Yahoo Tuning Groups Ultimate Backup metatuning the truth about muslims

Since you're so warm and fuzzy with the Musims maybme you'd enjoy watching
some of thierl wideos where they talk about just what they will do to you
when they get ahold of you. THey don't even consider you, a non-Muslim, to
be human.

This is not the fringe element of Islam. THis is the way they believe
dammit!!

Why not check this out? Or are you afraid to?

http://www.islamic-news.co.uk/

> If a kafir person (non-believer) goes in a Muslim country, he is like a cow,"
> explains Hamza. "Anybody can take him. That is the Islamic law."
>
> "If a kafir is walking by and you catch him, he's booty," he says on one tape.
> "You can sell him in the market. Most of them are spies. And even if they
> don't do anything, if Muslims cannot take them and sell them in the market,
> you just kill them. It's OK."

And these are your friends? What is wrong with you? Do you not have any
sense at all!! These people are INSANE AND DANGEROUS. Listen to their own
words! THey do not make a secret of how they feel and what their plans are!
Islam is NOT a religion of peace just as Stalin was not a great
humanitarian!

- Jeff

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

Jeff!
Not all moslems are member of Al Qaeda. WHat if you where judge by Jerry
falwell or Ashcroft.
BTW in 1987 Henry Kissinger call Ashcroft the most dangerous man in the United
States. Guess what jeff well you are going to have to kiss his ass. Jeff wake up
and look what the christians did to you today. Homekland Secrurity is the nail in
the coffin of your ameroica. It is pale to a pair of buildings. Just look who did
you in man, you got nothing left. you got no rights but the corporations have them
all and can't be sued. This is done by CHRISTIANS and to them you are satan just
like you are to there busimess partner Bin Laden who we trained and is playing the
part the fascist here want him to play. Yea jeff hate Islam while we give to you in
the a... atill it comes out your mouth.

"X. J. Scott" wrote:

> Since you're so warm and fuzzy with the Musims maybme you'd enjoy watching
> some of thierl wideos where they talk about just what they will do to you
> when they get ahold of you. THey don't even consider you, a non-Muslim, to
> be human.
>
> This is not the fringe element of Islam. THis is the way they believe
> dammit!!
>
> Why not check this out? Or are you afraid to?
>
> http://www.islamic-news.co.uk/
>
> > If a kafir person (non-believer) goes in a Muslim country, he is like a cow,"
> > explains Hamza. "Anybody can take him. That is the Islamic law."
> >
> > "If a kafir is walking by and you catch him, he's booty," he says on one tape.
> > "You can sell him in the market. Most of them are spies. And even if they
> > don't do anything, if Muslims cannot take them and sell them in the market,
> > you just kill them. It's OK."
>
> And these are your friends? What is wrong with you? Do you not have any
> sense at all!! These people are INSANE AND DANGEROUS. Listen to their own
> words! THey do not make a secret of how they feel and what their plans are!
> Islam is NOT a religion of peace just as Stalin was not a great
> humanitarian!
>
> - Jeff
>
> Meta Tuning meta-info:
>
> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
> metatuning-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Web page is http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/metatuning/
>
> To post to the list, send to
> metatuning@yahoogroups.com
>
> You don't have to be a member to post.
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

-- -Kraig Grady
North American Embassy of Anaphoria Island
http://www.anaphoria.com
The Wandering Medicine Show
KXLU 88.9 FM 8-9PM PST

🔗wallyesterpaulrus <wallyesterpaulrus@...>

--- In metatuning@y..., "X. J. Scott" <xjscott@e...> wrote:
> Since you're so warm and fuzzy with the Musims maybme you'd enjoy
watching
> some of thierl wideos where they talk about just what they will do
to you
> when they get ahold of you. THey don't even consider you, a non-
Muslim, to
> be human.
>
> This is not the fringe element of Islam. THis is the way they
believe
> dammit!!
>
> Why not check this out? Or are you afraid to?
>
> http://www.islamic-news.co.uk/
>
> > If a kafir person (non-believer) goes in a Muslim country, he is
like a cow,"
> > explains Hamza. "Anybody can take him. That is the Islamic law."
> >
> > "If a kafir is walking by and you catch him, he's booty," he says
on one tape.
> > "You can sell him in the market. Most of them are spies. And even
if they
> > don't do anything, if Muslims cannot take them and sell them in
the market,
> > you just kill them. It's OK."
>
> And these are your friends? What is wrong with you? Do you not have
any
> sense at all!! These people are INSANE AND DANGEROUS. Listen to
their own
> words! THey do not make a secret of how they feel and what their
plans are!
> Islam is NOT a religion of peace just as Stalin was not a great
> humanitarian!
>
> - Jeff

your ignorance is shocking, frightening, and disgusting. i hope there
is an afterlife and a hell reserved for racists like you and Hamza,
so that the two of you may cause each other eternal pain and
suffering.

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@...>

I don't doubt that there are good peace loving Muslims, just as there are good peace loving Christians. One of my students was an Afghani, and we had many long talks about his religion (Sufi). Depending of the sect, they may or may not have been brainwashed into the culture of violence. The Bible advocates the same kind of violence against non Jews as the Koran does against non Muslims, and it is just a matter of interpretation whether you believe in committing atrocities in the name of God.

That said, I think the last thing we need in this country is more religious people. We have enough trouble from them already. How about encouraging more atheists and agnostics to immigrate instead?

John Starrett

🔗X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>

This is an interesting problem - what is the source of these mass-psychoses?

It's tempting to blame religion but not always is religion involved, just as
often atheists or pagans are behind all the trouble.

So what is going on?

What about this as a proposed source ef the trouble -- systems of authority.

Religious leaders tell the people to riot and they do. Political leaders
like Stalin and Hitler dress up in fancy clothes and have ritual and pomp
and unquestioning obedience to authority, and the same sort of evil goes on.

I say systems of authority are the problem and the opposite, anarchy is the
answer.

If someone claims to be a Muslim, let them read the Koran and follow it as
they please. But if they start killing their neighbors (as an individual)
the neighbors can recognize the person as psychotic and round him up.

If someone claims to be a Christian, let him read the Bible and follow it as
he pleases. Perhaps he will establish low cost or free medical clinics and
hospitals in impoverished Islamic and Hindu nations -- as Mother Teresa and
as Franklin Graham have done. But if he decides instead to rape little boys,
then as an individual, the neighbors can recognive the person as psychotic
and round him up. Certainly we should not see some authoritarian hierarchy
making excuses for the pedophile, intimidating his victims ad covering up
his scrimes, as we have seen in the despicable pedophile scandal in the
Catholic Church.

If Hitler starts killing Jews, the neighbors can recognize the individual
person as psychotic and round him up.

If Stalin starts killing Jews, the neighbors can recognize the individual
person as psychotic and round him up.

What do you think?

Is not the entire problem not really religion but authority?

And is this likewise not the best reason to oppose the new police state laws
that congress has willfully passed that give powers to an authdoritarian
system rather than allow security to be in the realm of the individual
through individually armed citizens?

- Jeff

🔗Kraig Grady <kraiggrady@...>

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@...>

🔗wallyesterpaulrus <wallyesterpaulrus@...>

🔗X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>

🔗wallyesterpaulrus <wallyesterpaulrus@...>

--- In metatuning@y..., "X. J. Scott" <xjscott@e...> wrote:
> on 11/22/02 3:37 PM, wallyesterpaulrus wrote:
>
> >> Is not the entire problem not really religion but authority?
> >
> > you're definitely getting warmer now!
>
> Ok, well this was sort of a big leap I made as a result of this
>whole thing.
> I've always been sympathetic a bit towards anarchists such as
>Jefferson, but
> wasn't sure if anarchy could really work as the basis of a society -

i'm not sure i can either -- but it's a direction worth looking in.

> but
> maybe if authority is the root of all evil (particularly since
>authoritarian
> systems promise to relieve individuals of responsibility for their
>actions
> and to think for themselves -- 'just do as you're told and you'll
>be fine'
> is a very dangerous teaching.) we should do all we can to find a
>way to make
> anarchy work...

well, every time an anarchist gets in the news these days, it's
because they're committing an act of terrorism -- so if you, jeff,
were to be logically consistent (which i hope you wouldn't), your
feelings towards anarchists should be the same as your feelings
toward muslims . . .

🔗X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>

on 11/22/02 4:08 PM, wallyesterpaulrus wrote:

> well, every time an anarchist gets in the news these days, it's
> because they're committing an act of terrorism

I'm speaking of anarchy as the opposite of authoritarianism - what some
anarchist theorists refer to as pure anarchy.

Anarchy is what Thomas Jefferson proposed and favored -- self-government in
which each individual was responsible for his own actions. Jefferson
speculated that under these circumstances individuals would take advantage
of this freedom (for anarchy and freedom are simply synonyms) to better
themselves and make rational decisions to improve themselves and the
environment they live in and the people they freely choose to associate
with. Jefferson believed that free (as in freedom) education was needed to
be available to those who wished to pursue it to convey these values.

Authoritarianism is where a central authority makes decisions and the
individual bears no responsibility.

For example, the imam tells you to kill so you do it and are not responsible
for your actions if what you did was wrong.

Or the government slaps a swastika on your arm and sends you out to take
over Europe. No worries mate, I'm just following orders.

Or the Grand Dragon tells you to put on a hood and go round up some negros.

Qr the preacher tells you to go beat up the guy selling controversial books
at the mall book store.

In all of these, people act not of their own volition, but by submitting
their will and giving up their identity to a charismatic leader who creates
their identity and path for them, whether it be an ethnic identity, or a
religious one.

The opposite of this is anarchy, where people are consciously aware of how
this words and chose to make their own decisions and follow their own path.

People running around and blowing themselves up and shooting women and
babies resting at home because their imam told them to is not true anarchy
at all.

- Jeff

🔗wallyesterpaulrus <wallyesterpaulrus@...>

--- In metatuning@y..., "X. J. Scott" <xjscott@e...> wrote:
> on 11/22/02 4:08 PM, wallyesterpaulrus wrote:
>
> > well, every time an anarchist gets in the news these days, it's
> > because they're committing an act of terrorism
>
> I'm speaking of anarchy as the opposite of authoritarianism - what
some
> anarchist theorists refer to as pure anarchy.
>
> Anarchy is what Thomas Jefferson proposed and favored -- self-
government in
> which each individual was responsible for his own actions. Jefferson
> speculated that under these circumstances individuals would take
advantage
> of this freedom (for anarchy and freedom are simply synonyms) to
better
> themselves and make rational decisions to improve themselves and the
> environment they live in and the people they freely choose to
associate
> with. Jefferson believed that free (as in freedom) education was
needed to
> be available to those who wished to pursue it to convey these
values.
>
> Authoritarianism is where a central authority makes decisions and
the
> individual bears no responsibility.
>
> For example, the imam tells you to kill so you do it and are not
responsible
> for your actions if what you did was wrong.
>
> Or the government slaps a swastika on your arm and sends you out to
take
> over Europe. No worries mate, I'm just following orders.
>
> Or the Grand Dragon tells you to put on a hood and go round up some
negros.
>
> Qr the preacher tells you to go beat up the guy selling
controversial books
> at the mall book store.
>
> In all of these, people act not of their own volition, but by
submitting
> their will and giving up their identity to a charismatic leader who
creates
> their identity and path for them, whether it be an ethnic identity,
or a
> religious one.
>
> The opposite of this is anarchy, where people are consciously aware
of how
> this words and chose to make their own decisions and follow their
own path.

everything you say above is fine, and none of it is new to me.

> People running around and blowing themselves up and shooting women
and
> babies resting at home because their imam told them to is not true
anarchy
> at all.
>
> - Jeff

of course it isn't. who suggested it was? all i meant was that quite
a few of the terrorists out there are fanatical muslims, while quite
a few are anarchists instead. but this is no reason to villify all
members of either group!!

🔗Joel Rodrigues <jdrodrigues@...>

On Friday, November 22, 2002, at 03:39 , metatuning@yahoogroups.com wrote:

> From: "X. J. Scott" <xjscott@...>
> Subject: Re: Re: the truth about muslims
>
> on 11/21/02 11:23 AM, John Starrett wrote:
>
>> How about encouraging more atheists and agnostics to immigrate >> instead?
>
> I understand where you are coming from with this, but weren't > Lenin, Stalin
> and Mao Tse Tung all atheists?
>
> - Jeff

I've seen this argument from various (mostly Christian) quarters before. It's a deceptive red herring. It also means one of two things. Either you don't understand what atheism means, or you wouldn't mind discrediting atheism.

An example of bullshit of the latter kind is here:

<http://kenraggio.com/KRPN-Chaos.htm>

This page illustrates (and save me a whole bunch of half-assed typing) the error in your offering the three idiots as examples of how atheism is not the answer. Read it if you dare. It's aptly titled, 'The Revenge of the Petty Bourgeoisie Intelligentsia'

<http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/features/2000/payne1.html>

Also see here for more:

<http://www.positiveatheism.org/mail/eml9892.htm>

Oh and Hitler was an altar boy. Doesn't mean much. You see being Christian was not an issue for him, it was incidental to his existence. What made him the twit he was is that he was an Aryan supremacist.

A present example of someone who is dangerous to a large degree *because* he is a Christian is the Pretend-King George. Clinton is Christian too, but his personal religious beliefs never were an issue.

Hi Starret, given my fear of guns, republicans, and the US Federal govt. (too much American TV maybe ?), I plan on visiting at some point too say hello to all you nice xenharmonic-type people, but there's no way I'd stay. Viva Europa.

Cheers,
Joel

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@...>

🔗X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>

🔗John Starrett <jstarret@...>

--- In metatuning@y..., "X. J. Scott" <xjscott@e...> wrote:
> > Colorado is a Republican stronghold, but they still allow us to grow our own
> > food
>
> This may be at risk.
>
> Two years ago the USDA tried to get me to sign some forms allowing me
> permission to grow crops on my own property in return for giving them
> permission to search my property without a warrant at any time.
>
> I refused of course and was required to write a letter explaining why.
>
> Last week some USDA agents came onto the farm and searched my greenhouse
> without a warrant -- I suppose they were looking for pot. All they found was
> some tomatoes, peppers and brussel sprouts.
>
> - Jeff

Jeff, I would guess you are on a number of lists. This sounds so foreign to the vision of the founding fathers, it is sickening. Can you give us more information on this incident?

John Starrett

🔗X. J. Scott <xjscott@...>

on 11/23/02 1:48 AM, John Starrett wrote:

>> Two years ago the USDA tried to get me to sign some forms allowing me
>> permission to grow crops on my own property in return for giving them
>> permission to search my property without a warrant at any time.
>>
>> I refused of course and was required to write a letter explaining why.
>>
>> Last week some USDA agents came onto the farm and searched my greenhouse
>> without a warrant -- I suppose they were looking for pot. All they found was
>> some tomatoes, peppers and brussel sprouts.
>>
>> - Jeff
>
> Jeff, I would guess you are on a number of lists. This sounds so foreign to
> the vision of the founding fathers, it is sickening. Can you give us more
> information on this incident?

Well there's two incidents -- the form incident, and the search incident.

There's not too much to either one of them.

In the form incident, I got a letter from them saying I had to sign it. I
think the reason given was some bill that had passed dealing with required
disclosure of acreage - exactly how much you were farming and what you were
growing and had grown and were planning to grow. The form implied that your
plans on what you were going to grow in the future were subject to their
approval or denial. Note that I do not accept any sort of government farm
aid or anything like that. The authority was of course the interstate
commerce clause. I went down to the local USDA office to argue it with them
and they said I was the only person to complain and that all farms in the
county had gotten the letter and everyone else was signing it. I don't
remember exactly how the conversation went but I was pretty aroused over the
whole thing and most likely talked about facism and if anyone wanted to stop
me from growing vegetables on my own property they could come out and try
and stop me and so forth. I remember that I was especially upset about the
part where in order to get their approval I had to 'voluntarily' waive my
right to seaches by probable cause. They said that if I had an objection I
could write a letter stating why I could not comply with the requirement and
it would be reviewed by some board. So I did and a few weeks later there was
a message on the answering machine saying I would not have to comply with
the requirement but that whether or not I signed it they did not need
probable cause to inspect my property and that the agents did not normally
search houses but just were there to 'verify' what crops were being grown.

Since that, when discussing it with people, I did hear reports that other
people occasionally saw USDA people coming on to their land for these
verification visits. I don't know how widespread it is or how often the
checks are. They don't announce themselves or ask permission it seems so its
hard to tell if the recent one is the first visit. It's possible it is since
I only recently put the plastic sheeting on top of my two small greenhouses
for the year -- this was probably spotted by the USDA spotting plane that
flies over the farm about once a week while making its rounds.

I don't know what the deal is with this stuff and the local USDA office was
sympathetic to my plight after I explained myself. I think the general idea
was that they don't agree with this but what can they do they are just
following orders and have to do what congress says.

Another issue is that you can't buy plain manure anymore around here,
apparently it's illegal to sell it or to use it. Can only buy 'processed'
manure, which is 40% or so manure that has been processed in an oven and the
rest 'organic and inorganic materials', which are not specified but I assume
it's industrial waste (which is what is added to the chemical fertilizers as
filler) and won't use it - I use goat poop now instead but I have been
informed that it is now technically illegal for me to sell vegetables to
people because I am using dangerous, unprocessed and ungovernment-approved
raw manure.

I see it all as part of the attack against family farms and against
nonchemical and organic farming. Also against people who have retreated and
are trying to live free from government interference.

- Jeff