Panel of former Muslims speaking on Capitol Hill says U.S. needs to “wake up” to threat of Islamism

http://www.nigerdeltacongress.com/warticles/wha...

Dhimmi communities were subjected to the payment of taxes in favor of Muslims — a requirement that was central to dhimma as a whole. The Jizya is a tax paid to be excused from serving in the military, and obligates the Muslim authorities to defend Dhimmis in war. Sura 9:29 stipulates that jizya be exacted from non-Muslims as a condition required for jihad to cease. Failure to pay the jizya could result in the pledge of protection of a dhimmi's life and property becoming void, with the dhimmi facing the alternatives of conversion, enslavement or death (or imprisonment, as advocated by Abu Yusuf, the chief qadi — religious judge — of Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid).[73]

Taxation from the perspective of Dhimmis who came under the Muslim rule was "a concrete continuation of the taxes paid to earlier regimes" and from the point of view of the Muslim conqueror was a material proof of Dhimmi's subjection.[10] Lewis states that it seems that the change from Byzantine to Arab rule was welcomed by many among the Dhimmis who found the new yoke far lighter than the old, both in taxation and in other matters. Some even among the Christians of Syria and Egypt preferred the rule of Islam to that of Byzantines.[13]

The importance of dhimmis as a source of revenue for the Muslim community is illuminated in a letter ascribed to Umar I and cited by Abu Yusuf: "if we take dhimmis and share them out, what will be left for the Muslims who come after us? By God, Muslims would not find a man to talk to and profit from his labors."[74] The main tax imposed on dhimmis is known as jizya — a poll tax — . Later, the kharaj emerged as a tax payable on land by a farmer regardless of his religion.[75]

In an important early account, Malik's Muwatta reports that the jizya was collected from men only, dhimmis were exempt from zakat, and additional taxes were to be levied against dhimmis who travelled on business:

"The Sunnah is that there is no jizya due from women or children of people of the Book, and that jizya is only taken from men who have reached puberty. The people of dhimma ... do not have to pay any zakat ... This is because zakat is imposed on the Muslims to purify them and to be given back to their poor, whereas jizya is imposed on the people of the Book to humble them...If in any one year they frequently come and go in Muslim countries then they have to pay a tenth every time they do so, since that is outside what they have agreed upon, and not one of the conditions stipulated for them. This is what I have seen the people of knowledge of our city doing." (17 24.46)

Most Islamic scholars agree that jizya must be levied only upon adult males. Another interpretation is that jizya was only paid by men because it was an exchange for the dhimmi's life: as it was only the adult males whose lives were forfeit in defeat, so only they had to pay the jizya.

The 8th-century scholar Abu Ubayd advised that dhimmis must not be burdened above their capacity or caused to suffer.[73] Al-Nawawi, however, dissents, demanding "the poll tax to be paid by dying people, the old, … the blind, monks, workers, and the poor, incapable of practicing a trade." The latter view was often applied in practice, as contemporary non-Muslim sources give witness of taxation even of dead persons, widows, and orphans. Al-Nawawi demands that the unpaid amount of poll tax remain a debt to the dhimmi’s account until he becomes solvent.[76] In the Ottoman Empire, dhimmis had to carry a receipt certifying their payment of jizya at all times or be subject to imprisonment.

Although in general it is unclear whether Muslims or Dhimmis (despite not having to pay Zakat) had to pay higher taxes, Lewis notes that there are varying opinions among scholars as to how much of an additional burden this was.[73] According to Norman Stillman: "Jizya and kharaj were a crushing burden for the non-Muslim peasantry who eked out a bare living in a subsistence economy."[77] Ultimately, the additional taxation was a critical factor that drove many dhimmis to shun their religion and accept Islam.[7]

Another very sad attempt at basically ignorants trying to "or wishing to" interpret something they do not know or even "want to know"

You give 7th and 8th century examples and somehow try and meld them to today. You even hit on the very evidence of what it is and blindly ignore it ..... jizya being a tax and payment on those that lost in conflict of the then Jihad of the time of Mohammed. The rest was political taxes chosen by the leadership at the time and like all religions justified it with some tax. The Byzentines made their salt tax and literally claimed it was just under God because they killed the Christ.

As I said, and as I am sure you will avoid like the plague in answering, which government claims a religous jizya tax? The answer, of course being blatantly obvious, none.

As for the very piss-poor example from the obvious agenda based website Niger Delta Congress, I am again dissapointed that from someone whom showed very intelligent postings at the beginning, can attempt to link an item from a local revolutionary group that not only is involved in kidnapping foreign oil workers, demands a radical version of Christian-only Government but also much of the site was blocked by my anti-virus.

I should also add that they quote Norman, aka Noam Stillman, the brilliant professor of Hebrew Studies that specialises in North African and Shephardic Jewish communities. He referdred to historical events that was carefully quoted out of context in the item you provided and it would be better to note that he praises Morocco and its efforts to support and encourage return migration of its historic Jewish population. He quite clearly states the real histories and in his excellent must-read book: "From Iberia to Diaspora: Studies in Sephardic History and Culture" the reality is that Jews were badly treated in history by both Muslim and Christian governments and until the turn of the Industrial Revolution, life was much better living under Muslim nations. He also sadly agrees that the cost of the Moroccan Jews moving to Israel was the loss of a unique Andalousian and Saharan Jewish Identity.

He would certainly consider the misquote that was done on him as insulting and I think you will find his opinions about many of the opinions on this blog quite interesting and not what you would all imagine.

Solkar. You really need to take a stress pill and chill out. You constantly try to refute everything that is said by anyone who disagrees with you. This alone makes you wrong. Plus the certainty with which you "claim" everything also makes you suspect. The true religious person knows what they want but constantly keeps an open mind and questions things to make sure they see the truth.
We are given a mind to think not to follow.
Also, a truth seeker realizes they cannot know anything unless they listen and finds the truth from whomever they encounter. To LEARN is FREEDOM.
So quit expecting an attack and therefore creating one. Just listen and wonder and digest and then give a rebutal if it feels right.
Religion is hypocrosy. It is FAITH that is real. When man attempts to interpret again and again what he THINKS he knows, it is then that the confusion results. A confusion that is at times deliberate and at more times unintentional. More is the pity.
Religion is also control and it is effective only because we humans respond to the concept of "mob-rule". If we did not get as stupid as the stupidist person in the mob we would not "attend" any wars.
The silly idea of honor being had by reason of conflict (Physical conflict that is) will kill us all.
Honor is learned through spiritual awakening. And that is only had by making ones self see what one does not want to see.
To learn what one does not want to learn and then to act as one does not want to act.
We are born not knowing anything except to stay alive. Then we seem to learn to keep ourselves alive through taking life from others.
Islam is just such a "faith".
Christ did not kill he healed. He did not tell others to kill he told them to heal. He did not come to lead but to serve. I am not pushing any religion or idea except for the religion (or perhaps more correctly the faith) of freedom of ideas.
And the truth.
All of you, stop trying to convert and just listen with patience and understanding. The only way to convert someone is to make them want to be like you.
So I ask you all, what is the difference between you? Only an idealogical one which is very minor. The problem is there are those who make it major only because they can and then they kill for the love of it and the power it bestows on them. We are a twisted race with only one destiny and that is death. Not LIFE.
IF we cannot stop the hatred.
To point the finger is just as bad as defending death and killing and rape.
So stop and listen, you do not have to agree just listen. Sometimes, if you listen you might just learn something.
Further:
You are all fed up with the state of the world?
You are all correct in this.
You are all fed up with no one doing anything about it?
You are all correct in this.
You are all trying to do something the only way you can?
You are all correct in this.
So, seeing my last few sentences, are you all so different? Really?
Or is it you are sick of all the death and wrong and you want life and happiness for all?
We ALL feel that way. At least any sane person does.
We are ALL to blame for the state we find ourselves in. We can all try to argue that this is not so but to see the truth we have only to look in the mirror and see it.
What one of you would not take life to defend you or your families lives?
What one of you does not wake up every morning with bad breath?
Or complaints about pain, life , children acting up?
What one of you does not feel hatred or jealuosy or pity or love?
Look around and see we are all the same. It is unchecked ideas that are killing us. GREED, FEAR! They are the real enemies, not people.
The only real prize we have is each other. The only real pride we feel is in each other.
What one of you does not have heroes, of some type he or she looks up to?
Remember they are only men and women too, just like you.
We war because we war within ourselves. If we were happy and content within it would be so without.
But always remember, we are only as good as we wish to be.
So start wishing mankind or you may find that the genie has left and has taken the wishes left with him.

I fear that it is the same in my country too. Imamer are recuting young boys in the places they have for teenagers and want them to be islamic followers and maybe they will be terroririsst in the end of there "educations". I think it is time for every country to wake up before it is to late.

" recuting young boys in the places they have for teenagers "

Hmmmm. Very odd that association of "young boys" and an old
Imam...sounds they were having oral sex, as usual.

Anyway,the words "Muslim" and "Education" can't walk hand in hand.
Nothing provided by muslims resembles my concept of education...A
Madrassa can't even be compared to HOGWARTS, where Harry Potter
studied.

Sorry if my english is not the best. What I meant was that imamer is visiting youht clubs where teenagers (both boys and girls) are meeting and have fun. Some of those parts of my town here are being segregated and in those part of the town, there is not so many swedes and the teenagers are very much left to there own and get lost because neither there parents or the swedish people take any notice of what those guys are doing, so they are easy target for these imams and they make them feel important and being seen in the comunity and that is a big problem here.

Every red-blooded American should be aware that America's way of life
could enter into the list of the most endangered species.

As long as school kids get the suicidal, politically correct, plainly
unaccurate concept of Islam as being a "peaceful religion", no
real progress could be achieved.

The truth must be told in order to deal with the problem in a decisive
manner.

Muslims aren't healthy to America.
They act as cigarettes on our lungs.

They must leave.
ALL of them.

The mosques should be demolished . They became centers to teach anti-American
sentiments.
Just kick them out.

Here is a bunch more of these apostates. And an amazing number of them have actually been given the opportunity to see Jesus. He is gathering his flock from all tribes and nations on earth. Cool. Check this out:
http://www.muslimjourneytohope.com/watch.asp
And Solkhar, keep your negative comments to yourself. Many of these peeps were real devout muzzies-to the point of helping execute infidels, communicating with jinn etc. etc.

What a piece of dribble. So now we are expected to assume that some 60 odd Christian converts on an overtley "we now see Jesus" website reflects anything other than that they may have found such people, and I took a look and I am not even fully convinced their stories are even true. If you want I can fall into the same game and show you all the Muslim convers on websites that are just as glossy, and I have met many of them as well..... oh, hell, I guess I can even say I am one too! You will lose the tit-for-tat game, but I do not play like that.

I love the "given the opportunity to see Jesus" which sort of tells a great deal about you Greggg57."

Tells a great deal about me huh? Well just give me a few of the things that it tells about me. And bear in mind, At least the Lord Jesus was not a pedophile, or an armed robber, and HE performed many miracles.... proving what he said about himself. Olf mo was unable to prove ANYTHING. Get this: "How do we know that muhammad was right? Because the koran said he was. OK, How do we know that the koran was right, ...because muhammad said it was was........" What a STUPID ARGUMENT. And it can only come from arabic type reasoning.

Yes, there should be a wake up call against the complacency and wishy-washy liberal "niceness" that makes the west vulnerable to the threats of radical islamists, organised abuse and infiltration of terrorists. Having said that, this farce of a group that claims to be of value requires to be ignored and if anything shunned.

This so-called panel represents nothing but themeselves and their own self-interest. They certainly do not reprent ex or inactive Muslims at all, most of whom have simply rejected association with organised Islam. They also do not represent the life and complexities of Muslims outside the west whom feel, because of the hardship and frustration with radicalism and in-your-face conservatism, distance themselves and are then targetted.

The best example of the sheer absurdedy and malicisousness of this group is how they "play stupid". *As shown in this article, Imani whom is a journalist and thus should be aware of simple things, claims that petrol dollars supports wahhabism and Shi'a radicalism. That statement is so far from the truth and anyone with a bit of intelligence knows how the petrol-dollar is spent, the checks and literally the thousands of people whom are employed watching and analysing such funding, let alone the political situation in these countries. So we must ask how come he and this group support such a rediculous statement? It is a ploy of course and that is the sheer sum-total of the malicious motovies of such a group. Add to that, they represent no-one but themselves. Where is the thousands of supporters? Why is it always the same group? Like Spencer, Fitzgerald and Gellar, they are a self-congratulating, self-supporting and self-centred clique of the same people trying to dish out in various forms the same cocktail of garbage.

As SirW below has naivelly supported, we have the same problem. Wafa Sultan knows better but plays the stupid ignorant card for some crazed reason. She may have had her own personal bad experience at the brutal hands of radicals where she has grown up and that is both sad, terrible and does require sympathy for her and condemnation for those that have done so, but as a former academic, she knows very well that it represents only her experiences and those in at most 6 countries and small portions of others. So why does she play stupid. Most of them are hate-for-profiteers, they simply want to sell books and the easiest is scandal. They all crossed lines and thus cannot go back and recant so they go further.

Again, they represent themselves and that they were media time is sad. If anything, by putting such a pathetic group will only give more excuses and be a distraction to the real and important effort to combat real risks and threats and not the generalized bull-crap that they and other low-lifes spout.

As for ex-Muslims, the vast majority do not actually reject Islam but reject and refuse contact with organised Muslim communities, mosques and the clergy. They do so because of simply being fed-up with the political and radical crap that has flooded thier lives. It all depends on the location and situation that they have grown up in. Most ex-Muslims come from war-zones or with high-radicalism. I have met many in my travels and most if you push them still believe in God/Allah and the Prophethood of Mohammed, but they simply refuse to be connected or associated with the Muslim community. As I understand, there are more Shia ex-Muslim then Sunni and that already tells you something, they are as I mentioned, from those 6 or 7 hard-line or repressive regimes that have linked theocracy with the judiciary and/or they are from a social group in a country that was targetted. Were are the others? Why is it not generally cross-the-bord Muslims from all facets and aspects of life and from all countries equally? That itself answers the question and it is not fear.

I attended on meeting in my home town of Rotterdam and a certain Hurst Ali, a hypocrit of the first order, spoke about how "people are leaving Islam in droves" as she put it. I stood up and asked where? She refused to answer and just waved generally. I returned the question and said do not repeat the same dismissive wave that got you booted out of parliament, and the audience applauded me and she walked out. That is her. She thinks having a book means that she is some how smarter, she thinks that just making statements means that she is correct when she fails. She too, like Wafa Sultan "pretends" that her experiences are a global epidemic when they certainly are not. That she was a disliked politician, person and no longer lives, supports in the country that she stated as an election platform that she both loves and would die for.

What a joke.

"As for ex-Muslims, the vast majority do not actually reject Islam".

Really, Solkhar? How is it that you have had contact with the "vast majority" of apostates? If not, how can you with any accuracy say that they "do not actually reject Islam"? How you have the gall to accuse others of "generalizing" is amazing.

"I have met many in my travels". Is this what makes you an authority on apostates? You demand proof that "people are leaving Islam in droves". Once again, you offer no proof to back up what you say...just more unsupported garbage.

"she thinks that just making statements means that she is correct...". Solkhar, you are an unbelievable hypocrite.

As I said to you on another thread ther Christine_S, come up with the goods otherwise old dear or I suggest you just continue snoozing in blissfull ignorance as you appear to do. Come up with the goods as in prove me wrong. Show me the "vast majority of so-called apostates".

As far my own contacts - I never said I am an expert, I always talk from my own experiences or what I have read. I do not make things up or say what "i want things to be like" which you suffer from. My experiences are based on the places I have been and travelled. Add to that as a western born white Muslim, I automatically meet westernized Muslims. For example in Rotterdam, my home town is full of what you would class as apostates, I lived in Stockholm for two years, now there is a large group of politically active anti-Muslim establishment whom are constantly condemned by radicals - but they as an association do not deny their faith in God or the Qur'an. My four years in Brussels came accross a very large community of those who reject Islamic Theocracy. Even within the Muslim world that I have travelled, the more cosmopolitian Casablanca, Istanbul, Alexandria are all cities that have people that think of anything except religion, avoid Mosques like the plague, go to bars and get drunk, nightclubs looking for women and if you say are you a Muslim, they will probably even say "no" but if you press them, they will say I believe in Islam but I do not like the word "Muslim" because it currently represents something that I am not.

Of course there are those that have rejected Islam and are now aethiest or even other faiths, and I have also met them. I know an Egyptian Coptic priest in Tilburg, in the south of The Netherlands, he was born a Muslilm. I respect his kindness and simplicity and he does not despise me for being a Muslim and he is not all agenda-driven, he respects even the reasons why I became. But out of all of those so-called apostates, and I think I have met over the years more than 200 - not one is the hypocritical synical and arrogant hate-for-profiteers like those in this article.

Oh, as for Sir_W, he stopped responding when I pointed out his inaccuracies, guess he does not like that.

Jeez Louise,Solkhar,don't you have a home to go to?

"Show me the "vast majority of so-called apostates".

No one knows the true number of apostates. They are in hiding, fearing a death sentence from your "peace-loving" brothers. I did not cite statistics about the "vast majority". You did!

If you are basing what you said on "personal experiences", then your statement should read: "the vast majority of apostates I have met...", and not "the vast majority of apostates...". See the difference adding just a few words can make? Let me guess...is that what you meant, but your "English is not so good"?

Is that why SW has stopped responding to you?? I thought it was because you are pompous, unreasonable and full of crap. I will try to take his good advice and ignore you, but if I decide to do that, please do not view it as another false victory for yourself. No one likes to debate a self-serving liar, but it is difficult to let you think you have gotten away with spreading your bullshit.

"I thought it was because you are pompous, unreasonable and full of crap", that too. And his victories are false, and you're right about debating a self-serving liar, it just gives him more room to lie. Our freedom of speech will continue to let him get away with his bullshit, but I trust almost all that post on here will see it for exactly that.

Prove you wrong? I have already proved you to be a liar.

Your desperation, by writing so copiously on this site, to convince yourself of your wisdom in choosing to follow a religion that has the death penalty for apostasy (or, as you would say, so-called apostasy), is tragic to behold.

By the way, the Egyptian Coptic priest you mention was not born a Muslim. Think before you write such silliness.

He(Solkhar) misses your subtlety Beej!
It has escaped him that no one is born Muslim it is an acquired pathology from one's parents and culture.
He rails against extremism;but seems to find apostasy unpalatable(my ummah,right or wrong).
Evidently apostasy is criminal in his eyes.
He dismisses Muslim apostasists as money grubbing mountebanks who sell books and speeches in order to
make a living.
Everybody has a right to make a living;and everybody has a right to derrogate Islam as we do here.
Personally I see these people as heros;who at risk to life and limb (literally)keep the abomination of Islam in the public eye as an Allah ordained death cult.
Even relatively sophisticated Muslims like him ;seem hopelessly ineffectual in halting or even slowing the progress
of their more zealous coreligionists.
The most effective (by a country mile)are the apostates;who, through their experience,see Islam for what it is:
A dangerous black comedy which cripples the minds of its adherents to accept that which is morally and philosophically sound.
And petro- dollars do underwrite Salafist/Wahabist agendas as demonstrated in one of my prievious posts.(hate literature and videos disseminated through Saudi funded schools and mosques)
This was featured onBBC Newsnight in which the headmistress of such a school made an obviously disingenuous
denial.
The sneer of incredulity on the host's face(Jeremy Paxman);was sufficient to convince anybody of the contempt he felt for the lying cow.
I have a feeling that Paxman has been told to tone down his n inquisitorial style of late(in the interests of politeness);but
his body language and voice tone reveals the true contempt he feels.
If Solkhar feels he has a role to play in opposing Islamic barbarism;then I would suggest apostasy as a positive step.

"It has escaped him that no one is born Muslim it is an acquired pathology from one's parents and culture", interesting, I was not born Muslim either.
"Evidently apostasy is criminal in his eyes", no I do not and never have I. I would say though that It consider those that use their Muslim background as an excuse to attack the faith as very questionable in their morals.
"He dismisses Muslim apostasists as money grubbing mountebanks who sell books and speeches in order to
make a living." No I do not and have never done so either, I have said that this particular group mentioned in this artile does.

"Even relatively sophisticated Muslims like him ;seem hopelessly ineffectual in halting or even slowing the progress of their more zealous coreligionists." Actually it is people like myself and hundreds of thousands of us whom simply attempt to live normal lives, continue in our non-radical ways that is the greatest enemy to radicalism. The assumption that fighting radicalism with another form of radicalism or with another form of evil is the only solution is a miserable concept that is doomed to make matters worse - in fact the recent past as proved it.
Jeremy Paxman whom I normally appreciate did in fact probably the most poor quality of sensationalism on that episose. The Saudi Government has worked hard on distancing itself from salafism and wahhabism and the prisons there are full of them. Petro-dollars are also the most scrutinized and monitored funding towards terrorism and proscribed-list organisaitons. I should know it because your tax dollars and those of EU nations funds companies like mine to do so. That Paxman picked and chose a perfect example of what still is there and what still needs to be taken out but for sensationalism generalized and was lambasted in the press for it afterwards from most quaters.
As for my becoming an apostate, radicals have called King Abdullah of Saudi an apostate because he does not accept wahhabist or salafist views, thus for them 99 per cent of all Muslims are. That is the point, in most Muslim countries, someone who decides he is no longer or not interested in religion, Islam in general or the theocratical systems simply knows that "culturally" he may be in trouble with ignorants and radicals but most governments do not give even the slightest sh*t as long as the person does make a thing about it publically. The biggest problem in fact is the nasty provocative evangalists whom go to countries like here in Morocco with lots of money, seduce poor Muslims to "see Jesus" and then advertise it back home thinking that the message does not seep back, or they get caught and make a thing about it as if there was innocent "bible study groups". Just recently another group was closed down, the foreigners expelled. The newly created Christian had not converted because of escaping "islamic barbarism" as you so incorrectly and naively put it, like "born agains" they are after a method of escaping the social/economic life they were in.

There is no such thing as born a Muslim;the infant is forced into it by his parents whether well meaning or otherwise.
The matter of free choice is non applicable
Apostasists.who then campaign against the faith are immoral.
Ask yourself why they became apostasists in the first place?
As far as I can tell upon reaching their respective age of reason;they arrived at the logical conclusion that Islam was nonsense and represents a negative sociopathy in the world today.
I see no difference between Ali Sina,Wafa Sultan, et al.and myself.(or Beej.Tonto,SirW et al.}
You seem to be of the opinion that Islam can become normal and civilised;I wish I shared your optimism;but I keep reading of more bodies on a daily basis.
As for Christian ev angelists they are offering Muslims a free choice of accepting a new superstition in return for their old one.(Muslims also proseletise).
The religion sellers are sim ply salesmen,nothing more;but Islam clearly doesn't like competition.
Freedom of religion Solkhar don't you believe in that;after all you made a choice.
I've even recited the "Sha na na"or whatever you call it ;then reject it in order to mock Muslim colleagues.
They haven't killed me yet;although one did mutter something about judgement day.
I 've even shown them my Mohammed/Aisha marriage souvenir mug.

I find the language reference a bit sad, but ok, I now understand the technical jargon your trying to put. One is not born anything but it is what one grows up as until one can make a choice. Thus no one is born Christian, Muslim, Jew or even aethiest etc. There is no free-choice in any of that until the time of choice.

You assume I have a great problem with apostacy of which I do not and have made only the one provision is that I think it is morally reprehensible for anyone of any faith who converts to then come back and attack the faith using their "being part of that religion" as some form of excuse. Why do I hate that? Simply put it insults the average sincerity of the bulk of believers of that faith and is attacking directly the core-base-human-emotion of faith.

As for why people become apostates in the first place, from my own experience, which I think is wide and quite representative, they mostly become apostates because they are not interested, no longer accept the teachings (ie no longer believe) or they object to the radical in-your-face control that many communities suffer from. All those that have become public attackers are those whom suffered from the acts of radicals or the state and I put most of them in the "rape victim" category - meaning they fall under that banner of some rape victims whom then hate "all men" and never get back into normal life. That is Wafa Sultan and Hirst Ali's problems or that real ugly peice of work Brigitte Gabriel.

There is no comparison to this group that you mention to anyone else, as they are pushing obvious incorrect examples of the life of the average Muslim globally and they know it, so they have no excuse other than they are doing so for some agenda. It is certainly profit and fame, there is no other explination. The real victims of such radical abuse, the bulk of Iranian, Afghan, Sudanese and other women whom have suffered do not go on global agenda driven bandwagons, they become if possible refugees in other countries - often still more moderate Muslim countries and they sit in hostels being supported by groups (often run by again Muslim charities) and engage with lawyers trying to gain recomense. Queen Rania of Jordan runs one such fund, there is one run by Princess Lalla Asma here in Morocco which are typical examples.

As for the Evangalists, no they do not come to offer simple choices, that is pure and utter propoganda. They come targetting countries, they offer money and they do the most disgusting of things, they condemn as evil and of the devil the faith of a community, tell them that their faith is the only salvation and then they break the core family fabric of society. Then, as they have huge budgets, will go on media blitzes back at home to say that they were being all nice and doing nothing illegal or immoral and that the authorities abused them. I am certain that even the illegal and immoral attempt to kidnap children in Haiti was under the same banner, of which now we know that one third of those children had parents and were not even orphans. Organisations run the likes of Jim Ammeran, Lloyd Turner and Bernard Wilks actively use money and force to "save the world" into their mold and is as utterly repugnant as the salafists, wahhabists, juhmeria and other Muslim equivilants and do not think that the Christian ones are not malign. Almost certainly those three names I mentioned are involved in turnin the Ugandan government into an evangelical nation that will if unstopped execute those found to be practicing homosexual. It is not the Ugandans that are pushing it but the teachings and pressures from the "The International Transformation Network" go to the Bruce Wilson article in Talk3action.org http://www.talk2action.org/story/2010/1/21/1533... refers.

I should also point out that about not liking "sellerse". I have a personal hatred for those that try to "sell" their religion, be they Muslim or whatever, but until you have lived in developing countries and discover the need for social cohesion and discover that family values are the real fabric for stability, you will see why most Muslim countries go hard on those non-Muslim selling their religion and even those not of their school of Islam. Shia Muslims are not allowed to sell their faith here either, only Maleki, Hanafi and Sufis are allowed in Morocco to do so. But add to that, the protection of the symbols of unity and faith is considered a matter of national cohesion and stability and that is the main consideration and it is not that Muslims do not "like the competition" they wonder why European and other nations do not do the same. Belgium, Italy, Spain and Monaco are all the officially Catholic Nations and even they do not control their religious levels and that is for Muslims suprising. So when you see a Muslim nation not accepting active recruitment, they assume that your nation is allowed to do the same and that if you do not, that is entirely your problem and would not condemn you if you did. No hidden bullsh*t there.

That I was given the choice and chose to do so should if anything be sign to you that I have no hatred for apostacy. For a start I was not "recruited", I observed, showed interest, studied and then sort out Muslims. Secondly, the poltical and social infrastructure of The Netherlands was such that the fabric of that society was not going to collapse, third, there has been for over 600 years a Muslim community there and thus there was no "foreign interference" that is easily identifyable in a country that is over 90 per cent of one faith.

You seem to have issues with ex Muslims who then go on to denigrate Islam Solkhar!
The reason is self evident:they were coerced into believing with all its attendant hate and dogma;and then awoke
to a damascene realisation that the dogma was bullshit.
The emotion of inculcated delusion is powerful.
Ask yourself why such people should literally risk life and limb to so viscerally oppose Islam.
The answer is surely that they believe passionately that the barbaric mores of Islam represent a clear and present danger to civilised society.(I particularly enjoyed the feisty Wafa verbally destroying some halfwit cleric
on Al Jazeera.The debate was conducted in Arabic;of which Wafa is a native speaker;thus the bombastic cretinous Imam was unable to shout her down.(the hosting Al Jazeera chap was clearly shocked at Wafa's
"straight from the shoulder" mauling that the she gave "the holy man".
Brigitte Gabriel is a Christian Arab from the Lebanon.
She was also brain washed into hating Israelis;but also had a "road to Damascus" change of mind when they saved the life of her ailing mother;and furthermore was shocked at the kindness she was shown by them.
Realising that she had been misled;she embarked on a career of opposition to Islam to redress her prievious prejudicies.
She wrote a book called"Because they hate"a demolition of Islamic dogma;which was not well received by
Mohammedans.
She is also a native Arabic speaker;and extremely articulate.
In addition she is also strikingly beautiful.
In short we have an intelligent,beautiful(intelligent beautiful women have a powerful media presence)woman; who
is not shy in labeling Islam backward,violent and uncivilised.
Ugly Solkhar??is that because she doesn't sing from your hymn sheet?
I regard Wafa ,Gabriel and Hirsi Ali as heroines who put their life on the line in defense of what they believe.
Curiously that's what a lot of retarded Muslims do to.(particularly those who want to kill them)
The difference is that my heroic trio are fighting for right;whereas the dogma zealots of Islam aren't.
.

I have an "issue" with anyone of any religion leaving it and then using thier "being an ex- whatever " as some form of evidence to attack that religion. I find that as disgusting and would condemn any for Christian Muslim-convert who does that as just as dispicable.

It does not take someone special to out-strip a theocratic old-style cleric in a debate, their answers are so predefined and predictable that they can easily be shown as the backward fools that they certainly are. At the same time I can think of some very good modern, moderate Muslims that would have just as much stood their ground and pointed out the unrealistic picture and over-generalizations that Wafa Sultan tried to make on that program. I watched it and I also speak Arabic.

Brigitte Gabriel is by far the biggest joke. You like here and the others because they say the things that appeal to you and ignore the fulli mplications of what they are. In her particular case, go to her website and the huge attempt to suck-up to American symbolism and patriotism clearly shows her aim - to sell books. That she has a gift of the gab and I agree phsyically is extremely attractive only helps her do so. But then she what she puts is complete generalized nonesense that takes no consideration of the entire picture of the Muslim world, the variations and levels of faith, control and in fact how Muslims live. She, Hirst Ali, Sultan and others some how forget that important fact and thus must be condemned for it as they have no excuse. I have pointed out Hirst Ali and how she no longer is part of The Netherlands at all, her reputation was shot to peices in her short pathetic period of parliamentary life.

None are heroic at all, all are in fact cultural-sell-outs and are not even fighting for what is right but for hate. To compare them to the rhetoric garbage from what we already know as radical and ultra-conservative theocrats is like chalk and cheese and a waste of effort. You need to compare them to the real heroes, those that try and are making an impact within the Muslim world - women business women, public figures, political leaders, civil servants and ministers, teachers and the large number that did get to have an education and thus teach their children that change is coming. By giving value to that trio of hate-for-profiteers gives disrespect and devalues the real heroines.

Your opening paragraph puzzles me, Solkhar. Who better to voice an opinion of something than one who has had first-hand experience?

" Thus no one is born Christian, Muslim, Jew or even aethiest etc. There is no free-choice in any of that until the time of choice. "

Nope. A child born from a Jewish mother is already Jewish by the Halakha.
You must inform yourself better next time you write about Judaism.

By the way I want to thank you for NOTconverting to Judaism.
Unlike Islam, we do not accept anyone who show interest to
convert.

WHY ?

Because we don't want QUANTITY, but QUALITY.

I don't consider myself just Christian; I consider myself Judeo-Christian, and thank God for the Ten Commandments, the Old Testament demand for equality before the law (true equity), and the command to love your neighbor as yourself - Quality.

Since the time of Constantine, European civilization has tended toward Judeo-phobia; whereas American civilization; with a fresh start intellectually and morally, has tended toward Judeo-philia. Likewise, in regards to Christianity, the Europeans have developed along Constantinian (Judeo-phobic) lines whereas Americans have developed along Judeo-Christian lines.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/jewish/jews-roma...

Beejj, notice how he has spun the conversation to sources and credibility? He has not addressed the main issue which I feel is the most important part of this apostate's statement. That Islam is a political system, not a religion! This not the first apostate to say that. As with any Muslim, this is the truth they try very hard to hide. Atheism was a plank in the Communist Party platform. Religion is a plank in the Islamic platform. When necessary or convenient they play it as a "race" or "culture" card. But there is no other religion, these days, that imposes a system of laws wherever it goes, even on those that don't belong to it, after overthrowing the existing systems. That's politics, not religion. Once Muslims are in power they impose their system of taxation, especially that on non-Muslims, and suppress all dissent, look no farther than Iran today. Religion is the excuse for what they do, which is control of every aspect of daily life for both Muslims and non-Muslims alike,

Your full of crap there SirW and I think you know it. "But there is no other religion, these days, that imposes a system of laws wherever it goes, even on those that don't belong to it, after overthrowing the existing systems. That's politics, not religion. Once Muslims are in power they impose their system of taxation, especially that on non-Muslims.'

So how many Muslim countries are there that impose religous taxes on non-Muslims? That over generalization is making you look like a complete idiot when before your postings had some logic to it. You half got it when you said it was politics and not religion, simply because you are talking about the politics of man and not the religion.

Sometimes I am amazed out deeply stuck up thier arseholes some westerners have stuck their heads. It is as stupid as the assumption that all Arabs ride camels and all Arab women are in burqas and locked away in their homes. Oh, for some reality please!

"The Sikh community living in Pakistan's Khyber Agency has succumbed to Taliban pressure, and have agreed to pay Jazia tax to the ensure safety of their families."

http://news.oneindia.in/2009/06/03/paksikhs-giv...

Isn't that the way it works in all totalitarian countries - and in communities controlled by the mafia? Yes, that is how it works. Islam is totalitarian politics - just like Fascism and Marxism - it's religious arm is a form of Orwellian Doublethink.

1. Islam is a religion of peace - The lie
2. Islam is a totalitarian political system - with a mass-murdering terrorist/military arm - The truth

"Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them... with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth." George Orwell - 1984

"If human equality is to be forever averted; if the "high," as we have called them, are to keep their places permanently; then the prevailing mental condition must be controlled insanity (Doublethink)." George Orwell - 1984

Since you mention in you postings the words facism and tolaterianism vertualy each and every time, in another thread I pointed out that my belief is that facism is from the right and not the left of which you object/disagree.

A well worded item by in religiousright-watch that basically sinks the liberal/facist terminology of Jonah Goldberg refers to and explains basically the view that I support. Quoting Michael Tomasky in "The New Republic" and HNN's David Neiwert's I could not find a better explanation and prudency : http://www.religiousrightwatch.com/2010/01/sele...

"It is thus necessary that the individual should finally come to realize that his own ego is of no importance in comparison with the existence of his nation; that the position of the individual ego is conditioned solely by the interests of the nation as a whole ... that above all the unity of a nation's spirit and will are worth far more than the freedom of the spirit and will of an individual... By this we understand only the individual’s capacity to make sacrifices for the community…" Adolph Hitler

“For Liberalism the individual is the end and society the means… For Fascism, society is the end, individuals the means, and its whole life consists in using individuals as instruments for its social ends.” Alfredo Rocco

“The Germans would not have recognized or embraced those (anti-individual) beliefs in the nineteenth century, when the West was still being influenced by the remnants of the Age of Reason and the Enlightenment, when the doctrines of the rights of man and the autonomy of the individual were paramount.” Leonard Peikoff

“Socialism for the Nazis denotes the principle of collectivism as such and its corollary, statism – in every field of human action, including but not limited to economics. “To be a socialist,” says Goebbels, “is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole”” Leonard Peikoff

http://www.peikoff.com/lr/chapter1.htm

Marxism is Left and so is Fascism. Fascism is Socialist government control of class struggle where the majority suppresses any convenient minority. Marxism is Socialist government control of class struggle where the minority (proletariat) suppresses the middle class majority. How do Marxism and Fascism manage their respective class struggles? Answer: Through control or ownership of property - collectivization of property.

“Contrary to the Marxists, the Nazis did not advocate public ownership of the means of production. They did demand that the government oversee and run the nation’s economy. The issue of legal ownership, they explained, is secondary; what counts is the issue of control. Private citizens, therefore, may continue to hold titles to property – so long as the state reserves to its self the unqualified right to regulate the use of their property. If “ownership” means the right to determine the use and disposal of material goods, then Nazism endowed the state with every real prerogative of ownership. What the individual retained was merely a formal deed… which conferred no rights on its holder. Under Communism, there is collective ownership of property de jure. Under Nazism, there is the same collective ownership de facto.” Leonard Peikoff

http://www.peikoff.com/lr/review_rand.htm

“It had long been realized that the only secure basis for oligarchy is collectivism. Wealth and privilege are most easily defended when they are possessed jointly. The so-called "abolition of private property"...meant in effect the concentration of property in far fewer hands than before... In the years following the Revolution it (The Socialist Party of Oceania) was able to step into this commanding position almost un-opposed because the whole process was represented as an act of collectivization… It had always been assumed that if the Capitalist Class were expropriated Socialism must follow; and unquestionably the Capitalists had been expropriated. Factories, mines, land, houses, transport, everything had been taken away from them; and since these things were no longer private property it followed that they must be public property. Ingsoc (Socialist Principles of Oceania), which grew out of the earlier Socialist movement and inherited its phraseology, has in fact carried out the main item in the Socialist program with the result; foreseen and intended beforehand, that economic inequality has been made permanent.” George Orwell – 1984

In both cases (Leftist Marxism and Leftist Fascism) Socialist (collectivizing) government control (social engineering) is a violation of our American Declaration of Independence and Constitution.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODJfwa9XKZQ

The problem there S_R is that your example fails, you stated that the Sikhs there are have succumbed to the blackmail by the local Taliban. I am certain even you know that the Taliban is not the government, in control or has the chance of becoming the government and thus it is just a radical group making extortion on the population. I repeat, there is no government that pushes al Jizya which is a historic tax that I should also remind you that Christians impossed on non-Muslims, with the Bizantine Authorities first doing so on Jews as a salt-tax and even in my country that Amsterdam imposed on Jews.

It rather puts to question you wasted effort of talking about double-talk. Totalitariansim was impossed just as much under the banner of Christians or by Christians (that learned their morals from Christian schools). Islam is a religion of peace as much as Christianity and Judaism as they are all extentions of one another, and there is no such thing as an Islamic political system as such, those are the creations of man in thier own interpetations of scriptures/message etc and as man has constantly shown, they are willing to modify their faith and interpretions to fit their political agenda and not the other way around as it should be done.

" Islam is a religion of peace "

Oh,please Dominic...there we go again with MORE LIES.

This remark isn't truthful at all.

Islam is sheer hatred, bloodlust and wanton violence.

You have not proven anything Beejj, I made an error and recanted that textual error, the rest I stand by.

As for the Egyptian Coptc priest, yes born a Muslim in Egypt, yes he hid from authorities and the radicals for threat of death, moved to a coptic community under false name in Syria before leaving overseas. No such silliness there, it happens. He holds no anamosity and is a wonderful person, he is in his late 70s now and a pleasure to sit with and talk to, a treasure I would call him. Tildburg in Noord Brabant has a very large Copt community. As the other Dutch speaker on this blog to go do a search and find the details.... oh, last thing, think before you open your mouth and accuse.

Your "error" was a bald lie, Solkhar, and you know it. As for recanting, when did you do so? Far from recanting, you blustered and waffled in your usual fashion, hoping that it would suffice to cover your tracks, but you failed.

No, he was not, I repeat, born Muslim. It's an impossibility. He can be the loveliest bloke in the world, but he was not born Muslim. Your statement is devoid of logic. Do I have to spell it out for you? You are the one who needs to think before writing.

We are probably thinking of two scenarios so you will have to remind me of my lie, of which until you remind me I totally recant.

If your refeference to "born a Muslim", that is my English, yes I should have said born and grew up as a child in a Muslim family, aka like most people, "born Christian, Jew, etc". If that is what the argument is, then I find it rather illogical to make an argument about that.

So, I repeat, I know an Egyptian Coptic Priest, born in Egypt to a Muslim family, grew up "as a Muslim", left it and become a Copt and later a Priest. Does that sound better now?

I need to remind you, Solkhar? Very well. You claimed that Christians, like Muslims, punish raped girls by killing them. You did not recant after writing this, but squirmed and did your utmost to evade my challenge. You lied.

On another occasion I took you to task because you claimed that under Islam there is no death penalty for homosexuality. The reason for my doing so was that Vanderbilt professor Awadh Binhazim admitted that such was the case, saying that "it is not our law: it's in the Koran." Now, one of you is wrong or lying. I rather suspect that the professor is the one not telling porkies.

I find it interesting that you asked me to remind you of these. Might your "forgetfulness" be a cheap attempt to escape censure?

It pleases me you admit that nobody is born Muslim or Catholic or whatever. I hope silly little Muslima 363 (or whatever the number is) reads these and your words, and I hope she has the intellect to ponder the significance the indoctrination she received during vulnerable childhood. Of course, there are uncounted millions of all religious persuasions in the same boat as she. Were it not the case, the various religions would have a hard time of it just surviving.

To return to the homosexuality theme, last evening I watched a programme on the A(ustralian)BC dealing with the dancing boys of Afghanistan and was sickened by it all. That little boys are so foully used by men on such a scale is heartbreaking. On several occasions men were asked what their wives thought about their activities, and every man replied that wives' opinions didn't matter. Interesting. And to think that American and British, etc, lives are being lost in such a country!

I do not remember so much the conversation about the rape and though I am not denying nor attempting to squirm in any fashion, I suspect we were targetting the subject from differing angles and how your describing it is not the way I was probably addressing the subject. What I certainly would have been referring to was the subject of honor killings in general and that it happens in orthodox eastern European communities but is just considered "murder" or "family dispute" but that for strict conservative Greek or Serb Orthodox families, the girl is also often in danger because they would argue how was she in that situation in the first place, even though it can be so unfair and unjust in this modern day and age. Again, I will not go back through texs to find it, I have the flue, it is very late and I have to work tomorrow morning early.

As for the other subject, that particular person probably meant the haddiths, not the Qur'an and if he did, then he is taking the a particular haddith's interpetation of the Qur'an's references to examples of how "at that time" it was necesary to protect the community integrity - which I might add was always fragile. So he may believe that, but I will argue that I am more correct and follow the more common interpretation simply because most Muslim countries do not have the death penalty for homosexuality, in fact the vast majority do not. To add to that subject, you may note on this thread that I have mentioned a certain very powerful and cash-influencial US based evangalist sect that actively tries to dominate the lives of developing countries and is very much influencing law makers in Uganda, and it was in fact a number of them that pushed the current legislation there for the change of laws that not only make homosexuality illegal but an executionable crime. I do not see that they will claim it is the Qur'an but they will certainly claim it is in the Bible. Add to that the Calvinist party in The Netherlands not only has in its platform that women should not be able to work in public office at any level but homosexuality should be considered a criminal offence. I have avoided studying calvanism but I am sure they will say it is in the Bible.

Oh, as for the item on the Australian ABC about Afghanistan, pointing out the problems in Muslim countries as some form of excuse or proof does not stick, try the male child prostitutes of Brazil's main cities, the "good luck clubs" of Cambodia, the ugly French and Belgium F*ck Clubs that try and spring up here in Morocco targetting the poor kids with their euros, let alone the child porno rings in the US, Australia and frankly everywhere. We can go into the subject of Catholic priests if you like or turn onto the subject of wife beatings with Nepal having the highest average and so on and so forth. Do not bother, as for the loss of US and British (and others) lives in that country, you may wish to spare a small time of compassion for the drug trade in those countries and the lost teenagers and others that outdo any current military loss of life. I hate sanctimonious crap, play that with other ignorants, I have seen it all - the worst and the best man and nature has done and I am (God willing) only half way through my life.

Yes, go over your messages of about 3 or 4 weeks ago.

The ABC programme (I missed the beginning of it) pointed out what goes on in Afghanistan. It made no mention of anything other than that. The fact that it did so in no way implies it turns a blind eye to what happens in other countries. By the same token, it is always quick to bring to public attention the foul deeds of certain Catholic priests, so don't play the usual Muslim line of defending such practices by pointing out that all is not sweetness and light everywhere. One of the most alarming aspects of the show was the fact that the interviewed Afghan men had not the slightest notion of paederasty. I find it most revealing that you look upon the revelation of Afghan taste for little boys as sanctimonious crap.

“I suspect we were targetting the subject from differing angles and how your describing it is not the way I was probably addressing the subject. What I certainly would have been referring to…”

Trying to understand the above reply you, this quote popped into my head:

“I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I'm not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”

Dizzying...as always.

That's why I won't respond to him anymore Christine_S, but I'm glad you've pointed these things out. He's nothing more than a spin doctor. I doubt even Bill O'Rielly could do anything with him.

Westerners "don't want to judge anybody based on their [religion]," Sultan said, "[But] Islam is not a religion. Islam is a very dangerous political ideology. ... There is no such thing as radical Islam and regular Islam or spiritual Islam. ...There is only one Islam."

There you have it, straight from the mouth of an apostate, what I've been saying for quite a while now. The problem is, getting enough people to know the truth and getting them to act on it. This is why they want to kill apostates so badly, and why it is so hard to get the truth out about Islam.