[OT] - Interview with a former Jihadist

M. Bréqs · Post by **M. Bréqs** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:51 pm

Contra wrote:how bout this, read mohammed's Haditha(hadiths-or biographies) and see how he lived it, "radical islam" whether this doctor says it or not is true islam as taught and lived by mohammed and his followers, so to say sunni's beliefs are more peaceful or shiite, is absurd. you do have peaceful muslims, but to true islamists they are secular, because they do not follow mohammed's teachings to a t.

and the day will come where they willl either have to join the true islamists, or fight for life with the rest of us, thats up to them.

check the book WW3:unmasking the end time beast,
written by Simon Altaf an ex-sunni muslim.

www.abrahamic-faith.org

I'll take a look later this evening, I can't get that site through the firewall at my current computer.

izniezot · Post by **izniezot** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:52 pm

that artikel is pure bullshit.

Contra · Post by **Contra** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 8:56 pm

M. Bréqs wrote:
Contra wrote:how bout this, read mohammed's Haditha(hadiths-or biographies) and see how he lived it, "radical islam" whether this doctor says it or not is true islam as taught and lived by mohammed and his followers, so to say sunni's beliefs are more peaceful or shiite, is absurd. you do have peaceful muslims, but to true islamists they are secular, because they do not follow mohammed's teachings to a t.

and the day will come where they willl either have to join the true islamists, or fight for life with the rest of us, thats up to them.

check the book WW3:unmasking the end time beast,
written by Simon Altaf an ex-sunni muslim.

www.abrahamic-faith.org

I'll take a look later this evening, I can't get that site through the firewall

at my current computer.

www.yourarmstoisrael.org

scroll down the screen to the bottom right see a lady with green on click on the articles menu.

read this for now, if u want.

http://yourarmstoisrael.org/Articles_ne ... 202006.pdf

btw, F all that the beast in the bible is the roman catholic church , keep believin that while the "radicals" come from behind and try to behead us all.

M. Bréqs · Post by **M. Bréqs** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 9:00 pm

izniezot wrote:that artikel is pure bullshit.

Excellent refutation... Wow. Your arguement is so well supported. If you haven't written a book on debate, you should! Gosh, I'll have to deconstruct your technique, that's masterful.

M. Bréqs · Post by **M. Bréqs** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 9:02 pm

noisetonepause wrote:
M. Bréqs wrote:I've been saying this for years
People have been saying what you're saying since Mohammed's time.

Yeah, and they've often had their heads chopped off for saying so. I actually fear for the Doctor's safety. Ishrad Manji has received a number of death threats too...

Contra · Post by **Contra** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 9:09 pm

M. Bréqs wrote:
noisetonepause wrote:
M. Bréqs wrote:I've been saying this for years
People have been saying what you're saying since Mohammed's time.
Yeah, and they've often had their heads chopped off for saying so. I actually fear for the Doctor's safety. Ishrad Manji has received a number of death threats too...

yes like the tribe in saudi arabai in mohammed's time called Banu Quraiza, and many others including israelite tribes in saudi arabia who didnt want to convert.

300 men were beheaded , the women were spread like sex toys, and the children and women also were used as slaves and converted to islam, and also had to pay zakat..

similar to the "white man" and his 3/4 of a human law for the blacks in america.
(that's for all those people who say all israelis are white and are opressing the black muslim)

also let it be known and i will find the source again, the slave trade's predominant sellers to european settlers was done by arabic muslims,
as was the assistance of the holocaust by the mufti of "palestine".....

watch "Obsession:The Movie"

and one more thing to get it out, it has been documented in jordanian newspapers, that the "palestinians" were actually Jordanian citizens who were told to leave israeel by JORDANIANS so they could wipe out the Israelis, Jordan didnt do shit and now they blame israel, crafty plan by a fork tongued people(not all jordanians) but when that hate for Israel or anything non Islamic comes into play you generally will do whatever it takes to place blame on israel (who "our boy" Ahminedijad, wants to wipe off the face of the earth.)

noisetonepause · Post by **noisetonepause** » Fri Nov 03, 2006 10:46 pm

I would just like to add as a disclaimer, to any readers of this thread, that what M. Breqs et al posts as facts about Islam is disputable at best, downright lies and misinformation at worst.

To anyone interested in the Muslim faith, I can recommend a few titles, for example Professor Fazlur Rahman's book "Islam", published by University of Chicago Press. At the very least read something that will give you a solid basis before going to the openly anti-Islamic titles suggested by M. Breqs and others on this thread.

I'm out.
Paws.

djsynchro · Post by **djsynchro** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 3:09 am

If I were you, I'd be more worried about what to wear to gigs...

Machinesworking · Post by **Machinesworking** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 3:17 am

I think it's pretty funny really. I can walk into any store owned by an arab here in Seattle, and they all say the same things, the US is a great country, but our foreign policy in the middle east sucks.
the 47 year old lady who owns a gas station I go to moved here from Iran after the Sha was booted. She didn't want to live in a fundamentalist country. She is appalled at the USA for being so violently aggressive towards a country she fled because she hates the government!
We both sit there, and wonder what is so intellectually fucked up about most people that they can't see that it's not the USA's right to control other countries, and that you can condemn a view, without forcing a confrontation like we do with Iran.
Mbreqs and crowd, the fundamental fact you miss is that you have no right to judge people for actions they haven't yet took. You cannot condemn people for not believing what you believe. The whole anti muslim thing is retarded. The guy in question is an ex-extremist. Personally, I find ex-christian extremists to be somewhat mentally ill, and not in any shape to make judgments about politics or religion. I mean no offense by that, but it's akin to being a cult member. This applies to fundamentalist muslims as well.
Have a great friday!

franknputer · Post by **franknputer** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 3:47 am

M. Bréqs wrote:By attacking the source, b0unce has made a reverse appeal to authority, a logical fallacy.

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

However, we see that in order to appeal to an authority legitimately, one must satisfy the following conditions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:1. The authority must have competence in an area, not just glamour, prestige, rank or popularity. Citation to statements made by a sports or entertainment figure about foreign policy would be an example of an improper appeal to authority.
Dr. Tawfik Hamid certainly qualifies on the first count, having been a former jihadist himself. He is not popular, nor is he reknowned for anything other than his experiences in life.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:2. The judgment must be within the authority's field of competence. Linus Pauling won a Nobel Prize for chemistry, then later made claims that massive quantities of vitamin C would prevent cancer in humans. This claim was in the field of medicine and thus outside his field of competence.
The authority must be interpreted correctly. This is particularly a problem in religion; where the Koran, Bible, Torah, etc., have been interpreted with varying and sometimes contradictory results.
Dr. Tawfik Hamid again qualifies based on his experiences as a member of Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:3. Direct evidence must be available, at least in principle.
Evidence supporting Dr. Dr. Tawfik Hamid's position is legion; Turn on Al-Manar, you'll see it for yourself. Check out MEMRI.org, you'll see even more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:4. The expert should be reasonably unbiased (not unduly influenced by other factors, such as money, political considerations, or religious beliefs). For this reason, appealing to one's own authority is never legitimate. The trial of Galileo (for promoting his belief in a heliocentric solar system and not the geocentric model taught by the Church) is one famous example. The court did not arrive at its guilty verdict by applying the scientific method of hypothesis and empirical observation. Instead Galileo was found guilty on no other basis than the religious authority of the Roman Catholic Church itself, which was at the basis of the prevalent scientific theory of the time.
Again, Dr. Tawfik Hamid comes off as legitimate. In fact, he has disincentive to speak as he does, considering the death threats he faces for being so uncannily blunt. Thus I can see no bias on his part.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority wrote:5. The judgment must be representative of expert opinions on the issue (as opposed to an unrepresentative sample). Lawyers sometimes find a non-representative "expert" to offer a theory which is not generally accepted (such as a so-called Twinkie defense) in hopes of winning their case.
Dr. Tawfik Hamid unfortunately doesn't represent a majority of muslims... This is the whole crux of his arguement, thus it is difficult to meet this condition. However, Ishrad Manji and a few other courageous muslims echo his sentiments. If you wish I can try to find more.

Wow - that was very thorough, even if it's not all there. Your whole argument is also an appeal to authority - interestingly, you also missed a couple of things. For example, your point 2 actually swallows up the real point 3, and you make no mention of it in your followup:

The authority must be interpreted correctly. This is particularly a problem in religion; where the Koran, Bible, Torah, etc., have been interpreted with varying and sometimes contradictory results.

There's the big question - is he really interpreting things correctly? Hard to say, really. He raises some interesting points, but they are seemingly unsubstantiated beyond his own personal experiences.

Ah, but wait - you also left this out:

A technique is needed to adjudicate disagreements among equally qualified authorities. If scientific testing of the claim is not possible, then the majority of expert opinions is sometimes used to develop a consensus.

I believe there is an absence of both scientific data AND general consensus to support Dr. Hamid's claims. For that matter, you haven't really given any evidence that his claim of being a terrorist is actually true...

A (fallacious) appeal to authority argument has the basic form:

1. A makes claim B;
2. there is something positive about A,
3. therefore claim B is true.

The first statement is called a 'factual claim' and is the pivot point of much debate. The last statement is referred to as an 'inferential claim' and represents the reasoning process. There are two types of inferential claim, explicit and implicit. Arguments that (fallaciously) rely on the objectionable aspects of the person for the truth of the conclusion are discussed under ad hominem.

An appeal to authority is a logical fallacy: authorities can be wrong, both in their own field and in other fields; therefore referencing authority does not automatically imply truth. However, referencing authority may carry a high enough probability of truth that it would be correct to base decisions on it.

That pretty much sums it up right there.

Contra · Post by **Contra** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:19 am

noisetonepause wrote:I would just like to add as a disclaimer, to any readers of this thread, that what M. Breqs et al posts as facts about Islam is disputable at best, downright lies and misinformation at worst.

To anyone interested in the Muslim faith, I can recommend a few titles, for example Professor Fazlur Rahman's book "Islam", published by University of Chicago Press. At the very least read something that will give you a solid basis before going to the openly anti-Islamic titles suggested by M. Breqs and others on this thread.

I'm out.
Paws.

why dont we quote men of muhammad's time instead of people tryin to shroud the world in mystery???

"oh whatever a christian tells me of christianity must be true, and what ever a muslim says of islam must be true"

peaceful(or secular) muslims tell u its a religion of peace cuz its all they know and theyre delusional to the truth..now do they deserve to be killed? hell no. if theyre peaceful theyre cool with me...but learn the truth of muhammad from his original followers not people trying to hide the truth....

Muhammad had his opponents murdered one by one. Asma bint Marwan spoke out against Muhammad for having another man murdered named Abu Afak who was 120 years old. In his displeasure towards her, Muhammad asked his followers to murder her as well. She was killed while she slept. Abu Afak did not fare well, Asma bint Marwan was the second person who fared the same fate for criticising Muhammad. Their crime was that both were poets and writing poetry against Muhammad.

From Ibn Sa`d's Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir, translated by S. Moinul Haq, volume 2, page 31.

SARIYYAH OF `UMAYR IBN `ADI
Then (occurred) the sariyyah of `Umayr ibn `Adi Ibn Kharashah al-Khatmi against `Asma' Bint Marwan, of Banu Umayyah Ibn Zayd, when five nights had remained from the month of Ramadan, in the beginning of the nineteenth month from the hijrah of the apostle of Allah. `Asma' was the wife of Yazid Ibn Zayd Ibn Hisn al-Khatmi. She used to revile Islam, offend the prophet and instigate the (people) against him. She composed verses. Umayr Ibn Adi came to her in the night and entered her house. Her children were sleeping around her. There was one whom she was suckling. He searched her with his hand because he was blind, and separated the child from her. He thrust his sword in her chest till it pierced up to her back. Then he offered the morning prayers with the prophet at al-Medina. The apostle of Allah said to him: "Have you slain the daughter of Marwan?" He said: "Yes. Is there something more for me to do?" He [Muhammad] said: "No. Two goats will butt together about her. This was the word that was first heard from the apostle of Allah. The apostle of Allah called him `Umayr, "basir" (the seeing).

Another case:

Another case of beheading took place with a Jewish chief called Kinana in Khaibar of the tribe of Banu Nadir.

"Kinana al-Rabi, who had the custody of the treasure of Banu Nadir, was brought to the apostle who asked him about it. He denied that he knew where it was. A Jew came (Tabari says "was brought"), to the apostle and said that he had seen Kinana going round a certain ruin every morning early. When the apostle said to Kinana, "Do you know that if we find you have it I shall kill you?" He said "Yes". The apostle gave orders that the ruin was to be excavated and some of the treasure was found. When he asked him about the rest he refused to produce it, so the apostle gave orders to al-Zubayr Al-Awwam, "Torture him until you extract what he has." So he kindled a fire with flint and steel on his chest until he was nearly dead. Then the apostle delivered him to Muhammad b. Maslama and he struck off his head [beheaded him], in revenge for his brother Mahmud." (Life of Muhammad page 515).

Kinana's wife Saffiya who was very beautiful fell in lot to Dahiya another Muslim but he was persuaded by Muhammad after some negotiation with money to part with her so Muhammad could marry her which he later did adding her to his harem of wives. She became Muhammad's tenth wife. Clearly the precedent is set and the chief of this Jewish tribe was swiftly executed after extracting the treasure from this so called infidel according to Islamic traditions. [ref: Muslim II, P 237, quoted by Margolieuth P 363.]

Muhammad bore false testimony against the Jewish tribes in Medina to drive them out of Arabia by saying they helped the Quraish tribe when in fact they did not.

All three tribes of the Jews were eliminated one by one.

Banu Qainuqa - Expelled

Banu Nader - Expelled

Banu Qurayza - All the men beheaded

In the battle of the Ditch (AD 627), Banu Qurayza was said to have sided with the Meccans against the Muslims, which were victorious (they actually refused to help the Meccans because of what had happened to one of the other Jewish tribes). As a result, the 400 to 600 hundred male Jews were beheaded, while their children and women became slaves. The judgment was given by Sad, and Muhammad commended him for this judgment:

"Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." (Sura AL-BAQARA 2:16) The Quran "

It doesnt get any more evident....

remember its not a hate thread but truth.

peaceful muslims get the ok from me, problem is REAL MUSLIMS like muhammad and osama bin laden and alzarqawi etc. wanna kil those peaceful muslims claiming them to be kuffar or infidels as anyone of us who doesnt follow the true teachings of muhammad.....

i could care less about what that doctor said before, but just read what muhammad the so called peaceful one said and youll see.

Machinesworking · Post by **Machinesworking** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:47 am

Contra wrote: peaceful muslims get the ok from me, problem is REAL MUSLIMS like muhammad and osama bin laden and alzarqawi etc. wanna kil those peaceful muslims claiming them to be kuffar or infidels as anyone of us who doesnt follow the true teachings of muhammad.....

i could care less about what that doctor said before, but just read what muhammad the so called peaceful one said and youll see.

BS. You are focusing on the fundamentalists and calling them the "real" muslims. Do you think Pat Robertson is a REAL CHRISTIAN compared to those that try to follow the bible's more tolerant teachings? (Pat Robertson suggested we assassinate Hugo Chavez the president of Venezuela)

It's the same logic, you're focusing on the extremists, using it to fuel your own prejudice, and trying to justify it with "evidence".You could easily do the same with christianity.
Shit you're even reaching back two thousand years? Christianity seriously kicks muslim ass when it comes to genocide and other atrocities with that time stretch to reach into. The west has a nice long history of pogroms and other religion based mass murder parties.

Contra · Post by **Contra** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:48 pm

Machinesworking wrote:
Contra wrote: peaceful muslims get the ok from me, problem is REAL MUSLIMS like muhammad and osama bin laden and alzarqawi etc. wanna kil those peaceful muslims claiming them to be kuffar or infidels as anyone of us who doesnt follow the true teachings of muhammad.....

i could care less about what that doctor said before, but just read what muhammad the so called peaceful one said and youll see.
BS. You are focusing on the fundamentalists and calling them the "real" muslims. Do you think Pat Robertson is a REAL CHRISTIAN compared to those that try to follow the bible's more tolerant teachings? (Pat Robertson suggested we assassinate Hugo Chavez the president of Venezuela)

It's the same logic, you're focusing on the extremists, using it to fuel your own prejudice, and trying to justify it with "evidence".You could easily do the same with christianity.
Shit you're even reaching back two thousand years? Christianity seriously kicks muslim ass when it comes to genocide and other atrocities with that time stretch to reach into. The west has a nice long history of pogroms and other religion based mass murder parties.

if your true christian which pat robertson isnt you would kill only in defense.
if u read the shit i posted above it shows you 'fundamentalists" ARE true 7th century muslims.

dont be blind to the truth.

remember what i said before its too late.

Contra · Post by **Contra** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:50 pm

Machinesworking wrote:
Contra wrote: peaceful muslims get the ok from me, problem is REAL MUSLIMS like muhammad and osama bin laden and alzarqawi etc. wanna kil those peaceful muslims claiming them to be kuffar or infidels as anyone of us who doesnt follow the true teachings of muhammad.....

i could care less about what that doctor said before, but just read what muhammad the so called peaceful one said and youll see.
BS. You are focusing on the fundamentalists and calling them the "real" muslims. Do you think Pat Robertson is a REAL CHRISTIAN compared to those that try to follow the bible's more tolerant teachings? (Pat Robertson suggested we assassinate Hugo Chavez the president of Venezuela)

It's the same logic, you're focusing on the extremists, using it to fuel your own prejudice, and trying to justify it with "evidence".You could easily do the same with christianity.
Shit you're even reaching back two thousand years? Christianity seriously kicks muslim ass when it comes to genocide and other atrocities with that time stretch to reach into. The west has a nice long history of pogroms and other religion based mass murder parties.

if your true christian which pat robertson isnt you would kill only in defense.
if u read the shit i posted above it shows you 'fundamentalists" ARE true 7th century muslims.

dont be blind to the truth.

remember what i said before its too late.

Contra · Post by **Contra** » Sat Nov 04, 2006 2:52 pm

Machinesworking wrote:
Contra wrote: peaceful muslims get the ok from me, problem is REAL MUSLIMS like muhammad and osama bin laden and alzarqawi etc. wanna kil those peaceful muslims claiming them to be kuffar or infidels as anyone of us who doesnt follow the true teachings of muhammad.....

i could care less about what that doctor said before, but just read what muhammad the so called peaceful one said and youll see.
BS. You are focusing on the fundamentalists and calling them the "real" muslims. Do you think Pat Robertson is a REAL CHRISTIAN compared to those that try to follow the bible's more tolerant teachings? (Pat Robertson suggested we assassinate Hugo Chavez the president of Venezuela)

It's the same logic, you're focusing on the extremists, using it to fuel your own prejudice, and trying to justify it with "evidence".You could easily do the same with christianity.
Shit you're even reaching back two thousand years? Christianity seriously kicks muslim ass when it comes to genocide and other atrocities with that time stretch to reach into. The west has a nice long history of pogroms and other religion based mass murder parties.

if your true christian which pat robertson isnt you would talk in that manner....
if u read the shit i posted above it shows you 'fundamentalists" ARE true 7th century muslims.

dont be blind to the truth.

remember what i said before its too late.

[OT] - Interview with a former Jihadist

Re: [OT] - Interview with a former Jihadist

Re: [OT] - Interview with a former Jihadist