"Moderate islam Does Not Exist"

pay attention, genius, nobody thinks that.

red totally agrees that muslims are very dangerous. you are mischaracterizing him because you are a scoundrel. every single of one of us here agrees that islamic fundamentalists are a dangerous and horrible force wreaking havoc on the world.

the only thing we dont agree with you about is that we are smart enough to understand that not every muslim is a radical murderer. you actually understand this too, you just like to classify the non murderers as non muslims. thats stupid, but yunno, to each his own.

also i think it appropriate to note here that catholics are also terrible and they apparently love nothing more than covering up child abuse.

 

OK. Now you've crossed the line. Define "abuse".

 

What are you smoking? I mean this thread isn’t about only a few so-called Islamic fundamentalists trying to hijack the peaceful so-called religion of Islam. It’s about Islam not being a so-called moderate religion!

Thus, you are intentionally trying to misrepresent the issue in a silly and stupid attempt to vilify me as somehow deliberately misrepresenting the issue in order to intentionally confuse the readers of this thread and to also purposely misrepresents what it is Red says. Indeed, so there cannot be any confusion whatsoever, here is exactly what Red has to say:

“The United States has significant military facilities in 20 Muslim countries.

The United States has formal non-NATO alliances with 6 Muslim countries

The United States has a major NATO military ally in Turkey where we have stationed nuclear weapons.

The United States has gone to war against a Muslim nation with 11 other Muslim nations as military allies.

Attempting to conflate a few thousand terrorist extremists with 1.8 Billion Muslims worldwide is absurd. Muslim countries do what is in their best interests. When they disagree with us they take issue with us. When they agree with us they cooperate.

Just exactly like Israel, who foolishly repudiated the United States last week, and boy is it going to cost them.”

Hence, not only are you an obsessive/compulsive bigot and proud of it, but you are also a damn liar as well.

Okay genius, please document and post a link to where I ever made such an idiotic off the wall stupid claim, because I never ever said anything like that. Indeed, that sounds stupid and like something only you would say, so I can understand how you could come up with such idiocy.

Here you go so you won’t be confused, all none devout Muslims, nominal Muslims, secular Muslims, Muslims in name only, and secret Muslim apostates who maintain their Muslim identity out of fear and coercion are of course moderate.

However, we didn’t label Soviet dissidents escaping to the West moderate communists because it was stupid, and likewise it is very stupid to label non-devout, nominal, secular, Muslim in name only, and apostate Muslims as moderate, because they reject the mental prison of Islam.

Indeed, the entire meme of categorizing Muslims as being moderate or radical is nonsensical because not only does it mean different things to different people, but also it is nearly impossible to differentiate a truly moderate Muslim from a radical Muslim, and for someone as morally confused as you, it is literally impossible.

On the other hand, though, every devout Muslim that willing submits to the will of Allah and devoutly adheres to that very radical totalitarian ideology that cloaks itself in religion for the purpose of infiltrating the societies it targets for eradication so it can replace its form of government with Islamic totalitarianism is a radical by definition. Thus, by definition that means that all devout Muslims are radicals.

You see similar to the way that all Christians are thought to emulate Christ and are therefore called Christians, all devout Muslims are also inculcated to emulate Muhammad in everything they do, because Muhammad was the most perfect Muslim that every lived. Hence, similar to Christians all devout Muslims are in reality Mohammedans.

Therefore, when you see a Muslim on the Internet lopping off the head of a kafir infidel while hollering Allah Ackbar (God is great!), what you are actually witnessing is a Mohammedan attempting to become a more pious Muslim, by emulating the prophet Muhammad, since Muhammad used to holler Allah Ackbar (God is great!) when he lopped off the heads of kafir infidels.

Of course, you have to feed your obsessive/compulsive hatred of Christianity by preemptively vilifying and demonizing Christianity and Christians as well, which is par for the course for someone as bigoted as you.

 

well, like i said before, religions are infinitely interpretable, so you could be a "moderate" anything, because people self-identify as whatever religion, and they claim it means whatever they want it to mean. if you want to a peace-loving muslim, so be it. you might claim the peace-lover is not a "true" muslim, but nobody really cares what you think.

wait a sec, let's for once pay attention to spikke for a sec, see what he says:

ok, so we agree. kinda makes me wonder why you even started this thread. are you ok?

 

Of course, Red always dodges the issue when the issue is inconvenient like I knew he would. Par for the course Red.

 

What course? Nonie Darwish doesn’t talk about a course. Hell, she doesn’t even talk about AQ. She talks about what every day life is like for normal average run of the mill Muslims living inside of the Dar al Islam. You know stuff like the misogyny, the harsh oppression of women, the way women are treated like chattel, the way female genitals are mutilated, the way women often become the victims of honor killing, the way women are divorced and often discarded, the constant incitement to violence against kafir infidels, Jews, and the West that transpires, the way small children are brainwashed to hate kafir infidels cradle to grave, the systematic persecution and violent oppression of non-Muslim dhimmis, the cruelties of Sharia, the way the crimes of apostasy and blasphemy are treated throughout the Dar al Islam by the death penalty, etc., etc., etc.

She doesn’t even talk about the people that you consider to be radical Muslims like AQ. Instead, she speaks about average Muslims living in the Islamic world and about what happens in every day life. In other words, she talks about everything you want to avoid and ignore like the plague in order to pretend that Islam is a Religion of Peace™ being hijacked by a tiny minority of Muslims.

You are delusional and doing your best to avoid the issue! When you have Muslim apostates brought up and raised in the Islamic world escaping to the West and spilling the beans, that kind of stuff is very hard to dismiss. The fact that Islam is not moderate is unequivocal, but like a blind sheep you want to ignore what those Muslim apostates like Darwish and many others have to say about what life is like in the Islamic world for average everyday Muslims because it doesn’t fit the mold of the garbage you have been force fed by your leftwing elites. Indeed, it’s like putting a square peg in a round hole as for as you are concerned. Therefore, you ignore it.

The only thing you listed was garbage, and if you think Muslim states aren’t playing double games with the USA and are our genuine legitimate allies, then it is very obvious that you are gullible and naïve to the extreme.

 

So that must mean you disagree with the reality that Islam is not moderate because you totally ignore famous Muslim apostates who have spilled the beans about Islam. Okay, I’m not surprised. Like other leftists you prefer to delude yourself. At least you didn’t try to bite my head off this time.

With respect to the six so-called facts, you wouldn’t know what a fact is if it stared you in the face and spit in your eye. You are way too far-gone for that.

Not to mention that I’m not quite sure I understand what you are talking about in any event. Just like I didn’t know what you meant by the word “course” in your previous post. You seem to be communicating with an apparition or something sometimes.

Nevertheless, if you want proof that devout Muslims believe in the obligation for jihad to make Islam supreme, please reference below. Now, if you think you can ally with such people, then it is axiomatic that you are gullible to the extreme.

Taqi al-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328) was a jurist of the Hanbali madhhab. He directed that “since lawful warfare is essentially jihad and since its aim is that the religion is God’s entirely and God’s word is uppermost, therefore according to all Muslims, those who stand in the way of this aim must be fought.”

He is, however, hardly the only Islamic scholar whoever said anything like this.

Ibn Khaldun (1332-1406), a pioneering historian and philosopher, was also a Maliki legal theorist. In his renowned Muqaddimah, the first work of historical theory, he notes that “in the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force.” In Islam, the person in charge of religious affairs is concerned with “power politics,” because Islam is “under obligation to gain power over other nations.”

Another Maliki jurist, Ibn Abi Zayd al Qayrawani (d. 996), agrees: “Jihad is a Divine institution. Its performance by certain individuals may dispense others from it. We Malikis maintain that it is preferable not to begin hostilities with the enemy before having invited the latter to embrace the religion of Allah except where the enemy attacks first. They have either the alternative of converting to Islam or paying the poll tax (jizya), short of which war is declared against them.”

The Hanafi Shaikh Burdanuddin Ali of Marghinan (d. 1196) says the same thing: “It is not lawful to make war upon any people who have never before been called to the faith, without previously requiring them to embrace it, because the Prophet so instructed his commanders, directing them to call infidels to the faith, and also because the people will hence perceive that they are attacked for the sake of religion, and not for the sake of taking their property, or making slaves of their children, and on this consideration it is possible that they may be induced to agree to the call, in order to save themselves from the trouble of war….”

Even the great Muslim philosopher Averroes (1126-1198) says this: “the Muslims are agreed that the aim of warfare against the People of the Book . . . is twofold: either conversion to Islam, or payment of poll-tax (jizya).”

Finally, Syed Abul A’ala Maududi, a Pakistani, was arguably the most influential Muslim theologian and thinker of the 20th Century. He said the following point-blank:

“Islam wishes to destroy all States and Governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and program of Islam regardless of the country or the Nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and program . . . [T]he objective of Islamic Jihad is to eliminate the rule of an un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of State rule. Islam does not intend to confine this revolution to a single State or a few countries; the aim of Islam is to bring about a universal revolution.”

Hence Red, like the inculcated leftwing ideologue you are, you can continue to bury your head in the sand to escape reality all you want, but only the most gullible amongst us would be naïve enough to believe that you can actually ally with people who hold the above documented beliefs.