2
   

Michael Jackson converts to Islam

 
 
herberts
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 03:59 pm
Straight off Google...

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=121018&Disp=All
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/009414.php
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1541030/posts

"One of the most effective weapons of the enemy is your ignorance of him..." (Herbertus, circa A.D.2005)

Be afraid - be very afraid. Yes, this means you too Dagmaraka... Cool

Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 04:19 pm
thanks Herbert.

My own take on it all is pretty simple. Whilst Islam is the justification and even provides the incentives for terrorism and jihad (doing Gods will, 72 virgins to play with later etc) the actual causes of terrorism are more prosaic...e.g. disgust and reaction to western imperialism in the middle east (because of our dependency on middle eastern oil), repression of the Palestinian people by the Israelis, revenge for Britain's supporting role in the invasion of Iraq...etc.

I'm really not sure there is much support behind the idea of a new caliphate. (But those striving for it are certainly very dangerous people). I somehow suspect it suits Western interests to build political islam into a global threat to fullfil the need of a universal enemy to replace defunct nazi and communist ideologies.
0 Replies
 
Reyn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 05:17 pm
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
I have my own ideas about Divinity which I can hardly express to myself, let alone to anyone else, so I dont.

Yes, me too.

I'm not someone who is currently involved with any religion of any sort. I don't really think I'm an atheist though. I do believe in a continuation of life past what we call death. I don't think that qualifies me as being religious, or believing in a religion per se.

BUT, I do feel that it's all held together somehow, whether that is God, or whatever.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 05:22 pm
Reyn wrote:
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
I have my own ideas about Divinity which I can hardly express to myself, let alone to anyone else, so I dont.

Yes, me too.

I'm not someone who is currently involved with any religion of any sort. I don't really think I'm an atheist though. I do believe in a continuation of life past what we call death. I don't think that qualifies me as being religious, or believing in a religion per se.

BUT, I do feel that it's all held together somehow, whether that is God, or whatever.

No rain, it just means you're a fruitcake but we already knew that. What you need rain is a job, an outdoor job where you get a lot of exercise. That will clear your brain, I hope.
Your friend the Dys.
0 Replies
 
Reyn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 05:35 pm
dyslexia wrote:
No rain, it just means you're a fruitcake but we already knew that. What you need rain is a job, an outdoor job where you get a lot of exercise. That will clear your brain, I hope.
Your friend the Dys.

Fruitcake? I hate fruitcake, can't stand the crap.

No more outdoor jobs for me! 31 years is long enough.

You know, I'd love a job where I get to poke fun at Arizonians. :wink:

So what do you believe in, Dys? I mean besides eating lots of chili and being full of gas. Laughing
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 05:38 pm
I believe I am the locus dei.
0 Replies
 
Reyn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 06:12 pm
dyslexia wrote:
I believe I am the locus dei.

You did that on purpose, Oh Enlightened One. Laughing

Ya knew I wouldn't have a clue, and would have to look it up.

Okay, for others that are as thick as myself, here's what The dys is talking about:

Loc-Dieu

The abbey of Loc-Dieu is a cistercian abbey located near Martiel, 9 km west from Villefranche-de-Rouergue, in the department of Aveyron in France.

Funded in 1123 in a place formely called Locus Diaboli (Devil's place) due to the large amount of dolmens around it, it was renamed by the monks into Locus Dei, Loc-Dieu: the place of God.

Burnt by the English in 1409, the buildings were rebuild in 1470 in the abbey fortified.

The abbey was sold by the French government during the French revolution in 1793 and the Cibiel family bought it in 1812, whose descendants still live in it.

The buildings were restaured in 1840 (East wing) and in 1880 (South and West wings).

In 1940, the paintings of the Louvre, including the Mona Lisa, were hidden in Loc-Dieu during the summer to escape the German troops.

The abbey and its large park are now open to visit.


I feel so.... informed now.

Thanks, guy! :wink:

One question: How the heck can you be a building?
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 06:14 pm
herberts wrote:
Dagmaraka is obviously in PC denial about the darker side of Islam


nope. all i said is that not all muslims are jihadists. i've no sympathy for religious fanatics of any sort. so please save your 'obviously' for a different occasion.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 06:31 pm
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
thanks Herbert.

My own take on it all is pretty simple. Whilst Islam is the justification and even provides the incentives for terrorism and jihad (doing Gods will, 72 virgins to play with later etc) the actual causes of terrorism are more prosaic...e.g. disgust and reaction to western imperialism in the middle east (because of our dependency on middle eastern oil), repression of the Palestinian people by the Israelis, revenge for Britain's supporting role in the invasion of Iraq...etc.

I'm really not sure there is much support behind the idea of a new caliphate. (But those striving for it are certainly very dangerous people). I somehow suspect it suits Western interests to build political islam into a global threat to fullfil the need of a universal enemy to replace defunct nazi and communist ideologies.


that i can fully subscribe to. just, again, it's not ALL muslims that misuse islam this way.

there are some nasty violent groups of hindus in india, for example, but that don't go to say that hinduism as such is a nasty violent religion. if anything, it seems more peaceful on paper then christian and muslim religions. causes of terrorism and jihadism don't stem purely from the religion, they are far more complex as steve began to hint at. unfortunately cold war and proxy games helped to escalate both and we aren't faring too well right now at reconciliation efforts among our two civilizations.

i am just not fond of gross generalizations. i don't find them useful.
0 Replies
 
herberts
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 07:01 pm
Steve...
Quote:
disgust and reaction to western imperialism in the middle east (because of our dependency on middle eastern oil)


If this is part of the spurious motivation for militant Islam then it is truly awesome for its duplicitous hypocrisy. There is a great deal more Islamic imperialism in Western nations than is the reverse.

The Islamic diaspora of the past 40-years has seen a Medieval plague settle upon the erstwhile peace and social tranquility of a dozen Western nations - with our politicians and our liberal academics sanctifying these delinquent incursions under the divisive policies of multiculturalism and racial vilification laws.

I have reams of reference sites which expose just how immigrant Islam has brought with it a plague of criminality and unemployed idleness on the dole.
0 Replies
 
dagmaraka
 
  1  
Reply Fri 30 Dec, 2005 07:05 pm
one can find reams of sites that explain why it is so and how it is the West's fault. Please humour us with your own insight instead.
0 Replies
 
herberts
 
  1  
Reply Sat 31 Dec, 2005 05:29 pm
Dagmaraka...
Quote:
one can find reams of sites that explain why it is so and how it is the West's fault. Please humour us with your own insight instead.


bitchy bitchy... ! Laughing

The sites I cited Cool most certainly do not blame the Western governments for the scourge of Islam which currently is the primary social disease and biblical plague of our time upon the good order and peaceful homogeneity of a half dozen of the world's most civilised nations.

I look forward to the time when I might live long enough to witness the enforced repatriation of immigrant Islamic communities back to their countries of origin in the basket-case wastelands of the Middle East's pre-medieval cesspit theocracies.

This disruptive and mischievous Islamic genie was released from its Middle Eastern bottle upon the advice of leftwing-liberal Western politicians and academics who naively believed that the moral virtues of politically correct policies of immigration and multiculturalism was all that was needed for this to be the correct course of action.

And upon such imbecile and limp-wristed logic we have ever since reaped the Whirlwind of immigrant Islamic delinquencies and anti-social attitudes.

Dagmaraka - you're very welcome to drop by anytime at Edit: Moderator: Link Removed for a cuppa tea and a chat with some of the contributors there. We brawl like cats on heat but beneath it all we remain friends.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Jan, 2006 08:42 am
edgarblythe wrote:
Ain't no religion worth a warm bucket of spit.


That is the most insightful comment I've read about religion. I've been accused many times of posting thoughtless one-liners about religion. As I posted on another thread this evening. I simply won't waste my mind on that tripe.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Jan, 2006 08:46 am
herberts wrote:
Steve...
Quote:
disgust and reaction to western imperialism in the middle east (because of our dependency on middle eastern oil)


If this is part of the spurious motivation for militant Islam then it is truly awesome for its duplicitous hypocrisy. There is a great deal more Islamic imperialism in Western nations than is the reverse.

The Islamic diaspora of the past 40-years has seen a Medieval plague settle upon the erstwhile peace and social tranquility of a dozen Western nations - with our politicians and our liberal academics sanctifying these delinquent incursions under the divisive policies of multiculturalism and racial vilification laws.

I have reams of reference sites which expose just how immigrant Islam has brought with it a plague of criminality and unemployed idleness on the dole.


May I ask, what country you live in?
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Jan, 2006 09:28 am
herberts wrote:

...basket-case wastelands of the Middle East's pre-medieval cesspit theocracies


I hope you dont take this the wrong way I if I say I agree with you on that. Perhaps thats why a lot of people from those countries prefer to be in Europe or the US. Its a complicated issue, simple remedies such as forced re patriation would not work, besides being just plain wrong. It would end up being extermination not repatriation. I dont have any obvious answers, and I dont claim to fully understand the causes of this war.

But I agree we are in a war between Western ideas of civilisation, (in the tradition of the reformation, the Enlightenment, and secular liberal democracy) and as you say basket case pre medieval theocracy.

more later
0 Replies
 
littlelady01
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jan, 2006 11:07 pm
ignorance knows no bounds
Wow. I never realized how many ignorant people we have living in this world until I began reading these disgusting & appalling forums. How can one sit there and say such terrible things about Islam without studying it? Sure, if I say online all day and did search engines, I could find a lot about this EVIL EVIL relgion known as Islam and how it's centered on nothing more than terrorism.........are you kidding me???

Don't be so ignorant, please. We have enough living in America. Open the Qura'n and realize what it is really saying. Don't take things so literal. All this nonsense became worse and worse after september 11th. Funny how no one focuses on all the conspiracies in the air about the government planning that attack. Funny how there are people dying all across the world and us americans have nothing better to do, but lash out on a religion we are so ignorant to know nothing about. Islam does not go around preaching hate, terrorism, and war. Open a book you ignorant fools. Islam is the religion of peace and nothing less of that. Never has Islam wanted the beauty of God to be forced upon someone else. Never was Islam a religion of hate and war. Never. Open a book before opening your mouth & representing yourself as nothing, but a fool.

Your idealism disgusts me.
0 Replies
 
fresco
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jan, 2006 01:05 am
littlelady01

Welcome to A2K.

It seem to me that the "idealism" is yours. It is an undeniable fact that SOME Islamicists, seeing no "beauty" in life itself DO want the so-called "beauty of God" to be forced upon others. Those moderates who stand on the sidelines have no moral authority over their sociopathic brethren. Indeed most of them are afraid to speak out. I suggest you put your own house in order instead of accusing others of being "fools" when they spot you selecting from the more palatable passages of your "Good Book". The terrorists are merely quoting other passages.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
0 Replies
 
MuslimK
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2006 12:06 pm
Quote:
Well, this may be true, dys. From what I understand about Islam they have no problem with having sex with children. Their own beloved prophet married a girl of six and had sex (raped her IMO) at the age of nine. Mind you, I realize he (Michael Jackson) was found not guilty. But, in cases like these, I prefer to err on the side of the child.

Sad thing is, all he needs to do is ask God to forgive him and stop doing it (that is, if he is doing it.)


I just want to clarify something ::

Having sex with children is extremly prohibited in Islam.

And the info you have about The Prophet (peace be upon him) is completely wrong!
Prophet Mohamed never married a six year old girl!

You can have more info on that on Wikipedia ::

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad%27s_marriages

And for more info on Prophet Mohamed ::

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

Please READ them ... It wont take time.

-------

About the topic ::

Homosexuality is also extremely prohibited in Islam as well as Pedophilia...

So, if the charges against Michael Jackson are true... HE IS COMPLETELY UNWELCOME IN ISLAM!

Thanks.

0 Replies
 
Arella Mae
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2006 12:10 pm
MuslimK,

Exactly how old was Aisha when she married Muhammed? I couldn't find that information.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2006 12:14 pm
Momma Angel wrote:
MuslimK,

Exactly how old was Aisha when she married Muhammed? I couldn't find that information.


From Wikipedia:

Quote:
Young marriage age controversy

The age of Aisha at marriage is an extremely contentious issue. On the one hand, there are several hadiths which are said to have been narrated by Aisha herself, which claim that she was six or seven years old when betrothed and nine when the marriage was consummated. On the other hand, an early Muslim chronicler, Ibn Ishaq, claims that Aisha may have been 14 to 16 years old, just past the age of puberty, or perhaps even older.

Most Muslim scholars have accepted the tradition that Aisha was nine years old when the marriage was consummated. This has in turn led critics to denounce Muhammad for having sexual relations with a girl so young, which in modern times would be classified as child sexual abuse. A response to this criticism has been that Aisha was post-pubescent at nine and that early marriages were common in most cultures until fairly recent times.

However, some Muslim scholars point to other traditions that conflict with those attributed to Aisha in this matter. If the other traditions are right, this would imply that Aisha was either confused in her dating, was exaggerating her youth at marriage, or that her stories (which were not written down until more than 100 years after her death) had been garbled in transmission. If we believe traditions that say she was post-pubescent when married, then these other traditions, from Ibn Ishaq and Tabari and others, seem much more convincing.

From the viewpoint of the Islamic clergy, the ulema, this explanation, while relieving them of one difficulty, poses another. The "late marriage" argument values the biographical and historical literature, the sira, over the canonical hadith, or oral traditions accepted by the ulema. However, anything that threatens the value of the hadith, and especially hadith narrated by Aisha, threatens the whole elaborate structure of Islamic law, or sharia. The Shi'a version of sharia is less at risk in this one instance, as the Shi'a deprecate anything sourced to Aisha.

Liberal Muslims do not see any problem with saving Muhammad's character, as there is no definitive proof of either side. Conservative Muslims, and the ulema, tend to embrace the "early puberty" theories.
[edit]

Evidence of age nine at consummation

These traditions are from the hadith collections of Bukhari (d. 870) and Muslim b. al-Hajjaj (d. 875). These two collections are regarded as the most authentic by Sunni Muslims.

* Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310: 'Aisha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

* Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88 Narrated 'Urwa: The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

* Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).

* Sahih Bukhari 8:151, Narrated 'Aisha: "I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet , and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)

* Sahih Bukhari vol. 5, Book 58, Number 234 Narrated 'Aisha: The prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six. We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Harith Kharzraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage).

Other hadith in Bukhari repeat this information.
[edit]

Evidence of older age

* According to Ibn Hisham's recension of Ibn Ishaq's (d. 768) biography of Prophet Muhammad, the Sirat Rashul Allah, the earliest surviving biography of Muhammad, Aisha accepted Islam before Umar ibn al-Khattab. If true, then Aisha accepted Islam during the first few years of Islam. She could not have been less than 14 years in 1 AH - the time she got married[citation needed].

* Tabari reports that when Abu Bakr planned on migrating to Ethiopia (8 years before Hijrah), he went to Mut`am - with whose son Aisha was engaged at that time - and asked him to take Aisha as his son's wife. Mut`am refused because Abu Bakr had converted to Islam. If Aisha was only six years old at the time of her betrothal to Muhammad, she could not have been born at the time Abu Bakr decided on migrating to Ethiopia. Tehqiq e umar e Siddiqah e Ka'inat, Habib ur Rahman Kandhalwi, p. 38.

* Tabari in his treatise on Islamic history reports that Abu Bakr had four children and all four were born during the Jahiliyyah - the pre Islamic period. If Aisha was born in the period of jahiliyyah, she could not have been less than 14 years in 1 AH. Tarikh al-umam wa al-mamloo'k, Al-Tabari, Vol. 4, p. 50.

* According to Ibn Hajar, Fatima was five years older than Aisha. Fatima is reported to have been born when Muhammad was 35 years old. Muhammad migrated to Medina when he was 52, making Aisha 14 years old in 1 AH. Tamyeez al-Sahaabah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaniy, Vol. 4, p. 377.
0 Replies
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 11/16/2024 at 07:35:27