Topic: [Vote] Who did 911? - page 24. (Read 63039 times)

^ Folks, both types are "true Muslims", by definition, because they are using Islam as the basis and justification for their actions. Same goes for Christians and Jews. It's about how what is written in those "holy books" is interpreted; there is no "true interpretation", only peaceful and non-peaceful interpretations. A good example of an extremely (even insanely) hateful interpretation is that of our own J.J Philips above!



This is the root cause of your misperception of reality. You believe what you are told by "authoritative sources", when such sources are established as "authoritative" by the dominators who want to control you.


It's literally like saying that you have refuted the observation that the sky is blue. Truly pathetic. You actually believe that there couldn't've been any molten steel, therefore there wasn't any... but there was. You only ever paid attention to one side of the argument... the one you believed from the beginning.


Somehow you completely miss that the alternative scenario, which is what you have always believed is what happened, is far, far, far more preposterous! This is called brainwashing -- the equating of the idea of critical thinking with that which is presented as being accepted by "authoritative sources".


You are utterly clueless as to the research that has been done, one both sides of the argument (truthers and debunkers). We know lots of details about this woman, we know who created the disinfo/misinfo about her, etc.


Your Israelis attacked the US on 911, just like they have attacked many other commerical airlines since the mid 1970s.  Just like they continue to attack innocent victims worldwide.


Then why are you spendulus your time here defending the biggest criminal gang the world has ever seen? What a clown!

What are your interests then? Do you know anything about any subject in some way related to 9/11? Do you believe wars are for the good of mankind? Why are you posting here?

I suspect you use the word "war" very differently than I do. There's a huge difference between someone killing a Muslim and someone mocking Muhammed.

I defend the right of people to say things I disagree with. I get the impression this is difficult for Muslims to understand. Of course, obviously, I might argue with people I disagree with, but I wouldn't kill them.

I don't mind if murderers get killed. You could say that the Muslims who murdered the Charlie Hebdo artists committed an "act of war" against something I believe in (freedom of expression). And I'm glad they were eventually killed. I watched the video of French police repeatedly shooting Amedy Coulibaly and enjoyed it. I wish all Nazi murderers like him were violently killed on camera. In a variety of ways, of course. Otherwise it would get boring.

Freedom of thought and freedom of expression are ideas that became very important in the West during the past centuries. If you'd like a good summation for how and why they are important, I recommend reading Chapter 2 of John Stuart Mill's On Liberty. He even discusses the specific example of allowing people to speak out against religious doctrines. There are a lot of interesting passages. Here's one:


I'm not aware of any time or place in the history of Islam in which there was even the idea that people should be free to express unpopular ideas (e.g., atheism). I suspect the idea still sounds so foreign to Muslims that they simply can't understand it. They can't get past the idea that of course people who insult Muhammed should be put to death. Anything else sounds crazy.

Not that the West is perfect. I think the West is going through a scary period in which expressing certain "politically incorrect" ideas can get people punished by law. I'm thinking specifically of people who vocally oppose gay marriage. I don't care about gay marriage, but I care about people's right to freely express their ideas. (The term "gaystapo" used to sound funny to me; now it sounds accurate.) The rush to blame the youtube video "The Innocence of Muslims" after Benghazi in 2012 also makes it clear that people are not legally free in the West to speak out against Islam. In some parts of the West mentioning bad things about Muhammed is considered Islamophobia and is actually illegal.

This thread has largely been about denying that Jihadis committed the September 11 attacks. It's obvious to me (and many others) that Jihadis committed the September 11 attacks. But I don't think people who think differently should be silenced. They should be argued with. People should present evidence and other people should poke holes in their evidence. That's one way knowledge is obtained, precisely through this kind of debate.

To be honest, though, I think Muslims should fear freedom of expression. Most of their beliefs are ridiculous, and that becomes clear when people are free to talk openly about those beliefs. If there weren't this politically correct taboo against criticizing Islam, Islam would probably be seen as like Scientology. Except where Scientology was created by a science fiction writer, Islam was created by a 7th century illiterate.

The quote is "true?"  I think we could argue all day over what it means.  Obviously "mischief" has many meanings.  Obviously, "In the land" refers to a land, not the entire world. 

I guess that's why there are so many people doing so many different things "in the Name of Islam."

What a total screwup.

@J.J Philips
Qur'an 5:33. "The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter."[/b]

 
My Answer
Hey listen to me the verse you quote is true If some will did war against Islam or say something about Muhammad (SAW) then he/she will be killed by muslims and he will no more in this world..
Let me ask one thing ? Suppose if someone did war against the one whom you believe ? What you can do ??

It is only my opinion, but if this was truly believed I think a true Muslim would shrug off and laugh at those who draw cartoons of Mohammed.  Instead they would direct Jihad against those murdering Muslims who mock the Prophet by  killing those who draw cartoons.

I am curious as to your opinion of this attitude.

Come on. It's been pointed out over and over that there are passages advocating violence and murder. It's completely possible for the Qur'an to both say "A" and say "not A". If a text asserts both A and not A, it means the text is inconsistent (and hence false). This is basic logic. And, not to offend anyone, but only fucking idiots very uninformed naive people believe these old religious texts are a reliable source of truth. They all were written by humans and all contain inconsistencies.

Let's give an example.

(A) It is wrong to murder.

I could take your quotes to support (A). Here is a quote from the Qur'an which clearly advocates "not A", that it is not wrong to murder.

Qur'an 5:33. "The recompense of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off on the opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter."

(There are a lot of violent passages in the Qur'an and Hadiths. I picked the first one I found that explicitly mentioned killing.)

Ah, now I'm familiar enough with apologists to know what you're thinking: killing those who are against "Allah and his messenger" and "do mischief in the land" isn't murder. That's justifiable killing -- a kind of death penalty.

And that's one big step towards justifying what Jihadis do around the world on a regular basis: killing innocent people because of various imagined transgressions against "Allah and his messenger."

That's how the Jihadis who did 9/11 justified their actions, and it's how the Muslims around the world who were happy about 9/11 justify them -- on those occasions when they admit Muslims are responsible instead of trying to blame the Jews.

PS: Learn how to use quote tags please. Otherwise, I'll start quoting you and changing the quotes into things that make it look like you don't like Muhammed. You wouldn't want to get your head cut off, right? Here's an example of how that might look:

This is the difference which is mentioned by you, true muslim the one who is against violent and is in the favour of peace...
[/quote]  But that's not what the Quran and the Hadiths say.  


Murder is strictly forbidden in the Qur’an.
Qur’an 6:151 says, “and do not kill a soul that God has made sacrosanct, save lawfully.” (i.e. murder is forbidden but the death penalty imposed by the state for a crime is permitted).
Quran 5:53 says, “… whoso kills a soul, unless it be for murder or for wreaking corruption in the land, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind; and he who saves a life, it shall be as if he had given life to all mankind.”

bozo

Try http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm for starters.

Which hadeeth and Quranic verse say these type of thing ?? can you please mention these hadith and verses..?

 But that's not what the Quran and the Hadiths say.  

EDIT: They say both peace and violence, and they say them as directives at times.

This is the difference which is mentioned by you, true muslim the one who is against violent and is in the favour of peace...

Actually, it refers to true Muslims... the ones who are both violent and peaceful.

That is your point of view @Badecker and this type of defense reffers to you Lol Isn't ??

Part of military intel is about watching their own people. Why? Because there are some very high-up military personnel who don't like some of the things the military does.

It doesn't take more than a small handful to pull something like a cruise missile attack off. And if they were caught by the military later, the military wouldn't tell anyone.

I dont know that I can say it was a grand conspiracy, it does look like the terrorists did it.  However there are some really strange things going on at the pentagon explosion, and that one looks like it might be suspicious.  It would maybe be possible for the government to plan something like that last minute.  It is hard to believe some of the theories out there.

A defense of "no defense" isn't a defense.  

EDIT: See: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11800158.

Hahahahahaha Im not blaming anyone but behind 9/11 there was not a single muslim and if errors in my argumentation then you correct me ?
Ok why not im ready to serious and honest discussion lets Start ?

CARLYLE GROUP   plenty who worked for that group did 9/11
CONTRACTS     all over the globe
money money money
super rich treat the poorer people like sheep fact
as long as there friends and family are ok they could not give a shit about no one else FACT

Well, if you believe that this means using strawman logical fallacies to "defend Islam," I would politely suggest you reconsider your methods.

If you believe that it means you believe what the Muslim government of Pakistan says, and do not believe what an infidel government says, I would suggest you reconsider that.

Errors in argumentation are not a good thing.  This is because they obscure the truth instead of revealing it.  I do not believe any "Prophet" would encourage such a path.

This thread started with some guys, or just one with a couple strawmen, trying to claim that 9/11 was the result of Jews.  This was complete horseshit.  They posted links, and even the links they posted did not support their ridiculous claims.  This can be defined as the method of propaganda.  I have only suggested we can move past that to serious and honest discussion, but if not, so let it be.