Sounds bizarre, right? Well...
Kyrgyzstan president says Islamic dress 'turns women into terrorists'
THE president of Kyrgyzstan has said women can become radicalised by wearing Islamic dress.
Almazbek Atambayev has tried to dissuade women in the country from dressing in hijabs, niqabs and burkas saying: "Our women have been wearing miniskirts since 1950s, and they never thought about wearing an explosive belt."
Yeah, OK...but why would the leader of a "mainly Muslim country" spew hatred of his own people? That's the real puzzlement here. :-)
Of COURSE I know it! That's what the smiley was for. I was being facetious. (I refuse to use the 'S' word. That would pay homage to the aspiring nimrod in chief with the combover from hell.)
Why do you always seem to assume the worst as far as I'm concerned?
Seriously? You're gonna apologize for an innately violent ideology by evoking the "...But Christians are worse.." defense? What's next? "He/They started it! Neener, neener!"
...Oh, and Christians haven't beheaded or burned anyone at the stake for at least 400 years give or take. Even when they did they were CLEARLY off the scriptural reservation. Modern Islamic terrorists are not.
(The Phineas Priesthood was completely new to me. :-))
LOL!
The major clothing outlet for 'Islam's R us' has a new line of clothing with bombs sewn right in.
Nimitz
A person puts his own credibility and capacity to think in serious doubt if he goes to an obviously anti Muslim site to get objective information about Islam. Can you get more dumb than that?
Your refusal to think for yourself is one of the reasons you have failed to follow through on our discussions elsewhere.
Your allegation that it is the HQ that leads people to commit atrocities is as skewed as the view that it is the US constitution that leads Americans to crimes.
A person has to have a warped mind to think the same as extremists do that either the HQ or the US constitution commands its followers to commit atrocities.
I'm not. Just tired of BS. And a peace afterwards doesn't make a stupid act beforehand any less patronizing or debasing.
You said to me inside another thread: "'Many' could take lessons from your example of civility."
You know, this goes two ways. If we are going to discuss stuff without making a fool of each other, just like the way we ask questions, then... Oh WTH... I seem be wasting my time...
Over and out on this thread, at least from my side.
Where did I state they are worse? Are you delusional? And clearly the "neener" part is all on you.
And no, your Christian terrorists didn't beheaded anyone. They only killed them by bombs and firearms.
Over and out.
All the same old same "Al". I didn't make any remarks on better or worse. Actually I wasn't aware we could call any terrorist group better. But that will be you, "Al". Oh, by the way I didn't see you replying on which social club you're a part of? Ashamed sharing in public?
'Our women have been wearing miniskirts since 1950s, and they never thought about wearing an explosive belt'.
They wouldn't dare!
I believe the previous president banned beards, banned ballet and issued a proclamation that removed government approval from gold teeth. On that issue, government dental health advice was once to 'chew bones'. Strange country.
The point noted in the question fails to address the issue of a majority of the Muslim population not being defined by denominational Islam. I suspect that has far more relevance than what clothes they wear, although of course there may well be some link or other between the two.
CLURT
1) That would be a valid point had I never read the Qur'an myself. My 'biases (read: revulsion)' stem from that endeavor. Your ad hominem, while perfectly understandable under the circumstances, is without basis in this instance EVEN IF the sole impetus for my 'biases' came from anti-Islam (as OPPOSED to anti-Muslim) sites. Inasmuch as you seem to require constant reminding, this isn't about Muslims. It's about the vile ideology of ISLAM. GET THIS!
2) Your attempts at evasion are wearing thin/becoming increasingly obvious. Perhaps you should back away before you descend into the usual barb tossing. Thus far my criticisms have been limited to the ISM. Yours, on the other hand, are directed almost entirely at me..AS IF you're going to intimidate me into silence. Hint, CLURT: that's NOT gonna happen.
3) Your analogy REMAINS flawed.
4) And NOW you're questioning my mental state. How formulaic. :-)
(Edit: for all rational individuals who are familiar with this site, my "failure to follow through" relates directly to the fact that threading on AM only goes eight levels deep. EVERYONE "[fails] to follow through" beyond level eight. :-))
comment by Nimitz on :"Your attempts at evasion are wearing thin/becoming increasingly obvious."
This is posted here because several attempts at posting it under my answer have all mysteriously failed.
I expect you believe that Islam is the worst religion around. There is no law against that opinion. Pick the worst thing [just one] that makes Islam the worst religion, back up your claim with your best evidence and let's examine it. That's fair enough isn't it?
Umm....I'm guessing that you completely missed (or chose to ignore) the point of the post to which you're responding, but be that as it may:
1) Not all who are clad in loosely 'Islamic' dress are Muslims.
2) It's a plot. The owner of the site is clearly Islamophobic, and hence is censoring your every post. :-^D
3) I am all too eager to rise to your expectations. In fact I DO believe that Islam is the "worst religion around." We've already discussed (ad nauseam) the evidence which supports that belief both in and outside the context of Islamic scripture. Beyond that, we're in need of no more evidence than that supplied by Muslims themselves EVEN IF there are plenty of passages in the core text of Islam to support my beliefs. The cowardice of the 'god' of Islam is only outmatched by its sadism, and its 'prophet' is a WELL established child predator. Thus, the more 'fervent (observant)' a Muslim becomes, the more violent, unstable and threatening to civilization a Muslim becomes. This is or can be known to all simply by reading the Qur'an, and that is why I continue to parrot my disclaimer: "Believe nothing I say about Islam. Believe nothing which anyone else says about Islam. Read the Qur'an YOURSELF and be duly repulsed.
There will come a day when all the people of the earth see Islam for the thoroughly repugnant ideology that it is, and on that day it will be sent slithering back to Mecca and Medina like a snake to its hole just as the pervert prophet predicted. On that day every human being on earth will see the monstrous deity of Islam for the hellish abomination that it is, and they will condemn it in the strongest terms of universal disgust!
Thank you for posting evidence that you cannot enter into a rational discussion. You're driven by blind hatred and can only copy and paste from anti Muslim sites.
Your statement that "its 'prophet' is a WELL established child predator" is very juvenile. I responded to it in great detail elsewhere. You couldn't post a single sentence in response and yet here you are again posting the same discredited lie.
If you ever feel you have a valid point then just "Pick the worst thing [just one] that makes Islam the worst religion, back up your claim with your best evidence and let's examine it. That's fair enough isn't it?"
Islam is not a rational religion. Thus it deserves no rational treatment from me. In fact, its definitive IRRATIONALITY is spelled out from cover to disgusting cover in the Qur'an. (The Hadith merely cements the point.)
OK, Clurt, what would YOU call a fifty-some-odd year old man who marries and 'thighs' a six year old girl only to consummates the relationship at the ripe old age of NINE? I don't know where you're from, but where I live such an individual is the WORST of perverts!
As for that which makes Islam the worst religion around, you can start with any of the verses (surahs) found here: http://www.inthenameofallah.org/Allah%20&%20his%20Hell.html YOU pick one.
What kind of sadistic freak, Clurt, tortures someone for an eternity for the 'crime' of disbelief? What kind of sub-animal burns off one skin of a human being and gives the victim another so s/he can be tortured some more? If you respond to these questions with anything other than a direct, material reply, there will be no point in responding at all. (Hint: that means you can spare me the "God of the Bible is just as bad/worse" gambit.)
Nimitz
1- It looks like you're letting your emotions cloud your thinking. You start off with "Islam is not a rational religion. Thus it deserves no rational treatment from me." This is a bit like accusing someone of being insane and then telling them that you will behave insane too.
2- You called Mohammed a paedophile in an earlier conversation. I fully addressed that accusation. [My response included the fact that paedophiles are attracted and addicted to the idea of sex with little children not to the idea of entering into a lasting marriage with one] I checked a few times and found that you had nothing to say to refute any of my arguments there. So I thought the matter was settled.
3- Now you bring the matter up again as Mohammed "consummates the relationship at the ripe old age of NINE? I don't know where you're from, but where I live such an individual is the WORST of perverts!" I already addressed that point as well in that earlier thread. Let me remind you that we're talking about what was socially acceptable 14 centuries ago. But we don't have to go back that far in time and place. If we move much nearer in time, place and culture to 12th century Europe we find that Agnes of France was married in 1179 to prince Alexios son of the Eastern Roman Emperor Manuel I Komnenos when she was 8 [eight] yo. After Alexios was murdered, Agnes, then aged 12, married a 65 year old named Adronicus. Elsewhere in Europe, children as young as 3 were sometimes married as recorded in the Decretum Gratiani. Now do we try and find a slot for these people in your scale of "the WORST of perverts!" or do we say that that was how they did things then and this is how we do them now?
4- Here's another example of how you've let your thinking become clouded. It is YOUR accusation that the HQ "makes Islam the worst religion around" yet for evidence to back that up you want ME to "start with any of the verses (surahs) found" in a certain website. As a Muslim I am the accused [the accusation being that I'm following the worst religion around] And yet you are asking me, the accused, to pick evidence to show that I'm guilty.
5- The clouded thinking continues to the final paragraph. By now you know that if you point to verses in the HQ to show that it portrays God as a "sadistic freak" then someone will point to verses in the Bible which portray God as far worse, using the same standards of judgement. So you say "you can spare me the "God of the Bible is just as bad/worse""
Well, he has a point, if you dress like that people will immediately want to kill you around here and you do have to defend yourself.
TERRIFYING.
*like*
