Military class suspended for view on Islam

[PRB]

Originally Posted by Prototype

Islam is a missionary religion that tells its followers to spread their faith not to dissimilar from Christian missionaries.

True, but expecting a dif result.

Now here’s thing, a believer is not necessarily a Muslim. “The People of the Book” as they are called in the Quran (followers of other Abrahamic religions) are believers. Non believers are anyone else that is not a Muslim.

“The People of the Book” are spoken of quite well in most of the Quran, non-believers not so much, but both are to be treated with kindness and tolerance.

“…ye should show them kindness and deal justly with them…” Sura 60:8

This is untrue as it relates to believers/non believers. In Muhammeds early Meccan days he was concilitory towards Christians/Jews as he thought they would convert. He also feared for his life as he had few followers and no 'strength of Arms'...this is when he wrote the 'we can all get along' verses.
In his later Madina period, when he was a warlord and powerful, he wrote very aggressive verses commanding Jew/Christians to convert.
The obvious total contradictions (God changed his mind?) have been explained away by Islamic jurisprudence (AL Azar University and others) thru 'abrogation' or simply ' in any contradictory Quranic verses (there are many) the later verse overrides (abrogates) the earlier.
The vers you quoted has been abrogated.

5:51 "Take not the Jews and Christians as Auliya (friends/protectors), they are but Auliya of each other. And if any amongst you (Muslims) takes them, then surely he is one of them (Kafir)

8:And fight them until there is no more fitnah (disbelief in anything but Allah) and the religion will be for Allah alone. But if they cease (other Religions), then certainly, Allah is all seer of what they do.

4:47 O you who have been given the Scripture (Jews/Christians)! Believe in what We have revealed confirming what is with you, before we efface faces (making them without nose/mouth/eyes) and turn them hindwards, or curse them We cursed the Sabbath Breakers.
And the Commandment of Allah is always executed

[PRB]

Dhimmis in the past were taxed and it was certainly a form of oppression, I will not disagree with that as most Muslim rulers used it to simply have Non-Muslims acknowledge their government.

It is important to note that they were to be protected as part of the Dhimmi contract and failure to do so was a sin.

They were allowed to practice their own religion and laws (Halakha), even if it offended Muslims and were given the same rights as Muslim citizens.

This is untrue. They were not given the same rights and are still not. Look at the slaughter of Christians in Egypt today....if Muslims burn a church it cannot be rebuilt unless they petition the Govt.
A Dhimmi has no standing in court, the word of a Muslim, by law, weighs more. I refer you to the laws of Saudi Arabia as an example...check their 'blood debt' laws where one will pay 1/2 the penalty for accidental death of a Kafir over a Muslim.


Naturally born Muslims or converts

They are natural-born Muslims.

A quick question for you...."Is Muhammed, as an individual, relevant in today's world"...Is he 'The perfect example of Manhood'.

I think Muhammad is relevant for Muslims in the sense that he is viewed as being an the perfect example of a Muslim and so we are supposed to imitate him.

This is one of the primary problems....Muhammed took slaves raped them as they were property, executed bound prisoners etc...all fun and games in that day and age yet Islamic scholars call him 'the perfect man' as you said to be emulated...he sent spies to murder his enemies, and allowed them to lie to protect themselves....all of the things Al Q points too as following his example......sadly, you will not find a prominent main stream Imam that will condemn anything Muhammed did.

There are some things he did that I would not but I wouldn't do things that Abraham did either (almost killing his son).

Another Quranic issue is dates and times......as you point out, in the Old Testiment, there is violence when God ordered the Jews to slay whomever....however, it was designated at a time and place....The God of Abraham did not say "Slay all Philistines forever" There was a start and an end

This does not exist in the Quran.....it says

8:67 It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he made a great slaughter in the land

8:59-60 Let not the unbelievers think that they can get the better: they will never frustrate them.
Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the enemies, of Allah and your enemies, and others besides, whom you may not know but whom Allah does.

That is the most open ended verse for violence that I know of....you need to slaughter those that you might not even know, but Allah does? There is no time limit on this, It is not 'Old Testiment' but used today by every violent Muslim...just following not only the Quran but Muhammeds example.

It's similar to how Christians will view Jesus, they try to do good things just as he is told to have done.

Comparing Christs acts to those of a Warlord practicing a theopolitical conquest beggers the imagination.

[PRB]

BTW, you never answered my question.
What is the only, defined as written, way to guarantee a free pass to the highest level of Islamic heaven?
One where all sins (murder, rape, whatever) will be forgiven upon the act?

[PRB]

I've studied Muhammed for about 15 years now and I find him rather peculiar for the 'most perfect man'.
Interestingly, all of Allah's wishes/tenets also benefited Muhammed in some way.
In my opinion Muhammed was a sexual sociopath. You may think dif but hear me out from simply an example viewpoint.
Muhammed was not a do as I do guy, he was a do as I say guy.
A Muslim may have 4 wives...how many wives did Muhammed have? Because the Prophet was 'special'...who said so...the prophet.
Now Muhammed, and all at war Muslims, could take as many slave concubines as 'their right hand' could gather but occasionally a guy just wants a local gal so Allah told Muhammed he was special.
Even for that day/age the Companions noted unusual sexual things Muhammed would do...like open mouth/tongue kiss pre pubecent girls not of his family. But, he was the Prophte so 'who knows the ways of Allahs mouthpiece'.
Then there is the flip side.
Muhammed basically said that women were also an evil breed. When he took his trip to 'hell' and saw the suffering there he noted that they were predominatly women.
Women entice you, they must be covered up, under the authority of men...
He displays the classic glut/famine of sexual predators. He is very sexually active in even a strange way for that time and place and then often blames women for that activity.
Reminds me of a sexually frustrated Catholic Priest that abuses young boys then rails agains homosexuality in the pulpit.
How has this great 'example' been interpreted in Muslim culture....honor killings, property, blamed for their own rape because 'they entice'....
Unusual, and recent, fatwahs where you can work with (workplace) an unrelated woman if you suckle at her breasts like a child...then you are 'related' ...There are verses where women 'shine' in the Quran but then there are totally contradictory verses where they have an inherent evil within.
Muhammed wrestled with his sexual deviation thru out his life and passed this to his folowers thru his word and actions.
We see this sanctioned deviancy thruout Islamic culture.

[PRB]

If you want to debate verse for verse I'll go along with you.

However, you may be a fine young man sincere in his 'beliefs' as are many Muslims. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims (thankfully) cherry pick their religion and emulate the good and ignore the dark side of the faith.
You are (as the man said) allowed your own opinion but not your own facts.
I only repeat the Quran, the words of the Companions or decisions by Ilamic jurists.
I also refer to how Islam has impacted cultural development.
Nothing more.
A sincere terrorist would tell you you are not practicing Islam and could point to verse after verse to support his thesis. He could point to Muhammeds example. He could point to recent Imams supporting warfare on that level as valid.
I would also say that some of your comments are very scriptually naive from a jurisprudence point of view, I hope that is from lack of study only.
Most non Muslims are ignorant of your religion so can be diverted easily with a few abrogated verses or out right misinterpretation (the New Qurans from Saudi Arabia that have been 'toned down' to be more palatable to westerners where you don't 'beat your wife' but 'strike her lightly' etc.)
I have no more patience with being politically correct with this anymore.
Islam is a threat to the West.
Those that dress it up in a cute outfit further that threat even if they don't understand it themsleves..... they are furthering the threat.

[T-Rock]

No verses in the Quran are removed or altered.

Muslim activists deliberately hide (taqiyya - rooted in taysir) a major Islamic doctrine called "al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh" (the Abrogator and the Abrogated, aka Mecca vs. Medina)..., and when Mohammed began to contradict himself..., and his followers noticed the contradictions..., this is what "Mo" had to say:

"None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We
substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath
power over all things?" Surah 2: 106

"When We substitute one revelation for another, and Allah knows best what
He reveals (in stages), they say, "Thou art but a forger": but most of them
understand not." Surah 16:101

"God abrogates and confirms what He pleases. His is the Decree Eternal." Surah 13:39

"If We pleased We could take away that which We have revealed to you:.." Surah 17:86

"Never have we sent a single prophet or apostle before you with whose
wishes Satan did not tamper. But God abrogates the interjections of Satan
and confirms His own revelations." Surah 22:52

The Reliance of the Traveller, Pgs 625 - 626 address the doctrine of Abrogation:


o22.1 ( I )
(9) those (nasikh) which supersede previously revealed Koranic verses;
(10) and those (mansukh) which are superseded by later verses.


Those who do not accept abrogation fall outside mainstream schools of Islamic Jurisprudence...


http://www.amazon.com/Reliance-Trave.../dp/0915957728
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Abrogation_(Naskh)

Surah 109:6,...To you be your Way, and to me mine....

....is abrogated by Surah 9:5, "But when the forbidden months are past,
then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, an seize them,
beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but
if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity,
then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful."

Islam is a missionary religion that tells its followers to spread their
faith not to dissimilar from Christian missionaries

The difference between the missions are like night and day according to Islamic Jurisprudence....

The following is from the "Reliance of the Traveller"


The Objectives of Jihad*

*o9.0
(O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived
from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion.

o9.1 Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2). When enough people perform
it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others.

o9.6 It is offensive to conduct a military expedition against hostile
non-Muslims without the Caliph’s permission (A: though if there is no
Caliph (def: o25), no permission is required.
(The Reliance of the Traveler. Pgs 599-609)
http://www.amazon.com/Reliance-Trave.../dp/0915957728


Neither Christian scripture, nor any other religions employ such perpetual, open-ended commandments for "War" as does Islam on its mission fields...


"O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends;
they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a
friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the
unjust people." (5:51), therefore, "...Fight those who do not believe in
Allah...nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given
the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they
are in a state of subjection. (9:29) also,..."The Day of Judgement will not
come about until Muslims fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew
will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslims,
O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad
tree, would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews"
(al-Bukhari)

[MR2]

Military instructor suspended over Islam course

WASHINGTON | Wed Jun 20, 2012 10:58am EDT

(Reuters) - The instructor of a college course that taught top military officers the United States was at war with Islam has been relieved of teaching duties and the course ordered redesigned to reflect U.S. policy, a military spokesman said on Wednesday.

[SF-TX]

We are once again admonished that Al Qaeda and Jihadists have a 'warped view of the Islamic faith.' CPT Kirby, perhaps you could explain where they have strayed from the proper view of Islam and how so many others seem to follow this 'warped view' of Islam. What is the proper view of Islam? Does it differ from that of Al Azhar University?

The instructor of a college course that taught top military officers the United States was at war with Islam has been relieved of teaching duties and the course ordered redesigned to reflect U.S. policy, a military spokesman said on Wednesday.

The elective course at the National Defense University's Joint Forces Staff College included a slide that asserted "the United States is at war with Islam and we ought to just recognize that we are war with Islam," Pentagon officials said in April as they launched a review of the course...

...Navy Captain John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, said in April that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta was deeply concerned about some of the materials being taught in the course, such as the slide suggesting the United States was at war with Islam.

"That's not at all what we believe to be the case. We're at war against terrorism, specifically al Qaeda, who has a warped view of the Islamic faith," Kirby said.

Link

[T-Rock]

"That's not at all what we believe to be the case. We're at war against terrorism, specifically al Qaeda, who has a warped view of the Islamic faith," Kirby said.

I would like for someone to explain in detail, utilizing the Qur’an, the Hadith, and Shariah, how AQ has warped the Islamic Faith?

[Streck-Fu]

And this is how we keep losing conflicts.

Our entire military command needs a Sun Tzu refresher....

[T-Rock]

"The final bastion of America's defense against Islamic jihad and sharia, the Pentagon, fell to the enemy in April 2012, with the issuance of a letter from General Martin E. Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, re-issuing his earlier order that all Department of Defense (DoD) course content be scrubbed to ensure no lingering remnant of disrespect to Islam." ~Claire M. Lopez~

It appears CAIR has infiltrated the highest levels of the White House and the Pentagon

http://www.thomasmore.org/sites/defa...2011%20(3).pdf

Muslim Letter that Prompted the Pentagon to Purge Military Instruction “Offensive to Islam”
September 26, 2012

A letter dated October 19, 2011 signed by 57 Muslim organizations, was sent to the White House with copies to other federal officials responsible for national security, including Secretary of the Department of Defense, Leon Panetta. The letter demanded that all training materials that they judge to be offensive to Islam be "purged" and instructors "are effectively disciplined."

Because many reporters and citizens have asked for a copy of the letter, TMLC is linking to the 7-page letter here, and attaching it to this press release as well. You may also view it by going to the TMLC website at: www.thomasmore.org. Note the highlighted areas on page 5 of the letter.

> http://www.thomasmore.org/sites/defa...2011%20(3).pdf

This letter was referred to in a previous Thomas More Law Center press release. Click here.
Following that letter, in April 2012, Army Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Matthew Dooley, a highly decorated combat veteran, was publically condemned by General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and relieved of his teaching assignment at the Joint Forces Staff College (JFSC). The reason: the negative way Islam was portrayed in his elective course entitled, Perspectives on Islam and Islamic Radicalism.

On May 10, 2012, during a Pentagon press conference with Defense Secretary Panetta seated next to him, General Martin Dempsey expressed negative opinions regarding the Perspectives on Islam and Islamic Radicalism course, characterizing it as "totally objectionable" and "against our values." General Dempsey personally committed to removing any similar curriculum from military professional education within the JFSC and elsewhere.

The Thomas More Law Center now represents LTC Dooley, a 1994 Graduate of the U. S. Military Academy at West Point.

Click here to support TMLC's defense of LTC Dooley.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, observed, "In order to appease Muslims and the White House, General Dempsey and the Department of Defense rushed to punish LTC Dooley. In the process, they violated not only our Nation's core principles of free speech and academic freedom guaranteed by our Constitution, but also, a number of the military's own regulations dealing with academic freedom and non-attribution policies of the National Defense University (NDU) to which LTC Dooley was assigned. They violated the right to due process of law and even by-passed the University's Provost, who under NDU's own rules has primary responsibility for adjudication of this matter."

Click here for a Summary of NDU regulations on Free Speech and Academic Freedom

Source: http://www.familysecuritymatters.org...o-islam?f=news

[Dreadnought]

I think some people in here need to read "A World Without Islam." Most of what I see in here is circular, immature hate.

Heaven forbid you can be good at your job and at warfighting without hating Islam.

[abc_123]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

I think some people in here need to read "A World Without Islam." Most of what I see in here is circular, immature hate.

Why do some people need to read that book?

Which posts to you categorize as circular hate? Why?

[PRB]

Originally Posted by Dreadnought

I think some people in here need to read "A World Without Islam." Most of what I see in here is circular, immature hate.

Heaven forbid you can be good at your job and at warfighting without hating Islam.

I don't 'hate' Islam I just understand it. All we've done is provide Islamic verse that supports violent Jihad....Muhammed was not successful at spreading Islam until he adopted violence/war against non believers.
If you have an opinion that we have presented non Quranic verse or Hadith then please...enlighten us.
There is no radical Islam....just Islam.

[Dreadnought]

Originally Posted by abc_123

Why do some people need to read that book?

Which posts to you categorize as circular hate? Why?

The ones blaming an entire religion, Islam in this case, for the actions and interpretations of the few, simultaneously ignoring equivalent violence and ignorance in both the Old and New Testaments.

"A World Without Islam" describes the extremism, as well as the overall stagnation of the majority of the Middle East/South Central Asia, as a function of history and circumstances, not as a function of religion. Islam brings nothing significantly different to the table from Christianity or Judaism. In fact, all three of the Abrahamic religions are nearly mirrored.

The fact that as an overall populace Christians and Jews have "evolved" past their antiquated, violent interpretations of their religious texts is further a function of other factors, not solely of the religion. Had American and European civilizations been predominately Muslim and Middle Eastern civilizations been predominately Christian and history remained the same, there exists no doubt in my mind that the end result today would be no different.

If you see ridiculousness and violence in Islamic holy texts and not in Christian and Jewish texts, then you are a fool who is either willfully or blindly ignorant. The end result is the same.

The enemy of America is not Islam. The enemy of America is the mindset that believes the previous statement. With that being said, I work with others who share my opinion as well as those who absolutely hate and want to kill everyone who is a Muslim. I've noticed neither has an effect on their ability to do their job.