• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About phatmonky

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  1. I don't even know what to make of this - what are your opinions?
  2. I understand this, and at no time have I said that the scarve removal was LESS important than someone wearing another religion's symbol. I'm simply saying that many feel just as offended when told they cannot show symbols of their religion, and it is highly assumptive for anyone to say otherwise - like you said, try wearing another person's shoes. The law simply isn't just an attack on islam, that's all I'm getting at. It's an attack on all religions, but that's what you get in a many of the liberal socialized countries of Europe. I expect to see germany follow this trend in the near future.
  3. I find it quite presumptiuous to discount others religious views so quickly, because you feel so strongly in yours. I don't have any more of a point, simply I disagree
  4. Why don't you explain this one - Somehow muslim women feel more strongly about their head scarves than other religious people feel about their respective symbols?? Give me a break.
  5. buwahahhaa..... They ban headscarves, to keep with their idea of banning all religious symbols in school, so they are now zionists and jews? Get over it, it's not an attack on islam, but on all religions. In the west, Christianity has been feeling this sort of pressure for half a decade. Removal of Creationism as a theory, removal of voluntary prayer at any school events, removal of anything to do with any religion in any public place. Islam, welcome to what the rest of the religions have been delaing with. It's wrong then, it's wrong now, but it isn't another 'jew conspiracy'
  6. No, not at all, like I said, I just don't want to go through the whole list putting them in context I still urge you to do so, but If you want, I'd be happy to go down them later. I have to get going though - I run a business that needs my attention I'll put one more in context..... Your first one, you said "II Kings 19: 16 Lord, bow down thine ear, and hear: open, Lord thine eyes, and see: and hear the words of Sennacherib, which hath sent him to reproach the living God. - He is All-seeing and All-Hearing in Islam and Glory to Him! does not have to be reproached." This is nothing but a man speaking to god. He is asking to hear him. If you ask god to help you, for his guidance, does that mean that he isn't aware of what is going on? No, it simply means you are praying for the strength you need. Kings II 19:20 - God resonds with "Whereas you have prayed to me against Sennacherib king of Assyria, I have heard you." If I say "please god, hear my prayers and help me" - that does not mean he didn't hear them unless I said it. It is just the cries of a mortal man asking for help
  7. Dan, for someone who has taught me much about reading the quran at more than face value, I am surprised at you I'm not going to go to all of your postings, but I'll just point out this one (I urge you to further research the rest) Psalm 89 is talking about God's promise to David to "make your dynasty stand forever and establish your throne through all ages". (PS 89 2-5) The quote you pasted was the reaction of the people to the defeat of David. How could this be? God promised a throne as enduring as the heavens. But let's look further. Do you, yourself, not agree that this life is merely a predecessor to the next? It is assumed that God meant David a place in heaven, not a throne on earth, for a seat in heaven is far greater than that of this world .
  8. wow, this has erupted Thanks to all for contributing, despite my disagreement with some of it. Abu Dujanah, do you believe "an eye for an eye", is the best course of action?
  9. I have not read all of these replies yet, so pardon me if I repeat somethign that has already been said....... Al-Qaeda is NOT performing Jihad in the islamic sense, according to my reading, for the Quran calls for explicitly for Jihad WITHOUT the killing of women and children. No where in the Quran does it suggest Jihad to be waged with a disregard to other muslims, or innocent's lives. Killing of Iraqis with car bombs, turks with car bombs, civilians at Italian, American, and English Embassies, bombing of UN PEACEKEEPERS.......this is not Jihad as I am told. This is a abombination that cloaks itself in a religion.
  10. you edit my post? then delete it? What is your problem?
  11. Did you know....... The first sign of dehydration is a sense of hunger. This is the most common mistake people make when dealing with thirst. Dehydration in itself is a illness, and leads to other illnesses. Stay hydrated and you will stay healthier. ZamZam or Tap water.....Atleast Tap water keeps my teeth shiny
  12. I wonder if Mecca Cola or ZamZam are inadvertantely using Vanilla extract
  13. oh, and you mentioned whether we really wanted to go to Iraq or not - Personally, I supported it. I will take the time later to fully explain if you wish for my reasoning, but I do not support the follow through. Bush, yes I elected him, has done many things I wanted, and then gone and screwed it all up. Our Public relations sucks! Our follow through very often is extremely lacking! I'll expand later I'm off!
  14. [ Dan, as always, I very much appreciate your input, despite me often not agreeing You are always full of thought, and I don't think I have ever seen you just accept something because you heard it - I admire such a quality very much Before I begin, I am going to be running some errands soon, so if I am lacking on a answer to one of your several questions, just let me know and I'll be happy to add more input. Starting with the statement about flight 93 and 6 miles of wreckage. The furthest wreckage was 8 miles away, and was a piece of burnt paper foudn in a residential neighborhood. This story was all over the place, but I've yet to see pictures of diagrams from any real source showing where the bulk of the large debris was. Let's be honest here - paper, small items, etc. would have no problem traveling by wind and water (the lake the crash took place near). This is the only amount of information I've been able to confirm online. This, along with the phone calls of passengers telling their loved ones that they " are going to do something" shortly before this. adds to the theory that a struggle insued and the plan was crashed purposefully or accidentally by one side or the other. Scenario two is that the plane is shot down. I am not able to find any evidence backing this, but I have no moral dillema with such a thing (for the record). I just wish flight 93 was as well documented and studied as the other crashes. Again, there isn't any evidence supporting there being any less people at the WTC that day than any other time. I followed all the links about the jews, and the supposed internet message on the news group (I'll see if I can find it on google's UUnet archive later if you'd like), and it's all just.....well extremely vague with no evidence. I don't claim to know all that has happened, simply that all of my time and research on this points to some basic theories, but I guess they aren't as exciting as a good conspiracy. By mentioning the jew comment I didn't mean anything toward muslims - just mentioning a baseless theory that I always hear - Thing is, jews did die in the WTC, and there werent 5000 of them there for that many to leave. I must confess, that despite my itending to do so, I have not read the entire text of either patriot act yet I do however know that every court looking at it has declared it constitutional, therefore your statement about the bill of rights isn't so accurate What I do not like is the misuse of it! If it is designed for terrorism, it shouldn't be used for drug runners and others, in which the money is not funding said terrorism. I don't agree with focusing on people in this country that are from certain countries and already here - if we are looking for illegals, let's get them all out at once, not just a certain group. I do however support increased screening at airports and for visas, from countries in which the climate breeds fanatiscm. If I go to Afghanistan I'll be killed or kidnapped. This is what I deal with when traveling abroad - I do not see a problem with a picture at the airport of people from certain countries (minding you said list is not static and countries are able to be added and removed), and I will not make apologies that a majority of people in many of those countries are muslim. It is fanatics (which are in fact in a certain region) that are the problem, not muslims. As for my final thoughts on the patriot act - I always loved the saying "those who would trade freedom for safety deserve neither". Some of the patriot act is needed, some I see a great ability to misuse it - I personally will be happy when it is not renewed (it is a timed document) and we surgically apply the good and not the bad. If we really want to discuss 9/11 and outcomes, why don't we talk Guantanamo - that always proves to be a wildcard in conversations
  15. Muslimah - I desperately want to think highly of you, but if you are taken in by things like this, I'm ashamed of it. I'll only spend my time on a single item, for this would all take too long for my liking. "The twin towers could not have collapsed as a result of burning jet fuel. Most of that fuel was consumed on impact. In the south tower, most of the fuel was spilled outside the building. Heat caused by burning jet fuel does not reach temperatures needed to melt steel. What does stand out as particularly suspicious and still unexplained is that fires raged out of control beneath THREE of the collapsed towers for ONE HUNDRED DAYS, clearly indicating the presence of some kind of substance utilized in the demolition of the structures. " I can get my friends who are chemical and civil engineers to give you the scientific reasons that this alone is an absolute laugh. I recently had them take a look at this page - - You see, this page is based upon the idea of traditional construction (as it even quotes the so "damning" study at the bottom) The WTC was not built in the form of a standard Steel skeleton (a grid system), for it was requested to have more office area, and that meant no center columns. The weight of the building is fully supported by the external walls, with the floors in between acting as braces to keep them straight (imagine a tube with floors in it). The heat of the jet fuel would not have done anything to weaken the external structure, this is right. But, it wasn't the external structure that gave way. It was the internal floors, which still held fire retardent from the 1960's. You have a single floorholding all weight from a jet liner, and all debris fallen from floors above it. If that floor gives way, it is possible (and this is the probable theory for the reason of the collapes, agreed by independent engineers!) that the floors following could cause a dominoe effect dislocating the floors before it. This is also the reason for such an implosion, rather than the buildings falling over. As the internal support gave way, the building fell in on itself. As for the reason a fire went on for 100 days below the rubble, this shows nothing except stupidity. You have an entire office building that was on fire. When the hoover dam was built, it was laid in layers. If not, the concrete would takeHUNDREDS of years to cool! You see, there's a little deal about exothermic reactions and insulating them - When hoover dam was built, the layers were cured and cooled within a day. Look at the difference pressure and insulation does But alas, I am done. I suppose the jews really did it too, since there was a rumor (no evidence) that all the jews walked out of the WTC before it happened