College Republican says he got violent threats after he asked Muslim group to condemn terror attacks

ah, so you also support and defend violent Jihad against The West.

 

A fail argument is still a fail argument. Hence the correct reply is, to label that remark as a rant from an utterly biased tw@t.

 

Look at what the Christian/Judean west did to their countries. How about the west stop supporting that jew nation violating international law? Stop funding the Egyptian violent dictator? Stop supporting Saudi Arabia blowing up Yemen. Reimburst Iraq with trillions for the creation of ISIL because they caused the total anarchy? Need I go on?

 

No I'm not. Here you are.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/265621/muhammad-and-forced-conversions-islam-raymond-ibrahim

Mohammad IS that "religion of peace". He trumps the Qu'ran which he wrote.

 

Yeah.

I have no problem bringing ANYBODY up on terrorism charges for committing or inciting violence on ANYBODY based on race, religion, etc..... Are you trying to imply something about me with the "white supremacy" comment? "Hate crimes" are a stupid idea, but they should be applied equally on everybody. Maybe I should have said "hate crimes" instead of "terrorism". It's more along the lines of what I meant, assuming a crime were actually committed.

 

You may appreciate this column, and with some interesting links. https://www.steynonline.com/8109/the-language-of-losing

Included is an interesting comment from a Muslim, "Western politicians should stop telling us that fundamentalism and violence have nothing to do with traditional Islam. That is simply wrong... The approach you describe won't work. If you refuse to acknowledge the existence of a problem, you can't begin to solve it".

 

From Fred's link:

"In Afghanistan, we're fighting for something not worth winning, and we're losing. In Europe, Islam is fighting for something very much worth winning, and they're advancing. And, according to all the official strategists in Washington and elsewhere, these two things are nothing to do with each other."

 

Obviously my statement flew 1000 miles over your head. Has nothing to do with "my bad isn't nearly as bad as their bad". It isn't my bad. Nothing in Republican doctrine justifies the action taken while an abundance of Islamic doctrine justifies Muslims who "fight", "kill", "slay" and "smite the necks" of the unbelievers "until.... religion is only for Allah"

 

That's why I provided the words of Islamic scholars who are Muslims to refute the orientalist from the west you rely upon.

 

AND the Islamic Caliphates, applying Islamic Doctrine as law, as they existed from 632 until the 1920s and now again for the last few years, is a fundamental component of Islam. Its 1300 years of existence is the norm and the 90 years of its absence the exception.

 

We can all read what the Koran says.

[9.5] So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Convert or die!

 

Says your western, non muslim College professor. The Koran and Islamic scholars say otherwise

 

You sourced the words of "Michael Bonner, Winter, T. J., & Williams and A.C. Brown, Jonathan"
I doubt they are Muslims.

 

Without context and the interpretation of a scholar... you're just nowhere.

 

You mean: says wikipedia. And you dragged in non Muslims.

 

Silly fool. Those are the authors of YOUR posting from Wikipedia. Of course, you had no idea what was the source.

 

What a pathetic joke you are. YOU are the only one citing and quoting Wikipedia.

 

Oh pff.. in that case:
https://www.islamreligion.com/articles/661/let-there-be-no-compulsion-in-religion/
By Sami al-Majid


Sheikh Sami al-Majid, a mosque imam in Riyadh and professor at Imam Muhammad Bin-Saud Islamic University
https://english.aawsat.com/theaawsat/features/saudi-clerics-seek-dialogue-among-various-sects

 

First action of the first Caliph following Muhammads death was to wage the wars of Apostasy against fellow Muslims who stopped paying Zakat to Mecca after Muhammad died. That's because, they were commanded-

[9.5] So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

when they stopped paying "the poor-rate", its back to "slay the idolaters wherever you find them"

Of course no one can be compelled to believe in the moon god. They are only compelled to surrender to the authority of the moon god

Dr. al-Buti “The Jurisprudence of Muhammad’s Biography”

(p. 287) "It may be said, 'What is the value of a faith in Islam which is a result of a threat? Abu Sufyan, one moment ago, was not a believer, then he believed after he was threatened by death.' We say to those who question: 'What is required of an infidel or the one who confuses other gods with God, is to have his tongue surrender to the religion of God and to subdue himself to the prophethood of Muhammad. But his heart felt faith is not required at the beginning. It will come later."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_Verse

The Sword Verse (ayat as-sayf) is the fifth verse of the ninth sura (Surat at-Tawbah, or ) of the Qur'an[1][1] (also written as 9:5). It is a Qur'anic verse widely cited by critics of Islam to suggest the faith promotes violence against "pagans" ("idolators", mushrikun), by isolating the portion of the verse "fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them" ( fa-uq'tulū l-mush'rikīna ḥaythu wajadttumūhum فَاقْتُلُوا الْمُشْرِكِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدْتُمُوهُمْ ; trans. Abdullah Yusuf Ali).[citation needed] The next immediate verse (often excluded from quotes) appears to present a conditional reprieve within the statement: "if any of the idolaters seeks of thee protection, grant him protection till he hears the words of God; then do thou convey him to his place of security -- that, because they are a people who do not know."

Qur’anic exegetes al-Baydawi and al-Alusi explain that it refers to those pagan Arabs who violated their peace treaties by waging war against the Muslims.

Yeah well.
That is just such a classic muslim hate thing, that it made it to wikipedia.
That is what you get when fanatic haters rip things out of context.

What a fail.
Thanks for playing.

 

The bottom line is that Christians and the practitioners of most other religions on the planet know for a certainty that it is wrong to harm or kill others. Christ was very clear about that. In Islam, it is a matter of interpretation.

Some Muslim sects are against violence--and are thoroughly persecuted by Muslims of other sects because of that. One such persecuted sect has been the Sufis, but now a claim is being made that even they may not be as peaceful a the West believed..

https://www.quora.com/What-are-all-...considered-most-radical-and-the-most-peaceful

http://shoebat.com/2014/06/22/peaceful-muslim-sect-turned-fanatic/

 

Bottom line is....
You claimed they do a "convert of die"... and I sourced from a Muslim scholar from Saudi Arabia that you're dead wrong.
You claimed those Muslims are commanded to kill the infidel. And I sourced your claim is a classic Islamophobic hate speech.

And now what? Now this? lol
Let me remind you that it's the Christians who spread their faith the furthest around the globe.
And they did not do that peacefully one bit.

 

yhere reportedly are many Muslim scholars that try to work around the more heinous actions of Mohammed, but yet there he is--the man who benefited from someone else's unpolluted teachings who used them for his own advancement, staining them in the process.

Read about the 40 day retreat by Jesus, where he struggled with the devilish desire to use his spiriotual knowledge for his own empowerment on Earth, rather than to transmit valuable knowledge to others.

Jesus won that battle...Mohammed lost it. He chose power on Earth and polluted his own teachings as a result.

http://www.spiritofthescripture.com/id497-jesus-40-days-in-the-desert-and-the-ego.html

 

The verse from the Koran commanded them to kill the idolaters, not the other poster. AND an exception to the general rule of "slay the idolaters wherever you find them" doesn't negate the general rule.