Islamic Terrorism

April 24th, 2013 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

The two brothers suspected of bombing the Boston Marathon appear to have been motivated by a radical brand of but do not seem connected to any Muslim terrorist groups, US officials said after interrogating and charging Dzhokhar Tsarnaev with crimes that could bring the death penalty.

Tsarnaev, 19, was charged in his hospital room, where he was in serious condition with a gunshot wound to the throat and other injuries suffered during his attempted getaway. His older brother, Tamerlan, 26, died after a fierce gunbattle with police.

The Massachusetts college student was charged with using and conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction. He was accused of joining with his brother in setting off the shrapnel-packed pressure-cooker bombs that killed three people and wounded more than 200 a week ago.

The brothers, ethnic Chechens from Russia who had been living in the US for about a decade, practiced Islam.

Two US officials said preliminary evidence from the younger man’s interrogation suggests the brothers were motivated by religious extremism but were apparently not involved with Islamic terrorist organisations.

In one sense it is more concerning they were not dupes put up to it by a terrorist group, but decided to turn to based solely on their religious beliefs.

There are approximately 1.6 billion Muslims, and it goes without saying that the vast majority do not practice or support terrorism. Just mindlessly ranting against an entire religion achieves nothing.

And of course there have been terrorists motivated by other religions – Northern Ireland, for one.

But to my mind there is a difference with terrorism done by extreme . It is that religion seems to be the sole reason for the terrorism.

Most terrorism involves territorial disputes. Northern Ireland was part-religious but partly an fight over the partition or Ireland.

Terrorism in Kashmir is linked to control of disputed territory. Religion is part of it, but not all of it.

Other factors involved in why people turn to terrorism can be extreme poverty, lack of education etc.

But when it comes to terrorism involving relatively well off, well educated citizens, with no territorial dispute – the sole factor often is just their belief in an extreme version of Islam. And to be frank that is scary.

Tony Blair and the IRA managed to find a political settlement that has almost stopped terrorism in Northern Ireland. The same has happened in other areas.

But I’m at a loss to know how you stop people like the Tsarnaev brothers concluding that their God wants them to blow up children who are watching the Boston Marathon. When a religion doesn’t unambiguously condemn violence and killing, and many priests promote rewards in the afterlife for those who kill in God’s name – no wonder. When Iran’s mullahs hand out fatwas encourging people to kill the likes of Salman Rushdie, it is no surprise that you have others decide that killing people for their God is a good idea.

Christianity has it faults, and a chequered history. But the number of Christian priests who in modern times ever call for someone to be killed is almost zero – the odd lunatic excepted. But sadly in Islam, all too many religious and political leaders (and the two are linked) do preach violence in God’s name.

The solutions are not easy. Just condemning 1.6 billion Muslims for the sins of a few is not a solution – just prejudice. But neither is there merit in ignoring the problems and almost unique challenges of Islamic terrorism. The lack of a central authority in Islam, and the inability to modernise their teachings, makes change very challenging.

In the end the only practical long-term solution is to encourage moderate Muslim leaders, to speak out and condemn the extremists, and make clear that terrorism is evil and sinful – no matter what.

But I have to admit I am pessimistic. I don’t see an end to religious terrorism in my lifetime.

Tags: , ,

104 Responses to “Islamic Terrorism”

  1. Kimble (4,443 comments) says:

    I don’t see an end to religious terrorism in my lifetime.

    You will see more of it as a better educated and more incredulous population abandons the social crutch of religion, those few remaining will get ever more fervent and trenchant in their beliefs.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. mandk (1,018 comments) says:

    I think the terrorism in Northern Ireland was (is) more tribal than religious.
    You didn’t get many provos chanting Hail Marys before bombings and kneecappings.
    It is true, though, that the different tribes belong to different denominations (insofar as they subscribe to religion at all).

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Andrei (2,668 comments) says:

    Yes once the progressives have convinced the Imams to conduct same sex marriages in mosques we will all sit around singing kum ba ya and everything will be just peachy

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 21 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. jims_whare (404 comments) says:

    Well the horse has really bolted on this one but the solution was lost some 40+ years ago when liberal do gooders from the 60’s onward decided that allowing open immigration policies from muslim countries was a wonderful idea – and like a religious cancer Islam in all its different flavours has started spreading through much of the Western world.

    A long time ago the muslims were prevented from conquering Europe on the battlefield however they are now doing the same via birth rates and strict adherence to ideology.

    People who said this over the last 40 years have been labeled bigots and racists – sadly often bigots and racists are proved to be true.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. nasska (11,813 comments) says:

    Its seems that although not all Muslims are terrorists most terrorists are Muslim. As such I’m at a loss to understand why we continue to allow immigration from Islamic countries.

    The future risk to the rest of us is unacceptable.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Carlos (683 comments) says:

    Moderate Muslims who speak out normally end up being shot, beheaded or blown up too. So, I think the only solution, which won’t happen, is for Muslims to realise that Islam is as vile and evil as Nazism and to leave the faith in droves.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. nasska (11,813 comments) says:

    Andrei…..you are a fool. Your (& a few of your Godnutter mates’) puerile obsession with dragging the subject of gay marriage into every forum is childlike or indicative of mental instability.

    Grow up.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 18 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Matthew Flannagan (76 comments) says:

    The problem is exasperated by standard liberal views on religion and public life, which demand public discourse be conducted in secular terms. Islamic terrorists can only be refuted on there own terms, when others can engage them on the presuppositions they hold by other people’s of the book. As long as the west continues to marginalise theological moral discourse and refuse to understand or take it seriously. The problem will remain.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Harriet (5,132 comments) says:

    “….And of course there have been terrorists motivated by other religions – Northern Ireland, for one….”

    The IRA were never motivated because of Roman Catholicism – and they certainly weren’t fighting against the British for being practising Anglicans.

    Those issues -if they ever were issues- were just other reasons to despise eachother. They weren’t the central issue.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Ashley Schaeffer (513 comments) says:

    I don’t condemn 1.6 billion Muslims, but I certainly condemn their fascist ideology masquerading as a religion.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Urban Redneck (234 comments) says:

    Just mindlessly ranting against an entire religion achieves nothing.

    Maybe you should have a quite word to Blubber Boy

    There are approximately 1.6 billion Muslims, and it goes without saying that the vast majority do not practice or support terrorism.

    There are a vast amount of quiescent Muslims out there who don’t conduct terrorist acts, BUT they don’t condemn them either. Hypothetically speaking, if the caliphate ever took over, all of the feminists and homosexuals would be in for a really tough time, and I highly doubt there would be anyone from the Muslim community raising a single finger to help them.

    We shouldn’t be letting any of them into the country, period.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Kimble (4,443 comments) says:

    which demand public discourse be conducted in secular terms

    This is just “oppressor claiming victimhood” bullshit. And from the oppressors who continue to claim to have the ONLY language with which morality can be discussed, no less.

    Atheism isn’t killing your religion. Your religion is a fantasy that evaporates upon application of reality.

    Islamic terrorists can only be refuted on there own terms…

    You can’t use reason to change the mind of someone who hasn’t set their mind through reason.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. jawnbc (93 comments) says:

    There’s certainly a large religious element to the Troubles in Ireland, but in many respects it was an archetypal anti-racist/anti-classist social movement. There were laws that prevented Catholics from doing certain jobs and, living in certain areas. The police were used to reify these injustices. And the response to peaceful demonstrations was thuggery. But rather than being simplified as Catholic versus Protestant, the aggression was largely between Catholics and Calvinists (rather than CoE/CoI).

    None of which is a justification for the terrorism and violence that followed.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. garethw (205 comments) says:

    “No territorial dispute”
    Huh? Al Qaeda is very clearly rooted in a large-scale territorial dispute. They are fighting for the removal of all kafir from Muslim countries, and obviously started in the “defence” of Afghanistan. Bin Laden clearly stated he wanted the removal of US and Western influence from Muslim countries. There is some argument as to whether they intend to create a complete global caliphate, but it looks more like they just intend regional caliphates across Muslim countries (Middle East, SE Asia and parts of Africa)
    It’s very much a territory-based dispute, just perhaps on a much larger scale than we’ve seen before.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Nigel (517 comments) says:

    I think there needs to be a very close look at the extremist preachers myself, they pray on young like these two and create the environment for acts like Boston. To me the religion ( Muslim/Christian/Buddhist ) is far less of a factor than these preachers, work out how to isolate/ostracise them & to my way of thinking you solve most of the issue.
    Yes Buddhist’s have been going off the deep end in Burma, ironically targeting Muslims.
    Maybe a better example of Christian terrorism would be the Spanish Inquisition or Witch hunts, though that gets into the arguement of what is terrorism and it might be simpler to look at what drives followers of a religion to kill others in the name of that religion & to me that leads back to the very human leaders of the religions.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Harriet (5,132 comments) says:

    “….and many priests promote rewards in the afterlife for those who kill in God’s name – no wonder….”

    DPF-

    Priests in this day and age, are mostly Roman Catholic as I understand it.

    And none promote anything in the way of killing – or being rewarded for it.

    To call just any religious leader a ‘priest’ is wrong, as most know it as a term belonging to the Catholic order.

    I hope your not trying to slur us DPF ! :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Peter (1,723 comments) says:

    It’s a religious war.

    The West is over them, but Islam is not. It’s a collision of two different ages.

    There is no solution.

    Well, there is, but you’re not going to like it…..

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    But I’m at a loss to know how you stop people like the Tsarnaev brothers…

    There will always be a small percentage of society that suffers from the type of mental or psychological condition that allows them to commit such acts.

    It is not the religion, or even the extreme beliefs, but in fact a disease of the mind that allows the thought processes to absorb and become obsessed with the religion/cause and the requirement for violence or murder. When such people form groups, the ‘collective mindset’ becomes more extreme and dangerous. The ability to then recruit young, vulnerable and perhaps socially inadequate and confused people is easy in today’s world (and in fact through-out history) when there will always be some that feel ‘hard done by’ and at odds with mainstream society. Convincing such people to take part in extreme violence is easy, especially when psychologically disturbed are in a position of influence (in this case older sibling).

    I think it is easy to blame organised religions when in fact it is the type of people they are that makes them become ‘extremists’. I see little difference between these people and the average run of the mill psychopath.

    Religion just gives them a story and an excuse.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 14 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Dave Mann (1,251 comments) says:

    While you raise some very good points and your arguments are reasoned, calm and try to display tolerance and not prejudice – I think this highlights one of the most challenging problems with Islam.

    You think and behave like a rational intelligent human being, while every true Muslim on earth, if they actually believe the world view that they are fed from birth, think that their God requires the whole world to be converted to their religion. In these people’s minds, it is not wrong to kill infidels, lie to them, deceive them or treat them as lower beings; they are infidels and they deserve no better.

    Even though they don’t all practice terrorism en masse, the background of their thinking and culture sets them firmly against human progress and reason and, as such, I can’t agree that condemning 1.6 billion Muslims is just prejudice. It is simply recognising the facts. This 1.6 billion people must support the concept of terrorism deep down in the secret recesses of their minds, otherwise why aren’t we seeing mass marches all over the world by ‘moderate’ Muslims protesting against their terrorists’ mindless killings? I don’t think I have ever heard of such a thing. Have you?

    The world is in a state of philosophical and economical flux between various competing political and economic systems and this is no bad thing because of the exchange of ideas involved…. but it is at WAR with Islam and the minority who realise this are labeled as bigots and islamophobes.

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Nigel Kearney (1,049 comments) says:

    They key difference between Islam and Christianity is that Muslims believe the Quran is the direct, literal word of God in the same Arabic language that is used today. This is central to the story of how Islam came about and why people believe it. So, compared to the Bible, there is much less scope for ignoring the nasty bits and convincing yourself that God didn’t really intend them.

    However I still tend to think people primarily use religion to justify things they want to do for other reasons. Religion is quite convenient for justifying violent acts, particularly the idea of receiving a reward after you’re dead. But when you want to kill a bunch of people who are inconveniently of the same religion as you are, other justifications can usually be found. There are plenty of genocides in this category.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Ed Snack (1,927 comments) says:

    Northern Ireland was not in the normal sense a religious conflict although the differences originally rose out of that difference. The terrorists were not catholics in any meaningful sense, that was just a label, tribal, if you like. The IRA was a nationalist group, and the various splinter groups (INLA, Real IRA, etc) were essentially far leftists of various stripes. Protestant labelled gangs were more likely to be more definitively religious but far less likely to indulge in random terrorism, typically for a majority or entrenched group they targeted the minority rather than the public at large.

    I don’t think you could say, for example, that the IRA bombed Brighton during the Conservative Party Conference because they were motivated by Catholic precepts or teachings. They did so for political reasons to gain a united Ireland. That the divide was catholic/protestant was almost incidental by then. As noted above, if an IRA bomber called upon “Holy Mary, Mother of God” it would not be as a form of blessing or religious affirmation, but as a curse !

    That is fundamentally dissimilar to the current Islamic terrorism where religion itself is the primary driver and enabler. You cannot easily separate Islam the religion and Islam the politico-social organization, Islam is at one and the same time a religious orientation and a political movement that controls the laws and customs of a country.

    Thus you are mistaken about “the majority of Muslims” and terrorism. Support for Islamic terrorism is remarkably high amongst all Muslim communities although many cannot openly say so in secular societies. Islam means submission, submission to God and by extension to the religious authorities. If they say “kill the kaffirs” then that is what you are commanded to do, and if you refuse you would be an apostate and subject to the penalties associated with that. And who are the “religious authorities” ? More and more they are extremists if only because that’s where the money is.

    You should also see the doctrine of Taqiyya, olr deception. Although initially primarily aimed at dissumulation about ones religion, it has wider application:

    “The primary Quranic verse sanctioning deception with respect to non-Muslims states: “Let believers not take for friends and allies infidels instead of believers. Whoever does this shall have no relationship left with Allah – unless you but guard yourselves against them, taking precautions.” (Quran 3:28; see also 2:173; 2:185; 4:29; 22:78; 40:28.)

    Al-Tabari’s (838-923 AD) Tafsir, or Quranic exegeses, is essentially a standard reference in the entire Muslim world. Regarding 3:28, he wrote: “If you [Muslims] are under their [infidels’] authority, fearing for yourselves, behave loyally to them, with your tongue, while harbouring inner animosity for them… Allah has forbidden believers from being friendly or on intimate terms with the infidels in place of believers – except when infidels are above them [in authority]. In such a scenario, let them act friendly towards them.””

    So it is perfectly normal for Muslims to deny support for Islamic terrorism, and as fervently as they wish, while being able to support it in reality without being conflicted in any way. Those they are lying to are not truly people but infidels, infidels such as you David.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Steve Wrathall (285 comments) says:

    And as always, Pat Condell nails it:

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    I am not sure what the solution is, but a good start would be for the USA to withdraw from Muslim lands and stop sponsoring radical Islamists, such as Obama’s (declared) $300 million aid package to the Syrian Islamic extremists over running that country. Every thing the US has done to address the problem has made it worse. Unfortunately we all have to suffer the effects of their ignorant foreign policy. In some places they kill Muslim radicals, while sponsoring them in others. It has become far worse under the dreadful Obama administration.

    Overall the biggest threat we face from radical Islam is not the bombs, but our own liberal immigration policies and political correctness. The UK is stuffed. They allow Sharia law in the UK and radical Muslim hate groups, while killing strict Muslims in their own countries of origin. The biggest threat to the West is already here, living legally among us.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    Thanks Steve W

    i see that one of the imans who influenced the Boston terrorists was Australian.

    Who knows what is being taught in islamic study groups in muslim mosques here in New Zealand.

    It’s quite encouraging to read above several correspondents who have woken up to the folly of
    importing more muslims into N.Z. and are prepared to call for a stop to it.

    Not so very long ago such calls would have resulted in strident calls of, ‘Racist’ from our
    progressive friends.

    More and more Kiwis are waking up to the fact that importing muslims into our country is a ‘No Win.’
    which will inevitably end in tears.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. kowtow (8,776 comments) says:

    If you are at a loss to understand ,then get studying.It’s simple. Read the Koran and study Mohammeds’ life. Plenty of resources.
    This is one of the biggest dangers to western civilisation.Couple massive Muslim immigration to the west with socialist notions of equality,a socialist interpretation of human rights,multiculturalism,an extremlely aggressive anti Christian agenda etc and you have the problem we have today.

    Enoch Powell saw it and was destroyed by the Establishment elite (working class people supported him as they are the first victims of mass immigration) .

    The first practical step is to stop Muslim immigration.

    Oh and by the way ,we call it “terrorism” but they call it Jihad. And jihad is a holy and Allah ordained activity.
    Once you realise it’s God’s work you will begin to understand why these people are so dangerous to our way of life and civilisation.

    Educating Muslims is not the answer, first we have to educate ourselves about Muslims.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    If you are at a loss to understand ,then get studying.It’s simple. Read the Koran and study Mohammeds’ life.

    The christian bible is just as bad and maybe even worse.

    The difference is most christians ignore the perfect word of their of God.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 17 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    And there we go,
    right on cue, Kea chips in with a totally inane comment.

    A true nincompoop.

    The old silly persons argument, “Well,you think thats bad, but what about this ? this is even worser.”

    Airhead.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    bereal, your a bitter snide little clown with nothing intelligent to say. You have also not heard gods message. The bible is a vicious and dark book.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. kowtow (8,776 comments) says:

    kea you are a dense shite.

    The Bible is to Christians the revealed Word of God. Holy Spirit ,Church authority etc

    Not the literal word of Allah as revealed by a blood thirsty maniac,Mohamed, justifying his violence and sexual practises.

    Now run along and find us some hideous quotes from the Koran.We’re treated to so much Old Testament bashing a bit of the Koran might make a change.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. hj (7,066 comments) says:

    The christian bible is just as bad and maybe even worse.

    The difference is most Christians ignore the perfect word of their of God.
    ……………………..
    I doubt that. The Koran has more overt calls to violence against non believers. The Bible has a lot of good things in tjhe new testament like “he that be without sin amongst you throw the first stone. Nevertheless it hasn’t stopped behaviours such as the inquisition. The problem lies in allowing people into your house but not making them stick to your most enlightened set of rules.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. sbk (313 comments) says:

    “otherwise why aren’t we seeing mass marches all over the world by ‘moderate’ Muslims protesting against their terrorists’ mindless killings? I don’t think I have ever heard of such a thing. Have you? “..no.

    …if Muslims do protest/take to the streets…what do get…it is behead the infidels…Death to all those do not accept the word…and a constant stream of rhetoric/verbal reminders that soon we(infidels) will be converted,made dhimmis or die.

    It is about frigging time those “moderates”that everybody keeps talking about,got vocal….but we all know that wont happen.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    if Muslims do protest/take to the streets…what do get…it is behead the infidels…Death to all those do not accept the word…and a constant stream of rhetoric/verbal reminders that soon we(infidels) will be converted,made dhimmis or die.

    Yes true. Were you talking about England ?

    Because that is where the most dangerous and capabable terrorists are often found. Not so much so in Africa or Afghanistan.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. MajorBloodnok (361 comments) says:

    Don’t be surprised to hear of a Boston terrorist sleeper cell that trained and equipped the two bombers. There will be more like them.

    And if you think Islam is a religion of peace, and not territory, look what is happening in North Africa. In the news this year: Mali, Nigeria, Somalia, Libya…

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. infused (660 comments) says:

    Kowtow: nail, head.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    And if you think Islam is a religion of peace, and not territory, look what is happening in North Africa. In the news this year: Mali, Nigeria, Somalia, Libya… the UK, Norway, Sweden, USA, Netherlands, Australia, Denmark, Germany…

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    kowtow (4,196) Says:

    April 24th, 2013 at 11:49 am
    kea you are a dense shite.

    The Bible is to Christians the revealed Word of God. Holy Spirit ,Church authority etc

    Not the literal word of Allah as revealed by a blood thirsty maniac,Mohamed, justifying his violence and sexual practises.

    Now run along and find us some hideous quotes from the Koran.We’re treated to so much Old Testament bashing a bit of the Koran might make a change.

    (Not the literal word of Allah as revealed by a blood thirsty maniac,Mohamed Jesus, justifying his violence and sexual practises.)

    kowtow, the distinction you draw is not there. The fact you claim YOUR book is superior is a sign of christian arrogance and nothing else.

    Do your really believe the bible is the word of god ? I do not think so. I think your a better person than that. If you continue on in this way I will have to post [again] some of gods commands and then you will look like a hypocrite. There is genocide, rape, torture, infanticide, incest and very brutal punnishments for minor imagined crimes. The Quran is simply the old testament. At least the radical Muslims extremists really do follow gods perfect word.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 11 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Matthew Flannagan (76 comments) says:

    Kimble writes:

    “This is just “oppressor claiming victimhood” bullshit. And from the oppressors who continue to claim to have the ONLY language with which morality can be discussed, no less.”

    Actually what you dismiss as “bullshit” without any argument is in fact explicitly stated and defended as the mainstream position in the literature, your welcome to read the stanford encyclopaedia of philosophy which spells out the debate and refers to the view I described as the standard view.
    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/religion-politics/. It pays to actually know something about a topic before you start dismissing comments about it.

    ” And from the oppressors who continue to claim to have the ONLY language with which morality can be discussed, no less.” Actually no theologian or christian philosopher I am aware of claims to have the only language with which morality can be discussed. So that’s kinda false, there are arguments that theism provides the only metaphysical basis for certain features of morality to be explicable, but that’s quite different to claiming that morality can only be discussed with theological language. Your confusing moral semantics with ontology, again try and know what your talking about before you write.

    As to the rest of your comments, assertions and slogans don’t count for much, to show theism is false you need to actually provide reasons for that conclusion, not simply assert its a fantasy, and the claim that you can’t use reason to refute a position which was not based on reason is actually false. The fact a position is not based on good reasons does not mean there are not good reasons against it. And irrationally form views can be refuted by reason, there is in logic a whole argument form known as reductio ad absurdism which does this. Again try and understand what your talking about before you mouth off.

    But in this context what I said is perfectly correct, if one wants to offer an argument that refutes Islamic radicalism one needs to appeal to premises that those tempted by such radicalism accept, arguing that such radicalism is false from a secular view point is hardly going to count as a plausible argument unless you already accept a secular viewpoint to begin with and those tempted to Islamic radicalism don’t. To refute it you need people who are willing to accept certain theological premises for the sake of argument and argue from those and those people need to know and understand those premises well enough to make the argument.

    Silly ignorant name calling by ignorant secularists who don’t know the first thing about what they are talking about tends to get no where.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. lastmanstanding (1,303 comments) says:

    Thanks Steve Wrathall This guy hits the nail right on the head.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    The two brothers suspected of bombing the Boston Marathon appear to have been motivated by a radical brand of Islam but do not seem connected to any Muslim terrorist groups, US officials said after interrogating and charging Dzhokhar Tsarnaev with crimes that could bring the death penalty.

    Right, well lets just assume and pontificate instead of establishing the facts, shall we?

    The MSM has marginal credibility after the NY Post reported from a trusted law enforcement source that 12 people had died.

    The MSM has marginal credibility because of the improbable account of the demise and capture of the suspects.

    Tamerlan’s aunt identified the “naked guy” as being her nephew, a Golden Gloves boxer. The MSM’s inconsistent story is that he was the carjack victim whom the suspects abandoned after they had robbed him.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. kowtow (8,776 comments) says:

    kea says

    “The Quran is simply the Old Testament”

    You clearly haven’t read the Koran.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Urban Redneck (234 comments) says:

    To back up Harriets & Ed Snacks comments earlier, the Provisional Irish Republican Army was an Irish republican paramilitary organization whose objectives were to remove Northern Ireland from the UK and establish a socialist republic within a united Ireland by force of arms and political persuasion.

    Moloney, Ed (2002). A Secret History of the IRA. Penguin Books. p. 246.

    The media largely reported it as an ecclesiastical conflict but it was mostly political.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. RRM (10,026 comments) says:

    Kea –

    I’m no scholar but I had the simplistic view is that Muslims view Jesus as just another 2nd- or 3rd-tier prophet of [God/Allah/etc] and that is where they diverge from all those who believe he was the son of God…?

    Yes? No? Sort-of…?

    (That, and their ideas about crime & punishment are about where xtian Europe was 500 years ago…)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-04-22/bombing-suspect-s-uncle-accused-kazakh-president-of-fraud

    Bombing Suspect’s Uncle Accused Kazakh President of Fraud
    By Erik Larson

    The uncle of the suspects in last week’s Boston Marathon bombing told a London court in 2010 that Kazakhstan President Nursultan Nazarbayev had overseen the theft of state assets worth billions of dollars.

    Ruslan Tsarni, who is from Kyrgyzstan, the former Soviet republic to the south of Kazakhstan, worked “in various capacities” with a closely knit network of associates led by Nazarbayev’s son-in-law from 2000 to 2008 that regularly engaged in fraudulent business practices, he said in a witness statement to the High Court in London in December 2010, when he was 39 years old. Tsarni said he moved to the U.S. in 2008 after working for the Kazakh group. He is now a U.S. citizen living in Montgomery Village, Maryland.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. RRM (10,026 comments) says:

    DPF:

    In the end the only practical long-term solution is to encourage moderate Muslim leaders, to speak out and condemn the extremists, and make clear that terrorism is evil and sinful – no matter what.

    Disagree – expelling Muslims from what we can term “western” or “Christian” lands, creating a fortress around half the world and designating Islam as The Enemy would be another long-term solution that could be done, and therefore is “practical.”

    Not a very hopeful future to aim for, but workable. I believe the world will swing that way at least a little, and we will see expulsions of Muslims from Europe in my lifetime.

    Nuclear War would be “a practical solution” too, heaven forbid.

    DPF:

    But I have to admit I am pessimistic. I don’t see an end to religious terrorism in my lifetime.

    Agreed, I look at those people and there is so much hatred and callousness in them, it’s difficult to imagine it turning around. maybe in 500 or 1000 years they will be more enlightened countries, but not now.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    RRM, not 2nd rate, the major divergence is the meaning of the crucifixion. The Gospel of Barnabus in Ankara is an early text which supports the Quranic interpretation.

    Surah 19

    28 O sister of Aaron! Thy father was not a wicked man nor was thy mother a harlot.
    29 Then she pointed to him. They said: How can we talk to one who is in the cradle, a young boy ?
    30 He spake: Lo! I am the slave of Allah. He hath given me the Scripture and hath appointed me a Prophet,
    31 And hath made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and hath enjoined upon me prayer and almsgiving so long as I remain alive,
    32 And (hath made me) dutiful toward her who bore me, and hath not made me arrogant, unblest.
    33 Peace on me the day I was born, and the day I die, and the day I shall be raised alive!
    34 Such was Jesus, son of Mary: (this is) a statement of the truth concerning which they doubt.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Ed Snack (1,927 comments) says:

    Kea, you’re arguing like a 12 year old about something you appear to know little about. But here’s a critical difference, for the great majority of mainstream Christians, the bible is divided into two parts, the old and the new testaments. For Christians, the new essentially supersedes the old, so the old, whilst useful and full of references, is not authoritative with respect to the practice of Christianity.

    And for most Christians, neither is the new literally authoritative. To simplify, the bible is generally considered to be divinely inspired but written by humans, and therefore subject to interpretation, something very widely practised.

    There are exceptions of various fundamentalist stripes, but amongst Christians these are a tiny majority although they are fairly visible because they are widely criticized as much as anything. I would also imagine that followers of the Jewish religion follow similar patterns, most regard the OT as a guide, but only fundamentalists regard it as always authoritative.

    So finding bloodthirsty and otherwise exceptional passages in the OT is interesting but such passages rarely influence the behaviour of Christians. There are essentially no such passages in the NT although as humanly written books are there can be conflicting viewpoints expressed.

    Contrast this with the Koran. The Koran is not “divinely inspired”, it is the literal, dictated words of God as given to his prophet. The words mean what they say and are not strictly open to interpretation though of course some such (these are the Hadiths, or commentary) is necessary to work around the various conflicting verses. Typically, the earlier in the Koran a verse appears the more authoritative it is. So it is difficult for a devout Muslim to have an interpretation of the Koran if it conflicts with a specific verse. Unlike the OT passages which Christians can happily ignore, a Muslim can be labeled an apostate for doing so. Thus if the Koran commands believers to hate Jews, then hate them they must.

    So one should not compare passages in the OT and the Koran, only one set of passages is the literal word of God to the great majority of its practitioners. So you do yourself and your arguments great disservice by trying to compare them. You remind me of a young person objecting to Christianity because “Jesus said suffer the little children…” and I don’t think that little children should suffer because he said so. Embarrassed silence when the archaic meaning of suffer is explained…

    In the scholarly world, one theory is that Mohammed created such strictures about the Koran (and to a devout Muslim of course Mohammed did no such thing, God told it to him) because he had observed the problems with differing religious interpretations that bedevilled early Christianity, and which also created many splits in the Jewish faith including that which produced Christianity. Thus he sought to guard his creation against such divides. He didn’t succeed entirely, witness the existence of Sunni and Shia, Druze, Ismaili, etc, but it certainly makes the task of modernizing the faith far harder, it would almost take a second Mohammed to enable the reformation that most westerners would hope for.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. unaha-closp (1,180 comments) says:

    Matthew Flannagan:

    “But in this context what I said is perfectly correct, if one wants to offer an argument that refutes Islamic radicalism one needs to appeal to premises that those tempted by such radicalism accept, arguing that such radicalism is false from a secular view point is hardly going to count as a plausible argument unless you already accept a secular viewpoint to begin with and those tempted to Islamic radicalism don’t. To refute it you need people who are willing to accept certain theological premises for the sake of argument and argue from those and those people need to know and understand those premises well enough to make the argument.”

    Islamists arise from secular issues, they arise from reality – we know this because they exist, they are real. They do not arise from a made up fantasy set of premises, however much Islamists may claim to have an explicit religious cause to their existence they are wrong. We are not going to win by constructing a counter argument on made up premises that suit us better, because our position will also be wrong. Our argument will inevitably fail in the face of observed reality.

    Islam is a big religion and like all big religion is flexible/complicated/convoluted/obtuse enough to adapt to reality. It has survived through hundreds of years, by being relevant for hundreds of years. As can any successful religion, it can be made to say whatever you want it to say. If you want to create a Islamic theological argument for peaceable relations and a complete absence of terrorism, you can and it has been done by many people. However secular reality causes some people to make a counter arguments and they can also justify these in Islam.

    Radical Islam arises from a very simple secular reality – the House of Saud likes money.

    Their money is maximised by extracting the oil and selling it whilst maintaining control over the country. They have a population of fellow citizens that is diverted from taking the control away from the Saud family by religion. The religion is funded for the purpose of telling the population that superiority is achieved through religious practice. The religion impedes economic activity which prevents any competing independent power base arising in the country to challenge the House of Saud, and this impediment is okay as the oil wealth compensates for the loss of internal economic growth. Basically it is a religion that works well for Saudi Arabia inside Saudi Arabia.

    Unfortunately the Saudi religious establishment exports its “superior” form of religion to the rest of the world, which doesn’t have inexhaustible oil wealth. (This helps the House of Saud by exporting a lot ambitious young men to be the spreaders of the religion – directing them to correct the moral failings of the world.) In places where there is no oil wealth the religion fails in very secular ways – its adherents become poor, very quickly – and the Islamists interpret this reality on being due not to their religion but rather to the lack of faith in the wider community. They then argue (forcefully) that the rest of the population needs to become religiously pure to achieve success.

    What this all means is that terrorism is unsolvable, because of secular reality. We need the flow of oil from Arabia to be uninterrupted, for that to happen the created religion needs to be allowed to continue. Until the oil stops flowing their will be terrorism.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    There is no such thing as moderate islam , radical islam etc..there is only one islam, one Koran , one set of hadiths.
    The terrorists are people who have come under the influence of Saudi promoted WAHHABISISM.. An early promoter of islam to Maori , was the guy going into the prisons..He said he was paid 500 thousand to promote islam to Maori people especially the gang members..You may recall how he had done a lot of prison visiting and dawa before he was stopped from going to NZ prisons. Yet the Saudis fund schools and islamic centres at Unis in Aussie and NZ..I understand the school in AK had too be bailed out with tax payer money..It would be hard to find an islamic school in Aussie which hasn’t been involved in fraud..An islamic school is planned for CHCh..
    The cultish nature of islam is very evident in the terrorist training camps as one of the stated aims is to get all these young men away from their families..All cults try to separate people from their families.
    I don’t have any answers..
    The Aussie sheik is Sheik Feiz Mohammed..I have been trying to find out whether he has been here..I would say he has. He is from Auburn Sydney and is of Lebanese descent..He currently tries to distance himself from previously expressed views but only a total moron would believe this change of heart. The Bostom young men were influenced by his earlier videos.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Time for Bible class

    If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you … Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die.” — Dt.13:6-10

    Death for Cursing Parents

    1) If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)

    2) All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

    Death for Adultery

    If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

    Death for Fornication

    A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

    Death to Followers of Other Religions

    Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

    Kill Nonbelievers

    They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman. (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

    Kill False Prophets

    If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, “You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord.” When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

    Kill the Entire Town if One Person Worships Another God

    Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. “The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him.” (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

    Kill Women Who Are Not Virgins On Their Wedding Night

    But if this charge is true (that she wasn’t a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father’s house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

    Kill Followers of Other Religions.

    1) If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

    2) Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden. When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2-5 NLT)

    Death for Blasphemy

    One day a man who had an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father got into a fight with one of the Israelite men. During the fight, this son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the LORD’s name. So the man was brought to Moses for judgment. His mother’s name was Shelomith. She was the daughter of Dibri of the tribe of Dan. They put the man in custody until the LORD’s will in the matter should become clear. Then the LORD said to Moses, “Take the blasphemer outside the camp, and tell all those who heard him to lay their hands on his head. Then let the entire community stone him to death. Say to the people of Israel: Those who blaspheme God will suffer the consequences of their guilt and be punished. Anyone who blasphemes the LORD’s name must be stoned to death by the whole community of Israel. Any Israelite or foreigner among you who blasphemes the LORD’s name will surely die. (Leviticus 24:10-16 NLT)

    Kill False Prophets

    1) Suppose there are prophets among you, or those who have dreams about the future, and they promise you signs or miracles, and the predicted signs or miracles take place. If the prophets then say, ‘Come, let us worship the gods of foreign nations,’ do not listen to them. The LORD your God is testing you to see if you love him with all your heart and soul. Serve only the LORD your God and fear him alone. Obey his commands, listen to his voice, and cling to him. The false prophets or dreamers who try to lead you astray must be put to death, for they encourage rebellion against the LORD your God, who brought you out of slavery in the land of Egypt. Since they try to keep you from following the LORD your God, you must execute them to remove the evil from among you. (Deuteronomy 13:1-5 NLT)

    2) But any prophet who claims to give a message from another god or who falsely claims to speak for me must die.’ You may wonder, ‘How will we know whether the prophecy is from the LORD or not?’ If the prophet predicts something in the LORD’s name and it does not happen, the LORD did not give the message. That prophet has spoken on his own and need not be feared. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22 NLT)

    Infidels and Gays Should Die

    So God let them go ahead and do whatever shameful things their hearts desired. As a result, they did vile and degrading things with each other’s bodies. Instead of believing what they knew was the truth about God, they deliberately chose to believe lies. So they worshiped the things God made but not the Creator himself, who is to be praised forever. Amen. That is why God abandoned them to their shameful desires. Even the women turned against the natural way to have sex and instead indulged in sex with each other. And the men, instead of having normal sexual relationships with women, burned with lust for each other. Men did shameful things with other men and, as a result, suffered within themselves the penalty they so richly deserved. When they refused to acknowledge God, he abandoned them to their evil minds and let them do things that should never be done. Their lives became full of every kind of wickedness, sin, greed, hate, envy, murder, fighting, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They are forever inventing new ways of sinning and are disobedient to their parents. They refuse to understand, break their promises, and are heartless and unforgiving. They are fully aware of God’s death penalty for those who do these things, yet they go right ahead and do them anyway. And, worse yet, they encourage others to do them, too. (Romans 1:24-32 NLT)

    Kill Anyone who Approaches the Tabernacle

    For the LORD had said to Moses, ‘Exempt the tribe of Levi from the census; do not include them when you count the rest of the Israelites. You must put the Levites in charge of the Tabernacle of the Covenant, along with its furnishings and equipment. They must carry the Tabernacle and its equipment as you travel, and they must care for it and camp around it. Whenever the Tabernacle is moved, the Levites will take it down and set it up again. Anyone else who goes too near the Tabernacle will be executed.’ (Numbers 1:48-51 NLT)

    Kill People for Working on the Sabbath

    The LORD then gave these further instructions to Moses: ‘Tell the people of Israel to keep my Sabbath day, for the Sabbath is a sign of the covenant between me and you forever. It helps you to remember that I am the LORD, who makes you holy. Yes, keep the Sabbath day, for it is holy. Anyone who desecrates it must die; anyone who works on that day will be cut off from the community. Work six days only, but the seventh day must be a day of total rest. I repeat: Because the LORD considers it a holy day, anyone who works on the Sabbath must be put to death.’ (Exodus 31:12-15 NLT)

    ——————————————————————————–

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    RRM, does the above post answer your question, regarding the relative evil of the Bible v Quran ? :)

    You christians you deny this are a bunch of liars worthy of nothing but contempt by right minded people.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    Ed Snack @ 2.17

    well said.
    Of course Kea will not get it because he isn’t able to, there is no way to help
    these obsessive compulsives such as Kea.

    joana, also well said.
    Regardless of whether this POS Feiz Mohammed has ever been here or not others
    of his ilk probably have been here, talking to gullible young minds in islamic study groups.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Ed Snack (892) Says:

    April 24th, 2013 at 2:17 pm
    Kea, you’re arguing like a 12 year old about something you appear to know little about. But here’s a critical difference, for the great majority of mainstream Christians, the bible is divided into two parts, the old and the new testaments. For Christians, the new essentially supersedes the old, so the old, whilst useful and full of references, is not authoritative with respect to the practice of Christianity.

    So Ed tells us god fucked up and wrote another book. Well there goes the Ten Commandments and rather a lot else !

    But lets see what JESUS SAID shall we:

    Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place.” (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

    For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

    “It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid.” (Luke 16:17 NAB)

    And he meant it too ………. !!!

    Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark.7:9-13 “Whoever curses father or mother shall die” (Mark 7:10 NAB)

    Jesus has a punishment even worse than his father concerning adultery: God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole. The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell. (Matthew 5:27)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. bereal (3,137 comments) says:

    And there he goes again, right on cue. @ 2.38

    Obsessive compulsive totally lacking comprehension skills.

    The difference between the Old and New Testaments Ed took the time to expain
    goes straight over the head of poor old Kea.

    Laughable really.
    And this fool will never give up.
    At least this has got him off global warming.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Gosh look at all these thumb downs I am getting for posting bible quotes. Must be those dam atheists LOL :) :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. Ross Nixon (559 comments) says:

    Kea those Old Testament quotations applied to a small theocracy which hasn’t existed for 3000 years. None of those instructions were reiterated 1000 years later in the New Testament.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Rightandleft (670 comments) says:

    It should be pointed out that it took millenia and a great deal of bloodshed for Christianity to become the peaceful religion of social justice it is today. Christians also once considered their religion territorial and set out first to reconquer Spain from the Muslims and then to reclaim the Holy Land from the infidels during the Crusades. Along the way they massacred Jews at every turn. Jews were massacred by Christian in York in 1190, in Strasbourg, France in 1348 and many other instances across Europe. In 1492 the Christian King and Queen of Spain forced all Jews to either convert to Christianity or be expelled without any of their money. Martin Luther wrote a book calling for Jews to be stripped of all their property and enslaved. It was entitled, “On the Jews and their Lies.”

    You may argue these things were all in the Middle Ages but Christian persecution of Jews and Muslims continued into the modern era. In 1904 the priests of modern-day Russia and Ukraine stirred up one of the most violent persecutions of Jews pre-Holocaust, called the Kishinev Pogrom. When the actual Holocaust began priests in the Balitic States and Poland drove persecutions of Jews that aided the Nazi invaders, often resulting in Jews being massacred before the Nazis even had time to bring in their killing squads.

    Since WWII Christianity has in general been a much more peaceful religion and I wouldn’t say Christianity was a driving force in the Northern Ireland terror bombings. But Islam is a much younger religion. When Christianity was 1400 years old it was still slaughtering Jews and on the verge of dividing into Catholics and Protestants, primed for another centuries long period of blood-letting amongst themselves.

    I don’t believe that radical Islam is the sole reason these men turned into terrorists. They used their religion as an excuse for hatred driven by other factors. They didn’t like their adopted society, didn’t fit in for whatever reason. Islam acted as an enabler, offering them a way to express their violent rage and delude themselves into thinking they were on the moral high-ground as they slaughtered innocent children. I think their Islamic beliefs made their terror possible, but wasn’t the primary cause for their hideous crimes.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. kowtow (8,776 comments) says:

    uana closp

    Islam got to France in 732. Look up Poitiers or Tours.Long before we put the Suads in power in arabia.And they’ve been trying ever since.The difference now is our leaders refuse to resist and actually encourage it in the name of equalty or multiculturalism.

    Look up Vienna 1683.
    Look up the Armenian genocide 1915.

    Arab oil?We don’t need it, Canada has shit loads but Obama wants clean oil from the Saudis,how much sense does that make.?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Ross Nixon, your view contradicts Jesus and gods perfect word.

    I note that christian are happy to quote the good bits that fit with modern secular morality, without reference to the context in which those things were said.

    I suggest if the bible make you feel uncomfortable:

    1. Your a decent normal person.

    2. You need to step into the light.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Its ok folks. God has “Changed” and is not like this anymore. Yeah Right !

    (what about that eeeeeeevil Quran A? )

    Kill Women Who Are Not Virgins On Their Wedding Night

    But if this charge is true (that she wasn’t a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father’s house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20-21 NAB)

    God Will Kill Children

    The LORD says, “All their wickedness began at Gilgal; there I began to hate them. I will drive them from my land because of their evil actions. I will love them no more because all their leaders are rebels. The people of Israel are stricken. Their roots are dried up; they will bear no more fruit. And if they give birth, I will slaughter their beloved children.” (Hosea 9:11-16 NLT)

    Kill Men, Women, and Children

    “Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, “Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple.” So they began by killing the seventy leaders. “Defile the Temple!” the LORD commanded. “Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!” So they went throughout the city and did as they were told.” (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT)

    Kill Old Men and Young Women

    “You are my battle-ax and sword,” says the LORD. “With you I will shatter nations and destroy many kingdoms. With you I will shatter armies, destroying the horse and rider, the chariot and charioteer. With you I will shatter men and women, old people and children, young men and maidens. With you I will shatter shepherds and flocks, farmers and oxen, captains and rulers. “As you watch, I will repay Babylon and the people of Babylonia for all the wrong they have done to my people in Jerusalem,” says the LORD. “Look, O mighty mountain, destroyer of the earth! I am your enemy,” says the LORD. “I will raise my fist against you, to roll you down from the heights. When I am finished, you will be nothing but a heap of rubble. You will be desolate forever. Even your stones will never again be used for building. You will be completely wiped out,” says the LORD. (Jeremiah 51:20-26)

    (Note that after God promises the Israelites a victory against Babylon, the Israelites actually get their butts kicked by them in the next chapter. So much for an all-knowing and all-powerful God.)

    God Will Kill the Children of Sinners

    If even then you remain hostile toward me and refuse to obey, I will inflict you with seven more disasters for your sins. I will release wild animals that will kill your children and destroy your cattle, so your numbers will dwindle and your roads will be deserted. (Leviticus 26:21-22 NLT)

    More Rape and Baby Killing

    Anyone who is captured will be run through with a sword. Their little children will be dashed to death right before their eyes. Their homes will be sacked and their wives raped by the attacking hordes. For I will stir up the Medes against Babylon, and no amount of silver or gold will buy them off. The attacking armies will shoot down the young people with arrows. They will have no mercy on helpless babies and will show no compassion for the children. (Isaiah 13:15-18 NLT)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Ed Snack (1,927 comments) says:

    Kea has a point, Jesus did in fact quite possibly preach (and I would say most probably did) a messianic version of the Jewish faith which is not particularly akin to what became Christianity. But Christianity split from that almost immediately under the teachings of Paul, and by that version, the old rules are indeed invalid and don’t have to be followed. Not mentioned above is that a major block to gentile participation (allowed but in an inferior position) was circumcision, most potential male believers were NOT prepared to go through that to join.

    It is rather a surprise that those words survived in the gospels as they were written as they definitely contradict what Paul was preaching, possibly they were too well known to omit at that point. However Pauline sophism was able to explain that the reference was to those practicing the Jewish faith; they were not exempt the laws in the way that Pauline converts were.

    That is certainly a weakness in the claim to be carrying out Jesus’ teachings, but not insurmountable. Paul’s teachings offer a different way and that is what Christianity became. So the old testament strictures are not in any sense binding Kea. The one NT quote you had made a lot of the “bad behaviour” of those described, but did not call for their death or other mistreatment. Gods death sentence is a reference to the lack of salvation, not an earthly fate.

    So one can call oneself a Christian and have no requirement to follow anything in the OT, a decision hallowed as it were by nearly 2,000 years of practice. That’s the advantage of having a holy book that is not utterly authoritative, meanings and interpretations can change more easily although it does encourage a multiplicity of varieties of the faith. And it’s not to say that various Christian authorities didn’t try impose a single interpretation in the past. Many sects of Christianity suffered badly at the hands of others over religious interpretations, from the early Gnostics, Arians, Manicheans, through to the Cathars and of course the Catholic-Protestant disputes and wars.

    Summary, Kea you may quote the OT all you like, there’s no requirement for any Christian to follow those strictures although some may chose to do so.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    Former FBI employee says that the Tsarnaev brothers were recruited by FBI

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Summary, Kea you may quote the OT all you like, there’s no requirement for any Christian to follow those strictures although some may chose to do so.

    That is not what Jesus said. He made it clear that the old laws apply. I note that the 10 commandments are in the old testament.

    The point I was trying to make was not about the merits of the various faiths. I was simply highlighting the fact that both the Quran and Bible contain some pretty ugly stuff. One is no better than the other in terms of their holy books.

    When it comes to the actual behaviour of its followers, Christianity comes out ahead overall.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    Christianity comes out ahead overall.

    Can you name a worse case of religious abuse than the Christian residential schools in Canada?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Kimble (4,443 comments) says:

    Can you name a worse case of religious abuse than the Christian residential schools in Canada?

    Have you SEEN some of those beards?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. kowtow (8,776 comments) says:

    ugly

    go on then.tell us about the evil white christian colonialist Canadians.

    I can’t wait.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. unaha-closp (1,180 comments) says:

    Can you name a worse case of religious abuse than the Christian residential schools in Canada?

    Makkah Intermediate No.31

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    Makkah Intermediate No.31
    Single incident, 15 girls dead, 40+ injured.
    Nature of injury: suffocation, smoke inhalation, burns?
    Malicious intent: probably not.

    Christian residential schools in Canada
    Multiple incidents spanning over 100 years, estimated 50000+ children dead.
    Nature of injury: disease, violence from teachers including rape and murder.
    Malicious intent: widespread.

    Also Saudi is Wahabist, not your typical Muslims.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Kimble (4,443 comments) says:

    Waaaaah! We can’t stop terrorism because we have to discuss things in a public space in a secular way!

    Atheism is to blame for religious terrorism? After centuries of religion dominating social discourse, it is now secularism that is causing religious terror?

    And you seriously think you, a non-muslim, would ever be able to dissuade an islamic terrorist from being an islamic terrorist if only you were free to show them the truth about their religion? Oh, it says killing people is bad?

    How about you go field test that theory in Egypt first?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Can you name a worse case of religious abuse than the Christian residential schools in Canada?

    UglyTruth, I do not need to in order to support my point. Globally there are more problem Muslims than Christians. I feel for the decent Muslims out there, but perhaps they should take a more active role in eliminating the radical elements.

    As an atheist I have a problem with religion generally and do not take sides due to any allegiance.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    UglyTruth, I do not need to in order to support my point.

    So we should just take your word for it?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    UglyTruth, no do not take my word for it. I assumed you had a reasonable grasp of current affairs and an adult reading level. My bad.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Obama winning the hearts and minds of the coloured folk:

    Washington’s drone war has turned Yemenis against the US and sparked “intense anger and hatred,” which Al-Qaeda has exploited for recruitment, according to witness testimony at the Senate’s first public hearing about the legality of drone strikes.

    http://rt.com/usa/us-drone-senate-yemen-306/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    You mean the current state of affairs where the simplest explanation is that the FBI recruited the one or both of the Tsaernev brothers and that Tamerlan was not killed as described by MSM accounts because he had been handcuffed and identified after the brothers surrendered to the police?

    Or do you mean the current state of affairs where actors were used to create a controlled presentation for the MSM?

    Or do you mean the current state of affairs where the state narrative places some blame on the internet while the CISPA legislation is being advanced?

    Or maybe you mean Glen Beck’s allegations that DHS lied about Ali Alarbi being taken into custody?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    UglyTruth, you really need to brush up on your reading skills if you think I buy into the usual msm narrative. Having said that, I do not buy into conspiracy theories without evidence.

    Regardless of all that, you are focusing on single events and not the bigger picture. All over the world Muslim extremists are causing problems in the name of their religion. From Thailand to Mali to Norway. It is a global problem and goes well beyond the West.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. Bob R (1,393 comments) says:

    Atheist science blogger Razib Khan has an interesting post on the talk of equivalence:

    “Recently Bill Maher ripped into CSU San Bernadino professor Brian Levin for making the ridiculous equivalence between Christian extremism and Islamic extremism. The problem, which Maher pinpoints, is that Islamic extremism is not that extreme. By this, I mean that Islamic extremism (e.g., Muslim Brotherhood) has much greater broad based support than Christian extremism (e.g., Christian Reconstruction). The difference here is that you’ve heard of the Muslim Brotherhood, while far fewer have heard of Christian Reconstructionists. That’s because the former have democratic support in a populous Muslim country as the ruling party.

    The standard liberal cant is to change the subject, and point to the past history of Christianity, or engage in unrepresentative comparisons. Since I know more history and religion than most of my interlocutors, I have little patience for this. Sophistry loses its power when the tactics are often so nakedly amateurish. And this is not simply abstraction. Let’s look at what’s been happening in Bangladesh, the country in which I was born, BANGLADESH’S ISLAMISTS CALL FOR DEATH OF ‘ATHEIST BLOGGERS’:

    The Islamist marchers listed 84 bloggers who they demand be arrested or hanged, In February an atheist blogger named Rajib was stabbed to death a month after blogger Asif Mohiuddin was nearly killed for his beliefs.

    First, Bangladesh is a moderate Muslim country. The ruling party is secular. It is not an Islamic state. Rather, in an old fashioned 1970s socialist manner it is officially the People’s Republic of Bangladesh. But in deference to the religiously conservative nature of the populace there is still some mixing of church & state, as we would understand it in the West. But Bangladesh, unlike Pakistan, has not opted for a monotone Islamic identity. The national anthem was written by a Hindu.

    So there you have it, in a moderate Muslim country you can have hundreds of thousands march for the death of individuals based on their religious disbelief…

    And yet I’m not worried in the United States. Why? The ultimate reasons are products of history (e.g., the longstanding Anglo commitment to freedom of conscience). But more proximately there is a broad American consensus that atheistic speech (and offensive speech more generally) should be protected, especially on the part of cultural elites. You an confirm this with the General Social Survey. …

    Addendum: Over the years I’ve mined the World Values Survey for a lot of data. Unlike some Left cultural relativists who play the equivalence game I actually like to deal with empirical distributions. To get a sense of range of opinion on something like stoning of adulterers, please see this post.

    * When I told a French friend that I’d done this he was terrified for me. He was convinced if I’d done this in Europe I’d be a dead man. Probably he was overly worried, but it illustrates the problem of having a critical mass of belligerent barbarians within the gates.

    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/04/why-atheists-can-speak-in-the-west/#.UXhAGr-24yE

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    Depressingly, Islam appears to be moving towards less tolerance and more fundamentalism. You see this in countries like Indonesia, which is the worlds biggest Muslim population. Most folk there are very moderate and view the US favourably. In recent years there have been increasing attacks and violence by radicals, along with demands for stricter Islamic laws. Many of those behind this change have been getting their ideas from the Middle East.

    One thing that is not helping this trend is the US attacking and occupying Muslim lands. For obvious reasons it is breeding more radicals and creating a them-and-us attitude. This is not the best approach to the problem in my view and has made the world a less safe place for all of us.

    Islam has become a rallying point for those who wish to oppose the perceived US & Western hegemony. It is often driven by those who seek political power rather than spiritual salvation. Religion has a history of being used for political ends.

    I think we know the solution and that solution is proven to work. The West overcame the threat of communism by leading with example. Trade and enterprise, mutual benefit, a higher standard of living, ended the cold war. If we can maintain as normal relations with Muslim people as possible, it will make us all safer. We will catch more flys with sugar than vinegar. This is not simplistic, it is proven to work.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    Regardless of all that, you are focusing on single events and not the bigger picture. All over the world Muslim extremists are causing problems in the name of their religion. From Thailand to Mali to Norway. It is a global problem and goes well beyond the West.

    Well, perhaps you wouldn’t be so ignorant of the bigger picture if you had looked at what Sibel Edmonds was saying like I she suggested.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. wat dabney (3,809 comments) says:

    That is not what Jesus said. He made it clear that the old laws apply. I note that the 10 commandments are in the old testament.

    This is pretty much what I have said previously.

    Yet all the fake Christians here declared that they can freely ignore the OT laws.

    Including keeping the Sabbath.

    They are not real Christians of course.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    wat dabney, Christians are happy to cherry pick the OT for the bits they agree with and dismiss the rest as, out of context/from another time/not to be taken literally etc.

    One thing you can say about fundamentalists of any religion is that at least they are honest. Fred Phelps of the WBC is honest and backs up his views with the clear words of the bible. Christians hate him for it :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    Sibel Edmonds began working for the FBI shortly after the Sept. 11 attacks, translating top-secret documents pertaining to suspected terrorists. She was fired in the spring of 2002 after reporting her concerns about sabotage, intimidation, corruption and incompetence to superiors. She first gained wide public attention in October of that year when she appeared on 60 Minutes on CBS and charged that the FBI, State Department, and Pentagon had been infiltrated by Turkish individuals suspected of ties to terrorism. On October 18, 2002, at the request of FBI Director Robert Mueller, Attorney General Ashcroft imposed a gag order on Ms. Edmonds, citing possible damage to diplomatic relations or national security. Edmonds is a key witness in a pending class-action suit filed by 9/11 families against the government.

    http://antiwar.com/news/interview.html

    Edmonds also advocates that people look at the bigger picture, but rather than spelling it out she tends to dump data so that people can connect the dots themselves. On the bigger picture, she commented that people should think about George Bush’s “fool me once” gaffe in the context of the blowback hypothesis.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. wat dabney (3,809 comments) says:

    Christians are happy to cherry pick the OT for the bits they agree with and dismiss the rest as, out of context/from another time/not to be taken literally etc.

    The vanity! The hubris!

    But the essential point is that, as you say, these fake Christians are in no way taking their morals from the Bible.

    We can safely ignore any Biblical objections that such people raise to issues such as gay marriage. If they can pick and choose then so can we.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    wat, the OT takes a pretty dim view of poofters and demands they be stoned to death. The cherry pickers select the condemnation part and reject the stoning. If they really followed gods perfect timeless word they would be out pelting homos with rocks night and day ! In countries with Sharia law, that is just what they do.

    The approach of Sharia law is simple and easy to understand. The only valid law is Gods law. So all laws should follow Gods law. It does not matter if it is buying a car, setting up business, getting married or weeding the garden. It all has to be done according to Gods law. They logically contend that man can not make law that contradicts a perfect God.

    Are they mad ? Yes.

    Are they honest ? Yes.

    Most of the Christians on KB get a -Yes- for the first question and a -No- for the second.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    If they can pick and choose then so can we.

    Are you implying moral equivalence with “fake Christians”?

    In theology “picking and choosing” falls within the domain of hermeneutics. Unless you have some knowledge of a rational basis of interpretation it is unlikely that your argument will be any better than that of the people you criticise.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. wat dabney (3,809 comments) says:

    Are you implying moral equivalence with “fake Christians”?

    No, I’m saying my morals are superior.

    I don’t selectively use religion to support my bigotry whilst at the same time ignoring everything in the creed which would inconvenience me personally.

    I’m saying there is no such thing as sin, only objective harm.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    I’m saying there is no such thing as sin, only objective harm.

    Then what were the original writers referring to when they wrote of sin?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    This morning on Winds of Jihad there is a headline about Al-Harbi visiting the White House several times. There are also pictures from his face book page including one of Michelle Obama..Who is he exactly and will the true story about him ever come out?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    “I’m saying there is no such thing as sin, only objective harm.

    Then what were the original writers referring to when they wrote of sin?”

    UglyTruth, what writers ? (I do hope you are not being a moron and using the bible as authority for the bible, because that would make you a great big wanker.)

    wats, statement stands on its own merit. What someone else said some place else does not matter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. wat dabney (3,809 comments) says:

    Then what were the original writers referring to when they wrote of sin?

    They were writing complete crap.

    The “sin” of mixing fibres in ones clothing?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. wat dabney (3,809 comments) says:

    True Christians unite against the abomination!

    http://godhatesmixedfibers.com/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    Yesterday , on Winds of Jihad there was lengthy article re the name Tamberlan. It is worth reading.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    We all know being a poofter is an abonimation unto the LORD, but so is eating a feed of mussels or Crayfish.

    Here are some other abonimations to look out for :)

    http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/list-of-abominations/question-1138309/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    @Joana,

    Strange that the article omits to mention the FBI’s role in his radicalization. Do you have any comment on this?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    We all know being a poofter is an abonimation unto the LORD, but so is eating a feed of mussels or Crayfish.

    You don’t think that eating shit is disgusting? Mussels are biological filters, crayfish will eat dead marine carcasses.

    1) a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable
    a) in ritual sense (of unclean food, idols, mixed marriages)
    b) in ethical sense (of wickedness etc)
    AV — abomination 113, abominable thing 2, abominable 2

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. wat dabney (3,809 comments) says:

    Ugly,

    That has to be the weakest theological argument ever.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    no sorry I have no idea..I gather you have as strong point of view.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    1) a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable
    a) in ritual sense (of unclean food, idols, mixed marriages)
    b) in ethical sense (of wickedness etc)
    AV — abomination 113, abominable thing 2, abominable 2

    UglyTruth, tell us more about the abomination of “mixed marriages” ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    Joana, Tamerlan’s mother said that he had been involved with the FBI for the previous three two five years. Sibel Edmonds, who previously worked for the the FBI, said that the nature of Tamerlan’s interaction with the agents was typical of the FBI
    s treatment of recruits. The FBI has a history of working with potential terrorists in order to develop a controlled terrorism scenario. The Boston bombing has many of the hallmarks of a false flag event, and the MSM accounts of the brothers activities are inconsistent and improbable.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    Kea, mixed marriages in the original sense where most probably marriages involving Hebrews and Canaanites, who had a family curse originating with Canaan, the grandson of Noah.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    UglyTruth, thanks for the guess work on what the bible “probably” said. But lets stick to what it does say shall we.

    Why are mixed marriages an abomination unto the LORD ?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    You have a bad habit of talking shit about people, Kea.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. Kea (13,359 comments) says:

    UglyTruth, I am flattered by all the attention, but back to the topic at hand…

    Why does the bible oppose mixed marriages ?

    UglyTruth (626) Says:
    April 25th, 2013 at 10:47 am
    We all know being a poofter is an abonimation unto the LORD, but so is eating a feed of mussels or Crayfish.

    You don’t think that eating shit is disgusting? Mussels are biological filters, crayfish will eat dead marine carcasses.

    1) a disgusting thing, abomination, abominable
    a) in ritual sense (of unclean food, idols, mixed marriages)
    b) in ethical sense (of wickedness etc)
    AV — abomination 113, abominable thing 2, abominable 2

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    Recognized Rules For Gatekeepers

    Rule 1 – Avoid mentioning the piece of evidence, or possibility, which you are trying to keep from ever entering people’s minds

    http://911u.org/CoDR/gatekeeping101.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    Tamerlan Tsarnaev attended a workshop sponsored by the CIA-linked Jamestown Foundation, Izvestia reports today. The Russian newspaper cites documents produced by the Counterintelligence Department Ministry of Internal Affairs of Georgia confirming that the NGO “Fund of Caucasus” held workshops in the summer of 2012 and Tsarnaev attended.

    The Caucasus Fund was established in November, 2008, following the Geoergian-Ossetian conflict. The main purpose of the organization, according to Izvestia, is to “to recruit young people and intellectuals of the North Caucasus to enhance instability and extremism in the southern regions of Russia.”

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/tamerlan-tsarnaev-attended-cia-sponsored-workshop.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. UglyTruth (4,552 comments) says:

    As with any likely false-flag scenario, one must ask Cui Bono? ~ who benefits?

    The American people certainly did not benefit, nor did the Muslim world of which Tsarnaev identified. Attacking a sporting event attended by innocent men, women and children from around the world makes no strategic sense unless the perpetrators intended to entice retaliation. It stands to reason then, that those perpetrators would have to pose as their enemy to bring about a charged response against that enemy.

    So who stands to benefit from such an operation?

    From Haaretz:

    Ron Dermer, a diplomatic advisor consultant to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and candidate for the post of Israeli ambassador to Washington, told a closed meeting of U.S. Jewish leaders in New York last week that the Boston marathon bombings would increase American support for Israel – just as that support increased following the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

    So is the FBI lying or intentionally withholding information about multiple contacts with Tsarnaev? Maybe not. That’s not to say that Tsarnaev’s mother is lying either. But if the FBI didn’t control Tsarnaev’s “every step,” as his mother claims, then who did?

    We’ve now come full circle. We know that Israel is the one entity that stands to benefit from the attacks in Boston. But is it in their character to pose as U.S. intelligence of law enforcement assets in order to manipulate patsies into performing actions that serve their interests? Oh yeah! After all, the motto of their intelligence service is “By Way Of Deception, Thou Shalt Do War.

    Buried deep in the archives of America’s intelligence services are a series of memos, written during the last years of President George W. Bush’s administration, that describe how Israeli Mossad officers recruited operatives belonging to the terrorist group Jundallah by passing themselves off as American agents. According to two U.S. intelligence officials, the Israelis, flush with American dollars and toting U.S. passports, posed as CIA officers in recruiting Jundallah operatives — what is commonly referred to as a “false flag” operation.

    The memos, as described by the sources, one of whom has read them and another who is intimately familiar with the case, investigated and debunked reports from 2007 and 2008 accusing the CIA, at the direction of the White House, of covertly supporting Jundallah — a Pakistan-based Sunni extremist organization. Jundallah, according to the U.S. government and published reports, is responsible for assassinating Iranian government officials and killing Iranian women and children.

    But while the memos show that the United States had barred even the most incidental contact with Jundallah, according to both intelligence officers, the same was not true for Israel’s Mossad. The memos also detail CIA field reports saying that Israel’s recruiting activities occurred under the nose of U.S. intelligence officers, most notably in London, the capital of one of Israel’s ostensible allies, where Mossad officers posing as CIA operatives met with Jundallah officials.

    The officials did not know whether the Israeli program to recruit and use Jundallah is ongoing. Nevertheless, they were stunned by the brazenness of the Mossad’s efforts.

    “It’s amazing what the Israelis thought they could get away with,” the intelligence officer said. “Their recruitment activities were nearly in the open. They apparently didn’t give a damn what we thought.”

    http://revoltoftheplebs.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/by-deception-thou-shalt-do-boston/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote