I'm Norwegian and I have nothing against Islam

[Ask The Geezer]

Alot of women choose to cover their faces.

Probably a GOOD thing.

Now that I think about it, more american cows, er, um, women, should do that too.

[PAlexC]

We need to work on midriff's and buttcracks first. For starters, it's always the wrong girls that dress like that. Second, in the summer, it's kinda sexy. In March, that makes you a desperate skank. Third, ladies, when I see your crack I don't think it's sexy. I think you look like a plumber.

[TallGuyLittleCar]

muffintop (n): role of fat hanging over low rise jeans.

[Ask The Geezer]

Queen Rania of Jordan does NOT wear a veil, she's on C-Span now, and I'd hit it.

[EVPohovich]

I think I should "invade"...

[Visionray]

Some women choose to wear the veil while others don't like it. You could argue the ones that choose so are brainwashed. Or maybe not.

I always thought it would be a good idea to do a spin-off on the Girls Gone Wild videos, called Afghani Girls Gone Wild, where they would get freaky, show a little bit of shoulder, perhaps some elbow.

Just a joke, no offense to anyone. From their point of view westerners don't have the greatest morals, with our gambling, legal prostitution in some areas, massive porn industry, high divorce rates, drug culture, etc.

[TallGuyLittleCar]

Some women choose to wear the veil while others don't like it. You could argue the ones that choose so are brainwashed. Or maybe not.

one opinion I heard is that the woman felt it forces the man to treat her intellectually since he could not tell if she was hot or not.

[silverx2]

they did that before.

[Visionray]

damn, oh well have to think of another series.
This reminds me of when someone stole Gerbicks Redneckula idea.

[Ask The Geezer]

All of the questions in this and other islam forums here are being answerd by 5 of the arab world nation leaders right now on C-span 1 right now. If you have the ability to wattch it, you should.

[Ask The Geezer]

if thats the case then we are all related somehow

Is there a question there? Yes, we are all related. I've never actually met anyone who believed anything else. I mean, it's taught here in the schools.

But, more specifically, arab and jew are also related, blood, bone and hair. And not that long ago either, something like 4,000 years. All one tribe, and I'm not talking biblically.

[XU1]

Is there a question there? Yes, we are all related. I've never actually met anyone who believed anything else. I mean, it's taught here in the schools.

LOL.....Yes'm...I can think of a few people I should disown...

But, more specifically, arab and jew are also related, blood, bone and hair. And not that long ago either, something like 4,000 years. All one tribe, and I'm not talking biblically.

Yep,you are right there, except the Jewish origins can be traced to Persia, and are not Arabs ( strictly speaking)

The Point I have been trying to make though is that the Jews have been/were discriminated because of who they are NOT what they believe, most Jews are not really religious...unlike Muslims.

iTony

[Visionray]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4700414.stm

Sweden shuts website over cartoon

[The site's host, Levonline, pulled the plug on the website of the Swedish Democrats' SD-Kuriren newspaper after consulting with the government.

It is believed to be the first time a Western government has intervened to block a publication in the growing row.

[Ask The Geezer]

Skinhead sites and neo nazi's are next.

And all FrontPage home made sites after that.

Too bad they went to the government tho, they could have just added it to their TOS and pulled the plug on their own. That's nothing new, it's done with most hosting companies with pr0n and hate sites now.

SD-Kuriren can buy a server tho and put it up themselves.

[Ask The Geezer]

The Point I have been trying to make though is that the Jews have been/were discriminated because of who they are NOT what they believe, most Jews are not really religious...unlike Muslims

Yeah, I got that the first time around too.

[XU1]

2. The Qur'an is the only religious scripture in the world that says,"marry only one".

Some one should read the Bible before making these glorious claims about the Quran.

The Qur'an is the only religious book, on the face of this earth, that contains the phrase `marry only one'.

Possibly, but there are more ways than that to say the same thing.. Like as in 1Timothy 3:2,12"......The overseer should be..a husband of one wife....so should deacons be husbands of one wife..."

1 Corinthians 7:2"....Let each man have his own wife...and each woman have her own husband ( no alowance for plurality )

In earlier times, Christian men were permitted as many wives as they wished, since the Bible puts no restriction on the number of wives.

Wrong again......and you don't have to go to the bible to find evidence of this either...

It was only a few centuries ago that the Church restricted the number of wives to one.

It was written in the scriptures long before the Quran came into being...also Jesus in Matt 19:4-6 Said "Did you not read that He who created them from the beginning created them Male and Female, for this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife and the two wil become one flesh, so that they are no longer two but one...there fore what God has yoked together let no man put apart..."


All references to marriage By Jesus and the Apostles were directed at "One" Husband and "One" Wife. EG: Matt:19 8,9 " I say to you who ever divorces his "wife" ( not wives) or "a" wife, except on the grounds of fornication.... "
Sorry for the quotes...but I just wanted to clarify one of the many claims that seem to be made these days about How the Quran is so superior to other Holy books.

iTony

[Ask The Geezer]

but I just wanted to clarify one of the many claims that seem to be made these days about How the Quran is so superior to other Holy books.

Just try and remember, neither of the books of either religion were written by the lead figures themselves, but by wannabe's who came after and more than likely had their own ax to grind, or profit to make from it. Therefore, neither one is worth the paper they are written on, not as true accountings of what these two actually said. It's not like they were taped or anything. More like some New York Times reporters byline, reporting on what was said. And we all know how good that is.

[XU1]

More like some New York Times reporters byline, reporting on what was said. And we all know how good that is.

Amen......Brother..

Here is an interesting article today about Muslim Moderates:

What passes for moderation in the Islamic community — “I share your rage but don’t torch that embassy” — is nothing of the sort. It is simply a cynical way to endorse the goals of the mob without endorsing its means. It is fraudulent because, while pretending to uphold the principle of religious sensitivity, it is interested only in this instance of religious insensitivity.

Have any of these “moderates” ever protested the grotesque caricatures of Christians and, most especially, Jews that are broadcast throughout the Middle East on a daily basis? The sermons on Palestinian TV that refer to Jews as the sons of pigs and monkeys? The Syrian prime-time TV series that shows rabbis slaughtering a gentile boy to ritually consume his blood? The 41-part (!) series on Egyptian TV based on that anti-Semitic czarist forgery (and inspiration of the Nazis), “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” showing the Jews to be engaged in a century-old conspiracy to control the world?

A true Muslim moderate is one who protests desecrations of all faiths. Those who don’t are not moderates but hypocrites, opportunists and agents for the rioters, merely using different means to advance the same goal: to impose upon the West, with its traditions of freedom of speech, a set of taboos that is exclusive to the Islamic faith. These are not defenders of religion but Muslim supremacists trying to force their dictates upon the liberal West.

And these “moderates” are aided and abetted by Western “moderates” who publish pictures of the Virgin Mary covered with elephant dung and celebrate the “Piss Christ” (a crucifix sitting in a jar of urine) as art deserving public subsidy, but who are seized with a sudden religious sensitivity when the subject is Muhammad.

Washington Post

I think the obvious is finlay starting to be spoken about...

iTony

[emm_eye]

Just try and remember, neither of the books of either religion were written by the lead figures themselves, but by wannabe's who came after and more than likely had their own ax to grind, or profit to make from it. Therefore, neither one is worth the paper they are written on, not as true accountings of what these two actually said. It's not like they were taped or anything. More like some New York Times reporters byline, reporting on what was said. And we all know how good that is.

You are absolutely wrong here..

The Quran is a holy book which was revealed to Prophet Muhammed.

And not a single word of the Quran has ever changed.

[indivision]

Great article. Thanks. This whole situation really exposes the basic ironies we're dealing with.