Islamic Totalitarianism: A Manifesto

[ablarc]

MANIFESTO:

Together facing the new totalitarianism

After having overcome fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism, the world now faces a new totalitarian global threat: Islamism.

We, writers, journalists, intellectuals, call for resistance to religious totalitarianism and for the promotion of freedom, equal opportunity and secular values for all.

The recent events, which occurred after the publication of drawings of Muhammed in European newspapers, have revealed the necessity of the struggle for these universal values. This struggle will not be won by arms, but in the ideological field. It is not a clash of civilisations nor an antagonism of West and East that we are witnessing, but a global struggle that confronts democrats and theocrats.

Like all totalitarianisms, Islamism is nurtured by fears and frustrations. The hate preachers bet on these feelings in order to form battalions destined to impose a liberticidal and unegalitarian world. But we clearly and firmly state: nothing, not even despair, justifies the choice of obscurantism, totalitarianism and hatred. Islamism is a reactionary ideology which kills equality, freedom and secularism wherever it is present. Its success can only lead to a world of domination: man’s domination of woman, the Islamists’ domination of all the others. To counter this, we must assure universal rights to oppressed or discriminated people.

We reject « cultural relativism », which consists in accepting that men and women of Muslim culture should be deprived of the right to equality, freedom and secular values in the name of respect for cultures and traditions. We refuse to renounce our critical spirit out of fear of being accused of "Islamophobia", an unfortunate concept which confuses criticism of Islam as a religion with stigmatisation of its believers.

We plead for the universality of freedom of expression, so that a critical spirit may be exercised on all continents, against all abuses and all dogmas.

We appeal to democrats and free spirits of all countries that our century should be one of Enlightenment, not of obscurantism.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Chahla Chafiq
Caroline Fourest
Bernard-Henri Lévy
Irshad Manji
Mehdi Mozaffari
Maryam Namazie
Taslima Nasreen
Salman Rushdie
Antoine Sfeir
Philippe Val
Ibn Warraq

[ablarc]

A KIND OF GODLINESS
Pictures from Today’s News, February 28, 2006

I. Soldiers in the Front Line

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/240.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/250.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/255.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/260.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/265.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/270.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/275.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/280.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/285.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/290.JPG

[ablarc]

II. Holy Man

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/320.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/330.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/340.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/350.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/360.JPG

[ablarc]

III. The Hope of Glory

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/420.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/430.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/440.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/450.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/455.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/457.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/460.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/470.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/480.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/490.JPG

[ablarc]

IV. Meat

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/510.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/520.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/530.JPG

V. Reward

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/493.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/494.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/496.JPG

http://66.230.220.70/images/post/islamictotalitarianism/495.JPG

[ZippyTheChimp]

Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Chahla Chafiq
Caroline Fourest
Bernard-Henri Lévy
Irshad Manji
Mehdi Mozaffari
Maryam Namazie
Taslima Nasreen
Salman Rushdie
Antoine Sfeir
Philippe Val
Ibn Warraq
Mr Rushdie can give the others advice on how to live with an execution fatwa hanging over your head.

[ablarc]

There's a sense in which we all have one. Twenty-seven hundred and something folks in the WTC had that fatwa called in.

[ablarc]

Quotations from Rushdie

"I don't think there is a need for an entity like God in my life." -- From an interview with David Frost.

"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist." -- From The Swedish "Censorship" Homepage

"I do not envy people who think they have a complete explanation of the world, for the simple reason that they are obviously wrong." --From an interview with David Frost (PBS)

[czsz]

"What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist."

Just because one has the liberty to offend does not mean that it should be deployed in unwise situations. A liberal society is held together by conventions of civility, tact, and politesse.

[ablarc]

^ Goes without saying. Like the freedom to bear arms, it needs to be exercised judiciously.

Wish some of that judiciousness would rub off on folks in the Middle East. We're not perfect, but we're not rabid.

[dragonslayer]

this post scares me. its time the moderate moslems made themselves heard - if not the future for the non islamic world looks very bleak indeed.

[ablarc]

this post scares me. its time the moderate moslems made themselves heard - if not the future for the non islamic world looks very bleak indeed.
Are you islamic, dragonslayer?

[Viktorkrum77]

I hate those who stereotype Islam. Not all Muslim's are extremists, even those who are are not like Osama Bin Laden and such.

I've personally studied Islam (apart from other religions as well), and it's wrong to stereotype any religion. If you ever travel to the Middle East (traveled to Oman, UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Bahrain) you'll understand more about Islam, and that it truly is a peaceful religion (despite Saudi law).

[ablarc]

I hate those who stereotype Islam.
It's extremist to hate anybody.

That's what's so disturbing about those pictures. All that hate ...

Sunnis hate Shiites, Shiites hate Sunnis, they unite only to hate yet others: Danish cartoonists, popes ...

The thread that unites is hate. The thread that divides is hate.

You'd think folks would get tired of standing on principle, kick back a little, and live out their lives. You only get to do it once.

It's not like all that death and hate makes folks happy. And I can't believe God is such a jerk that it pleases him. They could just cut it out.

There's more than a little foolishness on display.

.

[BrooklynRider]

I disagree. Islam is a very extreme religion in this modern world. A practicinng muslim, by religious nature, is an extremist. I'm a pretty liberal guy, but I think Islam is at complete odds with western civilization. I say shut the door on Islamic immigration.

Let the flaming begin.

[ZippyTheChimp]

if not the future for the non islamic world looks very bleak indeed.I think it's the future of the Islamic world that looks bleak. These people aren't getting anywhere.

By Islamic world, I mean the theocratic variety. Places like Tunisia are doing fine. Lebanon could, if they would just leave it alone.

[ablarc]

Places like Tunisia are doing fine.
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_73/ai_109220707

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Tunisia

Interesting that they ban Hijab. Just like France. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab

.

[MidtownGuy]

Christianity, as practiced by some, reeks with hate and violence. Has for millenia.
The value, or nature, of Christianity in our modern society could also be debated.These generalities are troublesome to me. Why not close the door on all religious fanatics?
Ablarc, I'm curious, have you done any traveling to moderate Islamic countries?

[BrooklynRider]

I can't argue with your points.

[ablarc]

Ablarc, I'm curious, have you done any traveling to moderate Islamic countries?
Only Islamic countries I've been to are Egypt, Yemen, Iran, Lebanon, Turkey and Bosnia, though I guess that's over half the moderates.


Christianity, as practiced by some, reeks with hate and violence. Has for millenia.
Wouldn't go near this issue with you; can't have a discussion with one who's ex cathedra.


The value, or nature, of Christianity in our modern society could also be debated.
Indeed it could, but not with an ideologue.


Why not close the door on all religious fanatics?
You'd need to have people making decisions about who is or isn't one of these. Wouldn't want to find you in this role. ;).

[You're a bit of an extremist yourself, you know (that's alright, don't change; you might give up too many good things about yourself at the same time!). :)]




Btw, if you want exposure to the opinions of liberal Islamic moderates, read the first post in this thread.

[MidtownGuy]

can't have a discussion with one who's ex cathedra.

Papal infallibility? Please clarify.:confused:



Only Islamic countries I've been to are Egypt, Yemen, Iran, Lebanon, Turkey and Bosnia, though I guess that's over half the moderates.

Surprised. Your absolute proclamations led me to believe otherwise. Some of your presentation seems almost, well, "ex cathedra ".
I've been to all the countries on your list, and you can add Morocco and Sudan. My experiences and/or observations were evidently different from yours.


The value, or nature, of Christianity in our modern society could also be debated.
Indeed it could, but not with an ideologue.

Yeah, Christians are unable to get past their ideology. Jews too.


You'd need to have people making decisions about who is or isn't one of these. Wouldn't want to find you in this role.

Or you, for that matter! Actually, you've inadvertantly substantiated the point I was making...who decides? That's the problem.


[You're a bit of an extremist yourself, you know (that's alright, don't change; you might give up too many good things about yourself at the same time!).
I'm hardly an extremist, ablarc. The extremist proclamations and generalizations of other people (you in this case), however, tend to bring it out of the other side in response. Which, of course, is a phenomenon of the larger problem we're discussing.


Btw, if you want exposure to the opinions of liberal Islamic moderates, read the first post in this thread.

Please explain what makes you think I didn't.

[MidtownGuy]

I don't like religious fanaticism of any kind. My posts are not a defense of Islamic extremists, but rather an attempt to inject a little balanced thinking in a thread whose pictures, under variously applied headings, raise questions. It isn't so much what you said in words,(you measure those carefully), but rather the statement you were making with the collection of photos.
It might have been more useful if the identity of some of these images would accompany their placement, as in your other illuminating threads. :)
What exactly is being pictured? A boy lays on a bed, wounded from violence.
Is this Iraq? Palestine? Situations are different. Apparently he is a boy soldier, going by your title "Soldiers on the Front line". Wounded by Islamic totalitarianism, or our bombs , I don't know. I have seen countless pictures of such casualties resulting from American or Israeli aggression. Then you've got a bunch of women wearing black and looking pissed at something. Throw in some pictures of explosions and dead people, and there you have it, proof that folks in the Middle East could use some of the
enlightenment that so guides the actions of us in the West. Never mind that
a lot of the images pictured are a result of the meddlesome and misguided
actions of those same Westerners that you imply are somehow less violent.

No need to ask my religion. I think all three Abrahamic religions have serious problems with the way they have been practiced and used to justify violence. In my opinion, they all have a totalitarian element.

[Ninjahedge]

I disagree. Islam is a very extreme religion in this modern world. A practicinng muslim, by religious nature, is an extremist. I'm a pretty liberal guy, but I think Islam is at complete odds with western civilization. I say shut the door on Islamic immigration.

Let the flaming begin.
You take your pain killers this morning BR, or are you just throwing chum into the water for shts and giggles?

:confused:

[Capn_Birdseye]

I disagree. Islam is a very extreme religion in this modern world. A practicinng muslim, by religious nature, is an extremist. I'm a pretty liberal guy, but I think Islam is at complete odds with western civilization. I say shut the door on Islamic immigration.

Let the flaming begin.
Although I might not express it in the same words I agree with the sentiments as expressed by BrooklynRider.
The rise of fundamental radical Islam is an attack on Western Christian-Judean Civilisation. As more and more Moslems emmigrate to Western European countries they are setting up parallel cultures and organisations within those established communities - you have only to look at many major cities & towns in the UK to realise the dramatic changes that have taken place. In some places you could actually believe, looking around you, that you were in a Moslem country. The flawed concept of "multi-culturalism" as espoused by our third-rate politicians have caused the problem and continues to do so. We now have Moslem schools being set up in many of the towns and cities populated by the immigrants, a form of "religious apartheid" that excerbates divisions within our communities.

[dragonslayer]

Are you islamic, dragonslayer?

No i'm one of the 'Kuffar' (as a charming moslem holy man currently residing in belmarsh prison here in london calls the non-believer). why do you ask?

[ablarc]

No i'm one of the 'Kuffar' ... why do you ask?
Thought you might be one of the moderate muslims needing to make themselves heard.

[dragonslayer]

Thought you might be one of the moderate muslims needing to make themselves heard.

A moderate muslim. The more i think about this the less convinced i am that there are any.

[Capn_Birdseye]

A moderate muslim.
About as rare as a hen with teeth I'd say. Moderation and Islam are contradictions in terms - try being a practising Christian in Saudi Arabia, that loyal US ally!! You can't even build a church let alone wear a cross.

[PhilosopherWarrior]

Islamic doctrine requires UTTER submission in every mind that accepts mohamedd as "alla s" mouthpiece. It is desperately built around "pillars" that so envelop one's minute-by-minute perseptions that a person has only so many personal "freedoms" and no real social choices at all.
The day begins with specific details of when and how to pray, and what to say.. and how often one must repeat rhythmic monotonous peons of self submission. Every pious muslim is beholden to his religious leaders direct and specific directives. ANY self-described "cleric" can proclaim action BY the faithful for any personal analysis of "disrespect" or heresy.
In truth islam is a religion that has NOT endured the growing phase known as the "reformation".

Imagine a world were the christian civilization was still a feudalistic/aristocratic THEOCRACY, were domestic politics happened between factions of faiths.. all maneauvering under the jealous eye of a Papal "caliphate"...
You above describe christian atrocities?
They happened when the masses were still impotent serfs "submitting" to religious despots rule.
That Islam IS antithetical, contradictory, and systemically opposed to democratic INDIVIDUALISM goes without saying...
the insanity of arming, sympathising with, and legitimizing this cancerous ideology is apparent to some of us.

[Ninjahedge]

INTERESTING, I think we all get your POINT on the matter, but it might HELP if you didn't CAPITALIZE so many words in your STATEMENT to try and evoke EMPHASIS.

It kind of DEFEATS the original PURPOSE, you know?

[Capn_Birdseye]

INTERESTING, I think we all get your POINT on the matter, but it might HELP if you didn't CAPITALIZE so many words in your STATEMENT to try and evoke EMPHASIS.

It kind of DEFEATS the original PURPOSE, you know?
I believe PhilosopherWarrior expressed his views eminently and his emphasis through the use of capitals was both balanced and correct. Thank you PW, and by the way I totally agree with your comments.

[Meerkat]

A very interesting book i've just read:

http://www.melaniephillips.com/londonistan/

http://www.encounterbooks.com/books/londonistan/

Anyone here defending Islam should read it.

[Bob]

I recently read (and recommend) "Because They Hate," by Brigitte Gabriel. The book is extremely well written and inciteful. Some of the passages are downright brilliant. Among the author's observations is that "some cultures ARE better than others." I know at first glance that sounds crass, but she defends her positions throughout with crystal clarity. Finest book I have read since Oriana Fallaci's masterwork, "The Rage and the Pride."

[Meerkat]

http://www.sullivan-county.com/images1/islam3.jpg

http://www.sullivan-county.com/images1/behead1.jpg
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/images/british_women.jpg


This is 21st century London - my city. You'll see these images all over Europe, and nothing is ever done to stop it. Food for thought really.

[Ninjahedge]

How many were at that rally Meer?

Are you saying that we should not allow them to protest? Maybe that London should go totalitarian and forbid anyone from opposing what i sthere?

I do not agree with what they are saying, or the fact that they hide their faces (maybe they should just use the thermal imaging cameras they have and get a facial imprint of these people and try ot trae what is going on...), but that is their choice. And meeting this choice and action withhatred only fuels the fire.

Hey, you know sometimes the best way to see what your potential enemies are doing is to let them come out and show you rather than forcing them to hide and only seing them when they attack.

Keep your friends close, and enemies closer. Some enemies become friends when they realize that you are not as different as they were told you were.

[Meerkat]

How many were at that rally Meer?

Are you saying that we should not allow them to protest? Maybe that London should go totalitarian and forbid anyone from opposing what i sthere?

I do not agree with what they are saying, or the fact that they hide their faces (maybe they should just use the thermal imaging cameras they have and get a facial imprint of these people and try ot trae what is going on...), but that is their choice. And meeting this choice and action withhatred only fuels the fire.

Hey, you know sometimes the best way to see what your potential enemies are doing is to let them come out and show you rather than forcing them to hide and only seing them when they attack.

Keep your friends close, and enemies closer. Some enemies become friends when they realize that you are not as different as they were told you were.

I think there were a couple of hundred, but can't remember exactly. This protest was in answer to the Danish cartoons a few months ago.
Obviously living in a democracy everyone has the right to voice their opinion, and i'm not suggesting that these people should be banned from demonstrating.
The main problem i have is that foreign born Islamic preechers have been entering England for 2 decades now and have been allowed to preech violence and hate at a number of mosques. The government did nothing about this until after very recently and i fear that by allowing them to incite young moslems to violence, we now have a problem which appears to be almost out of control. Abu Hamza is a good example. He is an Egyptian born 'cleric', now a British citizen (and currently in prison). There are links between him and a number of terrorists (the 'shoe' bomber Richard Reid being one). There are other preechers who have actively promoted 'holy war' on the 'none believers' here for many years and i blame the government for allowing this. What they should have done was deport these trouble makers in the first place - instead they seem more concerned with their human rights.

[ablarc]

"In dictatorships, you need courage to fight evil; in the free world, you need courage to see the evil."

--Natan Sharansky

[Ninjahedge]

I think they need more houseplants!!! ;)

[Meerkat]

I think they need more houseplants!!! ;)


Unfortunately my houseplants seem to die soon after i but them. I bought some Ivy for my bedroom when i moved into my new flat 3 months ago and its already dead. I think i may have overwatered it.

[ablarc]

Former Member of Radical Islam Questions Faction


July 6, 2007 from Morning Edition, National Public Radio


One of the more vivid voices marking the second anniversary of London's July 7 attacks is that of Hassan Butt. He's calling on Muslims to renounce terror, and he speaks from experience: Butt spent years inside what he calls "Britain's jihadi network."

On two occasions, he met with Mohammed Sidique Khan, the leader of the July 7 bombings, who, like Hassan Butt, was born and raised in Britain. Now in his 20s, Hassan Butt was recruited in the late 1990s, while still a teenager, joining radical Islamist groups that were then little known in Britain.

He traveled to his parents' homeland of Pakistan. There, he recruited others, and most dramatically, called publicly for "martyrdom actions."

Presciently, he predicted in a BBC interview that young Britons who traveled to Afghanistan to fight alongside the Taliban would eventually return to mount terrorist attacks at home. When Hassan Butt returned to Britain in 2002, just a year after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, he was arrested, his passport confiscated, and he was placed under surveillance by British authorities.

Then in early 2006, he made a public break with the jihadi network.
He spoke to Renee Montagne from his hometown of Manchester, England, to talk about the terror network of which he was once a member. The conversation began with the latest, foiled, attacks in Britain, in which the alleged attackers were all either doctors or medical personnel.

Listen to the interview here:

http://www.npr.org/templates/dmg/popup.php?id=11781188&type=7&date=&au=1&pid=12411341&random=2327054744&guid=000B37C572EA0691637517FC61626364&uaType=WM&aaType=RM,WM&upf=Win32&topicName=News&subtopicName=World&prgCode=ME&hubId=-1&thingId=11778628&tableModifier=&mtype=WM


* * *


Somewhat watered-down selections from the interview:


RENEE MONTAGNE, host: One of the most vivid voices now calling on Muslims to renounce terror is that of a young man who himself spent years inside Britain’s radical jihadi network. Hassan Butt was recruited while still in school. He went on to recruit others during his stay in Pakistan, and most dramatically called publicly for martyrdom actions.

When he returned to Britain in 2002, just over a year after the 9/11 attacks, he was arrested and his passport was confiscated.

Then in early 2006, Hassan Butt left the jihadi network. He joined us from his hometown of Manchester, England, to talk about the terror network he was once part of and spoke for.

Mr. HASSAN BUTT (Activist/ Commentator): There isn’t one model for people who become radicalized or people who turn towards terrorism. I think that needs to be understood from the beginning. People have different backgrounds, different histories, but the joining factor of all these people is the fact that they all believe in Islam and they all believe that the work that they’re doing pleases God.

So, I guess, when I was approached at the age of 17, I was actually - I grew up in an area of Manchester where we had a lot of racism. So, as a result, I guess these people came along and they gave me this version of Islam. And they’d seen that we were involved in gangs and we were involved in violence. And these people actually gave me a type of new outlook to life and they kind of empowered me with Islamic ideas.

MONTAGNE: As you describe yourself one might think that you were somehow deprived or uneducated, but in fact, as I understand it, you were quite a successful scholar and your family was not poor.

Mr. BUTT: You’re right. I grew up in a very prosperous family. My elder brothers are doctors. My younger brother is a successful businessman. But I guess actually what happened was my first high school that I went to was a majority white high school and I suffered a lot of racism. And I really wasn’t getting through my studies as smoothly as, for example, my parents would want me to. They then moved me along to a school that was predominantly Muslim and in a different area of Manchester. And actually as a result I made friends with people there and those people are involved in gangs and probably did come from a lot more deprived backgrounds.

MONTAGNE: You were part of radical Islam, as you would call it yourself, for several years and you recruited others. What did you tell those you were talking to that they found the most compelling?

Mr. BUTT: Obviously, we’d talk about the atrocities that were taking place in Palestine, in Iraq, the atrocities that were being committed by Muslim governments with the support or with the silence, I guess, of the Western regimes. And these would be inspiring factors, but this wouldn’t be the thing that would turn someone from a normal political activist to someone who would turn to militant radical Islam. It became us teaching these people that the only solution Islamicly that we have is to fight these people and to kill these people. And we would use Islamic theology and we would show them that the work we were engaging in was an obligation upon Muslims, using various interpretations of the Koran and various interpretations of the saying of the Prophet Muhammad.

MONTAGNE: And the word terrorist, that wasn’t part of the vocabulary.

Mr. BUTT: No, we actually - I mean, we were quite proud of the fact that we will be called terrorists. I mean, there’s a verse in the Koran which means, strike fear into the hearts of the unbelievers. We would actually say terrorism is part of Islam. It’s not something against Islam. This word was actually used in the Koran; it comes from the word irhab. And, you know, this wasn’t something that we were ashamed of.

MONTAGNE: What made you leave?

Mr. BUTT: It was a long process. When I came back to Britain after leaving Pakistan, there was a lot of questions in my head, and if I be, you know, completely honest, those questions initially weren’t doubts. Those questions were appearing so that I could have more conviction in carrying out the work that I was carrying out. Over time, when these things weren’t being explained, I really then began to question everything that I had done. And I really began to think, well, is this really being done in the name of Islam or is this being done in the name of some political agenda. For me, these people became murderers who just enjoyed killing and causing havoc rather than trying to achieve any type of stability as a result of it.

MONTAGNE: Well, what you’ve just said sounds – may be utterly accurate, but it sounds like an intellectual process. And I think there is so much emotion tied up in these attacks. You could look at the July 7th attacks, for instance, or any of these attacks, and say, oh, my gosh, those people had – they’re innocent, you know. They had families.

Mr. BUTT: Yeah.

MONTAGNE: They’re just trying to make their way in the world. Was there an emotional component to your change, or even a spiritual component?

Mr. BUTT: As a Muslim, I don’t take away my spirituality from my intellectual. I mean, it was - I mean, I was sitting here thinking how is it possible for me to justify killing people, like you’ve said, who are just going and earning a living or going and trying to get back to their families, or people who don’t even know anything about international politics. So I guess, yeah, there was a certain emotion that was in me. But I guess, for me, the way we are brought up within the network is to detach ourselves from our emotions and to think about things rationally and logically.

MONTAGNE: You have since spoken out on the other side.

Mr. BUTT: Yeah.

MONTAGNE: And one of the things you say is that the interpretation of Islam has to be updated.

Mr. BUTT: Yeah.

MONTAGNE: Out of, as you’ve put it, the Middle Ages. Elaborate on that.

Mr. BUTT: For a long time, a lot of people, especially the moderate Muslims, have been talking about how peaceful Islam is and how loving Islam is. And what they’ve tended to do is ignore the verses and chapters in the Koran that talk about violence, that talk about killing. And they’ve hope by ignoring it or being in denial about it that this problem will disappear. And this hasn’t been the actual case.

If I’m a young Muslim who has picked up the Koran and come across certain chapters in it and in there it says, kill the unbelievers until they become Muslim, fight them until they say (speaking foreign language). You know, if a young Muslim reads that and he goes to the mosque and the mosque says, oh, don’t ask questions like this, or the moderate Muslims says, oh, don’t discuss things like this. If they then go to the radical Muslim who is willing to discuss this Koranic chapter, then naturally he’s going to become inclined towards him because this person is giving him answers to questions that his mind has.

And so hence what I’m calling for is there to be an open debate. Firstly, we need to be able to go back to the books of Islam and to be able to do a new, what we call ijtihad, or create a new reality and explain. Hang on a second, you know, everything that was written in the medieval times is not applicable today. And then that new reality needs to be addressed to young Muslims.

MONTAGNE: Have you met with suspicion on the part of, say, the moderates that you want to reach?

Mr. BUTT: Yeah. I mean…

MONTAGNE: Or your former groups? Do they say you must be an informer, somebody must be paying you?

Mr. BUTT: Yeah. I’ve had people accusing me of being a traitor, people accusing me of never really understanding Islam. The moderates accuse me of jumping on the bandwagon of making Islam look bad because they don’t want Islam to change, I guess.

MONTAGNE: And British authorities, I mean, surely they were watching you over those years that you were an extreme radical.

Mr. BUTT: Yeah.

MONTAGNE: What’s been your experience now?

Mr. BUTT: I’ve been contacted by the security services. And one thing that I’ve stressed to everybody is, my issue isn’t to have, you know, handful of people arrested. You know, I won’t be appearing in court against anybody. My aim is to change a whole generation of Muslims and not just have a handful of Muslims arrested which they already have under surveillance anyway.

MONTAGNE: Thank you very much for joining us.

Mr. BUTT: Not a problem at all. Thank you.

MONTAGNE: Hassan Butt spoke to us from Manchester, England. Until last year, he was a prominent public voice for Britain’s radical jihadi network. You can hear an extended version of our interview at npr.org.


You’re listening to MORNING EDITION from NPR News.


Copyright ©1990-2005 National Public Radio®. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to National Public Radio.

[lofter1]

My aim is to change a whole generation of Muslims ...

-- Hassan Butt


Mr. Butts certainly has his work cut out for him. Too bad he didn't figure this out sooner.

But why does what he describes surprise anyone?

It's an old story.

Various types of folk for thousands for years have been marching off to kill in order to please their "gods".

Mankind is a twisted mess of stuff.

[ablarc]

It's a common mistake to lump all gods and prophets together in the urge-to-mayhem category. That's facilitated by the fact that purported adherents offend the spirit of their own creed (Pat Robertson re Hugo Chavez); thus casual observers mistake the messenger's fabrication for the message.

Do you suppose that correct adherence to peaceful Buddhism leads inevitably to violence? Jains avoid stepping on sidewalk ants. Christians are exhorted to turn the other cheek and love their neighbor. When --as often happens-- they don't, it's not because they're following their creed's teachings, but because they're in violation.

Islam is different from that. Allah clearly and specifically requires killing by his followers under certain circumstances --such as the ones that prevail today and until the eventual global hegemony of Islam.

As in the case of Marxism, National Socialism and Bonapartism, the goal is world domination --and it's both political and military (oh, and spiritual, too).

Don't take my word for it; read the Koran. The translation I recommend is by Abdullah Yusuf Ali (a good read).

[212]

Well, ablarc, since you seem to be thinking about this issue a lot ...
Assuming you're right* that the problem is literal Islam itself, what kind of policies should the Western democracies pursue toward the Islamic world, including their own Muslim populations? Engagement? Aid? Containment? Walls? Threats? Deals?

(*Personally, I doubt the Koran is really the problem. But rather than argue, I'm curious to hear some prescriptions from someone like you who's traveled widely in the Mideast and Europe.)

[ablarc]

Well, ablarc, since you seem to be thinking about this issue a lot ...
Assuming you're right* that the problem is literal Islam itself, what kind of policies should the Western democracies pursue toward the Islamic world, including their own Muslim populations? Engagement? Aid? Containment? Walls? Threats? Deals?
http://66.230.220.70/images/post/muslims/322.jpg

Deals.



(Don't think they'll work though. Likely it's already a lost cause.)

Read the Koran.

[212]

Deals.

It's a beautiful New Yorker cover -- and it's the current one, no less, so apropos. That's the social contract that works here in NYC. And Toronto. Coexistence and grudging respect.
It works less perfectly in London and Amsterdam.
It might yet work in Dubai.
It used to work in Cairo, right?

What kind of deals do you have in mind?

[212]

Read the Koran.

Oh, I read a bit of it some months ago (just a bit), when MissIndia was trying to spread the word on WNY. To me it read like ... a seventh century religious text. I'm perfectly willing to accept that the Koran says what you say it does.

But we humans have a very long history of softpedaling our religious texts whenever they get inconvenient. Islam has been around for almost 1,400 years. Has it been a mortal threat all this time? Or just at specific times?

[ablarc]

What kind of deals do you have in mind?
Enlarge the loophole. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1539219/posts
http://www.mideastyouth.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=611
http://www.tomgreen.com/uso.php

[ablarc]

To me it read like ... a seventh century religious text. I'm perfectly willing to accept that the Koran says what you say it does.

But we humans have a very long history of softpedaling our religious texts whenever they get inconvenient. Islam has been around for almost 1,400 years. Has it been a mortal threat all this time? Or just at specific times?
It's a threat now, and it's growing.

* * *


Love is better than war.

Even "love" is better than war.

[212]

Enlarge the loophole. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1539219/posts
http://www.mideastyouth.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=611
http://www.tomgreen.com/uso.php

You'd like to make the world Bahrain ...
Well, you're exceptionally well read, and I enjoyed the links.

One of the comments in the FreeRepublic thread is close to my thinking on our problems in the Islamic world -- at least in Saudi Arabia and to some extent Pakistan and Egypt:

"Middle Eastern tyrants have long encouraged radical religion and funded Madrassas to keep the anger of their poor, illiterate masses directed at anyone but themselves. Conveniently, the tyrants also exercise rigid control over the local media, so that their people never see their debauchery. Only in recent years has the House of Saud -- notable but by no means alone in this -- seen the radicalism it has fostered come back to bite its own pampered butt."

I think that over the decades the West has been so desperate for stability in the region (keeps the oil flowing) that we've ended up supporting some dreadful regimes against their own people. The regimes crush their liberal democracy movements, and co-opt the big mosques, and the only independent power centers end up being the radical clerics. The regimes' media blame us for supporting Israel, and the radical clerics blame us for supporting the regimes. When the regimes crack down, their weapons are Made in the USA.
Fertile ground for recruiting terrorists against us.

I'd say putting some distance between us and the regimes would help, but we may be in too deep ...

[Mohamed]

Ok, can i understand that is the justice

http://www.roshangari.com/as/sitedata/20050119163924/G_ta_E_D_Iraq-1.jpg


http://www.watein.com/4images/albums/userpics/Animation3.gif

http://www.alwatan.com.sa/daily/2006-10-05/Pictures/photos/0510.Pol.P2.N210.jpg

========================================
that is the backwardness
(Dubai)
http://www.arabic.xinhuanet.com/arabic/2005-10/18/xin_e46ea12e71dc4c6e890803230291eedd.jpg


http://losaan.com/uploader/pic/fdaey_dubaitrain05.jpg


(Cairo)

http://arabic.cairo.grand.hyatt.com/picsbig/p36388p001.jpg

http://touregypt.net/featurestories/nightcairo.jpg

http://www.al-vefagh.com/1384/840305/html/005553.jpg


I confess there is a backwardness
why? because you control us
==================================

قال صلى الله عليه وسلم (طلب العلم فريضة على كل مسلم و مسلمة )

Mouamed told ( Males and Females must learn)

[ablarc]

^ Those prison guards at Abu Ghraib and those of their handlers who can be proved to have known of these atrocities (all the way up the chain of command --to the president himself, possibly) should be tried for high crimes. It's a small group, but unfortunately they control the government.

If you abandon the high road, you have to go on the defensive. More than anything else this destroyed American credibility and replaced it with well-deserved condemnation.

Mohamed, few Americans approve of this.

[OmegaNYC]

^^^ but those who do will say:

http://www.alwatan.com.sa/daily/2006-10-05/Pictures/photos/0510.Pol.P2.N210.jpg


will turn into:



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e4/Majestic_Liberty_Large.jpg/200px-Majestic_Liberty_Large.jpg


Sadly, a chunk of 'em run this government.

[Mohamed]

Let me ask, Please,
Did you(all) read any Islamic books?, any books.
Please, read any English Islamic book

[Meerkat]

http://www.pipelinenews.org/images/hamza.jpgYes Mohamed - i've read a book about Islam in the UK, specifically about this man - Abu Hamza. Its called Londonistan by Melanie Phillips - you should read it too. Its very enlightening.

[ablarc]

Yes Mohamed - i've read a book about Islam in the UK, specifically about this man - Abu Hamza. Its called Londonistan by Melanie Phillips - you should read it too. Its very enlightening.
No, no, Meerkat; he means a book by muslims, not a book about them. ;)

[Capn_Birdseye]

I don't believe Mohamed should be given a platform on this forum. I sense he, whoever "he" actually is, is merely trying to provoke anti-American feeling under the guise of his "poor" (?) English grammar and spelling. He seems well able to find the "right" kind of images to portray in an effort to embarrass Americans, and it just makes me suspicious of "his" motives.


he means a book by muslims, not a book about them

Not a book, but an interesting interview:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/relrpt/stories/s386913.htm

[212]

Please, read any English Islamic book

What are your favorites?

[ablarc]

Not a book, but an interesting interview:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/relrpt/stories/s386913.htm
Interesting indeed: what everyone should know about Islam.

Problem is, no one in the West reads the Koran, so we're able to delude ourselves about the creed it espouses.

"Religion of peace," the President sanctimoniously intones, making believers of half the U.S.

If he actually read the Koran, he wouldn't say that.

[212]

Love is better than war.

Even "love" is better than war.

Would you like to elaborate on this, as it relates to the West and Islam? Could be interpreted any number of ways ...

[ablarc]

^ Part of Islam's problem is Dark Age puritanism. That manifests itself in the way women are treated: scarves, burkas, etc. --as though sex was their only attribute. The other side of that coin is Mohammed Atta and the boys in the strip club.

My Iranian students were connoisseurs of whiskey and whorebags to a man; when we were in New York on a field trip they would melt into Brothelworld. That's what I mean by "love."

They were real zealots about their whoring. When they returned to Teheran I bet they turned into good boys and moralists.

Decadent Western licentiousness probably engenders less murderous violence than repressed sexuality. If Larry Flynt could open a chain of clubs in Teheran...

[Mohamed]

I mean books by "moderate" Muslims about Islam .


==========================================



http://www.pipelinenews.org/images/hamza.jpg

This man,HA,"**** this man"do you Know why?Because he kills innocents(not armys)under"ISLAM" name.
He not a muslim.

bin Laden,...,.....**** them......!!!

they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.

[Capn_Birdseye]

This man,HA,"**** this man"do you Know why?Because he kills innocents(not armys)under"ISLAM" name.
He not a muslim.

bin Laden,...,.....**** them......!!!

they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
they are not muslims.
Methinks he doth protest too much ......:)

[212]

Part of Islam's problem is Dark Age puritanism. That manifests itself in the way women are treated: scarves, burkas, etc. --as though sex was their only attribute.

If we ditched our military aid to the Egyptian and Pakistani regimes, and instead poured the billions into micro-loans for women there, we might see better results.


The other side of that coin is Mohammed Atta and the boys in the strip club.

My Iranian students were connoisseurs of whiskey and whorebags to a man; when we were in New York on a field trip they would melt into Brothelworld. That's what I mean by "love."

Interesting story. And I'd guess the worst Orwellian nightmare of sexual repression would be Saudi Arabia, birthplace of most of the 9/11 terrorists and also a plurality of suicide bombers in Iraq ...


They were real zealots about their whoring. When they returned to Teheran I bet they turned into good boys and moralists.

And none of the students were women. Part of the problem.


Decadent Western licentiousness probably engenders less murderous violence than repressed sexuality. If Larry Flynt could open a chain of clubs in Teheran...

Sounds a little like Dubai, which with all its licentiousness seems immune to terrorism. (Too useful to everyone on all sides, right?)

[ablarc]

Sounds a little like Dubai, which with all its licentiousness seems immune to terrorism. (Too useful to everyone on all sides, right?)
You get the idea.

[ablarc]

Sounds a little like Dubai, which with all its licentiousness seems immune to terrorism.
Are there strip joints in Dubai?

[212]

^ Checking the internets, I found nothing beyond rumors of strip clubs in Dubai. But the prostitution is well documented.

Worth noting again here, as you did, that the 9/11 terrorists took advantage of American strip clubs and then attacked us anyway.

But I do think you're right that a sexual revolution in the Islamic world, with a demystifying of sex, would benefit everyone more than political revolutions would. A real female middle class should, in the long run, lead to better social stability and gradual democratization.

Achieving this, though, I doubt a frontal theological attack on Islamism would be most useful. Instead, how about
- micro-lending to women (http://www.grameen-info.org/bank/GBdifferent.htm)
- moral support to courageous women in the Islamic world and elsewhere (http://www.iwhc.org/getinvolved/events/2006gala/mukhtaranbibitribute.cfm)
- and support for governments based on human rights, not on which dictatorships act most conveniently for us?

[212]

I mean books by "moderate" Muslims about Islam .

Still waiting for your recommendations, Mohamed.

You can point out something on www.amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com), http://www.barnesandnoble.com/ or http://www.barnesandnoble.com/ ... they're some of our leading online book retailers.

[ablarc]

212, I like your solution, but wouldn't it take half a century or more for it to quiet the global turmoil?

By then, wouldn't they have delivered a nuke in a suitcase?

* * *

Tangentially, is a stripper more liberated than a woman in a burka?

If Dubai and Bahrain allowed it, would you advocate micro-loans to women wanting to open Hustler Club branches?

[Capn_Birdseye]

If Dubai and Bahrain allowed it, would you advocate micro-loans to women wanting to open Hustler Club branches?
I'd advocate micro mini-skirts to women, but then again I'm just a salty old seadog who has probably spent too much time at sea!

[Mohamed]

Download this books,for FREE!!!
you can download books for FREE from most Arabic sites,to make reading for all !

Enjoy this site
hundreds of books and links:

http://sultan.org/index.html#scholars


*************************************************

The Wisdom behind the Islamic Laws Regarding Women
by:Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahman ‘Abdul-Khaliq
Download: http://www.almeshkat.net/books/archive/books/book2_e.zip

*************************************************

You Ask & the Quran Answers
by: Mohamed Elesery
Download: http://saaid.net/Anshatah/dawah/You_ask.zip

**************************************************

Mohamed,The messenger Of Allah
by:Abdurrahman al-Sheha
Download: http://www.saaid.net/book/8/1405.zip


more?!

[Meerkat]

^
why are you so keen for us to read about islam?
Are you hoping, by any chance, that we will see the error of our heathen (or Kuffar) ways and convert???
If so you are waisting your time, at least with me anyway - i'm really not interested in the teachings of Mohamed.
Does this mean i should now be killed i wonder??????
Out of interest, have you ever read the bible?

[ablarc]

Meerkat: the high road, if you please.

[Meerkat]

Meerkat: the high road, if you please.


:confused: I don't know what you mean?

[ablarc]

^ Since you brought up the Bible: the high road is the one Jesus would take when replying to a provocative post.

Replying in kind is the low road.




It's all about example.

[Meerkat]

I guess in retrospect my previous comment appears abrupt, but i gain the impression that every time i meet a moslem they view it as their duty to convert me to Islam. I haven't read the Bible since school - it was just a (rather silly) point i was trying to make.

Anyway, a book i bought on Saturday and started reading today is by Ed Hussein called the Islamist:

http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/book_extracts/article1685726.ece

It may help me understand why some of my fellow countrymen would blow themselves and as many others as possible to bits.

[212]

212, I like your solution, but wouldn't it take half a century or more for it to quiet the global turmoil?

Thanks. Our previous half-century of Mideast strategy hasn't been a roaring success, so maybe it's time for a change.


By then, wouldn't they have delivered a nuke in a suitcase?

Taking the question literally -- well, the West has made some progress on radiation detectors at ports and airports. The next terrorist attacks will use weapons available domestically, just as previous attacks have.

As for our strategies against nuclear terrorism ...

- We need to limit the spread of nukes and keep working with all nations to prevent weapons and waste from falling into terrorist hands.

- Pakistan's "Islamic bomb" may seem to pose a special challenge, but the Islamist parties have never gained more than 20% in an election. For now we have more to fear from the Pakistani dictatorship (which supported the Taliban) than Pakistani democracy.

- And it's obvious to Americans (really, almost all except some very important ones) that finding the Qaeda leadership must be our top military priority, not the second priority to you-know-where. Sheesh!


If Dubai and Bahrain allowed it, would you advocate micro-loans to women wanting to open Hustler Club branches?

By some bank in the Emirates? Sure, whatever. By the U.S. Agency for International Development? Not a chance. :cool:

[212]

I glanced at the books you recommended, Mohamed, and here are my quick reactions.


You Ask & the Quran Answers
by: Mohamed Elesery
Download: http://saaid.net/Anshatah/dawah/You_ask.zip


These are verbatim answers from the Quran to some very basic questions about Islam's core beliefs ... I suppose it's meant to reassure potential converts.


Mohamed,The messenger Of Allah
by:Abdurrahman al-Sheha
Download: http://www.saaid.net/book/8/1405.zip

This one is a good read! Among other things, we get a rather detailed description, from one of his daughters, of the Prophet's physique: "His neck was [pretty] like that of a doll, and it was silvery white" .... and more. We also get to hear how the Prophet spoke (with perfect intellect, despite his lack of letters), how he conducted himself (quietly, though outraged by injustice), all about his wives, and more ... and it's written in an engaging way.



The Wisdom behind the Islamic Laws Regarding Women
by:Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahman ‘Abdul-Khaliq
Download: http://www.almeshkat.net/books/archive/books/book2_e.zip


This tract is mostly offensive to Western ears. Here's his passage about women who work here.

"In these ignorant un-Islamic societies, men are pleased with this situation as this gains for them greater gratification with women and drops from them a considerable amount of the responsibility of working and supporting her and her children. This obviously is a selfish attitude on the part of men. Sadly many women are pleased with this situation, I mean gathering between working outside the house to support herself and her natural duties of pregnancy and child birth and breast feeding. This is because of her desire for amusement and to boast; not because there is any real human or moral value in her working outside the home. Unlike what is claimed, women’s work has no real value boosting the economy. Rather the truth is that by competing with men for jobs outside the home, women are a cause in the spread of unemployment and an increase in the useless consumption of cosmetics, clothes, and perfumes that have all become necessary items for women working outside the home. Furthermore every woman that works outside the home is in most occasions a cause for denying an opportunity for a man who could work in her place. Again this is one factor in unemployment. Moreover the man who takes the place of a woman in the household cannot substitute her in her natural duties."

Yikes. And here's the rule for inheriting wealth:

"As women in Islamic law are not required to maintain themselves or others, she was given half of what men receive in inheritance in observation that she is not responsible for the maintenance of anyone and to replenish men’s wealth who alone are responsible to work and provide maintenance."

Another yikes. Mohamed, are these views mostly accepted in your country, or are they controversial?

[Mohamed]

Another yikes. Mohamed, are these views mostly accepted in your country, or are they controversial?
Of course, these views are accepted in my country (Egypt),and other countries in Africe,cause we have unemployment, most youth-girls are working,But most guys don't work .
In Khalij countries they don't care, they have employment,most women are business-women, same time most men are business-men


"As women in Islamic law are not required to maintain themselves or others, she was given half of what men receive in inheritance in observation that she is not responsible for the maintenance of anyone and to replenish men’s wealth who alone are responsible to work and provide maintenance."

cause man must providing them wifes with money

[212]

^ If I understand your post correctly -- more young women than young men are finding work in Egypt. Why is that?

[Mohamed]

I mean young women can find work easily.
Young men can't find any work

[Meerkat]

Mohamed, as a moslem, i'd like your opinion on the following statement issued by the Islamic council of Europe at a seminar held in London, on how Islamic communities in Europe should act, and eventualy gain power over the host community:
'Once the (islamic) community is well organised, its leaders should strive to seek recognition of Muslims as a religious community having its own characteristics by the authorities. Once recognised, the community should continue to request the same rights as the other religious communities enjoy in the country. Eventually the community may seek to gain political rights as a constituent community of the nation. Once these rights are obtained then the community should seek to generalise its characteristics to the entire nation'.

In England as in other parts of Europe, moslems are already demanding special treatment, with 61% of the Islamic community in the UK supporting the implementation Sharia law. This poll was carried out by the left wing Guardian newspaper.

Sayed Maududi, the head of an organisation called Jamaat al-Islami (a group which the 'moderate' Islamic foundation of Leicester, here in England supports) states 'The truith is that Islam is a revolutionary ideology which seeks to alter the social order of the entire world and rebuild it with its own tenents and ideals'. Sayed Maududi also influences the 'moderate' Muslim Council of Britain.

The Muslim council of Britain (itself infiltrated by Islamic extremists), reaction following the 2005 bomb attacks in London firstly condemmed the bombings, and them, astonishingly went on to suggest that the British should adopt a more ' Ilamic' lifestyle and way of thinking.

I could go on and write statement after statement along similar lines, but at the end of the day, isn't global domination a fundemental concept within Islam?

[Mohamed]

I could go on and write statement after statement along similar lines, but at the end of the day, isn't global domination a fundemental concept within Islam?

No,Allah told Mohamed to tell the other nation:
"لكم دينكم و لى دينى"
"You have your belief , we have our belief"

[Capn_Birdseye]

In my view Islam is an aggressive, intolerant, backward-looking, death-orientated religion that seeks to usurp other faiths, most notably Christianity. As Meerkat has already indicated, it seeks to extend its influence into Western countries and through agitation and subversion make its prescence felt beyond its numerical strength.
There is an undeclared war on between Islam & Western Judeao-Christian values, the trouble is the West hasn't woken up to the fact yet!

http://www.islam-watch.org/AyanHirsi/My-View-of-Islam.htm

http://www.apostatesofislam.com/

[ablarc]

In my view Islam is an aggressive, intolerant, backward-looking, death-orientated religion that seeks to usurp other faiths, most notably Christianity. As Meerkat has already indicated, it seeks to extend its influence into Western countries and through agitation and subversion make its prescence felt beyond its numerical strength.
There is an undeclared war on between Islam & Western Judeao-Christian values, the trouble is the West hasn't woken up to the fact yet!
Sad but true. Islam, like Nazism before it, has the long-term goal of world domination. Its short term goal is also shared with the Nazis: elimination of Jews.

How many American apologists did Hitler have in 1938?

Would he have had more if he had claimed he was a religion?

Religious tolerance says: "Respect it --even if it wants to destroy our culture."

Let's try to understand it. :cool:

[nycla3]

Compelling reading to broaden this discussion:

http://www.amazon.com/God-Not-Great-Religion-Everything/dp/0446579807

It resonated with me.

[212]

I mean young women can find work easily.
Young men can't find any work

Why can't young men find work when young women can?

[212]

Sad but true. Islam, like Nazism before it, has the long-term goal of world domination. Its short term goal is also shared with the Nazis: elimination of Jews.

Many Muslims are hostile to Jews now, but how can you say that's intrinsic to Islam?

For hundreds of years, Jews found shelter in Islamic lands when they were persecuted in Christian Europe.

Also -- today, a million Muslims are Israeli citizens, with little strife against the Jewish majority. (Quite different from the Palestinians outside Israel's 1967 borders.)

[Mohamed]

In my view Islam is an aggressive, intolerant, backward-looking, death-orientated religion that seeks to usurp other faiths, most notably Christianity.

When Mohamed came to Makka, he let Quraiesh live peacefully .
When Mohamed lose in Ouhod, he worked hard to effacing the beating and win next time .
Allah Said "
"قاتلوهم كما قاتلوكم ,و لا تعتدوا ان الله لا يحب المعتدين"
means"Fight them as they fighted you,don't start fight Allah don't like who start fight"


Why can't young men find work when young women can?

The headmasters of works, like to employment young women !!!

[Ninjahedge]

Mohamed.

One slight problem with that last statement.

It all boils down to leaders who insist on pointing fingers and screaming "he started it!!!!".

If you can convince your people, devout as they are, that some attack was made on your people, your religion, or even your IDEAS, then they are then, in their mind, instructed to fight back.

MANY religions and nations have used this as a reeason for conflict, with very few being correct.


"They attack our very way of life!!!"

Hell, it even has some Americans convinced to fight anything vaguely resembling an islamist, you think it is not being used by others in the same manner for the same basic reason?

[Mohamed]

Dear Ninjahedge,
can you give an example

[OmegaNYC]

I'm not Ninja, but I can give you one.

Remember this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War) last year?

[212]

The headmasters of works, like to employment young women !!!


Do older men also have more trouble than older women in finding work?

[Meerkat]

To everyone reading this thread i very very strongly suggest you read the two following books;

'Londonistan; how Britain is creating a terror state within', by Melanie Phillips,

and

'The Islamist' by Ed Husein.

I have read both these books this week, the latter i finished yesterday, and it's mind blowing how readicalised young Moslems in the UK have become. I seriously worry for the future of the non-islamic world.

[Capn_Birdseye]

To everyone reading this thread i very very strongly suggest you read the two following books;

'Londonistan; how Britain is creating a terror state within', by Melanie Phillips,

and

'The Islamist' by Ed Husein.

I have read both these books this week, the latter i finished yesterday, and it's mind blowing how readicalised young Moslems in the UK have become. I seriously worry for the future of the non-islamic world.
I'm about to buy the first book you mention, I've got a lot of respect for Melanie Phillips.
As for your last comment - totally agree, the war is on, the trouble is many on our side don't realise it!

[ablarc]

...the war is on, the trouble is many on our side don't realise it!
Many still feel the duty to make excuses for the enemy. "After all," they intone sanctimoniously, "it's all our fault. We made them this way by ... supporting Israel, Saudis and the Shah ... coveting their oil ... publishing cartoons ... not showing enough respect ... mea culpa ... Let's give them the benefit of the doubt ..."

Another dubious contribution of political correctness --like making excuses for Hitler in September of 1939.

Trouble is, you can't defeat these folks militarily. At least you could rely on a Nazi soldier to be afraid to die, but you can't beat a foe on the battlefield if he doesn't fear death.

It's been amply demonstrated that there's no military solution to this problem.

And appeasement doesn't work. There isn't the will or the money to buy them off, anyway.

What's left is capitulation...

...or providing inducements to get Muslims to revise their interpretation of Islam itself.

That is truly a tall order; they will have to learn to regard all those Koranic exhortations to violence, war and death as purely metaphorical.

They will have to be motivated to do that. By what? Promise of filthy lucre? Coveting Western culture's blandishments?

It truly is us versus them, and it's they who have framed it in those terms, and who continue to do so.

The enemy is the creed of Islam. Though it offends our liberal sensibilities, we must realize we are fighting the religion itself.

Can't win this one with weapons. Can we survive at all with enemy combatants in our midst?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_column

[Mohamed]

Can you point the books on www.amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com)


I'm not Ninja, but I can give you one.

Remember this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War) last year?

It's a wrong by "a Muslim" not "Islam"
remember"Fight them as they fighted to,don't start fight Allah don't like who start fight"

[ZippyTheChimp]

The enemy is the creed of Islam. Though it offends our liberal sensibilities, we must realize we are fighting the religion itself.This doesn't explain why there are countries with a majority Muslim population that are peaceful. Significantly, most are not in the Middle East. Tunisia is 99% Muslim.

It also doesn't explain the integration of Muslims into US society. London and the UK have comparable percentages of Muslims to NYC and the US.

London's Muslim population is 607,000. NYC is estimated between 600,000 and 800,000. National percentages are 2.7% UK, 3.7% US. Both groups read the same Koran, and while London has had terror attacks by its own Muslim citizens, NYC has not.

Maybe the problem is a political vacuum that is filled with radical fundamentalism. The same political vacuum existed in feudal Europe, when Christianity exhibited the same intolerance as Islam.

In my opinion, the greatest threat to my liberal sensibilities is US Christian fundamentalism. 85% of American Christian fundamentalists believe there should be no separation between church and state.

Inquisition, anyone?

[Capn_Birdseye]

Inquisition, anyone?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZQI0Xm29To&mode=related&search=

[Ninjahedge]

Mohammed. Who posed the threats on the lives of individuals that posted /printed pictures of the prophet Mohammed?

Since when is the depiction of a prophet considered a violent act of war equivalent and punishable by death to the one doing so, even if that person is not of the faith?

If you only meet violence/aggression with the same, why didn't these guys just publish insulting comics of Jesus? I believe that some MODERATES did just that, but that is not what I am talking about. What I am saying is that when you say that people of your faith are taught not to attack unless they are attacked first, the leaders of that religion that are looking for action make their own definitions on what they consider to be an "attack".

While I do not believe in the interpretations that our own Christian faith has undergone over the last 200 years or so (eevrything from witch burning to banning the teaching of Evolution), one of the basic tenants of the New Testament is to try to show honor, restraint and tolerance.

Jesus was a peace-nik tired of the over-corproatization of his society (overturning the tables of merchants in the plaza). Mohammed was a warrior out to kill his enemies. There is a basic bent here that is fundamentally different in how certain thnigs are viewed, and reacted to.

One final thing. If a religion says only to attack when attacked, but also says to spread the word, what happens when people resist the spreading of the word? Is that an attack? Does it warrant reprisal/retribution? And at what level?

When people are unhappy about life, it is prety easy to get them to believe something better may come along via a supernatural entity. Even in our own nation the phrase "hope for the best" is slowly being replaced by terms like "Pray to God". Once that much emotional property is tied to a dietal figure, it is much easier to promote reaction on a philosophical point than actual logic.

So, if someone draws a picture of Mohammed, it is easier to convince people that that person should be killed for it.

[Ninjahedge]

And Zip, that is kind of the direction I was going. The only difference being the fundamental basis of each religion prompting different social movements and actions in response to specific issues.

It all comes back to the same thing. Blind Faith should be left to Steve Winwood.

[ZippyTheChimp]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ZQI0Xm29To&mode=related&search=Being a big fan, I'm pissed that I didn't think of it.

[ZippyTheChimp]

If you only meet violence/aggression with the same, why didn't these guys just publish insulting comics of Jesus?Or taken an example from thier adversaries, and engaged in some self deprecating humor.

[Jasonik]

Or a self deprecating humorous inquisition. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAVJ9ZyghlA)

[ablarc]

In my opinion, the greatest threat to my liberal sensibilities is US Christian fundamentalism. 85% of American Christian fundamentalists believe there should be no separation between church and state.
"My kingdom is not of this world."

If they make that claim, those 85% are apostates. That is an error of man, in opposition to the unmistakable directive of scripture.

When Islamists make the same claim, they are following the dictates of the holy book.

Zippy, it's important to not mistakenly tar all religions with the same brush; some religions are more peaceful than others. You might, for example, find a Buddhist monk in the lotus position accepting resignedly his machine-gunning by a Chinese soldier.

[ZippyTheChimp]

When Islamists make the same claim, they are following the dictates of the holy book. Zippy, it's important to not mistakenly tar all religions with the same brushBeing Muslim doesn't make you an Islamist; being Jewish doesn't make you a Zionist; being Christian doesn't make you a Fundamentalist.


[It's important to not mistakenly tar all religions with the same brush; some religions are more peaceful than others.It seems to me the peacefulness of many religions is a function of the political system under which it exists. When Christianity was a political force in Europe, it was a brutal, intolerant religion.

Reading a book isn't the same as knowing the person. Do you have any Muslim friends? I don't mean people you come into contact with.

[Capn_Birdseye]

http://www.jimhasak.com/archives/chr-isl3.html

http://www.jimhasak.com/archives/chr-isl1.html

http://www.jimhasak.com/archives/chr-isl2.html

[ablarc]

being Christian doesn't make you a Fundamentalist.
True. In fact Christians are exhorted by scripture to eschew politics: "Be not too much conformed to this world." Coercive political action is proof positive that those who fail to heed this warning are phony "Christians." That includes more than half of Americans today who call themselves Christians.


being Jewish doesn't make you a Zionist
Maybe a tiny bit less true. Seems that Yahweh wants the Children of Israel to occupy the Promised Land.


Being Muslim doesn't make you an Islamist
Not being militant means you're a bad Moslem. Read the Koran; you'll soon enough discover that.



We're talking about scripture's judgment on these matters, not yours or mine. Scripture is nothing if not clear.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Not being militant means you're a bad Moslem. Read the Koran; you'll soon enough discover that.Do you know for a fact that all, or the majority, of Muslims believe that; or are you assigning this universally based on what radicals spout in the media?

You're talking about what's written in a book; I'm talking about what most people do after they read the book.

[ablarc]

You're talking about what's written in a book; I'm talking about what most people do after they read the book.
As you say, we're talking about different things.

You're right about what you're talking about --what people actually do-- and I'm right about what I'm talking about --what scripture tells them they should do. The latter is the subject of this thread, going back to Rushdie's manifesto in the first post.

I'm well aware that most adherents of most religions don't obey all their scripture. What's unfortunate is that after centuries of somnolent unobservance, Muslims are becoming devout and literal-minded about what their Book tells them. That is an inherently dangerous condition.

If you have any doubt about the truth of that assertion, I urge you to read the Koran.

That book is completely unambiguous. (And you'll probably find it entertaining.)

[ZippyTheChimp]

As you say, we're talking about different things.Not when we're talking about the threat.


What's unfortunate is that after centuries of somnolent unobservance, Muslims are becoming devout and literal-minded about what their Book tells them.Do you have any proof that Muslims were generally unobservant before - you didn't specify a date. They didn't read the Koran in the 1920s.

It seems to me that Muslims (at least Arabic Muslims), became radical (observant?) during the 60s and 70s, with what they perceived to be the unfair support by the West of Israel. Look who stepped in - the USSR. appears to have been political.


If you have any doubt about the truth of that assertion, I urge you to read the Koran.An illogical conclusion.

And don't assume that I haven't read the Koran, or at least large portions of it.

One of my early union cases was a Muslim co-worker - a regular guy, except he didn't cuss or drink alcohol. And he prayed. I had to hammer out an agreement with management to allow him to do this at work.

Although I had contact with Muslims since I was a child, I felt I needed to explore the religion. So I read large portions of the book. I found it boring.

I also found out that this particular person's observant behavior was more in homage to his parents than an Islamic world view.

[Mohamed]

I also found out that this particular person's observant behavior was more in homage to his parents than an Islamic world view.

What was he do more Koran tell him ?


As you say, we're talking about different things.

You're right about what you're talking about --what people actually do-- and I'm right about what I'm talking about --what scripture tells them they should do. The latter is the subject of this thread, going back to Rushdie's manifesto in the first post.

I'm well aware that most adherents of most religions don't obey all their scripture. What's unfortunate is that after centuries of somnolent unobservance, Muslims are becoming devout and literal-minded about what their Book tells them. That is an inherently dangerous condition.

If you have any doubt about the truth of that assertion, I urge you to read the Koran.

That book is completely unambiguous. (And you'll probably find it entertaining.)

I AGREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[ZippyTheChimp]

What was he do more Koran tell him ?I don't quite understand your question.

Are you asking if he was a strict follower of the Koran? That was not my impression.

[Mohamed]

I mean Koran tell nation to the max homage to their parents,
so, what was he do more ?
You said you read a part of Koran .

[ablarc]

"The Islamic nation now faces a great phase of Jihad, unlike anything we knew fifty years ago. Fifty years ago, Jihad was attributed only to a few individuals in Palestine, and in some other Muslims areas." -- Saudi cleric Dr. Nasser bin Suleiman Al-'Omar, aired on Al-Jazeera TV on April 19, 2006.

Islam is naturally totalitarian -- a total belief-system. If, here and there, in the centuries without technological advances and the wealth with which to exploit those advances --and thus without the ability to spread the full doctrines of Islam-- Muslims were able to live as Muslims without necessarily being fully aware of --much less always following at every step the doctrines of Islam-- today is different.

The full undiluted message of Islam is now constantly available to those who might once have been ignorant or unobservant Muslims, reminding them that the full teachings of Qur'an and Hadith are a mere click away, and making the same undiluted message available to Infidels suffering from various degrees of disaffection with the modern world.

No longer can simple pious Muslims live in villages, completely unaware of their duties save for the five canonical daily prayers -- now the whole of Islam is far more readily available to them, with consequences both for Muslims, and for Infidels, that are as yet unappreciated.

Technological advances in the Western world have made it much easier to disseminate the Call to Islam to Infidels, and the full message of Islam to Believers worldwide, and furthermore, to offer propaganda -- often of a kind that Infidels find appalling but that apparently works on Believers.

[Some] argue that the existence of such new technology also makes it possible to influence Muslim minds so that some will have their faith weakened, Western government has dared to broadcast the political, economic, social, and intellectual failures of Muslim societies, and Islam itself.

Indeed, one discovers that deep behind enemy lines, Muslims are watching not the regular Western channels, but getting their news -- in Dearborn as in the East End of London, as in the banlieues of Paris and Lyon and Marseille, from Al-Jazeera: willingly, Arab Muslims limit themselves to Arab Muslim propaganda, for only that is "telling the truth."

It's the perfect belief system for all those who are disaffected and whose only idea of a way out is yearning to be free by becoming part of a Collective. And the habit of submission, and of mental submission, is not the only characteristic of Fascism that Islam exhibits. For more on this, see Ibn Warraq’s article “Islam, Middle East and Fascism” and read of how closely [b]Islam meets the criteria, as once offered by Umberto Eco, that define Fascism.

Fifty years ago, one hundred years ago, the Muslim world was obviously weak, without resources, facing an obviously much more powerful and self-confident West. Those who recognized this and wished to do something about it, were the ones who pushed "reform" in the sense of greater constraint on Islam, and the granting of rights closer to what had been granted in the West to individuals.

But the extent of that "reforming" impulse has often been exaggerated, and furthermore, it was undertaken by those who wished not to jettison Islam, but to rescue it from what they took was certain decline, and possibly fall, in relation to that West.

--Hugh Fitzgerald


... what happened on [September] the 11th is somehow within Islam, it's essential to Islam in some sense ... violence is "existentially" Islam ... meaning fundamentalism is somehow an essential consequence of Islam itself ... in England, unfortunately, the intellectuals, with a few exceptions, are so Islamically and politically correct that they dare not use the word Islam in front of terrorism.

They're now following the lead of the politicians. Bush and Tony Blair are the two leaders who have introduced religion into political life, and now they're the ones to refuse to use the word 'Islam' when talking about terrorism. They just won't understand what is happening; they will repeat the same old mistakes.

If they cannot analyse the situation and see that Islam is the motivating factor behind all this, then how on earth are they going to tackle the problem? It seems completely incomprehensible to me.

--Ibn Warraq

.

[ZippyTheChimp]

It's the perfect belief system for all those who are disaffected and whose only idea of a way out is yearning to be free by becoming part of a Collective.So what about those who don't see no other way out - like the vast majority. They read the same book.

It's not as if someone reads the Koran, and decides to become a suicide bomber. The vulnerable to a message are recruited by politically savvy handlers, who despite having knowledge of the Koran themselves, never seem to don the dynamite vest.

So what are you saying ablarc, that Muslims who are observant, anywhere and everywhere, are threats? Should we root out all believers and do away with them? Make practicing the faith a capital crime?

[ZippyTheChimp]

I mean Koran tell nation to the max homage to their parents,
so, what was he do more ?
You said you read a part of Koran .I still don't understand your question..

The man wanted to say his prayers while at work, and I got an agreement with the manager to allow it.

[ablarc]

So what are you saying ablarc, that Muslims who are observant, anywhere and everywhere, are threats?
Truly observant: yes, inherently.

And you'll find plenty of formerly-observant Muslims who think it's important for us to know that (several in this thread, starting with Salman Rushdie).


Should we root out all believers and do away with them? Make practicing the faith a capital crime?

My suggestion appears earlier in this thread, Zippy. (You don't need to put absurdities in my mouth.)

[ZippyTheChimp]

Truly observant: yes, inherently.Ill defined. What's truly observant as opposed to observant?


And you'll find plenty of formerly-observant Muslims who think it's important for us to know that (several in this thread, starting with Salman Rushdie).Rushdie was marked for death by a fatwa issued by a radical cleric. He can be excused if he is paranoid about the observant (or truly observant).


My suggestion appears earlier in this thread, Zippy. (You don't need to put absurdities in my mouth.)Can the indignation. It was clearly a question.

[ablarc]

What's truly observant as opposed to observant?
In Christianity, observant is going to church Sundays and saying grace. If you do that and are in the Mafia, you're still going to hell. If you live an exemplary, loving, productive and considerate life without anger and hatred, you're truly observant --maybe even if you don't attend church.

In the case of Islam, if you pray five times daily, don't drink and don't cuss, you're observant; if you combine that with driving an explosive-laden van into the infidel's airport because there's a jihad, you're truly observant.


Rushdie was marked for death by a fatwa issued by a radical cleric. He can be excused if he is paranoid about the observant (or truly observant).
By those criteria, the opinions of Jews in Nazi Germany needed to have been discounted; they were after all at risk (paranoid?).

Btw, I thought paranoia was an irrational fear. If someone wants to kill you, is that paranoia?


Can the indignation. It was clearly a question.
A rhetorical one, don't you think? ;) (Had elements of setting up a straw man, which is best left to the disrespectful. :))

[ZippyTheChimp]

In the case of Islam, if you pray five times daily, don't drink and don't cuss, you're observant; if you combine that with driving an explosive-laden van into the infidel's airport because there's a jihad, you're truly observant.So what I would call a radical fanatic, you would call truly observant. Would you hazard a guess as to the percentage of the Muslim observant are truly observant?


By those criteria, the opinions of Jews in Nazi Germany needed to have been discounted; they were after all at risk (paranoid?).To make the correct comparison, it would be excusable if Jews who experienced the Holocaust were fearful of Germans everywhere.


Btw, I thought paranoia was an irrational fear. If someone wants to kill you, is that paranoia?Again, its paranoia to think that everyone is trying to kill you.


A rhetorical one, don't you think? ;) (Had elements of setting up a straw man, which is best left to the disrespectful. :))No I don't . What would you do with an entire religion?



July 24, 2007

Global Poll Finds Optimism in Developing World

By BRIAN KNOWLTON

WASHINGTON, July 24 — A new global opinion poll finds that people in developing countries are broadly more satisfied with their lives than five years ago, their incomes buoyed by economic reform and globalization. But it also finds substantial pessimism in wealthier parts of the world, where spending power has been more stagnant.

“There is a consensus among most people surveyed that they have made personal progress,” said a report from the Pew Research Center. “In 36 of 47 countries a majority or plurality of respondents say they are at a higher spot on the ladder of life now than they were five years ago.”

Still, in the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan, large majorities said that they expected their children would face worse lives than they had. While Americans were the most optimistic in the developed West, just over half expected to be personally better off in five years. Discontent has grown more in the United States than in any other country surveyed.

Separately, the survey found support for terrorist tactics continuing a dramatic decline in predominantly Muslim countries, although in the Palestinian territories, a strikingly high 70 percent of those polled still support suicide bombings in some circumstances. Support for Osama bin Laden fell sharply, plummeting in Lebanon to 1 percent from 20 percent in 2003.

Among other findings: the Chinese surveyed expressed extremely high satisfaction with their government, though their personal satisfaction remained low; the United States, still highly polarizing, was cited most often as countries’ closest ally and also as the greatest threat; deep splits ran through Europe, with Swedes among the world’s most satisfied people and Bulgarians near the global bottom.

In all, 45,239 people were surveyed in 46 countries around the world and the Palestinian territories from mid-April to early May for the Pew Global Attitudes Project of the Pew Research Center of Washington. Margins of error ranged from 2 percentage points to 4 percentage points.

The survey confirmed the obvious: that people with rising incomes are generally more satisfied and more supportive of their governments, with the most satisfied all being in Asia — China, Malaysia and Bangladesh. But it underscored that expectations of a better life can be more important than absolute income numbers.

Among the dourest respondents were the French and Italians — wealthy by world standards but suffering from economic and political malaise. People in rising countries like Mexico were among the most upbeat. Indeed, Mexicans placed themselves higher on a “ladder of life” than any other nationality.

“There’s a pretty good correlation between the ratings people give their lives and absolute G.D.P.,” or gross domestic product, said Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center.

The results were “a testament to the way global economies are affecting people’s lives in a positive way,” Mr. Kohut said. “Personal satisfaction is really high in the Latin American countries,” which collectively had gone from zero growth in the previous five-year period to 18 percent in the latest.

China posted by far the greatest economic growth of any country surveyed, with per-capita G.D.P. up 58 percent since 2002. This has translated into far higher satisfaction with national conditions — 83 percent, up from 48 percent in 2002. And support for the national government, at 89 percent, was the highest of any country but Malaysia (92 percent).

Bates Gill, a China specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said the high support levels for the Chinese government were consistent with earlier poll results but should be viewed cautiously.

“Polling is still a relatively new phenomenon in China,” he said, “and I guess the notion of anonymity and being confident that ‘bad answers’ would not get reported is still just not widely felt,” he said. “People self-censor.”

Still, only 34 percent of Chinese said they were satisfied with their lives.

Optimism was clearly lacking in some developed countries. In Japan, seven times as many respondents expected the next generation to fare worse than expected it to do better. The same ratio prevailed in Italy. France and Germany were not much more optimistic.

The results reflected human nature, said Jagdish Bhagwati, an economist with the Council on Foreign Relations. “If you have had a good experience, you tend to extrapolate it forward, and if you had a bad experience, you become a pessimist.”

Amid the bracing effects of globalization, Dr. Bhagwati said, even the whiff of opportunity can help. In one of the world’s poorest countries, Mali, 9 people in 10 expect their lives to improve in the next five years.

Among the most dismal views came from two populations jolted by violence and uncertainty: the Lebanese and the Palestinians. Only about 1 in 20 of each expressed satisfaction with national conditions.

Overall, support for terrorism has fallen steadily. Majorities in 15 of 16 Muslim populations said suicide bombings could rarely or never be justified.

Thirty-four percent of Lebanese supported suicide bombings, sometimes or often, if “in defense of Islam,” but that was down from 74 percent in 2002. Twenty-three percent of Jordanians supported such bombings, down from 43 percent. Support in Pakistan fell from 33 percent to 9 percent. All have been targets of suicide bombings.

In Jordan, where more than half of respondents expressed confidence in Osama bin Laden in 2003, that figure dropped to 20 percent.

But Palestinians stood out: 70 percent said they supported suicide bombing sometimes or often. Only 6 percent said it was never justified. It was the first time this poll had put that question to them.

Meanwhile, events have left the United States with a deeply mixed image.

People in 19 countries cited it as their most dependable ally, but those in 17 others — particularly Muslim countries, but also China — called it their top threat. Nigerians called it both.

Troubling for the United States, negative views have grown in Turkey, a close ally concerned about events in Iraq. Seventy-seven percent of Turks now see the United States as a threat.

Majorities in Western Europe, Canada and the United States, as well as Israel and Kuwait, named Iran as the greatest potential threat. The growing power of the European Union was reflected in the fact that people in five countries named it as their closest ally.

Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company

[ablarc]

So what I would call a radical fanatic, you would call truly observant.
So would Mohammed.


Would you hazard a guess as to the percentage of the Muslim observant are truly observant?
Very, very few. If it were one tenth of one percent in a population of a million, it would be a mere thousand. How many does it take to blow up the Golden Gate? Could you do it with 19?


Again, its paranoia to think that everyone is trying to kill you.
Who said anything about "everyone"? He was only afraid of the people who actually wanted to kill him. Paranoia is delusional, fear is not. Being in a room with a tiger is excellent grounds for fear.


What would you do with an entire religion?
If it was dangerous, I'd encourage it to be less devout. Western materialism and decadence might help do the trick. I doubt the Aga Khan was dangerous.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Very, very few. If it were one tenth of one percent in a population of a million, it would be a mere thousand. How many does it take to blow up the Golden Gate? Could you do it with 19?Reinforces my point. Many read the Koran, but very few blow up bridges. Many read the Bible, but few murder doctors at abortion clinics.


Who said anything about "everyone"? He was only afraid of the people who actually wanted to kill him.Trace this back, before you defined truly observant. In my view, if Rushdie was fearful of all of them, he was paranoid. As it turns out, you defined the truly observant as fanatics, not representative of Muslims. Being afraid of the people who are trying to kill you is not the implication of that post.


If it was dangerous, I'd encourage it to be less devout. Western materialism and decadence might help do the trick. I doubt the Aga Khan was dangerous.That could be said about most religions.

I'm no fan of religions. They are grounded in bigotry and fear; they are a roadblock to scientific and social advancement; and are easily manipulated by governments.

As indicated in those surveys, the situation is much too fluid to be explained by what is written in the Koran.

[ablarc]

Many read the Koran, but very few blow up bridges.
So, it only takes a few. Why use a thousand if 19 will do?


Many read the Bible, but few murder doctors at abortion clinics.
Bible says "don't murder abortionists." Exact opposite of what Koran says about blowing up infidel's bridges. You're tarring all religions with the same brush once again. Simultaneously, you seek to obfuscate the distinction between adherence to scripture and violation of scripture by those who claim adherence to a creed.


I'm no fan of religions.
Obviously. And like any prejudgment, it leads you to false generalizations. So it enablesy conclusions before you evidence is examined or evidence accurately observed.


They are grounded in bigotry and fear
Some are, some aren't. They're not all the same. Would that claim stand up applied to Quakers and Unitarians? A blanket condemnation of religion also has elements of bigotry.

Also throughout this thread you've only ascribed nonobservance to the dictates of their creed to Muslims ("Most muslims don't kill infidels despite what the Korand orders."), while when it comes to Christians, the views of false prophets like Falwell or Dobson --and the actions of the criminals the inspired-- are ascribed to the religion itself. Thus Christians who are out of line are said to be illustrating the fundamental wrongness of their scripture (as though Jesus said "kill abortionists."). You may think that serves your rhetorical purposes, but it's quite intellectually dishonest and leads to erroneous conclusions. It's your particular flirtation with bigotry. ;)

I think it's time for both of us to take a breather and let others weigh in on this topic, if they choose, so I'll leave the last word to you ... :)

[Mohamed]

Bible says "don't murder abortionists." Exact opposite of what Koran says about blowing up infidel's bridges. You're tarring all religions with the same brush once again. Simultaneously, you seek to obfuscate the distinction between adherence to scripture and violation of scripture by those who claim adherence to a creed.
Koran says"don't murder females,old men and children"opposite Bible


("Most muslims don't kill infidels despite what the Korand orders."),
Muslims belive in Bible and gospel





If I professional in English, I'd make you Muslims !

[ZippyTheChimp]

So, it only takes a few. Why use a thousand if 19 will do?You're missing the point. If the Koran is read by millions, and 19 people commit a terrorist act, why indict the book?


Bible says "don't murder abortionists." Exact opposite of what Koran says about blowing up infidel's bridges.The Bible has been used to justify slavery. In both cases, it isn't the books themselves, but circumstances - political, social, and economic - that lead people to use religion to justify their actions.


You're tarring all religions with the same brush once again. Simultaneously, you seek to obfuscate the distinction between adherence to scripture and violation of scripture by those who claim adherence to a creed.You keep ignoring the evidence that the overwhelming majority of Muslims don't adhere to the scripture as you see it. You have yet to provide a case that the religion itself is the problem, rather than, like Christianity, the problem is those who pervert it. The Christian fundamentalist desire to obliterate the separation of church and state in the US would lead to an oppressive government. Does it really make a difference that it's not encouraged in the Bible?


Some are, some aren't. They're not all the same. Would that claim stand up applied to Quakers and Unitarians? A blanket condemnation of religion also has elements of bigotry.Not broad-based enough to affect political change. Clearly, we are talking about major religions. And I didn't condemn any religion. My exact words were, "I'm no fan." All of them are exclusionary in nature, and it's up to the adherents whether or not it leads to bigotry.


Also throughout this thread you've only ascribed nonobservance to the dictates of their creed to Muslims ("Most muslims don't kill infidels despite what the Korand orders."), while when it comes to Christians, the views of false prophets like Falwell or Dobson --and the actions of the criminals the inspired-- are ascribed to the religion itself. Thus Christians who are out of line are said to be illustrating the fundamental wrongness of their scripture (as though Jesus said "kill abortionists."). You may think that serves your rhetorical purposes, but it's quite intellectually dishonest and leads to erroneous conclusions. It's your particular flirtation with bigotry. ;)No, you've continually missed what I've been saying. I've said it above.

The pogroms against Jews throughout Europe were justified because they were "Christ killers." Were these pogroms encouraged in the Bible? No. Did it make a difference? No.

The fact that there are peaceful Muslim countries, that there are 800,000 Muslims in NYC with no acts of terrorism, that support for terrorism is decreasing in the Middle East (has the population lost its reading skills?) - it all points to a dynamic set of circumstances.

It's much easier, in rhetoric, to ignore this and just blanket condemn the religion. Ironically though, since the religion is here to stay, it's easier to solve the problem when you know what it is.

The standard retort to this is, "You're justifying the actions of terrorists, and assigning blame elsewhere." People who preach hate and those who act on it are criminals, and should be dealt with accordingly. And many of the problems in the Middle East are self-inflicted.

But declaring a War on Islam is like waving a flag with your head in the sand and your ass in the air.

[212]

I think it's time for both of us to take a breather and let others weigh in on this topic, if they choose, so I'll leave the last word to you ... :)


Well, I've been enjoying the exchange. You know I'm mostly on Zippy's side, but it's a powerhouse of a debate.

What's odd about this whole thread: It starts with a clarion call by Rushdie, Hirsi Ali et al -- for defending universal liberal principles against an illiberal foe.

Then, fueled by a litany of frightening images and inflammatory (largely neoconservative) tracts, various forum members are tempted to junk those liberal principles -- in particular, asylum and equal justice under the law.

This latest argument is a turn for the better. Instead of reinforcing prejudices, each of you is questioning the other's easy assumptions -- to good effect.
That's what an honest debate is all about. Ablarc, hope you'll keep at it.

[Mohamed]

That's what an honest debate is all about. Ablarc, hope you'll keep at it.
So,I was honest about Islam ?

[212]

^ I assume you were. Maybe ablarc has a different view. You and he seem to be the most interested in the literal theology.

[Mohamed]

You must read Koran,It show the true of Islam .

**************************

who have Muslims friends ?
Is they bad ?

[ablarc]

You must read Koran,It show the true of Islam.
On this point we agree completely, Mohamed.

I took your advice a couple of years ago and sporadically since.

[212]

^ Mohamed, many Muslims live in the United States, but few are Islamists (the term we use for those who want to replace secular laws with Sharia for everybody).
So I don't know if I've ever met an Islamist.

I knew more Muslims in college than I do now. Those I knew best, I'd describe as either liberal or traditional, not evangelical. None tried to convert me to Islam. Most loved living in America. They loved its freedoms, its wealth, and how well things work here. They disagreed, sometimes bitterly, with a lot of our foreign policy.

[212]

You must read Koran,It show the true of Islam.

Just wondering: How many times have you read the Koran?

[Meerkat]

No,Allah told Mohamed to tell the other nation:
"لكم دينكم و لى دينى"
"You have your belief , we have our belief"


Yes the Koran does say this.

The prophet Mohammed also says 'beware of extremism in religion; for it was extremism in religion that destroyed those who went before you'.

That doesn't alter the fact that christians are being terrorised and killed and churches being destroyed my moslems in Sudan, Congo, Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Lebanon, the Philippines and many other places. Even Lord Carey (former achbishop of Canterbury) stated in Rome in 2004 that Islam 'stood in opposition to practically every other world religion - Judaism in the middle east; to Christianity in the west, in Nigeria and the middle east; to Hinduism in India; to Buddhism, especially since the destruction of the temples in Afghanistan'. A very brave thing to say considering the fate of Pim Fortuyn the Dutch politician who was attacked after supposedly insulting Islam. His chest was ripped open with a blade and pages of the Koran pushed into the cavity. So much for freedom of speech here in Europe. This hate seems to pervade the moslem community through Europe. Shockingly, in the UK around 13% or a estimated 208,000 view the suicide bombers of 7th July 2005 as martyrs, there is no reason to suspect that these figures would be any less amongst moslems in any ather part of Europe. There are also an estimated 2000 British moslems attending terror training camps in the middle east every year. When i hear people saying, 'oh, its only a few of them - just a few fanatics', i think about Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, director of MI5, who, in 2006 stated that there were 200 terror groups, 1600 identified individuals and 30 known terror plots in the UK alone, and these are just the ones that the authorities know of.

I'm not sure how the relationship between moslems and the wider community is in the USA (i suspect they keep a low profile - at the moment), but here in the UK it is becoming increasingly strained - some areas are turning into Islamic ghettos, due to 'white flight' from many areas of our cities, and there is also friction (probably more, in fact) between moslems and other immigrant groups; for example rioting btween afro-carribean christians and moslems in Birmingham resulting in a mosque and church both being severly damaged. After reading the Islamist, written by Ed Husein, a young man of Bangladeshi descent, i think the question is not how many moslems have been radicalised here in the UK but more to the point, how many haven't. I was so disturbed after reading his book i actually had trouble getting to sleep after finishing it. It appears that extremists have infiltrated nearly every Mosque and Islamic society in this country, and some of the most dangerous, including Hizb ut-Tahrir are still legally spreading sedition and hate. The government seem to be doing very little about this. The intention of this group, and many others like it here in the UK is to overthrow the government and replace it with an Islamic one (not to mention the destruction of Israel, killing of homosexuals etc, etc). This is a fact. And the worrying thing is these groups are increasing in power, and popularity amongst the Islamic community. Some of Hizb ut-Tahrir even have members who have won seats in local copuncil elections under the guise of the 'Respect' political party, basically the socialist workers party under another name, playing for moslems votes.

In his book Ed Husein describes how in the early 90's he became a member of this group. At his local college while he was a student he set up the Islamic society and managed to radicalise virtually every moslem student (the college being predominantly moslem). He finally left the group after witnessing the knifing of a black christian following an argument between a group of black youths and moslems over the use of a snooker table at the college. This is a very, very shortened version of events, but you get the general idea. He claims the view of non-moslems being inferior is not an unpopular view within the Islamic community.

Considering the British governments inability to stop extremism in the UK, and the conclusion of the authors in the books i have recently read relating to the situation in the UK, it made me think about a speech from 1968 made by an English politician Enoch Powell. Like everyone else over here i knew of his famous 'rivers of blood' speech, but never having actually heard it, i had a look at its content, and it striking how accurate it is to the currently situation when considering the number of Islamic societies here, not least the moslem council of Britain;

'Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding. Like the Roman, I seem to see 'the River Tiber foaming with much blood.'

[ZippyTheChimp]

I'm not sure how the relationship between moslems and the wider community is in the USA (i suspect they keep a low profile - at the moment),What leads you to suspect they are keeping a low profile?

[Reality]

For god's sake what are you saying!

Are you saying that Muslims are extremists and full of Violence!

How did you come to this conclusion!

Well, look around you:

Who is KILLING the Innocent Iraqi people ?
Who is KILLING the innocent Afghani people ?
Who is KILLING the Innocent Palestinian people ?
Who is KILLING the Innocent Lebanese people ?
Who KILLED thousands of Muslims in Cosovo ?

Who is deciding every new day to go to war, just for the sake of over-powering the world ?


Those are SOME examples, not all, about the real violence against Muslim people along the history, and around the world!

When Prophet Mohammad was characterized in the cartoons in Denmark!
what was Muslim's reaction! did we attack or violate anyone, no, we just stop buying the Danish products, thats all.

Muslims do not have to justify them selfs to anyone.

Look through History; after the Christians took Alandalus(Spain) from Muslims,
does anyone here know what happened to Muslims Andalusian national? thay were all have to choose, either to be KILLED or forced to be Christians! What do you name this, peace? Muslims were hanged in Alandalus, or beheaded, children, women, seniors,,,,

I can talk forever!

GUYS, BE LOGICAL.
ANALYZE!
THINK!
READ!

Have anyone read any part of Quran.


By the way,
look at this link on You Tube,
what is going on?
are we - Muslims- full of hate ??????
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abxjorrXD90

[212]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abxjorrXD90

That video is hateful and absolutely moronic. I don't think it's well known in the United States, and I'm personally embarrassed to have seen it. Ugh!

If it's any comfort to you, people here do subject all sorts of religious paraphernalia to abuse: for example, the famous and controversial work of art called "Piss Christ" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ), a photograph of a crucifix submerged in urine. But "Piss Christ" wasn't controversial because of its existence per se -- the controversy was that U.S. tax dollars financed a museum exhibit that included it.

At least "Piss Christ" is art, though, and it was defended by many Christians.
This YouTube video isn't art, it's just hate and stupidity.
We wouldn't ban it completely or punish the producers -- we revere freedom of expression too much to do that -- but I agree 100% that it's repulsive.
(I wonder if YouTube will remove it.)

Maybe other people here will address your other points.

I'm curious, are you writing to us from somewhere in America, Europe, the Islamic world?

[212]

Have anyone read any part of Quran.

Have you read the previous posts here in this thread?
A bunch of them will answer your question.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Reality:

If you are trying to convey the point that the majority of Muslims are not violent, that's one thing; but several of your statements require a reality-check.


Who is KILLING the Innocent Iraqi people?All suicide bombers in Iraq are Muslims. Besides killing Americans (some who may be Muslim themselves), they indiscriminately kill Iraqis.

It's no different in the other places you listed.


When Prophet Mohammad was characterized in the cartoons in Denmark!
what was Muslim's reaction! did we attack or violate anyone, no, we just stop buying the Danish products, thats all.That's all? Are you sure there was no violence, or do you refuse to acknowledge it?


Look through History; after the Christians took Alandalus(Spain) from Muslims,
does anyone here know what happened to Muslims Andalusian national? thay were all have to choose, either to be KILLED or forced to be Christians! What do you name this, peace? Muslims were hanged in Alandalus, or beheaded, children, women, seniors,,,,We can sit here for hours listing atrocities by Christians and Muslims. What does that tell you?


Muslims do not have to justify them selfs to anyone.What you have to do is speak out against the violence that's committed in the name of your religion. Until you do, many people are going to think that violence is part of what you believe.

[ablarc]

When Prophet Mohammad was characterized in the cartoons in Denmark! what was Muslim's reaction! did we attack or violate anyone, no, we just stop buying the Danish products, thats all.

GUYS, BE LOGICAL.
ANALYZE!
THINK!
OK: You're delusional.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

.

[Meerkat]

Reality

As far as i can see it is radical Islam that is responsible for the murder of the thousands of innocents in Iraq /Afghanistan/Lebanon/Palestine. Not the Jews (constantly scapegoated for just about everything, and fighting for their very survival), not the Europeans, not the Americans. Following the atrocities in Kosovo, NATO bombed Serbia in 1999 to prevent the killing of the muslims, but that never seems to get a mention. You comment on the Danish cartoons - in Arab countries, gangs of fanatics trawled the streets hunting Danes and Norwegian nationals to kill, burning the national flags and attacking buildings with links to Denmark and Norway. Out of interest, did you actually see the cartoons? I didn't see them and i live in England, a few hundred miles form Denmark. Did anyone in any Arab country see them? I doubt it. When you refer too Spain; Grenada, the last moslem city fell to the Christians in 1492 - this is 2007!!!!! Your post is a good example of how in denial moslems are to the current situation, and ready to drag events up from hundreds of years ago to justify current Islamic aggression.

I'm not saying all muslims are violent, but increasing numbers of them support violence against others, particularly here in the UK. There is also a strong feeling of Islamic superiority over other world religions. But anyway, don't accept what i say - read some of the books i suggested on this subject.

An interesting point i noticed in the news today, Hizb ut-Tahrir the extremist group i mentioned previously (banned in most countries, but not here in the UK) are holding a conference in Jakarta this week (attended by some 80,000 people) calling for the introduction of a global Islamic caliphate.

In Europe we have a serious problem with radical Islam, and its getting worse, and if the authorities here continue to turn a blind eye it will be catastrophic. For example, planning permission has been granted in London next to the Olympic park for the largest mosque in Europe. The mosque will be run by a group called Tablighi Jamaat, according to the FBI and French intelligence this group is one of the largest recruiters for Al Quaida in Europe - in France an estimated 80% of Islamic extremists come from Tablighi ranks. The group want an Islamic quater for the games. Funny, i thought the games were supposed to bring people together, not segregate, and yet this is what moslems around the world want.
So when you watch the Olympic games in 2012 you will see this structure dominating the skyline of east London. Not just dominating the skyline, but also dominating the minds of moslem youth in the east end and around the country.

Reality, i'm curious - as a moslem, what are your thoughts on this?

[Mohamed]

There are 70 million Muslims in Egypt (I'm one of them) live peacefully, such around Arab States .
a few are terrorists living in far places .
but,are Isrealians ( who attacked Lebanon & Palestine ) Muslims ?
are Americans (who attacked Iraq ) Muslims ?

[Meerkat]

There are 70 million Muslims in Egypt (I'm one of them) live peacefully, such around Arab States .
a few are terrorists living in far places .
but,are Isrealians ( who attacked Lebanon & Palestine ) Muslims ?
are Americans (who attacked Iraq ) Muslims ?

I'm sorry, i seem to have been completely misled then - Islam is religion of love and peace, bringing goodwill to all the peoples of the world.

Is all this trouble then a Jewish conspiracy?

[ablarc]

Is all this trouble then a Jewish conspiracy?
You mean you didn't know?

[ZippyTheChimp]

Meerkat, you never answered my question.

[Mohamed]

I'm sorry, i seem to have been completely misled then - Islam is religion of love and peace, bringing goodwill to all the peoples of the world.

Is all this trouble then a Jewish conspiracy?

Not Jewish but Israelian conspiracy

[Reality]

Reality

As far as i can see it is radical Islam that is responsible for the murder of the thousands of innocents in Iraq /Afghanistan/Lebanon/Palestine. Not the Jews (constantly scapegoated for just about everything, and fighting for their very survival), not the Europeans, not the Americans.

Muslims did not attack Iraq in 2003 looking for WMD-which obviously they did not find but still looking- its America and its Allies.

Muslims did not declared in 1948 a new State instead of Palestine, by the name Israel, if you think that Israel is just fighting for their survival! what about Palestinians, how could they survive!

Muslims did not attack Afghanistan in the 80's, it's Russia.
Then USA in 2001! USA was dropping bombs from 10-20,000 feet to kill as they said terrorists, how many women and children died with those Terrors!

Muslims did not attack Lebanon, Its Israel.

Muslims did not kill Vietnamese, its Americans.



You comment on the Danish cartoons - in Arab countries, gangs of fanatics trawled the streets hunting Danes and Norwegian nationals to kill, burning the national flags and attacking buildings with links to Denmark and Norway. Out of interest, did you actually see the cartoons?
oh yes. i saw them, and by the way, it's not the cartoons that provoked Muslims, it's the Ideas that was promoted by it.

I didn't see them and i live in England, a few hundred miles form Denmark.

I am not responsible for your ignorance, sorry.



Did anyone in any Arab country see them? I doubt it. When you refer too Spain; Grenada, the last moslem city fell to the Christians in 1492 - this is 2007!!!!! Your post is a good example of how in denial moslems are to the current situation, and ready to drag events up from hundreds of years ago to justify current Islamic aggression.

I think your argument goes too with the Jews and the Holocaust?
By the way, Muslims died in the Holocoust too! we should brag about it too as the jews.



I'm not saying all muslims are violent, but increasing numbers of them support violence against others, particularly here in the UK. There is also a strong feeling of Islamic superiority over other world religions. But anyway, don't accept what i say - read some of the books i suggested on this subject.

Maybe both of us need to read more about the OTHER.



An interesting point i noticed in the news today, Hizb ut-Tahrir the extremist group i mentioned previously (banned in most countries, but not here in the UK) are holding a conference in Jakarta this week (attended by some 80,000 people) calling for the introduction of a global Islamic caliphate.
In Europe we have a serious problem with radical Islam, and its getting worse, and if the authorities here continue to turn a blind eye it will be catastrophic. For example, planning permission has been granted in London next to the Olympic park for the largest mosque in Europe. The mosque will be run by a group called Tablighi Jamaat, according to the FBI and French intelligence this group is one of the largest recruiters for Al Quaida in Europe - in France an estimated 80% of Islamic extremists come from Tablighi ranks.

For your info, Islam is different than other religion in the way Masjeds are run. In Masjeds no one runs the show, we pray in Masjed five times a day, Usually the oldest who know will about Quran Lead, in some countries some official Islamic organization recommend an Imam.
And who ever is paying the rent for this Masjed or Bought it, cannot control or feed anything in the mind of prayers!


The group want an Islamic quater for the games. Funny, i thought the games were supposed to bring people together, not segregate, and yet this is what moslems around the world want.

No, thats not what the Muslims around the world want.
Have you seen or heard about the Asian cub, who won, its Iraq. The happiness were in all Iraq, Sunnis and Sheia. The Segregation between Sunni and Shea started with the help of USA in Iraq.
Segregation is an idea employed by the west on colonies to keep colonies busy fighting each other, so they would not resist.

You know Meerkat, Its all about surviving, with different interests, the west's interests is with OIL, thats the main reason for the Iraq war, its not about Saddam or WMD, the other reason is the Protection of America's Spoiled baby Israel, and another reason is the Strategic base location for the US forces against the big guy, Russia!

And Muslim are RESITING the occupation, its like the resistance you are showing - either if you are aware of it or not- against Muslims in England or Europe!
Reality- Check !

[ZippyTheChimp]

So are Muslim suicide bombers killing other Muslims in Iraq?

Where do you live?

[Reality]

So are Muslim suicide bombers killing other Muslims in Iraq?

Where do you live?


Each news channel has it's own opinion.
Your news MUST say something to satisfy the western viewers, and on the other side, our channels have to satisfy our viewers.

which news channel should we believe? I wonder !

Me, nor you, know whats going on there! except of what we see on TV.

I am in the UK.

[ZippyTheChimp]

So your answer is no?

[ablarc]

Delusional. The theory survives all observations to the contrary. More and more elaborate spin is placed on those observations to make them fit the theory.

The totality of Western news media is counterfeiting video footage. The government has whole buildings full of graphic artists fabricating satellite photos. (Everyone knows the earth is flat and no one has been to Space.)

[Capn_Birdseye]

Some posters on this forum are trying to paint a picture of Islam as a moderate peace-loving religion that is somehow misunderstood by the rest of the world.

This is an ingenious attempt at trying to deceive people.
Let us, for the record, be clear on this subject one more time: Islamism, Radical Islam, Political Islam, and Militant Islam are different terms for essentially the same thing, a virulent, hateful, and violent system of beliefs and practices. Yet, one and all are progeny and mutation of Islam itself.
Islam in all of its forms and sects is simply an evil ideology that is practiced by all Muslims.

Islamism is a pincer, with the world in its jaws between the end-of-the-world Shiism and the jihadist Sunnis. To the simple mind of western “intellectuals”, within every ideology there must always be “good liberals” and “bad conservatives”, and so they search in vain for the “moderate”, “reasonable”, “pragmatic” wing of any threatening ideology.
But in their enormous ignorance of the realities of Islam, they fail to realize that in Islam, the wings are not “left” and “right”, or “liberal” vs. “conservative”; they are two jaws in the same supremacist device that aims to crush the life of all non-believers.

Attempting to build a bridge to “moderate” Islam is in fact a road to hell, since “moderate Islam” is oxymoronic.
The so-called “Moderate Muslims” or “Secular Muslims” would like to have their cake and eat it too. They wish to remain Muslims in name only, yet not bother to read the mandates of the Quran or understand the context in which Muhammad foisted his poisonous prophecy upon the world.
Instead of conclusively demonstrating Islam's violent nature from its very inception and moving in another direction with what they can prove is the worthwhile portions of Islam, they have decided to marry an inherently noxious religion with an inherently godless philosophy, secularism. “Secular Islam Summit” was hilarious; a run-down and meaningless show of desperate attempt to salvage a bankrupt and deadly ideology.
Also, these happy-go-lucky people-of-Islam are indeed delusional, for Muhammad’s record is not even the subject of debate. His utterances and deeds are a part of history that is simply not debatable. Islam is what Muhammad said it was in the diatribes of vitriol and hatred that is the Quran; and Islam is what Muhammad did during his violent life. If you accept Islam as your religion, you become a part of the guiding principles of hatred, revenge, and rejection of prior enlightened prophecies. But the “bridge-builders refuse to acknowledge the fact that one cannot be a Muslim and not abide by the dictates of the Quran.

Keep in mind that the fact being a Muslim is a clear admission of wrongdoing, the extent of which depends on the degree of a person’s Muslim-ness. If he is only a Muslim who does not practice Islam, then he is, at the very least, guilty of hypocrisy. If he is somewhat of a Muslim by tithing, from time to time, following the ranting of the local mullah or imam, and swallowing whole the pronouncements of the high divines, then he is guilty of significantly contributing to the evildoings of Islam.

It is time for the non-practicing Muslims to abandon their childish desire to cling to evil, yet pretend they can “reform” it, like the abused wife insisting that she can cure her alcoholic, violent spouse by remaining in a codependent relationship. It’s time the self-described “moderates” either accept the truth of their ugly religious ethics and reject them by joining the forces of liberty and worldwide family of free people, or join the forces of darkness. But to join the peace-loving free world, you must immediately stop making excuses for the religion of hate!

[ablarc]

^ Well said.

[infoshare]

^ Well said.

Agreed. :cool:

But to be fair: ALL Religion needs to be "swept into the dust bin of history" - the sooner the better.

[Ninjahedge]

Reality, you seem to be on the all inclusive "us or them" bus.

You avoid answering questions about ANYONE of your religion killing any other. Zip asked you 3 times whether suicide bombers had killed any other Muslim, and you start yelling about Muslims being killed by the US Army.

We did not ask you that. And, aside from possibly Pat Tillman, we try to avoid killing our own citizens and forces when attacking "enemy forces".

I say that in quotes because the mere definition of that is getting cloudier as we progress in this occupation.

Now, take a step back and look at what else Zip has said.

If you really believe that there is only a small percentage of radicals that profess this sort of violence at all costs, why don't you, and people like you, speak out against it? We here in the states speak out against our own leaders and whet they do if we disagree, and shortly after 9-11 people who opposed were met with similar insulting remarks aimed at the whole feeling of tribal "Us vs. Them" mentality.

It is not healthy. Be a stronger individual and don't snap back and yell at people when you feel they are categorizing. But also do not defend everyone as if they were all one and the same. They aren't.

And as for the Captain. Geez man! Come on! It is like saying the Protestantism is a secular Christianity. That Catholicism, with a lot of its dated practices, hierarchical leadership, and bloody history is somehow so different than the Muslim faith that we can't see them in similar light.

YES they both are different, and trying to make one fit the others model is not the right way to look at it. But saying that somehow peace-loving Islamics are a joke is just sad.

ALL religion wants to "introduce" its ideas to the people. They want to "teach" everyone to believe in the same God(s) they do. Only a few have not, and they, unsurprisingly, have usually been diluted, driven out, or crushed by those that do.

It is the nature of humanity that we all must be like everyone else, no matter how different we are. And if you decide to be different, "we" are better.


Makes me sick the more I think about it.


The human animal.

[Mohamed]

So,
with-any droit did Amricans attack Iraq ?
with-any droit did Americans attack Vietnam ?
with-any droit did Americans attack Afghanistan ?with-any droit did France,Israel & UK attack Egypt ?
with-any droit did Israel attack Palestine & Lebanon ?
with-any droit did Israel attack Jordan ?with-any droit did France attack algeria ?
with-any droit did Spain attack Morocco ?
Is that means christianity is a virulent, hateful, and violent religion ?
I think you haven't read Koran yet .

[Ninjahedge]

So,
with-any droit did Amricans attack Iraq ?
with-any droit did Americans attack Vietnam ?
with-any droit did Americans attack Afghanistan ?with-any droit did France,Israel & UK attack Egypt ?
with-any droit did Israel attack Palestine & Lebanon ?
with-any droit did Israel attack Jordan ?with-any droit did France attack algeria ?
with-any droit did Spain attack Morocco ?
Is that means christianity is a virulent, hateful, and violent religion ?
I think you haven't read Koran yet .

First off, stop with the droit references. Just because one nation does somethnig that many consider wrong, it does not give implicit right for another to do the same.

Also, many HERE did not support things like Iraq or Vietnam, and you DO HEAR US PROTESTING OUR INVOLVEMENT IN BOTH!

So where is your protest of the extremists blowing themselves up in market squares? If we are looking at a "droit" scale, I believe killing women and children indiscriminately (with no evidence of ANY THREAT WHATSOEVER) is FAR down on the list of military actions using correct aplomb.

I do not agree with some of the bits posted previous here lumping all into a "pincer", but still, you seem to eb doing the same on the other side.

And enough with the "have you read the Koran" already. Some peopel here have. And most who haven't are not saying what they think is in it....

Anyway, will continue later....

[Capn_Birdseye]

Isalm is an intolerant violent religious cult that seeks to destroy Christianity & Judaism, and those, even on this forum, who try to perversely rationalise this are as bad as those poor unfortunate Muslims who know no better.

Muslim theologians are unanimous in declaring that no religious toleration was extended to the idolators of Arabia at the time of Muhammad. The only choice given them was death or the acceptance of Islam. Similarly, no tolerance is shown to atheists and unbelievers. The Koran is full of lurid descriptions of the punishments awaiting them. Surah XXII.9 states: "As for the unbelievers for them garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skins shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods."

The Koran also enjoins all Muslims to fight and kill nonbelievers: "When you meet the unbelievers, strike off their heads; then when you have made wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives" (Surah XLVII.4).

Christians are marginally better regarded than the Jews, but the Koran still accuses them of falsifying the Scriptures: "They surely are Infidels who say, 'God is the third of three': for there is but one God; and if they do not refrain not from what they say, a severe punishment shall light on those who are unbelievers" (Surah V.75. See also Surah IV.157 where the crucifixion is denied).


According to the Koran, Jews have intense hatred of all true Muslims, and, as a punishment for their sins, some of them had, in the past, been changed into apes and swine, and others will have their hands tied to their necks and be cast into the Fire on Judgment Day. The attitude enjoined upon Muslims toward the Jews can only be described as anti-Semitic, and certainly not conducive to a better understanding, tolerance, or coexistence: "Believers, do not take Jews or Christians as friends. They are but one another's friends. If anyone of you takes them for his friends, then he is surely one of them. God will not guide evil doers" (Surah V.51).

[Jasonik]

My suspicion regarding the West's foundational reason for the rejection of fundamentalist Islam and Sharia law, though it may be couched in ethical or human rights terms, centers around the proscribed monetary system of the Prophet (http://www.islamicmint.com/newsarticles/minaret.html).

We could all go on in different strains of Christopher Hitchens' rants, (well done Capn') or we could realize that the only reason there is a conflict, is that Islamic fundamentalism threatens the global central banking cartel by demanding commodity backed real money for the one commodity they have the potential to control; oil.

Regarding the Western motivation:
-This has never been an ideological struggle.
-This has never been a struggle for oil.
-This has always been a struggle to extinguish the last vestiges of sound bimetalic monetary policy and allow the control and manipulation of all currencies and commodities by central banks.

The Taliban in Afghanistan, as brutal and authoritarian as they were, were not a concern until they threatened oil interests with their bullion backed ideology (https://edit.britannica.com/getEditableToc?tocId=21435). (Rampant inflation of paper fiat 'money' led to a non-global-power sanctioned return to a bullion based trading system - that had all its gold stolen during the US invasion, and now will submit to a new imposed banking system.)

For a monetary reason why we invaded Iraq see this (http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_03/wallenwein040903.html).

One could make a valid case that the Euro vs Dollar war is the real reason behind the United States' invasion of Iraq.

If that sounds like a ridiculous exaggeration, just realize that in November of 2002, Saddam Hussein has opted to settle all Iraqi oil sales under the UN's "oil for food" program in euro rather than US dollars.

Whether Saddam did this just to "get back" at President Bush for insisting that he disarm, or whether he felt that his financial goals were better served that way, is ultimately irrelevant.

The undeniable fact is that the United States, as the issuer of the world's sole reserve currency, cannot afford to have other OPEC nations follow Iraq's example. For, if that happens, the dollar's reserve currency status with all of its benefits to the United States is - well - over!

Once these primary sources of conflict are identified, it is a great eqalizer in the sense that we can all realize that our foreign policy is being dictated by central banks and currency manipulations and holding global populations hostage. It could even be speculated, in light of recent developments - that China is hoding its axe over the US economy as a warning not to leave the middle east and force it to trade for its oil in Euros, undermining its years of positioning with respect to the Dollar. (And the British are fighting a proxy war against the Euro.)

We do not have wars over ideologies; we have wars over interests.
We do not convince people to fight wars by explaining the interests; we convince people to fight wars by explaining ideologies.

Hard bullion backed currency worldwide - immune to infation, would do a great deal toward making the world a more peaceful place.

For more on Islamic monetary policy click the Gold Dinar.
http://www.taxfreegold.com/gold-dinar.jpg (http://www.taxfreegold.com/gold-dinar.html)

[ablarc]

Jasonik, do you not perhaps detect a hint of crackpottery in all this?

(I read your links, incidentally.)

[Jasonik]

All what?

[Mohamed]

you murder us in Iraq
you murder us in Palestine
you don't understand
you stole our land
i swear to god we will stop that.
that's all i have

[ablarc]

^ The voice of moderate Islam (peaceful).



There you go, Zippy: wouldn't take too much to push or coax this gent across the line.

(Where's that explosives belt?)

[OmegaNYC]

you murder us in Iraq
you murder us in Palestine
you don't understand
you stole our land
i swear to god we will stop that.
that's all i have

Mohamed, by saying that, you're just proving that Islam is backwards in thinking.

[Meerkat]

Meerkat, you never answered my question.

Sorry Zippy, i intended to reply but was waylaid by Mohammed and Reality.

In all honesty i don't know what the relationship is between American moslems and the wider community, as i said, i expect they keep a low profile as i can't imagine the american people putting up with the nonsense we in Europe have to live with, flag burning, demanding 'special treatment' etc. And if they did, i'm sure your government would be down on them like a ton of bricks - unlike here. Now the British government is asking for the return of 5 highly dangerous individuals at Guantanamo bay - not even British subjects, but granted 'leave to remain'. Shameful.

Mohamed has summed up Islamic paranoia in his latest addition to this thread. Mohamed - You are not the victims - you are the aggressors. Your religion kills and murders around the world, you fight against every other creed, every other religion, and when confronted you claim to be victims. It is Islam that is killing in Iraq and Palestine - not us. Do you really think we want your land? Its an empty desert, what could we do with it? All you say is 'read the Koran' over and over again without replying to any point raised here by either myself or anyone else.

Such hypocricy!!

[Meerkat]

Each news channel has it's own opinion.
Your news MUST say something to satisfy the western viewers, and on the other side, our channels have to satisfy our viewers.

which news channel should we believe? I wonder !

Me, nor you, know whats going on there! except of what we see on TV.

I am in the UK.


Well there's a surprise! Just out of curiosity, why are you here? Why are so many other moslems here, who quite obviously hate the UK? Wouldn't you be happier living in a Moslem country, after all the UK is Christian (or Kuffar) territory. Your argument shows clearly a 'them and us' attitude. Are you, perhaps, one of the 13% of moslems here who felt that the 7/7 suicide bomers were martyrs?

[Mohamed]

Mohamed, by saying that, you're just proving that Islam is backwards in thinking.
I didnot say i will murder you as you murder my grand-parents

[ablarc]

^ Measured moderation.

balance, calmness, composure, constraint, coolness, dispassionateness, equanimity, fairness, forbearance, golden mean, judiciousness, measure, mildness, moderateness, poise, quiet, reasonableness, restraint, sedateness, sobriety, steadiness, temperance, toleration.

.

[Meerkat]

Another book you may like to read as you are living in the UK, Reality (among the other books i mentioned previously), is:
'The suicide factory: Abu Hamza and the finsbury park mosque'
by Sean O'Neill and Daniel McGrory.

I'm halfway through - chilling stuff - it makes me wonder what sort of country the UK has become. (And Mohamed - Abu Hamza was born in your home city of Alexandria).

http://www.politicos.co.uk/books/25719.htm

And some more light reading:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Londonistan-Britain-Creating-Terror-Within/dp/1903933765

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Islamist-Joined-Radical-Britain-Inside/dp/0141030437

By the way, well done Captain Birdseye for you previous post - you hit the nail right on the head!!

[Mohamed]

what do you want,Ablarc ?

[OmegaNYC]

I didnot say i will murder you as you murder my grand-parents

Ummm, I hope you're kidding.. Right??

[Meerkat]

I didnot say i will murder you as you murder my grand-parents

Who murdered your grandparents?

[Mohamed]

Israel did in Sinai

[Meerkat]

Well, thats a tragedy of course - no one wins in war. But also remember many Israeli families are mourning their dead too.

Quite a few of my family were killed in WW1 and WW2 by the Germans, some fighting and some in air raids on London, but the war is in the past - i like Germany and i like the Germans.

Holding a grudge is unhealthy - where has it got the middle east? Nowhere.

[212]

Birdseye, where are you getting those ridiculous quotes?
I'm no expert, but even at a quick glance this online Koran (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=512697) almost totally contradicts you ...


Surah XXII.9 states: "As for the unbelievers for them garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skins shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods."

The quote above (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=512697) describes a "day of resurrection".
It's a little like Christianity's Book of Revelation (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/apocalypse/revelation/white.html), which I understand is also unkind to unbelievers.
This is what Allah is supposed to do during the "day of resurrection" -- it is definitely *not* an instruction to Muslims!
(Whew.)


The Koran also enjoins all Muslims to fight and kill nonbelievers: "When you meet the unbelievers, strike off their heads; then when you have made wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives" (Surah XLVII.4).

Whoa!!! This quote is 180 degrees different from the translation I found (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=797085) -- which requires relatively humane treatment of prisoners. It reads:

[47.4] So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates. That (shall be so); and if Allah had pleased He would certainly have exacted what is due from them, but that He may try some of you by means of others; and (as for) those who are slain in the way of Allah, He will by no means allow their deeds to perish.
[47.5] He will guide them and improve their condition.
[47.6] And cause them to enter the garden which He has made known to them.


"They surely are Infidels who say, 'God is the third of three': for there is but one God; and if they do not refrain not from what they say, a severe punishment shall light on those who are unbelievers".As I read it, that passage (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=158021) is a boast, not a threat. It predicts that when Allah tests Christians or Jews with some misfortune, eventually they will give in and turn to Allah for relief, and Allah will forgive their disbelief.


Believers, do not take Jews or Christians as friends. They are but one another's friends. If anyone of you takes them for his friends, then he is surely one of them. God will not guide evil doers" (Surah V.51).

Well ... this quote of yours appears accurate (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=158021) to me. The same passage instructs Muslims instead to try to convert us -- which we find aggravating.
But a bunch of posts ago on this board, our Mohamed described (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=180738&postcount=82) something in the Koran that encourages coexistence. Maybe he could elaborate on that.

P.S. The Koran translation I'm looking at is from 1983, by M.H. Shakir and published by Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, Inc -- and posted by the University of Michigan. Mohamed and Reality, what do you think of the translation?

[Reality]

Dear Friends,

Well, first we have to put a starting point.
Are we here trying to argue, each trying to proof a point that is irrelevant to the main stream of the discussion.
It's not who wins and who losses in this argument.
By going through each detail we'll be lost.

Are you trying to proof that Islam is wrong! Why? I did not attack your religion just because your government did many things aggressively.

Are you judging Islam just because a group of Muslims or who claim that they are Muslims, acted wrongly trying to proof their point! I cannot reply on their behalf. Ask them why are they doing what they're doing. Don't ask me.

I know its not your fault you were born Christian or Jewish or even an atheist, and not my fault that i was born Muslim, not saying that it's the right religion!


What I am expecting from each of you just to think! Argue, analyze, question, your self !

First, ask your self; who created heaven and earth, if you discovered that SOMEONE who is beggar than everything did it, that's mean you are on the first step, that we have one thing in common to start with!
If you don't believe in GOD in the first place, then no need to waste your breath and mine in arguing!

If, you have a religion, ask your self is it the right one.
how do you know it's the right one? by analyzing! if you are Christian; read the bible, and see if it makes sense to you, if it didn't or some parts of it didn't go through your mind, ask a priest.
Ask your self, why there are many versions of the bible?
Why there are many kinds of Christians?
Don't answer me, answer your self.

If your thoughts concluded that the religion you inherited from your parents and society is wrong, read about other religions, you might find some answers.

Ask you self why god created you? Is it just to live however you want, then what differentiates you from animals!

Many people did that, and founded that Islam is the closest religion to the human nature, Cat Stevens is an example, he was a rich, famous pop star, he had everything, what did he found in Islam? Not only him, if you looked and searched you will find a lot.

God is one, who never had a son, how could he, does it make sense to anyone that Jesus is God's son, how? and why?

Dear friends,
Just by believing that God is one, and prophet Mohammad is his last messenger, just as all the prophet before him like Jesus and Moses, and Abraham and Noah,etc, were, then you are a Muslim, as easy and simple as that.

Then when you are a Muslim, you have four things you have to do, pray to god, help the poor, do the Pilgrim once in your life time, fast one month a year.

Do you see any violence in that?


Dear friends,

In the judgment day, when god asks you; do you believe in me? Did you believe all the prophets I sent to you to lead you to the right path?
What would you answer him?
If you said the right answer, you will go to heaven for eternity, and if you said the wrong answer, you will be in hell forever.
Do you think you could argue with GOD!

Islam is the Global religion.
Islam is the religion of all prophets, including Jesus and Moses, its written in your holy book "that one day a prophet will come and his name is Mohammad". If it's not written in the Bible or Torah at your house, look for another version, the original version.

There is no use to argue, by saying Muslims did, or Christian or Jews did.

Just remember, God created Paradise and the Hell.
God created the human kind, among other creatures.

God created the Devil, do you know that the devil was one of the angels around god, then god created our father Adam, and asked all his angels to kneel to Adam, all the angels knelled except of the devil, saying and questioning god the reasons for kneeling, causing god to expel devil from heaven to earth, and the devil promised god that he will obsess humans until the judgment day.

[Meerkat]

Well there's a surprise! Just out of curiosity, why are you here? Why are so many other moslems here, who quite obviously hate the UK? Wouldn't you be happier living in a Moslem country, after all the UK is Christian (or Kuffar) territory. Your argument shows clearly a 'them and us' attitude. Are you, perhaps, one of the 13% of moslems here who felt that the 7/7 suicide bombers were martyrs?

Reality, you didn't answer my question. Why are you living in England? It is NOT an Moslem country, and never will be. Your previous comments in reply to my recent post made very little sense - you didn't actually answer any of the points i raised.

The post preceeding this one simply seems to be an assertion of Islams supposed 'superiority' to all other world religions. Islam is NOT the global religion, it is the religion for 1 in 6 of the population. Do i need to put forward any further argument to show how 'British' moslems have an attitude that is arrogant and aggressive. It also proves my point that moslems are coming here and trying to set up an Islamic state, firstly by coersion, and eventually by force.

[Reality]

P.S. The Koran translation I'm looking at is from 1983, by M.H. Shakir and published by Tahrike Tarsile Qur'an, Inc -- and posted by the University of Michigan. Mohamed and Reality, what do you think of the translation?

It's not easy to find a good translation of the Quran.

I don't know about the translation you have mentioned, but I will ask and let you know,
Some translations are misleading and don't give the whole picture.

But for you and those who are interested in reading the Quran and know more about Islam
http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/MainPage/indexe.php

[Reality]

Reality, you didn't answer my question. Why are you living in England? It is NOT an Moslem country, and never will be. Your previous comments in reply to my recent post made very little sense - you didn't actually answer any of the points i raised.

The post preceeding this one simply seems to be an assertion of Islams supposed 'superiority' to all other world religions. Do i need to put forward any further argument to show how 'British' moslems have an attitude that is arrogant and aggressive. It also proves my point that moslems are coming here and trying to set up an Islamic state, firstly by coersion, and eventually by force.


I am a student studying in the UK.
I am not here to set up an Islamic state, nor to talk and advertise for Islam.

[Meerkat]

But why chose to study here? Why not a university in, say, Egypt? You clearly have an issue with Cristianity. There is a saying 'when in Rome, do as the Roman's'. When in England, maybe, do as the English.

If you want to practice you religion, then fine, but don't try to push it onto us.

And as i said before, as you are here, read these books, and see the destructive effect Islam is having on the UK.

http://www.politicos.co.uk/books/25719.htm

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Londonistan-Britain-Creating-Terror-Within/dp/1903933765

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Islamist-Joined-Radical-Britain-Inside/dp/0141030437

[212]

Thanks in advance for checking on the Koran translation, Reality.
I'm especially interested in the passages that Capn_Birdseye cited -- and as far as I can tell, grossly misrepresented.

[Reality]

But why chose to study here? Why not a university in, say, Egypt? You clearly have an issue with Cristianity. There is a saying 'when in Rome, do as the Roman's'. When in England, maybe, do as the English.

If you want to practice you religion, then fine, but don't try to push it onto us.


I did not push my religion onto you or anyone, here or anywhere, I participated in this topic when I saw that you and others attacking a religion that obviously you know about only from the news, which is lately concentrating on terrorist, and believing that this is Islam!

And I chose to study here because they have the exact major i was looking to learn about, which is a new major, a marriage between Law and Economics, and it's quit interesting. :)

[Reality]

And as i said before, as you are here, read these books, and see the destructive effect Islam is having on the UK.

http://www.politicos.co.uk/books/25719.htm

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Londonistan-Britain-Creating-Terror-Within/dp/1903933765

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Islamist-Joined-Radical-Britain-Inside/dp/0141030437

Thank you Meerkat for these references :) which i am sure i will know something new about how the Muslims here in the UK are doing, not about "ISLAM", Nevertheless, the only two sources of Islam are: Quran and Sunnah.
Though I know that these books represent only their authers point of view, but I will read it.;)

Humans are students, from birth to death.

[Meerkat]

I did not push my religion onto you or anyone, here or anywhere, I participated in this topic when I saw that you and others attacking a religion that obviously you know about only from the news, which is lately concentrating on terrorist, and believing that this is Islam!

And I chose to study here because they have the exact major i was looking to learn about, which is a new major, a marriage between Law and Economics, and it's quit interesting. :)

I'm not attacking you personally by the way, or even Islam in general, but how can you expect me to draw any other conclusion from the one i have made here, from what i see every day, not just on the news or the books i have read, but around me on the streets of London? The events of 7/7 were done in the name of Islam as admitted by the perpetrators. The moslems i speak to are becoming increasingly confrontational. For example a colleague of mine made anti-Christian comments recently at work, and until that time i didn't even know she was a moslem. There is a problem here, i'm sure you'll admit that.

We could go on like this for ever. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, but as i said, don't take this as a personal attack.

[Reality]

I'm not attacking you personally by the way, or even Islam in general, but how can you expect me to draw any other conclusion from the one i have made here, from what i see every day, not just on the news or the books i have read, but around me on the streets of London? The events of 7/7 were done in the name of Islam as admitted by the perpetrators. The moslems i speak to are becoming increasingly confrontational. For example a colleague of mine made anti-Christian comments recently at work, and until that time i didn't even know she was a moslem. There is a problem here, i'm sure you'll admit that.

We could go on like this for ever. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, but as i said, don't take this as a personal attack.

Dear Meerkat,

We as Muslims respect all religions.
We don't have the right to attack any religion.
And by the way, I don't blame anyone who is saying that Islam is a violence religion, how would you know otherwise!
If I were in your place, and saw a group of people attacking and bombing by the name of a Religion! I would be curious to know more about this religion! Am I right Meerkat!

And I am sure you are not attacking me personally or even attacking Islam:).
I am happy with this discussion, that gave me the opportunity to talk about Islam, not to convert you or anyone, at least to explain that Islam is not as bad as is the picture shown by the unfortunate current events.
Take care.;)

[212]

That's all nice, Reality -- but I'd still like to hear you answer Zippy's question.

[212]

^ Great Britain has gone to bed for the night. Guess I'll be waiting till tomorrow.

[Meerkat]

Not all of us i'm afraid - i'm on night shifts.

[Reality]

Dear Friends,

I found this translation of Quran that you will find understandable,

http://discover-islam-online.com/quran-translations.htm

yours,


During my research, I saw this article that I wanted to share with you all:


The Qur’an: A book you can believe in
In the name of God, the Most Compassionate, Most Merciful

The Qur’an: unique among Scriptures
The Qur’an is the most often-read book in the world. Revealed by God to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in the 7th century, and revered by Muslims as being God’s final Scripture and Testament, its words have been lovingly recited, memorised, and implemented by Muslims of every nationality ever since. The faithful are inspired, consoled often moved to tears by its eloquence and poetic imagery, especially when recited aloud. And yet, the Qur’an is unique in being the only Scripture that is free of scientific inaccuracies, whose historical authenticity can be verified, and whose text has been so carefully preserved that just one authorised version (in Arabic) exists. Approximately the length of the New Testament, the Qur’an is also the only holy book that can be memorised in its entirety by people of all ages and intellectual abilities – including non-Arabic speakers – which Muslims consider to be one of its miracles. We invite you to take a few minutes to learn something about a book that is the foundation of the world-view and culture of almost one-fourth of the people on this planet.
A scientific Scripture for a scientific age
One of the most remarkable things about the Qur’an is that it contains many verses which accurately describe natural phenomenon in various fields such as embryology, meteorology, astronomy, geology and oceanography. Scientists have found its descriptions to be inexplicably valid for a book dating from the 6th century; in fact, many of the processes and functions mentioned in the Qur’an have been discovered only recently. This fact alone has been the cause of a number of distinguished scientists embracing Islam. It also explains why the conflicts that emerged in Europe during the Middle Ages between faith and reason, religion and science, never arose in Islam; the Qur’an repeatedly encourages people to reflect and use their intelligence, and most Muslim scientists and inventors have also been pious believers.
Some of the Qur’an’s ‘scientific’ verses include an accurate description of embryonic development during the first forty days of life; an explanation that the roots of mountains are like pegs which help to anchor and stabilise the earth’s crust; that a natural barrier exists wherever two seas meet (each maintains its own salinity, temperature and density); that waves occur in layers in the depths of the ocean; that the heavens and earth were first joined together before being split apart; and that the heavens emerged from ‘smoke’, i.e. the gases and dust that characterise nebulas as stars are forming.
The Qur’an was never meant to be a ‘science textbook’; whether highlighting the wonders of nature or the lessons of history, its verses direct us to reflect on the glory of God. However, no other ancient book or Scripture is accurate in this way. Muslims believe that this is one of the Qur’an’s proofs; one of the things that makes it a credible, ‘living revelation’ for a modern age, and allows it to reveal itself afresh with passing time.

The Qur’an and the development of knowledge
The word ‘qur’an’ means ‘recitation’, and the first verse of the Qur’an to be revealed by the Angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad was a command to ‘Read (or recite)! In the name of your Lord…’ This directive to a man who, like most people of the time, could neither read nor write, marked the beginning of a new age in human communication, learning, and development. Whereas earlier Scriptures had been written and passed down by elite circles of priests and scribes – usually long after the death of the religion’s founder – the preservation of the Qur’an was a community effort from the beginning, and it was completed during the Prophet Muhammad’s own lifetime. The Prophet’s early followers eagerly memorised and recorded each new revelation as it was revealed; by the time he passed away, thousands had memorised the entire Qur’an by heart. Within two years after the Prophet’s death, the first caliph Abu Bakr requested the Prophet’s secretary Zayd to collect all existing copies and fragments of the Qur’an in one place, in order to compile a standard edition. This manuscript became the basis for the authorised editions that were distributed to each Muslim province during the rule of ‘Uthman, third caliph; remarkably, a few of those early manuscripts have been preserved and can still be viewed in museums today.
Following the example of the beloved Prophet, who encouraged all Muslims, male and female, to seek beneficial knowledge, mosques became centres of learning as well as prayer. The concept of universal, free basic education originated in Islam; children learned to read, write, memorise the Qur’an and do basic maths at village mosque schools; bright students were sent to cities to pursue higher education. The world’s first universities, hospitals, and postal services were established by Muslims. Early caliphs set up institutions like the ‘House of Wisdom’ in Baghdad, where scholars were paid to translate scientific, literary and religious works from every known language into Arabic. It was this open-mindedness that inspired Jews and Christians under Muslim rule in Spain to translate classical Roman and Greek texts from Arabic into European languages, sparking the European Renaissance.

A book with a message and a purpose
Like all books, the Qur’an is a means to convey a message – in this case, a very special message from the Creator to all humanity. The Qur’an is an ‘owner’s manual for the human being’; whoever wonders about the purpose of life and their own existence will find it to be a guide par excellence. Building on prior revelations, this Final Testament confirms the age-old truths of previous Scriptures, but clarifies points of faith where error or confusion have crept into them over the centuries. Those who have read the Bible will find much that is familiar: descriptions of God’s handiwork; stories of the Prophets, Satan, angels and the Day of Judgement; moral and ethical guidelines; and spiritual practices like prayer and fasting. Yet the Qur’an is not just a re-hashing of old stories; its perspective is unique and fresh, and its worldview eminently suited to people of today.
To give one example, according to the Qur’an, God held Adam and Eve jointly responsible for tasting the forbidden fruit; no special curse was laid on Eve for leading Adam astray, and no ‘original sin’ came into being, to be inherited for all time by innocent children. Adam and Eve simply sought His forgiveness and were forgiven, and Adam (peace be upon him) is respected in Islam as the first Prophet.
There are other important distinctions between the Qur’an and the Bible; the Qur’an asserts that much of the original books of the Bible and other Scriptures have been lost or corrupted over time (whether through warfare, political intrigue, religious schisms or other reasons). One only has to consider the number of different versions of the Bible in use today, the lack of ‘first’ originals, and the late discovery of long-lost Scriptures like the Dead Sea Scrolls to realise that this viewpoint is an objective one. The Qur’an rejects the concept of salvation or special privilege based on ethnicity; God does not discriminate on the basis of race or colour. It also denies the need for the sacrifice of innocent life – animal or human – in order for people to attain salvation. It states that Jesus (peace be upon him) was not crucified as claimed, but that God saved him from his enemies, as one would expect of God’s honoured and beloved Messenger; his life was meant to be an inspiring example. Spiritual salvation is to be achieved solely through humble repentance, coupled by an attempt to make amends for one’s sins, and a sincere intention not to repeat one’s mistakes in the future. There is no official priesthood in Islam, and the Imam is no more than a knowledgeable prayer-leader and brother in faith; one’s sins need only be confessed directly to the Creator.
The Qur’an’s main message is to call people to turn to the Source of all being and the Giver of life, and to serve Him with a pure heart, free of idolatry or superstition. In Islam, ‘One God’ means just that: there is no concept of trinity, or anything else to complicate one’s understanding. Like the single nucleus of a cell or an atom, He Alone is the ‘control centre’ behind it all; anything else would lead to chaos and confusion. God is Unique and without partner; He was not born and did not give birth; He is All-Compassionate and Merciful, Almighty and Just, and the only One we need turn to for guidance and help. Anything that we allow to come between ourselves and our Creator – even our own egos – is an idol. Wealth, fame, physical attraction and all the pleasures of this world will someday fade, and we will not be able to take them with us when we die. Only our faith and good deeds will remain, to light our graves and be a beacon for us on the Day of Judgement.
Although no translation of the Qur’an can faithfully capture its Arabic meaning (and all Muslims are encouraged to learn Arabic), the following excerpt illustrates these points beautifully: ‘Recite to them the story of Abraham,
When he asked his father and his people, ‘What do you worship?’
‘We worship idols,’ they replied, ‘and we are ever devoted to them.’
He said, ‘Do they hear you when you cry?
Or do they benefit or harm you in any way?’
They said, ‘No, but this is what we found our forefathers doing.’
He said, ‘Do you see, then, what you and your forefathers have been worshipping?
Truly, they are all my enemies, except the Lord of the Worlds,
Who created me, and Who guides me,
And Who feeds me and gives me to drink,
And when I am ill, He heals me,
And Who will cause me to die, and give me life again;
And Who, I ardently hope, will forgive me my sins on the Day of Judgement.
O Lord, grant me wisdom, and unite me with the righteous,
And grant that I may be remembered well in future generations,
And make me one of the inheritors of the Garden of Delight;
And forgive my father, for he is one of those who is lost;
And do not disgrace me on the Day when all will be resurrected,
The Day that wealth and children will not avail anyone,
Except one who brings to God a clean heart.’
(The Qur’an, Chapter of ‘The Poets’, 26:69–89) -------------------------------------------
Interested in learning more? For reliable information on the Qur’an, Islam and Muslims, contact: WAMY EUROPE: 46 Goodge Street, London W1T 4LU, UK
E-mail: wamy@wamy.co.uk, Tel: +44 (0) 20 7636 7010, Fax: +44 (0) 20 7636 7080
More Literature about Islam in other Languages is available in our website: www.wamy.co.uk (http://www.wamy.co.uk)

[212]

I found this translation of Quran that you will find understandable,
http://discover-islam-online.com/quran-translations.htm


Thanks.

This Koran translation, like the one posted on the University of Michigan's website, completely disproves (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=181757&postcount=174) the scariest Koran quotes posted by Capn_Birdseye.

Maybe the Koran isn't so belligerent after all.

So ... anyone else have some supposed chapter and verse to test against the real thing? And Capn, where exactly did you get your misleading quotes from?

[Mohamed]

Well, thats a tragedy of course - no one wins in war. But also remember many Israeli families are mourning their dead too.

Quite a few of my family were killed in WW1 and WW2 by the Germans, some fighting and some in air raids on London, but the war is in the past - i like Germany and i like the Germans.

Holding a grudge is unhealthy - where has it got the middle east? Nowhere.
You right, the war in past.
So, we forgot what did UK & France do to us .
I'm avowing to you we will forgot what DO Israel do,If they leave Palestine .

[212]

^ Do you mean that Israel will likely see peace if it returns to its pre-1967 borders?

[Ninjahedge]

you murder us in Iraq
you murder us in Palestine
you don't understand
you stole our land
i swear to god we will stop that.
that's all i have

Oh give me a break.

You should know by now that militant posturings only gets the people you want to have dominance over resist you. Don't be stupid.

You start talking like that too much and you get countries like Russia and China on your butt. They do not give a crap about your religious leanings, or your "rights" as human beings. At least in the US you have people protesting the very treament some of your people get when incarcerated. I do not think you will see the same if you were to be seen as a threat to some other nations.

YOU swear to got that "we" will stop that. Again, you are speaking for the many when you are a singular person. One thing that radical groups prey (and ironically pray) on is the feeling of helplessness of the poor and disadvantaged. The same way that civic leaders in our own nation use peoples dissatisfaction to get them elected, radical islamics use it to get people to kill themselves for them.

Most of your leaders do not care about Islam as much as they care about themselves. They get you to kill yourselves for them first under the name of whatever god or prophet you will believe to get you to make such a sacrifice.

Use your own mind and think for yourself.

[Ninjahedge]

I didnot say i will murder you as you murder my grand-parents

I was not aware that I was 80 years old.

You are being fed and lead like lambs to the slaughter Mo.

Your leaders will enjoy the meat you provide at the cost of your own life, and those close to you. THEY will gain land and power, not you.

If you are lucky, you will still be alive to see what they have gained due to your effort and your loss.

[Ninjahedge]

Just realize that a poorly worded response does not reflect well on the poster.

Also , posturing and preaching does not sit well in a politically leaning discussion. Pointing out pieces here and there are all part and parcel of the conversation, but if you go too far, it comes off as pushing the religion rather than clarifying or defining the actual position.

Ah well.


As for the mis-quotes from Captain, I am not surprised.

Captain, could you please show where these things are coming from? When you try to find the truth, it is good to know what mouths it is coming from.

[Capn_Birdseye]

It's interesting and indeed necessary to understand the concept of abrogated verses in the Koran, for example:
"Let there be no compulsion in religion; truth stands out clear from error" (Sura 2.256).

Apologists for Islam often quote this verse, and most Westerners, unfamiliar with the Koran and imagining that it must obey the same theological logic as the Christian Bible, assume that Islamic scripture mandates religious toleration toward non-Muslims. That assumption is inaccurate.

The Koran includes many abrogated verses, called mansukh, and abrogating verses, nasikh; the latter cancel the former, rendering them invalid, though they nevertheless remain in the Koran and are deceptively quoted, for Western consumption, as though they still represented genuine Islamic beliefs. Nasikh and mansukh are legion: Of the Koran's 114 suras (chapters), only 43 are without abrogated or abrogating verses. That is naturally surprising, and so unexpected that few Westerners are aware that significant segments of the Koran have been theologically annulled. Mohammed's non-Muslim contemporaries were just as surprised.

How does one know, when two verses are contradictory, which is abrogated and which is abrogating? It is a question of date: Later texts abrogate earlier texts whenever there are inconsistencies between them. The Koranic verses that teach tolerance and peace, in particular those that prohibit compulsion in religion, are among the earliest of Mohammed's many revelations and are thus liable to abrogation, whenever Allah felt the inclination to revoke his immutable word.

Although Islam, unlike Judaism and Christianity, received its revelation from a single person within a short period of time, roughly twenty years, Mohammed was nonetheless able to impose upon his followers the implausible belief that the inerrant Muslim God had routinely changed his mind.!

The pacific, tolerant message of Sura 2.256 reflects the historical circumstances of its composition. Islam was still then decidedly a minority faith and Mohammed and his small band of followers, in Medina and surrounded by non-Muslim enemies, were threatened with destruction. The early Koran of necessity presented religious tolerance as a divine command because nascent Islam had not yet acquired the physical power to compel conversion: "The Apostle had not been given permission to fight or allowed to shed blood ... he had simply been ordered to call men to God, endure insult, and forgive the ignorant" (Ibn Ishaq, Sirat Rasul Allah).

But when Islam became powerful, Allah's eternal message changed. Islam could now "call people by the sword" -- that is, compel conversion -- and accordingly "verses of the sword" were conveniently revealed to the Prophet, verses that sanction and indeed command conversion of the Infidel by armed violence, which historically would be Islam's preferred method.

Sura 2.256 was thus abrogated by a later verse, composed after Mohammed had begun to prepare his new Muslim empire for Jihad against the non-Muslim world: "Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush" (Sura 9.5). This "verse of the sword" not only abrogates 2.256, but also abrogates well over a hundred earlier verses that formerly taught peace and tolerance toward non-believers.

Only the later, abrogating verse now represents authentic Muslim teaching.

Islam: "Religion of Peace"(?)

"Those that make war against Allah and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be slain or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land. They shall be held up to shame in this world and sternly punished in the hereafter." (Sura 5.33)

"O believers, take not Jews and Christians as friends; they are friends of each other. Whoso of you makes them his friends is one of them. Allah guides not the people of the evildoers." (Sura 5.51)

"Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: 'I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!' That was because they defied Allah and His apostle. He that defies Allah and his apostle shall be sternly punished by Allah." (Sura 8.12-13)

"In order that Allah may separate the pure from the impure, put all the impure ones one on top of another in a heap and cast them into hell. They will have been the ones to have lost." (Sura 8.37)

"And fight them until there is no more [I]fitnah (disbelief and polytheism, i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah alone (in the whole world). But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah) then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do." (Sura 8.39).

"Muster against them [i.e. non-Muslims] all the men and cavalry at your command, so that you may strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them who are unknown to you but known to Allah." (Sura 8.60)

"O Prophet, urge on the believers to fight. If there be twenty of you, patient men, they will overcome two hundred; if there be a hundred of you, they will overcome a thousand unbelievers, for they are a people who understand not." (Sura 8.65)

"It is not for any Prophet to have prisoners until he make wide slaughter in the land." (Sura 8.67).

"Fight those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden -- such men as practice not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book [i.e. Jews and Christians] -- until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled." (Sura 9.29)

"If you do not go to war, He will punish you sternly, and will replace you by other men." (Sura 9.39)

"Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and deal harshly with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate." (Sura 9.73)

"They [i.e. faithful Muslims] will fight for the cause of Allah, they will slay and be slain." (Sura 9.111)

"O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you, and let them find in you a harshness, and know that Allah is with the godfearing." (Sura 9.123)

"When We resolve to raze a city, We first give warning to those of its people who live in comfort. If they persist in sin, judgement is irrevocably passed, and We destroy it utterly." (Sura 17.16)

"We have destroyed many a sinful nation and replaced them by other men. And when they felt Our Might they took to their heels and fled. They were told: 'Do not run away. Return to your comforts and to your dwellings. You shall be questioned all.' 'Woe betide us, we have done wrong' was their reply. And this they kept repeating until We mowed them down and put out their light." (Sura 21.11-15)

"When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take a ransom from them, until war shall lay down her burdens." (Sura 47.4)

"Mohammed is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Sura 48.29)

"May the hands of Abu Lahab [Mohammed's uncle, who had refused to embrace Islam] perish! Nothing shall his wealth and gains avail him. He shall be burnt in a flaming fire, and his wife, laden with firewood, shall have a rope of fiber around her neck!" (Sura 111.1-5)

http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/quran_teaches.htm

[Mohamed]

yeah Ninjahedge,cause our leaders are stooges .
but I'm sure we will change them


Do you mean that Israel will likely see peace if it returns to its pre-1967 borders?

no,when we take all land

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/1048/map.gif

[Ninjahedge]

yeah Ninjahedge,cause our leaders are stooges .
but I'm sure we will change them

Is that sarcasm, or are you saying that you do not like your current leaders. You have to be a bit more expressive of your actual thoughts, these small statements are hard to understand.


no,when we take all land

Man you are oblivious. You just made an impossible demand. the only thing you will get when you demand everything is bloodshed. If the Israelis are not agreeable to letting small portions of their state go, what makes you think that they will give all of it to you?

What makes you think that terrorist attacks will make them all run away?

What makes you think that this mode will somehow get you all that you think you deserve and everyone will be magically happy after that?


It simply does not work that way.


Do us a little favor Mo, try to back your statements up a little. You are dangerously close to what we call "trolling" here. I am not saying that I agree with the Captain, but I also do not agree with your statements either, or, at the very least, how they are phrased.

If that is not your intent, give us a bit more to go on. If that IS your intent, please stop now.

[Capn_Birdseye]

no,when we take all land
It'll never happen moh! You're at last showing your true colours, forget the "peace & love" thing, your religion is intolerant, violently aggressive, deceptive, misogynist, homophobic and anti-Semitic.

The West’s propensity for ignorance is nothing short of astounding when one considers the amount of information on Islam available on the internet. Never before have books on the subject of Islamic history and terrorism been so prolific, yet the same old dangerously erroneous opinions on the causes of Islamic violence remain as popular, uninformed and widespread as ever.

Seemingly unwilling to make the effort to research the true causes of modern Islamist violence, many in the West, including the media, are ever ready to proffer an autoethnophobic (cultural self-loathing) root-cause as to how “We Westerners must have, somehow, caused the problem and therefore deserve what we are getting”. The apologists, propagandists and appeasers continue to confidently promote the view that Islamic terrorism is born of, and nurtured by, poverty, social marginalisation, and Islamophobic bigotry. A raft of other exculpatory justifications for the current global violence is put forward with the one common theme that, in one way or another, the West is to blame and its chickens are simply coming home to roost. So when the recent revelation emerged that a number of medical professionals were involved in two failed terrorist attacks in Britain, the naively deluded went into a confused tailspin, scratching their, cognitively dissonant heads. Their beloved paradigm of the disempowered, impoverished and alienated Muslim now had more holes than a lace tablecloth. No doubt they are busily readjusting their theories to explain how these privileged, intelligent, middle-class professionals could be driven to their wits-end, and forced to lash out with such blind destructive fury at the “evil” West.

The number of medicos involved indicates that the Hippocratic Oath appears to be held in the same contempt as oaths of citizenship or, for that matter, any other. Of course, as emulators of their Prophet Muhammad’s example-- an obligation incumbent on all Muslims-- it’s little wonder that the dishonouring of one’s sworn oath is regarded so carelessly “By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better, and expiate my oath” Sahih Bukhari 7:67:427.

True patriots and loyal citizens they can never be, as no sworn undertaking, irrespective of how solemn or binding, is capable of trumping a Muslim’s primary loyalty and overriding obligation to the “cause” of Islam. Nor is there anything novel in the involvement of medically trained jihadi’s in radical Islam.

A few prominent extremist doctors include:
• Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri--Al-Qaeda mastermind and number two man, a surgeon.
• Dr. Mohammad Rabi Al-Zawahiri--Ayman's father and a Muslim Brotherhood enthusiast, pharmacologist and professor.
• Dr. "Abu Hafiza"-- Moroccan psychiatrist andAl-Qaeda master planner.
• Dr. Abdel Aziz Al-Rantisi--Late HAMAS leader, pediatrician;
• Dr. Mahmoud Al-Zahar--HAMAS co-founder and leader, surgeon and lecturer at the Islamic University in Gaza;
• Dr. Fathi Abd Al-Aziz Shiqaqi- physician -Late founder of Islamic Jihad and active in Fatah.



Another widely accepted myth is that Islamic radicalism is merely an understandable and predictable response to post WW II Western foreign policy, particularly that of the United States due to its support for Israel and involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan etc. This simplistic explanation totally disregards the inflammatory effect of the radical Islamic ideologues of the 1920s, ‘30s and ‘40s, before America had any involvement with the Middle East and well before Israel even existed. The inescapable historical truth is that influential thinkers such as Hassan al Banna, Sayeed Qutb and Mualana Sayeed Abul Ala Maududi were the modern revivalists of an ideology as old as Islam itself ; an ideology founded on the belief of Islamic superiority with its dream of world domination. It was the later Saudi and Iranian windfall oil wealth that allowed those countries to promote, finance and export radical Wahabbi and Khomeinist armed jihad to countries both within and outside the Middle East, Hezbollah being a prime example. Hassan al Banna’s al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun (Muslim Brotherhood) is indisputably the progenitor of all modern radical Islamist groups.

The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Maududi's Jamaat-e-Islami in Pakistan sought to restore the Islamic theocratic ideal, namely the union of religion and state, whilst conveniently blaming the decline of Muslim societies on the contrary secular Western idea of the separation of church and state. Qutb and Maududi inspired a whole generation of Islamists, including Ayatollah Khomeini, who developed an Iranian version of their works in the 1970s.

Despite the gullible Westerner’s certitude that terrorist attacks are “all to do with Iraq and Afghanistan”, they are, in fact, all about Islam's desire to rule the world as a borderless Caliphate. Whenever the willfully deluded Westerner or duplicitous Muslim seeks to explain away these terrorists attacks as reactions to U.S or British foreign policy, simply ask them what it was that precipitated the first world trade centre attack in 1993 - ten years before Iraq and eight years before the U.S. became involved in Afghanistan!

What was it in Khomeini 's revolution , if not expansionist ideology, that refused to be satisfied with their stated objective of ridding Iran of the Shah and Western influence, but then, going on to spread Islamic revolution to the rest of the world ?

Khomeini tells us that:

“Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to paradise, which can be opened only for holy warriors!

There are hundreds of other [Koranic] psalms and hadiths urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.”

“Islam grew with blood . . . . The great prophet of Islam in one hand carried the Koran and in the other a sword . . . . Islam is a religion of blood for the infidels but a religion of guidance for other people.”

---Ayatollah Khomeini.

Let us be under any false illusions, we are at war with Islam, a fight to the death, and we need to take up the sword to defend ourselves and our way of life as the Crusaders did many centuries ago, only this time we need to complete the job.

[Reality]

Dear Birdseye,

You did put some quotes, which we proved that you were quoting wrong, not only that but you explained the wrong quotes your way.

Anyway, I guess now it your turn to explain,
I am curious, you are saying that Islam and Mohammad are full of violence and and,
Though, Jesus him self encouraged death to non believers!

Look at this;
:o

Instant Death to Apostates (those who desert their religion) in the Bible's Old and New Testaments:
It is often believed that the Bible gives absolute religious freedom to everyone. Most of the Christians in the United States and the the West think that the freedom of choice and speech that they have comes originally from the Bible. Let's just see how accurate this myth really is.

In the Old Testament:
Let us look at Deuteronomy 13:6-9 "If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying: Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other, or gods of other religions), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people."
Also let us look at Deuteronomy 17:3-5 "And he should go and worship other gods and bow down to them or to the sun or the moon or all the army of the heavens, .....and you must stone such one with stones and such one must die."
This verse was sent to me by Yusif 65 (THEJOEMAN2@excite.com); may Allah Almighty always be pleased with him: 2 Chronicles 15:13 "All who would not seek the LORD, the God of Israel, were to be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman."

In the New Testament by Jesus and Paul:
Jesus:
Note: Please pay close attention to my red emphasis below.
Let us look at what Jesus said in the New Testament in context:
Matthew 15:1-9
1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked,
2 "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat!"
3 Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?
4 For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'
5 But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,'
6he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.
7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8 " 'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.
9 They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'"
There are few points to notice here:
1- Notice in verse 3, Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for breaking the Commands of GOD Almighty.
2- In verse 4, he used the cursing of parents' punishment as an example. The context, however, is not limited to just this example!
3- In verses 7,8 and 9, he used a quote from the book of Isaiah in the Old Testament, to further prove that they are not following the Commands of GOD Almighty.
4- Jesus clearly had a problem with them not following the punishment of death for cursing the parents or any punishment of death that is commanded in the OT for this matter! In fact, Jesus himself said:
"Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"
"Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples: 'The teachers of the law and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat. So you must obey them and do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.' (Matthew 23:1-3)"
This clearly means:
1- Jesus absolutely approved and commanded the following of the OT's Laws regarding apostates!
2- The fact he commanded death penalty for cursing the parents clearly proves that he also approves of killing apostates as clearly shown in the OT verses above!


There is no question that Jesus approved of killing apostates, exactly as killing those who mistreat their parents!


Paul:
Let us look at Romans 1:20-32 (from the New Testament) "20. For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
23. and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24. Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
25. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.
26. Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
27. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28. Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.
29. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips,
30. slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents;
31. they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
32. Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them."

Also psychics must be put to death. Let us look at Leviticus 20:27 "And as for a man or woman in whom there proves to be a mediumistic spirit or spirit of prediction, they should be put to death without fail. They should pelt them to death with stones. Their own blood is upon them."
The above verses clearly show that the Bible doesn't tolerate apostates. Jesus did honor the Old Testament's laws and ordered his followers to follow the Old Testament until the day of Judgment:
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law (the Old Testament) or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law (the Old Testament) until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"
Christians always say as an excuse that an Old Testament law does not apply to them. According to Matthew 5:17-18, we clearly see that Jesus honored the Old Testament, and forced Christians to follow the unmodified laws of it that have not been replaced by newer ones in the New Testament. The Old Testament as we clearly see above orders the immediate killing of apostates/renegades. The New Testament as we also clearly see above, orders the death of the apostates/renegades. And according to Matthew 5:17-18 above, apostates/renegades in Christianity must be put to death simultaneously.
By the way, please visit: Christians are obligated to follow the Old Testament. (http://www.answering-christianity.com/ot.htm)

Also, during the middle centuries when the Church used to rule over everything, the minority Christians and the Christian Scientists were slaughtered and put to death by the majority ones just because the Priests and Ministers of the High Church decided to call as "heresies" or "apostates". The Bible does give clear authority to the Priests and Ministers to call someone an apostate:
"The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment. (1 Corinthians 2:15)"


Conclusion:
The Bible in both the Old and New Testaments command the killing of apostates, and those who disagree need to produce their proofs.
After all, the Medieval Churches during the middle centuries, who used to persecute minority Christians and Jews, were not deviants after all! They were simply following their bible; the book of women's vaginas and breasts taste like "wine". (http://www.answering-christianity.com/x_rated.htm)



very interesting !!!!!:eek:
I might convert !!!!:confused:

[Capn_Birdseye]

Dear Birdseye,
You did put some quotes, which we proved that you were quoting wrong, not only that but you explained the wrong quotes your way.
Your online Koran did nothing of the sort!
What you have failed to address repeatedly is to explain the concept of abrogated verses within the Koran which enable many of Mohammed's early revelations to be changed whenever Allah felt the inclination to revoke his immutable word!
So we have a situation whereby Mohammed was able to impose upon his followers the implausible belief that the inerrant Muslim God had routinely changed his mind! Useful deception eh?

It's interesting what an ex-Moslem thinks of the faith he abandoned:

Can You Believe in Islam? Examining the Evidence! by Humanity First (http://www.islam-watch.org/Humanity)
09 Jul, 2007
This article analyzes whether we can believe in Islam.

A Claim of Prophethood

What if I, widely known as a highly moral, kind, intelligent, well respected and honest person stated:

"The creator of the universe, the Almighty Himself spoke to me yesterday and commanded me to be His messenger. He said that he was tired of religious fighting between his people and wanted to eliminate the confusion about His Word that had resulted because of some false prophets. To avoid any errors, this time he was giving me an electronic read-only CD with versions of His Word in all major human languages. This read-only document could easily be made available to every nation and individual."

The miracle was that the document was in all major languages and different versions had exactly the same meaning. My family and community could attest that I have not known those foreign languages. Thus, it was God who had given it to me. Would you become a believer?

Now, let's add that the document had a marvelous message for humanity. It was simpler than and superior to the charter of the Human Rights Commission. There was nothing inhumane that would need excuses or justifications, nor any verse that was not self explanatory. Would you believe?

My guess is - Probably not. This, in spite of the fact that this message would be more logical, moral and clear than existing Holy books and so would be the prophet's character. The Almighty is so Great that believing anything to be from Him is no ordinary belief. The certainty of the proof to believe should transcend any mathematical, scientific or logical proof. It should almost surpass the proof our own existence in this world. God has given me my mind and my heart as evidence of Him. For someone to tell me something that supersedes or overrides these gifts to me from God, I would need greater proof of Him than these very gifts themselves which I live with. How can a claim of a human override what my God given gifts (mind and heart) tell me? When the proof of God in me makes me cry on seeing a helpless innocent old man being murdered (Bukhari Vol 2, Bk 19, N173) or protest when I am taught intolerance (Quran 5: 51) , how can I ignore and insult God's evidence in me. I cannot. And you cannot.

Therefore, my claim of being God's messenger just does not make the cut. It cannot rival God and my evidence cannot rival the human heart and mind.

This situation is akin to being a citizen of a town within a country. Assume that 2 people in the town have copies of 2 conflicting constitutions that each claims is true. Which am I to believe without confirming for myself with the supreme authority in the country? What if one of the copies is really well printed and looks authentic but is actually an impressive work of the Mafia and made to look authentic with a forged signature and seal of the country's President?

For the reasons above, nobody can say that you disrespect God by not believing my claimed prophethood. In fact you are only upholding evidence from God that is stronger than my word. You only have a higher expectation of God's Greatness and Perfection.

Now, let us assume that the person claiming prophethood was not me but Abraham Lincoln, Aristotle, Newton, Einstein, Florence Nightingale, Gandhi or Martin Luther King Jr.
Nobody did more to end slavery once and for all than Lincoln; or to advance science than Aristotle, Newton or Einstein; or for wartime medical efforts than Nightingale; or for peace and non violence than Gandhi; or for civil rights than Martin L King Jr.

Would you believe them? Some of us may be tempted to. But for the most part, in spite of the impeccable characters of these individuals, we would probably take their advice but not blindly follow them or equate their word to God's Word.

Even seeing the evidence with your eyes, you would not believe me or my prophecy. How do we blindly follow the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) then? Especially when neither his message is perfect nor is his character exemplary. (reference Quran and Sahih Bukhari or www.faithfreedom.org (http://www.faithfreedom.org/)). Blind faith cannot defeat my God-given mind and heart.


Why we cannot believe in Islam?

I believe in God. But how can I disgrace Him by believing in Islam? How can I believe that God was so imperfect to have such an imperfect message? How can I believe an inhumane messenger was His? How can I believe that God is confused to have His message so full of abrogation and substitutions? How can I believe that God cannot explain His message better so that so many of his followers are not misguided?

We cannot just believe in Islam. We cannot compromise on the perfection of God. The Almighty has not given us a reason to believe Muhammad (pbuh). In fact he has given us several reasons to disbelieve him. The Quran is replete with logical fallacies, scientific errors, mathematical mistakes, superstitions, medical inaccuracies and heresy (Please refer to articles on www.faithfreedom.org (http://www.faithfreedom.org/)).


The Evidence in the Quran

Muhammad (pbuh) abused the name of God. He did not have evidence from God and convinced people by using deceiving methods such as:


1. Praising God often in the Quran as evidence of divinity

An example is:

YUSUFALI: He it is Who shapes you in the wombs as He pleases. There is no god but He, the Exalted in Might, the Wise. (Quran 003.006)

The above statement is obvious. It is not proof from God. Anyone can praise God.


2. Praising God's creations often in the Quran as evidence of divinity.

An example is:

YUSUFALI: And the earth We have spread out (like a carpet); set thereon mountains firm and immovable; and produced therein all kinds of things in due balance. (Quran 015.019)

This statement is also but obvious. Anyone can praise God's creation or nature. How is this statement evidence? Yet it is presented as proof by Muhammad of God’s word. Muhammad was describing what he observed. He saw the land spread like a carpet and he stated the mere obvious. Ironically, little did he know that as time progressed, mankind would learn that what looked like a carpet was really spherical. Even more ironically, people try to justify this statement today, but it is unfortunate that they are only letting their God given mind be defeated by a 7th century man's ignorance.

[Most verses touted as scientific fall under category 2 and a logical study of those verses reveal fallacies in the Quran. It is clear that they were based on what is known or apparent then (though we have already proved above that even if a scientific fact was unknown, but later proven, it would still be insufficient evidence. Individuals such as Newton and Einstein did so and are not prophet].


3. Repeating History, Mythology or past religions in the Quran and Sunnah as evidence of divinity

An example is:

YUSUFALI: We gave Moses the Book, and made it a Guide to the Children of Israel, (commanding): "Take not other than Me as Disposer of (your) affairs." (Quran 017.002)

(Excerpt from Sahih Bukhari Volume 1, Book 5, Number 277) Narrated Abu Huraira:
The Prophet said, 'The (people of) Bani Israel used to take bath naked (all together) looking at each other. So once Moses went out to take a bath and put his clothes over a stone and then that stone ran away with his clothes. Moses followed that stone. Moses took his clothes and began to beat the stone." Abu Huraira added, "By Allah! There are still six or seven marks present on the stone from that excessive beating."


Anyone can repeat known information. Repeating from history or religion is not evidence. We can each describe past facts or tales if we wish. The presence of Christians and Jews in Makkah and Medina would make the repetition of their beliefs’ concepts even easier. Of course, the repetition can be distorted by anyone also (This covers discrepancies in facts and is also necessary to prove that the original is corrupted). So repetition of the past or a distorted repetition of the past is no evidence as anyone can do so.


4. Using Circular Logic in the Quran as evidence of divinity

An example is:

YUSUFALI: This is the Book; in it is guidance sure, without doubt, to those who fear Allah; (Quran 002.002)

Any book can self claim that it is the book of truth without doubt. Any person can self claim he is saying the truth. A rapist can self claim that he is innocent beyond doubt. Self claims are not valid because they are not evidence.

Another example is:

YUSUFALI: O ye who believe! Obey Allah and His Messenger, and turn not away from him when ye hear (him speak). (Quran 008.020)

Again, this is circular logic. Anyone can self claim to be God’s messenger, later recite a verse and claim it is from God and in the verse state that he is the messenger. This is not evidence because such logic does not prove anything as it goes in circles without authenticating any fact.


5. Using Imagination to create unverifiable claims in the Quran and Sunnah as evidence of divinity

An example is:

YUSUFALI: And the Jinn race, We had created before, from the fire of a scorching wind. Quran 015.027

This statement is imaginative and cannot be evidence. If I said that the Jinns wore pink shirts, can I use that as evidence? No, because anyone can let their imagination loose!


6. Making misleading pre-emptive statements to block people's minds to support methods used as false evidence of divinity

Examples are:

YUSUFALI: In their hearts is a disease; and Allah has increased their disease: And grievous is the penalty they (incur), because they are false (to themselves). Quran 002.010

YUSUFALI: Deaf, dumb, and blind, they will not return (to the path). Quran 002.018

Anyone can pre-empt criticism. This cannot be used as evidence either. If a swindler was defrauding me in a scam that promised me riches, he would probably tell me early that I should ignore what critical advice people around me will give me. He would tell me that those people are not smart enough to see what I see, that they are stupid or that they will be jealous of me and therefore try to discourage me.

In this way, when even good people warn me of the impending scandal, I will ignore them, until I realize that I've been cheated and the swindler has tricked me. But by then it will be too late.
Since swindlers use this strategy too, this cannot be valid evidence.

7. Baseless descriptions of fear used as a last resort to supplement false evidence of divinity

An example is:

YUSUFALI: But if ye cannot- and of a surety ye cannot- then fear the Fire whose fuel is men and stones,- which is prepared for those who reject Faith. Quran 002.024

Fear is the supreme tool employed in the Quran. But fear can be created by anyone to force any belief.

If somebody wanted me to believe something wrong, what better way than to create fear in my mind? If the belief was right and genuine evidence produced, fear would not be needed.

If a thief wanted to steal a bank, what better way than to use fear to make the bank employees follow his orders to open the safe? If a legal withdrawal is being made, fear would not be needed.

If I am a good person and the mafia wanted to use me to kill a person, what better way than to threaten to kill me if I did not commit the murder? If the deed is to cheer up a woman in distress, why the need for a death threat?

Therefore fear cannot be the basis of proof for the Quran either. In fact, such fear and inhumanity are generally used in efforts that are anti-God.

The above categories cover all verses used as evidence in the Quran. As shown, such verses are meaningless and hold no value as proof to justify assuming that the Almighty is imperfect.

Muhammad did not have any evidence from God. He used our innocent beliefs and the name of God. We cannot believe him because we cannot take his baseless claims over God's evidence in our minds and hearts. We cannot be led by Muhammad because if we do so, we have given up on the perfect God. We cannot follow him to God. We can only follow Muhammad to the fiery Hell that he so well describes in the book he himself wrote in the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

As for Islam being a peaceful religion, well just take a look at what it calls "justice"!

http://www.omdurman.org/sharia.html#stoning

[Ninjahedge]

As I read through Reality:


1 Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked,
2 "Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat!"
3 Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?
4 For God said, 'Honor your father and mother' and 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'
5 But you say that if a man says to his father or mother, 'Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is a gift devoted to God,'
6he is not to 'honor his father' with it. Thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.
7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:
8 " 'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.
9 They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'"


Jesus is kind of quoting the bible and calling on the hypocracy of the people who are criticising him and his apostles.

IOW, he is saying "Hey! You are questioning my guys oing something wrong, but by your own word, you should be put to death by your own actions! Don't start criticizing those around you when you are guilty of transgressions of your own code of law".

He was not calling for their death. AAMOF, he was pointing out the fallacy of the rule that they mentioned by showing a transgression that they had made themselves. "Fine, you want to forbid them from coming in? Then you need to die because you broke your own rules! Or are you only following the rules that suit your needs?".

He was calling for reform of the rules of old, which were not what he believed in.

I will read more later.... ;)

[Ninjahedge]

And Reality, you are cherry picking passages from teh testaments. AAMOF, you put two new testament passages in to prove the "evil hearted" ways of the apostles, but then slip in a little OT (Leviticus) at the end w/o mentioning that you are going back to the OT.

We all know the OT is very warlike and combative. Noone will deny that. It was a scripture made in a time of little to no tolerance.

As for Pauls little exerpts about homosexuality? That is more difficult, as it encompasses all sexual divergents from the currently (at that time) accepted norm.

This is also a point of contention in many of our own churches. One church not allowing teh rental of one of its spaces for a civil union here in NJ (they are currently being sued).

The one difference being, most of the people, even if they consider HS to be bad, do not believe they should be killed for doing so. Many believe that they should be "converted" back, but few believe in devine retribution for their "sins".


So, that being the case, that it is not just the holy book that shows the intensions of a particular religion, but also the actions of its congregations, how does this reflect on the islamic extremists? Abortion clinic bombers do not reflect well on Catholocism, but they are much rarer than civilian deaths due to suicide attacks. Deaths of people that have little or nothing to do with the fight itself.

We keep saying "read this" and "read that", but the real problem is not in what any frigging little book says, no matter how old it may be. What matters is how the people USE it. How THEY read it.

Undeniably the Koran is more, um, "direct" in its instructions to its people, but that is still up to the people to determine what it means in a society that even the most "gifted" of prophets would never have believed himself.


The one thnig ALL people of ALL religions MUST remember, is that any book that is that old is bound to have some contextual problems when being applied in todays societies. Hopefully they take the words written as a general guide to how they should live their lives and not as an absolute lawbook.

If they do, there will always be fighting because you will never get everyone to read the word of God in the same way. The same words, the same people. There will always be someone who sees it differently.

[Capn_Birdseye]

The one thnig ALL people of ALL religions MUST remember, is that any book that is that old is bound to have some contextual problems when being applied in todays societies. Hopefully they take the words written as a general guide to how they should live their lives and not as an absolute lawbook.

That is most definitely not what Moslems believe!

[Ninjahedge]

Captain, it is not what most "devout" people of any religion believe.

They have this kind of juvenile mysticism attached o their holy scripture that makes any critical discussion of it heresy. I think this was done to eliminate any questioning of authority. You get the same thing in almost any facet of life.

If a kid asks an insecure teacher a question they do not know the answer to, rarely do you get an honest "I don't know, let me find out" from them. You get a "Don't be silly" or some other dismissal of the question.

You also get that in almost any profession, where an underling asks a legitimate, but difficult question that the boss/master etc does not know. Outright refusal to answer the question, or defamation of the one who asks. "Only an idiot would ask a question like that!"

Or, in the case of religion "Only an infidel would question the holy scripture!"


Man's insecurity, fear of the unknown, and wolf-pack like mentality all come together in organized religion. You really have to keep your wits about you if you choose to believe. Just remember, leave "blind faith" to Steve Winwood.

[Reality]

I am really in the middle of my studies, but I'll temporarily response what pops in my head, for now, and we could elaborate later.


You are saying Jesus is Kind when.......!
I'll respond to you by saying; Of course Jesus is nice, and even without adding a condition in the sentence like you did!

Jesus is Very nice, that's why god chose him to be a prophet.

This is where we go wrong. Jesus (Peace upon him) is one of God's prophets, he is not God's SON.

Jesus had a massage from GOD, the same massage of Prophet Moses and Prophet Abraham, and finally Prophet Mohammad (Peace upon them all).
Do you see where am I going?
Do you see where is the common ground between Judaism and Christianity and Islam!



If you guys spent half the time, trying to accuse Islam of all the faults, looking the other way around, you will understand.

No need to yell or accuse each other.

The case here is, some people are accusing Islam with things that are not Islam,

I wrote some insight about Islam, Quran, Prophet Mohammad,
Plus, I did put a link to A translation of Quran in English, French, and other languages. And another link for those who want to know better about Islam and Its' relation to other Religions.

Prophet Noah spent almost 1000 years trying to convince his people about god.
Prophet Jesus, was crucified trying to convince his people.
Almost all the Prophets went through hell trying to convenes and convert their people.

I am not a prophet, nor even a scholar. I am just a ORDINARY MUSLIM, UNDER THE SHELTER, shouting out for you, wanting you to come into the shelter, not out in the rain and wind and cold, trying to show you the way that would save you.
It's your choice.

I have declared that I am not responsible, don't come in the after life, tilling God, we did not know about Islam, you knew and denied.
What you are doing now is exactly what the people around Prophet Jesus did to him, accusation, humiliation, attacking him, and eventually crucifying him.:(

[OmegaNYC]

Reality, I think your argument of "Jesus isn't God's son", and then go on to accusing members of this forum of looking at Islam's "faults" is wrong on a fundamental basis. Also, a bit hypocritical.

[ASchwarz]

I am really in the middle of my studies, but I'll temporarily response what pops in my head, for now, and we could elaborate later.


You are saying Jesus is Kind when.......!
I'll respond to you by saying; Of course Jesus is nice, and even without adding a condition in the sentence like you did!

Jesus is Very nice, that's why god chose him to be a prophet.

This is where we go wrong. Jesus (Peace upon him) is one of God's prophets, he is not God's SON.

Jesus had a massage from GOD, the same massage of Prophet Moses and Prophet Abraham, and finally Prophet Mohammad (Peace upon them all).
Do you see where am I going?
Do you see where is the common ground between Judaism and Christianity and Islam!



If you guys spent half the time, trying to accuse Islam of all the faults, looking the other way around, you will understand.

No need to yell or accuse each other.

The case here is, some people are accusing Islam with things that are not Islam,

I wrote some insight about Islam, Quran, Prophet Mohammad,
Plus, I did put a link to A translation of Quran in English, French, and other languages. And another link for those who want to know better about Islam and Its' relation to other Religions.

Prophet Noah spent almost 1000 years trying to convince his people about god.
Prophet Jesus, was crucified trying to convince his people.
Almost all the Prophets went through hell trying to convenes and convert their people.

I am not a prophet, nor even a scholar. I am just a ORDINARY MUSLIM, UNDER THE SHELTER, shouting out for you, wanting you to come into the shelter, not out in the rain and wind and cold, trying to show you the way that would save you.
It's your choice.

I have declared that I am not responsible, don't come in the after life, tilling God, we did not know about Islam, you knew and denied.
What you are doing now is exactly what the people around Prophet Jesus did to him, accusation, humiliation, attacking him, and eventually crucifying him.:(

Salaam Alaikum, brother. I am a revert to Islam living in New York.

You have explained yourself and the relationship between religions well. There are many ignorant folks out there, and others who refuse to read and think for themselves.

[ASchwarz]

yeah Ninjahedge,cause our leaders are stooges .
but I'm sure we will change them

no,when we take all land

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/1048/map.gif

In the U.S. and UK, many people are brainwashed to think that Israel is 100% innocent and can do no wrong. They are unable to accept nuance and unwilling to understand history.

Thankfully, many others see through the lies on Fox News and from the Bush administration.

[Ninjahedge]

I am really in the middle of my studies, but I'll temporarily response what pops in my head, for now, and we could elaborate later.


You are saying Jesus is Kind when.......!
I'll respond to you by saying; Of course Jesus is nice, and even without adding a condition in the sentence like you did!

Jesus is Very nice, that's why god chose him to be a prophet.

This is where we go wrong. Jesus (Peace upon him) is one of God's prophets, he is not God's SON.

Jesus had a massage from GOD, the same massage of Prophet Moses and Prophet Abraham, and finally Prophet Mohammad (Peace upon them all).
Do you see where am I going?
Do you see where is the common ground between Judaism and Christianity and Islam!

I never said he was anything.

He could be a fictional character in a book about morals and civil living. Some people need him to be the "son of God" to somehow lend credibility to what he was saying. For me? I really don't care. I think he was a nice guy and a lot of what he said made sense.


If you guys spent half the time, trying to accuse Islam of all the faults, looking the other way around, you will understand.

No need to yell or accuse each other.

The case here is, some people are accusing Islam with things that are not Islam,

I wrote some insight about Islam, Quran, Prophet Mohammad,
Plus, I did put a link to A translation of Quran in English, French, and other languages. And another link for those who want to know better about Islam and Its' relation to other Religions.

Thing is, Captain is a little over-zealous when it comes to some things. But the thing that gets me is that other friends of mine who have read the Koran, and practiced the faith, have let me know that the religion is more of a combative one from its roots. Very strict guidelines, very strait forward.

Things like talk of combat in a holy scripture seems a bit weird to me. They seem to be trying to talk of battlefield ettiquite, not religion in that one passage you quoted, which brings me back to the same militaristic base of origin for the text.

The problem lies in peoples interpretation of it, which in the case of the Koran is much like the Old Testament. Both are not very tolerant of others, and (as I am led to believe in the way of the Koran) VERY combative against people who seek to disrupt or "defile" the religion itself.


Prophet Noah spent almost 1000 years trying to convince his people about god.
Prophet Jesus, was crucified trying to convince his people.
Almost all the Prophets went through hell trying to convenes and convert their people.

And that has what to do with what we are talking about?


I am not a prophet, nor even a scholar. I am just a ORDINARY MUSLIM, UNDER THE SHELTER, shouting out for you, wanting you to come into the shelter, not out in the rain and wind and cold, trying to show you the way that would save you.
It's your choice.

Unfortunately, you are also the rain that is falling that you seek to offer us shelter from!

Question. Do you consider yourself on the ame page as the zealots that blow themselves up in the name of your scripture and your prophet? It is a very important question, and should only be answered with a yes or no.

I do not care if you can see where they are coming from, or that you can feel for them. Do you consider them martyrs for your cause?

If you do, you are one of the people causing the problem and unrest. Approval of a heinous act is almost as bad as commiting it. It give the strength to those that seek to kill in the name of what they think is better, with little regard to those around them.

It is very xenophobic, bigoted and selfish.


I have declared that I am not responsible, don't come in the after life, tilling God, we did not know about Islam, you knew and denied.
What you are doing now is exactly what the people around Prophet Jesus did to him, accusation, humiliation, attacking him, and eventually crucifying him.:(

Um, no.

We are not attacking you, so stop with that analogy now. Next thing you know you will pull a "Hitler".

[Ninjahedge]

In the U.S. and UK, many people are brainwashed to think that Israel is 100% innocent and can do no wrong. They are unable to accept nuance and unwilling to understand history.

Thankfully, many others see through the lies on Fox News and from the Bush administration.


Um, no.

We see them as a militant thorn in the side of the middle east that was given a bunch of mutual holy land as capitulation for the things they suffered during WWII.

I do not think that that choice was 100% correct, and that access to areas like the Wall, and Jerusalem should be allowed to all.

But, at the same time, with examples like the Golden Mosque in Iraq, you can see why some are hesitant to allow free access to holy temples and the like. religion has a tendency to both create, and destroy, its own treasures and contributions.

Now, as for Israel and Palestine? They are acting like two children. I think both need to be reprimanded. Israel for driving people out in the name of safety, and Palestinians for actually staging attacks from civilian areas turning the Israleis into paranoid militant reactionists.

I think Israel should return to its original borders and establish a more universal free access system into and out of its country in joint cooperation with some of the muslim nations bordering it.

In the name of preservation of the holy lands, they would need to jointly keep an eye on things, but swear neutrality in areas of conflicting faith.

NOT an easy thing to do, and I sadly do not think it will ever happen.

But talking about sweeping the Jews into the sea and driving them from the Holy Land is intolerant bigoted trash. I wish the world would just frigging grow UP already!

[Ninjahedge]

I am saying "Um, no" a lot, aren't I? :p

[Reality]

Reality, I think your argument of "Jesus isn't God's son", and then go on to accusing members of this forum of looking at Islam's "faults" is wrong on a fundamental basis. Also, a bit hypocritical.

Pardon !

I didn't get that !

Could you elaborate more plz.

[Meerkat]

[quote=Capn_Birdseye;181889]It'll never happen moh! You're at last showing your true colours, forget the "peace & love" thing, your religion is intolerant, violently aggressive, deceptive, misogynist, homophobic and anti-Semitic.


Couldn't have said it better. The question i am now asking myself is why are we arguing with these fanatics? They have been so brainwashed from a very early age about the 'beauty' of Islam, if every non-moslem in the world was slaughtered in the name of Islam, they would still argue it was a religion of peace and love (its all remarkably like 'doublethink' in George Orwells 1984). If you choose to be deluded in this way, fine, but stop trying to convince everyone else, it simply doesn't work.

[Meerkat]

In the U.S. and UK, many people are brainwashed to think that Israel is 100% innocent and can do no wrong. They are unable to accept nuance and unwilling to understand history.

Thankfully, many others see through the lies on Fox News and from the Bush administration.


What a load of rubbish. It is the followers of Islam who are brainwashed. Speaking to them is a bit like speaking to a pre-programmed robot. It is you who should open your eyes and see the truith.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Meerkat,

Although I don't agree with some of the comments Reality has made, when I compare your posts with his, my impression is that you are the one that's intolerant.


Sorry Zippy, i intended to reply but was waylaid by Mohammed and Reality.

In all honesty i don't know what the relationship is between American moslems and the wider community, as i said, i expect they keep a low profile as i can't imagine the american people putting up with the nonsense we in Europe have to live with, flag burning, demanding 'special treatment' etc. And if they did, i'm sure your government would be down on them like a ton of bricks Hmmm.

I asked why you thought Muslims in America are laying low, and your answer is a repeat of the statement.

The heart of the matter is not what the American people would do (that's speculation on your part), but why we don't have similar problems. Same density of Muslim population, same Koran. Is it prejudgment on your part? It seems you have prejudged Reality. Why? Are his posts fanatical, or is he fanatical because he is Muslim.


^ The voice of moderate Islam (peaceful).

There you go, Zippy: wouldn't take too much to push or coax this gent across the line.

(Where's that explosives belt?)Of course, ablarc is not guilty of prejudgment, just selective judgment. And he seems to be an expert on what it takes to push someone with an ax to grind over the edge. Quite a feat for someone who still hasn't said if he has any Muslim friends.

[212]

Hey, it's more Koranic verses from Capn_Birdseye!
Has he actually read this stuff in the Koran?
Well, I just did, and it took me a while to check the latest quotes.
Yet again, Birdseye's source has taken them out of any useful context, and they end up mostly misleading.

So, do any of these verses encourage violence toward us today?
Birdseye seems to think so. But I doubt it -- with one exception, at the end of my post.

I'm putting my answers in bold so they're nice and clear.
And don't just trust me. See for yourself ...


"Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them, and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush" (Sura 9.5). This "verse of the sword" not only abrogates 2.256, but also abrogates well over a hundred earlier verses that formerly taught peace and tolerance toward non-believers.

"Fight those who believe not in Allah and the Last Day and do not forbid what Allah and His Messenger have forbidden -- such men as practice not the religion of truth, being of those who have been given the Book -- until they pay the tribute out of hand and have been humbled." (Sura 9.29)

"If you do not go to war, He will punish you sternly, and will replace you by other men." (Sura 9.39)

"Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and deal harshly with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate." (Sura 9.73)

"They [i.e. faithful Muslims] will fight for the cause of Allah, they will slay and be slain." (Sura 9.111)

"O believers, fight the unbelievers who are near to you, and let them find in you a harshness, and know that Allah is with the godfearing." (Sura 9.123)

^ These verses do not declare war on us today.

Sura 9 (http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/9.htm) is a declaration of war against groups in Mecca who are accused of violating treaties with the Muslims. It declares that the Muslims will also break the treaties, in four months.

Of interest to us: Sura 9 specifically says that "Pagans" who haven't violated treaties should be left alone.

4. (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous.


"Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: 'I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!' That was because they defied Allah and His apostle. He that defies Allah and his apostle shall be sternly punished by Allah." (Sura 8.12-13)

^ That's punishment by Allah, not by Muslims.

This verse (http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/8.htm) is a little like the plagues of Egypt in the Old Testament -- they're spread by God, not by the Isralites.


"In order that Allah may separate the pure from the impure, put all the impure ones [i.e. non-Muslims] one on top of another in a heap and cast them into hell. They will have been the ones to have lost." (Sura 8.37)

Another fire and brimstone (http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/8.htm) warning about what Allah (not Muslims) will do to the unbelievers.


"And fight them until there is no more [I]fitnah (disbelief and polytheism, i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah alone (in the whole world). But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah) then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do." (Sura 8.39).

"Muster against them [i.e. non-Muslims] all the men and cavalry at your command, so that you may strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others besides them who are unknown to you but known to Allah." (Sura 8.60)

"O Prophet, urge on the believers to fight. If there be twenty of you, patient men, they will overcome two hundred; if there be a hundred of you, they will overcome a thousand unbelievers, for they are a people who understand not." (Sura 8.65)

"It is not for any Prophet to have prisoners until he make wide slaughter in the land." (Sura 8.67).
^ Unless we plan to fight in the Battle of Badr, we're probably safe.

These verses from Sura 8 (http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/8.htm)are commands given to Muslim fighters at the Battle of Badr in Mohammed's time. Their meaning is passionately argued here (http://www.ruqaiyyah.karoo.net/articles/fingers.htm).


"When We resolve to raze a city, We first give warning to those of its people who live in comfort. If they persist in sin, judgement is irrevocably passed, and We destroy it utterly." (Sura 17.16)

"We have destroyed many a sinful nation and replaced them by other men. And when they felt Our Might they took to their heels and fled. They were told: 'Do not run away. Return to your comforts and to your dwellings. You shall be questioned all.' 'Woe betide us, we have done wrong' was their reply. And this they kept repeating until We mowed them down and put out their light." (Sura 21.11-15) ^ More warnings to us from Allah, but not Muslims.

This is more fire and brimstone. "We" (http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/21.htm) refers to Allah and angels. The verse right after the last one quoted says ...

"16. Not for (idle) sport did We create the heavens and the earth and all that is between!"


"When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield strike off their heads and, when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly. Then grant them their freedom or take a ransom from them, until war shall lay down her burdens." (Sura 47.4)

^ Slanderous nonsense.

I thoroughly refuted this horrible mis-translation in my previous post. (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=181757&postcount=174)
Charming that Birdseye repeated the lie again.


"Mohammed is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Sura 48.29)
^ It's a matter of tone ...

The translation Reality linked to substitutes "strong" for "ruthless". (http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/48.htm)


"May the hands of Abu Lahab [Mohammed's uncle, who had refused to embrace Islam] perish! Nothing shall his wealth and gains avail him. He shall be burnt in a flaming fire, and his wife, laden with firewood, shall have a rope of fiber around her neck!" (Sura 111.1-5)

^ Don't take this one literally.

Mohamed and his uncle had a ferocious running feud (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Lahab), but this Sura (http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/111.htm) is a warning of brimstone in the hereafter, not a lynching.


"Those that make war against Allah and His apostle and spread disorder in the land shall be slain or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off on alternate sides, or be banished from the land. They shall be held up to shame in this world and sternly punished in the hereafter." (Sura 5.33)

^ And, well, uhoh ...

This verse (http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/QURAN/5.htm) is the first one that really troubles me, because it appears to permit cruelty outside the confines of a battle like Badr.
Would the Muslims here like to clear this up?

[Reality]

Dear all,

I would like, no I would love to put this link to you for an American Preacher from Texas, talking about Islam.
Please ENJOY. :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMdxlrLX_B8&mode=related&search=

[Meerkat]

Meerkat,

Although I don't agree with some of the comments Reality has made, when I compare your posts with his, my impression is that you are the one that's intolerant.

Hmmm.

I asked why you thought Muslims in America are laying low, and your answer is a repeat of the statement.

The heart of the matter is not what the American people would do (that's speculation on your part), but why we don't have similar problems. Same density of Muslim population, same Koran. Is it prejudgment on your part? It seems you have prejudged Reality. Why? Are his posts fanatical, or is he fanatical because he is Muslim.

Of course, ablarc is not guilty of prejudgment, just selective judgment. And he seems to be an expert on what it takes to push someone with an ax to grind over the edge. Quite a feat for someone who still hasn't said if he has any Muslim friends.



As I said in my previous reply i don't know why they are laying low - i don't know what sort of relationship americans have with moslems in the USA - there is no other way i can reply to your question. The best answer i can offer is that in the US you have around 3 million moslems or approximately 1% of the population. Here we have 1.6 million (probably nearer to 2 million according to recent population studdies) or between 3 - 5% of the population, and in some areas the populations are becoming increasingly segregated, particularly the area where i live which is predominantly moslem. In France that number goes up to 6%, and community relations are far worse - the riots a couple of years ago, the French far right national front getting 12% of the vote etc. The UK is also much smaller than the US and far more densely populated this can lead to friction between varous groups, with everyone practically living on top of each other. One thing i have noticed here is that relations between Sikhs / Hindus / Christians and jews are far better than with the Islamic community. I have my theories why in the US it appears there are better community relations than here in Europe, the fact that certain Islamic 'clerics' here are allowed to openly preach on the streets for the killing of all non-moslems which doesn't really help community relations. As i have already said, it is not all moslems who act in this way, but certainly an increasing number of them are, particularly the younger generation. It does seem, however, that Islamophobia in the USA is also increasing, according to this article;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1727812,00.html

Am i guilty of intolerance? Possibly, (although i'm certainly not the only one on this thread). I'm not a hypocrite and i will put my hand up and admit my faults. However, i found some of the comments made by Reality that imply Islam is somehow superior, and that it is the only true religion irritating. It is something i hear very often, and i am curious why someone with views such as those would want to live in a non-moslem country. To constantly assert that Islam is a peaceful religion, and Islam is somehow always the victim is clearly delusional. I'm not sure how i am guilty of prejudgment though as my opinion has formed of various other members as i have read through the posts. Surely if i was prejudging them i would form an opinion of that individual before i have read their post? On my part, maybe the use of the word 'fanatic' was a bit strong in my previous post, but it seems that this argument is going round and round in circles, with everyone having their own particular interpretation of the Koran. This i feel is part of the wider problem - no central authority such as you get with Christianity (the pope for example), and so the Koran can be read in any way the reader wishes.

I'm not sure whether the question about moslem friends was directed at me, but yes i do have a moslem friend. Her family hail from Yemen, and are now no longer in touch with the family back home as they are considered 'dirty' for now living in Europe. And yes, we have held discussions about this subject. Very recently I was also close to a moslem student nurse on the ward where i work, who has since had to leave the course and been sent to Pakistan by her parents for an arranged marriage to a man she has never even met. Her career in nursing is now over, and that i feel, is a shame.

[Mohamed]

So,Muslims will take New York and make it Islam state and kill you all,
what you think what will you do ? welcome us ? or attack us ?
If that happened !,we can call you forget the "peace & love" thing, your religion is intolerant, violently aggressive, deceptive, misogynist, homophobic and anti-Semitic. ?!
Israel murder us daily .
guys! I said we forgot what did UK and France do,cause they leave us !

[Mohamed]

WALAAA!!! great peace !!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.stolenchildhood.net/images/israel_lebanon_war_israeli_children_signing_missil es_israeli_children__2.jpg
from Israel children to Lebanon children
http://www.alamuae.com/up/Folder-003/1154862922_Image1.jpg
that woman is jehadi
http://www.schnews.org.uk/sotw/images_sotw/palestine-boy-tank.jpg
the boy is strong
http://www.darussalam.ae/images/content/palestine1_big.jpg
who did that hole? Israel did !

[Mohamed]

http://www.darussalam.ae/images/content/palestine2_big.jpg

http://medfan2003.jeeran.com/palestine.jpg

http://medfan2003.jeeran.com/palestine1.jpg
yeah that girl is Jehadi too, hahahaha
http://www.amanjordan.org/images/Gaza23-7-2002/palestine25-1.jpg
my family :(
http://www.mpjc.org/images/palestine.jpg
that fool think cring will back his family !
http://www.ouraqsa.com/uploads/files/palestine48.jpg
she is funny

yeah Israel love peace

[212]

"If you want to make peace, you don't talk to your friends. You talk to your enemies."

- Moshe Dayan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moshe_Dayan) (1915-1981)
Israeli military commander and defense minister

[Capn_Birdseye]

What you Islamists repeatedly fail to address is to explain the concept of abrogated verses within the Koran which enable many of Mohammed's early revelations to be changed whenever Allah felt the inclination to revoke his immutable word!

So we have a situation whereby Mohammed was able to impose upon his followers the implausible belief that the inerrant Muslim God had routinely changed his mind! Useful deception eh, you can use the verses in any way you want to prove your point to any non-Moslem! So don't give me all that rubbish about misinterpretation, its a deliberate ploy adopted by Isalm to use their holy book to cloak their real intentions and persuade non-Moslems that theirs is this so-called religion of "peace & love" - when it's anything but!!!

Islam is a religion based on the teachings of a false prophet, that is intolerant, violently aggressive, deceptive, death-orientated, misogynist, homophobic and anti-Semitic.

Here's your "peace & love" - see how a three-and-a-half year old girl is encouraged to call Jews "apes & pigs", in fact the clips show a terrible litany of hate & intolerance from a supposedly "peace-loving" religion (which it isn't)!

http://inhonor.net/videos/uped/fl_video.php?f_num=65500

http://justifythis.blogspot.com/2006/12/killing-teachers-for-allah-merciful.html

http://inhonor.net/videos/uped/fl_video.php?f_num=215500

http://inhonor.net/kids_at_war.htm

[212]

^ Mohamed, by the way, you might consider Dayan himself to have been your enemy. During the Suez Crisis of 1956, Dayan commanded Israeli forces in Sinai. For most of his life he campaigned to expand Israeli territory. At the end of his life, though, he helped draw up the Camp David Accords, which returned Sinai to Egypt -- and he argued for Israel's withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza.

I'm truly sorry to learn about your grandparents' death in fighting in the Sinai. Wars are evil, and those who start them rarely think through the terrible consequences -- which you live with today.

[212]

What you Islamists repeatedly fail to address is to explain the concept of abrogated verses within the Koran which enable many of Mohammed's early revelations to be changed whenever Allah felt the inclination to revoke his immutable word!

Who cares?
Your scariest Koran quotes have been mostly BS.
Maybe you should be called "the Koran troll" (http://flashpoint.wordpress.com/tag/taxes/tax-troll/).

[Ninjahedge]

Mo, we are not validating the casualties of war, FAR FROM IT!

Please spar us the pictures of bloodied babies and crying mothers. The same can be shown on all sides in a matter like this. It is a tool to get people to demand more of the same.

If you show people of your area these pictures, they will cry for blood. If they GET it, guess what? The other side now has crying mothers and bloody babies. Yuo think they will simply say "Well, now we are even!"

NO! It NEVER goes like that! No matter who may truly have "started" it (most of these conflicts usually escalate, they never truly "start" by one sides blatant use of violence on another), no matter who may have, they do not stop!

Also, the pictures you have posted do not show anything about the peaceful nature of Islam. Not a damn thing! You are getting off topic and trying to validate acts of violence in retalliation for other acts of violence, and somehow validate those that seek to tie it all back to God and religion.


Again, I urge you to think through your posts before posting. Your statements are a bit hard to discern and their true meaning may be lost (you describe certain acts or reactions with an unclear subject, it is hard to tell whether you are saying that they are the victims, or possible perpetrators of the actions you are mentioning).


So,Muslims will take New York and make it Islam state and kill you all,
what you think what will you do ? welcome us ? or attack us ?

Out of context. How will you be "coming"? Your statement before seemed to say that you are looking to annex the whole of Israel, not a very convivial statement there (not nice or harmonic).

What you think what will you do? Um, like I said, it depends on what YOU will do. The Muslims we hav in the US now are getting along quite well with the general population. If a mass comes in and starts burning flags and blowing up institutions, the reaction might be quite different. But as it stands, you are talking about something that does not exist right now.


If that happened !,we can call you forget the "peace & love" thing, your religion is intolerant, violently aggressive, deceptive, misogynist, homophobic and anti-Semitic. ?!

Um, what? that is a big "If". So what youa re saying is that if you come here you will be attacked because you are muslim and nothnig else? You REALLY need to get out more. There are very few people that would ever do that, and they are generally shunned, and CRIMINALLY PROSECUTED for doing such things.

Now, this does not give you the right to do whatever YOU want when you come here, but it does not mean that you will get the same reaction you would get in some of the nations in the middle east.


And as for Israel, I do think they have gone over the top. But how would YOU respond to being threatened every day, and having people blow themselves up in shopping malls. Tolerance goes BOTH WAYS, and only goes so long.

The longer it stays, the less likely you will get any kind of understanding from either side. Hell, you have people in the world that hate others not for ANYTHING any of their living reltives have done to any of their own living relatives, but for something that happened 100 or more years prior.

People hold grudges, and that has NEVER been healthy to society.

[Capn_Birdseye]

Who cares?
Your scariest Koran quotes have been mostly BS.
Maybe you should be called "the Koran troll" (http://flashpoint.wordpress.com/tag/taxes/tax-troll/).
There are none so blind as though that will not see.

[ZippyTheChimp]

As I said in my previous reply i don't know why they are laying low - i don't know what sort of relationship americans have with moslems in the USA - there is no other way i can reply to your question.Or maybe they aren't laying low at all.


The best answer i can offer is that in the US you have around 3 million moslems or approximately 1% of the population. Here we have 1.6 million (probably nearer to 2 million according to recent population studdies) or between 3 - 5% of the populationI've provided data that shows the percentages for NYC and US are comparable to London and the UK - actually a bit higher in the US. Religious populations in the US are almost always lower than actual, since this information is not required in the census.


and in some areas the populations are becoming increasingly segregated, particularly the area where i live which is predominantly moslem. In France that number goes up to 6%, and community relations are far worse - the riots a couple of years ago, the French far right national front getting 12% of the vote etc.That's my point. There are other factors that determine a move toward fanaticism. Look at Mohamed. He has been radicalized by a personal tragedy, and won't consider anything but his world view. Doesn't that also happen to Israelis who experience similar tragedies?


The UK is also much smaller than the US and far more densely populated this can lead to friction between varous groups, with everyone practically living on top of each other.You won't find many Muslims in Utah or Montana. While the country is on average less dense than the UK, the city centers are comparable. NYC has a greater density than London.


I have my theories why in the US it appears there are better community relations than here in Europe, the fact that certain Islamic 'clerics' here are allowed to openly preach on the streets for the killing of all non-moslems which doesn't really help community relations.This should not be permitted, by any religious group.


As i have already said, it is not all moslems who act in this way, but certainly an increasing number of them are, particularly the younger generation. It does seem, however, that Islamophobia in the USA is also increasing, according to this article;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,,1727812,00.html
As you said, Islamophobia.


Am i guilty of intolerance? Possibly, (although i'm certainly not the only one on this thread). I'm not a hypocrite and i will put my hand up and admit my faults.I don't think you're a hypocrite, but your dismissal of Reality may be prejudgment.


However, i found some of the comments made by Reality that imply Islam is somehow superior, and that it is the only true religion irritating.I disagree with much of what he says.

As I've said, religion by nature is exclusionary. No matter how ecumenical they attempt to be, there is a foundation of the true belief and everyone else. You and I may be nationalists, but that wouldn't stop us from admitting the faults of our countries, and maybe stating that some other country has a superior society. It's done all the time on this forum.

That does not happen in a discussion among religious people of different faiths. It's at the core who they are.


It is something i hear very often, and i am curious why someone with views such as those would want to live in a non-moslem country. To constantly assert that Islam is a peaceful religion, and Islam is somehow always the victim is clearly delusional.See above.


I'm not sure how i am guilty of prejudgment though as my opinion has formed of various other members as i have read through the posts. Surely if i was prejudging them I would form an opinion of that individual before i have read their post?You answered yourself, below.


On my part, maybe the use of the word 'fanatic' was a bit strong in my previous post, but it seems that this argument is going round and round in circles, with everyone having their own particular interpretation of the Koran. This i feel is part of the wider problem - no central authority such as you get with Christianity (the pope for example), and so the Koran can be read in any way the reader wishes.Yeah, a good point. So why is it assumed by some that the book (the religion) itself is the problem? The overwhelming majority practice the same religion, and to varying degrees of success, are integrated within the societies they live; or live in peaceful Muslim countries.

And what would we gain by demonizing the religion? The radicals already have the pretense they want, that the West is conducting a holy war against Muslims; the Iraq war is the perfect recruitment tool. Let's give them another by proclaiming their religion violent and evil.


I'm not sure whether the question about moslem friends was directed at me, but yes i do have a moslem friend.No, it wasn't.

[Mohamed]

I think you must think and read more books by moderate Muslims about Islam

[Capn_Birdseye]

I think you must think and read more books by moderate Muslims about Islam
The term "moderate Muslims" is a contradiction in terms.

"Moderate", "peace-loving", "tolerant" are not words I'd associate with Islam, a religion that is inherently aggressive, intolerant, and violent.

Not one of our Islamic "scholars" has yet refuted the highly questionable concept of abrogation of Koranic verses, (I'll quote what I said earlier):

What you Islamists repeatedly fail to address is to explain the concept of abrogated verses within the Koran which enable many of Mohammed's early revelations to be changed whenever Allah felt the inclination to revoke his immutable word!

So we have a situation whereby Mohammed was able to impose upon his followers the implausible belief that the inerrant Muslim God had routinely changed his mind! Useful deception eh, you can use the verses in any way you want to prove your point to any non-Moslem! So don't give me all that rubbish about misinterpretation, its a deliberate ploy adopted by Isalm to use their holy book to cloak their real intentions and persuade non-Moslems that theirs is this so-called religion of "peace & love" - when it's anything but!!!

As for the "peace-loving" smokescreen, perhaps our Islamic friends & apologists might care to read this:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Terrorism/peace-loving.html

[Reality]

Dear Mohammad,

I am against posting these pictures!

Though, I am aware of your point in posting them, showing the violence we are facing every day, past, and and present and maybe future.

But, on the other side, anyone here could post pictures from 9/11 or 7/7 or Madrid train station, and many others.

All these are faces of violence and death that Islam rejects.
Violence is not the solution, never was, never will be.
We want all that to stop.
No more killing from America, from Alqaida, from UK, from Israel, from who ever is using his power to force anyone to kneel and obey.

Osama bin laden and his group are NUTS, maybe he is an agent, not an agent for Islam I'm sure, Islam did not benefit anything from his actions, no, thanks to him, Islam picture is bloody, for who! I don't know, and I don't care, what he is doing is wrong. no doubt about it.

Bush as well is NUTS, his administration is NUTS. Israelis are NUTS.

But they are a minority comparing to the rest of the world. We can stand against them, and stop them.

Bin Ladin is saying he is doing all what he's doing by the name of Islam.
He is bluffing, and we Muslims are against him and his group.

Bush is saying he is doing what he's doing by the name of freedom and Justice and by the name of Americans. He is bluffing, American people are against him or at least the majority are.

Israeli's, and we have to stop here awhile, we have to distinguish between Israeli's and Jewish. There are many Jewish people against Israel government and Israel State, and they consider an Israeli state is even against the Jewish holy book.
Israel's are wrong.

If I and you and everyone started with him self consider Violence out of our options, and substitute that with communication channels, between cultures, religions, societies.

[LeCom]

I think it's about time for another Crusade War. Get all the world's religions fundamentalist nutjobs from all religion in the same spot that we don't care too much if it gets messed up (like the Sahara Desert) and let them duke it out. We'd have right wing Christian extremists go against Muslim jihad suicide bombers and whatnot, mixed in with whatever other fundamentalist Nazis other religions have, and it's be no-holds-barred, anything goes warfare. After the smoke settles over the burned and charred battlefield, all we'd have left in the world are the moderates who wish well to each other. It's a win-win situation - radical nutjobs will think they died as martyrs and everyone else will be happy to get rid of them.

[Capn_Birdseye]

No more killing from America, from Alqaida, from UK, from Israel, from who ever is using his power to force anyone to kneel and obey.

If I and you and everyone started with him self consider Violence out of our options, and substitute that with communication channels, between cultures, religions, societies.
I wish you'd stop apologising for Mohammad, he's pursuing his own agenda, its plain to see.

As for the fantasy non-violent world you describe, it just won't happen. Islam is on the march, we are at war with this aggressive intolerant religion, a war they started as commanded by their "prophet", and the sooner the liberal apologists wake up to the fact the better. The enemy is inside the citadel! I'm no neo-con, fundamental Christian, neo-Nazi, or any other right-wing nut-case, just a rational human being who'd prefer to live in peace & harmony but once provoked will stand up and fight to the end.

[Ninjahedge]

Actually, what would happen is that all the telephone cleaners in the world would no longer be available and we would all die of a disease that spread through handsets. (Douglas Adams rip....)


Seriously though Reality? Bush is not nuts. Sad to say. I do not like what he is doing, I do not agree with 90% of his administrations policies, but nuts is not a way I would describe him.

He is very self serving and egotistical. His administration knows this, and has adgendas of their own. The entire group is a bad influence on our nation.

If you want some good, humorous, insite on this, look up "The Daily Show" with John Stewart. Very funny political commentary.


On that note..... ;)

[Reality]

I wish you'd stop apologising for Mohammad, he's pursuing his own agenda, its plain to see.

As for the fantasy non-violent world you describe, it just won't happen. Islam is on the march, we are at war with this aggressive intolerant religion, a war they started as commanded by their "prophet", and the sooner the liberal apologists wake up to the fact the better. The enemy is inside the citadel! I'm no neo-con, fundamental Christian, neo-Nazi, or any other right-wing nut-case, just a rational human being who'd prefer to live in peace & harmony but once provoked will stand up and fight to the end.

I am not apologising for Mohammad, or anyone.

Oh, god, Birdseye, don't be agressive, and stop attacking.

[Reality]

I think it's about time for another Crusade War. Get all the world's religions fundamentalist nutjobs from all religion in the same spot that we don't care too much if it gets messed up (like the Sahara Desert) and let them duke it out. We'd have right wing Christian extremists go against Muslim jihad suicide bombers and whatnot, mixed in with whatever other fundamentalist Nazis other religions have, and it's be no-holds-barred, anything goes warfare. After the smoke settles over the burned and charred battlefield, all we'd have left in the world are the moderates who wish well to each other. It's a win-win situation - radical nutjobs will think they died as martyrs and everyone else will be happy to get rid of them.

about time for a crusade war ??????????? !!!!!!!!!
MORE VIOLENCE !!!!!!

Do you have VIOLENCE in your veins.
Then you say Islam is Violence!!!
listen to your self.
Who is being radical here!

[infoshare]

It's a win-win situation - radical nutjobs will think they died as martyrs and everyone else will be happy to get rid of them.

Brilliant. Thanks for the best belly-laugh I've had all day! :rolleyes:

[Ninjahedge]

about time for a crusade war ??????????? !!!!!!!!!
MORE VIOLENCE !!!!!!

Do you have VIOLENCE in your veins.
Then you say Islam is Violence!!!
listen to your self.
Who is being radical here!

Reality, re-read it with a bit of a dry tone in your mind.

It's sarcasm. He is not calling for all PEOPLE to get together in war, but all the most radical ones that call for the blood of others to just get into a ring and beat each other to death.

This goes double for the "leaders" of these groups who are so happy to let others die for them, but are reluctant to do the same they ask their followers to do in the name of the God they profess to worship in the same way.

IOW, "God says it is good to die for him, now you go die for him and I will keep your family safe when you are gone."

BS.

[Meerkat]

And what would we gain by demonizing the religion? The radicals already have the pretense they want, that the West is conducting a holy war against Muslims; the Iraq war is the perfect recruitment tool. Let's give them another by proclaiming their religion violent and evil.



Zippy, i wan't demonizing Islam in general, rather radical Islam. My previous posts, with the various quotes and statistics were in reference to how radicalised moslems are becoming in the UK, and the rapid increase in the population of that religion here. As i said to Reality, i wan't attacking him personally or his religion in general. And as i said, i regretted the use of the word fanatic in the previous post.

I do, however, think that my fears are very well founded. The rise of radical Islam in Europe and the 'eurabain' scenario, (which appears, slowly to be becoming reality) fills me with horror; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurabia. This is not paranoia, this is actually happening. The plan to build a 'mega mosque' by the radiical 'Tablighi Jamaat' group, near the olympic village in London , seems to be bringing this scenario another step closer http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/09/25/do2502.xml. Have a read through these articles, they are very interesting.

I agree that the war in Iraq is exactly what the radicals wanted, its furthered their cause considerably, but even before the war radicals in the UK were recruiting many youngsters to their cause, even from the early 1980's, and the government turned a blind eye for decades.

[212]

What you Islamists repeatedly fail to address is to explain the concept of abrogated verses within the Koran which enable many of Mohammed's early revelations to be changed whenever Allah felt the inclination to revoke his immutable word!

So we have a situation whereby Mohammed was able to impose upon his followers the implausible belief that the inerrant Muslim God had routinely changed his mind!

Birdseye, if even the scariest-sounding verses (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=181757&postcount=174) don't tell Muslims to attack us today (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=182005&postcount=216), then why should we be scared that some verses supersede others?

[ZippyTheChimp]

Zippy, i wan't demonizing Islam in general, rather radical Islam. The premise of this thread is that Islam is radical.

[Meerkat]

The premise of this thread is that Islam is radical.

Anyway Zippy, what are your thoughts on Islam?

[Meerkat]

Osama bin laden and his group are NUTS, maybe he is an agent, not an agent for Islam I'm sure, Islam did not benefit anything from his actions, no, thanks to him, Islam picture is bloody, for who! I don't know, and I don't care, what he is doing is wrong. no doubt about it.


So, reality, why don't all moslems stand up and reject him and AlQuaida? Some do, thats for sure, but they seem to be a minority. To many, it seems Bin Laden is a hero. I'm not so sure he is an agent though. Who do you think he is an agent for?

[212]

"A Rising Tide Lifts Mood in the Developing World" (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/549/global-opinion-trends-2007)

http://pewresearch.org/assets/publications/549-8.gif


"Muslim Americans: Middle Class and Mostly Mainstream" (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/483/muslim-americans)
http://pewresearch.org/assets/publications/483-2.gif


"How Muslims Compare With Other Religious Americans" (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/535/how-muslims-compare-with-other-religious-americans)
http://pewresearch.org/assets/publications/535-3.gif


"Pakistanis Increasingly Reject Terrorism ... and the U.S." (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/561/pakistan-terrorism)

http://pewresearch.org/assets/publications/561-1.gif

http://pewresearch.org/assets/publications/561-2.gif

http://pewresearch.org/assets/publications/561-3.gif

[Capn_Birdseye]

Birdseye, if even the scariest-sounding verses (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=181757&postcount=174) don't tell Muslims to attack us today (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=182005&postcount=216), then why should we be scared that some verses supersede others?
The concept of abrogation within the Koran demonstrates clearly a number of things:
1) That Allah, through his so-called prophet Mohammed, appears to be an indecisive God that routinely changes his mind on issues! Not really what you'd expect from the Almighty!
2) That abrogation is used as a deceptive ploy by Moslems when confronted by non-Moslems about the violent aggressive and intolerant verses within the Koran. Useful eh?

Lets be under illusions what we're dealing with here, Islam has aggressive ambitions and they intend to fulfil them through violence:
“Islam is not a normal religion like the other religions in the world and Muslim nations are not like normal nations. Muslim nations are very special because they have a command from Allah to rule the entire world and to be over every nation in the world.”


"Islam wishes to destroy all States and Governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam regardless of the country or the Nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and programme, regardless of which Nation assumes the role of the standard bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State."


“Islam is a revolutionary faith that comes to destroy any government made by man. Islam doesn’t look for a nation to be in a better condition than another nation. Islam doesn’t care about the land or who owns the land. The goal of Islam is to rule the entire world and submit all of mankind to the faith of Islam. Any nation or power that gets in the way of that goal, Islam will fight and destroy. In order to fulfill that goal, Islam can use every power available every way it can be used to bring worldwide revolution. This is Jihad.”


---Sayeed Abdul A'la Maududi, ‘Jihad in Islam’

[212]

^ Well, you didn't address my question.

Good news, though -- when your keyboard dies, your Ctrl, C and V keys will have a hot date with the 72 virgins.

[Capn_Birdseye]

^ Well, you didn't address my question.

Good news, though -- when your keyboard dies, your Ctrl, C and V keys will have a hot date with the 72 virgins.
You obviously haven't read my postings or you'd see that I, unlike yourself who ignores all questions, have responded to your question, its all centres around the duplicitous and somewhat irrational concept of abrogation of Koranic verses.

As for being rewarded with 72 virgins for killing innocent people ..... well, I'll leave that strange concept for others to comment upon ....

[212]

Your "enemy in the citadel" has been downgraded to "duplicitous and irrational". Is this progress?

Try going to some original sources outside the handful of websites that reinforce your preconceptions.

[Capn_Birdseye]

Your "enemy in the citadel" has been downgraded to "duplicitous and irrational". Is this progress?
Do you have a comprehension problem? One talks of the individuals, the other refers to the Koran, please pay more attention or you'll have to stay behind after school!

[ZippyTheChimp]

Anyway Zippy, what are your thoughts on Islam?Islam or Islamism? There seems to be considerable movement between these two terms in this thread.