Muslim-only towns in America

[theDoctorisIn]

not me.....Islam is full of shit....after reading those 10 laws how can you deny it....?

yeah....there are lots of nice muslims who are sinners like the rest of us.....people are people...

however the BELIEF SYSTEM OF ISLAM does not allow for "moderate" muslims......Islam is Islam...there has been no new enlightened reformation.....

You're proving my point for me.

If you had ever met a Muslim, you'd know that's ENTIRELY not true. There are at least a billion "moderate Muslims" in the world.
It's crazy to me that anyone can be that ignorant.

Thats not true, the term "moderate" Muslim doesn't even make sense, its just something we use here in the West but its not realistic, being a "moderate" Muslim would mean you follow Islam in moderation and you cannot do that, you either follow Islam or you don't. Go to a Muslim country like Jordan or Kuwait and ask people there if follow Islam in moderation or if they are moderate Muslims, they won't know what the fuck you are talking about.

You do realize that the extremist Muslims in the middle east are just a tiny fraction of the total number of Muslims in the world, right?

There are at least a billion Muslims that don't live in the middle east, don't live under sharia law, and aren't trying to kill you.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

You're proving my point for me.

If you had ever met a Muslim, you'd know that's ENTIRELY not true. There are at least a billion "moderate Muslims" in the world.

It's crazy to me that anyone can be that ignorant.

what are you......a muslim yourself? .......or just another ignorant patsy liberal in denial....?

Actually, I'm Jewish, and not "in denial" about anything. And I have many Muslim friends.


I wonder how I'm supposed to tell my friends that they're not supposed to be friends with me...

In most cases, they are not taught that at all.

There are Jewish-only towns and Jewish-only court systems all over NY. Why the outrage about Muslims doing the same thing?

I thought police were infallible.

Those Christian missionaries must have deserved it, just like the OWS protesters.

My landlord is a Pakistani Muslim, and he's invited me over to his house for dinner many times. Doesn't sound so "insular" to me...

one does not have to physically kill to be "extreme"....one can also non-physically kill society as well...which is also "extreme" in nature.....it's actually another form of jihad....albeit less violent....

You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

this is info straight from a muslim Q&A site.....a "mushrik" or "kaafir" is a non-muslim...

There are thousands of interpretations of the Quran, just like there are thousands of interpretations of the Bible. Should I post some links to the Westboro Baptist Church, and claim that they speak for all Christians?

you must be an anti-zionist jew.....which probably explains your muslim "friends"....but hey jews and muslims have gotten along before.....just don't let your friendly personal experiences blind you to the stealth jihad that exists....those Christian missionaries did not "deserve it" and most of the police probably knew it but were following orders.....they were within their Constitutional rights and in court were acquitted....this was something that should not happen in America....OWS bums had more right to free speech in public than they did.....my guess is there were very few...if any....muslims who took up the missionary's offer on youtube for a discussion.....

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

just don't let your friendly personal experiences blind you to the stealth jihad that exists.

You have every right to exhibit your irrational hate and fear of Muslims and ignorance of Islam. You do not have the right, however, to attempt to codify that hate and ignorance.

Carry on.

 

[Cowman]

private Muslim community

what part of 'private' does the OP not comprehend? There are 'private' communities of all kinds in the US. Religious, ethnic, age, sexual orientation, etc.


Big whoop.

I think the complaint is that it is a community that harbors terrorists.

Where the fuck did you pull that dingleberry from?

 

[bucs90]

While it is a bit scary, the truth is that the freedom congregate and creat local laws is what this country is builit on and we should applaud.

As long as local laws don't conflict with state and federal laws or violate the fundamentals of our USC.

Just check out the Free State Movement.

So long as those local laws aren't about immigration, guns, weed, speed limits or displaying Christian symbols in public places. THOSE laws aren't to be settled locally. But Islamic Sharia Law? Yeah, the Feds wont investigate them the same way they do militias full of white honkeys.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

just don't let your friendly personal experiences blind you to the stealth jihad that exists.

You have every right to exhibit your irrational hate and fear of Muslims and ignorance of Islam. You do not have the right, however, to attempt to codify that hate and ignorance.

Carry on.

Critical thinking appears to be lost in America....and we will suffer the consequences....

While it is true there are a few muslims who reject sharia.....the poison of sharia is spreading within America....

"Today, “moderate Islam” is an illusion. There is hardly a spark, much less a wildfire. Making moderation real will take more than wishing upon a star. It calls for a gut check, a willingness to face down not just al-Qaeda but the Qaradawis and their sharia campaign. It means saying: Not here."

Secularism can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society.” The writer was not one of those sulfurous Islamophobes decried by CAIR and the professional Left. Quite the opposite: It was Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s spiritual guide and a favorite of the Saudi royal family. He made this assertion in his book, How the Imported Solutions Disastrously Affected Our Ummah, an excerpt of which was published by the Saudi Gazette just a couple of months ago.

This was Qaradawi the “progressive” Muslim intellectual, much loved by Georgetown University’s burgeoning Islamic-studies programs. Like Harvard, Georgetown has been purchased into submission by tens of millions of Saudi petrodollars. In its resulting ardor to put Americans at ease about Islam, the university somehow manages to look beyond Qaradawi’s fatwas calling for the killing of American troops in Iraq and for suicide bombings in Israel. Qaradawi, they tell us, is a “moderate.” In fact, as Robert Spencer quips, if you were to say Islam and secularism cannot co-exist, John Esposito, Georgetown’s apologist-in-chief, would call you an Islamophobe; but when Qaradawi says it, no problem — according to Esposito, he’s a “reformist.”

And he’s not just any reformist. Another Qaradawi fan, Feisal Rauf, the similarly “moderate” imam behind the Ground Zero mosque project, tells us Qaradawi is also “the most well-known legal authority in the whole Muslim world today.”

Rauf is undoubtedly right about that. So it is worth letting it sink in that this most influential of Islam’s voices, this promoter of the Islamic enclaves the Brotherhood is forging throughout the West, is convinced that Islamic societies can never accept secularism. After all, secularism is nothing less than the framework by which the West defends religious freedom but denies legal and political authority to religious creeds.

It is also worth understanding why Qaradawi says Islam and secularism cannot co-exist. The excerpt from his book continues:

As Islam is a comprehensive system of worship (Ibadah) and legislation (Shari’ah), the acceptance of secularism means abandonment of Shari’ah, a denial of the divine guidance and a rejection of Allah’s injunctions. It is indeed a false claim that Shari’ah is not proper to the requirements of the present age. The acceptance of a legislation formulated by humans means a preference of the humans’ limited knowledge and experiences to the divine guidance: “Say! Do you know better than Allah?” (Qur’an, 2:140) For this reason, the call for secularism among Muslims is atheism and a rejection of Islam. Its acceptance as a basis for rule in place of Shari’ah is downright apostasy.

Apostasy is an explosive accusation. On another occasion, Sheikh Qaradawi explained that “Muslim jurists are unanimous that apostates must be punished.” He further acknowledged that the consensus view of these jurists, including the principal schools of both Sunni and Shiite jurisprudence, is “that apostates must be executed.”

Qaradawi’s own view is more nuanced, as he explained to the Egyptian press in 2005. This, I suppose, is where his vaunted reformist streak comes in. For private apostasy, in which a Muslim makes a secret, personal decision to renounce tenets of Islam and quietly goes his separate way without causing a stir, the sheikh believes ostracism by the Islamic community is a sufficient penalty, with the understanding that Allah will condemn the apostate to eternal damnation at the time of his choosing. For public apostasy, however, Qaradawi stands with the overwhelming weight of Islamic authority: “The punishment . . . is execution.”

The sad fact, the fact no one wants to deal with but which the Ground Zero mosque debate has forced to the fore, is that Qaradawi is a moderate. So is Feisal Rauf, who endorses the Qaradawi position — the mainstream Islamic position — that sharia is a nonnegotiable requirement. Rauf wins the coveted “moderate” designation because he strains, at least when speaking for Western consumption, to paper over the incompatibility between sharia societies and Western societies.

Qaradawi and Rauf are “moderates” because we’ve abandoned reason. Our opinion elites are happy to paper over the gulf between “reformist” Islam and the “reformist” approval of mass-murder attacks. That’s why it matters not a whit to them that Imam Rauf refuses to renounce Hamas: If you’re going to give a pass to Qaradawi, the guy who actively promotes Hamas terrorists, how can you complain about a guy who merely refuses to condemn the terrorists?

When we are rational, we have confidence in our own frame of reference. We judge what is moderate based on a detached, commonsense understanding of what “moderate” means. We’re not rigging the outcome; we just want to know where we stand.

If we were in that objective frame of mind, we would easily see that a freedom culture requires separation of the spiritual from the secular. We would also see that sharia — with dictates that contradict liberty and equality while sanctioning cruel punishments and holy war — is not moderate. Consequently, no one who advocates sharia can be a moderate, no matter how well-meaning he may be, no matter how heartfelt may be his conviction that this is God’s will, and no matter how much higher on the food chain he may be than Osama bin Laden.

Instead, abandoning reason, we have deep-sixed our own frame of reference and substituted mainstream Islam’s.

cont.
Inventing Moderate Islam - Andrew C. McCarthy - National Review Online

 

[ScreamingEagle]

If it can happen in Europe......it can happen here....

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQOCcx5V9RI]Geert Wilders Warning to America Part 1 of 2 - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdX1qpCtlh8]Geert Wilders Warning to America Part 2 of 2 - YouTube[/ame]