No Churches In Saudi Arabia Unless Pope & All Christians Recognize Mohammed

[savvy]

http://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/newsdetails.php?newsid=1114
Riyadh: March 29, 2008.

No churches should be permitted in Saudi Arabia, unless Pope Benedict XVI recognised the prophet Mohammed, according to a Middle East expert.

While Saudi mediators are working with the Vatican on negotiations to allow places of religious worship, some experts believe it will not occur without this recognition.

Anwar Ashiqi, president of the Saudi centre for Middle East strategic studies, endorsed this view in an interview on the site of Arab satellite TV network, al-Arabiya on Thursday.

"I haven taken part in several meetings related to Islamic-Christian dialogue and there have been negotiations on this issue," he said.

"It would be possible to launch official negotiations to construct a church in Saudi Arabia only after the Pope and all the Christian churches recognise the prophet Mohammed."

"If they don`t recognise him as a prophet, how can we have a church in the Saudi kingdom?"

Ashiqi`s comments came after a declaration launched by the papal nuncio of the Persian Gulf, the archbishop Mounged El-Hachem, at the opening of the first Catholic church in Qatar last week.

The prelate had announced the launch of "treaties to construct a church in Saudi Arabia where it is banned to practise whatever religion they want outside Islam".

El-Hachem estimated three to four million Christians in the Saudi kingdom who want to have a church.

A member of Saudi Arabia`s Consultative Council, Abdelaziz al-Thinani, rejected the prelate`s claims saying that there were no Christians among the Saudis who were all Muslims.

"Those few Christians do not reside in the country permanently, they come and go," he said.

He denied there were four million Christians in the kingdom and said the issue of human rights should not be used to call for the construction of a Christian church.

Most of Saudi Arabia`s Christians are foreign workers. There are 8.2 million foreign workers in a country of 25.6 million people according to a report by the Saudi Labour Ministry.

[Mediocrates]

I say let them all fight it out amongst themselves.

[Kenneth]

"No Churches In Saudi Arabia Unless Pope & All Christians Recognize Mohammed"

In related news British Illustrator Martin Handford, creator of the "Where's Waldo?" puzzle books to sue Saudi Arabia for copyright infringement.

[savvy]

If Saudi Arabia permits religious freedom, it would be a miracle. However this would upset Al-Qaida and the radicals. Bin Laden thought in was haram to permit US troops on Islam's Holy Land Saudi.

[andak01]

This isn't Islam, it's KSA-LAM.

[savvy]

Andak, if you're seriously committed to condeming the extremism and bad rep you're co-religonists are repeatedly given your religion, then perhaps you would like to consider this.

Muslims embrace label as heretics

By CHRISTOPHER QUINN
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 03/29/08

Muslims gathering in Atlanta this weekend call themselves heretics half-seriously.

Remember, said Emory professor Abdullahi An-Na'im, opponents of Muhammad and Jesus called them heretics. So-called heresy can accomplish great changes, he said.

Emory professor Abdullahi An-Na'im hopes the meeting sparks positive change and openness.

About 75 Muslim bloggers, writers and free thinkers from the United States and abroad are expected this weekend at the Muslim Heretics Conference, where they will talk about democracy, women's issues and critical thinking. They hope their discussions will spark positive changes and open conversations that will echo around the world.

"We want to rehabilitate the notion of heresy as a creative force," said An-Na'im, who wrote "Islam and the Secular State: Negotiating the Future of Shari'a," which is a defense of secular governments for Muslims.

It has been published in six languages. An-Na'im has lectured on the issue around the world, including in his native Sudan, where a mentor from his early life was killed by the Islamist government.

He said new communication technologies such as the Internet are opening the Muslim world to new ideas, and repressive governments can no longer control the flow of information. So there is a great deal of ferment going on in the world of thought among the planet's 1 billion-plus Muslims.

Iranian-born Fereydoun Taslimi of Atlanta, who also helped organize the conference, said, "We plan to do it every year, a gathering of people who like to discuss issues and keep the momentum and networking of Muslims going."

The organizers have been talking about such a conference for months, he said. In January, they decided to put the word out and see how many people would show. Registration for the conference is closed.

Some Muslims have criticized them for using the title Muslim Heretics Conference, Taslimi said.

"But we decided to stick with it, in that we feel we are against the kind of actions that are being committed in the name of Islam," such as violence and repression, he said.

Taslimi said some of the same critics a few years back complained about the use of the words "Islamic reform," but have adopted the phrase when discussing issues where their religion and the modern world intersect.

Jill Carroll, an author and the director of the Boniuk Center for Religious Tolerance at Rice University in Houston, said such conversations are happening with increasing frequency and are important.

"Every religion has to confront the social and political realities of the time," she said.

"There is a growing conversation of, what is our role in the 21st century. We have to interpret our faith newly."

[Mercury]

This isn't Islam, it's KSA-LAM.


Andak,

If most muslims believe your rather than KSA version of Islam, why didn't we see a single large muslim demonstration with people shouting "not in our name" (I do not even ask for burnings of KSA flags and images of their king).

[bararallu]

Andak,

If most muslims believe your rather than KSA version of Islam, why didn't we see a single large muslim demonstration with people shouting "not in our name" (I do not even ask for burnings of KSA flags and images of their king).

Fatalism? Culturally unacceptable behavior to challenge your co-religionist? At least among the Arabs.

[Mil]

I heard Iran has the largest number of Jews in the Middle East after Israel. All 20,000 of them. They should go for a synagogue.

[andak01]

Andak, if you're seriously committed to condeming the extremism and bad rep you're co-religonists are repeatedly given your religion, then perhaps you would like to consider this.

Muslims embrace label as heretics

I don't consider myself a heretic in the least. And I don't think one has to adopt that label in order to effect change. The implication is that Islam is the culprit and I believe it is the interpretations of the modern, post Muslim Brotherhood imams that is. There were always a multitude of interpretations possible within what is accepted as Islam. It's people that stopped allowing for those possibilities that have caused the most problems.

[dayag]

I heard Iran has the largest number of Jews in the Middle East after Israel. All 20,000 of them. They should go for a synagogue.

For what it is worth, there are synagogues in Tehran & Isfahan:
http://www.kosherdelight.com/Irankosher.htm

[Yala]

For what it is worth, there are synagogues in Tehran & Isfahan:
http://www.kosherdelight.com/Irankosher.htm

It's worth a whole lotta propaganda for Iran. That's what it's worth.

[Parsi]

The flag of Saudi Arabia gives you all the answers about the nature of Islam and its birth land.

For what it is worth, there are synagogues in Tehran & Isfahan:
But there is not a single Sunni mosque in Iran.
I heard Iran has the largest number of Jews in the Middle East after Israel. All 20,000 of them. They should go for a synagogue.
And Israel has the largest Persian population in the Middle East after Iran.
It's worth a whole lotta propaganda for Iran. That's what it's worth.
That's right. It allows the regime to portray a Jewish-friendly face, while being the enemy number one of Israel.

If most muslims believe your rather than KSA version of Islam, why didn't we see a single large muslim demonstration with people shouting "not in our name" (I do not even ask for burnings of KSA flags and images of their king).

Because deep in their hearts and minds they know that Mohammad had no tolerance for anything other than Islam. People of Mecca were worshipping their own idols (there were many idols in Kaaba ), until Mohammad knocked them all down and broke them into pieces.

And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will never be accepted of him, and in the Hereafter he will be one of the losers. Quran 3:83-85

Start twisting and apologising......NOW!

[Angry Lord]

No Churches In Saudi Arabia Unless Pope & All Christians Recognize Mohammed
Riyadh: March 29, 2008
[quote]No churches should be permitted in Saudi Arabia, unless Pope Benedict XVI recognised the prophet Mohammed, according to a Middle East expert.

After pope recognizes the mohammed, the next call will be either accept islam or death.

Question: Can Muslims force others to accept Islam?

Summary Answer: Muslims are commanded to fight unbelievers until they are either dead, converted to Islam, or in a permanent state of subjugation under Muslim domination. Allowing people of other faiths to live and worship independently of Islamic rule is not an option.

Full expalnation is given here (http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Quran/013-forced-conversion.htm)


"If they don`t recognise him as a prophet, how can we have a church in the Saudi kingdom?"

Next step would be to ask the pope to accept Islam or else...

[ygalg1]

After pope recognizes the mohammed, the next call will be either accept islam or death.
recognizing Muhammad's prophet hood to be genuine, is in itself conversion to Islam.

[ygalg1]

seems to me andak01, you are reinventing Islam. not that I am against it. but that is your own self deceit.

[Angry Lord]

recognizing Muhammad's prophet hood to be genuine, is in itself conversion to Islam.

No, to "fully" become an muslim one has to also accept Allah as the "only" god.

[ygalg1]

No, to "fully" become an muslim one has to also accept Allah as the "only" god.
I missed that one:D

[andak01]

seems to me andak01, you are reinventing Islam. not that I am against it. but that is your own self deceit.

I haven't reinvented anything. My imam and most of the Muslims in my community are fine with my views which I've discussed with them many times. It's your filtered view of Islam which causes you to believe that something new has to be invented for Muslims to live comfortably in the West.

[Mediocrates]

This is a lot of nonsense. Anwar Ashiqi's comments have been posted hundreds of times around the web, all quoting the same words. The man is an attention whore.

[andak01]

Because deep in their hearts and minds they know that Mohammad had no tolerance for anything other than Islam. People of Mecca were worshipping their own idols (there were many idols in Kaaba ), until Mohammad knocked them all down and broke them into pieces.

How did Hezekaih purge Solomon's temple?
He abolished idol worship which had resumed under his father's reign. He abolished the shrines and smashed the pillars and cut down the sacred post. He also broke into pieces the bronze serpent which Moses had made, for until that time the Israelites had been offering sacrifices to it "(2 Kings 18:4).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezekiah

And what did Judah Maccabee do when he purified the Temple?

Judah Maccabee marched into Jerusalem and set about to purify the Temple. Idols were torn down and the altar which had been defiled with the sacrifice of pigs was dismantled and a new one built. New holy vessels were crafted. A date was set for the rededication of the Temple—the 25th of Kislev, the same day on which, three years earlier, Antiochus had issued his decree.
http://www.cbn.com/spirituallife/BibleStudyAndTheology/jewishroots/Hanukkah_Jews_For_Jesus.aspx

And what did Henry VIII do at the foundation of the Church of England, for which the Queen is to this day the Head? And what did Constantine do to the Roman Temples?

What did the Anabaptists do?

It was the iconoclasm (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iconoclasm) of 1566 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1566) (the Beeldenstorm) – the demolition of statues and paintings depicting saints – that led to religious war between Catholics and Protestants. The Beeldenstorm started in what is now the arrondissement of Dunkirk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrondissement_of_Dunkirk) in French Flanders (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Flanders), with open-air sermons (hagepreken) in Dutch (http://www.mdsk.net/jicono_nl.html). The first took place on the Cloostervelt near Hondschoote (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hondschoote). The first large sermon was held near Boeschepe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeschepe) on July 12 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_12), 1562 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1562). These open-air sermons, mostly of Anabaptist or Mennonite signature, spread through the country. On August 10, 1566 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1566) at the end of the pilgrimage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilgrimage) from Hondschoote to Steenvoorde (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steenvoorde), the chapel of the Sint-Laurensklooster (Cloister of Saint Lawrence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Lawrence)) was defaced by Protestants. The iconoclasm resulted not only in the destruction of Catholic art, but also cost the lives of many priests. It next spread to Antwerp, and on August 22, to Ghent. One cathedral, eight churches, twenty-five cloisters, ten hospitals and seven chapels were attacked. From there, it further spread east and north, but in total lasted not even a month.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flanders

Iconoclasm has a long history that is by no means confined to Islam and in fact predates it by centuries.

[Angry Lord]

^^ The point was muslims are imitiating the actions of mohammed and attacking people of other religion in the name of Islam.

It does not mean that in the past the acts that you posted have not taken place but today how come an jew is not breaking idols of other religion? while muslims continue doing the same whether it be the demolition of the bamiyan buddhist statues in afghanistan or the recent destruction of buddha statues in pakistan.

[andak01]

^^ The point was muslims are imitiating the actions of mohammed and attacking people of other religion in the name of Islam.

Muslims is a big word. That takes in 1.3 billion people. Are 1.3 billion people or anywhere close to that attacking people of other religions? Well, no but... 1% Well, no but... .5% Well, no but...

It does not mean that in the past the acts that you posted have not taken place but today how come an jew is not breaking idols of other religion?

What's your plan for Al-Aqsa mosque when Israel takes rule of the Temple mount? How would that mosque be used if there were no more Muslims in Jerusalem to attend prayers there?

BTW, I have nothing but condemnation for the Synogogues that were burned in Gaza following the departure of the Jews. At minimum they should have been left standing. Burning them was an ugly and senseless act.

...while muslims continue doing the same whether it be the demolition of the bamiyan buddhist statues in afghanistan or the recent destruction of buddha statues in pakistan.

Again, it wasn't Muslims in general, but the Taliban that did that. Many Muslims condemned the action.

Here is the story of a Muslim archeologist and his Muslim team seeking to find a lost statue of Buddha in the area.

http://www.afghan-web.com/culture/thirdbuddha.html

[ygalg1]

I haven't reinvented anything. My imam and most of the Muslims in my community are fine with my views which I've discussed with them many times. It's your filtered view of Islam which causes you to believe that something new has to be invented for Muslims to live comfortably in the West.
are you denying the raped of a woman when at the same day her family be slaughtered by his orders? are you denying he's a paedophile? are you denying he covet the wife of his adopted son. made him to divorce her so he can fulfill his sick lust? are you only Koran islamist?

[ygalg1]

What's your plan for Al-Aqsa mosque when Israel takes rule of the Temple mount? How would that mosque be used if there were no more Muslims in Jerusalem to attend prayers there?
hopefully dismantled.

[ygalg1]

BTW, I have nothing but condemnation for the Synogogues that were burned in Gaza following the departure of the Jews. At minimum they should have been left standing. Burning them was an ugly and senseless act.

that is Islam as always been and your denial simply ridiculous.

[Angry Lord]

Muslims is a big word. That takes in 1.3 billion people. Are 1.3 billion people or anywhere close to that attacking people of other religions? Well, no but... 1% Well, no but... .5% Well, no but...

In many humble opinion it is ignorant to say that there are 1.3 billion muslims.

One sect of muslim does not consider another as muslim but as heretics,kafirs,etc. Even during training in religious education major emphasis is laid on condemning other muslim sects and steps are taken that practises from other sects are not followed in this sects.

This "1.3 billion" stat is quoted only to attract more people.

What's your plan for Al-Aqsa mosque when Israel takes rule of the Temple mount? How would that mosque be used if there were no more Muslims in Jerusalem to attend prayers there?

That is an hypothetical question. It is like asking What's your plan when the martians visit you?

How can one answer what will happen in the future? Instead why not debate what is hapenning today?

Again, it wasn't Muslims in general, but the Taliban that did that. Many Muslims condemned the action.

Do you mean to say that Taliban were not Muslims? Each and every member of the taliban was an muslim who had studied the koran in religious seminaries.

Mullah Omar the amir of the Taliban himself ordered the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddha statues. Note the word Mullah and amir. To become an Mullah one needs to study the kuran in detail and only then he can call himself an Mullah. How come Mullah Omar who was so well versed in koran order the destruction of the statues?

When he issued the orders of the destruction of the statues he also quoted the koranic verses that decreed the demolition of the statues. Now who is responsible for the destruction? Mullah Omar or the Koran?

Here is the story of a Muslim archeologist and his Muslim team seeking to find a lost statue of Buddha in the area.
Such one off incident dont mean much when the majority of the muslim nations were in silent agreement.

[andak01]

are you denying the raped of a woman when at the same day her family be slaughtered by his orders? are you denying he's a paedophile? are you denying he covet the wife of his adopted son. made him to divorce her so he can fulfill his sick lust? are you only Koran islamist?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. No.

[ygalg1]

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. No.
your denial suggests you're Koran only islamist.
else left for you to accept Muhammad committed these atrocities.

[andak01]

In many humble opinion it is ignorant to say that there are 1.3 billion muslims.

One sect of muslim does not consider another as muslim but as heretics,kafirs,etc. Even during training in religious education major emphasis is laid on condemning other muslim sects and steps are taken that practises from other sects are not followed in this sects.

This "1.3 billion" stat is quoted only to attract more people.

OK, Shiites make up around 15%, so 1.1 billion. Sufis aren't actually a sect to themselves. There are many Sunnis that also consider themselves Sufi.

That is an hypothetical question. It is like asking What's your plan when the martians visit you?

When it comes to predicting the future of Jerusalem, nothing is hypothetical, including martians. :)

How can one answer what will happen in the future? Instead why not debate what is hapenning today?

I doubt you can give me an example of Muslims today destroying something that we wouldn't both agree to condemn.

Do you mean to say that Taliban were not Muslims? Each and every member of the taliban was an muslim who had studied the koran in religious seminaries.

Correction. A lot of them can't even read and some of them who have memorized the entire Quran don't know enough Arabic to understand its meaning. They are a very ignorant lot.

Mullah Omar the amir of the Taliban himself ordered the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddha statues. Note the word Mullah and amir. To become an Mullah one needs to study the kuran in detail and only then he can call himself an Mullah. How come Mullah Omar who was so well versed in koran order the destruction of the statues?

Because he's a fallable human being with a dramatically flawed interpretation. Remember those statues stood under Muslim rule for at least 14 centuries. I'm sure there were a multitude of scholars that never thought to destroy them.

When he issued the orders of the destruction of the statues he also quoted the koranic verses that decreed the demolition of the statues. Now who is responsible for the destruction? Mullah Omar or the Koran?

Mullah Omar. Otherwise you should give just as much credit to the Quran for sparing those statues for 14 centuries.

Such one off incident dont mean much when the majority of the muslim nations were in silent agreement.

They weren't silent at all. They publicly condemned the action.

The Times of India, March 2, 2001



NEW DELHI: Leading Islamic clerics and leaders on Friday condemned the destruction of Afghanistan's ancient Buddha statues in central Bamiyan province by the ruling Taliban regime as "un-Islamic" and "an act of cultural genocide against humanity." "It is an outrageous act. It should be treated as a crime against humanity. Bamiyan is part of the world's cultural heritage. The destruction of Buddha statues is an act of cultural genocide against humanity," Babri Masjid movement leader and former diplomat Syed Shahabuddin said.
http://www.rawa.org/statues.htm#2


ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, March 12 (UPI) -- U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in Pakistan on a tour of the region, expressed outrage Sunday over the demolition of 1,500 year-old Buddha statues by Afghanistan's Taliban rulers. Annan called the destruction of two ancient Buddhist statues in central Afghanistan as "a disservice to both Afghanistan and Islam."


"I think no one will accept" the Taliban's argument that Islam allowed them to destroy the Buddhist statues, Annan told reporters after the meeting, adding that the demolition would also harm fundraising appeals for aid for the Afghan people. Countries with a large Buddhist population -- such as Japan, Sri Lanka and Thailand -- were more passionate in their appeals to save the relics.

Islamic Iran offered to buy the relics "for safe custody" with a promise to return them whenever the Afghans wanted. The Taliban's closest ally, Pakistan, sent a high-level delegation to convince the Taliban to change their mind.
A delegation also came from the world's largest Muslim body, the Organization of the Islamic Conference on Saturday to help protect the statues but failed to prevent the destruction.
http://www.rawa.org/statues.htm#5

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/english/200103/06/eng20010306_64217.html

All OIC states - including Pakistan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan), Saudi Arabia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) and the United Arab Emirates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates), three countries that officially recognised the Taliban government - joined the protest to spare the monuments.[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamyan#cite_note-5) A statement issued by the ministry of religious affairs of Taliban regime justified the destruction as being in accordance with Islamic law.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamyan#cite_note-6) Saudi Arabia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saudi_Arabia) and the United Arab Emirates (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Arab_Emirates) would later condemn the destruction as "savage".[citation needed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citation_needed)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhas_of_Bamyan

[andak01]

your denial suggests you're Koran only islamist.
else left for you to accept Muhammad committed these atrocities.

Your refusal to allow that a Muslim can read both the Quran and the Sunna and not agree with your own charges simply points to your own ignorance and intolerance. Maybe I don't fit your stereotype of what a Muslim has to be, but that doesn't mean I don't exist.

[ygalg1]

Your refusal to allow that a Muslim can read both the Quran and the Sunna and not agree with your own charges simply points to your own ignorance and intolerance. Maybe I don't fit your stereotype of what a Muslim has to be, but that doesn't mean I don't exist.
sunna derived from ahadith. the charges are according to ahadith.
the atrocities of Muhammad are coded there.
you in love with this so called religion, that made you see no flaws. it is your ignorance.

[Parsi]

How did Hezekaih purge Solomon's temple?
....

And what did Judah Maccabee do when he purified the Temple?

...
What did the Anabaptists do?

....

Iconoclasm has a long history that is by no means confined to Islam and in fact predates it by centuries.

I have explained, many times, why this technique is a fallacy.

[andak01]

I have explained, many times, why this technique is a fallacy.

I understand why it's a fallacy. You have a different standard for what Muslims do versus non-Muslims. An Anglican or an Anabaptist ripping statues off the wall and smashing them is one thing, Hezekaih destroying idols is one thing, Judah Macabbee destroying idols is one thing, Muslims destoying idols is another. For that matter, Muslims condemning the destruction of statues seems to fall into an ignore category with you.

[Angry Lord]

OK, Shiites make up around 15%, so 1.1 billion. Sufis aren't actually a sect to themselves. There are many Sunnis that also consider themselves Sufi.
There are other sects too. Ahmadiyas who have been persecuted and been declared kafirs. They cant build new mosques, their existing places of worship are being taken over and they are being ruthless sought to be eliminated from the face of earth.

When it comes to predicting the future of Jerusalem, nothing is hypothetical, including martians. :)
Nobody can predict the future. Therefore the future of Jerusalem is also not predicted.

I doubt you can give me an example of Muslims today destroying something that we wouldn't both agree to condemn.
How about the destruction of the idols in kabba which the native arabs worshipped? No muslim will dare to condemn their destruction.

Correction. A lot of them can't even read and some of them who have memorized the entire Quran don't know enough Arabic to understand its meaning. They are a very ignorant lot.

The word talib means a student, in this context a student of islam. The taliban were a group of students who studied the koran in islamic madrassas and also were provided military training. They were not a bunch of idiots who did not know what they were doing. They systematically went about their agenda of destroying each and every "unislamic" thing. They subjugated the women and condemned them to second class citizens by restricting their education and freedom of movement, mass murder of another sect of muslims shias to be precise and destruction of any objects they deemed unislamic including the 6000 statues that were preserved in the kabul museum.

Because he's a fallable human being with a dramatically flawed interpretation. Remember those statues stood under Muslim rule for at least 14 centuries. I'm sure there were a multitude of scholars that never thought to destroy them.

Many earlier attempts had been made to destroy but they did not posess enough firepower to totally smash them to pieces. Even when the taliban set about to destroy the statues they had to force the Hazara shias to climb the statues, drill holes in them, filling them with explosives and then the taliban sitting at an safe distance would detonate them. If they could lay their hands on modern explosives earlier then the bamiyan buddha would have been blasted centuries earlier.

Mullah Omar. Otherwise you should give just as much credit to the Quran for sparing those statues for 14 centuries.
If there were no such verses in the koran which call for the destruction of statues then even Mullah omar would not have dared to touch the buddha staues. The problem is not people like mullah omar. The problem lies elsewhere which no muslims dares to recognise.

They weren't silent at all. They publicly condemned the action.
When it comes to sunni sect of islam of which the taliban were a part, the moral authority rests with the regime or person who controls the two mosques considered holy by muslims. At that point of time it was saudi arabia.

The major part of money for taliban came from saudi arabia. Saudis could have easily prevented the destruction of the bamiyan buddhas by either threatening to stop the money or by using their moral authority since they controlled the two mosques. They did none of the above since they too were in silent agreement that the 2 buddhas need to be destroyed. Afterall they were the real masters of the taliban. The islamic books that the talib studied were provided by saudis. The saudis knew what they were doing when they provided those books to the talibs.

All the islamic countries were funneling money to taliban through islamic charities but none threatened to stop the flow of money if the taliban destroyed the buddhas. This is the real problem. They are ready to give press statements but are not ready to take concrete action. They want good PR but are not ready to stepin to do good deeds.

[andak01]

There are other sects too. Ahmadiyas who have been persecuted and been declared kafirs. They cant build new mosques, their existing places of worship are being taken over and they are being ruthless sought to be eliminated from the face of earth.

Everywhere? Or is this again the prevalent view IN SAUDI ARABIA or IN IRAN?

How about the destruction of the idols in kabba which the native arabs worshipped? No muslim will dare to condemn their destruction.

There was a war. The winner created a new theocracy with a state religion. The losers lost the idols they had in the one shrine. How did Constantine do it? Or Hezekaih or Judah Maccabee or Henry VIII or Luther's people or the Anabaptists or the Spanish during the reconquista or the Albanians both Christian and Muslim or the Crusaders or Savanarola or the Puritans at Salem or the Hindus at Ayodha? What did the Chinese do to the Tibetans when atheism was the state religion?

The word talib means a student, in this context a student of islam. The taliban were a group of students who studied the koran in islamic madrassas and also were provided military training. They were not a bunch of idiots who did not know what they were doing.

Islamically they are a bunch of idiots. I know people who have been to Afghanistan. There is nothing written in Islam to prevent a woman from getting an education and learning to read. Quite the contrary.

They systematically went about their agenda of destroying each and every "unislamic" thing. They subjugated the women and condemned them to second class citizens by restricting their education and freedom of movement, mass murder of another sect of muslims shias to be precise and destruction of any objects they deemed unislamic including the 6000 statues that were preserved in the kabul museum.

They did all of that, despite the condemnation of other Muslims.

Many earlier attempts had been made to destroy but they did not posess enough firepower to totally smash them to pieces. Even when the taliban set about to destroy the statues they had to force the Hazara shias to climb the statues, drill holes in them, filling them with explosives and then the taliban sitting at an safe distance would detonate them. If they could lay their hands on modern explosives earlier then the bamiyan buddha would have been blasted centuries earlier.

Some theory. So what about Churches and monestaries that, outside of Saudi Arabia dot the ME?

If there no such verses in the koran which call for the destruction of statues then even Mullah omar would not have dared to touch the buddha staues. The problem is not people like mullah omar. The problem lies elsewhere which no muslims dares to recognise.

No you don't dare to accept that there can be two interpretations of the same words. Why is that so difficult?


When it comes to sunni sect of islam of which the taliban were a part, the moral authority rests with the regime or person who controls the two mosques considered holy by muslims. At that point of time it was saudi arabia.

And Saudi Arabia was getting rid of the destabilizing influence of BIn Laden et all by shipping them to Afghanistan.

The major part of money for taliban came from saudi arabia. Saudis could have easily prevented the destruction of the bamiyan buddhas by either threatening to stop the money or by using their moral authority since they controlled the two mosques.

Don't be so sure. A lot of different groups tried to stop them.

[Angry Lord]

Everywhere? Or is this again the prevalent view IN SAUDI ARABIA or IN IRAN?

Check how the Ahmadiyas are treated in Pakistan or Bangladesh? The word "muslim" from the grave of one famous pakisatani ahmadiya muslim, who had also won the nobel prize, was erased just because he was an ahmadiya. This is just one example were even the dead have not been spared.

There was a war. The winner created a new theocracy with a state religion. The losers lost the idols they had in the one shrine. How did Constantine do it? Or Hezekaih or Judah Maccabee or Henry VIII or Luther's people or the Anabaptists or the Spanish during the reconquista or the Albanians both Christian and Muslim or the Crusaders or Savanarola or the Puritans at Salem or the Hindus at Ayodha? What did the Chinese do to the Tibetans when atheism was the state religion?

Again why do compare Islam the "religion of light" to other "dark" and "false" religions as preached by islam? If islam does what other religions do then what is the difference between islam and others. This means that Islam is also an "dark" and "false" religion.

Islamically they are a bunch of idiots. I know people who have been to Afghanistan. There is nothing written in Islam to prevent a woman from getting an education and learning to read. Quite the contrary.

The Talibans studied the koran and them implemented it and you call them idiots. If this is the way you describe well-read muslims then what can one say.

Some theory. So what about Churches and monestaries that, outside of Saudi Arabia dot the ME?

Allah has not showered his full "light of knowledge" on the rest of the ME like saudi arabia. A few years from now ME will be fully illuminated by "the light of Islam".

No you don't dare to accept that there can be two interpretations of the same words. Why is that so difficult?

So you accept the Koran was the reason that led to the destruction of bamiyan buddhas.

And Saudi Arabia was getting rid of the destabilizing influence of BIn Laden et all by shipping them to Afghanistan.
I hope you will read up history and understand the difference between Taliban led by Mullah omar and Al-Qaeda led by Osama bin laden. Both were allied but had different objectives.

Don't be so sure. A lot of different groups tried to stop them.
Just for some good PR.

[andak01]

The Talibans studied the koran and them implemented it and you call them idiots. If this is the way you describe well-read muslims then what can one say.

But they didn't implement it. They didn't even provide education for their women. They didn't treat women with respect. They created compulsion in religion. They brought back the practice of temporary marriages that the Prophet banned. There are literally hundreds of ways they have broken the Sunna. Having memorized the Quran doesn't make a Muslim well read. A lot of people memorize it without understanding its meaning.

[Angry Lord]

You choose to ignore many of the questions that i raised.

But they didn't implement it. They didn't even provide education for their women. They didn't treat women with respect. They created compulsion in religion. They brought back the practice of temporary marriages that the Prophet banned. There are literally hundreds of ways they have broken the Sunna. Having memorized the Quran doesn't make a Muslim well read. A lot of people memorize it without understanding its meaning.
Read my posts. Taliban did not just memorize the koran, they perfectly understood it's meaning and implemented it.

If there was any deviation from the islamic path then their bosses in saudi arabia and pakistan would have used their money power to lead them back to the "right path". This wasn't the case which shows that taliban were indeed implementing islamic laws (sharia) with full backing of its ideological masters.

[andak01]

Read my posts. Taliban did not just memorize the koran, they perfectly understood it's meaning and implemented it.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

If there was any deviation from the islamic path then their bosses in saudi arabia and pakistan would have used their money power to lead them back to the "right path".

Their bosses in Saudi Arabia were only interested in maintaining their own political power in the absence of the challenge posed by people like Bin Laden.

This wasn't the case which shows that taliban were indeed implementing islamic laws (sharia) with full backing of its ideological masters.

What it shows is that the Saudis didn't care what went on in Afghanistan, so long as they could pump their radicals over there to be cannon fodder.

[KettleWhistle]

BTW, I have nothing but condemnation for the Synogogues that were burned in Gaza following the departure of the Jews. At minimum they should have been left standing. Burning them was an ugly and senseless act.
Why condemnation? What difference does it make? Certainly, most Jews don't really care. An empty synagogue is just an empty building. Now, our historical and holy sites, graves or our patriarchs, etc., are a whole other matter.

[Angry Lord]

We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

If you want to ignore the fact that Talibanis had studied the koran and implemented it in its full form then what can i say?

Tommorow you will also want to disagree with the fact that Al-qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks.

Their bosses in Saudi Arabia were only interested in maintaining their own political power in the absence of the challenge posed by people like Bin Laden.
So finally an acceptance that the most Islamic regime in the world is led by opportunists rather than people with morals.

What it shows is that the Saudis didn't care what went on in Afghanistan, so long as they could pump their radicals over there to be cannon fodder.
The saudis were heavily into the Afghani jehad to use it as an laboratory to experiment with implementation of sharia on a large population so that in the future the lessons learnt could be applied all over the whole world.

[andak01]

If you want to ignore the fact that Talibanis had studied the koran and implemented it in its full form then what can i say?

Tommorow you will also want to disagree with the fact that Al-qaeda was behind the 9/11 attacks.

Funny you should say that. No, I don't deny that Al-Qaida committed the attacks after having gotten into a drunken brawl in a strip club they committed suicide and killed Muslims, women and children with fire, also burning Qurans in the process. If that to you is "implementing the Quran" then we have nothing more to talk about. There are Hadiths and Quranic quotes forbidding all of those activities. And no, you don't know more about Islam than I do. Reading ProphetOfDoom doesn't qualify you as an Islamic scholar.

So finally an acceptance that the most Islamic regime in the world is led by opportunists rather than people with morals.

Yeah. Unlike Dick Cheney, Saudis are driven by corrupt croneyism. :)

The saudis were heavily into the Afghani jehad to use it as an laboratory to experiment with implementation of sharia on a large population so that in the future the lessons learnt could be applied all over the whole world.

The people they sent to Afghanistan were destabilizing KSA. It was a win-win for them to get rid of them and at the same time build credibility with the US for fighting the Russkies. Problem was, there wasn't a plan for what happens when the Russkies are gone and the trained force remains behind.

[Angry Lord]

Funny you should say that. No, I don't deny that Al-Qaida committed the attacks after having gotten into a drunken brawl in a strip club they committed suicide and killed Muslims, women and children with fire, also burning Qurans in the process.

So you are more worried that the Quran got burnt in the process of killing "infidels" rather than the terrorist actions of the Al-qaeda.

If that to you is "implementing the Quran" then we have nothing more to talk about. There are Hadiths and Quranic quotes forbidding all of those activities.

And yet today even after those very same Hadiths and Quranic quotes have been constantly told to the layperson the terrorists factories keep churning out more terrorists rather than putting an end to it. Then are those muslims that commit terrorist actions not fit to be called muslims?

And no, you don't know more about Islam than I do. Reading ProphetOfDoom doesn't qualify you as an Islamic scholar.

First and foremost i didn't quote any koranic verses. Just held an mirror to the actions of the muslims that they undertake in their mission to bring the "light of Islam" to the whole planet.

Yeah. Unlike Dick Cheney, Saudis are driven by corrupt croneyism. :)
Why compare the "pure arab muslim" one who has received the "light" to an person from "dark", "false" religion?

Has the "light of Islam" run out that now muslims are compared to people of such religion to hide their double standards in morality.

The people they sent to Afghanistan were destabilizing KSA. It was a win-win for them to get rid of them and at the same time build credibility with the US for fighting the Russkies. Problem was, there wasn't a plan for what happens when the Russkies are gone and the trained force remains behind.

There were multiple reasons why the saudis were itching for a state were sharia and jehad could be implemented "fully". They knew that implementing them in Saudi arabia will ruin their country. So afghanistan become an lab in which such experiments could be carried without any danger to their state.

[andak01]

So you are more worried that the Quran got burnt in the process of killing "infidels" rather than the terrorist actions of the Al-qaeda.

No. That's just one in the list of many things that they did contrary to Islam. But no, I actually didn't say anything remotely like that.

And yet today even after those very same Hadiths and Quranic quotes have been constantly told to the layperson the terrorists factories keep churning out more terrorists rather than putting an end to it. Then are those muslims that commit terrorist actions not fit to be called muslims?

It's really not very important what we call them. They are criminals and a danger to society first and foremost. They need to be handled in the way we handle any terrorist with informants, intelligence, surveillance, law inforcement and military. The Western legal system and military are fully capable of preventing and prosecuting the majority of terrorism. If the test of success is zero activity, I doubt we'll get there, but thousands upon thousands of cases can be prevented and have been prevented.

As for the governments that support them, they are all coming to a painful realization that there is nothing to be gained by it, through a multitude of economic sanctions, etc. My hope is that, at minimum, we can arrive at some uneasy allies like Libya, where the governments offer us cooperation through their own self interest and prove that this can be a successful venture. Carrot and stick need to be part of the solution. Eventually that kind of cooperation can lead to more reforms.

First and foremost i didn't quote any koranic verses. Just held an mirror to the actions of the muslims that they undertake in their mission to bring the "light of Islam" to the whole planet.

No. You only held a mirror to the most vicious examples who act nothing like the majority of Muslims.

Why compare the "pure arab muslim" one who has received the "light" to an person from "dark", "false" religion?

I don't know, that's your statement. I didn't say anything like that.

Has the "light of Islam" run out that now muslims are compared to people of such religion to hide their double standards in morality.

No more than the light of Christianity has run out because of David Koraish or Eric Rudolph or Jim Jones or Charles Manson or Joseph Kony or anyone else who perverts the teachings of the Bible for the purpose of murder. They would all tell you they are on the right path and that others have strayed.

There were multiple reasons why the saudis were itching for a state were sharia and jehad could be implemented "fully". They knew that implementing them in Saudi arabia will ruin their country. So afghanistan become an lab in which such experiments could be carried without any danger to their state.

Let's see, they knew it would ruin their country, but they were enthusiastic to implement and promote it. That makes sense to me. NOT!

[Angry Lord]

It's really not very important what we call them. They are criminals and a danger to society first and foremost. They need to be handled in the way we handle any terrorist with informants, intelligence, surveillance, law inforcement and military. The Western legal system and military are fully capable of preventing and prosecuting the majority of terrorism. If the test of success is zero activity, I doubt we'll get there, but thousands upon thousands of cases can be prevented and have been prevented.

FBI, CIA or Homeland defense and their clones in other countries cant completely stop terrorist attacks until the ideology that encourages and legitimizes terror are not destroyed.

No. You only held a mirror to the most vicious examples who act nothing like the majority of Muslims.
If the actions of wahabi,deobandi muslims who form a major chunk of muslims are vicious then the problem is with their ideology and not my pointing their actions.

No more than the light of Christianity has run out because of David Koraish or Eric Rudolph or Jim Jones or Charles Manson or Joseph Kony or anyone else who perverts the teachings of the Bible for the purpose of murder. They would all tell you they are on the right path and that others have strayed.

I will be concerned only when other people start listening to their views and do an 9/11 on the muslims.

Let's see, they knew it would ruin their country, but they were enthusiastic to implement and promote it. That makes sense to me. NOT!
Any person who has read the Koran knows that it calls for the destruction of non-muslims and yet people call Islam an "peaceful religion". Is that not an contradiction?

[andak01]

If the actions of wahabi,deobandi muslims who form a major chunk of muslims are vicious then the problem is with their ideology and not my pointing their actions.

Obviously they don't form a majority even combined. Even you wouldn't contend such a thing.

I will be concerned only when other people start listening to their views and do an 9/11 on the muslims.

Then you believe two wrongs make a right?

Any person who has read the Koran knows that it calls for the destruction of non-muslims and yet people call Islam an "peaceful religion". Is that not an contradiction?

Believe it or not, some people actually read the Quran outside of the influence of ProphetOfDoom. We actually read the words and the explanations given in the tafsir and listen to the sermons our imams give in explanation. After all that, we don't conclude that we have to kill anyone. Is that a crime? Are we stupid because we don't agree with the Taliban and Al Qaida?

[Angry Lord]

Obviously they don't form a majority even combined. Even you wouldn't contend such a thing.
They do form an majority among sunni muslims when you combine them. The major part of sunni muslims who follow wahabi and deobandi ideology are also the ones who are ready to take part in terrorist actions.

Then you believe two wrongs make a right?
I am not advocating any such thing, Just pointing out the obvious difference in the fundamentalists in islam and other religions.

Believe it or not, some people actually read the Quran outside of the influence of ProphetOfDoom. We actually read the words and the explanations given in the tafsir and listen to the sermons our imams give in explanation. After all that, we don't conclude that we have to kill anyone. Is that a crime? Are we stupid because we don't agree with the Taliban and Al Qaida?
One islamic verse says it is ok if muslims lie in front of kafirs. I hope you are not using that verse when writing your posts.:unsure:

[andak01]

They do form an majority among sunni muslims when you combine them.

I disagree. If you have some figures to prove or disprove such a point, please present them. I couldn't find any.



The major part of sunni muslims who follow wahabi and deobandi ideology are also the ones who are ready to take part in terrorist actions.


There's some truth to that. But there are subsects within each group that are far more extreme. It isn't that all Salafs or deobandis are jihadis.


I am not advocating any such thing, Just pointing out the obvious difference in the fundamentalists in islam and other religions.

The difference is that Islamic theocracy didn't have the tar beat out of it by centuries of bloodshed like the Papacy or by nukes like the Emporor worshippers of Japan or by the Pharoahs and the Babylonians like the Jews. Neither the Jews nor the Christians gave up their theocracies without a fight. The Jews were put under the yoke of several other theocracies before secularism came along. I'm sure you are familiar with all of that.

Islamic theocracy on the other hand was a world player until the fall of the Ottomans and still maintains significant power today.

One islamic verse says it is ok if muslims lie in front of kafirs. I hope you are not using that verse when writing your posts.:unsure:

Mein Kampf says that Jews are a bunch of liars. And every general that ever lived said that their enemies were liars while using propaganda during time of war to lessen the appearance of defeats and increase the effect of victories. Lying is part of life. That's why we have a word for it in English.

Now if you want to play the game that Muslims lie and Jews don't, go deceive yourself. I have no reason to lie on this forum. The points I make are readily checked in public sources on the internet. Some of what I say is opinion. If you find something that contradicts an opinion, that isn't the same as proving that someone willfully deceived you. Calling such a person a liar is a lie in itself.

[Angry Lord]

There's some truth to that. But there are subsects within each group that are far more extreme. It isn't that all Salafs or deobandis are jihadis.
A person who believes that a non-muslim should be either converted or killed is a extremist. Every deobandi and wahabi believes this $hit and tries his level best to implement this demonic ideology. For this very reason they are jehadis.

Islamic theocracy on the other hand was a world player until the fall of the Ottomans and still maintains significant power today.
Islamic theocracy or Sunni theocracy? ;)

Mein Kampf says that Jews are a bunch of liars.
I thought you only believed in the Koran, now you have shown that you also believe in Mein Kampf. Hail andak.

Lying is part of life. That's why we have a word for it in English.
Thanks for clearing my doubt and confessing that muslims indeed are liars since they follow koranic verses that ask them to lie before kafirs. Now all your posts make more sense. They all are a bunch of lies to save the face of islam before us(kafirs).

Now if you want to play the game that Muslims lie and Jews don't, go deceive yourself.
Why drag the jews in this matter? The question was Does the koranic verse say that it is ok to lie before kafirs? Simple answer could be either Yes or No. But you seem to be itching to drag jews in every other matter concerning Islam.

I have no reason to lie on this forum. The points I make are readily checked in public sources on the internet.
Yah, you seem to fancy links from wikipedia which as everyone knows can be easily subverted by posting false and misleading information.

[andak01]

A person who believes that a non-muslim should be either converted or killed is a extremist. Every deobandi and wahabi believes this $hit and tries his level best to implement this demonic ideology. For this very reason they are jehadis.

Well you're simply wrong. I personally know more than a couple of wahabbis. That's not what they believe and I've spoken with them extensively about it.

Islamic theocracy or Sunni theocracy? ;)

This is one of the difficulties of this complex subject. Depending on what we are talking about, it might make sense to refer to a single entity which really doesn't exist. In this case Islamic theocracy refers to both KSA and Iran which, though theocraticly different both act as theocracies.


I thought you only believed in the Koran, now you have shown that you also believe in Mein Kampf. Hail andak.

Actually, I'm against the methods of Mein Kampf being used against me or anyone else for that matter.

Thanks for clearing my doubt and confessing that muslims indeed are liars since they follow koranic verses that ask them to lie before kafirs. Now all your posts make more sense. They all are a bunch of lies to save the face of islam before us(kafirs).

I haven't quite come to the conclusion that all Jews are stinking bigots, but you're not pushing me away from that.

Why drag the jews in this matter? The question was Does the koranic verse say that it is ok to lie before kafirs?

What verse?

Simple answer could be either Yes or No. But you seem to be itching to drag jews in every other matter concerning Islam.

You've called Muslims liars, implying that's something we do more than other people or even more outrageous something we do that nobody else does. This is a Mein Kampf type of charge leveled against the "lying Jews". Well, one of the greatest liars of all times was Otto Schindler who saved the lives of Jews. Islam does not make a virtue of lying, period.

Yah, you seem to fancy links from wikipedia which as everyone knows can be easily subverted by posting false and misleading information.

wikipedia is easy to search. Some of the articles state that they have neutrality issues. If you don't like my wikipedia articles, each one has its sources listed at the bottom. They are as good or as bad as any other source. Difference being they may have different slants or a more neutral point of view depending upon what the article is about.

[Angry Lord]

Well you're simply wrong. I personally know more than a couple of wahabbis. That's not what they believe and I've spoken with them extensively about it.
The actions of wahabi and deobandis speak for themselves. No need to bring "i know some terrorists but they are so nice" thing.

Actually, I'm against the methods of Mein Kampf being used against me or anyone else for that matter.
I didn't quote Hitler $hit book. I asked you about Koran and its order to lie before kafirs, if you cant understand simple logic and have to indulge in logical somersaults to defend your islam's honour then it speaks for itself the type of ideology islam is?

I haven't quite come to the conclusion that all Jews are stinking bigots, but you're not pushing me away from that.
Why such hatred towards jews? Did jews rape your wife just because she is an non-jew or did jews cut any muslim's head just because he was an non-jew?

What verse?
I hope you know what Taqiyya is?

You've called Muslims liars, implying that's something we do more than other people or even more outrageous something we do that nobody else does. This is a Mein Kampf type of charge leveled against the "lying Jews". Well, one of the greatest liars of all times was Otto Schindler who saved the lives of Jews. Islam does not make a virtue of lying, period.
Then explain Taqiyya or is that something that Hitler put into your koran.

wikipedia is easy to search. Some of the articles state that they have neutrality issues. If you don't like my wikipedia articles, each one has its sources listed at the bottom.
Sources that link to free websites which are setup only with the intention to widely spread mis-information.

[andak01]

The actions of wahabi and deobandis speak for themselves. No need to bring "i know some terrorists but they are so nice" thing.

They aren't terrorists and they don't support terrorism. But I'd hate for reality to get in the way of your opinion.

I didn't quote Hitler $hit book. I asked you about Koran and its order to lie before kafirs,

I'm not familiar with that verse.

if you cant understand simple logic and have to indulge in logical somersaults to defend your islam's honour then it speaks for itself the type of ideology islam is?

You've essentially accused me of being part of a species that can't tell the truth. I'm giving you the respect you so richly deserve. Are you one of those lying Jews? Do you find that question insulting? Then don't address somebody else in that tone.


Why such hatred towards jews? Did jews rape your wife just because she is an non-jew or did jews cut any muslim's head just because he was an non-jew?

Did Muslims rape your wife? Did they cut off your head? Somebody you know? Somebody who knows somebody you know? Yes, a Jew did kill a Muslim sometime over something. Should I hold that over your head and judge you based on that?

I hope you know what Taqiyya is?

I'm quite sure you think you do.


Then explain Taqiyya or is that something that Hitler put into your koran.

Taqiyya is an excuse for lazy assed bigots like yourself to call anything a Muslim says that you don't like a lie. It's like a switch to turn your brain off with. Instead of saying lalalala, you can say taqiyya taqiyya taqiyya. Thanks for playing.


Sources that link to free websites which are setup only with the intention to widely spread mis-information.

That's what you think? What, I should pay extra for my internet news?

[Angry Lord]

They aren't terrorists and they don't support terrorism. But I'd hate for reality to get in the way of your opinion.
Wahabis and Deobandis are known to support mass murder of unarmed civilians. Afghanistan under Taliban is an prime example. Your verbal somersaults trying to defend such terrorist swines only exposes you and your religious beliefs.

I'm not familiar with that verse.
A muslim should know islam. Since you dont know islam you are an kafir. Henceforth you should call yourself an kafir. That suits you.

You've essentially accused me of being part of a species that can't tell the truth. I'm giving you the respect you so richly deserve. Are you one of those lying Jews? Do you find that question insulting? Then don't address somebody else in that tone.
Cant i be an "lying christian", "lying buddhist", "lying kafir"? Why this intense hatred that you display towards jews. Either Hitler was your teacher in school or your mullah worships Hitler.

Did Muslims rape your wife? Did they cut off your head?
Mohammed whom you muslims call as your prophet has already done these inhumane things and more. It is written in your koran. Go read it.

Taqiyya is an excuse for lazy assed bigots like yourself to call anything a Muslim says that you don't like a lie. It's like a switch to turn your brain off with. Instead of saying lalalala, you can say taqiyya taqiyya taqiyya. Thanks for playing.
Asking a question on taqiyya changes one into "lazy assed bigots"? Well I'm starting to like muslim logic.:p

That's what you think? What, I should pay extra for my internet news?
Why not use Hamas news? They also have a jehadi mickey mouse for people like you.:lol:

[varian]

...
Why such hatred towards jews? ...

The main focus of Islam is to marginalize Judaism and Jews in general. To some of us on this forum, Islam has shown antagonism towards the Jews from its inception. Putting any kind of religious building in any country controlled by Muslims is just asking for tragedy. It is obvious to most Jews that this diety called allah is not the same entity as their HaShem. Allah seems to be antagonistic towards Jews, whereas, HaShem has always left the door open for them to return to Him. Many Muslims exhibit attitudes towards the Qur'an, Kaaba, Muhammad, the meteor stone, and other customs that are just as pagan as the other visual gods that Muhammad supposedly cleansed from the former pagan shine, the Kaaba. Just read about the rituals during the Hajj. Their mythology is as elaborate as any of the "Arabian Night" tales or mythology of any other religion on the planet. Like most cultists, when confronted with eveidences of questionable behavior of Muhammad, or the exegesis of the Qur'an, then they just counter your opinion with their favorite canned Muslim scholar. When one confuses a statement made in a hadith with a statement from the Qur'an (or visa versa), then you have already lost the debate, because the subject is discounted due to presentation and not context or content. In dealing with many of the so called "peaceful, moderate Muslim apologists" on this forum, you might as well go spit into the wind, you'll have more success. Good luck anyway!!! :cool:

[andak01]

Wahabis and Deobandis are known to support mass murder of unarmed civilians. Afghanistan under Taliban is an prime example. Your verbal somersaults trying to defend such terrorist swines only exposes you and your religious beliefs.

Some among each of those groups do support terrorism, but they don't all think as a collective hive and many even among those groups do not. This isn't a binary equation that if you are born in Afghanistan or KSA, you support terrorism.

A muslim should know islam. Since you dont know islam you are an kafir. Henceforth you should call yourself an kafir. That suits you.

And a Jew should respect religion. And a person who has never had one one thousandth the experience of living around the people he's talking about should consider learning more before spouting off. Do you attend a mosque, study the Quran daily, pray to Allah, have Muslims to your home everynight? Talk with them, play with their kids? Talk face to face with Muslim scholars? And yet, from a book or a website, you know enough to make God's judgement on me? You should be praying to forgiveness and not to me. I can forgive your ignorance.


Cant i be an "lying christian", "lying buddhist", "lying kafir"? Why this intense hatred that you display towards jews. Either Hitler was your teacher in school or your mullah worships Hitler.

I don't have any hatred for Jews whatsoever. I hate bigots who approach me with "why do all Muslims lie all the time"? Obviously you are offended when I take a similar tack with you. Would you like to try again and start over. Muslims lie, Jews lie. That's why every language in the world has a word for that act. If I ask a general where his troops are, he's going to lie to me. If you wife says: "Do you think I look fat?" Your choice, you do what you want.

Mohammed whom you muslims call as your prophet has already done these inhumane things and more. It is written in your koran. Go read it.

I have read it, but without ridiculous leading commentary. I just read the words and then I studied his biography and then I read tafsir. It's not hard, you should try it. Quite a different experience from getting predigested poison from prophetofdoom.

Asking a question on taqiyya changes one into "lazy assed bigots"? Well I'm starting to like muslim logic.:p

There's no point in moving on from there. If the first question you are going to ask is "Why do Muslims all lie?"

Taqiyya means you can pretend to convert if there is a gun to your head. It doesn't mean you lie about what Islam is or misquote the Quran. It doesn't give you liberty to break contracts or treaties. That's what it is. If you want to shut your brain down that's your choice.

[Angry Lord]

The main focus of Islam is to marginalize Judaism and Jews in general. To some of us on this forum, Islam has shown antagonism towards the Jews from its inception.
And this needs to be conveyed to all those people who are ignorant of islam and think it is an peaceful religion. Islam literally means Submission.

Putting any kind of religious building in any country controlled by Muslims is just asking for tragedy. It is obvious to most Jews that this diety called allah is not the same entity as their HaShem. Allah seems to be antagonistic towards Jews, whereas, HaShem has always left the door open for them to return to Him. Many Muslims exhibit attitudes towards the Qur'an, Kaaba, Muhammad, the meteor stone, and other customs that are just as pagan as the other visual gods that Muhammad supposedly cleansed from the former pagan shine, the Kaaba. Just read about the rituals during the Hajj. Their mythology is as elaborate as any of the "Arabian Night" tales or mythology of any other religion on the planet.
This is the actual "light of Islam" that needs to be shown to millions of ignorant people.

Like most cultists, when confronted with eveidences of questionable behavior of Muhammad, or the exegesis of the Qur'an, then they just counter your opinion with their favorite canned Muslim scholar. When one confuses a statement made in a hadith with a statement from the Qur'an (or visa versa), then you have already lost the debate, because the subject is discounted due to presentation and not context or content.
Another trick as displayed by andak is to accuse others of propoganda if verses in Islam promoting enemity and hatred are questioned.

In dealing with many of the so called "peaceful, moderate Muslim apologists" on this forum, you might as well go spit into the wind, you'll have more success. Good luck anyway!!! :cool:

Well reading the verbal somersaults of Muslim apologists is real fun. Better than Youtube's "Achmed the terrorist". :D

[Angry Lord]

Some among each of those groups do support terrorism, but they don't all think as a collective hive and many even among those groups do not. This isn't a binary equation that if you are born in Afghanistan or KSA, you support terrorism.
Deobandis and Wahabis are present in large numbers outside Afghanistan and Saudi. Most terrorists attacks carried out by sunnis can be traced back to either Muslim brotherhood, Deobandis or Wahabis.

And a person who has never had one one thousandth the experience of living around the people he's talking about should consider learning more before spouting off.
I live among muslims, both the shia and the sunni variety. I know their behaviour and have seen their actions. I dont need lessons from you on muslims.

Do you attend a mosque, study the Quran daily, pray to Allah, have Muslims to your home everynight? Talk with them, play with their kids? Talk face to face with Muslim scholars? And yet, from a book or a website, you know enough to make God's judgement on me? You should be praying to forgiveness and not to me.
To know more about Muslims one needs to read koran and the associated islamic books with an open minded and see that they are full murders, rapes and looting. Islam has brought nothing but destruction.

I can forgive your ignorance.
You are no one to forgive my alleged "ignorance". First inform yourselves what an mess you have got yourself into by joining Islam.

I don't have any hatred for Jews whatsoever.
Taqiyya.

I have read it, but without ridiculous leading commentary. I just read the words and then I studied his biography and then I read tafsir. It's not hard, you should try it.
Taqiyya in action again.

Taqiyya means you can pretend to convert if there is a gun to your head.
Another Taqiyya. :D

The word "Taqiyya" (http://www.islam-watch.org/Warner/Taqiyya-Islamic-Principle-Lying-for-Allah.htm) literally means: "Concealing, precaution, guarding.” It is employed in disguising one's beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions or strategies. In practical terms it is manifested as dissimulation, lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding with the intention of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking. It is currently employed in fending off and neutralising any criticism of Islam or Muslims.

Falsehoods told to prevent the denigration of Islam, to protect oneself, or to promote the cause of Islam are sanctioned in the Qur'an and Sunna, including lying under oath in testimony before a court, deceiving by making distorted statements to the media such as the claim that Islam is a “religion of peace”. A Muslim is even permitted to deny or denounce his faith if, in so doing, he protects or furthers the interests of Islam, so long as he remains faithful to Islam in his heart.

And if you need more "light" on mohammed also read this.
Muhammad’s Dead Poets Society (http://www.answering-islam.de/Main/Authors/Arlandson/dead_poets.htm)

[andak01]

Nurse, the patient is flat-lining! He exibits no further response to stimulus. He's found a way not to have to think about anything a Muslim says to him. He's shut himself in a chat room with Ali Sina and Ibn Warraq and no amount of information can coax him out!

Where as I know not all Jews are liars, because they don't all believe the hateful crap you spew.

[Angry Lord]

Nurse, the patient is flat-lining!
What is the name of the nurse? Aisha?

More on taqiyya
Outwitting

Islamic spokesmen commonly use taqiyya as a form of 'outwitting'. The skilled taqiyya-tactician doesn’t want the matter at hand to be debated or discussed; so his opponent must be outwitted or preemptively outflanked by the use of taqiyya. The objective is to divert attention away from the subject through duplicity and obfuscation.

Role playing as the victim
When placed under scrutiny or criminal investigation, (even when there is overwhelming, irrefutable evidence of guilt or complicity), the taqiyya-tactician will quickly attempt to counter the allegation by resorting to the claim that it is, in fact, the accused who are the 'the victims'. Victims of Islamophobia, racism, religious discrimination and intolerance. Currently, this is the most commonly encountered form of distraction and 'outwitting'….. Defence by offence.

they don't all believe the hateful crap you spew.
I only talked about Islam. Thanks for informing that Islam is crap for you.

[dayag]

What is the name of the nurse? Aisha?

More on taqiyya


I only talked about Islam. Thanks for informing that Islam is crap for you.

Angry Lord,

Twisting Andak's words to a meaning he never meant doesn't prove you right. You know he doesn't believe your portrayal of Islam is accurate, nor that Islam is "crap". You are not making yourself look clever with such trollish behaviour.

You claimed that there is a verse in the Koran which says it is ok to lie to Kafirs. When Andak asked you what verse you are referring to, you start squawking about taqiyya, using it as your whole answer to many of Andak's statements (the equivalent of calling him a liar - more trollish behaviour).

If you can prove Andak wrong, then do so. Cite the verse which tells Muslims that they can lie to Kafirs or just drop the subject, since he has called your bluff and proven you wrong.

Please play nice or go away.
Rules of the Road (http://www.israelforum.com/board/showthread.php?p=26#post26).

[Angry Lord]

Angry Lord,

Twisting Andak's words to a meaning he never meant doesn't prove you right. You know he doesn't believe your portrayal of Islam is accurate, nor that Islam is "crap". You are not making yourself look clever with such trollish behaviour.

I hope you have read all of Andak posts. When i asked him what Taqiyya means this is the response from him.
Taqiyya is an excuse for lazy assed bigots like yourself

Is making personal attacks OK when others ask him questions on Islam?

If you can prove Andak wrong, then do so. Cite the verse which tells Muslims that they can lie to Kafirs or just drop the subject, since he has called your bluff and proven you wrong.

Lying for the sake of Allah
Hadith Sahih Bukhari (5:369)
Prophet Muhammad called for volunteers to assassinate a poet who was making fun of him, K’ab bin Ashraf.

K’ab’s step-brother Muhammad bin Maslama said he would, but could he lie to get him out of his fortress? The Prophet replied affirmatively.

Taqiyya, Taqqiyya and Dissimulation (by Robert E. Burns, Grad Dip Islamic Studies).



Taqiyya, a "higher order of truth sanctioned" by the Qur’an.
Bukhari: V7B67N427 “The Prophet said, ‘If I take an oath and later find something else better than that, then I do what is better and expiate my oath.”

Qur’an 5:41 “Whomever Allah wants to deceive you cannot help. Allah does not want them to know the truth because he intends to disgrace them and then torture them.”

Qur’an 66:2 “Allah has already sanctioned for you the dissolution of your vows.”

Taqiyya is common to both Shiite and Sunni Muslim discourse and has significant implications for understanding Islamic fundamentalism and terrorist operations. The theory and practice of counter terrorism would be counter productive, indeed pointless, and even harmful, without reference to taqiyya.

The implications of the principle of Al-Takeyya
Unfortunately, when dealing with Muslims, one must keep in mind that Muslims can communicate something with apparent sincerity, when in reality they may have just the opposite agenda in their hearts. Bluntly stated, Islam permits Muslims to lie anytime that they perceive that their own well-being, or that of Islam, is threatened.

[andak01]

I hope you have read all of Andak posts. When i asked him what Taqiyya means this is the response from him.

Is making personal attacks OK when others ask him questions on Islam?

I can tell where you get all your source info. If you genuinely want to learn about Islam, you could use Islamic sources. Those sites predefine what you are reading so as to put Islam in the worst light. If given a copy of Moby Dick, the commentary would go.

"Look at how the Muslim imperialist author forces the reader to submit to dhimitude!" Using the imperative command tone, he sets the reader to his violent will!

"Call me Ishmael."

WhaleOfDoom.com



Lying for the sake of Allah
Hadith Sahih Bukhari (5:369)
Prophet Muhammad called for volunteers to assassinate a poet who was making fun of him, K’ab bin Ashraf.

K’ab’s step-brother Muhammad bin Maslama said he would, but could he lie to get him out of his fortress? The Prophet replied affirmatively.

Taqiyya, Taqqiyya and Dissimulation (by Robert E. Burns, Grad Dip Islamic Studies).

First off. You said you had something from the Quran. This isn't from the Quran. Secondly, this isn't as the header states, lying for the sake of Allah. Since it isn't in the Quran, those aren't the words of Allah. Unlike when God tells Joshue to slaughter everyone in sight in the Bible, Allah didn't say this. Third. It isn't a general prescription or a requirement, it's a specific permission in a specific situation. This quote, supplied by the Scottish missionary Robert Burns is captioned and taken out of context so as not to be recognizeable. Did Burns write it, translate it, write a book called Taqiyya? Just what does Burns have to do with this?


Qur’an 5:41 “Whomever Allah wants to deceive you cannot help. Allah does not want them to know the truth because he intends to disgrace them and then torture them.”

You are the perfect example of what this verse talks about. You've got it in your head that Muslims are nothing but liars, and I've already said I can't help you with that. You cannot deceive me to believe what isn't true. Sadly, this verse also dooms you do your fate of believing lies.

[andak01]

Volume 7, Book 67, Number 427:

Narrated Zahdam: We were in the company of Abu Musa Al-Ash'ari and there were friendly relations between us and this tribe of Jarm. Abu Musa was presented with a dish containing chicken. Among the people there was sitting a red-faced man who did not come near the food. Abu Musa said (to him), "Come on (and eat), for I have seen Allah's Apostle eating of it (i.e. chicken)." He said, "I have seen it eating something (dirty) and since then I have disliked it, and have taken an oath that I shall not eat it ' Abu Musa said, "Come on, I will tell you (or narrate to you). Once I went to Allah s Apostle with a group of Al-Ash'ariyin, and met him while he was angry, distributing some camels of Rakat. We asked for mounts but he took an oath that he would not give us any mounts, and added, 'I have nothing to mount you on' In the meantime some camels of booty were brought to Allah's Apostle and he asked twice, 'Where are Al-Ash'ariyin?" So he gave us five white camels with big humps. We stayed for a short while (after we had covered a little distance), and then I said to my companions, "Allah's Apostle has forgotten his oath. By Allah, if we do not remind Allah's Apostle of his oath, we will never be successful." So we returned to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Apostle! We asked you for mounts, but you took an oath that you would not give us any mounts; we think that you have forgotten your oath.' He said, 'It is Allah Who has given you mounts. By Allah, and Allah willing, if I take an oath and later find something else better than that. then I do what is better and expiate my oath.' "


So if I say to a poor beggar by the road, "I swear I don't have a penny and I won't give you any money. and then I find a dollar in my pants is it better to give charity or not? So his oath was making him stingy and breaking it made him charitable. But of couse you left that part out, because you're so honest.

If I make a treaty to be an ally of Germany and the Nazis take over, is it better to honor the treaty or fight the Nazis?

[Angry Lord]

First off. You said you had something from the Quran. This isn't from the Quran. Secondly, this isn't as the header states, lying for the sake of Allah. Since it isn't in the Quran, those aren't the words of Allah.

I hope you know that all muslims believe in the koran, sunnah and the hadiths. Taqiyya is one of the hadiths (oral traditions relating to the words and deeds of the mohammed).

Now you cant deny that mohammed explicitly gave permission to lie.

Sadly, this verse also dooms you do your fate of believing lies.
Dont worry about my fate. Worry about yourself and the wrong path that you have choosen that leads to destruction.

[Angry Lord]

So if I say to a poor beggar by the road, "I swear I don't have a penny and I won't give you any money. and then I find a dollar in my pants is it better to give charity or not? So his oath was making him stingy and breaking it made him charitable.

There is a vast difference between such situations and today's world afflicted by jihadism. Daily beheadings, suicide bombs, rocket attacks by muslims and then constant denial that this has anything to do with Islam appears that taqiyya is being used rather than any truth being spoken.

If I make a treaty to be an ally of Germany and the Nazis take over, is it better to honor the treaty or fight the Nazis?
Many of today's jehadis would rather join Hitler rather oppose him on moral grounds.

[dayag]

I hope you know that all muslims believe in the koran, sunnah and the hadiths. Taqiyya is one of the hadiths (oral traditions relating to the words and deeds of the mohammed).

Now you cant deny that mohammed explicitly gave permission to lie.

Dont worry about my fate. Worry about yourself and the wrong path that you have choosen that leads to destruction.

Actually, Angry Lord, hadiths are not considered to be infallible by Muslims. There are various levels of credibility for hadiths. And as Andak pointed out they must be considered in context.

[dayag]

There is a vast difference between such situations and today's world afflicted by jihadism. Daily beheadings, suicide bombs, rocket attacks by muslims and then constant denial that this has anything to do with Islam appears that taqiyya is being used rather than any truth being spoken.

Many of today's jehadis would rather join Hitler rather oppose him on moral grounds.

Angry Lord, not all Muslims are Jihadis. The fact that Andak opposes such extremists does not mean that he is engaging in taqiyya, but that he thinks they are perverting Islam and committing evil.

If we are to prevail against these terrorists, it will only be with the help of those Muslims who oppose them as well. If Israel takes on all of Islam, we are doomed to destruction. If we ally ourselves with people like Andak, we have at least a chance for success against those who are a threat to us all.

[andak01]

If we are to prevail against these terrorists, it will only be with the help of those Muslims who oppose them as well. If Israel takes on all of Islam, we are doomed to destruction. If we ally ourselves with people like Andak, we have at least a chance for success against those who are a threat to us all.

There's constructive talk. And for my part I consider that a call to action. There are many Muslims that don't hate Jews. If I am to understand that there are dayags in the world who don't hate all of us, I'm sure to rally behind those people. I don't want either Muslims or Jews to be ostracize in my community or any place else. Allah and Muhammad (SAW) didn't tell us to hate Jews, they told us to defend against Jews and others that are out to destroy us. Defending yourselves against destruction by the threat of jihadis is a valid action. Demeaning Muslims who bear you no ill will is not.

[varian]

... Demeaning Muslims who bear you no ill will is not.

Then we are to take that all your constant demeaning of anything non-Muslim on this forum was only in self-defense? As a defender of your faith, all your presentations can be considered the ultimate fact: take it to the bank because you have sat in the presence of esteemed Muslim scholars and of course not one of those scholars would have a gram of a tainted or biased view. Therefore you are actually the persecuted minority on the forum, and have been placed in an intellectual refugee camp, so to speak. That has a distinct "Palestinian" ring to it. The esteem, or lack of it that you seem to elicit from other posters on this forum is well deserved. You have earned every bit of it. Like so many other cultists that I have met; despite your vast knowledge about everyone else's beliefs, when it comes to your own religion; you don't know what you don't know.

In a post in another thread you try to goad a new member of the forum into a verbal battle. This is of course was done in self defense for some perceived slight made against you. I mean who could blame you for such an unbridled exhibition of your own personal ego? I don't know how you are in the flesh, but IMO, on this forum you are not exactly known as a peacemaker.

[andak01]

Then we are to take that all your constant demeaning of anything non-Muslim on this forum was only in self-defense?

How is it that I ever demeaned anything non-Muslim? Seriously. But yes, I am in defense mode at least 90% of the time here. Sometimes I lose an argument because my only in kind response would be to go to a disgusting level of bigotry, something I don't have in my heart.

As a defender of your faith, all your presentations can be considered the ultimate fact: take it to the bank because you have sat in the presence of esteemed Muslim scholars and of course not one of those scholars would have a gram of a tainted or biased view.

They do of course have biases. But they are at least Muslim! Let me tell you something. About five years ago, when I first came to this forum, I was much more anti-Israel than I am today. As an American, I had gone through my life without taking a close look at Israel. As a Muslim and reading in the news and listening to fellow Muslims, I got my nose stuck in it. And initially, I read a lot of material written by non-Jews. I was outraged and angry. Why didn't I know all this stuff before. As I know now, not (in every case) because it wasn't true, but because it was spun and because coming to know the Jews and Israel is a lot more complicated then reading a couple of websites, you need to know the people. I had spoken to and read the words of people who hated Israel. I needed to know more.

Now I do know more than I did then and if you get the attack dogs off me long enough, I'll show you.

Therefore you are actually the persecuted minority on the forum, and have been placed in an intellectual refugee camp, so to speak. That has a distinct "Palestinian" ring to it.

Wha...? I'm the persecuted minority here because you guys drove off some people that are more civilized than me. I would prefer them to be here than me, honestly.


The esteem, or lack of it that you seem to elicit from other posters on this forum is well deserved. You have earned every bit of it. Like so many other cultists that I have met; despite your vast knowledge about everyone else's beliefs, when it comes to your own religion; you don't know what you don't know.




That's pretty good, call one of the best established and most popular religions in the world a cult. I think that pretty much sums up the rest of your post.


In a post in another thread you try to goad a new member of the forum into a verbal battle. This is of course was done in self defense for some perceived slight made against you.

Are you referring to Angry Lion? He started off by asking me why all Muslims are allowed to lie. I don't know, why are all Jews allowed to lie?

I mean who could blame you for such an unbridled exhibition of your own personal ego? I don't know how you are i[/qun the flesh, but IMO, on this forum you are not exactly known as a peacemaker.

I make peace with those who make peace with me. I've actually made peace with a number of posters. I have the highest respect for some of the posters here.

[varian]

...
That's pretty good, call one of the best established and most popular religions in the world a cult. I think that pretty much sums up the rest of your post. ...

The more one looks into Islam, the more one finds that Islam is just another compiled religion. Of course not one word of the following would have a shred of truth in it then.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=h-tsbkPzQCg

Are you referring to Angry Lion?

Is this a serious question? No!!!


I make peace with those who make peace with me.

Quite revealing.

*******************
Back to the topic. Putting a structure of any other religion in Saudi Arabia would not be wise for reasons too numerous to list.

[andak01]

The more one looks into Islam, the more one finds that Islam is just another compiled religion. Of course not one word of the following would have a shred of truth in it then.

Just because someone talks with an Arabic accent doesn't make them a Muslim. Of course there were several sahabi that knew all the verses of the Quran. We have their names and even their biographies and descriptions of them having recited the Quran in the presence of the Prophet. One of those memorizers was involved in both the first compilation and the second vowelled version. His name is Zayd ibn Thabit (RA). Others who memorized the Quran while the Prophet was alive were Qatada ibn al-Nu'man (RA), `Abd Allah ibn `Abbas (RA), Ubay ibn Ka'b (RA), Hafsa bint Umar (RA) (one of Muhammad's (SAW) wives). The RA is a term of respect given to the first generation of Muslims. We have very detailed biographies of all of those people who were themselves surrounded by other literate people. Hafsa kept a complete collection of the revelations as they were written down. So, prior to the time of Muhammad's (SAW) death, she had a complete collection. Muhammad (SAW) had recited the Quran completely in order on multiple occasions and others had memorized it in that order.

Is this a serious question? No!!!

Then I misunderstood you. Who then?

Quite revealing.

In what way? Don't you give what you receive in the way of kindness and security? Isn't you very low perception of Arabs and Muslims based upon bad experiences you've had and the ways they have treated you or that you perceive they have treated you? If you come at me with a gun, I'll show you a knife. Come at me with a knife and I'll fight with my hands. Come at me with your fists and I'll shake your hands. We're never going to get anywhere by constantly escalating the rhetoric.

Back to the topic. Putting a structure of any other religion in Saudi Arabia would not be wise for reasons too numerous to list.

There can be a secular set of laws based upon Sharia that is not Sharia, just as there is a system of laws based on Mosaic law that doesn't apply justice with stoning,

[varian]

When I read about the Battle of Yamamah, the type didn't have an accent. The presentation on youtube was on another link related to the battle. It was just another rendering (audio) of some of the printed versions. The great loss of life by the followers of Muhammad (those who were verbal reciters of the early verses of the Qur'an) in the Battle of Yamamah was one of the reasons to "collect and compile" all the versions of the Qur'an to come up with one "canonized" version. Later all the other versions that were found were destroyed, so the inerrancy of the Qur'an is really just Islamic dogma; an Islamic effort akin to the xtian Nicene Council. There was no extant verified version of the Qur'an at that time and Muhammad had already passed. The claim that today's Qur'an in any language is "exactly as received from Gabriel" appears to be just another Islamic myth. So, it would not be wise to build any structure devoted to any other religion in a Muslim run country.

[savvy]

Whenever Muhammad's battles or actions are brought up in this forum, Andak responds with self-defence. They were done all done in self-defence etc. That's exactly what PA sucide bombers, hamas, Hezbollah, etc say. They're acting in self-defence or resisting someone or something. It's not hard for people to conclude that they are in fact behaving just like moderate Muslim apologists do.

[andak01]

The great loss of life by the followers of Muhammad (those who were verbal reciters of the early verses of the Qur'an) in the Battle of Yamamah was one of the reasons to "collect and compile" all the versions of the Qur'an to come up with one "canonized" version.

The great loss of Muslim life at the Battle of Yamamah ( around 75 followers that had memorized the entire Quran ) was cause of alarm. This shows that there were that many hafiz on the same year as the Prophet dies. Seriously, your youtube doesn't agree with any history from that period. It's a total rewrite.



http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Mss/

Later all the other versions that were found were destroyed, so the inerrancy of the Qur'an is really just Islamic dogma; an Islamic effort akin to the xtian Nicene Council.

Well it's not. For one thing, most of the people involved in preserving the original unvowelled version were alive during the life of the Prophet. Zaid Bin Thabit was already recording Muhammad's (SAW) revelations during his lifetime, he was about 21 years old when the Prophet died in 632 CE. Uthman ruled from 644 to 656. Zaid worked on the first compilation based on ordering the Quran in the order that Muhammad (SAW) recited it and that Zaid himself had been taught by the Prophet. So, the Uthman vowelled version dates no later than 656 CE and there are several copies still in existence from that time including one in Turkey and another in Tashkent. Zaid was about 45 years old when the vowelled version came into being. There were other Muslims who had memorized the entire Quran, none of whom disputed with Zaid. And believe me, a single missing vowel would have caused them to give their lives.

The Nicene Council was three centuries after Christ's death. I'm not certain how a church council three centuries later is analogous to vowelling a book already in existence twenty years later, but perhaps you'll tell us.

There was no extant verified version of the Qur'an at that time and Muhammad had already passed. The claim that today's Qur'an in any language is "exactly as received from Gabriel" appears to be just another Islamic myth. So, it would not be wise to build any structure devoted to any other religion in a Muslim run country.

There is plenty of history to back this up, and even many western scholars agree with that history. A great deal more is known about history in that area because there was a very high rate of literacy.

http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Quran/Text/Mss/topkapi.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zayd_ibn_Thabit#Uthman.27s_era:_644_.E2.80.93_656



BTW, complete memorization of the Quran takes between several months and a couple of years for working people and modern school children. It is absolutely possible that Muslims who did nothing else had time to memorize the entire book. There are literally millions today that have accomplished that feat, enough that every single mosque in the world can have a hafiz recited for the 30 days of Ramadan.

[varian]

You believe in your fairy tales, and I'll believe in mine. You believe in your brand of idolatry, and I'll believe in mine. To you, Muhammad represents the greatest person to enter the world, and for me he represents one of the greatest evils (with the help of eblis and shaitan). I don't happen to put god in a box as the Muslims do. Since this is an pro-Israel forum, and I happen to believe that there are many prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled involving HaShem's blessings upon Israel, therefore I prefer to side with the "fairy tales" in the Tanakh. Therefore, IMO, Islam represents a major (not the only one) evil that stands in the way Israel receiving its promised blessings. Islam does not represent the restoration of the covenant given to Israel, nor does it in any way annul or supplant that covenant. Like Ishmael, it is a bastard that flaunts itself before the promised, and like Ishmael, will be cast out of the camp in the end for its 'untoward' behavior. Oh, I forgot, you are a peaceful Muslim who believes that all the radical Muslims are wrong. Perhaps they are following the real Islam and you are really wrong. Either way it is no small thing for a djinn to represent good and deceive a man. No matter how good this new creation sounds or is packaged, it still represents evil. There is no dispute that Muhammad was a man of violence and bloodshed. All excusable of course. It seems that even Budda taught a higher path: I believe that Muhammad would score a minus eight. Then some Muslim apologists point out that the xtian Jesus even had a disciple pick up a sword, yet nobody was killed, and nobody was raped, no possessions were plundered, and nobody was enslaved. Murder, rape, theft, incest, assassination, plundering, and a whole range of other crimes can only signal that this person is an agent of evil. Xtianity may have been bad, but Islam is definitely evil's perfect religion!!!

Now, you just go ahead and clean this mess up with your superior scholars and their tainted scholarship and I'm sure that the world will be only too willing to come running to bow before the being that called such a person as Muhammad to be the bearer of that diety's final revelation to mankind. As if one can't find better prophets amongst the minor prophets in the Tanakh who deliver more noble thoughts and words than the so called prophet of prophets. Thanks, but no thanks. If there is no god, then I have nothing to lose by believing in HaShem; If there is a G-D, then HaShem is far superior to Muhammad's god, even if belief in HaShem is wrong. And please don't try to insult many forum members by claiming that allah and HaShem are the same, they aren't.

You may reply to this if you like, but I think that our dialogs on this forum should end here. I have known and worked with Muslims that I respected (Shiites), but I honestly have no respect for your brand of religion, prophet, holy books, canned scholars, or co-religionists that are causing so much death and destruction around the world in the name of peace. They sound no more reasonable than US politicians who believe that America should be an empire.

I'll make this my last post on this forum so that you can continue to post your tainted views uninhibited. You may be able to bury many with you voluminous Islamic BS, but I doubt that you will really fool many.

Blue And White Forever,
Goy for Israel - Out!!!

[andak01]

You believe in your fairy tales, and I'll believe in mine. You believe in your brand of idolatry, and I'll believe in mine. To you, Muhammad represents the greatest person to enter the world, and for me he represents one of the greatest evils (with the help of eblis and shaitan). I don't happen to put god in a box as the Muslims do. Since this is an pro-Israel forum, and I happen to believe that there are many prophecies that are yet to be fulfilled involving HaShem's blessings upon Israel, therefore I prefer to side with the "fairy tales" in the Tanakh.

That's different. If you want to say that Muhammad was evil or that he invented the Quran, that's your belief. I can't prove that the Quran was a revelation from God. But if you want to pretend that nobody knew the full contents of the Quran at the time of the Prophet's death, at best, that is something disputed by historians. There is a vast set of writings that contain the thread of continuity that has convinced many Western historians that the Quran is the same as recited by Muhammad (SAW).

So I will go so far as to admit that certain established Western historians don't agree with the Muslim explanation about the creation of the Quran. However, there is a large camp that do.

Therefore, IMO, Islam represents a major (not the only one) evil that stands in the way Israel receiving its promised blessings. Islam does not represent the restoration of the covenant given to Israel, nor does it in any way annul or supplant that covenant. Like Ishmael, it is a bastard that flaunts itself before the promised, and like Ishmael, will be cast out of the camp in the end for its 'untoward' behavior.

"Cast out"? In what way? Obviously not by violence, since you claim to be the religion of peace instead of us.

Oh, I forgot, you are a peaceful Muslim who believes that all the radical Muslims are wrong. Perhaps they are following the real Islam and you are really wrong.

Is it better for you if I'm wrong or better if I'm right? See, I'm beginning to see that many of you don't want there to be a moderate interpretation to Islam after all. That gets in the way of destroying all of Islam as you are wont to do.

Either way it is no small thing for a djinn to represent good and deceive a man. No matter how good this new creation sounds or is packaged, it still represents evil. There is no dispute that Muhammad was a man of violence and bloodshed.

There is a dispute. I dispute it. Relative to his age and location, he was relatively peaceful. If you take all of the dead in all the battles fought and all the sieges and executions on both sides by Muslims during Muhammad's (SAW) lifetime, it wouldn't be the number of Jews killed by his contemporary in Byzantium, Heraclius. Justinian killed 30,000 rioter in a single day in 532 CE.

When Hypatius reached the hippodrome, he went up immediately to where the emperor is accustomed to take his place and seated himself on the royal throne from which the emperor was always accustomed to view the equestrian and athletic contests. And from the palace Mundus went out through the gate which, from the circling descent, has been given the name of the Snail. . . . Belisarius, with difficulty and not without danger and great exertion, made his way over ground covered by ruins and half-burned buildings, and ascended to the stadium. . . . Concluding that he must go against the populace who had taken their stand in the hippodrome-a vast multitude crowding each other in great disorder-he drew his sword from its sheatb and, commanding the others to do likewise, with a shout be advanced upon them at a run. But the populace, who were standing in a mass and not in order, at the sight of armoured soldiers who had a great reputatation for bravery and experience in war, and seeing that they struck out with their swords unsparingly, beat a hasty retreat. . . . [Mundus] straightway made a sally into the hippodrome through the entrance which they call the Gate of Death. Then indeed from both sides the partisans of Hypatius were assailed with might and main and destroyed. . . . There perished among the populace on that day more than thirty thousand. . . . The soldiers killed both [Hypatius and Pompeius] on the following day and threw bodies into the sea. . . . This was the end of the insurrection in Byzantium.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/procop-wars1.html

All excusable of course. It seems that even Budda taught a higher path: I believe that Muhammad would score a minus eight. Then some Muslim apologists point out that the xtian Jesus even had a disciple pick up a sword, yet nobody was killed, and nobody was raped, no possessions were plundered, and nobody was enslaved.

And they were all living under Roman law, not at war with Rome which was an impossibility as they all would have ended up cruxified.

Murder, rape, theft, incest, assassination, plundering, and a whole range of other crimes can only signal that this person is an agent of evil. Xtianity may have been bad, but Islam is definitely evil's perfect religion!!!

That's your opinion, not the opinion of over 20% of the earth's population.

Now, you just go ahead and clean this mess up with your superior scholars and their tainted scholarship and I'm sure that the world will be only too willing to come running to bow before the being that called such a person as Muhammad to be the bearer of that diety's final revelation to mankind.

Correction, nobody bows to Muhammad (SAW). We do not worship him in any way shape or form.

As if one can't find better prophets amongst the minor prophets in the Tanakh who deliver more noble thoughts and words than the so called prophet of prophets. Thanks, but no thanks. If there is no god, then I have nothing to lose by believing in HaShem; If there is a G-D, then HaShem is far superior to Muhammad's god, even if belief in HaShem is wrong. And please don't try to insult many forum members by claiming that allah and HaShem are the same, they aren't.

Again, your opinion. Do you think that you worship the same God as the xtians?

I have known and worked with Muslims that I respected (Shiites), but I honestly have no respect for your brand of religion, prophet, holy books, canned scholars, or co-religionists that are causing so much death and destruction around the world in the name of peace.

Nobody is asking you to agree with people who cause death and destruction. But you have no reason to call people who aren't evil.

They sound no more reasonable than US politicians who believe that America should be an empire.

I'm sure you give polititians a lot more respect.

Blue And White Forever,
Goy for Israel - Out!!!

Mozel tov.

[savvy]

Andak, We know what someone is by their nature. We know that something has rabbit nature because it behaves like a rabbit. Like wisewise we can distinguish between Hashem and Allah, based on their nature. Allah does not even know the meaning of a covenant as we previously discussed on another thread. Allah has not created human beings in his image and likeness. Islam flatly denies this.

[andak01]

Allah does not even know the meaning of a covenant as we previously discussed on another thread.

The covenant is mentioned many times in the Quran.

Allah has not created human beings in his image and likeness. Islam flatly denies this.

So Jews worship an anthropomorphic God? Who knew? Who knew that a being capable of creating everything looks like your uncle. Kind of begs the question of what age and sex God has and how many fingers. Has God got a good haircut like Romney? What kind of clothes does He wear?

[andak01]

Who stuck this thread in the Looney Bin and why?

[Kenneth]

what age?
He's 42 but often mistaken for a late thirties

...and sex God has?
He's a man of course, a man's man.

and how many fingers.
9.5, lost the top of a pinky while fishing on R&R in Danang's Hong River.

Has God got a good haircut like Romney?
Holy mackeral no.

What kind of clothes does He wear?
Denim, to complement his moustache.

[andak01]

Well now we're getting somewhere. Levis, Jordache or Wranglers?

Has God got a good haircut like Romney?
Holy mackeral no.

A mullet?

[Kenneth]

Levis of course.

A mullet?
Possibly, it is a classic cut. Serious on top, party at the back.

[savvy]

The covenant is mentioned many times in the Quran.

Yeah, we went over this. The covenant is a set of laws and Jews are guilty of breaking it. Allah doesn't know what a covenant means.

So Jews worship an anthropomorphic God? Who knew? Who knew that a being capable of creating everything looks like your uncle. Kind of begs the question of what age and sex God has and how many fingers. Has God got a good haircut like Romney? What kind of clothes does He wear?

Thank you for once again displaying your inability to think. It does not mean God has two eyes and one nose. It means that God has created us with the ability to feel and think the way God does. A view Islam clearly does not share. Perhaps, because Allah is a meteror rock that can't feel or think.:D

[andak01]

It means that God has created us with the ability to feel and think the way God does.

So you think like an omniscient being? That explains why you think you're so much better than me.

A view Islam clearly does not share. Perhaps, because Allah is a meteror rock that can't feel or think.:D

Where do you come by such ignorance?

[savvy]

So you think like an omniscient being? That explains why you think you're so much better than me.

The material world and God, according to Aristotle, are incompatible with one another. The two never intersect. The one, God, exists in total separation from the other, the material world. This view of the God-worl