RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Islamic ignorance

He got theo'd.

having muslims around means more Bacon for the rest of us!

anyone who believes in a mystical being creating the earth with a wave of his hands and follow the rules written by a schizophrenic 2000+ years ago is crazy.

London Daily Express:

Demands for a ban on 'un-Islamic' activities in schools will be set out by the Muslim Council of Britain today. Targets include playground games, swimming lessons, school plays, parents' evenings and even vaccinations.

Dozens of Taliban killed in Afghanistan: 20 suspected militants drown crossing a river.

Father Found Guilty in Honor Killing
By PAISLEY DODDS, Associated Press Writer
5 hours ago

LONDON - A father who ordered his daughter brutally slain for falling in love with the wrong man in a so-called "honor killing" was found guilty of murder on Monday.

Banaz Mahmod, 20, was strangled with a boot lace, stuffed into a suitcase and buried in a back garden.

Her death is the latest in an increasing trend of such killings in Britain, home to some 1.8 million Muslims. More than 100 homicides are under investigation as potential "honor killings."

Mahmod Mahmod, 52, and his brother Ari Mahmod, 51, planned the killing during a family meeting, prosecutors told the court. Two others have pleaded guilty in the case. Two more suspects have fled the country. Sentencing is expected later this month.

The men accused the young woman of shaming her family by ending an abusive arranged marriage, becoming too Westernized and falling in love with a man who didn't come from their Iraqi village. The Kurdish family came to Britain in 1998 when Banaz Mahmod was 11.

"She was my present, my future, my hope," said Rahmat Suleimani, 29, Banaz Mahmod's boyfriend.

During the three-month trial, prosecutors said Mahmod's father beat his daughter for using hairspray and adopting other Western ways. Her uncle once told her she would have been "turned to ashes" if she were his daughter and had shamed the family by becoming involved with the Iranian Kurd, her sister 22-year-old Bekhal Mahmod testified.

Banaz Mahmod ran away from home when she was a teenager but returned when her father sent her an audio tape in which he warned he would kill her sisters, her mother and himself if she did not come home, her sister said.

She was later hospitalized after her brother attacked her, the sister told the court. The brother said he had been paid by their father to finish her off but in the end was unable to do it, said the sister, who testified in a full black burqa. She said she still feared for her own life.

The years of Banaz Mahmod's abuse were compounded by police officers who repeatedly dismissed her cries for help.

She first went to police in December 2005, saying she suspected her uncle was trying to kill her and her boyfriend. She sent police a letter naming the men who she thought would later kill her.

On New Year's Eve, she was lured by her father to her grandmother's home, where she suspected he planned to attack her after he forced her to gulp down brandy and approached her while wearing gloves. She escaped by breaking a window and was treated at a hospital.

Police dismissed her suspicions, and one officer, who is under investigation, considered charging her with damages for breaking her grandmother's window.

Laying in her hospital bed after the escape, Mahmod recorded a dramatic video message saying she was "really scared."

The videotape, taken by her boyfriend at the hospital, was shown to the jury during the trial.

After she was released from the hospital, she returned home and tried to convince her family she had stopped seeing her boyfriend.

But friends told the family they spotted the couple together on Jan. 22, 2006.

Soon after, a group of men allegedly approached her boyfriend and tried to lure him into a car but he refused. It was that event that prompted Banaz Mahmod to go to police again. This time officers tried to persuade her to stay in a safe house. She refused, believing that her mother would protect her.

But her mother and father left her alone in the house the next day. Her boyfriend alerted police after time passed in which she failed to send him text messages.

Her body wasn't discovered until three months later after police tracked phone records.

Britain has seen more than 25 women killed by their Muslim relatives in the past decade for offenses they believed brought shame on the family. More than 100 other homicides are under investigation as potential honor killings.

Some Muslim communities in Britain practice Sharia, or strict Islamic law.

"We're seeing an increase around the world, due in part to the rise in Islamic fundamentalism," said Diana Nammi with the London-based Iranian and Kurdish Women's Rights Organization.

Zuh? Why is swimming consider un-Islamic?

Because there is a chance it would wash the nasty B.O., most of them seem to love having, off.

U.S. Troops Mistakenly Kill Afghan police
By Associated Press
2 hours ago

KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghan police mistakenly thought U.S. troops on a nighttime mission were Taliban fighters and opened fire on them, prompting U.S. forces to return fire and call in attack aircraft, killing seven Afghan police, officials said Tuesday.

U.S.-led coalition and Afghan troops, meanwhile, killed more than 24 suspected Taliban fighters during an eight-hour battle in southern Afghanistan on Monday, the coalition said.

President Hamid Karzai's spokesman labeled the shooting at a remote police checkpoint in the eastern province of Nangarhar "a tragic incident" caused by a lack of communication.

"The police forces were not aware of the coalition's operation," said spokesman Karim Rahimi. "The police checkpoint in the area thought that they were the enemy, so police opened fire on the coalition, and then the coalition thought that the enemies were firing on them, so they returned fire back."

The commander at the post, Esanullah, who goes by one name, said U.S. gunfire and helicopter rockets killed seven policemen and wounded four.

Maj. Chris Belcher, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition, said a combined coalition-Afghan force was ambushed by small arms fire and rocket propelled grenades from two sides while on the way to conduct an operation against a suspected Taliban safe house.

"Afghan and coalition forces took incoming fire and they responded to it," Belcher said. The forces called in air support, he said.

A policeman at the remote checkpoint said police called out for the U.S. forces to cease their attack.

"I thought they were Taliban, and we shouted at them to stop, but they came closer and they opened fire," said Khan Mohammad, one of the policemen at the post. "I'm very angry. We are here to protect the Afghan government and help serve the Afghan government, but the Americans have come to kill us."

Rahimi said the incident showed why Karzai has repeatedly called for increased cooperation and communication between Afghan and international troops. He said an investigation into the incident had been opened.

The killings of civilians by international troops has been an ongoing problem in Afghanistan, and several recent civilian shootings prompted the upper house of parliament to pass a bill last month that would prohibit international forces from launching military operations unless they are attacked or have first consulted with the Afghan army, government or police.

In Nangarhar province in March _ the same province of Tuesday's police shootings _ 19 civilians were killed and 50 wounded by Marines Special Operations Forces who fired on civilians while speeding away from the site of a suicide bomb attack, casualties that sparked angry protests and denunciations of the U.S. presence there.

The International Committee of the Red Cross on Tuesday said the impact of violence on civilians in Afghanistan is worse now than a year ago.

Pierre Kraehenbuehl, the ICRC's director of operations, said fighting between armed opposition groups and the Afghan army supported by international forces had intensified significantly in the south and east of the country since 2006 and was spreading to the north and west.

"Civilians suffer horribly from mounting threats to their security, such as increasing numbers of roadside bombs and suicide attacks, and regular aerial bombing raids," he said in a statement.

In the southern province of Kandahar, U.S.-led coalition and Afghan troops killed more than 24 suspected Taliban fighters during an eight-hour battle in southern Afghanistan, the coalition said Tuesday.

The troops were initially ambushed by militants in Shah Wali Kot in Kandahar province Monday, but retreated after several of their fighters were killed.

A force of some 30 Taliban later attacked the same coalition convoy, and Western forces called in airstrikes on a compound and a vehicle. "During the eight-hour battle, over two dozen enemy fighters were killed," the coalition said.

Meanwhile, three Afghan civilians were killed and two wounded in the eastern province of Kunar on Monday after a car drove through a NATO checkpoint and soldiers opened fire on it, said NATO's International Security Assistance Force. The car drove through the checkpoint despite the use of hand gestures and flashing lights, ISAF said.

Gen. Abdul Jalal Jalal, Kunar's provincial police chief, said one of the wounded civilians later died.

A roadside bomb attack 25 miles north of Kandahar city on Monday killed a Canadian soldier. The soldier, identified as Trooper Darryl Caswell of the Royal Canadian Dragoons, was the 57th Canadian soldier killed in Afghanistan, the Canadian military said.

The death brings to at least 78 the number of soldiers killed in Afghanistan this year, including at least 39 Americans.

Violence has spiked in Afghanistan in recent weeks. More than 2,300 people have died in insurgency-related violence this year, according to an Associated Press count based on U.S., NATO and Afghan figures.

In Paktika province a roadside bomb hit a police vehicle in Gomal district on Monday, killing one policeman and wounding six, said Ghamai Khan, the governor's spokesman. Police later saw a Taliban militant planting another roadside bomb and killed him, he said.

In the eastern province of Paktia, Afghan police and U.S.-led coalition troops acting on a tip discovered rocket-propelled grenades, mortar rounds and bomb-making materials hidden under two animal pens in an Afghan home. Militants fired machine guns and RPGS at the troops when they first entered the home, the coalition said in a statement.

The coalition said that local elders "vowed to track down" the bomb maker.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When shit like this happens, the terrorists win.

Article 11 of The Treaty of Tripoli (1796)

Article 11 reads:

As whomod already pointed out, it is in an official treaty. Second, Jefferson had more right than you do to intrepret the intention of the founders and of the constitution.

 Quote:

But in any case, the role of Christianity in forming the principles of American democracy is clear.

yes, it is a very minor part. "American Democracy" is basically just following in tradition of the British system put in place shortly before America's founding. It is also the culmination of many different cultures and ideas over the years. None of which was really christian. In fact looking at some of the christian actions in America around that time (Salem witch trials for one) it's a good thing the christians didn't have a lot of influence.

 Quote:

And equally clear, the desire of its creators that Christian principles would continue to be an enduring part of that democracy, as long as American democracy continues to exist.

then why doesn't it say that in the constitution. It makes a vague reference to god and then says clearly there is no official church. There is no reference to jesus or a trinity.

 Quote:

Again, I consider Christian concepts to be vastly different from those of Islam.

then you're very ignorant of your own faith. i'm not surprised. you've already demonstrated that you prefer the myths to thefact. i bet you sincerely believe George Washington chopped down a cherry tree.


it's the same damn god. The Jews spawned the christians and the muslims. While the christians are the only one with the trinity concept (and there are christians who don't believe in that) the idea of a trinity was conceived during the time of the ancient greeks. In fact many of the core concepts of modern abrahamic faiths were constructed slowly during ancient times. The Jewish faith evolved slowly. Then the christians evolved from them over disagreement regarding jesus' divinity. And then muhammed came along awhile later and wrote the scriptures for the muslims.
But really it's all the same faith just with different branches, some branches diverge more than others but really it is all the same.
And most of the "evil" beliefs you put on them is just the same type of shit you go for just twisted around. technically islam forbids harming of innocents. so people like bin laden twist what they consider the definition of innocent (not unlike the christian bush changing the definition of torture).
christians put just as much into their "holy wars" as muslims do. in fact anyone who is really religious has the capacity for great violence and evil as long as they believe god wants them to kill and that it is justified (see abortion doctor murders, witch trials, inquisition, KKK, etc).
The reason for terrorism is much more complex than "they hate us for our freedom." If that were the case they would attack the closer countries that have way more freedom than we have (see: Netherlands with drugs and prostitution and less crime). They attack us because we have a history of fucking about in their homes. We basically empowered Saddam with support and weapons, trained bin Laden's people, sold weapons to Iran, mucked about with Iran's political system and allowed oppressive governments to remain as long as they were loyal to us, became buddies with the Saudis who are the worst power in the region, and have generally been a source of their chaos. When we bomb their village, innocent little kids who lose their dad grow up hating us (like Batman but with more sand). They see us as evil, they see us as killers who threaten their families. And the problem is that we keep doing the things that help that view of us. We don't do things diplomatically there, we just bomb them. So when someone like Bush says "I won't debate Saddam i'm just going to attack" and then his invasion kills several hundred thousand Iraqis, then the people start to really hate us. Not for our freedom but for our actions. John Kerry wanted to run the war on terror as a police action, which is what it really is. he understood that this wasn't some enemy that can be attacked with an army in nice flashy fox news graphic sequences. but bush likes those nice photo-ops. standing on a battle carrier or on some 9/11 rubble.
So anyway, the point is that they're human and we're human and we all pretty much want the same thing out of life. They see us like we see them and often judge each other based on the worst elements of our respective societies.
of course i'd be willing to bet money that you'll respond how my typical liberal mindset is destroying america and i hate christians and blah blah blah.

Wasn't the american constitution inspired and somewhat based on the Magna Carta?

Some Muslims need to lighten up. So do also some Christians, Jews, Communists, Libertarians etc. There are liberal, moderate, conservative and dogmatic Muslims, as well as fundamentalist Muslims. I bet some of them are even gay, in or out of the closet. The same goes with Christians and Jews.

I thought you were above of this kind of generalization, Jerry.

Okay so I goofed.

The Muslims who want to kill and blow up people and buildings and shit like that need to lighten the fuck up.

"Apology accepted, Captain Needa."

Poor old Captain Needa!

Y'know, I never noticed before that Darth has a codpiece...

according to historians the American Constitution had many inspirations, including the recent British Constitution.
According to wondy, Jesus flew down and wrote it for Jefferson.

yeah. people who point out all these muslim complaints seem to overlook the christian complaints about harry potter being a tool of evil and sex education being a tool of evil and teaching science and not the bible being a tool of evil.
it's really sad how wimpy the abrahamic god is that all these lowly humans need to defend the poor guy from all these books and swimming pools.

Let's see:

When Salman Rushdie wrote a book that offended Muslims the leaders of Islam openly ordered his death and he had to go in hiding for years to avoid being murdered.

When J.K. Rowling wrote a book that offended Christians the leaders of Christianity whined a little, said they (gasp) wouldn't buy her books and she kept on living a public life and raking in millions.

Yeah, Adler, both religions are exactly the same.

Idiot

The difference is: Christians don't go out and kill and threaten those who don't ascribe to their views. They may hold picket signs or launch mail campaigns or write their congressman, or donate money to help starving people, but they don't kill, intimidate or fund terrorist groups.

(I myself don't see the harm in Harry Potter, any more than I do the latest issue of DOCTOR STRANGE, or movies like Rosemary's Baby or the Exorcist. None of these are the Satanic Bible or the Necronomicon, they're just lowbrow/middlebrow entertainment. )




Actually, what Christians teach is science that's not in denial that there's a God. The complaint of Christians is the suppression in our schools of any scientific evidence that there's a God, that's deemed too politically correct or "offensive" to discuss.

The theory of "intelligent design" is that the complexity of nature suggests an ordered pattern, too ordered to have randomly occured, that the very order of the universe suggests there is a Designer.

And I'll just ignore the more blasphemous and pointlessly inflammatory parts of what you said.

why should delusional thinking be taught in a science class? and christians can be very violent people. every group of people can be very violent under stress, especially when their stress is fueled by a religious sense of certainty.

Yeah, remember that time a group of pissed off Christians hijacked a bunch of airplanes and flew them into buildings, killing thousands?

i remember when a pissed off christian started an illegal war killing hundreds of thousands and ruining his country's reputation.

See. This is the kind of thing I mean about extremist liberals. You would think that, given their own claimed belief in gay rights, feminism, etc., liberals would be the people most worried about radical Islam. But instead they conjure up this fiction that Christians are worse and use essentially made-up examples ("illegal war")("killing hundreds of thousands") to do so.

And, as near as I can tell, half the reason they do this is because they hate President Bush so much that they'd rather be on the side of fundamentalist Muslims than a President who just happens to be from a different political party.

the same old "you hate the president and support terrorist" argument? it's very childish.
bush has made the situation worse, he has created a stronger draw towards terrorism in the region. and he uses fear mongering to rile people up and justify his shady dealings. dealings which undermine the constitution that the terrorists supposedly hate. and you want to pin an entire race/religion/region of people as evil, which is the first step towards concentration camps and the punishment of innocent people for crimes or offenses of their entire race/religion/region.

Ray:

You're the one who brought Bush into the argument. It's not my fault you can't debate any topic without eventually falling back on "Bush is Just Evil."

Contrary to your Rayfacts(TM), Islam is neither a race, an ethnicity nor a regional trait. It is a belief system.

You need to stop defending beliefs that you would otherwise find objectionable simply because the people holding them in this instance are, in your mind "oppressed minorities" threatened by the "evil" George W. Bush.

If you want to say that Bush has bungled the war on terror, fine. That's a reasonable position.

If you want to say that Christians should try to be more tolerant, lest they turn into people like the radical Muslims, I could respect that.

But for you, or anyone else, to be so caught in political correctness, and fuzzy-headed moral relativism that you stick your head in the stand and pretend that radical Islam isn't an ongoing threat, or is no worse than any other religion, well, that's just dangerous as hell. Not just for people like yourself (gay Jewish liberals), but the rest of the world too.

the problems are caused by people in your party. the ones who start wars and cause discontent and hatred of America around the world and then pointing to that anti-American sentiment that they caused and say "see, this is what we need to fight with more wars."

The problem is caused by the many hu- mans on this planet who are assholes, whether they be republican, democratic, christian, muslim, or followers of Mr. Potato Head.

How DARE you drag Mr. Potato Head into this!

You're evil, EVIL I SAY!!!

oh, and I think that both G-man and adler have both just made some fine points

Mr Potato Head died in the frying pan for our sins...

Damn you, Mr. Potato Head is too good for politics!

bad Beardguy57, BAD BEARDGUY57

Let's see... Pro:

Most proponents of Christian influence in Government cite quotes from the founding fathers, Supreme Court Judges and Presidents among other dignitaries and use legal texts such as the Declaration of Independence and it’s reference to a “creator” to promote their view that this country has always been intended to be a “Christian nation”.

There are varying degrees as to the belief on how much influence the church is to have over government. But the unifying belief among most Christians is that the United States was founded on Biblical principles basic to Christianity and to Judaism from which it flowed.”, therefore any attempts by what they describe as “secularists” to remove God from government are to be challenged. The main argument is that any omission of God in our Constitution is simply an oversight that can be explained away by the fact that everyone who founded this country accepted the fact that God was the source of civic authority as proven by the aforementioned quotes and documents.

Most polarizing issues such as the ban on prayer in school, the abortion debate, gay marriage, even the posting of the Ten Commandments in government courthouses can all be traced by the pro religion in government advocates to a country that has lost its moral compass due to God being systematically removed from our lives by the secularists. The push to fight back over this perceived attack is strong and the chosen avenue the fundamentalist right has chosen is the courts. Either by attacking sitting judges or electing judges with a predetermined agenda to overturn rulings or vote against decisions unfavorable to their perception of what is moral and right.

Con:

The main argument used for the separation of church and state is Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptist Association of Connecticut in 1808:



Another important document that makes clear the intent of the founding fathers is Article 11 of the 1797 Treaty of Tripoli which clearly and unequivocally states “The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion.” “[The treaty’s] authorship is ascribed variously to George Washington, under whom the treaty was negotiated, or to John Adams, under whom it took effect, or sometimes to Joel Barlow, U.S. consul to Algiers, friend of Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine, and himself no stranger to the religious ferment of the era, having served as a chaplain in the Revolutionary Army. But the validity of the document transcends its authorship for a simple reason: it was ratified. It was debated in the U.S. Senate and signed into law by President Adams without a breath of controversy or complaint concerning its secular language, and so stands today as an official description of the founders’ intent.” . The fact that this was an official document signed and ratified by the United States Government and can be traced directly to the founding fathers shows irrefutable proof that while the founding fathers may or may not have been devout Christians at various times in their life and in their papers, their official positions clearly show a desire to keep religion and government separate.

The misperceptions and the wide chasm between those who seek to impose their brand of Christianity on the entire nation and those who see any reference to God as a threat to reason and the Constitution is vast and in my opinion completely unnecessary. In a sense, both sides are right and wrong. It is wrong to think that the belief in God played no role in the founding of our country but it is also wrong to assume that the founding fathers were devout men who created a “Christian nation”. Christians espousing this political agenda should know better than to try to create the kingdom of heaven on earth by forcing people to act righteous thru the law. Jesus Christ himself railed against the legalistic dictates of the Pharisees partly on account of the fact that it forces people to act righteous rather than it coming from their own heart.

Forcing people to condemn others for their lifestyle or for their differing beliefs is so completely opposite of the character of the founder of their religion that I wonder if they ever step back enough from their hatred and misguided sense of oppression to see this.

The secular left too misses the boat when it seeks to remove the oldest and most potent reminder that this country and civilization itself needs moral guidelines to ensure that anarchy and lawlessness don’t run amok. The Ten Commandments, prayer, ethics, and the golden rule had long been standard tradition in this country because this nation was founded primarily by people of the Christian faith. This should be a matter of fact and not something to scoff or ridicule or seek to erase from memory or tradition.

If both sides could just let go of their prejudices and misconceptions of this country and of each other, there is much common ground that can be found. Some denominations such as Southern Baptists do achieve this middle ground where there is belief in the separation of Church and State. And contrary to popular misinformation, many Christians are liberals, Democrats and for church state separation. Mostly on account of the fact that historically, the alignment of the church and state has never bode well for Christianity.

Seeing as how i'd already written an assignment on this, i thought it easier to just copy it over.