Deportation of Muslim Extremists ?

[*d*]

Good point. Muslims are required to "submit" and "obey." They are probably the two most commonly used words in the Qur'an. Even the "Islam" means submission. There is no choice in a Muslim society. Anyone rejecting Islam has to be killed. You're not even allowed to possess a bible. Islam is more than a religion. It's an all consuming lifestyle. In an Islamic country, you go to an Islamic school, you submit yourself to the religion and you're ruled by an Islamic dictator following Islamic law. The only way out of it is death. A total Islamic indoctrination is required to get people to do the horrific things that they do in the name of Islam.

Christianity is all about choice. Here are the facts, you make the choice.

I just want to make one thing clear. I don't have anything against Muslims. I've known many in my life and I've found nearly all of them to be fine people. I am currently trying to educate myself on their religion. What I've learned so far is nothing short of shocking. I have nothing against Muslims but I condemn their religion. I believe that it's time we all start to understand that this Islamic fundamentalism is the problem.

Keep trying to educate yourself on the Islamic faith, Cinema. Eventually you'll figure it out. Your fine Muslim friends did. Some day you could be as compassionate as them.
PS. Islamic fundamentalism is not the problem. Its just the dirty tool used of a greater political problem.

 

[George OTJ]

Christianity is all about choice. Here are the facts, you make the choice.

More bullshit! Wasn't their an article not long ago about women being ordained as Catholic priests in the middle of the Saint Lawrence River because the Catholic church couldn't interfer in what is considered international waters. You're allowed to choose as long as the guy in charge says it's ok.

Your whole argument of "submit" and "obey" is nonsense. Aren't we as Canadians required to "submit" and "obey" to the laws of Canada? If you could take that literally then explain why there are so many cops, and prisons, and inmates. (If you're American, please sub the appropriate words.)

Nice try in trying to change the topic by the way. We were talking aout Muslims; not Muslim countries or Muslim extremists. Once again you're claiming Muslims don't have free will, and that's nonsense.

 

[George OTJ]

The crusades were a military response to Islamic agression when they took over the holy land.

and that made the raping and murder of innocents ok? Right! People can jutify anything in the name of their own religion.

 

[Musketeer]

It's sad to see that most of the London and Madrid bombers were 'homegrown.' Most were raised in Britain, went to school there, had jobs, families and friends there. They weren't flown in 'terrorists' with a job to do. These guys could have been your neighbours.

One of the terrorists came into Britain claiming refugee status and he repaid the kindness of the British people for allowing him in, by bombing them.

I totally agree with the policies of Tony Blair to root out the radical clerics and to deport 'extemists' who are poisoning young minds and recruiting them to commit such heinous deeds. In France, Italy, Spain and Holland they are now doing the same.

Canada should be much more vigilant with its open door immigtration and refugee policy. It's time we woke up and stop being the ostrich burying its head in the sand.

No one in Canada wants to talk openly about these things, until one day, unfortunately a terrorist act happens here. No politician or even the press has the guts here to talk openly about our flawed immigration and
refugee system, potential terrorist cells, radical Islamic clerics and extremists living among us.

These things are debated openly in the European media and European politicians aren't afraid to tackle these issues for fear of losing a few ethnic votes. It's time we opened these issues up for debate here as well.

 

[George OTJ]

I just want to make one thing clear. I don't have anything against Muslims. I've known many in my life and I've found nearly all of them to be fine people. I am currently trying to educate myself on their religion. What I've learned so far is nothing short of shocking. I have nothing against Muslims but I condemn their religion. I believe that it's time we all start to understand that this Islamic fundamentalism is the problem.

LMFAO Reminds me of the old sick joke "I'm not prejudice, I think every one should own a black man. If I was prejudice, then only certain people could own one."

*My apologies to any how are offended by that. *

 

[George OTJ]

These things are debated openly in the European media and European politicians aren't afraid to tackle these issues for fear of losing a few ethnic votes. It's time we opened these issues up for debate here as well.

Agreed. We should do this while we can approach the issues with calm and rational thoughts. We shouldn't wait until we are forced by pain, loss, anger to deal with these important issues of protecting all Canadians.

 

[Musketeer]

Agreed. We should do this while we can approach the issues with calm and rational thoughts. We shouldn't wait until we are forced by pain, loss, anger to deal with these important issues of protecting all Canadians.

DITTO! Precisely what I meant. Thanks George.

 

[Truncador]

You're saying Muslims have no free will? LOL Bullshit!

No, I'm saying that Muslims, unlike Christians, are obliged to follow an exhaustive set of religious laws covering every aspect of life and which can never be revised or altered (i.e. any form of religious innovation is deemed to be categorically sinful). Their tradition doesn't even allow for the possibility of re-interpreting religious laws, since the jurisprudence of their church fathers is considered to be as absolutely authoritative and binding as the revealed laws themselves. In this respect, Islam is even worse than a police-State.

 

[George OTJ]

No, I'm saying that Muslims, unlike Christians, are obliged to follow an exhaustive set of religious laws covering every aspect of life and which can never be revised or altered (i.e. any form of religious innovation is deemed to be categorically sinful). Their tradition doesn't even allow for the possibility of re-interpreting religious laws, since the jurisprudence of their church fathers is considered to be as absolutely authoritative and binding as the revealed laws themselves. In this respect, Islam is even worse than a police-State.

Re-read your post - you're saying that by being Muslims, they have no choice in how they observe their religion and live their lives.

And personally, I resent your implication that Canadian Muslims are living in a police state!

 

[oldjones]

No, I'm saying that Muslims, unlike Christians, are obliged to follow an exhaustive set of religious laws covering every aspect of life and which can never be revised or altered (i.e. any form of religious innovation is deemed to be categorically sinful). Their tradition doesn't even allow for the possibility of re-interpreting religious laws, since the jurisprudence of their church fathers is considered to be as absolutely authoritative and binding as the revealed laws themselves. In this respect, Islam is even worse than a police-State.

If that was true there would be no Muslims sects like Sunnis, Shiites and so on. The fact that there are such sects in Christianity as Syrian Orthodox, Maronite, Coptic (never mind ones as modern as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) is likewise proof that Christians (the humans, not their god) "are obliged to follow an exhaustive set of religious laws covering … etc etc." Those who choose to follow other beliefs or practices, or revere one "church father" [a rather odd usage when referring to Islam] rather than another, had to set up their own sects: Lutherans, Ismailis etc. Choice I call it.

What people forget is that Islam is only 1300 years old. If we compare it to Catholicism that means its Reformation's a couple of centuries to come. And an Orthodocx Christian would say "What Reformation?"

When we talk of a Christianity of choice, we're referring to today's secularized churches—not including to the Irish, of course—only the ecumenical ones at that. The better comparison would be to the Christianity that routinely slaughtered its "heretics" in numbers unknown until the Holocaust. Or maybe nice Anglicans who burned at the stake anyone they suspected of "freely choosing" Roman catholicism over the English flavour.

We haven't invented a religion yet that fanatic true believers haven't cited to justify the murder of those they don't like, and that would include nice American Baptist and Pentacostals firing crosses on their lawns to 'welcome' Jews and Catholics to the neighbourhood.

As to Muslims being forbidden the Bible; were that so, how did Christians and Jews acquire the honorific Peoples of the Book?

 

[brianzen]

Yeah, there's just a bunch of hyperbolic reactivity. The Brits, make that Blair, are chasing to get into the good light. I, having seen idiots firebomb the hindu temple in Hamilton because they thought they were attacking muslims, would rather we not engage in discriminatory practices. Encouraging dialogue, such as the recent statement from Canadian imams, is the more practical and longlasting action.

 

[Truncador]

If that was true there would be no Muslims sects like Sunnis, Shiites and so on.

Actually it is. The following Hadith spells it out in black and white:

Wa sharrul Umoori Muhdathaatuhaa, Wa kulla Bid'atin dhaialah, wa kulla dhalatin fin-naar (Every innovation is misguidance and every misguidance goes to Hell fire)

The fact that there are such sects in Christianity as Syrian Orthodox, Maronite, Coptic (never mind ones as modern as the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints) is likewise proof that Christians (the humans, not their god) "are obliged to follow an exhaustive set of religious laws covering … etc etc."

The heart and soul of Christian doctrine is that submission to God relieves the individual of the obligations to observe the Law, which itself is rendered irrelevant by Christ's death on the cross, won't help you get into God's good graces at best, and provides an occasion for the sins of hypocrisy and pride at worst.

In practise, of course, things get considerably more complicated than that. All the great Abrahamic faiths (and the secular political ideologies which emerged upon their horizon: liberalism, socialism, fascism, etc.) severely censure certain behaviours they regard as expressions of a human impulse to disorder and disobedience (esp. gambling, intoxication, extra-marital sex and above all homosexuality, carrying weapons (modern Christians/Socialists), body modification, most forms of dance, theatre, representational art, and music) and always use the power of the State to supress these things wherever possible. And any Christian denomination that can is going to get itself established as the official Church and make life a living hell for those who pick the wrong religion. In these respects Christianity and Islam are about as different as McDonald's and Burger King.

The key difference, though, is that in Christianity it's always possible to challenge legalism, both on the abovementioned grounds and the doctrine of separation of Church and State inscribed in the structure of Christian theology (according to which the State, as a profane institution founded on the sin of pride, can never make men truly moral). No such openings exist in the Islamic doctrine AFAIK. Where Christianity constituted itself as a libertarian rebellion against law, Islam constituted itself as an authoritarian bestowal of law on the lawless, and moreover as a State (the Arabic language does not even have words covering the Western distinction between spiritual and temporal authority).

As to Muslims being forbidden the Bible; were that so, how did Christians and Jews acquire the honorific Peoples of the Book?

Their theory is that the Judeo-Christian books extant today have been corrupted and are worthless.

 

[George OTJ]

For those who think we should be focused on Muslims, read this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/al_qaida_new_generation

Angry Outsiders Boosting al-Qaida's Ranks

By DANICA KIRKA, Associated Press Writer 54 minutes ago

LONDON - They had roots in Pakistan, Ethiopia, Somalia and Jamaica: the suspected al-Qaida foot soldiers in Britain were immigrants or were children of immigrants — a new breed of recruits that underscores the changes in the organization since the Sept. 11 attacks, say experts studying the London bombings.

These experts, who include a pioneer in personality profiling, say al-Qaida, always loosely knit, is mutating into satellites that attract local operatives bound by disenchantment with the Western societies in which they grew up. It is no longer a hierarchy with
Osama bin Laden calling the shots, they say.

"Al-Qaida version 1.0 is functionally dead," said Jerrold Post, a founding director of the
CIA's Center for the Analysis of Personality and Political Behavior. "Al-Qaida version 2.0 is almost more an ideology. ... It's an adaptive organization responding to a crisis."

With its founding fathers in hiding, and dozens of key operatives under watch, al-Qaida has changed. No longer considered capable of large transnational attacks, it is taking advantage of people who don't have to cross borders, receive cash from abroad or engage in other international transactions that might alert authorities, said Brian Jenkins, a senior adviser to the president of the Rand Corp....

Targeting Muslims won't make us any safer. I'll repeat what I said back on page 1.

leave religion and race out of it!

Focus on those who would do us harm!

 

[George OTJ]

PS Truncador - You're using different words but you're still saying the same thing - that by being Muslims, they have no choice in how they observe their religion and live their lives. And that is still bullshit!

 

[strange1]

Canada (as well as many countries including Iraq) is full of moslems who are not fundamentalist and have many different interpretations as to how to follow their faith. As examples, many Moslem women will not wear a hijab on a regular basis. Many Moslems do not restrict themselves to halal meat. I have even known some who will eat pork. Contrast this with the stereotypical Afgan woman under the taliban. How can you claim that there is no choice? As with other religions, there is always a difference in interpretations.

States will promote the views of those in power. When fundamentalists are in power, the laws will promote fundamentalism. When moderates are in power, there rulings will allow the freedoms we are used to. This is true for any country, east or west, Christian, Moslem, Jewish, Hindu, ......

 

[Cinema Face]

No one is advocating that we target Muslims. Violence draws violence. What we need is to really understand our enemy, and yes, Islamic fundamentalism is our enemy whether we choose to accept it or not.

Muslims are not our enemy. Islamic fundamentalism is.

I believe in a global village, where we live together in peace and in the betterment of humanity. I have no problem with anyone who wants to come to this country and start a new life.

I have a huge problem with people who come to this country and advocate killing and destroying what we have built here. IMHO, they forfeit their right to be here and we need to take steps to protect ourselves from these hateful, intolerant people.

In this small world we live in, there is no room for hatred. I refuse to tolerate someone else’s intolerance.

I choose to try to understand what makes a person want to kill us, innocent people who did nothing wrong, in the misguided belief that there is more honor in killing themselves and some of us rather than try to co-exist with us.

 

[George OTJ]

No one is advocating that we target Muslims.

Give us a break! Do you read your own posts? Or Truncadors? Did you read the title of this thread? You're not against Muslims, just the people who follow Islam! Wow, what am I missing here?

I'm not against the followers of Islam; I am against Terrorists without regard to their religion, race, nationality, or any other division you'd care to name. My concern with the attitudes you and others have expressed is that authorities will focus there efforts on one group and miss the Terrorists that don't fall into that profile.

 

[oldjones]

PS Truncador - You're using different words but you're still saying the same thing - that by being Muslims, they have no choice in how they observe their religion and live their lives. And that is still bullshit!

What he said. Transliterating a hadith (which is a narration about the Prophet, not a part of the Qu'ran and has the authority one accords it, or those who say it has authority. One might compare Talmudic writings or the books of tha Apocrypha, or the Book of Mormon) It doesn't speak to my point: numerous Muslim sects demonstrate that there are numerous choices within Islam, each of course claiming to be the exclusive holder of true belief and that all others are misguided. Christianity is no different; any number of the born again will tell you the Popes sit at Satan's right hand in Hell. I myself was officially declared by the Catholic church to be a heathen and therefore damned (The priest married us anyway—he too was married BTW—but he had to get permission from Rome)

As to the difference between the libertarian virtues of 'pure' Christianity vs. the unfortunate practices of those Christians unfortuinate enough to achieve some power to deny choice to others: who cares? It's the same distinction that can be made between 'true' Islamic practice and the 'deviant' variety espoused by whatever sect you dislike.

Granted Arabic and Islam don't separate religion and state as we like to think we do. But don't talk that way too loudly in the "one nation under God" whose judges think memorializing the Ten Commandments (that'd be the 'legalism' Christians believe were supplanted by the commandments to "love thy God with all thy soul and thy neighbour as thyself" (Matthew 22:35, sorry I'm not giving the original Greek)

Again, I'd argue that given an inch the Christian true believers would have religion (theirs of course) so commingled w/ the state, you'd never separate them. On the other hand, I'm led to believe that although Bosnia was majority Muslim, it's official constitution was as secular as any Western state; Turkey's been rigorously secular and almost anti-Islamic since Ataturk, and the most populous Islamic country in the world shows a very tolerant face to non-believers

Q: In which country is there more religious freedom; England or France? In which country is there a state religion with the Head of State as the Head of the Church? We both know the answer: England, and the revolution they had to acquire a bit of that free choice you talk about wasn't completed for centuries, though pretty much everyone lost the stomach for fighting when they chopped off the king's head.

Which left the Civil War for the Englishmen in the colonies to continue into the next century, and resulted in another Bill of Rights—which a constant stream of court cases demonstrates is still more an ideal than a fact. And I'm not sure how you can excuse GBII's insistance on state support for faith-based (that'd be his faith) charities and nonsense like "creation science", if it's Christianity that separates church and state. The recent debate about same sex marriage certainly revealed how ready many of us are to deny to others the happiness we take as our right because of something some god supposedly told someone sometime ago.

Here's the thing: you can't discuss this with believers because they know the truth, the way and the light. Among non-believers the discussion's pretty much pointless—except to reveal the underlying prejudices installed early on by their culture—because there ain't no such animal as Christianity or Islam, just a bunch of variant practices espoused by various adherants in varying numbers. We agreed on free religious practce, and no state faves because it's practical.

Besides, I thought what we Christians cared about and judged people on was what they did not what they believed and we thought they might do. Here endeth my feeble attempt to get back on topic: Tony's rather repugnant and useless proposal for hygenic deportation.

Mizpah

 

[Cinema Face]

A well written post OJ. However, I disagree that Mulsims in an Islamic country have the choices you talk about.

In most Islamic countries, Muslims are compelled to submit to Islam under penalty of death. Theirs is a life of ignorance, despair, tyranny and mind-numbing ritual. Yes, there are some exceptions. You mentioned Turkey. There's also UAE. However, there are far too many examples of religious intolerance in countries like SA, Iran, Egypt, Libya, Algeria, Pakistan, Afghanistan and many others.

Non-Islamic people in an predominantly Islamic country are killed and persecuted. Look at the Coptics in Egypt, consider that Mulsims in Sudan have killed more than 3 million Christians and other Muslims in the last 20 years, look at the Islamic violence in Indonisia, remember what happen during the Miss Universe pagent in Nigeria when rioting Muslims killed hundreds of Christians.


Here's some more examples of Islamic "freedom" of religion:

http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/news/bn2005/bn-2005-01-28.htm

http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/news/bn2005/bn-2005-07-14.htm

http://www.freedomhouse.org/religion/news/bn2005/bn-2005-04-06.htm

“The government of Iran is one of the only states in the world to put someone on trial for his life solely for his religious belief,”

Qur’an 33:36 “It is not fitting for a Muslim man or woman to have any choice in their affairs when a matter has been decided for them by Allah and His Messenger. They have no option. If any one disobeys Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a wrong Path.”


Qur’an 3:131 “Fear the Fire, which is prepared for those who reject Faith: and obey Allah and the Messenger.”

Qur’an 3:19 “Lo! religion with Allah (is) Surrender.”

 

[Cinema Face]

A few more examples of Islamic freedom of religion:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/004660.php

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3974179.stm

http://www.canadianchristianity.com/cgi-bin/na.cgi?nationalupdates/041110rally