12.12.2007

Second Essay on Islam



* * UPDATE:

Ya'll will see a cowardly comment below by an "ANON" in the combox. The commenter's idea is that America is tainted by slavery and cannot point fingers at jihadists fer all the killin' they done-- check the responses fer the fun of it.

But any whose interested mebbe will want to check out the book at the left--a scholarly look at how many millions of Europeans have been enslaved by Muslims.

From a Review of Professor Davis' book:



(European) Slave numbers declined through four causes: death, escape, redemption (i.e. by ransom), and conversion to Islam. Davis gets annual rates from these causes of 17 percent, 1 percent, 2-3 percent, and 4 percent, respectively. This implies a total number of slaves, from the early 1500s to the late 1700s, of one to one and a quarter million. This is an astonishing number, implying that well into the 17th century, the Mediterranean slave trade was out-producing the Atlantic one. Numbers fell off thereafter, while the transatlantic trade increased; but in its time, the enslavement of European Christians by Muslim North Africans was the main kind of enslavement going on in the world.

Christians were captured by two methods. First, there was the seizing of ships by straightforward piracy. The ship itself became a prize along with its crew and passengers. Second, there were raids on the coasts of European countries. Spain, France, and Italy were worst affected, but the pirates sometimes ventured further afield. In 1627 they kidnapped 400 men and women from Iceland.

The victims in either case would be taken back to one of the Barbary ports — the main ones were Algiers, Tunis, and Tripoli — and sold in a slave market, by auction. They ended up either as the domestic slaves of private persons, or as slaves owned by the state, to be put to work rowing galleys, or constructing public works. The first of these two fates was usually preferable, as there was some chance of humanity from a private owner. Prof. Davis’s account of the lives of galley slaves is hard to read, and state slaves employed on public works were not much better off. There was no large-scale private-enterprise slavery as in the plantations of the Old South. The North African states had little commercial culture.

The effect on the European coastal populations was dramatic. Entire areas were depopulated. The author even sketches out an argument that the culture of baroque Italy was determined in part by a turning inward from the terrors of coastal life — from the “fear of the horizon” that afflicted all the regions subject to slave raiding. He tells us (he is professor of Italian Social History at Ohio State University, by the way) that to this day there is an idiom in Sicilian dialect to express the general idea of being caught by surprise: pigliato dai turchi — “taken by the Turks.” The distress of those left behind, deprived of a husband of father, is painful to read about.

* *
Ya'll Aunty's point here is to disabuse anybody of the idea that because the USA has slavery in her history, that she cain't complain about the jihadist horrors. Islam teaches and promotes an evil ideology against the entire world unless and until they submit to Islam. This monstrous teaching is the fertile field of the Islamic terror that Anon tries to excuse by pretending that Western abuses is no worse'n Islam-- utterly laughable.

The abuses of ISLAM is systemic and taught as a good thang--not an occasional aberration, and NEVER lamented, but still in existence.





Hey all ya'll whose regulars and to any visitors--Aunty invites ya'll to read the first essay and references, scroll backwards to see how we got into this yak-fest on Islam.
I meant to git up the essay on a Brief History of Islam and the West--an' I will...but not before Christmas (sorry!! I know, I promised...really sorry).

Meanwhile, I'se gonna post various clips from other folks...startin' with this one:

from http://www.humanevents.com/ )



A passenger revolt occurred on a Malaga-Manchester flight. Vacationing Brits refused to fly with two Arabic-speaking men. This came in the wake of arrests of 21 British-born Muslims who were plotting to blow up as many as 11 trans-Atlantic flights.

A spokesman for Britainâ™s opposition Tory party said the passengers panicked into “behaving irrationally.” Fancy that, not wanting to fly with members of a faith whose adherents keep trying to blow things up.

Within days of this incident, a Lebanese student was arrested for trying to plant bombs on German trains. In India, meanwhile, a group with alleged ties to al-Qaeda threatened to blow up the 17th century Taj Mahal.

If Muslims make travelers nervous, its not without cause.

Would you be more likely to have an anxiety attack at 20,000 feet if the passenger seated next to you was: A) An Irish nun saying the Rosary? B) A Mormon missionary in regulation white shirt and narrow, black tie? C) A Hari Krishna in a standard-issue saffron robe? or D) A bearded bloke of Middle Eastern complexion holding a well-thumbed Koran?


Guessing the religion of those who plant bombs, highjack planes, fire into crowds of civilians, take hostages and murder hostages is the world's ultimate no-brainer.

And yet our leaders, the media and many of us pretend there’s absolutely no connection between psychopathic, ideological killers and the religion which exalts the slaughter of unbelievers.

To counter confusion here, a la Letterman, I humbly offer The Top 10 Reasons Why It's Quite Possible That Islam Isn't Exactly A Religion of Peace....

Where Have All The Moderate Muslims Gone

If suicide bombers are radical Muslims, apologists for suicide bombers must be moderate Muslims. (In a letter to Tony Blair following the unraveling of the latest plot, 40 Muslim community leaders — including six members of Parliament — claimed Britain's foreign policy gave ammunition to extremists)

If someone slaughtered hundreds of innocents in the name of Christianity, everyone from the Pope and Billy Graham to your parish priest or local pastor would denounce the crime as an obscenity — without reference to the fall of Constantinople.

Hardly a day goes by that evil isn't perpetrated in the name of Islam somewhere in the world. When it comes to denouncing same, moderate Muslims are mostly AWOL.



................


48 comments:

Enemy of the Republic said...

You've have given evidence to support your point. However, I think the majority of Muslims who travel, do so with normal intentions--get to point one to point two. But in Britain, I can understand their reluctance about Muslim passengers--or any European country as much of the terrorism occurs there, along with portions of Asia. There are moderate Muslims who are not AWOL; they simply don't get on the news. I know them from work and from articles I read. And even in countries like Iraq and Afganistan, there are lots of Muslims who would simply like to live life, go out to dinner, play in the park, take walks....Newsweek wrote an article about Bagdad coming back to life. Gosh, I hope it is a turn for the better.

boneman said...

The one thing that I'm finding to be consistant through-out history, and I have you to thank for that, Auntie, because my sociology professor dictated a LAW to us...history never repeats itself, and anyone who says it does owes a ten page report on the validity of such a statement...anyway, the constant single idea seems to be, a group finds differences in another group, wages a verbal debate to those specific points, then demeans and dehumanizes them, then conquers them.

And, should I have the professor today, I would quickly say he is full of it, because it goes on century after century, year after year, day after day.

It ain't the easy way....
What do we all have in common, what can we all build on together, how can we focus on peace and good will towards each other?

And, my. You are quite the "rebel" aren't you?
I just picked up from PBS that the pope has issued instructions to all Catholics to attempt to work together. Hey, I didn't mean for you to try to be handed over to satan which, I believe, disrespecting the pope will get you, eh?

Aunty Belle said...

Enemy OTR, welcome!

I doan know iffin ' ya read the first essay--the idea bein' to show how Islam is evil systemically, intrinsically. This is NOT to say all Muslims are evil, they most assuredly is not.

It is meant to demonstrate from Islam's own texts (Qur'an and the Hadiths) that the proper conduct for a faithful Muslim is jihad against all unbelievers...further, that "peace" only comes AFTER conversion to Islam, thus it is not and can never be a 'Religion of peae" for those in it's midst who refuse to convert to Islam.

Aunty sees what ya mean on moderate Muslims--yep, I think the news doan give them enough air time--but it is also true that those who want to go to dinner and walk in the park are not considered good Muslims by the majority of their brothers.

The idea behind this clip from Current Events is that it is not bigoted to fear travel on planes with Middle Eastern men --it is prudent to be watchful and even suspicious, based on immediate past events. What is bigoted is caling prudent folks "bigoted." But the news establishment does jes' that.

Lemme note while I'm at it one of mah uncles is stopped regularly--he is Lebanese, born here. So, it ain't as iffin' folks I love ain't sufferin' wif the inconveniene--but thas' small price to pay. Please came again,, EOTR.

TO all visitors and newcomers,
I'se noted earlier, an' I reckon it's a good idea to mention it again, that I works in an area that
puts me wif Muslims of many countries-- mah thoughts here is more than jes' snatched out of a hat

Ya'll come again when the second essay id up--an' there is some reference material Down in the Hollow for some extry background.

Aunty Belle said...

Hey Boney,
well, Honey, looky--ya make it sound like all ideas is equal. They ain't.

Ya wrote:

"the constant single idea seems to be, a group finds differences in another group, wages a verbal debate to those specific points, then demeans and dehumanizes them, then conquers them."

Boney, Aunty do think that "differences" matter and need to be debated. Some thangs thas' different about other cultures or political structures make a heap o' difference.

All cultures is not good. They have good in 'em, but on balance they people doan thrive, doan know no freedoms...so I never could be still when some professor types play-like all cultures is equal in value.

Poppycock.

Now Boney, about the Pope and Aunty--naw darlin' I ain't no rebel. Me and Pope Benedict is on the same page. Whar' is ya thinkin' we's seein' it differently? Catholics should work together--but that means work toward living out and achieving the Gospel message. Amen!

Infinitesimal said...

I had this conversation with the sweetest softest most humble and caring Malay woman whose country had sent her to my school in order for her to learn Rehabilitation Psychology and come back to Malaysia to teach it.

She is very approachable and so as we were waiting for classroom to open i asked her if i could ask a few questions.

See, she is muslim.

I asked her, if the muslim population in Malaysia stoned women and/or killed them after they were raped.

She told me no.

She did not mind my ignorance.
She is so kind.

She thought for a minute about my question, and then replied further, that she saw the issue of subjugating women as being one of culture, and not of ascribing to a particular faith.

So, I felt to ask further about the concept in her faith of jihad.

She was a little confused.

So I expounded,
"you know," I said, "when the extremists rise up and kill all the infidels, the unclean non-believers?"

She thought about that question for me too, and calmly replied that this also was not a religious thing, but a cultural interpretation.

"Jihad, means" she said, "fighting to overcome something."

she continued...

"It is usually a personal thing, like my coming to America all alone to learn, is a form of jihad. I am overcoming my fear, fighting it, and persevering."

The way she explained it to me, it became a beautiful thing, and not a terror filled hateful concept.

She said that the Islamic faith is different by region, and that her religion is one of helping and never hurting.

I believe her, as I aspire to emulate her calmness and sense of fortitude.

She is my friend, and she is Muslim. ANd, I think that we sometimes tend to lump "MUSLIM" as a culture... you know?

It seems that way, not about you in particular, or at all, but just people in general over here.

well anyway, i may not be making much sense but i had wanted to mention that story last week but just had time to today.

She really helped me to understand that "MUSLIM" is not a culture, and neither is "CHRISTIAN".

A point most obviously demonstrated by the current Republican administration.


Hooooooooooooooowwwwllll!

Aunty Belle said...

Hey Infinitessima! So glad youse finished yore exams. Yea!!!

Yes, Doll Baby, I does know Muslim ladies like yore friend. It's important that you shared this point.

I knows a physician (for women only) who heps Aunty see Islam from her inside view--she sees the subjugation of women (she cain't examine a male patient) as both cultural-regional (her is Albanian) and required by Islamic tradition.

The thang is that in some regions the cultural adaptation of Islam is better, more humane than in others--but that version, that regional adaptation is a DEPARTURE from what the Qur'an teaches and the Hadiths say...meaning, that kinder , gentler adaptation is not authentic Islam.

oddly enough, Aunty has seen shock on faces of women from Jakarta when they learn of certain verses in the Qur'an...these are young women, 30-40s who are members of various delegations to international fora--an' invariably they is "enlightened" on the matter of correct ISlamic practice by a Muslim fella from the Middle East.

But, Infini, looky, one nice lady doan equal Islamic teaching or practice--all of us could find some dear Muslims--thank heavens there are many--but not most. Most are conditioned by the teachings and they do NOT understand jihad as primarily the personal struggle, though that too.

Nope, sadly, they understand jihad the way it is given in the Qur'an--as a "holy war" against infidels--and that Islam MUST CONQUER the world for Allah's will to be complete.

This is precisely how Aunty can say that Islam is inherently (from the inside to the outside)evil--it teaches evil toward the innocent right in the Qur'an--mandates evil against non-believers.

They jes' ain't no spin that can remove that reality--a reality that we see ACTED on daily in headlines of papers around the world.

ArtfulSub said...

1) Hope the next essay is somewhat shorter as I think that MIGHT induce certain individuals to stay close to the topic.

2) Infini's entire post could have been borrowed verbatim from "When the Dhimmi asks about Islam".

3) There is but ONE obscure reference to an internal jihad within the satanic verses of mohammed. There are 167 describing jihad as externally directed against non-muslims and apostate muslims.

4) There are influences (cultural and otherwise) that impact some SUPERFICIAL aspects of islam in different places. It's a grave mistake to think the evil CORE of islam changes much from place-to-place.

5) Malaysian girls aren't forced to wear the full Afghan-Style Wool Burkas because they'd die of heat-sroke before they could breed future terrorists. Clothing options are a SUPERFICIAL aspect of islam.

6) There isn't an Imam or Prayer-Leader in Malaysia who would say that "Jihad is mostly an internal struggle" INSIDE a Mosque to a muslim audience. That's a CORE aspect of islam.

7) There isn't an Imam in Malaysia who would deny that islam teaches that those die in EXTERNAL JIHAD are automatically absolved of all sins and go directly to paradise. That is THE CORE teaching of islam.

7) They reserve that "jihad is an internal thing" exclusively for the Dhimmi.

Aunty Belle said...

Hey Artfulsub--yep, the whole reason I ain't uploaded the new essay is I'se trying to off-load some of it to the Down in the Hollow pages, so as ter keep the primary essay shorter.

Well, ya said it true--as I thought I also made note: Jihad in the Qur'an is against unbelievers. It can also be a personal struggle--but that is purely secondary.

Ardlair said...

What I'd be really worried about at 20,000 feet is sitting next to a 350lb American.

Believe me.

It hurts.

And following your reasoning through, I'd also be really worried in America about going into a mall where there were any 19 year old males, or a high school where anyone liked grunge, or a university campus where anyone came from south east asia.

More of your usual frightened, prejudiced crap Aunty B.

And the really amusing thing is that this series of essays was meant to demonstrate that you aren't prejudiced!!!!

I just don't understand why, instead of giving us 5000 word posts, you don't just write three words for your next essay............. " I am prejudiced", call the site Aunty Bigots Back Porch, and leave it at that.

We'd all respect your honesty.

Happy Christmas!!!
(If you celebrate pagan festivals!!)

Love
A

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous Boxer said...

I have nothing to add other than this is quite the education... and I thank you.

ThursdayNext said...

Actually, at 20,000 feet in the air I would be *most* comfortable with a nice Jewish rebbe sitting next to me.

Boneman, what we ALL have in common are our children. As the Israelis say, if only our enemies loved their children more than they hated us. The solution to world peace is for parents to cease their fucking selfishness and put the well being of their children FIRST instead of LAST.

ThursdayNext said...

PS: All parents of all nations and backgrounds are selfish in this world...I direct that at all, because all are guilty.

Aunty Belle said...

Dear Anon--why ain't ya' resourceful!! Ya found an essay on Middle East Online and brought it over fer us? So thoughtful...

And whas' this? Ya pasted it together wif' another tainted source, the maniacal leftist media monitors: http://usa.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/24568

Well, chuckle...looky, is ya tellin' us wif a straight face that Americans and Europeans whose lives are at stake oughta put stock in what their sworn enemies have written over at Mid East Online?


--know ya won't mind, but I took your cut an' pasted offerin' over to Down in The Hollow, whar' folks whose interested can go check it out.
(folks thar's a link on the sidebar to Down in the Hollow--a resource page for these discussions.)

Now doan, pout, Anon--I ain't editin' or censorin' ya--it's jes' that if ever'body stitches together paragraphs from various Islamic sources, stuff already published, we'd be pretty bogged down

Fer the sake of keepin' thangs moving, lemme suggest to one an all that if ya' wanna quote mor'n three paragraphs of some other source, that ya give the link to the rest so we can all go read it iffin' we's curious about it.

This is NOT to say that yore comments have to be short--they can be l o n g , but let them be yore own thoughts.

Aunty Belle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aunty Belle said...

TO ALL READERS:
The deleted comment was from
an ANON who done left a log long comment that were jes' cut n' paste job from Islamic sources, principally a 2005 article by Louay Safi, the editor of Journal of Islamic Social Science.

(But, uh, ANON fergot his manners, fergot to give credit to the real author, Louay Safi--wonder why?? But, Aunty seen that article too, a while back, so I can hep ya'll by identifyin' its real author)

Iffin' ya' is interested, the comment is now on the DOWN in the HOLLOW pages. (see Aunty's Sidebar fer DATA for BACK Porch)

Aunty Belle said...

Hey Thursday Next! Pleased to see ya jump on it.

Ya quoted, " if only our enemies loved their children more than they hated us"

Amen!!

Aunty Belle said...

Ardlair,
why gracious, that were a fast trip--how was Libya?

We done reviewed the definition of bigot onc't afore, does ya recall? So far, ya' have provided no evidence, only rhetoric.

..................... said...

just doing my usual lurking on the back porch..
merry christmas, belle...

Ardlair said...

I don't need to provide any evidence to support the notion that you are a bigot Aunty.

You do such a great job yourself!

read and learn bloggers.
read and learn.

A

Ardlair said...

PS
Libya was cool.
Literally.
At this time of the year it always is.

Only difficult moment was on the flight back to London.

There was an American on the flight.

Everyone thought he was a goddamn terrorist!

Aunty Belle said...

ardliar, yore bigotry against Americans is showin', better hike up yore slip a bit.

Anonymous said...

CIVILIAN CASUALTIES INFLICTED BY THE CHRISTIAN USA

Hiroshima/Nagasaki (1945) 100-200,0000
Tokyo firebombing (1945) 85000
Phillippines (1899-1902) 200,000
South Vietnam 520,000
Afghanistan bombing (2002) 3000
Iraq - 8000 – 500,000 depending who you read.
And…….the genocide of the American Indian ..... 2 million or so.
And……..the African American slave holocaust………..20 million or so.

So maybe 25 million total?

And maybe a million, yes a million, innocent civilians killed by the USA in the past 100 years.

Seems like Islam has a way to go.

Aunty Belle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Aunty Belle said...

Anon, yore ignorance an' amorality is staggerin'.

Of yore list, none but the last were innocent--ever heard of Pearl Harbor?

.......meanwhile ya' cowardly Euro-Anon, yore sorry fanny lives in a modicum of peace BECAUSE America rescued yore scalp from yore own idiot lilly-livered pollyticians who wanted to play patty-cake wif' Hitler and Stalin--youse a foul hearted ingrate. That we yakned yore skin back from the jaws of totalitarianism and gulags 'cause ya wouldn't /couldn't still festers in ya belly doan it? Youse a pitiful specimen.

As for American Blacks, two points:

Yore numbers is absurd--they were not that many Blacks in USA at time of slavery; furthermore, the average Black male sold fer 2500 dollars--yeah, 2500 in 1859--got any idea what that is in today's currency--what a fool ya' is to think folks who invested that kinda' $$ in a slave would then kill it--youse an idiot--a victim of propaganda. Ya cain't even count. (much less think)

Second point--them slaves didn't git heah wifout the hep of Black chiefs--I mean, what cerebral deficit do it take to think them English and Dutch and Spanish slave traders simply strolled into the African bush and rounded up "millions" of slaves to transport--think there was roads into the heart of the bush? Think them Blacks din't have no spear-sharpshooters who could outwit and out hide them prissy Europeans? ROTFLOL!

Pal, them slaves was rounded up by their OWN chiefs, and by enemy tribes--jes' like is still goin' on today. Ever heard of Rwanda? Sudan? So...blame the European slave traders and the Black slave traders afore ya can even git to America's shores.

As fer Indians--it ain't right that pioneers and the US gubmint mistreated and warred on Indians--not right at all-- but iffin' ya got one cell left in yore vacant hide thas' fair, or informed in history, ya knows them Indians killed each other in 100 fold greater numbers than Americans did.

Yore problem is youse a petty jabber whose willin' to jettison truth to try to land a blow--fool that you is to think folks doan see right through it.

America is like democracy. It ain't perfect, but it is the best there is on this earth.

Fact is that every sort of people have committed gross horrors against others and even they own folks--but the cleanest hands is American hands. The cleanest system of gubmint is American...an' as bad as that has become, it ain't nuthin' to the the CoE and the dastardly chicanery that they done lowered on yore haid with the Treaty of Lisbon. Ya' stoopid amphibian, ya cain't even smell yore own hide burnin'.

Think thas' bias? Check out whar' people try to immigrate to--folks KNOW that there is somethin' special heah--an' that eats ya alive --oh yeah, the evidence world wide favors the American spirit, an' how that makes ya squirm.

Heah's how it gonna be wif ya, toodles--iffin' ya wanna make another comment similar to this one, thas' fine--, as long as it is not filled wif' foul language, we can go at it.

BUT it better have a name and a blog site attached. Iffin' another cowardly "Anon" message show up heah wif this kinda garbage attached, it will be deleted forthwith--sign yore screed if ya's got the guts to own it.

12/15/2007
Delete

Anonymous said...

Auntie, you're scaring me!

Food for thought on Islamic trade of slaves. Islam is the topic still, is it not?

"Black Africans were transported to the Islamic empire across the Sahara to Morocco and Tunisia from West Africa, from Chad to Libya, along the Nile from East Africa, and up the coast of East Africa to the Persian Gulf. This trade had been well entrenched for over 600 years before Europeans arrived, and had driven the rapid expansion of Islam across North Africa.

By the time of the Ottoman Empire, the majority of slaves were obtained by raiding in Africa. Russian expansion had put an end to the source of "exceptionally beautiful" female and "brave" male slaves from the Caucasians -- the women were highly prised in the harem, the men in the military. The great trade networks across north Africa were as much to do with the safe transportation of slaves as other goods. An analysis of prices at various slave markets shows that eunuchs fetched higher prices than other males, encouraging the castration of slaves before export.

Documentation suggests that slaves throughout Islamic world were mainly used for menial domestic and commercial purposes. Eunuchs were especially prised for bodyguards and confidential servants; women as concubines and menials. A Muslim slave owner was entitled by law to use slaves for sexual pleasure.

As primary source material becomes available to Western scholars, the bias towards urban slaves is being questioned. Records also show that thousands of slaves were used in gangs for agriculture and mining. Large landowners and rulers used thousands of such slaves, usually in dire conditions: "of the Saharan salt mines it is said that no slave lived there for more than five years."

ANON--but NOT that other Anon.

ArtfulSub said...

Can we ban foreigners from this discussion? Don't think any have contributed anything other than reminding us that they're spineless and believe everything they're told by their media masters.

Aunty Belle said...

TO OTHER Anon:
thanky fer yer comment--yes, Islam is the topic, not America.

However, addin' to what ya done posted:

"Prior to the Atlantic trade of enslaved Africans to the Americas, Muslim traders out of the Middle East and Northern Africa purchased, sold, and captured *millions* of enslaved Africans and Central Europeans in a slave-trading network that extended from present day Hungary to Southeastern Asia and the Far East."

[R.L.F. Davis, Ph. D.
California State University, ]



TO ALL:

Looky, Aunty doan wanna block anonymous comments 'cause some folks doan have blogs---some folks find us by searchin' topics and they ain't often moved to comment--but when they do, it can be interestin'.

Enemy of the Republic said...

I will reread your other essay--I've been behind in almost everything due to work. I am careful to say things because this is an issue I care about and I don't want to be wrong or unjust. And as for Muslims who enjoy a meal at a restaurant, it really depends on the country, not the Koran. Baghdad, despite Saddamn, was one of the freest societies for Islam--Osama didn't consider Saddamn a Muslim. I should add that it went better for Sunni Muslims as Saddamn persecuted Shiites and Kurds--one reason civil war brews in Iraq--and even the Sunnis can't agree, since some were of Saddamn's party, and some were not. I don't imagine too many Muslims in Palestine can afford a meal out, plus it would be a great way to die in some unpleasant fashion. Saudi Arabia is very strict; I doubt women have much chance to do things that we in this country take for granted. I really don't know about Syria. Afganistan is possibly the worst--Yemen is also bad and Libya has improved because the dictator finally realized that we could go in there and kick his ass, not that I endorse it. Iran, oddly enough, is relatively open; my mom traveled there and was surprised.

I will read more, Aunty Belle--I may not always agree, but I really like you and I want us to always discuss issues with respect. To me, that's the only way to do business.

Anonymous said...

uh oh.

Infinitesimal said...

Enemy said the eff word.

Ardlair used my most hated word.
(and it ain't "Americans"... or terrorists)

And Auntie is hitchin' up her skirts and reading a riot act on anon.

Yeeee Haw, a showdown at the hoedown!

An she responds.

Artful is showing his bias now to anons (why?) do you mean foreigners to the blog or foreigners from other countries?

YES! I love America too Auntie...
We put a stop at the Boston Tea Party after we wrote that thing that nobody reads.

Soon it will a totally different document. I caught DREAMY Russ Feingold on CSPAN giving opposing voice to a constitutional amendment that would give the illegal wiretapping a pass, paving the way for legal wiretapping, without permission from the telecommunication companies, instead, providing an amendment that would authorize carte blanche access to any individual conversation for any reason the administration gives.

To me, this is Unamerican, and a blasphemy to the original founding father's ideal. The one they put on paper, that was supposedly with checks and balances so as to never be altered.

There are no checks and balances for the current amendment. If it passes the house, it is ratified and installed.

To me, the fact that this does not even warrant a story in the daily news reports.... similar to the tirade of press that Paris Hilton and her blackberry pink crystal phone.

We all got up to the minute breaking news of her every movement, culminating in her big walk down the runway.
What was she wearing? I know every station reported her outfit.

But a constitutional amendment to alter telecommunications and privacy at large?

Poppycock! Let them watch CSpan.

Like who ever watches that? except for dorky me... searching for Russ Fiengold Doll Baby dreamboat of solid American Values. And the only one to oppose all of the ridiculous, ludicrous amendments to our beloved and treasured Constitution during the current administration's regime.

(and I do NOT mean poor George Bush, who like his British counterpart, is just a literal figure head... aw... sheyucks)

Our current constitution is not American.

OK, that's my rant on that.
And Indians

the assimilated ones joined the military and fought the redcoats.
military service is a huge source of pride, and go to any powwow and see them call the veterans dance.

Many vets arrive wearing all the decorations and medals received.

Where we once were a "melting pot"
the term has been officially changed in favor of cultural competency.

A sense of preserving culture of the individual that is in your neighborhood. Standardized tests are now no longer norm-referenced to white middle class respondents.

We did want to assimilate, in the olden days. It was our Medieval Times as a nation. But now we are learning to celebrate, and not assimilate. As a nation we are VERY strong, and we are proud too. But within this new pride of acceptance, having been around only for the last 50 years or so; Are not the very Americans who cultivate culture... in the newfound American way.... also the ones who give voice to the attitude of respect for Muslim culture?

Can those that warn of the fear of jihad, try to understand that these people are a pruct of our new American change in values over the last 60 years?

the current generation is more tolerant, laee afraid of foreign people and values. They are taught to accept. I value both opinions here and i stand about in the middle in my won thoughts. I enjoy respecting the opinion of all involved. If I do not pay attention to them? How will I learn to define my educated self?

I guess I am accepting the culture of blogville...

I am so proud to be an American, and so depressed to watch it all go down the toilet.

In Myth, Magic and Religion, there always must be a large evil to make the good shine brighter.

she said...

to ardlair: then don't fly with AlGore.

vanille: have your mild mannered girlfriend speak to the mullahs. apparently, they have wildly divergent views on jihad and unfortunately your buddy's not in charge.
anytime you want to see it for yourself vanille you can watch the undercover videos from the london mosque...where one imam advocates violent Jihad against the non-muslims and predicting that an army of Muslims will arise against the non-muslims in England ...*reference: Howard, Jamie (January 7, 2007). Revealed: preachers' messages of hate. The Observer.

of course you "hep-cats" and vet it also at Wiki tivi tavi.


vanille, whats with all the tattletale shi ite youse doin? grrrerhahahaha oh you remind me of back in the day at WCH''s

aunty: nice work on the anons...and your ever amazing patience with the broken records "up in here"



whatever kufaars. kafiirs and dhimmis. grrrerhahahaha

artfulsub's #7: grrerhahaha eeexxxxaaaactly

trying to keep it short, as a courtesy aunty. and definitely keep the anon's flowin.

she said...

im still crackin up at that dress down of anon aunty. grrrherhahahaha
grhrherherhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

iamnot said...

Present!

boneman said...

downloaded all the comments...
have been under the blizzard...
Got a solution to m'word diarhea
keeping it short, single ideas

If you want to SEE one of the things man has added to the Bible, look at the very beginning of Genesis. What date does it say?

Why?
'Cause I'm pretty sure the CREATOR don't give a rat's behind for time.
And, of course, it don't help any that it's wrong, eh?
But, there it is in the Bible.

Ardlair said...

Was going to keep my mouth shut but the intervention of neo-con-ultra-right-wing-bible-bashin-evangelist-artist-formerly-known-as-K9 ( christmas neck kisses from dracland to ya she baby) has made my intervention a necessity.

As ever I will attempt to balance the situation.
Regarding anon.

I don't know anything about the Phillipines in 1899 ( must find out...) but how can Aunty Belle possibly possibly possibly say that the townsfolk of the big Japanese cities, or civilians in Vietnam killed by agent orange or worse, were "not innocent"???

Is that because in war, anything goes?
Like anything at all?

If US cities had been bombed in WW2 would you regard those who died as guilty?

And, was 9/11 an act of war?

And if so were those who died "guilty" of something?

Please educate me.

American Interests said...

No harm in pointing finger at jihadists! We need to judge Islam in the context of our current day and age. Accordingly, to suggest that Western abuse is just as abhorrent is well, wrong. Simplistic this comment may sound, it was meant to be…

An enlightening post Aunty!

Merry xmas…

she said...

are you flirting with me? grrrerhahahaha

boneman said...

(So, we can kind’a be long winded, but not too much reference material? I mean, I think I understand. I’ll put an asterisk by the statement I think is done properly….
But, I should try to stick to the “one subject” thing. It would help to keep these shorter….
So, which subject? Which subject?)

“As fer Indians--it ain't right that pioneers and the US gubmint mistreated and warred on Indians--not right at all-- but iffin' ya got one cell left in yore vacant hide thas' fair, or informed in history, ya knows them Indians killed each other in 100 fold greater numbers than Americans did.”

(I’de hate t’get into it by starting out with, you mean “than EUROPEANS did” don’tcha?
So, I’ll just skip on by that one….)

As fer not followin' hatred, well, nobody here does, darlin'. Is ya sayin' we'uns is lookin' to hate folks?

(You have been asking me things like this since the start. Your first question like this landed right after hellpig’s call for Islamic radicals to waste MY family and throw nuclear devises at Mecca. (Why not Medina? Because, just like artful, there’s no real research going on there)
You actually cheered hellpig on then ASKED why I thought someone was ‘hating’?
Heck, I don’t even know who Beauchamp is, but I did note three other things from there.
#1 I apologized but hellpig didn’t.
#2 Hellpig ain’t been back, and if’n it’s cause t’me, I’ll be glad to step away ‘cause it is yer friend and all. (y’all tell me, Auntie. I won’t hold no grudge….)
#3 Another “hater” appeared on the horizon damning me for defending m’self. One who seems to foam at the mouth with hatred, spitting out venomous opinion whenever he can. I actually attempted to open a dialogue at his site, but was censored for being civil.
So, I’ll address that bit’o’business in a separate comment after I figure out what single point to comment on.

I thought maybe comment on….)

“but I cain't go along wif' yore idea that the bible is "twisted"...iffin' ya read the earliest accounts of the Early Church (80-400 AD) youse gonna see how hard the folks worked to keep the gospels and epistles *from* being twisted by the powers that be, by the political and social movements of the time…..”

(…but y’know. This here seems to be our own private disagreement, and it doesn’t go to the post of evil and Islam so much. Anyway, I had already pointed out the lawyer’s addition to Deuteronomy, and the date of 4004 BC for the beginning (HA!) and, well, you already knew that most of Genesis was word of mouth handed down and that Moses and his “elders” wrote it down was only because that’s when writing became the way to record history.

So, that’s not a good point to get into….)

Heretics is them who make a "choice" to pursue what St. Paul identiified as "a differnt gospel."

An' thas' fine...jes' fine, as long as the chooser ain't tryin' to call hisself "Christian."

Imagine a
a Democratic party whar' some folks want to depart from certain party platforms that are closer to the Republican ideals...well then, OK, they "choose" to go by another set of ideals, but they ought'nt try to pass themselves off as Demiocrats, right?

(Yer talking about Lieberman, aren’t you? I personally think that the act of doing what he thought was right, even against the party lines (dang! He’s backing McCain! I voted for McCain in our primary back in 2000, but that yellow bellied..brumph-a-brugher-rabble-runker won the nominaton.
So, I voted for Gore in the big election.
Imagine a Republican president that, after elected, and upon being approached by the biggest money in the world and told to dance, said, “no.” And so it happened at least three times in this country’s great history,
Abraham Lincoln
Teddy Roosevelt
Dwight D. Eisenhower
…and yet, for the life of me, I can’t figure out why these creeps (Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, Bush senior, Bush Junior) “suck up” to big businesses like a newborn t’Mamma’s teat! (by the way, note the missing name)

And a more proper term would be “apostasy”, instead of heretic…. but, it still doesn’t wash.

‘Bout the closest comment I can think is…)

Aunty Belle said...
Boney, hep me--what does ya mean, honey?

Ain't nobody round here callin' fer no nazi set-up. 'Cept the Muslims--jes' a wee bit of history on Muslims and Naziism will show what side the Muslims favored in WW II.

( *Good news/bad news.
Good news is, yeah. You’re absolutely right.
You see, Fred (Nietzche) well, ol’ Fred said that the Christians had all but destroyed what he called “the whole harvest of Mohammedan civilization” and that the “wonderful culture of the moors in Spain, which was fundamentally nearer to us and appealed more to our senses and tastes than that of Rome and Greece, was trampled….” (#60 Anti-Christ ©1920, Knoph)
And on that small point he was right.
They WERE the appeal of most of Europe. Their colleges taught sciences so far in advance of the leach-sporting doctors of Germany or France at the time. The Cordova station of Islam was more education than anyone of Europe had ever seen.
And, sure enough the Christians were the instigators behind getting rid of the Muslims. And why not. First off, when expelling the Jews from Spain and the surrounding areas a unique symbiosis began between the Jews and the Muslims. The Jews began working into the Islamic neighborhoods and business sectors. So to continue the expelling of the Jews they had to get rid of the Muslims, too. (Columbia History of the World ©1972)
What a clown circus! The Jews, readily accepted by the Muslim community, entrenched within the very folds that, centuries later would be calling for the eradication of Israel. If it weren’t for the vicious, merciless attacks by Christians, steady attendances would have elevated Europe to a monumental status BECAUSE of the Muslim teaching, possibly leading the world away from what ended up being a civil war between them all, culminating in strict rights of passage routes, and policies concerned with who may trade with whom and for what; laws in place for half a millennium which would later be the basis for World War One,…. a war, I might add, that we are STILL fighting.

Bad news is, the conservative right-wing today in America IS directly a line of the conservative right-wing from 1930s Germany.
Two things…Darwin’s theories being characterized within whole cultures and societies(the idea of natural selection has had far reaching implications when also interpreted as sociology, but, that AIN’T what Darwin was suggesting at all, and rightly so. The very idea of modeling society after natural phenomenon is stupit)
and
the right-wing being the preamble against Stalin’s extreme leftist agenda. Hey, someone of strength HAD to take the vanguard there, and since we were the only nuclear power on earth then, we took the lead.
And who is it at the vanguard of fighting this? Truman, somewhere around 1947 or 48. Go figure…. He was a “RIGHT WING” Democrat.
So, the Muslims and we were friends as long as the right held power in the USA.
But this goes more to present politics than the Islamic discussion goin’ on; a bit off course. If I’m going to keep this short, I’m going to have t’stay on course and not get tangented off by big words and such.
Like,….)

Many a time I looked fer yore help wif various miscreants who done impugned mah mulierity, veracity and ratiocination.

(I know “miscreant” and even use it on occasion m’self. But, I try not to over use it… “a vile wretch; an unprincipled scoundrel”
Veracity was also a used word from my own vocabulary, “truth or truthfulness” but, fer whatever reason, I always felt more comfortable using the actual word, “truth” when trying to express it.
…. but, “ratiocination?” I thought it was going to be like one of those ‘made-up-from-a-buncha-words’ word, but, it turned out to be real “the act or process of reasoning” but, then the coup d’gras….

Mulierity, well now, this may be a form of mule-like and the action of being so (?) or maybe not.
There’s also the muley, a hornless cow. But, no mam. I reckon I fear to call you a mule OR a cow. (‘Specially after reading where y’all chewed a new orifice in someone’s less than tactful comment.) (Now, as for why that person went and spoiled their previously ‘restrained’ comments, well, y’know. That, too, is part of the addressin’ in m’next comment; not to you, but, if the other guy was, say, Ardlair, then the two of ya may have just been played against each other…)
But then I found, Muliebrity, (and fer just a minit I thought MULE and CELEBRITY and I thought it would be funny, but) then, and what it means is:
1. The state of being a woman; womanhood
2. The qualities of a woman; feminity
I reckon I’ll go with this here one. As fer the missing “B”? Well, it IS Auntie Belle, isn’t it….


….but, again. It didn’t have a whole lot to do with Islam and such.

Or maybe address the Paul issue?)

I'se missin' yore point on St. Paul--why is ya aggravated wif him?
He was a murderous persecutor of the Jews who accepted Jesus--the first Christians. But he repented and spent the rest of his life in service to the gospel.

(I don’t have a beef with Paul. I used to. This part’s hard to explain, so I’ll try t’keep it from getting’ log winded….
What I don’t like is how Paul is used. Folks grab him and use him like he’s their personal lil lawgiver.
Don’t like women preachin’?, go to Paul.
Don’t like homosexuals?, go to Paul.
Don’t want individualistic thinkin’?, go to Paul.
Don’t like group thinkin’? go to Paul
Don’t like Peter’s way of preachin’? go to Paul.
Paul was just a man, just doin’ what he thought he should be doin’.
Y’all act surprised that I call him out like I did, a treacherous killer, but, yeah. He got the LIGHT in him, and he changed his bad ways. He started out bad and changed his wicked ways. So, that makes him OK? What if suddenly, folks that were Islamists decided to overthrow their oppressive moron leaders? What if they took the words of the Koran to actually mean it’s up to the CREATOR to pass judgment, which was always the intent of the thing?
Say they just go back to prayer. Five times a day.
On their knees.
Repeating the same words time and time again.
Would that mean Islam is STILL evil?
…and if not, then why would you believe me to be so aggravated with Paul?

That’s the story!
The letters, danged confusing things, were written to many different folks. Not all mankind as a group.
That’s how they should be read; as a letter from a big brother trying to convey to each of us, not ALL of us, but EACH of us how we can make our spiritual lives better’n they are. And, once that’s in play, mankind starts getting’ down to the important things in life, which is helping each other as best as we can. (I’ve heard that somewhere, eh)
It ain’t fer law makin’ at all, else it would make us synonymous with the Islamic folks.


I The Old Testament
II The Apocrypha
III Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, (the New Testament)
IV Acts, the Letters and Revelations

These four should have always been separate books.
So, I have nothing against Paul but rather, I have it against those who would try to force feed him to us via the Bible as law from the CREATOR, when it is not. And, according to the words Artful dug up, even Paul says so.
But, still. That’s not on the right course, either. It bends more to an argument we might have at a way later time of our lives.
Sorta along these lines, I figure,….)
“Iffin' ya ain't Christian this next point might not mean much, but looky--all evil cannot be overcome by love--if it could, why t here would be no Satan.”

(If evil cannot be overcome with Love, then there is no CREATOR. Even your man, Paul had that right.
But, that’s OUR Bible, not the Islamic Bible.

So, if all these aren’t good points to make, then what shall I write?)
“Boney, Aunty do think that "differences" matter and need to be debated. Some thangs thas' different about other cultures or political structures make a heap o' difference.

All cultures is not good. They have good in 'em, but on balance they people doan thrive, doan know no freedoms...”

(AHA! A point to debate on….And, it’s even got the Auntie stamp of approval, but, wait.
Wait!
?
Because you don’t know the WHOLE story, seein’ as how you thought that I meant fer Catholics to get along better with themselves…
And having a debate means you put your heart into it, but, the fact is, you need to be told about your church’s vanguard toward reconciliation.
Yup.
The pope is calling for Catholics to take the lead in reconciliation
….with the Muslim community.
So, first off, you’ll be wanting to look into this (knowing that I do that the Holy Catholic Church means way more to you than any ol’ debate, right or wrong. You seem to have some very strong principles, and for that, I will desist any debate until you say that, without a doubt, you are on the ‘right track’) and, right about now, yer probably wonderin’ how come a protestant like me seems to have information on the Holy Catholic Church. I got the info from a PBS special on the religions of the world…they showed how each prays, what they believe in, and so on.
(Don’t be mad, but, the two that stress kneeling on one’s knees are the Catholic Church and Islam….)
That IS the right thing for me to do, isn’t it? Holding off till you can find out if yer gonna give heresy a chance in yer life or stick with the pope? (and, oddly, that very last question DOES lead to our debate on Islamic, or any other religion.)
And, anyway. Holy Cow!
Did you see all the pages I got of not talking to the Islam post? (sort’a)
OK, well, a fair amount went to a few giggles, too, but, c’mon. It’s the holidays and folks should be HAPPIER, eh.
Merry Christmas, gal!)

(now, if’n y’want to keep that grin, just skip over the very next commentin’.
‘Tain’t anywhere near as many sweet comments t’be found there)

boneman said...

Dear Artfulsub….
Since you’re not answering up at your own blog, I was wondering….
What’s a “muzzie” ?
Is it like a Kike,
Spick,
Nigger,
Injun,
Gimp,
Nerd,
Artist,
And is that anything like
White Trash,
Redneck,
Bitch,
or
Gooks,
Chinks,
Japs,
Sand Niggers,
Jerries,
Krauts,
Or even
Ass,
Hoboes (hobi?),
Mackerel Snappers,
Welfare Mothers,
Leftie Lefterson and his
lib-speaking left handed liberal friends,
Boozehounds,
Strippers,
(Can we ban foreigners from this discussion? Don't think any have contributed anything other than reminding us that they're spineless and believe everything they're told by their media masters.)
Crazies,
Bacon Chompers,
(like most democrats, he's a hate-filled demagogue,)
Cons,
Bikers,
Leftist Western Media,
Euro-Leftist,
Cotton-picker,
(And they'll LIKE what they see as long as it appears that Women are allowed to dress like Britney Spears and drunks are allowed to drink),
….and the most damning of all, Them.

Aren’t these all symbolic vocalizations of “hate”?
And the name of your hatred is “Christianity”?


“It is, as the original question asked, inherently intrinsically evil. As is the "religion" of moon-worship that it co-opted.”

(No, Artful. The redundancy is ALL yours. Auntie has an easier task of NOT using redundancy to prove Islam is inherently evil. As for the religion of “moon-worship”, you are mistaken because you do not do research; Mohammed actually borrowed heavily from the Judaism and Christianity of the area, and THEY (Judaism and Christianity) are studied after the Sun God, RA, from the Egyptians, and before that, the Hammurabi Code.)

“I hesitate to address the second question since it was asked out of hatred.”

(I didn’t realize you were a mind reader….)

"All Scripture is inspired by God is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It straightens us out and teaches us to do what is right. It is God's way of preparing us in every way, fully equipped for every good thing God wants us to do."
Perhaps one of the HEAVENLY REWARDS DUE TO CHRISTIANS (???) will be a complete understanding of that and other passages.
In the meantime, here on Earth, it's best looked at as a tool to better understand the risen Son of the Living God, Our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.
And, as an inspiration to continue to spread the Good News of the TRUE religion that it serves. Christianity. A religion that has been, undeniably, a force for good in this World and particularly within the USA.
A religion that HAS and will CONTINUE to free benighted souls from the horrors of false "religions" such as moon-worship and "islam".

(You must be a politician wanna-be. So many words not saying anything except meaningless clichés and opinionated rhetoric, and that isn’t even a good argument FOR religion. Please, stop before you splinter off another hate-filled group of flag-wavin’, holier-than-thou church of the self righteous.
That you think things are DUE you? You think “complete understanding” is due you? for what? Suffering? Are you trying to call forth an Illumination?
…or putting yourself on a pedestal eye-to-eye with the CREATOR?
And here you are amongst us, now.
Matthew 7; 21, 22: “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesize in your name, and in your name drive out many demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you! Away from me, you evildoers!”)


ArtfulSub said...
Off-topic but I'm pleased to announce that the sow who lives with us in the double-wide is the proud Mommy of three squeeling new piglets! A girl and two boys.

Hillary, Ardlair and Mohammed.

Grrrherhrahahahhahahahaha

(I gotta tell ya right off, these past two years of reading K9 have brought me to respect her. Auntie also deserves respect, and yet, for some reason, you keep insinuating yourself to them. They may go along with yer silliness, but, it IS demeaning to them that you do it the way you do.)

I don't see OUR central challenge here to be convincing Conservatives and Christians that the form of satan-worship called "islam" is inherently evil. I'd add INTRINSICALLY evil.
And the above, “grrrherrahahah” and later cheering on K9 fer pouncing back at Ardlair.

(Are you comfortable hiding behind their skirts?
Or are you really “SHE” ….
(which would be a REAL wowser to the bloggin’ community…no disrespect meant, only, some of us are STILL reeling from the “K9 is a GrrrrL” outing)
but, no. You are not Auntie or She. Both have more class and gumption! Yeah, …. Gumption!
1. Bold, energetic initiative; courage to act.
2. Shrewd common sense (see; ratiocination)
Here’s a clue. It’s in the dictionary)

I'm GUESSING your central point was that what Christ said equates with what the warlord Mohammed said and DID.

(It’s obvious you’re guessing.
No, this isn’t even close to my point. My point was, you said to give you a “meanest part of the Bible” and you would show how much worse the Koran was compared to it.
I offered the threat that Jesus SUPPOSEDLY gave his disciples of the outcome of non-believers, and, in doing so, also offer up the actual event of Sodom and Gomorrah, and (thanx to your mistake) the act of giving someone to Satan (which I called “excommunication” because that act IS cruel and devastating to the individual, but Auntie sez it ain’t supposed to be a punishment) and lastly, due to your not answering up here or at your own blog and giving me more time to find other examples, the death sentences from Leviticus and Deuteronomy. They’ll be along here in a moment….
That you had no knowledge of the “mean-ness” in the Bible maybe you should READ IT sometime if you’re going to pretend to know what it says and doesn’t say.
Also you redundantly repeat things that you’ve already said before, again.
Oh, that isn’t fair, I guess. Maybe you need several synonyms about a thing to understand that thing…. Lord knows, I need my dictionary a fair amount of times. But, I don’t misquote it or call “up” “down” …. )

My analysis of that lesson (an analysis widely shared) is that Christ advised us to preach the Good News.

(No. He said take up the cross (the work)
Love the CREATOR with all your heart, mind and soul,
Help others as you would have them help you.)

And to let those with hardened hearts know that the punishment for ignoring and rejecting it would be fierce.
And delivered by GOD. Not by men.

(So, why are YOU being so hard-hearted about it? Do you think maybe the CREATOR isn’t watching? What? You think the CREATOR wants you to fill in on the judgment and condemnation stuff? The HOLY SPIRIT has abandoned us all so now we should kowtow to YOURs or anybody else’s pharisaic ways?
You’re like the guy on the highway, so mad that everyone is speeding so you get in the left lane (HA! Go figure on THAT one!) and drive even velocity with the guys in the right lane so EVERYBODY HAS TO do what you want them to do!
Matthew 23; 13 “Woe to you, teachers of the law (scribes) and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.”)

A world where very very very few Christian Preachers teach that MEN should kill those who reject the Good News.

(You mean, now that the “new world” has already been “discovered” by the white man and established his laws, that missionaries didn’t kill whole villages for their lack of belief or even wanting anything to do with such a wicked god as the Europeans have wrought against them, do you mean you don’t believe the Catholics of Ireland didn’t kill those opposed to them just because they were Protestants, or that the Christians didn’t commit the massacres in Bosnia of the Serbs, are you of the mind that bush junior never once waved the flag of self-righteous, Christian indignity ? Are you THAT blocked from the news of our time? )

A world where virtually NONE of the Nations born out of Christianity have a policy that demands that Baptized Christians who convert to other faiths be put to death. Most prescribe no civil penalty at all for that mistake.

(Your Bible calls for the penalty of death for disbelief.
Leviticus 20; 27: A man or a woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death.
(does this mean losing their lives in the here-after? God is going to punish that person(s) No…)
YOU are to stone them: their blood will be on their own hands.

Do you have any understanding of the Koran, for, this is as if written from it. THEIR BLOOD WILL BE ON THEIR OWN HANDS. But, then, that’s because the Koran was written from these Old Testament texts, and from the Gospels.)

Perhaps the question shouldn't have been is Islam inherently evil. Perhaps it should have been has it been a Lingering and Consistent evil?

(Is this a replacement for inherently / intrinsically?
Lingering? Consistent?
By changing the word, moving on to a new perspective, but the first perspective, which isn’t now, nor was it before, yours to mold “into your own idea.” This essay on the Islam Religion being inherently evil is Auntie’s.
So, now you want to do an essay on the intrinsically lingering and consistent Islam, and isn’t that wonderful?
I’de even read it, but, no sense in commenting on it, I guess, because we both know what will happen to my comments, eh?)

Those factors of lingering and consistent are PART of how I see the word INHERENT.

(So, if someone asks you a question too tough to answer, you’re going to make up new adjectives for an adjective which has nothing to do with your answer at all?)

If something becomes GOOD eventually or goes through phases of GOOD and EVIL, I wouldn't use the word INHERENT.

(So, to you, before Paul regained his sight, are going on the premise that he is EVIL, and therefore, HIS RELIGION (Judaism) is also EVIL but after the alteration, he was OK and his new religion was OK, too? Even though his old religion was still killing Christians, or getting them killed, but it’s ok ‘cause…
What ARE you saying? That YOU know all there is to know about the religion of Islam, PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE and therefore you are in charge of either codifying it or leaving it asunder? YOU? What have you to compare with?)
(I’m asking your age, young mouth. Do you feel that your experience is of a long enough period to match to any religion? Are you thousands of years old? Hundreds? Are you the ONLY person we need to confer with? Are you the expert we’ve been seeking all these many millennium?)

The message, one I consider evil, that MEN should kill unbelievers has lingered for 1200 years. That message has been consistent throughout those 1200 years.

(The Bible started declaring the death sentence for unbelievers from about 1500 BC. (so, that would make the killing spree ok fer the last 3500 years!)
From Deuteronomy 7 ….destroy the Hittites, Girgashites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, seven nations larger and stronger than you and when the Lord your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must DESTROY THEM TOTALLY. Make no treaty with them, and SHOW NO MERCY.
Break down their alters, Smash their sacred stones, Cut down their Asherah poles and burn their idols in the fire.
(the pole and sacred stones represent the mother of 70 gods, one of them Baal)

(16) you must destroy all the peoples the Lord your God gives over to you. DO NOT LOOK ON THEM WITH PITY…

(24) He will give their kings into your hand and you will wipe out their names from under heaven.
No one will be able to stand against you.
YOU WILL DESTROY THEM.

How does THAT rate in your lingering, consistent, inherently intrinsic evil?
Not future/ later in heaven they die/ allegorically, with harps and angels flapping about, but rather, just as you contend that the “warlord” demands blood and obedience, so do the earliest form of religious leaders of your bible call for death of those who don’t believe in the Jewish God, Yahweh, and THEY MEAN FOR YOU TO DO SO WITH YOUR OWN HANDS.
You HAVE read the Bible, haven’t you?
I mean, it isn’t a new book for you, is it?
How could so much hatred come from the pages of a book so many folks hold dear to their hearts? Don’t bother answering that one, artful. You don’t know and you’ll just end up guessing at it.
You refuse to see, even from your own book that it isn’t religion that is evil, but rather the men who wield religion.
The Bible, which has NOT introduced YOU to a life of helping others and peacemaking so much as it has been your manual for showcasing a false superiority over other folks. Hell! Men have been killing unbelievers BEFORE CAIN. They’ve been killing unbelievers since the first great family that bowed to the Sun god, RA, killed all who didn’t believe without regret or doubt. The first Jews had no qualms about killing those who didn’t believe, and then they also killed those who believed that the Messiah had come.
(I find it more interesting, AND TELLING that the history of the Jews living WITHIN the Islamic empire FARED BETTER than the Palestinians now trapped within the borders of Israel, a land stolen by the British and handed over to the Jews as reparations done against them in world war two, a hardy slap in the face of Muslims and Jews if ever I heard of one. And NOT the first time, nor even LAST time the British will insinuate themselves on the businesses of foreign peoples.
If anything, if it were for reparations, the Jews should have been given a huge tract of land within the Ruhr Valley, way nicer than the harshness of Israel, though there was the historical factor. None-the-less, it was lands lost centuries prior. But, even after losing the lands so long ago, they were allowed into and about Jerusalem, Israel, and the region.
However, after the British invasion, and the subsequent handing of the land back to Jewish leaders, the name of Jew became synonymous with occupation. Laws put in place restricting Muslim movement anywhere within Israel.)

You got yer head poked up yer butt if you think Bible thumping Christians and Jews have been the shining exemplar of the world.
Their motto has ALWAYS been,
“IT’S NOT MURDER IF YOU KILL AN INFIDEL.”
…and it will probably always be so as long as there are men and women around to kill and subjugate each other.
People like you, artful.
And WHO gets to pick who the infidel is?

Indians all over the USA were being killed because they would dance the Ghost Dance, a religious ceremony of respecting the dead and asking for better times. (and it ain’t proper t’say that just because they had their own skirmishes before the EUROPEANS got there that it was OK to take all their lives away from them, so, NO hiding behind Grannie’s skirts.
I mean, Auntie’s skirts.
(well, she SAID she looked the PART….she said it when she was talkin’ about Boggs’s picture)
No religion should be called a religion if it calls for the death of anybody for any reason.
German Christians killed the Jews because they didn’t believe in Christ. German Jews killed Muslims during the six day war because they demanded the land. Where do you come off thinking that Islam is any worse/better than anything a person WANTS to worship?
In Over the Hedge, an animated movie, a character points out that the VISUAL is that we pray TO our food.
And there may be something to that. You, of course, wouldn’t have any idea of what I’m speaking, would you? You don’t realize that 317 people die every week of starvation RIGHT HERE IN THE USA.
In this “great nation” we pray to our food (?) and we pray to our sports games (?) and we pray for monies (?) and we pray to utterly destroy our enemy, batter his body to the ground, blood spilling away, parts laying about….We pray for the diseases to take their children, and early deaths take their women folk. We pray for their failure in whatever endeavor they are concerned with. (So, what part will we be offered when standing before the CREATOR?)
Heck, there are parts of China where a person will be killed if he DOES have a belief system, if the government feels it’s dangerous. Buddhism, for example. But, yer not going to focus on that for two reasons; since Nixon, the Republicans have been in bed with the Chinese. And if your party tells you to go to bed with the Chinese, you do just that. The second reason is it’s the religion of Buddhism.
DANG! Jerry freakin’ Falwell said every Christian in America should have a rifle and be ready to use it. Do you suppose he’s thinking “for rabbit hunting?” Or killing people?
You pick the century, I’ll show you some religious group or other killing in the holy name of some (made up) god, be it Jesus, the Jehovah, or Allah, Baal, Gog or any other name they find to bless their wicked little terror reign.
PRAISE THE LORD and PASS THE AMMUNITION!
(Kay Kaiser and the Orchestra, around 1920)

And that brings me to ask, what of YOUR challenge?
Are you going to let Auntie answer up for you? Because she did NOT answer up to what you said you would.
The idea that all those people would be incinerated (whether by man or god, mox nix. Destruction IS destruction.) is way stronger language than in the Koran. And, even if you hide under Auntie’s answer, remember, Luke 10; 12 is a JUST a description of Genesis 19; 24.
How about that there Deuteronomy 7, huh? Yeah, real “peaceful” religion you prescribe to….
I can SEE where you developed yer manners….)

From What We All Believe, Ruth Cranston;
Mohammed preached no intricate body of doctrine. His concept of God is grand and simple. It reminds us of the concept of the Jews; One-ness, Timelessness, Omnipresence and Incorporeality. God is a universal and infinite Spirit, yet with a definite rulership over man and exercising judgment and all power over him. Ideas similar to the Jewish are expressed on creation also. In the Koran we find substantial portions of scripture and stories almost identical with stories in the Bible. The story of Creation, the story of the Flood, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the story of Mary and of Christ whom Mohammed accepts as the Messiah the Jews had been waiting for. His emphasis, however, is not on these background stories and allegories but on the righteousness of the individual.

“Righteousness,” says the Prophet, “is of him who believes in God…who gives away money for God’s sake…unto orphans and the needy and the stranger…of those who perform their covenant… and who behave themselves patiently in adversity and in hardships.”
“When a man dies people will ask what property has he left behind him. But the Angels who examine him in the grave will ask: what good deeds hast thou sent before thee?”

(But, since it isn’t in the Bible, you wouldn’t have read anything like this, would you?
And, the funnier thing that you didn’t notice is YOUR OWN godless chatter. Your hatred of these peoples has hardened YOUR heart, has darkened YOUR mind, set a gangrene within YOUR soul. This from a scripture you accidentally pointed out. Go read the thing again. 2 Timothy 2 16-18.

That’s what “muzzie” is, artful.
It’s godless chatter.
Just like ALL hateful diatribes.)

“Your words are Poison!”
(Lady Eowyn; the movie, Two Towers)

Ardlair said...

Boneman.....................

Bravo.

I do however know that attempting to get those of these persuasions to really engage in discussions about
their views

is like.........

pissing into the wind.

But, bravo.

Ardlair said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ronbo said...

MERRY CHRISTMAS, AUNTY!

http://ronbosoldier.blogspot.com/2007/12/merry-christmas-readers-of-this-blog.html

Cheers, Sergeant Ronbo

ArtfulSub said...

Merry Christmas Aunty!

Aunty Belle said...

Boney..I'se slow--MERCY, but this extra life I has is gobblin'up all mah time, leavin' nuthin' fer blog-life.

Ya wrote:

"'Cause I'm pretty sure the CREATOR don't give a rat's behind for time."

Honey, shure He do--the Creator MADE time fer us'uns....He doan need it , but we does.

For God,who is eternal, all time is present, the past present and future are al immediately present.

But fer us'uns who live in flesh, we needs time--so He made it.

What in the tarnation is goin' on back heah???

I'll git to the rest of this brohoaha directly...stay tuned.

Malinda777 said...

Auntie, your scrawlins are brilliant as always!

WE, AMERICA, mostly of a Christian belief of some sort founded this USA.

Our Jesus through God (in Christian belief)put the individual so high on the pedestal that He gave His life to save ours, each of ours.

Which means, that He believed in us EACH individually, each believing in what we will, and He gave us the freedom to choose, good or bad, and He put it all on the cross, or the line, just for the individual.

So, through that belief, we have always been a fair nation...a nation that believes in individual freedom and individual choices, without chastising those different...as our same Christianity teaches us to turn the other cheek.

SO...EVEN ATHEISTS, OR MUSLIMS, OR LEFT WINGISTS, should not try to drive us out, but REALIZE that without US, they wouldn't have the right to believe whatever they want.

Without the USA foundation of the belief in the freedom and the prophetic knowledge that the individual and his successes would lead the world to peace, these moonbats would have been out of business long ago.

We are the voice of reason, and trying to defeat us is only leading to their own demise. That makes them flat stupid.

Aunty Belle said...

Malinda!! Baby Doll--hoo whee, I'se so happy ter see ya again!

Youse made an awesome point --the primacy of the individual ---and the "right" to be different, not a goose-steppin' automaton of moonbattery. An yeah doggie! Iffin' it weren't fer the Christian teachin' of the preciousness of the person and free will, then dictators would have a free reign the world over.

Honey, I'se jes' real real happy ter see ya!

Muslims Against Sharia said...

Most of the Western Muslim establishment is comprised of Islamist groups claiming to be moderates. True moderate Muslims reject Islamic supremacy and Sharia; embrace religious equality and democracy.

Poll: Who is a moderate Muslim?