Lowry speaks about CAIR and NR

Recently Powell and Rice both opined that tsunami relief would show Muslims that Americans aren't all that bad. That statement in itself shows ignorance of the teachings of Islam about unbelievers, and ignorance of the history of the region, and how jihadist preachers used similar disasters to stir up hatred of the unbelievers, even as those unbelievers were helping them.

Simon Winchester, in his excellent Krakatoa, related how Wahhabist preachers had blamed the 1883 catastrophe on the presence of the Infidels and how the Dutch soon had an Islamist uprising on their hands, in spite of European humanitarian aid.

Nothing new, but nobody remembers.

The reason muslims behave the way they do is because of Muhammad's example.

He is the example - the model.

A critique of his behavior will certainly not stem the tide of jihad activity, but it will certainly enlighten the minds of those who are not muslim.

As any other religious founder is under the microscope, Muhammad should be right there amongst them.

The very fact that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia et al are attempting to influence the UN to impose blasphemy laws against those who wish to critique Muhammad should be an indication to all that these proponents have something to hide.

In this day and age, via the internet and other means of information dissemination, that task has become futile.

The editor of the premier magazine in the ideological battle with communism lays down without a fight in the face of fascism.

The editor of a Christian principled magazine won't defend a Christian's right to declare Muhammad a false prophet and thus he actually defends the worst of totalitarian policies.

And he does all this because, they didn't say, "'Hey, let’s have a public fight over Mohammed and aggressively market books about him,' then reverse course?"

That is his flip response to serious inquiries? He ended this with the following, which I notice, Robert kindly didn't post,

"Now, back to your regular programming…"

I need air.

Forgive him, Father, for he knows not what he does.

So what us Jihadwatchers need to do is write a note to Rich explaining how he got it wrong. But do it lucidly and briefly!

Remember that a lot of otherwise good people have a visceral reaction about discussing religion, any religion. "Religion, private" is what they think.

Islam is the big wake up call that no, religion is not private and BELIEFS HAVE CONSEQUENCES along with ideas.

Robert-

A superb rebuttal to this p.c. naivete by NR's front man. Thanks for penetrating and straightening out his foggy pretzel logic.

BTW-

Caught you interviewed on the 'Tammy Bruce' show today by a serendipitous twist of the dial, and enjoyed it immensely... although Ms. Bruce kept having a[n undestandable] problem with the title of your book under discussion "The Myth of Islamic Tolerance", turning it twice into "Intolerance". (Although I forgive her, since "Islamic intolerance" not only rolls off the tongue more naturally, it is the fact we confront.) Very gentlemanly of you not to correct her on the air.

Meanwhile-

National Review's mouthpiece Lowry is working at about at the same superficial level of 'grasping what the current Islamic crisis MEANS' as the public face of the American government ('religion of peace! religion of peace!'), the dithering EU leadership and the mealy-mouthed U.N. Unwilling to do their homework, and using the sanitized Cliff Notes version of "Islam-all you need to know" for their glib talking points and 'shifty' intellectual foundation.

As someone they SHOULD have heard of put it:

"A fool is he who builds his house on sand."

Lowry should shake the silica from his ears and look around. "Discrediting Mohammad" is a charmingly p.c.-friendly 'Islamophobic' rationale that says nothing but answers everything.

And C.A.I.R. would be popping champagne corks right now, in triumph over their cowing of the NR 'dhimmi' wit, except that, as I'm sure Mr. Lowry recalls:

-in a dream Mohammad was given a choice between a pitcher of milk and one of wine, and his 'divine' selection of the moo juice has steered the Muslims in their abstemious habits ever since.

In fact, isn't it high time for Madison Avenue to get the 'prophet' in one of those famous dairy ads. I can just see his henna-dyed beard with an added white moustache, and the pithy logo beneath asking:

"GOT MILK?"

(Or, in the 'tolerant' Islamic version:)

"GET Milk! Or die!"

BigSleep:

I am a big admirer of Tammy Bruce, and also it is bad form ever to correct the host on his or her own radio show. The only time I can recall doing it was when one host apparently conflated my name with that of David Pryce-Jones, who wrote the foreword to my book "Islam Unveiled," and kept calling me "Robert Jones." But if he had had a larger listenership, perhaps it would have been better to change my name.

Cordially
Robert Spencer

Spiny Norman,

That's fascinating. So whenever an natural disaster occurs, muslims blame it on the existence of Christians (and presumably, Westerners in general)? I was surprised to see that this kind of thing has been happening since well, well before the Indonesia tsunami. I wonder how long its been going on. No more than 1300 years or so, I imagine.

Geoff

Robert,

I think that in the end you will win because you are right. I just hope it doesn't take another large terrorist attack in order to get the West to fully wake up.

For people to properly discuss Islam, they would need to do a number of things. The first thing would be to recognize that the Qur'an itself is only the major but hardly the sole text, and that the other great source of Islamic beliefs and acts come from the Sunna, or "Custom" which itself is comprised of the Hadith and the Sira.

Once that was clearly understood, one would have to:

1) Read, and re-read, together with the most authoritative Muslim commentaries, or at least from some of them (and Umdat al-Salik, "The Reliance of the Traveller," is a helpful compendium put together for the use of Muslims, and most enlightening), the three canonical texts of Islam -- the Qur'an (available in various English translations set out synoptically), the Hadith (available in the recensions of Bukhari and Muslim on-line), and the Sira (and in addition to the Muslim version, many biographies of Muhammad by Western scholars
of Islam -- such as Sir Wiliam Muir, Professors Arthur Jeffery, and Tor Andrae, and Maxine Rodinson -- are all readily available.

2) Study not only the texts, but how they are received. Are they taken literally? Figuratively? Are there different guides available by which Muslims reconcile seemingly contradictory elements, as for example the doctrine of abrogation, or "naskh"? And is that doctrine of abrogation helpful in smoothing out the harshness and hostility in many passages, or does that doctrine, on the contrary, make the Qur'an far harsher in its impact than a cursory reading, and a misunderstanding, might suggest?

4) Study the role of Islam in the lives of Muslims. How potent is that religion, how much does it pervade and suffuse everyday life, down to the slightest conversational allusion? For that one would need to read, and not quickly, in both in the historical sources (Muslim and non-Muslim) and in the reports of European travellers, diplomats, visitors, and in modern times, the sociologists who live for a year or two or five among Muslims, or like Fr. Menezes, tended to them over many decades, and left a record of their observations. One would also have to consult the testimony of both those who were born into Islam, and remained Muslims, and those who became "defectors" from Islam, though intimately familiar with it -- such people as Ibn Warraq and Ali Sina and Azam Kamguian and Irfan Khawaja and a thousand other articulate writers on the subject, many of them presently in this country, and the rest, of course, in other non-Muslim countries where they are safe from the penalty for apostasy.

5) study the psychology of Muslims -- that is, what does belief in Islam do to one's worldview, one's way of regarding the world, and facts both of the workings of the natural world, and of the acts, and attitudes, of Infidels? Several books have been devoted to analysis of "The Arab Mind" (the title of a well-known book by Raphael Patai), but more important, perhaps, is a study of the "Psychology of Muslims." One such study exists -- that of Andre Servier -- but it is out-of-print. The assumption, for example, that both Infidels and Muslims regard treaty-making in the same way is simply false. Infidels adhere to the principle of Pacta Sunt Servanda (Treaties are to be obeyed), while for Muslims, the model of all subsequent treaties between Muslims and Infidels is the agreeement made by Muhammad with the Meccans in 628 A.D., the Treaty of al-Hudaibiyya. Without understanding the significance of this treaty, one cannot begin to discuss the value of, for example, Israel's signing of solemn agreements (or what appear to Israel and the United States as solemn agreements) with Egypt, or the "Palestinians," or any number of others.

6) Attmepting to comprehend how Islam inculcates a manichaean view of the universe, in which the essential division is between Believer and Infidel, and hostilty, or even mureerous hatred, is so deeply inculcated, at every level, even down to urging Muslims never to take non-Muslims as friends, never to wish them well on their own holidays, never to accept even their seeming acts of benevolence (as the help extended a month ago in the tsunami aftermath) as anything other than a sinister plot, designed to soften up Muslims the better to then have them heed the "whisperings of Shaytan" (Satan). That this seems incredible to Western man does not mean that it is not true: the lack of historical training, and of training in the exercise of imaginative sympathy, among not only ordinary people but among those who have a special duty to learn, and then to instruct, others (which includes journalists, government officials, and those who presume to explain things to us, and to, presumably, work to protect Infidels and Infidel society), now can be seen to have practical consequences.

7) Studying, and thinking about, and studying again, and thinking again -- for it takes time to have this matter sink in -- what it means to be a "moderate" Muslim. Is it a question of simple nonobservance, nonchalance about the Faith? Is it based on ignorance, the ignorance of an illiterate Bedouin, or Afghani villager, or someone deep in the Sumatran jungle who knows he is a "Muslim" but has no idea what that may mean. To be a "moderate" is it enough not to be a believer or follower of "Wahhabi" Islam? If so, then what was that learned theologian Ayatollah Khomeini, or Muhammad Atta, or Hassan al-Banna who formed the Muslim Brotherhood?

Is a "moderate" someone who opposes the burka? Who opposes the full imposition of the shari'a when it comes to the criminal law?

Is it someone who accepts Western dress, Western ways of doing things, Western technology, and yet still believes that Islam has a divine right to spread across the globe and that it must, as Muhammad said, come to "dominate and not to be dominated"?

Is a "moderate" someone who assures you that he is a "moderate" or do we need other proof, given the religiously-sanctioned doctrines of dissimulation (Taqiyya, Kitman) and those who practice them being well-versed in lying for the Faith and for the wellbeing of Believers?

And is a "moderate" Muslim someone who assures you he fully accepts pluralism but you suspect it is only because for now, living in the West, and still in the process of solidifying the position and entrenchment of Islam, he needs the protection of Western pluralism, tolerance, and a highly-developed system of individual rights, but that he has no intention of supporting pluralism in the West when he no longer needs it for his own purposes, and will make no move to ensure that pluralism is accepted in the Muslim countries themselves, with full rights for non-Muslim minorities, and the right of freedom of conscience for Muslims themselves (i.e., the right to become apostates without being killed).

Is a "moderate" Muslim someone who is now "moderate" but who may, at some personal setback, some disappointment or depression or emotional desarroi, sorts of people, as one can so easily do, given that Islam provides a Total Explanation of the Universe and that Explanation includes the Infidel, all Infidels, as the objects of all hatred and blame. Thus it is that we Infidels, when things go wrong in our own lives, can blame our parents, our siblings, our children, our spouses, Fate, the stars, our cholestorel level, our serotonin level, The System, Amerika, or even, at times, ourselves, Muslims have it all so simple: they can blame the Infidels.

8) Study how changes in technology -- such as the widespread availability of audiocassettes, videocassettes, satellite television channels, the Internet -- can effect the reception of Islam among those who are already convinced that they are "Muslims" and identify themselves as such, but perhaps are largely ignorant of a good deal of the contents of Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, and their Islam has until now consisted of rather casual attendance at a small village makeshift mosque, and observance of the five canonical prayers, and Ramadan. What does the existence of those Islamic tapes, satellite channels, and the Internet do to the practice of Islam -- does it make for more, or less "moderation"?

9) Study how the entirely unprecedented permission granted to millions of Muslims to live in the dar al-harb -- from the Muslim point of view, behind enemy lines, the Lands of the Infidels -- has led to a situation that was not analyzed in advance, and at this point has created, for all the Infidels involved, a situatin that no one could disagree has made life for Infidels, in their own lands, far more difficult, unpleasant, expensive (the costs of security, including monitoring what goes on in mosques and madrasas) and more physically dangerous, than it would be without those millions of Muslim immigrants, whose numbers grow because the birth-rates are, in Western Europe for example, five times higher (7 1/2% annual growth versus 1 1/2% annual growth) so that if nothing is done, then Europe, well before the end of the century, and probably well before the middle of the century, contain a sufficient Muslim population, determined and cohesive, that will effecctively take possession of the historic birthplace of Western civilization, its art treasures, its museums, its wealth, its land, its military capacity.
If, of course, as Rich Lowry says, we are fighting merely a "war on terrorism" and Islam itself is fine, then the islamization of Europe, as long as it proceeds through peaceful demography and Da'wa, should hold no terrors for him or those who think like him.

1)) study the history not only of Jihad-conquest, but of the treatment of the much larger numbers of those conquered -- more advanced, wealthier, more settled, and more civilized populations, compared to the primitive Muslim conquerors. Are there any similarities in the treatment, under Muslim rule, of the Christians and Jews of the Middle East, or North Africa, or Spain, and the treatment meted out to the Zoroastrians of Sassanid Persia, or the Hindus and Buddhists of Central Asia and of Hindustan? In other words, over 1350 years in time, and from Spain to the East Indies in space, are there remarkablly wide differences in how Muslim overlords treated their subjugated non-Muslim populations, or do we find, upon close examination, that in fact we are most struck by the astonishing similarity in the treatment?

12) study that treatment -- what exactly did the ahl al-kitab, the People of the Book, the specialy-favored (so we are told) Christians and JUews, have to do in order to stay alive, and to avoid forced conversion to Islam, and to continue to practice their own religions? What were the series of disablities, economic, political, legal, and social, under which those Christians and Jews labored? And what was the treatment meted out to Zoroastrians, and to Buddhists, and to Hindus? And what was the reason that the HIndus, for example, after the murders of 60-70 million of them, were finally granted a kind of honorary "People of the Book" status, and permitted to live as long as they paid the jizya and endured the other indignities of dhimmi status?

13) study how the treatment of dhimmis changed, or did not change, under the pressure of Western powers on the Ottoman rulers, beginnning with a study of how those Ottoman rulers did, or did not, actually execute the Tanzimat reforms of 1839, or any of the later reforms in their treatment of non-Muslims that were supposedly undertaken in order to limit Western (Christian) pressure.

14) study the persistence of the mistreatment of non-Muslims, including the massacres of Maronites in 1860, the massacres of Armenians in 1894-96 and then the full-scale genocide of 1915-1920, the massacre of Assyrians in Iraq in 1933, the various pogroms against Jews throughout the Muslim Arab lands, all through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, until there were no more Jews left to enslave (as in the Yemen), or expropriate property from (as in Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Algeria), or to murder (as in Egypt, Syria, Iraq, Algeria, Tunisia, Yemen, Morocco).

15) study the persistence as well of Jihad, as with the local Jihads in West Africa (1804), North Africa (1830s), East Africa (1880s in the Sudan), or the world-wide Jihad declared in Constantinopole in 1915.

16) study the relation of the wherewithal that OPEC oil money gave to the spread of Islam, through the determined and relentless use of th e of the "money weapon" in many ways:

-- to acquire hundreds of billions of dollars of th emost advanced weaponry.

--to pay for WMD projects, some successful, some abandoned, some with an outcome still unknown, in Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Syria (with Egypt and Syria using outside aid, including in Egypt's case, foreign aid from the American government)

--to establish a network of academic centers, and individual professors, dependent on Arab money and eager to do Arab bidding not only about the obvious topic (the Arab-Israeli matter), but on the entire subject of the nature of Islam, its theory and practice -- which is the Great Untaught and Unknown Subject on American campuses today.

--to establish a network of ex-diplomats and ex-intelligence officials, all Westerners, who can act as defenders of Islam, help to deflect criticism from Saudi Arabia in particular, and to keep insisting that it is Western (or American) policies, and not the tenets of Islam, that explain the obvious examples of Jihad everywhere in the world, from the southern Sudan and northern Nigeria to East Timor, the Moluccas, Pakistan, Bangladesh(for those HIndus beaten to death surely were not part of some Pentagon conspiracy), and to muddy whatever clarity about both the proper definition of "terorrism" and to keep as many policy-makers from understanding Islam as possible. Names such as Raymond Close, James Akins, the late John C. West, Fred Dutton, and others who as "public relations advisers" or more commonly, as "international business consultants" or latterly, people helpfully specializing in "explaining Islam to the Western world in the hope that they may contribute to avoiding a clash of civilzations" (see the website of Alistair Crooke's little outfit for more in this vein), and of course, expect a handsome payment from "concerned" Arab governments and individuals

--to buy into large media companies and thereby to insure that their coverage of Islam remains --predictably innocent. Or, as in the case of National Review (see above), even to drop a word to a powerful advertiser (Boeing, which of course hardly wishes to offend such good present and future clients as the Arabs), that CAIR must be strongly seconded when it attempts to censor an ad.

There is much more. I could have listed ten points, or twelve, or a Baker's Dozen, or Thirty-three, or Ninety-Nine Theses. I stopped at Sweet -- or Grim -- Sixteen. That should be enough to jog a few people into beginning to study what they should study. Instead of taking the word of those who keep repeating that Islam is a religion of "peace" and "tolerance," or who believe that Western civilization owes "so much" to islam, or those who tell us that the bad old days of Jihad are a thing of the past, and as for dhimmitude -- it doesn't exist, it's merely a figment of Bat Ye'or's imagination.

Well, it';s now time for Study Hall.

Let's see who gets this right.

Very disappointing response from Lowry. In addition to Spencer's remarks, note that Lowry accepts the idea that 'discrediting Mohammad' (which is not the point) comes 'from the right'.

So, we are back to the old, well worn, ludicrious categories: Muslim apologists and friends (left)/ Muslims critics (right). So, folks like Oriana Fallaci are on the 'right'.

Foolishness. Apologists for Islamic ideology and facism are most appropriate opponents of 'liberals', namely, those advocating 'libertas', freedom.

But we have been over this before. These common political categories do not apply to the anti-Jihad movement, because the movement is essentially driven by human rights concerns, which should form bonds between folks from a diverse political spectrum. I am always surprised that is doesn't, except in rare circumstances. But, that will change inevitably.

Please read the posts and articles of Hugh Fitzgerald, Mr. Lowry, and do some reading. The National Review disappoints, greatly.

Another thing I was thinking about.

Winston Churchill spent a good deal of the period prior to both WWI and WW2 knowing the inevitability of what was to follow because of studying the enemy. He had specialized knowledge, being a soldier for a number of years and a very smart man. I strongly suggest reading biographies of him.

I think Robert is in much the same position as Churchill. He correctly understands the danger that Islam presents. I'm not sure whether he has a solution, but predicting an important problem is a very good start. I think in the future he will be regarded as a Winston Churchill of his times.

The disturbing thing about that analogy is that it took the British government until war was upon them before they finally woke up. While there has been a pre-emptory shot fired in the current war (9/11), I'm not sure whether that will be enough. I think it may take a nuke scale attack on America for it to wake up to what it faces.

Most informative post, Hugh. You are Robert Spencer's best intellectual friend

"Robert Spencer and some others on the right feel very strongly that it is important to discredit Mohammed and Islam as such in order to win the war on terror."

"feel very strongly...imporant to discredit Mohammed and Islam...."

"war on terror"

It is not a "war on terror," no matter how many times this or that Important Personage says it is. It is a war, world-wide in scope, and essentially without a clear terminus ad quem, which is not directed only at the United States, and not only at Christians and Jews, but appears to be directed "only" at the United States because the United States remains the most powerful and determined enemy of the Jihad, even if many of its leaders (and journalists) have an uncertain grasp of what it is all about.

If R. Lowry thinks that what is going on is a "war on terror" then let me highlight the question that can be found in the posting above: would he object, then, if Islam by peaceful means gradually took over all of Europe -- that is, through Da'wa (the Call to Islam) and demography? If he would object, on what grounds would he do so? If he is unwilling himself to study Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira, and he is impatient with those who seem to labor under the dreamy notion that such study, both of the teachings of Islam, and of the history of Jihad-conquest and of the treatment of non-Muslims subjugated to Muslim rule, is irrelevant, he will not ever be able to articulate just what it is about the "islamizaton of Western Europe" or of "South America" or of anywhere else that might just worry him -- and not a little, but a lot.

Anyone who remains satsified with that phrase "war on terror" as helping clarify, in Infidel minds, the nature of the conflict, the wellsprings of the conflict, the likelihood of that conflict having a natural end, the reasonableness of the notion that creating in Iraq a "democracy" of the most primitive kind will give rise to a "Light Unto the Muslim Nations" that will, in turn, cause assorted Muslim swords to be turned into assorted plowshares, and that as long as "terror" ends or diminishes we are home free and in like Flynn, has no business helping to instruct us.

For the misallocation of resources stems from an adamant refusal not only to identify that the problem is not "terror" but Jihad, and Jihad has many weapons, including those of wealth, demography, Da'wa -- and all of those weapons must, in turn, be dealt with by weapons of the same kind. Those who do not speak correctly are not helping in the war of self-defense against the Jihad.

As to that misleading and by now comical phrase, the "war on terror" -- let us turn to Karl Kraus. He was fond of quoting a particular passage by Confucius. Here it is:

Frederick Ungar, in his introduction to Karl Kraus' book, "The Last Days of Mankind," writes that Kraus often quoted Confucius:

"If concepts are not right, words are not true; if words are not true, works are not achieved; if works are not achieved, morality and the arts do not thrive; if morality and the arts to do thirve, justice miscarries; if justice miscarries, the nation does not know where to put its feet and hands. Therefore, disorder in words must not be tolerated."

If it is only a "war on terror" then one implicies no opposition to the Islamization of Europe. That phrase "war on terror" encourages a continued confusion, that helps to hobble a real war of self-defense against the Jihad, and to further acquiesce in the misallocation of men, materiel, money, morale, and attention that the current phase of our presence in Iraq (not the first phase, but this phase), has become, when there are so many more important and more useful things to do with those men, that materiel, that money, that morale, that limited attention by our rulers and masters.

Lowry pooh-poohs and belittles. But it is he who is blissful in his ignorance of Islam, and therefore in the many instruments of Jihad, and in the nedd to use words rightly.

As Bemelmans ended "Madeleine" -- "That's all there is. There isn't any more."

Jtf, et al. For those who insist on believing that the allies of the Islamoids are on the left. I really have to plug, once again, Paul Sperry's new book Infiltration: How Muslimb Spies and Subversives have inflitrated Washington. This may chagrin the erstewhile patriotic Christian Republican, but the real harm is being done from within the present administration.

Bush actually does believe, it seems, that Islam is a religion of peace and that the likes of Osama are aberrations. I can accept such an attitude in an ignorant cretin who lacks curiousity, but not in Rove, Norquist or Robert Muhammad Mueller and Norm Mineta.

It's all about Muslim votes and Saudi money.

Here's a link to Sperry's website Sperry Files

I'm almost finished the book, and just started the afterword. Sperry lays down 10 reasons why the Islamist supporters and facilitators (such as those in the administration) are the perfect enemy.

l. Patience (as Ayman Zawahiri said "We are a patient nation in performing the work, even if it last a long time". The 1998 US Embassy bombing took five years of planning, 9-11 took longer, and America, especially the administration and sadly JW types are back in snooze mode because they haven't hit since 9-11.

2. The language barrier, we have to rely on Arabs and Iranians for translation, ludicrous.

When Arab leaders (secular and religious) speak in English they sing one song, when the speak in Arabic they switch to offense mode.

3. All in the family. They can't be penetrated because they are a mafia, in fact more than the mafia (by the way the word mafia comes from an Arabic word, as does the "protection" racket, seems the citizens of Siciliy learned quite a bit from their Arab Conquerors.

4. Different Calendar... very important, a minor example was the Muslim prophecy posted yesterday that the US would be hit by a TSunami in 2007, which actually is roughly 2629.

5. Alias. Arabs have a very different naming system. A person can be Ali son of Marwan or Ali father of Abdullah.

6. Freedom of religon. Islam alas is considered to be a religion and only a religion, apparently very few in the west have come to terms with the fact that it is an ideology (well all religions are ideologies anyway) but Islam, unlike Judaism and Christianity, is a complete ideology, religious and political, and it is the political nature of that ideology that sets it aside and makes it a fair target, as well as removing it from the protection of religous freedom.

7. Muslims are not easily bribed.

8. Terrorism is tax exempt (a problem we in the US created by granting tax exemption to religions.)

9.Saudi Protection Thank George W. Bush and Baker Botts, Cheney, Exxon, Texaco, Mobil and their commercial ties to the House of Saud and OPEC, (and thanks to the other group of craven politicos in both political parties) who welcome the influx of OPEC and Saudi Money into their campaign funds.

10. The Racism and Bigotry Defense. (Can be dispensed with offhand because Islam is not a race, however the racism card is hard to get rid of because Jews have been playing that card against antisemites and Jews aren't a race either, it is the most disgusting, overused and misused card played - and not I am not a racist, but I am a culturist.

He also lists 10 ways to defeat them

1. Not in my backyard
2. Enforcing loyalty oaths
3. Profile Muslim travelers
4. Audit Muslim charities and mosques
5. Break off official ties with CAIR Attn: President Bush and Karl Rove
6. Expose the Saudi Embassy
7 Deny Security Clearance to Muslim Activists
8. Offer scholarships in Arabic
9. Fight Muslim activism in public schools
10 Step up counterterrorims training at Quantico.

Hello my hate filled brothers and sisters,

I friend of mine directed me to this site. I think I should introduce myself first, I am a young Muslim in the UK, I was born here and I am currently studying at a London University. You can call me Mohammad Yusuf. I have read this article and a few others on this website and to be honest I am not surprised with the level of hate. I am a Muslim and I am extremely proud of my religion, I can proudly say I am a Muslim. The people on this website tend to be people who hate Islam for no reason, they have absolutely no reason to hate Islam however you can make stupid excuses for yourself, to be quite frank with you, you can hate Islam all you want, I couldn't really give a damn. You have got to understand we Muslims take great pride in our religion, in many western countries such as the US many people attack Jesus (peace be upon him) now I really can't understand why you people use so much energy to try and slander the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) when you can't defend Jesus (peace be upon him) in your own country. You have to understand this, God has stated that the Quran is his book, its as simple as that, end of story no one can hurt it, no one has for 1400 plus years, and no one ever will. No one can hurt the honour of the Prophets, this is why words such as yours can't hurt Muslims, we have faith in God and this is enough for us.
I recently read a post about some guy welcoming debates from Muslims, I have sent a message to him however I did not receive a reply. I have added my email address to this post, please feel free to email me with your views, I'm sure out of the few people who visit this site some can debate and won't be scared about emailing me. Me friends the door is open.
You know Europe has closed the door on Christianity, it is a shame as I think all religion is good as it leads to a healthy society. Did you know that the BBC recently stated that more Muslims go to Mosque than Christians go to Church in the whole of the UK, there are roughly 2 million Muslims in the UK and 60 Million plus so called Christians in the UK. Do the math, Many claim that Christianity is the largest religion in the world, I openly challenge this claim. An average Muslim in the world is equal to a priest in Christianity. A Muslims faith is as strong as a mountain and you know that. You always hear about Christians pending millions to spread their religion, however we Muslims don’t have to do this, God guides who he wills and this is enough for us. Your attacks on Islam are weak and only make youngsters like myself stronger in belief, this encourages us to spread the message of love and peace.
You can carry on living in your own ignorance, you can claim that Arabs are a threat to the US, you need to open your eyes. Arabs couldn’t hurt a country like Poland. Who are Americas enemies, North Korea, China, Israel, India, Russia, the EU? You need to open your eyes.
Many people here attack other cultures, well at least they have cultures. America has nothing and you know it, your country is based on McDonalds, Burger King and pornography.
We have a multi-cultural society in England, we love each other and we learn from each other. Love is the way forward. Me and my friends are worried about how America is trying to impose its values on other countries in the Mid-east. Remember that the large protests in the UK and Europe attended by millions were organised by Christians and not Muslims.

I look forward to hearing from you guys.

I am currently off University as I have got my Easter holidays, if you are a nut and want to send me hate mail go ahead, I’ve got plenty of free time. I am looking for smart people on here that can debate with me. If you want to debate, make sure you know what you are talking about as well. I don’t want people attacking Islam because of what a few fanatics (Wahabis/Salafis) do, if you want to know about Islam, read what is written in the Quran. See the actions of true Muslims and judge Islam by that.

Bye for now.

Mohammad Yusuf

(I have posted the message I sent to another user below, If you want to reply please feel free to do so)

Hi,
A friend of mines gave me your email address, he told me that you are willing to debate with Muslims. Well I would like to have a debate with you. I am a Muslim living in the UK, I was born here and I am currently studying at University. I don't want to give you my full name but you can call me Mohammad Yusuf.
Well my friend showed me a website in which you posted a comment, it was a website about Jihad.
I have read your post, you mentioned some points and this is what I wish to discuss with you.

When you were addressing a gentleman called Gaiour you said you couldn’t figure out why he hated ‘Israel/Zionism’ so much. This is the first thing that I wanted to discuss with you. Israel and Zionism are 2 things that are completely different. There are many Jews against the state of Israel, I have met a few as well. There are many sites on the net such as (http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/), (http://www.nkusa.org/), (http://www.jewsnotzionists.org/) to name a few.
I would like it if you take a look at these websites. They will give you a great insight my friend.

I have posted some quotes from some Rabbis below.

Rabbi S. R. Hirsch "[The Torah] forbids us to strive for the reunion or possession of the land by any but spiritual means"

Rabbi S.D. Schneerson "Not via our desire did we leave the land of Israel, and not via our power will we come back to the land of Israel."

Rabbi C. Soloveichik "[Zionists] want a state in order to make Jews into heretics."

Zionism has nothing to do with religion it is a political movement, that’s it. It is a political movement that aims to move Jews to Palestine. Religious Jews have stated that the existence of Israel is not legitimate according to their teachings, Moses peace be upon him stated that the Children of Israel would never have a homeland. Reading what these high profile rabbis have stated it really makes you think about what you see in the news. The Israelis have never been in peace, ever since they moved to Palestine. Not much of a promised land!, the wars we are seeing now in the Mid-East are being orchestrated by influential Zionists within the Bush administration in order to make Israel more secure.
In the Quran God states that enemies of Islam may make plans against us but God also plans, and that God is the best of planners.

You have got to understand that Israel is a Godless state that commits heinous crimes against the weak Palestinians. You have got to understand that this is what makes the Palestinians resort to suicide bombings, they have nothing else to hit the enemy with Juts look at the list of causalities on each side, who is doing the terrorising. There was a recent horrific case shown in the UK news of an Israeli soldier who shot a young girl 13 times in the head!!!, she was walking in a dangerous area was shot once from a distance but this soldier wanted to make sure she was dead. I am not surprised that the state has such a bad image in the UK and world wide, to begin with they have a war criminal as a leader, now don’t tell me Israel is a heavenly state. Israel is a military monster, it has been receiving 3 billion dollars annually for many years. If it was a heavenly state it wouldn’t need any help from any one. I guarantee you this, if all aid was cut off and no help was given to Israel, it would not last even 5 years, that I can guarantee.

There are many other things I would like to discuss with you, however I wish to keep this message short.

I am looking forward to your reply, I want this debate to be civilised, I don't want any swearing we can speak to each other like civilised human beings.

Hope to hear from you soon.

Bye.

Oh yeh, my email address is :ia786@hotmail.co.uk

Of note in the posting above:

"You have to understand this, God has stated that the Quran is his book, its as simple as that, end of story no one can hurt it, no one has for 1400 plus years, and no one ever will."

"An average Muslim in the world is equal to a priest in Christianity. A Muslims faith is as strong as a mountain and you know that. You always hear about Christians pending millions to spread their religion, however we Muslims don’t have to do this, God guides who he wills and this is enough for us."

Of note in the posting above:

"You have to understand this, God has stated that the Quran is his book, its as simple as that, end of story no one can hurt it, no one has for 1400 plus years, and no one ever will."

"An average Muslim in the world is equal to a priest in Christianity. A Muslims faith is as strong as a mountain and you know that. You always hear about Christians pending millions to spread their religion, however we Muslims don’t have to do this, God guides who he wills and this is enough for us."

Sounds like National Review is part of the problem and not a part of the solution. National Review hasn't updated their 9/10 thinking to 9/12 thinking yet.

What seems to me absolutely missing from the NR response is any mention of the following question, much less any explicit answer to it:

Was the ad, and is the book, "anti-Muslim hate literature"?

This is a very important question, no matter who (NR or not) wrote the ad, and no matter who (NR or not) selected the book to be promoted by the NR Book Service.

Pilgrim

Asalamu aleykum Muhammad:

I am a Muslim as well, albeit "secular" in my thinking. If you want a challenge, I shall offer you one.

I want you to attempt to comprehensively refute the assertions of Hugh Fitzgerald and Robert Spencer if you believe them to be wrong, using of course the Qur'an, Hadith and Sirah. Are these "attacks" that you refer to baseless? Read Mr Fitzgeralds comment above (I believe it is the ninth comment) and address all sixteen points. Are you ready to undertake this?

As a Muslim, I challenge you to do this.

wa salam

Thomas Hamza Mohammed Haidon

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Article 19

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

I am disappointed, I have made a few points and no one wants to discuss them. Is every one here a brain washed zombie, you listen to what you want to hear but ignore everything else. I have given my email address : ia786@hotmail.co.uk
I am waiting, someone challenge me, someone challenge me.

Thomas Hamza Mohammed Haidon, you have challenged me on a different issue to the one I raised. I would challenge you to refute what I posted earlier. However I will step up to your challenge and I will with the help of God shatter your arguments, I will post this later on as it is 4.32 am and I will be going to sleep in a while. Now I have responded yo your request. Can you post your email address, I will write to you directly, I will also post it here.

Why is it everyone is scared to answer me. Read my post. No one here has said anything, not one word.

My email address is: ia786@hotmail.co.uk

If you are scared to debate on here we can do it in private. If this guy called Robert Spencer is reading this I challenge you, I challenge everyone here.

ia786@hotmail.co.uk

You can reach me via email at:

t.haidon@justice.com.

Before you contact me however, I implore you to read the materials further on this site, and some of the materials posted on this site newzealand.freemuslims.org. Also have a look at the materials posted at www.secularislam.org and www.faithfreedom.org.

Mohammad Yusuf-
I would be interested in your comments on the following article. Would you consider the student's actions to be immoral? Did they deserve the punishment they received? If yes, why? If no, why not? Treehugger

THE students had begun to lay out their picnic in the spring sunshine when the men attacked.
“There were dozens of them, armed with guns, and they poured into the park,” Ali al-Azawi, 21, the engineering student who had organised the gathering in Basra, said.

“They started shouting at us that we were immoral, that we were meeting boys and girls together and playing music and that this was against Islam.

“They began shooting in the air and people screamed. Then, with one order, they began beating us with their sticks and rifle butts.” Two students were said to have been killed.

Standing over them as the blows rained down was the man who gave the order, dressed in dark clerical garb and wearing a black turban. Ali recognised him immediately as a follower of Hojatoleslam Moqtada al-Sadr, the radical Shia cleric. Ali realised then that the armed men were members of Hojatoleslam al-Sadr’s Mehdi Army, a private militia that fought American forces last year and is now enforcing its own firebrand version of Islam.

The picnic had run foul of the Islamist powers that increasingly hold sway in the fly-blown southern city, where religious militias rule the streets, forcing women to don the veil and closing down shops that sell alcohol or music....

That victory has brought to a head the issue of whether Iraq’s new constitution will adopt Islamic law — or Sharia — as most religious Shia leaders desire.

In Basra, however, Islamic militias already are beginning to apply their own version of that law, without authority from above or any challenge from the police.

Students say that there was nothing spontaneous about the attack. Police were guarding the picnic in the park, as is customary at any large public gathering, but allowed the armed men in without any resistance.

One brought a video camera to record the sinful spectacle of the picnic, footage of which was later released to the public as a warning to others.

It showed images of one girl struggling as a gunman ripped her blouse off, leaving her half-naked. “We will send these pictures to your parents so they can see how you were dancing naked with men,” a gunman told her. Two students who went to her aid were shot — one in the leg, the other twice in the stomach. The latter was said to have died of his injuries. Fellow students say that the girl later committed suicide. Another girl who was severely beaten around the head lost her sight.

Far from disavowing the attack, senior al-Sadr loyalists said that they had a duty to stop the students’ “dancing, sexy dress and corruption”.

“We beat them because we are authorised by Allah to do so and that is our duty,” Sheik Ahmed al-Basri said after the attack. “It is we who should deal with such disobedience and not the police.”

After escaping with two students, Ali reached a police station and asked for help. “What do you expect me to do about it?” a uniformed officer asked.

I have quickly re-read the post that you (Thomas Hamza Mohammed Haidon) were referring to. I will be posting a more thorough response later.
I just want to quickly say I feel sorry for you guys, I don't know how you people sleep at night. You have so much hate in your heart, you assume that every act by a Muslim is done in order to destroy the 'West'. Come on, I actually find this rather amusing.
You think too much of young Muslims like me, I am just an ordinary guy who happens to be Muslim and living in the UK. I am at University now, I want to raise a family in the UK. I like the UK, I am a British Muslim and I am proud of it. The people in the UK are really kind and I owe this country a lot I acknowledge that. This country has educated and fed me, God Bless the UK and its citizens.

I'm going to get some rest now. Hopefully by the time I check on this site later on you will have discussed a few issues from my earlier post.

Good night.

My email address again: ia786@hotmail.co.uk

To ia786:

Your post sounds hateful, arrogant...wait a minute...ISLAM is hateful, arrogant...makes perfect sense.

Islam does not criticize itself, let alone allow anyone else to criticize it.

"Adherents of militant Islam account for some 15-20 percent of the Muslim world..."

www.meforum.org/article/168

'Treehugger' nice to meet you,
You have posted something that means nothing. I have made a claim about Israel having no right to exist according to Jewish law, and no one can answer me, instead you are throwing pathetic articles at me. A Muslim does something extreme, blame Islam, blame me. Yes that makes sense. In America there is a sad case of a brain damaged woman being starved to death in front of the whole world. How many Christians are there in the US, what have they done, they have abandoned her. I could use this and attack your religion but I won't because I don’t need to lower myself to such a disgraceful level. I will never attack a religion. We are all God‘s creation, simple as that. The article states this was the work of a 'radical Shia cleric', what has this got to do with Islam, nothing. You cannot attack my way of life and a billion other peoples because of the actions of one fanatic.

Good Night

I will be back

Yes,
I knew there would be one, 'Report' you claim that Islam is 'hateful, arrogant' okay you beleive what you want. Live in your own ignorance if it keeps you happy.
I will never lower myself to such a level, never will you hear such disgraceful words from my mouth.

'"Adherents of militant Islam account for some 15-20 percent of the Muslim world..."'

Okay, you believe what you want.

I will be back my friends.

Good Night ^_^

"America has nothing and you know it, your country is based on McDonalds, Burger King and pornography."
Oh, that hurt, ia786. Should I claim your heritage is based on camel-jockeying? Wouldn't that be "intellectual"?

Email me, challenge me: ia786@hotmail.co.uk

Come on Robert Spencer, is that all you have. I'm waiting

Muhammad Yusuf ia786- (R2D2/C3PO/THX1138 ?)

Only a world-historical schmuck begins their salutation to an electronic epistle with an insult to its intended recipients, and then pretends to expect a decent and intelligent response.

Likewise, the Qur'an is so larded with apoplectic vilifications and overflowing rage against those who would not kowtow to its self-declared 'holy'
dogmas, and its 'prophet' is continually threatening death in this life, and eternal doom in the next (screaming in pain amidst a sea of molten lead and raining brimstone), that it would lead a normal, basically-compassionate human being to judge the author of such an irrational and violent screed to be little more than a vengeful, frustrated and bilious monster.

(Royally pissed, in the Brit vernacular.)

The kind of adult guy who would go to bed with a 9 year old girl.

Believing in a 'faith' as noxious and contemptuous of half of the human species (women, in case you didn't notice those demeaning and devaluing suras), and so full of disdain for anyone but those who lick its dictatorial boots, may please your despot-wannabe soul, but spare us the meaningless links and pointless harrangues.

The free human mind will judge the value of all thoughts.

The Qur'an is a thought. From a human mind.

I place it one the scales of reason and human feelings and find it terrifyingly wanting.

It produces people who can repeat its catalog of smug hatreds, but refuse to think for themselves.

The brain is not a dead recording device for regurgitating dust from the 7th century, a mere biological tape recorder, it is a living creative force sharing in the shaping of the unfolding and expanding Cosmos.

No God would have any respect for a creature that abandoned the use of the infinite gift of consciousness and forced it, djinni-like, into a bottle of dogma.

There to stagnate and run in circles like a dog chasing its theological tail. Kafir, kafir, kafir!

Break the bottle. Free your spirit. Love the Universe like a bride or like a groom.

Wake to compassion.

Don't just believe.

Conceive.

Dear Mohammed Yusuf,

Hello my hate filled brother. I went to a university in the UK too - maybe even the same one. No one here is afraid to debate you. They know the rule, however: don't feed the troll. =)

I don't think you really know the difference between hate and anger, Yusuf. One comes from within. Another from the actions of others. Hence:

"The people on this website tend to be people who hate Islam for no reason, they have absolutely no reason to hate Islam"

Are you, perhaps, sight-disabled? It would be impossible to say that the people on this site "hate islam for no reason". They have ample reason to hate islam - or perhaps you don't really read the posted news? I think you ought to - and yet they restrain themselves merely to anger (unlike reactions I have gotten from muslims on other sites I've gone to). But, if you'd rather just make sad assumptions in order to render your faith unassailable, well, I can see why that might be your choice. After all, neither history nor dialectic is on your side.

"You have got to understand we Muslims take great pride in our religion, in many western countries such as the US many people attack Jesus now I really can't understand why you people use so much energy to try and slander the Prophet Mohammad when you can't defend Jesus in your own country."

Your great pride in your religion (to the extent that you think that the average muslim is 'worth' more than the average Christian - or secularist) is fine, if that is all you have. Go. Be proud. But stop accusing Christians and Jews of misunderstanding their religion, or of perverting the 'Abrahamic faith' (especially for the former, as Mohammed's very base understanding of Christianity was derived from specific semi-heretical Christian sects), or of 'polytheism'. Don't persecute women, admit to the faults in your religious practice - as other religions have done - and accept that you are not superior to them. And why should secularists such as myself object to criticism of either Mohammed or Jesus? Why should we be 'obligated' to defend Jesus first, for some reason, before we can investigate your culture? Are you mad, or merely thick?

"God has stated that the Quran is his book"

Not really. Mohammed stated that the Quran was Allah's book. We have yet to hear from Allah on the matter, and as there was no independent observation of any of this 'Allah's' power, there seems to be no evidence for his existence. You have to understand that faith is all very well, but there must be some kind of evidence for something before a truly critical and thoughtful mind can accept it.

I was interested to note how your seemingly ecumenical position degenerated into a superiority diatribe for islam. Islam doesn't spend millions to try to spread its message? Really? Those Saudi-run mosques in the US must exist on dreams and star-dust, then.

Ultimately, Yusuf, these are not attacks on islam - only on the version of it that refuses all responsibility for its history and engages in the persectution of minorities and women. It is, of course, up to you to decide which side you care to be on. Since you're too busy complaining to JW than getting out and changing your religion, I think it can be assumed that the side you've chosen is clear.

Lastly, who said that Arabs are a threat to anyone? Arabs? Where's that post? I thought we were talking about islam here, or the radical elements thereof. And you must specify which elements of 'American culture' (which is really Western culture overall) are being 'imposed' on the Middle East, and which of those you disagree with. The emancipation of women? The voice of the people in government? The protection of the populace from radical interpretations of islam? Please specify.

And I would hesitate, most strongly if I were you, to infer that the anger of the people on this site comes sheerly from the actions of Wahhabis. It is, in fact, from the reading of the Quran that one derives the most horror of islam; so it has remained for time immemorial. Who is attributing these actions to all muslims? I would thus suggest that if the actions and words of individuals concern you so little, that you would concern yourself with helping to bring love and kindness to your own faith - for did not this Jesus (pbuh) say "Remove the plank in your own eye, then you will be able to see clearly to remove the speck in your neighbour's eye"?

I look forward from hearing from you. Perhaps you might be able to select a specific topic for your argument this time. I will require no assistance for the act of debating you, so please bring your god too.

Geoff

PS: What does Israel having or not having a "religious right to exist" have to do in any way with this thread? Do you really not read the articles? And why should Israel be based only on religious law? Most democratic, free nations in the world don't require a religious reason for their existence.

Geoff

PPS:

"Come on Robert Spencer, is that all you have. I'm waiting"

He's sleeping at this time of night, you idiot.

Geoff

"I want to raise a family in the UK. I like the UK, I am a British Muslim and I am proud of it."

One wonders if the degree of self-awareness of this particular poster extends to analyzing what it is, in his eyes, that makes him "like the UK" (how big of him, this "British Muslim" who allows himself to admit that he does "like the UK" as if, as far as the indigenous Infidels are concerned, that should be the end of the matter, and of their concern). Is it the absence of emphasis on the collective, the umma, and the respect for individual liberties? Is it the way that people work, rather than rely on a disguised jizya, or inshallah-fatalism? Is it the way in which women have absolute legal equality with men, and polygamy is not permitted? Is it the freedom of conscience, that comes after centuries of slow development in the Western world, and that permits everyone to belief in any religion or no religion, and certainly to exercise freely the right of apostasy? Is it the freedom to make fun of everything, including of course all religions and all founders of religions? Is it the freedom to engage in free and skeptical inquiry in all areas of life, without which science cannot develop? Is it the sculptures in the public parks, the portraits in the National Portrait Gallery, or the paintings in the National Gallery of gods, noblemen, genre paintings of family life, that he finds so splendidly unlike what is to be found in any Muslim country? Is it the ability to criticize rulers freely, as opposed to those societies where the ruler is, as long as he is a Muslim, to be unquestionably obeyed? Is it that he admires and feels relaxed about the pluralism of British society, and enjoys meeting, and engaging greetings with, every sort -- Christian and Jew, Buddhist and HIndu and Sikh, and with agnostics and atheists as well, who do not seem quite as dead-set on whispering the temptations of Shaytan in his ear? Is it what he can see on television, read in the newspaper? Is it that in the universities many people seem to think that some subjects are worth studyhing -- ancient Mayan civilization, or the Dinka and Nuer, or runic neumes, just out of intellectual curiosity, and not in order to act as handmaids of the government or of plans of conquest? Is it that the wealth of allusion in conversation is not limited, as it is in Muslim societies, to what is in Qur'an, Hadith, and Sira? Is it not, finally, that everything admirable in Western countries, and which this and other Muslims purport to like, are entirelly the product of a civilization that could never have been produced in Islam, by Muslims, and that in all of its fundamental understandings and arrangements, political and economic and intellecutal and social, is flatly contradicted by the principles of the shari'a, and that this contradiction, this opposition, this hostility, is not something to be waved away, or ignored, but should be taken most seriously by Infidels who, funnily enough, are attached to their own civilization, for all of its sillinesses and stupidities, and would not willingly have it modified in the slightest to accomodate the demands, completely inimical to that civilization and to its wellbeing, of Islam.

Finally, if the Muslim poster in questin can, for a minute, imagine himself to be, not a Muslim, but a non-Muslim, yet one who knows that that poster knows many, if not almost all, Muslims believe, and what their real attitudes, or the attitudes inculcated by Qur'an and Sunnah are toward non-Muslims, what would he make of, what worries would he have, about all the Muslims who have now settled in the Bilad al-Kufr? Would he worry at all, or would he think that everything is just fine, hunky-dory, and it is just one more splendid element in the glorious mix of peoples and ideologies of Islam? And if his answer is that there is absolutely nothing to worry about, and Muslims really have lost all desire to spread Islam and to transform those Infidel lands they have been allowed to settle within, into places where Islam dominates, and Muslims essentialy rule -- if he has abandoned all such desire, then one would like to ask: Why?

And finally, what elements in the political, economic, intellectual, and social arrangements and understandings in the Western or Infidel world does this particular "British Muslim" wish were to be adopted in, and by, Muslim countries?

Hi Big Sleep,
'schmuck' I don't know what that means and frankly I don't want to know. I have read your post and one thing I noticed is that you refer to God in Islam as a different God. Lets get this straight there is only one God, one God for Jews, Christians and Muslims. Allah is the Arabic word for God. Jews and Christians in the Mid-East who speak Arabic also call God Allah. You need to wake up.

'demeaning and devaluing surahs' The Quran gave rights to women that the West only started to give in the 1900s. So you believe the west’s treatment of women is not demeaning. Women are exploited so much but are told they are free. Even in the UK many white women have converted to Islam and observe hijab, why?. These women are educated, Why do you think they converted. There have been thousands of cases and also many documentaries about this. Now don't look up cases of the wahabis/salafis treatment of women. That has nothing to do with Islam.

The rest of your post is a load of hogwash, it doesn't mean anything. Its because of people like you that Christianity is in such a weak position. You assume that the time we are living in now is the peak of mankind and that we should not follow any heavenly books. Would you say that if Jesus (peace be upon him) was here on earth. The Gospel, Torah and Quran promise hell to anyone who lives a bad life. Now recently I was told that new Christian scholars believe that hell is a state of mind?? What! We can't make excuses for ourselves. You say things are changing and that we should adapt, okay but a law from God is set in stone. If adultery, fornication and homosexuality were wrong 2000 years ago during the time of Jesus (peace be upon him) they are wrong now and will still be wrong when he returns (May God quicken his return)

Muhammad Yusuf,

You claim to want an open non-hateful discussion
with people here, yet you have already stereotyped
America as a "country based on McDonalds, Burger
King and pornography" . You have already
contradicted your supposed "open" dialog request.
I'm not sure what it is you want to hear from
people here when the running theme through your
posts is about the perfection and superiority of
Islam ("An average Muslim in the world is equal to
a priest in Christianity"). You claim to be a
university student. I think you would get an "F"
grade for logic, consistency and truthfulness in
your verbose and unbalanced ramblings, if it were
to be submitted as a class report.

You post from the U.K, enjoying the benefits of a
liberal Western society, yet a Muslim majority
country like Saudi Arabia will not extend that
same privilege to non Muslims like Hindus, Sikhs
etc to practice their own religion there,
as you do in a Christian majority country. But
you crow about how your precious religion is
perfect in every way.

I don't think you know what the word "civilised"
means, when you haven't shown the faintest trace
of it in your posts. You are so smug in your
self righteousness that it is pointless to
use any logic to debate you. Obviously as you said
you have time on your hands and just want to troll here.

Now go away... your perhaps have a cell meeting to
attend.

No allah is NOT the G-D of Israel and the Christians! The G-D of the Bible is a forgiving and loving G-D, not the hateful entity of the qur'an. You are following a prophet that had convulsions and frothed at the mouth and "screamed like a camel" when he received his messages. He told Kadija that he was possessed, but Kadija told him it was god. Imagine that his revelations (supposedly) were confirmed by a woman (a half brain) what irony.

Carolyn,
I found that post really funny. What do you know. Have you been to the Mid-east, have you been to Israel. Can you speak Hebrew and Arabic. Have you read the Torah, Gospel and Quran. Think before you post, you are not making any point you are just ranting on and I will not go to such a low level. I as a Muslim love Moses (peace be upon him), Jesus (peace be upon him) and Mohammad (peace be upon him). You need to wake up.
I believe in the return of the Messiah as do all Muslims, Jesus is mentioned many times in the Quran as well as his blessed mother Mary (God bless them both). Jesus (God bless him) stated in the Gospel that there will be a Prophet after me and his name would be Ahmed, this is one of the names of the prophet Mohammad.
You can hate and hate but it doesn’t change anything.
So what you are saying is that whenever God says that there will be punishment for evil doers do you ignore this, what will happen to evil doers. God has set laws and God is all powerful. God is the most merciful God can forgive who he wants. We are all God's creation, we need to learn to love each other.
Praise the Lord (AlhamduIllah)

Qur’an 9:29 “Fight those who do not believe in Allah or the Last Day, who do not forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, or acknowledge the Religion of Truth (Islam), (even if they are) People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizyah tribute tax in submission, feeling themselves subdued and brought low.” [Another translation says:] “pay the tax in acknowledgment of our superiority and their state of subjection.”

Qur’an 5:17 “Verily they are disbelievers and infidels who say, ‘The Messiah, son of Mary, is God.’”
Qur’an 5:51 “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends. They are but friends and protectors to each other.”
Qur’an 5:72 “They are surely infidels who blaspheme and say: ‘God is Christ, the Messiah, the son of Mary.’ But the Messiah only said: ‘O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord.’”

23At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect–if that were possible. 25See, I have told you ahead of time.

26“So if anyone tells you, ‘There he is, out in the desert,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here he is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it. 27For as lightning that comes from the east is visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. 28Wherever there is a carcass, there the vultures will gather.

So Carolyn you think Wahabi/Salafi/Taliban Islam is the true Islam. These fanatics are the people that read the Quran and take its meaning literally. You need to get your facts straight.
We follow the Scholars of true Sunni Islam, you think that after reading a few articles you know more about Islam and they way I live my life.
Please, grow up.

Going to bed now, goodnight.

Yusuf, Mohammad was not a prophet. I really don't see what there is to debate about that. Regards, ROPMA.

There are verse in holy books that are violent in nature, but are we supposed to take them literally.

Give me a break, read what Sunni Scholars say. I could attack your religion but I won't I will list quotes you don't have to explain them to me, just acknowledge they exist.

"This day the LORD will deliver you into my hand, and I will strike you down, and cut off your head ... that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel." 1 Samuel 17:46

"He ordered the guards and officers to slaughter them all, and to let not a single one escape." (2 Kings Chapter 10 verse 25) "God said to Jehu, 'you have done well in carrying out what is right and have completed what I wanted done to the house of Ahab. Therefore your sons will be kings over Israel to the fourth generation." (2 Kings Chapter 10 verse 30)

"Joshua destroyed everyone. They did not leave anyone alive." (Joshua 11:14) "They were put to the sword, destroying them all." (Joshua 11:12)

They were "cut down until they had not a single survivor." (Joshua 11:8) "Their cities were destroyed," (Joshua 11:12) and the people living there were "put to the sword, destroying them all". The Israelites then "plundered the cities," (Joshua 11:14) and "every living soul they put to the sword until they had destroyed everyone. They did not leave anyone alive." (Joshua 11:14)

"Kill every woman." Numbers 31:7

"Kill every little boy." Numbers 31:7

"Kill all the infants and suckling babies." 1 Samuel 15:3

"Devour the nations the lord your god delivers over to you. Show them no pity." Deut. 7:16
"You must completely destroy them; you shall make no peace treaties with them, and show no mercy to them." Deut 2:1

And David took the head of the Philistine and brought it to Jerusalem; but he put his armour in his tent. And as David returned from the slaughter of the Philistine, Abner took him, and brought him before Saul with the head of the Philistine in his hand." 1 Samuel 17:54

Mo Yusuf ia786 R.U.R. 1040-EZ-

Kafir, kafir, kafir!

(The dog barks, but the Caravan moves on...)

My God! You have ALL of the answers to EVERYTHING!

So wise, a veritable mouth-trumpet for infallible, ineffable, invincible, interminable Allah (peanutbutter upon him).

What need is there for such perfection to even speak to a 'fallen' heap of degenerates as we?

Meanwhile-

Grow a second cerebral hemisphere.

Rent "The Life of Brian".

Disturb the Universe.

Eat a peach.

Concluding Unscientific Postscript:

I would think that it was 'najis' and 'haram' for you to use such a forbidden expression as "hogwash".

Shame on you!

test

King Jehu ordered the people to behead Ahab's sons and to bring him the heads of Ahab's sons "at Jezreel by this time tommorrow...And when the letter came to them, they took the king's sons, and slew them, seventy persons, and put their heads in baskets, and sent them to him at Jezreel. When the messenger came and told him, "They have brought the heads of the king's sons," he said, "Lay them in two heaps at the entrance of the gate until the morning.". (2 Kings Chapter 10 verse 6) "God has now fulfilled the prophecy of the prophet Elijah. So Jehu put to death all who were left of the house of Ahab in Jezreel, as well as all of his close friends and priests, until he had left not one single survivor." (2 Kings Chapter 10 verse 10) "He put to death all of Ahab's house, who were left there and so blotted it out, in fulfillment of the word which YAHWEH had spoken to Elijah." (2 Kings Chapter 10 verse 7) "He ordered the guards and officers to slaughter them all, and to let not a single one escape." (2 Kings Chapter 10 verse 25) "God said to Jehu, 'you have done well in carrying out what is right and have completed what I wanted done to the house of Ahab. Therefore your sons will be kings over Israel to the fourth generation." (2 Kings Chapter 10 verse 30)

You are a wise man; you will know what you ought to do to him, and you shall bring his head down with blood to the grave." 1 Kings 2:9

Then the woman went to all the people in her wisdom. And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri." 2 Samuel 20:21

"She put her hand to the tent peg and her right hand to the workmen's mallet; she struck Sisera a blow, she crushed his head, she shattered and pierced his temple." Judges 5:26

"And a certain woman threw an upper millstone upon Abimelech's head, and crushed his skull." Judges 9:53

If you are going to take a few verse from the Quran then take a look at the verses above. I have respect for all holy books but you can't just look at a few verses in the Quran criticise it when the Gospel, Quran and Torah are all similar in nature.

Why should we believe anything you say?

http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6b/1.html

And BTW I am quite grown, I'm grown up enough to remember all the terrorist attacks that started in the 60's and continue until now in the name of your god.

Now I really do have to go to bed. Have fun all.

Muhammad Yusuf-

"I have made a claim about Israel having no right to exist according to Jewish law, and no one can answer me, instead you are throwing pathetic articles at me".

Sorry, not interested in debating whether or not Israel has a "right to exist" according to an obscure tenant of Jewish Law. The country of Israel exists, and will continue to exist. I sincerely hope that the Palestinians take this opportunity and get down to building a decent state. I am not optimistic, but would love to be proven wrong.

"A Muslim does something extreme, blame Islam, blame me".

Actually, I didn't blame you. If you reread my questions, I was wondering what your take was on the report. The article seemed appropriate for a university student, since it was about the treatment of fellow students by other Muslims.

"The article states this was the work of a 'radical Shia cleric', what has this got to do with Islam, nothing".

Are you saying the Shi'ites are not Islamic?

"Unfortunately, this is only one example of not the action of one fanatic".

Sadly, this does not appear to be the case. There are many, many examples of Muslim versus Muslim violence and Muslim versus Nonmuslim violence. I believe that the majority of conflicts in the world today involve both Islamic societies and individuals.
Facts and figures are available upon request.

"In America there is a sad case of a brain damaged woman being starved to death in front of the whole world. How many Christians are there in the US, what have they done, they have abandoned her".

I agree that the Terri Schiavo case is appalling. However, Christians are in the majority when it comes to protesting this horrible miscarriage of justice. They have been attempting to get her food and water, but have been unable to get past the police.

"I could use this and attack your religion but I won't because I don’t need to lower myself to such a disgraceful level".

Feel free to question Christianity as much as you like. Open inquiry and honest criticism are allowed and are not disgraceful.

Treehugger

Honest criticism is allowed, the freedom of speech law is used by Godless people to attack people like you and me. Freedom of speech has never ever helped normal people like you and me it is used by people with bad intentions to get away with blasphemy. Christianity is a large religion, if I were to say something bad about Jesus (God bless him) do you think I am right to do that. No I am not. That is called an Insult. Inquiring is legitimate but making criticisms in order to provoke a reaction is obviously wrong, is it not?

Jesus (God bless him) stated in the Gospel that there will be a Prophet after me and his name would be Ahmed, this is one of the names of the prophet Mohammad.

Chapter? Verse? Not the qur'an, the Gospel,as you claim, will be looking tomorrow am.

Bye for now, will be back later

Bye for now, will be back later

Bye for now, will be back later

There is only one problem with all the verses you posted, ia. They are old testament, not new. Everything Jesus said is more important to a Christian than anything conflicting in the Old Testament. Go argue with some Jews if you want to deal in Old Testament.

It sounds like you still have a problem with atheists.

And you are obviously a troll because you haven't answered anything levelled at you so far.

Robert,

Fair enough, except that Lowry has me wrong. I do not in the least "feel very strongly that it is important to discredit Mohammed and Islam as such in order to win the war on terror," and in writing this sentence Lowry betrays a rather severe misunderstanding of the nature of my work and that of others.

Tell me about it. I thought the more I studied Islam the more insight and knowledge of another equally-valid worldview I would find. I was raised a Unitarian. I went to a Baptist pre-school, church, temple, UU church, and more. Wherever my friends worshipped, I was cleared to go.

I'm sure like many people I made it to Koran verse 3.151 before realizing something was drastically wrong with Islam, setting it far apart from the other so-called Abrahamic faiths. After finding "terror" I searched the whole Koran. Terror is Islam's version of fellowship.

Now I want to pummel people with bars of soap in a pillowcase every time I'm accused of being anti-Muslim, a la Full Metal Jacket. Hello?! Read the friggin' books! By now, several years later, I'll bet I know more Islam than many actual Muslims.

"Honest criticism is allowed, the freedom of speech law is used by Godless people to attack people like you and me. Freedom of speech has never ever helped normal people like you and me it is used by people with bad intentions to get away with blasphemy".

I have to disagree with you on the free speech issue. Historically, being able to question and openly discuss issues has led to significant advances in human history. For example, Leonardo Da Vinci's questioning the Catholic Church's teaching that the earth was the center of the universe led to significant advances in our understanding of the universe. Freedom of speech also led religious people to openly question the moral correctness of slavery.

In an imperfect world, there will always be those who say stupid or offensive things. However, if you limit speech, you limit new and potentially good ideas. I am willing to put up with being offended or uncomfortable on occasion in order to keep the ideas flowing.

"Christianity is a large religion, if I were to say something bad about Jesus (God bless him) do you think I am right to do that. No I am not. That is called an Insult. Inquiring is legitimate but making criticisms in order to provoke a reaction is obviously wrong, is it not?"

You have the right to say whatever you want about Jesus, even if it offends me. That is FREEDOM OF SPEECH. Asking questions in a respectful manner is COURTESY. I agree that it is an important and often underutilized virtue.

Treehugger

ia786,

when the Gospel, Quran and Torah are all similar in nature.

Dear Yusuf,

I found your post really funny. What do you know of Christians; have you ever been one? Good thing you can read Hebrew though. LOL.

Interesting comment 2468 - he won't answer me, a secularist. He's a bit scared, I imagine. No worries. Makes things actually too easy for me.

There's nothing wrong with making criticisms, Yusuf. You claim to live in the UK, but you don't seem to understand this very basic point. If the evidence - Quran, tradition, Hadith - indicates something unpleasant about your prophet, well then frankly thinking people are going to object to that. Not really their fault. You'll just have to get used to it, rather than trying to silence them.

Yusuf actually raises one criticism: there are violent passages in the OT. Fine - but, frankly, no one follows them in this day and age. No one murders in their name. Can the same be said of islam? Well, of course not. Sunni, Shi'ite and Wahhabi, the name of the game is oppression. And equally frankly, the Christian version of God really has very little in common with the islamic one, just as the Sunni Allah has (according to you, it seems) little in common with the Shi'ite one. This is not an isolated viewpoint, unfortunately.

Nor, moreover, is the oppression of women under sharia. Sorry, Yusuf, being considered half a person legally (if that) does not constitute rights or respect. I think your university is failing to teach you much of use.

At least you admit you're not in favour of gay rights, though. It's good to admit these things to yourself. Get it out in the open, like.

If you don't take the Quran literally, as you claim: great. No threat from you then, unless you support questionable social practices, which your posts suggest you do. Of course, many scholars disagree with you rather sharply. Go tell imams in Iran how you're muslim but you don't believe in a literal translation, and then give us all a call when (if) you get out of prison.

But ultimately, the most important thing for you to do now is to admit that islam does engage in social and religious oppression of women and minorities, that this bigotry is based in the Quran, and that the Prophet did in fact do some rather horrible things to his neighbours and others; that he is, according to his own history, not the "perfect man". Admit also that women can lead prayer, and that homosexuals should have the same rights as other humans. And lastly, admit also that the theological attacks of islam on Christianity have no logical basis.

That being done, I'd be happy to debate further with you.

Geoff

Carolyn2,

I wonder actually what that would even prove, were it true. It's hardly difficult to simply read a chapter from a preceeding text and simply decide to go by the name of the deity within. I was also amused by how Ahmed is supposed to be another name for Mohammed; if one casts a wide enough net, one is sure to hit the target. 99 names for 'God', anyone? =)

Geoff

ia786 well I am Godless, so what, also I am a Brit, so making points about words in the Bible or whatever have no relevence to me at all.

The problem is simply this, Islam is not only a religion but a system of government and law.

While Muslims try to push their backward laws and system of control on us then we will resist it because in the West we have a system of government that works perfectly well thank you, it prevents the control of the people by despots and murderers and protects the people and allows us to develop wealth without the fear of having some higher authority then take it from us, its not perfect, but no system is. On the other hand the backward culture of Islam has left Middle Eastern countries economic and cultural wastelands.

My main point is this, Islam is putting itself forward in the West as a system of government and law, but as a religion it is protected from criticism, but as it is being put forward as a system then my individual right is to diesect it and understand it, I look at the centre of the religion based on the phopet, the Qu'ran and see hatred and aggression, I have looked at some of the hadith and see the same. My conclusion is that he is anything but perfect, the acts he carried out prove that he is not a perfect man, this system is not a political system appropriate to the West and the protection of individuals.

You fail to understand that it is the freedom to be able to stand up and criticise and say that this is wrong that makes our countries and systems what they are. We can correct wrongs before they go to far.

Then I look at the performance of the West as compared to the Middle East, if it was not for oil there would be no economy to speak of. You are in a university in Britain, well hopefully you are learning something that will add to the development of the planet Earth.

In the Dhimmi website you will come across a story of an imam in Germany saying peace and love to the infidels as his public face, but in the mosque he was preaching hatred and hellfire to the Germans. Why?

Earlier someone posted a question about the attack on a picnic in Basra, why did they do this, why had they the right to do this?

In the UK acts of racism have reduced sharply over the period that I have been alive, you have rights and are protected by the state and its laws, in Middle Eastern or Islamic countries non-Muslims have limited rights if any. I am proud at the high level of my civilisation, but have to say, we are being tolerent to the intolerent who do not accept and respect our system, or at least don't seem to. As far as I am concerned you can worship whoever you want, but stop ramming it down my throat.

All you can tell me is that each Muslim is worth more than a Christian Priest and that the Qu'ran is the book of God, well I disagree with you. Your words are full of arrogance.

I as a non-believer have never stolen, hurt another, been unfaithful to my wife, yet religion, which tells me to hate a non-believer etc. will make me a better person.... hhmmmmm I am missing something here. I live by the golden rule, as put foward on Al Sina's site and always have done, treat others as you expect to be treated yourself.

Go look at this site and have a debate with Al Sina, I bet you lose!

http://www.faithfreedom.org/

ia786 well I am Godless, so what, also I am a Brit, so making points about words in the Bible or whatever have no relevence to me at all.

The problem is simply this, Islam is not only a religion but a system of government and law.

While Muslims try to push their backward laws and system of control on us then we will resist it because in the West we have a system of government that works perfectly well thank you, it prevents the control of the people by despots and murderers and protects the people and allows us to develop wealth without the fear of having some higher authority then take it from us, its not perfect, but no system is. On the other hand the backward culture of Islam has left Middle Eastern countries economic and cultural wastelands.

My main point is this, Islam is putting itself forward in the West as a system of government and law, but as a religion it is protected from criticism, but as it is being put forward as a system then my individual right is to diesect it and understand it, I look at the centre of the religion based on the phopet, the Qu'ran and see hatred and aggression, I have looked at some of the hadith and see the same. My conclusion is that he is anything but perfect, the acts he carried out prove that he is not a perfect man, this system is not a political system appropriate to the West and the protection of individuals.

You fail to understand that it is the freedom to be able to stand up and criticise and say that this is wrong that makes our countries and systems what they are. We can correct wrongs before they go to far.

Then I look at the performance of the West as compared to the Middle East, if it was not for oil there would be no economy to speak of. You are in a university in Britain, well hopefully you are learning something that will add to the development of the planet Earth.

In the Dhimmi website you will come across a story of an imam in Germany saying peace and love to the infidels as his public face, but in the mosque he was preaching hatred and hellfire to the Germans. Why?

Earlier someone posted a question about the attack on a picnic in Basra, why did they do this, why had they the right to do this?

In the UK acts of racism have reduced sharply over the period that I have been alive, you have rights and are protected by the state and its laws, in Middle Eastern or Islamic countries non-Muslims have limited rights if any. I am proud at the high level of my civilisation, but have to say, we are being tolerent to the intolerent who do not accept and respect our system, or at least don't seem to. As far as I am concerned you can worship whoever you want, but stop ramming it down my throat.

All you can tell me is that each Muslim is worth more than a Christian Priest and that the Qu'ran is the book of God, well I disagree with you. Your words are full of arrogance.

I as a non-believer have never stolen, hurt another, been unfaithful to my wife, yet religion, which tells me to hate a non-believer etc. will make me a better person.... hhmmmmm I am missing something here. I live by the golden rule, as put foward on Al Sina's site and always have done, treat others as you expect to be treated yourself.

Go look at this site and have a debate with Al Sina, I bet you lose!

http://www.faithfreedom.org/

ia786 is a young thing, with little knowledge and much enthusiasm.
He has so much to learn, and yet is so sure that he knows everything, not just islam, but Judaism and Christianity as well, that i do not think we can help him much.
He is a lucky puppy indeed to be in the U.K.

Daffersd

I live by the golden rule

I can chart it this way:

Judaism: some old rules superceded by the Ten Commandments. Old rules are followed, but old punishments have been abandoned. Now prayer is recommended. Other faiths treated equally or ignored. No rules of governance or unequal treatment for nonbelievers. ETHICAL-EQUAL BEHAVIOR is paramount.

Christianity: Same as Judaism with the additional teachings of Jesus. Most of what Jesus had to say was nonviolent or philosophical. Throw in the forgiveness for sins, but rules stay pretty much the same.

Islam: government, dhimmi rules for nonbelievers - unequal treatment, jizya - taxation for nonbelievers, shari'a - medieval law, NO COMMANDMENTS, NO ETHICAL RULES, beheading, terror, and submission to be used against any non-Muslim who won't follow the dhimmi/jizya/shari'a rules.

Some day in La-La Land, there might be a kinder, gentler Islam. I'm not holding my breath.

1400 years ia786, no, more like 1350, still, like a bad dream, it seems like forever.

We Christians and Jews and Hindus, whose history, knowledge, culture and religious philosophy goes back 4000 years plus, and we Bahai's, Mormons and Yazidis whose understandings and revelations came after your islamic self annointed 'messenger' 1350 years ago, are always amused by the islamic arrogance that everything and everyone before and after your self annointed 'messenger' was wrong.

And i know the Jains, Confucians, Rastafarians, Sikhs, Shinto, Pagans, Parsis, etc feel the same way.

You really should be worried about those Raelians though, they could really be a threat you know.

Dear Yusuf
Had lunch with Coptic Christian friend today. A lot of her relatives were tortured and killed by Muslims in Egypt, rest of family were forced to flee from their own country...You say that WE are filled with hate yet we allow minorities to practise whatever religion they want in our countries. Since most of the Middle East was once
populated by large numbers of Jews and Christians please tell me what happened to them after 'wonderful Islam' appeared??

Beagle,

Totally agree with you there.

Yusuf,

Islam is an unacceptable political and legal system in the Western world of individual rights, in fact its unacceptable anywhere as it allows the strong and violent to take from the weak and defenceless.

Understood it now, hate has nothing to do with it, cold calm logic has everything to do with it.

I don't hate you and peaceful Muslims, I think you are mis-led and brain-washed, I do however hate the extremists who kill, rape etc. in the name of Allah, who seem to be from what the Qu'ran says real Muslims.

Anyway I hope like me that you will reach a ripe old age, and die in bed having killed no-one, injured no one, stolen nothing, been faithful to ones wife etc and respectful to other people as a person.

Remember for evil to triumph, good people have to do nothing...

The Golden Rule was mentioned earlier.
Jesus said "Always treat others as you would like them to treat you; that is the Law and the prophets"
Matthew 7:12
2 verses later he said
"Beware of false prophets, men who come to you dressed up as sheep while underneath they are savage wolves. You will recognize them by the fruits they bear."
Matthew 7:15/16

The violent Old Testament passages quoted by the boy above are almost the same ones quoted by one of the previous Trolls. With particular emphasis on the early establishment of the Kingdoms. Is there some kind of Islamist website out there with a list of violent OT passages filed under something Like " Browbeating the Dhimmis; Tu-to-que for the use of "
Because they seem to miss the point that these incidents are reports of history. This is what happened, humans may well do bad things etc. The point being made clear throughout that the Lord loves us all, will use us for his work whatever our sins and will forgive all who truly repent. None of those perpetrating violence are held up to us as the perfection we should emulate.
That perfection is Christ, God made man.

Getting back to the Trollish delight in the gory bits of the OT, there was a monologue from my childhood of which I can only remeber the first line about A-hab the A-rab. Is this significant perhaps.

Morning all!

When I saw the number of posts, I knew some Froll had been visiting.

Notice how he avoided answering Any question, and attempted to mis-identify All quotes from the Koran as something 'wahhabist.' As if the Wahhabis were not Also reading it straight from the Koran...

Good work, guys!

Now. I don't know if things will update before I go to work, so here are my dailies. I don't suppose I could get someone to copy the lot into one of today's new threads?

Today’s Extras:

The Leftist Academia’s propaganda machine. It's the perfect Anti-Science: Mention only the facts that back you up, ignore contradictory data, vilify anyone that questions you, stamp out calls for reform, repeat the lies again and again, and eventually you will win.

U Penn’s Terror Apologists:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17538

Academic Rock Star:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17449

A Prof tangles the Truth:
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=17540

Liberal bias in the classroom:
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/ct20050330.shtml

It seems "Mohammad Yusuf" aka ia786 is also an adherent of the Pragmatist philosophy, and is therefore a "denial-ridden believer".

Definition of "Salafi":::

"The word Salaf means predecessors (or ancestors) and refers to the Companions of the Prophet Muhammad, the early Muslims who followed them, and the scholars of the first three generations of Muslims. They are also called - As Salafus Saalih (the Righteous Predecessors)."
http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Salafi

Rich Lowry sounds like he's completely full of it to me. If a mistake was made, NR could have posted some kind of statement correcting it. The fact that that they discontinued selling the books proves that Lowry's statement is a whitewash. I can't beleive how much respect I just lost for NR is such a short period of time.

What's CAIR going to do now, go after Amazon and every other bookseller that sells anything that they don't like?

Come to think of it, islam is Pragmatist in of itself, except for two things, the authority of mohammed and allah.
It's "western" counter-part substitutes "science" as it's god. It should be unnecessary to point out the limitations of science, or the atrocities and false-hoods perpetrated in the name of "science". Aka known as psuedo-science, aka the religion of con-artists and back-stabbers, and the powerful.

Definition of "Salafi":::

"The word Salaf means predecessors (or ancestors) and refers to the Companions of the Prophet Muhammad, the early Muslims who followed them, and the scholars of the first three generations of Muslims. They are also called - As Salafus Saalih (the Righteous Predecessors)."

What you don't realise is that Salafi is the new name adopted by Wahabis. They did this in order to trick Muslims. Do a bit of History reading; The British Empire helped create the sect of Wahabism/Salafism you see in the World now. The British helped spread this belief in the mid-east in order to weaken the Islamic Empire. I will post a website, The British gave the Guy support and this is why this warped version of Islam is alive today. The guy Abdul Wahab formed a partnership with the Saudi family and this was the birth of fundamentalist Islam. These people take the Quran literally. I am a Sunni and listen to interpretations by Scholars, Wahabis believe that you don't need one, they believe you read it and take every thing literally.

http://www.saudistrategies.com/alsaud.html
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/gulf/wahhabi.htm

Mr. Yusuf,
You are being decieved and used to maintain and further the power and privilege of an elite here on earth.
They,and many others(in different incarnations)are exploiting known weaknesses in humans through psychological manipulation and coercion. They seek to make the "lesser" humanity unknowing willing slaves to them. Slavery has various degrees, from soft to hard, soft is easier to get people to accept as normal and proper.

"What you don't realise is that Salafi is the new name adopted by Wahabis. They did this in order to trick Muslims. Do a bit of History reading; The British Empire helped create the sect of Wahabism/Salafism you see in the World now. The British helped spread this belief in the mid-east in order to weaken the Islamic Empire."

Again, a few elements for inspection:

1) The grotesque conspiracy theory -- "Wahhabis" are not themselves real Muslims, but do things "in order to trick Muslims" [now we have separated out "Muslims" from "Wahhabis"] and what is most important, "[t]he British Empire helped create the sect of Wahabism/Salfism you see in the world now."

This is peculiar. Abdul Al-Wahhab was born in the early 18th century in Nejd (or Najd). This movement had no contact with the British, who enterered the Persian Gulf at the very end of the 18th century, but only by ship [never attempting to go inland into Arabia, until a lone intrepid traveller, Shakespear, managed to cross, a century later, the Rub al-Khali], and they were there to suppress the Arab slave trade in black Africans [Arab slavers in East Africa took as their local center two islands -- Zanzibar and Pemba -- and could then ferry African slaves by dhow to such centers as Muscat and the Muslim slave-markets in Jeddah, Cairo, Damascus, Constantinople, and elsewhere]. Yet this conspiracy theorist would have us believe that "the British" were behind the spread of "Wahhabism" -- this is precisely like the conspiracy theory about the Mossad and the C.I.A. actually being behind the 9/11 attacks. In a belief-system that encourages obedience to authority, and to the acceptance, in its main text, of all sorts of incredible phenomena to be taken not metaphorically but literally, naturally the powers of credulity are highly developed, and the powers of intelligent analysis and skepticism left deliberately undeveloped, even suppressed. The results of this one can see in the failure of any contribution, over the past 1000 years at least, of Muslims to the development of science.

Systems of belief do not always stunt the mental growth. But Islam does. Not everyone, necessarily, is affected: to the extent that one is largely unobservant, nonchalant, relaxed and perhaps even a secret apostate, one can combine being an outward Believer with a certain amount of skeptical thought. To the extent, however, that one is a real Believer in Islam, the main text of which is to be taken literally, and which presents a god who is whimsical in his inverventions, rather than merely the initial Craeator who sets the machine running (a machine whose laws can be investigated), to that extent one will have a good deal of difficulty engaging in science, or indeed in making sense of the world. And conspiracy theories will come easily.

Yosuf 786, some reading material from what is probably your favorite website. It appear more people are comming to the truth. Since your belief systeme is so tolerant, you shouldn't mind.

http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-06/23/article04.shtml

http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-06/26/article04.shtml

http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2004-02/21/article08.shtml

http://islamonline.net/English/News/2005-02/03/article09.shtml

http://islamonline.net/English/News/2004-12/31/article03.shtml

There have been many posts overnight and it will take a while for me to reply.

Islam never says that all people before the time of Mohammad (peace be upon him)will go to hell.
The nation of Moses (peace be upon him), The nation of Jesus (peace be upon him), The nation of Noah (peace be upon him). These are all prophets and their believers are the best of people.

Many people here think Islam is on the brink of launching a great Jihad on the 'West'. Well you have been brainwashed by the US media. You guys in the US need to lighten up, there was a documentary a few months back on the BBC called the power on nightmares. This was on during prime time. This report showed that the war with Iraq was planned before the tragedies of 9/11. It showed that Al-Qaeda does not exist. We have a programme every Thursdays called question time, once it was done in the US and I was truly shocked at the level of ignorance. The US had given Saddam Hussein weapons earlier during the War with the Iranians, every one knows this, however the US politician on the show said that it was a lie!! These are established facts and your politicians lie to you. The audience on the show were defending him as well.
Michael Moore was on the show too, whenever he spoke there were boos from the crowd, he then said that he is saying certain things because he wants the viewers in the UK to realise how brainwashed the Americans are.
Sometimes the truth hurts but that doesn’t make it a bunch of lies. You have been brainwashed into believing there is a big Islamic threat. Do you think Richard Perle, Wolfowitz lose sleep over this 'big' threat. No politician does. No Islamic country can ever hurt the West, Muslim countries are in an awful state. I can honestly say that. You guys need to lighten up a bit. North Korea has nukes, Russia is shifting back to the old days, and it has sold weapons to Syria. These are the big issues. China is going to have its arms embargo lifted by the EU, address the real issues and threats to the US. Many westerners are losing low level and highly advanced Jobs to India, if it happened to be a Muslim country you guys would be making such noise, but it’s a Hindu country, so you think they are no threat. These are the real issues; don’t let your politicians fool you.

I thought the full moon passed a few nights ago. An awful lot of energy expended here arguing with someone who cannot distinguish accounts in the OT of events and a screed that is nothing more than a brigand's pseudo-religiously inspired justifications for savaging other human beings.

Many people here think Islam is on the brink of launching a great Jihad on the 'West'.

You are one to be speaking of propaganda. I see you've swallowed about a metric ton of it. I could go through and Fisk all of it, but it's really not worth the effort. I just hope you don't vote.

Guys:

PLEASE STOP FEEDING THE TROLL. This one's lame attempts at what he tries to pass off as reasoned arguments are not even intellectually challenging enough to answer and are just WAY to easy to slap down.

He's a kid (and not just chronologically); it's wrong to take advantage of his brainwashing, ignorance and naivete. Plus, he doesn't answer questions or arguments substantively, thereby earning his true designation as a troll.

I think it is well worth our time to continue to focus on Islam, but thanks for the tip 786...

Moose

While I get the sense that it would be as impossible to make an impression upon one argumentative UK Muslim (ia666 XKE 007 -who has decided to make a dogged effort enlighten the brain-washed here on JW/DW) as it would be to hammer a puddle of mercury, I have to agree with one line of thought he has inadvertently reminded me of-

VIZ- while we shouldn't forget about the Great Threat posed by people in India taking computer related jobs ("Hello, Yahoo tech support? This is 'Brad'.") or ever lose sight of the Terrifying Prospect of China bootlegging copies of "STAR WARS- Episode 3" (before release!), I do admit that the greatest looming threat to the West is probably Global Warming.

Especially the kind caused by some tightly-knit (but according to a British t.v show, non-existent...) al-Qaedi type group getting their mitts on a loose nuke- for the glory of Sura 9:5, perhaps?- and raising the temperature of some localized portion of the globe (say Washington, D.C. or NYC or London) to about 4,000 degrees farenheit (a little more than Michael Moore's puny 911).

When the Jews, Hindus, Russians and Amish begin waging a planetary assault on freedom based on their holy book, I'll start up my own warning site called:

"ZionistKrishnaVodkaBuggyWatch.org".

Meanwhile, enough of the tendentiously OT points... I suggest UK Muslim take his pent-up proselytizing urge to a Shi'ite website and debate the schism in Islam with them until the crack of Judgment Day... (with apologies to the English children's story about Tweedledee and Tweedledum).

Or maybe contemplate this theological mystery:

"How can you decide on the truth or falsity of the existence of God unless you become God?"

"Showed that al-Queda doesn't exist".

My, how gullible we are. Heh.

Islam never says that non-Muslims will go to hell? Well, that's not what my Quran says. I have a word you need to know: abrogation.

About those American weapons given to the Iraqis - you know, myself I don't doubt it, and yet I've never ever seen, in any footage of that war, a single American-style weapon, anywhere. Nor thereafter, during the Gulf War (either one), though surely some of those piles of American equipment should have survived. No M16s, no LAW rocket launchers, not a single tank in the M-series. Maybe an M113. Once. What I did see was AKs, RPGs, BTRs, several tanks in the T-series - in short, mounds and mounds of Russian weapons. In fact, I would say EXCLUSIVELY Russian weapons systems. Gee, that's odd. I wonder where they came from.

Yusuf, we'd love to believe that islamic nations (and frankly, again, so that you understand, we're talking about islam as a religious and political force here, not islamic countries per se) aren't a threat, but the people living in those nations do seem to be. Or were the 19 hijackers in 9/11 from the Mossad. (Rhetorical question: I know you think they were, but, really, they weren't. Try not to be shocked.)

Why do you keep changing the subject, Yusuf? Can you not argue even one aspect of the debate? I suspect the brainwashing in this affair is on the other brain, or that CGW is right, and that you're a troll. I'd advise everyone reading this, quite seriously, to NOT email Yusuf. It seems highly suspicious to me that he keeps asking for emails rather than debating; hacker, possibly, since he has no skill at the former.

Geoff

pwnage

I hope we at Jihadwatch have the good sense to never email someone who may be a threat. All the debating can be done right here.

It seems highly suspicious to me that he keeps asking for emails rather than debating; hacker, possibly, since he has no skill at the former.

Geoff
Remember Hapshetsut and his questionaires?

BTW, Michael Moore talking about how brain-washed Americans are is laughable.

Geoff you say I need to concentrate on one aspect of this debate, well I’m here on my own discussing some issues with about 20 different people who keep raising different issues.

I have given my email address: ia786@hotmail.co.uk
Please feel free to email me and we can concentrate on a particular issue if you wish. I won't bite ^_^

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-528574,00.html

How US helped Iraq build deadly arsenal

Read this, don't worry it wasn't written by a Muslim. Welcome to the real world

"You have been brainwashed into believing there is a big Islamic threat. Do you think Richard Perle, Wolfowitz lose sleep over this 'big' threat. No politician does. No Islamic country can ever hurt the West, Muslim countries are in an awful state."

Again, a text worth noting:

"You have been brainwashed...." Far from it. The government and the press, for a variety of reasons, including ignorance mingled with fear both of giving offense to the pieties of the age (about "everyone wanting the same thing" etc.) and to specific, entirely baseless new pieties about Islam and "the three abrahamic faiths" that "share so much," does everything it can to misstate the nature of the menace, and to make it seem to be some disembodied, unconnected threat of "terror." Terror is merely a tactic, one of many instruments of Jihad to spread Islam), rather than the impulse to Jihad that has been part of Islam, central to Islam, Islam's raison d'etre (for why else was it originally concocted out of a mishmash of pre-Islamic Arab pagan lore, Judaism, and Christianity, deformed but still visible through the deformation, if not to both justify, and promote, the conquest of far more advanced, settled, wealthy, and numerous populations of Christians and Jews by Arabs who needed to present their own religion, and one of course usefuly recognizable and familiar to the Christians and Jews who were the initial victimis of conquest and subjugation.

"Do you think Richard Perle, Wolfowitz lose sleep over this 'big' threat." One suspects that Perle now does, for out of office he need not rise at 4 a.m., and can allow himself the leisure to think, read, ponder, and not rely only on what a "good Muslim" such as Aboul-Enein produces, or what the too-worshipful acolytes of Bernard Lewis (sole fount of wisdom on the Muslim East, some appear to think) may allow themselves to understand (and following Lewis, they will give short shrift to Bat Ye'or).

As Richard Pipes noted some time ago, Wolfowitz is a weapons systems analyst with no training, or inclination, to understand that culture and ideologies matter, and certainly Wolfowitz's immediate sources of information about this world do not inspire confidence. To wit:

1) a stint as the American (and Jewish) ambassador in Jakarta, told by Indonesians eager to please an American (and Jewish) ambassador exactly what he wanted to hear about "moderate" Islam.

2) a sister in Israel who is on the left, and would never suggest to herself, or to Wolfowitz, to come to understand the Arab hostility to Israel as one based on immutable doctrines of Islam that do not and can not abide the possiblity of an Infidel sovereign state in the midst of the dar al-Islam, so that however much Israel, from its point of view, compromises, this can only whet rather than sate Arab appetites, and the Jihad against Israel is essentially endless. But if your own sister -- who, for god's sake, even lives there -- is your expert, then you are unlikely to even begin to comprehend either Israel's real situation, or connecting that difficult sitatuion (that is not a "problem" and has no "solution").

3) Wolfowitz's amorous relations with an Arab divorcee who of course has helped to push him, and hence the American government, to decide that what ails the Arab and Muslim world is lack of "democracy" -- not Islam -- and that the brinaing of this "democracy" will naturally lead to all sorts of people so busy running things, taking care of sewage and dog-pounds and suchlike, that they will have no time to take Islam too seriously.

Yes, how true. As soon as Khomeini came to power (and in any election he would have been the overwhelming choice), the mullahs were simply so busy running the country that they had no time to execute the leaders of the Jewish and Baha'i communities, no time to support the PLO and help create, and arm, Hezbollah; no time to devote to buying arms or starting a nuclear-weapons project, no time to suppress all free thought and to murder anti-regime exiles in Paris and Los Angeles; no time to....--yes, that's what happens when "Islamists" have to actually assume power and discharge the responsibilities of rule -- Islam just goes by the wayside.

And of course there is the example of Turkey. Just look at how permanent and entrenched secularism is in Turkey. Put in a few reforms, a la Ataturk, keep in place for 3/4 of a century, and presto-magico, the menace of Islam, and its tenets and worldview, simply disappear.

you have to discharge the responsibilities of rule, and come in the from and Wolfowitz, a systems analyst whose views on Islam, and understanding of Islam.

"No Islamic country can ever hurt the West."

Really? What about Islamic "groups" then? What about communities of Muslms, living in the West, working actively to transform that West, now by noisy demands, and now by ostentatious displays of sweet reason, and a sudden great attachment to the beauties of "pluralism" and "dialogue" as on display in the taqiyya-kitman of the "new, improved" Islam that those Bright Young Muslim Things hold out as having so much promise, and that Tariq Ramadan, in his sinister way, is now flogging as well. "Dialogue," "pluralism" that is at the heart of Islam -- oh good god, spare us this nonsense.

Islam has been "hurting the West" for 1350 years. It took over what was once part of the Christian world -- Mesopotamia, Syria, Egypt, the rest of North Africa. It took over the ancient homeland of the Jews, and apparently they who had endured the rule of Romans and Byzantines found the Muslim overlords so oppressive that many of them had to leave the Land of Israel -- which is why eventually 90% of the world's Jews ultimately came to live under Western Christendom, terrible as the intermittent persecutions may have been, rather than live in the "paradise" of Islam.

Islam has been "hurting the West" ever since Muslims conquered Byzantium and destroyed its civilization -- though the flight of Greek scholars to the West, it is true, helped to spark the Revival of Learning.

Islam has been "hurting the West" of Christians and Jews, and "hurting the East" of Hindus and Buddhists for as long as it has been in existence.

"No Islamic country can hurt the West"? Madrid, Beslan, New York, Washington and a thousand plots and subplots uncovered in time suggest otherwise. But the hundreds of billions of dollars now being spent to defend against the JIhad, to monitor large Muslim populations, to protect synagogues and churches, Jewish and Christian schools, outspoken political figures (how much does it cost the Dutch state to protect Geert Wilders? Ayaan Hirsi Ali?), parliaments, subway systems, railroad stations, airports, bus stations, chemical plants, oil refineries, and on and on -- all because of the existence of Believers in Islam -- does that not inflict economic damage, as Bin Laden and others have expressly noted with such glee, on the Western world?

And what of the vast sums being expended now in Iraq, in a vain hope that "democracy" will remedy the situation, just as naive Israelis used to believe that making the desert bloom and bringing prospertiy to one corner of the Middle East would serve as a "Light-Unto-the-Nations" as well, instead of as a horrifying example, to the Muslims, of their own backwardness which was contra naturam, for by all the laws of Allah it was right, it was proper, it was just, that Islam "is to dominate and not to be dominated."

The presence of Muslims in the lands of the Infidels has, without question, already led to a state of affairs for the indigenous Infidels, and for non-indigenous non-Muslims (Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Confucians) to lead lives that are often far more unpleasant, unsettled, expensive, and dangerous, than they would be without the presence of Muslims -- "moderate" or "immoderate" in their beliefs, with the former always in danger, after some personal setback, of transforming into the latter, with all that that implies.

Fiinally, this Muslim Everyman shows us the permanent self-confusion in which any semi-aware Muslim must exist, for he "likes the U.K." and also recognizes that "Muslim countries are in an awful state." True -- they are. And they are in that "awful state" despite the fact that those Muslim countries suffered far less from European "colonialism" than did black sub-Saharan Africa, Hindu India (which suffered the thorough-going imperialism of the Muslim invaders, and then a relativgely much more bening rule by the "colonial" British, who helped Hindus recover their own past). They are in that "awful state" despite having been, for 33 years now, the recipients of the greatest transfer of wealth in human history -- a wealth entirely unrelated to any effort on their own part, but merely to an accident of geology. That wealth has not been shared to improve the lives of the poorer Muslims; it has gone to armamaments, to fantastic palaces all over the Gulf; to a distribution of wealth that gives the permanent lie to the nonsensical claim that Islam fosters "social justice" (yes, the justice of attending the mosque together, and submitting to Allah together, but not any real impulse to redistribute the wealth, which all over the Arab and Muslim states is stolen by those in power -- and it is Islam itself that discourages rebellion and encourages submission to the Ruler as long as he is a Muslim).

So here we have on display, in all of his conspiracy theories (blame the British for the "Wahhabis" a/k/a "Salafis" who are the only source of wickedness and aggression in Islam), and his belief that Islam cannot "harm the West" when it has been harming the West for 1350 years -- please read "The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam" by Bat Ye'or to see how the eastern half of Western civilization, that which was in fact, an equal inheritor of classcial antiquity, and the cradle of Christian civilization (where did Tertullian, where did St. Augustine come from, if not the Christian civilization of North Africa), which was, in stages, conquered by Muslims, who destroyed much of the physical evidence of that rich civilzation (of course all sculpture and all paintings of living creatures had to go, but so did many churches and synagogues, and libraries and manuscripts), and then those membgers of the so-called "protected peoples" (protected from Muslims themselves) were subject to the many financial, social, and political disabilities whose sum is the institution of dhimmitude, which led to the slow asphyxiation of all non-Muslim peoples under Islam, with their remaining remnants continuing to be persecuted, everywhere that populations of non-Muslims exist, to one degree or another, throughout the lands where Islam prevails.

Why should anyone living in the U.K. or the rest of Europe, or the rest of the non-Muslim world, believe that things will be any different in the future?

'I hope we at Jihadwatch have the good sense to never email someone who may be a threat. All the debating can be done right here.'

So you think I may be a threat, really. That’s charming. I've come to this site and raised a few issues, I have had my religion attacked, I've been insulted but I will never lower myself to such a pathetic level. Most people have been respectful and I appreciate that, all I want is healthy debate, that’s it.

For some this site is like a fantasy world, it attracts people of a certain nature. When someone with a different view arrives he is attacked. Can't we speak to each other in a respectful and mature way. If I have said anything that has offended any body I say sorry, I never meant to offend any one, all I want is some healthy debate that looks at the real issues.

Yusuf; Why does this site cause you concern ? What "lies" in particular trouble you ? You just come on, post a few bits an pieces about hatred, but what evidence do you have of the hatred ?

Well at least you admit you can't or won't stick to a single topic. And how does weapons in Iraq relate to islam? Are weapons required for worship?

Yes, the article talks about chemical weaponry and so forth - very nice, maybe even possible - but of course it was conventional weapons, not chemical weapons, that caused most of the loss of life in that war. These weapons were not supplied by the US. These were Russian weapon systems. Sorry. Welcome to the real world.

Again, really, we're talking about islam as a geopolitical force rather than that of any particular islamic nation. This is what we're discussing. Do you or do you not have a specific comment to make about the above thread? This thread relates to legal intimidation by CAIR, a radical muslim organization (Wahhabi, I believe), within the US. You might argue the 'peace of islam', if you like.

And finally, I'd love to be able to believe you about that email addy. Unfortunately, emailing you is out of the question for two reasons:

i) I've been threatened for my beliefs and my temerity ('obstinacy') in believing them before by your co-religionists, and as I have no way of knowing your real intent (and wouldn't it be lovely if radicals were visible by big red hats or something), and

ii) I prefer to keep the debate where all can see it, rather than send it to you where you could cut and piece together bits of it for whatever purpose might serve you. Sorry. Debate really requires openness, something email simply does not have.

Geoff

Mr. Yusuf, I do not hate you or muslims.

All you know about god is what humans have told you or written.
They tell you things they know you want to hear, they promise you eternal life-- to become like a god, immortal. They put your mind at ease, as long as you think and do what those authoritive humans tell you to.

Religion is not the only vehicle other sly humans use to control other people(not always for evil ends, but then, is dishonesty an acceptable method to achieve good, why the secrecy then?), there are many ways to manipulate people, all you have to do is know human nature and have the means of exploitation.

The media is a propaganda tool,what they propagate in the "west" is pseudo-scientific Pragmatism, which is the prefered "religion" of the power-elite of the "west"(and no, most are not jews), there can be disagreement about method and means, but the ultimate objective is the same. You cite the BBC "Power of Nightmares" as contrasting USA media, but in fact what is shown in the USA is only a more subtle version. There can be no denial whatsoever that the dominant American(and world-wide) governmental, cultural, and media institutions have been promoting the "islam is a religion of peace" line in the extreme. Of course they try to maintain the illusion of objectivity, as the situation demands, so occasionally something real will be shown.

The differences are semantic, the ultimate objective is the same. It's on auto-pilot now.

The Hegelian Dialectical process is also at work, thesis+ anti-thesis= synthesis, contradictions make progress possible, and are even purposely constructed with a predetermened end result in mind. It takes no heed of truth or reality. It is a vehicle to create a virtual reality.

Islam is the old version, the newer one is a conglomeration of international leftist,corporatist, blue-blooded elitists who will do anything to become like gods on earth, and any seemingly divergent pronouncements or actions are only indications of internal power struggles and differences of opinion on strategic/tactical efficiency.

Ooooh - it's take-apart time. Geoff happy.

"So you think I may be a threat, really."

No, I just prefer not to give you my email address so that you might sign me up for every crap list you have, and because I prefer open debate. That's all.

That’s charming. I've come to this site and raised a few issues, I have had my religion attacked,

"I've been insulted but I will never lower myself to such a pathetic level."

Let me cast your mind back to:
"Hello my hate filled brothers and sisters"

Now while I realize this may be the standard greeting in islam, this is not reeeeally the way one starts a conversation in the US, or the UK for that matter.

"Hello, hate filled street vender, may I have that bag of crisps, please."
"Hello, hate filled officer. Was I driving too fast?"

You have just, yourself, entered the stream of pathos. Enjoy.

"Most people have been respectful and I appreciate that, all I want is healthy debate, that’s it."

Actually, most people have been insulting, which is fine, and quite normal after being called 'haters', or perhaps 'religiously inferior'. Not unusual, that.

"If I have said anything that has offended any body I say sorry,"

Good. You should be.

"I never meant to offend any one, all I want is some healthy debate that looks at the real issues."

Great. We've shown you them. Let's discuss the thread.

Geoff

I'll be back in a while fellas

BinLadin et al is not "hijacking" islam, he is trying to save it, it IS THE WEST THAT IS TRYING TO "HIJACK" ISLAM.
So, the Salafis are correct, that is islam. Fundamentals are true by definition.

I myself reject con-artists and totalitarians of any stripe, east or west.

"I'll be back." LOL - Have you noticed that is the response when someone wants to engage him in debate, isn't that what he said he wants ?(debate)

Young Troll;- I didn't come to this site to be insulted.

Old Lady;- That's nice Dearie, Where do you usually go?

Dear Yusuf:

I have been watching this thread with amusement,and I haven't said much until you came up with a lie which was widely used before the Iraq war and has since been very popular with muslim,liberals and so called pacifist around the world.
No my dear friend,Irak was armed by the Soviet Union(much of its still unpaid) at very good price; Saddam did find in France a very eager seller as well, you might not remember the infamous tanker war where french built Mirage F-1 shot several dozens of french built Exocet anti-ship missiles to any tanker carrying Iranian oil; and in third place we have the Chinese which were so eager to sell they actually sold weapons to both the Iranians and the Iraqis.
Once again, another myth shattered by the true my friend.

Peace be upon you and may help you to wake up and smell the cofee

Cheers

Lionheart

Lionheart:

'Peace be upon you ' - put me in mind of the exchange in Carry On up the Khyber':

'Peace be upon you'.

'And peess on you too'.

Sorry to lower the tone.

Was he talking to or about The Khasi of Kalabar, it's been a while since I saw it.

Yusuf, can't you be specific in your challenges for debate? What do you wish to debate?
Also, please identify the putative "hate" you find on this site. Is Islam's inherent hate reserved for only muslims? Why is it so disturbing to muslims for infidels to acknowledge and discuss the same hate that you are inculcated with from birth until death? Are you ashamed of the hatred that literally oozes from the Qur'an, or are you afraid that too many infidels might find out about it? That would put muslims in a rather awkward and precarious position and would defintely inhibit the Islamic agenda. I'm afraid it's too late, your secrets are already exposed and guess what? Millions of informed infidels do not share your passion for Islam; we find it revolting, threatening, and blasphemous.

And by the way, Allah, the Arabic and Islamic word for God, is not the God of the Bible. Your Allah in no way, shape, or form resembles the Christian God. As any good muslim can attest, the Christian Trinity is thoroughly and irreverently disparaged in Muhammad's collection of delusions, the Qur'an, and Christians are designated as polytheists, the most despicable of all people. As you know, polytheism is the only unforgivable sin in Islam. You can kill, lie, steal, cheat, covet, etc. with no fear of damnation, but polytheism is the ultimate transgression. Islam is devoid of morality. Christians and muslims DO NOT WORSHIP the same God. Contrary to the lies you have been taught, which are easily dispelled by historical facts, Islam followed Judaism and Christianity and was the last Abrahamic religion. It would not exist had Judaism and Christianity not preceded it, and it is loosely based upon plagarized, albeit convoluted, material from its predecessors.

Until you have been to the U.S. and experienced it for yourself, you would be wise not to pay too much attention to the BBC. They are the most egregious anti-American propagandists on the planet next to the infamous media farce, al-Jazeera.

I suppose we all exist in some form of an insulated world where the "other" is ignorant, naive, or brainwashed. But my dear little British muslim, you are suffering from total media and religious indoctrination. I guess nobody ever told you that you can't believe everything you see on television, hear in the mosque, and read in the British tabloids but maybe after a few years of university education, you'll learn to think for yourself in spite of Islam and the BBC. In the meantime, we will remain ever vigilant just in case the one or two muslim fanatics out there attempt to massacre us on a massive scale again as demanded and sanctioned by your holy and peaceful Qur'an.

The NRO is a Young Republican' Bush-fest, where the master's "Islam is peace" regurgitate is compulsory service. IIP crap is taken as axiomatic by YR doormats, and contrarian statements are deemed anathema. NRO has its own pope: George Walker Bush. And anything burped, chirped or farted by Bush43 is given encylical authority, notwithstanding the lack of a factual basis of same. Why not bring back the British monarchy, with GWB on the throne and make Congress a chimp chorus for rule by divine right.

(No wonder Buckley's National Review plays 2nd fiddle to the New Republic, and always will)

Yon troll speaks from a lower orifice: a sound most unpleasing. Wouldst dignify this noise with answers?