This AP image is making the rounds.
"How dare you say Muhammad spread his faith by the sword?"
What is the over/under for increased rage after Friday sermons?
This AP image is making the rounds.
"How dare you say Muhammad spread his faith by the sword?"
What is the over/under for increased rage after Friday sermons?
What would happen if someone burned an effigy of Mohammed in Vatican Square .. or anyplace for that matter?
Muslims Gone Wild!
from Neal Boortz:
The Vatican is in the hot seat this week over comments made by Pope Benedict XVI in which he essentially called into question the actions of the Prophet Muhammad by quoting from a book, saying: "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." Uh-oh....if you think this went over like a lead balloon, you would be right.
Muslims the world over are up in arms, with clerics calling on the Pope to apologize. What for? They say the Pope was promoting the idea that Islam might be violent. Oh really? Why such sensitivity to that idea? Because it might be true? Of course, whenever leaders in the Islamic community get backed into a corner over terrorism and jihad, they bring up The Crusades. Yawn.
The facts are what they are: Islam has become a violent religion. When atrocities are committed around the world in the name of Allah, condemnation never seems to come from those in the peaceful religion. The silence is deafening when, for instance, a suicide bomber blows up innocent women and children in Israel.
The truth hurts....even if it's the Pope saying it. Of course he'll wind up apologizing, political correctness being what it is.
this is exactly what we wanted. Muslim portraying their immense stupidity.
They are always so predictable...
"Over/Under..." after the whipping-up Khutbas:
Nathan Detroit says 3 to 1.
Sky Masterson says 5 to 1.
Jimmy the Greek? Jimmy ain't answerin' the phone.
Well, the totalitarian governments basically sign a pact with the devil (Islamist clerics) who then give these gory sermons to a largely uneducated and illiterate audience and incite violence like this. It works great for the dictator because all the rage is redirected toward cartoons/America/Israel or what have you and away from him. The message is "it's not because of my repressive regime that you're suffering. It's those Joooos!!!". Were it not for these sermons, most people in the Muslim world wouldn't have even known that the Pope spoke and wouldn't have cared much what he said if they did.
Check out some of the Friday sermons on MEMRITV - it'll make your blood run cold. Although, I think it's kind of funny that the Imam is usually screaming at the top of his lungs and looks like he's about to have a heart attack and when the camera pans the audience, half of them can't keep their eyes open!
Put White Rhobes and Hoods on these guys, and the outrage would be palpable.
is this the Islamic version of the Mexican hat dance.??
'Have Your Say' is much more balanced this time:
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=3822&&&edition=2&ttl=20060915170007
My comment was deleted by the moderator, but just look at many comments by Brits. They just may be getting it. That's a welcome change.
I don't understand. I was just told by Papa Smirk on T.V. that the values we share are "universal" regardless of what part of the world.
I guess freedom of speech isn't highly regarded all over the world. Might be few other freedoms, but maybe I am stretching.
And they wonder why we trash islam as we do.
Do they ever realize how utterly foolish the rest of civilization sees them? I guess ignorance is bliss.
I remember Jimmy, he got into trouble for speaking the truth,:
On January 16, 1988, he was fired by the CBS network (where he was a contributor to the NFL Today program) after commenting to a reporter that African Americans were naturally superior athletes because they had been bred to produce stronger offspring during slavery: "During the slave period, the slave owner would breed his big black with his big woman so that he would have a big black kid—that's where it all started." Snyder died of a heart attack in Las Vegas, at the age of 76.
Kinda of like saying Muslims kill more often because they are bred to kill.
Benedict blunder shows he has failed to master media machine from Breitbart.com
Thank God. The last Pope's "mastery" led to this.
"Media machine mastery" is just a euphemism for being another multicultural politically correct puppet.
Long live Pope Benedict XVI!!!!! (and I'm not a Catholic)
Neal,
It's not so much that Islam "has become" violent. It just never steadily PROGRESSED beyond violence. It did progress during periods in history (look toward the period closer to the end of the Ottoman Empire and its attempts to modernize) but it always seemed to regress faster than it progressed. The most recent regression is about 30 years old and it has been a very fast slide.
I agree with you about the Crusades argument. BIG yawn.
Well, here we go again. Hold on! This is going to be a rough ride.
someone bringing popcorn?
WILL THEY START BURNING BIBLES?
Libbysmom, I just read a lot of those comments. The muslims sure have a distorted view of history. It's just insane how they all claim islam is peaceful. Oh, the insanity!!!
have you read the muslim saying "there are christians in arab land so they are totally respected".
Fedup, that saying deserves a R-I-G-H-T. They say they're respected only because they haven't killed them yet. And the one that said it was never spread by the sword. Another R-I-G-H-T.
Freewoman, religion is what you make it. If this is what's passing for Islam, then it it is not at all peaceful. It's scary. With these people it's kill or be killed. These people are self-radicalising and they'll use any excuse. But Islam doesn't HAVE to be violent. That's the larger point.
another NOTE on the BeBeCeera comments
you can "rate" a comment.
This one got 134 points while the average is 20
the muslim community proves again how "tolerant" it is becoming.
jonathan, cambridge, massachusetts
All the comments about being fed up with moslems are rated over 50. All the comments by moslems about how peaceful and tolerant they are are around 10.
This means a lot for the average feel in UK.
I'm layin' 8 to 5 all the way. It's a foregone conclusion. The lastest in a Long Line of "atrocities" committed on the poor oppressed Muslims of the world, and I'm certain the Imams wont miss an opportunity to make political "hay" over this, that's their Job. I'm sure several actually died when the full impact of Pope Benedicts words struck them.(His words being so deadly) What a cruel Man. The Pope (To speak Truth in such an honest way), is an "Outrage". I expect to see another embassy burned, or what's the point...right? From now on, Expect to see at least one "atrocity" committed against the Ummah every month. Outrage over the truth...8to5.(A Lock)
CRU18
WILL THEY START BURNING BIBLES?
Posted by: KAOSKTRL
Religious leader Ali Bardakoglu said the Pope's comments represented what he called an "abhorrent, hostile and prejudiced point of view".
"Whilst Muslims might express their criticism of Islam and of Christianity, he argued, they would never defame the Holy Bible or Jesus Christ."
Well, that settles it, doesn't it?
"The facts are what they are: Islam has become a violent religion. When atrocities are committed around the world in the name of Allah, condemnation never seems to come from those in the peaceful religion. The silence is deafening when, for instance, a suicide bomber blows up innocent women and children in Israel.
The truth hurts....even if it's the Pope saying it. Of course he'll wind up apologizing, political correctness being what it is."
Posted by exsgtbrown
I'm sure you didn't mean it, but you say that Islam HAS BECOME a violent religion like it's somthing new. Islam has always been a violent, intolerant religion. Then you state "The silence is deafening when, for instance, a suicide bomber blows up innocent women and children in Israel." It might be deafening to some, but not to Muslims. Their definition of "innocent" is a hell of alot different than many others.
Also, don't look for Pope Benedict to apologize so quickly. I figure he might apologize if people got offended, but he won't apologize for saying what he did. He's a cleaver individual.
Well, Citycat, the mohammadons love the violence, so I doubt that they will change.
No wonder these animals live in squalor...seems that none of them work for a living. Achmed to Mohammed..what you doin today? I've not seen anything to burn or behead today what about you bro? Ahhhh something to burn stuff and flags about!!! Call up all the brothers in arms for a flag and effigy burning today and we can blame it on Israel and Bush!! Meet you at the town square or where the last bomb blew up the Shiites....The boss will understand! By the way Mo, who exactly is our boss?? Ahhh yes Allah!!
May the Force be with you...
What a worthless bunch of losers. I think someone should publish those cartoons again.
You know, it really isn't all that comforting to see how the religions of Christianity and Islam are bringing people of the world together.
How's this for an apology?
"I'm sorry that you are such infantile, thin-skinned, violent, ignorant, uncritical, stupid, backward lemmings that you were offended by my remarks."
I don't wanna be together with a bunch of fanatics adoring a pedophile.
I saw this reported this morning on Deutsche Welle TV (in English). Here is their report
Two comments: Although an atheist, (actually an apostate Catholic) I have been a fan of Pope B16, as regards his steadfast attitude towards Islam, thus I am disappointed that he relented and apologized. Secondly take not of the last two paragraphs the Muslims really like Pope JP II, but of course considering that he Debased himself and betrayed his faith by kissing the Qur'an
Those who criticize Islam evidently are not permitted to use the very words of the Qur'an, Sunnah, and the example of the Prophet in the Sira to point out the sources of the violence. We are called "racist bigots" for doing so. Which race? Islam is implanted within every ethnic groups and race upon this earth. Additionally, for each race and ethnic group there are other religions in evidence. So, does that mean we hate ourselves as well?
Here is another example of cognitive dissonance. If we quote the Qur'an, Sunnah, and deeds of the Prophet (Sira)to point out the source of the violence, are not our Muslim interlocutors committing blasphemy by either denying those words or our truthful use of them?
""apologize to Muslims for the crusades, and forced christenings and persecutions of Muslims. That would be an admirable gesture for peace and understanding.""
someone tell this stupid mohammedan that the other pope already apologised for the crimes of the church.
It's not that EVERY pope must do it. Once is enough.
And where are the apologies of the moslems for 1400 of just being themselves?
This is an important development. I respect the pope for saying something that he believes in and doesn't tip toe around the facts BUT, this opens up a new chapter in the war on terror. This could cause even moderate muslems to feel threatened by catholics world wide and attack their interests. Lets pray this don't happen but with moslems, anythings possible.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,213930,00.html
This is the story relating to the photo (not fauxto this time). I particularly enjoyed this quote from the article:
"Anyone who describes Islam as a religion as intolerant encourages violence," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Tasnim Aslam said.
Well, doesn't she just prove the point that it is intolerant since she states that just by someone describing Islam in a way that Moslems don't like will incite them to violence?!?
"The facts are what they are: Islam has become a violent religion." exsgtbrown, quoting Neil Boortz
Correction in order here: Islam "has not become a violent religion." It was so from the beginning. Mr. Boortz needs to get up to speed on this, as he has not read the history of jihad conquest and has no working knowledge of the Qur'an.
Finally, a head of state has the courage and integrity to expose the demon and all hell is let loose. This could turn the tide in a big way. History is a series of catalysing moments and this is one of them. It is potent and momentous.
should revise his comments and stop attacking Islam, which is the religion of more than 1.5 billion people in the world."......
posted by Nariz
Someone should question this guy on how many of those 1.5 billion actually CHOSE to be a muslim, and how many of those 1.5 billion would love to LEAVE islam with their lives.
Oh.
One point five billion.
Right.
And which country did they recently "spread by the sword the faith that" they preach to get to that number?
Islam, which is the religion of more than 1.5 billion people in the world."......
So that means that there is a good 4.5 billion sane people that have nothing to do with a fanatic cult of death. Hey moslems, you are a minority.
Purple Haze
Are you suggesting that we should ignore the sources of the violence in Islamic scripture, tradition, and the example of the Prophet? The jihadis correctly interpret their religion. "Moderate" Muslims need to know what they are up against, and insulating them from their own scriptures' injunctions is not a helpful strategy. You leave the field open to the clerics and activist jihadis to bring more of the "moderates" in line with al illah and the Prophet. I am sure the chimerical "moderates" are hardly influential precisely because they fear their own co-religionists more than they respect the truth.
Well, out of this black day when Oriana Fallaci has just passed away - maybe there is just a glimmer of hope - the first Catholic Pope who is not (in Oriana Fallaci's own words) 'fornicating with Islam.' Remember when Pope John Paul II kissed the Koran in the interests of 'tolerance and understanding'. Don't get me wrong, even though I am not Catholic, I have a great deal of respect for the late Pontiff, but to be kissing the very book that curses Christians and Christianity - well I find that a bit much to swallow I'm afraid. At least this Pope has woken up to the threat that exists in Islam, and he seems less afraid to speak his mind than other high profile figures, which is a good thing, even if what he says is still very mild.
Wow! Prayers are over so it's time to raise some hell outside the masjid. What better way to pass the afternoon when you live in a dusty dry, god forsaken hole with no hope and countryside decimated by 1300 years of Mohammedism.
Purple Haze, those muslims who "fear" Catholics
are idiots. There is nothing to fear from Christians unless of course, one can't stand hugs. The muslims are grasping at straws. They don't want islam's brainwashed to learn the truth about the cult.
An especially nice picture of a nice Muslim protester:
http://www.foxnews.com/images/223870/5_26_091506_pope_protest.jpg
OMG, George-rem that guy needs to see allah (in hell) quick. He looks insane.
Havent seen all of it yet
Some nice quotes here
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20060915/capt.isl10209151348.pakistan_pope_isl102.jpg
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20060915/i/r2741954457.jpg
And this nice story
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060915/ap_on_re_mi_ea/pope_muslims_9
Turkish lawmaker compares pope to Hitler By SUZAN FRASER, Associated Press Writer
ANKARA, Turkey - A Turkish lawmaker said Pope Benedict XVI would go down in history "in the same category as leaders such as Hitler and Mussolini" for remarks he made about Islam. Meanwhile, Pakistan's Foreign Ministry summoned the Vatican's ambassador to express regret over the remarks.
HENRY, Islam certainly does NOT have to be violent and intolerant. The entire dhimmi system was revolutionary for its time. At the time, Christians would just force conversion or slaughter. But that was then and now the concept of dhimmi is both outdated and not practiced with the benovalance it should be. Democracy with separation of religion and state should replace it.
You have clearly not read the Koran (or you've cherry-picked your passages) and you are most likely also confusing Koran and Haddith. Not that this would make you any different then most Muslims, unfortunately. Islam's history is no bloodier than the Christian history. Check out Bernard Lewis' history "What Went Wrong" - it's only about 160 pages. But that's not even the point. History is history and we are no longer living in the year 1095. Instead of modernizing and accepting (or even KNOWING about) Age of Enlightenment principles, the Muslim world hangs on to centuries old dogma and reads STORIES of conquest in the Koran as COMMANDS for conquest (bloody conquest, no less). This makes them unable to compete with the rest of the world and basically and they start looking for scapegoats. So, they've turned into modern-day Nazis.
But this was not the Islam I was taught and not the Islam I teach my kids. I was taught (and now teach) that, like any religion, it is a personal communication with God - not a political theory and never to be forced on anyone. Period. Incidentally, I'm not offended by the Pope's remarks. It's the Muslim clerics themselves who perpetuate Islamic violence and then scream bloody murder when they're called out for it. How can you sceam "Religion of Peace" and bomb people at the same time? Laughable. The Pope should not apologize - he should point that out their hypocracy to them.
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20060915/i/r2741954457.jpg
'Jihad is hump of Islam'?! WTF is that supposed to mean?
another encouraging sign about Pope Benedict that seems to be forgotten, is that last July he refused to label Islam "a religion of peace."
I am devout Catholic and i believe that when this world war escalates, Vatican City will be destroyed. Maybe thats what it will take for tolerant, appeasing Catholics to finally defend their faith.
Someone should send a RPG down his throat.
Don't ANY of those sandrats ever work for a living? They give pathetic a new definition.
Time for another round of cartoons.
I hope the Vatican is at code red....
citycat,
This is islam, by the rules, straight down the line. It is not peaceful never has been. They are not self radicalizing, they follow a strict code of behavior. They don’t need an excuse for violence, it is required.
I have been searching for one that doesn’t look insane. No luck so far.
20 to 1 the Pope doesn’t apologize.
check out the "jihad is war against terrorism" sign in this one
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20060915/capt.isl10209151348.pakistan_pope_isl102.jpg
So Citycat, can islam reform?
How do you get around the scientific parts of the koran, such as , people come from blood clots, semen from the spine, mountains hold down the earth, the world is flat, the fly's wings, with your children? Do you teach them that modern science is right and the koran is wrong? And if the koran is the immutable word of allah........ I am curious.
Tgusa,
"This is islam, by the rules, straight down the line. It is not peaceful never has been."
I completely disagree with you. Any religion is defined, IMO, by how it's practiced. There is mercy in the Koran, there is repentance, forgiveness and respect. If you choose to ignore those passages, then it's violent, hateful and disgusting.
You've never met one that doesn't look insane because if you saw me, you wouldn't think I were Muslim.
The Pope shouldn't apologize. The Islamic religious leaders are choosing to drive their constituancy into violent conflict with the values of the civilized world. They cannot call that peaceful. I hope the Pope points that out in lieu of an apology.
Muslims outraged again. What's it about this week? These people even get outraged about the steps taken by non-Muslims to avoid being blown up by them.
Wanna bet the State Department will express 'regret' over the Pope's statements?
a few things...
1. May God Bless Pope Benedict XVI, and please give him the strength not to apologize, and to elaborate more intently on the subject.
2. Once again, Muslims bitch and moan, burn things, and threaten... but I haven't heard one iota of information from Muslims to prove the contrary to the Pope's, or Emperor Paleogalo's (sic?), remarks.
3. Although Pope John Paul II kissed the Koran, he did so as a man of our God, trying to bring humankind together. He did not denounce, or betray his God (as the Fox reporters did.) Unfortunately, he didn't understand, or shaded the truth behind Islam.
4. More importantly, for his time, he did understand the evils of communism, and the USSR, for which he played an enormous part in the defeat of.
5. Thanks to Pope Bendict XVI, maybe the world will see the true evils of Islam, as they act like a bunch of idiots (as usual.) Unfortunately, the free world doesn't believe the U.S. because they have been blinded by political correctness, but the Pope reaches globally.
6. To the Muslim people: "You can't handle the truth!"
7. I think it's time the Mohammed Cartoons get plasted all over the place.
8. Thinking of going as Mohammed with a Bomb on my head for Halloween.
Compare this with how Americans spent the 5th anniversary of 9/11. Quiet mourning, and still a lot of "why-do-they-hate-us" and "how-could-we-make-them-like-us-more" talk.
When was the last time Christian (or Hindu, or Buddhist, etc) mobs chanted "death to Muslims", "death to Palestine", "death to Pakis", "death to Arabs" etc.?
Somehow, there wasn't. Not even after any brutal jihadist attacks against the Infidels.
Somehow there are always, for any reason at hand, Muslim mobs chanting death to any group of Infidels they manage to recall at the moment.
If the wide audience doesn't start getting it now, they never will.
Wouldn't it be time that Muslims start asking themselves the "why-don't-they-like-us"-question?
It amazes me that all of these "moderate" muslims talk about how they want dialogu and peace and understanding while simultaneously critisizing just about every aspect of western/American/Judeo-Christian life and values. Yet the minute that someone implies that Islam might have to change its violent, hateful ways, they cry "bigot", demand apologies and immediately compare the speaker to Hitler.
Who can take their pleas for "dialogue" seriously any more?
I really hope that the Pope doesn't back down on this. He is initiating EXACTLY the type of dialogue that this world so desperately needs to engage in.
citycat said:
"Freewoman, religion is what you make it."
I don't agree. Religion has inherent structure to it, it involves a set of ideas. It is not infinitely flexible.
Regarding Islam in particular, my understanding is that the Koran (though it may be Hadith, or may be scholarly tradition, I have only started studying relatively recently, and I am still learning) states that older verses "replace" earlier verses when the two are in conflict. My understanding is, further, that context and scope must be taken into account when interpreting a verse (as is the case for any meaningful real-world piece of human language).
This ends up creating a delineation of what you can make of religion if you accept that Holy text, and makes it possible to talk about ideas and actions stemming from them being either in line with a given religion or contrary to it (much as this inconveniences political strategists like James Taranto).
You also say: "But Islam doesn't HAVE to be violent. That's the larger point."
I would very much like evidence of this. If it is possible to hold the Koran as infallible, and to silmutaneously hold that Islam isn't violent, well, I would like to know what sort of solid technical theological interpretation can yield this. Such a technical analysis would make a wonderful book with the potential to combat ideology-based violence in the Muslim community, saving the lives of Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Is it possible to write without distorting language, scope, context, and Koran-founded or reliable-Hadith-founded Islamic principles of interpretation?
Muslims murder 3,000 innocents in New York and expect no criticism.
Muslims murder 202 tourists in Bali and expect no criticism.
Muslims murder 333 schoolchildren and their teachers in Beslan and expect no criticism.
Muslims murder 292 innocents, mainly Kenyans and Tanzanians at two US Embassies and expect no criticism.
Muslims murder 241 US and 58 French peacekeepers in Beirut and expect no criticism.
Muslims fire 4,000 Katyusha rockets into Northern Israel killing over 50 innocent civilians and expect no criticism.
Muslims murder 52 in London and 191 in Madrid and expect no criticism.
Muslims murder 200 in Mumbai and expect no criticism.
Muslims behead Western hostages in Iraq, Buddhist monks in Thailand and Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia and expect no criticism.
Muslims murder 500,000 in Darfur and expect no criticism.
Muslims regard Jews as 'sons of pigs and monkeys', and threaten to nuke Israel and expect no criticism.
Muslims force women to wear hideous sacks and expect no criticism.
Muslims danced in the streets and handed out sweets to their kids to celebrate the 911 atrocity, and still expected no criticism.
Muslims have carried out almost 6,000 fatal terrorist atrocities since 911, and countless thousands since their catalogue of murder began in 623 AD and expect no criticism.
But if a Pope dares to tell the truth about Islam or Danes publish cartoons about Mohammed, then let the outpourings of hate begin.
What a barbaric, gruesome, bitter, satanic, backward and twisted cult of death Islam is.
Good on yer, Benedict.
the readings are from 14th century and still relevant today! not much progression here then.
of course the rioting, burning effigies,threating violence, etc will endear us to them much more!!
sad fools.
i guess islam will implode from within. too any double standards.
today the pope has opened a lot of eyes.& prompted a lot of questions this can only be a good thing.
It turns out the the pope's mealy mouthed words were actually fighting words. The depth of the Muslims' false grievances have been, and are, astonishing. Perhaps now, that Jews and Israel are not the only ones being attacked, the irritating hypocrisy of the Muslims will be made clear by what's left of Rome's followers? The question is, unlike President Bush who has the muscle to back up his threats, that were implicit in his September 11, 2006, address, Rome has no army. The French, Spanish, etc. have clearly shown that they are cowards that will incite the Muslims against Jews and Israel in the false hope that Islam will leave them be. Not much chance of that; but I say the euro-trash and the Muslims deserve eachother.
"another encouraging sign about Pope Benedict that seems to be forgotten, is that last July he refused to label Islam "a religion of peace."
I am devout Catholic and i believe that when this world war escalates, Vatican City will be destroyed. Maybe thats what it will take for tolerant, appeasing Catholics to finally defend their faith."
Posted by: freedomfight11
The more I have studied Islam and the teachings and the live of Mohammed the more I truely believe that Satan is in the mix.
mrsmomomoto, that is correct and the verses in the Koran talking about PEACE and COEXISTANCE with others of THE BOOK (Jews and Christians) were written BEFORE the teaching of JIHAD and conversion by the sword.
I HAVE lived in an Islamic Republic and I was never so happy to see crosses on steeples as when I was at last "home" again. It is admirable that many devote Muslims DO live their faith so fully, something I vagely remember my grandparents doing.
citycat said
Okay, stupid me, I don't have better ways to spend my time, so I'll feed the troll.
Dhimmitude is "outdated"? So, the immutable word of Allah was true 1,350 years ago, but not anymore? When did the word of Allah become "outdated"?
And benovalance (sic)? Dhimmitude involved not being allowed to have any visible sign of worship (jewelry, prayerbeads, skullcaps, etc.) in public. They had to supplicate themselves as they paid the jizya, and in order to feel "subdued", the Muslim taking their money had to strike them. At any time and under any pretense, this "benevolant" dhimmitude could be (and was) revoked, leading to the other two choices: forced conversion or death.
To which sect do you belong, that does not accept the hadith and surah as representing the life of Allah's Prophet, Muhammad, the Perfect Man that Allah said was to be emulated for all time? The Qur'an may have precedence over the hadith and surah, but all three are in agreement that violence towards non-Muslims is mandated by Allah, and any of us here can quote the relevant verses.
What's that thing called, when comedians spray the beverage out of their mouth in surprise? Insert one of those here.
Huh? Are you sure you are a Muslim?
Qur’an 4:91 “You will find others who, while wishing to live in peace and being safe from you to gain the confidence of their people; thrown back to mischief headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and offer you peace besides restraining their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear sanction and authority.”
Qur’an 8:59 “The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them.”
And so on and so forth. We've got pages of these quotes if you're interested. It's hard not to "cherry pick" when you're picking from a cherry tree, but maybe you have figured out how to pick plums from a cherry tree? The Qur'an is what it is; you seem to be the one choosing which parts you want to accept, and which parts you want to reject.
Do you practice your version of Islam in public, or do you practice it only while hidden and in fear of being found out by the "real" Muslims? No-one is denying that some people who identify themselves as Muslims would like to reject some of the violent sections of the Qur'an. But that is not the point.
Wasn't CityCat the moniker of another (non-Muslim) JW/DW poster a while back?
Freewoman,
How do I get around the scientific parts of the Koran? The same way I you probably get around creationism with your kids if you are a Christian (or a Muslim, for that matter). God didn't LITERALLY create the world in 7 days. Evolution, for, example, is not in conflict with God being the creator. Who created evolution? Plus, there are language issues in the and translation problems from the 7th century to modern language and from Arabic to English. So was it really a clot or are we talking about babies developing in the womb with a placenta?
IMO, Islam makes science very easy. The first Surah of the Koran commands Muslims to learn. The Koran also tells Muslims to "listen to the Scientists". You are supposed to learn and progress through scientific research. After all, learning and progress is ordaned by God so that his creation (man) has a way to discover the world that God has created and improves human lives. Global jihad, on the other hand, creates nothing and teaches nothing. Thus, I consider global Jihad anathema to Islam.
Also, all the Christian prophets - including Christ - are prophets in Islam as well. In fact, the only difference is that Christ is not a diety. But did you know that Muslims believe that when the end of the world comes it will be Jesus coming to take pious to the kingdom of God and not Mohamed? Islam also teaches that no prophet is more important than any other. So why should I ignore Christ and only pay attention to Mohamed? So, yeah, there's absolutely NO religous reason why Muslims can't live without violence and conquest.
Although, I have to say that Islamic clerics in Saudi Arabia have ABROGATED the Koran's passages of mercy. That's the real problem. The clerics have given them a religous reason (which they have no right to give). That's like the Pope cancelling the New Testament. So, now they're teaching only KILL KILL KILL. I'm sorry, I don't call that "Islam".
citycat,
Believe me the real spirit of this blog and its community is to root for people like you, the peaceful muslims. You must admit however, that when it comes to confronting your own fellow muslims who in fact support jihad, you are facing an uphill battle convincing them of these things that you say here. Moderates are intimidated into silence and have zero impact on halting the advance of jihad.
As you say, religion is defined by how it is practiced, and from the objective observer's eyes, Islam is a war machine attempting to camouflage itself as a religion. Your efforts to change that are far more appreciated than your efforts to convince us that we are being deceived by our own eyes.
This AP image is making the rounds.
I wondered for a moment where the Screaming Old Lady famously photographed doing her schtick in different places in Lebanon was.
But it's an AP photo... maybe she's under contract with Reuters.
Hugh,
Sky once said "On the day when I left home to make my way in the world, my daddy took me to one side. 'Son,' my daddy says to me, 'I am sorry I am not able to bankroll you to a large start, but not having the necessary lettuce to get you rolling, instead I'm going to stake you to some very valuable advice. One of these days in your travels, a guy is going to show you a brand-new deck of cards on which the seal is not yet broken. Then this guy is going to offer to bet you that he can make the jack of spades jump out of this brand-new deck of cards and squirt cider in your ear. But, son, do not accept this bet, because as sure as you stand there, you're going to wind up with an ear full of cider.' "
I first memorized this monologue I was five, some 50 years ago (if you want to know, just ask). I've been USING this speech and relating it to the muslims ( i.e. Taqqiya) for years now with any and everyone who would listen. I've alienated my wife, my kids think I'm nuts, and I can't seem to get any of my friends to go fly fishing with me any more. But I don't care. I'll continue to tell the truth to anyone any time I get the chance.
Sooner or later I know I'm going to get stabbed or worse by a member of the ROP. As Nicely-Nicely once said,
"People all said sit down
Sit down you're rockin' the boat.
And the devil will drag you under
By the sharp lapel of your checkered coat,
Sit down, sit down, sit down, sit down,
Sit down you're rockin' the boat."
I'm not afraid to rock the boat.
Citycat,
"I consider global Jihad anathema to Islam."
You've just declared yourself apostate. Watch your back from your mat buddies.
"In fact, the only difference is that Christ is not a diety."
A rather crucial difference to minimize.
"But did you know that Muslims believe that when the end of the world comes it will be Jesus coming to take pious to the kingdom of God and not Mohamed?"
Yes, to break the cross and kill the unbelivers, yada yada.
"Islam also teaches that no prophet is more important than any other."
Bullshit. Sahih Bukhari 9.93.507
"I have to say that Islamic clerics in Saudi Arabia have ABROGATED the Koran's passages of mercy."
As you have abrogated the Medinan verses.
"The clerics have given them a religous reason (which they have no right to give)."
No, actually the Qur'an does that quite efficiently on its own.
"That's like the Pope cancelling the New Testament."
No, it's like the Pope affirming the New Testament.
"So, now they're teaching only KILL KILL KILL. I'm sorry, I don't call that "Islam".
Then leave it. Try reading Ibn Warraq for a change.
citycat, I still don't know if this is a put on. I'd like to believe you are a moderate Muslim, but then you say things like "Islam makes science very easy" and "Islam says listen to the scientists", and "[Islam] is a personal communication with God", and it sounds like a superficial understanding of Islam that is refuted by the slightest amount of investigation.
But anyways, on with the show:
Not just clerics in Saudi Arabia, but in Pakistan, Iran, Syria, Indonesia, Thailand, Yemen, and really, EVERYWHERE that Islam is taught by ANY of the major Islamic schools of jurisprudence. How did ALL of those Islamic scholars get it wrong, how did they all misunderstand the Qur'an in such a fundamental way? And hearing this misunderstood violent message from the confused scholars, how did the vast majority of moderates accept their message? I mean, if the Pope came out tomorrow and said we need to kill all non-Catholics (which is a ludicrous hypothetical meant with no lack of respect towards the Pope), Catholics would question his mental health, they wouldn't just go out and start killing like robots. If the Qur'an teaches peace and harmony, why are there so many Muslims throughout the world who think that it calls for violent jihad?
Imagine if Saudi Arabia in the Fifties and Sixties had asked British tradesmen to move into the country to fill a need for workers.
Those British workers bringing their wives and children with suitcase loads of tea and baked beans would have needed a bit of help settling in at first, but soon they would have wanted a community centre and a bowling green. Then they would have wanted maybe a C of E church and a Catholic church. Before too long they would expect a church in every town where there is a bowling green and a tea room, not to mention the community centre and soon a tennis court as well.
After fifty years of this the Saudi Arabians of British descent would be getting a bit cheesed off at being treated as second class citizens in a foreign land and they might decide to take action…
In reality those British immigrants would never have rose above the status of hired help and they certainly would never be allowed to proliferate Christianity to every town in the land.
In Britain these events have happened in reverse. In Britain the Muslims are not only taking action, they also have a voice that belies the fact that they make up only 2.7% of the population. Bombs have raised their minority status into the major realms of public opinion.
So many times I read comments by Muslims that say I reject extremism but nobody is listening to me. That is because the MCB is the voice of Islam in Britain and they are refusing to say what you think. Why are they refusing to say it? The open letter to parliament was a waste of time that denounced violence, but pointed out reasons for the violence. That letter proved that the majority of Muslims with influence consider other Muslims above the country they live in. That surely is the ultimate failure of the multicultural experiment.
Then we have the hate fest that follows every criticism of Islam. I can picture the raving Mullah banging on about why the Pope must die for his blasphemy, while he holds up a picture of the Pope and guesses his height.
“We need a size eighteen for this one brother!”
“Allah provided me with a size eighteen effigy only last week!”
“Good, let the riot begin!”
For every argument the Muslims make to support their victimisation by the West, I can show them a picture of a Mosque in Britain and furthermore I can show them a council that is building accommodation for Muslim families.
The Pope brings a truth that comes from decades of study and his words should not be distorted to fit agendas. If he apologises personally then we are doomed.
Heh heh heh... hilarious post... "How dare you say Muhammad spread his faith by the sword?" with a picture of Islamists doing what Islamists do.
As someone who has debated all types over the years on religious issues... Islamists, Muslims, are up there with the most ill-prepared, illogical of them all.
They have nothing which stands on reason... no evidence whatsoever.
They usually won't debate... because they can't.
And, like all such groups, they are extremely weak when it comes to debating because it becomes so trivial to turn them... or put them into a state of crisis.
As for this Pope thing, I am all for that. About time Catholics had a Pope willing to stand up and speak uncomfortable truths. (Being a hard core "Protestant", myself, typically I am opposed to the Popish system, but I am not opposed to anyone who speaks the hard truth against Islam... on that matter, anyway.)
Ultimately, Islamists will want to strike out at the Pope again, he is an easy target for them... though, this alone won't raise Catholics against Islamists -- but their celebrations worldwide afterwards would. (Same with 9/11... it would have been just isolated Muslim kooks if it were not that Muslims all over the world celebrated it and therefore bloodied their hands.)
What is the problem?? the Musiln people cann't take the truth?? don't know th koran?? or what Mo revealed??
the Sura's say it all:
Sura 9:5-6 kill those who join other gods with allah wherever you may find them
Sura 8:12 I will instill terror into the hearts of the infidels, strike off their heads then, strike them off from every fingertip
Or what most Islamic schollars believe to be the last Sura revealed, giving it precedence:
Sura 9:29 Fight those who believe not in allah, nor the last days, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by the religion of truth(even if they are) of the people of the book, until they pay the Jizya (a special tax on non-muslims) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.So the Pope had the courage to speak up and say the truth, so what! I was personally waiting to see if this Pope would do/say something monumental. And to some degree he has. He told the truth which is more than most heads of state are doing, including our own Presidnet Bush.
Every Christian, every lover of the truth should stand with him, put this Muslin rage to death!
Hear me I'm not saying kill Muslims, I'm saying hold Muslims accountable for their rage and destruction! There very koran support what the Pope said.
Islam is a 1,400 year old study in hate, murder, racsim, sexism, and murder, and the satistics are in: the massacre & extermination of Zoroastians in Iran; Million Armenians in Turkey
Buddhists & Hindus in India; 6,000 Jews in Fez, Morocco, in 1033; 100's + Jews killed in Cordolb between 1010 & 1013; the entire Jewish communinity of 4,000 in Granada in 1066
1,000 Jews killed in anti-Jewish rioting in Baghdad; the list goes on and on.
It supasses any Christian wrong doings b/c the Holy Bible doen't support their actions. They weren't acting in accordance with their Lord's wishes, they were evil men. The problem with Islam is Islam, its all written down in the koran, the book of hate, murder, lies & cheating of your enemies, rape, racism, sexism. The koran supports all this garbage! If Muslims don't like the truth, find a holy book of honor, a prophet of good report (not a child molester, a demon possed, dirty old man)
mrsmomoto,
"Religion has inherent structure to it, it involves a set of ideas. It is not infinitely flexible."
This is precisely the point. The Haddith seek to make the religion more "flexible". The Haddith, in fact, added back a lot of disgusting stuff (like rape is okay during war) that are forbidden by the Koran.
"my understanding is that the Koran (though it may be Hadith, or may be scholarly tradition, I have only started studying relatively recently, and I am still learning) states that older verses "replace" earlier verses when the two are in conflict."
I don't know what school of Islamic thought that refers to. I'd never heard of any such rule. CERTAINLY, you are not allowed to replace any verses in the Koran.
The problem is all this "flexibility". Now, I think that a lot of Christians (a quarter of my relatives are Christian) take bible verse too literally. Or misinterpret stories as commands. The Muslims do the same. In addition, Muslim clerics have recently taken to "cancelling out" parts of the Koran. How's that for flexible? Supposing a priest started canceling out "love thy neighbour" in the Bible. Would you still call that Christianity? You'd probably think that's a little too flexible.
The rule for Haddith has always been that if it contradicts the Koran, it is not a valid Haddith. In fact, Haddith didn't even appear until 250 years AFTER the establishment of Islam. So, I don't even consider Haddith a fundamental part of Islam. It's certainly not "holy scripture". For example, I don't even wear a veil because all that purdah stuff is in Haddith. The Koran only asks me to dress modestly and cover my bosom. I figure, as long as my boobs aren't hanging out, I'm good.
with regard to why I don't think Islam should be violent, please see my response to freewoman. Bottom line is, I have a whole big (Muslim) family and a bunch of friends of the family who think all this effigy-burning, jihad, anti-American, Anti-Israel, anti-cartoon, riot stuff is bullshit. We're definitely in the minority but we exist.
As for whether other Muslims will consider me a "real Muslim" based on my beliefs - I just don't give a crap. I answer to God. Not Mullahs. Not other Muslims.
I think more will come back to our way of thinking eventually. I mean, how can you live a normal life when you're constantly on Jihad??
My problem Citycat, is if the koran is the word of allah, and if allah doesn't realize the world isn't flat, and it's not the mountains that hold the world in place, and semen doesn't come from the male's back, how can you still worship him? If, as the koran states, that he created everything, wouldn't he have known the truth? And how do you teach your children that, women are worth as much as men, it's not nice to hit women, and women aren't just tilth to be used or abused as her husband wishes? Do you teach your daughters to be independent or to just depend on their husbands?
My daughter was taught to be independent, think on her own and to know that just because her sex carries the babies, she is not to be used and abused by the sperm donor.
Also, how can you worship a man who was a mass murderer, pedophile , rapist and thief? He is not someone to emulate. Most life in the universe knows right from wrong and don't honor those who are blatantly savage toward others.
When CityCat writes:
"But did you know that Muslims believe that when the end of the world comes it will be Jesus coming to take pious to the kingdom of God and not Mohamed?"
CityCat is being disingenuous. Muslims do not believe that Jesus is merely going to return to "take the pious to the kingdom of God". They believe that Jesus will also return to be the final Caliph of a global Islam and that he will lead all Muslims in a global jihad against non-Muslims. I.e., Muslims believe that Jesus will return to fight and kill pagans, Jews, and -- Christians!
citycat said
Because when Christ heard his message of love and forgiveness, he misunderstood and he was being deceived. Because Muhammad, Allah's Prophet, is the only one who heard the message directly from Allah, word for word, as it is written in the Qur'an, with all the "smite at their necks" and "kill them wherever you find them". Christ had it wrong, Muhammad had it right.
Christ was not the son of God, he did not die on the cross, his death did not save humanity.
This is all from mainstream Islamic tradition. The version you're saying sounds like the superficial taqiyah they feed to the infidels to placate us.
If you felt lost and were welcomed with flowery ebullience to the teachings of the Qur'an, please be careful about what exactly you have joined. Do not stop questioning and learning.
Whoa! The Pope is supposed to believe in the superior and distinct truth of the Church. The Pope is allowed to speak comparatively of Christianity and other religions to the detriment of other religions.
Islamic arrogance is jaw dropping.
for the record:
How are hadith collections viewed?
The overwhelming majority of Muslims consider hadith to be essential supplements to and clarifications of the Qur'an, Islam's holy book.
In the matter of what is called fiqh, or Islamic jurisprudence, the Qur'an contains many rules for the behavior expected of Muslims. However, there are many matters of concern, both religious and practical, on which there are no specific Quranic rules. Muslims believe that they can look at the way of life, or sunnah, of Muhammad and his companions to discover what to imitate and what to avoid.
In the matter of what is called tafsir, or exposition of the meaning of the Qur'an, Muslim scholars believe that it is useful to know how Muhammad or his companions explained the revelations, or upon what occasion Muhammad received them. Sometimes this will clarify a passage that otherwise seems obscure.
Hadith are a source for Islamic history and biography.
For the vast majority of devout Muslims, authentic hadith are also a source of religious inspiration.
Some contemporary Muslims argue that the Qur'an alone is sufficient. Examples of such Muslims groups are Tolu-e-Islam (Resurgence of Islam), Free Minds, and United Submitters International. Muslims who take the "Qur'an alone" viewpoint are regarded as deviant by mainstream Muslim scholars, and by the vast majority of Muslims. Hadith-trusting Muslims argue that many Qur'anic instructions are impossible to fulfill without guidance from the ahadith. (The Qur'an does not, for example, specify how many prayer cycles constitute fulfillment of each of the daily prayers. ) The origins of some verses and statements in the Hadith cannot be verified as regards their source of origin.
THe vast majority of Hadith trusting Muslims argue that many QWur'anic instructions are impossible to fulfill without guidance from the ahadith---If you say the Hadith is not holy scripture you may only be half right. the Hadith supplements the Qur'an and Muslims follow blindly.
The photo says it all...
Citycat:
I have to disagree with you 'to the max'!!
First of all, most of the Kuran's forgiveness verses usually apply to MUSLIMS ONLY. AL-lah does not forgive those who do not submit to his will. If you disagree remember the Kuran states: "An evil fate awaits the unbelievers." How forgiving is THAT?? Not very, insofar as we can see. Sorry, but I just don't see much negotiating room for obtaining forgiveness in light of that one.
Secondly, the Kuranic passages that advocate killing, hate, and warfare against the infidels vastly outnumber the passages that advocate forgiveness. Thus, Muslims hate, kill, and war against infidels to a far degree and frequency than they are willing to cut them any slack. I wonder why.
Thirdly, the supposed Founder of Islam, Muhammed, did NOT practice a faith marked by forgiveness and benevolence. He lived by the sword and spread al-lah's message by the sword. And that is the way Islam is practiced today--in accordance with its Founder Muhammed's practice of the faith.
So we can see that Islam has indeed been defined by the way it is practiced. Islam is and always has been practiced the way its founder practiced it--brutally. So, why would Muslims practice their so-called faith any differently than its alleged 'Founder' did?? Maybe we should ask ourselves, why wouldn't they?
Jan,
It's a giant, uphill battle. I don't think it can be won by negotiation. Do the people in the photos look like they want to negotiate. Here's how the negotiation would go:
"submit to our Taliban will".
"No"
Then they behead you. Pretty much, we're just going to have to kill them first. There's no convincing terrorists they're wrong.
"Your efforts to change that are far more appreciated than your efforts to convince us that we are being deceived by our own eyes."
Now, I'd be interested to know where you find my efforts to convince you that you're being deceivd by your own eyes?
I should have written , this is islam as practiced by what appears to be a majority of muslims today. citycat could be considered part of a tiny minority of extremists who don’t properly understand how islam should be practiced(misunderstanders of islam). The fanatics believe citycat can be whipped into shape when the time comes, if not they will just kill citycat. If muslims like citycat were to finally stand up to these fanatics (that would mean dispatching them) we could then begin a dialogue. Of course, we will probably never get anywhere due to the neverending list of contradictions we would have to resolve. Could citycat raise a sword against these fanatics, these insulters of the Pope?
Are Catholics allowed to be 'offended' (the new buzz word to justify violence) at the burning of an effigy of the Pope?
Is it only Muslims who are allowed to be 'offended'?
We are being called "infidels" in their mosques everyday, by their top critics. Why aren't we offended. Imagine if the pope went up and said "Everyone who's not Catholic is an infidel" what would that do to the world. They are waiting on a chance to get offended. They'll snap and show their real face. I just feel sorry for the Chrstians living among them. Here's an excerpt from an article on CNN today
"Meanwhile, a youth center run by the Greek Orthodox church in the Gaza Strip was slightly damaged by a small explosion on Friday, witnesses told Reuters.
It was unclear if the blast was connected to the pope's comments."
Notice the use of word "small" and "unclear."
Long live the pope!
I sent the BBC site on this item the following e mail,
Just think what would happen if John Cleese and the Monty Python crew made a film of "The Life of Iqbal". A camel trader who just happened to live in Arabia at the same time as Mohammed and kept being mistaken for him!
They did not post it, wonder why?
citicat,
Concerning the "enlightened" concept of dhimmitude, please pick up Bat Ye'or's "The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude."
The application of the Dhimma was highly unpredictable. Capricious would be more like it. No Muslim caliph or emir was required to honor it, as there was plenty of precedence for refusing it.
It was actually a repressive system that imposed, at best, a second-class citizen status upon Jews and Christians. Their religious practices were greatly circumscribed and a crushing, humiliating jizya was required to be paid. To add to the humiliation of the jizya, the leaders of the infidel communities were the ones who were compelled to be the tax farmers.
Why are you trying to draw a moral equivalence here between Christianity and Islam? There is nothing in our faith that REQUIRES us to behave badly towards non-Christians. That is not the case with Islamic scripture and jurisprudence.
For God's sake, what has to happen to us before people finally understand that the source of the violence is in mandated, compulsory jihad outlined in Islamic scriptures, law, and the words and deeds of the Perfect Man, Muhammed?
" And in Gaza City, a grenade exploded outside a Christian church, though there were no casualties. "
All I've got to say is Hellooooooooooo..... Earth to radical muslims..... Religion of Peace?
Give me a brake.
Rosie O'Donnell says Christians are terriorists. Did the Christians riot in the streets.
What about not being able to wear a cross in public in Saudi Arabia. I think it's about time the Christians demand freedom of religeous expression in the Arab world.
Citycat:
I think you don't know your own religion. I would suggest reconsidering it.
It may be a hard pill to swallow that anonymous strangers, maybe even some who are brash, know your religion better then you... but maybe this is not very difficult when they see these fanatics and what they do and how they quote the Koran and other Islamic Scriptures to do it?
I have to admit, I have known many Muslims who would never take the sword and are great people. But, the truth is these Muslims are Muslims in name only. They were born into it. Their "goodness" and the goodness of any Muslim I have met, religious or not, does not come from Islam -- it comes from their own self, and their culture which pre-exists Islam.
Islam acts as a poison on these people. Islam is the singular problem. Islam is why these nations did not flourish.
That the Turks had any kind of success at all was due to the fact that those under their control were more religious then they were. Their conquerings surely came from Islam, but their ruling afterwards surely did not.
Islam is designed to conquer and destroy just like locusts are.
And, as other have noted, maybe you are a grasshopper today... but under certain conditions grasshoppers change into locusts, their swarming form. They under physiological changes. Then, they become destructive.
Are you so sure you don't have the capability to go from grasshopper to locust, yourself?
I think most moderate Muslims (non-religious ones)... believe they do not have to try and fight against extreme Muslims in all of this... because they do not fear the West against their brothers.
If the Islamists there keep attacking us, eventually we will be forced to respond. They will be decimated.
I would try to hold their hand back, if you care at all for your people.
We are being called "infidels" in their mosques everyday, by their top critics. Why aren't we offended. Imagine if the pope went up and said "Everyone who's not Catholic is an infidel" what would that do to the world. They are waiting on a chance to get offended. They'll snap and show their real face. I just feel sorry for the Chrstians living among them. Here's an excerpt from an article on CNN today
"Meanwhile, a youth center run by the Greek Orthodox church in the Gaza Strip was slightly damaged by a small explosion on Friday, witnesses told Reuters.
It was unclear if the blast was connected to the pope's comments."
Notice the use of word "small" and "unclear."
Long live the pope!
I don't know why we're all worried about the islamic horde--just check out the half-wit in the pic stomping on the flames with flip-flops.
Islam wants your clitoris! Renew the Crusades!
Even the church is now waking up. Poor little Muslims me thinks they protestith too much. The truth hurts.
Concerned Citizen,
"You've just declared yourself apostate. Watch your back from your mat buddies."
I don't associate with those mat buddies. Keeps the blood pressure down. Most of my buddies are non-Muslims (for obvious reasons)
Christ as a non-diety is not that crucial. Christ's TEACHINGS are what's important.
I have not abrogated verses. The Koran has to be taken as a whole - including mercy.
In answer to several others (because I there's only one of me and I can't type that fast):
Look at Dhimmis in the Ottoman Empire. They were allowed partial autonomy and not subject to Islamic rule. While they paid a tax but were not obligated to serve in the Ottoman army. FOR THE TIME (an important distinction) this was pretty benevolant. Today we know better (democracy, age of enlightenment), so we should do better.
For Freewoman who is concerned that since dhimmitude is in the Koran we have to follow it: I believe that since the first Surah commands us to "learn" and further we are commanded to listen to and benefit from scientists, we can make changes to dhimmi. God commanded dhimmi so that other religions are protected, not forced to convert but can live in Muslim-run governments. But the core of the idea is protection of other faiths. Democracy does that better, so we should progress to that. Of course, there will be people who disagree with me but that's what I think.
The Koran teaches that men and women are equal. I know that later it permits men to hit their wives. So which is it? They contradict each other. How do I deal with that? The Koran also says that "if it contradicts itself. It is not from God". The stuff about equality appears in the Koran first and repeats. The beating appears once. Methinks somebody snuck that in. In any case, beating contradicts the the equality, so we stick with the equality. My husband would rather cut off his arms than hit me - or the kids. Our children are treated equally. My kids can date whomever they want and they can marry whomever they want from whatever religion they want. Not mainstream, you say? I'm not mainstream.
But, tough issues exist in every religion. Are divorced Catholics still catholic? How do you explain the lack of zero-tolerance for pedophile priests? How do you tackle the inquisitions and the bloody wars between Protestants and Catholics in, say, England with respect to the peaceful nature of Christianity?
Special_guest:
Would I waste this much time for a "put on" on a board where we are all anonymous? No it's not a put on. You're right in your last post about it not just being Saudi Clerics who abrogated it. But the Saudis are the only ones I have a source for (in case anyone challenged me on that). It's disgusting I tell you.
Pythagoras:
Chrisitans and Jews are "people of the book" and "worhip the same God". They are not infidel. Calling them infidels happened later to make slaughtering them convenient.
Mercy is for everyone. Why? Because God is the final judge - not man. Because pagans have to be given a lifelong chance to convert to the one and only God (otherwise, you're killing a potential believer). If the Pagans attack you (or anyone, for that matter), you have to "slay them where you find them".
So, they've taken that last bit, invented some kind of "oppression" by Christians and Jews and are screaming that they have to Jihad against that. Easy. Stupid, but easy.
CNN's Delia Gallagher is discussing the Pope's speech. God, is she HOT or what? Her new haircut is sexy as hell. Wow.
comedy from the muslim world.
Still from the free comments on albebeceera site
Added: Friday, 15 September, 2006, 19:05 GMT 20:05 UK
it is a shame for the pope to speak like this. This shows his lack of knowledge or desire to hide the facts. He must have known about the what islam brought in terms of women rights, equality among white and black and so on.
A poster said that the Pope has no army, and therefore dismissed his statement. Well, the previous Pope had no army when he denounced Communism on his trip to Poland, and that speech started the crumbling of the Soviet empire. Why? Because it made millions of people stop being afraid. If millions of Europeans emulated Benedict's courage and stopped being afraid to tell the truth, Europe might just save itself from the Muslim takeover, which is facilitated by fear of political incorrectness.
Another point: two posters mentioned that there are a billion and half Muslims in the world. Maybe there are, but then again, maybe that's become the conventional wisdom only because it's been repeated so often. For all we know, the number may be much smaller. Two are too many, but it certainly would help to know the size of the threatening army.
"I should have written , this is islam as practiced by what appears to be a majority of muslims today. citycat could be considered part of a tiny minority of extremists who don’t properly understand how islam should be practiced(misunderstanders of islam). The fanatics believe citycat can be whipped into shape when the time comes, if not they will just kill citycat."
Citycat is as good as dead if she says what she's saying here in, say, Gaza.
"If muslims like citycat were to finally stand up to these fanatics (that would mean dispatching them) we could then begin a dialogue."
NEVER gonna happen, my friend. These people don't want to talk - as I pointed out in a previous post.
"Of course, we will probably never get anywhere due to the neverending list of contradictions we would have to resolve. Could citycat raise a sword against these fanatics, these insulters of the Pope?"
No, I don't raise swords for insults. I believe in free speach. I don't believe that people have a right NOT to be offended. I believe in the right to blaspheme.
I (and my family and friends) support the war in Iraq, Afghanistan, and I support Israel's right to whack the crap out of Hezbullshit. My only criticism is that Israel tread too softly. Hezbollah had the whole "civillian death" angle going for it. I'm for the Patriot Act and tapping phone lines. Know why? Got nothing to hide. I stood in line for 2 hours in 2004 to vote for Bush - knowing that he was not going to win my state because I live in NYC. Isn't that kinda like what you ment by "raising the sword"?
Kissing the dirt where ever he goes is one thing, kissing the Qur'an is another. Muslims know it for what it, an act of submission "to the word of Allah", and that was JPII's message, the Muslims read it, and the Pope wasn't so stupid as not to know it.
By the way Hojat e Islam Khatami will be visiting the Pope in October.. wait and see how that goes over.
I have no mercy for self inflicted wounds,arrogance , stubborness or blatant stupidity.
By the way JP II is not a Saint, especially in the eyes of the Catholic Truth, Pope Pius XII Society folk.. those hard core traditionalists even reject
Pope B16 because he gives audiences to the likes of clowns and Khatami.
Picture of the Year
cc NOTES:
"You've just declared yourself apostate. Watch your back from your mat buddies."
wELL WELL, THE mUSLIMS COULD EITHER KILL YOU OR LOVE YOU.
THE warning should be heeded.
Citycat,
"Christ as a non-diety is not that crucial. Christ's TEACHINGS are what's important."
Perhaps you should reconsider Christ's "I AM" statements. They are part of his "teaching" as well. His deity is the central most crucial part of the Christian doctrines of propitiation and substitutionary atonement.
Of course, you pick and choose from Jesus' teachings because Ibn Hazm declared the Taurat and Injeel tahrif (despite the Qur'an and the ahadith do not). You also need to study the doctrine of naskh, and the concepts of ijtihad and taqleed further.
Has it ever occurred to you why an Islamist would refer to Jesus/Y'shua/Isa as "Christ", meaning Messiah/Moshiakh? Does this not seem completely contradictory to the quote from Bukhari above to you?
I find it strange you mention your children. It's as if you/re saying, gang members are okay, the poetry of the rap is good, some gangbangers go overboard and are unbalanced, even violent. It's mostly because of the gangsta rappers. Gangbangers don't HAVE to be violent. But I don't really hang out with other gangbangers because I'm afraid of them and I don't agree with their overall perspectives and the violence.
I mean, damn, what about your kids? WTF are they supposed to think? You expect them to agree with YOU forever?
"Look at Dhimmis in the Ottoman Empire. They were allowed partial autonomy and not subject to Islamic rule. While they paid a tax but were not obligated to serve in the Ottoman army."
other than telling us that being a dhimmi was a good thing, are you telling us that female genitalia mutilation is good for sex?
Do you recall a similar treatment from christians to minorities back then?
Of course NOT! Regardless of the TIME.
"God commanded dhimmi so that other religions are protected, not forced to convert but can live in Muslim-run governments. But the core of the idea is protection of other faiths. "
how the "protection" worked is under everybody's eyes.
"The Koran teaches that men and women are equal. I know that later it permits men to hit their wives. So which is it? They contradict each other. How do I deal with that? The Koran also says that "if it contradicts itself. It is not from God". "
wow, you learn a thing everyday, the koran is a fraud
"But, tough issues exist in every religion. Are divorced Catholics still catholic? "
this is total stupidity from your side. Divorce doesn't exists for the church but from the LAW.
WE have this silly thing called separation of church and state, so what the LAW admits is one thing, what the church admits is another, but guess what? LAW stands OVER RELIGION.
"How do you explain the lack of zero-tolerance for pedophile priests? "
see above, the church is not a police authority therefore it's POLICE and LAW taking care of it. As they would do with any other citizen.
Many pedophiles are caught in schools as teachers and janitors, so why don't you ask ZERO tolerance from schools also? because when they face one case THEY CALL THE POLICE.
The madrassa is different. The clerics have both religious authority and LAW authority, therefore it's YOUR madrassas that have lack of zero tolerance.
"How do you tackle the inquisitions and the bloody wars between Protestants and Catholics in, say, England with respect to the peaceful nature of Christianity? "
how do you explain that the protestant and catholics were arguing ONLY in ireland and NOT in other countries with MIXED protestant and catholics?
that's because the reasons weren't as much as religious as they were POLITIC and territorial.
It's not job of the Pope to say who can live in northern ireland? CAPICHE?
"Because pagans have to be given a lifelong chance to convert to the one and only God "
why pagans cannot remain PAGAN?
"Look at Dhimmis in the Ottoman Empire. They were allowed partial autonomy and not subject to Islamic rule. While they paid a tax but were not obligated to serve in the Ottoman army."
-- from a posting above
Non-Muslims were "not subject to Islamic rule"? In every single encounter with any Muslim, they were subject "to Islamic rule." Only within their own communities could they enforce their own religious laws. If a single Muslim or the state was involved, then Islamic law took over.
As for the assertion that they were "not obligated to serve in the Ottoman army" -- please google the word "devshirme" and read carefully.
The facts are what they are: Islam has become a violent religion.
Posted by: exsgtbrown at September 15, 2006 11:57 AM
... a slight correction. Islam IS and always WAS a violent religion. Hostility starting with 'There is NO God but ALLAH', denying all other religions, if one can see.
NovaRocket,
"I think you don't know your own religion. I would suggest reconsidering it."
So, you're calling me ignorant?
"That the Turks had any kind of success at all was due to the fact that those under their control were more religious then they were. Their conquerings surely came from Islam, but their ruling afterwards surely did not.
Islam is designed to conquer and destroy just like locusts are."
Please explain to me what Sufi Muslims ever did to destroy?
This, though, you consider very enlightened. You provide nothing to back this up but I'm supposed to just take it from your glorious fingertips as fact.
You know nothing about history, Islam or Christianity, most likely.
Moreover, your reading comprehension skills are poor.
I have repeatedly said that this is NOT the Islam I was taught by my family and not the one we practice. I have repeatedly said that this FASCISM has to be subdued (you'll never get completely rid of it) just like we conquered the the Nazis. If for no other reason, than I PERSONALLY don't want to live in their version of Hell...I mean, Islam. They are NOT "my people", as you put it. They are the enemy of everything I believe.
So, perhaps you'll rethink attacking me personally. I've done nothing to you.
I've become disheartened. I KNOW I can't talk to the Jihadist loonies because they're insane. Unfortunately, it seems that I can't talk to people who claim to be more rational and less hateful either.
for more info on Devshirmeh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devshirme
The Popse has (as of now) thrown down the gauntlet
And
The guy who posted This is a hard core, extreme right wing Catholic, a liberal hating, feminist hating, homosexual hating pre Vatican II Catholic, and that forum has more than a handful of them.
"Please explain to me what Sufi Muslims ever did to destroy? "
wonderful, sufist in islam are probably 2% and the usual islamic clerics doesn't even consider sufism part of islam.
FedUp,
When I read your post I honestly thought you were referring to a typically British sarcastic comment.
After reading it on Al-BBceera, i'm still not convinced that Ahmet wasn't taking the piss:)
After all he might be Ahmet Zappa slipping a comment by the BBC censors for a laugh.
Sufism has been criticised as being non Islamic in nature. The adherents of the Salafi school form the majority of Muslims opposed to Tasawwuf.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufism#Traditional_Islamic_schools_of_thought_and_Sufism
Concerned;
Once again: Bukhari compiled HADDITH. Haddith are not obligatory. So, I don't care what Bukhari said.
I don't know what you were trying to say in the rest of your post. You'll have to clarify before I can respond.
They are always so predictable...
Posted by: FedUp at September 15, 2006 11:58 AM
And that is a key observation.
Islam has little to offer to modern civilization, other than death and destruction, The architecture of Islam is such that it leaves no room for growth / development / progress, starting with incentives / threats to join Islam, closing the doors by death on leaving Islam. From there on, there is nothing but fear and terror. The UMMA is hostage to Islam (although, the same UMMA is an assasin to us infedels), exceptions being Ali Sina etc.., out of fear / terror.
A key observation, again.
bigcat:
Nice try.
Christians worship and Jews worship Jehovah--NOT al-lah. Jehovah or Yahweh and al-lah are two distinct entities and that can be seen in the night and day differences between their teachings. Al-lah originated in the Mesopotamian region thousands of years ago, as I am certain Islam did too.
Certainly, Islam's penchant for slaughtering human beings is absolutely alien to Judeo-Christian doctrine. The violence frequently cited in the Old Testament reflects the low level of social development in human society at that time rather than on the beliefs taught by Jehovah. Insofar as I can tell, Islam emerged from Mesopotamian human sacrifice cults; its behavior is much more akin to ancient fertility cults than a monotheistic faith.
Ousamah bin Laden, the de facto leader of the Islamosphere, has repeatedly called Americans 'infidels' in the media and declared for jihad for Muslims worldwide to kill them in 1996. It's odd that so many Muslims accepted the idea of slaughtering human beings without revulsion at the idea or dissent against it. It is highly unlikely that this would have happened without Kuranic support--and there is as it happens. There is so much hate against Judeo-Christianism taught in the Kuran, that murdering these people becomes almost an afterthought.
And by the way, Islam has spent most of its time in the sun attempting to eradicate Judeo-Christianism, which it succeeded in doing throughout the Middle East. Jihad was not really a later development. It was Islam's modus operandi all along since day one. In a single night, Muhammed 'the Prophet' captured and beheaded at least 800 Jews. Forgiveness clearly wasn't for Islam's Founder; it was an alien concept to him. An evil fate indeed awaited the unbelievers. Why would Muslims change horses in midstream and stop the violence now?
I see nothing misunderstood about Islam; in fact, all these Muslims over 14 centuries can not be misunderstanding their own religion. 14 centuries of violence is more than enough. If Muslims cannot get their religion right by now, it is time they moved on to something else and got that right instead.
another super-wise comment from the BBC have your say
Added: Friday, 15 September, 2006, 19:47 GMT 20:47 UK
Is it me...
Certain Muslim groups claim the Holocaust wasn't as bad as people say, but at the slightest offence, Muslims automatically compare the offence to the Holocaust or Hitler as if it were a great atrocity.
Why the contradiction?
DK, USA, MidWest
The above is wonderful
Muslims protest at accusations that they are violent by err, acting violently!
You couldn't make it up!
Muslims should be behind bars at a zoo being fed bananas!
This discussion of Sufism appears to run on two paths. Most non-Muslims, hearing the word "Sufism," immediately think of other-worldly whirling mevlevis, or the love poetry of Rumi, which in turn often gets mixed up with all kinds of other love poetry -- not to mention "Siddhartha," and "Jonathan Livingston Seagull," and the Summer of Love in Haight-Ashbury, or is it (John) Ashbery. That those who are Sufis can also be called to the duty of Jihad appears to escape some, including those who teach about Al-Ghazali (who mentions the duty of Jihad), or who "discovered" Islam by becoming acquainted with Sufis (such as Carl Ernst, for example). But even if every Sufi were considered to be willing to treat, and to believe in treating, Infidels as full equals, the exaggerated emphasis on this mystic relation to God which supposedly negates all the violence and hostiility in the Qur'an and Hadith -- and the poster who claims that he does not bother with the Hadith means little or nothing, for what counts is not what he or a million or a few million Muslims do, but what a billion Muslims do. Surely he can understand the wariness and suspicion of anyone who actually takes the trouble to read, with understanding, the Qur'an, and the most authoritative collections of Hadith. And finally, there is the figure of that Perfect Man, Muhammad. Infidels, reading Muslim accounts of Muhammad, strangely do not share that view of him as uswa hasana, al-insan al-kamil. Many of them come away horrified that he should be presented as a figure worthy of emulation.
What are we Infidels to do about that? What should Muslims who tell us they ignore the Hadith, tell us further about Muhammad as an exemplary figure? If you reject the Hadith, if you reject the figure of Muhammad, are you in fact still a Muslim, or are you merely that convenient thing, a "cultural Muslim" or a "Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only" Muslim?
Why not make the complete break, so that you don't have to spend time constantly explaining away to yourself, much less to others, what exactly you accept and what you reject, because you would have to reject a very great deal of Islam, and accept a very little bit, in order to convince Infidels that they need not worry. How far must the need for filial piety, or the desire not to jettison one's past -- but which past? The Islamic past? Or the past before that, with one's ancestors who were conquered by Islamic warriors, and forced either on pain of death, or on pain, perhaps initially endured, of the status of dhimmi imposed upon them. Why not save one's filial piety for those more distant, originally non-Muslim ancestors?
"wonderful, sufist in islam are probably 2% and the usual islamic clerics doesn't even consider sufism part of islam."
Well, that's part of my point, isn't it? The sufis self-identify as Muslims, don't they? Incidentally, MOST grudginly clerics do identify them as Muslims (but they call them crazy). But that's not even the point.
If say, 2% of Sunni Muslims think the guys in the photo above are nut-jobs, are pro-America, etc. then you can't say that "all Muslims are violent". If a cleric comes along and declares that those 2% of Sunnis aren't Muslims does that make them not real Muslims? I don't think it does. Just as I don't think that an ex-communicated Catholic is no longer a Christian. I say I'm Muslim and I want my version of Islam to win (I don't bloody care if clerics consider it "real" or not. Are the Protestants "real" Christians?) - so that we can get on with living normal lives. I have no intention of hiding in a cave in pursuit of worthless Jihad so that someone can force a burhka on me. Anyway, you get the point.
I've got to run. I've been here way longer than I should have been.
Basically, I just wanted you all to know that - even though we are small in number - there are Muslims living among you (and in the Middle East) whose values are much more aligned with American values. We support America's actions in the Middle East and we hope that democracy will eventually take hold there because it is the only hope they have there. I'm going to remain optimistic to that end.
If you think we've given Muslims & Arabs enough chances and it's time to call a murderous ideology a murderous ideology, sign the petition and pass it on:
http://timesup911.blogspot.com
Muslims outraged?
I am shocked!!!! They are normally so level-headed and tolerant of the opinions of others!!!
What would Mohamed say?!
Oh yeah, “kill the infidels”
No doubt far more than 2% of Russians were against Communism. Were one to believe the Germans after the war, they knew nothing, saw nothing, had nothing to do with anything and especially with that "madman Hitler" who had "dragged us into war" -- it was all disgusting nonsense, in which a great many people on all sides participated, but still, there must have been not 2%, but even 5% or 10% of the German population that did not consist of Nazi supporters or collaborators. Nonetheless, that is not enough to have stayed the Allied hand. In war, the enemy must be damaged, even if in damaging that enemy, a very small proportion of the targets, such as those 2% that the Muslim poster above refers to -- are also harmed. The very idea that we are to fashion policy on the basis of that "2%" as a saving remannt is absurd.
In any case, there are examples, one after the other, of phony reformers who turn out to harbor views that are unacceptable to us, ranging from Saad Eddin Ibrahim and the Kifaya Party that has been collaborating with, and supporting the positions of, the Ikhwan in Egypt, or all those Mossadegh acolytes in Iran who made a bargain with the Khomeini-devil, and were eaten up, and many others who turned on a dime. Why, even General Naguib of Egypt, the one whose coup against Farouk helped bring Nasser eventually to power, started by saying it had been wrong for Egypt to go to war in Palestine and that he wanted to make peace with Israel, and within a few months, because the Arab public would not stand for it, he had switched entirely, claiming that Israel was a "cancer" and had to be elimiinated. And that is always the way it goes.
The whole business of working to help the few good guys, as they see themselves, and spending Infidel lives, and huge sums of money, and all of our attention, in order to undo the damage, political, economic, social, moral, and intellectual, that is caused by Islam itself, is silly. There is no real "civil war" for "the soul of Islam." For god's sake. There are a handful of reasonably sane peopole who see, but cannot declare openly, what is wrong with Islam. They are our friends, but they are too few on which to base any hopes, or dreams, and certainly any further mistakes in policy. Instead, all aid to these countries, whether in the form of economic and military aid, or all those well-funded fashionable programs whereby we "encourage democracy" and hand out fellowships -- lots of Arabs are now making quite a good living on this "reformation of Islam" and "democracy-project" stuff, but no one will dare to recognize that the permanent problem, the problem that prevents Western-style democracy and an end to blaming the Infidel, and an end to such things as the Greater Jihad against all of us, the Big Jihad against America, and the Lesser Jihad against Israel, is Islam itself.
Instead of helping the Muslims, Infidels should insist that they help each other. Let the rich Arabs, not the Infidels, pay whatever they wish to pay to the poorer Arabs. Let the Arabs and other Muslims not be rescued from their own failures through the efforts, the lives, the money, of Infidels. Let there be, as much as possible, a closed world of Islam, forcing Muslims to confront the sources of their own failures, to locate those failures, beginning with the natural bias toward despotism as long as the despot is a Muslim (for in Islam, legitimacy of a government does not depend, cannot depend, on the expressed will of mere mortals, but only on the expressed will of Allah, in Qur'an and Sunnah, and embodied in the Shari'a), and of course the inshallah-fatalism that explains economic failure despite having been the recipients of the greatest transfer of wealth in human history, and then the moral failure that comes from dividing the world between Believer and Infidel, and requiring that the former conquer, or at least subdue, the latter. And finally there is the intellectual failure, the failure of a belief-system that everywhere discourages free and skeptical inquiry, and everywhere promotes the idea of submission, including mental submission. All of those causes of the failure of Muslim societies are rooted in -- Islam. Islam is the "root cause" of failure among Muslim peoples and polities. This they do not want to see. They should be forced, through circumstances, through no longer being able to count on Infidel aid and Infidel support and Infidel Every--Indulgence, to be made to see it.
I am usually good in making google researches but it's 30 minutes I am searching and I have yet to find a decent page that tells me HOW MANY SUFI there are around.
I entered a labirynt of pages where it's not even given for sure that all sufis think the same.
Even on Encyclopedia britannica site, the piece on sufism is written by an expert bla bla but she totally avoid to give figures.
But considering I found a page that said there are 10 million sufis in Egypt (one of the countries that treat non-muslim worse) I have a hard time thinking all 10 million sufis are pro-war-iraq-afghanistan etc.
And yes, the protestants are real christians.
Sorry I don't think this sufi thing will win. Victimhood is too enclosed in muslim's mind and they need a religion that justifies it and amplifies it.
What I understand also from hugh's piece is that being a part of the sufi movement doesn't prevent muslim from the usual anti-non-muslims attitude and all the rest.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=405238&in_page_id=1811&ct=5#StartComments
"The late Pope John Paul II spent over 25 years to build bridges and links with the Muslim community. He showed the world that its perception of Islam was false and that we are peace-loving people.
Didn't the late Pope get shot by a muslim?
Y'all need to look at this from a completely different perspective. There ain't no rage, there ain't no anger. To them it's just party time, plain and simple. And they'll take any excuse to party. It's like spring break, muslim style.
One tries to imagine oneself a Muslim. One tries to imagine oneself a Muslim who is aware of what is written in the Qur'an, and aware of how its verses, after abrogtation, are understood, and have been understood, by many, almost all, Muslims across space and through time. One imagines oneself as a Muslim aware of the Hadith, of the most authentic collections of those Hadith, and of the role that Hadith play in determining what Muslims take as the other leg of Islam -- Sunna, as in "Qur'an and Sunna."
Finally, one wonders what a self-professed "moderate" Muslim makes of the Life and Works of Muhammad -- not only the life and works as it can be found in Arthur Jeffery, Tor Andrae, Sir William Muir, but as it can be found in the Muslim sources. Surely even the chagrinned "moderate" who does not recognize, in his own kind parents or grandparents, the kind of Muslims making news everyday, nor those gathered for grim demonstrations in Karachi, or Gaza, or for that matter Hyde Park. But surely, too, he must realize, by this point that there is too much in the texts, too much that is taken as the essence of Islam by so many -- by almost all -- Muslims, for him to expect attitudes, and thoughts, and statements, and policies of self-defense, by Infidels, to be based on his own private Islam, his exceptionalism or that of his Western-educated or quite unusual family. No. One cannot base policies toward Egypt by positing that all Egyptians are potential Magdi Allams. They are not. We cannot base policy in Iraq (it's been tried) on the belief that "Iraqis" are all so many Chalabis, Allawis, and Makiyas. We cannot base policy toward Saudi Arabia on the belief that the man who writes the "Religous Policeman" blog represents millions of Saudis. He doesn't. We cannot ignore the Sheik Al-Azhar, or the late Sheik Bin Baz, or Al-Qaradawi, the most publicized popular writer and guide to Islam among Sunni Arabs, and cannot ignore all the other evidence of Musliim behavior toward non-Muslims (look at what has happened to Hindus in Pakistan, Kashmir, and Bangladesh as a result of Muslim mistreatment,persecution, and murder). We cannot ignore the Bumpiutra system (a disguised Jizyah)in Malaysia or the decades of persecution of Christians in Indonesia. We cannot ignore Muslim behavior toward non-Muslims in Nigeria and the Sudan and everywhere that non-Muslims and Muslims live within the same state.
No. Those who insist on offering their own personal tale, when they are exceptional, and not the cruel rule, are deluding themselves, and -- innocently -- helping to delude Infidels, who need all the un-deluding they can get.
Oh, hell, just one more...
Hugh,
"the poster who claims that he does not bother with the Hadith means little or nothing, for what counts is not what he or a million or a few million Muslims do, but what a billion Muslims do."
I'm a she. Yes, it's what a billion Muslims do. So, it didn't matter that there were Germans like Schindler. You still had to fight the Nazis even if a few of the Germans were not bad folks. I think all my posts basically agree with that. No?
"Surely he can understand the wariness and suspicion of anyone who actually takes the trouble to read, with understanding, the Qur'an, and the most authoritative collections of Hadith."
She can totally understand that. But anyone who takes the time to read all that should also take the time to understand how the religion has been bastardized to suite oneself. Just a hint: it usually happens through accepting and rejecting of certain haddith and re-interpretation and outright abrogation. That's why I don't accept any one clerics view - God gave me a brain too.
And yes, anyone could be called to Jihad. You could say that the war on terror is a Jihad against terrorism. My point is that the Muslim "Jihad" on the West is contrived - and you're not supposed to go on contrived Jihads. That ain't self defense. The American (and Israeli) war on terror is clearly legitimate.
"If you reject the Hadith, if you reject the figure of Muhammad,"
Rejecting Haddith is not rejecting the figure of Mohamed at all. During his lifetime, people would try to write down what Mohamed said and did because the Koran said "listen to the Messenger". Mohamed forced them to burn the manuscripts because he said that he was just a man, he is not God, the Messege (the Koran) is complete, nothing else he (Mohamed) had to say was part of the religion. That's why the Haddith suddenly magically appear 250 years after his death. The Muslims started whining that the Koran didn't answer every question of daily life. Duh! It's not supposed to..it's to guide you, not to make every decision for you.
Mohamed as the "perfect man" is also a "development" that occured after his death. It essentially diefies Mohamed and runs counter to HIS OWN word and the Koran. I was just having a conversation about that very problem recently.
"are you merely that convenient thing, a "cultural Muslim" or a "Muslim-for-identification-purposes-only" Muslim?"
If there's one thing I'm not is a cultural Muslim. But really, this is an idiotic question. look, Protestants disagree with Catholics on certain issues - like saints and interpret the Bible slightly differently. Then there are divisions within Protestants, there are Copts and Orthodox Christians, etc. They all believe something different. They all disagree on certain interpretations in Christianity but they're all Christian.
Do you know what you need to believe to be a Muslim? The Shahada. "There is no God but God (read: only one God). Mohamed is a prophet of God". A prophet - not THE prophet - A prophet.
"Why not make the complete break, so that you don't have to spend time constantly explaining away to yourself, much less to others, what exactly you accept and what you reject, because you would have to reject a very great deal of Islam, and accept a very little bit, in order to convince Infidels that they need not worry"
So, you're saying that, despite the fact that you have almost no knowledge of Islam - beyond what you gleaned on Wikipedia and sound-bites - you have come to the conclusion that its 100% full of blood-thirsty assholes. When someone steps forward who is clearly not a blood-thirsty asshole, you authoritatively say that they are not a "real" Muslim and should convert to your religion - but quick. So, it's not that you want Muslims to be more like me, you want us all to convert or die?
And then you tell me you're better? I just hope you're in the minority here. You're starting to sound a lot like a Wahhabi.
Arent the majority of Chechen Muslims Sufi?
blah blah blah...massacre those who insult islam...blah blah blah...kill all infadels...blah blah blah...pope must die...blah blah blah
Not as bad as the mohammad cartoons, so it looks like its the peaceful side of islam on show this time.
And to think we allow these thugs to immigrate to our countries!
Islaminfestation must end NOW!!
"But anyone who takes the time to read all that should also take the time to understand how the religion has been bastardized to suite oneself. Just a hint: it usually happens through accepting and rejecting of certain haddith and re-interpretation and outright abrogation. That's why I don't accept any one clerics view - God gave me a brain too. "
but you claimed yourself to be a minority, a minority of 1.4 billion people is less than nothing, especially a minority without any spokeperson that can be listened by the others.
"Protestants disagree with Catholics on certain issues - like saints and interpret the Bible slightly differently. Then there are divisions within Protestants, there are Copts and Orthodox Christians, etc. They all believe something different. They all disagree on certain interpretations in Christianity but they're all Christian. "
your biggest mistake: you think the bible is for us what the koran is for you.
The bible has been written by men telling the word of god as they interpret it, that's why we have the church that with its good and bad sides are helping with the interpretation.
You have the koran which is claimed to be IPSISSIMA DEI THE ONLY WORD OF GOD and you have not one single institution taking care of the interpretation but an ocean of so called imams that are basically doing what they want.
That's why neither protestant, nor orthodox follow literally the bible teachings and this is what put us together.
You are anyway making a confusion.
The division are just 3
Roman catholic
Orthodox
Protestant
copts, maronites, chaldeans etc are the rites, not a different type of christians.
"So, you're saying that, despite the fact that you have almost no knowledge of Islam - beyond what you gleaned on Wikipedia and sound-bites - you have come to the conclusion that its 100% full of blood-thirsty assholes."
First, we are at least trying to understand so don't write off our searching on the matter so easily.
secondly it might not be full of blood-thirsty assholes but it's surely 99% full of intolerant and arrogant people.
Intolerance and arrogance can be expressed in many ways, some of them are violent and meant to hurt.
You are talking with someone who met 3-4 jews in her life and I found them all very snob.
The difference is that I would never feel threatened by any jew, they will never try to overpopulate the world, they will never try to impose their ways to others, their respect for the law is like mine, they might be JEW before being spanish, russian etc, but this wouldn't make them go against the law.
Even hindu people sometimes don't respect human rights toward their women but in no way they are hurting us or trying to impose their customs to us.
"When someone steps forward who is clearly not a blood-thirsty asshole, you authoritatively say that they are not a "real" Muslim and should convert to your religion - but quick."
We might tell you you are not a real muslim but our words are of no importance. There's 1 billion muslim that will tell YOU that you are NOT a muslim and it's still from them that you will have to face the convert or die threat. Not from us.
"Arent the majority of Chechen Muslims Sufi?"
that's what I read. sufi movement originated in kazakstan (asia, former russian country) so even if it arrived pretty much everywhere it could be that chechens and iguscets are sufi. As well as uzbekstan, kyrgistan etc
CityCat is apparently oblivious to the fact that Islam is a diseased monster, and she hangs onto one of the few inches of healthy tissue that exist on the otherwise gangrenous pustules of rotting radioactive flesh on this metastatically cancerous juggernaut -- and by doing so giving tacit support to the beast -- and claims she is using the brain God gave her!
Citycat,
Sorry if we seem disappointed in you. It is not because of your views, or because of your rejection of the particular tenets of Islam you choose to ignore.
The disappointment is that your "version" of Islam is of no help in accomplishing your or our goal, that of producing a truly moderate non-violent Islam based on theological arguments within orthodox Islam.
Sure, you may be able to convince other Muslims to reject the Hadith; the Sira; the Tafsir; the doctrines of naskh, tahrif, ijtihad, taqleed, etc.; 14 centuries of historical Islamic jurisprudence...
but not enough to make a difference. Not as much (not near as much) as if you convinced them using orthodox exegesis of the Qur'an and universally accepted Sahih sources.
But, otherwise... welcome to Western civilization.
citycat,
your views are so antithetical to mainstream Islam (for example, praising Israel) and so heretical that you would be stripped, raped, scourged, crucified and beheaded in front of your family if any "good" moslem got wind of what you are saying here.
Are you saying it just to flatter us? To be in with the in-crowd?
It makes no sense why you would call yourself a moslem since you seem to agree with the board here that its a degenerate tribal creed whose adherents are retards.
yes, Chechens are sufi, of course their own personalized sect of the part of the cult that they feel suitable...
http://www.iol.ie/~afifi/Articles/chechnya.htm
here it's also written that chechens had no problem follow sharia law...
http://www.watchdog.cz/index.php?show=000000-000015-000006-000010&lang=1
To sum it up sufism in chechenia lead to wahabism and now wahabist and sufist are killing each other in chechenia...
where have I seen this movie already?
"you're saying that, despite the fact that you have almost no knowledge of Islam - beyond what you gleaned on Wikipedia and sound-bites - you have come to the conclusion that..."
-- from a posting above
Good to be informed that I need only rely, and indeed must all along have been relying, in the same unconscious way that the character in Moliere had all along been speaking prose without realizing it, on Wikipedia for my information about Islam (and, most likely, about everything else I might know about). Armed with this assurance, I will now engage in an act of massive de-accession that would do Thomas Hoving proud, ridding myself of the contents of five groaning floor-to-ceiling bookcases, filled with books on Islam and Islamic history, not to mention the himalayas of off-prints and xeroxed papers (even by some members of MESA Nostra), that have rendered two large rooms in the house almost impassable for all but the most intrepid.
Strange that what prompted this furious reply in which I am accused of regarding all Muslims ("100%") as (fill in here whatever caconym you think a demure Muslim girl-- keep in mind those family values and that celebrated modesty -- would be likely to use, then check her posting above to see if you were right), was a sketch of attempts to empathize with those born into Islam, and an attempt to imagine what it must be like to realize, to read with comprehensio, the Qur'an and Hadith, and to further read the Muslim accounts of the Life of Muhammad, and then to put it all together, and try somehow to make sense of this that can still allow you to consider yourself a Muslim, without doing violence to your own intellectual coherence. Many of the testimonies of former Muslims collected in book-form in "Leaving Islam," and also put on-line at many websites run by highly articulate and intelligent ex-Muslims, reveal that one reason for making the final brave leap was the inability of this or that "Muslim-in-name-only" to any longer endure the moral and mental incoherence which was required, and got to be too much to endure, even though one was risking at least social ostracism by one's relatives and Muslim friends, and possibly much more.
Knowing Ibn Warraq, his works and days, and having read the works of many other ex-Muslims, including Ali Sina, Anwar Shaikh, Azam Kamguian, Irfan Khawaja, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and so many others, some deliberately unknown to the public, I have come to one conclusion: the keenest minds, the ones endowed with the most intelligence and moral sense and also sense of humor, among all those born into Islam, belong to those who choose as adults to leave it. For some of them, it required quite an effort. For others, no effort at all, was entirely natural, accorded with every natural fiber of their being. All felt a great sense of relief that at long last they had shed their snakeskin, no longer had to cling to an identity or uphold a filial piety they did not feel, no longer had to perform mental somersaults in order to explain themselves to others, and still more importantly, to themselves.
I hate to jump on the 'argue with CityCat' bandwagon, but I feel that this is exactly the kind of dialogue that we need more of. Also, I would like to thank you, CC, for coming on here and explaining your views in a rational, coherent manner. The majority of Muslims that I encounter online are...not so kind. Moving on.
"Do you know what you need to believe to be a Muslim? The Shahada. "There is no God but God (read: only one God). Mohamed is a prophet of God". A prophet - not THE prophet - A prophet."
Okay, but see, the problem is that even something as fundamental as the Shahada is interpreted far differently by those who, unfortunately, seem more and more to represent the face of "true" Islam.
You say "There is no God but God", meaning "There is only one deity, and it is God". THEY say "There is no God but AL-LAH", meaning "There are no true deities but the God of Islam".
You say "Mohamed is a prophet of God", meaning "Mohamed is one of God's many true prophets". They say ". . . and Mohamed is his prophet", meaning "There is ONE true prophet, and his name is Mohamed."
How can one say that both beliefs reflect the core of Islam when they are so diametrically opposed?
citycat, there is no good islam and bad islam. There is only islam and it is all bad. If you want to hold to the idea that you can be a muslim without worshipping anything evil, you are self-deluded. You are in denial, you don't want to believe that the religion you were assigned is fundamentally corrupt.
If you reject all the violent, imperialist, misogynist aspects to the Koran, you are not a muslim, you are a pretender, holding on to her muslim faith despite everything in it. They only humane passages in the koran apply to muslims ONLY. It is specific in that. All others are to be destroyed in body or spirit, or both.
Just like when Himmler gave his Posen speech to the SS officers. He told them that they were to be kind to each other, but brutal to all else. "One principle must be absolute for the SS man: we must be honest, decent, loyal and friendly to members of our blood and to no one else."
If that speech was put into a book, a nazi a 1000 years hence could say that Nazism teaches us to be honest, decent, loyal and friendly to each other and use that quote as proof, forgetting about the rest of the sentence. That is the analogy to the Koran. So as a Nazi, I can go to kill Jews, and then defend my beliefs by stating that my religion, as written by Himmler, states we are to be honest, decent, loyal and kind. So why am I villified for being a Nazi? It's just anti-Nazi racism and I demand an apology.
What you have to undertand is that the koran was intended as a war manual for the purposes of non-muslims, and for the purposes of muslims, it is taskmaster for their menial day-to-day activities. It holds no religious values. No where in the Koran are there any morality tales to buttress human deceny.
It is not a religious book. It is a cult manual.
I wish our senators and represenatives would speak the truth like the pope.
exsgtbrown wrote, "The facts are what they are: Islam has become a violent religion. When atrocities are committed around the world in the name of Allah, condemnation never seems to come from those in the peaceful religion."
Let's take it all the way: Islam IS and ALWAYS HAS BEEN a violent religion.
exsgtbrown also wrote, "The truth hurts....even if it's the Pope saying it. Of course he'll wind up apologizing, political correctness being what it is."
With THIS Pope?? Wanna bet?? If you thought Pope John Paul II was a bit outspoken, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
The pope spoke to an audience of students at the university of Regensburg, he spoke in German when he quoted that last Bycantinian Emperor...
It is surprising, -since non of the speech was broadcast in Pakistan, India, Turkey, the MiddleEast, or elsewhere, -how it slipped my attention over the years that all this screaming mobs are highly educated, compulsorily mastering a second language, German in this case, and how extremely satuarated these muslim societies must be with internet and other information channels that in such extreme short time their populations can analyze these remarks by the pope,fathom the problem, and now demand an apology on global scale...
it is amazing.
Citicat,
I appreciate your efforts. To me, it matters little if you're not considered "true Muslim" for ignoring the ahadith, interpreting the Koran as a nonviolent work, etc. I don't care if you're "in denial" if you do interpret it this way.
Someone also mentioned clitorectomy -- you wisely did not respond, but I will: the practice is not found in the Koran (and I doubt it's in any of the ahadith). It's an African practice that predated Islam. Attributing it to Islam is not entirely fair.
For what it's worth, I do think you're misinterpreting the Koran. Religion is indeed in how you practice, and I wouldn't care what the Koran said if Muslims ignored it. But many do not. Many do focus on the violent passages, and do pay attention to the ahadith.
It's true there are some here who don't believe there are any moderate Muslims. Looking at the scripture, they find it logically untenable. However, people have been known to hold logically untenable positions. I'd far rather have irrational peaceniks than rational warmongers.
Be careful, and don't give up hope in posting here. Take breaks if you need them, but make sure your voice is heard.
Ya, that's right. We want to make sure that a muslim should come here to sell us this taqiyya that the Koran is not a hate book, does not advocate death and destruction, and really is just being hijacked by extremists.
Please, for all intents and purposes, citycat might as well work for CAIR.
No, we don't need that kind of voice to be heard here because that is the voice we hear EVERYWHERE on the MSM, in the newspapers, the magazines, the cable news outlets, the TV stations and all over the net. That line is everywhere.
Thank you but no thank you. Been there, done that. Now we want to hear the truth. That is why we come here. We don't come here to hear slick muslim propaganda.
After being out for the day and coming home to see this, I am starting to wonder if the Muslims can even be dealt with in a positive manner. His holiness Pope B16 had no choice but to speak the truth, even if it hurts, because it will liberate. This is in the historic record weither the Muslims like it or not.
Fedup says-
"how do you explain that the protestant and catholics were arguing ONLY in ireland and NOT in other countries with MIXED protestant and catholics?"
I presume you've never been to Glasgow then?. They'll kill eachother up there over religion mate.
Robert,
If you think this is bad with a man of Godly faith, wait till your most honest book about Muhammed comes out in a few weeks.
"Someone also mentioned clitorectomy -- you wisely did not respond, but I will: the practice is not found in the Koran (and I doubt it's in any of the ahadith). It's an African practice that predated Islam. Attributing it to Islam is not entirely fair."
the contest of that sentence was another. However since there are millions of islamic scholars with nothing better to do on their hands and nowadays the majority of women mutilated are muslims why not a single one of them has ever tried to speak out against it?
Because it fits well with the general idea of the muslim world of the woman.
Islam is such a strong cult I am sure if they didn't find the practice useful they would have already dismissed it.
Remember that for the muslim culture silence is assertion.
Pyroskank,
"Okay, but see, the problem is that even something as fundamental as the Shahada is interpreted far differently by those who, unfortunately, seem more and more to represent the face of "true" Islam."
No. This I have to disagree with. Even the DUMBEST bastards admit that Islam has many different prophets. Show me even one example of a Muslim saying that there is only ONE prophet.
It's pretty plain language. It says: "mohamed Rasul Allah". If it said "Mohamed EL Rasul Allah" the that would mean "Mohamed is THE prophet". So, it's kinda hard to argue that he's THE prophet.
As for "Allah" versus "God" - "Allah" is Arabic for "God". The Koran says that this is the same God as the God of the Jews and the Christians. I've heard that same argument from Christians and was a little shocked that they didn't know that. You can look it up yourself - I have to go to dinner soon.
Anyway, my point in bringing up the Shahada is that all you have to believe is that there is ONE God and that Mohamed was A prophet to be a Muslim. Historically, that is how it has been. Like I said, I'm pretty sure the Wahhabis think people like me are heretics but I don't care what they think. I brought up the Shahada for the people here who were asking me how I can believe what I believe and call myself a Muslim. Even if all Muslims agree on the Shahada, it doesn't change the fascist turn that a lot of Islam has taken - and that's really the issue for all of us, isn't it? I mean, do you really care what people privately believe as long as they're not trying to bomb you or take away your freedom? Of course not.
Look, you have every reason to be afraid of the people whose tapes make it to Al-Jazeera and they so "generously" offer you conversion or death. And so do I. You don't meet Muslims like me on the internet so much because most Muslims like me are just employed, living busy lives and trying to raise good kids. Just like you. Also, I live in America and enjoy a free press, so I'm not brainwashed by the Muslim Brotherhood machine and I can do and say what I want. There are others though like me though. Check out SandMonkey.org. He's an Egyptian blogger. And then there's always "Free Muslims against Terrorism". Also, Fouad Adjami. I mean, we're out there - there's just less of us than there are of "them".
As for how can diametrically apposed beliefs claim to be the core of the same religion? Well, I mean, I guess you could say that we all pray to one God, don't eat pork, don't believe in sex before marriage, don't drink, etc. I guess we agree there. But We disagree on almost everything else. The thing is, I DON'T believe they (violent Jihadis) represent the core of the religion as it SHOULD be. But they certainly represent the way it IS. And there-in lies the rub, right?
Which one is the real Islam? I say that this is beside the point. The fascists need to be beaten down. If you're calling that the real Islam, then that's fine with me. If you're calling mine the real Islam then that doesn't change the fact that we still need to defeat the fascists, right?
Anyway, thanks for the discussion. This time I really have to go eat dinner and I bid you all a great weakend.
"I presume you've never been to Glasgow then?. They'll kill eachother up there over religion mate."
I have been to glasgow last summer.
Any deaths?
Hehe..... Football and Religion go hand in hand there mate....... Glasgow Rangers = Protestant , Celtic = Catholic . The Jocks up there are some of the worst bigots in the isles.
Thanks, Cryptic. I didn't respond to a lot only because I don't have time - there's only one of me. But, I'm hitting clitorectomy below.
Fedup,
"Remember that for the muslim culture silence is assertion."
You're kind of showing yourself to be a Moron. First, you don't know history and now you don't know current events. Even the most evil and nasty of the Muslim clerics have gone hoarse banning clitorectomy. Oh, and even Al-Azhar doesn't ban abortion either. Bet you didn't know that.
Okay. The kids' patience has run out. Gotta go.
FedUp,
I don't really blame you for being fed up. But you should pick facts/arguments better:
"secondly it might not be full of blood-thirsty assholes but it's surely 99% full of intolerant and arrogant people."
You have no way to prove this. It's opinionated rhetoric.
"You are talking with someone who met 3-4 jews in her life and I found them all very snob."
Oh, please. As if 3 to 4 represents any kind of sample. I grew up highly Jewish communities (say, 40% Jewish, which is a HUGE percentage for most places in the US). (ummm, but yes, I did find a large percentage of them, nowhere near all but higher than most populations, snobbish -- example: when I was in second grade one of my friend's mothers argued with me about what religion I was, claiming I was Jewish.).
"The difference is that I would never feel threatened by any jew, they will never try to overpopulate the world, they will never try to impose their ways to others, their respect for the law is like mine, they might be JEW before being spanish, russian etc, but this wouldn't make them go against the law.
"
Haaaahahahaaaaaaa! This simply isn't true. Jews can be (not all, of course) thugs just like any other religion. I lived in an area with many Hasidim, and they would often try to impose their way of life on others, live by Jewish law rather than actual state law, disobey both sets of law, have as many children as humanly conceivable, throw rocks at goyim fire trucks coming to put out fires in their neighborhoods, etc.
This isn't meant to be anti-semitic in any manner. Many of my friends growing up were Jewish (even snobbish ones -- it's not the worst of sins), and there are many truly wonderful things about their culture. Just pointing out that they don't always treat minorities well either. And they follow the Old Testament, don't they? Hardly a peaceful book.
Point made about football and religion all round then.
"Fedup,
"Remember that for the muslim culture silence is assertion."
You're kind of showing yourself to be a Moron. First, you don't know history and now you don't know current events. Even the most evil and nasty of the Muslim clerics have gone hoarse banning clitorectomy. Oh, and even Al-Azhar doesn't ban abortion either. Bet you didn't know that."
Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi, head of the al-Azhar Islamic Institute has stated that the practice is un-Islamic. The Health Minister of Egypt, Ismail Sallam, announced the ban on FGM in 1996-JUL. This was upheld by a junior administrative court in Cairo.
Sheik Youssef Badri, a Muslim fundamentalist, took the health minister to court. In 1997-JUN, an Egyptian court overturned the country's ban on FGM. Eight Muslim scholars and doctors had testified that the ban exceeded the government's authority and violated the legal rights of the medical profession. Sheik Youssef Badri commented: "[Female] circumcision is Islamic; the court has said that the ban violated religious law. There's nothing which says circumcision is a crime, but the Egyptians came along and said that Islam is a crime." About 1997-JUL-6, the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel interviewed Sheik Badri. He claimed that many Muslim women are pleased with this victory of Islam over its enemies. When it was pointed out to him that parents in Morocco and Algeria do not practice FGM, he replied that the clitoris in Egyptian girls was larger than in those countries and had to be cut back to a normal size. He quoted a French study which showed that circumcised girls are less likely to catch AIDS. * He believes that the United States is spreading misinformation on the health risks of FGM.
FATWA in egypt to promote it
1981-JAN-29: The Great Sheikh of Al-Azhar (the most famous University of the Islamic World) stated that parents must follow the lessons of Mohammed and not listen to medical authorities because the latter often change their minds. Parents must do their duty and have their daughters circumcised.
Amnesty International estimates that over 130 million women worldwide have been affected by these procedures. Considering the States involved I bet a very large majority is muslim.
Seems to me like the ETERNAL mantra: a few muslims are terrorist but almost all terrorist are muslims.
citycat,
Thank-you for taking the to come to JW/DW.
What suprises me is the reaction to what the Pope has said in the last few days. The historic record cannot be denied. Do the research. Also this Pope is more like a college professor and being able to go deep into the history of Christian/Muslim relations. In other words, an historian.
Also I have a question. If you say that Allah is the same God as what Jews and Christians worhip, why is it that when you pray, it is in the direction of the large cube in Mecca that has what looks like a moon rock?
PS : Decided to add another question.
What does that rock play in Muslim life?
PS :
Thanks, citycat.
Football and Religion, that’s the problem. There is no fun or games in islam. A perfect example is the recent cancellation of “muslim fun day” at an Amusement park due to a lack of interest. Sexual repression on a massive scale, reading the same book over and over for life, combined with the inability to blow of some steam playing Football or some other game leads them to, you guessed it… explode. Maybe we need to substitute “Book or Ball, for “Light" unto the muslim world”
"You have no way to prove this. It's opinionated rhetoric."
not at all. Stating that the whole world will be islamic is arrogance. Stating that muslim people cannot marry non-muslim unless they convert is feeling superior. Saying that the children of a muslim male HAVE to be muslim is arrogance/superiority attitude.
What is the fundamental base of the jiza, the second class citizen treatment if not the inner conviction that jews and christians are pigs and apes?
Muslims (at least in my countries) among the million things they request exclusively for themselves, they want SEPARATE CEMETERIES.
The above are NOT my opinions, it's facts about muslims. By saying it's only ARROGANCE and INTOLERANCE I was being extremely kind.
"Oh, please. As if 3 to 4 represents any kind of sample."
this wasn't the point, but I see you have a peculiarity for extrapoliating sentences and turn it to whatever you want.
"This simply isn't true. Jews can be (not all, of course) thugs just like any other religion. I lived in an area with many Hasidim, and they would often try to impose their way of life on others, live by Jewish law rather than actual state law, disobey both sets of law, have as many children as humanly conceivable, throw rocks at goyim fire trucks coming to put out fires in their neighborhoods"
out in cinemas near you.
During the last year or so within Canada I have noticed the Islamic leaders have given up on the ruse that a few ignorant people have hijacked their Peaceful faith, the tone has switched to the murderers as being un-True Muslims and their actions "UnIslamic" .
Today I see a new demon rear their ugly face, with all the Global violence by Muslims to Muslims and the bonus killings of infidels , the story to the meadia is to denounce all forms of violence and that they denounce terrorism.....BUT....ah yes that famous tag line that follows with a excuse for them and how the West forced them to murder for Allah.
The every so tiring BUT, sounds like an admission to Muslims being predisposed to violence
via the Quran and Muhammad.
These poor Imams and diluted Moderate Muslims will find out one day that they'll be sliding
all the way down to hell on their "BUTS".
In 1989 a Jihadist suicide killer murdered 14 schoolgirls and injured about 12 others befor he turned the rifile on himself, the Media took 10 years to reveal the whole story of his Algerian Father and strict Sharia-Law in his home as a Devout Muslim.
Gamil Gharbi changed his name to Marc Lepine as to blend in at school and one day when he memorized the school routines for his 20-Female hit list classroom, he walked in , told all the males to leave and the opened fire with the rifile .
His suicide letter explained it all and Sharia-Law and Allah was at the root of his desire to purge Canada of those sinfull infidels, that was 17 years ago and still the media doesn't want to offend Muslims , but the media had no problem letting 15 million males get blamed by the FemiNazis and Men-haters.
Gamil Gharbi's story is in the CBC.ca archives via the Search-CBC box in the upper right corner of most webpages for CBC articles.
Hi citycat,
Peace to you.
If Islam is as you imagined it to be, there wouldn't be so much problems that Islam is giving to the world today. I wish you were right, but there is the reality that is against you. I have lived right next to Muslims, and they show themselves to be nice people. Just don't ever insult Muhammad. I have defended Muslims in the presence of other people. I even wanted to become a Muslim.
The vast majority of the Muslims disagree with you, unfortunately. It seems you don't even know about abrogration (Surah 2:106). Though not necessarily completely agreed upon, Muslim scholars have compiled lists of nasikh wa mansukh verses. So, Surah 2:256 has been abrograted by Surah 9:5 (the famous Sword Verse). In ibn Kathir's Tafsir, we read
And the majority of Muslim clerics hold to the Sunna of Muhammad. It is fine and dandy to hold to your views, but you will be classified by Muslim clerics to be apostates.
And as to your citing of Isa as coming, we know that. However, what you didn't tell us is that he will abolish the jizya tax. That means the formal invitation to islam, consisting of "conversion, jizya or war" will then be changed to "conversion or war". Muslim scholars, in teaching about the Qiyama, tell us that Isa will accept nothing except Islam or death from the non-Muslims. Yes, he and al-Mahdi will kill all those who refuse to submit to Islam.
Al-Mahdi & Antichrist
Re: the Catholic - Protestant thing:
When I was in Catholic school in the 1950's, we were taught very matter-of-factly, that Jews and Moslems were classed as "infidels," meaning, they did not believe in Jesus as Son of God. The Orthodox, we were taught, were "schismatic." This meant that they had the true faith, sacraments, etc., but were not in union with the Church of Rome. Protestants, however, were classified as "heretics." This indicated that they were Baptized as Christians, but that some of their teachings were erroneous.
My Jewish, Lutheran, Pentecostal and Greek Orthodox neighbors might be pretty pissed-off at being designated either as heretics or infidels or schismatics. Or they might laugh, as we often did when called "Cat-lickers," "Mackerel-snappers," etc.
The language of the more Triumphalistic age of Catholicism changed much during the 60's and thereafter. The concepts, I believe, are still the same. We just don't use them. PC, I guess.
I also remember that I was told by more than one friend concerned for my salvation, that we Cat-lickers had to worship Mary, and that if the Pope told us to fight against our country we'd have to do that, too. My landlady's daughter told me that nuns carried around bags of black dust for magic purposes. And so on.
There were heated discussions, for sure, and even "fighting words" but we did not burn the local rabbi in effigy, blow up the local protestant church, nor did Monsignor tell us we had the duty of slaying our sister if she married a Mormon. (He definitely would have told us NOT to attend the wedding.)Occasionally our windshields would be graced with tracts and pamphlets urging us to forsake the "whore of Babylon" (Pius XII at that time) which was an annoyance.
Christians have certainly not always treated one another with decency or forebearance. But one of the beautiful aspects of this nation under God, is that ALL religions live side by side. They don't necessarilly like one another. They certainly don't believe alike. There are many Bible-belt folks who would love to help Catholics "get saved," and so on. But we can't force it - which is one of the greatest gifts of modern democracy and of the US Constitution. And, historically speaking, much of the strife amongst Christians of different Churches has been brought on precisely because of state & government interference, as in "cujus regio, eius religio," which meant that if you were Lutheran, and your king was Catholic, guess what? You weren't Lutheran any more.
I bet that if I moved to Glasgow and set up a "Virgin Mary on-the-half-shell" shrine in my front yard, some of the local lads might deface it, or bust some of my windows BUT I could expect to get police protection. Try THAT in Saudi Arabia.
I was recently in a supermarket in the Chicago area. In one aisle I saw two Franciscan friars in their brown habits, and a few aisles over there were a couple of Laotian Buddhist monks. No blood was spilt. There wasn't even any yelling! Nor do I think that either pair of brethren were charged a special tax.
Let' hope we can preserve this grand culture of ours from the virus of Islam.
Put White Rhobes and Hoods on these guys, and the outrage would be palpable.
Posted by: Thunder Pig at September 15, 2006 11:59 AM
++++++++++++++
and what do you think the turbins are made of????
Tgusa-
"Football and Religion, that’s the problem. There is no fun or games in islam."
Oh I don't know mate. I know my own home team has a huge following amongst Asian fans, mostly Muslim, right across Britain.
I went to a local off licence (liquor store?) tonight to get myself a bottle of John Daniels. It's run by a family of Pakistani Muslims. I live in Liverpool in the North West of England and we have a very strong regional identity. Where I live in the North of Liverpool is where the Irish mostly settled after the Potato Famine, so you don't get many "non white" families living here. Now, apart from their skin colour and the sari's on the girls, they're no less a part of our neighbourhood as anybody else. In fact the only thing they disagree with anybody on is the football or cricket scores, which pretty much puts them in the same bracket as most anybody else in the city.
Don't get me wrong. We're a pretty unforgiving people in this city if we're crossed. You either come here to live our way of life 'cos you want to, or you can F*** off. That's how we see things. You may find it surprising that just one generation in, these Muslims are just as much "Scousers" (as the people of our city are known) than anyone else. They just happen to be Muslims. But they have no less capacity for fun and the obligatory sporting humour and whatknot that go with living here than anybody else.
The difference here is that they've integrated very well and become part of "our" community. Admittedly, there are parts of Britain that are practically ghettos. That's their choice, the reasons for which are for other discussions, but there are those who are willing to move away from them and buy into the concept of adopting the outlook and values of different communities. Liverpool has seen it's fair share of sectarian differences. At one time there were no-go areas for Catholic and Protestant alike. But we've moved beyond that. As long as the "Liverpool" way of life is first and foremost, we don't care what religion you are. When you walk into the Balti curry house and the waiter walks out, looks at you and then starts to take the p*ss 'cos the rival team in your city beat "Your" team, all delivered in the strong accent and vernacular that is unique to your home town, it's pretty hard to identify with them as other than one of your own, regardless of which team they support.
Mert-
"Point made about football and religion all round then."
It's not quite as simple as that mate. It's a mystery as to why the Jocks used fooAtball teams to take sides, but the fact is there regardless: In Scotland, there is "still" sectarian hatred between Catholics and Protestants.
citycat,
"This is precisely the point. The Haddith seek to make the religion more "flexible". The Haddith, in fact, added back a lot of disgusting stuff (like rape is okay during war) that are forbidden by the Koran."
But my understanding is that in the traditional schools of Islam, the Koran is thought to have authority over the Hadith. If so, how does the disgusting stuff get okayed if it is in conflict with the Koran? Is it officially okayed by scholars despite the conflict with the Koran? If so, I would think it would be much easier than it appears to be to make the case to Muslims in general to stop believing in and doing these things.
"I don't know what school of Islamic thought that refers to. I'd never heard of any such rule. CERTAINLY, you are not allowed to replace any verses in the Koran."
'Replace' wasn't a good word. I meant "supercede". I mean to bring up the idea that, if two verses in the Koran conflict, the latter verse is the verse to be considered applicable. In that sense, the directives of the first verse are "replaced" by the second verse.
My understanding is that this rule, the rule about later superceding former when the two are in conflict, has root in the Koran. I do not know this for sure. (Please, if someone could let me know where this rule comes, giving me the specific verse if it comes from the Koran, I would be grateful).
"In addition, Muslim clerics have recently taken to "cancelling out" parts of the Koran. How's that for flexible? Supposing a priest started canceling out "love thy neighbour" in the Bible. Would you still call that Christianity? You'd probably think that's a little too flexible."
How recently, and which parts, have the clerics taken to cancelling out?
My understanding is that the reason clerics "cancel out" parts of the Koran, specifically many of the peaceful parts, is that other parts, which appear to contradict those peaceful, came later. Supposedly, there is a rule saying that the later parts supercede the former. I admit I don't know the source of this rule.
To my thinking, your case could work if you either (a) could reference sufficient context to demonstrate that the parts which *appear* to be in conflict are not actually in conflict, with the more violent verse being interpreted, on the basis of context, as being strictly limited in scope, and the peaceful ones more broadly (note that I don't have any idea if this could be done), OR (b) if that rule is not grounded in the Koran, but is instead grounded in something with less centrality to Islam proper.
I would rather like it if something like this could be done and widely disseminated, as I believe it could end up saving very many human lives. I haven't seen anything like it being done, though. I see the opposite: a surge of more violent interpretation, funded by Sauidi oil money to be sure, but nonetheless not being countered by a coherent opposing interpretation.
"with regard to why I don't think Islam should be violent, please see my response to freewoman."
If I understand your reply correctly, you are saying that you think true Islam isn't violent because of the passages about peace (some of which are similar to those of Jesus in the New Testament). You are also saying the the clerics abrogate those verses without proper reason, thereby distorting Islam.
If I understand what you are saying, then my reply is that I think it is important for you and other peaceful Muslims to confront the reasons the clerics give for abrogating the peaceful verses.
If you believe they are misinterpreting verses by not taking scope and context into account, you (and other peaceful Muslims) can confront them (possibly research on formal discourse theory, for example) and hopefully sway Muslims away from the clerics' overly-violent interpretation. If you believe the rule about superceding is not valid (either in general because it isn't rooted in the Koran after all, or in specific cases because after taking context into account, there isn't a conflict that would require the superceding), then you can confront them with this, and hopefully sway people away from the clerics' overly-violent interpretation.
For me, however, I haven't seen this happening in the last five years. I've instead seen organizations like CAIR become wildly powerful, and use that power to smear non-Muslims like Mr. Spencer for just pointing out that the traditional interpretation of Islam is what it is.
I would like it to happen--that is, to see a strong case made to Muslims that Islam is really a religion of peace--but, not being Muslim, it wouldn't be effective for me to do it (even aside from my relative lack of knowledge on the subject).
"For example, I don't even wear a veil because all that purdah stuff is in Haddith. The Koran only asks me to dress modestly and cover my bosom. I figure, as long as my boobs aren't hanging out, I'm good."
This sounds quite sensible.
"Bottom line is, I have a whole big (Muslim) family and a bunch of friends of the family who think all this effigy-burning, jihad, anti-American, Anti-Israel, anti-cartoon, riot stuff is bullshit. We're definitely in the minority but we exist."
Good. I hope you are able to hold your ground. I think it would be helpful if you could back up your minority position with solid theological arguments, and I would very much like to see those made. That would involve addressing the reasons clerics give for superceding earlier verses with latter verses if they conflict, and addressing issues of when verses actually conflict, given context and scope.
"I think more will come back to our way of thinking eventually. I mean, how can you live a normal life when you're constantly on Jihad??"
You're right, it isn't possible.
I think many expect that they will convert the world, and then not have to be on active Jihad any more. Like with many other utopian movements, there seems to be this belief that any cost (starving the Ukranian peasants, murdering the Europe's Jews, etc.) now, no matter how horrific by basic human ethical standards, is worth it for some supposedly "perfect" future (which never actually comes), and therefore not really evil.
But, going to your main point, I agree, and I hope more Muslims come to your way of thinking. They will have to to live good lives (by which I basically mean, raising happy families, working productively, exploring and advancing the sciences, contributing to the arts). And, if you think you could make a theological argument to your fellow Muslims that could help enable that, I think it could do a lot of good.
Abrogation is the word.
Citycat does not sound like a muslim to me...
What does it take to be a true believer? Mohammad made it sound easy when he said that a true believer does the prayers, pays the tax, bows in homage and renounces agreements with jews. But it is more complicated than that, is it not? One must believe that Allah is God and must submit to him. In submitting to him, one must believe that the Quran is the very word of Allah, and ALL his orders, demands and commandments be followed. Following Allahs orders, no matter how vile, is the only way to Allahs heaven. Space off on Allah and you go directly to hell, you dont pass 'go' and you dont collect your $200. That means that muslims must hate what Allah hates, or they are not muslims. Allah hates the guts of everyone who does not hate what he hates (mostly non-believers. If a muslim refuses jihad, he dies a hypocrite... no heaven for him/her. I think Citycat is spacing off on Allah, and Allah is pzzed. He is sending Iblis to 'fix' the problem.
I'd like to join with CrypticLife, FedUp, bigcatgirl13106, and others who thanked citycat for sharing her opinion. It was not a perfect exchange, but I found it far more informative than some of the threads composed of partisan rantings we've seen lately. I certainly don't agree with all of citycat's positions, but that's probably true for all posters here (even my personal favorites such as Alarmed Pig Farmer, pythagoras, or Nariz). She can express herself without the triumphal bald-faced taqiyyah of "Naseem", or the incoherent mumblings of Mohideen Ibramsha. JW/DW should be overflowing with "moderate" Muslims like her, since we've been told repeatedly that they compose the "vast majority" of Muslims. We finally heard from one, and I hope she sticks around.
cosmicAvenger said
Excellent point. How does word travel so quickly in Islamic lands throughout the entire world about a speech in German in Germany? Or about cartoons published in a local paper in a Danish newspaper? Or a couple of teenaged Muslim kids running from the police in France who barbecue themselves on a power station? Do they have some international toll-free number that they can call and report the outrage pretext of the day? 1-800-MO'S-RAGE or something similar?
These Islamic rage-a-thons are well scripted and organized. I hope that some intelligence organization somewhere is watching how the information gets disseminated, and who is doing the disseminating.
But I'm kidding myself. Those are the same intelligence organizations that tell us that these are all independent nationalistic events with no religious motivation committed by a few mentally ill radicals with no religious motivation.
2 converted journalists at gunpoint?
many more in africa.
ok the pope got it wrong its not the sword anymore its the GUN!.
Maurice Chevalier singing "Louise!", only different:
Every little bomb seems to whisper "Islam."
Kids and their moms scream to see a pogrom....
You get the picture... Everybody having fun yet? Islam is a riot!
(Who said "Islam is the biggest joke free zone in the world"? Oh -- I think it was me. They look like they're having fun at least...)
What's really funny is watching muslims with their placards in India and Pakistan...
Placards are written in hindi/sanskrit, not their wormy arabic. Damn hypocrites!
Even here in South Africa, they speak hindi and not their fukked-up arabic crap.
Ciao!
Mrmommoto
"My understanding is that the reason clerics "cancel out" parts of the Koran, specifically many of the peaceful parts, is that other parts, which appear to contradict those peaceful, came later. Supposedly, there is a rule saying that the later parts supercede the former. I admit I don't know the source of this rule."
Now, doesnt' that just seem like a very convenient "rule"? So, God gives Mohamed The Message (the Koran) and Mohamed tells the Muslims The Message is complete. So, wouldn't a normal person say "Huh....so human viciousness must be tempered with human compassion. That's God's command. How do I do that? I want what I want but God also commands mercy."? Isn't that the classic struggle of human spirituality? The fight between good and evil? Isn't Mercy God's command as well?
But if you're, say, a 9th century Arab conqueror and all that mercy crap just gets in the way of your pillaging, what rule would you make up? I KNOW! I'll get rid of all that mercy. Wow! Now all we have is "go kill everybody" but no spiritual struggle and we can just chalk it up to "God's Will". Fabulous. And, hey, let's add some Haddiths that bring back pre-Islamic practice, like Purdah and forced marriage. YAY!
You're right. You're not seeing it from CAIR. But what do you expect from a terrorist front group?
The problems in the Middle East have less to do with Islam and more to do with what happened in Germany with the rise of Hitler. I'm kind of out of time right now but very quickly: Rise to power of brutal dictators, blaming it on a scapegoat (America, Israel, you name it) leads to a "Mein Kampf" mentality, next step is find justification in Religion to go take over the world. I think you guys see that.
Hopefully, after the civil war in Iraq is over, they'll settle into a working democracy and a free market economy. That will give them a vehicle for individual empowerment. Empowered individuals don't need scapegoats. Bye bye fascism. Other autocracies in the ME should topple in time. THEN, people like me will be heard.
Until then, people like me just support Israel and America in its efforts to stamp out Islamo-fascism. Period.
In the meantime, if you want to be less depressed, check out
www.Danielpiper.com
www.freemuslims.org
I don't belong to any organizations but I like what I see there.
Someone should question this guy on how many of those 1.5 billion actually CHOSE to be a muslim, and how many of those 1.5 billion would love to LEAVE islam with their lives.
Posted by: freewoman at September 15, 2006 12:37 PM
That is a very valid question. Islam is designed to boost it's numbers by terrorising those who join, compelling or killing those who don't and simply killing those who leave. Islam unlike a religiom of integrity, plays on numbers, whereas numbers are the refuge of the mediocre.
'Support of the masses, is the joy of the timid.' M K Gandhi (1869-1948).
citycat says The Koran teaches that men and women are equal. I know that later it permits men to hit their wives. So which is it? They contradict each other. How do I deal with that? The Koran also says that "if it contradicts itself. It is not from God". The stuff about equality appears in the Koran first and repeats. The beating appears once. Methinks somebody snuck that in. In any case, beating contradicts the the equality, so we stick with the equality.
If the koran has NEVER had a word changed and it is the immutable perfect words of god given directly to mohammad HOW could somebody sneak something in?
http://www.searchtruth.com Quran translation Mohsin Khan 33:59
59 O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies (i.e.screen themselves completely except the eyes or one eye to see the way). That will be better, that they should be known (as free respectable women) so as not to be annoyed. And Allah is Ever OftForgiving, Most Merciful.