[Ben_Edict]

"...This war of nations demands heavy sacrifice. Still, those sacrifices do not begin to compare with those we would be forced to bring if we lose. The enemy naturally wants to make his battle against [us] as easy and safe as possible, and hopes to diminish our morale by seductive agitation. That is poison for weak souls. He who falls for it proves he has learned nothing from the war. He thinks it possible to take the easy road, when only the hard path leads to freedom.." ".. .In other words, they are the rubbish of our nation, who nonetheless give the enemy an entirely false idea of this people..." "...That nation, which has demonstrated heroism and more heroism, has only one wish when reading these accounts: to kill them. They deserve nothing else. One cannot even claim that they do not know what they are doing. They have to know it, for they have been told often enough, even by the enemy, should they not want to believe us..."

Joseph Goebbels


Sounds like they considered the jews a threat.

I emphasized your conclusion, because I have never seen such an, hm, uninformed conclusion. Everybody who has the slightest idea about the Nazi-regime, must be well aware, that the Nazis had developped (based on some deranged race theories already in existence) their racist theory, that Jews where simply "unworthy" existences, which should be completely and systematically killed. How can you quote one of the worst demagogues of all time as a reference? Goebbels talked up to the complete destruction of all big German cities, in fact up to the date, when the Soviet army stood at the gates of his bunker about the final "Endsieg" of the German army. How can you present such an idiot as a reference for anything?

Ben


EDIT: P.S. I would suggest you read the diaries of Victor Klemperer, who by a mixture of luck, help from others and his own will to surviove, lived thoughout the Nazi dictatorship in Germany as a Jew, before you give us more quotes from Hell.

[Ben_Edict]

You are correct, it appears there are in some countries in Europe as well.

In many countries, in fact - for good reasons. Because we have that history at our doorsteps. You reach the Konzentration Camps, like Auschwitz, Dachau, Bergen-Belsen, to name but a few within a couple of hours driving.

Nobody who was there and saw with his own eyes will deny the Holocaust, nobody he heared the survivors giving witness, who heared some of the murderers giving evidence or who read the accounts of surviving Jews, will be able to deny the Holocaust.

Whoever denies the Holocaust has some political or ideological reason to do so, reasons beyond humanity or morality or ethics.

Ben

[Nass]

It's not worth pursuing this avenue, to be honest.

No church or even evangelism of any kind is permitted in any Islamic state by law. I would personally not be comfortable if such a law were reversed for the Western world as freedom of faith is vital for people to come to their own convictions freely and willingly. Now this to me is not an invitation for muslims to gain a sociopolitical stronghold on western society, but they should still be allowed to believe as they choose in that free society.

Hmmm - I'm not so sure about this? I googled it because I was curious and there do seem to be churches in Iran which is an Islamic state. Same with Pakistan. That said, clearly it's not a comfortable mix, persecution is rife etc.

I lived in Egypt myself which isn't an Islamic state but is a Muslim country. Egypt has a rich history of Coptic Christians and although that again isn't a comfortable situation, I do remember coptic churches there.

[Ben_Edict]

Hmmm - I'm not so sure about this? I googled it because I was curious and there do seem to be churches in Iran which is an Islamic state. Same with Pakistan. That said, clearly it's not a comfortable mix, persecution is rife etc.

I lived in Egypt myself which isn't an Islamic state but is a Muslim country. Egypt has a rich history of Coptic Christians and although that again isn't a comfortable situation, I do remember coptic churches there.

Yes in some Muslim countries Christian churches are allowed or are simply there, because the Christian believe is more than 600 years older than Islam. Nevertheless look at the reality in Saudi Arabia (where you get persecuted, if you show your Christianity), look at the problems Christians face more in more in many other Muslim dominated countries, from Jemen to Sudan and beyond, basically throughout the North and Central African continent or in Muslim Asia.

No, I am not Islamphobic. We have a in our small town some churches (Protestant and Catholic), we have a mosque and in the neighbour town a synagogue. That never caused problems, except for the parking space necessary around the mosque - but that could be resolved easily. And the minarette is there, though not too high, because we have simple local rules for buildings in the different areas (living areas, industrial sites etc.), which will not accomodate a higher tower at the location.

Ben

[Wheatfield]

Nah, I can respect and even love my Muslim brothers and sisters without subscribing to their beliefs quite easily.

All this means is that you don't subscribe to the fundamentalist version of your religion of choice.
The whole Muslim issue is a Muslim problem that is spilling over into the rest of the world. Until the Muslim culture gets it's shit together and decides that they will no longer tolerate the evil in their midst, they are going to have to deal with the fact that people will not have 100% trust in Muslims in general.
A Muslim saying they abhor violence, but then doing nothing to root it out of their own religious culture is pretty hollow.
I believe the term is tacit permission when you say you won't support something but then support it by inaction.
I recall some years ago a friend of mine pointed out that the Muslim faith is about 700 years younger than the Christian faith and that they would grow up eventually.
Consider what was routinely being done in the name of Jesus in the 1300s, and consider that this is the level of maturity that the Muslim faith is at in the 21st century.

[flippedgazelle]

did anybody ever ask what would happen if the situation was reversed?

let's say i want to build a catholic church in saudi arabia or iran. how would that go?

waqas, you'll need to answer this question first before you expect others to accomodate you or your faith.

Here's why waqas does not have to "answer this question first before you expect others to accomodate you or your faith":

One of the founding principals of the United States was freedom from religious persecution, and the right to peaceably pursue worship of any faith. This is established in the US Constitution.

For other countries, you would have to check their Constitutions.

Everything else is simply non-applicable.

Truely my post about architectural rules was an objective post, but that's how things work in Finland, and probably in other European countries as well. Plus it can be effectively used to block "unwanted" people and whatever the majority think that comes with it. It may be racist or intolerant of other religions, but technically system can do that if the majority has chosen so.

The holocaust denial law issue is also something that I've thought about. I wouldn't say I'm a particularly practicing Christian (Lutheran in fact), but yes a Lutheran Christian nevertheless. I study in a university and like to promote free thinking, which is applied in free science etc.; a system in which people study whatever they wish and provide more accurate information. This is where these kinds of anti-laws are rediculous. I find it rather suspicious that you can't freely state your mind or be allowed to claim something that contradicts the dominant theory.

The anti-denial laws regarding the Jewish holocaust prevent discussion regarding this part of history. First of all, one should be allowed to express contradictory claims, given that he or she can back up the claim with credible sources. If the claim has credible sources and appears to be more accurate than the dominant theory, the person claiming such would be breaking the law, am I not right? Not to mention that the person would never be allowed to claim such before the academic peers who uphold a certain theory to be the absolutely objective truth, even when we know that there can never be anything completely objective.

I find it suspicious that you are not allowed to discuss and research something that may lead to something deemed "wrong". If the dominant theory is accurate, there is nothing to be feared and the researchers will only get more support for the theory.

[Ben_Edict]

... This is where these kinds of anti-laws are rediculous. I find it rather suspicious that you can't freely state your mind or be allowed to claim something that contradicts the dominant theory.

The anti-denial laws regarding the Jewish holocaust prevent discussion regarding this part of history. First of all, one should be allowed to express contradictory claims, given that he or she can back up the claim with credible sources. If the claim has credible sources and appears to be more accurate than the dominant theory, the person claiming such would be breaking the law, am I not right? Not to mention that the person would never be allowed to claim such before the academic peers who uphold a certain theory to be the absolutely objective truth, even when we know that there can never be anything completely objective.

I find it suspicious that you are not allowed to discuss and research something that may lead to something deemed "wrong". If the dominant theory is accurate, there is nothing to be feared and the researchers will only get more support for the theory.

1. nobody in his/her sane mind takes away the freedom of speech or the academic freedom to discuss theories, not even in those countries with anti-holocaust-denial-laws!

2. the holocaust is NO theory! It does not fall under this kind of freedom. Will you discuss whether animals are oxygen-breathing? Is this just a theory? Come to Germany and Poland and simply go to the places of unbelievable mass murder. It is no theory to be discussed.

3. We all know, that lying is something frowned upon but accepted in general as part of life. We all do it, we witness lying politicians, business bosses etc. day by day. But our accustomisation to lying does not rule out, that liars get punished. There are no "credible sources" for holocaust denials, the places, the wittnesses, the Nazi-regime's own documentation are readily available. Go and look, go and understand and don't "just discuss"...

Ben

[octavmandru]

why?

10 guys on an island, 9 black 1 white, lets just assume for a moment that all 9 black guys dont like the white guy, so they "vote him off".

we as an audience might feel bad for the white guy, we can throw out such words as racism and intolerance. But if the remaining 9 guys feel better after whitey tootles off then why should our opinion really matter? Its their ****ing island.

....

Unless you're the white guy...

[waqas]

Your Bible quote was not out of context - it was just wrong.
None of the Qur'an quotes can be interepreted in any other way, even in context. Fight + restraint, still = fight when you think you should. Not a biblical principle.



You're blind if you've not already seen it.

Ash,
Your first post here said that it's sad to see people talking about Minarets being banned, and within a few posts I have been able to steer you to a not-so-sympathetic view of the bigger picture

How is that Bible post any more out of context than the Quran post you made? You read the context and it's talking about "fight until there is no persecution", and about "will you not fight those who broke covenants they made with you", how can you say that that is any different from what Bible says?!!

[Gooshin]

Unless you're the white guy...

Okay so you're the white guy on the island, the rest dont want you there, what are you going to do?

[waqas]

I disagree with these points. Firstly, just because muslims are religious outwardly, doesn't mean Christians (who actually believe in the Bible and what it entails) are any less spiritual. But it's easy for muslims to point the finger and say "look at what these infidels are doing, gambling, stealing, raping, etc." - self-righteousness is quite commonplace.

Ash, I disagree with you, I will just give one example of sexual promiscuity, how can you say that it's ok to have multiple girlfriends at the same time (or even one girlfriend at a time with extra-marital sexual relationship), even have kids or get pregnant before marriage and still continue to live together as an unmarried couple, and still be spiritual? That is something that is much more common and acceptable for the average Christian compared to the average Muslim (not comparing a Christian living in a free society and a Muslim living in a locked up Saudi Arabia, just the compare the average Muslim in US or Europe). My point is not say that "my car is big", every person has to defend only his own deed in front of God, I'm not saying I am a better person because I belong to this group that happens to have a better overall average.

I believe in freedom of choice (of course within societal law and that which governs basic human tenants), and I believe Islam stifles some of that choice in the name of preserving purity and morality. A person who believes prohibiting certain freedoms limits the immorality is delusional IMO.

Islam gives you freedom of choice, there is no such thing as a forced conversion,

Quran 2:272
"You are not responsible for guiding anyone. GOD is the only one who guides whoever chooses (to be guided). Any charity you give is for your own good. Any charity you give shall be for the sake of GOD. Any charity you give will be repaid to you, without the least injustice."

[2:136] Say, "We believe in GOD, and in what was sent down to us, and in what was sent down to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Patriarchs; and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and all the prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction among any of them. To Him alone we are submitters."

[2:137] If they believe as you do, then they are guided. But if they turn away, then they are in opposition. GOD will spare you their opposition; He is the Hearer, the Omniscient.

[2:138] Such is GOD's system, and whose system is better than GOD's? "Him alone we worship."

[2:139] Say, "Do you argue with us about GOD, when He is our Lord and your Lord? We are responsible for our deeds, and you are responsible for your deeds. To Him alone we are devoted."

<---- And this was addressed to the Prophet, he was not told to force others, how can a "righteous Muslim" of today force others to be good? This is how it should be but there are some people who would like to force it upon others, they are not following the core values of Islam, of Quran. Let's not judge Islam's core values on what some people do, freedom of choice is a core value in Islam, otherwise Quran would tell the "believers" to force it upon others, nowhere in the Quran it says anything like that.

Hadith (saying of Prophet) in Bukhari (sorry, I don't have exact reference):
"He who hurts a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state, I am his adversary, and I shall be his adversary on the Day of a Judgement."

[waqas]

This struck me as interesting...

filppedgazelle,

What in the world does that have to do with Islam and Minarets? You're buying the propaganda and indicting Islam for the attack on twin towers landmark? Was it the only time 3,000 innocent people died? Was Christianity indicted for Hitler's crimes, or Crusaders' crimes? Someone said above that all that was history, what's relevant now is that there are some crazy Muslims who would kill innocent people (or something like that) but remember that Bush said that the "war on terror" is a crusade, and quite frankly Muslims can't help but see colonialism and neo-imperialism (Iran 1953, Iraq, Afghanistan etc) as a continuation of crusades (even though it's about money, oil, resources, not about religion, otherwise Vietnam, Korea, Panama, Chile etc wouldn't have been under attack by West).

[waqas]

Bottom line....Muslims want to rule you or kill you. I've never heard of other mainstream religions tha want to do this. Gays or Lesbians? Never heard it there......Christians or Jews? Not there either. No doubt there are a lot here that would defend the atrocities of Nazi Germany, they wanted to do the same thing. Fortunately, there are still those that can see clearly enough to see the light and fight evil for what it is, and are not deterred by those that are blind to reality. We won't settle this here, the ones that will are out there tonight in harms way, living in misery and discomfort so the little weasels of "diversity" can defend the indefensible.
Regards!

Rupert, I will kill you if I get my hands on you... because I am a Muslim and you're not...

[Nass]

Although I'm European and all for free speech etc, I personally think that absolute & unrestricted free speech is a bit dodgy - I can live with a few restrictions. ie:

• child pornography
• false statements that result in harm (defamation)
• national security information
• shouting of “Fire!” in a crowded theater
• holocause denial