5 Ridiculous Things you Probably Believe About Islam

[Bob Hubbard]

http://www.islamophobiatoday.com/20...lous-things-you-probably-believe-about-islam/
http://www.cracked.com/article_18911_5-ridiculous-things-you-probably-believe-about-islam.html

#5. If You’re a Muslim Woman, You Have to Wear the Veil

#4. Our Founding Fathers Would Never Have Tolerated This Muslim Nonsense!

#3. “Muslim” Equals “Arab”

#2. Western Cultures Are Far More Humane Than the Bloodthirsty Muslims

#1. Islam Is Stuck in the Dark Ages


The article makes some insane comments to rebut these. Claiming that Arabs invented math, and that Jefferson celebrated Islamic feasts in the White House for example. It totally glosses over the new requirements of all the Sharia laws being enacted across the US that will soon force people like me who enjoy shooting naked women to convert or get my block hacked off.

What utter nonsense.

 

[granfire]

I call troll on you, Mister!

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Naw, just being sarcastic. Personally, I'm not sure I'd consider Cracked a viable source. I still think of them as a MAD wannabe.

 

[billc]

http://americanvision.org/1631/thomas-jefferson-koran/

thomas jefferson and the muslim pirates.

From the article:

Jefferson, embroiled in a war with Islamic terrorists in his day, commented, “Too long, for the honor of nations, have those Barbarians been [permitted] to trample on the sacred faith of treaties, on the rights and laws of human nature!”[1] Little has changed since the eighteenth century. In Joseph Wheelan’s well researched and highly readable book on America’s first war on terror with Islam, we learn that “Jefferson’s war pitted a modern republic with a free-trade, entrepreneurial creed against a medieval autocracy whose credo was piracy and terror.

The opening line of the “Marines’ Hymn”—“From the Halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Tripoli”—commemorates the Mexican War (1846–1848) and the war with Tripoli when Marines took Part 1n the capture of Derna on April 27, 1805.

So what did Jefferson learn from the Koran? As early as 1786, Jefferson, who was serving as the ambassador to France, and John Adams, the Ambassador to Britain, met in London with Ambassador Abdrahaman, the Dey of Tripoli’s ambassador to Britain, in an attempt to negotiate a peace treaty based on Congress’ vote of funding. Peace would come at a price. If America wanted “temporary peace,” a one-year guarantee, it would cost $66,000 plus a 10% commission. “Everlasting peace” was a bargain at $160,000 plus the obligatory commission. This only applied to Tripoli. Other nations would also have to be paid. The amount came to $1.3 million. But as we saw above, there was no assurance that the treaties would be honored. In vain Jefferson and Adams tried to argue that the United States were not at war with Tripoli. In what way had the U.S provoked the Muslims, they asked? Ambassador Abdrahaman went on to explain “the finer points of Islamic jihad” to the Koranically challenged Jefferson and Adams. In a letter to John Jay, Jefferson wrote the following:

The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman [Muslim] who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.[5]

 

[billc]

http://www.khouse.org/articles/2007/691/

from this article:

looked for an answer to that question this past week. What I found was absolutely fascinating: Jefferson needed that copy of the Koran because he was desperate to learn something about Islam from that religion’s written de facto standard of all things Muslim. Why? Because the United States was going to war in the early 1800s against conservative, Wahhabi-type, radical Muslims.

(As only the third president of the United States, Jefferson had no CIA to feed intelligence data to him and to his national security advisor. Come to think of it, Jefferson had no national security officer.)

“And so it happened that agreements were reached be-tween the United States and rulers of the Barbary Coast. In exchange for cash payments, the rulers pledged to guarantee the safe passage of American ships and to put a stop to the practice of maritime kidnapping. As the 18th-century came to a close, Americans were cautiously optimistic that they had solved the Barbary problem.

“By 1801, however, it became clear that the policy of appeasement had failed. The Pasha of Tripoli, who five years earlier had been satisfied with a payment of $56,000, now demanded increasingly larger sums. When they were not forthcoming, piracy resumed. The same held true for the other Barbary states. The Algerians received payments from the U.S. totaling $990,000 plus another $585,000 in 1793 to cover the ransom of 11 American ships. These were extraordinary sums for a nation with a budget of no more than $7 million, but the appetite of the Muslim states seemed to grow evermore insatiable.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

And yet:

As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion,—as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquility, of Mussulmen,—and as the said States never entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

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

And later treaties made clear the US wasn't at war with Islam. It did however take another war to settle things once and for all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Barbary_War

 

[billc]

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/05/fitzgerald-jefferson-the-adamses-and-making-sense.html

And this was John Quincy Adams on Islam:

"Adopting from the sublime conception of the Mosaic law, the doctrine of one omnipotent God; he connected indissolubly with it, the audacious falsehood, that he was himself his prophet and apostle. Adopting from the new Revelation of Jesus, the faith and hope of immortal life, and of future retribution, he humbled it to the dust by adapting all the rewards and sanctions of his religion to the gratification of the sexual passion. He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. THE ESSENCE OF HIS DOCTRINE WAS VIOLENCE AND LUST; TO EXALT THE BRUTAL OVER THE SPIRITUAL PART OF HUMAN NATURE (Capitals in original)...Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant...While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men."
And Adams concluded:

"As the essential principle of his [Muhammad's] faith is the subjugation of others by the sword; it is only by force, that his false doctrines can be dispelled, and his power annihilated."
As one reads and ponders these remarks by Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, and John Quincy Adams, one is struck by the self-assurance that they represent civilization, and that Islam and its representatives did not, and it would have been ludicrous to pretend otherwise.

 

[billc]

Thomas Jefferson and islam:

http://www.independentconservative.com/2007/01/04/thomas_jefferson_koran_islam/

From the article:

Given Jefferson’s library had religious books from around the world and various times. His owning a Koran does not prove any reverence for Islam any more than his copy of “William King’s Historical Account of the Heathen Gods and Heroes”, which was a popular book of that time, but not regarded as something to revere.
Jefferson had a Koran and he also had
…multiple copies of the Old Testament, editions of the Bible incorporating both Old and New Testaments, and several copies of the New Testament in a number of different scholarly editions.
…
If volume means anything he obviously cared about Islam less. The order of his religious books went from the pagan to moral. Starting with books about things like Greek and Roman gods, then the Koran and ended with his larger volume of Jewish and Christian material. The order of his books was significant. Jefferson held the Koran in a lower regard than Jewish and Christian works.
The author later notes this truth in saying:
…
The idea of progress underlies Jefferson’s organization of his religious books, and the list suggests a general progression from pagan to Christian.
…
The organization of the library catalogue implies that the Islamic belief system was an improvement over the pagan religions yet fell short of the belief system Christianity represented.

 

[billc]

Jefferson's iftar: from wikipedia on the iftar

Robert Smith, Secretary of the Navy, had learned earlier that week that Mellimelli would not eat before sunset during Ramadan, information that likely informed the timing of his Jefferson's sunset dinner later in the week.[5]

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Jefferson also did some "editing" to the Christian Bible, removing a lot of the 'nonsense" from it.

 

[billc]

From Robert Spencer, head of Jihadwatch.com and his column at frontpagemag.com: http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=35139

The idea that Islamic culture was once a beacon of learning and enlightenment is a commonly held myth. In fact, much of this has been exaggerated, often for quite transparent apologetic motives. The astrolabe was developed, if not perfected, long before Muhammad was born. The zero, which is often attributed to Muslims, and what we know today as “Arabic numerals” did not originate in Arabia , but in pre-Islamic India . Aristotle’s work was preserved in Arabic not initially by Muslims at all, but by Christians such as the fifth century priest Probus of Antioch, who introduced Aristotle to the Arabic-speaking world. Another Christian, Huneyn ibn-Ishaq (809-873), translated many works by Aristotle, Galen, Plato and Hippocrates into Syriac. His son then translated them into Arabic. The Syrian Christian Yahya ibn ‘Adi (893-974) also translated works of philosophy into Arabic, and wrote one of his own, The Reformation of Morals. His student, another Christian named Abu ‘Ali ‘Isa ibn Zur’a (943-1008), also translated Aristotle and others from Syriac into Arabic. The first Arabic-language medical treatise was written by a Christian priest and translated into Arabic by a Jewish doctor in 683. The first hospital was founded in Baghdad during the Abbasid caliphate -- not by a Muslim, but a Nestorian Christian. A pioneering medical school was founded at Gundeshapur in Persia — by Assyrian Christians.

In sum, there was a time when it was indeed true that Islamic culture was more advanced than that of Europeans, but that superiority corresponds exactly to the period when Muslims were able to draw on and advance the achievements of Byzantine and other civilizations. But when the Muslim overlords had taken what they could from their subject peoples, and the Jewish and Christian communities had been stripped of their material and intellectual wealth and thoroughly subdued, Islam went into a period of intellectual decline from which it has not yet recovered.

 

[Sukerkin]

Lots to get my teeth into here . I have to rush off to practise waving swords around, however, so I shall have to wait.

I just wanted to say that, aye, there has been a good deal of gilding the lily when it comes to the contributions of what are now the Arab-and-or-Islamic nations to world history and culture.

We all build upon the work of others at the end of the day. After all, if you wanted to you could very easily argue that the British Empire caused the greatest increase in science and industry that the world has ever seen. But without some key work that had been done elsewhere and elsewhen in the history of humanity then it would never have happened.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney

"A MAN WITH A CONVICTION is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point." So wrote the celebrated Stanford University psychologist Leon Festinger (PDF), in a passage that might have been referring to climate change denial—the persistent rejection, on the part of so many Americans today, of what we know about global warming and its human causes. But it was too early for that—this was the 1950s—and Festinger was actually describing a famous case study in psychology.

 

[elder999]

http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/03/denial-science-chris-mooney

.

Because today we live in a society in which spurious realities are manufactured by the media, by governments, by big corporations, by religious groups, political groups...So I ask, in my writing, What is real? Because unceasingly we are bombarded with pseudo-realities manufactured by very sophisticated people using very sophisticated electronic mechanisms. I do not distrust their motives; I distrust their power. They have a lot of it. And it is an astonishing power: that of creating whole universes, universes of the mind. I ought to know. I do the same thing."
— Philip K. Dick

 

[Bob Hubbard]

The interesting thing is, if say 25% of the article is wrong, that still leaves 75% correct.
If half is wrong, half is still right.
If 75% wrong, 25% is still correct.

I wonder if those in a rush to find fault will also validate and confirm when they find the articles conclusions correct?

 

[granfire]

The interesting thing is, if say 25% of the article is wrong, that still leaves 75% correct.
If half is wrong, half is still right.
If 75% wrong, 25% is still correct.

I wonder if those in a rush to find fault will also validate and confirm when they find the articles conclusions correct?

:lfao:
are you holding your breath?

 

[elder999]

The interesting thing is, if say 25% of the article is wrong, that still leaves 75% correct.
If half is wrong, half is still right.
If 75% wrong, 25% is still correct.

I wonder if those in a rush to find fault will also validate and confirm when they find the articles conclusions correct?

.

The pre-Socratic Greek philosopher Parmenides taught that the only things that are real are things which never change... and the pre-Socratic Greek philosopher Heraclitus taught that everything changes. If you superimpose their two views, you get this result: Nothing is real."
— Philip K. Dick

 

[Bob Hubbard]

:lfao:
are you holding your breath?

Nope. Tried that once, got a cease and desist notice from the attorneys for the Smurfs. Said I was "Too Smurfing Smurf like, and they'd Smurf my Smurf if I didn't Smurfing cut it out.".

 

[Blade96]

Smurf off.

 

[yorkshirelad]

http://www.islamophobiatoday.com/20...lous-things-you-probably-believe-about-islam/
http://www.cracked.com/article_18911_5-ridiculous-things-you-probably-believe-about-islam.html.

#5. If You’re a Muslim Woman, You Have to Wear the Veil.

No one HAS to wear anything. I can walk around Newport Beach, stark bollock naked if I want, but I will not like the repercussions.

#4. Our Founding Fathers Would Never Have Tolerated This Muslim Nonsense!
The founding fathers treated women like second class citizens, owned slaves and would duel you to the death if you insulted them. Sound familiar!

#3. “Muslim” Equals “Arab”.
Let's not forget Louis Farrakhan and the Persians.

#2. Western Cultures Are Far More Humane Than the Bloodthirsty Muslims.
No, not at all....Oh, I forgot, we don't execute homosexuals and adulterous women.

#1. Islam Is Stuck in the Dark Ages.
Not at all, after all, surely wanting the destruction of a neighbouring country is the epitome of enlightenment!


What utter nonsense
Yes, pretty much!