The Strange Case of Dr. Mohammad Haneef

WHY DON'T YOU JUST F*#@$% OFF YOU [EDITED - CARTOON EXPLETIVES]

Is this article ideological-jihad?

Chandra is highly sceptical of an Australian government that is trying to combat terrorism, but shows no scepticism of Dr. Haneef who gave his SIM chip card to a terrorist.

Why is that?


Western governments are under siege from global muslim terrorism and Chandra campaigns against their efforts to combat it.

Who's side are you on Chandra?

I am disgusted with the case and the two ignorant people who chose to comment.

The young doctor was just going home to see his baby.

Haneef gave his SIM card to a terrorist.

Can you PROVE that Haneef did not knowingly support terrorism?

Maybe you can explain what you think is so disgusting about the Australian government trying to protect us from terrorism?

Arab Propaganda

The Aussie Govt donot have evidence that Haneef supported terroism. They specifically said 'not intentionally'. Let them come up with evidence that he participated in act intentionally and we can all stone him, shoot him or hang him. In fact, that is what the Ahmed brothers deserve. To be hung by their b*** for trying to kill innocent fathers and mothers and for besmirching the name of our country. I think it is time for the Ahmed brothers parents to apologise for the vile act of their children.

rgds

Here is an update

(((((((((New Delhi: A Brisbane court has granted bail to Indian doctor Mohammed Haneef, charged in connection with last month's failed car bomb attacks in Britain.

However, hours later the government invoked immigration laws to keep him behind bars.

Immigration Minister Kevin Andrews told reporters in Canberra that he had cancelled Mohamed Haneef's working visa on suspicion he had links to terrorists.

Haneef would be taken into immigration custody soon, Andrews said.

Haneef's bail application had been rejected on Saturday by a Brisbane court, only to be reconvened on Monday morning 1030 hrs local time.

Haneef was charged with recklessly providing resources - amounting to a mobile phone SIM card - and supporting terrorism. However, the magistrate felt that the charges were not very serious and granted him bail, saying it was an exceptional circumstance.)))))))))))


The fact that the court was willing to give him a bail indicates the seriousness of the charges. Now they wish to torture him by cancelling his visa. Amazing!!!!

Chandra:
Don't you think Australia has a right to prosecute individuals who are transiting or living in that country based on their own laws?

In my opinion India should protest when such gross violations happen to Indians because they happen to be Indians (being Indian is their only crime) and not get involved in every criminal or civil case that an Indian gets involved.

What would you do if an Indian is going to get flogged in an Arab country because he committed a crime there and he is being treated according to the law of the land?

This whole business of 'making special case for our citizens' doesn't go well if you want your citizens to keep traveling wherever they want to.

If Australia does indeed subject Indians to harassment without a legal course, I think India should warn its citizens not to visit that country.

And if they visit in spite of that warning, they are on their own.

A consistent policy would help, instead of such ad hoc ism.

Thanks

What is the relevance of consolidation of muslim vote and the counter weight to that, as indicated in your writing?

Chandra - The Australian government is investigating Haneef because he gave a SIM card to a terrorist.

The Au government need more time to investigate so they have legally invoked an immigration law.


Do you think there is any other motivation behind the Au governments (completely legal) actions other than to protect us from terrorism?


You're outraged by the Ahmed brothers, but then you're outraged when the Au government try and combat terrorism. Seems hypocritical.

Sujai

I dont know about Aussie rights. Frankly I dont care. What i am concerned is that an Indian is being incarcerated for no reason. The Australian Civil Liberties Union has just today condemned the latest move by the Australian Govt. If they prove he is a terrorist, nobody is a fool to come and criticise the Aussie Govt. Atleast I will not

Itinerant

Relevance for the UPA Govt- They seem to be sleeping not realising the potential vote loss if they donot act. The same way NDA got whacked over Kandahar.

Arab Propaganda

No Hypocrisy at all. I am consistent, punish those who are guilty, free those who are not. Spending time in prison can be the most devastating experience in your life (even worse than the loss of a close one).

The Aussie Govt spent 2 weeks trying to investigate all possible angles and found nothing. The British have not uttered a single word so far about Dr Haneef, the judge has already given Dr Haneef bail. I am not sure what else do you want in terms of evidence. How many days is enough? 3-weeks, 4-weeks, 5-weeks? is there a time frame.
As I mentioned in my post, the real reason they are charging him for 'recklessness' is because they realise a. they have goofed up on him and b. John Howard has an election in a few months time. Lastly, I wonder how he would have been treated if he was a Chinese.

Chandra - excellent points. The Australian police have consistently bungled this thing up - let's not forget the other doctor who was detained and then let go, but not before they released his name and other details. This is Howard trying to make himself and his administration look important. I guess the Aborgines issue wasn't giving him enough of a push.

Sujai - the Australians have every right to prosecute whoever they wish for whatever crime they feel might have been committed except that the "crime" was apparently committed in Britain and the British don't want Haneef do they? And, if I'm not mistaken, Haneef was held this long under the Australian version of the Patriot Act. So basically they're trying to penalise him for something his cousin did in another country via an extraordinary (in the literal sense) set of rules. The Indian govt really ought to speak up.

I think the Australian govt. is simply buying time. The court in Brisbane granted bail but the Australian foreign ministry cancelled his visa to keep him in detention. The intention is very clear - to keep him in custody somehow until the Australian police can make a case, charge him under a law and take him to trial. We should wait for some more time.

Maybe you are correct that they've goofed up and made a terror suspect out of thin air.

You said:

The second aspect that I am bothered about is the absence of any reaction by the Indian Government to these new charges.

Slightly incorrect :)

Read this report: http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=89598

I quote:

India has conveyed its concern to Australia over the issue of Mohammad Haneef, who has been held in connection with failed UK terror plot and asked Canberra to treat him "fairly and justly" under Australian law.

India's concern was conveyed by Ministry of External Affairs to the Australian High Commission.

Chandra

"No Hypocrisy at all. I am consistent, punish those who are guilty, free those who are not."

-My hypocrisy charge was related to your one sided outrage. You side stepped my charge.


"As I mentioned in my post, the real reason they are charging him for 'recklessness' is because they realise a. they have goofed up on him"

-How have they goofed up on Haneef? ...and if they have goofed, then whats their rational for charging him for 'recklessness'?

Atlantean

The Aussie Govt is buying time trying to win points for the next election. This incident and all the news leaks that follow stinks of the 'Woolmer' affair. Today a new leak appears in the Australian suggesting extensive contact with the two terrorists even a day before the bombing. My question is- why didn't they use that evidence to deny bail in a court of law?

Here is a quote from a politician

"Meanwhile, a former Liberal politician says the Government's decision to revoke the visa of Haneef will be politically popular.

Former New South Wales attorney-general John Dowd, who is now with the International Committee of Jurists, says the decision will appeal to sections of the public.

"This is a vote-winner for the Government," he said.

"There's no doubt that the people, a lot of the people out there - they say 'yes, well he ought to be kept away', and how the Government's got to protect us and so on - this is politically astute."

Here we are......

Anyway, we should protest, that is the most decent thing to do. They have asked for more time, they have got it. Let us now wait and see if they find anything against him now.

Indian Govt: Yes, that media release came after i finished writing this (Sunday morning :-). In any case they are not being as bold as they should, let us wait and watch.

Here is an update for today, finally stronger action from the Govt

"The Indian foreign ministry on Tuesday summoned the Australian High Commissioner over the treatment of Indian terror suspect Mohammed Haneef.

New Delhi clarified that it was against terrorism but expressed concern at the cancellation of the suspect's work visa.

The cancellation allowed Australian authorities to keep him in detention shortly after a court in Brisbane gave him bail"

More Updates

Details, contained in documents the government used to back a decision to revoke his visa on character grounds, include that Dr Haneef chatted online with one of the British suspects about his daughter's birth three days before the failed plot, and accepted a loan from another so he could afford to sit a medical exam in England two years ago.


The defense lawyers said they released the documents, which were provided to them by government officials, because they were in the public interest and backed their claim that the case against their client Mohamed Haneef was extremely weak.

The documents also allege that Haneef sought to leave Australia on July 2 after speaking to his father-in-law in India. They say Haneef's father-in-law bought the one-way ticket that he was intending to use on the day of his arrest in Australia.

Haneef says he was rushing home to be with his wife and newborn daughter, who was having health troubles.

Interview with Dr Haneef leaks to an Australian newspaper

Here is the entire interview transcript - someone might want to do an article analyzing it

Great news!!! Dr Haneef is released!!!!

Great news .....really?....why?

Its not over yet...we've rushed too quickly to cheer it would appear

Haneef may have had prior knowledge...

http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=90261

Thanks for that information Bystander. And instead of starting a fresh interrogation Indian government is hastily rushing to play the vote-bank card by offering him a Government job.

Scion very true.And we have authors on this site wildly cheering him.Must be a paid hack.

why do you think so many people on this site are so keen for dr haneef to be innocent?

why do they want that so much?


why would anyone want dr haneef to be innocent or guilty? surely the only thing that matters is what the result of the investigation is? why would anyone be vested in a particular outcome for this case? seems strange...

#19 Bystander

This new evidence is so damning, yet he has been released...weird!!! I think we should look at the context and the complete chat, not just some selective leakages

rgds

Tacit admission that he did indeed chat.....and use those very words.....slimy bastard....didn't mention it in any of his press meetings.

It's not a full chat, says Haneef(full chat my ass)
http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=90329

if the chat transcript is accurate then it doesn't seem like there's much doubt that haneef is guilty.

i'm dissappointed at the australian government for failing to keep haneef behind bars.

why isn't the autralian government doing more to protect innocent women and children from terrorism?


where have all those posters gone who were attacking the australian government and defending haneef?

where have those people dissappeared to? why have they gone so quiet on this issue?


I guess this issue is no longer of interest to them because it doesn't provide them with an opportunity to bash western governments.


terrorists and australia government bashers are allies because they have the same enemy.

taking the side of terrorists against your own government is a pretty vile position to take.

"where have all those posters gone who were attacking the australian government and defending haneef?"

In nutshell.

Most of those who protested on behalf of Haneef only did so because it presented them with an opportunity to bash a Western government.

America/Aus. bashers will gladly side with terrorists if it gives them the chance to attack a western government.

Bystander, MAPAD, SS

You are not carrying out a sane analysis, just picking up tit-bits from Times of India and Indian Express I guess. The sense I am getting is that you hate muslims and you are particularly thrilled that Haneef, a muslim is being blamed for terrorism.

Anyway, now let me trash all your comments swiftly

a. Bystander

Chat evidence. In the face of it, looks quite damning. I will repeat my question to you. Why did they drop the charges if they had such damning evidence? Why blame him for handing over SIM card when you have a chat that has more damning evidence?

Second: Issue of Al Qaeda Linkage: Please read press release by Bangalore Police. They say they have no evidence one way or the other.

Essentially, you judge this issue on the basis of the fact that he is a muslim and I am sure it delights you to see muslims in trouble.


MAPAD

Chat Transcript: Let us wait for the entire chat transcript before jumping to conclusions. Donot forget that everybody waited 2 weeks for the Govt to charge Haneef before even questioning their motive. So your point about Australian Govt is invalid. Donot forget that there is nobody out here defending the nut-case Ahmed brothers who are also Indian.

Secondly, If indeed the Chat transcript is so damning, why did they not charge him and keep him in jail. Why did they charge him only for transferring the SIM card. Sounds counter-intuitive!

from your posting it is clear that you are driven primarily by hatred of muslims. In other words you are in capable of conducting a sane debate.

rgds

Chandra - No I don't hate muslims, partly because I believe they are victims of islam. No one would choose to be a muslim. Islam means submission. To be a muslim is to be a slave. I do not hate slaves, I want to help free them.

I do however have complete contempt and hostility toward islam. it is a vile, oppressive ideology that must be defeated, just as nazism had to be defeated.

All totalitarian ideologies must be defeated for the good of mankind.

according to islamic texts, mohammed was a peodophile and a murderer. he was a vile violent man.

Islam is highly offensive to me because i hold liberal values.


Have you read the koran? Just let me know if you'd like me to post some quotes for you. I'd be happy to do so.



I don't understand your point about 2 weeks and the chat transcript, but as for your point about nobody defending the ahmed brothers. There's a reason for that.

America haters know that defending the ahmed brothers is completely indefensible so they avoid it.

However, Haneef's case is ambigious and unclear so it is the perfect cover for an america hater to use haneef's case as an opportunity to attack western governments.

Haneef's case is nothing more than a convenient
platform for the american hating agenda, hence the huge interest from certain parties in his case.

i don't claim to know the intricasies of how the australian government should be handling haneefs case. what i do know is that once the transscript excerpt was made public the America Haters seemed to lose interest in the topic. make of that what you will.

my point from the beginning is that the Aus. Gov. owe it to us to be very thorough in their investigation because of the serious threat terrorism is posing to our society.

i think you should accept that if you a muslim then you are going to come under closer scrutiny. if you don't like it, then leave islam.

nothing shocking about this.

nazism is illegal in most european countries. we discriminate against sex offenders by putting them on a register and barring them from certain jobs. we deny certain jobs to people with criminal records. we place immigration restrictions on people with certain convictions.

democratic society takes measures to protect itself all the time. muslims are a threat and should be handled accordingly.

i would love to see you argue that muslims are not a threat to democratic society. i think you know that they are, you just don't believe in liberalism enough to confront them.


islam is a very serious threat to democracy and liberalism, if we do not go on the offensive we will go the same way as germany did under hitler.

if you cannot see that chandra then i feel sorry for you.

i know you would love to believe that i hate muslims because it would give you the perfect excuse to neutralize my POV.

i didn't hate russians, but i abhored communism.

i don't hate muslims, but i abhor islam.

i abhor islam because its affront to every liberal value i hold.


i want islam obliterated, just like i want child abuse and rape and sexism and violence and inequality obliterated.


i totally understand you find it uncomfortable to be confronted with the reality that 1.2 billion people are card carrying members of a totalitarian ideology that seeks to subjugate the planet.

don't worry chandra, they will subjugate you too.

islam has already conquered 50 countries, what makes you think they'll stop at 50?

muslims fight every battlefront to pursue their goal to islamize the planet. ideological, social, political, military, terrorist, etc.

all muslims contribute to jihad. every muslims is a vote for islam.

look inside the average islamic country if you want to see the living hell that islam has in store for you and the people you love.


when are you going to wake up chandra?

MAPAD

Thank you for summarising your hatred for muslims. Let us move on with some of your other points....

a. Firstly, you are yet to dispute points raised by me. Let me repeat those questions again.

IF INDEED THE AUSSIES HAD CLINCHING EVIDENCE- LIKE THE CHAT, WHY DID THEY NOT CHARGE HIM WITH THAT? WHY DID THEY CHARGE HIM ONLY WITH THE SIM CARD OFFENCE AND LATER, DROPPED THAT TOO. WHY?????

b. MAPAD: I don't understand your point about 2 weeks and the chat transcript

Chandra: My point about two weeks is that nobody protested even once during the first 2 weeks of arrest because they trusted the Aussie Govt. After the 2 weeks were over, the best the Aussie Govt cam up with was the SIM card linkage. The chat information that is being flotated around now was available even during that period. Yet, they did not charge him using the chat evidence. Why?

c. MAPAD: America haters know that defending the ahmed brothers is completely indefensible so they avoid it.

Chandra: Forget Americans, have you heard one negative comment from the Brit agencies about Haneef?

d. MAPAD: However, Haneef's case is ambigious and unclear

Chandra: So what are you debating?

MAPAD: i don't claim to know the intricasies of how the australian government should be handling haneefs case

Chandra: So what are you debating?

Where are you from? Are you an Indian or Australian?

rgds

Chandra - there's another bit of info that some of the google-challenged around here don't seem to have to come across: namely, Kevin Andrews released this chat thing as the "more evidence", the "secret information" he had but couldn't give out when making up his mind about haneef's visa.... EXCEPT, this "secret information" was made available in court when Haneef was charged. the so-called "more evidence" has actually been a part of the public record for weeks now.

Chandra - where exactly did I summarize my hatred of muslims?

it doesn't surprise me you decieve yourself into believing that i hate muslims. it is a very understandable tactic on your part.

it shook me to my liberal core when i realized what islam was really about. it was a very unplesant experience that turned my world upside down so i completely understand why you would try and marginalize my voice so you can stay in denial.

as for your points;

a) there is no point for me to dispute. you are asking questions. i don't know the answers to your questions because unlike many of the disingenous posters on this board i do not claim to be an expert on the investigative protocols of the australian government in general, and the haneef case in particular.

i have never said that haneef is guilty. i am merely expressing my distaste for how america bashers (and by america bashers, i mean people who hate western governments) are simply using haneef's` case as an opportunity to advance their campaign of hatred against america.

the america haters are not interested in the real challenges this case presents which include 'how do we deal with the threat to our society that islamic terrorism presents?'

b) again, valid questions on your part, but again, i don't have the answers. it would be disingenous of me to say i know more about the specifics of the case. i am not involved in the investigation.

many american haters were convinced of his innocence (both legally and morally) and that the australian government had had goofed, bungled and generally been incompetent and dishonest.

its hard to see how any of the posters on this board could know enough about the case to make those assertions.

you can only deduce that they choose to believe those things because it allows them to do the one thing they love to do best which is bash america.


c) what does this prove?


d) i don't know whether haneef is guilty or not. that is more than anyone on this board could claim to know.

i'm debating that america haters are using haneef's case to indulge in their favorite passtime which is to bash america.

it seems to me that once the transcript was released it became harder to argue haneef innocence and therefore his case no longer provided cover for their agenda to bash the US.


I'm an american. i'm proud of american values. i defend american values because i believe they are worth fighting for.

i believe in liberty, freedom and the pursuit of happiness.

i believe in equality, freedom of speech and democracy.

that is who i am. if i see those values under threat i am going to use my freedom of speech to defend them.

its amazing how offended people get when you stand up for liberal values.

i refuse to be ashamed for being a liberal.

mapad:

if you believe you are a liberal...(core or no core)...then i might have news for you

;)

temporal - yes i am liberal to the core. share the news!

MAPAD...

Tell me something, what is your religion? Or are you an atheist?

rgds

Amrita

This is precisely my argument.
When I first wrote this, I was a little concerned. More so because I am based out of the UK. But the more you read the case and the daily news bytes, the more it appears that the police have or built a poor case. Inherently, leaving a day after bombing, one way ticket etc appear to be good reasons for an arrest. No wonder nobody said anything for two weeks. Anyway, if he is a terrorist, we should not send him to Australia, they interrogate their suspects too nicely. We should hand him over to Dilli Police.....

Chandra - religions are nothing more than a set of chosen beliefs, therefore everyone has a religion.

my religion is human rights.

i demand special consideration for my beliefs just like all other religious people.

I expect special reverence to be paid to my faith.

Hopefully the Liberal in you will hold a special respect for my dearly held and sacred worldview.

Thank you.

C'mon guys. This debate is totally un-necessary. Haneef was a terror suspect. Australian govt thought it better to nab him and question him rather than let him loose and let innocents die. Australian police investigated him, found no evidence and freed him. This is pretty straight forward; why some people here are crying fowl?
What if Haneef was a real terrorist and had killed hundreds of innocents? Terrorism is such an evil thing that we should support Au govt (or for that matter any govt) even if they investigate anybody without any solid evidence.

MAPAD

Clearly, your human rights and liberalism does not apply to muslims. (Hatred)

Secondly, you have been talking about a case you knowing nothing about. (Ignorance)

Hatred+ignorance is a deadly combination my friend.

rgds

Chandra - Unfortunately for you, merely saying something does not make it true. I have explained at length why I do not hate muslims.

If you want to say that i hate muslims then you have to offer arguments that support your statement. you haven't done that.

clearly not a big believer in freedom of speech and open debate are you?


The reason you so desperately want it to be true that i hate muslims is so you can justify to yourself dismissing what i'm saying about islam.

i completely understand that is it difficult for you to accept the reality that 1.2 billion people subscribe to an ideaology that is totalitarian, expansionist, supremist and in many ways akin to nazism.


i notice that you are not able to refute any of my assertions about the threat of islam, so you use my supposed hatred as a strategic tool to keep yourself in denial.

truth hurts chandra.

its people like you that made the holocaust possible.



i wasn't discussing the case chandra, i was discussing peoples reaction to it and how people were using the case to advance their agenda. if you want to say i'm ignorant then just go ahead and prove it.

you have to support your statements with reasoned argument if you want them to be taken seriously.


again, my opinions don't fit into your prescribed worldview so you stratgically declare me as ignorant.

nice tactic chandra. very effective way of keeping your head in the sand.


your post didn't engage any of my arguments, and yet i'm the one who's ignorant?

sounds like your suffering from doublespeak.

your behavior is the kind that george orwell warned us about.


you love to shut down debate when it doesn't support your worldview don't you?


there's something totalitarian and intolerant about that, don't you think?

BREAKING NEWS:
Haneef had links with radicals: Report

http://www.rediff.com/news/2007/aug/02glasgow.htm

chandra:

regardless of his/her/their confessionary statements about ideals and beliefs...you are onto something here:

Hatred+ignorance is a deadly combination my friend.

MAPAD

Your statements about Islam and muslims ARE no different from what Hitler said about jews. Look at some operative words that you use.

a. To be a muslim is to be a slave (Highly provocative)

b. I do however have complete contempt and hostility toward islam. it is a vile, oppressive ideology that must be defeated

c. according to islamic texts, mohammed was a peodophile and a murderer. he was a vile violent man.


You say you are an American and a liberal? I am quite surpised. Do a small test- Just run through the entire set of comments by me and everybody else(People on both sides of the debate). Check how many people have used words like those you have used. It is people like you with low tolerance who have tendency to blame others for everthing. It is people like you who are responsible for so much bloodshed in history- The Nazis thought that there was a problem with Jews, the Arabs thought there was a problem with the christians and so on.
You assume you are conducting sane debate but you are not. Simple Test- Run through this entire post and news.google for Haneef+American. The only person linking the Haneef case to hatre for United states is YOU. In other words you are extremely paranoid. God bless you. We Indians are fighting this case because he is an Indian and the evidence as of now shows he is not guilty. That simple.

cheers

Reddy Garu,

That news was published in Aussie newspapers on Wednesday night- India time. Not breaking anymore

rgds

Chandra - the arguments you advance are making this very easy for me.

a) Yes, the statement 'muslims are slaves' maybe highly provocative, but what does this have to do with whether its true or not?

Are we not allowed to speak the truth just because some people find it provocative?

Anyone saying 'jews deserve equal rights' in late 30's germany would have been considered provocative.

would you have had a problem with that statement too?


There was a time when speaking out for civil rights, womens rights and gay rights would have been considered provocative.

Would you have had a problem with that?


Your lack of conviction in freedom of speech and my right to reveal uncomfortable truths seem to be suspiciously right wing.

Do you not think that truth is sometimes a difficult pill to swallow?


Oh, by the way, when did hitler ever say that the jews were slaves? (in the context that they needed liberating from oppression) please try and find me a quote if you can.

your argument that because i denounce totalitarianism then i am just like hitler is an interesting one.

maybe you also think i am just like I am just like a KKK member because i denounce racism?


if i had said in 1850 'to be a black is to be a slave' would i have been wrong to highlight that injustice?

would you have condemned me for being provocative? or should i have kept quiet and turned the other way?

why do you not want me to rock the boat chandra? why do you not want me to challenge the status quo?

where would be the morality in that? where would the courage be in that? where would the liberalism be in that?

again, your attachment to the status quo seems suspiciously conservative and right wing.


if the liberals of the 20th century had listened to you chandra then we would not have defeated racism, homophobia and mysogyny.

if martin luther king had listened to you he would have cancelled the civil rights movement so he could avoid being called 'provocative'.

it's a good job Gandhi didn't allow accusations of being 'provocative' deter him for being a force for peaceful resistance.

way to go chandra! ;)


as a liberal, why do you not find it offensive that muslims live under the tyranny of a celestial dictator who requires them to beg on their knees 5 times a day?

as a liberal, why do you not find it offensive that muslims live under a celestial dictator who wields the threat of eternal hell and torture if they do not comply with his wishes?

as a liberal, why do you not find it offensive that muslims live under celestial dictator who condemns to DEATH anyone who chooses to no longer be a muslim?

no, apparently none of this is offensive or provocative to you.

yet, you find it offensive and provocative that i complain about this awful inhumane oppression.

you find it offensive and provocative that i believe muslims deserve to live lives free of fear, oppression and retribution.

you find it offensive and provocative that i condemn the slave like conditions that muslims have to endure.

what does that say about your liberalism?

your stance seems suspiciously anti-human rights and suspiciously right wing.


b) yes, i hold oppressive totalitarian ideologies in utter contempt. this includes nazism, communism and islam.

am i wrong to be hostile to ideologies that turn people into slaves?

please explain to me why, as a liberal, i should not be hostile to totalitarianism.


c) the koran and the hadiths document these truths about mohammed, so not much of an argument to be had here. unless you are saying the koran is not to believed, in which case, we completely agree.

mohammed had sex with a 9 year old girl, aisha. mohammed murdered hundreds of jews from the Banu-N-Nadir tribe after they had surrendered.

consult google if you don't believe me.


another thing i'm sure you'll readily agree with, is that mohammed was a pyschopathic liar.

the koran is a crude and obvious hoax. the claim that mohammed received divine word from god is a ridiculous to say the least. if you believe that they you may as well believe in the tooth fairy too.

as goebbels said 'a big lie is more likely to be believed than a small lie'.


have you read the koran?

have you read mohammeds lies that god told him that muslims must 'slay [jews and christians] whereever you find them' and 'cast terror into the hearts of the unbelievers'.

mohammed was evil, the koran is fraudalent and evil, just as mein kampf was evil.

is it OK with you if i use the word 'evil' to describe things that are evil? ...or are you going to accuse me of being provocative?

or maybe you think i shouldn't describe mein kampf (a book that endorses the holocaust) as 'evil'?

maybe you might find that a bit provocative?

maybe you don't think the holocaust was provocative, only the condemnation of it?


it's amazing to me that when i denounce something that is evil, you find my denouncation provocative, but not the actual evil i'm denouncing.

some liberal you are chandra!


as for your so-called 'tests'.

so because i am the only one using words such as 'evil' 'vile' and 'contemptible' (when i'm denouncing totalitarianism) i must be wrong?

even by your standards, thats a weak argument.



your attempt to equate my denouncation of totalitarianism with 'nazi's having a problem with jews' is just plain daft.

so according to you, liberals who try to defeat oppressive totalitarian ideologies are just like people who support those ideologies?

a bizarre claim to say the least!


you maybe right, i maybe be the only one linking the haneef case to anti-westernism, but by that logic, you would have said that gallileo was wrong too.


you don't seem to be able to refute any of my statements, so you resort to trying to neutralize me by claiming that i'm 'paranoid' 'highly provocative' and 'not using the words that others are using'.

unfortunately for you, none of your claims prove that my statements are wrong.



islam is a totalitarian ideology that reduces muslims to slaves because they are condemned to death should they wish to exercise freewill and leave their captor.

...therefore liberals should vociferously condemn islam and strive to defeat it.


do you agree with this statement chandra?



i eagerly await your response. :)

MAPAD

Please believe whatever you want. As far as I am concerned, people like you are a threat to a harmonious society. Your arguments are exactly the same as used by Hitler way back in the 30s. In his case he was blaming Jews and in your case you blame Islam. It appears your knowledge of other religions is abysmally low. Tell me one religion on the planet that is not responsible today for violence and death? None. If you are so concerned about religions being responsible for all thats wrong with this world, please treat all religions equally- All religions are bad. But I am sure you will not do that. You probably consider whatever is your religion is superior all the others. Else, you would have been consistently attacking all religions. You are thoroughly inconsistent and therefore showing your prejudices. If you have a God I am sure even God cannot help you.

MAPAD: Oh, by the way, when did hitler ever say that the jews were slaves? (in the context that they needed liberating from oppression) please try and find me a quote if you can.

Chandra: Between 1933-1936. Please search TIME archive for precise comment. I am sure many comments about Jews will mirror your comments about Islam :-)

MAPAD: again, your attachment to the status quo seems suspiciously conservative and right wing

Chandra: Uncle, I am not obssessed with right wing, left wing etc. You are the one who is repeatedly talking about you being liberal and yet you violate liberalism's fundamental tenant- Tolerance.

MAPAD: as a liberal, why do you not find it offensive that muslims live under celestial dictator who condemns to DEATH anyone who chooses to no longer be a muslim?

Chandra: huh!!!! Kuchh bhi....daru waru pee-ke type karthe ho kya???

MAPAD: you find it offensive and provocative that i believe muslims deserve to live lives free of fear, oppression and retribution.

Chandra: Uncle, there are 160 M muslims in my country. I sure a miniscule of them live in fear/opp and retribution. On the other hand, in some regions in my country, people from my religion have screwed the muslims in every possible way. Why dont you have a similar opinion about Hinduism and Christianity?

MAPAD: you maybe right, i maybe be the only one linking the haneef case to anti-westernism, but by that logic, you would have said that gallileo was wrong too

Chandra: Gallileo? Kaun sa daroo pee ke type karthe ho bhaiya????

MAPAD: islam is a totalitarian ideology that reduces muslims to slaves because they are condemned to death should they wish to exercise freewill and leave their captor

Chandra: I dont think muslims are slaves. I dont think hindus are slaves nor do I think christians are slaves. However, there are enough jerks in each religion who use your kind of logic to kill people of other religion.

God bless your twisted mind. I pray for your swift recovery....

rgds

CHANDRA: As far as I am concerned, people like you are a threat to a harmonious society.

MAPAD: according to your logic, rape victims who complain about rape are a threat to harmonious society too.

are you honestly saying that you see my response to totalitarianism as the problem, and not the totalitarianism itself?

unbelieveable!

You are indulging in what they call 'blame the victim'.

totalitarianism tries to take away my freedom, and when i complain ,i am the one causing the problem.

your claim that i am a 'threat to harmony' and being 'highly provocative' is an attack on my right to defend myself.

you seek to deny me my right to resist totalitarianism.

This is total fascism on your part.




CHANDRA: Your arguments are exactly the same as used by Hitler way back in the 30s.

MAPAD: How exactly are my arguments the same as hitlers?

Did hitler state that the judiasm was totalitarianism and should be eradicated because it was an oppresive ideology that enslaved jews?

i went to the Time archives and found nothing to this effect. please show me where to find the quotes!




CHANDRA: Tell me one religion on the planet that is not responsible today for violence and death?

MAPAD: religion has caused more death and destruction than anything in the history of humanity. obviously mankind would be much better off without religion. i'm glad we can agree on that.




CHANDRA: ...you violate liberalism's fundamental tenant- Tolerance.

MAPAD: Sorry to break it to you Chandra, but Liberalism does not mean tolerating totalitarism, cruelty, violence, rape, sexism, murder, child abuse or anything else that contradicts liberal values.

If you tolerate anything and everything it means that you have no values.

if you tolerate cannibalism, murder, infanticide, slaughter, rape, genocide and child abuse its means that you are 'ammoral'.

Liberalism is about promoting and defending Liberal values such as equality and freedom, not tolerating ideologies that seek to destroy it.




CHANDRA: huh!!!! Kuchh bhi....daru waru pee-ke type karthe ho kya???

MAPAD: Sorry I don't understand your response, but just to make sure you understand...Islam prescribes the death penalty for muslims who wish to leave Islam. That is coercion, fear, bullying, repression and it is slavery.

When someone is held captive against their will it is called slavery. The word islam means 'submission'. Only slaves submit. muslims are slaves.


I denounce islam because i think slavery is cruel and wrong. i know you think I am a 'threat to harmony' and 'highly provocative' for attacking slavery, but I believe that is the liberal thing to do.

Do you support my efforts to defeat islamic slavery?




CHANDRA: I dont think muslims are slaves. I dont think hindus are slaves nor do I think christians are slaves.

MAPAD: Christians and hindus are not slaves because they are not held captive to their religions by the threat of death.

however, muslims will be killed if they leave islam. this means that muslims are captive slaves to islam because they cannot leave. now do you understand?

i have explained very, very clearly how islam is slavery.


do you now understand that muslims are slaves?

MAPAD

Tell me something. Have you ever lived with or interacted with muslims? Or you base you summary on reading selected downloads of Koran and Hadith?

Mapad: however, muslims will be killed if they leave islam.

Chandra: Really??? And pray how did you arrive at this conclusion?

MAPAD

If you think all religions are responsible for death and destruction, why are you targetting only Islam. Please target all religions. But you dont seem to, that is why I think your credibility is extremely low.

rgds

Yes, I am very close friends with 2 muslims and I am acquinatanced with other muslims. I am also familiar with Koran and Hadith.

Here is proof that Islam prescribes the death penalty for muslims who want to leave Islam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam


I have a low opinion of all religions, but I have particular contempt for Islam because it is the most totalitarian, oppressive and cruel to its followers.

Only Islam prescribes the death penalty for leaving, therefore it is the only religion that practices slavery.

I find the enslavement of Muslims particularly offensive and therefore I criticize Islam more than other religions.



Now do you understand why I have such a problem with Islam?

MAPAD

You dont seem to understand my question. Are muslims getting killed because they are leaving Islam???? I dont think so.

The bible and the gita also talk about Killing. That does not mean all Christians and Hindus subscribe to killing others. Your ideological and reality disconnect worries me a lot. You sound like a modem-intellectual. Somebody who has no idea of the real world and bases all his/her learning from selected web-sites on the Internet. Anyway, I am sure you will find a way out of your sadness

You claim to have 2 muslim friends.....on yahoo messenger or in reality? I am quite surprised that people are willing to listen to your crap and not counter your wilful hatred.

[edited]

please follow guidelines while commenting

Chandra - sadly yes, muslims are killed for leaving Islam.

http://www.peacefaq.com/apostacy.html#whatac

It actually happens.


LET ME SPELL THIS OUT FOR YOU.

If a muslim appears before an Islamic court and states their rejection of Islam they WILL be sentenced to death.

As I have stated many times in this thread; Muslims live under the threat of the death penalty for leaving Islam. Muslims cannot choose to leave Islam therefore Muslims are captive slaves to Islam.

WHICH PART OF THIS SIMPLE TRUTH DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?


The Bible and Gita do not prescribe the death penalty for apostacy (leaving your religion) so you comparision is invalid.


I do not base my opinions on Islam on web sites, they are based on real life experiences with Muslims and Islam.


Unfortunately I am only too acquainted with the real world of Islam.

I have seen first hand the Islamic threats that Muslims live under.

Unfortunately, the barbaric teachings in the Koran and the miserable reality of being a muslim today are directly connected.

Please watch this video of an Islamic stoning http://www.apostatesofislam.com/media/stoning.htm



Have you seen these quotes from the Koran?


TERROR:

3:151
We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve

8:60
And prepare against them what force you can and horses tied at the frontier, to terrorize thereby the enemy of Allah...

8:12
I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

Moreover Allah says of those who reject him. Because, Allah has already sentenced them to death.



UNBELIEVERS:

2:191, And slay them wherever ye catch them

2:193, And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression

2:216, Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you



Chandra, are you starting to understand what Islam really is now?

Can you see the connection between these words from the Koran and the countless violent acts commited by Muslims in recent years?


Can you understand why I dislike Islam?

MAPAD: If a muslim appears before an Islamic court and states their rejection of Islam they WILL be sentenced to death.


Chandra: What islamic court? There are no Islamic courts in India.


MAPAD: As I have stated many times in this thread; Muslims live under the threat of the death penalty for leaving Islam. Muslims cannot choose to leave Islam therefore Muslims are captive slaves to Islam

Chandra: Show us some examples of recent times.

Also, Just because you say does not mean it is the truth. Quite a few lovers have been killed by both Hindus and Muslims in India. Does that mean Hindus are killers?

MAPAD: The Bible and Gita do not prescribe the death penalty for apostacy (leaving your religion) so you comparision is invalid

Chandra: Really? Have you read the Bible and the Gita or you trawl only anti-Islamic web-sites? :-). There are so many instances of wanton death in both these books. Does that mean that the religions are murderous. NO!!! Please learn to differentiate between crazy men and a religion.

MAPAD: I do not base my opinions on Islam on web sites, they are based on real life experiences with Muslims and Islam.


Chandra: It does not matter. Your hatred is a danger to society, nothing less

MAPAD: I have seen first hand the Islamic threats that Muslims live under.

Chandra: Where? Also, what makes you think that religious fundamentalists from other religions are less worse?

Just like you quoted from the Koran, there are enough quotes from other religions that prescribe violence on others. But sorry, I donot take that as the basis to judge people or the religion they follow. It is a sheer waste of time. Religion is personal and let us leave it there.

Similarly, while many muslim nuts have killed people of other religions, christians and hindus have killed as many as well. Your inability to distinguish between the violence of a minority and the peacefulness of the majority is surprising. But I guess at another level, it is not. You are so throughly prejudiced, nobody can drum any sense in you.

rgds

August 2 2007...so thats quite recent and after Haneef was freed....if our author wants to nitpick so be it...but Reddy has posted a useful and important link...suggest everyone read it ...just goes to show the importance of not making facile judgments.

MAPAD..very useful comments...but don't try arguing with our know-all friend...its pretty much useless...he'll hang on to his dogma by the coat-tails come hell or high water....now we know where his sympathies lie.

Bystander

I am surprised that you support hatred prescribed by people like MAPAD. You call me whatever you wish, no problem. But to condone somebody's prejudice and hatred is very dangerous. Similar to neville chamberlain, you are.

rgds

Bystander 55

I asked you twice and you did not respond. If the Aussies had such clinching evidence, why did they not charge him with this?

rgds

MAPAD...people like the author are what is known in blogging as "the Tireless rebutter"....For Tireless Rebutter there is no such thing as a trivial dispute. He regards all challenges as barbarians at the gates. His unflagging tenacity in making his points numbs and eventually wears down the opposition. Confident that his arguments are sound, Tireless Rebutter can't understand why he is universally loathed.

[edited]

read guidelines and stick to it

CHANDRA: What islamic court? There are no Islamic courts in India.

MAPAD: If there are no Islamic courts in India then it is because India not an Islamic state. Not yet anyway. ;)

This does not prove that Islam does not prescribes the death penalty for apostate Muslims.

This does not prove that Muslims do not live in fear of the fact that Islam prescribes death for them.

My point from the beginning has been that Islam prescribes death to Muslims who wish to leave Islam. That is contemptible.

You have yet to disprove that statement.


Muslims accept the Koran as the ultimate authority in their lives. The Koran prescribes the death penalty for those choosing to leave Islam.


Will you now agree that Islam threatens the death sentence to Muslims who wish to leave Islam?

Will you join me in denouncing this cruel death sentence?


There are 50 Islamic countries. In some of these countries there are Islamic courts. If you stand before one of these courts and reject Islam you will be sentenced to death.

Even if you are a muslim living in a non-Islamic country you live in the knowledge that your own religion prescribes death for you should you choose to reject Islam.

It is very likely that if you publicly reject Islam that a Fatwa will be issued against you even if you do not live in an Islamic country.

Some of the people who have Fatwa's issued against them are killed. Ask Theo Van Gogh the Dutch filmmaker what happens to some of the people who criticize Islam. You won't be able to. He's dead. Theo was killed by muslims because he criticized Islam.

These death threats are very, very real Chandra.

This means that if you are a Muslim you are a captive slave of Islam. You are held under a death threat.

If you have any doubt of the seriousness with which Muslims take this death threat then simply go and talk to Muslims.


Read the following article if any of this is unclear.

http://worldnews.about.com/od/
glossarya/a/islam_apostasy_2.htm

Currently, the following countries have laws sanctioning the death penalty as a punishment for apostasy: Afghanistan, Iran, Mauritania, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudia Arabia, Sudan, and Yemen.

Furthermore, Muslim clerics may issue fatwas declaring believers apostate, putting them at risk for violence at the hands of fundamentalists or even honor killings by their own family members.

Do you realize that Salmon Rushdie has lived under police protection for nearly 20 years? Do you think the Islamic death threat for apostacy is real for him?




CHANDRA: Show us some examples of recent times.

MAPAD: Here is a well known recent example of a muslim who was sentenced to death for apostacy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Rahman_(convert)

There is also the famous case of Salmon Rushdie, of which I'm sure you're aware.




CHANDRA: Really? Have you read the Bible and the Gita or you trawl only anti-Islamic web-sites? :-). There are so many instances of wanton death in both these books.

MAPAD: The Bible and Gita do not prescribe the death penalty for apostacy. Islam does.

If you would like to refute this point then please quote directly from the Bible and Gita.

Islam is the only religion that issues a death threat to its own followers.



CHANDRA: Where? Also, what makes you think that religious fundamentalists from other religions are less worse?

Just like you quoted from the Koran, there are enough quotes from other religions that prescribe violence on others. But sorry, I donot take that as the basis to judge people or the religion they follow.


MAPAD: Are you blind Chandra? Can you not see how Islam is more violent than other religions?

Have you not heard of Beslan where 186 school children were slaughtered by Muslims?

Have you not heard of 9/11?

Have you not heard of the London 7/7 bombings?

Have you not heard of the Mumbai train bombings?

Have you not heard of the Madrid Bombings?

Have you not heard of the Bali Nightclub bombings?

Have you not heard of the London/Glasgow bombings?

Do you not read about the frequent truck bombings in Iraq?


All these terrorist acts were committed Muslims.

How can you argue that Islam is not a violent ideology?


Please show me another religion that is currently as violent as Islam.



Chandra, do you accept that Islam prescribes the death penalty for those who reject Islam?

Do you accept that someone who is held captive under the threat of death is a slave?

Do you agree that Islam deserves special contempt for enslaving its own followers with threats of death?


Chandra, I find it very strange your reluctance to condemn Islam for making a death threat against its own followers.

I find it equally strange that global terrorist violence is not proof to you that Islam is more violent tham other religions.


Only Islam prescribes the death penalty for leaving, therefore it is the only religion that practices slavery.

I find the enslavement of Muslims particularly offensive and therefore I criticize Islam more than other religions.


Do you think I am justified in being more hostile to Islam than to other religions?

MAPAD

You are yet to give me examples in India where people have been killed for leaving Islam. I know of cases where lovers have been killed but that has been a mix of Hindu and Muslim both. So your continuous hatred needs to be followed up with solid evidence. I dont see that.


MAPAD: Some of the people who have Fatwa's issued against them are killed. Ask Theo Van Gogh the Dutch filmmaker what happens to some of the people who criticize Islam. You won't be able to. He's dead. Theo was killed by muslims because he criticized Islam

Chandra: So many Indian politicians have said various things about Islam. No fatwa yet. These fatwa issuing mullas will always choose small liberal leaning countries. Let me them try India for example. They will not because they know the penalty for such an act. If you show weakness, people will exploit you. But that does not mean you go about hounding people and reminding them that their religion is screwed up. Missionaries in India are just like you, everyday in the monring they visit the poorest of the poor in India and remind them how screwed up Hinduism is. Then they tell them the Jesus died because of their sins. What crap!!! All religions are equally screwed up. Tell me one religion that is not screwing around with non-believers? Hindus, Christians, Jews, Buddhists, all of them. The problem is not the religion, it is the people. People like you who spread hatred around, it people like you who are a problem to civil society. You need mental help of some sort that will enable you to get over your hatred.

MAPAD: I find it equally strange that global terrorist violence is not proof to you that Islam is more violent tham other religions

Chandra: you have some data or this is an invention of numbers

- Muslims get killed in India (by hindus)
- Muslims kill others (in many countries)
- Christians kill muslims (Chechenya, Iraq, Afghanistan)
- Buddhists kill hindus (in Sri Lanka)
- Jews kill muslims (in Palestine)

Of course, I dont see it this way at all. You talk about the great muslim danger because it threatens your country. 15 years ago, you guys were sleeping with every possible muslim country in this world. Not only that, you were arming the nut case bin Laden because he was ready to fight Russia. So, you think they suddnely discovered religion? Please learn to understand the context of your statement. All religions are equally bad and equally good. If you think muslims and islam is a problem, dont let them enter your country and even better donot buy oil from them until they give up their religion. That I am sure you will not do, you have only greed that drives you and your country.....

CHANDRA: You are yet to give me examples in India where people have been killed for leaving Islam.

MAPAD: I never claimed that Indian muslims had been killed for leaving Islam.

Allow me to remind you what my statement actually was.

'islam is a totalitarian ideology that reduces muslims to slaves because they are condemned to death should they wish to exercise freewill and leave their captor.'

Perhaps I should point out something rather obvious here.

The reason there are not many muslims who have actually been executed for leaving Islam is very, very simple.

Very few people are going to stand up in an Islamic court and say 'I reject Islam' when they know that the consequence of saying that is that they will be executed.

My statement remains the same.

Islam uses the threat of death to enslave Muslims.


Will you finally accept this statement?




CHANDRA: So many Indian politicians have said various things about Islam.

MAPAD: Now we are finding some common ground. Yes I agree, if you tolerate Islamic bullying you only embolden Muslims to bully more.




I'm sorry to tell you Chandra that Islam is substantially different from other religions.

-Islam threatens the death penalty for those that want to leave
-Islam is the only religion that claims to be the literal word of God
-Islam is the only religion that insists non-believers must convert, pay a poll tax or be killed
-Islam is the only religion demands complete 'submission' from its followers

Why does me making truthful and accurate statements about Islam mean I am 'full of hatred'?

Would warning against Hitler's persecution of the Jews also be proof of 'my hatred'?



I agree with you that Muslims are killed by non-Muslims, but that was not my point.

My statement was that Muslims are more violent that other religions.

Show me another of group of people who can match this list of terrorist acts.
-Bali Nightclub
-Beslan
-Madrid
-London 7/7
-9/11
-Mumbai
-London/Glasgow
-Truck bombing in Iraq
I can give you many, many example if needed.


Show me proof that Muslims are not the most violent terrorist group on the planet.



Chandra, I want to thank you for helping make my point about threats.

"So many Indian politicians have said various things about Islam. No fatwa yet. These fatwa issuing mullas will always choose small liberal leaning countries. Let me them try India for example. They will not because they know the penalty for such an act."

Yes, you are right, Muslims do not issue Fatwa's in India because they understand the penalty/threat.

Muslims understand threats.

Muslims live under threat of death if they leave Islam.

Because of that threat Muslims are held captive to Islam.

That threat enslaves them.

Muslims do not have their own freewill. Muslims are slaves.


So now we can agree on this simple point right?




Why does criticisizing an inhumane religion like Islam prove that I am full of hatred?

If I criticize Hitler does that mean I am full of hatred too?



Are you ready to accept that Islam enslaves its followers, poses the greatest threat to civilisation because it is violent and it members commit terrorist acts as part of a campaign to subjugate non-muslims?


Are you ready to do the right thing and denounce Islam?

MAPAD: I never claimed that Indian muslims had been killed for leaving Islam

Chandra: You said Muslims are killed, Indian or otherwise. Yet, you do agree that all muslims are not the same. What is your point then? You seem to agree to my point about good and bad apples rather than blaming the religion.

MAPAD: Very few people are going to stand up in an Islamic court and say 'I reject Islam' when they know that the consequence of saying that is that they will be executed

Chandra: Why should somebody go to a court and say I reject Islam? Does every Hindu or christian go to a court to reject their religion? Religion is a private matter, whether you accept it or reject it is a personal decision. It is only when cranks like Laden, christian missionaries and nut case hindus make it a public issue that we end up in conflict. You have no business in telling people that their religion is wrong. Let them take their own decision. There are many gyaanis on this planet for good now

MAPAD: Now we are finding some common ground. Yes I agree, if you tolerate Islamic bullying you only embolden Muslims to bully more.

Chandra: No common ground mate. There is a difference between threatening others and getting threatened. Nobody is issued a fatwa in India because we Hindus are a majority. People can do that against a small western country because there are few muslims living there. Secondly, saying provocative things against any community is patently wrong. It is silly to say the least. But i guess you are too demented to understand that.


MAPAD: Show me another of group of people who can match this list of terrorist acts

Chandra: Why should I? I dont trawl around the internet searching for religious based violence. Why? because I am not a nut. Just because two muslims blew up themsevles at Glasgow, does not mean all muslims in India think that way. Just because Dhanu blows herself to kill Rajiv Gandhi, it does not mean all Hindus are like that. Just because the catholic IRA kept bombing protestant Britain, it does not mean all catholics are that way. Have a sense of context. Learn to evaluate things a little sanely.

MAPAD: Muslims do not have their own freewill. Muslims are slaves

Chandra: So what do your muslim friends tell you when you tell them this? Even missionaries in India tell Hindus in India about their paganism. Of course we know they are wrong, just like you. It is lunatics like you who need be reigned before disaster strikes

rgds

I have said multiple times that Islam threatens its followers with death should they choose to leave Islam, therefore they are captive slaves.

Sorry, to break it to you Chandra, but the fact an Indian muslim has not been executed for apostacy does not disprove this statement.

My statement still stands. :)

As I said, executions rarely happen because Muslims would rather remain trapped within Islam than be killed.

Surely you have the empathy within you to understand their predicament?




CHANDRA: Why should somebody go to a court and say 'I reject Islam'?

MAPAD: A Muslim would not choose to go to court to reject Islam! If a Muslim speaks out against Islam they will be brought before an Islaimc court. If they still speak out in the court room they are sentenced to death.

As you can well imagine, Muslims who want to leave Islam do not want to do so by dying!




CHANDRA: You have no business in telling people that their religion is wrong.

MAPAD: So I would have had no business telling Hitler he was wrong either?

Maybe we should just all look the other when violent immoral people are threatening our freedom and safety?

Is that what you're recommending?

Who's side are on Chandra? You are starting to worry me! Do actually support terrorists? Surely not. Please put my mind at rest!




Chandra, I did not have to trawl the internet to come up with a list of muslim terrorist acts. I simply read the newspaper a couple of times a week.

Sadly, it is getting harder to ignore the onslaught of violence commited by Muslims.


The Koran states the following;

"You will receive a great reward if you are killed while fighting for the sake of Allah." (K 4:74)

"If non-Muslims do not want to convert [to Islam] capture and kill them wherever you find them." (K 4:89)

I think we have safely established that Islam is the most violent ideology in the world today.


Please join me in denouncing Koran inspired violence. Please show me your commitment to human rights.








Why I am a lunatic Chandra?

Is it because I confront violence and totalitarianism?

Is it because I defend Liberalism and human rights?



The Koran is violent, Mohammed was violent and today many Muslims are violent because they follow the Koran.

Will you join me in denouncing Islam?


Will you join me in denouncing Islam's threat of death to its own followers?

heheh

Maybe we should just all look the other when violent immoral people are threatening our freedom and safety?

now you have switched from attacking the religion per se all this while to attacking the followers despite solemn declarations to the contrary

wah bhaee wah!

;)

temporal - thanks for your comment. it's very easy to answer this.


I have stated repeatedly that Islam is a totalitarian ideology that demands complete and utter submission from it's followers.

Muslims are slaves to Islam.

The Koran instructs Muslims to commit violence.

Muslims are violent and immoral to the extent that they submit to Islam.

I doubt it is much fun being a violent immoral person, that is why I see Muslims as victims.

That is why we must liberate Muslims from Islam.

It is the ideology of Islam that is the problem.

That is why I invite people to attack and discredit it.


temporal, will you join me in denouncing Islam or are you just going to look the other way while violent immoral people (who are acting on the instruction of Islam) threaten our safety?



Have I made this clear?

MAPAD,
let me ask u this...
aren't most of the religion in the world totalitarian ideologies and demand submission??
now don't get me wrng here...
i feel religion per se is very pure..so wht makes it unpure?? simple! the extreme ideology of some of the people following it..ie. some 0f the corrupt once..
ill give u an example..
i am a hindu and i really respect it.. but do i respect caste system? no..even tho its very mch a part of it..
its an established fact that caste system was incorporated in hinduism in the long run.. at the beginning there were no such concept..
so wht i am trying to say is this...
lets not blame islam religion.. u can can attack the extremists u want to..not the religion...

mapad:

please make up your mind and avoid doublespeak...it is all too simple for a reader to see through your straw arguments

why don't you suggest ways to rid these billion plus souls? (now that you have switched tactics)

gas chambers? nuke them?

and if you don't have a final solution in mind then share with us your practical solution instead of the rhetorical bile you foam off every board

:)

Diya, yes monthestic religion is completely totalitarian.

Monothestic religion is based around the idea that there is a God/celestial dictator who will sentence you to heaven or hell at his discretion based on whether you have worshipped him correctly and adequately conformed to his wishes.

However, Islam takes this totalitarianism a step further. Islam states that should you want to leave Islam you must be killed.

Islam makes its followers physically captive as well as spirituality captive.

The other feature to the Koran is that it is the only religion that claims its scripture is the literal word of God which makes it even more restrictive.

At least with other religions it is easier to drop the texts that condone stoning, racism slavery etc.


Personally i find totalitarianism offensive and a direct threat to human rights.

Nazism, Communism and Islam are all totalitarian ideologies and we are all aware of the quality of life of the poor people who had to live under them.

Obviously any sane and moral person is going reject totalitarism.



Unfortunately, Dyia when a Muslims commits an act of violence they are doing exactly what Islam tells them to do, therefore we must hold Islam responsible.

When somebody declares themselves a Muslim it is a problem because they are saying that they support the Koran and Mohammed.

Mohammed was a murderer, peopophile and psychopath and the Koran is an evil book that inspires Muslims to commit violence.

There is nothing pure about this. It is just plain wrong and it is our duty as decent people who respect human rights to speak against Islam and the Koran.


Declaring yourself a Muslim is the same as someone declaring themselves a Nazi and supporting Mein Kampf and Hitler.

We cannot allow or tolerate this. Islam is evil, just a Nazism is evil.



Why we should not blame Islam for demanding Muslims commit violence?

Why should we not blame Islam for commanding Muslims to kill for Allah?

Why should we not blame Islam for instructing Muslims to 'slay jews and christians wherever you find them'?


I blame Islam and its Koran for telling people to kill non-Muslims.

I think murder is wrong. I cannot support it.

I will speak out against murder because I think it is the moral thing to do.


Will you join me Diya and denounce Islam and tis evil teachings?

temporal - if you think I am engaging in doublespeak them explain why you think that, don't just throw the accusation out there.

likewise, if you think I employ straw arguments then demonstrate that, otherwise your claim is baseless.


we don't need to rid ourselves of 1bn+ souls, we need to rid our planet of the ideology of Islam.

just as we didn't need to kill every German to rid ourselves of Nazism.

how do we defeat islam? the same way we defeated sexism, homophobia and racism in America, by people speaking out.

No-one in America had to suicide bomb to win equality for blacks, gays and women.

People had to denounce predujice and sexism to defeat it.

AMAZINGLY NO-ONE ON THIS BOARD SEEMS TO BE WILLING TO SPEAK OUT AGAINST ISLAM!!!

How are we going to defeat evil ideas if we do not reject them?



Islam's current war against america can be divided into 2 catagories. Military and ideological.

The ideological war i just described. we must speak out against a religion that states kill non-believers and enslaves its own followers with death threats.

we need to stop saying things like 'all religions are the same' and 'all religions have extremists'. those statements are total BS, and yet people say them all the time.



If we win the ideological war then we will have to do less on the military front.

If we had of succeeded in stopping hitler sell people on the idea that all Germany's problems were because to the Versaille Treaty, that Jews were sabotaging the country and that germans were the aryan super race then we wouldn't have lost 60million people in world war 2 would we?


Islam is engaged in a war of ideas with the west. If you get people to accept that Jews are inferior then it won't take much for people to start killing Jews will it?

Likewise, if Islam can get you to accept that suicide bombing is at least partially our fault then we're never going to get serious about combatting it are we?


Militarily? We have to crush islamic militants mercilessly. We have no choice. These people are completely radicalised and will not stop trying to kill us unless we kill them.

Did we have any choice but to go to war with hitler?

i hate violence, but if someone is trying to kill then you have to go to war, or be prepared to be killed. i don't want to be killed by totalitarians.

Just like we had to go to war with Hitler. He would never have stopped until we made him stop.

Right now, we have the Taliban resurgent in afghanistan and terrorists trying reduce iraq to barbarism and poverty.

We must absolutely crush them and make it completely clear that they will not suceed in creating hell on earth just like they have done in Saudi Arabia, Iran and the Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.


Sadly, the apathy of the pretend-liberals on this board and their refusal to fight the ideological war against islam means that we are going to have to fight a bigger military war down the line.

apathy is what made the holocaust possible.


i think the apathy of the liberals on this board is deeply immoral and will cost many, many lives.

mapad:

how do we defeat islam? the same way we defeated sexism, homophobia and racism in America, by people speaking out.

quite a delusional statement sir:)

speaking out against injustice and wrong cannot be justified by turning on hatred and ignorance with after-burners

your putrid generalisations to 'reform' perceived wrongs cannot be done in vacuum just like sexism, racism, and global terrorism still hold sway in your loved america

so what is your final solution?

temporal, why is it dellussional for me to say that america defeated sexism, homophobia and racism by people speaking out?


i don't see the connection between speaking out against injustice and turning on hatred.

according to your logic, those who spoke out against hitler displayed hatred.

utter nonsense.

:)

because they still exist in the greatest country in the world

oh wow temporal! how brilliant of you to make that claim!

you are indulging in a debating tactic known as 'Reductive Fallacy'.

yes, sexism, racism and homophobia still exist in america, but there is greater equality in america than in any other coutry in the world.

you know all this, you are just trying to present one side of a complex topic in order to create a false impression.

There you go, I exposed your cute little debating tactic. are you happy now? :)

mapad:

you wrote:

how do we defeat islam? the same way we defeated sexism, homophobia and racism in America, by people speaking out.

i humbly exposed your blanket fallacy

;)

you're the kind of guy who will say that the existence of 200 Nazi's in Yugoslavia is proof that we didn't defeat Nazism in Europe.

it's called nit picking.


you know exactly what I saying. you are well aware that my point was not that america was perfectly free from prejudice, but that liberals had won major victories against prejudice.

i was sincerely answering your question about how to defeat Islam and was using america's success in creating equality as a parallel to help explain my point.

you largely ignored my answer and instead choose to home in a detail in order to deflect the discussion.

how impressive! what a clever person you are!


clearly messageboard point scoring is more of a priority for you than discussing how to protect human rights against totalitarianism.


your tactics are lame, childish and suggest a lack of intellectual honesty on your part. :)



p.s. if you want to refute my original claim that Islam is a violent religion and enslaves its followers by threat of death then go ahead! i would love to hear your arguments!

i do not know you:)

am merely judginig you by your words

your question has been effectively answered many a times by chandra...but you feign comprehension-challenge and keep on regurgitating fallacies

:)

you call it judging me on MY words, but you know that it s just tactical nit picking on your part to deflect the argument. :)


if think chandra has effectively answered my statements then frankly i'm amazed!


please tell me how chandra disproved this statement.

"Islam is a violent religion and enslaves its followers by threat of death"

do your own work mapad

read all his replies:)

"Islam is a violent religion and enslaves its followers by threat of death"


temporal, disprove the statement or admit defeat. i'll allow to use chandra's arguments or your own. either is fine. :)

sure;)