taken, literally. If Islam is truly a religion of peace, why not remove the death penalty for trivial offenses? Say that "death" to the apostate means that the apostate will be shunned by the community and denied the 72 virgins [what do the women get?] in the afterlife.

Meanwhile, get used to the idea of obeying the laws of the country that you emigrated to. If you have come to the USA, enjoy the freedoms that it offers but do not think you can slaughter people for some vague crime of "insulting Islam" in some way or when a Muslim decides to join some other religion. As it is now, Islam appears to be the most intolerant and barbaric religion on the planet. Continued barbarism and intolerance will only polarize people and make matters worse.

a reply to: enlightenedservant
"And you didn't address the double standard I keep bringing up with Muslims wanting to be treated equally under hate speech laws. And the fact that the Rabbi version of the Charlie Hebdo cover was deemed offensive, anti-Semitic, and taken down. The newspaper even apologized for it. But the same image depicting another Semite is applauded and seen as free speech because it was a Muslim Semite. And they were printed at the same time! That's BS & I know you can see the hypocrisy in it."

I did neglect to address this fully. The situation you described above is a bit different. Your vocabulary hints that you are likely of high school age. Look into WW2 and the German-Jewish connections. Both countries are sensitive to the fact that millions of Jews were exterminated en masse because of their religion.

What is defined as hate speech? What do Muslims consider hate speech? If I stand on a soap box and make speeches about how we should deport all Muslim immigrants back to wherever they came from and how Mohammed was a fraud and his teachings incite terrorism and sedition, is that hate speech in your opinion?

originally posted by: enlightenedservant

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
lets not get the Thread closed down because I see some are drifting and causing slanging matches about which prophet said what to who...

This isn't really about any prophets... its about 'christians being thrown overboard for being christian and whether this behaviour will soon be showing its ugly head in Europe!! Well, it already has on a few occassions but will it get worse??

And those who have nothing to do with either Faith will be in the middle of this ding dong battle!

Why should 1.6 to 1.8 BILLION people be held accountable for the crimes of a small mob? Why is it acceptable to blame all Muslims and our religion for the crimes of a small mob?

Do you use "collective responsibility" when a Christian, Buddhist, Jew, or atheist commits a crime? If not, why the exception for Islam? Also, people in Europe riot & fight all the time, particularly over football. So should all Europeans be blamed for it, especially whenever racism or bigotry is involved? No? Of course not, because the people who committed the crimes are the only ones responsible for their actions. Same with this non-story.

Where did it say in any of my posts on this Thread that 'I blame them all'??

It doesn't.

What I am sayng though is that those who are living side by side with you now... may not in the not too distant future!" You could have many from 'Somalia' (BOKO-Haram followers or just lain fanatics) already waiting to pounce on you... because as you have seen in the news and in my OP.. they are already on the boats or already on the shores of Italy!

Did you forget about the Army cadet who had his head chopped over in South london???

originally posted by: pteridine
As I see it, the problem is that Islam is stuck in the seventh century. Apparently, they have never had any sort of reformation and are still living by the rules that brought some sort of rule of law to those that had none in the seventh century.
When will they move toward the present? When will all the Imams speak against terror by those who would kill for no reason? When will the thin-skinned, insecure Muslims stop the death penalty for "insulting Islam," a rather vague term that could mean anything? A cartoon is punished by death? How barbaric is the so-called "religion of peace?"

Now, most want Sharia in the countries they immigrate to. Do they really expect the rest of the world to step back over 1000 years to cater to their whim? What was their goal when they did immigrate?

Yes, this is exactly what the Civilised World don't want and never will... so I forsee a future where this thing just won't end or at least it won't end anytime soon for as long as these 'Christians' and 'Muslims' don't get along. The thing is.. like I said before... the rest of us have to see, feel, read and hear about it near enough on a daily basis.

Those 2 Religious Groups have to sort it out for the rest of humanity and by that I mean they have to agree to disagree and call a halt to all involved and keep their 'Churches' and 'Mosques' or they have to end those Religions and learn to live in peace without any 'Churches' & 'Mosques'!

We were living peacefully up till around 20 years ago... maybe even as little as 15/16 years ago... well, at least we never heard of it on a daily basis!

I think somewhere along the line Islam has been changed to a nationality other than a religion. The hate that has filled Islam seems to me to be more based on culture than a religion. Take a good look at what is been done in the name of Islam today and you will see its about culture and nationality and the parallel to things that were happing in the 1930s in Europe are fearfully similar. So dont hate Islam, hate the people who have changed the religion for there own use and culture and power. The only thing that is more powerful than a religion is a culture and nationality that hates everything that is not like it.

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
While I am not of any Faith, I find this to be a continuing trend that if you are of Christian' Faith you wil be murdered by the Fanatical scum describing themselves as 'Muslims'...

well if theyre not muslims they what are they? i dont hear any muslims speaking out whenever this happens, and it happens quite often.

a reply to: JourneymanWelder

Well, they are 'Muslims', just not the "Peaceful ones"..

Notice the quotes..



I never actually said 'They weren't Muslims'

I am quite content with all religions destroying each other. Just don't take the rest of us out with ya.

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
no they couldn't have muslims belong to the religion of peace, jihadist or radicals are the only ones that resort to doing things like this.

just wait, those that say that will be here shortly.

As with any religion, it is usually hijacked with the wacky ones.

Many Muslim people I know are peaceful and very open, even embracing Christianity as it is their way to get a better understanding and more answers to their world.

I tend to avoid the wackos.

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
no they couldn't have muslims belong to the religion of peace, jihadist or radicals are the only ones that resort to doing things like this.

just wait, those that say that will be here shortly.

As with any religion, it is usually hijacked with the wacky ones.

Many Muslim people I know are peaceful and very open, even embracing Christianity as it is their way to get a better understanding and more answers to their world.

I tend to avoid the wackos.

Sad but the wackos seem to come after us with guns and bombs

originally posted by: imod02

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
no they couldn't have muslims belong to the religion of peace, jihadist or radicals are the only ones that resort to doing things like this.

just wait, those that say that will be here shortly.

As with any religion, it is usually hijacked with the wacky ones.

Many Muslim people I know are peaceful and very open, even embracing Christianity as it is their way to get a better understanding and more answers to their world.

I tend to avoid the wackos.

Sad but the wackos seem to come after us with guns and bombs

I can say the same for the wackos with guns representing the US army in various countries.

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
no they couldn't have muslims belong to the religion of peace, jihadist or radicals are the only ones that resort to doing things like this.

just wait, those that say that will be here shortly.

As with any religion, it is usually hijacked with the wacky ones.

Many Muslim people I know are peaceful and very open, even embracing Christianity as it is their way to get a better understanding and more answers to their world.

I tend to avoid the wackos.

You might be surprised. My mother who has many close clients over the past thirty years brought up the topic of Salmon Rushdie with one of her "moderate" Muslim clients. Their response? Death. Total shocker. Ask your Muslim friends what they think should happen to Rushdie. Suddenly you will see a veil lifted and expose these peaceful loving Muslims in a different light.

originally posted by: FlySolo

originally posted by: bullcat

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
no they couldn't have muslims belong to the religion of peace, jihadist or radicals are the only ones that resort to doing things like this.

just wait, those that say that will be here shortly.

As with any religion, it is usually hijacked with the wacky ones.

Many Muslim people I know are peaceful and very open, even embracing Christianity as it is their way to get a better understanding and more answers to their world.

I tend to avoid the wackos.

You might be surprised. My mother who has many close clients over the past thirty years brought up the topic of Salmon Rushdie with one of her "moderate" Muslim clients. Their response? Death. Total shocker. Ask your Muslim friends what they think should happen to Rushdie. Suddenly you will see a veil lifted and expose these peaceful loving Muslims in a different light.

Perhaps, perhaps not.

I am very sure you are right with a lot of people having that opinion.

I have never ever yet once seen any negative or hateful intentions by one friend of mine.

From a cummie with a great point..RELIGION IS THIS OPIATE OF THE PEOPLE... Chairman Mao.

originally posted by: Spider879
From a cummie with a great point..RELIGION IS THIS OPIATE OF THE PEOPLE... Chairman Mao.

What is a cummie?

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: intrepid

using the moral values of the past is just another claim that muslims apologists make to defend him so now we know where you stand for sure.
ol mo was over 50 years old back then and already had other wives, he was closer to death than being a young groom. why didn't he marry a pretty 20yr old instead of a child of "14"".

muslims are as quick or quicker to point values or morals as Christains are. they'll stand in unity and scream that this is against gods will, but let someone say something against the old mo marring a young girl and they flood to to the webs making all kinds of excuses, values and lifespan being one of the first they use.

besides, he wasn't marring her because of life span issues or it being acceptable. he married her because, he had been dreaming about her and he had the power to force her father to let him. sounds like a pervert to me.

She wasn't a child. She was a grown woman. The Aisha myth dead. I and many others have addressed this fallacy that is being spewed by Muslims and non-Muslims.


A pervert? You're entitled to your opinion, even if you pulled it out of your backside.

originally posted by: bullcat
I can say the same for the wackos with guns representing the US army in various countries.

Are they the wackos or the ones that decide they should go over there? This all is really a numbers game, if you have a few wackos then it is a very isolated issue, if you have 100 million of them, or extremest in a better term, then it is a world wide issue.

As in your case, you say you tend to avoid them, but what if there are so many you can't? And so how much of the world is today.