bart
Decader
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 861
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
OK, soap box time!
- Thread starter Austpilot
- Start date
- Watchers 10
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
pilot141
Professional Cynic
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 274
Ok guys...before we go too deep into the religious discussions consider this:
Islam's goal is to destroy every other religion. Period. If you talk to a Mormon they will say that you are seeking the wrong path to God; same with the Catholics, Jesuits, etc. Everyone believes that their path to God is the correct one; otherwise why believe it?However, most religions will try to CONVERT you to the right way.
Islam's way of conversions is killing you. Not to say this method was not used during other periods by other religions (people will say the Crusades, but that was really a war to keep Islam from overunning the world, and both sides used despicable methods), but today the only way to CONVERT infidels to Islam is to kill them.
An Islamic who kills you believes he is doing you a favor: you obviously cannot accept Islam in this life; therefore your only hope of salvation is to be killed and have another chance at accepting the one true God.
Once we accept this fact we can defend ourselves better. We must know that our enemy has no intention or desire to "bring us around" to his way of thinking. In Islam, there is no such thing as a "conscientious objector". You are either a believer or you are dead. The militants will not be happy until all "infidels" are dead.
What this means is there is no such thing as negotiation with these people. The only negotiation should be done with B-52s orbiting overhead - and no conditions to the surrender. This is a hard nosed battle, but most Americans do not realize how fiercely dedicated our opponent is to wiping out our way of life.
Now is the time to stick to our guns - literally. This is the gut-check time for the American people, and I hope that we will prove to be worthy.
Islam's goal is to destroy every other religion. Period. If you talk to a Mormon they will say that you are seeking the wrong path to God; same with the Catholics, Jesuits, etc. Everyone believes that their path to God is the correct one; otherwise why believe it?However, most religions will try to CONVERT you to the right way.
Islam's way of conversions is killing you. Not to say this method was not used during other periods by other religions (people will say the Crusades, but that was really a war to keep Islam from overunning the world, and both sides used despicable methods), but today the only way to CONVERT infidels to Islam is to kill them.
An Islamic who kills you believes he is doing you a favor: you obviously cannot accept Islam in this life; therefore your only hope of salvation is to be killed and have another chance at accepting the one true God.
Once we accept this fact we can defend ourselves better. We must know that our enemy has no intention or desire to "bring us around" to his way of thinking. In Islam, there is no such thing as a "conscientious objector". You are either a believer or you are dead. The militants will not be happy until all "infidels" are dead.
What this means is there is no such thing as negotiation with these people. The only negotiation should be done with B-52s orbiting overhead - and no conditions to the surrender. This is a hard nosed battle, but most Americans do not realize how fiercely dedicated our opponent is to wiping out our way of life.
Now is the time to stick to our guns - literally. This is the gut-check time for the American people, and I hope that we will prove to be worthy.
I don't want to jump into a religious debate, but FYI: the most basic tenet of "mormonism" is that each person should have their own personal relationship with their maker. It was founded on the believe that a 14 year old boy wanted answers to his own prayers, and got them. However, yes...conversion is the goal. The difference is that such conversion is supposed to be entirely between the individual and God...and the only way this can come about is by personal prayer.
This isn't really any different than what many religious schools preach, except that direct revelation is claimed, and direct authority...only one of two religions in the world that make this claim today.
This isn't really any different than what many religious schools preach, except that direct revelation is claimed, and direct authority...only one of two religions in the world that make this claim today.
TheFlyingWeasel
Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2002
- Posts
- 24
Islam, we are told over and over again by the self-appointed guardians of righteous thinking, is not a religion of violence and aggression but of peace and love. Does not the Koran have at the head of every chapter: 'In the name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate'? Who could disagree with that? That's the sentiment of all decent people everywhere isn't it?
How can people be so naïve and stupid?
Very easily it seems, almost a mandatory qualification, since it makes it easier to spew out sanctimonious drivel with a straight face. But where are the doubting voices, the posers of awkward questions that might expose this ludicrous charade for the convenient nonsense it is? Certainly not the TV interviewers and ambitious journalists with careers to think about, who in any case know no more about the subject than the people they are interviewing, and are every bit as keen to appear 'tolerant' and 'understanding' for fear of something nasty happening on their own doorsteps.
Here are a few questions that might be put to them or any other apologist for Islam.
(1) If real Islam is all about peace and love, how did it acquire an empire that stretched from Spain to India, by sweet reason?
(2) When is Islam going to apologize for overrunning the Hellenic-Christian civilization of the Middle East, conquering Constantinople in 1453, and laying siege to Vienna in 1529?
(3) If the Koran is all about peace and love, how are such verses as the following to be explained? K.4:74, 'Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fights in the cause of God, whether he is slain or victorious, soon we shall give him a great reward'. K.4:76, 'Those who believe fight in the cause of God, and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil.' K.5:54, 'O believers, take not Jews and Christians as friends, they are friends of each other. Those of you who make them his friends are one of them. God does not guide an unjust people.' K.9:29, 'Fight those who believe neither in God nor the Last Day, nor what has been forbidden by God and his messenger (Muhammad), nor acknowledge the religion of Truth (Islam), even if they are People of the Book (Jews and Christians), until they pay the tribute and have been humbled.' K.47:4, 'When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds, then set them free, either by grace or ransom, until the war lays down its burdens.'
It is not difficult to see how those who regard the Koran as God's own speech can find in verses such as these the justification for practically any act of 'terrorism' imaginable. When such texts are put to apologists the usual response is to say that they are bad translations and it is quite different in the Arabic, and in any case such verses are balanced or cancelled by other meliorating texts elsewhere in the Koran. Unfortunately, according to the traditional Muslim chronology of revelation, early texts are abrogated by apparently contradictory later texts, and all the above texts are late or 'Medinan', while most of the 'compassionate' texts are early or 'Meccan'. It has been said that the text at K.9:5, 'Slay the idolaters wherever you find them', cancels 124 verses advocating mercy and toleration.
There is no Pope in Islam, no ultimate authority able to say what real Islam is, or what is the right interpretation of texts, there is just and endless spectrum of opinion. Those involved in recent events, wearing red head -bands emblazoned with texts such as those above, have every right to consider themselves real Muslims going about God's work and deserving reward in the hereafter. Indeed, such people probably have more right to consider themselves good Muslims than those Western educated, Western suited, representatives of Muslim institutions expressing sympathy and regret, or any benignly smiling Sufi talking about 'the heart'; the latter are especially nauseating in that they share many of the aims of the militants, such as the restoration of the caliphate, without the courage to do anything about it.
It is important that such things are said loudly and said now, since it is likely that before long both the writer and the publisher of these words could be deemed guilty of the crime of inciting religious hatred. So widespread are such sentiments amongst the liberal intelligentsia that it is surprising that there have not yet been mass conversions. In contrast, outside such circles, it appears that either Islam is true, in which case we all ought to be Muslims, or it is not true, in which case it is pernicious nonsense and it cannot be criminal to say so.
We are constantly told that we are not engaged in a war against Islam, but why not a war against Islam? Why not a war against that billion of the world's population bound in benighted ignorance and superstition? Why not a war against a world-view diametrically opposed to all those democratic values that it is supposed to hold so dear? Why not?
Because Western Civilization is led for the most part by evangelical nincompoops, one with messianic delusions, more than half in love with what in their muddled minds they like to think real Islam is, and what in their dreams they would like the West to be - God-fearing, Bible-reading, Church-going, a land of inanely grinning communitarians whose highest value is that their pathetic little egos strut about the world stage for as long as possible.
We are also told that the events of September 11th were not a clash of civilizations or world-views, but that is exactly what they were. It was not by chance that the twin towers of the World Trade Centre were the first to go. In the minds of many Muslims tall buildings are the ultimate symbol of infidel pride and arrogance and defiance of Allah, especially evident in the end times before the final reckoning. The fact that they were also temples of usury and symbols of the economic power with which Jews and Christians undermine and exploit the Muslim world can only have added to the satisfaction of bringing them down, especially when it was achieved by just ten men wielding pen knives. That there were Muslims in the building at the time is of no consequence, since their fate was already sealed by K.5:54 and K.9:29 quoted above.
The purpose of the attack on Afghanistan we are told is to bring about 'justice', as if there were some cross-cultural consensus on what any such word means.
The only relevant question to be asked about 'justice' is: Whose justice, mine or yours, ours or theirs, man's or God's? Where did that law originate, who invented it, with what purpose in mind? What kind of world did it come from and what kind of world was it intended to bring about?
Certainly not that where Muslim justice held solid for almost 1400 years.
It is not without significance that 'infinite justice', the original name for the attack, had to be changed since it unwittingly usurped one of the Koranic names of God, it was replaced with the favorite shibboleth from the Western lexicon of praise: 'infinite freedom'.
The world needs to wake up and rapidly appreciate that whether we like it or not we are at war with Islam, but this war we did not declare, it was declared for us, upon us by the enemy, just as Japan did so many years ago.
They paid dearly for that mistake.
The world, those countries that harbor such sentiment, provide safe havens for known radicals and terrorist, support them and encourage them should be held accountable.
It’s either them, or us and I will not go quietly into the night.
Weasel
How can people be so naïve and stupid?
Very easily it seems, almost a mandatory qualification, since it makes it easier to spew out sanctimonious drivel with a straight face. But where are the doubting voices, the posers of awkward questions that might expose this ludicrous charade for the convenient nonsense it is? Certainly not the TV interviewers and ambitious journalists with careers to think about, who in any case know no more about the subject than the people they are interviewing, and are every bit as keen to appear 'tolerant' and 'understanding' for fear of something nasty happening on their own doorsteps.
Here are a few questions that might be put to them or any other apologist for Islam.
(1) If real Islam is all about peace and love, how did it acquire an empire that stretched from Spain to India, by sweet reason?
(2) When is Islam going to apologize for overrunning the Hellenic-Christian civilization of the Middle East, conquering Constantinople in 1453, and laying siege to Vienna in 1529?
(3) If the Koran is all about peace and love, how are such verses as the following to be explained? K.4:74, 'Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fights in the cause of God, whether he is slain or victorious, soon we shall give him a great reward'. K.4:76, 'Those who believe fight in the cause of God, and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil.' K.5:54, 'O believers, take not Jews and Christians as friends, they are friends of each other. Those of you who make them his friends are one of them. God does not guide an unjust people.' K.9:29, 'Fight those who believe neither in God nor the Last Day, nor what has been forbidden by God and his messenger (Muhammad), nor acknowledge the religion of Truth (Islam), even if they are People of the Book (Jews and Christians), until they pay the tribute and have been humbled.' K.47:4, 'When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds, then set them free, either by grace or ransom, until the war lays down its burdens.'
It is not difficult to see how those who regard the Koran as God's own speech can find in verses such as these the justification for practically any act of 'terrorism' imaginable. When such texts are put to apologists the usual response is to say that they are bad translations and it is quite different in the Arabic, and in any case such verses are balanced or cancelled by other meliorating texts elsewhere in the Koran. Unfortunately, according to the traditional Muslim chronology of revelation, early texts are abrogated by apparently contradictory later texts, and all the above texts are late or 'Medinan', while most of the 'compassionate' texts are early or 'Meccan'. It has been said that the text at K.9:5, 'Slay the idolaters wherever you find them', cancels 124 verses advocating mercy and toleration.
There is no Pope in Islam, no ultimate authority able to say what real Islam is, or what is the right interpretation of texts, there is just and endless spectrum of opinion. Those involved in recent events, wearing red head -bands emblazoned with texts such as those above, have every right to consider themselves real Muslims going about God's work and deserving reward in the hereafter. Indeed, such people probably have more right to consider themselves good Muslims than those Western educated, Western suited, representatives of Muslim institutions expressing sympathy and regret, or any benignly smiling Sufi talking about 'the heart'; the latter are especially nauseating in that they share many of the aims of the militants, such as the restoration of the caliphate, without the courage to do anything about it.
It is important that such things are said loudly and said now, since it is likely that before long both the writer and the publisher of these words could be deemed guilty of the crime of inciting religious hatred. So widespread are such sentiments amongst the liberal intelligentsia that it is surprising that there have not yet been mass conversions. In contrast, outside such circles, it appears that either Islam is true, in which case we all ought to be Muslims, or it is not true, in which case it is pernicious nonsense and it cannot be criminal to say so.
We are constantly told that we are not engaged in a war against Islam, but why not a war against Islam? Why not a war against that billion of the world's population bound in benighted ignorance and superstition? Why not a war against a world-view diametrically opposed to all those democratic values that it is supposed to hold so dear? Why not?
Because Western Civilization is led for the most part by evangelical nincompoops, one with messianic delusions, more than half in love with what in their muddled minds they like to think real Islam is, and what in their dreams they would like the West to be - God-fearing, Bible-reading, Church-going, a land of inanely grinning communitarians whose highest value is that their pathetic little egos strut about the world stage for as long as possible.
We are also told that the events of September 11th were not a clash of civilizations or world-views, but that is exactly what they were. It was not by chance that the twin towers of the World Trade Centre were the first to go. In the minds of many Muslims tall buildings are the ultimate symbol of infidel pride and arrogance and defiance of Allah, especially evident in the end times before the final reckoning. The fact that they were also temples of usury and symbols of the economic power with which Jews and Christians undermine and exploit the Muslim world can only have added to the satisfaction of bringing them down, especially when it was achieved by just ten men wielding pen knives. That there were Muslims in the building at the time is of no consequence, since their fate was already sealed by K.5:54 and K.9:29 quoted above.
The purpose of the attack on Afghanistan we are told is to bring about 'justice', as if there were some cross-cultural consensus on what any such word means.
The only relevant question to be asked about 'justice' is: Whose justice, mine or yours, ours or theirs, man's or God's? Where did that law originate, who invented it, with what purpose in mind? What kind of world did it come from and what kind of world was it intended to bring about?
Certainly not that where Muslim justice held solid for almost 1400 years.
It is not without significance that 'infinite justice', the original name for the attack, had to be changed since it unwittingly usurped one of the Koranic names of God, it was replaced with the favorite shibboleth from the Western lexicon of praise: 'infinite freedom'.
The world needs to wake up and rapidly appreciate that whether we like it or not we are at war with Islam, but this war we did not declare, it was declared for us, upon us by the enemy, just as Japan did so many years ago.
They paid dearly for that mistake.
The world, those countries that harbor such sentiment, provide safe havens for known radicals and terrorist, support them and encourage them should be held accountable.
It’s either them, or us and I will not go quietly into the night.
Weasel
TheFlyingWeasel
Member
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2002
- Posts
- 24
Before some one flies into a rage at me for posting this just allow me to say one more thing that might place my position into perspective.
I lost four family members when WTC fell, one a member of the NYPD Emergency Services Unit another a Paramedic for the FDNY and two distant cousins who worked for the Port Authority.
I also knew Victor Saracini, Captain of UAL 175.
Weasel
I lost four family members when WTC fell, one a member of the NYPD Emergency Services Unit another a Paramedic for the FDNY and two distant cousins who worked for the Port Authority.
I also knew Victor Saracini, Captain of UAL 175.
Weasel
jsoceanlord
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2001
- Posts
- 367
a wise guy once told me that animals that are predators have their eyes in the front of their head and they focus on a point (lions and tigers, etc).
animals that are prey have their eyes on the side of their heads so they can defenseively keep an eye out 180 degress.
people are like the first group - it's the human condition
animals that are prey have their eyes on the side of their heads so they can defenseively keep an eye out 180 degress.
people are like the first group - it's the human condition
Timebuilder
Entrepreneur
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 4,625
An interesting debate that raises many questions. My cup of tea! While what defines a "nutter" is really a personal matter, and an opinion, let me clarify some facts for you as far as beliefs are concerned. I have always found what people believe to be fascinating, and it has a great imapact on our lives as pilots, and the future of America.
The difference between an abortion clinic bomber and a guy who flys an aircraft into a building on behalf of Islam is easy.
The clinic bomber has made a bad choice in an effort to stop the killing of innocents. Good in intention, bad in the methodology. His inividual act is murder, just as the abortion clinic is murderous. Both activities are prohibited by the Bible, so the bomber is clearly not santioned by Christian biblical doctrine. The bomber is on his own there, and is just another criminal. The Bible clearly sets military killing apart, and does not consider military acts to be murder, as God clearly led Israel to victory in many cronicled conflicts. The bomber may see his act as a military action, but he has no doctinal support for that belief. The bomber should be working to close the clinic, and convince others not to partake of the services which it offers. THAT is the biblical way.
On the other hand, Islam is not interested in talking us out of our free society, one where we can choose to either embrace or reject any religion as we so desire. To Islam, trying to convince us that we are the great satan is a waste of time. Islam's only desire is to eliminate the infidel. The only correct response is for us to eliminate those who choose to act on that portion of the Quoran text.
In the case of the bomber, his act is clearly outside the doctrine, and in the case of the hijacker, clearly within the doctrine. We can't always identify the clinic bomber before he acts, making him almost impossible to stop beforehand. He is a renegade who must be brought to justice. The hijacker or suicide bomber must be stopped BEFORE they can act, since we can easily identify those who intend on harming America. They are the Islamic extremists, and we had better be up to the task. Literally, it's either us or them.
The difference between an abortion clinic bomber and a guy who flys an aircraft into a building on behalf of Islam is easy.
The clinic bomber has made a bad choice in an effort to stop the killing of innocents. Good in intention, bad in the methodology. His inividual act is murder, just as the abortion clinic is murderous. Both activities are prohibited by the Bible, so the bomber is clearly not santioned by Christian biblical doctrine. The bomber is on his own there, and is just another criminal. The Bible clearly sets military killing apart, and does not consider military acts to be murder, as God clearly led Israel to victory in many cronicled conflicts. The bomber may see his act as a military action, but he has no doctinal support for that belief. The bomber should be working to close the clinic, and convince others not to partake of the services which it offers. THAT is the biblical way.
On the other hand, Islam is not interested in talking us out of our free society, one where we can choose to either embrace or reject any religion as we so desire. To Islam, trying to convince us that we are the great satan is a waste of time. Islam's only desire is to eliminate the infidel. The only correct response is for us to eliminate those who choose to act on that portion of the Quoran text.
In the case of the bomber, his act is clearly outside the doctrine, and in the case of the hijacker, clearly within the doctrine. We can't always identify the clinic bomber before he acts, making him almost impossible to stop beforehand. He is a renegade who must be brought to justice. The hijacker or suicide bomber must be stopped BEFORE they can act, since we can easily identify those who intend on harming America. They are the Islamic extremists, and we had better be up to the task. Literally, it's either us or them.
Chunk
SkyFuzz
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Posts
- 496
...back to what I was saying....
.....less jackjawin'......
.....more azz-kickin'.....
I lost an old shipmate at the Pentagon. Some of the fellas from the delivery section of the TR made sure a selection from the gift shop was delivered in his name.....
http://www.geocities.com/chunk75/pycior.html
America needs to be outraged....needs to let the world know that just because we are home of the free doesn't mean we will be walked on....we have claws and backbone.
Chunk
.....less jackjawin'......
.....more azz-kickin'.....
I lost an old shipmate at the Pentagon. Some of the fellas from the delivery section of the TR made sure a selection from the gift shop was delivered in his name.....
http://www.geocities.com/chunk75/pycior.html
America needs to be outraged....needs to let the world know that just because we are home of the free doesn't mean we will be walked on....we have claws and backbone.
Chunk
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
