It's interesting that you have taken it upon yourself to be the spokesperson for ISIS and to express who is and who is not a pious Moslem.
Where on earth do you get that silly idea? Maybe you should read a bit more carefully. I base my opinions on what I've read from various Islamic leaders, clerics and scholars. What do you base yours upon?
And as per your typical pattern of behavior, you make unfounded claims to quoted material that was posted. You do so as a defense mechanism because you are incensed that anyone would dare criticize your islamist heroes.
Are you done yet Ms. Plagiarest? Did you even look at your own post or are you going to keep flinging poo in hopes of obtaining a different result?
As we have seen consistently, you cannot honestly and objectively respond to comments that are critical of ISIS and their pious adherence to islamist values of striving in the way of Muhammud (swish). They have provided every indication that their actions ( taking sex slaves), are consistent with islamist principles of jihad and emulate the actions of Mo' (swish), islams inventor.
I have no issue with being critical of ISIS. They need to be destroyed. Still swishing around are you?
I've provided you ample opportunity to present an honest assessment of the actions of ISIS but you are in thrall to the violence and depravity being inflicted upon a population that is under the bootheel of a 7th century death cult that has made clear examples of adherence to 7th century norms established by Muhammud (swish) in his invention of Islamism.
Now you're being silly again.
Are you done with your lies and falsehoods yet? I note with amusement that you're so desperate to protect your islamist heroes, you're reduced to spewing the same phony claims.
You keep repeating the same gibberish.
Its pretty clear that your familiarity with islamist history and theology is cliche-ridden and facile. The ability to articulate and manipulate cliches, even common ones, is not a substitute for a working knowledge of your religion and of it’s history.
My familiarity with the history of Islam and theology is based on what I've read and I have no issue with providing sources (which I usually do) rather than plagiarized cut'n'paste. You've displayed little working knowledge at this point though you appear to be pretending to be something of a scholar.
What knowledge you have of the politico-religious ideology invented by muhammud (swish), is little more than selected versions of youtube clips, what you hear on the evening news which are the sources that you use to represent the particular version of Islamism that you would propose to be the real Islamism. [/quote}
Islam is a religion. The term "politico-religious ideology" is a very modern (post-9/11) invention by certain groups in an attempt to de-legitimize Islam as a religion.
I have never used youtube clips for source material (other than the occassional apt Monty Python clip) nor do I waste time watching them as they are difficult to verify for accuracy and easily distorted. Perhaps you are self-describing here.
Yes, I understand that is your rationalization. But is not the truth. You need to understand there is 1,400 years of islamist history with which to make judgments about the religion that Mo' (swish ) stole from the religions that preceded his invention of Islamism.
You do realize that all today's modern religions "stole" from preceding religions when they invented theirs? I mean, you being such a scholar and all I figure you probably know this.
What we do have is a 1,400 year historical record of war, colonialism and subjugation of the infidel and conquest byu the sword.
....and that is different from other religions...like say Christianity, how? They were all a bunch of bloody butchers in those days. You also ignore the fact that it was not all spread by the sword. In many parts of the world Islam (like Christianity) offered something better to the people who chose (not necessarily forced) to convert. That's part of that there 1400 years of history also.
The reasons for this behavior surviving as a part of the historical record is because the wars waqged in furthere of mohammedan ideology have been so destructive to humanity. The historical record is very clear about moslems taking no exception to the ideas of war, conquest, colonialism, subjugation of the infidel, sexual slavery, genocide and piracy as part of spreading the religion. These behaviors were not morally objectionable to moslems as the acts were (and obviously still are), in accordance with following in the way of muhammud (swish) so they were recorded in the effort of preserving the Sunnah of islam’s inventor as an example for all later Moslems.
Those behaviors were not "morally objectionable" to anyone in those days. The historical record is full of stuff like that. So is the Bible.
So, lets take a look at islamist family values, shall we?
Ruling on having intercourse with a slave woman when one has a wife - islamqa.info
10382: Ruling on having intercourse with a slave woman when one has a wife
Muslim Family Values
Praise be to Allaah.
Islam allows a man to have intercourse with his slave woman, whether he has a wife or wives or he is not married.
A slave woman with whom a man has intercourse is known as a sariyyah (concubine) from the word sirr, which means marriage.
This is indicated by the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and this was done by the Prophets. Ibraaheem (peace be upon him) took Haajar as a concubine and she bore him Ismaa’eel (may peace be upon them all).
Our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) also did that, as did the Sahaabah, the righteous and the scholars. The scholars are unanimously agreed on that and it is not permissible for anyone to regard it as haraam or to forbid it. Whoever regards that as haraam is a sinner who is going against the consensus of the scholars.
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphan girls then marry (other) women of your choice, two or three, or four; but if you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly (with them), then only one or (slaves) that your right hands possess. That is nearer to prevent you from doing injustice”
[al-Nisa’ 4:3]
Lovely!
Indeed. One can always skillfully pick the worst of a religion, culture, ideology and use it to represent the whole. Societies in those had slaves (and a low regard for women). Those rulings reflect the culture of the time.
These are the heroes you hope to defend.
No. I defend my neighbor, who is married with 3 children - one son still in highschool, a daughter who is starting out her career as a doctor and another daughter who is majoring in business and econonics. I don't think my neighbor is interested in intercourse with slaves.
