Associate
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,727
- Location
- Wiltshire
What relationship do i have with the van driver?
Finsbury Park Van Attack
- Thread starter FrenchTart
- Start date
- Status
They don't collectively hold blame for some idiots. Did you apologise for that prat whos the subject of this thread? I didn't...
Can't remember which attack it was trying to find the links but the attackers were reported to police by Muslims and evidently not enough was done about it.
I don't see how you can lay blame to them all when all they do is share similarities in every day life.
Deleted member 68110
Deleted member 68110
Putting aside the fact many Muslims have done exactly what you falsely claim they have not, if Thomas Mair or Darren Osborne say they acted on behalf of white people, or British people, or any other set of people, you feel all of those white people, or all British people etc should "collectively hold their hands up and take some responsibility"?
Because if not and you differentiate between the 2, we're back to looking up "bigot" in the dictionary.
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,727
- Location
- Wiltshire
If somebody in my family killed someone, they don't suddenly stop being part of my family.
Why do muslims who commit terror in the name of their beliefs suddenly stop being Islamic?
Why do muslims who commit terror in the name of their beliefs suddenly stop being Islamic?
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,727
- Location
- Wiltshire
What shared beliefs do white people have?
All Muslims read from the Quran, do they not?
Deleted member 68110
Deleted member 68110
Why are you avoiding the question by asking something completely unrelated?
Just to follow on from my last post:
Just had a look. Mair shouted "This is for Britain" when he murdered Jo Cox.
@MatteH Oxford - If you're British can you show us where you...held up your hands and took some form of responsibility?
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,727
- Location
- Wiltshire
Well, I don't have any British literature that I follow telling me to kill in its name, unlike some faiths I could mention.
Well family is family you can't change that, you can always change your faith but if you don't something which is considered a sin and don't repent and ask forgiveness from god and the person you have wronged and refrain form doing it again your not practicing your faith very well.
Killing civilians is considered a major a sin in Islam be it a muslim or none muslim its a sin.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,727
- Location
- Wiltshire
Only in they are muslim, converting or agree to submit to the will of Allah i.e. beome a dhimmi.
Everyone else is a kuffar/kaffir, and fair game (Yes I have read the Quran, I have of copy of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Koran_Interpreted)
You can't change your faith in Islam, the penalty for leaving is death!
No that is completely false if you have read the Quran you would know this. I don't see how you came to conclusion unless you read a versus out of context and missed the rest of the chapter...
I checked the traditional KJV version, since that's the most famous one.
The passages exist. If you picked up a bible and read it for yourself, how did you not see them?
The interpretation of some of the text is dubious, but only some. For example, the passages that site interprets as Jesus advocating killing disobedient children don't look that way to me. I interpret them as a counter-argument to people criticising Jesus for not following tradition/orders - he's saying that the people criticising him for not following tradition/orders also don't follow tradition/orders, so their criticism is hypocritical and invalid. It's a false equivalence (washing your hands really isn't on a par with killing your children) and thus sophistry, but it's not advocating killing disobedient children.
Other of the passages quoted are clearly as stated, though. For example, most of Matthew 10 is about Jesus sending his disciples out to brainwash people into destroying their own societies and killing their own relatives so that Jesus can take power over the weakened and divided society with people strongly bound to obeying him because they killed their relatives on his command. Standard power grab tyranny stuff, though worse than most.
I didn't check the stuff in Revelation because pretty much the whole book is weirdness that could mean anything. I think someone took far too much of a hallucinogen and had a really bad trip.
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,727
- Location
- Wiltshire
The famous quote is about killing innocents; it would be like ‘killing all of mankind’. The people who quote it leave out the address to the children of Israel and the following verse 5:33
5:32: “For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah’s sovereignty), but afterwards lo! Many of them become prodigals of the earth.”
5:33:
“Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,”
I know context well enough. People who don't either don't believe, follow other faiths or won't submit to ‘Allah’ are not innocent under the faith of Islam.
The penalty for apostasy in Islam is 100% the death sentence.
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 7,614
A public service announcement:
Islam is a set of voluntarily held beliefs. Skin colour is a genetically hard-wired feature.
When people suggest that the Muslim community take responsibility for the inordinate amount of dysfunction their belief system fosters, they are asking the Muslim community, not the Brown community. Replying with “something something white people” is deliberately disingenuous and designed to deflect and obfuscate.
End of public service announcement.
Islam is a set of voluntarily held beliefs. Skin colour is a genetically hard-wired feature.
When people suggest that the Muslim community take responsibility for the inordinate amount of dysfunction their belief system fosters, they are asking the Muslim community, not the Brown community. Replying with “something something white people” is deliberately disingenuous and designed to deflect and obfuscate.
End of public service announcement.
I'd rather hear their opinion than censor.
It's no longer freedom of speech if suppressed by government.
Correct. https://islamqa.info/en/20327
Why do people even bother quoting these fairy tale books.. What needs to happen, seeing that some people do take it too far, is simply ban the book and close the mosques.. Especially the Finsbury Park one, since it has history of radicalizing its members . Look at it this way, if it was a Christian white recruiting center preaching hate against anyone of colour, it would have been closed down in an instant.. Or another way to look at this is similar to owning a gun. 99.9% of gun owners are peaceful.. But they're banned cos the odd nutcase and the damage he can do. Same applies to Islam, is no different to a gun.. Proof that the religion has one too many nutjobs is the weekly attacks we're seeing.
Can't deny that a faith will all stick together. I'll never forget the night of Sept 11th 2001 after watching QuestionTime on the BBC, where they had an open forum, and a large percentage of the forum was muslim. Every single one was in defending what happened. This was before Afghanistan / Iraq were all invaded, (which is the excuse of today's terrorist) People just stick together, that will never change. The only way to dismantle and save innocent lives is stop / ban Islam. Explain that they've only been brainwashed and there really was no Mohammed. True story that ! They're only humans after all, can be changed. Once we show them there's a better way to live their lives and progress, they'll all be grateful and will look back at how bad they once were. (Nazi Germany anyone?)
Can't deny that a faith will all stick together. I'll never forget the night of Sept 11th 2001 after watching QuestionTime on the BBC, where they had an open forum, and a large percentage of the forum was muslim. Every single one was in defending what happened. This was before Afghanistan / Iraq were all invaded, (which is the excuse of today's terrorist) People just stick together, that will never change. The only way to dismantle and save innocent lives is stop / ban Islam. Explain that they've only been brainwashed and there really was no Mohammed. True story that ! They're only humans after all, can be changed. Once we show them there's a better way to live their lives and progress, they'll all be grateful and will look back at how bad they once were. (Nazi Germany anyone?)
freedom of speech is freedom from consequences as far as legal repercussions are concerned - that is the whole point of freedom of speech, what else do you suppose you're 'free' from otherwise in this context?
there are obviously constraints where you no longer have freedom of speech in specific scenarios - no country really has full freedom of speech, the US probably has the most freedom in this respect, the UK isn't so good in this respect
Like i said out on context and you have ignored all the other verses & chapters regarding the subject, why would god stay don't kill innocents, don't kill unless in self defence of your life etc then say the opposite in this versus?
You need to understand the historical context behind this chapter it can be found in Sahih al-Bukhari.
Heres a link it will explain it better than me :
https://discover-the-truth.com/2014/10/05/quran-533-the-punishment-of-those-who-wage-war/
https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/03/18/those-who-wage-war-and-make-mischief-quran-533/
That's a false equivalence. Muslims choose to follow a specific ideology - Islam. That's not equivalent to people having a similar skin colour or whatever the connection is that you're making with the incompetent stupid terrorist who's the subject of this thread.
Because they choose to share the same ideology.
I think it's not enough of a connection to justify blame and in any case I regard the fundamental basis of responsibility to be individual and not collective at all, but there is a difference between an ideology and a "race" or nationality.
It was more aimed at the terrorists views rather than the colour of his skin. I probably should have been clearer sorry. I guess more of his views will become known in time but if it was in response to the attacks it would suggest he held Muslims accountable in general for the actions of a few, exactly what the person I contested did.
Is believing all Muslims to be at fault not a choice?
Honestly I dont know how far the "can't leave Islam" rule is taken. I only have a singular anecdote where they were shunned by their family(so not ideal to back up a point). If it is a common thing when people leave the faith, considering they're born into it is it really a choice? Certainly not an easy one by any definition, to have to leave a life behind.
If I have it wrong I'm more than happy to be called out on it.
Muslims come out basically saying "this is not Islam as we recognise it". What more do you want? If I go and kill a dozen people and say that it's because I believe that's what it means to be a Christian then the church will disavow me and say it's nothing to do with them.
I'm not sure what people want from Muslims here. They can't be held collectively responsible for beliefs that don't universally - or even majorly - hold.
I'm not sure what people want from Muslims here. They can't be held collectively responsible for beliefs that don't universally - or even majorly - hold.
- Status