Wow, this is incredibly offensive. I'm Korean and I have many close friends that are muslims (ranging from devout to not practicing) and they all have friends of varying religions and ethnicities.

Aside from that, yes there are lots of angry muslims out there who are giving the religion a bad name, that can't be denied but it's unfair to blame the entire religion and everybody that's a part of it.

To compare Christianity being attacked to the attack of Islam is like comparing a white male New Yorker being descriminated against as opposed to an African American being descriminated against in Booger Hollow Alabama. Both are wrong, but at the end of the day, the New Yorker is a white man living in America. At the end of the day, even after "Piss Christ," Christianity was still the dominant religion in the United States controlling all aspects of government policy making from the local to federal level.

Muslims don't have the benefit of any of this. Instead, they have a white Christian controlled government opressing them on a worldwide scale.

I'm not defending the actions they've taken in protesting the cartoons but some of the claims you made are ridiculous. The world isn't black and white and there's not always a right answer to everything. Both sides here are wrong and people need to calm down and talk things over.

Hate to tell you this Ben, but those folks over there in the middle east have half the money in the world and most of the oil...and somehow...it's still Americas fault that they're oppressed...again...not my flavor of Kool-aid.

You can spew that crap about both sides being wrong...but one published cartoons...the other killed people for it...just a bit of a difference there. I'd call it a bit of OVERKILL!

Andy,

If you've been reading the comments on Blog Critics carefully, you would know that the word "Moslem" means someone attempting perfection (completion) through submission to G-d. Islam means completion (through submission to G-d).

Robertson is not wrong in stating that Islam is not the religion of peace. But he is being disingenuous by implying that it ought to be so considered. Bush, in making this claim, is merely showing the manure dribbling on his chin from kissing Saudi ass. Someone in his PR department ought to wipe away the manure. Even here we can smell it...

Or is it the smell of the firecrackers kids are lighting in honor of Purim?

I think he's right this time as well. Islam in general will not tolerate any dissent from Islamic law. And its goal is to spread that law to every person and place around the globe. Those that do not follow Islam are supposed to be put to death.

I'm not going to deep get into this. You're not going to convince me of anything and I'm pretty sure I'm not going to convince you of anything.

The actions of those protesting the cartoons can't be defended. It's unfortunate that it happened and it's unfortunate that they've been pushed that far.

Nothing in this complex world is as simple as "cartoon + violent religion = blood shed"

As for the people that have half the money in the world and most of the oil, those few in posession of that are the ones rubbing elbows with our president and the American people are the ones making that oil so valuable in the first place.

I'm going to step out of this now since I'm at work but I'm interested to see what others have to say...

Ruvy - I read MOST of the comments...some of them are just to much. I understand what you're saying.

It's not Robertson calling Islam the religion of peace, it seems to be Muslims that call this religion what it isn't. I honestly see nothing peaceful about this religion.

I mean really, I stayed in a hotel in Egypt and if you leave your window open, this religion doesn't even let you sleep in!

I'll wait and see if I can get the three examples I asked for in my post...but I won't hold my breath.

Dr Abdul Kalam, Imran Khan, Tariq Ali - all public figures, all peaceful. What a jejune expectation!

Muslims organizations also participated in tsunami relief and hurricane katrina relief. Some organizations also donated to 9/11 funds, this shouldn't be a surprise because NOT ALL MUSLIMS ARE THE SAME.

Andy: ref to three examples.

Here's one example.

This link points to others.

Good luck in escaping your not uncommon predicament.

Andy - while your assessment is a generalization and we all know generalizations can be dangerous, I can certainly understand your feelings.

Clearly there are lots of good-hearted Muslims in the world, but the current climate surely emphasizes the negative.

In my opinion, this cycle of violence will continue until the majority of good Muslims outnumber those who wish to commit acts of violence.

In the meantime, we must praise the good and pray for peace.

Oh, and kill Osama Bin Laden until he is dead, dead, deadski.

Pat Robinson is an arse.

the majority of good Muslims DO outnumber those who wish to commit acts of violence.

Do you really believe otherwise?

Anil - your first link is to Hindu's being nice to Muslims...not the other way around...I guess you could classify it as Muslims being peaceful, which is what I asked for...but for every one example of them being peaceful I can give you at least 10 of them being violent.

I agree Dawn, there are good hearted Muslims in the world. The only problem is there aren't enough of them being vocal about how fucked up some of the most powerful ones are.

I've read here on BC before where some would compare the Puritans back in the 1600's to what's happening today in the Muslim world...I believe it was meant to show how evil christianity can be. My response when I read that comment at the time was how many puritans are left?

The problem here is that the radical element of this religion doesn't seem destined to end any time soon. There are to many imams out there teaching hate and to many ignorant people ready to strap on a bomb and do what they're told.

Pat Robertson can spew hate all day long AND NOTHING HAPPENS! Ask Hugo Chavez. One well placed imam or mullah can have who knows how many brainwashed kids walking into marketplaces with bombs strapped to their asses?

Andy, et al.

Let me make this real simple for everybody. ISLAM IS NOT THE RELIGION OF PEACE. ISLAM MEANS COMPLETION THROUGH SUBMISSION TO G-D.

So all this crap about Islam NOT being the religion of "peace" and whining about it is an argument knocking down a straw man. If you are stupid enough to believe some Wahhabi snake oil salesman selling you this line of garbage, you deserve to be fooled. These things can be looked up in this modern day and age.

Every now and then Pat Robertson is right about something. Every now and then my wife would win a few bucks in the Minnesota State Lottery. It all boils down to the same thing. Basically, you can count on Robertson to be wrong, or to be disingenuous about what he says.

ONCE - in his comments about Sharon being hit by a stroke - Robertson was right. That about sums up his batting average - .001.

And for the thousandth time. It is the Wahhabis and their spoor - the Moslem Brotherhood, the Saudi dynasty, Al Qaeda and the Taliban - who say that anyone who is not a Moslem deserves to die. The rest of the Moslems do not say any such thing. I'm beginning to see why they say teachers are underpaid...

dude, you're full of shit. sure, there is lots of violence stemming from islam. it's a rallying point that the violent use. the religion isn't violent, it's the people that are. those people are a minority.

one could say that since bush is a raving lunatic christian, that all the violence done by the united states armed forces is a christian attack against muslims. that's the way the voilent muslims want the rest of islam to see it, because it will make them believe that a religious war is on the way. they are manipulating and using islam as a source of power and recruiting, not the other way around. it's just a fucking front. an excuse! that's all it is.

think about this. islam, in its current form, is about 6-700 years younger than christianity. what were christians doing 6 or 700 years ago? roving the earth, destroying in the name of the lord! convert or die, heathan!

think of it as growing pains. muslims are not fucking stupid. don't assume they are. those who want violent change want that change because they want the power that will be available in the aftermath. their religion is the shield they choose to employ. you can't blame an old book for the evil that men do.

re your "i can think of 10 examples [in the news] of muslims being violent for every 1 example of them being peaceful" or some such nonsense bullshit... PEACE DOES NOT MAKE THE NEWS, WAR DOES. that's like saying "I CAN SHOW YOU 100 PICTURES OF PENGUINS I SAW [IN THE ARCTIC] FOR EVERY 1 PICTURE YOU CAN SHOW ME OF A PLATYPUS." you don't find stories about peaceful muslims in the press... and you don't find platy... pusses? pi? ...whatever, you don't find them in the artic.

or the antarctic. whatever. shit.

i'm referring to the writer of the article, not you, ruvy... although your comment is rather confusing.

Yup, Zing,

What do I need to do to get my point across - draw letters of fire in the sky?

I'm definitely beginning to see why they say teachers are underpaid.

Bush never did anything in the name of Christianity.

And why is it because some group did something six or seven hundred years ago that it's ok for another group to be doing it today? It was wrong then, they obviously figured that out and it's still wrong....you know...the puritans again. It's the 21st century...time to catch up!

and lastly..dude, I know I'm full of shit, that's why my eyes are brown.

Pat Robertson is a major league asshole, please people whatever you do, don't believe what that devil says. The goal of Muslims is NOT "world domination". The goal of Muslims is that their land is not occupied by foreign armies and not forced to join the New World Order of Godless consumption and entertainment. Their goal is self-determination to live as they see fit and would respond much better to fair and open diplomacy as opposed to being "liberated" by American bombs.

Scapegoating Muslims is "free speech", but saying a bad word about Jews and you end up in prison. Mmmmmm. YOU, Mr Westerner might not find anything wrong with that but according to the Muslim code of justice, there certainly is ALOT wrong with that double standard. And Western countries INVITED Muslims into their lands in the first place, OK. The Westerns are now in "shock" because Muslims remain devout towards their religion and haven't "assimilated" into Western "culture" of decadence, godlessness, materialism and sexual promiscuity. The problem is that Muslims don't belong in the West but they are unfairly scapegoated and their "threat" is hugely exaggerated.

You people should really learn to empathize with your enemy if you're ever going to have peace in this world.

it's not okay for them to be doing it now and it wasn't right then. but, it's the same thing. you can't blame the bible for the crusades. if i could, i would... but i can't. it's the stupid fucking christians.

and no, bush never did anything in the name of christianity (although god does tell him what to do he says), but that doesn't matter. it's all about how the extremist muslims twist it. like you twist their violence into a hatred-filled diatribe against all muslims.

hey ruvy-- you say something like "islam is not a religion of peace," but then follow it up with something about specific groups being evil, while the majority are peaceful. which is it? just want to know. maybe you should restate what you said...

Who's scapegoating anyone? I'm blaming Muslims for what Musims are doing.

You say they don't belong in the west...but they are there and it looks like they intend to stay, so they better learn to get along. It's a big sand box and we all need to get along. I happen to like my decedant ways and I'm not changing. You want to live in the stone age, so be it, but not in my neighborhood. We have electricity now and running water...and schools for our daughters.

You say they were invited. The door is always open, but when you come here, you live by OUR rules...the rules of civilization. Like most have and probably still want to...but it's my feeling that not enough of them speak out against the bullshit and until that happens, shit won't change.

Yeah Robertsons' an idiot. I never said he wasn't. and I'm not drinking any of his Kool-aid either.

I don't blame the bible for the crusades..I blame the Muslims for that also.

you've got to be kidding...

I don't blame the bible for the crusades..I blame the Muslims for that also.

Is that a joke? That's like blaming the Polish for Hitler's invasion of Poland.

Zing writes,

"hey ruvy-- you say something like "islam is not a religion of peace," but then follow it up with something about specific groups being evil, while the majority are peaceful. which is it?" just want to know. maybe you should restate what you said...

What I said is - for the third time - ISLAM IS NOT THE RELIGION OF PEACE. ISLAM MEANS COMPLETION THROUGH SUBMISSION TO G-D.

That is a definition based on my knowledge of Hebrew, a sister language of Arabic. So forget the "religion of peace" bullshit - because that is what it is! Bullshit! Read the definition above.

There is a cult within Islam - for the 20th time and counting - called the Wahhabi - that believes that everybody should be their variety of Moslem - or dead. They are not the majority of Moslems - yet. But they are damned influential, controlling Mecca and Medina, and being the base of the Saudi dynasty, Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the Moslem Brotherhood. And they have a taste for violence.

Part of me wants to believe this whole post was a joke from the beginning. I guess I'm pretty out of touch for not realizing that people this out of touch exist and also for not realizing that people still drink kool-aid. wtf.

Comment #22 makes this entire post hate speech

Ruvy,

Not to speak for anyone else, Zing included, but I understood what you were saying from the first time you said it.

However, you seem (and correct me if I'm wrong) to be saying that the word and/or idea of Islam is not literally translated or defined as "the religion of peace." Well, when I heard Islam described as "the religion of Peace," I never thought that it was a literal translation or definition. Just a description.

Some (although by no means all, of course) would say that the will of G-d IS peace. So submission to His will would, by default, make Islam essentially a religion of peace.

Mike, I hear you.

But going on that kind of logic, then Judaism is the religion of peace, Christianity is the religion of peace (you know, as in "prince of peace?") along with a few more. Perfection is attained when you is at one with whatever the various varieties of Hinduism call G-d. Therefore, Hinduism is the religion of peace.

Are you getting the idea? That is why I stick with the straight unvarnished Arabic, rather the derivations possible from it.

This dude needs to take a logic class. Then anger management. Then tolerance. Etc.

I've read some pretty hair-brained crap on here from time to time, but this is so obviously bad.... I'm with Ben and Aaman.

There is no way to have a discussion with our author until he gathers up some education and replaces a bit of his hate with brains.

... really shocking stuff here.

ruvy, you must admit that your "defintion" of islam is not going to be the most fair or balanced... you're jewish, and your country is at war with several elements of islam. there are a billion muslims in the world, and the most of them are peaceful. those muslims that are at war with your people probably see you much the same way you see them... as unwitting fools under the spell of evil, malicious leaders. and for that you (and they) deserve to die?

no religion is "the" religion of peace. a religion might be peaceful. and, i would say that most people are peaceful. you seem to say the same thing when you say, "They [the Wahhabi] are not the majority of Moslems..." even if they are becoming influential. let's face it, islam is under attack. with articles like these and the a large majority of the western world backing israel over islam... it's not a good time to be a muslim.

ruvy, i agree with you in several ways. but you write like your word is gospel, which it is not. it comes across as arrogant and all-knowing, which it isn't. your view is skewed, (as is mine, but in less obvious ways,) and you need to take it down a few notches if you want to reach people. if you have to repeat yourself "20 times," then obviously it's something that you are doing, not the other way around. your preaching is blocking your message.

Aaman, you are right, the number of good Muslims does indeed outweigh the bad. I don't think I meant or wanted to imply the opposite. What I should have said was that until the vocal number of good Muslims outweigh the physical actions of the bad, we will have violence, and subsequently we will have growing mistrust and fear from the West.

I like to think I am a reasonable person when it comes to accessing a whole group of people as either good or bad. Clearly, it's neither fair nor reasonable to judge the actions of a few and superimpose it on the whole as a respresentation of the entire group.

But I also know there is ZERO doubt that the only people who can turn this ship of fools who have hijacked Islam around to be Muslims themselves. This has to be a consolidated and united front where Muslims stand arm and arm and turn their back and reject this form of radical Islam wholly and fully.

This has not happened. It may not ever happen. People have to be pretty evolved to come together for a common good, and we are not exactly an evolved species in this area.

Ok, so, we have hear a people just as ignorant as Pat Robertson, wow. The Crusades - Christians killing Muslims and Jews in the name of God. Now that that's cleard up, let's move to what Islam is. I grew up in a predominantly Muslim society. I even went to a private Muslim school. Learning about other beliefs was always emphasized. I have read the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Quran. The Old Testament has equal amounts, if not more, of punishment and cursing towards the Pagans, or in our times, the non-believers. The New Testament is mainly of peace, but if you look at who the writers were and the time it was written, it is obviously clear that some committee arbitrarily put the book together.

Although there are some words of harshness towards evil people in the Quran, the majority of the religion teaches peace. An all out attack on the religion is just pure hatred and ignorance. Do your reading people! Islam contains forms of feminism, meditation, and trascendence. Islam teaches tolerance. Under Islamic rule in Spain, the Christians and Jews flourished. But this ended when the Christians came back and kicked all the Jews and Muslims out. Anyways, the point in all this is that Islam is not a religion of hatred or violence, almost no religion is. It is the people who ruin purity. We are all humans here and we all do stupid things, but the main religions of the world supposedly comes from God, and he is righteous.

If you guys want to look more at peace in Islam check out some Sufi books. Or maybe read about the main tenants of Islam (the five pillars and the same 10 commandments in Christianity and Judaism). Also, check out the organization MPAC. They are one of the major Muslim organizations that are speaking out against all this violence going on. These are educated people who publish journals on these kinds of things all the time, but because Muslims are a minority, their works are not distributed across the country. Be educated and careful to not let the media brainwash you. Salam (this mean PEACE in Arabic).

Fair enough, Ruvy.

Actually, you're kinda making one point for me with the first part of your comment in #29. To my way of thinking, one must either accept all religions as "religions of peace," or admit that no religion is truly a "religion of peace."

I choose to do the former. I believe that at their core, every belief system strives for peace; I refuse to let the .0001 percent of Muslims who are burning embassies define that religion for the other 1.499 billion. Regardless of how vocal the violent ones are.

I'm not kidding about the crusades...they were started to push back the advances of Muslims into what was believed to be christian territory...look it up...you people tell me I need to get educated???

religion creates followers. "sheep," if you will, a flock for the shepards to manipulate. if they are willing to follow a religion, they will follow their religious leaders.

it doesn't matter if it's islam, christianity, judaism or scientology. in the wrong hands, religion can be dangerous.

andy, the crusades lasted hundreds of years. maybe they were started by a muslim advance, but the last few (like 2-6) took place nowhere near traditional christian lands. i'm not saying the christians are totally to blame. both are responsible.

your reasoning is that of a child. "he started it!" whatever.

you need to relearn a lot of things.

I know you folks don't like wikipedia...

But it's the easiest and usually nuetral source...

On the Crusades The immediate cause of the First Crusade was Alexius I's appeal to Pope Urban II for mercenaries to help him resist Muslim advances into territory of the Byzantine Empire. In 1071, at the Battle of Manzikert, the Byzantine Empire had been defeated, and this defeat led to the loss of all but the coastlands of Asia Minor (modern Turkey). Although the East-West Schism was brewing between the Catholic Western church and the Greek Orthodox Eastern church, Alexius I expected some help from a fellow Christian. However, the response was much larger, and less helpful, than Alexius I desired, as the Pope called for a large invasion force to not merely defend the Byzantine Empire but also retake Jerusalem.

andy, where do you live that you don't run into muslims every day? have they ever killed you? hit you? even looked at you funny?

when's the last time you heard about muslim on christian violence in america? now reverse that.

your three examples of muslims being peaceful:
3/13/06, 3/12/06, 3/11/06.

I didn't bring up the crusades...YOU DID! They are ancient history.

My whole point before YOU bought up ancient history was it doesn't matter what anybody did hundreds of years ago. What matters is what happens today. It's the 21st century and you don't fire bomb buildings for FUCKING cartoons.

Where is the moral outrage from the MILLIONS of moderate Muslims?

"ruvy, you must admit that your "defintion" of islam is not going to be the most fair or balanced... you're jewish, and your country is at war with several elements of islam."

I haven't heard any Moslems argue with my definition. Have you? A number of times, I have addressed Molems telling them that this is how I view them - and I get no arguments. The definition comes from a scholar of Islam, Dr. Asher Eder, and was agreed to by a Sufi scholar, Sheikh Prof. Abdulhadi Palazzi. I do not mention Mohammed in the definition (most Moslems would, as a matter of course) because it would then make it problematic for a Moslem to then claim Abraham to be a Moslem, which all Moslems do.

A different definition of Islam, which unfortunately some Jews have convinced themselves of, is that it is essentially a pagan religion worshipping the moon god. I would suggest that Jews accepting this definition would be strongly influenced by the fact that we are at war with a number of Arab countries.

In spite of my views, I do not hold this view of Moslems at all. I believe that there will be a reconciliation between Jews and Arabs spearheaded on a religious basis, not a political one.

Good dates to pick zing...didn't they just find 87 bodies in a mass grave in Bagdhad? Muslims being peaceful.

whatever. they are ancient history. that you paint as the muslim's fault. done.

you don't firebomb buildings for cartoons, and you don't paint 1.4 billion for the actions of a few, okay?

i don't know where the moderate muslims are. probably pretty offended by both sides... probably staying out of it. they'd rather not get anyone angry.

Andy, did you read the last sentence of that Wikipedia quote?

However, the response was much larger, and less helpful, than Alexius I desired, as the Pope called for a large invasion force to not merely defend the Byzantine Empire but also retake Jerusalem.

The Crusades were, according to the very text you provided, not just a defense of the Byzantine Empire. They were the result of the Pope suddenly deciding that he could use Muslim incursions into Byzantium as an excuse to invade Jerusalem, which by then had been in Muslim hands for 400 years.

And even if they WERE just a defense of the Byzantine Empire, then the Empire itself would deserve at least as much blame as the Muslims, being that they were unable to defend their own territory enough to win the Battle of Manzikert.

It's the 21st century and you don't fire bomb buildings for FUCKING cartoons.

I think we're approaching this the wrong way here. I don't think this is about modern times; it's about the relative maturity of a religion.

Islam is now about 1,350 years old.

When Christianity was 1,350 years old, it was embroiled in Crusades and Inquisitions, Holy Wars and internal battles.

Much like Islam today.

Perhaps ANY religion at about that age would exhibit these kinds of behaviors, no matter WHAT century it is. After all, 13-year-old children in 2006 act the same way (immaturely) as 13-year-old children did in 1406. Why should it be a surprise that 1300-year-old religions in 2006 act the same way as 1300-year-old religions in 1406?

Again, should it really matter who started it all and why? Looks like the Muslims AND the Christians BOTH lost Jerusalem! It apparently does matter, but should it?

Are the crusades what got the Danish embassies bombed? Are they what got the train in Madrid bombed or the London subway or the World Trade Center? No, it was wild animals on the loose and someone needs to cage their pets!

I don't doubt that there are peaceloving Muslims in the world...alot of them for that matter...but you are your brothers keeper, whether you like it or not.

That's probably a very true statement Michael.

i said "in america," andy, didn't i? you wanted examples of muslims being peaceful. there you go. how many americans murdered americans in the past few days? quite a few. but most were peaceful. your brush is too big. every day, most muslims the world over are 100% peaceful, going about their day. what's happening in iraq isn't normal, and i think u.s. actions have plenty to do with the fact that civil war is on its way.

ruvy--point taken. still, your views on the muslim world have to be taken with a grain of salt. i don't trust you to be 100% fair, and i can see why you wouldn't be. i wouldn't be either. i'm probably not. the more you protest, the more i doubt.

So many words to read....so many opinions. Here's a couple more: Sir Arthur C. Clark said, "One of the greatest tragedies in human history was the hijacking of morality by religion."

And Susan B. Anthony (1820-1906) said, "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires."

I have long been of the opinion that ALL religions were invented in order to gain power over others. It is also my firm belief that religion has done more harm to humanity than anything else.

I expect the sheep will want to kill me for my views.

looks like andy may be coming around... i made the same point as mike does in #45 in my comment #15, which he dismissed quite easily.

four hours! keep pushing!

religion is the product of mind-altering drugs and/or malnutrition.

and I said it was time to catch up and I still think it's time to catch up...

I'd say I agree more with Logician than anyone...I felt that religion was a controlling thing in peoples lives most of my life...I've probably been subjected to more religion than a lot of people in this country and I stepped away from it a long time ago.

Andy, good luck educating a modern audience on the Crusades. People have too many preconceptions. One needs an understanding of the sweep of history to understand the Crusades.

For example, the Muslims "were" in Jerusalem, and the Christians tried to drive them out. They succeeded, but then somehow the Muslims "were" back in Jerusalem. The Muslims "were" in Spain, almost "were" in Vienna, "were" in Byzantium. The Christians responded to this were-ness by trying to drive them out.

Maybe the problem is that in the last 50 years, the Muslim advance in the West has been non-violent. Maybe people think that Islam has always advanced through passports and prison conversions. Thanks to our public schools, Americans don't understand the spread of Islam (or anything pertaining to religious history).

"At the end of the day, even after "Piss Christ," Christianity was still the dominant religion in the United States controlling all aspects of government policy making from the local to federal level. Muslims don't have the benefit of any of this. Instead, they have a white Christian controlled government opressing them on a worldwide scale."

Ben, let's compare "Piss Christ" to the Dutch cartoons.

"Piss Christ" was a work of art in a Christian country, protected by the government. The Dutch cartoons were produced in a (nominally) Christian country. Imagine a similar anti-Muslim work of art produced in Saudi Arabia. The artist would be executed by the government.

In the West, "Piss Christ" recieved a mixed reaction, although it energized a section of the electorate. I don't know of any reaction in Arab countries. In the West, the Dutch cartoons recieved a mixed reaction, and were rarely duplicated out of respect for Islam. In Arab countries, there were riots and murders.

The West was unfazed by "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" being broadcasted in Egypt. I think there's a big difference: Americans don't care what other people think of them, for better or worse. The Arab street seems obsessed with international perception.

Why don't we hear any prominent followers of Islam condemning the so called "radical muslims", if the radicals are really in the minority? Seriously, when Robertson says something that is inconsistent with the Christian faith, you hear many many prominent Christian leaders condemning him. Why doesn't this happen in the Islamic community when the "radicals" behave in the most violent of ways? One can only conclude that it's because their activity is silently condoned if not encouraged by the remaining members in general.

Bustyn - Maybe you should learn Arabic. These guys do argue, but in the language of the Qur'an. And their style of argumentation is different to what you are used to.

For the most part Moslem scholars are trying to reach their own adherents, not you, and the same goes for non-scholars who enter into the debate.

You might want to look at the deeper pages of the Al Jezeera web-site inwtead of just what is featured as headline news on Google or CNN. Also, you could check out Desicritics. You'd be surprised what you find...

Not every Moslem is a bearded idiot screaming death to the Great Satan.

Baronius, you wrote, "The West was unfazed by "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" being broadcasted in Egypt."

Maybe you should have amended that to "the Christian West."

We Jews were fazed. And pissed off.

Maybe destroying a few mosques and firebombing Egyptian embassies (or gutting the one in Tel Aviv) is the only thing that Arabs do understand.

Also, I couldn't help noticing that in your "sweeping vistas of history" discussing the Crusades, the fact that basically crusaders sharpened their swords murdering Jews as they wended their ways to Jerusalem got passed over.

Not that I'm surprised...

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. That applies to Robertson's stopped brain as well.

Dave

Chrstians kill alot more people than muslims. and thats a fac. and for every violent crime commited by muslims i can give you 10 commited by Chrstians.

[quote] Andy, good luck educating a modern audience on the Crusades. People have too many preconceptions. One needs an understanding of the sweep of history to understand the Crusades.[/quote]

Yes, indeed one does. One needs to understand that, in the noble spirit of the Crusades, they decided to pay a friendly visit to Constantinopole in 1204, and took the oportunity to sack it, bringing the Byzantium to the point of collapse. It wasn't a pretty sight, let me tell you, but it was quite a loot. Pay a visit to San Marco in Venice, it looks awfully "eastern" for some reason. But I guess it's all fine; after all it was an attempt (failed) to civilize those barbaric and pagan "easterners" as well, which weren't much better than the muslims or the jews anyways. Ironic is that, while suposedly defended the christianity from the muslims, the Crusdes accomplished exactly the opposite: they ralied the pretty much scattered muslims against a common enemy and weakend beyond recovery Byzantium, making it much easier for Mehmed to conquer it in 1453. Of course, when real defense agains the muslim invasion was in question (in XIII century), the westerners didn't bother that much; it was after all about those schismatics in the east which refuse to kiss our holly father pinky ring.
I suggest you read some real history on the crusdes and not the ones published by the Vatican.
But one poster (I forget which one) is right this wasn't then (and it isn't now) really about the teaching of a certain religion but rather about using the religion to achieve whatever social or political end.
Appologies for possibly bad english....

Most of what I read above is opinion based on little or nothing to do with history or reason. You might like to look at the books shown at the top of the page, maybe even read them, and perhaps think about what you read.

Those who care to express opinions on this topic of Islam as a religion of peace might like to read any number of transaltions of the Qur'an, all of which are more or less the same, forget the nonsense that not reading it in Arabic nullifies the undeerstanding. It's violent, incoherent tripe in any language.

And once one has waded through the rubbish that is the Qur'an, there comes the task of dealing with what is valid and what is abrogated. "there is no complusion in Islam" is abrogated by sura 9:5. "kill the unbelievers wherever you find them. Smite them at the neck and cut off their fingertips."

Once one has read the whole damned thing there is still the problem of making sense of any of it, which means turning to the ahadith for clarifications not availabe t the average reader. Even there one finds strong, medium, and weak hadiths. The strong consistently across the four schools of Islamic law all promote and even demand violence against non-Muslims.

Then, once one has gotten through the crap that is not allowed to change or be interpreted for close to 1,000 years, there comes the time when one is forced todeal with oneself as one is as a person:

Are you honest or are you someone who truly wishes to follow the crowd and let others do you thinking for you so you'll never be stressed out mentally or live in fear of seeming out of popular poses?

Do you truly want to play games of lazy and dispicable moral equivelence by writing that the Bible and the Gita are just as violent as the Qur'an? If you do then you are the loser, and there is no further help for you unless honesty is someday something you value more than the love of the fools around you who applaud like seals at the aqurium when you hold up a rotten fish.

You can find out about the history of Islam from reputable sources if it's important to you. You won't like it. Or you can read the paper and listen to the taqqiya of whoever is the day's popular spinner. The price of living a lie is pretty steep. It might come to being the price of your life.

Andy says,

"...I know I'm full of shit, that's why my eyes are brown."

At last!! Someone who comprehends the intricate relationships between genetics and faeces. Take a bow, me boy, there are damned few as wise as you. Only, uh, don't leave another "deposit" in the process. ;-)

Ruvy - my blue eyed father always tells me that's why my eyes are brown...I figured...Dad wouldn't lie to me!

Let's not kid ourselves--we can't paint all Muslims with the same brush, or we have to call all Christians Muslim hating lunatics for what some Americans are doing right now to behave prejudicially toward Muslims.

Yes, the illogic of that statement is intended to illustrate how out of touch Robertson is. After his comments about wanting justices to die, and how New Orleans flooded to clean out the sin, he doesn't deserve respect.

Andy, no matter how full of shit my kids are, I can't tell them that. They have the grey blue eyes of their mom and dad...

Chris, I had a ten paragraph answer that I just managed to lose by hitting the wrong key...

I'll have to get back to this.

Robertson was saying what most Americans think. Not all Americans, but most of us are tired of the religion of peace line. Other than that Robertson is a nut.

There are, what, about a BILLION MUSLIMS in the world? How many are involved in terrorism? Hundreds? Maybe thousands at most? That's still 0.0001% of the total.

Yes, there are savage statements in the Koran. But so too in the Old Testament.

Nor do a billion Muslims seek to take over the world. They are a billion individuals, same as everyone else.

To deny them, or anyone else, their individuality is anti-libertarian, anti-American, anti-conservative, and anti-Christian.

muslims are not inherently bad people. islam is not any worse than any other religion.

bad people use islam to work up emotional, radical responses, and you have fallen for it. you are being manipulated.

what this post has to say is bordering (actually, it's running right across that border,) on bigotry.

tolerance is a good thing. understanding that what one muslim person does does not reflect what all muslim people do is pretty fucking simple. that's a fucked up sentence.

Actually studies show that about 10% of Muslims are of the violent stripe. The real problem with Islam is that it IS rooted in violence. The Koran lists the pillars necessary to be a good practicing Muslim. One of those pillars is jihad, it is required that you try to convert people by the sword. Just look at what happened to north Africa in the two centuries after Mohammad "recieved" the Koran from Allah. What is interesting is the fact that the Muslims who are practicing their faith best are the most violent. We should either get rid of Muslims or make it mandatory that Muslims have to be only moderate, marginal, cafeteria Muslims.

Islam is rooted in violence. The religion itself is rooted in violence. To say that not all Muslims are violent misses the point, they may not be violent in action, but they hold to a belief system which requires violence in order to be pious.

While the best Muslims are the most violent, conversely the best Catholics are the most peaceful. This juxaposition shows Islams essentially evil nature and Catholicisms divine nature.

Tolerance doesnt mean that everyone is right, no matter what they believe because they choose to believe in it. Some things are right and others are wrong. Its called objective truth and it does exist. It is not intolerant to say that someone else believes in something that is wrong. Otherwise, what would teachers be, except really intolerant people.

Andy..i'm ashamed and greatly disappointed in you for this Article...

your whole position on this Thread has been semantically, symbolically and logically the exact same as if you said

"what is with these Jersey folks? the Mafia guys kill people, and they are from Jersey...therefore all Jersey folks are evil Mafia guys that kill people and i hate them..."

bah....

Excelsior!

Western people will continue to distrust Islam until it displays the ability to deal with it's radical elements. Until then, the West will perceive Islam as lacking internal control and requiring outside control. That's the bloody result of inaction.

gonzo - I've said it several times in the comment section...until the moderates of this religion are louder than the extremists...I'll never consider this religion peaceful.

so...until Italians from Jersey are louder than the Sopranos or the Godfather ...then all Jersey folks are mafia killers...

i get ya, and agree with the basic Thought...just not your broad brush sterotyping ALL 1 billion plus Muslims for the actions of a handful

you say you want them to speak louder? can the guy from Bloomfield talk louder to someone in Dubai than the Godfather?

fucking spare me the straw men


i'm still disappointed...

Excelsior!

A response to this article, and a variety of blogospheric/media opinions on Islam is over at Desicritics, and quite interesting

mark-- give us a link to your 10% study. and is jihad really one of the pillars of islam?

Jihad is listed in the Koran as one of the pillars of Islam and I got the 10% (and I realize simply saying this name discredits me) from the O'Rielly Factor, but I'm pretty sure he researched it before he made that statement.

aaman--there are many good points in that article, especially, "declaring Islam as a fundamentally incorrect, evil religion is just about as extreme and radical as al-Qaeda urging all Muslims to do Jihad against America."

yeah, you'd better find a source better than the o'rielly factor. he probably DIDN'T research it.

i'm looking for the pillars of islam right now...

um... yeah... jihad is NOT one of the five pillars... there's the profession of faith, prayer, fasting, charity, and the pilgrimage... where's jihad, mark?

ahh... from wikipedia: "A few Muslims, mainly belonging to the sect of the Khawarij, hold that there is a sixth pillar of Islam, jihad literally meaning "struggle" or "combat." Often understood to refer to holy war, this is viewed by many as a misinterpretation, especially in the sense of conversion by sword; however, if the English use of "war" is meant spiritually/metaphysically (such as being "at war" with one's conscience), as opposed to literal armed conflict, it is considered to be the most precise and accurate translation."

gonzo - it's not the people...it's the book...and as long as a book that calls for holy war against unbelievers is around...and it's my understanding that there are over 100 passages in the Qu'ran calling for jihad against unbelievers, this religion will be a problem...

One of the excuses I keep hearing about why I'm not hearing enough moderate muslims is because I don't speak arabic...well, you know what? Neither do half of those 1.6 billion muslims that like me, aren't hearing it either.

There will always be a handful that can hi-jack the religion again...

Quoting a snippet from the most recent comment by the author of that post I linked to:

...BTW, if you've already decided that we're all evil and killers, you might as well suggest what should be done in response? I suppose your options would be a)too kill as all at once b)to kill us one by one, gradually c)do not kill us, but deprive us socially, economically, etc etc...

Please note that I am not suggesting any of you will do so, or that you should. Merely hypothezingy. I'm just wondering, exactly what your aggenda is, after establishing Islam as the problem and declaring it as the root cause of all evil and unrest in the world, where do you go from here? Just wondering, that's all.

We could always go with Ann Coulter...kill all their leaders and convert the rest to Christianity???

It's a valid question Aaman and I'm not sure I have the answer.

Should we do what is being demanded of us? Make sure that everything in print and any other media isn't offensive before it's put out there? Do we need some kind of council to evaluate news and commentary to make sure it doesn't offend any more musims?

You tell me? How do you handle a group of people that burn down buildings over cartoons? That behead people like Tom Fox that are in their country to help them...People that blow up churches where people are worshipping Allah? How do you deal with people like this? How do you deal with people that believe that the holiest thing they can do is die for their religion?

I think it's important to realise, as in most religious traditions, there are various ways in which to practice one's religion vis a vis the Govt. One's political philosophy will determine how a person's religion will manifest itself politically.

As I understand it, the current Islamic terrorists' political philosophy developed in the late 19th century. It's the political philosophy that needs to be debunked, not the religion per se. Muslim moderates in the western world have largely proven their religion can be peaceful in the past, like I say, all depends on the political philosophy more than anything.

I dont know any violent muslims, but i might have met some, and not known about it. but ive seen a lot of tv. I dont know how that counts.

If you are 20 and listening to robertson and served in the navy, i'd say you still have many surprising and interesting people to meet ...

and most muslims do not speak or understand arabic .... in fact arabs/arabic speakers are a minority among them ...

also i'm sorry the burden is not on muslims to prove that they are this or that.

The real inconvenient burden is for those who know little about muslims to get to know them....

...a little sharper civility rather evil incarnate blunt demonization ...

gazelle - you misread that...I'm not 20...I did 20. I've been to the Middle East and Europe and Japan and South America and Central America. I've met plenty of interesting people.

But I say that it is on the people that practice this religion to rein in the ones that have hi-jacked it. Just like you see people in the western world putting down the likes of robertson and falwell and other assholes like that...I expect to see Muslims putting down Osama and his buddies...not wearing t-shirts with his picture on them or dancing in the streets whenever an infidel is killed in the name of jihad.

Come one, gazelle, get with it...he's only repeated those "20 years in the navy" about 2,000 times...

okay.

2 things:

one: islam says no violence unless in defence, forgive, take care of neighbors etc etc

two: the extremists understand that 'islam' or 'muslims' whatever their understanding of these are, are under threat, and therefore need defending thru violence. (still a simplistic view)

++++

Understanding this will go a long way in learning about the subject matter of what this article is trying to address but failing to do so.

for example exploring questions like why are muslims thrteatened. by what, whom. according to who. what is the worldview of the particular group that thinks like this....

and believe me there are many different answers, and would not make a neat little post.

best

yep, i misread that '20 year vet' wondering wow early retirement.

sorry about that.

I know for sure that usama is condemned by most, but then there is wwf or ... and some people go yaaah. that s all there is to it for most people but the insults are real.

best

I guess in MCH's eyes, I'm not allowed to be proud of that fact. I'd call it the third biggest accomplishment of my life...but hey, he's got an attitude problem anyway.

Look, I get what some of you are trying to say...but I'm actually reading one of those books that I picked that BC makes you hawk here...hehe...and it's really kinda scary!

Koontz or King coulda wrote this shit!

I'm put off by most religions anyway, but this one...and the more I read about organized religion...any organized religion the more put off I get.

Nice to see you at long last Gazelle. It was hard making those points of mine without a little backup...

Please help me out on one small point, if yu would? I thought that all Moslems had to learn Arabic becasue it was forbidden to teach the Qur'an in any other language. Am I wrong? Is this changed?

Reuven

I came across that cartoon of Mohammed that's causing all the insane protests. I printed it up, enlarged it and pasted it on my target sheet to use when I go to the gun range. It has improved my aim considerably. I sure hope this does not offend any Muslims or other idiots.

Sincerely, Pagan and Proud of it

Hey, that's a good idea, Logician. Way more fun than just shooting at Osama.

Dave

kill! has anyone even taken a shot at osama? i mean the real one... not some bit of paper. big men!

when i go to the target range, i shoot at a picture of a dumb hick try to suck his own dick, while blowing his foot off as he struggles towards ecstacy. sometimes, i bring a picture of a hunter in orange clothing... the sun at his back... the field grass blowing around his knees... it's so romantic...

Hey zing, where can I get that picture? Sounds like fun.

And I'm pretty sure Osama isn't volunteering to stand and get shot in gun ranges, but if he ever does I imagine someone will shoot him.

Dave

i made it myself!

i'm fuckin off for the keys for a week. have fun everybody.

don't judge anyone.

as long as a book that calls for holy war against unbelievers is around...and it's my understanding that there are over 100 passages in the Qu'ran calling for jihad against unbelievers, this religion will be a problem...

What about a book that calls for the execution of blasphemers? Would that religion be a problem?

Yeah it would. They're all a problem. How many blasphemers have been killed lately in the name of any other religion besides Islam?

Notice what you just said, Andy.

"in the name of religion"

Religion or spirituality, in and of itself is not violent. EVIL MEN are.

mmmmmk?

How many blasphemers have been killed lately in the name of any other religion besides Islam?

Doesn't matter. It's the book itself that's the problem, remember? Not the people who do what the book says.

Zingzing,

"when i go to the target range, i shoot at a picture of a dumb hick try to suck his own dick, while blowing his foot off as he struggles towards ecstacy."

I wish we had such nice pictures when we went for target practice... The scores would go up dramatically, even if the targets started to move rapidly. Just went a few days ago with the other police volunteers. Boring, boring. But I know I shoot well enough to kill anyone who approaches...

I imagine that we all bring our own biases into our reading of history. In my youth, I approached history with a fuzzy, "let's get along" attitude toward the three great monotheistic religions. I instinctively favored Judaism, but respected all three. I've read a lot since then, reluctantly coming to the conclusion that there's something sour in Islam.

Yes, Ahab, I've read some Vatican-approved history (I'm not going to take that as an insult). And yes, Ruvy, I probably overlook anti-Semitism, because the idea is so foreign to me. It just seems so absurd, I have trouble believing it. I've been reading up automotive history recently, and wow, Henry Ford was nuts.

The 1350 argument is fallacious. There's no necessary timetable in the development of a religion. But for kicks, let's compare contemporary Islam to 1300's Christiandom. Where is Islam's mendicant movement comparable to Dominic and Francis of Assisi? Where is the blossoming of literature in Muslim countries? The equivalents of Thomas a Kempis, Dante, and Chaucer? And the 1300's saw the Scholastic movement in philosophy and theology. I don't know of any budding Aquinas in Islam.

The Crusades were often terrible and stupid. There's no denying it. History illustrates plenty of good and bad periods in Christianity. The history of Islam has many more lows and fewer highs. Muslim societies have imploded far too often for it to just be a coincidence. Algebra is cool, but there hasn't been much before or since.

Gabriel, if that's true (#68) then most Americans are idiots.

Mark, how exactly do you propose to "make it mandatory that Muslims have to be only moderate, marginal, cafeteria Muslims."? What if I said the following:
"The world would be a lot better off if it were mandatory that Christians had to be only 'moderate, marginal, cafeteria Christians'? After all, Christians perpetrated the Crusades, and modern Christians molest kids, burn abortion clinics and bomb Arab countries."

And Andy, Coulter is a Cun*. She needs to be burned at the stake on TV in my opinion.

, Baronius, your argument in #106 is invalid - Muslim societies kept the light burning during the Dark Ages, too tiresome to list their innovations, etc.

JP, it was a joke to make my point. Point being, the most dangerous Muslims are the ones who do what Islam tells them to. My point was that if we are going to let people be Muslims, it would only be safe if we told them they could only be bad (marginal, cafeteria) Muslims. The same does not apply to Christians, because those Christians who bomb abortion clinics and molest children (non-Christians do this as well) are not following what Christianity prescribes.

Some here have raised the point: If it's just a tiny, evil, minority of Muslims doing the evil nasty stuff, why don't we hear the moderate Muslim majority protesting?

Reminds me of a DryBones cartoon I saw in the Jerusalem Post, many years back. It was in the wake of yet another Arab terrorist attack against Jews. So in the DryBones strip, 2 Jewish guys are talking. First 1 says, "All those demonstrations are so depressing." 2nd guy says, "You mean those demonstrations by Jews expressing their grief and rage at the murder of their loved ones?" 1st guy says, "No, I mean the demonstrations by Arabs expressing their outrage over the shedding of innocent blood in their name." 2nd guy: "But there weren't any such dimonstrations." 1st guy: "I know. That's what's so depressing...."

MAOZ....Thanks for the cartoon (#110).
Loved it!!!

Your assertion "They called it artistic excellence! You gotta be kidding me! Anyone can piss in a jar and throw a crucifix in it. What's so excellent about that crap?" shows that you have not an ounce of desire to find out anything about which you are ignorant.You have made up your mind and don't want the facts to get i the way.When Rush retires,you have a job already waiting for you

You're absolutely right. I don't have an ounce of desire to find out why someone would piss in a jar and submerge a crucifix in it. What facts could possibly make that art?

ruvy rote:

I thought that all Moslems had to learn Arabic becasue it was forbidden to teach the Qur'an in any other language. Am I wrong? Is this changed?

correction to previous:
1300 million or 1.3 billion

Gazelle,

Thank you

I understood that only a minority of Moslems were Arabs. I had entirely forgotten to take illiteracy into account.

Best

It seems like Islam just wants to be left alone. If it weren't for the oil they have I doubt if the rest of the world would care about them at all.
Its like the " Amish" communities in Pennsylvannia. They just want to keep their seperate ways and identies. Seperating themselves from the " unclean thing". But the Amish are peaceful!!! Islam is armed and dangerous. Maybe they should be more like the Amish. And maybe we should get the hell out of THEIR country!! We never should have dipped our wicket in their oil pool, and THEY never should have been tempted in doing business with us infidels. They could have kept the oil all for themselves. Why did they let us in their country in the first place?

When you approach a Muslim anywhere with "Assalamu Alaikum" what response do you get - ?

the beauty of Islam is in this Arabic greeting - a social form common to 1.3 billion people

the sad thing about Islam is that the greeting is often as empty as a car salesman's handshake

Aaman - two points concerning #108...

first - the concept of the "dark ages" in Europe has been more or less debunked as renaissance bigotry

second - the Profit wasn't born until the period of the "dark ages" was about half over...if you want to give credit for preserving the written tradition of the Greeks and Christians then give it to the pre-Islam Arabs

troll

another idea was, why not (like how Israel welcomed all jews to be automatic citizens after WW11.) Make Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq and the other intollerant countries of Arabia, the world headquarters for all Muslims. So all the muslims from all over the world can get out and go there where they belong. We won't bother them, and they can stay with each other over there. But no more of our " unclean money and products, and no more of their unclean oil to be traded between us and them. We can all live happily ever after. What do you think? Or are the Arabic leaders a little concerned about making lots of profit from the so called "Infidels"?

dear Allah - I know that I got cute and called the Prophet the Profit but ya didn't have to nuke the site

troll

"I guess in MCH's eyes, I'm not allowed to be proud of that fact. I'd call it the third biggest accomplishment of my life...but hey, he's got an attitude problem anyway."

But is it necessary to repeat it over and over, ad nauseam, like you're the only person who's ever made a career out of the military.

There are hundreds of thousands vets - both men and women - who've sacrificed more than yourself, but you don't see them bragging about it on the blogoshpere week after week, month after month.

When my four years were up, I couldn't wait to get out and get the freedom back to craft my own individualism.

Chip (#117), excuse me but it seems to me that if all that Islam wanted was just to be left alone, it would never have appeared beyond the Arabian Penninsula.

Islam was spread by the sword long before Westerners got all excited by slimy black stuff coming out of the earth.

(Shabbat Shalom, Yehudim ahuvim!)

MCH - So, now I know that you have a problem with people that espouse war without ever having served and those that served and made a career out of it. You know damn well I don't bring it up as much as you say. I bring it up when, in my opinion, the discussion warrants it or when someone like you calls me a chicken hawk. Along the same note, everyone here knows you have an issue with the war but you continue with your bullshit chicken hawk argument...so, what's the difference? I can gaurantee that I haven't typed on here that I'm career military as many times as you've typed chicken hawk. Is that what MCH stands for? Mr. Chicken Hawk?

we in the West have this problem
we use the word "religion" to define certain mass movements. We then assume that anything defined by us as a "religion" automatically includes a search for peace.

if we included Nazism, Devil Worship, and the belief systems of head hunting tribes we would not make that automatic assumption.

so Islam mde it into our category of "religion"
so it must(?) be peaceful.
i think not.

Dry Bones
Israel's Political Comic
Strip since 1973

the islamic legacy cannot be separated from the western - this is a factual mistake many people make.

arabia deserta had been a roman province, and where sheba dwelt?

Instead of comparing levels and readiness for violence (preemptive strikes, bah), compare the accounts of the prophets in the torah, the new testament and the quran and you'll start seeing the commonalities/differences and the prophetic tradition that continues and also comes to fruition with islam with specific reference to muhammad's life.

the emphasis on terror is of course misplaced and politically motivated against a particular political formation. All this of course has little to do with the religion, except exploitation of the religious emotion and fantasy.

An anecdote about Frederick II of Sicily if you havent traced it yet.

isn't it in everyone's interest to defuse the reasons which give rise to extremists on a global scale. must be some kind of large stupidity which can suddenly draw people from diverse corners to react like they have - or is it the global microcosm of the media village?

the easy answer is not it.

its not just muslims who react to things in the world. lets not forget leo strauss, tom paine, jefferson, rousseau, marx, iqbal, maududi, khomeini, mandela or havel.

if jews can be from russian shtetls, and jesuits belgian, luther german, sun-moon korean, falwell from lynchburg VA, why not an ibn-arabi of murcia, an ibn hazm of cordoba and an abdullah of marseilles - when we know where moses, jesus and muhammad dwelt.

new worlds do have to be created still - these other kinds of freedom need protection too.

best

Wolfe ... says he believes in the same God as his Jewish father and his Christian mother.

exactly the pov i espouse, had i been born in a different household... ancient glocalism

"you continue with your bullshit chicken hawk argument..."

And you continue with your bullshit "f---ing pacifist" argument with anyone who opposes the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

I honestly don't think pacifist is a word I use very often. I know I've never called you one. I've called you a lot of other things...but never a pacifist.

What exactly is your problem with me anyway? What have I done to piss you off besides disagree with your chicken hawk argument...or is that all it takes? I haven't commented on a war post in here in a while, but you seem to follow me around in here and make your snide little comments...are you the BC stalker?

zing: aaman--there are many good points in that article, especially, "declaring Islam as a fundamentally incorrect, evil religion is just about as extreme and radical as al-Qaeda urging all Muslims to do Jihad against America."

There is absolutely NO comparison.

"declaring Islam as a fundamentally incorrect, evil religion" is nothing more than expressing an opinion, for Chrissake! Urging Muslims to go slaughter the infidels is genocide. It's the same kind of a difference as expressing your opinion than Bush is a dangerous idiot, and picking up a gun with the intention of assasinating him.

The fact that you regard equating these two things as making a "good point" just shows how utterly fucked up the Muslim mind is, and why Islam has no place whatsoever in the modern civilized world.

That last sentence might make sense, Richard, if Zing was a Muslim. Which he isn't.

Hello everybody my namd is Mark the major problem with the world now and past is religionl. Think of how many people have been killed in the name of ( insert standard religion here), than for any other reason. Now someone mentioned that moderate muslims need to speak out against extremeism. Where were those moderate christian voices when white southerners were taken away american black citizens constitionally promised rights, allowing white people in the south to commit any immoral and unconstitional act they wanted against black people including rape and murder. This inhumane treatment only stopped 40 years ago, and oh yes the south was supposedly a christian society. Mark

Most conflicts have nothing to do with religion at all. Ultimately, it all comes down to the Haves vs. the Have-Nots.

Pat Robertson has a filthy brain with nothing good in it
and it is no wonder that if he went on again saying something
against Islam.

Regarding the Column writer i initially thought he is a
confused person and needs some guidance & who is also
seeking for a list so here is a v short list of 15 Muslims Individuals
that world knows.

( You may pick 3 of your choice and if need more names i'll provide u laters.)

1.Doctor Genius: Zakir Naik

2.Sheikh Yusuf Estes

3.Ex Pop Sensation: Yusuf Islam aka Cat Stevens

4.Ahmed Deedat

5.Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi

6.Renowned female Scholar: Aminah Assilmi

7.Adnan Oktar aka Harun Yahya

8.Sir Syed Ahmed Khan

9.Former Prime Minister of Malaysia: Mahathir bin Mohamad

9.Greatest Sports Person of all Time: Muhammad Ali

10.The Handsome Cricketer Legend: Imran Khan

11.Football Hero: Ali Daei

12.Football Great: Zinedine Zidane

13.Squash Immortal: Jehangir Khan

14.Greatest Basketball Player: Kareem Abdul Jabbar

but later what i discovered
in his comments ref #22 that he has lost his mind
and just like all others in the west, is victimised by the
media propaganda and hatred against Islam & muslims.
and just for the sake of the say he
never used a thing known as 'brain' but showed his
frustration.

Regarding Christians and their reaction on "Piss Christ"
i would just say when religion doesnt exist in a society
and also not practised by a large majority then whocares about
if 1oo's of 'Piss Christ'appear.

Killing over blasphemous caricatures has a background to look
at before opening one's mouth.

I strongly condomn the violance
took place but did any-1 looked up why all this had happend?

Most of the Western media didnt talk and covered initial peaceful
protests that took place all over the world that is the main reason of
ur unawareness.

In majority of Muslim countries there is 'NO' place for
public voice and freedom, leaders who are ruling them
are religionless & nothing but appointed men
by the west and U.S for maintaining their influence and interest.
and it is a historical fact now.

Thus, it is a natural reaction that when your sentiments are deeply hurted
and your voice isnt heard and u dont get the justice what u do? violence is
the reaction and the same had happened.

West calling Islam & muslims extremist and terrorists because of the acts of
few individuals so should i call the same for christanity if i see Adolf Hitler
and G.W.Bush ?

saying it is not against Islam and muslims is a foolish statemtent.
and bombing is done for what? Peace LOL
it is like fucking for virginity

Zingzing#20

"bush never did anything in the name of christianity (although god does tell him what to do he says),
but that doesn't matter. it's all about how the extremist muslims twist it.
like you twist their violence into a hatred-filled diatribe against all muslims."

i totally agree with the views of Zingzing,

Ruvy # 14
"Let me make this real simple for everybody.
ISLAM IS NOT THE RELIGION OF PEACE.
ISLAM MEANS COMPLETION THROUGH SUBMISSION TO G-D."

Mr.Ruvy highly need to educate himself as he doesnt know much about Islam
Islam is a religion of peace that means that a person submits his will to
the will of God. That he is ready to sacrifice all his desires for the will of God.
and if you read Qo'ran u'll know what Islam really is. shaping your opinion
after watching few individuals who r the result of U.S and western policies is
totally absurd.

This Osama and Jihadis were the BEST thing when USSR was there, for U.S and for the west.
they trained them, supported them militarized them and after their objectives accomplished
left them, now the same are the terrorists and naming them as the reflection of Islam
is muslim extremism ?
LOL is there anything exist known as 'character' ?

The issue of caricatures making a slogan that it is the freedom of speech!
Hurting sentiments of the huge muslim world is what freedom of speech?
tell those lunatics if freedom is without responsibility how can peace prevail?
freedom without responsibility develop Wildness and it made west WILD Animals.

If some-1 says anything against Samitic's belief of Holocaust he is punished
as a man recenty got sentence in Austria.

All sources of terrorism belongs to Israel, U.S & the west.


The slogan of 'Freedom of Speech' doesnt apply there and if still your heads r dumb
to understand what is happening with Muslims then i just can laugh on your mental health.

YOu're absolutely right about one thing Waleed. freedom without responsibility developes wildness. That would explain burning down embassies over cartoons. As far as your opinion on who and why the Crusades started...guess that's the difference between the way your history was written and mine was...mine says that the Crusades were to push back Muslim advances...apparently yours was written a little differently.

And of course, once again ladies and gentlemen, it's the U.S.'s fault for all this terrorism...oh yeah...and Israels too! Time to throw in the BULLSHIT flag!

and as for your list...the only two names on there that I recognize are Casius Clay and Lew Alcindor!

Islam: Misunderstood throughout the World the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) were sent to their respective people, as the Qur'an says: "We did indeed send, before you, Messengers to their (respective) people, and they came to them with clear signs." ( Holy Qur'an, 30:47)
Islam is a monotheistic religion, civilization and way of life now practiced by 1.5 billion people. Easily the world's fastest growing religion, Islam is not confined to the Middle East
Muslims see themselves as the afflicted, not the afflictors; they feel themselves desperately on the defensive, not on the offensive; they consider themselves the objects of violence, not the initiators of violence. In sum, Muslims across the world consider themselves victims. In support of their position, Muslims will take their Christian and Jewish neighbors on a quick tour of the world. They inevitably begin with Bosnia, where nearly 200,000 Muslims have been slaughtered by Serbian Christians. Muslims are horrified and sickened by the fact that 22,000 Muslim women, aged 9 to 82, have been raped by Christian troopers. Muslims wonder privately about the weak and very late Western response.

In Kashmir, Indian occupying forces violently oppress Muslims, killing thousands of Kashmiris. Elsewhere in India in December 1992 and January 1993, violent Hindu mobs went on a rampage in Bombay, killing over 800 Muslims, destroying 5000 Muslim homes and forcing 200,000 Muslims to flee the city. Mosques were firebombed and mothers watched as their sons were pulled from their homes and slain or burned alive. In Tajikstan and other places in Central Asia, the Communists have made a comeback and, with the help of Russian troops, have attacked and killed more than 20,000 Muslims. Another 350,000 have been forced to flee.

Even in China, Muslims find themselves under heavy military pressure. Chinese troops oppress Muslims in the western province of Xinjiang.

Even in many of the predominantly Muslim countries of the Middle East, Muslims find themselves under attack where the leadership is essentially secular. In Iraq, Saddam Hussein continues his war of genocide against the Shi'ites in the south.

In Algeria, when the Islamists scored a surprise victory in the December 1991 elections, the regime declared the election null and void. Since then, Algeria has been the scene of a bloody civil war. The government blames Islamic fundamentalists of striking terror in the very same areas where they had received majority of votes from. The governments explanation of fundamentalists unleashing waves of terror in their own strongholds, sounds very plausible indeed and casts shadows of dound over the credentials of the secular government instead.

In Egypt, Hosni Mubarak's regime, facing widespread disaffection of its people, pursues a policy of torture and execution of members of the Muslim opposition. In March 1993, his troops fired upon 500 unarmed Muslims at prayer in the Rahman Mosque in Aswan, killing nine and injuring 50. In the West Bank, another more widely publicized mosque massacre occurred a year later in Hebron when a Jewish settler killed 30 in a group of praying Muslims before the survivors could beat him to death. This litany of anti-Islamic violence is recognized and recited by Muslims everywhere. The situation is exacerbated when Muslims incredulously find themselves labeled as terrorists and when Western governments encourage their secular Middle Eastern allies to confront Muslim populist movements with brute force. One result of these Western perceptions and policies, of course, is that they begin to radicalize the huge mass of moderate Muslim believers. Meanwhile, the extremists on the fringes

This perception is not due to any intrinsic resentment of Islam by the American people. It is understood that the mainstream of Muslims, the vast majority of them, like in every other faith, is peaceful and pay their taxes, trying to make America a better society, trying to improve relations with neighbors and colleagues
But images and terminology influence public opinion, and a bitter taste is left when Islam is reported in the daily headlines. The term "Islamic fundamentalism", whatever it means, has been repeated enough times in relation to violent incidents that naturally, any thinking human being has to be uncomfortable with the fact that America is home to a vibrant Muslim community. The problem stems from negative images about Islam. In the court of public opinion, Islam is guilty until proven innocent.
Even though the Middle East was home to fewer terrorist incidents than Latin America and Europe, for example, it is still regarded as the region where terrorism is rooted. According to a recent US State Department report, Patterns of Global Terrorism, issued earlier this year, 272 terrorist events occurred in Europe, 92 in Latin America and 45 in the Middle East. Sixty-two anti-US attacks occurred in Latin America last year, 21 in Europe and 6 in the Middle East. These numbers represent the terrorist trend and not an anomaly, whereby the majority of perpetrators are not linked to the Middle East or Islam. The Red Army Faction in Germany, the Basque Separatists in Spain, the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, the Shining Path in Peru and the National Liberation Army in Columbia are not viewed with the same horror as terrorist groups of Muslim background.
There is no moral justification for terrorism regardless of the ethnic or religious background of the perpetrator or the victim, but the factual basis of terrorism has been either hidden or twisted in the public's perception of this policy problem, especially in congressional hearings on terrorism. The countries with the worst terrorist records in the world are not in the Middle East either. They are not even Muslim countries outside the Middle East. They are Columbia and Germany, havens for drug lords and neo-Nazis.
The negative association of Islam with terrorism exists, but no one has ever asked "Why?". Could it be that American society cannot overcome the Khomeini phobia, even though he is dead? The US Congress found it necessary to push $20 million towards covert operations in toppling the Iranian government even at the dissent of people in the CIA. The Arab countries, both friend and foe, are run by tyrants who kill more of their own people than those outside their countries. The presumption that these countries represent a threat to American interests or that any one of them can dominate the region or even rival the only remaining superpower is indeed generous. So the issue is not these countries' hegemony in their region or the world, but about who can dominate their people and exploit their resources. The perception in the Middle East is that US policy does not serve the peoples interests; it protects Israel and fri