<B>FranchiseBlade Giddy it is one thing for either side to discuss something negative about their side, but there is a problem here. 1. We don't have to be on different sides. There is no reason why Muslim and Christian can't and shouldn't be on the same side.</b> I have nothing against Muslims except that a few of their crazies killed a bunch of Americans, Spaniards and Brits and they don't seem to be very effectively policing their own. Some of them are even rooting for more... <B>2. When discussing something negative it helps if it is objective, and from a reliable source or has legitimate evidence. An article that starts with the premise of taking quotes out of context and trying to use those to label a religion as something that is not, isn't objective, nor is it worthy of discussing seriously, unless that discussion starts and stops with people pointing out the gimmiks used by the author.<?B> Why does something have to be objective? Aren't there some things that you are not objective about because you know them stone cold? Maybe this guy's experience places him well beyond objectivity. We have heard these criticisms of Islam for years now. Why is this article treated like a revelation? <B>A topic worth discussing is Islamic law where people who shop lift have their hands cut off, or women are not allowed to vote, get educations drive, etc. That discussion would probably come down to practice of the religion more than if that is proper application of Islam's principles. But I will concede fully that those are things are negative about the way that some people practice Islam.</b> Those are fine, but I'm not sure why it's off-limits to talk about a practice that impacts our war effort...
well that the whole concept of Al-Takeyya right? lying to defend oneself.. "Al-Takeyya" or "al-Taqiyya" which literally means: "Concealing or disguising one's beliefs, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions, and/or strategies at a time of eminent danger, whether now or later in time, to save oneself from physical and/or mental injury." Isn't that the main point you are repeatedly trying to make in all your posts? That they as an enemy are lying to us? so you are saying you didn't mean to say these?
I don't see where the entire faith is denigrated by this. Nugent made one remark which does not alienate his friends but does you.... I'll vote with his friends, thank you. I don't post anything which I know to be "previously debunked." The world doesn't start and end with what you "know" to be true. Those peaceful demonstrators were, if I remember correctly, professional demonstrators with hate messages on their T-shirts and intentions to disrupt. Where is the hate speech in this article? There is more weekly hate of President Bush expressed on this little old BBS than in the aggregation of articles that I have ever posted.
Do you think that the US Media is lying to protect the US interests? Why or why not? Now answer that question for me about the Muslim media?
so what do you want to see in their manuals? 1.) Be complete honest to your interrogators.. if you're interrogating an enemy, would you expect them to be honest?
I'm coming very late to this debate and haven't gotten a chance to read through the whole thread but Giddyup I thought that you said you never bashed Islam as a religion but only Muslim terrorists. It looks to me like you're bashing the whole religion.
Crikey! Do you agreee with the article you posted? You seem to since you're defending it. That's saying that Muslims, it doesn't say "some Muslims" can't be trusted and are lying. the whole article is about how the Muslim religion sactions lying. Now unless you think lying is a good thing that sounds like hate to me if someone were to say that a whole religion supports lying and all practitioners of that religion are liars.
giddyup, No one tells the truth during a time of war. If our own government isnt honest with us on many issues and intentionally seeks to mislead us to garner public support/opposition to any particular issue, I wouldn't expect the filthy Al-Qaida of all groups to be completely 'honest' with their enemies. If anything, in fact, I would say that Al-Qaida heads (Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri to be specific) are actually quiet honest about their motives, and have even gone as far as issuing 'final warnings' ahead of attacks on the Europeans as to clearly state what their intentions were. So if we specifically narrow the application of Al-Taqiyya with Al-Qaida, I don't think they care to fool the 'Crusaders and Jews' much, they have been blunt in most of their speeches and don't seem to care much about being PC or 'nice' to polish the image of Al-Qaida. If anything, they WANT to be seen as vicious and brutal because it builds up their profile in the world, and puts the 'fear of God' (as they like to say) in the hearts of their enemies. Al-Qaida has adopted a strategy of an 'ends justify the means', which is totally and completely anti-Islamic and can be EASILY refuted. They see their fellow Muslims (let alone the 'Crusaders and Jews') as nothing more than 'collateral damage' and 'rejectors of Islam', thereby justifying their deadly attacks that claim by FAR more Muslims than non-Muslims. Lying to the enemy is 'standard procedure' not just during time of war, but also during time of 'peace'. Just look around the world and you will find MANY examples of this. Frankly, I am surprised you're suprised!
don't know why you have shifted to the media now.. yes media lies.. american media will not knowingly endager the safety of american troops.. same as muslim media will not knowingly endager the safety of muslim fighters.. now you answer this.. has our own government ever lied to the enemy during war? how about to its own people? have they concealed anything from the american public?
The very first sentence from the article: "Like most religions, Islam in general, forbids lying." Then we get this litany of circumstance where lying is promoted by the Koran. I'm puzzled why the terrorist experts think it worthy of attention but the "experts" here get all up in arms about it?
Because at that time it was not War time. And lying to the people who are on your side is never good.
1. Giddy Muslims aren't the ones that lied to start a war in Iraq. How well would you consider that policing our own? Muslims are the ones who tried to turn in the London bombers as being dangerous 2 years ago, and the police didn't listen. The fact is that you are the one in your post who started talking about one side(referring to the Muslims) and another side(referring to others). Supposedly this war isn't about a war against Islam, and we are supposed to be on the same side. Talk about sides that pit non-Muslims against Muslims isn't being a very good ally. 2. It doesn't necessarily have to be objective though it would generate better discussion which was supposed to be your purpose. In addition this writer used a fake name, and his whole premise has been shot down. The article was discussed and shown to be twisting small passages from a text to try and change the actual meaning of an entire religion. Once that happens there is no longer any point in discussing the author's contention which doesn't even exist. 3. If you want to talk about the enemy's tactics that is fine. We can. Post an article about the enemies tactics. But don't post an article which claims to state that a certain religion teaches something it doesn't teach, and claim that is the enemy's tactics especially when Islam isn't our enemy.
I have not seen one single terrorist expert ever give any creedence that the muslim religion promotes lying. Kingcheetah showed many many more parallel passages from Christian texts and nobody claims that the bible promotes lying. The premise set forth by the author using a fake name isn't a real teaching of Islam. Why spend time discussing a fake teaching of Islam.
hey who started a thread about lying? and worse enemies lying? what enemy does not lie? it's friends who lie to friends who are very distrubing..
