NationStates Jolt Archive

I know there have been comments made about the Pope's recent comments on Islam, and more than a couple of threads on Islam and Muslims. I'll try to avoid most of that...
Does anyone else think it's a bit odd that the response to the Pope's comments on Islam, cited from a medieval text, characterizing parts of the faith as "evil and inhuman" (taken out of context or not, it honestly doesn't matter) is violence and death-threats? As per an AP article today, "The mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammed Hussein, urged Palestinians to halt attacks on churches in the territories, but held the pontiff responsible for the outpouring of anger." Even if the Pope hadn't been quoting someone else, and was expressing personal sentiment, the proper answer to accusations of being evil, violent, or generally not nice would not (I'd think...) be to go out and be violent, questionably evil (I think that is fair, if people have been attacking churches and innocent people), and generally not nice...
I'd think there would be a better way to go about expressing concern for a negitive view of one's religion, other than lending support to the stereotype.

Anyone else think that's odd, or is it just me?

Arr! They be almost as slippery as ninjas arrr!

Let's see...in response to the pope's remarks, we get Muslims fire-bombing a church, killing a nun in a hospital...yup, pretty much a great argument that they're not violent.

/sarcasm

Let's see...in response to the pope's remarks, we get Muslims fire-bombing a church, killing a nun in a hospital...yup, pretty much a great argument that they're not violent.

/sarcasm

I know this may be difficult to understand, but not all Muslims are violent; hell, not even the vast majority are. Just because a few nutcases try and stir up more shit doesn't mean you can condemn an entire people.

I know this may be difficult to understand, but not all Muslims are violent; hell, not even the vast majority are. Just because a few nutcases try and stir up more shit doesn't mean you can condemn an entire people.

(Immediately assuming people's stupidity is neither fair nor helpful. Moving on.) I do not say that all Muslims are violent, nor do I make any comment on the Islamic faith as an entity. However, the violent minority gets media time. AP nor the televison news broadcasts are, to my knowledge, saying much of anything about peaceful Muslims or people not outraged by the Pope's comments. As such, the minority is, however unfortunately, tainting the view of Islam as a whole and publicly reinforcing the negitive ideas being circulated about Muslims. Are all Muslims bad? Of course not. But some are, and those are the ones getting all the attention.

I know this may be difficult to understand, but not all Muslims are violent; hell, not even the vast majority are. Just because a few nutcases try and stir up more shit doesn't mean you can condemn an entire people.

Have you seen the demonstrations? "You said something we don't like! Burn you!" :rolleyes:

Are all muslims bad ? of course not.. however, the problem w/ Islam itself, is that the majority of muslims do not voice strong enough opposition to those speading hatrid and discontent "in the name of islam". And so, the picture is painted, either muslims are violent or indifferent (which some might argue is just as bad).

However, I would say those muslims willing to resort to violent measures are more then just an insignificant minority. Rather, it is a minority large enough to be concerned about.. and because moderate muslims themselves fear these radicals.. it becomes simple enough to paint all of Islam in one stroke. The true problem is not how everyone preceives Islam from the outside, but how Islam allows itself to be precieved .

Have you seen the demonstrations? "You said something we don't like! Burn you!" :rolleyes:

Oh yes, because that's the majority of Muslims, isn't it? But I'm sorry, please ignore the truth and go back to believing that the actions of a vocal minority some how represent the majority...

I know this may be difficult to understand, but not all Muslims are violent; hell, not even the vast majority are. Just because a few nutcases try and stir up more shit doesn't mean you can condemn an entire people.

A few nutcases who enjoy the sympathy and support of a huge segment of the population and in many cases the majority. A perfect example is the Mufti quoted in the OP. He asks them to stop attacking churches, but then blames the violence on the pope.

I'm so tired of hearing this whole, "it's just a few of them," excuse. The fact is that the reason the "moderate" Muslims have not controlled the actions of a "few nutcases" is because THEY SYMPATHIZE WITH THE NUTCASES! Their answers to violence when people publish a cartoon or quote a text isn't to trun to their own and say STOP! The "moderates," the ones who stayed home and didn't burn down a building or murder someone, react by saying, "if the Pope would just shut up or you would stop publishing things that we don't like good Muslims wouldn't need to behave this way."

It does seem an incredibly bad time to start quoting crusade era texs

I know there have been comments made about the Pope's recent comments on Islam, and more than a couple of threads on Islam and Muslims. I'll try to avoid most of that...
Does anyone else think it's a bit odd that the response to the Pope's comments on Islam, cited from a medieval text, characterizing parts of the faith as "evil and inhuman" (taken out of context or not, it honestly doesn't matter) is violence and death-threats? As per an AP article today, "The mufti of Jerusalem, Mohammed Hussein, urged Palestinians to halt attacks on churches in the territories, but held the pontiff responsible for the outpouring of anger." Even if the Pope hadn't been quoting someone else, and was expressing personal sentiment, the proper answer to accusations of being evil, violent, or generally not nice would not (I'd think...) be to go out and be violent, questionably evil (I think that is fair, if people have been attacking churches and innocent people), and generally not nice...
I'd think there would be a better way to go about expressing concern for a negitive view of one's religion, other than lending support to the stereotype.

Anyone else think that's odd, or is it just me?

I think it's funny. Some Muslim morons came up with a great idea. "The pope sez our religion is violent. We'll show him, firebomb the local catholic church!"

Anyway, I wouldn't apologize. No reason to. Just as the Muslims don't like their religion criticized from a few verses in the Koran "taken out of context", they shouldn't criticize the pope for a couple of lines from an old text taken out of context. Clearly they're not after equal respect, they think that their religion is special.

It does seem an incredibly bad time to start quoting crusade era texs

Is it a bad time to shoot nuns because of it?

I actually thought the Moslems threatening and violently protesting that were hilarious.

SAY WE'RE PEACEFUL...OR ELSE

Hilarious. I feel bad for all the Moslems who aren't total dumbasses who probably are a bit embarassed by their behavior.

What annoys me (Aside from the fact that the Pope is annoying in general >>) is that he did quote from a text that, medieval or no, accused Islam of being violent and evil. He quoted from a text that has no basis in fact, was racist, and should have no basis in today's society.

Instead of quoting random racist biased texts, he should rather do some research and create his own quotes. I mean, has he even read the Quor'an (forgive my spelling). Islam preaches non-violence in its religious texts. They are far from evil. Give them some credit.

Instead of quoting random racist biased texts, he should rather do some research and create his own quotes. I mean, has he even read the Quor'an (forgive my spelling). Islam preaches non-violence in its religious texts. They are far from evil. Give them some credit.


The Qur'an teaches non-violence.

Its the leaders at the local level who preach violence.

The Qur'an teaches non-violence.

Its the leaders at the local level who preach violence.

The Qur'an teaches that you should be violent towards those who are violent towards you, its not 100% pacifist. This is where the local leaders and extremists get their support, their absolutely convinced that the western world is engaged in a war with islam. Thats why its incredibly stupid to start quoting texts from the crusades

What annoys me (Aside from the fact that the Pope is annoying in general >>) is that he did quote from a text that, medieval or no, accused Islam of being violent and evil. He quoted from a text that has no basis in fact, was racist, and should have no basis in today's society.

Instead of quoting random racist biased texts, he should rather do some research and create his own quotes. I mean, has he even read the Quor'an (forgive my spelling). Islam preaches non-violence in its religious texts. They are far from evil. Give them some credit.

What annoys me is that everyone is so willing to condemn the Pope for what he said but not the Muslims for what they are doing. In responce or not, there is no reason to react as violently and as "evily" as they are. Seems to lend credence to the text the Pope quoted.

Arr! They be almost as slippery as ninjas arrr!

*Throws shuriken. Disappears all ninja-y*

Yeah, the OP is right.

The persons that firebombed, shot a nun and chant for the death of the pope are sub-human scum of the earth and should be put down like a vermin infestation.

The ones that were offended by what they thought he said and discuss it need to have their concerns addressed.

There should be no misunderstanding here, no "excuses" for the absurd violent response.

People look at the pope for Catholics the same way poeple look at the President for Americans, they have your leader sum up what all of you must be like.

And I actualyl read the Islam texts and find them for the most part very interesting, and terrorists are not Islamic, they are as close to that as the KKK is to christianity

What annoys me is that everyone is so willing to condemn the Pope for what he said but not the Muslims for what they are doing. In responce or not, there is no reason to react as violently and as "evily" as they are. Seems to lend credence to the text the Pope quoted.

Of course-they have proven the emperor quoteds point.

Of course Islam is violent. Indeed, given the increasingly populist nature of the violence, most notably in regards to the Danish cartoons and the recent Papal comments, the "its only extremist factions" contention appears less meritorious.

Christians are just as violent, the kkk claims to be christian and so does the IRA. they are the same as the islamic ones

The Qur'an teaches that you should be violent towards those who are violent towards you, its not 100% pacifist. This is where the local leaders and extremists get their support, their absolutely convinced that the western world is engaged in a war with islam. Thats why its incredibly stupid to start quoting texts from the crusades

It teached more than that.

"Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): 'I am with you: give firmness to the believers. I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers. Smite ye above their necks and smite all their fingertips off them. This because they contended against God and His Apostle. If any contend against God and his Apostle, God is strict in punishment ... O ye who believe! When ye meet the unbelievers in hostile array, never turn your backs to them. If any do turn his back to them on such a day –unless it be in a stratagem of war, or to retreat to a troop (of his own) – he draws on himself the wrath of God, and his abode is hell, – an evil refuge (indeed)! It is not ye who slew them; it was God."

When the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war). But if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity [become Moslem], then open the way for them.

Fight those who believe not in God nor the last day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor acknowledge the religion of truth, (even if they are) of the people of the Book [Christians and Jews], until they pay the jizya [tribute] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. The Jews call Uzair [Ezra] a son of God, and the Christians call Christ the Son of God ... God's curse be on them.I am so tired of hearing this "Islam teaches peace" crap. It does not. The only good Muslims are the same as teh only good Christians. The ones who don't take their faith so seriously. Unfortunately, they are not as common in much of teh Muslim world. They never had a reformation and an enlightenment and they need them really badly.

Christians are just as violent, the kkk claims to be christian and so does the IRA. they are the same as the islamic ones

IRA is more political, but yes the KKK is part of the christian identity movement.

Theres also the lord resistance army in northern uganda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord's_Resistance_Army

(EDIT: i dunno what's wrong just copy and paste the url)

Christians are just as violent, the kkk claims to be christian and so does the IRA. they are the same as the islamic ones

That's a load of complete PC crap. The KKK is a fringe group that isn't taken seriously by anyone outside of it's miniscule numbers. Osama Bin Laden can be found on T-Shirts and posters all over the Muslim world.

The Qur'an teaches that you should be violent towards those who are violent towards you, its not 100% pacifist. This is where the local leaders and extremists get their support, their absolutely convinced that the western world is engaged in a war with islam. Thats why its incredibly stupid to start quoting texts from the crusadesHeey! I was gonna say that :p

Yet it doesn't excuse the cunts who legitimise & enable the actions of the IslamoFascist scum with their apologist shit.

We may not be fighting an actual crusade agains Islam, but they believe we are, and they are fighting a crusade of their own. That can't be apologised or ignored. Unfortunately comments like this:The persons that firebombed, shot a nun and chant for the death of the pope are sub-human scum of the earth and should be put down like a vermin infestation.Only affirms the belief that the entire religion is under attack. Amusingly, it is also exactly the sort of thing IslamoFascists spew themselves. We infidels are subhuman scum & need to be put down like vermin.

Ive seen kkk t-shirts. And while the IRA is mostly political, they belive god is on their side in the conflict. If you wanted i could go look for more terrorist groups that claim christiandom

I am so tired of hearing this "Islam teaches peace" crap. It does not. The only good Muslims are the same as teh only good Christians. The ones who don't take their faith so seriously. Unfortunately, they are not as common in much of teh Muslim world. They never had a reformation and an enlightenment and they need them really badly.

25:63:

The worshippers of the All-Merciful are they who tread gently upon the earth, and when the ignorant address them, they reply, "Peace!"



28:55, And when they hear vain talk, they turn away from it and say: "To us our deeds, and to you yours; peace be to you: we do not seek out the ignorant."


Quran 5:69 says (Arberry): "Surely they that believe, and those of Jewry, and the Christians, and those Sabeaans, whoso believes in God and the Last Day, and works righteousness--their wage waits them with their Lord, and no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow."


the pagans and unbelievers mentioned are the polytheistic meccans, who were trying to destroy islam

christians, jews, and zoroastrians are "people of the book" and can go to heaven....

5:82. " . . . and you will find the nearest in love to the believers (Muslims) those who say: 'We are Christians.' That is because amongst them are priests and monks, and they are not proud."



[4:90] Exempt those who join a people with whom you have concluded a peace treaty, and those who come to you with hearts unwilling to fight you, nor to fight their relatives. Had God willed, he could have placed them in power over you and they would have made war on you. Therefore, if they leave you alone, refrain from fighting you, and offer you peace, then God gives you no way to go against them.

Quran 4:94:

. . . Do not say to one who offers you peace, "You are not a believer," seeking the spoils of this life. For God has abundant treasure. You used to be like them, after all, and then God blessed you.

What annoys me (Aside from the fact that the Pope is annoying in general >>) is that he did quote from a text that, medieval or no, accused Islam of being violent and evil. He quoted from a text that has no basis in fact, was racist, and should have no basis in today's society.

Instead of quoting random racist biased texts, he should rather do some research and create his own quotes. I mean, has he even read the Quor'an (forgive my spelling). Islam preaches non-violence in its religious texts. They are far from evil. Give them some credit.

It has some basis in fact. Islam has brought some evil into this world. So has Catholicism, but the catholics have progressed and reformed some. It's not racist. Islam isn't a race. Islam certainly doesn't preach non-violence. It preaches when to use violence and when not to.

I think a persons environment does a lot to influence a persons politics and personal beliefs.

The KKK was strongest in the rural south where they didnt have much int eh way of technology to see differieng opinions (or tolerance for differing opinions) or how the rest of the world thinks about anythign really.

I'm pretty sure that it's the same if not worse for those in small towns in the middle east where differing opinions are not tolerated or accessible. Plus extreemism is much mroe likely to take root where people live in squalor and have little hope for anything other than a better afterlife.

If we could disseminate information technology more easily in these areas I think we'd have a chance at helping people get a bigger picture of the world before small time radical Imams are able to lead the impressionable youth with no hope into the violence based world of radicalized Islam. Bombs wont change any minds for the better and neither will talk about how their whole religion is evil and violent.

Ive seen kkk t-shirts. And while the IRA is mostly political, they belive god is on their side in the conflict. If you wanted i could go look for more terrorist groups that claim christiandom

I don't need you to do that. I already know that there are a few extremly small, very little known groups that are terrorist that are also Christian. Noe that are taken even remotely seriously enough in the larger Christian world to really be noticed because they aren't big enough and don't have enough broad support to act on the world stage, but I know they exist. But to draw a comparison between them and the large phenomenon of Muslim terror is absurd.

Even if individula acts of terrorism are lightly condemmed in the Muslim world, many of those condemnations carry the obligatory tag, "If you guys don't stop drawing cartoons you can't expect this to stop." The fact is that Bin Laden is a hero in the Muslim world and not just to a fringe group of extremists, but to school children.

the pagans and unbelievers mentioned are the polytheistic meccans, who were trying to destroy islam

christians, jews, and zoroastrians are "people of the book" and can go to heaven....

Your quotes are from the early Sura when islam was small and they could not defend themselves. Once they got big and Mohammed could get rich they started spreading their religion by the sword and forcing everyone to pay tax to him for their right to exist.

My livelihood is under the shade of my spear, and he who disobeys my orders will be humiliated by paying Jizya.

I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, 'None has the right to be worshiped but Allah,' and whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshiped but Allah,' his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah (either to punish him or to forgive him.)".

He started out much like jesus, but unlike jesus he ended up commanding an empire and he enforced his rule with a sword. His teachings start by forbidding fighting, then allowing it in self defense then, finally, commadning it as a duty of all Muslims.

He started out much like jesus, but unlike jesus he ended up commanding an empire and he enforced his rule with a sword. His teachings start by forbidding fighting, then allowing it in self defense then, finally, commadning it as a duty of all Muslims.

Or, it was until the meccans started to persecute the shit out of muslims and put a price on muhammeds head.

I don't need you to do that. I already know that there are a few extremly small, very little known groups that are terrorist that are also Christian. Noe that are taken even remotely seriously enough in the larger Christian world to really be noticed because they aren't big enough and don't have enough broad support to act on the world stage, but I know they exist. But to draw a comparison between them and the large phenomenon of Muslim terror is absurd.

Even if individula acts of terrorism are lightly condemmed in the Muslim world, many of those condemnations carry the obligatory tag, "If you guys don't stop drawing cartoons you can't expect this to stop." The fact is that Bin Laden is a hero in the Muslim world and not just to a fringe group of extremists, but to school children.


That's not true. After every terror attack there are often several condemnations of the terror attack from smaller independent Muslim groups as well as a joint one from the larger Islamic organizations... and they don't blame the attacks on the victims or the policy makers the terrorists are attacking, as far as I have seen. But you have to actually be searchign for these condemnations.

People keep saying that the media givesmmore attention to the blood and gore than it does the apologists and that is probably why thats all you seem to see. Because being nice or statements that lead to conflict resolution doesn't sell the papers. The grotesque stuff makes the first page and the condemnations make some small print in the unread section of the paper. They never make it on tv.

That's not true. After every terror attack there are often several condemnations of the terror attack from smaller independent Muslim groups as well as a joint one from the larger Islamic organizations... and they don't blame the attacks on the victims or the policy makers the terrorists are attacking, as far as I have seen. But you have to actually be searchign for these condemnations.

People keep saying that the media givesmmore attention to the blood and gore than it does the apologists and that is probably why thats all you seem to see. Because being nice or statements that lead to conflict resolution doesn't sell the papers. The grotesque stuff makes the first page and the condemnations make some small print in the unread section of the paper. They never make it on tv.

No, I think what you're seeing is the opposite. Yes, a whole bunch of groups in America will condemn these attacks unconditionally. Of course, when you debate them later on the radio they'll start coming up with things we need to change about ourselves, and I don't mean the war in Iraq I mean stop drawing cartoons, to prevent attacks in the future. But from the Muslim world you're just wrong. It was not even a week after 9/11 that King Faud from Saudi Arabia came here and blamed the attakcs on American policies in the Middle east. He's right in that Osama Bin Laden was upset by our presence in Saudi Arabia, something King Faud asked for. While he was expressing his regrets, however, millions of Muslims world wide were celebrating in the streets. Osama Bin Laden T-Shirts were selling off the rack, even the ones with the "bert is evil" picture on them. To anyone paying attention you had to draw the conclusion that, while many political leaders did the political thing and offered conditional "regrets" about the event, the Muslim community was throwing a party in Al Qeada's honor.

Anyone else think that's odd, or is it just me?

Yup, this hardliner will only set things backwards.

No, I think what you're seeing is the opposite. Yes, a whole bunch of groups in America will condemn these attacks unconditionally. Of course, when you debate them later on the radio they'll start coming up with things we need to change about ourselves, and I don't mean the war in Iraq I mean stop drawing cartoons, to prevent attacks in the future. But from the Muslim world you're just wrong. It was not even a week after 9/11 that King Faud from Saudi Arabia came here and blamed the attakcs on American policies in the Middle east. He's right in that Osama Bin Laden was upset by our presence in Saudi Arabia, something King Faud asked for. While he was expressing his regrets, however, millions of Muslims world wide were celebrating in the streets. Osama Bin Laden T-Shirts were selling off the rack, even the ones with the "bert is evil" picture on them. To anyone paying attention you had to draw the conclusion that, while many political leaders did the political thing and offered conditional "regrets" about the event, the Muslim community was throwing a party in Al Qeada's honor.


one palestinian neighborhood on CNN=/=whole muslim world

Or, it was until the meccans started to persecute the shit out of muslims and put a price on muhammeds head.

First, he was trying to take over the Meccans. Second, whatever the history, the text and the teachings still reflect that reality. Third, at the height of his power he was killing and subjigating Christians, Jews and pagans all over the Middle east and his teachings towards the end of his life reflect that. He needed his followers to fight and die for him to extend his power so the book that recorded his teachings reflect that.

Do this, find an atrocity commited in the name of Jesus, then find something he said that justifies that atrocity. Then do the same for Muhammed. You'll find it very hard to do the first. In the second it will be very easy.

BTW - I'm an atheist so I don't believe in either religion and I used to sound just like you. I'm tired of hiding my head in the sand, though, and I am seeing this religion for what it is. If the Muslim world is really as peaceful as it says it is then they need to clean up their own house. It's not up to no Muslims to do that.

one palestinian neighborhood on CNN=/=whole muslim world

I'm sorry you only found time to watch coverage of one neighborhood in Palestine. If you had spent any time in the months and weeks following teh attacks watching news from all over the place and reading news from all over the place you would see that the one neighborhood you took the time to watch on TV was a reflection of celebrations that were taking place from the mediteranian to India.

No, I think what you're seeing is the opposite. Yes, a whole bunch of groups in America will condemn these attacks unconditionally. Of course, when you debate them later on the radio they'll start coming up with things we need to change about ourselves, and I don't mean the war in Iraq I mean stop drawing cartoons, to prevent attacks in the future. But from the Muslim world you're just wrong. It was not even a week after 9/11 that King Faud from Saudi Arabia came here and blamed the attakcs on American policies in the Middle east. He's right in that Osama Bin Laden was upset by our presence in Saudi Arabia, something King Faud asked for. While he was expressing his regrets, however, millions of Muslims world wide were celebrating in the streets. Osama Bin Laden T-Shirts were selling off the rack, even the ones with the "bert is evil" picture on them. To anyone paying attention you had to draw the conclusion that, while many political leaders did the political thing and offered conditional "regrets" about the event, the Muslim community was throwing a party in Al Qeada's honor.

So what you are saying is that I need to show you a multitude of terror condemnations from non-political leaders where they don't say that the attackee deserved it?

okay, fine, but I hope you will reciprocate with links priving that millions celebrate terror attacks and especially with links to letters of condemmnation of terror but also stating that the people being attacked deserved it. If you don't have any links to prove this then you are talkign out of your ass and showing great ignorance and intolerance for Muslims as a whole, unjustly.

http://www.islamicinstitute.org/fb-2005/morecndmn7-7.asp

http://www.muhajabah.com/islamicblog/archives/veiled4allah/010721.php

http://emuslim.com/IslamAgainstVoilence.asp

http://www.oxfordimap.org/resources/Islam%20condemns%20Terrorism%20leaflet.doc

http://www.islamicthinkers.com/index/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=411&Itemid=26

http://www.today.az/news/politics/29990.html

http://forum.arbuz.com/archive/index.php/t-3809.html

http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/terror.htm

http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm

Also I dont see anything wrong with stating that a countries foreign policy can be reason why radical groups would retaliate since it's true as the radical groups doing the attacking have themselves said.

First, he was trying to take over the Meccans. Second, whatever the history, the text and the teachings still reflect that reality. Third, at the height of his power he was killing and subjigating Christians, Jews and pagans all over the Middle east and his teachings towards the end of his life reflect that. He needed his followers to fight and die for him to extend his power so the book that recorded his teachings reflect that.

Do this, find an atrocity commited in the name of Jesus, then find something he said that justifies that atrocity. Then do the same for Muhammed. You'll find it very hard to do the first. In the second it will be very easy.

BTW - I'm an atheist so I don't believe in either religion and I used to sound just like you. I'm tired of hiding my head in the sand, though, and I am seeing this religion for what it is. If the Muslim world is really as peaceful as it says it is then they need to clean up their own house. It's not up to no Muslims to do that.


He never tried to take over the meccans, he started to gain followers in Mecca, mecca was a city that relied on tourism, that is pagans coming to worship the idols in the ka'ba. When muhammed started to gain converts the meccans bashed him, so he moved to medina(the hijra). He continued to gain followers in medina until the head of the town converted, he then gave leadership to muhammed, muhammed now had a city.

The meccans couldn't tolerate this, it was a direct threat to their religious tourism monopoly, so they declared war and placed a bounty on muhammed's head. Thats when the violent suras show up, when the meccans started to attempt to eradicate islam. Muhammed and the muslims defeat the meccans and take control of mecca, muhammed destroys the ka'ba idols and proclaims it an islamic shrine. Shortly afterword, muhammed died, he was succeeded by abu Bakr who spread islam to N. Africa and persia......

http://eawc.evansville.edu/chronology/ispage.htm

one palestinian neighborhood on CNN=/=whole muslim world

or indeed a few reporters finding a few radicalized groups chanting "death to America" does not millions of Muslims make.

Why did we see so much of that deatht o America footage (on repeat) as opposed to the groups who were expressing their sympathy for the US and outrage at the terrorists?

I saw a few of those sympathy clips (online). I've read a lot of condemnations of terror by the main Islamic groups too (online), but this stuff wont make mainstream media because it is too nice and doesnt stir up controversy and therefore does not sell.

Thos in the Islam is a religion of hatred mode are just buyign into the hype that they are being programmed to believe.

EDIT: besides, US Americans are just as bad when it comes to condemning the whole of a people for the actions of a few. 18 guys commit a terror attack on the US and suddenly EVERYONE in the US was screaming "Turn the middle east into a parking lot". Every single one of them . I saw video footage ON THE NEWS so it must be true.

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g211/JonnyRockeyfingers/muslim.gif

-SNIP-

I would also like to add these:

http://www.uga.edu/islam/hamza.html
http://www.uga.edu/islam/antiterrorism.html
http://www.uga.edu/islam/sachedina.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,553587,00.html
http://www.islamfortoday.com/murad01.htm
http://www.islamfortoday.com/60minutes.htm
http://www.masud.co.uk/sep11.htm
http://www.islamfortoday.com/murad04.htm
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/09/0925_TVkoran.html
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment-forte101901.shtml

I know there have been comments made about the Pope's recent comments on Islam, and more than a couple of threads on Islam and Muslims. I'll try to avoid most of that...
Does anyone else think it's a bit odd that the response to the Pope's comments on Islam, cited from a medieval text, characterizing parts of the faith as "evil and inhuman" (taken out of context or not, it honestly doesn't matter) is violence and death-threats?
Yes it is odd. The Muslims who rioted and committed acts of violence could have made the Pope look like a complete idiot by not acting violent.

Their response vindicated his words.

So what you are saying is that I need to show you a multitude of terror condemnations from non-political leaders where they don't say that the attackee deserved it?

okay, fine, but I hope you will reciprocate with links priving that millions celebrate terror attacks and especially with links to letters of condemmnation of terror but also stating that the people being attacked deserved it. If you don't have any links to prove this then you are talkign out of your ass and showing great ignorance and intolerance for Muslims as a whole, unjustly.

http://www.islamicinstitute.org/fb-2005/morecndmn7-7.asp

http://www.muhajabah.com/islamicblog/archives/veiled4allah/010721.php

http://emuslim.com/IslamAgainstVoilence.asp

http://www.oxfordimap.org/resources/Islam%20condemns%20Terrorism%20leaflet.doc

http://www.islamicthinkers.com/index/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=411&Itemid=26

http://www.today.az/news/politics/29990.html

http://forum.arbuz.com/archive/index.php/t-3809.html

http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/terror.htm

http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm

Also I dont see anything wrong with stating that a countries foreign policy can be reason why radical groups would retaliate since it's true as the radical groups doing the attacking have themselves said.

No. I want you to find condemnations from religious leaders inside the Muslim world. I want to see a condemnation from an Imam in pakistan or Iran. I want to see what a Sufi in Saudi Arabia has to say. I don't care what a Muslim student group from the University of North Carolina has to say or some "Muslim expert" who now lives in London. The guy you quoted from Syria only said suicide attacks were wrong because the fighter shouldn't have to commit suicide.

The reality that the attacks were celebrated in the Muslim world is born out in poll after poll. I gotta go home now but I'll dig up this thread tomorrow and post some numbers from the Pew research center and other places if need be, but if you are seriously trying to deny that "martyrs" are heros in the Muslim world you really need to dig yoru head out of the sand.

No. I want you to find condemnations from religious leaders inside the Muslim world. I want to see a condemnation from an Imam in pakistan or Iran. I want to see what a Sufi in Saudi Arabia has to say. I don't care what a Muslim student group from the University of North Carolina has to say or some "Muslim expert" who now lives in London. The guy you quoted from Syria only said suicide attacks were wrong because the fighter shouldn't have to commit suicide.

The reality that the attacks were celebrated in the Muslim world is born out in poll after poll. I gotta go home now but I'll dig up this thread tomorrow and post some numbers from the Pew research center and other places if need be, but if you are seriously trying to deny that "martyrs" are heros in the Muslim world you really need to dig yoru head out of the sand.

http://www.islamfortoday.com/taliban.htm

whole page-full

http://www.islamfortoday.com/taliban.htm

whole page-full

I'm sorry, I thought I was clear. I wanted some political and religious leaders condemning acts of terrorism from within the Muslim world, specifically the attacks of 9/11 or 7/7 or the Madrid train bombing would be nice. What you posted was a bunch of links to the Sunni government of Saudi Arabia explaining its reasons for breaking diplomatic relations with the Shiite Taliban. In anycase, I really do have to leave now, but since this is so heated and interesting I will look this up again when I get home.

http://www.islamfortoday.com/taliban.htm

whole page-full

Just some poll numbers from what is probably a good news source in your eyes.

In Morocco, 26% now say they have a lot or some confidence in Bin Laden and 35% feel the same way in Indonesia.

However, in Jordan, confidence rose to 60% from 55%. In Pakistan, it went to 51% from 45%.

Analysts say a similar picture emerged when respondents were asked whether suicide bombings were justifiable.

In Morocco 13% said they often or sometimes could be justified, down from 40% in 2004.

However, support rose in Jordan, to 57% from 43% in 2002.
Even in the countries where supporters are in the minority they still are a large enough group to hardly be called "fringe."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4684989.stm

I know this may be difficult to understand, but not all Muslims are violent
Most of us are only criticising the nutjobs.

What annoys me is that everyone is so willing to condemn the Pope for what he said but not the Muslims for what they are doing.
I suppose that to some people offending Islam is unforgivable, even if the message that offended them is pro-peace.

And I actualyl read the Islam texts and find them for the most part very interesting, and terrorists are not Islamic, they are as close to that as the KKK is to christianity
As a Christian terrorist group, the KKK are a good organisation to compare al-Qaeda to.

Both organisations prospered in times when their regions (the US south and middle east, respectively) felt threatened. The majority in parts of both regions sympathised and supported these racist groups.

People still need to remember that the Arab world only has about a fifth of the Muslims in the world yet for some reason that region has a monopoly on the image of Islam.

Christians are just as violent, the kkk claims to be christian and so does the IRA. they are the same as the islamic ones
No they are not. Even the extremist Christians are relatively peaceful. The KK K and IRA are no longer extant, and neither were ever global. Al-Qaeda killed more people on one day than the IRA killed in 30 years.

I am so tired of hearing this "Islam teaches peace" crap. It does not. The only good Muslims are the same as teh only good Christians. The ones who don't take their faith so seriously.
The Quaran is full of contradictions. Islam teaches peace and sometimes war as well. Remember that jihad doesn't always mean war. It means struggle, which can be anything from a struggle against evil within one's mind to holy war against an enemy.

Christianity is also a religion of peace.

I'd like to say some things on some of the points raised.
1) There are, indeed, Muslim organizations that do not support violence and condemn terrorism. They are not doing enough. I see many statements, many words, and far too few actions. No, bombs do not effectively solve these problems, but other Muslims can. Very rarely do I see any anti-terrorist or even pro-'peace without having to destroy the West' clerics preaching to the people. As it stands, it is the few extremeist clerics who ignite the mass population into uproar. And the people do follow. And the people -will- follow.
2) The problem is not with the religion, it is with the people. We can sit here and play the quoting game until we've posted the entire text of every holy book. It makes no difference, because there is support for all sides. And, in the end, it makes -zero- difference, because it is the people that are doing the killing, making the bombs, blowing themselves up. Those people do not care what the book says; they care what their clerics say. And those clerics are preaching violence, intolerance, and hatred. Not all, but those.
3) Yes, Christianity does it too. And Christianity had its time of hatred and mass violence. Hopefully, that time is over for Christianity. Hopefully, someone can convince the Muslim commonman that it is time to let go of their hatred too. But, in the current situation, the way to end the violence is to destory the West. That is not, practically, something that will be done with happy doves and pretty flowers.
4) Perhaps it was not the world's most shining political move for the Pope to quote medieval texts. Nor is it appropriate for Muslim leaders to take those words out of context and use it to incite violence. Nor, however, should the Pope be forced to recant his words because someone was offended. Differing ideas and their subsequent debate create progress for civilization. Killing the people that disagree with you, or killing innocents in place of those that disagree with you only serves to reaffirm that civilization has failed and humanity is nothing more than clothed savages.

Every person who posts here in anger, or in retaliation, feeling that someone else is stupid or intolerant...every one of those people is guily of exactly what is going on now among the Middle Eastern Muslims. We can see, and are argueing about the fact that anger does not solve problems...remember that when you get angry. Anger and closed-mindedness cause these problems. Understanding, understanding -of- both sides and -by- both sides...that alone solves them.

Just some poll numbers from what is probably a good news source in your eyes.

There are poll numbers that show that 80% of germans think islam should be banned, and muslims should be jailed. I don't believe them and I don't believe this.

There are poll numbers that show that 80% of germans think islam should be banned, and muslims should be jailed. I don't believe them and I don't believe this.

Care to show them?

Care to show them?

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,2025041,00.html?maca=en-rss-en-all-1124-rdf

more like 56% got it mixed up with how many think islam is abusive towards women

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,2025041,00.html?maca=en-rss-en-all-1124-rdf

more like 56% got it mixed up with how many think islam is abusive towards women

Oh i thought you meant from the same source. I think BBC News is a much more reliable source then that.

Oh i thought you meant from the same source. I think BBC News is a much more reliable source then that.

I don't think any polls are reliable

I don't think any polls are reliable

Well it's gonna be pretty hard to debate then with no objective facts. Oh well i'm going to bed now anyway.

There are poll numbers that show that 80% of germans think islam should be banned, and muslims should be jailed. I don't believe them and I don't believe this.

Come on now, there's no historical precedent for Germans rounding up and jailing people based on their religion.

I know, Germans of today aren't nazis, but it struck me as kind of funny.

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,2025041,00.html?maca=en-rss-en-all-1124-rdf

more like 56% got it mixed up with how many think islam is abusive towards women

I found those numbers very believable. In anycase, as to the Pew Research poll cited by the BBC, are you saying they are lying or that you don't think the numbers are accurate? If you think they are lying then we have no reason to continue this debate because you simply will not accept facts that disagree with your fluffy bunny, furry mitton world where everyone loves and cares for each other - or they would if it weren't for evil westerners. Pew is one of the most respected polling organizations in the world and people left and right rarely argue with their integrity. If you are saying that you think the numbers are wrong, wrong by how much? 5%? 10%? The usualy margin of error in polls like these are 3%. If they are wrong one way they may be wrong the other. Maybe it is 70% of Jordanians who have confidence in Osama Bin Laden as a world leader. But maybe you're right and it is only 50%.

I can take a poll that proves that 100% of americans are jews. How? by going around to every synagogue in america and asking the people inside what their religious affiliaton is.

They just walk around the ME going from radical mosque to radical mosque, News agencies report what they think their viewers want to hear, not the truth. I hardly ever watch the news anymore...

I can take a poll that proves that 100% of americans are jews. How? by going around to every synagogue in america and asking the people inside what their religious affiliaton is.

They just walk around the ME going from radical mosque to radical mosque, News agencies report what they think their viewers want to hear, not the truth. I hardly ever watch the news anymore...

Yeah. That's what they did.

The Pew Global Attitudes Project is a series of worldwide public opinion surveys that encompasses a broad array of subjects ranging from people's assessments of their own lives to their views about the current state of the world and important issues of the day. More than 90,000 interviews in 50 countries have been conducted as part of the project's work.

The Pew Global Attitudes Project is co-chaired by former U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, currently Principal, the Albright Group LLC in Washington, DC, and former Senator John C. Danforth, currently Partner, Bryan Cave LLP in St. Louis, MO. The project is directed by Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan "fact tank" in Washington, DC, that provides information on the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. The project is principally funded by The Pew Charitable Trusts. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation provided a supplemental grant for the 2002 survey.

The Pew Global Attitudes Project is a unique, comprehensive, internationally comparable series of surveys available to journalists, academics, policymakers and the public. It aims to gauge attitudes in every region toward globalization, trade and an increasingly connected world; to measure changes in attitudes toward democracy and other key issues among some of the European populations surveyed in the 13-nation 1991 benchmark survey, the Pulse of Europe (also directed by Dr. Albright and Mr. Kohut); to measure attitudes about terrorism; to examine the intersection between the Islamic faith and public policy in countries with significant Muslim populations; and to more deeply probe attitudes toward the United States in all countries. Recent Global Attitudes surveys have gauged worldwide opinion about international news developments.

Secretary Albright and Senator Danforth co-chair the Pew Global Attitudes Project international advisory board, consisting of policy experts and business leaders. In addition, the Pew Global Attitudes Project team consults with survey and policy experts, academic regional and economic experts, activists and policy-makers. Their expertise provides tremendous guidance in shaping the surveys.

So you're saying they're lying. The sampling rules and everything are posted at Pew and you can read them anytime. That's a really bad tactic. It's fine to call attention to a bad source in an argument, but to just cover your ears and go, "la, la, la, la, I'm not listening to you, la, la, la, la,,,,," is really lame.

Shiny happy people laughing
Meet me in the crowd
People people
Throw your love around
Love me love me
Take it into town
Happy happy
Put it in the ground
Where the flowers grow
Gold and silver shine

Shiny happy people holding hands
Shiny happy people laughing

Everyone around love them, love them
Put it in your hands
Take it take it
There's no time to cry
Happy happy
Put it in your heart
Where tomorrow shines
Gold and silver shine

Shiny happy people holding hands
Shiny happy people laughing

what lovely flamebaiting,

Roughly half of Muslims in Lebanon, Jordan and Morocco said such attacks are justifiable, while sizable majorities in Turkey, Pakistan and Indonesia disagreed.

from your own site, yup all muslims are terrorists all right, thats for sure. That'd be indonesia the world's most populous muslim country.

Osama bin Laden's standing has dropped significantly in some pivotal Muslim countries, while support for suicide bombings and other acts of violence has "declined dramatically,"

more damning evidence of the evil muslims plot to destroy the west.

Frankly, if your have going to resort to Ad Hominem arguments and strawmen, it means you have nothing left meaningful to say.

and i do realize it is ironic i'm using the same poll I disputed. I have changed my position, 90,000 people is far too many to be false. I assumed it was another retarded news poll of about 500 people.

what lovely flamebaiting,



from your own site, yup all muslims are terrorists all right, thats for sure.



more damning evidence of the evil muslims plot to destroy the west.

Frankly, if your have going to resort to Ad Hominem arguments and strawmen, it means you have nothing left meaningful to say.

and i do realize it is ironic i'm using the same poll I disputed. I have changed my position, 90,000 people is far too many to be false. I assumed it was another retarded news poll of about 500 people.
You need to take your own advice. I have been very clear. I never said "all Muslims are terrorists" and what's more you know this. You are setting up your argument in that way here because you are deliberately setting up a straw man. I have said from the beginning that, though bombings and suicide attacks are carried out by a small minority of Mulsims, their actions are supported by large percentages of the populations of Muslim countries and in some cases the majority. That was my claim from the start and I backed it up. YOU claimed that it was only a very small "fringe" minority that supported terrorists and their actions and then when I called you on your bullshit and proved you wrong you reacted by saying that PEW were liars. Then, in an effort to set up a blatantly obvious strawman, you used the very report that you said was a lie to prove I was wrong about an argument I didn't make, that being, of course, "All Muslims are terrorists."

You need to take your own advice. I have been very clear. I never said "all Muslims are terrorists" and what's more you know this. You are setting up your argument in that way here because you are deliberately setting up a straw man. I have said from the beginning that, though bombings and suicide attacks are carried out by a small minority of Mulsims, their actions are supported by large percentages of the populations of Muslim countries and in some cases the majority. That was my claim from the start and I backed it up. YOU claimed that it was only a very small "fringe" minority that supported terrorists and their actions and then when I called you on your bullshit and proved you wrong you reacted by saying that PEW were liars. Then, in an effort to set up a blatantly obvious strawman, you used the very report that you said was a lie to prove I was wrong about an argument I didn't make, that being, of course, "All Muslims are terrorists."

Sorry about that, lost control of myself, but I must admit that to me, you sound like an islamophobe. The whole "muhammed was an evil warlord" shit really has had me quite pissed off. Combine that with the personal attacks and flamebaiting and you have a very pissed off pyotr. I will concede the point though, some people in the ME support bin laden. I don't think this is because of their religion, I think it has more to do with the social and political situation in the region than to do with religion. Religion as been used as a veil by many governments over the centuries, warrior popes, divine rule for kings, and all that shit. Islam is not an evil religion, muslims are not evil people, and I believe that the overwheling majority of muslims in the US and Europe are not supportive of terrorism or Bin Laden.

Sorry about that, lost control of myself, but I must admit that to me, you sound like an islamophobe. The whole "muhammed was an evil warlord" shit really has had me quite pissed off. Combine that with the personal attacks and flamebaiting and you have a very pissed off pyotr. I will concede the point though, some people in the ME support bin laden. I don't think this is because of their religion, I think it has more to do with the social and political situation in the region than to do with religion. Religion as been used as a veil by many governments over the centuries, warrior popes, divine rule for kings, and all that shit. Islam is not an evil religion, muslims are not evil people, and I believe that the overwheling majority of muslims in the US and Europe are not supportive of terrorism or Bin Laden.

Okay. I would point out, though, that politics are often indistiguishable from religon in the Middle East - or the White House right now.