| Author | Message | ||
     Humancafe |
MOHIDEEN IS WRONG This discussion will address the ways Mohideen Ibramsha is wrong about the things he says about his faith. The thread launches with these two posts, one by Mohideen, the other by Ivan: Mohideen --Sunday, August 27, 2006 - 10:47 am:
This was Ivan's response -- Sunday, August 27, 2006 - 09:09 pm:
Given that there is virtually no vitriolic response from Muslims regarding all, historically and into the present, all the crimes of their faith against humanity, and certainly no mass riots by the majority of allegedly peaceful Muslims against such crimes, especially terroristic activities against innocent civilians world wide, then it must be assumed either such a "peaceful majority" does not exist, and in fact Muslim peacefulness is a disadvantaged minority within the faith, or it is held hostage by the "criminal minority" to control and subdue them into silence over these crimes. This makes Mohideen's claim that his "peaceful" religion, per his "The religion of peace does not mandate any killings", is wrong. If Mr. Ibramsha is not wrong, then prove him right. Editors, Humancafe [As editors, our policy is not to take sides, but to open a forum debate in the interest of finding the truth.] | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
I believe I should watch in the sidelines at least for a while. | ||
| Ivan |
Disproportionate odds: 12 against 1400 million: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=401 "UN better learn from the experience of the creation of Pakistan in 1947 and the response of the Indian Hindus in that regard. Let me remind the world that both Israel and the Indian land, which Muslims’ demand as their own, came through barbaric conquests by the brutal Islamic armies coming from the Arab lands staring in 637 and 712 CE, respectively. If the Christians of Britain and other European counties cannot demand their former colonies as their own lands, the Muslims too cannot demand the same. This indeed applies to any place in the world Muslims live in. This is the strange world within which the mindset of Jihad inhabits in its adherents. It is for the Muslim world to renounce this brutal mindset, especially as it applies to their blind hatreds of Western freedoms (which they call immoral, because it differs from theirs) and the destruction of Israel (which they claim is their right as mandated by their god, to maintain absolute power in the Arabian peninsula), and to renounce their intolerance of all other world beliefs (because they think only theirs is valid) from the minds of men. In effect, Muslims want to eradicate all modern achievements (which they blame for their own backwardness) while denying their religion is violent and a war cult (calling it a religion of peace) in total disregard of their historical record. This is called denial, a childishly stubborn refusal to accept responsibility for their actions, while accusing everyone else's actions as injuriious to them. This, in my opinion, is what the 'mohideens' of the Muslim world represent, and why they are wrong, and will continue to be wrong until they renounce this violence. (To be a good and true Muslim, to follow the Quran to the letter, then this violence must be obeyed as it was given to them by their god through their prophet; which is true also for all peoples who were conquered by this violent mentality, from western Africa to Indonesia.) But they have not, and can not, and most likely will not, because they think their disproportionate odds against 'infidels' is a sign from their god. But their historic and present unreasonable denials will keep them from ever seeing the truth. When this happens, like a very bad and violent 'child's' antisocial activities in the school yard, they must be forcibly stopped, with a firm responsible disproportionate 'adult' force if need be. If Muslims cannot stop their socially irresponsible violent behaviors, then we who are responsible will stop it for them, though they will not like it, because it will be good for them. Ivan | ||
| Anonymous |
Islm is most interesting, stupidly so, which is its weakness. http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=412 | ||
| Ivan |
OKAY, SO WHAT'S WRONG? First of all, there is a foundation built on circular reasoning: God tells a prophet a story, or so he thinks; the prophet tells everyone else who will listen, or make them listen by force and threats if necessary, that God told him this 'truth'; part of this 'truth' story is that God said anyone who does not believe him is blasphemous; which is punishable in various ways, even death; God therefore make this prophet a 'perfect man' whom no one may disobey, or question and disagree with, or face punishment; anyone disagreeing with God having told the 'truth' to this prophet must now be punished, or killed; how do we know this is true? Because the prophet said so. So the story is totally circular. How do we know this is the truth? 'Because the prophet said so!' And if you disagree with this 'truth'? You get punished, or killed. End of story. No, it is not the end of story. If this was all inclusive within the religious sect that believes this circular reasoning, then no one would be bothered, except to think it quaint and naive. But this circular reasoning then goes on to say that now God wants everyone, I mean everybody on the planet, must believe this or else face punishment and death. Now it gets sinister. Because if you see through this transparent ruse to force everyone to believe that this prophet is the 'true' word of God, and criticize it as stupid nonsense, you now face the wrath of those who believe in this circular reasoning. They will attack you. And so the 'end of the story' has a nightmarish ending, in that it does not merely apply to some small sect of desert nomads, serving their purpose to raid others of their wealth; but now it becomes a world threat. So this magic formula of circular reasoning is cast outwards onto the whole world, as if we too are to believe in it, though we see it as sheer nonsense. But by questioning it, by disagreeing with this obviously naive yet coercive philosophy, we then are exposed to its threats, even death. Because they are militarily and intellectually weak, they attack us with terrorism. Therefore, that is what is wrong. I wrote something more than two decades ago in Habeas Mentem, ch. 15, which said: "It is this social freedom that is the responsibility of our social guardians. It is the responsibility of those individuals most conscious to preserve that order that is least coercive and that encourages the greatest consciousness. It is their responsibility to rebel if they find their society imprisoned and to establish the social agreement that will define their social order. But, in how they do this, what they must strive for above all, as conscious minds, is that they be consistent in their efforts with the principle that is their definition as conscious minds. That is their trust. Then, such a society most free can materialize in itself correctly in proportion to how is the mind in its reality. What is possible, what can be materialized in reality, if it is not forced on reality by coercion, is then what is correct within the universal order. What is impossible, what fails to materialize, is then what is being rejected by the universal reality. In this manner, the conscious mind can judge what it is that it is doing with the universe and what it is doing against it. Simply, what is in error is what fails to materialize in our reality because it is contrary to what is right in the universal order. To resist it and to continue to apply effort in this direction of failure, provided this is done without the use of coercion on others, will continue to yield no benefit and produce only a loss. When free from coercion, this occurs naturally and it is how the mind learns to communicate with its universal order, its greater reality. When the mind can consistently succeed to materially yield its desired objectives and can do this with less error, the benefits of the universal order materialize within its reality. Such is the power of social freedom." This was no idle statement, but what had constructed itself from the previous 14 chapters, to come to this: that only when we are free from coercion can we materialize the reality of a universal order in our midst. Otherwise, we are negating that universal order through coercions, and it fails to communicate into our reality, personally and collectively. That is what is wrong with this prophet's circular reasoning, that one must believe him under penalty of coercion. Of necessity, a priori, this already makes him wrong! His is an unconscious mind striving to dictate to those whose minds are conscious, who love freedom, and who understand freedom's power. It is so self evident that wherever these coercions are checked, society shines and prospers. But where these coercions dominate, it suffers and is unproductively regressive. But it gets more complicated, because those who believe in this circular reasoning will never step outside the circle, so they cannot understand that it is within their own circle the problem exists, so blame everyone else in the world on their troubles. That is both denial and transference, both of which are 'unconscious' behaviors. Yet, this is the God's 'truth' this prophet claims to have given to mankind. Never mind all the other injustices, the harsh punishments, the hatred of all who disagree with him, the so called 'infidels' who may be far greater and richer believers in God than these foolish circular people, and never mind how awful they treat their women, or even orphans, and how they punish homosexuals or so called infidelity, by stoning! A woman is raped, so what happens? Are the men punished? No!!! They stone the woman! But these are minor details, minutia, in comparison to the greatest fault of all, that coercions rule, rather than the freedom of human beings to live their lives in agreement. And it shows. Their societies are blighted with failure. What happens now, that they've declared war on the 'infidels'? Well, first of all we identify the enemy, understand his reason, or lack of reasonableness, and then we take action to stop his unfriendly, anti-social, and certainly anti-freedom behaviors. We identity this enemy first as a cult, a war-cult. Then we find the reasons why this cult is attacking us, and face off with this knowledge to challenge them. If that does not work, and they continue to attack, since their ability to reason outside their circle is so circumscribed, which means they do not understand anything about us and our freedoms, then we do what must be done. I also wrote in that chapter, long before I even envisioned such a threat: "Nor is the conscious mind conquered; it does not submit. The social guardians are those who are forever vigilant of the safety of their world and conscious of the forces of their society. They tolerate the presence of all other societies, but they do not tolerate another's aggression. Aggression is an unconscious act, and it is the responsibility of the social guardians to guard against the trespasses of the still unconscious mind. A mind confident in its knowledge, and aware in its reality, is not afraid of aggression. It finds it loathsome, revolting, and acts directly to repel it. It repels it swiftly, efficiently, almost clinically with the least shedding of blood. War is not to be a tool of diplomacy, rather it is a cruel failure of understanding, a failure of diplomacy. It must be entered into only if no other avenue is left open. Once entered upon, it must be fought with total determination and conviction and the full power of the free mind. It is not to be entered into casually or thoughtlessly; but, once engaged into it must be executed swiftly and efficiently. The unconscious mind is not heroic and generally will not attack where there is strength; however, if it should attack, then it must be repelled. The constant vigil of the conscious mind against those circumstances that could result in attack are a severe responsibility towards the well being and survival of its society, and steps should be taken far in anticipation of conflict to avoid war. But, if these fail, battle must ensue. Whether the war is then fought through vast military mobilization or through covert activities, it must never be fought halfheartedly but always fought to win. The aggressor will not seek to trespass into where there is material and spiritual strength, and these are the conscious mind's first defense. But if society is attacked, anguish and bitterness must be held back and, as a last resort against the unconscious mind, the aggressor must be destroyed." This is a job that must be done, without ill will, and without hating the enemy. It simply must be stopped, a mind still unconscious, from dominating over the rest of us. So the Kofi Annans of the world must be stopped, because they do not understand that this war is for real, not just meeting resistance with equal and unsurpassed resistance; we cannot do diplomatic games with our soldiers' lives. If we engage the enemy, because the enemy understand nothing, we are forced to do the job to completion. As long as their circular reasoning dominates their actions, and they both fear and hate our freedoms, we must be socially and personally conscious of this threat, and must stop it. We must win. That is what is demanded of us as conscious minds, not because I said so, but because the survival of consciousness on this planet depends on it. And unless we are willing to regress back to a primitive world again, where both slavery and poverty are the norm, we had better pay attention and be conscious of this. There is no way out but to destroy the circular reasoning until it can no longer attack us with its coercions. Either that, or we help it reform itself out of its coercions, which is unlikely; they said so. This leaves us no choice. If we are to evolve as a planet of free and conscious beings, then we must win. As higher minds who can see through the coercions of this circular reasoning, and who understand the value and powers of freedom, we owe it to our future generations, who will remember us, and thank us. This is a cold duty. So not to think that I mean ill will for those who are trapped within their world of circular reasoning, because that is their misfortune to have been born into it, or foolishly accepted it of their own free will, to have no free will. But for those of us who understand, without malice or ill will, we have a job to do, a responsibility to all our future generations, to stop the coercions. This is done both through reason and education, as well as force. Our planet's survival, and future evolution into a greater sphere of conscious worlds, from which we are yet excluded, depends on this victory. We must be conscious of this, or then we are not worthy. Strange all this is coming to a boil now. But this is our test of the millennium. Are we truly a conscious planet or not? Their prophet, unbeknownst to himself, and his followers, is in fact an instrument of God; they force us to fight back. Love is greater than threats and fear, though they may disagree, because they say so; freedom and reason are more powerful, not because we say so, but because our reality proves it. That proof is the hand of God, us doing 'God's will'. To stop the coercions, we must win, and become accepted as a conscious world. And that is not a cold duty, but one filled with light. This is a challenge for humankind, all of us, even those whose world is trapped in their circular reason: I believe in God that we will win, and humanity will be saved. Distant future generations will thank us. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
BTW, there is a simple solution to this problem. Follow in the footsteps of Ataturk, take away power from the ayatollahs and mullahs and secularise. Religion remains a personal belief system, but it has no business in public affairs, should never ever be politicized. There is no ill will towards the religion, but the mis-interpretation of God's word, which never ever advocates coercion, must be understood within the framework of those who coerce it to their own advantage, rather than laying it in the only place it can belong, in one's personal belief. I think even Mohideen will agree with me on this one: Religious belief can only exist as a communication between God and man, or woman, and never through the intermediaries of politicized interpretations to serve the will of some power hungry men. That is what is meant by religious freedom. | ||
| Ivan |
On 'Tolerance' in the Muslim World. I had forgotten I had this, but it is interesting to find it again. For example: "Saudi Arabia, with its absolute ban on any religion besides Isl*m and its rigourous suppression of critics of the House of Sa'ud is a typical example of the sort of intolerance towards free thought and religious expression found in most Muslim nations. In Pakistan, protestors get bludgeoned over the head....when they're not doing the bludgeoning themselves. In Iran, dissenters from the Shi'ite Muslim theocracy are usually jailed, whipped, or executed. One need only to remember the death warrant placed on the head of Salman Rushdie for writing a book critical of Isl*m, The Satanic Verses. The very title of that book offended Muslim sensibilities by its reminder of Mohammed's penning what are called "the Satanic verses". These were verses which he supposedly wrote while under the influence of Satan, condoning that greatest of sins in Isl*m, shirk, which is when a person associates other gods with Allah. There seems to be an inherent tendency in Isl*m which influences its followers away from toleration of opposition. In fact, only ONE nation with a Muslim majority qualifies as having a truly democratically-elected government with freedoms protected by the rule of law, this being Turkey. And Turkey's democracy is none too stable, what with the constant tension in that nation between the government on one hand, and Isl*mist extremists (and the military strongmen ready to take over if the Isl*mists make a move) on the other. Further, Turkey's democratic system originated through the efforts of Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and the Young Turks movement, who set Turkey on an overtly secular path which sought to consciously imitate the West. Despotism as seen in Libya, Syria, Sudan, and formerly in Iraq, and monarchy as seen in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Kuwait, are the norm for the Muslim world." http://www.studytoanswer.net/myths_ch8.html So Mohideen is right, that in Saudi Arabia, what he calls the Arabian Peninsula, though this stretches it a bit, only Isl*m may exist, so 'religious tolerance' may not exist there. However, in their zeal, other Dar-al-Isl*m nations emulate the Saudis just as well, so not much tolerance all around in the Muslim world. And this: "The simple explanations for Muslim intolerance can stem simply from the more medieval aspect of Middle Eastern culture. Isl*mic tradition and culture, as we will see a little later, is basically the grafting of 7th century Arabian culture onto the civilisation which falls into its grasp. Viewed in this light, it should be little surprise to us that many Isl*mic practices and shari'a laws would appear, in the very least, barbaric to Western eyes. After all, Europe did away with many of the same practices centuries ago. Likewise, any authoritarian system is not likely to endorse the acceptance or toleration of opposition. One could hardly expect dictatorships like those found in Syria to act differently than modern despots like Stalin or Hitler, or medieval despots of all nationalities." God Bless American Freedoms! Thank God for the Founding Fathers separating church and state. In their wisdom, they did us an immense service. Finally: "Yet, we do not see Bible-believing Christians gunning down members of other religions or bombing the houses of worship of other faiths. Instead of being merely a matter of exclusivism, Isl*m's often violent intolerance stems from its ingrained attitude of superiority over those who are not Muslim. Traditional Muslim teaching on the subject depicts those who refuse to accept Isl*m as deficient, unintelligent, and morally bankrupt because of their refusal to acknowledge the "obvious" superiority of the Isl*mic deen (way of religion) and convert. This attitude of superiority, however, is confronted by the obvious inferiority of Muslim power and prestige in the world today. Huntington sums up the matter quite succinctly when he writes, “The underlying problem for the West is not Isl*mic fundamentalism. It is Isl*m, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and are obsessed with the inferiority of their power.”" This overt religious dogma intolerance is wrong, and primitively 'medieval'. Ivan | ||
| goddess worshipper |
Should anyone take interest in what the Muslim god 'Allah' likes and dislikes, read this: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=420 Allah loves Muslims who, ignoring the sensitivity of their wives engages in sex with their sex-slaves Allah does not like agriculture; He prefers plundering as His profession Allah likes to brand kafirs on their noses. Allah likes memorization without understanding Allah does not want to fight by himself but loves those who fight for Him Allah loves illiteracy and poverty; He hates education and prosperity. Allah hates kings Allah loves to inflict cruelty to animals and shed their blood. Allah loves pebbles and stones, especially odd numbers of them; they are His mercy (listed in reverse order) Is this the one-god humanity must follow? This is wrong, Muslims are wrong. | ||
| Naive |
I can't take it any more. In the past the Roman Catholic church was in the business of keeping itself in power. Thus their attempted monopoly on the word of God. They disallowed any interpretation or translation of this word for a very long time. Reformers eventually came around like Martin Luther, who made small dents in the armor of that Holy juggernaut. Currently the muslim world is experiencing the same phenomena. Historically they are about 600 to 700 years behind the rest of the world. If we were to break this down into stages of maturity, then they are like early teens (very egocentric) totally enamored with their own faith. Unfortunately we will never be able to convince them, or help them grow. As had happened with Christianity, the change or reform must come from one of their own. For only one raised in that faith could develop a rhetoric the rest would accept. Teenagers have a very difficult time believing what adults say. They must screw up, get disciplined, and eventually learn from the error of their ways. Does this sound familiar? Furthermore teenagers mostly listen to other teens, older teens, more popular teens. This is the phenomena we are dealing with. Waging war against this mindset is pointless, unless you are prepared to wipe them all out. No one wants to do that! Indeed the only way to make change in this or any religion is to alter the very perceptions of its adherents. That is why those who cling to power in this religion enforce bans on many things Western. They fear one of their own may actually start to think. Mohideen you are intelligent. I pray (for lack of a better word) that you would see how your fellow Muslims are indeed trapped in a vicious socio-historical nightmare. I do not condemn your belief in God. I do condemn a belief that critically restrains a human's ability to reason. You will argue that your reasoning is not constrained, but we are not talking about one individual. We are talking about a social happening that fosters destructive thinking. The very fact that you admit you have warmongers in your faith demonstrates the problem. No perfect faith would inspire this. The flaw of every faith is their claim of perfection! Religious people love their faith because they believe it is perfect. Perfection should inspire people to be perfect. Unfortunately when dealing with subjectively flawed beings, their can be no agreement on what is perfect knowledge, perfect philosophy, or perfect action. This realization should be enough to ween humanity from its juvenile attachment to the teat of religion. Every man should practice a spirituality for himself, to himself, and never hurtful to others. Groups lead to group thinking and mob action, unless their interaction and subsequent action is tempered with wisdom derived from historical analysis. Is it intelligence to let the thinking processes of 1400 years ago dictate behavior today? This how and why thinking humans are forever seeking to improve the laws that govern large group behavior. This is social evolution. It is also no wonder that large groups that don't do this are stuck in the dark ages of reasoning. Look at another topic on this site for proof. Are women equal to men? What?!!! Naive | ||
| Ivan |
I so totally agree with you Naive. "Mohideen you are intelligent. I pray (for lack of a better word) that you would see how your fellow Muslims are indeed trapped in a vicious socio-historical nightmare. I do not condemn your belief in God. I do condemn a belief that critically restrains a human's ability to reason. You will argue that your reasoning is not constrained, but we are not talking about one individual. We are talking about a social happening that fosters destructive thinking. The very fact that you admit you have warmongers in your faith demonstrates the problem. No perfect faith would inspire this. The flaw of every faith is their claim of perfection! And yes, women are equal to men. This is not even an issue, except that Mohideen sees it as one, as per his faith. We should, nay must, condemn any belief system that restrains reason, or worse, punishes those who dare to use reason. This is not from God, though it may be from a small cult-god, one which needs constant attention and un-reasoning submission to worship him. To my mind, there is no question that Mohammed's teachings are backwards, in more ways than one, and that calling him a 'perfect man' or that his teachings are 'a religion of peace' exemplifies how truly backwards this had become. Did this prophet have better intentions? Hard to say, it was another era. Did his teachings become violent and vile in today's standard of behavior? Most definitely yes! Should we still be honoring such violent aggressions against so-called 'infidels' who do not agree with this prophet's teachings? Absolutely not. Most reprehensible is their attitude towards women, human beings who are of the opposite sex of men, but who are thinking and loving and dreaming human beings just like men, maybe even better than men. For their faith to keep them down in virtual slavery is a major crime against one half of humanity. Infantile or adolescent aside, this crime may not be tolerated by us modern civilized, and conscious of our freedoms, human beings. But as you say, Reform must come from within, by one of their own. Who will do it? What is God doing about it? Will it take ridicule and humor (as our friend Le Chef amply displays) to make them see their own absurdity? Will Mohideen ever see it as such? Hard to say, this is a different era. Unfortunately, they are still stuck in that ancient era of horny adolescent males who want to get 'the girls' as their prophet told them it's okay to do. When they stop thinking with their lower parts of their body and rise up to the level of cerebral intellect, perhaps such Reform can take place. Most interesting to sit back and watch, except at the same time we have to keep them from killing us, no small feat. So if they live amongst us, as a first step towards their possibility of reform, we force them, literally force them, to obey our laws that grant the same rights to women as enjoyed by men. Then, let's see what happens.  BTW, I too think Mohideen is an intelligent, and well meaning man. Most interesting will it be to see how he responds to these issues, especially as it holds back over a billion men and women of the planet in a regressive state of mind. Ivan | ||
| Naive |
Yes I know. I only mentioned the "are men equal to women" thread to demonstrate a negative consequence of religious interpretation. A wise philosopher once said, "The measure of any society is how it treats its women." I forgot who it was. It doesn't really matter. The statement is ultimately applicable to the current issue. Really if you treat your women as second class citizens, you are treating yourself and your future generations as such. The only possible "change" you will get in the Muslim world with regards to the Quran is from interpretation. If they fight each other over interpretation (Sunni - Shiite), it stands to reason that only they can work out how they will eventually interpret and behave afterwards. The warning I see echoed in your words is that by letting their interpretations spill over into world affairs, they may be inviting disaster for themselves. I do see Mohideen's point of view. Many Muslims do suffer because of the actions of extremists, and yes the U.S. government is indeed shady and has played its part in conspiracy. Does that justify the extreme responses we have seen? The scary part is that the mindset we are talking about says, "Yes it is O.K. to attack civilians of your enemy if they do not control their government." Well here many people do protest our government's involvement in war. We heckle our leaders, publicly criticize them, vote them out of office, etc. It may not happen right away, but the fact that we have varying viewpoints gives us a forum which eventually leads to change. With no separation of church and state, the thoughts of people become dangerously polarized, religious leadership largely goes unquestioned. Change is virtually impossible. As long as Muslims exist in this condition they will face internal and external strife due to the stringent interpretation of an already absolute rhetoric. That is the vicious nightmare I was refering to. Naive | ||
| Ivan |
Naive, I concur with yours. I see this as a very dangerous opinion, which leads to an internal kind of "Islamofascism", though Mohideen may not see it that way. But the danger to our democracy would be clear: if the enemy does not like our democratically agreed upon outcome of the vote, then it is okay to fight them. Not acceptable, since this leads to seditionist behavior, dangerously antisocial to our beliefs in freedom, which are in opposition to the antifreedom of Sharia, and thus leads to both an internal and external threat to our way of life. This line of reasoning, such as Mohideen proposes, is unacceptable. | ||
| Stop |
" Malaysia has a hybrid legal system that incorporates both Islamic and civil laws for personal and family matters: Muslims are governed by religious laws against drinking, eating during the daylight hours of Ramadan and having close proximity between unmarried women and men. Marriages, divorces, funerals, and inheritance are governed by Islamic laws." http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=423 Is this the natural outcome of allowing sharia family law inside nation's secular law? England, France, Germany, and all Europe pay attention to Malaysia. Your future will be like this if you do not reverse current immigration from Muslim countries. Stop Muslim immigration now. | ||
| Naive |
Stop, Your message smacks of racism. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Islm is most interesting, stupidly so Posted on Tuesday, August 29, 2006 - 05:40 pm: Anonymous From the link http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=412 === It is like the concept of 0/ 0 in Algebra. It is an undefined or illegal term, against which, even the smartest computer can do nothing. === Mathematics evaluates the limits and calculates the cases of 0/0. Given 2a/a as a approaches zero gives the value of 2 as a limit. Given square(a)/a gives zero as a approaches zero. Given additional information, the mathematical equation, the cases like 0/0 are resolved. So also in the religion of peace. See http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=intentions+reward+deeds+emig ration+according&translator=1&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_w ord=all God knows the intentions of the human and thus the reward would be as per the intentions. Coming to the claim of some members of the religion of peace, if their intention is to spread their faith by force and if they practice jihad for that the reward would be for that. Since spreading the faith by force is against Verse 256 of Chapter 2 of the Holy Quran, they would be considered the rebels and be treated as such. Please see http://www.searchtruth.com/searchHadith.php?keyword=Constantinople+blood&transla tor=3&search=1&book=&start=0&records_display=10&search_word=all where we find: === A believer will continue to go on quickly and well so long as he does not shed unlawful blood; when he sheds unlawful blood, he becomes slow and heavy-footed. === There is no reward for any jihadist who sheds unlawful blood as per the above Tradition. | ||
| Ivan |
Some incidental news today, regarding world Jihad: 1. http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/05/world/middleeast/05cnd-iran.html Iran's President Calls for Purge at Universities. This is the end of 150 years of 'secularism' in Iran, professors and lecturers are out first, students deemed too secular and rebellious next, and then what? All free inquiry, free thought, philosophical thinking, freedom of belief, scientific freedoms, they are all washed away by a medieval rigid dogmatic mindset. Bye bye freedom, hello slavery. 2. http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2394775 Danish Police Arrest 9 Terror Suspects. Is the world getting weary of this fundamentalist Muslim threat? Of the 9 only one was ethnic Dutch, guess who were the others? 3. http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/09/05/lebanon.bomb.ap/ Bomb targets Lebanon police convoy. Hardly seems news worthy, given it's Lebanon. But killing each other seems to be the rigor. 4. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-euroterror5sep05,1,7330116.s tory?coll=la-headlines-world&ctrack=1&cset=true The Enemies in Their Midst An analysis of why in Europe home grown terrorists with birth roots are being wooed and successfully recruited by outside forces to do Jihad, not against some enemy abroad, but against their home countries in Europe. Very interesting article, never mentions that perhaps the religion itself is fundamentally at fault, due to how its ancient teachings are being violently interpreted. What is the cause for this homegrown terrorism in Europe? Is Pakistan really to blame, or Al Qaeda? Or is it something more fundamentally wrong with the mullahood, in the hood? Quote: "With North Africans, many seem to become involved in terrorism through crime, whereas Brit-Paks are going straight to terrorism," the official said. "They are considerably more inspired, more pure. The scope is much greater. It's the threat. It's way ahead of everything else in terms of complexity. And it multiplies a thousandfold when they disappear back to Pakistan." Do a word search, and you'll see the religion is never mentioned, except in the context of "extremist", so political correctness continues. Maybe if they dump kaka on their heads, they'll look up? 5. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-090506bush,0,7385019.story Bush Sees Gains in War With More Scattered Foe Really? How about a potential 'army' of terrorists world wide in the hundreds of millions, as their prophet told them to be? 6. http://www.khaleejtimes.ae/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/subcontinent/2006/Se ptember/subcontinent_September174.xml§ion=subcontinent&col= Militant group is targeting Shia leaders. A little suicide killing here, a little assassination there, what's it all about? 7. http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/651hkpos.asp A Conversion You Can't Refuse What's in a forced conversion to the religion of peace where there is no forced compulsion to convert? Quote: "The coverage also showed the continuing cluelessness of much of our media when it comes to religion, despite its growing influence in all Middle Eastern conflicts. Centanni and Wiig were not merely kidnapped but also--something new in the Palestinian areas--forced to an nounce that they had converted to Is___m as a condition not only of their release but of their survival. (bold mine) The significance of this forced conversion has been downplayed in the media. The New York Times and the Washington Post even pronounced the two "unharmed" on release. This judgment is perverse. If Muslim prisoners in American custody were forced to convert to Christianity on pain of death or as a condition of release, the press would denounce it as virtual torture, and rightly so: No sane person would say the prisoners had suffered no harm." All these threats are still being delicately and politely treated by the media as 'politically' inspired, or maybe merely socio-political. But how long will it be before they lay the real blame at the feet of the source? Never blame the religion, no matter how vile are some of its teachings, but take a long hard look at the 'interpretations' of the religion for political and tyrannical ends. In time, they will say what it really is, but not yet... Mohammed is still a 'perfect man,' and his teachings 'blameless', per 2:256. Well, it's been an interesting day. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
BTW, we know all of the above 7 are a Jewish conspiracy carried out by the CIA! LOL | ||
| Ivan |
ARE WE WITNESSING A MINI-JIHAD HERE TO BRING ABOUT SHARIA? WHAT A WASTE. Repost from http://www.humancafe.com/discus/messages/88/94.html?1157511859#POST1821: Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 07:03 pm: I'm reposting it, because I think it belongs here as much as on the other page. I do not mean any of this with any malice, but with pure curiosity: Why are we wasting time on this discussion? When I stop and think of all the beautiful things in life and nature, and the universe, we could be exploring, I am appalled by how much time we are using up to answer to a purely coercive philosophy of life. "You love Pepsi-Cola, we love death" is a horrible way to approach the wonders of all existence. Personally, I don't care much for sugary fizzy drinks, though I might have one if offered, but I'd as well have glass of good wine. We love Life. That's what we should be discussing, and love humanity, the beauty of all human beings. Not concentrating on debating a vision of the world that is so dark, so shadowy, even the way they dress their women all covered in black, like shadows of death; these are disturbing to more elevated human beings. Why are we being dragged down into such darkness, when the universe is full of light? Coercion is a failure, a stark reminder of the primitive world of enslavement and butchery and pain we came out of. The Muslim's Jihad wants us back down there again, resenting us for moving on into a brighter future. Rigid coercive religious dogma belongs to another age, one long ago dropped here, and to be constantly reminded of its ugliness is disturbing. Even more disturbing is that there are people who claim to have honorable and good intentions of peace, by making their world of coercions our reality, even by force. No!!! It's a vicious lie. This cannot be allowed to happen. We are so much higher, so much more alive, and so much more in tune as conscious human beings of the beauty and greatness of all existence, that we cannot be dragged down into such small visions of hell as presented by their ancient and outdated prophet, claiming to be the 'voice of god'. No!!! Freedom, as each and every human being is allowed to be free from coercions, and free to be who they are without coercing others, that is what God is all about. Doing God's will is what every one of us who is free is doing every moment of our lives. We breathe with free air, and exhale who we are, and then breathe in again the universe. That's the beauty of humanity, not dressing up in rags for men, and black head-to-toe tents for women. That is un-beauty, it is degrading to the universe of God, and it hems in humanity into the smallest of visions, of dark visions, from which we had long emerged. We cannot go back to that primitive world, because all it can do is stop us from being true human beings, as beautiful and rich and free and creative human beings. We're not going back, none of us, not even by that evil Jihad unleashed on us by the resentful world of so-called religious clerics who hate our freedoms, and want the power for themselves. Because we are free, each one of us is powerful, and we better understand that power. They who wish to take it away from us fear it, hate it, and will even suicidally kill for removing us from it. No!!!! That is malicious and pernicious, that hatred which we must now contend with, and to which we find ourselves answering challenges posed in sometimes absurd terms, even coy and allegedly peaceful terms. No, that's takiyya, a sinister subterfuge of sneaky jihad. Why do we have to waste time to debate such absurdity? There is so much more to life and the universe than what Mohideen's, and his religion's vision is all about. We are so much brighter and better, and more beautiful than anything they represent. Is it not time to say, enough?! Let's move on. The coercions will be taken care of by those whose job it is to stop them. Freedom will reign in this world, and Jihad be damned. This is who we are. And we are absolutely beautiful, all of us, of all races and historic backgrounds. We are great light filled human beings. That is what this forum is all about. Humancafe is about that. We are about the "evolution of human consciousness." I think we've been driving around in low gear long enough. Time to shift. Reason is but a tiny part of our mind. Time to go and open up, feel and dream new realities, open the gates to a greater universe out there of beauty, of truth, and the soul of a great humanity evolved on this world. Look at all the great things created to now, the arts, the literature and theater and film, our rich music, the sciences and technology, the great architectures, the rich cities and wealth of being, not merely material wealth, but spiritual and intellectual wealth. Look at our cultural history. We are all of that. It is not the surly decrepitude of "we love death." That morbid philosophy is for losers. Rather, it is truly "We love Life!" Love. Think about how big this universe is, and it is all Love. That's where we're going. Ivan Ps: Mohideen, as a fine human being you are welcome to join us in this next venture of where humanity, in both its reason and higher consciousness, is going. But to do that, you must leave your depressing Muslim stuff behind, since that is holding you back. Or do not join us, and we go on without, that's okay. You are a free man. BE ADVISED, I WILL CLOSE THIS THREAD ON SEPTEMBER 11TH. ENOUGH. | ||
| ANON |
Ivan, In memory of the dead of September 11 and the thousands killed and maimed in Iraq. I support your decision to close this thread. I am in the process of shredding all of my geometric designs. I am looking at one now that involves the generation of a perfect cube that is tied to my solution of the Billiard Problem. It uses the intersection of the two curves that form the center of the circle that surrounds the triangle in my solution to the Billiard Problem as the starting point for the generation of a perfect cube. Geometry does not lie like men do. Nor is geometry colored by bias or the worldview of men driven by base instincts, such as greed or lust for power and wealth. It exists in a pure releam free of the influence of human pettiness. But for a lack of action and due diligence on the part of egocentric men and women in the intelligence community 9/11 and the losses in Iraq could have been prevented. Out of protest for their lack of due diligence and action I am shredding all of my diagrams, documents, predictions and analytic work save those posted on the web. I am also destroying my compass and ruler. When those faceless nameless men and women in the intelligence community who failed to prevent 9/11 and the losses in Iraq because of lack of due diligence and arogence leave this world, I may once again pick up my compass and ruler. Till then, I know in my heart of hearts they will pay a price in the next life for all the loss of life that these events lead to. When my time comes I expect to be there in the next life to give testimony against them. Because our god is a loving god I expect that he will forgive them, like his son did 2000 years ago. For my part my satisfaction will be seeing them confess to god their sins of pride, greed, arogence and lust before being forgiven. Such is the difference and promise of our religon verses all the others. Our god loves all, forgives all who truely repent when freed of illnesses that limit their ability to make sound judgments and denies none the oportunity to meet him in the end. Ed | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Out of protest for their lack of due diligence and action I am shredding all of my diagrams, documents, predictions and analytic work save those posted on the web. I am also destroying my compass and ruler. Ed Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 04:07 pm: Anon Ed, I rarely cry. Now my vision is clouded as I type. Please if you have not shredded already send them to me. I might not understand your work today. But I promise that some one down the ages would do so. Ramanujam Iyengar did wonderful mathematics that none of his contemporaries understood. His scribbling was the inducement for a lot of research. So would be your diagrams. Please send them to me. Let us, hopefully good individuals, not harm ourselves in protest of some stupidly violent act done by some one else. | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
But to do that, you must leave your depressing Muslim stuff behind, since that is holding you back. Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 11:17 pm: Ivan Did I bring any of that on my own? In the thread on “Evolution” I avoided responding to some attacks on my religion. However when there is an increasing crescendo I need to step in. Let us keep Humancafe free of all religions and let us debate science, culture, art and what not. A sunset or a sunrise is always a beauty to behold irrespective of whether the sun sets on a muddy pool or not. | ||
| Ivan |
Thanks Mohideen, let's turn a new page. I had an idea... Ivan | ||
| Mohideen Ibramsha |
Wherever Muslims had dominated the land it went back to desert, so you collectively are rather poor stewards of the land. Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 11:17 pm: Ivan I left history when I joined college in 1962. I do not know history. So I would accept your statement. However to me the future is never determined by the past. The past just gives a starting point. The future is always better. There are certain aspects of current society that holds us back. We Muslims believe that we have no permission to indulge in monopolistic trade; we have no permission to claim intellectual property rights; we have absolutely no permission to indulge in usury; we are strongly discouraged from accumulating wealth. These aspects of our faith might result in so called backwardness of our community as judged by non-Muslims. However we have no permission to let a fertile land become desert. Let us hope that with appropriate education the future Muslims would excel in converting the desert to fertile land. You had indicated that this thread would close on 9/11. I love to defend myself that I am not wrong. However I cannot do so in a few hours. Hence, please visit http://deentech.com/Is_Mohideen_Wrong_No.aspx to read the proof that Mohideen is indeed right. I bid good bye now. Thanks for your kindness. | ||
| Ivan |
UNITED NATIONS MAY BE THE CAUSE OF ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PROBLEM? " Both the Israelis and the Palestinians can trace their claims to the region of Palestine back to the 13th century BCE (Before Christian Era). Prior to 1500 BCE, the region was known as Canaan. Canaanite tribes controlled Canaan for more than 1,000 years, until around 1500 BCE when Jewish tribes settled in the area. These Jewish tribes later came into conflict with the Philistines, a people of Greek origin. It is from these people that the term Palestine is derived. The rest is current history, to push the Jewish people into the sea... The whole article, going back to 1500 BCE regarding Jews and Philistines (Palestinians originally of Greek origin?), to the present conflict, can be found here: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=429 I strongly concur with the original UN 181 resolution to have an "international zone in Jerusalem." I also condemn terrorism of any kind against the people of Israel, or Arabs living in refugee camps as 'Palestinians'. I also think the United Nations in its present form should be disbanded. The Arabian Peninsula should be free of any such conflicts. Ivan | ||
| Anonymous |
Quoted from article written by a Muslim, provocative insight into why life in Muslim lands is so depreciated: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=430 "In all fairness to the Arab-Islamic civilization, the prohibitions of the Qur’an and Hadith regarding music, singing, and having “fun,” and the overemphasis on the Ramadan regime of staying up during the night and listening to a recitation of the Qur’an, were not always and everywhere taken seriously. Both during the Umayyad and Abbasid caliphates, Muslims high and low, indulged in all kinds of worldly pleasures. And in modern times, both men and women singers (mostly Egyptian) became celebrities all over the Arab world thanks to the dissemination of their works by radio, disks, and cassettes. Neither can we deny the role of Arab cinema (again mostly Egyptian) in fostering a special genre of tarab (entertainment), with such well-known names as Muhammad Abdelwahab, Um Kalthoom, Farid al-Atrash, and Ismahan. However, these specific manifestations in Islamic life could not be reconciled with the clear teachings of the authoritative Islamic texts. When we take such texts seriously, and exegete that in accordance with the plain meaning of their words, the thesis of the article stands correct: Islm accords too high a priority to death in the cause of Allah, and thus depreciates human life." All in the name of murder for their god Allah, Jihad is wrong, global terrorism is wrong, One must conclude Islm is wrong. Also read this, poverty is not to blame: http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=432 Lack of "education" is not to blame: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml;jsessionid=WGOGEMFPMFC5DQFIQMGSFF4AVC BQWIV0?xml=/arts/2006/09/09/ftmadrass09.xml So why Muslim world so backwards? Islm is wrong. Anon | ||
| Le Chef |
Why is Mohideen Wrong?  Paradoxically, he's right! Le wrong-way Chef | ||
| Ivan |
Very funny Le Chef, though I don't think an even number of 'wrongs' make it right, anymore than an odd number of 'rights' make it wrong. Only Mohideen knows, paradoxically, whether he is truly right or wrong. Anon, very sad, but so true, that by all evidence life in the pan-Muslim world is depreciated, and it gets worse the more focussed they are on their belief-system. It looks like 'check mate'. Maybe for this reason 'martyrdom' so appeals to them. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
Understand 911, what it was about. "Why We Cannot Rely on Moderate Muslims" http://www.news.faithfreedom.org/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=433 "Mr. Spencer notes that “The fact that someone who would like to see the [US] Constitution replaced has led a prayer for those sworn to uphold it is just a symptom a larger, ongoing problem: the government and media are avid to find moderate Muslims -- and as their desperation has increased, their standards have lowered.” The situation is complicated by many factors, including, taqiyya and kitman: “These are Islmic doctrines of religious deception. They originated in Shi’ite Islmic defenses against Sunni Islm, but have their roots in the Qur’an (3:28 and 16:106). Many radical Muslims today work hard to deceive unbelievers, in line with Muhammad’s statement, “War is deceit.” In the desperation to find 'moderate' Muslims, the media and government is undergoing contortions, but the target population remains illusive. When the majority of Muslims believes "war is deceit" or a significant minority believes "we love death", the finding such a moderating influence within their world is illusive. Until we see and hear a loud proclamation by their faithful against Jihad, against imposing a world wide Sharia, then the good intentions of finding this voice of moderation is self delusional. We must face the truth, that perhaps the very idea of 'moderate' Muslims is takiyya. We in the West, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, America, may have an enemy from within, but not just the population of radicalized and extremists, but from within the moderates as well. This is serious, and our government better pay attention. We should reach out to the Muslim community world wide, a global outreach, of understanding, tolerance, kindness and love, but at the same time remain weary of where they're coming from. If a 'moderate' Muslims calls for the Caliphate, they are siding with the enemy, and we should tighten our boundaries on what that means. Our freedoms are not to be bargained away on the world bazaar of religious intolerance, where the Caliphate institutionalized Sharia would make our freedoms extinct. A free world based on social agreement, and religious tolerance, is radically different from a world based on politicized religious laws that coerce away our freedom, and render the idea of the freedom of human agreements meaningless. We may do as we wish provided we do not trespass on the rights of others to do as they wish, in a non-coercive social environment, where we are innocent unless guilty of such coercions. This applies to our laws, which guarantee such freedom, and which may not be replaced by any religious inspired laws that restrict our freedoms. Sharia is dangerous, and the Caliphate called up to replace our constitutionally agreed upon laws is also dangerous. So though we may respect their religion as what they wish to believe in, since we believe in religious freedom, we also believe in the separation of church and state, and this cannot be overturned, ever. The best way to work with so-called moderate Muslims is to invite them to a better understanding of what our world of freedom is all about, to help them modernize their conceptuality of inter-human actions that preserve our free rights to agreements, legally supported by our constitutional rights, while maintaining our equality, both in terms of race and gender, before the law. But if the Muslim world, globally as well as internally, fails to understand and appreciate this, then it must be held suspect. So, invite them and support their efforts to modernize and liberalize their ideology, but restrain them in their freedoms to undermine ours. What 911 represents is this gulf of understanding, and their coercions ready to do us harm, because we belief in a freedom absent from their world. It cannot go any other way, they must modernize or be restrained. If restrained, their natural freedoms are held in check, in the same way a criminal's freedoms are held in check, which means they are not privy to the same privileges afforded free men and women. Our so-called 'war on terror' is in fact deeper. It is actually a 'war on Jihad', which in turn means a war on the ideology of a Sharia based Caliphate. We must be very clear as to what it is we are fighting, and in the same vein the moderate Muslims must be very clear that they will support us in this. This support must not be just with their silence, but must be overt and loud. Until then, they must be held in reserve. When we see pro-freedom demonstrations in the Muslim communities, then we will know they are against what happened on 911. When will this happen? To date, it never has. So when we see them expressing their anti-freedom sentiments like this: " Norway’s most controversial refugee, Mullah Krekar, has said in public that there’s a war going on between the West and Islm, and that Islm will win. “We’re the ones who will change you,” Krekar told. “Just look at the development within Europe, where the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes.”We have reason to become alarmed, not because of their sheer numbers, but because of their ignorance of what our civilization is about. We are NOT about "materialism, egoism, and wildness" as this mullah says. Rather we are about "respect for the individual, tolerance of others beliefs, equality before the law, equal opportunity for all races and genders, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, the right to be free of trespass against one's person and property, the obligations of legal contractual agreements, our right to be free of deceit and other coercions, the sanctity of the human body, the right to our free expressions of who we are regardless of our sexual orientation, the right to live in a world free of pollution of our soil water and air, the right to respect the other, the protection of our natural wilderness from destruction and saving species from extinction, the right to an education, the right to worship privately as we desire, the right of democratically elected governmental leadership, the right to work, the right to raise our children in an environment free of violence and fear, the right to live in any affordable neighborhood we choose, the right to be free of discrimination based on age or sex or race, the right to truthful advertising and contracts, the right to petition our government with grievances, the right to be protected against predators and all criminality, the right for our children to be safe, the right to good health, the right to own capital for investments in our future, the right to bear arms and self protection, the right to be free of sexual molestations, and all constitutionally guaranteed rights to our human freedoms, the right to live in peace." These are our "human rights" for the freedom to be safe within our laws and to express our human being as to who we are. We have that right. So the mullah is very wrong, he understands nothing our of rights. And I only listed some of them, not all inclusive. These are not guarantees we will always achieve such goals, but it is a guarantee that we have a right to pursuing such goals. As free human beings, both men and women equally, we have a right to being who we are, a right none are allowed to take away from us. This is what 911 is all about. Ivan | ||
| Ivan |
IN SOLEMN REMEMBRANCE OF 911 The problems of Freedom are different from the problems of Sharia. Neither can coexist with the other, if one is coercive. All Free peoples, as well as Muslims, must choose peaceful tolerance and human dignity, and solve the problems of coercions in their worlds. Then maybe there can be peace. We will pause to remember the thousands of innocent victims of that heinous crime against humanity. For those who wish to honor the victims, there will be a moment of silence Monday, Sept. 11th, at 8:45 am, NY time, when the North Tower was struck; and again 9:03 am, when the South Tower was struck. America and the world must never forget this day of infamy. The forces of darkness thought they could crush us down to their level, but they were wrong. We will rebuilt and raise all humanity into the light. Ivan THIS THREAD IS NOW CLOSED, IN SOLEMN REMEMBRANCE OF 911. |