Pakistani pol: No room for terrorism in Islam

“It is our prime duty to resolve the problems through peaceful means,”

So, I take it that Chief Minister Hoti has just declared his apostasy from Islam?

Some one better tell his no-religionists. They appeared to have missed the memo.

Instead of pretending that were it not for Jihad, Islam would be unknown to the world, maybe they could try Facing Evil Head On, even if that means fully accepting that Islam is rotten to the core, irrespective of the moral character of individual Muslims.

“It is our prime duty to resolve the problems through peaceful means,” he said.

so said the winner of month's Taqiyya Moment

Well, infidels are now doing jihad on each other themselves.
The action that has been packed into the last few days!
China shone, with the most magnificent Olympics Opening Ceremony in world history. Just 2 days later, Uighur jihadists contributed their own bloody, human-murdering "sports event" in the east of the country, just as "Palestinian" jihadists did at Munich Olympics in 1972. And who helps the Uighurs? The United States of America, in its all-out effort at Cantacuzening the Global Jihad away from itself and against China, Russia and Serbia.
And on the very morning of the Olympics Opening, "our man Saakashvili" in Georgia had outdone even Muslims, mass-murdering Ossetian civilians, most of them Russian citizens, on the scale of 9/11.
Well, was I right or was I right? If some of you noticed, I had confidently predicted it here just 2 days earlier, on Aug.6, ending my post on that day with the words: "the US is apparently aiding Georgia in an inevitable attack on separatists". Indeed, I predicted it more than a year earlier here, in a post in response to the May 23, 2007 article titled "Fort Dix Suspect Applied For Police Jobs". I even provided a detailed scenario of how this will happen. I have studied the traits of Homo Sociopathus, the specie that totally determins the Foreign Policy of the United States so well, I can easily predict its pattern of conduct years ahead. The primitive Sociopathus is devoid of all human qualities, including the most basic common sense, so it is entirely precedent-driven. I predicted that because the Sociopathus got away with "Kosova" evil, it considers it "a foreign policy success", and will be emboldened to challenge Russia on its own border by backing the bellicose anti-Russian nutcase Saakashvili whom it installed through a "color revolution" in breaking the separatists, almost all of them with Russian citizenship, through brute force. I also predicted that it will blow back into the Sociopathus' eyes. But the Sociopathus did not see it coming, because it is incapable of thinking in a human way. What was fully obvious to me, was beyond its comprehention. It cannot believe Russia had actually fought back instead of the usual whining and complaining. But how could Russia not? How could it stand idly by as "America's boy" murdered far, far more Russian citizens than the jihadists did in the Moscow bombings, the theater siege and Beslan combined?
Late Oriana Fallacci wrote that she failed to notice the threat of the Global Jihad in the '70's because of the huge distraction of the Cold War, and its byproduct, the hot war in Vietnam. Well, it's quite a distraction from the Global Jihad the degenerate Rice and other State Dept. sociopathae have just created on the Russian border. Instead of removing the intolerable threat of nuclear terrorism from the Iranian nutcase Ahmadinejad, the Sociopathus had cultivated its own nutcase Saakashvili as an intolerable threat to Russia. Russia is now apparently determined to get rid of Saakashvili. And who can blame her? It's now or never for her. The nutcase decided to strike when he was on the brink of joining NATO. It is better for Russia to fight the war on him all the way now, when he is not a NATO member yet, than after he becomes a NATO member, and THEN commits another atrocity on Russian civilians, in which case Russia will have to fight an all-out war against the entire NATO alliance.
Predictably, the Insane McCain is apoplectic about "Russian brutality". If he wins, things will get even worse, because it will be Russia, not Iran on the receiving end of McCain's insanity. Meanwhile, the mad suicide bomber Ahmadinejad gets a huge break, and all the time he needs to develop nukes and then smuggle them into the US to Hezbollah suicide bombers already pre-positioned here, all around us. These are days of wild fun for Ahmadinejad. The infidels are doing his work for him, plunging this world into chaos and creating the conditions for the coming of the 12th imam. The United States of America and the Western Europe are in an iron grip of evil insanity. The end times must be near.

Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.

Hoti ought to take Zawahiri to lunch and discuss his peaceful position - but I'll bet those two can't get through the first course without incident.

Ameer Haider Hoti campaigned for NWFP chief minister with calls to negotiate with Taliban and called for Sharia law for NWFP's Swat (which the Taliban also seek to implement):

June 11, 2008
Govt engaged with all stakeholders for peace in NWFP, says Hoti
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\06\11\story_11-6-2008_pg7_61

April 2, 2008
ANP makes history as Hoti sworn in as NWFP CM
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\04\02\story_2-4-2008_pg7_18

March 19, 2008
Ameer Haider Hoti, CM Designate NWFP -- "If things can better, why not?" on Sharia law for Swat
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\03\19\story_19-3-2008_pg3_5

March 2, 2008
Govt to seek dialogue with Fazlullah
-- Candidate for NWFP chief minister, Ameer Haider Hoti
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\03\02\story_2-3-2008_pg7_1
-- "Hoti assured his full support for a political solution to the Swat situation, he added. Hoti had earlier said that the Taliban 'are a reality' and that he would 'hold talks' with them to improve law and order in NWFP."

Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999

http://osetian.com/index.html

I wish I could read and speak Russian, because the other point of view is simply not shown. Some of the links work there, but the video needs translation. It looks pretty bad for the truth here is the west that is for sure.

No terrorism, but plenty of room for jihad.

"Appreciating efforts of the council members, Hoti said that their endeavors would result into gaping the differences in different religions of the world and particularly in Pakistan, religious harmony and spirit of co-existence will promote."

GAPING?

Hoti said their endeavors would result in [opening, as a gap; splitting; becoming open wide] the differences in different religions....

He wants to accentuate the differences? Doesn't sound like religious harmony.

"saying all the religions were meant for promoting love, harmony and to put the humanity on right path."

1350 years later, and now you tell us? Or does that phrase "to put the humanity [sic] on the right path" with its obvious fi-sabil-Allah edge, mean what I think it means?

that phrase "to put the humanity [sic] on the right path" with its obvious fi-sabil-Allah edge...

Oh the humanity!

Islam has a winning mentality....I sure that even the spirited kuffar women will agree to this...some of them absolutely love Islam.

I don't know about "room for terrorism" but I do know that it isn't required....Islam doesn't need it...it stands by itself.

Misunderstandings turn into problems when allowed to fester...no need for it.

The winning mentality of Islam is so powerful...the kuffar would take it all and run if he could....steal it and keep it for himself as a "marketing tool"....but we are wise to this ...and so you turn the misunderstaniungs into problems...tell me it ain't so.

Enraged:

Don't slur the Georgians. They have been putting up with rocket attacks (rockets paid for, manufacture by, and delivered by Russia) for years. The attacks have been of increasing frequency, and unlike the Georgiians, Ossetian forces PURPOSELY hang out close to civilians.

This is Israel vs. PLO all over again, only Georgia doesn't have the advantages Israel has.

Being against Jihad isn't saying much unless one is also for the West. Otherwise, its just about trading masters.

"Chief Minister NWFP Ameer Haider Khan Hoti has said that there was no room for terrorism in Islam"

He must have a different Qur'an than the one I have.

Now if Ameer can just talk the Taliban into it.........

How much money did we give Pakistan? This doesn't have anything to do with the Chief Minister's statement does it?

Looking at the previous post, Zawahiri didn't get the memo.

“Every religion believe in peace and are against violence and terrorism and they are a major source of teaching and searching for peace and tranquility against hatred and unrest,” Hoti said this during a meeting...

Depends on one's definition of "violence" and "terrorism" and "peace." Moslems are good at playing the word game called Differing Definitions -- and also taqiyya.

Depends on one's definition of "violence" and "terrorism" and "peace." Moslems are good at playing the word game called Differing Definitions -- and also taqiyya.

Posted by: Always On Watch

Right.

We call it terrorism. They call it jihad.
We define "civilians" differently.
We also have different definitions of "innocent".

People that have never held a gun, planted a bomb or said one bad thing about Islam can still be considered valid targets for jihad, even if they're walking along the street.

"Islam has a winning mentality....I sure that even the spirited kuffar women will agree to this...some of them absolutely love Islam."

Not this spirited kafir woman - I hate Islam.

'hindenberg' the Mohammedan Boggart (who fancies himself as a Mohammedan Dementor) is here again, making hideous faces, snarling, boasting and threatening and 'assuming the sale'.

He claims that Islam has "a winning mentality". Yeah - the bizarre, over-controlling, obsessive mentality that is demonstrated in another thread, 'Cucumbers broke al-qaeda's power in Iraq':

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/022168.php#comments

Here's the 'winning mentality' as demonstrated by the devoutly Muslim jihadist 'heroes' of al-qaeda:

"Al-Qa'eda has lost credibility for enforcing a series of rules imposing their way of thought on the most mundane aspects of everyday life.

"They include a ban on women buying suggestively-shaped vegetables, according to one tribal leader in the western province of Anbar.

"Sheikh Hameed al-Hayyes, a Sunni elder, told Reuters: "They even killed female goats because their private parts were not covered and their tails were pointed upward, which they said was haram.

"They regarded the cucumber as male and tomato as female. Women were not allowed to buy cucumbers, only men."' END QUOTE.

I won't even go into the farrago of nonsense and lies, what Martha Gellhorn called 'mad hattery', that pullulates all over the Islamosphere: the insane conspiracy theories that make the maddest tinfoil hat wearer and urban myth purveyor of the western world look positively rational by comparison. But I will say that the electronic file I have called 'nonsense and lies dept', and in which I file all examples of Muslim conspiracy theories and Big Lies, that have been reported here over the past four years, is not small.

Islam wants to conquer the world - but its 'winning mentality' seems to be akin to the 'winning mentality' of a psychopathic serial rapist-killer as he stalks a woman. For once he 'wins', all he wants to do is to hurt, to humiliate, to strip his victim of all beauty and dignity; and then, with maximum cruelty, to erase the victim from existence altogether. He creates *nothing*. The victory he seeks is a victory of pure evil.

Such a 'winning mentality' is to be despised by all decent people, and resisted to the utmost.

“Every religion believe in peace and are against violence and terrorism and they are a major source of teaching and searching for peace and tranquility against hatred and unrest,”

So who's promoting all the hatred and unrest? Atheists? It can't be religions, they are searching for peace. Why are they searching? You mean after 6000 years or so, religions have not found peace?
Its got to be those darn atheists...or kuffars...not much difference. Neither believe in Allah or Mohammad as the messenger.
I guess Hoti is going to ignore Allah's words as set out clearly in the Quran, and examples of Mohammad.

Thats good if it is actually the case. I wonder how long this guy will last?

And Fred...We have seen examples of Islamic mentality...lock it up, throw away the key...

"Appreciating efforts of the council members, Hoti said that their endeavors would result into gaping the differences in different religions of the world and particularly in Pakistan, religious harmony and spirit of co-existence will promote."

Huh? Does anyone have any idea what that line is supposed to mean?

I am surprised at the comments on this forum.

That person, the Chief Minister that is, is A MUSLIM! But you guys don't care what he says! This forum seems quite full of hatred with Anti-Muslim stance.

Those Muslims that speak of peace are not considered as Muslims by you guys! Which essentially is 99% of Muslims. Look at Musharraf - he's a Muslim too! And COAS Pakistan Army, both of whom are American friends! And this is true of many other political leaders.

But like I said, for you, anyone who preaches of peace is not a Muslim! In other words, you guys have decided that you are only considering terrorists as Muslims. And any Muslim who is not a terrorist is a non-Muslim actually!

And then there's no Islamophobia? What a shame!

I am surprised at the comments on this forum.

Posted by: thecentrist at August 11, 2008 11:46 PM

And I am surprised that you are surprised.

I mean, given the recent articles at this site of Muslim Taleban sympathizers in the Pakistani government, and their explicit admission as such, that you would expect us to ignore our "lying" eyes and not accept that 99% of the world's Muslims are absolutely peaceful, solely based on your statement.

There is not a single poll that will support your statement of 99% Muslims being peaceful, not a one, and as a matter of fact, the opposite is true to the tune of at least 15-20% globally.

If thy be truthful, bring thy proof, otherwise, stick that in your hookah and smoke it.

Awake,

>"There is not a single poll that will support your statement of 99% Muslims being peaceful, not a one, and as a matter of fact, the opposite is true to the tune of at least 15-20% globally."

Sure 99% was my reading from Muslims around me, probably putting it as a general statement was not the right thing to do. But here's something that might come as a surprise to you:

I am attaching a link from CSMonitor with a poll indicating that less American are anti-Terrorist as compared to people in Muslim countries.

For example, 86% Pakistanis believe terrorism is never justified as compared to 46% Americans!

Now I will like to invite you to bring some poll that shows that about 80% of the Muslims support terrorism!

Thanks.

From:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0223/p09s01-coop.html

"The survey, conducted in December 2006 by the University of Maryland's prestigious Program on International Public Attitudes, shows that only 46 percent of Americans think that "bombing and other attacks intentionally aimed at civilians" are "never justified," while 24 percent believe these attacks are "often or sometimes justified."

Contrast those numbers with 2006 polling results from the world's most-populous Muslim countries – Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nigeria. Terror Free Tomorrow, the organization I lead, found that 74 percent of respondents in Indonesia agreed that terrorist attacks are "never justified"; in Pakistan, that figure was 86 percent; in Bangladesh, 81 percent. "

"Chief Minister NWFP Ameer Haider Khan Hoti has said that there was no room for terrorism in Islam"

But jihad is not terrorism. jihad is legitimate.

"saying all the religions were meant for promoting love, harmony and to put the humanity on right path"

The right path being islam, and because muhammad was the last prophet, look to him and his deeds, emulate him and you are on the right path.

“Every religion believe in peace and are against violence and terrorism and they are a major source of teaching and searching for peace and tranquility against hatred and unrest,”

"Hatred" and "unrest" exists only in dar-ul-harb. If everybody follows islam, everything would be hunky-dory. See islamic paradises like afghanistan and iraq and sudan and iran and....

"Appreciating efforts of the council members, Hoti said that their endeavors would result into gaping the differences in different religions of the world and particularly in Pakistan, religious harmony and spirit of co-existence will promote."

Co-existence ? And the reason for the birth of pakistan was ? Would you like to talk about what happened in West Punjab in 1947, the year pakistan was born ?

Just because most Muslims aren't Jihadists, doesn't mean that most Muslims aren't engaged in the Islamization of non-Muslim lands.

Arjun.sevak, no wonder I was surprised. You are reading between the lines. How could he condemn terrorism so you were satisfied? And did you even see my post? More Americans think terrorism is justified than people in Muslim states?

Arjun, the rest of your post is not backed up by data either. You're making claims with your understanding of what Islam is with what you heard from terrorists! Not from average Muslims or prominent Muslim scholars! That is what I am trying to address.

But I strongly suggest the following two reads (both western - one american, one british) which talk about history of 'terrorism' - welcome to another viewpoint if you appreciate it because JihadWatch will have you believe otherwise!

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/t/terrorism/index.html?scp=1-spot&sq=terrorism&st=nyt
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/recent/sept_11/changing_faces_01.shtml

Rogster, I am not going to address your comment because this article was about a Muslim leader stressing that terrorism is not justified and people here declared him an apostate. I would have had some discussion but I have no idea what your definition of Islamization is.

In an earlier post, I claimed that 99% Muslims are not terrorist. I still believe in that and could argue with data, but it was easier to get comparative data for 'justification of terrorism' than 'involvement in terrorism'.

Lastly, I came here for the first time in the last few days. After going through it, I believe it is a good brain-washer. It is taking every piece of news and then twisting it in one way or another to ensure that everyone (wrongly) understands Islam is bad no matter what good Muslims say or do.

Best wishes to all.

"You're making claims with your understanding of what Islam is with what you heard from terrorists! Not from average Muslims or prominent Muslim scholars! That is what I am trying to address."

My understanding of islam comes from muslims themselves, some of them belonging to imam families (the "scholars" you mention). I was a student of urdu once upon a time.

"But I strongly suggest the following two reads (both western - one american, one british) which talk about history of 'terrorism' - welcome to another viewpoint if you appreciate it because JihadWatch will have you believe otherwise"

To all new jihadwatchers - I suggest :

http://historyofjihad.org

"In an earlier post, I claimed that 99% Muslims are not terrorist. I still believe in that and could argue with data, but it was easier to get comparative data for 'justification of terrorism' than 'involvement in terrorism'."

No, 99% of muslims are not "terrorists", they are jihadis, waging their jihad on Kaffirs (Infidels) for the past 1400 years. Do you know how many people were killed in India alone ? The most conservative estimate is 70 - 80 million, though I do not agree with this and think that the bodycount is higher.

"Lastly, I came here for the first time in the last few days. After going through it, I believe it is a good brain-washer. It is taking every piece of news and then twisting it in one way or another to ensure that everyone (wrongly) understands Islam is bad no matter what good Muslims say or do."

To see what the good muslims are doing, checkout this site.

http://thereligionofpeace.com

Bye bye, taqqiya master.

"Islam has a winning mentality....I sure that even the spirited kuffar women will agree to this...some of them absolutely love Islam."

Any woman who loves Islam is not a "kuffar". She's a convert. A Muslimah. A "kuffar" woman would never love Islam, which contains statements that women are deficient in religion, comprise the majority of souls in hell, and are to be subservient to anything with a penis.

"I don't know about "room for terrorism" but I do know that it isn't required....Islam doesn't need it...it stands by itself.

Indeed, the inherent terrorism in the Qur'an, ahadith, and the Sira, cetainly stand alone. No need for 'innovation'-- all of the most merciless and barbarous ways to treat another person are already included.

"Misunderstandings turn into problems when allowed to fester...no need for it."

Misunderstandings like... what? Have you an example, Freddy?

"The winning mentality of Islam is so powerful...the kuffar would take it all and run if he could....steal it and keep it for himself as a "marketing tool"....but we are wise to this ...and so you turn the misunderstaniungs into problems...tell me it ain't so."

Winning mentality? Islam loses with me, from the get-go. I have to swear both to your illah, and your so-called "prophet". Sweal allegience with Muhammed? Never.

The "kuffar" has no need to steal Islam, as we already have the originals, in the Torah, and the New Testament.

".....I sure that even the spirited kuffar women will agree to this...some of them absolutely love Islam."

hindenberg needs a little help from Webster's on the definition of kafir (btw, kaffur is plural for kafir).

Anyway.....

[Kafir: This is a person who refuses to submit to Allah.]

So, Fred, if someone refuses to submit to allah, then it stands to reason that this same person would in no way "love Islam", as you purport. Besides, there is nothing to love about Islam, even if you are neutral on the subject of allah, because Islam runs counter to the freedoms that freedom-lovers hold dear. You silly lover of Islam, you. Looks like Islam has stolen your ability to think clearly.

"The winning mentality of Islam is so powerful...the kuffar would take it all and run if he could....steal it and keep it for himself as a "marketing tool"....but we are wise to this ...and so you turn the misunderstandings into problems...tell me it ain't so."

--

Hey, I'd like to know how I can use islam as a "marketing tool" for my business.

Are Coca-Cola and Mickey D's doing so well because they are using islam as a marketing tool?

The "winning mentality"..? Of course he has to use the work "kuffar".. that's verbal terrorism and he just disproved himself.

The whole speech is as convoluted and illogical as only the most KKKoran-addled brain can spew forth.

I sincerely wish the KKKorag were good for something for a change! Even if it could be used a s a "marketing tool".

Well, the discussion has deviated from the actual topic, so I'll go back to the original, which is whether Muslims believe in Peace or not.

The way I understand on this forum is that people have decided anyone who believes in peace is not a Muslim. So, Islam is not peace because whoever believes in peace is not a Muslim anyway (no matter what he calls himself) - he turns apostate by our definition of Islam. Pretty counter-intuitive to me.

Arjun, can you please provide some neutral source that claims Muslims killed so many in India alone? I would love to find a scholarly study in a peer reviewed journal that substantiates this claim with an evidence. I provided for my claims - let's not make claims without evidence. And I would also like to know how many Muslims were actually involved in the attacks. Because that is a very important number too since our discussion is on how many Muslims support peace.

However, let's go independent of the words for our argument and look at what Al-Qaeda is doing. Irrespective of whether it is labelled as jihad or terrorism, people know what they do and one way to find out Muslim sentiment would be to just look at how many Muslims actually support them. So here's one for Muslim support for Al-Qaeda:

"The PIPA poll, which was conducted between December 2006 and February 2007, also found that large majorities reject Al Qaeda itself and its core tactic of attacking civilians. More than 75 percent of those surveyed in the four countries – Egypt, Pakistan, Morocco, and Indonesia – say attacks on civilians is un-Islamic."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0425/p01s04-wome.html

It seems to me that it is VERY clear that more than 75% in a poll said that attacks on civilians is un-Islamic.

Btw, the US government has been using word 'jihad' which, as US government realized and even going by your argument, is supposedly a positive for Muslims. Despite that, 75% oppose attack on civilians and reject Al Qaeda. And the news item on US government's use of the word 'jihad' is here:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92552774

And finally, the study of Urdu has nothing to do with Islam, so not sure how that adds to the evidence at all.

I sincerely hope that some people do realize that terrorism is not Islam and majority Muslims are themselves fighting against Al-Qaeda. It is for this reason that Pakistani Muslim government has caught numerous Taleban and Al-Qaeda agents from Pakistan with the help of Pakistani military, flown some to US in Pakistani and many tried in courts with many Muslim lawyers and Muslim judges and convicted them and made them serve. Those are all Muslims too, which probably folks here would not agree to. And the same is true of all the other Muslim governments that are actually fighting terrorism.

That is why I am still surprised at why this news item was not trusted at all!

Best wishes to all and peace!

thecentrist,
Did you go through those sites I provided in my post above ? Or were they not "neutral" enough for you ?

Note to management : There is a possibility that the centrist is a heavyweight taqqiya master, like m.j. akbar (A journalist over here who is currently in taqqiya overdrive, writing articles for the Times Of India).

> Note to management : There is a possibility that the centrist is a heavyweight taqqiya master, like m.j. akbar (A journalist over here who is currently in taqqiya overdrive, writing articles for the Times Of India).

WOW!

So, did I say I was a Muslim or not? Did I ever claim anything to my identity? Am I not just providing you sources with all the claims? I did not leak out anything as I wanted to have an objective discussion, but looks like folks who call Muslims as hard and intolerant are intolerant to finding them tolerant and reasonable!

Basically what I captured from your last statement, with all due respect, is that when someone argues with you and provides evidence contrary to yours, just label them negatively and also alert the management (so much for free speech!)

I did open up those websites. If you want, I can give you a critique of where they were making claims without any evidence and where they actually had evidence. And when they have evidence, where I believe their evidence is not strong (because I have counter evidence) and where theirs is strong. However, I am not going to have a long discourse over those issues since they are NOT related to this post. As the policy says on this forum, the comments are supposed to be on topic and I want to make sure that these comments are indeed useful for the audience with regards to this topics.

The general issue that I think exists is that some of the people here seem to be looking at one side of arguments only and choose to ignore others. If you do that, then of course you are going to believe that one side only and preach it and fight for it. My posts are attempting you to look at both sides, not just one, and do that objectively. And I do not benefit from it btw.

Have you thought whether it makes ANY difference whatsoever to me what you believe? It does not. You don't know me, I don't know you. And you have seen my posts, I am quoting sources, polls and not just making a claim after another. My first post here was about my surprise to see that while a prominent Muslim leader vociferously pronounced his allegiance to peace, it was nonetheless twisted beyond any reasonable degree to still deduce that Islam is pro-terror and that leader is now an apostate!

I did provide evidence against that, with at least one poll showing that more than 75% of Muslims oppose Al-Qaeda and believe attacking civilians is un-Islamic, but to no avail.

I will say though that whatever you do is for yourself, not for someone else. When you choose to build hatred against a group, it only affects you. If you choose to open up and understand the diversity within that group, then you open up yourself to learn them even better since there is not a single group in the world where views of all its members are the same. If you believe that, then you are mocking their intelligence, and ridiculing their humanity.

I am going to retire my friend from this thread because I see no use in continuing here since the posts now have stooped down to labeling me names.

Best wishes to all the readers, and peace to all. If any of you want to listen to reason, do read the sources in my posts above, especially the one at http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0425/p01s04-wome.html.

"I did not leak out anything as I wanted to have an objective discussion, but looks like folks who call Muslims as hard and intolerant are intolerant to finding them tolerant and reasonable!"

I have replied to hundreds of people like you and I think that I have better things to do than to argue with a taqqiya master, which is what you are. You do not have to tell me whether you are a muslim or not, your acts speak for themselves.

"I did open up those websites. If you want, I can give you a critique of where they were making claims without any evidence and where they actually had evidence"

You went through http://historyofjihad.org in A SINGLE DAY ? And you know the tens of thousands of historic events that they describe are false ? My,my, you must be God (allah, in your case).