Muslims: 'We don't want to take over this country'

yes sure..

thats one of the biggest lies spread by religious people..

ok, i meant the constitutional right of freedom of speech.. and of course islam has also been exposed to other ideas, but not in the degree that christianism has come in contact in the west for example of illuminism.

so im troll for expressing my ideas? ok then

No, you're a troll for expressing yourself in such a way that it is nearly certain you're only doing it to get a rise out of people. Abe posted an article, but your response was:

to the poster above: stop proselytizing here.. islam sucks big time, its possibly the most violent religion out there.. go to an arabic country and you will know what im talking about

The number of fallacies in that particular blurb, and the level of ignorance, is astounding, so I choose to believe you are a troll rather than admit that there could be someone so crass and out of touch on this message board with any genuinely good intention.
 
You are full of it...

religions are anti-liberty and anti-democratic by nature, but still chrisianism and hebraism
have been exposed to the free market of ideas.. not so with islam

Lot of liberty in this Babylionian Talmud message concerning my property rights:

Non-Jews — No Property Rights
:rolleyes:

The Talmud teaches that non-Jews have no property rights. Their possessions are "like unclaimed land in the desert." (See Jewish Encyclopedia, p. 667) The illustration is given of the 4th Century notable Rabbi Ashi who, knowing this, acted accordingly and gave "an adroit and evasive answer" when questioned by the Gentile owner of a vineyard who overheard Ashi tell his slave to go into his vineyard and get him some grapes if the vineyard belonged to a Gentile, but not to take any if the owner be a Jew. "Is it permitted to take from a Gentile?" the owner asked. Ashi's evasive answer is given with the explanation that: "In truth Ashi coincided with the opinion of the authority stated above: namely, that … Gentile … property is considered public property, like unclaimed land in the desert." (Soncino Press 1936 publication of the Babylonian Talmud)

The Talmudic authority which holds that Gentile property is like unclaimed land in the desert is the Talmud Book of Baba Bathra, Folio 54b, there cited. The passage actually appears on page 222 of the Soncino edition: "Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel: The property of a heathen is on the same footing as desert land; whoever first occupies it acquires ownership."


That's some racists bullshit...Do not confuse yourself, the Babylon Talmud is for non-True-Torah Jews. True Torah Jews are allies of liberty...
 
Last edited:
Could we have one thread without Christian-bashing, or bashing of any religion at all?

It has always seems so odd to me that we could profess out of one side of our mouths that we believed in individual liberty for all, while out of the other side of our mouths, some bashed others' faith every chance they got. It seems very hypocritical to me.
 
Could we have one thread without Christian-bashing, or bashing of any religion at all?

It has always seems so odd to me that we could profess out of one side of our mouths that we believed in individual liberty for all, while out of the other side of our mouths, some bashed others' faith every chance they got. It seems very hypocritical to me.

Would be nice.
And I know the mantra about "no trolls here", but this is a classic tactic of divide and slide.

Can't have the folks forgetting who the "enemy" is after all. ;)
 
Could we have one thread without Christian-bashing, or bashing of any religion at all?

It has always seems so odd to me that we could profess out of one side of our mouths that we believed in individual liberty for all, while out of the other side of our mouths, some bashed others' faith every chance they got. It seems very hypocritical to me.

Thank you.
 
to the poster above: stop proselytizing here.. islam sucks big time, its possibly the most violent religion out there.. go to an arabic country and you will know what im talking about

Wow you don't even know what Arab means. Please educate yourself.
 
Google: Dont be Evil
Muslims: We dont want to take over the world
Both=crap. But what religion doesnt want to take over the world? Almost all religions send out missionaries to try and convert. The only religous organization I can think of that dont actively seek to take over the world are the Free Masons. You have to ask to be a free mason. But obviously not seeking to take over the world through numbers is proof that youre taking over the world by manipulating politicians like puppets.
 
Google: Dont be Evil
Muslims: We dont want to take over the world
Both=crap. But what religion doesnt want to take over the world? Almost all religions send out missionaries to try and convert. The only religous organization I can think of that dont actively seek to take over the world are the Free Masons. You have to ask to be a free mason. But obviously not seeking to take over the world through numbers is proof that youre taking over the world by manipulating politicians like puppets.

I think you are confusing "evangelizing" with "taking over the world". Big difference.
 
What do you think the Muslims want to do? They basically just want to convert everyone so they can keep their religions interests at heart.
 
What do you think the Muslims want to do? They basically just want to convert everyone so they can keep their religions interests at heart.

I don't think "the Muslims" want to do any one thing any more than I'd think "the Christians" got together last week and decided what this week's agenda would be. Most groups want more members, and religions are no exception. More members certainly means more clout, more donations, and fits in with the plans of many involved (be they altruistic or fiendish plans). The lengths to which the groups will go to gain more members varies, though, almost to a person. Someone might just mention their religion when the topic arises, or when it seems polite to do so. Someone might knock door-to-door praising the Lord and inviting you to listen to the Good News. Someone might kill you if you don't convert. All of those people might call themselves Christians.

The idea of taking over the country is a cartoonish one. No one is going to take over this country anytime soon, because those with the power right now are gripping it very tightly. Over time, the hope is to have more rational and logical people ready to take over spots that are, for one reason or another, vacated. Those plans are not exclusive to "the Muslims." This forum is dedicated to much the same kind of goal. There are other groups waiting in the wings for much the same opportunity.

"We don't want to take over this country" is as silly as "Muslims want to take over this country." You can really only speak to statistics and yourself. However that, in and of itself, sort of discredits these broad, sweeping theories that people of a given color, religion, sexual preference, gender, or whatever else are somehow conspiring to wrest control from the current crop of overlords.

Fear and hatred are such potent weapons in the way they disarm people and short-circuit rational thought.
 
Which is pretty much what I was saying. No ones trying to actually take over the world. Except for the UN...
 
We've occupied how many middle eastern countries and we're worried about them taking over ours?

Is that karma on a nationwide level?
 
I empathize with Muslims....but I dont respect them cuz they stink of FEAR.

A huge percentage of Muslims know that 911 was a frame up job, yet they will not organize themselves to proclaim 911 truth cuz they think "community outreach" is a better way to improve their image.

One thing about the zionists.......they command respect cuz they arent afraid to fight. They fight for the wrong things, but at least they don't cower.

Muslims have the numbers, the organization, and the money to blow the 911 scam wide open. But they dont say shit about 911 cuz they are FEARFUL.

pathetic.

Maybe that has to do with the gigantic empire thwarting their homelands and they are already thought to be terrorists?

If a dog gets hit with a stick every time it barks, do you expect it to keep barking at passers as a plea for help, if everytime it does the "master" smacks it in the face and the passers by just say "stupid dog"?
 
We've occupied how many middle eastern countries and we're worried about them taking over ours?
We're not there to stay, the Muslims over here, on the other hand, are.

Feel free to change your mind once there are 50 million of them, or join the 'well it's too late now - so lets keep 'm happy' crowd that has a majority in Europe.
 
We're not there to stay, the Muslims over here, on the other hand, are.

Feel free to change your mind once there are 50 million of them, or join the 'well it's too late now - so lets keep 'm happy' crowd that has a majority in Europe.

The EU crowd that you speak of was already in favor of a giant welfare state. It was doomed already. To blame "the Muslims" for the downfall of European economies is nearsighted at best. It's as absurd as blaming "the Mexicans" for the US crash.
 
We're not there to stay, the Muslims over here, on the other hand, are.

Feel free to change your mind once there are 50 million of them, or join the 'well it's too late now - so lets keep 'm happy' crowd that has a majority in Europe.

Assume for a moment that one takes that as gospel, and that one also believes that Muslims were behind 9/11 and were happy about it and all that.

They are here to stay, but we're there to kill them en masse and stick around for years and "force them to be free."

Way more Americans are dead because of the wars than because of 9/11. Definitely way more civilians overseas have died as a result of those wars than ever died on 9/11.

Given a choice, I'd rather live here and have a Muslim neighbor than live there and be shot on my way to the market (later to be listed as collateral damage, of course).

Take an objective look at Iraq and Afghanistan lately. There were radical elements that took over those countries before, and now they are not in power. If they are not in power, then it stands to reason that they were ousted... that the countries were "taken over." Who did the taking over?
 
Back
Top