'Right Wing Extremist' speaker withdraws from West Point event after protests

[bodecea]

So, defend it then.

I still fail to see why this guys views are any different to some of the free speech from others.

If his right to free speech were actually in danger, I would. It isn't.

I just recently met a couple of Iranians that would love to see the guy speak. Their hatred of what some have done to their religion runs deep. No they would not be offended, infact they may wish to expand on the remarks.

Sure.

 

[Sunni Man]

I just recently met a couple of Iranians that would love to see the guy speak. Their hatred of what some have done to their religion runs deep. No they would not be offended, infact they may wish to expand on the remarks.

Iranians are almost all Shiites; which is basically an Islamic cult.

So real Muslims don't care what their opinion is about this speaker or Islam.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Gen. William Boykin can espouse his racist rants elsewhere but not here representing America's finest.







U.S. News - 'Extremist' speaker withdraws from West Point event after protests

West Point issued a brief statement late Monday saying that retired Lt. Gen. William Boykin has decided to withdraw from speaking at the Feb. 8 prayer breakfast and another speaker would be lined up in his place.

The Army is drawing protests from veterans’ and Islamic groups for inviting a retired general who many have called anti-Muslim to speak at a West Point prayer breakfast.

Lt. Gen William G. Boykin has been criticized for speeches at evangelical Christian churches in which he made disparaging remarks about Islam. Boykin has said that Muslims are trying to implement Shariah Law in the United States and that Islam is the greatest threat America faces...

kidrocks

 

[Jarhead]

I knew I made it too simple. Okay, how many white (W.A.S.P.) Muslims do you know?

And how many black WASPS's do you know?

Of course, the answer is none.

But what that has to do with the debate at hand, I dont know.

Bottom line...Islam is a religion where its believers are of several races...caucasian and black being the most prominant.

Now...that being said...how can a man who has a concern over a religion that is multi racial be deemed as a racist?

Unless, of course, it is just easy to call himn a racist.

Which makes those that call him a racist naive and using the race card where it is not applicable.

You want to criticize him for being naive to the Islam religion.....go for it....

But then I would think the American way would be to educate him.

Or do what the left likes to do....ciriticize him; and take away his freedom of speech.

Nobody took away his right to free speech. He can still be an islamaphobe all he wants to...he just can't speak at West Point. He can still go on Fox and spout his nonsense.

good point.

I see it. You are correct.

 

[Conservative]

Okay...so ya'll aren't racists, just religionists? Would ya'll be okay with a virulent anti-Christian speaker at West Point?

As a Catholic, yes, I would be. Supporting freedom of speech is easy when you agree with what's being said. It is when it is hard that counts.

Personally, I may not like what you have to say, but I will defend, with my life, your right to say it. Shame on you that you won't do likewise.

I swore an oath to defend it you douchnozzle. Did you?

The defenders of free speech shouldn't be inviting the fox into the hen house. Our military is a place for all qualified Americans and Muslim students at West Point should not be subject to an Islamaphobe anymore than Christian students should be subject to speeches from a Christianaphobe. Keep you phobias on the blogs, don't invite them to speak at West Point.

Translation: The defenders of free speech only want to hear from people whose free speech they agree with. Got it.

 

[bripat9643]

Okay...so ya'll aren't racists, just religionists? Would ya'll be okay with a virulent anti-Christian speaker at West Point?

As a Catholic, yes, I would be. Supporting freedom of speech is easy when you agree with what's being said. It is when it is hard that counts.

Personally, I may not like what you have to say, but I will defend, with my life, your right to say it. Shame on you that you won't do likewise.

I swore an oath to defend it you douchnozzle. Did you?

The defenders of free speech shouldn't be inviting the fox into the hen house. Our military is a place for all qualified Americans and Muslim students at West Point should not be subject to an Islamaphobe anymore than Christian students should be subject to speeches from a Christianaphobe. Keep you phobias on the blogs, don't invite them to speak at West Point.

You pontificate about the First Amendment, and then you immediately claim certain points of view aren't permissible.

What kind of moron are you?

 

[bripat9643]

The Qu'ran encourages Muslims to lie to infidels if it advances the cause of Islam. You know that, don't you?

And did you know that Christians lie left and right despite the 10 Commandments?

Perhaps, but the Bible doesn't tell them to lie to non-Christians. You even noted that they lie DESPITE the 10 Commandments, not because of the 10 Commandments

 

[whitehall]

Notice how the left operates. They prefer to silence a US retired general rather than give him a chance to speak. American institutes of higher learning used to be a place to exchange opinions and argue and learn. Now apparently even the USMA has become a closed minded institution run by radical lefties.

 

[Sunni Man]

The Qu'ran encourages Muslims to lie to infidels if it advances the cause of Islam. You know that, don't you?

Would you please link chapter and verse where the Quran encourages Muslims to lie?

 

[Conservative]

The Qu'ran encourages Muslims to lie to infidels if it advances the cause of Islam. You know that, don't you?

Would you please link chapter and verse where the Quran encourages Muslims to lie?

read the thread...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/205901-right-wing-extremist-speaker-withdraws-from-west-point-event-after-protests-2.html#post4744037

The Qur'an:

Qur'an (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell a lie.

Qur'an (3:28) - This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to "guard themselves."

Qur'an (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..." The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.

Qur'an (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who must "hide his faith" among those who are not believers.

Qur'an (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts" The context of this remark is marriage, which explains why Sharia allows spouses to lie to each other for the greater good.

Qur'an (66:2) - "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths"

Qur'an (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means deceit. If Allah is deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose.

 

[Sunni Man]

The Qu'ran encourages Muslims to lie to infidels if it advances the cause of Islam. You know that, don't you?

Would you please link chapter and verse where the Quran encourages Muslims to lie?

read the thread...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/205901-right-wing-extremist-speaker-withdraws-from-west-point-event-after-protests-2.html#post4744037

The Qur'an:

Qur'an (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell a lie.

Qur'an (3:28) - This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to "guard themselves."

Qur'an (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..." The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.

Qur'an (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who must "hide his faith" among those who are not believers.

Qur'an (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts" The context of this remark is marriage, which explains why Sharia allows spouses to lie to each other for the greater good.

Qur'an (66:2) - "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths"

Qur'an (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means deceit. If Allah is deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose.

All but one of those verses were given during a time of war and have to do with a response to broken treaties, or deceiving the enemy in order to win the war.

Lying for just the sake of lying; such as in business transactions, it strictly forbidden.

The only one on your list that allows what we in the West call a white lie is between husband and wife to keep marital harmony.

Such as when an overweight wife asks, "Does this make me look fat?" and the husband wisely answers "No"

 

[bodecea]

As a Catholic, yes, I would be. Supporting freedom of speech is easy when you agree with what's being said. It is when it is hard that counts.

Personally, I may not like what you have to say, but I will defend, with my life, your right to say it. Shame on you that you won't do likewise.

I swore an oath to defend it you douchnozzle. Did you?

The defenders of free speech shouldn't be inviting the fox into the hen house. Our military is a place for all qualified Americans and Muslim students at West Point should not be subject to an Islamaphobe anymore than Christian students should be subject to speeches from a Christianaphobe. Keep you phobias on the blogs, don't invite them to speak at West Point.

You pontificate about the First Amendment, and then you immediately claim certain points of view aren't permissible.

What kind of moron are you?

Aren't permissable? Who got arrested or fined for presenting their point of view. Name names.

 

[Conservative]

Would you please link chapter and verse where the Quran encourages Muslims to lie?

read the thread...

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/205901-right-wing-extremist-speaker-withdraws-from-west-point-event-after-protests-2.html#post4744037

The Qur'an:

Qur'an (16:106) - Establishes that there are circumstances that can "compel" a Muslim to tell a lie.

Qur'an (3:28) - This verse tells Muslims not to take those outside the faith as friends, unless it is to "guard themselves."

Qur'an (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..." The dissolution of oaths with the pagans who remained at Mecca following its capture. They did nothing wrong, but were evicted anyway.

Qur'an (40:28) - A man is introduced as a believer, but one who must "hide his faith" among those who are not believers.

Qur'an (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts" The context of this remark is marriage, which explains why Sharia allows spouses to lie to each other for the greater good.

Qur'an (66:2) - "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths"

Qur'an (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers." The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means deceit. If Allah is deceitful toward unbelievers, then there is little basis for denying that Muslims are allowed to do the same. (See also 8:30 and 10:21)

Taken collectively these verses are interpreted to mean that there are circumstances when a Muslim may be "compelled" to deceive others for a greater purpose.

All but one of those verses were given during a time of war and have to do with a response to broken treaties, or deceiving the enemy in order to win the war.

Lying for just the sake of lying; such as in business transactions, it strictly forbidden.

The only one on your list that allows what we in the West call a white lie is between husband and wife to keep marital harmony.

Such as when an overweight wife asks, "Does this make me look fat?" and the husband wisely answers "No"

same link...

From Islamic Law:



Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746 - 8.2) - "Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory... it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression...



"One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie.

 

[bodecea]

Notice how the left operates. They prefer to silence a US retired general rather than give him a chance to speak. American institutes of higher learning used to be a place to exchange opinions and argue and learn. Now apparently even the USMA has become a closed minded institution run by radical lefties.

Silence him? He was arrested? He was fined? Please point that out to us.

And please come back here and make the same complaint when some Catholic University does not allow a spokesperson for NOW or Planned Parenthood come speak at their venue.

 

[Conservative]

Notice how the left operates. They prefer to silence a US retired general rather than give him a chance to speak. American institutes of higher learning used to be a place to exchange opinions and argue and learn. Now apparently even the USMA has become a closed minded institution run by radical lefties.

Silence him? He was arrested? He was fined? Please point that out to us.

And please come back here and make the same complaint when some Catholic University does not allow a spokesperson for NOW or Planned Parenthood come speak at their venue.

The general was invited, then essentially dis-invited. In your example, there would have been no invitation to begin with.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

"Boykin has said that Muslims are trying to implement Shariah Law in the United States and that Islam is the greatest threat America faces."

Sounds like simple reality to me but I guess there are many in denial.

Sounds like your little secret to me, but I guess there are many in denial.

In interviews, American Muslims say they reject separate

 

[Sunni Man]

From Islamic Law:

Reliance of the Traveler (p. 746 - 8.2) - "Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible (N:i.e. when the purpose of lying is to circumvent someone who is preventing one from doing something permissible), and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory... it is religiously precautionary in all cases to employ words that give a misleading impression...

"One should compare the bad consequences entailed by lying to those entailed by telling the truth, and if the consequences of telling the truth are more damaging, one is entitled to lie.

Sorry to bust your bubble, but this is Not in any way, shape, or form, Islamic Law.

Nor is it the Quran.

You are quoting from a book called, "Reliance of the Traveler", which was written by an Islamic scholar centuries ago.

It is just his opinion, and only carries the weight of his opinion.

No muslim is obligated to follow or believe in his writings or ideas. Period.

 

[bodecea]

Notice how the left operates. They prefer to silence a US retired general rather than give him a chance to speak. American institutes of higher learning used to be a place to exchange opinions and argue and learn. Now apparently even the USMA has become a closed minded institution run by radical lefties.

Silence him? He was arrested? He was fined? Please point that out to us.

And please come back here and make the same complaint when some Catholic University does not allow a spokesperson for NOW or Planned Parenthood come speak at their venue.

The general was invited, then essentially dis-invited. In your example, there would have been no invitation to begin with.

Actually, we have had speakers un-invited here at USD, the Catholic University. Speakers get un-invited all the time all over the U.S.

But, please.....show us where "un-inviting" someone is in violation of their 1st Amendment rights. I'm listening.

 

[Conservative]

Silence him? He was arrested? He was fined? Please point that out to us.

And please come back here and make the same complaint when some Catholic University does not allow a spokesperson for NOW or Planned Parenthood come speak at their venue.

The general was invited, then essentially dis-invited. In your example, there would have been no invitation to begin with.

Actually, we have had speakers un-invited here at USD, the Catholic University. Speakers get un-invited all the time all over the U.S.

But, please.....show us where "un-inviting" someone is in violation of their 1st Amendment rights. I'm listening.

did I say anyone's rights were violated? Please... show me that post.

 

[9thIDdoc]

He withdrew his offer to speak at a prayer breakfast.
Maybe he had concerns with separation of church and state. West Point is a government sponsored college after all. Maybe he didn't wish to attend a prayer breakfast with Muslims for religeous reasons or for fear they would explode.